I have a relative who was around in 1975, but now thinks that our mother "was just making up" hysteria about 1975.
I know I saw some Kingdom Ministries & other material on the web about 1975. Please p.m./post me a link to it.
Skeeter
Need 1975 Material for Relative
by skeeter1 8 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
zeroday
Try this site and scroll down to the 1975 portion...
http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/part-3-statements-concerning-1918-1925.html
-
DazedAndConfused
The problem I see with the 1975 hype is that the 'society' NEVER outright said anything. Pre-70's the brothers were allowed to basically write their own talks. (even the public, Sunday) I remember the elder in our hall telling my mild and meek mannered father that he had no say from now forward because the socirty was now going to control everything said from the podium.
AFTER 1975 came and went all of a sudden the society seemed to think that they needed to control everything said. I found this odd since at the time the brothers in our hall 'seemed' to be on the up and up. I would have never thought that they would be insincere in their intents.
I remember hours upon hours, as a pre-teen hearing about how we would die. Anything from a cage put around your head with a hungry rat inside to jokes about a sister who was a little heavy in the nether regions. (Funny at the time) She would say that in the end (pun intended) she would be staked out for 'butt steaks' because she was so well endowed.
Humour aside, that was traumatising to a 12 year old.
In the end, you can look up all the info put out by the society, but they were always smart enough to not say things as fact. They just alluded to it and scared the crap out of most people without remorse for their actions.
-
zeroday
but they were always smart enough to not say things as fact
They would use words like "Possibly" "Could happen" "It might be" but you are right then in 1976 came the kicker:
w76 7/15p.441par.15A Solid Basis for Confidence******
15
But it is not advisable for us to set our sights on a certain date, neglecting everyday things we would ordinarily care for as Christians, such as things that we and our families really need. We may be forgetting that, when the "day" comes, it will not change the principle that Christians must at all times take care of all their responsibilities. If anyone has been disappointed through not following this line of thought, he should now concentrate on adjusting his viewpoint, seeing that it was not the word of God that failed or deceived him and brought disappointment, but that his own understanding was based on wrong premises. -
Leolaia
I don't really agree that the Society never said anything outright. They were rather all over the map, making cautious "maybe" statements mixed with much more definite statements. Consider this example:
"This seventh 1,000-year period could well be likened [possibility] to a great sabbath day, pictured by the sabbath day God commanded ancient Israel to keep after working for six days. (Ex. 20:8-10; 2 Pet. 3:8) After six thousand years of toil and bondage to sin, sickness, death and Satan, mankind is due [possibility] to enjoy a rest and is in dire need of a rest. (Heb. 4:1-11) Hence, the fact that we are nearing the end of the first 6,000 years of man's existence is [definite expectation] of great significance [i.e. NOT that it "may be" of significance]. Does God's rest day parallel the time man has been on earth since his creation? Apparently so. [probability] From the most reliable investigations of Bible chronology, harmonizing with many accepted dates of secular history, we find that Adam was created in the autumn of the year 4026 B.C.E. Sometime in that same year Eve could well have been created, directly after which God's rest day commenced. In what year, then, would the first 6,000 years of God's rest day come to an end? The year 1975. This is worthy of notice, particularly in view of the fact that the 'last days began in 1914, and that the physical facts of our day in fulfillment of prophecy mark this as the last generation of this wicked world. So we can expect [definite expectation] the immediate future to be filled with thrilling events for those who rest their faith in God and his promises. It means that within relatively few years we will [definite expectation] witness the fulfillment of the remaining prophecies that have to do with the 'time of the end [i.e. NOT that we "may" witness the fulfillment in a few years]' " (Awake!, 10/8/1966, pp. 19-20).
Here is an especially dogmatic statement:
"True, there have been those in times past who predicted an 'end to the world,' even announcing a specific date. Some have gathered groups of people with them and fled to the hills or withdrawn into their houses waiting for the end. Yet, nothing happened. The 'end' did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing? Missing was the full measure of evidence required in fulfillment of Bible prophecy. Missing from such people were God's truths and the evidence that he was guiding and using them. But what about today? Today we have the evidence required, all of it [italics theirs]. And it is overwhelming! All the many, many parts of the great sign of the 'last days' are here, together with verifying Bible chronology....Would you still doubt if someone told you that winter was coming very soon? Would you say he was just guessing or merely expressing his own idea? Or would you acknowledge, on the basis of solid evidence, that he knew the facts and was telling you the truth? .... We today have all [italics theirs] the many parts of that sign, nearly forty of them, being fulfilled within the same generation, and we have God's timetable, his 'calendar,' showing that the time has nearly run out for the present unrighteous system of things. This is very different indeed from the situation with whose who proclaimed an 'end to the world' in earlier generations" (Awake!, 10/8/1968, pp. 23-24).
Another statement (and this one is in the WT Library CD-ROM):
"But for God-fearing students of the Holy Bible containing both the ancient Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Greek Scriptures, there is a more important millennium that compels their attention. That is the seventh millennium! No, not the seventh millennium measured from A.D. 1, but the seventh millennium of man’s existence here on earth, the seventh millennium measured from God’s creation of perfect man and woman in the garden of Eden. This is usually measured according to the Anno Mundi rule or "In the Year of the World" calendar, the world of mankind being here meant. Does this fact have any bearing on the approach of the peace of a thousand years or of a millennium? Very apparently Yes! [definite expectation]... In order for the Lord Jesus Christ to be "Lord even of the sabbath day," his thousand-year reign would have to be [definite statement] the seventh in a series of thousand-year periods or millenniums. (Matt. 12:8, AV) Thus it would be a sabbatic reign. Since early in the existence of mankind Satan the Devil has been on the loose, making the human family to toil in hard bondage, causing the earth to be filled with violence before the global flood of Noah’s day and inducing the same old earth to be filled with even greater violence today. Soon now six millenniums of his wicked exploiting of mankind as his slaves will end, within the lifetime of the generation that has witnessed world events since the close of the Gentile Times in 1914 till now, according to the prophetic words of Jesus in Matthew 24:34. Would not, then, the end of six millenniums of mankind’s laborious enslavement under Satan the Devil be the fitting time for Jehovah God to usher in a Sabbath millennium for all his human creatures? Yes, indeed! [definite expectation] And his King Jesus Christ will be [definite statement, see above] Lord of that Sabbath.... In like manner Christ’s sabbatic reign for a thousand years will be a peaceful time for this earth and its inhabitants. It will be [definite statement] a time of rest from all the warfare and violence of the previous six millenniums [i.e. the 6,000 years of man's existence before the millennium]" (Watchtower, 10/15/1969, pp. 622-623).
Another definite statement:
"If you are a young person, you also need to face the fact [definite statement] that you will never grow old [definite expectation] in this present system of things. Why not? Because all the evidence in fulfillment of Bible prophecy indicates that this corrupt system is due to end in a few years.... Therefore, as a young person, you will never fulfill any career [definite expectation] that this system offers. If you are in high school and thinking about a college education, it means at least four, perhaps even six or eight more years to graduate into a specialized career. But where will this system of things be by that time? It will [definite expectation] be well on the way toward its finish, if not actually gone!" (Awake!, 5/22/1969, p. 15).
The most definite statements were made in 1968-1969. Then in the years immediately preceding 1975 they became a bit more cautious in printed literature (just as Russell did immediately before 1914, and as Rutherford did when 1925 came), though what was being said verbally in talks and conventions was another matter.
-
Quotes
When defending the 1975 mess, WTS always, and I mean *ALWAYS* quotes those one or two cautionary sentences in the WT mag. In fact, the quote they now focus on was virtually buried in page-after-page of 'near certainty' and 'highly appropriate' and 'part of gods wonderful plan' quotes that filled many articles and even public talks at assemblies. It is being totally disingenuous for WTS to only "remember" those few-and-far-between cautionary notes.
They entire book "Life Everlasting In Freedom of the Sons of God" dealt with 1975 more than anything else. What's that? Never heard of that book? Yeah, that's because the WTS has virtually expurgated its existence from their history. They are hoping that everyone forgets that it ever existed.
Furthermore, there is a big flaw in the "it was only some brothers and some congregations, it wasn't the Society's teaching or fault" argument. The flaw is: don't all JWs speak with "one language"? Don't they all preach and teach the same thing? If that is the case, how could "a few brothers, at some places, on their own" cause this mistaken 1975-ism?
Furthermore, the large drop in JW adherents post-1975 demonstrates that their was a wide disappointment and falling away. This was not a minor blip at just a couple of congregations, despite what WTS would like to have you believe. The expectation was source from the WTS hierarchy, and the blame for the resulting disappointment belongs there as well.
~Q -
cabasilas
A couple of scanned documents that may be of help:
The 1966 Awake! article that Leolaia referred to:
http://web.archive.org/web/20060311142422/http://www.reexamine.org/images/1966-Awake-10-8-p17-20.pdf
The October 8 1968 Awake! that contains similar statements about 1975:
http://tjliberte.free.fr/Library/Watchtower_Publications/Other_books/1968_Awake_October_8.pdf
The 74 KM that applauds those who have sold their homes in order to pioneer in the short remaining time can be downloaded from this filesharing site:
http://www.filesend.net/download.php?f=e2bb6433d5349ff1f91be019fbba3b56
-
Atlantis
1980 Yearbook-pp. 30-31 "The brothers also appreciate the candor of this same talk, which acknowledged the Society's responsibility for some of the disappointment a number felt regarding 1975."
-
cabasilas
And here some background information written by Ray Franz on 1975:
http://web.archive.org/web/20031209184316/http://users.volja.net/izobcenec4/coc/9.pdf