"The Calendar of Jehovah God" (page 2)

Leolaia

Rutherford publically rebuked Woodworth over the calendar:

"Shortly after coming to Bethel we were shocked to witness the spectacle of our brethren receiving what is designated as a 'trimming' from you. The first, if memory serves me correct, was a tongue lashing given to C. J. Woodworth. Woodworth in a personal letter to you stated something to the effect that it would be serving the devil to continue using our present calendar. For that he was humiliated, called a jackass, and given a public lambasting" (Moyle v. Fred W. Franz, et al., pp. 1732-1733).

Woodworth's math also does not appear to have been accurate. On p. 380 of the 13 March 1935 issue of the Golden Age, he writes that "in the autumn of 4129 B.C. the new moon rose at, Jerusalem time, 8:23: 27.504592 a.m., Sunday, September 22." According to Skyview Cafe, moonrise occurred on - 4128-09-22 (the year is not -4129 because 1 BC is counted as year 0) in time zone UT +2 in Jerusalem, ISR at 02:13 am, not at 8:23 am, and this fell on a Wednesday in the Gregorian calendar. More to the point, the new moon itself rose on Friday, September 25, at 06:32 a.m. So Woodworth's calculations ended up being three days out of whack with the actual passage of time. Three days out of six thousand years however is not too bad.

Leolaia

Interesting find, cabasilas! Looks like Woodworth's article was indeed ahead of the 1943 in dispensing with the extra 100 years. On the other hand, Rutherford already had begun to push 1874 to the side, by publishing such statements as: "The year 1914, therefore, marks the second coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, the King of glory" (1 December 1933 Watchtower, p. 362). I wonder how long Woodworth was engaged in his research and whether it already influenced Rutherford before 1935.

chasson

thanks cabasilas for the two others Golden-Age !!!

Bye

Charles

cabasilas

I have to apologize to everyone. I inadvertantly left out some pages in the "Jehovah's Calendar" file and I've just fixed it. If you downloaded it earlier you will want to do it again and overwrite. It just goes to show one shouldn't do such editing at the wee hours of the morning. Sorry about that!

The complete file (including the missing pages from earlier) is here:

http://www.catholic-forum.com/members/popestleo/Jehovah's%20Calendar.pdf

The first Golden Age issue to discuss the new Calendar was entirely devoted to that subject. The second two issues also included other regular items. The above "Jehovah's Calendar" file is limited to the subject of the Calendar. Those who might want all 3 issues can download them here:

http://www.catholic-forum.com/members/popestleo/g35MAR13-APR10.pdf

I've included the other info from the 35 YB and the Watchtower statements at the end of that file.

Again, I'm sorry about the mix-up with the missing pages from earlier but it's all fixed now.

cabasilas

More on the change in the date for creation. Page 382 (in the first GA issue of the series) says:

"None may say at just what time 'Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul" (Genesis 2:7, A.R.V.), but this series of articles contains the strong evidence that it was in the spring of the year 4060 Before Ransom (4028 B.C.)."

Looks like this signalled the dropping of the extra 100 years in Russell's chronology which had given the 1872 date. As Leolaia has already said JFR had already just discarded 1874 for the date of the parousia of Christ in favor of 1914. This continued the move from Russell's chronology to a new chronology that JFR was formulating.

cabasilas

Just was reading some more from the 1935 Watchtower bound volume. Notice this from the lecture "The Great Multitude" which JFR delivered at the Washington DC convention on May 31, 1935. (This is the famous lecture where JFR announced that the "Great Multitude" of Revelation chapter 7 was an earthly class.) He throws out an odd statement but it makes sense considering what had been going on amongst the JWs during this period:

The year 1918, according to the worldly calendar, marks the time when the Lord came to the temple of Jehovah, and also marks the end of the Elijah period of the Church.

The text of JFR's lecture was published in the August 1, 1935 Watchtower. This statement is on page 231. If the lecture was delivered on May 31st JFR certainly had been preparing it beforehand. Perhaps it reflects the anti-Gregorian calendar sentiments which had fueled the Golden Age series?

Atlantis

Some of the very best research I have seen for quite some time concerning time tables!

Excellent work Cabasilas!

Keep them coming old friend!

Cheers! Atlantis-

IP_SEC

Eccl 12:12 But beyond this, my son, be warned: the writing of many books is endless, and excessive devotion [to books] is wearying to the body

What a waste of good ink and paper

Atlantis

Watchtower-1966-May-1st-p.279 The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on the fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church.—Pages 355, 371, 373, edition of 1881. Scan: http://x5.freeshare.us/view/?125fs389280.jpg Cheers! Atlantis-

cabasilas

Here's a scan of the JW Calendar that was published for 1935. It was listed as 1903 Y.R. (in the Year of the Ransom):

Now, the reason the new calendar was proposed was because the current one in use in most of the world (the Gregorian) was connected to "false religion" (they called it a "papal" calendar) and because the days and months of the year had pagain origins. It was a similar concern that led Quakers to use terminology like "first day" and "eleventh month" instead of Monday and November, though Quakers did not try to change the overall scheme of the calendar. (Most modern Quakers do not make issues of these things today.)

I think that this illustrates the fallacy of seeking "pagan origins" in our current customs. When we refer to Wednesday are we honoring Woden? Or Thor on Thursday? Or, when a bride wears a veil at her wedding is she doing so because she's trying to ward off demons? Or, when Americans use the American dollar bill which has the all seeing eye of Horus on the reverse (and a pyramid to boot!) are they involved in demon worship? Or, when someone puts up a Christmas tree in their home are they honoring ancient pagan deities? No. These things have lost any association to paganism today.

"The Calendar of Jehovah God"

Share this