Nine JW assumptions about 1914 and Daniel 4

by a Christian 15 Replies latest jw friends

  • jeanV
    jeanV

    very good.

    You could have added that no other prophecy in Daniel had two fulfillments (at least not for the WTBTS). funny, no?

    It will be interesting to see with what he comes back, particularly with regard to 587 vs 607. There is plenty of evidence about 587 that you'll put him in a corner.

  • startingover
    startingover

    Mike,

    Do you happen to know what month in 1943 they changed the 1874 to 1914? I recently discovered some letters my grandfather wrote to a friend preaching to him about 1914. They were written in 1942, shortly before he died in May of 1943. My curiosity has been spiked wondering if he ever knew about that change. In another letter to his family in that same year, he lamented that there were so many changes taking place in the organization it bothered him, and he saw what he described as "gullibility" in those around him. If he had lived past 1943, he might have left the organization and history would have been completely changed. I probably shouldn't go there, because if he had I probably wouldn't have existed.

    I found it interesting that he used the date 606 instead of 607 in his 1914 calculations, I guess that shows they hadn't discovered the 0 year yet.

    Edited to say you did an excellent job with those letters.

  • toreador
    toreador

    Excellent job Mike!!

    Toreador

  • a Christian
    a Christian

    Starting Over,

    You asked: Do you happen to know what month in 1943 they changed the 1874 to 1914?

    I don't know about the month. I would guess early summer. Because that's when they have always released their new books at the district assemblies.

    The book to which I refer was entitled "The Truth Shall Make You Free". It was published in 1943.

    I don't have a copy of that book. But I have another of the Society's books which refers back to that book and its doing away with "1874". The following quote is from "God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached" published by the Watch Tower Society in 1973:

    In the year 1943 the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society published the book "TheTruthShallMakeYouFree." In its chapter 11, entitled "The Count of Time," it did away with the insertion of 100 years into the period of the Judges and went according to the oldest and most authentic reading of Acts 13:20, and accepted the spelled-out numbers of the Hebrew Scriptures. This moved forward the end of six thousand years of man’s existence into the decade of the 1970’s. Naturally this did away with the year 1874 C.E. as the date of return of the Lord Jesus Christ and the beginning of his invisible presence or parousia. The millennium that was to be marked by the detaining of Satan the Devil enchained in the abyss and by the reign of the 144,000 joint heirs with Christ in heavenly glory was therefore yet in the future. What, then, about the parousia (presence) of Christ? Page 324 of the above book positively says: "The King’s presence or parousia began in 1914." Also, in the Watchtower issue of July 15, 1949 (page 215, paragraph 22), the statement is made: " . . . Messiah, the Son of man, came into Kingdom power A.D. 1914 and . . . this constitutes his second coming and the beginning of his second parousía or presence."

    Odd that this book refers to a 1949 Watchtower as teaching that Christ's return took place in 1914. Is this indicating that it wasn't until 1949 that the Watchtower magazine taught that Christ's "parousia" began in 1914?

    I have not been a JW since about 1980. I believe the Society published a somewhat candid/somewhat whitewashed history of the organization in 1993 entitled Jehovah's Witnesses: Proclaimers of God's Kingdom. I don't have a copy. But I remember hearing that this book also admits to the 1874 doctrine being taught up until 1943.

    Hey guys and gals, thanks to all for the kind words about my letters. Like I said, I thought I'd post them here so someone might read them. Because I doubt their intended recipient will.

    Mike

  • startingover
    startingover

    Thanks for the info Mike

    I recall that reference in the Proclaimers book, but I was not familiar with the other references. I am going to analyze my grandfather's writing to see if I can figure out what he knew. I don't know about that 1949 date.

  • M.J.
    M.J.

    bookmarked.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit