ComfortMyPeople

You definitely aren't painting a pretty picture of this World Economic Forum @Mic Drop I had no idea about the Satanic side of that organization.
We shouldn't be surprised though. We know who "the ruler of this world is".... Jesus told us 2 millenia ago.

This is not a slight to you but I use it to raise a new thought:
Has anyone noticed how the media disparages anyone who does good research and brings the truth to others?  Wikipedia just writes the most liable things about people wherein the celebrity himself has no right to change anything..... even personal histories are changed.  Far lefties are suddenly called far-righters or conspiracy theorists.  The HIT-media is part of the world-wide retaliation-machine which has been put in place by the powers that rule the media at present; and any professor which displays  a little common sense, is a statistical guru, or prized virologist/geneticist, is no longer worthy of being an academic. Their stellar careers get marked by very nasty black spots - especially if they lost their tenure at a university due to gender politics or by speaking out.  Their successful career is maligned and the worth of the Nobel prizes etc. suddenly cancelled.
Although this so-called truth-faction, coming from a wide political spectrum, are not all religious -  they do try to dismantle the deceit and gaslighting going on throughout the world.  Some of them are older (they do not have families in the home and can speak out), and know that they may be targeted and have also accepted this inevitability..... due to the totalitarian way of thinking which is tightening its stranglehold on the world.
The orchestration of the false prophet and the wild beast seems to be world-wide and very efficient.   Revelation 16:  And I saw three unclean inspired expressions* that looked like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the wild beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet. 14  They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and they perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war of the great day of God the Almighty."
This propaganda was prophesied. Propaganda definition: propaganda is the dissemination of information—facts, arguments, rumors, half-truths, or lies—to influence public opinion. I may add that people may soon end up hurting themselves or even their loved ones when they are zealously following instructions via the propaganda.  (Germany's government propaganda during ww2 is a good example of creating good zealots).
While the reliable signs given by Jehovah are now going into fulfillment in the world (such as pestilences, untimely deaths, hunger soon to appear in great scope, King of the North, and the UN trying to get world-controlling documents drawn up and ratified); these signs are giving us an indication where we are in the stream of time (if we watch for them).
The false prophet is also busy with his signs. The false prophet is leading us all mesmerized along with their lab-manufactured problems, massive fear-inducing propaganda, together with an unending list of solutions which have already been deliberated on by those who will soon become the 10 new kings together with the UN; constantly creating new diversions so that the populous cannot get time to think straight; and the atheist prophets of scientism can get their transhuman agenda into play.
What I find fascinating, is the propaganda...... they are managing it extremely well through the appointed  counter media or managed opposition - (algorithms watching every new trend or truth being discovered) - and writing new hit-news  pieces with half-truths which debunk the lies with more half-lies. They use written and visual aids to great effect.  Soon they will be able to cancel-kill all dissenting voices by cancelling all documents which expose the truth. The world will truly be in darkness then- Satan's darkness where no light of any truth will shine through. 
The implication of this is that people could be rounded up for prison or any other nefarious reason and media will be managed by the "state". No news of this will leak out or will be downplayed as "conspiracy"-theory.
What the above definition does not say is that governments usually do the propaganda.  In USA an amendment was passed in 2012 which allows propaganda by the federal government..... and since the end of last year, the government and the UN has appointed various media organizations to remove anything they deem mis-information.  At present they are managing it, but here is the scary part: citizens which go against the LGBTQ agenda now taught in schools to very young children, their names are put on a 'terrorist' list.   
In fact, Governments have done propaganda just about forever because they have had the money and the cooperating educated class to do it. Jesus's death was instigated by a small group of ruling class people (Sanhedrin) who managed, by collusion or conspiracy, to arrest Jesus and sway public opinion ... they could even have planted a few agitators in the crowd as modern propagandists do. 
The "dragon's" propaganda has been excellent in its dividing of humans.  The BLM movement, post-modern philosophy and the rewriting of history has filled many unsuspecting people with hate for others with a different color or worldview;  the publicity about the fakeness of the bible and its historicity is everywhere; the book of Enoch and the anunnaki now has a large following which is basically a form of demon worship.  The belief in aliens is skyrocketing .....due to the belief that the anunnaki were aliens;  as is, the new religion of scientism and the idea that one can live forever in a computer algorithm. 

I  too have bored my family on vacation when I looked at the sewerage systems, baths, building materials, walking through the town and studying all the implements and hand tools and went through the sites with a tooth comb.  I always had a penchant for understanding how the poor folks got through their day.
Recently I listened to a talk by a professor (forgot his name) but he spoke about "empire".   It made me think of the seven heads of the beast.  What he said came down to this: empire was always a war machine which fed the rich and the ruling class.  Soldiers  would grab not only slaves but the wheat, food, animals and strip the land of all its riches.  Everything was transported back to the capital city or became part of booty.  Afterwards there was also the matter of tribute from the survivors.......  Does modern empire work the same?   Certainly.... especially the false prophet which has "two horns like a lamb but began speaking like dragon".  All these trumped up wars come to mind.
Listened today to two people talking about the time under Stalin. How the death squads within Russia murdered people via poisons and plausible suicides and also operated in other countries. One such killer in UK was tracked and he had already committed 14 murders without anyone suspecting foul play.  The polonium case however did hit international news. Putin has similar operations today and was apparently involved in this type of operations in his salad days. 
Eight oligarchs, living in other countries, have died suddenly from non-suspect heart attacks, except for one family who  were all brutally murdered, children included. The father was working as an accountant and had given information to the West on how money was being transferred through banks while renewed sanctions were in place. 

I agree, but that's not what I was talking about.
To me it looks more like they are trying to make us think that they will deliver some kind of "piece de resistance" which will save our lives at Armageddon and if we don't listen to instructions now, we may not listen to that special piece of instruction later on and as a consequence we will die. That is rubbish*. Again, I am not saying instructions are bad. It is the way this is being done. Using this type of reasoning as a coercive tool to obey instructions today. That's what I don't like. Not the listening to instructions.  The thing is, like this they have every Witness second guessing themselves with how far they should take today's instructions seriously, (vaccination being an example) and sitting on the edge of their seat in anticipation of some future imagined instruction, instead of focusing on what really matters. Too much focus on last minute "life saving" instructions coming from imperfect men. As I explained in my original post, the mark on our forehead is what qualifies each individual for survival. The way we live our life now. The mark for survival is not given at obedience to some instructions delivered at, or just before, Armageddon. Pure worship book: "Before the destruction comes, individuals need to be “sighing and groaning”—deeply grieved  at heart—over the wickedness of this world. And rather than hide their feelings, they must demonstrate by words and actions their devotion to pure worship. How can they do so? They need to react favorably to the preaching work that is being done today, to continue putting on a Christlike personality, to get baptized in symbol of their dedication to Jehovah, and to support Christ’s brothers loyally."  It doesn't say "And you must listen to instructions to go and hide in an attic/basement/forest and get vaccinated" Or whatever the case may be....
*It’s as stupid as saying you all must get vaccinated in order to get saved at Armageddon. 

Thanks for your input. This makes perfect sense, and it aligns with what we read in Acts and does not at all contradict Jesus' instructions to the 70 evangelizers. There was an urgency to the preaching in the first century, and the most effective means, for that time and place, would have been used first.
Thought this was excellent, too. Among the Greeks [and Romans], these empty rituals were more important than beliefs. There was not much concern that the story about a certain god in one town could differ quite a bit from the stories told in another town. There was no specific set of beliefs or doctrines, so that the expectations about how humans could be affected from the gods was more general and rooted in superstition. Events were often "chalked up" to the capriciousness of those gods.
Your description of the appeal and superiority of the Christian message in those next couple paragraphs was packed with so many good points. I loved it.
It sounds like you have a great knowledge of history, but there is a difference in knowledge and making sense of it to people today. I think that's a great skill of yours. You actually make sense out of it. And the fact that you live in such historic geographical locations must make your knowledge and application come alive even more.
As a family (wife, kids, brother, parents) we have taken a couple Mediterranean cruises that covered Rome, Pompeii, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus/Smyrna, Egypt, and Istanbul. I'm sure I bored my kids with all the details I wanted to share about the Biblical and historical connections in all these places. At least they could always go back to unlimited ice cream and pizza when they got back on the cruise ship. 
 

It was custom to congregate at the city gates or market places.  Paul was the "apostle to the nations" and preached to Greeks as well as other nations.  He was here in Albania via the Via Ignatius from Corinth - then called Illyricum.  (He could have been in the port city here where I live because Rome later considered to make this the eastern capital instead of Byzantium). At the gates or market Paul usually would find someone favorable and go home with them and preach further. On occasion he would use this house as a base. He also went to the Synagogues.  In most cities it was the Jews who started the riots because he was teaching a new form of Judaism. (To them it sounded like blasphemy, when they refused to acknowledge the Messiah had come.) In the week, I am sure, he would have done some house preaching after working on tents. 
Although the Greeks had the oratory tradition, I wonder how much of a help it really gave to the poor and those who moved in the lower echelons of society? Religion was run by the upper echelons or educated segments of society. It was also very set in tradition and ritual. To my thinking, it offers only an empty framework of tradition and many stories of Gods - as much as Hinduism with its many gods and its caste system does today.  With skillful preaching (and the miracles during the lifetime of the Apostles), the gospel message was appealing to those with a searching heart.  (The other points mentioned above about angels and other points, were good to think about.)
Not only did the Christians teach a different god, a creator with a Name (using the Septuagint translation of Hebrew scriptures), but this god was interested in humans because he sent a loving, human son who came to earth to show us how to live.  This representative of God was killed as a man because he preached about a future kingdom which would restore the earth..... and this ONE was killed in a very ghastly way by the authorities (which I supposed appealed to anyone ever treated unjustly by authorities or even a few rebels).  He taught that all humans were brothers and war and violence was wrong.  (The military machine of Rome would not like this idea because one could only rise to the top in society through war such as humble donkey breeder, Vespasian.)
The fact that this lowly Jesus (being the son of the true god), was prepared to die for our imperfections, and all his associates saw him raised up again, must have been a powerful message. The gospel message was simple - in that it taught love.  That all should love and treat each other justly, to share material things, be hospitable, no biased, and to not be selfish or materialistic, not hang onto earthly things because Jehovah would provide. Also the pagan religions taught a lot of superstition. They were free from fear and superstition. 
I think those plagues against Christendom in Revelation 6 were all thrown down from heaven by the angels and distributed by Rutherford against Christendom in his public exposes - lol -  (he had his fiery place in the unfolding of Jehovah's purposes). 
I appreciate your examples - I must add that these are all individuals that you quote during a period of the dark ages. A period when the Catholic church allowed no dissent to their false teachings. Very little true light was available.  But a slow renaissance was coming into the church as well. JWs often cite these examples of faithful people, who stood up against the powerful church, as ones who were possibly also anointed by Jehovah as they often were burnt or executed by the Church. John Wycliffe, Johannes Huss,  comes to mind. They kept their integrity with the available light they had at the time.   Jesus taught that ALL Christians must carry the gospel (Romans 10) How will they know if they have not heard? (paraphrased).
As I mentioned before, people who just read the bible with a sincere heart, understand that they have to preach.  I have a Swedish friend who had never read the bible in her life or been to a religious class (her parents were atheists), who tried to preach on her own after she regularly read the bible. She did not know how to go about it and no-one listened. It was not long after this that Witnesses found her and she is still a full-time preacher today.
 
We not only preach but we are an earth-wide community or congregation of people dedicated Jehovah.  In the "last day" this prophecy is coming to fulfillment.
Isaiah 2: 2- 4 "  In the final part of the days,he mountain of the house of Jehovah Will become firmly established above the top of the mountains, And it will be raised up above the hills, And to it all the nations will stream.c 3  And many peoples will go and say: “Come, let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, To the house of the God of Jacob. He will instruct us about his ways, And we will walk in his paths.” For law* will go out of Zion, And the word of Jehovah out of Jerusalem. 4  He will render judgment among the nations And set matters straight* respecting many peoples. They will beat their swords into plowshares And their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, Nor will they learn war anymore.
From the above we learn that they are under heavenly mount Zion, New Jerusalem (Hebrews 12:22 But you have approached a Mount Zion and a city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads* of angels).  Jesus is now ruling invisibly in heaven and we fall, as a world-wide nation under his heavenly government. The identifying mark is our love because we refuse to kill our brothers in other nations - we are not influenced by the nationalistic wars propagated by beastly nations. 
 
My husband grew up as a Brethren, which also has different sects.  Some of them do not even eat with their children if they have not been baptized. 

I … I’ve been concerned lately about the outbreak of monkey-pox, and I’ve been thinking about wearing my welding helmet.

I dunno. I think this is more like my son-in-law not going to another house until he has cleaned out my fridge.

It does not contradict what Jesus said, because the Greek here does really not say anything about going from house to house. The KJV translators had a lot to do with this translation, and "from house to house" has therefore become a common English way of saying "in your houses."
Paul is saying, basically: I didn't just teach you brothers publicly [among other people], but even [privately] in your homes.
Notice that the literal expression in the Kingdom Interlinear is "according to houses" not "from house to house."

This is different from Jesus; words in Luke 10:7 which actually forbid (under those circumstances) going from house to house. Literally: "Do not you be going from out of a house into [another] house."

And, of course, Jesus explains why in the context.
Most translations still follow the KJV example, but some have used a more koine-Greek-based translation, saying:
NLT: I never shrank back from telling you what you needed to hear, either publicly or in your homes.
Latin Vulgate: quomodo nihil subtraxerim utilium quo minus adnuntiarem vobis et docerem vos publice et per domos
CEB You know I held back nothing that would be helpful so that I could proclaim to you and teach you both publicly and privately in your homes. CEV When I preached in public or taught in your homes, I didn't hold back from telling anything that would help you. ERV I always did what was best for you. I told you the Good News about Jesus in public before the people and also taught in your homes. GNT You know that I did not hold back anything that would be of help to you as I preached and taught in public and in your homes. TLB Yet I never shrank from telling you the truth, either publicly or in your homes. ICB You know I preached to you, and I did not hold back anything that would help you. You know that I taught you in public and in your homes.   Also, I should add that I don't think Paul never would go from one house to the next in his preaching, if the situation called for it. It's just that Acts 20:20 isn't really about that kind of preaching activity.

Also what about angels? They must have still had the ability to guide circumstances here and there on earth, even when the spiritual gifts waned.
And there was another practical method of preaching that we don't have. There was a reason that Paul didn't go from house to house. And there was a reason that Jesus forbid the 70 disciples from going house to house. It was because you had an immediate assembly as soon as got into the gates of most towns/cities. You could begin announcing the reason for your visit in the town square and draw a crowd. There was no reason to go from house to house. It would be a waste of time (and they were never going to finish the circuit of towns in Israel as it was).
But there was always a chance to find multiple favorable ears, all that would listen, by just walking into a town and start preaching to the crowd in the marketplace, the square, the agora.

Persecution, from Jewish religious leaders at first, and Romans soon after, can also act as a unifying force, and creates a lot of publicity and concern over who these people are and exactly what is the claim against them.
There were a lot of prejudices, I think, in the Roman empire against Jews in some circles (and many of the Christians were treated as if the same as Jews). But Romans also put up with a lot of religious variety, including some "novel" ones, and many found the Jewish religion very appealing too. (Probably due to its sense of historical purpose, and better-documented claims of ancient origins, and a more rational story of creation than the Greek/Roman pantheons.)
Also, I think that the Christian variety of Judaism was one that some Roman political leaders did have a use for. It taught peace and cooperation with the political rulers, right up to the point where they wanted to force the worship of pagan gods or forbid the Christians their preaching ministry. If the Romans would learn not to push them too far, they were ideal citizens. 
Maybe not most, but the Greek mindset of the elites often found the idea of listening to new ideas (seedpickers) appealing.
I'd have to agree. This must have been a big thing in the first century. Although Christianity began reporting huge numbers in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, when we assume that these gifts had already faded to near non-existence.
It's possible, like some scholars claim, that the quick growth of Christianity outside "Palestine" was based on the appeal to wealthier Greek/Roman proselytes to Judaism. A lot of the synagogue funds for the Jewish diaspora had been coming from these families who had found Judaism appealing. But now a new version of Judaism had developed that had all the appeal of Judaism, but with a more urgent purpose, vibrant "living" beliefs, a much more appealing "Lord" and an imminent solution to political problems and injustices. And no pressure to circumcise!!!
The movie "Agora" (2009) doesn't claim to explain Christianity's rise in the early centuries, but it's historically sound enough to give us a good idea that the appeal for many adherents was more economic than spiritual. Christianity, to them, was a socialist revolution, with enough wealthy adherents to cover the needs of the poorest, through re-distribution.
(This probably doesn't belong to the Rutherford topic either, but ...)

Sloppy sloppy. Where do you get your quotations? The above quote is a lie. Here's the actual quote:
*** w68 8/15 p. 499 par. 30 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes. Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh creative “day.” Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the “sixth day,” which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam’s 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or “day” ended, and how long Adam lived into the “seventh day.” And yet the end of that sixth creative “day” could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam’s creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.
 

I don't think the question was about what the "Flood" represented, but what the "Ark" represented. The Children book says it represents God's organization, as you saw. But I only brought up the Children book because someone here had just mentioned the book. You could actually go to MOST of Rutherford's books and find a similar statement.
Here's his book "Riches" (1936)

. . .

...

If it sounds odd to say that the "other sheep" must work with Jehovah's witnesses, it was because, in those years, only the anointed remnant were called Jehovah's witnesses. The "other sheep" were called Jonadabs.
In the Salvation book (1939) he also says the Ark represents God's organization. Curiously, this time he made Noah represent Jesus instead of the faithful remnant (faithful and discreet slave), but still had his sons and their wives represent the "other sheep" (Jonadabs). In this particular book (Salvation) he somehow left out the faithful remnant.

At any rate, you are probably aware that Rutherford consistently says that Noah's Ark represents God's organization, and that this means only Jehovah's witnesses could expect salvation.

I was just thinking of that expression "Jehovah allowed it." You might think it flippant for me to say, Jehovah also allowed the Holocaust. But, I once hired a consultant who was a Jewish rabbi, and who also had some specific IT skills we needed. His conversations about religion were usually guarded, but I asked him if he thinks that so many Jews are either atheist or agnostic because of the Holocaust. He said that ha-Shem (God) allowed it as a test to see who would still have faith. To me, that sounded rather distasteful, and I don't know if it's a common belief among Jews. In one sense, we almost have to believe that it's partly true of all bad things that Jehovah allows, but what kind of a test is that?
I think we should still fall back upon the idea that we are all imperfect and not to be trusted, and yet, if an individual or group will gather in Jesus' name to accomplish a ministry with the right heart condition, then their effort will be blessed. And I think that what proved a right heart condition among Russell and early Bible Students included the desire not to kill fellow humans (no war) the desire to see Jehovah as a real approachable and understanding, loving person (no Hellfire, no Trinity), and a desire to spread the good news of the Kingdom. To the extent that this desire was motivated by love, the work was blessed. This blessing is manifested especially in the fact that it attracts more persons of like motivation. 
The failures and imperfections aren't really "tests" so much as they are the natural interaction among highly imperfect persons. True Christianity is set up this way so that our own motivations are made manifest by how we see the conduct and faith of others working out, and our desire to apply spiritual growth in our own lives. It's the idea of pressing on to maturity, chewing solid food, and leaving the milk behind. Yet there are always some of us who are still more comfortable and satisfied with the "milk," and there are always some who will be serving "milk" instead of "solid food." The GB serve both. No matter where we are on this food maturity spectrum, we should be welcoming to all the others no matter where they are on that food spectrum. -- And then, what some obsess over as items of solid food, thinking these are "deep things of God," are probably the milkiest of all.
The most solid food of all, for the most mature, is simply love out of a purely motivated heart.
(1 Timothy 1:4, 5) Really, the objective of this instruction is love out of a clean heart and out of a good conscience and out of faith without hypocrisy.

Just to clarify a few things. I am not averse to cooperating with instructions. That is not what I am talking about at all. And I am very appreciative of the constant reminders in WT studies, talks etc. which help us to remain in pure worship. Very grateful for it, and I think the GB are doing an excellent job. And our family does have a backpack ready (ha!)
What really irritates me though is this constant need to harp on about the reason to obey now .....the reason being that if we get used to obeying now,  it will mean our salvation in the future when we have to obey this one last instruction (whatever "impractical" thing that will be) to get saved. That is wrong. It's like a veiled threat. 

What gets me is when we keep going on about obeying instructions in order to survive Armageddon. This weekends WT study mentioned it agaiin....comparing the GB to Joshuah and Zerubabel. (Otherwise the study was very good). "Sometimes God’s people received direction that did not appear to be practical from a human standpoint but turned out to be lifesaving". 
The WT gave a couple of current examples....just stopping short of mentioning getting vaccinated against covid (thank goodness).
Are we not putting too much emphasis on the organization being the saving power, in other words our salvation being dependent on instructions coming from imperfect men? Whereas salvation is clearly going to come from Jesus, and we may be anywhere doing anything when Jesus saves us. Or is the mark for survival from the secretaries ink horn contingent on having our backpack ready or hunkering down somewhere?? As if Jesus cannot save us uless we listen to these types of instructions. I always thought the criterion was dependent on pure worship. This whole life we live is a test of our loyalty to Jesus and Jehovah. Everything we do today and tomorrow, the choices we make with respect to pure worship is what places that mark on our foreheads. And after all these tests we encounter every day, then there will be another test to see how obedient we are to the GB?? Give me a break! Past Bible examples do show that there were certain procedures the people had to follow in order to survive, BUT the situation at Armageddon will be incomparable, it cannot be said to parallel any other situation before then. I don't know why we keep obsessing that it is the same. It's like regurgitating types and anti types again....drawing parallels where there are none.

It was stated by a bethel brother at an assembly…we were quiet relieved to hear it..it was when they were asking us if we had kept up with the changes…that was one of them….2006 is old news now.
Also brother Luchiani ( however you spell it )  gave a very recent talk on …only Jesus knows who will be saved…it was a excellent talk…you could tell he was reminding us…it wasn’t as blatant as the talk at the assembly and that talk was well after 2006 
Yes I still hear some talks given saying our life will depend on our loyalty to the org…..but I have never heard them equate the org with the ark since that assembly talk..
just on a side note I know it’s an organization but personally I prefer Gods people to organization…..the Israelites were GODS PEOPLE….the Jews were GODS PEOPLE…..The Christian’s were GODS PEOPLE….perhaps it’s something that’s just me…a little bit of a quirky thing,

We can always trust that Jehovah is righteous and his judgments are righteous. When all things are made new, the old will be forgotten. And I don't think we know enough about who will and won't survive anyway.

It’s okay JWI…I hadn’t actually finished my comment when I posted…and I’m just grateful the teaching has been changed….Jesus was a stumbling block for his own people…..and I beleive the organization at times has been like that with their own…a stumbling block.".the sadness of it at times is just overwhelming for those who dont survive.

I wasn't trying to beat round the bush. I agree that a lot of damage was done to many. For example, my father and his two sisters (my aunts) received the Children book in person at the St. Louis assembly. The Children book made my father and his two sisters reconsider marriage and having children, because it made having children in this system appear untheocratic, even unchristian. My father of course decided to marry and have children, but my two aunts did not have any children, and in later years they were both quite sad about having followed these "instructions from the Lord."
In 1950, the Watchtower was already loosening up on those instructions, as you can see from a Watchtower article that year, but still with the remaining implication that if you want "perfect" children, you should wait:
*** w50 6/1 p. 176 Letter ***
The flood was a real physical catastrophe to the old ungodly world. The Battle of Armageddon will be likewise a physical catastrophe to this present evil world, and not something just spiritual. The ark of salvation that we enter is not a literal ark but is God’s organization; and as for Noah’s family’s not having children while in the ark, if the “other sheep” class’ now having natural children in the “ark” condition vitiated the picture of the childlessness of the ark’s occupants, then the anointed remnant’s having natural children now would also vitiate the “ark” picture or type. But it does not. Children born now are not born in fulfillment of the divine mandate reissued. When God reissued this mandate to marry and reproduce to Noah after the flood (Genesis 9:1, 7) the mandate was fulfilled in a typical way by a token fulfillment, 70 (10 X 7) generations being listed in Genesis, chapter 10, as springing from Noah and his sons. In the same way the fulfillment of the divine mandate reissued after Armageddon will be, not by crowding it with inhabitants to the saturation point, but by a token fulfillment that will allow for the resurrection of the dead with plenty of room for these resurrected ones. Thus, as pointed out in the Watchtower article “The Apostle’s Counsel on Wedlock”, February 1, 1947, page 45, column 2, footnote, God will show that he can have the divine mandate fulfilled in a very literal way in vindication of his world and he will give a faithful demonstration of its fulfillment. Those having part in its fulfillment will still ‘serve God in his temple day and night’ (Rev. 7:15), they will fulfill Deuteronomy 6:7 as to bringing up their children, and their children will fulfill Ephesians 6:1-3 as to obeying their parents, in the same way that the anointed remnant and their children are instructed to obey these divine commandments.

Thank you…I know we dont often take into consideration these all lived  a whole different world and era….what was okay back them…would never be legally possible today nor even an accepted thing in the community,,,
And again some of this is here say or passed down..some written and with proof …all I know even tho I prefer Russell’s demeanour and his will for how things should go forward….we owe Rutherford credit for many things,,,,but I still think he unnecessarily laid the ground work for beating the sheep and making the truth harsh…just not what Russell wanted,

I already gave a short answer with my opinion on this question. I found it funny that I just got to a part of Persson's book where he answers the same question. It's unbelievably long. I just found it funny that someone put so much work into answering that question and even draws on some material where I never would have thought to look. In one case I didn't even know that the material existed. 
Persson uses a couple of the same ideas that I used in my answer. But many more, too. I don't think it's at all important to read all of what I'm about to paste below, but I wanted to let you know that it's only about HALF the information he actually uses in the book to answer the same question:

Pudgy is right. It's not written in the same words. It's written the way I quoted the same sentiment from the February 15, 1919 Watch Tower, p.51. In fact, the timing of that article might even make someone guess that it was a way of showing agreement with the similar, but much more direct, statement from the "Federal Council of Churches" (FCC) just a few weeks earlier. They both praise the objective/purpose of the League, and both convey that it is in line with the kingdom message foretold in the Bible. Also if you read the entire comment from the FCC you see that they also didn't make it the equivalent of God's Kingdom, just a political expression of it. It was very common in those decades for the Watchtower to express agreement with political happenings that they understood to be aligned with the expectations about the Kingdom. This was especially true of Zionism, movements with respect to "capital vs. labor," and various politicians of the time who were even depicted as the near equivalent of "prophets."
Edited to add an example:
For example, the 1924 Golden Age (now Awake!), on page 149, says:
We understand now, why Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, who like Judge Rutherford is permeated with the real Biblical and prophetic spirit, ceases not in his discourse to defy the devil, and throw (morally) an inkwell into his face, as the deceased Luther did. We understand also why the Premier of the Labor Party turns his back on the League of Nations, of which formerly he was an apostle, and draws near to the Americans whose eyes are opened.
Judge Rutherford cites, in addition to prophecies from Isaiah, Ezekiel and Amos, from Mr. MacDonald: "There is neither betterment nor peace in Europe. The governments are powerless. The year 1924 is worse than 1914." Again he [Rutherfod] quotes the prophet David Lloyd George: "A new chapter opens in the history of Europe, with a climax of horror such as the world has never witnessed."

I think you are right. This was the main issue that the "Stand Fasters" publicized. The Watchtower and Rutherford said that there was no problem in buying War Bonds, because it showed we were "friends" with the United States.
But I notice the date on the pamphlet you posted. January 1919. So this was also just about the exact same time when the Watchtower had declared its basic "support" for the League of Nations. In effect, the Watchtower was calling it 'the political expression of God's Kingdom on earth." Naturally they didn't think it in any way "replaced" God's Kingdom, but thought of it as a kind of expression of God's Kingdom because it had the same shared purpose and goals. The February 1919 Watchtower said:
“We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.” — Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51
l have seen it pointed out that it was also a crazy coincidence that the Watchtower was here "wondering admiringly" at the League, even using the same words about its "wonderful" expressions and that we cannot but "admire" it's high principles. This was an unfortunate use of words when we consider that the 1984 New World Translation translated Revelation 17:8, purportedly about the same League of Nations, as follows:
(Revelation 17:8)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The Stand Fasters claimed that Rutherford's attitude and words were compromising toward the world and its politics.

I think that part of the problem is that apostates are driven by a variety of motivations, and there is therefore a wide range of quality in their work. I have never heard of this book by Casarona, but from what you have shared, it seems to be the kind of book you could thumb through very quickly and reject as one of those that grasps at straws and just presents anything negative without doing much research, merely copying the worst claims he has heard about.
For example, Richard Wheelock did not jump from a third floor factory window as so many people think. He jumped from a window in the Towers Hotel. He had been suffering from depression from many years before this happened. He had even threatened suicide going as far back as the time when his fiance, Audrey Mock, left him to marry Brother Knorr.
It's stupid to blame the Society directly for factory accidents. These are usually human error. There are probably only a very few cases where legal liability might have reached "to the top." But it would be rare to get credible public knowledge of such events, because it would be rare for the family of a Bethelite to make a case against the entire Watchtower Society for a wrongful death. I can't imagine my own parents even thinking of such a thing if anything had happened to me there.
Yes, there were suicides even when I was there, but only two, I think. The numbers of Bethelites were greatly increased in the 1970s and there was a thought going around that congregation elders were purposely encouraging Bethel service to young brothers whom they termed "damaged goods." They thought that the spirituality at Bethel would fix them. In some cases it was evidently mental issues stemming from sexual abuse catching up to them. And we'll never really know what it was in this lifetime.
It appears that those were your words, not Casarona's. If so, I don't think it's fair to try to judge the faith of someone who suffers from deep bouts of depression. For all we know it was confident faith in the resurrection that motivated his suicide.
I do think, of course, that some ex-JWs, non-JWs, and apostates are definitely out to give Bethel, or the Watchtower Society, a bad review. But no matter their motive, I think we also need to look at the quality of their research. I remember when Jim Penton wrote a book about the history of the persecution of Witnesses in Canada. It was considered an excellent book and was available in the Bethel Library. Penton was considered an excellent historian and of course there was pride in that a professor or PhD had written such a good book. The Watchtower even said:
*** w77 1/1 p. 11 Insight on the News ***
“A Debt of Gratitude”
● Writing in the Toronto “Star” of October 4, 1976, Stuart Shaw mentions the book “Jehovah’s Witnesses in Canada: Champions of Freedom of Speech and Worship,” by James Penton, associate professor of history at the University of Lethbridge. Shaw explains that it discusses the intense persecution of the Witnesses in that country from 1939 to 1956, “first at the instance of the federal government and then at that of the government of Quebec.” . . .  Referring to the recent book, however, and shedding some light on the underlying cause, Shaw comments: “Penton argues convincingly, citing official correspondence and documents of the period, that the real reason was entirely different. The King government was under heavy clerical pressure—from the Roman Catholic Church in particular, but also from some Protestant clergymen—to suppress these ‘heretics.’”
Of course, when Penton later criticized certain aspects of the organization, he was disfellowshipped, and suddenly his books, even if they were better researched, were no longer argued convincingly, and he had somehow turned into a sloppy historian. 
I think that motivations and biases can be important to understand, but mostly it's about the quality of research and presentation of evidence. And sometimes we might have to ignore some conclusions a researcher might draw from the evidence, but still find the presentation of evidence itself valuable. 
Also, if no one finds anything specifically wrong with a book or research, or makes no attempt to counter the evidence, then it is probable that they are just complaining about the person BECAUSE the evidence itself is too strong to deal with.