Wednesday, November 23, 2016

The JW Organization, Armageddon, 1914, and Russell (moved)

Moved to:

https://ransomforall.blogspot.com/2023/08/jw-arm.html

2 comments:

  1. The following comment was made on the old site:

    1914 came into prominence after I studied with the Witnesses back in the seventies. When I researched this date I discovered that the society simply kept the date, but changed the meaning of it. Russell I believe was expecting the end of the Gentile times, maybe even Armagedden. He got WWI instead. He died two yrs later. Of course he did update the dates in his books in 1916, up one year. As William Miller found out, there are problems when you start date setting in regard to prophesy. There are still those in the church who have not learned those lessons.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, Russell was expecting end of the Gentile Times in 1914; he was also expecting Armageddon to begin in 1914, and he was also expecting warfare to begin in 1914. Although Russell was wrong in much of the details, I do believe he was correct in that the Gentile Times did end in 1914; I believe he was correct in that warfare did break out in 1914; I believe he was correct in that the beginning of Armageddon (the time of trouble) came in 1914, and I believe we have been in the time of trouble ever since 1914. One has to realize, however, that Russell’s view of Armageddon was not at all the same as what the JWs preach Armageddon to be. I believe Russell did also see warfare in 1914 in a scale not ever seen before in World War I.

      Russell was not expecting that in 1914 all unbelievers would be eternally destroyed, as some of the Watchtower statements have led many to believe. Russell believed that Armageddon is a period of time for the chastisement of the people of the nations, not the time for them to be eternally destroyed.

      Russell did not, however, update his books in 1916 up one year. Russell did in 1916, change the author’s forewards in the Studies in the Scriptures; Russell did not, however, in those forewards change 1914 to 1915. As those forewards show, Russell died in 1916 still with the belief that the Gentile Times had ended in 1914; he died in 1916, still with the belief that the time of trouble had begun in 1914 — not 1915. No, Russell never changed 1914 to one year later.
      See the research concerning the alleged change to 1915:
      https://rlctr.blogspot.com/search/label/1915

      See various 1916 forewards in the Scripture Studies at:
      http://www.mostholyfaith.com/bible/volumes/index.asp

      Many would seem to like to throw out the time prophecies in the Bible and disregard them. Many of these, however, do not apply such to the seventy weeks of Daniel 9, so that, while condemning date setting, themselves do set dates regarding the seventy weeks, evidently without any thought that they are themselves “date setting”. I do not believe, however, that one should disregard any of the time prophecies of the Bible.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.