Sunday, April 30, 2017

Charles Taze Russell and the Alleged "Satanic Bloodlines"

There are many sites, videos and publications being produced that are claiming that Brother Charles Taze Russell was of a "Satanic" bloodline, and with a lot of insinuations, misrepresentations, distortions of facts, etc., their arguments sound persuasive, and alas, many are being deceived into believing this lie. Many Christians who believe that Jesus paid the wages of sin for our redemption are also being deceptively led to, in effect, deny the redemption in Christ as presented in the Scriptures.

All mankind came under what could be called the "Satanic" bloodline of Adam when Adam sinned. Adam originally was a "son of God". (Luke 3:38) As a result of his sin, all mankind, became condemned in his sin (Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22), and as such, by nature, became "sons of wrath", "sons of disobedience", (Ephesians 2:2,3), "children of the devil" (1 John 3:10), "offspring of vipers." (Matthew 3:7; 12:34; 23:33; Luke 3:7) This is the only "Satanic" bloodline revealed in the scriptures.

The claim, however, seems to be that simply possessing a certain name makes one of a "Satanic bloodline", evidently which would exclude anyone of that "bloodline" from being able to be saved through the blood of Jesus. It is being claimed that because Charles Taze Russell bears the family name of "Russell" that this is supposed to mean that he is of some alleged "Russell" Illuminati/Satanic bloodline. Therefore, by such name association and obscure reasoning, these people are arguing that Brother Russell was of such a bloodline, and a member of what they call the "Illuminati". Does the Bible support such an idea? Did Russell believe in such?

In reality, all this "name" heritage as proof of Satanic bloodline is nonsense. Regardless of what "name" line you are born with, without Christ (faith in the pure sinless blood of Jesus that was sacrificed), all descendants of Adam are still of the Biblical Satanic figurative bloodline as a 'sons of wrath',  'sons of disobedience', 'offspring of vipers'. (Matthew 3:7; 12:34; 23:33; Luke 3:7; Romans 3:13; Ephesians 2:2,3) Regardless, of what name one may be born with, whether Jew or Gentile, if you have been regenerated through faith in Jesus,  you are a son of God, the seed of Abraham through faith. -- Romans 8:14; 9:8; Galatians 3:26-29.

The judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation. -- Romans 5:16, New American Standard (NAS).
By the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one. -- Romans 5:17, NAS. Through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men. -- Romans 5:18, NAS.
Through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners. -- Romans 5:19, NAS.

As a result of Adam's sin, God subjected Adam and all his descendants to a "bondage of corruption" (Romans 8:21), "vile passions" (Romans 1:26), "a reprobate mind" (Romans 1:28), "vanity" (Psalm 39:6; Ecclesiastes 1:2,14; 2:11; 3:19; 11:8; Romans 8:20), so that, whether Jew or Gentile, outside of Christ:

Romans 3:9: They are all under sin.
Romans 3:12:There is no one who does good, no, not, so much as one."
Romans 3:13 "Their throat is an open tomb. With their tongues they have used deceit." "The poison of vipers is under their lips;"
Romans 3:14 "Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness."
Romans 3:15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood.
Romans 3:16 Destruction and misery are in their ways.
Romans 3:17 The way of peace, they haven't known."
Romans 3:18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

Without faith in the blood of Jesus, one is still "dead through trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1); a child of disobedience (Ephesians 2:2), by nature a child of wrath (Ephesians 2:3), and thus of the only bloodline that could be called "Satanic".

The above is basically what Charles Taze Russell taught; scripturally, was he of a Satanic bloodline that could not be redeemed through faith? Definitely not. Through faith in the blood of Jesus, as a "son of God" he was delivered from the realm of the children of darkness into the realm of the children of light. -- Ephesians 5:8.

Russell, however, did not believe one needed a "go-between", such as human leaders of an organization such the Jehovah's Witnesses, in order to accept the pure blood of Jesus.  He believed and taught that any one, of any Christian denomination or sect, or outside of all Christian denominations or sects, could belong to Jesus.

See Russell's sermons and studies:
  A Blessed Hope for Suffering Humanity
  O Give Thanks Unto the Lord, For His Mercies Endureth Forever
  Who, Then, Shall Be Saved?
  The Law of Retribution
  The Fact and Philosophy of the Atonement
  Ransom and Restitution
See our own study:
The Ransom For All

 Searches of Russell's works (please note that not all of the results given may actually be the words of Charles Taze Russell):

"Bloodline" - Russell evidently never used the word "bloodline" itself, thus we do not include this word in our searches.
"Blood" "taint"
  Click Here to search the Most Holy Faith site.
  Click Here to search the C. T. Russell site.
  Click Here to search the AGS Consulting site.
Condemned in Adam
  Click Here to search the MostHolyFaith site.
"Blood of Christ"
   Click Here to search the Most Holy Faith site
  Click Here to search the C.T. Russell site
  Click Here to search the AGS Consulting site
Related:
  The Watchtower and the Masons
  Russell on "Spiritism"
  Masonic Symbols?

Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Jerusalem: Incredible archaeological find brings Bible to life

Archaeologists digging just south of Jerusalem's Temple Mount have made a historic discovery, unearthing the first-ever seal impression of an Israelite or Judean king ever exposed in situ in a scientific archaeological excavation. The discovery, made during Ophel excavations at the foot of the southern wall of the Temple Mount, is an impression of the royal…

Monday, April 24, 2017

The Skull and Bones Society and C. T. Russell

There have been many false statements being made concerning Charles Taze Russell and the "Skull and Bones" Society. Some have even claimed that CT Russell was the "founder of the Skull and Bones", most endeavor by various imaginary lines to in some vague manner connect Russell with that Society.  The goal is to make it appear that Russell was in some way a leader in an alleged Illuminati plot to take over the world. Thus, it is usually also falsely claimed that Russell was a 33rd Degree Freemason, and that he was the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses religion.

The false argument, is, in effect, that CT Russell was the member of some alleged Illuminati bloodline that was controlled by the Jesuits. Evidently, it is being assumed that anyone of this bloodline cannot be saved by the blood of Jesus. As yet we have not found any statement as to how one who is alleged to be of such a bloodline could not become be covered by the blood of Jesus. CT Russell certainly demonstrated by his life and works that he was a believer in the blood of Jesus. It would be totally nonsensical to think that a man would spend most of his time, money and energy sabotaging that which he is being alleged to have been secretly supporting, and yet, evidently, according to the statements we have read by various authors, Russell was covering up what he was secretly supporting by spend most of his time, money and energy in sabotaging what he was supposed to be secretly supporting.

Most who speak of Russell as being connected with the "Skull and Bones" Society usually only hint at such a connection, claiming, for instance, that Russell was of the same bloodline as the founder of that Society. From Wikidpedia, we find the following information concerning the Skull and Bones Society:
Skull and Bones is an undergraduate senior or secret society at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. It is a traditional peer society to Scroll and Key and Wolf's Head, as the three senior class "landed societies" at Yale.
The society's alumni organization, which owns the society's real property and oversees the organization, is the Russell Trust Association, named for William Huntington Russell, who co-founded Skull and Bones with classmate Alphonso Taft. The Russell Trust was founded by Russell and Daniel Coit Gilman, member of Skull and Bones and later president of the University of California, first president of Johns Hopkins University, and the founding president of the Carnegie Institution.
***
Skull and Bones was founded in 1832 after a dispute among Yale's debating societies, Linonia, Brothers in Unity, and the Calliopean Society, over that season's Phi Beta Kappa awards; its original name was "the Order of Skull and Bones."
Note that the "Skull and Bones" was founded in the year 1832. Note also its connection with Yale University.

Now note that Charles Taze Russell was not even alive in the year 1832; CT Russell was born in the 1852, twenty years later. He certainly was not the founder of a society twenty years before he was born. Nor have we found any evidence that CT Russell ever set foot in the Yale University, or that he even knew that such a Society as "Skull and Bones" existed. There is no link at all between CT Russell and the Skull and Bones, except that one of the Founders of Skull and Bones had the last name of "Russell". We have found no evidence that CT Russell knew of or was of any near relationship to William Huntington Russell. Some have erroneously claimed that WH Russell was the uncle of CT Russell; this would have meant that WH Russell would have been the brother of CT Russell's father, Joseph Lytel Russell. CT Russell's father, however, had no brother by the name of William Huntington Russell.

It appears that those who hate the glad tidings that Russell actually preached continue to use the spirit of human imagination so as to keep coming up with more and more false accusations to make concerning Russell in order to prove by what they are imagining: that Russell was a member of the Freemasons, an Illuminati, etc. In reality, we believe that Russell's works give overwhelming testimony that Russell was not involved in any kind of "secret society", such as the Skull and Bones.

Ronald R. Day, Sr. (Restoration Light Bible Study Services: ResLight, RLBible)

Originally published: May 11, 2012; updated: March 20, 2014, April 24,2017, September 18, 2019
.

Saturday, April 22, 2017

Some Historical Errors

This is a response to some claims being made by William Cetnar, presented in a video entitled, "Jehovah's Witnesses History Exposed." This video is a part of one of the John Ankerberg shows. Much of what Cetnar says, however, appears to be out his own imagination, or is based on what someone else has imagined.

Although Restoration Light Bible Study Services is not associated with the Jehovah's Witnesses, some keep pointing us to a video entitled "Jehovah's Witnesses History Exposed". We are NOT endeavoring to defend the Jehovah's Witnesses organization, but rather our endeavor is simply to point out what we believe to be errors in the presentation.

Cetnar claims that Charles Taze Russell was the first president of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Actually, although Russell was the first president of the legal entity, The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, Russell knew nothing of, and did not believe in, any authoritarian "organization" such as the Jehovah's Witnesses. That legal entity as Russell had intended for it to be, however, was virtually destroyed within a few weeks after Russell died, and a new Watch Tower Society was created at the hands of Joseph Rutherford. It was not until after Russell died that the "Jehovah's visible organization" dogma appeared, leading to a separation of the Bible Students from Rutherford's Watch Tower. While Russell was alive he maintained that there "is no organization today clothed with authority. (Watch Tower, September 1, 1893, page 262) No, Russell was not the president of any religious organization at all; he definitely was not the president of an authoritarian organization such as he preached against.

Russell never said that he is the angel (messenger) of Laodicea; nor did he claim that such a messenger had any "authority" over the church. Thus, William Cetnar is in error pertaining to this. Others may have made that claim for Russell, but he himself never made such a claim for himself. Additionally, Russell did not believe that any of the "angels" of Revelation were prophets of God, or that any of them held any divine authority over the church. 
https://www.google.com/search?q=angel+laodicea&sitesearch=mostholyfaith.com
(Please note that not all results are actually Russell's words; some of the results refer to someone else's thoughts, especially in the commentary on the book of Revelation.)

Russell never spoke of himself as "God's channel of communication". One cannot find anyplace in all the tens of thousands of pages of Russell's works where he ever made such a claim. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22channel+of+communication%22&sitesearch=mostholyfaith.com
(The instances given do NOT reflect any claim of being "God's channel of communciation" but rather of the Watch Tower as a channel of communication related to activities amongst the Bible Students.) See: Russell and "Only Channel"
https://rlctr.blogspot.com/2017/03/channel.html

Russell most certaianly NEVER claimed to be "God's Prophet". In fact, he stated many times that he was not a prophet and that his expectations were not prophecy. The only prophecies that Russell believed in are the prophecies found in the Bible.
See the RL research under:
Charles Taze Russell and Prophecy
http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/12/prophet_17.html

Russell evidently did believe that he was being used by God in a special way, but he never claimed to the sole spokesman/spokesperson for God. Indeed, I could not find any place where he claimed to be God's spokesman, although he did speak of himself as a mouthpiece for God; but he also claimed that all Christians should be mouthpieces for God. See the RL research: "God's Mouthpiece"
 http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/12/mouthpiece.html
Nor did Russell himself ever claim himself to be the "faithful and wise servant". Not did he "volunteer" to be such. It was actually his wife who first applied the Matthew 24:45 to Russell. See: Russell: Faithful and Wise Servant
http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/10/fws.html

Cetnar claims that Jehovah's Witnesses began in 1874. In reality, there were no "Jehovah's Witnesses" in 1874. In 1874, there was a small independent group of Bible students in Pittsburgh associated with Charles Taze Russell which had already been meeting for several years, but that group did not believe in an organization such as "Jehovah's Witnesses". That group had already been in existence, however, for several years before 1874, so one might wonder why anyone would think that in 1874 that group would represent the beginning of the "Jehovah's Witnesses."

Additionally, that group, before 1874, never made any announcement that Jesus would return in 1874. Russell himself, before 1874, held no expectations at all regarding 1874. Therefore, in 1875, Charles Taze was not all "upset" because of an alleged failure of Christ to return 1874; in 1875, he had never thought Christ had returned in 1874.  All the years before 1876, Russell never believed anything at all about 1874!!!! Yes, in 1876, Russell accepted Barbour's conclusion that Christ had already returned in 1874; it was in 1876, not before, that Russell came to believe anything at all concerning the date 1874. Before 1876, he never believed anything about 1874. Before 1874, Russell never said anything at all about Christ's return in 1874. Having no expectations at all concerning 1874, he had no reason to be "upset".

Russell laid out many historical details in his Supplement to the First Issue of the Watch Tower http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2016/11/supplement.html

It is made to appear that Barbour and Russell came up with the idea that the Greek word often transliterated as "parousia" means "presence." The fact is neither Barbour nor Russell came up with the definition of "parousia" as meaning "presence". James Strong and many other Greek scholars had already shown the primary meaning of "parousia" as "presence" long before Russell or Barbour. Nor is there anything in Matthew 28:20 that would be violated by the view that Christ, having been put to death in the flesh, is now a spirit being, and will return as a spirit being. Matthew 28:20 is not about his parousia, but of the time intervening between his ascension and his parousia, when he personally returns. Jesus does not become a spirit being at his parousia, when he returns, but he was raised as a spirit being back in the first century. (1 Peter 3:18) Nevetherless, whether he be spirit or flesh, he is in the heavens until the time of restoration. (Matthew 26:11; Acts 3:21) As foretold, however, the world was to never see him again, but his disciples would "see" him. (John 14:19) This does not mean that he could not be present with his people for we read that, although he was in heaven at the right hand of his God, he was serving his people as priest, making intercession for them. Thus, although his person is in heaven until his return, he still has communion with his people. -- Romans 8:34; Hebrews 4:14,15; 7:25,26; 8:1; 9:24; 1 John 2:1.
See: Jesus Died a Human Being - Raised a Spirit Being

However, Russell, sometime before 1874, had already concluded that Christ would not come in the flesh, because he had sacrificed in his flesh for our sins. (1 Timothy 2:5,6; 1 Peter 3:18) To reiterate: although -- before 1874 -- Russell held no expectations regarding 1874, he had already concluded that Christ was not to return in the flesh, but rather as a spirit being. This was before he had, in 1876, accepted Barbour's conclusions regarding 1874, as well as before the year1874 itself.

Russell did not claim that he was any spokesman for any "one true religion". For his views concerning the one true church, see: 

Did Russell advocate any "visible organization of God" as spoken of in the video? No, he did not. He did not believe in any such organization, and certainly not in the authoritarianism that is claimed by the leadership of the JWs. See some our research related to Russell and: Organization

Did Russell place his writings above the Bible? No! See links to some our research regarding
Russell and: Authority 

Cetnar claims that Russell said that he talked to angels. This is totally false!!! In over 50 years of studying Russell's writings, never have we found anything in Russell's writings wherein he makes such a statement. Indeed, Russell disclaimed having received any kind of "divine revelation" by such means. Russell certainly would never have recommended that anyone should be disfellowshiped for believing the Bible if they found something in his writings that disagreed with the Bible. Indeed, he said regarding his "Studies in the Scriptures", "before we would accept anything as being our own personal faith and conviction, we should say, 'I will not take it because these studies say so; I wish to see what the Bible says.' And so we would study the Scriptures in the light of these SCRIPTURE STUDIES; we would prove every point, or disprove it, as the case might be. We would be satisfied with nothing less than a thorough investigation of the Bible from this standpoint." -- The Watch Tower, September 15, 1910, "Is the Reading of 'Scripture Studies' Bible Study?". 

Russell certainly never advocated the "shunning" techniques that the JW organization insists upon. Russell's views regarding disfellowshiping may be found at: 

Charles Taze Russell never, ever, claimed to have "talked with angels." Instead, Russell actually stated the very opposite: "We claim no new revelations, for to our understanding the revelations of God to his saints are completed and finished by the records of John on Patmos." -- Watch Tower, July 1882, page 2.

We do agree with the Cetnars that the JWs alleged 144,000 cannot be the "the prophet" --organizationally -- for today. We have not found anything in Russell's writings, however, that makes such a claim. Additionally, he certainly could not have made any such claim in the sense that JW leadership made such a claim, since Russell did not believe in such an authoritarian organization. Furthermore, Russell believed that the only prophet similar to the prophets of old for our time is Jesus (through the apostles). -- Hebrews 1:2.

Charles Taze Russell, once he understood the "ransom for all" around 1872, never preached a message that all who did not belong to any organization, sect, group, religion, etc., would be exterminated in 1874, 1879, or any other date. There were no Jehovah's Witnesses back then either preaching such a message. Russell DID NOT BELIEVE in the JW message regarding Armageddon, and thus, he did not preach such a message. Indeed, he preached against similar messages being preached by some sects of his day.

Regarding the alleged 6,000 years since Adam's creation: even if their chronology is true (we do not believe that it is), the year of Adam's creation does mean that the seventh day of 7,000 years began in that same year. The Bible does not directly reveal when the the seventh day began, but it is highly unlikely that it began in the very day that Adam was created. Brother Russell suggested that 6,000 years from Adam's creation as 1872, and he allowed two years before the beginning of the seventh day, and thus he believed that 6,000 years from beginning of the seventh day of 7,000 years ended in 1874.

The foretold "forbidding to marry" has been fulfilled in many ways. In practically every state and nation, there are many laws that forbid various ones to marry. In some places, one is forbidden to marry if they have been divorced for any reason whatsoever. Most places forbid marriage to young people under whatever age has been determined by men who have enacted such laws. And of course, in some religions, those appointed as "priests" and/or "nuns", etc., are forbidden to marry. The latter, however, is more or less voluntary, since one is not forced to become either such a priest or nun. In the other instances, it is not voluntary, but the will of others are forced upon those who come under such prohibitions. I do not know to what extent the JWs sought to enforce the "no marriage" policy; I do not know if one could be disfellowshiped for breaking, or for disagreeing with, the "no marriage" policy. I remember one JW, many years ago, told me that very few in the organization gave any serious attention to that policy, thus, I assume that one would not be disfellowshiped if they did marry. On the other hand, I also met one JW who, as a result of the Society's statements, never did marry, and who told me of the frustration that this had caused in his life.

Mrs. Cetnar (approximately 18:36) speaks of her great-grandmother as being a member of the JW religion with Charles Taze Russell. If one had been associated with the work of Charles Taze Russell, that one would not have been a member of the JW oganization, despite what JWs today may claim. There was no JW organization, no JW religion at all, in the days of Russell. Russell did not believe in such a religion, nor did the Bible Students in general believe in such a religion. Russell never spoke of God speaking through any such organization.

The topic of blood transfusions comes up in the video. Many think that the JW prohibition on blood transfustions came from Charles Taze Russell. This is false. Russell never spoke against blood transfusions, and would certainly never assumed authority to forbid anyone from taking blood transfusions. For what Russell said about eating blood, one may see:
http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2017/01/blood-transfusions.html
It should be noted that neither Russell nor his Watch Tower claimed to be the "only way to God". Russell pointed to Jesus as the only way to God.

It is claimed that Jehovah's witnesses announced the end of the world for 1874, 1879, 1914 and other dates. In 1874, 1879 as well as in 1914, there were no Jehovah's Witnesses. As already pointed out, before 1914, Russell himself held no expectation at all for 1874, and certainly never claimed that the world was to end in 1874. I don't know of anyone who made any prophetic claims for 1879; Russell held no expectations for 1879. Russell did hold expectation -- without claiming any authority as a prophet -- of the church being completed in 1878, but he never said anything about the world coming to an end in 1878, nor in 1914. His earlier view was that the Gentile kingdoms would all be gone in 1914, and the peace was to come to the world in 1914. He was not expecting what is generally called the end of the world. He changed his viewpoint on this, however, in 1904, and from and 1904 onward, he was no longer expecting the end of all Gentile kingdoms in 1914, and rather than expecting peace, he was expecting "time of trouble" to bring revolutions. He never actually set any time for the end of the "time of trouble".



We will, God willing, be adding more to this later, as time permits. Stopped at: 25:41

Can The Ethiopian Change the Color of His Skin?

We are presenting below an article often being cited as proof that Russell was a racist. Of course, if one is looking for something racial, one can find something in the works of practically any author that could been imagined to be racist. Such characterization, however, does not necessarily mean that the author had actual racial intent or racial motives in what was written.

The article is related what God is able to do versus what man cannot do for himself. The title is actually a quote from the Bible itself.
Watchtower, February 15, 1904, page 52. http://mostholyfaith.com/Beta/bible/Reprints/Z1904FEB.asp#Z52:13

"CAN THE ETHIOPIAN CHANGE HIS SKIN?"

We answer, No. But all will admit that what the Ethiopian cannot do for himself God could readily do for him. The difference between the races of men and the differences between their languages have long been arguments against the solidarity of the human family. The doctrine of restitution has also raised the question, How could all men be brought to perfection and which color of skin was the original? The answer is now provided. God can change the Ethiopian's skin in his own due time.

Prof. H. A. Edwards, Supt. of Schools in Slater, Mo., has written for the public press an elaborate description of how Julius Jackson, of New Frankfort, Mo., a negro boy of nine years, began to grow white in September, 1901, and is now fully nine-tenths white. He assures us that this is no whitish skin disease; but that the new white skin is as healthy as that of any white boy, and that the changed boy has never been sick and never has taken medicines. Realizing that his story would be doubted, he interested Dr. F. A. Howard, chief division surgeon of the Chicago and Alton Ry., who corroborates the statement in the following published extract from a letter:
"I am obliged to you for an opportunity of seeing and examining the negro child, Julius Jackson. 
"I found his heart action, respiration and temperature perfectly normal and his mental faculties seem acute for one of his age.
"The white skin now covering at least 90 per cent. of his body is, so far as I am able to judge, in full possession of all its organs and those organs seem to be performing their natural functions – no roughness, chalky, or ashen appearance is present.
"It seems to me that the conditions warrant your opinion – the change is certainly caused by chemical conditions of the blood.

Very truly, "F. A. HOWARD."

Jeremiah 13:23 - Can the Ethiopian change his skin? -- World English

Those familiar with Brother Russell's writings know that he was always looking for news items that he could relate to prophecies and/or the coming times of restitution (restoration). (Acts 3:21) Such is the case here, for Brother Russell was not emphasizing any racial prejudice, but his intent was related to the fulfillment of what he thought could be related to the times of restitution of all things.

Some conclude from Russell's statement: "We now know the answer", that he was showing that he was a racist, for this, as they reason, means that Russell was saying that God is turning all mankind into the white race. One claims: "The reason for printing such a story, of course, is to demonstrate that God can and will change the “Ethiopian” (black man) into a white man in the New World." While Brother Russell certainly presented this to illustrate that God can certainly change the color of a person's skin, he did not say that that black people will be turned to white people in the times of restitution. In harmony with what Brother Russell presented elsewhere, we believe that he was just saying that all will eventually become one color as was Adam, whatever that original color was. The question is, was it Russell's intent to be racist in what he stated? Obviously not. Most often, Russell referred to all mankind as being "one race", regardless of color of skin. We believe, however, that Russell's point was that God can change the color of anyone's skin, if he so desires.

Elsewhere Brother Russell wrote concerning the original race as created by God:
We may suppose that they were neither as white as some of us, nor as black as the negro, but of a swarthy, tawny color. If this be true, the extreme whiteness of some peoples is not to be considered the original standard, but a deflection on the one side, as the negro and others are deflections on the other side. -- Watch Tower, July 15, 1902, page 216.
While many see "racism" in the article under consideration, if one is consistent in their reasoning, it would seem that such should also imagine such racism in the Bible itself. There are indeed some who claim the Bible is racist; such are usually not believers in the Bible, but are, in effect, opposers of the Bible. Such who claim the Bible is racist, however, are usually not believers in the Bible, but if one is a believer in the Bible, to be consistent, if they consider Brother Russell to have been a racist for his statements, it would seem to us that consistency would require them also claim that God is racist. If they are consistent, they would have to consider God to have been racist in choosing the descendants of Jacob as his chosen people. (Exodus 19:5,6; Deuteronomy 7:6; 26:18; Amos 3:2) They would have to also consider God to have been a racist for even asking the question, "Can the Ethiopian change his skin?" (Jeremiah 13:23) Additionally, one could consider Jesus as having been "racist" when he said, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." -- Matthew 15:24.

Furthermore, the Bible shows that the races (and consequently the various skin colors) did come about as a result of the God's curse on the peoples at Babel (Genesis 10:1-32; 11:7), for before that dispersion all spoke one language. (Genesis 11:6) If that curse is lifted (Revelation 22:3), it would seem that the various races will no longer exist. Additionally, it is apparent from the Bible that all mankind originated from ONE man (Luke 3:38; Acts 17:26; Romans 5:14; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22,45), and that one man was one color, no matter what that color that might have been. Since mankind is to be restored to what he was originally (Acts 3:21; Romans 5:12-19), to Brother Russell it seemed reasonable to conclude that all will be restored to whatever color man was originally. We are sure, however, that Brother Russell would not at all be upset if all mankind is brought back with their separate colors, it surely was not something that he was making an issue over. Indeed, the only ones who seem to be creating a major issue over it are those who, for some reason or other, hate Russell, or hate what Russell stood for, that is: the good news of great joy that will be for all the people, and yet it is this very message that causes many others to appreciate Brother Russell's works..

At most, however, it would only be one's personal opinion that Brother Russell had an intent of being racist in the article. And to whatever extent Russell is deemed racist in his application of scripture, to the same extent one would have to consider God Himself to be racist. Nevertheless, God certainly has permitted racism to be a divisive factor among mankind, which is all part of the original curse in that, due to Adam's disobedience, God has subjected all races of mankind mankind to vanity and corruption. -- Genesis 3:17-19; Job 7:1,3; Psalms 39:5,6; 62:9; 144:4; Ecclesiastes 1:2,8-15; 2:11,17,23; 3:19; 4:4; 7:13;  11:8; 12:8; Romans 1:18-22; 5:12-19; 8:20,22.

Much that could be said about this article, however, would be similar to what we stated concerning the earlier article, "Can Restitution Change the Ethiopian’s Skin?"









Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Angels and Women

A site that no longer exists made the following assertion:
"Russell recommended his followers read the book, Angels and Women. He personally supervised its editing and said it was beneficial because it throws light on certain Biblical subjects."
On another site we find the following:
"This book Angels & Women was a book written by a friend of Russells. She claims to have listened to beautiful music and then was impelled to write the book. It is said a "spirit" "dictated" the novel to her, as he desired to return to God's organization." 
The author continues:
"I found the actual scan of Russell giving a Review of the Book in the Golden Age July 30th, 1924 pg. 702.
What are the facts?"

The fact is that the book titled "Angels and Women" did not exist while Russell was alive. Brother Russell never mentioned such a book, nor did he write any advise to anyone to read that book. The reference to "God's organization" in the quote above is evidently in reference to "organization" as used by the JWs.

In 1878, a book by the name “Seola,” written by Mrs. J. Gregory Smith (pen name), was published. The author's real name was Ann Eliza Smith. We have no evidence that Mrs. Smith was associated with the Bible Students, and we have not found any record of any friendship that existed between Russell and Mrs. Smith. The book was evidently written as a fiction novel, although some made an assertion that Smith claimed to have written it in under the influence of the spirit world. We have not read this book (nor do we indeed to read it), but although we have found no such claim from Mrs. Smith that she wrote the book under the influence of spirits. Nevertheless, if what is reported to be in the book is true, then it may have been that she was indeed either knowingly or unknowingly under the influence of the demons. It is reported that Mrs. Smith would probably not have had the knowledge presented in the book except by such an influence. At any rate, some have claimed that Mrs. Smith wrote the book through what is often called “automatic writing,” which is a form of spiritism in which a spirit actually does the writing through a human being.

In 1924, another book was published by the A.B. ABAC Company, of New York, entitled “Angels and Women,” which is based on the earlier book by J. G. Smith. As far as we have been able to determine, contrary to what is being stated on several sites, this book was never published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, nor by the International Bible Students Association.

From what we have read, we conclude that this later book was not exactly the same as the book “Seola,” but rather the book “Angels and Women” is an revised version of the earlier book. We are still not sure who edited this later book, but there is a reference to a “Bible Student” who was “a personal friend of Pastor Russell.” This comes from a review of the book as presented in The Golden Age magazine (this magazine was not printed in Russell’s day, nor is this "review" attributed to Brother Russell), thus the “Bible Student” was probably actually a follower of Rutherford and Rutherford’s new teachings and organization. Below is the "review" as presented in The Golden Age, July 30, 1924 p. 702:
Review of Book

"ANGELS AND WOMEN" is the title of a book just off the press. It is a reproduction and revision off the novel, "Seola" which was written in 1878, and which deals with conditions prior to the flood.

Pastor Russell read this book with keen interest, and requested some of his friends to read it because of its striking harmony with the Scriptural account of the sons of God described in the sixth chapter of Genesis. Those sons of God became evil, and debauched the human family prior to, and up to, the time of the great deluge. We call attention to this book because we believe it will be of interest to Bible Students, who are familiar with the machinations of the devil and the demons and the influence exercised by them prior to the flood and also now in this evil day. The book throws light on the subject and is believed, will aid those who carefully consider it to avoid the baneful effects of spiritism, now so prevalent in the world.

The book is revised and published by a personal friend of Pastor Russell, and one who was close to him in his work. It is published by the A. B. Abac Company, New York city.

The publishers advise that the regular price of the book is $2.00; but to all subscribers to The Golden Age, it will furnished at $1.00 per volume, when ordered in lots of ten or more. This is not an advertisement, but a voluntary comment.
We present the following quote from The Golden Age, December 3, 1924:
When Pastor Russell was here, he read a book dealing with conditions that obtained prior to the Flood. He requested some other brethren to read it. It was so much in harmony with the Bible account of the fallen angels that he regarded the book as remarkable. Under his supervision it was revised, and later published by one who was formerly his confidential associate. The new book is published under the title "Angels and Women". Scripture citations are given. An appendix is added. Pastor Russell remarked that at some opportune time the book, revised, should be published.
Of course, Rutherford himself had been a personal friend of Russell’s before Russell died, but we know that after Russell died, Rutherford rejected and often misrepresented what Russell taught and said. One author, Ken Raines, claims that a JW told him that the revisor was “Ed Brenisen,” who was indeed a follower of Rutherford, and what became the “Jehovah’s Witnesses” leadership.

Below are links to both books as found on archive.org: 

While we cannot be certain what happened while Russell was alive that he did not write about, there is nothing in any of the writings of Russell that speaks of a book called "Seola" nor of “Angels and Women” Indeed, the revised book, "Angels and Women" did not exist in the days of Russell. There is no evidence at all from Russell's writings that Russell personally supervised its editing, as claimed. Indeed, we cannot be certain that Russell ever actually read the book. However, although we cannot be certain, it is possible that Russell did come across a copy of the book “Seola,” written by Mrs. J. G. Smith, and it is also possible that he might have suggested that some of his co-workers might read the book to see how it might relate to the Bible. He may have desired their feedback concerning the book. We highly doubt that Russell actually thought of revising such a book for publication, although we believe that it might have been possible that he had thought of writing an publication related to the Biblical account of the angels who married women before the Flood of Noah's day. Without actually having been there, we cannot actually know what may have happened.

We do know that Russell several times in his writings showed how the demons will present truths in order to get people to accept a greater lie. Thus, he could have had this in mind regarding this book, if he had read it. If he did not read it but only read about the book, he may have requested some to read it in order to inform him of its contents. We do not find any thing written by Russell in which he was “recommending” or that he endorsed the book Seola to his readers, or that he gave approval to this book, or that he thought of revising the book for publication. Nevertheless, he often sought to get the opinion and suggestions from others concerning if and how such items might be related to the Bible. Since Brother Russell never mentioned that book in his writings, we believe it possible that Russell decided against any use of the book.

However, those who claim that he recommended the book, Angels and Women, are obviously in error. The only book that he could possibly have recommended to his associates would have been the book, “Seola,” since the later revision did not exist in his time. Additionally, those who claim that the review of the book, Angels and Women, that appeared in The Golden Age was written by Russell are also obviously in error. Surely, however, if he had endorsed or gave approval to the book Seola, there would be some record of such a recommendation in his writings, but there is no such recommendation. We could find no mention of either book in the Bible Students DVD Library. As a whole, we would say that Bible Students have nothing to do with either book.

The Golden Age, in 1924, claims that Russell personally supervised the editing of the later edition, and wished that it be published at an opportune time. However, we do not put much faith in what was being said by the leadership of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society in 1924, since there were many statements being made after Russell died that have been proven untrue. Nothing from Russell's day gives any testimony at all that Russell supervised any editing or revisions of that book.

Some have claimed that the Foreword in the book, Angels and Women, was written by Charles Taze Russell. Again, Russell usually put his name in the Forewords that he wrote to any book. We do not find his name in the Foreword of the book, Angels and Women.

References (We do not necessarily agree with all the conclusions and/or statements made by these authors):

Seola (Wikipedia)

The Golden Age’s Review and Endorsement of "Angels and Women,”
Ken Raines

 “Anne Eliza Smith”, article in Wikipedia:

If anyone has any actual facts related to this, feel free to contact us.


Alleged Failure of 1914 and Misrepresented Historical Claim

We are quoting the following from a website:
In 1876, Russell wrote an article that appeared in the October, 1876 issue of the Bible Examiner under the title, “Gentile Times: When do they End?” On page 27 he was writing about Luke 21:24...
The entire article has been reproduced in the collection entitled:

We wish to say to begin with that the article represents Russell's view before 1904; in 1904, he came to realize that the "time of trouble" was to begin in 1914, not end in 1914. See our research on this at:

The author of the site continues:
He said that the “Seven Times” will end in AD 1914. However, the anticipated Kingdom of Jehovah did not come. Big surprise! None, zero, zip, nada of the events concerning Jerusalem, mentioned in Luke 21:24 occurred in the predicted year, 1914. The Society then concluded that 1914 was not the end of the “Seven Times” but was to be a turning point in human history. Two years later, Russell died. (Maybe the dejection and depression that God was actually not using him took its toll.)
There are several misrepresentations being presented here. Although Russell was expecting God's kingdom to be established in 1914, he was not expecting that it would all of a sudden bring peace to the earth in 1914, rather just the opposite: from 1904 onward, he was expecting that with the influence of God's kingdom the world would enter into the worst time of trouble and warfare that it had ever seen, the nations would become angry. Thus, it is absolutely not true that nothing happened in 1914, and the fact that the greatest war the world had ever seen began in that year does give reason to believe that the spasms of the time of trouble did begin that year.

The quote from the site, after declaring that nothing happened in 1914, then states: "The Society then concluded that 1914 was not the end of the 'Seven Times' but was to be a turning point in human history." This is totally false! The Society in 1914 certainly never concluded that 1914 was not the end of the Gentiles, and as far as we know, it has never concluded such! Russell certainly never made any statement that the Gentile Times had not ended in 1914, and he made many statements to the effect that they had ended up to the day that he died. We have no doubt that Russell died rejoicing that he was seeing the Bible prophecies come true.

That Brother Russell had not concluded that the "seven times" had not ended can be seen from the following quotes from the The Watch Tower, all made after October 1914.
Because certain important things are to be accomplished, we see that God is permitting what to others might seem to be purely human devilishness. For a wise purpose He permits this reign of lawlessness, this condition which evokes universal odium. Our thought is that we should look for still further evidences day by day that the Gentile Times have ended, and that God's Kingdom has begun its work. We are expecting to see multiplied proofs of the Kingdom power, though the world will not recognize it as such until it is manifested in the flaming fire of Anarchy, which is still further along. The present step is the war of the nations. The next step will be Socialism--an attempted Socialism--among the people. Then the third step, Anarchy, will gradually come on. When this symbolic fire shall prevail, then the world will realize what we are trying to tell them now; namely, that God's Kingdom is taking control, and that these various demonstrations are evidences that our Lord is taking His great power. But the many will not begin to see until the flaming fire is revealed. When we endeavor to tell them now they will not receive it, but they will be thoroughly convinced when they see the destructive fire of Anarchy. The Watch Tower, February 15, 1915.
 The Bible indicates that the Gentile Times have ended. Their kings have had their day. They have made a good showing, in many respects. Many of these governments have done wonderfully. The Watch Tower, July 15, 1915. We believe that Gentile Times have ended, and that God is now allowing the Gentile Governments to destroy themselves, in order to prepare the way for Messiah's Kingdom. The Watch Tower, April 15, 1916
It still seems clear to us that the prophetic period known as the Times of the Gentiles ended chronologically in October, 1914. The fact that the Great Day of Wrath upon the nations began there marks a good fulfillment of our expectations. The Watch Tower, September 1, 1916
We only chose those quotes that are most precise; more quotes could have been given. These, however, are sufficient to show that Brother Russell did not then, in 1914 (or any other time after 1876), conclude that the "seven times" had not ended in 1914.

By Ronald R. Day. Sr.

A Lying Spirit Lies About Charles Taze Russell

We are here addressing a report related by one allegedly given by the name of Rodolfo Acevedo, who claims to have had an out-of-body experience during which he visited hell and heaven. Our studies of the Bible alert us that such experience may actually be visions given by demons who wish to promote their lies. At any rate, Mr. Acevedo claims that he saw Jesus, who was to show im “many things in hell, heaven and the condition of my church on earth.” We don’t know that this vision was real; from the way it reads it could well have been all made up. On the other hand, the demons evidently are indeed using such methods, often associated with a near-death experience, in order to spread their lies. In Mr. Acevedo’s experience, one of these spirits claims to be Jesus Christ, but a closer examination reveals that this spirit is a lying spirit pretending to be Jesus.

In this experience, Mr. Acevedo claims that he saw a man, and Mr. Acevedo states, “The Lord said that this man was the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.” In the context, the "man" is supposed to be Charles Taze Russell. That this spirit is a lying spirit pretending to be Jesus can be seen from the fact that Charles Taze Russell was NOT the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Russell did not believe in such an organization as Rutherford created after Russell died. The real founder of the “Jehovah’s Witnesses” organization was Joseph Rutherford. It was not Charles Taze Russell.

For links to research related to: Russell and the Jehovah's Witnesses

This spirit pretending to be Jesus states:
Charles Russell is in hell because he taught lies!!
Of course, if Charles Taze Russell is now in the Bible hell, then, according to the Bible, he is unconscious and waiting for the resurrection. See my study: What Does the Bible Really Say About Hell?

This writer, for one, will be eternally grateful to the Heavenly Father for all the truths that Charles Taze Russell has brought forth from the Bible, and his defense of Jesus as the atoning sacrifice for sin. However, the JWs actually reject the core teaching of Russell regarding the atonement in Christ, replacing it with a teaching that basically states: join us, or be eternally destroyed in Armageddon. Thus, the Armageddon message preached by the JWs is almost the very opposite of the good news that will be for all the people that Russell preached.

The lying spirit says of Charles Taze Russell:
This man taught that God was only a God of love.
Anyone familiar with Russell’s teachings knows this is not true; indeed, Russell continuously presented Jehovah as being balanced in justice, love, power and wisdom, with each attribute working harmiously together with all his attributes to bring forth the marvelous plan of redemption that is in Christ. The real Jesus would know the truth about what Russell taught, and would not need to present a lie.

We are told: The Bible says that God is a consuming fire.

Yes, the Bible does say this, and Brother Russell agreed with this.
http://tinyurl.com/russell-consumingfire (We will be providing more of these links to the works of Russell; however, while the Google searches of the mostholyfaith.com site provides results that are mostly the works of Russell, there may be many links provided to works of others also.)

The lying spirit claims:
This man Charles Russell took the word hell from the Bible
Again, One can verify from Russell’s own works that he did not at all take the word “hell” from the Bible. Russell did explain from the Bible itself what “hell” is: http://tinyurl.com/russell-hell.

Again, the real Jesus would know what Russell taught, and would not have to make up such a lie.
The lying spirit continues:
and he took out all the words sheol and Abaddon.
Russell certainly never took out either the word “sheol” nor “Abbadon,” whatever this is supposed to mean by "took out." He certainly never took these words out of the Bible. Why would he do such a thing? Again, the spirit proves to be lying; the real Jesus would not promote such a lie.

The lying spirit continues:
Also, he denied the deity of Jesus Christ and also denied the deity
Brother Russell certainly did NOT deny the deity of Christ; he did show from the Bible what the deity of Christ means.

We could not find any place that Russell specifically denied the deity of the God’s Holy Spirit; we can say that Jehovah’s Holy Spirit is deity in the sense that God to whom the Holy Spirit belongs is deity. Russell certainly did not add to and read into the scriptures that the Holy Spirit of God is a person of the Supreme Being.

The lying spirit continues:
and he put only the Word Jehovah in the Bible.
We are not sure what this is meant to say. As stated, it makes no sense. Brother Russell, however, certainly never put "only the Word Jehovah in the Bible," whatever this is supposed to mean. Brother Russell did often quote from various translations by others that presented the Holy Name as “Jehovah”. At any rate, the real Jesus would know exactly what Brother Russell did or did not do, and definitely would not need to create such lies.

The lying spirit claims:
He took out Jesus and the Holy Spirit.
This is absolutely false! Surely the real Jesus would not present such a lie!

The lying spirit claims; For this cursed man, all these souls are falling into hell.” (Rev 22:18-19).

Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

There is nothing in these verses about the Bible hell. Nevertheless, since Russell did not take away from or add to the words of the prophecy as given to John, this has nothing to do with him.

Mr. Acevedo states:
Then the Lord said: “I curse that man”
Here the lying spirit, whom Mr. Acevedo claims to be "the Lord", proclaims a curse on Charles Taze Russell. However, the real Jesus reserved judgment until the last day, and did not bring judgment against those who did not accept him. -- John 12;47,48; See also 2 Peter 3:7.

Mr. Acevedo states:
When we left this place, these prison doors closed and caught fire and this man Charles Taze Russell cried and screamed and cursed Jesus repeatedly because Jesus said “The judgment has been set for this man”.
What can we say? The lying spirits will give people a vision of whatever falsehood they determine the person will have a tendency to believe. It would appear that, in addition to promoting the lie that the dead are not actually dead, the real reason for this vision was to try to dissuade people from reading the truths that Russell presented. The Bible no where presents any idea that the soul is alive while the body is dead; indeed, the Bible shows that if the body is dead, the person is a dead soul.
See our studies related to what happens when a person dies: