Read the wikipedia articles on Russell and Rutherford, seem to me to be they very fa-liable people. Reading between the lines sounds like Russell was making a lot of money out of his books, As for questioning core Christian teachings based on Bible such as the trinity think Unitarian movement got there first and without all the snake oil.
Van, the anti-catholic part on Rutherford was an eye-opener: the whore of Babylon representing false religion (The Catholic church) is nothing to do with 'Jehovah's' revelation but dates back to 17th Century European religious wars, (another wikipedia link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholicism_in_the_United_States). All Rutherford did was extend it to any religion that was outside his ego.
My answer to your question how will history judge Rutherford: a control freak who blended Protestant pre-justices with Russell's brand of Adventism (the second coming of Christ). In my opinion his approach was meglamanic with the unfortunate consequence that he created an organisation (Jehovah's Witnesses) that could only look inwards. Although the doctrines may change they always have to refer back to Rutherford's framework
grahammt
JoinedPosts by grahammt
-
23
How will history treat Judge Rutherford?
by Vanderhoven7 inmark jones writes:.
how will history treat joseph rutherford?.
like ben gorden has said, it would depend on who’s looking back.
-
-
grahammt
-
10
message for belbab
by hellenback ini know 2 names of elders at bromley cong robert slee who was spitting image of rutherford and gerald archer.
another was peter king..
-
-
grahammt
Probably a bit late for this thread, I was at Bromley congregation 1974 to 1976 and remember Robert Slee well. I speak very much as an ex-JW and do not have a flattering opinion of the elders, most struck me as dull and self-righteous.
Robert is the elder I remember best as he headed my local Tuesday study night and ministry. I always admired his intellect but struck me he could have a mean temper. and keep inner thoughts well hidden. Before my Baptism he asked me some difficult theological questions which weren't in any of Watchtower literature: did he have secret doubts ?
Yes he was wealthy with the nice house and cars but would not hold that against him, some of the happiest memories of this period were the summer garden parties he held.
Knew Gerald Archer before he became an elder, surprised he stayed.
Have better memories of congregation members.
Always interested to find out what happened to the people I remember -
1
JW is not a Christian religion, it is a dangerous Zoroastrian cult
by grahammt inthe assumption that the bible should be treated as an authorised holy book is due to the protestant burden of having to use the written word as the ultimate authority: the catholic church relies on apostolic succession.
the reality is the bible is motley collection of writings to cover: early stories and myths; abrahamic covenant; the rise and history of the nation of israel; gospels and early church letters.
the odd book out is the last one revelation which if taken on its own has no connection to any of the proceeding: it is a zoroastrian conception of a cosomological fight between good and evil; it has exotic and mythical imagery.
-
-
grahammt
PS should have included Judaic law, poetry and the prophets in the Bible books
-
1
JW is not a Christian religion, it is a dangerous Zoroastrian cult
by grahammt inthe assumption that the bible should be treated as an authorised holy book is due to the protestant burden of having to use the written word as the ultimate authority: the catholic church relies on apostolic succession.
the reality is the bible is motley collection of writings to cover: early stories and myths; abrahamic covenant; the rise and history of the nation of israel; gospels and early church letters.
the odd book out is the last one revelation which if taken on its own has no connection to any of the proceeding: it is a zoroastrian conception of a cosomological fight between good and evil; it has exotic and mythical imagery.
-
-
grahammt
The assumption that the Bible should be treated as an authorised Holy book is due to the Protestant burden of having to use the written word as the ultimate authority: the Catholic church relies on Apostolic succession. The reality is the Bible is motley collection of writings to cover: early stories and myths; Abrahamic covenant; the rise and history of the nation of Israel; gospels and early church letters. The odd book out is the last one Revelation which if taken on its own has no connection to any of the proceeding: it is a Zoroastrian conception of a cosomological fight between good and evil; it has exotic and mythical imagery. It is full of symbolic number and cryptic clues. This is very different from the previous books which have earthly narratives and discussion of human and theological values.
Without the book of Revelation all of Jehovah's Witness doctrines and what the Bible teaches would be meaningless.
The Bible has to be interpreted literally to arrive at 1914 date; Methuselah must live 969 years to meet the cosmological prediction.
Natural science must be rejected to give credence to mythological character of Revelation
Any event in the Bible can only be seen in terms of Revelation out-come
Anti-christedom doctrines are developed to demonstrate that all other Christian churches are the evil.Jesus must die on a stake as only the evil churches believe in the cross.
A restrictive and coercive life style is imposed to define obedience to the ultimate good. In reality good for a Jehovah's Witness is defined in avoiding anything that might be considered bad. There is never any sense of personal humility or a warm generous spirit to anyone outside the cult.
What we have is the meglamanic work of Rutherford without any real understanding of the human values of Jesus which is central to Christianity
As you may guess I was a JW from 1974 to 1976 at the height of 1914 expectation. I was given the usual guilt complex by the elders when I stopped attending, but who's looking stupid now ?