The 2026 Annual Meeting of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society took place on Saturday, October 3rd, just two weeks after the Governing Body reversed its long-standing prohibition on blood transfusions.
If I had to sum up that meeting in two words, they would be: Damage control.
For years, the Organization has been bleeding members. I few weeks back, I visited a congregation where I had served as an elder for years. The last time I attended was in 2004. Back then, the hall was packed—sometimes beyond the limits permitted by fire regulations.
There was nowhere else to go. Five congregations shared that one Kingdom Hall. Across Toronto, the halls were full, and we were desperately looking for places to build. During the thirteen years I lived in that area, my congregation, the Rexdale congregation, divided to form a second congregation, Mount Olive. Then a few years later, Mount Olive spawned a third congregation, which was the one I visited, Rowntree Mills.
Now, twenty-two years later, here is the attendance on Sunday at the Rowntree Mills congregation. Look at all the empty seats. What happened to all the phenomenal growth in Toronto that characterized the 1990s. In fact, several halls have been sold in Southern Ontario, and congregations have been merged to shore up attendance.
So where is Jehovah’s blessing?
Here is what Jesus told the Samaritan woman: The Father is looking for people who will worship him in spirit and in truth. People. Individuals. He did not say that God was looking for an organization for his followers to pledge their loyalty to.
Many are leaving Jehovah’s Witnesses because they have discovered that the Organization’s claim to possess the truth does not stand up to scrutiny. The same is occurring across the religious landscape of Christendom. People are waking up to the hypocrisy of religious leaders.
Yet the Governing Body soldiers on hoping to stem the outflow. But people are seeing through the subterfuge.
The organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses has constructed a doctrinal framework that in the 20th century appeared sound and solid. But as we move deeper into the 21st century, we see that it is really just a house of cards. Several talks at this year’s annual meeting demonstrate just how fragile their belief system has truly become.
Take for example the final talk of the 2026 annual meeting. The speaker is none other than Governing Body member Stephen Lett. His entire talk is built on an unscriptural premise. His fellow Governing Body member, Geoffrey Jackson, sets the stage.
“So the anointed living on earth today are not so concerned about the timing of the first resurrection. We’re worried about bigger concerns. Will I really make it? Will I be faithful to the end even if there are serious trials? Will I receive the final sealing? Those are the big questions, and you’re going to love Brother Lett’s explanation when he answers the question, ‘When do the anointed receive their final sealing?’”
“Final sealing.”
Where does the Bible use that expression?
It doesn’t.
The anointed are not sealed twice. They are sealed once. These men have invented a term, built a teaching around it, and presented it as something Christians ought to worry about.
First, manufacture the anxiety. Then offer the Organization’s explanation as the relief.
Here is what the Bible actually says:
“Also, do not be grieving God’s holy spirit, with which you have been sealed for a day of releasing by ransom.” (Ephesians 4:30)
And:
“But the one who guarantees that you and we belong to Christ and the one who anointed us is God. He has also put his seal on us and has given us the token of what is to come, that is, the spirit, in our hearts.” (2 Corinthians 1:21, 22)
Think of a seal on an envelope. God puts it there. It remains unless we break it.
God has judged us worthy of that seal, that anointing by holy spirit. We may stumble. We may even fall. But stumbling does not automatically break the seal. As long as we turn to God and seek forgiveness, it remains.
There is no need for a second sealing to make the first one count.
So why push this teaching?
Because they need people to stay. They have lost their old deadline—the promise that the end would come within a single generation counting from 1914. But they still need the flock to believe that walking away from the Organization means throwing away salvation.
Listen to how Lett begins.
“I would like for you to imagine two situations. Now, in the first one, a brother with the earthly hope runs 26 miles in a marathon, but then he quits. Would he receive the prize? No, because a marathon is 26.2 miles. Even though he would have run over 99% of that race, he would forfeit the prize because of not running the last 1%. Now you can see in this picture we have, this brother in red is stopping. He’s discontinuing the running shortly before the finish line. That is really sad, isn’t it?”
Lett has now introduced the second non-scriptural term: “earthly hope.” Type “earthly hope” in parenthesis in the WT Library program and you’ll see hundreds of hits in Watchtower publications, but not a single one in the text of any Bible.
What would seem to be far closer to reality would be this situation: Two witnesses run the race. One gives out before the end, and leaves the Organization and become an atheist and then dies. The second continues as a faithful member of the Organization right up to this death. Neither one partook of the emblems. Neither one accepted the anointing of holy spirit. Both will come back in the earthly resurrection of the unrighteous. They both get the same reward if you want to call it that, the resurrection of judgment.
Jesus only spoke of two resurrections and while the second is an eventuality, it isn’t something lovers of truth should be hoping to be part of.
“Do not be amazed at this, for the hour is coming in which all those in the memorial tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who did good things to a resurrection of life, and those who practiced vile things to a resurrection of judgment.” (John 5:28, 29)
But Lett’s message is about remaining a member of the Organization. He wants his listeners to believe that if they leave now, they’ll have lost out on life. He is tying their endurance to loyalty to the Governing Body and continued membership in the Organization he helps control. They have even compared the Organization to Noah’s ark. Either you stay inside, or you drown.
But loyalty to men is never stressed in Scripture as the path to salvation. Loyalty to Yehovah and to his Christ, well, yes, that’s the key.
Next, Lett lays out three questions.
“What has been our understanding regarding this final sealing?
“Two, what is our adjusted understanding? Now here’s where we get the clarification.
“Three, what is the scriptural basis for this adjustment?
“And then toward the end of our talk, we’ll discuss an interesting question: Were the majority of the 144,000 selected in the first century?”
In answering the first question, Lett reaches for a technique that goes back to J. F. Rutherford: convince the overwhelming majority of Witnesses that they have not been anointed with holy spirit.
Listen carefully to the evidence he provides.
“But now that first one we raised, what has been our understanding regarding the final sealing? Well, to answer that, we need to first consider what it means for one of the anointed to be initially sealed. Let’s talk about that first. Well, in Bible times, a seal was a mark of ownership or authenticity. And similarly, when Jehovah anoints one of the 144,000, he figuratively seals that person, identifying him as his special possession and inviting him to share with the Christ in heaven in rulership. Those who receive this calling are not left in a quandary. They’re not left thinking, ‘Well, maybe I’ve been invited, but I’m not sure.’ No, Jehovah’s powerful holy spirit assures such ones without the slightest doubt that they have definitely received this unique heavenly calling.”
Did you notice what was missing?
A scripture!
He has just described what supposedly happens when God anoints someone. He has told you exactly how that person must feel and how completely certain that person must be. He says all this with certainty without once giving us a Bible verse to support his claim.
We are just supposed to accept his opinion about some mythical experience that supposedly determines whether we belong to Christ.
What Lett is doing—what the Governing Body has always done—is striving to convince his listeners to reject the very calling they should be embracing.
Scripture does not tell us that receiving the holy spirit requires some unmistakable mystical experience.
So how can we recognize the spirit’s work? Here is one passage worth considering:
“And as for you, the anointing you received from Him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But just as His true and genuine anointing teaches you about all things, so remain in Him as you have been taught.” — 1 John 2:27, BSB
We don’t need a teacher, because the holy spirit teaches us all things. How does that work?
Jehovah’s Witnesses are trained to depend on someone to teach them. They wait for the Governing Body to announce adjustments, clarifications, and new understandings.
They wait for those familiar words: “The Governing Body has decided.”
What does that dependence tell us? Could it indicate that, collectively, they are not being guided by the holy spirit—even those who claim to be anointed?
Now, someone will object: “Doesn’t the Bible say that Christians can be teachers?”
Of course. Ephesians 4:11 says that Christ gave the congregation “shepherds and teachers.” James 3:1 warns: “Not many of you should become teachers.”
So how do we reconcile those passages with John’s statement?
There is a difference between a fellow servant who helps you understand Christ’s teaching and a religious authority who claims the right to dictate what you must believe.
One helps you reason. The other demands that you surrender your conscience.
Only Jesus Christ has been given the authority from God to make rules for us to follow unquestioningly.
