by JanH 23 Replies latest jw friends
Jan,
Excellent post.
I would agree that the 20th century was a prosperous century for humans. Obviously, our population and living standards increased geometrically in many parts of the world.
I would differ that the 20th century was prosperous for the earth as a whole living ecological system.
hugs
Joel
nice post Janh,
wow not one reply post attacking you personally. lol
--------
on another topic you posted the example of looking for horses when you hear the sound of hoof beats unless ofcourse you were in Africa where you would look for zebras. This appears to say look to the most obvious cause first. Why then in the big bamg theory do you abandon the search for cause? It seems cause and effect is maintained back to that point in the past where it is then abandoned. I would be interested in your thoughts on this.
the ideas and opinions expressed in this post do not necessiarly represent those of the WTB&TS inc. or any of it's subsidiary corporations.
JanH:
Your article presents a compelling case that many Christians in the 14th century would have concluded they were witnessing a fulfillment of what is termed a sign of the last days. I have a few comments.
Many Christians through the centuries, always convinced that their time was that of the end, has always pointed to the ones who doubted the messages of doom and gloom, and applied to them the worlds in 2. Peter about "scoffers." Of course, the "scoffers" have always been correct, and the doomsayers were always wrong.
I am not sure what your point is about 2 Peter 3:3,4. At face value the only conclusion is to this end: scoffing would be erroneous in one period of time, “the last days.” The text does not preclude scoffers in other periods of time, when Christians might incorrectly assume “the last days”. So according to the text, scoffers would always be right, except when the scoffing was finally done in “the last days.” So, to say “Of course, the ‘scoffers’ have always been correct, and the doomsayers were always wrong” as evidence supporting your overall conclusion would be, I believe, an error. You may not have intended this comment as this sort of evidence, but it has the effect of illogical bias going into an otherwise worthy article. Some will mistake it as evidence, so why include it.
Assuming we accept the troubled interpretation of the so-called ‘synoptic apocalypse’ that has Jesus stating that wars, diseases, famine, crime and earthquakes would be a sign of his future second coming, let us put a loyal Christian in at the end of the 14th century.
Your article does a pretty good job of putting a loyal Christian in at the end of the 14th century, with one exception. The article fails to address certain details, like how 14th century Christians who had never observed an earthquake could have rightly concluded “the last days.”
Assuming as you have, the so-called “sign of the last days” would be one that all Christians could observe, whether they would observe it or not. If this is true, then your article fails to make the case that 14th century Christians claiming “the last days” were doing so correctly because it fails to address Christians that almost certainly never observed, for instance, an earthquake. Because Christians in Eurasia probably observed earthquakes does not mean they all did. Also, it is doubtful that Christians in Africa would have witnessed earthquakes during the same period.
There is no disputing the calamity of the 14th century. Arguably, that period is one of the worst in human history in terms of effect to humans, if not the worst. But the so-called “sign the last days” does not require the worst period, at least until the finale called Armageddon.
All this said, I agree that details of the WTS’ interpretation are more than lacking. An example is their discussion of earthquakes. Certainly their claim of increased earthquakes since 1914 is without merit, as are their claims that the so-called sign requires increased earthquakes.
A close friend of mine has posted on this forum including, as it turns out, on this subject. I happen to have a fairly polished draft of an article written by him addressing this subject. A search of this site turned up a ruff version of the same article. I think several here know this person as Friend. I do not have permission to post the more polished article, but here are links to articles I found on the subject:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=769&site=3#6623
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=808&site=3
The wars, famines, pestilence, and earthquakes were to serve as a sign of the "beginning of the pangs of distress," and do not make up the whole sign. The most prominent aspect of the sign of Christ's presence is that the good news of the kingdom will be preached to all the nations. Seeing that Christendom is clueless about what God's kingdom is, it is obvious that at no other time in history has it been possible for that aspect of the prophecy to be fulfilled, as it is being fulfilled in the international witness that the Watchtower Society has been giving in recent decades. Back during the Dark Ages when the bubonic plague was raging, many thought that the end of the world was coming then, but obviously the period was not the one which the prophecy pinpointed. Your reasoning simply fails to take into consideration everything that Jesus said would mark the period of the last days of this system of things. / You Know
Jan,
Thank you for posting this. I was looking for this on the Internet and couldn't find the link again.
Back in the 14th century, wasn't the printing press invented which allowed the printing of the Bible? And then just a little bit later the translation from Latin to the vernacular? Would that cover your preaching work, You Know?
Slipnslidemaster: "The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad."
- Salvador Dali
To Marvin Shilmer:
With respect to your comments about JanH's reference to 2 Peter and scoffers, his point was that Christians who pointed to world conditions in their day as signs of "the end" usually also pointed to the existence of scoffers as signs of "the end". But they were as wrong about their application of 2 Peter as they were about their application of Jesus' words about "signs of the end" to conditions in their day. Thus, it is nonsensical for anyone to claim that the presence of scoffers is further proof that "the end is near". JanH was not attempting to use this to disprove any Christian's contention that "the end is near", but to show why Christians cannot use 2 Peter to prove such a contention.
As for JanH's illustration of a 14th-century Christian's claiming that the century he had just witnessed contained all of the "signs" mentioned by Jesus and that therefore he must be living in the last days, the point was that the Christian would have been incorrect no matter whether he 'correctly' applied Jesus' words or not. In other words, if Jesus meant that earthquakes had to be observed worldwide as a "sign", and the 14th-century Christian was by some means actually able to observe them worldwide, he would have been wrong to claim these as a sign. And if he only observed one or more local quakes and then 'incorrectly' applied Jesus' words, he certainly would have been wrong about them as a sign.
The point here is that (as JanH stated, even assuming that Jesus meant to give signs of the end to watch for) even if a 14th-century Christian 'correctly' applied Jesus' words to each 'sign', events proved him wrong about the imminence of "the end". Therefore, such 'signs' are valueless for all time periods after the 14th century.
Logic tells us the same thing: earthquakes, war, famine and pestilence are as common in human history as grass, blue sky and sexual desire. Invoking them as 'signs' gives one no more information about the nearness of "the end" than saying, "Look! The grass is green! The sky is blue! Young men are lusting after young women! Jehovah's Witnesses are preaching!"
These facts really point out what JanH mentioned as a major caveat: Jesus actually said nothing at all about quakes and so forth being signs of imminence of "the end". In fact he said the opposite: quakes and so forth were not to be interpreted as signs of "the end".
Of late, JWs are fond of dismissing the proof that their earlier claims, such as "earthquakes are 20 times worse in the 20th century", are nonsense, by saying, "Jesus said we'd see earthquakes. We see earthquakes. This is a fulfillment of the sign Jesus said to watch for." Again, this dismissal ignores the fact that earthquakes are as common as grass and therefore that only a significant change in the occurrence of quakes or grass can be a sign of anything. Lack of change gives no information at all.
I wonder if you could see your way to making Friend's polished draft, or at least the points made in it, available. I'm sure he wouldn't object to making it available privately.
To You Know:
The so-called preaching work that JWs do is not a sign of anything, except perhaps their supreme arrogance in thinking that they're special. C. T. Russell taught that Christendom had fulfilled Jesus' commission to "make disciples of people of all nations" by not later than 1860. Can anyone prove him wrong? No, because the criteria for measuring something as nebulous as "preaching to all nations" are completely subjective. Exactly the same objections you might raise against Russell's claim can be applied to JWs today. Try it if you don't believe it.
Furthermore, JWs can hardly be said to have been very effective preachers in many major population centers. Hardly anyone in China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and many other lands have even heard of JWs, much less been preached to effectively. In Western lands JWs are usually well known, but not in most others. In Western lands, JWs are not well known for preaching "the good news of the Kingdom" -- they're best known for any number of other things, mostly not complimentary.
It is also the case that the very basis for JW preaching -- that Christ was enthroned in heaven in 1914 -- is a false doctrine because the 1914 date is nothing more than a disproved dream of some 19th-century prognosticators. When all evidence is considered, biblical and extra-biblical, JW 'chronology' is seen to be no more than smoke and mirrors. Thus, JWs are as clueless about "what God's kingdom is" as JWs claim that "Christendom" is. And of course, the applications that JWs give to 'modern day fulfillments of Bible prophecy', such as in that astute 1917 work The Finished Mystery, change as often as does the underwear of a working supermodel.
AlanF
The problem is in looking at what Jesus intended to say.
More and more Bible scholars are looking at the verses in Matt. 24 not as a sign of the end, but as a warning NOT to be looking for signs of the end.
A Bible translation called the message puts it very well: (this is a paraphrase, I don't have it in front of me) "Don't be alarmed, this is just routine history."
He then follows that with the statement that his coming would be obvious to everyone.
Russell taught that Christendom had fulfilled Jesus' commission to "make disciples of people of all nations" by not later than 1860. Can anyone prove him wrong?
Your flim-flamery is again quite apparent. Yes, Christendom made disciples, in that they made the Bible available, to an extent. However, they did not fulfill the aspect of the prophecy about preaching the good news of the kingdom for a witness to all the nations. That is something quite different. As I pointed out, Christendom has no idea what God's kingdom is, so they could not possibly fulfill the prophecy that called for the message of God's kingdom to be preached in all the earth. The fact that Jesus said that that message would serve as a witness against the nations indicates that Jesus was not merely talking about a generic disciple making message. The announcement that Jehovah's Witnesses are giving about God's kingdom replacing human governments fulfills what Jesus said would take place during his presence.
When all evidence is considered, biblical and extra-biblical, JW 'chronology' is seen to be no more than smoke and mirrors.
Nonsense. Chronology has nothing to do with it. Jesus gave a prophesy that foretold certain events that would happen. Those things have happened and are happening, and will continue to unfold until all of Jesus' words have been fulfilled to the last letter. / You Know
Yet another buffoonish, ignorant post from the King of Bullshit, Booby Priest King. Try replying to the entire content of the post, rather than the quasi-content of your brain, Booby.
Give my regards to Uncle Teddie.
AlanF
You Know
I think that you will find that none of the signs that the organisaton looks for have been fulfilled. For example earthquakes, since 1914 they have decreased, famines were far worse in past centuries and diseases ravaged mankind to a far greater extent in the past. If the best the society can do is point to their own preaching work then that is a bit sad.
Looking at the evidence it is suprising that anyone still follows them.After all they are wrong about 607, so how can the last days start in 1914, and they were proved wrong about the generation - nothing happened and they only changed this doctrine once their promises failed. Living in expectation of the end and the death of humanity is a fruitless exercise.
