Can you help?

by Old Goat 6 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    I seldom post here, though I read the posts here daily. I spend most of my time just growing older. (I became a Witness in 1948, so you can guess my age.) I have an enduring interest in Witness history. I follow the two history blogs run by Schulz and de Vienne, the authors of the biography of Nelson Barbour. They endlessly impress me with their work.

    Today on the public blog one of them posted a question concerning their next book. They are considering publishing volume one now. I’ve read almost all of this in rough draft as they post it on their private blog. It’s startlingly good. The research is the best I’ve ever seen and it is readable. In a quiet and scholarly way (they’re both teachers) the authors reveal parts of the Watchtower’s past I’d guess the Watchtower Society does not itself know and in detail. It’s not the expose some of us might want. It’s good, solid history.

    It’s drawn from original sources including the private papers of the principals. I’ve noted in their footnotes private letters from J. C. Sunderlin, family papers from the von Zech family, Stetson's private letters and similar things. The chapter on Russell’s childhood and young adult years is the most complete I’ve ever seen, and it’s illustrated with photos of original documents. The photos they’ve uncovered are sometimes poor quality, but that they found them at all is amazing.

    The problem is they’re considering shutting down their project. It’s not in anyone’s interest to have that happen. If you’re at all interested in a really good, solidly researched, professionally written history of the Watchtower, please go to their public blog and tell them so:

    http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/

    Their book considers the years from Russell’s childhood to about 1887. It documents the development of Zion’s Watch Tower readers into a separate religious identity. But, unlike Zygmunt and others, does so from a historian’s perspective, rather than from a sociologist’s view. A chapter on the early “study group” dissects their doctrinal development. The authors connect what Russell wrote about it to the books he read, the controversies of the day and tells the sources of their early beliefs. It was for me a myth-busting read.

    There is a section on Russell’s business ventures. Interestingly, part of it is taken from the Ross libel trial. I’ve looked for decades for a fragment of that and never found it. They trash what some have written about Russell's businesses, noting in footnotes and text (with supporting documentation) what really happened.

    They are occasionally snippy over what others have written. A recent book by Zydeck is trashed in some detail. Things Witness writers have said are found to be untrue. They smack some anti-Witness writers for bad research.

    They take up the widely held belief that Russell was primarily influenced by Adventists. This turns out to be a distortion. In chapters two and three they take us back through the pages of The Restitution, the Bible Examiner and other papers and show us just who these people were and with whom they affiliated. They present things I’d never seen and I’ve researched this subject since the 1950s.

    One thing that impresses me is their willingness to understand religious foible and to still present events bluntly. If the Watchtower Society had done this years ago, instead of foisting off propaganda as history, some of us would have a better view of them. I would at least.

    I can’t praise them enough, as you can see. If you value this kind of research, go to their blog and tell them so. I do not want this project to die, and personally, I would like them to publish volume one as soon as possible. Will you help?

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    Hi, Old Goat, and welcome! I know there are several here who may share your interest in the story of the people behind the WTB&TS.

    Personally, I am more interested in the "black sheep" of Watchtower history and the invisible women of the Watchtower, a very difficult area to research.

    I have done some work looking into the history of W. E. van Amburgh, Fred Robison, Merlin Fogh and M. L. McPhail and have greatly appreciated the work others here have done looking into the affairs of Rutherford and his family and the treatment Olin Moyle received for having a conscience, among others.

    I will follow your link and offer encouragement to the writers. Thanks!

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    As I understand it, A. D. Jones does not come off well. He became a major fraudster and was responsible for someone's death. He was arrested and fled NYC for points west. One of the authors told me that Conley hired a clergyman for his faith cure house that seduced the young women. Conley was suitably horrified, I suppose. I've read bits of their research on A P Adams. Apparently he was a corpulent bully.

  • shadow
    shadow

    Great stuff. Hope they finish. Thanks for posting this.

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    Maybe I should have used a term other than "black sheep," or expanded it to explain that I ejoyed looking into the histories of men of conscience who were the forefathers of the great crowd of apostates today. I will (of course!) enjoy reading about the Watchtower sociopaths and bullies, but the Watchtower was also a place where intelligene and conscience were often not welcome.

  • Old Goat
    Old Goat

    Nathan,

    That's a very interesting comment. I've read snippets of their material on Paton. There is a finished chapter with his biography. It's really good. I see that they see him as a bit nasty. I've read some of their notes on his break with Russell, and though I reject Universalism, some of what he wrote strikes me as very thoughtful. In this era Russell associated with G Myers, a Restitution evangelist. I've read some of his sermons. I can see why he didn't stay with the Watch Tower, and I wish they were more readily avialable. Do you have any other names of "the thoughtful" that fall into the period before 1890? This topic interests me.

  • Cold Steel
    Cold Steel

    The problem with history is that it has to be defensible in order to be published. The Society cannot continue its claims as being the one and only if its history is full of false prophecies and different doctrine. The greatest roadblock, of course, is the claim itself. How does God endorse a church without endorsing it? There are no ancient scriptures that presage the Kingdom, except Daniel 2, where the stone representing the Kingdom was cut "without hands," representing it being directed by God and not man.

    I've had a few JW missionaries drop by and complain about "manmade" religions. I always thought that would take some chutzpah unless you could produce some evidence that your religion wasn't manmade. At least another Adventist Restorationist movement, Seventh Day Adventism, was based on God sending Ellen G. White visions and new information. As far as I know, Russle never claimed any visions; neither did Rutherford. So what made them better scholars of the Bible than Luther, Calvin, Campbell, or Armstrong?

    The first publication I ever read from the Society was The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life. Cost me twenty-five cents and I got a FREE green Bible with thin pages and cheap ink that smelled horrible. The Bible was so badly, nay, horribly, translated that I threw it away. It seemed to me that the translators had an agenda of some sort.

    But Witnesses see the logic of being God's only true organization, but they're saying things only prophets could say or know, and were I them that would concern me a bit. Recall that when Jehovah returns, he will say unto many, despite their claims, "I never knew you!"

    When He returns to the earth and is seen having tea with the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, then I'll admit they have some solid foundational claims.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit