WTS Chronology(Oslo Hypothesis) from Vicar;Trinity College Fellow,Cambridge

by Gamaliel 90 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Gamaliel
    Gamaliel

    Gamaliel Report, September 2003:

    The source of the 606 and 607 BCE date for Nebuchadnezzar's destruction of Jerusalem was originally based on misunderstanding Ptolemy and some poor Biblical exegesis. Interestingly, a lot more Jehovah's Witnesses are now aware of Second Adventist origins for C.T.Russell's ideas. When challenged with odd or embarrassing beliefs, some Witnesses are quick to dismiss them with phrases like, "Oh, Russell got that from Barbour [Henry Grew, Henry Dunn, George Storrs, etc.]." But most Witnesses still tend to seem quite proud of the wisdom and discernment Russell displayed in promoting the 1914 date. It's vaguely known that Russell and Barbour joined forces to publish this but very few know that it did not originate even from Barbour, but from the Rev. E. B. Elliot, A.M., Vicar of Tuxford and Fellow of Trinity College at Cambridge. It's found in the 1846 edition (2nd edition) of the book "Horae Apocalypticae." This must have been Nelson Barbour's source.

    For background, the "anti-chronology" that the Watchtower Society has been promoting, literally from its inception, includes an historically unsupported date for the destruction of Jerusalem's Temple by Nebuchadnezzar. Accepting the dates 606 BCE (now, 607 BCE) instead of 587 or 586 BCE for that event has bequeathed an embarrassing situation upon Jehovah's Witnesses. They are forced to deny one of the most well-documented of all periods in ancient history: the entire Neo-Babylonian period. The attempt to promote this 20-year difference even creates issues with synchronizing Assyrian and Egyptian historical touchpoints to the Babylonian period. Also, while one could expect Bible believers to latch onto any small glimmer of historical evidence that upholds the Bible, Witnesses have created a situation for themselves in which they are required to deny a wealth of evidence that actually supports the Bible record very well during this period.

    Carl Olaf Jonsson, of Sweden, formally questioned this "chronology" nearly a quarter-century ago in his book "The Gentile Times Reconsidered." The Watchtower Society made no serious attempt to answer it. Rolf Furuli, of Norway, has made what he himself evidently sees as a serious attempt to provide that answer. Rolf Furuli calls this "chronology" the "Oslo Chronology." In other circles, it has been called the "Brooklyn Hypothesis," "The Watchtower Hypothesis," etc. I am of the opinion that Furuli, in stirring up these murky waters again, studiously avoids mentioning Jonsson by name, but has seen fit, instead, to toss a little bit of slanderous "mud" toward Jonsson so that any response by Jonsson might be seen as tainted by personality issues. (See: http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/furuli.htm )

    It's the same ad hominem tactic the Watchtower (and scandalized corporations of all types) have utilized in order to dismiss embarrassing evidence against them without any requirement to discuss the evidence. (The label "apostate," for example, is used the way other corporations might use the phrase "just a disgruntled employee" in lieu of a considered response to facts.)

    The real source behind the chronology, however, is neither Pittsburgh, Brooklyn nor Oslo.

    The relevant portion of a book entitled Horae Apocalypticae (Commentary on the Apocalypse) by the Rev. E. B. Elliot, A. M (Vicar of Tuxford, and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge) has been posted on a site for the Bible Students who still generally support most of C.T.Russell's teachings. Page 260-1 of the book contains the following quote: "

    I must add yet a word besides on two or three other more dubious, yet very interesting and important prophetic periods. And, 1st, on the seven times of Nebuchadnezzar's insanity and state of bestialism: {1} These calculated after the year-day system, on the hypothesis of the Babylonish king's insanity figuring that of the great empires which he then headed, in their state of heathen aberration from God, (an hypothesis on the truth of which I do not myself entertain much doubt,) terminate, -- if dated from the time, B.C. 727, when the Assyrians under Shalmanezer {1} first acted the wild beast's part against Israel,-about the year 1793; that is, at the epoch of the French Revolution, and the coincident going forth of the gospel-message to evangelize the heathen: -- doubtless a very remarkable synchronism: especially considering that the bisecting point of these seven times is then A. D. 533; the very commencing epoch, with Justinian's Decree, of the three and a half times of the Papal Antichrist. Of course if calculated from Nebuchadnezzar's own accession and invasion of Judah, B.C. 606, the end is much later, being A.D. 1914; just one half century, or jubilean period, from our probable date of the opening of the Millennium.

    [The opening of the millenium was A.D. 1862, according to Rev. Elliot, from page 260; Russell (via Barbour) used A.D. 1873 (for the end of 6,000 years of man's existence).]

    In addition to the above quoted material, I am also copying the title page as shown on the site:( http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/bsl/04%20Horae%20Second%20Edition%20Chronology.htm )

    HORAE APOCALYPTICAE,

    OR

    A COMMENTARY ON THE APOCALYPSE,

    CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL;

    INCLUDING ALSO AN EXAMINATION OF THE CHIEF PROPHECIES OF DANIEL.

    ILLUSTRATED BY AN APOCALYPTIC CHART,

    AND ENGRAVINGS FROM MEDALS AND OTHER EXTANT MONUMENTS OF ANTIQUITY.

    BY THE REV. E. B. ELLIOTT, A. M.

    LATE VICAR OF TUXFORD, AND FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE.

    SECOND EDITION,

    CAREFULLY REVISED, CORRECTED, AND IMPROVED;

    WITH AN APPENDIX,

    CONTAINING, BESIDES OTHER MATTER,

    A SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF APOCALYPTIC INTERPRETATION, AND INDICES.

    VOL. IV.

    SEELEY, BURNSIDE, AND SEELEY, FLEET STREET, LONDON.

    MDCCCXLVI.

    1846

  • stillajwexelder
    stillajwexelder

    gamaliel -- I am sure that C.O.Jonson being the scholar he is will be aware of this info -- but have you forwarded this information to him?

  • Gamaliel
    Gamaliel

    stillajwexelder,

    I'll do that now. Thanks for the reminder. For all I know, he already knew this. Jonsson traced some other Russell doctrines nearly back to the 18th century according to Jim Penton's "Apocalypse Delayed." He must have better access to good libraries than I do in NYC. I have been having a hard time getting any of the old Second Adventist books even from the NYC Reference Library lately. I managed a tiny bit from Storrs, but most things they say they have are missing from the shelves. I've done better on eBay than the library! But the Bible Student associations themselves are the best collectors of this stuff, obviously.

    Gamaliel

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Gamaliel,

    Interesting post. As you may know Jonsson speaks of Elliot's work at some length in 'The Gentile Times Revisisted' and it seems that its contents played a great part in C19th Adventist interpretation of 'end times' prophecy.

    Elliot's book is very scarce, though believe it or not I managed to pick up a two volume set on eBay some years ago for $65.00!

    Best regards - HS

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    Good information, Gamaliel. As you surmised, Jonsson already has this information and a lot more besides. In 1993 he and I put our heads together and dug up as much reference material as we could find because of the Society's recent publication of the Proclaimers book, with its "new" information on the history of the 1914 date. We found all the references we wanted.

    Elliott actually published four editions of Horae Apocalypticae, I believe in 1844, 1846, 1851 and 1862. I have photocopies of the relevant sections from all four editions (I got one copy from a Bible Student who owns all four volumes of the 1846 edition; he picked it up at a used book sale in Chicago many years ago; the rest I got on interlibrary loan). The 1914 date was mentioned in the first two, but I don't think in the 3rd except for a vague allusion, and certainly not in the fourth. You'll also notice that in the 2nd edition that you quoted, Elliott dated the beginning of the "seven times" leading to 1914 from " Nebuchadnezzar's own accession and invasion of Judah, B.C. 606", which was the accepted date for Nebuchadnezzar's accession year (the true date is 605 B.C.). So, while Elliott used a calculation that ended in 1914, the basis for it was almost completely different from what the Watchtower Society uses for its braindead calculation. But this is typical of them, using information that sort of points in the direction they want, but doesn't really, to fool JW readers into thinking they're receiving "food in due season" from God.

    One of your old buddies, Bert Schroeder, also has some of this information, because in 1993 I wrote him a letter detailing some of this stuff and telling him that the writeup in the Proclaimers book was incorrect because of the above considerations. Of course, he never dealt with it.

    AlanF

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    Thanks Gamaliel for the info and the link to the "Bible Students". After having been told all my life that the Russellites wandered off into oblivion when they would not accept the "Progressive" changes in the WTS - I know find them alive and kicking and with a useful website.

    It was interesting to read their view of events 1916 - 1919 . There are two sides to every story!

  • Gamaliel
    Gamaliel

    AlanF,

    Thanks for the info. I was sure this was not new info, in any sense. It's just that there is some obvious renewed interest by JW's in the whole 607 thing because of the Furuli's latest effort. Originally, I was just going to point out that Elliott's book called the day-for-a-year thing a "hypothesis", to turn the phrase back on a poster here who just loves to call Jonsson's work a "hypothesis," thinking, I guess, that there is some polemic value in that (although it seems that now he realizes that the word "hypothesis" doesn't reflect Jonsson's supposed "dogmatism" that this poster would now like to associate pejoratively with Jonsson).

    I had noticed the point about 606 meaning Nebuchadnezzar's succession and invasion of Judah. I'm glad you brought it up. This understanding is better suited to the more probable meaning of Jeremiah and Chronicles when the 70 years are identified for Babylon's rise to power affecting all nations around Judea, rather than their specific association for 70 years with Judea herself. Is there more evidence that this is how Elliott saw it and that Barbour simply misunderstood, or did Barbour purposely make the change believing that all chronology before 536 BCE was murky (and therefore flexible) as Jerry Leslie (Bible Student) says about Russell?

    I had mentioned some plans to you for the end of summer. Those plans have changed. I'll write or call you about it on the weekend if you are not terribly busy.

    Gamaliel

  • Gamaliel
    Gamaliel

    Hillary,

    Thanks for the info. Both my copies of GTR have been on continuous loan to others who needed them more than I and, in truth, I have still done little more than skim the book myself. My differences about 1914 were on Scriptural grounds, and it wouldn't have made an iota of difference if, by some coincidence, the JWs had actually used a true chronology to get their dates.

    Remembering what COJ was able to uncover on other pre-Russell matters, I was pretty sure that sending him this would more likely just be an excuse to speak with him on some specifics questions within Elliott's work. But I won't embarrass myself by sending this info to him. Elliott already had put almost the entire set of evidence (the jubilees, the 7 times, the 6000 years, the parallel dispensations) only slightly adjusted by Barbour and Russell. The only thing Elliott was missing was the Great Pyramid.

    BTW, do you (or perhaps AlanF) know how to get ahold of the "revived" issues of The Bible Examiner? Evidently COJ wrote for the magazine per a reference in Penton's "Apocalypse Delayed."

    Gamaliel

  • Gamaliel
    Gamaliel

    blues,

    Thanks Gamaliel for the info and the link to the "Bible Students". After having been told all my life that the Russellites wandered off into oblivion when they would not accept the "Progressive" changes in the WTS - I know find them alive and kicking and with a useful website.

    It was interesting to read their view of events 1916 - 1919 . There are two sides to every story!

    That's the truth. JWs have an ambivalent view of Bible Students these days. They provide a lot of free resources that otherwise would cost thousands. (My wife should be thankful for them.)

    On the Rutherford stuff, the Proclaimers book is awefully one-sided. The version I had heard from my table head at Bethel and a couple other old-time Bethelites was exactly in line with the Bible Students' story.

    Gamaliel

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Gamaliel,

    BTW, do you (or perhaps AlanF) know how to get ahold of the "revived" issues of The Bible Examiner? Evidently COJ wrote for the magazine per a reference in Penton's "Apocalypse Delayed."

    No, unfortunately I do not have this item in my collection, though I suspect that Alan may have. His house I understand is a huge pile of books with a bed precariously balanced on the top.

    Best regards - HS

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit