The timing of Jesus' 2nd Coming

[Ann O'Maly]

13 hours ago, Arauna said:

There is no 'assumption' that the year has 360 days.  The Israelites used the "moon year" with a short 13th month every 4th year...

The lunar year is 12 x 29.5 day months = 354 days. This means an intercalary (leap) month of either 29 or 30 days long had to be added every 2 or 3 years to re-calibrate with the solar year (thereby becoming a luni-solar system). An intercalary month would lengthen that year to 383 or 384 days long.

The 360-day year is neither a lunar nor solar year, but is a schematic one of 12 x 30 day months which then have to have the 4 epagomenal days (2 equinoxes and 2 solstices) added to make 364 days and better align with the solar year. The 364-day year divides neatly into 52 weeks of 7 days. (See Book of Jubilees, ch. 6 and information on the Book of Enoch's 'Astronomical Book').

13 hours ago, Arauna said:

However, revelation clearly gives the number of days for 3 and a half. So one only needs to double this number to get to 7. Quite simple...

But several leaps in assumption have to be made to arrive at the 'simple' conclusion. E.g. Why are 7 (360 day) years of 2,520 days stretched to 2,520 (365.25 day) years? Does the Aramaic word for 'times' in Dan. 4 necessarily mean literal years anyway?

[Arauna]

Why do you quote from apocryphal scripture that was written 'after' the holy scripture was already completed - so as to push the conversation again into another debate?.  I am not going into another debate about apocryphal scripture because you do not even believe in the bible...  This conversation is about the Bible and its prophecies. I think you are deliberately misleading this conversation to give smart sounding soundbites.   

On average, the moon revolves around the Earth in about 29½ days and some hours.  To accommodate certain ritual requirements, the Jewish calendar consists of 12 or 13 months of 29 or 30 days.  Most nations that worked according to the moon such as the Arabs had the same calendar.    To remove all doubt about the number of prophetic days in a month - God removes all doubt - because he gives us the number to use. He gives u the number of days for 3 and half times - so it is easy to calculate 7 times.   The bible is consistent - even if you do not believe in it....

 

 

 

[JW Insider]

9 hours ago, Arauna said:

I do not confuse gentile rule with messianic rule. The period that the tree was stumped  depicts Nebuchadnezzar's rule (gentile rule) and when the band is removed it depicts the Messianic rule when Jehovah gives the rulership to Jesus at the end of the gentile times - Jesus is the one who has the right to the throne...

Yes. I agree that this is the way we explain it. I was not thinking that you personally confused gentile rule with messianic rule. I am referring to several problems with this explanation that we (WTS) has had to deal with through the years. 

One of these problems is the fact that the "debased" and "humiliating" experience of Nebuchadnezzar, a pagan Gentile, is explained in our doctrine as corresponding with the "debased" and "humiliating" experience of Jesus Christ, a non-pagan, non-Gentile.

• (Daniel 4:16,17)  16 Let its heart be changed from that of a human, and let it be given the heart of a beast, and let seven times pass over it. . . .so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he gives it to whomever he wants, and he sets up over it even the lowliest of men.”

Remember, that this is Nebuchadnezzar speaking in those verses just quoted, and he is remembering the dream just as Jehovah wanted him to remember it. So the question is therefore WHO is this "lowliest of men" whom the Most High sets up over the the kingdom of mankind? Note, too, that the idea of the words translated "lowliest of men" might be just as well translated "lowest or basest of persons."

It's easy to see that this basest of persons is Nebuchadnezzar. He became low, debased and humiliated for his pride. I'm sure we all know the passage, I only include it below as a reminder that Nebuchadnezzar knew very clearly that he himself was this person who was made low and debased, and also as a reminder that it was his own kingdom that was restored to him, which causes a bit of a logical distortion when we claim, as you said, that while stumped and banded it pictures the beastly rule of the Gentiles, yet when the band is removed [and Nebuchadnezzar gets his kingdom back] it depicts the Messianic kingdom given to Christ Jesus.

• (Daniel 4:22-35) 22 it is you, O king,. . .25 You will be driven away from among men, and your dwelling will be with the beasts of the field, and you will be given vegetation to eat just like bulls; and you will become wet with the dew of the heavens, and seven times will pass over you, . . . 31 While the word was yet in the king’s mouth, a voice came down from the heavens: “To you it is being said, O King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, ‘The kingdom has gone away from you, . . .  until you know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he grants it to whomever he wants.’” 33 At that moment the word was fulfilled on Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar. He was driven away from mankind, and he began to eat vegetation just like bulls, and his body became wet with the dew of the heavens, until his hair grew long just like eagles’ feathers and his nails were like birds’ claws. 34 “At the end of that time I, Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, looked up to the heavens, and my understanding returned to me; and I praised the Most High, and to the One living forever I gave praise and glory, because his rulership is an everlasting rulership and his kingdom is for generation after generation. 35 All the inhabitants of the earth are regarded as nothing, and he does according to his own will among the army of the heavens and the inhabitants of the earth. And there is no one who can hinder him or say to him, ‘What have you done?’ 36 “At that time my understanding returned to me, and the glory of my kingdom, my majesty, and my splendor returned to me. My high officials and nobles eagerly sought me out, and I was restored to my kingdom, and even more greatness was added to me.

