Hello everyone.
If you are a loyal member of the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses, you need to stop for a moment and ask yourself a few important questions. Questions like: Why were circuit overseers directed to tell congregation elder bodies to remove all publications from their kingdom hall libraries that predated 1950? Why does the WT Library program only go back to 1950? Why does the Watchtower index for all publications from 1930-1985 make no reference to the article that first explained the Organization’s primary teaching concerning the identity of the Other Sheep? Why go to so much work to hide the origin of a teaching that is fundamental to the salvation hope held by millions of Jehovah’s Witnesses?
Truth is light. If you have the truth, you embrace the light. You do not conceal yourself in darkness. We are going to shine some much-needed light on the origin of the other sheep doctrine.
Let us start by examining who is responsible for the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
I’ll direct you to a July 15, 2013 issue of The Watchtower to an article titled “Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?” That article explains:
“The faithful and discreet slave”: A small group of anointed brothers who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food during Christ’s presence. Today, these anointed brothers make up the Governing Body.
“Appointed over his domestics”: In 1919, Jesus selected capable anointed brothers to be his faithful and discreet slave.” (w13 7/15 p. 25 [box])
In 1919, the foremost member of this faithful slave was J. F. Rutherford, a man who promoted himself as the “Generalissimo of the Bible Students’ Organizations.” I’ll give you a moment to take that in. The word generalissimo is an Italian term and means "the highest-ranking of all generals". Francisco Franco of Spain and Joseph Stalin of Russia also held that title. One might think it an incredibly pompous title to assume for a man calling himself a Christian. However, the current Governing Body has shown itself equally capable of assigning a title to themselves, one that can only be conferred by Jesus Christ, that of Faithful and Discreet Slave.
We must ask ourselves, was J. F. Rutherford truly led by holy spirit to reveal truth to Jehovah’s Witnesses? Based on the July 15, 2013 Watchtower we just cited, the current Governing Body certainly believes that to be the case. They teach that Rutherford was the faithful and discreet slave appointed by Jesus in 1919 to lead Jehovah’s Witnesses to salvation.
But what did Rutherford himself believe to be the source of his inspiration?
I exposed this fact about J. F. Rutherford in the previous video, but it will benefit us to review that evidence.
“If the holy spirit as a helper were directing the work, then there would be no good reason for employing the angels … the Scriptures seem clearly to teach that the Lord directs his angels what to do and they act under the supervision of the Lord in directing the remnant on earth concerning the course of action to take. It would seem there would be no necessity for the ‘servant’ to have an advocate such as the holy spirit because the ‘servant’ is in direct communication with Jehovah and as Jehovah’s instrument, and Christ Jesus acts for the entire body.” (w30 9/1 p. 293)
Would it surprise you to learn that this Rutherford teaching—that angels and not holy spirit are being used to carry messages from God to the Governing Body—is still current today within the Organization? This interpretation is tied to the belief that the first resurrection has already occurred. In an article in the January 1, 2007 issue of The Watchtower titled “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way!” we are told:
“What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest. That would indicate that the first resurrection began sometime between 1914 and 1935. Can we be more precise?”
Can you follow the chain of logic? According to Witnesses, Jesus returned in 1914. Since he is back, there was no longer any need for the holy spirit, which was only sent in his absence. According to this belief, the resurrected Rutherford could be one of the 24-elders group used to communicate divine truths today.
Let’s to over that one more time, because it is imperative that we grasp the full ramifications of what is the current teaching of the Governing Body on this subject. They teach that the first resurrection began in 1918 or thereabouts. They believe that the faithful slave was appointed by Jesus in 1919. They believe that Rutherford was part of the faithful slave as are the current members of the Governing Body. They believe that resurrected ones, which would include Rutherford are “involved in communication divine truths today.”
Okay, with that in mind, let’s have a look at the man who gave birth to the doctrine of the other sheep, a teaching which has remained intact since its creation in 1934. This teaching is a major part of the message of the Good News that Jehovah’s Witnesses have been preaching since before I was born.
How can we know if what they believe is true? How can we know if the angelic messengers communicating divine truths are indeed communication truth from God and not lies from Satan? How can we know?
The apostle Paul tells us how:
“...only there are certain ones who are causing you trouble and wanting to pervert the good news about the Christ. However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond what we declared to you as good news, let him be accursed. As we have said above, I also now say again, Whoever it is that is declaring to you as good news something beyond what you accepted, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:7-9)
So, if we can prove that Rutherford’s teaching of the good news concerning the salvation of the other sheep is false, then two things are evident. One: It didn’t come from God, so it came from a different source, a demonic one; and two: Anyone preaching this good news is going to be cursed by Yehovah God.
So, to be fair, let’s allow Rutherford to make his case. As we study his words, it will quickly become evident why the Organization has removed this article from its Publications index.
In 1934, Rutherford released a two-part series in the August 1 and 15 issues of the Watchtower titled “His Kindness”.
I wanted to share this with everyone. This is one of the volumes I got from the late Dr. James Penton, a good friend of ours who lives nearby, and he passed away just a few months ago. This particular issue is the one we're discussing. You'll notice the mailing label, which we've redacted for the sake of privacy. They used to put those labels on the cover when they delivered them. You'll notice Ezekiel's vision. It's a regular thing because for them, in those days, types and anti-types played a huge role in their understanding of scripture. This is, of course, stuff that's all made up. "His Kindness, Part 1" is the issue we're discussing. "Cities of Refuge", "Unaware", and "The Avenger." These are the main topics. Look at the density of this. So much writing. And all of it, of course, is just fabrication of the imagination of J. F. Rutherford. Pages and pages of this stuff. I can't imagine sitting through studies of all of this. And that's just one of two articles. It goes on. Again, the label. August 15, 1934, "HIs kindness." You'll see how to take refuge, how to secure your place in the kingdom and not be killed by the Avenger, which would be Jesus Christ, who'll come and kill you if he didn't seek refuge in the Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses. Basically, they continue to believe that today, but they don't accept the premise of it, which is types and antitypes. And so that just shows you some background to authenticate what we're talking about.
The entire premise for this doctrine was Rutherford’s belief in types and antitypes. If you are unfamiliar with how types and antitypes work, the idea is that something in the Hebrew Scriptures represents something of great importance in the Christian Scriptures. For instance, to avoid losing their firstborn when the tenth plague came upon Egypt, the Israelites killed a lamb and spread its blood on the door posts of their homes. That was the type. The antitype is the lamb of God, Jesus Christ, whose blood was poured out to save us from our sins.
Type and antitype. But here’s the thing. We don’t get to make these things up. Unless something in Scripture is explicitly applied as a type, then who are we to make something up to suit ourselves. That would be going beyond what is written.
Unfortunately, Rutherford reveled in his application of types and antitypes. I will just give you some of the highlights, but they will be enough to clarify whether his words come from God or another source.
We’ll start with the first part of the article taking all our quotes from the August 1, 1934 Watchtower.
Christ Jesus, the Vindicator, will destroy the wicked; but the kindness of Jehovah has provided a place of refuge for those who now turn their hearts toward righteousness, seeking to join themselves unto Jehovah’s organization. Such are known as the Jonadab class, because Jonadab foreshadowed them. (p. 228, par. 3)
I’ll give you a little background to explain where Rutherford is going. Jehu was the tenth king of the northern Kingdom of Israel. He was anointed by Elisha to rid Israel of Baal worship. Jonadab was not an Israelite, but he supported Jehu, and at one point joined Jehu in his chariot. This is all very important in establishing Rutherford’s antitypical application. You see, Rutherford claims that Jehu represents anointed Jehovah’s Witnesses, like himself. And Jonadab represents the unanointed other sheep class of Witnesses. And the Organization represents the arrangement in Israel of cities of refuge where an manslayer could flee to escape vengeance from the family members of the person he has accidentally killed. This is all explained in exhausting detail in the article.
