Chosen? Guess that's debatable. Did he figure it out on his own? No. See the bolded if it's too long for you.
Mr. Russell was first of all, a businessman quite able to respond to what would sell and how to do it.
He was also a liar, a fraud, a womanizer, false prophet, and perjured himself many times. It's public record of the times he lied under oath and was caught at it. He was often in court.
Quoting: Nine's Russell was not perfect, but he did seek to speak the truth. One will not find any public court record in which he was ever charged with perjury. The court records indicate that on one occasion he did not interpret some certain questions with the intent that the questioner had for the questions, or, on another occasion, that his memory failed him as pertaining to a certain name, but not that he was actually lying.
[
link to ctr.reslight.net]
The womanizing might not be 100 percent true if Mr. Russells assertions are true that it wasn't him, but fallen angels materializing as him that the women actually saw.
Quoting: Nine's I do not know of any time that Russell ever made such an assertion. Mrs. Russell made a lot of insinuations about certain circumstances, which insinuations Mr. Russell explained, but I have not found any place that Russell ever claimed that angels were materializing as him.
Anyone that spoke against him or his scams was sued.[/scam]
Russell certainly did not sue everyone who spoke against him. This is totally silly.
Since Russell had no "scams" the real scammers were those who were spreading falsehoods about Russell.
He even sued the newspaper that reported about his escapades.
Quoting: Nine's Yes, Russell sued The Brooklyn Eagle for its gross evil misrepresentation of Russell. His mistake was in filing suit for libel rather than slander. If he had filed for slander, he probably would have won the suit.
Rutherford, the one that took over the WT society after Russell, was his attorney at some of these court hearings.
Charles Taze Russell got many doctrinal ideas from Jonas Wendell, a Seventh Day Adventist preacher. Jonas Wendell didn't believe in a burning hell or the trinity. Mr. Wendell believed the second coming would be in 1873.
Quoting: Nine's Evidently, Russell, around 1870, did regain interest in the Bible as result of attending one of Wendell's meetings. Russell did not state what it was at that meeting that rekindled his interest, but it evidently did have something to do with what hell is actually is, according to the Bible. Russell, however, did not accept Wendell's "end of the world" teachings, nor at that time did Russell have any interest in Wendell's study of time prophecies.
Shortly after 1870, Russell came to understand the ransom sacrifice of Jesus, and the Jesus had sacrificed his flesh, and thus that Jesus is no longer a human being.
Around 1876, Russell came across Barbour's publication which spoke of Christ's invisible return. Recognizing this as being similar to his own conclusions that Christ is no longer a human being, and that Christ would not return in the flesh, Russell became interest in what Barbour had to say. Thus, in 1876, Russell accepted Barbour's conclusion that Christ had already returned in 1874 and that the Gentile Times were to end in 1914.
IMO it doesn't take much of a business man to notice the following this prophecy gained and after it failed, to know the seed was already planted and it could be watered to produce a following and mega money at a later date.
Quoting: Nine's If Russell was interested in making mega money for himself, he certainly adopted a method that ensured that he would not make mega money for himself. Indeed, Russell divested himself of his wealth in order to promote the message of the good news of great joy that will be for all the people, although the vast majority of the people are still blinded by Satan, and thus oppose that message.
Russell encouraged his followers to read the book "Angels and Women." Some sources say it was Russell who personally supervised it's editing, others say it was a close friend who edited, with Russell supervising.
Quoting: Nine's I have found no evidence that Russell ever "encouraged" his alleged "followers" to read the book, Angels and Women. In reality, that book did not exist until after Russell died, although its percursor, SEOLA, did exist. Rutherford had a way of stretching the truth of history, even rewriting history, as it suited him. Russell may have suggested to some of his co-workers that they read the book SEOLA (I don't know) with the thought of making a report about the book, but there is no meantion of that book anywhere at all in any of Russell's known writings. Thus, whatever, Russell might have suggested towards anyone reading that book, he never suggested that the readers of his magazine should read that book.
[
link to ctrussell.wordpress.com]
Regardless, the book was dictated by a "fallen angel" and was offered at a discount to Russell followers.
Quoting: Nine's I don't know of any actual records kept, but I believe it is quite possible that most of those who had been associated with the work of Russell did NOT accept this book. By 1928, more than 75% of the Bible Students had rejected Rutherford's "Jehovah's visible organization" dogma.
It was later recommended by the Watchtower Society "as shedding new light they believed and taught that Jehovah was a being who eternally existed in the time and space of this universe. This place was the Pleiades star system. From there Jehovah sent his angels to earth."
Only fair to add that it was at a time when they thought that "some" fallen angels were "honest".
Quoting: Nine's I don't think that Russell ever spoke of any of the "fallen angels" as being "honest". He did believe that there was a possibility that the fallen angels might be offered an opportunity to repent. It was this thought that evidently led Rutherford or some Rutherford's associates to think that this book, SEOLA, was written under the influence of such a repentant angel. Russell, himself, however, never wrote anything about the book, SEOLA, which would seem to indicate that he did not hold that book to be a dependable source of truth.
