ComfortMyPeople

That is why we now have this crazy philosophy driving the "great reset".  Driven by ideology of the World economic Forum. They are now burning old books and independent thought is no longer allowed.  The "critical " part of critical theory is gone amok.

https://voiceforscienceandsolidarity.substack.com/p/it-is-5-past-12?r=1iysu3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
 
Dear Friends,
I just listened to this 45-min desperate plea by highly-esteemed vaccinologist/immunologist Geert Vanden Bossche. His reports are typically so medically/scientifically esoteric that I cannot understand them. (Transcript included, if you prefer).
He writes for educated professionals in those fields. Since he is unaware that “the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one”, he cannot fathom WHY the medical world is remaining silent in the face of the humanitarian crisis that is the inevitable result of the current vaccine response to the SARS Covid-19 pandemic!! He explains that the unvaccinated are the vacuum cleaners of the pandemic (previous article) and the vaccine-response is an insult to science and exacerbating the pandemic and the infectiousness of the virus!!! He finds a further/escalated humanitarian health crisis to be inevitable. He states he can no longer send out diatribes/reports about this, because the situation is simply too stressful for him!
I plan to give him a witness today. Just bait with a small witness, then I will wait…see if he takes the bait, then I will provide more…
Since we are a geographically far-flung group, and come from all sorts of backgrounds, if some or even one of you,  would take pity on this man in his distress, and share the good news, in addition to my feeble attempt, we will have done a good deed and served our Master obediently.
 
I have lived & worked as a resort architect in 3 countries (US, Czech Republic, England) and recently have been working as a financial professional, licensed in Annuities & Mutual Funds. Nothing scientific/medical here. Some of you have a more scientific bent and perhaps would be more effective. However, we know that Jehovah & King Jesus can use any donkey to deliver the ‘gold’. 
Please consider perusing this article.
Note the desperation/distress of this scientist/vaccinologist. See if you feel compelled to give him a witness. 
Your fellow worker, 😉

(Daniel 11:43) . . .And he will rule over the hidden treasures of gold and silver and over all the desirable things of Egypt. And the Libʹy·ans and the E·thi·oʹpi·ans will be at his steps.
I guess this assessment is a bit controversial...

Please, do it you for me!

(Daniel 11:43) . . .And he will rule over the hidden treasures of gold and silver and over all the desirable things of Egypt. And the Libʹy·ans and the E·thi·oʹpi·ans will be at his steps.
I guess this assessment is a bit controversial...

I don't think that was the only reason. Several countries in Europe would not be ready to stand by the US-sponsored sanctions against Russia (because they don't want their citizens to be faced with cold this winter). They were still compromising on the economic sanctions, but would have no more reason to compromise if the pipelines were sabotaged.
The US/NATO war against Russia which is being accomplished by using the Ukrainian people as cannon fodder is a war where Russia has tried to negotiate a peaceful solution for years. Since 2014, Ukraine has bombed and tortured its own Russian-speaking citizens in the Donbas regions, killing at least 14,000 of them just in the last 8 years. In fact, when Russia pulls out of a region, Ukraine uses it as an excuse to continue bombing their own Russian-speaking populations there even during this war. Russia has been trying to support the Russian-allied Donbas regions going all the way back to the Minsk agreements. Even during this war, Russia has offered to negotiate and the West has interfered with these negotiations. Boris Johnson even openly intervened at a point when it seemed Ukraine was ready for peace. Remember that the BILLIONS of dollars in military aid, is not free from the US military contractors. They still get paid through US citizen's tax dollars and payments approved from Ukraine's puppet government, that the US set up there.
So the basic idea that makes even more immediate sense is that Germany and others now have no choice but to support the US war against Russia via Ukraine.

Haven't seen much evidence for the validity of the second part of that question. The idea that the US would push for a proxy war against Russia in Ukraine has been public even for many years prior to the US coup that replaced the president in 2014. Even Biden stated many years prior that the way to get Russia involved would be to push for more NATO countries, including Ukraine, along the Russian border.
Also, Rice was not the only person to admit that Europe needs to be forced into a greater dependence on US energy. It's a well-known, and sometimes openly admitted goal of US war in the Middle-East to gain control over the energy resources. Trump admitted it openly at least once. The very reason that the US continues to occupy about a third of Syria has been to continue stealing control of its oil. The commission that looked into whether Assad (Syria) actually "gassed his own people" had actually already debunked it, although the debunking was from the same people who would later change their story. Libya was building up better relations with the US, when Gaddafi started pushing for national control of the oil resources, and cooperation among African nations. It is not really a secret that this is why Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and others decided to murder him (and laughed about it).

Allen! Allen! Allen! Allen! Allen!
ALLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN!

Sure. It's a bad habit from past employment, but I think a lot about what people can do with statistics. You know: "lies, d#$%n lies and statistics." You can make people believe in things that are true, only half-true, or completely false. Here are my own numbers below. I had never looked at mine before, and it reminded me that the 11 downvotes I gave out were part of a joke that I was playing with someone else here.
But I can also state, with some sense of real accomplishment, that nearly 580 of the 618 downvotes I received, all came from the very same person, even though they came from about 27 of that same person's various accounts.

 

Yet you continue to enter a JW forum and declare Jehovah is not God's name "repeatedly".......
Adios.... go find some other waters to play in and hurl insults.
 

This is an interesting point. The information that @Patiently waiting for Truth included is true, and it does not confirm the 1970 Watchtower article. That article was wrong, and the Watchtower kept that wrong view from about 1950 to about 1980. Without admitting that this old view was wrong, the Watchtower has more recently (1984) made a correction to it, which I have included at the end of the post.
The 1970 Watchtower article that Chioke Lin quoted earlier says:
*** w70 6/1 p. 343 A New Bible Translation—Does It Honor God? ***
But French scribes did not invent the name “Jehovah.” It was in use centuries before, Raymond Martin’s Pugio Fidei using it in the form “Jehova” in the year 1270.
Here's the same wrong information repeated in 1980:
*** w80 2/1 p. 11 The Divine Name in Later Times ***
Interestingly, Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk of the Dominican order, first rendered the divine name as “Jehova.” This form appeared in his book Pugeo Fidei, published in 1270 C.E.—over 700 years ago.
This incorrect information had been presented in further detail back in 1950. Many of the extra details are correct:
*** w50 12/1 pp. 472-474 An Open Letter to the Catholic Monsignor ***
Your quotation from the Catholic Biblical Encyclopedia says Jehovah was the incorrect pronunciation given to the Hebrew tetragrammaton JHVH in the 14th century by Porchetus de Salvaticis (1303). But let us say: The origin of the word Jehovah used to be attributed to Petrus Galatinus, a Franciscan friar, the confessor of Pope Leo X, in his De Arcanis Catholicae Veritatis, published in 1518. But the latest scholarship has proved he was not the one to introduce the pronunciation Jehovah, and neither was your aforementioned Porchetus de Salvaticis. As shown by Joseph Voisin, the learned editor of the Pugio Fidei (The Poniard of Faith) by Raymundus Martini, Jehovah had been used long before Galatinus. Even a generation before Porchetus de Salvaticis wrote his Victoria contra Judaeos (1303), the Spanish Dominican friar Raymundus Martini wrote his Pugio, about 1278, and used the name Jehovah. In fact, Porchetus took the contents of his Victoria largely from Martini’s Pugio. And Scaliger proves that Galatinus took his De Arcanis bodily from Martini’s Pugio. Galatinus did not introduce the pronunciation Jehovah, but merely defended it against those who pronounced the Hebrew tetragrammaton Jova.
In 1557 Jehovah became established in John Forster’s New Hebrew Dictionary, and Marcus Marinus admitted Jehova in his Lexicon Arca Noae of 1593. Sebastian Muenster uses the name Jehova in his text of his Latin translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (1534), and in his notes on Exodus 3:15 and 6:3 he uses the name as though it were well known. Also in 1557, in bringing out Pagninus’ Latin version of the Hebrew Scriptures, Robert Stephanus used Jehova uniformly for the Hebrew tetragrammaton. In a note on Psalm 2:1 he remarked that substituting Adonai for it was to be rejected as a Jewish superstition.
Cardinal Thomas de Vio Cajetanus in his Commentary on the Pentateuch, of 1531, regularly used Jehova. In his translation of Genesis 2:4 he has “Jehova Elohim”; and in his note on Exodus 6:3 he says: “Jehovah the God of your fathers appeared to me (Iehova Elohe patrum vestrorum visus est mihi).” To be consistent, you should call that “shallow scholarship” on the part of your cardinal, what?
But that such “shallow scholarship” is not limited to Roman Catholic clergy of the 13th to the 16th centuries, ...
The pronunciation Jahweh, usually credited to John L. Ewald of the 18th century, goes back farther, to the 16th century. Ten years before Ewald was born (1747), Jahveh was found in Eichhorn’s Simonis, the Lexicon in most general use in Germany. F. H. Gesenius adopted the pronunciation Jahveh when Ewald was still defending Jehovah.
A correction to this misinformation was made in 1984, in our publication "The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever." (Appropriately released at the time of the 1984 Reference Edition of the NWT.) In this publication, it was tacitly admitted that the monk, Raymundus Martini, had never used any form like "Jehovah" or "Iehovah" or "Jehova" or "Yehova." These forms were not generally evidenced until the 16th century, literally several centuries later.
*** na pp. 17-18 God’s Name and Bible Translators ***
In time, God’s name came back into use. In 1278 it appeared in Latin in the work Pugio fidei (Dagger of Faith), by Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk. Raymundus Martini used the spelling Yohoua. Soon after, in 1303, Porchetus de Salvaticis completed a work entitled Victoria Porcheti adversus impios Hebraeos (Porchetus’ Victory Against the Ungodly Hebrews). In this he, too, mentioned God’s name, spelling it variously Iohouah, Iohoua and Ihouah.  Then, in 1518, Petrus Galatinus published a work entitled De arcanis catholicae veritatis (Concerning Secrets of the Universal Truth) in which he spells God’s name Iehoua.
The name first appeared in an English Bible in 1530, when William Tyndale published a translation of the first five books of the Bible.
------------
*** na p. 17 God’s Name and Bible Translators ***
In time, God’s name came back into use. In 1278 it appeared in Latin in the work Pugio fidei (Dagger of Faith), by Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk. Raymundus Martini used the spelling Yohoua.
*** na p. 18 God’s Name and Bible Translators ***
[Picture on page 18]
God’s name in the form Yohoua appeared in 1278 in the work Pugio fidei as seen in this manuscript (dated to the 13th or 14th century) from the Ste. Geneviève library, Paris, France (folio 162b)
*** na p. 17 God’s Name and Bible Translators ***
Printings of this work dated some centuries later, however, have the divine name spelled Jehova.

At first I thought you might be being somewhat judgemental on the overseer George Benson....and stayed quiet.... however when you wrote the above it got me to thinking....
Wasn't there an official video not long ago telling young people to put down their violin (musical instruments) in favor of studying and field service?
That would be an obvious stumbling block to millions of JW's worldwide which would be a very strong argument for him to choose NOT to use his talent publicly despite having a natural right to do so.
Interesting conundrum here.
ok... I've said enough.... I'm sure Brother George Benson would be an interesting elder to talk to and get his views on things given his experience in life.

Interesting that it dates close to the 1st century ....
 

More interesting information: 
 

Historian David Kertzer, author of “The Pope At War: The Secret History of Pope Pius XII, Mussolini, and Hitler,” joins Amna Nawaz to discuss.
Hitler had a secret "back channel" setup with the Pope.
10/16/1943 - They (Nazis) tried to arrest all of Rome's Jews ... and held them just outside the walls of the Vatican for 2 days... ends up 1,007 Jews were sent to their deaths in Auschwitz without protest to Hitler.
 

The Bible describes burning sulfur and fire raining down from the sky which permanently destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:24).
Is there any evidence still left in the geological record that matches the Bible’s description of what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah?

In 1913, Raymond Weill was the first Jewish archaeologist to excavate the most ancient part of Jerusalem. What was he looking for? King David's Tomb. How did he know where to look for the tomb? He used the Bible!

The Genesis account of the creation of the Earth is not taken from a viewpoint in outer space, the entire account is taken from the viewpoint of a person standing on the ground looking at events.
 
What he sees from the ground is what is recorded.

Go to Genesis again and re-read it keeping that idea in perspective firmly in mind, and it makes a lot more sense with what we know happened from solid evidence.

I agree, generally. You can't know for sure that it was exactly 40, since the Bible doesn't tell us. It could have been just those 4.5 hrs (Fri) + 24 hrs (Sat) + 0.5 hrs on Sunday, or as many as 11 hours on Sunday. That leaves a range of 29 hours up to a maximum of 39.5. So I agree that 40 might be the maximum, outside possibility that the synoptics would allow for. And that's where I got the "1.64 days" [max] altogether, similar to your number, less than two days.
You apparently stake quite a lot on the idea that Jesus was dead for exactly 40 hours even though the Bible gives us a range that apparently runs from about 29 hours minimum to 39.5 hours, maximum. I would agree that 40 is an outside possibility, but my point was trying to show that we can't be exact where the Bible is not exact.
And yet, you go so far as to imply that all can be lost, like Satan, if one doesn't accept the meaning of "40" and the fact of Jesus being dead for exactly 40 hours.
More speculation on your part. How do you know that Satan thought a day to Jehovah was 24 hours. Satan seems to be taking advantage of the idea that he knew it would not be within 24 hours that Adam would die. Besides, the Watchtower once taught that a "day" with Jehovah could have been 42,000 years long, since Genesis 2:4 refers to all 6 creative days as a single day, and we used to teach that each creative day must have been 7,000 years long (6x7,000=42,000).
*** it-1 p. 594 Day ***
The entire period of the six time units or creative “days” dedicated to the preparation of planet Earth is summed up in one all-embracing “day” at Genesis 2:4:
(Genesis 2:4) This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.
So, for all you know, Satan thought that a day to Jehovah was 42,000 years long, or at least 7,000! Where would Satan have gotten the idea that a day to Jehovah is only 1,000 years, or as you say, only 24 hours??
Somehow, you don't make it sound like your "ministry" is based on faith in God and love of God and neighbor. By going through the machinations to calculate the number of hours Jesus might have been dead, I was hoping you would catch on that this is all just pure speculation and has nothing to do with the Christian objective:
(1 Timothy 1:4-7) . . .Such things end up in nothing useful but merely give rise to speculations rather than providing anything from God in connection with faith. 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. 6 By deviating from these things, some have been turned aside to meaningless talk. 7 They want to be teachers of law, but they do not understand either the things they are saying or the things they insist on so strongly.

I appreciate that you finally fixed part of your mistake.
In the past few years you kept insisting that this quote about 1914 +120 years came from Russell himself. Later, you reworded slightly to make it look like it came from the beliefs of Russell himself. Now you finally admit above that it comes from the "International Bible Students Association." It doesn't of course. As I documented for you already, it's just a recent quote from a modern-day Russellite-styled "Bible Student" (not the IBSA) who still hopes to protect Russell's reputation against the  the failure of those old 1914 predictions.
The man you are quoting from is just another Internet forum contributor and writer, probably much like yourself, who would love to see that 1914 still has some specific significance to the "generation that will not pass away." I suspect that, like a lot of us, you see the folly of the word-game that some of the brothers (like Brother Splane) have begun playing with the multiple overlapping lifespans that make the length of that generation "fuzzy." You want to see 1914 become a clearer demarcation point that still plays a direct role in Bible prophecy.
Our publications admit that all the various teachings we had about the "generation" from 1879 to about 2009 were incorrect teachings. A lot of Witnesses I have talked to, still want those old statements to be correct, even if it means stretching things a bit. I still hear a Witness now and then say that there have been persons in Siberia that lived to be 120.
At least you are not emphasizing the possibility of a 120-year lifespan. I think a lot of Witnesses don't understand that by trying to hold to 1914 this way, they are really just making a mockery out of Jesus words. This idea that at least one person might have been born in 1914 and live to the year 2034 implies that Jesus was really saying something like this:
When you start to see all these things occurring, lift up your heads and rejoice, because all of you will be dead, except for maybe one of you. And if that one 120-year old person endures to the end, he will be saved. He will also be very thankful that the days of tribulation were cut short on account of the chosen one, him.

I don't follow the "Org," I appreciate the organization for how it has been instrumental in currently helping millions of people build their faith on a solid foundation: faith in Jehovah, Christ Jesus, and the words and teachings of the Bible. I appreciate that it very efficiently and effectively has been instrumental in teaching tens of millions more, and getting the word out to hundreds of millions. (I.e., setting an example for preaching and teaching "good news" about a time under the Kingdom when there will be no more war, no more divisive politics, no more racism, and a time when Jehovah's provisions will make all things new, returning heaven and earth to His original purpose.)
I don't believe we need worry too much about the history of an organization, as if that is what Jesus meant by building on a solid foundation. What the organization was back between, say, 1884 and 1935, or even between 1935 and 2021 is also not of such great concern to me. I'm interested in the history mostly to the extent that I want to make sure that what we currently teach about that history is accurate and not distorted.
I have other interests in history, more generally, because I find it fascinating. Not just religious history, but all kinds of history. I always learn about various mundane themes (sociology, class, leadership, politics, psychology) that seem relevant as historical situations tend to be repeated.
Also, my great-grandfather was a "Pilgrim" in the Chicago Bible Students who traveled with Russell to speak at conventions, and he continued on under Rutherford. He said that most of the Chicago Bible Students were "Russellites," as he himself had been, and most of them left under Rutherford. Some of his "brethren" had left even earlier. Some had left in 1909 over doctrinal issues (New Covenant, "The Vow") some in 1914 and 1915 over failed predictions and expectations. So I admit that some family stories and "artifacts" of the Bible Student era hold my interest for more mundane reasons, too.
Even if the original organization had been no more than another faction of Catholicism or Protestantism that didn't believe in Trinity, Hellfire or War, that would be more than enough of a good start. My only expectation, historically, is that it would continue to progress, to put off more and more false teachings. Then we should find some evidence of Jehovah's blessing as it should attract more people who are looking for a kind of Christianity with a reasonable core of Biblical values and therefore find a brotherhood that encourages and promotes Christian conduct and activities. But the foundation is Christ, not the Organization. 

1914 is a good case in point. I'm interested in how our chronology traditions developed, and how these teachings were justified, and changed, and re-justified, with both secular mistakes, and Biblical interpretion mistakes. But I'm not interested in anecdotes about the personalities of those people who carried on and defended the chronology traditions. Those traditions (1844, 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1918, 1925) either stand or fall on whether they had Biblical support. The human and secular support, or lack thereof, is far less relevant. The point should not be to embarrass Wm Miller, Nelson Barbour, Joseph Seiss, Charles Russell, Morton Edgar, or Joseph Rutherford, but to check such teachings against the Bible "touchstone."