Jehovah's Witnesses

Rev. Father A. Maximiadis

This article first appeared on this website in the ‘Forum’ section in May 2007. It has been transferred to the ‘Articles’ section and assigned the above title. The original subject matter and typographical layout has, for the most part, remained unaltered, except a few very necessary deletions. Moreover, additions for the purposes of clarification; to render the article more readable for visitors.

The American cult, who call themselves the “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” have made assertions that deserve responses. This article is written to address a few of their assertions, one of which is their denial of ‘Saint Peter’s Episcopacy at Rome’.

Firstly, this article will clarify the reason this cult will not be called the “Jehovah’s Witnesses”. This so-called name is a Renaissance, sit venia verbo, a bastardization of the consonants of the Shem ha-Meforash (‘Tetragrammaton’). Moreover, the vowels of ‘Adonai’ (‘ó κύριος’) in the Massoretic Text. The Jews, the faithful custodians of the Torah, withdrew the use of the Shem ha-Meforash from secular use; in the postexilic period in 300BC. To ensure that the sacred name would not be profaned. It was reserved solely for use by the Temple High Priests during the Day of Atonement.

Secondly, the “Jehovah’s Witnesses”, notwithstanding this sacred 2,300-year observances of Judaism, label God with a 16th-century counterfeit name, and claim it as God’s real personal name. Labelling God with a counterfeit name is tantamount to pronouncing the Tetragrammaton itself, if that were at all possible and is sheer blasphemy! No mere mortal can give a personal name to the Omnipotent God. Only God Himself has the divine privilege to do that, and to had revealed it; if He had wished to do so. This cult ought to have adopted the appropriate name after their founder Charles Taze Russell (1852-1916): “Charlie’s Witnesses”. For further information read: ‘Names of God in Judaism’ at Wikipedia.

The Origin of The ‘Russellites’.

The ‘Russellites’ were founded, in the early 1870s, by Russell (February 16, 1852 – October 31, 1916), (a Pittsburgh haberdasher), popularly known as “Pastor” Russell. At first his cult was known as the ‘Russellites’ and later designated, ‘The International Bible Students Association’. Moreover, in 1931 (v.i.) the “Jehovah’s Witnesses”. The activities, of the Russellites, are int al. principally printing and door-to-door distribution, of religious publications by voluntary proselyters. These activities are controlled and directed by three United States-based corporations. The ‘Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania,’ the ‘Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society Incorporated, of New York’; and the ‘International Bible Students Association’. These corporations were first under the directorship of Russell (sq. 1916). Also, then his successors: “Judge” Joseph Franklin Rutherford (1869 – 1942), under whom the cult transformed into an absolute autocracy. Nathan Homer Knorr (April 23, 1905 – June 8, 1977). Knorr oversaw the cult’s translation (of sorts) of the Bible, “New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (1984)”. Frederick William Franz (September 12, 1893 – December 22, 1992). Followed by Milton George Henschel (August 9, 1920 – March 22, 2003), and Don A. Adams (1925 (age 89–90)).

“μακάριοι οἱ εἰρηνοποιοί, ὅτι αὐτοὶ υἱοὶ θεοϋ κληθήσονται”.

Μαθθαῖος, v:9. GNT.

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God”.

Matthew, v:9. NKJV.

The Russellites have a notorious reputation for their antagonism towards the Christian Church, its orthodoxy, and its clergy. This interminable stance is sustained by vitriolic, condemnatory propaganda against the Churches, and disseminated in their numerous publications.

Views on Worship.

The following pronouncement (v.i.), is a self-revealing case in point of the cult’s idiosyncratic loathing. It condemns “Christendom (for) having “…forsaken God’s clean worship …”, (and allegedly) becoming part of “… Satan’s wicked organization that oppresses the people…” and supposedly having “… failed to show concern for the poor…”. (brackets mine) (Watch Tower, sine nomine, 1 December, 1951, pp. 732-33).

“…oh wicked Christendom why have you forsaken God’s clean worship? Why have you joined forces and become part of Satan’s wicked organization that oppress the people? Why have you failed to show concern for the poor as Jehovah commands?”

The above pronouncement is flamboyantly arrogant, judgemental, and absent of even a soupçon of rationality.

“Μὴ κρίνετε, ἵνα μὴ κριθῆτε ἐν ᾧ γὰρ κρίματι κρίνετε κριθήσεσθε, καὶ ἐν ᾧ μέτρῳ μετρεῖτε μετρηθήσεται ὑμῖν”.

Μαθθαῖος, vii:1,2. GNT.

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge,you will be judged; and with the same measure you use, it will be measured back to you”.

Matthew, vii:1,2. NKJV.

Do the Russellites really expect its readership to believe that Christendom’s meagrely 2,000-year liturgio-hermeneutic tradition is ‘part of Satan’s wicked organization?’ From the Russellites’ vast 81-year reservoir of knowledge, where, when, and how, in their opinion, did Christendom allegedly ‘forsake God’s clean worship?’ And the historical source from where their founder, Mr Russell, and his successors; obtain their moral authority to make such Judgements?

Φαρισαῖε τυφλέΦαρισαῖε τυφλέ, καθάρισον πρῶτον τὸ ἐντὸς τοῡ ποτηρίου, ἵνα γένηται καὶ τὸ ἐκτὸς αὐτοῦ καθαρόν. Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι παρομοιάζετε τάφοις κεκονιαμένοις, οἵτινες ἔξωθεν μὲν Φαίνονται ὡραῑοι, ἔσωθεν δὲ γέμουσιν ὀστέων νεκρῶν καὶ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας.

Μαθθαῖος, xxiii:26,27. GNT.

“Blind Pharisee “Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also. “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness.

Matthew, xxiii:26,27. NKJV.

Judicial Practises, Then and Now.

The Russellites’ suggestion that Christendom “oppresses the people” is, in my opinion, a historically distorted and misplaced notion with absolutely no relevance to the church today. The religious, social, and political mores today are entirely different from those predating the early 19th century. The Russellites are attempting to vilify the church by superimposing their distorted views of the historical past onto the historical present. The historical circumstances are not as simple as the Russellites would have its readership believe, i.e., “Freedom of religious expression was stifled”. (‘Mankind’s Search for God’, sine nomine, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, New York 1990, p.282). The cult luxuriates in denigrating others who, in the past, allegedly “oppress the people” without looking at their repressive practises in the present.

The actual circumstances qu., the historic past, was faced with threatening forces that were bent on destroying the church and all the established institutions of contemporary society. These crucial events occurred during the late Dark Ages, the latter part of the Mediaeval period; and most of the Renaissance. Anarchy and heresy were creating havoc in both church and state. For example, Donatism and Priscillianism; in the 4th and 5th centuries. The Catharist (Albigenses) 12th and 13th centuries. And the disruptive forces that gave cause for the so-called “Spanish Inquisition” from 1479 to 1808 (and reintroduced, six years later, in 1814 to 1834). These are the facts of the historical past that the Russellites omitted from their pronouncement of the historical present.

These disruptive forces were curbed to assure national unity and security, and ecclesiastical protection of souls under its care. Some judicial practices were in some isolated cases excessive, e.g., Tomas de Torquemada (1420-98). They were the accepted legal procedures of the state in those centuries. Some state approved practises of this time will be viewed censoriously in the centuries ahead. However, these procedures, whether we approve or not, have to be considered in the context of the accepted societal norms of the period.

Christian Philanthropic Activities.

booth The Christian church has, since the early centuries, demonstrated a generous philanthropic spirit organized for serving the spiritual and temporal needs of orphans, sick, poor, and the aged. The social work of the Salvation Army, an evangelistic and social work organization was founded by William Booth (1829-1912) in London’s East End in 1865 And from 1880 spread to mainland Europe, United States, Australia; et al. In the United Kingdom alone, their full time Officers, with 70,000 volunteers, are mcauleydelivering numerous welfare services daily to thousands of the needy.

Image Above: Postal stamp of Catherine Elizabeth McAuley. depaul

Numerous religious orders and congregations of the Roman Catholic Church has, for many centuries, tirelessly made incalculable contributions to social service; amongst a great diversity of other works. For example, the Sisters of Mercy, a non-cloistered order of nuns, founded by Mother Catherine Elizabeth McAuley (1787-1841) in Dublin; 1831. At present order numbers 13,629 nuns, who operate scores of hospitals, orphanages, schools, and colleges.

Image Above: Vincent de Paul.

Numerous congregations of the Daughters of Charity (founded in Paris by Vincent de Paul (1580-1600) [canonized in 1737 by Pope Clement XII]. And Louise de Marillac (1591-1660) [canonized in 1934 by Pope Pius XI]; in 1633)), numbering 27,000 nuns, dedicated to education, nursing, care of the aged; and the poor. The Russellites have accumulated vast wealth over the past 81-years. Prime real estate with modern buildings to house offices, factories, and staff residences; in the United States, England, South Africa, Spain, New Zealand, et alibi. They hypocritically accuse the Churches of “… fail(ing) (brackets mine) to show concern for the poor” (op. cit. p. 733). While they direct their financial resources towards worldwide expansionary activities of “witnessing” (their euphemism for ‘converting’). Or rather ‘poaching’ the faithful from other jurisdictions in 64 countries (Mankind’s Search for God, sine nomine, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, New York, Inc. 1990. p. 361), to accumulate even further wealth.

Their pronouncement condemning Christendom for ‘failing to show concern for the poor’ is unadulterated hypocrisy at its worst. From the vast wealth accumulated, from the Russellites’ multinational corporations, how much have they contributed towards relieving the afflicted? How many (if any) orphanages, hospitals, schools, shelters for the poor, foundling homes, have they established?

Πορεύεσθε ἀπ’ ἐμοῦΠορεύεσθε ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ [οἱ] κατηραμένοι εἰς τὸ πῡρ τὸ αἰώνιον τὸ ἡτοιμασμένον τῷ διαβόλῳ καὶ τοῖς ἀγγέλοις αὐτοῦ. Ἐπείνασα γὰρ καὶ οὐκ ἐδώκατέ μοι φαγεῖν, ἐδίψησα καὶ οὐκ ἐποτίσατέ με, ξένος ἤμην καὶ οὐ συνηγάγετέ με, γυμνὸς καὶ οὐ φυλακῇ καὶ οὐκ ἐπεσκέψασθέ με.

Μαθθαῖος, xxv:41b-43. GNT

“…’Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: ‘for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; ‘I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me'”.

Matthew, xxv:41b-43. NKJV

Anti-Christians in Christian Clothes.

Are the Russellites entitled to refer to themselves as Christians? They have appropriated the Holy Bible and sacrilegiously interpolated it with their perversions. They have hijacked the Christian agenda and corrupted it with ancient heresies. They either ignore or vilify the Historical Traditions of the Christian Church. They encroach on other’s ecclesiastic territories with total disregard for church membership, ethnicity, and traditions. They conduct worldwide aggressive, and coercive ‘poaching’ activities, to colonize, and metamorphose, the unquestioning into a ‘theological’ culture of middle-America. They are in practise tyrannical and unrepresentative of the principals of the Christian Church, and the principals upon which their parent nation, the United States of America; was founded. They have assumed the sole monopoly on ‘truth’. They have put themselves forward as the “true religion”, and regard all others as “Satan’s world empire of the false religion”. (op. cit. p. 370). Are these the characteristics of a Christian church?

“ὁ μὴ ὢν μετ᾿ ἐμοϋ κατ᾿ ἐμοϋ ἐστιν, καὶ ὁ μὴ συνάγων μετ᾿ ἐμοϋ σκορπίζει”.

Μαθθαῖος, xiii:30. GNT.

“He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with me scatters abroad”.

Matthew, xii:30. NKJV.

The Russellites unequivocally state, “Christendom… (has become)… part of Satan’s wicked organization” (brackets mine) (Watch Tower, sine nomine, 1 December, 1951, pp. 732-33); without providing, even a soupçon; of sound evidential support. The Russellites, by their admission (vs.) define themselves as an ‘anti-Christian’ organization.

Sect or Cult?

Ought the Russellites be referred to as a ‘sect?’ or ‘cult?’ Broadly speaking, ‘cult’ automatically suggests itself due to the extreme separatist stance from orthodoxy. Moreover, exponent of the teachings of the ‘millennialist’ mélange of so-called “churches”. Namely, the Seventh Day Adventists, Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints, Worldwide Church of God, and the British Israel Movement. The Russellites make an assertion int. al., that the Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church has no claim to apostolic succession. These opinions are based upon Holy Scripture, the Patristics.

The Questian of St. Peter’s ‘Episcopacy at Rome’.

The Russellites make the following assertion regarding Saint Peter’s Episcopacy at Rome:

“The Catholic Church claims that Jesus built his church on Peter, who, they say, was the first of an unbroken line of Bishops of Rome, and Peter’s successors” … “There is not even any absolute proof that Peter was ever in Rome”.

‘Mankind’s Search for God’, sine nomine, Watch Tower Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvania, 1990, p. 268.

The above assertion exemplifies a naïvety and uncultivated comprehension of hermeneutics, and a conspicuous absence of evidential support. St. Peter’s status of the primacy of honour as first and equal to the Apostles, and their episcopal repetition (‘apostolic succession’); is unmistakably attested in sq. ‘Petrine texts,’

“κἀγὼ δέ σοι λέγω ὅτι σὺ εῗ Πέτρος, καὶ ἐπὶ ταύτῃ τῇ πέτρᾳ οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν καὶ πύλαι ᾅδου οὐ κατισχύσουσιν αὐτῆς”.

Μαθθαῖος, xvi:18 GNT.

“And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”

Matthew. Xvi, 18. NKJV (cf. Luke xxii, 32; John xxi, 15-17).

This Matthaean account is quite clear: Firstly, Jesus names Simon bar-Jona ‘Peter’ (‘rock’), upon whom, viz., ‘rock’ (πέτρᾳ fem. n. of Πέτρος), that Jesus “will build” (implying a later date (vide: Acts ii: 2-4)) His Church on St. Peter equally with the other Apostles (vide: Matthew, xviii:18). Secondly, Jesus assures Peter that “the gates of Hades (ᾅδου = ‘Sheol’) will not prevail against it (q.e., ἐκκλησίαν (‘church’))”, and it is to endure “…to the end of the age” (ἕως τὴν συντελείας τοῦ αἰῶνος). Moreover, will continue to do so (Matthew, xxviii:20b), as it can be historically demonstrated to had done so; for the past 2000-years. Therefore, the Russellites’ assumption, ut supra, reveals a jejune inaptitude in ecclesiastic history.

Lexicological Deception: The Rock and the Stone.

Furthermore, the Russellites put forward the following question accompanied with ripostes of sorts.

“Who was the rock that Jesus indicated at Matthew xvi:18, Peter or Jesus? The context shows that the point of the discussion was the identification of Jesus as “the Christ, the Son of the living God”, as Peter himself confessed. Logically, therefore, Jesus himself would be that solid rock foundation of the church, not Peter, who would later deny Christ three times. – Matthew 26:33-35, 69-75.” (op.cit. p. 268).

[Underline mine to indicate one of the Russellites’ favourite words, viz. “logic”.]

The question and ripostes are, sit venia verbo, ‘garbled’, and ‘contextually’ confused. Evidently, the Russellites’ forte lies in semantic bickering from lexicons and dictionaries. Rather than arguing “logically” from original hermeneutic and patristic sources. Quite clearly, Jesus founded His Church on St. Peter (Matthew, xvi:18a) near the Graeco-Roman city of Caesarea Philippi (Matt. xvi:13). Where He asks St. Peter, the following question: “But who do you say that I am?” (Matt. xvi:15b). Secondly, St. Peter responds to Jesus’ with his Confession: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. xvi:16b). “Σὺ εἶ ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος” (Μαθθαῖος, xvi:16b GNT)). St. Peter has vocalized the collective faith, in the presence of his fellow Apostles (Matt.xvi:13). Thirdly, it is through this faith in, “Christ, the Son of the living God”, the Church was to be Founded (cf. Acts. ii:1-13) on St. Peter (e.q., ‘rock’), first among equals with his fellow Apostles as the first Bishop of Rome [Ancient episcopal catalogues name St. Peter second after St. Linus].

Notwithstanding Matthew, xvi:18a et al., the cult contradict the apparent meaning of Jesus’ words: “you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church”. The meaning of the text could not be any clearer, either in Greek or English. Therefore, it does not follow “logically” that “Jesus himself would be that solid rock foundation of the church, not Peter” (op. cit. p. 268). This incoherent assumption is apparently based on the Russellites’ misconceptions of the contexts of: “rock” (‘πέτρᾳ’) (Matt. xvi:18a 18a), “living stone” (‘λίθον ζῶντα’) (1 Peter, ii:4, 5), “cornerstone” (‘ἀκρογωνιαίου’) (Ephesians ii:20), and “chief cornerstone” (‘λίθον ἀκρογωνιαϊον ἐκλεκτὸν’) (1 Peter, ii:6).

A contextual analyses of these words in the above sources, et alibi, demonstrate beyond doubt that ‘rock’ (‘πέτρᾳ’) is quite different from ‘stone’ (‘λιθον’). [vide: ‘Theologisches Begriffslexikon zum Neuen Testament’, vol. iii, Brown, C. (ed.), Eng. transl. 1978. pp. 383.3(a)-84.(b), et cf. p.393.2(a)]. The former context is indicative of ‘whom’ Jesus is to build His Church, viz. St. Peter and his fellow Apostles, whereas the latter ‘λιθον’ unmistakably signifies “Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone” (‘ἀκρογωνιαίου αὐτοῦ Χριστοῦ Ιησοῦ’) (Ephesians, ii:20b). “Logically, therefore,” Jesus Himself (the ‘chief cornerstone’), ‘moulds’ and ‘directs’ the Church which He founded upon St. Peter (‘πετρα’) and his fellow Apostles.

Misappropriation of Sacred Text.

The Russellites, in their inimitable modus operandi, attempt to frustrate the discussion by importing St. Peter’s ‘denial’ (Mark, xiv:30,68,70) into the Petrine text discussion (v.s.). This indicates the cult’s inability to provide exegetical evidence to argue against the, historically verifiable, succession of the Roman Catholic (and Graeco-Russian Orthodox) Bishops succeeding St. Peter and the Apostles.

St. Peter’s ‘denial’ Mk . xiv:30,68,70 speaks of temporary ‘unfaithfulness’ to Jesus. “Logically, therefore”, this Marcan material has no analogical relationship with the Petrine text (vs.). Therefore, the cult’s misappropriation of Sacred Text, to promote their brand of ‘Adventism’, is Machiavellian and hermeneutically dishonest. Moreover, its continuous deprecation of the Holy and Apostolic See (Cathedra) of Rome (op. cit. pp. 268-72); is morally reprehensible.

The Question of St. Peter’s Residentiary at Rome.

The Russellite’s assumption is suggesting, “There is not even any absolute proof that Peter was ever in Rome” is unreasoned and suppositional. The evidence becomes apparent by chronologically juxtaposing the New Testament (NT) texts internally, exempli gratia: in John xxi:18 – 19 the location of St. Peter’s martyrdom is described to be the place “where you do not wish to go” (“ὅπου οὐ θέλεις”), and in Acts, xii:17 the obscure “place” (‘τόπον’) where St. Peter “went” (‘ἐπορεύθη’) Acts, xii:17. Although these two samples are silent as to the precise place, they do not constitute sufficient grounds for the cult to disregard St. Peter’s residentiary at Rome.

The conspicuous exclusion of specific details of St. Peter’s residentiary, and martyrdom (64 – 5 AD), in the imperial capital, is due to the metaphoric nuances employed by the writers. The exclusion was to secure the uninterrupted growth of the fledgling Church, and security of its members, during the Neronian persecutions; following the fire of Rome in 64. These persecutions occurred intermittently, in the capital, and possibly elsewhere in the Empire; until c. 150. This repressive ambience was, of course, contemporaneous with the writers and their contemporaries, who would have been familiar with these metaphoric nuances, throughout the 86-year period. For example, the author of the Apokalipsis cryptically referred to Rome as “Babylon” (‘Βαβυλὼν’) (xiv:8), and to Nero as “the number of the beast … 666” (‘τὸν ἀριθμὸν τοῦ θηρίου’) (xiii:18), [vide: D. R. Hillers, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, 170 (1963) p. 65].

Although early evidence in the NT sources are, prima facie, not forthright in providing “absolute proof,” there are sufficient indicia in the external literature, e.g., the Epistles of the four following Patristics, v.i., substantiating St. Peter’s residentiary at Rome. The first example is that of St. Clement (fl. circa 96), the third Bishop of Rome after St. Peter, who, in his Epistle to the Church at Corinth; wrote,

Peter, through unrighteous envy, endured not one or two, but numerous labours; and when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him”.

1 Clement: chap. v, (cf. chap. Vi).

Second is St. Ignatius (circa 35 – c. 107), the third Bishop of Antioch, in his Epistle to the congregation at Rome,

“Rather entice the wild beasts, that they may become my tomb, and may leave nothing of my body; so that when I have fallen asleep [in death], I may not be found troublesome to any one. Then shall I be a true disciple of Jesus Christ when the world shall not see so much as my body. Entreat the Lord for me, that these instruments I may be found a sacrifice to God. I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you.”

Ignatius, Rom. iv:3b.

Thirdly, St. Gaius’ (circa. 280), twenty-ninth Bishop of Rome after St. Peter, made reference to: ‘ta tropea ton apostolon,

“I can point out the trophies of the apostles. For if you are willing to go to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way you will find the trophies of those who founded the church”.

Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica II. xxv.vii.

And fourthly, St. Irenaeus (circa 130 – c. 200) Bishop of Lyons, who wrote,

“…that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the succession of the bishops”.

‘Irenaeus Against Heresies’, bk.iii,chap.iii:2b.

The examples given above suffice to demonstrate the profound inaptitude, of the cult’s basic understanding of Christian text, and its willful perversions of Sacred Scripture, and vigorous denigration of the most fundamental Christological and soteriological Teachings, and Tradition, passed down from the Apostles and Patristics; by the time-honoured ancient Church.

“ὁ δὲ Ἱησοῦς ἢρξατο λέγειν αὐτοῖς, Βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς πλανήσῃ πολλοὶ ἐλεύσονται ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματί μου λέγοντες ὅτι Εγώ εἰμι, καὶ πολλοὺς πλανήσουσιν”.

Μᾶρκος, xiii:5,6. Greek New Testament.

“Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He’, and will deceive many.”

Mark, xiii:5,6. NKJV.

Anti-Christian Propaganda.

The Russellites vigorously publish and disseminate abusive and hostile propaganda against all institutional religion, viz., The Protestant Churches, The Anglo-Catholic Church, The Holy Orthodox Catholic Apostolic Church; and particularly against the Holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church.

C. T. Rutherford: “Religion is Against God”

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, Cross, F.L. (Ed. in Ch.) et al. (2nd ed.), 1974. p. 729.

The cult is, by its admission, opposed to ‘religion,’ and, therefore, forfeit the right to describe their organization as “religious”, or their society as a “Christian” organization. They rebuke even the most fundamental doctrines of the Christian Church, verbi gratia the physical Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts, ii:22-36, 1 Peter, i:3), which they believe,

“…the man Jesus is dead, forever dead”

‘Studies in the Scriptures’, Russell , C. T. vol. v, p.454).

The visible manifestation of the Parousia , (Matthew, xxiv:30. Apocalypse, i:7), which they reject as they believe ‘He has already returned (“invisibly”) in 1914’ (‘The Truth Shall Make You Free,’ sine nomine, et anno). The Trinitarian dogma, because they believe “…Satan is the originator of the trinity doctrine” (‘Let God Be True,’ sine nomine, rev. ed. 1952, p.101) – non obst., seq., overwhelming evidential triadic parallelisms in the Pauline sources: I Cor. ii:7 – 16; vi:11; xii: 4 – 6; II Cor. i:21 – 22; xiii:14, et cetera. Moreover, they have revived the 4th-century heresy of Arianism (condemned at Nicaea in 325), which rebukes the ‘Deity of Jesus Christ ‘ (John, i:1, Colossians, ii:9).

“…καὶ ἑν πλεονεξίᾳ πλαστοῖς λόγοις ὑμᾶς ἐμπορεύσονται…”

2 Πέτρος, ii:2. GNT.

And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed.

2 Peter, ii:2 . NKJV

‘Tower’ of lies, and Deception.

‘The Watchtower,’ is considered to be,

‘The prophet of God’

‘The Watchtower’, sine nomine, 1 April, 1972, p.197).

‘The Watchtower’ publication has a notoriously impudent reputation of avoiding historical data, and exegeses. The cult’s proselytizing propaganda is illusory, superficial and anti-intellectual. Recently it has included numerous paradisiacal multiracial illustrations, presumedly to neutralize some of the cult’s past apartheid practises. This is sheer rhetoric. When are Afro-Americans, Hispanics et al., expected to appear in the upper echelons of the cult’s autocracy? It promotes apocalypticalism and is unashamedly belligerent towards Christology and soteriology. It is unscrupulously Machiavellian in its mendacious analogies, and contextual misquotes from hermeneutical and other sources. Its pseudo-scholarship appeals to the susceptible, unquestioning; and particularly the disenchanted members of society. Outré writings under anonymity (presumably to avoid accountability), and fabrication in misquoting, and partially quoting from other author’s intellectual property – and the Sacred Scriptures! – is morally reprehensible. Avoidance of the overt conventions (practised in bona fide literary circles) is gross discourtesy. Including essential details of others’ material – viz., author’s name, journal or book title, et cetera is de rigueur.

“ἀπὸ τῶν καρπῶν αὐτῶν ἐπιγνώσεσθε”.

Μαθθαῖος, vii:16. GNT.

“You will know them by their fruits”.

Matthew, vii:16. NKJV.

The Lucrative Russell Empire.

In 1896, Russell founded the ‘Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society’, as well as other commercially lucrative enterprises. These companies were conducted through some subsidiaries. Russell was the principal recipient of approximately 99% of the wealth that stemmed from these subsidiaries through a single anchor company of which he held almost 100% shares. Russell, and his wife Maria F. Russell, née Ackley, directed these enterprises jointly until their separation in 1897. A certain unpleasant, matter, int. al., was dealt with, at law, over a 12-year period. Mrs Russell obtained a dissolution of their marriage (1909), and a handsome settlement of $6,036.

Προσέχετε ἀπὸ τῶν ψευδοπροφητῶν, οἵτινες ἔρχονται πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν ἐνδύμασιν προβάτων, ἔσωθεν δέ εἰσιν λύκοι ἅρπαγες.

Μαθθαῖος, vii:15. GNT

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.

Matthew, vii:15. NKJV.

The Penultimate Heresiarch.

Approximately 6,000,000 people worldwide obsequiously relegate their spiritual destinies to the anti-Christian legacy of the indubitable heresiarch, the unlettered Charles Taze Russell, described on public record as a “perjurer,” and soi-disant “pastor,” ‘scholar,’ and ‘theologian’.

Russell elevates the status of his ‘Scripture Studies’ above the Canon of Sacred Scripture,

“If the six volumes of ‘Scripture Studies’ are practically the Bible, topically arranged with Bible proof texts given, we might not improperly name the volumes ‘The Bible in an Arranged Form.’ That is to say, they are not mere comments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see, also, that if anyone lays the ‘Scripture Studies’ aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years – if he then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years, he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the ‘Scripture Studies’ with their references and had not read a page of the Bible as such, he would be in the light at the end of two years, because he would have the light of the Scriptures”. [sic]

‘The Watch Tower’, 15 September, 1910, p. 298.

“Prophet” of Irrational Beliefs (Astrology, and Failed Prophecies).

Russell is elevated to the status of a “prophet” seven months following his demise,

“Truly there lived among us in these last days a Prophet of the Lord; and although now he has passed from human sight, his works remain an enduring witness to his wisdom and his faithfulness!”

‘The Watch Tower’, Rutherford, J. F. 1 June 1917.)

“Works remain(ing) an enduring witness to his wisdom and his faithfulness” [brackets mine] include his teachings of the irrational ‘science’ of astrology. He tought that the influence of “Uranus and Jupiter” (presumedly referring to the conjunction (0º) in 9º.30′.00″ Aquarius on 4 March 1914) would set “… man free to work out his own salvation” (v.i.). “Uranus” and “Jupiter” who are “setting man free”, no mention of God!

“When Uranus and Jupiter meet in the humane sign of Aquarius in 1914, the long promised era will have made a fair start in the work of setting man free to work out his own salvation, and will insure the ultimate realisation of dreams and ideals of all poets and sages in history”.

Watchtower’, Russell , C. T. 15 June, 1922. cf. ‘Studies in the Scriptures’, vol. iii, p.327, ‘The Golden Age,’ sine nomine , September, 1924.

The ‘Watchtower’ vacillates in its theological positions. In 1914 (q. v.) astrology was published in the ‘Watchtower’ as an accepted theological component of its teachings. 81-years later it is rejected because it “…lead(s) to demon harassment or even possession by wicked spirits” [brackets mine] (v.i.).

“The practice of spiritism can lead to demon harassment or even possession by wicked spirits. Therefore, God lovingly, warns us not to get envolved in any spiritistic practices. (Deuteronomy xviii:14; Galatians 5:19-21) … One popular form of spiritism is divination – attempting to find out about the future or the unknown with the help of spirits. Some forms of divination are astrology …”.

Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life’, sine nomine, Watchtower Bible Tract Society, New York, Inc. 1995, p.112)

This raises the questions as to whether or not the ‘Watchtower Bible and Tract Society’ was under “… demon harassment or even possession by wicked spirits”; in 1914? Moreover, 80-years from now on, which of the current teachings, will be considered as ‘demon possessed?’ Notwithstanding Russell’s failure as a founder of a “religious” society, his followers have continued adhering to his guileful directives for the past 101-years. Their “Prophet” failed in his predictions of the second Advent of Christ in 1874, and ‘end of the world’ in 1914. Their “Prophet’s” integrity failed dismally in his “Miracle Wheat” libel suit against ‘The Brooklyn Daily Eagle’ for $100,000 damages; 1 January 1913. Their “Prophet” failed by his premeditated ‘perjury’ under oath in the matter concerning: ‘Russell vs. Ross’, at the High Court session, Ontario (17 March 1913).

Corruption of The Holy Bible.

The Russellites promote loathsome propaganda against that which they profess to be. They denigrate the ancient Churches of Christendom. They corrupt the Holy Bible, deny, or falsify historical facts, to promote their heresies, and quote from Holy Scripture – to lure the impressionable – as the Devil attempted with Jesus during the Second Temptation (Matthew, iv:6).

The colporteurs of Russellism are proselytizing (or poaching) the unwary from the Christian Church to the heretical beliefs of Arianism. They disseminate pseudo-spiritual, and anti-ecclesiastical propaganda, and aid and abet in fragmenting Christ’s Church. Russellism is a doctrine of hate. It’s assertion that “Christendom” is part of “… Satan’s wicked organization” (v.s) is not compatible with Jesus’ comments on love, or the Church He founded.

Αγαπήσεις κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ καρδίᾳ σου καὶ ἑν ὅλῃ τῇ ψυχῇ σου καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ σου αὕτη ἐστὶν ἡ μεγάλη καὶ πρώτη ἐντολή. δευτέρα δε ὁμοία αὑτῇ, ̍̓̓̓Αγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. ἐν ταύταις ταῖς δυσὶν ἐντολαῖς ὅλος ὁ νόμος κρέμαται καὶ οί προφῆται.

Μαθθαῖος, xxii:37-40. GNT.

“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

Matthew, xxii:37-40. NKJV.

“Ὦ οἱ ποιμένες οἱ διασκορπίζοντες καὶ ἀπολλύοντες τὰ πρόβατα τῆς νομῆς μου”.

Ιερεμίας, xxiii:1 LXX.

“Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of My pasture!” says the Lord”.

Jeremiah, xxiii:1. NKJV.

Fathers Homepage