Jump to content

JW Insider

1975 was in the past. Are we HONEST about it TODAY?

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

JW Insider -
The Librarian -
185
4592

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

You bore me now!

LOL! I saw that coming as soon as I asked you that question:

In what sense do you believe that there are two periods of 1,260 that make up the 2,520?

18 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

When Pastor Russell started talking to Nelson H. Barbour. Barbour was a Second Adventists just like Paton a co-worker to Barbour. That doesn’t mean anything since Russell was clear on how he viewed the Second Adventist movement.

And not just Barbour and Paton, as we have seen. It was MOST of the persons Russell spoke about and mentioned in the Watchtower publications during those early years.  Also, Russell was definitely NOT clear on how far he wanted to distance himself from the entire Second Adventist movement until a few years later. When Russell first chose to financially support and contribute to Barbour's Adventist "Herald" journal and "Three Worlds" publication, he gave every evidence of being fully in support of Barbour's Second Adventist teachings, and not just on chronology. Russell, of course, tended toward the "Age to Come" beliefs which differed from many (but not all) Second Adventists. (Joseph Marsh, mentioned above, is now considered the first major promoter of the Age to Come movement, but he was closely associated with Adventists in the Second Adventist tradition.) Many Adventists, including Barbour, had waited for the "Bonfire" instead of a true "Age to Come" where the earth is restored to Edenic paradise by the end of the "Thousand Years." (Age to Come believers also did not generally accept the Trinity, Immortal Soul or Hellfire doctrines. The "Advent Christian Church" diverged from "Age to Come" by reverting to the  Trinity doctrine.)

Russell accepted only the "major" Age to Come beliefs, but Russell also accepted non-A2C teachings, since he taught that Jesus had a prehuman existence, the Devil was a real person, and the higher-called Christians will rule directly from heaven rather than just from the earth.

In 1881, just 19 months after starting Zion's Watch Tower, Russell looks back on where his associates were in 1871, and recognizes that so many of the Watchtower associates were then Second Adventists. (ZWT Feb 1881) This makes sense, since Russell built his subscription lists primarily from Barbour's Herald, and Rice's recently defunct paper. In 1879, Russell accepted the Second Adventist contributors to Barbour's Herald as Watchtower contributors, including B W Keith, Paton, and Rice among the new set of Watchtower contributors. All of them had been associated with the Millerite movement, and all of them were evidently accepting of "Age to Come" beliefs, except that Paton leaned toward Trinity, and Barbour was a late-comer to Age to Come ideas about a "broad" salvation. And of course, Barbour, Storrs, Stetson and Wendell had also been connected with the Millerite movement.

You say that these facts don't mean anything, but it seems possible that Russell's own actions and admissions in 1876 might mean just as much, or more, than some of his statements in hindsight from years later. Recall that, 1876, Russell claims his special interest was chronology, saying: " It was about January 1876 that my attention was specially drawn to the subject of prophetic time. . . " His first published article by July 1876 was an "Adventist" piece on chronology in Storrs' Adventist journal. And also in 1876, Russell becomes an Assistant Editor of Barbour's "Herald." Russell's speaks of getting "Three Worlds" published as his major accomplishment with Barbour. It was being made ready in 1876 to be published in 1877. Early Watch Tower publications gave Russell credit for this book, although it's clear now that he didn't write it, but had reviewed all its contents.

The book (Three Worlds) concludes with "WIlliam Miller's Dream." I quote:

We publish the following because it has been so perfectly fulfilled. Every position
on the prophecies held by Bro. Miller has been attacked during the "tarrying of
the Bridegroom," and while the "virgins all slumbered and slept." And yet every
one of those applications have of necessity again been incorporated in these
present arguments
, and the casket, enlarged and rearranged, does indeed "shine
brighter than before":

WM. MILLER'S DREAM
"I dreamed that God, by an unseen hand, sent me a curiously wrought casket,
about ten inches long by six square, made of ebony and pearls curiously inlaid. To
the casket there was a key attached. I immediately took the key and opened the
casket, when, to my wonder and surprise, I found it filled with all sorts and sizes
of jewels, diamonds, precious stones, and gold and silver coin of every dimension
and value, beautifully arranged in their several places in the casket; and thus
arranged, they reflected a light and glory equaled only by the sun." (These jewels
are the beautiful truths the open casket unfolded to his sight.
)

While Russell was never a Second Adventist, he was still an adventist who leaned much closer to Age to Come teachings. But like Storrs, a kind of Adventist mentor, he didn't want to focus on denominations, and he especially didn't want to be directly associated with previous failures of the Millerites and other Second Adventists. In this way he was like many other Adventists of his time, who often claimed that they never really had that much interest in previous date setting, and that they came to their current date-setting chronology through a purer path, and never got their hands dirty with previous failed prophecies or disappointments.

And of course, you already know the "Proclaimers" book admits Russell's "indebtedness" to Adventists under the heading "Influence of Others" https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/pc/r1/lp-e/1200274967/0/2:

Russell referred quite openly to the assistance in Bible study he had received from others. Not only did he acknowledge his indebtedness to Second Adventist Jonas Wendell but he also spoke with affection about two other individuals who had aided him in Bible study. Russell said of these two men: "The study of the Word of God with these dear brethren led, step by step, into greener pastures." One, George W. Stetson, was an earnest student of the Bible and pastor of the Advent Christian Church in Edinboro, Pennsylvania. The other, George Storrs, was publisher of the magazine Bible Examiner, in Brooklyn, New York.

And, naturally, you have already added many other evidences of this same point in your post above, even if you often tend to disagree with your own posts. But you do admit, as I have said, his interest in Second Adventism was primarily chronology-driven.

18 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

So why do you continue to DENY there wasn’t a fallout due to Bible understanding.

Because it absolutely was a fallout due to Bible understanding. I think you already agree with me on this point, too, despite your ambiguous 'double-negative.'

18 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

You want to insinuate that this was Russell’s views when they were actually Barbour’s.

Nothing to insinuate. Russell was actually pretty clear over time where his views differed from Barbour's. Some of those differences, such as the nature of the ransom, were spelled out very early in their relationship. Some were more clearly spelled out very soon afterward, i.e., the Age to Come / Abrahamic Faith related views (regarding the "Bonfire" of the earth, broad salvation, etc.), and it didn't take long before Russell spelled out the differences on Trinity between himself and Paton. I don't think there is much question, at least over time, where Russell differed from Barbour. Barbour even continued to criticize some of Russell's views, now and then, in the decades after they split.

18 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Barbour said no second Adventist had any use for it, so a new partnership ensued.

I don't recall that quote. Do you have the source? I'm guessing that you are referring to this from the 7/15/1906 ZWT, but if you have a quote of what Barbour actually said, that would be interesting:

I inquired of Mr. Barbour as to what was being done by him and by the Herald. He replied that nothing was being done; that the readers of the Herald, being disappointed Adventists, had nearly all lost interest and stopped their subscriptions;--and that thus, with money exhausted, the Herald might be said to be practically suspended. I told him that instead of feeling discouraged and giving up the work since his newly found light on restitution (for when we first met, he had much to learn from me on the fulness of restitution based upon the sufficiency of the ransom given for all, as I had much to learn from him concerning time), he should rather feel that now he had some good tidings to preach, such as he never had before, and that his zeal should be correspondingly increased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I won't continue on the rest, your stupidity bores me now!

LOL. I saw that coming as soon as I asked the question:

In what sense do you believe that there are two periods of 1,260 that make up the 2,520?

Nearly the same thing happened when I asked Allen that question.

3 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Once again, you contradict yourself so many times, it's pathetic.

You haven't shown where. A proposition given without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

3 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Barbour if you bothered to read my post was done with Second Adventism when Russell and Barbour continued the Herald. I can't believe how much Satan is in your head. Therefore, those publications were inspired by new light, not old light, NOT Advent light, that you continue to falsely claim.

I know you made that claim. But without evidence. The problem with your theory is that when Russell and Barbour continued the Herald, it was still very much an Adventist publication. That didn't change. The book "Three Worlds" that they published in 1877 was steeped in Millerite Adventism, so much so that you see the way they concluded it with a defense of Miller in the section on "William Miller's Dream" above. It even copied the "seventh month" movement. But it was a date-adjusted Adventism with very similar interpretations of the same time periods. With Barbour's MINOR adjustments to make Miller's end dates move 30 to 45 years further into the future, Russell kept these very similar time period interpretations throughout the entire series of Studies in the Scriptures, and these doctrines were generally kept until 1927, with a few of them remaining until 1943. Even before Russell influenced him, Barbour, still a full-fledged Second Adventist, had already moved Miller's start date for the 2,520 years from 677 BC to 606 BC (based on Bowen/Elliott/etc). This made the period nearly the same as John Aquila Brown's use of the 2,520 years.

Your theory that Barbour was done with Second Adventism apparently has no evidence, unless you know of some that you are not sharing. But there is plenty of evidence that indicates your theory is not true. I actually agree with you that Russell's ongoing work in the Watch Tower was based on "new light" that progressed further and further toward clearer truth, and further away from Barbour's influence and the influence that other Second Adventists had on Russell. But this couldn't happen completely until 1927 (to about 1933) when the WTS was finally finished selling off the remaining stocks of Studies in the Scriptures.

It seems likely that you are able to keep your claim alive only by changing the definition of Adventism to a special definition that works for you. If this is the case, then you are only arguing semantics. It's probably another one of those cases where anyone else is a liar "with Satan in their head" if they use a word the way a dictionary or Encyclopedia Britannica, for example, uses it, instead of a way that you need them to use it to fit your own ideology.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Adventism

I don't point to that article to say they are right about "Jehovah's Witnesses" but to give you an idea of the "definition" of "Adventism" and "Second Adventism."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I am not going to do the research for you. Maybe you can get your personal “hen” to do that for you.

I believe that person goes by “comfortmypeople”.

I don't know what a "hen" is, in this context, but as far as I can tell @ComfortMyPeople is from Spain, while I am in New York. I have never seen him or any of his research.

You show the idea that many Adventists gave up on dates after their expectations failed. What would you expect?

There are not many other options, when you are at the end of the possibilities that your particular date system allows.

A die-hard Second Adventist might just try to make some new adjustments to the "system" to figure out why the expectations might have been off by just a few months, or a few years, or even a matter of decades. They keep looking for a way to get the system to work because they can't give up after they invested so much in the beliefs. After Miller's failures, he himself decided against setting more dates, but thousands of people were ready to listen to the next predictions for the 1850's, 1860's, 1870's, etc. This makes the continuing date-setters even MORE of a die-hard Adventist. And these are the types of persons who influenced Russell to continue date-setting. Russell continued date-setting, and adjusting his date predictions from 1879 to 1915.  

Of course, there is one other solution, and that is to say that your date really was right all along -- that Jesus really did come to be present in 1874, but that it has been an invisible presence. This was the very solution that fit Russell's ideas, and it kept Barbour's adjusted dating system unchanged, except for that one detail. Russell expected the visible manifestation of Christ's kingdom to begin around 1914, and ultimately this was also changed to an invisible "manifestation," so that all those other dates 1874, 1878, 1881, 1914, etc., could remain unchanged. Of course, over time, 1881 was dropped, then 1874, then finally 1878 had no more prophetic significance (around 1961) and it was completely dropped, too. So that we only have 1914 remaining. (And I think this date, too, will be dropped in about 15 years barring any earthshattering changes.) But we still believe in the imminent manifestation of Jesus advent based on our interpretation of various prophetic time periods that we have tied to the present time period. Therefore we are still under some of the influence of adventists, in that general sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/25/2019 at 6:02 PM, JW Insider said:

*** w68 8/15 pp. 499-501 pars. 30-35 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
And yet the end of that sixth creative “day” could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam’s creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.

This came to my stupid head while reading again about terminology: "6000 years of human creation".

This is very close to wording - Birthday. Birth of Adam and Eve. In that "day" 4026 BCE Adam was "Born".

Timeline

“In the beginning . . .”

4026 B.C.E. Adam’s creation - source: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102009479

Well, it seems to me how WT Society was "involved" in sort of "celebration for Adam Birthday". Why to bring so much attention on Adam Birthday. This is pagan custom. Even to mention when your birthday is/was (only for administrative reasons) may be to understand as promoting idolatry :))))))) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Hey, you just solved your first word puzzle, Congrats!! This came to my stupid head 😂🤣

Ohh, do not worry, this is just for public fun and entertainment. :)))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Perhaps this will shed some light of me being tired of ignorance by those professing to be witnesses. Omitting a strong fact is another way of lying by them.

At least you understand the point that, as you say, "omitting a strong fact is another way of lying by them." I agree 100 percent, and it's really the ongoing theme here. The article you mention is exactly what I had in mind when I said:

On 8/25/2019 at 12:02 PM, JW Insider said:

Both at meetings, and in my personal study, I was reminded of what Jesus said: 'No man knows the day or hour.' "

Again, what was the counsel at the time? It's true the scripture was sometimes brought up.

Yes. We've also discussed this exact idea before. We've also discussed the typical life cycle of these predictions.

