<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Supplement to the First Issue of the Watch Tower</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html</link>
	<description>Restoration Light Bible Study Services</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 06:38:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Response to &#8220;History of the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses&#8221; Youtube video</title>
		<link>http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html#comment-116</link>
		<dc:creator>Response to &#8220;History of the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses&#8221; Youtube video</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=346#comment-116</guid>
		<description>[...] The video claims that Russell had not first-hand knowledge or revelation about the &#8220;invisible return.&#8221; Evidently, this is contrasting Barbour with Russell, attributing Barbour as though Barbour had claimed to have received this by means of special &#8220;revelation&#8221;, as a prophet, whereas Russell did not. As already pointed out, however, Russell had already evidently concluded from Bible study that Jesus would not return in the flesh, which would mean that he did not believe that Christ would return visibly in the flesh. http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The video claims that Russell had not first-hand knowledge or revelation about the &#8220;invisible return.&#8221; Evidently, this is contrasting Barbour with Russell, attributing Barbour as though Barbour had claimed to have received this by means of special &#8220;revelation&#8221;, as a prophet, whereas Russell did not. As already pointed out, however, Russell had already evidently concluded from Bible study that Jesus would not return in the flesh, which would mean that he did not believe that Christ would return visibly in the flesh. <a href="http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html" rel="nofollow">http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonas Wendell&#8217;s 1870 Presentation</title>
		<link>http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html#comment-86</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonas Wendell&#8217;s 1870 Presentation</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:10:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=346#comment-86</guid>
		<description>[...] then it seems more logical that Russell would have responded to that message favorably. See: http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html wherein Russell describes those [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] then it seems more logical that Russell would have responded to that message favorably. See: <a href="http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html" rel="nofollow">http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html</a> wherein Russell describes those [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
