Why 1914 Dose not Mark the Establishm...

Why 1914 Dose not Mark the Establishment of Christ Reign in Heaven

Posted in the Jehovah's Witness Forum

First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Since: Aug 12

Tacoma, WA

#1 Aug 30, 2012
The purpose of this post is to show clearly that the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society’s teachings about the date 1914 are not true.
The current WTBS understanding of the date 1914, and why it is THE major doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses movment, is as follows:
-The heavenly government was setup in Heaven, of which Jesus is King, in the year 1914.
-Satan was kicked out of Heaven, by Michael the Archangel as recorded in Revelation 12, in the year 1914.
-In 1919 Jesus judged the religions of the world and found that only the International Bible Students worthy of being God’s chosen people.
Because they claim that in 1919 Christ, shortly after taking up kingship in heaven, inspected the worlds religions and chose them as God’s people and to use the Watchtower as his “sole collective channel for the flow of biblical truth to men on earth”(Watchtower July 15th 1960) we can see that the years of 1914 and 1919 are central to the doctrines of the Watchtower.
The main issue with the date of 1914 is that there is no Biblical basis for the belief. The calculation used to reach the date of 1914 is a follows:
The seven Times in Daniel Chapter 4 (Daniel 4:25) are speculated to be equal in length to the “time times and half a time”(or 3 1/2 times) that are mentioned in Revelation chapter 12 (Revelation 12:6,14). Hence seven Times is equated to 2520 days (as the 3 1/2 times in Revelation 12 equals 1260days)
The prophecy of Daniel chapter 4 is then speculated to have a second fulfillment above and beyond the fulfillment described in that chapter because of a fully unrelated vs. in chapter 12 (Daniel 12:9). This fulfillment is speculated to mark of the end of the “Gentile Times” spoken of by Jesus (Luke 21:24), and is said to start in the year that Jerusalem falls to Babylon falls. This year is claimed by the Watchtower to be 607BCE although this date also has no historical backing.
Taking the date of 607BCE and adding 2520 days reaches no historically significant date, therefore Numbers 13:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 are used to once again speculate that the 2520 days should be converted to 2520 solar years by assuming that “a day for a year” is a “Bible rule” for interpreting prophecy. Adding 2520 solar years to the year 607BCE then gives us 1914 CE.

Since: Aug 12

Tacoma, WA

#2 Aug 30, 2012
The main problem with this calculation is the amount of speculation required.

Speculation #1: The seven times in Daniel 4 should be equated to the time times and half a time in Revelation.

These two instances of the word times have nothing to do with each other. Daniel 4 is talking about 7 times (which are not given a specific length) that would pass over King Nebuchadnezzar during which he would become like the beast of the fields. Revelation 12 is talking about 3 and ½ times that the woman would be taken away from the presence of the serpent. These two events have no viable connection to each other without introducing speculation.

Speculation #2: The 7 Times in Daniel 4 are actually 7 years.

This is historically inaccurate and impossible. There was no point in Nebuchadnezzar’s documented rule that he could have been away from his throne for a period of 7 years. Also it is notable that his “majesty and splendor were restored”(Daniel 4:36 NASB) after the 7 times had pasted and the longest documented absence from the throne was a mere 6 years and was at the very end of his 18 year rule. It is more prudent to calculate the 7 times as 7 seasons or months however the exact duration of time is of little importance in the prophecy.

Speculation #3 2520days should be converted to solar years.

This calculation requires the largest amount of speculation in the overall calculation. Not only must you assume that the 7 times in Daniel = 7x360days (1 lunar year) to get to the 2520 days you must them use an unrelated vs. in Numbers to convert those days in to years. However these years are not lunar year as 1 lunar year equals .985674 solar years and calculating 2520 lunar years from 607BCE only reaches 1877 CE 37 solar years prior to the year that the Watchtower claims that Jesus took his throne. So for the calculation to work you must change from lunar years to solar years halfway through the equation with absolutely no reason whatsoever. In fact years in the bible are all lunar years as the Jewish calendar was lunar so to use Numbers or Ezekiel as a basis for converting days to solar years makes no sense at all, as any years mentioned in those books would be lunar years.

