1975 was in the past. Are we HONEST about it TODAY?

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

 

 

THAT ... is the one paragraph of damning hard evidence that explains it all ... EXCEPT ... that when the people sold their homes and businesses, cars and other assets ... THEY OFTEN CONTRIBUTED THE MONEY TO THE SOCIETY.

....and if there is one thing that the Society has an insatiable addiction for ... IT'S MONEY!

ps: This is HARD EVIDENCE BillytheKid46 .... it cannot be refuted, except by those with the agenda driven WDS infected mind of a child.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

For those in Rio Linda, the preceding post was a synopsis of everything "1975".

That quote from the 1974 Kingdom Ministry, for anybody above the thinking ability of a chicken, says it all about, did the Society REALLY expect 1975 to be the end of this System, and Armageddon?

THE ONLY OTHER CHOICE is that it was a deliberate money-grubbing fraud, and they KNEW they were telling a lie.

Choose!

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

[Witness]

42 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

For those in Rio Linda, the preceding post was a synopsis of everything "1975".

That quote from the 1974 Kingdom Ministry, for anybody above the thinking ability of a chicken, says it all about, did the Society REALLY expect 1975 to be the end of this System, and Armageddon?

THE ONLY OTHER CHOICE is that it was a deliberate money-grubbing fraud, and they KNEW they were telling a lie.

Choose!

Chickens have enough sense to call it a day.  They choose to retire.  Some people never quit pecking away at what has already been picked clean.  

[Witness]

9 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Then you have this idiot “witness” subvert the Bible Student ideology with this disingenuous claim. What a pearl of wisdom this person has. Good enough to teach demons.

 

"Complete destruction of the 'powers that be' of 'this present evil worlds - political, financial, ecclesiastical - about the close of the Time of the Gentiles; October A.D. 1914." (C.T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, IV, p. 622, 1897)

 

 

STUDY XIII
THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE KINGDOM,
AND HOW IT WILL MANIFEST ITSELF

 

Subsection: Setting Up the Kingdom *Vol. III, Chap. 6.

 

All this is in harmony with the Scriptural declaration that the Kingdom of God must first be set up before its influence and work will result in the complete destruction of "the powers that be" of "this present evil world"—political, financial, ecclesiastical—about the close of the "Times of the Gentiles," October A.D. 1914. Let us note some scriptures to this effect.

 

It seems, this person left out a good portion of facts out in order to make a false claim. False claims that are no different from those posted by ?Winsider.

Well, thank you for correcting my idiocy. My source of this quote was incomplete.  But how does it prove to be a false claim? That 1914 was not predicted as the coming Armageddon and the ushering in of the Kingdom? 

Under the same subheading:

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE KINGDOM,

AND HOW IT WILL MANIFEST ITSELF

 "In our previous studies of the subject we learned that the “Times of the Gentiles,” which occupy the interim of time between the removal of the typical Kingdom from Israel and the full establishment of the true Messianic Kingdom upon the ruins of the present kingdoms, will end in October A.D. 1914.  We have seen that the period of our Lord’s presence from 1874 to 1914 is a “harvest” time, the [page 617] earlier part of it for gathering his elect bride, and the latter part a time of trouble, for the overthrow of present institutions, in preparation for the new Kingdom."  

[JW Insider]

@BillyTheKid46, I guess that after you have called me and others a lot of terrible names, and after making a lot of false claims about me and others, that I should probably respond in the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15, especially since I made this thread at least partly about "honesty."

Since you have provided no evidence, except for some evidence that helps my case, and hurts your own, I really don't need to do anything more than just let you know that your opinions are mostly wrong and misleading. I know absolutely that nearly all your claims about me are wrong. And I think some of those claims are also dishonest, but I don't know enough about you to judge that for sure.

Also, for those many times when you appear to be the most disingenuous, you simultaneously give evidence that you cannot help but project onto others any of the negative things that your mind tells you might be true of yourself. For this reason, I do not consider you dishonest in many cases, since this is just a reflex in some people. For reference, I'll give a definition of this kind of projection from Google:

Psychological projection is a defense mechanism people subconsciously employ in order to cope with difficult feelings or emotions. Psychological projection involves projecting undesirable feelings or emotions onto someone else, rather than admitting to or dealing with the unwanted feelings.

