"This Generation"

by Jeffro 41 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Jeffro

  I know the Witnesses changed their 'generation' definition in 1995 to get away from being tied down to the literal generation of people who saw 1914.

  But applying their definition of the word to Matthew 24:34 makes the verse meaningless, regardless of whether the original text grammatically allows for their interpretation. There is no point in saying "this generation will by no means pass away" if 'generation' merely refers to an attitude of people which may remain the same for any ongoing period of time.

  There is simply no point in saying it unless it was intended to refer specifically to a literal generation of people who were alive at the time. Of course, there is no validity to their 1914 doctrine anyway, but nevertheless, they are inextricably stuck with it.
• 

  zeroday

  Without their 1914 date all of their doctrines disappear. Their claim to be the only channel of communication between God and true christians etc. They can not discard it with out the entire house of cards crashing down on them. That is why they had to dance around the literal and figurative "Generation".
• 

  Confession

  It's so strange to look back on this change. Truth is, I don't remember being affected by it. I was first appointed as an elder in December of 1995, the same month the Newsweek article came out. I was only interested because an old friend and elder from a former congregation, Brother Kris of Saginaw West, was interviewed as part of it.

  Charles Kris, 73, a retired autoworker from Saginaw, Mich., served three years in prison with 400 other Witnesses for refusing to fight in World War II. "It was prison life, but I took advantage of the time to study the Bible and witness to other prisoners," he recalls. But for Kris and especially for those younger Witnesses who have no memory of the rough early days (the Nazis interred many Witnesses in concentration camps), preaching God's message is more important than witnessing the end of the world. "I'd like to live to see it happen," says Kris, who still hands out tracts door to door. "But if it doesn't in my lifetime, I won't be disappointed."

  Charlie died a few years later. It was not until I read this that I really thought about the change. I remember thinking that I never really accepted the Society's position on "this generation" anyway. So when they changed it it seemed like a validation of what I'd been feeling. Can you say, "clueless"?
• 

  Abandoned

  The whole generation change didn't hit me when I was in. Back then, I just thought it was another clever trick by jehovah to expose the fake brothers in the congregation. After reading a good deal of CoC though, the whole thing makes so much more sense. Every date they ever used, they relegated to a lower and lower position over time until they could get rid of it altogether. 1874, 1878, 1881, 1999, 1914, 1918.

  For example, first the end of all governments were "cleary" going to come in 1914. That came and went so russel said that since it took three years for jerusalem to fall, it wouldn't be until 1918, but that the governements would definitely fall that year. That didn't happen so 1918 became the time of cleansing. Soon, 1918 will not have any significance.

  These guys are beyond heinous.
• 

  heathen

  Yah that is a bit hard to swallow .There are alot of things that the generation in Mathew are supposed to live through but the passage does say , this generation will by no means pass away until all the things come to pass. In effect it's saying it does pass away, not that you will live forever.I mentioned my belief that the generation of 1914 would die off and received some flack whenever I was studying so now they would expect me to swallow that load of BS ? Like it's now an invisible generation but stil the "anointed" are the only ones that rapture. I mean jeeze with a cut off date of 1935 on that , it would leave only a couple if that.
• 

  Narkissos

  Applying "this generation" to anything besides the generation of 70 AD makes the Synoptic context meaningless.

  But Christian readers have been doing it for 19 centuries now.
• 

  Clam

  Applying "this generation" to anything besides the generation of 70 AD makes the Synoptic context meaningless.

  Absolutely!

  Just to clarify the WTS "position" for any thread onlookers:

  "Even if we presume that youngsters 15 years of age would be perceptive enough to realize the import of what happened in 1914, it would still make the youngest of ‘this generation’ nearly 70 years old today. So the great majority of the generation to which Jesus was referring has already passed away in death. The remaining ones are approaching old age. And remember, Jesus said that the end of this wicked world would come before the generation passed away in death. This of itself, tells us that the years left before the foretold end comes cannot be many." - AW 10/8/68 p13-14

  "If you assume that 10 is the age at which an event creates a lasting impression on a person's memory, then there are today more than 13 million Americans who have a recollection of World War I. And if the wicked system of this world survived until the turn of the century,which is highly improbable in view of world trends and the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, there will still be survivors of the World War I generation. However, the fact that their number is dwindling is one more indication that ‘the conclusion of the system of things’ is moving fast towards its end." - WT 10/15/80 p31

