by RULES & REGULATIONS 14 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I'm not a Bible scholar and my 40 years of learning false teachings and assumptions from the Watchtower Society took my thinking abilities away. Here are some questions I have:
How can one ''event'' have a two-fold prophecy and take 2000 years to come to a finality?
How can the destruction of a ''temple'' turn into the ''destruction of Armageddon''? How did Armageddon even get in the picture?
Did Jesus or any apostle writings ever mention an event such as ''Armageddon''?
It's obvious that the account was referring to events that would happen around the time of the destruction of the temple - within "[that] generation" just as Jesus said. The Great Tribulation can have only one fulfilment because it is described as tribulation 'such as has not occurred before, nor will occur again.'
Another thing: the wars, food shortages, earthquakes - these are not part of a composite sign. Jesus was actually telling his followers to not view them as a sign - that they do not mean the end is imminent. Watchtower is actually doing exactly what Jesus was telling his followers not to do!
In this same synoptic gospel account, Jesus warns his followers against believing and following after false prophets who would come in his name and claim the time is at hand. Think about this: If the food shortages, earthquakes, wars, etc were truly a sign that the time is at hand then why are those prophets wrong for making such proclamations? Why is Jesus discrediting them? Answer: Because both the false prophets and the bad world conditions are wrong in their message that the end is at hand. Jesus was telling his follower: 'don't be misled by world conditions and don't be misled by false prophets'.
R&R, as you saw above, I agree with you that the events described in the Olivet Discourse (up to the parable of the fig tree and "this generation") are referring to events in the 1st century. And it is not just the WT who claim that those events have a more future fulfillment. But the surrounding context definitely places them in the events of the Jewish-Roman War of 66-73 CE.
But having said that, look at a comparison of foretold events that Rev 16 describes laid side-by-side with Mt 24 & Lk 21 here. There are obvious similarities, and a few differences also. One could understand some thinking that the Olivet prophecy and Rev 16 are describing the same thing. They aren't. But they are similar enough to lead some to think they are.
It appears that both follow a similar pattern. Yet they each have differences because one is a local event and the other is a world wide event.
Half banana, I saw an article maybe a year or two back in which archaeologist excavated in Nazareth and did find a few very simple houses from around the time when Jesus supposedly lived. Search 'Has the childhood home of Jesus been found?'
No, it's not likely that Jesus actually was born in or grew up in Nazareth, that seems to be a bastardization of Nazarene, 'Matthew' makes that connection ( I use the term generously) in the second chapter of 'his' gospel. If Jesus existed, and that's a big if, he lived in Capernaum, in 'Mark' there's only one mention of Nazareth and its editorial, it doesn't seem to come from any source that 'Mark' used or adapted
Yes John P, the archaeology of Nazareth of the period of Jesus' putative birth showed one humble farmhouse and an old cemetery nearby. Nazareth was not shown on Roman maps of the period and Josephus lived within a short walk of it and never mentioned it in his writings. Like he never mentions Jesus either (except by the later and spurious insertions to be found in his texts) and yet would have been truly expansive on the subject of Jesus had he existed, especially being on his own doorstep so to speak.
There does seem to be a conflation of the two names Nazarene and nazirite in certain people's minds, the latter being the mould for an ascetic holy man, an idea which could have been used to foster a similar image for Jesus.
