Moise Racette

Actually……… The commandment in the Bible says in Hebrew, “You shall not murder”.
Self defense is not murder.
Neither is killing animals for food, or useful materials, like loin clothes. God did that.
Owls eat mice …. And THEY can FLY !

Anna,
My best guess with the information we have at this moment in time is that the victim and the murderer or both were members of that particular congregation.
Whether it was because they died, or were  disfellowshipped or some other thing is ambiguous at this moment in time. They MAY have even been current JWs at a different Kingdom Hall.
At any rate, my best guess is that if these people were ever Jehovah’s Witnesses, it will not be mentioned on JW.org news.
It’s like the reporting they did on humanitarian aid of Haiti when they had the earthquake, and the Society worked with the United Nations and the U.S. Army distributing relief supplies.
You never heard that aspect of it, And almost nothing was reported on JW.org news.

I think the point the media is trying to accomplish is, it's another dark day for shootings in America. That apparent murder-suicide of "former" members of that congregation, doesn't necessarily detail if they were active or former members.
The politics of this world is, should Americans be allowed to carry guns in a house of worship. In some States, that's already allowed. Will a good guy with a gun be helpful in a shooting? 
That depends on the circumstance. There was a couple trying to make a point about guns in a church in 2017, the fool shot himself by accident inside the church. There was a shooting in a Texas church and a person with a gun shoot the suspect. A shooter in California was subdued by church members, no guns. One size doesn't fit all.
People that look at scripture in Jesus time might say, Some apostles carried swords. Yes! They did, but how many apostles involved themselves with Roman politics or an incursion in a synagogue. I recall, when Jesus was jailed, tried, and killed without so much as 1 apostle doing anything about it. I believe Christ words were, if my kingdom was part of this world, my servants would fight for me.
John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world; if it were, My servants would fight to prevent My arrest by the Jews. But now My kingdom is not of this realm." Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders.
It is a tragedy, we should just leave it at that.

We can view humanities imperfection in many ways. It won't change the outcome. Imperfection cannot be cured in this old system. Therefore, whatever the motive, it remains a human tragedy. It is compounded since the murderer decided to act at a kingdom hall. 
This incident is not the first time, a male shot a female at a Kingdom Hall. People are losing "reasoning" as we get closer to judgment day. Awareness and preparedness is something each individual needs to consider. The Org is making it very evident how we need to be cautious with our surrounding. 
Regardless how the media places the circumstance, they want to see American outrage. Who among humanity can tame Satan?
This depends on how we each view the reporting.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/25/us/colorado-jehovahs-witnesses-homicide-investigation-dead/index.html
The individuals were married and former members of the congregation, police said. 
To me, this doesn't indicate if they were or weren't. Doesn't it really matter? A couple went to a Kingdom Hall. Someone lost her life, the other ended his life. One life will be redeemed, while the other will be judged.
Now the other reporting about incendiary devises. There are many common items that can be considered incendiary. Gasoline can, Ammo Box, flares, etc. Can any of those media outlets see the future?
https://news.yahoo.com/multiple-incendiary-devices-found-christmas-182628560.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall
An investigator will have to determine if such devises were part of a plot or were they just simple, there in the vehicle before the incident.
The fact, the shooter ended his life without further incident, can mean, that person was only interested in hurting one person. The message about the usage of the KH is to be determined.
Did that person have a grudge against the Org, or the individual that was part of the Org, or was at one point a member, then left, and decided to return, thus angering the other.
This tragedy has too many unknowns, other than it being a tragedy. Without speculating, prayers are needed for our worldwide brotherhood. 

I think the point the media is trying to accomplish is, it's another dark day for shootings in America. That apparent murder-suicide of "former" members of that congregation, doesn't necessarily detail if they were active or former members.
The politics of this world is, should Americans be allowed to carry guns in a house of worship. In some States, that's already allowed. Will a good guy with a gun be helpful in a shooting? 
That depends on the circumstance. There was a couple trying to make a point about guns in a church in 2017, the fool shot himself by accident inside the church. There was a shooting in a Texas church and a person with a gun shoot the suspect. A shooter in California was subdued by church members, no guns. One size doesn't fit all.
People that look at scripture in Jesus time might say, Some apostles carried swords. Yes! They did, but how many apostles involved themselves with Roman politics or an incursion in a synagogue. I recall, when Jesus was jailed, tried, and killed without so much as 1 apostle doing anything about it. I believe Christ words were, if my kingdom was part of this world, my servants would fight for me.
John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world; if it were, My servants would fight to prevent My arrest by the Jews. But now My kingdom is not of this realm." Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders.
It is a tragedy, we should just leave it at that.

I think the point the media is trying to accomplish is, it's another dark day for shootings in America. That apparent murder-suicide of "former" members of that congregation, doesn't necessarily detail if they were active or former members.
The politics of this world is, should Americans be allowed to carry guns in a house of worship. In some States, that's already allowed. Will a good guy with a gun be helpful in a shooting? 
That depends on the circumstance. There was a couple trying to make a point about guns in a church in 2017, the fool shot himself by accident inside the church. There was a shooting in a Texas church and a person with a gun shoot the suspect. A shooter in California was subdued by church members, no guns. One size doesn't fit all.
People that look at scripture in Jesus time might say, Some apostles carried swords. Yes! They did, but how many apostles involved themselves with Roman politics or an incursion in a synagogue. I recall, when Jesus was jailed, tried, and killed without so much as 1 apostle doing anything about it. I believe Christ words were, if my kingdom was part of this world, my servants would fight for me.
John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world; if it were, My servants would fight to prevent My arrest by the Jews. But now My kingdom is not of this realm." Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders.
It is a tragedy, we should just leave it at that.

It escapes people on the fundamental knowledge of these independent researchers, scholars, theologians, historians or whatever people wish to call them. Those people have at least contributed to an undisputable event in man's history. 
1812-War
1865- Civil war coming to an end
1866- Proclamation on the End of the Confederate Insurrection
1914-War
1917-Belfour Declaration
Another researcher in 1834 commented on 2000AD. What happened in 2000? Y2K
 

How would the poster justify the banning of others just to keep your group intact?  Can a person regain their old identity? If not, then why speak of something that's out of someone's control. Yet, the anonymity is high in forums. It would appear, it's not like this group is fooling anyone by their protection. They are allowed to speak their minds in any manner and retain their original accounts. This smells of hypocrisy.

Flat notes they were.
For me, it is the 49 round boxing match of my great uncle, Joe Jennette against Sam McVey in Paris, both of whom used to routinely fight Jack Johnson, until the latter captured with World Heavyweight title and thereafter himself refused to face Black challengers.
As the 50th round began, Sam refused to budge from his corner, moaning, “This man ain’t human!”
The date was 1909, so it more or less matches prophesy, particularly if one isn’t fussy.

Why am I reminded of a certain local sister’s remark years ago about witnessing to her own former people, the Pentecostals? ‘When they’ve got their music on, you can’t touch em.’
In the background as I write this, family members play ‘Jehovah Give Me Courage’—it’s not only music, but video. 

I have a very simple test to determine whether or not Moise Racette’s pseudo analysis is correct or not.
I just look out the window.
Reality is what it is.
…. and the fact remains that everyone in the history of the human race that is trying to interpret these prophecies has been wrong, and there’s no exception.
 

Of course I don't accept what he wrote in his book. It all turned out to be wrong. For example, here are a couple of snippets in the paragraphs just following the page you quoted.


And, as you must be aware, he interpreted dozens of political events, especially in Turkey and Europe, to be fulfillments of nearly every trumpet and vial and quake and beast and other symbol he could find in Daniel, Revelation and Ezekiel. All of them are to be rejected because none of his expectations about any of them turned out to be true.
But I'm not in denial that J A Brown actually wrote such preposterous and presumptuous interpretations. What you posted twice is still part of the same valid evidence we have that J A Brown did NOT believe the 3.5 Gentile Times ended in 1917. He ended them in 1844.
The entire history of all nations from the Head of Gold in the image of Daniel 2 down to the time when God's Kingdom would crush and put an end to all these nations would therefore start with Nebuchadnezzar's reign and end in 1917, according to Brown. Therefore, every political thing that ever happened after Nebuchadnezzar began his reign would have to fall somewhere between 604 BCE and 1917 CE.
Therefore the 1290 years falls within that range of time, but that doesn't mean that the Gentile Times are the 1290 years. The 1335 years must also fall within that range and cannot extend beyond it, but that doesn't make the 1335 years the same as the Gentile Times either. The entire range of 2520 years must fall exactly within that same range from 604 BCE to 1917 CE, but that doesn't make the 2520 years the same as the Gentile Times either, according to Brown. The 391 year period that Brown speaks about, from (1453 CE to 1844 CE) must also fall within that same range, but that doesn't mean that those 391 years are the Gentile Times either. Same goes for the 2,300 days.
In fact, only one of those periods, the 1,260 days, is the one that Brown said was the Gentile Times, because it was the 1,260 year period, he said, where the Mohammedan Abomination was standing where it ought not, around Jerusalem, and which therefore got in the way of Israel creating a nation. But there would be a first judgment upon the Mohammedan impostiture in 1844, at the end of the 1,260 "days" of the Gentile Times. (And Brown expected Jews to begin returning to Palestine in the 7 years leading up to that date, starting in 1837.) Then there would be a total extirpation of the Muslim presence in 1873, the 1290 days. Then of course, total "happiness" would come to all who are able to wait the 1,335 days to that final second judgment upon all nations.
Notice that the parts you quoted from Even-Tide above is what I had pointed out before, that Israel can finally be established when the Gentile Times end in 1844, "the RISE of the Jewish kingdom." Then they become an Empire by 1873. Then they become the transcendent Glory of Israel in the world at the time of the last judgment in 1917.

More or less what I expected you to say based on past experience in this type of a discussion. Reminds me of a scene from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winnie_the_Pooh_and_the_Blustery_Day
OK, if there's a 1 to 2 year "play" then why do you prefer 1865 then? Are you able to answer that question, at least?
Why would this be about the United States?
What game?

It appears the first and second post can be read with adobe and MS Office word by @T.B. (Twyla) and @Pat Martin. I downloaded some samples and they worked for me.

It should be since it was John Aquila Brown that talked about the gentile times. Therefore, the abolitionist John Brown has no relevance in prophecy, other than smearing the name of God. So, yes! its funny.

The points  I get from all of this discussion is that in the last two millennium, EVERYONE HAS ALWAYS BEEN WRONG.
And there have been NO exceptions.

I wonder what you thought John Brown was right about, then, when you said "that doesn't mean he was wrong about 1914."
For the record John A Brown (in 1823) said that:
The end of the Gentile Times was going to be just a few years off, in the year AD 1844. The beginning of the Gentile Times was the start of Mohammedism (Muslims) in AD 622. The Gentile Times were 3 and 1/2 times in length, using the length Revelation 11:2 assigns to them. Multiple times he clarifies that the length of the Gentile Times in Luke21:24 = 1,260 (day/yrs) The reason this looks like only 1,222 [solar] years is because he uses "Mohammedan" lunar years So there is really nothing about John A Brown thinking there are "seven" Gentile Times. (Of course, the ONLY length of time that the Bible ever associates with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24 is 1,260 days, so Brown uses that period in years.)
The completely separate 2,520 year period which he derives from Daniel 4 is a period he sets to the start of Nebuchadnezzar's first year of reign in 604 BCE. That would be the year to start the "head of gold" from the image found in Daniel 2  So to Brown it's unrelated to Jewish or Messianic rulership, or the destruction of the Temple about 18 or 19 years later (which Brown would have therefore associated with 587 or 586 BCE.)
And Brown never indicates that the Gentile Times would end in 1914 or 1917 or any time around World War I. He ends the Gentile Times in 1844. He ends Daniel's 1,290 day period in 1873. And he ends Daniel's 1,335 day period in 1917. Because all the periods started with the beginning of the Muslim Mohammedan religion in AD 622.
C.T.Russell and many other commentators had focused on the Papal and secular politics of the Holy Roman Empire, using only Solar years, and therefore had started the 1,260 "days" earlier and ended them in 1799. That made the 1,290 "days" end in 1829 and the 1,335 "days" end in 1874. J A Brown appears to be the first commentator to end the 2,300 days in 1844, which Adventists also accepted, both using solar years and starting around Ezra's time in 457 BC.

@Pudgy With respect to the so-called "overlapping generations," John A Brown had "solved" this (in 1823) by saying that Jesus was referring to the literal, physical "Nation of Israel." Curiously, his arguments also count on the fact that the natural nation of Israel would NEVER pass away, but would be restored at Armageddon in 1844, and would become a world empire, surviving the attack of Gog and Magog in 1873, and would reach its full and glorious realization in the entire world by the time of the second judgment in 1917. Some of this is similar to C.T.Russell's view in the Watchtower, and even Rutherford's view up until at least 1925, that the nation of Israel would gradually become the only surviving nation in the world, ruling from Jerusalem in Palestine.
A lot of Witnesses are not aware that C.T.Russell was a "world famous" Zionist according to some current Zionist historians. But Rutherford's last major support for Zionism was the book "Comfort for the Jews" in 1925, containing teachings that Rutherford dropped completely by 1930 (in the books, Light I and Light II).

Yes, you make an erred assumption in behave of my post. I never indicated John A Brown mentioned 1914CE. His understanding was on the gentile times. I mentioned 1914CE as a perceived understanding to the end of the gentile times, which is 1914CE. So, me mentioning John A Brown and 1914CE is inconsequential to your post.
If you are to play with words, play with them correctly, thanks. 
Also, why would anyone want to discuss how people that deny with impunity 1914CE here, when they will never be convinced nor will they ever convince others of that denial.

Although J A Brown did mention 1917CE, which is more inline with the Jewish perception of Prophecy with the Balfour Declaration. 
Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government in 1917 during the First World War
So, anyone viewing the prophetic signs "correctly" can go either or.
From the rise of the four monarchies, commencing 604 A.C., to their final dissolution, there will be a grand week of years, or 2520 years, and will terminate, January 1, 1917.
How he arrived at, 1917 is to be considered. It should have started in 653AC.
 

There is nothing good that can be said about the abolitionist John Brown. He profaned the name of God and used his misunderstanding of scripture to justify his murderous rampage.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/63389806-john-brown
That doesn't mean he was wrong about 1914CE

If you knew the results of experiments, they would not be experiments!

I would imagine the above YouTube video illustrates the denseness of critical thought coming from a mindless person. This works against anyone trying to criticize others. It does bring up a question. Did Jesus and his apostles waste their time, walking long distance, town to town, city to city, house to house to bring the gospel of God to the people? Is cart witnessing any different?
When organizations use televangelism as a choice, are they wrong? What say the critics?

Broken Promise, and I believe it has been granted. I guess there is no reason for a closed club.
"I had quit the JW Open Club, so as not to be a cause for dissension …. [w]hich if I am not careful I can take over a conversation … as TTH ALLUDED to that, and he was correct.
Under the circumstances, I feel if I do not comment, it would solve at least 3 points of concern.
I have been thinking about this for several days and decided it would be appropriate to “belong” if I only commented if asked a question, etc.,[]and not post cartoons.
Basically, the same rules at the Kingdom Hall, except I will be courteous to anyone that is courteous to me, except that for d’fd people, not to discuss any theocratic issue or “what’s going on”, etc., realizing it is a double[]edged sword that should cut both ways.
With all that in mind, I again request approval to join the closed club[] mainly as an observer.
The open club has evolved into a bat cave of crazy people."
Pudgy