Matthew 24. Is the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine based on less likely, special definitions of SIGN, PAROUSIA, CONCLUSION, LIGHTNING, GENERATION, and "GENTILE TIMES"?

[TrueTomHarley]

13 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

that theory pales with this simple “FACT” that after 1914AD, man developed the ability to “destroy” the inhabited earth, that they didn’t have before.

I well remember in the 70's discussing the verse about God bringing to ruin those ruining the earth. Back then, the only type of ruin one could envision to encompass the whole earth was by nuclear war. Now there are many to add to the list, including totally unforeseen ones. Not to mention that the first, threat of nuclear war, is staging a comeback.

[JW Insider]

I didn't expect this topic to wind up with so much discussion of the 70 years, but I'd like to bring it back to specific topics brought up in Matthew 24. One major topic, not really discussed yet, is the "SIGN." But even before we discuss the sign, we should notice that it's the SIGN OF THE PAROUSIA and the SIGN of the SYNTELEIA, that they asked about. For that reason, it would probably be useful to review whether or not it is proper to understand this as a SIGN of a PRESENCE and a SIGN of a CONCLUSION. If it should mean that, then perhaps a generation full of signs is an accurate meaning. But if it refers to a "signal event" that gives them advance warning of the time of the "Judgment Day" then this cannot very likely refer to a generation full of signs.

THE LIKELY MEANING or DISTINCTION between PAROUSIA, SYNTELEIA, EPIPHANEIA, APOKALYPSIS

The point of this part of the topic is to see whether it is possible, or even more likely that the terms Parousia and Synteleia, in context, refer, respectively, to the ROYAL VISITATION & MANIFESTATION (i.e., JUDGMENT DAY) and the FINAL END & DESTRUCTION (i.e., JUDGMENT DAY) rather than merely a "presence" and "conclusion." When that evidence is included in the question about the sign, we have another way of looking at the question. This other way of looking at the question sheds a lot more light on why Jesus answered in the way he did. In fact, it removes what would otherwise appear to be some awkward wording or even a contradiction on the part of Jesus. We know Jesus did not contradict himself, so we should be interested in a meaning that makes more sense with the total context of Jesus' words.

We have already discussed evidence that many contemporary Jews would have understood the meaning of the terms as the signal events referring to the timing of the Judgment Day. If we were to insert those meanings into the verse in Matthew, we would have the following, in context:

(Matthew 24:1-4 -- [with the question in vs 3, paraphrased]) ¹ Now as Jesus was departing from the temple, his disciples approached to show him the buildings of the temple. ² In response he said to them: “Do you not see all these things? Truly I say to you, by no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” ³ While he was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: “Can you tell us WHEN this will happen? Can you tell us what will be THE WARNING SIGN OF YOUR JUDGMENT VISITATION and the FINAL END OF THE AGE?" [NWT: "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?”] ⁴ In answer Jesus said to them: “Look out that nobody misleads you, . . .

The NWT is translated in such a way that you would never get this idea from the question, and yet we have already shown that this is what the actual words Matthew used would have meant to many Jews in Matthew's audience. And we also know that this is the basic idea that the disciples themselves had about the Kingdom of God. They wanted to know when it would MANIFEST itself.

(Luke 19:11) 11 While they were listening to these things he spoke in addition an illustration, because he was near Jerusalem and they were imagining that the kingdom of God was going to display itself instantly.

(Acts 1:6, 7) 6 So when they had assembled, they asked him: “Lord, are you restoring the kingdom to Israel at this time?” 7 He said to them: “It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction.

Of course, if the disciples had known that Jesus would be ruling invisibly from heaven they would not have had this idea that a time would come for it to "display itself instantly" upon the physical nation of Israel. Therefore, they must have been looking for an advance warning sign so that they could know when to be away from the disaster.

This is consistent with the idea that the "parousia" of a powerful godlike person could be considered to be a "theophany," or an "appearance" like some kind of bright and shining manifestation. To make this clearer we will use the original word PAROUSIA or SYNTELEIA in the following verses, to make it easier to understand the original meaning.

(2 Thessalonians 2:8, NWT, KIT) . . .the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his [PAROUSIA].

But even this does not fully match the likely meaning of the word that the NWT uses here. Note the KJV and NIV, for example:

(2 Thess. 2:8, KJV) the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

(2 Thess 2:8, NIV) the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming.

That's because the word in Greek is ἐπιφάνεια (epipháneia) which according to Thayer's Greek Lexicon:

epipháneia -- an appearing, appearance; often used by the Greeks of a glorious manifestation of the gods, and especially of their advent to help; in 2 Maccabees of signal deeds and events betokening the presence and power of God as helper."

It's the same word used in 2 Timothy and Titus:

(1 Timothy 6:14) ¹⁴ to observe the commandment in a spotless and irreprehensible way until the manifestation [EPIPHANEIA]  of our Lord Jesus Christ,

(2 Timothy 4:1) I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom:

Note that the NWT in 2 Tim 4:1 uses the word "AND" here, although most translations follow a Greek text which has the word "AT" in this place, so that the verse reads more smoothly as:

(2 Tim 4:1, NLT) I solemnly urge you in the presence of God and Christ Jesus, who will someday judge the living and the dead when he appears to set up his Kingdom:

In fact, the sense of the "AND" in some Greek texts is very likely intended to offer the meaning that shows up in the NLT, because the point is that Jesus will judge the living and the dead AND he will do this through his glorious manifestation AND through his kingdom. This fits the illustration in Matthew:

(Matthew 13:39-43) The harvest is a [SYNTELEIA: Destruction/Final End] conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. ⁴⁰ Therefore, just as the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be in the [SYNTELEIA: Destruction/Final End] conclusion of the system of things. ⁴¹ The Son of man will send his angels, and they will collect out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and people who practice lawlessness, ⁴² and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be. ⁴³ At that time [the harvest] the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.. . .

This is the same scenario that Paul mentions when he includes the resurrected ones into the same picture about the time when righteous ones will shine at the SYNTELEIA. The only difference is that Paul refers to it as the PAROUSIA.

(1 Thessalonians 4:15-17) ¹⁵ For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the [PAROUSIA: ROYAL VISITATION AND GLORIOUS MANIFESTATION] presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; ¹⁶ because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. ¹⁷ Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord.

According to our current Watchtower doctrine, Paul can never be completely correct. If, as the Watchtower claims, the resurrection has already occurred (back between the years surrounding 1918 and up through as late as 1935, per the current teaching), then those who survived until the presence (1914 and on)  may easily precede those who fall asleep in death during the "presence."  Russell, for example, survived until the "presence," in 1914 and he died in 1916 and therefore easily preceded, let's say, Rutherford, Knorr, and Fred Franz, and probably at last 44,000 others, according to our current teaching.

But also note that the expression translated "together" has a word in front of it that is not translated in the NWT's 1 Thess 4:17,  creating an expression that means not just "together," but, "at the same time together." This is why Thayer's, Vine's and Strong's all offer this definition, especially in the adverbial sense which is obvious here: 

Strong's ἅμα (háma) adv   a primary particle; properly, at the "same" time, but freely used as a preposition or adverb denoting close association:—also, and, together, with(-al).

Thayer's ἅμα (háma) 1. adverb, at the same time, at once, together. . . .  In 1 Thess 4:17 and v.10 where ἅμα (háma) is followed by syn, ἅμα is an adverb (at the same time) and must be joined to the verb.

Vine's ἅμα (háma) "at once" . . . in Romans 3:12; 1 Thess 4:17

This is obvious even in the way the NWT translates this in other places where ἅμα (háma) is used.

(Acts 24:26, NWT) 26 At the same time he was hoping that Paul would give him money.. . .

If the PAROUSIA is the time when those who survive until then are taken at the same time as the resurrected ones, then clearly the Parousia could not have really been ongoing in 1918 to 1935:

*** w07 1/1 pp. 27-28 pars. 10-12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
10 Can we say more precisely when the first resurrection begins? An interesting clue is found at Revelation 7:9-15, where the apostle John describes his vision of “a great crowd, which no man was able to number.” The identity of that great crowd is revealed to John by one of the 24 elders, and these elders represent the 144,000 joint heirs with Christ in their heavenly glory. (Luke 22:28-30; Revelation 4:4) John himself had a heavenly hope; but since he was still a man on earth when the elder spoke to him, in the vision John must represent anointed ones on earth who have not yet received their heavenly reward.
11 What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest. That would indicate that the first resurrection began sometime between 1914 and 1935. Can we be more precise?
12 At this point, it may be helpful to consider what might be viewed as a Bible parallel. Jesus Christ was anointed as the future King of God’s Kingdom in the fall of 29 C.E. Three and a half years later, in the spring of 33 C.E., he was resurrected as a mighty spirit person. Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility. Although this cannot be directly confirmed in the Bible, it is not out of harmony with other scriptures that indicate that the first resurrection got under way soon after Christ’s presence began.

That was an odd mix of speculation, along with both dogmatic and very undogmatic statements. Still, while it's true that the first resurrection gets underway as soon as or soon after Christ's PAROUSIA begins, none who survived until the PAROUSIA were taken to heaven along with (together at the same time with) those who were resurrected somewhere between about 1918 to 1935. Yet, it is recognized that the first resurrection got under way "soon" after Christ's PAROUSIA would begin. What was that "harmony with other scriptures"? The example is given in the next paragraph, but with an interesting bit of bracketed information that is in the original Watchtower article -- not something added here as an explanation:

For example, Paul wrote: “We the living who survive to the presence of the Lord [not, to the end of his presence] shall in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with the Lord.” (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17) Therefore, anointed Christians who died before Christ’s presence were raised to heavenly life ahead of those who were still alive during Christ’s presence. This means that the first resurrection must have begun early in Christ’s presence, and it continues “during his presence.” (1 Corinthians 15:23) Rather than occurring all at once, the first resurrection takes place over a period of time.

But the writer who recognized the point that he put in brackets did not recognize that the Greek of 1 Cor 15:23 never says DURING his presence. It actually harmonizes with 1 Thess 4, by saying "AT HIS PAROIUSIA" as if PAROUSIA were an event rather than a duration:

(1 Corinthians 15:23) ^₂₃ But each one in his own proper order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence.

The Greek word here would usually mean "AT" in a case like this. It is only translated "DURING" because our traditional doctrine tells us to believe that it is a DURATION of time.

Strong's Definition:

ἐν (en) --a primary preposition denoting (fixed) position (in place, time or state), and (by implication) instrumentality (medially or constructively), i.e. a relation of rest (intermediate between G1519 and G1537); "in," at, (up-)on, by, etc.:

The NWT agrees that this is true in the way the following verse is translated along with the NWT footnote:

(1 Corinthians 15:51, 52) . . .We shall not all fall asleep [in death], but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, during* [fn. "at"] the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we shall be changed.

(The updated NWT removed this footnote so that the word "at" is no longer shown and instead now footnotes the word "blink" with "twinkling.")

It's for the exact same reason that the NWT almost always chooses to say "in the conclusion" (IN the SYNTELEIA), even though it is just as proper to say "at the conclusion" (AT the SYNTELEIA).

There are times, however, when the NWT has chosen to translate the exact same word as "AT"

(1 Thessalonians 2:19) 19 For what is our hope or joy or crown of exultation before our Lord Jesus at his presence [PAROUSIA]?

(1 Thessalonians 3:13) 13 so that he may make your hearts firm, blameless in holiness before our God and Father at the presence [PAROUSIA] of our Lord Jesus with all his holy ones.

(1 Thessalonians 5:23) . . .And may the spirit and soul and body of you brothers, sound in every respect, be preserved blameless at the presence [PAROUSIA] of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The reason that the word is translated above as "at" instead of "during" is because it is too clear that the parousia refers to a judgment event in these places. We think of it as the "END" of the parousia when this judgment event happens. But we should remember that Paul always recognized that the relief given to all those of faith would include resurrected ones, and that this resurrection was to be at the same time as Jesus brings judgment on the disobedient. All this obviously happens at the PAROUSIA, not during the PAROUSIA, as shown in the quotes above.

(2 Thessalonians 1:7-10) 7 But you who suffer tribulation will be given relief along with us at the revelation [APOKALYPSIS] of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels 8 in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance on those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus. 9 These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction from before the Lord and from the glory of his strength, 10 at the time when he comes to be glorified in connection with his holy ones and to be regarded in that day with wonder. . .

It's the exact same word that could have been translated as "during" except that the NWT chose "at" when the reference seems to be to a specific time of judgment. But notice that this "specific time of judgment" is called PAROUSIA and APOKALYPSIS (which means revealing).

In fact, every reference to the parousia of Jesus appears to be more appropriately associated with his revelation (apokalypis) and manifestation (epiphaneia). Both the language structure AND content of these phrases about the PAROUSIA are also used with reference to the APOKALYPSIS, even though our current doctrine claims that only one of the two words refers to a judgment event.

(1 Peter 1:7) 7 in order that the tested quality of your faith, of much greater value than gold that perishes despite its being tested by fire, may be found a cause for praise and glory and honor at the revelation [APOKALYPSIS] of Jesus Christ.

(1 Peter 1:13) . . .keep your senses completely; set your hope on the undeserved kindness that will be brought to you at the revelation [APOKALYPSIS] of Jesus Christ.

(1 John 2:28) ²⁸ So now, little children, remain in union with him, so that when he is made manifest we may have freeness of speech and not shrink away from him in shame at his presence [PAROUSIA].

Similar phrases show that the primary point was the judgment event even when other words and phrases were used. But these ones, also, give us a good sense of the meaning of the terms Parousia, Synteleia, Apokalypsis, Epiphaneia, etc:

(Jude 24) ²⁴ Now to the one who is able to guard you from stumbling and to make you stand unblemished in the sight of his glory with great joy. . .

(1 Corinthians 1:7, 8) . . .while you are eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. ⁸ He will also make you firm to the end so that you may be open to no accusation in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Cor 1:8, just quoted, could have translated the same word for "AT" above as "DURING" instead of "IN" as was done here (i.e., "during the day of our Lord Jesus Christ"). The point was emphasized here so that no one thinks that the word "during" is what implies a long period of time. It's the belief about whether the reference is to a long period of time that determines how the NWT has translated the word in every case.

The overall point is that it appears likely that the words Parousia and Synteleia refer to judgment events rather than long durations of time such as a generation during which to watch for signs. That would explain why Jesus could liken the parousia to the judgment event of Noah's day, or the judgment event of Sodom, or the judgment event of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E., and lastly the judgment event at the revelation and manifestation of Jesus Christ in judgment of the entire world.

[SuziQ1513]

On 8/9/2017 at 7:43 PM, J.R. Ewing said:

In the matters of the heart, as you know, we are in accord, and meant NO disrespect, with the inclusion as you, yourself stated: “Look, it's not about me”.  I understand the offshoot humor your balance to the otherwise incorrigible, unreachable, and unrepentant can become cumbersome. This is a goal for those who enter this forum that doesn't understand the criticism of the Watchtower by “active Witnesses” and as you stated are “new and/or naïve” to bible understanding by a website that “boast” of being friendly toward witnesses, but have the inclination of hiding their true motives behind such “hatred” manifested by as you quoted, for being “disillusioned, perhaps over some injustice they have encountered”. There is NO justification to remain committed to change anyoneÂ’s doctrine (faith) for feeling slated.

 

 

Romans 12:17-21New International Version (NIV)

 

 

^17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. ^18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. ^19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”^[a] says the Lord. ^20 On the contrary:

 

 

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”^[b]

 

 

^21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

 

 

 

 

 

Romans 2:5-11New International Version (NIV)

 

 

^5 But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. ^6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”^[a]7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. ^8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. ^9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; ^10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. ^11 For God does not show favoritism.

 

 

However, there is a bible based implication for those that believe, they have every “right” to think of justifying, their apostasy driven rhetoric, or defending someone’s apostasy.

 

 

Hebrews 6:4-8English Standard Version (ESV)

 

 

^4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, ^5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, ^6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. ^7 For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. ^8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned.

 

 

 

 

 

0ne only needs, remember the Proverbs.

 

 

Proverbs 4:13-27New International Version (NIV)

 

 

^13 Hold on to instruction, do not let it go; guard it well, for it is your life.^14 Do not set foot on the path of the wicked or walk in the way of evildoers ^15 Avoid it, do not travel on it; turn from it and go on your way.^16 For they cannot rest until they do evil; they are robbed of sleep till they make someone stumble.^17 They eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence.^18 The path of the righteous is like the morning sun, shining ever brighter till the full light of day.^19 But the way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know what makes them stumble.^20 My son, pay attention to what I say; turn your ear to my words.^21 Do not let them out of your sight, keep them within your heart;^22 for they are life to those who find them and health to one’s whole body.
^23 Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.^24 Keep your mouth free of perversity; keep corrupt talk far from your lips.^25 Let your eyes look straight ahead; fix your gaze directly before you.^26 Give careful thought to the^[a] paths for your feet and be steadfast in all your ways.^27 Do not turn to the right or the left; keep your foot from evil.

 

 

 

 

 

 

After all, what is the difference between this worldly illustration of apostasy, to the unintellectual displayed of apostasy, here?

 

 

Awh, shucks!  I think you made all that up!   

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

15 hours ago, SuziQ1513 said:

Awh, shucks!  I think you made all that up!   

Would it be any different with thinking the things made up here, deserve the same sarcasm? but we both know, Right! A!

Too bad this deception needs revision!

Welcome To Our Community

The most intelligent people on planet Earth hang out on this forum. Be ready to have your points of view challenged and refined.

[TiagoBelager]

JWI,

I can say that your linguistic (lexical) analysis per se has merit. I myself have had for some years an understanding of the terms that are lexically as you have reviewed here. In fact, there is a bit of Greek grammar we call the epexegetical genitive that probably applies to "the sign of your Parousia," so that the semantic is "the sign that is your Parousia."

So, why have I not communicated as much to responsible brothers? Because, to use an expression that Rotherham once used, "in fine" there need be no contradiction in a certain matter of eschatology. I will use that insight, for example, in our seeing 1914 as the beginning of that Parousia.  In a foreshortened time perspective that is common in viewing last-days events through the prism of Bible prophecies, the Parousia may be described in such a way that focuses on the final day and hour, as though the Parousia is something consummated in 24 hours or so. But there is no contradiction between what we understand about 1914 and what we expect about the final end of this system of things. If the book of Revelation had not been written, then we should, with merely more knowledge of Greek vocabulary, have become very confused. Revelation alerted early Christians that much more should have to be accomplished by Christians before they would get their reward of the crown of everlasting life. Revelation gives us the basis for seeing that the Lord's day, during which preaching the Kingdom's establishment occurs, is not something done in a matter of weeks right before Armageddon. No, for that preaching must occur over a sufficient length of time so that "the error of the land comes to a completion." Peoples' bad responses to the persecutions of a righteous people will expose the nature of what is in the heart, because if they are craven cowards (out of fear of violent death so that they resist taking a public stand with God's people), then they are condemned for such wickedness. 

It is absolutely necessary that we remain united in our preaching if we are to remain in our Lord Jesus' favor. He makes prosper our work, and we prosper spiritually when we continue steadfast in humility, not pushing ahead of the Slave.

Tiago

 

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Even if what is being taught is WRONG?

[TiagoBelager]

Even if what is being taught will, in Jehovah's timing of matters, become a thing abandoned, yet He can allow it until He corrects it. The saying went out in the brotherhood that the Lord prophesied that the apostle John would not die but would remain until the Lord's return. That was a wrong interpretation that Jehovah let go out among the brothers, but was not corrected until very near John's death. It did not make any of those brothers false prophets, though maybe they had let themselves become unduly excited in what they were saying now that John had become so very aged, relatively speaking. Maybe some of those excitable brothers in a short while even let themselves become embittered against John: 'Why had he waited so long to disabuse our minds?' Another and last-days example: the organization had pyramidology in the subjects taught.  It was something that should not have been preached/taught, but it takes time to see the error in some doctrines. I knew that history before I was baptized, but it never colored my stance towards Jehovah's Witnesses who were teaching me. I have never felt any embarrassment about our history from 1874 right on up until today. I am proud of the selfless devotion of C.T. Russell, J.F. Rutherford, Nathan Knorr, Fred Franz, and so many others I cannot take the time to name here. If there is no idolatry, nothing that encourages or excuses sexual immorality, nothing that attacks the holiness of our God Jehovah, nothing that would make us bloodguilty or overlook how it can be incurred, nothing that preaches abandonment of the Kingdom hope, etc., then Jehovah may for a time overlook errors in certain doctrines.

Having said all that, I do not think at this time that the Parousia did not begin in 1914, but I think that there is a part of its duration in this wicked system of things that will be capped at Armageddon, but also that it will extend for another 1000 years thereafter. Yes, I see nothing that means that there were not 7 symbolic times that began in 607 BCE and ended in 1914 CE. (Discussions of Babylonian cuneiform tablets do not shape my judgment that 70 years of desolation ended in 537 BCE in the 7th month of the Jewish calendar; I see that a focus for the 70 years desolation on Judah is aligned with a period of time from when that land was not a scene for sacrifices to Jehovah until when such were restored, i.e., from 607 BCE to 537 BCE.)

Tiago

 

[Arauna]

To use the illustration of the woman who is pregnant. There is no doubt she is pregnant because the signs are there. One can see she is pregnant long before the birth pains start. ( conclusion of system).  Later the birth pains start to intensify severely (problems intensify - great tribulation) and then the birth/end.

We know the signs are here on earth that Jesus has been ruling amidst his enemies since 1914.   We expect the conditions to severely intensify before the end.

[JW Insider]

WHY EVEN BRING UP THE ISSUE OF 1914 AT ALL?

Most Bible readers believe that the sudden, surprising, shining, lightning-like PAROUSIA event has not happened yet. But many of the same people read about the "signs" in Matthew 24 and get pretty much the same idea of the prophecy as Jehovah's Witnesses do. They hear about wars and earthquakes and pestilence and famine and believe that these are signs that, as things get much worse, this is proof that the end is near, and Jesus could return at any moment. It's as if Jesus said:

"You want a sign? I'll give you LOTS of signs!"

The major difference between Jehovah's Witnesses and many other readers is that we (Jehovah's Witnesses) will often say that all these signs must have started specifically in 1914. This is not a difficult doctrine to convince others to believe. People in all generations have wanted to believe that their generation was the very one Jesus spoke about. 1914 was a definite historical turning point from several perspectives. The first war that was called a "World War" started that year. And since then it is easy to see that there's no turning back to the supposed times of peace and tranquility that existed almost everywhere. Also since then the world has grown from a sparse 1.8 bilion people to a crowded 7.5 billion. There are 4 times as many people, but on average they are using literally thousands of times more resources (electricity, fuel, waste). The dense populations, contention over resources, wars, terrorism, and increased effects of violence now effect more people than ever before. Earthquakes have a higher chance of killing large populations at once. Communication and news that focuses almost exclusively on everything negative anywhere in the world has also increased our fear and our belief that things will keep getting worse until God's Kingdom steps in to save us.

So the primary lesson that most of us, Witnesses or not, take away from Matthew 24/Mark 13/Luke 21 is this:

(Matthew 24:33, also Mark 13:29) "Likewise also you, when you see all these things, know that he is near at the doors."

(Luke 21:25-31)  25 “Also, there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and its agitation. 26 People will become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth, . . .28 But as these things start to occur, stand up straight and lift up your heads, because your deliverance is getting near. . . .31. .  Likewise also you, when you see these things happening, know that the Kingdom of God is near."

This is the basic idea that comforts us, and it isn't wrong. Whether we should say that Jesus was specifically targeting a "generation" that started in 1914 or not, God's Kingdom will finally step in. It's always possible that we are in a final generation that will see the final end of this system. We need not be in fear like the nations and those without faith and hope. We can lift our heads up and expect deliverance no matter how bad things get.

So why even bring up the issue of 1914 at all, then? We are clearly in a "wicked" generation. Things appear to be going from bad to worse everywhere we look. If anyone tried to say things aren't so bad, a hundred sources could be found to contradict that claim. Amongst the millions (literally) of books in the world, it's easy to find a hundred or more that claim that 1914 was a major turning point, if not the major turning point, in modern history. The "SIGN" and how it is tied first to a "great world war" seems to be the most important evidence for this doctrine. It's what makes us so sure about what might otherwise look like a ridiculous prophetic type-antitype teaching where we see the wicked, haughty, Gentile king Nebuchadnezzar punished with insanity and say that Nebuchadnezzar represents the Messianic Kingdom. When that wicked man finally acknowledged that his haughtiness was misplaced, he was restored from his insanity, and this represents how Jesus was restored to the non-Gentile Messianic throne in 1914.

But was this idea in the Bible? And if it wasn't, is there any reason to stand up to such a long-standing traditional teaching in our own religion if it's not really doing any harm? Or is it doing harm? Obviously, this entire topic was initiated there is clear evidence (to some) that it doesn't work scripturally, based on the words and meanings of the context of Jesus' words? But why should we pay more than the usual attention to the exact meaning of Jesus words if it makes no difference in the long run. Is this just a matter of "obsession" over very minor matters? Is it a matter of stubborn pride? Is this just a matter of wanting to be right at all costs? Is it really in defense of the Bible?

That last question is so important that I'll try to give a short answer right here. I'll reword it

WHY DOES THE BIBLE SAY WE SHOULD NOT BE CONCERNED WITH CHRONOLOGY?

Jesus said that it was not for us to know the "times and the seasons." Paul, said that as far as the topic of "times and seasons" and the "parousia" we need nothing to be written to us, because we know it will come unannounced as a thief. So the best we can do is stay on the watch to be prepared at all times as if it can come at any moment. This way that day won't "catch us" off-guard as a thief would want to catch us. Of course, perhaps all that was supposed to change around 1914. Perhaps at that point we were supposed to know the times and seasons after all. And we could always rationalize that we only claim to know the beginning of the parousia but not the end of the system.

Also, we might ask, what harm could there be in trying to know, even if Jesus said we wouldn't be able to know?

Is it possible that Jesus had a reason for telling us that not even he knew the "day and the hour"? Is it OK to try to get to know the "times and seasons" as long as we can still say we don't know the "day and the hour"?

Jesus gave some illustrations showing that our attitudes and motivations might come to light if we noticed that there was a delay. He gave the illustration of the evil slave who would take advantage of the delay and begin to lord it over his fellow slaves. He gave an illustration of those who would not make wise use of the time and the resources they were given (the "talents"). He gave an illustration of those who didn't prepare well enough for a potential delay. (foolish virgins). Not once did Jesus commend anyone for discerning how soon the future "times and seasons" would be, but he did commend those who had prepared and readied themselves to endure to the end, and make wise use of their time, no matter how long that delay might be.

The obvious reason would be that if we knew the end was going to come on a certain date, we might fall into any one of the traps that would show us unprepared for that day:

• We could fall into the trap of thinking that we must get into full-time service just because we know the day is nearly upon us, and we believe that we will get a reward for our good works. That might sound like it's not so bad. A little more full-time service is accomplished, so what does it matter what the motive was? But there is no reward for good works or full-time service. The "reward" is only for the proper motivation behind our activities. Remember that the Pharisees dedicating their resources to "full-time" service to the Temple, but weren't fully taking care of their own families, so that Jesus condemned them for this.

If we were to act any differently because we KNOW the time, then this already shows something was potentially wrong with our motivation in the first place.

• We could fall into the trap of thinking that there is still time to take it easy, to "put Kingdom interests second," just for a little while, because we KNOW that there is still time to repent and be shown mercy.

Again, if we were to act any differently because we KNOW the time, then this already shows something was potentially wrong with our motivation.

• We could fall into the trap of thinking that we are smarter than others, and can look down on others for not understanding prophecy and secular and Biblical chronology as well as we do. Yet we are relying on secular knowledge (to date 539, for instance) and this type of secular knowledge is foolishness to God, and just results in questions for debate rather than anything of true Christian value, such as love, justice, mercy and TRUE wisdom. 

Related to all the ideas above, is the problem of building new doctrines on a weak foundation, and therefore presumptuously assuming that any additional explanations built on the puffed up knowledge is also correct.

• We could fall into the trap of thinking we are something when we are nothing, and start to think of ourselves as so especially favored and gifted with God's spirit that we begin coming up with hundreds of other explanations, that must be so, just because we have a strong belief that our chronology must be so. Therefore predictions are made that end up stumbling others, or end up being ideas that we ultimately have to apologize for because it can be shown that they did not come from Jehovah's holy spirit, but were based on presumptuousness. Remember that the idea of 1914 originally came to as as part of scheme of dates that included 1798, 1799, 1844, 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910 and a few others. All those dates have been dropped because they were "false doctrines." Russell was so sure of these dates that he found them in his studies of the Great Pyramid, which was "THE major selling point" of the Studies in the Scriptures series. It was this series of dates that was so sure that these were called "God's dates, not ours."  These dates resulted in judging other religious groups as "the foolish virgins" specifically because they stopped looking in 1844 and missed the 1874 presence and the 1878 kingship. It was presumptuous to call others "fools" when we also finally dropped the 1874 date, ourselves. After 1914, this schema was part of the "undeniable proof" that 1918 would see undeniable visible signs of heavenly activity towards the earth. These dates brought us to conclude that 1925 would definitely see the earthly resurrection begin. We were told that we had more evidence on which to base faith in 1925 than we had about 1914 itself, and more evidence for 1925 than Noah had in believing in the coming Flood. Things that happened in 1918, 1919, 1920, 1922, 1931, 1935, even up until 1942 were all sees as necessary teachings just because of the 1914 teaching. Several of these dates have already been dropped as incorrect teachings that needed adjustment (i.e., "false" teachings). A few of them are "still on the books." But we have reason to believe that such incorrect teachings could end up being important to correct if they are wrong. Here are two examples that have been mentioned before:

  • (2 Timothy 2:15-18) 15 Do your utmost to present yourself approved to God, a workman with nothing to be ashamed of, handling the word of the truth aright. 16 But reject empty speeches that violate what is holy, for they will lead to more and more ungodliness, 17 and their word will spread like gangrene. Hy·me·naeʹus and Phi·leʹtus are among them. 18 These men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred, and they are subverting the faith of some.

If 1914 is not true, then all those decades of teaching that the first resurrection has already occurred in 1918 could put us in exactly the same situation as the "empty speeches that violate what is holy" and which "spread like gangrene."

• The second example, builds on the example above. In the first century, it was possible that claiming the resurrection had already occurred included something like the claim that it was all spiritual, and there would be no literal resurrection. Of course, it could also have subverted the faith of some in the idea that some had already received their reward before others which would make it seem like Paul didn't know what he was talking about when he said that the currently living and the resurrected dead would be caught up at the same time. Whether persons like the apostle Paul or C T Russell are already in heaven or not might seem like an innocuous teaching, but look at what can come out of it. In 1916 it was taught that Russell had died but was now a spirit who was directing every aspect of the Society's work from beyond the veil. What's the difference in that and spiritism?

That type of thinking was repeated well into the 1920's. And it resurfaced again in the 1980's with the "Revelation - Grand Climax" book and then again in 2000 in the Watchtower. Note, the same Watchtower just mentioned in a previous post:

*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 11 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest.

When we condemn Christendom for thinking they can communicate with the dead, their adherents say, but these are spirits. So what's the real difference if we say that people who have died who are now spirits are communicating divine truths today. At least the above contains terms like "it seems" and "may be involved." Prior to this it was taught that there was no doubt. But it also implies a kind of "inspiration" that comes from someone other than Jesus and Jehovah to reveal divine truths. But more importantly it was used as a way to bolster a convoluted piece of circular reasoning in the article above. We were building on a sandy foundation and presumptuously pretending it was a rock foundation. 

The above is not to say that the doctrine is definitely wrong, but it shows how the Bible expects us to "pay more than the usual attention" to such matters, because a false doctrine can become a serious thing.

• Another point that should be addressed is the fact that there is little difference in saying we only know the time of the beginning of the parousia but not the end. All the issues of believing we know the time of parousia still arise. For example, Jesus said it would be only one generation. So what happened when we approached 30 and 40 years beyond 1914? Speculation was rampant. What happened when we approached 60 years beyond 1914 and it was also believed that the end of the 6,000 years would end in 1975. We became so presumptuous that we published why the 1970's would be the "appropriate time for God to act." We tell Jehovah when it's appropriate to act?!?!?!  We (JWs) published and promoted Watchtower articles that said that now is not the time to "toy" with the words of Jesus that no one knows the day and the hour.  We can say when it's no longer appropriate to bring up a certain scripture. In the 1970's, just prior to 1975, we also began publishing articles that stated explicitly that Jehovah's Witnesses were a prophet. After the 1970's expectations failed to materialize, the generation went on, and we were 70 years from 1914, and had to change the definition of the generation. Then at 74 years from 1914 we found an article where a Hebrew "scholar" said 75 years was a good length for a generation:

*** g88 4/8 p. 14 The Last Days—What’s Next? ***
J. A. Bengel states in his New Testament Word Studies: “The Hebrews . . . reckon seventy-five years as one generation, and the words, shall not pass away, intimate that the greater part of that generation [of Jesus’ day] indeed, but not the whole of it, should have passed away before all should be fulfilled.” This became true by the year 70 C.E. when Jerusalem was destroyed.
Likewise today, most of the generation of 1914 has passed away.

At 80 years from 1914, the definition of generation is updated again, etc., until the latest, current definition.

This problem is not necessarily gone with the updated definition of generation. Because, even though it is now defined as TWO BACK-TO-BACK LIFETIMES  it, too, is attached to a finite number of years starting in 1914. As the end of the possible range of time comes into view, this becomes the equivalent of making people think they "know" the times and the seasons. That's clearly presumptuous, and therefore begets all the same issues mentioned above.

 

 

 

[JW Insider]

17 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

What about Luke 17, "the Kingdom is not coming with striking observableness"?

Good question. But first of all we should note that the Bible does not actually say this. The term translated "striking" observableness actually means just "observability." The word "striking" was added for some reason. If anything, it is probably closer to the opposite meaning, of any kind of observableness, or non-striking observableness. In other words, a likely meaning is that the Kingdom is not going to come with signs to observe, or any kind of inspection (speculation). (In the same way that the Pharisees were not given a sign to make them believe that the King of that Kingdom was already standing in front of them.)

The NLT translates like this:

(Luke 17:20, NLT) One day the Pharisees asked Jesus, “When will the Kingdom of God come?” Jesus replied, “The Kingdom of God can’t be detected by visible signs. [fn]   {The footnote says "by your speculations"}

Of course, this verse was about the coming of the Kingdom that was "overtaking them" in their day. The Kingdom began taking on loyal subjects as members of that "nation" even while Jesus was a kind of "king-designate" as we say. But we know that may more subjects of that Kingdom began entering the Kingdom after Jesus was spoken of as the "King of Kings and Lord of Lords" and when he was given a position "far above every government." That was of course, when he sat at the right hand of the throne of Majesty, God's right hand, when he was given ALL AUTHORITY in heaven and on earth. (Mt 28:18-20)

(Colossians 1:13) 13 He rescued us from the authority of the darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son,

But you are right that, even though this was about the Kingdom about to overtake them in Jesus' day, it could have given evidence that the way the Kingdom comes at the time of the parousia might be invisible. Jesus was the one who cleared up that question by saying that it would appear like lightning: bright, sudden, surprising, and would shine from one horizon all the way to the other horizon. 

(Matthew 24:27) 27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be.

Now if we could only find a scripture that says that this kind of lightning is invisible . . . .

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, TiagoBelager said:

Even if what is being taught will, in Jehovah's timing of matters, become a thing abandoned, yet He can allow it until He corrects it. The saying went out in the brotherhood that the Lord prophesied that the apostle John would not die but would remain until the Lord's return. That was a wrong interpretation that Jehovah let go out among the brothers, but was not corrected until very near John's death.

Yes. It's true that brothers were speculating about things surrounding the Lord's coming. In this case, Jesus said that some of those standing with him during his ministry would not die before they saw him coming in power:

(Matthew 16:28) "Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom.”

And also that they would not complete the circuit of the cities of Israel before the son of man would arrive.

(Matthew 10:23) 23 When they persecute you in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to you, you will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives.

Although the first verse was fulfilled in a vision given to a few of them, Jesus said these things to show the potential imminence of the Kingdom. It could come at any time. They couldn't even say: "Well the preaching work is not finished yet, so we know that Jesus' arrival in power can't happen yet." Even if the Parousia was a long way off, it was not for them to know, and it should always remain of immediate concern. Jesus took away these obstacles that might make them believe the end was so far off that it didn't matter to them immediately. 

Notice too in both of these verses above that there is no separation of a parousia from his coming in his Kingdom: his "arrival."

Notice too that the verse you quoted makes the same point just discussed in a previous post about why chronology should be no concern of ours.

(John 21:22, 23) 22 Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” 23 So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?”

They were tying the chronology of this particular disciple's lifetime to the generation that would see Jesus come. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? But notice too that the disciples have no hint about a "parousia" that would be separate from the time when Jesus comes, or arrives. But more importantly, the times and seasons are still in the Father's jurisdiction so, as Jesus says, "of what concern is that to you?" If we are paying close attention to Jesus' words we should be concerned with why Jesus said not to be concerned with chronology. We should not try to use the mistake they made as an excuse for why we can make more of the same types of mistakes.

[TiagoBelager]

I do not believe that there is a Parousia separate from the enthronement event; the Parousia does not come later only after the time when Jesus took his heavenly throne, for Revelation alerts us that there would be a "short while" from Jesus' enthronement (Parousia) until the time when Satan's reign is over. Why give us such details in prophecy if God's people living in the last days are not meant to know their meaning/import for them -- to know why there is a period of greatly increased woe upon the earth? It is all of a piece; there are events occurring in these last days that we are meant to know marks establishment of God's Kingdom. Yes, they occur in the Lord's day; they help us see when the Parousia began. It extends from 1914 until the time when Jesus hands over the Kingdom to his Father.  We should not have discerned such a Parousia so long as we did not have, among other things,  the book of Revelation in hand. It clarifies Greek vocabulary for us, and shows us that many things begin occurring of special interest for, and involvement of, true Christians living in the last days since the Lord's enthronement and before he implements judgment against the wicked. So, Revelation must also be included as part of what God's people rove about in, in order that their knowledge should increase. It increases gradually and thus not by inspiration, not even inspiration for sake of correction . . . else why do we see it specified that roving about (in Bible prophecy, e.g., in Daniels's prophecies) at "the time of the end"/"end of the days" (vv. 4, 12 i.e., "the last days") would be the thing that results in knowledge becoming abundant, increasing? (Daniel 12:4, 8-13). In the last days is when those having insight will understand Daniel's prophecy; they understand it at "the time of the end," which is followed later after the end of the last days by Daniel's coming to be among those receiving resurrection from the dead.

If one has incomplete knowledge/insight of the Scriptures, it will cause him to argue for things that cannot coherently stand in place in the light of all that Jehovah said should obtain for his servants in the last days. When we discern such incoherence, then is when we know that we have need of more insight. Just the same, somebody's argument that we probably lack insight into a matter at present should not cause any of us to take up a way of life that in effect says, "Why not this way of life? We don't know the day and hour. Who can say what season of time we are in as respects the nearness of when Jesus will implement judgment against the wicked?"  One who responds like that to arguments made by those who do not appreciate the work that God's people are accomplishing in these last days reflects by that response a serious deficiency in his faith.

Tiago