What are the differences between Dispensationalism and Russellism?

queenknitter · #1 (**permalink**) 05-23-2008, 08:09 AM

This is the first thread I've started here. I think I've got my signature right and all.

Three of my grandparents were followers of Charles Taze Russell (proto-JWs). I was doing some research into that cult, and I was stunned when I found Russell's chart on the "times."

Now. Help me out here. Are there ANY differences between Russell's chart and any of the myriad ones I saw enlarged and plastered on dispie church hallways as I was growing up (pick one)? I do understand that Russell was an Arian and did not believe in Christ's deity, and that's crucial. But in trying to understand my grandparents attraction to this cult, I was a little dismayed that it might have been the same attraction the rest of my family has had toward dispensationalism.

Thanks.

turmeric · #2 (**permalink**) 05-23-2008, 08:53 AM

Don't know, haven't checked. I think that Russell and William Miller and others were proto-dispensational in their eschatology, though they had other peculiarities. Those two were a product of the "burned-over district" phenomenon in the mid-19th Century, as was Joseph Smith.

queenknitter · #3 (**permalink**) 05-24-2008, 09:13 AM

Ah yes. I'm familiar with Miller and his Great Disappointment. And all the -isms that came out of the Burned-Over District. I hadn't directly connected Miller with Russell, but that makes sense, so thanks!

R. Laurence Moore also connects JWs, 7th-Day Adventists (Millerite descendents), and Pentecostals, but fundies get their own chapter. He says:

Quote:

many strongly premillenial or millenarian religious groups attracted people whose relatively deprived economic circumstances might otherwise have turned them into natural antagonists of status quo social systems.

This does explain my grandparents' attraction -- poor, struggling, first-generation immigrants. But instead of becoming Marxists, they make their struggle religious and join the exact opposite of their status quo (Roman Catholicism) and become Russellites. I know that they really just wanted to stick it to Rome.

I think Moore is the historian who also describes millenialism as a poor-man's seeking to control history. Control, control, control -- it's all about control. I can see that in the works-righteousness that the JWs feature. They get "points" not for converting the masses, but for arguing with them.

And uh . . . that eerily sounds like dispensational fundamentalism too.

Anyway, just trying to pull some more foolish skeletons out of my closet, I guess.

C

turmeric · #4 (**permalink**) 05-24-2008, 09:33 AM

Millenialism can turn politically radical a la Koresh. There were famous radical millennialist movements in the late middle ages.

queenknitter · #5 (**permalink**) 05-24-2008, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by turmeric

Millenialism can turn politically radical a la Koresh.

Yup. Makes total sense. . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by turmeric

There were famous radical millennialist movements in the late middle ages.

Go on. . . . My religious history training begins with Plymouth Rock. I don't know much before that. . . .

C

Stephen · #6 (**permalink**) 05-24-2008, 10:19 AM

If I recall, Russell was influenced by Miller. Many of the cults started about the same period of time. David Reed, who is a fairly new member of the Puritan Board, is a former JW and is well versed in eschatology and the teachings of the JWs. He is a good person to ask about this issue. He has not posted for a few weeks, but you could certainly email him. I find him to be a great resource on JW's and he has written alot of material on this subject. You can click on the member list and scroll down to the "D's" and click on "David Reed."

turmeric · #7 (**permalink**) 05-24-2008, 11:06 AM

Mediaeval Millenniarianism

I chose a Roman Catholic site because the RCC was a big player in the events, however I'm not recommending swimming in the Tiber!

Gomarus · #8 (**permalink**) 08-20-2008, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by queenknitter

. . . Now. Help me out here. Are there ANY differences between Russell's chart and any of the myriad ones I saw enlarged and plastered on dispie church hallways as I was growing up (pick one)? I do understand that Russell was an Arian and did not believe in Christ's deity, and that's crucial. But in trying to understand my grandparents attraction to this cult, I was a little dismayed that it might have been the same attraction the rest of my family has had toward dispensationalism.

IMHO, the attraction is prophecy and using current events to predict the second coming. This is found in both. Apart from insignificant and incidental overlap, the two theological systems are substantially different. The charts are not the same either.