The 1914 generation is still going strong 100 years later - 2014 study article.

by THE GLADIATOR 443 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • yadda yadda 2
    yadda yadda 2

    Consider what happens if we remove that reward: What if those that refused to worship the Roman gods are treated no different than those that did? What if those that died in the arena are simply resurrected to life on earth just the same as those who escaped punishment by burning incense to the Emperor's diety? What reason would there be for dying in the arena at all? --None whatsoever. Remove the heavenly reward and you remove the reason to be faithful.

    The situation is virtually the same in a modern setting. Why convert to the JW faith? Why go to all the meetings, go out knocking on doors, refuse to celebrate holidays, etc.? JW's do this because they, like the early Christians, believe that their salvation is at stake. For non-anointed JW's that salvation is described at Revelation 7:9-10.

    What happens if we remove that reward? What happens if JW's simply grow old and die and are eventually resurrected to life in paradise just like everyone else who never bothered with the JW faith at all? What reason would anyone have for being a JW? --None whatsoever.

    Take for example, a fictional JW family. The grandparents were baptized as adults in the late 1930's and never considered themselves to be anointed. They were the only members of their respective families to become JW's. They've been dead for 20 years now. How is their fate any different than all their "Unbelieving" brothers and sisters and cousins that never bothered with the JW faith? In JW theology, there is no difference. They're all going to be resurrected.

    Any way you look at it, an "Earthly hope" is not a doctrine that can be taught longer than about a generation or so. It's only the proximity of the end and the prospect of not having to die that makes it viable. Remove that reward and you remove any reason to be faithful.

    JW's view the 'earthly reward' as the default position lost in paradise by Adam and Eve. The heavenly hope is an abberation to create an administration (govt) to restore that default position, per Milton's poem "Paradise lost, paradise regained."

    But before this default position is restored, the Biblical God is going committ genocide on an unimaginably horrific scale. He is going to exterminate the great majority of humankind, billions of them at Armageddon. They will deserve it, Christiniaty teaches, because we are all born with Adamic sin and the wages of sin is death. There will be no pity or mercy, they all had their chance when JW's came offering Awake and Watchtower magazine's on Saturday mornings, if you were lucky enough to be in a country where they did that. Those unfortunate billions unfortunate enough to live in China, Indian, or Muslim countries will be slaughtered on account of their 'community responsibility' for having leaders who never let the JW's get a foothold in their country.

    Jehovah by his own standard of justice is forced to do it, he has no choice. He is compelled to commit this global slaughter by some unfathomable higher moral standard that is utterly incomprehensible and too horrific to contemplate for all human beings, except perhaps to persons such as Genghis Khan, Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Il Jong, etc.

    And so it all boils down to the 'reward' for JW's remaining faithful to the organisation being escaping this terrible global slaughter by their version of God. He's an angry, vengeful God, who has been saving up his pent-up rage and hatred of mankind all this time, just waiting for the time to finally wipe them all out. A God of love would never torment people forever in hell, he will only just send hordes of angels and Jesus to kill billions of them, including bad little girls and their dollys and naughty pet dogs, like rats infesting a house. Much more reasonable.

    Thus Satan will be proven to be a manslayer and Jesus praised as the saviour of the world.

    It's such wonderful good news JW's preach, wouldn't you agree? You must be blind not to see it.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    The Watchtower Corporation's commercialization of ancient mythological stories, were really intently created

    to attract attention to the WTS's published literature.

    It worked for awhile because the WTS. exploited people's ignorance of the bible, promoting a platitude of anxiety and fear.

    A good example of Americanized Charlatanism.

    Now those drawn out indulgent and fictitious doctrines are starting to pinch the organization in the ass.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman
    TD

    Why would a JW reader conclude that "...at that time" means something other than, "at the time Jesus made the statement?"

    "He was first of all referring to his listeners and other Jews at that time."

    Note that this validates what I've said over and over and over on this thread; that the prophetic content of Jesus' words applies first to the original audience.

    There were no "other Jews" present at the Oilvet.

    "He was first of all referring to his "listeners....... at that time." This could mean the Olivet/ or All Chrsintians or both.

    He was first of all referring to "... Jews at.... that time." Since there were no other jews other than the Jews that were there, this seems to mean the Jews from the time of the Olivet until 70AD.

    Or

    "He was first of all referring to his listeners" Could mean only the 12 Apostles (but since only 4 were actually listening could also only mean the 4/12) at the time of the Olivet.

    AND

    and other Jews at that time." could mean (Of course no other Jews were at the Olivetic discourse) simply means Jews of that time period.

    But the problem with the above interpretation is that no distinction is made between "other Jews" and Christians. The wts would not include Christians to be included with Jews. So WTS means unbelieving Jews not {unbelieving Jews+ Christians} = "other Jews at that time."

    OR the WTS could mean the 12 and the non believing Jews

    Or the wts could mean the actual listeners at the Olivet and the non believing Jews

    One thing is certain: the wts teaches that the Olivet applies to the Apostles, ALL Christians, and the non believing Jews at that time (that era) NOT at the time the discourse was given.

    The wts artfully uses "first of all" and "at that time" ALSO to allude to the wheels parallel to land that you mean. In other words, the statement seems to allude to the "antitype" already taught and in the mind of the jw reader reading the wts statement.

    The statement(seemingly) alludes to a parallel prophecy.

  • UnConfused
    UnConfused

    I thought the Generation of 1914 was completely off the hook?

    So they are still teaching that some that saw 1914 will be around for the END?

  • Narcissistic Supply
    Narcissistic Supply

    Ambient abuse.

  • villagegirl
    villagegirl

    Problem : there are no "classes" at all.

    The WT made up that doctrine.

    Just can't get your head around that ?

  • TD
    TD

    Fisherman,

    Interesting perspective, but I really don't think it's that complicated. We're talking about a spoken conversation. Jesus' disciples asked him a question and he answered it. Those who listened to that answer were the listeners.

    The point of the 1978 article was that Jesus could not have been referring to anyone substantially younger than those who actually posed the question to him that night. (i.e. His listeners) Therefore in the modern day counterpart the "generation" would be composed of those who were adults or close to it (i.e. At an age of understanding) in 1914 when the "sign" began.

    We both know that position has since been abandoned and that this particular aspect of the supposed parallel no longer exists.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    TD

    A) When you say "prophetic part" of the Olivet are you referring to the prophetic part of the Oilvet discourse? : (prophetic part + non prophetic part) =Olivet (Discourse)

    or

    B) Are you using the term "prophetic part" of the Oilvet to distinguish the event from the substance of the discourse given by Jesus? : Olivet = A hsitorical event that occured on the Mount of Olives circa 33 AD. Present at this event was Jesus Christ and 4 of his Apostles. At this event Jesus gave a discourse also called the Olivet.

    There is a difference between the event and the discourse.

    For A: Substance of the discourse

    For B: The individuals present

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman

    TD,

    Those who listened to that answer were the listeners.

    Olivet= Event

    The point of the 1978 article was that Jesus could not have been referring to anyone substantially younger

    Olivet= substance of discourse

  • Mary
    Mary

    Bookmarked for later. (Assuming 'this generation' is still here.....)

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit