Anna

It's Bolivia.

Have you tried finding a forum where both Witnesses and non-Witnesses gather to discuss Witness-related subjects? Perhaps you could mention it there.

What if you took a stack of coupons for the book(s) and attached them to small pieces of gum, and then surreptitiously stuck them to the bottom of every chair in the hall, repeating this process in 100 or 200 Kingdom Halls in the next year? Over the following year, the gum would lose its gumminess (Mt 5:13?) and then your coupon would be picked up by hundreds of different people over time. It'd be like a silent book tour where most of your effort is spent chewing and sitting down, and shifting your seat more often than most.

I have only netted a couple hundred sales through that method. It sounds good, but the payoff is less than you might think.

It’s okay.  Your comments made me think of myself and my own experiences.  I take it all in stride now.  Thanks for sharing!!! 
... now my problem is makeup.  LOLOLOLOL #itsgoodtolaugh
??

@Ann O'Maly tried clearing the cache, and cookies and rebooting. Still the same. This is the only website that's giving me trouble @The Librarian. with  firefox. Started a couple of days ago...
Just tried this website in chrome, and there's no problem. I was able to type this on my lap top right now..

And then there's Europe -ya American prunes! I mean prudes 
http://www.inspiredtraveller.in/places-in-the-world-where-public-nudity-is-legal/
It doesn't mention the UK, where nudity is also legal, (unless it causes distress to the viewer. Makes sense. I just love British laws, lol)

To be fair, the original version of this hymn was written by Frances Ridley Havergal (1836-1879) and originally played with music by Henri Abraham Cesar Malan (1787-1864). The original version also included the words "Take my silver and my gold." In 1966, we were still singing this song at the Hall with the words: "Take my silver and my gold."
(Frances Havergal was the wife of an Anglican preacher [Church of England] and her brother was a priest in the Anglican church.)
Our penultimate version included "take my:" heart, mind, feet, hands, voice, life, myself. Our current version now includes "take my:" heart, voice, feet, hands, silver, gold, life, myself.
So we had to lose "my mind" and raise "my voice" to accommodate "my silver and my gold."
As you can see below, the original Anglican version (right) had "take my:" life, moments, days, hands, feet, voice, lips, silver, gold, mind(intellect), will, heart, love, and myself. The ones we still include are highlighted in red, so we are now at 9 of 14. Starting in 1905 (Hymns of the Millennial Dawn) we sang it almost exactly as it is in the original. The 1905 version (left) was the way Russellites sang it and was very much like other versions of the original as sung in other churches.
  1  Take my life and may it be
Lord, acceptable to thee;
Take my hands, and let them move
At the impulse of thy love.   Take my life, and let it be
Consecrated, Lord, to Thee;
Take my moments and my days,
Let them flow in ceaseless praise,
Let them flow in ceaseless praise. 2 Take my feet and let them be
Swift on errands, Lord for thee;
Take my voice and let it bring
Honor always to my King.
    Take my hands, and let them move
At the impulse of Thy love;
Take my feet and let them be
Swift and beautiful for Thee,
Swift and beautiful for Thee. 3 Take my lips and let them be
Moved with messages from thee;
Take my silver and my gold;
Nothing, Lord, would I withhold.
    Take my voice, and let me sing
Always, only, for my King;
Take my lips, and let them be
Filled with messages from Thee,
Filled with messages from Thee. 4 Take my moments and my days;
Let them flow in constant praise;
Take my intellect and use
Ev'ry pow'r as thou shalt choose.
  Take my silver and my gold;
Not a mite would I withhold;
Take my intellect, and use
Every power as Thou shalt choose,
Every power as Thou shalt choose. 5 Take my will and make it thine;
It shall be no longer mine;
Take my heart, it is thine own;
Thus in me thyself enthrone.     Take my will, and make it Thine;
It shall be no longer mine.
Take my heart; it is Thine own;
It shall be Thy royal throne,
It shall be Thy royal throne. 6 Take my love, my God; I pour
At thy feet its treasure store;
Take myself-- I wish to be
Ever, only, all for thee.     Take my love; my Lord, I pour
At Thy feet its treasure-store.
Take myself, and I will be
Ever, only, all for Thee,
Ever, only, all for Thee. We began singing a very pretty, shortened version of this song a couple decades later. We changed the name from Consecration to Dedication in 1950, and this was the way we were singing it up until 1966 (pictured below) -- with "take my:" life, voice, feet, hands, mind[intellect], moments, silver, gold, heart, myself -- still managing to fit 10 out of 14 points from the original.

I don't even know what "Grammerly" is.
I am of course going to look it up ....
I find it embarrassing not to know everything.

Well - not from the platform, I hope. Or, at least, not in public prayer.
 

I can imagine a situation where it was a sister's fault that the entire songbook had to be updated again. And, although it's pure speculation, it wouldn't be the first time something like this happened. They say it was a sister who got celebrating anniversaries approved. They say it was a sister who got the idea of approving multiple blood fractions. Ultimately it was a sister (Audrey Mock) who got the rule changed at Bethel that if a brother got married, he had to leave Bethel.
In this case, imagine a brother as high up in the hierarchy as the Governing Body itself who has a wife. Now every time this wife sees her husband glancing for too long at a younger sister she knows she can't say anything directly, so she just starts humming the tune of: "O Guard Your Heart, you . . . "  After all, these songs have become the playlist of our lives, and I must have a thousand triggers that immediately get me to start humming any one of a hundred different Kingdom Songs.

I think you'd get on really well. At the mid week meeting last week I asked him what was so outstanding about Bathsheba. He said she was out, standing under the shower.

Lol! You Crack me up!

@AlanF

I must admit ... I do enjoy the dual edged bladed agenda driven conversions on this topic.
It reminds me of what author Stephen King said about writing one of his books ... I think it was "The Strand", where he had so many characters running around on the pages he could not keep up with them ... so he wrote in an explosion that wiped most of them out.
18 pages of debate to support something that may or may not have happened outside the physical Universe 100 or so years ago ... that was, or is invisible, to me (here comes a variation on one of my favorite expressions ...) is like milking a mouse because you need to make five pounds of cheese .... which has already been sold in advance.
That's a LOT of work !
So .... what's a simple Barbarian like myself to think with all these arguments and counter-arguments ...
I think I will make a bucket of popcorn! .... and watch the show!
Carry on Troops!

The image was a bit small. I have page 208 in text format which generally uses the spacing and line break style of the original, with original spellings:
------------------------------------------------------
[resur-]rection of the dead, and on the triumphant era of blessed-
ness, which immediately ensues.   I would again impress
on the mind of the reader, that these events depend upon
the fulfilment of the chronological periods ; and that as
the " new heaven and new earth," which are created at
the second judgment, and at the time of the general resur-  
rection, necessarily synchronise with Daniel's era of blessed-  
ness ;  so must the " new heaven and new earth " be con-  
sidered as succeeding the '' old heaven and old earth," or
the tyrannical monarchies of the old dispensation.   The  
times of these monarchies are fixed by the " seven times "
of the symbolic image, and by the 1335 years of the Mo-
hammedan Imposture ;  and unless it can be shown that
erroneous data have been assumed, on which these chro-
nological periods have been founded, then must it be
maintained that the forty-five years of Daniel are the
period of the second judgment ; and, commencing in 1873,
are attended by the sitting of that judgment, and by the
general resurrection, the last hour of which terminates
with the " seven times " of the monarchies, and with the
1335 Mohammedan years, in 1917.  It may be further ob-
served, that it is a judgment of the " wicked " only ; be-
cause the righteous rise first, and attend Christ " at his
coming."  Death, hell and the sea, and their dead, sub-
sequently stand in judgment.
     The Saviour himself, speaking of the signs of his se-
cond coming, foretels all these events ;  and upon that
memorable occasion, when he predicted the treading down
of Jerusalem, and " that the Jews should be led captive
into all nations," during the times of the Gentiles, ob-
viously refers to the sitting of the second judgment, at
which he is to appear as the Judge. " Heaven and earth,"
or the dispensation of the tyrannical empires, which were
the instruments of the captivity and desolation of his peo-
ple, he declares " shall pass away,"---the very token of the
second judgment,--- " but my words shall not pass away."
Verily I say unto you, " This generation shall not pass
away till all be fulfilled."  Whatever, therefore, be the [p.209]
criticisms upon these extraordinary words . . .
--------------------------------------------------

AlanF, I think that you will be asked to avoid the kind of insulting language and imagery. I am sure that other forums have allowed an escalation of this type to reach greater heights/depths of such. One of the things that has made this particular forum more palatable, according to several people here, myself included, is the fact that all perspectives have been able to come together WITHOUT these rough edges.
 

@Anna I will let the @admin know. 
I haven't experienced that warning yet though personally.

Apologies to @scholar JW but it's pretty clear that the Watchtower had already given away the answer, back in 1983, which shows clearly that AlanF is correct, as was Ann, Carl Jonsson, and many others:
*** w83 8/1 p. 20 par. 15 Israel and the “Times of the Gentiles” ***
15 In the dream that Jehovah God sent to his “servant,” King Nebuchadnezzar, there were “seven times” that were decreed from heaven. How do these connect up with “the times of the Gentiles” or coincide and become identical with them?  
THUS, EXAMPLES which would only make sense if the connection/link/etc means an "equating."
*** w98 9/15 p. 15 par. 1 Waiting in “Eager Expectation” ***
Similarly, a prophecy providentially caused sincere 19th-century Bible students to be in expectation. By linking the “seven times” of Daniel 4:25 with “the times of the Gentiles,” they anticipated that Christ would receive Kingdom power in 1914. *** yb75 p. 37 Part 1—United States of America ***
Very noteworthy was the striking accuracy with which that book pointed to the end of the Gentile Times, “the appointed times of the nations.” (Luke 21:24) It showed (on pages 83 and 189) that this 2,520-year period, during which Gentile or non-Jewish nations would rule the earth without interference by any kingdom of God, began with the Babylonian overthrow of the kingdom of Judah in the late seventh century B.C.E. and would end in 1914 C.E. Even earlier, however, C. T. Russell wrote an article entitled “Gentile Times: When Do They End?” It was published in the Bible Examiner of October 1876, and therein Russell said: “The seven times will end in A.D. 1914.” He had correctly linked the Gentile Times with the “seven times” mentioned in the book of Daniel. (Dan. 4:16, 23, 25, 32) True to such calculations, 1914 did mark the end of those times and the birth of God’s kingdom in heaven with Christ Jesus as king. Just think of it! Jehovah granted his people that knowledge nearly four decades before those times expired. *** jv chap. 10 p. 134 Growing in Accurate Knowledge of the Truth ***
As early as 1823, John A. Brown, whose work was published in London, England, calculated the “seven times” of Daniel chapter 4 to be 2,520 years in length. But he did not clearly discern the date with which the prophetic time period began or when it would end. He did, however, connect these “seven times” with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24. In 1844, E. B. Elliott, a British clergyman, drew attention to 1914 as a possible date for the end of the “seven times” of Daniel, but he also set out an alternate view that pointed to the time of the French Revolution. Robert Seeley, of London, in 1849, handled the matter in a similar manner. At least by 1870, a publication edited by Joseph Seiss and associates and printed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was setting out calculations that pointed to 1914 as a significant date, even though the reasoning it contained was based on chronology that C. T. Russell later rejected. *** w15 6/15 p. 22 par. 12 Live in Harmony With the Model Prayer—Part I ***
12 When the time approached for God’s Kingdom in the hands of Jesus to start ruling from heaven, Jehovah helped his people to understand the timing of events. In 1876, an article written by Charles Taze Russell was published in the magazine Bible Examiner. That article, “Gentile Times: When Do They End?,” pointed to 1914 as a significant year. The article linked the “seven times” of Daniel’s prophecy with “the appointed times of the nations” spoken of by Jesus.—Dan. 4:16; Luke 21:24. *** w84 4/1 p. 16 par. 4 Heed God’s Prophetic Word for Our Day ***
4 That year 1914—what of it? Over a century ago, C. T. Russell (who became the first president of the Watch Tower Society) linked the Gentile Times with the “seven times” mentioned in the book of Daniel. (Daniel 4:16, 23, 25, 32; Luke 21:24, Authorized Version) Writing in the Bible Examiner of October 1876, Russell said: “The seven times will end in A.D. 1914.” He also was a joint publisher of the 1877 book Three Worlds, and the Harvest of This World, which showed (on pages 83 and 189) that the 2,520-year period of Gentile world domination without interference by any kingdom of God began with the Babylonian overthrow of the kingdom of Judah in the late seventh century B.C.E. and would end in 1914 C.E. Similarly, the Watch Tower issue of March 1880 stated: “‘The Times of the Gentiles’ extend to 1914, and the heavenly kingdom will not have full sway till then.”  

Ask them to please put you on their Do Not Call list. You may get a visit once a year or two just to check you still live there or still don't want to be routinely called on ... excepting any occasional mistakes made by those who were either not told of the DNC or weren't paying attention.
So to make sure ...
Put up a sign: 'No religious callers' or 'No Jehovah's Witness proselytizers' or 'JWs beware: Rabid, salivating, two-headed apostate lives here. Knock at your own risk.' ? 
And JWs don't come to your door every day - c'moooon. 
 

I feel privileged as though watching a superhero movie with fantastic heroes and villains converging, ready for combat & settling old grudges once and for all. But what will happen if I get up for popcorn or to use the restroom?
(wait till @Top Cat O'Malighan reveals his true identity)
(and just where does the Librarian fit in? What great personage was she back in the day before ruin set in and she gathered some books to start a new persona?)
(and exactly who is @Ann O'Maly and how did she get her paws on every paper that's ever been printed?)
(why does @AlanF call @scholar JW Scholar Pretendus and how did Christopher Hitchens become Yoda the wise?)
(has @JW Insider succeeded beyond his dreams summoning up the spirits, perhaps scaring even himself?)
(who is Neil Galt?)
(Am I full of you-know-what?)

I don't think you can be talking about Gerard Gertoux developing an ego and leaving the truth, because really we have absolutely no proof of that. The only thing that is evident from his own writings is that he believes Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. So I am not sure what you mean by trust. That we can not trust him because of that? As far as I am aware he has never criticized the WT and he has not advertised his research regarding that subject, in fact he has been laying pretty low, and not really wanting to talk about it with anyone.
Why is that dangerous thinking? Isn't that just stating a fact? I didn't say that we should be complacent, but I do think we should be realistic.
I think there is a danger though in promising people something that will happen in their life time, and then it not coming true. My best friend, a long time pioneer, left because she lost faith that this is the true religion because of promises that were "without a doubt true" but that never happened and that kept getting explained away. I personally feel it's a little presumptions to claim these things. Then some will say..."well, they were in it for the wrong reason, that's why they left". But what is it we are feeding in people when we put such emphasis on the imminent end? We are doing exactly that, we are encouraging serving Jehovah for the wrong reason. Not because he is a God deserving our exclusive devotion, but because of what we can get out of him very soon. I wonder, did Jesus have in mind attracting people to the Kingdom in such a way? Yes, of course we tell them to "repent" because the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near, yes it is good we are not complacent like other religions, yes it is good we keep a sense of urgency, and yes it is good to keep our hope alive and in front of us, but to make certain claims (or I should say the Slave, we just repeat what they say) which are blatantly erroneous, makes fools of others and us, and can cause people to stumble. Perhaps this is a test. How loyal are we to Jehovah "despite" man's errors. Another good friend of mine, a very zealous faithful sister, is not allowing the errors of man to slow her down, or stumble her. She  waves her hand in dismissal at the new explanation to why Armageddon hasn't come yet, aka the 'overlapping generation'. Pretty much in a similar manner as Br. Herd did in the December broadcast when talking about our "past" understanding of the generation. He seems to think we've finally got it. She thinks it's nonsense. Her motto is; when it comes it comes, in the meantime I am here to do my job. And if I die so what?  Hopefully I will be resurrected. And if not, I won't even care, will I?
When the Slave admits they've sometimes had wrong expectations, that doesn't mean we have to have those same wrong expectations too, does it?

I don't think you can be talking about Gerard Gertoux developing an ego and leaving the truth, because really we have absolutely no proof of that. The only thing that is evident from his own writings is that he believes Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. So I am not sure what you mean by trust. That we can not trust him because of that? As far as I am aware he has never criticized the WT and he has not advertised his research regarding that subject, in fact he has been laying pretty low, and not really wanting to talk about it with anyone.
Why is that dangerous thinking? Isn't that just stating a fact? I didn't say that we should be complacent, but I do think we should be realistic.
I think there is a danger though in promising people something that will happen in their life time, and then it not coming true. My best friend, a long time pioneer, left because she lost faith that this is the true religion because of promises that were "without a doubt true" but that never happened and that kept getting explained away. I personally feel it's a little presumptions to claim these things. Then some will say..."well, they were in it for the wrong reason, that's why they left". But what is it we are feeding in people when we put such emphasis on the imminent end? We are doing exactly that, we are encouraging serving Jehovah for the wrong reason. Not because he is a God deserving our exclusive devotion, but because of what we can get out of him very soon. I wonder, did Jesus have in mind attracting people to the Kingdom in such a way? Yes, of course we tell them to "repent" because the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near, yes it is good we are not complacent like other religions, yes it is good we keep a sense of urgency, and yes it is good to keep our hope alive and in front of us, but to make certain claims (or I should say the Slave, we just repeat what they say) which are blatantly erroneous, makes fools of others and us, and can cause people to stumble. Perhaps this is a test. How loyal are we to Jehovah "despite" man's errors. Another good friend of mine, a very zealous faithful sister, is not allowing the errors of man to slow her down, or stumble her. She  waves her hand in dismissal at the new explanation to why Armageddon hasn't come yet, aka the 'overlapping generation'. Pretty much in a similar manner as Br. Herd did in the December broadcast when talking about our "past" understanding of the generation. He seems to think we've finally got it. She thinks it's nonsense. Her motto is; when it comes it comes, in the meantime I am here to do my job. And if I die so what?  Hopefully I will be resurrected. And if not, I won't even care, will I?
When the Slave admits they've sometimes had wrong expectations, that doesn't mean we have to have those same wrong expectations too, does it?