by Dold Agenda 12 Replies latest jw friends
Q: When did russel/bible students came up with the 606-1914 calculations?
For russel the invisible precense of Jesus started 1874 right?
But was'nt his year of autumn 1914 when the harma should start based on pyramydology alone?
Or was he from the start telling about "7 times" and 360 for a year in any of his (er.. marias) books?
Or is this something that came up afterwards as a cover-up?
They didn't.
See Blondie's excellent comment in this thread to find out who did:
When did russel/bible students came up with the 606-1914 calculations?
They didn't.
The 606/1914 calculation came entirely from Nelson Barbour, a disappointed follower of William Miller. Russell first came across Barbour's writings in January of 1876. Russell was so impressed with Barbour's work that he paid his expenses to come to Philidelphia and meet with him. Russell then financed the publication of Three Worlds and Harvest of This World which explained Barbour's end-times chronology in detail.
Barbour and Russell worked together for about a year before a disagreement over the mechanics of the Ransom caused them to part company. Russell then commenced publication of a periodical of his own entitled Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence.
For russel the invisible precense of Jesus started 1874 right?
Yes.
But was'nt his year of autumn 1914 when the harma should start based on pyramydology alone?
The pyramidology came much later and was never anything more than a supporting line of evidence (i.e. Corroboration of the original calculation.)
Also, the modern JW concept of Armageddon came after Russell died. Russell's view was very different.
Russell did believe that 1914 would be the farthest limit of Man's rule though.
Or was he from the start telling about "7 times" and 360 for a year in any of his (er.. marias) books?
The "Tree Dream" (Seven times) has always been the principle calculation
Thx!
It's also what I consider one of the most misleading aspects of the "Faith in Action 1" DVD, which made it look it was Russell who discerned the 607/1914 calculation.
606 is interesting in itself that 606 was derived from fall of Babylon in the autumn of 536BC. Historians viewed autumn of 538 as the fall of Babylon but few wanted to align the fall with 70 years of Jewish captivity so the year for the fall of Babylon was viewed by some as 536BC and that's the year Russell used. Unlike today when wts claims that it took two years (539-2) after the fall of Babylon for the Jews to be allowed to go back home from Babylon. The 1914 was calculated from 606BC as the year for the end of gentile times and end of the world as they knew it. 1914 was also based on other supportive calculations from 1874 and 1878. Pyramid was another supportive proof that the last days will end in 1914. There is a lot of numbers floating around which I don't remember them all but some were 40 year harvest from 1874 which ended with 1914. Another parallel I think was 40 years from appearance of Christ (30AD baptism) was the fall of Jerusalem to Rome(Jewish system) thus 40 years from the second arrival of Jesus was the end of the system of things.
7 times was used by many earlier date seekers but the 7 times and end of the gentile times came together in the 1800s.
I researched this some 3 years ago so the details now are starting to get a bit fuzzy (I hope all the above numbers and dates I give are correct as I'm going off my memory) but you will find answers to your questions in Russell's Thy Kingdom Come book and by reading Gentiles Times Reconsidered by Carl Olof Jonnson.
No different to JWN's own Lars and Obves.
Seems like Luke 21:24 is back (someone said they'd gone over the a Matt. passage):
http://www.watchtower.org/e/bh/appendix_10.htm
hmmmmmm . . .
The book Nelson Barbour: The Millennium's Forgotten Prophet traces the 2520 year calculation to Joshua Spalding, an American clergyman who wrote about 1800. Russell got the 1914 date from Barbour who in turn extracted it from E. B. Elliott's Horae. Barbour did not hide his reliance on Elliott, but Russell seems never to have mentioned him.
The 606 calculation was rejected by a man named Baldwin who pointed to 607 BC, the date Russellites later accepted. Many of the historical puzzles like this one are answered in that book.
I cannot recommend this strongly enough. I'm a member of the authors' private history blog. Their work is outstanding. One of the two writers is a Witness; the other is Church of God (Abrahamic Faith). They write straight history. It's well documented and far different from the silliness that shows up here on occasion. Buy and read the book. I'm waiting anxiously for their next book. They've posted exerpts of it on their blog. The research is breathtaking.
I'm a little fuzzy on the details now, but didn't John Aquila Brown use the 2,520 years calculation in his book "The Even Tide" in 1823. I believe that to be correct. This would have been 20 years before Russell was born, and some 40 years before Russell started preaching.
-MF31-
