Cameron writes on page 41:
Franz said that in order to receive the appointment mentioned in Matthew 24:47 they “had” to have been providing (1) the correct Bible teachings (2) at the proper time. And according to the June 1, 2001 Watchtower, their teachings must also have been (3) only what God had revealed in his Word, and (4) that they had rejected all teachings that were based on human wisdom or tradition. But as the following chart shows, they didn’t meet any of their standards relative to any of the teachings considered in this study…
Now let’s review the four points he brings up. First point is:
they “had” to have been providing (1) the correct Bible teachings
From 1879-1919 the Society was teaching correct Bible teachings. They were teaching against the trinity, against a literal place of hellfire, against the immortality of the human soul, against a paid clergy class, against the superstition of not using the Divine name, against Jesus being a God-Man, etc. To anyone who is honest with themselves, it is evident, they were teaching “correct Bible teachings.” It is a completely different thing for opposers to admit that. If they do concede to this point, then this lends doubt and uncertainty to the whole premise of Cameron’s book. An overly used tactic Cameron engages in his book is the repeated emphasis of the Society’s misinterpretations and inaccuracies. He never acknowledges all of the CORRECT teachings the society was teaching during those years. Why does he leave that out of his book? Maybe he can answer that for us. Now the argument can be made that the Society was not teaching “all things” correct. This is true, and as already addressed in prior entries, the Bible answers this objection satisfactorily with the “refinement” prophecy.
The second point:
(2) at the proper time.
The Society was teaching “correct Biblical teachings” at the “proper time.” Why was it the proper time? It was the proper time because from late 1800’s to 1919(the years inspected according to Cameron), Christendom as a whole was teaching fundamental lies about the core teachings of the Bible. For example, they would teaching God was triune composed of three divine eternal persons, which is found nowhere in Scripture. They were teaching this triune God would torture sinners in hellfire, something opposed to the God of love. They were teaching the soul was immortal, incapable of dying. This teaching clearly opposed to Biblical truth. They encouraged young men to participate in the “Great War” even if it involved the killing of their fellow man, this being anything but one of the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ. They had taken God’s Holy name out of the Scriptures and gave no importance to it whatsoever. In contrast, the Bible Students lead by Charles Taze Russell were teaching against all these lies of Christendom. So, yes, it was most definitely the “proper time”!
Third point:
And according to the June 1, 2001 Watchtower, their teachings must also have been (3) only what God had revealed in his Word,
By this statement Cameron is misleading his readers. First let us look at the fuller quotation:
They base their teachings on the Bible. Jesus said: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality.” And also: “He that is from God listens to the sayings of God.” (John 7:16, 17; 8:47) Logically, to enjoy God’s backing, one must teach only what God reveals in his Word and reject teachings based on human wisdom or tradition.—Isaiah 29:13; Matthew 15:3-9; Colossians 2:8.
What Cameron implies with his statement is very misleading. He seems to suggest the Society must have had everything correct and hence, “their teachings must also have been only what God had revealed in his Word.” Once again, Cameron assumes when Christ chose his temple that his temple would need to have everything correct from the outset and wouldn’t have any inaccuracies. He ignores and even throws out the prophecy of the refinement in his assumptions. Malachi 3 and Daniel 12, among other scriptures, literally refute his argument. Why didn’t he address this Bible Prophecy?
Fourth point:
and (4) that they had rejected all teachings that were based on human wisdom or tradition.
Now we can see a vital error by Cameron. From his erroneous assumption on point three, he makes another conclusion on point four based on a prior inaccurate assumption. In fact, this is a common trend in his book and if not careful, one may be quick to fall into his schemes. In other words, this point is also answered by the prophecy of the Refinement. Later on in the same chapter, Cameron states what the Society said about Pastor Russell on page 621 of Proclaimers:
It certainly could not be expected that God would use C. T. Russell if he did not loyally adhere to God’s Word
Cameron argues since Russell’s theology had certain inaccuracies, that he “did not loyally adhere to God’s Word.” It seems Cameron demands perfection from Brother Russell, which is in reality, an unattainable feat. I suppose Cameron holds people to a higher standard than Jah and Christ do? Does that make Cameron more righteous and just, and therefore superior to Jah and Christ? Certainly not. It is certainly very loving and caring that Christ and Jah were not demanding perfection from the Society as Cameron does, we can be thankful that Christ and Jehovah look at hearts, not brains. As Psalms 7:9 says:”And may you [God] establish the righteous one; And God as righteous is testing out heart and kidneys.” Even King David prayed that God read his heart and refine it. (Psalms 26:2) And as Jeremiah said: “Jehovah of armies is judging with righteousness; he is examining the kidneys and the heart.” (Jeremiah 11:20) Jehovah confirmed this in Jeremiah 17:10-“I, Jehovah, am searching the heart, examining the kidneys, even to give to each one according to his ways, according to the fruitage of his dealings.” Similarly, Jesus says in Revelation 2:23-“all the congregations will know that I am he who searches the kidneys and hearts, and I will give to YOU individually according to YOUR deeds.” Jesus even condemned ones for not expressing “justice and mercy and faithfulness”-conditions of the heart. (Mt 23:23) So when Jesus appointed the “faithful and discreet slave” (Mt 24:45-7) “over all his belongings”, he was not primarily looking at the brain. Rather, he was “examining the kidneys and the heart”. The ones that proved faithful to him he could use, for these demonstrated that they were *teachable and leadable*. That’s why “the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established” (Pr 4:18).They demonstrate that their heart is in a teachable condition so they can learn greater light from the Bible.
Chapter 4 was a short chapter and thus a short entry. End.
Settingtherecordstraight's Blog 
STRS,
You said, “Cameron never acknowledges all of the CORRECT teachings (about the Trinity, hellfire, immortality of the soul) the Society was teaching during those years. Why does he leave that out of his book?”
Actually I DID mention those teachings. On page 40 I said, “There are some teachings that have not changed since 1919. They include: God’s name is not
“God,” God is not a Trinity, Jesus is not God, the soul is not immortal, hell is not hot, the dead are not conscious, and the earth will not be destroyed. But there were others who taught these same things before and after 1919. If these teachings passed an examination by Jesus, they would have passed no matter who was teaching them.”
The footnote said, “On page 622 of the Proclaimers book it acknowledges that Russell was not the only one who taught these things but it was just that he did a better job of publishing them than anyone else. See also page 45 under the
heading, “Influence of Others.”
If those who taught the same things the Society was teaching on these subjects doesn’t mean that they were Jesus’ “faithful and discreet slave” then I have conclude that those teachings didn’t mean the Society was Jesus’ “slave” either.
Don
STRS,
You said, “(Christendom) encouraged young men to participate in the “Great War.”
I don’t have the quote at this time but I do recall that Russell said that it was OK to go into the military. But he did recommend ‘shooting over the heads’ of the enemy in order to avoid killing anyone.
Don
You might wish to explore:
http://ctr.reslight.net/2010/06/30/onwar.html
Note: I couldn’t find Russell’s thought about “shooting over the enemy’s heads” but I’m pretty sure that’s what he recommended for Bible Students that couldn’t avoid going into the military.
And he also recommended for those who couldn’t avoid it that they try to get into some medical field of the Army.
In the reference material that was provided by “reslight” it seems clear that Russell sure didn’t recommend getting involved in any war.
But the Quakers weren’t too happy about getting involved with the military either.
Don
STRS,
I had quoted the Society when they said, “Logically, to enjoy God’s backing, one must teach only what God reveals in his Word and reject teachings based on human wisdom or tradition.” – June 1, 2001 Watchtower
You said, “Cameron seems to suggest the Society must have had everything correct and hence, ‘their teachings must also have been only what God had revealed in his Word.’”
But again, I’m not the one suggesting such a thing. I’ve just tried to hold the Society to their own criteria. And based on the above criteria they didn’t have God’s backing with any of the 48 teachings I mention in the book.
You said, “ Once again, Cameron assumes when Christ chose his temple that his temple would need to have everything correct from the outset and wouldn’t have any inaccuracies.”
And once again, I’m not the one who set the above criteria.
If you feel the above criteria is not realistic then I would recommend that you write to the Governing Body and explain to them what the correct criteria should be.
Don
STRS,
You said, “It seems Cameron demands perfection from Brother Russell, which is in reality, an unattainable feat. I suppose Cameron holds people to a higher standard than Jah and Christ do?”
The only standards I use to judge Russell’s and Rutherford’s teachings are the same ones that the Society uses to judge everyone else.
And based on their standards I have concluded that the Society would not have met the qualifications of a faithful or discreet slave of Jesus Christ based on what they had been teaching down till 1919.
Don
STRS,
I made the following point earlier but I’d like to expand on it a bit…
I know that you feel that the fact that before and after 1919 the Society was teaching the truth about things like the Trinity, immortality of the soul and hellfire that it proves that the Society is Jesus’ FDS.
But since others besides the Society were teaching the same things, why doesn’t that fact prove the same thing about them?
Especially so when it is realized that those other people were NOT teaching any of the strange things that Russell and Rutherford had been teaching that were not true, like the 48 ones I mention in the book.
For example: In 1914 while the above people WERE WAITING for Jesus’ return to begin his parousia, the Society was NOT WAITING for his return to begin his parousia. And so who was more faithful and discreet about that very important matter?
From its beginning in 1879 the Society has never waited or watched for Jesus to begin his parousia.
I wonder if you have noticed that ThirdWitness does not reason on this matter in a legitimate way when he changes the subject from Jesus‘ return to begin his parousia in 1874 to Jesus return in Kingdom power in 1914. And then he accuses me of not understanding what the Society was teaching about 1914.
ThirdWitness is so obsessed with trying to convince others not to pay any attention to what I have to say that he apparently doesn’t notice when he misrepresents what I have to say in order to prove his argument.
Don
I would add that in 1919 the Society was still basically preaching the Gospel as Russell had taught it, although Rutherford was already leading the Society into preaching an organization. By 1930, The Society was teaching almost the opposite of the Gospel that was taught in 1919. Russell never taught such an idea as that most of the population of earth was to eternally destroyed without ever receiving any benefit from the “ransom for all.”
http://jws.reslight.net/?p=19
STRS,
You pointed out how other religions had “had taken God’s Holy name out of the Scriptures and gave no importance to it whatsoever.”
But Russell and Rutherford “had taken God’s Holy name” and placed it on all their teachings that were not true.
The Proclaimers book says…
“Brother Russell did not claim credit for what he taught.”
But he should have taken credit for his teachings mentioned in my book because Jehovah surely didn’t take credit for them either.
The Proclaimers book says…
“He was an outstanding student of the Bible.”
But that didn’t help him understand the Bible about his teachings mentioned in my book. It seems fair to ask: If he was such “an outstanding student of the Bible” then how come he could never understand when Jesus returned to begin his parousia? ‘
How “outstanding” could he have been when he announced the wrong date for 40 years (1876-1916)?
Russell had said, “If I did not speak…the very stones would cry out.”
It seems to me that he should have “let he very stones cry out” about his teachings mentioned in my book. Those stones would not have taught any of them and they certainly would never have put Jehovah’s Name on them.
Don
STRS,
You said, “When Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the ‘same things’ Cameron says it is only because the governing body is telling them to believe.”
Wasn’t that true during those decades the Governing Body told the Witnesses to believe that it was “the Creator’s promise of a peaceful new world before the generation of 1914 passed away?
What about the 48 teachings mentioned in my book? Jehovah’s Witnesses believed all of them as long as the Governing Body told them to believe them even though none of them were true.
That’s why I said that the fundamental reason why Jehovah’s Witnesses have their unity of belief is “because their Governing Body does not allow anyone in their religion who disagrees with them even if what they are teaching isn’t true.”
As I have previously said, the fact that you and ThirdWitness haven’t figured this out yet doesn’t mean that I’m lying. It just means that for whatever reason(s) you two haven’t noticed that this is how the Watchtower religion works.
Don
STRS,
I said, “The Watchtower’s free Bible study program is set up in such a way that Bible students become convinced that it is God’s organization before they ever get to Matthew 24:45-47.”
You then said, “Has Cameron ever thought the student becomes convinced Jehovah’s Witnesses are God’s people because of the truths they teach from the Bible, not because of the interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47?”
Isn’t that what I just said? People “become convinced that Jehovah’s Witnesses are God’s people (“God’s organization”) based on what the Society is teaching today. But according to their interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47 they should be convinced because of what Russell and Rutherford had been teaching “down till 1919.”
If you and ThirdWitnesss honestly think that Jesus would have been so pleased with what they had had been teaching down till 1919 that he appointed Rutherford and his associates “over all his earthly interests,” then that’s what you will believe.
But in my case since I honestly think Jesus would have been so displeased with what those men had been teaching that he would not have appointed them over anything, and so that’s what I believe.
This doesn’t mean that you two or I are trying to mislead or deceive anyone. It only means that we disagree on this matter.
Don