The 7th creative day and the 1000 yr. reign--isn't the BORG still on the hook with 1975?

by Alpaca 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Alpaca
    Alpaca

    The BORG has simultaneously used several lines of reasoning in conjunction with one another to argue that we are "in the last days" period of time. The sequence of events is supposed to be: "the last days," Armageddon, and then immediately Christ's millenial reign (1000 years).

    As I recall one of the pieces of evidence the BORG used to bolster the argument for Armageddon coming in 1975 was that the period of the 7 creative days was supposed to end up spanning 49,000 years.

    According to the "Paradise" book and other 50s and 60s publications the 7 creative days started after the earth had been here for a very long time. Each of the 7 creative days was supposed to be 7,000 years long.

    God created Adam & Eve at the very end of the 6th creative day. But, Adam was created first and there was some time that went by, during which Adam was naming the animals, before Eve was created (this was a fact that the BORG seized on after 1975 failed). The seventh creative day began immediately after humans were created.

    According to the BORG 1975 marked the 6,000 year anniversary of Adam's creation. And, that was what fed the 1975 Armageddon frenzy, because the 6,000 years + the 1,000 year reign was supposed be the full time period of the 7th creative day.

    When 1975 began receding into the past, they offered the reasoning that because of the unknown period of years between Adam's creation and Eve's creation that same length of unknown time would have to added to 1975 before "the end" and Armageddon would arrive.

    That bought the BORG some time, but with all of the other "adjustments in thinking" that have taken place in the last 10 or 15 years, even the doctrines surrounding the seven creative days, that used be part of the core of the "last days" argument, are crumbling.

    In addition to the generation of 1914 idea getting shitcanned, the period of time Adam needed to name enough animal speces that would later fit into the Ark, is now becoming ridiculously long as well...it's nearly 35 years. Almost the length of time Noah spent building the Ark and getting all of the animals on board.

    My point with all of this is that even if they find some new numerology to create another date for the end, they are still going to have to deal with this aspect of the argument.

    Any thoughts or observations?

  • sir82
    sir82

    It's another one of those things that they just don't talk about any more, in hopes that the issue just kind of goes away.

    Other such issues, for example, are:

    -- Evolution (they'll talk about a Creator and set up a false dilemma with "did these wonderful things arise by blind chance?", but they have not made any attempt to seriously debunk evolution for 20+ years)

    -- Child abuse ('nuff said)

    -- Failed prophecy (1925, 1975, "the generation of 1914", etc.)

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    Yes, I agree that they are still "on the hook" with 1975. They are also still "on the hook" with one of the fundemantal justifications of 1975 and 1925 - Fred "the Oracle" Franz's calculation (probably plagarized) of the Israelite Jubilee year celebration. That's why there are precisely 50 years between the 1925 date and the next JW date of choice, 1975.

  • dismayed
    dismayed

    Thats the cool thing about running your own cult...you can just make up the rules as you go! You don't have to explain your past failures because you are God's spokesman. You might lose a few people along the way, but you just pick up new recruits and keep on truckin'

  • Alpaca
    Alpaca

    BTW, dismayed...just in case I didn't welcome you on board...

    Welcome on board!!!!

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    The later references to the Creative days are much more vague

    g02 6/8 p10

    "According to Bible usage, a day is a measured period of time and can be a thousand years or many thousands of years. The Bible’s creative days allow for thousands of years of time each"

    g9/06 p19

    "How long, then, were the creative days? The wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved."

    No more info on that page .

    Of course if you remove the 7000 year day then the whole point of 6000 years of mans existence is lost. Still, it was 34 years ago and most dubs have forgiven and forgotten by now

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    La La La.. "1975 never Happened!!" ..La La La

    Laughing Mutley...OUTLAW

  • Alpaca
    Alpaca

    Blues Brother,

    Thanks. I have been out for nearly 12 years and I don't keep up with the "noo light" as it gets brighter.

    So, it sounds as though they have shitcanned that line of reasoning as well.

    I guess the nebulous length of the creative days also clears up all of those pesky problems with the evidence that life has been on Earth for billions of years.

    It seems like they are running out options.

    A poster on another thread ("easyreader") made a very good comment that a cult without a date cannot survive. So, if a new date for the end is not in the works, the BORG is probably going to shrivel up and die.

    One can only hope.

  • undercover
    undercover

    From the Watchtower's website, under the article: Does Science Contradict the Genesis Account (select paragraphs)

    http://watchtower.org/e/200609a/article_01.htm

    When Was “the Beginning”?

    The Genesis account opens with the simple, powerful statement: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) Bible scholars agree that this verse describes an action separate from the creative days recounted from verse 3 onward. The implication is profound. According to the Bible’s opening statement, the universe, including our planet Earth, was in existence for an indefinite time before the creative days began.

    Geologists estimate that the earth is approximately 4 billion years old, and astronomers calculate that the universe may be as much as 15 billion years old. Do these findings—or their potential future refinements—contradict Genesis 1:1? No. The Bible does not specify the actual age of “the heavens and the earth.” Science does not disprove the Biblical text.

    How Long Were the Creative Days?

    What about the length of the creative days? Were they literally 24 hours long? Some claim that because Moses—the writer of Genesis—later referred to the day that followed the six creative days as a model for the weekly Sabbath, each of the creative days must be literally 24 hours long. (Exodus 20:11) Does the wording of Genesis support this conclusion?

    No, it does not. The fact is that the Hebrew word translated “day” can mean various lengths of time, not just a 24-hour period. For example, when summarizing God’s creative work, Moses refers to all six creative days as one day. (Genesis 2:4) In addition, on the first creative day, “God began calling the light Day, but the darkness he called Night.” (Genesis 1:5) Here, only a portion of a 24-hour period is defined by the term “day.” Certainly, there is no basis in Scripture for arbitrarily stating that each creative day was 24 hours long.

    How long, then, were the creative days? The wording of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 indicates that considerable lengths of time were involved.

    Creations Appear Gradually

    Moses wrote his account in Hebrew, and he wrote it from the perspective of a person standing on the surface of the earth. These two facts, combined with the knowledge that the universe existed before the beginning of the creative periods, or “days,” help to defuse much of the controversy surrounding the creation account. How so?

    A careful consideration of the Genesis account reveals that events starting during one “day” continued into one or more of the following days. For example, before the first creative “day” started, light from the already existing sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth’s surface, possibly by thick clouds. (Job 38:9) During the first “day,” this barrier began to clear, allowing diffused light to penetrate the atmosphere.*

    On the second “day,” the atmosphere evidently continued to clear, creating a space between the thick clouds above and the ocean below. On the fourth “day,” the atmosphere had gradually cleared to such an extent that the sun and the moon were made to appear “in the expanse of the heavens.” (Genesis 1:14-16) In other words, from the perspective of a person on earth, the sun and moon began to be discernible. These events happened gradually.

    The Genesis account also relates that as the atmosphere continued to clear, flying creatures—including insects and membrane-winged creatures—started to appear on the fifth “day.” However, the Bible indicates that during the sixth “day,” God was still in the process of “forming from the ground every wild beast of the field and every flying creature of the heavens.”—Genesis 2:19.

    Clearly, the Bible’s language makes room for the possibility of some major events during each “day,” or creative period, to have occurred gradually rather than instantly, perhaps some of them even lasting into the following creative “days.”

    (in the middle of the preceding paragraph is a highlighted box that says, "Genesis does not teach that the universe was created in a short period of time in the relatively recent past")

    According to Their Kinds

    Does this progressive appearance of plants and animals imply that God used evolution to produce the vast diversity of living things? No. The record clearly states that God created all the basic “kinds” of plant and animal life. (Genesis 1:11, 12, 20-25) Were these original “kinds” of plants and animals programmed with the ability to adapt to changing environmental conditions? What defines the boundary of a “kind”? The Bible does not say. However, it does state that living creatures “swarmed forth according to their kinds.” (Genesis 1:21) This statement implies that there is a limit to the amount of variation that can occur within a “kind.” Both the fossil record and modern research support the idea that the fundamental categories of plants and animals have changed little over vast periods of time.

    Contrary to the claims of some Fundamentalists, Genesis does not teach that the universe, including the earth and all living things on it, was created in a short period of time in the relatively recent past. Rather, the description in Genesis of the creation of the universe and the appearance of life on earth harmonizes with many recent scientific discoveries.

  • undercover
    undercover

    Notice this quote near the end of the article:

    Genesis does not teach that the universe, including the earth and all living things on it, was created in a short period of time in the relatively recent past. Rather, the description in Genesis of the creation of the universe and the appearance of life on earth harmonizes with many recent scientific discoveries.

    True, Genesis doesn't teach that...but the Society did. This statement, in print, is in direct contradiction to what the Society taught for decades...namely that man was created some 6,000 years ago.

    This is an example of Watchtwer revisionism at work. I bet they're hoping that by burying that quote near the end of an article, that most brain-dead dubs won't notice it. Let's face it, most JWs can't read more than a couple of paragraphs of any WT publication before their eyes glaze over and they go into a trance.

    This way, the Society can point to this article to outsiders as saying, "see, we're not fundies...we agree with science...and so does the Bible." Meanwhile the rank and file are zombied out and don't realize that a core teaching of their religion has changed under their very noses.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit