1914 is perhaps the most convoluted piece of rubbish to ever come from the printing presses of Watchtower. I'm still surprised that Trinity-bashing JWs can't smell just how stink with falsehood, 1914 is.
1914.... current significance?
by NeverKnew 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Finkelstein
By correct interpretation and understanding of the bible, the WTS has been an Satan inspired false prophet saturated in corrupt commercialism.
The WTS made doctrines to help in the following proliferation of the publications the WTS made, that's a truth this organization can never wiggle out of.
-
scratchme1010
The 1914 thing, IMO, is now being toned down. Historically they have used (abused?) that year as the basis for many of the things they used to preach that now are trying to pretend they never said. Back in the late 1800's they claimed that the new order was going to come in 1914. Then "new light" showed that ridiculously convoluted story about Daniel and the 7 times and the Revelations, and 607BC.
The thing is that all that nonsense is based on Babylon being destroyed in that year, 607 BC, but the JWs are the only ones who claim that that's when that happened. All you have to do is go to any library and find that no reputable, credible historian points at that year. Of course, their calculations of the seven times thing miserably fails if things didn't happen in that year. If you ask me, all their calculations fail miserably, period.
-
FayeDunaway
I'm actually surprised they don't have 'new light' and correct the 607 date. Wouldn't it buy them 18 more years? I believe the correct date is 589 b.c? Which would put the end of the gentle times at...1932...when the great depression was hitting full force. Not as exciting as wwI, but I bet you they could work with it the way they try so hard to work with whatever they want to prove. Come on, brothers, I dare you!! That gives the generation another chance,(.... the first one, not the 'overlapping' one!)
-
alcyone
There are many questions that lead to the 1914 question:
Why did nobody come to the JW interpretation of the Bible in 1830? ... "Because it was not the time of the end, only after 1914..."
Why it was right for CTR to leave SDAs instead of 'waiting for Jehovah'? .... "It was different then, it was not time of the end which started in 1914"
JW's teach there is some special period after the 1914. During this period there are different "rules of engagement":
- before 1914: study Bible individually, question auhorities, create separate Bible study group, individual relationship to God matters
- after 1914: join the right organization, otherwise you are lost!
Maybe you can start from this angle and later they will discover how much they rely on 1914
-
jws
I don't really follow every article, but it seems to me that they seem to be downplaying the whole calculation thing and just referencing 1914 every now and then. The average JW probably knows there's some calculation behind it, but they don't really know.
Russell calculated 1914 by taking the destruction of Jerusalem (536 BC), subtracting 70 years to get 606 BC, thinking it was plain math and thinking -606 = 606 BC with no zero year, did: -606 + 2520 = 1914.
Yet:
- The descruction of Jerusalem was found to be 539 BC 3 years earlier so subtract 3 years -> 1911
- Found out there's no 0 year. So add a year 1911 --> 1912
So we're at 1912. Oops, no war. How do we get back to 1914? Let's say the 70 years ended 2 years later because it took 2 years for the Jews to move back. So the "after the 70 years is fulfilled, I will punish the king of Babylon" goes out the window. Because that king was killed in 539 and that means the 70 years already ended. If the 70 years ends 2 years later, you can't punish the king afterwards unless you're going to punish the dead king's soul in some afterlife, but the JWs don't believe in that. So 70 years can't end after 539 BC. But no matter, let's say it ended when the Jews got back home. And let's give them 2 years to do it because apparently slaves were in no hurry to return to their ancestral home.
So 539 BC becomes 537 BC. So now we can add 2 years to our last result, 1912 + 2 = 1914!!! Now everything works to the year we want. Because darnit, that's how prophecy is supposed to work. Start with the fulfillment and work backwards.
How people fell for this back when they switched, I don't know (lack of resources?). But how this was originally calculated is also a big secret hidden from JWs. Never mind the starting date of 607 being wrong. There's more to their faulty calculations than just that.
-
jws
FayDunaway wrote:
I'm actually surprised they don't have 'new light' and correct the 607 date. Wouldn't it buy them 18 more years? I believe the correct date is 589 b.c?
I believe the date given is 586/587 and I'd have to look to see why that's even an issue. That's around the start of their calendar so maybe it's a thing where it happened right around the new year, but you don't know if it happened before or after. Either way, it's about 20 years. So 1914 + 20 = 1934. But nothing significant happened in 1934. Bonnie & Clyde were killed as was John Dillenger. That's sort of a decrease in crime, not the increase they want. And it's only the US. So 1934 doesn't really do anything.
Anyway, IMO, you could further stretch it. 7 times or Jewish years wouldn't be 2520 days. We know years aren't 360 days. You lose 5.25 days/year. So eventually your calendar is all screwed up. Your summer months are now winter months and vice-versa. So the Jewish calendar added a what I would call a "leap month". Any 7 year period would have 1 or 2 "leap months". So 7 times would be 2550 or 2580. So now 1934 becomes 1964 or 1994.
Anything big happen in either year? Oh, yes! Wasn't it 1994 that JWs finally re-imagined what a "generation" meant? That was big to the world of JWs. But that's kind of a whole circular thing based on those born in 1914 reaching 70. But other than inside JW-land, nothing to speak of globally.
Or, since the prophecy was created by the creator of the universe who knew exactly how long it took for the earth to revolve around the son (about 365.25 days not 360), 7 times would be about 2556.75. 36.75 more years. Or if you used 365, you'd get 2555 (35 more years) So now let's go back to 1934 and add 35 or 36 or 37 years. 1969 - 1971. Again, not relevant. Well, there was Woodstock, which some Christians may feel was a sure sign of the end.
Yes, they could gain more years by doing this. And it remains to be seen whether they will. It would buy them a lot more time. Look, you can get all the way up to 1994 if you want and that was only 22 years ago. Start the "generation" then and you have another 50 years or more. But that's yet another change and IMO, a big one. JWs would notice and say WTF??? And many would lose their belief. Even if they don't know the calculation, they know 1914 was a big deal.
And secondly, look at all that was supposed to happen. Greater earthquakes, greater famines, more war (WW1). How do you go back on all that and say there was more after any of these dates. 1964, 1970, 1994. Even if you give or take a year, not much. For years, they've been teaching all the world has gotten worse since 1914. How do you now say the world was calm before Jesus came in whatever year they choose, if WW2 was before that year? This isn't like the old days where people probably didn't know all of the conflicts going on all over the world. You can't call WW2 just a squabble and wars afterward worse. The documentary cable channels won't let you forget about WW2.
Yes, they can buy time, but with great costs that will make them look worse than hanging onto an old date.
Which puts them between a rock and a hard place. Keep the old date and your religion is basically like an expiration date on your milk. It's probably good for a little longer, but it's going to go bad soon. Your religion gets less and less believable day by day. Or change it and look like you never knew what you were talking about and lose everybody's faith in your authority.
-
sir82
1914 is definitely being de-emphasized.
It still gets mentioned, but only in passing. Virtually no attempt is made to draw attention to it or to justify it.
I suspect it will become rather like 1844 for the Seventh Day Adventists - still doctrinally significant but rarely if ever mentioned.
-
steve2
They've stuck with 1914 because of its unquestionable historical significance. If there'd been no outbreak of war that year - and, man alive, what a war! - they'd have revised or buried the doctrine long ago - just like Adventists and other millennialists stepped sideways away from 1848 - the one-time heralded year of the end.
No other "proposed" alternate year comes close to capturing the aura of 1914 - which is not to say the leaders won't tone down even further its alleged Scriptural significance.
-
FayeDunaway
Great post, JWS!