James Thomas Rook Jr.

2011, after the Nation realized they could NOT keep their doctor, they could NOT keep their health plan, and the $2500 every person was going to save on their Health Care, was going to cost them about $10,000 more, and if they did not buy it, the IRS would add a whopping fine to their Income Tax return.
On a related note, in 1980, the Governing Body in considering the "signs in the heavens ..." actually considered declaring Sputnik to be the fulfillment of Bible Prophesy, Schroeder, Karl Klein and Grant Suiter proposed moving the beginning of the "generation" to the year 1957, to coincide with the 1957 Sputnik event,  and it almost became "new light", except a 66-2/3 majority vote was needed to adopt that policy, and one member of the Governing Body went to the restroom, and when he came back, he changed his vote, and it failed by one vote.
In retrospect, perhaps the Brother should have held his water.
 
 

It's a difficult doctrine, with an easy explanation.
The Earth is about 3.5 billion years old.
Each creative day is (3.5 billion divided by 7 = 500,000,000) about 500 million years..
Armageddon will occur at the "End of Days".
Therefore ... "Stay Alive, 'till 500,001,975".
See?
The math works out perfectly, AND it agrees with fossils !
TA DA!
Plus! --- the .ORG gets a LOT of "wiggle room".
As Marvin Webster sez: "Ya'll think about it."
 
 

What year did robocalls from the cloud begin besieging every man woman and child on earth, causing them to look to the heavens and curse, day and night?

Life is one continuous comedy .... then you die.

@James Thomas Rook Jr. The Democrats are snowflakes, and crybabys. Although I have no side, but rather, of God's, watching the absurdities of the political clown theater reminds me of watching cartoons of a child, something to make you laugh before bible study or going to school.
Not sure if you are aware of this, but there was a meme that angered some Demos, even the people of CNN:
 

You are going to have to do some serious explaining, to justify that statement, as it makes no sense at all.
Further, if Thor is the reaction you get when eating a Thanksgiving Day meal, you need to take some Athpirin.

Life is one continuous comedy .... then you die.

