just my 2
@@@@@@@@@@@@
Look what Watchower said about this doctrinal reversal:?If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two years ago would be regarded as darkness now. But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. ?new Light? never extinguishes older ?light,? but adds to it.? (WT Feb. 1881,page3)
Thus, the Society claims that the date 1914, as signifying the end of the Gentile Times, is a "fundamental Bible truth." Equally one might reasonably expect that the Society's claim for the establishment of the Kingdom in 1914 would also be considered to be a fundamental truth. That presents a dilemma; if it is indeed the case that "no foundational doctrines of the WTS have changed" as some claim, then, logically we can only conclude that the "establishment of the Kingdom in 1914" is not a "fundamental Kingdom truth," because the date for that event has been changed. Holding the position that "no fundamental doctrines have changed" thus requires one to invent quite arbitrary and ridiculous definitions of what is "fundamental." This also produces a tautology.
Q: Which doctrines have not changed? A; The fundamental ones.
Q: Which are the fundamental docrtines? A: Those which have not changed.
This is the only way to validate the doctrine of New Light which is supposed not to affect fundamental teachings.
In summary, we can conclude that the claims made by the Society for the date 1914, according to the Society itself, are central to its existence. Revising the date 1914, or, better, abandoning this absurd chronology altogether, would sweep away the last vestiges of the authority claimed by the Society for its teaching that it is engaged in a special work that is directed by Jehovah and Jesus and that these are the last days.
The recent change in the teaching on "this generation" in reality represents the abandonment of the date 1914 as a date of significance without actually doing so explicitly. If Jesus came to power in 1914, with, however, no observable effects on this planet, and if the subsequent "last days" period can extend for an unbounded period of time, then what is the good of knowing the date 1914 in the first place? In effect, this puts JWs in exactly the same position as other Christians who do not claim special knowledge of that invisible event in 1914.
Posted by Running Man [RunningMan] on August 18, 2000 at 10:29:24 {QCmrIpEC7.lLCr7htMtU1l4cklgBgk}:
In Reply to: LATEST WT "FLIP-FLOP" posted by / You Know on August 18, 2000 at 08:52:33:
I got the impression that you feel that there is nothing wrong with changing doctrines in light of changing times. Well, I hate to tell you this, but the very source that is changing the doctrines today, has itself thoroughly condemned this practice.
You said:
"In point of fact, it is perfectly within the Watchtower's right to change our policy..."
According to the Society:
"It is a serious matter to represent God and Christ in one way, then find that our understanding of the major teachings and fundamental doctrines of the Scriptures was in error, and then after that, to go back to the very doctrines that, by years of study, we had thoroughly determined to be in error. CHRISTIANS CANNOT BE VACILLATING - 'wishy washy' - about such fundamental teachings. WHAT CONFIDENCE CAN ONE PUT IN THE SINCERITY OR JUDGEMENT OF SUCH PERSONS." (Watchtower 5/15/76 p 298)
"If you are a Catholic, can you understand how a practice that was considered by the church a 'mortal sin' can suddenly be approved? If it was a sin five years ago, why is it not today? ... The change in teaching has shaken their confidence in the church. Would you not feel the same way if what you had always been taught to be vital for salvation was suddenly considered unnecessary? WOULD YOU NOT BE INCLINED TO QUESTION OTHER TEACHINGS OF YOUR CHURCH ALSO?" (Awake 4/22/70 p8)
