Anna

If you survive it ... and are not crippled too badly... experience is the BEST teacher !
I so very much enjoy knowing what I know, today.
Willy-Nilly ... I survived getting the many tests first, and the expensive lessons afterwards.
...and SOMEHOW ... I survived it.
The easiest way to understand why one would NOT want to change the past is to understand the  "Butterfly Effect" and  to see the movie by the same name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect
 
 

I hope no one felt slighted by Anna's remark about sparring partners. I certainly don't feel that anyone is at any kind of disadvantage, especially not you, or @AllenSmith, or  @Gone Fishing (Eoin), or @TiagoBelager, and others. (The last is a new name to me who impresses me with his maturity, organized thoughts, and style.) Resources are so easily available to everyone. All this information is available on the Internet, in the Bible, in Bible commentaries, Bible dictionaries. Even a close study of the changes and contradictions over the years, using ONLY the Watch Tower publications could lead one to the same conclusions being discussed here. If this were some completely esoteric issue that very few people could know about, then it might be wrong to even question it in a forum such as this, because it would simply be a matter of someone pontificating about a belief with no fair opportunity for anyone to respond, add to it, or discredit it. If we don't bring it up, our Bible students will rarely bring it up. And our overall message has been simplified somewhat so that the appeal is less and less to persons with the kind of educational background who would care to question it, anyway.
But on the other hand, it's dishonest to just make a claim that goes against the evidence without an explanation for WHY we are dismissing the evidence. It would be exactly as if there was a religion that started claiming that World War I started in 1894, not 1914. If we were in such a religion, we could claim it in 6,666 different places in various religious publications, and say that our Bible interpretation tells us this is true, so therefore we know it's true, and we could tell everyone who challenges it, that they are putting secular dates above the Bible dates. If someone were to challenge it with encyclopedias, coins, receipts, then they might be told they were being haughty. In religion, the leaders and members have the prerogative to do this.  But what would we think if the religion just started publishing the dates of everything prior to World War 1 by adding 20 years to it, and didn't offer an explanation? 
That's pretty much what happens even to things like the date for the "Fall of Nineveh" in 612. Because for 1914 to work, the Watch Tower publications also need to change this to 632, adding 20 years to it.
*** it-2 p. 505 Nineveh ***
Therefore, the capture of Nineveh (about seven years earlier) in the 14th year of Nabopolassar’s reign would fall in the year 632 B.C.E.
*** it-1 p. 205 Assyria ***
The fall of the empire. The Babylonian Chronicle B.M. (British Museum) 21901 recounts the fall of Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, following a siege carried out by the combined forces of Nabopolassar, the king of Babylon, and of Cyaxares the Mede during the 14th year of Nabopolassar (632 B.C.E.): “The city [they turned] into ruin-hills and hea[ps (of debris)].” (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. B. Pritchard, 1974, p. 305; brackets and parentheses theirs.) Thus the fierce Assyrian Empire came to an ignominious end.—Isa 10:12, 24-26; 23:13; 30:30-33; 31:8, 9; Na 3:1-19; Zep 2:13.
According to the same chronicle, in the 14th year of Nabopolassar (632 B.C.E.), Ashur-uballit II attempted to continue Assyrian rule from Haran as his capital city. This chronicle states, under the 17th year of Nabopolassar (629 B.C.E.): “In the month Du?uzu, Ashur-uballit, king of Assyria, (and) a large [army of] E[gy]pt [who had come to his aid] crossed the river (Euphrates) and [marched on] to conquer Harran.” (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, p. 305; brackets and parentheses theirs.)
There is no evidence to move this from 612 to 632, but the Watch Tower publications have no choice, because all these dates are tied together, and must be manipulated so that 1914 still works.
Remember that it doesn't matter at all to me. It's our publications that say that the SECULAR date given for the end of the Babylonian empire in 539 is so accurate that they call it "assured" and even "absolute." That's the Watchtower that called this date "absolute." And therefore, our publications pretend that dates like 632 BCE for the fall of Nineveh are "set in stone." If you read the article on "Assyria" in the Insight book, you would even think that Babylonian Chronicle "21901" provides evidence for 632 BCE. You might also think that the same chronicle states that Haran was conquered in 629 even though all the archaeological evidence consistently points to 609 and no archaeological evidence points to 629. In fact, the publications continue to insist on these dates where they simply add 20 to the secular dates without any explanation in 99% of the cases. 
By the way, you might think that the Babylonian dates depend on the Assyrian (which depended on the Egyptian). But this isn't true. Those TEN THOUSAND pieces of evidence related to the Neo-Babylonian period include astronomical diaries and other interlocking tablet evidence that consistently supports, what the Watchtower calls the "accepted chronology." I'm not claiming that the Neo-Babylonian period is set in stone, but this would evidently have been the opinion of the Governing Body based on what the Watchtower, referenced in a previous post, has claimed here:
INCONTESTABLY ESTABLISHED
When a date is indicated by several lines of evidence it is strongly established. The scientific law of probabilities imparts a united strength to the strands of the cable of chronology far greater than the sum of the individual lines of evidence. This is a law which is implicitly relied upon in important affairs: viz., that when a thing is indicated in only one way it may be by chance; if it is indicated in two ways, it is almost certain to be true; and if in more than two ways, it is usually impossible that it is by chance or that it is not true; and the addition of more proofs removes it entirely from the world of chance into that of proven certainty.
This is the actual level of independent lines of evidence behind the fact that Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year should be dated to 587 instead of 607. According to the Watchtower's line of reasoning, therefore, 587 would be the proper date, even if you threw out the Egyptian and Assyrian dates. It is NOT dependent on those synchronisms. Based on the evidence, the Watchtower is inadvertently here stating that 607 must be wrong, and 587 is a "proven certainty."
Of course, I don't believe it's a "proven certainty" any more than you do. But the problem is that anyone can look at this evidence for themselves. You do not have to be a specialist of any kind. Our methods of dismissing such evidence will come across exactly as dishonest as those who would argue that World War I started in 1894.
That's an excellent point.
Still plan on getting to that part of the discussion.
 

