1919 resurfaces in the Treasures part of this week's midweek meeting. TBH The previous 1919 doctrine was pure nonsense but the current one is even dumber and completely indefensible!
One of the most important teachings of the Watchtower organization is also potentially the most indefensible of all their teachings. It is the idea that they as true Christians went into spiritual captivity in the 2nd century CE and were freed from captivity to Babylon the Great in 1919 and that their leaders were appointed as God's only channel of communication for all mankind!
I honestly think the current explanation of the 1919 doctrine is one of the hardest teachings to defend.
At least the previous understanding until 2016, while arbitrary, tried to connect the teaching to actual events in that year:
- Rutherford and others being imprisoned = “spiritual captivity”
- Their release in 1919 = release from captivity
You could at least follow the logic, even if you disagreed with it.
But the newer explanation says the captivity actually began with the great apostasy in the 2nd century. If that’s the case, then the release from captivity can no longer reasonably be tied to Rutherford being released from prison in 1919.
That creates a big broblem:
In what meaningful sense were the Bible Students still “in captivity to Babylon the Great” in 1913 (in Russell's era), but somehow no longer in captivity by 1920 (in Rutherford's era)?
They attempt to link it to the impetus given the preaching work in 1919, but as attested to in their own publications, the Bible students were actively preaching during the Russell era.
Rutherford actually slowed down for a while after Russell died, then ramped up in 1919 with the big "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" campaign and the prediction that Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful men of old would return in 1925.
Both groups used the cross, celebrated Christmas, observed birthdays, pyramidology etc. until the late 20s and even early 30s. So what exactly changed in 1919 that suddenly marked a divine "freeing" from captivity?
This is what happens when an organization is more interested in protecting a timeline than teaching truth. Change my mind. I’m genuinely curious who can defend this mess with a straight face.
PREVIOUS TEACHING:
CURRENT TEACHING:
ATTEMPTS AT DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE: https://wol.jw.borg/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102017933 (Remove b from borg)
If Rutherford's impetus to the preaching work is the proof then Russell and Co were not still in captivity as he also gave impetus to the preaching:
