Could Russell be " disfellowshipped" one day?

by jean-luc picard 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  jean-luc picard

  In fact Russell never was a Jehovahs witness.

  In the Proclaimers book, page 40 they write:

  Stirrings of Watchfulness
  In the 19th century, though, the religious climate led to stirrings of
  Christian watchfulness. As a result of Bible research on the part of some
  clergymen and Bible scholars, such teachings as the immortal sod, eternal
  torment after death, predestination, and the Trinity were restudied. In addition,
  some students of the Bible were closely examining Bible prophecies
  pertaining to the last days. Consequently, various groups of persons
  began thinking seriously about the Lord's promised return.

  William Miller predicted the return of Christ in
  visible form in 1843 or 1844. The German theologian
  J. A. Bengel set the date for 1836; the Irvingites in Engl&
  dlooked first to 1835, then 1838,1864, and 1866.
  There was a Mennonite group in Russia that looked
  / first to 1889, then to 1891.

  So why not relegate Russell to the level of these other bible scholars, and say that the true "truth" came sometime later.

  That way, they could disassociate themselves from a lot of the now embarrassing things that Russell said.
• 

  St George of England

  They would then have to do the same to Rutherford

  then to Knorr

  then to Franz.....

  The WTS have published embarrassing stuff throughout its history and continue to do so.

  George
• 

  jean-luc picard

  I think that, with passing time, they will not even talk about these men.

  After all, most people dont go beyond the surface, so they may just conveniently forget that they existed.
• 

  J. Hofer

  they'd come up with something like jesus doing a returning visit to clean his organization in 1980 or something.
• 

  teel

  I don't think there's need for that. They're doing a very good job obscuring Russel's teachings right now. The average JW knows he had some "misconceptions", but they file those under the "light was not so bright", and all is ok. It will never occur to them that many other christian groups were closer to the present dogma of the JWs than Russel was, so based on the teachings, the russelites would have to be pretty low on imaginary scale of Jesus judging the religions in 1914-1919. Since this idea requires some actual critical thinking, there is no need to distantiate themselves from Russel - after all he was hailed for too long as the person who finally started on the right path, they can't just drop him now.
• 

  Aussie Oz

  well even after watching the new dvd my kids only knowledge of russell was that he was some dude that preached a lot.

  so i would say they dont need to DF the old coote...

  the new generation of jws have no idea who he is anyway

  and he will just become some forgotten part of the trip

  oz
• 

  ProdigalSon

  All the past garbage is just "old light". The dubs, like all fundies, are fully convinced of "progressive revelation". I've even heard that's the reason for the OT God's behavior: Old Light. He was used to dealing with cave men and neanderthals for billions of years, so he was still acting like one. I mean, take a look at a Tyrannosaurus Rex.... this is what God did to entertain himself before he decided to finally put Adam and Eve here, only to have Da Debil screw it all up on the first day.
• 

  sizemik

  As long as they're still tied to the 1914 bullshit, they're going to have to keep presenting their sanitised version of their history. I don't think they care much about the critics of Russell . . . they just fob them off as "evil".

  New recruits are the lifeblood of the cult . . . and they, like the rest of us, take a while to "examine the truth" about anything apart from what "the slave" says is true.

  They are quite comfortable in their deception
• 

  DesirousOfChange

  I think that, with passing time, they will not even talk about these men.

  And with the new "anonymous" GB arrangement, there will not be any ONE man to heap criticism upon in the future. Just like the NWT translation committee.
• 

  Mad Sweeney

  I think the GB 2.0 is going to be less and less anonymous than the previous versions. The way they splatter their faces, names, and titles on the DVDs nowadays is something neither GB 1.0 or 1.1 would have done. There are a few of those clowns who truly love themselves.