Posts by paladin

I remember that evil hand. It just looked weird. After studing that book three times some sister said she liked it so much and wanted to study it again. I felt sick after hearing that.

77

1914: Still Important to Watchtower in 2012

by leavingwt in

.

98 years later, the 1914 date is still important to the watchtower organization.. .

below is a screenshot of a portion of page 19 from the may 15, 2012 watchtower magazine.. .

paladin

I came across this article while researching. Seems like WT$ ideas did't originate with them.

C T Russell and the Date 1914

<<< (3/5) >>>

freyd:
From my understanding the reign of the Kings ended with the death of Zedekia which occurred when he was in captivity in 606 a year after the fall of Jerusalem with it's "desolation" perhaps beginning as Dreese mentioned as early as 610. In terms of the big picture, when we add up the time beginning with the creation of Adam we get 2513 + 429(513-84) +580 +606 + 1872 =6000 . If we take the 580 date from 1kings 6 as the corrected number of a copist error, we get a further line of evidence confirming Br Russel, making 587 bogus and any chronology supported by it meaningless, as well as the period of the judges being n/a.

Vienne:
The 1914 date wasn't original with Russell. J. A. Seiss pointed to 1914, though on a different basis. He had read Seiss's Last Times. It entered his thinking as accepted doctrine during his association with Barbour.

The forthcoming book Nelson Barbour: The Millennium's Forgotten Prophet contains this bit of history (used by permission):

Barbour and his associates did not immediately reconsider Gentile Times. The issues of an invisible parousia and other chronological speculations came first. We also do not know who among them initiated the discussion. In the absence of other claims, it is probably safe to suppose that Barbour was responsible for concluding Gentile Times ended not in the 1870s, but in 1914. The first mention of the 1914 date as the end of The Times of the Gentiles is in the September 1875 issue of The Herald of the Morning. In passing Barbour remarked, “‘The time of the Gentiles,’ viz. Their seven prophetic times of 2520 years ... which began when God gave all into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, in 606 B. C.; do not end until 1914.”49

Barbour is indebted to John Aquila Brown for the 2520 year computation. Brown in turn owes the calculation of the “seven times” of Daniel’s prophecy as 2520 years and the association of it to The Times of the Gentiles to Joshua Spalding. Spaulding wrote Divine Theory; A System of Divinity in 1798, though it seems not to have been published until 1808. Spalding, writing of the seven-times of Daniel’s Great Tree Vision, said: “Seven times, or one full week of years, upon the great prophetic scale, is 2520 years. This supposition is much strengthened by the consideration, that the continuance of mystical Babylon is said expressly to be for a time, times, and a half; and as the times allotted for this division of the empire, is the half of a week, three times and a half, it is natural to conclude, that the whole of the times, called the times of the Gentiles, is a whole week, or seven times.”50

Though Spalding was an American clergyman, the British Library Catalogue testified that his books circulated in Britain. It is possible that J. A. Brown was familiar with Spalding. Yet, it seems certain that in actual influence on Barbour, Brown played a part that Spalding did not. That Gentile Times were 2520 years became a standard view among expositors, though they were calculated from various start dates. The popularization of the 2520 year calculation was probably due to George Stanley Faber. He used the calculation in The Sacred Calendar of Prophecy, published in 1828.51 When The Christian Guardian and Church of England Magazine reviewed Faber’s book in 1830, it accepted without question the 2520 day calculation, though it suggested Faber had no basis for his start date.52 Edward Bickersteth adopted the calculation in the mid-1830s. His reputation as a pious Bible scholar sealed it into Advent thinking.53

If the 2520 year calculation isn’t original to Barbour, nothing else in his “‘Gentile Times” calculation belongs to him either. Faber mentioned the 606 B.C. date in his 1811 work A Dissertation on the Prophecy Contained in Daniel ix, 24-27.54 In the 1820s several authors pointed to 606 B. C. as the date at which the seventy-year long exile began.55 In 1834 Matthew Habershon mentioned the 606 B. C. date, but calculated the “seven times” from three years later, ending them in 1918.56 William Miller adopted the 2520 year calculation but ended it in 1843.57 John Dowling, a Baptist pastor, criticized William Miller’s method for calculating the “seven times,” suggesting that “it would have answered the purpose ... much better had this subtraction happened to have brought out the number 606 B. C., the date of the commencement of the 70 years captivity of the Israelites in Babylon.”58

