Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
TheWorldNewsOrg

Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg supports universal basic income

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

TheWorldNewsOrg -
Guest -
2
408

Top Posters

  • TheWorldNewsOrg 1
  • Guest 1

Recommended Posts


Guest

As more and more gets automated the only ones who are enriching themselves with technology are the elite shareholders.

Everyone else is still expected to increase productivity yet not share in the bounty that tech is bringing the world.


Similar to the story of oil. 

1 barrel of oil = energy density of 25 men working all year = $1 to pull out of the ground.

Who has enriched themselves with the oil boom of the last century +? Not the common man.

 

Bill Gates proposed taxing the robots.... Hmmm....

Something is going to break before long.

The common man won't have the $ to purchase what the corporations want to sell us.

@Marra McDonald Johnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By admin
      I replied her Mark zuckerburg might be listening us.

      She laughed.

      We laughed

      Alexa laughed

      Siri laughed.
    • Guest Mark Zuckerberg
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      Mark Zuckerberg said Sheryl Sandberg is a great partner and hopes the two can work together for years to come.
      In an interview with CNN, Mark Zuckerberg said he will not step down as chairman of Facebook's board. He also praised COO Sheryl Sandberg when asked if she would step down.
    • By admin
      On a press call with reporters, the Facebook C.E.O. denied knowledge of the Republican oppo-research firm his company hired to handle its aggressive public-relations campaign.
      Speaking to reporters on a conference call Thursday, Mark Zuckerberg was unusually animated, his voice rising as he struggled to extricate himself from Facebook’s latest crisis. The original point of the call had been to discuss “content governance” on Facebook’s platform, and a new transparency memo regarding the social network’s community standards. Instead, the 34-year-old C.E.O. found himself fending off accusations that Facebook, at the height of the Russian interference and Cambridge Analytica scandals, had employed a Republican opposition-research firm to sway public opinion and smear its critics. Zuckerberg, famously stoic, even robotic in his mannerisms and emotions, sounded exasperated as he fielded almost all of the questions on the nearly 90-minute call, hardly any of which were related to content governance, transparency, or community standards.
      The call was a reckoning more than two years in the making. Since the 2016 election, Facebook has been working to rehabilitate its public profile, culminating in an apology tour that took Zuckerberg to Capitol Hill in April. Addressing senators under oath, Zuckerberg had promised that he understood where Facebook had gone wrong, and described a good-faith effort to do better in the future. But as The New York Times reported Wednesday in a more than 5,000-word, five-byline bombshell, Facebook’s actual conduct had been far less responsive—and far more cynical. According to the Times, it wasn’t until the spring of 2016 that Facebook was tipped off to Russian interference on its platform, leading the company’s chief security officer at the time, Alex Stamos, to investigate. When Stamos presented his findings to Zuckerberg, C.O.O. Sheryl Sandberg, and other top executives, Sandberg was furious. “Looking into the Russian activity without approval, she said, had left the company exposed legally,” the Times reports.
      Sandberg and Zuckerberg asked Stamos to study the issue further, but a paper containing the findings was never released, following objections from Joel Kaplan,Facebook’s vice president for U.S. public policy, and other Facebook executives. Republicans, Kaplan said, would accuse the company of siding with Democrats regarding whether Russia had sought to elect Donald Trump. Sandberg reportedly agreed. Later, as evidence of Russian infiltration became more dire, Zuckerberg and Sandberg agreed to release some of the findings in a blog post. But after Stamos and his team drafted the post, the Times reports, Sandberg and her deputies pushed to make it less specific. Critical information about the legitimacy of the 2016 election may have been buried.
      While Facebook publicly downplayed the severity of the Russian problem, Stamos was still grappling with how to fix it. In September 2017, when Stamos informed Sandberg that the issue still wasn’t under control, a ferocious boardroom interrogation of Sandberg ensued. “You threw us under the bus!” she reportedly yelled at Stamos, who she apparently believed had betrayed the company by revealing its security problem.
      Meanwhile, according to the Times, Sandberg was aggressively building inroads in Washington, doing everything possible to lobby and pressure lawmakers to keep regulation at bay. After Mark Warner and Amy Klobuchar introduced the Honest Ads Act, legislation that could compel social-media companies to say who bought ads on their sites, Facebook hired Luke Albee, Warner’s former chief of staff, to lobby against it, and tried to appeal to Klobuchar, who was featured on the Web site for Sandberg’s female-empowerment book Lean In. (Sandberg was notably absent during Thursday’s call with reporters.) In perhaps the ugliest and most revealing response to the mounting backlash, the Times reports that in October 2017, Facebook hired a political-consulting group called Definers Public Affairs, helmed in part by former Jeb Bush staffer and Crooked Media contributor Tim Miller, to ingratiate itself among conservatives and seed negative stories about its competitors:
      On a conservative news site called the NTK Network, dozens of articles blasted Google and Apple for unsavory business practices. One story called [Apple C.E.O. Tim Cook] hypocritical for chiding Facebook over privacy, noting that Apple also collects reams of data from users. Another played down the impact of the Russians’ use of Facebook.
      The rash of news coverage was no accident: NTK is an affiliate of Definers, sharing offices and staff with the public relations firm in Arlington, Va. Many NTK Network stories are written by staff members at Definers or America Rising, the company’s political opposition-research arm, to attack their clients’ enemies. While the NTK Network does not have a large audience of its own, its content is frequently picked up by popular conservative outlets, including Breitbart.
      Among the details that have been most inflammatory is the claim that Definers promoted conspiracy theories tying criticism of Facebook to Democratic mega-donor George Soros, a Jewish billionaire who has been vilified by the far right and anti-Semites, and who was recently the target of an attempted bombing.
      A research document circulated by Definers to reporters this summer, just a month after the House hearing, cast Mr. Soros as the unacknowledged force behind what appeared to be a broad anti-Facebook movement.
      He was a natural target. In a speech at the World Economic Forum in January, he had attacked Facebook and Google, describing them as a monopolist “menace” with “neither the will nor the inclination to protect society against the consequences of their actions.”
      While Definers was encouraging reporters to investigate the financial ties between Soros’s family and groups critical of Facebook, it also played the other side, “lobbying a Jewish civil-rights group to cast some criticism of [Facebook] as anti-Semitic.” (On his call with reporters Thursday, Zuckerberg said he has “tremendous respect for George Soros.”)
      Facebook’s lengthy statement in response to the Times story lists a “number of inaccuracies,” and the company denies it knew about Russian activity as early as spring of 2016. But the statement itself doesn’t contradict the Times’s reporting. Facebook’s board of directors also issued a statement that acknowledges it pushed Zuckerberg and Sandberg to move faster once it spotted Russian interference, but characterized the idea that they “knew about Russian interference, and either tried to ignore it or prevent investigations,” as “grossly unfair.”
      Facebook’s contract with Definers may be more complicated. On Wednesday, Facebook terminated its relationship with the political consultancy, and on his call with reporters, Zuckerberg was adamant that he had never even heard of the company. “This type of firm might be normal in Washington, but it’s not the kind of thing I want Facebook associated with,” Zuckerberg said at one point. At another, he said, “I learned about this relationship when I read the New York Times piece yesterday.” When the question was posed a third time, he shrugged it off. “Someone on our comms team must have hired them.”
      Journalists covering the story were incredulous. Definers is a well-known oppo firm, and prior to the end of its business relationship with Facebook, sent reporters myriad messages and e-mails in support of Facebook and decrying the company’s critics. It seems highly unlikely that Zuckerberg would not have been aware of its involvement in his company’s external public-relations campaigns. What’s more, Definers’ work was only one component of a broader P.R. effort led by Zuckerberg’s top deputies. According to the Times, Sandberg and Kaplan pressured members of the intelligence community not to criticize Facebook’s response to Russian interference. They also worked to cultivate Republican supporters in Congress to shore up Facebook’s political position. After the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke in March, Kaplan promoted Kevin Martin, a former Federal Communications Commission chairman who also served in the Bush administration, to lead Facebook’s U.S. lobbying. As part of this effort, the Times reports, Facebook broke ranks with much of Silicon Valley to support a sex-trafficking bill that holds Internet companies liable for sex-trafficking ads on their Web sites—a way to curry bipartisan favor on the Hill.
      On one level, it is shocking that the Times story was reported at all. Facebook is a famously secretive organization, particularly within its upper ranks. That multiple executives vented their frustrations to the Times is evidence that the once-impenetrable social-media juggernaut has sprung a few leaks. But it is equally shocking, if not surprising, how Facebook appears to have closed ranks. At the moment, it’s not clear who, if anyone, will answer for the company’s P.R. skulduggery surrounding the 2016 election. Zuckerberg did not directly answer questions about whether any heads would roll during Thursday’s call, and signaled his steadfast support for Sandberg, his top lieutenant since 2008. “Sheryl is doing great work for the company,” Zuckerberg said. “She is leading a lot of the efforts to improve our systems. While these are big issues, we’re making a lot of progress, and a lot of that is because of the work she’s doing.”
      Will this latest crisis be the one that finally turns public sentiment decisively against the company, or will it only scandalize the media? Facebook, after all, has weathered several storms that would knock out a smaller company with a less viable public-relations muscle. Congress may yet become a pain point, especially given the bipartisan desire to see Zuckerberg in the stockades and new regulations imposed. But Democrats and Republicans still disagree in their aims, and remain equally clueless when it comes to specifics. At least for now, the party that seems most injured by the Times bombshell is Definers, which lost a lucrative partnership and saw its name become radioactive. Facebook, despite deserving far worse, sails on.
      https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/11/mark-zuckerberg-refuses-responsibility-for-facebooks-latest-greatest-scandal
    • By Money & Finance
      USA TODAY
      Facebook CEO to replace four neighboring homes
      USA TODAY
      Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg wants to maintain the face of his neighborhood. The social network's cofounder is planning to replace four houses that surround his Palo Alto home with four smaller units, according to plans first reported by The San Jose ...
      Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to raze four homes with a view of his ownMarketWatch
      Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg replacing 4 next-door Palo Alto homesSan Jose Mercury News
      Facebook CEO Zuckerberg wants to tear down neighboring homesFox News
      SFGate -Breitbart News -Daily Mail -Newsmax
      all 27 news articles » Google
    • By Money & Finance
      Not sure who you've been talking to the past few months...but NYT journalists were chatting in secret with 50+ people (execs, lawmakers, lobbyists, etc.) about Facebook's (-0.26%) handling of its recent scandals.
      What did they find? The report claims that CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg ignored warning signs, deflected blame, and sought to "shift public anger toward rival companies." And that's only the first couple paragraphs. 
      Here's more:
      "At critical moments over the last three years, [Zuckerberg and Sandberg] were distracted by personal projects, and passed off security and policy decisions to subordinates..."
      Apple CEO Tim Cook's criticism of Facebook "infuriated Mr. Zuckerberg, who later ordered his management team to use only Android phones." 
      Facebook's board pushed back yesterday, calling the report "grossly unfair." It admitted the company was "too slow" to detect Russian election interference, but said it's "made considerable progress" since then. 
      Exhibits A and B? Its ability to limit misinformation around the midterm elections, and this brand new report detailing its removal of harmful content. Plus, Zuckerberg made a point to defend himself in front of reporters yesterday.
    • By admin
      Dear Mark, (I know we aren't on a first name basis .. so pardon me that)
      You created a "forum" that went viral and shook up the world. All forum admins everywhere have been trying to learn your secret to success ever since.
      Governments are trying to figure out what to do with Facebook. They love it and hate it at the same time.
      However, your shareholders greed has come to the point where they are endangering the precious baby you created.
      No one has ever seen a company pivot from desktop to mobile as fast or as successfully.
       
      With all that said, let me offer my humble opinion on your platform. Ads (as I have on this website are ok and acceptable to the public)
      All the other creepy uses of user's data are just creepy and not worth even touching.
      Facebook is getting KILLED in the privacy and trust arena which is critical and very tough to ever recover.
       
      Here are a list of moves that should never have happened and hopefully you'll be able to roll back to recover:
      Allow users the ability to control their OWN newsfeed completely. I mean down to the granular level. (Think about how that would reduce your responsibility for creating people's newsfeeds for them only to later hear them complain about how you suck at that) Keep ads OUT of the newsfeed. Settle for banner ads and make billions off of the user interaction increase. (Less can be MORE) Don't throttle Page / Group owner's views of their posts to their audience. These "publishers" / (companies) create interaction. Throttle them and you throttle interaction that the rest of the forum admins in the world would die for. (This will ignite the entire platform) Your Publishers and Page owner's created your platform's ubiquitousness. Then you abandoned them in order to charge them. They have mostly left now along with the users) There are more including a complete brand refresh that we should talk about someday. Facebook is dying but it can still be revived and grow even more.
      Imagine what could be accomplished in the ecommerce area alone? But that lack of trust is killing you.
      Anyways, I wish you all the best.
      Forum Admin
       
       
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook has introduced sweeping changes to the kinds of posts, videos and photos that its more than two billion members will see most often, saying on Thursday that it would prioritize what their friends and family share and comment on while de-emphasizing content from publishers and brands.
      The shift is the most significant overhaul in years to Facebook’s News Feed, the cascading screen of content that people see when they log into the social network. Over the next few weeks, users will begin seeing fewer viral videos and news articles shared by media companies. Instead, Facebook will highlight posts that friends have interacted with — for example, a photo of your dog or a status update that many of them have commented on or liked.
      The changes are intended to maximize the amount of content with “meaningful interaction” that people consume on Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, the company’s chief executive, said in an interview. Facebook, he said, had closely studied what kinds of posts had stressed or harmed users. The social network wants to reduce what Mr. Zuckerberg called “passive content” — videos and articles that ask little more of the viewer than to sit back and watch or read — so that users’ time on the site was well spent.
      https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/11/technology/facebook-news-feed.html
    • Guest
      By Guest
      As computers get more creative and AI begins to create better AI......
      Once it becomes cheaper to use robotics than human labor.....
      What will people do?
      I remember making a post called Humans Need Not Apply that compared us to horses 120 years ago. 
       
      Maybe, in an attempt to be optimistic, governments will tax automation and provide a universal basic income for everyone? Then we will all spend our time learning piano or art in liberal arts degree universities with recorded lectures over YouTube.
       
    • Guest
      By Guest
      “For the ways my work was used to divide people rather than bring us together, I ask forgiveness and I will work to do better.”
      Mark Zuckerberg’s message of regret on the Jewish Day of Atonement, Yom Kippur. Facebook’s in hot water for allowing Russian-backed ads on its platform to influence the 2016 election.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      (CNN Money) - Mark Zuckerberg tiene un plan para ayudar a prevenir que noticias falsas sean compartidas en Facebook.
      Las medidas, que fueron anunciadas en un post nocturno en Facebook, llegan tras acusaciones de que una oleada de historias falsas influenciaron las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos. 
      "El fondo es que tomamos la desinformación de forma seria", escribió Zuckerberg. "Tomamos esta responsabilidad con seriedad. Hemos tenido importantes avances, pero aún hay más trabajo que hacer".
      El CEO dijo que Facebook está trabajando en desarrollar un más fuerte detector de noticias falsas, un sistema de alerta, y formas más sencillas de levantar reportes, así como tecnología para clasificar la desinformación. La compañía también ha estado en contacto con organizaciones dedicadas a revisar datos.
      Se trata de un cambio de tono de Zuckerberg respecto a los comentarios hechos inmediatamente después de la elección.
      "Creo que la idea de que las noticias en Facebook -las cuales son muy pocas- influyeron en la elección en algún modo es una idea muy loca", dijo la semana pasada.
      Zuckerberg no detalló qué tan pronto se pondrá en marcha el plan. Pero éste debería hacer más sencillo para los usuarios el reportar el contenido erróneo, de forma similar a como ocurre con el cyberbullying, con un solo click en la red social.
      "Algunas de estas ideas funcionarán bien y otras no", reconoció Zuckerberg. "Comprendemos cuán importante es el tema para nuestra comunidad y nos comprometemos a hacerlo bien".
      http://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2016/11/19/este-es-el-plan-de-mark-zuckerberg-contra-las-noticias-falsas-en-facebook/#0
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      SAN FRANCISCO — Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg laid out a 10-year plan to connect the world that sounded as much like a political cause as a grab for potential billions in dollars.
      In a sweeping address that took on sharp political tones at times, Facebook's 31-year-old CEO detailed how Facebook aims to reach the planet's 7 billion people — half of whom do not have Internet access. And he took very direct aim at those who would limit free trade and immigration.
      “We are one global community,” he said. “Whether we are welcoming a refugee fleeing war or an immigrant seeking opportunity, coming together to fight a global disease like Ebola or to address climate change.”
      The theme of the keynote was, "give everyone the power to share anything with anyone," positioning Facebook as a unifying force for good against the current political winds of divisiveness.  Zuckerberg detailed a plan to bring people together through an ambitious strategy of unfurling technology that jumps borders and crosses cultures, a sharp rebuke to Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, who has advocated building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border and banning Muslims from entering the U.S.
      “As I look around the world, I’m starting to see people and nations turning inward, against the idea of a connected world and a global community,” Zuckerberg said. “I hear fearful voices calling for building walls and distancing people they label as ‘others.’ I hear them calling for blocking free expression, for slowing immigration, for reducing trade, and in some cases even for cutting access to the internet."
      "It takes courage to choose hope over fear," he said.
      In a post on his Facebook page after the keynote, Zuckerberg said the speech was "personally important to me and I spent a lot of time writing it."
      "Even if it's unusual for a CEO to address world issues and lay out a 10-year roadmap to improve them, I care deeply about connecting the world and bringing people together, so I wanted to put this out there. It's different from any other speech I've given," he wrote.
      The keynote, the most politically charged Zuckerberg has ever delivered, staked him as a business leader on the world stage. Speaking to a crowd of 2,600 developers from around the world, one-third of whom used a passport to get to the conference, Zuckerberg presented his vision in three pillars:
      — Artificial intelligence, which will help Facebook better sift through and understand all the photos, videos and updates people post to Facebook;
      — Connectivity, the goal of making Facebook and the internet available everywhere and to everyone through lasers and drones;
      — Virtual and augmented reality, which Zuckerberg says one day will bring friends together even if they are on other sides of the planet through a pair of "normal-looking" glasses that can overlay digital elements on the physical world and become "the most social platform."
      Not everyone buys into Zuckerberg's plans for global domination. In February, India dealt a major setback to Facebook's plans to use Free Basics service to deliver a limited version of the Internet that included Facebook, at no cost.
      "Mark Zuckerberg's vision is both benevolent and altruistic as well as entirely self interested at the same time," said Greg Sterling, contributing editor to SearchEngineLand.
      Source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2016/04/12/zuckerbergs-10-year-plan-expand-facebook-empire/82936814/


  • Forum Statistics

    61,689
    Total Topics
    114,598
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,511
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Rosjes128
    Newest Member
    Rosjes128
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • For 2010 to 2019, it was 213 times for those years. But this includes the superspike for the 100 year anniversary when both 2013 and 2014 included 121 between them, representing more than half of the decade in just those two years. If those two years had been normal years, the total would have been just 213-121+9+9=110. 2013 and 2014 included the preparation and finale of a big push for a 1914 centennial. And maybe it's just me, but I have a feeling that it fell kind of flat. There was another of these "anniversaries" (70th) that was built up in 1983 and 1984, where that decade's yearly average was doubled in '83 and tripled in '84 -- very similar to what happened in 2013 and 2014 when that average was quadrupled in 2013 and then septupled in 2014. (BTW, if you made a chart that broke this into 5 year intervals, a trend would seem much more obvious.) Still, I don't think it's being slowly phased out. I think that it gets mentioned less as it seems less important, and less practical to our current issues. It is no longer a field service "draw" based on the generation that would not die out as it would have been in 1983/4 when the generation meant something else. Once something has lost some of its importance, someone will start reconsidering whether it was ever that important at all, and this might encourage a reconsideration of the Gentile Times doctrine into a simpler, more Biblical teaching. (Just my opinion of course.) My sentiments exactly! I noticed. I was speaking about giving evidence. You should have. It would provide even more evidence for what I was saying. You are the only one I know who repeatedly tries to call me an "expert." I have never claimed this about myself. I just happen to have had several assignments that gave me an opportunity to read all of Russell's writings in the Bethel Library between about 1977 and 1982. And I have enjoyed reading further and refreshing my memory on some of this now that almost everything Russell wrote is so easily accessible online, and checkable against my physical library that contains most (but not all) of Russell's writings.
    • You are right. I was equating the importance not so much in the number of times it is mentioned, but that it is mentioned at all! I just tried to create a graph, but alas, since I've never done one either in word or excel, I failed miserably. I got the horizontal axis right, but I just can't find how to create the vertical axis and how to change the data (numbers) for the vertical axis so I completely messed up. In any case, the chart would show that since 1950 Watchtowers, the mention of 1914 has a sharp downward trend. During 1950 to 1959, it was mentioned 891 times, and during 2000-2009 it was mentioned 216 times. I don't have data for the years 2010 to 2019. So comparatively there is a big difference, but it still seems like too many mentions, if we are thinking along the lines of it slowly being phased out. In my opinion anyway....  
    • I just woke up startled, from my afternoon nap. I had a really scary nightmare, about the Presidential Impeachment effort now going on. I dreamed I was a Democrat Congressman, and in the dream I thought I was possessed by a demon that controlled me like a puppet. And in fighting that double whammy of being a Democrat Congressman, and a demon, I was trying to fight the evil that possessed me. I thought "Could it be that we are just whiney bullies, completely divorced from reality, trying to railroad and frame a man for crimes that do not even exist, but are merely policy differences between adversaries?" I thought "Could it be that this is just a vendetta, for his unspeakable crime of making us and all out friends look like complete fools, in predicting Hillary would win in a landslide of historic proportions?" I thought "Could it be that our hatred for this man, and his continuous string of accomplishing what he promised to do in his campaign is making us hate him even more, giving us NOTHING to run on in 2020?" I thought " Could it be that this unfair sham of a trial to get him impeached is merely to mortally wound him so he will lose the 2020 Presidential Election, especially since every one of our candidates are either senile, or bat-crap crazy .... or both?" And then I came to the unconsious realization ( ... as I was in fact dreaming ...) that "NAAAAH! ... merely a spot of indigestion."        
    • Nice try! Nothing has changed with word manipulation. Face it, its was you, JTR, TTH, Anna that get people banned. But here we go, I prove you wrong, and now you're using it as an excuse to ban. So, let's not contradict yourself, why people get banned because of spamming. It doesn't have anything to do with being rude or anything else. It has to do with people here not wanting to be proved wrong. I don't wish to give anything. I just don't like manipulating other peoples words to come out with a false claim. I could go even further about Russell's spoken words. Put you're the researcher and ranking expert here. Your supposed to know all that already.
    • You are going to have to do some serious explaining, to justify that statement, as it makes no sense at all. Further, if Thor is the reaction you get when eating a Thanksgiving Day meal, you need to take some Athpirin.
    • Watch out, you just admitted that it was you who got people banned from this forum. And up until now, I'm sure no one had any idea that it was you getting yourself banned all those times. 🙄 You said: "Russell didn't care for the Pyramid scheme" and now it appears you wish to give, as evidence, the fact that Russell wasn't sure if the Pyramid indicated anything for the year 1910. If you read what Russell said, however, he claimed that the Pyramid perfectly supported 1874, 1878, 1881 and 1914. He had several times predicted related events timed to about 1910, but he could not distinctly find them in the Pyramid, as he claimed to have found for other dates. Even in 1911, just months after this 1910 question was answered, Russell said in the March 15, 1911 Watch Tower: "No doubt all of our readers have read STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES, Vol. III, the last chapter of which describes the Pyramid and sets forth much of the wonderful symbolic teachings shown in its construction. It shows the Pyramid to be in exact harmony with the Bible. Indeed, some, after reading this volume, have referred to the Great Pyramid as 'The Bible in Stone.'" Just because Russell didn't care for how well the scheme supported 1910, doesn't mean he didn't care about how it was in EXACT harmony, he claimed, with 1874, 1878, 1881 and 1914. The 1917 Finished Mystery book bragged about how Russell's chronology was written before he ever saw the Pyramid, and before he even saw any of Edgar's abundant evidences of the accuracy of Bible chronology in the Pyramid. In 1920 Rutherford went to see it, and the Watch Tower in Dec 15 reported that all the other pyramids were built under the direction of Satan except "the Great Pyramid, which was built under the Lord's supervision." In the June 15 1922 Watch Tower Rutherford published that the "present-truth chronology . . . the correspondency of dozens of measurements proves that the same God designated both pyramid and plan. . ." By 1924, it was claimed of course in the May 21, 1924 Golden Age that the Pyramid, the "Scientific Bible" verified the importance of 1874, 1914 and 1925. (This addition of the 1925 date is actually kind of hilarious if you have carefully read Charles Piazzi Smyth and Joseph Seiss, and see how Russell had re-used their material.) Also in 1924, The Way to Paradise, showed the Pyramid with the caption "GOD'S PLAN WRITTEN IN STONE." Here, it was conjectured that Shem probably built it. Russell had conjectured it was Melchizedek. This was repeated in 1925, and as late as 1926, the Watch Tower said that "advanced Bible Students believe that the Great Pyramid at Gizeh is the witness to the Lord in the Land of Egypt mentioned by the Prophet. (Isa. 19:19)" It was not until 1928 that it became a monument built "under the direction of Satan the Devil." It was now Satan's Bible and no longer "Jehovah's Witness" in stone. This was one of the reasons for the controversy when Rutherford insisted that this false information in Volume III, continue to be sold and advertised in 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932, etc. And still made available for sale by the Society even in the 1940's. Special deluxe editions of the Studies in the Scriptures were still mentioned in the Kingdom Ministry as late as July 1967.
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.