One of our forum contributors stumbled across this. I thought it was an interesting insight into our position on the holding of contrary opinions on matters of a speculative or interpretive nature. It would be wonderful if we continued to hold this position, but I fear that is no longer the case.
From the October, 1907 Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence
A DEAR Brother inquires, Can we feel absolutely sure that the Chronology set forth in the DAWN-STUDIES is correct?–that the harvest began in A.D. 1874 and will end in A.D. 1914 in a world-wide trouble which will overthrow all present institutions and be followed by the reign of righteousness of the King of Glory and his Bride, the Church?
We answer, as we have frequently done before in the DAWNS and TOWERS and orally and by letter, that we have never claimed our calculations to be infallibly correct; we have never claimed that they were knowledge, nor based upon indisputable evidence, facts, knowledge; our claim has always been that they are based on faith. We have set forth the evidences as plainly as possible and stated the conclusions of faith we draw from them, and have invited others to accept as much or as little of them as their hearts and heads could endorse. Many have examined these evidences and have accepted them; others equally bright do not endorse them. Those who have been able to accept them by faith seem to have received special blessings, not merely along the line of prophetic harmonies, but along all other lines of grace and truth. We have not condemned those who could not see, but have rejoiced with those whose exercise of faith has brought them special blessings–“Blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear.”
Possibly some who have read the DAWNS have presented our conclusions more strongly than we; but if so that is their own responsibility. We have urged and still urge that the dear children of God read studiously what we have presented;–the Scriptures, the applications and interpretations–and then form their own judgments. We neither urge nor insist upon our views as infallible, nor do we smite or abuse those who disagree; but regard as “Brethren” all sanctified believers in the precious blood.
“we have never claimed that they were knowledge, nor based upon indisputable evidence, facts, knowledge; our claim has always been that they are based on faith. … Possibly some who have read the DAWNS have presented our conclusions more strongly than we; but if so that is their own responsibility. ” ———————————— In my opinion this is a very early example of “previously some have thought …” Even though this isn’t actually a change in doctrine it is a shift in emphasis whereby ‘caveat emptor’ is introduced for those who might have thought that they were reading proofs and evidences.… Read more »
What I find so funny is that the “proof” of 1874 was based on a measurement of the “grand gallery” of the Pyramid taken in inches. Inches!? Besides, hadn’t the ancient Egyptians already switched over to the metric system? We should have been measuring in centimeters. Oh wait, I get it, the Israelites were still on the British Imperial system of measurement, so they coded the measurements in inches so their Egyptian overlords would never catch on to the hidden message. Brilliant! Seriously, when are we going to stop being babes and start taking on the traits of men? Paul’s… Read more »
“Carefully they examined the chronology but it seemed faultless and positively declared that the 6,000 years ended in 1873.” Compare that quote (posted by Apollos above) with the following: *** jv chap. 28 pp. 632-633 Testing and Sifting From Within *** “Later on, during the years from 1935 through 1944, a review of the overall framework of Bible chronology revealed that a poor translation of Acts 13:19, 20 in the King James Version, along with certain other factors, had thrown off the chronology by over a century.*” The footnote goes on to say: “…In the light of these corrected tables of… Read more »
The troubling sentence for me is this: Those who have been able to accept them by faith seem to have received special blessings, not merely along the line of prophetic harmonies, but along all other lines of grace and truth.
Although subtle, it seems to imply that those who do not agree do not receive the “special blessings.”
I hear you. And the irony in retrospect is that those who believed and received these unnamed “special blessings” were ultimately proven to have been wrong in their beliefs. Was Jehovah giving “special” blessings to some because they unknowingly believed what was wrong, while denying such blessings to others who were perceptive enough to recognize man’s error for what it was? Now, if the unaccepting ones were allowing a feeling of disappointment and even disillusionment with those taking the lead to affect their zeal, then Yes, I can see how they could miss out on blessings. However, I don’t think… Read more »