My response was not directed to the Thor comment, it was regarding something else, clearly concerning Thanksgiving. For it you wanted it to remain a joke, you should have chosen your words very wisely in your next response, so you walked into this one - classic Matthew.
This just shows your ignorance, and it shows how you, among the mainstream, do who propose yourself as Christian, cater to traditions of men. As far as I know JWs do not consider Yah as a pagan God, however, they consider, like the rest of us, you should be among the fold, that the pagan god in question concerning Thanksgiving is all about - That is, if you care enough for Yahweh to understand how he is about false gods and worship.
In short, concerning what @4Jah2me said, which clearly cannot be defended; the issue here is not with having dinner (a household practice among families), the issue is primarily on observance of paganism. You and 4Jah can fool around to your heart's contend, but I say to you this, a serious man or woman of God doesn't mess around or succumb to lukewarmness in situations like this, more so, giving ammunition to people like Jack Ryan and Atheists cohorts to clown Christians.
True Christians recognize that we do not need one day or a government issue day to give praise to God, for Christians praise and thank God everyday, however, we should not be like the Romans, to interject paganism into Christianity.
Concerning Thanksgiving, it is an annual harvest that stems from a very old tradition known to man. Thanksgiving was celebrated originally in early October as some would say by the Romans and on that holiday, the celebration was solely dedicated to The Goddess of Harvest, Ceres (which I mentioned this to you before, but evidently, you shy away from it), in addition, the holiday itself to it's very roots is called Cerelia (not to be confused with Floralia) - An ancient Roman religion, the Cerealia, was the major festival celebrated for the grain goddess Ceres. It was held for seven days from mid to late April, but the dates of said celebration are uncertain.
Eventually, the Christians who took favor it such eventually took over the Roman holiday and it soon became a well established tradition in England, where some of the Roman customs, as well as Roman rituals for this day were observed. Also as a side note, the King of England proclaimed days of thanksgiving during the American Colonial Period, and in doing so without the influence of either the Pilgrims or Puritans.
Now it is not unknown to anyone that JWs as well as the Restorationist community do not celebrate pagan festivities, more so, perhaps use to do so perhaps in the past, as many have, until they discovered it's roots vs. earlier Christians who knew not to mess around with paganism, let alone show some form of observance of such days. As for us, majority of us Unitarians (most if not all Unitarian denominations) do not partake in such things, and in my case, the culture I grew up in, such observance is discouraged and frowned upon, to please God we do not partake in the sins of what some traditions bring, so to speak, therefore, it is wrongful in the eyes of God, for a Christian, to incorporate anything originally used for pagan worship and practices and combine true religious worship to Yahweh and or related activities concerning Christian practices. Although you have a choice, just not every choice and or decision comes with some sort of outcome, even one that reaps consequence.
Information of the Goddess of the Harvest, or Thanksgiving - Ceres
What is, and I quote you, the word specifically,
You are right at some degree, however, your own words points the arrows in your direction, shooting yourself in the foot, or set flames to your own tent, so to speak. You say you are a "Christian", numerous times, but now we see a foolish display of hypocrisy on your part (this isn't the first time, nor the last), and using JWs as a shield will not help you at all, so that JW badge, pin or whatever I figuratively removed from you and cast it aside, in addition, without said shield and or appeal to motive, the Bible can now be used against you and your spirit can be tested (1 John 4:1), a verse I love very much by the way.
Now, to be blunt, God, you know, the one you said you pray to, tells us "clearly" in the following verse
Exodus 20:3 - You shall have no other gods before me.
So we see here, God is very clear, quite elementary and straight to the point. I'm sure you have a good reading comprehension, so the reading difficult is practically non-existent. God tells us that we should not have ANY other God besides him, and no, it is not just a single verse if you are not aware, that would be way too easy, rather, this is stated numerous times, countless times in Scripture concerning God Yahweh and false gods, take a read at the good book, knock yourself out - https://www.openbible.info/topics/worship_of_false_gods
Let's not forget about what Jesus said to Satan as well (Matthew 4:10, Luke 4:8) Jesus said to serve only who? Yahweh, the God of Jesus, the God of me, the God of you.
I do not know about where you lay, mentally, but Jesus Christ, the savior himself, God's only begotten, was as clear as the blue waters of the Atlantic Ocean, and an honest reader can pickup and understand what is conveyed.
Question to you, if you partake in the festivities of Ceres, no matter how hard you try to Christianize it, how to do think God views what you are doing?
Let's continue to unravel your hypocrisy... Next verse.
Amos 5:21 - I hate, I despise your feasts, and I take no delight in your solemn assemblies.
Now, The Most High, Yahweh, clearly do not show approval for festivities that has roots connected in the soil of false religious practices that condone such ill conduct, i.e. paganism... We shouldn't be dwelling in unclean things (Isaiah 52:11; 2 Corinthians 6:17), and the Scripture makes it clear as to such, especially on what we must do concerning worship.
As Christians, we should be against such things, upright even, and profess the truth of the gospel to those that either do not know any better and or lost in the murky seas, conjured up by the Great Harlot, Babylon.
For if people like Apostle Paul and countless others can stand up to what is wrong, what is preventing you from doing the same?
That being said, you can clown people with your idiocy, but you cannot clown God for showing who you are, and a 3rd time, I was right to include you among mainstream Christianity due to the fact you think such a practice is OK... Reasons why True Christianity will ALWAYS be above mainstream Christianity, for we not only know the teachings and the Scripture and what Jesus had taught about the gospel and God, but we do so much in our power to put the application, hence, that is what makes US Christians.
I leave you with this - Who are you for: Yahweh or Ceres? There's no middle ground according to what is read in Deuteronomy and the marginal references, which you should know - It's mentioned in the Bible itself, in which, Christians read day and night. I know where I stand, but you... You do not have any type of Holy Ground to stand on, nothing at all perhaps...
If anyone is committing blasphemy - it is you, in this regard. Clearly, there's no explanation and or refutation to something that you know to be indefensible, but you can torment yourself to try even though there's no backing to defending something that I can boldly say as God is my witness, unclean.
Your so called spirit has been tested... "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world."
The more you know when it comes to researching into things a bit more, mainly the root of something. It happens to the best of people. What is consider harmless gatherings is at times harmless, mainly when it comes to the Creator vs. his Adversary and who is on whose side.
That being said, I have a grip on reality, more so enough to drop the truth bombs in hopes the mainstreamer finally chooses to repent.
And yes, everyone knows about that planet, but the name, not so much.
 

You are right. I was equating the importance not so much in the number of times it is mentioned, but that it is mentioned at all!
I just tried to create a graph, but alas, since I've never done one either in word or excel, I failed miserably. I got the horizontal axis right, but I just can't find how to create the vertical axis and how to change the data (numbers) for the vertical axis so I completely messed up. In any case, the chart would show that since 1950 Watchtowers, the mention of 1914 has a sharp downward trend. During 1950 to 1959, it was mentioned 891 times, and during 2000-2009 it was mentioned 216 times. I don't have data for the years 2010 to 2019. So comparatively there is a big difference, but it still seems like too many mentions, if we are thinking along the lines of it slowly being phased out. In my opinion anyway....
 

If that kind of comparison were intended to create a representative analogy, then the Devil represents "glorious" congregation elders in Jude, where, according to one interpretation, we shouldn't speak abusively of "glorious" elders in the congregation just as Jesus/Michael wouldn't speak abusively of "glorious" Satan when arguing over Moses' body. 😎 (Note: I still don't believe this was the intent of the comparison at all.)

What thread is that? ...oh I see, the "Trump Derangement Syndrome", lol

Unnecessary on his account. He is so bombastic that I can hear him in my sleep.

Sounds like you disagree with what Brother Splane said when he admitted that over 100 teachings that had turned Bible parables and Bible historical narratives into specific prophecies were examples of going beyond the things written.
But if you think about it, almost every single past error where the Watchtower has made an interpretation that was later changed was also a matter of going beyond the things written. Whenever there was a changed teaching where the Watchtower had said "this is what it means" instead of "this is what it might mean" was a matter of going beyond the things written.
Therefore, there are hundreds of additional examples. And we should be very happy for this kind of progress.
Yes. You've said this same thing previously, and I questioned you about it. Thanks for repeating it so I know it wasn't a mistake. You have compared the current Governing Body as a group much closer to modern-day Apostles than merely a modern-day version of the Council of Elders in Jerusalem. I still think this is a dangerous mistake, no matter how much we appreciate their work for the world-wide congregation. It sounds like you might disagree specifically with recent humble remarks made by Brother Herd. Sounds like you believe this was only "mock humility."
No, it merely means that I have seen what the Watchtower has said (and admitted) about this topic, and you apparently do not wish to accept what they have said on the topic..
That would be quite an accusation against the Watchtower, since the point made was about the desire of the GB to make corrections for us in the Watchtower. Obviously you don't believe this as can be seen in the sentence you wrote right after that one. If their passion is to correct, I see this as a very good thing, not trying to be equal to Christ (or the apostles, for that matter).
I believe the Watchtower is misrepresenting a couple of issues, but these have not become an obstacle to my faith. I was fortunate enough to be given some heads up and preparation for things that would have otherwise been painful to discover on my own. I was happy to know that others had already discovered these things and still wanted to continue associating and encouraging their brothers and sisters to accept our situation and navigate through it with faith intact. And I think that exposure of such issues has had a very positive impact on the doctrinal changes we have seen in the last couple of decades especially.
I skimmed over what JTR and TTH said about contacting the Watchtower directly. I have done this several times myself with surprisingly good answers at times. It's nothing to make light of in my opinion.
 

Are you for real? You know nothing about me.....and the tests I had to face.... 
But I know the word of God and I have paid my dues.  My daughter had cancer and had surgery  which lasted the entire day..... without blood and she was 8 and half months old.  ....
If she had taken blood she would not have survived.  It is what the doctors and this world don't tell you that is important!  I can share all the info I learnt  with you to prove to you that the bible is absolutely right when it cautions us to abstain from blood. .... if you are interested I can inform you.
It takes the liver 30 days to break down foreign blood in the system..... if the person is too weak they get anaphalactic shock from the blood transfusion - which is never given as the reason for death on the death certificate. ..... always complications from surgery.
Life is important to me ..... but everlasting life is more important. 

I get exactly what you mean, kinda like these? 
"Families are free to report abuse to the authorities" 
"leave it in Jehova's hands"
"click on jw.orb"
"the answers are on the website"
"That's for Jehova to decide" 
"we don't shun former members" 
"we only had the library card"
 
 
 
 

Another reason I follow politics is for its clarification of Pilate’s question: “What is truth?” It is a cynical question, as though mocking ones who say they can find truth.
“I will never lie to you,” Trump promises his “base.” ‘He is the most lying President in history,’ opponents say. It doesn’t matter if you like him or not. How can one not look into that?
It turns out that a lie is in the eye of the beholder. By May of 2019, the Washington Post claimed to have chronicled 10,000 Trump lies—“false or misleading claims,” and yet by any historical standards, they would not be called lies. NBCNews.com, hardly a Trump-friendly site, gives examples.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trump-lies-lot-media-must-focus-what-he-s-lying-ncna1009986
92 times Trump claimed that “NAFTA is one of the worst trade deals ever signed in the history of our country.” That can be called a “lie?” The Post counts it as 92 lies. Speak to those whose interests have suffered on its account. At worst it is an subjective exaggeration. 
Trump says, “I have been the most transparent president and administration in the history of our country by far.” A lie? An unprovable boast, at worst. Daily tweets of whatever happens to pop into his head, in any historical context, would be lauded as the epitome of transparency. Here the pundits harrumph mostly because they are bypassed—they are used to spinning a president’s words before he can spin them himself, but here he does end runs around them.
In fact, the nbcnews.com article recommends readers not to be so gleeful over counting his “lies” that one becomes like the little boy crying wolf. The “lies” are mostly boast, imprecision, exaggeration, hyperbole—and not actually “lies” at all. The article actually produces no “real” lies, even as it counsels readers to be on the lookout for them. That doesn’t mean there aren’t any. To be sure, that is not the purpose of the article, but you almost think that some would be there, if only for purposes to contrast the “not-really” lies with the “actual” lies. All we hear on media is “the lies of Trump” repeated full-throttle, and yet this article, by someone who is decidedly not a Trump fan, points to none.
Now, one must be verrrrry careful in comparing the spiritual and the profane—even more careful in comparing words of the sacred with words of the politics. You do not want to be confused with the right wing church that mixes politics and religion so thoroughly as to make any smoothie maker envious. The School Guidebook observed that when you give an illustration, your illustration should parallel the reality illustrated in all significant respects. Otherwise, someone will point to the discordancy and the entire illustration goes up in smoke. It is why I do not care for those illustrations likening Witnesses to firemen who are urgent because lives are at stake. True, lives are at stake but they are not at stake at that very hour. Those firemen would not carry on so urgently if it was just to warn you that your smoke detector batteries are getting low.
So you have to be cautious comparing the two. Manifestly, they are not the same in many regards. That’s why I like it that Alan brought up the subject (6 times!) and not me. Still, Jesus uses all types of people in illustrations—those “righteous” and those “unrighteous.”—like the “unrighteous” steward who robs his owner blind and the owner ends up commending him for it. (Luke 16:8) So you don’t have to run like a rabbit just because those you use to illustrate points are not saints.
The same people that savage Trump for his “lies” would have savaged Jesus for his “lies.” In fact, for the most part, they do—the political left is far more irreligious than is the right. There are many excellent reasons to dislike Trump—reasons that do not hold true at all with Jesus. But here we are dealing with word devices that some would qualify as legitimate and some would qualify as lie. Jesus would have been a consummate liar in the eyes of these critics, and that fact is better appreciated for how they kick back at the commander-in-chief that they loathe.
Hyperbole? Jesus uses it all the time. Yes, he puts it to more noble use than Trump, but he is not shy about using it. He thinks it not a “lie” to use hyperbole—it is plainly a tool in his tool box—and it has the added benefit that the critics are separated out—they miss the point completely so as to object to blatant and unprovable exaggeration. Many of Jesus’ parables are not only hyperbole, but they are quirky hyperbole, such as the unrighteous judge who will not grant justice to the widow until she nags him nearly into an early grave—and that judge is used to illustrate how you ought to persist in prayer to the Father! (Luke 18:5)
Metaphor? Strictly speaking, a metaphor is a “lie.” “The tongue is a fire,” says James. ‘It is not,’ would counter the Washington Post and you can almost imagine them testing this statement, evaluating the claim with a thermometer. “God is the potter and we are the clay,” says the Word—and the Washington Post logs two “lies.” “He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I shall resurrect him at the last day,” declares Jesus at John 6:54. Call that not a metaphor? It is even a metaphor that contributed (says Bart Ehrman) to accusations of cannibalism that served as a pretext for early Christian persecution.
Ad hominem attack? That’s a type of lie, Trump’s detractors say, since they are stated “without evidence”—to borrow a media clarification that is now routinely applied to the President but has never been applied to any of the other countless scoundrels and blaggards of history. Jesus used ad hominem attack all the time. Pharisees were the “blind men leading the blind”, the “whitewashed graves hiding every sort of filth.” He would have been called out for lying each time in the Washington Post.
Ask Jesus a question, and he will not answer it. He will ask a counter question instead that makes you scared to ask another. This is a major no-no to critical thinkers today, who insist that their questions be answered without resort to raising a “straw man.” Still, Jesus doesn’t care. He raises straw men as readily as he raised Lazerus. (Mark 11:27-33)
Head games? I don’t know what in the world was Trump’s claim of huge inauguration attendance, easily debunked as a “lie” by just viewing the photos—so easily that it becomes clear he is playing a head game of some sort, clarified when KellyAnne comes on TV to speak of the “alternative facts” he would like media to pay attention to. Are not Jesus’ parables head games of a sort? He would never explain them to his critics—only afterwards to his disciples would he “explain all things,” and it served as a way of separating the wheat from the chaff. (Mark 4:34) Would he have granted an interview with the Washington Post to explain all those parables? I have my doubts.
About this time we can send Trump packing off to the stables. I was never too comfortable bringing him in to begin with, so I waited for someone with TDS to do it, and Alan obliged—allowing me to point out with but diminished spiritual damage that Trump illustrates certain aspects of communication so perfectly that he becomes invaluable for just that reason. 
You can even go further. Trump, by all accounts, represents “flyover country”—the common working people usually ignored by policymakers who are pursuing their own ends and careers. His enemies? Those policymakers—the “swamp,” the “elites,” the wonks that hail from Harvard and who live for the machinations of the beltway. And if you really want to get sacrilegious, you can recall that he descends on the golden escalator from his high and mighty perch, and announces to his “base:” “I am your voice.” You can even liken media’s relentless efforts to separate Trump from his “base” to the efforts of JW critics to separate the GB from its “base”—and for the same reason—that both might be better neutralized.
I can think of only one other President who offered some of these same parallels: “The buck stops here,” “give em hell, Harry” Truman , who was despised by the “elites” then—even blue blood FDR kept his distance from his own “inferior” VP—on account of his crude demeanor and businessman origin. Like Trump, Truman’s elite enemies even gloated that they had won the election and later had to eat crow!—one of the iconic photos of American history is Truman holding aloft the (wrong) headline of his own defeat. He offers many of the same object lessons, but not as strikingly as Trump, mostly because people were more civil back then and opponents didn’t seek to gouge each other’s eyes out as they do now—a nod to the further applicability of 2 Timothy 3:1-5.
(Wow. I just thought up the Truman parallel as I was writing this remark. The day I throw my hat in the ring to form my own sect, I will spin some sort of an anti-type out of both names beginning with ‘Tru”—what are the chances of that? And I will play on Truman being “True Man”—same as they did with Jim Carrey on the Truman Show. And wait till I get done with the fact that Truman started as a haberdasher-, the same as you-know-who. Yes, I like the idea more and more. Only....I cannot do this Mighty Ministry on my own! Send me your contributions—large or small!—(but large is preferred)—for the Lord’s sake I would gladly walk around in rags, but the fact of the matter is, I look so much better in the two-thousand dollar suit that I will buy with them)
 

I have carefully considered all of the above points, and concerning the willingness to die for one's beliefs, I have this to say about that:
Actor, comedian, and film producer, etc., Woody Allen said it best when asked about one of his latest movies, and the body of movies he had made in the past, either as star, producer, director, or all three ...
"Would you, through your movies, like to live forever in the hearts of your many fans?"
He replied "I would like to live forever, in my apartment in Manhattan."

OCD is in and of itself not NECESSARILY a bad thing.
...and not NECESSARILY a disorder.
It just seems that way to other people who have to endure it
.... when they are not interested in that particular application.

The old method of handling this was to use the expression "present truth." Many adventists including Seventh Day still use the expression. It's based on a mistranslation of 2 Peter 1:12 where the KJV said:
Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.
The tendency among 19th century Adventists was to see a "chronology" element or "time" element in the English expression that did not exist in the original Greek. Therefore, the idea was that: even when in the midst of learning or teaching falsehood, it was still "present truth" at the time, and what is now "present truth" could turn out to be false in the future, but it will always have been "present truth" because it's always the best we had at the time.
From the Greek, this is better translated as "the truth that is present in you" (American Standard and NWT). 
A similar rush to see a time element in the English translation was done by Barbour and Russell and others who had been associated with Adventists. Here's an example from Leviticus:
(Leviticus 26:28) 28 I will intensify my opposition to you, and I myself will have to chastise you seven times for your sins.
This was originally the primary source for Russell's 7 times = 2,520 years, and the 7 times of Nebuchadnezzar's dream about his own insanity was only a secondary source. But we have since learned that Leviticus here didn't refer to chronological "times" but the sense was "7 times as much" as in "I will hit you twice as hard, or three times as hard, or seven times as hard." This was already in the context, but chronologists and numerologists rarely notice the context until they have already formed a time related doctrine.
(Leviticus 26:18-21) . . .“‘If even this does not make you listen to me, I will have to chastise you seven times as much for your sins. . . . 21 “‘But if you keep walking in opposition to me and refuse to listen to me, I will then have to strike you seven times as much, according to your sins.
Now that we have noticed this, we have been stuck with using Nebuchadnezzar as if his wicked Gentile kingdom somehow represented Christ's Messianic non-Gentile kingdom. (Another contradiction between 1914 and the Bible.)
We still tend to make a "chronology word" out of things having to do with time when we translate the Greek word for time as "appointed time" instead of what might better be translated as "opportune time."
Note that it's the exact same word "time" in these two verses:
(Ephesians 5:16) 16 buying out the opportune time for yourselves, because the days are wicked.
(Luke 21:24) . . .and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.
Neither the word opportune nor appointed is found in the Greek, only the word time. But the more typical meaning is "opportunity" as in:
Will you find the opportunity to do this? Will you find the time to do this? Not:
Will you find the appointed day and hour to do this? We have added a more specific chronological sense that usually isn't necessary in the Greek.
 

I think that's exactly correct. But we know that as Christians we are still under under a duty to question, reflect, test, prove, meditate, and "make sure of all things." We must do this even if it were an angel out of heaven giving us the interpretation, according to Galatians 1 and 2. And Paul specifically applied that thought to the way the Galatian congregation(s) should have tested and made sure of the incorrect counsel coming from council of elders at Jerusalem, because evidently some were too quick to accept that counsel just because it came from those who seemed to be pillars in the congregation. To Paul, he said, it didn't matter who those men were, or what they seemed to be, and he even included Peter, James and John in that idea of who to question. John himself later wrote that we should test the inspired utterances (1 John 4:1).
I have. And the Watchtower has also claimed to have found MANY previous misinterpretations of prophecy which interpretations they said came from God, and yet warranted a redefinition of that interpretation. In fact I quoted you one of several places where the Watchtower has admitted exactly what you say you have not found:
*** ws17 June p. 13 par. 16 Set Your Heart on Spiritual Treasures ***
At times, our understanding of a Bible prophecy or a scripture may be adjusted. When that happens, it is important to take the time to study the adjustment and meditate on it. (Acts 17:11; 1 Timothy 4:15) We not only need to understand the main differences between the old understanding and the new one, but we also need to pay attention to the details of the new understanding.
I've seen you accuse others here of blasphemy, when they defended the Bible, and yet you are able to make a statement such as that!
Yes, certain Bible Student congregations continued to follow the Barbour/Russell advent timeline, which included Rutherford and the Watchtower editorial board, up until about 1927, with some intermediate adjustments over time to what Russell had said about 1914, and 1915, and with some brand new ideas about 1918, and 1925.
Russell's concerted effort to "finally understand his own chronology" barely changed a thing, except for a few changes to some Great Pyramid measurements, and some vacillations between 1914 and 1915, and a change around 1904 to push the period of tribulation to the few months after 1914 instead of the few months (or years) before 1914.
I would agree that Edgar's pyramid scheme hardly influenced Russell. That's because Edgar only wanted to get even more details on the subject, and completed most of this work after Russell had already published all he had to say on the Pyramid. Also, Russell was already satisfied enough with the details he had borrowed from Joseph Seiss.
You say: "Perhaps, that is where the confusion lies" but there is no need for any confusion at all. Russell's works include all the necessary details, and they are all easy to find. If we wish to discuss Russell's own published views, we don't need to worry about the many other groups that sprung from Barbour's and Russell's teachings.
I think I know what you are talking about. I think the admins or moderators here consider it spamming when someone overuses a long string of a dozen or more dislike emojis at the rate of one per minute on the posts of people they dislike, and a string of a dozen or more "like" emojis at the rate of about one per minute on their own accounts of different names. I think once a person is caught doing this once, it's dangerous to keep doing this with even with a smaller string of up-votes and down-votes. Sometimes the give-away to the game is when the down-vote is simply a negative response to a Scripture or a direct quote from the Watchtower.

True, but a well-established, misinterpretation of a prophecy has no divine providence.
Over the years here, Allen, I've often seen you attack the Bible when you think the Bible contradicts the Watchtower, but here you are attacking both the Bible and the Watchtower: 
*** ws17 June p. 13 par. 16 Set Your Heart on Spiritual Treasures ***
At times, our understanding of a Bible prophecy or a scripture may be adjusted. When that happens, it is important to take the time to study the adjustment and meditate on it. (Acts 17:11; 1 Timothy 4:15) We not only need to understand the main differences between the old understanding and the new one, but we also need to pay attention to the details of the new understanding. Such a careful study will guarantee that the new truth becomes part of our collection of Bible truths. Why is it good for us to make such efforts?
Russell did not reject Barbour's chronology. Years later, after their split, when Barbour began rejecting his own chronology and numerology, Russell continued to accept it and doubled down on it. The split was primarily over variations in their understanding of the ransom, but I was talking about his chronology and numerology.
Conflicted or not, I think you should feel welcome to express your opinions, whether they are for or against me, for or against others, the Watchtower, or even the Bible. I have not seen any indication that you are breaking any rules. Controversial discussions might upset people, but that's the value of discussion: it can upset long-established traditions (strongly entrenched ideas/things) and some people have a large emotional investment in these traditions. Some level of "upset" or "disturbance" should be expected. Neither you nor I should be expected to deal with these issues totally devoid of emotion. At least we are mostly trying to stick with the scriptures, the facts and the evidence.
 
 
Because of the way that posts are being merged (again) I will take up the subject of the 1260 days and 3 1/2 days in Revelation under another topic heading.

(Genesis 6:5-7) 5 Consequently, Jehovah saw that man’s wickedness was great on the earth and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only bad all the time. 6 Jehovah regretted that he had made men on the earth, and his heart was saddened. 7 So Jehovah said: “I am going to wipe men whom I have created off the surface of the ground, man together with domestic animals, creeping animals, and flying creatures of the heavens, for I regret that I have made them.. . .
If we have faith like that of Abraham, then we will ask questions about this. Just as we have asked questions about what Jesus meant when he spoke of a resurrection on Judgment Day for those who were destroyed in Sodom. Abraham asked:
(Genesis 18:22-33) . . .Then the men left from there and went toward Sodʹom, but Jehovah remained with Abraham. 23 Then Abraham approached and said: “Will you really sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 Suppose there are 50 righteous men within the city. Will you, then, sweep them away and not pardon the place for the sake of the 50 righteous who are inside it? 25 It is unthinkable that you would act in this manner by putting the righteous man to death with the wicked one so that the outcome for the righteous man and the wicked is the same! It is unthinkable of you. Will the Judge of all the earth not do what is right?” 26 Then Jehovah said: “If I find in Sodʹom 50 righteous men in the city, I will pardon the whole place for their sake.” 27 But Abraham again responded: “Please, here I have presumed to speak to Jehovah, whereas I am dust and ashes. 28 Suppose the 50 righteous should lack five. Because of the five will you destroy the whole city?” To this he said: “I will not destroy it if I find there 45.” 29 But yet again he spoke to him and said: “Suppose 40 are found there.” He answered: “I will not do it for the sake of the 40.” 30 But he continued: “Jehovah, please, do not become hot with anger, but let me go on speaking: Suppose only 30 are found there.” He answered: “I will not do it if I find 30 there.” 31 But he continued: “Please, here I have presumed to speak to Jehovah: Suppose only 20 are found there.” He answered: “I will not destroy it for the sake of the 20.” 32 Finally he said: “Jehovah, please, do not become hot with anger, but let me speak just once more: Suppose only ten are found there.” He answered: “I will not destroy it for the sake of the ten.” 33 When Jehovah finished speaking to Abraham, he went his way and Abraham returned to his place.
In Christian parlance, even Abraham and Noah were NOT intrinsically righteous, but they were counted as if righteous due to their faith. Jehovah as the Giver of LIfe has a right to destroy everyone. He may also save persons, or bring them back from the dead. And we were made to ask questions in order to understand Jehovah better.
It is clear to me that you have never had a five-month old son or daughter, or grand-son or grand-daughter. We can accept that Jehovah knew what would become of those babies in their circumstances of the time. But Jehovah also knows that only those with haughtiness and no natural affection will stop questioning and stop investigating.
(Psalm 10:4) . . .In his haughtiness, the wicked man makes no investigation;. . .
Just an aside, but that reminds me of how the psalmist almost turns the judgment imagery of the Flood "on its head" in these poetic lines:
(Psalm 36:5-8) . . .O Jehovah, your loyal love reaches to the heavens, Your faithfulness up to the clouds.  6 Your righteousness is like majestic mountains; Your judgments are like vast, deep waters. Man and beast you preserve, O Jehovah.  7 How precious your loyal love is, O God! In the shadow of your wings, the sons of men take refuge.  8 They drink their fill of the rich bounty of your house, And you cause them to drink of the torrent of your delights.
Like Noah, we are in effect "deluged" with the watery depths of Jehovah's bounteous delights and judgments.
But by blaming the young babies, don't you end up losing the natural meaning of Jesus' words about the innocence and humility of children, or what Paul meant when he said:
(1 Corinthians 14:20) . . .but be young children as to badness; . . .

The same Elon Musk whose red sports car sent to Mars was supposed to have batteries for cameras and telemetry that would last 12 hours and more.
They failed at four hours.
 
 
 
 

One of three questions they asked me at my Reinstatement was (paraphrased) "What is your opinion of the Governing Body?"
I replied  (paraphrased) " I would have to agree with them in the February 2017 Watchtower, that they are neither inspired of God, or infallible.".
I believe that if I had phrased that differently, all other things being equal, I would NOT have been Reinstated.
By actual test, I would agree with you, Anna.

I have carefully considered all of the above points, and concerning the willingness to die for one's beliefs, I have this to say about that:
Actor, comedian, and film producer, etc., Woody Allen said it best when asked about one of his latest movies, and the body of movies he had made in the past, either as star, producer, director, or all three ...
"Would you, through your movies, like to live forever in the hearts of your many fans?"
He replied "I would like to live forever, in my apartment in Manhattan."