by Lady Lee 56 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Interestingly, there seems to have been a second pamphlet on the matter called Harvest Siftings (Watchtower, 11 June 1894, pp. 75-77), precisely the name that Rutherford gave his own pamphlets defending his dismissal of the original board of directors. Does anyone even heard of the 1894 Harvest Siftings?
The other interesting thing about Rose Ball was that 1894 was also the year Russell allegedly acted improperly with her.
VM44....Even more interesting is the following remark: "The charge of 'bondage' and 'under my thumb', etc. which now they [the Zechs] make public, I find has been a part of their 'whisperings' for the past four years.... Three years ago [i.e. 1891] Sister Ball was invited over to their home to spend the evening and then advised, confidentially, that she was imposed upon by us, etc., etc., etc. Sister Russell and myself then visited them, showed the error of this course and they apologized. But within a year it now seems that they began again: Bro. Henninges was 'talked to' about being in bondage to Bro. Russell; and it was intimated that he was a fool for staying here" (p. 28-29).
Clearly, Russell here portrays Rose Ball as an adult in 1891, who alone went to the Zechs for the evening (such that Maria and Charles had to visit them separately), and who held a confidential conversation in which the Zechs tried to persuade her that she was under Russell's thumb, and like Bro. Henninges (Rose's future husband) "was a fool for staying here". But Rutherford would have Rose a mere 12-year-old during this incident. In reality, she was about 22.
Neither was Rose an orphan. Her parents did not die until 1911.
There is a reference to this affair in the Proclaimers book:
*** jv chap. 28 p. 627 Testing and Sifting From Within ***
Special letters to the Bible Students in Allegheny, Pennsylvania, invited them to a meeting on April 5, 1894. Brother and Sister Russell were not invited and did not attend, but about 40 others were present. The letter, signed by E. Bryan, S. D. Rogers, J. B. Adamson, and O. von Zech, said that the meeting would involve things concerning their "highest welfare." It turned out to be a malicious effort on the part of these conspirators to poison the minds of others by divulging what they surmised to be evil in Brother Russell's business affairs (though the facts were to the contrary), by arguing that Brother Russell had too much authority (which they wanted for themselves), and by complaining because he favored use of the printed page to spread the gospel and Bible-class meetings instead of only giving discourses (in which they might more readily expound personal views). The congregation was greatly disturbed by what occurred, and many were stumbled. But those who turned aside did not as a result become more spiritual persons or more zealous in the Lord's work.
Yes, VM44, I have it and will send it to you! 1894 A Conspiracy Exposed And Harvest Siftings http://m1.freeshare.us/view/?139fs222829.jpg Cheers! Atlantis-
VW44 - The Tower Publishing Company was a firm owned by Charles T. Russell. It was used in publishing the first 4 volumes of the Studies in the Scriptures as well as tracts,and the Zion's Watchtower magazine.It operated from 1887 to 1898, when Russell transferred assets of the company by donation to the WTB&TS.
A while back I posted some info on Russell's "preaching" tactics. It adds credence to the complaints being made in this document.
1906 Training for Colporteurs - a real eye-opener
This training session for colporteurs during the Believers in the Atonement Sacrifice of Christ Convention held in Ashbury Park New Jersey July 22-29, 1906.
Russell himself is giving colporteurs instructions on selling books. He most definitely isn't talking about preaching the Word of God.
A colporteur is out selling the Studies in the Scriptures. He says that at one home he sees they already have the Millenial Dawn books. Redis my comment
Q.What would you do if you were presenting the Studies in Scripture and you saw they had the Millennial Dawn books?
A. I would try to sell the books anyway, because we know it is only prejudice they have.
Now this is bizzare. The Studies series is the same as the Millenial Dawn series. As far as I have seen it is the same book with a different title. To make matters worse, try to sell your books even if they have the other set
Q. How would you answer if they were to ask you—"Is this the same as Millennial Dawn?"
A. I would try to evade the question by asking them—"What does Millennial Dawn teach?" They would doubtless say it taught this and that, etc., which we would know it does not teach. You could then say: "this work does not teach anything like that."
