Anna

LOL.  Poetry got me through my husband's sudden death and a daughter with cancer..... so it had its function...... and I had to go back to work to keep food on the table...and in the process I learnt a few more lessons about life. Particularly - when to let go.  There is a time for everything.... also to let go.
We all have ego's and want to be heard  but I honestly believe that if you have been through severe problems where you only are grateful to have a life.... you realize how precious your gift of life is ..... to have an opinion, to be seen and heard or have influence -  all that other jazz -is just the trimmings. The substance of your life is what is in yourself and what is between you and Jehovah.
We will soon face the most dire threats to our lives.   We are now facing the beginning of the escalation of anarchy.  Our lives is the only precious thing we have and this is all that Jehovah promised us - our lives.
So let GO of the unimportant grievances, unimportant hurt feelings and all the unimportant ideas. Let GO of the ego and the traps and snares it brings to our lives.  Time is running out.  Like the illustration of the 10 virgins - make sure you are one of those who have enough oil to shine your lamp while waiting for the groom to arrive.

Yes, what Arauna said is true, humans LOVE to share their bits of knowledge, and if it’s something they’ve discovered themselves, so much more so. But it’s natural for us to do it and it’s not always bad, and nor are the motives behind it always bad.  I believe when Carl Olof Jonsson first “discovered” what he did when he researched the Gentile times, he had no bad motives. He obviously believed he had found the truth regarding that subject, and believed the WT didn’t realize they were in error. Put yourself in his shoes. Imagine how you would have felt if your “exciting” discovery was met with reservations almost bordering on indifference. His downfall was not the research, nor his discovery, nor his writing to the society about it, but his hurt ego, and pride that HIS discovery was not recognized.  We all want to be recognized for the effort we put into something, and he had put a lot of effort into it. It doesn’t feel good if someone tells you “you leave the thinking to us and you go and play in the sand”. However if someone tells you that they do not accept your opinion, that they see things differently, then humility should move us to let it go. No point in arguing or forcing our opinion on others. In the end the truth will eventually always come out.  But unfortunately he (COJ) was “trapped by his own cleverness”.
I like what one GB member said, that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that we should respect that. We do it in FS all the time. Don’t we just love it when someone gives us the opportunity to explain some aspect of the Bible to them, but don’t we also just have to accept that it may not change their previously held opinion? It happens all the time, and we just have to move on.  Just think the many times you reasoned with someone on the trinity, and showed them the many scriptures to refute it. But we don’t stand there browbeating them until they see things our way do we?
Similarly in our brotherhood,  we are not all cookie cutter the same. We don’t all have the same opinion on everything. We may even have differing views on some aspects of the Truth. A very good friend of mine, a very spiritual and zealous sister, who doesn’t just talk the truth but she walks it too, does not believe in the new interpretation of the generation. She doesn’t go around trying tell others why not, I only know about it because we are very close. She doesn’t make a big deal out of it, it’s just her opinion after all, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I am sure there are many who do not believe in the overlapping generation and I am sure there are quite a few who are not convinced about 1914 either. Does that make them a “bad” Witness?  @Arauna if we were in the same congregation, and you knew me from here, would you avoid me? I am sure FS would be lovely with you, would you let me go with you, or would you say no, because I have my own opinion on the generation and 1914? I would really be interested to know your answer because your answer will show whether it really matters what I (and by extension others) believe regarding these subjects or not.

Yes, what Arauna said is true, humans LOVE to share their bits of knowledge, and if it’s something they’ve discovered themselves, so much more so. But it’s natural for us to do it and it’s not always bad, and nor are the motives behind it always bad.  I believe when Carl Olof Jonsson first “discovered” what he did when he researched the Gentile times, he had no bad motives. He obviously believed he had found the truth regarding that subject, and believed the WT didn’t realize they were in error. Put yourself in his shoes. Imagine how you would have felt if your “exciting” discovery was met with reservations almost bordering on indifference. His downfall was not the research, nor his discovery, nor his writing to the society about it, but his hurt ego, and pride that HIS discovery was not recognized.  We all want to be recognized for the effort we put into something, and he had put a lot of effort into it. It doesn’t feel good if someone tells you “you leave the thinking to us and you go and play in the sand”. However if someone tells you that they do not accept your opinion, that they see things differently, then humility should move us to let it go. No point in arguing or forcing our opinion on others. In the end the truth will eventually always come out.  But unfortunately he (COJ) was “trapped by his own cleverness”.
I like what one GB member said, that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that we should respect that. We do it in FS all the time. Don’t we just love it when someone gives us the opportunity to explain some aspect of the Bible to them, but don’t we also just have to accept that it may not change their previously held opinion? It happens all the time, and we just have to move on.  Just think the many times you reasoned with someone on the trinity, and showed them the many scriptures to refute it. But we don’t stand there browbeating them until they see things our way do we?
Similarly in our brotherhood,  we are not all cookie cutter the same. We don’t all have the same opinion on everything. We may even have differing views on some aspects of the Truth. A very good friend of mine, a very spiritual and zealous sister, who doesn’t just talk the truth but she walks it too, does not believe in the new interpretation of the generation. She doesn’t go around trying tell others why not, I only know about it because we are very close. She doesn’t make a big deal out of it, it’s just her opinion after all, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I am sure there are many who do not believe in the overlapping generation and I am sure there are quite a few who are not convinced about 1914 either. Does that make them a “bad” Witness?  @Arauna if we were in the same congregation, and you knew me from here, would you avoid me? I am sure FS would be lovely with you, would you let me go with you, or would you say no, because I have my own opinion on the generation and 1914? I would really be interested to know your answer because your answer will show whether it really matters what I (and by extension others) believe regarding these subjects or not.

Yes, what Arauna said is true, humans LOVE to share their bits of knowledge, and if it’s something they’ve discovered themselves, so much more so. But it’s natural for us to do it and it’s not always bad, and nor are the motives behind it always bad.  I believe when Carl Olof Jonsson first “discovered” what he did when he researched the Gentile times, he had no bad motives. He obviously believed he had found the truth regarding that subject, and believed the WT didn’t realize they were in error. Put yourself in his shoes. Imagine how you would have felt if your “exciting” discovery was met with reservations almost bordering on indifference. His downfall was not the research, nor his discovery, nor his writing to the society about it, but his hurt ego, and pride that HIS discovery was not recognized.  We all want to be recognized for the effort we put into something, and he had put a lot of effort into it. It doesn’t feel good if someone tells you “you leave the thinking to us and you go and play in the sand”. However if someone tells you that they do not accept your opinion, that they see things differently, then humility should move us to let it go. No point in arguing or forcing our opinion on others. In the end the truth will eventually always come out.  But unfortunately he (COJ) was “trapped by his own cleverness”.
I like what one GB member said, that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that we should respect that. We do it in FS all the time. Don’t we just love it when someone gives us the opportunity to explain some aspect of the Bible to them, but don’t we also just have to accept that it may not change their previously held opinion? It happens all the time, and we just have to move on.  Just think the many times you reasoned with someone on the trinity, and showed them the many scriptures to refute it. But we don’t stand there browbeating them until they see things our way do we?
Similarly in our brotherhood,  we are not all cookie cutter the same. We don’t all have the same opinion on everything. We may even have differing views on some aspects of the Truth. A very good friend of mine, a very spiritual and zealous sister, who doesn’t just talk the truth but she walks it too, does not believe in the new interpretation of the generation. She doesn’t go around trying tell others why not, I only know about it because we are very close. She doesn’t make a big deal out of it, it’s just her opinion after all, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I am sure there are many who do not believe in the overlapping generation and I am sure there are quite a few who are not convinced about 1914 either. Does that make them a “bad” Witness?  @Arauna if we were in the same congregation, and you knew me from here, would you avoid me? I am sure FS would be lovely with you, would you let me go with you, or would you say no, because I have my own opinion on the generation and 1914? I would really be interested to know your answer because your answer will show whether it really matters what I (and by extension others) believe regarding these subjects or not.

Yes, what Arauna said is true, humans LOVE to share their bits of knowledge, and if it’s something they’ve discovered themselves, so much more so. But it’s natural for us to do it and it’s not always bad, and nor are the motives behind it always bad.  I believe when Carl Olof Jonsson first “discovered” what he did when he researched the Gentile times, he had no bad motives. He obviously believed he had found the truth regarding that subject, and believed the WT didn’t realize they were in error. Put yourself in his shoes. Imagine how you would have felt if your “exciting” discovery was met with reservations almost bordering on indifference. His downfall was not the research, nor his discovery, nor his writing to the society about it, but his hurt ego, and pride that HIS discovery was not recognized.  We all want to be recognized for the effort we put into something, and he had put a lot of effort into it. It doesn’t feel good if someone tells you “you leave the thinking to us and you go and play in the sand”. However if someone tells you that they do not accept your opinion, that they see things differently, then humility should move us to let it go. No point in arguing or forcing our opinion on others. In the end the truth will eventually always come out.  But unfortunately he (COJ) was “trapped by his own cleverness”.
I like what one GB member said, that everyone is entitled to their opinion, and that we should respect that. We do it in FS all the time. Don’t we just love it when someone gives us the opportunity to explain some aspect of the Bible to them, but don’t we also just have to accept that it may not change their previously held opinion? It happens all the time, and we just have to move on.  Just think the many times you reasoned with someone on the trinity, and showed them the many scriptures to refute it. But we don’t stand there browbeating them until they see things our way do we?
Similarly in our brotherhood,  we are not all cookie cutter the same. We don’t all have the same opinion on everything. We may even have differing views on some aspects of the Truth. A very good friend of mine, a very spiritual and zealous sister, who doesn’t just talk the truth but she walks it too, does not believe in the new interpretation of the generation. She doesn’t go around trying tell others why not, I only know about it because we are very close. She doesn’t make a big deal out of it, it’s just her opinion after all, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. I am sure there are many who do not believe in the overlapping generation and I am sure there are quite a few who are not convinced about 1914 either. Does that make them a “bad” Witness?  @Arauna if we were in the same congregation, and you knew me from here, would you avoid me? I am sure FS would be lovely with you, would you let me go with you, or would you say no, because I have my own opinion on the generation and 1914? I would really be interested to know your answer because your answer will show whether it really matters what I (and by extension others) believe regarding these subjects or not.

By the way is the kind of comment that lands people who make it, out of the truth. May you never be stumbled.
 I hope one day the faithful slave is not going to change their understanding of 1914, to one similar to what is presented here by JWI. If they do, it won't make me think any less of them. What is it going to do to you though? And don't say it will never happen, because it HAS happened on many occasions where they taught one thing, and then "refined" their understanding. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against refining our understanding, or even changing our understanding. We should never dogmatically insist on something, and as far as I can see, change is proof that the FDS have not dogmatically insisted on something when further evidence came to light. So why should WE be dogmatic? Is it wrong to say that there are some interesting scriptural arguments being brought forward? Why insist on something "just" because for the present this is what the FDS teach? At least THAT should NOT be the argument. The argument should be a well presented scriptural counter argument. So far I have not really seen this on this thread, or on the other one. The majority has just been diversions, and attacks on the person and their motive.
What if I was to call into question your person and motive? Are you perhaps scared if 1914 is wrong, where will that leave a lot of our beliefs? Where would that leave you? Are you afraid this could delay the end?  Is that why you are sidestepping the issue and diverting attention from the "message" to the person? What are you afraid of?
So, how did that feel.

My previous comment was neither opposed to putting faith in Jehovah and the FDS, nor respecting and being loyal to Jehovah and the ones taking the lead. It was also not opposed to being obedient to those taking the lead and being submissive.  And also not opposed to the idea that Jehovah has his organization in complete control.
So what was your point?
 Exactly. So why worry about 1914?

Yes, I believe the true faith is a minority too. The scriptures tell us so. We don't believe in the trinity, immortality of the soul and no Jehovah in NT do we?  Why include that in the mix with visible parousia and king in 33 C.E. though? Does that make it wrong just because the majority believe that? The majority also believe other things that we as JWs believe also.
Just as a side issue, I noticed that in the new 2013 NWT there are several instances where we changed the wording to be more in line  with other (Christendom's) translations.  You know the saying,  truth is truth no matter who says it

My previous comment was neither opposed to putting faith in Jehovah and the FDS, nor respecting and being loyal to Jehovah and the ones taking the lead. It was also not opposed to being obedient to those taking the lead and being submissive.  And also not opposed to the idea that Jehovah has his organization in complete control.
So what was your point?
 Exactly. So why worry about 1914?

By the way is the kind of comment that lands people who make it, out of the truth. May you never be stumbled.
 I hope one day the faithful slave is not going to change their understanding of 1914, to one similar to what is presented here by JWI. If they do, it won't make me think any less of them. What is it going to do to you though? And don't say it will never happen, because it HAS happened on many occasions where they taught one thing, and then "refined" their understanding. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against refining our understanding, or even changing our understanding. We should never dogmatically insist on something, and as far as I can see, change is proof that the FDS have not dogmatically insisted on something when further evidence came to light. So why should WE be dogmatic? Is it wrong to say that there are some interesting scriptural arguments being brought forward? Why insist on something "just" because for the present this is what the FDS teach? At least THAT should NOT be the argument. The argument should be a well presented scriptural counter argument. So far I have not really seen this on this thread, or on the other one. The majority has just been diversions, and attacks on the person and their motive.
What if I was to call into question your person and motive? Are you perhaps scared if 1914 is wrong, where will that leave a lot of our beliefs? Where would that leave you? Are you afraid this could delay the end?  Is that why you are sidestepping the issue and diverting attention from the "message" to the person? What are you afraid of?
So, how did that feel.

Yes, I believe the true faith is a minority too. The scriptures tell us so. We don't believe in the trinity, immortality of the soul and no Jehovah in NT do we?  Why include that in the mix with visible parousia and king in 33 C.E. though? Does that make it wrong just because the majority believe that? The majority also believe other things that we as JWs believe also.
Just as a side issue, I noticed that in the new 2013 NWT there are several instances where we changed the wording to be more in line  with other (Christendom's) translations.  You know the saying,  truth is truth no matter who says it

Yes, I believe the true faith is a minority too. The scriptures tell us so. We don't believe in the trinity, immortality of the soul and no Jehovah in NT do we?  Why include that in the mix with visible parousia and king in 33 C.E. though? Does that make it wrong just because the majority believe that? The majority also believe other things that we as JWs believe also.
Just as a side issue, I noticed that in the new 2013 NWT there are several instances where we changed the wording to be more in line  with other (Christendom's) translations.  You know the saying,  truth is truth no matter who says it

Why are you bringing this into the discussion?

WHEW!
With this posting there have been 14 LOOOOOONG pages of discussion.
I am so, SO glad it has been resolved.
It has absolutely NO application to my life, that I can do anything about, BUT, it's like watching people pick, and pick and PICK at their dandruff ... it's SO hard to look away.
The ONLY "saving grace" is that when on our deathbeds, we will get all this time back, spent discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin ... but ONLY to check our emails.

By the way is the kind of comment that lands people who make it, out of the truth. May you never be stumbled.
 I hope one day the faithful slave is not going to change their understanding of 1914, to one similar to what is presented here by JWI. If they do, it won't make me think any less of them. What is it going to do to you though? And don't say it will never happen, because it HAS happened on many occasions where they taught one thing, and then "refined" their understanding. Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against refining our understanding, or even changing our understanding. We should never dogmatically insist on something, and as far as I can see, change is proof that the FDS have not dogmatically insisted on something when further evidence came to light. So why should WE be dogmatic? Is it wrong to say that there are some interesting scriptural arguments being brought forward? Why insist on something "just" because for the present this is what the FDS teach? At least THAT should NOT be the argument. The argument should be a well presented scriptural counter argument. So far I have not really seen this on this thread, or on the other one. The majority has just been diversions, and attacks on the person and their motive.
What if I was to call into question your person and motive? Are you perhaps scared if 1914 is wrong, where will that leave a lot of our beliefs? Where would that leave you? Are you afraid this could delay the end?  Is that why you are sidestepping the issue and diverting attention from the "message" to the person? What are you afraid of?
So, how did that feel.

Why are you bringing this into the discussion?

On everything important, I agree.
 
I'm not claiming that we need to interpret it. After all the Bible already gave the interpretation. As you said before: "No need for another interpretation but thanks anyway." [Emphasis added.]
If the Bible says that it already gave us the interpretation, don't we risk adding to or taking away from the words of the scroll if we decide that we need another interpretation? And it can also lead to all kinds of scriptural problems and inconsistencies, which so far no one has responded to with scripture. (Changing the topic isn't the same thing, and, fwiw, I don't celebrate Christmas.) A mere claim that "the Governing Body" has all interpretational authority is probably fine for most of us. But when the scriptures demand that we search them and not accept "a letter as though from us" on the topic of the parousia, but suggests that we use "reason" my own conscience tells me that I have a responsibility to follow the Bible as best I can and follow the lead of the Governing Body as best I can, too. Wherever there might be a difference, however, I think we know who we should obey.
(2 Thessalonians 2:1, 2) 2 However, brothers, concerning the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ . . . we ask you 2 not to be quickly shaken from your reason nor to be alarmed either by an inspired statement or by a spoken message or by a letter appearing to be from us, to the effect that the day of Jehovah is here. (Luke 21:8) . . .He said: “Look out that you are not misled, for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, . . . ‘The due time is near.’ Do not go after them. . . (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.
(Acts 5:29) . . .: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.
 

Perhaps I should not say this, but this discussion does not bother me. Nor does it do damage to the cause, even if Ms. Violin appears to hope it will. Historically, many have peered intensely into these things. They still are. It is nothing new that they do it here.
The big fat books we used to study, when explaining some teaching, would preface their remarks with: "it does not mean this' and 'it does not mean that." 'Why do they say what it does not mean?' the Circuit Overseer asked. 'Why don't they just say what it does mean?' It was for the sake of the old-timers, who were being called upon to unravel understandings they once had. Understandings come and go. I'll take the GB's current version because they have some tangible apparatus to show that what they spin has been blessed by God. God's spirit has moved countless volunteers to do things that they do nowhere else. I'm actually a little heartened to see some discuss at length things like this because "it ain't me, babe." I don't feel threatened by it. Let them quibble chronology till the cows come home and hope they are not missing the facts on the ground @Araunaspeaks of, for that is where the real proof of is - faith expressed in practical ways that no one else has gotten around to doing. This stuff is icing on the cake with innumerable variables arguable many ways.
Listen, I'm smart (if you are not fussy) yet this all goes over my head. It will do the same to everyone. Not so if I took hours to review and digest it, but I don't - the real truth is supported by deeds, and if there are no supporting deeds, then it is mere academic air and no one ought to get too worked up over it. Let the ones who have made it a special interest carry on with discussion. For personal reasons, there are a few non-spiritual subjects I know in considerable detail. Why should I object that some have made this theirs? I'll just interrupt here and there to insult @The Librarian.(the meddlesome hen)

Until Satan was put out of heaven there were doubtful ideas spread all the time in heaven and angels (even if perfect) were vulnerable to this as they could use their free choice to turn against Jehovah and disobey him. They also had to prove their loyalty to Jehovah.  Book of revelation indicates that one third of the myriads of angels followed in Satans footsteps.... (it hurt the heavenly family) and angels on their way to earthly missions were intercepted by Satans rulers.... One angel told Daniel that the archangel came to help him!  The heavens was also subject to Satans influence!   So this clears up the flawed thinking above about the heavenly woman!  The book of Jude indicates that Jesus had to rebuke an angel who wanted to take Moses's body to (no doubt) create more false worship and destroy the plans of Jehovah to bring forth the Messiah from the nation of Jews!
Since Satan was a heavenly creature the issue of obedience and loyalty to Jehovah became an UNIVERSAL issue.  This is why the firstborn son came to earth because he was directly created by God - a heavenly creature who became less than the other angels and therefore settled the obedience of heavenly creatures (until death) in addition to the earthly issue to be settled.
The heavens rejoiced greatly when satan was thrown out! For sure.  This 'woman' gave birth to a new nation when a new spiritual land was created!  The 144,000 who were in death received the First resurrection and a new nation (of priests and kings) was born!  These would be part of this new Kingdom!       The logic of the writings I have seen thus far in these 12 pages defies logic and since Jehovah is absolute logic I expect things to fit in perfectly and make absolute sense. As I said before - people become so captured by the minute detail that they lose the larger picture and literally throw out the new born baby (the sacred secret of the kingdom) with the bath water!
I expect to see an unbelievable intensifying of the power of satan on the earth - to the extent that there is no more good people to hold his total influence back!  So far - wickedness has been held back by the decency of societies.... this is a figment of the past.
Whether we will see a third world war - we do not know - but it will just be more of the same on a much larger scale.  However, civil society is becoming so hard to live in with wickedness, love of violence and spiritism everywhere!  The longer the world situation is building the bigger the effect when it cracks open!
Everything is escalating because many issues are coming to a conclusion - such as the destruction of the earth - soon we will reach a point of no return with so many issues regarding the earth on the table.  I can go on and on about the issues we are facing with the earth (climate change is the smallest one!)....
So - this is the time to unitedly preach, preach, preach!

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.

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

I recall that 1914 was the first major war fought with airplane bombing, flame throwers, chemical and gas weapons, many submarines (improved on the tiny ones used in the civil war in USA)... it was also after the development of the telegraph - used extensively;  tank warfare and individual soldiers were issued with machine guns.... battle of the Somme rates on most lists of worst battles ever fought.
Second world war is an improvement on this with aircraft carriers; radar; radio used extensively during war; and atomic bomb; 
What do we have now: improvement on previous weapons: satellites, drones, intercontinental ballistic missiles; nuclear submarines; supersonic jets; electro magnetic pulse; more varieties of nuclear weapons; information warfare, 
Most weapons are all improvements on the communications or weapons used in the 1914 WW1....
The proof is still on the ground.  

Yes, I fully agree with you, one should expect that
 
Actually JWs in Italy are one of the largest religions after the Catholics

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.

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]