You may not know this about yourself, but you sometimes make the projection obvious by even repeating portions of the exact vocabulary that disturbed you. A couple of times you have even devolved to the simplest kind of projection, reminiscent of the PeeWee-Hermanesque retort: "I know you are but what am I?"

For this reason I'm not at all insulted by your insults, but I feel sad for how well it explains your reflexive thinking. It makes me think that, at least subconsciously, every false thing you have said about me is something you are concerned might be true about yourself. To me, therefore, you are only insulting yourself.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

I wish I could give that TWO upvotes, and an "Amen"!

It's true, and worse .... it's fair.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

18 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

A couple of times you have even devolved to the simplest kind of projection, reminiscent of the PeeWee-Hermanesque retort: "I know you are but what am I?"

BINGO!

Third grade BTK thinking.

[Srecko Sostar]

14 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

However, by your statement here. You must think the cycle of 6000 years accrues when?

Read more carefully what i wrote, please. I didn't connect "6000 years cycle" with cyclical events of any sort. Science can tell us more about "cycles" in nature, on Earth or in Space.  

 

[derek1956]

Why  bring yourself to their level if they insult you, that`s what the world does not Jehovah`s people we don`t go down to their level 

[JW Insider]

10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Pastor Russell never referenced Armageddon in 1914.

All of this issue goes away when we understand the way the terms were used in Russell's writings. We merely need to look at when Russell referenced the "great tribulation," rather than "Armageddon."

Armageddon was to be a battle between "capitalists and workers." A kind of worldwide socialist revolution between the forces with money (including religion) and those who felt the economic antagonism, those who would fight and "strike" to be treated fairly, or get what they want --especially "labor." Here is a picture of Armageddon from the 1914 Photo Drama of Creation. These would be the first "battles" of Armageddon, until "crushed" by God's Kingdom within a matter of months after 1914.

The most general view throughout most of the early Watchtower publications had been that the "great tribulation" would be in 1914. Then it became the few years leading up to 1914 and ending in 1914. Then, when they considered that the harvest (ending in 1914) should not be interrupted until the end of the harvest, they began teaching (in 1904) that the rest of the Bride/144,000 would expect to receive their heavenly reward in 1914, while the rest of the world fell into chaos and anarchy in the few months following October 1914, with no human institutions ruling anywhere in the world (except in Israel). As 1914 approached, there was more focus on 1915, and the months that followed -- or even a consideration (mostly dismissed) that 607 BCE (called 606 at the time) had been wrong and that it could be the more historically accurate date of 587/6 (called 588 below):

Note the following from IBSA Expanded Biblical Comments [on Daniel] -- quoting Russell's writings:

The impact is prominently noted throughout the Scriptures as a "time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation." (Dan. 12:1) OV83:T The little period of 40 years between 1874 and 1914 is, in the Scriptures, called the "Day of Vengeance," the smiting time preparatory to the inauguration of the Kingdom of righteousness. R1874:5 We expect this smiting in 1915, not 1914. Q96:4 If Zedekiah's dethronement should be dated BC 588, it would make the date 1932. My conviction, however, favors 1914. SM480:T This smiting, we believe, is near at hand (1915 comment) . . .

Of course, the "Battle of Armageddon" is always associated with the "Great Tribulation," but the exact meaning behind this vocabulary has changed over the years. The following is from Russell's book "Thy Kingdom Come" (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol 3):

The Scriptural time-proofs which we have considered show that this trouble was due to date from the time of Christ's second advent (October, 1874), when the judging of the nations would commence, under the enlightening influences of the Day of the Lord. This is shown in the Great Pyramid thus:

The "Descending Passage," from the entrance of the Great Pyramid, leading to the "Pit" or "Subterranean Chamber," represents the course of the world in general (under the prince of this world), into the great time of trouble (the "Pit"), in which evil shall be brought to an end.. . . Then measuring down the "Entrance Passage" from that point, to find the distance to the entrance of the "Pit," representing the great trouble and destruction with which this age is to close, when evil will be overthrown from power, we find it to be 3457 inches, symbolizing 3457 years from the above date, B.C. 1542. This calculation shows A.D. 1915 as marking the beginning of the period of trouble; for 1542 years B.C. plus 1915 years A.D. equals 3457 years. Thus the Pyramid witnesses that the close of 1914 will be the beginning of the time of trouble such as was not since there was a nation—no, nor ever shall be afterward. And thus it will be noted that this "Witness" fully corroborates the Bible testimony on this subject, as shown by the "Parallel Dispensations" in Scripture Studies, Vol. II, Chap. VII.

Nor should any doubt the fact that the forty years of "harvest" began in the fall of 1874 because the trouble has not yet reached so portentous and unendurable a stage; and because, in some respects, the "harvest" period since that date has been one of great advancement in knowledge. . . .

Besides, we should remember that the Word of the Lord clearly shows that the judgments of this time of trouble will begin with the nominal Church, preparatory to its overthrow, and in the strife of selfishness between capital and labor, both of which are now organizing for the culminating trouble.

To be even more pedantic, the "great tribulation" and the "time of trouble such as was not since there was a nation" were not always exactly the same thing either, since the "great tribulation" was seen a bit differently, depending on how it was to come upon each different class (Bride class, great company, the world). However, it's a simple matter to find at least a dozen specific references by Russell to the "great tribulation" starting in 1914. The Watchtower even held onto a version of this same view until fairly recently (last clarified in 2013), teaching that the "Great Tribulation" started in 1914 and had been cut short on account of the chosen ones back around 1918 to be started up again just prior to Armageddon.

*** w13 7/15 pp. 3-4 par. 3 “Tell Us, When Will These Things Be?” ***
For a number of years, we thought that the great tribulation began in 1914 with World War I and that “those days were cut short” by Jehovah in 1918 when the war ended so that the remnant would have the opportunity to preach the good news to all nations. (Matt. 24:21, 22) After the completion of that preaching work, Satan’s empire would be destroyed. Thus, the great tribulation was thought to have three phases: There would be a beginning (1914-1918), the tribulation would be interrupted (from 1918 onward), and it would conclude at Armageddon.

 

[JW Insider]

10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I have provided plenty of proof that you are a liar.

No. I've told the truth. Just because you oppose the truth, this does not make me a liar. Not once have you ever provided even a shred of evidence. Yet, I've probably made several mistakes over these last few years here. I would welcome any correction of any kind, and you've had 2.5 years under the name BillyTheKid46 to provide something.  It's rare that you have even made an attempt. Usually it's just bluster of the sort that claims you disagree and therefore anyone who disagrees with you must be a liar.

4 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

However, the worst hypocrite is JWinsider because he "claims" to come from BETHEL.

LOL. I don't claim to come from Bethel. I come from California, Missouri, and New York, mostly. I happened to work at Bethel in Brooklyn, NY from 1976 to 1982. It's even on my old work resume. Telling the truth doesn't make me a liar and a hypocrite.

4 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Therefore, I have no problem bringing myself to their level.

Then you should think about it. It might be a refreshing change of pace. I think there would be a lot less haughtiness, dishonesty, pretentiousness and contentiousness.

4 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

JWinsider has his comments redirected to an apostate site

My comments can be used anywhere anyone wants to use them, with or without attribution. Several people have asked, and I've always said Yes. You can try to make a book out of these comments and sell it, for all I care. I've been requoted on a couple of apostate sites, and Witness pages, too. Jesus said to give to anyone who asks of you, and not turn away anyone who would borrow from you.

And by the way, you claim that this site is an apostate site, and yet you directly contribute to it.

10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Meantime, if you don't like me showing people your manipulations and distortion of watchtower literature, TOUGH! That's exactly what I will continue to do, at every turn.

Actually I would love for you to start showing people where I have manipulated or distorted Watchtower publications. I don't believe I have, but I'd be happy to discuss any places where you believe this has been the case, and I will gladly admit the mistakes and make the corrections wherever I was wrong. I should add, of course, that your own use of the literature appears to be blatantly manipulated and distorted. Even under this very topic you have made statements that appear to contradict the Watchtower's teachings, while evidently pretending that you agree with them or understand them.