2015-07-28 23:23:01 UTC
The material below has also been posted at:
Several claims are being made concerning the Bible Students that are misleading, to say the least, in the video entitled, "WHY Bible Students say they have the truth". This video, by the way, never gets around to actually saying "why" the Bible Students say they have "the truth." Instead, what is presented in the video is actually an attack on the Bible Students movement that falsely misrepresents the Bible Students and Russell.
It is not at all true that the beliefs of the Bible Students and the beliefs of the JWs are "almost the same". There are some similarities, but as regarding the central doctrine of salvation and the atonement, organization, as well as many other things, the Bible Students believe almost the very opposite of what the JWs teach and believe.
Bible Students is Not a Religion or Sect
"Bible Students" is not supposed to be a religion, or a sect, although many associated with the Bible Students movement often make use of the term "Bible Students" as though it is such. Sadlly, the sectarian carnal way of thinking often prevails even amongst the Bible Students.
See my study on "sectarianism":
Charles Taze Russell was himself a non-sectarian who did not believe in sectarianism nor in starting a new religion.
See my research related to Charles Taze Russell and Sectarianism
"Bible Students" can only have the "the truth" if they have Jesus and his God. -- John 14:6; 17:1,3; 1 John 2:23.
Nevertheless, many Bible Students speak of being "in the truth" as meaning something beyond the simple scriptural statement, which often does lead to a sectarian spirit.
A true Bible Student is a follower of Brother Russell only as Brother Russell may point to the Bible. Anyone who is a follower of Russell otherwise is not a true Bible Student. In the same way a Bible Student may be a follower of Matthew Henry, Martin Luther, etc., in the sense of realizing truths that they have presented from the Bible. To be a follower of any man, that is, to take whatever any man says to be "truth" simply because he said (other than the authors of the Bible) this or that, is not being a Bible Student.
The only "cult" that any Bible Student should belong to would be the "cult" of Jesus and his apostles. That is how Brother Russell himself viewed the matter.
Who Did Russell Actually Believe to Be the "only authority" of the Church?
Anyone who is putting faith in Brother Russell and not in the Bible is in a state of self-contradiction, since Brother Russell preached against putting faith in Brother Russell and not in the Bible. On the other hand, Brother Russell gave a tremendous amount of Biblical references that do indeed show that his writings are "Bible aids", but as he said, his Bible aids are not to take the place of the Bible. A true Bible Student should believe the Bible even if it contradicts Russell's aids.
See my research:
Should One Blindly Follow Russell?
However, to say that one does not need aids to understand the Bible would not be in agreement with the Bible itself. Thousands read the Bible through the tint of whatever traditions they have in their mind and fail to comprehend its true message. One does need the help of God's spirit, but this does not mean that one should neglect to use human aids, whether that aid comes from Robert Young, James Strong, Martin Luther, or whoever else. Indeed, if one is reading the Bible in English, he is reading the Bible with the aid whoever has translated the Bible into English. If one goes to church and hears a sermon, he is subject to being influenced by the conclusions of what is being said that sermon. To be fully without the aid of any others than the Bible writers, one would need the original autographs of every book of the Bible, and one would have know without the aid of anyone else the original languages in which they were written.
See my study:
Understanding Kingdom Mysteries
While I do not agree with all of Brother Russell's conclusions, I do believe that God used him to bring forth many truths from the Bible, especially as related to the atonement as provided through Jesus. His works prove this to be true. One of general education should be able to verify the veracity of the basic truths Brother Russell presented by use of aids such a Strong's Concordance, Englishman's Lexicons, etc. Today, such aids may be even found online for the free use of any.
Regarding the Bible Students, see:
Regarding Charles Taze Russell, see:
The Chart of the Ages
The Chart of the Ages shown almost throughout the video is not directly concerning the Great Pyramid of Egypt, nor is it based on the Great Pyramid of Egypt as the video seems to suggest. The Chart of the Ages is not used by Bible Students all over the world to predict the future, but it is used to illustrate the various ages as revealed in tehe Bible.
As many organizations make use of pyramids to illustrate their organizational structure, so Brother Russell made use of pyramids to illustrate the structure and development of God's Kingdom. One should note that the Chart of the Ages is not about the Great Pyramid, but rather the Bible. The chart is NOT based on the Great Pyramid, but is based on the Bible itself and the various features as presented in the Bible itself; this does not mean that all that Brother Russell stated and/or presented related to that chart is absolutely true. Each Christian should be free to make up his or he own mind concerning the details of God's plan and purposes.
For Brother Russell's own explanation of the Chart of the Ages:
God's Holy Name
It really does not make sense to say that "Jehovah" is not God's name. "Jehovah" is simply an English form based on the Hebrew form of God's Holy Name most often used in the Masoretic Hebrew text; another form often used amongst Bible Students is "Yahweh". The English form "Jehovah", however, is more directly based on Hebrew; the English form "Yahweh" is based on some sounds often attributed to a koine Greek form of the Holy Name (that form is often transliterated as IAUE). Most scholars, however, have concluded that the Koine Greek lacks the same sounds of ancient Hebrew. Additionally, any form of the Holy Name produced in Hebrew would have to based solely on pronunciation, not on vowels, since the Hebrew at that time had no written vowels. Then the assignment of the sounds of those Greek vowels as given by later scholars may or may not be correct. At any rate, since the Greek does not have the sounds of the original, the result of producing the Holy Name in Greek would be a shortened Greek version of the name, and thus should not be used as a basis for claiming how God's name was originally pronounced in Hebrew.
Nevertheless, "Jehovah" is indeed an English form of God's Holy Name. The English form, "Jehovah", does indeed represent in English form the Hebrew form of the only true God, the God and Father of Jesus. Whether the sounding of the name is exactly the same as the original Hebrew is irrelevant; God has never stated that his Holy Name must sound alike in every language, which, in reality, would mean that one could not speak God's Holy Name at all in some languages, since those languages would not have any sound equivalent to the original Hebrew pronunciation. Most, however, who make much ado about the English form "Jehovah" not being the Holy Name of God, are inconsistent in that they fail to do the same with name of the Messiah, as well as other names. In other words, they most often still present the Messiah's name as "Jesus", although the English pronunication of "Jesus" is definitely not the original Hebrew pronunciation of that name.
See my research:
Correct Spelling and Pronunciation of God's Name in English
As pertaining to God's name, we are told in the video to do the very opposite of what one really should do. Like many others, it appears to be reckoning the English form "Jehovah" to be a "name" in and of itself, totally separate from the Hebrew. If one is consistent regarding this, one should do the same with the name of the Messiah, and claim that "Jesus" is not the name of the Messiah. In reality, the reasoning presented in the video is actually fallacious reasoning.
It is claimed that a Spanish monk invented "Jehovah". This is totally false. No, the Catholic church did not invent the English form "Jehovah".
See my related research:
A Catholic Monk Invented "Jehovah"?
It is definitely totally false that God's Holy Name is "the LORD", or that it is "GOD", as many translations often falsely present God's Holy Name as being.
See my research:
Is the Holy Name "the Lord"?
Most Bible Students would agree that the pyramid of Giza cannot "predict" anything. That is not its purpose. Any who make use of the Great Pyramid to "predict" this or that, would have to basically depend upon their own imagination, or become subject to the influence of demonic spiritism. Brother Russell did not use the Great Pyramid as a basis for expectation; he, and many others, did and do believe that the Great Pyramid does corroborate what the Bible itself says, as well as the chronology and time prophecies of the Bible. Actually, there is overwhelming evidence that the Great Pyramid is indeed God's Witness in Egypt.
See my research page:
Brother Russell did NOT use the Great Pyramid as a basis to predict the future. He used Biblical prophecies as a basis. This is not to say that he was correct in all his expectations, as he evidently was not.
See my research:
Charles Taze Russell and the Great Pyramid
The video discussed above may be seen at: