Re: 1874 vs 1914
- Bumping this up
--- In email@example.com, "Jim" <gospel_driven_man@...> wrote:
> Here is a compilation of comments from various publications from the
> Society regarding the invisible return of jesus Christ and when this
> event supposedly happened. I have added my thoughts/comments and
> questions as they popped up and I realize they may seem like
> rambling, for that I apologize.
> "In 1943 the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society published the
> book "The Truth Shall make You Free." In its chapter 11,
> entitled "The Count of Time," it did away with the insertion of 100
> years into the period of the Judges and went according to the oldest
> and most authentic reading of Acts 13:20, and accepted the spelled-
> out numbers of the Hebrew Scriptures. This moved forward the end of
> the six thousand years of man's existence into the decade of the
> 1970's. Naturally this did away with the year 1874 C.E. as the date
> of the return of the Lord Jesus Christ and the beginning of his
> invisible presence or parusia." Footnote at the bottom of page 133 of
> the Proclaimers book
> "So when Christ's invisible presence began in 1914, happy were these
> Christians to have been found watching!" (WT 12-1-84 p.14)
> What were they watching for? In 1914, if I understand the proclaimers
> book, they believed that it was 1874 when Christ's invisible presence
> Since the Proclaimers book informs us that in the above quote of the
> change in doctrine regarding the invisible presence of Jesus Christ,
> what does it make of quotes in WTBTS publications that indicate they
> were looking forward to Christ's invisible presence prior to 1914 and
> comments that say they believed such prior to 1943?
> Let's look at a few quotes and see if they agree with the above quote
> from the Proclaimers book.
> "Why, then, do the nations not realize and accept the approach of
> this climax of judgment? It is because they have not heeded the world-
> wide advertising of Christ's return and his second presence. Since
> long before World War 1 Jehovah's witnesses pointed to 1914 as the
> time for this great event to occur. (Watchtower June 15, 1954 p.370
> paragraph 4)
> So, prior to 1914 they pointed to 1914 as the time for Christ's
> return and second presence, though they didn't change their belief
> that this event happened in 1874 until the year 1943. Why am I seeing
> a problem here? What am I not understanding?
> To add to the problem, let's look at a quote from the book Prophecy
> written by the 2nd President of the WTBTS J.F. Rutherford and
> published in 1929.
> "The Scriptural proof is that the second presence of the Lord Jesus
> Christ began in 1874 A.D. This proof is specifically set out in the
> booklet entitled Our Lord's Return. " (Prophecy 1929 p.65-66)
> Again I ask, what was being watched for in 1914? I also ask, how do
> you reconcile the obvious disagreement between the June 15, 1954
> Watchtower and the Book Prophecy? Since the official teaching was
> that the invisible return of Christ happened in 1874, why did the
> writers and publishers of the 1954 Watchtower not correct this
> obvious error? Why the dishonesty about their history?
> Let's look at another two quotes and see what we find.
> "After the war ended in 1918, there was no work available in England,
> so I rejoined the army and went off to India as part of the peacetime
> garrison. In May 1920 the malaria flared up again, and I was sent up
> into the hills to recuperate. There I read all the books I could get
> my hands on, including the Bible. Reading the Scriptures intensified
> my interest in the Lord's return.
> Months later, down in Kanpur, I started a Bible study group, hoping
> to learn more about the Lord's return. It was there that I met
> Fredrick James, a former British soldier who was now a zealous Bible
> student. He explained to me that Jesus had been present since 1914,
> invisible to man. This was the most thrilling news I had ever heard."
> (Watchtower September 1, 1990 p.11)
> "The time of the Lord's second presence dates from 1874, as above
> stated." (The Harp of God 1921 p.231)
> So even though in 1921 it was taught and believed that Jesus had been
> present since 1874, we have Jack Nathan testifying he was told in
> what was most likely late 1920 that Jesus had been present since
> 1914. Something just is not adding up here.
> To make matters even worse in the March 15, 1990 issue of the
> Watchtower in the article `The Faithful Slave' And It's Governing
> Body. Check this out:
> "On arriving to inspect his slaves in 1918, whom did the Master,
> Jesus Christ, find giving to his body of attendants their measure of
> food supplies at the proper time? Well, by then, who had given
> sincere truth-seekers the correct understanding of the ransom
> sacrifice, the divine name, the invisibility of Christ's presence,
> and the significance of 1914?" (Watchtower March 15, 1990 p.13)
> Again, we see from the above evidence, in 1918 it was taught in
> Watchtower publications that the invisibility of Christ's presence,
> was in 1874, so who was giving the correct understanding in 1918?
> My big question though, is, why the seeming, though maybe not
> deliberate, dishonesty from the WTBTS about their own history?
- baseless speculation. And what were they preaching?? False prophecies....another gospel. Both points disqulaify them from anything.
--- On Thu, 4/30/09, Steve Klemetti <sklemetti@...> wrote:
From: Steve Klemetti <sklemetti@...>
Subject: Re: [Jehovah's Witnesses Gathering] Re: 1874 vs 1914
Date: Thursday, April 30, 2009, 9:23 AM
donn reese wrote:
> That really is the crux of the issue. The Bible Students are an entirely different religion than the Witnesses. Dispensationalist vs Hybrid New Covenantalist.
> It would be like saying- God approved the Pentecostal religion in 1918 therefore the Presbyterians are the true religion????
> If someone can make sense of that claim I'll eat my straw hat
It is because in 1919 the Bible students started doing something with
the faith as in preaching it.
No other religion as even taken the Christian faith seriously.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]