The Governing Body continues to cling to flawed prophetic understanding concerning 1914, as the latest Watchtower shows
The Governing Body continues to cling to its flawed prophetic understanding concerning 1914

The day is Sunday 28 June, 1914. A car takes a wrong turn down a street in Sarajevo, Bosnia.

As the driver backs up, a bystander approaches. He pulls out a pistol, and shoots the couple sitting on the passenger seat. Both die within minutes. The assassin’s name was Gavrillo Princip, and his victims were Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie.

This single incident set off a chain of events that would ultimately lead to two world wars and a long and bitter cold war. Millions would die from the anarchy and chaos that would ensue once the powder keg of Europe had been ignited by this simple spark.

But apart from the far-reaching ramifications on world history and politics, the events on that fateful day would also breathe life into a hitherto innocuous Bible group in America – blowing a gust of wind into its otherwise lifeless sails that would propel it well into the next century.

Without the events of 1914, the success of Russell's bible student movement would have been jeopardized
Without the events of 1914, the success of Russell’s bible student movement would have been jeopardized

I refer, of course, to the Bible Students under Charles Taze Russell, who were to later morph into what we know today as Jehovah’s Witnesses. If the start of World War I had not coincided with 1914, then quite possibly that religion (and this website) would not exist.

It was the fact that something of significance happened in that year that enabled Russell and his associates to claim that their predictions had not been a complete failure. 1914 would thus become an anchor point in Witness teachings around which an entire religion could be built for decades to follow.

We now sit on the cusp of 2014. As 1914 slips deeper into the fog of history, you would expect the Watch Tower Society to begin quietly distancing itself from that year. But quite the opposite is happening. The Governing Body recently unveiled a revision to its New World Translation which enshrined 1914 as a year of significance in its appendix. And more recently still, a new Watchtower study magazine has been released that mentions 1914 no less than 18 times (excluding the questions).

To download the magazine, please click here.

When reading this latest magazine the impression is given that a person would need to be stupid not to reach the same conclusions as Jehovah’s Witnesses regarding the year 1914.

“Because we regularly study God’s Word, we can see that prophecy is being fulfilled right now. What a contrast with people in general! They are so involved in their lives and pursuits that they overlook the clear evidence that Christ has been ruling since 1914 and will soon bring God’s judgment.” – w14 1/15 p.28

“As one writer states: ‘The world of 1914 was full of hope and promise.’ With the outbreak of World War I later that year, however, Bible prophecy came true. The subsequent famines, earthquakes, and pestilences as well as the fulfillment of other Bible prophecies proved conclusively that Jesus Christ had begun to rule in heaven as King of God’s Kingdom in 1914.” – w14 1/15 p.13

This sneering and bullish refusal to let go of the 1914 teaching permeates the entire magazine. Great pride is taken in the fact that “the Bible Students spent decades pointing out that the year 1914 would be significant.” (page 12)

Significant in what respect? Precisely WHAT did Russell and his associates expect to happen in that year? To find out, let us consult some words penned by Russell in his second volume of Studies In The Scriptures, published in 1906…

Taken from page 101 of Studies In the Scriptures Vol. II, published in 1906
Taken from page 101 of Studies In the Scriptures Vol. II, published in 1906

 

Watchtower gives a misleading portrayal of Russell's expectations for 1914
Watchtower gives a misleading portrayal of Russell’s expectations for 1914

As can be clearly seen from the above, Russell expected 1914 to mark, not the beginning, but the END of Armageddon. He further claimed that Christ had already started ruling invisibly in 1878.

Were these claims put forward as innocent suggestions on a “take it or leave it” basis? No. Russell considered the imminence of Armageddon back then as “plainly visible” from the Bible’s standpoint. And yet notice how the latest Watchtower describes pre-1914 expectations…

They were not completely sure about what would happen. Still, they knew that 1914 would mark a turning point regarding divine rulership.” – w14 1/15 p.28

It is impossible to read those words and identify them with the certainty with which Russell propounded his specific expectations for 1914. Consider two more of his quotes from pre-1914, and notice the conviction with which these statements are made…

“The date of the close of that ‘battle’ is definitely marked in Scripture as October, 1914. It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874.” – Watchtower reprints, January 15, 1892, p.1355

“We see no reason for changing the figures — nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God’s dates, not ours. 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.” – Watchtower reprints, July 15, 1894, p. 1677

For more similar quotes, please click here.

By claiming that Russell and his associates were not “completely sure” about what would happen in 1914, Watchtower is re-writing its own history. And not for the first time either. The publications show that Russell WAS totally convinced of what would happen in 1914 – he just turned out to be wrong. And he died in 1916 before he could see just how wrong he was.

Sticking to the plan

But where does all this leave the Governing Body of 2013?

Well, as the 100-year anniversary of October 4/5 1914 (Tishri 15) looms ever closer, they are presented with two options. They can either begin distancing themselves from 1914 and start to hint at “new light” as to when Christ’s heavenly rule began, OR they can stick rigidly with a year that has all but vanished into the distant past. The fact that the Governing Body has adopted the latter course indicates to me that they are either bereft of imagination, or heavily deluded by their own Witness upbringing – or perhaps both.

!cid_BAFB031B-53B5-407C-82B4-ED9D208AFC39

But I struggle to find sympathy for the Governing Body’s situation. When presented with clear evidence that previous understandings have failed they SHOULD be humbly apologizing – not just for their error but for ruthlessly punishing any who disagree with their narrow interpretation of scripture. Instead they not only re-write their own history – they also chain themselves emphatically to a chronology that is already obsolete.

If the 1914 teaching were a beloved pet dog that died a long time ago, the Governing Body is a slightly deranged owner that takes it to the taxidermist, has it stuffed in a lifelike position, and places it prominently in his home – pretending it is still alive. That is how I would illustrate their preoccupation with this year. Any Witnesses who consider themselves loyal must demonstrate the same irrational devotion.

As an example, read the article “100 Years of Kingdom Rule – How Does It Affect You?” which attempts to invoke pride among Witnesses in the 1914 teaching. Consider the following timeline, which appears on pages 13 and 14…

Chart on pages 13 and 14 of the Watchtower 1/15 Study Edition
Chart on pages 13 and 14 of the Watchtower 1/15 Study Edition

 

The above timeline is clearly designed to impress Witnesses with the organization’s accomplishments since 1914 – and doubtless many will be won over. But when it is scrutinized objectively, things begin to unravel. For example, IF this is truly God’s organization and Christ has been guiding the organization as its head since 1919…

  • Why did it take 8 years for house-to-house work on Sundays to be organized?
  • Why did it take 19 years for ministerial servants to begin being appointed theocratically?
  • Why did it take 53 years for congregation oversight to be assigned to a body of elders?
  • And so on…

There is simply no justification, biblical or otherwise, as to why it would take Christ so very long to implement such rudimentary procedures. For example, it did not take years for Christ to organization his disciples to undertake a preaching tour of Israel, as we see in Matthew 10. But for some reason getting his chosen organization to start preaching on Sundays took Jesus 8 years!

I was also bemused by the part of the timeline that heralds 1976 as the year “the Governing Body is organized into six committees.” Why so?

As this website has already explained, the Governing Body only truly came into existence in the form we recognize it in 1971. It was in this year that it was decided that the spiritual leaders of Jehovah’s Witnesses should be distinct and separate from the board of directors of the Watch Tower Society.

The first true Governing Body in the 1970s remained under Knorr's control until 1976
The first true Governing Body in the 1970s remained under Knorr’s control until 1976

Fast forward five years, and 1976 didn’t just see the formation of the six Governing Body committees – it saw the powers of the President significantly reduced (much to Knorr’s protest, if you read Crisis of Conscience) so that the Governing Body could finally assume the power and prominence it enjoys today.

The timeline in this latest Watchtower is intended to gloss over all of this, and leave Witnesses with the impression that there has ALWAYS been a Governing Body directing them. But this simply isn’t true. Neither Charles Taze Russell nor Joseph Rutherford ever sat on any “governing body” where their personal views or wishes could be superseded by the views of the majority. That is simply not what we see through any objective analysis of Watchtower history.

I would rather not allow myself to become too diverted on this issue. Suffice to say you can find more information from the following sources, which I would highly recommend if you are at all unclear as to how long the Governing Body has been around in its current form…

Duping the next generation

The more I observe the Governing Body, the less I am surprised at their apparent inability to embrace substantive change – either doctrinally or procedurally.

Here we have a group of men who were under the organization’s spell for decades before they ascended to their current positions. They were chosen BECAUSE of their steadfast allegiance to the organization and to keeping the status quo. They are thus programmed to keep Knorr’s Watchtower of the 1950s ticking over smoothly rather than to help it reform and change with the times. We see this right down to their aversion to beards and insistence on forcing everyone to dress like an extra on “I Love Lucy.”

What I do find intolerable is the conceitedness of it all. Any who dare to say “maybe we got it wrong” is branded an apostate and punished in the worst possible way by being cut off from his or her JW family.

Equally troubling is the manner in which the Governing Body is voraciously pursuing the next generation of Witnesses, which I touched on in a previous article. This sadistic recruitment drive is in further evidence in the January Watchtower.

A chapter entitled “Making Wise Choices During Youth” drills home the idea that becoming a Witness is a necessity rather than a choice for young ones. The only choice available to them is how quickly and to what extent they will volunteer their time and skills to Watchtower’s benefit. “Each person must make his own choice how he will spend his life as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses,” declares page 18 paradoxically.

Watchtower wants older Witnesses to dupe the next generation into repeating their mistakes
Watchtower wants older Witnesses to dupe the next generation into repeating their mistakes

The follow-up chapter, entitled “Serving Jehovah Before the Days of Distress Come,” is targeted at the older generation of Witnesses. In reminding them of ways in which they can put their age and experience to good use, it suggests: “Could you invite younger servants of God to your home for some upbuilding association? Could you ask them to accompany you in the Christian ministry and show them the joy you experience in serving Jehovah?” (page 23)

In other words, “Yes, you threw away your career prospects and wasted decades believing our failed promises. Now, please make yourselves useful by encouraging the next generation to do the same.”

If you happen to receive a copy of the January 15th 2014, please do me a favor. Put it in a safe place – some place where it can lie undisturbed for many many years. Make sure your new revised Bible is equally safeguarded. Why? Because decades from now, when the Governing Body of the future is telling us that they never said they were “completely sure” that 1914 marked the beginning of Christ’s rule, I have a feeling you may find it useful.

 

John Cedars signature logo

 

 

 

 

Further reading…

Warm thanks to Vincent Deporter for contributing a cartoon for this article.

156 thoughts on “The 1914 Obsession: Watchtower clings to flawed teaching in first magazine of 2014

  • October 23, 2013 at 2:30 pm
    Permalink

    oops meant fittest not species

  • October 23, 2013 at 4:17 pm
    Permalink

    Go to the hall in fact go inside be courageous and brave. I dare ya.!!!!!

  • October 24, 2013 at 6:59 am
    Permalink

    doublegame

       I hear you loud and clear! When the Family study night was encouraged, we began reading chapters from the Bible. We read chapter 24 of Matthew and curiously wondered at precisely what verse did the prophecy telescope to 1914. To me it seems the contextual considerations of Matthew 23 and 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 do not allow an application beyond the destruction of Jerusalem.

        Therefore, some have concluded that Christ must have been invisibly present during and since the destruction of Jerusalem, which makes perfect sense. The destruction was proof that the age of his kingdom had arrived and the gathering of the heavenly sons of the kingdom had begun and would be ongoing to the present time (notice the uptick in Memorial partakers), albeit not the return and rapture that many had expected.  Matthew 27: 50-54 records some sort of mass resurrection having taken place after Jesus’ resurrection (perhaps that of all the ancients). 

