Topic: Bible Students
False Representation of Russell on Various Sites
The following is in response to a series of false statements concerning Charles Taze Russell as well as some other matters. It appears that several sites have picked up on, and are repeating basically the same thing with a few variations and separate additions. One site attributes the source of this false information to the book So What’s the Difference? by Fritz Ridenour. We have found basically the same material, with variations and additions, on the following sites:
The material is directed toward Jehovah's Witnesses, but in doing so, many false statements are being made about Charles Taze Russell, and many of the teachings and practices of the Jehovah's Witnesses are being attributed to Russell. We are not with the Jehovah's Witnesses, and we are not here to defend that organization, but we do highly esteem Brother Russell for the work that he did. (Nor do wish to be understood as defending everything that Russell taught.)
It is claimed that the "cult" of Jehovah's Witnesses was founded by Charles Taze Russell. Charles Taze Russell was not the founder of the organization called "Jehovah's Witnesses." Russell did not believe in such an authoritarian organization, nor did he believe in the unique teachings of that organization. He most certainly was not the founder of that which he preached against.
http://ctr.reslight.net/category/founder-of-jws
It is claimed that Russell became convinced that hell did not exist. Actually, Russell did not become convinced that hell did not exist, but rather he came to realize the truth about what the Bible hell is. What Russell rejected was the man's false idea of a hell of eternal suffering. Once having discovered what the true Bible hell is, he held to the belief in the existence of the true Bible hell until the day that he died.
http://www.agsconsulting.com/htdbv5/r4553.htm
http://hereafter.reslight.net/archives/608.html
It is claimed that Russell published a pamphlet after hearing a sermon on the Second Coming of Christ, and evidently sometime before 1874 had made a statement that "Jesus Christ would return in 1874." Russell never published anything before 1874, so he never said anything to the effect that "Christ would return in 1874." Before 1876, Russell had no interest in time prophecies, and thus could not have been expecting, before 1874, that Christ would return in 1874. Sometime before 1876, Russell had already concluded that Christ would return as a spirit, not a human being, but he never set forth any date for when he was to return. It was in 1876, two years after 1874, that Russell came across N. H. Barbour's writings. Seeing that Barbour had come to conclusions similar to his own, Russell met with Barbour, and in 1876 Russell accepted that Christ had already returned, but that since he is a spirit being, his parousia is not seen by human eyes of flesh. Russell held to that belief until the day he died. The "pamphlet" that is evidently referred must be the booklet entitled "The Object and Manner of Our Lord's Return." This booklet was published in 1877, however, three years after 1874. Nevertheless, in that booklet Russell never mentioned 1874 at all, although he had already accepted the idea that Christ had already returned in 1874. See:
http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/11/08/supplement.html
http://ctr.reslight.net/2009/12/15/wendell1870.html
http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/russell/object.pdf
It is claimed that Russell later changed "the date [1874] to 1914." Russell did not ever change the date of Christ's return to 1914. Russell believed until the day that he died that Christ had returned in 1874. He never held to any belief that Christ would or did return in 1914 at all.
It is falsely stated that Russell claimed that "he knew Greek" and it is further stated that Russell "had claimed to be an ordained minister, but under oath he admitted that he had never been ordained." Russell never stated at any time that "he knew Greek." Russell admitted that he had never been ordained by any of the self-appointed ordainers who were claiming that only they had the right to ordain. He was not admitting that he had never been ordained by God. Russell was never charged with perjury by any judge or by any court, and certainly was not guilty of "willful perjury" as stated.
http://ctr.reslight.net/category/perjury
http://mostholyfaith.com/bible/QB/qb.asp?xRef=Q514:1#Q514:1
It is stated that Russell claimed to "have the one and only interpretation of God's word." Russell never made such claim. This claim, made by Rutherford and later JW leadership, is often falsely attributed to Russell, but Russell never claimed such an idea.
http://ctr.reslight.net/category/sole-channelauthority
Although some of the statements concerning the JWs' belief regarding Armageddon are not correct, we will not address those, since we are with the Jehovah's Witnesses, nor do we share the belief in "Armageddon" as taught by the JWs. We wish to say also that Russell never believed in "Armageddon" as it is taught by the JWs, but rather he believed that that Armageddon was to serve to discipline the nations, so as to prepare the nations for the Kingdom rule.
http://ctr.reslight.net/2010/01/10/armageddon-search.html
Contrary to the opinion of trinitarians and some others, Jesus never claimed to be equal to the Most High, and never claimed to be the Most High, but rather the son of the Most High.
http://godandson.reslight.net/archives/263.html
It is stated that "a man’s death is not enough to atone for the sins of the world." The Bible never says such a thing, but actually says that it is a man's death that does atone for the sin of the world. (Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22; 1 Timothy 2:5,6) In reality, there is nothing at all in the Bible that says that in order to pay for the sin of the world, Jesus had to God; such a claim is made by man, not by anything that is revealed to us by God through His holy spirit. Some claim that to in order to be without sin, Jesus had to be God, but if Jesus had to be God in order to obey God, then the basis of the atonement as presented in the Bible is not true, and rather than condemning in the flesh, as Paul stated (Romans 8:3), Jesus justified sin in the flesh, for he would have proved that Adam would have need to have been the Most High in order to obey the Most High.
http://atonement.reslight.net/archives/51.html
http://atonement.reslight.net/archives/149.html
Regarding the bodily resurrection: There is no resurrection of the dead soul except that it be given a body, and thus with the resurrection of Jesus, he was given a spiritual body when he was raised from the dead. Being raised with a spiritual body, he was indeed raised bodily. He was not raised, however, with the body that he died with, for he offered that body in sacrifice, although he did have access to that body until he ascended and presented that body to his God. If, however, Jesus still has the body of flesh that he died with, then either he failed to complete that sacrifice, or he took that sacrifice back; either way, such a teaching annuls the ransom sacrifice of Jesus.
http://atonement.reslight.net/archives/1.html
http://atonement.reslight.net/archives/195.html
http://hereafter.reslight.net/archives/430.html
http://hereafter.reslight.net/archives/548.html
John 16:13 does not say that one receives a spirit that will individually guide them into all truth or that one should follow any spirit that claims to to be the "holy spirit" regardless of how much a spirit distorts what was revealed earlier by the holy spirit. Many misuse John 16:13 to make it appear that they have received the holy spirit, and thus they will follow whatever is revealed by that spirit beyond and even contradiction to the things written. In reality, God has revealed his truths by means of his holy spirit through the apostles. The faith was once delivered to the saints in the first century, not by men living after the apostles died. The unipersonal God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, by means of His holy spirit, especially led the apostles into all the truths concerning Christ and what he said, and thereby the faith was delivered to the saints in the first century. (John 14:26; 16:4-13; Galatians 1:12; Ephesians 3:5; 2 Timothy 2:2; Jude 1:3) The truths revealed to the apostles and made available to us are recorded in the Bible itself. (Ephesians 3:3-12; Colossians 1:25,26; 1 John 4:6) Of course, without the holy spirit, these things that are recorded will still be a mystery to us. — Mark 4:11; 1 Corinthians 2:7-10.
Part of the truth revealed by means of the holy spirit was that there was to be an apostasy, a “falling away” from the truth of God’s Word, with strong delusions. (Matthew 13:24-30; Acts 20:29,30; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; 1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 4:3,4) This falling away had already begun in the first century, with some receiving a different spirit and preaching “another Jesus”; the apostasy was restrained for only a short while. (2 Thessalonians 2:7; 1 John 2:18,19; 2 Corinthians 11:4) The apostasy spread rapidly after the death the apostles and developed into the great “Man of Sin”, or more correctly “Insubordinate Man,” “Lawless Man”, or “Illegal Man”, a great religious system, which claimed to have the authority to add to God’s Word since their revelation was allegedly of God’s Spirit, and these revelations were claimed, in effect, to add more to the faith that scriptures say had once delivered to the saints. (Jude 1:3) The central doctrine became the false teaching that Jesus had to be God Almighty in order to provide atonement for sins. With this spirit of error in mind, the writings of the apostles were totally reinterpreted by means of the spirit of human imagination and assumptions so as to accommodate the error, and many of the Hellenic Jewish philosophies were also adapted and added to and blended in with the New Testament, even as the Jews had done with the Old Testament.
We may be adding more to this later to address some of the other matters that appear on many of the sites listed....
