All Scripture Inspired book/1975

Advertisement

Viewed 2043 times

    comment posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 07:26:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 33 of 205
    Joined 2/22/2001

    I was just looking at this quote from another thread:

    1963
    "Of what significance is this today? It means that by the fall of 1963 mankind has dwelt upon this earth 5,988 years. Does this mean, then, that by 1963 we had progressed 5,988 years into the 'day' on which Jehovah 'has been resting from all his work'? (Gen. 2:3) No, for the creation of Adam does not correspond with the beginning of Jehovah's rest day. Following Adam's creation, and still within the sixth creative day, Jehovah appears to have been forming further animal and bird creations. Also, he had Adam name the animals, which would take some time, and he proceeded to create Eve. (Gen. 2:18-22; see also NW, 1953 Ed., footnote on Vs. 19) Whatever time elapsed between Adam's creation and the end of the 'sixth day' must be subtracted from the 5,988 years in order to give the actual length of time from the beginning of the 'seventh day' until now. It does no good to use Bible chronology for speculating on dates that are still future in the stream of time."
    (All Scripture is inspired of God and Beneficial, 1963, page 286)

    My question is this: did the Society not use the All Scripture book during the Theocratic Ministry School (or any other meetings) during the period of 1966 to 1975, when the hopes regarding 1975 were being built up?

    As long as I can remember, the All Scripture book was a "constant."

    It seems really weird that if they WERE using this book, the congregations were still able to overlook a basically irrefutable line of reasoning to kibosh 1975 (not knowing the gap between Adam's creation and the end of the sixth day, which, even using a 7,000 years interpretation, could be a LONG time), PLUS the statement that "It does no good to speculate..."

    (Btw, I always loved the phrase "the stream of time" when I was a Witness. It sorta gave me the chills to think that we were at the End of Time, so to speak, in our "generation." Oh well.)

    comment

    somebody posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 08:47:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 487 of 1313
    Joined 7/5/2000

    comment,

    Good point, and good question. It must have been one of those things that not many noticed.

    peace,
    somebody

    M TD posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:00:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 1 of 4793
    Joined 5/14/2001

    Comment,

    The SI book was used extensively prior to 1975. As a result of related comments being made at the time, the overall effect of the material you have quoted from page 286 was not as great as one might imagine. For example:

    *** w68 5/1 271 Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time ***
    4 According to reliable Bible chronology Adam was created in the year 4026 B.C.E., likely in the autumn of the year, at the end of the sixth day of creation. Then God brought the animals to man to name. Yet, of Adam, Genesis states these words of Jehovah: “It is not good for the man to continue by himself.” (Gen. 2:18) Adam would realize this lonely condition very quickly, perhaps in just a few days or a few weeks. He would realize he needed another earthling with whom he could communicate, share his experiences, and his life. Nor would his naming the animals take an unduly long time. The basic animal kinds could have been relatively quickly named, for when such basic kinds were taken into the ark in Noah’s day, it did not involve millions of beasts, but perhaps only a few hundred basic kinds. Thus, Adam’s naming of the animals and his realizing that he needed a counterpart would have occupied only a brief time after his creation. Since it was also Jehovah’s purpose for man to multiply and fill the earth, it is logical that he would create Eve soon after Adam, perhaps just a few weeks or months later in the same year, 4026 B.C.E. After her creation, God’s rest day, the seventh period, immediately followed.

    *** w68 8/15 500 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
    33 This time between Adam’s creation and the beginning of the seventh day, the day of rest, let it be noted, need not have been a long time. It could have been a rather short one. The naming of the animals by Adam, and his discovery that there was no complement for himself, required no great length of time. The animals were in subjection to Adam; they were peaceful; they came under God’s leading; they were not needing to be chased down and caught. It took Noah only seven days to get the same kinds of animals, male and female, into the Ark. (Gen. 7:1-4) Eve’s creation was quickly accomplished, ‘while Adam was sleeping.’ (Gen. 2:21) So the lapse of time between Adam’s creation and the end of the sixth creative day, though unknown, was a comparatively short period of time. The pronouncement at the end of the sixth day, “God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good,” proves that the beginning of the great seventh day of the creative week did not wait until after Adam and Eve sinned and were expelled from the Garden of Eden.

    The gap between Adam's creation and the end of the sixth day was not overlooked, it was simply minimized.

    Tom

    comment posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:21:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 35 of 205
    Joined 2/22/2001

    Thanks for pointing out those additional quotes, Tom. Of course, the funny thing is that they are speculative ("need not," "could have been," "would have been"), when that was precisely what the All Scripture Inspired quote was cautioning against.

    comment

    M TMS posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:27:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 102 of 869
    Joined 12/14/2000

    This quote was a subject of much discussion in my peer group c. 1965. During that year, my uncle, the presiding overseer and ex-circuit overseer returned from a refresher course at Brooklyn. He was giddy with the news that the "Society had discerned the end of the 6,000 year period."

    Another young brother showed me this quote in the SI book and so we went together to confront my uncle with it. My uncle was a good organization man, not actually very articulate, who spoke in great cliched platitudes he had used for years. He was unable to respond coherently to our questions.

    So in 1966, when "Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God" was released, my fascination with the chronology had already been diffused. I eagerly read the description of freedom, the symbolic baptisms and other material, but looked with suspicion on the 1975 prediction.

    My original copy of the SI book still almost opens to this quote, as I used it many times over the years to reason on this point over the years.

    TMS

    M Number 6 posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:39:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 9 of 102
    Joined 6/30/2001

    Comment.

    This is amazing. i thought the first time the Society ever came out with the 1975 stuff was in summer 1966. Yet it is obvious that they had worked it all out 3 or more years previously.

    It is well noted that Fred Franz wrote the "Life Everlasting.." book but did he write the SI book? If so who did or was it a collaboration of various writing dept members? You see if Franz didn't write the SI book then WHO worked out the 1975 date as the calculation (albeit with very cautionary notes) is here in full detail 3 yrs previously.

    Which brings me to another point. Notwithstanding the disappointment felt worldwide by the R&F dubs when nothing happened in 1975, how accurate is the date anyway? Using Bible chronology is it ACTUALLY POSSIBLE to work out the end of 6000 years of human history (assuming of course you accept the Biblical account of creation.)

    Finally I can remember using the SI book right up to and including 1990 when I left. Did newer editions come out with this removed? One would have thought so especially with the Watchtower penchant for sanitizing their own history and stating: "We never said that!"

    I find the whole 1975 issue fascinating and would be interested in other peoples opinions on this "new light" that comment has given us!

    6

    I am not a dub I am a free man.

    F Prisca posted Tue, 10 Jul 2001 10:54:00 GMT(7/10/2001)

    Post 929 of 5642
    Joined 12/16/2000

    Six,

    The SI book was revised and released in 1990.

    Paragraph 13 on page 286 says:

    "Of what significance is this today? The first edition of this book, published in 1963, stated: .... "

    It then quotes the exact paragraph that comment quoted from.

    M MacHislopp posted Wed, 11 Jul 2001 07:14:00 GMT(7/11/2001)

    Post 471 of 1694
    Joined 2/27/2001

    Hello comment,

    A very nice topic and question!

    You do know the answer to your question and
    now you do understand the problem with " older " literature…!
    It shakes , and eventually d e s t r o y trust in the WTS.

    Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp

    M seedy3 posted Wed, 11 Jul 2001 10:56:00 GMT(7/11/2001)

    Post 22 of 632
    Joined 6/24/2001

    Hmmmm TD

    the article you quote makes an interesting statement, aside from the subject at hand.

    Adam would realize this lonely condition very quickly, perhaps in just a few days or a few weeks,..............
    The basic animal kinds could have been relatively quickly named, for when such basic kinds were taken into the ark in Noah’s day, it did not involve millions of beasts, but perhaps only a few hundred basic kinds..............

    So now does that give rise that the WTS beleives that evoloution is part of Gods (jehovahs) purpose?

    Hmmmmmm....... I wonder

    seedy

      Close

      Confirm ...