If Russell Was Not a Mason, Why Are So Many Saying That He Was? (Working on)

Why are people claiming that Russell was a member of the Freemasons, when the facts show that he was not a member of the Freemasons?

As far as we know, no one ever claimed that Russell was a member of the freemasons while he was alive. The first such claim we have found appears to be that of a woman by the name of Edith Starr Miller (alias, "Lady Queenborough"), who wrote a book entitled Occult Theocrasy, which was originally published in 1933. Her claim that was Russell was part of a conspiracy of Masons' alleged occult plan to rule the world. In fact, Miller totally misrepresented Russell and what Russell taught in order to make it appear that Russell was indeed an occultist, a Mason, etc. 

Very few, however, took Miller's book very seriously until Fritz Springmeier and David Icke resurrected her teachings and embellished them with all kinds of other alleged "proofs" that Russell was a Freemason, and alleged that he was a member of an alleged "Illuminati" whose goal is to rule the world. From that, others who hate the truths that Russell presented have joined the misrepresentation of Russell as a Mason. Many who profess to be Christian have often supported Springmeier's theory that Russell was of some "serpentine" bloodline, evidently without realizing the contradiction of such a theory to the Bible.

In reality, none of them ever present any actual proof that Russell was Mason (nor could they, since he most definitely never was a Mason), but what they present are their own imaginations and assumptions placed over such symbols as the cross and crown symbol, the sun of righteousness symbol, some quotes of Russell taken out of context (or in some cases, totally reworded to fit the perception they are wishing to display of Russell), etc.

Why? We can only conclude that the "god of this world" is behind this, as he seeks to keep people blinded to any truths Russell taught, and he is very sly so as to make what is false appear to be true. Nevertheless, just the presentation of such allegations -- even though they are false -- would certainly seem to put Russell in a bad light in the eyes of many. -- 2 Corinthians 4:4; 1 John 5:19; Revelation 12:9.

We will add that most people think of Russell as being the "founder" of the Jehovah's Witnesses. The truth is that Russell was never a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses, but many project what the Jehovah's Witnesses' leadership teaches back to Russell, although Russell, on my ways, taught almost the very opposite of what the Jehovah's Witnesses teach. Still, Satan can certainly make use of such a misperception to suppress the truths that Russell taught.

============

Originally published May 22, 2012. Last updated:  6/1/2024

Ronald R. Day, Sr.

Russell, the Rothschilds and Israel (Working on)

Did Russell Give Out That He Himself Was “Some Great One”?

By Ronald R. Day, Senior, Restoration Light Bible Study Services (ResLight; RlBible)

J. J. Ross, in this pamphlet entitled Facts and More Facts About the Self-Styled “Pastor” Russell asserts the following concerning Charles Taze Russell:

He got a considerable following of the common people, and sold out the five men’s furnishing stores which he owned, thenceforth devoting all his time to teaching and preaching his peculiar religious doctrines and giving out that he himself “was some great one.”

Since Ross puts “was some great one” in quotes, we are left with the impression that Ross is quoting from Russell, and that somewhere Russell made the claim that he “was some great one,” using those very words. In fact, however, the alleged “fact” assertion that Ross presents is not fact at all. Search as we may, we do not find anywhere that Russell used the expression “some great one” of himself.

One may search Russell works for the expression “some great one” below:

Ross did not give any citation as to where he obtained the quote: “was some great one.” We have found no place where Russell actually used the expression “was some great one” as such, and he definitely never spoke of himself as being "some great one,' so the quote is evidently false. As best as we are able to determine, Ross may have been referring to what is stated in the October 1, 1909 Watch Tower, page 293, which, in Ross’ mind, could possibly be twisted to mean that Russell claimed that he was “some great one.”  Let us read the whole paragraph in order to get the context of what was actually stated:

Our opponents are ready to admit that the Lord has used the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society as his channel or servant in forwarding the harvest message in a most remarkable degree — in a manner and to an extent hardly to be believed and never equaled — in many tongues and at the hands of many “fellow-servants,” Colporteurs, Pilgrims, Volunteers, etc. They admit that there is no question that a remarkable service has been rendered, and hence that it is indisputable by any who believe that there is a harvest work in progress and that the Society has been a servant of the harvest message in a most profound and peculiar sense, even if they dispute that it has fulfilled Matthew 24:45, as being “that servant.” Our friends, on the other hand, point out that very rarely, indeed, is there any quarrel or dispute over the privilege of being a servant, and that never in the world’s history before has this passage been applied, and that very few would be either desirous of being “that servant” or capable of fulfilling that service. They point out that a servant is known by his service, and that if the service be shown to have been performed, the title of servant is an appropriate one, although one not generally coveted. Those who have laid claims to being “some great one” have styled themselves in some fantastic manner Messiahs, Elijahs, prophets, etc., but amongst these none has ever been found to claim the title of “servant,” nor to rejoice specially in service — particularly not without money and without price, but merely from love for the Lord, love for the Truth and love for the brethren.

Please note above that Russell did not refer to himself as “some great one,” but he refers to others who have made claims to being such. Russell himself consistently disclaimed being a prophet, and certgainly never claimed to be the Messiah, Elijah, etc. Nevertheless, it appears that Ross may have taken Russell out of context so as to present as a  “fact” that Russell was “giving out that he himself ‘was some great one.'” Nevertheless, Ross continues in this same manner throughout his pamphlet, so that his “facts” are actually distortions and misrepresentations, as we hope to continue to show, God willing, as we present more posts concerning Ross' alleged "facts".

* Russell, Blacks and Discrimination

This is in response to an article entitled, “Jehovah’s Witnesses, Blacks and Discrimination“, written by Jerry Bergman, Ph. D. (Evidently, the article has been removed, so our response only includes what we got to before its removal.) We are not with the Jehovah’s Witnesses, so our response is not to defend the JWs or their organization, but rather we are responding regarding statements made concerning Charles Taze Russell. Russell, himself, was never a member of the JW organization, but many view things he wrote and stated are often quoted as though he were laying down dogma as does the JW leadership.

Bergmen presents several quotes from the Golden Age. The Golden Age magazine was not printed in Russell’s day, but we mention this because due to the ay that quotes are presented from that magazine; many may associate what is stated there as being from Russell, although Russell had no control over what was printed in that magazine. A sentence is quoted from the October 15, 1919 Golden Age and is offered as proof of discrimination. In the context, however, the author of the article was simply pointing out some of the arguments being presented for the case of national prohibition. After that, the article presents some of the arguments of related the negative consequences of national prohibition. The one sentence, however, is quoted out of context and placed in the context of “racial discrimination”, although we highly doubt the author had any intent of racial discrimination.

Bermgen states:

Another article refers to Orientals as “coolies” who were “cutthroats and murderers” (Golden Age, March 10, 1926, p. 374).

What was stated in context:

The story is told of Dr. Clark that while a missionary in India he listened to a song from a band of coolies who had been cutthroats and murderers, but had become converted. The chief one had once been captured and sold as a slave. No master could keep him, he was so wicked. A missionary bought him with the hope of saving him. Here the coolie heard that the blood saves!

“Could it cleanse a murderer?”

“Yes.”

“One who killed five ment?”

“Yes; all sin!”

“One who killed ten, twenty, thirty?”

“Yes, all manner of sin.”

“I am that man.”

His life was transformed. Verily, can man do this, and can God not? (Jeremiah 18:4-6)

Before going further, we wish to emphasize that this was not written by Russell, although some may quote this as being from Russell. Nevertheless, the story is evidently being retold from some other source, although the source is not stated, and we have not been able to find the source. At any rate, as respects the word “coolies”, the article simply reflects the common usage of that time. The word simply referred, not to all Orientals, but rather to unskilled Orientals. The term, like the term “darkie” as used by Stephen Foster, could be used in an endearing manner, or it could be used as expressing a source of cheap labor. The former usage is, not, of itself, racism, any more than if one had said “Chinese”, “Japanese”, or “Khmer”. Nevertheless, it could also be used as a derogatory term, but it should be obvious that this was not the intent in the article.

Bergmen further makes it appear that the author was claiming that all Orientals were “cutthroats and murderers”, which is definitely a deceitful method of quoting out of context, since it is apparent from the context that the author was referring to just this one “band”, not all Orientals. We do not know if Bergmen, himself, is the source of the material he is presened, or if he is just repeating what he read from someone else. Nevertheless, who ever came up with the quotes out of context had to know that they were misrepresenting what was actually stated.

Biological Inferiority of the Black Race

Bergman claims that the Watchtower “for decades officially taught the doctrine of biological inferiority of the black race.” We have found no evidence anywhere Brother Russell’s writings that he ever thought such a thing, It is further claimed: "Formal segregation of blacks was once rigidly enforced in their organization, both during the rule of their first president, C.T. Russell (1852- 1916) and their second, Joseph F. Rutherford (1869-1942) and even until the late 1950's." This refers to "the rule of their first president". The fact is that Russell was never the president of an organization such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, and Russell never claimed authority to rigidly or otherwise to "rule" over others related to such an idea. Russell preached against authoritarianism. The norms in the US at that time, however, was totally different than it is today. In many -- if not most -- places in the United States at that time it was against the law for whites and "colored" to congregate together.

Getting to quotes from Brother Russell, Bergmen presented some selective quoting from The Watch Tower, April 1,1914, page 110:

Recognizing that it meant either the success or the failure of the…[Photo] Drama as respects the whites, we have been compelled to assign the colored friends to the gallery… Some were offended at this arrangement. We have received numerous letters from the colored friends, some claiming that it is not right to make a difference, others indignantly and bitterly denouncing [us] as enemies of the colored people. Some … told us that they believe it would be duty to stand up for equal rights and always to help the oppressed…. We again suggested that if a suitable place could be found in which the Drama could be presented for the benefit of the colored people alone, we would be glad to make such arrangements, or to cooperate with any others in doing so.

Bergmen then states:

The administration then concluded that the Watchtower interests were to be put ahead of efforts to achieve racial justice and human rights, a policy that continues today.

Brother Russell, like Jesus and the apostles in the Bible, did not believe that the Christian's mission is to reform Satan's world. The point was not to put "Watchtower interests" first, but rather to put first the presentation of God's wonderful message from the Bible, the good news of great joy that shall be for all people presented in the Photo Drama. This message is centered in Christ, who died to reconcile the world to God. -- Romans 5:6,8,12-19; 2 Corinthians 5:18,19; 1 Timothy 2:5,6; 1 John 2:2; 4:10,14.

Bergmen then presents some more selective quotes:

Our explanations were … it is a question of putting either the interests of God’s cause first, or else the interests of the race first. We believed it our duty to put God first and the truth first–at any cost to others or to ourself! We explained that we thought that all the colored brethren should know… that we love to serve them in any way possible and to give them the very best we have to give of the Gospel message; and that it is only a question of whether our giving to them in one way would entirely deprive us of giving the truth to others (Watchtower, April 1, 1914:110).

Bergmen’s method of quoting and his comments make it appear that as a result of the incident at the Photo-Drama showing, that Brother Russell decided a new policy for the WTS. In reality, Russell was, in effect, reiterating the policy, based on the New Testament, from the beginning of not getting involved in the world’s politics and social issues. However, the kind of selective quoting presented by Bergmen is very misleading, for it leaves out various parts and often combines one thought as being associated with something that was not originally intended.

We will present the entire article below.

THE COLOR LINE FOUND NECESSARY

   WE might have anticipated that many colored people would be deeply interested in THE PHOTO-DRAMA OF CREATION. But it did not impress itself upon us until gradually their number increased to about twenty-five per cent. of the whole audience. Of course, we were glad to see them, glad that they were interested in the DRAMA. We had the same feeling respecting them as others; but it was quickly discerned that it was not a case of feeling, but that, whereas the colored people of New York City are about five per cent. of the population, in our audiences they are about twenty-five per cent. and the number increasing. What shall we do? As the attendance of the colored people would increase, proportionately the number of the whites would decrease; for explain it how we will, a majority of whites prefer not to intermingle closely with other races.

  Recognizing that it meant either the success or the failure of the enterprise of the DRAMA as respects the whites, we have been compelled to assign the colored friends to the gallery, which, however, is just as good for seeing and hearing as any other part of The Temple. Some were offended at this arrangement.

    We have received numerous letters from the colored friends, some claiming that it is not right to make a difference, others indignantly and bitterly denouncing us as enemies of the colored people. Some, confident that Brother Russell had never sanctioned such a discrimination, told that they believe it would be duty to stand up for equal rights and always to help the oppressed, etc. We were obliged to explain the facts, assuring all of our loving interest in the colored people, and of our desire to do them good, and not injury. We again suggested that if a suitable place could be found in which the DRAMA could be presented for the benefit of the colored people alone, we would be glad to make such arrangements, or to co-operate with any others in doing so.

   Our explanations were apparently entirely satisfactory to all of the fully consecrated. To these we explained that it is a question of putting either the interests of God’s Cause first, or else the interests of the race first. We believed it our duty to put God first and the Truth first– at any cost to others or to ourself! We explained that we thought that all the colored brethren should know our attitude toward them–they should know that we love to serve them in any way possible and to give them the very best we have to give of the Gospel Message; and that it is only a question of whether our giving to them in one way would deprive us of giving the Truth to others.

    Some who were still tenacious and quarrelsome we merely reminded of our Lord’s declaration that in inviting visitors into the house it is the place of the host to say where they shall sit, and then we showed them the parable of the man who chose the chief seat of honor and was given a lower one.

   In answer to the query as to how our course of conduct squared with the Golden Rule, we replied that it squares exactly. We would wish others to put God first. If our personal interests are or ever have been in conflict with the real and apparently best interests of the Lord’s Cause, it is a part of our consecration vow to ignore our interests in favor of the interests of the Lord’s Cause. This is what we mean by the declaration that we are dead to self and alive to our God as New Creatures.

   We reminded one dear sister that the Lord enjoins humility, and assures us that unless we humble ourselves we shall not be exalted. If nature favors the colored brethren and sisters in the exercise of humility it is that much to their advantage, if they are rightly exercised by it. A little while, and our humility will work out for our good. A little while, and those who shall have been faithful to their Covenant of Sacrifice will be granted new bodies, spiritual, beyond the veil, where color and sex distinctions will be no more. A little while, and the Millennial Kingdom will be inaugurated, which will bring Restitution to all mankind–restitution to the perfection of mind and body, feature and color, to the grand original standard, which God declared “very good,” and which was lost for a time through sin, but which is soon to be restored by the powerful Kingdom of Messiah.

See also our resource page: Russell and Racism

1 Corinthians 13:1 - The Tongue of Angels

Was Charles Taze Russell a Mason? (Working on)

Cure For Appendicitis

It is being claimed that Russell taught that appendicitis is caused by biting worms in the colon. The obvious reason for this claim is to make it appear that Russell was some kind of quack who should not be taken seriously. Russell, himself, however never claimed to have any special knowledge of appendicitis or any other disease. 

As far as appendicitis pain, there was an article in the Watch Tower of January 1, 1912, page 26, entitled "Cure for Appendicitis". We don't know that Russell himself wrote it; it was probably given to him from one of his associates, possibly a doctor, and he simply had it printed in the magazine. It is probable that in 1912,  much of the work at the Watch Tower Society was handled by others, although Russell sought to approve everything that appeared in the Watch Tower, he himself stated, "We try to be careful about every word that goes into the Watch Tower, but we do not claim to be infallible; we are doing the best we can." -- What Pastor Russell Said, page 57.

 The article does not state that appendicitis itself is caused by "biting worms", but rather that the pain from appendicitis is caused by "biting worms". We cannot say exactly what is meant by "biting worms" in the article, but bacteria itself could be described as "worms", and we suppose the infections caused by bacteria could be described as from biting worms.

Nevertheless, there is research that speaks of parasitic pinworms that have been found in the appendix with appendicitis. Sanotin was indeed used even by some doctors in the days of Russell to bring relief to patients suffering from appendicitis pain, as it does expel such parasites, thus bringing relief to the patient suffering from pain caused by those worms.

Regardless, the short article was simply a suggestion; it was not presented as being dogma, infallible, without error, etc. Nor did the article represent an authoritarian organization such as Rutherford created after Russell died. If the article had appeared in one of the home advice magazines of that day, more than likely no one today would be writing evil of those authors. But because it was printed by the magazine that Russell edited, it is being presented as though it was some kind of official doctrine that was being promulgated by someone. Russell, however, never assumed any such authority, not for himself, nor for the Watch Tower Society of his day.

We should also note that the information was passed gratis; Russell was not getting rich in having this information published.

The article may be found online at:
http://mostholyfaith.com/Beta/bible/Reprints/Z1912JAN.asp#Z26:13

The World Magazine and the Alleged 28 Year Old Prophecy

JW Claims and Russell's Expectations Regarding 1914

Some Early Quotes Regarding 1914

* Did Russell Change the End of the Gentile Times to 1915?

Did Russell "Await the Rapture" On the Mount of Olives?

* Did Russell Claim that the Gentile Times Had Not Ended in 1914?

Revelation 14:9-11 – The Smoke of Their Torment (Working on)

Do these verses refer to the doctrine that many will suffer consciously for all eternity?

Revelation 14:9 Another angel, a third, followed them, saying with a great voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead, or on his hand,
Revelation 14:10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is prepared unmixed in the cup of his anger. He will be tormented (literally, touchstoned) with fire and sulfur in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb.
Revelation 14:11 The smoke of their torment (being touchstoned) goes up forever and ever. They have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name. — World English.

The words translated tormented and torment above are in the Biblical Greek forms of the word that usually transliterated as Basanos, which literally means "touchstone".

First, we note that these verses are in the book of Revelation, a book that is full of symbolism. This is not speaking of a literal beast, nor of literal wine, nor of literal fire, nor of literal brimstone (sulfur), nor of literal smoke, nor a literal lamb, etc. Likewise, the touchstoning, rendered “tormented” in most translations is symbolic of a trial, a testing, which does result in an everlasting symbolic “smoke” that can symbolically be seen forever. Such a symbolic touchstoning, while taking place, would certainly not be pleasant, bur rather very unpleasant, and thus, traditionally, the touchstoning has come to be viewed figuratively as representing a torment, or vexation.

All will at once concede that if a literal worshiping of a beast and his image are meant in verse 9, then few if any in civilized lands are liable to the penalty of verse 11; and if the beast and image, and worship, and wine, and cup are symbols, so also are the torments, and smoke, and fire, and brimstone.

Second, we need to note what is not spoken of here. There is nothing said here about the Bible hell (hades/sheol), nor of anyone suffering while allegedly being conscious while dead. Nor does it say that those being touchstoned have gone into the second death, pictured as a lake of fire in Revelaton 20:14. There is nothing said about alleged immortal souls or spirits of any human being kept alive for eternity. All of such ideas have to imagined, assumed, added to, and read into what is stated. Indeed, the scriptures does not say that these being touchstoned by fire and sulphur are while in this experience, in a death condition as is traditionally thought of.

The touchstoning being spoken of takes place while these people are alive here before the present evil age has ended, and it takes place upon the earth.  It is depicted as a trying of which continues from day to day, without letup, allows no rest to those undergoing this trial for the duration of the trial. Their having no “rest” could signify the lack of rest of faith in Christ (Hebrews 4:3,9,10), as opposed to their putting faith in that which is symbolized by the beast and its image. The trial is connected with their bowing down to the beast and image of the beast. Basically, this is a trial of worshipers who are worshiping in a manner unapproved by God. Included in these are the tares that Jesus spoke of, false Christians. Their trial will leave a symbolic smoke that will be symbolically seen forever and forever, attesting of the horrible results of this beast and its image. The deception and error of these systems will never be forgotten –as smoke, which continues to ascend after a destructive fire, is a testimony that the fire has done its work.

No Salvation Until Russell?