Reflection from the past...

by Scorpion 16 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  RR

  Pathofthorns:

  Can u explain what you just said in more detail?

  Certainly .... The Chronology that the Jehovah's Witnesses use today IS NOT the chronology that C.T. Russell used to determine his dates. In fact they are two entirely different chronologies

  The only date the two agreed on was 1914, however, Pastor Russell believed that "the Gentiles times" would end in 1914, and based upon end time prophecies, his mistake was believing that the 'signs' and 'events' leading up to armageddon would happen all within a timespan.

  Let me try to explain in laymans term. Russell believed that the presence began in 1874 [there are at least five different ways to arrive at the date] and that teh gentile Times would end in 1914, a forty year period. He believed the presence would last forty years and end in 1914 with armageddon. Later he amended his thoughts as the world events seemed to show something differently, although he was dogmatic about the dates, he was not so dogmatic about the events [contrary to some]. The reason for the chnage from 1914 to 1915 is that in the Jewish calander, the first month is October, so the end would come betwen October 1914 and October 1915. Interestingly the WWI broke out in October 1914.

  We have to keep in mind that although the Society uses certain phrases similiar to Russell, such as the "gentile times", they meant different things to both Russell and the Society. To Russell the gentile times had everything to do with Israel, while to the Society it had everything to do with the Society.

  In answer to the Studies in the Scriptures Russell had all his books printed outside, there were no Society presses, normaly any changes he made, were made in The Watch Tower journal, and the brethren would note those chnages in their volumes. Often time in reprinting the volumes, Russell simply made a correction of thought in his forewords, leaving the rest of the book intact. This caused problems, because how many remember reading what the foreword says when you're half way through the book?

  "People in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones"
• 

  RR

  Okay, I didn't find the 1902 quote [yet] but I did fine this interesting bit from 1907, in regards the chronology:

  But let us suppose a case far from our expectations: suppose that A.D. 1915 should pass with the world's affairs all serene and with evidence that the "very elect" had not all been "changed" and without the restoration of natural Israel to favor under the New Covenant. (Rom. 11:12,15.) What then? Would not that prove our chronology wrong? Yes, surely! And would not that prove a keen disappointment? Indeed it would! It would work irreparable wreck to the Parallel Dispensations and Israel's Double, and to the Jubilee calculations, and to the prophecy of the 2300 days of Daniel, and to the epoch called "Gentile Times," and to the 1260, 1290, and 1335 days, the latter of which marking the beginning of the "harvest" so well fulfilled its prediction, "Oh, the blessedness of him that waiteth and cometh unto the 1335 days!" None of these would be available longer. What a blow that would be! One of the strings of our "harp" would be quite broken! However, dear friends, our harp would still have all the other strings in tune and that is what no other aggregation of God's people on earth could boast. We could still worship a God so great and grand that none other could compare with him. We should still see the grandeur of his salvation in Christ Jesus--"a ransom for all." We should still see the wonders of "the hidden mystery," our fellowship with our Redeemer in "his death" and also "in his resurrection" to "glory, honor and immortality"--"the divine nature." If, therefore, dearly beloved, it should turn out that our chronology is all wrong, we may conclude that with it we have had much advantage everyway. If the attainment of our glorious hopes and present joys in the Lord should cost us such disappointment as our friends fear, we should rejoice and count it cheap! - The Watch Tower 1907, page 297

  Notice the difference between Russell's attitude and the Society's.
  It might not happen .... so don't be disappointed, however consider the thoughts of the Society about 1975, they kept pushing the friends to preach and preach, to forsake everything, and when 1975 came and went, what did they do? Blamed it on a few overzealous Witnesses.

  Edited by - RR on 21 December 2000 22:16:44
• 

  Scorpion

  RR,

  You are right about Russell in the fact that he was not as dogmatic as the Society is after Rutherford took over to the present.

  The problem I see with Russell that correlates with the Society today, is that both Russell and the Society run ahead of God with premature or false statements as to what is going to happen in the future and try to relate these statements to the Bible. This is misleading and makes such individuals such as Russell look like a Kook.
• 

  Pathofthorns

  Very interesting. Thanks RR. I'll watch this thread and see how it developes.

  Path
• 

  RR

  Scorpion, I understand what you're saying, but keep in mind that Russell never claimed to be a prophet, although there are many who claim he was a false prophet for his 1914 prediction.

  However, all the prophecies we have are contained in the scriptures, some have been fulfilled, others have yet to be fulfilled, a fulfilled prophecy can only be known AFTER the facts.

  Russell was no prophet, because he was not given anything new or added to scriptures, what he attempted to do was INTERPRET prophecy, based on his knowledge of Scripture and the end times.

  It is interesting that some of the great theological minds, Martin Luther, John Clavin to mention a few, have predicted dates, none of which came to pass, not even close, yet no one calls them a false prophet or even mentions such date setting.

  "People in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones"
• 

  Scorpion

  RR,

  Where did Russell get his knowledge about Scripture?

  You said that no one calls Luther or Calvin a false prophet for the dates they set.

  I say: It just shows how blind people are when they follow a man and his false predictions in the name of God. Just because Calvin and Luther are not called upon for their error of false date setting does not excuse them as well as Russell for the misguided teachings they espoused.
• 

  RR

  Where did Russell get his knowledge about Scripture?

  He got it from various sources, he borrowed here, he borrowed there, he borrowed mainly from the Advent Christians

  "People in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones"