THE HOUSTON-DAVIDSON DEBATE part 3

Transcript as published in the John O’Groat Journal for March 6, 1896

THE “MILLENNIAL DAWN” CONTROVERSY – INTERESTING THEOLOGICAL DISCUSSION IN CANSIBAY FREE CHURCH – DISPUTANTS, MR C.N. HOUSTON, WICK, AND REV. MR DAVIDSON, CANSIBAY.

A PUBLIC theological discussion is rather a rare event in these northern parts, and the debate arranged between Mr C.N. Houston, Wick, and the Rev. Mr Davidson, Canisbay, which came off in the Free Church there on the evening of Wednesday of last week was looked forward to with considerable interest, The discussion had reference to certain teachings of the book “Millennial Dawn,” for the circulation of which Mr Houston acknowledged responsibility, and intimated his willingness to defend its teachings as being scriptural when these were challenged by the Rev. Mr Davidson. When at seven o’clock the principals in the discussion faced the audience they found that every seat in the commodious and comfortable church was occupied. After preliminary praise, and prayer by the Rev. Mr Davidson, Mr Houston moved that Dr Macgregor take the chair. Mr Davidson seconded, and the Doctor, after some remarks, agreed to do so, impressing on the audience the necessity of giving both gentlemen and fair and patient hearing. Truth, he said, could not permanently suffer from anything that was said or done. Vague rumours had been abroad that some lively interruptions might be expected, but, on the whole, throughout the discussion the audience behaved themselves very well, although at one point the interruptions caused some liveliness, and there was a momentary danger of the chairman losing control of the audience. Fortunately, however, he held them very well in hand, and the debate was carried out ably and brought to a satisfactory and becoming conclusion. An hour each was allowed for the opening speeches. The chairman called upon Mr Houston to open the discussion after having read the subject as follows:-

“I, C.N. Houston, affirm that according to the Scriptures, the ‘ransom for all’ given by the ‘Man Christ Jesus’ does not give or guarantee everlasting life or blessing to any man. It only guarantees for every man an opportunity for life everlasting.”

“I, Donald Davidson, affirm that according to the Scriptures, the ‘ransom for all’ given by the ‘Man Christ Jesus’ does give and guarantee everlasting life and blessing to some men. It does not guarantee ‘another opportunity or trial for life everlasting,’ as taught in ‘Millennial Dawn,’ vol 1.”

MR HOUSTON’S OPENING SPEECH.

Mr Houston began by saying that he appeared before them that night with great pleasure. If they believed the one-half of what he had been circulated regarding him and his beliefs he did not wonder they should have very strange feelings in their hearts. He hoped, however, to be able to disperse some of the most erroneous ideas that might have been crammed into them. The chairman had truly remarked that truth could not suffer permanently. There was no truth held to-day but had a struggle at the commencement. And there was nothing that had been so much opposed as God’s truth. Some of them would remember the controversy that arose over the proposed Revision of the Bible. But they had it now, and there was not so much about it. In 1611 the Authorised Version of the Bible was opposed, and further back Wyclif was opposed for translating the Word of God into the English tongue, and he had made a remark which lived down the ages – that he would make a ploughboy know more of the truth of God than the hypocritical priests of Rome. And so all along there had been the same bitter opposition. But the god of this world, Satan, knew all the time that it was the light – knowledge – that was going to break up his kingdom. It was in his interest to use holy, religious, hypocritical cant to keep it back, and so it had ever been. If therefore they believed all they heard, that he had been disseminating error, he was sorry; for they had known him all his life and knew that he ever sought to do that which was considered right. Some three years ago, he proceeded, he was led to see that there was far more in God’s word than had ever yet been made known. He searched the light that was brought to him, proved it, and found there was not a single point which could be gainsaid by the whole word of God. He accordingly resolved to re-arrange his affairs, and after his brother-in-law’s death he determined, after prayerful and earnest consideration, to give up business and devote his life to the study and proclamation of God’s truth independent of any creed or sect, but just as he had seen it pointed out in that blessed book “Millennial Dawn,” which was the word of God expounded. After that he engaged a man to distribute that little tract “Do you Know.” He was challenged for this by the Rev. Mr Davidson, who had every right to challenge him, but he on the other hand had every right to his own opinions and the expounding of them. God’s truth was every man’s possession; and that was the stage they were at now. The proposition he had to affirm was –

“That, according to the Scriptures, the ‘ransom for all’ given by the ‘Man Christ Jesus’ does not give or guarantee everlasting life or blessing to any man. It only guarantees for every man an opportunity for life everlasting.”

The last part of that sentence was not exactly according to the book, but Mr Davidson would not take it up in any other way, so let it go. He was glad that Mr Davidson had accepted it even in this form, and here he was to try and make known just a little of what it is to get an opportunity for life everlasting.

Now

WHAT WAS A “RANSOM?”

Dr Young of Edinburgh defined it as a corresponding price – an equivalent of the same kind. Let them now come to the Scriptures and see God’s arrangement with the first man. He described the glory of the garden in which the glorious perfect man was placed – God’s representative on earth – a representative man of what God meant men to be. And had he obeyed God he would have been there forever and ever, for God did not set him there with a trap to fall into. God’s foreknowledge does not clash with His righteous doings. If God did not intend something better for the race he did not think He would have suffered the world to live down in misery for six thousand years if there was no hope. Now Adam had laws laid down to him, and so long as he obeyed he would be lord over the whole earth. But the moment he made any deviation – and sin was just deviation – it was said to him he would die – “In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” Well he did die in one of God’s “days.” And all his posterity was doomed the same way, and there had not been a man able to redeem his brother. Now he wished them particularly to understand that God meant Adam to live and obey Him. Here now came the Ransom. God does not give or guarantee everlasting life or blessing to any man by His own eternal fiat without a purpose, but He has guaranteed to all an opportunity for life and for blessing. God’s order in Adam was repeated in the case of the Jews – “Choose life that ye may live; refuse my law and it is death.” God does not propose to give eternal life right off without our acquiescence, acceptance, obedience; but neither does He propose to condemn if He has found a Ransom, not one living soul but those who wilfully refuse the Second Adam, the Lord from Heaven. The great principle laid down to Adam was to obey God, and he had the ability to do so. But he did not. Now the Second Adam comes on the scene – the Son of God, the Perfect Man – came and divested Himself of His glory, and the Second Man’s life had to be given for the first man’s life – blood for blood, life for life. And so they read that “as in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” Paul beautifully reasoned out the whole transaction in the 5^th chapter of the Romans. The Second Adam gave His life for the first and all that was in him, and that would be testified by God to every living soul in due time. That was an arbitrary act of God decreed by Him before the world was. There was therefore no man who could perish but by refusing, after full knowledge and opportunity of knowing and understanding what the Second Adam had done. That was the truth of God; that was the gospel, the joyful message which shall be unto all people. But that did not of itself save any man. There was just this little thing – you have it for nothing on condition you take it. The Son of God by one offering took away sin for ever and made reconciliation with God. Now, then, how many of the sons of men had heard this glorious gospel? The heathen had not heard. It would be a moral impossibility for God to suffer creatures to live on for ever if He had no provision of love and mercy; but He condemned them all in one that He might redeem them in One. Now is there to be a time when God shall show forth what He has done for mankind? Yes. Whosoever will may have life. Two thousand years ago the Jews had an idea that the promise that was made to Abraham was to have a literal fulfilment and that Jacob and all the patriarchs and prophets were to be brought back. Paul said “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you that God should raise the dead?”  But they forgot their life’s history and what they had been taught through the blood of bullocks and goats. They forgot that the world had to be redeemed first before one of them could get it. Christ had to die according to the Scriptures, and but for that they could never possess the land. And they shall possess it, for God had decreed it, and they had been ransomed by the Son of God, and all the earth at the same time. But before that takes place God purposed that the price should be paid two “days” in advance, 2000 years or so before the purchase was taken possession of, and why? That a noble people might be taken out of the world who would just believe all this, and as a reward for their faith and their witnessing to the world and overcoming were to be over yonder and made glorious beings like unto the Son of God. When that people is taken out, after this, declares the Apostle James “I will return and will build again this tabernacle of David...that the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles” – after the spiritual sons are first taken out to be joint heirs with their Lord in restoring and blessing the world of mankind. He could prove that from the Word of God. The Jews were gauge. They had a carnal notion that they must be set up, and so they did not receive Him when He came. And when He said “This day your house is left unto you desolate” from that moment they began to receive their double – their period of disfavour, which five or six lines of Bible testimony proved terminated in 1878. Their rise, however, would be as gradual as their fall had been, and after that time was up Jerusalem would be ready to receive Him and not till then.

A WORD ABOUT THE “SECOND CHANCE.”

It was knowledge that would be our condemnation if the favour of God were rejected. Our wills were a factor that God had recognised and if they doubted that or disbelieved it then the Scriptures were broken. God meant man to be a noble being and not a slave, and the awfulness of sin was shown in the destruction of those who fell away and remained impenitent, who had possessed knowledge and opportunity, had tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come. For them was reserved the devouring fire which should devour the adversary. What a responsible thing it therefore was to those who hear and do not obey.

MR DAVIDSON’S REPLY

Mr Davidson began by saying that in the time allotted to him he would centre his thoughts and arguments on the latter part of the terms of debate and would do his best to make his position clear and convincing that the “ransom” did not guarantee “another opportunity for life everlasting as taught in ‘Millennial Dawn,’ vol. 1.” He would first, however, by way of argument and answer to Mr Houston’s speech, make one remark. From his letters and his remarks his position seemed to be: there is ransom for all;, then why should not all receive blessing through that ransom? No doubt it was a little difficult to reconcile these two positions; but he (Mr Davidson) would endeavour to make it clear by a simple illustration. Mr Houston was a draper in Wick, and being in that line of business, he was quite willing and fully competent to supply to all the servant girls who into Wick at each term with bonnets and dresses. (Laughter and some hisses.) But he supposed he was not exaggerating or stating what was untrue when he said that many of these persons when they went into Wick did not go into Mr Houston’s shop and buy bonnets and dresses notwithstanding his willingness to supply these articles. Many of them went into other shops – by their conduct they showed they had no faith in Mr Houston or his goods – (some hisses) – in which they were perhaps mistaken, but it was a fact. He could sympathise with Mr Houston in that position, for he was in the same position himself as regards spiritual matters. There was a ransom for every one in Canisbay, and they knew that, but alas, many would not come and avail themselves of it. The god of this world had blinded their minds, and that explained why, though here was a ransom for all, all did not avail themselves of the glad tidings. Proceeding, he said he had one or two questions to put to Mr Houston, which he might answer or decline to answer. They could not extort an answer.

(The Chairman read the first question) – “Does Mr Houston sincerely believe that according to the Scriptures all who are unsaved in this present life will get a second chance or another opportunity for life everlasting after death?” To that he (Mr Davidson) said No.

Mr Houston said he would answer the question in his reply.

Mr Davidson (resuming) said the next question was – “Does Mr Houston acknowledge that the book ‘Millennial Dawn’ teaches the doctrine of a second chance or another opportunity of life everlasting to the unsaved after death?” He (Mr Davidson) said Yes; and he ventured to say the meeting would demand straight answers from Mr Houston to these questions. (Applause and “Answers.”)

Mr Davidson, proceeding, said that Mr Houston would make them believe that he was as orthodox as himself (Mr Davidson), but he had to do with the book. He thereupon read lengthy extracts from the volume in question. The extracts were to the effect that the Scriptures do not teach that death ends all probation; that the heathen and infants will assuredly have an opportunity of being saved in the age or dispensation to come, when all that are in their graves shall come forth, and when they shall have a hundred years of trial during the millennial time; and Mr Davidson further maintained that the book teaches that a second chance will be given to those who have lived in a civilised state and seen or possessed a Bible.

A TESTIMONY OF INTELLIGENT MEN.

Mr Davidson said he would now read a document signed by 21 persons, including himself – gentlemen who occupied honourable positions and were supposed to be honest and intelligent men. It was as follows: -

“We, the undersigned, having read the book ‘Millennial Dawn,’ vol. 1., are decidedly of opinion that it plainly teaches the doctrine of a ‘second chance’ or ‘another opportunity’ of life everlasting to every man after death. (See pages 105, 108, 111, 129, 130, 140, 144, 150, 151, 158, 159, 160, 161.)
 

James Macpherson, E.C. minister of Canisbay.

                 Alex. Sinclair, C.C., Canisbay.

                 Andrew Munro, teacher, Canisbay.

                 Alexander G. Macgregor, medical doctor.

                 James Sutherland, elder, inspector of poor.

                 George Manson, elder, Duncansbay.

                 David Kennedy, elder, Freswick.

                Alexander Dunnett, elder, Brabster.

                David Nicholson, deacon, Seater.

                John Simpson, deacon, Moy.

                Francis Sutherland, deacon, John O’Groats.

                William Dunnet, elder, Huns.

                William Steven, elder, Gills.

                George Malcom, deacon, Gills.

                Matthew Dundass, deacon, Duncansbay.

                Geo. T. Mackenzie, schoolmaster and deacon, Freswick.

                Arthur M’Connachie, divinity student, Zion Chapel, Wick.

                Daniel Sutherland, accountant, Wick.

                 Alex. S. Fullarton, teacher, Wick.

A. Phimester, clothier, Wick.

Donald Davidson, Free Church Minister, Canisbay.

Continuing, Mr Davidson said he did not see why he should go on to discuss this solemn doctrine if Mr Houston did not believe in it? He therefore thought it would be better to have plain answers from Mr Houston – yes or no. (Applause.)

The Chairman repeated the questions and Mr Houston said – I will reply in my own way.

The Chairman – Exactly. (To Mr Davidson) – Go on, you have 25 minutes yet.

There being cries of “Answer,” Mr Houston rose and read from Hebrews vi., 4,5,6; and x., 26,27, pointing out that the condemnation was based on rejection after knowledge.

The Chairman – The question is, Is there a second chance for those who are unsaved in this world? (Applause.)

Mr Houston was proceeding to a further explanation, when the discussion was rather marred by the interference of some of the audience.

Councillor Alex. Sinclair held they get a straight answer, yes or no, to the questions. It was truth they wanted not words.

Mr Houston – If Mr Davidson thinks I should answer any proposition he chooses I shall not say “yes” or “no” to an absurdity.

The first question having been read again by the chairman,

Mr Houston said he would give an illustration. When a man was flogged on board ship, a doctor stood by and stopped the punishment if he saw that the culprit had not sufficient life and sense to make him conscious of what he was getting. If God had provided a ransom which was as far reaching as the evil that is in the world, would it be just or fair that poor creatures should be cast into destruction because they had heard something about the ransom but did not fully understand and acquiesce in it? That would be doing what the law of this country would not do; and that was his answer. (A voice, “Not straight!”)

At this point there was a short interval during which some exciting conversation took place among the audience.

The discussion being resumed, Mr Davidson said he would now proceed to argue the question. They had, he said, arrived at this knowledge in the course of their debate, that Mr Houston did really believe in a second chance to the unsaved after death.

Mr Houston – Not as you put it.

Mr Davidson said he was not particular about the terms used. He would say “every man” as was stated in the book. He was opposed to the doctrine for four reasons – (1), Because it is unphilosophical and unreasonable; (2), Because it is a doctrine which is repugnant to Christian thought and feeling; (3), Because it is highly dangerous to morality; and (4), Because it is wholly unwarranted by Scripture. Mr Davidson gave his reasons in considerably length for each of these objections to the doctrine. It is, he said, an ingenuous theory, but is a theory spun out of a man’s own brain. It is a human speculation and therefore has the value only of a human speculation. He demanded plain Scriptural warrant for the doctrine, and it lay with Mr Houston to find the proof. He saw not a glimmer of hope from the lips of the Saviour beyond this present life. The Scripture doctrine is, “Now is the day of salvation;” and no one of the human race could answer the question, “How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?” They dare not go beyond what was written. (Applause.) Let Mr Houston now give plan Scriptural warrant for his belief. (Applause.)

MR HOUSTON’S SECOND SPEECH

Mr Houston, while expressing satisfaction that Mr Davidson had read so much from the book, pointed out that by not completing some of the quotations he had not brought out the author’s true point, which was that a ransom had been given, and that it was only those who came to a clear and distinct understanding of it who would be condemned for refusing it. On an ordinary estimate there had been 142 billions of people born since the time of Adam, and only one billion of them by the most liberal estimate had ever heard of the name of Christ. But the ransom had been given, and if the 141 billions were to be condemned for refusing it that would be illogical and unlike our God. He then quoted from the Confession of Faith showing that the teaching of Mr Davidson’s Church was to the effect that the elect only would be saved, and that the rest of mankind God was pleased to pass by and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin. He did not therefore wonder at Mr Davidson’s vehemence in repudiating the doctrine that the ransom for all must be testified to all in due time, but he asked where were the justice and consistency, and where was the Scripture, for condemning men for not accepting a ransom which was never offered to them or which they were foreordained to reject? The words “As the tree falls so it shall be,” rather bore out his doctrine that as it falls so it shall rise again. Mr Davidson might preach a universal gospel, but the Confession of Faith did not. Mr Davidson was like the blinded Jews of old who thought that all that God was going to do for the world was to be done by them. He said it was only for some men. Then woe betide the multitude, for St Paul argued that no one could be saved but by hearing of and believing on this Name. Christ, however, had tasted death for every man, although that did not excuse sin in any. He read from “Millennial Dawn,” page 145, as follows – “We do not wish to be understood as ignoring the present responsibility of the world, which every man has, according to the measure of light enjoyed, whether it be much or little; whether it be the light of nature or of revelation.” The news of a second chance for all in the Second Adam was the Gospel or glad tidings. God had appointed a day in which He would judge the world, and He would bring back man to it. The Jews would be taken back to the land, yes and the Gentiles also. He (Mr Houston) had come to them that night, and it was at their peril whether they received or rejected the glorious truth which he had to tell them about.

MR DAVIDSON’S CONCLUDING SPEECH.

Mr Davidson said that he never listened to such a mixture of orthodoxy and heresy, of sense and nonsense, from the lips of any man. That was his opinion and judgment. Mr Houston appeared to have no shadow of doubt in his mind regarding those great and solemn questions respecting the state of the heathen, the offer of the gospel and the doctrine of election. He (Mr Davidson) had arrived at no such condition of certainty; and he would like to be a little more humble. He could not reconcile God’s sovereignty with man’s free will. God’s command was “Go ye into the world and preach the gospel to every creature,” but God was not in duty bound, as a mere matter of justice, to send him the Gospel; and he might have been made an ape, a horse or a worm instead of a human being. If he were cast into hell, he could not say nay. If God had sent him the Gospel, he could only consider it a marvellous act of mercy, condescension and love on His part for which he trusted to praise Him throughout eternity. He had no ambition to continue this controversy any longer. He freely handed it over to any party who might take his place in answering Mr Houston. He would tread his path humbly and confidently, assured that God in His own time would bring all things to light. His answer as to the present and future condition of the heathen was that a great sin and guilt lay upon the Christian Church for not obeying the command, “to preach the gospel to every creature;” but he had this satisfaction to his own mind, that unto whom much is given of them much is required. He believed that there would be various degrees of punishment when the day of judgment comes. He dare not go beyond God’s word. He left those matters which were not intended to be solved in the hands of Him who, being a God of justice and love, will not punish any individual beyond what he deserves; and if he, a simple member of the human race, got strict justice meted out to him, he, at least, would have no reason to complain. (Applause.)

MR HOUSDON’S LAST WORD.

Mr Houston in his concluding speech said it was because the Judge of all the earth would do right that he sought to be there that night; and he was there because he wished to show forth what was a Scriptural, Godlike, philosophical and true doctrine. (A voice, “You’ve no Scripture for a second chance.”)  Mr Davidson said he had spoken some nonsense. Well, he was not alone in that; for it was written that the very wisdom of God had appeared foolishness to men. Mr Davidson also said that he (Mr Houston) had not a shadow of doubt; but why should he doubt? for if God’s word said that a ransom is given to all, for all it is. He quoted from Rotherham’s translation the text John xi. – 25,26 – “I am the resurrection and the life. He that liveth and believeth in me though he die shall live again; and no one who lives again and puts faith in me shall in any wise die unto the remotest age. Believest thou this?” Mr Davidson might seem to be charitable; but when his Church declared against God’s Word that only a certain elect number are saved and that the rest are passed by, he thought it behoved men who sought to maintain the honour of God to see, if God had given a ransom, that that ransom ensures what it says, and that it will be declared to all. The problem of God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility was solved by that doctrine – that God has appointed a day wherein he will judge the world, so that every man who ever lived shall hear the voice of the Son of God. God’s sovereignty in the ages and dispensations was fixed and true and man’s free will was true also.

Mr Davidson had a right of reply but said his last word would be to move a hearty vote of thanks to the chairman. This was seconded by Mr Houston who said that the doctor had acted as chairman in a very fair manner indeed. (Applause.)

The meeting then quietly dispersed, the proceedings having terminated about 10.30. Parties from Wick and Halkirk were hospitably entertained by Councillor Alex. Sinclair, merchant, by the Rev, Mr Davidson, Dr Macgregor and others.

William C. HIcks

Hicks was a resident of Union Mills, Indiana. He published for a few month a magazine entitled Voice of the Word. We have virtually no information about him and cannot find copies of his magazine. anyone?

This is NOT a watchtower item

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WATCHTOWER-Six-glass-slides-The-march-of-world-powers-Glass-prohecy-Revelation-/190710904462?pt=Antiquarian_Collectible&hash=item2c6741768e

The item description is misleading and uninformed. A close look at the slides shows a focus on the date 1880. This attaches the slides to a Second Adventist movement centered in NY and Maine, but not to the Watch Tower. Let the Buyer Beware!

Buffalo, New York, 1873

First Italian Watchtower

One of our regular readers is seeking scans, photocopies or originals of the Italian Watchtower between 1903 and 1940. Contact me if you can help.

H B RICE - AN IMPECUNIOUS MAN

by "Jerome"

A name that occurs in many histories of the Watchtower Society (although omitted from the Proclaimers book) is H.B. Rice – full name Hugh Brown Rice. His name is found in the first issue of Zion’s Watch Tower as a contemporary of CTR. Rice had attempted to start his own journal The Last Trump – but financial woes resulted in failure. CTR offered to send the new ZWT to Rice’s subscribers, and listed him as a regular contributor to ZWT – although that was not to happen.

Financial difficulty was a recurring theme throughout Rice’s association with the Age to Come movement.

Back on January 26, 2008 on the original blog, Bruce posted quite a detailed article on Rice in an early draft of one of the chapters. This article will attempt to fill a few gaps that subsequent research has uncovered, but readers are well advised to read the earlier article to get the fuller picture.

In a letter written in 1887 (reproduced in full at the end of this article) Rice gives some brief biographical details of himself. “I was educated at Amherst College, Mass., (class of 1870) and was for a time in Auburn Theological Seminary at Auburn, N.Y….I preached for a short time among the Presbyterians and then for some seven years among the “Disciples,” but…seeing the way of the Lord more clearly in reference to the life eternal and the gospel of the kingdom, I was baptized on the confession of this faith by Brother Richard Corbaley in Yale County, Cal., in 1878 or ’79.”

Richard Corbaley (1820-1903) was an old-timer in the Age to Come movement, who had travelled west in the early 1870s along with Benjamin Wilson. Corbaley was credited with founding the first Church of God congregation on the Pacific Coast in the Restitution for May 24, 1876. His life story is given in his obituary in the Restitution for September 9, 1903.

A letter from a Thos. Hughes in the Restitution for March 13, 1878 reviewed the personnel in his area, which included Richard Corbaley, along with “Bro. Wilson, Rice and wife at Sacremento.” Whether this is H B in early 1878 is unknown, but certainly by 1879, H B Rice is very much in evidence as a featured speaker with Corbaley at the annual Church of God conference in California. This was held over August 14-17, 1879 and a full report then published in the Restitution for September 10, 1879. This report indicates where Rice’s main loyalties and interests lay so soon after ZWT began publication and now that his own paper The Last Trump had folded.

The report reads (in part) “Brother R. Corbaley submitted his report as Evangelist…in the (Friday) evening we were profitably entertained by listening to a discourse delivered by Brother H.B. Rice from John xvii.3…by motion Brother Richard Corbaley was elected as Evangelist for the ensuing year…in the (Saturday) evening Brother H.B. Rice delivered a discourse on “the key of interpreting the Scriptures,” during which he dwelt at some length upon the fact that the natural always precedes the Spiritual…(on Sunday) after listening to short but interesting discourses by Bros. H.B. Rice and R. Corbaly (sic) the friends and brethren proceeded to bid each other farewell.”

The same report included the appointment of a future business and conference committee to include a certain C.W. Russell – not CTR, but a name that avid readers will find elsewhere on these blogs; and also a commendation of The Restitution as a “valuable paper” to whom the report was of course sent.

Rice then seems to disappear from view, apart from brief correspondence found in ZWT and Barbour’s Herald. Barbour’s June 1879 Herald mentions Rice’s “business failures” and “lack of means.” CTR’s Zion’s Watch Tower last hears from Rice in its July 1880 issue which again talks of “loss of business.” It mentions that Rice has obtained a situation in San Francisco and has moved there.

Several years go by and then Rice resurfaces in the pages of The Restitution in 1885. His comments indicate that as far as financial woes are concerned, not a lot has changed.  In The Restitution for January 21, 1885, he writes from San Jose, California, that he is now in the Real Estate business, but wants to go preaching and “to devote more time and attention to this matter than I have done for some years.” But there is a problem, “In worldly goods I am very poor, and have a wife and four children to support.” He asks for “a helping hand” – which could be interpreted as someone moving there to preach, or financial help so he could do it further.

A couple of years later, he pops up again, this time from Oleander, California, and indicates that financial woes have continued dogging him. In the Restitution for September 21, 1887, he describes himself as “poor in this world’s goods, and…hampered by business connections entered into for the purpose of providing for my family.” Not much has changed except that there are now five children to feed, quaintly described by Rice as “all young and non-productive of material needs.” Rice is now running “a little country store here but am partly in debt for my building and my stock.” But it is a good location – maybe someone could go into partnership with him or perhaps buy him out? It was a good prospect – honest! Brother Benjamin Wilson was nearby, but organizing anything had proved difficult.

Whether anyone responded to his business suggestion is not recorded, but in the November 7, 1888 issue of Restitution, Rice is now at Delano, California on “a government claim, a homestead of 160 acres,” enthusing about the Philadelphia National Conference to come, and bemoaning (as always) his financial circumstances. He would love to go preaching but “am too much burdened by the cares of a large and helpless family”. Farming is not working out, so “unless the brothers know of my condition and feelings they certainly can never help me to devise ways and means to do gospel work.” Basically, please can someone help me financially?

Something must have worked out temporarily for him, because in the January 9, 1889 Restitution, Rice writes two letters about his current preaching tour. Unfortunately – and you could say almost par for the course – Rice runs out of money and gets himself stranded far from home. Home is California but Rice has been preaching on the opposite side of the States in Wilmington, Delaware. The friends there suggest that he moves on to visit his mother and sister in Knoxville, Tennessee, the city of his youth. Perhaps it is reading too much into it, but one almost hears a sigh of relief when Rice moves on, because once in Knoxville, he writes to The Restitution, “I am as yet, of course, unable to return to my family in California, and I suppose God has a work for me to do here yet, else he would send me the money to get home.” How his “large and helpless family” back home are managing during this time is undisclosed.

Somehow, Rice does get back home and almost immediately - indefatigable as ever – he is writing to the Restitution again. From the February 13, 1889 issue: “I reached home Jan. 30^th after a long and eventful absence…It occurred to me…to say that if any of the brethren in California so desire and can arrange to meet the necessary expenses (!) I could preach some this summer.”

This is followed up with another letter that results in editorial comment on February 27, 1889, to the effect that they have received communication from Brother H B Rice at Delano, Ca. “There seems to be a door opening for him there, but he needs some help financially...” In other words – the usual! Rice’s letter was due to be published in the next issue, but unfortunately that issue is not extant.

The final reference to H.B. Rice that this writer has been able to find in The Restitution was a month or two later in the issue for April 10, 1889. Referring back to an announcement in the previous week’s issue (which again sadly is missing) there is an editorial note that they were in error last week saying that the Executive Board had passed a resolution that Bro. Rice should receive some money from the Evangelical Fund – it should have been Bro. Niles...  Oops! One wonders what the story was behind that.

At this point the impecunious H B Rice disappears from the pages of the Restitution – this time apparently for good.


There had been a repeating theme to his writing over a ten year period; however, at this distance it would be harsh to judge the man’s sincerity. He obviously lacked the financial acumen of a CTR, and for whatever reasons his early forays into commerce were a regular disaster area. However, his frequent appeals for financial help were always linked to his desire to preach as he saw fit.

But once disappearing from view, he finally obtained a position enabling him to feed his family. Being an Age to Come preacher had not really worked out and perhaps that decided that his religious interests (however they now evolved) should remain as a spiritual hobby rather than livelihood.

From research presented a few years ago on these blogs we know he ended his days – no longer impecunious – but also no longer apparently in association with the Restitution. When he died, there was no mention in its pages. And his connection with CTR had ended almost as soon as it started.

His obituary was published in the Los Angeles Herald for November 3, 1905. The main subheading concentrated on his business activities – “Pallbearers Are Selected From Intimate Business Friends of the Deceased Steamship Agent.” The account stated that he “was president of the Hugh B. Rice company, steamship and touring agents.” The funeral service had been conducted by “Rev. J.W. McKnight, pastor of the Magnolia avenue Christian church…assisted by N.W.J. Straud, leader of the Bible class of which the deceased was a member.”

The complete obituary along with a photograph of the family gravestone can be found on the Find a Grave site under Hugh B Rice, born October 6, 1856, died October 31, 1905, Mountain View Cemetery, Altadena, Los Angeles County, California.

For a photograph of H B Rice, please see Bruce’s earlier post on January 26, 2008 referred to above.

Letter to The Restitution, September 1, 1887, page 3.

OLEANDER, Cal.

Dear Restitution:

I notice with interest and joy all attempts to organize effort in the spread of the glad tidings of life through the Son of God. I, too, long to preach the good news of the kingdom, but, knowing that the very many of the called, chosen and faithful are, like myself, poor in this world’s goods, and being hampered by business connections entered into for the purpose of providing for my family things honest in the sight of God and men, I have supposed it were impossible to obtain the needed means to enable me to devote my time to preaching. So I have kept silent. But when I read of the call for laborers, when I see the fields white for the harvest, when I go to hear professed gospel preachers who are blinded by the errors of the apostasy and see how the people are feed (sic) on husks while our Father’s storehouse is full of rich food for the hungry, ready for their use if only the shepherds would give it to them.

Oh, my heart burns within me, and I long to give all my time, all my energies to this work. My heart is full of love and pity for the erring, the blinded, the famishing, the dying men and women around me on all sides. Starving, but not for the food which perishes – this is a land of plenty – but for the bread which comes down from heaven. But how can one who has a wife and five children, all young and non-productive of material needs, who has no money except as earned slowly by daily toil, to feed, clothe and educate these dependent ones, how can such as one go out and the preach the word in a land containing but a handful of brethren?

I have a little country store here but am partly in debt for my building and my stock. It is a good location, in the very midst of the fruit and raisin industry which makes this part of our State famous already. My store is situated between and about one hundred yards distant from two packing houses and fruit driers. Last season the Curtis Fruit Company, which owns one of them, put up 23,000 boxes of raisins, and this year the two institutions together will probably put up 60,000 boxes. This gives employment to many men, women and children at fair wages. It is a new but prosperous neighborhood, all the while improving. We have either a family or young bachelor living on nearly every twenty acres. We are nine miles south of Fresco and five west of Fowler, and have most of the conditions necessary for a good country business. We have a good school house and a postoffice, and with the exception of about three months of hot weather (in June, July and August) a very fine climate indeed. Eastern people are usually delighted with it.

My house is new, worth about $1500, stock and fixtures $500 more. Hence $2000 is about what I consider my place worth as I have it now. With an additional $2000 the place and business can be put in fine shape for a comfortable home and moderately remunerative income for one or two small families. The postoffice, which can be had in the store if desired, pays now $10 a month and would draw trade besides. Now if some brother who has the capital and a taste for the mercantile life in a humble way in the country will join me or buy me out possibly I can devote more if not all my time to the ministry or gospel preaching. I have been lecturing in the school house on Life and Death and trying to interest and instruct people. Considerable interest has been manifested.

Perhaps I should say that I was educated at Amherst College, Mass., (class of 1870) and was for a time in Auburn Theological Seminary at Auburn, N.Y., that I preached for a short time among the Presbyterians and then for some seven years among the “Disciples,” but that, seeing the way of the Lord more clearly in reference to the life eternal and the gospel of the kingdom, I was baptised on the confession of this faith by Brother Richard Corbaley in Yale County, Cal., in 1878 or ’79. Since then I have been isolated from brethren a good deal but have been giving myself to reading and the study of God’s word as I have had opportunity, never neglecting to speak a word in private or in public as occasion occurred if I could aid a fellow mortal or honor my Father in heaven and our elder brother Jesus of Nazareth the Christ of God and our only true life-giver.

I have thus told you of myself and how I wish to give myself wholly to the gospel word. Do you know of any way to accomplish this end? Or do you know of any brother who would trade for my store or go in with me in such an enterprise. My idea would be, so far as I am concerned, to make the store only a means of support while I gave myself mainly to preaching and teaching the word. We have a few brethren and sisters here but no regular organization. Brother Benj. Wilson is here, two Brothers Balch (?) and Brother Calder and their wives, about a dozen of us in all. Circumstances have made it out of my power to do more than speak to them and others who were interested to come and hear. There are causes not necessary to name here which have operated to prevent any attempt at organization, but which I hope soon will be removed. If you see fit to state my case in an abbreviated way (what I have written is too long and rambling to print) in THE RESTITUTION, I would like to see if the Lord may by such means open a door for me. I am with much love,

Your brother in Christ,

H.B. RICE

M. Joblin

We believe there is a connection between an M. Joblin and the Russells and maybe Stetson and Storrs. I haven't been able to make it yet. Anyone know anything helpful?

I appreciate that some of you may be curious about our personal details. Without meaning to be unkind, we do not intend to post them or answer queries via email. Bruce does not belong to any social networking site. I have a twitter account I seldom use.

My name as it appears on our book is my writer's name. It's a form of my real name. Rachael is the fifth in a string of given names. It is not my true first name, though it is my name. de Vienne is part of a longish last name which is composed of place names. Use of the full last name is regulated by law. My maiden name, though of French derivation, belongs to a German family. My married last name is a fairly common Scots last name. None of this will assuage the curiosity of those few who feel compelled to ask personal questions. Hopefully, the clues I've given here will send them off looking in the wrong corners. In a semi-teasing way, I'm telling you 'no', and saying I won't hand out personal details.

As much as I ever tell, I tell on my personal blog. http://wardancingpixie.blogspot.com/ It's a boring blog and seldom contains anything about this project.

I value my privacy. So does Bruce. Please do not ask personal questions. I am not comfortable with them.

We need ...

First names for three early Watch Tower evangelists, Sisters Cox, Wier, and Harper, all active in Kentucky in the 1890s.

Information needed

We need biographical information for the D. Widner mentioned in the April 1883 issue of Zion's Watch Tower.

We need biographical information and a photo for W. V. Feltwell, an Episcopalian minister. He's mentioned in several issues of ZWT.

We need biographical information and a photo of William Evert Parsons of West Virginia. He is found on page 643 or the WT reprints. Parsons was pastor of the Church of the Reformation in West Virginia.

Don't

Do not send me invitations to social networking sites. I do not accept them. If you wish to contact me you may post a comment here or email me directly. I do not have a facebook, skype, twitter, towoo or other account. I don't want one. Please don't spam my email with invitations.

One of our blog readers wants more information about this booklet ... anyone?

Need to see ...

Any report, including notes by anyone attending, personal letters or any thing at all that describes the annual meeting of the Watch Tower Society in 1942.

We need ...

We need a clear recording of F. W. Franz's remarks on his personal history made the District Convention in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1978. Anyone?

Just a note ...

We have not placed this material here for you to appropriate as your own without credit. Please credit us if you use what you find here. Also be aware that much of this material has been updated, and there are some details that are not accurate. We no longer post long sections of research on this public blog. Our updated and on-going research is on our private, invitation only blog.

Wish List Continued

Our Wish List

There are several major items that we would like to see. They’re all expensive or involve travel we can’t afford.

1. We would like the Storrs archive at the NY Public Library microfilmed. That’s about 300 dollars. We don’t have that money. We’re not certain what is in the archive. Someone visiting NY City could make copies fairly cheaply.

2. Also in NY City at Columbia University is a run of Our Rest magazine. They also have some really important tracts. This requires a personal visit, and you can’t just walk in the door. Anyone in the New York City area or who will visit there who wants to help should email me.

3. We have located in the Washington D. C. area a run of A. D. Jones’ magazine. We do not know if it is helpful or not. Microfilm costs approach 370 dollars. Ideally someone in the D. C. area could view these and copy out the more helpful items. Again, email me if you plan on being in D. C. or live in that area.

4. At the Library of Congress is an archive of early Liberian missionary papers. Some of these relate to the Rev. Seton who wrote to Russell in the 1880s. There are more letters in an archive in Texas. We do not know the worth of these items.

5. There is a large archive of letters and documents in Washington D. C. relating to the arrest and prosecution of Rutherford and others in1918.

6. At the NY Public Library is a political booklet by A. D. Jones. We would like a really good duplication, especially if his photo is attached.

Most of the polemical material listed in the previous post is available through interlibrary loan. We simply cannot afford the fees at this time. If you have any of these or are curious enough to send for photocopies, please share with us.

Also on our wish list are any letters by early Bible Students no matter how irrelevant they may otherwise seem. We’ve made all sorts of connections off what seem to be very slight clues.

Looking way ahead to other things, we would like Watchtower Society letters from the 1940s. We also would like personal letters written by Witnesses during that time.

We need to see these ....

J. A. Maynard: Russellism, 1928.

Carlyle Boynton Haynes: Russellism: Or the Coming of a False Christ. No date.

Joseph Kyle: Russellism: A Review of the Teachings of the Watch Tower and Bible Society, no date.

Alva J. McClain: Russellism: Its Claims, Methods and Doctrines, 1931.

Karl Linsenmann: Russellism, no date

William James Dawson: Russellism, no date

Amzi C. Dixon: "Russellism" under the searchlight: the red flag of warning with reference to the movment known as "Russellism" or "Millennial Dawn", 1914.

Joseph Stump: Russellism; a Counterfeit Christianity, 1923.

L. C. H. Hopkins: The IBSA of Russellism, 1922.

Thomas Williams: Russellism Refuted, 1905.

Percy George Cross: Russellism, a Caricature of Christianity, 1913.

George Candee: Bible and Reason Versus Russellism, 1912.

Merwin Stone: Russellism, Or, The Church of St. Bunco, 1915.

George W. Sandt: Another Pious Fraud, Or, The Story of Russellism, 1914.

William Hamilton Nelson: Is Jesus Coming Soon? A Bible Study of Adventism, Russellism, Etc. 1918.

Gover Cleveland Loud: Evangelized America, 1928. pages 294-296 only.

Daniel Webster Key: What is Russellism, no date.

J. G. Tasker: Dr. Loofs on Russellism, Expository Times, January-March 1922.

F. Mellows: Russellism: The Latest Blaspheme, no date, published in the UK.

FUTURE PROBATION

By "Jerome"

In Bible Examiner (hereafter abbreviated to BE) for October 1877, page 6, the editor George Storrs made one of his periodic pleas for support. While thanking readers for their prayers, he noted that financial help would also be welcome. His paper, he claimed, was unique. He argued “shall the only paper in America that speaks out boldly on this question be compelled to suffer and be crippled for want of funds?” There is an asterisk by the word America, and the footnote reads: “I except “The Herald of the Morning,” a paper published by Dr. Barbour, Rochester, N.Y.”

By this date, Charles Taze Russell (hereafter abbreviated as CTR) was supporting the Herald, (and if only the 1877 issues were extant to check, was probably writing for it as well).

Since the same issue of BE has Storrs debating with CTR over the date-setting properties of Three Worlds, it was obviously not Barbour’s chronological gymnastics that appealed. The doctrine or “question” that set The Herald apart from all other current publications in Storrs’ mind was Future Probation.

It is not the purpose of this article to comment on whom might be nearer the truth on the subject, as we are writing history not theology. But future probation had been a contentious issue for Christendom for centuries.

To define the concept – future probation is the belief that in the future individuals could have a testing period with the prospect of eternal life ahead of them. So their everlasting prospects were not just determined by what they did in this life, but they would benefit from a probationary period in the future after resurrection. It was usually (although not exclusively) tied in with a literal Millennial reign by Christ over a literal earth. However, just who might benefit was a bone of contention amongst those espousing the doctrine – would it include “the wicked” or just the “ignorant” like the heathen or unbaptised infants - and if “wicked” how exactly might one define the term?”

Orthodoxy in centuries past came out strongly against such a concept. If individuals did not accept Christ in this life, then that was it, there was no further chance. One example was in the official creed of the established Church of England. In 1552 Archbishop Cranmer produced the “42 Articles of Faith.” Article 42 attacked those who believed in future opportunities after death with the words: “They also are worthy of condemnation who endeavour at this time to restore the dangerous opinion that all men, be they never so ungodly, shall at length be saved, when they have suffered pain for their sins a certain time appointed by God’s justice.” While attacking a Universalist view, and perhaps a further swipe at the Roman Church’s purgatory (already attacked in article 22), it also reaffirmed that the “ungodly” – however defined – had lost out forever at death. Any other view was “a dangerous opinion.” Since the concept of Future Probation requires a location for it to happen – such as the earth during the Millennium – Article 41 of the same document obligingly condemned believers in the Millennium as heretics. However, it should be noted that ten years later in 1562 these articles ended up on the cutting room floor. The Church of England of today has to manage with just 39 Articles.

When this view was coupled with traditional teachings on hell – that all those not accepting Christ in this life were destined for eternal torment – it was perhaps unsurprising that some felt uneasy at the prospect of millions being so condemned. This was especially so if their opportunities to accept Christ in this life had been limited by geography and circumstance. Putting it in very human terms – was that fair? Those raising such questions were not accusing God of being unfair, but were aiming at the theologians who seemed to suggest that the vast majority of mankind would have been better off not being born at all.

One reaction against orthodoxy was to swing to the extreme of Universalism – the concept that eventually all would be saved. Writers such as John Murray in America promoted Universalism in the 18th century. Universal Salvation might take some time – it WOULD take some time – but ultimately that was God’s plan. Some individuals were even sufficiently magnanimous to include the Devil in these calculations. (A few associated with CTR would eventually leave the Bible Student movement to become Universalists, including John Paton and his aptly-titled Larger Hope Publishing Company).

Once interest in the Second Advent drew various people together in the first half of the nineteenth century, another dimension was added by the acceptance by many of conditional immortality. This doctrine taught that immortality was not automatic, but was conditional. Those who did not gain eternal life would gain eternal sleep. That dealt effectively with the concept of a burning hell, but also affected the concept of future probation. If the wicked – whether through intent or ignorance – were just going to sleep forever, that wasn’t so bad, was it? So while future probation was debated by the Advent Christians and Age to Come groups, the majority came out against the concept, or at least had views on salvation more exclusive than inclusive.

Taking the Advent Christians first, their official histories had some tart comments to make on the doctrine. Isaac C. Welcome in “History of the Second Advent Message” (1874), pages 515, 613, laid into George Storrs’ view of “probation after the Advent” as erratic and radical and “very detrimental to the progress of truth and sound doctrine.” The doctrine was “nearly analogous to Universalism.” Albert C. Johnson in “Advent Christian History” (1918), pages 242-243, described 19th century advocates as a kind of fifth column –  “(they were) finally distracted and disorganized by the advocates of future probation theories, who worked their way into the conference quietly until they gained control” – the conference had “been perverted by the age-to-come teachings.”

As suggested by the last quote, Age to Come groups were more sympathetic towards the idea. The first prerequisite for the unsaved to return for their “chance” was somewhere for them to return to, and the Age to Come focus was already on human life for a thousand years. But their paper The Restitution was happy to publish such articles as J.F. Wilcox’s ‘A Major Proposition and its Results’ in July 28, 1875, which categorically pronounced that “the whole...world who have not had God’s revealed word, but who...sinned without law, shall never be raised from the dead...as natural brute beasts they utterly perish in their own corruption.” An article promoting future probation, ‘The Progressive Age’ by Elder J. Parry, was denied publication, so Storrs published it instead in his BE for July 1874. By October 3, 1877, Elder John Foore was writing to The Restitution that he would like the paper “much better if it could be opened for the advanced views such as the blessing of all nations and all kindreds in the age to come.” The request apparently fell on deaf ears.

With other columns denied him, Storrs believed BE to be the primary voice for this doctrine, and fended off critics from all sides. When opponents dubbed the position “second chance” – it was met with the retort that for millions who died in ignorance this was their first chance. When critics then came back with “better chance” – it was met with the riposte, how could that be when now the chance was to be part of the bride of Christ?

Others settled on “fair chance.” As it happened, Storrs didn’t like that description any more than the others (BE October 1875, page 5), but it was more correct – you could say, more fair - in describing his theology

When opposers accused Future Probationists of being closet Universalists – Storrs standard response was that while he did not believe in universal salvation, he did believe in universal opportunity.

And yet Storrs’ position was not quite the same as others believing the doctrine. He defined his position as The Ages to Come. While it sounded like the Age to Come belief in a literal thousand years for humans on earth (and probation for nations then living), Storrs embellished it considerably. He spoke of Ages because he did not believe probation would happen for the dead during the Millennium, but rather after the Millennium in what he called “a succession of ages” or Ages to Come. (BE October 1874, editorial ‘The Ages to Come’). He accepted that not everyone would come back, and had broken with the Life and Advent Union over his belief that wicked dead would not be resurrected; nonetheless, the number would still be sufficient to require potential Ages (plural). And some who came back could still lose out – albeit a minority.

A key scripture for Storrs was Revelation 20 v.5: “But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished.” In his article ‘Due Time’ (BE August 1876) Storrs used this to reason that their resurrection and probation had to take place after the Millennium. Others might interpret this as referring to beneficiaries only coming to full life after passing their test at the end of the thousand years. Those opposed to the concept in its various shapes and forms, might dismiss the verse as an interpolation.

Storrs was a major influence on CTR. CTR chose the BE columns for his first known literary efforts, and in ZWT for May 1,1890, singled out Storrs (along with George Stetson) for special mention before recounting how his understanding of the ransom and restitution developed – to encompass far more than he had previously thought. The original May 1, 1890 issue, page 4, has CTR explaining how “in 1873 I came to examine the subject of restitution from the standpoint of the ransom price given by our Lord Jesus for Adam, and consequently for all lost in Adam, it settled the matter of restitution completely, and gave fullest assurance that ALL must come forth from Adamic death and be brought to a clear knowledge of the truth and to fullest opportunity of everlasting life in Christ.”

When CTR reprinted the article in A Conspiracy Exposed and Harvest Siftings – a special ZWT of 1894, he made several revisions to this paragraph (as found on page 96), including changing the date from 1873 to 1872. All future printings including those from June 15, 1906 (reprints 3821) stick to this revision.

But this was future probation. Without going into details, this was Storrs’ basic message in BE. Storrs had restarted BE in late 1871, after breaking with the Life and Advent Union. We do not know if CTR received Storrs journal then, because the first two years of the revived BE are unavailable. It was a weekly newspaper and may not have survived. But from October 1873 it became a monthly which could be bound into volumes. These have survived, and the Russells are readers from the start. However, they obviously would know of Storrs from his previous reputation. The Russell names are also found in the letters received columns of The Advent Christian Times and the World’s Crisis in the early 1870s – and the Crisis is certainly known to have publicised Storrs’ views by vigorously attacking them at the time.

CTR would claim in ZWT May 1, 1890, page 4, that he brought this concept to Nelson Barbour. “When we first met, he had much to learn from me on the fullness of restitution based upon the sufficiency of the ransom given for all.”

All this helps to explain why in October 1877 Storrs would single out “The Herald of the Morning, a paper published by Dr. Barbour, Rochester, N.Y.” as the only journal he believed to be supportive.

Barbour had already submitted an article endorsing future probation to BE, which was published in September 1876. In ‘The Work of Redemption Progressive: or Ages Employed in Accomplishing It’ Barbour stated “there is much positive scripture...to prove that there is to be probation in the world to come, for all who have not been brought to the knowledge of the truth in this world, and committed the unpardonable sin.”

While the article was sympathetic of Storrs’ views in principle, it was a little short on specifics. And looking closer at the details, there would be a key difference between Storrs’ views and those of Barbour and Russell. As noted above, Storrs taught Ages to Come, and looked beyond the Millennium for future probation to be worked out. In contrast, both Barbour and Russell would favor a more traditional view – that the Millennium was the judgment “day” and that a thousand years would be sufficient.

In Barbour’s Three Worlds (1877) for example, we read on pages 10 and 66: “There is much positive Scripture...to prove that there is to be probation in the millennial age, or world to come, for all who have not been brought to the knowledge of the truth in this world, and committed the unpardonable sin...It follows that probation must end with the thousand years.”

When CTR began publishing under his own name, he presented the same view. From Object and Manner of Our Lord’s Return (1877), page 26: “In (their day of trial, when they are on probation for eternal life) their “day of judgment” (not a 24-hour day, but the millennial or judgment age) they will fare better than the Jews — have fewer stripes.” He elaborated further in Food for Thinking Christians (1881), page 95: “It is their judgment day—one thousand years. During all that time, God’s truth, as a two-edged sword, will be quietly, but surely as now, doing a separating work...The great mass of mankind will learn God’s ways, and delight to walk therein. These he calls his sheep—followers, and during the age they are gradually gathered to his right hand.”

Looking at CTR’s theology overall, this was his main message, a legacy from Storrs, in spirit if not in detail. Yes, the second presence of Christ was a key theme with its chronological framework. Yes, “putting the hose on hell” with conditional immortality was a key platform. Yes, there would be issues like clashes with orthodoxy over the trinity. Nonetheless, in CTR’s mind at the time, future probation – summed up by his slogan “A Ransom for All” was what he believed to be the key message of the Bible. And he made sure as many as possible knew it.

Where we're heading

This is raw material from what will be chapter six or seven. This chapter focuses on new congregations, new workers and the character of the early fellowships. The two men we profile below appear only once in Zion's Watch Tower, but they're representative of many who read the magazine and who carefully considered its contents. We lack detail. That's an constant issue. The story is in the detail. We can't tell you what we do not know.

Please read the following. If you have details to add, please do so. Comments are welcome.

Amon Hipsher and Lorenzo Jackson Baldwin

Amon Hipsher was a resident of Ames, Story County, Iowa. Born in Pennsylvania about 1820, he was a successful and wealthy farmer.[1] Hipsher was active in Church of God (One Faith) conferences. He was elected conference president in December 1874.[2] At a subsequent conference someone objected to him being placed in sole charge of future arrangements, describing the arrangement as Hipsher acting as a “little pope.” This seems to have been an objection only to the arrangement, not a comment on his personality. He declined re-election for the next year at the December 1875 conference. By 1884 the conference was renamed The Christian Conference of Iowa, and Hipsher was elected vice president.[3]

We know little of his religious background prior to 1874 beyond the fact that he subscribed to The Heretic Detector, an anti-Universalist magazine published in Middleburg, Ohio.[4] He lived in areas reached by Stetson and his closest associates, and there is an obvious connection on that level. He was one of the first readers of Zion’s Watch Tower, and in the March 1881 issue Russell addressed a question sent in by him, writing, “Bro. A. Hipsher, for answer to your question: see ‘Unpardonable Sin,’ page 3.”

It appears that Russell wrote his article on unpardonable sin specifically to answer Hipsher’s questions. His approach was interesting [continue]

Lorenzo Jackson Baldwin was another Iowa resident. He was born March 2, 1823, in Vermont and died in Madison County, Iowa. He was a small-time farmer in the Mackenburgh, Iowa, area. In 1883 he wrote to S. A Chaplin, editor of The Restitution, seeking “a boy between 15 and 20 years old” to live with them for “two or three years.” He promised “to send him to school winters and pay wages for eight or nine months in the years.” Baldwin and his wife specifically asked for “a reader of The Restitution and a believer in the gospel of the kingdom.”[5]

Baldwin was also active among One Faith believers in Iowa. We find him attending a One Faith conference in September 1875 with an Elder Baldwin, apparently a relative.[6] We find him noted in the same "questions and answers" article in which we met Hipsher. He apparently asked a flood of questions. Russell’s response was: “Bro. J. Baldwin: It would require the entire space of Z.W.T. for a year or more to answer all your questions in full. We commend to you the reading of all the tracts 3 or 4 times; then read ‘day dawn.’ You need not expect to obtain all the truth on so great and grand a subject at one swallow, it is a continuous eating. You must seek. ‘He that seeketh findeth.’ ‘Then shall we know if we follow on to know the Lord.’ (Hos. 6:3.)”[7]

Based on Russell’s recommendation of Bible Students Tracts numbers one and two, we believe that Baldwin’s questions centered on issues of “second probation” and the reason for and manner of Christ’s return. These were issues that would have raised questions among Russell’s One Faith readers.

It is evident that some considerable interest came from Ohio and Iowa which were strongly Age to Come and had been one of the focus points of Barbour and Russell’s early ministry.

[1] The 1860 Census returns for Story County, Iowa, say his real estate was worth five thousand dollars and his personal property worth five hundred dollars.
[2] Conference Report, The Restitution, January 6, 1875.
[3] “Little Pope”: Report of the Conference Held Near Alden, Iowa, The Restitution, July 25, 1875. Declines Nomination: Iowa, The Restitution¸ December 20, 1875. Vice President: Iowa Conference Report, The Restitution, October 15, 1884.
[4] His subscription is noted in the November 1840 issue.
[5] Mr and Mrs. L. J. Baldwin to Editor Restitution, The Restitution, October 24, 1883.
[6] Mrs. M. V. Duggar: Iowa Conference, The Restitution, September 22, 1875.
[7] C. T. Russell: Questions of Correspondents, Zion’s Watch Tower, March 1881, page 8.

On the private blog ...

We're nearing completion of a lengthy biography of George Storrs, focusing on his separation and conflict with Millerite Adventism, his adoption of Age to Come belief and similar matters. We have corrected a generally circulated error about the influence of John T. Walsh, identified John Thomas, not Walsh, as the individual who introduced Non-resurrection of the wicked dead doctrine to Examiner readers, and documented Storrs' continued Age to Come belief while in the Life and Advent Union.

We correct standard misconceptions about the LaAU. My impression is that almost no one who's written about it since 1880 bothered to read the original material, certianly none of those who see this as Storrs' return to Adventism did so. We're writing up Storrs separation from the LaAU this week and maybe into next.

This is part three of chapter two. The full chapter consists of the life details of Wendell, Stetson, and Storrs as they relate to the Russells. This is followed by a general discussion of Russell's interactions with Adventist and Age-to-Come believers and his association with the One Faith movement.

We are accepting requests to join the private blog. Not every request will receive a positive response. We're looking for those who can contribute in some way. If you are interested, email one of us, tell us something about your self and why you're interested. If you think you can contribute to our research in someway, say that too.

Do any of you have ...

The May 23, 1844, Midnight Cry? We need to see the full text of Miller's letter re Storrs found in that issue.

Storrs preached here to a Chruch of God congregation in the 1850s

john t. walsh

Walsh is credited with introducing the non-resurrection of the wicked dead doctrine to Storrs. Within the documentation we have (original, not secondary sources), it appears that John Thomas did that in an article in the December 1847 Bible Examiner. Everyone says Walsh did it. Every secondary source we have says that was Walsh. People who should know say it was Walsh. We can't find anything to indicate Walsh adopted the idea before Thomas did, but we also don't have most of the Examiner for 1847. Can you help us solve this puzzle?

We need to see this ...

Teachings of "millenial dawn" shown to be unscriptural : being a brief review of doctrines found in their own published works

Author: G F Haines

Publisher: Boston : Advent Christian Publication Society, 1908

Anyone?

A snippet from chapter 2 of next book. Rough Draft only

Life and Advent Union

            In 1863 Storrs and his associates formed the Life and Advent Union to promote the teaching that the wicked dead would not be resurrected. Storrs was elected president [insert others] and the editor of a new journal, The Herald of Life and the Coming Kingdom. We do not know if this intentionally echoed the title of Elias Smith’s Herald of Life and Immortality, though we strongly suspect it did. It is important to note that they were united only by this doctrine. Animosity flowed from Second Adventists, including those associated with the Seventh-day sect, and some congregations voted to exclude Life and Advent speakers. However, until the mid-1870s, LaAU speakers participated in the Advent Christian ministry and spoke at their conferences.

The Life and Advent Union was not seen as a separate church. In this era neither the Advent Christian Association nor the Union, were churches in their own right, but associations of people, many of whom belonged to other churches, focused on a particular doctrine. More modern writers, especially polemicists, lose sight of this. Some have never grasped the point. They simply do not understand this era. Their research is shallow, or they parrot what others, equally uninformed, have written. Some slant the story to fit a polemic.  Neither group could fairly be described as a church until the late 1870s.

It is a mistake to see Storrs’ participation as a return to Millerite Adventism. None of those who remained Millerites saw it that way. He did not abandon his Literalist beliefs, but continued to advocate them. There were Adventists in the Union. Most of its adherents came from among Adventists. But some, including Storrs, no longer counted themselves as Millerite Adventists, and a goodly portion of The Herald of Life’s readership came from outside the Adventism.[1] The early advertisements for it focused on distinctively Age-to-Come doctrine rather than Millerite belief. As with most of magazines and papers focused on Christ’s return and more narrowly focused on a specific doctrine, it never achieved a significant circulation.[2]

Advertisement from the January 30, 1864, Scientific American. Note the Age-to-Come phrasing. [photo caption]

            Most Adventists and Age-to-Come believers rejected the doctrine. Horace Hastings wrote and published a tract entitled Retribution to voice his objections. He adopted an argument he found objectionable when it came from hell-fire advocates. Hastings, though widely praised later for his Anti-Infidel Library, was a vain, self-promoter who frequently commented negatively on other’s writing and reasoning ability, and circulated photos of himself to those who admired him. While denying to hellfire believers the claim that “soul sleep” tended to foster immorality, he adopted that argument to refute Storrs and his fellows:

The moral bearings of a doctrine which teaches that to every sinner ‘death is an eternal sleep;’ that they shall not all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ; that every one shall not give account of himself to God; that God shall not bring every work into judgment; that there shall not be a resurrection of the, dead, just and unjust; that they that have done evil shall not come forth to the resurrection of condemnation; that no sinner need to meet his blasphemed and insulted God in judgment; that a pistol-ball, a dagger, or a cup of poison, can, in an hour, put the vilest transgressor where neither God nor man can judge him for his iniquities, or punish him for his crimes; that he who has trodden under foot the Son of God, and counted the redeeming blood an unholy thing, shall not be counted worthy of a ‘sorer punishment’ than all, both righteous and wicked, receive in natural death; that there is no cause for ‘a certain fearful looking-for of judgment and fiery indignation’ by those who ‘sin willfully, after’ they ‘have received the knowledge of the truth;’ … the moral bearings, I say, of such a doctrine as this are proper subjects of serious consideration. … A mother, after her youthful daughters had been associated with a preacher who taught this doctrine, told me how they drew inferences of impunity in sin, and security in impenitence, which they could mention and act upon, even though he might not be affected by them. I myself have been met with the same objection, when I have sought to warn unconverted men to repent and turn to God. ‘If we die, and that is the last of us, it is no great loss.’[3]

---

[1]           This continued to be true into the 1930s. Religious Bodies: 1936, Volume II, Part 1; Denominations A to J Statistics, History, Doctrine, Organization and Work, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1936 (1941 edition), page 41, notes that “a number of people hold the views of the Union who are not enrolled in its organized churches.”

[2]           S. M. Jackson [Editor]: Concise Dictionary of Religious Knowledge, New York, 1891, page 18, estimates that it had a circulation of 1000 in 1890.

[3]           H. L. Hastings: Retribution: The Doom of the Ungodly After the Resurrection of the Dead, just and Unjust, Boston, 1862, second edition, pages 154-155.

January 30, 1864, Scientific American

Note the Age to Come phrasing.

Storrs preached here every Sunday in the late 1840s and early 1850s.

Good stuff ...

We sent a partially completed chapter off to Jan Stilson, a historian who writes about Arbrahamic Faith issues. The Abrahamic Faith congregations overlap Watch Tower history in the 1870-1900 period. Also called One Faith, Russell associated with them for some years. Her response was:

Rachael; I read this quickly, some parts more thoroughly than others. Wow. You have done extensive research and written a very thorough document. it is quite readable, not stuffy. I think all your analyses about the interactions of the Literalists, the Age to Come, the Various Adventists and Russell are spot on. I don't find anything to complain about. Also, you hit the nail on the head with David G*****. He has done extensive research but his analysis is not always to be trusted. I look forward to seeing the finished book.

Bruce sent the same material to a writer for a major religious magazine whose interest is in the same area as ours. He made favorable comments too. We can't reproduce them because of confidentiality issues. But we are happy to have them.

Today on the private blog ...

Jerome has written a well-researched article on the interplay between Adventists, Age to Come belief and Russell's place in the Age to Come movement.

We are open to requests to read the blog, but mere curiosity will not get you access. We're sorry that this is so, but bad experiences from both sides of the isle have made some caution necessary. Tell us who you are, why you want to see it, and if you think you can contribute something beyond curiosity.

The prime rule is that what is on the private blog stays there. You may not copy it to your web site, use it in your book, article or controversial post. You many not link to it.