PLEASE READ ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS SUPPLIED IN THE COMMENTS TO THIS POST.

Jehovah’s Witnesses trace their origins to the nineteenth century Adventist movement in America. That movement began with William Miller, a Baptist lay preacher who, in the year 1816, began proclaiming that Christ would return in 1843. His predictions of the Second Coming or Second Advent captured the imagination of thousands in Baptist and other mainline churches. Perhaps as many as 50,000 followers put their trust in Miller’s chronological calculations and prepared to welcome the Lord, while, as the appointed time approached, others watched nervously from a distance. Recalculations moved the promised second advent from March, 1843 to March, 1844, and then to October of that year. Alas, that date too passed uneventfully.

After the “Disappointment of 1844″ Miller’s following fell apart, with most of those who had looked to him returning to their respective churches before his death in 1849. But other disappointed followers kept the movement alive, although in fragmented form. Their activities eventually led to the formation of several sects under the broad heading of “Adventism” including the Advent Christian Church, the Life and Advent Union, the Seventh-Day Adventists, and various Second Adventist groups.

An interesting side-note: The Branch Davidians who died at Waco, Texas, under the leadership of David Koresh also trace their roots to the same Millerite source through a different line of descent. In 1935 the Seventh Day Adventist Church expelled a Bulgarian immigrant named Victor Houteff, who had begun teaching his own views on certain passages of the Revelation or Apocalypse, the last book of the Bible. Houteff set up shop on the property at Waco. After first referring to his tiny new sect as The Shepherd’s Rod, Houteff and his people in 1942 incorporated and renamed themselves Davidian Seventh Day Adventists. Houteff died in 1955, and in 1961 his wife Florence officially disbanded the sect, but a few followers under the leadership of west Texas businessman Benjamin Roden took over the real estate. Roden died in 1978, leaving behind his wife Lois and his son George to lead the group. Then, in 1987, David Koresh took over the leadership position, and the tragedy that followed is public knowledge.

Jehovah’s Witnesses, likewise, trace their roots back to the Adventists. But they do not often admit this to outsiders; nor do many Witnesses know the details themselves. JWs are accustomed to defending themselves against the charge that they are a new religious cult. They will often respond that theirs is the most ancient religious group, older than Catholic and Protestant churches. In fact, their book Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Divine Purpose asserts that “Jehovah’s witnesses have a history almost 6,000 years long, beginning while the first man, Adam, was still alive,” that Adam’s son Abel was “the first of an unbroken line of Witnesses,” and that “Jesus’ disciples were all Jehovah’s witnesses [sic] too.” (pp. 8-9)

An outsider listening to such claims quickly realizes, of course, that the sect has simply appropriated unto itself all the characters named in the Bible as faithful witnesses of God. By such extrapolation the denomination is able to stretch its history back to the beginnings of the human family-at least in the eyes of adherents who are willing to accept such arguments. But outside observers generally dismiss this sort of rhetoric and instead reckon the Witnesses as dating back only to Charles Taze Russell, who was born on February 16, 1852, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Originally raised a Presbyterian, Russell was 16 years old and a member of the Congregational church in the year 1868, when he found himself losing faith. He had begun to doubt not only church creeds and doctrines, but also God and the Bible itself. At this critical juncture a chance encounter restored his faith and placed him under the influence of Second Adventist preacher Jonas Wendell.

For some years after that Russell continued to study Scripture with and under the influence of various Adventist laymen and clergy, notably Advent Christian Church minister George Stetson and the Bible Examiner’s publisher George Storrs. He met locally on a regular basis with a small circle of friends to discuss the Bible, and this informal study group came to regard him as their leader or pastor.

In January, 1876, when he was 23 years old, Russell received a copy of The Herald of the Morning, an Adventist magazine published by Nelson H. Barbour of Rochester, New York. One of the distinguishing features of Barbour’s group at that time was their belief that Christ returned invisibly in 1874, and this concept presented in The Herald captured Russell’s attention. It meant that this Adventist splinter group had not remained defeated, as others had, when Christ failed to appear in 1874 as Adventist leaders had predicted; somehow this small group had managed to hold onto the date by affirming that the Lord had indeed returned at the appointed time, only invisibly.

Was this mere wishful thinking, coupled with a stubborn refusal to admit the error of failed chronological calculations? Perhaps, but Barbour had some arguments to offer in support of his assertions. In particular, he came up with a basis for reinterpreting the Second Coming as an invisible event: In Benjamin Wilson’s Emphatic Diaglott translation of the New Testament the word rendered coming in the King James Version at Matthew 24:27, 37, 39 is translated presence instead. This served as the basis for Barbour’s group to advocate, in addition to their time calculations, an invisible presence of Christ.

Although the idea appealed to young Charles Taze Russell, the reading public apparently refused to ‘buy’ the story of an invisible Second Coming, with the result that N. H. Barbour’s publication The Herald of the Morning was failing financially. In the summer of 1876 wealthy Russell paid Barbour’s way to Philadelphia and met with him to discuss both beliefs and finances. The upshot was that Russell became the magazine’s financial backer and was added to the masthead as an Assistant Editor. He contributed articles for publication as well as monetary gifts, and Russell’s small study group similarly became affiliated with Barbour’s.

Russell and Barbour believed and taught that Christ’s invisible return in 1874 would be followed soon afterward, in the spring of 1878 to be exact, by the Rapture-the bodily snatching away of believers to heaven. When this expected Rapture failed to occur on time in 1878, The Herald’s editor, Mr. Barbour, came up with “new light” on this and other doctrines. Russell, however, rejected some of the new ideas and persuaded other members to oppose them. Finally, Russell quit the staff of the Adventist magazine and started his own. He called it Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence and published its first issue with the date July, 1879. In the beginning it had the same mailing list as The Herald of the Morning and considerable space was devoted to refuting the latter on points of disagreement, Russell having taken with him a copy of that magazine’s mailing list when he resigned as assistant editor.

At this point Charles Russell no longer wanted to consider himself an Adventist, nor a Millerite. But, he continued to view Miller and Barbour as instruments chosen by God to lead His people in the past. The formation of a distinct denomination around Russell was a gradual development. His immediate break was, not with Adventism, but with the person and policies of N. H. Barbour.

Nor were barriers immediately erected with respect to Protestantism in general. New readers obtaining subscriptions to Zion’s Watch Tower were often church members who saw the magazine as a para-church ministry, not as an anti-church alternative. Russell traveled about speaking from the pulpits of Protestant churches as well as to gatherings of his own followers. In 1879, the year of his marriage to Maria Frances Ackley and also the year he began publishing Zion’s Watch Tower, Russell organized some thirty study groups or congregations scattered from Ohio to the New England coast. Each local “class” or ecclesia came to recognize him as “Pastor,” although geography and Russell’s writing and publishing activities prevented more than an occasional pastoral visit in person.

Inevitably, Russell’s increasingly divergent teachings forced his followers to separate from other church bodies and to create a denomination of their own. Beginning, as he did, in a small branch of Adventism that went to the extreme of setting specific dates for the return of Christ and the Rapture, Russell went farther out on a limb in 1882 by openly rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity. His earlier mentor Nelson H. Barbour was a Trinitarian, as was The Herald of the Morning’s other assistant editor John H. Paton who joined Russell in leaving Barbour to start Zion’s Watch Tower. The writings of Barbour and Paton that Russell had helped publish or distribute were Trinitarian in their theology. And the Watch Tower itself was at first vague and noncommittal on the subject. It was only after Paton broke with him in 1882, and ceased to be listed on the masthead, that Russell began writing against the doctrine of the Trinity.

By the time of his death , Charles Taze Russell had traveled more than a million miles and preached more than 30,000 sermons. He had authored works totaling some 50,000 printed pages, and nearly 20,000,000 copies of his books and booklets had been sold.

Followers had been taught that Russell himself was the “faithful and wise servant” of Matthew 24:45 and “the Laodicean Messenger,” God’s seventh and final spokesman to the Christian church. But he lived to see the failure of various dates he had predicted for the Rapture, and finally died on October 31, 1916, more than two years after the world was supposed to have ended, according to his calculations, in early October, 1914..

His disciples, however, saw the World War then raging as reason to believe “the end” was still imminent. They buried Russell beneath a headstone identifying him as “the Laodicean Messenger,” and erected next to his grave a massive stone pyramid emblazoned with the cross and crown symbol he was fond of and the name “Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.” (The pyramid still stands off Cemetery Lane in Ross, a northern Pittsburgh suburb, where it reportedly serves as the focal point of an eerie scene each Halloween as modern-day Russellites encircle it, holding hands, in a vigil commemorating the day of his death.)

According to instructions Russell left behind, his successor to the presidency would share power with an editorial committee and with the Watch Tower corporation’s board of directors, whom Russell had appointed “for life.” But vice president Joseph Franklin (”Judge”) Rutherford soon set about concentrating all organizational authority in his own hands. A skilled lawyer who had served as Russell’s chief legal advisor, he combined legal prowess with what opponents undoubtedly saw as a Machiavellian approach to internal corporate politics. Thus he used a loophole in their appointment to unseat the majority of the Watch Tower directors without calling a membership vote. And he even had a subordinate summon the police into the Society’s Brooklyn headquarters offices to break up their board meeting and evict them from the premises. (Faith on the March by A. H. Macmillan, pp. 78-80)

After securing the headquarters complex and the sect’s corporate entities, Rutherford turned his attention to the rest of the organization. By gradually replacing locally elected elders with his own appointees, he managed to transform a loose collection of semi-autonomous democratically-run congregations into a tight-knit organizational machine run from his office. Some local congregations broke away, forming such Russellite splinter groups as the Chicago Bible Students, the Dawn Bible Students, and the Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement, all of which continue to this day. But most Bible Students remained under his control, and Rutherford renamed them “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in 1931, to distinguish them from these other groups.

Meanwhile, he shifted the sect’s emphasis from the individual “character development” Russell had stressed to vigorous public witnessing work, distributing the Society’s literature from house to house. By 1927 this door-to-door literature distribution had become an essential activity required of all members. The literature consisted primarily of Rutherford’s unremitting series of attacks against government, against Prohibition, against “big business,” and against the Roman Catholic Church. He also forged a huge radio network and took to the air waves, exploiting populist and anti-Catholic sentiment to draw thousands of additional converts. His vitriolic attacks, blaring from portable phonographs carried to people’s doors and from the loudspeakers of sound cars parked across from churches, also drew down upon the Witnesses mob violence and government persecution in many parts of the world.

Like Russell, Rutherford tried his hand at prophecy and predicted that biblical patriarchs Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would be resurrected in 1925 to rule as princes over the earth. (Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1920, pp. 89-90) They failed to show up, of course, and Rutherford quit predicting dates. In fact, referring to that prophetic failure he later admitted, “I made an ass of myself.” (The Watchtower, October 1, 1984, p. 24)

Vice President Nathan Homer Knorr inherited the presidency upon Rutherford’s death in 1942 but left doctrinal matters largely in the hands of Frederick W. Franz, who joined the sect under Russell and had been serving at Brooklyn headquarters since 1920. Lacking the personal magnetism and charisma of Russell and Rutherford, Knorr focused followers’ devotion on the ‘Mother’ organization rather than on himself.

After decades of publishing books and booklets authored by its presidents Russell and Rutherford, the Watchtower Society began producing literature that was written anonymously. But it was not impersonal, since the organization itself was virtually personified, and readers were directed to “show our respect for Jehovah’s organization, for she is our mother and the beloved wife of our heavenly Father, Jehovah God.” (The Watchtower, May 1, 1957, p. 285)

A superb administrator, Knorr shifted the sect’s focus from dynamic leadership to dynamic membership. He initiated training programs to transform members into effective recruiters. Instead of carrying a portable phonograph from house to house, playing recordings of “Judge” Rutherford’s lectures at people’s doorsteps, the average Jehovah’s Witness began receiving instruction on how to speak persuasively. Men, women, and children learned to give sermons at the doors on a variety of subjects.

Meanwhile Fred Franz worked behind the scenes to restore faith in the sect’s chronological calculations, a subject largely ignored following Rutherford’s prophetic failure in 1925. The revised chronology established Christ’s invisible return as having taken place in 1914 rather than 1874, and, during the 1960’s, the Society’s publications began pointing to the year 1975 as the likely time for Armageddon and the end of the world.

The prevailing belief among Jehovah’s Witnesses today is that the Society never predicted “the end” for 1975, but that some over-zealous members mistakenly read this into the message. However, the official prediction is well documented. See, for example, the article titled “Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?” in The Watchtower of August 15, 1968, pp. 494-501. Allowing for a small margin of error, it concludes a lengthy discussion with this thought: “Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. . . . It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.” (p. 499) For several other quotes pointing specifically to 1975, see the book Index of Watchtower Errors (by David A. Reed, Baker Book House, 1990) pages 106-110.

