BTK59

Furthermore, I am absolutely certain that he possessed an extensive compilation of the kings' chronicles from esteemed sources like "Edwin R. Thiele" and "Ptolemy Canon", which he frequently referenced.
The Watchtower Chronology commences in 4026 BC, whereas general secular history utilizes Ussher's 4004 BC. The crucial point here is that by solely relying on secular history as a reference, the same conclusion is reached without the need for Adam to utilize the Watchtower chronology.
Why do we keep trying to confuse the issue with our chronology dates when the end goal is the same?
Pyramidology -- adam rutherford -- Volume 3, 1966
THE 3RD YEAR OF JEHOIAKIM
Daniel 1:1
The first verse in the Book of Daniel states: “In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem and besieged it.’’ This verse has puzzled archaeologists. As punctuated in the English Bible, Jeremiah 46,!2 seems to state that the Battle of Carchemish was fought in the 4th year of Jehoiakim. It is clearly recorded in the cuneiform Babylon Chronicle (B.M. 21946) that this battle occurred a few weeks before Nebuchadnezzar ascended the Babylonian throne in the 21st year of his father,Nabopolassar, whose death occurred on the 8th of AB (August).
The Chronicle also records a siege of Jerusalem in the 7th year of Nebuchadnezzar and the capture of the king (Jehoiachin) and appointment of the new king (Zedekiah) on the 2nd of Adar (March). As Jehoiachin only reigned 3 months, his accession on the death of Jehoiakim was therefore in the December of Nebuchadnezzar’s 7th year (8th year by Jewish reckoning). Hence Jehoiakim died in the first half of his 11th regnal year (being Tishri years) and in the latter half of Nebuchadnezzar’s 7th year (Nisan years). As the Battle of Carchemish was fought in the summer, had it taken place in the 4th year of Jehoiakim (second half), this would have been synchronous with the first half of Nebuchadnezzar’s 1st year (2nd year, Jewish reckoning), whereas we know from the Babylonian Chronicle itself that the battle occurred in the 21st year of the reign of Nabopolassar (Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year) and hence in Jehoiakim’s 3rd year. As explained on page 572, the seeming contradiction is accounted for by the erroneous punctuation of Jeremiah 46,1.),
Here we can observe that he specifically references the siege of Jerusalem in 598 BC. He thoroughly examines secular history without depending on other factors. According to his perspective, the third year of Jehoiakim begins in 610 BC, specifically in the late portion of the year around October or November. Notably, Jehoahaz was made king in that period, and three months later, Jehoiakim ascended to the throne, aligning with secular historical records from 606 BC.
However, the Watchtower's use of different dates originating from 4026 and chronologically running down from that point results in an obvious misalignment. Nevertheless, the discrepancy does not negate the fact that either the 607 BC Watchtower or the 606 BC Bible Students is correct, given that scripture mentions the 3rd year in one passage and the 4th year in another.
So, those 2 years you are now agreeing with could have been used anywhere from 605 to 539.

I absolutely agree with your statement. This indeed provides compelling evidence that apostates mistakenly relied on the Babylonian Chronicles, when they could have easily utilized the correct method, which supports the Watchtower Chronology. The COJ book should have been considered utterly worthless by conflicted bethelites.

Pyramidology -- adam rutherford -- Volume 3, 1966 
THE EARLY PERSIAN PERIOD Persia became the dominating world power, with Cyrus as first monarch, after the Fall of Babylon. In 1957-38 the pub-lication of the translation of the three recently discovered Harran Inscriptions (H1, B.; H2, A.; H2, B.) of Nabonidus, the last independent king of Babylon, is revolutionary in that the first-hand detailed chronological information therein supplied demands an adjustment of the hitherto accepted chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period and that of the reign of Cyrus of Persia following. The details of this are given in Chapter IV, wherein we discuss the chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period but, suffice is to say here that these new invaluable archaeological discoveries show that the hitherto generally received date of the Fall of Babylon, 539 B.c., must be lowered 2 years and that the correct date for that event is 537_Bic, This means of course that the date of the accession of Cyrus as the first Persian Emperor is accordingly 537 B.c., with his Ist regnal year beginning in Nisan, 536 B.c. That this dating is correct can also be shown independently from Persian history as follows: (This portion was posted by you)
Continued: After the fall of Babylon, the Jews returned to the Holy Land in the reign of Cyrus the Great. Both Ptolemy’s Canon and the contract tablet datings show a 9 years’ reign for Cyrus and 8 years for his son and successor, Cambyses. The latter reign is astronomically fixed by the record of the lunar eclipse of 16th July, 523 B.c. in the 7th year of that reign. 

Thus, there is an understanding of the events from 539 BC to Cyrus' Edict in 538 BC and the return of the Jews in 537 BC, which aligns with the Watchtower's view of 537 BC and the recognition of 607 BC as the 70-year mark. However, the inconsistency arises when the same two years accepted for the process of 539 BC are denied in the context of 607 BC, with the preference being for 587 BC based on astronomical data, which was previously upheld for 10 years. This shift in stance seems to come after causing confusion for many, all in an effort to argue against the Watchtower's position. It appears to be a belated change in perspective.
In his fourth volume, he delves deeper into the topic of 607 BC, shedding more light on it. Additionally, it's important to consider the timeframe of his demise.
Pyramidology -- adam rutherford -- Volume 4, 1972
This means to say that the end of this World Order comes precisely 4 Times or 1440 years (4x360=1440) after the beginning of Daniel’s 34 Times in a.d. 538. A pattern of prophetic Times apparently runs through the Divine Plan of the Ages, for from the birth of Christ in 2 B.c. (date of which is conclusively proved in Book JJ) to the inauguration of the Millennium in 1979 is exactly 54 Times or 1980 years (14. B.c. + A.D. 19782= 1980). All students of chronological prophecy are of course familiar with the 7 Times of Daniel, chapter 4, extending from the beginning of Babylonian domination in 607 B.c. till a.p. 1914, the commencement of World Wars and first stage in the breaking-up of the Old Order. Then the Great Pyramid’s chronograph defines another 3 prophetic Times beyond that, namely from 1914 to 2994 which is a period of 1080 years (3 x360=1080)—Book I, pages 149-150.
However, what is being overlooked is the fact that Adam Rutherford's book was actually published in 1966, yet no apostate from that time, such as COJ or anyone in the present era, has ever mentioned the connection it has with the Babylonian Tablets at the British Museum. This crucial link is being deliberately downplayed, and I am bringing this to the public's attention with great emphasis.
By relying solely on secular history, 607 BC stands as a credible date that has been substantiated in the past, well before the advent of all the COJ misconceptions.

When God grants wisdom and understanding through the Holy Spirit, it is never a trial. Job got it, so why haven't all of you understood that you must find your own meaningful purpose.

Given Tom and JWI's desire to keep their criticism here, I believe it's best to start a fresh conversation that prioritizes intelligent discussion. Personally, I fail to comprehend the purpose of intertwining various topics and subsequently gripping about others' inability to stay on point, especially when the individuals leading the discourse are unable to do so themselves.   Job questions why the wicked go unpunished, and the current discussion appears to lack significance in its present state. As a result, Satan's initial argument does not establish a conclusive connection with the subsequent expression. No dictionary can fully interpret God's guidance, and that is the crucial element missing in this mundane analogy. It is what God has given us to understand by means of his Holy Spirit.   Meantime, for the latter, I'll give you a hint, "of judgement" literal "time" which is "hide/store up" if you are a linguistic expert, you'd understand.   Perhaps you will find the solution amongst yourselves. Having a command of grammar simply isn't enough.   Therefore, @nkboswellIf you would like to engage in a more in-depth conversation, I kindly request that you wait until I initiate a new thread. Hopefully, this one will remain devoid of disruptive discord and unwarranted criticism towards the Watchtower, Governing Body, or Elders, and our Bible NWT.

Please refrain from trying to deflect the conversation with wordplay. My criticism was not directed at the Governing Body or the Watchtower's interpretation of scripture using their own concordance and lexicon. They do not use the same one as you do. I was actually critiquing your choice of words in criticizing the NWT, especially since you may not possess adequate linguistic skills for such an endeavor.
These belong to your responsibilities, not mine, nor the Watchtowers' if Its understood correctly.
"he NWT gets rid of the apparent contradiction by changing "he" (Jehovah) to "one" to try to make it align with 1 Chronicles. It might work here, but does not work for other cases that are similar."
The Watchtower is not contradictory in its tone. It's all coming from you.
"In fact, there have been persons who treat the opening two chapters of Job as a later addition just to explain away that very ending. Personally I don't think this is necessary. And there have been some attempts to differentiate passages that can attribute certain anthropomorphic characteristics when God is referred to as Jehovah but not when he is referred to as El or Elohim in the original language. (Such as "regret" etc.) The full discussion should take many pages."
There is nothing regrettable about simplifying passages in order to enhance understanding. The NWT has an "excellent" format in its linguistic application. No one is obliged to use the NWT, just as no one is obliged to be a witness. The choice is entirely up to the individual.

