by Legacy 62 Replies latest jw friends
AndDon'tCallMeShirley - "The article is deliberately confusing. 99% of JWs will be easily worn down considering the material and give up; those who really want to make sense of it will also give up...because it will annoy anyone with any sense of rational, logical thought."
You actually think they specifically wrote it to be paradoxical and contradictory on purpose?
@Apognophos - The question I have with all this is, "Where did Jesus go in 1919?"
In the parable the master went away when he appointed the slave to dispense food to the domestics.
George
Good question St George, since if he went away in 1919, who appointed the newest batch of GB, none of whom were alive when the 1919 appointments were made.
Maybe Christ pops back every now and then to see how things are going. I don't recall this in the illustration of the 10 virgins.
Splash
Splash - "Maybe Christ pops back every now and then to see how things are going."
If he does, every facepalm's an epic one.
I liked the quote in COC when Knorr said,(paraphrasing), "Gee, I hope we're right about 1914, we bet the farm on it".
Good thing he was long dead by 1995.
He would have been real pissed at ol' Fred.
Imagine a conversation about this if they were alive in the early 90's.
The scene opens in Knorrs office. He has summoned Fred Franz, who is setting in front of his desk.
NHK: What the fuck, Fred? We're running out of time here! People BORN in 1914 are almost 80 years old! Let alone those that were 12. They're over 90, fer Chrissake! We've already stretched this thing to the breaking point. Now what?
FF: Yes, Yes. I know Nathan. But, I've got an idea. You know the original Greek word for "generation" is..
NHK: Don't start that original Greek shit with me, you dumbass!...we're in a bind here and I need some answers!
FF: Well, what I'm saying is, we could start running some articles in the 'tower about being faithful to the GB and, oh yeah!, some district convention talks and...well... kind of soften the fuckers up for a couple of years and then, wham! We tell them they have read too much into what was said before and that here's the straight dope. Then we put THEM on the defensive. Remind them about "no one knows the day and hour"... and "thief in the night" and all that good shit...
NHK: Are you serious? They'd run us out of town on a rail!
FF: Now wait a minute, Nate. We've been through this before. You can't kill these bastards with a stick! They'll buy whatever we tell them. The ones that don't, well, they either eat it and smile or we boot 'em! It'll be fine I tell ya'
NHK: Well, we don't have much choice do we, mister "1975"?
FF: Nate, come on, you said you wouldn't bring that up again.
NHK: Ok, you little fruit. Put something together and and we'll run it by the jerk jolly boys and see where it goes.
It surprising how accepting the 1914 doctrine is when no other Christian based religion has it except the WTS. publishing House.
Its almost like this doctrine was concocted by the WTS. deliberately just to attract attention to its literature toward the public. .......naaaaaaa.
Vidiot:
You actually think they specifically wrote it to be paradoxical and contradictory on purpose?
In the diet, supplement and exercise world there is a dictum:
"complicate to profit, simplify for results".
In other words, diet, supplementation and exercise is simple once you understand a few basics. So, simple, in fact, that promoting these concepts honestly would wipe out any hope of anyone actually making money on it.
Thus, supplement companies and exercise gurus make health appear as complicated as possible, and quite impossible for the layperson to navigate on their own without expensive "expert" advice, goofy equipment and mind-numbing programs and methodologies. Complicated = profits.
WT has deliberately complicated a simple parable and made it impossible for the lay-JW to understand without the "expert" guidance of the GB. It's sheer genius.
ADCMS, Precisely!
If JC's ARRIVAL didn't occur in 1914 or 1919 then the "last days" could not have started either. (at least according to their previous understanding) Or am I missing their convoluted point?
