A police officer friend tells me that driving overly-cautiously is a good sign the driver is intoxicated. Most officers, he says, would stop the driver to check. It's also a sign that a wellness check is needed. This sounds reasonable to me.
Posts by vienne
-
240Derek Chauvin - The Right to a Fair Trial
by Simon inanyone following the derek chauvin trial?.
if you are actually following it, not just listening to the media, you will likely realize that there is a huge gap between what is going on in court and what is being reported in the media.. if the trial was fair, i think he should be acquitted.
there is plenty of reasonable doubt about the cause of death (his dealer doesn't want to testify because he could be guilty of 3rd degree murder for selling him a fatal amount of fentanyl) and even doubt over whether the officer even had his knee on the guys neck or did anything counter to what they were meant to do as per policy.. but is it fair?
-
-
-
47
Why Do People Loot and Destroy When Someone Gets Shot?
by minimus insomeone gets shot and or killed and hundreds of people decide to loot and destroy businesses or whatever else is in their path.
what does this do to make things better?
i really don’t get how they think it makes things better or solves anything..
-
-
vienne
Criminals seek their own advantage. Theft and mayhem in the guise of righteous anger is not new.
-
7
Wanting articles on statistics for the incidence of csa between the Catholic Church and JW
by joe134cd inhad an ultra jw relative say to me the there are only a few examples of csa in the jws.
the catholics are significantly worse.
i’m after statistical information that proves him wrong.
-
-
vienne
This is Professor Folks take on it at a recent conference. I do not know enough to comment, but I found this interesting.
-
20
False memorial partakers deserve to die???
by Jofi_Wofo inevery memorial, much emphasis is placed on making sure that only the (self-proclaimed) anointed partake in the emblems.
this year, however, the speaker at my wife's congregation presented it as an even more serious matter.
he likened it to individuals in ancient israel who sought position of the priesthood despite never been appointed by jehovah.
-
-
vienne
Someone sent me the talk outline. I did not see this in it.
-
24
Jehovah's Witnesses are a breakaway
by HowTheBibleWasCreated inlet me follow the trial.
in 1931 rutherford started jehovah's witnesses.
be before that.. bible student and they merged before 1917 with russelites and they merge with adventists, and then miller in 1844.before that be disperse into baptist and other denominations.
-
-
vienne
I'm not ignoring your reply. My mom's very elderly uncle went into the hospital. So we're away from home for a while. When I return home, I'll post a reply. Please be patient.
-
24
Jehovah's Witnesses are a breakaway
by HowTheBibleWasCreated inlet me follow the trial.
in 1931 rutherford started jehovah's witnesses.
be before that.. bible student and they merged before 1917 with russelites and they merge with adventists, and then miller in 1844.before that be disperse into baptist and other denominations.
-
-
vienne
I should add the text of an email sent from Penton to one of the authors of Separate Identity:
Many thanks for the texts you have sent. I have only had time to read your introduction, but I was greatly pleased by it. I feel as irritated by the long-continued “Adventist Theory” as do you. I see also that you have added to my own understanding of the origins of Russell’s thinking, and I hail you for that.
I have not been well of late since my heart is acting up. Therefore, I may be a bit slow in getting back to you. But I will certainly read what you have discovered and written with anticipation.
Again, my best regards.James Penton
-
24
Jehovah's Witnesses are a breakaway
by HowTheBibleWasCreated inlet me follow the trial.
in 1931 rutherford started jehovah's witnesses.
be before that.. bible student and they merged before 1917 with russelites and they merge with adventists, and then miller in 1844.before that be disperse into baptist and other denominations.
-
-
vienne
I am aware of what Zoe wrote. It's incorrect. It defines Adventism as any belief in the near return of Christ. This ignores the three strands of Millennialism. Zoe supports the claim of Russellite Adventism with a citation from Rogerson. Rogerson did not support his claim with a reference to an original source.
Most "modern" scholarship would tend to use Millennialist, Literalist or age to come in lower case. There is a brief bibliography in Separate Identity vol 2. An example is Julia Neuffer in her The Gathering of Israel: A Historical Study of Early Writings. Writing about Storrs abandoning Adventism, she wrote:
By October, 1844, wrote L.[ewis] C. Gunn of Philadelphia, some in one congregation there had adopted a similar view, and Charles Fitch was at the same time (not long before his death) teaching probation for the heathen after the Advent. Others, added Gunn, like himself believed that at or just before the Advent “many of the Jews will be miraculously converted, and hail His appearing with the exclamation, ‘blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.’” All these, he said, “had changed from their former belief, and differed entirely from Mr. Miller, and the great body of advent believers in this country – but agreeing with the Literalists.”
Literalism is Age to Come belief.
You may be looking in the wrong era. Literalism/Age to Come belief is an extension of colonial era in American and the 16th Century belief in England. The Literalist/Age to Come system was controversial in that era, but pervasive.
Mom wrote in her introductory essay:
Literalists and Adventists had significantly differing hermeneutical approaches. Literalists followed a grammatical-historical or literal hermeneutic. Millerite Adventists and its descendent religions follow an allegorical-typological hermeneutic. William Bridge (c. 1600 –1670), a Separatist [sometimes called Independent] clergyman espoused Biblical Literalism, and in doing so tells us that it went under several names in Martin Luther’s day. Among these were “Vocabulists, Literalists, Grammatists, and Creaturists.” These titles, not all of which were meant to be complimentary, referred to the belief that the Bible said what it meant to say. Its vocabulary and its grammar was meant literally and framed so human creation could understand its plain words. Bridge suggested that in his day some were following the path of the wildly speculative theologies of the Reformation era and just as liable then as in the past to “be drawn into Popery.” C. F. Sweet quoted Martin Luther, J. A. Ernesti, Vertringa, and Jeremy Taylor noting that they all followed a literalist path.
Literalist/Age to Come/Restitution believers represent a broad spectrum of belief, but the principal unifying factor is belief that the Bible is not allegorical unless it plainly states something is an allegory. American scholars tend to focus on Colonial Era expositors when they consider Millenarian belief. Most American writers on prophetic subjects in the period up to 1850 were Literalists [Same animal as Age to Come]. In her opening essay [vol 2] mom briefly traces some of the pre-Russell Literalists. You may also want to read Jan Stilson: An Overview of the Leadership and Development of the Age to Come in the United States: 1832-1871, Journal from the Radical Reformation, Fall 2001. Jan is a Church of God, General Conference (Atlanta) historian.
Neuffer touches on the differences between Adventists and Age to Come believers, writing:
Indeed, the winds of doctrine developed hurricane force in 1850 among the Adventists – especially the majority group – over “the age to come.” This was a new name for the old Literalism that the Millerites had denounced as “Judaism.” The result was the emergence of an unorganized but distinct age-to-come party, comprising those who adopted the Literalist view of the millennium. The leading exponents described it in slightly varying forms, but they all saw it as a period of continuing probation, with mortal Jews in literal Jerusalem. ...
Where did the age-to-come doctrine of the 1850s come from? Possibly it stemmed chiefly from the British Literalist publications that had been circulated among the Millerites. However, the name seems to have come from the title of the 1850 editorials and the 1851 book by Joseph Marsh. Certainly his paper, The Advent Harbinger (Rochester, N.Y.), became the sounding board for the doctrine, although other individuals had taught it before him.
Surprisingly, Neuffer did not know that Age to Come is a Biblical phrase as found in the King James Bible. In fact the Age to Come theologies extend back to Renaissance/Reformation writers, primarily English, Dutch and German. Though they believed in the near return of Christ, they were not Adventists and would not have been accepted into the Adventist fellowship because of strong differences in doctrine. None of Russell's doctrines trace to Adventism. Without exception they came from the Age to Come movement, variously called Restitution, Literalism, Church of God (Which caused confusion with Campbelites and others). Mom and Schulz present a long list of examples in both volumes of Separate Identity.
-
24
Jehovah's Witnesses are a breakaway
by HowTheBibleWasCreated inlet me follow the trial.
in 1931 rutherford started jehovah's witnesses.
be before that.. bible student and they merged before 1917 with russelites and they merge with adventists, and then miller in 1844.before that be disperse into baptist and other denominations.
-
-
vienne
I'd prefer to think of them as men of faith, though misguided. But certainly some were devious, lying bastards. Change that 'some' to many.
-
24
Jehovah's Witnesses are a breakaway
by HowTheBibleWasCreated inlet me follow the trial.
in 1931 rutherford started jehovah's witnesses.
be before that.. bible student and they merged before 1917 with russelites and they merge with adventists, and then miller in 1844.before that be disperse into baptist and other denominations.
-
-
vienne
By the time Russell met him, Barbour had left Adventism for Mark Allen's Church of the Blessed Hope, an Age to Come body. Barbour says his Church of the Strangers was affiliated with Allen's Church. Russell says as much too without naming Allen's movement. Russell wrote:
The Answer ... explained how Mr. Barbour and Mr. J. H. Paton, of Michigan, a co-worker with him, had been [Italics are mine.] regular Second Adventists ... and that when the date 1874 had passed without the world being burned, and without their seeing Christ in the flesh, they were for a time dumbfounded. They had examined the time-prophecies that had seemingly passed unfulfilled, and had been unable to find any flaw, and had begun to wonder whether the time was right and their expectations wrong, – whether the views of restitution and blessing to the world, which others were teaching, might not be the things to look for.
Notice that they HAD BEEN Adventists. They were such no longer when Russell met them, but had shifted to the teachings of "others." Restitution doctrine is Age to Come doctrine.
George Storrs left the Millerite movement [Adventism] in 1844 among much controversy and recrimination. When Russell met him (1874) he was teaching, not Adventist world burning, but Restitution doctrine. He wrote in Bible Examiner that he did not and had not for some time read any Adventist publication. He did, however, write for Age to Come journals including the Restitution. Adventists sniped at him, defamed him, and printed lies. He addressed this in issues of Bible Examiner.
B. W. Schulz, a Fellow of a scholarly group focused on Witnesses, that includes the most prominent writers of today, and my mother, Rachael de Vienne, are, I would say "the most senior" writers on Witness history. Their work is cited by the most recent authors. These include George Chryssides in Jehovah's Witnesses: Continuity and Change and Zoe Knox Jehovah's Witnesses and the Secular World. Penton's third edition also cites their work and calls them "first rate historians." Mom and Dr. Schulz's books are narrative changing, and their conclusions are backed up with citations and quotations from original sources. Bruce contributed fact checking and editorial comments to Chryssides forth-coming book, due out in September, and he is acknowledged in the preface.
That someone who wrote some years past does not include current research proves nothing but that he was unaware of developing research. That you can't find references to Age to Come only means you looked in the wrong places. Start here: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22age+to+come%22&tbm=bks&source=lnt&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:1800,cd_max:1899&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjVx9KmrNPvAhXbLc0KHVRXCtkQpwUIJQ&biw=1366&bih=625&dpr=1
The Age to come movement, sometimes called Literalist, was diverse with many sub doctrines that conflicted with others within their movement. Russell was most influenced by those associated with The Restitution. By the time Russell met him, Stetson was teaching age to come and had been since 1865. He says so in a Restitution article. While some of his former Adventist associates still admired him, Stetson was dropped from the Advent Christian speakers list because of his change in doctrine. His articles were no longer accepted. And he was writing for The Restitution and for the British journal The Rainbow.
-
24
Jehovah's Witnesses are a breakaway
by HowTheBibleWasCreated inlet me follow the trial.
in 1931 rutherford started jehovah's witnesses.
be before that.. bible student and they merged before 1917 with russelites and they merge with adventists, and then miller in 1844.before that be disperse into baptist and other denominations.
-
-
vienne
Russell was never an Adventist. He was an Age to Come Millennialist. His doctrines came from that source. Separate Identity, both volumes, considers this in detail. At one point Russell tells his readers that while he knew Miller's failed chronology, he never read anything Miller wrote.
On the other hand, he tells his readers that he read The Restitution, an Age to Come newspaper. He mentions various books that he read, including J. A. Seiss' Last Times. Seiss was a then prominent Lutheran, whose books are still reprinted. He quotes various periodicals, none of them Adventist or Millerite.
Surprisingly, most of his earliest followers were Methodists. Not Adventists of any sort.