Help with 1914!

by izobcenec 13 Replies latest jw friends

  • izobcenec

    I am discussing about the year 1914 with my dub friend...he insists, that the year 607 is scriptural,
    because 607+70 is 537, when israelis returned to their land. I presented all the evidence about 586/87
    but It just isnt enough, what should I do now?

  • Elsewhere
    I am discussing about the year 1914 with my dub friend...he insists, that the year 607 is scriptural,
    because 607+70 is 537, when israelis returned to their land. I presented all the evidence about 586/87
    but It just isnt enough, what should I do now?

    That's BS... he is playing a numbers "shell" game with you.

    The date counting is supposted to begin when the temple fell, not when they returned.

  • Drue

    Hi, Izo,

    There is a recent detailed discussion on 1914 with AlanF, aChristian, Earnest and others:

  • Gig

    One idea would be to ask your JW friend to show you ANY dates in the Bible, perhaps starting with 1935 when heaven was closed by Rutherford. There is no Bible chronology per se, it ALL depends on historical records that exist in the Bible as kings and their reigns, along with tens of thousands of tablets and business records confirming them. There's a web site, SOS outreach if I remember correctly, that lists legitimate sources that establish 586/87 for the fall of Jerusalem, appropriately 607 sources. Ask your friend to offer one, just one, other than the WTS that says it was 607. Also include the WTS quote that basically says that yes, some secular historians and the scholars of christendom agree that 586/87 is the correct date, but that no one can deny that yet undiscovered evidence may be found that refutes all existing evidence. It's not a difficult arguement to show how flimsy and unreasonable it is to rely on totally unsupported claims because MAYBE in the future evidence MIGHT be found that would overturn TENS OF THOUSANDS of items of EXISTING proof. And the claim that SOME historians and scholars say 86/87, no, ALL historians and scholars. The simple fact is the WTS will ignore comprehensive and overwhelming proof in order to avoid admitting error, error that in this case debases the teaching of Christ's return, and far more importantly that shortly thereafter chose the WTS as his FDS.

    So again, my basic suggestion is to show that there are NO dates in the Bible, so we rely on historians and scholars by necessity, who are unanimous. It is far more reasonable to see that the WTS cannot admit the 607 error because it removes their claim to FDS fame.

  • D8TA

    1) Buy a bottle of Advil

    2) Buy a days supply of some good Beer.

    3) Read this thread:

    4) Call AlanF in the morning.

  • Gerard
  • Liberty

    Hi Izo,

    This subject is very complex and there are others here who can do a better job of explaining the actual numbers (even this might not be enough to convince a die hard fanatic) but you might consider another line of argument. For me, it wouldn't matter if the numbers really did add up to 1914 because I'm still left with a big "So What" gap in my own mind. Much of what was so special about 1914 has been rendered meaningless by the passage of time. We don't have to argue and juggle numbers to prove that The Generation who saw "Christ made king" in 1914 are now all DEAD. Only tiny babies in that time hang on to life in their 90s now, hardley the fulfillment of a promise that "that generation" would not pass away before Armageddon.

    Even the Society had to change the interpretation of the Generation to one that was so inclusive that it has lost all prophetic meaning since anyone born from then til infinity is now included giving us NO clear time limit on Armageddon's coming which was the only really important thing about 1914 in the first place. This alone should be enough to get any honest truth seeker to question all of the Watch Tower's other bogus "predictions". Without the power of "special God inspired" knowledge of Bible prophacy the Watch Tower Society is just another dooms day cult grasping at straws. Ask your friend, " Honestly, what is important about 1914 if it does not help us pinpoint Armageddon's start since Christ will still be our King either way?"

  • izobcenec

    thank you for your help!

    I know I could study all those articles (jeremiah) but all that is still debatable...a matter of interpretation...
    what I would need is something "spectacular", "out of space" argumenent, that would prove, that 1914
    is must be very simple, because all those long explanations just dont I know I am
    asking too much, but who knows, maybe someone gets an idea

    I had an argument, that WWI started BEFORE the end of gentile times (world war started in july, gentile
    times ended in october) that made him think, but now I need something more.

    thanks again!


  • roybatty

    You could go in circles with a JW about 1914. Two questions though...

    1) Did what JW's expect to happen in 1914 actually happen? Nope.

    2) Did their changed understanding about "the generation of 1914" happen? Nope.

    So why should you believe their "invisible king" rap and the new understanding about the generation of 1914 crap (cira 1995)?

  • link

    The following was taken from the Societies official web site today:

    How long a time period would these last days prove to be? Jesus said regarding the era that would experience the "beginning of pangs of distress" from 1914 onward: "This generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur." (Matthew 24:8, 34-36)

    So Jesus spoke about 1914 did He? I cant find it in my bible so I better check the NWT.

    With the cleaver use of words and the crafty use of punctuation marks they can make the Bible say just about anything that they want it to. What hope has an even half honest person got in any discussion with them on this topic. (Or any other for that matter).


Share this