I hadn’t noticed until today that this passage which Apollos and others have cited in posts and comments is actually referring to the presence of Christ. While there are no shortage of “artfully contrived stories” originating from men in all religions, Peter is expressly referring to the absence of such ‘tall tales’ from his teaching regarding the presence of Christ and what he witnessed in the holy mountain.
Our teaching regarding the presence of Christ as beginning in 1914 is so contrived that it requires a chain of more than a dozen interdependent assumptions to be accepted by the student before it can seem to make sense. This contrivance is most artfully done and continues to mislead millions. Peter was unwittingly (or inspirationally) warning us about it almost 2,000 years ago.
Question is: Will we pay attention or do we prefer the story over the truth?
The comments from Andrew and Sargon made me again think about the inherent danger in clinging onto these artfully contrived false stories. I used to justify ignoring the doctrine in my own mind as simply something that my own faith does not depend on. “No harm, no foul” so to speak. But more recently I am coming to appreciate that there are actively dangerous elements to even tacitly supporting the doctrine. (1 Thessalonians 2:13) Indeed, that is why we also thank God incessantly, because when YOU received God’s word, which YOU heard from us, YOU accepted it, not as the… Read more »
sorry forgot to quote the source of the signs of apostasy. questions from JW 1976.
I
problem is that the whole WT foundation is 1914, if they dropped that, then they would have to admit that Christ did not become King that his prescence is wrong, that in 1919 a FDS was not founded, that the overlapping generation was wrong, they would have to admit to much, the only relief it would bring would be many would have an excuse to leave, whole families, I believe that a lot of JW doubt 1914, but by fear they say nothing, the WT is still very much active in their WT study articles on 1914 it is still… Read more »
I made the bold move of privately speaking out against 1914 to some friends. It was met with a yawn. They said they avoid talking about the doctrine to anyone in service. It’s “proven” by our interpretation of one scripture and is easily refuted by a dozen. The GB aren’t idiots. What disturbs me is that the refusal to change this doctrine appears to be willful. A willful attempt to promote a false doctrine. I told my friends I no longer believe it. Since they secretly doubt its validity as well, they didn’t really care. But they said I need… Read more »
I think you are right, Meleti. They can get away with it. I think the simplest reason for this is that nobody cares about 1914 anymore. Can you think of a Witness who actually thinks that date is really important to their worship? I don’t think I could name one. And here’s an interesting thought: Remember in the 1970s and 1980s when the 1914 calculations were done every year or so as an assignment in the Theocratic Ministry School? When was the last time that was done? If the Governing wrote that the 1914 understanding was wrong, and that they… Read more »
These verses that Peter wrote are really interesting because he connects the presence and the transfiguration. I wonder how the Wt explains Matthew 16:27,28 (and the following transfiguration) now – those verses are clearly talking about the “coming” which is mentioned in Matthew 24 and 25 and the Wt now (correctly) says this coming is yet in the future. So that would mean that the transfiguration and the presence are in the future, too. I wonder how Wt explains this…
Given that more than a year has gone by without any attempt to reconcile this “new” teaching with established doctrine like Mat. 16:27,28 or the various parables like the bridesmaids which are still linked to 1914, I’m beginning to think that they see no need to resolve the inconsistencies they’ve created for themselves. We are now well indoctrinated and since we do no real Bible study outside of the carefully prepared menu which is our weekly fare, they probably can get away with this for quite some time.
Yes in the greek sophizo mythos. To invent. A fable. Mythos used also at 1 timothy 1 v 4. Niether give heed to fables. But 2 timothy 4 v 3 to 4 took my eye. For a time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine but after there own lusts they shall heap to themselves teachers having itching ears and they will turn their ears away from the truth and shall be turned into fables. Mythos. KJV.
“Look at the Artwork!”
How many times have you said that to yourself or to others when you opened a new issue of this magazine? The beautiful pictures and photographs that are painstakingly produced are there for a purpose. They are teaching aids that make us think and feel. They can be especially helpful when we prepare for and participate in the Watchtower Study.—July 15, 2013 Watchtower, (page 32)
On October 2, 1914, Charles Taze Russell entered the Bethel dining room. “The Gentile Times have ended, their kings have had their day,” he rumbled. “Anyone disappointed? I’m not. Everything is moving right on schedule.” [Yearbook, 1975, p.73]
Everything still is on schedule, except that as of 12/12/2013 the Kings are still having their day. So we seem to have a 100-year problem, at least (well maybe 99 1/4 year problem.)
I love this comment!