“But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have one Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth your father, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Christ.” (Matthew 23:8–10, BSB)
The Catholic Church violates these stipulations through the authority it assigns to its clergy, including encouraging people to address their priest as “father.” Jehovah’s Witnesses violate the prohibitions concerning teachers and instructors when their leaders assume an authority that belongs to Christ.
Jesus commands. We obey.
Teachers in the congregation are there to help us understand his words. They do not get to replace them. No man is authorized to announce “new light” and demand that we accept it over what Scripture plainly says.
Yet many Witnesses accept the Governing Body’s teaching even when it contradicts Scripture. And where Scripture leaves a matter open, they want someone to hand them an absolute ruling. And the Governing Body has been more than willing to oblige them.
We must not fall into that lazy habit of handing our thinking—and our conscience—to someone else.
Look at the context of John’s words:
“But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.” — 1 John 2:20, BSB
Then:
“I have written these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you.” — 1 John 2:26, BSB
And immediately afterwards:
“And as for you, the anointing you received from Him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you.”
John is not abolishing Christian teaching. He is warning against deception.
You do not need a supposedly enlightened religious authority standing between you and Christ, deciding what you are permitted to believe. For instance, for eighty years they told Witnesses accepting a blood transfusion and donating blood were mortal sins. Now, it’s a matter of conscience.
Your conscience is not the Governing Body’s property.
Let me add this: The oft-heard phrase, “The Governing Body had decided…” which precedes an announcement like their reversal on the ban on blood transfusions is a direct challenge to the authority of our Lord and King, Jesus Christ. They are trying to usurp the authority that only belongs to the Christ. Make no mistake about this: There will be an accounting.
With that in mind, let’s return to Lett’s talk.
“When Jehovah anoints one of the 144,000, he figuratively seals that person, identifying him as his special possession and inviting him to share with the Christ in heaven in rulership.”
Lett treats 144,000 as a literal limit.
I maintain that this is false—and that his own publications give him the information needed to see why.
Consider how The Watchtower explains Galatians chapter 4.
“Paul explained the elements of this ‘symbolic drama.’ ‘These women mean two covenants,’ he wrote, ‘the one from Mount Sinai, which brings forth children for slavery, and which is Hagar. . . . She corresponds with the Jerusalem today, for she is in slavery with her children.’ (Galatians 4:24, 25) Hagar represented literal Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital.” (The Watchtower, March 15, 2006, page 11, “‘A Symbolic Drama’ of Value to Us”)
The article continues:
“Whom, then, did ‘the free woman’ Sarah and her son, Isaac, represent? Paul indicated that Sarah, the ‘barren woman,’ symbolized God’s wife, the heavenly part of his organization. This heavenly woman was barren in that before Jesus came she had no spirit-anointed ‘children’ on the earth.”
So, according to their explanation, Hagar represents literal Israel. The barren woman represents the heavenly part of Jehovah’s organization, and her children are the spirit-anointed.
Very well. Now read the rest of the verse, Stephen Lett.
“For it is written: ‘Be glad, you barren woman who does not give birth; break into joyful shouting, you woman who does not have birth pains; for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous than those of her who has the husband.’” (Galatians 4:27)
“More numerous.”
Follow their own interpretation through. The anointed must outnumber the children of literal Israel.
If the anointed are limited to 144,000, then the Israelites would have to number fewer than 144,000. Yet historically, we know that over a million died in the destruction of Jerusalem alone in 70 Common Era.
On that reading, 144,000 cannot be a literal ceiling.
Surely these exalted Bible scholars, assisted by all their illustrious helpers, can do simple arithmetic.
Or is the problem that they do not have the holy spirit to teach them?
They cling to that literal limit. Why maintain this failed system almost a century after Rutherford introduced it?
Lett gives us a revealing answer.
“And if you think about this, this adjusted understanding would be comforting, I’m sure, to you dear ones with the earthly hope. Why do we say that? Well, you will not have to endure these intense times of the great tribulation alone. You will do so shoulder to shoulder with Christ’s brothers. You’ll still be able to show Christ’s brothers good things, do good to them. And during the great tribulation, as will be the case with those who take a stand with Jehovah’s people after the great tribulation begins, they’ll still be able to do good to Christ’s brothers too. So it is a comforting thought to think about it.”
There it is. They want their other sheep class of Jehovah’s Witnesses to feel scripturally obligated to support them financially. They are saved by continuing to support those men claiming to be Christ’s brothers.
When Rutherford created the other sheep class in 1934, he established a clergy/laity distinction of the kind found in the major churches. Lett is drawing on the Organization’s interpretation of the sheep and the goats to reinforce that division.
The Watchtower made the arrangement explicit.
The Watchtower, March 15, 2012, page 20, paragraph 2, “Rejoicing in Our Hope”
“The other sheep should never forget that their salvation depends on their active support of Christ’s anointed ‘brothers’ still on earth.”
Your salvation depends on supporting them?!
That is an extraordinary claim to make about men who have positioned themselves as rulers.
By creating a secondary class of Christians, Watchtower tightened its grip on the flock. If you want Jehovah to save you, you must support the anointed—and, above all, the anointed men who run the Organization.
But this secondary class with an earthly hope is Rutherford’s invention. What does the Bible tell us about the identity of the other sheep? They are anointed Gentile disciples of Christ, distinguished from the Jewish disciples described as the little flock. (John 10:16; Luke 12:32)
Now we come to the great tribulation.
“So the four winds, we now understand—and this is a new understanding—is the winds of Armageddon, not the great tribulation. And the final sealing takes place not before the great tribulation, but before Armageddon. After the anointed who are still alive go through that period of testing right along with those who have the earthly hope.”
Here is the passage in Revelation:
“These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” (Revelation 7:14)
The Governing Body has built an elaborate theology and chronology around this single reference to “the great tribulation.” The Bible doesn’t explain what the great tribulation is, and this term in this context is not mentioned elsewhere. But the Governing Body have it all figured out.
Well, sort of. They keep changing their mind.
Formerly, only the other sheep went through it. Now the anointed do too. So their familiar expression, “the great crowd of other sheep,” needs an addition: “the great crowd of other sheep and anointed.”
But step back from their charts and terminology for a moment.
Are we supposed to believe that Christians alive at the end must undergo a more intense test than the millions of faithful Christians who have lived since Christ?
Could this passage not describe the tribulation God’s children have endured throughout history, rather than a particular pre-Armageddon cataclysm?
For now, remember John’s warning:
“I have written these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you.” — 1 John 2:26, BSB
Keep that warning in mind as we examine Lett’s next argument.
He wants to explain why the majority of the 144,000 would have been selected since 1914.
Why does that matter?
Back in the 1990s, only about 8,000 were partaking. They were called “the remnant.” Since the turn of the century, that term has all but vanished from Watchtower publications.
You see, their problem is that the number keeps growing. Most of the 8,000 that partook in 1990 are dead, yet last year almost 25,000 partook of the emblems. According to Watchtower records, almost 90,000 partook at the memorial on 1925.
All that creates a problem since they insist that 144,000 is a literal limit covering the entire Christian era. How can they explain away the growing number of partakers? Let’s see what Lett has come up with.
“But now let’s just briefly discuss that intriguing question: Were the majority of the 144,000 chosen in the first century? I don’t know if you’ve ever pondered that question, but let’s think about this now. We can’t answer that question dogmatically, but we can discuss seven facts that we do know, that we know, and here they are. Number one: On Pentecost, 33 CE, there were about 120 who were the first ones to receive the heavenly calling, and then later that day, about 3,000 others were added. Second fact we know: Thereafter, it seems that the growth was steady but modest. Why do we say that? Because most of the congregations were small enough that they could meet in private homes.”
“Seven facts that we do know.”
Then, almost immediately: “It seems.”
Those are not the same thing, Stephen.
And “steady but modest”? What nonsense!
Acts 4:4 already gives a figure of about 5,000 believing men. Men. Women are not included in that figure, but they were there too. Lett mentions the initial 3,000 but ignores this later, much larger figure. That’s revealing, don’t you think? He skips right over it. Not a very honest thing to do, wouldn’t you agree?
As for meeting in homes, what does that prove? A large number of Christians can meet in a large number of homes.
Small meeting places do not establish a small total membership.
Look at the progression.
The word translated “thousands” in Acts 21:20 literally means “myriads”—tens of thousands.
And that is just within the Jewish world. What happens to the total when you include the Gentiles?
Now listen to the remaining points. We need to hear them because the weakness of this argument deserves to be exposed.
“Here’s a third point. Some wicked men and imposters slipped into the congregations, the Bible says. Such ones undoubtedly never received the heavenly calling.”
Some men were imposters. Therefore, what?
How many? Out of how many believers? Over what period?
Without those figures, this tells us nothing about the total number of faithful Christians. The existence of imposters does not make the growth recorded in Acts disappear.
“Here’s a fourth point. Some first-century Christians proved unfaithful.”
Again: How many?
If you had a million Christians and half proved unfaithful, you would still have 500,000.
That is an illustration, not an estimate. The point is simple: Saying that some fell away does not establish how many remained.
Surely these distinguished scholars understand that much.
“Five. During the many centuries following the death of the apostles, the number chosen must have been very limited.”
“Must have been.”
Why must it have been?
Because his interpretation needs it to have been.
This is speculation presented as one of seven known facts.
We all hate to be lied too, but when the lies are so transparently made, it really irks, doesn’t it?
Frankly, we have no way of counting everyone God chose during those centuries. Christianity expanded in the second, third, and fourth centuries. Thousands resisted the churches’ acceptance of the Trinity. During that time, Christians were persecuted. On the understanding I have presented, those centuries alone would easily take us beyond 144,000.
And the centuries did not stop there. What about the religious awakenings that followed? Thousands abandoned the traditional churches in the 18th century, forming Bible student groups. What about the 90,000 Bible Students who partook of the bread and wine in 1925 alone?
That is one year, within one religious movement.
You cannot make all those people disappear by saying the number “must have been very limited.”
“Here’s a sixth point. Now this talks about modern times. Some who received the heavenly calling in modern times did not remain faithful.”
That is true.
And the current Governing Body has hardly demonstrated faithfulness by distorting Scripture and assuming authority over God’s flock that belongs to God and Christ.
Claiming to be anointed does not put a man beyond examination. His teaching must still be tested.
Now listen to the final point.
“And one more point. In modern times, many who served alongside the anointed were never called to heavenly life. My grandfather is an interesting example of this. He was baptized in 1933, assuming he was one of the anointed, but then he attended the convention in Washington, D.C., in 1935, and after hearing Brother Rutherford’s talk, he stood up, indicating that his hope was not heavenly but earthly. How many stood up with my grandfather? Well, according to an eyewitness, over half of the some 20,000 people in the audience stood up.”
And there, presented as reassuring family history, is one of the gravest problems with this teaching.
Thousands of people believed they were anointed. Then Rutherford delivered a talk, and convinced them they were not.
What does their standing up establish?
It establishes that Rutherford persuaded them.
It does not establish that God had never called them.
Yet this is offered as evidence that those people should not be counted among the anointed. The teaching persuaded them to reject their calling, and their rejection is then used to prove the teaching.
That is circular reasoning with consequences.
Through this teaching, thousands of Jesus’ disciples were persuaded to stop partaking of the bread and wine. Does it not appear that these men are cutting people off from salvation.
Listen to Jesus:
“So Jesus said to them: ‘Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day; for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him.’” (John 6:53–56)
Jesus later instituted the Lord’s Supper, identifying the bread with his flesh and the wine with his blood.
“Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood remains in Me, and I in him.” (John 6:56)
On what authority do these men tell millions of believers to refuse those emblems?
Jesus says:
“Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves.” (John 6:53)
Could the warning be more clear?
The teaching of Stephen Lett and the rest of the Governing Body shuts the door to the kingdom of God in the faces of believing Jehovah’s Witnesses. It teaches them to stand back from what Christ offers and wait for men to tell them where they belong.
These are people seeking life in Christ. Their hope is not something for a religious hierarchy to ration.
It’s disgusting.
Thank you for listening to the end. I’ve put a link in the description of this video to a channel PlayList that contains videos discussing and explaining all the issues raised here, like the other sheep teaching, the two resurrections, the great tribulation, and many more.
Until next time.