I was doing reseaerch on early days of the society and remembered a radio programme about the Apostle Paul from earlier in the year. The gist of the programme was that Paul had remodeled the early christians in his image and that many of the restrictions and edicts from that time had little to do with Jesus earlier teaching. For example the vilification of homosexuals and the denegration of women.
This made me think about how Rutherford changed the early Bible students and added restrictions to them as well trying to remodel the organisation into something he could control.
Jesus spent time teaching about the kingdom, preaching the need for love, forgiveness and acceptance. In his parable of the prodigal son, the child was allowed to make his own choices in life and when he returned the father welcomed him home straight away. There was no restrictions or penance to be paid just love.
In Acts 15 we are told that when the older men in Jerusalem had considered what rules should be imposed on the congregations the list was small, no fornication, worship of false gods and blood. The Men who made these rules had no doubt known Jesus personally and made a considered judgement based on what they thought he would wish.
When Paul came on the scene he didn't have the gravitas of being one of the early disciples so he has a vision and Jesus speaks to him personally from heaven. The conversation is brief but Paul realises the error of his ways an converts. He then sets about making himself a leader within the organisation. He belittles the older men in Jerusalem in his letters and writings, he makes a point of belittling Peter telling him off publicly. The fact that Peter didn't lump him one in the congretion says more about Peter's christian qualities than Pauls. After all I don't recall Matt 18 telling people that if they have a problem with their brothers then they should tell them off in the congregation, write a letter to the circuit and then publish it for the world to see.
Pauls letters are full of added restrictions and rules. He introduces the idea of keeping the congregation clean and casting out those who don't follow the rules.(Judas was allowed to continue association with Jesus and if ever there was a case of the need for disfellowshipping he would be number 1) He puts women in their place (very Rutherford). Many people who oppose him are publicly are reprimanded through his letters and people are told to quit mixing with them.
The christianity of Paul seems some distance from Jesus and love has little place in his writings. It is left up to John to tell us about love and he was the disciple Jesus loved so I feel more warmth towards him.
So in organisation speak perhaps Rutherford was the antitypical Paul whoo hoo prophecy fulfilled. Except that would make Russell the antitypical Jesus, oh pooh that doesn't work.
What are your thoughts?