Knorr’s training programs for proselytizing, plus Franz’ apocalyptic projections for 1975, combined to produce rapid growth in membership, the annual rate of increase peaking at 13.5 percent in 1974. All of this pushed meeting attendance at JW Kingdom Halls from around 100,000 in 1941 to just under 5 million in 1975. Growth since then has been slower, but fairly steady in most years, with the result that nearly 11.5 million gathered at Kingdom Halls in the spring of 1992 for the Witnesses’ annual communion or “Memorial” service commemorating Christ’s death with unleavened bread and red wine.

During the 1970’s changes took place at Watchtower headquarters in regard to presidential power. First it became accepted in theory that the Christian Church (which Jehovah’s Witnesses see their organization as encompassing) should not be under one-man rule, but rather should be governed by a body similar to the twelve apostles. The 7-member board of directors of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania had previously been portrayed as fulfilling this role, but in 1971 an expanded Governing Body was created with a total of eleven members, including the seven Directors. The aim was to demonstrate that the leadership derived authority from an apostolic source, rather than from Pennsylvania corporate law.

This new Governing Body was displayed as further evidence of the sect’s being the one true church, but in actuality Nathan Knorr continued to rule Jehovah’s Witnesses much as Russell and Rutherford had done before him. That is, until 1975, when Governing Body members began insisting on exercising the powers granted to them in theory but that had never really been theirs in practice. Over the objections of Fred Franz the Body that he had been instrumental in creating actually began governing, so that when Nathan Knorr passed away in 1977 Franz inherited an emasculated presidency.

Franz also inherited an organization troubled by discontent over the obvious failure of his prophecies of the world’s end in the autumn of 1975. Even at Brooklyn headquarters little groups meeting privately for Bible study were beginning to question not only the 1914-based chronology that produced the 1975 deadline, but also the related teaching that the “heavenly calling” of believers ended in 1935, with new converts after that date consigned to an earthly paradise for their eternal reward.

The hitherto fast-growing sect actually began losing members for the first time in decades, as people who had expected Armageddon in 1975 became disillusioned. When membership loss grew into the hundreds of thousands-a fact masked by new conversions in figures released by the Society, but reported in an investigative article in the Los Angeles Times of January 30, 1982 (pp. 4-5)-president Franz and the conservative majority on the Governing Body took action. In the spring of 1980 they initiated a crack-down on dissidents, breaking up the independent Bible study groups at headquarters, and forming “judicial committees” to have those seen as ringleaders put on trial for “disloyalty” and “apostasy.”

By the time this purge culminated in the forced resignation and subsequent excommunication of the president’s nephew and fellow Governing Body member Raymond V. Franz (a development Time magazine found worthy of a full-page article, Feb. 22, 1982, p. 66) a siege mentality took hold on the world-wide organization. Even Witnesses who left quietly and voluntarily for personal reasons were denounced as disloyal and were ordered shunned, former friends forbidden to say as much as “a simple ‘Hello’” to them.

Thus, although Frederick W. Franz served as the sect’s chief theologian for some fifty years-from the start of Knorr’s presidency in 1942 until his own death on December 22, 1992-the fact that he outlived his failed prophecies by more than fifteen years required him to impose a mini-Inquisition on the membership in order to keep his doctrinal and chronological framework in force for the remainder of his lifetime.

Milton G. Henschel’s selection as fifth Watchtower president on December 30, 1992, is truly significant for the 13 million now attending Kingdom Halls. At first glance the choice of a staunch conservative for the post may seem to guarantee a continuation of the status quo, with little change in the offing for Jehovah’s Witnesses. But a closer look reveals this appointment as the conservative old guard’s last stand-an indication that radical change in the sect’s leadership and doctrines is imminent.

At age 72 Henschel became the second-youngest member of the Governing Body, and he was selected to lead by men several years older than he is. (Both the average age and the median age at the time of Henschel’s appointment calculated out to about 82 years.) With members in their eighties known to sleep through meetings and to vote on matters upon being awakened (See eyewitness Raymond Franz’s account in his book Crisis of Conscience, p. 40.) the Body is losing its ability to provide purposeful and decisive leadership. Henschel was no doubt chosen in part due to his having vitality others lacked. Obviously, these aging leaders will not be able to hold the reigns of power much longer. The men who shared in building the Watchtower into what it is today will soon leave it behind for others to run.

In the decades following the death of founder Charles Taze Russell, his successor J. F. Rutherford found himself forced to re-write many of the sect’s major doctrines. Much the same can be expected when JWs of a new generation inherit the positions currently occupied by Milton Henschel and his fellow elderly Governing Body members. When new leaders eventually take over, will they drop the ban on blood transfusions? Only time will tell. But, even if they do, it will make no difference for those who have already died, nor for those Witnesses continuing to die while the teaching remains in place.

Adapted by Jehovah’s Christian Witness, from the book “Worse Than Waco: Jehovah’s Witnesses Hide a Tragedy” copyright © 1993 by David A. Reed, P.O. Box 819, Assonet, MA 02702. For a more detailed account of Watchtower history see the book “BLOOD ON THE ALTAR” by David A. Reed (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Publishers, 1996).

Is it true that for religious reasons Jehovah’s Witnesses may not become members of the YMCA (Young Men’s Christian Association)?

Yes, that is so. We have long recognized that the YMCA, though not being a church as such, is definitely aligned with the religious organizations of Christendom in efforts to promote interfaith.

In September 1885 the Watch Tower took this position:

“Alas for the Bible-rearing practiced in the Y. M. C. Associations! They are completely under the control of the sectarians, by whom they are supported. Though professedly non-sectarian, professedly controlled by no creed but the Bible, they are more creed-bound than others, since they are bound by all the popular creeds.”—P. 6.

Later the underlying religious purpose and interfaith efforts of the YMCA were mentioned in the September 1964 issue of Kingdom Ministry, used by Jehovah’s Witnesses in one of their meetings.

Many persons think of the “Y” simply as a social organization that offers various services, such as a swimming pool, facilities for athletic training and a place for clubs to meet. Commendable as some of these provisions may be, it is important to bear in mind that the YMCA was founded with a distinctly religious basis. This was set out at a World Alliance in Paris in 1855. The main part of that official statement (called the Paris Basis) reads:

“The Young Men’s Christian Associations seek to unite those young men, who, regarding Jesus Christ as their God and Saviour, according to the Holy Scriptures, desire to be His disciples in their faith and in their life, and to associate their efforts for the extension of His Kingdom amongst young men.” (Italics added)

While in some countries churches may not be the YMCA’s main source of revenue and while membership is open to persons of all races, nationalities and religions, the fundamental religious objectives of the “Y” cannot be ignored.

‘But,’ some may sincerely wonder, ‘is religion or interfaith really an aspect of the YMCA?’ The answer must be “Yes.” Though religious features may be de-emphasized in some branches of the YMCA, all local “Ys” are still expected to comply with the Paris Basis. Further, note comments from the 1975 YMCA publication Christian and Open:
Anza A. Lema, associate of the executive committee of the World Alliance of YMCAs, wrote:

“From its very foundation, it has always looked to the Bible for inspiration and guidance. In many ways its role in the world has tended to complement that of the church without claiming to be a congregation itself. . . .

“But it is more than just an instrument through which Christians put their moral ideals and teachings into practice as they serve society. Most supporters of the YMCA look at it as a place where real fellowship with one another through Jesus Christ is experienced. . . .

“In humbling itself and trying to relate its structures and services more directly to the community, it will be carrying out more effectively its role of service and priesthood for its neighbours. . . . “

Matthias Dannenmann, general secretary, National Council of YMCAs of Germany, said:

“From its very beginning the YMCA was no doubt meant to have only Christians as members and on the other hand there was the missionary obligation towards those members who could not yet profess Jesus Christ. . . .

“The YMCA is a big offer, but only in as far as Jesus Christ is working in it as Living Saviour. We should do our very best not to drive out this Lord but as we carry him in our name we should personally use every chance of meeting him in the YMCA and of continuously extending this possibility to other people.”

Officials of the organization have pointed out that they feel that more attention needs to be given to the religious orientation of the YMCA. Dr. Paul M. Limbert, from 1952-1962 secretary-general of the YMCA’s World Alliance in Geneva, Switzerland, wrote:

“It may readily be granted that too few Y.M.C.A.s take full advantage of the opportunity for ecumenical education inherent in these informal contacts among Christians . . .

“When questions about different forms and beliefs arise among young people and adults, the wise leader takes advantage of the occasion to guide discussion from superficial argument to deeper dialogue. . . .

Leaders in both churches and Y.M.C.A.s need to recognize more clearly the essential nature of a lay ecumenical Christian movement. A Young Men’s Christian Association is not a church nor a substitute for a church.

. . . Yet the Faith and Order commission of the British Council of Churches declared in a carefully worded statement in 1959 that the Christian Associations are ‘valuable auxiliaries’ of the churches, organs of their own missionary activity.”—The Christian Century, June 10, 1964.
And The Christian Century of August 29, 1969, in its article “Happy Birthday, Y.M.C.A.!”, stated:

“Realizing that the Christian identity of the ‘Y’ has often been drowned in swimming pools, its leaders are engaged in recovery of theological awareness and ecumenical vigor. . . . It may be that the greatest challenge to the Y.M.C.A. is to reclaim its religious heritage for the robust assertion of a new ecumenism among laymen in local communities. The Y.M.C.A. just might be able to do things for the Christian churches which, in their parochial rigidities, they seem unable to do for themselves.”

Consequently, there is ample evidence that the YMCA originated with religious objectives and continues to have such to this day.

In joining the YMCA as a member a person accepts or endorses the general objectives and principles of the organization. He is not simply paying for something he receives, such as when buying things being sold to the public at a store. (Compare 1 Corinthians 8:10; 10:25.) Nor is his membership merely an entry pass, as when a person buys a theater ticket. Membership means that one has become an integral part of this organization founded with definite religious objectives, including the promotion of interfaith. Hence, for one of Jehovah’s Witnesses to become a member of such a so-called “Christian” association would amount to apostasy.

Some individuals have on occasion not become members but have paid a onetime admission fee, viewing this as simply paying for a commercial service available. Even in this regard it is wise to consider whether this course will adversely affect the consciences of others.—1 Cor. 8:11-13.

Jehovah’s Witnesses, of course, appreciate a balanced amount of healthful exercise. The Bible says that “bodily training is beneficial for a little.” Yet it adds that “godly devotion is beneficial for all things.” (1 Tim. 4: That does not mean devotion to a triune God. The Bible does not teach that Jesus is “God” in a trinity, as is taught in many of Christendom’s churches and as is still included in the “Paris Basis” of the YMCA.—1 Cor. 11:3; John 17:3.

While interfaith efforts and ecumenism are popular today, they are not upheld by the true God, who told his servants: “Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. . . . ‘Therefore get out from among them, and separate yourselves.’” (2 Cor. 6:14-17) Also, Jesus plainly said that the Almighty must be worshiped “with spirit and truth.” (John 4:24) Most definitely that does not mean joining in a religious cause with persons holding beliefs contrary to what the Scriptures teach. (Rev. 18:4, 5) Thus, it is because of their understanding of what God expects of true worshipers, and of what the purposes and direction of the YMCA are, that Jehovah’s Witnesses may not become members of that organization.
Further, it is well to give thought to the fact that in virtually all the years of the YMCA’s existence, it has not acted in harmony with the spirit of Isaiah 2:2-4, as can be noted from the following historical facts:

“YMCA services to the armed forces began, in the United States, with the Civil War, and it continued giving service through all wars thereafter.”—Encyclopædia Britannica, Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 835, 1976 ed.

“In the Civil War, only ten years after its beginning in Boston, and before there were buildings or secretaries or financial resources, a total of 4,859 ‘delegates’ were recruited and deployed and over six millions of donated funds used for the temporal and spiritual needs of soldiers. . . .

In World War I, the American Y.M.C.A. assumed an enormous responsibility for service at home and abroad for which a staff of 25,926 was required with expenditures of more than 167 million dollars. In World War II, the Y.M.C.A. became one of the organizations that founded the United Service Organizations [USO], joining as a group of private religious organizations from Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish faiths in an agreement with the Federal government to provide civilian recreational, welfare, and religious services to men in uniform and to war-production workers in communities adjacent to military establishments.”—The New Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia, Vol. 36, pp. 13,467, 13,468, 1952 ed.

“YMCA activities for members of the armed forces began during the Civil War (1861-1865). These services increased with each later war and reached their fullest development during World War II (1939-1945). The YMCA maintained more than 450 clubs for the Allied armed forces.”—
The World Book Encyclopedia, Vol. 21, p. 477, 1978 ed.

This kind of service under the name “Christian” was certainly not in fulfillment of Micah 4:3.

Copywrite Watchtower Bible & tract Society.

