God's Kingdom Rules

[HollyW]

On the questions forum the video "The Kingdom---100 Years and Counting" was mentioned.  I notice that it begins with the same event the 2014 book "God's Kingdom Rule" does:

October 1st or 2nd, 1914, and C.T. Russell's announcement that the Gentiles times had ended.  The letter in the book from the GB invites you to  PICTURE yourself as a member of the Brooklyn Bethel family on Friday morning, October 2, 1914.  and with the video that's certainly easy to do, isn't it.

But what did that mean to them,  “The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day!” 

What events were they looking forward to?

Did those events take place?

 

 

 

[HollyW]

On 6/30/2016 at 7:06 AM, HollyW said:

On the questions forum the video "The Kingdom---100 Years and Counting" was mentioned.  I notice that it begins with the same event the 2014 book "God's Kingdom Rule" does:

October 1st or 2nd, 1914, and C.T. Russell's announcement that the Gentiles times had ended.  The letter in the book from the GB invites you to  PICTURE yourself as a member of the Brooklyn Bethel family on Friday morning, October 2, 1914.  and with the video that's certainly easy to do, isn't it.

But what did that mean to them,  “The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day!” 

What events were they looking forward to?

Did those events take place?

 

I'm not sure this dining room event even happened.....sometimes they say it was October 1st and other times that it was October 2nd. 

The first mention of it that I could find was in the May 1922 WT where Rutherford said this:

[May 1, 1922 WT p. 139] On the first day of October, 1914, Brother Russell walked into the dining-room at Bethel and, clapping his hands, announced in stentorian tones· "The gentile times have ended! The kings of earth have had their day!" Brother Russell was right then. He was right when he wrote Volume II concerning the gentile times.

Indeed, Volume II of Russell's STUDIES series laid the foundation for October of 1914 being the end of the Gentile Times, and in that Volume he gave seven distinct proofs that his calculations were correct and were Biblical. So, when (and IF) he made that statement in October of 1914 at the dining room, his audience knew exactly what he was referring to. They'd been reading it and hearing about it for the entire time they had been following Russell.

The volume is called "The Time Is At Hand" and Russell wrote it in 1889. It is referred to as Volume 2, or II, but it's actually his third volume because the first volume is referred to as Volume 0.  They started out as "Millennial Dawn" volumes but were changed to "Studies in the Scriptures" at some point. There are several web sites that have these volumes available for download: 

http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/engli...ks-and-tracts/ and http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf

On pages 76-79 Russell presents seven proofs for support that his date of October 1914 for the close of the gentile times is accurate and scriptural.

This is what he wrote:

In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men. ["The Time Is At Hand" 1889, p.76.]

Ok. So....what did his announcement on October 1st or 2nd of 1914 in the dining room mean to his audience?

Imagine yourself there, as the GB has invited you to in their letter in their book "God's Kingdom Rules!" Imagine hearing those words, "The Gentile Times have ended! Their kings have had their day!" (Just like the song #14 "Be Glad You Nations") Those hearing Russell's announcement were expecting that the "full end of the times of the Gentiles, .....the full end of their lease of dominion" had ended that year in October and "that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men."

That's our answer to the first question, isn't it, that's what Russell's announcement, “The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day!”  meant to them...."the full end of the times of the Gentiles,....the full end of their lease of dominion,...the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men."

What events were they looking forward to?  Russell lists seven specific events that would take place, showing that his calculations and predictions about 1914 were both accurate and Biblical.

[HollyW]

Let's take a look at the Bible evidence Russell had been saying would prove him right about the end of the Gentile times. This is from his book called "The Time Is At Hand" which he wrote in 1889:

In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men. And be it observed, that if this is shown to be a fact firmly established by the Scriptures, it will prove:

Firstly

, That at that date the Kingdom of God, for which our Lord taught us to pray, saying, "Thy Kingdom come," will begin to assume control, and that it will then shortly be "set up," or firmly established, in the earth, on the ruins of present institutions.

Secondly

, It will prove that he whose right it is thus to take the dominion will then be present as earth's new Ruler; and not only so, but it will also prove that he will be present for a considerable period before that date; because the overthrow of these Gentile governments is directly caused by his dashing them to pieces as a potter's vessel (Psa. 2:9; Rev. 2:27), and establishing in their stead his own righteous government.

Thirdly

, It will prove that some time before the end of the overthrow the last member of the divinely recognized Church of Christ, the "royal priesthood," "the body of Christ," will be glorified with the Head; because every member is to reign with Christ, being a joint-heir with him of the Kingdom, and it cannot be fully "set up" without every member.

Fourthly

, It will prove that from that time forward Jerusalem shall no longer be trodden down of the Gentiles, but shall arise from the dust of divine disfavor, to honor; because the "Times of the Gentiles" will be fulfilled or completed.

Fifthly,

It will prove that by that date, or sooner, Israel's blindness will begin to be turned away; because their "blindness in part" was to continue only "until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" (Rom. 11:25), or, in other words, until the full number from among the Gentiles, who are to be members of the body or bride of Christ, would be fully selected.

Sixthly,

It will prove that the great "time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation," will reach its culmination in a world-wide reign of anarchy; and then men will learn to be still, and to know that Jehovah is God and that he will be exalted in the earth. (Psa. 46:20)  The condition of things spoken of in symbolic language as raging waves of the sea, melting earth, falling mountains and burning heavens will then pass away, and the "new heavens and new earth" with their peaceful blessings will begin to be recognized by trouble-tossed humanity.  But the Lord's Anointed and his rightful and righteous authority will first be recognized by a company of God's children while passing through the great tribulation--the class represented by

m

and

t

on the

Chart of the Ages

(see also pages 235 to 239, Vol. I); afterward, just at its close, by fleshly Israel; and ultimately by mankind in general.

Seventhly,

It will prove that before that date God's Kingdom, organized in power, will be in the earth and then smite and crush the Gentile image (Dan. 2:34)--and fully consume the power of these kings.  Its own power and dominion will be established as fast as by its varied influences and agencies it crushes and scatters the "powers that be"--civil and ecclesiastical--iron and clay.

Available online at http://wtarchive.svhelden.info/english/books-and-tracts/ and http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf

So, these are the events you would be expecting when you imagine yourself in the dining room that day in October 1914 when C.T. Russell announced that the Gentile times had ended.  These events are the evidence that would prove October 1914 was the correct date Biblically for the end of the Gentile times.  Perhaps someone who feels strong enough spiritually to defend him or her self biblically could show which, if any, of these events took place.

 

[JW Insider]

Good post. Good research.

On 7/30/2016 at 5:29 PM, HollyW said:

[May 1, 1922 WT p. 139] On the first day of October, 1914, Brother Russell walked into the dining-room at Bethel and, clapping his hands, announced in stentorian tones· "The gentile times have ended! The kings of earth have had their day!" Brother Russell was right then. He was right when he wrote Volume II concerning the gentile times.

The Watchtower here says it was on October 1st, and I think A. H. Macmillan was the first to say it was on October 2nd.

I have read Macmillan's "Faith on the March" and I'm now reading the typewritten first draft of Macmillan's "Faith on the March." (His edits remind me of experiences watching the editing process at Bethel.) For years, I have noticed that there are a couple of things that Macmillan either just "made up" or else he had a very poor memory, or was choosing between two or more versions of a story. But when he chose to report on specific things that Russell said or did, there is strong evidence that it's Macmillan's own fault when he reported it incorrectly. (For example, when a bunch of Watchtower readers were reported to have waited on a bridge in Pittsburgh in their white robes expecting to be raptured, he quotes Russell to exonerate him from any personal embarrassment in that incident. But he ends up claiming Russell said something that he wouldn't likely have said unless Russell also had a bad memory. The newspaper account that Macmillan claims to base the story on, actually doesn't exist, and it now appears Macmillan confused it with a report from a Philadelphia newspaper about an incident a few hundred miles away from Pittsburgh.)

On the other hand, Rutherford had also been known to make "convenient" changes in a story, which he did several times in his booklet from 1915: "Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens." As a lawyer he must have had some of the documentation in front of him, but he makes several claims in that booklet that differ from the court records, often just slightly and often in a technically ambiguous manner, and often with an obvious purpose of simplification or to avoid a distraction that might create suspicion. (The entire booklet was written for the purpose of exonerating Russell from about a dozen of the major claims made against him and/or his business practices.)

In think that in this particular case, I would choose to believe that it did happen, and that Macmillan is correct, rather than Rutherford. The reason is that Rutherford may have only wanted to give emphasis to the fact that the Gentile Times ended on October 1st, and including the fact that Russell waited until October 2nd would be a distraction that would have required a small explanation. So the slight change was just to avoid the distraction. Technically, Rutherford may have thought that "first of October" could ambiguously refer to the earliest part of October instead of a specific date. It's also possible that Rutherford incorrectly remembered it being on October 1st.

But the other reason to accept Macmillan's date is because it looks like he is working from a diary. We also know from another source document that Macmillan had worked out the travel dates for all his speeches and convention travel in 1914. We also have a letter from Macmillan explaining why he can't make a certain travel arrangement based on the dates and (un)available funds. As a Bethel administrator, he would likely have kept good documentation. Also, we know it was common for many Bible Students to use books like "Daily Heavenly Manna" as a diary. What he writes in Faith on the March appears to say that many of the Bethelites didn't even get home until late in the day or evening on October 1st.  500 persons (including Bethelites and "conventioners" who would be staying at Bethel at least until Sunday October 4th) were traveling on October 1st from Saratoga Springs to Brooklyn.including a Hudson Steamer from Albany. This is several hours of travel. Note from Macmillan's book:

Ever since 1879 The Watch Tower had been calling attention to the foretold end of the present systems as due to begin in 1914. But while we were all looking forward to 1914 and the end of wickedness and sorrow in the earth, many of us were thinking more of our own personal, individual "change" than anything else. On August 23, 1914, as I well recall, Pastor Russell started on a trip to the Northwest, down the Pacific coast and over into the Southern states, and then ending at Saratoga Springs, New York, where we held a convention September 27-30. That was a highly interesting time because a few of us seriously thought we were going to heaven during the first week of that October. At that Saratoga Springs convention quite a number were in attendance. Wednesday (September 30) I was invited to talk on the subject, "The End of All Things Is at Hand; Therefore Let Us Be Sober, Watchful and Pray." Well, as one would say, that was down my road. I believed it myself sincerely — that the church was "going home" in October. During that discourse I made this unfortunate remark: "This is probably the last public address I shall ever deliver because we shall be going home soon." Next morning (October I ) about five hundred of us began the return trip to Brooklyn, including a lovely ride on the Hudson River Day Line steamer from Albany to New York. Sunday morning we were to open services in Brooklyn, this to conclude our convention. Quite a number of the conventioners stayed at Bethel, the home of the headquarters staff members. Friday morning (October 2) we all were seated at the breakfast table when Russell came down. As he entered the room he hesitated a moment as was his custom and said cheerily, "Good morning all." But this morning, instead of proceeding to his seat as usual, he briskly clapped his hands and happily announced: "The Gentile times have ended; their kings have had their day." We all applauded.

We were highly excited and I would not have been surprised if at that moment we had just started up, that becoming the signal to begin ascending heavenward — but of course there was nothing like that, really.

[My great grand-father was with Russell on the Northwest and Pacific portion of Russell's convention tour starting August 23, 1914. He was one of speakers out of Chicago who usually joined Russell only on the "Western Tour" as they called it ]

[JW Insider]

On the other hand, the "first edition" of "Faith on the March" says that this happened on Sunday, October 4th:

We realized that 1914 was upon and now we must do something about it. On the 23rd of August, 1914, Brother Russell made a trip out in the northwest, down the Pacific coast and over into the Southern States, and wound up at Saratoga Springs, New York, where we held a convention September 30 through October 4, 1914. That was an interesting time because we thought we were going to heaven that first week in October--- and were looking forward to that. That was the idea.

...

On Saturday about 500 of us took the Hudson River daylight boat, a very lovely ride from Albany to New York. Then Sunday morning we were to open up in the Tabernacle and conclude our convention. Quite a number of the conventioners stayed at Bethel. Sunday morning, October 4th, the dining room was crowded. Brother Russell's habit when he came down in the morning was to hesitate at the entrance of the dining room a moment and say, "Good morning, everyone". We would all say, "Good morning". But this morning after greeting us as to the time of day he said, "The Gentile Times have ended, their kings have had their day." Then, of course, we all applauded. We were all very excited and I wouldn't have been surprised if at that moment we all just started up, that being the signal to go up, but it wasn't.

So the same recorder of these events first wrote the circumstances to show why it was Sunday, October 4th when the announcement was made.

[HollyW]

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Good post. Good research.

The Watchtower here says it was on October 1st, and I think A. H. Macmillan was the first to say it was on October 2nd.

I have read Macmillan's "Faith on the March" and I'm now reading the typewritten first draft of Macmillan's "Faith on the March." (His edits remind me of experiences watching the editing process at Bethel.) For years, I have noticed that there are a couple of things that Macmillan either just "made up" or else he had a very poor memory, or was choosing between two or more versions of a story. But when he chose to report on specific things that Russell said or did, there is strong evidence that it's Macmillan's own fault when he reported it incorrectly. (For example, when a bunch of Watchtower readers were reported to have waited on a bridge in Pittsburgh in their white robes expecting to be raptured, he quotes Russell to exonerate him from any personal embarrassment in that incident. But he ends up claiming Russell said something that he wouldn't likely have said unless Russell also had a bad memory. The newspaper account that Macmillan claims to base the story on, actually doesn't exist, and it now appears Macmillan confused it with a report from a Philadelphia newspaper about an incident a few hundred miles away from Pittsburgh.)

On the other hand, Rutherford had also been known to make "convenient" changes in a story, which he did several times in his booklet from 1915: "Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens." As a lawyer he must have had some of the documentation in front of him, but he makes several claims in that booklet that differ from the court records, often just slightly and often in a technically ambiguous manner, and often with an obvious purpose of simplification or to avoid a distraction that might create suspicion. (The entire booklet was written for the purpose of exonerating Russell from about a dozen of the major claims made against him and/or his business practices.)

In think that in this particular case, I would choose to believe that it did happen, and that Macmillan is correct, rather than Rutherford. The reason is that Rutherford may have only wanted to give emphasis to the fact that the Gentile Times ended on October 1st, and including the fact that Russell waited until October 2nd would be a distraction that would have required a small explanation. So the slight change was just to avoid the distraction. Technically, Rutherford may have thought that "first of October" could ambiguously refer to the earliest part of October instead of a specific date. It's also possible that Rutherford incorrectly remembered it being on October 1st.

But the other reason to accept Macmillan's date is because it looks like he is working from a diary. We also know from another source document that Macmillan had worked out the travel dates for all his speeches and convention travel in 1914. We also have a letter from Macmillan explaining why he can't make a certain travel arrangement based on the dates and (un)available funds. As a Bethel administrator, he would likely have kept good documentation. Also, we know it was common for many Bible Students to use books like "Daily Heavenly Manna" as a diary. What he writes in Faith on the March appears to say that many of the Bethelites didn't even get home until late in the day or evening on October 1st.  500 persons (including Bethelites and "conventioners" who would be staying at Bethel at least until Sunday October 4th) were traveling on October 1st from Saratoga Springs to Brooklyn.including a Hudson Steamer from Albany. This is several hours of travel. Note from Macmillan's book:

Ever since 1879 The Watch Tower had been calling attention to the foretold end of the present systems as due to begin in 1914. But while we were all looking forward to 1914 and the end of wickedness and sorrow in the earth, many of us were thinking more of our own personal, individual "change" than anything else. On August 23, 1914, as I well recall, Pastor Russell started on a trip to the Northwest, down the Pacific coast and over into the Southern states, and then ending at Saratoga Springs, New York, where we held a convention September 27-30. That was a highly interesting time because a few of us seriously thought we were going to heaven during the first week of that October. At that Saratoga Springs convention quite a number were in attendance. Wednesday (September 30) I was invited to talk on the subject, "The End of All Things Is at Hand; Therefore Let Us Be Sober, Watchful and Pray." Well, as one would say, that was down my road. I believed it myself sincerely — that the church was "going home" in October. During that discourse I made this unfortunate remark: "This is probably the last public address I shall ever deliver because we shall be going home soon." Next morning (October I ) about five hundred of us began the return trip to Brooklyn, including a lovely ride on the Hudson River Day Line steamer from Albany to New York. Sunday morning we were to open services in Brooklyn, this to conclude our convention. Quite a number of the conventioners stayed at Bethel, the home of the headquarters staff members. Friday morning (October 2) we all were seated at the breakfast table when Russell came down. As he entered the room he hesitated a moment as was his custom and said cheerily, "Good morning all." But this morning, instead of proceeding to his seat as usual, he briskly clapped his hands and happily announced: "The Gentile times have ended; their kings have had their day." We all applauded.

We were highly excited and I would not have been surprised if at that moment we had just started up, that becoming the signal to begin ascending heavenward — but of course there was nothing like that, really.

[My great grand-father was with Russell on the Northwest and Pacific portion of Russell's convention tour starting August 23, 1914. He was one of speakers out of Chicago who usually joined Russell only on the "Western Tour" as they called it ]

Thanks for the additional information.  Macmillan also seems to have mis-remembered what the WT had been calling attention to ever since 1879.  It wasn't the beginning of the end, it was the end of the end.

In reference to Armageddon, ZWT of Jan 15, 1892 p.24-25, has the following about “the battle of the great day of God Almighty.”

The date of the close of that “battle” is definitely marked in Scripture as October, 1914.  It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874.   

It’s end was predicted for October, 1914.

[ZWT Aug. 1, 1892 p.238-245] “the final overthrow of present governments will be at the same time as the fall of ecclesiasticism, and will be followed by from five to seven years of socialism and anarchy, to end with 1914 by the establishment of Christ’s Millennial government.”

That was why they all were expecting to be raptured in October of 1914 (hence the white-robe bridge incident?) because they had been saying the end of all the governments and all the churches (except the WTS) would take place by 1914 and the 1,000 year reign of Christ would begin (the millennium).  

Though the WTS still holds to the Gentile times ending in 1914, all the evidence, the seven points, Russell put forward to prove his date was scripturally accurate, show that it was not accurate at all.

[JW Insider]

No one can tell for sure why we emphasized October so much. It was the habit of several chronologists after William Miller and therefore followers of Barbour and Russell also emphasized October. It has nothing to do with when the Temple fell even though the book "What does the Bible Really Teach" mistakenly indicates that the temple fell in October. Other publications such as Insight and various Watchtower articles say that it was NOT October. (More importantly, the Bible says it was not in October.) I think the "Bible Teach" book changed it to October just to simplify the reasons for explaining October 1914. It was probably for similar reasons that the date for Russell's announcement has changed from October 1st to October 4th to October 2nd. Don't know if you are aware, but the Watchtower has also taught that the actual date for the end of the Gentiles Times was October 4th:

*** w79 9/15 p. 24 par. 11 The “Cup” That All Nations Must Drink at God’s Hand ***
11 Now that the Gentile Times ended in 1914, we know that the day for Jehovah to hold an accounting with the Gentile nations for “their error” must be very near. Never has the world been the same since 1914. Secular historians cannot explain the reason for this. But the reason simply is that about October 4/5, 1914, or 2,520 years from the desolating of Judah and Jerusalem after the Babylonian conquest, the Gentile Times of uninterrupted world domination ended.

*** w75 11/1 p. 661 par. 15 The Time for Choosing God as Sovereign ***
This fact of universal interest has been true since the year 1914 C.E. In that year “the times of the Gentiles,” or, “the appointed times of the nations,” ended about October 4/5 , when counted from the desolation of Jerusalem and the land of Judah by the Babylonians in the year 607 B.C.E.

*** w73 3/15 p. 168 What Kind of Ruler Does Mankind Need? ***
When did Jehovah do so? In the year 1914 C.E. when the “appointed times of the [Gentile] nations” ended, about October 4/5.

*** w72 6/1 pp. 351-352 Questions From Readers ***
At the end of the Gentile Times, about Tishri 15 ( October 4/5 ), 1914 C.E., Revelation 11:15 was fulfilled: “The kingdom of the world did become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ.”

*** w72 12/15 p. 748 par. 5 The Time to Decide in the Name of Which God to Walk ***
By the end of the Gentile Times about October 4, 1914, eight nations and empires of Christendom, along with Japan, were fighting one another.

*** w71 12/1 pp. 717-718 par. 1 What Its “Right Condition” Means for Us Today ***
The Gentile Times had begun about the middle of the lunar month Tishri in 607 B.C.E., and so their 2,520 years of duration would end in 1914 about Tishri 15, which corresponds with October 4/5 . By then the British Empire and other empires of Christendom were embroiled in the war. The other member of the Anglo-American Dual World Power entered the war in the spring of 1917.

*** w70 1/15 p. 50 par. 5 Peace with God amid the “Great Tribulation” ***
Both the Bible’s time schedule and the physical facts of history prove that the Gentile Times, “the appointed times of the nations,” ended in 1914 C.E. about October 4/5 that year.

That expression "the physical facts . . .  prove" was an expression that Rutherford often used when there was no real evidence for something. In this case, it's probably F W Franz using it, but with the idea that WWI provided those "physical facts of history."  There are many more quotes like this, but notice that the next one actually admits that it is two months off, and offers no explanation for it.

*** w65 9/15 p. 569 A Pivotal Date in History ***
With this pivotal date established, it is easy to go back seventy years from the seventh month of the year 537 to the seventh month of 607 B.C.E. as the time of the desolation of Jerusalem and Judah. In 607 B.C.E., the month of Tishri began on September 22/23, the day for the observance of the festival of the new moon. It was in that month of 607 B.C.E. that the “seven times,” or, “the times of the Gentiles,” “the appointed times of the nations,” began. (Dan. 4:16, 23, 25, 32; Luke 21:24, AV; NW) This was two months after Jerusalem had been destroyed and its temple plundered, wrecked and burned down, after which its two principal priests were killed.—2 Ki. 25:5-21.

Evidently to make up for the lack of evidence for October 4th, one of the next paragraphs points out that "At Ezra 3:6 it is stated: 'From the first day of the seventh month on they started to offer up burnt sacrifices to Jehovah, when the foundation of Jehovah’s temple itself had not yet been laid.' This would be, according to the Gregorian Calendar, on September 28/29, of 537 B.C.E. So on the first day of the month they celebrated the new moon of the seventh month of that year."

Then, a footnote states the following (linked to September 28/29):

*** w65 9/15 p. 570 A Pivotal Date in History ***
Or, according to the Julian Calendar, October 4/5, 537 B.C.E. See Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.–A.D. 75 (edition of 1956), by Parker and Dubberstein, page 29.

Just because Tishri 1 fell on October 4/5 in 537 doesn't mean it fell on October 4/5 in any other "signficant" year. The above admits that it wasn't that date in 607, and in 1914 Tishri 1 lands on September 8th. Of course, this particular new moon celebration was just one of three different memorials to the time of the Temple destruction, but was not the date for the destruction itself according to the Bible and the Insight book.

The October tradition is actually based on a lot of assumptions, including the idea that Adam was created around October 1, 4026. The old October 1, 4028 B.C.E. date was more definite, but when it changed to 4026, the Insight book changes it only to "likely".

*** it-1 p. 45 Adam ***
That was in the year 4026 B.C.E. It was likely in the fall of the year, for mankind’s most ancient calendars began counting time in the autumn around October 1, or at the first new moon of the lunar civil year.

For some reason we began believing that Jehovah, in effect, created the civil, secular calendar when he created Adam. (When Jehovah implemented the sacred calendar the first month was changed from Tishri to Nisan in the spring.) The older reasoning was closer to the idea that "we just knew" because we understood Bible chronology. The newer reasoning, starting around 1950,  included the idea that Adam must have been created in the fall, and this would explain why many secular calendars (including the Hebrew) started in the fall.

*** w70 5/1 p. 273 par. 5 An Ingathering Affecting All Mankind ***
However, Bible chronology which indicates that Adam was created in the fall of the year 4026 B.C.E. would bring us down to the year 1975 C.E. as the date marking 6,000 years of human history with yet 1,000 years to come for Christ’s Kingdom rule. So whatever the date for the end of this system, it is clear that the time left is reduced, with only approximately six years left until the end of 6,000 years of human history. (1 Cor. 7:29) This corroborates the understanding of Jesus’ words that the generation alive in 1914 with the outbreak of World War I would not pass away until the end comes.

*** w68 5/1 p. 272 Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time ***
4026 [B.C.E]           Creation of Adam (in early autumn)  Gen. 2:7

*** w51 4/1 p. 221 An Interesting Chronological Chart ***
  4025 B.C.    Adam’s creation (in the fall)         Gen. 2:7

 

 

It might seem off the subject, but the October date of Adam's creation was once accepted as a very important factor in determining the possible date for Armageddon, and as we see in the quotes above, this was tied back to 1914. And as the quote below shows, for some reason we "needed to determine" time from the "autumn of 4026" -- elsewhere stated to be about October 1st.

*** w68 5/1 p. 271 pars. 4-5 Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time ***
Since it was also Jehovah’s purpose for man to multiply and fill the earth, it is logical that he would create Eve soon after Adam, perhaps just a few weeks or months later in the same year, 4026 B.C.E. After her creation, God’s rest day, the seventh period, immediately followed.
5 Therefore, God’s seventh day and the time man has been on earth apparently run parallel. To calculate where man is in the stream of time relative to God’s seventh day of 7,000 years, we need to determine how long a time has elapsed from the year of Adam and Eve’s creation in 4026 B.C.E. From the autumn of that year to the autumn of 1 B.C.E., there would be 4,025 years. From the autumn of 1 B.C.E. to the autumn of 1 C.E. is one year (there was no zero year). From the autumn of 1 C.E. to the autumn of 1967 is a total of 1,966 years. Adding 4,025 and 1 and 1,966, we get 5,992 years from the autumn of 4026 B.C.E. to the autumn of 1967. Thus, eight years remain to account for a full 6,000 years of the seventh day. Eight years from the autumn of 1967 would bring us to the autumn of 1975, fully 6,000 years into God’s seventh day, his rest day.

*** w67 7/15 pp. 446-447 The Removal of Mankind’s Chief Disturber ***
Adam was created in 4026 B.C.E., which means that six thousand years of human history end about the fall of 1975 C.E. We are in the great 7,000-year rest day of God, starting at the time he rested after the creation of Adam and Eve. There are, therefore, a thousand years left to run.

In those years we sometimes gave another piece of evidence as a reason for sticking with the October tradition. The following article which is specfically on the topic of the time of Adam's creation gives no other reason for October other than this one, and this one just appears almost out of the blue with no other context about October. (In 1955 we were still pointing to the 1976 date, not 1975, which happened when we changed the date of creation back again from 4025 to 4026.)

*** w55 2/1 p. 94 Questions From Readers ***
What are the reasons for changing the creation date of Adam first from 4028 B.C. to 4026 B.C. and now recently in the book “New Heavens and a New Earth” to 4025 B.C.? . . . Incidentally, Jesus, who became the second or “last Adam,” was born in the fall of the year around the first of October. . . . The very fact that, as part of Jehovah’s secret, no one today is able to find out how much time Adam and later Eve lived during the closing days of the sixth creative period, so no one can now determine when six thousand years of Jehovah’s present rest day come to an end. Obviously, whatever amount of Adam’s 930 years was lived before the beginning of that seventh-day rest of Jehovah, that unknown amount would have to be added to the 1976 date.

Apparently, the entire October tradition was just something we inherited from Nelson Barbour, and we kept it even though we found very little basis or evidence for it.

 

 

 

 

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, HollyW said:

That was why they all were expecting to be raptured in October of 1914 (hence the white-robe bridge incident?) because they had been saying the end of all the governments and all the churches (except the WTS) would take place by 1914 and the 1,000 year reign of Christ would begin (the millennium).

It was an interesting time. The white-robe bridge incident was curious. This was a reference to a previous time. Recall that Barbour thought it would be 1873 then 1874 and there were several places where many of his followers gathered for a final rapture. Russell joined the expectations in time for the 1878 expectation, and then Russell's readers (without Barbour) next expected it in 1881. Until 1914, there were no real "rapture" expectations for all Bible Students, although 1910 became popular for a while. 1914 was the biggest, but there were a lot of speeches that downplayed the expectation from November of 1913 on through about the middle of 1914 when Russell indicated for a while that he had lost faith in 1914 and even wondered what people might be saying 100 years in the future (2014) as he said that it no longer seemed likely to happen. But then the war started and he regained his faith in the chronology. Even then, however, Brother Wise and others continued to downplay the exact expectation for October. Brother MacMillan was sure of October, however. In 1915 he even gave a convention talk blaming the extension (then 8 or 9 months after October) on a lack of dedication by the great crowd (great company/great multitude).

The robes issue is even more interesting. It was once a pejorative way to make fun of Millerites and Barbourites to claim that they were standing around at night wearing their white "ascension robes." There is a lot of evidence that robe thing was just made up ("out of whole cloth"), from a story starting out of the Boston area. But over time, it seems like the Bible Students began to think of it as appropriate, after all. Remember that when Russell was dying, he asked to have his "toga" put on, so that he died wearing it. Also, the "first edition" of Faith on the March indicates that even MacMillan might have already had his white robe prepared. (He lets us know this in the context of telling about one Bible Student who already had already negotiated a funeral plot for himself in the summer of 1914 to be ready by around October 1914.)

Another minor point is that the Millennium had already started in 1873/4. The new millennial day was already dawning, thus, "Millennial Dawn." The first Jubilee cycle after that was to end in 1924 which was one of the reasons that Abraham, Isaac, Jabob, David, etc, were to be raised in 1925. It was not until much later that the Millennium was expected to end in 1976, then 1975 after some chronological adjustments. Franz even gave one speech where he mentioned the new understanding of the Jubilee to start in 1975. It would have coincided with the earlier chronology of Jubilee cycles, 1874/5, 1924/5, 1974/5 - and for a time Franz even wanted to change the 1975 date to 1974, but was evidently outvoted and the article was never published.

[Ann O'Maly]

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

It has nothing to do with when the Temple fell even though the book "What does the Bible Really Teach" mistakenly indicates that the temple fell in October.

Really? *Runs off to look* Holy blunders! You're right! 

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

I think the "Bible Teach" book changed it to October just to simplify the reasons for explaining October 1914.

I think so too. It was poorly worded. It would have been better phrased, "The 2,520 years began in October 607 B.C.E., when  after Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians and the Davidic king was taken off his throne."

Or better yet, insert the real year (587 B.C.E.) ... and delete the '2,520 year' part. But that's another discussion. 

Quote

Apparently, the entire October tradition was just something we inherited from Nelson Barbour, and we kept it even though we found very little basis or evidence for it.

The October thing is to do with Gedaliah's assassination in the 7th month (September/October) and when the remaining Jews fled to Egypt. Russell and Barbour maintained right from the beginning that the '70 years' related to the period when the land was 'desolate, without an inhabitant' and that only happened, according to their interpretation, once the remnant Jews fled to Egypt.

Of course, as we know, Jeremiah's '70 years' related to the nations' servitude to Babylon which began long before Jerusalem's destruction. Not only that, but according to Ezekiel, there were still people living in Jerusalem's ruins in December:

Ezekiel 33:21 - At length in the 12th year, in the tenth month, on the fifth day of the month of our exile, a man who had escaped from Jerusalem came to me and said: “The city has been struck down!”

Ezekiel 33:23-29 - Then the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 24 “Son of man, the inhabitants of these ruins are saying concerning the land of Israel, ‘Abraham was just one man, and yet he took possession of the land. But we are many; surely the land has been given to us as a possession.’

25 “Therefore say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: “You are eating food with the blood, and you lift up your eyes to your disgusting idols, and you keep shedding blood. So why should you possess the land? 26 You have relied on your sword, you engage in detestable practices, and each of you has defiled his neighbor’s wife. So why should you possess the land?”’

27 “This is what you should say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: “As surely as I am alive, those living in the ruins will fall by the sword; those in the open field, I will give as food to the wild beasts; and those in the strongholds and the caves will die by disease. 28 I will make the land an utterly desolate wasteland, and its arrogant pride will be brought to an end, and the mountains of Israel will be desolated, with no one passing through. 29 And they will have to know that I am Jehovah when I make the land an utterly desolate wasteland because of all the detestable things that they have done.”’
 

[JW Insider]

Yes. Thanks for including the Bible Teach quote for me. I noticed I needed to include it, but I decided I had overloaded my quotation quota.

I understand the beliefs of Russell and Barbour about October and the use of the 7th month event when Gedaliah was assassinated. I've made the same claim for Gedaliah and the so-called final, full desolation, and, of course, I have believed it and defended it, too. In front of other Witnesses, in person, it's easier and easier to avoid the subject because hardly any Witnesses are interested any more in such details (in my experience).

And you might well be right, that this is why October has stuck with us. 

But the more I read in the chronology articles in old Watchtowers and old journals from Barbour and other Second Adventists, I'm starting to think it would have been October no matter what. You almost "proved" it with the verses from Ezekiel which show that the desolation was a process involving multiple events over about a 70 year period. There was nothing special about the October event. JWTheologian even brought up the reference to those scholars who make a case for saying that the land was never completely desolated, but who claim that there may have been political purposes for speaking of the land as "completely" desolate when it was really only in a "deslolated" condition. Some scholars claim that this would more easily resolve land ownership disputes among the elite when they came back and found squatters. I pointed out to him that this is an interesting point of view but is NOT a Biblical point of view.

Anyway, for the moment at least, I think the "October" tradition influenced the reasoning of Barbour about Gedaliah, not the other way around. I am thinking it was already a tradition for the Second Adventist school of chronologists, with or without Gedaliah.

[HollyW]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

No one can tell for sure why we emphasized October so much. It was the habit of several chronologists after William Miller and therefore followers of Barbour and Russell also emphasized October. It has nothing to do with when the Temple fell even though the book "What does the Bible Really Teach" mistakenly indicates that the temple fell in October. Other publications such as Insight and various Watchtower articles say that it was NOT October. (More importantly, the Bible says it was not in October.) I think the "Bible Teach" book changed it to October just to simplify the reasons for explaining October 1914. It was probably for similar reasons that the date for Russell's announcement has changed from October 1st to October 4th to October 2nd. Don't know if you are aware, but the Watchtower has also taught that the actual date for the end of the Gentiles Times was October 4th:

 

Thanks, again.  No, I wasn't aware of the October 4th date.

Whether it was the 1st or the 2nd or the 4th that he made the announcement, Russell's announcement itself was obviously wrong ---- he gave the evidence that proves the Gentile times did not end in 1914, nor any year since then.  None of the events have happened that he said would happen if he were correct.

As I posted above, back in 1892 Russell presented "Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men. And be it observed, that if this is shown to be a fact firmly established by the Scriptures, it will prove:"

It can't be ignored as being of no interest to current JWs since the governing body itself has asked them to picture themselves back in the dining room in October of 1914 when Russell made the declaration that the Gentile times had ended.

You've done quite a bit of research in the WTS history, so this must be something you've found on your own. 

[HollyW]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

It was an interesting time. The white-robe bridge incident was curious. This was a reference to a previous time. Recall that Barbour thought it would be 1873 then 1874 and there were several places where many of his followers gathered for a final rapture. Russell joined the expectations in time for the 1878 expectation, and then Russell's readers (without Barbour) next expected it in 1881. Until 1914, there were no real "rapture" expectations for all Bible Students, although 1910 became popular for a while. 1914 was the biggest, but there were a lot of speeches that downplayed the expectation from November of 1913 on through about the middle of 1914 when Russell indicated for a while that he had lost faith in 1914 and even wondered what people might be saying 100 years in the future (2014) as he said that it no longer seemed likely to happen. But then the war started and he regained his faith in the chronology. Even then, however, Brother Wise and others continued to downplay the exact expectation for October. Brother MacMillan was sure of October, however. In 1915 he even gave a convention talk blaming the extension (then 8 or 9 months after October) on a lack of dedication by the great crowd (great company/great multitude).

 

Russell hadn't been saying war would start in 1914 though.  He was saying Armageddon would END in 1914.  So he still should have suspected the inaccuracy of his predictions.  

I hadn't heard that about Macmillan, however it's not been unusual for the average JWs to be blamed for the mistakes their leaders have made.  Kind of like 'you were foolish to believe us'.