The ZERO Year.....red herring?

by rassillon 20 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • rassillon
    rassillon

    I have been researching and studying the 607/587/1914 thing for a while now. Not nearly as knowlegeable as Leolaia AlanF, etal..... But, even though I have learned to question almost everything, I haven't really questioned the assertion that Russell did not realize there was no zero year. I just accepted it. So rarely does the society admit to making a mistake, you just accept that they wouldn't admit to making a mistake they didn't make. Anyway, I got to thinkin' and researching in my REPRINTS and Studies in the Scriptures. Well I found this. "The Time is at Hand" copyright 1889

    THE END OF ISRAEL’S SEVEN TIMES

    This long period (“seven times,” or 2520 years) of Israel’s punishment is the period of Gentile

    dominion—the “Times of the Gentiles.” Since, as we have already shown, the “Gentile Times”

    began B.C. 606, and were to continue twenty-five hundred and twenty years, they will end A.D.

    1914 (2520-606=1914). Then the blessings recorded in the latter part of the same chapter

    (Lev. 26:44,45) will be fulfilled. God will remember and fulfil to Israel the covenant made with

    their fathers. Rom. 11:25-27

    This may be shown more clearly to some thus:—

    Israel’s “seven times” of chastisement

    =

    2520 years.

    They began when the lease of power

    was given to the Gentiles, which, as we

    have shown, was 606 B.C.

    Consequently, in A.D. 1, 606 years.

    of their period had passed, and the

    remainder would indicate the A.D.

    date, viz.,

    1914 It appears that Russell was quite aware that there was no zero year. I have not been able to find anything as of yet to indicate that he made the mistake of including a zero year in his calculations. Does anyone have any references to any of his actual writings which demonstrates his inclusion of a zero year? AlanF, JWFacts, Nark...Others??? Thanks.

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    rassillon, the stuff you quoted from Russell shows that he did not know there was no zero year.

    To calculate the length of time properly for periods spanning 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. you apply this formula: XXXX B.C.+ YYYY A.D. - 1. Thus, the one year span from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. becomes 1 + 1 - 1 = 1 year. You also get 606 + 1914 - 1 = 2519.

    AlanF

  • badboy
    badboy

    ITS GOOD TO KNOW WHETHER THERE WAS A YEAR ZERO!

  • Honesty
    Honesty

    The Revelation book has a box on page 105 with a footnote that you should read.

  • VM44
    VM44

    From the Revelation book on the WT-CD-ROM Library. --VM44

    1914 Foreseen

    “It was in B.C. 606, that God’s kingdom ended, the diadem was removed, and all the earth given up to the Gentiles. 2520 years from B.C. 606, will end in A.D. 1914.”—The Three Worlds, published in 1877, page 83.

    “The Bible evidence is clear and strong that the ‘Times of the Gentiles’ is a period of 2520 years, from the year B.C. 606 to and including A.D. 1914.”—Studies in the Scriptures, Volume 2, written by C. T. Russell and published in 1889, page 79.

    ...

    [Footnotes]

    Providentially, those Bible Students had not realized that there is no zero year between “B.C.” and “A.D.” Later, when research made it necessary to adjust B.C. 606 to 607 B.C.E., the zero year was also eliminated, so that the prediction held good at “A.D. 1914.”—See “The Truth Shall Make You Free,” published by the Watch Tower Society in 1943, page 239.

  • VM44
    VM44

    What does the Revelation book mean by "the zero year was also eliminated"?

    There was no zero year to begin with!

    Now I have to check the reference it gave to the 1943 book, The Truth Shall Make You Free..

    --VM44

  • VM44
    VM44

    One thing is certain, C.T. Russell never bothered to carefully check his 605BCE to 1914AD calculation.

    What a joke! Of course, in many ways, Charles Taze Russell was a walking joke himself.

    --VM44

  • GermanXJW
    GermanXJW
  • rassillon
    rassillon

    OK, Alan, I guess I am just dense or something...

    which, as we have shown, was 606 B.C. Consequently, in A.D. 1, 606 years.

    That quote from above seems right?? No?? 1AD is 606 years from the beginning of 606BC? Am I getting the October to October thing confused? From Jan 1st 1BC to Dec 31st 1AD is 2 years right?

    606 607 1
    605 606 2
    604 605 3
    3 4 604
    2 3 605
    1 2 BC 606
    1 1 607
    2 1 AD 608
    3 2 609
    4 3 610
    5 4 611
    1910 1909 2516
    1911 1910 2517
    1912 1911 2518
    1913 1912 2519
    1914 1913 2520
    1915 1914 2521
    1916 1915 2522
    1917 1916 2523
    1918 1917 2524
    1919 1918 2525

    I made the above in excel real quick (lots of rows hidden or it would be just too long) Anyway, am I confusing myself because I am looking at whole years and not the Oct to Oct as a year overlapping standard calendrical years. Thanks for the input guys! -r

  • VM44
    VM44

    Hi rassilon,

    The count of years in the rightmost column should start at zero.

    So if you start with the year 606BCE, then the year 605BCE would correspond to the 1 year count of time.

    --VM44

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit