Jeffro
That is 'word salad'. It isn't the 'structure of the narrative' that 'shows the timing'. The direct statements in Matthew 24:15-31 indicate the 'timing'. Regarding the 'chosen ones', the passage directly states that the 'tribulation' would be 'cut short' on account of the 'chosen ones', and only after the tribulation had ended was 'Christ' meant to appear to 'gather' the 'chosen ones'. No part of the 'structure' suggests the 'presence' of Christ prior to or even during the 'tribulation'.
---
Be that as it may, for the Olivet Discourse requires interpretation on two levels: a first-century fulfilment with the destruction of Jerusalem and a later fulfilment with Christ's Parousia beginning in 1914 CE. The direct statements from vs 15 31 prove that there is a mixture of the timing that was to occur prior to 70 CE and after 1914 CE.The chosen ones in the first instance refer to Jesus' disciples and the latter refers to His anointed ones living after 1914 or at the time of His Parousia.
---
The JW claim that Jesus' presence began in 1914 with a yet future 'great tribulation' contradicts the Bible's quite direct order of events: 'great tribulation', and then Christ's presence. Their view is a relic of C. T. Russell's failed claims about 1799, 1874 and 1878 and J. F. Rutherford's subsequent attempts to retrofit those claims to 1914 and beyond.
---
No it does not make any contradiction with Jesus' clear and unambiguous statement about the great tribulation which climaxed the Parousia.
scholar JW