Again i see the effort made to connect the time periods as an obvious attempt to subtly suggest the end MUST be very near BECAUSE the precedent of the of 120 years for Noah. It is hard to see another reason to review the supposed Noah dates and compare with present expectations.
THEY'VE DONE IT!!!! The WBTS set a new date!
by dmouse 208 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
gumby
If they are hinting at a date.......then they were hinting on this same subject many years ago, which cannot be true.
If you go to any information in the literature that deals with Noah's preaching......such as the 'Insight Books', you will find much the same wording about the 120 years of a set time for man. Those years always are refered to as a warning and a time limit set for man. I am not so sure this was intentionally done to promote a date, as very little OTHER information about it surrounded it.
I'm sure it will not take long for witnesses to be speaking of this date if this article was meant to be pushed and promoted by the higher ups. Anything other than that will be simple rumors by fanatical dubs. If these rumors are true.....I'm sure an assembly program, or the like will either dispell the idea, or promote it more................(or they will just be vauge and smile within themselves.....happy that the r&f are again afraid the time is short0.
Gumby
-
Tinkerbell4125
Just reading that article was scary. Makes me shiver!
I remember counting down the years to 1975 on my fingers when I was little. *sigh* Got baptised at 13 in 1973 with my mother, so we would be ready in 1975!!! Dropping out of high school in 1974 to aux pioneer so I would be ready for 1975! After the big A didn't come in 1975 I went back to high school. I know people thought I was crazy!
Scary to know that people still are buying into that crap.
-
undercover
I see where Minimus is coming from. The article doesn't come right out and say 1914+120=2034, be prepared because the Big A will come by then. It does make a parallel with Noah's day, his preaching and the time it took for the flood to come to today, because we're 90 years into a similar time period.
At the same time though, the publications were always very vague about the 1975 date. They never came right out and said Armaggeddon will be in 1975. They just said it was an important date. Over time, however, because of the repeated mentionings of this date both in the publications and at assemblies/halls, everyone came to believe it was THE date. The WTS let them believe that. Later, when the WTS tried to not take blame for it, they met with resistance and had to basically issue an apology.
Only time will tell if this date or the 120 year time period will be significant. If they continue to harp on the 120 year period and compare it to Noah's preaching time period then yes, I would tend to believe they are using another date to
extortencourage the JWs to stay vigilant. If this is just a one time use of this tactic toscaremotivate people then I wouldn't place to much significance on it.Resurrect this thread in a year and let's compare notes then.
-
RubaDub
I think too many of us get carried away with this and are speculating far too much.
Let's face it, the most important date in modern times was 1922, when they blew the horns on that famous day in Cedar Point Ohio.
***** Rub a Dub
-
Nosferatu
Some of the R&F are going to make the connection that 1914+120=2034, however, most of them are going to keep this idea to themselves for now. The only way the R&F are going to get excited about the year 2034 is if the WTS keeps relating Noah's day to our day in the Watchtower. It'll be interesting if the WTS makes mention of this in a future Watchtower. If they don't, this article is just going to be another fart in the wind.
-
Winston Smith :>D
I fully concur w/dmouse.
The WTS is floating an idea to the R&F. they need an expiration date on the ‘end is soon’ BS. Then, when it fails, only the ‘old timers’ will remember the build-up to the “Do More by ‘34” campaign and some will leave. The newbies in the Troof at the at time will again say that some just read too much into it not knowing the past history; just like 1975.
Read back to 1966- 1968 pubs. The ‘idea’ was floated just like this. There will be clarifications on the subject in a ‘Q’s from Readers’, then a special symposium at the District Convention. Maybe a new release down the road in a few years, a focused study program that will replace the ‘Knowledge’ book to get baptized in 6 months, etc…
It’s the same game plan that gets played for every generation of JW’s. I’m glad I’m on my way out with my loved ones. This made my Monday. It’s completely laughable.
Some think it’s not written with this intention, and that’s fine. But if these same ones think that not one of the R&F will glom into this and ride it, then I wonder if maybe they have been out too long to forget the mindset of the typical, desperate, R&F JW.
Winston.
-
link
I have consulted our local version of "Scholar" who advises me as follows.
Genesis 6:3 is telling us two things, a) that as from the year 2490 b.c. the life expectancy of man will be reduced to 120 years and b) the flood would occur in 2610 b.c. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Armageddon.
Armageddon is just waiting the "final sealing" of the last of the 144,000 because some of the first team dropped out due to apostasy. Since nobody knows how long this process will take it is impossible to put a time scale or date on it.
This is the current local thinking as provided to me yesterday.
link
-
dmouse
Link, What your pet JW scholar said:
Genesis 6:3 is telling us two things, a) that as from the year 2490 b.c. the life expectancy of man will be reduced to 120 years and b) the flood would occur in 2610 b.c. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Armageddon.
Contrast that with what the Watchtower said:
21 Although the Flood seems remote from our day, it clearly provides a warning that we must not ignore?.
The whole article is about parallels between Noah's day and ours. They ARE making connections between the flood and Armageddon. Your 'scholar' is either using theocratic warfare, or he's not very theocratic, or he's not very bright.
-
rocketman
Yes, the connection is apparent.
Then again, there's that definition of apparent.
Seriously, I agree dmouse, they are making a connection.