1914 ....A significant year in bible prophecy

[BlaznFattyz]

interesting that the closer generations to adam lived hundreds of years and has tapered off.

 

[mee]

That has happened in the past, for JWs, on six occasions. However, they no longer openly predict the future's end date, only that the time is nigh (hence mee's insistence that we take heed, now). And not every JW is fixated on the year 1914, like our friend mee. I happen to think mee, is trying to say something important, but can't get it out, because of the 1914 issue being a stumbling stone to him (and unfortunately us as well).



v/r

Q

for me ,i can see that the early bible students knew from their study of the bible that 1914 was a very significant date , but now because of revealed understanding,they realize that this date was THE START of the last days , and they also realize that noone knows the day or the hour when Jesus will go into action . but NOW is the time to put ourselves on the side of the reigning king Jesus christ ,because when the time comes for the king to go into action it will be to late to say let me in , because the figrative door will be closed , just as the door in the litral ark at the flood in Noahs day was closed by God himself, so it will be when Jesus comes to judge the inhabited earth . noah preached for about 40 years that there was going to be a flood but they took no note of the warning , and when the flood did come they were trying to get in the ark and asking to be let in ,but it was to late , and Jesus did say that the flood of noahs day would be like the presence of the son of man (jesusChrist)
Jesus urged his followers to stay alert. He provided a sign so that his presence could be recognized, though most would take no note: "As the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. For as they were in those days before the flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark; and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be."—Matthew 24:37-39. yes the presence of the son of man started in 1914 when Jesus was made king of Gods heavenly kingdom goverment . so yes i am trying to say something important, but 1914 is not a stumbling stone to me ,but it is a very significant date indeed .
And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come. matthew 24;14 DANIEL 2;44 Daniel 7;13-14

 

[mee]

So man has been appointed 120 years of life (max) since after the deluge... so counting 120 years from 1914 we get the year 2034.
I'm not trying to make fun of anyone's beliefs here but how would Jehovah's Witnesses react if it were suddenly 2036 and judgement day still hadn't happened?
The way I see it is that it has got to happen BEFORE 2034 for the Jehovah's Witnesses position to be vindicated.

many mis quote this 120 years ,this is refering to how much longer they had left before the flood came . not to how long a life span was .
Jehovah’s long-suffering was seen in Noah’s day. Over a century before the Flood, "God saw the earth and, look! it was ruined, because all flesh had ruined its way on the earth." (Genesis 6:12) Still, for a limited time, Jehovah showed long-suffering toward mankind. He said: "My spirit shall not act toward man indefinitely in that he is also flesh. Accordingly his days shall amount to a hundred and twenty years." (Genesis 6:3) Those 120 years allowed faithful Noah time to produce a family and—when informed of God’s decree—to build an ark and warn his contemporaries of the coming Flood.

 

[mee]

interesting that the closer generations to adam lived hundreds of years and has tapered off.

yes we really are in a dying state , 70 years is about it , but if because of special mightyness it could be eighty years or more

In themselves the days of our years are seventy years;
And if because of special mightiness they are eighty years,
Yet their insistence is on trouble and hurtful things;
​

For it must quickly pass by, and away we fly. psalm 90 ;10 old age is full of trouble some things , arthritis, going blind, deafness, bend double , loosing our teeth , wrinkles, walking sticks wheelchairs having to be looked after like a baby .ect,ect, not many escape these things in very old age. but life is very short it passes quickly when we are young and then we are gone. it really is an enemy to us ,but this enemy death will be swallowed up for ever when death is swallowed up for ever
He will actually swallow up death forever, and the Sovereign Lord Jehovah will certainly wipe the tears from all faces. And the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for Jehovah himself has spoken [it].Isaiah 25;8
(Revelation 21:4) And he will wipe out every tear from their eyes, and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore. The former things have passed away."
(1 Corinthians 15:26) As the last enemy, death is to be brought to nothing.

 

[Quahom1]

for me ,i can see that the early bible students knew from their study of the bible that 1914 was a very significant date , but now because of revealed understanding,they realize that this date was THE START of the last days , and they also realize that noone knows the day or the hour when Jesus will go into action . but NOW is the time to put ourselves on the side of the reigning king Jesus christ ,because when the time comes for the king to go into action it will be to late to say let me in , because the figrative door will be closed , just as the door in the litral ark at the flood in Noahs day was closed by God himself, so it will be when Jesus comes to judge the inhabited earth . noah preached for about 40 years that there was going to be a flood but they took no note of the warning , and when the flood did come they were trying to get in the ark and asking to be let in ,but it was to late , and Jesus did say that the flood of noahs day would be like the presence of the son of man (jesusChrist)
Jesus urged his followers to stay alert. He provided a sign so that his presence could be recognized, though most would take no note: "As the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. For as they were in those days before the flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark; and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be."—Matthew 24:37-39. yes the presence of the son of man started in 1914 when Jesus was made king of Gods heavenly kingdom goverment . so yes i am trying to say something important, but 1914 is not a stumbling stone to me ,but it is a very significant date indeed .
And this good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come. matthew 24;14 DANIEL 2;44 Daniel 7;13-14

In otherwords, 1914 is the "conception" date, and hence forward would be the "pangs of labor", with contractions occuring more and more frequently...does that about sum it up?

 

[mee]

In otherwords, 1914 is the "conception" date, and hence forward would be the "pangs of labor", with contractions occuring more and more frequently...does that about sum it up?

1914 is the start of the last days,(the last days of man ruling himself independent of God) the heavenly kingdom was born then , but as you mentioned, on the earth it was the pangs of distress
Like literal birth pangs, these "pangs of distress" will no doubt continue to intensify until Christ ‘completes his conquest’ by destroying every vestige of Satan’s visible organization.—Matthew 24:8.
climaxing in the great tribulation

 

[FLOWERGIRL]

Did not the organisation of Jehovah's witnesses prophecy that the return of Jesus would be in 1914?

 

[aburaees]

Did not the organisation of Jehovah's witnesses prophecy that the return of Jesus would be in 1914?

They didn't prophecise such a thing, in fact Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe any of their members to be prophets...

They simply interpret "existing" Bible prophecies to demonstrate that Jesus was given the kingdon in 1914, which was physically unseen but recognised by the signs of the times.

(These aren't my own beliefs by the way)

 

[Dor]

Thats true the members are not prophets.

From their own publications:
"More accurately, was there any group on whom Jehovah would be willing to bestow the commission to speak as a prophet in His name, as was done toward Ezekiel back there in 613 B.C.E.?" (Watchtower, March 15, 1972, p. 189)
"So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet? This prophet was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah's Christian witnesses. Of course, it is easy to say this group acts as a prophet of God. It is another thing to prove it. The only way that this can be done is to review the record. What does it show?" (Watchtower, April 1, 1972, p. 197).

So not the members but the organization they claim as a prophet, there record is not very good either.

 

[TJ1]

Thats true the members are not prophets.

From their own publications:
"More accurately, was there any group on whom Jehovah would be willing to bestow the commission to speak as a prophet in His name, as was done toward Ezekiel back there in 613 B.C.E.?" (Watchtower, March 15, 1972, p. 189)
"So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet? This prophet was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah's Christian witnesses. Of course, it is easy to say this group acts as a prophet of God. It is another thing to prove it. The only way that this can be done is to review the record. What does it show?" (Watchtower, April 1, 1972, p. 197).

So not the members but the organization they claim as a prophet, there record is not very good either.

Wow Dor. Either you should stop using the copy-and-paste method or you should stop misquoting, because your quotes above are not correct. Here are the correct quotes:

More accurately, was there any group on whom Jehovah would be willing to bestow the commission to speak as a “prophet” in His name, as was done toward Ezekiel back there in 613 B.C.E.?

So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come?

IDENTIFYING THE “PROPHET”

These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet? The clergy of the so-called “Christian” nations hold themselves before the people as being the ones commissioned to speak for God. But, as pointed out in the previous issue of this magazine, they have failed God and failed as proclaimers of his kingdom by approving a man-made political organization, the League of Nations (now the United Nations), as “the political expression of the Kingdom of God on earth.”

However, Jehovah did not let the people of Christendom, as led by the clergy, go without being warned that the League was a counterfeit substitute for the real kingdom of God. He had a “prophet” to warn them. This “prophet” was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses. They are still proclaiming a warning, and have been joined and assisted in their commissioned work by hundreds of thousands of persons who have listened to their message with belief.

Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a “prophet” of God. It is another thing to prove it. The only way that this can be done is to review the record. What does it show?

Notice how your quotes leave out some relevant information? The biggest thing is that when our organization is referred to as a "prophet," it is put in quotation marks, indicating it is a quasi-prophet. We do not believe that anyone today actually has the gift of prophecy, since that was temporary in the Christian Congregation. (1 Cor. 13:8) But there are "prophets" in the sense that they preach the Word of God and warn others, just as the ancient prophets did.

So this leaves the question, did you deliberately misquote the Watchtower or was it someone you copied from, and why? Could it possibly be for the purpose of spreading lies about us? (Matthew 5:11)


TJ

 

[Quahom1]

... (1 Cor. 13:8) But there are "prophets" in the sense that they preach the Word of God and warn others, just as the ancient prophets did.

So this leaves the question, did you deliberately misquote the Watchtower or was it someone you copied from, and why? Could it possibly be for the purpose of spreading lies about us? (Matthew 5:11)
TJ

So do teachers and ministers. The second part of a "prophet" is telling what will come true, and it does, exactly as prophesied. Without the second part, there is no "Prophet". And the one who claims to be a prophet of God, but has even one error, is to be stoned to death. That too is Biblical.

Quasi-prophet is sort of like, quasi-star? quasi-profficient? Not fully engaged, therefore of no real significance. Quasi means not all criteria are met to fullfil the obligation.

No one has lied about anything. Your own words and title, give pause to consider.

 

[Dor]

Actually it was an accidental misquote. Sorry my Firefox seetings do not allow pasting off clipboard so I was typing from a different window and I admit my typing is the hunt and peck method.

I do not need to spread lies about The Watchtower and have not said anything about your integrity yet. Thank you very much.

No one needs to spread lies about The Watchtower there record of "prophecies" speaks volumes.

 

[TJ1]

Actually it was an accidental misquote. Sorry my Firefox seetings do not allow pasting off clipboard so I was typing from a different window and I admit my typing is the hunt and peck method.

And how exactly did you accidentally leave out six quotation marks and at least three sections (that I counted) of text without giving any indication of it? I guess I don't see how that couldn't be deliberate.

But if it was in some wierd, crazy way an accident, how about we be a little more careful about what we post as fact.

I do not need to spread lies about The Watchtower and have not said anything about your integrity yet. Thank you very much.

No one needs to spread lies about The Watchtower there record of "prophecies" speaks volumes.

Once you catch me misquoting you or your church then you have the right to question my integrity as well. And as for your last comment, I find it interesting that when you have just given a false quote, for whatever reason, you have the nerve to take a shot at the source you just misquoted.


TJ

 

[FLOWERGIRL]

Hi TJ1,

Does the Watchtower compare itself to Ezekiel then?

Originally Posted by Watchtower, March 15, 1972, p. 189
More accurately, was there any group on whom Jehovah would be willing to bestow the commission to speak as a “prophet” in His name, as was done toward Ezekiel back there in 613 B.C.E.?

Also, is there any further information (context) I could read up on in that page (189) of the Watchtower, March 15, 1972? Just so I get the whole picture.

Thanks.

 

[Quahom1]

Hi TJ1,

Does the Watchtower compare itself to Ezekiel then?

Originally Posted by Watchtower, March 15, 1972, p. 189
More accurately, was there any group on whom Jehovah would be willing to bestow the commission to speak as a “prophet” in His name, as was done toward Ezekiel back there in 613 B.C.E.?

Also, is there any further information (context) I could read up on in that page (189) of the Watchtower, March 15, 1972? Just so I get learn the whole picture.

Thanks.

Interesting question. Didn't E99 address this once? Dor? Mee? Can you folk remember?

 

[TJ1]

So do teachers and ministers. The second part of a "prophet" is telling what will come true, and it does, exactly as prophesied. Without the second part, there is no "Prophet". And the one who claims to be a prophet of God, but has even one error, is to be stoned to death. That too is Biblical.

