(Investigator 90, 2003 May)
Charles T Russell, the founder of the Watchtower Society (WTS) and of the sect called Millennial Dawn which became Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs), engaged in public debates and had some success.
By 1913
Russell
discouraged further public
debate on the grounds that:
1. Talent makes more impression than truth;
2. Debate arouses anger, bitterness and malice;
3. Russell's debates had been intended as "entering-wedges for the newspaper work."
(Watch Tower Reprints 1915, May 1, p. 5685)
…the "battle of the great day of God Almighty" (Rev. 16:14.), which will end in A.D. 1915, with the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership, is already commenced. (p. 101)
But not until the great day of trouble is about closing – not until the Gentile kingdoms are ground to powder and utterly removed, no place being found for them (A.D. 1915, as shown in the preceding chapter) – not until great Babylon is utterly overthown and her influence over the world broken – will the great mass of mankind come to realize the true state of the case. (p. 140)
The harvest work will occupy forty years for its full accomplishment, ending with A.D. 1914. (p. 150)
The "Gentile
Times"
prove
that the present
governments must all be overturned about the close of A.D. 1915… (p.
242)
Russell, however, probably did not want extra prestige for Rutherford because Rutherford was not Russell's choice as a potential successor.
For example,
in his Will
and Testament C
T Russell named a five-man Editorial Committee to determine the content
of The Watch Tower after his death. The Will and Testament
excluded
Rutherford from the Committee. After Russell died, however, two
Committee
members were replaced with two others one of whom was Rutherford.
(Watch
Tower Reprints1916, December 1, pp. 5997, 5999)
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE 1916
Early 1916 | December 1916 |
W E Page | J F Rutherford |
W E Van Amburgh | W E Van Amburgh |
H C Rockwell | H C Rockwell |
E W Brenneison | R H Hirsh |
F H Robison | F H Robison |
The second reason, therefore, for Russell's policy of discontinuing public debate was probably to keep Rutherford in check – an aim that failed when Rutherford became the next WTS president!
Rutherford, however, would have seen public debate differently. To him – if he could represent Russell – it would be an effective way to gain extra prestige and popularity within the cult. This indeed happened in 1915, April 21-24, in Los Angeles, California.
The Los
Angeles
Express
(April 22)
reported:
In the 1920s
Rutherford
phased out public
debates. A debate with Dr B H Shadduck, an anti-Rutherford writer and
editor
of The Sunday School Times, failed to take place because
Rutherford's
people insisted on "impossible conditions":
One talking-point of the "witnesses" is the boast that the clergy are afraid to debate with Mr. Rutherford. The answer is two-fold.
1. Not one
clergyman in
500 has read the
books of Mr. Russell and not one in 5000 has contrasted the early and
late
editions.
2. If one
who is
informed accepts the challenge,
they impose impossible conditions. I have repeatedly offered to debate.
My last experience was with a gentleman in the mid-West. He demanded
that
I come to his town, bear my own expense, debate with him twice a
day for twenty days, discuss the questions he proposed and
no
other, and be silenced by the chairman if I introduced other matters. Not
one question, under this rule, would permit me to discuss doctrines
peculiar to this cult. I offered to submit the matter to arbitration
and
this was refused.
(The Seven
Thunders
of
Millennial Dawn,
B H Shadduck, 1928, pp. 3 &31)
In the
1930s
Rutherford issued challenges
for debate to the Pope, which were ignored.
The next presidents of the WTS, N H Knorr and F W Franz, also banned JWs from public debating. They claimed debates settle nothing, are influenced by the speaking ability of the debater, and often get off the topic by criticising the opponent personally.
A WTS letter
to a Mike
Frederickson said:
Debate with an honest intent to find out who's right would have sorted out many false prophecies of the WTS before they were preached and so saved the time of millions of people! When the above letter speaks of "Bible-based beliefs" and "learn about God's will", it implies the unsubstantiated claim that any potential opponent in debate is wrong and nothing can be learned from him.
The real
reason JWs
won't
debate is that
informed opponents will likely bring up failed prophecies of the WTS
and
that would be bad publicity. People would find out what Reverend Troy
stated
in 1915:
The truth about Jehovah's Witnesses:
Dictionary of Jehovah's Witnesses at:
https://ed5015.tripod.com/jwdictionary/