Another Lie/Revisionist History in todays WT study!!

by BU2B 78 Replies latest jw friends

  • BU2B
    BU2B

    I caught yet another Revisionist history deception in todays WT lesson.

    Here is a quote from paragraph 4 of the 2/15/13 Study Edition

    "Decades before 1914, Jehovah's worshippers declared to the nations that the end of "the appointed times of the nations" would come in that year and that the world would enter into an unequaled period of trouble."

    This is a lie because the WT actually said this at the time!

    July 15, 1894 WT states,

    gods dates

    I told my wife as we sat in the KH today that the WT today is mistaken as it was taught back then that the end was coming in that year not the start of the last days. Also they felt the last days had been ongoing with their beginning in 1799!

    There is nothing any JW loyalist can say against this, as it is non debatable, not an opinion but right here in Black and White, that this in todays WT was a lie and a deception, and at the very best a grave error!

  • leaving_quietly
    leaving_quietly

    Sorry... I have to disagree. I initially thought the same thing, but had to dig a little and found that The Bible Examiner of 1876 had an article entitled "Gentile Times: When Do They End" that does say the things the article here claims.

    http://ia600307.us.archive.org/27/items/1876BibleExaminer/1876_Bible_Examiner_Russell.pdf

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    : Also they felt the last days had been ongoing with their beginning in 1799!

    Yes, and what is even worse is that they taught that at least until 1930, some 11 years AFTER Jehovah had inspected an approve his faithful slave as pure and clean!

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Farkel

  • alanv
    alanv

    The point is Russell and his cronies felt this was the time of trouble that would lead to Armaggeddon. It did not. It had nothing to do with God taking action against the nations. It just turned out to be an extra large war. If it had been God's war, all nations would have ended in destruction, as it was, many nations were not part of the world war, and most of them lived to fight another day. This was not what Russell expected and spoke of at all.

  • leaving_quietly
    leaving_quietly

    I don't disagree. Just saying that what they said in today's WT is technically true. What other things they expected at that time were conveniently left out of the article. I was most interested in the "decades before" part, which meant it had to be at least 20 years prior, and found (a) it was in this 1876 article, (b) the article pointed to 1914 and (c) the article said it would be 'a time of trouble such as never was before'. All of that is true. The only part I could not confirm is that it was "declared to the nations" as the 1876 article was clearly written to the brethren, not the nations. The 1894 article mentioned in the OP seems to say the opposite of the 1876 article as far as the time of trouble is concerned.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I fully believe WT to be revisionists. However, in this case, what they stated today is technically true.

  • AndDontCallMeShirley
    AndDontCallMeShirley

    leaving_quietly said: Sorry... I have to disagree. I initially thought the same thing, but had to dig a little and found that The Bible Examiner of 1876 had an article entitled "Gentile Times: When Do They End" that does say the things the article here claims.

    The Bible Examiner article you refer to does nothing to support Watchtower's claim. You should choose your battles with a little more discretion. As farkel accurately noted, Russell taught that 1799 was the beginning of the last days, not 1914, and this remained an official teaching of WT until 1943.

    Russell did not predict anything close to a world war as a 1914 event. In fact, not one thing Russell said would occur in 1914 happened! 100% fail. Furthermore, sometimes coincidences happen relating to so-called "prophecy" and world events. This is where the 1799 date originated. George Bell predicted the Catholic Church would be overthrown. In 1798 Napolean captured and imprisoned the Pope. So, 1799 was said to be the start of Bell's prophetic timeline. Of course, it was pure coincidence, but that didn't seem to bother Russell or any other end-times fundamentalists.

    1914 was not predicted to be the beginning of a time of trouble and the start of the last days. No, it was the end, the finality, Armageddon. So, when WT claims that it has consistently pointed to 1914 as the start of the last days and the date of Jesus' enthronement as King it is a flat-out lie! Russell originally taught that Jesus returned invisibly in 1874, a date he borrowed from the Adventists. Additionally, the 607-1914 dates/Gentile Times was not Russell's idea either. That was invented by JA Brown and modified by the Adventists, too.

    You stated twice the word TECHNICALLY the WT was right. That's candy-coating, nothing more. If something is absolutely, irrefutably true, you don't need to use the word "technically". Granted, 1914 was a time of trouble, but certainly nothing compared to other time periods and events in history. Many world leaders and military officers anticipated a major war starting in Europe prior to 1914. It was a matter of "when", not "if" it would happen.

    ---

    "Jehovah’s Witnesses have consistently shown from the Scriptures that the year 1914 marked the beginning of this world’s time of the end and that ‘the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly men’ has drawn near." The Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1993, p. 9

    "But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble. Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226
    --

    1922 "The indisputable facts, therefore, show that the "time of the end" began in 1799; that the Lord's second presence began in 1874." (The Watchtower, March 1, 1922)

    "'The time of the end' embraces a period from 1799 A.D., as above indicated, to the time of the complete overthrow of Satan's empire and the establishment of the kingdom of the Messiah. The time of the Lord's second presence dates from 1874, as above stated. The latter period is within the first named, of course, and in the latter part of the period known as "the time of the end." (The Harp of God, 1921 p. 236)

    1888: "In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that the date will be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men. And be it observed, that if this is shown to be a fact firmly established by the Scriptures, it will prove; Firstly, that at that date the Kingdom of God, for which our Lord taught us to pray, saying, Thy Kingdom come, will obtain full, universal control, and that it will then be set up, or firmly established, in the earth, on the ruins of present institutions." (The Time Is At Hand, 1888, p. 76, 77)

    --

    "In the coming 26 years [1914/1915] , all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved." (C.T. Russell, Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 2, p. 98-99, 1889)

    --

    "We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble." (Watchtower July 15, 1894, p 266; p 1677)

    --

    *: "In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of A.D. 1914." (The Time Is At Hand, 1902 edition, p. 99)

    * note change in the 1915 edition below when 1914 failed

    1915: "In view of this strong Bible evidence concerning the Times of the Gentiles, we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the kingdom of God, will be accomplished near the end of A.D. 1915. (The Time Is At Hand, 1915 edition, p. 99)

    when 1914 and 1915 failed to bring Armageddon, the WT again pinned those events on another year:

    Also, in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of Christianity. (The Finished Mystery, 1917 edition, p. 485)

    and, all the failed predictions did not result in any humility or honesty in the WT, Rutherford continued the nonsense with the "Millions" charade:

    1922 "We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925. It was on this line of reckoning that the dates 1874, 1914, and 1918 were located; and the Lord has placed the stamp of his seal upon 1914 and 1918 beyond any possibility of erasure. What further evidence do we need? Using this same measuring line.... it is an easy matter to locate 1925, probably in the fall, for the beginning of the antitypical jubilee. There can be no more question about 1925 than there was about 1914." (Watchtower, p. 150, May 15, 1922)

  • Oubliette
    Oubliette

    Nice catch, BU2B. It's interesting that in the WT Study only last week we were encouraged thusly:

    "We benefit from balanced consideration of the history of Jehovah’s organization, ... Moreover, we do well to examine our history, learn from it, and plan for the future." - The Watchtower, February 15, 2013, p. 12, para, 18

    They say this, but look what happens when we actually do this!

    We find glaring inconsistencies, contradictions and historical inaccuracies and outright revisions!

    So, I have to ask myself, "Why would they encourage us to do something that would only expose their hypocrisy and lies?" The only reason I can figure that they would encourage the R&F to "examine our history" is that they know that you canNOT discovery their treachery without going to forbidden websites. In other words, they're calling your bluff.

    Oubliette

    BTW,What the heck is a "balanced consideration" of history?

  • Oubliette
    Oubliette

    When someone makes a "technically true" statement regarding the "End of the Gentile Times" (or anything else for that matter) while simultaneously misrepresenting what C. T. Russell and the Bible Students understood to be the significance of that teaching, they are being dishonest.

    It is possible that the WT writers really do not know what Russell taught about 1914. I find this hard to believe, but if true then it means that the WT writers are incompetent and do not even know their own history accurately.

    It is much more likely that they DO know their history and that they are deliberately being deceptive using clever language to misrepresent what actually happened while allowing themselves "plausible deniability."

    Today's WT is dishonest regarding what Russell taught concerning 1914.

    Is this the way "God's Visible Organization" should be representing Jehovah?

  • leaving_quietly
    leaving_quietly

    Erm... sorry... didn't mean to make this into a battle.

    TL;DR - "I agree with you... I am simply responding to the exact wording in the paragraph."

    Longer version:

    But, to be clear, the WT views 1914 as both the end of the Gentile Times and the beginning of the last days. Today's WT talked specifically referred to 1914 as the end of "the appointed time of the nations" (aka the Gentile Times), so we're not talking about the beginning of the last days here, therefore, that shouldn't be part of the discussion. Thus, I maintain that the article today is technically correct. We all know about the "last days" debacle. I'm not denying that. I'm just using the words in the paragraph today and comparing them to what the 1876 article said (and what the 1888 article you quoted said... "full end of the times of the gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914".

    If today's article said, "Decades before 1914, Jehovah's worshippers declared to the nations that the last days would begin in that year and that the world would enter into an unequaled period of trouble." then we would be having an entirely different discussion, and we would all be on the same page. But, they didn't say that. However, as my dad once told me, "Pay particular attention to how the Society words things. They do it for a reason." Often, that reason is to gloss over certain things, as is clearly the case here. So, based on the wording alone, I am simply pointing out that what they said today is technically correct. Of course, anyone who does research would come across all the references you brought up, and as per last week's article, we should be examining our rich heritage, should we not?

  • leaving_quietly
    leaving_quietly
    Today's WT is dishonest regarding what Russell taught concerning 1914.

    No question. I agree. To an average JW, though, you have to respond to the exact words, which I attempted to do (and failed... )

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit