The 1914 generation is still going strong 100 years later - 2014 study article.

by THE GLADIATOR 443 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Finkelstein

  Finkelstein, I do not think JW and GB will abandon 1914 for another decade or two.

  Yes much in agreement with that.

  Its just a shame that so many people had to swallow the fraudulent bullshit from this religious publishing house.

  They got successful wining over people by creating fictitious doctrines which were not true by virtue

  of where and how these doctrines were derived from. They exploited the bible and the belief in the bible to the fullest degree

  but since they did publish their own bible why not develop doctrines that would attract attention to these

  products.

  .

  I keep on saying that the WTS's inherent corruption really stems from the fact that it is a religious

  publishing house and Kingdom Halls are actually (brainwashing) training centers for their own door to door sales

  representatives.
• 

  THE GLADIATOR

  Finkelstein Kingdom Halls are actually (brainwashing) training centers for their own door to door sales representatives.

  This is true. The Watchtower Society's have based their set up on a standard USA cold sales company. After I left Jehovah's Witnesses, many years ago, I had a go at door-to-door sales with a large UK double-glazing company. They had meetings, back-calls, literature placement, and a field-overseer and local team leader. The dress code was strict - a sit and tie at all times. I couldn’t believe how similar the set up was to the Watchtower Society.

  This set up worked when the aim was literature sales. Now they give the stuff away, there is no longer any point it. They may as well the organization from one office. All literature is downloaded from their website. Of 7 million Jehovah's Witnesses donated just $10 a year they would have $70 million a year just to run the office. They could do a deal with a book company to produce a new book each year and deliver to congregations. The Society would get a royalty on sales.
• 

  DATA-DOG

  Fisherman, what meds are you on? I ask that respectfully.

  The term " District Attorney " was NEVER mentioned in any of my comments. I said defense attorney, NOT "District Attorney." Anyone can read my comments and see that. Yet you said , " DD, JC was defense not DA." Uh...yeah, I know... No one but YOU ever mentioned the term "District Attorney", you imagined that term was used in my comment. Then you used your imagined comment as "proof" of your own correctness. Since it was so obvious that it was not used, I had to ask if you were using the abbreviation "DA" for Defense Attorney by mistake, which is why I said, " If by "DA" you mean Defense attorney,..."

  That was the only logical assumption that I could make, since the term "District Attorney" was never used. I assumed in your favor that you actually read what was on the page, therefore you must have just missed the point of the illustration. So we both know that Johnny Cochran was not a DA, but part of O.J's defense and that he was an attorney, or lawyer, which I correctly pointed out in my comment. When we imagine that others say certain things and we run with that story, a meaningful discussion is impossible. That is why it is so hard to talk with an indoctrinated JW. If they are not repeating mantras, they are busy mounting a defense based on what they IMAGINED you said.

  JWs have been trained not to listen, but to project the appearance of listening while planning their next comment at the door. That is one factor that makes conversations so difficult. You can feel that you are taking crazy pills when speaking to a JW, because they twist everything that you say to fit their pre-conceived notions. They really don't even realize that they are doing it. In their own mind they have had an epiphany, and based on what they imagined you said, they precede to enlighten you with "truth." Since it is so obvious to reasoning people that most JWs do not reason before they speak, the GB command JW's to walk away from the doors of any who don't want "the truth." Public discussions, internet blogs, videos, court transcripts, accurate records of what things were really said, these are the GB's worst nightmare. They just wish that JWs would please stop defending the "truth!"

  Perhaps we will see a change in the preaching work soon? I picture a group of JWs up early, before dawn. Their territories are now called "routes." An Elder drives the van, while pioneers throw rolled up WT and Awake tractazines on the porches of their neighbors. This way the life-saving rescue work can continue while ensuring that JWs do not accidentally start defending the "truth."

  DD
• 

  Fisherman

  DD, You don't see.
• 

  TD

  They also would have discerned the sign.

  Interesting word choice, Fisherman. "They also" (?) I think you need to let go of that egocentric viewpoint and see the Olivet discourse primarily in terms of the original audience rather than in terms of self.

  If you seem to be saying that wts teaching is what establishes the "sign of christ's presence" then you do not see it, sir.

  That' not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that prophetic parallels vis-à-vis possible secondary fulfillments are derived primarily from the first fulfillment. How could it be otherwise?

  It is the other way around. JWS say that It is the sign that formualtes the parallel with the passage of time and events.

  What you're describing here is a hermeneutical fallacy called the, "Invisible interpreter." This happens when a third party to the dialogue, such as you or myself inserts themself invisibly into the conversation and treats it as if it were spoken directly to and about us and the times in which we live. Biblical interpreters for thousands of years have sincerely believed that they were the one special group who would witness the final fulfillment of Jesus' words. And there have been times in human history, such as the 14th century when they were certainly much closer in terms of calamitous events to what Jesus described and the perceived 'parallel' was arguably stronger.

  It's conceivable that JW's could reach that state of mental disarray, but this was not their interpretational method for the majority of the 20th century as anyone familiar with the writings of the late Frederick Franz is aware.
• 

  Finkelstein

  The WTS. proclamation that it had been chosen by god as his earthly mediator for all mankind falls apart quite

  quickly once the history of this organization is closely examined .

  The year 1914 is just but one of these failed elements of proof and confirmation resting on the WTS..

  .

  People can say things all they want but the its their actual works that reveals their viability toward supporting

  themselves from these proclamations. You can actually use the bible to back that up if you wish.

  In some ways over time the WTS will end up becoming a commercial failer from what started to be a growing

  success story one hundred years ago.

  I kind of feel sorry for JWS now and into the foreseeable future, for they are really going to grow

  even more anxious awaiting all that was promised.

  Maybe the WTS should have been a little more honest and truthful proliferating its literature

  toward the public.
• 

  DATA-DOG

  Everyone reading your comments can see just fine. My patience just ran out quicker than other's.

  The teaching of the GB regarding the generation of 1914 was a false prophecy. As it became obvious, they moved the goalposts. It's that simple.

  DD
• 

  Fisherman

  DD,

  Here is a hint. The cause of a defense attorney is not "justice", see? Your erroneous thinking is exposed by your commentary and that is not an opinion. But I cannot do your thinking for you or give you any more hints.
• 

  Brainfloss

  
• 

  Fisherman

  Interesting word choice, Fisherman. "They also" (?) I think you need to let go of that egocentric viewpoint and see the Olivet discourse primarily in terms of the original audience rather than in terms of self.

  By original audience, I thought that you meant the "great crowd" audience I was actually referring to the GC in 1935, and that even though they did not understand "generation"as it is taught today, they discerned the sign. In any event, how could I have possibly been referring to the 12.

  TD,

  I have to consider the secondary part of your post focusing on the Olivet. Let me think about it. It seems though, that you disagree with the wts parallel interpretation method of the Olivet(discourse) and you seem to be saying that the Olivet had ONLY a primary fulfillment. No?