AndDontCallMeShirley stated:
wulf said: Wow it's quite interesting to read a Bible Student well versed in Russell etc (@reslight2).
ADCMS: REALLY ?!!!
A few reslight quotes:
The "change" spoke of above evidently actually took place in 1911 edition
Yes, since I do not have an 1908, 1909, or 1910 edition, and I do have a 1911 edition, I cannot be certain that the change did not happen before 1911, thus, I say "evidently". By saying "evidently", I do not mean that I do know that the change is shown in the 1911 edition; that is a verifiable fact, since a scan of the 1911 edition is available from archive.org. Not having seen any 1908, 1909 or 1910 editions (if there were such), I cannot say for a certainty that the change did not take place before 1911, thus I say "evidently."
AndDontCallMeShirley stated:
it has been speculated that the change may have been made without Russell’s authorization
Which does not do away with the fact that the change did appear in 1911 edition, and that it does indeed not correspond with Russell's statements in the context, and that it does not agree with Russell's statements in the pages of the WT and elsewhere in 1911.
AndDontCallMeShirley stated:
one could conclude that Russell may have changed this
I does not matter about this; this does not do away with the FACT that the change is in the 1911 edition; it does not do away with the FACT that the change does NOT agree with the context; it does not do away with the fact that the change does not agree with what Russell was saying in the pages of the WT and elsewhere in 1911.
None of the short statements quoted of me changes the facts -- they appear to be given simply to turn attention away from the facts; the change appears in the 1911 edition, and thus the change was not because of any alleged failure of 1914. Indeed, Russell was in September of 1916, a few months before he died, still affirming his belief that the Gentile Times ended in 1914, not 1915.
It still seems clear to us that the prophetic period known as the Times of the Gentiles ended chronologically in October, 1914. The fact that the Great Day of Wrath upon the nations began there marks a good fulfilment of our expectations.... We see no reason for doubting, therefore, that the Times of the Gentiles ended in October, 1914.
http://www.mostholyfaith.com/bible/reprints/Z1916SEP.asp#Z264:2
It should be self-evident, that regardless of how or who or what caused the change in the 1911 edition of The Time Is At Hand, Russell never stopped believing and teaching that the Gentile Times ended in 1914; he never changed his teachings to say that instead of the Gentile ending in 1914, that they will end in 1915.
he died in 1914
Proves I am not perfect and can hit the wrong key.
.evidently Russell did not wish to go into the details at that time
Russell, at that time was taking 'the back seat' to Barbour; Barbour did go into the details in showing that the time of trouble, according to his understanding, had begun in 1874. Russell later presented some of those details; at first, he accepted Barbour's conclusion that the time of trouble had begun in 1874; later, he came to the conclusion that time of trouble had not yet begun, but that it would come sometime before 1914; and finally, in 1904, he became convinced that the time of trouble could not begin until the Gentile Times had ended.
Nevertheless, had Barbour never rejected the scriptural basis for the ransom, Russell would never have felt the need to start another magazine. Indeed, the biggest reason that Russell started The Watch Tower was to defend the atonement, the substitute, that Christ provided to pay the debt of sin and the wages of sin -- death.