What if the Gentile times did not end in 1914?

[HollyW]

11 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Well, if you get the point of the analogy and feel it lines up with my posts which focus on Scriptural references.... then job done. This is a public forum remember.

If you have a different opinion than that, you should state it clearly instead of offering up analogies that end up saying the same thing your posts have been saying, to wit:  that it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times ended in 1914 or not.

Yes, this is a public forum, though I'm not sure what you're trying to say that has to do with either your opinion or my question(s) about the Gentile times.

Quote

Lifeboats enable an escape from the ship if the perception is that the ship is doomed. However, mutineers have also found them useful (Fletcher Christian comes to mind).

In this case, both come to mind, don't they.   Handy for a sinking ship, or conversely to dispatch the Captain.

Quote

So for the purpose of the illustration, the crew are determined to continue their mission and, regardless of the attempts of the dissuaders, most of the passengers choose to stick with the ship.  

And evidently regardless of who's at the helm. 

Quote

The dissuaders and those persuaded by their arguments board a number of the ship's lifeboats. The ship sails on into troubled waters to continue it's mission. The lifeboats return to shore. Time will tell who made the wisest choice. 

Two different scenarios lend themselves to your illustration.

1. If someone questions the direction the ship is going in, he's looked on unfavorably by the crew and either changes his mind or gets thrown overboard (the lifeboats being reserved for more important personages).

2. In every port where your ship anchors, those on board (themselves having been persuaded to leave other ships) are sent ashore to persuade unsuspecting mates to leave their ships and board yours---where the only way off has sever consequences (better to stay aboard and keep quiet).

Quote

As for the question, I have never suggested that it doesn't matter about the Gentile Times ending in 1914. What is significant however is that if it did not and the suggested domino effect on doctrine takes place, we will all be here to tell the tale. If it it did.... then who will the survivors be?

You've more than suggested it, Eoin, and you're doing it again, along with the other doctrines attached to 1914 being the end of the Gentile times.  There's absolutely zero evidence for it and probably would have been discarded by now except for the importance of the other WTS doctrines attached to it, namely, Jesus did not become King in 1914, the Messianic kingdom was not born in 1914, the presence of Jesus did not begin in 1914, and no inspection took place between 1914 and 1919, therefore no appointment of a faithful slave took place in 1919.

Consider what my next question might be: What if the GB was NOT appointed as the faithful slave?  They've already dropped the appointment they presumed over all of Jesus' earthly interests.  Can they drop the appointment as His faithful slave in charge of all His believers and still maintain any credibility?  From your posts, I'd say they can.

[Evacuated]

Well @HollyW, I think that just about rounds it off for me. Your able grasp of the allegory, ability to reassemble it's detail and to imaginatively extend it's application indicates clearly that you have understood every word of my postings.

I will still track the topic in case any others contribute a useful perspective. 

[HollyW]

6 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Well @HollyW, I think that just about rounds it off for me. Your able grasp of the allegory, ability to reassemble it's detail and to imaginatively extend it's application indicates clearly that you have understood every word of my postings.

I will still track the topic in case any others contribute a useful perspective. 

Thank you for the discussion, Eoin, and for confirming that, at least for you, it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times ended in 1914 or not.   Since that means the question in the OP is of no importance nor interest to you, I wonder what, speaking in nautical terms, prompted you to put an oar in.

[AbigailSensefulOne]

On 8/17/2016 at 7:29 AM, HollyW said:

Taken from Luke 21:24 “And Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations [“times of the Gentiles,” KJ, RS] are fulfilled.”

What would it mean for the WTS and JWs if 1914 was not the end of the Gentile times?  

In light of what Russell had said would happen, and didn't, it's very likely that 1914 did not see the fulfillment of Luke 21:24 after all.  What teachings hinge on this date and would need to be understood differently when and if the Governing Body changes JW's belief about 1914?
 

 

 

Questions: Where is Russell now? What year did the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem? The 2,520 years mentioned in Revelation 12: 6 and 14 - Are they literal years? If so, what year would it be now? 

If 1914 is not the year of Christ's presence, then what year is it? Answer those questions, and I will present you with proof that it is indeed the year 1914.

[HollyW]

10 hours ago, AbigailSensefulOne said:

Questions: Where is Russell now?

Good question, Abigail, because if the Gentile Times didn't end in 1914 then Russell was not resurrected to heaven in 1918 and your belief would change to him being non-existent now.

10 hours ago, AbigailSensefulOne said:

What year did the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem?

In 589 BC, Nebuchadnezzar II laid siege to Jerusalem, culminating in the destruction of the city and its temple in the summer of 587 BC.

10 hours ago, AbigailSensefulOne said:

The 2,520 years mentioned in Revelation 12: 6 and 14 - Are they literal years? If so, what year would it be now? 

Revelation 12:6 says 1,260 days. Revelation 12:14 calls the period a time, times, and half a time; in other words, three and a half times. In fact, both expressions stand for three and a half years, which the WTS says extend in the Northern Hemisphere from the spring of 1919 to the autumn of 1922. 

Christians believe they are 1,260 literal days, just as the WTS does, but they have not occurred yet because they will be the last half of the great tribulation, which is yet future.

10 hours ago, AbigailSensefulOne said:

If 1914 is not the year of Christ's presence, then what year is it?

Christ has not returned yet.

10 hours ago, AbigailSensefulOne said:

Answer those questions, and I will present you with proof that it is indeed the year 1914.

The founder of the WTS religion has already presented seven proofs, the fulfillment of which he said would prove that his calculations about 1914 were based on the Bible.  All seven proofs failed.  What do you make of that?
 

[Ann O'Maly]

 

On 10/12/2016 at 6:50 PM, Teresa Morales said:

[Ann] How do you know you will see it in your lifetime? The early Bible Students thought they would see it in their lifetimes as has each subsequent BS/JW generation after that. So how do you know that you and your generation will be the one?

[Teresa] The answer is simply this: 

To paraphrase, Jesus said that when we first begin to see these things occurring, "The end is not yet." And then later he gave a direct answer of what changes in world conditions would signify the "conclusion of this system of things." 

Granted, everything he mentioned could be identified as a "common" problem, situation or condition at one time or another, that was the point. Great bolts of lightening and the loud sound of a horn were not going to be alerting the masses that prophecy was being fulfilled. 

Given that Jesus mentioned 'common' problems and conditions (and instructed his disciples not to be misled by those 'signs' - Matt. 24:4f.; also cp. v. 44), what specific changes in world conditions did Jesus point to that unequivocally pinpoint when the 'conclusion of the system of things' and the downfall of Satan and his demons would be? 

Quote

However, he was very clear that these conditions would continue to increase in number and severity to the extent that anyone keeping "on the watch" would be able to recognize its significance.

The only increase Jesus mentioned was the "increasing of lawlessness" (24:12). Statistically, crime rates fluctuate but mainly have been on a downward trend.

As far as homicide goes, it was much more dangerous to live in centuries past.

https://ourworldindata.org/homicides/

Quote

How do you think the men of old felt about the promise to, "bring to ruin those ruining the Earth?" We'll have to ask them to know for sure. But, in this critical time in history, governments are putting limitations on corporations and imposing fines and sanctions against those causing severe negative impact on the environment.

I doubt that men of old were ecologically aware like we are today, so did John of Patmos have 'ecological' ruining in mind?

Quote

 Mankind has once again, just as in Noah's day, ruined his way upon the Earth. And this time, it's in a way that they don't even know how to fix! 

That's a very blanket statement. There are multiple issues - social, moral, economic, health, ecological, etc., etc. Some problems are fixed, some aren't or can't be at the moment, and some are being worked on.

Quote

About the, "presence of the son of man," Jesus told us that it would be just like Noah's day. Men and women getting married (nowadays even to the same sexes) and saying, "Where is this promised presence of his?" And "they took no note, until the flood came and swept them all away!" 

I think you are conflating Jesus' words with Peter's. There is no indication that the antediluvians were questioning Jesus' promised presence. Moreover, they simply 'did not know' when the Flood was coming until it was upon them and took them by surprise (this is the whole point of the illustration - like the Flood, Jesus' Parousia will be unpredictable). 

The NWT poorly renders the Greek as 'took no note' in this verse. As a sidebar, compare the changed rendering in the rNWT with that in the older NWT at John 17:3. The same word ginōskō used there is also used in Jesus' illustration, but in the latter instance, the antediluvians did not 'know' or 'come to know.'

Quote

But all of this aside, there was one more thing that Jesus included in the list of things that would indicate the exact "generation" that would live to see the fulfillment of that prophecy. He said, "... this good news of Gods Kingdom will be preached to entire inhabited Earth, as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come!" Jehovah's Witnesses are preaching at an unprecedented rate, and are expanding into all "four corners" of the earth... and no one, not even Satan with all his demons, can stop the progress of those being gathered together to worship the "only true," Almighty God Jehovah, Creator of the Universe! No other efforts to organize global preaching have or will ever come anywhere close to achieving the kind of success the witnesses are having. The only explanation can be that they have Jehovahs backing, blessing and support! If not, it wouldn't be getting done! Period! And Jehovah never takes action against law defying people without first giving them a warning and providing for them a way out!

How do you account for the better success and growth of other Christian religions? For example, the JWs' distant cousins, the Seventh Day Adventists, have been around for about the same time and yet in 2014 they had over 18 million members, missions all over the world, preaching in over 900 languages, as well as health care ministries, educational programs and relief agencies.

https://www.adventist.org/en/information/statistics/article/go/-/seventh-day-adventist-world-church-statistics-2014/

Has God been backing, blessing and supporting the SDA church too?

Quote

So, a good question for you to ask yourself would be, "Would I have gotten on the ark?" 

Hard to do if you're half a world away from it. A more pertinent question for Christians is, "Biblically-speaking, what or who corresponds to the ark during the Gospel Age?"

Quote

[Ann] And doesn't it bother anyone that the 'Gentiles' are still having their 'times' over 100 years after the' Gentile times' supposedly ended?

[Teresa] Is that really so? Please explain why that is your opinion. On what are you basing that comment? 

On the objective fact that the 'Gentile' governments are still in administration upon the everyday affairs of Planet Earth.

Quote

[Ann] Really? Earthquakes, wars, pestilence, food shortages, persecution, evangelism and lawlessness have only occurred together in the 20th and 21st centuries?

[Teresa] Despite those who might suggest that there is an alternative explanation for the significant increase in frequency and severity of the events outlined in Jesus "composite sign," they fail to disprove the claim that Satan and his demons have whipped society into a frenzy, on a global scale, that has caused terror and despair to thrive unabated, and has resulted in the oppression and persecution of god fearing individuals. This is happening globally, and is not getting any better with the advancement of science and technology. 

See comments above.

The whole world isn't in frenzied chaos. If you were living in Aleppo or similar, you might be forgiven for thinking so at the moment. Are you living in Aleppo? Or are you living peacefully in your home, able to go to the market, drive to work, openly worship at your KH and evangelize door-to-door? If so, it suggests a measure of community and governmental stability, does it not - the opposite of 'frenzy' and 'chaos'?

Quote

[Ann] Define 'very short.'

[Teresa] Okay... 
When you consider that Satan started out as a perfect angel, then he was alive even before the Earth was created. Therefore, he could possibly have been in existence for countless millions upon millions of years. At the very least, he is without a doubt, older than the human race! The idea of a human living to be even only one thousand years old today, is preposterous! That's because Jehovah set a limit on us so that a lifespan would be kept to 70 or 80 years on average. So when Jesus said that Satan would be confined to the earth, he described him as walking around as an angry lion, seeking to devour someone. He warned us that the, "Devil has come down to you, having great anger, knowing he has a 'short period of time!" Those are Jesus words. And if the generation that sees the "composit sign" is to also see "the conclusion of this system of things," then that sets the clock ticking against Satan. And on anyone's scale of relativity, millions of years leading up to being hurled out of heaven, compared to a "generation" of being confined to the Earth, constitutes a "very short time!" And if all the chaos on earth is an indication that the prophecy was indeed fulfilled, and I believe it does, doesn't that indicate that even Satan believes in that prophecy, and that Jehovah's will is soon to be carried out? 

What you are in effect saying is, as far as we and our lifespans are concerned, the term 'very short' is meaningless since it's only relative to the vast timescales of supernatural beings. Consequently, Satan's 'very short' time could yet run to thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or millions of years - a blink of an eye considering the billions of years he and our planet have existed. ... Which brings us full circle to my initial questions:

How do you know you will see it in your lifetime? How do you know that you and your generation will be the one?
 

So far you have presented various eisegetical perceptions and suppositions that do not match with observable reality.

[Teresa Morales]

On 8/23/2016 at 3:00 AM, HollyW said:

I think that's what we're talking about, Eoin----there's every reason to expect change in the future, even of the date 1914 for the end of the Gentile times.  And when that change takes place, there will be a number of other teachings that will go with it.

I don't believe there is any reason to expect changes to our understanding regarding the "Gentile Times" ending in 1914. However, if there are changes, they will be based on clearer understanding of the scriptures and will be explained well. Therefore, it will be another example of the "light getting brighter." 

 

 

[Teresa Morales]

On 8/29/2016 at 2:12 PM, HollyW said:

If your opinion is not  that it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times ended in 1914 or not, could you clarify by stating clearly what your opinion is please.   

From what you've already posted, that is clearly what your opinion is.  

Isn't that why you said the Bible would still hold true even if 1914 doesn't, so it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times didn't end in 1914. 

Isn't that why you said you'd be sticking with the faithful ones in Hebrews 11 who  'received a favorable witness because of their faith', since to them, it really doesn't matter if the Gentile time didn't end in 1914.

Isn't that why you pointed out that "Jesus as Head of the Congregation is just as alert today as he was in the 1st Century", so it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times didn't end in 1914.

Isn't that why you said "Discussions and expectations about dates have presumably been going on one way or another ever since Jesus said he would return" so it really doesn't matter if the Gentile time didn't end in 1914.

And Isn't that why said "Jehovah's Witnesses continue to develop, grow, prosper, and seem to be successful in whatever they turn their hands to", so it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times didn't end in 1914.

Clearly that is what Teresa is saying, that she's ready and willing to adjust her thinking to brighter new spiritual light on this when it comes, so it really doesn't matter if the Gentile times didn't end in 1914.  

I don't understand your reason for questioning the validity of 1914 being the end of the Gentile Times? What should have happened that didn't?

[Teresa Morales]

On 8/23/2016 at 0:51 PM, HollyW said:

Even though it would mark a turning away from what they had said was the truth, I don't think the men on the WTS GB would consider their actions to be apostasy, even though that IS their definition of it.  More likely it will read something similar to the presentation of changed beliefs used in the 11/15/2016 WT:

For many years, this journal suggested that the times of the Gentiles ended in 1914 and "the one who has the legal right" to the Davidic crown, Jesus Christ, became King in that year. However, for reasons that we shall outline in this article and in the one following, a re-examination of the subject was necessary.  

 

This is a BLATANT MISQUOTE!

 I'm not sure if it was manufactured by you or sent to you this way, however, I have poured over the Nov 2016 Watchtower magazine and the above comment is partly a quote(out of context) and mostly conjured from thin air! 

In light of this realization, I withdraw from this conversation as it is not necessary to banter with those who are willing to align themselves with Babylonish teachings and lack reasonableness and common sense. 

See jw.org to view this magazine for its actual comments. I believe the relevant points are in the article "Called Out Of Darkness."

[HollyW]

11 hours ago, Teresa Morales said:

This is a BLATANT MISQUOTE!

 I'm not sure if it was manufactured by you or sent to you this way, however, I have poured over the Nov 2016 Watchtower magazine and the above comment is partly a quote(out of context) and mostly conjured from thin air! 

In light of this realization, I withdraw from this conversation as it is not necessary to banter with those who are willing to align themselves with Babylonish teachings and lack reasonableness and common sense. 

See jw.org to view this magazine for its actual comments. I believe the relevant points are in the article "Called Out Of Darkness."

I didn't present it as a quote, I said it would be similar to how beliefs had already been changed:

Quote

Even though it would mark a turning away from what they had said was the truth, I don't think the men on the WTS GB would consider their actions to be apostasy, even though that IS their definition of it.  More likely it will read something similar to the presentation of changed beliefs used in the 11/15/2016 WT:

For many years, this journal suggested that the times of the Gentiles ended in 1914 and "the one who has the legal right" to the Davidic crown, Jesus Christ, became King in that year. However, for reasons that we shall outline in this article and in the one following, a re-examination of the subject was necessary.  

The scripture this puts me in mind of is not found in Hebrews.....it's in 2 Timothy 3:7 "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

 

[HollyW]

12 hours ago, Teresa Morales said:

I don't believe there is any reason to expect changes to our understanding regarding the "Gentile Times" ending in 1914. However, if there are changes, they will be based on clearer understanding of the scriptures and will be explained well. Therefore, it will be another example of the "light getting brighter." 

Which confirms what I said in an earlier post, it really doesn't matter to you if the Gentile Times ended in 1914 or not.

[HollyW]

12 hours ago, Teresa Morales said:

I don't understand your reason for questioning the validity of 1914 being the end of the Gentile Times? What should have happened that didn't?

There are seven events that should have happened, but did not.

At the beginning of the book you're studying now, "God's Kingdom Rules", there's a letter from the Governing Body with an invitation to imagine yourself in the dining room at their headquarters in NYC when Russell comes in and announces, "The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day."

The letter in the new book doesn't provide the background for such a statement, but if we are to imagine ourselves there then let's take a look at what Russell's announcement that morning actually meant to his audience. Had what he had been telling them was going to happen, happened? Had the Gentile Times really ended?

He had written a book in 1889 called The Time Is At Hand, and it had become one of the volumes of his Studies In The Scriptures set; in his Forward for the 1914 edition it was claimed that it had reached a distribution of one and a half million copies. 

In it, on pgs. 76-79, Russell lists seven proofs that would show whether or not 1914 was really the end of the times of the Gentiles as he claimed it would be---and as JWs today are still claiming it was.

So let's look a the list. It's from his publications online at http://www.ctrussell.us/ and here's what it says:

Quote

In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that that date will see the disintegration of the rule of imperfect men. And be it observed, that if this is shown to be a fact firmly established by the Scriptures, it will prove: 

Firstly, That at that date the Kingdom of God, for which our Lord taught us to pray, saying, "Thy Kingdom come," will begin to assume control, and that it will then shortly be "set up," or firmly established, in the earth, on the ruins of present institutions.

Secondly, It will prove that he whose right it is thus to take the dominion will then be present as earth's new Ruler; and not only so, but it will also prove that he will be present for a considerable period before that date; because the overthrow of these Gentile governments is directly caused by his dashing them to pieces as a potter's vessel (Psa. 2:9; Rev. 2:27), and establishing in their stead his own righteous government.

Thirdly, It will prove that some time before the end of the overthrow the last member of the divinely recognized Church of Christ, the "royal priesthood," "the body of Christ," will be glorified with the Head; because every member is to reign with Christ, being a joint-heir with him of the Kingdom, and it cannot be fully "set up" without every member.

Fourthly, It will prove that from that time forward Jerusalem shall no longer be trodden down of the Gentiles, but shall arise from the dust of divine disfavor, to honor; because the "Times of the Gentiles" will be fulfilled or completed.

Fifthly, It will prove that by that date, or sooner, Israel's blindness will begin to be turned away; because their "blindness in part" was to continue only "until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" (Rom. 11:25), or, in other words, until the full number from among the Gentiles, who are to be members of the body or bride of Christ, would be fully selected.

Sixthly, It will prove that the great "time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation," will reach its culmination in a world-wide reign of anarchy; and then men will learn to be still, and to know that Jehovah is God and that he will be exalted in the earth. (Psa. 46:10) The condition of things spoken of in symbolic language as raging waves of the sea, melting earth, falling mountains and burning heavens will then pass away, and the "new heavens and new earth" with their peaceful blessings will begin to be recognized by trouble-tossed humanity. But the Lord's Anointed and his rightful and righteous authority will first be recognized by a company of God's children while passing through the great tribulation--the class represented by m and t on the Chart of the Ages (see also pages 235 to 239, Vol. I); afterward, just at its close, by fleshly Israel; and ultimately by mankind in general.

Seventhly, It will prove that before that date God's Kingdom, organized in power, will be in the earth and then smite and crush the Gentile image (Dan. 2:34)--and fully consume the power of these kings. Its own power and dominion will be established as fast as by its varied influences and agencies it crushes and scatters the "powers that be"-- civil and ecclesiastical--iron and clay.

Did, or have, any of those events happen?  No.  So by what Russell himself said, that shows his calculations for 1914 were not based on the Bible.