In conclusion the sheer amount of speculation required to come to the conclusion, that the prophecy in Daniel chapter 4 points to 1914, dismisses it entirely as a viable basis to base a fundamental doctrine on.
Johnny Donovan

Middletown, NY

#3 Aug 30, 2012
Really should debate with Fred Frantz.Maybe the governing body are in touch with him.

“Bustin' Myths”

Since: Dec 09

Location hidden

#4 Aug 31, 2012
Hi point man!
arse holl

Monticello, NY

#5 Aug 31, 2012
Johnny Donovan wrote:
Really should debate with Fred Frantz.Maybe the governing body are in touch with him.
I also read that the governing body are in touch with the anointed. They maybe using seances.
aadriver

Biggleswade, UK

#6 Aug 31, 2012
I mentioned the solar years and lunar years discrepancy the other day on another thread. Surprises, surprise not one JW refuted it.
Same with the rest of the points you make, they will have a hard time proving you are wrong in your conclusions.

Since: Aug 09

Location hidden

#7 Aug 31, 2012
trogdorjr wrote:
The main problem with this calculation is the amount of speculation required.
Speculation #1: The seven times in Daniel 4 should be equated to the time times and half a time in Revelation.
These two instances of the word times have nothing to do with each other. Daniel 4 is talking about 7 times (which are not given a specific length) that would pass over King Nebuchadnezzar during which he would become like the beast of the fields. Revelation 12 is talking about 3 and ½ times that the woman would be taken away from the presence of the serpent. These two events have no viable connection to each other without introducing speculation.
Speculation #2: The 7 Times in Daniel 4 are actually 7 years.
This is historically inaccurate and impossible. There was no point in Nebuchadnezzar’s documented rule that he could have been away from his throne for a period of 7 years. Also it is notable that his “majesty and splendor were restored”(Daniel 4:36 NASB) after the 7 times had pasted and the longest documented absence from the throne was a mere 6 years and was at the very end of his 18 year rule. It is more prudent to calculate the 7 times as 7 seasons or months however the exact duration of time is of little importance in the prophecy.
Speculation #3 2520days should be converted to solar years.
This calculation requires the largest amount of speculation in the overall calculation. Not only must you assume that the 7 times in Daniel = 7x360days (1 lunar year) to get to the 2520 days you must them use an unrelated vs. in Numbers to convert those days in to years. However these years are not lunar year as 1 lunar year equals .985674 solar years and calculating 2520 lunar years from 607BCE only reaches 1877 CE 37 solar years prior to the year that the Watchtower claims that Jesus took his throne. So for the calculation to work you must change from lunar years to solar years halfway through the equation with absolutely no reason whatsoever. In fact years in the bible are all lunar years as the Jewish calendar was lunar so to use Numbers or Ezekiel as a basis for converting days to solar years makes no sense at all, as any years mentioned in those books would be lunar years.
In conclusion the sheer amount of speculation required to come to the conclusion, that the prophecy in Daniel chapter 4 points to 1914, dismisses it entirely as a viable basis to base a fundamental doctrine on.
Your first point appears to reject one of the many rules people use to study the bible: "let scripture interpret scriptures" Why shouldn't it. You don't say why.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#8 Aug 31, 2012
trogdorjr wrote:
The purpose of this post is to show clearly that the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society’s teachings about the date 1914 are not true.
The current WTBS understanding of the date 1914, and why it is THE major doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses movment, is as follows:
-The heavenly government was setup in Heaven, of which Jesus is King, in the year 1914.
-Satan was kicked out of Heaven, by Michael the Archangel as recorded in Revelation 12, in the year 1914.
-In 1919 Jesus judged the religions of the world and found that only the International Bible Students worthy of being God’s chosen people.
Because they claim that in 1919 Christ, shortly after taking up kingship in heaven, inspected the worlds religions and chose them as God’s people and to use the Watchtower as his “sole collective channel for the flow of biblical truth to men on earth”(Watchtower July 15th 1960) we can see that the years of 1914 and 1919 are central to the doctrines of the Watchtower.
The main issue with the date of 1914 is that there is no Biblical basis for the belief. The calculation used to reach the date of 1914 is a follows:
The seven Times in Daniel Chapter 4 (Daniel 4:25) are speculated to be equal in length to the “time times and half a time”(or 3 1/2 times) that are mentioned in Revelation chapter 12 (Revelation 12:6,14). Hence seven Times is equated to 2520 days (as the 3 1/2 times in Revelation 12 equals 1260days)
The prophecy of Daniel chapter 4 is then speculated to have a second fulfillment above and beyond the fulfillment described in that chapter because of a fully unrelated vs. in chapter 12 (Daniel 12:9). This fulfillment is speculated to mark of the end of the “Gentile Times” spoken of by Jesus (Luke 21:24), and is said to start in the year that Jerusalem falls to Babylon falls. This year is claimed by the Watchtower to be 607BCE although this date also has no historical backing.
Taking the date of 607BCE and adding 2520 days reaches no historically significant date, therefore Numbers 13:34 and Ezekiel 4:6 are used to once again speculate that the 2520 days should be converted to 2520 solar years by assuming that “a day for a year” is a “Bible rule” for interpreting prophecy. Adding 2520 solar years to the year 607BCE then gives us 1914 CE.
The calculation of 1914 is not dependent on the year Jerusalem falls. Those are INDEPENDENT calculations.

1914 depends on the year Cyrus conquered Babylon.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#9 Aug 31, 2012
trogdorjr wrote:
Speculation #1:
Speculation #2:
Speculation #3
The book of Daniel itself says it would not be an obvious or easy book to work out and understand:

*** Dan 12:4 But you, Daniel, close up these words, and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall roam here and there, and knowledge shall increase."

So you can always argue "speculation speculation".

But the understanding of the Daniel prophecies are the result of over 130 years of detailed Bible study, at the time of the end when the book of Daniel itself says it would become understandable.

I invite READERS to look at the results of that prayerful Bible research:

Pay Attention to Daniel’s Prophecy!
http://www.jw-media.org/rus/publications/dp_e...
jace

Woodbridge, VA

#10 Aug 31, 2012
trogdorjr wrote:
The main problem with this calculation is the amount of speculation required.
IT GETS WORST even the wt admits that they speculate and SURMISE,[problem is after 130yrs THEY STILL ARE SPECUALATING AND SURMISING

WHEN WILL THEY LEARN
$$$$$$$$$$

http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...

Gareth has often quoted this

*** WT, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110 ***

With regard to 1914: "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises ... We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them"
**********

now let's start off by Est the definition of the word Surmise

1.
To infer (something) without sufficiently conclusive evidence.

2.
To make a guess or conjecture.

3.
An idea or opinion based on insufficiently conclusive evidence; a conjecture.

Conjecture

1. Inference or judgment based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence; guesswork.

2. A statement, opinion, or conclusion based on guesswork:

I have repeated asked Gareth

--Are you sure you want to run with this quote??????--

well let's run with it folks

So now we see the WT EDitorial staff acknowleding that 1914 is based on Guesswork or Surmising

so now we move forward, the WT Editorial staff now attaches a major teaching to this Surmise on 1914.

they now attach their appointment by God in 1918- yes to a date they admit they are Guessing on

now if you have surmised on 1914 and now you are attaching a teaching to a surmised date,-------WHAT DOES THAT MAKE 1918???

YEP more surmising

now notice what can ONLY BE CALLED SURMISING in regards to 1918- since it turned out to be wrong

"In the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by the millions"

Finished Mystery p. 485

So what we see above is--- yes another example of THE WT SURMISING,------

now these are the same guys who want folks to accept that God appointed them in 1918,

now OF COURSE THAT WOULD NOT BE SURMISING RIGHT??? WINK WINK

now is the following SURMISING??????

The Watchtower- Sept 1st, 1922: "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the scriptures because it is fixed by the law of God to Israel..."

Watchtower- April 1st, 1923: "Our thought is that 1925 is definitely settled by the scriptures."

##########

NOW WAS all the above about 1925 surmising???????

well it turned out to be nothing more than GUESS WORK or surmising

yet keep in mind that the WT editorial staff of writers after all this SURMISING ON 1914, SURMISING that the world will end in 1918 and SURMISING that the world would end in 1925

now turn around and announce "GOD APPOINTED US!!!!!!"

and they actually want folks after examining all this surmising to say that they are now not SURMISING about their Appointment

when you build your foundation on SURMISING OR GUESSWORK anything you build on top of it- yes is going to be SURMISING AS WELL

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#11 Aug 31, 2012
jace wrote:
<quoted text>
IT GETS WORST even the wt admits that they speculate and SURMISE,[problem is after 130yrs THEY STILL ARE SPECUALATING AND SURMISING
WHEN WILL THEY LEARN
$$$$$$$$$$
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-...
Gareth has often quoted this
*** WT, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110 ***
With regard to 1914: "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises ... We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them"
**********
now let's start off by Est the definition of the word Surmise
1.
To infer (something) without sufficiently conclusive evidence.
2.
To make a guess or conjecture.
3.
An idea or opinion based on insufficiently conclusive evidence; a conjecture.
Conjecture
1. Inference or judgment based on inconclusive or incomplete evidence; guesswork.
2. A statement, opinion, or conclusion based on guesswork:
I have repeated asked Gareth
--Are you sure you want to run with this quote??????--
well let's run with it folks
So now we see the WT EDitorial staff acknowleding that 1914 is based on Guesswork or Surmising
so now we move forward, the WT Editorial staff now attaches a major teaching to this Surmise on 1914.
they now attach their appointment by God in 1918- yes to a date they admit they are Guessing on
now if you have surmised on 1914 and now you are attaching a teaching to a surmised date,-------WHAT DOES THAT MAKE 1918???
YEP more surmising
now notice what can ONLY BE CALLED SURMISING in regards to 1918- since it turned out to be wrong
"In the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by the millions"
Finished Mystery p. 485
So what we see above is--- yes another example of THE WT SURMISING,------
now these are the same guys who want folks to accept that God appointed them in 1918,
now OF COURSE THAT WOULD NOT BE SURMISING RIGHT??? WINK WINK
now is the following SURMISING??????
The Watchtower- Sept 1st, 1922: "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the scriptures because it is fixed by the law of God to Israel..."
Watchtower- April 1st, 1923: "Our thought is that 1925 is definitely settled by the scriptures."
##########
NOW WAS all the above about 1925 surmising???????
well it turned out to be nothing more than GUESS WORK or surmising
yet keep in mind that the WT editorial staff of writers after all this SURMISING ON 1914, SURMISING that the world will end in 1918 and SURMISING that the world would end in 1925
now turn around and announce "GOD APPOINTED US!!!!!!"
and they actually want folks after examining all this surmising to say that they are now not SURMISING about their Appointment
when you build your foundation on SURMISING OR GUESSWORK anything you build on top of it- yes is going to be SURMISING AS WELL
There still may be people out there who still fall for Jace's cheap tricks.

Whereas BEFORE 1914 the WT printed this:

*** WT, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110 ***

With regard to 1914: "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises ... We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them"

**********

That was over ONE HUNDRED YEAR AGO.

Since then many other Bible prophecies have proven to substantiate 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times as have historical events.

So whereas BEFORE 1914 Jehovah's Witnesses were "surmising", 100 year AFTER 1914 they are quite certain from the body of Bible and historical proof.

Since: Aug 12

Tacoma, WA

#12 Aug 31, 2012
Duh-boy wrote:
<quoted text>
Your first point appears to reject one of the many rules people use to study the bible: "let scripture interpret scriptures" Why shouldn't it. You don't say why.
For the sake of argument then lets throw out speculation 1 and 2. Let discuss #3 since in my opinion even if you grant #1 and #2 #3 is insurmountable.

Since: Aug 12

Tacoma, WA

#13 Sep 1, 2012
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
The calculation of 1914 is not dependent on the year Jerusalem falls. Those are INDEPENDENT calculations.
1914 depends on the year Cyrus conquered Babylon.
Really????? So you don't agree with the book that you linked to???

Please see pg 95 (if you are viewing the .pdf in your browser it should be on pg 99/321 so you can get there super quick). It says and I quote "God himself had such sovereignty chopped down and banded in 607 B.C.E. when he used Nebuchadnezzar to destroy Jerusalem."

The next few pages walk you through how to get from 607 BCE to 1914 CE I'm not seeing any reference to Cyrus in that calculation.

Can you please explain in more detail what exactly you mean by "The calculation of 1914 is not dependent on the year Jerusalem falls." because the Watchtower Bible Tract Society doesn't agree with you (at least not currently).

Since: Oct 10

Homebush, Australia

#14 Sep 1, 2012
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
There still may be people out there who still fall for Jace's cheap tricks.
Whereas BEFORE 1914 the WT printed this:
*** WT, January 1, 1908 (reprint) page 4110 ***
With regard to 1914: "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises ... We do not even aver that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them"
**********
That was over ONE HUNDRED YEAR AGO.
Since then many other Bible prophecies have proven to substantiate 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times as have historical events.
So whereas BEFORE 1914 Jehovah's Witnesses were "surmising", 100 year AFTER 1914 they are quite certain from the body of Bible and historical proof.
your surmising, the WT picked certain dates and actually believed it to be so true, that they bought a mansion to house the resurrected worthies that were to arrive on the scene in 1925, they were predictions, prophecies without any biblical truth. False prophets.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#15 Sep 1, 2012
trogdorjr wrote:
<quoted text>
Really????? So you don't agree with the book that you linked to???
Please see pg 95 (if you are viewing the .pdf in your browser it should be on pg 99/321 so you can get there super quick). It says and I quote "God himself had such sovereignty chopped down and banded in 607 B.C.E. when he used Nebuchadnezzar to destroy Jerusalem."
The next few pages walk you through how to get from 607 BCE to 1914 CE I'm not seeing any reference to Cyrus in that calculation.
Can you please explain in more detail what exactly you mean by "The calculation of 1914 is not dependent on the year Jerusalem falls." because the Watchtower Bible Tract Society doesn't agree with you (at least not currently).
The Book does not explain the calculation in full.

The date of the destruction of Jerusalem is calculated from the same date that the end of the Gentile Times is calculated from.

Daniel tells us when the START of the Gentile Times is by telling us when the 70 years of exile are over. So the calculation BEGINS with Cyrus conquering Babylon, counts 70 (+2) years back to get to 607 as the start of the Gentile Times (captivity).

Then 2520 (7 times) years are counted forward for the DURATION of the Gentile Times to 1914.

The date of the fall of Jerusalem is INCIDENTAL to the actual calculation.

However, if the Bible is true, then the temple in Jerusalem did fall in 607 for several reasons. One being the prophecy linking the fall of the temple in Jerusalem to the start of the Gentile Times.

So the calculation of the end of the Gentile Times is INDEPENDENT of the calculation of the fall of the temple in Jerusalem.

However the Bible holds those two independently calculated dates to be coincidental.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#16 Sep 1, 2012
array wrote:
<quoted text>your surmising, the WT picked certain dates and actually believed it to be so true, that they bought a mansion to house the resurrected worthies that were to arrive on the scene in 1925, they were predictions, prophecies without any biblical truth. False prophets.
Talk about "mentally diseased"!!!

I have already proved to you many times that what you have just claimed is UNTRUE.

The mansion in question was built in 1927, two years AFTER the date you said they were waiting for!!!!!!

Since when did anyone build something AFTER the event they were waiting for?

SECONDLY the WTS did NOT by the mansion in question.

The said mansion was DONATED to the WTS.
jace

Woodbridge, VA

#17 Sep 1, 2012
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
So you can always argue "speculation speculation".
THIS IS NOT TRUE, If something happens then its a FACT IF it does not then it was mere speculation

the wt taught that the FINAL KING OF THE NORTH WAS THE SOVIET BLOCK
when i as an elder stood before 1000's this was NOT TAUGHT AS MERE SPECUALATION of the wt editorial staff-
it was taught as SPIRIT DIRECTED INFO FROM GOD THAT WAS MEANT TO be taught to billions as the Gospel of the Divine word of God

i can't help if you don't grasp the difference in presenting something as from God and something as mere human specualation

when the soviet block of nations fell not what your dumbA$$ wt editorial staff said:

*** dp chap. 16 pp. 280-281 The Contending Kings Near Their End ***

With the disbanding of the Soviet Union in December 1991, the king of the north suffered a serious setback. Who will be this king when Daniel 11:44, 45 is fulfilled? Will he be identified with one of the countries that were part of the former Soviet Union?

Or will he change identity completely, as he has done a number of times before? Will the development of nuclear weapons by additional nations result in a new arms race and have a bearing on the identity of that king? Only time will provide answers to these questions.

“We are wise not to speculate”
##########

WHAT??????????

the wt spent DECADES speculating that the Soviet block WOULD BE THE LAST AND FINAL KING

GARETH IT WAS ALL SPECUALATION as father time has shown

from the very first wt article that said the soviet block would be THE FINAL AND LAST KING OF THE NORTH leading into armegedom it was all specualation

the wt should have presented it as such NOT CLAIMING THAT GOD GAVE THEM SOME SPEICAL INSIGHT

*** w89 3/15 p. 17 Insight That Jehovah Has Given ***
*** Rbi8 Daniel 11:33 ***

"And as regards those having insight among the people, they will impart understanding to the many"

"a major way in which Jehovah has set his witnesses apart as a distinct people is by the insight he has provided through his visible organization"

GETTING STUFF WRONG IS NOT INSIGHT DUDE
jace

Woodbridge, VA

#18 Sep 1, 2012
dp chap. 16 pp. 280-281 The Contending Kings Near Their End ***



“We are wise not to speculate”

########

when will the WT editorial staff of writers LEARN TO DO THIS-

the offer specualation as Truths from God, when in fact over and over Father time shows it to have been MERE SPECUALATION THE DAY IT ROLLED OFF THE PRESSES

wt just needs to stick to bible commentary and cut out all the foolish claims of WE GOT THIS INFO FROM GOD REJECTION OF IT MEANS GOD WILL HAVE TO KILL YOU

THIS is the basic and most bottomline problem with the wt editorial staff and what they write

to claim that God will kill folks for NOT ACCEPTING WHAT IS CLEAR TO EVERYONE IS mere speculation is sad

Gareth if they want to write books great, then be honest with the readers and tell them THIS IS MERELY OUR OWN HUMAN UNDERSTANDING OF THE MATTER ON XYZ

to try and put a spin on it like their writings are "somewhat like" Moses and Paul is sad

anytime a writer of any publication INVOKES SUPERNATUAL INFLUNCE IMPACTED WHAT THEY ARE WRITING, such a writer is claiming inspiration

Gareth this is a problem that jw are unable to deal with

note once again IF ANY WRITER INVOKES THAT HIS OR HER WRITINGS are the result of an OUTSIDE SUPERNATURAL INFLUENCE THAT IS INSPIRATION

then to add insult to injury CLAIM THAT REJECTION OF SUCH WRITINGS WILL lead to the death of a person at the hands of GOD THE ALMIGHTY

Gareth even you have to publiclly admit that for any writer making such a claim is really stretching it as writer

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#19 Sep 1, 2012
jace wrote:
GETTING STUFF WRONG IS NOT INSIGHT DUDE
Getting stuff progressively more and more correct IS having insight.

That's the point.

Jehovah's Witnesses never pretended to be doing anything other than LEARNING and IMPROVING their understanding of scripture.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#20 Sep 1, 2012
jace wrote:
Gareth if they want to write books great, then be honest with the readers and tell them THIS IS MERELY OUR OWN HUMAN UNDERSTANDING OF THE MATTER ON XYZ
This is what Jehovah's Witnesses say:

*** re chap. 2 p. 9 The Grand Theme of the Bible ***

It is not claimed that the explanations in this publication are infallible. Like Joseph of old, we say:“Do not interpretations belong to God?”(Genesis 40:8) At the same time, however, we firmly believe that the explanations set forth herein harmonize with the Bible in its entirety, showing how remarkably divine prophecy has been fulfilled in the world events of our catastrophic times.
jace wrote:
to try and put a spin on it like their writings are "somewhat like" Moses and Paul is sad
Jace knows he is lying on this:

*** w57 6/15 p. 375 par. 23 Overseers of Jehovah’s People ***

While the “slave” and other appointed overseers are certainly not inspired, as were the ones used to write the Bible, yet those in the congregation show proper respect for the position they occupy by responding to counsel given because they know that this is Jehovah’s provision for instructing his people at this time.—Heb. 13:7, 17.

*** w62 12/15 p. 762 We Need Jehovah’s Organization ***

The care of God’s organization today is not in the hands of men who are inspired by God.

*** w81 2/15 p. 19 Do We Need Help to Understand the Bible?***

True, the brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers.(2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not confused about WT publications. They know that they are not inspired and are subject to mistakes. They know and have come to trust that the understanding of scripture is IMPROVING over time. The WTS have in no way cause Jehovah's Witnesses to believe anything different.
jace wrote:
anytime a writer of any publication INVOKES SUPERNATUAL INFLUNCE IMPACTED WHAT THEY ARE WRITING, such a writer is claiming inspiration
No they are not. That is a lie.

ALL Christians claim to be guided by holy spirit. Such a claim is never a claim of divine inspiration enjoyed by the Bible writers.
jace wrote:
Gareth this is a problem that jw are unable to deal with
The problem we have to deal with is people like Jace telling lies, twisting truth and misrepresenting people.
jace wrote:
note once again IF ANY WRITER INVOKES THAT HIS OR HER WRITINGS are the result of an OUTSIDE SUPERNATURAL INFLUENCE THAT IS INSPIRATION
That's a lie.

Jehovah's Witnesses all know the difference between what is "divine inspiration" and what is being "lead by holy spirit". There is no confusion among Jehovah's Witnesses between those two things so the books are not misleading anybody.

It is JACE who seeks to mislead people by PRETENDING that when one of Jehovah's Witnesses reads that holy spirit is at work that they take it to mean tha someone is "divinely inspired" and therefore "infallible".

This is the huge LIE that Jace is peddling.

Jehovah's Witnesses think nothing of the sort. They FULLY understand that teachings change as improvements lead to better Bible understanding.
jace wrote:
then to add insult to injury CLAIM THAT REJECTION OF SUCH WRITINGS WILL lead to the death of a person at the hands of GOD THE ALMIGHTY
No, they don't.
jace wrote:
Gareth even you have to publiclly admit that for any writer making such a claim is really stretching it as writer
Jace is nothing but a liar. Everything he says is twisted. He is a pervert of the truth and shamelessly, morally bankrupt.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Gog and Magog After The Thousand Years 22 min Tony Price 77 1
Trump apologizes then reverts back to course. 28 min ihveit 86
Let's try this again, 144,000 ONLY? No jw has b... 44 min ihveit 951
Why the NWT is the best ever! 49 min ihveit 760
Who Created JW's? 54 min ihveit 105
In Tartarus While Dwelling in Heaven? 1 hr Tony Price 77 1
Are Jehovahs allowed to.........fart in public? (Jun '08) 2 hr Nomi 73
Trinity...why does it matter?! 5 hr ihveit 969
More from around the web