Is that like 15 minutes of fame?

In order to be able to answer that I would have to know what you mean by "They get there “direction” from God himself". Do you mean that Jehovah directly communicates with them through some supernatural way, or that they get their direction from His own word, the Bible? If it's the latter, then all true Christians get their direction from that source.

This is getting scary. Now Allen Smith is the VIRGINIAN!!!!

But be careful you don't get worn down, because Allen Smith and several of his alter egos will find scriptures that condemn this very thing, and beat you over the head with them

And yet there have been mistakes. This cannot be because GOD gave wrong insight can it? So it must be that GOD gives holy spirit, but it is up to the individual whether he actually follows it or not to get the correct insight!

I'm afraid JWI will find it difficult to find a good enough "sparring partner" who has enough knowledge on the subject to be able to stick to the issue at hand without resorting to attacks on the person's intentions instead of sticking to the subject. Facts and truth are facts and truth no matter who presents it. If we are not able to defend our view in a scholarly and scientific way, presenting counter evidence using available archeological material, then why even get involved in a discussion such as this?  I know I can't. I just don't have enough time to devote to research that is necessary to be able to argue with anything that JWI has touched on regarding the secular aspect relating to Bible chronology. In fact I don't even have much time to research the scriptures pertaining to this subject, never mind Babylonian astronomical diaries and such.  But I have been able to see some valid scriptural arguments being presented by JWI and I think it's OK to say "well, your reasoning might just be right". Is it going to change anything about how I view Jehovah, Jesus or our brotherhood? NO.
I am very well aware that casting doubts on 1914 automatically disqualifies 1919 and the appointment of the faithful slave. I am very well aware that a different interpretation regarding parousia, the sign, Generation etc. will automatically call into question whether we are really living in the last days. So what? I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it. Does that change our commission to preach? It shouldn't because aren't we all hoping that Jehovah is going to step in and bring relief to mankind, whenever that may be? To preach about God's Kingdom which will do just that, it is our commission, and we don't stop until the Kingdom is ruling over the earth. Should any of this change our attitude and view of those who are in "charge" and call themselves the faithful slave? I don't see why it should. Someone has to be in charge, we can't all be chiefs. So far, this arrangement has worked pretty well. There are many more arguments I could go into, but I don't think that's necessary. All I know is that those who have left Jehovah's organization, (or if you just want to call it Jehovah's Witnesses) and still believe in God, they have reverted back/or adopted most of Christendoms ideas. That tells me a lot and enough to convince me that we are the true religion, with all our flaws and imperfections.

In order to be able to answer that I would have to know what you mean by "They get there “direction” from God himself". Do you mean that Jehovah directly communicates with them through some supernatural way, or that they get their direction from His own word, the Bible? If it's the latter, then all true Christians get their direction from that source.

Is that like 15 minutes of fame?

You cannot imagine how liberating it is to watch with disinterest as a pontificate piles sticks around your ankles to burn you at the stake, and not be combustible.

And yet there have been mistakes. This cannot be because GOD gave wrong insight can it? So it must be that GOD gives holy spirit, but it is up to the individual whether he actually follows it or not to get the correct insight!

I ALSO BURST OUT LAUGHING at the "mirror scene", and again when the Lawyer was in the Porta-potty, and the T-Rex ate him.
If it had been a shark, the Lawyer would not have been eaten, as he would have received ... professional courtesy.

I liked the part when they glimpse in the sideview mirror the Tyranasaurus chasing them. It is close enough that it looks like it may swallow their Jeep, and the mirror caution says: 'Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.'
My kids gave me a dirty look on this one. The heroes were clambering atop the false ceiling when a mean dinosaur lunged at them. It was so over the top that I burst out laughing at what was supposed to be a very frightening moment.

Thank you Tom. I like your thoughts on this, and you raise many valid points  (it's one of your few posts where you are actually being dead pan serious, not that I don't enjoy your tongue in cheek humour).
The reason I posted that question was because I am very aware that if one doesn't happen to be on the same wavelength, its easy to misunderstand what the other person is actually saying. I understood it to mean that "how dare we even try interpreting the Bible, if that is the exclusive privilege of the FDS". Judging by @Noble Berean's answer, it looks like he understood it similarly. Your interpretation sounds perfectly reasonable though. I like this point "I think it is an appeal that congregational unity is more important than individual opinion about doctrine" it kind of puts it in a nutshell. Also this observation is very valid "Whenever the Governing Body issues direction on any doctrinal point, it may be that you, as a diligent student, noticed that point some time ago. If this was the world of churches, you would have gone out and started your own religion over it. How do you think there came to be so many sects and divisions among Christianity"? I know I'm not the only one who has noticed points ahead of when the GB has adjusted their view. (I mentioned this on here a little while ago referring to Babylonian captivity, in the spiritual sense). Some things may not be important enough to warrant starting a new religion over, but your point is perfectly apt!
I don't think JWI is trying to gain disciples for himself either, and as you mention in your following post it kind of sucks that in the minds of many people a carpenter who has expertise is never judged the same way as a writer or scholar who has expertise. This brings to mind an instance a few years ago, which actually involved you (yes, really, lol) when I was reading your stories in "Sheep and goats" and someone criticized it asking why on earth would anyone want to write about stuff like that and I replied that you were sharing your "creation" just like a composer won't forever just play his music for himself, but will want to share it with others. Jehovah created us to be this way.
P.S. Apologies to @JW Insiderfor causing a break in the thread. Maybe this should be posted as a new subject....

Absolutely. I have been lately communicating with an oaf who regularly launches vicious attacks at the Governing Body. He tipped his hand recently (IMO) to reveal his core difficulty - he thinks it is all about us. In fact, it is about the vindication of God's purposes and the sanctification of his name. Occasionally we take it on the chin as we yield to these greater things as the focus.
Having said that, I sometimes get discouraged that intellectual work is often misconstrued as  'showing off.' If I were an electrician, I would receive nothing but praise for developing that skill to the full. If I relished a certain electrically challenging project, no one would say I am being full of myself. Nobody would question my motive. Nobody would accuse me of attempting to stand out and achieve recognition to be admired by my peers. I will even concede that @Ann O'Malyhas a point in her carrying on about stifling talent - it is just that she takes a grain of truth and tries to bake it into a seven layer cake that I object to.
In my case, I write because I am not good at anything else. If someone should say - like @The Librarian -  'good writing!' of course I am pleased. But it is no different than a hands-on worker being commended for craftsmanship.
Jehovah's Witnesses are top-heavy with persons who work with their hands. Far from being a negative, this is added proof that Jehovah's Witnesses follow the pattern of first century Christianity. A carpenter is less likely to become too big for his pants than an educated statesman. Working class people came into the truth in droves back then - less so, the upper classes. It is exactly what one should expect. Nonetheless, it is not as though intellectual talent is a pejorative. Leave @JW Insider alone. Or at least, if you criticize him, as can arguably be done, do not do so in a way so as to imply that he is trying to outshine his brothers.
 

Years ago, when reflecting about this same fact, I came to the same conclusion: Jehovah propitiated, tolerated in some way that His people was taught with a false, or incorrect idea, in order to a higher benefit:  strengthen the resolution of witnesses during IIWW in order to face the cruel persecution.
But, some questions arise:
·        Did the Christians of the first century need to think incorrectly about Romans 13 in order to resist the persecution of Nero? ·        When our point of view was finally rectified (I believe in 1963 or close) did the brethren under the steel curtain begin to be less faithful then? The answer is obvious. Isn’t it?
I fully agree with you regarding Moses, Israelites, loyalty and faith. So, perhaps you’re  annoying, to some extent, with thoughts openly exposed here by @JW Insider or myself, in the sense that certain teachings or explanations of the "slave class" are incorrect.
·        In the first place, is it necessary to be faithful to accept all the explanations provided by the slave? ·        Can I be faithful if, although I am not convinced of certain explanations, I try not to disturb others and I go ahead? Let me explain what I’m trying to do with this kind of situations.
In the recent regional convention, in the last talk, was mentioned the end is imminent (well, the Spanish expression was “inminente”, I suppose in English was used another equivalent). Now, not that I do not believe that the end is imminent, is that I do not know. My base: our Master declaration: “…at an hour that you do not think likely, the Son of man is coming.”
I’ve watched the danger of these kind of imprudent (in my view) declaration many times, during many years (1914, 1925, 1975, 1994 end of generation, now overlapped generation). Brothers disappointed, at some degree bitter. The clear majority of Jehovah’s servants don’t need a false sense of immediacy. We give Him the most day by day. The end will come at his own due time. Concerning this, one question:
·        Is it more loyal if you strive because you believe that the end is imminent? ·        What happens to those who do not know when the end comes, and despite this we give Jehovah one hundred percent? ·        Are we therefore less loyal? Do you know, in my zone, the most repeated expression after the convention? “the end is imminent, the slave said this”. My answer: “oh yes, when I was a child also believed the end was imminent, in 1975. Sometimes our wishes are so strong that make this kind of statements”.
Oh, I wish go further, but for several weeks I’ll be busy
 

You might be right but here's why it doesn't make any sense to me. AC refers to "Accepted Chronology" and WT refers to Watch Tower Chronology. In the "accepted chronology" the indignities against Jerusalem had gone on for 69 years, or even 71 years if you start from the major events from the 18-month siege lasting from 589 to the destruction in 587. In the Watch Tower's timeline, these indignities had started 90 years ago. Zechariah supports the "accepted chronology" (or vice versa) when he says that mercy had been withheld from Jerusalem for only 70 years, not 90 years as the Watchtower timeline says:
#AC                       [<-----------------about 70 years from 587 to 518------------------->] #WT   [<--------------------------about 90 years from 607 to 518------------------------------>] ...6..6......6.........5..5......5.........5.........5.........5.........55........5.........5.5.......5 ...1..0......0.........9..8......8.........7.........6.........5.........43........3.........2.1.......1 ...0..7......0.........0..7......0.........0.........0.........0.........09........0.........0.8.......0 The Insight book says that Zechariah 1:7 is dated to about 519 BCE, right? That's near the end of the 2nd year of Darius.
(Zechariah 1:7) . . .On the 24th day of the 11th month, that is, the month of Sheʹbat, in the second year of Da·riʹus, the word of Jehovah came to the prophet Zech·a·riʹah . . .
(Zechariah 1:12) . . .So the angel of Jehovah said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you withhold your mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with whom you have been indignant these 70 years?”
*** it-2 p. 1226 Zechariah, Book of ***
About February 9, 519 B.C.E., the prophet Zechariah heard the words: “The whole earth is sitting still and having no disturbance.” (Zec 1:7, 11)
This would mean that the statements in Zechariah 7 were in 518 (almost 517) being now in the 4th year of Darius.
(Zechariah 7:1) . . .And in the fourth year of King Da·riʹus, the word of Jehovah came to Zech·a·riʹah on the fourth day of the ninth month, that is, the month of Chisʹlev. 2 The people of Bethʹel sent Shar·eʹzer and Reʹgem-melʹech and his men to beg for the favor of Jehovah, 3 saying to the priests of the house of Jehovah of armies and to the prophets: “Should I weep in the fifth month and abstain from food, as I have done for so many years?”  4 The word of Jehovah of armies again came to me, saying: 5 “Say to all the people of the land and to the priests, ‘When you fasted and wailed in the fifth month and in the seventh month for 70 years, did you really fast for me?
(Zechariah 8:19) 19 “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘The fast of the fourth month, the fast of the fifth month, the fast of the seventh month, and the fast of the tenth month will be occasions for exultation and joy for the house of Judah—festivals of rejoicing. . . .
You started out saying:
"Zechariah 7:5 expressly relates that there were lamentations and fasts that the Jews had practiced in the 5th and 7th months of every year for 70 years."
This reflects what we've been taught, that these lamentations and fasts had been practiced for 70 years, and the Watchtower suggests that these reflect the period of the 70 years between 607 and 537. Therefore the fasts would likely start on that first anniversary of 607 which would be the 5th and 7th month of 606, the following year in Babylon. They could end when the new foundation was laid in the 7th month of 537. (Ezra 3:1)  This would mean that the fasting in the 7th month would likely have run from 606 to 538. A total of 68 or 69 years, i.e., about 70 years.   But clearly, the fasting was still going on at the time of Zechariah's writing, 90 years after 607; it had not stopped 20 years earlier as the Watchtower suggests.
There have been a couple of explanations for Jehovah's disapproval of these fasts. The explanation you gave is one of them. Also:
*** w96 11/15 p. 5 Does God Require Fasting? ***
Some fasts established by the Jews met with God’s disapproval right from the outset. For example, at one time the people of Judah had four annual fasts to commemorate the calamitous events associated with Jerusalem’s siege and desolation in the seventh century B.C.E. (2 Kings 25:1-4, 8, 9, 22-26; Zechariah 8:19) After the Jews were released from captivity in Babylon, Jehovah said through the prophet Zechariah: “When you fasted . . . , and this for seventy years, did you really fast to me, even me?” God did not approve of these fasts because the Jews were fasting and mourning over judgments that had come from Jehovah himself. They were fasting because of the calamity that befell them, not because of their own wrongdoing that led to it. After they were restored to their homeland, it was time for them to rejoice instead of bemoaning the past.—Zechariah 7:5.

Who is the slave.... to give food at proper time.  You either believe they are the appointed slave to give food at proper time or you don't.  Simple.  Your words and actions will prove what you think....One must be prepared to step back and let your opinions take second place.
As someone said earlier - if interpretation were given to everyone - we would have 8 million different interpretations wouldn't we? As each person thinks they can serve better and have more of Jehovah's Spirit to interpret what they find.  Our final test (I think) will come when the slave is attacked in a most vicious way and false information spread about them to deceive and take Witnesses away from our most basic beliefs such as not voting, neutrality etc.
I also think there is a difference  between having confidence/trust in Jehovah and his abilities to lead; and personal humility.  I think that very few people work on the teaching of Christ that we should lessen ourselves and be prepared to suffer for it as he did. Most Witnesses need to work on this.  Moses had to spend 40 years of his life with SHEEP!  Intellectual pursuit ?  Naa....  he had to learn to trust Jehovah completely.   Then only - was he ready to lead Jehovah's people in true humility of spirit.  All that fancy education in Pharaoh's palace was useless. Joseph spent 13 years in a prison.... (he really had to trust in Jehovah -  I would have given up by year 3)..... Must have been pretty nasty in there.  No human rights.... etc.
I wanted to mention that if the Sumerian chronology is out - then you start at a very rocky basis for the other dynasties which come after.... and some of them overlapped and ran simultaneously. Perfect clarity and "absolute" is not the words I would use to describe the DATES for these dynasties.... Very skeptical....
I mentioned my book to demonstrate that it is not important what we achieve in this world.....  at present I am too busy in the field in any case..... but that we sometimes have to step back and be happy with being a no-body and not achieving anything of great significance!  I have lost all ambition regarding this world and since I did that I am extremely happy!   I was raised in an extremely ambitious family and it took a long time to get rid of this trait.  Like a jack-in-the box- it jumps out sometimes and I have to push it back in.  One can even be ambitious in the truth - to stand out....... all of us should investigate ourselves to see if that spark of putting ourselves in front and grudging others a place in the sun is still part of our personality.  I do not count my value in how many people I helped get in the truth, how many studies at one time, and how many seeds I sowed.....  I just keep at the job and wait on Jehovah.... and the peace it brings is so uncluttered!
If all of us had a waiting attitude (while doing what Jehovah requires from us) most things usually sorts itself out.... and there are always adjustments in the teachings to help us stay faithful to Jehovah...... is this not after all the main goal of all of us? ..... to stay faithful?
 
 

I think it is an appeal that congregational unity is more important than individual opinion about doctrine.
Whenever the Governing Body issues direction on any doctrinal point, it may be that you, as a diligent student, noticed that point some time ago. If this was the world of churches, you would have gone out and started your own religion over it. How do you think there came to be so many sects and divisions among Christianity?
Instead, you essentially 'sit' on your opinion. Maybe the theocratic organization will come around to it someday. Maybe they will even in some way notice your expertise and seek you out on that account. At any rate, the responsibility is theirs, not yours.
It's a little dicey putting such opinion out there publicly because countless persons latch on whose only goal is to thwart Jehovah's Witnesses and what they stand for. Really - do you think the ones hostile would all be placated if the WBTS came around to a new opinion on just this one point? 
Still, as has been pointed out, not everyone with a different view of chronology has ill intent toward Jehovah's Witnesses. Maybe there is something to be said for the fact that we, too, acknowledge different views exist and they are not categorically wrong just because we did not say it first.
None of this is to be harsh to JWI. He is smart regarding these matters of chronology and I am not. It is easy for me to say 'zip it' because I don't know anything. I don't think he is writing here to gain disciples for himself, as some have accused. I think, rather, that he does not want to see theocratic interests take it on the chin because of a wrong understanding. One can hardly say that the organization has never been wrong before. He is just exploring ideas and I like that. But I am not sure it does not stir up more dissension than it is worth, which is not good. Ultimately, publishing doctrinal light is the responsibility of someone else.
I haven't figured this out yet. I probably will not succeed in doing so.
 
 
 

What is theocratic law by the way? I thought it was the principles laid out in the Bible.
You need to encourage respondents but being gentle with them and showing honour. No one has to reply. 

It's a little too soon to tell.

That's just it. I personally do not think that 1914 really is that important with regard to being spiritually ready or not. Not only that, but who of us uses 1914 as part of the preaching message to be honest? Who of us has recently "explained" it to someone at the door, or even to a study? In view of that, I do not think that putting forward "alternate" views regarding 1914 on this forum necessarily garbles our message, because our message is not about 1914, but about being ready because we do not know when the end will come. Refinements to our scriptural understanding are being made usually after we discern that our past application has become obsolete due to the passage of time. But notice our core beliefs have never had to be adjusted since about 1935. We still believe the same about the soul, what happens when we die, who go to heaven, what is hell, the identity of God, the identity of Jesus, God's kingdom, the good news, moral standards etc.etc. So all the other stuff is interesting, but irrelevant to our salvation in the grand scheme of things. I doubt Jehovah is going to judge someone as not worthy of life just because they have reservations about 1914 or some other chronological aspect.

I agree with you wholeheartedly and that is why I find reasoning such as this one from the Nov. 2016 study WT a little disconcerting p.16, par. 9:
"Some may feel that they can interpret the Bible on their own. However, Jesus has appointed the ‘faithful slave’ to be the only channel for dispensing spiritual food. Since 1919, the glorified Jesus Christ has been using that slave to help his followers understand God’s own Book and heed its directives. By obeying the instructions found in the Bible, we promote cleanness, peace, and unity in the congregation. Each one of us does well to ask himself, ‘Am I loyal to the channel that Jesus is using today?’ "
I am misunderstanding what it's saying there? Anyone care to analyze this as they understand it?  And sorry, I know it's a little off topic.

I just want to know what "Bigly" world events happened in 1925 which outweighs 1914.... ... or any other date for that matter.  Any date which brought forth the world changing events of 1914.  Please help me out here!  You can change the date to whatever date you like with astounding reasonings and many quoted scriptures etc...... but I want to see the evidence on the ground!... and it must be really more significant than the events in and from 1914.  I am prepared to look at something I feel is really credible - otherwise you do not deserve  my attention!
Also - how much time is spent in teaching others about the Kingdom as instructed by Jesus.  This is our obligation.  We can spend all day in searching the scriptures and when we do not DO what Jesus said - all is in vain.  Our obedience is more important than knowledge because knowledge can puff us up and make us lose focus of bringing praise to Jehovah and warning  and informing our fellow humans on earth.  The attention of the focus can be ourselves if we indulge our own pleasures too much - whatever it is.
As you possibly may know my first language is not English and when I write fast I sometimes fail to check my sentences and my language... ..  I realize I am at a little disadvantage here! LOL  I am going to bow out gracefully now.  I have much preparation to do and I have been rushing in and out to return visits today..... so singing off in Sweden!
Good night.