Melton in his books on religion classifies the Adventist groups into William Miller's groups and Charles T. Russell's groups. Russell denied that he was ever an Adventist, however many in Miller's groups also denied this as well. He did have association with Christians from Miller's groups, like Wendell, Barbour, Storrs, Stetson. He learned much from them.
In my opinion, Russell made a fatal mistake in joining up with Barbour, and accepting his time proofs. Barbour had modified many of Miller's time proofs, and reapplied them to 1874 and 1914. Storrs, in reviewing Barbour's and Russell's views, warned and cautioned them against date-setting, and denied that Christ was now present. Storrs himself had been a major leader in the Miller Movement, in setting a date for Christ's return in 1844. He knew from experience the bitter disappointment resulting from date-setting. Unfortunately, Russell did not heed his former mentor Storrs, did not learn from the lessons of history, and thus repeated the mistakes that Miller had made.
He later separated from Barbour, but continued to hold to the invisible presence in 1874, had expected the rapture in 1881, and dogmatically predicted for years the end of society and the coming of the kingdom by 1914, selling books in the millions advocating his views. He did grow tentative as 1914 approached, yet many had already believed him. This focus on Armageddon and date-setting, by giving people unwarranted fears and false hopes, is harmful. Russell's mistakes need to be admitted and rejected.
The other mistake, in my opinion, that Russell made was the doctrine of "that servant." He had early on applied that to all Christians. He encouraged others to "prove all things", to exercise private judgement, and advocated the priesthood of all believers. However, he came to accept the view of his wife that he was "that faithful and wise servant." To his credit, he rarely if ever put it in print that he was "that servant", and wrote about it very little. He cautioned the brethren against preaching Pastor Russell instead of Christ, against seeing him in the Bible. However, although he preached against Babylon, the Papacy, and priestcraft, he allowed authoritarian religion to creep back in. It is true that many religions begin with a charismatic leader whose followers believe to be led by God, and Russell's group was not alone in this. But by applying scripture to justify power over other Christians, this authoritarianism which started small grew larger, more scripture was used, and the effects have lasted longer and stronger because of the Bible being used as support.
Russell's mistakes have not borne good fruit, and need to be seen for what they are.
Apart from these, and some personal failings such as his unhappy marriage, Russell had many admirable traits, and had views which counterbalanced and offset his more unfortunate teachings. He encouraged democracy in the churches in electing their officers, and allowed personal freedom in decisions and resisted legislating on private matters. He emphasized the love of God in saving all mankind in a future age soon to come. Much of his writing has a high moral and spiritual tone, appealing to reason, and yet capable of being poetic and soaring. He emphasized the need for character development and the Christian graces. He had a gracious and winsome manner in addressing the public, which can seen in his public sermons. He had a curious mixture of liberal and conservative views, and apocalypticism and rationalism, and he is not easy to categorize. While the Bible Students are today are often blind to his faults, the JWs would have been better off in maintaining more of his spirit, and his kind and gentler approach.
Steve
JAY DUBS: Russells Legitimate Children or Rutherford's Bastard Sons?
by Nate Merit 10 Replies latest jw experiences
-
stev