It seems certain that the ultimate source for Barbour’s 1914 calculation is E. B. Elliott’s Horae Apocalypticae, where the 606 B.C. to 1914 calculation is found.59 The next mention of the 1914 date in connection to Gentile Times I can find is by an anonymous author writing in The Original Session Magazine in 1850. The magazine was published in Scotland but saw circulation in the United States. This author suggested that the “seven times” would end in 1897, yet his calculation took him to 1914. He arrives at his other dates, including the 1897 date by a complicated series of additions and subtractions from the basic “2520 - 606 = 1914” calculation. If one removes all the puzzling additions and subtractions, one has Barbour’s usage. There is no way to know if Barbour was familiar with Session magazine, but he almost certainly was familiar with John Dowling and Habershon, and he tells us he read Elliott’s Horae Apocalypticae.

It is worth noting that Samuel Davies Baldwin taught that the actual date was 607 B.C. He dated the seventy years from 607- 537 B.C., a view later adopted by Jehovah’s Witnesses.60

By the summer of 1875 Barbour had a new prophetic frame work. Christ was present, walking the earth invisibly. The resurrection of the Saints occurred in 1875. Translation was due in 1878. Gentile Times would end in 1878, a date he quickly changed to 1914.

RRD:
Quote from: Vienne on Jun 15, 2008, 04:43

The forthcoming book Nelson Barbour: The Millennium's Forgotten Prophet contains this bit of history (used by permission):

Vienne,

Thanks for the information. I have looked for some info about this book by searching Google, but could find nothing. Do you know the name of the author?

Some of the minor points I will need to look into more thoroughly, but overall the information seems rather accurate. As you probably know, there is a flood of false information being spread all over the internet, and sometimes one has to study a lot to separate the false from the truth of what really happened and when.

I do, however, wonder at the title of the book, in that it speaks of Barbour as a "prophet." Does the author relate as to why he refers to Barbour as a "prophet,"
rather than as a student of prophecy? When I first saw the title, describing Barbour as a "prophet," I could not help but feel a little repelled, and was expecting to see Barbour being assailed as a "false prophet."

Christian love,
Ronald

Vienne:
The book is "forthcoming," that is not released yet. It is due out later this year. You can read a much earlier version of it at truthhistory.blogspot.com.

The authors are B. W. Schulz and Rachael de Vienne.

The book is straight history, though Barbour does not come off well. Let's just say he was a very talented but cranky man. Barbour saw himself as a prophet. Hence the title.

You will find information you may not know. Barbour's early life is elaborated. His inventions are mentioned. (He held several patents). His associations are explored. The sources of his theology are detailed.

You will also find an examination of John Aquila Brown's influence on Barbour. There is endless speculation on this point, but there is a definitive answer. There is some biographical information on Brown that seems never to have been published. He is often described as a Chruch of England clergyman. This is false.

Who Christopher Bowen was is explained in a lengthy footnote.

The 1873 movement is examined in some detail with many quotations from contemporary newspapers and magazines. Barbour's association with Russell is touched on, but not extensively. Most of the basics are widely known, and the book is about Barbour, not Russell. We are writing a follow up that considers aspects of Brother Russell's early ministry.

The Terry Island episode is discussed. Barbour's later years and associations are examined. His fellowship with Restitutionists and the Church of the Strangers is detailed. His political and social activism is explained. His influence on Bible Students, Witnesses, and Advent Christians is analyzed.

The Worcester Prophetic Conference is examined at length because of it's significance in Barbour's life. We explain at length the development and sources of Keith's research into the parousia, quoting from some of the research material he used. Keith was very specific as to his sources. This seems to have been overlooked by other writers.

There are hundreds of footnotes with references to original sources. In passing we note the false claims of others, and correct them with significant documentation.

We're waiting on permissions for a few illustrations. Other than that, the book is ready to go. It will be available from Amazon and Barnes and Noble.

For now, you may go to the "older posts" section of Truthhistory.blogspot.com and read a much earlier version. There are other articles and chapters on there too that come from the book we're writing now.

You will find biographies of Russell's early associates with material never published before. Some of this clarifies Russell’s statements about them; particularly is this true of Albert D. Jones. Russell was much more gentle with Jones than most people would have been, given the facts Russell elected not to publish. (They're found in a court case and contemporary newspapers.)

B. W. Schulz and I both have a back ground in historical research. I also write fiction, and have a novel going to paperback format in October. (It's an ebook now.)

Have I answered your questions?

ppcm:
Quote from: Vienne on Jun 16, 2008, 09:44

The book .......
The book is straight history, though Barbour does not come off well.
.......The 1873 movement is examined in some detail with many quotations from contemporary newspapers and magazines. Barbour's association with Russell is touched on, but not extensively. Most of the basics are widely known, and the book is about Barbour, not Russell. We are writing a follow up that considers aspects of Brother Russell's early ministry.

The Terry Island episode is discussed. Barbour's later years and associations are examined. His fellowship with Restitutionists and the Church of the Strangers is detailed. His political and social activism is explained. His influence on Bible Students, Witnesses, and Advent Christians is analyzed.

...........
B. W. Schulz and I both have a back ground in historical research. I also write fiction, and have a novel going to paperback format in October. (It's an ebook now.)

Have I answered your questions?

Hello Vienne

I saw Schulz's statement at http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/

Watch Tower History

...."I am not interested in bashing anyone's religion. I welcome your comments as long as you are polite. I have seldom refused to post a comment. My interest is in an accurate presentation of Watch Tower related history and that without any agenda but full disclosure. I like that the Bible presents the history of God’s people without glossing over error.

I occasionally point out an error of fact in someone else's work. I do not mean this as a personal or organizational attack. Unfortunately, some have taken it that way.
Plainly, some writers have an interest in recording and reporting what is false. I have tried to limit myself to general comments on accuracy. If your work was criticized and you think I erred in doing so, I will gladly receive your proof. A temper tantrum will not impress me.

The most frequent errors of fact are overstatements. More is read into the documentation than is there; or speculation is presented as fact. This is true of the brief article on the history of Jehovah's Witnesses in Ohio that receives mention in a footnote below. This is especially true of some controversialist writers. They make things up, pass it off as history, and expect their readers to believe it. If you’ve done that and find a comment in my text pointing out an error, a nasty email won’t get it removed. Present proof you are correct in the form of original documentation. Or admit the error.

I have no "side" in this, unless presenting a full history, including the bits ignored both by Russell's friends and his enemies, is a side. I am open to suggestions and help from any party. I do expect good behavior in posts. ..."
...Posted by B. W. Schulz
........

I saw the point list for the y'alls book at
http://truthhistory.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-04-10T14%3A00%3A00-07%3A00&max-results=20
"..........Depending on format, about 115 pages. Most significantly there is a full bibliography and every important point is referenced in a footnote. "

I'm just a little curious as to why y'all chose to write about the topic Nelson Barbour ?

curious, PPCM

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

83

Anyone have the outline for the 2012 'Special Talk'

by Lore in

jw
friends

the sunday after every memorial they intruduce a new talk, which is the 'special talk'.. this year it's called: "is it later than you think".

anyone able to provide me the outline?.

paladin

YKnot...

Thanks for those 1968 articles. I have the old Watchtower bound volumes back to 1960 and Awake back to 1976. Still waiting for our Special Talk and will compare notes when that times arrives.

66

Terrible conduct by congregation Elders in hospital room !

by RULES & REGULATIONS in

my uncle was rushed to the hospital last tuesday with severe stomach pain.

(he was diagnosed with colon cancer one year ago.

the doctors, family,and my uncle decided against colon surgery.

paladin

About Elders conduct, like the time two Elders dropped in to talk to me about having 15 minutes FS time. This happened when I was in a hospital waiting for more tests regarding my leaking heart valve. They were not concerned about my health, just time. What does that tell you about Elders?

18

my wife saw shunning first hand

by Aussie Oz in

well the other day we dropped daughter back to her mother, after what was a fabulous whole week with me.. sitting on the verandah of the house is grandpa jw, about 80 and recently widowed.

now, he is my ex father in law and we got on very good back in the day, even helped build his house.. anyway, i drop daughter off and i am looking at the man, who in the whole 10 mins that he sat there, gave one cursory glance our way as i stood on the footpath opposite the house talking to my kids.. this is a guy who will talk the leg off a chair, a guy who will start a conversation with a total stranger in the street, the man is a talker.. i mention to wife as we departed..."poor bastard, not even 'allowed' to say hello the father of his grandkids''.

if i was not d/f i know he would have come over, no doubt whatsoever.

paladin

Shunning has not happened to me yet, but if it does I will most definitely make verbal comment that it is emotional blackmail.