Another Lie/Revisionist History in todays WT study!!

by BU2B 78 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  DNCall said: the time of trouble being referred to is the great tribulation, not the beginning of the trouble that would mark the "last days."

  "We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble." (Watchtower July 15, 1894, p 266; p 1677)

  I'm glad DNCall pointed this out. The W 2-15-13 article does not present the truth, "technically" or otherwise.

  "There are two important here that we must not confuse, but clearly differentiate, namely, the beginning of "the time of the end" and of "the presence of the Lord". "The time of the end" embraces a period from A.D. 1799, as above indicated....the time of the Lord's presence dates from 1874" -The Harp of God, p. 231

  "Be not surprised, then, when in subsequent chapters we present proofs that the setting up of the Kingdom of God is already begun, that it is pointed out in prophecy as due to begin the exercise of power in A.D. 1878, and that the 'battle of the great day of God Almighty (Rev. 16:14) which will end in A.D. 1914 with the complete overthrow of earth's present rulership, is already commenced. The gathering of the armies is plainly visible from the standpoint of God's word." (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, The Time Is At Hand, 1889 Ed., p. 101. The 1915 Edition of this texts changed "A.D. 1914" to read 'A.D. 1915')

  To follow up on Billy's comment: In Russell's time, they thought they were living in terrible times and the world couldn't possibly survive beyond 1914. So their interpretation of "an unequaled period of trouble" beginning in 1914 would mean the rapture of WT Bible Students and global mass murder among humankind.

  "Our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They say that they do not see how present conditions can hold out so long under the strain."Watchtower 1894 Jul 15 p.227
• 

  SAHS

  “BU2B,” you beat me to it and stole my thunder! That’s okay, mate. I was fairly sure someone was going to beat me to it.

  I actually gave a comment in the Watchtower study this morning on that exact sentence in that very paragraph. My elder dad was doing the reading of the paragraphs, and I was sitting beside my mom. What I said (to the best of my recollection) was: “Originally, before 1914, they believed that 1914 would actually be the end of the time of the end, including Armageddon. They taught that the time of the end actually began in 1874 and that Jesus secured the throne of Kingdom power in 1878, and this was taught up until 1929, but that was clarified in 1932.”

  In hindsight, I think that I might have been a little bit incorrect regarding the organization’s past teaching of 1874 as being the earliest beginning of the time of the end. I was going to mention the 1799 date, which seems to have been the earliest date they taught as being the beginning of the time of the end, but I wasn’t too sure about that one as I kind of ran out of time to research it further before the meeting this morning.

  I was relying on the following specific post dated October 5, 2012 which I came across yesterday:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/239215/4/Please-Help-Wife-want-PROOF-of-Watchtower-Deception

  That particular post quoted a Paul Grundy, author of jwfacts.com, where he apparently quoted, “In 1914, the Watchtower was teaching that Jesus’ presence began in 1874 and his heavenly rulership began in 1878.” Then that post concluded with the following quote:

  “ ‘Our belief that the Kingdom began to be set up, or brought into power, in April, 1878, be it observed, rests on exactly the same foundation as our belief that the Lord became present in Oct. 1874, and that the harvest began at that time.’—Thy Kingdom Come, p. 205.”

  However, when I made my comment in the Watchtower study this morning, I probably should have just said that they taught that the time of the end actually began as far back as 1799 instead of saying it was 1874. It all starts to get rather confusing for anyone! All well, at least I probably got everyone thinking.

  Afterward, when my mom asked me where I got my information from for my comment, I decided to play for my parents the following video I came across on YouTube which very nicely relates to this morning’s Watchtower study:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYnMeCpTxIU

  Of course, my parents will never see the light (the real light, that is), as they spent the better part of their lives as very firm believers of whatever the Governing Body dispenses, whatever that is. (They’re now in their seventies.) All well. What can you do.
• 

  krejames

  Great thread. Have marked this for future reference. I was wondering what everyone would make of that sneaky little phrase in the WT today hehe

  I have to admit since reading "A People For His Name" I have become a bit of an apologist for CT Russell. Clearly a lot of his teachings were completely way off but I kind of get the impression he was a genuine guy, and at least someone I would have liked to have had a long interesting chat with. So I'm just going to come back on the following:

  "Hey Fred Franz could never admit he caused the 1975 fiasco, he learned from the best spinner- C.T.Russell".

