The WT study yesterday (page 3)

Bobcat

Splash:

While pre-studying the following questions came to mind:

Para 5: "These pangs of distress correspond to what took place in Jerusalem and Judea in 33CE to 66CE."
Question: Were there war, famine and earthquakes in Judea between 33CE and 66CE?

R. T. France, in the NICNT-Matthew commentary (pp. 903, 904) mentions "earthquakes in Asia Minor in A.D. 61 and in Italy in A.D. 62, in Jerusalem in A.D. 67, and another serious earthquake at an unspecified earlier date in Palestine. A widespread famine around A.D. 46 is mentioned in Acts 11:28 and Josephus, Ant 3:320; 20.51-53, 101. Other more localized occurrences which did not get into historical records may also be assumed (note the mention of local earthquakes in [Matthew] 27:51 and Acts 16:26)."

Para 6: "In the first fulfillment, the Standing In A Holy Place occurred in 66CE."
Question: Did the Romans infiltrate the temple in 66CE?

Luke's parallel account mentions 'Jerusalem being surrounded by encamped armies' (Lk 21:20; "a holy place," Mt 24:15; "where it ought not," Mr 13:14)

Dan 9:26 refers to "the city and the holy place" that are to be 'brought to ruin.' And Jesus foretold the destruction of both the temple and the city. The Society usually mentions Gallus' troops getting as far as the temple wall before retreating, but Luke's rendering seems to negate any need for such detail.

Para 6: "In the larger fulfillment, the Standing will occur when the UN atacks Christendom."
Question: Since when do we consider Christendom to be a Holy Place?

This problem is solved if the prediction of Mt 24:15 is taken 'as is,' as a prediction relating to the 1st century Jewish temple and the city of Jerusalem.

Para 7: "In 66CE the Romans cut short it's attack... Jehovah will cut short the attack of the UN on false religion"
Question: So if the 1st century Christians had to flee when it was cut short, what corresponds to fleeing today when it will be cut short?

Same as answer just above. The Society's answer to this is basically, 'we'll have to wait and see.' Their answer is based on the idea that there is a dual fulfillment.

Para 8: Now describes the Rapture of the anointed, as pointed out by many others.

I couldn't locate this in par.8. But if it is based on Matthew 24:31, then again, their conjecture is based upon a false premise. In a 1st century only fulfillment, Mt 24:31 would be describing the worldwide gathering of Jesus' disciples in the centuries that follow the destruction of Jerusalem.

ablebodiedman

Luke's parallel account mentions 'Jerusalem being surrounded by encamped armies' (Lk 21:20; "a holy place," Mt 24:15; "where it ought not," Mr 13:14)

Dan 9:26 refers to "the city and the holy place" that are to be 'brought to ruin.' And Jesus foretold the destruction of both the temple and the city. The Society usually mentions Gallus' troops getting as far as the temple wall before retreating, but Luke's rendering seems to negate any need for such detail.

Here are the details:

Ok,

1: Look over the wall of Jerusalem.

2: Is Jerusalem surrounded by Roman Armies?

3: Yes/No

Let the reader use discernment.

Anyone seeing a problem with that?

abe

JakeM2012

molybdenum Good Point about someone testifying in court

Splash

Thanks for the research Bobcat - I always enjoy your posts.
You're looking at the account from the point of view that it was only a 1st Century event, I've seen your views on this in other posts.

The earthquakes you mention are not from Judea, but were many miles away in Turkey/Italy. These wouldn't have been felt in Judea at that time, although the one in Palestine and the miraculous earthquakes were nearer.

If Dan 9:26 mentions a city and a holy place, then is the city the holy place? I can't see any other way of interpreting this (from the viewpoint of history) than the city being classed as the holy place as per Luke, but it's still not what I would call 'accurate'.

We still struggle with Christendom being a holy place if we have a modern day fulfillment, simply because it is NOT a holy place. Now if that Holy Place was the so-called centre of modern day true worship as believed by JW's (ie Brooklyn), then the verse may have more credibility for a modern day interpretation.

That 'Rapture' point that you couldn't see in para 8 is actually in end note 2 linked to para 8 at the end of the article, based on Mt 24:31.

Thanks for your thoughts, they were good to read!

Splash

yadda yadda 2

Bobcat

Splash:

In regard to Mt 24:31, see my post on this page. There are a number of OT allusions in the verse to the gathering of God's people. The Society, by viewing 24:31 as a modern time fulfillment, sees the gathering as being something like in 1 Thess 4:16, 17. But their view is further skewed by their view that this only involves the remainder of the 144,000. To the WT, the "chosen ones" are only this small group.

The temple was ultra holy for the Jews, but the city was also called "the holy city." For many of those who fled (which included Judea, not just Jerusalem), they would have had to get the news of the Romans arrival by word of mouth. Few, even in the city, would have had rooftops that adjoined the city's walls that would have allowed them to watch what was going on. Luke 17:31-36 makes more sense to me if one imagines being warned by word of mouth that it is time to flee.

Thanks for your comments Splash.

Take Care

ProfCNJ

@Molybdenum - I had smile on my face after reading your analogy. Following the same line of reasoning, you can just imagine Noah declaring God's judgment, that it would rain for 40 days & 40 nights (Genesis 7:4).

What would happen if after just 7 days the rains have stopped, flood has subsided? And we now see Noah saying: "Ooops, I have to change my understanding of what God said... It used to be 40 consecutive days and nights, but after considering the circumstances and further deep reflection, the no. of days to rain were cut short by God due to ....

However, on the 10th day or after 3 days, rains have resumed, but now heavier, floods begun to rise more than ever. Then it continued for another 10 days w/out let-up. Suddenly, Noah comes out of the ark and declared: "Rains have resumed for 10 consecutive days... It will be reasonable to conclude that the 40 day promise will be fulfilled."

Imagine how would the people of his generation react in viewing his integrity as God's messenger.

Oubliette

we will consider what we believe now

It's pretty funny actually when you THINK about it: JWs believe whatever they are told to believe.

Their beliefs are NOT things which they themselves have arrived at through thoughtful consideration, careful research or life's experience. Their "beliefs" are simply whatever the writers of the WT tell them to believe. And whenever the writers of the WT decide that all JWs everywhere are going to have a "new" belief, they put it in the WT and all the little J-dubbies obediently change their beliefs as easily as putting on a new shirt.

It's pretty effing weird when you really see it for what it is.

The WT study yesterday

Share this