by Vanderhoven7 29 Replies latest jw experiences
I believe the WTS has completely misapplied Matthew 24:1-35.
I believe the scripture is quite clear that Jesus was speaking to His own generation and not some obscure future or 1914 generation.
If you happen to be a JW and/or futurist, what makes you believe Jesus was talking about events that would transpire in the 20th/21st century?
Vander
I do not qualify to answer according to your criteria above, and await answers from those who do with interest.
Here is my 2cents: it is my opinion that Matthew was written in the decades after the 70CE destruction of the temple, and the words we read were put into the mouth of "Jesus" to make him seem prescient.
We are not even reading a prophecy for the first century,we we are reading history spoken by a fictional character, the "jesus" of Matthew,supposedly before the event, this is not to say that there was not an historical Jesus.
"Matthew" was concocted in a smokey room in late 1st century Palestine to further the growth of the Cult of Jesus, the Temple being gone, the prophecies of the Jewish Scriptures, temple centric as they were, needed new interpretation, and a messiah, to extend the Jewish religion.
Just look at the questions the desciples asked.
Matt 24:3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming [presence] and of the end of the age?”
The "age" that the desciples were living in was the Mosaic age. That only ended when the temple was distroyed.
Hebrews 8:13 shows that even at the time of the writing (of Hebrews) the Mosaic age had not ended yet.
Even though Jesus was standing before them, the desciples knew that He's presence "parousias" could not start until the Mosaic age had ended.
The presence that the WTS teaches as starting in 1914 (or 1874 as taught until at least 1929) really started in 70AD.
Peace
Most of Mt. 24-25 is yet future (a verse or two is about 70 A.D.). It is the time preceding His yet future Second Coming after Armageddon, Daniel's 70th week described in Rev. 6-19. It relates to Israel, not the present Church Age. Preterists are wrong and must rely on a subjective allegorical interpretation. Futurists are correct using a normative literal approach. WT is totally off track to read in dates from the 1800s, 1900s, 2000s into here and Rev. Their chronology is indefensible and constantly changing from Barbour/Russell/Rutherford ff.
Wobble
Interesting theory. But such would not explain the physical facts. Christians escaped the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD precisely because they heeded Christ's instruction to flee the city.
John Gill
"...it is remarked by several interpreters, and which Josephus takes notice of with surprise, that Cestius Gallus having advanced with his army to Jerusalem, and besieged it, on a sudden without any cause, raised the siege, and withdrew his army, when the city might have been easily taken; by which means a signal was made, and an opportunity given to the Christians, to make their escape: which they accordingly did, and went over to Jordan, as Eusebius says, to a place called Pella; so that when Titus came a few months after, there was not a Christian in the city . . " (John Gill, on Matthew 24:16).
http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom#footnote9_79pgh12
Bob
Agreed. 1874 and 1914 are fabricated and spurious to scripture, while 70 AD saw the fulfillment of Matthew 24 till verse 35. Verse 34 is the time text for "all these things" including the removal of temple stones to occur. Jesus was not referring to a generation 2000 years down the road, but the very same generation he referred to in the previous chapter (23:36).
However, not being a full preterist, I believe the parousia being discussed from 24:36 on...with a brief mention (verses 26, 27) to contrast His coming Judgment on Jerusalem with the final conflagration.
Godrulz
I believe it is quite clear from the evidence in the text ay hand that every vese of Jesus' reply till verse 35 applies to Christ's generation alone.
You know, it makes baby Jesus sad when his followers know so little about history and what was written, when why and why.
Everyone who could reasonably afford to leave the city and knew what was good for them left Jerusalem when they saw the opportunity. Escape wasn't just a Christian phenomenon. You don't need a prophecy to know that your city is going to be overrun by soldiers soon. There's no reason to believe the flight from Jerusalem was at all supernatural or exclusively a Christian event. Lots of people bolted, not just Christians.
Matthew 24 is what ever you want it to be. This is the wonder of the bible.