Mind you, Rutherford wasn’t really consistent in his application of types and antitypes. For example, Jonadab was a Gentile who supported the Israelite, Jehu. The cities of refuge were made for Israelites, not Gentiles, so Rutherford’s antitype is broken before it even gets off the ground. The article continues:
This loving provision made by Jehovah being announced at the time of making of the covenant of faithfulness shows that the cities of refuge foreshadow God’s loving-kindness for the protection of the people of good will [the other sheep] during Armageddon…
“God having now made known to his people that the word spoken by him, as recorded in Deuteronomy, applies since the coming of Christ Jesus to the temple, [circa 1918] we may expect to find that the provision for the cities of refuge, as set down in the prophecies, have an antitypical fulfilment in close proximity to the time of taking the faithful followers of Christ Jesus into the covenant for the kingdom.” (p. 228, pars. 4, 5)
Rutherford’s claim is that the other sheep are not anointed Christians. Of course, he offers no proof for this. His belief is based on a fabricated relationship between the Gentile Jonadab and the other sheep of John 10:16. Interestingly, the other sheep do represent gentiles, but there is nothing in scripture showing them to be unanointed. The gentiles in the first century got the holy spirit just like the Jewish Christians did.
But this thing about the cities of refuge typifying the Organization is just wrong. Hey, don’t take my word for it. Here’s what the current Governing Body teaches:
“…the March 15, 2015, issue of The Watchtower explained why our recent publications seldom mention prophetic types and antitypes: “Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so.” Because the Scriptures are silent regarding any antitypical significance of the cities of refuge, this article and the next one emphasize instead the lessons Christians can learn from this arrangement. (w17/11 Box on p. 10)
Let us be very clear on this. The organization is now specifically denying that any antitypical fulfillment exists with regard to the cities of refuge. Since the entire premise of Rutherford’s argument in support of the Other Sheep as a separate class of Christian with a secondary earthly hope is based on an antitypical fulfillment not supported in Scripture and specifically denied by the current Governing Body, the foundation for the current Other Sheep doctrine of the Organization is gone. Vanished into thin air! If you scan through the Watchtower Library online or use the Publications Indexes in search of scriptural support for the Other Sheep doctrine to replace Rutherford’s now defunct explanation you will find nothing. You will find bold assertions. You will find deductive reasoning. But it all amounts to a hill of beans since it is not built on a solid foundation of Scripture. Of course, the making of bold, unsupported assertions is nothing new in the publications. Rutherford continues:
The setting up of the cities of refuge was notice to those who should have need therefor that God had made provision for their protection and refuge in time of distress. That was a part of the prophecy, and, being a prophecy, it must have its fulfilment at some later day and at the coming of the Greater Moses. (p. 228, par. 7)
What a wonderful example of circular reasoning this presents! The cities of refuge were prophetic because they have a prophetic application, which we know because they were prophetic.
The types and antitypes come at the reader fast and furiously in this two-part article series. I’m only scratching the surface here, but you can obtain the magazines for yourself in digital format if you’d like. I’ll leave a link to them in the description of this video. [jws-library.one] But just to give you a feel to the zaniness of Rutherford’s mind, consider this:
The cities of refuge would be set up after the Israelites reached Canaan…This would seem to correspond to the time when the Elisha-Jehu work begins….In 1918 Jesus brought his faithful remnant then on earth across the antitypical Jordan river…The priests bearing the ark of the covenant were the first ones to enter the waters of the Jordan, and stood firm on the dry ground in the river until the people had crossed. Before the Israelites crossed the Jordan river, Moses, by the direction of Jehovah, appointed three cities of refuge on the east side of the river. Likewise also before the remnant were gathered into the temple the Lord caused to be delivered his message “Millions Now Living Will Never Die”, meaning, of course, that they must be subject to the conditions announced by the Lord. There also began an announcement that the Elijah work had ended. It was a period of transition from the Elijah to the Elisha work performed by the faithful followers of Christ Jesus. (par. 12)
What a mind-numbing parade of antitypes, and this is only in one paragraph from the article. We have an antitypical Elijah-Jehu work beginning, an antitypical Elijah work ending, and an antitypical Elisha work beginning concurrent with an antitypical Jehu work. There is also an antitypical Jordan river and an antitype to the priests carrying the ark and pausing in the river to dry it up. There is something antitypical about the three cities of refuge on the east side of the river as opposed to the other three on the west side. Some of this ties in with the antitype which became the “Millions Now Living Will Never Die” campaign message. Is your head spinning yet?
Now remember, the Organization has explicitly denied that the cities of refuge have any antitypical application at all. Bear in mind, that this is all Rutherford had. Take away the antitypes and there is no doctrine of an other-sheep class with a different hope than the anointed. We’ve already shown from Scripture in a previous video that the other sheep are anointed gentile Christians. There is no proof from Scripture to replace Rutherford’s far-fetched array of types and antitypes.
And here’s the thing: The current Governing Body know all this. They know their other sheep doctrine is a house built on sand, antitypical sand as that. Why do you think they don’t want you reading and researching old publications?
What was Rutherford’s purpose in setting up this two-class system of salvation. He freely admits it in the second article of this series.
Be it noted that the obligation is laid upon the priestly class to do the leading or reading of the law of instruction to the people. Therefore, where there is a company of Jehovah’s witnesses…the leader of a study should be selected from amongst the anointed, and likewise those of the service committee should be taken from the anointed….Jonadab was there as one to learn, and not one who was to teach….The official organization of Jehovah on earth consists of his anointed remnant, and the Jonadabs [other sheep] who walk with the anointed are to be taught, but not to be leaders. This appearing to be God’s arrangement, all should gladly abide thereby. (w34 8/15 p. 250, par. 32)
It appears that all this ridiculous antitypical gobbledygook was written for one purpose: To exalt a clergy class over a more numerous laity class. It’s an old story. Of course, things didn’t work out as Rutherford anticipated. The end was not imminent. His clergy class was finite, having been limited to just 144,000 in number.
As the number of Witnesses grew and the number of those professing to be anointed diminished, it became necessary to include “Jonadabs” among the clergy, so an ecclesiastical hierarchy was created that included zone overseers, branch overseers, district overseers (now gone), circuit overseers, and local elders.
Should someone argue that these do not constitute a clergy, it should be noted that, except for the local elders, all are supported financially, and more important, all have great power. The local elders can punish any publisher through disfellowshipping, which means the individual is cut off socially and often economically from family and friends.
Why didn’t Rutherford’s successors correct his demented teaching? I’m talking specifically about Nathan Knorr and Freddy Franz.
I met Freddy Franz when he came to Toronto and gave a talk in Spanish in our kingdom hall. He and Nathan Knorr had lived through the Rutherford era and knew the man intimately. They worked with him and it was Nathan Knorr who took over from Rutherford in 1942 as the President of the Watchtower, Bible and Tract Society. Those men could have corrected Rutherford’s erroneous teaching but chose to perpetuate that falsehood. The current Governing Body is no better.
To hide their history from scrutiny while not correcting the false teachings of the previous administration makes them complicit in the sin. This would seem to fit perfectly with the condemnation found at Revelation 22:15.
Outside are the dogs and those who practice spiritism and the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone liking and carrying on a lie. (NWT)
At the start of this video, we read Paul’s warning to the Galatians. The key phrase from that is worth repeating.
“However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)
I didn’t want to be accursed by God, so when I learned that the hope of the other sheep isn’t to live as sinners on earth, but to be adopted as spirit anointed children of God, I stopped preaching the good news according to Jehovah’s Witnesses.
The Organization isn’t going to change anymore than the rest of the churches of Christendom are going to change. But we can change. Let us be children of light, not agents of darkness.
Before I close, I would like to draw your attention to two publications that are available on Amazon. The first is a very thoroughly researched and documented work that exposes how Rutherford seized control of the Watch Tower Society, not by holy spirit, but by what amounts to a political coup. It’s titled: “Rutherford's Coup: The Watchtower Succession Crisis of 1917 and Its Aftermath” by Rud Persson. It is currently available in English and Spanish.
The other is my own book titled “Shutting the Door to the Kingdom of God: How Watch Tower Stole Salvation from Jehovah’s Witnesses”. It is available in English, Spanish, Russian, Italian, Romanian, German, Czech, and very soon in French as well.
Thank you for watching and for continuing to support the work that we do.