I brought this to an elders' attention years ago and basically, this is how the GB likes to interpret Luke 21:20-24
“Furthermore, when you see Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies, then know that the desolating of her has drawn near." -
happened in 66 C.E. when the Romans first attacked.
"Then let those in Jude'a begin fleeing to the mountains, and let those in the midst of her withdraw, and let those in the country places not enter into her".
There is very little evidence that these early Christians (or Messianic Jews as they were then known) actually 'fled to the mountains', although there is some debate as to whether some of them might have fled to Pella. Earliest written account for this though, is not until the 4th century CE. But for the sake of argument here, let's assume that they did flee to the mountains. This would have been done presumably when the Romans first retreated around 67 CE.
"...Woe to the pregnant women and the ones suckling a baby in those days! For there will be great necessity upon the land and wrath on this people.."---Again, this would have been referring to the time that Jesus' followers were supposed to 'flee to the mountains', after the Romans retreated around 67 CE.
"....and they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations..."
After the Romans returned and devastated Jerusalem 68CE - 70 CE
"...and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled..."
This of course is the part that they change. Without any justification whatsoever, the Organization insists that this "trampling" began not in 70 CE (which would be the logical flow of what we've already discussed), but in 607 BCE. This change was done for no other reason than them trying to shore up their bizarre theory that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914. Just add 2520 years to 607 BCE and you come up with the year 1913. Tweek it by saying there is no "year zero" and viola, you've got 'biblical proof' that 1914 is the be-all and end-all of life as we know it.
If you bring it to their attention and ask how they can possibly interpret the first part of verse 24 as applying to 70CE and the latter part of the same verse to a date hundreds of years earlier, you'll just get a glazed look and no logical answer. Which really is no surprise.