That you for the dialog. Well said. I need to think about the implications.
Because its very difficult to gain credibility with a brand new holy book and anyone who claims to be directly inspired by God or to have special knowledge is quickly challenged to prove it, which as yet nobody can. So its easier to use an existing book to base your theology on and to claim to be the only one correctly interpreting it.
I think we all need time to ponder that. The WT/JW is only a 100 yrs old and tried to force a religion.
In the case of the Watchtower, Rutherford just evolved Russell's belief that Christianity had essentially been corrupted (this idea originated during the protestant reformation) and it was the Bible Student's task to distill the "truth" from the lies. Therefore sooner or later (later in this particular case) a Jehovah's Witness version of the Bible had to logically follow.
I do respectively disagree. In the mid 1900's Christianity from some small place in the middle east didn't have time to be corrupted. Russell followed Miller to Arianism and Adventistism and end-of-the-world religions.
Russell had a successor picked out. It wasn't Rutherford. Rutherford hijacked the group and commercialized it. He stole over 150 million to build his place in CA. He was never a pastor - or cared.
to follow: