More from the Walsh trial, the cross-examination of Fred Franz:
Q: Yesterday's errors cease to be published do they?
A: Yes, we correct ourselves.
Q: But not always expressly?
A: We correct ourselves as it becomes cue to make a correction, and if anything is under study we make no statement of it until we are certain.
Q: But may one not assume that Judge Rutherford did not publish until he also was certain?
A: He published only when he was convinced, and he withheld publication until he was convinced that he was correct.
Q: So that what is published as the truth today by the Society may have to be admitted to be wrong in a few years?
A: We have to wait and see.
Q: And in the meantime the body of Jehovah's Witnesses have been following error?
A: They have been following misconstructions on the Scriptures.
Q: Error?
A: Well, error.
[...]
Q: And that Judge Rutherford took the view that man came upon this earth in 4025 BC?
A: 4124 BC.
Q: What is the present view?
A: One hundred years have been taken off.
Q: What was Pastor Russell's view?
A: Pastor Russell had an extra one hundred years in there.
Q: So that that date has been altered three times, has it?
A: The date has been corrected.
Q: But once the date was published by the Society all Jehovah's Witnesses were bound to accept it as Scripturally true?
A: Yes.
Q: And liable to be disfellowshipped if they demurred to the date?
A: If they caused trouble over it, because the Scriptures say that if anyone is a disturber inside the congregation he is hindering the growth of the congregation and its activities and should be disfellowshipped.
Q: Even though he perchance were supporting the date now taken by the Society, when the Society was publishing a wrong date?
A: One who may have a difference of understanding like that will wait upon Jehovah God to see if he is correct, and he will abide by what is published for the time being.
Q: But if he so awaits and understands he is correct what is he to do?
A: He gets a blessing because of his submission and waiting upon Jehovah and not leaving it to his own understanding.
[...]
Q: BethSarim was, was it not, a mansion in San Diego kept for the second coming of some of the Prophets?
A: Kept for the resurrected Prophets.
Q: Namely who?
A: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, Moses, and so on... Daniel.
Q: Was that in the days of Judge Rutherford or Pastor Russell?
A: No, that was in the days of Judge Rutherford.
Q: Were the whole body of Witnesses instructed to accept that the mansion was being kept for this purpose?
A: Yes.
Q: What has come of the mansion?
A: It has been sold.
Q: Why?
A: Because it was there, and the Prophets had not yet come back to occupy it, to make use of it, and the Society had no use for it at the time, it was in charge of a caretaker, and it was causing expense, and our understanding of Scriptures opened up more, and more concerning of the Princes, which will include those Prophets, and so the property was sold as serving no present purpose.
Q: Am I right that it was at one time forecast that in 1925 Abraham and other Prophets would come back to earth?
A: They were expected to come back approximately then.
Q: But they did not come?
A: No.
Q: It was published, was it not, to the body of Jehovah's Witnesses that that was to be expected in 1925?
A: Yes.
Q: But that was wrong?
A: Yes, and Judge Rutherford admitted it to the Headquarters.
[...]
Q: I understood the position to be - do please correct me if I am wrong - that a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses must accept as a true Scripture and interpretation what is given in the books I referred you to?
A: But he does not compulsorily do so, he is given his Christian right of examining the Scriptures to confirm that this is Scripturally sustained.
Q: And if he finds that the Scripture is not sustained by the books, or vice-versa, what does he do?
A: The Scripture is there in support of the statement, that is why it is put there.
Q: What does a man do if he finds a disharmony between the Scripture and those books?
A: You will have to produce me a man who does find that, then I can answer, or he will answer.
Q: Did you imply that the individual member has the right of reading the books and the Bible and forming his own view as to the proper interpretation of Holy Writ?
A: He comes--
Q: Would you say yes or no, and then qualify?
A: No. Do you want me to qualify now?
Q: Yes, if you wish?
A: The Scripture is there given in support of the statement, and therefore the individual when he looks up the Scripture and thereby verifies the statement, then he comes to the Scriptural view of the matter, Scriptural understanding as it is written in Acts, the seventeenth chapter and the eleventh verse, that the Bereans were more noble than those of Thessalonica in that they received the Word with all readiness, and they searched the Scripture to see whether those things were so, and we instruct to follow that noble course of the Bereans in searching the Scripture to see whether these things were so.
Q: A witness has no alternative, has he, to accept as authoritative and to be obeyed instructions issued in the "Watchtower" or the "Informant" or "Awake"?
A: He must accept those.