by Raphael 19 Replies latest watchtower bible
I don't know if Bill was mistaken or maybe he was confused.
I spent the weekend at Bill and Joan's home in 1988 and they were gracious hosts, even if Bill acted a little stange at times. His recent stroke must have addled him a bit. Bill and Joan certainly did help me with questions about the WT and I am forever grateful for the personal time they gave me.
Judge Rutheford wrote many times concerning angels conveying information to Jehovah's chosen ones.
From the webpage "The Spirit World Guided Rutherford" at http://www.seanet.com/~raines/guided.html
Angelic information
Being under the direction of angels meant the remnant received information and organization instructions from angels. In Rutherford's words:
Certain duties and kingdom interests have been committed by the Lord to his angels, which include the transmission of information to God's anointed people on the earth for their aid and comfort. Even though we cannot understand how the angels transmit this information, we know that they do it. [42]
These angels are invisible to human eyes and are there to carry out the orders of the Lord. No doubt they first hear the instruction which the Lord issues to his remnant and then these invisible messengers pass such instruction on to the remnant. [43]
... angels are delegated by the Lord to convey his instructions to the members of his organization on earth. Just how this is done is not necessary for us to understand. [44]
*** References ***
42. Preparation, 1933, pp. 36, 37; The Watchtower, August 15, 1933, p. 243 ¶3; The Watchtower, March 1, 1938 p. 79, ¶4.
43. Vindication III, 1932, p. 250; The Watchtower, September 15, 1938, p. 285 (Last paragraph).
44. The Watchtower, December 1, 1933, p. 364.
He also says that Russell claimed to be the FDS and the Laodicean messenger, both statements are misleading . Russell never claimed in any of his writings that he spoke to angels or was the aforementioned messenger or the FDS , rather it was some of his associates that suggested he may be.
Bull. Where did these messages come from? The WT publications that Russell was lord over. The messages in those publications were approved by Russell. If he didn't agree that he was talking to angels and the FDS, then he would have edited that out.
Well..Russells gravestone says he is the Laodicean Messenger...Id say SOMEBODY must have thought he thought he was in the Borg. So that is NOT a lie.
Initially, Russell taught that the Harvest of the "elect," an elite group that
included himself and whoever agreed with everything he said (which would be a
little group) was to last until 1881, although that date changed as time went
by. Russell eventually specified that the elect, otherwise called the "little
flock," was the 144,000 of Rev.14:1-5 taken literally to be 144,000 followers.
("Watchtower Reprints," 1881, p.224; 1880, p.172)
1880 Russell taught that the 144,000 of Rev.14:1 are the "little flock" he's
part of, not those of the "nominal church" of corruption, by which he meant most
all other Christians. "Christendom" isn't a derogatory word unless it's meant
that way, and he meant it that way. (Practically none of them taught a created
Jesus you worship, let alone when he invisibly appeared, etc.) The ability to
join the 144,000 would end in Oct., 1881:
"Dearly beloved, if we believe these things, our works will attest our faith.
If you and I believe that the door to the 'high calling' closes in less than a
year, should we not increase our efforts to bring all Christians into the light
of present truth--the knowledge of the bridegroom's presence--that they and we
may be more fully separated from the world." ("Watchtower Reprints," Nov., 1880,
pp.155,156,172)
1914 "The evidences seem to be that there are still quite a number of vacan-
cies in the elect number, because there are people coming into Present Truth and
consecrating who have come directly from the world. This would seem to indicate
that there are not at present a sufficient number fully consecrated to complete
the 144,000. If there were, these would be given the preference over those not
consecrated." ("Watchtower Reprints," March 1, 1914, p.5411)
1916 Russell taught that the ability to join the alleged literal 144,000
would end in "perhaps a year or two or three." "...we anticipate that before a
very long time--perhaps a year or two or three--the full number of the Elect
will be completed, and all will have gone beyond the Veil and the door will be
shut." ("Thy Kingdom Come," forward to 1916 edition, pp.i,ii)
Russell played prophet whether he claimed any contact with angels, or admitted
it or not, on any one occasion, by pretending to be the spokesman for a literal
144,000. The things he meant to justify the exclusiveness (and damning others)
included things like New Earth creationism, a created Jesus who was to be
worshiped for 1st cent. Jewish monotheism, when Jesus invisibly appeared and
would visibly appear, pyramidology, etc. The movement may have gotten even
stricter with Rutherford, but the phoniness started with the claim of being the
spokeman of a literal 144,000, and having to cook things up for the pretension
of exclusiveness, which started with Russell.
"He also says that Russell claimed to be the FDS and the Laodicean messenger, both statements are misleading ."
Usually when someone makes a claim that isn't borne out by the facts, it is a mistake or error, not lying per se.
BTW, Russell never made the direct claim himself, but as editor of the Watch Tower, he permitted such references to him as "that servant" to appear in the Watch Tower without correcting them.
I agree that there was a lot Bill Cetnar did to help others who wanted to escape the clutches of the WT Society.
Perhaps Bill was trying to bring out inflamatory facts against the WT not realizing that some of these were in error.
The problem is that if error is found then it calls into question other claims which although less inflamatory may be accurate.
Since CTR had control over HIS publication, he easily could've stopped any reference to his being "that servant". Since he didn't, one can rightly assume that he did not dissuade any from that belief.
Conversely, if someone tried to present information about him that was not believed to be true, he would've defended himself.
The lesson is that we all should aim for accuracy in our claims, and correct them when they are wrong.
The "Charles Russell was a child molestor" charge especially is one that should be debunked whenever it comes up.