One way to see that we have confused the messianic and gentile kingdoms is very clear. We are forced to simultaneously believe that Nebuchadnezzar was this "lowest, basest person" due to his punishment for haughtiness, and also say that it means Jesus Christ who was wrongly considered to be the "basest" of men by non-believers who didn't know or wouldn't believe the truth about Jesus. Here's an example of what we have said to prove that Jesus was the "lowest" or "basest" of mankind:

• *** w59 4/15 pp. 248-249 pars. 42-44 Part 12—“Your Will Be Done on Earth” ***
• 42 What did all this mean regarding world domination at the end of the “seven times” in the fall of the year 1914 (A.D.)? . . .  He must set over it the lowliest of men.—Dan. 4:17, RS.
• 43 That means He must give it to the anointed Son of David, Jesus Christ, who was considered the basest of men, so base, in fact, that he was wrongly called sacrilegious, a blasphemer, a seditionist, a winebibber and a glutton, and was impaled upon a torture stake like a criminal slave. He lowered himself from heaven to earth by emptying himself of heavenly power and glory and taking a slave’s form and coming to be in the likeness of men. . . .
• 44 Because of such lowliness God must highly exalt Jesus, higher than King David, who reigned on earthly Mount Zion. . . . This kingdom of David’s Son must bless the Most High God, just as restored Nebuchadnezzar did.

And, of course, no one would doubt that Jesus is the one who has the right to the throne, a Messianic throne that ultimately rules all the nations, and is ultimately even considered "Jehovah's throne" as part of the restoration of all things, after which Jesus hands the kingdom back to the Father.

• *** w57 12/15 p. 760 par. 13 Examples of Keepers of Integrity ***
• 13 The “throne of Jehovah” upon which Jesus wanted to sit as Anointed Ruler was not that throne on which King David had sat and which King Nebuchadnezzar overturned in 607 B.C.E., but it was Jehovah’s real throne in the highest heavens, where the place was kept for Jesus at Jehovah’s right hand.—Ps. 110:1, 2; Heb. 10:12, 13.

• (1 Corinthians 15:24-28) 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. 27 For God “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him. 28 But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.
• (Acts 3:19-21) 19 “Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get your sins blotted out, so that seasons of refreshing may come from Jehovah himself 20 and he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus. 21 Heaven must hold this one within itself until the times of restoration of all things of which God spoke through the mouth of his holy prophets of old.

[I'm still amazed that anyone can read that last 1 Cor 15 passage and remain Trinitarian.]

I'm not saying that our doctrine claims that Nebuchadnezzar directly represents Jesus. That has been said in the past, even based on the 1970 public talk outline on Daniel 4, but officially, it's usually with reference to his capacity as executioner of Jehovah's judgment. The Watchtower has said:

• *** w50 11/15 p. 444 par. 17    "In this capacity Nebuchadnezzar was a type of Jesus Christ."   [We no longer say this as of 1979; see below.]
• *** w94 3/1 p. 18 par. 3    ". . . but also the start of “the appointed times of the nations,” referred to at Luke 21:24. This 2,520-year period ended in our century, in the year 1914. By then the time had come for Jehovah, by his enthroned Son, Jesus Christ, who is greater than Nebuchadnezzar, to pronounce and execute judgment on the corrupt world." [This is updated wording to prior wording where Jesus was sometimes called the "Greater Cyrus" and, in years prior, the "Greater Nebuchadnezzar."]
• *** w80 5/15 p. 17 par. 4    "Nebuchadnezzar’s work in harmony with Jehovah’s will pictured the work of Jesus Christ during this “time of the end,” where we are now."
• *** w79 9/15 p. 23 par. 8    "This does not mean, however, that Nebuchadnezzar was a type of Jesus Christ,"

There are some other difficulties that have shown up historically and the Watchtower has reflected some of these changes over the years to the manner in which we explain the tree dream prophecy. I don't have to get into them now, but if anyone is interested, there is a lot to think about. I'm well aware that whenever a brother or sister finds a potential issue when reasoning on the scriptures that they will be sullied as "haughty" and "independent thinkers" or even worse. But when we study the Bible's words humbly and prayerfully and without immediately trying to use them to prove a long-held tradition, I think we can benefit from this type of Bible study. This also doesn't mean that I believe that a specific alternative is the only way to understand these verses, I am only pointing out what seems clear to me. I would welcome any other Biblical evidence that could explain the difficulties.

[JW Insider]

On 9/6/2016 at 2:52 AM, Arauna said:

If I give an illustration - it is to get a point across..... I do not expect a person to apply every minute detail to such a degree that the illustration is no longer relevant and loses its power.... that is nitpicking.   Similarly, I do not understand what you are trying to say -  because you are trying to see things that are not there  so you can refute the "beasty" time of Nebuchadnezzar to not be compared with gentile times..... but you are finding obscure things to reason upon.

I think it is shortsighted of you that you cannot see a correlation.   It fits in perfectly with the central theme of the bible (which is about human rule versus direct sovereignty by god) and it also fits into a perfect timeline ..... but I guess you have never thought of it that way...  

Ephesians 1:8-10New King James Version (NKJV)

⁸ which He made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence, ⁹ having made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Himself, ¹⁰ that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both^[a] which are in heaven and which are on earth—in Him.

I agree almost 100% with everything you said in this post, except for about 2 lines. If the differences seem important, I'll point them out, but mainly I want to understand specifically why the current explanation of Daniel 4 makes sense to you in the way it does.

I agree that it's easy to go too far with this type of questioning. I may have done this, even though I was trying to stick with only questions that gave me the most difficulty. And, of course, I agree with the main point of Daniel 4 that Jehovah is in charge, and the rulership(s) of the kingdom(s) of mankind are by his permission which he could revoke or renew at any time he chooses. In order to prove this point to a very haughty pagan king, Jehovah created a situation that would prove the point undeniably, even to such a haughty person who never worshiped the true God. It worked.

Obviously, from this illustration, we would accept that the same holds true not just of Nebuchadnezzar, but of all kings and rulers, including Belshazzar, Cyrus, Artaxerxes, Tiberius Caesar, Adolph Hitler, Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel, King Hussein, Nelson Mandela, etc. And it very well also applies to Jesus Christ, the heavenly ruler who has taken his great power and begun ruling as king.

I agree that it applies to Jesus in a somewhat different sense. It's only by the way we extend any parable that it also applies also to Jesus. The methods of trying to somehow "equate" Jesus and Nebuchadnezzar in a special manner do not make sense. (I'll explain that "special manner" below.)

And, yes, I realize that we aren't equating them in all respects. I was only giving a couple of examples of why it can appear absurd to equate them at all.

So I do see a correlation to Jehovah's overall sovereignty over the nations but I don't see a single correlation between the experience of Nebuchadnezzar and how this relates to the experience of the Messianic line, specifically. The Messianic line is included in any extended meaning we get from the experience, and of course, it was also brought low and raised on high to an even greater place of importance than it had before under David, or Zedekiah. But there is nothing in the passage that allows us to say that it specifically means Jesus. Especially is there nothing that says it means Jesus in an even more important way than what it meant for Nebuchadnezzar. It taught a universal truth, about God's rulership, especially over the wicked rulers of the world. It does NOT seem to ESPECIALLY teach a parable about God's rulership over his own kingdom through Christ Jesus.

Of course, the supposed "key" is the fact that it says "so that people living may know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he gives it to whomever he wants, and he sets up over it even the lowliest of men.” But we can see from the context that this is not specifically about Jesus. Since this is a universal truth, it applies everywhere. So, it's no surprise that we can say it also applies to Jesus as part of the Judean Messianic kingly line. We also know it applied when he raised up his servant Cyrus. It also applied during another part of Nebuchadnezzar's own life when he raised the kings of Babylon up to punish the kingdoms surrounding Judea, (such as the king of Tyre) and to also punish Judea itself during the 70 years of domination that Jehovah gave to Babylon. Sennacherib got the same lesson earlier when he was brought low while warring against Israel.

This must be where you think I'm "short-sighted" because I don't see a direct correlation that applies to only ONE other kingdom. Naturally, I think that it might be even more short-sighted to limit the scope to only one other kingdom. Some of the problems and ironies make me wonder whether the ONE other kingdom we teach to be the ONLY solution is even appropriate for this particular illustration. Since it's not even in the same category of the types of pagan, wicked and haughty kingdom's like Nebuchadnezzar's perhaps it's especially not in the most appropriate category for us to draw such a SPECIFIC meaning out of Daniel 4. In our doctrine, the experience of this one wicked and vicious king is ONLY meant to point to only ONE other specific kingdom besides him, and that one is surely not in the category of wicked, vicious, pagan kings -- because it's Jesus Christ. 

As I said, I agree with almost everything in your post. But another thing you said that I believe I can respond to is this:

On 9/6/2016 at 2:52 AM, Arauna said:

If the rest of mankind was so busy calculating time - why would god keep his own people backward?  Would it not be logical that he would give them a few prophecies regarding important steps in his purpose so they could realize that his purpose is moving forward? .... This could give them more faith... especially as the final days of this system is drawing closer.

For me, the answer seems straightforward. It is very logical that Jehovah knew and wanted his people to be concerned about time in order to be alert to identifying the Messiah, and to strengthen faith in the fact that Jehovah has the world and its administration under control.

There is only one reason why there could come a time when he would NOT want them to continue relying on cues from chronology -- and that would be when he was looking for a kind of faith that made us ready at all times without respect to the times and seasons, without respect to looking for signs of the times. If Jesus was looking for that kind of faith, even if the world went on for another thousand years or more (2 Peter 3:8) then I would expect that Jesus would say something like:

• (Acts 1:7) . . .“It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction.

And I would expect that the apostles such as Paul would agree with Jesus here and say things such as:

• (1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2) 5 Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night.

And I would expect that Jesus would explain, just as he did for his disciples when they asked, that we shouldn't be looking for signs of the parousia because we could be misled by thinking that wars, earthquakes, pestilence and such things were signs of the end when the end was not yet.

• (Matthew 24:3-6) . . .“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, . . . 6 You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for these things must take place, but the end is not yet.
• (Luke 17:20) 20 On being asked by the Pharisees when the Kingdom of God was coming, he answered them: “The Kingdom of God is not coming with striking observableness (NWT)
• (Luke 17:20 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." (NLT)

 

 

 

[Arauna]

I think you have the right spirit - we should research everything and make sure of it - so that our hearts are 100% committed and focused and we should regularly investigate ourselves inside to see if we are still staying " in the love of Jehovah".. However, I am not one to put emphasis on what people said or did in the past.  I am very much interested in present things.

Hence my impatience with people who insist on bringing up the past.... and expecting people to answer for it in the present time and culture... .

I myself have said things in the past, on which I have made a 180 degree turn about when I gained a different perspective.  I also view things in the time period they were said.    Good example is the 1950s - 60s in America:  High ranking officials said race related things that would be considered totally outrageous after the year 2000.... but back then these people were viewed by their piers as being "too liberal" and were targeted for being to liberal!

I am a baby boomer and I remember finding the truth in early 70s.  At this time the books we studied were so into history and gave lengthy, complicated explanations (I loved it but a lot of friends hated it - one of my favorite books is the 'ancient' Daniel book which came out in the 1950s and Babylon the great has fallen). Many  'comparisons' were made at the time which would not be done today by the governing body. Some things said, by todays standards, could be labeled  "cringe-worthy".  But we all are cringe-worthy in our infancy....and then we grow up.  All of us are "growing up"  in our spiritual stature - even the anointed are growing up all the time, becoming more mature. 

In fact, we have had a lot of material recently in our meetings where the Governing body has said they are going out of their way to simplify explanations..  For example they explained how there was a tendency to go into minutest detail in the past when discussing the illustrations given by Jesus ...... which can make one so engrossed in the details that one can lose the point.   They have given us recently some illustrations which take one almost immediately to the point - I almost felt cheated out of something - because I was going back to the old familiar pattern of doing things- the way things were done in the past.... We lose the 'youth' if we stick to the past and do things like we did in the past.  We have to move on and find new ways to explain things, simplify things.  I love the new app which explains the truth.  I have found so many wonderful illustrations on there  to teach the truth effectively...

As you must have gathered - I worked in PR for a very long time.  I learnt early on in my career, as a reporter and in PR, that materials which are simple, attract people - this was before the advent of internet.  In fact I worked on the internet long before other people because the press usually adapted to the newest technology faster than other business sectors.  At this time I was looking at the materials we as Witnesses presented  to people and thought, they are way too complicated for the average busy person who wants to get to the core of the matter much quicker..

You can imagine my joy when they not only started the new formatting but the way in which the truth is presented - the simplified language..

Angle is very important in any story.  I remember collecting information and writing an article - then my boss would reject it....  I would then go and rethink the exact same material with a new angle .... and it would be accepted.

The understanding of scripture is becoming so much clearer... and the angles are very much geared to the difficult times we are living in.  Technology has helped a lot.  Explanations are not cluttered with unnecessary data and the presentations are short so as to keep the attention of the reader.. Our meetings are also more focused on teaching new ones - because so many are coming in at present.  Us older ones have to get our kicks from studying privately at home. I have also learnt to think about things a lot...... so I sometimes get sustained for long periods of time thinking how incredible the Bible really is, consistent and logical.... and its message right on target for the times we are living in.... I also watch world events - the dire culmination of man's ruling over themselves to their own detriment - which is eminent. 

To me it is sad that people cannot look at their own experience and see how they themselves have changed and how the era's change (the way that society collectively thinks.)  Collectively, Jehovah's people have also changed.  I love how the Governing body is now emphasizing our development of the Christian personality -  much more than before.

Look at me rambling on.... Looking back cannot get one engaged in the present or the future...

 

[Evacuated]

The anwer to this question is quite categorically NO! and the scriptures quoted by @HollyW substantiate this.

However, there needs to be clarity about just what it was that Jesus said would have an unknown day and hour as referenced at Matt. 24:36, Mk.13:32. The important thing is that these words were given in answer to the question as to when the "conclusion" would be. So the timing of that event and all that it encompasses is what is unknown as to day and hour.

