Rutherford as a Bible scholar. (page 2)

JAVA

AlanF,

Such ideas tickle the ears of the foolish, and empower the unethical over the foolish.

That's an astute observation, and causes me to wonder about leaders offering simple answers to complex societal problems. It's fairly easy understanding why the gullible falls for simple answers, but the ethics of giving simple answers is intriguing, when the one in control knows better.

For example, politicians get elected by hiring more police, knowing crime goes down when people have living-wage jobs, not necessarily more cops on the beat. Religious leaders offer life eternal, knowing they don't know, but saying the expected because it makes people feel better. Of course, there are stages of unethical behavior that goes beyond the above. Sects like the Watchtower travel to the ethical extreme by telling followers to believe the unbelievable while forcing their lunacy with the gun of shunning pointed to the follower's head. As you said, it's an organization of unethical people holding power over the foolish.

The foolish flock to the one offering simple societal or religious answers. The Tower will always have a pool of people to suck in, and forums like this are there for followers that awaken. (It's always interesting seeing how pissed new ones get when they realize what happened.)

--JAVA

...counting time at the Coffee Shop

larc

A note on Russell,

In 1908, Russell wrote, "The full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914, and that date will be the furthest limit of the rule of imperfect men."

In 1916, two years after the failed prophecy, this text was changed in a new edition to read as follows. "The full end of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion will be reached in A.D. 1914,; and that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men."

The "end" or "furthest limit" of 1914 was change to a "beginning" of a "disintigration." Thus, with an economy of word changes, Russell was able to radically alter the meaning of his text. This is a clever writing method, but not a very honest one.

Two years after the failed prophecy of 1914, Russell wrote in the forward to the 1916 edition of the book cited above: "Dealing with subjects so difficult that they are rarely touched by others, it is not to be considered strange if some of the suggestions made in this Volume have not been fulfilled with absolute accuracy to the very letter."

Regarding the statement above, please note that his writings were not "suggestions". They were declarative statements of what the author considered to be absolute truth. Please note Russell's hedging when he stated that his prophesies were not absolutely correct "down to the letter". His prediction was very clear cut with no shades of gray, that is, the end of the world would occur by the end of 1914. You connot be almost right on a prediction like that. Your'e either right or wrong. (It's like saying that a a woman is almost pregnant: either she is or she isn't.)
Reference: Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. II p. p.76, 77. as cited by Walen in "Argmaggedon Around the Corner", p. 36

chasson

Thanks larc,

Your page in French:

http://www.chez.com/tjrecherches/RuthRel.htm

And for Norm, here we go:

http://www.chez.com/tjrecherches/RussellOrg.htm

You will be as international as the Watchtower ;)

Bye

Charles

larc

Chasson,

I will be back tommorrow with some quotes before and after the failed prophecy of 1925.

ozziepost

G'day AlanF,

Naturally, after seeing that bad ideas pretty much define the Watchtower organization

The bad ideas just keep on flowing! Take, for example, in the recent book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy!". In commenting on Daniel 11:30 "There will certainly come against him the ships of Kittim", it manages to convert this as Kittim=Cyprus="ships of Britain lying off the western coast of Europe". I kid you not! How on earth the book study conductors managed to gloss over that at their congregation book studies has be bemused.

BTW nice post, old son

Cheers,

Ozzie

MacHislopp

Hello Iarc,
excellent post!

Very good remarks :

"By they way, as many of you know, no one has to write an "apostate" book. Their own writings over time are enough to condemn them, and the rank and file don't even know it. It was reading the kinds of things I have quoted here that caused me to leave, not because of any so-called apostate books."

TRUE. Agape, J.C. MacHislopp

badboy

Interesting *

VM44

A recent thread asked who are the Watchtower Bible scholars?

That question reminded me of this thread started by larc where he tells us that Rutherford was advertised in print at one time as "The World's Foremost Bible Scholar"

I find that statement to be extremely hilarious!

--VM44

Rutherford as a Bible scholar.

--JAVA

Share this