Russell and Peters' "The Theocratic Kingdom"

This is related a series of books entitled The Theocratic Kingdom, by George N. H. Peters. Brother Russell was acquainted with Peters, and spoke highly of him, although Russell thought Peters had not gotten rid of some the “shackles” of “Babylon”. Russell wrote comments regarding Peter’s The Theocratic Kingdom, and provided information about those books, including the purchase price. Lately, however, it is being circulated around that “the May 1883 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower criticized Peters’ work, recommending that readers not purchase the title.” Quotes are given, which on the surface, appear to support this statement; and yet, if one reads what Russell actually wrote in May 1883 concerning Peter’s books, we do not find any place where he recommended either that one should or should not purchase this series of books. Here is the entire notice that appeared in the May 1883 Watch Tower:

THE THEOCRATIC KINGDOM.

Brother G. N. H. Peters, of Springfield, Ohio, is an old acquaintance and friend. He is a believer in the redemptive work of Christ, and hence a Christian brother. He is a believer in the future reign of Christ and the saints, for which cause sake he has suffered the loss of some things — some of the esteem of the nominal church. We regret to have it to state, however, that he is not free from Babylon’s shackles, being yet identified with the Lutheran sect — hence has been hindered from a fuller development in grace and knowledge of the word and plan of God than if he stood in the full liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free.

Our brother has spent a large part of the past thirty years in preparing a very comprehensive work on Eschatology, entitled – -“THE THEOCRATIC KINGDOM.” It treats of the kingdom of God to be established, from the standpoint known as “Premillenarian.” It gives voluminous reports of the hundreds of views entertained on this subject — advocating in the main the so-called “Pre-millenarian” view. While the author does not ignore the teachings of the Apostles, he lays greater stress and value on the opinions of the “Fathers” (the Christian teachers of the first five centuries) than we could acknowledge as proper.

The work will comprise three volumes of about 600 pages each. The publisher says that the price should be $5 per volume, but if sufficient orders — or promises at $3 per volume — are received in advance to justify, then that will be the price.

While we cannot recommend it to you more than as above, to briefly state the facts and circumstances, yet if you should conclude to order it or a prospectus of it you should address our brother and friend as above.

See this series of books online at:

https://archive.org/details/TheTheocraticKingdomPetersVols1-3

It should be obvious that in a sense, Brother Russell recommended the books, yet it was not without pointing out that it does not provide the plan of God as given in the Bible. Thus, Brother Russell could not fully recommend the book. To  say, however, that he recommended that the readers of the Watchtower not buy the books would be to distort what he actually stated. While we have not taken the time to read the book, we understand that it presents views that, in effect, deny the basis of the atonement as presented in the Bible.  Nevertheless, Brother Russell considered Peters to be a brother in Christ, a believer in the redemption through Jesus. The fact that Brother Peters presents some erroneous views does not mean that there is no helpful information to be found in his books, and thus Bible Students could find something useful in those books, just as useful information may be found in the works of many other Christian authors who do not understand the divine plan of the ages. Indeed, we do know that some Bible Students have made use of the books. For instance, Brother Donald Holliday, in study "The Secrets of the Kingdom," states:

The first seven parables of Matthew 13 describe various developments throughout the long age that was to precede the second advent of earth’s king and the coming of his kingdom. Then the “harvest,” described as the ending of the age, would take place under the auspices of the returned Lord. However, two of these parables, the ‘Mustard seed’ and the ‘Leaven,’ have sometimes been taken out of context and misapplied to a gradual process of kingdom development during this intervening age. There is some resulting confusion, therefore, as to the nature of the promised kingdom and the time of its commencement. One careful Bible scholar has regarded this error to be so serious and widespread even among Protestants that he has devoted three weighty volumes, drawing over a thousand references from Christian resources, in refuting this mistaken idea.(3)

In the footnote reference (3) we find:

3. George N. H. Peters (1825-1909), The Theocratic Kingdom (three volumes, 2,000 pages).

Brother Russell, however, probably viewed himself as having no right to tell anyone to buy or not to buy those books or any other books.  He simply left it up to each reader as to whether they should or should not buy the books. The fact that he included the purchase prices of the books shows that he expected that some of the readers may want to purchase the books.

Was Russell the Founder of a False Religion?

It was claimed on a site that evidently no longer exists that Charles Taze Russell was “the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses,” under the heading, “Jehovah’s Witnesses: False Religion.” Another site, under the title, "The Jehovah's Witnesses: A False Religious Organization," states: "The Jehovah's Witnesses is a religious organization which had its beginning in the early twentieth century. It was founded by Charles Taze Russell in the latter half of the nineteenth century."  The two statements in the latter quote appear to contradict each other. In truth, Charles Taze Russell was not the founder of the religion known as “Jehovah’s Witnesses.” He did not believe in such an organization, nor did he believe in the teachings of this religion. He was certainly not the founder of that which he did not believe in. 

Russell was certainly not the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization.

First, Russell was a non-sectarian who did not believe in such a sectarian organization. Russell preached against the sectarian kind of spirit that prevails amongst the JW organization. Russell, while he did not believe in denominationalism or sectarianism, believed and taught that true Christians, members of the true church, may be found amongst all denominations and sects that profess to be Christian.

Second, Russell did not believe in the kind of authoritarianism that the leadership of the JWs claim. He certainly never employed the “mind control” techniques used the by the JW leadership. Russell believed that the only authority in the church is Jesus and the apostles.

Third, Russell did not believe in the message of eternal doom for unbelievers that the JWs preach. This is related to their teaching regarding the battle of Armageddon. As far as we know, they still teach that most of earth's unregenerated population, including children, babies, etc., will be eternally destroyed during that battle. Indeed, Russell believed that all unbelievers would eventually be enlightened with the truth. Russell did not teach or believe in the kind of Armageddon that is preached by the Jehovah’s Witnesses; actually, he preached against similar teachings that existed in his day. Russell believed that Armageddon was a period during the time of trouble in which the peoples of the nations were to be chastised in preparation for the blessings of God’s Kingdom.

It is true that the "Jehovah's Witnesses" had its beginning in the early twentieth century. The founder of this organization was Joseph Rutherford, not Charles Taze Russell. Rutherford created the Jehovah's Witnesses organization by rejecting the core teachings of Russell and the Bible Students, especially as related to the basis of the atonement, Christian freedom (no centralized organization on earth clothed with authority), and many other things. 

Russell was therefore certainly not the founder of that which he did not believe in, and which he preached against.

Indeed, Russell himself never thought of himself as the “founder” of any religion; he claimed Christ as the founder of the religion that he believed in, that is, Biblical Christianity.

It is claimed that because of Russell’s “questionable character”, the Jehovah’s Witnesses no longer look at Russell as the founder of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Officially, the “Jehovah’s Witnesses” leadership claim that their religion goes all the way back to Abel. Individually, however, one might hear some the “Jehovah’s Witnesses” refer to the Charles Taze Russell as their founder, or as the “modern-day” founder of their religion. However, we are not aware that any of them would “no longer” claim him as their founder because of an alleged “questionable  character” that is falsely attributed to Russell. Nevertheless, the JW leadership does highly discourage study of Russell’s writings, with the claim that it is “old light.” We highly suspect that the real reason is that Russell’s writings would expose much of the teachings of the JW leadership as being false.

The true founder of the religion known as “Jehovah’s Witnesses” was Joseph Rutherford. Rutherford, after Russell died, used deceit and legal trickery to gain control of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society as a basis to form his new religion which he later called “Jehovah’s Witnesses.” You will not find any reference in Russell’s writings to a Watch Tower organization, and certainly not of an organization that Rutherford conceived after Russell died. Russell refused to usurp any authority over anyone (except as that which had been given to him as the President of the Watch Tower Society itself, which pertained only the internal affairs of he Watch Tower Society, not external matters of the lives of individuals who were external to the Watch Tower Society. That Russell was still maintaining this belief until he died can be seen from his statement in The Watch Tower, August 15, 1916, page 248:

Let it be borne in mind that the Society exercises no authority, makes no criticism, but merely gives advice; and that in the interest of the Lord’s Cause and the Lord’s people.

Almost immediately after Russell died, however, Rutherford and his followers began to present a concept an “organization” in connection with the Watch Tower Society. (See the Watch Tower issues of December of 1916).

See also: Russell and the JWs