by XPeterX 157 Replies latest jw friends
Gary,
I would just add that Barbour arrived at the 1914 date by counting forward from 606BC. At the time, this date was widely accepted in religious circles. That began to change from about 1875 on as more and more Babylonian chronicles were discovered. Eventually, almost everyone accepted the adjusted dates of 586 / 587
The Bible Students after 1914 simply had too much invested at that point to change.
In 1914, WWI began and they must've believed that they were in what appeared to be the beginning of the battle of armegeddon.
IIRC, for a long time afterward (since their Armageddon prophecy failed) they taught that 1914/WWI began the Great Tribulation. Later they taught that the tribulation began in 1914 and then later paused. It wasn't until 1969 that they discarded that teaching.
It wasn't until 1969 that they discarded that teaching.
Isn't it remarkable that there is NOTHING, absolutely nothing, about this whole 1914 date that has not been changed at some point in time?
I would be so much easier to either scrap it OR change it based on secular dating, at least that why the "generation" well have more time, LOL !
TD,
If Barbour indeed counted forward from 606 to arrive at 1914, then what was his basis for 606 to begin with? I guess the more general question would be, how did this date get accepted in general religious circles at the time?
You spin this issue right round, baby, right round
Like a record, baby, right round round round...
Titus,
As I've said before, the reason why this issue gets discussed so much here is because the WTS needs it to validate their authority. Without it, they're no better or worse than other Christian leaders. Without it, the faithful slave is no more qualified than the average Jehovah's Witness to interpret scripture. Think of what the ramifications this would have to their control over the flock.
Totally agree with you, GN.
They need to validate it. I really don't care for them.
But I also see this:
If they changed it, you would have attacked them, because they changed that.
They didn't change it, and now you attack them, because they don't want to change that.
It is like young children sitting in the marketplaces who cry out to their playmates, saying, ‘We played the flute for YOU, but YOU did not dance; we wailed, but YOU did not beat yourselves in grief.’ (Matthew 11:16-17)
So, I am playing to you now.
Let dance!
Come on!
I wanna see your hands over your heads!
If they changed it, you would have attacked them, because they changed that.
They didn't change it, and now you attack them, because they don't want to change that.
Their position is being attacked, Titus, not on the basis of changing it or not changing it.
It is being attacked because it was a false prophecy. It is still false prophecy whether it gets changed or not.
