1. Why did Brother Russell in 1916 look for a future rising of the nominal systems to great prominence again in connection with the Church- State Kingdoms?
a. Brother Russell was not permitted to know that false Christendom would not survive the war. He had correctly taught for many years that the world war would come and so weaken Christendom that revolution and anarchy could and would set in and finish the job of destruction. So he reasoned that the revolution and anarchy would not come until the war was over and based his comments on that premise. But by Nov. 11, 1918 (the date of the Armistice) internal revolution and anarchy had destroyed those church-state empires forever.
b. The nominal systems could not become prominent with kingdoms and empires which did not exist. They could not sit as a "Queen" when there was no king with which to commit harlotry. Church systems do not usually intermarry with Republics or Democracies, but should there be such a working arrangement made, the divine right of kings doctrine could not be used. Without that doctrine, there can be no false Kingdom of God. D36:1,2; R5466:18-20
c. In perusing our Pastor's writings, we have never found him to teach that there would be church-state union future to the time that the kings were gone. In other words, he thought that when the kings, the ruling houses of Europe were severed from their thrones, a come-back would be impossible. Search the Scripture. Do they speak of such a come-back? Do they speak of the "Stone" striking the "Ten Toes of the Image" the second time? We find no such teachings. C49:1