by Leolaia 119 Replies latest watchtower scandals
From what I understand about Rutherford and his need to control everything I can't see him using anyone as a ghost writer. I CAN easily say that I can see Rutherford up til the wee hours slaving away at his vitriolic rants at the Catholic Church, religion in general and politics
If there are writing similarities wouldn't it be possible for Franz to have copied the style set up by Rutherford.
I suspect there are many instances of the same style of writing to have been copied over time.
Barbara Anderson mentioned that she found a copy of a handwritten note written by Rutherford ordering Franz to reply to a QFR.
Who's to say that Franz didn't have the final say before Rutherford's books and articles went to print?
Sylvia
Okay the ghostwriter thing was a bit of a side issue anyway. Any comments on the other points I raised?
Thanks for all the work on this!
slimboyfat....I think you've raised some rather interesting questions. You are right of course that it is impossible to prove the central allegation -- short of the unlikely discovery of "smoking-gun" evidence. But it must not be forgotten that this claim arises not from circumstantial evidence but from what Berta's own relatives say she told them. There is also a second corroborating account of a confession by Berta shortly before her death, but this imho is unsubstantiated until the elder in question comes forward and relates this information himself. The circumstantial evidence is suggestive and provides the opportunity for such a relationship; it does not conflict with the information provided by Berta's family. At minimum, the evidence reveals a cluster of curious irregularities pertaining to Rutherford's inner circle -- Berta's abandonment of her husband, Bill Heath courting Bonnie while still married, Bonnie's ongoing misreprentation of her age on passports, Bonnie breaking Bethel rules to marry Bill, Rutherford's separation from his wife, Bonnie calling herself an adopted daughter of Rutherford, etc. That alone makes this an important inquiry, especially as it is at variance with the Society's stated views on marriage and morality. Bringing Berta's confession to her family into the picture, moreover, makes some sense out of these odd irregularities.
I do not agree that Rutherford was suffering with colorectal cancer for 4 1/2 years (summer of 1937 to winter 1942). "Colon cancer often causes no symptoms until it has reached a relatively advanced stage" [1]. It was in 1941 when Rutherford became very ill in a hospital in Indiana, and he retired to Beth Sarim where he was nursed by Hazel Burford for 8 weeks until his death. That would have been the time when his cancer reached its advanced stage and Rutherford was no longer in any condition to carry on his normal duties. But before this, especially in 1937 to 1939, he had a very busy travel schedule -- travelling across the United States as well as to Europe and the Pacific. Although his health was always limited on account of his pulmonary condition (hence his need for nurses since the 1920s), I certainly don't see any evidence that colorectal cancer would have been an issue as early as 1937 or 1938. In fact, Rutherford already had a dietician for many years prior to 1937, so having a dietician was not a new concern of Rutherford's. Regarding Berta's lack of qualifications, I would also mention that non-mainstream "alternative" therapies, such as those popular among the JWs of the era, have their own qualifications and degrees. Berta's relatives claim that she had no training or degree whatsoever in the field of nutrition. It is certainly possible, of course, that she already had an interest in diet (maybe through her Golden Age "education").
Finally, I think we need not to presume a certain necessary degree of "sexual activity" (which pain from colorectal cancer would have prevented) in order to picture Berta as a companion or girlfriend or "mistress" of Rutherford. Perhaps Rutherford had an attitude similar to Bill Clinton that as long as they don't "fornicate" through intercourse, it would not be adultery. Or maybe they did have such contact. Or maybe Rutherford only needed someone to hold, kiss, display affection. Who knows. But I do not necessarily suppose that they had to have been regular, active sex partners in order for Rutherford to have had a relationship with another woman outside marriage.
Their "relationship" - if there was such - could have been similar to David's with Abishag.
From The Message Bible:
1 Kings 1:1-4 King David grew old. The years had caught up with him. Even though they piled blankets on him, he couldn't keep warm. So his servants said to him, "We're going to get a young virgin for our master the king to be at his side and look after him; she'll get in bed with you and arouse our master the king." So they searched the country of Israel for the most ravishing girl they could find; they found Abishag the Shunammite and brought her to the king. The girl was stunningly beautiful; she stayed at his side and looked after the king, but the king did not have sex with her.
Since JFR was so sure his role was written into Bible prophecy, he could have rationalized such as an antitypical fulfilment!
Sylvia
LMAO!!! That's pretty funny!
I've taken the liberty of sinning against the Holy Spirit for the sake of entertainment. Sin(g) along, if you dare!
Song 11
The Shunammite Remnant
(Song of JFR 6:13)
1. ‘Dear Shunammite maiden, so lovely and fair,
Your spiritual virtues are many and rare.
Your speaking is pleasant, your charms a delight.
Your fellowship holds me, beloved Shunammite.’
2. Thus speaks her Fine Shepherd, Christ Jesus her Lord.
He wants her to share his eternal reward.
And how does the fair one, so firm as a wall,
Reply to her Lord, as a model for all?
3. ‘Exclusive devotion is not up for hire,
Since blazings of love are like blazings of fire.
Unyielding as Sheol all true love will be.
Like flame of Jehovah is your love for me.’
4. Fair Shunammite remnant, temptations resist.
Stay clean for your Bridegroom; on virtue insist.
Your virgin companions that walk in your train
Rejoice at your course and the prize you will gain.
LOL at NN.
Sylvia
Picking up on something that Leo said.
Even if a man is impotent (unable to get or maintain an erection) does not mean he isn't interested in a bit of playing around under the covers, under the table and behind wifey's back. I know about this from a professional perspection but more importantly from a personal perspective.
Two of my abusers were unable to get an erection. By the time I was 10 yrs old knew what to do but no matter what or how long it wasn't going to happen. It certainly didn't stop their minds from wanting to try. And if they found NO pleasure I see know reason why they would have kept trying.
Sex is such a taboo in the WTS. Back then - I suspect it was "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil." And that was the rest of the world. In a sexually repressed society like the WTS as it was under Rutherford. Would have had a tight knit circle that he trusted enough to keep their mouths shut.
Let's not forget too that it was Rutherford's predessor, Russell, who set a certain sexual standard, wouldn't even have sex with his legal wife!!!
