any truth 2 Russell funded by Rothchilds

by mind blown 65 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  reslight2

  ScenicViewer posted:

  Found on pages 1342 and 1343 of Watchtower Reprints.

  A letter to Barons Rothschild and Hirsch was given, which may seen in an earlier post. There is nothing in that letter that gives any evidence that Russell received funding from the Rothschilds. Evidently, those who cite that letter are either misunderstanding what Russell wrote, or else deliberately twisting what he wrote. Russell did made some suggestions, but, as far as I have been able to determine, as Russell later stated, no response was received from that letter. Other than that, I haven’t been able to verify any contact that Russell had with the Rothschilds.

  Followup to the above appeard in the March 1, 1892 Watch Tower, which I reproduce below:
  
  ROTHSCHILD PURCHASING LAND IN
  PALESTINE.
  ----------
  In answer to queries on the subject, we reply:
  We have not yet received a reply to the
  letters to Barons Rothschild and Hirsch, proposing
  a plan for the organization of Palestine
  as a nation. It appears, however, from the
  clipping below, that one of the gentlemen is
  already acting on a part of the suggestions offered.
  It reads as follows:--
  "Jewish exiles from Russia and Poland are
  really to have a home in Palestine after all.
  Through Baron Edmond de Rothschild a tract
  of land forty miles east of Lake Tiberias, and
  said to be extremely fertile, has been bought.
  No families will be sent until some young men,
  who are to go as pioneers, have made the
  country habitable."--Milwaukee Sentinel.
  
  It is evident from this notice that, at the time of that writing, he had not received any reply to his letter; doesn't at all sound like that Russell was close friends with them.
  
  As far as "Illuminati" is concerned, the only illuminati that Russell believed in of was the illumination of the Bible by means of the Holy Spirit.

  Charles Taze Russell, however, was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses organization; he did not believe in such an authoritarian organization. C. T. Russell did not believe that Christian congregations are subject to any central "governing body." He believed that each congregation should autonomous. Nor did Russell preach the bad tidings of great woe of eternal destruction in Armageddon for most of the peoples of the earth that the JW leadership teaches.

  Charles Taze Russell was most definitely never a member of the Freemasons' organization. I have tens of thousands of pages of Russell's works that provide overwhelming evidence that he was not a Freemason, whereas no one has presented any factual evidence yet that shows that he was a member of the Freemasons. All that is ever presented is what is being imagined and assumed, usually related to his Biblical study of the Great Pyramid (which has nothing at all to do with any kind of demonic occultism, spiritism, the Mason organization, etc.), some of the illustrations he used (cross and crown illustration, sun of righteousness with wings illustration, etc., again none of which illustrations are of themselves either of the occult, paganism, demonism, etc.). C.T. Russell did not believe in Enochian Magic, Enochian Magic Planes, astrology, Satanism, occultism, spiritism, demonism, witchcraft, etc. Indeed, he actively preached against such, although he never mentioned "Enochian Magic" at all by name.
  
  Several years after Russell died, Rutherford had a replica of God's witness in Egypt constructed in the middle of the plot owned by the WTS in the Rosemont Cemetery. There is nothing at all about Rutherford's pyramid monument, however, that is connected with the Freemasons' organization, nor with the Rosicrucians, etc. I highly doubt, however, that Russell would have approved of such a monument.

  I don't know a whole lot about David Icke; much of what Icke says seems to mimic the imaginative assumptions of Fritz Springmeier. I have studied several of Springmeier's books in great detail. He seems to identify the Illuminati as consisting of what he calls "Serpentine bloodlines". The only "Serpentine bloodline" that could scripturally be produced in existence today is that of Adam, who became a son of disobedience, and through whom all of his descendants have been condemned. All (the whole human race) of that serpentine bloodline may avail themselves of the ransom sacrifice of Jesus. According to the Bible, there has indeed been a conspiracy against God ever since the serpent (identified in Revelation as Satan) spoke his lie of deception to Eve. The seed of the serpent (Genesis 3:15) is the whole world according to the flesh; all of us, in the bloodline of Adam, are born into this world as members of the serpent's seed, "by nature, children of wrath," "sons of disobedience." (Ephesians 2:2,3) The only way to cut that tie is by means of faith in Jesus through the sacrificial blood that he poured out. (Romans 3:25; Ephesians 2:5; Galatians 2:20; 3:26) Thus, outside of those who have been justified and made alive by means of faith in Christ (Romans 5:1), everyone in the world is of the dying serpentine bloodline. -- Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22.
  
  Russell's works online:
  http://mostholyfaith.com
  
  My website on Russell; I have presented a lot study especially related to Fritz Springmeier's assumptions and misrepresentations of Russell.
  http://ctr.reslight.net
• 

  Old Goat

  Mind,

  The cemetery predates the Masonic temple by decades. Masonic membership was common: it would be hard to find a cemetery that has no Masonic burials. In what way was he influenced by masons? The claim is without foundation.<p>

  He was influenced primarily by British Literalists and American Age-to-Come believers, especially those associated with The Restitution, a paper published in the American Mid-West. Some of his beliefs, especially his chronology come from others such as Barbour and E. B. Elliot. Elliot was an Anglican. Barbour is often described as an Adventist. He WAS an Adventist. By the time Russell met him he had converted to Age-to-Come belief and associated with Mark Allen's Blessed Hope organization in a very loose fashion. By the late 1880s Barbour was styling his congregation in Rochester as the Restitution Church and was fully involved with Mark Allen's organization.</p><p>

  Many of Russell's beliefs came to him from George Stetson. Stetson accepted ordination fromr the Ohio Conference of the A. C. Church, but by the time he met Russell Stetson was preaching Age to Come and writing for the British journal The Rainbow and the American paper The Restitution. Storrs is a well known factor. Storrs left Millerite Adventism in 1844 and was opposed by many Adventists. He converted to Literalism and even when associated with the Life and Advent Union did not teach Adventist doctrine but Age to Come doctrine. T. White suggests only one doctrine as original to Russell. Schulz and de Vienne suggest that none of his doctrine was original with him and take great pains to show where the major doctrines came from.</p>

  Today, many call age to come believers a sect of the Adventist movement. This is wrong. Age to come belief predates Adventism, and it represents the standard approach to prophetic interpretation found in the UK and in Germany and the Netherlands back at least to the early 1600s. Russell was influenced in a secondary way by German expositors going back to Piscator, at least, through reading Seiss's Last Times. Seiss was a millennialist Lutheran. Russell met Seiss face to face in 1874 and arranged for Seiss to publish Object and Manner of Our Lord's Return as a supplement to Seiss's Prophetic Times. It was also published as a supplement to The Restitution, drawing comment from Restitution's editior and from Storrs. There is no detectable Masonic influence. That is all myth, created by a conspiracy theorist with no standards and repeated ad nauseam on the internet.

  While I believe there are true Christians among Witnesses, I do not see the Watchtower as the sole purveyor of truth. (or even much of a purveyor of truth) I have no reason to apologize for Russell or anyone else. But if we want to criticize the Watchtower organization, we should at least be accurate. We disregard accuracy when we parrot stupidity we might find on the internet. There is enough that is verifiably true.

  You're still accepting unfounded claims as truth. A short web search will not bring you to historical fact. You may want to visit http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/
• 

  Old Goat

  As a note to the comment: "Several years after Russell died, Rutherford had a replica of God's witness in Egypt constructed in the middle of the plot owned by the WTS in the Rosemont Cemetery. There is nothing at all about Rutherford's pyramid monument, however, that is connected with the Freemasons' organization, nor with the Rosicrucians, etc. I highly doubt, however, that Russell would have approved of such a monument."

  As noted earlier, a convention report shows the planning for this monument started in 1914. The design was approved by Russell. It was not Rutherford's idea. That is was his idea is a bit of Bible Student propaganda. The idea came from Bonhet, was designed by him, and approved by Russell. see: Souvenir Notes from the Bible Student’s Convention: Pittsburgh, Pa., January 2-5, 1919, page 7 .

  You should be able to find that online.
• 

  mind blown

  Oldgoat you had said...."I highly doubt, however, that Russell would have approved of such a monument."

  How do you "exactly" know he did not or wouldn't have approved this monument? What proof do you have?

  Also, my question was never answered. If after Russell died and Pyramid belief was abandoned, why still errect such an abomination? And who did it?
• 

  Old Goat

  Russell did in fact approve the monument. It was meant to reflect his belief that the great pyramid was God's great Stone Witness on the border of Egypt. See my comment above.

  The Watch Tower did not abandon this belief until 1928, almost ten years after the monument was finished.

  How is it an abomination? It's not Masonic, pagan or any such thing. The belief is silly, though many still hold to it, and Russell held to it long after it was discredited by facts. In 1881 some used a pyramid measurement to suggest a prophetic crisis for that year. Russell saw the year as important too, though not on that basis. Still, the events of 1881 should have made him question the validity of his belief. He was very reluctant to abandon any teaching he once accepted though there are some examples of him doing so. The pyramid cap stone was supposed to represent Jesus, "the head of the corner." The rays going downward represented Jesus guidance of the church. The open book, meant to hold the names of those who died "faithfully", is derived from the Bible (Name found written in the book of life.) At most it is a very presumptious monument because it presumed to identify who god put in the book of life. Abomination? I don't think so. Misdirected? Certainly.
• 

  Old Goat

  I'm not aware of saying "I highly doubt, however, that Russell would have approved of such a monument." I believe I said he did approve of the monument. I've cited the 1919 convention report to that effect twice. Russell approved of all sorts of nonsense that came from others. Not to change the topic, but you ever read about the "vow"? How about Millennial Beans? Russell was a mixture of the very bright and the very gullible.
• 

  mind blown

  sorry for the mis quote.. I really do need to wear my glasses when reading posts..oui....

  That's still an odd comment for someone to make. Why wouldn't Russell approve of the monument if he was into Pyramids? Who made this comment?

  When I have a chance I will check out Sha'el, Princess of Pixies and others blog for historical info. Is this blog from a Jw? I'm finding, many people are interested in Russell and history of the WTS.

  Abomination. Yes, it is to me personally. He believes numerology of the Pyramind, along coming up with a false 1914 prediction. Yes, also he was influence by occult beliefs...from what I've read. Yet many are dfed for less by the WTS....which in itself is an abomination. Again to me.
• 

  Old Goat

  Sha'el is R. M. de Vienne, PhD. She writes fantasy fiction in addition to history. Hence the name. She is not a Witness. The truth history blog is run by her and two others. The other two are Witnesses, but they're very careful and honest researchers. I know - or rather knew - Mr. Schulz "back in the day." Miss de Vienne teaches history and literature. She used to lecture at a university, though right off hand I do not remember which. I do not know her except via email. Mr. Schulz teaches history, and is a long-time witnesses. There is, i believe, some sort of family connection between them.

  Russell's beliefs were not numerology. That's something entirely different. He believed the pyramid's measurements supported a Bible chronology he got elsewhere. But we each see things within our own social context. Pyramidology may have fallen into the repertoire of occultists, but it did not start there.

  Mind, the comment was wrong, no matter who made it. Russell approved the design. There is valid documented evidence to support that. But people say uninformed things. It happens all the time, not just in regard to religion. It's not surprising.

  You might note that Russell did not derive the date 1914 from pyramidology. It derives from the work of several. The 2520 year calculation came from an American clergyman who published about 1808. The 1914 date comes from E. B. Elliot, an anglican clergyman. You will find a discussion of this in the book Nelson Barbour: The Millennium's Forgotten Prophet. It's an ebook on B and N or tradepaper on lulu.com.

  It's well worth a read. The ebook is by far the less expensive of the two. It's about half the paper bound version. Unless you plan on keeping the book in your library, I'd go with the ebook.
• 

  Quentin

  ...not character observations/assasinations... ( MB )

  Well, I see you continue to assum that my comment, which was a general observation, was amied at you and your character. Sigh, not at all, not at all. There is some very fine information being dispensed, hopefuly MB you will come to your own conclusion and be satisfied. I wish you well.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Old Goat another poster sent me Schulz's book about Nelson Barbour a couple of years ago. As you say it is a well documented piece of historical writing. Has he published anything else on Watchtower history?