With regard to Jesus' presence, about which enquiry was also made, a composite sign was given. To me, if I am on a journey to arrive at an important destination with which I am unfamiliar, road signs become important. I know when I need to look out for a sign as I make myself aware of my location. Then, when the sign becomes visible, I take the necessary course of action and reach (hopefully) my destination. And if I have an appointment time to meet, then I know about what time I need to be seeing the sign if I am to arrive on schedule.

 I am not using this analogy to illustrate nuances of difference between the meanings of words like "coming", "arrival" and "presence".  Enough has been said on that subject in many other postings. Suffice it to say that Jesus does not need to geographically relocate to be "present" any more than his father does. Just a change in focus is all that is required. And as for Jesus ruling his followers since the first century, of course that is true. But just as Jehovah has become king on numerous occasions just by excercising His authority (Ps 97:10), so Jesus can do the same.

I am suggesting that it could be seen as unreasonable to provide a sign of something important and then not to provide some indication of when the sign would be visible. 

Whilst there are of course "times and seaons that the Father has placed within His own jurisdiction", there are also those that He has seen fit to reveal. I happen to believe that the timing of Jesus full investiture  in kingdom power is one of those times and that this is what took place in 1914CE. The sign, a collection of world events not limited just to those listed in the Olivet discourse, have unmistakeably coincided with that event and are sufficiently attested to in order to command my attention and effect my direction of travel. 

 

[Evacuated]

There is a great deal of text and personal reasoning expressed in this thread reflecting doubt in the current application Jehovah's Wittnesses make regarding the period of 7 times featuried in Daniel's account of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar recorded at Daniel chapter 4.

In a nutshell, the current belief, as I understand it, is as follows:

The period of 7 times for the abasement and restoration of rulership described in this dream is understood as having an initial and literal application to a period of 7 years during which time Nebuchadnezzar suffered a debilitating period of temporary insanity at the hand of God. This blow was dealt to him as a result of his haughtiness and refusal to recognise that his great rulership, including the overthrow of the Davidic (Messianic) kingdom of Judah, had only been possible due to the specific excercise of Jehovah in allowing him to carry out judicial execution on the renegade kingly line of David. Nebuchadnezzar learned his lesson as described in verses 34-35, and his rulership was restored.

Without labouring the explanation, dealt with in great detail elsewhere, the dream is also seen as having greater application to the dethroning of the Messianic, Davidic kingly line seated in literal Jerusalem and, specifically, the time period until its restoration in the hands of Christ Jesus as the king of God's heavenly kingdom enthroned in heavenly Jerusalem. In my mind, this is cross-referenced to Ezekiel 21:26-27 where the forfeited Davidic crown woud be eventuallly restored by Jehovah to the one who has "the legal right". In the meantime,  a period of time for uncontested human rule on earth that Jesus referred to at Luke 21:24 would run it's course. (popularly known as the Gentile Times).

Amongst a multitude of interpretations of the time period referred to often as the "Gentile Times", Jehovah's Witnesses understand this time period as encompassing 2520 years of undisputed Gentile or non-theocratic domination of mankinds affairs. This is applied to the period 607BCE down to 1914CE which concurs with (our acceptance of) the date of Jerusalem's desolation (607BCE), terminating in the enthroning of Jesus as king in the heavens (1914CE) and described at Rev.12:10. The first execution of kingly power as described at Rev. 12:9 is the casting of Satan and his demonic supporters out of heaven. This is seen to be the prime cause of the escalation of disorder in earth's affairs and the commencement of the sign Jesus gave at, for example, Luke 21:10-11 and is paralleled at Rev.6:1-7.

With regard to the understanding of the 2520 literal 7 times or 7 years of madness experienced by Nebuchadnezzar, the interpreting of this period as being of much lengthier duration is not new. In the 19th Century, this dream was a topic of conversation among various bible students with John Aquila Brown making this interesting statement in c.1823, "The "seven times" would, therefore be considered as a grand week of years, forming a period of two thousand five hundred and twenty years". (The Eventide p.135). Part of his reasoning for an extended application of Nebuchadnezar's dream is the way in which Daniel's explanation of Nebucahdnezzar's earlier dream of a mighty, metallic image (Dan. Chap.2) refers in the first instance to Nebuchadnezzar being the "head of gold". However, the succession of metals in the image, down to the eventual destruction by the kingdom stone, are evidently successions of dynasties of kings or empires. This corroborates with the interpretation of Daniels own dreams of successions of wild beasts experienced later and recorded in Chapter 7 and 8, especially Dan.8:20. Convoluted counter arguments, both using scripture or historical references are not very convincing, so for me, there appears  to be no current need to reinvent the wheel at this particular time.

Some difficulty has been raised in equating Nebuchadnezzar as a type of Jesus and inconsistency in the comparison. Well, I fail to see Nebuchadnezzar as a "type" of Jesus even under that now-obsolete method of interpretation. What Nebuchadnezzar typifies (for want of a better word), is rulership gone wrong and we can certainly draw a parallel in the Davidic dynasty with it's prideful rebellion against Jehovah and it's forgetting that it owed it's very existence to Jehovah. This is what was debased in a manner like that experienced by Nebuchadnezzar (Ez. 21:26-27). As for Jesus being the "lowliest of men", it is true he was viewed as accursed dirt by his opposers and of no regard by many since. Far more significant is the statement at Ph. 2:7-8. The words at v 9-11 also have significance in connection with both Dan 4:17,and 4:32. Also important is the kind of lowliness Jesus described at Matt.11:29 and exemplified in his statement at John 5:30. Jesus far exceeded even the example of Moses in this regard (Nu12:3).

There are many things that could and probably will be said on this matter. But, for me anyway, I am quite satisfied that Jehovah, who "puts one man down and exalts another" (Ps 75:7),  is quite able to steer the thinking of His people into a correct understanding of His word. And any adjustments that need to be made will be disseminated through the faithful and discrete slave that His son has appointed to feed His people at this particular time. And, at the risk of irritation to some maybe, there are no indications for me that the critical comments on this particular thread form any part of that direction. 

[JW Insider]

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

I think you have the right spirit - we should research everything and make sure of it - so that our hearts are 100% committed and focused and we should regularly investigate ourselves inside to see if we are still staying " in the love of Jehovah".. However, I am not one to put emphasis on what people said or did in the past.  I am very much interested in present things.

I certainly appreciate that. As you might have noticed, most of the historical issues I mentioned are ones that we are still dealing with, in the present. It's true that we simplified the explanations and don't go into as much detail anymore, but those underlying explanations are still in the background.

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

Hence my impatience with people who insist on bringing up the past.... and expecting people to answer for it in the present time and culture... .

Absolutely. That's understandable. We need not worry so much about whether or not we were right or wrong on such subjects in the past. Jehovah is merciful and forgiving. Much more than we are. Also, I believe that our core doctrines outside the area of chronology count for so much more, that I am not worried even if we had never gotten anything right on the subject of chronology.  But I bring up these points of history, not so that they can be defended or critiqued, but for what insight they can give us on our current doctrines. Like you, I love history and I love research. Bethel allowed me to indulge this passion of mine even before there was a real Internet, and I was many times even allowed to spend actual "worktime" at a couple of local NYC libraries. Imagine my current joy now that so much more information is right at our fingertips.

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

At this time the books we studied were so into history and gave lengthy, complicated explanations (I loved it but a lot of friends hated it - one of my favorite books is the 'ancient' Daniel book which came out in the 1950s and Babylon the great has fallen).

The "Your Will Be Done On Earth" book on Daniel (1958) was the very first book I remember taking to the 'Book Study' on Tuesday nights. Actually I was too young at the time to get much out of it until later. It's the same book that was "serialized" into several 1958 Watchtowers including the one I quoted in a previous post here. But I do remember the Babylon book (1963) very well. My brother and I were attending a two room school at the time we were studying this book around 1965 and 1966.  I was in the room where a teacher taught grades 1-4 and my brother was in the other room where a teacher taught grades 5-8. A local preacher came in once a week on Tuesday to teach Sunday School over lunch. Everyone was supposed to attend, but we got out of it by being allowed to take our "Babylon" books to school that day and study on our own in the "cloak room." I was young and struggled with it, but really enjoyed the history.

 

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

We have to move on and find new ways to explain things, simplify things. 

It may not sound like it, but this was the driving force behind my critique of the 1914 doctrine.

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

As you must have gathered - I worked in PR for a very long time.

I have learned a lot about you and your career(s) online. And I also know some of the friends in Jax. We may cross paths. Glad to know you are a sister.

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

Our meetings are also more focused on teaching new ones - because so many are coming in at present.  Us older ones have to get our kicks from studying privately at home. I have also learnt to think about things a lot...... so I sometimes get sustained for long periods of time thinking how incredible the Bible really is, consistent and logical.

This is very good. When you mentioned how good the more recent simplified styles and simplified message is for teaching new ones,  I was about to mention the "double-edged" nature of this based on some of the complaints from older ones that were heard last year on the jw-archive forum. But I couldn't think of a way to say it without sounding like I didn't appreciate the change in style. Then I just noticed that you said it perfectly in the portion I just re-quoted from you, above.

14 hours ago, Arauna said:

I love how the Governing body is now emphasizing our development of the Christian personality -  much more than before.

I have mentioned this often myself. Even the doctrinal changes aimed at simplifying the way we look at parables and narratives are aimed at this goal. For me, this is also the answer to the improper focus some have given chronology, speculation, and "serving for a date." As Peter says:

• (2 Peter 3:11, 12) 11 Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of persons ought YOU to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 awaiting and keeping close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah,. . .

Thanks for the interaction. I appreciate your style and maturity, and even your lack of patience with nonsense. I will still likely pick up on some of the points you have made along the way to respond to this doctrinal issue. The idea is not to push you personally into an argument. (Although I would welcome a dialogue in the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15.) It's because you have given a sincere and correct response based on the current teaching. If there is another explanation that is simpler, more direct, and perhaps more Biblical -- then it should come out of a reasonable response to the defense that you have already made. If there is not a more Biblical response to the doctrine, then, of course, we will give the full benefit of the doubt to years of experience of the Governing Body.

I echo a lot of what you have said, because I appreciate the changes made, especially in more recent years. I believe they are taking us in an important direction. I don't know if outsiders recognize just how much has changed, and the benefits we are deriving from them.

[JW Insider]

16 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

There is a great deal of text and personal reasoning expressed in this thread reflecting doubt in the current application Jehovah's Witnesses make regarding the period of 7 times featured in Daniel's account of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar recorded at Daniel chapter 4.

I found the comments in your last two posts to be powerful and subtle at the same time. I also appreciated what you said in another recent thread about what you think would really change for us in a thread called "What if the Gentile Times did not end in 1914?" I am not sure I caught the whole nautical analogy over on that thread, but I was thinking that you meant you trust that any change in course will always be made if it's really necessary, and it will be timely enough so that no one's faith need be shipwrecked. But the part I appreciated more was your initial point that such a change would simply mean that true Christians would have an experience similar to that of the faithful men of old as summarized in Hebrews 11:13 (and a specific example you gave from Genesis 25:8). You also said: " These scriptures hold good regardless of when the Gentile Times end and would do so even if we had never heard the expression in our lives."

I thought that answer was spot on. I also noticed that you took the entire question in that thread to imply that, as you said, "the present system will end later rather than sooner." I don't know Holly (who asked the initial question) but would guess that this is irrelevant. Defining the Gentile Times in a certain way has had no effect on delaying or speeding up the end of the system. Isn't that the whole point: that this system could end at ANY TIME without warning?

That was just a rhetorical question. But I do have some questions and comments on your points in this thread.

 

[JW Insider]

20 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

However, there needs to be clarity about just what it was that Jesus said would have an unknown day and hour as referenced at Matt. 24:36, Mk.13:32.

BTW, when threads get this long (over one page) I wish the default was not "Sort by Votes." I don't know if everyone else gets this as their default, but I wish it was "Sort by Date" so that I could find what was most recently said.

Naturally, I agree with these re-quoted comments about Matthew 24, etc. But there is another question that seems to loom quite large in the minds of almost all Witnesses, and it results in some prejudices about motives. I think this needs to be addressed. Your last two posts covered the issue well, and summarized the important points about the history of the doctrine, and made what is probably the most important point about how we have seen many interlocking points from related scriptures as the key to accepting the 1914 doctrine. 

Therefore, we have a situation where some Witnesses have seen the doctrine as a "complete mess" of needing to jump all over the place to take verses here and there out of context, and to redefine Biblical terms to their "least likely" meaning instead of their "most likely" meaning. Some of these issues include:

• parousia: coming vs presence vs royal visitation
• synteleia/telos: conclusion vs end vs end of all things
• visibility: revelation/manifestation/appearance/lightning
• Jesus spoke of "the sign" vs "composite" sign
• Jesus said wars not "a sign" to watch for vs Watchtower saying this was the first and primary sign in 1914
• kingdom vs "all authority" vs "king-designate"
• standing/sitting/waiting vs "ruling as king" at God's right hand
• 70 years "for" Babylon vs 70 years "at" Babylon [i.e. "first deportation" or "next-to-last deportation"]
• 607 vs. 587 BCE
• day-for-a-year vs years ("times")
• first fulfillment on Gentile vs second fulfillment on non-Gentiles
• End of Gentile Times vs End of Lease of Gentile Times
• "this generation" vs "these several generations fitting within the lifespans of two overlapping groups"
• 1914 predicted: "not the beginning, but the end of the system" vs "beginning of the end of the system."
• Luke 21:24: Jesus said the Gentile Times had not yet started "will start" vs Watchtower's claim that they had already started 600 years earlier
• Revelation 11:3 Gentile Times = 42 months or 1,260 days vs Watchtower definition of 2,520 years.
• "last days" coincide with 1914 parousia vs meaning of "last days" in scripture
• [not a complete list]

But other Witnesses will look at these same issues and see that all these these related scriptures and interlocking definitions create a system that is effectively proved right because of the complexity. In the sense that if a three-fold cord cannot quickly be broken, then what about a ten-fold cord, a twenty-fold cord? And even more to the point, it is part of a larger hundred-fold cord that includes all of the teachings accepted from the Governing Body at the current time. [And, for some, anyone who expresses criticism of this one doctrine is somehow criticizing the authority of the Governing Body, and therefore Jehovah's arrangement, and therefore, is taking a stand against Jehovah himself.]

At the very least it is implied that Witnesses who are critical or express doubts about 1914 are trying to give direction to the appointed "faithful slave" perhaps out of a desire for prominence, ego, willful desire, independent thinking, apostasy, trolling, etc.

It is rare that Witnesses will look at such criticism and see it as a fervent desire to make sure of all things, or a reflection of someone who keeps testing whether they are in the faith. Rarely is it treated as if it reflects the noble-minded desire of the Beroeans to see whether these things were so.

Sometimes it is understood for what it is, but the interjection of the idea that this goes against the appointed faithful and discreet slave is a sure way to clamp down and make sure that others are prejudiced against seeing it in this light.

Can a criticism of a current teaching ever be an act of love and concern? Can it ever be compared to the idea of warning others who may have taken a false step? Can it ever be seen as something required of Christians who might want to make sure that a tradition does not make the word of God invalid?

I think it usually cannot because the first thought is often "Who are you to think you have the right and authority to give counsel to the appointed slave?" Even if right, we should always wait on the organization before saying anything, and not move ahead of the chariot. There is often the thought that any person who would dare to question in such a manner must be irritated that they aren't seen as having some "authority" too, or irritated that their words are not accepted as truth.

Naturally, I think there is a very different and healthier way to look at such situations. But I've gone on too long for a single post (again).

 

[HollyW]

23 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

BTW, when threads get this long (over one page) I wish the default was not "Sort by Votes." I don't know if everyone else gets this as their default, but I wish it was "Sort by Date" so that I could find what was most recently said.

I've noticed that, too.   The "Sort by Votes" default puts the answer to the question first, which is nice when browsing, but for replying I always click on "Sort by Date" at the top of the thread.

[Arauna]

I do not think it a complete "mess" when people use scriptures in different places in the Bible to come to a solid conclusion...  We would not understand who the 'harlot' in Revelation is if we did not link it to many of the prophets of the Hebrew scriptures who used this imagery.  Similarly, we would not understand who the beast is - if we did not link it to the several "messy" beasts in Daniel.   So too with the rightful owner of the throne... the theme and several timelines can be linked throughout the bible.  So the tree is (according to some on this forum) just an image of Nebuchadnezzar - who was a no-body regarding a role in the ultimate purpose of Jehovah.  Why would Jehovah go to the trouble of telling us a story that is not related to his purpose? - a king that went beastly.  Was it not used to portray something linked to Jehovah's ultimate purpose? The Kingdom of God?  Most things we read in the Bible are all related to Jehovah's outworking of his ultimate purpose throughout the ages.

Do you really think that Jehovah would leave his servants in the dark?   While we do not know the exact day and time of the end (like the day and time of a birth)  there are visible signs of things that have already happened invisibly in heaven.

Jehovah gave us a brain and he knows that we need to know more about our situation... that is why he wrote the Bible....and gave us timelines.  So why would he withhold information from us that could strengthen us to remain "ready".  For those people who search - there is ample information available.

Of course there are people who resist the slave and like to remain with their own dogma - and this is what is going on in these contributions which is about people pushing their personal agendas....... people who think they are smart and use ancient "Greek" type of debate to spread their ideas.

I have checked the secular dates (not the ones given above) and I have checked the scriptures used for the invisible ruling (Parousia) of Christ BEFORE THE END (even my Muslim friends I preach to - see the connection immediately when I read them Rev 12) so why would certain "intellectual" Christians friends not see it?  Arrogance maybe?  

I have no doubt that Jehovah is using the slave for the preaching of his  Kingdom government world-wide and to give us "food" to keep us strong. No other Christian religion understands the kingdom government of Jehovah and the neutrality we are to show now regarding world affairs - so like Paul said:- remember where you learnt these things.

Muslims are the only ones who have some understanding of a government!  Satan took the idea of a world-wide kingdom and gave it some twists and turns - and voila! ,,, We have Islam who believe they have to take over the world (with the sword) and bring an earthly caliphate/government to the earth under Sharia law!  ISIS does not vote... and they kill people who show loyalty to democracy - did you guys know that?  This is how close Satan is imitating the Bible in his teachings - a false government.

I always show Muslims the scriptures that Jesus is ruling invisible in heaven and that Christ will not return in the flesh.  Many will say (even Muslims)  "there is Christ - there is Christ" - but it will be false.  Muslims are waiting of Isa/Jesus to come back as a Muslim....(I have mentioned some of these scriptures in comments above but it fell on deaf ears....  People stick to their agenda and their nitpicking of old information in the WT...) So how would 'Christians' who do not believe in the 'Parousia' explain to a Muslim that he must stay neutral and not fight?  Because many believe that the escalation of the jihad will bring Jesus back much faster.  The Bible shows that we can refute every bad idea by means of the bible... 2TIM 3:16 - and believe me the scriptures in the Bible are potent!  if you have/understand the truth!

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, ¹⁷ that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

The teaching of the 'parousia' is in several places - Luke and Matthew - and Christians can negate it as much as they like - it is still there.  I have not heard one good argument that has convinced me otherwise in this forum....We are in the Parousia and the end (which includes that destruction of all false religion and human government oppression) is the next step in the timetable of God.