JW Insider

3 hours ago, Otto said:

You seem to want scripturpal proof of what a generation was in the bible...where is yours to show what jesus thought a generation was?

That's actually very simple. Jesus used similar expressions a few times. They even matched the context of Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.

• (Matthew 23:36-38) 36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. 37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you.

So a judgment day was coming upon Jerusalem, and it would come during the same time period in the lives of people who were contemporaries of Jesus, during the lives of the very same audience he was speaking with, the people who were alive at the same time as Jesus. We know that Jesus said this in about 33 CE and that "all these things" came about just as predicted. Jerusalem's judgment day came in 70 C.E. (which was about 37 years later). A great tribulation for many Christians in Jerusalem started around 66 C.E., which was 33 years later. 

The same idea can be seen in the expressions:

• (Matthew 16:28) 28 Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom.”

• (Mark 9:1) Furthermore, he said to them: “Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Kingdom of God already having come in power.”

• (Luke 9:27) 27 But I tell you truly, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Kingdom of God.”

• (Matthew 10:23) 23 When they persecute you in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to you, you will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives.

So the idea was that when people who were contemporaries of Jesus heard him make a promise, they would know it would happen in their lifetime, and they could therefore be happy and lift their heads up, knowing that the promise was close enough that most of them would live to see it. In the case of the promise that "some" would live to see Jesus coming in FULL kingdom power, Jesus made this come true for them just a week later through a vision on the "Mount of Transfiguration." But it proves the same point -- that it had to happen within the lifetime of the contemporaries within Jesus audience.

And that's exactly what happened with the promise in Matthew 24 and Luke 21, etc, when the disciples asked about when all these things related to Jerusalem's judgment day would occur. (Every one of the temple buildings' stones being toppled!) They could be happy that it was close enough to be within the lifetime of at least some of those standing there. 

Of course, it would have been some kind of a cruel joke if the prophecy had meant that it would finally get down to just the last few survivors before anyone could see the fulfillment. How could Jesus have said that "when you see these things, lift your heads up because you know that your deliverance is getting near" if he really meant something like this:

• I know I said you should lift up your heads, but what I really meant is that almost all of you listeners are going to die first, and perhaps only a couple of people might still be alive when this generation is just about to finally die out. In about 50 years, if Jerusalem has not seen her judgment day by that time, you might want to remember who were the youngest persons in the audience when I made the uplifting promise, and then figure out about how much longer those young persons might live. Let's say there were a couple of 15 year-olds and they might survive until about age 80, which is 65 years after I am making this encouraging and uplifting promise that your deliverance is getting near. This means that, not you, but people who are alive 65 years from now might want to start watching these youngsters very closely in 65 years, when they will be 80 year old, to see just how long they are going to live. When the last one is about to die, you will know that I am just about to bring Jerusalem's judgment day.  If the last one starts to die, you will even at that point know the day and the hour, too!

Even though this is ludicrous, for those who might have thought that the words about Jerusalem's judgment day also applied to his full and complete judgment day on the whole world, this could have resulted in something very much like that scenario. In fact, there is a kind of warning not to fall for this kind of thinking. It's at the end of John's gospel:

• (John 21:21-23) . . .“Lord, what about this man?” 22 Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” 23 So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?”

Jesus had already implied that "this generation" could die out completely before the final judgment day on the world. Note:

• (Matthew 12:41, 42) 41 Men of Ninʹe·veh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at what Joʹnah preached. But look! something more than Joʹnah is here. 42 The queen of the south will beraised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solʹo·mon. But look! something more than Solʹo·mon is here.

Notice the brilliant way in which Jesus would not tell them that the final judgment would NOT also come in their same generation, but had still been clear that the judgment day on Jerusalem would come within their generation.

2 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Here is a current portrait photo of me .... suitable for framing.

At least it looks like you are getting some of your hair back.

11 minutes ago, Queen Esther said:

  I  love  posting  since  ca. 7 years  and  I  learned  alot !  

I love what both of you are doing. Very positive attitude and a lot of good work that many people can enjoy. I think it's great that some people post as much as they can. All of us make mistakes, but there is always more that's right compared to what's sometimes wrong.

7 hours ago, Bible Speaks said:

Ahough a Christian earns little, the Lord estimates a small donation (Luke 21: 1-4).
(C) they should come from the heart and be given joyfully (2 COR 9: 7

I haven't seen the original of this, which I assume is in Spanish, but I suspect that the word "estimates" here is actually an error based on the word "estimado" or a related word which in this context would have referred to "holding dear" or "esteeming." (In other words, the Lord esteems [dearly appreciates] even a small donation.)

