I think Jerome and Bernard might be interested in who reads their articles

The Emphatic Diaglott and the Watch Tower Society

  

(A week or two ago I was advised by Rachael that a good number of people were still accessing an article I wrote on Benjamin Wilson’s Diaglott way back in 2011. Since a little extra information has been found since then, she suggested I might republish an updated version. So this is it, and it may be of interest to some newer blog readers.  Jerome.)

Although the Emphatic Diaglott and its publication by the Watch Tower Society come a little later than the period being researched on this blog, this translation had a major role to play in the early history of the Society.

This article will review that history briefly, but is mainly written to reveal who actually obtained the plates and gave the copyright to the Watch Tower Society in 1902.

Benjamin Wilson’s Emphatic Diaglott was first published in one volume in 1864 after being issued as a part-work starting August 1858 with Wilson’s journal The Gospel Banner. The version published by Fowler and Wells of New York was widely used by various Adventist and Age to Come groups, and the main Age to Come newspaper The Restitution partly grew out of The Gospel Banner. Wilson had been a friend of John Thomas, founder of the Christadelphians, but the two ultimately had doctrinal differences and split. While Thomas founded the Christadelphians, Wilson – although strongly anti-organization - had a major role in the founding of the Church of God of Abrahamic Faith. Today, the descendants of his group are usually called the Church of the Blessed Hope or Abrahamic Faith – a faction who did not join the Church of God General Conference in 1920.

Its connection with our history starts when one of Nelson Barbour’s readers, Benjamin Keith, hit upon Wilson’s translation of the Greek word “parousia” as “presence” rather than “coming”. This set minds working on an apparently failed prediction for Christ’s second coming in 1874. If the coming was an invisible presence (although that was not how Wilson would understand the matter) then their expectations had actually been fulfilled – but invisibly. This view ultimately became a major part of Charles Taze Russell’s belief system. (Hereafter abbreviated to CTR).

Once established, Zion’s Watch Tower Society highly endorsed the Diaglott. In Old Theology Quarterly for April 1893 “Friendly Hints on Bible Study and Students’ Helps” pages 9 and 10, the Diaglott is highly recommended as “another of God’s special blessings for our day...While we cannot say this work is perfect, we can say that we know of no other translation of the New Testament so valuable to the critical student – and this includes all to whom we write.”

Early copies had a note pasted in the front entitled A Friendly Criticism, which detailed some doctrinal differences between CTR and Wilson. While praising the work highly, the note drew attention to certain issues such as a personal devil, the pre-human existence of Jesus and his resurrected state - where the actual interlinear and Wilson’s own English version were not thought to harmonize.

At the same time, The Restitution paper carried an advertisement for the Diaglott each week for several decades.

Wilson died in 1900. Shortly after, in 1902, the copyright to the Diaglott was obtained for the Watch Tower Society, and they became its publisher for nearly one hundred years. Anyone who wanted to obtain a Diaglott now had to contact the Watch Tower Society.

The journal “Christadelphian Tidings of the Kingdom of God” for January 2009 in its article “Reflections” commented on how some erroneously thought the Diaglott to be a product of Russellism. It explained that “the confusion probably arises because the copyright for The Diaglott was purchased in the early 20th century by an anonymous buyer who then donated it to the Watchtower Society.”

The article viewed the Watch Tower Society’s publishing the work as “a sad, ironic twist of history.” It stressed there was no evidence that Wilson ever came in contact with Millennial Dawn.

This conflicts with a claim made in Consolation magazine for November 8, 1944, page 4 which states “Mr Wilson knew of the truth, and it is reported that he at one time attended some of the meetings of Jehovah’s people, but disagreed on certain fundamental issues.” It must be said that this is unreferenced information written decades after events, and the words “it is reported” do not necessarily bode well. There are a number of other Diaglott references from Consolation magazine in the 1940s. They state that the Diaglott “was produced about 1867” (February 3, 1943, page 29), that the “Society bought the plates and publication rights from the author, Mr Wilson” (February 3, 1943, page 29), and that Wilson “was a Christadelphian” (November 22, 1944, page 30). We now know that all these statements are incorrect. While the Consolation writers analysed the Diaglott’s strengths effectively, they obviously had limited historical records at their disposal.

