Posts by vienne

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

Yes, I have read them. We haven't used any of them as a resource. Breninge's book is interesting, though I think he drifts into well-trodden and sometimes wrong ground. Garbe's book is outside our era of interest, and I'm probably not competent enough to comment on it.

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

Nathan, you're most welcome

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

One other thought before I get back to work. It is okay [someone asked] if you call me by my first name, Rachael.

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

I should add a comment on Zydeck's biography of Russell. It is contrived, inaccurate, and misleading. If you want to be entertained, read it. If you want to be informed, save your money.

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

A People for His name was an honest attempt to write Watchtower history. It is useful. I own a copy. White had limited resources, drawing almost entirely from The Watchtower, which is a primary source, but does not present the entire picture. While a researcher shouldn’t discount it, the passage of time and the greater availability of original documents marks his book as dated. It is occasionally wrong, usually in minor points.

History books since Schnell? Schnell’s “Thirty Years” is the personal narrative of an angry man who resented being counseled over selling books to fellow Witnesses. He admits to a reputation as a womanizer. He contradicts letters he wrote to Rutherford. Personal narratives have a place in research. I own a copy of this book. We don’t quote from it because we’re writing about an earlier era. Remember personal narratives tell the story as the writer would have it, not exactly as it happened.

Desolations of the Sanctuary is another publication one cannot ignore. Some writers rely totally on polemics and controversial literature. They don’t have access to or are too lazy to find original documents. Contemporary though controversial literature is an original source document. Given its nature, use it with caution and verify any claims made.

E. Gruss’s Apostles of Denial and subsequent books cannot be ignored, but often enough they are misleading or fanciful. We quote once from AoD in volume 2, but only to refute an off the wall claim. Gruss is unreliable as are most books and dissertations that are refutations.

Beckford’s book is still worth a read, but severely dated and not a history but a sociologist’s treatment. Beckford told me last year that he did not understand the Russell era at all. This shows in his book, but if you research Jehovah’s Witnesses, you should read it.

Another sociologist, Norman Long, wrote Social Change and the Individual which considers Watchtower adherents in Zambia. This is not my era of specialty, but it seems accurate.

Herman Hesse’s book, Am mtigsten waren immer wieder die Zeugen Jehovahs, covers the Nazi era. It is interesting, accurate, enlightening, but it is in German.

Not really a history, but a personal narrative, Liebster’s Facing the Lion is a must read if you research Witnesses in the Nazi era.

George Chryssides, a colleague, has written several books and papers. The best of his work is Jehovah’s Witnesses: Continuity and Change. I wrote a review. It’s on our history blog. There are places where he errs. But this is a stellar generalist book. It is, unfortunately, very expensive. One of the reasons we publish through lulu is cost to readers. Our moderately priced book would be nearly 150.00 if Reutlage published it.

Emily Baran’s Dissent on the Margins is an excellent book dealing with the Communist era and drawn from official documents. You need to read this one. Aside from the quality of her book, I should say that Emily is just a really nice person.

M. Cole’s books are dated, but in their own way they’re original source material for the era in which they were published.

Penton’s Apocalypse Delayed must be read. Ignore the first two editions. The third edition corrects errors of fact and approach. It is by far the best edition. I should disclose that Penton said nice things about us in the third edition. His history of Witnesses in Canada is good.

V. V. Blackwell’s O’re the Ramparts they Watched is a personal and historical narrative from a long-time Watchtower lawyer. Good.

L. A. Stevens’ Salute! The Case of the Bible vs. the Flag is so-so.

Manwaring’s Render unto Caesar is stellar.

The Watchtower’s product, Jehovah’s Witnesses: Proclaimers of God’s Word, is good. It suffers from organizational dysfunction and it is one-sided. It’s main fault is lack of balance in some select areas. You can’t ignore the book, but it’s not really a history book; it’s a paean.

5

Has anyone done a point by point refutation of Fritz Springmeier's The Watchtower and the Masons: A Preliminary Investigation?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

is there a point by point refutation of that book?it's the source of all of the "russell was a mason" conspiracy.

i started reading the book and i noticed some pretty obvious holes in the argument... for example, he writes that the pyramid-shaped monument is "proof" and we all know it isn't.here is the book if you want to check it out.https://archive.org/details/fritzspringmeierthewatchtowerandthemasons1990_201603.

vienne

I read this and we cite it in our book. He gets everything wrong and makes wild claims. Then he admits he didn't really research his topic. He lists all the Russells he can think of that may have been Masons to infer that C. T. was one, then tells his readers he hasn't connected them. Bad book.

An example of his poor work is his claim that J. Paton baptized Russell. Russell was baptized in 1874, long before he met Paton. This is the only point we note in Separate Identity. Nothing else in his book is worth noting.

Springmeier has a troubled personal history. Personally I look deeply into a books quality when that's the case.

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

I should be in bed instead of posting here. Bruce and Rawe were friends prior to Rawe's last disfellowshipping. As I understand it from someone who should know, Bruce dropped contact afterward, though if Richard called him he was respectful. It is in Bruce's nature to treat people, even those with whom he disagrees, with respect. Bruce is not an 'apostate' what ever that really is.

43

Who is B.W. Schulz? Anyone know?

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

i am writing an article on whether c.t.

russell was a mason.

i am of the opinion that he was not, given the evidence.. i just bought b.w.

vienne

joe, have you read the book? It's verifiable history. Hard to fault that. The WTS has a copy and never expressed an objection to it. Bruce is an old timer who's lived a significant amount of watchtower history. Our books are JUST history. There is no agenda but detailed, factual history. Hard to fault that.

43