As was already mentioned by others, the book A&W has a Foreword that might seem a bit confusing. The Foreword contains the following apparent strain of "logic:"

• "Truth is stranger than fiction". . . . There was a time when all angels were good. The time came when many of them allied themselves with Satan and became evil, hence called "fallen angels." Woman possesses finer sensibilities than man. She is more susceptible to seductive influences. Satan and his allies have taken advantage of this fact in overreaching woman . . . . Evil angels and bad women have made countless millions mourn. The Bible story of fallen angels or evil spirits is briefly told as follows: . . . God had permitted the angels, prior to the flood, to have supervision of the peoples of earth. (Hebrews 2 :3.) These angels had power to materialize in human form and mingle amongst the human race. Satan seduced many of these angels and caused them to become wicked or fallen ones. They in tum debauched the women descendants of Adam. The materialized angels, called "'sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose." (Genesis 6 :2.) A mongrel race resulted from these fallen angels with the offspring of Adam. . . . The fallen angels or evil spirits were not destroyed in the flood, but imprisoned in the darkness of the atmosphere near the earth. . . . Since the flood these evil angels have had no power to materialize, yet they have had the power and exercised it, of communicating with human beings through willing dupes known as spirit mediums. Thus have been deceived hundreds of thousands of honest people into believing that their dead friends are alive and that the living can talk with the dead. All students, familiar with the Bible teaching concerning spiritism, will read this book with the keenest interest because it shows the method employed by Satan and the wicked angels to debauch and overthrow the human race. The reviser of this book is of the opinion that the original manuscript was dictated to the woman who wrote it by one of the fallen angels who desired to return to divine favor. It is believed that reverential persons now examining the revised edition of this book will have a better understanding of the evil influence about us and be better fortified in the Lord's word and grace to shield and protect themselves from these evil influences. Spiritism, otherwise named demonism, is working great evil amongst men. It should be studiously avoided. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. Hence this publication.

Let's break that down a little more simply:

• Woman . . . is more susceptible to seductive influences [of fallen angels]. Satan and his allies have taken advantage of this fact in overreaching woman . . . . Since the flood these evil angels have had no power to materialize, yet they have had the power and exercised it, of communicating with human beings through willing dupes known as spirit mediums. . . . . The reviser of this book is of the opinion that the original manuscript was dictated to the woman who wrote it by one of the fallen angels who desired to return to divine favor. . . . Spiritism, otherwise named demonism, is working great evil amongst men. It should be studiously avoided. To be forewarned is to be forearmed. Hence this publication.

Was this strain of logic part of the reason that the book is called "Angels and Women"? Was it implied that the author, a woman, might have been more susceptible to the dictation of a book from a fallen angel? Or was it that the woman author had a book dictated to her by a fallen angel and never noticed that this is what was happening? The person promoting the book through the Watch Tower Society's publication "Golden Age" had said that "even demons sometimes tell the truth." But how did they know that this particular fallen angel was always telling the truth? And if he was always telling the truth, why did the book have to be revised in literally HUNDREDS of places. Why is it that the book didn't know about the version of the doctrine Russell had accepted about the earth's "water canopy"? Why did it have to be revised to remove the race of black dwarfs? It's almost always possible to figure out the reasons for the updates in terms of special doctrines that Russell believed in, that the author had accidentally contradicted by not being aware of Russell's doctrines.

It's important to notice, I think, that the reasoning about being dictated by a fallen angel is circular, and proven even more so by later statements. The author of the book never claims or hints that the book was dictated by a fallen angel. Why did the promoters of A&W think it was dictated this way? Because they believed that angels could communicate this way, and that the book had many things correct from their own point of view, which must therefore have come from a fallen angel.

The fallen angel was just another character that the author had created in her book. People have written novels where Judas is a more fully developed character whom we are supposed to sympathize with. Gnostics wrote books 2,100 years ago that created sympathy for the Devil and made Jehovah look like the bad guy (the arbitrary trickster). It's common to create an unlikely hero in modern books and movies, so that we are meant to root for a mobster or an assassin. The original author here only did what many authors do in order to make a story compelling and interesting. I think we can easily assume that the "dictation" part was simply made up out of whole cloth by the promoters of the revised version. But the revisions make me wonder if even they believed it was true.

There are really a lot of problems with this Foreword. I skipped the part where it says that:

• A number of years ago Mrs. J. G. Smith published a novel entitled Seola. She claims to have been impelled to write it after listening to beautiful music. She made no pretense of a knowledge of the Bible. Yet many of her sayings are so thoroughly in accord with the correct understanding of certain scriptures that the novel is exceedingly interesting and sometimes thrilling.

Parts of this have already been commented upon. "She claims to have been impelled to write it after listening to beautiful music." This is not a claim about anything more than any common writer might claim. Some authors use silence, others use jazz or classical music. The word "impelled" is thrown in just to sound a bit more mysterious. "She made no pretense of a knowledge of the Bible." This, too, was just made up as a way to make it more mysterious sounding. It's like saying that some anonymous Bible translators made no pretense of having any knowledge of the Biblical languages, and that this must prove that the translation is superior in some mysterious way. The author may have done a lot of homework on the Biblical subject and obviously used a lot of imagination too. But the main thing to notice is that no one says that the author claimed NOT to have a lot of knowledge of the Bible accounts. This is quite different than merely noting that the author never bragged about her knowledge. So there is nothing "exceedingly interesting" or "sometimes thrilling" unless the promoters actually believed they were reading "secret knowledge" or "new light" that they thought was coming from a true source.

The Foreword next contains the words:

• The greatest Bible scholar of modem times read this book shortly before his death. To a close personal friend he said: "This book, if revised according to the facts we now know concerning spiritism, would he instructive and helpful."

This does not say that Russell ever thought the book was dictated. If he had, this would have been an important point to the promoters. Instead, it only says that it was the opinion of the "reviser." But calling the unnamed "Russell" the greatest Bible scholar of modern times is probably at least partially intended to compare the complete lack of Bible knowledge imputed to the woman author. Also, Russell apparently discovered or at least finally read the book as late as 1916 or shortly before. This would explain the 1924 publishing date of the revision. I read somewhere where a Bible Student thought he read it back in 1878 but that was probably a misunderstanding about whether Russell was a friend of the original author. (Another Bible Student does not think Russell ever had anything to do with the book.) But it should also be noticed that the book was supposed to be revised "according to the facts we now know about spiritism." This does not seem to have anyhing to do with the actual revisions, which were apparently only made to avoid distracting from OTHER Watch Tower teachings. None of the revisions had anything to do with an undestanding of spiritism. And as said above, any changes to the "dictation" would only indicate that they never really believed it was dictated by a completely honest fallen angel anyway.

After looking at a lot of the revisions, I think I can guess what was behind them and behind the whole idea of the "dictation" angle. But I've said enough on this part of the topic.

8 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

Why did those demons ask Jesus if he was  going to abyss them "before it was  time"  if they didn't already know what would happen when it was "time"?

These are all good questions. I don't know the answer.

8 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

Those spirit creatures wouldn't have to be exactly the same "one third of the stars" the dragon dragged to the earth in a certain year [- about which we disagree I think] would they?

We know which ones Peter was speaking about because he told us. But these are still good questions. I don't think I have anything to add at the moment on that subject though because I always give the Watch Tower publications the benefit of the doubt unless the ideas create a difficulty harmonizing with the scriptures or a contradiction with other scriptures on the same subject.

4 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Well, the good thing your argument doesn’t hold water. You accuse Russell of universalism that is not consistent with the evidence.

I'm not sure why you are still so concerned about this part of the discussion. I don't know if you ever noticed that I still have never accused Russell of universalism. All I said was:

• Russell apparently came pretty close to believing in "universal salvation" and this would include a number of fallen angels according to his thinking. He seemed sure that Adam, although perfect, would be resurrected to an opportunity to eternal life

I'd be happy to change the words "pretty close" to "Russell apparently came a little closer than most of us realize to believing in universal salvation, even though he was still not a true and complete believer in universal salvation." By this I mean that some of us would probably be surprised that Russell ever made statements claiming that fallen angels might be redeemed, or even that Adam himself would be brought back to life on earth. I do think these ideas are related to the ideas of "universal salvation.' Perhaps you think there is no relationship. That's OK too. I just thought that the point should be made. I appreciate that you would have used different words to make the point. Of course, you might not agree with the point, and that's OK, too. Remember that just about everything said here is just an opinion.

4 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

So, if the book was NOT published by the Watchtower, then it would mean, it became a good read for the purpose of confirming bible history through other published works.

The point I'm trying to figure out is how and why a book of fiction was able to confirm Bible history. Could Mark Twain have written a really good story about lepers in Jesus' day that somehow confirmed that the Bible was right about Jesus curing lepers? If Russell or Brenneisen or Woodworth or someone else had read Mark Twain's book and promoted it, would that have somehow meant that it had confrmed the Bible's accounts?

4 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Now, prove Russell personally accepted spiritism by your accusation?

Why would I do that? I still don't believe it's even likely that Russell accepted spiritism in any form. I don't believe he realized that the influence from pyramidologist became a form of divination. I'm not even sure that Russell thought this book was dictated by a fallen angel. I certainly never thought it was, no matter what the Watch Tower publications claimed about it in 1924.

4 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

So, with your argument, we should not give any credence, to published works that might be of biblical interest for research. That just shows the limitation one is willing to give in a fair and thorough quest for bible understanding.

Not sure where or why you would get that either. I think that authors often come up with interesting angles most of us would never think of, and a lot of these ideas could make the Bible accounts make more sense. These extra-Biblical authors aren't necessarily right, but their speculations might just allow us to see something in the original account we hadn't seen before. But no extra-Biblical speculations -- yours, mine, or even some brilliant author's -- should be given special "credence" just because we think they got their information from some spirit or some claimed source of inspiration.

4 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

However, you continue to ignore the plain and simple truth, no matter how many times you resurrect “Bible Student ideology” like opposers, that has NOTHING to do with present JW understanding is, Russell rejected Universalism.

You can go on all you want about Russell rejecting Universalism. It has nothing to do with my point, which is based on what Russell claimed to believe, not the label you are arguing about. I've known for 40 years that Russell rejected Universalism several times. This is why I never claimed that he accepted Universalism. My point was about how he had accepeted something pretty close to universalism, in my opinion. At least your statement above shows that you are aware that this has nothing to do with present JW understanding.

4 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Now the other misconception that is evident in your argument is, between universal redemption versus universal salvation.

No. That's still false. My argument was that Russell made clear statements that he thought fallen angels could repent and get back into Jehovah's favor. My secondary, supporting argument was Russell also made clear statements that Adam would be brought back to life on earth for an opportunity for everlasting life. Labels we might or might not put on such types of argumentation are still irrelevant.

2 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

Why DID Jesus preach to the spirits in prison?  I think that is a fascinating question and I can't imagine any reason other than some might repent.

You are right. It's a fascinating question. I can't say that you are wrong, but the Watch Tower publications now say that his reason for preaching was not "good news" but a proclamation of his victory which would be about the same as an announcement of their impending adverse judgment.

*** it-2 p. 674 Preacher, Preaching ***

• What was the objective of Jesus’ preaching “to the spirits in prison”?  At 1 Peter 3:19, 20, after describing Jesus’ resurrection to spirit life, the apostle says: “In this state also he went his way and preached to the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed.” Commenting on this text, Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words says: “In I Pet. 3:19 the probable reference is, not to glad tidings (which there is no real evidence that Noah preached, nor is there evidence that the spirits of antediluvian people are actually ‘in prison’), but to the act of Christ after His resurrection in proclaiming His victory to fallen angelic spirits.” (1981, Vol. 3, p. 201) As has been noted, ke·rysʹso refers to a proclamation that may be not only of something good but also of something bad, as when Jonah proclaimed Nineveh’s coming destruction. The only imprisoned spirits referred to in the Scriptures are those angels of Noah’s day who were ‘delivered into pits of dense darkness’ (2Pe 2:4, 5) and “reserved with eternal bonds under dense darkness for the judgment of the great day.” (Jude 6) Therefore the preaching by the resurrected Jesus to such unrighteous angels could only have been a preaching of judgment. It may be noted that the book of Revelation transmitted in vision to John by Christ Jesus toward the close of the first century C.E. contains much about Satan the Devil and his demons as well as their ultimate destruction, hence, a preaching of judgment. (Re 12-20) Peter’s use of the past tense (“preached”) indicates that such preaching had been done prior to the writing of his first letter.

I don't see anything specifically problematic about the current explanation, but as I said I can't say that you're wrong either.

This is the final part of the discussion of the December 3, 1924 advertisement for the "Angels and Women" book where the Golden Age responds to the two letters:

One letter showed concerns about the spiritistic origin of the book and one whole-heartedly endorsed it. The reply is shown in full:

Angels and Women . . .

Reply

TO BOTH above letters we reply as follows:

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". Scriptural citations are given. An appendix is added. Pastor Russell remarked that at some opportune time the book, revised, should be published.

As to its being a violation of the Vow to read this book, such an idea is not worthy of consideration. It would be no more wrong to read it than to read "What Say the Scriptures about Spiritism" or "Talking With the Dead"; for both these books quote much as to what the evil spirits do. Many have derived much benefit from reading "Angels and Women" because it aids in getting a clearer vision of how Satan overreached the angels and overreached the human race, and caused all the havoc amongst men and angels. It helps one to a better understanding of the devil's organization.

The book is published by the A. B. Abac Company, Madison Square, P.O. Box 101, New York City, N. Y.

THE GOLDEN AGE does not handle this publication; but all who desire it should write directly to the publisher at the above address.

As expected by the order and content of the letters, the Society was going to repeat its current stance and offer a small (dismissive) defense to take care of the slight objection.

We do apparently learn that it was revised under Russell's supervision, but Woodworth (the Golden Age) editor has also claimed that Russell was supervising every aspect of the work since 1916 from beyond the grave (beyond the vail/veil). So we don't really know if Brenisen (Brenneisen) started work on this before 1916 or not. (Later we'll see a reason to believe that Woodworth is referring to Russell supervising the revision after he died: 1916 through 1924.) 

The connection to "The Vow" would seem to be obvious. But note that the answer is that this book is no more wrong than to read books by the "faithful and discreet slave" on the subject of spiritism. Perhaps it was the added appendix with scriptural citations that made this rationalization possible. The book is claimed to have provided "new light" in that it gives a better understanding of the Devil's organization, and gives a clearer vision of "how" Satan overreached the angels and humans.

The street address is not given, just a post office number. This is thought to be Brenisen's publishing company.

In the timeline, the initial announcement and promotion in July 1924, was covered,  and now have begun to discuss the response to the book starting in the December 3, 1924 issue of Golden Age. Next is the positive response. (Again don't miss the signs of marketing within the letter itself.)

Angels and Women . . .

TO THE GOLDEN AGE:

With much pleasure and profit has the book, "Angels and Women" been read by Truth friends. It contains much to encourage one to loyalty and faith in God.

Do you think that it would be a real service to purchase these books in quantities of ten or more copies at a time so as to get the special $1 per copy rate that you have so kindly secured for us, and thus to have them on hand as Christmas and birthday presents or for other gift occasions to give to our relatives and friends, whom we have been unable to otherwise interest in Present Truth or only slightly so?

Would not some be disposed to read a fascinating novel of this kind, who might not be able to get first interested in "The Harp" or STUDIES?

Would this not be considered one way of instructing the people about matters concerning which there is so much ignorance, and direct them to the real Bible keys, the WATCH TOWER publications?

Should we send such orders to THE GOLDEN AGE?

If not, will you kindly give us the complete address of the A. B. Abac Company? There are many who would like to get a little more information regarding these items.

An Appreciative Reader

The first sentence by one appreciative reader somehow speaks for how much pleasure and profit this book has provided to "Truth friends." It's about loyalty and faith in God.

But notice that the second paragraph, highlighted in red above, looks completely like a common marketing ploy. It's merely a rewording and reminder of the original advertisement. And a new reminder that this would make a great Christmas gift, just in time. It's partly rhetorical in that there is no such thing as No for an answer. It's just like those radio ads or cheap TV ads where two persons converse:

• Mary: Can you give me some advice John? I have Problem X (x=hair loss, loose gums, 12 toes, etc)
• John: You are in luck, Mary. There is a wonderful new product that takes care of "Problem X" -- perfect for you!
• Mary: That's great, and I also love the fact that it's on sale now at my favorite pharmacy for buy 2 get one free! [Fake knowledge that Mary didn't really have, but the ad writers thought sounded better from her.]
• John: Right you are, Mary! And the sale runs from now until Christmas!!! [jingle, ka-ching! jingle, ka-ching! . . . repeat until fade-out]

And of course this new Golden Age advertisement in the guise of a letter is setting up the idea that this is a great witnessing tool as a stepping stone (or "gateway" book) to get them to buy real WATCH TOWER publications.

Again this "one" appreciative reader speaks for the many who would like to get more information regarding these items, apparently knowing all along that such orders will actually need to go to the A. B. Abac Company.

In my next post I'll cover the response to these letters in the same issue of the Golden Age.

I still think the timeline is informative in helping us decide just why this book was promoted in this fashion by the Watch Tower Society. We discussed the initial announcment in the The Golden Age, July 30, 1924 p. 702. For some reason this announcement said nothing about what made the book so important or just how it could help them ward off spiritism. This was the second major book that Woodworth promoted, and both of them tried to play off their close association with Charles T Russell for sales. (Finished Mystery and Angels & Women).

But the actual author of the book Seola was never mentioned. Neither was the reviser named, only that it was a close friend of Russell revising a book that Russell had recommended to his friends. According to Brother Herd, Russell endorsed the book and had written the foreward in the book. Russell did NOT write the foreword in the book, and we only learn second or third hand that Russell had endorsed the book. We know of nothing of the book from Russell himself, or even from Russell's lifetime.

In promoting the book through Watch Tower publications, they never mentioned that the original author was a woman, or that they believed she was acting as a spirit medium. Imagine how surprised you would be if you ordered 2 cartons of these books so that everyone in your congregation (a.k.a., "company") could get this new wonderful information about avoiding spiritism. You open up the book and are anxious to get a glimpse of just how "the faithful and discreet slave" had, in effect, posthumously (again!) provided spiritual food to the household of faith. (Russell was still the "faithful and discreet slave" at this point. Woodworth had proposed a new explanation of a parable that would have made Rutherford the fulfillment of a "steward" from a different parable, but it didn't really "stick" yet.)

So you open up the book "Angels and Women" and you anxiously read the foreword:

• "dictated to the woman who wrote by one of the fallen angels who desired to return to divine favor" -- Angels and Women, page 5.

In other words, it was dictated by a demon, and endorsed just because the Society held the view that some of the demons were honest and wanted to repent. You'd probably be thinking, "It's no wonder they left this part out of the advertisement." And that's no doubt what must have happened. They got letters. The Watch Tower publications didn't mention it again until December 3, 1924, after as much as 6 months of sales.

In the December 3, 1924 Golden Age they went ahead and printed just one letter of concern, and one enthusiastic letter of support, and then defended their continued endorsement of the book. Note how the concerns are cleverly downplayed:

Angels and Women

WE PRESENT some letters regarding this book (a review of which recently appeared in our columns) which we feel sure will be of interest to our readers:

TO THE GOLDEN AGE:

Pardon me for taking this much of your time on what may be so simple a matter; but I was approached about going into a club to get a certain book called, "Angels and Women". I made some inquiries, and was told that it was a book that a fallen angel dictated to a women, showing a desire to come back into harmony with God; and that Pastor Russell approved of the book. I had never heard of the book before; and as we are to shun anything akin to spiritism I should like to know positively whether the book has your approval before buying one; so if it is not asking to much would like a reply.

(Mrs.) W. S. Davis, Los Angeles, Cal.

Notice how she (Davis) is not complaining about buying the book under false pretenses, only that she has somehow learned "that it was a book that a fallen angel dictated to a woman" and that this doesn't sound like the right way to shun spiritism. So she'll still buy the book as long as they can assure her that it really had the approval of Pastor Russell and whether it really has the current approval of The Golden Age, in spite of these facts.

Then, of course, they follow this up with a glowing, enthusiastic letter of appreciation.

Anyone who has worked in marketing (I have) knows exactly why it had to be done this way. It's always a matter of handling objections in such a way that you can still produce an action on the part of the buyer. It says:  "You might have heard that this book is not really a book that helps you avoid spiritism, but that it's actually a book that is the product of spiritism. Perhaps this had made you wary about buying the book. Well guess what? You can rest assured that Pastor Russell himself really did endorse this book and the Watch Tower Society still endorses this book. So what are you waiting for? Have no fear! Buy this book today!"

I'll get to the positive letter in the next post.

2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

How is that different when using Russell's words to make a claim that ultimately wasn't Russell's ideology, and inadvertently pretend it was. It would be NO different than calling Russell an Adventist, just because some of his friends from other denominations contributed articles to the tower.

That's a good and thoughtful question in my opinion. You are right; it's not much different at all. It's easy to make a mistake in looking back over thousands of pages of material that is not all 100% consistent. Even though I never said that Russell was a universalist, it's good that you pointed out this might have been easily misunderstood.

2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

It would be NO different than calling Russell an Adventist, just because some of his friends from other denominations contributed articles to the tower.

This is also correct. Just because Russell was very interested in the Adventist chronology among other ideas, did NOT make him Adventist. This is why I would also not call him an Adventists, even if several of his beliefs were much closer to Adventism than most other religions of his time.

2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Are we to understand, people here need to "see" a disclaimer in order to understand the concept of endorsement?

It's probably an important factor to see what he actually said he believed without so much concern over whether he felt it put him under a certain label or category. It's also possible to "protest too much" that a person does (or does not) belong in a certain category.

6 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

J. C. S.

By the way, even though the long article you quoted called "Not Ashamed of the Gospel" supports what I was saying about Russell's view, we should be careful about the way in which we might inadvertently claim that early Zion's Watch Tower articles are supposed to exactly represent Russell's thinking at the time. This was from an early May 1881 Watch Tower, and the J.C.S. initials at the end of that article indicates that it was contributed by J. C. Sunderlin who said quite a few things that Russell himself never said. (Calling William Miller, "Father" Miller, for example.)

2 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

This is interesting. Why didn't you include, where you got all this subject matter?

There were just so many relevant quotes that I didn't take the time to type out the full month and year, just the page number with the F or R next to it. The F is a reference to the New Creation book, Volume 6 of Studies in the Scriptures. Those other references with just an R next to the number are the Watch Tower Reprint page numbers, which is, of course, the quickest way to refer to the entire set of Zion's Watch Tower and Watch Tower issues from 1879 to 1916. If you need to match them to a month and year, just go to http://www.htdbv8.com/  (Harvest Truth Data Base) and sort "Original Towers" by Ascending Chronological Order. All you have to do is recall a couple of unique words from the original article and it will likely show up on Google on one of the several Russell publication sites. I prefer agsconsulting.com to pick them up from. So ultimately the information is coming from Google searches.

If you are talking about some of the references to our beliefs about Armageddon from the 1940's through the 1970's (99.9% etc, these were recently discussed elsewhere on the forum.)

On 9/22/2017 at 1:15 AM, Anna said:

Br. Herd (if he really said anything like what was quoted)

He did. I found a copy. Attached below. Try from about the 6 minute mark through the 9 minute mark.

Also note this picture from Rutherford's book Religion (1940) p.16. Notice the plumes on the head of the giant on the left?

This came from Seola:

• "Mounted upon the back of each huge beast was a black dwarf robed in scarlet and holding a guiding wand in his hand. In front and rear were seen a band of gigantic men, clad also in scarlet, with black plumes upon their heads, and marshalled in battle array. These I knew must be the terrible beings of whom my father had spoken, Darvands, the offspring of angels and women..." (Seola - 1878, Page 63,4).

The original Seola had two additional races joining humankind, giants and black dwarfs as slaves (because the author was a little bit racist). A&W got rid of the black slaves, and also got rid of all references to storms, clouds, and rain prior to the Flood, even references to clear skies, and changed them all to references about the hard-to-see-through firmament or "water canopy."

Other references to the giants in Seola describe them with headbands (as shown here and still shown in recent publications) and with leaves (shown here) and with talismans (perhaps shown here as what appears to be a rock in the hand).

2 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

The foghorn is sounding off. But being dismissive of Russell’s own words seem hypocritical!!

A foghorn creates a sound that cuts through the fog. So if you meant that as a compliment, thanks. But that wasn't my intent because I was merely stating something based on Russell's own words. I realize that he distinguished himself from pure "universal salvation" believers. My point was that, if we don't dismiss Russell's own words, we can see that he was much closer to a universal salvation believer than we are (as JWs) and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised that Russell may have expected many demons to repent, even though they were perfect and we tend to view loss of perfection as rebellion. After all, he expected most of humankind to live on the earth, and most Christians (of all varieties) to go to heaven.

Many of us grew up with the very different ideas about salvation that Rutherford started to push and which Fred Franz promoted with numbers attached. Franz gave talks and wrote articles assuring us that BILLIONS would be destroyed forever at Armageddon, even putting the percentage of those who would be slaughtered at 99.9% on the side of Satan. Because of this we might not easily understand that Russell, while not a Universalist, tended to agree with them to an extent quite different from most other Christian religions of his time.

When Russell wrote an article on Universal Salvation he made points that would seem agreeable to many of them: [R 1436,7,8]

• UNIVERSAL SALVATION.  "We trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe."--1 Tim. 4:10. It is very generally conceded among Christians that Universalists are the only class of people who have any claim upon, or use for, this text of Scripture; but although we are not Universalists, we also, with Paul, trust in the living God [Jehovah], who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe. Thus the Apostle declares that in one sense the salvation which God has promised is to be universal, while in another sense it is to be restricted to believers. . . . But, while thus the Savior of all, there is a particular or special sense in which God is the Savior of those that believe and accept this reconciliation and the opportunity offered of making it everlasting salvation. This salvation is conditional: "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." (Acts 16:31.) This is an unequivocal promise of actual and permanent salvation to every individual who believes, i.e., heartily accepts. To such an one, God not only stands in the attitude of a savior, ready and willing to save, but he will go farther and actually accomplish his salvation; and this is the special sense in which he is the Savior of them that believe. . . . Others, while claiming that God is willing and ready to save all, practically deny it by claiming that the necessary believing must be done in the present life-- which practically excludes three-fourths of the race from any opportunity of sharing in it, since more than that proportion have died without any knowledge of the only name given under heaven or among men, whereby we must be saved. This view contradicts God's Word; because for even one member of the human race to be left unprovided for--to be left without the needful information and opportunity-- would render false the statement which God makes, that he stands as a Savior to all men. The entire matter is clear, however, when viewed from the standpoint of the Plan of the Ages-- which shows that through the redemptive work of Christ God has provided salvation for all from all that "was lost" in Adam; and that the knowledge necessary to the acceptance of this provided gift, while it has reached only the few in the present life, is to be testified to all in due time--in the coming age, in which Christ and his Church shall reign over and bless, with his gracious offer, all the families of the earth.

We should keep in mind that Russell (and Rutherford for many years) also had quite a different view of Armageddon than that which developed over time in the Watch Tower publications. Today, many Witnesses fret over what will happen with Hindus and Buddhists, for example, many still thinking that Jehovah must destroy any and all (plus their kids!) who had some opportunity to hear the good news as preached by us, because any who had a good heart condition would surely have rushed over to our side. How else can horses be practically swimming in blood?

Relative to the beliefs we held in the 1940's through the 1970's, Russell was more of a believer in universal salvation.

1 hour ago, AllenSmith said:

UNIVERSALISM--Pastor Russell's Belief.

I notice that none of those quotes you gave indicate that Adam will NOT be resurrected. Most of the time, this idea about Adam being resurrected or at least ransomed and redeemed was "buried" in the expression "Adam and his race" which I will show below. But first there is a very clear expression of it here:

• We should not forget that Adam and Eve in some respects foreshadowed Christ and the Church. Jesus personally is the great Savior of mankind, whose death constitutes the Ransom-price for the sins of Adam and the entire race. He is to be the Great Life-Giver, or Father of mankind. During His Millennial Reign He will give back earthly life to Adam and as many of his race as will receive it  -- Watch Tower, December 1912, p.373 R.5141

There are others just as explicit as that one, but most of the time, the reason the point is missed is because of the more complex expressions mentioned above, which I will highlight in some of these below:

• Under the divine arrangement the redemption of Adam from condemnation of death will ultimately affect all of his race, to the extent of releasing them from the sentence of death, and to the further extent of furnishing them the light, the knowledge and the opportunity of coming into Christ; but it will be only those who will avail themselves of this privilege, and come into Christ, that will be made alive, in the full, proper sense of that word--lifted up out of death completely. (F698 New Creation)
• Thus, too, Adam was not given an uncounted experience with sin, but for his first transgression was sentenced so completely that nothing short of a ransom could release him from his sin and its penalty, death.  R1261
• He who redeemed or purchased back Adam and his race from the sentence of death R1261
• No subject occupies a more important place in God's Word than the resurrection, except those two other doctrines so closely identified with it--the ransom, which is the basis of all hope in a resurrection, and the second coming of the Lord to establish his kingdom, under which the fruit of the ransom (resurrection) shall be extended to Adam and his race in general. R1258
• The death which Jesus experienced was exactly the same kind as the one which destroyed Adam-- the soul of Jesus died, as the ransom price for the soul of Adam (including Adam's posterity). R4994
• it was necessary for Jesus to become "the second Adam" as a perfect man that as the Second Adam he might give his life a ransom-price for the first Adam, thus redeeming him and incidentally all of his posterity. R4556
• There is, however, no sentient being in the sense of consciousness, or knowledge, or appreciation of pain or joy, or of any other experience, but the Divine Creator who first gave being has declared that in the case of Adam and his children it is his purpose to provide a Redeemer through whom all may be restored as completely as before they came under the death sentence.   R4657

Could be 100 more, but I think this should suffice for now. Even though Russell was not always consistent with himself, I have never seen a quote from him that could clearly mean the opposite.

And, let's not forget. . . . . [do not scroll down if you are squeamish]

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Let's offer a wider selection of favorites:

On 9/24/2017 at 8:01 PM, JW Insider said:

1. Review of Book    "ANGELS AND WOMEN" is the title of a book just off the press. It is a reproduction and revision of the novel, "Seola" which was written in 1878, and which deals with conditions prior to the flood.
2. 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.

I think these first two points got covered. It's interesting that we don't have much information on just what it was that appealed to Russell. Russell apparently came pretty close to believing in "universal salvation" and this would include a number of fallen angels according to his thinking. He seemed sure that Adam, although perfect, would be resurrected to an opportunity to eternal life, although I don't recall if he was ever so sure of Eve's chances. I don't recall this being speculated about much lately, although most JWs will now say that Adam has little chance because he was perfect and was not deceived and therefore rebelled.

There are some Bible Students who claim that this book was sent to Russell in 1878. But right from the start, evidently, Russell saw it as a book that might enlighten his followers about spiritism. If this is true, he could have accepted it as an "automatic writing" book, where the author acted as a spirit medium. At least that's what later Bible Students implied. Some Bible Students evidently say that Russell knew the author, although this could have happened after he read the book and he might have made contact at that point. (The author was the wife of the Governor of Vermont.)

These first two points of the review, however, give no clue about those claims. Only that the book was in striking harmony with the Scriptural account in Genesis. So on to the third point.

On 9/24/2017 at 8:01 PM, JW Insider said:

• 3    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 throws light on the subject of the devil and demons and the influence they exercised both before the flood and and now again in the time period of the books publication: 1878-1924 or thereabouts. Just how it throws light on their influence is not clearly spelled out. The book will also aid those who carefully consider it to avoid the bad effects of spiritism.

If indeed the book came through a spirit medium, it's not clear exactly why Bible Students should buy this book to help them avoid the effects of spiritism. Does the book give us insight into the clever ways that the demons can influence us? Does it tell us something new?

So on to the fourth point:

On 9/24/2017 at 8:01 PM, JW Insider said:

• 4   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.

For anyone who cares, the evidence points to a well-known Bible Student and long time personal friend of Russell named Ed W. Brenneisen, who lived in Dallas based on his letter to the Watchtower in 1900:

• MY DEAR BROTHER:--We cannot ever hope to have you and the other dear brethren (who assisted so graciously and unselfishly in making the gathering at this place on Sept. 29, 30, and Oct. 1 such a profitable one for our spiritual growth and upbuilding) fully understand this side the second vail what a deep spirit of gratitude and love fills our hearts for you. In every possible respect has the convention passed beyond our greatest hopes, and to whom but our very present Lord can we ascribe such unmistakeable direction in even the minutest detail? To him and the glorious Father be all the praise and glory, yet we forget not to thank him for the humble, loving instrument he has used of late years, so effectually to dispense and serve present truth to the balance of the household of faith. May the Lord continue to keep and richly bless you as that faithful servant. With much love,   E. W. BRENNEISEN,--Dallas, Texas.

In 1909, he was travelling as a convention speaker with Russell, MacMillan and others. The following is from the Nova Scotia convention. Other later (1915) convention reports show him also speaking with Van Ambergh, R.J.Martin, Menta Sturgeon and Rutherford.  Russell was the sole editor of the Watch Tower while he was alive, but listed 5 persons in his Will who would be on an Editorial Committee. These five persons were:

• WILLIAM E. PAGE, WILLIAM E. VAN AMBURGH, HENRY CLAY ROCKWELL, E. W. BRENNEISEN, F. H. ROBISON [and if any of them were unable to fulfill they should choose the replacement from a secondary list of five alternate choices] A. E. Burgess, Robert Hirsh, Isaac Hoskins, Geo. H. Fisher (Scranton), J. F. Rutherford, Dr. John Edgar [whose names were never to be attached to any Watch Tower publications after Russell died].

I mention that last point from Russell's will because Brenneisen, being a close friend, might have been alert to the fact that Russell didn't want any of these brothers to attach their name to anything they wrote, which might explain some of the "secrecy" behind the A&W book. Of course, this became moot, because within a couple of days of Russell's death, Van Ambergh immediately sent a letter that started the process of getting members of the Editorial Committee to resign.  Page and Brenneisen both responded with letters announcing their resignation in time for the December 1916 issue, just one month after Russell died. Van Ambergh put the condition that they must live at Bethel to be on the committee, which was evident Page's letter, too. Rutherford and Hirsh immediately replaced them on the Editorial Committee.

I can't really tell what relationship he had with Rutherford, but I have only seen hints that it didn't start out well.

On to point #5:

On 9/24/2017 at 8:01 PM, JW Insider said:

• 5  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.

I have documentation from the Society itself that printing the Finished Mystery was at a cost on the order of 20 cents, even though it was done by outside printers. This book, shorter and lighter, should have been about half that amount, or about 10 cents. I don't know how many were printed, but it must have been expected that this would be purchased by some in groups of 10 or more, meaning that there was an expectation that it would be redistributed in the same way that colporteurs and other book salesman were selling books in those days. Readers of the Golden Age were expected to see a great value in this book to order it in quantities of 10 or more. The profit per box would have been about $8.50 after shipping, but the profit per 10 sold separately would have been a lot more like $16.00 but would have been nearly 10 times the amount of work, and would probably require more marketing in the Golden Age.

It seems like a dirty trick to tell readers of this Watch Tower publication that this A&W book provided a good way to guard yourself from spiritism without admitting the part about it being produced (they believed) through a method that the Watch Tower had defined as spiritism.

I also find it odd that they would see the need to run an advertisement that ends with the words, this is not an advertisement.

4 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

 

 

I can't tell what this is about. Can you explain?

At first I thought this was the OTHER Easter Island:

2 minutes ago, Jay Witness said:

Did the 1st century christians or apostles get degrees in the Christian ministry?

• (2 Corinthians 3:1-3) 3 Are we starting to recommend ourselves again? Or do we need, like some men, letters of recommendation to you or from you? 2 You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts and known and being read by all mankind. 3 For you are shown to be a letter of Christ written by us as ministers, inscribed not with ink but with the spirit of a living God, not on stone tablets but on fleshly tablets, on hearts.

8 hours ago, Jay Witness said:

The original used to hang outside of the Service Department along the tour route at Patterson.

Who knows where it ended up when they moved to Wallkill?

Don't get the point you are making about the Patterson picture, unless it's that they have an even older version of the scrolls (pre-pre-2013) and the brother from Spain off to the left is in very poor light. This picture was still at Patterson last year on the tour route. I suspect it already got moved to Warwick. First thing I noticed when I saw this painting about 6 years ago is that the tall lamp makes a distinct shadow, but none of the apostles, etc., make any shadows. Reminds me of this picture: