To JWs - Creative Day Request

by Lionel_P_Hartley 17 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Lionel_P_Hartley

  The Society used to state regularly that a creative day (CD) is exactly 7000 years long. Actually, that teaching has never been revoked although recent literature - since about 1988 - always says that a CD is "thousands of years" long.

  Two questions:

  (i) Is any JW here willing to find out if the WTS still believes that a CD is exactly 7000 years long or not? Will you report your findings back? Here I'm thinking in terms of a letter to the WTS asking them to be specific.

  (ii) What would happen if a JW in good standing all of a sudden were to start stating, whenever it came up, say in a talk from the platform, or in an answer, or in conversaition that "a CD is 7000 years long." Would you get into trouble for saying something that the Society still officially teaches but which, for whatever reasons, it no longer mentions?

  Thoughts?

  LPH
• 

  YoYoMama

  *** ce 27 3 What Does Genesis Say? ***
  It would seem reasonable that the “days” of Genesis could likewise have embraced long periods of time—millenniums.

  *** rs 126 Evolution ***
  Thus the ‘days’ of Genesis chapter 1 could reasonably be thousands of years long.

  *** it-1 594 Day ***
  This flexible use of the word “day” to express units of time of varying length is clearly evident in the Genesis account of creation. Therein is set forth a week of six creative days followed by a seventh day of rest. The week assigned for observance by the Jews under the Law covenant given them by God was a miniature copy of that creative week. (Ex 20:8-11) In the Scriptural record the account of each of the six creative days concludes with the statement: “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning” a first, second, third, fourth, fifth, and sixth day. (Ge 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31) The seventh day, however, does not have this ending, indicating that this period, during which God has been resting from his creative works toward the earth, continued on. At Hebrews 4:1-10 the apostle Paul indicated that God’s rest day was still continuing in his generation, and that was more than 4,000 years after that seventh-day rest period began. This makes it evident that each creative day, or work period, was at least thousands of years in length. As A Religious Encyclopaedia (Vol. I, p. 613) observes: “The days of creation were creative days, stages in the process, but not days of twenty-four hours each.”—Edited by P. Schaff, 1894.

  What would happen if a JW in good standing all of a sudden were to start stating, whenever it came up, say in a talk from the platform, or in an answer, or in conversaition that "a CD is 7000 years long." Would you get into trouble for saying something that the Society still officially teaches but which, for whatever reasons, it no longer mentions?

  We shouldn't be dogmatic.
• 

  AlanF

  An interesting request that no JW in his right mind would take up.

  The problem here was well described by George Orwell in Nineteen Eighty-Four. The victim of doublethink has been trained to have the right instincts, to know without actually taking thought, what the right course is. In this case, the Society's ambiguity contains the subtle message, "Don't question us about this". Both the JW rank & file and those who answer the Society's correspondence therefore know perfectly well that any questions along this line must come from people who are either not JWs, or are not fully loyal, braindead JWs, and so are not worth giving a straight answer to. The JW knows that unless his letter is worded very carefully, the only response he'll get is from the elders who received his letter that the Society forwarded on to them, who will not be concerned with answering the question, but with determining the loyalty of the questioner to the Society.

  AlanF
• 

  Lionel_P_Hartley

  YoYO,

  Thanks for the references but you avoided my question. The question remains;

  Does the WTS still teach that a CD is exactly 7000 years long? Yes or no?

  How is it dogmatic to say what the WTS still officially claims in print - that a CD is exactly 7000 years long?

  Alan: perfect quotation. I;m sure even George Orwell would be shocked at the levels to which JWs have taken his words.

  LPH
• 

  YoYoMama

  I did not avoid your question. I referenced what the current stand of the Society is. You come to your own conclusions.

  And why would I attempt to argue with my brothers, whom I love, over such an insignifacnt trivial thing as the length of a creative day?
• 

  Lionel_P_Hartley

  YoYoMama,

  The Society has not retracted it's 7000 teaching explicitly so my question is a legitimate one and you avoided it. I didn't ask how long a CD is, I asked whether the Society still teaches that it is 7000 years long. Your quotes are not inconsistent with it being 7000 years long.

  Also, the length of a CD was not trivial when it was used as the basis for 1975. Many JWs, due to what you call dogmaticism as to the length of a CD - and by the Society - sacrificed careers and much more based on that teaching.

  Let's put it this way, in 1970 if you had undogmatically proclaimed that a CD was an unknown number of thousands of years long, how would you have been treated? As an apostate? As one of little faith who was trying to play with Jesus' words about the last days. You surely would've! You see, you have demonstrated that a JW treats whatever is in the WT magazine as though it were inspired. You dare not disagree, even in minor matters.

  LPH
• 

  YoYoMama

  The Society has not retracted it's 7000 teaching explicitly so my question is a legitimate one and you avoided it. I didn't ask how long a CD is, I asked whether the Society still teaches that it is 7000 years long. Your quotes are not inconsistent with it being 7000 years long.

  I guess they do not still teach that it is 7000 years long. So what?

  in 1970 if you had undogmatically proclaimed that a CD was an unknown number of thousands of years long, how would you have been treated? As an apostate?

  You try to make it sound like you will be disfellowshipped for one single thing that you don't totally agree with the FDS. This is very misleading. You might be disfellowshipped for being stubborn and insistent on your own belief, without proper respect for those taking the lead. You can still have your own ideas and be in good standing in the congregation if you are humble and wait for the changes through the proper channels.
• 

  Lionel_P_Hartley

  Do you think it is honest to change a teaching without saying so?

  Why do so many older JWs still think that a CD is 7000 years long?

  As for "so what" - so it means that the whole notion of the millenium completing the 7th Creative day is up the spout - just like "this generation" and just like will happen with 1914. But, so what, what a trivial little insignificant thing 1914 is. right? Oh yes, juts like blood components, alternative service, what trivia! My God how could anyone have taken those things seriously. So let's discuss important JW doctrines. Like ..... hmmmmm....

  What are the "proper channels" and who defines them - or do you mean the channel that is always wrong? One end of that channel is stuck up the GB's collective arse if one considers all the wise pearls of truth they have issued over the decades in God's name (the sure signature of a false prophet by the way).

  LPH
• 

  Moxy

  doctrine actually does appear to have an unwritten 'expiry date.' if nothing further is published, an older understanding is assumed to be out-of-date, even if it is not explicitly revised. for example, before the new Daniel book, any references to our understanding of the king of the north and south would typically be made with the caveat that the understanding was 'old' and that newer information was in all likelihood forthcoming.

  in my pioneer school in 1994, the CO instructor cautioned us when doing research to always use the latest publications, adding, 'anything within the last, say, 15 years, should be OK.' the implication was that anything over 15 years old was out-of-date, regardless of whether it has been replaced with a newer understanding or not.

  one need not dare practicing JWs to try and make the claims you suggest. one can usually find some curmudgeoned old green-bible-toting brother that *DOES* think 7000-yrs is the current understanding and *DOES* mention it in his comments. most of the audience of course, will have no idea what he's talking about, perhaps marvelling at the incredible 'depth of knowledge' he posesses. the few who do know what he's talking about will roll their eyes at our poor dear faithful brother. he wouldn't normally get a talking-to unless he started trying to convince other people. i would be curious to see someone younger, giving talks and teaching parts that tried to pull this off. im pretty sure the unwritten 'expiry dates' would be brought to bear in this case.

  mox
• 

  normie67

  Hey Guys

  The only person to push the 7000 CDs was Fred Franz with his article in the Watchtower Oct 74??
  As an active JW, that is, I believe, the only reference in Society's Lit. to this specific amount of time.I may be wrong, but ask any average "Joe Pub" in the Truth, and he will say "not sure".

  You may get a few who may still dogmatically say "7000 Years", but its not supported in any Lit. to date...I have done some research on this. I also asked a few about it and got the same response...."not sure".

  Just my 2 cents worth......

  I know this point isn't topic of conversation in the Congs now or in the past 10 yrs...(i.e Generation Change in Mid 90s)

  n67