Russell Founder of WTS - Not the JWs

One has responded to our finding that Russell was not the founder of the JWs, and several assertions have been made that are misleading, to say the least.

The claim is evidently that since Russell was the principal founder of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, and since the JWs are now using that legal entity as their "legal instrument", that this is supposed to mean that Charles Taze Russell was actually the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses organization. Of course, in reality, the legal instrument as Russell envisioned it, was not designed to be the legal instrument of an organization such as the "Jehovah's Witnesses." As he designed the Society, it was a legal entity for coordinating communication among the Bible Students and as a service organization.

When Russell died, Rutherford -- by means of deceit and legal trickery -- gained control of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, and almost immediately began to use that legal entity as a means of slowly producing what would become known as the JW organization. As a result many of the Bible Students rejected Rutherford's new ideas, and thus indirectly stopped supporting the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society. At first, the vast majority of the earlier Bible Students did not fully realize what was happening, or simply believed that the matter would correct itself in time. Thus, as reported, on the jwfaq.blogspot.com site, about 20% of the Bible Students stopped supporting Rutherford in 1917. This does not mean, as the Watch Tower leaders later stated, that they left "Jehovah's organization". That which the JWs mistakenly call "Jehovah's organization" did not exist in 1917, although Rutherford had already begun to implement ideas as a basis for such an organization. Rutherford slowly created his organization by rejecting the core teachings of Russell and the Bible Students. What is not stated on the jwfaq site, however, is that in the years that followed, many more of the Bible Students either voluntarily stopped supporting Rutherford, or else they found themselves disfellowshipped by Rutherford's followers for not accepting Rutherford's new teachings. Thus, according to the Watchtower's own published statements, by 1928 more than seventy-five percent of the Bible Students had stopped supporting the Society. Nevertheless, there were thousands who were associated with the Watch Tower after 1914 who evidently were never fully appreciative of the scriptural testimony concerning the local church organization, nor even in the central teaching of the "ransom for all." These, along with some of the earlier Bible Students, became the followers of Rutherford, and could not actually be called "Russell's followers" as is done on one of the sites.

Russell, however, was a non-sectarian, and he was not the founder of any religion; he did not believe in such an organization as Rutherford later formed after Russell died. Rutherford, in fact, rejected the core teachings of Russell, and replaced them with his own teachings. Rutherford, not Russell, was the one who set up an authoritative organization. Rutherford evidently realized that the core teaching of the "ransom for all" would not be an effective doctrine to sustain an organization such as he envisioned, and thus he dropped that teaching to make it a ransom for some, but not all, and he adopted a teaching of eternal destruction for almost all who disagreed with him, something Russell never thought to do. Russell was certainly not the founder of that which he did not believe in.

The fact that Russell and his associates started the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society does not mean that Russell was responsible for what happened afterwards, anymore than Jesus, in instituting his church can be held responsible for others who came after to him who sought to lord it over the church, and sought to kill others who disagreed with them. That organization came into being after Russell died. At the protest of thousands of Bible Students all over the world, Rutherford, after Russell's death, proceeded to form his organization, and began to teach almost the opposite of what Russell taught concerning the atonement. Over the next 15 years, most of the Bible Students around the world no longer supported Rutherford's new organization, so that the Bible Students movement, as a whole, continued to exist separate from the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.

The statement is made that "Russell’s group, the International Bible Students, had their name formally changed by Rutherford in 1931 to Jehovah’s Witnesses." This is misleading since the name of the Bible Students movement itself was not changed in 1931 to "Jehovah's Witnesses." Rutherford did have the name "Jehovah's Witnesses" adopted by his followers in order to distinguish his organization from the Bible Students who continued their own work separate from the WTB&TS. This is admitted in the resolution that was printed in The Watchtower, September 15, 1931, page 279, in that the name of "Jehovah's Witnesses" was being adopted because "shortly following the death of Charles T. Russell a division arose between those associated with him in such work, resulting in a number of such withdrawing from the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, and who have since refused to cooperate with said Society and its work and who decline to concur in the truth as published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society in The Watch Tower and the other recent publications of the said above-named corporations, end have opposed and do now oppose the work of said Society in declaring the present message of God’s kingdom and the day of the vengeance of our God against all parts of Satan’s organization; and said opposing ones have formed themselves into divers and numerous companies and have taken and now bear such names as, to wit, 'Bible Students, ' 'Associated Bible Students,' 'Russellites teaching the truth as expounded by Pastor Russell,' 'Stand-Fasters,' and like names, all of which tends to cause confusion and misunderstanding." Although I doubt that most 'Bible Students' today would agree that the statement is totally accurate, it does point out that the "Bible Students" were separate from the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, and that this is the reason for the "new name."

The name "International Bible Students Association" is the name of a legal entity in England; that name was never changed, and the legal entity still has that name to this day. The Bible Students movement itself continues to this day separate from the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society. Brother Russell did use the term "International Bible Students" as well as "International Bible Students Association" to describe the Bible Students movement. Thus, legally, it had two different applications, one as referring to the legal entity by that name, and the other regarding the Bible Students movement as a whole. However, Russell, in the Photo Drama of Creation presentation, also spoke of the conference in Jerusalem that is spoken of in Acts 2:16-18 as the first I.B.S.A. convention. In doing so, he was not referring to the legal entity in London.

From the Photo Drama of Creation

Today, however, Bible Students rarely use "International Bible Students Association" to describe themselves, evidently because many would confuse such an expression with the legal entity that still bears that name. The phrase "International Bible Students", however, is used in reference to an international convention, not as a "name" for the movement, but simply because the convention of Bible Students is international in scope. Some Bible Students have recently put a site called "International Bible Students Association", but this is obviously not the legal entity in London that is of the same name.

----- Ronald R. Day, Sr.

This above was originally published in Aprit of 2009; it has been edited several times since. Republished in September of 2014; Updated in August, 2021.

++++++++++++++++++++

Russell Says The Jews Are Superior Morally and Intellectually?

By Ronald R. Day, Sr.

The following is from "Bloodlines of the Illuminati," written by Fritz Springmeier.

Russell Says The Jews Are Superior Morally and Intellectually

Russell preached that the Jews are superior to Christians morally and intellectually.

"Judged in this broad, general way, who will dispute that the twelve million Jews are not in advance of the average of Christendom intellectually and morally?" C.T. Russell.

That's quite appropriate for a man who has turned the Messiah basically into a collection of Jews. Russell's hatred for Christianity could serve the interests of any group bent on Christendom's destruction.

The above contains a quote from a sermon of Brother Russell. Below is a link to the entire sermon:

Jews Not to be Converted to Christianity

If one reads what Russell actually said in context, it should become apparent that Russell had just described scripturally the mission of the true church and separateness of the world of the true church that is enrolled in heaven, and showing that the vast majority of those professing to be Christian are only Christian in name only. It is from this standpoint as related to the millions of professing Christians who were not giving in evidence of actually being consecrated to service of Christ that Brother Russell was speaking as being a broad general way of most Christians that Brother Russell compared the Jew to both "intellectually and morally." Russell was not saying that the Jew is inherently superior to those of Christendom, but he was speaking of his observation in which he could see that most Jews were far ahead of most professing Christians both morally and intellectually. 

Earlier in the study being quoted from above, Brother Russell criticizes the Jews:

The Jewish rabbis give practically all of their attention to the reading of prayers in the synagogue, which the people could do as well for themselves, and to the killing of the cattle, which can be done better by our great beef trusts -- which indeed do the most of it and then leave it for the rabbis to mark "kosher." God's Word through the Prophet applies to Jews as well as to Christians --"My people perish for lack of knowledge;" [Hosea 4:6] "There is a famine in the land, not for bread, but for the hearing (understanding) of the Word of the Lord." [Amos 8:11]

In this quote, he classifies both the Jew as well as the Christians as lacking in knowledge. 