"KEY" is the word that should be examined, as it signifies something with deep significance. Just like "meaningful." God grants wisdom through proper translation, which is crucial for conveying meaningful messages to his followers. Not everyone possesses the stature of Moses or a Levite, just as no one compares to Jesus or the apostles. Nevertheless, they have made a profound impact through their inspired written words. This inspiration is brought to life through the use of the appropriate lexicon and concordance. The existence of various lexicons with their own interpretations does not guarantee full support from God. Nor does one own interpretation. Let's entrust the task to the professionals and those who are guided by divine inspiration.

It's clear that Pastor Russell and the groups he proudly led had no association. Even today, these independent Bible Students continue on their own path, with some even embracing Adventism, as was the case in Pastor Russell's time. This does not mean that Russell was heavily influenced by Adventism, but rather that he found certain aspects intriguing enough to investigate. The false claim that Pastor Russell was an Adventist is an apostate vision, and today's Bible Students who support Russell's perspective will ardently defend this truth.
However, my statement remains valid. Not a single apostate has taken the trouble to mention that Brother Adam Rutherford, who is unrelated to Joseph Rutherford, made reference to the Babylonian Chronicles in his book volume 3.
It is irrelevant if certain Bible Students associate him with their long-forgotten alliances. What truly matters is what is referenced in all of his books. Personally, I own eight of them, and they all consistently refer to AD 1914 and how it marked the culmination of the Gentile Times, just as Russell had mentioned.
So, that's for the update. I'm sure someone else will find it interesting.
John and Edgar Morton had their own comprehensive ideology, which Pastor Russell only briefly mentioned in one of his publications. I recall it being a three-paragraph long piece. However, it is important not to overemphasize the influence of the Morton's ideology on Pastor Russell, as his primary interest lied in the Great Pyramid. He merely utilized the pyramid to validate certain biblical interpretations through calculations. It is crucial to note that Pastor Russell did not extensively engage with the pyramid schemes that others were involved in.
Of course, he visited the Great Pyramid, but that's not the point. The associations were "independent", meaning they would think and act independently in the best interest of their respective churches. Although this sometimes conflicted with Russell's own views, he never sought to impose his authority over others.
The key here is whether people are truly interested in the truth. For instance, if someone is genuinely interested in the truth as presented in Adam Rutherford's books, they should make a point to read all of his published works.
By examining the historical events, one can clearly understand the significance of the year 1776, which contrasts the alternative perspective of 1799 as a significant date. It is worth noting the inclusion of both 1917-1918 and 1914, as mentioned by the person in question. It is important to avoid distorting their words or manipulating their ideas.
I found it quite interesting when Adam depicted the British Empire as the savior of the Jews in 1914. Referring to Britain as "Israel" and the Jews as "Judah" adds a poetic touch to the story.
Anglo-Saxon Israel or Israel-Britain -- Adam Rutherford -- 1939
Snippet:
"It is important to notice, too, that since the Great War of 1914-1918 Great Britain (Israel) and the Jews (Judah) have occupied the Holy Land together, the latter being under the guidance of the former,"
 
 

Pyramidology -- adam rutherford -- Volume 3, 1966 He confidently refers to the years 539 BC and 537 BC, which he obtained from the Harran Inscriptions of 1957-1958 (H1, B; H2, A; H2, B). Additionally, he mentions the year 536 BC, which aligns with Pastor Russell's understanding of Chronology during that period.  However, it is regrettable that some apostates here foolishly embraced Carl Olof Jonsson's erroneous misconception of secular chronology, which they desperately used to challenge the accurate Watchtower Chronology. It is clear that your unwavering insistence on using the incorrect date of 587 BC contributed to confusion and disharmony. If a good researcher wants to conduct a thorough investigation, they must utilize all available information, rather than cherry-picking data that aligns with their preconceptions.   Isn't it, what people want here? Not a discussion but a fight when things don't go their way? There is too much resorting to strife and division, even though the Bible "clearly" speaks against such behavior.   My statement remains firm: no apostate has utilized Adam Rutherford's work to "connect" the Babylonian Chronicles in a manner that doesn't support baseless argument like COJ. Anyone who had thoroughly examined the chronicles would have recognized that one individual had already used them correctly prior to the claims of the opposing party. This serves as further evidence supporting the validity of the Watchtower Chronology. Another compelling reason to dismiss theoretical ideologies presented here. For those to whom this issue is significant, I encourage independent and comprehensive research.   Some individuals often become easily fatigued solely because they lack belief in the existence of alternatives. However, it is important to understand that there is always an alternative, and sometimes these alternatives coincide, even if it's just a single one.   In Adam Rutherford's third volume from 1966, which predates Carl Olof Jonsson's misguided book, there is a question as to why conflicted Bethelites didn't explore that instead of embracing COJ's book. Now, 10 years later, there is a demand for explanations and justifications after causing so much confusion (Stumbling) for many.

I just got appointed head of a thread. Call that not having a purpose?

They almost all do it in today’s world of theology.
Long ago, in answer to the question of where did we originate our explanation of suffering & evil, you pointed to a Great Courses lecture series by a Professor Hall. Our theodicy was there, you had heard, and the prof said it was the only theodicy that made sense.
In fact, it is only the fact that the theodicy involves Satan that makes it logical from his point of view. All other theodicies he considers do not. He confines his entire exploration, save for this renegade theology, to what he calls ‘ethical monotheism’—that is, one God unopposed. Since he himself comes from an evangelical Lutheran background, it surprised me that he has shoved Satan into such a tiny footnote, a player only in his last theodicy considered.
I think he has done it to join the world of contemporary scholars, who are thoroughly embarrassed by the thought of a Devil. It makes all their progressive efforts to repair the world and improve mankind pointless if there is a devil you can pin all the bad things to. Several times in his lecture, Hall points out this theodicy involving the devil is extremely unpopular today, to the point where he seems to assume that his audience may not even have heard of it! 
Consistent with this modern understanding from the scholars, the Book of Job is separated into 1) an ancient Jewish ‘fable’ consisting of chapters 1,2, and 42, and the poetic portion, consisting of all that remains. Frankly, I think the intellectual appeal of this approach is that, by separating the book into two portions, it puts you into position to understand neither, thus ensuring modern theologians will have a job till the end of time. You can debate the meaning of the poetic portion forever, with no one able to call your bluff. But the moment you integrate the ‘fable,’ it all resolves fairly quickly. But it resolves in a way repugnant to today’s theologians, so they don’t go there.
 

Another strategic maneuver to divert attention to a separate issue.
Visitors, we caution the public against misrepresentations of scripture. It is evident that some individuals lack the diligence to interpret scripture accurately, as demonstrated by this particular example.   God, in fact, incited David to take action. When we try to attribute this action to someone else, we fail to understand the true nature of God's intent. The Watchtower's goal is not to hide God's intentions and depict Him as a negative and wrathful deity, as some may suggest. On the contrary, it aims to shed light on His true intentions, which involve taking action. In this particular case, it pertains to understanding the reasons behind God's anger residing within human nature.   Friberg, Analytical Greek Lexicon   [Fri] ὀργή, ῆς, ἡ as a vigorous upsurge of one's nature against someone or something anger, wrath, indignation; (1) as a human emotion anger, wrath (JA 1.20); (2) as the divine reaction against evil, bringing judgment and punishment both historically and in the future wrath, indignation (MT 3.7; RO 9.22); as a future culmination of judgment in an outpouring of the stored-up anger of God (ἡ) ἡμέρα (τῆς) ὀργῆς (the) day of wrath (RO 2.5; RV 6.17) ὀργή N-NF-S ὀργή    In some other translations, "it" is employed to obfuscate the intended meaning as a replacement.   NAS  2 Samuel 24:1 Now again the anger of the LORD burned against Israel, and it incited David against them to say, "Go, number Israel and Judah." (2 Sam. 24:1 NAS)   Did the actions of David, Israel, and Judah provoke God's anger while they were waging war against the Philistines? Why did God become angry with them? It is better to learn the right way through thorough research or by speaking to a local Elder rather than accepting a misguided interpretation from just anyone here who has no clue on how to interpret scripture.   God does not find the use of these types of arguments, which aim to create conflict and discord among His people, acceptable.  

That's why comparing the NWT is worthless in your case. The emphasis on its completeness serves a righteous purpose as the Universal Sovereign, who can determine where His creation has erred.

Correct. That statement is solely based on my personal observation. I regrettably inserted the comment before referring to the Bible Student publications as a reference point. Thus, according to our revised chronology, 607 BC, 537 BC, and even AD 1914 are supported by scriptural facts and numbers without the bible directly stating the number 2520, or 1914 as demanded by apostates, except AD 1914 which is also used by the Bible Students. Therefore, I highly encourage visitors to exercise discernment when encountering and accepting alternative personal presentations. It is important to recognize that not all of them are grounded in facts.
You are correct about the freedom granted to the Jews from Palestine. Pastor Russell understood the struggles of the Zionist movement against the Turkish Student uprising that started around 1872-1874 or perhaps a little sooner, events that are also documented in secular history.
No, it seems that Adam Rutherford had no association with the Bible Student Association or the International Bible Student Association as far as I can tell. Further research may reveal a different story, possibly indicating a more recent affiliation after some Bible Students decided to sever ties even before Pastor Russell died.
Since the Bible Student Association operated independently, many Elders brought their own interpretations to the table. Some embraced erroneous ideologies that weren't acceptable to Pastor Russell, but since they were all learning something new, any insights that appeared to be valuable were discussed.
Brother Adam Rutherford embodies irony. In the past, individuals of all Christian faiths acted with respect towards others, regardless of their own denominational affiliations. However, in today's world, this kind of consideration is lacking, due to internal apostasy and various other factors.
In his remarkable series, "The 4-Volume Books of Pyramidology," Adam Rutherford not only embraces the Watchtower's stance on 607 BC and AD 1914 but also enhances it with thought-provoking insights. In the most captivating way, Rutherford skillfully links historical data to his own observations, leaving readers astounded since the 3rd volume was published in 1966 with the first volume published in 1957. Through  meticulous research and eloquent writing, he elevates the significance of this topic to new heights, making it impossible to ignore as a researcher.
Sometimes I wonder if that's where the disgraceful COJ got his information from in the late 70s to begin with, linking the Babylonian Tablets to his mistaken theories as if he were the first one, according to the impression given at that time. Heck maybe Bro. Adam Rutherford got the idea from the Watchtower, but not the link to the Babylonian Chronicles since the Watchtower explained that much later than 1966, like in 1971.
Pyramidology -- Adam Rutherford -- Volume 3, 1966
"British drove the Turks out of the rest of Palestine in A.D. 1918, by August of that year.
This, it will be observed, runs parallel with the “ Seven Times ’”’ or 2,520 years (Daniel 4, *°) ‘The Times of the Gentiles,’ which, as explained in Book I, pp. 114-122, began with the commencement of Babylon’s 70 years’ supremacy following the fall of Assyria in 607 B.c. and terminated 2,520 years later in A.D. 1914. According to the Babylonian Chronicle (B.M. 21901), the Babylonian campaign which overthrew the last king of Assyria (Asher-uballit II) in 607 B.c. occurred during the months June to August. Then 2,520 years later, the First World War developed during the months June to August A.D. 1914. It was on 28th June 1914 that the assassination of Archduke Francis Ferdinand, heir to the Austrian throne, stirred up the trouble leading to the Austro-Serbian declaration of war on 28th July, which was made the pretext for the big powers going to war, commencing with Germany’s declaration of war on Russia on August 1st. Then on the 23rd of August 1914 the war spread outside Europe by Japan declaring war on Germany. The times of the events in the years 607 and 604-603 B.C. as supplied by the Babylonian Chronicles B.M. 21901, 22047 and 21946 and their corresponding parallels 2,520 years later in A.D. 1914 and 1917-1918 are tabulated on page 934.
Adam Rutherford's earlier works are currently part of my extensive library. For over 10 years, no apostate has mentioned Brother Adam Rutherford's works and how he linked BM21901, BM22047, BM21946, which were desperately used by apostates and a few active witnesses, or so they say, to refute the Watchtower Chronology. These works have been available for a long time and easily accessible to true and honest researchers. It is remarkable how Satan deceives, showing that he hasn't lost his touch since Eve.
Aside from linking the "complete" liberation of the Jews from dominance through the Balfour Declaration of 1917-1918, it is worth noting that the British Empire actually witnessed the initial emergence of Jewish freedom in 1914 from Palistine.
Yet, this is only of interest to people researching the past to draw their own conclusions that would further aid its understanding of dates already thoroughly explained by the Watchtower for their members, without contributing to conflicting narratives and misdirection.
 

I just thought of something, maybe Adam Rutherford is a long-lost blood brother of Joseph Franklin Rutherford that isn't listed on Judge Rutherford's family tree, lol!

I've come across the term "allowed" in various Bible passages, but it fails to address instances where one gets upset and prohibits those who challenge with their own words and hostility. Silencing has never been effective and never will be.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Job 1%3A6-22&version=ESV
The composition he created about the topic he started showcases his authentic character. He takes ownership of addressing the repetitive and tiresome portrayal of a dormant matter concerning Bible Students. This issue holds no relevance to the present-day Watchtower and its genuine members. Nevertheless, even modern day Bible Students recognize the importance of defending themselves against misleading information.
 

Only a few individuals, such as comfortmypeople, Anna, Tom, and apostates like Srecko, pay respect and submit to you, a group of disingenuous pretenders and former members. I merely unveil the dishonesty of your contributions as an ex-bethelite on this forum. Your actions sow discord under the guise of serving God. Therefore, continue feigning righteousness with this meaningless comment that is clearly devoid of truth.
What have you done with George that you should have also done with Tom, Juan, and yourself? It's not fair to act impartial when you and Tom get angry and ban others instead of addressing the deceit and lies that all of you have contributed here as witnesses not in good standing or pretenders.

You didn't need to go off-topic in an attempt to impress, especially since you didn't succeed.

Except for George, who we both know is a lie intended to mask your deceit as a self-righteous pretender, you are accurate about the rest of your opposing friends. You treat them differently just like you do with people like the apostate Srecko, who supports you.
Let's avoid getting into another unnecessary conflict, shall we?

Visitors, I see no value in engaging in a futile debate with an unchangeable individual who falsely claims to be a witness yet denies the significance of 607 BC and 1914. This person presents misleading arguments that do not align with our current understanding, seeking only to sow discord and division among our faithful community. For a decade, he has been a persistent source of dissension and should have been removed long ago, much like how he excommunicates those who speak the truth here. His actions are motivated by self-preservation, stemming from a multitude of distortions.
As I may face a ban for speaking the truth, I recommend reading Pastor Russell's 2nd and 3rd volumes from his book series. There you will discover the truth about what Pastor Russell was referring to. This individual has been caught in a lie about Pastor Russell not connecting the "gentile times" and 1914, making it impossible to reason with an unreasonable man, whom people here are praising.
_the_time_is_at_hand / thy_kingdom_come
There you will find passages such as:
Pastor Russell had a profound understanding that for Christ's Kingdom to come to fruition, the right conditions needed to be present on earth, serving as a clear indication. World War I served as that unmistakable sign, signaling the end of the gentile times precisely in 1914. There is no room for confusion or disputes regarding the timeline: it was not 1915, nor 1916, nor any other year one might suggest. Those who deny the historical accuracy of 607 BC, 537 BC, and 1914, like apostates, are simply unwilling to accept the undeniable truth revealed by the existence of World War 1.
Do you not believe that today's Bible scholars have remained silent regarding the extensive dissemination of disinformation on the internet?
The analogy of the "proofreader" used by some is similar to the contrast analogy used by the Bible Students.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
A few cases like the typist's mistake of substituting 1873 for 1874 in the Author's Foreword, several like mistakes in substituting 1915 for 1914 and the mistake of making the Jewish Harvest end in 70 instead of in 69 (a mistake that the Author in 1904 corrected (p. 245, par. 2), but did not correct in the various places of its occurrence, because prohibited by the condition of the plates) the Editor silently corrected. As in the case of Volume I, linotype, which considerations of economy made him use instead of the more compressible hand type of the earlier edition, forced him to make slight verbal condensations without affecting the sense, in order to keep the pages of uniform size with the earlier editions, 
This Volume sets forth, what its author has been preaching for over forty years, that the Times of the Gentiles chronologically ended in the fall of 1914. The expression, Times of the Gentiles, in Bible usage signifies the years, or period of time, in which the Gentile nations of the world were to be permitted to have control, following the taking away of the typical kingdom from natural Israel, and filling the hiatus between that event and the establishment of God's Kingdom in the hands of Messiah—"whose right it is"—Ezek. 21:27. 
We could not, of course, know in 1889, whether the date 1914, so clearly marked in the Bible as the end of the Gentile lease of power or permission to rule the world, would mean that they would be fully out of power at that time, or whether, their lease expiring, their eviction would begin. The latter we perceive to be the Lord's program; and promptly in August, 1914, the Gentile kingdoms referred to in the prophecy began the present great struggle, which, according to the Bible, will culminate in the complete overthrow of all human government, opening the way for the full establishment of the Kingdom of God's dear Son. 
We are not able to see behind the veil; we are not able to know the things progressing under the direction of our glorious Lord and the members of His Church already glorified. Our thought is that somehow the Lord is taking a hand in the affairs of the world now as He did not do in times past. We do know that the great Time of Trouble, which has begun, very closely corresponds to the Divine declaration respecting the time and conditions of the establishment of Messiah's Kingdom. The Lord Himself informs us that, at the time He shall take to Himself His great power and reign, the nations will be mad and the Divine wrath will come. A little later on the time will come for the judging of the dead, and the giving of the reward to God's servants, small and great, leading on finally to the destruction of the incorrigible, who would exercise a corrupt influence upon the earth—Rev. 21:8. 
All over the world people knew of the expectations of Bible Students in respect to the year 1914; and when so stupendous a war as the present one broke loose, when the winds of strife began to blow with such fury and destruction, thousands remembered what they had heard and read respecting the end of the Gentile Times. Thousands today have come to fully appreciate the times in which we are living. The influence is very helpful and inspiring. A realization that we are in the Day of the Lord, and that very soon all of His saints will be gathered to Him by the resurrection change, has a stimulating and encouraging influence upon Bible students, separating them from the world and its fears and ambitions and fixing their eyes upon the Crown of Life, which the Lord has in reservation for them that love Him most. 
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
He is referring to the future tense, as he believes that Christ has begun to reign in his heavenly kingdom, and the Bible students now need to wait for the summoning of the 144,000 at some point in the future. We share the same privilege, but our time has come much closer due to our understanding of the generations.
You can also research on the internet to find out how modern-day Bible students defend Pastor Russell against the same disinformation being spread here.
Did Russell Originally Obtain the Date 1914 From Pyramids?
On one website, we find the statement: "Russell got the date 1914 originally from the pyramid measurements." On other sites and in many forums, some claim that the date 1914 was "based on" measurements of the Egyptian pyramids, or the Great Pyramid. This idea is repeated on many websites, forums, and Facebook groups. On another site, one may find: "One of the strangest 'revelations' from the pyramids was his calculated date of 1914. The date was based on his measurements of the interior passageways of the pyramids." Both statements are incorrect. By examining Russell's studies, Vol. 2 and Vol. 3, we can see that the date 1914 was obtained from Biblical time prophecies and parallels. The date was not originally obtained from pyramid measurements, nor was it based on measurements of passageways of any pyramid. It is true, however, that Russell believed that one pyramid, often referred to as the Great Pyramid, and this pyramid only -- not pyramids -- does verify the date 1914, as well as many other Biblical dates.
 
Therefore, feel free to use the information temporarily posted as one of the habits here, and after a ban, the removal of content that proves them wrong.
 

Have a great evening, as I won't be posting any more since it appears only nonsense is at work. I'm calling it a night!
Let's see tomorrow how JWI will explain his controversial statement.
OVM
(5) The feet and toes of the image, representing the Papacy and the commingling of State and Church domination, we find pictured in the ten horns of the terrible beast. These beasts are to rule the world until the end of Gentile times of world domination, October, 1914, which will also be the end of the Jewish times of Divine disfavor. Then the dominion will pass from these beasts, and their bodies or organizations as Governments will be given to the burning flame--turned over to destruction. The Prophet pictures the end of Gentile times and the manifestation of the Ancient of Days, whose throne was like a fiery flame and who caused the judgment to sit. It was at that time that the words of the last beast came into judgment--the great words uttered by the horn that had eyes and a mouth and that spake great, swelling words,--claimed by nearly all expositors of the past to represent Papacy and its boast of infallibility, etc. Then the beast was slain--the great and terrible beast, and his body.
It certainly seems like something that did occur during WW1. I would be interested in seeing how you refute Pastor Russell's words that contradict your argument.

My statement is based on facts, whereas your observation is not. Therefore, my intention was to unveil and correct the misconception, not to make a baseless claim.
It is an undeniable fact that apostates use the phrase "the end of the world" to refer to both 1914 and 1975. Your continued use of such tactics to distract is just another one of your manipulative strategies.
When individuals oppose it, they have the ability to express their emotions freely, but this does not make their claims necessarily true. Therefore, I strongly encourage anyone who is interested to conduct their own thorough research and uncover the genuine facts.
Your statement appears contradictory, but I invite you to challenge it. WW1 Pudgy was unable to do so, but I encourage you to try.
I won't delve into the entire history of the Bible Students like you're attempting to do, in order to gain the attention of the masses in the closed club.
You are effectively refuting your own points with your contradictory statements. Your argument is strong enough that I need not contribute.
This example merely showcases your inclination to analyze beyond the surface, disregarding countless literary passages that clearly convey intent instead of mere speculation. By selectively posting only the ones that support your argument and refusing to share others, you grant the public the freedom to conduct their own research.

You're resorting to posting senseless content to camouflage your own shortcomings. I refuse to engage in that. Stay focused on the topic you initially introduced and avoid creating unnecessary controversy.
We have irrefutable evidence of this through the individuals who arrive here only to be disheartened by your negativity, behavior, manipulation, and dishonesty. Therefore, I must acknowledge your exceptional performance.
You're not just part of the problem, but also are not the key to the solution. What advantages does the visitor gain from being here? How can people weigh in on the pros when there are only cons.
That's why I encourage visitors to explore the true narratives firsthand instead of being swayed by dissatisfied individuals who reject what they read.

What motivated brothers in the past to stand up for Pastor Russell and correct the misconceptions surrounding pyramology? Some brothers took it upon themselves to directly address the issue by personally funding the placement of a pyramid stone near Pastor Russell's grave. Unfortunately, there was misinformation circulating that claimed the Watchtower had acquired and installed the stone.
"Pastor Russell
was always firmly opposed to all forms of occultism, as will be discussed in greater detail in the section on Pyramidology later in this chapter; and he never knowingly employed any mystic symbols in his ministry and teachings."
"PYRAMID USAGE. Finally, we need to comment on yet another absurd charge in connection with the Pyramid. This was made by David Reed, who attempts to build a case on the alleged usage of questionable forms of pyramidology in the Pastor’s over all ministry. First, he cites the fact that a seven-foot-tall stone pyramid was used in the Society’s Rosemont Cemetery near Pittsburgh to mark the location of burial plots for members of the Bethel staff, including Pastor Russell, and then writes."
Another misconception that was circulating at that time involved the confusion between the "name" Rutherford and another Rutherford who was involved.
"A monthly publication, Pyramidology, by Dr. Adam Rutherford of New Castle, began in 1941. The Forest Gate Church (London) Bible Monthly was published 1936-1985. Phillys Stracy compiled an evening devotional book, Songs in the Night."
This insider knowledge may seem irrelevant today, as it reflects people's confusion in the past about the language used by others. However, it is important to acknowledge that we cannot make well-informed judgments about those conditions since we were not alive during that time. Whether Pastor Russell found the pyramid scheme intriguing but useless, or if later under Rutherford it was condemned as the devil's work because of the usage by other Christian denominations, none of these matters as it holds any significance now.

What positive outcomes can be achieved by spreading disinformation? You are the one responsible for manufacturing these controversies, unwilling to accept the truth when it is presented. Let's consider the example of the Russell comment and the apocalyptic rumors about the end of the world. You are well aware that Russell had to issue a full-page disclaimer to counteract the misleading ideas propagated by certain individuals, just like the Watchtower eventually did for the year 1975. However, you persist in promoting a false narrative, continuing to fuel this controversy. So, what beneficial response are you hoping to achieve with your personal denial?
This controversy is purely a product of your imagination, not of the Bible students, the Watchtower, or Jehovah's Witnesses. It has already been clarified, so it requires a nonconformist diehard to keep revisiting this deceit. Therefore, what is the benefit of airing this nonsense in public? Who stands to gain from this other than apostates?
What relevance does any of that have to do with the remarkable progress achieved by the Watchtower since gaining full control in 1950? Do the events of 1933, which a sister found controversial, truly matter? Did she fully grasp the significance of what she was reading? It is true that 60% of Bible students were in the process of relearning, while 30% did not adhere to Pastor Russell's ideology and chose to leave, leading to a separation from the IBSA. History shows that. However, what does this ultimately prove? Merely having access to dubious insider information does not hold much weight, especially when your own credibility is questionable.
Does today's Watchtower endorse pyramidology just like Brother Rotherford failed to endorse in his tenure as the head of the Bible Student Association under the publishing house the Watchtower? What was the true motivation behind the pyramidology that you personally find distasteful? It aimed to present an alternative perspective on chronology, which even Pastor Russell himself found intriguing but not essential. Those were Pastor Russells thoughts about it, regardless of what you dream up to refute his actual words by misrepresenting them, just like you did with "the end of the world in 1914" apostate fiasco.
What positive lessons can be derived from inaccurate information? You are eager to persuade others to adopt your perspective, so demonstrate how one can benefit from learning from misrepresentation. Instead of accepting your lack of credibility and deceitful conduct, how can one actually learn from your experiences? If tarnishing your reputation is your aim, then congratulations on a job well done as a role model.
Before criticizing others, it would be wise to reflect on your own actions. It seems that you are quick to judge others, especially me, while disregarding your own anger when you ban someone. Why do you continue to ignore this?
Matthew 7:3-5 English Standard Version
3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.
 

Certainly! I'm thrilled that you've finally acknowledged the extraordinary abilities that you possess and are actively employing, particularly in implementing your ban capabilities, which you've undeniably possessed all this time despite your initial refusal to recognize them.
I briefly believed that you censored me by disabling my ability to post comments, but thankfully I am now able to do so again. I attribute the issue to a minor technical glitch for the time being. It is possible that your future decision to ban me will be a deliberate strategy to enforce your personal rules by defending and protecting unchristian people here.
I'm confident that you possess the same capabilities as us. There are specific reasons why certain information being shared here is actually a disinformation campaign, intended to perpetuate further deception.
It's accurate that people often ban those they have a personal issue with or dislike. However, over the course of 10 years, have they truly managed to suppress the truth from being revealed?