God's Kingdom Rules

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Matt. 24:23-27

2Tim  2:19

Satan

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

However, the group Pastor Russell identified with the most was with the People’s Pulpit. Whereas the WTS was their publishing house for the IBSA, BSA, ABS, PSL, PSI, DBS.

This is wrong, Allen.

On 9/27/2016 at 3:41 PM, AllenSmith said:

Since Pastor Russell was representative of only the People's Pulpit? I didn't want to bring up the big guns, but since you're insisting on being so smart about the society only because you worked there, then explain to your audience the above statement by Pastor Russell.

This is also wrong.

That second quote, above, is the way you stated the same idea in the "Millions" topic. I don't intend to go off on a completely different topic like the one you had in mind when you said "please explain to your audience the above statement by Pastor Russell." It was part of a good question, and I'd be happy to respond if you would present it in a more appropriate topic or new topic.

 

But since you have repeated these ideas about "People's Pulpit," and represented them as some kind of "big guns" challenge, I'll oblige your attempt at antagonism.

 

First, please note that I have never claimed to be, as you claimed, "so smart about the Society." And it would be even more ludicrous for anyone to claim to be "so smart only because he worked there."

 

I do recall, however, that a user of the forum at jw-archive.org  named "AllenSmith" has made the claim that he has two PhD's in Theology. And then, as if to drive that claim home, he added an additional username: "JW Theologian." I see that you have also used these same two names on this particular forum. (There are several comments still available over at jw-archive.org where this claim of yours has been commented on by several other users. I do not bring this up to get you censured or to try to get any of your accounts suspended, and I never have and never will. I appreciate your contributions here, and I'm sure others do, too.)

 

For myself, I only claim to have been involved in a lot of research, but this does not make me some kind of expert, or "so smart." I have a lot to learn, and hope to learn more. Considering the number of posts I've made, and the average length of these posts, I suspect that I have typos and/or grammar errors and/or accidental mistakes of fact in the majority, if not all of my posts. I love to get out my old notebooks and share things I've researched from as far back as 1977 and compare them with new things I have found more recently. I'm continually trying to get it right, and hope that others will be willing to help correct errors and misconceptions along the way.

(Matthew 13:52)  . . . “That being the case, every public instructor, when taught respecting the kingdom of the heavens, is like a man, a householder, who brings out of his treasure store things new and old.”

I'll discuss the People's Pulpit Association in my next post.

 

[JW Insider]

11 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

However, the group Pastor Russell identified with the most was with the People’s Pulpit. Whereas the WTS was their publishing house for the IBSA, BSA, ABS, PSL, PSI, DBS.

You included a very similar point when you said: "Since Pastor Russell was representative of only the People's Pulpit? I didn't want to bring up the big guns,...[etc., etc...]"

You probably already know that you can read the original charters for the major U.S.A.-based associations at this site: http://watchtowerdocuments.org/corporate-charter-amendments/ .

Perhaps someone has copied them to other places now, too, so that you won't need to traverse the site of Barbara Anderson, a respected Watchtower researcher, but also an opposer of sorts.

The information needed to show the error you made is all found in Watch Tower publications. I'll quote just a couple of them:

Watch Tower, September 15, 1931 p. 279:

. . . to carry on said work orderly said company of Christians organized the corporations known as the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the International Bible Students Association, and the Peoples Pulpit Association; and they used and now use these corporations for the publication of books, magazines and other Bible literature; and in the course of time said company of Christians became known by such names as, to wit, ''Russellites," "Millennial Dawn People," "International Bible Students Association,'' and other like names; . . . . [T]he Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society and the International Bible Students Association and the Peoples Pulpit Association are merely names of corporations which as a company of Christian people we hold, control and use to carry on our work in obedience to God's commandments, yet none of these names properly attach to or apply to us as a body of Christians who follow in the footsteps of our Lord and Master, Christ Jesus.

 

Watch Tower, October 1, 1931 p. 297:

 

As faithful servants of God and followers of Christ Jesus we will continue to use the instruments the Lord has placed in our hands. Among these instruments are The Watch Tower, the corporations the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the International Bible Students Association, and the Peoples Pulpit Association; and these are used only as instruments to prepare and publish a proclamation or message.

 

Watch Tower, December 1, 1931 p. 360:

 

The proper relationship of the "Society", composed of God's anointed people now on earth, to the corporation, the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, is that the body of people who go to make up Jehovah's "servant" or witnesses is properly called the ''Society", and the corporation is the servant or instrument of this company of anointed people by which they carry on a part of their work. It was organized under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, but operates throughout the world. In 1909 the "Society", to wit, God's consecrated people, decided to move the operating headquarters from Pennsylvania to New York state; and in order to meet the conditions and enable this company to carry on its work in an orderly way, the Peoples Pulpit Association was incorporated and organized under the Membership Corporation Act of the State of New York, and it works together and in harmony with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. What is said about the Wat.ch Tower Bible and Tract Society is also true of and concerning the Peoples Pulpit Association, to wit: It is the servant or instrument of the "Society" . . . .

 

Watch Tower, January 1, 1934 p. 11

 

In the year 1884 these followers of Christ Jesus formed a corporation under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, which was then given the name Zion's Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society. The word "Zion" is one of the names which Jehovah God has given his capital organization and frequently appears in the Bible. The word" Zion" appearing in the corporate name had no reference to or connection with the Jewish organization which is called "Zionism". Afterwards the name of the above-mentioned corporation was, by the law of the State of Pennsylvania and order of court, changed to that of Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society; and the faithful followers of Christ Jesus on earth have continued that name of their corporation to this day. At no time has any Jew been connected with or supported the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society. Merely for convenience and to comply with the laws of the land, and to further the interest of its work,  the Society organized the Peoples Pulpit Association, in 1909, under the membership corporation law of the State of New York. For the same reason the International Bible Students Association was organized, in 1914, under the laws of Great Britain. These three corporations are really one, and they are all directed by the same officers and have possession and control of the property of the Society.

 

8 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Then, you need to further your research since the people's pulpit was the WTS before its name change in 1909.

 

This is also wrong. I won't go into all the details but you can see them from the quotes above, and perhaps just a couple more, I'll add below:

 

Qualified To Be Ministers, [1955] p. 309:

 

So in 1908 J . F. Rutherford, who by this time had become the Society's legal counselor and also a pilgrim traveling from city to city to give public lectures, and other Society representatives were sent to Brooklyn, New York, to negotiate the purchase of more desirable quarters. They obtained the old "Plymouth Bethel," 13-17 Hicks St ., Brooklyn, and the old Beecher home located at 124 Columbia Heights. To hold this new property in New York state satisfactorily and to do business within this state as a religious body it was necessary to form another corporation. Such a corporation came into legal existence February 23, 1909, and was named Peoples Pulpit Association . Thirty years later, in 1939, the name was changed to its present one, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc. From 1909 onward a monthly tract called "Peoples Pulpit" and then later "The Bible Students Monthly" was widely distributed by the millions, warning the Gentiles of the fateful year 1914 . And so for a number of years the society of witnesses became known as the International Bible Students Association, and, in 1914, the same identical work was organized under an association incorporated under the laws of Great Britain, under the name and style of International Bible Students Association.

*** jv chap. 8 p. 91 Declaring the Good News Without Letup (1942-1975) ***

On January 11, 1934, Brother Knorr was elected to be a director of the Peoples Pulpit Association (now Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc.), and the following year he was made the Association’s vice president. On June 10, 1940, he became the vice president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (Pennsylvania corporation). His election to the presidency of both societies and of the British corporation, International Bible Students Association, came in January 1942.

Therefore, there is something else wrong with this additional statement of yours: "the people's pulpit was the WTS before its name change in 1909."

The Peoples Pulpit was an additional corporation, separate (legally) from the Pennsylvania corporation. Therefore, the WTS did not have a name change in 1909.

The "Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society" (PA) continued to exist and the existing legal charter was continuously utilized for the publication of the "Watch Tower" magazine and nearly all of the other "Watch Tower" publications. [The "Watchtower" magazine is a still a "Watch Tower" publication (PA), as are almost all publications published, printed and distributed through the facilitation of the various corporations.] The "Peoples Pulpit Association" was a New York based corporation for the primary stated purpose of owning property. It was renamed "Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc." and later adjusted to "Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc."

Russell was not primarily associated with the Peoples Pulpit. He had already been associated since the 1880's with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society (PA). He continued to be editor and publisher through that same corporation even after 1909 to 1916 when he died. The first major publication of the Peoples Pulpit that caused any specific people's names to become associated with it was published in Rutherford's time. It was the "Seventh Volume" a.k.a. "The Finished Mystery." (There was a method behind this, of course, because Rutherford knew he could not have had it approved through the board of the Pennsylvania corporation.)

*** ka chap. 16 p. 313 par. 46 Completion of the Foretold “Sign” Nears ***

• An early warning was given by the publication of the book entitled “The Finished Mystery” by the People’s Pulpit Association in July of 1917. . . .

@Eoin Joyce The apostrophe in People's Pulpit [sic] was not the fault of Running Elk. I believe this was elderly Sister Kramer who, I think, was the last person at Bethel to proofread this book before its last printing.

[Back to Allen]

There is one point that could favor your claim, but it doesn't make the claim correct. I believe it is true that most of the liquid (cash) financial assets of the Pennsylvania corporation were soon moved to the New York corporation along with Russell's personal cash and property ownership. Because he was going through a divorce and the court ordered him to pay Mrs. Russell for the equivalent of "pain and suffering," he was therefore able to argue that he didn't have any money to pay her, as it was all contributed to the Society. Rutherford was already providing great value as his personal lawyer and handling some of the Society's matters at the same time.

 

[Ann O'Maly]

2 Tim. 2:19 doesn't help answer the question 'how do you know Rev. 12:7-12 'actually' started its fulfillment in 1914?', Eoin. You did provide a text that said love 'believed all things,' etc. However, I countered with Jesus' warning about not believing everything people would claim about his presence. You also offered this: 

Satan, the ruler of the world, is present.

But Satan was present as the ruler of the world back in the 1st century CE (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 1 Pet. 5:8). What changed in 1914?

So far your certainty is based on wafer thin reasoning. Have you anything more substantial to present?

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

So far your certainty is based on wafer thin reasoning. Have you anything more substantial to present?

Your assessment of my certainty is rather presumptous, however, your choice of metaphor is rather unfortunate given your apparent intent. I am flattered by it.

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

2 Tim. 2:19 doesn't help answer the question 'how do you know Rev. 12:7-12 'actually' started its fulfillment in 1914?'

2 Tim 2:19 was cited in answer to your warning about "false Christs" and  is to reassure you that Jehovah knows those on His side in these issues of dispute as to who represents Him in the "last days" (as He has also known on occasions past).

Regarding the attempts of these "false Christs" to mislead His people, which are referenced  in your quoting of Matt. 24:23-27. Whilst the intensity of those attempts to mislead is duly noted, so also is the statement "if possible". I can only echo Paul's words at Romans 8:38-39 and conclude from those that it is not actually possible for the false Christs to succeed in their attempts to "separate us from God's love that is in Christ Jesus our Lord", regardless of the intensity and ingenuity of their arguments.   

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Satan, the ruler of the world, is present.................. What changed in 1914?

Looking back at the verses at Rev 12:7-17,  after the hurling of Satan and his demons "down to the earth", verse 12 pronounces "woe for the earth" due to the Devil's frustrated anger at his impending defeat. Then the final verse 17 describes Satan's focus of attention on his waging of "war with the remaining ones of her offspring, who observe the commandments of God and have the work of bearing witness concerning Jesus".

Satan's defeat in the heavens at Michael's hand took place in 1914. The dire events, conditions and trends in all sorts of walks of life on this planet since that year are well reported on by all disciplines daily, so there is no need to reiterate a list of quotes that are already in the public domain and for that matter, appearing extensively on this very website.. (This includes for me the growing body of revisionist-type attempts to paint a picture of hope of better things that appears to be gathering momentum at the same time). These various reports in their entirety are (to me) a clear indicator of the intensified presence of Satan the Devil on, at, or, in the earth since the year 1914. 

This view is not shared by everyone I know, although many who oppose the idea of a super-human cause for mans' current woes are at a loss to provide an alternative explanation or solution.

