Archive for the 'N. H. Babour' Category

1844 Prophecy?

On the webpage at:

http://www.freewebs.com/wwwsoundnessofmindcom/charlestazerussell.htm

we are being told:

Nelson H. Barbour (1824-1908, NY)–Millerite Adventist taught that the rapture would occur in April, 1878. Paired up with Russell 1876-1881. Influenced Russell by teaching an invisible return of Christ. Split over differences after failed prophecy of Christ�s return in 1844 and debate over Christ�s ransom.
This appears to be saying that Russell split with Barbour over an alleged “failed prophecy” of Christ’s return in 1844. Could be a typo, possibly meant to be 1874. Regardless, Russell was not even born in 1844, so I do not see how he could be having any differences with anyone concerning an alleged failed prophecy concerning Christ’s return in 1844.
There was some difference, however, regarding 1878, not over Christ’s return (which neither was expecting for that year), but over what had happened on that date.
If 1874 was date meant, I believe both Russell and Barbour had agreed, at least until 1878, that Christ had already returned invisibly in 1874. Russell himself never made any predictions concerning either 1844 nor 1874. It was not until two years after 1874 that Russell accepted that Jesus had already returned in 1874. There was no failure concerning that date.
Neither Russell nor Barbour, however, ever claimed to be making any prophecies. Russell disclaimed be a prophet many times, but rather he claimed to be a student of prophecy. Thus there were no “failed prophecies”, not unless one may believe that the Bible itself contains “failed prophecy”.
See:
Russell’s own words regarding his differences with Barbour may be found at:

Filed under: Things You Might Not Know About Charles T. Russell | Tagged: , , , , ,

Permanent link to this post (291 words, estimated 1:10 mins reading time)
  • Share/Bookmark

November 28th, 2009 | Posted in 1844, 1874, 1878, N. H. Babour, Predictions | No Comments

Russell Questioned His Faith (RLCTR Blogspot Link)

The following statement has been made on a forum concerning Charles Taze Russell:

Russell questioned his faith at an early age and was uncomfortable with hell and predestination. He bounced around between Presbyterianism, Adventism, and Congregationalism before founding the movement that would become the JW’s.

Russell was right in questioning his faith in the teachings of man, especially those teachings that would depict the Creator as a fiendish demon as in such doctrines as the supposed indescribable eternal sufferings of billions of men, women, children, infants, etc., who died without believing in Jesus. Of course, as he pointed out, he thought that these teachings were actually a part of the Bible, and thus, believing this, his faith concerning the Bible also came into doubt. Once he learned that the Bible did not teach such blasphemous doctrines such as the eternal indescribable suffering of most of mankind, as well as the trinitarian dogma, and that it did teach that Christ died for all, he was right in taking up the Biblical stand for the truth concerning these matters.
For more information of the condition of the dead, hell, hades, sheol, lake of fire, eternal torment, etc., see:
For more information about the “ransom for all,” see:
For more information about the “trinity,” see:
Russell, however, learned the Biblical truths about hell, the condition of the dead, and about the trinity, as well as “the ransom for all,” from others who had become before him. His understanding of these matters did not originate from out of the blue, nor were they simply his own thoughts. It was the proper Biblical understand ing of these matters that led him to reaffirm his faith in the Bible, in the God of the Bible, and in Jesus as the Son of God who gave himself a ransom for all.
I doubt that Russell would have ever claimed to have been the founder of the Bible Students movement. At any rate, the Allegheny class of Bible Students existed before Russell became associated with N. H. Barbour, who was a “Second Adventist” (not to be confused with Seventh-Day Adventists).
Russell, of course, did not found an organization called “Jehovah’s Witnesses.” He never heard of such an organization; he did not believe in such an organization, and he preached against the formation of such an organization until the day he died. Russell refused to allow himself or the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society to become a “central authority” over the local congregations, although, individually, and as congregations, many of the Bible Students had come to view him as such.
Permanent link to this post (435 words, estimated 1:44 mins reading time)
  • Share/Bookmark

October 22nd, 2009 | Posted in Agnosticism, Church Organization, Jehovah's witnesses, Links, N. H. Babour | No Comments

Russell’s Disappointment Over 1878

Before 1878, Russell and Barbour had expressed that the translation of the saints should be expected in the spring of 1878, using parallels to arrive at that date. The event in the first side of the parallel was the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, which was suggested to find its parallel in 1878, and the thus the suggestion that in 1878 the living saints would be translated. However, from Russell’s later statements attributed to Russell, Russell evidently held some reservations that perhaps they were coming to the wrong conclusions about what to expect for 1878, but he evidently held this to himself until after 1878. Thus, the “disappointment” for Russell was not all that great, whereas, it appears that the disappointment for Barbour was much greater than for Russell. We should note that while Russell retained the basic timeline until his death, his views concerning what happened on what date later changed, as well as his expectations for 1914. We have added to some of our own remarks in double brackets [[...]]. We have also expanded names of the Bible books, and added Biblical citations (Names of book, chapters and verses of quotations given) that were not given in the original publication. Of course, the seven-year period Russell allots for the harvest in this article proved to be a wrong conclusion, but Russell denied that his expectations should be considered “prophecy.” Russell plainly stated that he was not a prophet. Nor did Russell believe himself to be the head of an organization, such at the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ central authority doctrine.

This is a preview of Russell’s Disappointment Over 1878. Read the full post (4387 words, estimated 17:33 mins reading time)
  • Share/Bookmark

October 10th, 2009 | Posted in 1878, Dates, N. H. Babour, Predictions, Russell's Writings | No Comments

Some Imaginative Misinformation Concerning Russell

Someone has just posted a page on a website directed toward “Jehovah’s Witnesses,” but which in reality is mostly concerning Charles Taze Russell. First, let us say that we have studied the works of Charles Russell very extensively for over forty years. (We are not with the JWs; we consider ourselves as associated with the Bible Students).

We have to state first that most of what is presented by the writer is from somebody’s imaginative mind.

This is a preview of Some Imaginative Misinformation Concerning Russell. Read the full post (2408 words, estimated 9:38 mins reading time)
  • Share/Bookmark

October 3rd, 2009 | Posted in 1874, 1878, 1914, Christ's Return, Dates, Gentile Times, Jehovah's witnesses, N. H. Babour, Predictions, Prophet, Rutherford | No Comments

Zion’s Watch Tower, July 1879 Supplement

ZION'S
WATCH TOWER
AND
HERALD OF CHRIST'S PRESENCE

Vol. I ********** JULY, 1879 ********** No. 1

page 1
SUPPLEMENT TO

Zion's Watch Tower,

And "Herald of Christ's Presence."

==========

PITTSBURGH, PA., JULY 1, 1879.

==========

To the readers of the "HERALD OF THE MORNING,"

This is a preview of Zion’s Watch Tower, July 1879 Supplement. Read the full post (5510 words, estimated 22:02 mins reading time)
  • Share/Bookmark

April 29th, 2009 | Posted in 1874, History, N. H. Babour | 1 Comment