English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If it was built for the resurected prophets that Rutherford said would be brought back to life in 1925, why was it sold in 1947? What is the real story? Please, no nasty remarks! I am only asking a question because I feel like we all have the right to ask questions! Thank you!

2007-10-30 06:45:40 · 5 answers · asked by Marie 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Line dancer, Please do not call anyone or website "apostate" just because they question this. If this is an honest up front question, it deserves an honest answer. I am not here to call anyone names or throw accusations, just asking an honest question. OK? Look, why did they say they were preparing a place for the prophets and then change their mind on this? Why does this organization always have a history of changing their minds on things? Who makes this stuff up anyway? Who exactly is it that decides when a doctrine is not right? On what or whom do they base their doctrinal decision making? I am really confused! Maybe I just do not see everything and you need to present the facts without calling people names. Here is your chance to help me understand all this. Thank you!

2007-10-30 09:42:22 · update #1

Thank you, Ruth for your honest answer. I applaud you for not calling anyone names because they just asked a question!

2007-10-30 09:44:58 · update #2

5 answers

Amber, Please see my answer to the previous question about Beth Sarim. The information is true and can be proven if you can locate a copy of the Consolation magazine.

Rutherford expected Abraham, et al in 1925, but they didn't come. In 1929, he had Beth Sarim built, it appears primarily as a lavish residence for himself, but in order to give it a "theocratic" angle, he said it was really for the "princes" which were due back any day. Apparently, though, it was really mostly for Judge Rutherford so after he died, the Society had no use for it, since no prophet had shown up to claim it.

The Society apparently stopped looking for them by 1947 and sold the property which was quite expensive to keep up. Three years later, in 1950, the Watchtower explained that the Society had changed its view about the "princes".

Edited

Just my 2 cents about Rutherford's luxury cars. Since the WT workers were being discouraged from acquiring such luxuries, it would seem more appropriate if Rutherford had declined the "gifts", or sold them, then purchased a more modest car, and donated the rest of the money to the worldwide work. Let's don't forget that even though the initial "gift" was donated, Watchtower donations then had to be used for upkeep and maintenance.

2007-10-30 07:16:11 · answer #1 · answered by steervase 2 · 4 3

Brother Rutherford had a severe case of pneumonia after his release from unjust imprisonment in 1919. Thereafter, he had only one good lung. In the 1920’s, under a doctor’s treatment, he went to San Diego, California, and the doctor urged him to spend as much time as possible there. From 1929 on, Brother Rutherford spent the winters working at a San Diego residence he had named Beth-Sarim. Beth-Sarim was built with funds that were a direct contribution for that purpose. The deed, which was published in full in “The Golden Age” of March 19, 1930, conveyed this property to J. F. Rutherford and thereafter to the Watch Tower Society.

Concerning Beth-Sarim, the book “Salvation,” published in 1939, explains: “The Hebrew words ‘Beth Sarim’ mean ‘House of the Princes’; and the purpose of acquiring that property and building the house was that there might be some tangible proof that there are those on earth today who fully believe God and Christ Jesus and in His kingdom, and who believe that the faithful men of old will soon be resurrected by the Lord, be back on earth, and take charge of the visible affairs of earth.”

A few years after Brother Rutherford’s death, the board of directors of the Watch Tower Society decided to sell Beth-Sarim. Why? “The Watchtower” of December 15, 1947, explained: “It had fully served its purpose and was now only serving as a monument quite expensive to keep; our faith in the return of the men of old time whom the King Christ Jesus will make princes in ALL the earth (not merely in California) is based, not upon that house Beth-Sarim, but upon God’s Word of promise.”

At the time, it was believed that faithful men of old times, such as Abraham, Joseph, and David, would be resurrected before the end of this system of things and would serve as “princes in all the earth,” in fulfillment of Psalm 45:16. This view was adjusted in 1950, when further study of the Scriptures indicated that those earthly forefathers of Jesus Christ would be resurrected after Armageddon.—See “The Watchtower,” November 1, 1950, pages 414-17.

2007-10-30 06:52:34 · answer #2 · answered by Abdijah 7 · 9 1

That's what happens when you get information from the wrong sources.

From 1929 on, Brother Rutherford spent the winters working at a San Diego residence he had named Beth-Sarim. Beth-Sarim was built with funds that were a direct contribution for that purpose. The money was from private donations.

After Rutherford passed away, Beth-Sarim was sold.

Watchtower libraries do not hide the existence of Beth-Sarim. Apostate websites, that have statements from ex-witnesses provide much wrong information. One site has Rutherford posing in front of 2 expensive cars, as if he were living a life of luxury. What was not told is that he did not drive these cars nor did he purchase them. They were donated from private contributions. Because of all the long distance traveling he did, driving a car was an impractical form of transportation.

2007-10-30 06:50:14 · answer #3 · answered by LineDancer 7 · 6 4

I would like for LineDancer to give us the real story then? This is true is it not? I have seen a video about this as well..There are pictures of Rutherford and the house..and his luxury cars that he purchased as well. So..what is the real story? If its not true..then tell us..What is it. I am interested as well.

2007-10-30 06:54:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

Never heard of it. That is strange that such a place existed and no witness ever heard of it.

2007-10-30 09:07:26 · answer #5 · answered by Ruth 6 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers