Posts by vienne

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

No, they preached a very unpopular, often ridiculed doctrine. The logical conclusion is that they believed what they preached. I am not claiming that Watch Tower doctrine, especially their approach to prophecy, is logical, scriptural or in anyway good. But one doesn't promote a doctrine that brings you ridicule and opposition if the sole goal is to sell books.

Many people believe irrational, unfounded things. Doing so does not mean one has a selfish motive. Just that they're irrational. The Watch Tower movement in Russell's day is part of a larger Millennialist [non-Adventist belief in Christ's near return] movement. Its doctrines overlap with other parts of it. Nothing in it is unique beyond an aggressive evangelism and Russell's personality. The total mix of doctrine is what made Russellism unique.

There is a disconnect between Russell's era and today's Witnesses. Witnesses are lineal descendants of the Russell era Watch Tower, but it is a different religion, one that Russell would have rejected. Still, I do not see Witness authorities as seeking selfish gain. There is no more evidence for that than there is for Russell. No matter what one thinks of current Witness belief, they plow all their money back into promoting their doctrine. So they're 'true believers,' even if one finds their doctrine unscriptural or irrational or both.

An evil motive is not necessary to mislead or abuse. Sometimes a firm conviction that we're right, left unchallenged, is enough to cause abuses.

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

F,

You're presuming things not in evidence. And you forget that the Watch Tower in Russell's day was a very minor movement. It did not draw much money. Russell expended his own money so that he died nearly penniless. You're confusing the modern Watch Tower with Russell's day. When Mrs. Russell went after her husband's money, the Watch Tower had to open its books to the court. They did the same in the Russell v. Brooklyn Eagle case. The accounts show that his books never paid for themselves. On those few years where there was a marginal income from them, the money was put back into the work. This does not certify Russell as blameless or right in doctrine, but it does undermine your conclusion. IF one attacks the Watch Tower, there are better, truer things on which to focus.

I do not deny that the religion hurts people. I would never say it does not. Nor would I excuse it when it happens. But your following the wrong path here, one that is not based on real events.

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

F,

The flaw in your reasoning is that the Watchtower has always taught an unpopular doctrine. They know it is unpopular and controversial. If they really wanted to attract numbers, would they not preach a more palatable doctrine?

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

Being wrong isn't corruption in and of itself. It may be stupidity, ignorance, or moronic, but its not corruption without bad motive. It's easy to attribute wrong motive, but it's much harder to prove. It is unethical to attribute a wrong motive when a more obvious and more neutral one exists. In this case, it's that they believed what they said.

Earnest belief does not free one from responsibility for what they write or say. But when it comes to adherents, those who chose to believe, the final responsibility rests on them. If something seems irrational, it probably is. Few schools teach formal logic today. But you can educate yourself to spot logic flaws. If one feels deceived by the Watchtower, the fault is ultimately theirs. We are responsible for what we believe. We cannot remove or deflect that responsibility by pointing to someone else, no matter how wrong headed their claims may be.

Another point to note is this: The phrase 'false doctrine' is common. It is also a bit of misdirection. Misleading, scripturally unfounded, illogical doctrines they may be. But they are truly doctrines. We should call them by a name that truly says what we mean. I'm not trying to create new phraseology, really. Intellectual abbreviations such as "false doctrine" can be useful shortcuts. But my personal preference is for a more exacting phraseology.

Being hurt by the Watchtower does not give one license to make things up. As Dr. Schulz and I write we encounter that repeatedly in the work of others some of whom have academic credentials. "Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" is a good working hypothesis when researching anything. If we or anyone on this board or another writer craft unfounded myth or suppose things without any evidence, we give grounds to reject both our work and us personally.

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

Bethel,

Russell's actual words were:

But let us suppose a case far from our expectations: suppose that A.D. 1915 should pass with the world's affairs all serene and with evidence that the "very elect" had not all been "changed" and without the restoration of natural Israel to favor under the New Covenant. (Rom. 11:12,15.) What then? Would not that prove our chronology wrong? Yes, surely! And would not that prove a keen disappointment? Indeed it would! It would work irreparable wreck to the Parallel Dispensations and Israel's Double, and to the Jubilee calculations, and to the prophecy of the 2300 days of Daniel, and to the epoch called "Gentile Times," and to the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days, the latter of which marking the beginning of the "harvest" so well fulfilled its prediction, "Oh, the blessedness of him that waiteth and cometh unto the 1335 days!" None of these would be available longer. What a blow that would be! One of the strings of our "harp" would be quite broken!

