If a year is really 365 1/4 days why 360 days to calculate 1914

by blondie 52 Replies latest jw friends

  • DesirousOfChange

    Of course all I got was bluster and told not to "think too deeply"

    That's solid advice for anyone that wants to remain a JW, because thinking and remaining a JW puts one on two opposite courses.


  • prologos

    Phizzy, when you deduct 38 from 1914 you get 1876 you are then in the ballpark of 1878 if you deal with cardinal numbers.

    Blondie's link:"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. so: forgetting about 1914 will be the end of that trouble.

  • Phizzy
    You are right prologos, and at the time I knew of Russell's various explanations of the 2nd coming/end times etc and was amused that my method put things back in to the area of "Old Light".
  • Vidiot

    blondie - "If a year is really 365 1/4 days why 360 days to calculate 1914?"

    Fred Franz - "Because... because f**k you, that''s why!!!"

  • TD

    The idea of 360 day "Biblical year" as an average between lunar and solar was postulated by Goudoever, I think. (Third paragraph)

  • NewYork44M

    The year A.D. 1878 … clearly marks the time for the actual assuming of power as King of kings

    The 1878 date was ignored and everyone forgot, died, or both. Something tells me in a few years 1914 will be ignored and the GB will simply wait for everyone to forget and die.

  • Beth Sarim
    Beth Sarim
    I forever failed to comprehend/or understand how the WTS got 360days for a year and not 365, never got that.
  • Rather Be the Hammer
    Rather Be the Hammer

    607 BC was the dealbreaker for me. I was a good biblestudent and when we studied the book of Daniel I wanted to be the one who could explain it all... Why the 'worldly history' was wrong with pointing to 587 BC as the year that Jerusalem was destroyed. So I made a timeline and wrote all the 'evidence' from the Bible on it and then I wrote everything down that is in the historybooks. To my surprise everything the historybooks say about Jerusalem fitted exactly in the story of the bible, while the explanation of the Borg needed a lot of 'well, the verse says it happens in his second year, but in fact the bible means that it happened in the twentysecond year'.

    Quote: "That this method of calculating is correctly used to bring us to A.D. 1914 from 607 B.C. is confirmed for us by the physical facts that have become manifest from that year 1914 on, in fulfillment of Matthew 24 and 25, Mark 13, Luke 21, and other prophecies concerning Christ’s second presence, in the time of the end."

    That's just so funny. First they use a made up date for the destruction of Jerusalem to calculate up to 1914. Then they say: 'look, something special happened in 1914, so we must be right about 607BC after all' and call it evidence that their calculations are correct.

  • prologos

    Nothing would give more meaning to one's life than being a player in a cosmic event, and millennianists grasped at straws to find proof of their greatness, using numerology* to bridge the gap to the past, fudging as they went along. They ignored one of the true sayings of "Jesus" Acts 1:7 " --it is not given to you to understand times and seasons--" . Even physicists labor on that one. Is time a river flowing by or are we moving through time? Measuring time is the easy part, unless you start overlapping.

    *** numerology: 360x400=144 000

  • Crazyguy
    I pionted this out to a couple of elders in my hall and boy one of them started getting up set and yelling at me. When I braught out all the mistakes and times the Borg had made towards end times the other one said God did this as a carrat to get people to follow. Face palm. I later was able to get myself out of the mess by stating that in the book of revelations the word year was mentioned with no reguard to what kind of year. I just used this to get myself out of trouble. Lets say I used the same kind of reasoning the Borg uses.

Share this