Another blogger has posted a lot of misleading information about Charles Taze Russell as related to Russell's Biblical study of what he believed to be "God's Stone Witness in Egypt". Much of what is stated in the blog appears to have been copied from other sources, so the author may not have been actually aware that what he has presented misrepresents the truth.
(1) It is falsely claimed that Charles Taze Russell is the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Those who are truly familiar with Russell's works know that Russell did believe in such an organization as the Jehovah's Witnesses; in fact, he preached against the idea of any central authority other than Jesus and the apostles and he preached against the idea that any outward organization has any scriptural claim to be the true church. Please note that the owner of this site is not with the Jehovah's Witnesses, nor does he seek to defend that organization.
See:
Russell - Founder of the JWs?
http://ctr.reslight.net/?cat=484
(2) The statement is made that Russell used the Great Pyramid of Giza for making Biblical prophetic predictions. This statement is misleading in that Russell did not use the Great Pyramid as the source of his conclusions, but rather he used the Bible itself.
See:
Charles Taze Russell - "Prophet?"
http://ctr.reslight.net/?cat=118
Russell and the Great Pyramid
http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=48
(3) It is claimed that Russell's study of the Great Pyramid sounds like the occultic new age type of thinking. This is misleading, since Russell's Biblical study of prophecy has nothing at all do with the Satanic occultism, or Satan's "New Age" ideas, except that, as Russell stated several times, Satan often seeks to imitate truth in order to get people to believe his lies.
See: Charles Taze Russell and the Occult:
http://ctr.reslight.net/?cat=599
(4) It is stated that the use of pyramids for prophecy is unBiblical. As stated, we agree, and I am sure that Russell would have agreed with that statement -- as it is stated -- also. However, the intent of the statement is misleading regarding at three points: (a) the reference to "pyramids" (plural) does not apply to Russell, since his interest was only in one pyramid he believed to be God's witness in Egypt; (b) the phrase "for prophecy" does not apply to Russell since he did not look to the Great Pyramid itself "for prophecy", but as corroboration of Bible prophecy; (c) the statement "is unBiblical" would seem to designate Russell's study of the Great Pyramid as being "unBiblical"; I do not believe that study of God's witness in Egypt to be "unBiblical", since such study corroborates and confirms the Bible itself as being God's revelation to man.
See:
The Great Pyramid and the Bible
http://gp.reslight.net
(5) A picture is presented of Rutherford's pyramid monument with caption "Pyramid/Grave of C.T. Russell of the Jehovah Witnesses". There are three things that misrepresented in that one statement: (a) The pyarmd monument shown was not built by Russell, but Rutherford had it constructed several years after Russell died. (b) Rutherford's pyramid monument is not Russell's grave. (c) Russell was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses organizaton.
See:
Russell's Grave
http://ctr.reslight.net/?cat=176
(6) The statement is made that Russell brought in influences from eastern mysticism into Christianity. In actuality, the only "eastern mysticism" that Russell believed in was the mysteries of the Bible, which is an "eastern" -- not a "western" book. Russell did not believe in, and did not teach, the "eastern mysticism" of heathen religions. The thought, however, suggests that the study of God's witness in Egypt, and how it corroborates the Bible is in some way connected to heathen religious mysticism, which it is not. The thought also suggests that Russell was the one who introduced the Biblical study of the Great Pyramid into Christianity. He was not; there were many Christians before him who had concluded that the Great Pyramid is God's witness in Egypt. Russell did not introduce that idea into Christianity, since it had already been introduced into Christianity by others who had come before him.
The title suggests that it is strange to study God's witness in Egypt; it is indeed "strange" to those who have not actually studied the matter, and especially to those who have their minds made up to be against such a study. Nevertheless, does not the Bible itself speak of how Ephraim considered God's laws to be strange. (Hosea 8:12) Indeed, many Christians, having highly influence doctrines of men and modern thought, might find much that is in Bible to be "strange".
I do not necessarily agree with all conclusions given by the following authors:
Bible Review Magazine 1902-1903 (Google Affiliate Ad)
Royal 39127H ETB1 Electronic Bible Reference Book (Google Affiliate Ad)
Handbook of Biblical Hebrew (Google Affiliate Ad)
Royal Consumer ETB1 KJV And World English Bible (Google Affiliate Ad)
Manual of Biblical Archaeology (Google Affiliate Ad)
