If Jehovah's Witnesses Were To Have A Spin-Off Religion, What Would It Be?

by minimus 106 Replies latest jw friends

  • RR
    RR
    How did you come to the conclusion that he is the "faithful and wise servant"?

    Ken, It might be debated that the term, " faithful and wise servant " (vs. 45), could be applied to the Lord's people as a whole class. On the other h and , it may be applied to any individual who would serve others the truth, "meat in due season" when Jesus returns. In this passage, as well as the parallel account in Luke 12, it appears clear that "those servant s [plural]" (vs. 37) who should be alert and watching refer to all the Lord's faithful people. Another suggestion might be that The Watch Tower organization itself would fill the role as "a faithful and wise servant ." However, on close examination, within the same context in Luke 12, is a clear distinction between one who serves and those who are served:

    "Blessed are those servant s [plural], whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching. . . Who then is that faithful and wise steward [singular] whom the Lord would make ruler over his household to give them [plural] . . .meat in due season." (Vss. 37, 42)
    Although all should be watching, one servant would be a steward over the rest of the servant s for dispensing the truth due at the end of the age.

    This responsibility would not imply lordship, apostolic inspiration or even origination of truths. Although Brother Russell rarely discussed these texts, when pressed to identify himself as fulfilling this role, he did not deny it. As his friends would say, "A servant is known by his service". If the content of his message and impact of his work are recognized as uniquely significant at the end of this age, then the conclusion that the Lord selected Charles Taze Russell as "that servant " is obvious.

    The position carried risks; the office, specific temptations. One temptation described in Matthew 24 was that once having proclaimed the presence of the Lord, the " servant " might with the passage of time be tempted to reconsider and say the Lord after all had not come yet. The other temptation might be to become abusive in his peculiar position and "smite his fellow servant s" (Matthew 24:48-51). No legitimate accusation of either of these sins could be laid at Brother Russell's feet. (Ironically, one Bible student offshoot, which postponed Jesus' coming to later dates and have historically oppressively ruled over people, have accused Bible students faithful to the original writings of Pastor Russell as the "evil slave class.")

    Still it might be asserted out that Br. Russell "did not originate" all the doctrines he taught and that he "made mistakes." But he disclaimed divine inspiration though he obviously possessed divine guidance in his writings. A " servant " might be allowed to make mistakes whereas the apostles' words in Scripture would allow no room for mistakes. Brother Russell, as a willing c and idate for this role, merely organized the assorted beliefs of the "cleansed sanctuary" class of the nineteenth century? which had freed itself from the doctrines of Dark Ages. He was not an originator; he was an organizer and a dispenser. He was not a lord over others; he was a servant ?a faithful servant .

    While he may not have added his name to pamphlets and tracts, he had no such qualms when it came to Pastor Russell's Sermons (hundreds of them published in newspapers all over the world).

    Ken, the Sermons were published AFTER his death, not during his lifetime.

    RR

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    R.R.,

    You write that "the Sermons were published AFTER his death not during his lifetime." I don't know if we're talking about the same sermons; I'm talking about the ones published in the newspapers DURING Russell's lifetime. I suggest you conduct a search for "Pastor Russell's Sermons." You should get at least 15 documents mentioning them.

  • wednesday
    wednesday

    I reember when the term"jehovah's Christian witness" came into use, in the 80's. The real jws said it was a apostate term and not to use it.

  • RR
    RR

    My Mistake Ken, you mentioned Pastor Russell's Sermons, there was a book of some 800 pages published by the Society in 1917 by that name. As to the Newspaper sermons, I don't have a problem with that. How many preachers of his day had newspaper columns? Plnety. Many have them today.

    RR

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    R.R.,

    So, how were those who wrote their names to tracts and pamphlets (whereas Russell didn't) trying to make their name famous, but his name in newspaper columns somehow is not the same? You seem to try to justify it by stating that other preachers did it also, so it was o.k. for Russell too. Notice that he doesn't mention books and magazines/ZWT (as his name appears as editor or author just as those pamphlets and tracts are authored by those he claims are seeking name fame.}

  • RR
    RR

    How many anonymous newspaper colums do you know of?

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    R.R.,

    They need not have been anonymous and he could have done it without using his name. He could have titled them Sermons from Zion's Watch Tower and Tract Society or People's Pulpit Association or Bible Students or Brooklyn Tabernacle.

  • RR
    RR

    Seems to me Ken, that you, like many others are grasping at straws, wanting to find whatever you can to discredit the man. GIve it up!

    RR

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    RR,

    He questioned the motives of preachers who wrote pamphlets and tracts signing their names, accusing them of seeking name fame. I'm merely returning him the same consideration.

  • RR
    RR

    Actually Ken, other than the newspaper column, his name never appears on any of his books as author, I could be mistaken, but I don't think they did.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit