teejay	Re: Russell; an unoticed freemason ?
	I'm sorry MadApostate. Gee, I wonder how you got your first name? What Larc is indicating is that Russell spoke negatively about Masonry in the Watchtower several times over the years. Also, in the 1913 Convention Report, which is constantly misquoted by conspiratists, Russell flat out said he had never been a Mason. Cool. I thought Larc meant that the current leadership spoke negatively about Masonry. Not a 'misinterpretation' but a simple misunderstanding. Huge difference. I do recall seeing a jpeg image of an article or two (don't remember where... maybe Randy's site) where Russell spoke of "his Masonic brothers" or something like that. As far him admitting point blank that he had never been a Mason, well... I'll take that for what it's worth, if you don't mind. Russell said a lot of things, as you are no doubt aware, and nearing the end of 'his earthly course' he may have begun to live under the delusion that he was the faithful and wise servant, making him beyond accountability, like say, the present day faithful and discreet slave. If it's all the same to you, I will base my opinion on more than what he said he was/n't. GET IT! RUSSELL WAS NOT A MASON!!! Cool. Like I said, and I mean as much now as ever, it doesn't matter to me one way or the other if he was or wasn't. It's just that I've read Russell's connection with Masonry both ways and didn't realize there was a definitive answer one way or the other. Hmmm, that's funny... I still don't see one! Nothing's changed, even considering Chasson's excellent research. However, it seems to me that it's important TO YOU that the word gets out that Russell was not a Mason (or am I misinterpreting again?). What's the big deal? Sheesh! Sorry that my comment about Chasson's research didn't indicate that he had not time-traveled back to the 1870s. Me, too. It might've cleared up some of the confusion(?). peace, tj
IP: qKxiMUESFbwp9bxO