...
Q. I have sold quite a number of the five-cent volumes where I could not sell the others. In one case a gentleman says, "You are selling these for ten cents, and they are marked five cents on the front." Is it better to sell them for five cents and not get the revenue, or should that be changed so nobody will be inclined to be prejudiced?
A. I would just say the five cents on there is all right. You can send and get as many of those you want at five cents a copy. They are published just at cost price. The five cents is what I am getting for my time in bringing them around. If you stop for a moment and think about it you will see that I could not afford to sell them at five cents.
So the marked price is for naught. Ask double and hope they dont' notice. And then they don't get paid (mentioned earlier) but double the price as their salary for their time - talking out of both sides of the mouth
Q. In delivering a set of books ordered by a lady, I handed her husband the books, and while his wife went in after the money, he says, "Are these books anything like Millennial Dawn?" I said, "This work treats on lines of chronology, etc." I turned him off the track and got the money and went away. After going away I felt a little bad, wondering if I had taken the right course.
A. I think probably we would have to supply in our minds part of what we supposed. We would suppose from the man’s question that he has some prejudice against Millennial Dawn, and that his prejudice is unfounded. That is to say, it is founded upon some misrepresentation or misunderstanding of what Millennial Dawn is. So this is not what he thinks Millennial Dawn is, so far as we know; therefore, I think you were justified in putting it in the form you did.
My mouth is hanging open. Didn't Russell write them all? Everything I have found says Russell wrote them - both sets the same with just the name change
It didn't matter to Russell whether a person had already bought the same books under the different title. sell sell sell
It seems these Special Editions were not included in Watch Tower Reprints so I think some of them got lost along the way. I'm going through my files to see if I can find the Jun/1894 edition
I'm a little bit confused....The volume of Harvest Gleanings by Chicago Bible Students titles the Extra edition Conspiracy Exposed and Harvest Siftings, whereas the actual scan that we have is just Conspiracy Exposed. So are the references to Harvest Siftings this document we have, or some other one? If it is the first possibility, where is it called Harvest Siftings? Is there a first page missing in the PDF?
Bookmark
Lady Lee....It's a pretty stunning Q&A, revealing an unseemly side to Russell's book-selling operation. I do wonder though if it really was the "same book with a different title". By the 1916 edition at least, Russell had subtly changed the book's references to 1874 and the 1914 prophecy, to reverse the earlier expectation. For instance, the original Millennial Dawn edition of Volume 3 stated: "That the deliverance of the saints must take place some time before 1914 is manifest ... Just how long before 1914 the last living members of the body of Christ will be glorified, we are not directly informed" (p. 228). The 1916 Studies in the Scriptures edition however had changed the words "before 1914" to "after 1914". Similarly, p. 342 in the Millennial Dawn version referred to 3416 pyramid inches in the Great Pyramid that indicated 3,416 years from 1542 BC to the year 1874, proving that "the close of 1874 was the chronological beginning of the time of trouble". The Studies in the Scriptures version however claimed that the length of the Great Pyramid passage was really 3,457 inches, indicating that the time of trouble really doesn't start until 1914. Without access to the many printings of the books, I don't know precisely when these changes were introduced. Were they added after 1914 or, since Russell was otherwise already toning down his expectation a few years in advance, were they already in place in the 1906 printings of Studies in the Scriptures? Perhaps those significant changes lay at the basis of the name change from Millennial Dawn (old light) to Studies in the Scriptures (new light). And as far as marketing is concerned, perhaps Russell did not want to have his colporteurs overtly admit that the first edition of the books contain prophetic mistakes and market the new books as the "latest edition". I would love to see the original printing of the Studies in the Scriptures to see if this was the case.
