there is little doubt that the early christians from apostolic times performed the bread and wine ceremony (eucharist) every sunday.
however russell made it a one time per year event.
isn't this move strange and suspicious?
The article below by the WCG explains that Armstrong held that the Lord's Supper should only be observed once a year. The WCG now gives the freedom to celebrate it more often.
http://www.wcg.org/lit/church/lordssup/howoften.htm How Often Should We Partake of the Lord's Supper?
there is little doubt that the early christians from apostolic times performed the bread and wine ceremony (eucharist) every sunday.
however russell made it a one time per year event.
isn't this move strange and suspicious?
The Adventist group Church of God (7th Day) also observes the Lord's Supper annually. They worship on Saturday, the Sabbath. "Hope" is the name of their magazine", and the "Passover" is the Lord's Supper. Note that many adopted it in 1881, after Storrs had adopted the practice. Did Storrs learn it from earlier from Sabbatarian Adventists, who followed Jewish practices? Herbert Armstrong, who came from the Church of God (7th Day) and the Worldwide Church of God, and some of their offshoots, also observed the Lord's Supper annually. So this practice is found in several Adventist groups. Where did it come from?
http://www.giveshare.org/churchhistory/historysdcog/history9.html
"The April 12, 1881, Hope set forth reasons for observing the ordinance annually at the time of the Passover. Pro and con articles followed, but Passover reports in the spring of 1881 showed that many brethren had accepted it."
"The April 26, 1881 issue states that the Passover was kept on the evening after the 13th of Nisan, with footwashing, at Brother Samuel Barackman's in Nebraska. Also, R.E. Caviness of Beckwith, Iowa reported observing it, and Brother S.S. Davison spoke in favor of an annual Passover. The May 24, 1881 issue contained a long article by A.F. Dugger explaining reasons for annual Passover observance."
"the observance of an annual Lord's Supper, certainly a primary Church of God (Seventh Day) doctrine."
there is little doubt that the early christians from apostolic times performed the bread and wine ceremony (eucharist) every sunday.
however russell made it a one time per year event.
isn't this move strange and suspicious?
Here is the footnote to the above reference to Storrs and Nisan 14:
"The custom of celebrating the Lord's Supper on 14 Nisan began among members of the Life and Advent Union in the 1860s. Storrs continued the practice until his death. See, for example, Bible Examiner, February 1877, 131. "
there is little doubt that the early christians from apostolic times performed the bread and wine ceremony (eucharist) every sunday.
however russell made it a one time per year event.
isn't this move strange and suspicious?
Penton's book can be viewed on the Google Book Search.
there is little doubt that the early christians from apostolic times performed the bread and wine ceremony (eucharist) every sunday.
however russell made it a one time per year event.
isn't this move strange and suspicious?
http://giveshare.org/churchhistory/born%20again.htm
Russell was also indebted to Storrs for the observance of Passover on 14 Abib, rather than as a weekly or quarterly Lord’s Supper (Apocalypse Delayed, page 17).
there is little doubt that the early christians from apostolic times performed the bread and wine ceremony (eucharist) every sunday.
however russell made it a one time per year event.
isn't this move strange and suspicious?
The practice of celebrating the Lord's Supper once a year on 14 Nisan came from Storrs.
can anyone direct me to a good website or thread on here that talks about any spin-off groups after they officially accepted the trinity doctrine, in the early 1980's i think, in order to join the world council of churches.
was there any fragmentation in the 7th day adventists when this happened?
any help would be appreciated.
http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/trinity/gane-thesis/
The Arian or Anti-Trinitarian Views Presented in Seventh-day Adventist Literature and the Ellen G. White Answer
by Erwin Roy Gane
The doctrine of Trinity has been a fundamental belief of the Seventh-day Adventist church since 1931. In the earliest years, however, most early church leaders were anti-trinitarian. What caused the change? Erwin Gane examines the various beliefs of prominent leaders in the early years as shown in their writings.
can anyone direct me to a good website or thread on here that talks about any spin-off groups after they officially accepted the trinity doctrine, in the early 1980's i think, in order to join the world council of churches.
was there any fragmentation in the 7th day adventists when this happened?
any help would be appreciated.
Arianism was prevalent among the Adventists in the mid-19th century, even among the leaders. Arianism entered the Adventists through the Christian Connection, which later merged with other groups to become the United Church of Christ. There is a offshoot of the SDA that is Arian, and they have a website about how the early SDA leaders were Arian. Perhaps I can find it. The Adventist group Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith are Unitarians, but do not believe in the pre-existence of Jesus. They were influenced by the Christadelphians.
Storrs believed that Jesus was God, but believed that the relationship of the Father and the Son was a mystery, and would not characterize his belief as either Arian or Trinitarian. Russell was an Arian in his beliefs like many Adventists of his time. Russell likely got his Arian views from George Stetson. Stetson was an Advent Christian minister who was pastor of the Allegheny Advent Christian Church from 1871-1873. Stetson wrote an article on the Ransom that appeared at the time in the the Advent Christian magazine. He gives the view that the ransom was a corresponding price to Adam. It is on the internet and I can locate if anyone is interested.
The SDA, Adventist Christian Church, and the Worldwide Church of God all made moves toward accepting the Trinity, reversing an earlier anti-trinitarianism.
Steve
a family member is searching for the original book "the three worlds" and sent me the following info:.
three worlds, or, plan of redemption, and, the harvest of this world.. .
published by nelson h. barbour and charles taze russell.
On the whole, the quote that started this thread is correct. However, I don't find anywhere that Russell stated that he had never seen the Herald of the Morning, or was not acquainted with Barbour. This is going beyond what is written. Russell had heard the 1873 time proofs from Wendell, and might have heard or read of Barbour, since he had also used the same proofs. It is true that Barbour had a magazine called "The Midnight Cry" that had a circulation of 15,000. But after the disappointment of 1873, the circulation fell, and a magazine with a new title "Herald of the Morning" was started. But the following was small. Although Russell seemed to have known about the disappointment of 1873, it seems from his account, that he was not aware of the movement's activities, or change of beliefs. He does not tell how the magazine came to him.
But there are questions that remain about this. What was the connection between that Bible study class that Russell started, and that Advent Christian church of which Wendell was pastor? How did Russell hear about the time proofs from Wendell? How can one unlearn errors without learning truth at the same time? If Russell was not an Adventist, why were his associates Adventists? Barbour, Paton, Wendell, Stetson were all preachers of the Advent Christian Church, and Storrs had been a leading preacher under William Miller. Did he lie about not being an Adventist?
I don't think he was lying, for one reason because he acknowledges that he was previously familiar with those time proofs of the Second Adventists, and their beliefs that he disagreed with. And the statement that he made that he learned no single truth from the Adventists, but they helped him unlearned errors, and prepare him for the truth - that statement is contradictory. He could have been deceiving himself about the matter.
There is some ambiguity of meaning to the word "Adventist." It can refer to anything coming out of the William Miller movement. But "Second Adventist" refers to someone belonging to the Advent Christian Church, which at the time was the largest Adventist group. The ACC organized, and the term "Second Adventist" was a denominational label. But many Adventists, like Storrs and others, were opposed to organization and denominations, and rejected therefore the label "Adventist" and would not call themselves an Adventist. They thought denominations were "Babylon", which they had left. There were other Adventists who were called "Age-to-Come" Adventists. They did not believe in the burning in the world, and believed in a literal kingdom on earth, and some believed in a future probation. Wendell was not an Age-to-Come Adventist, but Storrs and Stetson were. Russell as early as 1869 held to this view. He does not tell how he arrived at this view so early after being an agnostic, and regaining his faith in the Bible. My guess is that, since Wendell did not teach this, then he met someone at the Adventist church that steered him in that direction, perhaps this was Conley, who was in Russell's bible class.
The Age-to-Come Adventists and the Advent Christians would fellowship with each other at that time. They become more organized and separate later on. But the Age-to-Come Adventists were adverse to organization, and they commonly called themselves "The Church of God." Many of the Age-to-Come Adventists later organized as the "Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith." I have their history booklet, called Historical Waymarks of the Church of God. It shows that in the earlier years before 1900, Advent Christians and their believers met in the same church together, more commonly in the Midwest and West.
I have seen the original paper of the Advent Christian Church, called the World's Crisis and Advent Christian Times. There, in the 1870s, that Allegheny church is advertised as "The Church of God." This might indicate that there were a number of Age-to-Come believers in that church, including Stetson, who was pastor for a while. It is possible that Russell's Bible study class was actually a minority subgroup within that church. So Russell might have regularly attended the meetings of that Advent Christian Church, and heard Wendell and Stetson preach there, and attended his own class on Sunday evening, and yet since he disagreed with some fundamental beliefs of the Advent Christian Church, could in good conscience deny that he was an Adventist.
However, he does downplay his connection with the Adventists, and does not state Stetson and Storr's connections with the Adventists. Russell was definitely acquainted with the Adventist literature, quoting their articles in the Watch Tower even through the 1880s. In the Advent Christian papers, in the early 1870s, Russell's name appears frequently, not as writer of articles, but acknowledging receipt of his correspondence. I am assuming that he requested literature from them and gave money. So Russell knew about these papers at that time. Barbour's articles on 1873 appear in the Adventist papers, and Russell could have read them at the time.
As far as what this tells us, history shows that date-setting leads to disappointment. Storrs, Barbour, Wendell - each set dates, and experienced disappointment. The Three Worlds expected that the rapture would occur in 1878. We can see that this was a mistake. Storrs advised Russell and Barbour against date-setting. Storrs learned his lesson through experience, which Russell did not have, he was a young man. Russell made a mistake in following Barbour, and not listening to his former mentor.
Steve
a family member is searching for the original book "the three worlds" and sent me the following info:.
three worlds, or, plan of redemption, and, the harvest of this world.. .
published by nelson h. barbour and charles taze russell.
Russell gives another account of the early history in ZIon's Watch Tower, Feb. 1881, in the article "CAST NOT AWAY THEREFORE YOUR CONFIDENCE." It is found on R 187. It is quite detailed and goes on for several pages. I quote the beginning regarding the failed 1873 expectation.
A GLANCE BACKWARD at the steps of progress, and let all notice that the progress is not only forward but upward; i.e., the tendency is from the natural to the spiritual. We will look, not at any one person's experience, but at what serves to show the advance of the knowledge of truth for ten years past. Looking back to 1871, we see that many of our company were what are known as Second Adventists, and the light they held briefly stated, was that there would be a second advent of Jesus-- that he would come to bless and immortalize the saints, to judge the world and to burn up the world and all the wicked. This, they claimed would occur in 1873, because the 6,000 years from the creation of Adam were complete then.
Well 1873 came, the end of 6,000 years, and yet no burning of the world, &c.; but prophecies were found which pointed positively to 1874 as the time when Jesus was due to be present, and the resurrection of Daniel was also due as proved by the ending of jubilee cycles and the 1335 days of `Dan. 12`. The autumn of 1874 anxiously expected, finally came, but the earth rolled on as ever; "all things continued as they were from the beginning of creation." All their hearts were sad; they said, surely we have been in error--but where? Surely it is clearly taught that Jesus will come again; perhaps our calculation of time is at fault. Carefully they examined the chronology but it seemed faultless and positively declared that the 6,000 years ended in 1873. Then the prophetic arguments were carefully re-examined: Was an error found? No, they stood the test of all investigation and the jubilee argument and "1335 days" of Daniel could not possibly be prolonged beyond the fall of '74 or spring of 1875 and these periods were both past.
Dark indeed seemed the outlook; all were discouraged. It had seemed as though the Lord had been leading in the past, and yet now all these things which had been thought light seemed to be proved darkness.
