Dates (1914; 1975)

Also see: (Sites and Pages in Defense of Jehovah's Witnesses)

It appears that some anti-Witness writers (especially the apostate ones) like to use such information as "proof" that the Watch Tower Organization is a "false prophet." Most often they concentrate on dates such as 1914 and 1975 which haven't had the fulfillment that was originally expected for them. Then they find one of the extremely rare instances where the Watch Tower Society apparently calls itself a "prophet" in some sense (such as one particular 1972 WT article) and then conclude that the Organization claims to be a Prophet, but its predictions fail to come true. Therefore, they reason, the WT Organization must be a False Prophet as defined in the Bible and must be strongly resisted by honest-hearted Christians. (See the PROPHET study paper)

At no time did Russell, Rutherford, or the WT organization claim to be an inspired prophet with the gift of inspired prediction like some of those mentioned in the Bible. In fact, Russell himself taught that the miraculous gifts of the Spirit (which include inspired prediction) ceased long before the beginning of the 3rd century! - WT, Sept. 15, 1911.

Russell himself taught this understanding of prophets: "There were a number of prophets (public orators) and teachers in the [early] church."

He continues,

"We see a distinction drawn in our lesson between prophets and teachers. The Greek word rendered `prophet' signifies a `forth-teller.' It might be understood to mean one who tells in advance, or foretells, or prophesies coming events; but in its general use in the New Testament the word seems to indicate one who tells forth, in the sense of proclaiming, giving public utterance to, or standing up before the people in declaration of the Lord's Message. The distinction between prophets and teachers, as here used, seems to be that the former were persons of natural talent and ability for teaching the truth in a public manner, in orderly discourse, etc., while the teachers would be those possessing talent as instructors, but not necessarily in a public, or oratorical manner; comparatively few have the qualifications for public speaking [prophets] .... some others, who have not ability as public discoursers, have talent for presenting the truth in a less public manner, as in Bible studies, etc. [teachers]." - p. 3005, May 1, 1902 WT.

Again, in the June 15, 1909 WT, Russell writes:

"We are not to despise prophecies, but to respect them and to heed them. But this is not what the Apostle refers to [1 Thess. 5:20]. By the word `prophesying' he meant teaching, public utterance. Do not despise what anyone may publicly utter as a child of God in the church of Christ....
"Nevertheless prove all things and hold fast to that which is good - that which stands the test. Because a brother is sincere, in earnest, does not prove that he is right in his Scriptural expositions .... Even if you cannot accept his proposition, the study of the subject, the searching of the Scriptures in the proving may be of lasting benefit to yourself, establishing you more than ever in the truth. But let us be sure that we hold fast to the good." - p. 4419.

So, by understanding what Russell (and Rutherford, et. al.) meant by the term "prophet" and that they certainly never considered themselves as inspired predictors of the future but merely imperfect, fallible men, we can see how their detractors twist their statements to make them appear to be "false prophets" in the Old Testament sense.

Russell wrote on pp. 5367, 5368 of the 15 Dec. 1913 WT (republished from an October 1, 1907 article):

"A dear Brother inquires, Can we feel absolutely sure that the Chronology set forth in the Dawn-Studies is correct? - That the harvest began in 1874 and will end in A.D. 1914....?"

"We answer," Russell continues, "as we have frequently done before in the Dawns and Towers and orally and by letter, that we have never claimed that they were knowledge, nor based upon indisputable evidence, facts, knowledge; our claim has always been that they are based on faith. We have set forth the evidence as plainly as possible and stated the conclusions of faith we draw from them....

"Many have examined these evidences and have accepted them; others equally bright do not endorse them....

"We neither urge nor insist upon our views as infallible, nor do we smite or abuse those who disagree; but regard as `brethren' all sanctified believers in the precious blood.

"On the contrary, it is those who differ who smite us and speak evil of us .... They are our critics who always claim the infallibility. We go humbly onward following the Apostle's example and words, `We believe and therefore speak,' whether others hear or forbear to hear. Is not this in accord with the Spirit of Christ? ....

"But some of those who come to a trifling point on which they disagree seem to imagine that the entire harvest work must be overthrown, or at least stopped, until they get their little jot or tittle satisfactorily adjusted." - p. 5367

"But let us suppose a case far from our expectations: Suppose that A.D. 1915 should pass with the world's affairs all serene and with evidence that the `very elect' had not all been `changed' .... What then? Would that not prove our chronology wrong? Yes, surely! .... one of the strings of our `harp' would be quite broken!

"However, dear friends, our harp would still have all the other strings in tune and that is what no other aggregation of God's people on earth could boast. ....

"If, therefore, dearly beloved, it should turn that our chronology is all wrong, we may conclude that with it we have had much advantage everyway. If the attainment of our glorious hopes and present joys in the Lord should cost us such disappointment as our friends fear, we should rejoice and count it cheap!" - p. 5368.

And in the Jan. 1 1911 WT, Russell wrote:

"Suppose that our chronological calculations (never set forth as infallible) should prove to be fallible and in error. Our conclusion would merely be that the error could not be very great ....

"If, then, it should prove eventually that the crisis of earthly government will not be reached by the end of 1914, should we not be very faithful anyway, and remember that had it not been for that alarm clock which helped awaken us from the worldly stupor, we might not have been sufficiently awake to appreciate and enjoy the wonderful spiritual blessings which daily crown our lives?" - p. 4743
.
And in the Oct. 15, 1913 WT, Russell wrote:

"We wish still, however, to reiterate what we have said from the first respecting the date of the close of the Times of the Gentiles; namely, that the calculations as we presented them in Vol. II, Studies in the Scriptures, are the truth to the best of our knowledge and belief. Nevertheless, there is enough uncertainty about the matter of chronology to make it a matter of faith rather than of positive knowledge. We remind our readers that our consecration to the Lord is not to October, 1914, nor to any other time except that mentioned by the Savior - `Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.' - Rev. 2:10." - p. 5336.

Attempting to determine dates of future scriptural events in order to encourage fellow Christians was important to Russell (and Rutherford). If they did it honestly and publicly (which they did), it was a part of prophesying (in the sense of speaking out publicly), but it was obviously never considered as (nor promoted as) infallible inspired prediction! Nor was it considered to be an essential element of the essential work of a modern Christian "prophet." When it comes to proclaiming the truth of essential Bible doctrines, "where else is there to go?"

For more, see:
Sites and Pages in Defense of Jehovah's Witnesses

Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE 

Scriptures Index

Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide  

How is the work of Jehovah's Witnesses financed?

The work of Jehovah's Witnesses is primarily financed through voluntary contributions, as was true with the early Christians. (2 Cor. 8:12; 9:7) No collections are ever taken at their meetings; they do not beg for money from the public. Any donations from interested persons are used to further the worldwide work of Bible education conducted by the Witnesses.

Witnesses are not paid to go from house to house or to offer Bible literature on the streets. Love for God and for neighbor motivates them to talk about God's loving provisions for mankind.

The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, a legal religious corporation that is used by Jehovah's Witnesses, was incorporated in 1884 in accordance with the Nonprofit Corporation Law of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. This means that, by law it cannot be and it is not, a profit-making enterprise, nor do individuals make a profit through this Society. The Society's charter states: "It [the Society] does not contemplate pecuniary gain or profit, incidentally or otherwise, to its members, directors or officers."'

Learn more:
Jehovah's Witnesses - Restoration of First-Century Christianity

Search the Entire Content of Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site

Search the INDEX to the Official Jehovah's Witnesses Web Site

Official Jehovah's Witnesses Web Site, On-line Publications and Public Information

Contact Your Local Jehovah's Witnesses

FAQs from the Authorized Site of the Office of Public Information of Jehovah's Witnesses

Questions Often Asked By Interested People

Blood as Medicine And The Role of Your Conscience

The applications of the medical handling of blood or blood-derived products has produced questions such as:

"What about accepting small fractions extracted from a primary component of blood, such as serums containing antibodies to fight a disease or to counteract snake venom since some have concluded that such minute fractions are, in effect, no longer blood?"

And:

"What about a Christian's own blood being handled in the course of a surgical procedure, medical test, or current therapy?"

The Jews surely must have faced similar uncertainties with the eating of meat. The Bible is clear that a person obedient to God would not eat unbled meat. Still, questions might have arisen: When an Israelite killed a sheep, how quickly did he have to drain its blood? Did he have to slit the animal’s throat for drainage? Was it necessary to hang the sheep by its hind legs? For how long? What would he do with a large cow? Even after drainage, some blood might remain in the meat. Could he eat such meat? Who would decide? God offered basic guidance on slaughtering clean animals and draining their blood, but he did not go beyond that. - John 8:32

So how should a Christian who wishes to "abstain from blood" decide the personal medical handling of their blood and/or whether to accept blood-derived medications?

If a Christian who is sincere in abiding by God's moral principle to blood is uncertain about whether to accept certain procedures related to blood-derived medicine or handling, he should learn what God’s Word says and strive to mold his conscience by it. That will equip him to decide in line with God’s guidance rather than asking someone else to make a decision for him. (Psalm 25:4, 5) He would also carefully consider as much accurate information as possible concerning the procedure(s) in question.

Conscience is the inherent ability to weigh and decide matters, often moral issues. (Romans 2:14, 15) But just because something may be a matter of conscience doesn't mean that it is inconsequential. It can be very serious. If your compromise on this issue would trouble your Bible-trained conscience, ignoring it could not only damage your conscience, but also your relationship with God. That relationship is the only one that can lead to everlasting life, based on the saving power of Jesus’ shed blood.

Another reason why it is serious is that it can affect others whose conscience may differ. Take for example, Paul’s advice about meat that might have been presented to an idol and was later sold in a market. A Christian ought to be concerned about not ‘wounding consciences that are weak.’ If he stumbles others, he could ‘ruin his brother for whose sake Christ died’ and be sinning against Christ. So personal decisions on this matter should be taken very seriously. - 1 Corinthians 8:8, 11-13; 10:25-31

For more, see
God's View of Blood

Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE 

Scriptures Index

Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide  

Why did God give men nipples? Or is this evidence against Creation?

As embryos, males and females have similar tissues and body parts. The embryo follows a 'female template'. Jehovah God designed it so that when humans form in the uterus, the sex doesn't become determined until later on in our formation. Because nipples are there before this process begins the nipples stay.

"Oh Jehovah...I shall laud you because in a fear-inspiring way I am wonderfully made." (Ps. 139:14)

For more, see
Why Do Men Have Nipples?

The Human Embryo's Sex Differentiation: Why Do Men Have Nipples?

Creation

Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE 

Scriptures Index

Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide  

St. VALENTINE'S DAY - Does It Have Any Pagan Religious Associations?

SAINT VALENTINE'S DAY

"Ancient Romans placed great stress upon holidays that fell about the middle of the shortest month of the year. Dedicated to the goddess Juno, who was the wife of Jupiter, these festivals stressed love, courtship, and marriage.

"That was appropriate since Juno, queen of heaven, was regarded as the special protector of women in `critical times of life.'....

"When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire by edict of Emperor Constantine, religious leaders immediately started trying to do away with pagan festivals. Many of them had been observed for so many centuries that they resisted all frontal attacks, so there were many efforts to bring about change in a more subtle fashion. One of the most effective was a substitution of a Christian [?] observance for a pagan one, with special ceremonies held on or near the date of the long-established holiday.

"Since the martyrdom of St. Valentine was celebrated on February 14, it made sense to stress homage to the man who was said to have been stoned to death on that day in A. D. 269. For that reason the name of a man about whom no written records exist came to be attached to the day formerly dedicated to Juno." - How It Started, pp. 46-47.

"Valentine's Day comes on the feast of two different Christian martyrs named Valentine. But the customs connected with the day ... probably came from an ancient Roman festival called Lupercalia which took place every February 15. The festival honored Juno, the Roman goddess of women and marriage, and Pan, the god of nature." - The World Book Encyclopedia, p. 204, Vol. 20, 1973 ed.

Some would say that it's wrong to pay such homage to dead men, whether Catholic "Saints" or not, but certainly it's incredibly wrong to mix in pagan ceremonies honoring pagan gods in the process.

Martin Luther wrote,

"The pity is that we are so blind that we do not leave the devil alone to play his tricks in his own way; rather, we support him and multiply them. I wish people would leave the saints in peace, and not mislead humble folk. What spirit was it that gave the pope authority to canonize saints? Who tells him whether they are holy or not? .... God is just in judging us with His wrath and in allowing the devil to lead us hither and thither, to institute pilgrimages, ... to set about canonizing saints and other foolish things." - p. 458, Martin Luther, Selections From His Writings, Dr. John Dillenberger, Anchor Books, Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1961. 

"What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? .... `Therefore come out from them and be separate,' says the Lord. `Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you ...' says the Lord Almighty." - 2 Cor. 6:16, 17, NIVSB. [NIVSB f.n.: "agreement...between the temple of God and idols. There can be no reversion to or compromise with the idolatry they have forsaken for the gospel (cf. 1 Th. 1:9)."]

For more, see:
Holidays

Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE 

Scriptures Index

Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide  

What Greek text was used for the NWT? How were the textual variations reconciled?

"Among the more than 13,000 manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures, there are many textual variations. The 5,000 manuscripts in the Greek language alone show many such differences. We can well understand that each copy made from early manuscripts would contain its own distinctive scribal errors. As any one of these early manuscripts was sent to an area for use, these errors would be repeated in the copies in that area and would become characteristic of other manuscripts there. It was in this way that families of similar manuscripts grew up. So are not the thousands of scribal errors to be viewed with alarm? Do they not indicate lack of faithfulness in the transmission of the text? Not at all.

" F. J. A. Hort, who was co producer of the Westcott and Hort text, writes: "The great bulk of the words of the New Testament stand out above all discriminative processes of criticism, because they are free from variation, and need only to be transcribed. . . . If comparative trivialities . . . are set aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament."

EVALUATION OF TEXTUAL TRANSMISSION

"What, then, is the net evaluation as to textual integrity and authenticity, after these many centuries of transmission? Not only are there thousands of manuscripts to compare but discoveries of older Bible manuscripts during the past few decades take the Greek text back as far as about the year 125 C.E., just a couple of decades short of the death of the apostle John about 100 C.E. These manuscript evidences provide strong assurance that we now have a dependable Greek text in refined form. Note the evaluation that the former director and librarian of the British Museum, Sir Frederic Kenyon, put on this matter:

'"The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established. General integrity, however, is one thing, and certainty as to details is another."'

"As to the last observation on "certainty as to details," the quotation in paragraph 27 by Dr. Hort covers this. It is the work of the textual refiners to rectify details, and this they have done to a large degree. For this reason, the Westcott and Hort refined Greek text is generally accepted as one of high excellence. The Christian Greek Scripture portion of the New World Translation, being based on this excellent Greek text, is thus able to give its readers the faithful "saying of Jehovah," as this has been so wonderfully preserved for us in the Greek reservoir of manuscripts. - 1 Pet. 1:24, 25.

"Of further interest are the comments of Sir Frederic Kenyon in his book Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, 1962, on page 249: "We must be content to know that the general authenticity of the New Testament text has been remarkably supported by the modern discoveries which have so greatly reduced the interval between the original autographs and our earliest extant manuscripts, and that the differences of reading, interesting as they are, do not affect the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith." As shown on page 309 in the chart, "Sources for the Text of the New World Translation - Christian Greek Scriptures," all related documents have been drawn on to provide an accurately translated English text. Valuable footnotes back up all these faithful renderings. The New World Bible Translation Committee used the best results of Bible scholarship developed through the centuries in producing its fine translation." -ALL SCRIPTURE, study number 6 par. 26-31

For more, see
The New World Translation

Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE 

Scriptures Index

Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide  

Is there a difference between reading and understanding the Bible?

If someone reads the Bible, does that mean that he understands all that he has read?

Consider the example of Phillip and the E·thi·o´pi·an eunuch:

"Philip ran alongside and heard him reading aloud Isaiah the prophet, and he said: “Do you actually know what you are reading?” He said: “Really, how could I ever do so, unless someone guided me?”' (Acts 8:30, 31)

There is a true difference between reading something and understanding it. To illustrate: one can read an instruction manual, but if he fails to understand it, of what use is it to him?

The same principle applies to the Bible. We can read it all we want, but unless we seek to find true understanding, we may miss out on "finding the very knowledge of God" and even "eternal life":

"If you call out for understanding itself and you give forth your voice for discernment itself, if you keep seeking for it as for silver, and as for hid treasures you keep searching for it, in that case you will understand the fear of Jehovah, and YOU WILL FIND THE VERY KNOWLEDGE OF GOD." (Prov. 2:3-5)

"THIS MEANS EVERLASTING LIFE, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." (John 17:3)

“Make me understand, that I may observe your law and that I may keep it with the whole heart . . . THAT I MAY KEEP LIVING.” (Ps 119:34, 144)

For more, see:
UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE - What Will Help You?

Search For Bible Truths - ARCHIVE 

Scriptures Index

Search For Bible Truths - Search Guide