  Russell probably was a good spinner, but anyone reading through this thread would probably get the impression that the 1914 prophecy was his only concern and that, if it failed, it would be a showstopper as far as the Bible Students were concerned. That apparently wasn't the case, because in the WT of 10 January 1907, he wrote:

  "Let us suppose a case far from our expectations, suppose that AD 1915 should pass with the world's affairs all serene and with evidence that the 'very elect' had not all been 'changed' and without the restoration of natural Israel to favor under the New Covenant. (Romans 11: 12, 15) What then? Would that not prove our chronology wrong? Yes, surely! And would that not prove a keen disappointment? Indeed it would! It would work irreparable wreck to the parallel dispensations and Israel's double, and to the Jubilee calculations, and the prophecy of the 2,300 days of Daniel, and to the epoch called 'Gentile Times', and to the 1,260, 1,290, and 1,335 days... none of these would be available any longer. What a blow that would be! One of the strings of our harp would be quite broken!

  "However, dear friend, our harp would still have all the other strings in tune and that is what no other aggregation of God's people on earth could boast. We could still worship a God so great and grand that none other could compare with him. we should still see the grandeur of his salvation in Christ Jesus - 'a ransom for all' "

  I would venture to say the 1914 prophecy didn't appear to be so crucial to CT Russell as it is to the JWs today...so crucial in fact that the WT tweaks its history...
• 

  leaving_quietly

  Would this be considered a "balanced consideration" of our spiritual heritage?
• 

  Listener

  Good on you Sahs for making that comment at the Watchtower study, no doubt it went over a many people's heads.
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  SAHS: As I recall from somewhere in the Studies in the Scriptures, the 1799 beginning of the last days was based on Napolean's battles in Egypt. You should probably make a comment next Sunday to correct your error about Russell's error
• 

  jwfacts

  Whilst technically true that the end of the appointed times was 1914, it is a lie that they declared the world would "enter" the period of trouble in that year [1914].

  “…, and the time of trouble, or “day of wrath” which began October 1874 and will end October 1914;… “ The Day of Vengeance p.604

  There is also a timeline that I will load later from the The Time Is at Hand, which shows the time of trouble preceeding 1914.
• 

  jwfacts

  The following is a scan of the quote, but from Millenial Dawn, which was prior to it being called Studies in the Scriptures. It is great, as it also includes a couple of conflicting ideas of what a generation means, the term present truth, and all their 1800's dates. The first sign of 1780 was the "day of darkness", caused by the great fires of New England.

  
• 

  jwfacts

  The Time is At Hand page 219 showing the "time of trouble" ending in 1915.

  
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  Billy The Ex Bethelite said: As I recall from somewhere in the Studies in the Scriptures, the 1799 beginning of the last days was based on Napolean's battles in Egypt

  ------ --------

  1922 "The indisputable facts, therefore, show that the "time of the end" began in 1799; that the Lord's second presence began in 1874." (The Watchtower, March 1, 1922)

  "The overthrow of that dominion in 1798 by the French Revolution marked the beginning of the ‘time of the end’..." Watch Tower, August 1879, p. 24

  "The year 1799 marked the beginning of the ‘time of the end,’ when various events were to occur." Watch Tower, November 1, 1914, p. 5565

  "Twelve hundred and sixty years from 539 A.D. brings us to 1799, which is another proof that 1799 definitely marks the beginning of "the time of the end." this also shows that it is from the date 539 A.D. that the other prophetic days of Daniel must be counted." (Creation; 1927, p. 294)

  The Three Worlds (1877)

  If the 2300 days do not reach to’the end of the indignation, why were they given in answer to the question ? may be asked; and in responce I will ask, if the "time, times," and a-half, of Dan. 12: 7 , do not reach to the end of the wonders, why were they given in answer to that question? And, perhaps we can answer: the "time, times, and a-half," ended in 1798, at the taking away of the papal dominion, and is one of the great landmarks of prophecy.The ending of the 2300 days, something more than thirty years ago, is the great landmark by which the tarrying of the Bridegroom has been made to appear. And the Advent movement, with the message of the opening events of the seventh trumpet, was based on that prophetic period.

  Note this hypocritical statement by the WTS:

  "Some Roman Catholics have claimed that Jesus Christ's thousand Year Reign ended in 1799 when French armies captured Rome and deposed the pope as its ruler, so that he was deported as a prisoner to France, where he died." (Watchtower; Sept. 1, 1989; p. 12

  A classic example of WT pointing the finger at another religion when WT was guilty of doing the same exact thing! Kettle meet pot.