I am reading: "Rutherford's Coup" by Rud Persson -- 600+ pages, and much too expensive!

[Srecko Sostar]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

*** jv chap. 11 p. 152 How We Came to Be Known as Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
. . . A. H. Macmillan, an administrative associate of three presidents of the Watch Tower Society, said concerning that announcement by Brother Rutherford: “There is no doubt in my mind—not then nor now—that the Lord guided him in that, and that is the name Jehovah wants us to bear, and we’re very happy and very glad to have it.” Which viewpoint do the facts support? Was the name ‘a stroke of genius’ on the part of Brother Rutherford, or was it the result of divine providence?

I would like to know if somewhere JFR claimed to be "spirit-led", in the sense that today's GB explains the term "spirit-led"?

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

1 hour ago, WalterPrescott said:

Jehovah's Temple"

I think the scriptures make it clear that only the  Anointed are YHWH's Temple. 

[JW Insider]

5 hours ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

I think the scriptures make it clear that only the  Anointed are YHWH's Temple. 

No problem there. For several years, only the anointed were called "Jehovah's witnesses." For Rutherford, it was the way that the types and anti-types worked out for the identification of Israel in Isaiah 43. They were not to speak of a member of the "Other Sheep," "Great Crowd," as Jehovah's witnesses.

Russell had previously discussed the verse and presented it nearly the same way, saying that it meant that all true Christians would be called true Israelites, the Israel of God.

Russell's comments:

[Isa. 43:7] "Called by my name —Israel means "People of God" and the name will ultimately apply to all who are his. " .

. .  Those who thus covenant with God are begotten of the spirit of God, and as many such as are thenceforth led of the spirit of God, they are the recognized sons of God (Rom. 8:14)

But Russell considered the "Great Crowd" to also be a heavenly class, and anointed, just not the antitype of the more consecrated priestly Israelites: the Bride/Body that made up the 144,000. Russell's views on Isaiah 43 were confusing, however, because he was a Zionist who believed that the Jews were already returning to Palestine, setting up to make earthly Jerusalem the administrative capital of the world.

[Isa. 43:5] Gather thee —As certain as this prophecy has been fulfilled in the preservation of down-trodden Israel in all lands, so certain will it be fulfilled in their restoration to their own land. R232:5*

Rutherford gave up on Russell's Zionist views around 1930, opening the way for a clearer understanding of spiritual Israel. And a clearer understanding of Isaiah 43.

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, WalterPrescott said:

When a president decides, that doesn't mean he doesn't get input from others. So, YES! Team effort.

Of course, this is very possible, I just haven't seen any evidence from our publications, or from anyone who had lived through that time period. One of the biggest complaints about Rutherford, even admitted by MacMillan, is that he so often made decisions that ignored the input of everyone else. Not saying that happened in this case, but it would be interesting to see some evidence that he was a team player.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

No problem there. For several years, only the anointed were called "Jehovah's witnesses." For Rutherford, it was the way that the types and anti-types worked out for the identification of Israel in Isaiah 43. They were not to speak of a member of the "Other Sheep," "Great Crowd," as Jehovah's witnesses.

You are talking about the ideas of 'men'. I was talking about proof in scripture. 

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

  Those who thus covenant with God are begotten of the spirit of God, and as many such as are thenceforth led of the spirit of God, they are the recognized sons of God (Rom. 8:14)

Romans 8 : 14 is talking about the Anointed, as verse 15 shows. 

Berean Literal Bible
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. 15. For you have not received a spirit of bondage again to fear, but you have received the Spirit of divine adoption as sons, by whom we cry, "Abba! Father!"

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

But Russell considered the "Great Crowd" to also be a heavenly class,

So whom did Russell think would inherit the Earth. ?

Matthew 5 ; 5 

Berean Study Bible
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
 

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Russell's views on Isaiah 43 were confusing, however, because he was a Zionist who believed that the Jews were already returning to Palestine, setting up to make earthly Jerusalem the administrative capital of the world.

Um, so the Jews would inherit the Earth ?  So what happens to the Gentiles ? Oh yes they are a secondary heavenly class, the Great Crowd. 

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Rutherford gave up on Russell's Zionist views around 1930, opening the way for a clearer understanding of spiritual Israel.

I don't blame him, it seemed complete nonsense to me. But, I still question, was any of it inspired of Holy Spirit ?  And i don't think it was, but that's just my opinion of course. 

[JW Insider]

4 hours ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

So whom did Russell think would inherit the Earth. ?

All the non-Christians (who would soon learn to become Christians as the millennium progressed). Of course this would be after the then-imminent rapture of the rest of the 144000. Then the left-behind Christians would likely die off normally and get their lesser heavenly reward over the next few years as they each met their own natural or circumstantial death.

[JW Insider]

42 minutes ago, WalterPrescott said:

The problem back then was the legitimacy of the business. Since the board of directors, weren't a legitimate body under the law, then everyone that wasn't under compliance ended up being a critic on how a lawyer ended up legitimizing that business under Russell's instructions. Instructions that by in large are still followed today.

From your very first posts on this topic until now, many of your posts have contained claims that apparently have no evidence to back them up. And so many of the sources you have been quoting are merely the same sources that contradict your claims. Perhaps you could start explaining the reasons you make claims that appear to be the exact opposite of where the evidence leads. I know you like to point out how others are distorting nearly everything on this topic, but you never point out any specifics. Also, when you just make claims without any evidence, it could be that your own claims are just as distorted, or even more so. Just something to consider.

For example, why not start with your above claim that the board of directors weren't a legitimate body under the law. Where did you get that idea?

[JW Insider]

On 5/29/2022 at 10:55 AM, JW Insider said:

And unless someone asks me to, I won't even restart the topic in the Closed Club, where it was suggested it belonged in the first place.

About a week ago, and then yesterday, too, two different persons asked me some "legitimate" questions about things that were already said on this topic. I had hoped to turn the topic away from the book itself and just discuss more general issues about early Bible Student history.

I also realize that a lot of false claims have been made. By not even trying to respond, it might give the impression that I agree with the false claims. I probably shouldn't feel this way, but somehow it just seems dishonest to start a discussion and then allow so many false statements to go without any comment.

But WalterPrescott is correct that the particular book I brought up here is really mostly going over material that has been hashed and rehashed before. Nothing terribly new here, even if it's a pretty comprehensive and detailed historical review which can now be found in one place instead of going off to dozens of separate resources.

So, I think my best compromise would be to go ahead and answer the questions that have come up both here and through PM's. Also, since some people are offended by the book, or its author, I will forget the book and just give an overview based on the same historical resources and evidence that we can all find, many of which have already been brought here and elsewhere on the forum over the last few years.

I'm not saying I'll do this right away, but I will probably get around to starting it in several days.

[TrueTomHarley]

On 5/23/2022 at 9:52 AM, Anna said:

What gets me is when we keep going on about obeying instructions

A little research project I recently did:

I was about to comment on how Solomon requests of God an ‘obedient heart’ and that is the last thing you might expect a king to request. Before doing so I checked to see what other translations had done with that expression. To my surprise, ‘obedient’ was almost unique. The vast majority said ‘understanding.’ 

At first blush, this doesn’t bode well for the New World Translation, Only one other out of 64 translations say it as they do, but upon research, I came away thinking ‘obedient’ is likely the best rendering of all:

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2022/08/an-obedient-heart-or-an-understanding-heartwhich-is-it.html

[Anna]

15 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

 

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2022/08/an-obedient-heart-or-an-understanding-heartwhich-is-it.html

Good analysis.

If you don't mind...I spotted a typo. I think you meant to say "jump on the internet" not of.