Can Anyone Scan "A People For His Name" by Timothy White? (page 2)

This website says that more of Timothy White's book will be added later at the bottom. ************************************************************************************************** http://members.fortunecity.com/peopleforhisname/peopleforhisname.htm#

A PEOPLE FOR HIS NAME

A History of Jehovah’s Witnesses and an Evaluation

Timothy White

Published by Vantage Press in 1967

PREFACE

Jehovah’s Witnesses have been called “the fastest-growing religion,” and may also be called “the most active religion.” Their persistent house-to-house calling has forced a knowledge of their existence on every householder, and the coverage of their activities in the press has raised in all the question, “What moves them?” Religious teachers of all denominations have been forced, often on inadequate knowledge, to advise their parishioners how to receive these ardent evangelists.

Yet, despite the growing need, no adequate history of the movement has been made available. The recent books on the subject (which are reviewed in the appendix) were written either by members of opposing religious groups who were committed to see nothing good in Jehovah’s Witnesses whatsoever, or by active Witnesses who were committed to see nothing wrong. The best objective account is now nearly twenty years out of date, and is unavailable, being out of print. And all accounts have glossed over the heart and soul of the movement—the development of its doctrine—and thus failed to convey to their readers the feeling of being a Witness.

The Author has been intimately associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses for many years, close enough to be able to think as one, but never, at the same time, losing his objectivity. Statements he makes which may be disputed are always accompanied by a reference to an authoritative source.

CHAPTER 1

A MOVEMENT ALERTS THE WORLD

“Eight Officers of International Bible Students Convicted of Treason.”

“Three Children Expelled—Refuse to Salute Flag.”

“Child Dies—Parents Refuse Transfusion.”

“Mob Breaks up Gathering of Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

“Pastor Russell Leaves on World Tour—Will Visit Pyramid.”

“Mrs. Russell Granted Divorce— `Pastor’ to Appeal.”

In such sensational terms as these have Jehovah’s Witnesses been shown to the newspaper-reading public since the turn of the century. “Fanatics!” some have muttered. Others have sympathized.

Responsible for such a mixture of fame and notoriety were largely two of the most colorful people of our time: Charles Taze (“Pastor”) Russell and Joseph Franklin (“Judge”) Rutherford. Both were dynamic and fully dedicated souls, both brimmed over with a new and original view of the world, convincing large numbers of its validity, and both challenged in his own way and on many points the doctrines, organization and practices of the older Christian sects. Yet no man would ever confuse one man with the other! Their differences were as great as the contrast between them and the average man, and the dramatic clashing of their personalities has made the story of their movement one of unusal turbulence and excitement.

An understanding of “the people for his name”—Jehovah’s Witnesses of today—must begin with a look at the first of these giants whose image they reflect, Charles Taze Russell.

CHAPTER 2

CHARLES TAZE RUSSELL

“Charles, I want you to know that I gave you to the Lord as Samuel’s mother gave him,” said Eliza Birney Russell to her only son. “It is my hope and prayer that in God’s providence you may become a minister of the Gospel.” This prayer was to be answered, although perhaps not in the way this devout Presbyterian would have wished.

Charles was apparently an easy child to rear because of his willingness to follow his parents’ lead. A deep reverence manifested itself early in his life. He later said that he had never needed to be converted, but was born in a justified condition with God’s favor upon him.

He was born on February 16 th , 1852, in Pennsylvania. His secular education was carried out chiefly under the direction of private tutors. He showed a good aptitude of studies and a keenness to learn, but his education suffered from being foreshortened.

His mother died when he was nine, and so his father, Joseph, became the chief influence on the building of his personality. The relationship between him and his father was one of loving intimacy and mutual respect. The son, while still quite young, was able to influence the father to abandon his former religious affiliation. It is possible, though ironical, that it was the good-naturedness of his father that later made it so difficult for Charles to accept the austere and strict Presbyterian Heavenly Father.

Joseph believed in giving his son an early initiation into the responsibilities of life. At eleven he made Charles a business partner in his furnishing store, and the son gradually took over active management. Young Russell responded well under such demands, and, indeed, his whole development was precocious.

His devoutness showed itself early. At twelve he once became so absorbed in a concordance that he stayed up until 2 A.M. when his father found him. At twelve (or, as he sometimes said, 15) he decided to dedicate his life to the worship and service of God. He became a member of the Congregational Church and the YMCA. He became a teacher and a superintendent of a Sunday School. He planned to become a foreign missionary. He felt great compassion for humankind. Accepting the idea that God intended to abandon much of the human race to horrible torments, he took it upon himself to try to save as many as possible from such a fate. “That I thoroughly believed this doctrine,” said he in his popular lecture “To Hell and Back! Who are There”,

You may know when I tell you that at 17 [sic] years of age it was my custom to go out at night to chalk up words of warning in conspicuous places, where working men passing to-and-fro might see them, that peradventure I might save some from this awful doom. And the while I wondered why God, who is of infinite power, did not blazon forth some words of warning upon the sky or cause angel trumpeters to announce positively and forcefully the doom to which the world in general was, I supposed, hastening. I was an admirer of the great Baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon, and esteemed him very highly for the honesty and candor which made his sermons so dreadfully hot, believing that he was an exceptionally honest minister, and that others were grossly derelict in not preaching hell strenuously, in proclaiming eternal torment continually. [Pastor Russell’s Sermons, p. 517.]

But soon a change came. He got into a discussion with an infidel who asked him how a God of justice and love could abandon men to eternal torment. Charles was completely rebuffed. He inquired of his religious teachers, but did not get any satisfactory answer. He drifted into infidelity.

Believing the Bible to teach eternal torment, he rejected it along with the creeds and catechisms of his church. He stopped preaching. He rejected the Old Testament especially, and the New because it quoted from the Old. While holding the Bible as a worthwhile book, he was convinced it was not inspired by God.

Rejecting all this, he had no place on which to base his wrecked faith. The orderly arrangement of the universe, and the wonders of the human body told him there must be a Creator. And was it not reasonable that a wise Creator would make himself known to man, providing a revelation of himself? Russell thought so.

He spent his spare time in the next few years studying the claimed revelations of the Oriental religions. He rejected each in turn as unsatisfactory. He became torn between agnosticism, skepticism, and the conflicting claims of all the religions he had studied. To a devout youth like Charles, reared to reverence and feel close to God, this experience can be most disturbing. He longed for his former spiritual peace of mind, but was unable to find anything that satisfied his intellect. Russell’s ideals were gentleness and love of fellow man, and he could not respect a God who was any the less.

It was in this frame of mind in 1868 that he stumbled upon Adventism. The Adventist movement had been started by William Miller, a farmer, in about 1829. Miller had taught that the soul of man is not immortal, and consequently could not be tortured forever, but rather that the punishment for the incorrigibly is eternal death—annihilation, nonexistence. Another of Miller’s teachings was that Christ would return in 1844. The failure of this prophecy caused considerable dissension in the movement, the largest group branching off under Ellen White into the modern Seventh Day Adventists. These still accepted the 1844 date, but said that what had taken place then was in heaven, invisible to human eyes. Another group was called the Second Adventists who altered the 1844 date to some other time.

The group that Charles came upon in Allegheny, Pennsylvania, was headed by Jonas Wendell who held to 1874 as the date of Christ’s return. Wendell’s preaching was so different from what Russell was accustomed to that it started a new train of thought in his mind. Could the creeds and the established churches be really misrepresenting the Bible? Could the Adventists be right that there is no eternal torment? Have I really given the Bible an honest investigation, or have I been reading it through the eyes of the catechisms?

Wendell’s talk spurred him to investigate. In 1870 he set up a Bible study with a number of interested friends including his father. He started this study “willing, yea desirous to find in the Scriptures a divine revelation.”

His study confirmed as true the Adventists’ teaching on the soul and hell. Russell studied all the uses of the word “soul” in the Bible, and found that none of them described it as being immortal. To the contrary, there were innumerable references to the soul dying. It was Satan, and not God who had said to Adam, “Thou shalt not surely die.” Immortality, rather than an inherit attribute of man, was found to be a reward granted only to the faithful.

Russell studied hell, too, in a methodical manner. He investigated each and every occurrence in the Bible, tracing them back to their original Greek and Hebrew words by means of a concordance and dictionary. He found that four words are translated “hell” in the English Bible, and none of them convey the thought of torment. Hades and Sheol meant merely the place of the dead—oblivion, nonexistence. Gehenna does contain the thought of fire, but it was used only in symbolic contexts—parables and illustrations. It was a symbol drawn from the name of a valley near Jerusalem where refuse was burned. Since the fire was never used for torture, but rather for the purpose of destruction, it did not symbolize torment, but annihilation. The only other word translated “hell,” tartaroo, could convey the thought of degradation or imprisonment, but not torment. The only text Russell seemed to have had any difficulty with was Revelation 20:10, “the devil…shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.” He extricated himself from this text by explaining that the term “for ever and ever” is a translation of the Greek aeionion, “age-lasting,” and does not always signify without end. They later explained it by saying that “torment,” Greek basanizo, should have been translated “jailed.” But their own translation of 1950 still used the word “torment” here. They now hold that Satan will be tormented even while out of existence by the continual disgrace, shame and embarrassment associated with his memory. But although the Witnesses are unconvincing on this text, they have nevertheless built up a strong argument against the torment theory that has stood the test of time.

Ransom, Restitution and Resurrection

It was in 1872 that Charles came to his lifelong understanding of the Ransom, or atonement. His study of the Bible led him to different views from orthodoxy regarding this, too. For one thing man was to be redeemed not from torment but from death—death due to inheritance from Adam. This death, said Russell, was justly imposed on Adam, and came upon his offspring by a just law of inheritance. Everyone was born, therefore, without the right to live at all. Jesus had come to counteract that death penalty.

The highlight of Russell’s idea of redemption was that the ransom was provided not for just the righteously inclined, but for all men. He found that idea stated many times in the Bible. “Christ Jesus…gave himself a ransom for all” (1 Timothy 2:5), “he, by the grace of God, should taste death for every man” (Hebrews 2:9), “he is the propitiation…for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2). This meant no less than that all men would have those sins they inherited from Adam cancelled. All men, without exception, would gain back everything they had lost by Adam’s fall. All men would be made alive again. “As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22). This meant that the application of the ransom benefits to all men guaranteed their resuscitation from the dead. “All that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth” (John 5:28, 29). This idea was vastly and refreshingly different from that of his Presbyterian upbringing in which he had been taught that the majority of humankind was predestined without any choice on their part to hell-fire.

To Russell the doctrine of the ransom was all that the doctrine of hell-torment was not. It showed God as being completely just, for the severest punishment inflicted was death. It showed God’s wisdom, too, for it allowed God to redeem all mankind through the sacrifice of one. It showed God as loving, for he was not justly forced to provide a ransom sacrifice—he did so out of his compassion for the world. It demonstrated his power, too, in the bringing back to life of billions of humans. Hell-fire did none of these. While Russell had abhorred and despised hell-fire with all his being, he clung to and loved the ransom doctrine, speaking of it affectionately at every opportunity.

While Russell thought everyone would be ransomed, he did not think everyone would be saved. The ransom merely guaranteed a trial for everybody, a trial wherein they would be given enlightenment and experience, and allowed to choose for themselves whether they wanted life under God’s laws or death as a rebel against them. This trial would take place during the Millennium, or thousand-year reign of Christ. The Millennium was still future. Here again Russell found himself disagreeing with the Churches’ teachings.

Russell endeavored to be logical in his Bible study. He was therefore, unable to accept the doctrine of the trinity, another orthodox Christian teaching. This teaching states that Christ, God and the Holy Ghost are equal in power, substance and eternity, and together constitute one God. They could not be equal in power, he said, for Jesus while on earth testified, “My father is greater than I” (John 14:28). And even after his ascension to heaven, when God reached his greatest glory when “all things shall be subdued under him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him that God may be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28). They could not be equal in eternity, said Russell, for Jesus is called “the beginning of the creation of God” (Revelation 3:14), and “the first-born of every creature” (Colossians 1:15), indicating that he, unlike God, was created. Nor could Jesus and God be one God, for Jesus always spoke of himself as separate from the Father, prayed to him, said that God had forsaken him, said that God and he were two separate witnesses to his Messiahship, etc.

Russell, therefore, was like primitive Christians in his doctrines and ideas. He rejected the ideas that had been introduced into Christianity from Platonic philosophy after the first century, namely, Plato’s ideas of the immortal soul, and purgatory. His ideas were more consistent than the orthodox, for it is impossible to wed Greek philosophy with Christian teaching, as the Church had done, and avoid inconsistency and contradictions. This simplicity gave his ideas attractiveness to himself and his followers.

Spirit and Human Natures and Christ’s Return

Progressing from his early ideas, he unraveled new things. Christians in general, believing that man has an immortal soul, and that Christ was God incarnate, believe that the human and spiritual natures were mixed. Russell learned that they were not. Man was purely and wholly fleshly, “of the earth, earthly.” Christ, (apart from his stay on earth), God and the angels were purely and wholly spiritual in nature—they possessed spiritual bodies invisible to man. While spiritual bodies could materialize, as the angels and resurrected Christ did, this was the exception. Normally they remained invisible.

This radical difference and separateness between the two natures has been missed by most Bible students. Russell saw the distinction in texts like the following: “a spirit hath not flesh and bones” (Luke 24:39), “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15:50), “There is a natural body and there is a spiritual body” (1 Corinthians 15:44). Christ’s resurrection was an example of a change of nature from a natural to a spiritual body. He was “put to death, flesh, made alive spirit” (1 Peter 3:18, corrected translation). The bodies in which Jesus revealed himself after his resurrection were therefore not actually how he looked, but were materializations. They were made necessary because his spiritual body was invisible to men. Russell pointed out that Jesus materialized in different bodies at different times. Many times those to whom he revealed himself did not recognize him, although they had known him for years. His body was, therefore, at times different from the one he died with, and even different from one resurrection appearance to another. Once he appeared suddenly in a room in which all the doors were barred, showing that his body was created right there. Russell pointed out that most of the 40 days he was on earth before his ascension he simply remained invisible, not materializing at all. On one occasion, however, he must have been there, for he was able to repeat Thomas’s words.

The idea that Jesus could be invisibly present led to Russell’s first really original idea: the idea that Jesus at his return to earth would not be visible. Reflection showed that there was no need for the return to be visible. He had to be at his first advent for he needed to give himself as a human sacrifice. But at his second he was to come in power, not in humiliation.

Russell thought he found the answer at John 14:19: “Yet a little while and the world seeth me no more.” Yes, he would remain perpetually invisible. More reflection showed that the idea of an invisible second advent was the only way to solve many apparent contradictions in the Bible in passages dealing with his return. Some passages seem to say his return shall be quiet and unobtrusive. Acts 1:11 says he shall return “in like manner” as he left—silently and without display. Revelation 16:15 says, “Behold, I come as a thief.” He told the Pharisees, “the kingdom of God cometh not with observation” (Luke 17:20). Other passages, however, seemed to teach the opposite. “The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God” (1 Thessalonians 4:16). The concept of the invisible return explained these discrepancies. He could return and reveal himself by noisy manifestations—shouts, trumpets, etc., but if he personally was invisible these would be recognized as the signs of his return only by those in the know. To all others he would be as a thief, without observation, and quiet. This seemed to be the thought of 1 Thessalonians 1:7, 8: “the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire,” that is he would not reveal himself personally, but only by his acts of destruction and judgment.

By about 1875 Russell had reached this stage of his studies. Whereas his former ideas had been somewhat in line with his friends’, the Second Adventists’, this last idea diverged radically from their views. They taught that Christ would return visibly to destroy. Russell taught he returned invisibly for the purpose of resurrecting the dead. This conflict of thought led Russell to write a booklet expressing his new views entitled The Object and Manner of Our Lord’s Return of which 50,000 copies were published.

At the same time the Adventists themselves were undergoing another trial. The prediction of Jonas Wendell and others that 1874 would mark the end had failed, and once more the movement had been weakened. One of the exponents of the movement was N.H. Barbour who published a magazine The Herald of the Morning. In January 1876 Russell came across an issue of this magazine, and was startled to find it expressing views similar to his own. Barbour, like his associates, was disappointed in 1874, but later one of his readers, B.W. Keith, later a writer for Zion’s Watch Tower, came into possession of a new translation of the Bible, The Emphatic Diaglott. This new translation gave an entirely different thought to Matthew 24, a chapter dealing with the end of the world. Instead of saying that certain signs would occur at the coming of Christ, the Diaglott said they would occur at his presence. He reasoned that if Jesus needed signs like “great tribulations,” the gathering of the elect, etc., to indicate his presence, then Jesus himself must be invisible. Barbour and his associate, J.H. Paton of Michigan, accepted this idea and hence came to the doctrine of Jesus’ invisible return separately and independently from Russell, and about the same time.

The 1874 Date

Barbour had said one thing that Russell could not as yet accept—the date 1874. Russell, knowing of the dismay of the disappointed Adventists, had avoided studying the time prophecies of the Bible. But Barbour’s agreement on other issues led Russell to think he might have something to offer. He wrote to Barbour in Rochester, New York, inviting him to come to Philadelphia to offer proof of his 1874 claim, and offering to pay his fare. Barbour responded, and presented proof that wholly convinced Russell that Christ had actually returned and was then present invisibly. Barbour’s full evidence for the date is too complex to quote in full, but one of his proofs is essential to an understanding of Russell’s life: the evidence from “parallel dispensations.”

In many ways the operations of God with the Jews paralleled that with the Christian church: thus the former were founded on twelve patriarchs, the latter on the twelve apostles; the former used animal sacrifices as a redemption from sin, the latter the sacrifice of Christ. Barbour thought the time features were also paralleled. He calculated that the period of Jewish favor lasted 1,842 years from the death of Jacob to the anointing of Christ in A.D. 29. Similarly God favored his apostate Christian Church for 1,842 years, from the death of Christ in A.D. 33 to the year October 1874-1875. If the parallels held true, Christ would, then, have already returned invisibly.

CHAPTER 3

HARVEST GATHERINGS AND SIFTINGS

As soon as Charles Russell became convinced that Christ’s second advent took place in 1874, he became active. Barbour’s parallel dispensations taught that they were then in a period corresponding to the active and vigorous preaching of Jesus (A.D. 29-33) and his apostles (A.D. 33 onwards). Jesus compared his work to that of reaping in a harvest, gathering in the genuine grain, the sincere Jews, and casting off the chaff and the husks, the hypocrites. When Jesus sent his seventy evangelists out to preach he used this similar saying, “The harvest truly is great” (Luke 10:2). Again he said to his apostles, “I sent you to reap” (John 4:38). John the Baptist said of Jesus’ life and work, He “will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable” (Luke 3:17).

But Jesus also prophesied a future harvest. One vision that John had, recorded in Revelation 14:15, was of an angel crying out “Thrust in thy sickle, and reap: for the time is come for thee to reap; for the harvest of the earth is ripe.” And Jesus’ parable of the wheat and the tares describes a future separation, not among the Jewish nation but among the church. As the first harvest lasted from A.D. 29 to about A.D. 69 when the “unquenchable fire” John the Baptist spoke of fell upon the city of Jerusalem in the form of besieging Roman armies, so the latter harvest would last from 1874-1914 A.D. Russell had his life’s work cut out for him.

Barbour had done nothing towards the new work, Russell learned, because he was almost broke. The Herald of the Morning had stopped publication. Russell gave Barbour funds to write a book The Three Worlds containing both Barbour’s ideas on chronology and Russell’s ideas on the ransom. This 196-page book was published in 1877. Meanwhile Russell sold out his Pennsylvania business that had been so long distracting his religious calling, and joined Barbour in reaping the harvest.

His first work (1877) was to call together all the clergymen in Allegheny and Pittsburgh, and endeavour to convince them of the second presence. None of them believed. So he turned his attention to Barbour’s Second Adventist associates, traveling around, visiting them and addressing them. He invited J.H. Paton to assist, and sent Barbour back to restart The Herald of the Morning to provide a unified method of building up the interest he was causing. Some of those he interested joined him in the work. A.P. Adams, a former Methodist minister, was one, and A.D. Jones, one of Russell’s employees, was another. These five continued the work up until 1878.

Scarcely had thjs cooperative effort started when trouble brewed. Barbour pointed out that the Passover of 1878 was parallel to Passover A.D. 33 when Jesus ascended to heaven. He taught with assurance that this meant that the church would go to heaven April 1878. Russell was noncommittal. When 1878 rolled around Barbour was again to crash the hopes of his readers.

At that time Barbour wrote an article for the Herald setting forth a view of the ransom that Russell could not accept. He calls the idea that Christ’s death substitutes for the death of sinners “most obnoxious,” “unscriptural and obnoxious to all our ideas of justice or of right and wrong.” He claimed to find a “deeper and better meaning” for the passages in the Bible that appear to teach this thought. He claimed that the death of each individual man freed him from Adam’s sin, and he could be resurrected sinless without substitutionary atonement. Both Russell, and at Russell’s instigation, Paton, wrote articles to the Herald defending the substitution idea of redemption. Russell made repeated, but unsuccessful, attempts to reform Barbour from the wrong course he felt he was taking. Failing, he withdrew his support from Barbour, and in 1879 started to publish his own magazine Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence which he sent free to all the subscribers of the Herald. These readers, therefore, were subjected to continual criticisms and refutations back and forth between the Tower and the Herald. Paton and Jones joined Russell, while Adams identified himself with Barbour. The readers gradually split into factions under the onslaught of the two magazines. Barbour, using Russell’s money, continued to decry Russell, until his dwindling finances caused the Herald to stop publication.

The first issue of Zion’s Watch Tower was dated July 1879. It was a six to eight-page monthly with Russell as editor and publisher, and five regular contributors. It was first sent to 6,000 subscribers, many of whom received it as a free sample; others paid the fifty cents asked for it. After a few months Russell eliminated the non-payers, except those who could not afford it, but were still interested.

More Division

Paton and Russell continued to work in harmony after Zion’s Watch Tower started. Having run out of copies of The Three Worlds, Russell arranged for Paton to write Day Dawn and for Jones to publish it. Paton also continued writing Watch Tower articles until 1881 when he too came into disagreement with Russell on the ransom. He published a second book, a revised Day Dawn which Russell condemned as contrary to Scripture. Paton caused great division in Russell’s movement, for he was, apart from Russell, the most prominent one in it. Especially was this so since the title of his second book was the same as the first, and all Russell’s advertising for the first book served to further the interests of the second.

Paton’s late views were apparently this: that the church gained life not by Christ’s substituting for them in death, but by sacrificing sin in their own body. Paton’s last articles occurred in the June, 1881, Tower. By the close of 1881, A.D. Jones, still in harmony with Russell, set out on his own to publish Zion’s Day Star, a supplementary magazine to Zion’s Watch Tower. By the close of 1882 Jones, who had formerly rejected Paton’s views for publication, started to espouse them, even denying that all the New Testament was reliable. Thus Russell’s fourth and last original coworker fell out with him and Zion’s Watch Tower readers were again subjected to back and forth arguments about the ransom.

Russell’s Work

The idea that these divisions were only a manifestation of the separation of the wheat from the chaff enabled Russell to take them philosophically. While the divisions pained him, they did not discourage him, but rather caused him to step up his work. In Junr 1880 while he was still only 28 years old he traveled to various places in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Massachusetts and New York, visiting his subscribers who met in small groups. In November he made a similar trip to New York. These were the beginnings of what he was later to term the “Pilgrim” work—the sending of representatives to strengthen the church, discuss problems, and hold public meetings where they could be arranged.

With the January 1881 number of Zion’s Watch Tower he sent a sample copy of “Tract No. 1,” printed in response to requests he had received. With it he sent instructions that, if the reader desired, he could send for more and distribute them among the interested, but to Christians only. Later other 32-page tracts were forthcoming on such subjects as “Why Did God Make the Devil?” (No. 4) or “The Narrow Way to Life” (No. 5). Then to emphasize the responsibility of his readers to preach he published an article, “Anointed to Preach” in the July-August, 1881, issue of Zion’s Watch Tower. Here he showed that all members of the church were anointed by God’s spirit and therefore had a commission to preach Christianity to others. “Are you preaching?” he asked his readers. “We believe that none will be of the little flock [the church] except preachers. Are you preaching with all your talents and all your might? If so, you will by and by hear the words: `Well done, goof and faithful!’ If not, be in now; remember that you consecrated your all before you were anointed, and now you cannot be an overcomer and keep part of the price.”

But the distribution of small tracts by his subscribers did not get the work going fast enough for Russell. So he combined the subject-matter of the tracts into a pamphlet entitled Food for Thinking Christians, also published as the Tower of September 1881. This work was the most immense that Russell had organized up till that time; 300,000 copies of the booklet were first printed of 164 pages each. They went out so fast that 200,000 more were printed. Russell’s co-workers were all recruited for this new work. Brothers Adamson, Keim, Keith and McGranor covered American cities, addressing meetings, and hiring boys to distribute the pamphlet outside church doors. Some managers of newspapers and magazines in New York Chicago, Boston and Philadelphia learned of the work and furnished the Watch Tower office with subscription lists; 400,000 copies were in this way sent to country areas not covered by other methods.

Russell sent two representatives, Brothers Bender and J.C. Sunderlin, to Great Britain where they printed 300,000 copies in various big cities. In London they employed 500 boys to distribute the pamphlet. In both these countries in all 1,200,000 copies were sent out in a few months. The whole work was done free of charge to the public, the cost of tens of thousands of dollars being borne by Russell personally.

Ambitious as the Food for Thinking Christians work was, Russell had his eyes on farther horizons. In the Watch Tower of April, 1881, he had sent out a call “Wanted 1,000 Preachers.” He wanted anyone who could devote even the smallest part of his time to the work of tract and book distribution. To those who could give a half of their time or more he proposed to supply tracts, Day Dawns and Watch Tower subscriptions free to assist them in supporting themselves, and send them to cities and towns to build up the work. The success he had achieved with the tracts led him to greater faith that the harvest of the Christian era was truly in progress, and he was God’s chosen instrument to direct it. About once a year he continued to encourage his subscribers through Zion’s Watch Tower. In the January-February issue he cried, “Oh, that more could realize what a privilege it is to preach the `glad tidings’.” He taught how even those with dependant families, unable to do organized work, could carry small tracts with them to use when they met fellow Christians. In 1881 Russell also set up Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society, an unincorporated body with a turnover that year of over $35,000.

More Harvest Work

The traveling work continued. In June, 1882, for example, an associate, Brother Sunderlin, reported holding meetings in Arlington, New York, and two other brothers, Leigh and Spears, commenced a boat trip down the Ohio river calling and spending a week in each town they came to. During that summer Russell recommended to his readers to speak about the message openly in public parks or market places.

About once each year Russell would print a special issue of Zion’s Watch Tower. The October, 1882, issue, for example was sent to some 200,000 readers, the addresses of whom were gleaned from his subscribers, and the ready response to it caused him to print another 100,000. He sent many of these to clergymen, reaching, he estimated, nine-tenths of all in the United States.

Such lively activity produced results. By the close of 1882 Russell was receiving between 500 and 600 letters a week. He reported, “There are thousands of saints preaching the glad tidings by loaning the Tower.” He estimated that half of the letters he received were from those who preached. By September 1883 he was sending out 10,000 Towers each month, 800 of which went to clergymen. “Some take it in secret,” he reported, “and send us the names of fellow ministers to whom to send sample copies, who would not be known as the sender.” His work was becoming so popular that some clergy had to spend their sermon time preaching against it.

In November 1883 he began his first work in a foreign language—the publication of a sample Watch Tower in Spanish. He already had a good field of interest, for a bilingual brother, Charles Seagrin, had interested some 200 American Swedes into accepting the views of Russell. In the close of 1885 a Reverend Von Zech of the Lutheran Church, having cast many Watch Towers into the wastebasket unread, was led to read one, and so resign his position. Russell printed 20,000 copies of his resignation letter and reasons, in German, and distributed them among German-speaking Pennsylvanians. Later Zech became Russell’s German translator, and he started a small monthly Tower in German. Sample copies were distributed by Russell’s followers outside German churches.

In September 1885 Russell invited Bible students to a new work, later to be called the “colporteur” work, and now termed by Jehovah’s Witnesses the “pioneer” work. This invitation produced fruit, and the annual report says that “there are about three hundred colporteurs at work.” The colporteur work was organized in connection with the Food for Thinking Christians publication. A packet was prepared containing the book and a sample copy of the Tower, which the workers were to give out from house to house. A few days later the worker would return, taking back the packet or taking money in payment for it. The worker was to keep a 50% commission. Despite the liberal allowance the worker was not expected to make a profit. “Remember the OBJECT before you; that is not the selling of the packets, nor the taking of subscriptions, but the spread of the truth, by getting people to read. Endeavor as far as possible to forget the money feature of the work,” Russell advised.

In July 1886 Russell announced the publication of a new volume, promised for the last four years. The need of one had sprung up because of the eclipsing of Paton’s and Barbour’s books, and the negative aspect of Food. It was called “Millennial Dawn Volume I,—The Plan of the Ages.” Originally planned to deal with the time features of God’s plan, Russell found that he got so wound up with other things that he had to call this volume Number One, and reserve the chronology for Volume Two. The four years he took to write it were well spent, for it is a remarkable book. Russell’s style of writing found its natural scope far more suited to book- rather than article-writing. The ease and flow of the writing come naturally to the reader, and he is taken along from beginning to end with little effort on his part. The volume was also to be remarkable for its effect on its readers. A tremendous number of Bible Students had their first knowledge of Russell’s views through this book.

By March 1888 the seventieth thousand edition was in progress of preparation. By June 1889, 120,000 had been printed and the sales continued steadily in the ensuing years. Russell, to make the book cheaper, published it along as a paper-bound special Watch Tower and sold it for 25c. a copy. Workers sold it at profits ranging from nothing to 100% principally using the house-to-house method. By the time of Russell’s death, 4,817,000 copies had gone out, and it continued being distributed by the Society Russell formed until 1929. Other organizations have also reprinted and circulated it, and are still doing so.

The single volume planned at first soon had to be extended to seven volumes, six of which Russell planned wrote in his lifetime. Volume II became a discussion of the time features of God’s plan, already mentioned in part. Volume III discussed more time prophecies, and the millennial reign of Christ. Volume IV gave Russell’s view on how the end of the churches and governments would come. Volume V was a detailed discussion of the atonement and the nature of God, Christ, the holy spirit, and man. Volume VI treated of the true Church. Volume VII was to treat of Revelation and Ezekiel, two prophetic books of the Bible, and was written by two associates of Russell after his death. Circulation of these volumes, apart from number One, varied between a half and one-and-a-half millions.

Another method of preaching which was destined to have far-reaching effects was the distribution of a tract called “Old Theology Quarterly.” Each tract was of 24 pages and wsa printed in the form of a periodical in order to conform to postal regulations. The work started in April, 1889, with the tract “Do the Scriptures Teach That Eternal Punishment is the Wages of Sin?” 60,000 of these were printed originally. Some distributed the tracts outside church doors, especially after hell-fire sermons had been preached inside. Other tracts in turn were “Calamities, and Why God Permits Them” (No. 2), “Protestants, Awake!” (No. 3), encouraging a rebirth of the spirit of protest against Rome, “Dr Talmage’s View of the Millennium” (No. 4), “The Hope of Groaning Creation” (No. 6), “The Old, Old Story” (No. 7), “The Faith Once Delivered to the Saints” (No. 10), etc.

Russell encouraged children of his readers to participate in their distribution. These “child colporteurs” were to sell the tracts at 1c. each, pocketing half of the money themselves. By these and other methods 5 million pages left the Society’s office in the first year.

The free distribution of tracts was a continuing feature of Russell’s ministry. The “Old Theology Quarterly” was replaced by “People’s Pulpit” in 1909 and “Bible Students Monthly” later. Containing Pastor Russell’s sermons, they were distributed outside church doors, under doors of homes, in mailboxes, through the mails, in railway carriages, on parked cars, at state or county fairs, to personal friends and every other conceivable place that these ingenious Christians could think of. Those who participated in this work were called “volunteers” to emphasize the lack of force, threats or ultimatums in Russell’s encouragement to join in the work. Although the service was completely voluntary, Russell reported that the zeal of the workers was so great that “we feel disinclined to advise any increase along this line.” The number of tracts grew to astronomical figures, especially when compared with the few who took part in it. In the twelve months from November 1911 to November 1912, for example, 35,520,475 copies went out. Because most of these were distributed free or at a nominal price, the cost to Russell and his followers was always large.

The large quantities that went out did not always produce results satisfying to Russell. Said he in 1903, “Good results have come—though far less than we hoped for them from the vast quantity of printed matter thus circulated.” He was constantly put to it to devise means by which the tracts could be used more effectively and with less waste. He advised against using them for colored people or Roman Catholics, believing them to be less intelligent or open-minded than white Protestants. Special events or circumstances called for special editions. Number 54, “A Dark Cloud with a Silver Lining” was specially designed for bereaved persons. In 1913 he printed a special issue to answer charges made upon him and his movement by the Brooklyn Eagle. And, of course, the refuting of hell-fire was a common topic: Number 61, for example, was “Battering Down the Walls of Hell.” In 1908 he held a special campaign against the Seventh-Day Adventists through volunteer distribution.

The volunteer work was organized by a group of volunteers electing a “captain” to superintend distribution. As the number of workers increased, special assignments of territory were made by the captain to individual workers to avoid duplication. Continued crowding of territory caused Russell to encourage (1913) volunteers to work nearby towns that had no local group. Through this work many of the “wheat” or true Christians were gathered out of the denomination and into cooperation with Russell. And, too, Russell’s work became more and more distasteful to the shepherds of Christendom.

In 1899 Russell commenced another great work, the distribution of a booklet, The Bible vs. Evolution. From early in his life he had been very conscious of the inroads Darwin’s theory was making in the churches. Obviously one could not believe that man evolved upwards from ape-like creatures and at the same time believe that man fell from perfection because of sin. Belief in evolution, therefore, involved denial of the ransom idea which Russell held so dear. He felt that God was allowing this doctrinal test to come upon the nominal churches as a special dividing agent during the harvest period. He felt, therefore, that The Bible vs. Evolution would prove a divine agency to separate more true Christians from their merely professing associates.

He planned an attack like the “Food” campaign: the giving of the booklet to those who left church on Sundays. Each church was methodically and systematically covered with volunteers who stood half a block away, giving each person a free copy. The fact that the booklet was free, Russell felt, would make a favorable impression on the churchgoers who paid to attend. Hundreds of thousands of these booklets went out in this way.

Colporteurs

While most of Russell’s active followers were “volunteers” who spent just a few hours a week in various campaigns, more work was done by colporteurs who devoted longer periods of their time to this religious publicity. While there was no required minimum of hours they had to spend, they were expected to devote about half of their time to selling Russell’s books. To assist in supporting them Russell provided them with literature at very cheap rates. Volume I, for example, was given to them for 12 ½ cents, and sold to the public for 35 cents, making 180% profit.

In 1892 there were a mere 40 colporteurs getting these special rates. In Russell’s lifetime the number reached a peak about 1909 when “about 625” were at work. From 1904 onwards they tried to sell the entire six volumes of Russell to each householder at $2.25—extremely cheap, even for those days. Because they worked continually on this task, they were the ones mainly responsible for such a tremendous circulation of his writings.

The colporteurs, being supported to some extent by the funds of the Pennsylvania office, were more tightly bound to it than the volunteer worker. They received specific assignments of territory or routes from headquarters, were given printed instructions, such as “Special Instructions” or “Hints for Colporteurs,” and had to report weekly to Russell. Russell’s appraisal of the work they did is glowing. “We know of no more important part of the harvest work than that served by the dear colporteurs,” he said.

Further Siftings

Although Russell’s personality, drive and enthusiasm were causing his movement to become more widely known and established, let it not be thought that all of his followers were satisfied with his guidance. In 1894 he sent a skillful colporteur, Brother S.D. Rogers, to England to start that kind of work there. Rogers determined that England was not suitable for this type of work, and so he hit upon a different method of furthering the message, the giving of discourses and soliciting money for them. Russell did not want him to do this because he thought that preaching by the printed page achieved more lasting good. When he returned to Allegheny, Rogers tried vainly to convince Russell his method was better. The disagreement caused Rogers to leave Russell’s side. He was followed by Brother Von Zech who had been Russell’s German translator, and Brothers Bryan and Adamson, two other prominent followers. They created such havoc among Russell’s followers that he had to publish and send out a special booklet, A Conspiracy Exposed to Watch Tower subscribers to explain his action in dismissing them. The four sent out a circular stating their side of the issue, calling Russell a “pope” for his claimed dictatorial control of the movement, and making some critical comments about his treatment of his wife. They also came to disagree with him on the ransom doctrine. Because his wife was mentioned in the circular, Russell allowed her to visit some of the congregations that Rogers was to visit to refute his statements by her testimony of the happiness of their married life.

If Russell’s married life was happy in 1894, it was certainly not so for long. He had married in 1879 one of his early followers, working compatibly with her for 15 years. But after that his household was the scene of more and more friction. Mrs. Russell continually suggested alterations in articles her husband had written for the Tower. She had written articles for the Tower herself for many years, working as an “associate editor” in very close co-operation with Charles. As had happened with all his close associates before, Russell found that the very closeness led to bitter wrangling about small details. Russell, knowing the urgency of magazine publication, found his time being whittled away in debate to no purpose. He tried to settle the differences by compromise (such as printing one of her articles in the Watch Tower that he was wholly in disagreement with) and by altering her duties, but did not succeed in preventing the breach. The year 1897 saw an attempted reconciliation, with Mrs. Russell’s articles again appearing in the Tower and an appointment of her as head of a study group of sisters. She endeavored to get certain brothers and sisters on to her side against her husband. Another reconciliation followed and then a further division. On November 9 th , 1897, Maria left Charles’ side and went to Chicago where she aired her grievances. Russell would not let her return to him at the Allegheny Bible House, and so she had to live with her sister. She criticized her husband continually for a year, but then tried a reconciliation. Charles accepted her back at least enough to let her use a large house of his and visit her once a week. At her request, he discontinued this after a time.

Maria rented the empty part of the house and with the money she earned, in 1903, published a tract criticizing Charles’ treatment of her. She sent this to Watch Tower subscribers and clergymen. Russell replied to this by removing her source of income, the house, and giving her just sufficient monetary support to keep her. She was never again reconciled. That same year she sued for a formal divorce on the grounds of cruelty. Russell defended it, not because he wanted her back, but because he thought the court action would be used by her to work injury to his cause. It did. The decree was granted. Russell appealed the decision to the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The decision, given on October 19 th , 1908, affirmed the lower court’s ruling.

There are two violently conflicting accounts of Russell’s divorce extant today. Russell’s own version was printed in Zion’s Watch Tower of July 15 th , 1906, and embellished by later utterances in conventions and to the press. The opposite view was published by the Brooklyn Eagle and disseminated by clergymen in hundreds of different tracts “exposing” Russell and his movement. It is the latter version, unfortunately, that has been accepted as fact by the standard biographies of Americans.

Both views are extreme. Russell thought that the separation was granted merely because they had been apart so long already.. 1 [1. This opinion is expressed in W 7/15/06, pp. 223, 224. Reprints, p. 3817 (In this book W refers to Zion’s Watch Tower, later The Watchtower. Reprints refers to the seven-volume hardbound edition of collected Watch Towers.)] He thought his wife had become unduly ambitious. On the other hand the tracts of many Churches against Russell imply that the ground of the divorce was adultery with members of his congregation, which was simply untrue.

The truth seems to lie somewhere between these extremes. But to avoid being accused of prejudice or bias in either direction I will merely quote part of the official opinion of the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The case may be found in 37 Pennsylvania Superior Court 348, Russell v. Russell (1908):

Opinion by Orlady, J., October 19, 1908.

In the libel filed in this case, it is charged that the defendant [C.T. Russell] offered such indignities to the person of the libelant [Mrs. Russell] as to render her condition intolerable and her life a burden, thereby compelling her to withdraw from his home and family. In the specifications of indignities it is alleged that she was treated with disrespect in the presence of servants and others; that insulting language was used to her; that the husband circulated reports among her friends to the effect that she was of unsound mind, and other stories that were calculated to affect her character and her right to receive, entertain or visit friends, which stories reflected upon her good name and moral character, and that by words and actions he caused her to fear attempts would be made on his part to have her deprived of her liberty; by reason of which treatment she was kept in bodily fear, her health was seriously affected, her condition rendered intolerable and her life was made burdensome.

* * *

After a careful review of the 150 pages of testimony in this case, we are satisfied that the verdict was fully warranted, and was rightly sustained by refusing the defendant’s motion….It is enough for us to say that we have examined the whole body of evidence in the light of the general principles relative to the cause for divorce, and whilst it is conflicting in many particulars we are constrained to the conclusion that the testimony of the libelant and her witnesses, if believed by the jury, was sufficient to warrant them in finding the facts essential to a lawful dissolution of the marriage tie. Here our duty ends so far as the evidence is concerned.

The learned trial judge instructed the jury, that they were to be satisfied, by the strength of the evidence, that such personal indignities were put upon her, from time to time, continuously—not occasionally—but continuously, so as to render her condition intolerable and her life burdensome, and forced her to remove from her husband’s home. Which thought was repeated several times in the charge. And further, that the intolerable conditions and burdens which compelled her to withdraw, must not be on account of her own faults, her own stubbornness, intellectually or otherwise.

* * *

In an analysis of the testimony it is quite difficult to understand the view of the respondent in regard to his duty as a husband to his wife. From his standpoint, he doubtless felt that his rights as a husband were radically different from the standards imposed upon him by law and recognized by all the courts of this country. He stated to his wife, “I can show you a thousand women that would be glad to be in your place and that would know my wishes and do them.” His estimation of his own importance is gathered from his statement to a friend: `I have been approached twice by parties who contemplate the organization of a large bank in Pittsburgh, with a capital of three million dollars, and have solicited to permit my name to be used in connection with the organization as its prospective president,’ and to another friend, `After reading “The Plan of the Ages” people say, Brother Russel [sic] is great! I will go to Allegheny and be near this great man. When they get to Allegheny they found Brother Russel [sic] makes no claim to greatness, and merely claims that it is God’s word that is wonderful. He reasons the matter with them as though it were a question in mathematics; and when they hear the answer, they say, “how simple,`” and many like expressions of self-esteem pervade his testimony. Letters to friends furnish some idea of his estimation of his character. He repeatedly states that he is not self-conceited, but meek and not boastful, and writes that two phrenologists had examined his head and assured him that he was deficient in self-esteem. From his whole testimony, it would seem that he was right in reaching the conclusion stated by him in a letter to his wife, to wit: `I conclude that I am adapted to no one, and that no one is adapted to me except the Lord. I am thankful that He and I understand each other and have confidence in each other. The last month has fastened the conviction upon me much against my will. I am convinced that our difficulty is a growing one generally—that is a great mistake, for strong-minded men and women to marry.’ 1[1. This letter is reproduced in W 6/15/06, pp. 222, 223. Reprints, p. 3816. It appears from here that only the last two sentences are genuine quotations from the letter.]

From this viewpoint his conduct is at least consistent, and he would naturally feel warranted in feeling that any doubt as to the correctness of his views or conclusions would be due to plots and schemes on the part of his wife; that his wife was a blasphemer, or as he stated it, `One of two things is certain, either my wife has become mentally unbalanced, or else she has become possessed of a most wicked spirit.’

It is apparent from the testimony of each that each had strong convictions as to the correct interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. They were engaged in the publication of a newspaper called, `Zion’s Watch Tower,’ and the `Millennial Dawn,’ the `Watch Tower Bible,’ [sic] tracts and pamphlets.

His course of conduct toward his wife evidenced such insistent egotism and extravagant self-praise that it would be manifest to the jury that his conduct towards her was one of continual arrogant domination, that would necessarily render the life of any Christian woman a burden and make her condition intolerable. The indignities offered to her in treating her as a menial in the presence of servants, intimating that she was of unsound mind, and that she was under the influence of designing and wicked persons fully warranted her withdrawal from his house, and justified her fear he intended to further humiliate her by a threat to resort to legal proceedings to test her sanity. There is not a syllable in the testimony to justify his repeated aspersions on her character or her mental condition, nor does he intimate in any way that there was any cause for difference between them, other than that she did not agree with him in his views of life and methods of conducting their business. He says himself that she is a woman of high intellectual qualities, and of perfect moral character. While he denied, in a general way, that he attempted to belittle his wife as she claimed, the general effect of his testimony is a strong confirmation of her allegations.

* * *

While the early rule as announced in England and in some of the American states, was, [sic] that mental suffering, distress or injury, and bodily injury resulting from mental suffering were insufficient to constitute cruelty, yet the modern and better considered cases have repudiated this doctrine as taking too low and sensual a view of the marriage relation, and it is now very generally held, and has always been the rule in Pennsylvania, that any unjustifiable on the part of either the husband or the wife which so greivously wounds the mental feelings of the other, or so utterly destroys the peace of mind of the other as seriously to impair the bodily health or endanger the life of the other, or which utterly destroys the legitimate ends of objects of matrimony constitutes cruelty, although no physical or person violence may be inflicted, or even threatened or reasonably apprehended: [various precedents cited]. To warrant the granting of a divorce on the grounds of the conduct on either the part of either the husband or wife, as to render the condition of the other party intolerable and life burdensome, where there is no proof of overtly bodily harm actually inflicted or threatened, the evidence should be strong and convincing, the course of ill-treatment complaint of must have long continued and been of a serious character. The condition exacted by these decisions have been fully and clearly met by the libelant, and the proof adduced by her on the trial fully warranted the verdict rendered. Not error being found in the record the assignments of error are overruled and the judgment is affirmed.

The court ordered Charles to pay Maria $100.00 per month alimony. He did not do so, protesting that his money had been donated to Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society, the publishing corporation that printed his tracts. 1 [1. Note his plea in W 7/1/09, pp. 198-199. Reprints, p. 4424.] In as much as Russell was president of this corporation, and had full control of it himself, the court did not accept his plea of poverty. So after much time was spent in discussion in the court, Charles was shouldered with a bill for many years’ back alimony. He was away in Europe at the time, and so a group of Bible Students in the United States raised $9,000 and paid his alimony for him right up to 1913. Russell has been strongly criticized for evading alimony by transferring his funds to himself under a different name, that is, to his corporation. Although the fact of the transferal is true, Russell’s critics should remember that his wife wanted the money to print tracts to destroy the work he had built up. He considered that his money was dedicated to the Lord’s service, and naturally fought strongly against using it against that aim. The $40.00 he gave her was nearly four times as much as he himself received. Thus, although he may be to blame for dodging payments through dubious loopholes, it was not for the purpose of using the money for his own personal ends.

To be continued. More added later.

Can Anyone Scan "A People For His Name" by Timothy White?

cabasilas

cabasilas

peacefulpete

RR

VM44

Atlantis

A PEOPLE FOR HIS NAME

A History of Jehovah’s Witnesses and an Evaluation

New Worldly Translation

cabasilas

Lady Lee

Nathan Natas

Share this