Watchtower's 1914 Chronology - Ad Nauseum

[BTK59]

JWI, you should focus on monitoring your own multiple accounts instead of worrying about others. Continuously bringing it up only makes you appear foolish.

[BTK59]

 

Since you brought the name Charles Piazza Smyth

I believe this individual is yet another proponent of the British Israelite theory. I trust that the public will come to recognize how Pastor Russell addressed information that contradicted the unfounded assertions being presented here. Certain Bible Students, much like numerous independent Bible Students, exercised discernment when assessing Charles Piazza Smyth's writings, and that's why the "association" also considered other works.

It's important to consider Pastor Russell's views on this matter. Russell didn't pay much attention to occultism, and since Pyramidology is associated with Christian Science, he didn't give it much consideration either. He was intrigued by the great pyramid, but not in a way that suggested he sought enlightenment from it. Instead, it served as confirmation of things he already understood.

Pastor Russell was not influenced by Charles Piazza Smyth's works, unlike other "independent" Bible student associations. In fact, some modern-day Bible students have acknowledged this. If Pastor Russell had been alive during Brother Adam Rutherford's time, he would have likely agreed with his findings, further affirming his own knowledge. While he may not have formally endorsed Rutherford, he would have found his works intriguing, like any rational individual would.

Did Pastor Russell have a personal interest in pyramidology, as falsely claimed by some? Of course not! This is just another deceitful argument used by apostates to divert attention from their own shortcomings.

The crucial aspect lies in his true opinion on Christian Science. It is evident that, at some stage, he must have been accused of being connected or associated with a prominent Christian Science figure named Mary Baker Eddy. His response, soaked in sarcasm, was:

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE--Was Pastor Russell a Pupil of Mary Baker Eddy?

 

Q70:2:: QUESTION (1912)--2--Was Pastor Russell ever a pupil of Mary Baker Eddy? (Laughter.)

ANSWER--Not that I know of. (Laughter--applause.)

 

If Pastor Russell were alive today, it is possible that he would consider Jehovah's Witnesses to be an occult, but such an opinion would lack a solid biblical foundation. In my view, I would have respectfully disagreed with his assessment in this matter.

 

Harvest Gleanings vol 3

Nevertheless our text is not inappropriate to our topic, because Spiritism, Occultism, is a doctrine, and hence, as a whole, is to be proved or tried, to be weighed in the balance of reason and Scripture, and to be either accepted as true, or rejected as error. There is no middle ground, These things are either of God, or of the Adversary. It is our desire at this time to set before you conclusive evidence that Spiritism is of the Adversary, and, with its variations of Occultism, Hypnotism, Mesmerism, New Thought, Christian Science, etc., is the work of Satan, deluding the world of mankind, and leading them into the most woeful snares imaginable.

 

In certain cases, Pastor Russell believed that individuals who engaged in pyramidology for mystical purposes were undoubtedly carrying out the work of the devil. Brother Joseph Rutherford is not the only one.

 

Beware of the deceptive presentation of articles here, intended to mislead the public by distorting facts. The articles are designed to create a false impression of being good and right while actually being deceitful and misleading.

 

[JW Insider]

11 hours ago, BTK59 said:

JWI, you should focus on monitoring your own multiple accounts instead of worrying about others. Continuously bringing it up only makes you appear foolish.

You should be aware by now that I have only one account and I am not at all worried about your multiple accounts. Pointing out just a few of your active ones can merely help others here understand you a bit better. 

In the meantime, I will repeat that you have always been anxious to focus on distractions. You have had so many chances to provide even one bit of evidence, but you have never come through. You have always ignored and deflected or blustered or merely resorted to anger and ad hominem responses whenever any evidence is provided to you. You are making it pretty obvious that the only reason for your decade of failure to respond to evidence is because you don't have any evidence for a response. And the obfuscations you choose instead are an indication that you are are fully aware of this and that you think it's important to hide this truth from others.

As I've said already:

Instead of excuses, why not try to offer even just one piece of evidence that is specifically about Nebuchadnezzar that indicates a particular BCE year during his reign? If you don't, then it seems obvious that you can't. You've had over 10 years here to try.

[JW Insider]

11 hours ago, BTK59 said:

I trust that the public will come to recognize how Pastor Russell addressed information that contradicted the unfounded assertions being presented here.

Calling assertions unfounded when you know they are true is dishonest.

You are probably aware that Russell got most of his initial pyramid information through persons he never credited, and made it look like he came up with this himself. He paraphrased and nearly plagiarized parts of Joseph Seiss' book "Miracle in Stone" but never credited Seiss. He did reference Smyth's "Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid" and used Smyth's endorsement of what Russell published. Smyth gave it a glowing review and Russell published that letter in Studies in the Scriptures, Vol 3.

11 hours ago, BTK59 said:

He was intrigued by the great pyramid, but not in a way that suggested he sought enlightenment from it. Instead, it served as confirmation of things he already understood.

Not always. He had no other source for his predictions about 1910 and 1911 other than the Pyramid itself. This "enlightenment" he sought did not come from the Bible, but from "divining the entrails" of the Great Pyramid. 

Watchtower Reprints page 5249 : page 167, 1913:

We did in discussing the Great Pyramid—STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES Series—suggest that possibly a certain measurement of the step at the upper end of the Grand Gallery might signify something important by the end of 1910. But we hope that we made it clear that we built nothing on that suggestion—that it was merely a suggestion, a guess only, but a pointer that the year 1911 might be looked to with interest.

 

[JW Insider]

Here is the context and the letter from Smyth that Russell published in Volume 3 (Thy Kingdom Come), praising Russell's "originality" and "magnificently" worded passages. It also praised Russell's accuracy to within an inch, even though Russell later rescinded a couple of these measurements and changed them by up to 41 inches. Notice that Russell calls the Pyramid, not just Jehovah's Witness, but also Jehovah's PROPHET:

THE

CORROBORATIVE TESTIMONY

OF

GOD'S STONE WITNESS

AND

PROPHET

THE GREAT PYRAMID IN

EGYPT

 

A KINDLY COMMENT ON THIS CHAPTER
WHEN IN MANUSCRIPT, FROM THE PEN
OF THE ESTEEMED
PROF. C. PIAZZI SMYTH, F.R.S.E., F.R.A.S.
EX-ASTRONOMER ROYAL FOR SCOTLAND

Brother William M. Wright, on learning that this chapter on the Great Pyramid was written, requested that he might have the reading of it before it would be put into type, as he had already considerable knowledge of the Pyramid. This we gladly granted, assuring him of our desire for all the criticism possible. After reading the MS., Bro. Wright concluded that, as we desired criticism, the higher the standing of the critic the better. Accordingly he made a typewriter copy of the MS., and by permission mailed it to Prof. C. Piazzi Smyth, who is generally accorded a greater knowledge of the Great Pyramid's construction and measurements than any other man in the world, requesting that he examine the MS. carefully and note upon it any criticism he might have to offer in the interest of the truth. The Professor's answer to that letter, together with the MS. copy sent him, which bore his marks of criticism, when received were sent to the author. We thank Bro. Wright and Prof. Smyth for their kindness, and have followed the corrections indicated; which, however, only three in all, we were pleased to note were not of special importance. Only one of the criticisms was upon measurements, and it showed a variance of only one inch, which we gladly corrected.

Thinking it might be interesting to our readers we give below

Prof. C. Piazzi Smyth's Letter

Clova, Ripon, England, Dec. 21, 1890
Wm. M. Wright, Esq.,

Dear Sir: I have been rather longer than I could have wished in looking over the MS. of your friend, C. T. Russell of Allegheny, Pa., but I have now completed a pretty careful examination, word by word. And that was the least I could do, when you so kindly took the pains to send it with such care between boards by registered parcel, with every page flat, and indited by the typewriter in place of the hand.

At first I could only find slips of the said typewriter, but as I progressed through the pages, the powers, the specialties and the originalities of the Author came out magnificently; and there were not a few passages I should have been glad to take a copy of for quotation, with name, in the next possible edition of my own Pyramid book. But of course I did nothing of that sort, and shall wait with perfect patience and in most thankful mood of mind for when the author of Scripture Studies shall choose his own time for publishing. So I merely remark here that he is both good and new in much that he says on the chronology of various parts of the Pyramid, especially the First Ascending Passage and its granite plug; on the Grand Gallery, as illustrating the Lord's life; on the parallelisms between the King's Chamber and its granite, against the Tabernacle and its gold; and generally on the confirmations or close agreements between Scripture and the Great Pyramid, well commented on.

In the meanwhile, it seems that I am indebted to you for your kind gift of long ago of the first two volumes of Scripture Studies. I did not at the time get further than the first half of the first volume, finding the matter, as I thought, not quite so new as I had expected. But after having profited, as I hope, so much by a thorough reading of this advanced pyramid chapter of the third volume, I must take up the first two volumes again, de novo.

The parcel will go back between its boards, registered. I remain, with many thanks,

Yours respectfully,
C. Piazzi Smyth

[JW Insider]

15 hours ago, BTK59 said:

The crucial aspect lies in his true opinion on Christian Science. It is evident that, at some stage, he must have been accused of being connected or associated with a prominent Christian Science figure named Mary Baker Eddy.

There were big differences between the Bible Students and the Christian Science religion. The pyramid that was built near Mary Baker Eddy's birthplace was built in December 1918, by the same person who designed her cemetery memorial, but not officially sanctioned by the religion itself. The pyramid built near Russell's gravesite was built in 1921. Both have since been destroyed. 

Both had a metal box buried deep within to contain the writers' artifacts, and both had plaques on the 4 sides. One of “Eddy’s” plaques had “The new order of the ages” in Latin. 

Anything that Mary Baker Eddy had said about the Great Pyramid has been downplayed, and in fact, no one has found more than a sentence or two that she ever said about it. But there have been claims by those outside her religion that she supported pyramidology. 

In 1921, some Christian Scientists recommended pilgrimages to the site, but the church discouraged it, reminding people that Eddy didn't want people celebrating her birthday, and she had spoken out against mystic cults and "spiritualism" and "theosophy" that the pyramid apparently represented to some.

[JW Insider]

On 6/16/2024 at 5:37 AM, BTK59 said:

it is crucial to emphasize that the Watchtower timeline diverges from the conventional Ussher's chronology, which sets the creation at 4004 BC.

I'm not sure why anyone would say it is crucial to emphasize that the WTS generally accepts Bishop Ussher's chronology by adding either 19, 20, 21 or 22 years to everything prior to the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and generally accepts everything (without an adjustment) from about the time of the Jews returning to their homeland after Cyrus' decree freed them from Babylon. 

Naturally, this means that Bishop Ussher used 609 for the death of Josiah, and 588 for the destruction of the Temple, and the the WTS adds 20 and 19 years to those dates. The Watchtower, of course, uses 629 for the death of Josiah and continues to use 607 for the destruction of the Temple in order to make 1914 still work.

But this is about as "crucial" as saying that Bishop Ussher agrees within a year or so of COJ, or me, or perhaps 100 Bible commentators. Basically, it merely admits that the WTS generally accepts Ussher's relative chronology. Bishop Ussher turned his relative Bible chronology into an absolute chronology by using Babylonian Greek and Roman sources to fix the BC date of Evil Merodach, the successoor of Nebuchadnezzar at 562 BC. Per Wikipedia's source:

Quote

 

to establish the length of time from the creation to the accession of Babylonian king Amel-Marduk (also known as Evil-Merodach).^[6] He then used information from Babylonian, Greek, and Roman sources to fix the date of Amel-Marduk's enthronement at 562 BC (after Nebuchadnezzar's death), from which he was able to deduce a creation in 4004 BC.^[6]

James Barr, 1984-85. "Why the World Was Created in 4004 BC: Archbishop Ussher and Biblical Chronology", Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester 67: 579-580.

 

The Watchtower Society adds about 20 years that date, so that our "Ussher" date for every year prior to Evil-Merodach adds about 20, 21 or 22 years.

So Ussher uses the dates evidenced by astronomy for the period of the destruction and Exile. COJ does too. Adam Rutherford does too. As does Wiseman, and as do all the resources the WTS quotes from when discussing the period. This should not be surprising. 

Ussher stays within a year or two of all the astronomically evidenced dates. The only way Adam Rutherford found a way to stay within two years of the astronomically evidenced dates (and still keep 1914) is to reject 607 as the 18th/19th year of Nebuchadnezzar, and to reject Russell's and the Watchtower's date for the destruction of Jerusalem. He starts the counting of the 70 years and the 2,520 years (the 7 times) with the fall of Assyria instead of the fall of Jerusalem. That way he can continue to use 607. In this I would agree with him about 607 (within a year or two). I also agree with his date for the destruction of Jerusalem (within a year or two).

[BTK59]

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

You should be aware by now that I have only one account and I am not at all worried about your multiple accounts. Pointing out just a few of your active ones can merely help others here understand you a bit better. 

I comprehend your intention to convey your message to the general public, so I will entrust that task to you and your proxies.

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

In the meantime, I will repeat that you have always been anxious to focus on distractions. You have had so many chances to provide even one bit of evidence, but you have never come through. You have always ignored and deflected or blustered or merely resorted to anger and ad hominem responses whenever any evidence is provided to you. You are making it pretty obvious that the only reason for your decade of failure to respond to evidence is because you don't have any evidence for a response. And the obfuscations you choose instead are an indication that you are are fully aware of this and that you think it's important to hide this truth from others.

The sole responsibility lies with you. Instead of acknowledging your mistakes, you consistently resort to deflecting and redirecting blame. It is clear that the true failure here, for the past ten years, has been you—an ex-Bethelite, who not only uses ad hominem responses but also seeks to blame others for the unchristian behavior of your group. Let's not forget that I do not possess the authority to ban individuals like you and Tom do. Thus, continue deceiving yourself, for the public I am concerned about is well aware of your misleading tactics.

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

As I've said already:

Instead of excuses, why not try to offer even just one piece of evidence that is specifically about Nebuchadnezzar that indicates a particular BCE year during his reign? If you don't, then it seems obvious that you can't. You've had over 10 years here to try.

That's what frustrates you, the things that are right in front of your face, yet you are too oblivious to see them. You claim to be a researcher, so why not utilize your discernment and stop relying on others to guide you like a child? You reject facts from history, so how can anyone present information that your closed-mindedness would even consider accepting? I have no intention of trying to impress you, as you are insignificant to me. I will leave that to those who share your mindset.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Not always. He had no other source for his predictions about 1910 and 1911 other than the Pyramid itself. This "enlightenment" he sought did not come from the Bible, but from "divining the entrails" of the Great Pyramid. 

I have warned the public about this false impression. They can see for themselves that he is referring to that specific pyramid, not others as I claimed. It's clear that you are trying to confuse and manipulate them.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Calling assertions unfounded when you know they are true is dishonest.

You are probably aware that Russell got most of his initial pyramid information through persons he never credited, and made it look like he came up with this himself. He paraphrased and nearly plagiarized parts of Joseph Seiss' book "Miracle in Stone" but never credited Seiss. He did reference Smyth's "Our Inheritance in the Great Pyramid" and used Smyth's endorsement of what Russell published. Smyth gave it a glowing review and Russell published that letter in Studies in the Scriptures, Vol 3.

It appears that the source of dishonesty lies with you. Pastor Russell's sole purpose in being intrigued by the Great Pyramid was its alignment with his existing knowledge. Your fixation on labeling Pastor Russell as a spiritualist is unfounded. Merely mentioning Smyth does not indicate anything other than the fact that information of interest was being shared by "other" Bible Student associations.

Cease your false representation of a person who was sincerely seeking to rediscover Christianity, in order to perpetuate your deceitful allegations.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Here is the context and the letter from Smyth that Russell published in Volume 3 (Thy Kingdom Come), praising Russell's "originality" and "magnificently" worded passages. It also praised Russell's accuracy to within an inch, even though Russell later rescinded a couple of these measurements and changed them by up to 41 inches. Notice that Russell calls the Pyramid, not just Jehovah's Witness, but also Jehovah's PROPHET:

Those who can read English accurately can discern the false narrative you attempted to convey. I appreciate that you shared it. I mentioned volume 3 so that people could see for themselves how Pastor Russell, whom you dismiss as a false witness from a bygone era, has no connection to the present-day Watchtower. You are just another apostate, similar to Srecko, who used to engage in futile arguments. However, there is no endorsement in the correspondence between them, as it was a common practice among brethren to share their interests through writing. In this particular case, even the Bible Students, who you try to vilify, were forced to defend him against individuals like you. The discussion concerning the GREAT PYRAMID was for a distinct reason unrelated to spiritualism.

Consider another observation: it seems there might be a misconception about the word "CHAPTER," as Brother William M. Wright pointed out that you have.

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

There were big differences between the Bible Students and the Christian Science religion. The pyramid that was built near Mary Baker Eddy's birthplace was built in December 1918, by the same person who designed her cemetery memorial, but not officially sanctioned by the religion itself. The pyramid built near Russell's gravesite was built in 1921. Both have since been destroyed. 

Who placed that stone near Pastor Russell's grave? It seems like another attempt to create chaos and mislead. Why do you feel the need to sow doubt and confusion among people? What drives your misguided sense of compassion that contradicts everything Christ taught? There is no advantage in engaging in the work of the devil, so who gave you the authority to pass judgment on others as you will be judged?

The Watchtower Bible Students did not authorize the gravestone. A dedicated group of Bible Students, using their own resources, arranged for the placement of the gravestone in proximity to Pastor Russell's burial site. The main distinction lies in the fact that the Bible Student Associations and the "people pulpit and IBSA" are often mistaken to be the same, but they should be clearly differentiated as they are not one and the same. However, you persist in embarking on a senseless journey of bewilderment.

Quit attempting to impress others. It is evident that you lack a deep understanding of biblical student history and are merely regurgitating arguments from those who have strayed from the faith.

I will not accept your misleading tactics and posted articles, just as you reject mine. People have the ability to read "everything" for themselves, without having to selectively choose articles that create a distorted view, while disregarding other written articles that provide evidence-based facts.

[BTK59]

By the way, the topic here is "Watchtower's 1914 Chronology - Ad Nauseam." I used Adam Rutherford to illustrate the false narratives that apostates have used concerning the Babylonian Chronicles, especially an uneducated person like Carl Olof Jonsson, whom you have supported in the past. As an ex-Bethelite, he claimed to align the Babylonian Chronicles with 607 BC and relate this to 1914.

Adam Rutherford has not been endorsed by me for the purpose of pyramidology. This tactic of diversion is an attempt to confuse by introducing a different topic while failing to support baseless claims of refuting 607 BC, despite persisting in lying to the public about it. Stick to the subject at hand without deflecting. Pudgy isn't here to do your dirty work, as you seem to prefer making him look bad in front of the public. Now, the public can see the real you and what you stand for.

You made incorrect assertions regarding the dates 607 BC, 537 BC, and AD 1914. Additionally, your understanding of the biblical interpretation of 2520 years is flawed. Over the past decade, you have actively tried to disprove these dates, but your efforts have been futile. It seems as though you have become an apostate, refusing to acknowledge and accept the explanations provided by other scholars, apart from Jehovah's Witnesses. Who has given you the audacity to consider yourself the ultimate authority on knowledge, rejecting and denying everything else?

This is no longer about debates, but rather a battle to keep a false narrative alive that serves no purpose other than to create conflict and division. Why do you identify yourself as JW? These opinions hold no value, so why the need for an open discussion that brings shame to God?

Stop insinuating that the concept of "truth" is an ad hominem attack in an attempt to rationalize and utilize it against me in order to justify my banishment under that regulation, especially when you are equally responsible. The general public is well aware of your deceptive tactics. Simply because I honestly employ the truth, which you happen to find displeasing, does not give you the right to become enraged and ban me solely because you are losing an argument and your shortcomings are being revealed by the power of truth.

Don't manipulate me to justify your public accusations of my need for a ban, when it is actually you who should have been expelled a long time ago.

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, BTK59 said:

The main distinction lies in the fact that the Bible Student Associations and the "people pulpit and IBSA" are often mistaken to be the same, but they should be clearly differentiated as they are not one and the same. 

The "People's Pulpit" association was the original name that was then changed to "The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc."

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, BTK59 said:

Your fixation on labeling Pastor Russell as a spiritualist is unfounded.

You appear to be creating deceptions out of thin air. Why? Russell was not a spiritualist. Why act like someone said he was?

33 minutes ago, BTK59 said:

As an ex-Bethelite, he claimed to align the Babylonian Chronicles with 607 BC and relate this to 1914.

I don't think COJ was ever a Bethelite. And he didn't align the Babylonian Chronicles with 607 and 1914. You appear to be creating deceptions out of thin air.

35 minutes ago, BTK59 said:

Who has given you the audacity to consider yourself the ultimate authority on knowledge, rejecting and denying everything else?

More apparent deceptions. I am merely accepting the astronomical evidence for the BCE years. I should have a right to accept that evidence if I wish. I'm merely doing the same thing as 100% of the authorities that the Insight book quotes from in all their discussions of the astronomical evidence. I am doing the same thing the Watchtower does for for dates after 562 BCE. The difference is that I consistently accept that same evidence for dates prior to 562 BCE, especially where that evidence is at least 10 times better than the particular astronomical evidence the WTS has focused on. But I accept the WTS astronomical evidence, too, in spite of it's problems. 

Do you now have a date for Nebuchadnezzar that is NOT based on astronomical evidence? Or do you have other evidence for any of Nebuchadnezzar's years? You haven't been able to produce any for 10 years. I'll have to repeat again:

Instead of excuses, why not try to offer even just one piece of evidence that is specifically about Nebuchadnezzar that indicates a particular BCE year during his reign? If you don't, then it seems obvious that you can't. You've had over 10 years here to try.

[BTK59]

5 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

You appear to be creating deceptions out of thin air. Why? Russell was not a spiritualist. Why act like someone said he was?

You are mistaken. It is you who is creating a false narrative. Pyramidology, largely considered to be Christian Science, was actually opposed by Pastor Russell. Despite this, you continue to assert that he accepted it based on a few acknowledgments in articles. You are the one perpetuating this false impression.

33 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

The "People's Pulpit" association was the original name that was then changed to "The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc."

Correct, along with the IBSA were directed by Pastor Russell while "others" in the Bible Student Association directed themselves. The confusion is with the word independent.

12 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I don't think COJ was ever a Bethelite. And he didn't align the Babylonian Chronicles with 607 and 1914. You appear to be creating deceptions out of thin air.

What I meant to say, you were, and You're absolutely right; he was disputing the years 607 BC and AD 1914, just like you. Therefore, let's not deviate from the subject and misinterpret what I am trying to say by distorting my words.

15 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

More apparent deceptions. I am merely accepting the astronomical evidence for the BCE years. I should have a right to accept that evidence if I wish. I'm merely doing the same thing as 100% of the authorities that the Insight book quotes from in all their discussions of the astronomical evidence. I am doing the same thing the Watchtower does for for dates after 562 BCE. The difference is that I consistently accept that same evidence for dates prior to 562 BCE, especially where that evidence is at least 10 times better than the particular astronomical evidence the WTS has focused on. But I accept the WTS astronomical evidence, too, in spite of it's problems. 

Exactly. We all have the right to evaluate any written information and I, too, have the right to dismiss your unfounded assertions. It is futile to introduce additional dates to divert attention and change the topic when you find yourself losing an argument. Hence, you have no credibility to deny the evidence based on historical facts. The public deserves to be aware of where this deceit is originating from.

19 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Do you now have a date for Nebuchadnezzar that is NOT based on astronomical evidence? Or do you have other evidence for any of Nebuchadnezzar's years? You haven't been able to produce any for 10 years. I'll have to repeat again:

Other than the well-documented Babylonian Chronicles, I fail to see how any other evidence could possibly illuminate you on matters you are unwilling to comprehend. Once more, who are you to dismiss historical evidence simply because it contradicts your unfounded assertions? You're constantly contradicting yourself. I personally find it hilarious, but you're deliberately confusing the public. Why? What's your end game with all this manipulation? Is your group of people in the closed club now questioning your credibility?