Charles Taze Russell: Dates, Expectations, Predictions, Apologies, Response, Relevance

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 6/21/2021 at 6:41 PM, JW Insider said:

Note: An entire 30-page topic about "The disgusting thing that causes desolation" was recently deleted. The topic contained hundreds of posts, and they were from most of the usual participants here.

Um, was this just after I mentioned that Russell wasn't a JW ? And was it where TTH was comparing something Russell wrote to something from 1971 which came from the JW Org, and I said there was no comparison because Russell has nothing to do with the JW Organisation ?

I cannot understand why JWs cling to Russell, when Russell had no connection to the forming of the Jehovah's Witnesses organisation. Russell was an International Bible Student. 

https://internationalbiblestudents.com/about.html

Who are the Bible Students?"

The association of International Bible Students has existed continuously since the days of Pastor Charles Taze Russell to the present. In Brother Russell's day, the IBSA was a cooperative association of Bible Student congregations worldwide, all united by the common beliefs taught in Brother Russell's Studies in the Scriptures series. The Watchtower was merely a publishing house and lecture service, with NO central control over these thousands of associated, but independent congregations.

https://internationalbiblestudents.com/images/IBSA1910.pdf

After the death of Brother Russell in 1916, J.F. Rutherford took control of the IBSA, acting in violation of Brother Russell's Will and the Watchtower Bylaws. By 1931 J.F. Rutherford had radically changed and reorganized the Watchtower into a different organization. He named his new organization "Jehovah's Witnesses," in order to distinguish it from the various groups formed by the 75% of original Bible Students no longer connected. Hundreds of these Bible Student congregations worldwide have continued to the present, thus constituting a continuation of the original IBSA. These Bible Students remain united in the original early Watchtower beliefs taught by Brother Russell.

Was this the reason it was removed ? 

JWI, You have proven how way out of line Russell was and that he obviously didn't have any guidance by God's Holy spirit, nor did he seem to have the approval of Jesus Christ... 

But neither was Russell a JW. nor did he approve of Rutherford it seems. 

[JW Insider]

J. H. PATON APOLOGY FOR 1878

After that July 1879 Watch Tower issue supplement where Russell explained his involvement in the 1878 promotion, 1878 was mentioned again in the October 1879 issue. Here is where Paton explains the 1878 failure and proposes a meaning that "salvages" the failure, and would become the new 1878 doctrine until well after Russell died. But there is a kind of apology buried in there, too.

First of all for those who don't know the context of Paton's presentation, the "doubles" theory said that because the time from the death of Jacob to the death of Jesus Christ was 1,845 years, then the time from Jesus' baptism (his appearance as the Christ) until his invisible presence was also 1,845 years. Therefore 29 C.E. + 1,849 = 1874. And therefore the time from Jesus death/resurrection (his "change") in the spring of 33 C.E. until the spring of 1878 must also be 1,845 years.

Later of course, this same parallel would be used to show that the "favor" to the Jewish nation lasted until "Cornelius" in 36 C.E. and therefore those 7 years of "Jewish harvest" would correspond to the 7 years of "Gospel harvest" from 1874 to 1881. And even after the Bride class was translated to their spiritual bodies a time of trouble would continue for the nations for the remaining 33 years of harvest from 1881 to 1914. This corresponded to the time between 36 until Jerusalem was finally destroyed in 70 C.E.

• 1 BC + 1,845 = 1844 + 30 =
• 29 + 1,845 = 1874 + 3.5 =
• 33 + 1,845 = 1878 + 3.5 =
• 36 + 1,845 = 1881 + 33 =
• 70 + 1,845 = 1914 + 3.5 =
• 73 + 1,845 = 1918*

*As 1914 approached, it was remembered that some Jews had survived Jerusalem's 70 C.E. disaster until Masada in 73 C.E., which supported a new date of 1918. Russell didn't actually support 1918, but Rutherford did, and it was a big part of the predictions found in "The Finished Mystery" (7th Volume) published in 1917. Hopefully that helps to make sense of what Paton wrote in 1879. But remember that up to this point (1879) only the years 1844, 1874 and 1878 and 1914 were officially considered to be part of the application. 1881  hadn't been spelled out yet. Barbour never mentioned it in "The Three Worlds" although he did propose it as the new "end of the harvest" in August 1878. The first time the Watch Tower will mention 1881 will not be until May 1880. But even then the WT was not supporting the date. It was an article by J.H.Paton to say that this new date that Barbour was predicting was wrong. Later, the WT will accept 1881, but not in the exact same terms it was being predicted by Barbour. 

So back to the point, here is Paton explaining 1878 in the October 1879 Watch Tower, starting with p.R37:

THE TEN VIRGINS

Many of our readers are more or less familiar with the application of the parable of the ten virgins (Matth. 25), to a movement in this last generation in reference to the Lord's coming. . . . This is specially important now, because some of what has been considered the well-established features of the parable, are being discarded by some of our brethren, and a new departure is by them being made.

Translation: 1878 failed and some people are departing and rejecting features of the application of this parable.

It is confidently predicted that we will discard the whole application, but we see no reason for so doing. . . . This will be apparent presently to all who understand the former application, and the new position taken, and who are free enough from bondage to accept the truth as from the Lord, irrespective of the vessel in which it is conveyed.

Naturally, I would always recommend reading the entire original WT article, but I will quote long portions of the passage and try to edit it down to something more readable:

To appreciate the strength of the former application, we must see the place or time in the gospel dispensation, where the parable belongs, and to appreciate the weakness of the new departure it is necessary to see the parallelism of the Jewish and Gospel dispensations. The chart on which that beautiful bible argument is illustrated hangs before me as I write. We regard it as a clear, simple and strong definite time argument. From the death of Jacob to the death of Christ, --1845 years,--is the measure of the first or twelve tribe dispensation. From the death of Christ in the Spring of A.D. 33, until the Spring of A.D. 1878, is the measure of the second-- another period of 1845 years. The two dispensations are equal in length, the second beginning where the first ends, at the cross, or death of Christ. ...The two cherubim made "of one measure and one size" (1 Kings 6:25) placed with wings extended on either side of the mercy seat, illustrate the equality of the two dispensations. Types are exact, for being a feature of the law, they must be fulfilled even to the jots and tittles,... From the death of Jacob to the birth of Christ is equal to the period from the death of Christ to the Autumn of A.D. 1844,.... Each of these points was marked by an important event in reference to the coming of the Lord. The tarrying of Jesus for 30 years before his baptism and entrance on the harvest work, has its parallel in the tarrying time between 1844 and 1874, at which later point the harvest of the gospel dispensation began. Christ's personal ministry of 3-1/2 years, ending at his death, has its parallel in the 3-1/2 years of harvest from the Autumn of 1874 until the Spring of 1878. At his birth Christ came in the body prepared for sacrifice, tarried thirty years, and came as Bridegroom and Reaper, and three years and a half later he rode into Jerusalem as a King....The Anglo-Turkish treaty of 1878, made about the time of the Berlin Congress, securing certain legal favors to the Jews, opening the door for their restoration, is certainly in harmony with the application, and we are not ashamed of our rejoicing at its confirmation. We regard this whole affair as a remarkable confirmation of the truth of bible prophecies, and of the gospel of Christ. No one who is at all familiar with this argument, can fail to see that whatever tends to weaken or set aside the parallelism, weakens the whole position. As the former closed with its three stages of the coming of Jesus, so this one closes with three stages. In 1844 he was due to leave the most holy place. ... He was expected to come to earth, and to do a great many things that were not due, by those who had not learned that the law, which was a shadow, required that the High Priest should tarry in the holy place to cleanse it (the sanctuary means the holy place,) after he had done his work in the most holy and left it. (See Lev. 16.) That the tarrying was thirty years or from 1844 until 1874 has often been shown. ...Man did not make the parallels, but with the Lord's help found them. Thus then they stand related to each other;--at the end of the Jewish dispensation Christ came first as a babe, second as Bridegroom and Reaper, and third as a King; at this time, and points of time exactly corresponding, Christ first came from the Most Holy, and tarried in the Holy place, second as Bridegroom and Reaper, and third, as King.

Granted that this is not a pure apology but it acknowledges that the prediction was wrong, and that people were leaving over it. And the WT position was that these persons were, in effect, throwing out the baby with the bathwater. And the dates in the application were said to be from God, not man, and that anyone rejecting the truth of these dates (1844, 1874 and 1878) was still in bondage and not free enough to accept the truth from the Lord.

He goes on:

All who understand the arguments, admit that the tarrying of the parable began in 1844, and ended in 1874, and it has always been urged in favor of the cry which pointed to 1874, for the coming of the Bridegroom, being the "midnight cry," because it began at midnight,--1859--which is a very consistent reason. . . . Now brethren, all who can hear me, I want it clearly understood that I have not given up the application of the parable, and can see no sufficient reason for so doing. I believe the going forth ended in 1844, that the tarrying ended in 1874, and therefore the cry pointing to 1874 was the midnight cry, and I believe it was consistent that the name "midnight cry" then disappeared from the publication, because, as stated at the time, it had done its work; but in harmony with that faith I also believe that Christ came in the character of a Bridegroom in 1874. . . .

It is admitted by some that going into the marriage is not translation, but there is a special reason in their minds for placing that going in yet in the future, and the coming of the Bridegroom, also in the future, even though they teach as do we that the tarrying time ended in 1874. That special reason is the basis of the new departure we have mentioned. Since the Autumn of 1878, there has been a very clearly marked difference of opinion on the subjects of Atonement, Resurrection and Restitution. While we have not felt disposed to disfellowship anyone on account of a difference of opinion on these things, or for any other opinion as long as we are satisfied of the christian integrity of brethren, there has been difference enough to prevent the same hearty co-operation.   .  .

But the effort is now put forth to create a division before the Bridegroom comes (which is supposed by them to be future) such as will justify the claim that we are the "Foolish Virgins" of the parable.

The fact that this subject of the wedding garment is now agitated, and especially since the Spring of 1878, is to us significant. We regard it as one of the circumstantial evidences that it is due here, and that the midnight cry movement is past as is the cry itself.

Paton makes much of that doctrinal division in the year 1878, the same year that Russell and Barbour had begun to break ties. Paton, of course, had left Barbour and gone along with Russell, as did several former contributors to the Herald who now contributed to the Watch Tower. Paton wants to make this about something other than the chronology, because he tacitly admits that the chronology expectation on its own would have made Russell, Barbour, Keith and Paton look like the foolish virgins of the parable.

Up to this point, there is no real apology, but at least in the next article on the "wedding garment" we see more acknowledgement of the problem created by the failure:

This is an important question, and one which is receiving much attention at present from all who have been interested in the "Harvest" message, and who believe that in the Spring of 1878, a point was reached in the history of the gospel church, parallel to that of the Jewish church at the death of Christ. Though the faith of some has been severely tried, and some have perhaps been led to doubt the correctness of the position referred to above, we believe no good reason can be shown why the space of time covered by the "Two Dispensations," --Jewish and Gospel, as represented by the Cherubim, did not end in the Spring of 1878. However much we differ from some of our brethren in regard to the present position or the light that was due; at the end of the Jewish double, we still believe that future events will vindicate that the movement based on such an application of the prophetic periods and parallels was and is of the Lord. Our faith in the movement is deeper than our faith in men.

So Paton actually admits that the expectation was a part of "our mistakes" and might even be including himself as one of those "too many" who treated others as not "in the light" for NOT expecting it (as he obviously did). He is perhaps also saying that he (and therefore Russell and Barbour at that time) were being too "dogmatic," just because they felt so "sure."

That translation was not due in the Spring of 1878 is certain, and yet too many were inclined to treat others as not "in the light" for not expecting it then. Being positive or dogmatic does not make anything true, even if it does make an impression. Shall we not learn wisdom by our mistakes? We felt sure once that the gathering of the wheat into the barn by the angels, was translation, but now we are convinced that Omnipotence alone, in His hands who is higher than the angels, can give immortality, and therefore the angels can only gather into a condition of readiness for the great change.

That point about the angels becomes a curious transition (or diversion) to potentially blaming the angels for letting in humans who didn't actually have the wedding garment. After all the angels weren't above mistakes, since they can't read hearts, he says:

Some are just as positive yet that going in to the marriage is translation, but we are inclined to consider being "in" to the marriage the same as being "in" the barn, and we believe that some--perhaps a very small number--represented by one without the wedding garment-- will be cast out after being in. The "going forth" to meet the bridegroom, before the slumbering was not a movement from one place to another, but an act of faith, on account of prophetic light. The slumbering was a lack of the exercise of faith; and the "going out" to meet him under the midnight cry was also a movement of faith. If the going out to meet him was of faith, it seems consistent at least that the going in with him should also be of faith. We are quite sure that there is no reference whatever to translation in the parable of the ten virgins. That the expectation of translation is the proper attitude of those who are gathered in may be true, but it seems that even the angels are not infinite in knowledge. Some things "the angels desire to look into." 1 Pet. 1:12. And the Lord answered them indefinitely. (Dan. 12:7.) I am not sure that the angels are in all respects above mistake. They are sinless, but there is a great difference between purity and infallibility in knowledge. God and Christ can "discern the thoughts and intents of the heart;" but can the angels? We think not. And here seems a key: The angels gather in (let me suggest) those who have the light in theory, but the Lord causes to be put out into "outer darkness" (even what they have is taken from them) those who are not right in spirit.

I don't believe the admission of making mistakes and being too dogmatic and sure is very sincere. That's because I don't see any point in admitting mistakes but then quickly changing the subject to how the angels may also make mistakes. Further, he makes a point that the expectation was an act of faith. It showed the right spirit, and they showed they had spiritual light because the "theory" was still correct. Going out to meet him during the midnight cry was too early but showed the right spirit. Not going out in expectation showed the wrong spirit.

In later Watch Towers, the difference between the foolish virgins and the wise virgins would become the difference between those who believed in 1874, 1878 and then 1881, (wise) and those who didn't (foolish).

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

Was this the reason it was removed ? 

Personally I think that BroRando removed his own topic, probably because it was not very supportive of his predictions for 2034. And there were so many off-topic comments (a lot from me) that were not supportive of 1914. (His 2034 speculation depends on the accuracy of 1914.)

[JW Insider]

ZIONIST RESTORATION IN PALESTINE 1878-1914.

By December 1879, (WT quoted below) it was noted that Spring 1878 was also close to the middle of the period from October 1844 to October 1914. This idea allowed more focus on those prophecies supposedly coming true for Zionism in Palestine.

To build up Zion implies a process, and so far as relates to the earthly Jerusalem, includes the restoration of the Jewish nation of Israel according to the flesh, in all its parts; and we believe in its application to the Gospel church, the same must be true. That from 1878 to 1914 is the last half of the last trump, has often been shown, and also that this is the period during which Jerusalem is to be restored. "The last, or seventh trumpet covers the day of wrath, angry nations and the time of reward for prophets, saints and them that fear God's name, small and great." Rev. 11:18. . . . . Some are to be counted worthy to escape the tribulation [144,000/Bride], . . ., while others are left to pass through the fire, wash their robes, and come up out of the great tribulation [great crowd].

Another WT contributor from Barbour's paper was B.W.Keith and he wrote that the 144,000 were natural Jews, and the great crowd were gentiles. See WT June 1880, p.R108: [Note that he uses the term "apology" in the sense of the Greek word "apologia," meaning "defense" or "explanation"/"reason".]

The apology for presenting this subject, is, that the return of the Jews, and the time of trouble are becoming apparent facts; and it is believed that the two facts will be the means, in the next 35 years, of the conversion of the 144,000 Jews, and the great multitude of all nations, who will come up out of or after the great tribulation, with their robes washed white in the blood of the Lamb--Rev. 7. B. W. K.

Paton produced a kind of compromise solution in the same December 1879 WT (p.R58). I include the comment by Paton here because it shows he was not ready to produce a single year for the prediction about the date of their "change" or "translation." Apparently he saw the entire period now from 1878 to 1914 as a time for building up both natural Jews and the nation of spiritual Jews.

The making up suggests a gradual and not an instantaneous work; as also, "when the Lord shall build up Zion he shall appear in his glory." Ps. 102:16. This doubtless refers primarily to the restoration of the earthly Jerusalem during thirty-seven years, or from 1878 to 1914, which, according to the prophetic arguments, is the last half of the sounding of the seventh. But there are two Jerusalems --an earthly and a heavenly; a mount that could be touched, and a mount Zion that could not be touched. (Heb. 12:18,22.) We believe these are related to each other; the one outward and Jewish, the other inward and Christian; and that both are to be built up during the same period, "the last trump." According to the parables of the "two Dispensations," Christ was due to enter or come into the office of king in the spring of 1878, the parallel of his riding into Jerusalem in fulfillment of "behold thy king cometh;" and the same king who has the power to restore the natural Jerusalem, has the power to build up the spiritual Jerusalem; and it is declared that he will reward the whole church--prophets, saints and them that fear his name, small and great"--during the seventh trumpet, (Rev. 11:18)--the same period in which it has often been shown that the earthly Jerusalem will be restored.

This will help explain why Paton was initially against setting expectations for the date 1881. Next post.

[JW Insider]

1881

When 1878 failed to be the "end of the harvest" and failed to be the time when Russell and his associates received their reward, it might seem natural, in hindsight, that they would now focus on 1881, 3.5 years after the spring of 1878. Yet, Barbour's "Three Worlds" (1877), promoted by Russell, never mentioned 1881. It wasn't important because all of Christ's Bride, the 144,000, would already be in heaven in 1878.

However,  the August 1878 issue of Barbour's "Herald of the Morning" with both Russell and Paton listed on the masthead as assistant editors,  had now adjusted the new "end of the harvest" from 1878 to 1881.

When Russell split with Barbour in 1879, Russell carried that 1881 date with him as the revised "end of the harvest," and the time for the saints to "change" from physical bodies to spiritual bodies. Barbour, on his own, was now going so far as to say that Jesus would appear visibly in 1881, and Paton had also left Barbour and joined Russell's Watch Tower, ready to denounce that particular teaching.

Russell and Paton still agreed (in the Watch Tower) with Barbour's view that Israel would rise in Palestine in 1881, and that a time of trouble and conquest of the nations would begin at about that point, and that this time of trouble (wrath of nations) would not end until 1914. The 144,000 would all be with Christ from 1881, "worthy" to avoid that "time of trouble." And, of course, the "door" for new members of that Bride would obviously become closed to new members starting in 1881. But a great crowd of other Christians would come through that "day of wrath" from 1881 on (to at least 1914) by which time most of this  great crowd would come out of that great tribulation and also (ultimately) be in heaven. (The great crowd were considered to be anointed Christians who would also be in heaven, but not of the "high calling," not sitting on thrones or acting as priests with Jesus Christ their Bridegroom.)

Paton himself had just written a book ("Day Dawn") in 1880, which was advertised in the Watch Tower. But Paton's articles on 1881 said not to expect much in that year, because it was only an assumed parallel to the Jewish age, not necessarily a true parallel. Paton's articles in the Watch Tower downplayed expectations for 1881. The following is Paton's article in the Watch Tower, May 1880, p.R103

. . . then there is certainly no ground for expecting anything in 1881 more than in any other year. The advocates of the 1881 point have never claimed any more in favor of that date than a parallel to the last half of the 70th week of Dan. 9. They know as well as we that there is no prophetic period that ends in 1881.

Paton only allowed for a difference in expectation for the natural Jewish people and the Jewish nation. But Russell himself was much stronger on 1881. In the article from the Watch Tower, February 1, 1881, Russell explains:

Coming to the spring of 1878 ... we naturally and not unreasonably expected some change of our condition, and all were more or less disappointed when nothing supernatural occurred. But our disappointment was brief, for we noticed that the Jewish church (and not the Gospel church) was the pattern of ours,  . . . We then looked for the parallel to this . . .and found that the nominal gospel church. the parallel of the Jewish church, was . . . "spewed out" at the parallel point of time, 1878, but was due to have favor as individuals for three and a half years, or until the autumn of 1881. . . . (We know not the day or hour, but expect it during 1881, possibly near the autumn where the parallels show the favor to Zion complete and due to end, the door to the marriage to shut and the high calling to be the bride of Christ, to cease.) and light on that subject is becoming clearer;

Articles about these expectations for 1881 were repeated many times over the next few months of Watch Tower issues. Even the Great Pyramid was seen to show the year 1881, as shown in the May 1881 Watch Tower:

In April 1881, Russell also put out the famous call for 1,000 "little flock" preachers who would give away tracts for free and support themselves by selling Paton's "Day Dawn" and taking subscriptions to the Watch Tower, with the offer that they could now keep all the money from this method if they needed it to support themselves. This wasn't to be a long-term assignment because it was related to the imminence of October 2, 1881. This was similar to Russell's promotion of Barbour's book in 1877 to prepare the world for the spring of 1878.

To me, this suggestion in April 1881 (and basically repeated in August and September 1881) is uncannily similar to the 1973 and 1974 praise for those who would sell their homes and property to live out the rest of their days as a pioneer in this old system.

*** km 5/74 p. 3 How Are You Using Your Life? ***
Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world’s end.

In the midst of all this hype, calling it the "close of the Gospel day," and naming the actual day after which the change could take place, it was necessary for Russell to begin cooling down those expectations a bit. The same May 1881 issue also stated on p.5:

Two paragraphs later, the reason for this change is explained:

The point, of course, is that now it cannot happen until AFTER October 2, 1881. A few paragraphs later it stated:

That was May 1881 when Russell claimed "We . . . have repeatedly said that it could not take place before the fall of 1881." Actually, there appear to be no statements prior to this May issue that "repeatedly said" that. In fact, the March 1881 issue, just two months earlier, had just said nearly the opposite, that there was nothing stopping the change from taking place "immediately." Note the second paragraph in the quote below:

I mention this, because this is only one of several times when Russell claimed he hadn't said something which he clearly had. Whenever Russell says, in effect, "We never said that," these quotes are often used today in order to defend him from dogmatism. But sometimes they are just plainly not true.

A failure for anything significant to occur in 1881 would be hardest on older Second Adventists, people like Barbour who had personally experienced failures in 1843, 1844, 1873, 1874, 1875, 1878, and now 1881. Barbour dropped out of the expectation game himself after 1881. For most of the Watch Tower readers it would would be their third failure 1873/4, then 1878, now 1881. For new followers of Russell it would be more manageable, but there was no new date in the pipeline until 1914, a full 33 more years in the future. A long time to wait. (Although 1910 would also be added to the list of expectation dates.)

We would expect, then, that close to 1881 and perhaps again around 1910, that this would be a good context in which to look for any apologies concerning 1881.

So next we can look carefully at what was said in the immediate aftermath of October 2, 1881.

[JW Insider]

 "CHANGE" WOULD NOT TAKE PLACE BEFORE OCTOBER 2, 1881

VENGEANCE EXPECTED IN OCTOBER 1881

The March, April, May, June and July/August issues all mentioned October 1881 as the final year of the high heavenly calling for the Bride of 144,000.  The point was that the 7 years of "favor" (1874-1881) would end. And these were years that had protected the Bride/remnant from having to undergo tribulation during the day of vengeance. The wrath of nations could begin at any time after October 2, 1881.

The July/August issue also had to clarify that there was no direct expectation that the change would happen in October 1881, only that October was the terminus of the prophetic parallel, which ended the opportunity for any more to become members of the 144,000. While all would be "counted, sealed and selected by October" "they may not be changed until some time after.

That last quoted sentence shows that something specific was expected in 1881: "this vengeance."

The September 1881 issue didn't specifically mention October, and except for a mention of 1914 and 1874 here and there, it nearly avoided the topic of chronology altogether. It still mentioned how close they were to the end of the "door of opportunity" to become one of the 144,000:

And although the snippet above makes it look like Russell was asking for money, this was about how much one would be willing to give up for the high calling (144,000), not about how much money one might send to the WTS.

From what I've read elsewhere, the October issue itself was never made and the November issue was called October/November.

Therefore, this "November" issue should now be read very carefully. We won't really expect Russell to offer an apology, because, we recall that he never pushed for an immediate change by October anyway, stating that it would only be some time after October 2, 1881. This could have meant months or even years after.

This issue almost broaches the subject here, below, but without directly mentioning the often misunderstood build-up of October expectations:

That November issue had an article that repeated and clarified the expectation further:

 

It reviews the WT teaching about Matthew 25 and summarizes again, all that was taught about 1874 and 1881. But this time it's different from Paton's earlier article. Now the primary thing that distinguishes the wise and foolish virgins is the acceptance of the "time element" -- the chronology: 1844, 1874, 1878 and 1881.

I'm including many snippets from this article below, because this teaching had such an effect on the nature of the Bible Students right up through the 1930's. I have a letter from Rutherford in the 1920's to someone who had asked about being recently anointed to the 144,000 and Rutherford pointed back this article to show how the "door to the high calling had been shut in 1881" but that it was possible that replacements for unfaithful persons of that high calling were still being chosen. 50 years of such statements seem to have built up a Jonadab class (great crowd) who were repeatedly being told they were less "worthy" and less "consecrated."

Note next that "the disappointment had served an intended purpose" by stumbling those who no longer wanted to be associated with the failed chronology. Those who didn't want to be embarrassed or reproached wanted to distance themselves from the subject of "time." Russell himself had previously admitted to being one of those who was ashamed and embarrassed for the Second Adventists in 1873 and 1874, but he would soon (1876) accept that 1874 was the time to be looking, but not for a visible presence or outward sign.

The December 1881 Watch Tower issue, p.304, includes some interesting admissions, and a change in doctrine about 1881, but no apology. The doctrinal separation also is indicated that the WTS is God's true mouthpiece, as other religious organizations now fall under the category of Babylon the Great and are, since 1878, rejected as God's mouthpiece.

It was in the spring of 1879, that seeing clearly the parallelism between the nominal Jewish church and the nominal Gospel church, we were enabled to know just where the latter was finally rejected of the Lord and spewed out of his mouth (Rev. 3:16.) no longer to be his mouthpiece. We saw that this was due in 1878, as the parallel of the rejection of the Jewish church, when Jesus just prior to his crucifixion, wept over them and said, "Your house is left unto you desolate"-The Jewish church was there likewise cast off, or spewed from his mouth. We were led to see very clearly that the nominal church of the Gospel Age, is the Babylon (confused, mixed condition, of worldly-mindedness and luke warm Christianity) described in Rev. 18:2-4. This spewing out, or casting off, of the nominal church, as an organization in 1878-we then understood, and still proclaim to be the date of the commencement of Babylon's fall, as recorded there. And since then we feel ourselves led of the spirit, through the unfolding of this portion of the word of truth to say in the name of the Lord, to all God's true children in Babylon: "Come out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and receive not of her plagues." (vs. 4.) This seems to accord wonderfully with the second message--"Babylon is fallen." (Rev. 14:8.)

Then p.308 of the same issue brings up an issue that was becoming more important as time went on, because the WT had indicated that it still agreed with the doctrine that those of the "higher calling" would be protected from death as they waited for their glorification or "rapture." Agreement with this doctrine had been implied in the idea that they would be worthy to escape tribulation in the day of vengeance, but if they continued for months or even years beyond 1881 when the wrath of nations was expected, then what about the idea of not dying?

Q. Dear Bro. Russell, I want to make an inquiry relative to the thought advanced in last number of the paper, viz: That all the members of the body of Christ must die physically; and that the translation takes place in the "moment" of death. [And I must say, that it seems reasonable, and in general harmony with the Scriptures so far as I have studied.] My question is, Does not this application interfere with the Elijah type, at which, for some time we have looked with interest? Elijah did not die; and if he is a type and we the antitype, it would seem to teach that we should not die.

There is a Wikipedia paragraph here that summarizes the issue:

Russell consoled members with the news that 1881 had still marked the time when "death became a blessing" in the sense that any saint who died would henceforth be instantaneously changed into a spirit being.^[14] The revised view provided comfort for early believers who had held the view that the living faithful would never experience a physical death, and yet had seen other members in fact dying while they awaited their upward call. After 1881, physical death was defined as one of the ways in which some of the saints might undergo their translation.

The article in November 1881, called "The Blessed Dying" made this period since 1881 very similar to the time period that would later be assigned to 1918 and beyond: the idea that all those who died from that point on would be instantly changed to their glorious bodies.

And here it is, just now--1881, that for the first time we are able to read understandingly the words "Blessed are the dead, who die in the Lord from henceforth." Evidently the blessing is to the members of the Christ now living. But we inquire, in what respect will death be a blessing to us now, that it has not always been to other members of the body. We answer, the difference is that we shall not sleep, but we will be instantly invested with our heavenly--spiritual bodies, being changed in a moment dropping all that is human and earthly and being clothed upon with our heavenly condition.  [p.R304]

[Thinking]

18 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Personally I think that BroRando removed his own topic, probably because it was not very supportive of his predictions for 2034. And there were so many off-topic comments (a lot from me) that were not supportive of 1914. (His 2034 speculation depends on the accuracy of 1914.)

That comment about a fellow brother shows you have a real problem with ego….and a great need to be right……can you prove he did that…..or could that come under a false accusation against a fellow brother……Personally I don’t think anyone knows and you need to stop chasing this and be a little bit humble and stop shoving your thoughts down everyone’s throats…Whoever  did it could see it was causing disruptions and unnecessarily contentions and debating proving fruitless……and none of it promoting peace  amongst brothers….you do well to perhaps give some credit to whomever did it and stop your self promotion of your belief.

I couldn’t care less about dates…..so give it a rest …no honest hearted true brother would do what you are doing to prove your personal point…you are relentless in your crusade…

you are one big red flag to me!!!!

you are like a a broken record and I for one no longer even read your ramblings and copy and pastes….

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

13 hours ago, Thinking said:

I couldn’t care less about dates…..so give it a rest

Perhaps you would say that to the Governing Body of the Watchtower / JW Org.  They are very keen on dates and especially giving false prophecy. 'the last part of the last day of last days' . 1941, 1975. Before the year 2000 et al.

13 hours ago, Thinking said:

no honest hearted true brother would do

No honest hearted Anointed one (the GB) would pretend to be the F&DS and then give so much false information,

And as for Bro Rambo, if he were a true JW then surely he wouldn't be putting up a date (2034) as that is only his opinion and could be a stumbling block to others. Plus the fact that it would seem to go against the grain of following the GB to get 'food at the proper time'.  

Go now and have a good cry. If you don't like what people post you know the old saying, 'Just scroll on by'. 

[Kick_Faceinator]

21 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Whoever  did it could see it was causing disruptions and unnecessarily contentions and debating proving fruitless……and none of it promoting peace  amongst brothers

Finding truth calls for a division amongst brothers and sisters so we can know who has Jehovah’s approval, and who does not.

“But, of course, there must be divisions among you so that you who have God’s approval will be recognized!” 1 Corinthians 11:19

[Thinking]

7 minutes ago, Kick_Faceinator said:

Finding truth calls for a division amongst brothers and sisters so we can know who has Jehovah’s approval, and who does not.

“But, of course, there must be divisions among you so that you who have God’s approval will be recognized!” 1 Corinthians 11:19

Romans 16:17
 

New International Version
I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

New Living Translation
And now I make one more appeal, my dear brothers and sisters. Watch out for people who cause divisions and upset people’s faith by teaching things contrary to what you have been taught. Stay away from them.

English Standard Version
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them.

Berean Study Bible
Now I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who create divisions and obstacles that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Turn away from them.

[Kick_Faceinator]

3 minutes ago, Thinking said:

Romans 16:17
 

New International Version
I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.

New Living Translation
And now I make one more appeal, my dear brothers and sisters. Watch out for people who cause divisions and upset people’s faith by teaching things contrary to what you have been taught. Stay away from them.

English Standard Version
I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them.

Berean Study Bible
Now I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who create divisions and obstacles that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Turn away from them.

“Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.” - Jesus Christ, Luke 12:51

Uh oh…

[Srecko Sostar]

31 minutes ago, Thinking said:

That comment about a fellow brother shows you have a real problem with ego….and a great need to be right……can you prove he did that…..or could that come under a false accusation against a fellow brother……Personally I don’t think anyone knows and you need to stop chasing this and be a little bit humble and stop shoving your thoughts down everyone’s throats…Whoever  did it could see it was causing disruptions and unnecessarily contentions and debating proving fruitless……and none of it promoting peace  amongst brothers….you do well to perhaps give some credit to whomever did it and stop your self promotion of your belief.

I couldn’t care less about dates…..so give it a rest …no honest hearted true brother would do what you are doing to prove your personal point…you are relentless in your crusade…

you are one big red flag to me!!!!

you are like a a broken record and I for one no longer even read your ramblings and copy and pastes….

@JW Insider gave an opinion on who deleted the topic and why. What's so accusing in that about that other brother?

You should have read the last comment from Rando that he sent me. It was troubling what this man thought of those who thought differently from him. And how he allows himself to pronounce a severe condemnation/judgement of another.

In my opinion JW Insider has outstanding intellectual abilities and I don’t see any aspiration for self-praise. But even if I am wrong in my perception, it does not invalidate the results of the research and presentation he has shown. I hope he will stay on this forum in years to come.