No, the truths I present, as God's mouthpiece, were not revealed in visions or dreams, nor by God's audible voice, nor all at once, but gradually, especially since 1870, and particularly since 1880. Neither is this clear unfolding of truth due to any human ingenuity or acuteness of perception, but to the simple fact that God's due time has come; and if I did not speak, and no other agent could be found, the very stones would cry out. -- Watch Tower, July 15, 1906, page 229
Nonetheless, the tract immediately follows with the statement: "He made his living at the time as a haberdasher." Whether this is deliberate or not, this makes it appear that in some way while Russell was a haberdasher that he claimed to be God's mouthpiece, evidently having a sole position as being such. We do not know that Russell ever spoke of himself as "God's mouthpiece" while he was in the haberdashery business, but we do know he made such a statement of himself at least once after he got out of that business.
Even so, Russell also spoke of all of God's people as being "mouthpieces" of the Holy Spirit, of the Word of God, and/or of God
xIt should be noted that Russell spoke, not only of himself as God's mouthpiece, but he also spoke of any who are servants of Jesus as God's mouthpieces, and by his statements elsewhere, this would include consecrated ones regardless of what denomination or sect that one may be associated with.
Some time ago, one made the following claim:
You see, in Biblical terms, a prophet is someone who speaks for God. Have you ever heard the Watchtower Society claim they are the mouthpiece of God? We have heard them say this many times. Personally, I have also read it too. The first time they made this claim was in Zion’s Watch Tower, dated July 15, 1906. On pages 229-30, Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, made this claim for the first time.
The page that this was presented on has since been removed.
Rather than claiming to be a prophet receiving a message from through visions, dreams, or audibly, he disclaimed being such. His use of the word "mouthpiece" of himself does not mean that he was claiming to be a divinely--inspired prophet. Russell did believe that God was using to bring for truths already revealed in the Bible.
The Wikipedia article on Charles Taze Russell states concerning Russell: "He viewed himself—and all other Christians anointed with the Holy Spirit—as 'God's mouthpiece' and an ambassador of Christ." As stated, this is correct, although even this could be misleading, especially if placed in the context of what the Jehovah's Witnesses teach concerning "the anointed". The wording in the Wikipedia article may have been submitted by one the Jehovah's Witnesses, most of whom do not consider themselves to be "anointed with the Holy Spirit". Most of them claim to be of the "great crowd" (great multitude) of Revelation 7, and they do not believe that this "great crowd" has the anointing of the Holy Spirit.
The Wikipedia article continues: "Later in his career he accepted without protest that many Bible Students viewed him as the 'faithful and wise servant' of Matthew 24:45." Actually, Russell did state an objection to seeing "Russell in the Bible". Nevertheless, Russell did not claim the authority to object to the various views many Bible Students were promoting. As he stated, "I disclaim any special inspiration. In some particulars my views agree with those of other Bible students, and in other respects they disagree. Each hearer must use his own judgment, do his own Bible study, and reach his own conclusions." — "Battle of Armageddon" - Sermon given November 3, 1912, at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, as reproduced in the St. Paul Enterprise, November 21, 1916, page 1.
Rather than claiming to be a prophet receiving a message from through visions, dreams, or audibly, he disclaimed being such. His use of the word "mouthpiece" of himself does not mean that he was claiming to be a divinely--inspired prophet. Russell did believe that God was using to bring for truths already revealed in the Bible.
The Wikipedia article on Charles Taze Russell states concerning Russell: "He viewed himself—and all other Christians anointed with the Holy Spirit—as 'God's mouthpiece' and an ambassador of Christ." As stated, this is correct, although even this could be misleading, especially if placed in the context of what the Jehovah's Witnesses teach concerning "the anointed". The wording in the Wikipedia article may have been submitted by one the Jehovah's Witnesses, most of whom do not consider themselves to be "anointed with the Holy Spirit". Most of them claim to be of the "great crowd" (great multitude) of Revelation 7, and they do not believe that this "great crowd" has the anointing of the Holy Spirit.
The Wikipedia article continues: "Later in his career he accepted without protest that many Bible Students viewed him as the 'faithful and wise servant' of Matthew 24:45." Actually, Russell did state an objection to seeing "Russell in the Bible". Nevertheless, Russell did not claim the authority to object to the various views many Bible Students were promoting. As he stated, "I disclaim any special inspiration. In some particulars my views agree with those of other Bible students, and in other respects they disagree. Each hearer must use his own judgment, do his own Bible study, and reach his own conclusions." — "Battle of Armageddon" - Sermon given November 3, 1912, at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, as reproduced in the St. Paul Enterprise, November 21, 1916, page 1.
Russell consistently denied being a divinely-inspired prophet, and he consistently denied that his conclusions concerning prophecies are divinely-inspired prophecies, no matter how positively he sated his conclusions. He even admitted many times the possibility that he could be in error in some conclusions.
Russell, of course, was never a member of Jehovah's Witnesses, and was not the founder of an organization such as he preached against.
Speaking for God, however, as a Bible Student, or as a pastor, is not the same as speaking for God as a prophet as described in Deuteronomy 18:18-22. Otherwise, practically every minister of every denomination and church would have to be considered to be claiming to be a divinely inspired prophet of God, since they almost all profess to be preaching God's Word.
Did Brother Russell, in 1906, in the article cited, claim that he was a prophet as described in Deuteronomy 18:18-22? Let's read these verses:
Deuteronomy 18:18 I will raise them up a prophet from among their brothers, like you; and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I shall command him.
Deuteronomy 18:19 It shall happen, that whoever will not listen to my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Deuteronomy 18:20 But the prophet, who shall speak a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.
Deuteronomy 18:21 If you say in your heart, How shall we know the word which Yahweh [Jehovah] has not spoken?
Deuteronomy 18:22 when a prophet speaks in the name of Yahweh [Jehovah], if the thing doesn't follow, nor happen, that is the thing which Yahweh [Jehovah] has not spoken: the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you shall not be afraid of him. -- World English, added God's Holy Name as "Jehovah" in brackets.
Did Brother Russell claim that Jehovah (Yahweh) had spoken to him as spoken of above, and that he was relaying the words that Jehovah had spoken to him? No. The article referred to in the Watch Tower of July 15, 1906 is "Harvest Gatherings and Siftings" under the heading "A Sketch of the Development of Present Truth". It was in this article that Russell stated::
No, dear friends, I claim nothing of superiority, nor supernatural power, dignity or authority; nor do I aspire to exalt myself in the estimation of my brethren of the household of faith, except in the sense that the Master urged it, saying, "Let him who would be great among you be your servant." (Matt. 20:27) And my position among men of the world and of the nominal church is certainly far from exalted, being "everywhere spoken against." I am fully contented, however, to wait for exaltation until the Lord's due time. (I Pet. 5:6) In the Apostle's words I therefore answer, "Why look ye upon us, as though by our own power we had done these things? We also are men of like passions with yourselves"--of like infirmities and frailties, earnestly striving, by overcoming many besetments, discouragements, etc., to press along the line toward the mark of the prize of our high calling, and claiming only, as a faithful student of the Word of God, to be an index finger, as I have previously expressed it, to help you to trace for yourselves, on the sacred page, the wonderful plan of God--no less wonderful to me, I assure you, than to you, dearly beloved sharers of my faith and joy.
No, the truths I present, as God's mouthpiece, were not revealed in visions or dreams, nor by God's audible voice, nor all at once, but gradually, especially since 1870, and particularly since 1880. Neither is this clear unfolding of truth due to any human ingenuity or acuteness of perception, but to the simple fact that God's due time has come; and if I did not speak, and no other agent could be found, the very stones would cry out. -- Watch Tower, July 15, 1906, pages 229, 230
By quoting or referencing what Brother Russell said out of context, and placing his statement "as God's mouthpiece" in the context of the claims of the JW leadership as being God's sole channel of truth, many would like to make it appear that Russell was claiming the same for himself, or for his Watch Tower Society, to have the same authority that the JW leadership claims. Doing such makes it appear that Russell was claiming to have the "sole" divine authority as "God's mouthpiece" to present truth. In context, however, Russell disclaimed having any such "authority", as he stated in that very same article, "I claim nothing of superiority, nor supernatural power, dignity or authority." He further disclaims being a divinely-inspired prophet when he said that the truths he presented "were not revealed in visions or dreams, nor by God's audible voice."
This is in harmony with many statements Russell made, such as "We neither urge nor insist upon our views as infallible, nor do we smite or abuse those who disagree; but regard as 'Brethren' all sanctified believers in the precious blood." (Zion’s Watch Tower, October 1, 1907, page 294) "I am not a prophet. The very most I try to do, dear friends, is to interpret prophecy.” (What Pastor Russell Said, page 272).
That Brother Russell was not assuming any such role as the later JW leadership claims can be seen from his statement a few years later, when, in 1909, he said:
And additionally St. Paul and the other Apostles and each of the Lord's faithful ones are ministers or servants of this New Covenant now, in that they are engaged, as the Lord's mouth-pieces, in calling the members of the Body of Christ, and engaged also as the Lord's representatives in edifying one another and building one another up in the "most holy faith," preparing one another as members of the Body of the Mediator, the Body of Christ, to be associated with him in the work of his Mediatorial Kingdom of a thousand years. -- The Watch Tower, September 15, 1909, pages 279, 280.
Here Brother Russell speaks of ALL who are consecrated as being "the Lord's mouth-pieces". And who did Brother Russell consider the "consecrated" to be? Russell's views on this were a lot different from that of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
For instance, in 1910, we find that Brother Russell said the following:
We must take the broad, general ground of the Scriptures and recognize only one Church.Nor may we make the mistake of saying that the one Church is one sect. No sect, no denomination, however great and influential and numerous and rich, either in sordid or historic wealth, can be conceded the right to appropriate the name which our Lord gave to all truly his disciples. Surely none of us is sectarian enough to dispute this premise. We must learn to recognize the Church of Christ from the same viewpoint as does the Head of the Church. We must learn the force of St. Peter's words to Cornelius, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him." (Acts 10:34,35.)
Taking, therefore, the Scriptural view of the Church, we recognize it as the "Body of Christ" of many members, over which he is the head. It is composed of consecrated followers of Christ, irrespective of all denominational lines -- those who, turning from sin, accept Jesus as their Redeemer, through whom they have forgiveness of sins and reconciliation to the Father--those who have become disciples of Christ, taking up their cross to follow him, and who have received the begetting of the holy Spirit. Who could dispute that these are the Church of Christ? Who shall say that they must belong to this communion or that, or lose their relationship to the Head, Christ Jesus? The apostles never referred to Baptist Christians, Methodist Christians, Catholic Christians, Presbyterian Christians, etc., but merely to those whom we have described and whom they styled saints--"the Church of the living God, whose names are written in heaven." (Hebrews 12:23; 1 Timothy 3:15.) --- 1910 International Bible Students Convention Report, page 79
It should be clear from the above that Russell was not limiting the members of the church -- the consecrated -- to any certain fellowship, sect or denomination. Today, however, the Jehovah's Witnesses, in effect, believe that all those of the church are members of the organization that Rutherford created after Russell died. Thus, one should realize that Russell's view regarding this is a lot different from the views later presented by the Jehovah's Witnesses.
In 1915, he had his sermon, "The Catholic Church -- St. Peter's Kingdom Keys", published in "The Bible Students Monthly" (Volume 7, Number 9), which contains the following comment:
“The Lord in Heaven records as members of His true Church all the saintly — whether Roman Catholics, Anglican Catholics, Greek Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc. — and none others…. Do we not see that a part of our mistake was in calling the outward organization the Church of Christ, instead of remembering that the Lord alone writes the names of the Church, that He alone reads the hearts, that He alone is the Judge, and that He alone has the right to blot out the names of those who become reprobates? … We must see that the Church is a comparatively small company of saintly footstep followers of Jesus, irrespective of sectarian lines.” – Bible Students Monthly, Volume 7, Number 9 (1915), Under the title, “The Catholic Church — St. Peter’s Kingdom Keys.“
This further shows that he considered anyone who is truly consecrated as being members of the true church, irrespective of denominational ties.
The point is that Brother Russell did not limit "the Lord's people" simply to those who agreed with him; he extended that to anyone in any of the denominations who was actually consecrated to the Lord, and who thus would be God's mouthpiece, even though their message might be mixed with what he considered to be denominational and/or sectarian errors.
Also in 1913, Russell wrote the following in The Watch Tower, June 1913, page :
We urge that the Lord's people stifle curiosity, and desist from prying into things not clearly set forth in God's Word, as being injurious to them, hurtful to the Cause we are all desirous of serving, and tending to hinder the work of grace in our own hearts and in the hearts of those to whom we are the Lord's ambassadors and mouthpieces.
Again, he refers to all the "Lord's people" as being mouthpieces. This again shows that when he spoke of himself as being God's mouthpiece, it was not any with the concept of having the authority of a divinely-inspired prophet, as spoken of in Deuteronomy 18:18-22; he certainly never claimed to a be prophet in the sense of being a sole special representative of God or Christ. He never claimed that one had to come to him as a channel by which to come to Christ; he certainly never claimed that he himself was Christ, or that he, or the WTS of his time, should take the place of Christ, which is what is being described by the term antichrist (instead of Christ, or against Christ).
Nevertheless, one of the meanings Brother Russell attributed to the word "prophet", was that of public expounder. As a public speaker, he believed that all who were proclaiming the Bible were such prophets, again, irrespective of denominational ties, without meaning that they were divinely-inspired prophets as described in Deuteronomy 18:15-22. He believed, however, that many of the preachers are false prophets, prophets claiming authority that Jesus never authorized. From our own perspective, which we believe to be scriptural, if such a prophet, or teacher of God's Word, begins to claim authority that Jesus has never given to him, that prophet becomes a false prophet. Nevertheless, one could be a false prophet even if such a prophet had never been truly consecrated; on the other hand, even if one was truly consecrated, he can become sidetracked so as to become a "bad" or "evil" servant of the Lord. -- Matthew 24:48-51; Luke 12:44-46.
See our study:
Parable of the Four Servants — Luke 12:42-48
And finally, to show that Brother Russell still was NOT claiming any kind of divine authority for himself or for the Watch Tower Society, in 1916, just before he died, Russell wrote in The Watch Tower, August 15, 1916, page 248:
Parable of the Four Servants — Luke 12:42-48
And finally, to show that Brother Russell still was NOT claiming any kind of divine authority for himself or for the Watch Tower Society, in 1916, just before he died, Russell wrote in The Watch Tower, August 15, 1916, page 248:
Let it be borne in mind that the [Watch Tower] Society exercises no authority, makes no criticism, but merely gives advice; and that in the interest of the Lord’s Cause and the Lord’s people. -- The Watch Tower, August 15, 1916, page 248.
Russell never claimed to be a "sole" mouthpiece for God, as many make it appear.
Ronald R. Day, St.
Ronald R. Day, St.
(Original post: January 1, 2010; Updated August 16, 2014; updated and republished May 6, 2015; updated March, April 2023; still needs some updating and formatting)
Related:
Photo of Pastor Russell was colorized via pallette.fm
No comments:
Post a Comment