How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

by EmptyInside 282 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Fisherman

  resulting in most leaving and a few breakaway sects

  You don’t grasp that there are witnesses that testified to the sign that is believed to validate 1914. What are they going to say now, they made it up? There are events integrated with 1914 that are believed to fulfill Bible prophecy such as the Nation against nation, etc. Now disintegrate 1914? The authority of the FDS after the establishment of the Messianic kingdom in the heavens stands on 1914. Say that never happened? The anointed testified they saw a sign aka miraculous proof, empirical evidence from God? And now to say that the sign had nothing to do with 1914 or that they never experienced the sign? JW expect to be vindicated when the great tribulation realizes. JW stands on the establishment of the Messianic kingdom in the heavens in 1914.

  The faith of JW does not stand on Bible interpretation but on a perceived and experienced relationship with God. JW want and need the relief the realization of Bible promises will bring but they don’t need any more proof to make their faith any stronger. They are convinced in the resurrection, eternal life on earth and the joy and fulfillment the Bible promises. They will go to their graves believing that even if they don’t see the realization of the end. So nobody is going to leave even if 1914 was abandoned—which is impossible for the reasons I gave, that is to say for true believers. Also, I don’t think most people grasp or realize ir understand- like yourself-the standing of 1914 so even if 1914 was taken away nobody would realize its importance and wouldn’t leave for that reason. But that is just hypothetical because 1914 is whenGod’s kingdom is believed to have started ruling and it is integrated with the theology of JW.
  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  Fisherman:

  You don’t grasp that there are witnesses that testified to the sign that is believed to validate 1914.

  I ‘grasp’ it perfectly well that it is basically impossible for the Watch Tower Society to let go of ‘607’ and ‘1914’. But the claim that there are ‘witnesses’ to something happening ‘invisibly in heaven’ is nonsense, as is the correlation with unrelated events (that started too early) in the same year. Given the number of Adventist groups that picked just about every year in the late 19th and early 20th centuries for ‘something’ to happen, it is entirely unremarkable that something significant happened in one of those years.
• 

  Fisherman

  But the claim that there are ‘witnesses’ to something happening ‘invisibly in heaven’ is nonsense

  Where did the anointed claim they witnessed something going on in heaven?
  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  There is no evidence that anyone is actually ‘anointed’ and even the Watch Tower Society says such claims are unverifiable and prone to mental and emotional imbalance. 🤦‍♂️ Aside from that, it is a core Watch Tower Society teaching that something happened invisibly in heaven in October 1914. 🙄 But yes, of course no one actually witnessed it, but that’s kind of the point.😉
• 

  TonusOH

  Fisherman: The faith of JW does not stand on Bible interpretation but on a perceived and experienced relationship with God.

  Their faith in God might not require the 1914 explanation, but their faith in the GB as God's conduit on Earth does. A JW who loses faith in the GB and the organization's teachings does not have to lose faith in God; they are free to find another Christian denomination and test that one. The organization used the revised 1914 explanation (since their actual interpretation proved incorrect) to claim a certain authority and promote their sect. But its usefulness is waning, and may eventually work against their efforts.
• 

  Fisherman

  There is no evidence that anyone is actually ‘anointed’.

  I already put the word in parenthesis for you knowing your proclivity to fallacy. Either you intentionally do this believing you can mislead or you can’t grasp the subject and ramble on and on off course. What a waste of time responding to you.
• 

  Jeffro

  Fisherman:

  I already put the word in parenthesis for you knowing your proclivity to fallacy.

  Fisherman earlier:

  Where did the anointed claim they witnessed something going on in heaven?

  🤷‍♂️
• 

  Jeffro

  Fisherman:

  What a waste of time responding to you.

  Indeed. Though I went on to address the actual subject matter, all you did was complain, incorrectly, about my initial statement. 🤦‍♂️
• 

  mikeflood

  Well...GB 3.0 would drop it as soon as they are in charge...nu-lite and everything.

  Something on the lines like, well, we couldn't go in front of the scriptures, and besides that Babylon the Great is still in place...so keep that thing, it's fall for like before Armageddon, etc,etc. and carry on please.

  Nobody is gonna beat an eye, the Borg in general don't really care for that now. Remember, most of the oldies are gonne now.
• 

  Fisherman

  Jeffro, all you do is go off into tangent irrelevancies such as they are not anointed and mix in your commentary. The issue is not whether or not they are anointed but their testimony in that role whether or not they are ( the parentheses is seen by the reader) . It is axiomatic that if they are lying about being anointed the testimony is bunk. That is not the subject here; it is the consistency of JW teaching and that JW cannot stop teaching 1914 for the reasons I gave. —What a waste of time responding to you.