Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Verification on Charles Taze Russell | Col 2:9 | RR144 | 82640 | ||
Let's stick with Russell, the Watchtower of today have made many claims of Russell that were simply not true, they have simply rewritten their history to make it seem that Russell was a Jehovah's Witness in harmony with their theology of today, this is simply not true, the two are separate and distinct. Because many in his day believed he was "That Servant" does not in itself mean he taught he was "that servant." I'll save you the time, Russell in all his years, NEVER, I repeat, NEVER taught that he was "that Servant" of Matthew 24:45-48. You will never find such a statement from him, believe me. |
||||||
2 | Verification on Charles Taze Russell | Col 2:9 | Radioman2 | 82677 | ||
The Watchtower of today? I didn't quote "the Watchtower of today". I quoted the Watchtower of 1916 (12/1/1916, page 357). 'COMMENT: This contradicts Watchtower 12/1/1916, page 357 where the watchtower states Russell did in fact claim to be the Faithful and Discreet slave. '"Thousands of the readers of Pastor Russell's writings believe that he filled the office of 'that faithful and wise servant,' and that his great work was giving to the household of faith meat in due season. His modesty and humility precluded him from openly claiming this title, BUT HE ADMITTED AS MUCH IN PRIVATE CONVERSATION," (Watchtower 12/1/1916, page. 357.)' (Emphasis added.) ______________________ (http://www.carm.org/jw/docs/1000years_p346.htm) |
||||||
3 | Verification on Charles Taze Russell | Col 2:9 | RR144 | 82696 | ||
And as I said, "Let's stick with Russell, the Watchtower of today have made many claims of Russell that were simply not true, they have simply rewritten their history..." The Watchtower of 12/1/1916 is one of these rewritten statements. As I stated before, you will not find in any of Russell's writings, where he personally made such a claim in print. the article you quote from was not written by Russell, as he was dead by this time, it was written by "Judge" Rutherford, and it is hearsay, and "hearsay' never holds up in a court of law. Try again! :) |
||||||
4 | Verification on Charles Taze Russell | Col 2:9 | Radioman2 | 82700 | ||
No, you stick with Russell. | ||||||
5 | Verification on Charles Taze Russell | Col 2:9 | RR144 | 82701 | ||
I do! | ||||||