Posted by Captain of My Fate [COMF] on March 27, 1999 at 23:36:02 {oRa3VCcycQc/HTi1wdqwMW70vgA2d.KEI}:
Echoing the words of practicus about H2O, I said of the WBTS:
If the promoters are dishonest about knowing the date, how can they be trusted about anything else?
If the
promoters are dishonest about the history of the organization, how can they be trusted about anything else?
Moderator 14 said:
repeated references to 'dishonesty' are
slanderous because you have not produced nor has anyone else proof that any of these things were known to be untrue or that there was any intent to deceive. Being wrong is not the same as being dishonest.
Let's see if Moderator 14 is telling the truth. Were "any of these things were known to be untrue" regarding knowing the date? The Watchtower society claims that in the 19th century, bible students were pointing to the year 1914 as
the date of Jesus' return. Here are some quotations that state that:
September 15, 1998 Watchtower, p. 15
"...a prophecy providentially caused sincere 19th-century Bible students to be in expectation. By linking the "seven
times" of Daniel 4:25 with "the times of the Gentiles," they anticipated that Christ would receive Kingdom power in 1914."
June 15, 1954 Watchtower, p. 370
"[The nations] 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."
These statements are not true. They are what Moderator 14 would call "wrong." Let's look at the documentation that shows they are wrong.
January 14, 1892 Watchtower, p. 1355
"[The battle of Armageddon] is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874."
The Harp of
God, p. 235
"...1335 days after 539 A.D. brings us to 1874 A.D., at which time according to Biblical chronology, the Lord's second presence is due."
Prophecy, pp. 65, 66
"The scriptural proof is that the second presence
of the Lord Jesus Christ began in 1874 A.D."
Proclaimers, p. 133
"Russell also came to be persuaded that Christ's invisible presence had begun in 1874."
From these WBTS publications we see plainly that
19th-century Jehovah's Witnesses were not pointing to 1914 as the date of Jesus' second presence. They thought it was 1874. 1874 was taught as the date of his advent all the way up to 1929, the year Prophecy was
published. Now we must ask, when the society made the claims quoted above, that 19th century JW's were pointing to 1914 as the date of Christ's return, did they have access to their own writings? Of course they did. So what would be the
advantage of rewriting history to have the 19th century JW's pointing to 1914? Well, first of all, it would do away with an embarrassing miscalculation which had to be discarded. Secondly, it would be a piece of "evidence" that God was
blessing the organization with special knowledge even way back then, as opposed to the churches of Christendom. Let's go back to Moderator 14's statement above.
You have not produced nor has anyone else
proof that any of these things were known to be untrue or that there was any intent to deceive.
Oh, I have, M14, I have. I believe some apologizing is in order here now. But of course, you will not
apologize. Nor will you acknowledge the truthfulness of my point here, because you aren't honest enough. You don't have enough integrity to own up to your own wrongs. COMF