However, dear friends, our harp would still have all the other strings in tune and that is what no other aggregation of God's people on earth could boast. We could still worship a God so great and grand that none other could compare with him. We should still see the grandeur of his salvation in Christ Jesus--"a ransom for all." We should still see the wonders of "the hidden mystery," our fellowship with our Redeemer in "his death" and also "in his resurrection" to "glory, honor and immortality"--"the divine nature." If, therefore, dearly beloved, it should turn out that our chronology is all wrong, we may conclude that with it we have had much advantage everyway.

-- October 1, 1907, Watch Tower

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

Russell did not believe that Armageddon was the destruction of all. Witness doctrine on Armageddon is a product of an article by Rutherford in 1929.Russell believed that Armageddon was a period of anarchy following the end of gentile times when socialistic labor would turn against capitalistic governance. Chaos would ensue, eventually turning people to god's kingdom as expressed in a restored kingdom with its capitol in Jerusalem. Neither Russell nor modern Witnesses believe Armageddon means the end of the world.

As I said before, Time is at Hand was NOT Russell's first book. First in the Millennial Dawn series is Plan of the Ages, an update to Russell's Food for Thinking Christians. I own these and have read them many times.

I own and have read many times virtually everything Russell ever wrote. Its my job. I write history. I'm the coauthor of a major work on the Russell era.

https://www.amazon.com/Separate-Identity-Organizational-Readers-1870-1887/dp/1304969401

It is you who are mistaken. Almost everything Russell wrote is available on line. I suggest you confirm your view or give it up. Let me put it to you bluntly. Cite the reference to Russell's work that proves your point. Inform yourself.

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

Russell did not say the end would occur in 1914. He believed 1914 was the end of Gentile Times. He did not hold an 'end of the world' belief.

83

True or False did the Watchtower Corporation create false doctrines intentionally to enhance the proliferation of their own publications ?

by Finkelstein in

much as been revealed over the years to the date setting doctrines made by the wts.

such as ( 1874, 1914, 1925 , 1975 this generation, the last days, the end times etc.... which were not created by other christian based faiths.. as to critically examine why might reveal a hidden agenda to all these date setting proclamations.. the point in question is did the wts and its leaders intentionally manipulate or exploit the preaching of the gospel to enhance the proliferation of their own printed publications ?.

i would say convincingly yes, no question.

vienne

The 1914 date did not come from Russell. Barbour borrowed the date from earlier writers, all of whom were British Millenarians, often Anglicans. The same is true of 1874 which was looked to by others since the 1830s. 1914 was 'shared' by some Advent Christians.

I see Russell as a "True" believer, even if he was truly wrong. 1925 seems to be unique to the Watch Tower. Rutherford's reaction to the failure seems to mark him as fully convinced. F. W. Franz played with a date in the mid 1970s from the 1940s on. He was a fruit cake, but he appears to have believed his own propaganda.

38

Is There Any Thing That Would Make A JW SERIOUSLY Question Their Religion?

by minimus in

jw
friends

i realize that jehovah’s witnesses have been dumbed down for long time now.

.

still, i think there must be something that would make them really question their beliefs, even their life.. i think that if witnesses were told they could take blood or that disfellowshipping was unloving, they might stop and take a hard look at everything they have sacrificed their lives for.. i know the organization has muddled these subjects before but the i think even die hard witnesses might start to second guess the governing body..

vienne

IN 1924 Rutherford suggested in a Watch Tower article that the behavior other Witnesses was the biggest stumbling block. I think that remains true. Some offenses appear unforgivable. Elders and others prominent in the Witness organization are the 'face' of the religion. If they are insulting, as they often are, or domineering or self-entitled, they will drive others away. I have no reliable statistical data, but from incidental interviews with lapsed Witnesses this and a desire to live a life style different that that expected of adherents seems to be the most significant cause of disaffection.

12

Important Question about Bible Examiner Vol. XXI No. 1 (whole No. 313), October 1876, pages 27, 28

by Saename in

so i was just comparing several quotes from different watchtower publications related to 1914. in my experience, pre–1914 publications point to this year as the end, and post–1914 publications point to this year as the start of the last days.

so i was reading awake!

from 1973 january 22 p. 8 where it claims that jehovah's witnesses have always pointed to year 1914 as the beginning of the last days.

vienne

Smid, that's not Russell's teaching on 1914. He believed a time of anarchy would follow the end of gentile times and that eventually nations would submit to God's kingdom as represented by a reestablished Jewish kingdom. Russell did not believe in a world ending event either. Nor did he believe in an Armageddon similar to what Witnesses believe. Current Witness doctrine developed in 1929.

The vignette on the front of the Golden Age from the mid to late 1920s shows the Russell view. In the illustration capital and labour face of while God's earthly kingdom prospers. See page 90 in Time is at Hand. [1915 edition].