Posts by reslight2

27

Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash in

under the topic of failed end of the world predictions, jws 1914 date gets outed:.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--five-doomsdays-that-never-happened-143929918.html.

splash.

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.

27

Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash in

under the topic of failed end of the world predictions, jws 1914 date gets outed:.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--five-doomsdays-that-never-happened-143929918.html.

splash.

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

27

Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash in

under the topic of failed end of the world predictions, jws 1914 date gets outed:.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--five-doomsdays-that-never-happened-143929918.html.

splash.

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.

27

Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash in

under the topic of failed end of the world predictions, jws 1914 date gets outed:.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--five-doomsdays-that-never-happened-143929918.html.

splash.

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

27

Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash in

under the topic of failed end of the world predictions, jws 1914 date gets outed:.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--five-doomsdays-that-never-happened-143929918.html.

splash.

reslight2

kjw53 posted:

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.

I cannot find anything in Russell's writings that supports all of the above; much of it appears to be later teachings of the JWs. Yes, the "rapture" is a false teaching.

In a few of Russell's very earlier writings, he used the word "rapture", but his use of it was not the same its usage as represented in the doctrine of the "rapture" that many speak of, thus he evidently, early in his ministry, stopped using that term as related to the "change" of the saints.

One can check Brother's Russell's thoughts related to Revelation 6 at:

http://www.mostholyfaith.com/bible/BibleXref.asp?xref=bible^Revelation^6

You will need to click on the verse numbers to receive a listings of references to that verse. I do not necessarily agree with all of Russell's conclusions.

Although I could not find any specific statement from Russell in which he said "peace would be taken from the earth in 1914", many of his statements between 1904 to 1914 are in harmony with that thought.

As I mentioned earlier, Russell's view of Armageddon was not the same as that of the JWs. He was not expecting the kind of Armageddon that the JWs preach in 1914; he believed that Armageddon was a period of time -- however long it make take -- in which the peoples of the nations were fully learn the lesson of vanity, after which they were to be blessed in the coming blessings of the kingdom.

27

Yahoo News gives JWs a mention

by Splash in

under the topic of failed end of the world predictions, jws 1914 date gets outed:.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apocalypse-2012--five-doomsdays-that-never-happened-143929918.html.

splash.

reslight2

cofty posted:

Jehovah’s Witnesses’ prediction of the Second Coming, August 1914 ***
The door-knocking religious sect’s founder, Charles Taze Russell, predicted that the year would see the Second Coming of Christ.

The JW organization did not exist before 1914 and thus there were no members of that organization at that time. I do not know of anyone associated with the Bible Students who was "predicting" or expecting the Second Coming in 1914.

http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=1556

As someone else has already pointed out, Charles Taze Russell believed Christ had returned in 1874; he was not expecting Christ to return in 1914.
http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=1174

Russell did not believe in an organization such as the Jehovah's Witnesses; he certainly was not the founder of such an organization that he preached against.

http://ctr.reslight.net/?cat=64

From 1904 onward, Russell was expecting that the time of trouble was to begin in 1914, which I believe it did, and we have been in the time of trouble ever since 1914. Additionally, one of the things he believed that would accompany that time of trouble was to be "warfare". Not all that he was expecting has come to pass as quickly as he expected.

See:
Russell's Comments on "The Time of Trouble"

Russell's view of "Armageddon", however, was not the same as that of JWs. Russell was not expecting that in 1914 all unbelievers would be eternally destroyed without ever having come to a knowledge of the truth. Indeed, he preached against similar ideas that were being preached by some of the Second Adventists in his day. He believed that Armageddon was a period of time in which the peoples of the nations were to chastised, not eternally destroyed, in preparation for the blessings of the kingdom.

http://ctr.reslight.net/?cat=119

31

Jesus=The archangel Michael?

by WatchTowerofBabel in

(the first chapter of hebrews seems quite explicit on the issue).

but since scriptural texts don't seem quite enough for my jdub kinfolks (wtf?

), i tried to find out where this poppycock idea first popped up.. .

reslight2

I don't have too much time at the present to go into detail.

I am not with the JWs, but Russell adopted the idea that Jesus is the archangel from the Protestant reformers who taught this. Many trinitarians have taught that Jesus is the archangel.

See:
Trinitarians and Michael the Archangel

http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=674

There is nothing in Hebrews 1 (or anywhere else in the Bible) that says that he who is the chief over the angels is not the chief over the angels. Indeed, Hebrews 1:4,6 indicates that Jesus is indeed the archangel.

See my studies on the Michael the Archangel:

Michael the Archangel
http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=730

Is Jesus the Archangel?

http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=2860
http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=2966

5

Recent "New Light"?

by lilbluekitty in

jw
friends

so i've been away from anything witness-y for a number of months...what "new light" are they talking about now?

anything or is it all the same doom and gloom?

i haven't talked to my mom in awhile and when we do talk we don't talk about jw stuff much except for her bragging about rbc stuff.. what news is there?

reslight2

Eustace stated:

Also they only started existing in 1919, conveniently just after Charles Taze Russell died.

Russell actually taught against the formation of an organization such as the Jehovah's Witnesses. Until the internet, very few of the JWs were being exposed to what Russell actually taught; could it be that this "new light" is response to the exposure on the internet that no such "organization" existed in the days of Russell?

What Did Russell Teach About "Organization" as Related to the True Church?
http://ctr.reslight.net/?p=1892

5

Recent "New Light"?

by lilbluekitty in

jw
friends

so i've been away from anything witness-y for a number of months...what "new light" are they talking about now?

anything or is it all the same doom and gloom?

i haven't talked to my mom in awhile and when we do talk we don't talk about jw stuff much except for her bragging about rbc stuff.. what news is there?

reslight2

Eustace stated:

At the annual meeting it's been reported that they announced the Faithful and Discreet Slave is no longer the annointed on the earth, but is instead basically just the governing body.

In practice, this is actually the way it has been for several decades. Their alleged "anointed" class was never the ones who gave the alleged food to the JW believers in general; it all came from those in charge at that Brooklyn headquarters. In other words, there was never a consensus taken amongst all those professing to the "anointed" as to what "food" was to be given.

33

What Proof Is There That Rutherford Was Responsible For The Pyramid Monument Near CTR's Grave?

by JWB in

what proof is there that rutherford was responsible for the pyramid monument near ctr's grave?.

"charles taze russell died in 1916, the pyramid marker was installed in 1921 (5 years after his death), and the the masonic temple was built in the mid 1990s, these items have nothing to do with pastor russell's grave.

the masonic temple is not even on the cemetery grounds, it is a different property altogether.

reslight2

Finkelstein stated:

In spite of the indisputable fact that the Egyptian Pyramids were built and created in relation to the ancient Egyptian religious practices.

It may be true that "the Egyptian pyramids" (except the Great Pyramid) were built and created in relation to the ancient Egyptian religious practices. The overwhelming evidence shows that the Great Pyramid was not built or created in relation to the ancient Egyptian religious practices.