Posts by reslight2

68

Charles Russell's Last Days

by lovelylil in

jw
friends

this link contains a play by play of russell's last days including why and how he was found dead in a toga made from sheets.

thought some may find it interesting.. http://www.gtft.org/biblestudents/pastorrussellslastdays.html.

I am a Bible Student; I believe it probable that Sturgeon misunderstood and misinterpreted what Russell requested, and in his mind interpreted what Russell said in the manner as he presented it. I personally feel that Russell was probably very cold and was simply seeking some way to wrap his body so as keep from feeling so cold.

I have also suspected that Sturgeon may have been influenced in his report by Rutherford.

Although Russell had been dead for only a few weeks, the December issues had already begun to insidiously emphasize "organization", although not many of the Bible Students at that time understood the implications of such statements, nor to what end such statements would lead.

I do not know that this is true, but, if one reads closely what Sturgeon wrote, much of what he has written are his conclusions about what was happening just before Russell died, not necessarily what Russell himself was thinking.

Worship of Russell:

If anyone is actually worshiping Russell, whether ourwardly or in the heart, then that one has failed to understand what Russell presented, and by their worship of Russell would be denying what Russell taught, which would be a self-contradiction if such a person was claiming to believe in what Russell taught.

Russell spoke on this in 1910, when, in the context of speaking concerning those who find Brother Russell in the scriptures, and who were preaching Brother Russell, he stated:

I do not find it there. Some of them say that I am blinded on that subject, that they all can see better than I can. Perhaps they can, I do not know, but I think, dear friends, that there is a danger in that direction, and I would like to put you all on guard. I think it is the Lord's will that we should recognize every agency God uses, but we are not to recognize any agency of God as being in any competition whatever with the Lord or with his divine arrangement. He is the fountain of blessing, he only is most to be praised. I think that is the right sentiment. I believe you all agree with that. And yet I think there is a danger of some dear friends preaching Brother Russell. Brother Russell would like for you not to do so.
He thinks it would not be to the glory of God. Let me repeat, then, dear friends, that in my opinion we have so much of the Gospel of God, so much of his plan to study, so many opportunities of showing forth his praises, that we should employ all our time in that way. My advice, therefore, is that we give very little attention to anything outside of that.
The Scriptures do indeed say that we may render honor to him to whom honor is due, and that is applicable to anybody and everybody; as, for instance, we look back and we see Martin Luther, and he did a grand work, and we thank God for him; and we might say the same of John Wesley, and very truthfully; I am glad in God's providence he lived, and that he was a faithful man. And there were others of the Lord's people in the past. Let us be glad and rejoice in every one, and be thankful to God he has used various agencies in helping us, and in helping others, and in bringing forward his great cause; but let us not go into anything that would be at all like man-worship, for I am sure that would be displeasing to the Lord and injurious to ourslves. I remind you again of the Scripture in Revelations where the Church is pictured, which we called attention to, I believe, thirty years ago. John, the revelator, who was seeing these things, fell down to worship the angel who showed them to him, and the angel said, 'See thou do it not; worship God; I am thy fellowservant.'
And so, dear friends, if our Heavenly Father and our Heavenly Lord have used Brother Russell in any measure he is very glad and very thankful to be used. And if the Lord is pleased to use him any more, he will be glad to be used down to the last breath, but he does not want any worship, he does not want any undue adoration, he does not want any praise. He is glad to have the love of all those who are brethren of the Lord and to be considered a fellow-servant with all, striving to bring to pass all the glorious things that God has promised, striving to tell the good tidings of great joy to as many as the Lord, our God, shall call.

-1910; ("Convention Report Sermons", pg. 125) http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/russell/crs.pdf

My own thoughts pertaining the the faithful and wise servant:

http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=127

86

Here's PROOF that Charles Taze Russell Was NOT a Pennsylvania Freemason

by AndersonsInfo in

no, charles taze russell was not a pennsylvania freemason!.

this is the answer i received in a letter: .

"after a search of our records, we determined that the three russell's were not members of our organization.

reslight2

That symbol is the Egyptian Sun God RA, who is associated with Horus. No one has ever even tried to explain to me what this symbol was doing on the front cover of jw literature at the time they were supposedly "chosen" by Christ. to represent God on earth.

The Egyptians, having the spirit of perversion, perverted much symoblism of the Hebrews for use in their idolatry. -- Isaiah 19:14.

Russell, who was never a member of the JW organization, chose the special symbolization of the sun disk with wings to represent several scriptures, especially that of Malachi 4:2.

http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=322

19

FREEMASONS and Pastor Russell

by satinka in

speaking of the supernatural... if you do not already fully understand the beginning and development of the freemasons you might want to watch this 2005 series of videos (each about 10 minutes or less):.

i realize many of you already know that pastor russell who birthed the jws was a freemason.

so i thought you may find this of interest.. satinka.

reslight2

Yes, there are many who, by use of their imagination and assumptions, have assumed that Charles Taze Russell was a member of the freemasons. Actually, the tens of thousands of pages that have been produced from his works attest that he was not a member of that organization.

http://ctr.reslight.net/?feed=rss2&cat=3

68

STOP being naive - the time has come to use your PRIMAL SENSES

by Dogpatch in

jw
friends

a lot of us spend a great deal of time on this board and elsewhere discussing the intricate doctrines of the .

watch tower as if they were legitimate arguments from the bible.. one of these is the issue of blood and blood transfusion.. another is "who is the faithful and discreet slave?".

or "what is the definition of "generation" given in the bible, so we can prove the witnesses wrong?.

reslight2

Reslight:
My primal senses tell me that you are a Bible Student and still believe in Russell, despite all the god talk.
Was I right?
Randy

Randy: I am a Bible Student, and I believe that Russell was a Christian who endeavored to present Bible truths concerning God and Jesus, and the ransom sacrifice of Jesus, if that is what you mean by "believe in Russell".

68

STOP being naive - the time has come to use your PRIMAL SENSES

by Dogpatch in

jw
friends

a lot of us spend a great deal of time on this board and elsewhere discussing the intricate doctrines of the .

watch tower as if they were legitimate arguments from the bible.. one of these is the issue of blood and blood transfusion.. another is "who is the faithful and discreet slave?".

or "what is the definition of "generation" given in the bible, so we can prove the witnesses wrong?.

reslight2

Charles Taze Russell. And no doubt he borrowed that from some dissenting early Adventist who tried to reason his way out of why Jesus DIDN'T RETURN in 1844 or 1874. So millions of people spend decades arguing over a stupid idea that no one in the history of Christianity had bothered themselves with for 2000 years. Why? Because Jesus made it pretty plain how he would come back.

Jesus made it plain that he would not come back as a human being, having a body of flesh, which, if one applies the scripture, would mean that he would come back as a being a litlle lower than the angels. -- Hebrews 2:9.

It was in 1876 that Russell accepted Barbour's conclusion that Christ had already returned in 1874 (two years earlier). However, Russell had already concluded from his own study of the Bible that Jesus would not return as a human being, in the flesh, since he found out from the scriptures that Jesus had offered his humanity, his flesh, his body, in sacrifice to God. Aside from the fact that if Christ is still flesh that he is still a little lower than the angels (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:9), if he is still flesh, then we have no sacrifice for sin, we have no redemption, and and no price has been given to pay the wages of sin, etc.

The World Will See Me No More — John 14:19
http://prophecy.reslight.net/archives/12.html

primal:

1. first; original; primeval: primal eras before the appearance of life on earth . 2. of first importance; fundamental: the primal resources of a nation.

sense:

1. any of the faculties, as sight, hearing, smell, taste, or touch, by which humans and animals perceive stimuli originating from outside or inside the body. 2. these faculties collectively. 3. their operation or function; sensation . 4. a feeling or perception produced through the organs of touch, taste, etc., or resulting from a particular condition of some part of the body: to have a sense of cold. 5. a faculty or function of the mind analogous to sensation : the moral sense. 6. any special capacity for perception, estimation, appreciation, etc.: a sense of humor. 7. Usually, senses. clear and sound mental faculties; sanity: Have you taken leave of your senses? 8. a more or less vague perception or impression: a sense of security. 9. a mental discernment, realization, or recognition; acuteness: a just sense of the worth of a thing. 10. the recognition of something as incumbent or fitting: a sense of duty. 11. sound practical intelligence: He has no sense. 12. something that is sensible or reasonable: to talk sense. 13. the meaning or gist of something: You missed the sense of his statement. 14. the value or worth of something; merit: There's no sense in worrying about the past. 15. the meaning of a word or phrase in a specific context, especially as isolated in a dictionary or glossary; the semantic element in a word or group of words. 16. an opinion or judgment formed or held, especially by an assemblage or body of persons: the sense of a meeting. Defintions from dictionary.com.

Our primal senses as originally given to us through Adam have been corrupted due to sin. Adam was created with a crown of sinless glory that fully reflected the righteousness of God. Man was given dominion over all the earth, but lost that dominion due to sin, so that, we now do not see all things subjected to man. -- Genesis 1:26,28: Psalm 8:4-8; Romans 3:23; 5:12-19; Hebrews 2:7,8.

The senses the Christian is called upon to use is that which has been revealed through God's holy spirit in the Bible. Thus to the new creation, the primal, that which is of greatest importance, is what God has revealed in the Bible. To deny the purpose for which Jesus came in the flesh, that is, to give that flesh as for the life of the world, would be to deny the very basis of the redemption. Every thing in the New Testament, once properly understood, agrees with this. If we think we have found something that disgrees with this, then we have fully appreciated what was written; if this is so, usually our minds can only see the scripture through the blinding tint of man's tradition, and in doing so, we fail to get the full picture.

47

Charles Taze Russel nephew of William Huntington Russell

by truth.ceeker in

is this correct?

charles taze russel, an alleged free mason was the nephew of william huntington russell, the creator of the skull and crossbones, the americna version of the illuminati.

kinda makes sense that the apple wouldnt fall from the tree..

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.

47

Charles Taze Russel nephew of William Huntington Russell

by truth.ceeker in

is this correct?

charles taze russel, an alleged free mason was the nephew of william huntington russell, the creator of the skull and crossbones, the americna version of the illuminati.

kinda makes sense that the apple wouldnt fall from the tree..

reslight2

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.

See:

Russell's Expectations Concerning 1914

47

Charles Taze Russel nephew of William Huntington Russell

by truth.ceeker in

is this correct?

charles taze russel, an alleged free mason was the nephew of william huntington russell, the creator of the skull and crossbones, the americna version of the illuminati.

kinda makes sense that the apple wouldnt fall from the tree..

reslight2

“’Our own views are not prophecy, but interpretations of the holy prophets of old. -- Watch Tower, October 1890, page 8.’”

Prophesy:
1. To reveal by divine inspiration.
2. To predict with certainty as if by divine inspiration. See Synonyms at foretell.
3. To prefigure; foreshow.
v.intr.
1. To reveal the will or message of God.
2. To predict the future as if by divine inspiration.
3. To speak as a prophet.

While the word "prophesy" does not always have the same meaning in the Bible, it generally is meant of one as described in Deuteronomy 18:15-19; the prophets of the Old Testament were such prophets, and thus their statements are prophecy; Russell never claimed to be such a prophet, and nothing in his writings is such prophecy.

47

Charles Taze Russel nephew of William Huntington Russell

by truth.ceeker in

is this correct?

charles taze russel, an alleged free mason was the nephew of william huntington russell, the creator of the skull and crossbones, the americna version of the illuminati.

kinda makes sense that the apple wouldnt fall from the tree..

reslight2

Russell himself never claimed to the "Laodicean Messenger".

Here is Russell's original tombstone (picture circa 1921):

Evidently, sometime after 1921, that gravestone was replaced with the one that now his gravestone:

Russell's Gravestone

As I stated, Russell never claimed to be the "Loadicean Messenger". He certainly never claimed that either he or his writings were inspired by God in any such sense that would mean that he was claiming that his writings were without error. In a broad sense, every child of God is "inspired" by means of God's holy spirit.

See what I have written:
The Faithful and Wise Servant and Other Servants
http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=127

Russell stated:

Our own views are not prophecy, but interpretations of the holy prophets of old. -- Watch Tower, October 1890, page 8.

Neither must you lean upon the DAWN and the TOWER as infallible teachers. -- “The Watch Tower”, June, 1893 pg. 168.

More perhaps than any other servant, ZION’S WATCH TOWER has opposed the thought that the Church of Christ is composed of a clerical class commissioned to teach, and a lay class not commissioned to teach the divine Word: it specially has held up the inspired words, “all ye are brethren” and “one is your Master”; and has pointed out that all consecrated believers are of the “royal priesthood” each fully commissioned, not to “lord it” over others, but to sacrifice himself in the service of the truth, doing good unto all, especially to the household of faith. So with the servants of Matt. 24:49; service is their only commission, not lordship or self-appointment. All the members of the “body” are “anointed to preach” the gospel, and instructed to search the Scriptures, as we have heretofore clearly shown. This has been true ever since Pentecost, and is as true as ever to-day.
— Zion’s Watch Tower, June 15, 1896, pages 139,140.

Whatever "helps" really point us to the Bible as the only authority, and assist us in rightly dividing it, are profitable to us as servants and guides: but that which attempts to be to us instead of God's Word is a dangerous foe. -- Watch Tower, August 15, 1897, page 240.

So far as the true Church is concerned, the only authority in it is the Lord, the Head of the Church, and his Word, and the words of those whom he specially chose to be his mouth-pieces, the apostles.-- Watch Tower, July 1, 1900, page 195.

We claim no infallibility for our presentations. -- Zion’s Watch Tower, April 15, 1901, page 136.

We have urged and still urge that the dear children of God read studiously what we have presented;–the Scriptures, the applications and interpretations–and then form their own judgments. We neither urge nor insist upon our views as infallible, nor do we smite or abuse those who disagree; but regard as “Brethren” all sanctified believers in the precious blood. — Zion’s Watch Tower, October 1, 1907, page 294.

We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises, the Scriptural basis for which is already in the hands of our readers in the six volumes of SCRIPTURE STUDIES. -- Watch Tower, January 1, 1908, page 5.

We try to be careful about every word that goes into the Watch Tower, but we do not claim to be infallible; we are doing the best we can. (What Pastor Russell Said, Q56:1, 1910)

I am not a prophet.” -- What Pastor Russell Said, Q272:1, 1910.

If we have made some mistake in the time, it will not matter a bit; we are consecrated to Him unto death. Perhaps the Lord will test us along this line. But I should not mind; I tell you that I am enjoying the Lord, and enjoying the previous Word more and more every day, and if it gets still better by 1914, I don’t know how good it will be. So that, whether we have the exact moment is very immaterial to us; it is quite a secondary matter. But there is no doubt at all that the Kingdom will come–whether in that year, or another year–it is sure to come, “For the Lord of Hosts hath spoken it, and who shall disannul it”? — 1912, Convention Sermon Reports, page 439

47

Charles Taze Russel nephew of William Huntington Russell

by truth.ceeker in

is this correct?

charles taze russel, an alleged free mason was the nephew of william huntington russell, the creator of the skull and crossbones, the americna version of the illuminati.

kinda makes sense that the apple wouldnt fall from the tree..

reslight2

CT Russell was a plagiarist immersed in new age religious beliefs,

Yes, Russell did indeed accept the Bible teachings of the "age to come", the new heavens and the new earth. That will indeed be a "new age"; however, Russell had nothing at all to do with what is generally called "new age" teachings of today. Russell did not plagiarized anything; he did re-present what others before him taught; he never tried to hide that.

and he adopted, borrowed, and stole from various sources steeped in mysticism and the occult, including Masonry.

The above is, simply put, false, at least in the implications of the manner in which is was written. Russell preached against all forms of demonic occultism; nevertheless, he did borrow from many different sources of many different people illustrations, such using man's idea of secret soceity to illustrate the secret, or mystery, of the church as depicted in the Bible; the writers of the Bible did similarly.

He was a religious teachings whore and combined many facets of what he read, and came up with a form of religious Jeet Kune Do, passing these teachings off as his own original material, inspired of God and His spirit direction.

As I stated, Russell never tried to hide how he had arrived at his conclusions, nor the fact that others had helped to him to attain his understanding. Russell never claimed to be "inspired of God", and even disclaimed such. He did believe that he, and all children of God, are being led by God's spirit. (Romans 8:14) He did not believe that being led by the spirit of God meant that he was flawless, or that he was incapable of making mistakes, etc.

See what I have writte on this elsewhere:
Did Russell Claim Direct Revelation From God?
http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=43
Did Russell Claim Infallibility?
http://ctrussell.wordpress.com/2008/09/05/infallibility/

He was the equivalent of the forum user who pretends to know stuff, but is simply a copy and paste artist. It’s only impressive to those who don’t understand how google works, or who isn’t well read on a particular topic. The Bible Students who followed Russell were astounded at what Russell preached. They had never heard such things before because they were lazy-ass followers, infants needing to be spoon-fed. The trend continues today; 7.2 million Jehovah’s Witnesses can’t check a fact to save their lives.

All I can say is that the anyone who thinks the above of Russell has not genuinely studied Russell's works. Russell, however, was never associated with the Jehovah's Witnesses organization; he preached against the kind of authoritarianism of such an organization. Likewise, he preached against the kind of alleged "Good News" that is preached by that organization. Nevertheless, no Bible Student should be following Russell, except that Russell can lead the Bible Student to a greater and clearer understanding of Jesus and the God of Jesus. Anyone who settles for being "spoon-fed" has a misconception of what it is to be a true Bible Student. Nevertheless, I can say that this is exactly what many associated with the JWs wish; an organization such as the JWs appeals to the carnal desire of the flesh along this line (as do many other religious organizations).

See what I have written on this:
Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Idol
http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=803

reslight2

Posts by reslight2

The World Will See Me No More — John 14:19 http://prophecy.reslight.net/archives/12.html

The World Will See Me No More — John 14:19
http://prophecy.reslight.net/archives/12.html