Thinking

Understanding the Sign of the Son of Man...
 
Brother Russell also mentions that this time of trouble could last a certain amount of time as in the time of Noah. Then he mentions, "Then, later on, will come the Epiphania; that is to say, the revelation, or manifestation, of the present One.
This will not be a manifestation in the flesh, but in a great Time of Trouble, symbolically represented as fire, as when we read, "He shall be revealed in flaming fire, taking vengeance." -- 2 Thessalonians 1:7-10.
Christ Jesus referred to this sign when he said: “Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in lamentation, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” (Matt. 24:30) Thus the 'age of violence' was ushered in as the whole world experiences the Last Days. This age or time period will indeed come to an end (Matthew 24:14) as this prophecy is being fulfilled for ALL to SEE.            

Bullseye! 😀 

Yes - they should be - that is why we must watch ourselves!  Jehovah is the one that all must fear,

Do you actually know the difference between an apostate and a heretic?
There is a very real difference and I’m afraid the term apostate is bandied about much too often, here and elsewhere.

Lending a scriptural passage alluded to above by Arauna.
2 Samuel 24:10-14
10  But David’s heart* was struck with remorse+ after he had numbered the people. David then said to Jehovah: “I have sinned+ greatly by doing this. And now, Jehovah, please forgive your servant’s error,+ for I have acted very foolishly.”+ 11  When David got up in the morning, Jehovah’s word came to Gad+ the prophet, David’s visionary, saying: 12  “Go and say to David, ‘This is what Jehovah says: “I am giving you three options. Choose the one that I should bring on you.”’”+ 13  So Gad came in to David and told him: “Should seven years of famine come on your land?+ Or should you flee for three months from your adversaries while they pursue you?+ Or should there be three days of pestilence in your land?+ Now consider carefully what I should reply to the One who sent me.” 14  So David said to Gad: “It is very distressing to me. Let us fall, please, into the hand of Jehovah,+ for his mercy is great;+ but do not let me fall into the hand of man.”+15  Then Jehovah sent a pestilence+ on Israel from the morning until the designated time, so that 70,000 of the people from Dan to Beʹer-sheʹba+ died.+ 16  When the angel stretched out his hand toward Jerusalem to destroy it, Jehovah felt regret* over the calamity,+ and he said to the angel bringing destruction among the people: “It is enough! Now let your hand drop.” Jehovah’s angel was close to the threshing floor of A·rauʹnah+ the Jebʹu·site."
Read on, to verse 24, it is interesting.
This discussion has gone way too far over the brink. Hope the scriptural passage can redeem and refresh in some way.

Most of us are morally clean - it just takes ONE person who oversteps the principles of Jehovah to put a bad spot on an entire congregation.  BUT Jehovah forgave Manasseh who burnt his children in fire; he also forgave David who murdered someone and committed adultery.  We learn from this: humans who serve Jehovah are imperfect and prone to lose faith and do wrong things. 
Are there individual hypocrites who pretend to be moral when they are not?  I am sure there are. But they are usually exposed.  Jehovah himself says : that which is hidden will be exposed (paraphrased). So I trust that Jehovah does expose things........ but then people with bad motives will use this s fuel to hurt their brothers. But they will also be judged.  Who judges his brother harshly will face Jehovah's judgement.  So repent.
Conclusion:  it is morally wrong from YOU to expect JWs to NEVER make any mistakes or have blotches.  Unfortunately, your expectations are so high, I wonder if any person  could find approval in front of Jehovah by your standard.  Like David I say:  " Thank goodness Jehovah is the judge and not the super fine apostles; or those who stand in judgement of their fellow worshipers.

Who is responsible for the propaganda? 
rev 14:14 - 16
13  And I saw three unclean inspired expressions* that looked like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragony and out of the mouth of the wild beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet
 14  They are, in fact, expressions inspired by demons and they perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the entire inhabited earth, to gather them together to the war of the great day of God the Almighty.
All the kings of the earth are following this propaganda - which is leading them into direct conflict with Jesus Christ,  when he comes to rule completely over the earth.
The false prophet is  very busy with his signs. The false prophet is leading us all mesmerized along with their lab-manufactured problems, massive fear-inducing propaganda, together with an unending list of solutions which have already been deliberated on by those who will soon become the 10 new kings together with the UNs WHO organization; constantly creating new diversions so that the populous cannot get time to think straight; and the atheist prophets of scientism can get their transhuman agenda into play. 

I always thought the designation “classified” was somewhat  bogus because the governments on both sides know what’s going on, and I would imagine that the only people that don’t know is the general population, and anything that is remotely true may not be found out for 100 years or more, if ever.
Before I die I would like to get a non-fiction version of the Kennedy Warren Report.
That having been said, I can see to a certain point Putin‘s viewpoint because in the Ukraine they REPORTEDLY have or had at least five biological weapons laboratories, and the prevailing winds are from west to east.
 
 

Well, I've pretty much completed the book. I still have a few more references to find for myself, and look up. So that might take a while.
I have decided that there really isn't enough interest in the actual topic itself. Most of the interest is just a lot of trying to hold onto previously held opinions, or to prove others wrong, with or without evidence.. And unless someone asks me to, I won't even restart the topic in the Closed Club, where it was suggested it belonged in the first place. There are always plenty of good subjects to discuss and a lot of them are much more important anyway.
I will say that the book was excellent. One can read the whole thing and realize that you are not necessarily being influenced by the opinions of Rud Persson. To a much better degree than expected, you are really just reading evidence, and you are allowed to reach your own conclusions about the preponderance of the evidence. That's the way a book of historical research should be written. Not one that tries to draw conclusions for you.
Since I'm ready to draw a conclusion from the book I will say one "last thing." I have realized that, all in all, even though I thought I had been giving the benefit of the doubt to both sides evenly, I haven't. I knew there would be biases and prejudices both for and against the usual conclusions that we have drawn. But I didn't realize that we can be much more sure about which biases to agree with and which were to be rejected. The overall evidence makes it all too obvious. But I won't elaborate further here. People can get hold of the book for themselves if they wish. But even without the book, all one has to do is get hold of the sources, many of which are freely available on line, but with a lot of searching.
I also went back and corrected a couple of misconceptions I had at first. One was too minor to repeat: I had confused Ohio with Maryland as the place where Rutherford had some business and where he had just met PSLJ. The other is also about PSLJ, but is a more significant error on my part. So I will repeat here the correction I made on a previous page:
[Edited to add: I was wrong on this point about Rutherford not dealing with PSLJ as if he had serious mental problems. Rutherford was actually quick to deal with PSLJ as insane and mentally unbalanced, but Rutherford was inconsistent, and seemed to soften his position toward him. This hadn't made sense to me originally, and I was partly influenced here by the comments of a brother I spoke to at length about this very recently after reading this portion of the book. But Persson's book provides a detail that I take as an obvious clue as to the reason for Rutherford's inconsistency. Persson doesn't appear to draw any conclusion from that detail, but it makes me think that it was not just an absent-minded inconsistency on Rutherford's part. It served a purpose.]

They were not interested in company policy…..they wanted to follow Christ’s lead and were interested in her life and well being and we’re aware of her mental health at the time…..by the way she wants to come back….
Our elders are now very very kind ….I’m sure there may be still some of the old kind…..three strikes and your out….but the society is trying to weed them out or retrain them…..

We had some one asked to be disfellowshipped …the elders didn’t want to but she was insistent…..so they did…but it seems now the elders are loathed to disfellowship anyone,,,they really try hard to get the person to take a break….

We want to discuss scripture and our peeves in peace without having hate-OCD change the new subject of  hate for the GB in every thread...... that is why we want to get away from you.  Your nastiness follows us wherever we go. Most of us were prepared to put up with you - and we all did that for a very long time.... but now I think we have just decided it has been enough...
 

We had some one asked to be disfellowshipped …the elders didn’t want to but she was insistent…..so they did…but it seems now the elders are loathed to disfellowship anyone,,,they really try hard to get the person to take a break….

This was a lovely post….and Pudgy please come over…your our brother!!!!!

I am surprised they did. Usually they don't disfellowship someone just because they ask to be disfellowshipped (?) The only way I think that would work is if you handed them a letter of dissasociation...(?) But what do I know....
And yes, if you want to join the closed club you can.....as Tom said, it might be more beneficial for you than here only. 

Ditto - even if you are a smelly vulture.... lol. 
Seriously - you are adding to your own burdens /load.  No need to go as far as to punish yourself. 
I knew a brother who did the same as you.  He was also a character due to the fact that he grew up in an orphanage and (who knows) what happened to him there. He was never adopted. He learnt to only rely on the self... they are always awkward and do not generally fit in.  They themselves always feel different.  Children come out of these institutions with some unsociable traits such as quirky or extremely dark humor and an individuality which does not fit in. He was accepted back in the truth before he died.
I do not always understand your humor But I have not experienced it to be nasty or deprecating.  Sometimes only of the self!     Why continually expose yourself to the truly nasty ones?  Not worth it.

if he was an intellectual we could respect, I would accept that reasoning....... so I do not.  But the excerpt sounds a bit more socialist communist to me, where individuality is lost in the collective. 
Jehovah wants us to keep our individuality but learn to temper it around those who are not like us.  It is the loving thing to do.  Unfortunately, I also have a kind of break-out personality - like this weaponized virus!!   I contain myself (because I am a bit over the top in my enthusiasm for everything), and then the Jack-in-the-box jumps out!  I push it back in ... and then, when I am not vigilant - it pops up. 
We all have our failings. ......

Hmm. Well, we DO have to work on that. On the other hand, police are known to develop a sort of “gallows humor” due to what they have experienced. Maybe it’s something like that with you too.
You didn’t have to say this. No one here would ever have known. The fact that you did say it nonetheless indicates several things: 1) respect for the arrangement of the congregation of God, 2) a personal sense of honor, 3) proof that you do what you do out of fear of God and not humans, and 4) a desire not to ensnare others, even unknowingly, into violating congregation discipline not to engage with disfellowshipped ones. My respect for you has steadily heightened, and with this it goes through the roof. 
At the same time, I still see no reason you should not join the closed club, nor for @Annato reject your request when you make it. Disfellowshipped ones can attend meetings, in fact they are encouraged to do so when repentant. I’ve no doubt that the ‘honor system’ would compel you to behave there as though sitting in the Kingdom Hall. There’s no reason to cut yourself off from proper association, particularly as there are those there who are just the ticket for you to be readjusted. Find things worthwhile and you could even repackage them for the crowd here. I mean, the malcontents here repackage and run again the same pablum ad infinitum. No reason you can’t repackage stuff as well.
Well, yeah. I see where you’re coming from. But there’s no need to add to it unnecessarily. You should come, as the eagle does, to the carcass that is JWI—and all the others, too. 
I’m not sure what to make of this. Yes, you don’t want the Truth to be spoken of abusively. But with the elders apparently willing to keep you on board under some lesser form of discipline—well, I’m not sure one has to be less forgiving than God. Lots of sins are exposed these day. Adding them up, Jehovah’s people still have less than the population in general, because of the godly principles they diligently seek to apply. Even without holy spirit, it rubs off through sheer repetition.
We all fall short many times, James says. The truth of the matter might be as when Bud was replacing my car brakes and he couldn’t figure out how to reinstall the anti-rattle clip. “What’s one more rattle on a Ford?” he said at last as he threw it away.
Maybe I can serve as a character witness for you someday. I’d like that.
”Dear, TTH. Please don’t offer to serve as a character witness for Pudgy. We’re well away that he’s a character.”—the brothers.

.ok

Hey, that’s funny. I enjoyed that a lot.
Hey, that’s funny. I enjoyed that a lot.
Hey, that’s funny. I enjoyed that a lot.
Hey, that’s funny. I enjoyed that a lot.
Hey, that’s funny. I enjoyed that a lot.
Hey, that’s funny. I enjoyed that a lot.

Thanks for the kind invitation TTH, but the reason I left before is I was offending some very fine people with a very different sense of humor.
I realize that because of the general nature of what I am accused of, I am assumed guilty until proven innocent, and it looks like that resolution may take several more years, until it goes before a jury. 

For that reason alone, I initiated and asked the Elders to disfellowship me, and reluctantly, they eventually did, so the Truth may not be spoken of abusively.
I have learned to live without support from anyone, and may survive this …. Because, after all … it’s “one to a box”.

The officers posted outside Robb Elementary either lacked the training, skill or courage needed when it was needed most.
or as another commenter I just saw said: 
"Look up the "Ferguson Effect". Real impact of BLM." (which if true is bone-chilling)

No, one could not. Again, you misunderstand everything.
The day any member of the Governing Body takes full and personal credit for any deed performed on his watch, ignoring Jehovah, then and only then will your scripture have relevance. 
If you approach a Witness public speaker with commendation after a fine talk, he will more often than not murmur something to the effect that it is not he but Jehovah. He says this even though it is perfectly possible to give a persuasive talk without any input at all from Jehovah. Lots of people in the world speak persuasively.
So what are we to make of someone who takes full personal credit for doing what no human in a thousand years would be able to do?
and in accord with the principle, ‘to he who has been given much, much will be demanded.’ It was needed discipline that will benefit Moses. 
Find an instance where a member of the Governing Body has taken personal credit for some deed, to the exclusion of Jehovah. We will all wait for your apology and retraction.

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

I think we tend to misinterpret Acts 20:20, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't preach from house to house. I'm only saying that this isn't what that specific verse is about. We tend to impose a meaning on it that isn't there because of our favored method of preaching. But that doesn't mean that the term "house to house" is a terrible translation, only that we don't think enough about what it must have meant in that particular context.
There are good reasons today to use the house-to-house preaching methods, because there is no central gathering place where people get news and share ideas. In some cities there is something akin to that in certain parks. Union Square Park and Washington Square Park in NYC come to mind as places where people, often from NYU, meet to hold up signs and megaphones to promote an ideology. In fact, I have had success talking to individuals in these parks. But most people are not there to get talked to.
We are "encouraged" to report, it isn't "demanded."