1975 and the Jehovah's Witnesses

[JW Insider]

I have not made it a secret that I think we are currently hurtling toward the same problem we created for ourselves in the 1970's. Therefore, I think it's very important that we don't forget this part of our history, as we can learn from it. I think we learn just as much from the defensive attempts, like the one on "Defending Jehovah's Witnesses" linked above. In fact, I think the mistakes made back in the 1960's and early 1970's with respect to 1975 were very trivial compared to the lessons we can learn about our own egos, our pride and our honesty. Honesty is a form of faithfulness, and that's the only reason that this discussion might still be important to some of us today.

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

To defend the Truth, with lies ...

is satanic.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

1 hour ago, tromboneck said:

blah blah blah, blahbeblah blabah

BlaH!

[AnonymousBrother]

Guess the horse ain't dead yet.

[DefenderOTT]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I have not made it a secret that I think we are currently hurtling toward the same problem we created for ourselves in the 1970's. Therefore, I think it's very important that we don't forget this part of our history, as we can learn from it. I think we learn just as much from the defensive attempts, like the one on "Defending Jehovah's Witnesses" linked above. In fact, I think the mistakes made back in the 1960's and early 1970's with respect to 1975 were very trivial compared to the lessons we can learn about our own egos, our pride and our honesty. Honesty is a form of faithfulness, and that's the only reason that this discussion might still be important to some of us today.

Are you in anyway suggesting that BAR-ANERGES was not telling the truth? if so, were you there, I was, and I agree with his conclusion.

[AnonymousBrother]

The only problem with speculation is people's tendency to treat it as FACT.

Early Adopter Syndrome, that wanting to be "one of the first", plays a huge role in that, fueled by one's ego.

Not always, mind you.

But, many times, sure enough.

[DefenderOTT]

Dear AB

Couldn’t agree with you more. Those, that speculated in 1975 thought it was a fact which worked against their ego by hysteria. The organization didn’t fuel it, ego did. There's no reason to rehash assumptions with speculation. Otherwise, we start new with the same old thing. Putting the trust on those that believe speculation is an honest assessment.

[Israeli Bar Avaddhon]

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I have not made it a secret that I think we are currently hurtling toward the same problem we created for ourselves in the 1970's. Therefore, I think it's very important that we don't forget this part of our history, as we can learn from it. I think we learn just as much from the defensive attempts, like the one on "Defending Jehovah's Witnesses" linked above. In fact, I think the mistakes made back in the 1960's and early 1970's with respect to 1975 were very trivial compared to the lessons we can learn about our own egos, our pride and our honesty. Honesty is a form of faithfulness, and that's the only reason that this discussion might still be important to some of us today.

 

Dear JW Insider,
reading your comments I understand that you are a reflective and intellectually honest person.
If the people of God had "learned something" from past mistakes, it would be normal to debate the doctrines and prophecies in the light of the Scriptures.

If the people of God had learned anything, it would be normal for public conversations now to be done and also questioning the one who is not yet "faithful and discreet slave" (as admit Watchtower of 2013).

If we had learned something we would understand that we should study the Bible personally and this includes the possibility of finding something that goes against the official intent.

Obviously, if we had learned something.

Instead, if you try to get something back, anything, you're an apostate.
You do not get into the merit.
It does not matter if the arguments support the Bible; you are an apostate and just because you are going to rediscover the intent of the "NOT faithful and discreet slave".

Do you believe, honestly, that past history is served to something?

The people of God, exactly like in the past, are destined to repeat the same mistakes because the words of GB are more important than the words of the Bible.
Pay attention to prophecies.

If you can not understand the Word of God, it means the Bible lie - Proverbs 2: 1-5
I urge you personally to be certain of these things - 2 Corinthians 13: 5

[JW Insider]

9 minutes ago, Outsider said:

Excellent. I have always told my friends this cult is driven by the devil. You ex-witnesses have it right. I'm letting all my friends know to visit this excellent website, to learn to defend themselves when they come knocking at the door. They should use their literature against them like you guys use it here, with scripture an all. I have, and they stopped coming, thanks guys for the excellent use of scripture to expose this cult. Keep it up, keep spreading the word.

Irony sharpens irony.

[JW Insider]

3 hours ago, Outsider said:

I love your writing.

Thanks. But I was referring to the irony of responding to a point about "honesty" by creating additional, false, contradictory accounts -- alter-egos or "personalities," as it were. However, that is almost a perfect lead-in to what many of us saw happening not long after the 1970's came and went without the expectations fulfilled. I haven't studied the psychology of these things, so I can't speak to egos and ids as others might be able to. But I can agree that ego in the more common meaning of the word would help explain why so many people didn't want to admit having been wrong -- and were more than happy to adjust to the belief that this whole thing didn't really happen the way it did, and even if it did, it was only because a few brothers and sisters "ran ahead" of Jehovah's organization.

Even people who lived through the time period, as I did my along with own large family, including an extended family of Witnesses, were very quick to dismiss the idea that anything was ever said in the way it was actually said. A Bible study could actually read directly from photocopies of 10 to 20 year old publications to my mother and father, and they would deny that these were actual photocopies. My grandmother, who collected almost every special talk from every traveling visitor and Society (branch) representative, had all the old talks from the period, and even a circuit assembly from 1970, I think, that was just full of amazingly unscriptural talks about what the 1970's were sure to bring. My father was usually the "Sound Servant" (speakers, mics, mixers, amps, wires) at any assembly we attended, whether circuit, district, international, special meeting, and we often attended at least 6 assemblies a year due to this fact.  He kept a master copy of most of the assemblies and visits to the Norco Assembly Hall (the first one) and I would sometimes hear a talk again when he made copies of some of these talks on request. I heard the talks from this period more times than I care to remember.

Still, I found this time period to be exciting and entertaining. And I still think that the expectations--even though they were not fulfilled at the time many of us expected--were sill faith-strengthening rather than devastating, as they were to some. I thought they made us imagine more clearly what our lives could be like in just a few years, and it made us imagine what they might be like if things didn't happen as many expected. I never had a problem with this "exercise" of our faith. It was like a kind of mental "fire drill." I think it helped many to clarify their relationship with Jehovah. I was baptized in 1967, when the 1966 book that started this post was required reading for baptism. and began to auxiliary pioneer with all the magazines and books related to this issue. I was scheduled to graduate in 1975 but quit high school to pioneer full-time in 1973, not even 16 years old. This was recommended and encouraged by elders, circuit overseers and district overseers. My father, an electrical engineer, put some strict conditions on me if I were to leave school, including the amount of money I had to earn and split with the family per month, how soon I had to be able to support myself and leave the house (when I was 18 years old). So my life was defined around 1975 in such a way that I was not as apt to forget what happened and why.

But many persons who lived through the same period are now quick to deny that any of what happened actually happened, including things that happened to them personally. This is a disconcerting observation.

[Anna]

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But many persons who lived through the same period are now quick to deny that any of what happened actually happened, including things that happened to them personally. This is a disconcerting observation.

It is quite weird really. Cognitive dissonance perhaps?

Just recently I listened to one of the old recordings. The "infamous" talk given by District overseer Charles Sinutko, where the phrase “stay alive till 75” apparently got coined. It was entitled “Serving with everlasting view in mind” I am sure you know which one I am talking about. Br. Sinutko begins his talk by asking “do we know what 1975 means to us? Well we don’t have to guess what the year 1975 means for us. The WT May /1 1967 is very explicit; the end of 6000 years of human existence…and…possibly …the time when God executes the wicked” Unfortunately that word possibly got completely destroyed by what he says at the end of his talk, at around mark 20:20, when referring to the Society he says; “they know what’s coming, and don’t wait till 75, the door is going to be shut before then!”.  I can only imagine what those in attendance were thinking. It must have been hard for them not to “be looking forward to a date!”.

He of course wasn't the only person with a leadership role  to have voiced things this way. There were many, many others, as you personally know. Also, there is no doubt in my mind that those of the FDS, at least Fred Franz, really believed the end would come in 1975, although never officially taught, but merely insinuated. Logically, there is no reason to believe otherwise.

[Anna]

13 hours ago, DefenderOTT said:

Putting the trust on those that believe speculation is an honest assessment

I think it's quite obvious that those of the FDS who speculated on this, and originated the idea of 1975,  believed their speculation was an honest assessment.