The 1914 Doctrine and The Threat of the Egibi Business Tablets

by VM44 349 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • VM44
    VM44


    Could The Watchtower and the Jehovah's Witnesses survive the discarding of their 1914 doctrine?

    The doctrine that in 1914 the End of the Gentile times took place, Jesus took up rule in heaven.

    For some reason the JWs think the outbreak of World War I in 1914 is proof their prophetic calculations were correct.

    And, three or four years after 1914, Jesus inspected all of Christendom, and chose the Bible Students to be his select people.

    Rutherford was supplied with direction directly by angels and later, the Governing Body was directed by Holy Spirit, but at the same time they are not "inspired" (talk about holding two contradictory beliefs in your mind at the same time!)

    So all of The Watchtower's authority comes from the 1914 doctrine, discard it, and you might as well discard The Watchtower.

    All their talk through the years of doing God's Will and His Work will have been meaningless.

    Their spirituality they talk about in The Watchtower and they believe they have through their study and works will also be nothing but an illusion.

    Obviously, The Watchtower and everyone closely associated with it have too much invested in the 1914 doctrine for it to be discarded.....for now!

    I predict that in the decades to come, less and less will be said about 1914....perhaps in 50 years the 1914 WILL be discarded as out-of-date "old light".....by then, all the people whose held 1914 so dearly will be gone, and the people who control things could care less about a year a 150 years in the past. (Do any of us really consider anything that happened in 1855 as being significant for us today?)

    As for the 1914 calculation, it is extra-Biblical, an addition to the Bible by people trying to find "secret knowledge." Charles Russell did not invent the calculation, but took it over and believed it whole heartedly, as only the book-keeper that he was could have. Now The Watchtower equates the whole 1914 calculation as coming from the Bible, to go against it The Watchtower says, is to go against what the Bible says!

    If evidence is presented that shows 607BCE is an incorrect date, The Watchtower says "No! That is wrong. 607BCE is what the Bible says, and you do not want to contradict what the Bible says, do you?" See how they argue?

    The point is this, the Bible does NOT say anything at all about the year 607BCE, and the 607 year is arrived at by insisting that the year 1914 is the end of the Gentile Times. By insisting that 607 is a Bible based year, The Watchtower is attempting to use "proof by authority" to silence any critic. The essence of their argument is "This is Bible based(tm), so there!"

    The secular evidence that simply shows 607 BCE is wring are the business tables of the Babylonian banking family Egibi, discover OVER 100 YEARS AGO! The evidence is there...there is no 20 year gap in the reigns of the neo-Babylonian kings. If you search The Watchtower literature you will see that the name "Egibi" is NEVER mentioned once! Why? Simply this....They do not mention the Egibi business tables because THE WATCHTOWER DOES NOT WANT ANYONE TO KNOW ABOUT THEM...The Watchtower WANTS NO RESEARCH INTO THE EGIBI TABLETS! The tablets will show once and for all, ending all uncertainty, that the neo-Babylonian reigns are accurate.

    The Egibi tablets would THROW LIGHT upon the uncertainty The Watchtower likes to throw upon Ptolemy's kings list, and this they could not allow....so no mention of, and no research into the Babylonian business records.....The 1914 year doctrine be maintained.....for the time being!

    --VM44

  • scholar
    scholar

    VM44

    You are talking nonsense.First of all let us have a competent translation of these documents and see how they relate to current chronology of the Neo- Babylonian period which in any event is subjec to considerable interpretation, The 607 date and the Gentile Times ending in 1914 is firmly grounded in Scripture so it is impossible for secular materials to disprove a theology and chronology long advanced ny celebrated WT scholars.

    1914 is proved correct by the fact that since that momentous year we are living in the last days as prophesied by our Lord. WT scholars have nothing to fear from these tablets that you seem to be so excited about. I do not share your hysterical ramblings.

    scholar JW

  • Hellrider
    Hellrider

    Oh God, another 607-thread? And of course, celebrated Scholar JW shows up, spewing his "The 607 date and the Gentile Times ending in 1914 is firmly grounded in Scripture"-nonsense. How many times do you have to hear it, celebrated Scholar: THERE IS NO CHRONOLOGY IN THE BIBLE! The Bible mentions 3 of the 5 Babylonian kings of that era, and only the length of the reigns of ONE of them, and this "biblical chronology" has to be "placed" in, historically/chronologically in secular history anyway, and the only way to do that is by secular history (pivotal dates). How is it even possible to NOT understand this? Anyway, myself and some others are still awaiting your reply on some questions from the previous 607 vs 587-thread, here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/96152/7.ashx

    ...in which you have been boasting about your "celebrated WT Scholars", and your complete and infallible bible chronology. So we have been asking you:; WHERE IS IT? Could you please show us your infallible bible chronology, lengths of reigns and all? Please? Sometime before Armageddon?

  • Honesty
    Honesty
    The point is this, the Bible does NOT say anything at all about the year 607BCE, and the 607 year is arrived at by insisting that the year 1914 is the end of the Gentile Times. By insisting that 607 is a Bible based year, The Watchtower is attempting to use "proof by authority" to silence any critic. The essence of their argument is "This is Bible based(tm), so there!"

    I can think of one scripture that correctly supports the WT's claims regarding 1914:

    *** Rbi8 Mark 13:21-22 ***
    21 “Then, too, if anyone says to YOU, ‘See! Here is the Christ,’ ‘See! There he is,’ do not believe [it]. 22 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will give signs and wonders to lead astray, if possible, the chosen ones.

  • carla
    carla

    The funny thing here is Scholar want 'competent translation'! What a joke! Why doesn't he ask for competent translation in the NWT first?

  • nicolaou
    nicolaou
    Could The Watchtower and the Jehovah's Witnesses survive the discarding of their 1914 doctrine?

    Contrary to much popular opinion, my answer is an emphatic YES!

  • Hellrider
    Hellrider

    I think the same as Nicolai. They would loose a lot of members, though. But they`d get new ones, of course, fresh, naive blood, looking for salvation, the promise of everlasting life, coupled with selfrighteousness, sadism, hypocricy, sociopathy, power-hunger, etc. It will never end.

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    I also think that the wt will suvive the discarding of 1914. Once a structure is big enough, the schafolding can be removed, and it continues to stand on it's own.

    S

  • BluesBrother
    BluesBrother

    "The 607 date and the Gentile Times ending in 1914 is firmly grounded in Scripture"

    Excuse me but there are no dates in Scripture, there could not be since calendars have changed. Dates are only used to support Scripure and must be firmly grounded in history to have any relevance . It is not for me to debate the technicalities of King Lists and corroboritive evidence but I do know that the matter is open to dispute, therefore cannot support any scriptural belief.

    Could the Borg survive the ditching of 1914? Yes, I am sure it would. It carefully laid out a teaching that abandoned the "1914 Generation" and that was most relevant to many people. Of the Witnesses I know, I am the only one to have been concerned about it

    The Borg will lurch on until its "waters dry up", as they used to fortell for Babylon the Great.

  • M.J.
    M.J.

    Scholar, rather than going into your automated response, how about arguing against the evidence these business records provide?

    How about the hundreds of thousands of administrative and private legal cuneiform documents excavated from that time, each dated to its corresponding Babylonian regnal year? How come not a single one is dated to a regnal year during a supposed 20 year gap in everyone's timelines that the WTS asserts must be there in order to make 607 stand? How can one get around the fact that many of these not only record a single transaction, but a series of consecutive transactions spanning through several kings' reigns, and therefore blowing away any notion that there was a missing 20 years somewhere in there?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit