100 Years Ago: April 1915 – Russell claims Filipinos are lazy, barbaric; asks US President to sell Philippines to Japan

Main Points:

  • Russell wrote the President of the United States through the Secretary of State, stating that he wanted to write him privately but thought it best to send the letter to also be published in newspapers.
  • Russell’s letter reveals a level of political involvement that went far beyond Zionism and direct political involvement in the affairs of government.
  • Russell’s stated opinions about the Philippines reveals personal prejudices which are pro-American, anti-Filipino and pro-Japanese. He shows himself to be a “White-Man’s-Burden” Eurocentric racist.
  • A history of Russell’s opinions related to the Philippines reveal inconsistency and contradictions, but also clarify the real meaning of the expression, “End of the Gentile Times.”

________________________________

[photo above is from more recent context, unrelated to C.T.Russell]

The relevant statements in question were printed in the April 1915 Watch Tower magazine, pages 101-102. Here are some long excerpts, including most of the original article, with our own highlighted sections for emphasis using bold, color and underlining which was not found in the original text. We will interrupt the quotation to include editorial comments, which will be evident through the use of brackets and other formatting changes, when we are directly commenting on the text of the Watch Tower articles:

[Begin quotation from April 1915 Watch Tower]

SELL THE PHILIPPINES TO JAPAN

Two years ago, on our return from the Orient, we sent the below letter of suggestion to the Government with copies of it to the newspapers, some of which published the letter, which read as follows:–

Brooklyn, May 26, 1913.

Honorable Wm. J. Bryan,

Secretary of State, U.S.A.

Dear Sir:–I am addressing you, and through you the Honorable President of this Nation, and the Honorable Members of its Congress, upon a subject which I believe to be of prime importance to our Nation and to the world. I would have preferred to make this communication a private one, but believe that its object will be much better served if it be known at home and abroad that the suggestion comes from a native citizen, a minister and ambassador of Christ, rather than if the same suggestion were to emanate from some Official of our Government or from a politician.

[Editor: Russell’s claim that he preferred to make the communication private seems meaningless when it was simultaneously sent to newspapers for widespread publishing.]

THE WORLD’S PEACE ENDANGERED

. . . Japan’s need for room for her overflow population has already led her to grasp Korea, and it is no secret that she longs for possession of the Philippine Islands . . . .  Many broad-minded Americans have suggested that the United States has no desire to acquire colonies in an imperial sense, and that, therefore, the Philippine Islands should be surrendered to the Filipinos. The only objection urged against this move is that the Filipinos are not as yet sufficiently advanced in civilization to properly govern themselves. And those most intimate with the situation have not the slightest doubt that if the United States withdrew from the Philippines, the Japanese Government would immediately take control, and shortly the Philippine Islands would be inundated with Japanese–undoubtedly much to their benefit, as the latter people are more thrifty and prudent and energetic than the Filipinos.

[Russell objects to allowing the Filipinos to govern themselves because they are “not sufficiently advanced in civilization.” This is an exact reflection of the imperialist ideas of President McKinley which were also expressed in an idea called “The White Man’s Burden.” In fact, the Wikipedia article explains corrrectly that Rudyard Kipling’s original poem by that name was published in 1899 with the subtitle, The United States and the Philippine Islands.  The Wikipedia article includes: “At face value it appears to be a rhetorical command to white men to colonize and rule other nations for the benefit of those people . . . . the phrase “white man’s burden” as justifying imperialism as a noble enterprise. Because of its theme and title, it has become emblematic both of Eurocentric racism and of Western aspirations to dominate the developing world.” Russell was very clearly a racist.]

SOME RADICAL SUGGESTIONS

I suggest that the United States Government select from amongst the Philippine Islands one island suitable as a naval base, and tender to Japan the opportunity to take over the Philippine Islands at precisely the same they have cost the United States. . . . .

. . . Surely wisdom should dictate to both Nations that, in the interest of peace, cause for friction should be as far as possible eliminated. I believe that no more fair, no more just, no more honorable method for adjudicating this matter can be found than that we are suggesting–the sale of the Islands at cost to the Japanese.

Japan would give the Filipinos a splendid government— better, I believe, than would any other nation under the sun except our own Government. No one can visit the Philippines without feeling pride for what America has done for that people–and done in so unselfish and noble a manner, as an elder brother amongst the nations helping a younger brother. Under no circumstances would I favor turning the Philippines over to the domination of a barbaric people. The Japanese are not barbarians, but highly civilized.

[Russell is indirectly admitting that, in his own mind, “highly civilized” is a term he reserves for nations who were known for success at selfishly taking land and resources from others by force of war. That is an implicit part of his equation that calls the victors “civilized” and the victims “barbaric.” He has already admitted that Japan would look for excuses to take the islands by force if the USA wouldn’t sell it to them. He then, in fact, goes on to speak of war as a necessity immediately after the above.]

My discourse in Washington on the 25th, “Peace Desirable, War a Necessity,” was evidently misunderstood by some of my peace friends. While I claimed that nations have never been able to avoid war, and that they never will be able to wholly avoid it until the inauguration of Messiah’s Kingdom, . . . NOW seems to be the psychological moment, and, as stated at first, it seems best that these suggestions should come from an ambassador of Christ, rather than from a politician . . .. I call for its endorsement by peace societies and all who believe that war should be only a last resort. Faithfully yours,

A servant of the Lord Jesus Christ,

(Signed) C. T. RUSSELL.

[Russell’s “call for its endorsement by peace societies” is a call for the precursors of the “League of Nations” and the “United Nations” to give support to him. At the time, of course, Russell was considered not just “a faithful and discreet slave” but “THE” faithful and discreet slave. He alone held that title, and yet this is an example of his supposed “discretion.” Although the Watch Tower has consistently avoided discussing the episode in its history when the League of Nations was looked at with “wonder” and “awe” in 1919, it should not have come as much of a surprise considering these sentiments in 1915. In the near future, we plan to provide a short article on this particular part of Watch Tower history, when the Watch Tower looked at the League of Nations as if it were a political reflection of the Kingdom of God on earth.]

We learn a lot about Russell’s thinking that is not discussed in current Watch Tower publications. Whatever Charles Taze Russell thought it meant to be “no part of the world” and “to keep oneself without spot from the world,” it would not likely be recognizable to Jehovah’s Witnesses today.

RUSSELL CONTRADICTS HIMSELF

Russell’s ideas are not completely consistent with his ideas on the subject of the Philippines just a few years earlier when the United States was at war against the Spanish domination of the Philippines, beginning in 1898. Note how Russell falls into the trap of nationalism and prejudice in the same article, below, in which he speaks out against it. The following from the Watch Tower, July 1, 1898 page 195-197:

AS THE war with Spain progresses, it becomes more and more evident that “The Great Republic” [United States] is very thoroughly hated by her sisters in the family of Christian Nations so called. . . . Great Britain alone manifests sympathy: . . . Even the other republics of the world–France, Mexico and all those of Central and South America are jealous of their big sister.

The appeal to race prejudice and race pride has much to do with this condition of things and is most unwise. . . . And it is the same on both sides of the question: if one boasts of race superiority and valor, so does the other. And the more these selfish channels of thought are opened, the deeper the hatreds engendered and the more dangerous the possible results.

. . . Of course, when the time comes for Spain to sue for peace, she will probably be instigated by the pope to relinquish Cuba and close the war on condition that the United States abandon all claim on the Philippines. It is doubtless to threaten a prolongation of the war there, and thus to make the United States the more willing to relinquish the islands, that the Cadiz squadron has sailed eastward. Moreover, it is realized that the soldiers carried by this fleet will be needed to put down the Philippine rebels. The latter are the more intelligent of the natives who are rebelling as much against the tyranny of Romanism as against the oppression and cruelty of Spain. It is our opinion that the Lord wills to break the power of Papacy there, and hence that he will not permit Spanish misrule to be continued.

[We interrupt the article here, momentarily, to note that Russell feels he knows the Lord’s will and believes that this war in 1898 might even be the start of the universal anarchy still predicted for the year 1914. But he is covering his bases, something he will start to do much more often between 1906 and 1914. He doesn’t ever seem to completely lose his confidence in the year 1914, although he will despair over high probability of its failure starting around November 1913, and right up through the summer of 1914.]

To what extent the present war may be a waking up of all the world to an era of war which will impoverish all nations, and sicken all their peoples and prepare the way for the universal anarchy with which this age shall end, we know not; but such an outcome will not surprise us. If so, it will seem like the time mentioned in Joel 3:9-14. See the conclusion of the S.S. Lesson on Elijah, page 192.

[What follows is Russell’s explanation of how this could still be an expected part of God’s purposeful intervention in world affairs which should not be considered inconsistent with Russell’s predictions for 1914 when the times of the Gentile nations will truly end. After all, Russell will argue below, didn’t God intervene to make sure that America became such a great light of the nations amidst the darkness? What’s most odd about this argument is that Russell is actually claiming more providential intervention by God during the times of the Gentiles than the Watch Tower publications have ever claimed for the time since 1914 when the times of the nations have run out. In other words, NOW, since 1914 should be the only logical time since “607 BCE” when God actually would and should be constantly intervening because the nations have supposedly lost their “lease on power.” Yet, since 1914, they have seemed more powerful, with less interruption of their affairs. This is a huge inconsistency in the Watch Tower’s teaching about 1914. Here, Russell shows that he believes the end of the Gentile Times is an expression referring to the anarchy and chaos that will mark the end of this age, “The Gentile Times.”]

Of one thing we may be sure: the affairs of this world while nominally left to the “gentiles” until the end of “Gentile Times,”* the end of their lease of power, are nevertheless subject to a divine surveillance, to the intent that naught shall be permitted that our God is not abundantly able to overrule for good. Divine providence has already been manifested on behalf of America and doubtless will continue to supervise her course. Who that is God-fearing and possessed of a knowledge of history can doubt that this land was kept hidden until due time; that it was purposely made an asylum for liberty-loving people and for the oppressed of all nations? Who can doubt that its unparalleled history thus far has been a lesson to the whole world–“Liberty enlightening the world?” Who can doubt that thus the Almighty has been gradually forcing open the fetters of Church and State, of superstition and ignorance, and emancipating the peoples of Europe?

It was the influence of liberty and its blessings in America that led to the French Revolution–the French people being too ignorant, and too much under the influence of Romanism, to be able to appreciate and use the boon of liberty wisely. The same object lesson (America) has had a great influence upon Great Britain and Germany and upon the peoples of other countries in proportion to their intelligence and freedom from papal bondage.

As the reforms of Europe have been granted inch by inch by its monarchical aristocracy, under the glare of Liberty’s torch (America), it is but natural that they very generally feel a hostility; “because the darkness hateth the light,” as ever. There are exceptions to every rule, but generally speaking America is loved and appreciated only by the middle classes of Europe, and these chiefly in Protestant countries.

Nor should it surprise us if God has still some further work for America to do in pulling down the strongholds of error and waking up the mighty men and men of war. To some extent the torch of liberty may be a torch of war and destruction. This may sound strange to those who mistakenly have supposed that God is to be credited with all the peace and arbitration movements and Satan to be credited with all the moves toward war and violence.

[Back here in 1898, during the Spanish-American war, Russell is defending America’s involvement. God is to be credited with waking America up to the value of war! This is something he repeated again in 1913 in the speech he mentioned to in the letter to the President about selling the Philippines to Japan. That speech in Washington was named “Peace Desirable, War a Necessity.” ]

DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO

Russell’s inconsistencies show up on the same page where he printed the “SELL THE PHILIPPINES TO JAPAN” letter in April 1915. Just above that letter, the Watch Tower on page 101, said:

We have exhorted the brethren to strict neutrality so far as the combatants are concerned, whatever might be their natural inclination through accident of birth or association. . . . Let us more and more seek to take the Bible view of the great Armageddon, of which we are now having the prelude. . . . We are seeing fruits which have been ripening for forty years.

Christendom–Christ’s Kingdom–has not yet been established. It awaits the Lord’s time and the manifestation of His power and great glory in its establishment. These are kingdoms of this world, actuated by the principles of selfishness and deceived by Satan, “the god of this world.”

The Battle of Armageddon, to which this war is leading, will be a great contest between right and wrong, and will signify the complete and everlasting overthrow of the wrong, and the permanent establishment of Messiah’s righteous Kingdom for the blessing of the world. All these things are probably easier to be seen from this side of the ocean than by the dear friends who are nearer to, and more directly influenced by, the war and their national, personal interests. . .

Meantime, another danger to the Lord’s consecrated people lies along the lines of worldly-mindedness–neglecting the things of the Kingdom in favor of the things of this present life. Our Adversary is still alert. We, also, must be alert as children of the Light, children of the Day, soldiers of the Cross.

Except for the positive use of the word Christendom, and the idea that Armageddon was already beginning with the war in 1914, those words sound correct from the Watch Tower’s current perspective of neutrality. But it’s followed immediately by one of the least neutral examples of political involvement, a letter to the President, recommending the creation of a US naval base and subsequent sale of a “barbaric” nation to another “more civilized” nation.

It’s almost as if Russell is requesting that the European brethren should remain neutral, while “clearer heads” on Russell’s side of the Atlantic should be free to promote the national interests of America and Japan.

Russell is able to mix speech about Satan being the God of this system with speech about how God has been intervening with this system because war is sometimes God’s way of promoting the American torch of liberty. And it’s OK that the torch of liberty is sometimes a torch of war and destruction.

One might wonder, then, why Russell thought it so important to concern himself with American interests while telling the rest of his readers that such concerns appeared to fall under the idea of “neglecting the things of the Kingdom in favor of the things of this present life.” He expects the Gentile Times to be a time when the nations are in control, with some minimal intervention by God, but that as soon as this age of “Gentile Times” has ended, it would be synonymous with chaos and anarchy. In the meantime, however, Russell can hypocritically promote idea that he can think of as “God’s will” if it is in the best interests of America.

 

100 Years Ago: July 1915 – Go to War, But Shoot Over Their Heads!

Main Points:

  • In 1915, the Watch Tower still supported going to war if drafted, a policy that stayed about the same from at least as early as 1898 to as late as 1939.
  • Watch Tower suggests that if drafted to serve (conscripted) the Bible Student should request non-combatant service but, if not given this option, could shoot to miss, or shoot over the head of the enemy.
  • An interesting story is offered in support of God’s blessing on this “tactic.” Based on the meeting between between two “Bible Student” combatants, armed against each other with bayonets, early in 1915.
  • The odds against this story actually occurring were so astronomical that the story is, in effect, a claim of a miracle – but a miracle in support of a doctrine that Jehovah never really approved.

________________________________

The 2015 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses as it appears on the jw.org site contains an article named “100 Years Ago – 1915.” http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/2015-yearbook/jw-history-1915/

The primary topic of discussion about 1915 in that article is World War I. Note these excerpts:

During 1915, some Bible Students battled with feelings of disappointment. Much of the world, however, fought battles of a different kind. The Great War, later known as World War I, was enveloping Europe. . . . On May 7, 1915, . . . U-boats sank the British passenger ship Lusitania. More than 1,100 people died.

 The following, however, is a more interesting point from the same 2015 Yearbook article:

The Bible Students wanted no part of this war. However, they did not then fully understand the Christian position of strict neutrality. While they did not voluntarily enroll in the army, some of them accepted conscription and endeavored to obtain noncombatant roles. If forced into the trenches, others felt that they could simply “shoot over the enemy’s head.”

This policy is confirmed in the July 1, 1915 and the July 15, 1915 issues of the Watch Tower. The article “A View from the Watch Tower” gives the view that this war was the prelude of Armageddon and was predicted to end in anarchy. (By this point in time, the year 1914 was described as the year running from the fall of 1914 to the fall of 1915.) Russell recognized that there would be true Christians fighting in the armies of each nation. The following are excerpts from p.495,496 of this July 1, 1915 issue:

At the same time it should not be forgotten that there are saints of God in every land, and that doubtless there are saints in every army–in these armies because of conscription–in these armies to fulfil the demands of the governments, but with fullest determination that they at the same time owe their highest allegiance to the kingdom of kindness, and fully determined that they will kill nobody. We are hearing from the front, that they are seeking to live up to the teachings of the Word of God, pointed out in the sixth volume of SCRIPTURE STUDIES, and that they are being blessed in so doing. What more could we ask?

 That reference is to the sixth volume of Studies in the Scriptures, The New Creation, and is found on pages 594-595, where we read the following:

True, government may not always exempt those opposed to war from participating in it, although a very gracious provision of this kind has in the past been made for some who, like ourselves, believe war to be unrighteous; viz., the Friends or Quakers, exempted from military duty under specially generous laws. We may be required to do military service whether we vote or not, however; and if required we would be obliged to obey the powers that be, and should consider that the Lord’s providence had permitted the conscription and that he was able to overrule it to the good of ourselves or others. In such event we would consider it not amiss to make a partial explanation to the proper officers, and to request a transference to the medical or hospital department, where our services could be used with the full consent of our consciences—but even if compelled to serve in the ranks and to fire our guns we need not feel compelled to shoot a fellow-creature.

That “sixth volume” was first published in 1904, and the idea seems very little changed in the July 1, 1915 Watch Tower magazine:

Inquiries come to us respecting the advisability of enlisting in hospital corps, rather than to be conscripted for the regular service later on. Our advice would be to wait for the leadings of the Lord’s providence and to take such steps only when fully assured of their wisdom. Now is a good time to remember the words of the Lord, “Wait ye upon Me, saith the Lord.” It would be a mistake, however, for any of the Lord’s people to think themselves called upon to interfere in any manner with the world’s course in respect to enlistment. Let the worldly use their own judgment, while God’s consecrated people use theirs. To be “subject to the powers that be,” implies not merely a willingness to serve under compulsion, but implies also that we will not oppose earthly governments in any public manner.

In other words, do not volunteer for hospital service in advance of being conscripted or drafted. Allow yourself to be conscripted even if this means you may inevitably end up fighting with guns, cannon, bayonets, and other armaments in the trenches and on the front lines. Most Bible Students would be expected to request a transfer to a non-combatant role, and then hope for the best.

Note, too, how the Watch Tower is also being very careful not to speak out against either the enlistment or conscription processes in the various countries where the Bible Students followed the advice of the Watch Tower. Before this war was over, however, that advice about not speaking out against conscription or enlistment would often be ignored when J. F. Rutherford took over the reins of the Watch Tower later the following year (1916). More specifically, it was the 1917 Finished Mystery (Studies in the Scriptures, Volume VII) with anti-war sentiment –actually anti-conscription sentiment– found on a couple of pages. Rutherford had the offending pages removed, by having them torn out of already-printed volumes. However, this wasn’t enough to appease the authorities. Papers from the 1917 FBI investigation also show that there were various letters collected from Rutherford’s offices which confirmed that Rutherford was regularly being called upon to help the Watchtower’s Bible Students avoid conscription. [Future post or article is planned on this subject.]

This idea had actually appeared well before Studies in the Scriptures, Volume VI, from 1904. It had also appeared when the United States was becoming involved in its first major international conflicts since 1879, when the first Watch Tower was published. Outside of wars with Native American tribes, 1898 was the time of a war in Samoa, resulting in a new territory: American Somoa. The most prominent conflicts in 1898 were due to the Spanish-American War involving fighting by U.S. soldiers in Cuba, Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam.

Therefore, the July 1898 Watch Tower, p.204, had stated:

CHRISTIAN DUTY IF DRAFTED.. . . If, therefore, we were drafted, and if the government refused to accept our conscientious scruples against warfare (as they have heretofore done with “Friends,” called Quakers), we should request to be assigned to the hospital service or to the Commissary department or to some other non-combatant place of usefulness; and such requests would no doubt be granted. If not, and we ever got into battle, we might help to terrify the enemy, but need not shoot anybody.

That led to the questions printed in the August 1898 issue, p. 231:

Question. I was surprised to note your advice to any who might be drafted into the army. Would not your advice seem like compromising to avoid trouble?

Answer. It is proper to avoid trouble in a proper manner. It is proper to compromise when no principle is involved, as in the case mentioned. Notice that there is no command in the Scriptures against military service. Obedience to a draft would remind us of our Lord’s words, “If any man compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.” The government may compel marching or drilling, but cannot compel you to kill the foe. You need not be a good marksman.

Question. You suggested in a recent WATCH TOWER that, if drafted and in the army, we need not shoot to kill. Would such a course be right? Would it not be fraudulent?

Answer. No; it would be quite right to shoot, not to kill. You forget, perhaps, our provisos, which were that we explain our conscientious scruples against war, and seek to be excused; if not excused, that we seek non-combatant positions, as nurses, etc.; but if compelled to go a mile or many miles as a soldier, we still need not kill anybody.

None of these previous references from either 1898 or 1904 had specifically mentioned the idea or the term about “shooting over the enemy’s head.” Where did that come from exactly? The idea was first mentioned in the July 15, 1915, page 216, which also included the experience that is referenced in the recent 2015 Yearbook. Quoting from that Watch Tower, it states:

I have something to read to you. It is a translation of a letter. It was written in Hungarian, to a Slav brother in the United States, and was forwarded to us. A portion of the letter follows:

“A Hungarian soldier, injured on the battlefield, was returned home wounded. He was there met by some of our brethren, and later was led to diligent and earnest study of the Scriptures, and finally made his consecration to the Lord. This he symbolized last January, at the hands of our dear Brother Szabo. A few days later he was obliged to return to the front and to the trench, in Galicia. A cannon shot burned the cap from his head; earth caved in upon him. He was dug out by his comrades, and again sent to the hospital. This brought the dear brother into our midst again, but for a short time only. Presently he had to return to the firing line again.

“This time they came within 800 feet of the Russian line, and they received the command, ‘A bayonet charge!’ The Hungarian brother was at the end of the left wing. He sought only to protect himself from the enemy, hence endeavored merely to knock the bayonet from the hand of the Russian with whom he was confronted. Just then he observed that the Russian was endeavoring to do likewise; and instead of using his opportunity to pierce his opponent, the Russian let his bayonet fall to the ground; he was weeping. Our brother then looked at his ‘enemy’ closer–and he recognized a ‘Cross and Crown’ pin on his coat! The Russian, too, was a brother in the Lord! The Hungarian brother also wore a ‘Cross and Crown’ emblem–on his cap.

“The two brethren quickly clasped hands and stepped aside. Their joy was overflowing, that our Heavenly Father had permitted them to meet even on the field of the enemy! They could not understand one another’s speech, but by signs they conversed, taking out their Bibles–and the Russian had the SCRIPTURE STUDIES in his pocket with a song book, all bound in one volume, and a photo of Brother Russell. The Brother then took the bayonet of the Russian brother, and gave him over as a prisoner of war; and he still remains as such in Hungary, while the Hungarian brother has now been sent to the hospital for the third time.”

While there are not many rich or noble amongst the Lord’s brethren, yet when it comes to telling the Truth, they manage it very well!

In Germany, Great Britain, and all over Europe, our people have been conscious for years that this war was coming on. They have been writing to me and continually inquiring how they should proceed if they were drafted or went into the army. In Volume Six of SCRIPTURE STUDIES, the friends are instructed to avoid taking life. If they were ever drafted into the army they should go. If they could be sent to the Quartermaster’s Department to take care of the food, that would be desirable, or into the hospital work. They should endeavor to get such positions. They could not be expected to do service in the way of killing. If they were obliged to go on the firing line, they could shoot over the enemy’s head, if they wished.

And that is the way these brethren did; each had this same thought in mind. This letter shows the love of the brethren even on the field of battle, and in the enemy’s land, with carnal weapons. It made no difference that one was a Hungarian and the other a Russian!

I doubt that any readers were expected to question the story although the odds against it actually happening were overwhelming.

On the one hand, there were 15,000 or more active readers of the Watch Tower in 1915. The July 1, 1915 issue quoted earlier had stated:

Approximately 15,000 have already indicated to us that they have taken the Vow, and that therefore they belong to this great world-wide Prayer Circle which remembers each other and all the laborers in the Lord’s Kingdom daily at the Throne of Grace.

Other numbers provided for this time period would tell us that there could be as many as 18,000 or more associated with the Watch Tower and Bible Students in 1915. This means that with a world population of 1,800,000,000, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, there may have been one Bible Student for every 100,000 people. (Today it’s more like 1 out of every 1,000 persons.)

But most of those were in the United States. Based on the distribution of literature worldwide, 98% or more of all Watch Tower followers were in North America, Australia, United Kingdom, Germany, Spain, Italy, Greece, etc. Between 1% and 2% (max) could be expected in Hungary and Russia.

Even the 1% to 2% estimate is probably high, but also note the following number of “active” Bible Students from within just a few years during this same period. The “Jehovah’s Witnesses – Proclaimers” book says the following on page 425:

The actual number who were then sharing in that work, however, was small. Some who had fearfully held back during 1918 became active again, and a few more joined their ranks. But the records that are available show that in 1919 there were only some 5,700 who were actively witnessing, in 43 lands.

If we average the 5,700 with the 15,000 we come up with about 10,000. But about half of these were women, leaving only 5,000. That’s no more than 50 in Russia and 50 in Hungary. And we can assume that as few as 30% would have been conscripted to military service based on age and eligibility. That would leave 15 on each side. Also Russell claimed that reports from Europe showed that there had been good success in following the Watch Tower instructions that had included making a request for non-combatant roles. Assuming only one-third found re-assignment this way, we have only about 10 “cross-and-crown” wearing Bible Students on each side that might have found themselves battling each other in the front lines.

It’s fairly easy to imagine the odds of laying out two decks of cards in rows across from each other and testing whether, for example, the Ace of Spades from each deck happens to end up exactly across from each other. But still, it might happen often enough to make you think this is a fair possibility, even if not likely. But here we are looking for something more like dumping two haystacks on top of each other, each with a single needle in it, and then finding out that those two needles had fallen exactly against each other.

If you are looking for more mathematical accuracy, it seems even less likely than the haystack example. Here’s why:

Recall that the Hungarian and Russian “Cross and Crown” wearers are in a battle in Galicia just a few days after the Hungarian has converted to become a Bible Student in January 1915. A series of battles matching this description is known to have occurred between January and March 1915. Note the following from From http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/firstworldwar/index-1915.html :

March 22, 1915 – The Russians capture 120,000 Austrians at Przemysl in Galicia. This marks the culmination of a series of winter battles between the Austrians and Russians to secure the strategic Carpathian Mountain passes and opens the way for a Russian invasion of Hungary. Realizing this, the Germans and Austrians make plans to combine their troops and launch a major spring offensive.

That’s quite a large number of soldiers who must have been involved in this specific series of battles. But look at the size of the military population they were chosen from, based on this chart from http://spartacus-educational.com/FWWarmies1914.htm :

armies

Those battling against each other here were chosen from armies that ranged from 6 to 12 million on the Russian side and 3 to 8 million on the Austria-Hungary side. Therefore, Bible Students are not likely to make up more than one out of every million soldiers. (1:1,000,000). So now imagine those two card decks, not of 52 cards each, but of one million cards each with only one Ace of Spades in each deck. Now try to imagine the odds of those two aces ending up exactly across from each other.

The story of the two soldiers is repeated in the “2015 Yearbook” without any question, of course, about its authenticity.

The story, therefore, describes something no less than a mathematical miracle! And it was put to use in the defense of a doctrinal position that is now considered incorrect, and which wasn’t updated to its current form until as late as 1939. Note the “Proclaimers” book again, from page 191:

Though Jehovah’s Witnesses quickly discerned some issues that involve a Christian’s relationship to the world, other matters required more time. However, as World War II gathered momentum in Europe, a significant article in The Watchtower of November 1, 1939, helped them to appreciate the meaning of Christian neutrality.

This would mean that Jehovah, in effect, produced a miracle in support of a doctrine that he never approved. Oddly, no such miracle has ever occurred that would seem to support the Watch Tower’s stance on blood transfusion, for example. And for that matter, what should have been the odds for discovering a Greek manuscript of the “New Testament” with Jehovah’s name in it? Since the Watchtower claims that this was supposedly in all the correct originals, the odds in favor of such a find should be very high. It wouldn’t have even required a a miracle, and yet the miraculous protection of the accuracy of the Biblical manuscripts is often discussed in the Watchtower. Could not even one of these “accurate” manuscript examples have survived?

If Jehovah could make a miracle happen in support of a “false” doctrine, what would have made it so difficult for Jehovah to produce a miracle in support of a “true” doctrine?

100 Years Ago: Presidential Debates – Watchtower Style

The Watch Tower Society found that debates were a fairly good way of “marketing” so that this very small religious group could make a big splash.

Russell, as president of the Watch Tower Society, had gained attention especially through the Eaton-Russell debate in 1903 and then White-Russell debate in 1908. He said that he believed the Lord’s providence had opened up the way for those two debates.

So why did Russell put the report about about the Rutherford-Troy debate in the very back as the last article of the May 1, 1915 Watch Tower? And, more importantly, why was the first article in this same issue all about downplaying the value of debates?

Some have guessed that Russell was a bit concerned about Rutherford’s brash and bombastic style, and that it probably did not represent the same style Russell himself had carefully cultivated for the Watch Tower. Russell’s emphasis was on the “high calling” in order to be part of the exclusive “Bride of Christ” and on Christian “character development.” A truly demure “Bride of Christ” would not be found “debating.” Rutherford, on the other hand, had been an experienced political speaker (working for the campaign of William Jennings Bryan). And some would conclude that his legal background as an attorney made him a professional “arguer.”

So the argument goes that Russell was becoming leery of Rutherford’s rise to power in 1915. As Russell’s attorney, he “knew where the bodies were buried” as the expression goes. (For the record, this is just an expression. I am sure there weren’t any real scandals involving dead or buried bodies in Russell’s past. Russell’s act of sending Rose Ball to Australia a few months before she might have been called upon to testify against Russell at his divorce hearing isn’t the same thing. Nor is the fact that Rose Ball’s younger brother died while working in the same house where the claimed hanky-panky with sister, Rose, had occurred.)

Rutherford was indeed becoming much more prominent in 1915, but I don’t really think that there is direct evidence of Russell having a falling out with him, or getting too worried about his rise to power and control.

Still, the general tenor of the first article was quite negative about debates in general. Here several excerpts from the first article below. Notice how the “marketing value” of the debates is the primary concern: “valuable chiefly as entering-wedges for the newspaper work.” [I’ve highlighted some of the negatives in red, and marketing advantages in blue.]

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF DEBATES

Although the Lord’s providence did seem to open up the way for the “Eaton-Russell Debate” and later, for the “White-Russell Debate,” and through these Debates led the way on to the publication of the Sermons in hundreds of newspapers throughout the world, nevertheless the Editor is not, and never was, much of a believer in the advantages of debating. The Debates mentioned were valuable chiefly as entering-wedges for the newspaper work. . . . a debate . . . is also an excellent method of presenting the error to the public. . . .

An audience hearing a debate have the same difficulty that a jury has when hearing the opposing attorneys discussing the merits of a case. Each speaker has certain talent and ability, and each makes a certain amount of impression. . . .

Added to this is the fact that the debates in general are in the nature of a war of words, the disputants each seeking to undo the other’s arguments and to prove his own. In such a war of words the Truth is at a disadvantage. . . . . .our opponents seem to have no restrictions nor restraints. . . .Thus our opponents always have the advantage, not because they are intellectually brighter, but because they can and do use means to bamboozle the minds of the hearers and readers. . . .

So far as the Editor is concerned, he has no desire for further debates. He does not favor debating, believing that it rarely accomplishes good and often arouses anger, malice, bitterness, etc., in both speakers and hearers. . . .

This should not be understood to mean that the Editor would never again engage in a public debate, but merely that in order to induce him to debate, his opponent would need to be a person of so great prominence as to bring the matter to the attention of everybody. Only such a consideration would be a proper offset to the wide presentation of error thus accomplished. . . .

It’s actually a bit odd that Russell spoke out against them and then said he would do it anyway if he thought the “marketing” opportunity was worth it.

Whether Russell had noticed any dangers in Rutherford methods is hard to say. Rutherford had successfully defended Russell in court through his divorce and he had worked on mitigating other scandals. It seems likely to me that Russell was backing off of the debate scene for the same reasons that he distanced himself from the booklet “Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens.” He knew that these particular debates had to be very biased, just as the “Great Battle” booklet had to be very biased.

I am proposing that Russell realized that the debate was intended as part of  Russell’s defense campaign. These debates were designed to promote some positive publicity at a time when Russell’s scandals were becoming more and more publicized. Russell knew that these debates had been set up in a biased manner to help mask the scandals. How do we know that?

THE BIASED RULES OF THE DEBATES

Rutherford’s report was, as we pointed out, the last article in the same 1915 Watchtower. Even here, Russell repeats his negative view of debates after Rutherford’s report:

[We rejoice greatly that the blessing of the Lord was so richly with our dear Brother Rutherford on the occasion of the debates referred to above. Apparently the Lord guided these debates and blessed the outcome. However, we still feel a prejudice against public debates of religious questions, and have elsewhere expressed our reasons.]

Rutherford’s report was in the form of a letter. Below are some excerpts. Notice the methods that were enacted to “bias” the debate:

DEAR BROTHER RUSSELL:–

The debates are past history now–ending last evening. Every night the auditorium was packed, with probably more turned away than got in. . . . Certainly the Lord’s favor was with us, and the prayers of the many friends were answered. . . . The friends are all happy. . . . If the debates have accomplished no other good, I feel sure they have greatly strengthened the saints here, many testifying that the striking contrast between Truth and error has given them new zeal for service.

I must tell you how the Adversary did not succeed for once. My opponent was well prepared to assault you personally. I judged so from the interviews he had given the press two days before the debate. I said nothing then, but waited my time. About three minutes before we went on the platform for the first night’s discussion I called Brother Troy, my opponent, and two of his friends and two of our friends into a side room. You will recall that we had entered into a thousand-dollar obligation, with securities, that we would refrain from personalities. I then said: “Brother Troy, I desire to be absolutely frank with you and therefore I say this to you before we go on the platform. From your interviews with the press I judge that you intend to assault Pastor Russell from the platform. Of course, you can pursue that course if you wish, but the first time you attempt it I am going to have your bond forfeited.”

His reply was, “May I not mention his name?” “No,” I said, “not one time. I signed this agreement with you to discuss the Bible, and by that contract I am going to abide, and I shall expect you to do the same.” He said, “All right; I am ready.” We went on the platform. Not once did he mention your name throughout the four nights, but it was an awfully bitter pill for him to refrain therefrom. Having prepared along that line and being taken down so suddenly he was much disturbed and labored under much stress, as I could observe, during his first argument. I am confident the Lord directed this matter, and thus saved the debate from being an occasion for personal assault upon you.

. . .

Quite a large number of cards were turned in on each night. I have not the total here just now. I received a real blessing in the whole matter and am indeed grateful to the Lord that He has been pleased to give me this opportunity to bear witness to His great Plan.

This (Sunday) afternoon at the Shrine Auditorium we had a very good public meeting. The friends say there were about 3500 in attendance, 992 of whom turned in their addresses. This afternoon my subject was, “Babylon Before the Great Court”; and I took occasion to tell the people about the assaults the ministers were making against you personally. Several preachers were in the audience, and I stated that I would be glad to furnish a printed reply to each one of such charges. Sorry we did not have the booklet ready, but we will get it to many here when it does arrive. I hope that by the time you come the people will be more anxious to hear you than ever before. I think there are still some of the Lord’s people in this place.

I must take this occasion to say that the success of the publicity for the debates and meetings following here is due to the untiring and faithful work of our dear Brother Page Noll. He made himself very agreeable to the reporters “covering” the debates, and they were favorable to us in every way they could be. A full report of each day’s debate was published by the Express and the Tribune, and I am advised that about 75,000 extra copies were mailed out each day by the newspaper company to various parts of the world. The paper printed cards and distributed them all over the city, calling the attention of the people to the fact that verbatim copies of the debate would be in certain issues of the paper; and doubtless this sold many papers. Brother Noll had gone after the matter in a systematic manner, and the Lord surely blessed his efforts and his faithfulness. If a copy of the debates comes to your notice you will see that more space is given to my argument than to my opponent’s. That is due to the fact that I spoke with much more rapidity than did my opponent. Profiting by your experience at Cincinnati, I crowded in all that I could.

I enclose a clipping from one of the morning papers, wherein you will see that at yesterday’s meeting I spoke of the booklet I am getting out answering the slanderous charges against you. Quite a number are anxious to have these pamphlets, and I hope they may be ready soon.

Never before have I realized so fully the blessed privilege the Lord’s dear children have of praying for each other. I am sure that the prayers of the dear friends throughout the world had much to do with the success of these debates. . . . Brother Woodworth suggested that there must be great interest in Heaven in this debate. The Lord be praised for it all. I am thankful indeed that He was pleased to use me to glorify His dear name in any manner. Brothers Woodworth and MacMillan sat with me on the platform as counsel, and my son was by my side to take anything quickly that I desired and to prepare the copy for me without delay. . . . The Lord arranged it all. . . .

Please express my love to all the dear Bethel family, reserving a large portion for yourself. Please continue to remember me at the Throne of Heavenly Grace.

Yours in the service of the dear Redeemer,

J. F. RUTHERFORD.

There are quite a few lines in his report that appear to sound “self-serving.” Rutherford makes a case that he “won” the debates without question. But, of course, this has been questioned since then. The actual debate is available in several places online:

http://watchtowerdocuments.org/documents/1915_Rutherford_Troy_Debate.pdf

https://archive.org/details/RutherfordTroyDebate

The Watch Tower articles quoted above can be easily found in several places online, including:

http://www.agsconsulting.com/htdbv5/zwt0216.htm

Some interesting comments about the debate are found here:

Edmond C Gruss (Apostles of Denial, p.23)

and from a poster called “Athanasius” on JWN:

Regarding the Rutherford-Troy Debate, you might find it helpful to read the entire script. Bill Cetnar made it available in TROY DEBATES RUTHERFORD (privately published). I think that you can still order a copy from:

Cetnar

Route 3 Weir Lake Road

Kunkletown, PA 18058

The late Bill Cetnar assembled the information from the Los Angeles Express which covered the debate in great detail. Bill Cetnar makes this interesting observation in the book’s forward: “At a Bethel meeting I sat next to John Adam Baeurlein a former International Director and Officer of the Watchtower Society. He mentioned he had attended the Rutherford-Troy debates. I asked him why the Society refused to debate today. He answered: ‘Because Rutherford lost his shirt in debate with Troy.‘ . . . These remarks from this old man who spent 50 years at Watchtower Headquarters were a shock to me.”

Also, we happen to have an example of the type of agreement that Rutherford would enter into to keep the opponent from mentioning any scandals that Russell was involved in. If we read it carefully, the debater could not even quote from any Watch Tower publications. Even this would have been considered too damaging. The following is a portion of one of those “bonds” that Rutherford referred to in the Watchtower. This one comes from a debate that would have happened a few years later, if Rutherford had not created these impossible terms:

From B. H. Shadduck’s Seven Thunders of Millenial Dawn, 1928 ( https://archive.org/details/ThesevenThundersOfMillennialDawn ) we find a portion of one of these agreements:

shadduckrules

If it’s hard to read it says, in part, that Dr. Shadduck would follow certain rules, such as:

  1. … furnish a bond of $500.00 as a guarantee that he will not slander Pastor Russell during the debate, or refer to any quotation contained in any periodical or book published by the International Bible Students Association and if the Rev. B. H. Shadduck shall slander Pastor Russell or refer to any quotation or book published by the IBSA he shall at once pay the sum of $500.00 to his opponents in the debate.
  1. That it be understood that to slander means: To circulate a malicious report.

Shadduck believed these rules were meant to make it impossible to frame an argument clearly. It was clearly meant to produce the kind of legal intimidation that would become part of Rutherford’s signature style.

Recent Finds: Why Russell Distanced Himself From Rutherford’s “Great Battle”

Recently we posted a link to Rutherford’s “SPICY” booklet, and the first mention of it in the May 1, 1915 Watch Tower. That post highlighted how Russell distanced himself from the booklet and its publication. He offered the advertisement for it, but only after making it clear that he himself hadn’t read it.

The booklet referred to is, of course, “A Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens.” We linked to a copy on archive.org: https://archive.org/details/AGreatBattleInTheEcclesiasticalHeavens .

It’s also available on WatchtowerDocuments.org along with a lot more interesting documents that Barbara Anderson has collected, which can make for some very interesting historical reading by and about the Watch Tower Society. You’ll find it in the 1900-1919 section: http://watchtowerdocuments.org/watchtower-document-downloads-1900-1919/ .

In our post we mentioned that Russell might have distanced himself from the booklet for “legal” reasons. Some additional speculation on that subject is found in a discussion on JWN. We have permission from some of the people involved in that thread on JWN ( jehovahs-witness.com ). The relevant post (from 9 years ago) is reproduced below, although the rest of the thread is quite interesting for other reasons:

_______________________________________________

Gamaliel  9 years ago

Russell needed to distance himself from Rutherford’s “Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens” for seveaal reasons. It compared him to Jesus (“SAME OLD GAME OF THE PHARISEES AGAINST ONE MAN”). It obliquely labeled his wife as a “persecutor” of Christians ultimately because a judge was convinced she was telling the truth in court. (“EVEN GOOD JOHN WESLEY’S WIFE JOINED HIS PERSECUTORS”) 

The great and good John Wesley was another victim his own wife joining his persecutors. The same Pharisaical class defamed the Lord Jesus when He was on earth. They called in question the legitimacy of His birth, applied all manner of vile epithets to Him, denounced Him as an enemy of the government, and finally caused His crucifixion.

It included a hatred of Catholics that Russell was always careful to back away from. (“PAPAL ROME AND HER MONGREL PROGENY AGAINST ONE MAN”) 

Also, it included the common “worship” of Russell that Russell’s followers were infamous for. Russell was always careful to accept this worship with mock humility. 

THE GREATEST LIVING PREACHER In this case? PASTOR RUSSELL!

Then of course it tries to cover over Russell’s various “scandals” and likely gives untrue reasons by way of explanation. For example, the move from Pennsylvania to New York seems contrived, based on exact timing and other factors, to avoid monetary payments due his wife. The NY Corpororation and People’s Pulpit is defended for other reasons. Same goes for the defense of Russell’s “United States Investment Company”. In the same context the booklet tries to explain how Russell, who admittedly had “a quarter million dollars” had put it all into religious work and corporations. (And, for those who knew the specifics, it would therefore “go without saying” that he had truthfully claimed to have very little with which to compensate his wife, who had just been awarded damages by the court for Russell’s ill treatment and mental cruelty.) 

Russell was no doubt aware that Rutherford had taken some liberties to defend Russell against any possibility of truth in the claims of his wife. If the court transcripts are read carefully, Russell actually acknowledges some of his wife’s claims up to a point by acknowledging the alleged circumstances but putting a different spin on how he had got himself into those circumstances. Rutherford goes so far as to publish some of the actual claims against Russell which was probably a legal mistake in the long run. It made it harder to ever cover up the specifics. For example, the book includes the following under the heading “THE GREATEST FISH STORY EVER MANUFACTURED”: 

Upon the trial of this cause Mrs. Russell testified that one Miss Ball had stated to her that her husband said, “I am like a jelly-fish, I float around here and there. I touch this one and that one, and if she responds I take her to me, and if not I float on to others.” 

All this matter the Court struck from the record and would not permit it to go to the jury. In his charge to the jury the Judge said: “This little incident about this girl that was in the family, that is beyond the ground of the libel and has nothing to do with the case because not being put in it, and it was condoned or allowed to pass.” 

It is manifest that this “jelly-fish” story was entirely the product of Mrs. Russell’s imagination, and other facts which appear in the record conclusively show that it could not have been true. 

Pastor Russell emphatically denied that any such thing ever occurred. It would seem unreasonable that any man would make such a statement about himself. 

But the most conclusive facts disclosed by the record showing her statement to be untrue are these: Miss Ball came to them in 1889, a child of ten, and was taken into the home of Mr. and Mrs. Russell. She was treated as a member of the family. She was an orphan. She kissed both Mr. and Mrs. Russell good night each evening when she retired. They treated her as their own child. (Court Record, pages 90, 91.) Mrs. Russell testified that the “jelly-fish” incident transpired in 1894, when the girl could not have been more than fifteen years of age.

His [Rutherford’s] legal reasoning is full of non sequiturs. The reason for being struck from the record was not related to its truthfulness or lack thereof. Rutherford cleverly avoids this point. It is not “manifest” to be untrue. The attempt to reduce Mrs. Ball’s age to that of a young child may also be based on Rutherford’s taking advantage of a mistake in the court transcript, not Mrs. Russell’s testimony, per se. However, it misses the point. In the transcripts, Mrs. Russell was actually creating a much more general picture of infidelity that may have indeed included accusations of indiscretions with the opposite sex that could have begun at a younger age than the actual episode in question with Miss Ball. Miss Ball was not the only female mentioned. There was another “unfaithful and indiscreet servant” episode involving a servant girl in the household. Portraying Miss Ball as a young girl and later noting that Mrs. Russell continued to put up with her husband are hardly the concrete proofs that get Russell off the hook. 

As an aside, all good PR men and politicians manage to work their own resume into a praise of someone else. Note this clever little turn that Rutherford managed:

“We are reminded that St. Paul was a practicing lawyer for a time, and a successful one, too, and that he also made tents to provide his temporary necessities. Jesus was a carpenter. Blessed is he that labors.”

St. Paul’s first billing is “lawyer” not “tentmaker”?

_______________________________________________

100 Years Ago: June 1915 – “Meat in Due Season” Gets SPICY

JUNE 1915 – C T RUSSELL WAS PROMOTING A “SPICY” PUBLICATION THAT HE HADN’T READ, & SAID HE WANTED NOTHING TO DO WITH.

June 1915 was the first full month wherein Watchtower readers could obtain and read a new publication that had just become available out of Brooklyn in the previous month. Here’s how it was announced in the May 1, 1915 Watchtower, known then as, Zion’s Watch Tower, emphasis ours:

_____________________________________________________________

JUDGE RUTHERFORD’S SPICY DEFENSE

Brother Rutherford, grieved by the various untruthful, slanderous attacks upon the Editor, has prepared a pamphlet in my defense. A copy of it has just been handed me. I have not yet read it, though, of course, I knew of its preparation and in a general way of its contents. I preferred not to have anything to do with its publication. It explains Brother Rutherford’s views as a lawyer, as a brother, and as a man who most fully understands the entire situation. It contains some interesting illustrations and is priced at ten cents per copy, or eight dollars per hundred copies, postpaid. It is not unreasonable to expect that nearly all of our readers will be very glad to have this pamphlet, as it will furnish them with evidence on every point thus far brought forward by my maligners.

Orders for the pamphlets should be addressed to Judge Rutherford, New York City, P.O. Box 51. However, we will have a supply at THE WATCH TOWER Office, and, if one is ordering other things, this pamphlet can be supplied also. It is entitled, “A GREAT BATTLE IN THE ECCLESIASTICAL HEAVENS.”

_____________________________________________________________

If you’d like to read this booklet, it is available online in a few places. (See below for one of them.) You might enjoy it. But you might also see why Russell wanted nothing to do with this particular publication. Legal experts have also surmised why, perhaps, he would state that he had not personally read the publication. The booklet is packed with information which would require a full book’s worth of commentary to do it justice.

https://archive.org/details/AGreatBattleInTheEcclesiasticalHeavens

great battle

___