Fallout 2014

by wobble 66 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Ding

    I think they will just phase out 1914.

    As we've seen with all the date changes in WT history, in practice no date (including 1914) is crucial for most JWs: "My service to Jehovah isn't tied to a date."

    IMO, for most JWs, the only things that can't be changed by the Society without losing them are:

    1. The name "Jehovah"

    2. The kingdom and paradise earth promise

    3. No trinity

    4. No war

    5. No hellfire

    Changing the blood doctrine would cause many who have lost loved ones to leave, but most JWs would be fine with the "new light."

    The hyping of various dates for Armageddon has always boosted meeting attendance, field service, and numbers.

    Without something new to fan the flames, many long-time JWs get weary, disheartened, and even disillusioned by the never-arriving, vague claims of the imminence of Armageddon.

    Many fall away, but they are replaced by new dubs who haven't experienced all the apocalyptic letdowns.

    Most weary old-timers stick with the organization because they have invested too much of the lives in it to admit to themselves that it's bunk.

    They gut it out because they have nowhere else to go where they can find the "Big 5" above and because of fear that they will blow it all if they quit now because Jehovah is testing them and because of the mantra that "he who endures to the end will be saved."

  • wobble

    On what will the Governing Body base their authority if they totally abandon 1914 ? they may be non-thinkers, but I think this has occured to, or been pointed out to them, hence the overlapping generation rubbish, it gives them a connection.

  • Ding

    I don't think they'll abandon 1914.

    I think they'll quit emphasizing it and so phase it out.

    They'll just talk about being God's organization, Armageddon being imminent, etc.

    In the past, date-setting has been what fired up the publishers and swelled the ranks.

    I don't think they can do that any more because of the internet and all the ex-JWs who are waiting to pounce on any new date.

    They'll have to try to come up with something else besides dates to fire up the troops.

    Does anything have any thoughts on what they might try?

  • Vidiot

    Ding - "In the past, date-setting has been what fired up the publishers and swelled the ranks. I don't think they can do that any more because of the internet and all the ex-JWs who are waiting to pounce on any new date. They'll have to try to come up with something else besides dates to fire up the troops. Does anything have any thoughts on what they might try?"

    This is another substantial quandry for the WTS that can only get larger as time goes on.

    I'd mentioned this in another thread, but I'll reiterate it:

    Studies have clearly shown that apocalyptic millenialist groups absolutely need to date-set (prophesy) to maintain internal cohesion and continue to expand (and thusly survive). However, as Roger Ebert said, the practice has a limited shelf life; continued failed dates undermine the date-setters' credibility (eventually even with the R&F), but refraining to date-set undermines the sense of urgency vital to the groups' continued survival. If the WTS stopped stirring up End-Times anxiety, they would arguably no longer be the WTS, because stirring up End-Times anxiety is a fundamental characteristic of the WTS.


  • DesirousOfChange

    I think it's already been said: You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool 7.5Million people all of the time. (or can you?)

  • kurtbethel

    This reminds me of Y2K, the 2000 Jupiter Effect, and the 2003 planet X nonsense. People who peddle these ideas deserved to be mocked and laughed at.

  • just n from bethel
    just n from bethel

    Ditto for Ding - or 'yeah - what he/she said'

    The whole slow phase out of 1914 has subtly begun, imo.

    I mean compare the live forever book to the bible teach book - particularly the chapters that explain 1914.

    I think the Bible Teach book gets a paragraph or two and an appendix. - whereas the Live forever had a whole chapter.

    I even think the latest OM book changed up the baptismal questions a little on the 1914 question. I think it was much more in depth in the old version and now I think it's a bit generic, more just like... Do you believe we're living in the last days and why?

    What was dumb - was bringing in this silly overlapping generation stuff. That kind of made it semi-fresh again.

    The other problem with a full phase-out though, is that the Revelation book will have to be changed quite a bit - along with the Daniel book etc.

    However, the good news is that they really no longer have to dogmatically tie in prophecy from a day for a year type calculation. As they've done with 1919, it just kind of arbitrarily appeared. There is no time or times or half time to correlate to 1919. It just is the date that was picked. Kind of like the 2000 odd days in Daniel that start and end with a convention/Watchtower in the 1930s/40s. There's not a way to mathematically arrive at those dates even using symbology. They just picked them - put them in a one or two books, and never mentioned them again.

    More and more, they say "where else will you go" - which basically means - 'it's true, we're wrong on a lot of stuff, but hey I didn't invest 40-60 years of my life being part of the wrong club - it just has to be right - please, stay.?!!'

    It all reminds of the herlihy boy, with Farley = GB and Sandler = your JW relative/friend/elder:


  • GOrwell

    The "average mentions" thing is the total number of hits that the term "1914" returned on the WT CD for each decade, specifically in the Watchtower mag. For instance, the decade 1990-1999 had a total of 493 hits (added together for each year 1990-1999), and divided by 10 years, gives a 49.3 average for that decade.. This should filter out any abberations, like where one article in the decade had a special article on 1914 etc..

    Just shows how slowly, but surely, the doctrine is being laid to rest..

  • Juan Viejo2
    Juan Viejo2


    Is that image of JC in his throne from a WT graphic? I just wondered because I think I see some porn buried in it. Of course I see porn in everything - even porn. Let me take a closer look...

    Looks to me like a tiny naked lady lying in his lap !

    Jesus has two left hands!!!

    That proves that no one can "sit on the right hand of Jesus," because he doesn't have a "right hand!"


  • Juan Viejo2
    Juan Viejo2

    Thanks to Six Screens of the Watchtower, and some other sites, I can't look at a JW publication graphic any longer without seeing subliminal images.

    It is very curious the way they draw the folds in their characters' clothes. As someone has mentioned on an earlier post, look at any photo and you will rarely if ever see horizontal or angular folds, especially when someone is standing up. Folds tend to be vertical and creases and wrinkles will tend to disappear as the cloth is pulled down by gravity.

    I know, this is off subject, but hey - I saw porn! I know I did!


Share this