I disagree with your idea that Rutherford was the one that was neurotic and tense. I believe that most of the "neuroticness" was introduced by Nathan Knorr and Fred Franz the handpicked successors to Rutherford. Perhaps other of Rutherfords associates but the explosion in rules was under Knorr and Franz.
Should Charles Russell be credited as the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses?
by slipnslidemaster 38 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
minimus
SLIPPY, nice to see you here, as you are missed! I think it's obvious that Rutherford created the JWs. Russell was already dead.
-
RR
Consider that NOTHING Russell created exit today as he organized it.
Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence became The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom in the 1940s.
Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society became Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania in the 1940s,
People's Pulpit Association became Watcdhtower Bible and Tract society of New York, Inc. in the 1940s
International Bible Students Association was dissolved
The Society begins its modern day history, not with Br. Russell but when the events of Jesus presence in 1914 and appointing them in 1918 as the FDS class. Their only tie to Russll is to establish themselves as an old time religion of the 1800s.
All the property Russell purchased has been wither sold or destroyed, there is a sliver of the old Brooklyn Tabernacle still standing, ebacuse it shares the wall with another Watchtower building.
The Cambridge Encyclopedia, states that Russell founded the Bible Students and the Watch Tower Society and states that Rutherford founded the Jehovah's WItnesses. They at least have it right!
RR
-
Forscher
Interesting thread.
I guess the big reason the JWs still claim to be the true heirs to Russell's legacy is that despite all the negative stories out their about him, Russell's reputation is still a whole lot better than Rutherford's. Let's face it, yes, there are questionable stories about Russlell's morals and business dealings out there, But Rutherford's lust for power and dirty deeds are well-documented. So, while russell's legacy is a little tarnished, Rutherford's is in the sewer over its head. Who would want to claim that as its founder?
Besides, this whole business of who's Russell's legitimate heirs haunted Rutherford from the very begining of his reign as the president of the Watchtower. He siezed control of that company and caused no little dissent within the Bible Student movement at the time. Though membership figures are very hard to come due to the loose organization of the movement, I think I can safely say that upwards of half or more of the BS worldwide refused to recognise him as their leader. He was therefore forced to compete for legitimacy and recognition within the movement as he watched his former bretheren dwindle away and start competing groups. In the end, he was forced to break away and rename his group and the organization still feels a need to link its legitimacy to Russell.
Jehovah's Witnesses can still be called descendants of Russell in the sense that their organization was once part of the movement. Thus, in a sense Russell can be counted among its founders. But make no mistake, Rutherford was the real founder of that group. He, and those who followed him in power have turned that group into something which Russell would not recognise and likely would deny any connection to.
Forscher -
OnTheWayOut
despite all the negative stories out their about him , Russell's reputation is still a whole lot better than Rutherford's.
Rutherford's lust for power and dirty deeds are well-documented. So, while russell's legacy is a little tarnished, Rutherford's is in the sewer over its head. Who would want to claim that as its founder?
Good points. Also, pointing to Rutherford would place the WTS roots after 1914. It's important for them to
lie tospininform the faithful that they have been proclaiming the truth since before Jesusappeared to bring destructioninvisibly started his rule in 1914. -
slipnslidemaster
Ah! That is actually a very good point about 1914. Keeping that date means that they need to keep Russell. Makes perfect sense.
Also Rutherfords reputation vs. Russell's is a good point as well.
RR makes good points as well with the ultimate culmination in 2000 with the corporations being split and renamed.
-
fullofdoubtnow
Rutherford and his successors were the ones that made the wts what it is today, but I can't see them dropping Russell as the founder, though none of his ideas are published these days, and jws aren't encouraged to read them, just the opposite in fact. Thet need to be able to say thet "bible students had long known that 1914 would be a significant date in bible prophecy", and if they dropped Russell that would be even more unbelievable than it is now.
-
slipnslidemaster
I'm noticing that the discussion is morphing here a bit. I don't think that the Society will drop Russell as the founder, however should exJW's continue with the practice?
Should our writings, essay's, article's and other contributions to the Internet now be revised to "correctly" reflect that Jehovah's Witnesses were founded by Joseph Rutherford as an offshoot of Charles Taze Russell's Bible Students?
-
LittleToe
Slippy:Good to see ya. Where the debil have ya been, me ole drinking buddy!!!
I agree. Russell may have been a bit of an interesting character, with occult leanings and a penchant for draw folks after himself through his writings, but it was Rutherford who invented the JWs with a few additional evolutionary steps taking place under successive Presidents.
-
garybuss
Should Charles Russell be credited as the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses?
No!
He might not be the founder of the Watch Tower Publishing company either.
Rutherford named that which he created.