Truth Magazine

By Ron Halbrook

Introduction

The Church in West Columbia, Texas has a newspaper column called “New Testament Christianity.” We ran the following article to let people know that we are ready to help them. An honest Jehovah’s Witness would agree to the proposed study and the proposal helps people get dishonest Jehovah’s Witnesses off their doorsteps.

When talking with a “Jehovah’s Witness” at your door or anywhere else, be kind, considerate and courteous. Treat them as you wish to be treated (Matt. 7:12). Do not curse at them or persecute them in any way. Losing control of your temper or tongue only rein-forces prejudice in their heart. “Let your speech be always with grace” (Col. 4:6). “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men” (Gal. 6:10). Remember with compassion that the “Jehovah’s Witness” has an eternal soul, though his doctrine denies it, and that he will spend eternity in heaven or hell (Matt. 25:46).

Give them this article to explain a proposal for a fair and balanced study. Dear friend of the “Jehovah’s Witness” religion, the person handing you this article wants to study with you in a format of open discussion. Ron Halbrook will be invited into our home to share in the study sessions. He will be present at each study with the representatives of the “Jehovah’s Witness” religion, so that both sides of each subject or issue can be fairly presented. Ron Halbrook and the “Jehovah’s Witness” representatives must agree to conduct each study directly from the Bible, rather than studying the literature of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. Everyone agrees to be patient and courteous in these studies.

The subjects for study are: (1) The full deity of “the word” who came in the flesh as Jesus Christ (Jn. 1:1-14; Heb. 1:1-14). (2) Did God give his people in the gospel age the name “Christian” or “Jehovah’s Witness”? (Acts 11:26) (3) Is God’s only name “Jehovah”? (Isa. 9:6; Matt. 28:19) (4) What must I do to be saved? (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38) (5) Does the soul or spirit survive death? (Matt. 10:28; Lk. 16:19-31) (6) Will all Christians go to heaven or must some stay on earth forever, and is punishment in hell eternal? (Matt. 25:46; 1 Pet. 1:1-5) (7) Did God ordain the “Jehovah Witness” organization and has it made false prophecies? (Deut. 18:21-22; Phil. 1:1)

When the true prophets of God pled, “Come now, and let us reason together,” they invited their opponents, “produce your arguments” (Isa. 1:18; 41:21, NWT). God’s true people are interested in the same open study today.

Dear friend of the “Jehovah’s Witness” religion, the person handing you this article believes it would be fair and helpful if a public discussion could be held on the subjects listed above. Such public study is approved by Elijah, Isaiah, Jesus, Paul and Ron Halbrook (1 Kgs. 18; Isa. 43:9; Matt. 22; Acts 17:17; 1 Pet. 3:15).

If the “Jehovah’s Witness” wants to leave some literature, say you will take it if he will be fair enough to read something you have. If our readers will contact us now, we will supply them with tracts to keep on hand to exchange with a “Jehovah’s Witness.” If he wants you to pay or make a donation for his literature, point out that you are not asking any pay or donation for what you are offering in ex-change. If they offer a larger book and want money on that basis, tell them to come back later and you will make an even exchange. Let us know and we will supply what you need.

If they refuse this clipping, refuse a private study of both sides, refuse public discussion, and refuse to exchange literature, kindly close the conversation and gently close the door. You have done what is right and fair, your conscience is clear. You will know they are unfair and dishonest in asking you to examine your beliefs because they will not ex-amine theirs. “The legs of the lame are not equal” (Prov. 26:7; Rom. 2:21).

Clip and save this article for future use. Make copies — distribute them far and wide. Contact us for free tapes and tracts on “Jehovah’s Witness” doctrine.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 8, p. 3-4
April 15, 1993

By Terry F. Sanders

On the morning of February 27, the kind and gentle spirit of Goldie May Plum left its tabernacle of flesh to return to God after a sudden illness. Sister Plum was a faithful member of the Marrtown Road church in Parkersburg. She spent the majority of her 92 years in faithful service to God in every capacity.

She was born December 14, 1900 in Gilmer County, the daughter of Charles and Frances Bell Henderson. In 1917, she was married to the much beloved faithful gospel preacher Chaflen Dewey (CD.) Plum who preceded her in death in 1977. To this union were born three children: Wilma, who became Mrs. Cad Parsons and who passed away in 1965; Russell, now 71, who is crippled due to an illness in his youth and still lives at home; and Charles, who passed away in 1976 and was a faithful gospel preacher and the Chief of Police in Parkersburg at the time of his death. Sister Plum also leaves behind five grandchildren, eleven great-grandchildren and five great-great-grandchildren. A sister, Mildred Kreaps, survives and lives in Perrysville, OH. I should also mention that her son Charles’ widow, Lillian, has lived with Sister Plum since Charles’ death and has helped with the care of Russell and with other duties that age slowly prevented sister Goldie from being able to do. I have often thought that not only did sister Goldie serve as a splendid example of all that a Christian, wife and mother should be, hut that also sister Lillian has served as a “Ruth to her Naomi.” Two more excellent examples of womanhood would be hard to find in our present society.

The funeral services were conducted by this writer at the Lambert Tatman Funeral Home on March 2, 1993. 1 spoke of how sister Plum had mirrored the words of Proverbs 31:10-31 in being devoted to God, husband and children. Sister Plum served her God soberly, righteously and faithfully. She cared for her husband and children in their illnesses without complaint. The manner in which she went about caring for her family in this quite and humble fashion gained the respect of all who truly knew of it. The loving care this fine lady has given in her lifetime is a monument to her and speaks well of the lady that sister Plum was. Her kind is rare and we are fortunate to have been blessed by being acquainted with her for even a short period of time. It is my wish that her tribe might increase.

Her body was placed to await the resurrection by the side of her husband and son in the Chapel of Peace Mausoleum, Sunset Gardens, Parkersburg.

Friends may send cards and letters to Lillian Plum, 2503 Liberty Street,

Parkersburg, WV 26101.

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 7, p. 20
April 1, 1993

By Leonard White

To find the roots of the modern-day Jehovah’s Witness organization we need only go back 140 years. On February 16, 1852 Charles Taze Russell was born in Allegheny City, Pennsylvania. His parents were Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, but at an early age Charles joined a nearby Congregational Church because of its “more liberal views,” While still a teenager, Russell became troubled and confused by the teaching and preaching he heard, particularly the idea that God would create human beings which he foreknew and predestined to be eternally tormented. According to Russell’s own account, a turning point in his thinking came at the age of 18 when he chanced to hear a ‘Second Adventist” preacher named Jonas Wendell. About this same time Russell organized a Bible class in Pittsburgh. Six years later, at the ripe age of 24, he ‘vas elected ”Pastor” of this group, a title which he wore until the time of his death. Russell was fascinated by the prophetic speculations and chronologies of the Adventists. For a brief time he joined with Adventist N.H. Barbour in the publication of a magazine called The Herald of the Morning. Though this collaboration did not last long, there is little doubt that Russell’s later penchant for date-setting and his views on such things as biblical chronology, the soul of man and eternal punishment were largely influenced by these early associations with heirs of the ”Millerite” movement.

In 1879 Russell began publication of a magazine which he called Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence, known today as The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom, with an initial circulation of 6000 copies. In 1884 he incorporated Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society, followed in 1896 by the formation of The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the name still used today. It could perhaps be said that this marked the time of the founding of the Jehovah’s Witness organization. Russell served as president of the Society and for a time personally owned 99 percent of its capital.

Russell’s life was very colorful, to say the least. He was a dynamic (some would even say charismatic) leader who had proven his abilities as an entrepreneur by establishing, with his father, a chain of clothing stores. Now he was able through his writing and lecturing to promulgate his aberrant religious views and at the same time build a vast financial empire. The career of the organization’s founder and first president was a turbulent one indeed. He was involved in numerous legal battles, publicly exposed as a perjurer, charged by his wife and others with immoral conduct, implicated in fraudulent business schemes — all of which were viewed by his devoted followers as simply signs of the persecution which was to be expected from the wicked enemy, “organized religion.”

Russell’s greatest contribution to the movement’s theology came in a serious of seven books, known collectively as Studies in the Scriptures. The first volume appeared in I 886 and the seventh was added in 1917, after his death. It is somewhat of an embarrassment to modern Jehovah’s Witnesses that the “Pastor” encouraged the study of these books as being of greater value than reading of the Bible alone (Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1910).

In 1908 the Society purchased property in Brooklyn, New York and established headquarters there. Under the name Bethel, this continues today to serve as the hub of their world-wide operations.

Upon his death in 1916 Russell was succeeded as president by (Judge) Joseph Franklin Rutherford, who had previously acted as legal counselor for the organization. Rutherford was quick to take complete control, eliminating those who might be a threat to this authority. He proved to be a more prolific writer than his predecessor, producing over 100 books and pamphlets.

During World War I Rutherford’s outspoken denunciation of war made the Society very unpopular in the United States and even created suspicion in the minds of many as to whether he and his organization were loyal to this country. In 1918 Rutherford and several other leaders of the organization were brought to trial, found guilty of violation of the Espionage Act and sentenced to twenty years in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. Although they actually only served less than a year of this sentence, the Brooklyn head-quarters was temporarily closed and the activity of the Society was curtailed for several months. This episode made Rutherford a hero and martyr to his followers. Thereafter he served as a model for others in the organization who might be called upon to suffer for their faith.

In 1920 Rutherford followed in Russell’s footsteps by at-tempting to prophesy the time of the end. In a booklet en-titled Millions Now Living Will Never Die, he boldly pro-claimed that in 1925 faithful Old Testament worthies would be resurrected, and the existing world order would come to an end. Needless to say, Rutherford’s predictions about 1925 failed to materialize, just like those made earlier by Russell. Seemingly unwilling to admit the failed predictions, in 1929 the Society purchased a mansion in San Diego, California, ostensibly for purpose of providing a residence for the Old Testament “princes” when they returned to earth. While awaiting their arrival. Rutherford lived in the house, which came to be called Beth Sarim. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the others never made the promised appearance, and the house was finally sold after Rutherford’s death.

One significant development which took place during Rutherford’s tenure was the adoption of a new name for the individual members of the movement. Based upon the statement in Isaiah 43:10, “Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah,” in 1931 they became officially designated as “Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

When Judge Rutherford died in 1942 he was followed in the presidency by Nathan H. Knorr. Though never the highly visible autocrat the first two leaders had been, Knorr was a powerful and effective administrator. He soon established a thorough program of training for those members who would devote time to spreading the Society’s message to the world. In 1946 a new magazine, Awake!, was begun as a companion to The Watchtower.

For a long time the Witnesses had struggled to answer the charge that their peculiar doctrines were in disagreement with the Bible. They had found some help in the use of the Emphatic Diaglott, an interlinear text produced by Christadelphian Benjamin Wilson. What was really needed, however, was a new translation that harmonized with Watchtower theology. In 1950 the first volume of The New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures came from the press. In 1961 the translation of the entire Bible (The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures) was completed. Witnesses claim that previous English translations had been corrupted in order to uphold traditional religious errors, but that with the introduction of the NWT fidelity to the original text was at last achieved. Much can be, and has been, written to show- the fallacy of such claims. The NWT is a transparent attempt to bring the Bible into conformity with Watchtower doctrine. One reviewer aptly observed, “A close examination, which gets beneath the out-ward veneer of scholarship, reveals a veritable shambles of bigotry, ignorance, prejudice, and bias which violates every rule of biblical criticism and every standard of scholarly integrity.” The Society has consistently refused to reveal the names of the “scholars” who worked to produce the NWT. However William Cetnar, who was employed at Bethel when the translation took place, has given their names as: Nathan H. Knorr, Fred W. Franz, Albert D. Schroeder, G.D. Gangas and M. Henschel. None of these men had the training to quality them to undertake such a work. Fred Franz is said to have been the best qualified member of the team, but it was he who was embarrassed before a Scottish court by being forced to admit that he could not translate Hebrew into English.

In the early 1960’s Witness leaders became concerned over declining growth. Something had to be done to rejuvenate the movement. The decision was made to employ the technique used so successfully by Russell and Rutherford: prophetic speculation and date-setting to create great expectation of momentous events looming on the horizon. A series of books and articles (beginning in 1966 with Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God) rolled from the Brooklyn presses announcing that September 1975 would mark the end of 6000 years since the creation of Adam. It was clearly suggested time and again that the seventh millennium of mankind’s existence could be expected to run parallel with the millennial reign of Christ. Readers were assured that they were living in the “last days.” The book, The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life (containing a chapter entitled, “The Last Days of This Wicked System of Things”) stated that these “last days” began in 1914 and will end with-in one generation. The warning is then given, “this means that only a short time is left before the end comes!” (p. 95)

The result of these startling pronouncements was a phenomenal increase in activity and conversions. The number of world-wide baptisms went from 58,904 in 1966 to 295,073 in 1975. During those same years the number of “publishers” (Witnesses involved in preaching activities) rose from 1,058,675 to 2,062,449.

But just as had happened with 1874, 1914 and 1925, the year 1975 came and went without the climactic events that had been predicted. As might be expected, disappointment and disenchantment swept through the organization. By 1978, the number of baptisms reported was back down to 95,052. Since 1975 the Society has been denying that they ever made any definite statements to the effect that the end would come in that year, claiming that “there has been considerable individual speculation on the matter.” There can be no doubt, however, that the expectations for 1975 were the result of the published statements of the Watchtower Society.

The current president of the Jehovah’s Witness organization is Fred W. Franz, who succeeded Knorr at his death in 1977. In spite of glaring errors in doctrine and a long trail of failed prophecies, the organization still boasts millions of active workers, enormous holdings world-wide and an incredibly prolific publishing enterprise.

The Watchtower Society likes to point with pride to the uniformity of doctrine among its members around the globe. However, they usually fail to mention how this is achieved. Jehovah’s Witnesses are absolutely bound to accept without question the pronouncements handed down from Brooklyn. In recent years the Society has seen the defection of many of its members, some of whom were leaders. One notable example of this is Raymond Franz, nephew of Fred Franz. A former member of the Society’s top policy-making “governing body,” Raymond Franz has written a book, en-titled A Crisis of Conscience, which tells how he became increasingly disillusioned by observing the machinations and blatant dishonesty of the organization’s top leadership. As the title of the book suggests, Franz ultimately found himself in a crisis of conscience which led him to resign his position and sever all association with the Witnesses. Many others who have left the Society in recent years describe their experience as brainwashing and total domination by a heavy-handed organization which demands blind loyalty. Stories are told of members being disfellowshiped for such things as sending a birthday card or voting in an election. It is not difficult to see why those who remain in the organization are careful to adhere to what they are told by those above them.

This article has obviously been only a brief overview of the history of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, but even a cursory look at the activities and doctrines of this organization are sufficient to establish it as one more modern example of that concerning which the apostle John wrote long ago: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (I Jn. 4:1).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 8, p. 2
April 15, 1993

By Frank Jamerson

This is an outline study of divorce and remarriage, with special emphasis on four theories that circumvent the teaching of the Bible.

A. Who has the scriptural right to marry?

One who has never been married (Matt. 19:4-6; 1 Cor. 7:36).

One whose companion has died (Rom. 7:1-3).

One who has divorced his companion “for fornication” (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; Mk. 10:11,12; Lk. 16:18).

One who has divorced may remarry the one he/she has divorced (Matt. 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:10,11).

B. Unscriptural doctrines on the subject:

1. Some are re-defining “adultery” as the act of divorcing and remarrying. (They interpret “commits adultery against her,” Mk. 10:11,12, to mean just divorcing her and going through a wedding ceremony with someone else. They say it has nothing to do with a sexual act.)

The word “adultery” is defined by authorities as “unlawful sexual intercourse with the spouse of another” (see W.E. Vine and Thayer).

What was the woman “caught in adultery” doing? (Jn. 8:4) (Did they catch her in “the very act” of getting married to another woman’s husband?)

In Matthew 5:28, what was the man doing who “committed adultery” in his heart? (Was he fantasizing about a wedding ceremony with someone’s wife?)

Matthew 5:32 says the man who marries a “woman who is divorced, commits adultery.” (This does not say that he caused her divorce, nor that he had been married before. He would not have had to divorce a wife in order to have committed adultery with her; nor would he have had to marry her in order to commit adultery!) Furthermore, if a man commits adultery and his wife forgives him, the covenant is not broken (they are not divorced), but he still committed adultery.

Why was the man “committing adultery against” his wife in Mark 10:11,12?

Leviticus 18:20 — The man who “lies carnally” with his neighbor’s wife defiles himself; it is against himself.

Psalms 51:4 — David said that his sin was “against you, you only.” His major concern was that he had sinned against God.

I Corinthians 6:18 — One who commits fornication “sins against his own body.”

Mark 10:11,12 — The man who divorces his wife and marries another “commits adultery against” her — he sins against his wife. (Wuest’s Word Studies says “the expression may mean either ‘to the prejudice of her [the first wife], or with her [the second],”‘ Vol. 1, p. 198).

2. Some contend that Matthew 19:3-12 does not apply to non-believers. It is called a “covenant passage,” meaning that one must be in “covenant relationship”with God before it applies to them.

When Jesus was asked about divorce, he went back to the beginning of time — not the beginning of the Jewish law.

Paul specifically said that unbelievers had been guilty of adultery (1 Cor. 5:10,13; 6:9-11; Rom. 1:26-32).

The fact that God permitted polygamy, concubinage, and divorce and remarriage in the Old Testament period does not prove that it was not against his universal moral law.

A six-year-old who shoots another would not be punished as an adult. This does not mean that the law against murder is not in effect.

God obviously allowed some things before the complete revelation in Christ that he does not permit today.

God progressively revealed much of his law, but today it has been completely revealed in Christ and it applies to everyone (Matt. 28:18-20).

d. There are things in the law of Christ that do not apply to unbelievers, just as there are things that do not apply to all believers. God’s teaching on repentance and baptism only applies to believers; his teaching on the Lord’s supper only applies to those in the kingdom; his law on loving your wife only applies to those who are married; likewise his teaching on divorce and remarriage only applies to those who are married.

3. Some say that when the guilty party is put away, he/she is no longer married, and therefore may remarry, just as the innocent party.

This is based entirely upon human reasoning. No passage of Scripture gives the “put away fornicator” permission to remarry. In fact, Scripture specifically says that the one who marries the put away fornicator “commits adultery.” (Would it not be strange if the single man who married the divorced fornicator was sinning, but the divorced fornicator was not?)

Argument by analogy (“if two people are chained together and the chain is broken, both are free”) is not scriptural proof. (An analogy that fits the Scripture is a ball player who is under contract to a team. He may refuse to play for that team, but that does not free him to play for another — unless he is freed from the contract of the first team.)

Just because two people are divorced does not give them the right to marry someone else (1 Cor. 7:10,11).

God is the one who has “bound” us, and he did not free the guilty party to remarry!

4. Some say that baptism washes away sins, therefore those who were living in adultery before baptism may continue to live with that companion after baptism.

 

a. Some also say that the Christian can repent and pray and continue to live in a relationship that was formerly adulterous. (If God’s law of pardon for the alien would permit his remaining in adulterous relationships, then his law of pardon for the erring Christian would permit the same.)

b. When the Jews violated the law of God on marriage, what did they have to do? (See Ezra 10:3-5,18,19.)

c. But, some say “celibacy is too difficult a penalty.”

Is it too difficult for the innocent party who hasbeen put away but cannot marry another (1 Cor. 7:10,11)?

What did the man in Corinth have to do (I Cor.5:1)? (Questions: Was the woman a believer? If so, why was she not disciplined? Or, was she, but it is not mentioned? Would it have made any difference whether, or not, she was a Christian?)

d. “Committeth adultery” (Matt. 19:9) is in the pre-sent tense which indicates continuous action. Romans 7:1-3 tells how long it would be adultery.

e. Baptism washes away sins, but we must repent and turn away from them. Baptism does not change a relationship from sinful to righteous. What would a polygamous man have to do if he repented of polygamy? If people were involved in homosexual “marriages” and wanted to be baptized, what would repentance require?

f. I am sympathetic to Christians and non-Christians who have violated God’s marriage laws, but I can-not change what the Bible says.

Conclusion

The Pharisees understood that the teaching of Jesus on this subject was strict, and said, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (Matt. 19:10). Jesus said that not everyone could accept their saying, but some were eunuchs and others could “make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake” (v. 12). The worst thing in the world is not being celibate, but being lost (Matt. 18:8,9).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 7, p. 22-23
April 1, 1993