       With Jesus’ promise that he would return and be in their midst, early disciples could, and some did, enter into the reality of the kingdom here and now before their physical deaths and resurrections by seeking the spirit of truth, revelations, and visions. In addition to the Bible, much apocrapha speaks to this widespread practice.

     What I’m saying is this, there is more to Christ’s message than we’ve been taught all these years. Eventually, the WT G.B. will have no choice but to abandon the 1914 doctrine, but probably not before a lot of damage has been done.

    • October 24, 2013 at 7:26 am
      Permalink

      I agree with the partial preterist view. I don’t think that all has been already fulfilled, however, I clearly see by many historical evidences, that Matthew 24 and Luke 21 point to the events related to Jerusalem’s destruction. Josephus and Tacitus may help us to see how the prophecies were fullfiled. Nevertheless, I doubt that the Watchtower Society will recognize its wrong understanding of the gentile times.

  • October 24, 2013 at 12:21 pm
    Permalink

    Well this would certainly explain why the Sisters get so ill-treated in the KH. That 1950’s attitude is so prevalent even though many Sisters are the bread-winners in their family! It doesn’t make sense that they cannot be treated so equally in the organization.

  • October 24, 2013 at 4:19 pm
    Permalink

    This comments section has clearly lost its way. Cedars, Cedars, where art thou Cedars.

  • October 24, 2013 at 10:07 pm
    Permalink

    Mike. Christ said I (no one else) am the way and the truth and the life. So stick with him and you’ll not go wrong.

  • October 24, 2013 at 10:12 pm
    Permalink

    Yes and this is the point. It comes down to faith. If you trust totally in Him you will get his spirit no matter what you do and who you do it with or to if it is God’s will. That is why you all should worry less about all this and as they say Let go and let God. It works.

  • October 25, 2013 at 2:55 am
    Permalink

    Andrew, I’d like nothing better than to let go! Unfortunately, a group of 8 men have decided that I am mentally des eased and allow children to be abused by monsters that they don’t report to the police.

    I have likened their beliefs to a house of cards, take one away and it all topples. The whole issue is mute.

    There was no world wide flood, so there is no corresponding time of the end.

    If there is a God, then I’m sure that he/she/it will be able to save the world without killing billions of people.

    The witnesses’ obsession with 1914 is pertinent. They believe that God is going to wipe out billions very soon. It is a key doctrine, even though it is bogus. They brow beat their practitioners to give up normal human contacts with the world, labelling everyone, it seems, a bad association!

    Great article, Cedars!

  • October 25, 2013 at 8:36 am
    Permalink

    Octavio

    You may be right about Watchtower never changing. Anyway, here’s a thought. I, too, once believed that Jesus’ invocation of the book of Daniel had left his ‘end’ prophecy open-ended. Now I realize that he may have been referencing Dan. 9:27 and 12:1,7,11 and actually foretelling the duration of the Roman seige instead: “it will be for an appointed time, appointed times and a half” or 42 months. Assuming he was referencing the “seven times” in Dan. 4 would probably lead one far astray in understanding.

  • October 25, 2013 at 2:32 pm
    Permalink

    I don’t suppose it occurred to anyone that Daniel wasn’t written by Daniel, but likely by an educated Jew in the second century B.C.E, after many of the events that it “fortold”. Just a thought. This is worth considering because it suggests the source material for the 1914 date is arbitrary.

  • October 25, 2013 at 2:58 pm
    Permalink

    To the other Reader, I have been ‘Reader’ on various JW forums for about a decade.

    @dynamo

    If you look at a Jewish bible, Daniel is included among the kvittim, the writings, not among the prophets.
    It’s not prophecy, it’s prophetic entertainment.

  • October 25, 2013 at 4:00 pm
    Permalink

    I just wish that someone would come up for a date that it would be impossible, ludicrous, for the end and the paradise to come by. So I’ll do it!

    Here’s the deal. If all this end of days stuff doesn’t happen by, let’s say, 2080, can we all stop discussing what a group of men wrote in the Bronze Age about their own insignificant tribe of erstwhile goat herders and their sometimes tolerable God, Please?

    The country’s top scientist believes that there’s a 50/50 chance that our human society will endure into the 22nd Century. We all need to get together, in the spirit of Jesus, and begin to sort things out. One thing I’m pretty sure of is that there will be no divine intervention.

    I may be wrong. But if I am, what’s the harm in giving God a bit less to do? I mean, we could tackle some of the social inequalities that abound. That would be honouring Christ, wouldn’t it?

    Pick your worthy cause and try your best, I don’t think any God labelled as Love would find it in his heart to condemn you if you did. Excelsior!

  • October 25, 2013 at 8:20 pm
    Permalink

    I am not with the JWs; I am associated with the Bible Students. Charles Taze Russell was never a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. What Russell taught in many areas is almost the very opposite of what the JWs teach. Russell was still preaching against the kind of organization that the JWs have until the day he died. Likewise, Russell preached against the kind of Armageddon that the JWs preached. Russell believed that Armageddon was a period of time in which many things took place that was to chastise (not eternally destroy) the people of the nations.

    Russell changed his viewpoint concerning the time of trouble – Armageddon — in 1904. Quoting what he wrote before that time does not present an accurate picture of what was being said between 1904 to 1914. Nevertheless, in 1904, Russell rejected his earlier view, which he had adopted and adapted from N. H. Barbour, that the time of trouble was to end in 1914. In 1904, he accepted the view that the time of trouble was to begin, not end, in 1914, and that is what spoke of many times between 1904 up to 1914. Russell died in 1916 still holding to the view that the time of trouble had begun in 1914. I believe that the time of trouble did indeed begin in 1914.

    Russell many times disclaimed that he was a prophet, or that his conclusions and expectations should be considered prophecy. Nor was Russell saying that all should accept his teachings or else they were not Christian. Yes, Russell did indeed say in 1910: “Nineteen hundred and fourteen is the time when the “Gentile Times” will end. What does that mean? I do not know, but I think it is when God lets go in a general sense of the word, and permits things to take their course; and we can readily suppose, as the Apostle says, that the course of nature would be set on fire, because of strife. In the world of mankind, I shall expect a time of great trouble, which the Bible marks out as having its beginning about October, 1914.” — What Pastor Russell Said, Question 76:1 (1910).

    In 1911, answering the question, How long after the end of time of the Gentiles will it be before the first of the dead are awakened from the tomb?:

    “Guessing would not be very satisfactory, but our guess would be that after the times of the Gentiles come to a conclusion there will be a great time of trouble as the Scriptures clearly point out — trouble as never was since there was a nation. Then, following that trouble would come the reign of righteousness, blessings, increase of knowledge, God’s favor among men, and the living nations would all be more or less brought to a knowledge of the Lord. How long that would require I do not know.” — What Pastor Russell Said, Q589:3.

    Russell himself never gave any definite time for when the time of trouble would end, although he did discuss several dates that had been proposed by others: 1915, 1920, 1925, etc.

    In 1912, Russell stated:

    “We are expecting in October, 1914, that a great change will be due. Now, how quickly will it come? Whether on the stroke of the clock or not we do not know. We believe that it will land upon humanity by that time. Perhaps some of it will come before that, but we believe it will be stayed off until that time. Now, dear friends, what if it does not? We are just as well off as the rest. That is what the Bible states. If it does not state that to you, we have no quarrel. And if it does not come we will not try to bring it about. But, on the contrary, we will try to practice peace and holiness withal. We are children of peace and peacemakers, not strife breeders. But we believe the Bible teaches October, 1914, as the time. If that is incorrect for a year, or five, or one hundred years, no matter, it is coming some time, whether we have it right or not.” — Convention Sermons Report.

    These quotes and many more related to the time of trouble in 1914 may be found at:
    http://ctr.rlbible.com/?p=1301

  • October 26, 2013 at 12:30 am
    Permalink

    We talk too much about dates. The end will come when we least expect it, when no one is expecting it. Which end?
    It could be Armageddon or our personal end. It will happen, any time, whether we believe it or not.
    But while we are here, our thoughts determine our hope, our happiness, our love for God and for others, our good works. Life is truly a gift and NOW is the best moment of my life because I am determined that it be so. Struggles? So many and apparently without letup. But if we just look around, there is still so much beauty left everywhere.
    The Watchtower brainedwashed us into ignoring everything and just “Listen, Obey and be Blessed”.

    Thank you for this Blog, Cedars. You are putting your gift to good use. Your articles, have lifted my heart and sometimes dried my tears….

  • October 26, 2013 at 1:13 am
    Permalink

    Mandelay, i guess I agree with you, for Jesus said the generation would not pass and it didn’t. The year 70 was a
    Big change for the Jewish system of things.
    But what I’ve always wondered is, how come the apostle John, who wrote 5 books after the destruction of Jerusalem never mentioned or even alluded to it, when it was such a faith strengthening fulfillment of prophecy! Josephus spoke about it and a few others. Why not John?

  • October 26, 2013 at 4:01 am
    Permalink

    Daniel written later is it? But its in the Septuagint which preceeds most of the prophecy? So this doubt has a very short impractical life!
    The Seventy weeks of years prophecy was why some Jews were expecting the Messiah or Elijah, it also re-encodes the reasonableness of using ‘a day for year’.
    My suggestion makes it possible to understand day for year for the 1335, unless somebody can find another ships of kittim date?
    And I looked…
    B

  • October 26, 2013 at 4:26 am
    Permalink

    Dear ResLight;
    I think your point is quiet correct that we should distinguish between utterance of prophecy and interpretations of it.
    CTR, WT, and the guys who do ‘World end tommorrow’ billboards.
    Failed prophecy leaves God the Fool,
    Failed interpretation leaves man the Fool.
    Like it better.
    B

  • October 26, 2013 at 7:10 am
    Permalink

    Daniel is a book that was written much later than it is claimed by my religious people, JW’s included.
    It’s ‘prophecies’leading up to a point late in the second century BCE are eerily accurate, then the drop of to wildly inaccurate, as applied to the Jewish system of that era.
    Also, there is no mention of this book in extra biblical sources until the middle of the second century BCE when it became quite popular.

  • October 26, 2013 at 7:50 am
    Permalink

    Daniel written later is it? But its in the Septuagint which preceeds most of the prophecy?
    B
    Dear reader from reader, as I already initial my posts with a “B” perhaps you might initial yours with “A”; because our standpoints are different it will help readers of the readers.
    B

  • October 26, 2013 at 9:21 am
    Permalink

    @Reader (the one arguing that Daniel is a prophecy),

    “Daniel written later is it? But its in the Septuagint which preceeds most of the prophecy? So this doubt has a very short impractical life!”

    False.

    The Septuagint, which is the hebrew bible translated into greek, was completed no earlier than late 2nd century B.C.E (2nd century B.C.E = 200 B.C.E – 101 B.C.E).

    The “prophecy” of the division of Greece into 4 kingdoms, occurred in 303 B.C.E. The desolation of the temple occurred 167 B.C.E.

    There are no available manuscripts of the book of Daniel that are older than these dates. All evidence suggests the book was written after the events occurred.

  • October 26, 2013 at 4:48 pm
    Permalink

    Dear Dynamo;
    I have checked out some sites which use the compressed Preterist interpretation of Daniel, this is at least a logical and well researched doubt.

    A problem I found with it was [again] “The Ships of Kittim” which become those of the Roman general Popilius Laenas who was sent to Egypt [the line in the sand]. But as Romans were not the best of sailors and this event is clearly a sailing to the SOUTH Egypt.!?
    -Actually the “Your Will Be Done” book gets it right regarding the exploits of Antiochus, but still misses the actual “Ships of Kittim” event;

    655ce “Battle of the Masts” a muslim fleet is attacked by the Eastern Roman Emperor [King of North], but they put him to flight. This bloody Battle was at sea!
    The Caliphate became King of the South when it took Egypt.

    There is a general error in thinking the Roman Empire ended when Rome fell, Rome by then was no longer the Empire’s capital city, Constantinople was “Byzantium”.
    Try “daniel eleven hyperlinked” in google or put your cursor over reader above for link.

    In following the symbols in prophecy it can be difficult to link all into place, but if you keep sequence in mind the lookalikes seem solvable and Daniel goes Greek to Russia.
    But this is heavy book study stuff, except I’m not telling you to believe any of it. Running ahead ‘yeah’ x2 here. But I strongly say Daniel is inspired and runs to the End Times.
    B

  • October 26, 2013 at 4:58 pm
    Permalink

    ps; “YWBD” 1958. A brilliant book, I suspect rushed to finish and pushed for any 1914 support. Regretably not reveised or its long overdue!
    B

  • October 27, 2013 at 2:02 pm
    Permalink

    Where are the reply posts to George, that I made days ago, cedars? Does he even know I replied at all, before you pulled them?

    George, ask Barb Anderson who is. I am surely no active, fraudulent jw. Been df-ed over 35 years now. But cedars deleted my replies to you. How do you like a grown man pulling posts of another grownman? Silly men, I keep saying it because it is how you men behave. Censoring, just like when you were in the kh and at assemblies. Just admit that you still kind of like being able to shut someone elses freedom of speech, down.

    Anyway, I’m not sure why he deletes certain posts of mine, yet allows the others to stay unless he does so in order to say…what, look, she has posts up here, i do not delete her posts…blahhhhh Yet, I had a reply for you to refer to Barb A. as to how much of a jw I am. She should be able to clear it up. LOL!

    ~skally-we shall see if this even posts or gets pulled

  • October 28, 2013 at 6:12 am
    Permalink

    Well said mike,like reading your viewpoint.
    What troubles me is people conveniently forgetting the operation of God’s in the congregation.
    My time as a witness has been at times pretty unpleasant to say the least mainly due to problems with Elders not following scripture or just plain and simple being a pain in the rear.
    I however can say that i’ve personally witnessed powerful evidences of God’s spirit in operation and to deny this would not only be foolish but tantamount to blasphemy against the spirit and none of us want to go down that road.

  • October 28, 2013 at 3:17 pm
    Permalink

    Dear All;
    1914, first total war, first machine war.
    Any significance other than war?
    All these things are the beginning of pangs of distress – so nasty but not the End.
    last sign v 14 preceeds the End.
    Verse 15 invokes Daniel, that’s the serious stuff.
    Verse 6 dismisses 1914 bad as it was it was only a war!

    http://yahweh-immanuel.info/matthew%2024%20v%2015%20&%2016.html
    B

  • October 28, 2013 at 9:34 pm
    Permalink

    The four horsemen of the apocalypse ride, apparently since 1914, was supposed to have, according to scripture, 1/4 of all mankind dead because of the horrible situation. Yet, during that time, earth’s population has instead exploded, growing by roughly 400%.

  • October 29, 2013 at 7:28 pm
    Permalink

    That doesn’t make sense at all. The revelation was meant for the time of the end. Either it’s prophecy or it is a pile of nonsense. I’ve shown you haw it is the latter, and then you have to claim that it is something that it doesn’t claim to be to justify it.

    Stellar!

  • October 29, 2013 at 11:14 pm
    Permalink

    Excellent article. Simply stated:

    “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” — Matt. 24:36

    It doesn’t get any simpler. Any attempt to ‘know the hour’ is futile.

  • October 29, 2013 at 11:26 pm
    Permalink

    Dear Reader [A]
    The name of the book Revelation means “uncovering”, something has to already ‘be’, for it to be covered especially issues set in eden.

    Its not a case of foretelling the past but long running issues have conclusions comeing and explainning the past to these issues.

    If you consider say; the buying of a house, your concerns are all about the future family in the home and a mortgage, but you may get paperwork which is very old concerning the plot the house is on.
    Try this pair:
    Genesis 1 v 28 with Revelation 11 v 18
    Hope this helps.
    B

  • October 30, 2013 at 6:09 am
    Permalink

    @Doublegame
    There’s a good argument for John having been written much earlier than 70 C.E., so it doesn’t bother me that there is no mention of the destruction. 

     As for Revelation, it has since been ascribed to a different author who wrote it in the crudest barbaric Greek. The author was probably an Aramaic-speaking Judaizer who accepted Christ as the Messiah, which explains his indignation toward the Torah-bashing followers of Paul, Gentiles who were calling themselves the ‘real Jews’ (Rev.3:9).

    Overall, the book can be viewed as an anti-Roman tract that borrows imagery from Isaiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, and even older dragon mythology. The author could be describing how his world came to an end or maybe providing glimpses of its coming destruction as in Rev. 11:1,2. It was written to encourage Christians and keep Judaizers from corrupting themselves in Roman culture.

    Unfortunately, Revelation can be plugged into any conflict and adapted to changing times. In the fourth century, Bishop Athanasius used it against heretics when he changed the harlot of  Babylon from its original symbol for Rome to being a symbol for heretics. Isn’t that what the Watchtower has done in identifying the harlot as worldwide heresy?

  • October 30, 2013 at 4:02 pm
    Permalink

    Dear All;
    Maybe I should say my statements are not just what I think ‘off the cuff’ in conversation.

    I do accept Scripture as the ‘word of God’ but can and do live with not being able to explain every single thing; well not just yet!

    My special interest started with the Babylon the Great book, not one of the better books. So I read Alexander Hislops “The Two Babylons” and that got me interested! This was somewhere around the mid-seventies, I am now in my mid-sixties.

    What followed was perhaps 10-15 years of absorbing as much about ancient religions as I had time for, as I live in the UK and was a railway employee travel was easier.
    I registered the yahweh – immanuel .info domain Nov 2002, 5/6 years or so years after fading, [but my belief and trust in God remains firm. By GB cardinal reasoning this progress is not possible without it coming from them, ah well that’s life Daniel 4 v 35:James 1 v 5.]

    At that time I had the basis of six as a pagan number but it was some time before the 666 could be calculated.
    I publish to make available to all and permission to copy by anyone or group is granted on the site: http://yahweh-immanuel.info/copyright.html

    I consider the knowledge given, so I should do the same.

    Found jwstruggle and jwsurvey only recently in one of my researches for my website.
    B

  • October 30, 2013 at 7:05 pm
    Permalink

    Your ‘uncovering’ argument is weak at best. If the future course is set through prophecy, it could also be ‘uncovered.’

    However, you did not address my raised issue regarding the four horsemen. Could not be applied to times since 1914 as the WT does. That’s my position.

    As far as ‘prophecies’, there’s no more value in Revelation than there is in the writings of Nostradamus.

  • October 30, 2013 at 11:28 pm
    Permalink

    [comment removed for breach of posting guidelines]

  • October 31, 2013 at 4:43 am
    Permalink

    Hi Reader [B]

    I’m not sure where Cedars is, but I’m fairly certain he would not tolerate your interpretations supported by suspicious web links. They are off topic at best and evangelical at worst.

    Cedars has deleted comments of this nature in the past on the basis of them seemingly intending to confuse readers and draw them after themselves, leading them to potentially exchange one cult for another.

    It makes sense that a blog that covers topics that an aggrieved JW would find interesting would be exploited by a group promoting an alternate, but equally unsupported explanation. This is what I suspect you of doing, and it is wrong.

    Peace

  • November 1, 2013 at 2:22 pm
    Permalink

    Dear Dynamo;
    If it is wrong to defend belief or Scripture, then this is no place for me or my sort.
    bye.
    B

  • November 1, 2013 at 6:19 pm
    Permalink

    George,

    Are you avoiding my replies to you now, and why so sir?

    ~skally~

  • November 2, 2013 at 12:54 am
    Permalink

    Which leads me to conclude that they are either all correct, or all wrong.
    I choose to believe they are all right (in a way), and that “God” is too big for our labels and boxes.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: