by RR 139 Replies latest jw friends
Anyway, it's always a pleasure to read your posts.
Even though he's a little bastard, you like to read his posts??? Man! I like the skirt wearin guy myself.
RR, have a nice trip my man.....and thanks for being so patient with those who differ with youir beliefs. You have ALWAYS been a pleasure to have on this board. Take care bud.
Gumby
I conducted a search of the early Watch Towers at the Bible Students Online and came up with 23 instances where it it mentioned. So, I just selected a few at random. I think I found the one Min is referring to; it's the Nov. 1890 issue.
"The solution of the riddle that is puzzling men today--why our day has produced so much more of invention and discovery than the past--is found only in the Bible. It announced the present period of invention over two thousand years ago (Dan. 12:4). It pointed out, that far in advance, that with the year A.D. 1799 "The Time of the End" would begin, and that the present "Time of the End" would be the
"Day of God's Preparation" (Nahum 2:3) for the incoming Millennium of blessing. It is, therefore, to the fact that God is now lifting the veil of ignorance and letting in the light, which is of him, and not by human evolution, that present progress is attributable. Those who hold to God's version of the fall and the ransom and the restitution may be laughed to scorn now by the worldly-wise and heady, but they will be kept by the power of God--by the power of his truth--from many injurious errors which will stuble thousand on every hand. Abide in him, and let his word abide in you."
It seems to me that Russell is saying that the "Time of the End" is a period of enlightenment and progress to culminate in the Millennium. The question is, how long did he expect this period to be?
min:
If that's your cocky answer, so be it.
So, what's your answer to my question? Surely, you must have resources that would enable you to respond, with copy-and-paste references, to a great many of the threads that are started on this db. Why don't you do so?
Ona, I have no special info on the late presidents to share. Do you? ....Does it matter whether I copy and paste? Because I don't, so? What are you trying to say, Ona??
min, what I'm trying to say is (in addition to what I've already said):
You ask a whole lot of questions, and that's ok by me...
But, as a matter of course, it's natural for others to expect that you would, in consequence to those almost innumerable answers you've received, offer substantive evidence demonstrating your concurrence with and insuppressible anger at what the WTS has preached and done for 120 years. If you have definitive evidence and personal research which demonstrates that Russell was the 'monster' that some think he was, then post it up!
Otherwise, it's just your opinion against 6 billion others, and so who cares?
edit to add:
I have no special info on the late presidents to share. Do you?A project I'm working on; short answer: yes.
Please share what YOU know, Ona.....Personally, I never intimated that Russell was a "monster".....And if I want to give an opinion on anything, I think I can do that. Yeah, I can ask questions, give opinions and I don't have to cut and paste.
On,
Now you got me interested,,what is this project?
Now you got me interested,,what is this project?
It's waaaaaaay easier to find smut on Rutherford than it is on Russell Frankierussellhater!
Gumbrusselite
Gita/Gumby:I really enjoy reading you guys too. Thank you for your kind comments.
I'd like to meet you, sometime, Gita.
As you already know, I thoroughly enjoyed meeting you, Gumby. Hopefully we'll repreat that experience and get to talk more.
Reading a variety of opinions really helps me from getting staid, and falling into the dogmatism of my local (real life) contemporaries. I'd rather be kept on my toes and challenged, than fall into a pattern of mere religiosity.
I don't think it's likely to happen any time soon, but I wouldn't like to take that risk
min:
Please share what YOU know, Ona.....Personally, I never intimated that Russell was a "monster".....And if I want to give an opinion on anything, I think I can do that. Yeah, I can ask questions, give opinions and I don't have to cut and paste.
I have shared what I know, and what I'm finding out about the religion in which you and I were raised; numerous posts from old publications, especially Rutherford, showing what an arrogant self-serving asshole he was, and how he manipulated the WTS into the "form" that he wanted. Some personal thoughts: Of course, you're perfectly free to simply ask questions and express opinions. But in the grand scheme of life, it seems to me that most lifer-JWs go through a phase where they discover what the WTS has printed over the years, and find themselves so absolutely flabbergasted and incensed at the deception that they can't help but to post up a c&p of some QFR, or some other hard evidence of how deceptive that religion is. In the recovery process, hard evidence is the starting point. Farkel and AlanF and many others have provided such information...direct quotes and argumentative dissection of the stupidity of the WTS. Base-line research is where it starts. How many JWs do you think would be compelled to reconsider their situation just because someone says: "Well, in my opinion"? Which is exactly why I have an ongoing issue with Farkel and AlanF about Russell: Plenty of opinions have been expressed, but I have yet to see the hard evidence...evidence for which I am looking. Which leads to: frankie:
Now you got me interested,,what is this project?
I'm proofreading and chronologically collating a text-only database of every Watchtower and WTS book from 1877 through 1955, as one collection. It will take a bit of time LOL, but, when I'm done, and after obtaining proper permissions from copyright holders (none of whom are WTS ), then, we'll see what happens, eh?
