JW Insider

Perhaps I mentioned it somewhere already, but Reslite did get back to me with a response. And he also responded to a question I asked him on his blog. He is both careful and accurate, and therefore an excellent resource on Russell. He did not have the particular information I questioned him about, however, and he recommended another resource.
For most concerns about Russell, Reslite's default position is to defend him fully, and this is almost always the right direction to go. Most JW opposers (and Bible Student opposers) go for the more ludicrous attacks on Russell anyway, and therefore it's a safe bet on most issues to follow the information in the Proclaimers book and Reslite's information, too, where he can offer additional material.
But there are a couple of concerns about Russell that rarely get brought up, and one of these is the fact that Brother Rutherford claimed that Russell alone (individually - in his person) had been the "faithful and discreet slave" and Rutherford gave a funeral speech for Russell repeating this belief. This was in accord with Russell's own Watch Tower teaching about the "faithful and wise servant" for nearly the previous two decades. Rutherford also  published material about him clarifying that Russell himself accepted the title and would have claimed it publicly but that Russell's humility only allowed him to claim it privately.
This is not a big deal to me, but it is a minor concern, because the most current claim in our publications about this is that Russell "never claimed to be such" and therefore the idea is effectively blamed on others, with the idea that Russell only accepted this teaching about himself because of the undue influence of others around him. (See, Proclaimers.)
The actual history of the idea creates another minor concern about the current teaching: If Rutherford was one of those appointed by Jesus Christ in 1919  to be one of the select few members of the "faithful and discreet slave," then why was it that since December 1919 and all through at least 1927, Rutherford didn't accept this appointment from Jesus, but still insisted that ONLY Russell himself had been that faithful and discreet slave?
I have a feeling that the reason Dmitar referenced me with respect to this particular topic is because he recognizes the problems of these minor issues but he believes they are major, and therefore must somehow try to defend against them by making it appear they are just hearsay, not claims found in the WT publications themselves.  

Perhaps I mentioned it somewhere already, but Reslite did get back to me with a response. And he also responded to a question I asked him on his blog. He is both careful and accurate, and therefore an excellent resource on Russell. He did not have the particular information I questioned him about, however, and he recommended another resource.
For most concerns about Russell, Reslite's default position is to defend him fully, and this is almost always the right direction to go. Most JW opposers (and Bible Student opposers) go for the more ludicrous attacks on Russell anyway, and therefore it's a safe bet on most issues to follow the information in the Proclaimers book and Reslite's information, too, where he can offer additional material.
But there are a couple of concerns about Russell that rarely get brought up, and one of these is the fact that Brother Rutherford claimed that Russell alone (individually - in his person) had been the "faithful and discreet slave" and Rutherford gave a funeral speech for Russell repeating this belief. This was in accord with Russell's own Watch Tower teaching about the "faithful and wise servant" for nearly the previous two decades. Rutherford also  published material about him clarifying that Russell himself accepted the title and would have claimed it publicly but that Russell's humility only allowed him to claim it privately.
This is not a big deal to me, but it is a minor concern, because the most current claim in our publications about this is that Russell "never claimed to be such" and therefore the idea is effectively blamed on others, with the idea that Russell only accepted this teaching about himself because of the undue influence of others around him. (See, Proclaimers.)
The actual history of the idea creates another minor concern about the current teaching: If Rutherford was one of those appointed by Jesus Christ in 1919  to be one of the select few members of the "faithful and discreet slave," then why was it that since December 1919 and all through at least 1927, Rutherford didn't accept this appointment from Jesus, but still insisted that ONLY Russell himself had been that faithful and discreet slave?
I have a feeling that the reason Dmitar referenced me with respect to this particular topic is because he recognizes the problems of these minor issues but he believes they are major, and therefore must somehow try to defend against them by making it appear they are just hearsay, not claims found in the WT publications themselves.  

Perhaps I mentioned it somewhere already, but Reslite did get back to me with a response. And he also responded to a question I asked him on his blog. He is both careful and accurate, and therefore an excellent resource on Russell. He did not have the particular information I questioned him about, however, and he recommended another resource.
For most concerns about Russell, Reslite's default position is to defend him fully, and this is almost always the right direction to go. Most JW opposers (and Bible Student opposers) go for the more ludicrous attacks on Russell anyway, and therefore it's a safe bet on most issues to follow the information in the Proclaimers book and Reslite's information, too, where he can offer additional material.
But there are a couple of concerns about Russell that rarely get brought up, and one of these is the fact that Brother Rutherford claimed that Russell alone (individually - in his person) had been the "faithful and discreet slave" and Rutherford gave a funeral speech for Russell repeating this belief. This was in accord with Russell's own Watch Tower teaching about the "faithful and wise servant" for nearly the previous two decades. Rutherford also  published material about him clarifying that Russell himself accepted the title and would have claimed it publicly but that Russell's humility only allowed him to claim it privately.
This is not a big deal to me, but it is a minor concern, because the most current claim in our publications about this is that Russell "never claimed to be such" and therefore the idea is effectively blamed on others, with the idea that Russell only accepted this teaching about himself because of the undue influence of others around him. (See, Proclaimers.)
The actual history of the idea creates another minor concern about the current teaching: If Rutherford was one of those appointed by Jesus Christ in 1919  to be one of the select few members of the "faithful and discreet slave," then why was it that since December 1919 and all through at least 1927, Rutherford didn't accept this appointment from Jesus, but still insisted that ONLY Russell himself had been that faithful and discreet slave?
I have a feeling that the reason Dmitar referenced me with respect to this particular topic is because he recognizes the problems of these minor issues but he believes they are major, and therefore must somehow try to defend against them by making it appear they are just hearsay, not claims found in the WT publications themselves.  

Perhaps I mentioned it somewhere already, but Reslite did get back to me with a response. And he also responded to a question I asked him on his blog. He is both careful and accurate, and therefore an excellent resource on Russell. He did not have the particular information I questioned him about, however, and he recommended another resource.
For most concerns about Russell, Reslite's default position is to defend him fully, and this is almost always the right direction to go. Most JW opposers (and Bible Student opposers) go for the more ludicrous attacks on Russell anyway, and therefore it's a safe bet on most issues to follow the information in the Proclaimers book and Reslite's information, too, where he can offer additional material.
But there are a couple of concerns about Russell that rarely get brought up, and one of these is the fact that Brother Rutherford claimed that Russell alone (individually - in his person) had been the "faithful and discreet slave" and Rutherford gave a funeral speech for Russell repeating this belief. This was in accord with Russell's own Watch Tower teaching about the "faithful and wise servant" for nearly the previous two decades. Rutherford also  published material about him clarifying that Russell himself accepted the title and would have claimed it publicly but that Russell's humility only allowed him to claim it privately.
This is not a big deal to me, but it is a minor concern, because the most current claim in our publications about this is that Russell "never claimed to be such" and therefore the idea is effectively blamed on others, with the idea that Russell only accepted this teaching about himself because of the undue influence of others around him. (See, Proclaimers.)
The actual history of the idea creates another minor concern about the current teaching: If Rutherford was one of those appointed by Jesus Christ in 1919  to be one of the select few members of the "faithful and discreet slave," then why was it that since December 1919 and all through at least 1927, Rutherford didn't accept this appointment from Jesus, but still insisted that ONLY Russell himself had been that faithful and discreet slave?
I have a feeling that the reason Dmitar referenced me with respect to this particular topic is because he recognizes the problems of these minor issues but he believes they are major, and therefore must somehow try to defend against them by making it appear they are just hearsay, not claims found in the WT publications themselves.  

The bible shows that we must hope if they are not following Jehovah's standards but I do not trust them just because they are human.  When I was a widow I learnt the true nature pf people - the hard way.  I was an innocent and believed all people to be different levels of good.  I have learnt the hard way.  
Humans have perfection to the degree that they can perfectly accomplish the purpose and morals as instructed by Jehovah.  Without Him they are following their own ideas and can become fallible.  Only Jehovah has absolute perfection which is infallible. 

Ya ever notice that ALL of today’s “faith healers” heal stuff that is invisible to start with?
…… let me know when someone heals a thalidomide baby with no arms or hands, with fingers growing out of her shoulder
THEN you will have my attention!
 
Until then, EVERYBODY is just playing with words, like a retarded kid in a pool full of Scrabble chips.
 

He should delve into Ukraines President..and his past..it might give him second thoughts…

Clever.

The 520 are all the notifications I have in the last 30 days from the dozen or so people I follow, or people who respond to posts I made, or react to them, or mention me. But I am saying that out of every 500+ notifications, it's not unusual to have over a hundred of those notifications where Dmitar has referred to me or down-voted me, or tried to draw my attention to him in some negative way. 

He’s just flogging a dead horse because that’s all he knows how to do…your patience with him is admirable…and very good for visitors here reading your words… 

World War III has not begun yet, it is only an Information War as is a Hot War, remember, do not speculate of a possibility. The dominos for WW III has yet to happened. As for Ukraine, the US and their allies do not truly care for them, for Ukraine is only a tool to be used as a crux against Russia, granted the US and their allies with NATO affiliates and their actions.
 
That being said, the same thing of what I had told you many times, years ago, is taking effect, as we can see, granted the actions of Russia and their allies; then again Truthers are always targeted by the MSM, perhaps now you see.
 
For you were always told  of who the true threat is, for the majority, it will be already too late, the white throne those will have to answer to eventually.
Going forward, you should be concern of what your next steps are in the coming Reset and the actions of both Babylon and the Beast.
As we speak, weaponry and resources are being moved in the UK area, namely Scotland, and the area of which I associate you with, Glasgow. A US ally is playing their hand in something serious, just so you know.

A single name - Madeleine Albright. For the situation that led up to this is far more deep and serious.
Then again, you never paid attention to when it was said how the Wild Beast and Babylon was moving. So the rest you can figure out on your own.

True. Even a couple years ago when the Truther community did speak about the actions of NATO and the US allies, along with the United Nations, we were censored. It was inevitable that an action will cause an International Conflict.
The difference is that the US and their allies is dealing with a Nuclear Super Power.
That being said, the information we had was someone from NATO several years ago stated there want to start wars with several countries, those who were not on their side. We seen what they did already with the aid of the UN.
 
For the Wild Beast knows what it is doing. But this time, the fear and panic the unaware are succumbing to vs the aware who saw this coming and are prepared.
This is also a reminder that man cannot bring true peace or security, for only God and his Christ is capable to do such.
For whatever man touches, something gets tainted elsewhere.
That being said, violence, famine, fear, death is at an increase, especially in the US. Granted the economical Crisis taking place in the US, it is confirmed to slowly spill over into the EU. Elsewhere, heavy weaponry is being moved around in Glasgow, six deadly warheads making it's way over to the Royal Navy depot.
Fighter Jets flying over the skies of the United Kingdom.

Speculation. That reminds of the, ironically, the 1975 discussion. As we can see, concerning what the Information War (and Hot War) can turn into, there are both sides.
Not to mention, False Flags can make people jump to conclusions, even take action.
That being said, conflict overseas won't be one's only concern, but a Systematic Warfare among the people in the US and elsewhere, for neighbor will come against neighbor with ill intent, to survivor, to attack their own, etc. Something of which myself and @Kosonen has always talked about on here. Then you got the Reset, which will truly cripple the people even more. @Araunahas been vocal on that.
As the US dollar drops even more, the moral compass of some will also fall, for when ill intent is at an all time high, men, women and children, who are unaware won't be safe.
By the time unaware people figure out who the true enemy is, it will be too late.

Better to zoom out. Sometimes the news can't really be verified so its a slippery slope. Some of them actually want war. It caused a cousin of mine to actually prep for violence. 

The true enemy is Satan the devil. And God's word gives us enough information about the 'end times'.  Only YHWH through Yeshua  will save who He wishes to save.  As for the rest of it, persecution will come from all sides, but dying is not a problem when we have faith in the resurrection. 

@Space Merchant It may just be more than Methodist Faith tho. Weren't some Baptist ordinating women too? 🤔
Also since you linked that thread I made, I don't think people who say they have visions of certificates things to be true, especially when that vision comes from someone who thinks God oversees the torment of people in an Eternal Hellfire, makes no sense and that isn't something Jehovah is about.
@ApostaBabe Linda James We're not Extremist so I don't see how there's some kind of rage taking places in our halls although temporarily closed in some areas. Desperation possibly because of the stuff taking place in the world, not from brothers and sisters as a whole. In my case I'm perfectly fine, as well as our brothers and sisters at our hall.
@JW Insider You don't have to response but I know how you feel lol. Like someone talking about different fruits and vegetables and suddenly the conversation spirals into British Royal Navy ships and BOOM all of a sudden.... Cat videos lol 😆. 
A never ending story. 

Sending them in to a frontline with little or no ammo for their weapons made no sense to me when I heard about that. Except that one idea might have been to make sure Americans die so that the US will step in and step up to fight Russia. This was Ukraine's goal all along, but it's becoming painfully obvious to Zalensky now that it was never the US goal. The US only needed to tease them into a war that would continue to weaken the country, and hopefully still keep them dependent on the purchase of more military weapons from the US. Previously, the US sold them billions in weapons so that they would keep killing fellow Ukrainians in Donbas, to the tune of about 14,000 dead. Whether they are bombing their own people, as they have been for more than 8 years, or bombing Russians, should make no difference to the US, as long as they still need US weapons to do it.
It is usually the goal of stupid people in the media and in the population who think that the US is all-powerful and can step into a war with Russia (or anyone else) to prove American dominance over everyone and everything. Biden, and at least half of Congress, might be dumb enough to be goaded into it, but the entire goal of US wars and invasions and occupations since 9/11 has never been to "win" anything, but mostly to create enough chaos to make American weapon-making oligarchs richer, while weakening the economies of countries the US chooses to interfere with.
The US occupation of Syria, of course, is to continue illegally occupying about a third of Syria to weaken the country with civil war, and mostly to control its oil which the US has been stealing now since their civil war began there. (And, of course, to bully and lie about Assad enough so that he knows he can't fight back.) The US support of the genocide in Yemen is, of course, only to please Saudi Arabia since the US has no conscience about where they purchase oil from (while making sure that Germany and other Europeans will not purchase gas from Russia).
Oh wait! Was this about Ukraine or door-to-door ministry?

Sending them in to a frontline with little or no ammo for their weapons made no sense to me when I heard about that. Except that one idea might have been to make sure Americans die so that the US will step in and step up to fight Russia. This was Ukraine's goal all along, but it's becoming painfully obvious to Zalensky now that it was never the US goal. The US only needed to tease them into a war that would continue to weaken the country, and hopefully still keep them dependent on the purchase of more military weapons from the US. Previously, the US sold them billions in weapons so that they would keep killing fellow Ukrainians in Donbas, to the tune of about 14,000 dead. Whether they are bombing their own people, as they have been for more than 8 years, or bombing Russians, should make no difference to the US, as long as they still need US weapons to do it.
It is usually the goal of stupid people in the media and in the population who think that the US is all-powerful and can step into a war with Russia (or anyone else) to prove American dominance over everyone and everything. Biden, and at least half of Congress, might be dumb enough to be goaded into it, but the entire goal of US wars and invasions and occupations since 9/11 has never been to "win" anything, but mostly to create enough chaos to make American weapon-making oligarchs richer, while weakening the economies of countries the US chooses to interfere with.
The US occupation of Syria, of course, is to continue illegally occupying about a third of Syria to weaken the country with civil war, and mostly to control its oil which the US has been stealing now since their civil war began there. (And, of course, to bully and lie about Assad enough so that he knows he can't fight back.) The US support of the genocide in Yemen is, of course, only to please Saudi Arabia since the US has no conscience about where they purchase oil from (while making sure that Germany and other Europeans will not purchase gas from Russia).
Oh wait! Was this about Ukraine or door-to-door ministry?

Sending them in to a frontline with little or no ammo for their weapons made no sense to me when I heard about that. Except that one idea might have been to make sure Americans die so that the US will step in and step up to fight Russia. This was Ukraine's goal all along, but it's becoming painfully obvious to Zalensky now that it was never the US goal. The US only needed to tease them into a war that would continue to weaken the country, and hopefully still keep them dependent on the purchase of more military weapons from the US. Previously, the US sold them billions in weapons so that they would keep killing fellow Ukrainians in Donbas, to the tune of about 14,000 dead. Whether they are bombing their own people, as they have been for more than 8 years, or bombing Russians, should make no difference to the US, as long as they still need US weapons to do it.
It is usually the goal of stupid people in the media and in the population who think that the US is all-powerful and can step into a war with Russia (or anyone else) to prove American dominance over everyone and everything. Biden, and at least half of Congress, might be dumb enough to be goaded into it, but the entire goal of US wars and invasions and occupations since 9/11 has never been to "win" anything, but mostly to create enough chaos to make American weapon-making oligarchs richer, while weakening the economies of countries the US chooses to interfere with.
The US occupation of Syria, of course, is to continue illegally occupying about a third of Syria to weaken the country with civil war, and mostly to control its oil which the US has been stealing now since their civil war began there. (And, of course, to bully and lie about Assad enough so that he knows he can't fight back.) The US support of the genocide in Yemen is, of course, only to please Saudi Arabia since the US has no conscience about where they purchase oil from (while making sure that Germany and other Europeans will not purchase gas from Russia).
Oh wait! Was this about Ukraine or door-to-door ministry?

The Mainstream Media suppresses truth, and during war time, truth is often suppressed and or killed off. The MSM is a collective, grouped, and are often associated with things such as Big Pharma, as we know this due to the Opioid Crisis as is the COVID-19 Endemic, and Big Teach, mass censorship and suppression of information and truth.
As for the BBC article it was indeed misinformation. The claim is the Drone was from the Russians when in reality it is vastly different, leaning towards a False Flag to get the Croatia people involved, and even in their eyes, they see this too; granted NATO had quite the failure in that situation. The reason the BBC doesn't tell you this because they are among the many who are war mongers, and supporters of the military industrial complex. And this isn't one instance, it is several, in example, over the years, i.e. Syria Chemical situation.
 
They also censor people, myself included.
 
That being said it is understandable how your friend views truth vs the MSM, granted he himself was fooled by the New York Times and Newscorp, even one pertaining to CNN.

Clever.

The 520 are all the notifications I have in the last 30 days from the dozen or so people I follow, or people who respond to posts I made, or react to them, or mention me. But I am saying that out of every 500+ notifications, it's not unusual to have over a hundred of those notifications where Dmitar has referred to me or down-voted me, or tried to draw my attention to him in some negative way. 

After several people (including me) told you, that JWs don't do this, no one will provide proof or evidence for what we are claiming is not happening.
Also we gave several good reasons for not doing what you want: you ignored the Biblical admonition to FIRST help your own brothers in faith. Do you think we should do what is written in Galatians 6:10 or not?
Also we are in a situation where the whole European Union is overwhelmed with refugees. How do you expect a small number of JWs to handle a situation, that some of the richest nations of the world with more than 400million people can't handle? And since we can't handle the whole situation, what is wrong with helping your own friends first?
Which show that you are hopelessly uninformed about the whole situation. Only a small percentage of the population (and soldiers) on both sides are catholic.
More chaotic than it is? Millions of people with nowhere to go and next to no organized effort by some of the richest countries in the world to help them? And you think it would get less chaotic it 200.000 JWs would organize 3million refugees over night? Excuse me, but you say this so much without any knowledge, what is going on here, that I can't seriously discuss this with you.
175.000 JWs in Russia didn't take part in the invasion. Who is doing more to stop the war?
Huh?
I don't know if you misunderstood your study conductor or if he misunderstood what JWs are saying. But JWs don't teach this.
I let you answer this for you:
 

I largely agree. But I think that there is another way to look at the original historical events for MOST historical events found in the scriptures. I look at them like this:
(Romans 15:4, 5) . . .For all the things that were written beforehand were written for our instruction, so that through our endurance and through the comfort from the Scriptures we might have hope. 5 Now may the God who supplies endurance and comfort grant you to have among yourselves the same mental attitude that Christ Jesus had,
(1 Corinthians 10:1-11) . . .Now I want you to know, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea 2 and all got baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea, 3 and all ate the same spiritual food 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock meant the Christ. 5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them, for they were struck down in the wilderness. 6 Now these things became examples for us, in order for us not to desire injurious things, as they desired them. 7 Neither become idolaters, as some of them did; just as it is written: “The people sat down to eat and drink. Then they got up to have a good time.” 8 Neither let us practice sexual immorality, as some of them committed sexual immorality, only to fall, 23,000 of them in one day. 9 Neither let us put Jehovah to the test, as some of them put him to the test, only to perish by the serpents. 10 Neither be murmurers, as some of them murmured, only to perish by the destroyer. 11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.
In other words, the specifics are not applied to certain classes of Christians any more than they are applied to certain specific rulers or kingdoms. We don't have a Korah, Dathan and Abiram murmuring class who put Moses to the test in a specific way, for example. But we do learn a lesson for our instruction that no one, or no group of people, should put the words of Jesus to the test, or try to usurp, or take away from the authority of Jehovah's arrangement, who put Jesus as head over the congregation. So when Pharoah tried to attack the Israelites going through the sea, we don't need a new fulfillment of "Pharoah" every few decades. We don't need to identify the specific "Pharoah" of the 1st, 2nd . . . 19th, 20th and 21st centuries.
I think this is also true of the King of the North, for example. We have a specific person who Daniel had in mind for the great king whose kingdom was broken up to the four winds. We know that this great king was Alexander the Great. We don't need a new Alexander for each generation of history, or each generation of Jehovah's Witnesses. That's where I can personally see the LESSON of the "King of the North." We can always look at an event of history and say well that was the Pharaoh of this-or-that time period. Or that was the "abomination of desolation" of this-or-that time period.
I'm thinking, therefore, that Jesus wasn't identifying a "new" [Seleucid] king of the north when speaking of the Romans who would surround Jerusalem.
Jews of that generation would already have identified Caligula with Antiochus Epiphanes, for example, when Caligula had ordered the erection of his statue in the Temple at Jerusalem -- something that directly led to the revolution in Judea that resulted in the fulfillment of Jesus prophecy about the surrounding armies. This was all too similar to what Antiochus had done a couple centuries earlier. But this didn't mean that Antiochus was Caligula, only that the lesson was appropriate. There would be nothing wrong with saying that Caligula was being "an Antiochus," but not in the sense that he was the specific fulfillment of a prophecy.
All this makes sense to me up to a point, and I explained it OK. But it doesn't make sense completely, and I think this is where you are already coming from. For example, Paul in Thessalonians was very specific about identifying an end-times "antichrist" using the same terms as found in Daniel. This is part of the argument found here, too:
https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/daniel-11/