Some of you have read Schulz and de Vienne's Separate Identity, vol 1. A rough draft of a chapter meant for vol 2 is on their blog http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ . Some don't like history at this depth, but I do. Give it a look. They like comments and I'm interested in your reaction. I like the sometimes not so subtle comments on Russell's reasoning. I think they are exactly right.
Old Goat
JoinedPosts by Old Goat
-
4
Interesting Bit of History
by Old Goat insome of you have read schulz and de vienne's separate identity, vol 1. a rough draft of a chapter meant for vol 2 is on their blog http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ .
some don't like history at this depth, but i do.
give it a look.
-
-
Old Goat
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Chryssides is male. de Vienne is not. Personally, I'd include Separate Identity in his list of major works. I think it is story-changing.
De Vienne's review touched on the Jewish issue in Rutherford's day. This doesn't add any thing. Rutherford did indeed express reservations about the society's management, expressing them to Russell. This is in the original documentation His concerns were narrowly focused, relating only to the election process.
We sometimes wish an author addressed our pet issues in more detail. Both de Vienne and Persson fall into that in their reviews, though Rachael de Vienne tells you up front that's what she's doing. Chryssides presents the blood issues in a manner appropriate to a generalist history.
We approach books such as Chryssides from our own viewpoints. Perrson has a personal agenda that shows through in the blood comment. Is Penton's last revision the better book? In some ways, certainly. But they do not approach the matter in the same way. Penton does not address contemporary Witness social structure to the same depth. I have both books. You should too. And if you ignore Schulz and de Vienne's two books, you've made a serious mistake.
Other than Rutherford raising the issue of the legal form of elections with Russell, Perrson's comments on the 1918 schism are accurate. I still recommend Chryssides' book, though it is obscenely expensive.
I agree with this:
Lieu 2 hours ago
Biased people can't read unbiased information without complaining and focusing on minor errors. We should all know that from JWism.
With each book of research, we glean more and more information. Looks an interesting read.
On the question raised about the date of Jesus birth: Most scholars disagree with the Watchtower by from two to four years. Scholars have been wrong before. I've never seen a good refutation of the Watchtower's reasoning, but I've never perused it either. Sorry, I don't have a well-founded opinion on that issue.
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
It will be Separate Identity vol. 2. You can't search for their book there. What they do is post bits, occasionally whole chapters of the new work. Most of the longer posts are temporary. They put them up for comments, removing them or truncating them later. I check the blog at least once a day, and I contribute research as I can. Several do that. You can see it in the comment trail.
Sometimes they just post a query, a "can you help with this?" question. Or they ask about a reference they can't find. In time a section of new research pops up. They ask that you don't repost it elsewhere. The early day's Watch Tower you thought you knew is false. They write good stuff. And they don't much care if they offend someone in the process. Their goal is to produce an accurate, well-told tale.
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Dear Scenic,
Yes, Dr de Vienne tells me it's about two-thirds done. I've read some of the most recently finished chapters in rough draft. So many things I did not know. One of these is about early clergy interest. There was a surprising amount of that. Another is about the earliest evangelists, people the Watchtower ignores, or sometimes people the "Society" doesn't even know about. It's certainly a different story than the Proclaimers book tells.
You can follow their research on their history blog. Link was posted earlier.
People on this board who are certain they know Russell or Rutherford's story make me laugh. They don't.
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Ruby, I don't know if he does or not. Sorry. -
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Back in the day I knew Schulz. We worked together at large conventions and spoke at the same one at least once. He's a let the chips fall where they may kind of guy. Rachael de Vienne is a very short, extremely well educated, very funny younger woman. (Younger compared to me, anyway. I think she's about 40.) She is a meticulous researcher. She was never a Witness.
I think their books are destined to be classics in the field.
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Yes, that's Schulz and de Vienne's last book. It is very good. Very accurate. You should read it. I'm old. Almost 90. I spent my life within the Watchtower and teaching history at two large universities. I know good work when I see it. Separate Identity is superior to anything ever written about the Watchtower.
But you will have to make up your own mind. The few pages on Amazon do not take you to the richness of new research found in their book.
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Ruby, I think you're confusing authors and books. If you mean Schulz and de Vienne's book, Separate Identity, you should know that it is a far more detailed book than Chryssides' book. It is a return to original sources. It's much less expensive, about twenty-seven dollars, and more thoroughly researched.
If you are so committed to the view that Russell was a closet Adventist that you don't want to be challenged by solid research and facts, then by all means don't read it. If you want to see the historical evidence and be taken to documents you have probably never seen, then you should read it.
Russell did not believe or teach Adventist doctrine. He taught Literalist doctrine. In American that was called Age-to-Come. Her history blog is here: http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ . You can read that for free. You may want to start with http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/1874-75-allegheny-pittsburgh-adventist.html .
Schulz and de Vienne dissect Russell's doctrine and take you to its sources, the books he read, the people he met. The consider the years from 1871 to 1876 in detail. These were the years during which Russell developed his doctrinal mix. They show you the two competing prophetic systems, Adventism and Literalism. They define the difference through references to contemporary publications. You should challenge yourself.
Don't want to pay? Try inter-library loan.
-
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Ruby, have you read the book? I think not. If not, now can you have problems with the review? -
41
Review of Dr. Chryssides' new book on Jehovah's Witnesses
by Old Goat inhttp://truthhistory.blogspot.com/2016/04/a-review.html.
the book costs 140.00, but i bought it.
i agree with dr. de vienne's review.
-
-
Old Goat
Insight vol 2:
Time of Birth, Length of Ministry. Jesus evidently was born in the month of Ethanim (September-October) of the year 2 B.C.E., was baptized about the same time of the year in 29 C.E., and died about 3:00 p.m. on Friday, the 14th day of the spring month of Nisan (March-April), 33 C.E. The basis for these dates is as follows:
Jesus was born approximately six months after the birth of his relative John (the Baptizer), during the rule of Roman Emperor Caesar Augustus (31 B.C.E.–14 C.E.) and the Syrian governorship of Quirinius (see REGISTRATION for the probable dates of Quirinius’ administration), and toward the close of the reign of Herod the Great over Judea.—Mt 2:1, 13, 20-22; Lu 1:24-31, 36; 2:1, 2, 7.
His birth in relation to Herod’s death. While the date of Herod’s death is a debated one, there is considerable evidence pointing to 1 B.C.E. (See HEROD No. 1 [Date of His Death]; CHRONOLOGY [Lunar eclipses].) A number of events intervened between the time of Jesus’ birth and Herod’s death. These included Jesus’ circumcision on the eighth day (Lu 2:21); his being brought to the temple in Jerusalem 40 days after birth (Lu 2:22, 23; Le 12:1-4, 8); the journey of the astrologers “from eastern parts” to Bethlehem (where Jesus was no longer in a manger but in a house—Mt 2:1-11; compare Lu 2:7, 15, 16); Joseph and Mary’s flight to Egypt with the young child (Mt 2:13-15); followed by Herod’s realization that the astrologers had not followed his instructions, and the subsequent slaughter of all boys in Bethlehem and its districts under the age of two years (indicating that Jesus was not then a newborn infant). (Mt 2:16-18) Jesus’ birth taking place in the fall of 2 B.C.E. would allow for the time required by these events intervening between his birth and the death of Herod, likely in 1 B.C.E. There is, however, added reason for placing Jesus’ birth in 2 B.C.E.
Relationship to John’s ministry. Further basis for the dates given at the start of this section is found at Luke 3:1-3, which shows that John the Baptizer began his preaching and baptizing in “the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar.” That 15th year ran from the latter half of 28 C.E. to August or September of 29 C.E. (See TIBERIUS.) At some point in John’s ministry, Jesus went to him and was baptized. When Jesus thereafter commenced his own ministry he was “about thirty years old.” (Lu 3:21-23) At the age of 30, the age at which David became king, Jesus would no longer be subject to human parents.—2Sa 5:4, 5; compare Lu 2:51.
According to Numbers 4:1-3, 22, 23, 29, 30, those going into sanctuary service under the Law covenant were “from thirty years old upward.” It is reasonable that John the Baptizer, who was a Levite and son of a priest, began his ministry at the same age, not at the temple, of course, but in the special assignment Jehovah had outlined for him. (Lu 1:1-17, 67, 76-79) The specific mention (twice) of the age difference between John and Jesus and the correlation between the appearances and messages of Jehovah’s angel in announcing the births of the two sons (Lu 1) give ample basis for believing that their ministries followed a similar timetable, that is, the start of John’s ministry (as the forerunner of Jesus) being followed about six months later by the commencement of Jesus’ ministry.
On this basis, John’s birth occurred 30 years before he began his ministry in Tiberius’ 15th year, hence somewhere between the latter half of 3 B.C.E. and August or September of 2 B.C.E., with Jesus’ birth following about six months later.