Christendom

Christendom, as Brother Russell used it, refers to the alleged "Christian" kingdoms of the earth as supposedly the kingdom of Christ; Brother Russell stated in the study quoted above: 

But Christendom is not the Church of Christ at all. The term is a misnomer. It signifies Christ's Kingdom; whereas Christ's Kingdom, Messiah's Kingdom, is not yet, but is still waited for by the Jews and by the true Church --the saintly "little flock" of the New Testament. Both Jews and saintly Christians still pray, "Thy Kingdom come; Thy will be done;" and both still recognize that Messiah's Kingdom is the need of the world, and the hope of the world--and both are waiting for it.

Being a false "Christ's kingdom," and filled with sectarianism, such must come to an end in order for the peoples of these so-called "Christian" nations to be freed so as to learn how to serve God with one consent in the millennium. -- Isaiah 2:2-4; 26:9; Zephaniah 3:9.

By the same line of reasoning, we should realize that what is now what is often called Judaism is not what is to be approved by God, but rather the true Judaism which is to eventually accept Jesus as their Messiah under the new covenant which Brother Russell believed was yet future (and we believe is still yet future).  However, one could say, however, that true Judaism is in harmony with true Christianity. Thus, Brother Russell stated, evidently speaking of true Judaism: "Jesus and his apostles expounded the harmony between Christianity and Judaism, nevertheless comparatively few Christians today seem to grasp the subject clearly." -- "Christianity and the Law." Watch Tower, April 1, 1912, page 117.

And yet, so must present-day traditional Judaism and its blindness (*** add references) must be taken away, thus freeing the Jewish people so that may be enlightened so as to serve Jehovah with one consent. (Isaiah 2:2-4; Zephaniah 3:9) This cannot be done without their acceptance of Jesus as being their Messiah. Brother Russell stated, ""We understand one of the first things of the new order of things will be pouring upon Israel their share of the blessings and their eyes will be opened to recognize Him whom they rejected more than eighteen hundred years ago." -- What Pastor Russell Said, page 94.

Illuminati Bloodline

Any approval of the idea of there being any such "Illuminati Bloodline," as described by various "conspiracy" theorists, automatically rejects the Bible, and the basis of the ransom for all as revealed in the Bible, since Christ died for all who are dying in Adam. Adam and all of Adam's descendants are condemned in Adam. (Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22) We find nothing in the Bible about any special condemned bloodlines in our time. Russell only believed in one condemned bloodline (although he never used the word "bloodline"), that all races are descended from one blood (Acts 17:26), and that since all are condemned in one man, then only one sinless man is needed to redeem the entire human race. The Bible does not teach, nor did Russell teach, anything about any bloodlines today that are outside the power of the blood of Jesus to redeem.

It is the Bible itself, however, that shows that the Jewish people were alone chosen by God to receive the Law, and to the extent that any Jew would seek to keep that Law,  would, of course, result in better moral standards than all other nations. Was God being racist to do this? From the standpoint of the carnally-minded, it would seem so; it is only as one appreciates God's overall purposes that one can begin to comprehend the details of God's purposes.

Additionally, it is totally false that Russell turned the Messiah "into a collection of Jews." Jesus, of course, was indeed a Jew, but the body of Christ is mostly Gentiles, taken from all tribes and nations of the earth.

Russell's Alleged Hatred for Christanity

Russell had no hatred for Christianity. Only someone who is totally ignorant of what Russell taught or one who has a somewhat willful desire to misrepresent Russell would consider any idea that Brother Russell hated Christianity. In the sermon quoted above, Brother Russell stated:

The world misunderstands Christianity; so do the majority of Christians. The general misconception is, that the Church of Christ is in the world as a reformatory institution--to give the world correct moral ideas and to help keep them out of drunkard graves and from all kinds of licentiousness, brutality, profanity, etc. Indeed, the world measures Christianity by its success in fighting down these evils, and many Christians have the same false views.

This does not sound like Brother Russell was expressing a hatred for Christianity, but rather that he was defending Christianity, although he does point some false concepts of what many think that Christianity is supposed to be doing.

Russell, however, most often spoke of those who belong to Christ as being "Christian." Russell did, at times, refer to "nominal Christianity," noting an adherence to Christianity in name only. While one could say he hated the disobedience of Jesus as shown in actions and beliefs of nominal Christianity, he had no hatred for Christianity itself. In many cases, I would have quote extremely long portions of what Russell wrote in order for the reader to understand how Brother Russell spoke of a false or nominal Christianity as opposed to true Christianity. Here are a couple of short quotes from Russell regarding Christianity that could be easily understood:

Christianity is not selfish, but the reverse. -- Watch Tower, March 15, 1909, page 91.

This certainly doesn't sound like he hated Christianity.

True science has never contradicted the Bible; has never touched it but to confirm. The same God made both the world and the Word, so that there can be no contradiction. It is only false science that has seemed -- or been made to appear -- in conflict with Christianity. -- Watch Tower, September 1, 1904, page 262

If Russell hated Christianity, why would he seek to defend Christianity in relation to what he calls "false science"?

For more related to this see:
https://rlctr.blogspot.com/p/racist.html

The Color Line Found Necessary

 We are reproducing below a portion from an article from the Watch Tower, April 1, 1914, that is often misrepresented as proof that Brother Russell was a racist.

While it seems that Brother Russell gave a solid explanation of their decision, many still wish to force this into making it appear that Brother Russell was "racist" in choosing to have the colored seated separate from the whites.  It was standard at that time that white and blacks did not sit together in such meetings. In many places, it was even illegal for blacks and whites to congregate together.

This, however, was a public showing; it was not a meeting simply for the Bible Students. Please note that, as best as we can determine, it was not Brother Russell nor the Bible Students who were demanding not to be seated along with the blacks, it appears to be people from the public, many of whom certainly belonged to and/or attended various churches. Evidently, the situation was such that it appeared that these while people may have disrupted the showing of the Photo-Drama if the blacks were allowed to sit alongside them. Thus Brother Russell considered that he had to decide either to cancel the showing to avoid racial confrontation, or have blacks seated separately so that the Photo Drama could be shown. We do not believe that Brother Russell's decision to put God first makes him a "racist."

Nor should one judge Brother Russell according to later concepts related to racism. For instance, some have claimed that his usage of the term "colored" was itself racist. This would appear to be based on later concepts of offensive "racist" words some have created, which ideas did not exist when Russell was alive. Brother Russell certainly would not have been aware that anyone considered the word "colored" to be offensive to anyone, and as far we can determine none at that time objected to use of the word "colored." It would not be fair to think that Brother Russell should abide by later concepts that did not exist when he was alive.

Good sense makes one slow to anger,

and it is his glory to overlook an offense.

Proverbs 19:11, English Standard Version.

Did Russell Separate From and Later Divorce His Wife?

 

A poster in a forum that appears to no longer exist, made the following claim::

"Charles Taze Russell separated from his wife Maria and later divorced…without a scriptural basis."

Another, among many other false claims concerning Russell, made the following statement: "In court he claimed to be a Greek scholar [The truth is that Russell never made any such claim in court or out of court], yet in court he could not identify the Greek alphabet.  He lied under sworn oath and proved himself a perjurer.  [Russell never proved himself to be a perjurer.] In court it was discovered that he divorced his wife and gave his wife alimony."

Another claims "There are transcripts of his trail when he divorced his wife, because she accused him of groping other women. And his tombstone is a pyramid with the masonic symbol. [The pyramid is not Russell's tombstone, nor does it have any masonic symbol.] You can google the images."

Did Russell separate himself from his wife? No!

Did Russell later divorce his wife? No!

Actually, it was Mrs. Russell who separated from her husband, and and it was she who later filed for divorce; the court decision actually amounted to a legal separation. Brother Russell, of course, had no control over what his wife sought to do.

Here is some pertinent information from Joseph Rutherford's A Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens concerning this matter:

Without notice, [Russell's wife] voluntarily separated herself from him in 1897, nearly eighteen years after their marriage. For nearly seven years she lived separate and apart from him, he furnishing her a separate home.

There is much more that could be said, but this gives a summation.

The Wikipedia article on Charles Taze Russell correctly reports:

Maria Russell filed a suit for legal separation in the Court of Common Pleas at Pittsburgh in June 1903 and three years later filed for divorce under the claim of mental cruelty.... She was granted a separation, with alimony, in 1908.

Rutherford, in his book mentioned before also stated:

It has been remarked by a number of lawyers who have read the record in this case that "no court has ever before granted a separation upon so slight testimony as appears in this case."

***

There never has been an absolute divorce of either of the parties.

While in Ireland in the year 1911, Russell reported an event that is related to this:

The questions were of the usual order and were answered fully and promptly and to the apparent satisfaction of all the audience except the "Y.M.C.A." rowdies. One of the questions was inspired by an attack made on me there recently by the Rev. Dr. Torry. It was, "Is it true that you are divorced from your wife?"

I replied that my topic was, "Which Is the True Gospel?" and that my home affairs and my relationship to my God were my personal affairs. Nevertheless I would answer the question. "I am not divorced from my wife. The decree of the court was not divorce, but separation, granted by a sympathetic jury, which declared that we would both be happier separated. My wife's charge was cruelty, but the only cruelty put in evidence was my refusal on one occasion to give her a kiss when she had requested it." I assured my audience that I disputed the charge of cruelty and believed that no woman was ever better treated by a husband. The applause showed that the audience believed my statements. -- Watch Tower, December 1, 1911, page 436.

At any rate, it is apparent that Mrs. Russell was never actually granted a full divorce. 

Russell Acknowledges Jesus as "Channel"

I am giving below some quotes from Brother Russell that shows that he believed Jesus to be the channel between God and man.

It was quite proper that these disciples did not follow the course that some are inclined to follow today, viz., to seek to learn of the Master all that he would communicate, and then go forth and pose as wise ones amongst their friends, giving them the information they had received in driblets, and avoiding the mention of Jesus as the Father's channel of communication of the truth to them. -- "We Have Found Him! Eureka!", Watch Tower, February 1, 1900.

None have life in a legal sense except those who have obtained it from God through His provided channel Christ Jesus. -- "From Death to Life in Christ", Harvest Gleanings III.

All resolutions against sin and in favor of righteous thinking and living are commendable and helpful. But I recommend a comprehensive resolution; namely, to get right with God through His appointed Channel, the Lord Jesus Christ, and through the instructions of His Word, the Bible. -- "A New Epoch Starts", Harvest Gleanings III.

God purposed to allow sin to demonstrate for six thousand years its awful fruitage, and then to bring in a great Sabbath Day, the great Millennial Sabbath of a thousand years, and in that time to do a work for mankind which they cannot do for themselves. He is to do this work through Jesus, His appointed Channel. -- "New Creatures Perfect in Holiness", Harvest Gleanings III.

Only as the Heavenly Father shall grant His blessing may fruits to our labors be expected. It is written, "As many as the Lord your God shall call," and "No man can come unto Me except the Father who sent Me draw him." (Acts 2:39; John 6:44) Hence we see that our present appreciation of Divine goodness implies three gifts: (1) The Divine provision of eternal life, (2) Christ the Channel, and (3) the knowledge by which we are enabled to appreciate both the Gift and the Channel. -- "Christ Our Propitiation", Watch Tower, December, 1882.

The channel of all of God's Mercy is Christ Jesus, who declared, "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me." Of Him also St. Peter said, "Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under Heaven given amongst men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12.)  -- "Hope for the Sodomites", Watch Tower, February 1, 1913.

If anyone finds more that could be placed here, please respond in the comments below.

Related:

Who Did Russell Believe to be the "Only Authority" of the Church?

What Did Russell Teach About "Organization" as Related to the Watch Tower Society?