Posts by stev

9

If the Bible best-selling book in history, what is the second best-selling?

by ithinkisee in

.

anyone know?.

-ithinkisee

stev

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/JwBooksCirculation.htm

THE WORLD’S MOST POPULAR BOOKS

B S

(Investigator 79, 2001 July)

The following is a list of books with the highest printings. It excludes newspapers, booklets, brochures, pamphlets and magazines. The list is based on information to hand and some of the figures are not the latest or final figures. The list omits various separate translations of the Bible and the lower end of the list probably also omits other books.

The Bible (All versions) 1815-1999	3,880,000,000
Quotations from the Works of Mao Tse-tung 1966-197	800,000,000
Good News Bible 1976-1995	122,000,000
The Highway Code (United Kingdom) 1931-1996	117,000,000
The Truth that Leads to Eternal Life 1969/1981	108,000,000
New World Translation (In whole or part) 1950s-2000	100,000,000
American Spelling Book 1783 Noah Webster	100,000,000
Automobile Association Handbook 1908-1991	98,000,000
Guinness Book of Records 1955-1999	85,000,000
The McGuffey Reader 1853-1879 William H McGuffey	60,000,000
A Message to Garcia 1899 Elbert Hubbard	50,000,000
Knowledge that Leads to Everlasting Life 1995	46,000,000
The Living Bible	45,000,000
Deutsche Bundespost 1993 (Initial print)	42,000,000
You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth 1982/1989	42,000,000
World Almanac 1868-1980s	40,000,000
True Peace and Security 1986	37,000,000
Your Erroneous Zones 1876 Wayne W Dyer	34,000,000
In His Steps 1896 Rev. C M Sheldon	30,000,000
To Kill A Mockingbird 1960 Harper Lee	30,000,000
Gone With the Wind 1936 Margaret Mitchell	30,000,000
Valley of the Dolls 1966 Jacqueline Susann	29,000,000
The Diary of Anne Frank	25,000,000
The Commonsense Book of Baby and Child Care 1946 Benjamin Spock	25,000,000
Let God be True 1946/1952	19,000,000
The Late Great Planet Earth 1970 H Lindsey	18,000,000
American Red Cross First Aid Book	16,000,000
Is the Bible Really the Word of God? 1969	15,000,000
Roots 1976 A Haley	12,500,000
From Paradise Lost to Paradise Regained 1958	12,000,000
Sophie’s World 1996 J Gaardner & P Moller	12,000,000
Life—How Did It Get Here? 1985	11,000,000
The Bermuda Triangle 1975 Charles Berlitz	10,000,000
What’s the World Coming To? D E Stanton	10,000,000
Things In Which It Is Impossible For God To Lie 1965	10,000,000
Member’s Handbook, Auto. Assoc. 1990-91 (Initial print)	6,000,000
Worldwide Security Under the Prince of Peace 1986	6,000,000
Divine Plan of the Ages 1886	6,000,000

Notice how often the books of one sect – the Jehovah’s Witnesses – appear in the list. These are indicated by being underlined.

52

How would JWs run a country if they had one?

by Spectrum in

jw
friends

can anybody imagine what it would be like to live in a country run by jws?

what would they call it?

what laws would they have?

stev

In a totalitarian regime. There is a book "The Orwellian World of the Jehovah's Witnesses" which compares them to the book 1984 written by George Orwell. I paged through the book recently, and read that Orwell knew of the JWs, which leads me to wonder whether this influenced Orwell at all in writing the book.

There is a previous thread comparing the JWs to "Animal Farm", also written by Orwell. In the thread, the comparison is made between the Russian Revolution, which is allegorized in Animal Farm, and the JWs. Lenin is compared to Russell, and Stalin to Rutherford. The character Napoleon in Animal Farm is comparable to Rutherford.

Steve

21

Rutherford and Elevators -- All Others Use the Stairs

by VM44 in

during the olin moyle court case, some of the "jehovah's witnesses" witnesses were asked on the stand if they knew if the elevators were held at ground floor at lunchtime so that rutherford would not have to wait to use them when he returned to the building.. other people had to use the stairs; the elevators had to be kept ready for rutherford.. the jw witnesses denied knowing anything about this.

but in reading the transcript of the trial, one gets the impression that none of the jws wanted to admit anything negative about rutherford, for instance, that rutherford would give "trimmings" (verbal scolding) to individuals at lunchtime was not readily admitted by even clayton woodworth, a person who had direct experience being reprimanded by the "judge"!.

trying to get info from the witnesses appeared to be like squeezing water from a stone!

stev

The book "Apostles of Denial" by Edmond Gruss has 3 letters of Moyle in Appendix B, including the one posted above. Remarkably, Moyle wrote of Rutherford, "I am in a good position to make such protest because your treatment of me has been generally kind, considerate and fair." I wonder at this - why would Rutherford treat Moyle fairly and not others? Moyle was a lawyer, like Rutherford himself, and perhaps Rutherford respected him more or had more in common with him, just a guess. However, afterward, Moyle was disfellowshipped and wrote that Rutherford had spread falsehoods about him, and had not treated him well at all.

VM44 asks "How did it happen?" This is a good question. Russell had already set a precedent for one-man rule of the Society, and received some preferential treatment. However, there remained a tension between one-man rule of the Society and the democratically-run congregations, and the authority of "that servant" and the equality of the brethren. Russell in his Will and Testament desired that the one-man rule come to an end, and planned for the Board and Editorial Committee to come to the fore, but failed to prepare them for their expanded role. After Russell died, there was a struggle between the Pres. Rutherford and Board. Rutherford was following Russell's example, but the Board wished to follow Russell's Will. In hindsight, it is more clear now that control by a Board and Editorial Committee could have restricted spiritual abuse, caused by an authoritarian leader with no accountability. The pattern of Rutherford's management style was consistent from the beginning, and Moyle's letter is line with other accounts of Rutherford. Many times the only proper response to a spiritually abusive leader is to leave, which many did. It seems that the most departures occurred during the later 1920's, probably in response to the 1925 disappointment, but also to Rutherford's attempts to bring the congregations under the Society's control. Several years ago, an elderly gentleman related the story to me that he had in 1914 in Germany started with a few others a Bible Student class, which grew to 75. Rutherford came to visit Germany in the mid-1920's. After hearing him speak, they did not like what they heard, and the entire class ended their association with the Society.

Steve

19

Would an Book on Rutherford really be worthwhile?

by VM44 in

i have to make a decision now as to continue researching judge rutherford with a view of writing a book, or just let him go (after all, he died 63 years ago!

what do people here think?.

would a book about rutherford be a worthwhile project?

stev

Anne Baxter as Maria Russell.

AB: Oh, Moses, Moses! Why of all men did I fall in love with the prince of fools? Why must you deny me and yourself?
CH: Because I am bound to a God, and to a people, and to a shepherd girl.
AB: A shepherd girl? What can she be to you unless the desert sun has dulled your senses.
Does she grate garlic on her skin or is it soft as mine? Are her lips chafed and dry as the desert sand or are they moist and red like a pomegranate? Is it the fragrance of myrrh that scents her hair or is it the odor of sheep?
CH: There is a beauty beyond the senses, Nefretiri.

19

Would an Book on Rutherford really be worthwhile?

by VM44 in

i have to make a decision now as to continue researching judge rutherford with a view of writing a book, or just let him go (after all, he died 63 years ago!

what do people here think?.

would a book about rutherford be a worthwhile project?

stev

Charlton Heston as Charles Taze Russell.

19

Would an Book on Rutherford really be worthwhile?

by VM44 in

i have to make a decision now as to continue researching judge rutherford with a view of writing a book, or just let him go (after all, he died 63 years ago!

what do people here think?.

would a book about rutherford be a worthwhile project?

stev

Here is an actor that could play Rutherford. Paul Sorvino. He played the TV preacher in the movie Oh,God! with John Denver and George Burns. He also has starred in gangster movies. He is tall and heavy-set, with an imposing physical presence, and capable of a violent temper.

Steve

19

Would an Book on Rutherford really be worthwhile?

by VM44 in

i have to make a decision now as to continue researching judge rutherford with a view of writing a book, or just let him go (after all, he died 63 years ago!

what do people here think?.

would a book about rutherford be a worthwhile project?

stev

Yes, I think a screenplay would be a better idea. Include Russell in it too. Make it like the Warren Beatty movie of the Russian Revolution. Or Animal Farm. Or Elmer Gantry, or the Apostle. Scenes included could be:

Russell preaches before thousands. He denounces the churches, preaches against the Trinity and hellfire, and preaches a kingdom on earth when God will save all mankind. His books are burned. The Miracle Wheat incident. His encounters with other women as told by his wife. They separate. Their divorce trial. Refuses to pay more alimony. The scandalous headlines. He preaches to 5000 Jews in the Hippodrome and supports Zionism. His world tours. The movie-slide show PhotoDrama, 8 hours long, shown around the world. He preaches that Armageddon is approaching. 1914. Macmillan says that this will be his last discourse because he is going home. Russell asks him to preach later, which Macmillan reluctantly is able to do. Russell announces that the Gentile TImes have ended. The Roman toga scene. Russell's death scene in a train. His funeral attended by 1000s. Maria Russell attends. Rutherford's oration, telling that Russell kissed him and told him he loved him. Rutherford, Macmillan, and VanAmburgh conspire together to take over. They plot and manuever behind the scenes. The presidential election - Rutherford only is nominated. Rutherford ousts four Board members. Johnson and the Board argue with Rutherford at the table. He attempts to physically evict Paul S. L. Johnson from Bethel in front of the whole Bethel family. The Finished Mystery. They go to prison. Millions now living will never die. Beth-Sarim. He attempts to take control of the congregations, causing many to leave. He calls them Jehovah's Witnesses. Witnesses die in concentration camps in Germany. Refuse to salute Hitler. More court trials. The Moyle trial. Include scenes of Rutherford at the Bethel table, tongue-lashing others, using vulgar language. His womanizing. His bodyguards. His spy network. Scenes preaching while he is drunk. Hint at alcoholism. His phonograph records. Drinking beer at Bethel. His death scene. His funeral, only four attending.

Anthony Hopkins should star in this movie, find him a role. Who should play Rutherford? Paul S. L. Johnson (Hopkins might be good here)? Russell? Maria Russell?

Steve

123

1 Timothy 2:6

by defd in

.

i was wondering why the new world translation says corresponding ransom , where as others do not.

anyone know where i can go and get a translation from greek to english.. d.

stev

Here is the meaning of the Greek word "lutron" :

http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=3083

Strong's Number: 3083 lu/tron
Original Word Word Origin
lu/tron from (3089)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Lutron loo'-tron
Parts of Speech TDNT
Noun Neuter 4:328 & 4:340,543
Definition
the price for redeeming, ransom
paid for slaves, captives
for the ransom of life
to liberate many from misery and the penalty of their sins

Translated Words
KJV (2) - ransom, 2;
NAS (2) - ransom, 2;

Verse Count
KJV NAS
Matthew 1
Mark 1
Matthew 1
Mark 1

Here is the meaning of the Greek word "antilutron":

http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=487

Strong's Number: 487 a)ntiðlutron
Original Word Word Origin
a)ntiðlutron from (473) and (3083)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Antilutron an-til'-oo-tron
Parts of Speech TDNT
Noun Neuter 4:349,543
Definition
what is given in exchange for another as the price of his redemption, ransom

Translated Words
KJV (1) - ransom, 1;
NAS (1) - ransom, 1;

Verse Count
KJV NAS
1 Timothy 1
1 Timothy 1

Translations of 1 Tim. 2:6 :

1 Timothy 2:6

The Holy Bible, New International Version®: who gave himself as a ransom for all men - the testimony given in its proper time.
The American Standard Version: who gave himself a ransom for all; the testimony [to be borne] in its own times;
The New American Standard Bible: who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.
The King James Version (Authorized): Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
The New King James Version: who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,
The Revised Standard Version: who gave himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time.
The New Revised Standard Version: who gave himself a ransom for all - this was attested at the right time.
The J.B. Rotherham Emphasized Bible: Who gave himself a ransom in behalf of all, - the testimony, in its own fit times:
Young's Literal Translation: who did give himself a ransom for all -- the testimony in its own times --
International Standard Version: He gave himself as a ransom for all, a fact that was acknowledged at the right time.

123

1 Timothy 2:6

by defd in

.

i was wondering why the new world translation says corresponding ransom , where as others do not.

anyone know where i can go and get a translation from greek to english.. d.

stev

In Young's Concordance:
under the word "ransom"
the Greek word "antilutron"
1 tim. 2:6

the meaning is given as :

"a corresponding price"

10

JAY DUBS: Russells Legitimate Children or Rutherford's Bastard Sons?

by Nate Merit in

(i'm posting this because i have read older threads in which the jw's are referred to as pastor russell's disciples, his spiritual children, etc.

also, disparaging remarks about russell here and there.

no doubt this topic has been discussed already, but perhaps you would like to join me in another go).

stev

Melton in his books on religion classifies the Adventist groups into William Miller's groups and Charles T. Russell's groups. Russell denied that he was ever an Adventist, however many in Miller's groups also denied this as well. He did have association with Christians from Miller's groups, like Wendell, Barbour, Storrs, Stetson. He learned much from them.
In my opinion, Russell made a fatal mistake in joining up with Barbour, and accepting his time proofs. Barbour had modified many of Miller's time proofs, and reapplied them to 1874 and 1914. Storrs, in reviewing Barbour's and Russell's views, warned and cautioned them against date-setting, and denied that Christ was now present. Storrs himself had been a major leader in the Miller Movement, in setting a date for Christ's return in 1844. He knew from experience the bitter disappointment resulting from date-setting. Unfortunately, Russell did not heed his former mentor Storrs, did not learn from the lessons of history, and thus repeated the mistakes that Miller had made.
He later separated from Barbour, but continued to hold to the invisible presence in 1874, had expected the rapture in 1881, and dogmatically predicted for years the end of society and the coming of the kingdom by 1914, selling books in the millions advocating his views. He did grow tentative as 1914 approached, yet many had already believed him. This focus on Armageddon and date-setting, by giving people unwarranted fears and false hopes, is harmful. Russell's mistakes need to be admitted and rejected.
The other mistake, in my opinion, that Russell made was the doctrine of "that servant." He had early on applied that to all Christians. He encouraged others to "prove all things", to exercise private judgement, and advocated the priesthood of all believers. However, he came to accept the view of his wife that he was "that faithful and wise servant." To his credit, he rarely if ever put it in print that he was "that servant", and wrote about it very little. He cautioned the brethren against preaching Pastor Russell instead of Christ, against seeing him in the Bible. However, although he preached against Babylon, the Papacy, and priestcraft, he allowed authoritarian religion to creep back in. It is true that many religions begin with a charismatic leader whose followers believe to be led by God, and Russell's group was not alone in this. But by applying scripture to justify power over other Christians, this authoritarianism which started small grew larger, more scripture was used, and the effects have lasted longer and stronger because of the Bible being used as support.
Russell's mistakes have not borne good fruit, and need to be seen for what they are.
Apart from these, and some personal failings such as his unhappy marriage, Russell had many admirable traits, and had views which counterbalanced and offset his more unfortunate teachings. He encouraged democracy in the churches in electing their officers, and allowed personal freedom in decisions and resisted legislating on private matters. He emphasized the love of God in saving all mankind in a future age soon to come. Much of his writing has a high moral and spiritual tone, appealing to reason, and yet capable of being poetic and soaring. He emphasized the need for character development and the Christian graces. He had a gracious and winsome manner in addressing the public, which can seen in his public sermons. He had a curious mixture of liberal and conservative views, and apocalypticism and rationalism, and he is not easy to categorize. While the Bible Students are today are often blind to his faults, the JWs would have been better off in maintaining more of his spirit, and his kind and gentler approach.

Steve