What CAN be easily established today is that Wilson would certainly have known of Millennial Dawn and CTR. Wilson wrote for The Restitution almost up to the time of his death in 1900, and The Restitution regularly reviewed CTR’s works and activities. Wilson was also a special contributor to The Millenarian when it reviewed CTR’s Divine Plan of the Ages in February 1887. And a nephew of Wilson wrote a booklet attacking CTR’s theology.

There is also an account of several meetings between Wilson and ZWT Pilgrim J A Bohnet in 1892. Bohnet wrote up the experience many years later in an article on the front page of the St Paul Enterprise for April 4, 1916. He described how CTR had provided Wilson’s address, and how Bohnet visited Wilson several times at his home in Sacramento, California. Amongst other things they discussed CTR’s Friendly Criticism paste-in mentioned above. It was obviously amicable, but there was no meeting of minds – they remained divided on a number of issues including their understanding of the ransom and the pre-existence of Christ.

What does come out from their conversations as recorded by Bohnet is that reports that Wilson objected to CTR using his work so extensively were denied by Wilson. He was also asked point blank whether he was a Christadelphian? Wilson’s answer was, “No, I am a member of no organized denomination.”

Much misinformation has been circulated over how the Watch Tower Society obtained the rights to the Diaglott.

The book “Jehovah’s Witnesses – A Comprehensive and Selectively Annotated Bibliography” published by Greenwood Press in 1999, is one such example. On page 61 it relates how Benjamin Wilson (or as it calls him, Professor Wilson) wanted to sell the rights to the Diaglott because he got into serious financial trouble, but blocked CTR’s attempts to buy them. CTR then used a third party to keep his name out of it, so that Wilson couldn’t stop him. When Wilson discovered CTR had obtained the rights by such a devious method he publicly claimed there were numerous errors in the Diaglott anyway and he was going to produce a revised edition. No supporting references are given for this story, there is no record of anything of the sort in The Restitution – as already noted above, this was a paper with plenty to say about CTR on other issues - and history records that Wilson had been dead for a couple of years when the rights changed hands. We can safely discount such anecdotes as fantasy – with an obvious agenda.

Returning to the above quotation from “Christadelphian Tidings”, their reference to an anonymous buyer harkens back to the Society’s own description of the event. The Proclaimers book on page 606 made the comment: “That same year (1902), the Watch Tower Society came into possession of the printing plates for The Emphatic Diaglott...Those plates and the sole right of publication had been purchased and then given as a gift to the Society.”

The original reference comes from the back page of the Watch Tower for December 15, 1902 (which is not in the reprints). In offering the Diaglott as part of a list of available publications, the blurb stated:

“For several years a friend, an earnest Bible student, desirous of assisting the readers of our Society's publications, has supplied them through us at a greatly reduced price; now he has purchased the copyright and plates from the Fowler & Wells Co., and presented the same to our Society as a gift, under our assurance that the gift will be used for the furthering of the Truth to the extent of our ability, by such a reduction of price as will permit the poor of the Lord's flock to have this help in the study of the Word. REDUCED PRICES.--These will be sold with ZION'S WATCH TOWER only.”

So who was this earnest Bible student, anonymous friend and benefactor?

The answer was established in a court hearing in 1907. And it is not rocket science to guess who it really was.

In 1903 Maria Russell initiated court proceedings against CTR for what ultimately resulted in a divorce from bed and board – an official separation, but one where neither she nor CTR were ever legally free to remarry. Much hinged on the issue of financial support, and in April 1907 testimony was taken on CTR’s financial situation. Maria tried to establish that CTR still had considerable funds, whereas CTR testified that, bit by bit, he had already donated his assets to the WT Society. CTR was questioned at length about his financial affairs over previous years.

The Bible House had been turned over to the Society in 1898 and other properties subsequently – including the house Maria had lived in up to 1903. Now they were in 1907, CTR testified he had a small bank balance and an arrangement for board and lodging for the duration of his natural life.

However, the court testimony shows quite clearly that, back in 1902, and for a little while thereafter, CTR still retained direct control of funds in his own name. And in the details of this testimony he explained quite openly just how the Society obtained the Diaglott.

He stressed that the aim had been to allow as many as possible to obtain the Diaglott, and so had made it available on a not for profit basis.

Quoting from pages 204-205 of the transcript of the April 1907 hearing, CTR said (and CAPITALS MINE):

“We publish also a brief New Testament, with an interlinear translation in English, and the marginal translation. It was published originally and for many years, for 30 or 40 years, by Fowler and Wells, of New York. THE PLATES WERE PRESENTED TO THE SOCIETY BY MYSELF. The Society had certain corrections made in the new plates etc., as they were considerably worn, and the edition which Fowler and Wells retailed at $4.00 and wholesaled at $2.66 – 2/3 the Society is now publishing at $1.50 per copy, and it includes postage of 16 cents on this, and as they are nearly all purchased by subscribers to the Watch Tower it goes additional with each volume, and in his subscription to the journal; that is to say, that the Watch Tower for the year and this book that was formerly sold for $4.00 go altogether, with postage included, for $1.50, WITH THE VIEW OF INTERESTING PEOPLE IN THE WATCH TOWER PUBLICATION, and permitting the Watch Tower subscribers to have the Diaglott in every home possible.”

So before CTR donated his remaining assets to the Watch Tower Society, he was able to donate the plates personally to the Watch Tower Society.

The repairs to the plates extended the life of the Diaglott, and the new price made it more accessible to the public. In addition, throwing in a year’s Watch Tower subscription as part of the deal was adroit proselytizing. For instance, any newcomers to the world of The Restitution who wanted a Diaglott (or just wanted to replace a copy), now had to approach the Watch Tower Society for one. It was perhaps not surprising that attacks on CTR’s theology intensified in The Restitution in the early 20^th century.

However, this leaves us with the question: Why did CTR chose to remain anonymous, referring instead to a nameless benefactor?

It is here this writer is on shaky ground, because we have no direct way of knowing. But I can suggest two reasons why CTR might have done this.

First, there are his comments in the booklet A Conspiracy Exposed and Harvest Siftings published in 1894.This detailed CTR’s recent difficulties with certain individuals. One was an Elmer Bryan, who made certain accusations against CTR and brought two other brothers (H Weber and M Tuttle) to see him to apply the steps of Matthew 18:15-17. As recorded in the booklet, Brothers Weber and Tuttle heard both parties out and came to the conclusion that Bryan’s accusations were ridiculous. One involved the use of the pseudonym Mrs C B Lemuels (of behalf of Maria Russell) in advertising material some years previously. In dispatching this criticism, CTR said on page 45: “Besides, I bring my own name as little into prominence as possible. This will be noticed in connection with everything I have published – the O(ld) T(heology) Tracts, the DAWNS, etc.”

Looking at the tract series and early editions of the Dawns (Studies) one would be hard put to discover the author. CTR indeed kept quite a low profile. In some respects this was to change when the newspaper sermon work got off the ground. Newspapers wanted personalities and CTR reluctantly became one. But that was further down the line.

But that basic desire to keep a personal name out of matters may have influenced CTR’s decision to donate the Diaglott without claiming personal credit.

A second related reason may be tied to another comment from A Conspiracy Exposed, this time page 40. In connection with a business matter, CTR made the comment that he “preferred to avoid any unnecessary notoriety.” Had the world known that CTR had bought the plates and the rights from Fowler and Wells, there could have been uproar in certain quarters. This writer would theorize that if various Age to Come groups who used the Diaglott knew for certain that CTR had personally brought their baby under his control – and now would only make it available with a year’s worth of his journal – promoting his brand of heresy as they saw it – then cries of “Foul” and “Unfair” would ring out loud and clear.

There would be rumbles whatever happened, but no name – no direct blame. An anonymous benefactor leading to a publishing organisation generously providing the volume at reduced cost to all was far better P.R.

In fact, CTR did the public a great service. He rescued the Diaglott from potential oblivion with the state of the plates as they were. Then that reduction from $4.00 to $1.50 was well worth having. And for around a hundred years thereafter, the Watch Tower Society made this translation readily available to all. Ultimately the copyright expired and the Society’s inventory dwindled. Since 2004, groups like the Abrahamic Faith Beacon Publishing Society published their own version and viewed the translation as “coming home”. Interestingly, the modern versions published have retailed at a far higher price than the Watchtower Society ever charged, even when they did have a fixed contribution for literature.

Millennial Dawn Printer 1st Ed.

 

The Wilmington, Delaware, Daily Republican

November 22, 1886

Can  you add to our understanding?

Charles J. Peterson

Letters from Peterson to Russell appear in Zion's Watch Tower. He worked in Ohio and Kansas. In 1900 he was in Kansas. We need a basic biography. Anyone?

Transcribing help

We need a volunteer to type up a longish newspaper article. If you can do this quickly [and want to do it] email me at rmdevienne @ yahoo [dot] com and I'll send you the pdf file.

Bible Students in Germany during World War 1

Grateful thanks are due to Bernhard who has provided all the information and the graphics in this article on the situation faced by Bible Students in Germany during the First World War.

Recent posts and comments have dealt with how the Bible Students coped with conscription in World War 1. Prior to the war, the Watchtower magazine had given this advice on joining the military. From the Watch Tower for August 1, 1898 (reprints page 2345) CTR wrote:

"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."

How could you avoid shooting anyone? Perhaps you could do this by shooting over their heads? In the Watch Tower for July 15, 1915 (reprints page 5728) CTR expanded on this:

"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."

The problem for Bible Students dealing with this well-intentioned advice would only come to the forefront if and when conscription was introduced. So it came to the fore in Britain in 1916 and in America in 1917 when the draft was introduced. In Germany however, universal conscription was there from the start of the war.

There was a German Watch Tower magazine that gave some details of the situation and also gave the names of many of those involved. The two images below are from the German WT for July and August 1915.

This explains that more than 200 brothers were now in the military and lists many of their names. They are on land, on sea, some in garrisons, some in hospitals. One of them was Max Freschel who we will come back to later.

The numbers increased as the months went by. From the November 1915 German Watch Tower:

Translated it reads:

From our brothers on the field (i.e. battlefield)

“It is of interest to all brothers and sisters to know that there are currently about 350 of our brothers in the military. As a result of close correspondence with many of the loved ones, we receive many evidences of joyful faith and trust and patient perseverance in many difficulties. Some brothers wrote us that they feel strong knowing that so much is being thought of in prayer.”

The article then details the deaths in “the theater of war” of two Bible Students, Fritz Kownatzki from Zollernhöhe, East Prussia, and Johannes Finger from Barmen.  Fritz was 23 and Johannes was 33.

The article concludes: “Both brothers had written to us with expressions of love until shortly before their deaths, from which we could see that these dear ones sought to walk with Jesus ......”

Little is known about how individual Bible Students coped with being in the military while striving to adhere to their principles. One experience though is found in the German Watch Tower for June 1915.

In a letter August Kraftzig wrote: “I'm not directly at the front, but in the baggage (stores?) and consequently by God's grace not directly involved in the war.”

Years later in 1938 August became Branch overseer in Austria. He died in the Mauthausen concentration camp in 1940.

As noted above, one name in the lists of Bible Student conscripts was Max Freschel. Freschel was an Austrian of Jewish parentage. (The area is now part of Poland but was then Austria). At the outbreak of war his parents were in Switzerland while he was in the German Bethel. Max chose to stay in Germany, but this meant that, with universal conscription, he was called up for the German army.

In 1915 he wrote to CTR at least twice. We don’t know what he wrote but there is a letter in the German Watch Tower for October 1915 from Fred Leon Scheerer from Brooklyn. Friedrich Leonhardt Scheerer was a German Bible Student responsible for the German foreign work and he translated Max’s letters so that CTR could read them.

Max Freschel moved to America in 1926 and lived for the rest of his life in Brooklyn Bethel. He changed his name to Maxwell Friend. He would become heavily involved in radio dramas for the Society’s Station WBBR, and was one of the first instructors at Gilead School. When dramas were introduced to convention programs from the late 1960s onwards, many readers may remember his voice playing various patriarchs.

His life story appeared in the Watchtower in April 15, 1967, and is well worth reading. However, he skirts over the years of WW1. All he basically says is that when everything was revived after the war in 1919, he was too.

Posted to Answer a Question from Roberto

This is very raw, not even 'rough' draft, of a chapter currently planned for volume 3. We may include it in volume 2. This is only a few paragraphs from it. It is mostly unfinished. It will not stay up.

Labor Issues

            In this as in everything else, Russell and his associates interpreted current events as fulfilled or fulfilling prophecy. He said that he had been doing that since 1875 which seems perfectly plausible.[1] Russell’s interpretation of social and labor movements derived entirely from Adventist and Millenarian belief. During the Worchester Conference in 1872, organized to examine date specific predictions including Barbour’s, the Paris Commune was presented as a Last-Times event.

            If one looked to social unrest as a sign of Christ’s impending judgment, they were easy to find. A riot or insurrection occurred in the United States nearly every year since 1850. Some were anti-immigrant, some had underlying religious elements, some were over restrictions on liquor and beer sales; many were over labor and social injustices. Most often historians write about difficulties between large employers such as the railroads or meat packers, but the problems extended to small business and farm employment. A correspondent for The Restitution sermonized: “How about the profession of honesty which withholds from your poor neighbor, year after year, the ten, fifteen or twenty dollars due him for labor, under the flimsy plea of hard times, when the price of your tea, coffee and tobacco for one year would more than pay the debt.”[2]

            Wages and working conditions were deplorable. Shop girls turned to prostitution to supplement wages that did not cover their basic needs. The forty-hour work week was a distant dream, worker safety was nonexistent. Labor grievances often turned violent. In April 1859, striking brickyard workers in St. Louis, Missouri, armed themselves and fired on police. Two officers and some of the strikers were wounded. The mob reassembled the next day, and the Army was called in to quell the strike. A pattern of labor violence was established, and it escalated until labor unrest was seen as an element of Last Time events. Russell and his associates saw the Railroad Insurrection of 1877 in that light. world calls as such) is commendable if practiced with a view to paying what we owe.”d more than pay the debt. buisines  ormune

           

Relation to secular society

            They viewed world conditions through the lens of prophecy. It is not an uncommon phenomenon for someone to see the era in which they live as worse than other ages. Writers have quoted Hesiod, Socrates, and Aristotle as believing similarly. However, those quotations are of recent manufacture. As unethical as this is, they did so to support the view point that the current age is worse than past ages. Greeks looked backwards to a Golden Age. New Testament Christians and believers through successive ages look forward to a restored paradise. The New Testament view is that the last days are crisis years. So Russell and his associates looked to contemporary events for proof they were living at the end of the age.

            Their response to what they saw can be parsed into three areas: Christian behavior;  behavior of non-believers; and world affairs.

Christian Behavior

            Christians were to be holy and take the Gospel message to their neighbors. They were to maintain a correct relationship to the state. Russell discussed a Christian’s relationship to governments in 1886. Writing in The Plan of the Ages he said:

Man’s extremity will become God's opportunity,[3] and “the desire of all nations shall come” – the Kingdom of God, in power and great glory. (Hag. 2:7) Knowing this to be the purpose of God, neither Jesus nor the apostles interfered with earthly rulers in any way. On the contrary, they taught the Church to submit to these powers, even though they often suffered under their abuse of power. They taught the Church to obey the laws, and to respect those in authority because of their office, even if they were not personally worthy of esteem; to pay their appointed taxes, and, except where they conflicted with God's laws (Acts 4:19; 5:29), to offer no resistance to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt. 22:21) The Lord Jesus and the apostles and the early Church were all law-abiding, though they were separate from, and took no share in, the governments of this world.

Though the powers that be, the governments of this world, were ordained or arranged for by God, that mankind might gain a needed experience under them, yet the Church, the consecrated ones who aspire to office in the coming Kingdom of God, should neither covet the honors and the emoluments of office in the kingdoms of this world, nor should they oppose these powers. They are fellow citizens and heirs of the heavenly kingdom (Eph. 2:19), and as such should claim only such rights and privileges under the kingdoms of this world as are accorded to aliens. Their mission is not to help the world to improve its present condition, nor to have anything to do with its affairs at present. To attempt to do so would be but a waste of effort; for the world's course and its termination are both clearly defined in the Scriptures and are fully under the control of him who in his own time will give us the kingdom. The influence of the true Church is now and always has been small – so small as to count practically nothing politically; but however great it might appear, we should follow the example and teaching of our Lord and the apostles. Knowing that the purpose of God is to let the world fully test its own ability to govern itself, the true Church should not, while in it, be of the world. The saints may influence the world only by their separateness from it, by letting their light shine; and thus through their lives the spirit of truth reproves the world. Thus – as peaceable, orderly obeyers and commenders of every righteous law, reprovers of lawlessness and sin, and pointers forward to the promised Kingdom of God and the blessings to be expected under it, and not by the method commonly adopted of mingling in politics and scheming with the world for power, and thus being drawn into wars and sins and the general degradation – in glorious chastity should the prospective Bride of the Prince of Peace be a power for good, as her Lord's representative in the world.

The Church of God should give its entire attention and effort to preaching the Kingdom of God, and to the advancement of the interests of that Kingdom according to the plan laid down in the Scriptures. If this is faithfully done, there will be no time nor [sic] disposition to dabble in the politics of present governments. The Lord had no time for it; the apostles had no time for it; nor have any of the saints who are following their example.

The early Church, shortly after the death of the apostles, fell a prey [sic] to this very temptation. The preaching of the coming Kingdom of God, which would displace all earthly kingdoms, and of the crucified Christ as the heir of that Kingdom, was unpopular, and brought with it persecution, scorn and contempt. But some thought to improve on God's plan, and, instead of suffering, to get the Church into a position of favor with the world. By a combination with earthly powers they succeeded. As a result Papacy was developed, and in time became the mistress and queen of nations. – Rev. 17:3-5; 18:7.

By this policy everything was changed: instead of suffering, came honor; instead of humility, came pride; instead of truth, came error; and instead of being persecuted, she became the persecutor of all who condemned her new and illegal honors.[4]

[Analysis here]

Social Conditions

            In the early 1880s most Watch Tower comments on social issues reflected events in the United States. Writing in the May 1882 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower, J. C. Sunderlin used social conditions as proof that they were living in the Last Days. Many American intellectuals adopted Darwinism without understanding it. They suggested that evolution meant improvement; the world was improving, and so were the people living in it. Sunderlin disagreed:

The wise (of this world) say the world is growing better and better. Let us look at that for a moment ... . We will ask the questions, and you can answer them for yourselves. Can men leave their buildings open now more safely than formerly? Are there less locks and safes sold? Is there less murder and bloodshed than usual? Are there fewer prisons and convicts, less theft and arson? Are the instruments of war fewer and less formidable, are there less revolvers sold? [sic] Do men, by their actions, show that they love each other better than formerly? Do they legislate to benefit the poor more? Do capitalists make it easier for the laborer? Do they love the laborer (or his labor) and give him a nice, large slice from the loaf? Does the laborer love the capitalist, and do they work for each other’s interest? Are the churches purer and better and less worldly, plainer and more simple, and true and good, so that the worldly man is rebuked by their good works and has he confidence more than formerly in church members? Are there no grasping monopolies; if so, are there less of them, and are they working for the general good of mankind?

            There is much here that is undeniable, though American intellectuals, including clergy continued to parrot the idea of social progress into the 20^th Century, often to their embarrassment. One of these was Ephraim Llewellyn Eaton, a Methodist clergyman. Eaton and Russell debated in 1903, and Eaton did not fare well. He published a book in 1911 to defend his beliefs, writing:

Before the birth of Christ the world was a military camp, and wars were waged for conquest and reprisal. The Christian spirit has so far permeated the world that it would not to-day tolerate another war for either of these causes. Japan yielded to the Christian moral sense of the world when she relinquished her demand for indemnity of Russia; and America wrote the parable of the Good Samaritan into the law of nations when it espoused the cause of Cuba. If there shall be any war in the future, its only cause can be fear, distrust, or misunderstanding; and Christianity is rapidly making it impossible for one nation to fear, distrust or misunderstand another.

            Japan did not “yield to the Christian moral sense of the world.” It yielded to political influence. Justifying the Spanish American War as writing Jesus parable into international law seems disingenuous. In any event, the events of 1914 proved Eaton wrong. The entire philosophy of social improvement either by religion or evolution was and is false.

            He was correct. Locks and safes had proliferated. Many were exhibited at the World’s Columbian Exhibition in 1876. The official report said:

Viewing the best American safes, with their massive casework, heavy bolts, and ingenious lock-construction, we find a wonderful contrast with the American safe of fifty years ago. What was then called a safe was little more than a box with a hollow frame of heavy sheet-iron, between the outer and inner walls of which was deposited either (so-called) asbestos, plaster, or some other preparation deemed sufficient for protection in an ordinary fire. It was commonly made with corner- and edge-bands, which were riveted with ordinary rivets, and the whole outer surface of the safe, except the bottom, laid at regular intervals with cast-iron knobs, to add to the appearance of weight and strength. The locks were of the plainest character; and it is believed an expert burglar of the present day could enter them with very ordinary tools in a very few minutes. One of these “safes” is occasionally brought to light at public sale, where they are so little esteemed for their powers of protection as to make their price not greatly above that of a wooden box of similar dimensions.[5]

            The proliferation of more secure locks and safe testify to an increase in burglary, not to an increase in Christian morality. Neither was that of arson. Sunderlin would have read many reports of arson and other crimes. A single example will do, since we’re not writing a history of American social troubles. One of the New York papers from the era reported: ““Wednesday, the grand jury presented nine indictments, viz.: Assault with intent to ravish [ie: rape], one; burglary, first degree, one; burglary, second degree, one; burglary, third degree, three; arson, second degree, one; maltreatment of a girl under ten years of age, one.”[6]

            Sunderlin included gun issues as a sign of the last days and proof that the world was not improving. This was the era of wild-west gunfights. They are overblown by media presentations and cowboy movies which owe more to 19^th Century dime novels than accurate history. But they did happen. On October 26, 1881, a few months before Sunderlin wrote, Tombstone, Arizona Territory, walked into history over events at the O. K. Corral. But we think this is not what Sunderlin had in mind. Gun violence, especially with a pistol, was much closer to home. In a speech dated to October 20, 1880, Emery A. Storrs [1835-1885], a noted Republican politician and orator, touched on the gang and political violence in New York City, blaming it on corrupt Democrat operatives:

All parties represent some interest. What does that party represent? Not the manufacturing interest. They have sought the destruction of it since 1832. It is not the financial interests of the country. They would overturn our entire system. Is it the educational interest? [Laughter.] That’s a solemn question. I grieve to see it treated with so much levity. [Laughter.] Is it the moral interest? As representatives of great moral ideas, how does the average Democratic procession in the City of New York look? [Prolonged laughter.] I am constrained to think they don't represent any interest. [A Voice – The whiskey interest.”] My friend is mistaken; that’s not an interest. That is a calamity. They represent every single one of the calamities. They represent a stuffed ballot-box; they represent the assassination of revenue officers.[7]

            New York gangs were part of the Democrat machine in the 1880s and full of violence. This is history, not a modern political statement, though similarities to contemporary issues found in Sunderlin’s remarks are self-evident. Civil War Reconstruction, really the military occupation of former Confederate States, ended in 1877. Violence erupted in the South. Democrats were free to reassert political dominance and abuse and marginalize former slaves. At the end of the Reconstruction Era the South was in the hands of Republican voters most of whom were former slaves. Democrats did not end that, couldn’t not end that, without turning to violence. In Alabama, ninety thousand Republican votes were cast in 1872; there were almost none in 1878. Emery Storrs pointed to the cause: “Terrorism did it, fraud did it, the false count and the no-count did it, the flaming cabin did it, the shot-gun did it.” In 1872 there were 41,000, Republican voters in Arkansas, and in 1878 they cast 115 votes. Storrs said: “The shot-gun, terrorism, fraud, violence, did it.”  In 1872 Republicans in Mississippi, Republicans cast 82,000 votes, but in 1878 they cast 1,168. Storrs said: “The shot-gun reduced it; the bludgeon reduced it; the gentle ministrations of the White Leaguers and the Ku-Klux reduced it. His remarks were partisan, made in a political year, but they are accurate.[8]

---

[1]               C. T. Russell: God's Chosen People - Part II, Overland Monthly, March 1910, page 323.

[2]               J. I . Wince: Christian Conduct and Conversation, The Restitution, May 21, 1879.

[3]               The expression “Man’s extremity will become God’s opportunity” traces back to at least 1629 and is found in Adam’s Works published that year. Defoe used it, and in a 1798 George Whitfield described the phrase as “an old saying.” [An Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in Ireland; to Mr. William Thompson, London, page 8.] It was still in common usage in the late 19^th Century.

[4]               C. T. Russell: The Plan of the Ages, Millennial Dawn, volume 1, Tower Publishing, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1886, pages 266-268.

[5]               F. A. Walker: United States Centennial Commission, International Exhibition, 1878. Reports and Awards – Group XV. , J. B. Lippencott, Philadelphia, 1877, page 4.

[6]               Circuit Court and Oyer and Terminer, The Saratoga, New York, Sentinel, October 7, 1880.

[7]               The Great Republican Speeches of the Campaign of 1880, Staten Island Publishing Company, Stapleton, New York, 1881, pages 38ff.  

[8]              

Our post below drifted off topic, but let's continue

From the Laramie, Wyoming, Boomerang, April 15, 1918:

To our recent visitor from Green River, Wyoming

You're not welcome here. We will delete any comments from you. Find another site to troll.

Your analysis of this quotation

I need your comments sooner rather than later. Please.

Christians were to be holy and take the Gospel message to their neighbors. They were to maintain a correct relationship to the state. Russell discussed a Christian’s relationship to governments in 1886. Writing in The Plan of the Ages he said:

Man’s extremity will become God's opportunity,[1] and “the desire of all nations shall come” – the Kingdom of God, in power and great glory. (Hag. 2:7) Knowing this to be the purpose of God, neither Jesus nor the apostles interfered with earthly rulers in any way. On the contrary, they taught the Church to submit to these powers, even though they often suffered under their abuse of power. They taught the Church to obey the laws, and to respect those in authority because of their office, even if they were not personally worthy of esteem; to pay their appointed taxes, and, except where they conflicted with God's laws (Acts 4:19; 5:29), to offer no resistance to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt. 22:21) The Lord Jesus and the apostles and the early Church were all law-abiding, though they were separate from, and took no share in, the governments of this world.

Though the powers that be, the governments of this world, were ordained or arranged for by God, that mankind might gain a needed experience under them, yet the Church, the consecrated ones who aspire to office in the coming Kingdom of God, should neither covet the honors and the emoluments of office in the kingdoms of this world, nor should they oppose these powers. They are fellow citizens and heirs of the heavenly kingdom (Eph. 2:19), and as such should claim only such rights and privileges under the kingdoms of this world as are accorded to aliens. Their mission is not to help the world to improve its present condition, nor to have anything to do with its affairs at present. To attempt to do so would be but a waste of effort; for the world's course and its termination are both clearly defined in the Scriptures and are fully under the control of him who in his own time will give us the kingdom. The influence of the true Church is now and always has been small – so small as to count practically nothing politically; but however great it might appear, we should follow the example and teaching of our Lord and the apostles. Knowing that the purpose of God is to let the world fully test its own ability to govern itself, the true Church should not, while in it, be of the world. The saints may influence the world only by their separateness from it, by letting their light shine; and thus through their lives the spirit of truth reproves the world. Thus – as peaceable, orderly obeyers and commenders of every righteous law, reprovers of lawlessness and sin, and pointers forward to the promised Kingdom of God and the blessings to be expected under it, and not by the method commonly adopted of mingling in politics and scheming with the world for power, and thus being drawn into wars and sins and the general degradation – in glorious chastity should the prospective Bride of the Prince of Peace be a power for good, as her Lord's representative in the world.

The Church of God should give its entire attention and effort to preaching the Kingdom of God, and to the advancement of the interests of that Kingdom according to the plan laid down in the Scriptures. If this is faithfully done, there will be no time nor [sic] disposition to dabble in the politics of present governments. The Lord had no time for it; the apostles had no time for it; nor have any of the saints who are following their example.

The early Church, shortly after the death of the apostles, fell a prey [sic] to this very temptation. The preaching of the coming Kingdom of God, which would displace all earthly kingdoms, and of the crucified Christ as the heir of that Kingdom, was unpopular, and brought with it persecution, scorn and contempt. But some thought to improve on God's plan, and, instead of suffering, to get the Church into a position of favor with the world. By a combination with earthly powers they succeeded. As a result Papacy was developed, and in time became the mistress and queen of nations. – Rev. 17:3-5; 18:7.

By this policy everything was changed: instead of suffering, came honor; instead of humility, came pride; instead of truth, came error; and instead of being persecuted, she became the persecutor of all who condemned her new and illegal honors.[2]

[Analysis here]

---

[1]               The expression “Man’s extremity will become God’s opportunity” traces back to at least 1629 and is found in Adam’s Works published that year. Defoe used it, and in a 1798 George Whitfield described the phrase as “an old saying.” [An Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in Ireland; to Mr. William Thompson, London, page 8.] It was still in common usage in the late 19^th Century.

[2]               C. T. Russell: The Plan of the Ages, Millennial Dawn, volume 1, Tower Publishing, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1886, pages 266-268.

An extract -

Yes, I know this is detached from its setting. But I'm posting it as is anyway. We would like your comments. This is a temporary post.

This post has been deleted.

We need to see these:

Suggestive Outline Notes [Exact title is uncertain], 1882.


Hints to Millennial Dawn Canvassers. 1887.

This is fairly urgent. We need a good photocopy or scan of each. Can you help? 

Hints to Millennial Dawn Canvassers is NOT the same as the later Suggestive Hints booklet.