AlanF way back on page 53 reasoned: The reason for the inconsistency is as follows: The question "when will these things happen?" is common to all three passages. Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7 then pose the question, "what will be the sign that all these things are about to happen?" Applying this understanding to Matthew 24:3 immediately allows us to rephrase the 2nd question in the NWT: "what will be the sign that your presence and the conclusion of the system of things are about to take place?" But his means that the "sign" must occur in advance of the "presence" -- and this contradicts the Watchtower Society's doctrine that this "presence" began in 1914 and that the "sign" takes place beginning in 1914 and ending at "the great tribulation", whenever that might be. But the proper understanding, that Christ's coming has nothing to do with 1914, results in complete consistency: "what will be the sign that your coming and the conclusion of the system of things are about to take place?"
Naturally, I don't expect that thirdwitless will even understand the above points, much less attempt to debunk them.
Well here is the debunking.
You have once again misread and misapplied scriptures. (What a shock.)
A reading of the sentences before both Luke 21:7 and Mark 13:4 will show this beyond a doubt.
Luke 21: 6 he (Jesus) said: “As for these things that YOU are beholding, the days will come in which not a stone upon a stone will be left here and not be thrown down.” 7 Then they questioned him, saying: “Teacher, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when these things are destined to occur?”
Mark 13: 2 However, Jesus said to him: “Do you behold these great buildings? By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 And as he was sitting on the Mount of Olives with the temple in view, Peter and James and John and Andrew began to ask him privately: 4 “Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are destined to come to a conclusion?”
First take note of the subject that the disciples were questioning him about: the temple being destroyed. Now the question becomes obvious in both accounts. what will be the sign when these things are destined to occur? or what will be the sign when all these things are destined to come to a conclusion? What things? The things to do with the destruction of the holy place. That is the questions posed in both Luke 21:7 and Mark 13:4. Jesus took that opportunity to tell them about what things would happen during the conclusion of the Jewish system of things before the literal temple was destroyed as well as what things would happen during the parousia of Christ, the conclusion of the final system of things, up to the Great Tribulation and Armageddon.
So when AlanF reasoned: Applying this understanding to Matthew 24:3 immediately allows us to rephrase the 2nd question in the NWT: "what will be the sign that your presence and the conclusion of the system of things are about to take place?" But this means that the "sign" must occur in advance of the "presence"
He is wrong.
Rephrasing, or in other words, twisting Matthew 24 to suit your purpose is a misapplication of the questions and is not needed because Matthew 24 is not the exact same question that is recorded in Luke or Mark. Putting the accounts together then we see that the disciples ask several questions: Tell us, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when the temple's destruction is to occur, what will be the sign of your parousia, and what will be the sign of the conclusion of the system of things?
The events foretold that make up the sign was given to show his disciples when Christ's presence had arrived, when the conclusion of the system would take place, when the holy place was about to be destroyed (both literally and symbolically), and yes when Christ's coming at Armageddon was near.
Once again AlanF tries to make something so simple so complicated.