Afterword
Doctrinal Evolution and
Prophetic Failure
Through
1880 and 1881 Russell grew in confidence as a writer, or at least as an
outliner of articles he left for his wife to put in final form. It was a period
of doctrinal restatement, and occasionally one of refinement. In one of his
dialogue-format articles he wrote:
God’s
word is “new every morning and fresh every evening.” In this respect it differs
from all other books and, undoubtedly it is a fountain of living waters
(truths) from the fact that it contains special dispensational truths, as well
as general truth. Thus it is a great storehouse from which the Lord’s servants
are to bring forth “things new and old,” that the household of faith may have
meat in due season.” I seem to see in a clearer light than ever before, the
present condition of the nominal church and its future.[1]
Russell defined himself – and Watch
Tower adherents – as dispensationalists. [We demonstrated in one of the
introductory essays, Dispensationalism did not originate with Darby but
significantly predates him.] For Russell, this meant that scriptural
understanding appropriate to the Last Times was due. However, none of Russell’s
‘clearer’ understanding was new or original to him, but it was long established
doctrine among millennialists. He did not attribute his “clearer light” to
anyone else because he saw it as Biblical truth, derived from that source
alone. This is not exceptional; we find this in the work of many others.
When he and Barbour separated, his
theology was not set in stone. He did not remain a Barbourite at heart. And he
read widely. The “clearer light” he saw was adopted from standard prophetic
expositions. In the article quoted above he identified the great red dragon as
the Roman Catholic Church. This wasn’t ‘new’ to anyone, but had been Protestant
doctrine for centuries.
In volume one of Separate
Identity we pointed to the prevalence of prophetic interest in Pittsburgh,
naming Russell’s Congregationalist pastor as one who promoted this. Also within
Russell’s religious circle was William James Reid, pastor of the United
Presbyterian Church in Pittsburgh. We do not know that Russell read Reid’s
lectures on The Revelation, but he certainly read something similar. Most
Watch Tower adherents were familiar with commentaries on the prophecies. The
Allegheny Study Group spent considerable time reading them, especially when
they considered Restitution [Restored Paradise] doctrine. Russell selected from
existing commentaries those thoughts which he believed most closely represented
the Bible’s meaning.
Russell suggested that his
understanding of the prophecies was incomplete. Reporting on his visit to Lynn,
Massachusetts, he wrote:
I spoke on the
subject of this same chapter to the name-less little company of “this way,” in
Lynn, Mass., and concluded my remarks by telling them that I had never seen a
satisfactory explanation of the 666. And, though I thought I had given a
correct analysis of the symbols of the chapter, yet I could not claim it to be
wisdom, since I could not interpret the number. I suggested, however, that if
ours be the correct understanding of the time in which we are living – the “harvest”
of the age – and if our general application of these symbols be correct, the
number should soon be understood. I urged examination on the subject by all,
for the Lord is sometimes pleased to give wisdom through the weakest of his
children. “Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast ordained praise.”[2]
In 1916, when asked about one of the
prophetic figures found in The Revelation, he declined to answer, quipping: “About
the vials of wrath: I have not yet read the [as yet unwritten] seventh volume
of Studies in the Scriptures, and therefore have nothing to say about that.”[3] If
we can accept a statement found in the August 1, 1917, Watch Tower, he
remained dissatisfied with his research up to near his death: “Brother Russell
often spoke about writing the Seventh Volume [of Studies in the Scriptures],
and one of his last utterances about it was to the effect: ‘Whenever I find the
key, I will write the Seventh Volume; and if the Lord gives the key to someone
else, he can write it’ – or words to that effect.”[4]
The problem here – at least for a historian – is that this testimony lacks
other support. The Watch Tower’s comment appears to be derived from Menta
Sturgeon’s funeral discourse, wherein he reported that Russell said, “Some one
else can write that.”[5]
This is sole-source testimony, but no-one seems to have questioned this even
though many were opposed to the Finished Mystery, as compiled by Fisher
and Woodworth.[6]
Before proceeding we should note
that Rod Durost misrepresents Russell’s view of unfolding ‘truth.’ He quoted
Russell as writing: “The opening of the books of the divine revelation will
soon be completed,” suggesting that by this Russell claimed “divine
revelation.” Durost references Studies in the Scriptures: The Time is at
Hand, page 189. This isn’t found there. Instead it appears in Volume Three,
Thy Kingdom Come. And as found there, it is a claim that Christ grants
understanding to his servants. Russell did not make the claim Durost suggests.
This is typical of anti-Witness, anti-Bible Student polemicists.[7]
[add
comment on Crompton’s assertion]
Parousia (παρουσία)
Doctrinal developments in the 1880s
were diverse, but always connected to their understanding of prophecy. Three
major doctrinal changes, and a few minor ones, come from this period. Two of
the major changes came before 1881 and the other after. Each change caused
controversy.
That Christ would return invisibly
was believed by many before Russell and Barbour adopted the idea. We’ve
detailed that elsewhere in this series. Russell came to the idea through Seiss’
Last Times. Barbour was already familiar with the idea, but didn’t adopt
it until Benjamin Keith promoted it. All of this we’ve documented before. As
did many, they believed in a two-stage Second Advent. Christ would come
invisibly, necessitating a ‘sign’ to detect it. In time he would become visible
for ‘judgments.’ Russell’s explanation as found in Object and Manner of Our
Lord’s Return was: “We believe the scriptures to teach, that, at His coming
and for a time after He has come, He will remain invisible; afterward
manifesting or showing Himself in judgments and various forms, so that ‘every
eye shall see him.’” The ‘every eye’ quotation comes from Revelation 1:7.
Russell footnoted that text, explaining that the verse “does not necessarily
teach that that every eye will see Him at the same moment.”[8]
They expected Christ to become
visible at least to some in or near 1881, but constant and considerable
discussion among Watch Tower adherents modified that belief. Barbourites were
tending to discount their shared παρουσία doctrine, drifting back to expecting
a visible presence only.
image here
First
Printing of Object and Manner
The movement’s principals discussed
it among themselves, and discussion became public through an article by Lizzie
Allen appearing in the May 1880 issue. Written in response to Barbour’s claims
to have uncovered a “clean” theology, his term for his ventures into esoteric
belief systems, Allen focused on the sign of Christ’s presence, and the
difference in viewpoint between Watch Tower adherents and Barbourites. She referenced Matthew 24:3, presenting a
bastarized quotation based on the Emphatic Diaglott, a Greek-English
interlinear: “What shall be the sign of Thy parousia, and of the end of the
world?” Jesus answer showed, she wrote, “the need of a sign.” Jesus
warned (Verses 4-5) that many would claim to be the messiah, deceiving many. Allen
claimed that “a sign will enable those who obey ... to discern between the
false and the true.”
This point was preliminary to other,
more important thoughts. A “sign” was needed because “of the obscurity which
marks the period of his return.” Christ’s presence was not to generate,
...
physical demonstrations as shall make all aware of it. But as the days of Noah
were, so shall also the presence of the Son of man be. For as in the days that
were before the flood, they were eating
and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, and knew not until the flood
came and took them all away, so shall also the presence of the Son of man be,
(Vers. 37-39.) all things will indeed continue as from the beginning. How then
will the church be aware of His presence, except by a sign?
The sign was given only to those who
obeyed Christ’s commands, “and these cannot show it to the unfaithful.” Christ’s
presence would be known to those outside the faith when he performed might
acts. Allen paraphrased Matthew 24:23-28, which reads according to the
Authorized Version:
At
that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he
is!’ do not believe it. For false messiahs and false prophets
will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even
the elect. See, I have told you ahead of time. ”So if anyone
tells you, ‘There he is, out in the wilderness,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he
is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. For as lightning that comes from
the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.
In her view the ‘lightning” was not,
and could not be, natural light, “else His presence would not be likened to the
days that were before the flood.” She saw it as spiritual light, “divine truth.”
