Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash 27 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • reslight2
    reslight2

    Poztate posted:

    It’s been a good while since the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Brooklyn-headquartered Christian Restorationist denomination best known for eschewing holidays, rejecting blood transfusions and prolific doorbell-ringing activities, have unleashed an official Armageddon prediction. For a while there, particularly before the turn of the 20th century, forecasting the Second Coming of Christ was the Watchtower Society’s real bread and butter (the legal and administrative arm of Jehovah’s Witnesses seems more preoccupied with real estate transactions these days). Since its formation in the 1870s by minister and self-proclaimed “God’s mouthpiece” Charles Taze Russell, the Watchtower Society has fingered — and then revised — several specific Second Coming-centric predictions: 1878 (revised to 1881), 1914, 1918 and 1925. The most recent failed prediction came in 1975, a year, yet again, believed to be the beginning of Christ’s millennial reign. Starting in the late '60s and leading up to 1975, the church was mobilized by the “apparent” Armageddon (later cautiously downgraded to a mere “possibility”). Proselytizing activities increased, membership grew and many Witnesses went into full-on end days prep mode by selling property, cashing in insurance policies, etc. When 1975 came and went without incident, church leaders entered a serious period of denial, blame and regret (guess that’s what happens when you prophesize the end of the world and it doesn’t happen), initially claiming that the creation dates of Adam and Eve had been miscalculated resulting in prophetic error. Whoops.

    Lest anyone be confused by all of the above, Charles Taze Russell was never a member of the JWs, nor did he ever seek to forbid anyone from celebrating holidays or blood transfusions. A comparatively few (called colportuers) of the Bible Students went door-to-door selling Studies in the Scriptures; there were many thousands (called volunteers) of Bible Students who distributed free literature door-to-door (usually without knocking at the door) or on sidewalks, etc. In that time, however, there did not exist the coercive methods of the JWs, who claim that such work is needed for salvation, being saved from eternal destruction in Armageddon, etc.

    Russell was one of the main founders of the original Watch Tower Society; that Society, has he had intended for it to be, however, was virtually destroyed within a few weeks after his death.

    The Watch Tower Society (which did not come into existence until 1881) in the days of Russell never made any prediction at all concerning Christ's "Second Coming". Nor did Russell himself ever make any prediction at all concerning Christ's Second Coming. In 1876, about two years after 1874, Russell accepted Barbour's conclusion that Christ had already returned in 1874, and Russell held to that belief until he died in 1916. Russell never said anything about Christ returning in 1878, 1881, 1914, or 1918. Russell rejected the idea that the year 1925 held any significance.

    Russell did believe that he and all Christians (irrespective of denominational ties) are mouthpieces of God; he was not claiming any infallibility on his part nor on the part of Christians in general when made such statements. He never claimed to be the sole mouthpiece of God.

    "The church" from Russell's standpoint, "is composed of consecrated followers of Christ irrespective of all denominational lines." (What Pastor Russell Wrote For The Overland Monthly, page 187).
    http://www.mostholyfaith.com/bible/OverlandMonthly/overland.asp?xRef=OV187

    "The Lord in Heaven records as members of His true Church all the saintly-whether Roman Catholics, Anglican Catholics, Greek Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, or Presbyterians, etc.-and none others.... We must see that the Church is a comparatively small company of Jesus' footstep followers, irrespective of sectarian lines."
    http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2008/09/xf01-catholic-church.html

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    Mr Russell said peace would be taken from the earth in 1914--he was correct--- He saw the first ride of the white horse( rev 6) by Jesus who recieved his crown( 1914) he erred by putting a date on harmageddon, but was absolutly correct on the other two events. The rapture is a false teaching that is not found in Gods written word.

    Sounds like kjw53 does not know his history. "Mr" Russell (or shouldn't you say Pastor?) did not prophecy that 1914 would see peace taken from the earth. 1914 was always to be the END, not the beginning of peace being removed.

    "But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble . Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226

    "Mr" Russel viewed 1914 as a minor date in comparrsion to all the other dates he prophesied about.

    "Our Lord, the appointed King, is now present since October 1874, A.D., according to the testimony of the prophets, to those who have ears to hear it: and the formal inauguration of his kingly office dates from April 1878, A.D." Studies in Scriptures Series IV (1897) p.621

    "Mr" Russel believed that Armageddon was already in progress and would END in 1914:

    "… the battle of the great day of God Almighty … The date of the close of that "battle" is definitely marked in Scripture as October 1914. It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874." Zion's Watch Tower 1892 January 15 p.23

    For kjw53 and Reslight to claim that Russel was right about ANYTHING, is to be avoiding the facts. Russel was wrong in every single one of his predictions, including 1914.

    By the way, the early Bible Students DID believe in the Rapture, and believed that Jesus would be taking his church home before 1914.

  • reslight2
    reslight2

    mrsjones5 posted:

    and when nothing happened he moved it to 1914. What a happifying cowinkydink!

    No, Russell never moved it to 1914; the statement "when nothing happened" (relating to 1874), is nonsensical from the standpoint of actual history.

    Russell himself never accepted that Christ had returned until 1876, about two years AFTER 1874. Why woud he -- in the year 1876 -- be accepting that Christ had returned in 1874 if he believed that "nothing happened" in 1874? In reality, Russell died in 1916 still holding to the belief that Christ had returned in 1874. He never moved it to 1914.

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    "Mr" Russel was only wrong about setting the date for Armageddon, kjw53?

    "The seventh trumpet sounds from Aug. 1840, until "the time of trouble," or day of wrath is ended. Hence, it doubtless ends with the times of the Gentiles, and this forty years of conquest; and therefore, sounds until A. D. 1914; at the end of which, Babylon the great, will have fallen, and the "dragon" be bound: that is, the nations will be subdued, and "the prince of this world cast out."" Three Worlds and The Harvest of This World (1877) p.143

    "A.D. 33, to A.D. 70 was 36 ½ years; and so from A.D. 1878 to the end of A.D. 1914 is 36 ½ years. And, with the end of A.D. 1914, what God calls Babylon, and what men call Christendom, will have passed away, as already shown in prophecy." Studies In the Scriptures Series III - Thy Kingdom Come (1891) p.153

    "October, 1914, will witness the full end of Babylon, "as a great millstone cast into the sea," utterly destroyed as a system." Watch Tower 1911 June 15 p.190

    "HARVEST" is a term which gives a general idea as to what work should be expected to transpire between the dates 1874 and 1914." Studies In the Scriptures Series III - Thy Kingdom Come p.135

    "These, already examined, show that the close of 1874 marked the beginning, as the close of 1914 will mark the end, of this 40 years of harvest; while all the minutiae of the order and work of this harvest were portrayed in that of the Jewish age, its type." Studies In the Scriptures Series III - Thy Kingdom Come pp.149-150

    "And yet "Jerusalem must be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled;" hence, trodden down until A. D. 1914, when the day of wrath will be passed, and the resurrection and return of the "whole house of Israel" due." Three Worlds and The Harvest of This World (1877) p.166

    "The beginning of the earthly phase of the Kingdom in the end of A.D. 1914 will, we understand, consist wholly of the resurrected holy ones of olden time-from John the Baptizer back to Abel-"Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and all the holy prophets." Studies In the Scriptures Series IV - The Day of Vengeance p.625

    "That the deliverance of the saints must take place some time before 1914 is manifest, since the deliverance of fleshly Israel, as we shall see, is appointed to take place at that time... Just how long before 1914 the last living members of the body of Christ will be glorified, was are not directly informed;..." Studies In the Scriptures Series III - Thy Kingdom Come (1908 ed.) p.228

    And then did the WT say they were wrong? Of course not! They changed history and LIED:

    "From the mid-1870's, Jehovah's people had been anticipating that catastrophic events would start in 1914 and would mark the end of the Gentile Times." Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand! (1988) p.105

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    reslight2

    From: THE TIME IS AT HAND page 99

    In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished at the end of A. D. 1914. Then the prayer of the Church, ever since her Lord took his departure - "Thy Kingdom come'' - will be answered; and under that wise and just administration, the whole earth will be filled with the glory of the Lord - with knowledge, and righteousness, and peace (Psa. 72:19; Isa. 6:3; Hab. 2:14); and the will of God shall be done "on earth, as it is done in heaven."

    Last time I checked the kindoms of this world are still ruling. Or is this what God's will is like in heaven?

    page 101

    Be not surprised, then, when in subsequent chapters we present proofs that the setting up of the Kingdom of God is already begun, that it is pointed out in prophecy as due to begin the exercise of power in A. D. 1878, and that the "battle of the great day of God Almighty'' (Rev. 16:14.), which will end in A, D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership, is already commenced. The gathering of the armies is plainly visible from the standpoint of God's Word.

    Did this happen?

    Is the battle over? Is this as good as it gets?

  • whathappened
    whathappened

    There is so much erroneous prediction in early Watchtower publications, can't we all just agree that it was all BS and be done with it???

  • reslight2
    reslight2

    Christ Alone posted:

    Sounds like kjw53 does not know his history. "Mr" Russell (or shouldn't you say Pastor?) did not prophecy that 1914 would see peace taken from the earth. 1914 was always to be the END, not the beginning of peace being removed.

    "But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble . Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226

    "Mr" Russel viewed 1914 as a minor date in comparrsion to all the other dates he prophesied about.

    "Our Lord, the appointed King, is now present since October 1874, A.D., according to the testimony of the prophets, to those who have ears to hear it: and the formal inauguration of his kingly office dates from April 1878, A.D." Studies in Scriptures Series IV (1897) p.621

    "Mr" Russel believed that Armageddon was already in progress and would END in 1914:

    "… the battle of the great day of God Almighty … The date of the close of that "battle" is definitely marked in Scripture as October 1914. It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874." Zion's Watch Tower 1892 January 15 p.23

    Since Russell, who was never speaking on behalf an authoritarian religious organization such the Jehovah's Witnesses, and who disclaimed eing a prophet, changed his viewpoint in 1904 -- ten years before 1914 -- quoting his statements before 1904 is misleading. As I stated, between the years 1904 to 1914 Russell was indeed expecting the time of trouble to begin, not end. Before 1904 he still held to Barbour's view that Armageddon was to end in 1914; however, he had long rejected Barbour's view that Armageddon had begun in 1874. From the time (I have not yet found the exact date) that Russell rejected Barbour's view that Armageddon had begun in 1874 on up to 1904, Russell believed that Armageddon was to begin a few years before 1914, perhaps 1910 or 1911 and end in 1914. In 1904, however, he concluded that Armageddon would stayed off untilf 1914. As I also said, however, his view of Armageddon was not the same as that of the JWs; he was not expecting that all unbelievers were to be eternally destroyed in 1914; he was expecting that the world was enter into a period of time of chatisement, in which they would disciplined preparatory to the blessings of God's Kingdom.

    I gave a link earlier to many of Russell's statements concerning 1914 that he made between the years 1904 to 1914. Here it is again for those wo missed it.

    http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=1301

    And here are some more links
    http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=40

    Russell never "prophesied" anything about any date at all. He did give his conclusions concerning what he was expecting concerning certain dates are time periods. From the very start of his public ministry, however, he disclaimed being a prophet, or that one should view his studies as being equivalent to the Bible.

    I have been studying Russell's works for more than 50 years. I know that in his very earliest works he used the word "rapture" as related to the "change" of the saints. In the context, however, it should be apparent that he was not using it with the same meaning as given by the "rapture" dogma, especially that of many of the Second Adventists who were expecting the planet earth to be destroyed. Nor was he expecting that the saints were to be rise in their human bodies up into heaven, as I have seen some describe the "rapture".

    Here are some links that provide searches of Russell's works for the word "rapture":

    Please note that not all references that may come up are the words of Russell; also please note that the word "rapture" itself does not always refer to the doctrine of men called "the rapture". It's basic meaning is simply is that of ecstaticjoyordelight;joyfulecstasy.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=rapture+site%3Amostholyfaith.com

    https://www.google.com/search?q=rapture+site%3Aagsconsulting.com

    https://www.google.com/search?q=rapture+site%3Actrussell.us

    In his book, The Object and Manner of Our Lord's Return (1877), Russell used the word "rapture" only once:
    http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/russell/object.pdf

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    Why do you follow a dead false prophet, Reslight? Why not realize he was just a man? Why not focus on the Bible instead of following after a man that has been proven to be false time and again? His dates were all flawed. 1914 or not, his 1874 prophecy was garbage. His ideas about the pyramids (which he died believing in) were garbage. His ideas about when Jerusalem was destroyed is garbage.

    Why not move on? If you want to hold on to Christianity, why not follow God as ruler rather than a man?

  • reslight2
    reslight2

    Christ Alone posted:

    For kjw53 and Reslight to claim that Russel was right about ANYTHING, is to be avoiding the facts. Russel was wrong in every single one of his predictions, including 1914.

    I do not claim that Russell was right about all things; Russell himself never claimed to be right about alll things. He never claimed to be a prophet, and plainly stated that he was not a prophet, and that his Studies should not be considered prophecy, but simply studies of the prophecies of the Bible. I have proven to myself from the Bible itself that Russell was right about most things, although he may have been wrong about some of the details. But I am speaking all of his works, not just his expectations regarding 1914.

    Russell was right, I believe, in his expectation that the Gentile Times were to end in 1914, and what many call a figurative "lease" expired for the Gentile Kingdoms. I believe he was right in his expectation that the time of trouble was to begin in 1914. I believe that he was right in his expectation that Israel was to be restored to the promised land after the end of the Gentile Times, although he was wrong in expecting it to happen in 1914 or 1915.

    Russell was wrong in expecting the harvest to end in 1914, as well as 1918.

    Regardling the change of the saints (what many call "the rapture") in 1914, Russell tried to get his associates to not place too much emphasis on such, for as, he stated, there is no scripture that actually corresponds the change of the saints to the ending of the Gentiles; nevertheless, many Bible Students were placing a lot of emphasis on this expectation.

  • Christ Alone
    Christ Alone

    So then reslight, you hold that his ideas about 607 were correct?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit