|
"Quite an evil-minded work of art that distorts the reality, to say the least. Russell was expecting "the end" of the Gentile Times in 1914. From 1904 to 1914, he was expecting the beginning of the "time of trouble" in 1914; he plainly stated that he was not expecting "the end of the world" in 1914. I believe that the end of the Gentile Times did come in 1914, and that we have been in the "time of trouble" ever since." So, you are attacking me ad-hominem, calling me "evil-minded", then countering with more symantics? Your reasoning is pure and typical JW all the way, friend, and it's not a work of art friend, it's satire, and it's also documentation and evidence of what Rusell really intended when he published his non-prophesy prophesies. If you could, please, explain exactly the reason Russell and friends took a boat over to Israel in 1914 and sat atop the Mount of Olives for this picture? Was it a mere sight-seeing tour of the Bible lands? They weren't expecting to be raptured off or some such nonsense, where they? I'm surprised Rutherford wasn't wearing a damn jet-pack so he could get a head start. Actions beat subterfuge, rhetoric, symantics, and blah blah blah everytime. LOL, they packed and traveled to Jeruselem to stand on the transporter bay of the USS EyesOnThePrize . . . Expecting. Expecting. Russell published his "expectations" and everyone got worked up about going to heaven in October of 1914. Expecting the end of the Gentile Times in 1914, which meant, no matter what you say, or however Russell colored it before and after, that the end of this system of things was going to come; the implications and inferrences of Russell's false prophesies are clear. I'm not debating this crap with you anymore. You are clearly cherry-picking the denials of Russell and ignoring the whole story. Ridiculous. Peace |
Charles Taze Russel nephew of William Huntington Russell
by truth.ceeker 47 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
PublishingCult
-
thetrueone
It bears worthy to keep in mind that the believers of whom Russell congregated toward the WTS. publishing company,
where also individuals that worked for him in the printing and editing process of the company.
Russell was a devious and calculating exploiter of anything or anyone who would help him in the proliferation of
his published literature. He did not solely lean on the bible alone for exploitation purposes.
There seems to be a connection with the Freemasons and Russell, for some of his idealogical expressions are associated with
the Freemason beliefs, such as Pyramidology and the remaining IBSA still use Freemason Halls to give special talks and teachings.
It doesn't really matter whether he was or not, for C T Russell was a turn of the century religious charlatan,
out to gather the publics attention and promote his own books that he published,
he never really took off his salesman smock from his days at his clothing store.
-
Joey Jo-Jo
A few things I would like to bring up.
According to this book, masons being a secretive cult (if I can call it that) are taught to lie in the case of protecting their interests, so there wouldn't be any traces of the Russels being freemasons, not saying that he is one, he could just be interested, I dont think we will ever know.
Also, the NW translation initial bible for the bible students was bought from a Freemason.
There are similarities in wording, gran architect, kingdom etc.
Bible studends had meetings in masonic chambers.
But most symbols used by masons were adopted, sundisk is egyptian, cross in crown was used in other religions, the knight was a symbol used in the crusades, etc.
-
ziddina
I was about to say....
The way I heard it, Charles Taze Russell wasn't a Mason but was influenced by their beliefs and/or ceremonis...
Then I saw PublishingCult's comment...
What HE said... !!
-
Black Sheep
If you could, please, explain exactly the reason Russell and friends took a boat over to Israel in 1914 and sat atop the Mount of Olives for this picture? Was it a mere sight-seeing tour of the Bible lands? They weren't expecting to be raptured off or some such nonsense, where they? I'm surprised Rutherford wasn't wearing a damn jet-pack so he could get a head start.
Don't be rediculous. On October the first, Russell was in Pittsburgh. Faith on the March A. H. Macmillan page 27
-
PublishingCult
LOL @ Black Sheep :)
I also found this in Faith on the March, page 45 . . .
"C. T. Russell had no idea of building a strongly knit organization. At that time we saw no
need for it. We expected 1914 would mark the end of this system of things on earth.
Our big concern at that time was to preach as effectively and extensively as possible
before that date arrived. In the meantime, we thought, we must prepare ourselves
individually to be ready to go to heaven." -
Aussie Oz
Facinating stuff...
when i first started looking into the claims of Russell and the Freemasons, i concluded that it was a 'possibility' with a stretch.
For me to believe the link there had to be proof positive, not theories, not 'coincidences' either.
And that is what i find to be the problem, there is no PROOF, only supposition and speculation often based on odd words and symbols in use by many other groups besides masons, and these used to publish books and make claims that cannot be proved.
Without documents names, registers, money trail etc, it is as useless as tits on a bull in the efforts to expose the Watchtower for what it is.
It's an interesting conspiracy theory, and there it stays... a theory.
my 10 cents worth anyway!
oz
-
Black Sheep
PC's photo of Russell using the Mount of Olives for a launching pad in 1914 was published in the 1st September 1910 Watchtower.
It was taken on the 24th of April 1910.
-
PublishingCult
Ha ha, was it? I did not know that. Thank you.
-
reslight2
So, you are attacking me ad-hominem, calling me "evil-minded", then countering with more symantics? Your reasoning is pure and typical JW all the way, friend, and it's not a work of art friend, it's satire, and it's also documentation and evidence of what Rusell really intended when he published his non-prophesy prophesies.
I am not with the JWs, nor was Russell ever associated with the JWs. Russell never spoke as being a central authority for any such organization. Russell did not believe in the alleged "good news" that is preached by the JWs, and the message Russell preached was almost the opposite of what the JWs preach.
It is certain evil/bad to misrepresent the character of a follower of Christ. The caricature of Russell as saying anything about being packed on the Mount of Olives is indeed a lie, and is therefore bad/evil. " Yahweh hates... a lying tongue." -- Proverbs 6:16,17.
Psalm 34:13 - Keep your tongue from evil , And your lips from speaking lies.
To present anything, however, that misrepresents another as having bad or evil intentions, does represent an evil thought toward that person. Since whoever made up the material in the picture evidently did so with such evil thoughts toward Russell, then it does indeed represent such evil-mindedness, a mind intent on bad thoughts toward Russell. The one who made up the material, however, may have also thought that such did represent the truth, but yet because of the desire to find something "bad" about Russell, such would result in that which is "bad" in the thoughts of the one who made such up by which to misrepresent and slander Russell.
That being said, however, all of us, and one time or another, have been guilty of the sin of lying, and of being deceived by lies, which is why we need to the ransom sacrifice of Jesus. All of us have been guilty, at one time or another, of misrepresenting another by what we would project from own bad thoughts about that person. Thus, as Paul stated, none of us have any reason to condemn others, as we are all already condemned in Adam's transgression, and in need to Jesus' ransom sacrifice. -- Romans 2:1; 3:9; 5:12-19.
The real instigator of the deceptive lies about Russell, however, I believe is Satan the Devil. I do not believe that most people who are spreading such lies are originators of the evil of the deceptions of the lies, but rather that it is Satan. (John 8:44; Revelation 12:7) I thank the Heavenly Father for understanding that such deceptions will soon not be permitted by God, since Satan is to be abyssed, so that he will not be able to deceive the people during that coming day of the world's judgment. -- Psalm 96; Psalm 98; Isaiah 2:2-4; John 12:47,48; Acts 17:31; Revelation 20:3.
The real documentation and evidence shows that, from the very start his minstry -- which ministry has nothing at all to do with the authoritarian attidues of the JW leadership, Russell denied that his expectations were infallible and/or prophecy. Russell, from the very start of his ministry, claimed that the only authority one should recognize in the church is that of Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles, whose messages are found in the Bible. I have already given some of that true documentation and evidence.
If you could, please, explain exactly the reason Russell and friends took a boat over to Israel in 1914 and sat atop the Mount of Olives for this picture? Was it a mere sight-seeing tour of the Bible lands? They weren't expecting to be raptured off or some such nonsense, where they? I'm surprised Rutherford wasn't wearing a damn jet-pack so he could get a head start.
Since Russell never took a boat over to Israel in 1914 to sit top of the Mount of Olives, I have nothing to explain in this regard, except to say that Russell was not in Israel in October of 1914. Someone else has stated that the picture is from the September, 1908, Watch Tower; I have not been able to verify this, but it is evidently a picture taken sometime before 1914.
Expecting the end of the Gentile Times in 1914, which meant, no matter what you say, or however Russell colored it before and after, that the end of this system of things was going to come; the implications and inferrences of Russell's false prophesies are clear.
The above appears to be projecting back on Russell the later JW teachings. Russell did not believe in the end of the system of things as the JWs believe, and never was expecting such. Russell believed that the "end of the age" had already begun in 1874. From 1904 up to 1914, Russell was expecting the "time of trouble" was to begin in 1914; nothing at all to color it before or after; it is simple fact. His view of the "time of trouble" was that it was a period of time in which the people of the nations were to disciplined, not eternally destroyed, and such time of trouble would prepare the peoples for the blessings of God's Kingdom.
Russell's earlier view, which he rejected in 1904, was that the Gentile Kingdoms would all be removed in 1914, and that the blessings of God's kingdom would begin in 1914. As I stated, and such is simply fact, Russell, from 1904 on up to 1914, was expecting, not that the Gentile kingdoms would all be removed in 1914, but rather that the "time of trouble" was to begin in 1914, which would eventually lead to the removal of all Gentile rulership and the blessings of God's kingdom sometime after 1914. Russell, however, never gave any of his expectations as being any kind of central authority in the church; he certainly never gave any of his expectations as being a central authority of the Jehovah's Witnesses. From the very start of his ministry, he disclaimed any infallibility regarding his expectations, and never claimed that his expectations were infallible. Russell did not believe in any such central authority amongs men as the JWs have, etc., and preached against such authoritarianism until the day he died. All of this is simply fact. Nothing at all to "color: about it.
I'm not debating this crap with you anymore. You are clearly cherry-picking the denials of Russell and ignoring the whole story. Ridiculous.
Except that one is actually acquainted with the facts, I believe it would be best not to debate that of which one has little or no knowledge. One should certainly not present what has to imagined, assumed, distorted, etc., as representing the "whole story", while ignoring the actual facts.
It is not my purpose, however, to defend absolutely everything Russell said or taught, as I disagree with him on many things. Nevertheless, I do not believe that he deliberately taught anything in error.
No Christian writer since the days of the apostles can fully claim that everything that he has written is absolutely without error, and Russell certainly never made any such claim. He did believe, without claiming infallibilty for such belief, that what he had written was in harmony with the light of the Bible. I do not believe any Christian writer should be writing anything that he believes to be out of harmony with the Bible, although I have read authors who claim to be Christian that have openly rejected much of the Bible.
