Armageddon again

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-01 01:13am

I got this from the Skeptic's Annotated Bible site... it seems the Watchtower has a new definitive date for Armageddon: 2005.

http://www.jwinfoline.com/Documents/pro ... ration.htm

Those clowns just don't give up, do they? I can't wait to see how they will wring their way out of yet another failed prophesy...

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-01 01:30am

The site contains the following:

"The Watchtower is betting one last time that the Generation of the Anointed, the end of the chosen ones whose numbers were completed in 1935, and the great crowd which also started in 1935 will be the last generation. The Watchtower Jan 15, 2000 pg 13 says, Most of the remnant are quite elderly, and over the years the number of those who are truly anointed has been getting smaller. Yet, referring to the great tribulation, Jesus stated: “Unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short.” (Mathew 24:21,22) Evidently, then, some of Christ’s “chosen ones” will still be on Earth when the great tribulation begins."

One last time? If so, hallelujah! Though I kind of doubt it...

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2004-12-01 10:49am

The article makes the following strawman distortion (among others):

When will this generation of the end be over? The Bible points to a 70 year period of time that is considered the maximum span of a Biblical 'generation'. Since The Watchtower is now pointing to 1935 as the start of the final generation, 1935 plus 70 years equals 2005.

This is distorting the reasoning used in the quote. The "single generation" being discussed is not being used in the context of a set period of time. Further, the article gives no source for its claim that 70 years is a definitive period of time for a generation, even though it tries to show sources for other areas.

As for the 1975 thing, I've never seen any quote stating that anything special will occur in that year. In fact, it repeatedly cautions against looking to any specific date (or year) as a deadline as "concerning the day and hour, nobody knows."

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-01 04:22pm

No. They have made a definitive prediction. The Generation begun in 1935 will be the last, according to their claim, and the world will end before they all die off. Of course, they have been providing dates for the end of the world for a century now, with excuses emerging after each failure.

Mad · Post by **Mad** » 2004-12-01 06:38pm

Lord Zentei wrote:No. They have made a definitive prediction. The Generation begun in 1935 will be the last, according to their claim, and the world will end before they all die off. Of course, they have been providing dates for the end of the world for a century now, with excuses emerging after each failure.

Of course, that's a completely different position from from claiming 2005 is it. So which do you say the claim is?

And the only date I can think of of was for 1914 or somewhere around there. 1975 was never a prediction, merely a statement that got taken out of context by many.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-01 06:48pm

I suggest you read the entire site before you reply again. And no, they have named several dates in the past.

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2004-12-02 10:59pm

Lord Zentei wrote:I suggest you read the entire site before you reply again. And no, they have named several dates in the past.

Uhmm. Are you a Jehovah's Witness? Do you know what you are saying before spouting bullshit?

I've read part of the site and decided the rest isn't worth bothering reading.
The site is pure grade "A" bullshit.

If you have questions about JWs and their beliefs then ask me, either in a new thread or PM me.

As for the dates, in 1874, it was thought that in 1914 that the rapture would occur. It didn't and it caused a rift within the Bible Students (before we adopted the name Jehovah's Witnesses). We got the date right but for the wrong reason. It wasn't about the rapture.

As for 1975, it was never endorsed by the JWs. I'd have to look around but it wasn't the organization that came up with the date.

As for 2005, that is the date that the website mentioned, the guy pulled that date out of his ass.

As for the "chosen ones", yes most are elderly but not all. If one of them should turn their back on God then that person is no longer on of the "chosen ones" and someone else replaces him\her. I know one of them, and he's only in his mid thirties.

If you have questions then ask me.

Galvatron · Post by **Galvatron** » 2004-12-02 11:28pm

I believe it.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-03 01:21am

Uhmm. Are you a Jehovah's Witness? Do you know what you are saying before spouting bullshit?

No, you twit. What in the name of all that is sane gave you the idea that I am a Jehovah's witness when I am slamming them for being idiots? Who is the bullshitter here

you have questions about JWs and their beliefs then ask me, either in a new thread or PM me.

Why the hell should we start a second thread about this?

As for the dates, in 1874, it was thought that in 1914 that the rapture would occur. It didn't and it caused a rift within the Bible Students (before we adopted the name Jehovah's Witnesses). We got the date right but for the wrong reason. It wasn't about the rapture.

Ah, so you are a Jehovah's witness. Now I see.

As for 1975, it was never endorsed by the JWs. I'd have to look around but it wasn't the organization that came up with the date.

Sure it wasn't.

If you have questions then ask me.

Quit proletyzising. I'm not likely to be impressed.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2004-12-03 02:59pm

The end times according to Jesus in the NT repeatedly were supposed to be in the lifetimes of the people then, it's pure post hoc eisegesis to contend otherwise, despite some ambiguous wording common to all prophecy. The ambiguousness was to cover their failed prophetic asses at the time, not 2000 years later.

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2004-12-03 04:30pm

Lord Zentei wrote:
Uhmm. Are you a Jehovah's Witness? Do you know what you are saying before spouting bullshit?
No, you twit. What in the name of all that is sane gave you the idea that I am a Jehovah's witness when I am slamming them for being idiots? Who is the bullshitter here

I was being sarcastic with the first question plus when someone seems to think they know what the witnesses believe and then distorts it (the website not you) I get quite defensive. I apologize if I took it out on you.

Lord Zentei wrote:
As for the dates, in 1874, it was thought that in 1914 that the rapture would occur. It didn't and it caused a rift within the Bible Students (before we adopted the name Jehovah's Witnesses). We got the date right but for the wrong reason. It wasn't about the rapture.
Ah, so you are a Jehovah's witness. Now I see.

It's not a secret, but I don't go running around saying I'm a witness either. *shrugs*

Lord Zentei wrote:
As for 1975, it was never endorsed by the JWs. I'd have to look around but it wasn't the organization that came up with the date.
Sure it wasn't.

I do know that there was a Watchtower issue on that subject but it wasn't to endorse it, rather it was to debunk it.

If you have questions then ask me.

Quit proletyzising. I'm not likely to be impressed.[/quote]

I'm not proselytizing. I am giving you the actual info that the site seems to distort. Again, I apologize but as I've mentioned before I get defensive when people distorts facts on what JWs believe.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-03 04:59pm

Enigma wrote:I was being sarcastic with the first question plus when someone seems to think they know what the witnesses believe and then distorts it (the website not you) I get quite defensive. I apologize if I took it out on you.

Fair enough (although the phrasing of your post did suggest that you were refering to me, and that I needed to be a JW in order to know what I was talking about).

Enigma wrote:As for the dates, in 1874, it was thought that in 1914 that the rapture would occur. It didn't and it caused a rift within the Bible Students (before we adopted the name Jehovah's Witnesses). We got the date right but for the wrong reason. It wasn't about the rapture.

A failed prophesy is still a failed prophesy, even if you change your name.

Enigma wrote:It's not a secret, but I don't go running around saying I'm a witness either. *shrugs*

Ok, I wasn't meaning to stomp on your right to choose your religion. Just the earlier apparent insinuation that non-beleiving people couldn't provide criticism of your religion's ideas.

Enigma wrote:I'm not proselytizing. I am giving you the actual info that the site seems to distort, and wether the site is actually "distorting" the info is a matter of opinion.

Again, fair enough. Though your invitation to answer my questions in private email exchanges had me going there.

Enigma wrote:Again, I apologize but as I've mentioned before I get defensive when people distorts facts on what JWs believe.

I understand that, I used to be a "true beleiver" myself, Lutheran Evangelical to be precise, and I used to get very defesive too when I felt people were distorting my beleifs. In retrospect, they were not, at least for the most part.

Enigma · Post by **Enigma** » 2004-12-03 05:53pm

Lord Zentei wrote:
Enigma wrote:As for the dates, in 1874, it was thought that in 1914 that the rapture would occur. It didn't and it caused a rift within the Bible Students (before we adopted the name Jehovah's Witnesses). We got the date right but for the wrong reason. It wasn't about the rapture.
A failed prophesy is still a failed prophesy, even if you change your name.

Yeah we erred back then but we still use 1914 as the date that Satan was hurled to earth from heaven and that Christ began reigning as king. (long story).

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-03 07:15pm

So where, exactly, is the King? I thought the events in Revelations were supposed to begin with the Rapture? What is the hold-up?

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2004-12-03 08:41pm

Quotes from various members of the Watchtower Society:

Charles Taze Russell, 1889 wrote:...we consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished by the end of A.D. 1914

The Time Is At Hand, 1915 wrote:The Gentile Times prove that the present governments must all be overthrown about the close of A.D. 1915; and Parallelism above shows that this period corresponds exactly with the year A.D. 70, which witnessed the completion of the downfall of the Jewish polity.

The Finished Mystery, 1917 wrote:...in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of Christianity.

J. E. Rutherford, 1918 wrote:...there will be a resurrection of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and other faithful ones of old ... we may expect 1925 to witness the return of these faithful men of Israel from the condition of death, being resurrected and fully restored to perfect humanity and made the visible, legal representatives of the new order of things on earth.... Therefore we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the Apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection.

J. E. Rutherford, 1922 wrote:We understand that the jubilee type began to count in 1575 B.C.; and the 3,500 year period embracing the type must end in 1925....It follows, then, that the year 1925 will mark the beginning of the restoration of all things lost by Adam's disobedience.

The Watchtower, August 15, 1968 wrote: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....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.

Charles Russell (the first man quoted) was the founder of what is now the Jehovah's Witnesses. J. E. Rutherford (fourth and fifth quotes) was the second leader of the organization.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2004-12-03 08:43pm

Lord Zentei wrote:So where, exactly, is the King? I thought the events in Revelations were supposed to begin with the Rapture? What is the hold-up?

No, in the Revelation According to John, the Rapture is basically the last thing that happens, after all the plagues. However, there is argument among scholars about pre-millenialism, post-millenialism, and another view that believes that the Rapture will occur during the millenium. From the study I've done, though, it seems as if there is not a Rapture at all, but rather a general resurrection and re-creation.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-03 10:19pm

Sorry, my goof. Even skeptics can do that (that's why we choose to be skeptic of what we beleive).

Yet you have not answered my challenge: where is the King?

How can you count this "arrival" in 1914 as a fulfilled prophecy if it is non-verifiable?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2004-12-03 10:43pm

The JW prophecies hold about as much water as prophecies giving the date and time of Ragnarok. And, for that matter, a second coming of Mithras.

Expect more goalpost-shifting, both in this thread and by the JW's when 2005 comes and goes without anything that would qualify as the End Times. The Armageddon Business is entirely about inspiring fear in people and profiteering off their fear, and fear is a mass market right now.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-12-03 11:51pm

I recommend the late Stephen J. Gould's excellant book Questioning the Millenium. It has a very interesting (and obviously skeptical) chapter on the entire concept of Armageddon.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-04 07:23am

Earlier I stated that the JW had made several failed prophesies. The response was that the only failed prophesy was the one about the end times coming in 1914, and that the prophesy was partially fulfilled by the Christ appearing invisibly (not that I can see how that helps, surely an incorrect interpretation of the "signs" is incorrect; one can always find something that happens in a given year, partiicularly if you can't see it

).

There were many more dates named than 1914. Here is a site that lists several failed JW prophesies (it's always funny when religionists tear each other apart

).

http://www.chick.com/bc/2003/jw_prophecy.asp

How can we tell if the doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses are true? C.T. Russell, the founder of the Jehovah's Witnesses suggested a test for prophets somewhat similar to the one in Deuteronomy 18:22. He wrote: "Jehovah...will put all false prophets to shame either by not fulfilling the false prediction of such self-assuming prophets or by having His own prophecies fulfilled in a way opposite to that predicted by the false prophets."

Most of the teachings of the Jehovah's Witnesses are based on the interpretations of Scripture of Pastor Russell and Judge Rutherford, the first two leaders of the movement. These men also based prophesies of future events, complete with dates, on their interpretations of Scripture. These dates have now passed so we can see whether Jehovah has fulfilled their predictions or put these men to shame.

How accurate were their interpretations? The prophetic statements which follow are all from the Jehovah's Witnesses' Watchtower publications. For quotes and references which back up each statement see Answers to my Jehovah's Witness Friends, p. 21-40. Here are the dates which they set, and the events which they claimed would occur on each date.

1872: - Beginning of the millennium. Wrong! Watchtower publications later changed the date to 1975. Wrong again!

1874: - Christ's second coming. The Bible says "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him" (Rev 1:7 see also Acts 1: 11; Mat 24:23-30; Luke 17:23-24;). Christ did not return in 1874.

1914: - All world governments to be overthrown. God would glorify His people and govern the world. Later Watchtower publications admitted these prophecies and those of 1918, and 1925 had been wrong.

1915: - When man's governments had not been replaced by God's in 1914, the date was changed

to 1915. The Watch-tower Society later admitted that these prophecies "had not been fulfilled."
1918: - End of gentile times, the churches to be destroyed.

1920: - Mountains, republics, and kingdoms disappear.

1925: - "There will be no slip-up...Abraham should enter upon the actual possession of his promised inheritance in the year 1925." Watchtower publications later admitted that this prediction and those of 1914 and 1918 had been wrong.

1929: - A house was built for the return of faithful people spoken of in the Old Testament. It became an embarrassing monument to a false prophesy, so was sold in 1948!

1932: - The overthrow of christendom. Previously predicted for 1918, later moved to 1925, and then to 1932. The Watchtower later admitted: "1932 came and 'Christendom' was not destroyed...."

1975. - Beginning of the millennium. Because the Millennium had not begun in 1872 as had been prophesied, the date was changed to 1975. When this date passed many Jehovah's Witnesses applied Russell's test of a false prophet and left the movement.

So what? C. T. Russell and J.F. Rutherford, the men who made the false prophesies, claimed to have based most of them on Scripture. In all these points in which their interpretations of Scripture could be put to the test, they were wrong. Interpretations of Scripture by these same men form the basis for almost all of the doctrines which distinguish Jehovah's Witnesses.

No one should entrust the salvation of his soul to the interpretations of Scripture of men who were so clearly wrong in the points where they can be checked. But if someone is really intent on following their teachings, let him start by following Russell's test of a false prophet.

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2004-12-04 07:26am

Lord Zentei wrote:it's always funny when religionists tear each other apart

And by that I mean tear each other apart verbally. It's not funny anymore when they do so literally, - which all too often follows.