2=3 or 4=5
I read your post. I am considering the information.
The 1914 generation is still going strong 100 years later - 2014 study article.
by THE GLADIATOR 443 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Finkelstein
When the WTS. proclaimed and published the announcement that Jesus had returned
both times, in doing so they actually created value and relevance toward the
their published literature for consumption toward the general public.
.
C T Russell (businessman) J Rutherford (lawyer) were NOT trained bible theologians
but they were owners and directors of their own publishing company.
Put the two aspects of these individuals together and you have what created the Watchtower Corporation.
These are known and indisputable facts.
-
kaik
The problem with 1914 teaching is that it was arbitrary picked year on misguided calculation and reconfirmed in 1920's after the Great War as the start of the Jesus's kingdom and beginning of his invisible presence. Aslo since that era, JW is teaching that entire human race had entered the end of the system which will be fullfilled by generation that witnessed the year 1914. However, 100 years later and almost two dozen individuals left around the world enough old to remember the 1914 (last person born before 1900 had died couple months ago), there is a clearly mismatch on what JW were preaching, and what had really happened with our world. Additionally, the invisible presence was conveniently invented as it was not fullfilling Revelation 1:7, or Mat 24:30,31. What JW has put there, is own belief of some obscure religous group in country that even was not major world player (that was UK), and completely unknow to majority human race in 1918.
-
THE GLADIATOR
That's an interesting chart you have posted on the last page. This should be printed and a copy given to every Jehovah's Witness that calls at a home. The dithering and duplicity that the Watchtower Society has shown for well over a hundred years is shocking by any standard. The idea that they are personally appointed as Jehovah’s mouth piece is a ridiculous assertion. How they claim to dispense truth is beyond comprehension.
Doctors note: Despite all appearance to the contrary Gladiator is of sound mind, and despite not being a Christian had a great Christmas. The tone of this post is not a reflection on his mood but merely an impartial observation.
-
TD
But it says nothing that Christ returned prior to 1914. At least, I do not see it. It highlights 1914. Thanks for the post.
Slight digression here:
This scan is from the May, 1881 issue of Zion's Watch Tower:
Forty years later, 1874 was still held to be the year Christ returned:
-
wasblind
" Truthseeker,
It says nothing that Christ returned prior to 1914. TD and I are trying to focus on the " sign " of Christ presence as prophied by Jesus "___Fisherman
.
.
" When will the end of this wicked world come ?
Jesus answered: " Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, niether the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the father. " However, he also stated; " Truly I say to you that this generation [ that was alive when the " sign " of " the last days " began its fulfillment ] will by no means pass away until all these things occur.___Matt. 24:36, 34
Also, after telling of events that would follow the establishment of the kingdom in the hands of Jesus Christ in 1914, Revelation 12:12 adds: " Be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea, because the Devil has come to down to you. having great anger, knowing he has a short period of time."______Reasoning from the Scriptures Book pages 97 -98
.
.
Here is another statemen the WTS claims about the " Sign" that you discuss
.
.
" Before leaving the earth, Jesus Christ promised to return. Thrilling events ( That the WTS connects to 1914 ) in connection with God's Kingdom are associated with that promise."_______Reasoning from the Scriptures Book page 340
.
.
The WTS claim they know somethin Jesus said they wouldn't
The Times and the season
.
.
-
wasblind
Thanks TD,
You have clearly shown why would anybody continue to follow this mixed up religion
.
.
-
Finkelstein
Its worthy to note that the attempt to calculate a date by making a calculation is going against bible scripture.
The WTS. did so anyways in opposition to that, even to use a fictitious dating system by measurements of an Egyptian pyramid.
Again the men such as C T Russell were more pressed to think what could attract attention to his published
goods than respectively obey what the Bible said or directed .
-
TD
Fisherman
Do you mean the 12 Apsotles only
No I don't. Whether "the disciples" included any or all of the twelve wouldn't change the fact that a reader many years later does not have the same perspectives (Cultural, historical, linquistic, etc.) as somebody who was right there speaking face to face. It's human nature to interpret communication in terms of self, but the problem as it relates to biblical interpretation, is that the relevance of the message to the immediate audience (Those who were actually parties to the spoken conversation) is damaged in the process. --Sometimes to the point where the proposed interpretation renders the words completely nonsensical as far as the original audience is concerned. That is the "Invisible interpreter" fallacy I've mentioned.
Typology is one way to avoid that. Its origin comes from the Bible itself. (Bible writers themselves used it when interpreting older texts, as in Christ being the greater Moses.) It's certainly not the only way, but it's most relevant to the conversation we're having on this thread because JW writers and thinkers relied upon it very heavily at one time.
The current idea of overlapping groups forming a "Generation" is a break from that pattern, but as I've attempted to explain on this thread, that interpretation is not compatible with older JW teachings, like the "Great crowd" who must at least live to see the "Great tribulation" in order to have any prospect of surviving it at all.
-
Fisherman
TD,
Considering. In the meantime, keep in mind that your commenatry(teaching, conclusions) is not being considered (in terms of relevance). Jws disagree wit you. The subject at hand is wts teaching, not you. On the other hand, I want to contrast your commentary with your logic or argument or analysis or aproach.
Whether "the disciples" included any or all of the twelve wouldn't change the fact that a reader many years later does not have the same perspectives (Cultural, historical, linquistic, etc.) as somebody who was right there speaking face to face. It's human nature to interpret communication in terms of self, but the problem as it relates to biblical interpretation, is that the relevance of the message to the immediate audience (Those who were actually parties to the spoken conversation) is damaged in the process. --Sometimes to the point where the proposed interpretation renders the words completely nonsensical as far as the original audience is concerned. That is the "Invisible interpreter" fallacy I've mentioned.
I do not view our discussion in terms of winning an argument.
