607-1914 being phased out?

Moxy

years ago, when i first figured out the problems with the 607 chronology, i began to think that the society was mentioning the 7 times link to 1914 less and less in recent pubs. after all, the knowledge book gave it less space than the live forever book, and the fluffy require brochure doesnt mention it all. could it be, i wondered, that they are gradually phasing this teaching out? perhaps relying on other 'last days' evidences for the 1914 date as the kingdom birth?

later, i thought i was probably over-reacting because i had just started to really look for 607 references in earnest. my increased attention made just made it seem like the references were getting more sparse. a phasing-out did not seem likely.

now, im wondering again. one thing i never thought to do was simply query the wt cd for '1914' and '607' in WTs and look at the number of mentions. i just did and here are the results, 1914 numbers followed by 607:

1999: 16/7
1998: 37/3
1997: 50/15
1996: 36/7
1995: 32/6
1994: 58/9
1993: 53/4
1992: 85/5
1991: 48/13
1990: 65/2
1989: 44/10
1988: 49/21
1987: 61/3
1986: 73/6
1986: 76/15
1984: 172/9
1983: 137/15
1982: 74/23
1981: 61/6
1980: 53/20

so i wasnt imagining it. the 16 references in 1999 are the fewest for any year ever. of course, this is offset somewhat by the daniel book from that year, which mentions 607 and 1914 a LOT, while giving no explanation of the 607 choronology, an explanation conspicuous in its absence.

the w2001 4/1 cover features the question 'The Kingdom Good News - Is It For You?' and opens a 2-article, 5-page discussion on the kingdom. now this is a pretty fluffy article, as most cover series tend to be recently. but does it strike you as odd that 5 pages devoted to the kingdom, with subheadings like 'what is the kingdom?' and 'the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near' make no mention of 1914 at all? in fact there is no mention of a 'when' at all, of a 'last days' or of the kingdom being currently in power. you may wonder how the article can have any impact at all with no references to time period. and yet the article concludes with the terse paragraph:

'Act now, for the blessings of God's Kingdom are at hand!'

it is so elliptical that they could end the article with two time-based references in a single sentence while the entire 5 pages previous are devoid of them, that i am forced to wonder again about the 'phasing-out' idea.

mox

Skimmer

Yes, I believe that the WTBTS is once again engaged in the practice of "silent dropping". Instead of admitting an error in a doctrine, they slowly stop writing about the doctrine. This is particularly true for their chronological speculations.

Perhaps the final notice before officially dropping some teaching occurs whenever a new bible study book for potential converts is released. If a core belief is not mentioned, then for sure it will be revised as "new light" at the next assembly.

I'd be interested in reading the reference counts to other dates over the past twenty years. For example, how often is 1935 mentioned as the sealing date for the FDS? I think that one is going to be dropped soon. And how about 1919 as the date when the WTBTS was "chosen" as God's Only True Channel? And do they sill mention 4026 BC as the creation date?

I don't doubt that the WTBTS has an already established game plan for silently dropping all their chronological speculations. They're just spreading it out over time as a form of damage control.

Isn't it a bit odd that so much of the "new light" is given to "apostates" before it shows up in Brooklyn?

betweenworlds

Wow! That is really interesting. Thanks for the post Moxy.

expatbrit

607? 1914?

We never said that.

Moxy

all dates are being mentioned less. i have said before that i believe there are individuals higher-up, younger ones, who would like to see the WT get out of the chronology business altogether just as much as i do. this quote sums it up from w97 9/1

Jehovah’s Witnesses have been eager to know when the day of Jehovah will occur. In their eagerness they have at times made attempts to estimate when it might come. But by so doing, they have failed, as did Jesus’ early disciples, to heed their Master’s caution that we “do not know when the appointed time is.” (Mark 13:32, 33) Ridiculers have mocked faithful Christians for their premature expectations. (2 Peter 3:3, 4) Nevertheless, Jehovah’s day will come, Peter affirms, according to His timetable.

CTR must be spinning.

mox

apostate

If Jerusalem wasn't destroyed in 607 B.C.E., than the last days did not start in 1914. If the last days did not started in 1914 they were not appointed to be God's Faithful and Descreet Slave in 1919.

If they can't even tell when they been appointed to be God's Faithful and Descreet Slave than they have a trouble communicating with God.

The Bible doesn't say anything about blood transfusion or organ transplant ban. They are responsible for man slaughtering.

Skimmer

Note how the WTBTS "apology" places the blame on all JWs and not where it belongs, the governing body.

Did any of the rank and file ever contribute dates, doctrine, or anything besides cash and slave labor to Brooklyn? Where any of the rank and file asked to sign approvals to the material coming out of the writing department? How many times were any of the rank and file invited to attend any doctrinal discussions of the governing body? What happens to any rank and file JW who publicly endorses any doctrine which is at odds with the current "light"?

The only thing the rank and file JWs can be blamed for is their uncritical acceptance of the bovine feces output by the WTBTS printing presses.

bigboi

Hey Moxy;

I wouldn't be surprised if they are getting rid of these old teachings based on chronology. I think the WTS is attempting to become more mainstream. In the next 5 to ten yrs I think they will attempt to revamp most of their old teachings in favor of more mainstream interpretations.

Peace:

Bigboi

"..... anyone who ignores everyday reality in order to live up to an ideal will soon discover he had been taught how to destroy himself, not how to preserve himself." The Prince. Niccolo Machiavelli.

JT

Note how the WTBTS "apology" places the blame on all JWs and not where it belongs, the governing body.
Did any of the rank and file ever contribute dates, doctrine, or anything besides cash and slave labor to Brooklyn? Where any of the rank and file asked to sign approvals to the material coming out of the writing department? How many times were any of the rank and file invited to attend any doctrinal discussions of the governing body? What happens to any rank and file JW who publicly endorses any doctrine which is at odds with the current "light"?

The only thing the rank and file JWs can be blamed for is their uncritical acceptance of the bovine feces output by the WTBTS printing presses.

Skimmmer summed it up nicely

thye always use such phrases as

THE BROTHERS
SOME AMONG GOD'S PEOPLE
JEHOVAH'S PEOPLE
ETC

NEVER THE FDS got this one wrong

great post skimmer

james

philo

Moxy

Nice post.

I wonder when/if 1914 IS phased out, when that will happen. I guess you could project that time from your graph!

I think there would have to be "astounding" phrophetic displacement, to fill the missing 1914.

Here's something from last year on the subject of the chronology shift.

--------------------------------------------

Henry Grew … tired of Chronology

An article from WT October 15th 2000 is about an “old faithful” immigrant, Henry Grew. He has been resurrected into that illustrious Pre-Watchtowerian hall of fame. “Resurrected”, because until now there have been just two cursory references to this man in WTBTS literature. It may seem significant that both these references are from the recent official WT history book, “Proclaimers”. (At least back to 1950).

Grew has been pictured in a box on page 26. His stoutly bust is framed in a cameo, like a beloved uncle who left you his money. This is how George Storrs and CT Russell are depicted on pages 28 and 29 of the same article. The context of WT heritage is graphically clear, and requires no reading between the lines.

Most people know that Storrs and Russell were full-on Chronologists, in fact they were …ologists of just about every kind, such was their versatility, but that’s another story. Henry Grew, however, as we are told on page 28, consistently rejected all Chronological speculations after the famous William Miller predictions failed in 1844.

Now all faithful students of the Watchtower like me are behoooved to chew on this. So what does it mean? Or, why has the WTBTS given Henry Grew a full page of text, (plus a picture and summary box), and linked him so intimately with Storrs and Russell, and why now?

I would be interested to read what WT historians may make of this development, but until one does I think the obvious conclusion must be a chronological one. The WTBTS here and now wants to steer away from Chronology, and fairly briskly too. Its one thing to stop the chronologising itch (although I hear the first few weeks are the hardest) and drift away from it. But this isn’t drifting at all. Here we have an exalted, enlightened forerunner of our great and holy organisation who rejected chronological speculation.

Perhaps to be honest, perhaps to minimise criticism from the present faithful generation, or else to allow for future historical revisions, the article adds that he “did not object if others wanted to investigate Chronology” [p28]

If the WTBTS ARE moving none-too-quietly away from chronology as a whole, this would appear to confirm suggestions made H2O posters such as (MDS) that the org is preparing for BIG changes in doctrine.

philo
------------------------------
philo

607-1914 being phased out?

Share this