In his very first post to this thread, RoRo stated:
Having done some careful research in this area. I think it is safe to say that the JW's today are the children of one man, Judge Rutherford. Everything the Watchtower is, is due to his practices and theology.
Most viewers of this db are familiar with the WTS's "doublespeak" writing style. We are familiar how the WTS writes articles that seem to say that JWs can vote, when in fact the article's cloaked language retains the position that JWs cannot vote. We know that the WTS promised the Bulgarian government that JWs would not be disfellowshipped for accepting blood transfusions, when in fact the WTS simply changed their internal policy to consider the acceptance of a blood transfusion to be an act of disassociation.
Examples of similar WTS doublespeak are endless. Although by no means the best example, one of my favorites is this recent WT article which is designed to teach JWs to spy on and rat-out their fellow JWs who violate WTS mandates.
Watchtower 9/1/1987
"A Time to Speak"-When?Thinking Ahead Employers have a right to expect that their Christian employees will 'exhibit good fidelity to the full,' including observing rules on confidentiality. (Titus 2:9, 10) If an oath is taken, it should not be taken lightly. An oath makes a promise more solemn and binding. (Psalm 24:4) And where the law reinforces a requirement on confidentiality, the matter becomes still more serious. Hence, before a Christian takes an oath or puts himself under a confidentiality restriction, whether in connection with employment or otherwise, it would be wise to determine to the extent possible what problems this may produce because of any conflict with Bible requirements. How will one handle matters if a brother or a sister becomes a client? Usually such jobs as working with doctors, hospitals, courts, and lawyers are the type of employment in which a problem could develop. We cannot ignore Caesar's law or the seriousness of an oath, but Jehovah's law is supreme. Anticipating the problem, some brothers who are lawyers, doctors, accountants, and so forth, have prepared guidelines in writing and have asked brothers who may consult them to read these over before revealing anything confidential. Thus an understanding is required in advance that if serious wrongdoing comes to light, the wrongdoer would be encouraged to go to the elders in his congregation about the matter. It would be understood that if he did not do so, the counselor would feel an obligation to go to the elders himself. There may be occasions when a faithful servant of God is motivated by his personal convictions, based on his knowledge of God's Word, to strain or even breach the requirements of confidentiality because of the superior demands of divine law. Courage and discretion would be needed. The objective would not be to spy on another's freedom but to help erring ones and to keep the Christian congregation clean. Minor transgressions due to sin should be overlooked. Here, "love covers a multitude of sins," and we should forgive "up to seventy-seven times." (Matthew 18:21, 22) This is the "time to keep quiet." But when there is an attempt to conceal major sins, this may be the "time to speak."
In typical WTS fashion, the writer "pays homage" to governmental laws and regulations, as well as professional codes of conduct, YET reaches the desired conclusion that JWs are bound to spy on and rat-out other JWs who are not toeing the WTS line.
In another post to this thread, RoRo makes the perrenial Bible Student assertion that:
You need to do some homework, Russell never claimed to be God's prophet, ...
Take a look at this excerpt from the July 15, 1906 Watch Tower, and read closely what Russell wrote 95 years ago. Notice how closely Russell's writing style resembles the style of the 1987 article. Notice how Russell also "pays homage" to all the required denials of being "a prophet", YET manages to infuse that very conclusion in the mind of the reader, and even manages to do both in a single sentence:
Zion's Watch Tower
July 15, 1906Many are the inquiries relative to the truths presented in MILLENNIAL DAWN and ZION'S WATCH TOWER, as to whence they came and how they developed to their present symmetrical and beautiful proportions--Were they the results of visions? Did God in any supernatural way grant the solution of these hitherto mysteries of his plan? Are the writers more than ordinary beings? Do they claim any supernatural wisdom or power? or how comes this revelation of God's truth? No, dear friends, I claim nothing of superiority, nor supernatural power, dignity or authority; nor do I aspire to exalt myself in the estimation of my brethren of the household of faith, except in the sense that the Master urged it, saying, "Let him who would be great among you be your servant." (Matt. 20:27.) And my position among men of the world and of the nominal church is certainly far from exalted, being "everywhere spoken against." I am fully contented, however, to wait for exaltation until the Lord's due time. (I Pet. 5:6.) In the Apostle's words I therefore answer, "Why look ye upon us, as though by our own power we had done these things? We also are men of like passions with yourselves"--of like infirmities and frailties, earnestly striving, by overcoming many besetments, discouragements, etc., to press along the line toward the mark of the prize of our high calling, and claiming only, as a faithful student of the Word of God, to be an index finger, as I have previously expressed it, to help you to trace for yourselves, on the sacred page, the wonderful plan of God--no less wonderful to me, I assure you, than to you, dearly beloved sharers of my faith and joy. No, the truths I present, as God's mouthpiece, were not revealed in visions or dreams, nor by God's audible voice, nor all at once, but gradually, especially since 1870, and particularly since 1880. Neither is this clear unfolding of truth due to any human ingenuity or acuteness of perception, but to the simple fact that God's due time has come; and if I did not speak, and no other agent could be found, the very stones would cry out."
Charles Taze Russell
No, ShadyGrady never used the word "prophet", BUT what he did do was apply the elements of the definition of a prophet to himself, and led the readers in his day to the conclusion that he spoke for God.
RoRo is also wrong when he blames Rutherford (exonerating Russell) for the all the ills of the modern Watchtower. As demonstrated by Russell's quote above, Russell set the standard for WT doublespeak, to which all subsequent WT writers have been forced to measure up.