No comment about the graphs?
WT 5/1/06 -Backing Away from 1914? - NO
by TheListener 33 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
serendipity
Supposedly there were a few men on the GB who didn't believe that 1914 was THE date. Perhaps that contributed to the decline in the references.
-
TheListener
Regarding the graphs,
I find it interesting that the society was mentioning 1914 and 607 less and less prior to making the generation change in 1995. I posit that they knew they were going to change it and spent from 1988+/- until 1995 to soften everyone up.
It would be interesting to do some research on WT study articles from 1988 to 1995 prior to "the" study articles about the generation change.
Also, perhaps research on what other main topics they discuss and whether or not those issues are being mentioned more or less. It might give us some heads up about the new light that may be coming out.
-
TheListener
Leo, how did you figure out the usage for your charts?
Did you look at the indexes and review each hit for your specified search?
Did you look at the actual reference to make sure it wasn't just page 607 or 607 persons or something other than a 607B.C.E. discussion?
I am trying to do something similar for 1935 and 144,000 but am having a hard time.
-
blondie
I did notice a big surge in 2004 of 52 mentions after only 14 in 2003.
-
Leolaia
The Listener....I did what was quickest and tallied the total number for each year...a more fine-grained analysis would of course weed out the few examples you mention, but it would have taken me hours to do this (after all, there were hundreds of cases to go through) and I just wanted a quick view to see if there was a clear trend...
-
silentWatcher
If there is no 1919, you can see where this leads.
------------------------------------------------------------
yeah, no 7 trumpet blasts of Revelation, starting with the District convention in Akron, OH in 1922. LOL.
incentially, the 7 trumpet blasts of revelation can be re-created with vivid realism by eating a jeh-hoggie, a stale cheese danish, and a warm shasta soda.
-silent -
silentWatcher
about the graphs, (which are great work btw),
It sounds like they want to get away from 607 and have been trying for years. It's like Russell, the crazy uncle they keep locked away in the basement. How many times do you hear Russell ever mentioned? I learned more about Russell, the founder of my former relgion from APOSTATES than I ever did from the platform at the KH.
2014 is gonna be a biggie, on par with 2000 in many JW minds. There was a spat of "weird" articles in the late 90's, like "Let the Reader Use Discernment", that basically pushed a lot of things back. -
purplesofa
fact the "enemies" that Christ is more concerened with are Sin, and the "Last Enemy" death.
i agree moggy lover
-
aniron
Jehovah has committed the ministry of reconciliation to the anointed, so Paul could say: "We are therefore ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making entreaty through us.
I was thinking if the Apostle Paul back then said "WE are therefore ambassadors ...." speaking to his fellow Christians. How can anyone back then be an ambassador for a kingdom that was not going to be set up till 1914? Surely you can only be an ambassador for a kingdom that actually exists?