How Will They End 1914 Teaching? (page 28)

Fisherman

Tell me you prefer doctrinal bias over accuracy without telling me you prefer doctrinal bias over accuracy. 😂

Besides cut and paste, unlike TD, you’ve never translated anything it seems.

waton

How did they end the 1914 teaching fiasko in the Years after? they did not. instead they proclaimed, incredibly form 1918-25***:

"The World has ended [as we predicted in in 1914] millions now living will never die." *** proclaimers book 424-26

The minutiae about how they miscalculated 1914 are irrelevant. false is false.

They will end the 1914 teaching with something similarly misleading, falsely prophesied. The overlapping group generation is only the start.

Phizzy

" They will end the 1914 teaching with something similarly misleading, falsely prophesied."

I do not think they intend to end the 1914 nonsense in a way that actually shows it to be what it is.

They are forced to do what they did with Rutherford's 1925 tripe, let it die, bury it, move on.

waton

The 1914 thing for wt has turned into an exercise of navel gazing, in that it is now the beginning of the anointed generation.

Scripture has it , that the last generation will see the end, pass away after all has occurred. happened, kind of, in the first century for Jerusalem.

The current wt anointed generation, are slated to pass away way before the end, when it just barely gets rolling. at the onset of the Great Tribulation, the precursor to the battle.

So far wt has preached the old lie, "you will not die", (because you are in the 1914 generation.) The overlap takes them to 2075. all they have to do is to drop the anointing.

When the public turns to a Bible translation, it relies heavily on the principle of “truth in advertising” The public trusts that those who translate have been as fair, impartial and accurate has humanly possible. Accuracy in Bible translation means strictly excluding bias towards later developments in Christian thought. It means placing probable meaning above wished-for meaning.

----------

Back around the time the JW's released their interlinear, there was a Watchtower article speculating that much of the Bible comes to us in Greek because the rigid grammar makes for a very precise language, provided one follows it.

Fisherman

the rigid grammar makes for a very precise language, provided one follows it.

Your commentary is in Greek which the public doesn’t understand. The implication that WT strays from the grammar is arguable and not understood by the public. Using Greek grammar, translators have molded Jesus into God which is axiomatically not true whether or not the translator construes so using rigid Greek grammar. And that is what wt meant by the wt commentary you reference. Also, there is no fear that wt translation of the Bible is grammatically out of phase as you imply. Compared to other translations wt is in phase with the rigid base text except when wt interprets what the writer means or the overall teaching of the Bible ( keeping it simple. ) I respectfully understand your qualifications, Dr. I don’t think you are cut and pasting the conclusions of others about WT. Also, any mismatch is not significant overall. WT representation of Greek in the NWT is in phase with the base text and valid. But what do I know. That is only my humble belief.

TD

What implication?

I've simply pointed out that we're all bound by the same rules and conventions regardless of whether we believe the bible is the inspired word of God or just an interesting piece of literature.

If any implication of impropriety has been made, it's in the notion that a translator begins with a belief and translates accordingly. That's precisely what they try to avoid.

It's been pointed out that Jeremiah 25:11 contains two grammatical units and it's perfectly true. In the Septuagint, they are separated by a full stop.

Jeffro

Fisherman:

Besides cut and paste, unlike TD, you’ve never translated anything it seems.

So? JWs just parrot dogma without consulting so much as a concordance. I have a better understanding of and more honest approach to the concept than you. 😂

MeanMrMustard

Imagine a biography about John. In the biography, in response to a question about after dinner activities, John's grandmother says:

"John will clean the kitchen, and the family will take a walk for 30 minutes."

Employing scholar's method of "exegesis", clearly (because John is the main subject by context - his biography), this should be understood as John cleaning the kitchen for 30 minutes while simulateously taking a walk for same amount of time. And even though the next paragraph in John's biography lists each family member on the walk (some 20+), the writer definitely didn't mean it as family, but rather the main subject (John) only on the walk.

Also, there is no way John could start cleaning 15 min into the walk, as it's not the family, but John only, it's all 30 min.

DATA-DOG

This is where the GB really F up… not 1914, but by continually appointing new GB members. No more GB, especially if they are “Annointed”..

They can always tweak the understanding of 1914 but they have to get rid of the GB and let the “Helpers” take over. If they don’t show some kind of progress along their prophetic timeline they are going to bleed even more members. The Helpers can take over and say the GB are directing them from Heaven and then make up all kinds of new shit.

If the Org doesn’t change it will die, especially if they also experience a huge number of excess deaths because of the Gibbering Buddie’s decree to get the Jab…

DD

How Will They End 1914 Teaching?

Share this