Did Russell and Rutherford fit the WTS' own definition of false prophets?

False Prophets


Individuals and organizations


1) proclaiming messages that they attribute to a superhuman source but that


2) do not originate with the true God and


3) are not in harmony with his revealed will





Reasoning from the Scriptures, page 132





Also on page 4 of the April 15, 1995 Watchtower they define prophecies as follows:


'; Information written in advance about what definitely would occur in the future ';Did Russell and Rutherford fit the WTS' own definition of false prophets?
Russell %26amp; Rutherford Fit the Society’s Own Definition of False Prophets


The Governing Body insists that what Russell and Rutherford did does not come under the Bible’s definition of false prophets at Deuteronomy 18:20-22. What about their own definition? False Prophets Individuals and organizations (1) proclaiming messages that they attribute to a superhuman source but that (2) do not originate with the true God and (3) are not in harmony with his revealed will. Russell and Rutherford (1) attributed their messages to a superhuman source, (2) none of their messages that originated with God and (3) they were not in harmony with his revealed will. Therefore they were not false prophets? According to their own definition they were.





In their efforts to convince themselves that Russell and Rutherford were not false prophets, the Governing Body has apparently not noticed that it doesn’t matter if they were false prophets or not. Note again what former President Frederick Franz said in his God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has approached…The serving of food, the right sort of [Bible teachings] at the proper time was the issue. It had to be according to this that a decision must be rendered by [Jesus]. If Rutherford’s Millions Now Living Will Never Die was a false prophecy it certainly was not “the right sort of food at the proper time.” But even it was just “a mistake” it was still not the right sort of food or the proper time to be serving it. Even if Rutherford was not a false prophet he was still guilty of providing wrong spiritual food relative to the extremely important matter of Christ’s Kingdom, along with all the rest of the improper, untimely spiritual food he provided from both his own and Russell’s writings. And even if none of the teachings considered come under the Bible’s definition of false prophecies, they were still teachings that were not true on very serious matters such as the time of Jesus’ Second Coming and the end of the world. And so it doesn’t matter what the Governing Body chooses to call all those failed attempts to set dates. They were all wrong food at the wrong time which, according to the way they interpret Matthew 24:45-47, disqualified them as Jesus’ “faithful and discreet slave.” And according to their June 1, 2001 Watchtower not a single one of those teachings/prophecies mentioned should have ever appeared in the Society’s literature because none of them were “what God reveals in his Word.”Did Russell and Rutherford fit the WTS' own definition of false prophets?
They were not prophets. They were businessmen. Very, very good businessmen. And the Watchtower is one of the richest businesses in the world.
They sure do. So do all of their subsequent place holders.
Yes, by their own words !
Yes, not to mention the Holy Bible.
Yes, and they wore very flashy ties.
Yes!