For example, Russell made a lot of predictions about October 1914, then the November 1913 Watch Tower began hedging because it just didn't look like everything that was supposed to happen still had time to happen. So Russell began writing and saying that it looks like he had been wrong -- that it might be another year or so, or that people might look back on this prediction 100 years from now and wonder what it was all about. Another article came out in early 1914 that also expressed Russell's strong doubts about 1914. It's almost as if he was prepared to think that people might look back and laugh about this 100 years later.

Similarly, there were a lot of expectations that F.W.Franz had regarding 1975, and he began to give talks in late 1974 that still created excitement, but also asked the question about whether all the things that might be expected to happen first could still happen in time. In one of Franz' talks you can tell he is trying to do the right thing, but he is being a bit ambiguous and the audience doesn't really get it. It's as if it's a little too late to dampen the excitement, and the audience responds as if they think he is being "slick" -- saying one thing but meaning another. I heard one of these 1975 talks in LA. The audience starts to laugh and snicker when he says: "And don't any of you go around saying . . . " He was beginning to hedge in 1974, and the summer assembly talk was a reflection of that. It was an October 15, 1974 Watchtower that reflected the talk from the 1974 convention. It was timely, and it finally admitted that it was IMPORTANT to start strongly considering why "no man knows the day or hour."

This is why I said that the scripture was sometimes brought up, but it was almost too little, too late. The genie couldn't be put back in the bottle until the expectations apparently fell through. After 1976, there was hardly another mention even of the "mid-70s" anymore. And this shows you how the Witnesses are not the type of persons to create speculation on their own -- because as the mid-70s started to close out, you would expect even more and more speculation that the time was now approaching so much closer. After all, it was about what the mid-70s would bring, not specifically 1975. Yet, when the Watchtower and representatives from Brooklyn stopped mentioning it, it died out at a time when you would expect it to gain even more momentum, if it had been a "grass roots" speculation. You can therefore tell it was a top-down speculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I don't know what a "hen" is, in this context, but as far as I can tell @ComfortMyPeople is from Spain, while I am in New York. I have never seen him or any of his research.

You show the idea that many Adventists gave up on dates after their expectations failed. What would you expect.

There are not many other options, when you are at the end of the possibilities that your particular date system allows.

A die-hard Second Adventist might just try to make some new adjustments to the "system" to figure out why the expectations might have been off by just a few months, or a few years, or even a matter of decades. They keep looking for a way to get the system to work because they can't give up after they invested so much in the beliefs. After Miller's failures, he himself decided against setting more dates, but thousands of people were ready to listen to the next predictions for the 1850's, 1860's, 1870's, etc. This makes the continuing date-setters even MORE of a die-hard Adventist. And these are the types of persons who influenced Russell to continue date-setting. Russell continued date-setting, and adjusting his date predictions from 1879 to 1915.  

Of course, there is one other solution, and that is to say that your date really was right all along -- that Jesus really did come to be present in 1874, but that it has been an invisible presence. This was the very solution that fit Russell's ideas, and it kept Barbour's adjusted dating system unchanged, except for that one detail. Russell expected the visible manifestation of Christ's kingdom to begin around 1914, and ultimately this was also changed to an invisible "manifestation," so that all those other dates 1874, 1878, 1881, 1914, etc., could remain unchanged. Of course, over time, 1881 was dropped, then 1874, then finally 1878 had no more prophetic significance (around 1961) and it was completely dropped, too. So that we only have 1914 remaining. (And I think this date, too, will be dropped in about 15 years barring any earthshattering changes.) But we still believe in the imminent manifestation of Jesus advent based on our interpretation of various prophetic time periods that we have tied to the present time period. Therefore we are still under some of the influence of adventists, in that general sense.

 

Well, regarding the "hen" expression,  be sure, it's not spanish. And I have no idea about the use billythekid is trying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ComfortMyPeople said:

Well, regarding the "hen" expression,  be sure, it's not spanish. And I have no idea about the use billythekid is trying

I suppose that now is not the proper time to point out that I never refer to the Librarian without appending “that old hen.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I suppose that now is not the proper time to point out that I never refer to the Librarian without appending “that old hen.”

I think it was one of the Laura Ingalls Wilder books that had the phrase:

If at first you don't fricassee, fry fry a hen.

Or was it:

Whistling girls and crowing hens, always come to some bad ends.

Maybe, it was both. I've never read them myself. Our teacher read them all to us when I was in a 2-room schoolhouse in Missouri -- when I was in the 5th and 6th grades. It was really a one room schoolhouse with a divider down the middle, and one teacher handled grades 1 - 4 on one side, and another teacher handled grades 5 - 8 on the other. When I got to grade 5, we were supposed to be doing our schoolwork while the teacher teacher taught the other grades. Very distracting, but you get used to it. At any rate, all 4 grades at once had to listen to L.I.Wilder's "Little House" series for an hour a day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

image.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.png

Original version of 1975 in Prophecy!  (link to PDF)

Some good points there @BillyTheKid46, about Armstrong and Taylor. (I hadn't heard of Taylor back then.)

I remember hearing Witnesses talk about how closely Herbert W Armstrong sounded like the message of the Witnesses, and how elders from the platform had to mention that we don't listen to such programs even though there might be a lot of good information that draws us in.

Just like "The Plain Truth," this brochure "1975 In Prophecy!" from which I copied pieces above, speaks with similar language. The message had many differences, but it was styled much as our own teachings:

  • the 144,000 as spirit begotten ones.
  • The 6,000 years of trying man's rule as a test of whether man can rule himself.
  • It mentions the Great Tribulation,
  • and Armageddon,
  • and the New World (called The World Tomorrow).
  • It speaks of those who know the "Truth" surviving
  • During the millennium, those with the Truth will teach those others who come through the Great Tribulation.
  • Matthew 24 was often used to point out the greater number of earthquakes, famines, pestilences, and wars.
  • The fulfillment on Jerusalem in 70 was only the "typical" fulfillment.
  • Authors and experts were quoted about 1975, just as the 1968 version of the "Truth" book had done.
  • The repetition of phrases like "IT'S LATER THAN YOU THINK" and "Time is running out for this world," etc., were nearly identical to covers of the Awake! that put them in the form of a question: IS IT LATER THAN YOU THINK? Is Time Running Out For This World?"
  • The pictures of destruction at Armageddon with buildings toppling and dead bodies are shown before pictures of a new world society of survivors building things new, and then a paradise completed by the end of the thousand years.

Back in 1956, when the above magazine was written, the Watchtower was still teaching that the end of the 6,000 years of man's existence would be in 1976, not 1975.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By Jack Ryan
      Jehovah's Witnesses in a 1968 interview _Armageddon and 1975_ London Watchtower rep speaks to BBC.mp4
    • By JW Insider
      Because this post was moved away from its original context, a response to a post about Armstrong's promotion of 1975, I will edit the post below to contain all of @AllenSmith's original material, here. I'm moving his images outside the quote, so that they can be more easiliy seen as relevant to the discussion of H.W.Armstrong, as Allen intended.
       


       
      And, don't forget that, in 1956, Herbert W Armstrong supposedly stole the idea from the February 1, 1955 Watchtower, which put the end of 6,000 years within one year of 1976:
      *** w55 2/1 p. 95 Questions From Readers ***
      In 1953 in preparing the chart that appears in the book “New Heavens and a New Earth” a one-year error was brought to light. By the aid of the New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures the difference between the two numbers appearing at Genesis 7:6 and Genesis 7:11 became apparent, especially since there are two different Hebrew words here maintaining a distinct difference. At Genesis 7:6 the number 600 referring to Noah’s age means 600 full years, being what is generally termed a cardinal number. Whereas at Genesis 7:11 the number “600th,” an ordinal number, means 599 full years plus a portion of another year. . . .  Inasmuch as previously our chronology considered Noah as 600 full years old when he entered the ark, instead of the actual 599 years and some months, as we now see, this has meant that the preflood dates must be shrunk by one year, this bringing Adam’s creation for the fall of 4025 B.C. Incidentally, Jesus, who became the second or “last Adam,” was born in the fall of the year around the first of October.—1 Cor. 15:45, NW. It is well to understand that all Bible chronology dates for events prior to 539 B.C. must be figured backward from the Absolute date of 539 B.C. In the sure date of 607 B.C. for the fall of Jerusalem we have an anchor for the chronology establishment of the important year of 1914. By an overwhelming number of physical facts occurring since 1914, this great turning-point year in man’s history, 1914, has been abundantly confirmed. According to Genesis 1:24-31 Adam was created during the last part of the sixth creative-day period of 7,000 years. Almost all independent chronologists assume incorrectly that, as soon as Adam was created, then began Jehovah’s seventh seven-thousand-year period of the creative week. Such then figure that from Adam’s creation, now thought to be the fall of 4025 B.C., why, six thousand years of God’s rest day would be ending in the fall of 1976. However, from our present chronology (which is admitted imperfect) at best the fall of the year 1976 would be the end of 6,000 years of human history for mankind, 6,000 years of man’s existence on the earth, not 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh seven-thousand-year period. Why not? Because Adam lived some time after his creation in the latter part of Jehovah’s sixth creative period, before the seventh period, Jehovah’s sabbath, began. . . . The very fact that, as part of Jehovah’s secret, no one today is able to find out how much time Adam and later Eve lived during the closing days of the sixth creative period, so no one can now determine when six thousand years of Jehovah’s present rest day come to an end. Obviously, whatever amount of Adam’s 930 years was lived before the beginning of that seventh-day rest of Jehovah, that unknown amount would have to be added to the 1976 date. Of course, just a decade or so later, the Watchtower began minimizing the amount of time it would have taken for a perfect man to name all the animals if Jehovah brought them to him in a steady stream. The flaw in this reasoning was that angels would surely know that amount of time that Jehovah had kept a secret, so they would be aware of the day and the hour "when 6,000 years of Jehovah's present rest day come to an end."
      There is also evidence that Fred W. Franz, who wrote the article above, in 1955, began recalculating in the early 1970's and wanted to begin publishing October 1974 as the date for the end of the 6,000 years of human history. F.W.Franz, I am told, thought this would have strengthened the 1975 argument. But this was supposedly one of the few times when N.Knorr put his foot down and told him he had caused enough trouble with 1975, and that Knorr thought that this vacillation would actually weaken the faith that people put in the Watchtower.
      You probably already know this, but to your point, many Witnesses had to be counseled not to listen to Armstrong's radio program, especially in the late 1960's and early 1970's when many Witnesses claimed that he sounded exactly like the Watchtower.
    • By Jesus.defender
      ("They lost roughly three-quarters of the movement between 1925 and 1928, then suffered huge losses after 1975, when the end didn't come as they had implied over and over again," said Jim Penton, an ex-Witness who writes entries on Jehovah's Witnesses for the Encyclopedia Americana.)
       
    • By The Librarian
      by Fredrick William Franz
      Time In Which We Are Now Interested
      Los Angeles Sports Arena, Feb 5 1975
      I no longer have the version above....
      Although here is a version from Australia:
      Franz Fred - Time In Which We Are Now Interested Australia.mp3

      Agape!
       
       
    • By Aaron Gallegos
      The Governing Body claims to speak for God. They claim that they are spirit directed. Jesus warned us about false prophets making such claims at Matthew 24: 4, 5 & 7:15.
      The Governing Body showed a video on the first day of the 2017 regional convention where they place blame on the rank and file members for believing that 1975 would Mark the end of this system. This is a blatant lie. Here are quotes from their own publications to prove otherwise.
      01.) Life everlasting and freedom of the sons of God p.29,30.
      02.) 1970 July kingdom ministry under announcements. The public talk for the Circuit Assembly that service year is "Who will conquer the world in the 1970's?". Even a lapel card was printed for the members to wear.
      03.) 1968 Aug 15 Watchtower- Study article "Why are you looking  forward to 1975?". Members were told to ignore Jesus warning about no one knowing the day or hour.
      04.) 1968 Awake October 8
      05.) 1969 Awake May 22- Youths were told that they would NEVER GROW OLD in this system and it's useless to go to college because the system would not be here anymore.
      06.) May 1974 Kingdom Ministry- Members that sold their homes to and moved to serve as pioneers were COMMENDED as its the best way to use the rest of the time left in this system.
      What's very upsetting is that the Governing Body placed the blame on the members for believing the end would come in 1975. It was them and not the members that came up with This! They deliberately lie and hide evidence.

  • Forum Statistics

    61,696
    Total Topics
    114,701
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,513
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    pastel
    Newest Member
    pastel
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Anna: .... I tried to read all that stuff from the 1968 Watchtower you posted.  I REALLY did. But I concluded that the whole thing could probably be condensed to two short paragraphs, and to read it in it's entirety would probably be fatal to me, from the handful of caffeine tablets I would need to finish it.
    • My opening scriptures were Rev 5:9,10.  If you will look again at the WT’s Greek Interlinear, it states that the kings/priests will reign ON the earth.  Do you want to change that truth, Arauna?  If you could only see that a “new creation” is both heavenly and human.  They will serve God in heaven and as the early priests were commissioned to do – teach and serve the people under the direction of their High Priest, Jesus Christ..  Mal 2:7; Rev 1:5,6; 7:15  Can God’s priesthood teach the people if they remain in a spiritual state that the rest of God’s children do not have access to?  Can they say these words and be heard if they are out of contact with God’s future children?... “And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And the one who hears, let him say, “Come!” And the one who is thirsty, let him come. The one who wants, let him take the water of life freely.”  Rev 22:17 Can “New Jerusalem” prepared as a bride, come down from heaven if it is to remain in heaven?  Rev 22:2 Remember, the “144,000” are the Temple, the Holy City.  They bring God’s Spirit/direction/guidance to His children.   And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling of God is with humanity, and he will take up residence with them, and they will be his people and God himself will be with them.  Rev 21:3 The dwelling of God is the Temple/House of God – 1 Cor 3:16,17; 1 Cor 6:19; Eph 2:20-22 So, his ability to come back to earth has now passed.  Is this what you are saying?  Where are the scriptures that support this?  I have provided scripture that show Jesus returning to the earth. And after he had said these things, while they were watching, he was taken up, and a cloud received him from their sight. 10 And as they were staring into the sky while he was departing, behold, two men in white clothing stood by them 11 who also said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand there lookin] into the sky? This Jesus who was taken up from you into heaven like this will come back in the same way you saw him departing into heaven!” Acts 1:9-11 And again, when he brings the firstborn into the world, he says, “And let all the angels of God worship him.”  Heb 1:6  I am pretty amazed that Gen 28:12-17 and John 1:51 do not help you see that Jesus will be on the earth in the Kingdom.  I hope you actually read them.  A symbolic stairway in Jacob's vision is set up between heaven and earth.  The descendants of Jacob in Genesis, are “Israel”.  His descendants, the “144,000” inherit the earth.  Jesus referred to the stairway again in John, with his “angel”/messengers “ascending and descending” upon the Son of Man.   An anointed, refined and found faithful can be sealed while on the earth.  Yet even so, their obedience only to Christ must continue until he returns.  1 Cor 1:21,22; Eph 1:13; 4:30 Can you see you are creating a doctrine with no sound basis?  How do you know this?  You speak of unity among all in the organization, yet they are all individuals, both men and women.  You have even in error, designated that the organization's members are the Body of Christ.  But, when it comes the the true anointed Body of Christ you now say there will be no men or women, but clones as your GB portray them, once God's Kingdom arrives.  You are applying two sets of standards, which is hypocrisy.    Yes they do. You can see the slaves however you like, but I detect you looking through the lens of the GB who are telling all JWs lies about the anointed ones.  I see what scripture points out clearly, that the elders have usurped the role of God’s priesthood. Matt 24:15,16; 2 Thess 2:3,4; Rev 11:1-3; 13:6  Revelation’s “Jezebel” feeds God’s servants/slaves lies, and expects gratitude given to an organization, an idol.  Your very words speak their lies. The ancient Jezebel killed the prophets of God (1 Kings 18:13);  today’s “Jezebel” spiritually “kills” any anointed as well as their companions who see truth and reveal “her” lies.  Rev 13:11,14-17 But I have against you that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, the one who calls herself a prophetess,(Rev 13:11) and teaches and deceives my slaves to commit sexual immorality (spiritual harlotry) and to eat food sacrificed to idols.  Rev 2:20 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear, and will produce great signs and wonders in order to deceive, if possible, even the elect    
    • One thing is absolutely certain, Bible chronology reinforced with fulfilled Bible prophecy shows that six thousand years of man’s existence will soon be up, yes, within this generation! Here authors said how some "fulfilled Bible prophecy" showed something. This would mean how WT Society knew at that time what was already fulfilled or it will be. Is this claim really correct? Because they made interpretations about human events and projected their expectations, explained them as Bible prophecies. This was common practice. Another thing, let me remind please what was explanation of "generation" in 1968?  But they knew "something" about 70., what was more important for them :)) .... and it seems how "instructions" (gave from Jesus, and not Jeruzalem GB)  showed themselves as reasonable even from human standpoint. :))
    • After today's WT study I was reminded of how much simpler and clearer we have become. There are still some speculative elements there, but overall its nothing compared to some past WT studies, and although this might be slightly off topic here (but still on topic with regard to "difficult doctrine") I would just like to post one example from 1968. (WT 68/8/15)  Either people were more patient and studious than they are now, or even back then, perhaps only a handful were able to wrap their heads around this study. I will be bold enough to say many may have just heard "end in 1975", and that's it. Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? 1, 2. (a) What has sparked special interest in the year 1975, and with what results? (b) But what questions are raised? WHAT about all this talk concerning the year 1975? Lively discussions, some based on speculation, have burst into flame during recent months among serious students of the Bible. Their interest has been kindled by the belief that 1975 will mark the end of 6,000 years of human history since Adam’s creation. The nearness of such an important date indeed fires the imagination and presents unlimited possibilities for discussion. 2 But wait! How do we know their calculations are correct? What basis is there for saying Adam was created nearly 5,993 years ago? Does the one Book that can be implicitly trusted for its truthful historical accuracy, namely, the Inspired Word of Jehovah, the Holy Bible, give support and credence to such a conclusion? 3. Is the date for Adam’s creation as found in many copies of the Bible part of the inspired Scriptures, and do all agree on the date? 3 In the marginal references of the Protestant Authorized or King James Version, and in the footnotes of certain editions of the Catholic Douay version, the date of man’s creation is said to be 4004 B.C.E. This marginal date, however, is no part of the inspired text of the Holy Scriptures, since it was first suggested more than fifteen centuries after the last Bible writer died, and was not added to any edition of the Bible until 1701 C.E. It is an insertion based upon the conclusions of an Irish prelate, the Anglican Archbishop James Ussher (1581-1656). Ussher’s chronology was only one of the many sincere efforts made during the past centuries to determine the time of Adam’s creation. A hundred years ago when a count was taken, no less than 140 different timetables had been published by serious scholars. In such chronologies the calculations as to when Adam was created vary all the way from 3616 B.C.E. to 6174 B.C.E., with one wild guess set at 20,000 B.C.E. Such conflicting answers contained in the voluminous libraries around the world certainly tend to compound the confusion when seeking an answer to the above questions. 4. What have we learned in our previous study, and, hence, what are we now prepared to do? 4 In the previous article we learned from the Inspired Writings themselves, independent of the uninspired marginal notes of some Bibles, that the seventy years of desolation of the land of Judah began to count about October 1, 607 B.C.E. The beginning of this seventy-year period was obviously tied to its ending, that is, with the fall of Babylon in 539 B.C.E. So with 607 B.C.E. as dependably fixed on our Gregorian calendar as the absolute date of 539 B.C.E. we are prepared to move farther back in the count of time, to the dating of other important events in Bible history. For instance, the years when Saul, David and Solomon reigned successively over God’s chosen people can now be dated in terms of the present-day calendar. 5. What history-making events took place in 997 B.C.E.? 5 At the death of Solomon his kingdom was split into two parts. The southern two-tribe part, composed of Judah and Benjamin, continued to be ruled by Solomon’s descendants, and was known as the kingdom of Judah. The northern ten tribes made up the kingdom of Israel, sometimes called “Samaria” after the name of its later capital city, and were ruled over by Jeroboam and his successors. By our applying the prophetic time period of 390 years found in Ezekiel 4:1-9 with regard to Jerusalem’s destruction the death of Solomon is found to be in the year 997 B.C.E. This was 390 years before the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. ISRAEL’S ERRORS CARRIED 390 YEARS 6, 7. What time periods are referred to in Ezekiel 4:1-9? 6 Notice what is said on this matter by the prophet Ezekiel: 7 “And you, O son of man, take for yourself a brick, and you must put it before you, and engrave upon it a city, even Jerusalem. And you must lay siege against it . . . It is a sign to the house of Israel. And as for you, lie upon your left side, and you must lay the error of the house of Israel upon it. For the number of the days that you will lie upon it you will carry their error. And I myself must give to you the years of their error to the number of three hundred and ninety days, and you must carry the error of the house of Israel. And you must complete them. And you must lie upon your right side in the second case, and you must carry the error of the house of Judah forty days. A day for a year, a day for a year, is what I have given you. . . . And as for you, take for yourself wheat and barley and broad beans and lentils and millet and spelt, and you must put them in one utensil and make them into bread for you, for the number of the days that you are lying upon your side; three hundred and ninety days you will eat it.”—Ezek. 4:1-9. 8. When did the carrying of the “error” of the southern kingdom end? 8 This chapter 4 of Ezekiel, was not recounting past historical events but was prophecy of future events. It was telling of the time in the future when the glorious city of Jerusalem would be besieged and its inhabitants taken captive, all of which occurred in 607 B.C.E. So the forty years spoken of in the case of Judah ended in that year. The “error” of the northern kingdom, said to be carried for 390 years, was nearly tenfold greater when compared with the error of Judah carried for 40 years. When, then, did these 390 years end? 9. What indicates the “error” of the northern kingdom also ended in 607 B.C.E.? 9 They were not terminated in 740 B.C.E., when Samaria was destroyed, for the simple fact that Ezekiel enacted this prophetic drama sometime after “the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin,” which would make the termination not earlier than 613 B.C.E., that is, 127 years after the destruction of Samaria by Assyria. (Ezek. 1:2) Since this whole prophetic drama plainly pointed forward to the destruction of Jerusalem, and since both the house of Israel and the house of Judah were in reality one inseparable covenant-bound people, the remnant of whom would not be a divided people upon their return from exile, there is only one reasonable conclusion, namely, the errors of both houses ran concurrently and terminated at the same time in 607 B.C.E. In this way the 70 years of desolation of the land of Judah ended 70 years after the termination of carrying the error of both houses, so that thus a remnant of both houses could return to the site of Jerusalem. 10. So when did the “error” of Israel begin? 10 If the “error of the house of Israel” ended in 607, its beginning, 390 years prior thereto, was in 997 B.C.E. It began the year that King Solomon died and Jeroboam committed error, yes, great error, in that Jeroboam, whose domain was ripped off from the house of David, “proceeded to part Israel from following Jehovah,” causing them “to sin with a great sin.”—2 Ki. 17:21. DATE OF EXODUS, 1513 B.C.E. 11, 12. What other event in man’s history are we now prepared to date, and with the aid of what key text? 11 Looking back into the distant past we see another milestone in man’s history, the never-to-be-forgotten exodus of the Israelites from Egyptian slavery, under the leadership of Moses. Were it not for Jehovah’s faithful Word the Bible, it would be impossible to locate this great event accurately on the calendar, for Egyptian hieroglyphics are conspicuously silent concerning the humiliating defeat handed that first world power by Jehovah. But with the Bible’s chronology, how relatively simple it is to date that memorable event! 12 At 1 Kings 6:1 we read: “And it came about in the four hundred and eightieth year after the sons of Israel came out from the land of Egypt, in the fourth year, in the month of Ziv, that is, the second month, after Solomon became king over Israel, that he proceeded to build the house to Jehovah.” 13, 14. (a) On the Gregorian calendar, in what year did Solomon begin to reign? (b) In what year did he begin the building of the temple? 13 With this information one has only to determine what calendar year Solomon began building the temple, and it is then an easy matter to figure when Pharaoh’s army was destroyed in the Red Sea. 14 “And the days that Solomon had reigned in Jerusalem over all Israel were forty years.” (1 Ki. 11:42) This means that his last full regnal year ended in the spring of 997 B.C.E.* Adding 40 to 997 gives 1037 B.C.E., the year that Solomon began his peaceful reign. He did not begin the temple building, as the account says, until the second month of the fourth year of his reign, which means he had ruled a full three years and one month. Thus subtracting 3 years from 1037 one gets 1034 B.C.E., the year that the building work began. The time of the year was the second month Ziv, that is, April-May. This, the Bible says, was “in the four hundred and eightieth year” after the Israelites left Egypt. 15. (a) Explain the difference between a cardinal and an ordinal number. (b) So when did the Israelites leave Egypt? 15 Anytime we put a “th” on the end of a number, for instance on the number 10, saying 10th, the number is changed from a cardinal to an ordinal number. When one speaks about playing baseball in the tenth inning of the game, it means that nine full innings have already been played, but only part of the tenth; ten innings are not yet completed. Likewise, when the Bible uses an ordinal number, saying that the building of the temple began in the 480th year after the Israelites left Egypt, and when that particular year on the calendar is known to be 1034 B.C.E., then we add 479 full years (not 480) to 1034 and arrive at the date 1513 B.C.E., the year of the Exodus. It too was springtime, Passover time, the 14th day of the month Nisan. HOW LONG SINCE THE FLOOD? 16. How far back in history have we now penetrated, and what are the prospects of probing even deeper? 16 Already with the help supplied by the Bible we have accurately measured back from the spring of this year 1968 C.E. to the spring of 1513 B.C.E., a total of 3,480 years. With the continued faithful memory and accurate historical record of Jehovah’s Holy Word we can penetrate even deeper into the past, back to the flood of Noah’s day. 17. In recounting Israel’s experiences, to what events and to what time period does Stephen refer? 17 Stephen, the first martyred footstep follower of Jesus Christ, referred to what Jehovah said would befall Abraham’s offspring. “Moreover, God spoke to this effect, that his seed would be alien residents in a foreign land and the people would enslave them and afflict them for four hundred years.” (Acts 7:6; Gen. 15:13) Stephen here mentions three of Israel’s past experiences: As alien residents in a foreign land, as people in slavery, and as people afflicted for four hundred years. 18. What argues against the conclusion that these events were separate experiences following one another in consecutive order? 18 It would be a mistake to assume that all three of these experiences were of equal duration, or that they were separate individual experiences that followed one another in consecutive order. It was long after their entrance into Egypt as aliens that they were enslaved, more than 70 years later, and sometime after the death of Joseph. Rather, Stephen was saying that within the same 400-year period in which they were afflicted, they were also enslaved and were also alien residents. 19. How do we know the Israelites were “aliens” before entering Egypt? 19 Please note that, when Stephen said they were “alien residents in a foreign land . . . for four hundred years,” he did not say and he did not mean to imply that they were not alien residents before entering Egypt. So it is a mistake to insist that this text proves the Israelites were in Egypt for four hundred years. It is true that, upon entering Egypt and being presented before Pharaoh for the first time, Joseph’s brothers said: “We have come to reside as aliens in the land.” But they did not say nor did they mean that up until then they had not been alien residents, for on the same occasion their father Jacob, when asked by Pharaoh how old he was, declared: “The days of the years of my alien residences are a hundred and thirty years.” And not only had Jacob spent his whole lifetime as an alien resident before coming to Egypt, but he told Pharaoh that his forefathers before him also had been alien residents.—Gen. 47:4-9. 20. When did these 400 years end, and when did they begin? 20 Since the affliction of Israel ended in 1513 B.C.E., it must have begun in 1913, 400 years earlier. That year would correspond to the time that Isaac was afflicted by Ishmael “poking fun” at him on the day that Isaac was weaned. At the time, Isaac was five years old, and this was long before the Israelites entered Egypt.—Gen. 21:8, 9. 21, 22. Were the Israelites 430 years in Egypt exclusively, and how do certain ancient manuscripts shed light on this point? 21 Well, then, how long were the Israelites down in Egypt as alien residents? Exodus 12:40, 41 says: “And the dwelling of the sons of Israel, who had dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. And it came about at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, it even came about on this very day that all the armies of Jehovah went out of the land of Egypt.” 22 Here Ex 12 verse 40 in the Septuagint reads: “But the dwelling of the sons of Israel which they [and their fathers, Alexandrine MS] dwelt in the land of Egypt AND IN THE LAND OF CANAAN [was] four hundred and thirty years long.” The Samaritan Pentateuch reads: “IN THE LAND OF CANAAN and in the land of Egypt.” Thus both of these versions, which are based on Hebrew texts older than the Masoretic, include the words “in the land of Canaan” together with the word “Egypt.” 23. (a) So how long were the Israelites actually in Egypt, and how does Paul confirm this? (b) Explain the difference between the 400 and the 430 years mentioned in the Scriptures. 23 From the time that Abraham entered Canaan until Isaac’s birth was 25 years;* from that time until Jacob’s birth, 60 more years; and after that it was another 130 years before Jacob entered Egypt. All together this makes a total of 215 years, exactly half of the 430 years, spent in Canaan before moving in to Egypt. (Gen. 12:4; 21:5; 25:26; 47:9) The apostle Paul, under inspiration, also confirms that from the making of the Abrahamic covenant at the time the patriarch moved into Canaan, it was 430 years down to the institution of the Law covenant.—Gal. 3:17. 24, 25. The Flood began in what calendar year, and how long was this before Abraham entered Canaan? 24 By adding this 430 years to the 1513 it puts us back to 1943 B.C.E., the time when Abraham first entered Canaan following the death of his father Terah in Haran, Mesopotamia. It is now only a matter of adding up the years of a few generations to date the Flood correctly. The figures are given in Genesis, chapters 11 and 12, and may be summarized as follows: From start of Flood To Arpachshad’s birth (Gen. 11:10) 2 years To birth of Shelah (11:12) 35 “ To birth of Eber (11:14) 30 “ To birth of Peleg (11:26) 34 “ To birth of Reu (11:18) 30 “ To birth of Serug (11:20) 32 “ To birth of Nahor (11:22) 30 “ To birth of Terah (11:24) 29 “ To death of Terah in Haran, and Abram’s departure to Canaan at age of 75 (11:32; 12:4) 205 “ Total 427 years 25 Adding these 427 years to the year 1943 B.C.E. dates the beginning of the Deluge at 2370 B.C.E., 4,337 years ago. 6,000 YEARS FROM ADAM’S CREATION 26, 27. (a) How long before the Flood was Adam created? In what year? (b) What indicates that Adam was created in the fall of the year? 26 In a similar manner it is only necessary to add up the following years involving ten pre-Flood generations to get the date of Adam’s creation, namely: From Adam’s creation To birth of Seth (Gen. 5:3) 130 years To birth of Enosh (5:6) 105 “ To birth of Kenan (5:9) 90 “ To birth of Mahalalel (5:12) 70 “ To birth of Jared (5:15) 65 “ To birth of Enoch (5:18) 162 “ To birth of Methuselah (5:21) 65 “ To birth of Lamech (5:25) 187 “ To birth of Noah (5:28, 29) 182 “ To beginning of Flood (7:6) 600 “ Total 1,656 years 27 Adding this figure 1,656 to 2,370 gives 4026 B.C.E., the Gregorian calendar year in which Adam was created. Since man naturally began to count time with his own beginning, and since man’s most ancient calendars started each year in the autumn, it is reasonable to assume that the first man Adam was created in the fall of the year. 28. How does this chronology differ from Ussher’s in regard to Adam’s creation? 28 Thus, through a careful independent study by dedicated Bible scholars who have pursued the subject for a number of years, and who have not blindly followed some traditional chronological calculations of Christendom, we have arrived at a date for Adam’s creation that is 22 years more distant in the past than Ussher’s figure. This means time is running out two decades sooner than traditional chronology anticipates. 29. Why be concerned with the date of Adam’s creation? 29 After much of the mathematics and genealogies, really, of what benefit is this information to us today? Is it not all dead history, as uninteresting and profitless as walking through a cemetery copying old dates off tombstones? After all, why should we be any more interested in the date of Adam’s creation than in the birth of King Tut? Well, for one thing, if 4,026 is added to 1,968 (allowing for the lack of a zero year between C.E. and B.C.E.) one gets a total of 5,993 years, come this autumn, since Adam’s creation. That means, in the fall of the year 1975, a little over seven years from now (and not in 1997 as would be the case if Ussher’s figures were correct), it will be 6,000 years since the creation of Adam, the father of all mankind! ADAM CREATED AT CLOSE OF “SIXTH DAY” 30. What may occur before 1975, but what attitude should we take? 30 Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes. Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh creative “day.” Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the “sixth day,” which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam’s 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or “day” ended, and how long Adam lived into the “seventh day.” And yet the end of that sixth creative “day” could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam’s creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years. 31. What do the first two chapters of Genesis disclose? 31 In regard to Adam’s creation it is good to read carefully what the Bible says. Moses in compiling the book of Genesis referred to written records or “histories” that predated the Flood. The first of these begins with Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 2:4 with the words, “This is the history of the heavens and the earth . . . ” The second historical document begins with Genesis 2:5 and ends with Ge verse two of chapter five. Hence we have two separate accounts of creation from slightly different points of view. In the second of these accounts, in Genesis 2:19, the original Hebrew verb translated “was forming” is in the progressive imperfect form. This does not mean that the animals and birds were created after Adam was created. Genesis 1:20-28 shows it does not mean that. So, in order to avoid contradiction between Ge chapter one and chapter two, Genesis 2:19, 20 must be only a parenthetical remark thrown in to explain the need for creating a “helper” for man. So the progressive Hebrew verb form could also be rendered as “had been forming.”—See Rotherham’s translation (Ro), also Leeser’s (Le). 32. What indicates the sixth creative day did not end immediately with Adam’s creation? 32 These two creation accounts in the book of Genesis, though differing slightly in the treatment of the material, are in perfect agreement with each other on all points, including the fact that Eve was created after Adam. So not until after this event did the sixth creative day come to an end. Exactly how soon after Adam’s creation is not disclosed. “After that [Adam and Eve’s creation] God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.” (Gen. 1:31) After the sixth creative day ends, the seventh one begins. 33. (a) How do we know the end of the sixth creative day came very soon after Adam’s creation? (b) How does Genesis 1:31 prove the sixth day ended before Adam and Eve sinned? 33 This time between Adam’s creation and the beginning of the seventh day, the day of rest, let it be noted, need not have been a long time. It could have been a rather short one. The naming of the animals by Adam, and his discovery that there was no complement for himself, required no great length of time. The animals were in subjection to Adam; they were peaceful; they came under God’s leading; they were not needing to be chased down and caught. It took Noah only seven days to get the same kinds of animals, male and female, into the Ark. (Gen. 7:1-4) Eve’s creation was quickly accomplished, ‘while Adam was sleeping.’ (Gen. 2:21) So the lapse of time between Adam’s creation and the end of the sixth creative day, though unknown, was a comparatively short period of time. The pronouncement at the end of the sixth day, “God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good,” proves that the beginning of the great seventh day of the creative week did not wait until after Adam and Eve sinned and were expelled from the Garden of Eden. 1975! . . . AND FAR BEYOND! 34. What has brought about a better understanding of Bible chronology? 34 Bible chronology is an interesting study by which historic events are placed in their order of occurrence along the stream of time. The Watch Tower Society over the years has endeavored to keep its associates abreast with the latest scholarship that proves consistent with historic and prophetic events recorded in the Scriptures. Major problems in sacred chronology have been straightened out either due to fulfillment of Bible prophecies or by reason of archaeological discoveries or because better Bible translations convey more clearly the records of the original languages. However, several knotty problems of chronology of a minor nature are not yet resolved. For example, at the time of the exodus from Egypt when Jehovah changed the beginning of the year from autumn time on the secular calendar to spring time on the sacred calendar, was there, in the Jewish calendar, a loss or a gain of six months?—Ex. 12:1, 2. 35. Why is this no time for indifference and complacency? 35 One thing is absolutely certain, Bible chronology reinforced with fulfilled Bible prophecy shows that six thousand years of man’s existence will soon be up, yes, within this generation! (Matt. 24:34) This is, therefore, no time to be indifferent and complacent. This is not the time to be toying with the words of Jesus that “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36) To the contrary, it is a time when one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end. Make no mistake, it is sufficient that the Father himself knows both the “day and hour”! 36. What helpful example did the apostles leave us in this regard? 36 Even if one cannot see beyond 1975, is this any reason to be less active? The apostles could not see even this far; they knew nothing about 1975. All they could see was a short time ahead in which to finish the work assigned to them. (1 Pet. 4:7) Hence, there was a ring of alarm and a cry of urgency in all their writings. (Acts 20:20; 2 Tim. 4:2) And rightly so. If they had delayed or dillydallied and had been complacent with the idea the end was some thousands of years off they would never have finished running the race set before them. No, they ran hard and they ran fast, and they won! It was a life or death matter with them.—1 Cor. 9:24; 2 Tim. 4:7; Heb. 12:1. 37. So what will you be doing between now and 1975? And beyond that, what? 37 So too with Jehovah’s faithful witnesses in this latter half of the twentieth century. They have the true Christian point of view. Their strenuous evangelistic activity is not something peculiar to this present decade. They have not dedicated their lives to serve Jehovah only until 1975. Christians have been running this way ever since Christ Jesus blazed the trail and commanded his disciples, “Follow me!” So keep this same mental attitude in you that was in Christ Jesus. Let nothing slow you down or cause you to tire and give out. Those who will flee Babylon the Great and this Satanic system of things are now running for their lives, headed for God’s kingdom, and they will not stop at 1975. O no! They will keep on in this glorious way that leads to everlasting life, praising and serving Jehovah for ever and ever!     You are referring to Luke 10:17,18 "Then the 70 returned with joy, saying: “Lord, even the demons are made subject to us by the use of your name.” At that he said to them: “I see Satan already fallen like lightning from heaven".  But one of the cross references to Satan falling is Revelation 12:7-9   "And war broke out in heaven: Miʹcha·el and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled 8  but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them any longer in heaven. 9  So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him". I wonder why, since as you say we are to understand that it referred to the power Satan had over Jesus and his disciples. In a way no, but I think we are meant to see that the world in general was brought into more of a turmoil than it had been before, with the world warring on a worldwide scale, with lethal weapons capable of total world destruction I am thinking rather than using the word "defeat" (because Satan won't be defeated until after the 1000 years) the purpose of the battle in heaven in 1914 was to cleanse the heavens of his evil presence. Then during Armageddon it will be to bind him and put him in "jail" for a period of time. So no, I don't think there are several stages of defeat.   We are to believe that what changed after the battle in 1914 was the world in general.   Yes indeed. But how fatal would it really be if we ignored Jesus words about not knowing the day or hour?
    • The music video for Lionel Richie's "Hello" directed by Bob Giraldi, attracts attention as it tells the story of a music teacher (played by Lionel Richie) who falls in love with his blind student. "Hello is it me you're looking for?" is quite an insensitive pick up line to use on a blind woman.   Ah, the 80s, when people thought teachers stalking their disabled students was romantic...    
    • Quote @b4ucuhear " For example, we realized that the “superior authorities” mentioned in Romans 13:1 are, not Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, but the political rulers " BUT the original teaching by the Bible Students was that the 'superior authorities' was the political rulers. It was fully understood in the first place. So, why was false reasoning used to give false teaching ? Obviously no Holy Spirit involved there. So you cannot say that it was new light or better understanding when it was originally known anyway 
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.