Quasi-prophet is sort of like, quasi-star? quasi-profficient? Not fully engaged, therefore of no real significance. Quasi means not all criteria are met to fullfil the obligation.

"Quasi" means "to some degree." So if they put "prophet" in quotation marks for the purpose of indicating 'a prophet to some degree,' then they were purposely bringing out one particular sense of the word, that being preaching and warning others, and leaving the "second part" you described above. This isn't rocket science, and I'm not quite sure what you're argument here is. If you read the articles, you'll see that they are using the prophet Ezekiel as an archetype and describing the modern christians as the accompanying type.

In the same way, I can say John the Baptist was "Elijah." (Matthew 17:12)

No one has lied about anything. Your own words and title, give pause to consider.

Someone has certainly misquoted the Watchtower, making it look like it said something it didn't, which just happened to make it look bad. If you are going to deny that, well, that's your decision.


TJ

 

[TJ1]

Hi TJ1,

Does the Watchtower compare itself to Ezekiel then?

Originally Posted by Watchtower, March 15, 1972, p. 189
More accurately, was there any group on whom Jehovah would be willing to bestow the commission to speak as a “prophet” in His name, as was done toward Ezekiel back there in 613 B.C.E.?

Also, is there any further information (context) I could read up on in that page (189) of the Watchtower, March 15, 1972? Just so I get the whole picture.

Thanks.

Hi FLOWERGIRL,

I'll send you the two articles in their entirety.


TJ

 

[FLOWERGIRL]

Hi FLOWERGIRL,

I'll send you the two articles in their entirety.


TJ

Thanks TJ. I appreciate that.

 

[Quahom1]

"Quasi" means "to some degree." So if they put "prophet" in quotation marks for the purpose of indicating 'a prophet to some degree,' then they were purposely bringing out one particular sense of the word, that being preaching and warning others, and leaving the "second part" you described above. This isn't rocket science, and I'm not quite sure what you're argument here is. If you read the articles, you'll see that they are using the prophet Ezekiel as an archetype and describing the modern christians as the accompanying type.

In the same way, I can say John the Baptist was "Elijah." (Matthew 17:12)

Someone has certainly misquoted the Watchtower, making it look like it said something it didn't, which just happened to make it look bad. If you are going to deny that, well, that's your decision.


TJ

First of all we have had the pleasure of some mighty fine people here at CR who are JWs post here. And they have been quite forthright in their beliefs, which allowed us to learn alot and appreciate where they are coming from. Second, the Watchtower is of no import here as this is a Bible based forum. Perhaps that is why people like me and Thomas, and Abo, do not bring forth extenuating literature to further any cause we may have for our own peculiar versions of Christian faith, and why folk like E99, Mee, Tommy stick with their version of the Bible instead of exracurricular material that the rest are not privy to on a daily basis.

It is very easy to misquote material that changes relatively frequently, such as the "watch tower". Indeed the message has changed three times since 1977. So, please bear with any sceptism, or consider avoiding it all together by sticking with Biblical references, to back your "case in point".

It is common ground we all "understand".

Just a thought.

v/r

Q

Oh, and Welcome to CR

 

[TJ1]

Second, the Watchtower is of no import here as this is a Bible based forum.

I quote from the Bible, not the Watchtower. The only time I do is when someone misquotes it or asks me to.

Perhaps that is why people like me and Thomas, and Abo, do not bring forth extenuating literature to further any cause we may have for our own peculiar versions of Christian faith, and why folk like E99, Mee, Tommy stick with their version of the Bible instead of exracurricular material that the rest are not privy to on a daily basis.

I have used the NIV, NASB, the American Translation, and the KJV in my replies when proving my beliefs, though the NWT is certainly a fine translation.

It is very easy to misquote material that changes relatively frequently, such as the "watch tower". Indeed the message has changed three times since 1977. So, please bear with any sceptism, or consider avoiding it all together by sticking with Biblical references, to back your "case in point".

So how exactly is it "very easy" to take out six quotation marks which clearly changes the meaning of the article?

Oh, and Welcome to CR

Thank you much.


TJ