THE SUPPOSITION THAT HARVEST ENDED IN 1914 WAS A MISTAKE
The Pastor next proceeds to show another mistake, that he desired to correct, and it will be seen that if his conclusions are correct, and had been heeded, very much of the confusion and erroneous teaching that has existed since in the Church would have been avoided. It will be seen as we quote his words that it was his thought:
(1) That the Harvest did not end in 1914; neither had it ended when he wrote, in September, 1916.
(2) Nor was there any Scripture that gave any date ahead of that time that would indicate the end of the Harvest.
(3) In other words, that the idea of the forty-year time feature of the Harvest period was wholly an inference, and was discarded by him. We quote his words to this effect:
“We imagined that the harvest work of gathering the Church would be accomplished before the end of the Gentiles Times [1914 A.D.]; but nothing in the Bible so said. Our thought was purely an inference, and now we see that it was an unjustified one. This Harvest work belongs to the New Dispensation [beginning in 1874] and cannot be identified with the Old. Anyway, the harvesting of the Jewish Age, gathering 'Israelite's indeed' into the Gospel Church, did not close with A. D. 70, but progressed in various parts of the world thereafter. Quite a good many Jews, doubtless, profiting by their experience, were all the better prepared to be gathered into the Gospel Garner AFTER the destruction of their national polity. Similarly, we may expect that quite a good many will yet [since. September, 1916] be gathered to the Heavenly Garner, and we know of no time limit here.” (R 5950 col. 2 par. 14)
Still further bearing on this matter, as showing that it was his thought at the time he wrote (September, 1916) that the forty years supposed by inference to be a type, applying to the nominal Christian system, might possibly meet its fulfillment in 1918, in the utter destruction of them, he next proceeds to say:
"Incidentally we remark that some historians put the end of the Jewish time of trouble as April A. D. 73, which would correspond to April, 1918."
As the end of the time of trouble on the nominal Jewish systems did not occur then, and the end of such a time of trouble would of course mean their destruction, is it not reasonable and Scriptural to say that the antitype, so far as it related to the forty-year time feature, has failed both as applying to the nominal and true Church?
Would he not have understood it this way had he lived until April, 1918?
Would it not also prove that the Gentile date of 1914 must be considered as having no direct bearing upon the change of the Church, but to Gentile authority only?
And still further we ask, would it not be much the wiser and the more Scriptural course of the Church to be looking to the fulfillment of events yet to come to pass, rather than to dates? Let him that reads understand!
In closing we quote Pastor Russell’s words concluding the same article:
"Are we regretful that the Harvest work continues?
Nay, verily; we rejoice and have the pleasure each day of showing forth the praises of Him who hath called us out of darkness into His most marvelous light; and we delight in seeing how others are being benefited and made to rejoice.
Are we regretful of the experiences we have had in coming to this present point? Do we feel like repining that the Lord did not force upon us more careful attention to the parallelism?
Nay, verily; The Lord's leadings have been good. Perhaps, indeed, we got benefit from the thought that the Harvest work would soon be ended. Perhaps it led us to deeper consecration and greater activity in the service of the Lord, in ourselves and for others. We therefore have nothing to regret. "'Who led us first, will lead us still; calmly we sink into His will.'
Now understand that as much as we may honor and respect the Pastor as the Lord’s chosen vessel, “The Faithful and Wise Servant” chosen to deliver “meat in due season” to the household of faith, nevertheless our faith is not reliant solely upon his testimony along on this subject, but rather upon the Lord’s own words on the matter, for was it not he who when explaining the work of the harvest (Matt 13) clearly stated that the harvest would consist of (1) the gathering of the tares, i.e. the binding and bundling of the nominally professing church into its various, sects, creeds, and denominations, this in preparation for (2) their burning, and (3) that meanwhile the wheat should be gathered into the barn (or fully consecrated condition). Now we ask has all this work which the Lord himself designated as the harvest taken place. Has all the wheat been garnered, have the tares, not as individuals, but as systems of error been burned, destroyed? If not then we must conclude that the harvest is not yet completed.
(The Herald of Christ's Kingdom Vol 4 April 1, 1921 No. 7)
Understand that we bare no ill will toward any who differ with us on this subject; they like ourselves are entitled to their own opinion, however as the Pastor pointed out in Q150 “We must not allow our expectations (our own personal views and expectations) to weigh anything against the facts,’ The fact that the Harvest work is still going grandly on.
The Pastor next proceeds to show another mistake, that he desired to correct, and it will be seen that if his conclusions are correct, and had been heeded, very much of the confusion and erroneous teaching that has existed since in the Church would have been avoided. It will be seen as we quote his words that it was his thought:
(1) That the Harvest did not end in 1914; neither had it ended when he wrote, in September, 1916.
(2) Nor was there any Scripture that gave any date ahead of that time that would indicate the end of the Harvest.
(3) In other words, that the idea of the forty-year time feature of the Harvest period was wholly an inference, and was discarded by him. We quote his words to this effect:
“We imagined that the harvest work of gathering the Church would be accomplished before the end of the Gentiles Times [1914 A.D.]; but nothing in the Bible so said. Our thought was purely an inference, and now we see that it was an unjustified one. This Harvest work belongs to the New Dispensation [beginning in 1874] and cannot be identified with the Old. Anyway, the harvesting of the Jewish Age, gathering 'Israelite's indeed' into the Gospel Church, did not close with A. D. 70, but progressed in various parts of the world thereafter. Quite a good many Jews, doubtless, profiting by their experience, were all the better prepared to be gathered into the Gospel Garner AFTER the destruction of their national polity. Similarly, we may expect that quite a good many will yet [since. September, 1916] be gathered to the Heavenly Garner, and we know of no time limit here.” (R 5950 col. 2 par. 14)
Still further bearing on this matter, as showing that it was his thought at the time he wrote (September, 1916) that the forty years supposed by inference to be a type, applying to the nominal Christian system, might possibly meet its fulfillment in 1918, in the utter destruction of them, he next proceeds to say:
"Incidentally we remark that some historians put the end of the Jewish time of trouble as April A. D. 73, which would correspond to April, 1918."
As the end of the time of trouble on the nominal Jewish systems did not occur then, and the end of such a time of trouble would of course mean their destruction, is it not reasonable and Scriptural to say that the antitype, so far as it related to the forty-year time feature, has failed both as applying to the nominal and true Church?
Would he not have understood it this way had he lived until April, 1918?
Would it not also prove that the Gentile date of 1914 must be considered as having no direct bearing upon the change of the Church, but to Gentile authority only?
And still further we ask, would it not be much the wiser and the more Scriptural course of the Church to be looking to the fulfillment of events yet to come to pass, rather than to dates? Let him that reads understand!
In closing we quote Pastor Russell’s words concluding the same article:
"Are we regretful that the Harvest work continues?
Nay, verily; we rejoice and have the pleasure each day of showing forth the praises of Him who hath called us out of darkness into His most marvelous light; and we delight in seeing how others are being benefited and made to rejoice.
Are we regretful of the experiences we have had in coming to this present point? Do we feel like repining that the Lord did not force upon us more careful attention to the parallelism?
Nay, verily; The Lord's leadings have been good. Perhaps, indeed, we got benefit from the thought that the Harvest work would soon be ended. Perhaps it led us to deeper consecration and greater activity in the service of the Lord, in ourselves and for others. We therefore have nothing to regret. "'Who led us first, will lead us still; calmly we sink into His will.'
Now understand that as much as we may honor and respect the Pastor as the Lord’s chosen vessel, “The Faithful and Wise Servant” chosen to deliver “meat in due season” to the household of faith, nevertheless our faith is not reliant solely upon his testimony along on this subject, but rather upon the Lord’s own words on the matter, for was it not he who when explaining the work of the harvest (Matt 13) clearly stated that the harvest would consist of (1) the gathering of the tares, i.e. the binding and bundling of the nominally professing church into its various, sects, creeds, and denominations, this in preparation for (2) their burning, and (3) that meanwhile the wheat should be gathered into the barn (or fully consecrated condition). Now we ask has all this work which the Lord himself designated as the harvest taken place. Has all the wheat been garnered, have the tares, not as individuals, but as systems of error been burned, destroyed? If not then we must conclude that the harvest is not yet completed.
(The Herald of Christ's Kingdom Vol 4 April 1, 1921 No. 7)
Understand that we bare no ill will toward any who differ with us on this subject; they like ourselves are entitled to their own opinion, however as the Pastor pointed out in Q150 “We must not allow our expectations (our own personal views and expectations) to weigh anything against the facts,’ The fact that the Harvest work is still going grandly on.
