Earthquakes in one place after another

by free2beme 14 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  free2beme

  I realize that in the 1990's, the Witnesses changed their view on this thought of "Earthquakes in one place after another" to be more figurative and not literal. Yet most active Witnesses still see them as signs of the end. I did when I was younger and something occurred to me today as I watched the news from Pakistan.

  Did anyone ever have Witnesses that expanded beyond the warning of this natural disaster (earthquakes) to include all natural disasters? Let me explain, when ever a story came on about a hurricane, a flood, or tornado. It really did nor matter, I remember people saying that these too were signs of the end. Yet the bible did not even mention these things. In fact, because the Bible is a regional book, they do not even mention hurricanes because they did not live in an area where they happened and apparently their God never felt his followers would live somewhere where they would. So they are not signs of the end, yet we became so used to that natural disaster "earthquakes" being one, we just seemed in line to accept others were too.

  Now the thing with earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, even asteroid strikes. By far, by a huge amount, the worst of these happened long before man even appear in our present state on this planet. As much as Witnesses want to think, these got worse, they actually got less catastrophic then before and only because the planet now has such a full population, do we hear about every little earthquake, as there is most likely someone living there and scientist measure and report them all.

  Personally, I am amazed at how many people have died in the last year from natural disasters. Yet I do not see it as a sign of the end. I think nature might be doing a little house cleaning and population control, but not some war God preparing to bring peace. I just find it so sad, that Witnesses have for years found joy in earthquakes. As they think it is the sign of the end. Sad, isn't it? Especially since their doctrine does not even teach that anymore, but it felt good for so long ... why change?
• 

  Soledad

  I was just waiting for someone to bring this up!

  Yes, for sure, the witnesses thought that the earthquakes were literal. I had a discussion once with my mother about that. She said that before 1914 there weren't so many earthquakes as there are now. I said how do we know? Was there equipment available back then to measure just how frequent the earthquakes were? She then said that it wasn't about how big the earthquake was but about how devastating. Again I challenged her; I asked her if in the absence of mass media reports how did people find out just how devastating the quakes were? AS USUAL she didn't have a coherent answer so she just called me an insolent and stopped talking. Unreal. She will always defend the WT to the death.
• 

  free2beme

  I asked her if in the absence of mass media reports how did people find out just how devastating the quakes were?

  In the great San Francisco Earthquake, it was weeks before some people in the country and world even knew about it. If it happened now, you would see a live shot on any number of news media networks.
• 

  loveis

  Here is what appears to be the official WTS response:

  ***

  w87 1/15 pp. 21-22 Earthquakes—Distress Upon Distress ***

  Many seismologists believe that earthquakes are no greater or more frequent now than they were in the past. Conversely, others conclude that our generation has experienced earthquakes more frequently than did previous ones. Based on available records, the 20th century does significantly overshadow the past in seismic activity. Publications of the Watch Tower Society have repeatedly called attention to this, highlighting the Biblical significance of earthquakes occurring since 1914.

  Records of earthquakes before 1914 are not complete, however. And earlier generations did not have scientific means of measurement that would permit us reliably to compare the magnitudes of earthquakes past and present. Does this mean that we cannot recognize the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy?

  No, not at all. Jesus apparently foresaw that history would not record all pre-1914 quakes and that earlier generations would not have accurate seismological instruments, just as he foresaw the other circumstances of our time. Consequently, he did not word the prophecy in such a way that recognition of the fulfillment would require earthquake records from earlier centuries or instrument readings. Jesus did not say that the number of earthquakes in "the last days" would be X times greater than the number during some earlier period, nor did he state that we would see the greatest earthquakes ever. (2 Timothy 3:1) He did not speak as a seismologist.

  Jesus focused on the human experience. Earthquakes were to be part of "a beginning of pangs of distress." (Matthew 24:8) Distress is not measured by instruments. The travail of people is the ultimate measure of a calamity, including an earthquake. For Jesus’ prophecy to be fulfilled, distress caused by earthquakes would have to be present in a significant way. Recognition of the earthquake feature of the prophecy is thus not dependent on the vagaries of human record-keeping or upon scientific measurements of energy released. Today’s reports of earthquakes graphically portray the dimensions of human distress resulting from seismic activity.

  Why

  Earthquake Distress Has Increased

  Jesus apparently knew that world population would "explode" and that man’s practices would verge on "ruining the earth." (Revelation 11:18) In fact, world population has almost tripled since 1914. In prior centuries, an earthquake of a given magnitude usually affected fewer people than it would now.

  Consider Tangshan. It was just a hamlet until the 1870’s. If the 1976 quake had struck then, fatalities could not have exceeded the small number of residents. In 1879 industrial development began. By the 1970’s the population had grown to over a million, setting the stage for grave disaster in 1976.

  Furthermore, comparisons based simply on the Richter scale can be misleading. For example, the 1964 earthquake in Alaska killed 115 people and was 8.5 on the Richter scale. The Tangshan quake was rated lower at 8.2. Which one was truly greater? Measured by the human toll rather than by the Richter scale, the Tangshan event was clearly worse, the most severe of the 20th century. Instruments cannot measure the magnitude of human distress.

  also a brief mention in the Happiness book:

  ***

  hp chap. 15 p. 149 Is "the End of the World" Near? ***

  Persons may say that the growing world population and the size of cities account for the higher earthquake death toll since World War I. Even if this is the reason, it does not change what has happened.
• 

  Rado Vleugel

  See for more info on earthquakes this article written by Alan Feuerbacher.

  Greetings,

  Rado Vleugel
  http://www.watchtowerinformationservice.org
• 

  Doubtfully Yours

  Natural disasters is nothing more than nature's way of population control.

  DY
• 

  lucky

  The reasoning in that watchtower article is just mind-boggling.

  I would venture a guess that the population in Tangshan was quite a bit smaller in 1914 than it was in 1976. But if the earthquake had struck in 1914, it would still have been in "the last days".

  I would venture a guess that the bay area earthquake that hit in 1989 would have caused significantly more damage had it hit in 1913. Was Jesus not able to forsee engineering advances? Or do only earthquakes that cause a large "magnitude of human distress" count towards the "signs of the times"?

  All indications are that the world's population will keep growing. What's to say that an earthquake that killed 15,000 people in 1980 wouldn't kill 50,000 people in 2080? How can they say that "the population is big, so that means the time of the end is now", when there's no indication that the population is going to stop growing? Although, I guess with the "new light", 2080 will still be "the time of the end."

  It's disturbing that I use to buy into this crap.
• 

  BrendaCloutier

  100 years ago we didn't have the instant communications we have today. 100 years ago we might have heard about the tsunami in indonesia but it would have been weeks and we would not have cared like we do today.

  The earth as a living planet, is in constant flux, as we know today. Earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic action, landslides, floods, hurricanes, even global warming and cooling, are all natural phenomena associated with our live planet. That humans have contributed in the last 100 years to global warming significantly does not discount it as a natural phenomena, our existance as a life-form on the plant alone alters it. Just as the explosion of Krakatoa contibuted to global cooling for years.

  An old "friend" of the family tried talking to me of these events yesterday as I was trying to track down his ex-wife, who was a friend of mine (I think she's been df'd). I simply told him that I didn't buy it, that all we are seeing are natural earth cycles.
• 

  BrendaCloutier

  Thank you Rado. Sadly, AlanF is no longer allowed to post here.
• 

  AlmostAtheist

  That WAS a good article by Alan, thanks for that link!

  Dave