During this past summer of 1956, the Russell followers, "Jehovah's Witnesses", held their great national convention in our city. It was a propaganda undertaking, and their strategy was to go from house to house asking for rooms to house their delegates. What the real business of those chosen delegates was to be in those homes, would not be hard to guess. In our home the visitors were courteously met with the tenth verse of second John; and with the following withering (and in every case silencing) quotation from their own founder's books:

      In speaking of his books in "The Watch Tower" of September 15, 1910, page 298, Russell said:

      "If the six volumes of Scripture Studies are practically the Bible topically arranged with Bible proofs given, we might not improperly name the volumes 'The Bible In Arranged Form.' That is to say they are not merely comments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself . . . . .

      "Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see the divine Plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see also, that if any one lays the Scripture Studies aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years, if he then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has understood the Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the Scripture Studies with their references, and had not read a page of the Bible as such, he would be in the light."

      In view of the renewed and widespread propaganda of the "Witnesses" we have chosen as useful and timely for this month's reprint, the following from the writings of Brother Boll--the most intelligent and effective opponent of "Russellism" that we have ever known.--E. L. J.^a [1]

      A long while ago I preached a chart sermon in a little backwoods meetings house, and a sister who seemed to be one of the most intelligent and appreciative of my listeners, assured me that Brother Blank had lately been there and had preached that very sermon. Now I knew that was not possible, and began to question the sister to find out what the resemblance was between my sermon and Brother Blank's. "I know it was the same sermon exactly," she asseverated: "He preached just like you did. He had one of them charts tacked up on the wall, and he would p'int a while and talk a while, and talk a while and p'int a while, just like you did." And that was how she knew that it was "exactly the same sermon." I have wondered if perhaps that is not about the sort of ground on which some kind friends are so freely and confidently charging some of its with teaching Russellism. In, all probability they have observed that Mr. Russell "talks a while and p'ints a while" very much as we do. And when people set their heads that way any resemblance seems sufficient to them to justify themselves in calling a teaching they dislike "Russellism." It has seemed a charitable view to us to think that likely these doubtful friends are misinformed as to the nature of the prophetic teachings set forth in these pages, or else they are ignorant of Mr. Russell's doctrines, or of both alike, and that they make such charges merely because it affords a convenient way of disposing of certain vexing questions, and to absolve themselves from further responsibility.

      However the matter may be, and whatever may be the motive, we will undertake to be helpful in drawing some clear distinctions between Mr. Russell's views and what commends itself to us as true and faithful teaching of God's word.

      1. Mr. Russell teaches that Christ was not originally a Divine Being, but a creature of God--the chiefest of all God's creatures to be sure, and through whom all the rest of the creation was made, but a creature nevertheless.

      As to this fundamental point we are assured that "God has in much mercy taught us better." Our Lord was "God," from the beginning, before any created thing came into existence, and was with the God. There was nothing of all that was ever made but was made through Him. In Him were all things created--visible and invisible, thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers; and He is before all things; in Him all things hold together; and all things were created through Him and for Him. (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:15-17).

      2. Mr. R's teaching (which if he had believed in the deity of Christ would have been impossible) is that during the three days that Jesus lay in the tomb He was non-existent. I forbear making any comment on this.

      3. As to the intermediate state, in common with several other sects, Mr. Russell's followers hold the theory of "soul-sleeping" and "conditional immortality"--a theory resting upon a very shallow and inadequate generalization of scripture. This is the very framework of Russellism. [2]

      4. Mr. Russell teaches the annihilation of the (finally incorrigible) wicked. This annihilation theory is involved in the just mentioned doctrine of "conditional immortality." Mr. R. scouts, caricatures, and ridicules the commonly received doctrine of hell. In his lecture "To Hell and Back," he makes "hell" equivalent to the grave. In common with the false prophets of Jeremiah's time, he succeeds in leaving the general impression on the minds of sinners that "no evil shall come upon them." But the solemn and awful Bible descriptions of the doom of the lost, demand a deeper significance than the easy-going views of Russell attach to them. We cannot but believe that the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus was not merely a wild fable, employed for purposes of illustration; that the "weeping, wailing, gnashing of teeth", "tribulation", "anguish", "indignation and wrath"; the "eternal fire", the "torment", and "eternal punishment", are not to be explained away or interpreted so lightly as Mr. R. takes them. "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

      5. Mr. R. teaches that the body of Christ was never raised. Since His spirit (according to R.'s theory) could have no separate independent existence; since in fact the Lord ceased to exist for three days; and even then His body was not raised--Mr. R.'s doctrine amounts to a denial of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. For what he calls the resurrection is an out-and-out new creation and there could be no identity between the Lord who died and then wholly perished, and that new being which (according to R.) constitutes the risen Christ. But we are constrained by the testimony of the Word to believe that the Lord's body which was buried, was raised, glorified, and incorruptible.

      6. In his contention that Christ is now a spirit-being Mr. R. (doubtlessly not realizing that he does so), imputes a fraud to the Lord Jesus Christ. For this strange teacher says that Jesus, when He appeared to His disciples after His resurrection, said, "Handle me and see that it is I myself: for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me having" (Luke 24:39). He had assumed a body for the time, for identification. So then Jesus, although a spirit, assumed a body for a few minutes to make His disciples believe He was not a spirit!

      7. As the foregoing items show, Mr. Russell denies that Jesus is in any sense Man now. Strangely, some who are loud against Russellism agree with Mr. Russell in this important point. But I, for one, heartily believe and confess that He is man now (1 Tim. 2:5) and man's Representative, Mediator, and Highpriest before God; and judge also by the very virtue of His humanity (John 5:27, Acts 17:31).

      8. Mr. R. teaches that Christ, as a spiritual presence, has already come--has for years been here like a thief (since 1874). We believe that Jesus has not come, but is coming.

      9. We confess that "Jesus cometh in the flesh"--the Lord himself (Luke 24:39; 1 Thess. 4:16), identical with the Lord Jesus whom they had seen and handled, and who was taken up from them (Acts 1:11). Mr. Russell, as already seen, denies this. [3]

      10. Mr. R. teaches that all the dead are raised before or during the millennium. He denounces Rev. 20:5 as a forgery. But the Bible speaks plainly that the "rest of the dead" are not raised until after the Millennium (Rev. 20). There is no evidence of the supposed spuriousness of Rev. 20:5.

      11. Mr. R. declares that during the Millennium the unsaved dead, being raised, shall have an opportunity to obtain salvation. This is the distinctive peculiarity of Russell's doctrine. None of the brethren in Christ of whom I know teach or countenance such a theory.

      12. Mr. R. maintains that the judgment (Greek, "Krisis") is a new trial; but we are assured that it is the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous sentence and execution of the Judgment of God.

      13. Mr. R. denies the personality of the Holy Spirit. None of the writers of the Word and Work believe or teach so.

      14. Mr. R.'s interpretations of prophecy in general are, in my judgment, puerile and ridiculous. The idea of a man's making the lightning-like flash of the Lord's glorious coming to signify a gradual process (!); or of his holding that the church is the Elijah that was to come (!); or that the warning, "Woe to them that are with child and that give suck in those days means woe to the churches in those days who have a lot of new converts"! Such vagaries are of themselves sufficient to eliminate Mr. Russell from the ranks of prophetic students and interpreters who deserve serious consideration.

      Such are some of the differences (not all, by any means) between the views of "Pastor Russell" on the one hand, and probably the majority of those who believe in the pre-millennial and imminent coming of the Lord, and look for and love His appearing, among whom the editors and many friends of Word and Work would gladly number themselves. If the reader will examine these points of difference he will perceive that: These items comprise what is peculiar and vital to Russellism. Take them out of Russell's doctrine and he has no distinctive doctrine left. And yet Gashmu^b and his friends feel justified in accusing the men who radically dissent from every one of these items as being teachers of Russellism!

      Now it should be a small matter with God's servants as to who holds or repudiates any part of God's truth. A thing is neither false nor true merely because Russell, or any other man, advocates it. "What hath the Lord answered? What hath the Lord spoken?" It is only that that really counts. Doubtless Russell holds, alongside of vital error, much truth which is also held by faithful Christians everywhere. But that fact neither detracts from those truths, nor does it prove that those Christians belong to Russell's movement. But to use a name which, like "Russellism", carries a deserved stigma, in order to discredit a brother's teaching, and to prejudice the minds of other brethren against him--when, for a fact, he opposes that which is vital and distinctive in the teachings of Russell is a practice which (unless it is done in ignorance of the real facts), as we shall always, in absence of proof to the contrary, prefer to believe, we will forbear to characterize. [4]

[RATB 1-4.]

      The electronic version of R. H. Boll's Russell and the Bible (Louisville, KY: The Word and Work, 1956) has been produced from a copy of the tract in a contributor's collection. Thanks to the contributor for supplying a loan-copy of the printed text. This tract was first published as "Some Distinctions between Russell's Teachings and Bible Doctrine" in The Word and Work 9 (July 1916): 312-315.

      The first page of Russell and the Bible was authored by E. L. Jorgenson, editor of The Word and Work from 1956 to 1961. It is from his introduction that the date of the tract is known. R. H. Boll's text begins on page 2.

      Pagination in the electronic version has been represented by placing the page number in brackets following the last complete word on the printed page. Inconsistencies in spelling, capitalization, punctuation, and typography have been retained; however, corrections have been offered for misspellings and other accidental corruptions. Emendations are as follows:

            Printed Text [ Electronic Text
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 p. 3:      the eternal fire", [ the "eternal fire",
            Luke 24:39). [ (Luke 24:39).
 p. 4:      10. Mr. R. Teaches [ 10. Mr. R. teaches
            assured thot [ assured that
            prefer to believe) [ prefer to believe, 
 

      Addenda and corrigenda are earnestly solicited.

Ernie Stefanik
Derry, PA

Created 6 May 2001.
Updated 20 June 2003.