Posts by TD

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

Well again, Russell's terminology should be evaluated in the context of his own usage

(I understand that JW usage is somewhat different today)

For example:

So short a time ago as 1870 we saw, in addition to the first principles of the Gospel, only the two bare facts--the Lord's second coming and the Restitution --and these but vaguely; for though we then saw restitution taught in Scripture, we were much in doubt as to its comprehensiveness, questioning often whether it would include all the billions of the dead whom the god of this world had in the present life blinded. And concerning the Lord's second coming, while we realized that he is no longer a man, but is now the new creature--the express image of the Father's person-- a quickening spirit, yet we failed somehow to make a proper application of this to his second coming, and unthinkingly and ignorantly, rather expected his coming to be as a glorified man, than as a spiritual being. It was not until about 1874 that these things became clearer, so that we realized that when Jesus should come, it would be as unobserved by human eyes as though an angel had come; and that it could be known only by some miracle, by some manifestation or demonstration....
Next our attention was drawn to the subject of the TIME of our Lord's coming. Before this we had strenuously ignored time, partly because of its being made so much of by "Second Adventists," and because of the frequent failures of their expectations. Moreover, the fact that they claimed the destruction of the world to be the impending event, and used the periods of time mentioned in Scripture to mark the time of that destruction, was another reason why we were disposed to ignore the subject of time. Their erroneous theory of the destruction of the world cast discredit on the time which they associated with it.
When, however, the manner of our Lord's coming was seen in the light of what he is--a spiritual, and no longer a human being--then we saw that our Father had provided TIME in the Bible, that thus we might know, or see with the eye of our understanding, what we could not see with our natural eyes-- viz., the Lord's presence. A careful study of times and seasons taught in Scripture convinced us that the Lord was due to be present in 1874, and other time teachings of the Word showed that in the spring of 1875 the restitution of all things was due to commence.
This conclusion was rather startling, and surprised us thoroughly. It would have seemed so much easier to believe had the prophecies pointed twenty years ahead and shown us that then Jesus would come--be present and do a separating work in the nominal Church, and during a time of trouble should so order the truth that it, as his word, would smite down evil and error of every form, including "the kingdoms of this world," under "the prince of this world." We re-examined every point carefully, and every part fitted to every other with a completeness that bore the stamp of truth, and with a strength which testified that the calculations came from and were the testimony of God's chronometer.

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/214041/1874-1914-1943

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

Jeffro,

Where did the claim come from that it was only changed after Rutherford's death??

The Proclaimers book says the change was made in 1944 for some strange reason. Since then it's become a piece of "tribal wisdom" in xJW circles.

(The only change I can see that happened in 1943/1944 was the adjustment from 606 to 607)

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

Fisherman

The term second coming was stopped being used by JW many years ago as misnomer and replaced with return and invisible presence.

I understand.

Russell (according to himself) adopted the idea of an invisible presence around 1876, so this has been a belief since well before Zion's Watch Tower. As he used them, the terms Second Advent, Second Coming and Second Presence were virtually interchangeable.

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

There is a slightly earlier reference in a booklet (As Jonsson points out) but I don't have it (And so can't scan it)

I take it back. I do have the booklet.

This is taken from the 1932 publication, What Is Truth? page 48. It is (AFAIK) the first, clear reference to 1914 as the year for Christ's second coming in JW literature.

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

Although the word, Parousia is not used, the first clear, unambiguous reference to 1914 as the year for Christ's second coming in The Watchtower appeared in the December 1 1933 issue on page 3:

There is a slightly earlier reference in a booklet (As Jonsson points out) but I don't have it (And so can't scan it)

89

Myth of 1914

by peacefulpete in

the wt engages in history revisionism when insisting the world changed overnight in 1914. in fact the european power struggles that came to a head were centuries old.

millions of lives had been lost in the wars of the 19th century, with the world a powder keg the years prior to the assassination of franz ferdinand in june 1914 which is often said, albeit rather arbitrarily, as the start of the war that escalated over the next 4 years into the great war.

take a look at these two pages and ask if the wt's interpretation of history seems accurate to you.

TD

Life was different after the Great War, (Which is how the JW's manage to pedal the alleged significance of 1914 in Europe, which has a much better grasp of their own history than Americans do) but I agree that tensions had been at a boiling point for decades.

Even today, a German historian would likely disagree with this statement:

"While one camp, joining Great Britain, France, and Russia (Triple Entente) strove to preserve the fragile balance between the European great powers, the second camp formed around German Empire, Austria-Hungary, and Italy (Central Powers) was challenging it."

(Especially the part about Italy)

5

Parable as an example of Editorial Fatigue.

by peacefulpete in

16 the first appeared, saying, ‘[d]master, your [e]mina has made ten minas more.’ 17 and he said to him, ‘well done, good slave, because you have been faithful in a very little thing, you are to be in authority over ten cities.’ 18 the second came, saying, ‘your [f]mina, [g]master, has made five minas.’ 19 and he said to him also, ‘and you are to be over five cities.’ 20 another came, saying, ‘master, here is your mina, which i kept put away in a handkerchief; 21 for i was afraid of you, because you are an exacting man; you take up what you did not lay down and reap what you did not sow.’ 22 he *said to him, ‘[h]by your own words i will judge you, you worthless slave.

23 then why did you not put my money in the bank, and having come, i would have collected it with interest?’ 24 then he said to the bystanders, ‘take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.’ 25 and they said to him, ‘master, he has ten minas already.’ 26 i tell you that to everyone who has, more shall be given, but from the one who does not have, even what he does have shall be taken away.

luke....‘take the mina away from him and give it to the one who has the ten minas.

TD

Interesting article. Luke's placement of the feeding of the five thousand at or near the hometown of Peter, Andrew and Phillip (Bethsaida) really does make it nonsensical for the crowd to seek lodging and food "..in the surrounding villages and countryside" (..εἰς τὰς κύκλῳ κώμας καὶ τοῦς ἀγροὺς καταλύσωσιν καὶ εὕρωσιν ἐπισιτισμόν)

10

Who Will Conquer the World in the 1970’s?

by FatFreek 2005 in

this quote is from a kingdom ministry, advertising to its members (i was one until 1977) in the year 1970.. "a new circuit assembly program is scheduled to begin in september.

we believe you will find it most informative and upbuilding.

the public talk will be “who will conquer the world in the 1970’s?” kingdom ministry announcements, july 1970, p. 3".

TD

The JW's were big fans of Paul Ehrlich (The Population Bomb) and Rachel Carson (Silent Spring) back then.

They (The JW's) don't seem to be as susceptible to sensationalism today, but I could be wrong.

121

Babylon the Great

by Godlyman in

do jw's still believe that babylon the great is the empire of false religion?

inquiring minds want to know .

estephan.

TD

Fisherman:

1. The author of Revelation is God

Do Jehovah's Witnesses acknowledge the peculiarities of Revelation? Eusebius (quoting Dionysius) said in his church history:

Moreover, it can also be shown that the diction of the Gospel and Epistle differs from that of the Apocalypse. For they were written not only without error as regards the Greek language, but also with elegance in their expression, in their reasoning, and in their entire structure. They are far indeed from betraying any barbarism or solecism, or any vulgarism whatever. For the writer had, as it seems, both the requisites of discourse—that is, the gift of knowledge and the gift of expression—as the Lord had bestowed them both upon him.

I do not deny that the other writer saw a revelation and received knowledge and prophecy. I perceive, however, that his dialect and language are not accurate Greek, but that he uses barbarous idioms, and, in some places, solecisms. It is unnecessary to point these out here, for I would not have anyone think that I have said these things in a spirit of ridicule, for I have said what I have only with the purpose of showing clearly the difference between the writings.

Without disputing the idea of inspiration, it does seem that the writer of Revelation was free to use his own words and expressions.

2. Babylon the Great has not been destroyed yet.

Isn't that a circular prior assumption of your own viewpoint?