Notice all the highlighted sections. Then consider the things that I will present next. First will be proof of the Watchtower using the facilities at the YMCA for giving talks and baptizing people in their pools. If it is so wrong to join the YMCA just use the facilities or pay a onetime fee to use their facilities then why did the Watchtower use them?

Notice these quotes from some Watchtower Publications:

1977 Year book:

“An avid reader of The Watch Tower, Joseph learned that Brother Russell, while on a world tour during 1912, would visit India. Madras City was to be visited, so Joseph seized the opportunity to hear Russell and gain a personal interview. At Madras, Brother Russell lectured in the YMCA Hall and, though his schedule was full, he granted Joseph a personal interview lasting two hours”

“Our brothers lodged at the YMCA Hostel and worked the residential homes scattered about on the steep hillsides. Paths led zigzag-fashion up the mountainsides, making house-to-house work somewhat laborious. Skinner, being a little younger and having a more robust constitution than Wright, took the higher elevations. Meanwhile, Brother Wright, who had a poor heart condition, visited the lower slopes. Much literature was left in the homes of these people.”

“We had our circuit assembly at the YMCA Hall in Chowringhee, where it was good for me to meet the Bengali-speaking brothers for my first time.”

1991 year book:

“James said: “I read that a Japanese lecture would be given at the Nuuanu YMCA in Honolulu on the subject ‘Millions Now Living Will Never Die.’ This was something so different from what I had heard before, so I decided to attend. Since the advertisement invited us to bring our Bibles, I did so. I was very impressed with the speaker, who answered from the Bible all the questions asked. I filled out a slip of paper saying that I wanted to study the Bible.” This led him to the group study of 12 persons that comprised all the Bible Students associating together in 1926. James Nako progressed quickly and was baptized in July 1927″

08/01/1957 Watchtower:

Inexorably, as with all assemblies, the final day of the Manila assembly arrived. A crowded day it was. Baptism was scheduled as the first thing in the morning. The questions directed to the candidates for baptism to determine their worthiness for it were asked in as many dialects as were spoken by the candidates, besides in English—in Tagalog, Ilocano, Cebu-Visayan, Hiligaynon-Visayan, Bicolano, Samareno, Pangasinan, Pampango, Zambel and Ibanag. In spite of the difference of language all were alike in being dedicated to the same God Jehovah and in understanding his kingdom truth. Accordingly, 279 were favored with baptism in the YMCA swimming pool, not far from the Rizal Stadium, where 6,572 had heard them answer the decisive questions affirmatively.

07/15/1951 Watchtower:

That afternoon we joined in a meeting with the publishers and people of good will. I started to talk at 2:15 and a brother interpreted in Indonesian. At 3:30 Brother Henschel spoke and his talk was interpreted in both Indonesian and Dutch. I then summed up for 45 minutes with two interpreters. The meetings were held at the YMCA, and 37 were present. Most of them were Chinese, but there were Indonesians and others present too. They expressed great appreciation following the meeting and then showed their desire to comply with all theocratic requirements.

As far back as 1885 the Watchtower recognized that the YMCA was “completely under the control of sectarians, by whom they are supported and long recognized the YMCA as promotors of interfaith.” Why then was it ok for them to use the YMCA facilities to give talks, baptize people and lodge in the rooms?

I was a member of the YMCA before I became a witness. I was never required to accept or endorse their objectives or principles as a member. All I was required to do was pay a membership fee, thats it! If I was to the join the YMCA as a baptized witness, it would be considered apostasy!

The Watchtower lays down these commands but does not abide by them. Thats why they think it is ok to join the United Nations as an NGO as long as it was only for library access! In doing so they had to meet the requirements for becoming and remaining an NGO which means to publicly build support for the UN goals and programs which they indeed did.

http://www.pitn.net/

The last page of the February 1, 1976, Watchtower, was devoted to a notification entitled “Governing Body Adjustments.” The article advised that the Governing Body had, as of January 1, 1976, formed six supervisory committees: Service Committee, Writing Committee, Publishing Committee, Teaching Committee, Personnel Committee, and Chairman’s Committee. This was, of course, big news in the world of JWs. Prior to this time virtually all important policy- and procedure-making decisions depended ultimately upon the approval of one man–the Society’s president, Nathan H. Knorr. The February 1 article did not elaborate, but it soon became clear within Brooklyn Bethel that these committees were now operating with a measure of authority that previously had been possessed only by Knorr. The president of the Society no longer wielded absolute, total control.

A year later, in the January 1, 1977, Watchtower, the article “Serving With the Faithful Slave” said regarding these changes (in paragraph 16):

quote:

---

To meet further demands of expansion, it was arranged in 1971 to increase the number of “older men” serving as the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses from seven (the directors of the Watch Tower Society) to a total of eleven members. Further expansion, to eighteen members, took place late in 1974; of these, John Groh has since finished his earthly course. And it was during the next year, 1975, that one of the most significant organizational readjustments in the 100-year history of the modern-day witnesses of Jehovah came under consideration. After discussions that continued through most of that year, the reorganization was approved on December 4, 1975, by a unanimous vote of the seventeen members of the Governing Body. It became operative from January 1, 1976.

---

This article then continued on (in paragraph 17) to outline how the recently formed committees operated:

quote:

---

“Under this one Head [Jesus Christ], the anointed members of the Governing Body serve as equals, with a chairman rotating alphabetically each year. Administrative responsibilities are divided among the Chairman’s Committee of three members (comprising the chairman for the current year, for the previous year and for the year to follow), and five permanent committees of from five to seven members, which oversee the activities of Jehovah’s Witnesses world wide.”

---

The mention of “a unanimous vote” suggests that there was little or no disagreement about divesting President Knorr of complete control over operations of the Society and making all members of the Governing Body “equals”. Why, then, did it require nearly a year’s worth of discussion?While very few at the time realized it, just four months prior to this “empowerment” of the Governing Body, Society Vice President Fred Franz had revealed some clues about the discussions that were then still taking place. In his September 7, 1975, Gilead Graduation talk, Fred Franz revealed his personal feelings about what was then being debated and negotiated among the seventeen Governing Body members, and in so doing Scripturally disproved the existence of any Christian “Governing Body.”

To make his point that the graduating missionaries were being sent out by the Watch Tower Society–and NOT by any “Governing Body”, he drew upon the example of those evangelizers sent out by the Antioch Congregation of the first century. Here are excerpts from a transcript of his talk [I have retained Franz's word whiskers and verbal gaffs, even though this at times interferes with the fluidity of reading; all caps have been used where he raised his voice for emphasis, and bolding has been used to identify key thoughts]:

quote:

---

Well, you missionaries, you’re being sent forth today, after your graduation as missionaries. The last, eh, telegram we heard was about two being sent to Bolivia. There were others who’re being sent, maybe four or six or, or eight to a, a different country as assignment for work. Now don’t you missionaries think because you are being sent forth two together, or maybe four or six or maybe eight, that you are being sent forth as a committee to take over the work in the land to which you’re assigned. No such thing. You are being sent forth as individual missionaries to cooperate together, and to cooperate with the branch of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society which is operating and directing the work in the land to which you are assigned to act as an evangelizer. So don’t get this committee idea into your head because you’re being sent out in groups to a special land. Now, Jesus Christ finished his course as the greatest evangelizer of all. And then time moves on, and there is a man who comes on the scene, and he is the only one who is directly called an evangelizer; that’s his personal title–we find it in Acts chapter 21, verse 8. And that is Philip of Caesarea. And when Paul visited him on his stopover there at Caesarea, why he was called “Philip the evangelizer.” He’s the only one! Paul told Timothy in his final letter, 2 Timothy 4:5, that he should “do the work of an evangelizer.” But Philip is the one who is directly–and the only one–thus called personally “an evangelizer.” But of course we know there were other evangelizers. Now how did this man come on the scene, and who made him an evangelizer or missionary? Now that’s the point to observe. Well, we remember how the scripture in Ephesians four, verse eleven, tells us how the Lord Jesus Christ ascended on high and led a body of captive, and how he gave “gifts” in the form of men. Verse eleven says he gave some as apostles and some as prophets and some as evangelizers … and some as shepherds and teachers. The Lord Jesus Christ, the head of the Congregation … he gave not only apostles, not only prophets, but also evangelizers.

[ … contents abbreviated … ]

And then after that, what happened? Why, God’s, Jehovah’s angel talks to Philip and says, ‘Now you go.’ This is … the assignment for you, from Jehovah’s angel. ‘You go down to the road that leads south from Jerusalem to Gaza.’ And he went down there on that assignment from Jehovah’s angel. And then is when he had the encounter with the Ethiopian eunuch. And he baptized him, and after the baptism, why he was quickly caught away, or led away, by God’s spirit. And he went down there to the Philistine people, then up the coast of Caesarea, where he settled down and he had four daughters, and he was there as an evangelist when the apostle Paul came on that boat trip back to the Holy Land. And so that’s what happened with Philip, how he became an evangelizer. Now these are things to note, friends.

Then something happened right after that. And, eh, the Lord Jesus Christ took action. And he took direct action without consulting any man or body of men on earth. And that’s when He, the Head of the Congregation, met Saul of Tarsus, the persecutor there, on the road leading to Damascus. He stopped him! And he said , ‘Now, this is a chosen vessel unto me. I’m choosing him as the Head of the Church, without consulting any people on earth.’ And he chose Saul to be an evangelizer, to carry the message not only to the Jews but also to all the gentile nations.

Well, what about Jerusalem and the body down there? Later on the account tells us that Barnabas took Paul, or Saul of Tarsus, down to Jerusalem. But they were all afraid of him! And Saul of Tarsus, or Paul, tells us that when he went up there to Jerusalem he saw none of the apostles except Peter, with whom he spent fifteen days, and also, uh, the apostle James. [Nota bene: this is an error, as Galatians 1:18, 19 indicates it was "James the brother of the Lord," not the apostle James.] Those are the only two. And then he went back to Tarsus, and, uh, he continued on his way. Later on, why, Barnabas was sent down there to Antioch, and he hunted up Saul, brought him there, and, uh, they talked in Antioch for quite a while. Paul became a member of the Antioch congregation. And he was one of the prophets there in that congregation, specially mentioned. And then, all of a sudden, as he was serving there, uh, in Antioch, in Syria … not in Israel, but in Syria … why, God’s spirit spoke to that congregation there in Antioch and said, ‘Now, of all things you set aside, you, this congregation in Antioch, YOU set aside these two men, namely, Barnabas and Saul, for the work for which I have commissioned them.’ And so the Antioch congregation did that! And they laid their hands upon Paul, or Saul, and Barnabas and sent them forth as a number of translations read … ’sent them forth.’ And then they went forth by the holy spirit operating through the Antioch congregation, and they went out on their first missionary assignment.

So you see, the Lord Jesus Christ was acting as Head of the congregation and taking action directly, without consulting anybody here on earth what he could do or what he could NOT do. And he acted in that way with regard to, to Saul and Barnabas. And they were both apostles of the Antioch congregation. And so they went out on the work and had great success, and in course of time they completed their first missionary tour, and where did they go … where did they report? Well, there’s a record, you read it for yourself in the closing verses of the fourteenth chapter of Acts: THEY WENT BACK TO ANTIOCH, TO THE CONGREGATION THERE, and the account says they related things in detail to them, to this congregation that had committed them to the undeserved kindness of God for the work that they had performed. So there’s where they reported. So the record also says, now they stayed in Antioch not a little time.

Well, now, what happened? All of a sudden something, eh, occurs, and, uh, Paul and Barnabas, they go up to Jerusalem. Well, what’s the matter? What brings them up to Jerusalem? Well, is it, uh, the body of apostles and of other elders of the Jerusalem congregation that have summoned them up there and said, ‘Looka here. We have heard that you two men have gone out on a missionary tour … and you finished it, and you haven’t come up here to Jerusalem to report to us. DO YOU KNOW WHO WE ARE? We’re the Counsel of Jerusalem! Do you two recognize the headship of the Lord Jesus Christ? If you don’t come on up here in a hurry, we’re going to take disciplinary action against you.’ Is that what the account says? Well, if they had acted that way toward Paul and Barnabas, because they reported to the congregation, uh, by means of which the holy spirit had sent them out, then this Counsel of Jerusalem, of apostles and of other elders of the Jewish congregation would have put themselves ABOVE the headship of the Lord Jesus Christ.

But that isn’t what occurred. You know what happened, how Jews came down from Jerusalem and stirred up the matter of circumcision, and, eh, it troubled the congregation there in Antioch so much that the ANTIOCH congregation sent Paul and Barnabas UP TO JERUSALEM, to have the Counsel settle the issue. And, of course, being sent by the Couns … by the congregation at Antioch, they had to come back and report and advise the congregation of the settlement of the question, or the decision that was made by the Counsel there at Jerusalem. And THEN it was, when they were arguing in favor of Christians from the gentiles not having to be circumcised like Jews … it was THEN that Paul and Barnabas told what God had done by means of them in the gentile world. And THEN it was that the counsel got the report. Then they went back to Antico…och,, which had sent them forth to make known the decision, and the Jewish, then, eh, Counsel , why, sent along two men, Judas and Silas, with them. And so they delivered the report from the Counsel and, eh, there was great rejoicing among the gentile believers.

Now time passes, and Paul and Barnabas are at Antioch. And what occurs now? Well, did they receive an assignment from somewhere … on their next move? The account says that, eh, the two men, Paul and Barnabas, Paul says to him, he says, ‘Of all things let us go and visit the congregations that we have established.’ And, eh, they were agreed on, on this matter. And then, eh, the matter of, uh, accompaniment came up-who was gonna go with them? And, eh, Barnabas was in favor of Mark … John Mark. But, eh, Paul didn’t want him, because he had left them in Pamphylia in Asia Minor and had not gone along with them to the finish of the first missionary tour. So Paul didn’t have any confidence, eh, in Mark for the time being. And they had a great altercation, as you know. And it resulted in a split! And Barnabas took along Mark, and it proved to be a good choice, because afterwards Paul appreciated now the faithfulness of Mark and said, ‘He’s a useful servant even to me.’

But what about Paul? Well, he chose Silas, or Silvanus, as his companion in his missionary tour. And here’s one thing we must note again … now this happened up in Antioch. Toward the close of the fifteenth chapter of Acts it says that after Paul and Barnabas had been commended by the brothers of the Antioch congregation to the undeserved kindness of God, that they went forth on the second missionary tour of the apostle Paul. So again the Antioch congregation is being used to send out missionaries. …

And so, as we examine this account of these two most outstanding among the missionaries, uh, recorded, in, uh, Bible history, we find that they were sent out especially by the Lord Jesus Christ, the Head of the Church … a fact which the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society has upheld and accepted ever since the Society was formed. So we see how the Lord Jesus Christ as the Head of the Church has a right to act direct, without other organizations in view, no matter WHO we are. He’s the Head of the Church, and we can’t challenge what HE does.

Fred Franz Discredited a GB — Part IIAfter elaborating on how Jesus Christ had ‘used’ C. T. Russell as a modern-day evangelizer, Franz continued his talk with an historical look at the origins of the Gilead School, evidently intending to remind his audience that it was not a “Governing Body”, but the president of the Society who had been ‘used’ by God to bring about this marvelous educational institution. His comments regarding how the Society’s president was “viewed” are of particular note, as they suggest what the Governing Body’s nearly year-long discussions were aimed at bringing about …

quote:

---

Well, so that Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, uh, operated throughout the years, and then, to make the story short, we come down to the year 1942. And I can remember a special meeting that was held on Thursday, September the 24th, of the year 1942. A new president had, eh, arisen to preside over the affairs of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. And on this specified date, why, he called a joint meeting of the Board of Directors of the Pennsylvania Corporation and of the New York Corporation. There was a joint meeting of us members of these boards. Because both of these corporations were involved, now, in the project that was going to be submitted, uh, to this body of men. And I can remember how there was at that meeting, which was held up in Brother Rutherford’s, eh, the former president’s, eh, office, there were present the president, the new president, N. H. Knorr, and also vice president H. C. Covington, and secretary-treasurer W. E. Van Amburgh, and, uh, H. H. Riemer, who was my roommate at the time, and also T. J. Sullivan, and Arthur Goux, and myself. There were all seven members of the New York Corporation present at that meeting. And there were five members of the Pennsylvania Corporation at that meeting. Now, we got together, and the president of the Society, of both societies, Brother Knorr, uh, he first read a portion of the charter of the New York Corporation to this joint board meeting. How it was devoted to, uh, promoting the preaching and teaching of the Good News. And then he called attention to the fact that up there at Kingdom Farm there was this building, Gilead by name, and it was not being used to the full extent, only to one third of its capacity. And then he pointed out the fact, something that he had cherished in his heart for a long time, that this would be an excellent place to establish a SCHOOL, for the training and preparing of missionaries.

Well, this was a delightful proposal that was submitted by the president to all the rest of us, uh, board members, and there was favorable discussion all around about this proposed school. And then my roommate, H. H. Riemer, he made the motion that the president of these societies set in motion the operation to establish such a school for the preparing of men and women who at a moment’s notice could be sent out in preaching work to different countries. Then, H. C. Covington, the vice president and also the legal counsel, he added something to Riemer’s motion, and he said that the president of the Society should be AUTHORIZED to make all plans and arrangements to see that this school is established according to his discretion, and that he should also make all plans and arrangements to see that this school is financed and kept in operation. Well, I seconded that motion, and the motion was unanimously, eh, acc, eh…accepted, approved by all those present. And right after that, then, the president, he made further proposals about educational work of the societies, and proposed the publication of a school textbook that would be used by ALL the congregations of Jehovah’s people. And after the motion was made, why T. J. Sullivan approved of that educational motion, too. So that now the question was thrown to a united board meeting and this was also unanimously approved.

So, you see, dear friends, that the boards of directors of the New York Corporation and of the Pennsylvania as constituted back there, they had respect for the office of the president, and they did not treat the president of these organizations as a poker-faced, immobilized figurehead presiding over a society, a ‘do-nothing’ society.

Well, you can ask Brother Arthur Goux what he remembers of that meeting, he was there. And here is a copy of the minutes of that meeting [he opens a copy of the minutes; a rustle of noise is evident from the audience], to verify what I’ve told you. So you can see that, eh, this society really has the right and the authority to send out missionaries. That’s the challenging question I raised at the very beginning of this talk. And that society has continued on till now sending out missionaries now to the number of more than five thousand. Now isn’t that a wonderful? [Audience responds with sustained applause.]

And I’m sure that many of us here today are very glad that Jehovah has preserved the original president of the school down till now, and as president of the New York Corporation, why, he will continue in his office until the end of the current term on July 1st, Nineteen Hundred…or rather January 1st, eh, Nine…Eighteen…, Nineteen Hundred and Seventy-Six.

And when you come to think about it, dear friends, it’s really remarkable. Today, do you know, is the seventh day of September, Nineteen Hundred and Seventy-Five. [Loud audience stirring can be heard.] And do you know what that means according to this diary, Hebrew diary, from the land of Israel? Why this is the second day of the month Tishri of the lunar year Nineteen Hundred and Seventy-Six. And do you know what that means? That here on this day of your graduation, why, it is the second day of the SEVENTH MILLENNIUM of man’s existence here on earth. Isn’t that something? Isn’t that something, friends? [Loud applause from the audience.] That the opening days of the seventh millennium of mankind’s existence is signalized by the operation of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society in full compliance with the terms of its charter, sending out the fifty-ninth class of the Gilead School for missionaries. And furthermore, I’m told that, eh, by the arrangement of the New York Corporation, we already have some twenty brothers and sisters who are going to form class number sixty in the Gilead School. And, very interesting that at the end of sixty centuries of human existence here on earth, why class number SIXTY is going to start its schooling at the opening of the seventh millennium of mankind’s existence.

These are, eh, surprising things, startling things, HAPPIFYING things over which we can rejoice. And I’m sure that many of us here can be very, very happy that Jehovah God put into the mind of Brother Knorr and into his heart to establish this missionary school at Gilead. Jehovah God certainly has blessed it, and by its fruits, why it has become KNOWN as an approved agency in the hand of Jehovah God, so that there is no NEED to challenge the RIGHT and the AUTHORITY of this society to send out missionaries. And, friends, notice this, that just as God used the Antioch congregation to send out the two most out…two of the most outstanding missionaries of the first century, Paul and Barnabas, so today Jehovah God is using the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, in collaboration with the New York Corporation, to send out further missionaries. And they’re determined to keep ON in that course. That’s something very, very gratifying.

---

It is interesting that, after a nearly year-long struggle to wrest control of the Society from its then president, Nathan Knorr, the Governing Body twenty-five years later has seemingly relinquished that control by resigning their positions as directors and transferring oversight of the existing and newly created legal entities to others. One wonders whether these recent developments will–like similar adjustments in the past–become future “fulfillments” of prophetic speculation and a divinely ordained corrective realignment of “God’s Organization.”

Preface to Bible Student History

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.—1Pe 3:15

Who are you? What church do you attend? To what denomination do you belong? When these questions are asked they are not easy to answer. Bible Students are not easy to categorize.

When Alex Halley wrote his classical Roots and that became a television sensation, it started a trend of looking for one’s historical origins. Since this issue completes 75 years of publishing THE HERALD, it seems appropriate to do the same.

The Bible Student movement began about a hundred twenty years ago with the activity of Charles Taze Russell. Understanding the unique religious atmosphere of that time is essential to comprehending the whys and wherefores of a new movement.

This supplement to the Diamond Anniversary of THE HERALD will attempt to address this issue—placing the Bible Student movement in its historical context, both the broad scale setting of the entire Christian church and the narrower focus of the second advent movement.

Our regular feature, a verse by verse Bible Study, leads off this section. Entitled In the Beginning, it traces the very inception of the Christian church as it looks at each verse in the first chapter of Acts.

In Contending for the Faith we will note how controversy has always been an integral part of church history. Without question, the Bible can be a difficult book to understand. Sincere Christians have debated and fought mightily in their search for an accurate interpretation. They have not always agreed. Four of these great disputes are chronicled in this article—the nature of God, the authority of the priesthood, justification by faith, and the question of election and free grace.

Philosophy and religion have walked side by side. Man’s political struggle for justice has paralleled and interacted with his search for a more equitable religion. Tracing this tendency, particularly as it set the scene for religion in the close of the last century, is the object of the article The Decline of Faith.

More directly impacting the Bible Student movement was the interest in the second advent in the middle of the nineteenth century, centering around the activities of William Miller, anticipating the return of Jesus Christ in 1844. The relationship between the Miller movement and that of the Bible Students is chronicled in the article The Midnight Cry.

Zeroing in on the origins of the Bible Students are two articles. A New Wine Bottle deals with the birth pangs that accompanied the establishment of the new movement, while In The Time of Harvest takes a broader view of the entire ministry of Pastor Russell.

The Bible Student movement was revolutionary in its time. It was made the more so by the benign and benevolent leadership of Pastor Russell. The marked contrast between his leadership and the strong, dictatorial policies of his successor, Joseph Rutherford, was a cause of much confusion and dismay. Seeking peace and direction from the bewildering conditions, the Bible Students began to splinter into various groupings. One of these was the Pastoral Bible Institute, publisher of this journal. The origins of this group are traced in the article The Pastoral Bible Institute.

The past is merely prologue. Where do we go from here? How we build upon our origins is largely up to us. In the closing article of this series, the author looks at the future and seeks to chart a direction for the Christian to follow.

As in the regular issues of the magazine, we are including a Question Box feature. Customarily Bible Students call themselves truth people or speak about being in the truth. To many this sounds egotistical. This question is discussed in this column.

With this preview we submit the following articles for your consideration, and invite your comments.

In The Beginning

A Bible Study

’And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.’—Acts 2:42

A verse by verse study in Ac 1

THERE are many beginnings in the Bible. First, there is God who has no beginning. Then there is the beginning of his creative work in the forming of the Logos. (Re 3:14 Joh 1:1) There is also the beginning of his work with planet earth in Ge 1:1. But in the book of Acts we find another beginning, the beginning of the Christian church.

Those were confusing days. Memories were varied. There was elation at Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem. Then there was perplexity when at the Last Supper he told them again of his imminent death. Finally there was the despair with his arrest, trial, and crucifixion.

Despondency gave way to joy with news of his resurrection; but joy was mixed with bewilderment, for their Master was not the same. He now appeared in locked rooms, seemingly coming right through the wall. He disappeared just as mysteriously. Those were confusing days.

——————————————————————

MANUSCRIPTS…

The basis for today’s Bible. Of over 3000 extant, the following are judged the most important.

Sinaitic —Fourth century; complete New Testament.

Alexandrian —Early fifth century; most New Testament

Vatican 1209 —Fourth century; Matthew to Heb 9:14.

Ephraemi —Late fourth century; Fragments of Septuagint and of the New Testament.

Regius 62 —Eighth century; most of the Gospels.

Papyrus P45 —Third century; fragments of Gospels and Acts.

Papyrus P46 —circa 200, most of Pauline Epistles.

Papyrus P47 —Third century, middle third of Revelation

Papyrus P52 —ca. 125, Joh 8:31-33, 37, 38

Papyrus P66 —ca. 200; most of John

Papyrus P75 —Third century, most of Luke & John

——————————————————————

The Book of Acts

Verses 1 and 2

The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Spirit had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:

Theophilus is mentioned only here and in the opening verse of the Gospel of Luke, which indicates that Luke is also the author of Acts. While Theophilus was undoubtedly a real person, the meaning of his name, lover of God, is an appropriate title for all for whom the book was written.

The title, Acts of the Apostles, is somewhat vague and misleading, for it details the acts of ver