Posts by reslight2

i was rather surprised today as i explored some archaeological news for my macquarie asian history fb page, to be suddenly confronted with this heading in the israeli haaretz media site.. before herzl, there was pastor russell: a neglected chapter of zionism.

years before theodor herzl proposed creating a jewish state, charles taze russell was traveling the world holding jewish mass meetings, beginning in 1879, at which he urged jews to find a national home in eretz israel.

... and this quote from charlie's zion's watchtower (p. 329, 1892: .

reslight2

Russell never spoke of himself as a Zionist; that term originally only applied to Jews who promoted the return of the Jews to Israel. He was certainly in support of the Zionists.

The non-authoritarian, non-sectarian, Watch Tower Society of Russell's day however, virtually ceased to exist shortly after Russell died. Rutherford deceitfully had new by-laws passed and very cleverly created an atmosphere of "authority" by which he eventually promoted his "Jehovah's visible organization" dogma. By 1928, the vast majority of the Bible Students around the world had rejected this dogma.

In Germany, the Bible Students were not clearly delineated. As far as Hitler's regime was concerned, there was no distinction between "Bible Students" as to who was still promoting Israel's restoration from those who did not. It was not until after the war was over that a clear distinction became possible. Many of the number the WTS claims as being "Jehovah's Witnesses" who suffered during World War II were not actually "Jehovahs Witnesses," but were Bible Students who believed in the "ransom for all," that is, that Adam and all of descendants will eventually be blessed due to Christ's sacrifice, including all Jews as well all Germans. Rutherford had begun to deny the basis of the ransom for all as early as about 1923; he publicly denied the basis of the ransom for all in the 1930s, and the JW leadership has continued to do the same until this day.

43

JW Refutations of Criticism of Russell and Rutherford

by Duvduv in

can someone direct me to jw refutations of the harsh criticisms of charles russell and judge rutherford that are on the internet and youtube?

i am a fair person and insist on hearing both sides to a controversy.

in this case, i would like to know what traditional yw responds to such personal criticisms and alleged changes in beliefs.

reslight2

i cannot address all that is being said here. I am not with the JWs. I am a Bible Student as was Charles Taze Russell. There are indeed many, many false accusations and distortions of history being told about Russell, what he taught, what he did, etc.

I will be making references to my CTR site:

http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/10/all-on-this-site.html

I have been studying Russell's works and life for more than 55 years. I do not claim to know absolutely everything about him, and I still come across things that I did not know before. I do try to be as accurate as I can.

Russell was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses organization; he did not believe in such authoritarian sectarianism. Nor did believe in the organization method of salvation that Rutherford created and which is evidently still taught today by the JWs.

It would not be fully accurate to say that more than 75% of Bible Students "left the organization." They did leave or were separated from the legal entity the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, which could be referred to as legal business organization, but as the term "the organization" is often used by Jehovah's Witnesses, that would be misleading. The more accurate statement would be that the majority of the Bible Students worldwide rejected Rutherford's "Jehovah's visible organization" dogma; in effect, they refused to join themselves to "the organization". I will say that I don't know that Russell ever used to the word "organization" regarding the Watch Tower of his day. As a legal entity, I suppose the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of that time could have been referred to as an organization, but it was definitely not an "organization" in the sense that Rutherford and the JWs later made it to be.

For more related to Russell and Organization, click on the "Authority/Organization" option listed at the top of the CTR website.

I had some correspondence with some one workng on the book, "Nelson Barbour: The Millenium's Forgotten Prophet", before the book was published. If I remember correctly, I was sent a preliminary copy. At any rate, the thing I remember objecting to mostly was the reference to Barbour as a prophet. I have not seen Shultz' "A Separate Identity". I have ordered a copy of the book.

Russell was definitely never a member of the Freemasons.

For more related to this, click on the "Freemasons" option listed at the top of the CTR website.

While not all that Russell was expecting for 1914 came about as quickly as he thought, as far as Russell is concerned, 1914 was not a failure. Russell was never expecting Christ to return in 1914, and he did not spiritualize 1914 due to any failure of such an event. About 1872, Russell came to realize that Christ's return would not be in the flesh, but in the spirit. In 1876, he accepted Barbour's conclusion that Christ had returned in 1874.

Russell was expecting that the earthly phase of the kingdom would be established in Jerusalem in 1914 or shortly after; he did not change this expectation to something spiritual; I would say that most Bible Students are still expecting that the kingdom will be established in Jerusalem, whenever that may be.

One speaks of dates for "the end" as being 1874, 1914, 1975. The two dates that would be related to Russell would be 1874 and 1914. I am not sure what is meant by "the end", but usually this is supposed to mean "the end of the world."

Of course, Russell, before 1874, had no expectations regarding 1874 at all. Many Second Adventists were expecting the earth to be literally burned up with most its inhabitants eternally lost while a few would be saved. Russell rejected that idea. It was not until 1876, two years after 1874, that Russell accepted Barbour's conclusion that Christ had returned in 1874.

For more details regarding 1874, one may click on the 1874 option at the top of the CTR website.

As far as 1914 is concerned, before 1904 Russell accepted Barbour's conclusion that the time of trouble had begun in 1874 and that it would last for 40 years, thus ending in 1914. Before 1904, then, Russell was expecting that the world would be at peace in 1914. Russell never held to any views similar to what the JWs claim about Armageddon. He viewed Armageddon as a period of time when the people of the nations were to be chastised (not eternally destroyed). Such chastisement was to prepare them for the kingdom blessings to follow.

In 1904, however, Russell changed his view concerning the time of trouble, rejecting the view that the time of trouble had begun 1874. He then believed that it was to begin, not end, in 1914, and that rather than peace coming in 1914, the nations would be in the time of trouble. He was definitely not expecting "the end of the world" in 1914. He was expecting the Gentile Times to end in 1914, and the time of trouble was to begin in 1914.

Regarding the time of trouble, one may find more in the the posting, "Beginning of the Time of Trouble - Quotes From Russell" on my CTR site.

Russell presented several different scriptural methods for arriving at the date 1914, all of which the JWs have dropped except one, that of Daniel 4.

Russell accepted 607/606 as the date of Jerusalem's destruction because of the chronology based on the Bible, and the many ways this date interlocked and produced a symmetry for many other time features. Still, he was not dogmatic about this, and not all Bible Students in his day accepted his view that Jerusalem was destroyed in that year. Russell mentioned this several times, but he never insisted that one had to accept the 606 date or in any other of the chronology in order to be accepted in fellowhsip. I have a collection of research on one of my websites related to Russell and 1914, and also another regarding Russell, authority and organization. One may click on "Authority/Organization" and "1914" options on my CTR website.

Russell did nothing wrong regarding Miracle Wheat, despite all of the Eagle's distortions. I have much information related to this; one may click on "Miracle Wheat" option on my CTR site.

Contrary to much false information often being spread, I do not believe that Russell did anything wrong towards Rose Ball. I consider this matter incomplete, as evidently no one sought to verify any of the accusations made in court with Sister Henninges, who had married and was living in Australia with her husband at the time of the divorce trial. Sister Henninges, however, was of the belief that Brother Russell had "gone out of the truth" because of his beliefs regarding the new covenant, and thus there was some friction between her and Russell over this. As far as I know Sister Henninges during her lifetime never mentioned, affirmed, or disaffirmed any of the statements attributed to her or regarding her that were presented in court. At any rate, many do like use the hearsay testimony presented in court as a weapon for character assassination of Russell. Due to the the fact this was considered too old to be accepted as testimony in court, the testimony concerning Miss Ball was stricken from the records. Nevertheless, in all that testimony that Mrs. Russell presented, it fell short of accusing Brother Russell of adultery, and Mrs. Russell herself stated that she was not accusing her husband of adultery.

See "Russell and Rose Ball" on my CTR site. See also the "Marriage Problems" selection at the top.

7

Sex and Rockets - Strange Angel CBS series, Charles Taze Russell and Jack Parsons

by truthseeker in

jw
friends

i'm watching the cbs series strange angel.

it is based on a true story about jack parsons, who along with others, pioneered rocket development in 1930's america.. "strange angel, a drama series created by mark heyman (black swan, the wrestler) and based on george pendle's book of the same name, explores the dramatic intersection between genius and madness, science and science fiction.. the story follows the life of jack parsons, a mysterious and brilliant man in 1930s los angeles, who by day helps birth the entirely unknown discipline of american rocketry, and by night is a performer of sex magick rituals and a disciple to occultist aleister crowley.".

https://www.cbs.com/shows/strange-angel/.

reslight2

One of the sites linked to states:

"At the turning of the twentieth century, Charles Taze Russell was only one of many would-be seers who were attempting to trace the contours of the future amid the ruins of ancient Egypt."

First Charles Taze Russell was not a "seer"; he disclaimed being such. He only claimed to be a student of the Bible who presented his conclusions regarding prophecies found in the Bible.

Russell held no special interest in Egypt beyond the Biblical interest. I am not sure what is meant by "attempting to trace the contours of the future amid the ruins of ancient Egypt." He did seek to find confirmation of the Bible in Egypt and elsewhere. If the reference is to his Biblical study of God's Witness in Egypt (often called the Great Pyramid of Egypt), again, the GP itself only confirms the Bible. It is not, of itself, a source for future expectations (although some, by using a lot of imagination, have tried to use it this way).

7

Sex and Rockets - Strange Angel CBS series, Charles Taze Russell and Jack Parsons

by truthseeker in

jw
friends

i'm watching the cbs series strange angel.

it is based on a true story about jack parsons, who along with others, pioneered rocket development in 1930's america.. "strange angel, a drama series created by mark heyman (black swan, the wrestler) and based on george pendle's book of the same name, explores the dramatic intersection between genius and madness, science and science fiction.. the story follows the life of jack parsons, a mysterious and brilliant man in 1930s los angeles, who by day helps birth the entirely unknown discipline of american rocketry, and by night is a performer of sex magick rituals and a disciple to occultist aleister crowley.".

https://www.cbs.com/shows/strange-angel/.

reslight2

truthseeker

Charles Taze Russell indeed was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses organization. He did not believe in such sectarian authoritarianism, nor did he believe in the organization/Armageddon message preached by the JWs.

Nor was Russell expecting "the Apocalypse" (which scripturally means revealing, making manifest, known) to come in 1914. Most people think of' "the Apocalpse" as being the end of the world, but Russell was definitely not expecting the end of the world for 1914. Especially from 1904 onward, Russell was expecting the time of trouble was to begin in 1914 and end at some unknown time after 1914. Russell died in 1916, still holding to the belief that the time of trouble had begun in 1914.

Brother Russell did not believe in the concept of "the Apocalypse" as that term is often used today. The last book of the Bible is often called the Apocalypse, because it reveals by signs (symbols) things that already were and things that were yet future. Russell believed that most of the book of Revelation was already fulfilled in the past, that it started to be fulfilled even the first century, long, long before 1914. He was, therefore, not expecting the series of events often associated the phrase "the Apocalypse", as described in the OP.

Brother Russell believed that the appearance of anti-christ had begun in the first century, and that, after the apostles died, the spirit of antichrist produced what the KJV refers to as the Man of Sin, which Russell identified with the Papal system. He identified Babylon the Great also as being manifest especially in the sectarian Papal system. He was not expecting the antichrist nor Babylon the Great to come in 1914 or anytime after 1914. He was expecting Babylon the Great to be destroyed either in 1914 or sometime after 1914.

It is reported that Russell did announce at Bethel, on October 2, 1914, that the Gentile Times had ended, and that the Kings have had their day. As far as I have been able to discern, the only source of the date when this took place was that A. H. MacMillan, in his book, Faith on the March. Whether that was the specific date, and exactly what Russell said, I have not been able to verify.

Generally Russell did not specifically spell out October 2, 1914 as being when end of the Gentiles would be reached, and that the time of trouble was to begin. He most often referred to October 1 in a general way, but he also stated he didn't know exactly what day the Gentile times would end, but that he pointed to October 1 as being the general time. Russell never predicted that end of the world was to begin in 1914. He did believe that the end of the age -- which often rendered in most translations as "the end of the world" -- had begun 1874. He orignally thought the time period for the end of the age would itself end in 1914; however, his change of viewpoint (in 1904) concerning the beginning of time of trouble would indicate that from 1904 onward he was no longer expecting the end of the age period of time would come to a halt in 1914.

Russell did not believe in "Russellites." He believe that a Christian should follow Christ, not Russell.

However, the Bible Students as a whole rejected Rutherford's "Jehovah's visible organization" dogma. They did not take the name "Jehovah's Witnesses". Bible Students still exist today, separate from the JW organization that Rutherford created.

85

Here's PROOF that Charles Taze Russell Was NOT a Pennsylvania Freemason

by AndersonsInfo in

no, charles taze russell was not a pennsylvania freemason!.

this is the answer i received in a letter: .

"after a search of our records, we determined that the three russell's were not members of our organization.

reslight2

Regardless, Charles Taze Russell was definitely never a member of the Freemasons, nor of any of man's secret societies. Despite all the wild imaginative assumptions that many present as alleged proof that he was a member of the Freemasons, no one has presented any actual proof at all that he was a Mason, but we do have a lifetime of his works that overwhelmingly demonstrate that he was not a member of the Freemasons. It is inconceivable that any man would spend approximately 46 years of life, his entire fortune, etc., sabotaging something that he is alleged to have been secretly supporting.

Russell did on a few occasions draw some parallels to the Bible and what he supposed to be teachings of the Freemasons. He did the same thing with others, such as the Catholics, the Baptists, Methodists, the Odd-fellows, etc.

Likewise, Russell and the Bible Students rented meeting rooms from many different organizations, not just from the Freemasons. Bible Students still do this today.

Nevertheless, many statements Russell made concerning the Freemasons actually showed that he had some misconceptions about the Freemasons. For instance, in one article, appears to believe that all Masons are Knights Templar, and that all Freemasons are Christian. Later, in a sermon, he still seems to think of all Masons as being Christian, and refers to them as Masonic friends and even brethren, similar to the way he did with Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, etc. In that same sermon, he seems to present the Knights Templar as being of a higher order of Freemasons.

For much of my research related to Russell and the Freemasons, one might see:
http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/12/freemasons.html

85

Here's PROOF that Charles Taze Russell Was NOT a Pennsylvania Freemason

by AndersonsInfo in

no, charles taze russell was not a pennsylvania freemason!.

this is the answer i received in a letter: .

"after a search of our records, we determined that the three russell's were not members of our organization.

reslight2

From Wikipedia:

Miller was an active Freemason until 1831.[18][19][20] Miller resigned his Masonic membership in 1831, stating that he did so to "avoid fellowship with any practice that may be incompatible with the word of God among masons".[21] By 1833 he wrote in a letter to his friends to treat Freemasonry "as they would any other evil".[22]

85

Here's PROOF that Charles Taze Russell Was NOT a Pennsylvania Freemason

by AndersonsInfo in

no, charles taze russell was not a pennsylvania freemason!.

this is the answer i received in a letter: .

"after a search of our records, we determined that the three russell's were not members of our organization.

reslight2

Brother Russell never referred to Miller as "father Miller", although an article written by J. C. Sunderlin which appeared in the Watch Tower in May of 1883 does have the that phrase several times.

http://mostholyfaith.com/Beta/bible/Reprints/Z1883MAY.asp#Z3:27

85

Here's PROOF that Charles Taze Russell Was NOT a Pennsylvania Freemason

by AndersonsInfo in

no, charles taze russell was not a pennsylvania freemason!.

this is the answer i received in a letter: .

"after a search of our records, we determined that the three russell's were not members of our organization.

reslight2

Is there no way to delete this? Was accidentally submitted before I had finished.

34

CT Russell, he loved and supported genocidal militants.

by lastmanstanding in

i have the first volumes of the watchtower from the 1800's to the 1900's.. .

i will highlight vol.

2 january 15, 1892 to help the reader understand the truth regarding russell and his supposed appointment as, what the watchtower this year referred to, "he certainly was that minister" ...making vague reference to his being called "the laodicean minister" (found on his tombstone).

reslight2

OrphanCrow: Russel's 1914 "prophecy"

Russell was not a prophet, and his conclusions and expectations regarding 1914 were NOT prophecies. Thus, there was no Russell's 1914 "prophecy". He never claimed that his expectations and conclusions were without error, and certainly never claimed anyone had to accept his conclusions in order to be a Christian, to be associated with the Bible Students, etc.

http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/12/prophet_17.html

OrphanCrow: had more to do with the anticipated Balfour Declaration than it had to do with any invisible arrival of Christ

Russell was not at all expecting "any invisible arrival of Christ" in 1914. However, Russell was expecting the actual kingdom to be restored in Jerusalem around 1914 or shortly thereafter, and that the kingdom would slowly spread to other nations. While he did not set any date for the end of the time of trouble, I am sure that he did not think it would last more than 100 years. He did not realize that there there would be a period of time related to the restoration of Israel before Israel recognizes Jesus as their King. I do not see this happening until after Satan is abyssed. (Revelation 20:3) I am not sure exactly how all these prophecies fit together, but evidently the sons of God of this age are revealed before the actual restoration of the Kingdom in Jerusalem. Then there is to be a period of chastisement of Israel before the new covenant is actually concluded. -- Ezekiel 16:44-63.