The more and more I read about the history of the witnesses, the more I don't see them as one in the same as Charles T. Russell's religion. I think the religious movement from 1874 to 1916 was completely different than the one from 1918 to now. Rutherford is the real founder of Jehovah's Witnesses. He even came up with the name. He originated their primary doctrine: the role of the faithful and discreet slave. He turned it from a truly religious movement into a business enterprise.
I've come to the conclusion that Jehovah's Witnesses did not have their beginning in 1874, when Russell held his first study. Their true beginning is 1917, when Rutherford took over as president of the Watchtower Society. Like Russell borrowed the teachings of Miller and Barbour, Rutherford borrowed from Russell, but put his own twist on it, creating a new religion.
Jehovah's Witnesses - A Hijacked Religion
by B_Deserter 24 Replies latest jw friends
-
B_Deserter
-
Robert7
You have come to the same conclusion my wife and I came to. Rutherford totally started his new religion based off Russel, but changed many things. He even went against Russel's wishes that he left in his will. Rutherford introduced many new doctrines, and from what I read, he seems like a televangelist today, living the high life, and loving his fame. This is very different than what the Proclaimers book portrays.
You can read this history in Wikipedia:
-
steve2
This is, predictably, the very same conclusion that the various splinter groups from Russell and Rutherford reached. They would love to quote you, I'm sure. I think there is no doubt JWs are a very different group from Russell's and, in many respects they have also shed many of the crankier, more confrontational, in-your-face features of Rutherford's time. A 1930s JW would not recognise the 2008 JW! I wouldn't call it mellowing, more like getting older and creakier and it takes far too much energy to keep in people's faces.
-
neverendingjourney
There's no doubt about that. Today's Jehovah's Witnesses have more in common with Rutherford's brand of JWism than Russell's. Most of Russell's teachings have been replaced. A big part of Russell's focus was on pyramidology. He taught that the Great Pyramid of Giza was a testament in stone. He used various aspects of the pyramid to corroborate his views on prophecy. Pyramidology has since been discarded. Russell was a promoter of Christian Zionism. This has been done away with as well. Russell used the cross and was okay with celebrating birthdays and holidays. Rutherford did away with those things. The list goes on and on.
Modern JWs still hold on to Russell's beliefs about the trinity and hellfire. They retain the 1914 date, but have changed what supposedly happened on that date. Russell's other dates, such as 1799 and 1874, have been discarded. Rutherford really made the JWs into the door-to-door machine that they are known as today. He also shifted his followers' focus from loyalty to God to loyalty to an earthly organization. That's not to say that modern-day JWs aren't very different from JWs of the Rutherford era. They are. The blood ban didn't come into existence until after Rutherford's death. That's a major piece of modern JW theology. Let's not forget Rutherford's 1925 debacle either. Can we picture any JW today holding a sign that reads "religion is a snare and a racket"? The degree to which JWs changed post-Rutherford is not as dramatic as it was post-Russell, however. I completely agree with you on that.
This begs the question: What will Jehovah's Witnesses look like in 30 years?" but that's a topic for another occassion.
-
MMae
I wonder, how Jesus recogned/recogns each Russell, Rutherford, and the modern-day Governing Body in light of his own descriptions at Matthew 45-51?:
"Who here qualifies for the job of overseeing the kitchen? A person the Master can depend on to feed the workers on time each day. Someone the Master can drop in on unannounced and always find him doing his job. A God-blessed man or woman, I tell you. It won't be long before the Master will put this person in charge of the whole operation.
"But if that person only looks out for himself, and the minute the Master is away does what he pleases—abusing the help and throwing drunken parties for his friends—the Master is going to show up when he least expects it and make hash of him. He'll end up in the dump with the hypocrites, out in the cold shivering, teeth chattering." (The Message Bible)
Although he may have been misguided on many of his teachings, I tend to think of Russell as more interested in helping the individual come to Christ than either Rutherford or the GB. They impress me more as the "looks out for himself" types.
-
Borgia
Hijacked is quite a fitting description. I have called Rutherford's enterprise a coup d'etat. Either way, the basic is that the JW have lead people away from the doctrine that Russel had an argument about: the ransom. JW doctrine is withholding people from really using it (if you believe you need it, that is)
He went about his business in quite a clever way, never a big change all at once, but over the course of time. For an example: elder positions. Given the nature of the position any opposition would be rooted out before it could spring up. The same goes for ownership of kingdom halls, etc.
However, I wonder what would happen if opposition would spring up in a coordinated and massive way.....? can that be done?
Cheers
Borgia -
reniaa
Christianity is full of change, the jump in 300 ad when the emperor constantine got hold of christianity was massive, I think the only measure we can really use is the bible itself, because if a teaching is from men it will conflict with the bible as with a lot of practices that show personal goals of power, greed and adulation. Change unfortunately is a reality of christian faiths and usually come with a change of leadership, I wonder how many christian faiths at last count?
-
B_Deserter
Constantine really didn't change the Christianity of his time. It was a very splintered religion in the 4th century, with several different sects teaching many doctrines we'd find strange, and using gospels no longer used today. What the Council of Nicea did was pick which beliefs and creeds became "official." Many Christians churches like the Gnostics and the Egyptian Coptic church found themselves on the "wrong" side overnight.
What Rutherford did was different. He violated Russell's will by declaring himself the new president and firing those Russell had appointed, and introduced his own, man-made teachings. Holidays, blood, beards, no cross, even the name "Jehovah's Witnesses" came from Rutherford. -
freydi
Maybe some of the scales are starting to fall from the eyes. Br Russell had nothing to do with the dubs. The dubs only claim him as their founder when it's convenient. Da Judge was the one who started extreme shunning and all the other changes. The Truth has not changed nor it is a religion.
www.pastor-russell.com, www.ctrussell.us, bibletoday.com
Rev 12:17 -
catbert
Jesus agrees with you. He made his inspection in 1918, and searched the earth for his favorite Christains, and
found the JW's. He "appointed them over all his belongings" in that year. Jesus thought Russell had a screw loose,
and I tend to agree with him. The guy was obsessed with measuring pyramids.