A “great and wonderful unfolding of
truth is all that the bible gives us a right to expect during the presence of
the Son of man, and before translation,” she wrote.[9] This
was meant as a refutation of the assertion of some Barbourites that Jesus would
appear to his servants before heavenly resurrection. It was not a rejection of
a two-stage parousia, but it planted the seeds for that. If one accepted her
arguments, then one understood that Christ’s presence was totally invisible.
She rejected Barbourite belief based
on 1 John 3:2: “It doth not yet appear
what we shall be, but we know that when He shall appear we shall be like Him,
for we shall see Him as He is.” If ‘the saints’ do not understand Jesus’ nature
until they are resurrected, then Christ would not appear to humans in advance. She
appealed to Colossians 3:4, writing:
Again,
when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall we also appear with Him
in glory. (Col. 3:4). Hence, we urge on those who are “looking for that blessed
hope and the glorious appearing of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” the
Savior's command, “Take heed let no man deceive you.” The light of truth made
plain by the Spirit, is the only promised guide, while here we wait. And this
to us, is far more convincing than any physical manifestation could be.
The fuller implications of this
article are apparent. It set off discussions that did not immediately make it
to The Watch Tower. Two of the movement’s principals and some of its new
clergy adherents had some familiarity with Koiné Greek [1st Century
commonly-spoken Greek]. The dust started to settle after a behind-scenes
discussion of the Greek text of Revelation 1:7 which says of Christ’s return
that “Every eye shall see him.” Russell summarized their conclusions in the
September 1880 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower. Entitled “Optomai,” a common
transliteration of the Greek verb to see, the article said:
The
Greek word Optomai rendered, shall see, in Rev. 1:7. – “Every eye shall
see him,” and rendered, shall appear, in Heb. 9:28 “To them that look for Him
shall he appear a second time,” does not always mean to see with the eye. It
rather signifies attend and recognize. Illustrations of its meaning attend: The
priests and elders answered Judas; “See (Optomai – attend) thou to that.”
Matt. 27:4. Again, Pilate said, “I am innocent of the blood of this just
person; see (optomai – attend) ye to it.” Vs. 24. Also the word look in
Acts 18:15. The general signification of the word however, is recognize ...
Again,
Jesus said to Mary concerning Lazarus' resurrection, “Said I not that thou
shouldst see (optomai) the glory of God? John 11:40. Mary's eyes saw no
glory but she did see Lazarus raised, and in the power thus displayed she
recognized the glory of God.
Again
“All flesh shall see (optomai – recognize) the salvation of God.” Luke 3:6. In
the light of these illustrations of the use of the word we can realize that
there may be but little seeing of The Christ on the part of the world with the
eye. See how similar is the last illustration with the first text quoted – “every
eye” and “all flesh” shall recognize Him as the salvation of God.[10]
This was not a novel interpretation.
Others asserted this. And it is all within the word’s definition. Walter Roy
Goff [1877-1953], a post-millennialist Lutheran clergyman, used the same points
to support his views, writing:
[T]he
four main passages which are supposed by many people to mean that we shall see
with corporeal eyes the Lord's return have about them abundant reason for any careful
interpreter to say they do not contain such literal meaning. And if this is so,
then the disciples did not expect a visible return of their Lord after the
statement of the men in white apparel (Acts 1:11), as some assert ... . And
those today, who build up their argument for a visible return on these four
passages and others like them, must be wrong, especially since there are
definite passages denying a visible coming, (Luke 17:22), “Ye shall desire, *
* * * but ye shall not see,” (John 16:10), “I go to the Father, and ye
behold me no more,”[11]
This discussion became settled
doctrine with the publication of Food for Thinking Christians. If there
was indefiniteness in Allen’s article, Russell’s article was much more pointed,
and it became a clear doctrinal statement. Quoting or paraphrasing Hebrews
12:14; 1 John 3:2; and Ephesians 1:17 but without citing them, Russell wrote:
How will He come again? Briefly stated, we believe the
Scriptures to teach that our Lord will never again appear as a man; that at his
second coming he will be invisible to mankind; that none will ever see him
except the Church: “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord;” that
the Church will not see him until changed from natural to spiritual bodies;
that then “we shall see him as he is” [not as he was], for “we
shall be like him” [not he like us, as at the first advent]. But while none are
to see him with their natural eyes, all are to recognize his presence
and his power (“the eyes of their understanding being opened”). Hence we
read: “Every eye shall see (optomai – recognize) him”[12]
This
doctrinal transition brought controversial comments from Barbour, but that
conflict is subject matter for volume three of Separate Identity. As
clergy outrage intensified after 1895, the Watch Tower parousia doctrine
was interminably criticized and often misrepresented. This continued through
the 20th Century and into the present century. Consider Walter
Martin’s comment:
Jehovah’s Witnesses claim scholarship for this blanket
translation of parousia, yet not one great scholar in the history of
Greek exegesis and translation has ever held this view. Since 1871, when
“Pastor” Russell produced this concept, it has been denounced by every
competent scholar upon examination.
The reason this Russellite rendering is so dangerous
is that it attempts to prove that parousia in regard to Christ’s second
advent really means that His return or “presence” was to be invisible, and
unknown to all but “the faithful.”[13]
This
is a polemicist’s poor research and a misrepresentation. His misstatements vary
from minor to significant. The 1871 date is wildly wrong, something he could
easily have known when he wrote. Russell did not originate the concept, but as
we’ve shown elsewhere, it has a long history. He suggests that no “great”
Greek-language scholar ever accepted a uniform translation of παρουσία as
presence. One supposes that any scholar that disagreed with Martin would not
have been ‘great’ in his eyes, including Joseph Rotherham, who noted in the
appendix to his translation: “In this edition the word parousia is
uniformly rendered ‘presence’ (‘coming,’ as a representative of this
word, being set aside). The original term occurs twenty four times in the N. T.
[He lists all the verses which we omit from this quotation] ... The sense of
‘presence’ is so plainly shewn by the contrast with ‘absence’ (implied in 2 Co.
x. 10, and expressed in Ph. ii. 12) that the question naturally arises, – Why not always so render it?”[14]
Martin failed to cite or quote any of the “great” scholars who rejected Watch
Tower exposition of παρουσία. When one only writes polemics, it is convenient
to avoid citing sources.
Martin
misrepresents Russell and modern Watchtower belief, claiming that their view is
that only “the faithful” would be aware of it. He puts ‘the faithful’ in
quotes, but the phrase is lacking on the pages he sites as is the belief he
attributes to Watch Tower adherents. Russell, the modern Watchtower, and Bible
Student groups all believe that in time Christ’s presence will become apparent
to everyone, at least when Christ executes God’s judgment. Martin’s real
objection was that Russell and modern descendent religions present an
understanding of prophecy different from his own. The same is true for
Russell’s contemporaries who wrote similarly. Many who wrote anti-Russell
tracts simply mentioned the teaching without refuting it, relying on shock
value to accomplish their purpose.[15]
The Narrow Way to Life
Russell
dates their discussion of Matthew 7:13-14[16]
to the Allegheny Study Group’s early days, but it became a matter for general
discussion with the October 1880 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower. He does
not with exactitude date when they reached their conclusions, but he puts it in
an event order that lets us date it to 1874 or before.[17] He
summarized their findings in the February 1881 issue of the Watch Tower:
“the narrow way
to life” opened up before us and we saw that the life here referred to,
is immortal life – or the perfection of life; and this brought to our attention
the fact that God has many different orders of beings, all of whom, when in
harmony with Him are perfect, though each is perfect on his own plane of being,
as for instance, perfect angels are one order and perfect men (when restored to
perfection) are another order. These orders, one on the human plane and the
other on the spiritual, would each be supplied with life forever from the great
fountain – God – and thus supplied enjoy ever-lasting life. But this showed us
that the great prize for which we are running, is not merely continued
existence, but if we are over-comers the promise is immortal life (or life in ourselves)
a quality or perfection of life, said to be possessed only by Father and Son
and promised only to “the little flock” who walk the narrow way – “The way our
Leader trod.” “And few there be that find it.” As scripture began to narrow
down to the overcomers, as those upon whom the prize, for which we are running
should be bestowed it had the effect on many of stirring up to greater activity
that “no man take our crown” – a feeling akin to that of Paul when he said: “If
by any means I might attain unto the
resurrection,” (the first resurrection which includes Jesus our head and all
the members of His body who “live and reign with Him a thousand years” – only
over-comers are to reign). Therefore we seek to walk separate from the world.[18]
In some
respects the Allegheny Group’s conclusions mirrored well-respected expositors.
In 1885, Russell wrote:
“The narrow way to life” (Immortality) was not opened
up until Jesus came. He was the first to walk in it. He “brought life and
immortality to light.” (2 Tim. 1:10.) And though all believers (Levites) shall
become possessors of everlasting life, and the world (Israel) also, if they
will accept it – during the Millennial age; yet, only the priesthood, who
overcome and follow their Leader in the narrow way to life – sacrificing the human
– thus seeking Glory, Honor and Immortality, will ever become the possessors of
that unlimited degree of life called Immortality, as yet possessed only by
Jehovah and our Lord Jesus.[19]
Russell’s thought was that the narrow way of Matthew chapter seven is a pattern of behavior that copies Christ. This was and is the standard view of most Christians. But Russell’s view added additional thoughts, additions that in the view of most expositors have no place as commentary on Matthew Chapter Seven.
The
belief that the path to everlasting life does not open to the vast majority of
mankind until the Millennial age is derived from a very narrow set of
expositors, among them Dunbar Isidore Heath, whom we discussed briefly in an
earlier chapter. Angelography became a specialized field, leaving us a rich and
varied literature. Discussions of spirit nature and human nature in the
resurrection extend back at least to the Second Century. Quintus Septimius
Florens Tertullianus [c. 160 – c. 240] tells us that similar discussions were
prevalent in his day. Tertullian suggested that those who held views similar to
later Watch Tower belief were heretics who derived their teachings from Greek
philosophies: “The doctrine that the soul dies is derived from the Epicureans.
And the denial of the resurrection of the body is taken from the united school
of all the philosophers ... and the allegation that God consists of fire is
derived from Heraclitus.”[20]
Those
Second and Third Century Christians who believed the soul was mortal, (Ezekiel
18:4) who believed that Christ was a “life-giving spirit” (1 Corinthians 15:45)
and that they would be spirits in the resurrection, (1 John 3:2) and those who
believed God is a Spirit, (John 4:24; 2 Corinthians 3:17, 18) and that
spirits are “flames of fire” (Hebrew 1:7) would have disputed Tertullian’s
claims. They would have pointed to Scripture as the basis of their belief
system.
That
aside, we note that the Allegheny Group’s conclusions were not a new
revelation. We do not know how they came to them. It may have been by simply
reading and rereading the relevant Bible verses. Or it may have been through
exposure to angelography written by clergy from main-stream churches, many of
whose writers presented Angels as having spirit bodies with the capabilities
and characteristics noted by Russell in his The Narrow Way to Life tract
and the later versions of it found in Food for Thinking Christians and
the chapter of the same name found in Plan of the Ages.
Given
the approximate date that Russell attached to the development of this doctrine,
we can suggest that the similarly made statements found in Barbour’s Three
Worlds were one of the ‘thoughts’ presented by Russell that were
incorporated into the book.[21]
Barbour later called the Watch Tower’s developing views “spiritualism.” Clergy
did as well, most of them believing that Christ retained his fleshly body after
resurrection. The Watch Tower belief system, as noted here, became an enduring
point of contention.
Approach to 1881
America with much of the
Christian world was religious. Faith was serious business. If churches differed
in doctrine, sometimes condemning each other to a fiery Hell, Protestants listened
to the Scripture’s prophetic voice. Historians who write about this period tend
to focus on extremist and Adventist movements. But interest in prophecy was not
limited to fringe movements. It was a main-stream phenomenon. Baptists of
various stripe, Anglicans, Presbyterians and nearly everyone else had well-defined
interest in prophetic fulfillment.
Some few Catholic writers
believed Christ’s return impended. Worldwide, people expected key events,
prophetic fulfillments for 1881. An Australian newspaper reported that peasants
in Russia were convinced that the world would end November 11, 1881.[22]
The craze wasn’t confined to Russian peasants, but found believers elsewhere.
An Australian columnist who wrote as “Wandering Minstrel” poked fun at the
predictions, writing that he heard “a great deal of the millennium just now,
and prophets are predicting the end of the world.”[23]
The press always found a place for the odd, and “an old gentleman” from
Lincolnshire, England, drew press attention. Convinced that end would come in
1881, he had a balloon made that would carry him aloft and out of harm’s way,
furnishing it with three years of supplies, or so the press said. He planned on
taking tinned provisions, brandy, soda-water, claret and other creature
comforts.” Versions of this story were widely printed in the United States,
Australia and the United Kingdom.[24]
The development of Watch Tower
time-related belief was an outgrowth of Present Truth doctrine. The phrase is
taken from 2 Peter 1:12 which reads according to the Authorized Version:
“I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things,
though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.” Greek
scholars suggest that the phrase “present truth” means an indwelling of truth,
a personal commitment to and understanding of revealed truth.[25]
And the New World Translation, produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses, adopts
that understanding, reading: “For this reason I intend always to remind you of
these things, although you know them and are well-established in the truth that
is present in you.” Peter’s comments addressed the need for reminders to
reinforce already understood doctrine, the essential doctrines of Salvation.
However, in Russell’s lifetime
and for years before, religious writers, even fairly-well educated authors, saw
it differently. The Christian Intelligencer of 1829 published with approval
an article extracted from another religious magazine. Instead of defining
Present Truth as cherished, previously-learned ‘truth,’ it suggested that it
was newly understood doctrine arrived at through crisis:
Let it also be observed, that particular truths are
not at all times and in all places of the same importance. Whether men will
attend to it or not, there is such a thing as the present truth. A gospel truth
may derive a kind of adventitious importance from the very circumstance of its
being assailed, despised, or over looked; just as a particular fact in the
testimony of a witness may derive a great importance from its being opposed or
denied by other witnesses. The present truth, then, (that is, those parts of the
truth which claim the principal attention of Gods people,) is not always and in
all places the same; but varies with the state of the Church. Nor is it always
to be determined by its own native magnitude in the scale; but by its being
overlooked, neglected, or opposed. Accordingly, it is promised that when Zion’s
glory shall shine in the latter days, particular regard shall be paid by her
sons to matters which have formerly been despised or overlooked.[26]
As
early as 1674, commentators suggested that ‘present truth’ was connected to
predictive prophecy. William Bates published his Harmony of the Divine
Attributes that year, connecting the concept of ‘present truth’ with the
prophetic figures found in the Old Testament. Bates suggested that “no created
understanding could frame so various representations of Christ, all exactly
agreeing with him at such a distance.” He meant that Old Testament figures
foreshadowed Christ exactly, giving irrefutable evidence to Gospel Truth. “We
have,” he wrote, “an irrefragable argument of the truth and divinity of the
gospel: for it is evident .by comparing the ancient figures with the present truth.”[27] Bates did not extend this view to as yet unfulfilled
prophecies.
Bates’
conservative approach did not stop others from connecting the ‘present truth’
concept with unfulfilled prophecy. At the front door of the 19th
Century we find Christian writers referring it to future events. William Moseley Holland, a fellow worker with Henry
Grew in the Peace Society movement, wrote:
There may be those among the present audience, to whom
these predictions do not come home with the force of present truth. Others may,
also, so far postpone the period of their fulfillment, as to feel themselves
exonerated from instant exertion. To these, I would remark, that if universal
peace be clearly for the interest and happiness of our race, the individual
duty of every member of the community, plainly requires his assistance in its
diffusion, however remote may be the period when his labors bid fair to become
effectual.[28]
Holland spoke (this was first
a speech) of the Bible’s predictions of future peace and paradise, especially
those found in Isaiah. Understanding future fulfillments was part of Present
Truth. Holland believed that Christians should assist God in such fulfillments.
His theology took maters beyond mere obedience to political action, as if God
lacked both the will and power to fulfill his prophecies.
Harriet
Livermore, a largely forgotten but once influential female evangelist, connected
“Present Truth” to belief in the near return of Christ.[29]
Livermore was one of about 100 female evangelists preaching in the early 19th
Century, but, unlike some of them, she preached a conservative doctrine to
which few objected, preaching to the United States Congress on occasion.[30] Her
message was bibliocentric. She defended female preaching on Biblical grounds,
not on the grounds of “natural philosophy.” Preaching was a divine obligation,
not derived from natural rights, but from Jesus’ words. She was Literalist in doctrine; because of
that she was drawn to millennialist preaching and ridiculed by clergy for it.
Ridiculed she may have been, but millennialist belief was still a potent force
in American religious belief. Livermore’s definition of Present Truth as the
truth about Christ’s near return was adopted by others, both Literalist and
Adventist in outlook.
In the hands of Millennilists,
Age-to-Come believers, and Adventists, “present truth” always meant their
end-times teachings. Russell first met the concept through Jonas Wendell’s
booklet The Present Truth, or Meat in Due Season. And there after he saw
it in publications we know he read. Among these was the Literalist/Age-to-Come
paper, The Restitution. An article appearing in its February 27, 1878,
issue said “present truth ... represents or embodies the true scriptural
relation of our times to the near future.” Individuals and groups used the
phrase of their own, peculiar interpretations and predictions to stamp
themselves as in the Truth and others out of it. Russell and his associates
adopted this practice, occasionally capitalizing Present Truth and using it as
a descriptor of their faith.[31]
In 1880, Russell defined Present Truth as “the knowledge of the bridegroom's
presence.”[32] This was Watch Tower
doctrine but not a universal church teaching.
Russell and his fellow
believers’ views of the approaching year are almost always misstated. Brown,
Bell, and Carson’s Marketing Apocalypse says: “Jehovah’s Witnesses ...
have rescheduled the end of the world on nine separate occasions,” and cites
the 1881 date.[33] None of the dates they
cite were the focus of end of the world predictions. That they claimed such
indicates a profound misunderstanding of Watch Tower theology. Watch Tower
adherents did not believe the world would end. They expected other things for
1881. L. L. Dawson and B. C. Whitsel claimed that “Jehovah’s Witnesses
predicted Christ’s second coming in ... 1881.”[34]
They derived this from a misreading of an article by Zygmunt; they failed to
read any of the original material. Russell and his associates did not believe
Christ would return in 1881. They believed he was already present. There is
little excuse for errors of this nature. Others with some pretension to
academic credentials have made similar claims. One can safely consign their
research to the trash bin of poorly researched history.
Both Zion’s Watch Tower
and Herald of the Morning pointed to 1881 as a significant date. Readers
expected a variety of events, some of them conflicting. They were a small,
hardly noticed detail in a larger picture. A contemporary newspaper noted:
It would be difficult to describe all the sinister
predictions that have, as by common consent, been concentrated upon the coming
year. The soothsayers, divines, oracle makers, astrologers, and wizards seem to
have combined to cast their spell upon it. Superstitious people of every sort,
and some who are not willing to admit that they are superstitious, regard the
year 1881 with more or less anxious expectation and dread. …
Timid persons first began to look forward with some
alarm to the year that is about to open, when, several years ago, the key to
the so-called prophetic symbolism of the Great Pyramid of Egypt was made
public, backed by the name and reputation of the British astronomer, Piazzi
Smyth. Others using Mr. Smyth’s observations and measurements, have gone much
further than he did in drawing startling inferences; but no one can read his
book without perceiving how powerfully it must affect those who have the
slightest leaning toward superstition or credulity. …. So the belief, or at
least the suspicion, spread that the secret chambers of the Great Pyramid,
under Divine guidance by the most mystical character in all history,
Melchisedek, King of Salem, foretell … that the Christian era will end in 1881.[35]
The Barbourite Stance
Eighteen
eighty-one entered Barbourite discussions in June 1875. Writing for the
September 1875 Herald, Barbour said that “though the gospel dispensation
will end in 1878, the Jews will not be restored to Palestine, until 1881.”[36]
However, when Barbour pointed to 1878 as the end of the harvest of wheat-like
Christians, he saw “no semblance of an argument which can place the end of
Zion’s warfare beyond 1878; while there is just a possibility that it may end
next spring.”[37] His predictions failed,
and he extended affairs to 1881. Russell endorsed the new belief.[38]
Between
August 1878 and June 1879, little was written about 1881; space was filled with
the Atonement controversy. In the June Herald, the first issue after
Russell’s withdrawal, Barbour wrote:
The spring of 1878 should, in some sense, mark the end
of this age; while the autumn of 1881, is parallel with the termination of the
last half of the seventieth week determined on the Jews. Hence we look with
much interest to the autumn of 1881, and believe the gathering of the wheat of
the gospel church will then be consummated; after which the tears will be
burned.[39]
Barbour
believed the period from 1878 to the fall of 1881 was the last part of the
seventy weeks prophecy. (Daniel 9:24-27) It was “the time in which ‘the bride,
the Lamb’s wife,’ is to ‘make herself ready.’” He believed the Bride of Christ
was to put on “the wedding garment,” a cleansed, restored theology.[40] This
was Barbour’s test doctrine. If one did not believe what he taught, then one
was not part of the Bride of Christ. He claimed that Christ would appear in the
flesh to the faithful in 1881, and that only those who believed his new
theology would see him.
The
most significant of Paton’s comments on expectations for 1881 were made in
response to Barbour’s claims. They also reveal some difference between Paton
and Russell. Paton reasoned on the time parallels they believed existed between
Israel and the end times, using arguments that are meaningless to most of our
readers, but one comment stands out:
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. We do not say that
the covenant week will not have a parallel here. As the gospel began to go to
the Gentiles at the end of the 70th week or three and one-half years after the
cross, so the advanced truth here may begin to reach Israel in 1881. There was
no coming of Christ three and one-half years after the cross; why should we
expect such an event in 1881 admitting the force of the parallelism? There was
no change in the condition of believers three and one-half years after the
cross; why then, on such ground, expect a change in the condition of believers
here? The only change we can see as taking place three and one half years after
the cross, was in the condition of the nominal Jewish church and the gospel turning
to the Gentiles. A corresponding change in 1881 would affect the condition of
the nominal Christian church and the gospel turning in some special sense to
the Jews again.[41]
This
reveals considerable ambivalence. If 1881 is significant, it is only so
as it indicates that their message reached the Jews and an impending change in
“the condition of the nominal church.” It did not predict translation. There
was no reason to expect a visible Christ in 1881.
Russell’s expectations for 1881
remained unchanged. In the August 1880 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower, he
restated them, explaining that the years from 1878 to 1881 were parallel to the
three and a half years of continued favor to the Jews after Christ’s death: “As
the Jewish house was shown some special favor for 3-1/2 years, the latter half
of their covenant week so we expect some favor to continue with the Nominal
Gospel Church for 3-1/2 years, or until the autumn of 1881.” After 1881 the
nominal Church would be cast off and enter a time of trouble similar to that
experienced by the Jews culminating in the sack of Jerusalem in 70 CE.
Russell believed that they were in
“the day of the Lord.” They were in “the harvest of the gospel age.” Christ,
“the chief reaper” was present, and the work of separating wheat-like
Christians from the false was progressing. “Soon,” he wrote, “probably by,
possibly before, the fall of 1881, we shall be changed – born of the spirit [of
which we are now begotten] into the glorious likeness of our Head.” He restated
Barbourite belief that they were in a seven year harvest dating from 1874 to
1881. During that time all those who would make up God’s symbolic spiritual
temple, the Bride of Christ, would be brought into a “perfect spiritual
condition,” He expected translation to heavenly life in 1881.[42]
An article by A. D. Jones in December 1880 Watch
Tower suggested that after 1881 there would “be wonderful spiritual
manifestations,” demonic manifestations designed to confuse and mislead.”[43]
The Devil and wicked spirits would make “a last great effort previous to their
binding” when they would be subdued in fulfillment of Revelation 20:2. The
“spirit manifestations” would further the Satan’s original lie, “You shall
surely not die,” and distract people from God’s truth. His speculation rests
against a significant and prevalent interest in spiritism. Trances, spirit
knocking, séances were reported in the press; people took these reports
seriously. Spiritualistic periodicals proliferated, and Christian Science rode
into public notice on this phenomena.
Edward Cornelius Towne, a well-known clergyman and
skeptic, reported widely differing enumerations of Spiritualists:
The
popular Spiritism of this country [USA] has a numerical strength of perhaps
half a million. An English Spiritist who recently traveled through the country,
and made a careful estimate, would count only 600,000. He doubtless included
many who would refuse to confess a true Spiritist rule of faith. Judge [John
Worth] Edmonds counts 16,000,000, and Mr. [George Vale] Owen 7,500,000. They of
course enumerate all who are, in the non-spiritist sense, Spiritualists; and very
naturally Judge Edmonds thinks that he might well throw in 5,000,000 more, as
unconscious or unavowed Spiritualists. There is nothing veracious or legitimate
in such a count as this. Of true Spiritists, persons who deal with
manifestations, the number may be fairly estimated at about half a million in
this country.[44]
Despite
disagreements over the numeration of American Spiritists, we come away from
this with the sense that it was a significant movement, vocal and though not
reflected in Towne’s article, gullible. Jones took spirit manifestations
seriously.
Russell’s
view of 1881, appears in the same Watch Tower [December 1880] as did
Jones’ article. He believed that the world situation proved their expectations
to be correct. Radical politics – He pointed to Communists and Socialists in
Europe, Nihilists in Russia, Land-Leaguers and Liberals in the United Kingdom,
and oppressive Capitalists – corroborated their prophetic interpretation, “that
‘the day of the Lord is a day of trouble and that we are now in the
‘harvest’ of the gospel age.” He believed that “soon, probably by, possibly
before, the fall of 1881, we shall be changed – born of spirit ... into the
glorious likeness of our head.”[45]
This left some wiggle-room. Events expected for 1881 were possible, even
probable, but his comments allowed for failure.
He
was less cautious in the January 1881, paper. He was confident that prophetic
time-parallels they believed existed between First Century events and the Last
Days were accurate. On that basis he believed “that the gathering of the Bride
into the place of safety will occupy a parallel seven years of time, ending in
1881.” They believed that nominal Christianity was represented by the prophetic
figure of Babylon the Great. Through a system of date parallels and on no other
basis, they determined that Babylon was cast down, spewed out, in 1878. “We ...
expect that all who constitute part of the bride [of Christ] will be separated
before the Autumn of 1881,” he wrote. This made evangelism especially
important. What harvesting of wheat-like Christians (Matthew 13:24-29) remained
must take place before the fall of 1881.[46]
The
January 1881, Watch Tower focused on 1881. Borrowing his title from Revelation
6:10, Jones’ article was entitled “How Long, O Lord?” He reminded his readers
that an article by him published the month previously expressed the opinion
that ‘change’ to spirit bodies (resurrection to heaven) “was nearer then many
supposed.” In the December article he did “not attempt to prove our change at
any particular time,” but now he wrote that evidence suggested that “the
translation or change from the natural to the spiritual condition” was “due
this side or by the fall of ... 1881.” He felt recent doctrinal changes
increased the evidence. He believed scriptural evidence seemed “to indicate the
translation of the saints and the closing of the door to the high calling by
1881. He derived the closed-door image from Jesus parable of the wedding
feast.” – Matthew 25:10.
His
argument was built off time parallels built off a shaky application of Jeremiah
sixteen. Jeremiah 16:18 expressed divine judgment on Judah: “I will repay them
double for their wickedness and their sin, because they have defiled my land
with the lifeless forms of their vile images and have filled my inheritance
with their detestable idols.” Instead of seeing this as a promise of full
retribution, Watch Tower adherents saw it as time predictive. When Russell
explained this he observed that the word translated ‘double’ meant two fold,
leaping from there to a doubling or paralleling of time. “What could be plainer
than this?” he asked, asserting: “The prophet declares that from the time of Israel's
casting off from all favor until the time of their return to favor would be a
repetition or duplication in time of their previous history, during which they
enjoyed Divine favor.”[47]
Watch
Tower adherents accepted the Israel’s Double speculation because it was clever,
but it was irrational, a combination of several common logic flaws. It also
ignored scriptural context and basic Hebrew language meanings. Works offering
access to Hebrew were easily accessible, and some of them were known to
Russell, Barbour and their adherents. Uniformly they defined the “double”
punishment of Jeremiah sixteen as meaning ‘to the full,’ a complete recompense
for sin. Some descendent Bible Student groups continue to believe the doctrine,
but the Witnesses Bible translation reads: “the full amount due” in conformity
to modern translation practice.
Jones
asserted that “Gospel ages seemed to teach that the wise of the virgins” (a
reference to Matthew chapter 25) must all come to “a knowledge of the
bridegroom’s presence by the fall of 1881 when the door – opportunity to
become a member of the bride – will close.” He ended his article with a summary
of evidence: “We ... have taken prophetic measurements and allegories together,
five different points seeming to teach the resurrection of the dead in Christ
and the change of the living between the fall of 1874 and 1881. Two or more
witnesses are enough to prove any case, as a rule, and certainly God has given
us abundant evidence.”
Russell
left no doubt that they expected translation [change to life as heaven-dwelling
spirit creatures] in 1881. His words were without Jones’ equivocation. He
expected translation and the time of trouble on the nominal church to being
that year:
We have seen that the trouble upon the world begins by
the overthrow of the nominal church, and indeed every day since 1878 where we
believe the nominal church as given up to her travail [It, however, will not
fully commence until the “first born” – “little flock” are born, (He
means raised to heaven.) an event expected during 1881.] seems to witness the
uprising of new elements for her overthrow. Spiritualism is misleading thousand
and infidelity tens of thousands.[48]
In
February 1881, Russell told his readers that while he knew “not the day or
hour,” he expected that “during 1881, possibly near the autumn ... the favor to
Zion [nominal Christianity] complete and due to end, the door to the marriage
to shut, and the high calling to be the bride of Christ to cease.” He abandoned
his firm hold on Literalist principles, finding symbolisms in I Thessalonians
4:16-17 where no clear application exists. Russell’s exegetical dictum was that
scripture should be interpreted by scripture, but he abandoned that too. Verse
seventeen says the living Saints will meet will be caught away in the clouds to
meet the Lord in the air. Acts 1:9 is an obviously parallel verse. Speaking of
Christ’s ascension, it reads: “When he had said these words he was lifted up
before their eyes till a cloud hid him from their sight.” [J. B. Phillips]
Christ was raised to heaven, and according to Acts passed out of their view
concealed in clouds to return to his father. He became invisible to them.
This
can be made to fit Russell’s parousia doctrine, but he did not see the
connection. Instead he interpreted the
clouds in the light of his expectations for the near future. The clouds
symbolized the time of trouble “in or during which, we shall be caught away to
meet the lord in the air.” The air represented “the spiritual – supernatural –
control of earth’s affairs now possessed by Satan.” He saw these and other
fancies as increasing light. And his expectations for 1881 were clearly stated,
firmly fixed.[49]
Russell
saw the story of Isaac and Rebecca as part of the Bible’s typology. Concluding
an article on the subject found in the November 1881 Watch Tower, he
wrote:
The
Spirit is ... now telling us of Him who comes by way of unseen presence that He
is here present. Some members of “the bride” have already heard, others are
hearing daily. When all have been instructed, the next step in order will be
our leaving the second company – disappearing from their sight – going beyond
the vail of the flesh – entering the perfect spiritual condition; changed in a
moment from mortal to immortal; from natural to spiritual; made like unto
Christ's glorious body. Then “we shall see Him as He is,” for “we shall be like
Him.” Glorious hope, joyous moment. Soon the new nature will be freed entirely
from the restraints of the fleshly body and have “a body as it hath pleased
Him.” Soon we shall alight from the camels, and leave the servant's guidance
when we pass under the vail. When that which is perfect is come, we will have
no further need of the sustaining and helping promises of the word, nor of the
guidance of the comforter, for “we shall know as we are known,” and “see as we
are seen.”
We
seem to be very near the time of our change. Seek to keep it ever in mind. It
will help you over the hard places of life, cheer your heart, and help you “to
keep your body under.” See, also, to be as much as possible used as the
mouthpiece of the Spirit to inform the “espoused virgin” church of the Lord's
presence.[50]
Signs in the Heavens
Most of those who discuss
Watch Tower expectations divorce them from contemporary history, but there is
significant context, and we should examine it. As 1881 progressed toward its
terminus, pretend and real heavenly events panicked those who looked for signs
in the sun, moon and stars. (Luke 21:11; Matthew 24:29-31) On September 6,
1881, the skies over New England, Vermont and New Hampshire – over two hundred
thousand square miles – turned yellow. The cause was uncertain, though probably
a forest fire in the wilds of Northern Canada. This was a startling event.
Yellow haze hung in the upper atmosphere undisturbed by a steady breeze. In
some areas the haze reached the ground. Schools were dismissed and workers sent
home or worked using candle light. Chickens roosted, night insects chirped,
birds slept. While some saw it as an interesting phenomenon needing a good,
scientific explanation, many panicked. The Friends Intelligencer said:
“Among those who apprehended that the weird prophecies of the seers of Israel
concerning the earth’s destruction are to find literal fulfillment in our day
there was general apprehension that the last day of the human race had come.”[51]
Abraham
Brown of East Kingston, New Hampshire, wrote to the Springfield,
Massachusetts, Republican, suggesting that it was a last-days sign:
‘The sky was draped in a kind of fog, a little too
light for smoke, and a little too dark for steam.’ As all our wise men have
failed to give a scientific reply to the question of your correspondent, allow
me to suggest that a ‘fog which is a little too light for smoke, and a little
too dark for steam’ may properly be called a ‘vapour of smoke’ – and whether it
be from a supernatural cause or from unexplained or unknown natural causes – it
looks, and I have no doubt is one of the wonders of the fulfillment of the
prophecy of Joel, as declared by the apostle Peter in Acts 11, 19 and 20: ‘I
will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and
fire, and vapour of smoke: the sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon
into blood, before that great and notable day of the Lord come.’[52]
Brown
was serious. So were a multitude of others struck by the similarity between the
event and Bible prophecy. Watch Tower adherents were not persuaded. They
expected other events that year.
As we
noted in a previous chapter, Albert Jones focused on the perihelion of planets
on June 19, 1881, mentioning it in Bible Students Tract number six. He believed
Thomas Wilson’s booklet and other similar predictions supported his
expectations. He was not alone. Many outside the Watch Tower movement did as well,
including Barbour and his followers. Aged Barton Speak, who billed himself as
“an old Jacksonian Democrat,” wrote:
It is now midnight, and I am just in from the Stars.
You know this is the night of the conjunction of the big stars, that is, the
planets, and to-morrow – Sunday – is to be the end of the world; that is
certain so called wise men have said so. I ope this will prove a blessed
Saturday night for you if it is the last one. How little the beaux that sit in
conjunction with their lasses to-night know what is going on overhead. They
don’t know that the big stars of the solar system move up into a straight line
with the sun, to-night. That is so. … If there isn’t a big disturbance
to-morrow, I don’t want to be told … that when the earth gets out on a dress
parade with the sun and other big bodies in the sky there must of necessity be
a big disturbance …. The fact is, I don’t’ believe that a disturbance will take
place.[53]
Speak
was right, of course, or I wouldn’t be writing this and you wouldn’t be reading
it. Writers from The Restitution speculated on the supposed perihelion
of planets, taking the mater seriously. In May 1879, a F. W. Haskell of Lynn,
Massachusetts, wrote to Barbour asking:
Have you seen an article in the papers on the
conjunction of the four planets with the sun, which is supposed to explain the
pestilence and miasmatic pressure brought to bear on the earth, and which is to
vibrate with convulsions and thus scatter disease and death to its inhabitants?
There was an article in a Boston paper last week, warning the people to take
care of their health, as they will soon be called upon to face a season of
pestilence such as has not visited our earth since the christian era. [sic]
They ignore the ending of the gospel age, and yet are looking for the very
things foretold.[54]
Barbour
didn’t append an answer to Haskell’s letter, but in the next issue recommended
the booklet published by Thomas Wilson which we discussed on chapter six.
Published under two titles, the one noted by Barbour was Star Prophecies, or
a View of Coming Disasters on the Earth from1881 to 1885, as Viewed from an Astronomical
and Astrological Standpoint. Its ideas persuaded readers of both magazines.
Wilson also published John Collom’s The Prophetic Numbers of Daniel and the
Revelation which focused on pyramid measurements and planetary perihelia.
Other books and pamphlets, almost without number, did as well.
illustration: C’ book here
Mother Shipton and the Great Pyramid
As
the end of 1881 approached, Russell felt compelled to confront other beliefs,
some of them nonsensical:
“The Second Advent Church” people, and many in other
denominations, interested in the Lord's coming and expecting him in the flesh,
have turned their attention to 1881, and feel confident that they will see
Jesus with their natural eyes this year. Their hopes are based partly upon an
old rhyme called “Mother Shipton's prophecy,” which concludes thus:
The world unto an end will come,
In eighteen hundred and eighty-one.
and partly upon the teachings of “The Great Pyramid”
of Egypt, whose “Grand gallery” measures 1881 pyramid inches. This “Grand
gallery” is supposed to symbolize the gospel dispensation, and its 1881 inches
are supposed to teach that the gospel dispensation will be 1881 years long, and
a further reason for belief in 1881, is that so many other people are expecting
something. (Not a prophetic period, can be claimed, as they are all past.) Now
to us, these things seem a poor and weak foundation for the hopes built upon
them. Our belief that the Lord is present, is based on the “more sure word of
prophecy” to which Peter said, we would do well to take heed.[55]
Russell’s comments do not convey the full story. The
Barbourite and Russellite expectations were a minor part of a wide spread
expectation of doom. The 1881 religious panic washed over America, Canada,
Australia and the United Kingdom, leaving many in expectation. The Kapunda
Herald, an Australian newspaper, reported that the mother of one of the
miners to come home because she believed a prophecy attributed to Mother
Shipton:
It
seems we have – or had – “one believer”' in Dame Shipton's prophecies re the
end of the world in 1881! A party, who had a son away working in the north,
sent a letter to him telling him to come home before the end of the present
year, as they would very much like to die altogether. Oh! for a faith like
this![56]
Smyth’s Pyramidology found a
place in Australia too. H. J. Lambert, a Baptist clergyman, told the Hill
Street Baptist Church that the Great Pyramid pointed unmistakably to 1881, it
wouldn’t mark the end of the world, but a “great change would take place in
that year.”[57]
As far as we can determin, the Watch Tower message entered Australia in1881,
but there is little record of the activity of the lone seaman who carried the
message, and none at all concerning any prior interest in Zion’s Watch Tower
Canadians looked to June 19th. The
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Inquirer reported:
A great many people may not be aware of the fact that
a great many other people are somewhat astonished this morning to find the
world revolving steadily on its axis, and everything going on about as usual.
Yesterday, June 19, 1881, was the day fixed for the end of the world, or at
least for its reorganization, by a cataclysm so great as to destroy all forms
of life. The belief had its greatest hold in Canada, where many farmers refused
to put in their crops this year, asserting that it would be labor lost as the
world be destroyed before the crops could mature.[58]
Though
the paper’s comment about crop planting may be accurate, we should note that it
is suspect as an oft repeated story found in similar reports back to 1843.
Belief reached beyond the
English speaking world. A Queensland, Australia, newspaper noted end-of-the-age
excitement in Paris:
Great excitement is caused by the number of pamphlets
now published prophesying the near approach of the end of the world. In Paris
some thousands of brochures are sold every day. The credulity of mankind has
ever been agape to swallow the dire foreboding of self-constituted prophets.
Seasons like the present make the fortunes of the Zadkeils, and, in a higher
sense, play into the hands of well-meaning divines.[59]
Great Pyramid
In
volume one, we asserted considerable interest in the Great Pyramid as a
prophetic witness to “God’s Plan.” Interest reached its peak as 1881 approached
with lectures and booklets proliferating. A detailed history of pyramidology is
inappropriate here. A few examples will do. James French, a Baptist clergyman,
presented two lectures on the pyramid’s significance to the Baptist Ministers’
Conference. The first lecture, delivered in New York City. Baptist clergy
listened attentively for an hour and a quarter, thanking him and arranging for
part two. French turned his lecture into a series of articles for Baptist
Family Magazine.[60]
French
was far from unique. Dr. Rufus W. Clark, a Reformed clergyman, also advocated
pyramidology.[61] J. A. Seiss lectured with
some regularity through 1883. Edson Rogers, a Congregational clergyman from
Cincinnatus, New York, did as well.[62]
Newspapers of the period note numerous lectures on the topic by clergymen,
self-anointed and real professors and “experts,” all of whom saw the pyramid as
a prophetic witness and many of whom pointed to 1881 as a year of destiny. Watch
Tower and Barbourite belief may seem strange from out vantage point, but
compared with contemporary belief, it was tame.
As
late as August 1881, S. A Chaplin, editor of The Restitution, suggested
that “the Great Pyramid indicates some great political event in 1881-2. A great
change in human affairs is impending and at the door.”[63]
Barbour gave his readers a summary of Charles Piazzi Smyth’s pyramid measurements,
concluding that this was “an interesting coincidence ... as the floor measure
points to 1881, for, as we believe, the commencement of the return of literal
Israel; the 6 years, ‘impending,’ is the exact measure of the time from the
spring of 1875, where according to the jubilee cycles, the ‘times of
restitution,’ should have begun. Again: The mouth of the well, the type of Christ's
death, is 33 inches from the Grand Gallery; and this 33 inches added to the
measure of the Grand Gallery floor 1881, make 1914, the date of the end of ‘The
Times of the Gentiles.’”[64]
photo
James French
Though
the Mother Shipton prophecy was an admitted contemporary fake, it panicked some
in Brittan. Calling the rural poor “the
simple,” one writer asserted: “Great excitement was aroused among the simple in
England, and a large crowd assembled on a high hill to get a good view of the
proceedings; they went away greatly disappointed.” We could not verify this and
doubt this. It is like many other contrived end-of-the-age stories.[65] The closest we’ve come to
verifying this is a claim that near Brighton “many people spend the nights
praying in an open field.”[66] Both Daniel Cohen and
Russell Chandler assert that there was little panic because the hoax had been
exposed. We see no reason to pursue this in depth; it’s not relevant to this
history. The fact of belief is.
When
Russell wrote that “Second Advent people” were persuaded by the Shipton
prophecy, he was only partially correct. Someone accused Samuel Snow (then
calling himself Bishop Snow) of predicting the end for June 19, 1881. When
interviewed by a reporter for The New York Evening Telegram he
indignantly denied it. The same reporter interviewed William Roworth, Jr., the
son of a one-time associate of Storrs. He said none of the preachers he knew
were fixing an exact date for Christ’s return and the translation of the saints.[67]
A New
York Herald reporter was present for the same interview, reporting with
little difference the Roworths and Snow’s comments, but he prefaced his article
with these comments: “The Second Adventists have brought the world again to its
great crisis … in announcing the crash of worlds to take place to-day.” He said
they had promoted the view “in halls and churches in different parts of this
city and Brooklyn.” If he can be believed (something not always possible with a
reporter), there were some in the New York City area pointing to 1881.
Failure and Aftermath
Russell
spent a small fortune for that era to circulate Food for Thinking Christians
and secondarily Tabernacle Teachings. Both were meant to call as many of
the Bride of Christ as possible before translation, change to spirit beings
living in heaven. Eighteen eighty-one passed and nothing they expected
occurred. Russell was reluctant to give up what he saw as a date settled by a
reliable understanding of Bible dates and numbers. He proposed new doctrine: “When
that did not occur, they concluded that since Jesus’ anointed followers were to
share with him in the Kingdom, the resurrection to spirit life of those already
sleeping in death began then. He reasoned that the end of God’s special favor
to natural Israel down to 36 C.E. might point to 1881 as the time when the
special opportunity to become part of spiritual Israel would close.”[68]
These
new concepts caused significant controversy. It came from all quarters. Other
factors added to chaos. Paton reached a faith-crisis and left the fellowship,
starting his own magazine. Adherents in Canada rejected the idea, causing a
crisis there. Conley, whose adopted daughter died in this period and who did
not fully accept Watch Tower beliefs, transitioned into Faith Cure and attached
himself to another belief system. Albert Jones sank into fornication and theft,
no longer seeing the Watch Tower system as ‘truth.’ Barbourites, already small
in numbers, declined, suffering an equal disappointment. Barbour abandoned
almost every previous date speculation pointing to 1885. Difficulties with
Age-to-Come believers, Paton’s followers, Barbourites and others centered on
Ransom/Atonement doctrine, reaching a peak in 1885, but continuing well into
the Twentieth Century.
Well
publicized expectations based on the fake Mother Shipton prophecy and the Great
Pyramid’s measurements became the object of ridicule. Some of this spilled onto
Zion’s Watch Tower, though Russell expect other events and on a
different basis. This led him to make statements that would return to him. In
some respects we find Russell as his most ‘unlovely’ with this failure.
The
fragmentation that occurred in 1881-1882 and continuing preexisting controversy
defined the movement. These events are the heart of volume three of this book.
We promised things in the afterword of volume one that we must shove off to the
next volume. I’ve learned a lesson from that, so beyond this, I will not
elaborate on expectations. My experience is that we encounter details we did
not expect to find, and these often shift the story.
Index
We
promised an index at the end of volume two. When we did that, it was with the
expectation that this would be the final volume. It isn’t. It makes no sense to
prepare one now, when I would have to repeat some very hard work when volume
three is finished.
[1] C.
T. Russell: Dialogue. Rev. 13., Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1880, page
1.
[2] C.
T. Russell: “The Name of the Beast, Or the Number of his Name”, Zion’s Watch
Tower, January/February 1882, page 7-8.
[3] L.
Jones, Editor: What Pastor Russell Said: His Answers to Hundreds of
Questions, Chicago, 1917, page 627.
[4] Long-Looked-For
Seventh Volume, The Watch Tower, August 1, 1917, page 226.
[5] M.
Sturgeon, Pastor Russell’s Last Days, The Watch Tower, December 1, 1916,
page 363.
[6] The
title was derived from Revelation 10:7: “But in the days of the voice of the
seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be
finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.” – Authorized
Version.
[7] R.
Durost: The Churches of the Broad Way (the Cults), Lulu, 2007, page 38.
[8] C.
T. Russell: Object and Manner of Our Lord’s Return, Herald of the
Morning, First Edition, 1877, page 39.
[9] The
Watchtower publication Aid to Bible Understanding [1971] and its
revision as Insight on the Scriptures comment on Jesus words: “There
would be nothing to hide about Jesus’ having come as King, at the beginning of
his royal presence.” [Insight, volume 2, page 255] Though this sentence
is somewhat convoluted, it suggests only that Jesus’ parousia would
become widely known. However, The Watchtower [May 1, 1995, page 12]
returned to Allen’s exposition, saying: “As Jesus foretold, in a global way,
lightnings of Bible truth continue to flash over broad areas from eastern parts
to western parts. Truly, as modern light bearers, Jehovah’s Witnesses prove to
be ‘a light of the nations, that [Jehovah’s] salvation may come to be to the
extremity of the earth.’—Isaiah 49:6.”
[10] C.T.
Russell: Optamai, Zion’s Watch Tower, September 1880, page 8.
[11] W.
R. Goff: The Handbook of Eschatology, Or, A Consistent Biblical View of the
Lord’s Return, Keystone Publishing
House, Blairsville, Pennsylvania, 1917, page 34.
[12] C.
T. Russell: Food for Thinking Christians, Watch Tower Supplement, 1881,
page 63.
[13] W.
Martin and R. Zarcharias: The Kingdom of the Cults, “updated edition,”
2003, page 101.
[14] J.
B. Rotherham: Emphasized Bible, 1897 edition, appendix, page 271.
[15] An
example is George Whitefield Ridout’s The Deadly Fallacy of Russellism or
Millennial Dawnism.
[16] “Enter
by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to
destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the
way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.”
[17] He
puts the group’s development of this doctrine before their understanding of
Baptism which we can date with assurance to 1874.
[18] C.
T. Russell: “Cast Not Away Therefore Your Confidence,” Zion’s Watch Tower,
February 1881, pages 3-4.
[19] C.
T. Russell: The Typical Tabernacle and Its Teachings, Zion’s Watch Tower,
July 1885, page 4.
[20] Tertullian:
De Praescriptione Haereticorum.
[21] “The
little book of 196 pages thus prepared was entitled The Three Worlds; and as I
was enabled to give some time and thought to its preparation it was issued by
us both jointly, both names appearing on its title page – though it was mainly
written by Mr. Barbour.” – C. T. Russell: Harvest Gatherings and Siftings, Zion’s
Watch Tower, July 15, 1906, page 231.
[22] News
and Notes, The Goulburn, New South Wales, Southern Argus, October 1,
1881.
[23] Round
About Notes, The Cootamundra, New South Wales, Herald, October 19, 1881.
[24] See
for example: The Toowomba, Queensland, Western Star and Roma Advertiser,
September 21, 1881, and Refuge in a Balloon, The Hawaiian Gazette,
September 28, 1881.
[25] A.
T. Robertson: Word Pictures in the New Testament: “‘In the present
truth’ (the truth present in you), Parousei ... to be inside one.” See
his comments on 2 Pet. 1:12.
[26] The
article, entitled False Maxims, was extracted from The Religious Monitor
and published in the January 1829 issue of The Christian Intelligencer.
There is another similarly named periodical published in New York. This
magazine was published in Ohio for the Dutch Reformed Church.
[27] W.
Bates: The Harmony of the Divine Attributes, London edition of 1815,
page 365.
[28] W.
M. Holland: An Address Before the Hartford County Peace Society,
Hartford, Connecticut, 1831, page 8.
[29] H.
Livermore: Millennial Tidings No. 3, Philadelphia, 1838, page 56.
[30] Some
writers connect a significant rejection of Calvinism with post-Revolutionary
War rejection of all things British. Catherine Brekus perceptively wrote: “After vanquishing the British and creating
the first modern republic, many Americans refused to accept the Calvinist
message that they were utterly helpless to influence whether they were saved or
damned. Like many other Protestants, Livermore soon abandoned the Calvinism of
her youth for a new Arminian faith in God’s free grace and individual liberty.”
Livermore believed that Divine grace “is as free for the drunkard, the
adulterer, the liar and prophane, [sic] the fierce and cruel, the wrathful and
the murders, as for me; and if they will come to Christ ... they shall be
justified and sanctified.” – C. A. Brekus: Harriet Livermore, the Pilgrim
Stranger: Female Preaching and Biblical Feminism in Early-Nineteenth-Century
America, Church History, September 1996, pages 389-404.
[31] e.g.
L. W. Jones [editor]: What Pastor Russell Said: His Answers to Hundreds of
Questions, Chicago, 1917, page 396.
[32] C.
T. Russell: The Temple Building Type, Zion’s Watch Tower, December 1880,
page 8.
[33] Stephen Brown, Jim Bell, David Carson
(editors): Marketing Apocalypse¸ Rutledge, New York, 1998 edition, page
1.
[34] Their article appears in D. G. Tumminia and W. H. Swatos,
Jr.: How Prophecy Lives, Brill, Netherlands, 2011, page 119.
[35] The Terrible Year at Hand, The Sliver Creek, New
York January 14, 1881 . The same article appeared in many other
newspapers. Author’s name is not given.
[37] N.
H. Barbour: Where Are We? Herald of the Morning¸ June 1875, page 6;
Elijah the Prophet, Herald of the Morning, July 1879, page 9. The phrase
“Zion’s Warfare” did not, of course, originate with either the Barbourite or
Watch Tower movements. It is derived from Isaiah 40:2, and as a phrase applied
to Christian trials and probation appears regularly after the publication of
they John Kent’s hymn Zion’s Warfare is Accomplished in 1826.
[38] C.
T. Russell: The Prospect, Herald of the Morning, July 1878, page 11ff.
[39] N.
H. Barbour: Times and Seasons, Herald of the Morning, June 1879, page
95.
[40] N.
H. Barbour: Where are We; And What is the Duty of the Hour, Herald of the
Morning, August 1879, page 19.
[41] J.
H. Paton: Expedient for You, Zion’s Watch Tower, May 1880, page 8.
[42] C.
T. Russell: Restored Dominion, Zion’s Watch Tower, December 1880, page
7; Temple Building Types, same issue, page 8.
[43] A.
D. Jones: “False Christs,” Zion’s Watch Tower, December 1880, page 5.
[44] E.
C. Towne: Spiritualism and Spiritism, New York, New York, Tribune¸ March
7, 1872. Towne was addicted to misunderstood and quack science and to quack
religion. See his Headlights of New Knowledge, New Science, New Religion,
New Education, Boston, 1910.
[45] C.
T. Russell: The Restored Dominion, Zion’s Watch Tower¸ December 1880,
page 7.
[46] C.
T. Russell: “A Stone of Stumbling,” Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1881, page
1, 2
[47] C.
T. Russell: God’s Chosen People, Part III, Israel’s “Double,” A Fact and a
Theory, Overland Monthly¸ April 1910, pages 418-419.
[48] C.
T. Russell: Zion’s Travail, Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1881, page 6.
[49] C.
T. Russell: “Cast not Away, Therefore, Your Confidence,” Zion’s Watch Tower,
February 1881, page 5.
[50] C.
T. Russell: Isaac and Rebecca, Zion’s Watch Tower, November 1880, page
8.
[51] Yellow
Day: Friends Intelligencer, September 17, 1881, page 489.
[52] Quoted
in Historic Magazine and Notes and Querries¸ October/November 1882,
page 66.
[53] Letter
from an Old Jacksonian Democrat, Mifflintown, Pennsylvania, Sentinel and
Republican, June 22, 1881.
[54] F.
W. Haskell to Barbour in the May 1879 Herald of the Morning, page 56.
[55] C.
T. Russell: The Year 1881, Zion’s Watch Tower, May 1881, page 5.
[56] Moonta
Mines, The Kapunda, South Australia, Herald¸ May 25, 1880.
[57] Church
Anniversary – Lecture on the Great Pyramid, The Kapunda, South Australia,
Herald¸ May 22, 1879.
[58] We
Still Live, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Inquirer, June 20, 1881.
[59] English
Extracts: End of the World, The Toowoomba, Queensland, Western Star and Roma
Advertiser, October 1, 1881. Zadkeils is in Rabbinical literature the angel
of mercy, but the reference here is to Richard James Morrison, (1794-1874), an
English astrologer who adopted the name as a pseudonym.
[60] Kane
Weekly Blade, August 18, 1881; The Baptist Conference, The Philadelphia Inquirer,
February 15, 1881; The Earth’s Center, The Philadelphia Inquirer, December
7, 1881;
[61] Albany
Affairs, The Troy, New York, Daily Times, October 16, 1883.
[62] From
Cincinnatus, The Homer, New York, Republican, January 12, 1882
[63] S.
A. Chaplin: The Last Spasm, The Restitution, August 3, 1881.
[64] The
Great Pyramid, Herald of the Morning, September 1875, page 76. See Barbour’s appended comments.
[65] J.
C. Ryan: The End of the World, The Theosophical Path, July 1920, page 8.
[66] J.
Westwood and J. Simpson: Lore of the Land, Penguin, 2005, page 833.
[67] “The
Last Day.” Opinions of Leading Second Adventists Concerning Tomorrow, The
New York Evening Telegram, June 18, 1881.
[68] Jehovah’s
Witnesses: Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom, page 632.
