scholar and 1914

by Marvin Shilmer 63 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  OHappyDay

  Wooo, I said scholar would find some thin thread, but didn't know it would be this thin!

  How can it be said that the Society was right about the "End of the Gentile Times" when that phrase itself is open to different interpretation?

  1948 would be a better candidate than 1914, which resorts to numerical sleight of hand and stuff that supposedly happened, conveniently invisible, in heaven.

  At least in 1948 there is demonstrable proof -- the physical establishment of the State of Israel -- that the Gentiles trod down Jerusalem no more!
• 

  City Fan

  There's an easy way of proving to a JW that Jerusalem fell in 586/587 and not 607 - by using the bible.

  Since the Watchtower society accepts that Babylon fell in 539 BC, it also has to accept the regnal years of the Persian kings after this date. Darius I ruled from 521 BC - 486 BC. Simply show a JW in the bible Zechariah chapter 7, which is set in the fourth year of Darius, or 518/517 BC. It says in verse 5 "Say to all the people of the land and the priests, When you fasted and mourned in the fifth month and in the seventh, for these seventy years, was it for me that you fasted?"

  The fasting was to commemorate the destruction of the temple in 587/586 BC, the seventieth year from that date being 518/517 BC.

  CF.
• 

  AlanF

  "scholar" answered Marvin Shilmer:

  : End of the Gentile Times

  So say the ostriches known as Jehovah's Witnesses. Unfortunately, this "event" is entirely a product of the same fertile imaginations that declared until about 1930 that Jesus had returned invisibly in 1874. When all of C. T. Russell's predictions about 1914 ended in abject failure, he attempted to salvage his date system (and probably his sanity) in precisely the same way that his mentor Nelson Barbour had done with his failed prediction that Jesus would return in 1874: they declared that Jesus had in fact returned, but no one could see it.

  An interesting comment on this lunacy is made by Carl Sagan in Broca's Brain:

  Doctrines that make no predictions are less compelling than those which make correct predictions; they are in turn more successful than doctrines that make false predictions.

  But not always. One prominent American religion confidently predicted that the world would end in 1914. Well, 1914 has come and gone, and -- while the events of that year were certainly of some importance -- the world does not, at least so far as I can see, seem to have ended. There are at least three responses that an organized religion can make in the face of such a failed and fundamental prophecy. They could have said, "Oh, did we say ?1914'? So sorry, we meant ?2014.' A slight error in calculation. Hope you weren't inconvenienced in any way." But they did not. They could have said, "Well, the world would have ended, except we prayed very hard and interceded with God so He spared the Earth." But they did not. Instead, they did something much more ingenious. They announced that the world had in fact ended in 1914, and if the rest of us hadn't noticed, that was our lookout. It is astonishing in the face of such transparent evasions that this religion has any adherents at all. But religions are tough. Either they make no contentions which are subject to disproof or they quickly redesign doctrine after disproof. The fact that religions can be so shamelessly dishonest, so contemptuous of the intelligence of their adherents, and still flourish does not speak very well for the tough-mindedness of the believers. But it does indicate, if a demonstration were needed, that near the core of the religious experience is something remarkably resistant to rational inquiry. [Carl Sagan, Broca's Brain, Ballantine Books, New York, 1982, p. 332]

  One has only to look at the responses of "scholar" to see how right Sagan was.

  AlanF
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hello, Scholar, "Hons Research Scholar"

  I asked Can you name a single thing of significance that the Watchtower Society or Charles Russell taught about 1914 prior to 1914 that was accurate?

  You responded by writing:

  End of the Gentile Times.

  You tell us. Prior to 1914 was what the Watchtower Society or Charles Russell taught about the "End of the Gentile times" in 1914 accurate? Just one fact of accuracy about 1914 will suffice.

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  hillary_step

  Hello Marvin,

  Good to see you posting again.

  I must say, I admire your fortitude and resilience. How long is that you have been asking Scholar this question, four months? Perhaps one day we will be graced with an answer that does not insult the intellect like his one above.

  I am sure that when Scholar emerges from his Theological Privy, waving his dog-eared Watchtower at the shadow of reality looming over him, he may have an answer that confounds his usual refrain : "You will never understand because you do not believe in God, Christ or the veracity of ME, good friend of Jehovah".

  On the other hand he may not.

  Best regards - HS.
• 

  Farkel

  scholar,
  

  You said re 1914:

  : End of the Gentile Times.

  Please show dummies like us how that ties in with Dan. 4. Jesus and ONLY Jesus talked about the "Times of the Gentiles" (and Jesus NEVER mentioned the Book of Daniel in that context) and Daniel didn't say a word about the "Times of the Gentiles", either. What's the connection, then?

  Since you have all the degrees and stuff, please englighten little dummies like me. I am SO stupid and eagerly await your reply so I can something else SO stupid.

  Marvin,

  Add myself to the list of people who are glad to see you making a presence again. Not that I actually LIKE you, or anything.

  Farkel
• 

  scholar

  Marvin Shilmer

  Are you stupid? I answered your question. The end of the Gentile Times in 1914 was eagerly awaited by many expositors in the nineteenth century and even some of the clergy of Christendom in England agreed that the Gentile Times had expired avvording to their published Manifesto.

  scholar
• 

  onacruse

  The question was:

  You tell us. Prior to 1914 was what the Watchtower Society or Charles Russell taught about the "End of the Gentile times" in 1914 accurate? Just one fact of accuracy about 1914 will suffice.

  Your answer is:

  The end of the Gentile Times in 1914 was eagerly awaited by many expositors in the nineteenth century and even some of the clergy of Christendom in England agreed that the Gentile Times had expired avvording to their published Manifesto.

  So then, you consider the opinions of a few expositors to be accurate and definitive proof?
• 

  AlanF

  "Scholar" knows perfectly well that he can't answer Marvin's question without blowing his mind out.

  As we all know, every specific prediction Russell made about 1914 and what "the Gentile times" would bring failed.

  NOT ONE THING RUSSELL PREDICTED CAME TRUE. NOT ONE.

  Russell was therefore a false teacher, and therefore a false prophet -- by the Watchtower Society's own definition. "Scholar" can't admit to following an organization started by a false prophet.

  When 1914 came and went, all that Russell and his followers could do to save face was to claim that the "Great War" that was just beginning would lead quickly, in 1918, to the complete dissolution of all nations. Of course, that failed too. In later years Rutherford and company moved almost everything that had been claimed to have happened in 1874 forward to 1914 -- and then said it all happened invisibly! The notion of "the Gentile times" was completely stripped of its prior meaning, so that today all that's left is an empty label.

  "The end of the Gentile times". Hah!

  Might as well say, "The end of the NVKPEADYREAYDUH came in 1914. Invisibly."

  Gee whiz. What a prediction.

  Correction. What a piece of hindsight.

  AlanF
• 

  City Fan

  How long is that you have been asking Scholar this question, four months?

  For about 12 months I've been asking Scholar to post just one piece of the 'abundant secular evidence' for 607 BC that he claims exists, and so far nothing! You're in for a long wait.

  CF.