Posts by Old Goat

16

Update on the forth-coming history of Zion's Tower

by Old Goat in

http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/.

one of the author's introductory essay in rough draft.

worth a read and comment, i think.

Old Goat

They tell all that with startling clarity. But they tell more of the story than anyone else, and they take you places that Russell only hints at. They explore all the Millerite connections. There are photos of advertisements Storrs placed in NYC newspapers saying the end would come in 1843. But they also show whose doctrine shifted. Storrs’ did and dramatically so.

Chapters two and three are entitled:

2 Among the Second Adventists, Millenarians, and Age-to-Come Believers: 1869-1874

3 Among the Second Adventists, Millenarians, and Age-to-Come Believers: 1874-1876

They explore all the Adventist connections. But they also take you into his Millenarian connections. Millenarians were a separate group – the group Russell self-identified with. There are photos of and extracts of articles from contemporary papers and magazines. You will be pleased.

Chapter four is entitled A Separate Identity. It considers the early Bible class, starting with its real nature. The Watchtower CD shows a group composed of all men. Turns out this wasn’t so. They present a newspaper article that shows the bulk of those attending were women. There are brief biographies of W. H. Conley and G. D. Clowes. Clowes was elected pastor of the Allegheny Church of God (the group to whom Wendell preached). The Conley bio. is especially interesting. I thought he was an Adventist of some sort. Turns out he was not, but was connected to Peters (Theocratic Kingdom) and attended Peters’ church in Plymouth, Ohio.

They consider the group’s doctrinal journey. They break this down into key areas: 1. End of the Age; 2. Second Probation; 3. Ransom and Atonement; 4. Parousia and Restitution; 5. Restoration of the Jews; 6. World burning; 7. Baptism; 8. Resurrection; 9. Approach to Chronology and End-Times Prophetic Framework; 10. The Trinity; 11. Devil and Demons; 12 The Great Pyramid. 13 Church polity and other doctrines. In detail, citing original sources including Russell’s own words and the writings of those he knew (Storrs, Stetson, the Wilsons, J. A. Seiss, Shimeal, etc.) They show where his doctrines came from. Most of his doctrine is not Adventist at all but Millenarian.

The detail is – to use one of Dr. de Vienne’s favorite fluff words, “stellar.” Their book challenges accepted concepts, but I don’t think they lose the Adventist story at all. If anything, they tell more of it than anyone else has. This is, I think, a bit of forensic history.

21

Where did Pastor Russell get his TRUTH?

by Terry in

most jehovah's witnesses are aware there once lived a man named russell and he had something to do with the early years of their religion.. but, generally, interest in the early days is almost non-existent.

after all, nobody was running around calling themselves jehovah's witnesses, so what difference does any of that really make?.

russell and the origins of jw doctrines are, as a result of this total black out of curiousity, hidden and permanently obscured.. in fact, the only time charles taze russell is discussed is because some expose' by an apostate has raised a stink.. admitedly, most anti-jw books seek to dredge up scandals, lawsuits, accusations and failed predictions swirling around russell's ministry.. in my own opinion, none of that is half as interesting as the missing part of the equation: where from did pastor russell get his truth?.

Old Goat

By the time Russell met him, Barbour was no longer an Adventist, but was teaching millenarian, age-to-come belief. Storrs left Adventism in 1844 for an independent age-to-come belief system which he maintained and continued to advocate even while associated with the Life and Advent Union. If you read the truthhistory blog you will also see that the Allegheny church was not Adventist but One Faith as associated with The Restitution. They did not teach Adventist doctrine, and none of Russell's doctrine is uniquely Adventist. He, in fact, says it's not. We have every reason to believe him.

The two doctrinal sets are significantly different and the two groups said really nasty things about each other. When Schulz and de Vienne's new book comes out, you will find much of this detailed in the first three chapters. All of Russell's principal doctrines are derived from Age-to-Come belief. All Russell owed to Wendell is relief from hell fire belief.

The 1914 date is not derived from Adventism. Barbour got it from an Anglican, E. B. Elliott. Date speculation predates Adventism. You will find it among 18th Century German Lutherans and Anglican millenarians. You're articles are interesting, but you're barking up the wrong tree. Another example would be the 2520 year count of time. Not Adventist in origin. American Congregationalist from a book published in 1808.

Russell's unique view of restored paradise for many and heaven for few is not adventist. It comes from an Anglican and from a Brethren commentator. The idea that the jews would return to God's favor was strongly rejected by Adventists, but is an Age to Come belief. His view of resurrection, what some called "simultaneous resurrection" doctrine came from Benjamin Wilson. Wilson was an Age to Come adherent, never an Adventist. The two stage advent Russell taught until 1881 derives from Anglican commentators of the 17th and 18th Century. It is not an Adventist doctrine. Rejection of World Burning came from One Faith believers. It was the known teaching of J. T. Ongley, a one faith evangelist who preached to the Allegheny congregation. You will find somewhere on the truthhistory blog a copy of the One Faith church directory listing them as approved One Faith (aka restitution church, church of god) congregation.

I like your articles, Terry. But you're on the wrong trail. You're just repeating what you find on the internet and in poorly researched books. You can trace the real story through The Restitution and Bible Examiner. They're hard to find, but not impossible to locate.

Why do some expect Russell to have originated anything. That wasn't his goal, and he never claimed to do so.

I may get kicked off Schulz's private blog for doing so, but here is a small extract of what they've written:

Curry and those who have followed him base their conclusions on a series of misstatements and misperceptions. Russell, far from avoiding any connection with Miller, referred to him approvingly. So while it is true that Miller believed in a fiery end and rejected Conditional Immortality in favor of Inherent Immortality, these things did not serve to separate Russell from Miller. He saw the Millerite movement as the first step in a prophetic fulfillment, but wrong in doctrine. The idea that Russell avoided Adventist identity so that he could appear to be the independent restorer of primitive Christianity is invented from whole cloth. Russell saw himself as a kind of cut-and-paste Bible Student, reassembling from scattered sources the Old Theology. Russell said as much in 1889:
We must disclaim any credit even for the finding and rearrangement of the jewels of truth. “It is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes.” The writer wholly disclaims superior ability or qualification for the reorganization of the truth in its present solidarity. As the time had come for the bringing together of the scattered thoughts of past centuries in the marvelous inventions of our day. – so the time had come for the bringing together of the fragmentary hopes and promises of God’s Word scattered through Christendom. To deny that the Lord has simply “poured out” this harvest time blessing of “present truth” in his own due time and in his own way, would be as wrong as to claim it as of our own invention. … It came gradually, silently, as comes the morning dawn: the only effort necessary was to keep awake and face in the right direction. And the greatest aid in so doing was the effort put forth to awaken others of the “household of faith” and point them to the light and in turn to urge upon them the necessity for serving also, if they would overcome the lethargic “spirit of the world,” and be ready to go in to the marriage of the Lamb.
Russell believed he was led by God into increased understanding and a sound theology. Curry’s conclusion that all of Russell’s theology was Adventist is wrong. Russell’s doctrines came from outside the Adventist movement, or were held in common with others, or developed by others. Adventism wasn’t the source of his belief. Dunn, Seiss, Heath and others who influenced his thinking were anything but Adventists.

16

Update on the forth-coming history of Zion's Tower

by Old Goat in

http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/.

one of the author's introductory essay in rough draft.

worth a read and comment, i think.

Old Goat

http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/

One of the Author's Introductory Essay in rough draft. Worth a read and comment, I think. I'm really impatient. I wish this book would finally hit the presses.

I'm interested in your reactions to this essay.

24

Look at this ...

by Old Goat in

one of the authors of the soon to be published history of the watch tower's early years posted a small part of it in "rough draft.

" take a look http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ .

if you like their work (i think its superior, even in rough draft), give them some encouragement.. .

Old Goat

Penton on Schulz and de Vienne

http://www.channelc.org/ChCForum/forum/index.php?action=display&forumid=1&msgid=16306

43

Protesting

by zound in

is watchtower baiting apostates with this new awake?.

"is protest the answer?".

http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201307/is-protest-the-answer/.

Old Goat

most of the public and all of JWs view convention prosters as near idiots and fanatics. It does no good. I remember Goodrich (You may not know of him) and his sandwich board. That was in 1946 or 7. Don't remember which year exactly. Guys in scruffy jeans wearing top hats and tails handing out mimeographed tracts. Yes, I took one. The grammar was bad and the tract nearly unreadable. The bag head people shouting and carrying signs. Petacostals in seattle one year way back when, shouting and trying to pray with anyone. Other than annoying witnesses, this converts no one.

123

1969 "fact": You will never grow old in this present system of things

by Ding in

awake!

"if you are a young person, you also need to face the fact that you will never grow old in this present system of things.

because all the evidence in fulfillment of bible prophecy indicates that this corrupt system is due to end in a few years... therefore, as a young person, you will never fulfill any career that this system offers.

Old Goat

I came "into the truth" in the late 1940s. (yes, i'm THAT old) I remember this article. It made me shake my head, and I was still a true believer when it was published.

24

Look at this ...

by Old Goat in

one of the authors of the soon to be published history of the watch tower's early years posted a small part of it in "rough draft.

" take a look http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ .

if you like their work (i think its superior, even in rough draft), give them some encouragement.. .

Old Goat

Penton and Willis show up in footnotes. I don't think he lets his status as a Witness get in the way of scholarly standards. However, most of this is taken from primary sources. Very little of it, almost none of it, is taken from secondary sources. Looking through an early draft of their chapter three as found on their private blog, I find these footnotes as samples of their sources:

[1] J. L. Russell & Son to G. Storrs, Letters Received, Bible Examiner, April 1874, page 130. We do not know which of the Russells sent the letter. One researcher claims to have proof of contact between the Russells and Storrs as early as 1869. The proof is never forthcoming. We could not find it. The claim does not seem to fit the known facts. Consider this footnote a challenge to “put up or shut up.”

[2] G. Storrs: Visit to Pittsburgh, Pa., Bible Examiner, June 1874, page 259.

[3] Letter from J. L. Russell to Storrs and note appended by Storrs, Bible Examiner, November 1874, page 66.

[4] Parcels Sent to May 25, Bible Examiner, June 1874, page 288.

[5] Letters Received and Parcels Sent, Bible Examiner, November 1874, page 64.

[6] Margaret Russell Land’s testimony found in Souvenir Notes from the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society’s Convention, 1907.

[7] George Stetson to his daughter Kate, March 23, 1875. The letter is found in the Thew-Stetson Archive at the State University of New York at Plattsburgh.

[8] Storrs’ attendance: Charles Algernon Downs: History of Lebanon, New Hampshire, 1761-1887, Rumford Printing Co, Rumford, New Hampshire, 1908, page 430. Downs is our sole source for this. We would be happier with supporting documentation. School’s purpose: Convention on the Subject of a Seminary, The Panoplist and Missionary Magazine, December 1812, page 329.

[9] Emails from Jane Fielder, the school’s archivist, dated February 21 and 22, 2011. Ms Fielder searched the school’s records with no result but observed that the records are incomplete for those years.

[10] O. W. Muelder: Theodore Dwight Weld and the American Anti-Slavery Society, Jefferson, North Carolina, 2011, page 89. Storrs ministry in this period is well documented, presenting this record: Admitted on trial to the New England ME Conference 1825; Ordained deacon by Bishop Hedding at Lisbon, June 10 1827 and elder by the same at Portsmouth, June 15 1829; Appointments Landaff, 1825; Sandwich, 1826-7; Gilmanton and Northfield, 1828-9; Great Falls, 1830 and 1832; Portsmouth, 1830-1; Concord, 1833-4; Henniker and Deering supernumerary 1835; left the Methodists 1840; Without charge, Montpelier Vermont, 1841; Supplied Albany, New York, 1841-2. – See N. F. Carter: The Native Ministry of New Hampshire, Concord, 1906, page 428.

There is, as I said, almost no dependence on secondary sources. This is fresh, original research. I noted on another site that Penton said they were going where no one had previously gone. This is true. This is no rehash of what others have written, though they've obviously read it all.

24

Look at this ...

by Old Goat in

one of the authors of the soon to be published history of the watch tower's early years posted a small part of it in "rough draft.

" take a look http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ .

if you like their work (i think its superior, even in rough draft), give them some encouragement.. .

Old Goat

breezy reading? some of it is funny. there's a fine sence of humor behind some of what they write. And they scold people in ways I find entertaining. Forinstance, chapter 2, entitled Among the Second Adventists, Millenarians, and Age-to-Come Believers: 1869-1874, has this gem:

"Some considerable nonsense has come from the pen of Ralph Orr, one time editor and writer with the World Wide Church of God (Armstrongites). Orr asserted that Wendell predicted the return of Christ for 1874 and that he was responsible for the 2520 year count for the Times of the Gentiles. He says that after the failure of 1874, Wendell “replaced” that date with 1914. None of this is true. Gomes and Bowman suggested that Wendell provided a Seventh-day Adventist influence. This piece of utter nonsense should bring a sense of shame to the authors and their publisher Zondervan, though it probably does not. Wendell influenced Russell only in the two ways he mentions, awakening Russell’s interest in prophecy and satisfactorily answering his questions about the injustice of the Hell-Fire, endless torment doctrine."

They address an academic audience but sometimes is ways you'd expect from someone comfrotable sitting in you living room and explaining the mysteries of the universe in terms you can understand. (Okay, so I exaggerated). I notice they trash Zydeck's book. They make detail tell an engaging story. In volume two, which they'll release later, they take up the mass circulation of Food for thinking Christians. There's a whole narrative concerning events in Newark taken from a New York Newspaper. It's entertaining and informative.

I hope people buy this book. I want to keep these two at their projects. No one else is doing this.

24

Look at this ...

by Old Goat in

one of the authors of the soon to be published history of the watch tower's early years posted a small part of it in "rough draft.

" take a look http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ .

if you like their work (i think its superior, even in rough draft), give them some encouragement.. .

Old Goat

the proposed front cover with title is on the blog. Title is A Separate Identity: Organizational Identity Among Readers of Zion's Watch Tower: 1870-1887. In fact it covers a much wider era, presenting biographies of Storrs, Stetson, Wendell and others that take one back much further. I've read volume 1 other than the last chapter in rough draft. I am in awe.

24

Look at this ...

by Old Goat in

one of the authors of the soon to be published history of the watch tower's early years posted a small part of it in "rough draft.

" take a look http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ .

if you like their work (i think its superior, even in rough draft), give them some encouragement.. .

Old Goat

I just asked. said i was an old witness interested in the history. I taught history at the university level ages ago. That was a plus. They've been more cautious lately I think. They threw out three or four a few months ago. One of them was tosed out for publishing their photos on another blog.

The private blog has whole chapters in rough draft, photos, essays. It's a very rich blog. The rules are that comments must be to the point. They don't discuss theology. Not everyone is a witness. there are at least two professors from various colleges who aren't witnesses. Most are witnesses best I can tell. Many have some professional credential too. (Rare among witnesses). you can always ask. but i think they say 'no' more than they say yes.