JW Insider

It's not a mystery to a lot of people. You saw it in the Insight book, so it's not a mystery to the persons who put that book together. I'd wager that even AllenSmith hasn't changed his mind about this particular idea. I'm pretty sure you won't find a lot of support for this idea even among your own congregation.

Not inconsistent at all. This dream did have a future fulfillment. The Bible said it would. The the Bible said that it did! The Bible says it was fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar. What's inconsistent is that every dream and prophecy in Daniel has ONE fulfillment, but the Watchtower needed this one to have TWO fulfillments to support a tradition. Besides, I'm the one who believes it has a FUTURE fulfillment, just like the Bible says. But the Watchtower tradition indicates that it could have a PAST fulfillment. Jerusalem is clearly already destroyed at this point, as Nebuchadnezzar is already proudly and haughtily upon upon the vast great "world" empire that he himself has built. So if this dream happens AFTER Jerusalem is destroyed, then it is a prophecy about a time in the past when Nebuchadnezzar already destroyed Jerusalem. Furthermore, if the Watchtower claims that it was fulfilled in 607, and if they truly believe that 539 was an assured, secular, pivotal year, then 607 MUST be a time 2 years before Nebuchadnezzar even became king of Babylon.

I forgot to respond to this last portion you wrote: The Bible does not speak of the month as only thirty days. As already shown, the Bible, speaks of the measurement of months as lunar, from new moon to new moon. The Bible contains several places where numbers representing time and chronology were rounded off. Sometimes this rounding might have been done to make large numbers easier to remember, time periods easier to remember, or easier to calculate. We'd only be speculating if said we knew exactly why the Bible often appears to round the numbers. For example, Jesus may have been in the grave for as few as 29 hours? So if it was just a few hours more than one full day, why do we call it 3 days. Why was it called 3 days and 3 nights? Our solution is to say it was PARTS of three days. Because of the book of Jonah, perhaps this was the easiest way to remember that it was part of Friday (from afternoon until sundown which was the start of Saturday), all of Saturday, and part of Sunday (already raised before sunrise). In this case it's possible that "Parts" of three days were rounded off to three days. Another example, why does Matthew say it was 14 generations from Abraham to David, 14 from David to the deportation, and 14 from the deportation to Christ? If you count the generations listed here, or even the variations in the Hebrew Scriptures, or the LXX, or what's listed in Luke, you still don't get 14 for each of those. (Matthew 1:17) . . .All the generations, then, from Abraham until David were 14 generations; from David until the deportation to Babylon, 14 generations; from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ, 14 generations. *** it-1 pp. 915-916 Genealogy of Jesus Christ *** This division may have been made as a memory aid. However, in counting the names we find that they total 41, rather than 42. When the Bible says that 4,000 men were struck down (1 Sam 4:2) then 30,000 foot soldiers fell (1 Sam 4:10) do we always believe that it could not have been 3,998 or 30,002, respectively? Large populations are always rounded off to numbers like 5,000, 18,000 or even 500,000, 600,000, 800,000 etc. (2 Sam 24:9) Joʹab now gave to the king the number of the people who were registered. Israel amounted to 800,000 warriors armed with swords, and the men of Judah were 500,000. Note this from the Chronology article in Insight on page 461: the beginning of 1077 B.C.E. 40 years David’s reign to the beginning of 1037 B.C.E. 40 years Solomon’s reign to the division of the 997 B.C.E. 40 years kingdom Deuteronomy 2:7; 29:5; Acts 13:21; 2 Samuel 5:4; 1 Kings 11:42, 43; 12:1-20 *** it-1 p. 461 Chronology *** . . . the . . . three periods all may have included fractional figures. Thus, David’s reign is shown to have actually lasted for 40 1⁄2 years, according to 2 Samuel 5:5. If, as seems to have been the practice, regnal years of these kings were counted on a Nisan-to-Nisan basis, this could mean that King Saul’s reign lasted only 39 1⁄2 years . . . But there is another point you made above, if a month is only to have thirty days and this is for consistency in working out prophecies, then why do we not use 30-day months when deciding to translate these time periods into so-called modern day fulfillments? A year of 12 30-day months is only 360 days, so these supposed 2,520 years would be 360-day years. Yet the Watchtower uses 365.25 day years, and the Watchtower uses an average of 30.4375 days in a month for the fulfillment. So what's all the fuss about consistency if the Watchtower isn't concerned about it? [Edited to add:] And if as you say "it was to have consistency when we work out the prophecies," then why do we make a "day for a year" in the 7 times of Daniel, but do NOT make a day for a year in the three-and-one-half times in Revelation, and why do we NOT USE EITHER days or years, when Revelation 11:9,11 says "three and one half days"?

As @Ann O'Maly already said, none of this proves the Bible to be incorrect. As you say, the Bible gives a rounded number of 30 days, whenever it speaks of a range of dates. We don't know the exact reason. Probably for the same reason that anyone uses rounded numbers, for simplicity, for ease of calculations. I can't think of too many reasons that the Hebrews would need to calculate the exact number of days over a long period. Perhaps you can. Thinking about a farmer, as your did, if experience tells you that barley takes about 105 days from planting to harvest, you could easily translate that to 3.5 months. If you planted on the new moon, you could expect to harvest at the full moon (always on the 14th or 15th). If someone tells you that wheat takes 120 days, then you could translate that to 4 months, and if you do all your planting at the same time, then you could expect to plant on the same new moon with the barley and expect to harvest on the first new moon after the earlier barley harvest. (Oats, if they had them, might take 115 days to ripen.) It seems to me to be perfectly reasonable that you might want to know these number of days if you were hiring laborers, or for planning, but it also seems reasonable that a quick, close estimate was all that was needed, and thus there was no need to worry about the fact that a time period of 3 months might have 88 days in some cases or 89 days in some cases. (29+30+29) or (30+29+30). What we DO know is that if a previous month had 30 days, the next month is going to be closer to 29. If you try to call 2 months in a row with 30 days, the next new moon is going to show up about 28 or 29 days later. Ann is right that this was not always in a strict alternating pattern (which is why I said that the farmer would never be more than one day off). It is true that some Jews experimented with 364 day calendars, to be a little more in line with a solar calendar, but even these could also not be used for very long periods without adjustments. The Dead Sea Scrolls shows that they tried months of 30+30+31 days for each quarter of the year, for a total of 364. There is a possibility that Daniel was referring to such a calendar, but we don't know. I am sure you already know that Insight book says the following: *** it-1 pp. 389-390 Calendar *** Early calendars were mainly lunar calendars, that is, the months of the year were counted by complete cycles of the moon, as, for example, from one new moon to the next new moon. On the average, such lunation takes about 29 days, 12 hours, and 44 minutes. The months were usually counted as of either 29 or 30 days, but in the Bible record the term “month” generally means 30 days. . . . Hebrew Calendar. The Israelites used such a lunisolar, or bound solar, calendar. This is evident from the fact that Jehovah God established the beginning of their sacred year with the month Abib in the spring and specified the celebration of certain festivals on fixed dates, festivals that were related to harvest seasons. For these dates to have coincided with the particular harvests, there had to be a calendar arrangement that would synchronize with the seasons by compensating for the difference between the lunar and solar years.—Ex 12:1-14; 23:15, 16; Le 23:4-16. . . . The Jewish months ran from new moon to new moon. (Isa 66:23) Thus, one Hebrew word, choʹdhesh, rendered “month” (Ge 7:11) or “new moon” (1Sa 20:27), is related to cha·dhashʹ, meaning “new.” Another word for month, yeʹrach, is rendered “lunar month.” (1Ki 6:38) In later periods, fire signals were used or messengers were dispatched to advise the people of the beginning of the new month. *** it-1 p. 392 Calendar *** In postexilic times the names of the months used in Babylon were employed by the Israelites, and seven of these are mentioned: Nisan, the 1st month, replacing Abib (Es 3:7); Sivan, the 3rd month (Es 8:9); Elul, the 6th (Ne 6:15); Chislev, the 9th (Zec 7:1); Tebeth, the 10th (Es 2:16); Shebat, the 11th (Zec 1:7); and Adar, the 12th (Ezr 6:15). The postexilic names of the remaining five months appear in the Jewish Talmud and other works. They are Iyyar, the 2nd month; Tammuz, the 4th; Ab, the 5th; Tishri, the 7th; and Heshvan, the 8th. The 13th month, which was intercalated periodically, was named Veadar, or the second Adar. Eventually the length of most of the months was fixed as having a specific number of days. Nisan (Abib), Sivan, Ab, Tishri (Ethanim), and Shebat regularly had 30 days each; Iyyar (Ziv), Tammuz, Elul, and Tebeth regularly had 29 days each. Heshvan (Bul), Chislev, and Adar, however, could have either 29 or 30 days. The variations in these latter months served to make necessary adjustments with the lunar calendar but also were used to prevent certain festivals from occurring on days viewed as prohibited by later Jewish religious leaders. We don't have any evidence of the standard Hebrew calendar ever just adding a few days in a year, but there is plenty of evidence that the Jews lived under a calendar in Babylon that added a full month to every leap year, 7 times in a 19 year period. We know that even in Bible times the Hebrew calendar had already adopted the Babylonian names for the months. We also know that only about 250 years after Revelation was written that the Jews had already documented a formal a system that also added 7 full months at various places within every 19 year period. (One difference between them was that the Babylonians would use either the 6th or the 12th month for the intercalary month, and the Hebrew calendar settled on just adding it at the 12th month for each of those seven different times.) But we don't have to go to the Talmud or later Jewish writings to know that the Biblical month was from "new moon" to "new moon." (Isaiah 66:23, NWT 2013) 23 “And from new moon to new moon and from sabbath to sabbath, All flesh will come in to bow down before me,” says Jehovah. (1 Kings 6:37, 38, NWT 1984) 37 In the fourth year the house of Jehovah had its foundation laid, in the lunar month of Ziv; 38 and in the eleventh year, in the lunar month of Bul, that is, the eighth month, the house was finished as regards all its details and all its plan; so that he was seven years at building it.

You are right. Of course they didn't do the calculations. It was up to the priests to declare the holidays. The peasants, farmers, fishermen, traders, etc., paid attention to the priests because they needed to know when at least 3 of the holidays occurred. Turns out it was surprisingly easy to second guess the priests, though. You could almost always get the calendar right in Jewish society even without a priest, and you'd probably never have to check with a priest but once every two or three years. But that wasn't a problem either because heads of households, sometimes with family members, traveled to Jerusalem up to three times a year to celebrate the major holidays in Jerusalem. The priests would already know if a leap year was going to be declared at the end of that particular year, and probably knew years in advance which years would require it. It was easy for everyone to tell when the new month started. You could never be more than one day off, and could usually guess it right even with a strong cloud cover for two or three days. But I can tell you missed a couple of important points, if you really thought that anything said above meant that the farmer would need to do calculations. No. This isn't true. Jehovah is the one who gives us the average 29.5 days in a month, and it has always been exactly the same for thousands of years. So the new moon showed up every 29.5 days and they had to "round it off" based on whether they could see the new moon after sundown at the end of the month. This means that when they saw the new moon show up after the sun went down, they started counting that night until the next sundown as DAY 1. Then they could count off 29 days and know (by how small the sliver was getting) whether the new moon was going to occur the next sundown or if it might take until the day after. (1 Samuel 20:18) . . .Jonʹa·than then said to him: “Tomorrow is the new moon,. . . If it was obvious it was going to happen the next evening, then they wouldn't even have to watch, because that next evening started DAY 1 of the following month, and the month they were in just had 29 days. Because the current month had 29 days, the next month was going to have 30 days. Because that next month would have 30 days then the month after was clearly going to have 29 days. The new moons are going to be seen like that for many months in a row. The pattern could go on almost forever: 29+30+29+30+29+30+29+30+29+30+29+30 That's why you can say that the year had 254 days, and that the average month was 29.5 days. Because the pattern was so obvious, the highest priest in charge of such things, could declare that a certain 29 day month was going to have 30 days, but this would force an extra 29 day month into that same year. If they wanted to force a regular 30 day month to have only 29, then they would have to force an extra 30 day month into the year. Because the average is not precisely 29.5 they had another reason to declare an extra 30 day month after several years, without a 29 day month. This is one reason that the month added every leap year (Adar) could always be a 30 day month. Instead of the "plain" month of Adar, they would add a 30 day Adar I and call the next month Adar II. The above quote is from "Judaism 101" on http://www.jewfaq.org/calendar.htm But the pattern was so easily learned that anyone, even a completely illiterate farmer, could know the next 12 months just by knowing the day that the New Year was declared. He would never be more than one day off from Jerusalem's count for the entire 12 months. Two ideas from this sentence are wrong: It was not an extra short month, in fact it was almost always a 30 day month, rather than a 29 day month. It was not every fourth year. The year of 12 lunar months had 354 days which was about 11.25 days shy of a solar year. So after only 3 of these years, they would already be nearly 34 days behind the sun, more than a full month off. So they needed to add a full month, every 3 years, and even this left them short by 4 days to make up a whole solar year. So a couple times every 19 years they even needed to add a full, long month every 2 years. A typical solution that developed was to add the extra month every 3rd, 6th, 8th, 11th, 14th, 17th, and 19th year of every 19 year cycle. That's 7 times every 19 years, or every 2.7 years on average. It was a full, long month in every case. Since you asked. The motive is truth and accuracy and defense of the Bible. Also it's out of love for people, and the fact that a lot of people don't understand this and begin to believe that if you try to tell the truth then you must not be accepting the Bible. This results in unnecessary judgmentalism and sometimes even rejection of obvious truth. We should always be aware of this when we can, and always tell the truth about such things. Also, I believe you will find that the Watchtower accepts every bit of what I just said above as true. You may even find that the same persons who down-vote these posts where they do not LIKE the facts, already understand that these are still the facts. A down-vote without a defense is evidence to me that the point was probably made clearly enough.

And here I thought I had at least two-thirds of the angels, too.

Don't know if you saw it, but I quickly edited out a line in that last post that said that the Jews had experimented with a calendar of 30-day months after they had lived in Babylon. I was thinking of a post you had made several months ago when I wrote that. But I edited this out for two reasons. One is that it would be difficult to explain how these 12x30=360 day years were actually calculated as 364 day years without getting into resources like Enoch, the DSS, and perhaps even the potentially late timing of Daniel. Another reason is that the Flood account in Genesis counts the 5 month range as 150 days, even though it would have been about 147 or 148 days using "new moons." This could also have been a late redaction but thought it was more likely a reference to the way that date ranges were commonly described. I think there is some evidence that even though the Jews did experiment with "solar" 360 day calendars and 364 day calendars, that the 30-day month was referenced for practical reasons over ranges of dates, too. Even with a solar calendar we still do this because our own solar calendar today uses an average of 30.4375-day months. Describing a 3.5 year period as a 42 month period would involve an average of 30.125 days per month which is still pretty good for financial calculations, since there was typically only one leap year in the period. However, describing a 7-year period as 2,520 days (which the Bible NEVER does) would have involved a larger practical error since there would have been at least 2 and sometimes 3 leap years in that period. I do agree, at least, with the idea that a 30-day month was considered the "ideal" month in the Jewish calendar, and played a part in referencing this number of days in Daniel, and Revelation of course, references the same because it is based primarily on Daniel. (Revelation was the unsealing of the scrolls that Daniel said would have to remained sealed until the last days.)

Now who's going back to Russell? The Bible might be consistent, but we aren't. We don't believe the 1,260 days means exactly 1,260 days in the fulfillment of any prophecy about the 1,260 days. (in either Daniel or Revelation). Also we don't teach that 1,260 days means 1,260 years in either of of those prophecies. Also, a Biblical Jewish month was not thirty days. A Biblical Jewish month was always based on the "new moon." So that it was really 29.5 days long. This means that in practice there were six 30-day months, and six 29-day months every year. A 30-day month was only used as a way to give a close approximation to a range of months, a calculation from a starting point to an ending point. For example, the distance from the 17th of the 2nd month to the 17th of the 7th month was sometimes 146, sometimes 147, and sometimes 148 days. But because it is a multi-month span, the Bible rounds it off to 150 days. The distance from the 17th of the ninth month to the 17th of the 2nd month (of the following year) was sometimes 146, sometimes 147, sometimes 148, and sometimes 176, sometimes 177, and sometimes 178 days. The longer time periods over came up every 3 years or so, so if they are averaged in, then the average for a 4-year period using the ideal number of months in 4 years (48) would give often give you a 30.15 day month. So you can see why the 30 day month was useful for a quick approximate calculation of date ranges. That 30.15 day month average over 4 years, was still actually made up of months, where half of them were 29 days and half were 30 days. Here's a specific example that often happened. Each year was typically 354 days and every 2 to 3 years it could be 384 days, when an entire month was added for a leap year. So: 354+384+354+354 equals 1,446 days Assuming 12 months a year, that's 48 months Divide 1446 by 48 = 30.15 But it was really 49 months because there was one leap year in the mix: 1446 divided by 49 = 29.51, which is the distance from one new moon to the next new moon. So it should be clear why the Bible would use an average of 30 days to approximate a time span of 42 months as 42 x 30 = 1,260. In real life a real 42 month period was always 1,239 or 1,240 days. It was NEVER 1,260 days. But a 3.5 year period that was called 42 months, was actually a 43-month period (very rarely it was 44 months). Which means that the 3.5 year period was 1,269 days. If you have worked in banking or finance, you probably know that we still use the 30 day month, and therefore the 360 day year in some financial calculations. It's one of the built in functions in Microsoft Excel. There is evidence, I'm told, that the Babylonians used it, too. The DAYS360 function in Microsoft® Excel is used to calculate the number of days between two dates based on a 360-day year ...

Funny to look at the names of Bethelites on page 34-38: Charles Russell Coultrup (p.35) Charles Russell Hessler (p.36) Charles Taze Russell Peterson (p.37) Rutherford was said to have complained to MacMillan as early as 1918 or 1919 that he inherited a Russellite "cult." The men were known for dressing in black coats like his, wearing beards just like his, etc. He said they were "worshipping" Russell. *** jv chap. 6 p. 65 A Time of Testing (1914-1918) *** Others, on account of their deep respect for Brother Russell, seemed more concerned with trying to copy his qualities and develop a sort of cult around him. Oddly, one way to counter it was to suggest that beards be cut or you lose privileges. I heard from family members who go back to Russell's time (but can't verify yet) that a suggestion went out in the 1930's that Witnesses should wear more blue instead of "Russell" black at some of the assemblies. The Watch Tower publications reported that the audience at the 1942 St. Louis assembly looked like a "sea of blue."

This type of thinking is very appealing. I have used the same ideas in my own discussions at the door and with Bible studies for several years. So I understand the temptation to apply everything to 1914 whether it was developed in 1844, 1914, or 1944. The strong temptation to see a great world war as a "sign" is probably the very reason that Jesus repeated the point so many times -- that those who look for a sign should not be misled by wars or rumors of wars. A great earthquake would also sound like a sign of the end, or perhaps a perceived increase in earthquakes. The same could go for an increase in great pestilences, or great famines and food shortages. These things cause a lot of fear and concern, and often devastating loss of life. So it was natural that the disciples would have looked to such things as "the SIGN." The Watch Tower Society, for many years, stated that that such things (wars, earthquakes, etc) were NOT signs of the "presence" or "parousia." From the 1890's up until about 1931, the Watch Tower Society promoted books that made this point. These books evidently sold in the millions of copies. The WTS reported that 100,000 "Studies in the Scriptures" sold in 1931 alone. (This was no longer the teaching in 1931, of course, but it had been the teaching for decades, and the WTS still had a lot of these books left to sell, after most of the doctrines changed between 1927 and 1929.) Russell thought Jesus was saying that we should not be misled about wars, earthquakes, pestilence, etc., because this was not the sign. These were just the things that would continue to happen throughout history. A Bible paraphrase, called the Message, evidently understands it similarly by rendering Matthew 23:4-8 like this: Jesus said, "Watch out for doomsday deceivers. Many leaders are going to show up with forged identities, claiming, 'I am Christ, the Messiah.' They will deceive a lot of people. When reports come in of wars and rumored wars, keep your head and don't panic. This is routine history; this is no sign of the end. Nation will fight nation and ruler fight ruler, over and over. Famines and earthquakes will occur in various places. This is nothing compared to what is coming. Russell also said that these so-called signs, just referred to the routine history of mankind for the last 18 centuries. Not even the changes brought about by World War I made Russell think to change this idea.

BIBLICAL REASONS NOT TO TIE REVELATION CHAPTER TWELVE TO THE YEAR 1914 There are a few more obvious Biblical reasons that many have noticed already. One is the fact that the woman who is ostensibly about to give birth to the kingdom is depicted as very vulnerable, needing to be hidden away, hiding from a much more powerful dragon. *** re chap. 27 p. 177 par. 3 God’s Kingdom Is Born! *** The woman John here sees is . . . . Jehovah’s universal organization of spirit creatures . . . . Jehovah’s magnificent heavenly organization! If this woman is God's ENTIRE heavenly organization, then was there ever a time when God's ENTIRE heavenly organization was so vulnerable that it had to be hidden away so that Satan could not devour it? Remember that this is after Jesus had been make King of kings and Lord of lords back in 33 CE according to the Bible, and after all authority had been given him, and after he had been made to sit at the right hand of Majesty, and after he had been raised up in power back to the position he had before the creation of the systems of things. (Heb 1:3) This Jesus, was now the reflection of God's glory, and as of 33 CE, according to the verse in Hebrews, he "sustains all things by the word of his power." So are we saying that this Jesus who is part of God's entire heavenly organization in 1914 was so vulnerable that he had to be hidden along with the rest of Jehovah's universal organization of spirit creatures? Did Satan drag a third of the angels down and cast them down to the earth in 1914? *** re chap. 27 p. 179 par. 9 God’s Kingdom Is Born! *** Mention of “a third” would emphasize that a considerable number of angels have been misled by Satan. Of course, we place this event back at the time of the Flood. (So much for the claim that the events depicted as happening in this chapter of Revelation cannot possibly have occurred in the past): *** re chap. 27 p. 179 par. 9 God’s Kingdom Is Born! *** Satan also cast them down to the earth. This no doubt refers to Noah’s day before the Flood, when Satan induced the disobedient sons of God to go down to earth and cohabit with the daughters of men. As a punishment, these “angels that sinned” have been thrown by God into the prisonlike condition called Tartarus. So, Satan is here depicted as casting down a third of the angels and standing before the woman ready to devour her. If we are right that this is Jehovah's entire heavenly organization, then this one dragon, Satan, is now ready to devour Jesus, and at least two-thirds of the remaining angels. And now he has to do it alone because he just cast down that third of his "misled" angels to the earth. If he had only remembered to keep his new minions up there in heaven with him! At any rate, he is outnumbered at least ... (Revelation 5:11) 11 And I saw, and I heard a voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders, and the number of them was myriads of myriads [footnote: 10,000 times 10,000] and thousands of thousands. So 10,000 x 10,000 is 100 Million!! If myriads, plural, is at least 20,000, then Satan is outnumbered 20,000x20,000, or at least 400,000,000 to one. But of course, these angels on Satan's side are here battling with him. Tartarus must have very porous borders! That was purposely ridiculous to show that our current explanation doesn't make any sense. And yet, it makes perfect sense if we consider the one time when the woman, Jehovah's bride, was Israel. The most vulnerable time for the outworking of Jehovah's purpose through his Son was when his Son was made flesh, and born of a woman, the offspring of David, BEFORE he was with POWER declared God's Son by means of resurrection from the dead. (Romans 1: 1-4) . . . God’s good news, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning his Son, who came to be from the offspring of David according to the flesh, 4 but who with power was declared God’s Son according to the spirit of holiness by means of resurrection from the dead—yes, Jesus Christ our Lord. We know that Satan was behind the extra demonic activity on earth at the time of Jesus' ministry. We also know that Israel itself is depicted as God's woman, and even the symbol of the sun, moon and 12 stars were already a part of that symbolism: (Genesis 37:9, 10) . . .This time the sun and the moon and 11 stars were bowing down to me.” 10 Then he related it to his father as well as his brothers, and his father rebuked him and said to him: “What is the meaning of this dream of yours? Am I as well as your mother and your brothers really going to come and bow down to the earth to you?. . . Satan did try to devour Jesus at the most vulnerable time: BEFORE he was given even more power and authority than what he had before he was born as a human on earth. (Matthew 2:13) 13 After they had departed, look! Jehovah’s angel appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying: “Get up, take the young child and his mother and flee to Egypt, and stay there until I give you word, for Herod is about to search for the young child to kill him.. . . (Matthew 4:1) . . .Then Jesus was led by the spirit up into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil. . . . Then the Devil left him, and look! angels came and began to minister to him. Also, if this explanation is possible, it would be Israel that was fed for three and one-half years (1,260 days) which turns out to be exactly the amount of time that we believe Jesus went to feed the lost house of Israel in the time of his ministry. Not that this is the explanation either, but what would be the reason that God's universal organization of angels needed to be fed in the wilderness? And why would they need to flee after Jesus had already been snatched away to God's throne? Was the kingdom in heaven still so weak in 1914? (Revelation 12:5-6) 5 And she gave birth to a son, a male, who is to shepherd all the nations with an iron rod. And her child was snatched away to God and to his throne. 6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God and where they would feed her for 1,260 days. Another point I have heard (although I don't think it's very valid or relevant) is that the woman is in birth pangs because she is about to give birth to the Kingdom in 1914. Yet the scriptural references about the birth pangs we use elsewhere (Matthew 24, 1 Thess 5) are always used in order to speak of the time after the birth of the kingdom in 1914, and a time closer to the final end judgment event. It's as if the child is born and the birth pains come after that event and not before.

Snopes offers this comment. http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/elephantpainting.asp I looked it up because I noticed that in every one of the videos of this I've seen, the guy who fills the brush with paint always stays hidden in the same place away from the camera: Don't know if the training nightmare is described correctly, but the part about pulling on the elephant's ear during the painting process, does seem to be what's happening in each of the videos. A zoologist, Desmond Morris, reports the following, as reported by snopes:

Allen, Thank you for responding with good research here. I'm copying what I said about it over to here below (for reference) since it's already a page behind us and it's a very long page to scroll through. (Wonder how that happened?) I put it in a "quote" format so that, hopefully, it doesn't take up too much space unless someone wants to scroll through it. What you should see below is that I did, indeed, as you say, make too much of the idea that this refers to a bright and shining appearance. Still, there were other translations that also showed this same thing, although I only picked two of them. I don't know if you intended to include the CJB in your listing, because it is one of those that goes to the same point I made using the expression "the glory of his coming." If you did include it on purpose, then I thank you for your honesty. My point is that when a person makes an "epiphany" it can mean just an appearance. But in most prior Greek usage, when a "god" makes an "epiphany" it is usually not only an "appearance" but a "glorious" one. So I highlighted that portion of Thayer's, for example. I believe that Jesus is a "god." But that wasn't the only point. If you notice I also used the NLT for a meaning I prefer, even though it only uses the simple term "appearance." This is because the NWT uses the term "manifestation." Yet, something can be manifest to one person but not manifest to another, so it doesn't fully convey the basic idea of appearance and visibility. That's also why I put "PAROUSIA" back in the quotation of 2 Thess 2:8 from the NWT/KIT. It's because the primary point is that the parousia is visible. It's not just a "manifestation of his parousia" but an "appearance of his parousia." It's a little harder to miss the point about visibility with the word appearance. And, it's even harder to miss the point when the term "glorious appearance of his parousia" is used. (Or "brightness of his parousia.") But again, I really thank you for a scriptural response. I'd love to see a scriptural response to other points made here, too.

There are many reasons why I think John's reference to Christ's enthronement is a revelation about one of the most important events in Christian history, and that it had just happened in the first century. But I have no problem with the idea that there can also be an even greater future application. Recently, on this forum, some suggested that, just like Jehovah can "become king" at various times in history based on the manifestation of his power, that Jesus, too, could have become king in 33, and to some would become king at other times in history, and to some will become king at the time for which we pray "Let your kingdom come!" So note that I fully AGREE that Jesus has power by holy spirit for building up and true Christians as an international brotherhood in spite of persecution by Satan. This is not being challenged here in any way. Like you, I also think this has happened "since that event." The difference, I guess, is that I am not claiming that Jesus had to be made king AGAIN in order to do this during the last 100 years or so. Just because Jesus didn't begin each and every activity of his kingship immediately, doesn't mean he was not already king. I think we have to respect the Bible's presentation of the facts, too. Jesus Christ is introduced in Revelation as the "Ruler of the kings of the earth." A ruler is a king. (Revelation 1:4, 5) . . .May you have undeserved kindness and peace from “the One who is and who was and who is coming,” and from the seven spirits that are before his throne, 5 and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.”. . . Perhaps you do not believe this particular scripture was true of Jesus at the time it was written (around 100 CE). Notice, however, that this is in the introduction before the visions begin. (And the same phrase King of Kings is used of Jesus in 1 Timothy 6:15.) If Jesus already had "ALL authority" and was already "above every power" in 33 CE, then who are we to argue that he would get additional power and authority at a future time? In fact, we referenced this scripture earlier, but note carefully: (Revelation 3:21) 21 To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. Look at the cross-reference at the word "sat down" in the NWT. It was just after he offered his life as a propitiatory sacrifice: (Hebrews 10:12) 12 But this man offered one sacrifice for sins for all time and sat down at the right hand of God, So Jesus has been sitting down with his Father on his throne since 33 CE. No wonder Paul could say that "ruling as king" is the equivalent expression to "sitting down at God's right hand." (1 Corinthians 15:25) 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. We can't argue that Jesus doesn't start ruling because he must quietly "wait" until all enemies are put under his feet before he begins ruling as king, because he is ruling in the "midst" of his enemies. Otherwise you'd have to claim that Jesus still hasn't begun ruling as king because the last enemy death has not been put under his feet yet. Of course, for all we know, Jesus actually may have exercised his power in 1914, 1918, 1919, 1929, 1958, 1999, 2015, and may again display even further powerful activities in 2018. (I picked all those dates at random.) So I take nothing away from Jesus' kingly activities toward the nations or toward the congregation since 1914. But I haven't seen a Biblical reason to say that he needed to re-start his kingdom on that date just because some of the specific activities of that kingdom may have only started in these last 100+ years. Of course I can teach in good conscience that when Jesus was made the specially empowered King over mankind that one of his first acts was the casting out of the Devil and demons. It's just that I can't in good conscience be so presumptuous as to say that I know exactly when this occurred. I assume that Jesus referred to this event in anticipation when he said: (Luke 10:18) . . .At that he said to them: “I see Satan already fallen like lightning from heaven. But through Jesus' death, he apparently effected another fall: (Hebrews 2:14) . . .so that through his death he might bring to nothing the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil, (John 12:31-33) 31 Now there is a judging of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. 32 And yet I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all sorts of men to myself.” 33 This he was really saying to indicate what sort of death he was about to die. (John 14:28-30) . . .I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I am. 29 So now I have told you before it occurs, so that you may believe when it does occur. 30 I will not speak with you much more, for the ruler of the world is coming, and he has no hold on me. (John 16:10, 11) . . .I am going to the Father and you will see me no longer; 11 then concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged. (1 John 3:8) . . .For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest, to break up the works of the Devil. Yet, there are other indications that the time could be yet future: (Matthew 8:28-31) 29 And look! they screamed, saying: “What have we to do with you, Son of God? Did you come here to torment us before the appointed time?” 30 A long way off from them, a herd of many swine was feeding. 31 So the demons began to plead with him. . . (2 Thessalonians 2:7-9) . . .. 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence. 9 But the lawless one’s presence is by the operation of Satan. . . And, of course, there is another time when Satan falls yet again for the final time, this time from prison to earth to the abyss. (Revelation 20:7-10) 7 Now as soon as the thousand years have been ended, Satan will be let loose out of his prison, 8 and he will go out to mislead those nations in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Maʹgog, to gather them together for the war. The number of these is as the sand of the sea. 9 And they advanced over the breadth of the earth and encircled the camp of the holy ones and the beloved city. But fire came down out of heaven and devoured them. 10 And the Devil who was misleading them was hurled into the lake of fire and sulphur, where both the wild beast and the false prophet [already were]; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. We have often learned that the term "heaven" can have a symbolic meaning even for those on earth. Especially in the case of an entity who is inordinately exalted. (2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4) 3 Let no one lead you astray in any way, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction. 4 He stands in opposition and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he sits down in the temple of God, publicly showing himself to be a god. (Isaiah 14:12, 13) 12 How you have fallen from heaven, O shining one, son of the dawn! How you have been cut down to the earth, You who vanquished nations! 13 You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to the heavens. Above the stars of God I will lift up my throne, And I will sit down on the mountain of meeting, In the remotest parts of the north. (Daniel 4:22) 22 it is you, O king, because you have grown great and become strong, and your grandeur has grown and reached to the heavens, and your rulership to the ends of the earth. So, I doubt that any of us can say definitively what specific event is referred to in Revelation 12 when Satan is cast down from heaven. Did Satan literally have the authority to walk among the sons of God and take his station before Jehovah, as he is depicted doing in the book of Job? (Job 1:6, 7) 6 Now the day came when the sons of the true God entered to take their station before Jehovah, and Satan also entered among them. 7 Then Jehovah said to Satan: “Where have you come from?” Satan answered Jehovah: “From roving about on the earth and from walking about in it.” Is this all that Satan is supposed to have lost the ability to do in 1914? Was Satan able to take his station before Jehovah in 1913? Are we saying that Satan was the ruler of the world in 33 CE and was also still the ruler of the world in 1914, and still in 2017, with the exact same power and authority in 1915 that he had in 1913? The irony here is that we are really saying that the "good news of the kingdom" in 1914 was that the world would now be filled with much more wrath and trouble than ever for over 100 years. (Revelation 12:10) . . .“Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the Kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our God! Is this the real message about what it would mean that NOW have come to pass the salvation and power of and God's Kingdom? I'm not saying that the logic can't be made to work; it might well be true. But I wonder if it is potentially demeaning to the power of Jehovah and Jesus to assign these phrases this event as we have, for which the heavens declare that it means "God's Kingdom HAS NOW COME TO PASS!" "Now has come to pass SALVATION! Now we have finally seen the AUTHORITY of God's King, Jesus Christ! And yet our only evidence of this claim is that 1914 saw the beginning of WWI and in the next few years we saw the pestilence of the Spanish Influenza follow that war. Clearly we don't have the proper secular evidence that makes 1914 a Biblical date, so the entire remaining evidence is that there were very important historical changes that occurred in that particular year. I can make some sense of this explanation the same as you can. I'm just saying that there seem to be several more likely time periods that already have the support of scripture. I don't think we need to take Revelation 12 apart linguistically, although there are a few hints in the language that could put this as a vision of something that started in the past. I'll refrain unless this discussion dives further into that subject. BIBLICAL REASONS NOT TO TIE REVELATION CHAPTER TWELVE TO THE YEAR 1914 [This has been moved below to a separate post, as this current post was rather lengthy.]

While I was at Bethel, I never spoke with Ray Franz. He kept a very low profile, and stayed very active with his congregation after work. I did know some of his close friends, and I was good friends with several of the people who had worked closely with him on their assignments for the previous decade or more. Only two of those good friends (that I knew) were sent home from Bethel, and dismissed from the Writing Department, due to their friendship with Ray Franz. It was known that both of these brothers no longer held 1914 to be true, but this had been known for nearly 10 years, and it didn't stop them from receiving assignments to write Watchtower study articles, or books for the assembly releases. They were sent back to their congregations as elders with a special pioneer stipend. At least one of them continued to receive Writing and Research assignments from both Swingle and Barry over the next 10 years, or so, too. Several of the other brothers who could no longer conscientiously believe in 1914 remained in their positions in the Writing Department, Service Department, and even on the Governing Body. According to Ray Franz, he came to understand the problems of 1914 while researching the Chronology article for the book Aid to Bible Understanding. That was researched in the late 1960's, and was released in 1969. He was not disfellowshipped over this matter. Neither were the researchers who worked with him. I was working for Brother Schroeder from late 1977 to 1982, who also had his own ideas about 1914 that could not be published. The point is that no one was "aligned" with Ray Franz as far as I knew. Many brothers were "exposed" in the late 1960's for their beliefs about 1914, and this was not considered a reason to dismiss them, nor stop them from contributing as Jehovah's Witnesses. Even more persons admitted their doubts about 1914 when asked to respond to Carl Jonsson's manuscript. Even John Albu, another friend of mine who shared his books with me, and who was considered the primary person to try to respond to the COJ manuscript, had his own personal views about 1914 and Matthew 24. It actually sounds funny to me, when I see it happen so commonly here that someone tries to align an argument with Ray Franz as a means of dismissing it. It sounds a bit like saying that the Devil believes in God, therefore we should not believe in God.

I am not a preterist. That's because I believe the PAROUSIA and SYNTELEIA and APOKALYPSIS and EPIPHANEIA and THERISMOS (and millennium, of course) are still future. I also believe that Jesus has already been enthroned in kingdom power, sits at God's right hand, and that his invisible presence has begun, and that we are living in the last days, and that the times we are living in give proof that the only real solution to man's problems is the intervention by the Kingdom of God through Christ Jesus. This is the message that I preach, because I look for agreement in the congregation not disagreement. (1 Corinthians 1:10) 10 Now I urge you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you should all speak in agreement and that there should be no divisions among you, but that you may be completely united in the same mind and in the same line of thought. What I think might be true, or it might not be. I hope and expect to be set straight if these scriptures and evidence are not understood correctly. There are several people at Bethel who know exactly what my questions are and they know why these questions should be dealt with. I know that people have been thought of as not true Jehovah's Witnesses for having these questions, but I have never caused trouble** with my beliefs, have never been sanctioned for them, and have never lost privileges over them except to the extent that I have turned down a few assignments and have always been able to swap assignments with others if I felt I could not conscientiously present the material as assigned. My public talk assignments typically cycle through 5 of the outlines talks, and I have given at least 20 different outline talks, and a few different non-outline talks over the years, and there is not one thing in any of those talks that I disagree with in the slightest. **If you think that being on a discussion forum is "causing trouble," remember that anyone here can easily think of me, or at least pretend to think of me, as merely expressing the kinds of questions that can come up in field service due to the fact that all of these arguments have existed in some form or another for hundreds of years. Consider this a chance to practice overcoming objections, just as we sometimes hear in sample demonstrations at the midweek meetings. If you have been to the convention this year you might actually hear some preterist-sounding discussion on Sunday regarding Daniel 12. In effect, believing all of it was fulfilled in the past produces nearly the same effect as preterism. But what must have sounded the most preterist in my previous post is actually found in the Watchtower, although these points have gone through some slight adjustment, but never explicitly abandoned. Here's an example regarding the destruction of Jerusalem and the "great tribulation." *** w78 8/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers *** In view of the terrible destruction of Dresden, Stalingrad, Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II, how could Jesus describe what befell Jerusalem in 70 C.E. as a ‘great tribulation such as had never occurred before, nor would occur again’? That prophecy had a future application beyond what occurred to Jerusalem and on the Jews in 70 C.E., but it also was true as to the history of that city and nation. These words are in Jesus’ prophetic reply to the apostles’ question about his future presence and the conclusion of the system of things. (Matt. 24:3, 21; Mark 13:19) Jehovah’s Witnesses have often pointed out that much of what Jesus there foretold had two fulfillments: First, a limited fulfillment in the developments leading up to and including the Roman destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish system of things in 70 C.E. . . . For Christians living in Jerusalem and Judea who would be directly affected by the end of the Jewish system of things, the warning to keep alert was vital. The Roman armies surrounded the city in 66 C.E., but then unexpectedly withdrew. That was the specific signal that Jesus had mentioned in Luke 21:20-22. And history tells us that obedient Christians responded by fleeing from the city of Jerusalem and from Judea. So it is reasonable to apply also to the literal city of Jerusalem and Judea what Jesus next said, about the “great tribulation.” The destruction brought by the Romans in 70 C.E. was more extensive and terrible than when the Babylonians destroyed the city of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. Also, the tribulation in 70 C.E. brought the permanent destructive end to the Jewish-built city and temple and the system of worship centered around it. So Jesus was correct in prophetically describing the events in 70 C.E. as “great tribulation such as has not occurred [on that city, nation and system of things] since the world’s beginning until now, no, nor will occur again.” . . . And since then we have many times expressed that these words had an exact meaning for the first fulfillment, even if that fulfillment is considered miniature compared to the judgment event that brings a "destructive end" [SYNTELEIA] upon all the nations. *** w81 11/15 p. 18 pars. 8-9 ‘Stay Awake and Keep Your Senses’ *** 8 However, Christians who had stayed awake and had kept their senses were already out of Jerusalem and all Judea, having fled to places of security when the opportunity came after the year 66 C.E. By believing the prophetic words of Jesus and acting upon them, they survived. But, when that “great tribulation” came upon the Jews in 70 C.E., there was no longer any time for them to flee. Several thousand who tried to get out of the city through the Roman encirclement were caught by soldiers, who even cut open some of those Jews to get the gold that many of them had swallowed. . . . 9 That was indeed a severe “tribulation” that came upon the Jews, exactly as Jesus had foretold. (Luke 19:43, 44) *** w83 8/1 p. 24 par. 9 “The Israel of God” and the End of the Gentile Times *** What the inquiring apostles witnessed down to the end of the first century C.E. was a miniature fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy, in the way of famines, earthquakes, pestilences, wars and persecutions, as well as the wiping out of “the Jerusalem today.” There have even been Watchtower articles that indicated that all of the features, up until the actual "sign" were fulfilled in the first century. This included the wars, famines, earthquakes, pestilences and even the preaching of the good news in all the inhabited earth had a fulfillment in the first century: (Romans 10:16-18) 16 Nevertheless, they did not all obey the good news. . . . the word about Christ. 18 But I ask, They did not fail to hear, did they? Why, in fact, “into all the earth their sound went out, and to the ends of the inhabited earth their message.” (2 Timothy 4:17) 17 But the Lord stood near me and infused power into me, so that through me the preaching might be fully accomplished and all the nations might hear it; . . . (Colossians 1:23) . . .of that good news that you heard and that was preached in all creation under heaven. . . . The view that Jesus words had a fulfillment in the first century does not in any way discount a larger fulfillment.

The SIGN (pt 2 of 2) In the first part (The SIGN, pt 1 of 2) it was indicated that Jesus had been asked about a sign because the disciples wanted to know when this complete destruction of the temple was going to occur. Jesus indicates that they can expect all kinds of troubles right up until the judgment on Jerusalem begins, but that there would be no advance warning signs. Of course, people would be claiming that this or that sign was the evidence, but these would be from people who misunderstand, some sincere, some just false prophets, who would claim they understood various events as part of the sign. This becomes more evident, I think, when we pick up in the middle of Jesus' answer that ended above with the paragraph that loosely matches Matthew 24:21-22. I'll repeat that last paragraph before going on: Jesus: This is the beginning of a true judgment event the likes of which you have never seen. Nothing like it has ever happened upon Jerusalem before. It's going to be worse than even the tribulation upon Jerusalem back in Daniel's day. It's only because there will be a break in the tribulation that any persons in Jerusalem will survive at all. When you now find yourselves in the midst of this judgment event upon Jerusalem [this Parousia], it is even more important that you are not misled by false signs. Expect people to say that the Christ is here or there. Or you might meet someone who claims to be Christ. And they could even be performing powerful works. This can even mislead the chosen ones. But I am warning you in advance. And people are also going to say that Christ is around here or there, but you just can't see him right now because he is in some other place, like out in the desert, or he's here but he is just not visible to you now because he is in some inner room. Don't believe it. You'll know that can't be true because the true PAROUSIA is going to be like LIGHTNING that shines from one end of the horizon all the way over to the other horizon. You personally will have no reason to doubt it when you see it anyway, because circumstances will make it obvious, the same as if two people were working or sleeping together and one just suddenly disappeared, leaving the other behind. Anyone could spot these circumstances from a mile away. (L17:37) Because the true SIGN that you are asking about can't appear until immediately AFTER those days when the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven. That's the significance of the change that will come about for you when Jerusalem falls completely. There will be no more Jewish system of things. Your entire world will change. Only THEN will the TRUE SIGN appear: the SIGN of the Son of Man [the equivalent of the Parousia judgment event now ready to come upon the entire world at any time]. When the full and complete SIGN of the Son of Man does appear in heaven AFTER those days, it will be when ALL the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, when they will ALL see the Son of Man appear in heaven with power and great glory. This is when he will send out his angels with a great trumpet sound to gather together, to "HARVEST," the chosen ones from one end of the earth to the other. (1 Corinthians 15:51, 52) . . .We will not all fall asleep in death, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we will be changed. (Matthew 13:39-43) . . .The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. . . . 43 At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.. . . [So it should be clear that you aren't going to get any specific sign or signs until the TRUE SIGN, the SIGN of the Son of Man. And since that's the ONLY sign, then it's only when you see ALL these other things have happened [right up until the darkening of the sun and moon, and the falling of the stars, that you know that the SIGN, the Son of Man, is now finally NEAR at the doors. [So again, this is a reason why you won't be misled by anyone claiming that I had already arrived, here or there performing powerful works or giving signs to fool even the chosen ones, or that I had arrived over here or over there, but that you just couldn't see me because I was not visible, and off in the wilderness or hidden in a room.] Because NOW you know that I am NEAR, and just about to arrive. You won't need any advance sign, and you won't get any advance sign, because you already know what season you are in. You are in the final season before the harvest. Just like the fig tree that grows young branches and leaves you know that summer harvest is near. You, too, are in the final generation that will come to see this particular "harvest." It will happen as sure as you know that summer comes around. [But you might still wonder why I give you no advance warning sign.] It's because "Concerning that day and hour, NO ONE CAN KNOW, not even the angels. Not even the Son knows. Only the Father knows. [Because the times and seasons are in HIS jurisdiction.] It's going to be just like it was for most of the people before the Flood in the days of Noah. The PAROUSIA, judgment event, back then came as if with no warning. [It's true that Noah did some preaching, and the people should have repented when they found out what God purposed to do.] But those people just went right on living there life without a care, RIGHT UP UNTIL THE VERY DAY that Noah went into the ark and the judgment event surprised them and swept them all away. That's the same as it will be with the PAROUSIA of the Son of Man. [The PAROUSIA will also come upon the world just as it came upon the people of Sodom, who had no idea what was going to happen to them RIGHT UP UNTIL THE VERY DAY that Lot went out of the city and it rained fire and sulphur, and the judgment event took them away by surprise. It's as if two men were in the field, and without any warning, one gets taken along -- disappears -- and the other, to his surprise, is abandoned. [That's how sudden and surprising and without warning it will be.] It's as if two women were grinding at the same hand mill, and one woman suddenly disappears, and the other is suddenly abandoned. Imagine the surprise. [But that's the way it's going to have to be, and of course, it couldn't be that way if I gave you any kind of advance warning sign.] [You might think that because you are part of the chosen ones, that I would certainly grant you some kind of sign, but it won't be that way this time.] It's just like when a thief comes to your house one night. If there had been some kind of announcement then the householder would have known and would not have been surprised. But you need to be ready at all times, because you, even though you are chosen ones, you won't know when I am coming. It will be at a time you don't expect it. So I'm going to give you a few more illustrations to help you remember what is required to be ready at all times. First is an illustration about a faithful slave and an unfaithful slave. What happens when the master leaves a large household full of servants, and must leave the servants in charge of running the household smoothly until he returns? What happens when that return might be delayed? How do the servants usually act? What kind of actions would show a servant to be faithful and wise? What kind of actions would show a servant to be a wicked slave? etc... Here's another illustration about foolish and wise virgins. [Same idea.] Here's the situation . . . what would show these virgins to have been wise? What would show these virgins to have been foolish? etc... Remember the point: keep on the watch because you will not know the day or the hour. Here's another illustration about foolish and wise slaves who are given investments by their master. Here's the situation . . . What would show whether these slaves were foolish or wise? Here's another illustration about how when the Son of Man comes in glory, and all the angels with him, about how the "harvest" separates sheep-like persons from goat-like persons. . . What would show whether these persons were sheep-like, or goat-like? etc. . .

THE SIGN (pt 1 of 2) As already mentioned in a previous post, we (JWs) are not the only people who read Matthew 24 as if it must mean that things like war, earthquakes, famines and pestilence are part of a sign that proves the end is near. As these things get worse, we have faith that our deliverance is near. And there is nothing wrong with finding that kind of comfort in Matthew 24. But there is another way to understand why Jesus specifically mentioned those particular "signs". In fact, a close look at Jesus' words in all the gospel accounts might even indicate that this other way of reading it is more likely. The basic idea behind this "other way to understand" the signs, actually starts out in the Watch Tower publications during the time of C T Russell. The following is from Russell's Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 4, p. 567: The History of Eighteen Centuries Briefly Foretold --Matt. 24:6-13; Mark 13:7-13; Luke 21:9-19-- "And ye shall hear of wars and rumors [threats, intrigues] of wars: see that ye be not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are primary sorrows." Matt. 24:6-8 Thus briefly did our Lord summarize secular history, and teach the disciples not to expect very soon his second coming and glorious Kingdom. And how aptly: surely the world's history is just this--an account of wars, intrigues, famines and pestilences--little else. Notice that these are NOT considered to be signs of Jesus presence or Parousia. These were considered to be the common occurrences plaguing throughout all of the 18 centuries of history since around 33 CE. They were, in essence, the OPPOSITE of signs that his Parousia was close. Jesus' disciples would hear about many things that might mislead them into thinking they were signs of the end, but they were simply things that would be expected through any time of history. Based on a lot of the information already presented, it's possible to read Matthew 24 with the following meanings. This is not a translation, of course, and it is not even a paraphrase. It's more of a paraphrase with a lot of extra commentary added, along with expanded definitions of words based on some historical context, in order to present a probable meaning that Jesus could have had in mind in answering the question. It's not meant to be the only correct way to read Matthew 24, of course, but it's one of the possible ways to understand the account. Disciples: Aren't these Temple buildings magnificent and beautiful? Jesus: Yes, but take note: look at these buildings again, and remember that they are all going to be completely destroyed, right down to the very last stone. Disciples: WHEN? Please tell us when this is going to happen. How soon? [Are you going to make this happen NOW?] Are you saying that THIS IS GOING TO BE THE SIGN OF YOUR VISITATION OF JUDGMENT [that you have spoken about]? ARE YOU SAYING THAT THIS IS THE FINAL END OF ALL THINGS? THE END OF THIS AGE? WILL WE GET AN ADVANCE WARNING SIGN? Jesus: Don't be misled. It's going to be very easy to be misled [because you have heard that it was said, there would be signs like war, earthquakes, famines, and the like before the great day]. Now that I've told you about this great world-changing judgment event, it's going to be very tempting, whenever you hear about a great earthquake, or a great war, or a great famine, for example, that you are going to say: "Oh, this must be a sign of the end." But do not be misled, do not be alarmed. These things will surely happen, [just as things like this always keep happening] but this is NOT the sign of the end. These things are NOT the sign of my visitation. And even if these things sometimes get to be so bad that you are SURE it must be a sign of the end, just remember that in the REAL end of all things, things could get so much worse for you, that you will realize that these so-called signs were just the BEGINNING. Think of these things like a woman's first sign of labor pains. They might be painful, and you might even think: This must be the sign! The baby is surely on it's way this time! But those pains are nothing compared to the pain of actually giving birth. But even before that, you need to realize that people are going to claim to speak in my name, or even say they are representing me, or perhaps even say they are me. Perhaps they will even be sure that they are telling the truth because they are the only ones who truly understand what I'm about to tell you. But they will mislead many people. These are also the same ones who are going to point to wars, even just rumors of wars, too, or great earthquakes, or famines, and the like. Do not be misled by this kind of thinking. These things are not related to your question about the true end, my true "PAROUSIA" JUDGMENT EVENT, and the true "SYNTELEIA" FINAL END AND DESTRUCTION OF THIS WORLD. [To really prepare for such a judgment event, it's not going to be as easy as just watching for a warning sign so that you can get away.] In fact, you should prepare for persecution and tribulation. Some of you will even be killed. You will be hated because of your association with me. You might be betrayed, and some of this hatred might even come through stumbling and misunderstanding of persons you know. False prophets will mislead many people. And some who seem friendly and loving now and ready to face all these problems, will not remain that way when things really get worse. You will need to endure all the way to the end to be saved. And you must continue giving the announcement about this Kingdom right up until the end. What I can tell you about getting away from this initial judgment event (parousia/synteleia) on Jerusalem is this: When the judgment event begins, FLEE IMMEDIATELY! Don't even go back inside your house to get clothes and supplies. You will be able to recognize when this judgment event has begun when you see persons of the nations encroaching upon the holy place. You will remember what Daniel said: (Daniel 9:26, 27) . . .“And the people of a leader who is coming will destroy the city and the holy place. And its end will be by the flood. And until the end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations. 27 “And he will keep the covenant in force for the many for one week; and at the half of the week, he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease. “And on the wing of disgusting things there will be the one causing desolation; and until an extermination, what was decided on will be poured out also on the one lying desolate.” This is the beginning of a true judgment event the likes of which you have never seen. Nothing like it has ever happened upon Jerusalem before. It's going to be worse than even the tribulation upon Jerusalem back in Daniel's day. It's only because there will be a break in the tribulation that any persons in Jerusalem will survive at all. [etc. to be continued]

I'm in full agreement that the term "governing body" is a legal term, and for us it is a body of men who are charged with responsibility for making sure that the Christian congregation is protected from sectarianism. I think that's a pretty good description of their primary purpose. And of course, they absolutely try to protect or guard the current doctrines from dissension through private interpretation. But many times this private interpretation has already been incorporated into the body of doctrines. Obviously, we had about 100 years of privately interpreted "type-antitype" doctrines that were beginning to be removed around the years 1999-2002. Over 120 of these doctrines were removed in one sweeping move between the end of 2014 to the beginning of 2015. (3/15/2015 Watchtower). So the charge of the Governing Body can sometimes be to guard private interpretations. And we are happy to have very few of these remaining. FWIW, I appreciate very much what they are charged to do, and the heavy responsibilities that they are appointed to take on. Paul was approved for his work, just as you say, but Paul also went to great pains in Galatians to show how for at least 14 years he was NOT approved by the "governing body" of Jerusalem (Gal 2:1; 2 Cor 12:2). The way in which the apostles wrote letters that included "decrees" to be observed, however, is not necessarily applicable to the "Governing Body" of today. That's because the activities and writings of the first century apostles became the foundation of the Christian congregation. And even then, these were directly appointed by Jesus, so that Jesus was still the only true cornerstone of the foundation of the congregation. (1 Corinthians 3:11) 11 For no one can lay any other foundation than what is laid, which is Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 2:19, 20) 19 So you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, 20 and you have been built up on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone. Unless the Governing Body wishes to begin teaching that they are also apostles, there is no direct parallel to the idea of the current Governing Body also issuing decrees. I know you didn't say that directly, anyway, but the implication is there. But I should add that don't see anything wrong with the current Governing Body issuing something akin to "decrees." And these are often directly related to unity of teaching, consistency of preaching, setting priorities for various ministry efforts, preventing dissension, correcting error, protecting from sectarianism, etc. -- all the same things you mention. The difference is that we should question them, and study these "decrees" carefully, and never consider them to be at the same level as Jehovah's Word the Bible. Just something interesting here, I noticed that one of the decrees you mentioned was in 1 Cor 11:16 which says: (1 Corinthians 11:16) 16 However, if anyone wants to argue in favor of some other custom, we have no other, nor do the congregations of God. This is actually one of the places where we can get the idea that the current Governing Body should be welcoming questions that argue in favor of a different custom on some subjects for which the Bible has not provided a guide. (<-- @Anna -->) Notice that Paul appears to expect that on most subjects, anyone might wish to argue in favor of another viewpoint. He never says this is wrong or out of place. He wanted things to be orderly, of course, and in those days they used Jewish synagogues as meeting places, but the Christians allowed men and women to learn together, which was not a custom of the Jews in those places. Therefore, while a man could ask a question, he wanted the women to go through their husbands at home. This made perfect sense when we consider the prejudices of the societies under which they wished to spread the good news without hindrance. But there might be another custom that would work in a different place and time, one could argue. In this case, Paul implies that these questions have already come up, and "we have no other" alternatives to offer, nor do the other congregations. Unfortunately, we have no scriptural reason to say that it was a "Governing Body" who had approved these "decrees." Just because the body of elders at Jerusalem had more persons than just the 12, doesn't mean that the influence of the apostles was not important here. We do not even know for sure if any of the original apostles of Jesus were themselves literate and were able to write the gospels and letters we have attached their names to. We believe that Mark wrote for Peter, we even believe that Paul may have had a secretary due to eyesight issues or some other reason. The book of Matthew does not say it was written by a disciple named Matthew. In fact, all the gospels are anonymous, with names only added in later traditions. We know that if John wrote the book of John that the book of Revelation might be by a different John if we were to go by the style of Greek. But if these apostles used amanuenses then this could explain the differences. The main point however, is that we get the view of the apostles through the Christian Greek Scriptures, and it is also in this way that the apostles and prophets of the first century made up the foundation of the congregations. Therefore, we can just as well get the view of the apostles through those who worked with them, Barnabas, James (Christ's brother), etc. And, for all we know, these men were also counted as apostles, or sent-forth ones. Besides the reason for the decree in Acts 15 and therefore in Acts 16:4 was necessary as a way of apologizing for the mistake that Jerusalem had been making as they were trying to put a burden on Gentiles that was far above the burden that was put upon Jewish proselytes. We don't even have proof that this particular decree was intended to continue after enough Gentiles in the congregation could question it's continued value. There could have come a time after it became obvious that the Jewish Christians with weak consciences had matured and were no longer stumbled by the fact that the Gentiles needed no form of Jewish custom to follow. (We do have evidence in 1 Cor 8 that Paul did not always follow the decree himself, implying that some of the items on that decree might have been a right fit for the circumstances of the current congregations at that time.) I don't believe they were in violation of Jesus' exhortation. Jesus had asked the apostles to stay behind in Jerusalem likely because questions like this would come up among the Jewish congregations that they could deal with better from that city, where Jews continued to travel in and out of until 70 CE. It made it more efficient to build up Jewish Christians all over the world from a single place, and the body of apostles would be better equipped to follow the idea of "to Jews I became a Jew" (1 Cor 9:20) while a Roman citizen like Paul could focus on Gentiles (to Greeks I became a Greek).

Obviously, Revelation doesn't identify the enthronement as the Parousia, so that this first sentence (on its own) comes close to a type of circular reasoning. It's like saying "I don't believe they are separate because when Revelation mentions one of the two events, I don't believe they are separate there, either. Of course, I know you are focusing on the "short while" from an enthronement to the time the Parousia is over. (Which is at the end of the thousand year reign, per your posts.) But you are still defining Parousia according to beliefs that are not stated in Scripture. The Bible says that Jesus reigning as king is the equivalent of "sitting at God's right hand." We should have already known that from all the references to his Kingship in the first century. He is called "King of Kings" not the future King of Kings. He is said to have been given a position above all governments and lordships and above every name named when he sat down at the right hand of God. Remember, please, that 1914 was supposed to be the true "end of the Gentile Times" which should be defined as the time when "he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power." That's actually how it was defined when it was predicted for 1914. (And then 1915, and then 1918, and then 1925.) So the "predicted" end of the Gentile Times never occurred in 1914 anyway. But Jesus was already enthroned at his resurrection when he sat down at the right hand of God. The claim that this was just over his congregation is not scriptural: (Matthew 28:18) . . .“All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth. (Ephesians 1:20, 21) . . .Christ when he raised him up from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above every government and authority and power and lordship and every name that is named, not only in this system of things but also in that to come. (Hebrews 1:3) . . .he sustains all things by the word of his power. And after he had made a purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. (Hebrews 7:2) . . .First, his name is translated “King of Righteousness,” and then also king of Saʹlem, that is, “King of Peace.” (Hebrews 8:1) . . .he has sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, (1 Timothy 6:15) . . .He is the King of those who rule as kings and Lord of those who rule as lords, (Revelation 1:4, 5) . . ., 5 and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.”. . . (Revelation 2:26) 26 And to the one who conquers and observes my deeds down to the end, I will give authority over the nations, (Revelation 3:21) 21 To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne. Of course, there are many more Scriptures than that, but there is one particular one, that might be especially relevant here: (1 Corinthians 15:23-26) 23 But each one in his own proper order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence [or, AT HIS PAROUSIA]. 24 Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing. Notice how Paul replaces the phrase "He will sit at God's right hand" with "he must rule as king." In fact, notice that when the Gentile Times are over Paul refers to it as "the end" as in, the final end, not merely a conclusion or a 100+ year presence. Christ is resurrected, then those who belong to Christ are resurrected at his parousia to join him in the destruction of those Gentile governments and authorities and powers. Until that time those who belong to the Christ (spritual Israel: "Jerusalem") have been warred upon and trampled upon by the Gentile, but they join him in battling and putting an end to all Gentile rulership: (Revelation 13:7) . . .permitted to wage war with the holy ones and conquer them, and it was given authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation. [Gentiles] (Revelation 17:14) 14 These will battle with the Lamb, but because he is Lord of lords and King of kings, the Lamb will conquer them. Also, those with him who are called and chosen and faithful will do so.” (Revelation 2:26, 27) . . .And to the one who conquers and observes my deeds down to the end, I will give authority over the nations,[Gentiles] 27 and he will shepherd the people with an iron rod so that they will be broken to pieces like clay vessels, just as I have received from my Father. The specific argument made from the term "short while" is not definitive. That's because from Jehovah's perspective, the time has been short since the last days began. (1 Peter 1:4-6) . . ., 5 who are being safeguarded by God’s power through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last period of time. 6 Because of this you are greatly rejoicing, though for a short time. . . (1 Corinthians 7:29) 29 Moreover, this I say, brothers, the time left is reduced.. . . (1 Peter 4:7) 7 But the end of all things has drawn close. Therefore, be sound in mind, and be vigilant with a view to prayers. (Romans 13:11) 11 And do this because you know the season, that it is already the hour for you to awake from sleep, for now our salvation is nearer than at the time when we became believers. (Revelation 1:3) 3 Happy is the one who reads aloud and those who hear the words of this prophecy and who observe the things written in it, for the appointed time is near. In fact, the Devil knew that he was in the last days when Jesus already saw him fall like lightning, and this is why the Devil has worked against Christians for the short period of time ever since. (1 Peter 5:7-10) . . .. 8 Keep your senses, be watchful! Your adversary, the Devil, walks about like a roaring lion, seeking to devour someone. 9 But take your stand against him, firm in the faith, knowing that the same kind of sufferings are being experienced by the entire association of your brothers in the world. 10 But after you have suffered a little while, the God of all undeserved kindness, who called you to his everlasting glory in union with Christ, will himself finish your training.. . . Does this not describe the Devil as angry, "seeking to devour" yet for Christians, they know that he has only a "short period of time" so that they suffer only a "little while"? Remember that Revelation need not prophesy the future in every case, but can also "reveal" things from a heavenly perspective. Of course, these truths are not always limited to a specific period of time, either. It is just as likely that these same truths come to a more complete fulfillment at the very end, and even more finally definitive again at the end of the thousand years, when "nations" are mentioned again. Revelation can still mean several different things, just as our own Watch Tower publications have given different meanings to the same verses many times over the last 140 years or so. We can't know the final meaning of it yet, but we should no better than to try to force it to contradict other scriptures. And one of those contradictions is the idea that Jesus said not to look for signs like wars, earthquakes, pestilence and famine. He said these things would continue to take place, but these are NOT signs of the final end (synteleia). These are the very kinds of things that Jesus said would mislead us. And the reason, is pretty obvious from the rest of the chapter: because a thief gives no sign that he is about to break into your house. The parousia must come as a surprise. People will go along and do the kinds of things they have always been doing, just like they did in the days of Noah and Sodom. But the real and final end, the synteleia, will come as a surprise. Therefore, the SIGN is the sign of the Son of Man. I believe this too, only I think that all these things have have glimpses of fulfillment from the very first century: (1 Corinthians 10:11) 11 Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come. It absolutely was. Note that Daniel was sealed up until the time of the end when Jesus arrived upon the earth and what we needed to know about the future could then all be revealed at that time. In fact, this is why Revelation is written at the time when all the scrolls could be unsealed, because the time had arrived: (Galatians 4:4) 4 But when the full limit of the time arrived, God sent his Son. . . (Ephesians 1:8-10) 8 This undeserved kindness he caused to abound toward us in all wisdom and understanding 9 by making known to us the sacred secret of his will. It is according to his good pleasure that he himself purposed 10 for an administration at the full limit of the appointed times, to gather all things together in the Christ, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth. . . . All prophecy pointed to Christ. The full limit of the appointed times arrived, and there is nothing more to measure by means of chronology. If there were, it would contradict dozens of scriptures, many of which have been previously mentioned.

We still haven't discussed the subject of the "SIGN" but so many other sub-topics have come up that I still wanted to discuss them while they are only a few pages back. REASONABLENESS versus PRESUMPTUOUSNESS; or, TRUTH versus SPECULATION It has even been suggested that perhaps the teaching about 1914 really is wrong, or perhaps it's not, but it's not really our responsibility to "test" what we believe and "make sure of all things." In effect, people are saying it's not our own personal responsibility to "handle the word of God aright" as long as we are loyally following along and not questioning (out loud) the teachings of the Governing Body. Yet, the Bible says: (Romans 12:1, 2) 12 Therefore, I appeal to you by the compassions of God, brothers, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, a sacred service with your power of reason. 2 And stop being molded by this system of things, but be transformed by making your mind over, so that you may prove to yourselves the good and acceptable and perfect will of God. It has been suggested that if we exercise our personal Biblical responsibility to be "noble-minded" and are therefore "carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so," that this will result in 8 million different doctrines. But this does not happen if, in using our "powers of reason" we allow our "reasonableness to be known to all." It's the same reasonableness that will also remove all this fear of doing what the Bible tells us to do. (Philippians 4:5-8) . . .Let your reasonableness become known to all men.. . .Do not be anxious over anything . . . 7 and the peace of God that surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and your mental powers by means of Christ Jesus. 8 Finally, brothers, whatever things are true, whatever things are of serious concern, whatever things are righteous, whatever things are chaste, whatever things are lovable, whatever things are well-spoken-of, whatever things are virtuous, and whatever things are praiseworthy, continue considering these things. So according to this passage, what would actually happen if we followed the Bible's counsel to test, and prove, make sure, and question, use our powers of reason? If we are haughty and presumptuous, we might still get into the kind of trouble that people fear. If we are reasonable, and are letting our reasonableness become known to all, then the following happens: We would not be anxious, but would look for a way to present our concerns in a serious way to those who are given the responsibility to make decisions about these matters. We do not disrespect the Governing Body, but accept that this is a perfectly good and reasonable way to let all things progress in an orderly, organized manner. Imagine if Russell received 40,000 letters from concerned Bible Students about the mistake he was making with respect to the pyramidology, along with bits of astrology and numerology that were beginning to permeate the Watch Tower publications for several decades. Imagine if Rutherford received 20,000 letters from concerned Bible Students about his presumptuous predictions regarding 1925. Imagine if Fred Franz received 1,000,000 letters from concerned Jehovah's Witnesses about how determined he was to promote predictions for the mid-1970's. Imagine if David Splane received many millions of letters questioning the new meaning we are now giving to the word "generation." This doesn't mean that Bible Students and Witnesses needed to say that the doctrines were not true. Only that it was always the Christian responsibility to question. How long would these prior doctrines have lasted if this was done? How many fewer people would have been stumbled by presumptuous statements? Also, there is no need for those who question to come up with the solution. Isn't that why we have a Governing Body? To aid in making difficult decisions? And we should also note how easy it is to distinguish truth from speculation. Remember that the verse in Philippians said to continue considering "whatever things are true." Note the following sets of sentences: UNLABELED SPECULATION: Nebuchadnezzar must represent the Messianic Kingdom now being ruled by Christ. SPECULATION TRUTHFULLY LABELED: We believe it is reasonable that Nebuchadnezzar represents the Messianic Kingdom now being ruled by Christ TRUTH: We don't actually know for sure if Nebuchadnezzar represents the Messianic Kingdom now being ruled by Christ. Here's how we came up with this idea . . . . Please feel free to let us know if you think it is reasonable. UNLABELED SPECULATION: The facts in evidence prove beyond a doubt that 1925 will see the resurrection of Abraham and David. SPECULATION TRUTHFULLY LABELED: Based on our currently accepted chronology, along with a count of the Jubilees, we expect Abraham and David to be resurrected in 1925 TRUTH: We don't actually know for sure if 1925 will be the date when Abraham and David will be resurrected, but we would certainly like to see that. Here's how we arrived at this date. ..... Please feel free to let us know if you think this is reasonable. If it were any of us average elders, ministerial servants, pioneers, and publishers, then it would obvious that only haughtiness and presumptuousness would allow us to speculate but not label it as speculation. Perhaps we imagine the praise and accolades we would get if could show all kinds of esoteric knowledge and the ability to pull a piece from this scripture and that scripture, and it turned out to be right. Yet, considering "whatever things are true" requires humility. But reasonableness will move us to focus on truth instead speculation. Speculation, even if it is labeled correctly, is not as important as more serious things, along with righteous, chaste and lovable topics of consideration. Speculation would ultimately take a back seat to these things. A couple times it was suggested that, perhaps, even if it was wrong, it has been a good thing. Perhaps, as some people thing, we would never have attracted millions of people into our religion, or they would not have remained as faithful, if it weren't for these speculative teachings, true or not. That possibility has been previously suggested by @bruceq under this very topic, when it was pointed out that the Watchtower has also taught that the wrong understanding of Paul was better than a correct understanding of Paul's words in Romans 13 from 1929 to 1962. *** w96 5/1 pp. 13-14 God and Caesar *** Progressive Understanding of “the Superior Authorities” 12 As early as 1886, Charles Taze Russell wrote . . . "to obey the laws, and to respect those in authority because of their office, . . . to pay their appointed taxes, and except where they conflict with God’s laws" . . . This book correctly identified “the higher powers,” or “the superior authorities,” mentioned by the apostle Paul. . . that true Christians “should be found amongst the most law-abiding of the present time—not agitators, not quarrelsome, not fault-finders.” This was understood by some to mean total submission. . . . Obviously, a clearer understanding of Christian submission to the superior authorities was needed. 13 In 1929, at a time when laws of various governments were beginning to forbid things that God commands or demand things that God’s laws forbid, it was felt that the higher powers must be Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. This was the understanding Jehovah’s servants had during the crucial period before and during World War II and on into the Cold War, with its balance of terror and its military preparedness. Looking back, it must be said that this view of things, exalting as it did the supremacy of Jehovah and his Christ, helped God’s people to maintain an uncompromisingly neutral stand throughout this difficult period. Notice that Russell had it correct, but an incorrect understanding of Paul's words "helped God's people" more. Even though the doctrine went from correct, to incorrect, to correct again, it is labeled a "Progressive Understanding." Most people would look at this as the most haughty and presumptuous kind of thinking, and I certainly hope that this same type of thinking doesn't cloud our understanding of Jesus' words in Matthew 24. It's the same as saying that false teachings are sometimes just fine and acceptable, assuming they were found in the Watchtower, even though we can still condemn false teachings everywhere else. If you notice we never have had "false" doctrines; rarely do we even say they were "incorrect" or "untrue." We usually speak of them as views that required "adjustment" or "refinement." If a prediction failed, then we were merely looking for "the right thing at the wrong time," or sometimes "the wrong thing at the right time." We were being "optimistic." Or there was a positive result in that it only stumbled all the new ones who joined Jehovah's Witnesses for the wrong reasons. For years, we called our teachings "present truth" which helped to explain how, even if they were proven to be false, they were still "present truth" while they were being taught. When we dropped at least 120 type-antitype doctrines, when they were no longer considered valid, this was not because we had been "indiscreet," but because the slave becomes "steadily more discreet": *** w15 3/15 pp. 9-10 par. 10 “This Is the Way You Approved” *** As we might expect, over the years Jehovah has helped “the faithful and discreet slave” to become steadily more discreet. Discretion has led to greater caution when it comes to calling a Bible account a prophetic drama unless there is a clear Scriptural basis for doing so. With respect to expectations related to Matthew 24 beginning with Christ's parousia in 1874, we had even used those same "type-antitype" doctrines to show that we had no choice but to have incorrect expectations, because Jehovah had prophesied in advance that such mistakes would be made through the so-called prophetic narrative about Elijah. (See section below called: ELIJAH PROVES OUR CHRONOLOGY MISTAKES WERE PREDETERMINED.) Several pages back in this topic @Arauna reminded me of this when she said: There is a lot of important information hidden behind this idea that "they applied it to Russell." If you look closely at the new book, we are NOW applying it to Russell and his close associates: *** kr chap. 2 pp. 13-14 pars. 4-6 The Kingdom Is Born in Heaven *** The prophecy explains that Jehovah would come with “the messenger of the covenant.” Who was that? None other than the Messianic King, Jesus Christ! . . . 5 Who, though, was the other “messenger,” the first one mentioned at Malachi 3:1? This prophetic figure would be on the scene well before the Messianic King’s presence. In the decades before 1914, did anyone “clear up a way” before the Messianic King? 6 Throughout this publication, we will find answers to such questions in the thrilling history of Jehovah’s modern-day people. This history shows that in the latter part of the 19th century, one small group of faithful people was emerging as the only body of genuine Christians in a vast field of imitations. That group came to be known as the Bible Students. Those taking the lead among them—Charles T. Russell and his close associates—did, indeed, act as the foretold “messenger,” giving spiritual direction to God’s people and preparing them for the events ahead. Let us consider four ways in which the “messenger” did so. This might seem like an odd diversion, but it really relates directly to the discussion of our understanding of Matthew 24. We should note, in passing, that Rutherford taught that when he changed the understanding of Romans 13 [to the incorrect view], that this was a specific fulfillment of Bible prophecy and it was specific evidence of Jehovah's blessing on us, and a specific reason for the removal of his blessing from those who still believed in Russell's [correct] view. Also we should note that while Rutherford applied the messenger and prophet "Elijah" to Russell, he applied the prophet Elisha to the time of his own administration, and made note that Elisha asked for a double-portion of Jehovah's spirit compared to Elijah - (Elisha received Elijah's mantle and performed twice as many miracles, etc.). Thus, when Nathan Knorr was president, Elijah was changed to be a prophetic picture of Rutherford's time (not Russell) and Elisha became the prophetic picture of Knorr's administration: At the end of this post, I'll add the references to show this, under the heading: HOW ELIJAH/ELISHA MOVED FROM RUSSELL/RUTHERFORD TO RUTHERFORD/KNORR RESPECTIVELY But that was not the primary reason to revisit the Elijah/Elisha teachings of the Watch Tower publications. ELIJAH PROVES OUR CHRONOLOGY MISTAKES WERE PREDETERMINED One of the uses of the "type-antitype" prophecies was to perpetuate prejudices between the two classes of Witnesses as was done with the "prophecy of the prodigal son." The Elijah prophecy was used to effectively shift the blame to Jehovah for the mistakes that were made in making wrong chronology predictions. Note the April 15, 1918 Watchtower, p. 6237: Several times during the harvest, during the progress of what seemed like plagues to Christendom, the Lord has permitted his people to think that they were about to go. Brother Russell expected the church to go beyond the vail in 1878, 1881, 1910, and 1914 -- just as with Elijah, who went with Elisha to four different places before he was actually taken. These seeming disappointments were divinely foreknown, "his appointments." I think most of us can tell that this was not only a wrong use of a prophetic pulpit, but a presumptuous use of it. These are not brought up to show that our history can seem embarrassing, but hopefully to show how obvious it is that all of us should have been "on the watch" and ready to let our "reasonableness known to all." Our love for one another should have prompted that kind of association between the so-called "rank and file" and the "Governing Body." HOW ELIJAH/ELISHA MOVED FROM RUSSELL/RUTHERFORD TO RUTHERFORD/KNORR RESPECTIVELY Note that, after dropping Russell from the equation, the new prophetic explanation focused more on the specific persons of Rutherford and Knorr than it did on the particular time of their administration. Note chapter 16 and 17 of "Let Your Name Be Sanctified" [bracketed information added] [page 314, par. 47] The miracles that the "two witnesses" perform in fulfillment of the prophetic vision are of a spiritual kind. In the spring of 1918 the "wild beast," the one pictured in Revelation 13:1, 2 as rising out of the "abyss" of the sea, that is, the visible earthly organization of Satan the Devil, killed the witness work in its free public presentation. So it lay as if beheaded, like John. [page 315, par 51-52] This date 1914 therefore runs parallel with the date of Jesus' anointing, A.D. 29, to preach the "kingdom of the heavens" as having drawn near and to say: "The kingdom of God is in your midst." (Luke 17:21) What then? Three and a half years from A.D. 29 to 33 (spring passover time) would find its modern parallel three and a half years from the fall of 1914 to the spring passover season of 1918. . . . [In 1918] Jehovah with his "messenger of the covenant" should come invisibly to his spiritual temple to cleanse it and to judge. [Note that we no longer teach that 1918 was significant, nor that it was the time when Jesus came to his spiritual temple.] [page 318, par. 4] but in the quiet of the first postwar year, A.D. 1919, came the "calm, low voice" from the quiet pages of God's written Word, pages now further illuminated with the light of recent fulfillment of prophecies. [Note that none of the prophecies that were further illuminated at this time are currently considered to be true: the great campaign of 1919 was the prediction that visible manifestations of Christ's kingdom must come in 1925 and that there was more evidence for this than there had been about 1914. Everything that happened from 1914 to 1919 illuminated the fact that all the expectations about 1914 were wrong.] 7 In 1942, in the throes of World War II, the Elijah work passed. It passed away…. It was taken away in divine favor….but it finished with success and in integrity. It left the interests of God’s kingdom to a faithful successor who would cling to the commission from God through the anointed Elijah class, just the same as this successor had stuck to the Elijah class to the end. The carrying out of the Elijah commission kept on without a hitch. 8 The anointed Elisha class undertook the responsibility of carrying out fully the divine commission as symbolized by Elijah’s official garment. Five days after Rutherford’s death the boards of directors of the Watch Tower corporations for New York and for Pennsylvania held a joint meeting and unanimously elected N. H. Knorr, one of the anointed remnant, to be president of both corporations of the Society. There was grief over the passing of a faithful fellow worker, but there was no interruption of the work for the sentimental purpose of mourning over the dead. The change in personnel did not cripple the work, because this is not a man’s organization but God’s visible organization on earth. … 9 To get back to work with the “sons of the prophets,” Elisha had to make a test of God’s spirit upon him and get back across the Jordan River. He did so by repeating Elijah’s miracle of causing the waters of the Jordan to divide. Likewise with the Elisha class in 1942. … 10 In the very same [Feb. 1, 1942] issue of The Watchtower that announced the death of J. F. Rutherford as “a faithful witness,” appeared the special leading article entitled “Final Gathering.”… The Elijah/Elisha themes and motifs have been one of the longest running "type-antitype" prophecies to run through the pages of the Watchtower, throughout early issues in the 1800's on up until about 2003, with the points in the quoted paragraphs above explicitly promoted even in 1997. THE MORAL OF THE STORY These points were added here partially because they were alluded to by Arauna, but they as part of the discussion above, they show that speculation is often used for presumptuous self-aggrandizement. These are doctrines that have been dropped (mostly) but would not likely have lasted as long as they did if so many Witnesses did not shrink back from their Christian responsibility. It shows no disrespect to question; it shows that we obey God as ruler rather than men. Anything beyond what was already taught in the Christian Greek Scriptures should have seemed like anathema to us. No Bible Student nor any Jehovah's Witnesses should have felt afraid to question it and discuss it openly. (Galatians 1:10) 10 Is it, in fact, men I am now trying to persuade or God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I would not be Christ’s slave. The Governing Body, who are highly regarded just as those in Jerusalem were, are still to be respected and their opinions clearly matter, as they are the ones appointed to help us with such questions. Paul respected their position: (Galatians 2:2) . . .This was done privately, however, before the men who were highly regarded, to make sure that I was not running or had not run in vain. But he also reminded us: (Galatians 2:6-10) . . .But regarding those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me, for God does not go by a man’s outward appearance—those highly regarded men imparted nothing new to me. . . . James and Ceʹphas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars, . . .They asked only that we keep the poor in mind, and this I have also earnestly endeavored to do. Notice that the "governing body" focused on the important things ("keep the poor in mind"), and yet other potential problems were taken care of by questioning this same governing body. In Paul's case he said to Cephas: (Galatians 2:14) . . .I said to Ceʹphas before them all: “If you, though you are a Jew, live as the nations do and not as Jews do, how can you compel people of the nations to live according to Jewish practice?” The apostle Paul had spiritual qualifications to point this out publicly, and of course had an obligation at that level to handle it this way. But Paul also writes to entire Galatian congregation(s) to remind them: (Galatians 6:1-5) 6 Brothers, even if a man takes a false step before he is aware of it, you who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness. But keep an eye on yourself, for fear you too may be tempted. 2 Go on carrying the burdens of one another, and in this way you will fulfill the law of the Christ. 3 For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he is deceiving himself. 4 But let each one examine his own actions, and then he will have cause for rejoicing in regard to himself alone, and not in comparison with the other person. 5 For each one will carry his own load. Even though we should give respect to all older men, including the ones we call the "Governing Body" Jesus said that (Matthew 23:8-12) 8 . . . one is your Teacher, and all of you are brothers. . . . 10 Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ. 11 But the greatest one among you must be your minister. 12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. The term "Governing Body" is a legal term, not a Biblical one, and we know there is no separate "body" within the "body" of Christ, only "members" of his congregation. We should give them double honor and respect for their function as a committee of elders appointed to handle questions, their role in teaching, and as administrators of the functions of the congregation. One of the ways we show them respect is to see them, not as leaders, but as brothers. True respect includes questioning, not fear of questioning.

Yes. It's true that brothers were speculating about things surrounding the Lord's coming. In this case, Jesus said that some of those standing with him during his ministry would not die before they saw him coming in power: (Matthew 16:28) "Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom.” And also that they would not complete the circuit of the cities of Israel before the son of man would arrive. (Matthew 10:23) 23 When they persecute you in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to you, you will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives. Although the first verse was fulfilled in a vision given to a few of them, Jesus said these things to show the potential imminence of the Kingdom. It could come at any time. They couldn't even say: "Well the preaching work is not finished yet, so we know that Jesus' arrival in power can't happen yet." Even if the Parousia was a long way off, it was not for them to know, and it should always remain of immediate concern. Jesus took away these obstacles that might make them believe the end was so far off that it didn't matter to them immediately. Notice too in both of these verses above that there is no separation of a parousia from his coming in his Kingdom: his "arrival." Notice too that the verse you quoted makes the same point just discussed in a previous post about why chronology should be no concern of ours. (John 21:22, 23) 22 Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” 23 So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?” They were tying the chronology of this particular disciple's lifetime to the generation that would see Jesus come. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? But notice too that the disciples have no hint about a "parousia" that would be separate from the time when Jesus comes, or arrives. But more importantly, the times and seasons are still in the Father's jurisdiction so, as Jesus says, "of what concern is that to you?" If we are paying close attention to Jesus' words we should be concerned with why Jesus said not to be concerned with chronology. We should not try to use the mistake they made as an excuse for why we can make more of the same types of mistakes.

Good question. But first of all we should note that the Bible does not actually say this. The term translated "striking" observableness actually means just "observability." The word "striking" was added for some reason. If anything, it is probably closer to the opposite meaning, of any kind of observableness, or non-striking observableness. In other words, a likely meaning is that the Kingdom is not going to come with signs to observe, or any kind of inspection (speculation). (In the same way that the Pharisees were not given a sign to make them believe that the King of that Kingdom was already standing in front of them.) The NLT translates like this: (Luke 17:20, NLT) One day the Pharisees asked Jesus, “When will the Kingdom of God come?” Jesus replied, “The Kingdom of God can’t be detected by visible signs. [fn] {The footnote says "by your speculations"} Of course, this verse was about the coming of the Kingdom that was "overtaking them" in their day. The Kingdom began taking on loyal subjects as members of that "nation" even while Jesus was a kind of "king-designate" as we say. But we know that may more subjects of that Kingdom began entering the Kingdom after Jesus was spoken of as the "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" and when he was given a position "far above every government." That was of course, when he sat at the right hand of the throne of Majesty, God's right hand, when he was given ALL AUTHORITY in heaven and on earth. (Mt 28:18-20) (Colossians 1:13) 13 He rescued us from the authority of the darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son, But you are right that, even though this was about the Kingdom about to overtake them in Jesus' day, it could have given evidence that the way the Kingdom comes at the time of the parousia might be invisible. Jesus was the one who cleared up that question by saying that it would appear like lightning: bright, sudden, surprising, and would shine from one horizon all the way to the other horizon. (Matthew 24:27) 27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be. Now if we could only find a scripture that says that this kind of lightning is invisible . . . .

WHY EVEN BRING UP THE ISSUE OF 1914 AT ALL? Most Bible readers believe that the sudden, surprising, shining, lightning-like PAROUSIA event has not happened yet. But many of the same people read about the "signs" in Matthew 24 and get pretty much the same idea of the prophecy as Jehovah's Witnesses do. They hear about wars and earthquakes and pestilence and famine and believe that these are signs that, as things get much worse, this is proof that the end is near, and Jesus could return at any moment. It's as if Jesus said: "You want a sign? I'll give you LOTS of signs!" The major difference between Jehovah's Witnesses and many other readers is that we (Jehovah's Witnesses) will often say that all these signs must have started specifically in 1914. This is not a difficult doctrine to convince others to believe. People in all generations have wanted to believe that their generation was the very one Jesus spoke about. 1914 was a definite historical turning point from several perspectives. The first war that was called a "World War" started that year. And since then it is easy to see that there's no turning back to the supposed times of peace and tranquility that existed almost everywhere. Also since then the world has grown from a sparse 1.8 bilion people to a crowded 7.5 billion. There are 4 times as many people, but on average they are using literally thousands of times more resources (electricity, fuel, waste). The dense populations, contention over resources, wars, terrorism, and increased effects of violence now effect more people than ever before. Earthquakes have a higher chance of killing large populations at once. Communication and news that focuses almost exclusively on everything negative anywhere in the world has also increased our fear and our belief that things will keep getting worse until God's Kingdom steps in to save us. So the primary lesson that most of us, Witnesses or not, take away from Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke 21 is this: (Matthew 24:33, also Mark 13:29) "Likewise also you, when you see all these things, know that he is near at the doors." (Luke 21:25-31) 25 “Also, there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and its agitation. 26 People will become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth, . . .28 But as these things start to occur, stand up straight and lift up your heads, because your deliverance is getting near. . . .31. . Likewise also you, when you see these things happening, know that the Kingdom of God is near." This is the basic idea that comforts us, and it isn't wrong. Whether we should say that Jesus was specifically targeting a "generation" that started in 1914 or not, God's Kingdom will finally step in. It's always possible that we are in a final generation that will see the final end of this system. We need not be in fear like the nations and those without faith and hope. We can lift our heads up and expect deliverance no matter how bad things get. So why even bring up the issue of 1914 at all, then? We are clearly in a "wicked" generation. Things appear to be going from bad to worse everywhere we look. If anyone tried to say things aren't so bad, a hundred sources could be found to contradict that claim. Amongst the millions (literally) of books in the world, it's easy to find a hundred or more that claim that 1914 was a major turning point, if not the major turning point, in modern history. The "SIGN" and how it is tied first to a "great world war" seems to be the most important evidence for this doctrine. It's what makes us so sure about what might otherwise look like a ridiculous prophetic type-antitype teaching where we see the wicked, haughty, Gentile king Nebuchadnezzar punished with insanity and say that Nebuchadnezzar represents the Messianic Kingdom. When that wicked man finally acknowledged that his haughtiness was misplaced, he was restored from his insanity, and this represents how Jesus was restored to the non-Gentile Messianic throne in 1914. But was this idea in the Bible? And if it wasn't, is there any reason to stand up to such a long-standing traditional teaching in our own religion if it's not really doing any harm? Or is it doing harm? Obviously, this entire topic was initiated there is clear evidence (to some) that it doesn't work scripturally, based on the words and meanings of the context of Jesus' words? But why should we pay more than the usual attention to the exact meaning of Jesus words if it makes no difference in the long run. Is this just a matter of "obsession" over very minor matters? Is it a matter of stubborn pride? Is this just a matter of wanting to be right at all costs? Is it really in defense of the Bible? That last question is so important that I'll try to give a short answer right here. I'll reword it WHY DOES THE BIBLE SAY WE SHOULD NOT BE CONCERNED WITH CHRONOLOGY? Jesus said that it was not for us to know the "times and the seasons." Paul, said that as far as the topic of "times and seasons" and the "parousia" we need nothing to be written to us, because we know it will come unannounced as a thief. So the best we can do is stay on the watch to be prepared at all times as if it can come at any moment. This way that day won't "catch us" off-guard as a thief would want to catch us. Of course, perhaps all that was supposed to change around 1914. Perhaps at that point we were supposed to know the times and seasons after all. And we could always rationalize that we only claim to know the beginning of the parousia but not the end of the system. Also, we might ask, what harm could there be in trying to know, even if Jesus said we wouldn't be able to know? Is it possible that Jesus had a reason for telling us that not even he knew the "day and the hour"? Is it OK to try to get to know the "times and seasons" as long as we can still say we don't know the "day and the hour"? Jesus gave some illustrations showing that our attitudes and motivations might come to light if we noticed that there was a delay. He gave the illustration of the evil slave who would take advantage of the delay and begin to lord it over his fellow slaves. He gave an illustration of those who would not make wise use of the time and the resources they were given (the "talents"). He gave an illustration of those who didn't prepare well enough for a potential delay. (foolish virgins). Not once did Jesus commend anyone for discerning how soon the future "times and seasons" would be, but he did commend those who had prepared and readied themselves to endure to the end, and make wise use of their time, no matter how long that delay might be. The obvious reason would be that if we knew the end was going to come on a certain date, we might fall into any one of the traps that would show us unprepared for that day: We could fall into the trap of thinking that we must get into full-time service just because we know the day is nearly upon us, and we believe that we will get a reward for our good works. That might sound like it's not so bad. A little more full-time service is accomplished, so what does it matter what the motive was? But there is no reward for good works or full-time service. The "reward" is only for the proper motivation behind our activities. Remember that the Pharisees dedicating their resources to "full-time" service to the Temple, but weren't fully taking care of their own families, so that Jesus condemned them for this. If we were to act any differently because we KNOW the time, then this already shows something was potentially wrong with our motivation in the first place. We could fall into the trap of thinking that there is still time to take it easy, to "put Kingdom interests second," just for a little while, because we KNOW that there is still time to repent and be shown mercy. Again, if we were to act any differently because we KNOW the time, then this already shows something was potentially wrong with our motivation. We could fall into the trap of thinking that we are smarter than others, and can look down on others for not understanding prophecy and secular and Biblical chronology as well as we do. Yet we are relying on secular knowledge (to date 539, for instance) and this type of secular knowledge is foolishness to God, and just results in questions for debate rather than anything of true Christian value, such as love, justice, mercy and TRUE wisdom. Related to all the ideas above, is the problem of building new doctrines on a weak foundation, and therefore presumptuously assuming that any additional explanations built on the puffed up knowledge is also correct. We could fall into the trap of thinking we are something when we are nothing, and start to think of ourselves as so especially favored and gifted with God's spirit that we begin coming up with hundreds of other explanations, that must be so, just because we have a strong belief that our chronology must be so. Therefore predictions are made that end up stumbling others, or end up being ideas that we ultimately have to apologize for because it can be shown that they did not come from Jehovah's holy spirit, but were based on presumptuousness. Remember that the idea of 1914 originally came to as as part of scheme of dates that included 1798, 1799, 1844, 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910 and a few others. All those dates have been dropped because they were "false doctrines." Russell was so sure of these dates that he found them in his studies of the Great Pyramid, which was "THE major selling point" of the Studies in the Scriptures series. It was this series of dates that was so sure that these were called "God's dates, not ours." These dates resulted in judging other religious groups as "the foolish virgins" specifically because they stopped looking in 1844 and missed the 1874 presence and the 1878 kingship. It was presumptuous to call others "fools" when we also finally dropped the 1874 date, ourselves. After 1914, this schema was part of the "undeniable proof" that 1918 would see undeniable visible signs of heavenly activity towards the earth. These dates brought us to conclude that 1925 would definitely see the earthly resurrection begin. We were told that we had more evidence on which to base faith in 1925 than we had about 1914 itself, and more evidence for 1925 than Noah had in believing in the coming Flood. Things that happened in 1918, 1919, 1920, 1922, 1931, 1935, even up until 1942 were all sees as necessary teachings just because of the 1914 teaching. Several of these dates have already been dropped as incorrect teachings that needed adjustment (i.e., "false" teachings). A few of them are "still on the books." But we have reason to believe that such incorrect teachings could end up being important to correct if they are wrong. Here are two examples that have been mentioned before: (2 Timothy 2:15-18) 15 Do your utmost to present yourself approved to God, a workman with nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of the truth aright. 16 But reject empty speeches that violate what is holy, for they will lead to more and more ungodliness, 17 and their word will spread like gangrene. Hy·me·naeʹus and Phi·leʹtus are among them. 18 These men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred, and they are subverting the faith of some. If 1914 is not true, then all those decades of teaching that the first resurrection has already occurred in 1918 could put us in exactly the same situation as the "empty speeches that violate what is holy" and which "spread like gangrene." The second example, builds on the example above. In the first century, it was possible that claiming the resurrection had already occurred included something like the claim that it was all spiritual, and there would be no literal resurrection. Of course, it could also have subverted the faith of some in the idea that some had already received their reward before others which would make it seem like Paul didn't know what he was talking about when he said that the currently living and the resurrected dead would be caught up at the same time. Whether persons like the apostle Paul or C T Russell are already in heaven or not might seem like an innocuous teaching, but look at what can come out of it. In 1916 it was taught that Russell had died but was now a spirit who was directing every aspect of the Society's work from beyond the veil. What's the difference in that and spiritism? That type of thinking was repeated well into the 1920's. And it resurfaced again in the 1980's with the "Revelation - Grand Climax" book and then again in 2000 in the Watchtower. Note, the same Watchtower just mentioned in a previous post: *** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 11 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! *** What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest. When we condemn Christendom for thinking they can communicate with the dead, their adherents say, but these are spirits. So what's the real difference if we say that people who have died who are now spirits are communicating divine truths today. At least the above contains terms like "it seems" and "may be involved." Prior to this it was taught that there was no doubt. But it also implies a kind of "inspiration" that comes from someone other than Jesus and Jehovah to reveal divine truths. But more importantly it was used as a way to bolster a convoluted piece of circular reasoning in the article above. We were building on a sandy foundation and presumptuously pretending it was a rock foundation. The above is not to say that the doctrine is definitely wrong, but it shows how the Bible expects us to "pay more than the usual attention" to such matters, because a false doctrine can become a serious thing. Another point that should be addressed is the fact that there is little difference in saying we only know the time of the beginning of the parousia but not the end. All the issues of believing we know the time of parousia still arise. For example, Jesus said it would be only one generation. So what happened when we approached 30 and 40 years beyond 1914? Speculation was rampant. What happened when we approached 60 years beyond 1914 and it was also believed that the end of the 6,000 years would end in 1975. We became so presumptuous that we published why the 1970's would be the "appropriate time for God to act." We tell Jehovah when it's appropriate to act?!?!?! We (JWs) published and promoted Watchtower articles that said that now is not the time to "toy" with the words of Jesus that no one knows the day and the hour. We can say when it's no longer appropriate to bring up a certain scripture. In the 1970's, just prior to 1975, we also began publishing articles that stated explicitly that Jehovah's Witnesses were a prophet. After the 1970's expectations failed to materialize, the generation went on, and we were 70 years from 1914, and had to change the definition of the generation. Then at 74 years from 1914 we found an article where a Hebrew "scholar" said 75 years was a good length for a generation: *** g88 4/8 p. 14 The Last Days—What’s Next? *** J. A. Bengel states in his New Testament Word Studies: “The Hebrews . . . reckon seventy-five years as one generation, and the words, shall not pass away, intimate that the greater part of that generation [of Jesus’ day] indeed, but not the whole of it, should have passed away before all should be fulfilled.” This became true by the year 70 C.E. when Jerusalem was destroyed. Likewise today, most of the generation of 1914 has passed away. At 80 years from 1914, the definition of generation is updated again, etc., until the latest, current definition. This problem is not necessarily gone with the updated definition of generation. Because, even though it is now defined as TWO BACK-TO-BACK LIFETIMES it, too, is attached to a finite number of years starting in 1914. As the end of the possible range of time comes into view, this becomes the equivalent of making people think they "know" the times and the seasons. That's clearly presumptuous, and therefore begets all the same issues mentioned above.

I didn't expect this topic to wind up with so much discussion of the 70 years, but I'd like to bring it back to specific topics brought up in Matthew 24. One major topic, not really discussed yet, is the "SIGN." But even before we discuss the sign, we should notice that it's the SIGN OF THE PAROUSIA and the SIGN of the SYNTELEIA, that they asked about. For that reason, it would probably be useful to review whether or not it is proper to understand this as a SIGN of a PRESENCE and a SIGN of a CONCLUSION. If it should mean that, then perhaps a generation full of signs is an accurate meaning. But if it refers to a "signal event" that gives them advance warning of the time of the "Judgment Day" then this cannot very likely refer to a generation full of signs. THE LIKELY MEANING or DISTINCTION between PAROUSIA, SYNTELEIA, EPIPHANEIA, APOKALYPSIS The point of this part of the topic is to see whether it is possible, or even more likely that the terms Parousia and Synteleia, in context, refer, respectively, to the ROYAL VISITATION & MANIFESTATION (i.e., JUDGMENT DAY) and the FINAL END & DESTRUCTION (i.e., JUDGMENT DAY) rather than merely a "presence" and "conclusion." When that evidence is included in the question about the sign, we have another way of looking at the question. This other way of looking at the question sheds a lot more light on why Jesus answered in the way he did. In fact, it removes what would otherwise appear to be some awkward wording or even a contradiction on the part of Jesus. We know Jesus did not contradict himself, so we should be interested in a meaning that makes more sense with the total context of Jesus' words. We have already discussed evidence that many contemporary Jews would have understood the meaning of the terms as the signal events referring to the timing of the Judgment Day. If we were to insert those meanings into the verse in Matthew, we would have the following, in context: (Matthew 24:1-4 -- [with the question in vs 3, paraphrased]) 1 Now as Jesus was departing from the temple, his disciples approached to show him the buildings of the temple. 2 In response he said to them: “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, by no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 While he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: “Can you tell us WHEN this will happen? Can you tell us what will be THE WARNING SIGN OF YOUR JUDGMENT VISITATION and the FINAL END OF THE AGE?" [NWT: "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?”] 4 In answer Jesus said to them: “Look out that nobody misleads you, . . . The NWT is translated in such a way that you would never get this idea from the question, and yet we have already shown that this is what the actual words Matthew used would have meant to many Jews in Matthew's audience. And we also know that this is the basic idea that the disciples themselves had about the Kingdom of God. They wanted to know when it would MANIFEST itself. (Luke 19:11) 11 While they were listening to these things he spoke in addition an illustration, because he was near Jerusalem and they were imagining that the kingdom of God was going to display itself instantly. (Acts 1:6, 7) 6 So when they had assembled, they asked him: “Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?” 7 He said to them: “It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction. Of course, if the disciples had known that Jesus would be ruling invisibly from heaven they would not have had this idea that a time would come for it to "display itself instantly" upon the physical nation of Israel. Therefore, they must have been looking for an advance warning sign so that they could know when to be away from the disaster. This is consistent with the idea that the "parousia" of a powerful godlike person could be considered to be a "theophany," or an "appearance" like some kind of bright and shining manifestation. To make this clearer we will use the original word PAROUSIA or SYNTELEIA in the following verses, to make it easier to understand the original meaning. (2 Thessalonians 2:8, NWT, KIT) . . .the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his [PAROUSIA]. But even this does not fully match the likely meaning of the word that the NWT uses here. Note the KJV and NIV, for example: (2 Thess. 2:8, KJV) the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: (2 Thess 2:8, NIV) the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. That's because the word in Greek is ἐπιφάνεια (epipháneia) which according to Thayer's Greek Lexicon: epipháneia -- an appearing, appearance; often used by the Greeks of a glorious manifestation of the gods, and especially of their advent to help; in 2 Maccabees of signal deeds and events betokening the presence and power of God as helper." It's the same word used in 2 Timothy and Titus: (1 Timothy 6:14) 14 to observe the commandment in a spotless and irreprehensible way until the manifestation [EPIPHANEIA] of our Lord Jesus Christ, (2 Timothy 4:1) I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom: Note that the NWT in 2 Tim 4:1 uses the word "AND" here, although most translations follow a Greek text which has the word "AT" in this place, so that the verse reads more smoothly as: (2 Tim 4:1, NLT) I solemnly urge you in the presence of God and Christ Jesus, who will someday judge the living and the dead when he appears to set up his Kingdom: In fact, the sense of the "AND" in some Greek texts is very likely intended to offer the meaning that shows up in the NLT, because the point is that Jesus will judge the living and the dead AND he will do this through his glorious manifestation AND through his kingdom. This fits the illustration in Matthew: (Matthew 13:39-43) The harvest is a [SYNTELEIA: Destruction/Final End] conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. 40 Therefore, just as the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be in the [SYNTELEIA: Destruction/Final End] conclusion of the system of things. 41 The Son of man will send his angels, and they will collect out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness, 42 and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be. 43 At that time [the harvest] the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.. . . This is the same scenario that Paul mentions when he includes the resurrected ones into the same picture about the time when righteous ones will shine at the SYNTELEIA. The only difference is that Paul refers to it as the PAROUSIA. (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17) 15 For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the [PAROUSIA: ROYAL VISITATION AND GLORIOUS MANIFESTATION] presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; 16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. According to our current Watchtower doctrine, Paul can never be completely correct. If, as the Watchtower claims, the resurrection has already occurred (back between the years surrounding 1918 and up through as late as 1935, per the current teaching), then those who survived until the presence (1914 and on) may easily precede those who fall asleep in death during the "presence." Russell, for example, survived until the "presence," in 1914 and he died in 1916 and therefore easily preceded, let's say, Rutherford, Knorr, and Fred Franz, and probably at last 44,000 others, according to our current teaching. But also note that the expression translated "together" has a word in front of it that is not translated in the NWT's 1 Thess 4:17, creating an expression that means not just "together," but, "at the same time together." This is why Thayer's, Vine's and Strong's all offer this definition, especially in the adverbial sense which is obvious here: Strong's ἅμα (háma) adv a primary particle; properly, at the "same" time, but freely used as a preposition or adverb denoting close association:—also, and, together, with(-al). Thayer's ἅμα (háma) 1. adverb, at the same time, at once, together. . . . In 1 Thess 4:17 and v.10 where ἅμα (háma) is followed by syn, ἅμα is an adverb (at the same time) and must be joined to the verb. Vine's ἅμα (háma) "at once" . . . in Romans 3:12; 1 Thess 4:17 This is obvious even in the way the NWT translates this in other places where ἅμα (háma) is used. (Acts 24:26, NWT) 26 At the same time he was hoping that Paul would give him money.. . . If the PAROUSIA is the time when those who survive until then are taken at the same time as the resurrected ones, then clearly the Parousia could not have really been ongoing in 1918 to 1935: *** w07 1/1 pp. 27-28 pars. 10-12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! *** 10 Can we say more precisely when the first resurrection begins? An interesting clue is found at Revelation 7:9-15, where the apostle John describes his vision of “a great crowd, which no man was able to number.” The identity of that great crowd is revealed to John by one of the 24 elders, and these elders represent the 144,000 joint heirs with Christ in their heavenly glory. (Luke 22:28-30; Revelation 4:4) John himself had a heavenly hope; but since he was still a man on earth when the elder spoke to him, in the vision John must represent anointed ones on earth who have not yet received their heavenly reward. 11 What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest. That would indicate that the first resurrection began sometime between 1914 and 1935. Can we be more precise? 12 At this point, it may be helpful to consider what might be viewed as a Bible parallel. Jesus Christ was anointed as the future King of God’s Kingdom in the fall of 29 C.E. Three and a half years later, in the spring of 33 C.E., he was resurrected as a mighty spirit person. Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility. Although this cannot be directly confirmed in the Bible, it is not out of harmony with other scriptures that indicate that the first resurrection got under way soon after Christ’s presence began. That was an odd mix of speculation, along with both dogmatic and very undogmatic statements. Still, while it's true that the first resurrection gets underway as soon as or soon after Christ's PAROUSIA begins, none who survived until the PAROUSIA were taken to heaven along with (together at the same time with) those who were resurrected somewhere between about 1918 to 1935. Yet, it is recognized that the first resurrection got under way "soon" after Christ's PAROUSIA would begin. What was that "harmony with other scriptures"? The example is given in the next paragraph, but with an interesting bit of bracketed information that is in the original Watchtower article -- not something added here as an explanation: For example, Paul wrote: “We the living who survive to the presence of the Lord [not, to the end of his presence] shall in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17) Therefore, anointed Christians who died before Christ’s presence were raised to heavenly life ahead of those who were still alive during Christ’s presence. This means that the first resurrection must have begun early in Christ’s presence, and it continues “during his presence.” (1 Corinthians 15:23) Rather than occurring all at once, the first resurrection takes place over a period of time. But the writer who recognized the point that he put in brackets did not recognize that the Greek of 1 Cor 15:23 never says DURING his presence. It actually harmonizes with 1 Thess 4, by saying "AT HIS PAROIUSIA" as if PAROUSIA were an event rather than a duration: (1 Corinthians 15:23) 23 But each one in his own proper order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence. The Greek word here would usually mean "AT" in a case like this. It is only translated "DURING" because our traditional doctrine tells us to believe that it is a DURATION of time. Strong's Definition: ἐν (en) --a primary preposition denoting (fixed) position (in place, time or state), and (by implication) instrumentality (medially or constructively), i.e. a relation of rest (intermediate between G1519 and G1537); "in," at, (up-)on, by, etc.: The NWT agrees that this is true in the way the following verse is translated along with the NWT footnote: (1 Corinthians 15:51, 52) . . .We shall not all fall asleep [in death], but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, during* [fn. "at"] the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we shall be changed. (The updated NWT removed this footnote so that the word "at" is no longer shown and instead now footnotes the word "blink" with "twinkling.") It's for the exact same reason that the NWT almost always chooses to say "in the conclusion" (IN the SYNTELEIA), even though it is just as proper to say "at the conclusion" (AT the SYNTELEIA). There are times, however, when the NWT has chosen to translate the exact same word as "AT" (1 Thessalonians 2:19) 19 For what is our hope or joy or crown of exultation before our Lord Jesus at his presence [PAROUSIA]? (1 Thessalonians 3:13) 13 so that he may make your hearts firm, blameless in holiness before our God and Father at the presence [PAROUSIA] of our Lord Jesus with all his holy ones. (1 Thessalonians 5:23) . . .And may the spirit and soul and body of you brothers, sound in every respect, be preserved blameless at the presence [PAROUSIA] of our Lord Jesus Christ. The reason that the word is translated above as "at" instead of "during" is because it is too clear that the parousia refers to a judgment event in these places. We think of it as the "END" of the parousia when this judgment event happens. But we should remember that Paul always recognized that the relief given to all those of faith would include resurrected ones, and that this resurrection was to be at the same time as Jesus brings judgment on the disobedient. All this obviously happens at the PAROUSIA, not during the PAROUSIA, as shown in the quotes above. (2 Thessalonians 1:7-10) 7 But you who suffer tribulation will be given relief along with us at the revelation [APOKALYPSIS] of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels 8 in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance on those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus. 9 These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength, 10 at the time when he comes to be glorified in connection with his holy ones and to be regarded in that day with wonder. . . It's the exact same word that could have been translated as "during" except that the NWT chose "at" when the reference seems to be to a specific time of judgment. But notice that this "specific time of judgment" is called PAROUSIA and APOKALYPSIS (which means revealing). In fact, every reference to the parousia of Jesus appears to be more appropriately associated with his revelation (apokalypis) and manifestation (epiphaneia). Both the language structure AND content of these phrases about the PAROUSIA are also used with reference to the APOKALYPSIS, even though our current doctrine claims that only one of the two words refers to a judgment event. (1 Peter 1:7) 7 in order that the tested quality of your faith, of much greater value than gold that perishes despite its being tested by fire, may be found a cause for praise and glory and honor at the revelation [APOKALYPSIS] of Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 1:13) . . .keep your senses completely; set your hope on the undeserved kindness that will be brought to you at the revelation [APOKALYPSIS] of Jesus Christ. (1 John 2:28) 28 So now, little children, remain in union with him, so that when he is made manifest we may have freeness of speech and not shrink away from him in shame at his presence [PAROUSIA]. Similar phrases show that the primary point was the judgment event even when other words and phrases were used. But these ones, also, give us a good sense of the meaning of the terms Parousia, Synteleia, Apokalypsis, Epiphaneia, etc: (Jude 24) 24 Now to the one who is able to guard you from stumbling and to make you stand unblemished in the sight of his glory with great joy. . . (1 Corinthians 1:7, 8) . . .while you are eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. 8 He will also make you firm to the end so that you may be open to no accusation in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Cor 1:8, just quoted, could have translated the same word for "AT" above as "DURING" instead of "IN" as was done here (i.e., "during the day of our Lord Jesus Christ"). The point was emphasized here so that no one thinks that the word "during" is what implies a long period of time. It's the belief about whether the reference is to a long period of time that determines how the NWT has translated the word in every case. The overall point is that it appears likely that the words Parousia and Synteleia refer to judgment events rather than long durations of time such as a generation during which to watch for signs. That would explain why Jesus could liken the parousia to the judgment event of Noah's day, or the judgment event of Sodom, or the judgment event of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E., and lastly the judgment event at the revelation and manifestation of Jesus Christ in judgment of the entire world.