  "If Jesus used ‘generation’ in the sense and we apply it to 1914, then the babies of that generation are now 70 years old or older. And others alive in 1914 are in their 80's or 90's., a few having reached a hundred. There are still many millions of that generation alive. Some of them ‘will by no means pass away until all things occur.’ - Luke 21:32." - WT 5/15/84

  "Therefore, in the final fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy today, ‘this generation’ apparently refers to the peoples of the earth who see the sign of Christ's presence but fail to mend their ways." - WT 11/1/95 pg19

  D'OH
• 

  Perry

  I was enraged by this change and left the WT for good over it back in '95. I've got 50 dollars for anyone that can document a conversation about 1914 with an active witness for more than 5 minutes.

  It is the sand that their whole house of cards is built on.
• 

  Narkissos

  LOL.

  I must correct my previous remark, which was too broad, by adding that Luke already tries to separate the "generation" from the Jewish war, substituting to the "shortening" of the "tribulation" (Mrk 13:20) an intervening "time of Gentiles" (Luke 21:24) before the "signs in heaven" (Luke 21:25), which in the former versions were to occur "after" (Mark 13:24) or "immediately after" (Matthew 24:29) the tribulation and lead to the final "sign of the Son of Man".

  It is quite possible that along with this disconnection from the Jewish war, the genea is already losing some of its temporal meaning and starting its move toward a religious or racial one ("this generation" = "the unbelieving Jews who rejected Jesus," cf. Luke 17:25 among material from Mark 13).
• 

  moggy lover

  The Nov 1995 Watchtower, detailing the latest interpretation of Matt 24:34 to come out of the WTS thought control headquaters in Bethel, NY must surely be one of the seminal issues they have published in all the years of their otherwise sordid history.

  Like most charlatans, they applied theological legerdemain and intellectual sleight-of-hand to craft a scenario that diverted attention from their own previous failings and created a position that now seems unassailable.Conjuring, rather than revealing the meaning behind what may have been a solid biblical revelation, they ended up with tickling the ears of their R&F.

  The 1995 interpretation of Matt 24:34 is the latest culmination of a process that has undergone several mutations over the years of WTS existence. We will have the grace not to mention the utterly absurd prophetic utterances of Russell and Rutherford, utterances which were evidently made with divine sanction, because these have long since been embarrasingly discarded by their less than loyal sucessors. But suffice it to say that in recent years these changes have been well documented by observers of the WTS. Ray Franz, in his book "In Search of Christian Freedom" pgs 477-480] details these:

  1 Oct 8, 68 Awake: [pgs 13, 14] The comment was made that Jesus was "obviously" referring to those at least 15 years and over.

  2 Oct 1, 78 WT: [pg 31] What was "obvious" in 68, evidently became less than "obvious" ten years later.It now appeared, again under the sanction of a mutable god, that those "Old enough to observe" those things were being the ones being referred to. At the same time, they emphatically ruled out those born on that date of 1914, because this was thought to be a logical conclusion.

  3 Oct 15, 80 WT: [pg 31] Two years later, evidently under pressure to reveal what "Old enough to observe" meant, they suggested an age of at least 10 years.

  4 May 15 84 WT [pgs 4-7] Six years later from the statement made in 78, what appeared "logical" then mysteriously transmuted into "illogical" and those who were in fact born in 1914 became acceptable.

  Now, with nimble ambiguity, and misplaced rhetoric, they have settled on an "explanation" that satisfies neither scriptural nor personal concerns. Arrogantly insensitive to those who have tirelessly given their devotion to the WT leadership, and who now have suffered disappointment, this latest clarification of a troublesome issue has put to rest any further need for discussion.

  I feel that it is necessary to know that the evolution of WTS theology comes not as result of concern for biblical fidelity, but rather for gaining the best practical benefit to the WT leadership. WT theology coexists comfortably with their financial greed, and adjustments such as this satisfies this gratification, not biblical revelation. That such tactics violate even the most basic grounds of disciplined Bible exposition, is something that is of no concern to the WTS leadership. What is important is that they must be seen to be operating under divine fiat.

  How long the WTS can continue with this charade depends on their ability to obfuscate this matter sucessfully. The usual method employed is to create other certainties that can absorb the attention of the R&F. The displacement of the latest tract seems to be one such means.

  Cheers

  Cheers