Welcome Stirred, it seems we have a lot in common. I am 3rdgen on both parents sides and was just shy of 60 when I woke up. Have you told your story yet?
I want to know. Don't you?
by Old Goat 15 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Old Goat
Mr. Schulz is indeed still a Witness. He's not quite as old as I am, but he's elderly and infirm. He lives up river from me, close enough to drive up there and visit. I don't out of respect for him. He has never been anything but respectful to me despite my drift into serious doubt.
He has a huge respect for accuracy, and his books show it. He and Dr. de Vienne both teach history. De Vienne lives across a Columbia River bridge from me, and she was kind enough to meet me for coffee and answer questions. She is not at all what I pictured, even though I read her “just for fun” personal blog. She's very small, slightly built and full of humor.
If I have a criticism of Separate Identity, it's that sometimes the biographical details burden the story. However, I came away from the book with a real feel for the people he names. I was also impressed with the fairness with which the authors deal with people with whom they probably differ theologically. There is a noticeable difference between the authors and other writers. E. Gruss had a history degree. But he used history to write polemic. In some footnote or other Schulz and de Vienne note him as "seldom reliable," or some such thing. I agree. Polemic in the guise of history is not really history. They fault Zydeck's book as contrived. A so-called Bible Student historian fed Zydeck material, much of it wrong. I would have been more pointed had I written Separate Identity. But then I'm a nearly 90 year old cranky old man.
I agree that one of the highlights of the book is the discussion of Storrs’ role in all of this. I had no idea. For all his crank ideas, Storrs taught things about personal responsibility before God that the Watchtower has since abandoned to the hurt of every Witness. Another important chapter considers the doctrines believed by the original Study Group. They tell readers from whom they got them and show us how they know. The members of that group were nothing like what the Watchtower’s history video suggest. And they weren’t all men. By 1878 the majority were women and former Methodists.
They avoid doctrinal controversy. I can only think of one place (though there might be another or two that I've forgotten) where their personal belief intrude and it seems an appropriate comment. In a footnote they write:
"While we endeavor to keep our theology out of this book, it seems to us that Thomas and others mistook the meaning of the original Greek word ἀδίκων which basically means “nonconforming.” Entire layers of additional meanings were added by Thomas and others in this debate. Presumptions were made as to the degree and cause of this nonconformance to the divine will that were not warranted by Paul’s words. Those who believed that the “unjust” were resurrected only for damnation drew from John 5:29. (“And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”) Russell’s view was that the “judgment” was a testing period based on post resurrection behavior rather than past conduct, death being the penalty for sin."
This is in reference to the No-Resurrection of the Wicked dead doctrine. I think this is well handled even if one can detect personal belief in this.
Many of those who post on this board confuse polemic with history. They're not the same thing. We need to be accurate or we fail. Earlier on this thread someone asked for an example of inaccuracy. Miracle Wheat is an example. People spout all sorts of claims. This book does not address the issue. Apparently that's something Book Three in this serioes is meant to address. What happens here is that inaccurate articles printed in the Brooklyn Eagle are parroted without regard to the fact that newspapers are seldom accurate and the Eagle was being sued. The transcript of that trial is not hard to find. The transcrip presents a different story.
Another example is that photo that is supposed to show Rutherford drunk. They're drinking root beer. You can tell that from the dispenscer in the photo. We should not be willing to spew nonsense.
-
Old Goat
I see I neglected a question. Witness reaction? Volume 1 is a 357 page 8x11 page-size book. Most witnesses don't read "big books." ... because the Watchtower is more interested in compliant illiterates than in educating its people.
-
stirred but not shaken
OG..Thanks for keeping this alive. Hopefully others here will see the importance of having their facts straight before engaging in mud slinging regarding Russell. His thinking, ideas and teaching was like so many others of that time. They didn't all agree, in fact they seldom agreed, but they were hospitable (with some exceptions) and even published each others views. Men like Barbour, Stettson, Storrs, Thomas(responsible for the Christadelphian movement), etc., were involved in dialogs that would often take pendulum type swings as world events changed.
As you point out, they call out Zydek, a so called specialist on Wt. history for his inaccuracies. It was suggested to me to read his writing when I began to search, and I know that I repeated what I read to others. But it was not accurate. Now I have egg on my face. The authors of Separate Identity are far more faithful in their research and reproduce the documentation for the reader.
It is a long read. As JWs we were not used to that. As it is, I learned from my experience with Zydek and others, not to make statements that can't be verified. It makes the Wt. dissenter (honest or otherwise) appear what the org wants others to believe - spiteful, hateful liars.
I think it's evident that I would recommend the book and the one previous about Nelson Barbour.
Oh, and thanks for clearing up Schulz' JW affiliation.
-
TD
I want to know the details. Don’t you?
Yes. Thank you OG
-
TTATTelder
I bought the Nelson Barbour book. Looking forward to digging in to it soon. Thx.
-TE