“Since many of those who find they cannot conscientiously support all of the organization’s teachings have been exemplary persons, often longtime

members and very active in congregational service, some

reason must be supplied to Witnesses who have known them and

their conduct so as to justify the harsh step of excommunication.

This is accomplished by what amounts to a vilifying of them and

their motives, denouncing them as “apostates,” simply because

they feel compelled to give greater respect to God’s Word than to

that of an organization. The motive of such ones is always presented

as selfish, presumptuous, egocentric, born of a rebellious

spirit, disrespectful and unappreciative of God and Christ.” (Raymond V. Franz “In Search of Christian Freedom” page 438)

Why doesn’t Ken Flodin tell us what the issue and page number is of the 1910 Watchtower to which he is referring? Why does he not produce a copy of the page to show his audience how he was able to uncover this deceit? Apparently it was an easy matter for him to obtain a copy for himself so as to investigate the claims of the person writing the letter. But why doesn’t the Watchtower society provide for its members copies of its older literature so that they can make their own investigation?

If they were given a copy of the September 15, 1910 issue they would see, first of all, that the article the quote is taken from is entitled: “Is the Reading of “Scripture Studies” Bible Study?”

The very first paragraph states:

“The plan of reading twelve pages of the studies in the scriptures each day, tried by so many, results in more Bible study than any other way that we know of. We believe that it is not so much the time that is given to Bible study, but the amount of study done and the amount of information gained, that counts. We all know people who have spent days and weeks and years in study of the Bible and have learned little or nothing. We think the idea that Bible study is merely the time spent in handling a Bible and reading over some verses is a mistaken idea.”

After comparing Bible study to hunting and fishing, Russell goes on to say:

“The six volumes of Scripture Studies are not intended to supplant the Bible. There are various methods to be pursued in the study of the Bible and these aids to Bible study are in such form that they, of themselves, contain the important elements of the Bible as well as the comments or elucidations of those Bible statements”

What Russell is saying is the scriptures are contained in his books along with his commentary so reading of the Bible without his books would be a waste of time. If the question posed in the letter read by Flodin is why does Russell encourage reading his books instead of the Bible? The answer would be, because his books are designed as a commentary with the scriptures included. Russell makes this point further on in the article when he states:

“the six volumes of scripture studies are practically the Bible topically arranged, with Bible proof texts given”.

That being the case he goes on to say “we might not improperly name the volumes-the Bible in an arranged form.”

Here are copies of the article for you to read for yourself. Note how Russell makes his point of the superiority of his scripture studies in the highlighted areas.

First of all, as you can see, the layout of the magazine is different from what Ken Flodin describes. Unless his copy of this Watchtower is formatted differently, I can see no place where a single piece of white paper at the bottom of the left hand column would obscure important information that would give the wrong impression of information at the top of the right hand column. The quote that Flodin makes comes in the middle of the right hand column.

He does not read for his audience what was written in the article that agrees with the questioners point. So it is impossible to know which statement he is referring to. However, near the bottom of the first column under the subheading: “They Shall Be All Taught of God” the Watchtower states:

“We would conclude practically, that we could not understand anything about the Bible except as it was revealed. We would, therefore, not waste a great deal of time doing what we know some people do, reading chapter after chapter, to no profit. We would not think of doing it. We would not think we were studying the scriptures at all. We would think we were following the course that had been anything but profitable to ourselves and many others in the past-merely reading over the Scriptures.”

So when we come to the subheading “SCRIPTURE STUDIES NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE BIBLE” and the paragraph Flodin references, it must be understood in the context of what Russell has been saying throughout the article up to this point. The context Flodin has not provided you with, namely that there is no need to read the Bible if you have his books because the scriptures are provided and commented on. In Russell’s mind the only reason a possessor of “Studies in the Scriptures” would have for reading the Bible is to initially check that the quotations are accurate. After that the recommended twelve pages a day should suffice to keep one in “the truth”.

In fact Russell goes on to say:

“We are not wishing in this to say anything against one’s poring over chapters that he does not understand and others do not understand, hoping that he might light on some truth. We have no objection to this. He has a perfect right to do so if he wishes. He has a right to spend weeks and years in this way if he chooses, but the chances even then are that when he does light on something he will have it all wrong.”

Flodin is right when he says apostates are deceitful. But who is being deceitful?