Russell, Walter Martin and Reason

In his book, Kingdom of the Cults, Walter Martin makes some false claims concerning Charles Taze Russell. These claims may be found under the subtopic, "Jehovah's Witnesses vs. the Scriptures, Reason, and the Trinity." Despite the fact that Martin consistently presents Russell as being a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses, Charles Taze Russell actually was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses. While we are not with the JWs, we do have concern over such statements regarding a fellow student of the Bible.

Martin makes that claim that the Watchtower's criterion for measuring the credibility of any Biblical doctrine is "reason". He specifically misrepresents Charles Taze Russell (who was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses). Martin takes what Brother Russell stated in his study, "The Bible as a Divine Revelation Viewed in the Light of Reason" (found in Russell's book, The Divine Plan of the Ages), and distorts it to an application I am sure that Brother Russell never intended. Martin falsely claims:

Here is it is plain to see that for Russell, man's understanding of God's character lies Here is it is plain to see that for Russell of himself to be taken by faith, but in our ability to reason out that character subject to the laws of our reasoning processes. Russell obviously never considered Jehovah's Word as recorded in the fifty-fifth chapter of Isaiah the prophet, which discourse clearly negates man's powers of reasoning in relation to the divine character and nature of his Creator.

If Martin had sincerely  examined Brother Russell's writings, he would have known that what he stated is not true. Martin drew a false conclusion based on taking a quote out of context while disregarding what Russell had stated within the study itself as well as elsewhere. Indeed, Martin totally disregards Russell's defense of the Bible, which was the whole purpose of the study.  Indeed, Brother Russell stated in that study:

Since the light of nature leads us to expect a fuller revelation of God than that which nature supplies, the reasonable, thinking mind will be prepared to examine the claims of anything purporting to be a divine revelation, which bears a reasonable surface evidence of the truthfulness of such claims. The Bible claims to be such a revelation from God, and it does come to us with sufficient surface evidence as to the probable correctness of its claims, and gives us a reasonable hope that closer investigation will disclose more complete and positive evidence that it is indeed the Word of God.

Martin's motive was evidently to make it appear that the reason that Brother Russell rejected the trinity is that he could not reason out that doctrine. The reality is that Russell rejected the trinity because the Bible nowhere presents such a concept, and more importantly, the doctrine conflicts with the Biblical basis of the atonement.

The truth is that Brother Russell considered the Bible as the basis for all doctrine. He did not consider "reason" to be the basis, although he did believe one should use reason in study of the Bible. As to Brother Russell's real claims concerning the basis of doctrine, see our research concerning:
Russell and the Bible. See also our research related to the "Ransom and the Trinity".

Martin claims:

Russell obviously never considered Jehovah’s Word as recorded in the fifty-fifth chapter of Isaiah the prophet, which discourse clearly negates man’s powers of reasoning in relation to the divine character and nature of his Creator.

Isaiah 55:8,9 is quoted, which we provide here from the American Standard Version:

Isaiah 55:8 - For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith Jehovah. 

Isaiah 55:9 - For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. 

Since Russell never claimed that man's reason should be the basis for acceptance of doctrine, of course, the Kingdom of the Cults statement is false. Russell certainly did consider Isaiah  55:8,9. It is the authors of the Kingdom of Cults who in their zeal to discredit Russell simply ignore what Russell said in the same book that Martin quotes from, in the very first study of that book, Brother Russell stated:

As though by instinct, the whole creation, while it groans and travails in pain, waits for, longs for and hopes for the DAY, calling it the Golden Age; yet men grope blindly, because not aware of the great Jehovah's gracious purposes. But their highest conceptions of such an age fall far short of what the reality will be. The great Creator is preparing a "feast of fat things,"* which will astound his creatures, and be exceedingly, abundantly beyond what they could reasonably ask or expect. And to his wondering creatures, looking at the length and breadth, the height and depth of the love of God, surpassing all expectation, he explains: "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord; for as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." Isa. 55:8,9. -- Divine Plan of the Ages, page 10.

Martin states:

God never said, "Reason out the construction of my spiritual substance and nature" or "limit my character to your reasoning powers."

I believe Brother Russell would agree with this. However, the implication from Martin is that Russell did claim that one should reason out the construction of God's spiritual substance and nature or limit God's character to one's own reasoning powers. The fact is that Russell never made any such claims. It is Martin who misrepresents Russell on this and would twist Russell's words to make it appear that that Russell himself did make such claims.

Martin then makes it appear that Russell presented what he stated regarding John 1:1 because Russell wanted to limit God's character to his reasoning powers. Having discussed John 1:1 elsewhere, we will not get into this here. We wish to only point out that what Russell presented on John 1:1 was based on not adding to that verse all the assumptions necessary to seeing trinity in what John stated, and making use of the Biblical usage of the Hebrew and Greek words that often translated as "God", "god", "mighty", etc. Indeed, this is the default scriptural reasoning, in harmony with many statements throughout the Bible. The trinity doctrine is not at all based on scriptural reasoning , but rather on man's reasoning.  While the trinity doctrine certainly does harmonize with reason, that is NOT the basis for not adding the trinity doctrine to the Bible and reading the trinity doctrine into the Bible. See our Studies Related to John 1:1,2.

A lot of quotes are given from many of the publications of the Jehovah's Witnesses, obviously in an effort to make it appear that the reason for rejecting the trinity doctrine is based on human reasoning. Pointing out how a teaching is not in agreement with reasoning, however, is not the same making such the basis for not adding the trinity doctrine to the Bible.

Russell, however, never claimed that there are no mysteries in the Bible. Indeed, Study V in the book Martin quoted from, The Divine Plan of the Ages, is entitled: "The Mystery Hid For Ages and From Generations..." The fact, however, that there are "mysteries" in the Bible does not mean that we should add to the Bible a "mystery" about Jehovah as being a triune God. The Bible never presents any such "mystery". 

While the Jehovah's Witnesses have retained some truths that Russell presented, although they may give those a slightly different slant, the Jehovah's Witnesses have rejected the core teachings of Russell on the atonement, Armageddon, no organization today clothed with authority, Christian liberty, the restoration of Israel, the second death, and many other things. 

We will not -- in this short study -- address all the points presented in the Kingdom of the Cults concerning Russell, the trinity, etc. Much of what is presented in the book we have already addressed elsewhere, and God willing, we hope to address more as God permits.


  -- Ronald R. Day, Sr.