However, for me this just emphasizes the skill Satan demonstrates in that he is able still  to successfully "blind the minds" of unbelievers in the face of (what I consider to be) reality. No wonder at the same time he has also intensified his waging of war with those "who observe the commandments of God and have the work of bearing witness concerning Jesus" Rev.12:17, which includes a thorough expose of Satan the Devil and all his works.

Satan certainly does not share Oscar Wilde's feeling on publicity.

[Evacuated]

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

@Eoin Joyce  The apostrophe in People's Pulpit [sic] was not the fault of Running Elk. I believe this was elderly Sister Kramer who, I think, was the last person at Bethel to proofread this book before its last printing.

WHITE MAN'S HEAD (STILL) ON FIRE

[Ann O'Maly]

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Your assessment of my certainty is rather presumptous

My assessment is purely based on what you have presented in answer to my question. Nothing more.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

2 Tim 2:19 was cited in answer to your warning about "false Christs" and  is to reassure you that Jehovah knows those on His side in these issues of dispute as to who represents Him in the "last days" (as He has also known on occasions past).

Regarding the attempts of these "false Christs" to mislead His people, which are referenced  in your quoting of Matt. 24:23-27. Whilst the intensity of those attempts to mislead is duly noted, so also is the statement "if possible". I can only echo Paul's words at Romans 8:38-39 and conclude from those that it is not actually possible for the false Christs to succeed in their attempts to "separate us from God's love that is in Christ Jesus our Lord", regardless of the intensity and ingenuity of their arguments.   

Then how could Russell and Rutherford have been misled about Christ's presence, if they were also, not only part of His people, but claimed chosen leaders of His people? The attempts to mislead Russell were successful, since he died believing the wrong thing about Jesus' presence.

If you are arguing that wrong beliefs don't separate a true and sincere believer from God's love, then surely the same standard would apply to other Christian churches and their mistaken beliefs, would it not?

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Satan's defeat in the heavens at Michael's hand took place in 1914.

That's an assertion. What evidence do you have that this occurred in 1914?

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

This view is not shared by everyone I know, although many who oppose the idea of a super-human cause for mans' current woes are at a loss to provide an alternative explanation or solution.

Alternative explanations center on social and political upheavals rather than invisible super-human causes. Regarding solutions, until there is a cataclysmic extra-terrestrial/super-human intervention, humans in the here-and-now will have to muddle through and find solutions of their own.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Satan certainly does not share Oscar Wilde's feeling on publicity.

How do you know what Satan thinks about publicity or if it aligns with Oscar Wilde's view? 

[JW Insider]

On 9/30/2016 at 0:55 PM, Eoin Joyce said:

If they could get the date of Christs presence wrong then they could get the date of discerning it wrong at the same time couldn't they? It makes no difference to the actual event and the fact that Rev.12:7-12 started its fulfillment in 1914.

I understand your point from the first sentence, and I agree with the statement they could get a lot of things wrong and it doesn't necessarily change anything about the "actual event." But it certainly doesn't instill any confidence in the later claims about the supposed "actual event," either.

The claim that Revelation 12:7-12 refers to 1914 is contradicted by both the Bible and the Watch Tower publications. I think part of this is because they didn't understand the Greek of Matthew 24:8. If they had the NWT at that time, perhaps they would have dropped the entire 1874 to 1914 schema much earlier. 

Russell and Rutherford had continued to quote Matthew 24:7,8 as follows:

24:7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. 24:8 All these [are] the beginning of sorrows.

This was treated as if it were the general word for "sorrows" although the word sorrows is not the best way to translate it. The NWT correctly translates it as:

(Matthew 24:8) All these things are a beginning of pangs of distress. [early birth pangs, pre-labor pains]

(Revelation 12:1, 2) . . . A woman was arrayed with the sun, and the moon was beneath her feet, and on her head was a crown of 12 stars, 2 and she was pregnant. And she was crying out in her pains and in her agony to give birth.

In fact, the word in Matthew 24:8 is associated with the writhing pain of childbearing, so that the Greek LXX uses it when translating Hosea 13:13, for example, and other verses in the Hebrew Bible where expressions about a mother in childbirth pains was explicitly included in the context, including several Hebrew Bible passages that match the context of Matthew 24:

(Hosea 13:13) 13 The pangs of childbirth will come for him.. . . ( ὠδῖνες ὡς τικτούσης ἥξουσιν αὐτῷ)

The Watchtower, July 1, 1933, p. 204:

It had its beginning in 1914 and is still progressing. It was 1914 that marked the time of ''the beginning of sorrows'', and the sorrows continue upon the world. At the same time the truly anointed ones are rejoicing, not because of the sorrows and sufferings upon human creatures, but in the fact that the day of deliverance is at hand and that this deliverance will come through God's Anointed King.

 

The Watchtower, November 1, 1931, p. 325, 328:

 

It was in 1918, or three and one-half years after the birth of The Nation, that Christ came to the temple of Jehovah for judgment. . . . Who on earth understood prior to 1918 that Zion is God's organization and gives birth to the kingdom and to her children? The fact that no one on earth did so understand prior to the Lord's coming to his temple is proof that it was not God's due time for them to understand. Who understood prior thereto about Satan's organization, the battle in heaven, and the casting of Satan out of heaven 7 Manifestly no one could understand these things until the temple of God was open. (Rev. 11: 19) Only those who by the grace of God have been taken into the temple do now understand. These do not understand by reason of knowledge or wisdom that comes to them from any man, but they are taught of God, who teaches them the truth by and through the Head of the temple class, Christ Jesus. Why then should those today who really believe they are servants of God hesitate for one moment in determining the question concerning who gives them the doctrine of truth?

 

The problem is pretty clear. Russell had a woman going through the beginning labor pains before giving birth in 1914, and Rutherford has the labor pains after she gives birth in 1914. Rutherford and Witnesses for many decades were stuck with the second part of this problem, trying to use the "birth of the kingdom" analogy, because the pangs were only interrupted in 1918 on account of the chosen ones, but those birth pangs are expected to start up again prior to Armageddon when the Kingdom comes again, in the sense of the "Lord's Prayer" ["Let you kingdom come. . . ." -- Matt 6:10] Rutherford made much from the idea of the "Birth of a Nation" which also played upon the infamous, racist movie of this era.

 

Rutherford had an interesting solution, which might seem required when you factor in what Paul said:

(1 Thessalonians 5:2-4) 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night. 3 Whenever it is that they are saying, “Peace and security!” then sudden destruction is to be instantly on them, just like birth pains on a pregnant woman, and they will by no means escape. 4 But you, brothers, you are not in darkness, so that the day should overtake you as it would thieves,

He taught that the pangs of distress (including WWI) were these beginnings and that the "thief in the night" analogy applied to the sudden surprise of 1918 when Jesus came to his temple:

Watchtower, May 1, 1941, p. 140:

From time to time in these columns the Scriptural proof has been submitted showing that the Lord came to his temple in 1918. His coming then was like a thief, and the fact of his coming then was not known to the "remnant" of Jehovah's witnesses on earth until some time thereafter, not till 1922.

 

[This fits the other teaching that they were without Holy Spirit since 1918, and were "asleep" in 1918.]

 

Watchtower, April 1, 1941, p. 100:

The fulfillment is in the ''last days", when the true and faithful followers of Christ Jesus are brought into the light, and hence are in the temple and are no longer in darkness. Now they are children of the light: "Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil." (Eph. 5: 14-16) "But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief. Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day; we are not of the night, nor of darkness. Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober." -- 1 Thess. 5: 4-6. The Greater Barak, [Jesus Christ] the King of glory, has come . . . .

Watchtower, August 1, 1940, p. 231,232

These texts using the word "Lord" evidently do not refer to Jehovah, but do have reference to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and to whom the apostle refers in 1 Thessalonians 4: 15-17. This shows that ''the day of the Lord Jesus" refers to the time of his coming to the temple for judgment in A.D. 1918, or three and one-half years after he was enthroned. . . . The day of Jehovah God began in 1914 . . . But how about 1918? That did come as a thief and this shows that the day of the Lord mentioned by the apostle Paul in the foregoing text has reference to the day of the coming of the Lord Jesus to the temple for judgment and the beginning of judgment.

The birth pangs problem doesn't go away under Rutherford, but he found a way to completely ignore 1914 in discussions of Christ's presence. Oddly enough as of the August 15, 1940 Watchtower, Jesus invisible return, was evidently being moved from 1874 to 1918:

Watchtower, August 15, 1940, p. 253

Concerning his coming Jesus warned his followers that false teachers would arise and attempt to show that Christ is in the desert or in the secret chambers, as spiritists claim they have come in contact with him; but that his followers should give no heed to such advice. "For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the coming [parousia] of the Son of man be." Matt. 24: 26, 27. Jesus' words cannot mean that zigzag lightning comes always out of the east and shines unto the west and that this represents his coming. What his words really mean is that the lightnings come or appear in one part of the heavens and are seen by persons at different points and that therefore the lightning is not confined to a local place. It is seen by those who are watching. The statement recorded by Luke concerning the same thing supports this view: "For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day." -- Luke 17:24.
Lightning originates with Jehovah, says Jeremiah 10:13. Just so all light upon the divine purpose originates with Jehovah. When he reveals his light to his anointed church he does so through the Head of his organization, Christ Jesus. No human is able to make lightning. Likewise no human is able to point to the fact that Christ Jesus is at some local spot on earth. His presence is revealed to those of God's anointed remnant and their earthly companions of good will, all of whom look for the manifestation of his presence. In Matthew 24: 27, "coming'' specifically refers to his coming to the temple and his presence there for judgment of the "house of God", which house is composed of God's anointed and faithful ones and is not a material house of brick, wood or stone. (Mal. 3: 1-3; 1 Pet. 4: 17) Then Christ Jesus judges and disposes of the professed house of God, "organized religion" of "Christendom'', which is in fact a part of the Devil's organization. That judgment is now in progress, which proves that the Lord has come and is at the temple. The coming of the Lord to his temple [1918] is soon to be followed by a time of great distress upon earth, culminating in Armageddon, which will destroy Satan's organization.

Watchtower, September 15, 1940, p. 279:

In answer to the prayer of God's devoted people for deliverance and prosperity he sent his beloved Son, the King Christ Jesus, to the temple, and disclosed to his people the presence of Christ Jesus at the temple, where he had been from 1918 onward.

Watchtower, September 15, 1940, p. 287:

The presence of the Lord as represented by the ark of the covenant in his temple is a time of great shaking and agitation and commotion, all which is symbolically described at Revelation 11:19. This shaking, agitation, and commotion has been particularly true since 1918.

To me, this speaks very clearly to whether the Bible Students had really begun "discerning" anything about Jesus' invisible presence at some time during the year 1914. It even speaks to whether or not they were discerning anything in 1918, 1922, 1925, 1927 or 1930, which are some of the dates suggested elsewhere for when the "presence" might have been at least partially discerned to move from 1874 to 1914.

In 1933, the date for the "invisible presence" was still 1874. In August 1, 1940 (p. 248) the date for the "invisible presence" was still 1874. But as of the very next issue, August 15, 1940, references to both Christ's presence and Christ's coming did not reference 1914, and always spoke of the "temple" event in 1918, when Christ Jesus comes to the temple and remains invisibly present. The Bible Students are said to have seen the sign of that presence of Christ in 1918, but didn't recognize it until 1922.

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

If you are arguing that wrong beliefs don't separate a true and sincere believer from God's love, then surely the same standard would apply to other Christian churches and their mistaken beliefs, would it not?

4 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

No argument here. Don't be ridiculous, of course sincere believers aren't separated from God's love. John 14:31;John 16:13.

 

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

What evidence do you have that this occurred in 1914?

Everything happening then and since.

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Alternative explanations

10 a penny.  I've seen some on this forum. Another one is at 2Pet.3:4. Anyway, We'll all be here if I'm wrong. 

 

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

How do you know what Satan thinks about publicity or if it aligns with Oscar Wilde's view? 

Oscar Wilde was a lot of things, but a mind-blinder he wasn't.

[JW Insider]

20 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

That, however, doesn’t explain the misrepresentation on the narrative you proposed here, so let’s not use wordplay to deviate from the original message.

Wise words!

Sometimes I can only guess that you don't really understand that, while your sources contain information that is very interesting, it's usually information that I already agreed with. When it's relevant to the topic, very often it even supports of the point I was making. I've seen you include information that I was about to use. Of course, in the case of the various Bible Student groups, we can't just accept everything they say without question. Some have also shown that they are capable of distorting their history, in those "episodes" of their history that they find embarrassing or difficult to explain. (And some are not yet embarrassed about certain beliefs or "episodes" where they should be. Some still don't recognize what Rutherford correctly recognized about their own view of Russell, for example.)

The point you brought up about Russell and the Peoples Pulpit was not very relevant to what Russell taught anyway. It's true that there are some differences between what Russell said about himself and what various Bible Student groups said about him. These differences are interesting but not relevant to what the current Watch Tower publications mean when they speak of Bible Students discerning Christ's invisible presence in 1914.

On the very irrelevant point about Russell's claims about himself or the Peoples Pulpit Association you already countered your own claim for me, and provided the relevant argument that agrees completely with the point I was making when you said:

20 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

 In 1909 he thought the "People's Pulpit Association" sounded better, the headquarters of which he established at Brooklyn, New York.  In 1909 he resumed the title "Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society."  In 1914 the work was being carried on as the "International Bible Students' Association."

Thinking that some particular name sounded better, but then going right back to "resuming" the title "Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society" in the same year, was probably the very reason that so few people in the world associate Russell with the Peoples Pulpit, and why a relatively large majority of those who know about Russell only associate him with the WTB&TS and IBSA. You also mentioned that some Bible Students said he wanted full and complete control over the PPA. That's true, but it's exactly what he wanted (and had) over the WTB&TS, too.

The reason I hesitate to engage with your argument in more detail however is that, too often for my taste, you tend to sound not just nasty but also dishonest. I think you already know that this is the reason you have lost the respect that you seem to crave, even from fellow Witnesses. When you make false claims and get caught, you can merely claim as you did here, that 'that's what you meant' when your actual words show that meant something different. More often you merely ignore it when it's pointed out that your point was wrong, then pivot off to another subject where you often make more false claims, and you usually remember to offer up a few random insults and project a few of your own bad habits and fallacies onto other people.

If you would like to engage in a real dialog with anyone on any of these subjects, I think you already know what you should do differently.

(1 Peter 3:15) 15 But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect.

(Colossians 4:6) . . .Let your words always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should answer each person.

(Philippians 4:5-7) 5 Let your reasonableness become known to all men. The Lord is near. 6 Do not be anxious over anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication along with thanksgiving, let your petitions be made known to God; 7 and the peace of God that surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and your mental powers by means of Christ Jesus.

(James 3:17, 18) 17 But the wisdom from above is first of all pure, then peaceable, reasonable, ready to obey, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial, not hypocritical. 18 Moreover, the fruit of righteousness is sown in peaceful conditions for those who are making peace.

(Titus 3: 2) 2 to speak injuriously of no one, not to be quarrelsome, but to be reasonable, displaying all mildness toward all men.

(Titus 3:9-11) 9 But have nothing to do with foolish arguments and genealogies and disputes and fights over the Law, for they are unprofitable and futile. 10 As for a man who promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition, 11 knowing that such a man has deviated from the way and is sinning and is self-condemned.

(1 Timothy 1:5-7) 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.

 

 

 

[JW Insider]

19 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Can you apply the same reasoning, when you yourself made it a point to “post” the most controversial and foolish argument in another thread?

Yes, of course. The reason was not hidden at all. And while it is controversial, I said it only seems to be foolish, at first. Did you notice how you claimed I said I said it was foolish, when I said "this one might appear silly at first"? Do you see how that is dishonest? Do you see how you would have pointed out the same dishonesty if someone tried that kind of wordplay on you?

I believe it is very serious because it speaks to how well we appreciate truth. I brought those same concerns over from the "Millennium" topic to this topic for the same reason. I'll explain:

It is easy to show that the WTS has repeatedly made the claim that "they" predicted decades in advance that Christ's invisible presence would start in 1914. It's easy to show that the WTS has repeatedly made the claim that "they" predicted decades in advance that Christ would begin his reign as King in 1914. It's easy to show that the WTS has repeatedly claimed that "they" predicted, decades in advance, that the time of trouble seen in 1914 was evidence that what they had predicted (at least since 1904) was correct.

Yet all of those claims are false. "They" didn't predict decades in advance that Jesus would begin his presence, his kingship, or the type of trouble that was seen in WWI. ("They" predicted a vastly different kind of trouble, with a completely different outcome). 

I have put the quote marks around the word "they" to point out that the claim has been worded in different ways so that the following ideas might be believed: "sincere Bible students predicted," "Jehovah's Witnesses predicted," "Bible Students were proclaiming," "Charles Taze Russell and his associates proclaimed" "the pages of this very magazine pointed to the time," "The Watch Tower publications had been predicting,"  etc., etc.  

The claims have sometimes been worded in a way that is clearly false, yet they have been repeated several times. After the Proclaimers book, however, the Watch Tower publications have become more careful about not making these statements in such direct false terms. They have resorted to implying it, instead.

Implying something often enough, however, is just as misleading as stating it in false terms. Any lover of truth should be very concerned about this. We should not just be concerned with the idea that people are being misled, but we should also look at the same point from a higher level and ask why. What is the reason that this same point has been implied dozens of times?

The God's Kingdom Rules book gives us another glimpse into the reason, and it's very consistent with the reason that invariably follows the context of prior claims just like it. It's so that we have more trust in the men who "discerned" these things in advance. If we can be impressed that a "true prediction" as important as this one could have been predicted so many years in advance, then we will be more apt to believe that the persons behind that prediction were "spirit-directed." We will be more apt to believe that the entire "spirit-directed" organization that these men represented must have been blessed with powers of discernment that carries over into all other teachings. In other words, our belief that they were able to make this prediction can lull us into a false sense of security. It may have the effect of motivating us to defend a false teaching because we feel it must be "spirit-directed.

I personally believe that our teachings about hell, Trinity, political neutrality, Jehovah's sovereignty, etc, are the best around, but this shouldn't lull me into thinking that we don't have to test all the teachings. Perhaps the teaching about the "overlapping generation" is a false teaching that we should be questioning, and yet relatively few are questioning the teaching. More persons appear to be defending it as best they can. Also, the misleading idea that the early Bible Students "discerned" Christ's invisible presence in 1914 has been made a key element in the definition of the "overlapping generation" theory. This is not very likely just a coincidence.

Quote

*** w14 1/15 p. 31 pars. 15-16 ***  . . . “This generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen.” . . .  Jesus was referring to two groups of anointed Christians. The first group was on hand in 1914, and they readily discerned the sign of Christ’s presence in that year. . . . The second group included in “this generation” are anointed contemporaries of the first group. They were not simply alive during the lifetime of those in the first group, but they were anointed with holy spirit during the time that those of the first group were still on earth.

Ignoring our responsibility to question every teaching can be dangerous for Christians, because it can make us unwilling to follow the Bible's counsel not just for ourselves, but then we are no longer in a position to help our brothers and sisters if we see that they might be taking a false step.

(1 John 4:1) . . .Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God. . .

(1 Thessalonians 5:20, 21) 20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt. 21 Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.

(2 Corinthians 13:5) Keep testing whether you are in the faith; keep proving what you yourselves are. . . .

(Acts 17:11) . . .carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

(Proverbs 14:15) Anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word, but the shrewd one considers his steps.

(Philippians 1:9, 10) . . .And this is what I continue praying, that your love may abound still more and more with accurate knowledge and full discernment; 10 that you may make sure of the more important things, so that you may be flawless and not stumbling others up to the day of Christ;

(Romans 12:2) . . .so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

(Ephesians 5:9-10) 9 for the fruitage of the light consists of every sort of goodness and righteousness and truth. 10 Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord. . .

 

[Anna]

On 9/28/2016 at 3:54 PM, HollyW said:

Thank you, Anna!  That certainly supports the fact that the statement on page 20 is false.  Quite a bungle, wouldn't you say!

Now if they would just admit the statement on page 22 is also false.

Yes, the statement is false if you want to get technical.  But nobody will really pay much attention to it because it's not false in a sense where it would have a negative impact or become a stumbling block to anyone I'm sure.  I am trying to look at it from Jehovah's point of view (from what we know from the scriptures about his views). Would Jehovah find that statement offensive? Perhaps somebody should call Bethel and point the discrepancy out, or ask why it was stated this way. It would be interesting to learn the answer.....