Is 1914 still relevant in WT/JW Theology? (page 2)

Gayle

I suppose "2014" won't set off any bells in the minds for the most,,they'll just celebrate their Grand Centennial without a thought.

Refriedtruth

I was at the 1979 centennial of 100 years of the Watchtower and they had special commemorative WT issues and talk.

I betcha same daring showpiece on 100 years of Jesus 'invisible' enthronement with special commemorative WT.

To lurkers and whom it may interest the 1914 date is a carry over of William Millers Adventist 1844 'great disappointment' end times with the same illustrated prophecies of Daniel and the JW twist is Charles T Russel added pyramidology into the mix.

My old time JW grandfather talked about the pyramids often so there are eyewitness to all the WT bunk.

Refriedtruth

My elder and longtime presiding overseer pioneer JW grandfather BELIVED right up until he died in 1993 that the great pyramid was Jehovah's stone witness,He STILL BELIEVED it and would not let me 'refute' the old light.

( The measurements come from 'scratches' of increment markings in the grand hall of the great pyramid.The National Geographic just did a contemporary archaeological revision of the case and it turns out the 'increment marks' are simply tool marks from lifting and hoisting apparatus.)

Talk about total quackery that started the Watchtower religion.

Doubting Bro

So I started looking at the Revelation book to see if I could unwind some of the 1914/1919 teachings and push the dates forward. After losing my lunch and bashing my head against a wall for ever believing this crap, I have to say I agree that it's still relevant.

What a mess that Revelation book is! They take the same scripture and apply it to 1) early Christians, 2) "apostate" Christanity (only the bad stuff) and 3) post 1919 JWs (only the good stuff).

Their interpretations don't make any sense and aren't consistant so to come up with an alternative while staying in the same general framework is hard because you can't apply any logic to it!

I agree with the others that say it really doesn't matter if they change 1914 or not. They've bought themselves another 30 years or so with the insane generation definition. Let the next GB deal with it.

Phizzy

They cannot ditch 1914, because 1919 hangs upon it, without that, there was no "choosing of the FDS" by Jesus, and they have no right to speak as "God's channel or spokesman".

I see a definite lack of mention of 1914 in recent years, if it is ever spoken of , it is simply taken as a"given" , no proof for its importance in Bible prophecy is offered.

I reckon they will continue to promote 1919 until that simply becomes a "given", and 1914 will go the way of 1874 and 1799 or whatever the crazy years were.

I think in the distant future the best thing they could do is return to the idea of an unbroken line between the GB of the day, back to the Apostles, not credible of course, but nothing they present is, and they have gone back and forth with doctrine many times, (flip-flops).

The beauty of a kind of Apostolic Succession is that it is difficult to disprove, they will claim that because of the power of the Apostate Church lots of the links had to go underground, or be burned at the stake or whatever.

Once the 1914/19 thing is forgotten, the line of authority back to the Apostles will give them another 100 years !

Let's hope the Internet does for them long before that !

blondie

607 to 1914 (2520 days--years) is still being used to determine when Christ began reigning over the earth in the midst of his enemies. While 1919 depended on 1914, 1914 does not depend on 1919. I can see why they eliminated the connection between 1914 and 1919 and removed the beginning of the FDS/GB to a future date. They could never explain who the anointed were between 100 and 1879 or who the FDS/GB were. They did the same thing with humans being in a judgment day between 1914 and the start of the GT. People who died then were considered going straight to Gehenna. Now they teach that the judgment does not begin until after the GT starts ergo people who died prior are now considered worthy of a resurrection.

undercover

Saw a thread earlier that asked if the average JW could explain WT doctrine. It's a relevant quetion because to many of us, we've noticed that as time goes by, less and less of them can explain the "deeper things" of the WT religion, or even the basic teachings.

If this is the case, and I think it is, then 1914, or 1919, or any other convoluted teaching for that matter, means very little. They're just ancient dates and teachings that are too hard to fathom. For the average JW, including the smart ones, it's so difficult to grasp and reason it out that they end up thinking that they're the one with the comprehension problem, so they just accept what's written in the publications.

Black Sheep

It's funny how so many ex-JWs 'see' 1914 being dumped, when all they have to do is search the latest ragazines to find it being used.

The February 2013 study edition promotes it.

Phizzy

Sorry Black, I really must get my vomit bucket handy and have a look at that WT, or ......maybe not, I just made myself a wonderful gourmet dinner, shame to lose it Ibet they do not spell out how they work the thing out though, do they ? just a "given", even if one they still wish to promote, for a while.

I give 'em weeks till they begin to let it fade away.

No real mention of 1914 in 2013, even less in 2014 !

I forsee a sort of jokey , but sobering reference in 2014, that lets the R&F know that if they show the slightest lack of faith, they will get their sorry arse burned.

Finkelstein

Since the WTS. was ballsy enough to change the meaning/interpretation from generation to generation(s),

1914 will stay as is until it becomes ardently useless or worthy to keep any more.

If one were to evaluate this dating system to its validity, it would prove itself false but it was a marketing scheme nevertheless

which the WTS used and exploited for over a century . They have stopped mentioning it as much as they have in the past,

not surprising.

The problem for the WTS. now is how to handle the organization's past doctrines that have pretty much run their course.

More or less the inherent initiative by the WTS. now is to create lies to support what they have proclaimed to be " The Truth ".

If one were to point out their lies, they will simply close the door on you, they do not like people messing with their marketing strategy.

Take it or leave it, this is how religion works .

Is 1914 still relevant in WT/JW Theology?

Share this