When Apollo first suggested to me that 1914 was not the end of the “appointed times of the nations”, my immediate thought was, What about the last days? It is interesting that among those with whom I’ve raised this subject, that also has been the first question to cross their lips.
Why should that be? It’s only a year. Jesus didn’t even mention it when he gave us his sign of the time of the end. Likewise, Paul, when he added to our knowledge about the last days, failed to mention any kick-off year. Neither of them make the slightest allusion to any chronology intended to identify the start of the last days. Yet we seem to hold 1914 as of greater prophetic significance than the actual signs of the last days that Jesus and Paul gave us.
Perhaps you think they omitted pointing Bible readers to the chronological significance of Nebuchadnezzar’s vision in Daniel as a way of keeping this truth from the unworthy and revealing it only to true Christians in the time of the end. Ah, but there’s a rub. We didn’t come up with the 2,520 year-for-a-day calculation. William Miller, the founder of the Seventh-day Adventists, did.
In any case, if Jehovah had intended to use it to distinguish his people by giving us a date no one else had, why did we believe that it marked the end of the last days and the start of the Great Tribulation? Jehovah wouldn’t reveal a date to us and then mislead us as to its fulfillment, would he? Of course not.
The real question is, Why should even the thought that 1914 is not significant cause us doubts about whether or not these are the last days?
We are not the first to go through the abandonment of long-cherished prophetic dates. The brotherhood of Charles Taze Russell’s day believed in many such dates: 1874, 1878, and 1881 to name only a few. All were abandoned by the end of the first quarter of the 20th Century, with the exception of 1914 which was changed from being the end of the last days to the start of them. Why hold on to only one and abandon the rest? If the First World War had broken out in 1913 or 1915, do you think we’d still teach that 1914 was the start of the last days? Is our belief in the significance of this year the result of an historical coincidence?
The First World War and the Spanish influenza are two events of such monumental impact on humanity that they virtually cry out to be part of some larger prophetic fulfillment. If you are persuaded to think that way, consider that back in the 14th Century, people thought they were in the last days when the Black Death and the 100-years war decimated Europe and seemed to fulfill Jesus’ words. What we have all overlooked—myself included—is that Jesus didn’t foretell the “beginning of pangs of distress” to be marked by a really big war and a really big pestilence. He didn’t talk about size and scope at all, but only of sheer numbers. The significant increase in the number of wars, pestilences, famines and earthquakes is what holds prophetic significance.
So let’s take him at his word and just analyze the events he predicted would come, so that we can see whether or not we are really in the last days. Since our 19th Century brethren had to abandon their dates, and rethink their theology, let’s follow suit and approach this discussion without the burden of 1914 on our shoulders.
Right away we can realize that abandoning 1914 frees us from our current stretched-to-the-breaking-point interpretation of ‘this generation’. (Mt. 24:34) Since we don’t have to tie the start of this generation to a year now almost a century in the past, we are free to take a fresh look at it. There are many other doctrinal interpretations that need to be re-examined once we’ve discarded the legacy of 1914, but our purpose here is to determine whether we are in the last days based solely on the signs that Jesus and Paul gave us; so we’ll stick with that.
To start off, Jesus talked about wars and reports of wars. Consider this chart. It lists numbers of wars only, since that’s all Jesus referred to.
If you were to pick from this chart the times when the number of wars increased significantly—again without any preconceptions involving so-called prophetically significant dates—which period would you select? 1911-1920 is the highest bar at 53 wars, but only by a count of two. 1801-1810, 1851-1860, and 1991-2000 all show similar numbers at 51 wars each. So the difference between these four bars is not statistically significant.Let’s look at periods of 50 years. After all, the last days is supposed to span a generation, right? The four decades after 1920 don’t show an increase in wars. In fact, they show a marked decrease. Perhaps a bar chart grouping by 50 years will be helpful.
In all honestly, if we are looking for numbers of wars only, which time period would you select as the last days?Of course, increase in the number of wars isn’t the only sign. In fact, it is meaningless unless all other aspects of the sign exist simultaneously. What about number of pestilences? The Watchtower web site lists 13 new infectious diseases plaguing mankind since 1976. So they seem to be in the increase of late. What about famines? A quick internet search will reveal that food shortages and starvation are now worse than they have ever been. What about earthquakes. Again, an internet search will not point to the early 20th Century as a time period of increased activity by comparison with the last 50 years.
Then we have the other aspects of the sign. It is marked by an increasing of lawlessness, persecution, false prophets, betrayal and hatred, and the love of the greater number cooling off. With 1914 in the equation, we consider the false church to have been judged, so they don’t really count anymore. However, these verses make no sense if applied only to the true Christian congregation. Take 1914 out of the equation and there is no judgment yet on Christianity, true or false. Jesus is speaking about all who claim to follow the Christ. Only in the last 50 years have we seen a marked acceleration of all the events depicted from Mt. 24:8-12.
Then there is the fulfillment of Mt. 24:14. This was not even close to being fulfilled at the start of the 20th Century.
Taking into account now the conditions depicted by Paul in 2 Tim. 3:1-7 (again referring to the Christian Congregation) can we truly say that those conditions were in common worldwide from 1914 to 1960? The era of the hippie generation was a global turning point in how people acted socially. All of Paul’s words have come true since that time forward.
So with all of the foregoing, when would you conclude the last days started? Remember, this isn’t something that has to be interpreted for us by some higher authority. We are meant to determine it for ourselves.
Okay, the question isn’t a fair one, because asking for the start is like asking where a fog bank starts and ends. The last days didn’t start with a single event. Rather, it is the conglomeration of events seen historically that allows us to identify the time period. What does it matter exactly what year it started. What’s important is that we are now undeniably deep within that time period.
All of us who support his forum have no doubt that brother Russell was used by Jehovah God to get the work underway and to organize his people in preparation for the last days. However, like many of his contemporaries, he fell prey to the presumption that the secret to determining exactly when the end would come lay deeply buried in prophetic anti-types, parallels, and hidden chronologies. His fascination with the pyramids and how the dimensions and measurements of same could be used to determine our future is undeniable testimony to this unfortunate penchant of his. With all due respect to the man and his position in Jehovah’s service, I think it is fair to say that he did us a great disservice by this unscriptural emphasis on dates and made-up prophetic parallels.
There is a presumptuousness we have all fallen prey to makes us think we can get knowledge of the times and seasons of God. At Acts 1:7, Jesus explicitly states that is not within our jurisdiction, but we still try, assuming that the rules have changed, at least for us, his chosen ones, since those words were first spoken.
“Do not be misled: God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a man is sowing, this he will also reap…” (Gal. 6:7) True, those words are applied to the pursuit of the flesh over the spirit. Nevertheless, they state a universal principle. You cannot ignore Jehovah's universal principles, and expect to come out unscathed.
Brother Russell and the brotherhood of his day thought they could ignore the injunction against knowing the times and seasons of God. As a result we, as a people, have suffered embarrassment down to this day. Brother Rutherford and the governing body of his day thought the same thing and as a result continued to support some of brother Russell's questionable chronology resulting in the misguided and ingenuous belief that the ancient “Worthies” like Abraham and Moses would be resurrected in 1925. As ridiculous as that sounds today, we believed it back then and even went so far as to build a house to host them on their arrival. Brother Fred Franz and the governing body under brother Nathan Knorr promoted the idea that the end might come in 1975 which teaching haunts us to this day. And let's be fair, most of us around at the time were fully on board with these predictions. As a young man, I certainly bought into the 1975 prediction, I am now embarrassed to say.
Okay, all of that is in our past. Will we learn from our mistakes so as to repeat them exactly? Or will we learn from our mistakes so as to avoid them in the future? It is time for us to throw off the legacy of the past. I fear that abandoning 1914 and all that it entails will send shockwaves throughout the worldwide brotherhood. It will be a severe test of faith. Nevertheless, it is unwise to build on a faulty foundation. We are going to be facing a time of tribulation like none we have ever experienced before. It appears that there are prophecies to guide us through that time which, because he had to fit 1914 into the equation, we have misapplied to the past. They were put there for a purpose. We will need to understand them correctly.
Of course, all of this is in Jehovah’s hands. We trust him to make all things happen in their appointed time. Still, it is not right that we sit with folded hands expecting him to do all things for us. There are many examples of Bible characters who, working modestly within their own ‘jurisdiction’, demonstrated the kind of faith and zeal we would all like to call our own.
Are we right in calling for a change in this forum? Or are we acting presumptuously? I know how the governing body feels because they have told us so through this year’s district convention program. However, given the many mistakes they have made and given what the Bible says about putting absolute trust in nobles and the son of earthly man, I find it hard to give them pre-emptive determination over my life course. If we are wrong, may Jehovah correct us, but only not in his anger. (Ps. 146:3; Rom. 14:10; Ps. 6:1)
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by junachin on 2012-07-13 19:44:32
Thanks MV. It's easy to forget that the sign Jesus gave of the last days makes no mention of a specific kick-off date. It's also easy to think that discarding 1914 opens up the possiblity that we're not really in the Last Days. In actual fact, discarding 1914 is like cutting a ball and chain off our collective leg.
Comment by This Generation—The Backlash « Beroean Pickets on 2012-08-04 20:23:53
[...] Consider this: If you remove 1914 as the start of the Last Days, then when did they start? Jesus made no mention of a start year. According to what he actually said, all the signs from Mt. 24:4-31 must occur simultaneously for there to be a definitive time period we can accurately designate as the Last Days. Given that, we cannot say with any certainty that the Last Days began on a particular year. It would be like trying to measure the width of a fog. The start date is nebulous. (For more details on this, see “The Last Days, Revisited“) [...]
Comment by Bobcat on 2014-03-11 11:22:48
Meleti:
Here is some research for thought on the topic of "last days":
First is a survey of verses that mention "last day," last days, " and similar ideas referring to the end times:
Concerning the term "last day" (note singular) used only in the gospel of John. It occurs in:
John 6:39, 40, 44, 54 (by Jesus)
John 7:37 (by John as narrator in reference to a festival)
John 11:24 (by Martha to Jesus)
John 12:48 (by Jesus)
Besides 7:37, all these verses, except for 12:48, link "the last day" with a then future time of the resurrection.
12:48 links "last day" with a then future time of judgment.
Concerning Martha's use of the term in 11:24, the BECNT-John commentary says:
"Martha's affirmation of end-time resurrection was in keeping with Jesus' own teaching (cf. 5:21; 25-29, 6:39-44, 54), which in turn cohered with Pharisaic beliefs (cf. Acts 23:8; Josephus, Ant. 18.1.3 ~14; JW 2.8.14 ~163; see Barrett 1978:395) and those of the majority of first-century Jews (Bauckham 1998b)."
Note the interesting use by Luke of a plural/singular combination in Luke 17:26-30 (although it doesn't use "last day"/"last days") -
The "days of Noah" compared with "the days of the Son of man." (vs. 26) And then contrasted with "on that day" in verse 30. Those "days" precede and lead up to "that day."
*****************************
Concerning the term "last days." It occurs in:
Acts 2:17 Used by Peter quoting (loosely) from Joel 2:28-32. The context indicates Peter believes that "the last days" had arrived.
2 Tim 3:1 Used by Paul. The Society argues that these could only refer to some then future time. But note in the context: Paul tells Timothy (in verse 5) "from these turn away," that is, from the ones described in verses 2-5. Verses 6-9 also tie in with the ones described in verses 2-5 and Paul describes these as already on the scene and soon to make "no further progress.". This argues that Paul saw himself and Timothy in the midst of the "last days" he was referred to.
James 5:3 By James against rich Christians mistreating workers. The phrase is rendered variously by different translations. The phrase could mean they 'are storing [now] in the last days.' The verb for storing is aorist. Or it could mean they are storing up for a future judgment. It is hard to tell from this verse alone how James would answer the question, 'Am I in the last days?'
2 Pet 3:3 By Peter referring to ones ridiculing the idea of Jesus' parousia. In verses 1 and 2, Peter seems to be preparing his readers for the ridiculers, as if they were a danger to them. Indicating that Peter believed they were already in the "last days." In verse 5 Peter speaks of the ridiculers as having missed an important point. Again, indicating that they already were in existence.
Note Peter's reminder in verse 8 that the end of "the last days," during which they would receive the fulfillment of God's promises could still be some time off. (Also note the contrast between verse 5 and verse 8 - 'They failed to notice that, but don't you fail to notice this.')
*****************************
Phrases having a similar idea to "last days" occur here:
1 Cor 10:11 Paul identifies his readers ("us") as those 'upon whom the end of the age has arrived.'
1 Tim 4:1 Paul speaks of false teachers in 'the latter part of the days.' Compare with false teachers in 2 Tim 3:6-9. Paul saw this as a then present danger.
Heb 1:1, 2 "The end of these days" linked to the arrival of Jesus when he taught on earth. See further below for references to a better way of rendering the phrase with implications for its meaning.
Heb 9:26 "At the conclusion of the age." Referring to Jesus' arrival to sacrifice himself.
1 Pet 1:20 "At the end of the times." Referring to Jesus' life on earth which was the basis for faith in him.
1 John 2:18 "The last hour." John speaks of it as already arrived due to arrival of false teachers from among Christians. It should be noted that John uses "hour" idiomatically. In English it might be comparable to say "the last time."
***************************
Following are reference quote concerning how NT writers saw the "last days":
BECNT-Acts commentary (Darrell L. Bock, p. 112) concerning Peter's quotation of Joel, and his use of the term "last days":
The apostles read such texts as last-day, kingdom texts and saw themselves in the last days. Since the day of the Lord is also alluded to in this citation, what Peter is really saying here is that the coming of the Spirit is the beginning of "those days." An era of righteousness will conclude them, and that era comes with the day of the Lord.
[end quote]
*****************************
Concerning Hebrews 1:1,2
(Hebrews 1:1, 2 NWT) . . .God, who long ago spoke on many occasions and in many ways to our forefathers by means of the prophets, 2 has at the end of these days spoken to us by means of a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the systems of things. . .
The NWT greatly softens the impact of what the writer of Hebrews is saying by the rendering, "at the end of these days." (See here for how others render the phrase.) The WT holds to the idea that 1914 marks the start of the "last days."
The NAC-Hebrews commentary (David L. Allen, pp. 102-03) has this to say about "in these last days" (NIV rendering):
The expression "in these last days" contrasts with "in the past" [NIV; "long ago" NWT] of v. 1 and is descriptive of the time when the readers of the epistle lived. The phrase "in these last days" (ep' eschatou ton hemeron) is found in the Septuagint (with various inflections) and translates a Hebrew temporal idiom for the future as distinct from the past. The Jewish perspective of two ages - this age and the coming eshatalogical age - is well known [except among those taught by the WT - Bobcat]. The rabbis debated in which age the Messiah would appear, finding Old Testament evidence both ways. It is probably best to link the two at the appearance of Jesus: the closing out of "this age" and the inauguration of "the coming age." The phrase had come to have a technical eschatalogical significance in Jewish thought, and this was incorporated into the New Testament. The author of Hebrews, like the other New Testament writers, viewed the life, death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus as the inauguration of "the last days." [See two other quoted references that have the same idea here. - Bobcat] The present time in which the readers [of Hebrews] are living is "the last days" in contrast to the palai ["long ago" NWT - Bobcat] of v. 1. It is not only that the appearance of Jesus occurred during the last days, but that his appearance initiated the last days.
Also concerning the NWT rendering "at the end of these days," a footnote in the same commentary says:
Lunemann (Hebrews, 393) correctly noted that ton hemeron touton [literally "the days these" - Bobcat] should not be taken in apposition to ep eschaton with the meaning "at the period's close" ["at the end of these days" NWT - Bobcat], which these days form.
The NIGTC-Hebrews commentary (Paul Ellingworth, p. 93) also comments about "in these last days":
. . . [the phrase] is Septuagintal, used in echatalogical contexts such as Numbers 24:14 and Daniel 10:14 LXX, pasages which have other points of contact with Hebrews. Esxatou ["last"] is neuter, meaning not "on the last of the days," but "in the last days," or more idiomatically "in the end time." . . . Hebrews distinctive (not Septuagintal) addition of toutwn ["these"] indicates that the last days have begun. Toutwn should be taken with the whole phrase: "in these days which are the last days," not "at the end of these days."
It appears to me that the NWT rendering, "at the end of these days," is likely motivated by existing WT doctrine about "the last days."
*************************
Regarding 2 Tim 3:1 "Last Days":
From the NAC-Timothy commentary about what Paul probably meant by "the last days.":
. . . The term "last days" sounds as if it applies "especially to the last days of this age, before the Second Coming." (R. Earle, 1 & 2 Timothy, EBC, ed. F. E. Gaebelein, 197, p.406) However, in the New Testament the phrase refers to the entire time from the completion of Christ's redemptive work until his return. Christ's life, death, resurrection, and ascension have inaugurated the last days. Peter's speech at Pentecost in Acts 2:16-39 proclaimed this fact, and the writer of Hebrews 1:2 reaffirmed its truth. . . Today we are living in the last days, that period between Christ's exaltation and his return.
[end quote]
**************************
I've seen arguments presented against the above based on mathematical feelings, that is, 'how could the last days last roughly 2000 years. But the fact remains that NT writers viewed themselves as being in the last days. Nor can all of the scriptural references above be attributed to merely the last days of the Jewish nation. It might make Western ears feel better if they read "the last age" when they heard "the last days."
But this is posted here for research and reference purposes, and not intended to create a debate.Reply by anderestimme on 2014-04-16 18:51:23
Thanks Bobcat for sharing your research. So many lingering questions are getting thorough treatment here that I don't know how to process it all.
With regard to 2 Timothy 3, one of my lingering questions was: If Paul is here talking about our time, why does he give a similar list of wicked traits in Romans 1, where he's obviously not referring to some faraway future time?
29 And they were filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, and badness, being full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and malice, being whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, schemers of what is harmful, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, false to agreements, having no natural affection, and merciless. 32 Although these know full well the righteous decree of God—that those practicing such things are deserving of death—they not only keep on doing them but also approve of those practicing them.
Comment by Bobcat on 2014-03-12 09:55:40
As a follow on post to the above about "the last days." This post is a survey of the phrase, "the conclusion of the system of things" (NWT; Variously rendered in different translations.) The reason for this survey is because the WT Society equates "the conclusion of the system of things" with "the last days."
(Matthew 13:39-43) . . .The harvest is a conclusion of a system of things, and the reapers are angels. 40 Therefore, just as the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be in the conclusion of the system of things. 41 The Son of man will send forth his angels, and they will collect out from his kingdom all things that cause stumbling and persons who are doing lawlessness, 42 and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where [their] weeping and the gnashing of [their] teeth will be. 43 At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let him that has ears listen.
In these verses, "the conclusion of the system of things" is identified with the "harvest." Jesus then goes on to describe this harvest as a 'collecting out from his Kingdom all things that cause stumbling and persons who are doing lawlessness." Compare this with the parables of 'the faithful slave,' 'the 10 virgins' and 'the talents,' (Mt 24:45-25:30) where the time for throwing out the unfaithful disciples is the 'master's' coming or arrival. Compare also the following parable of the sheep and goats (Mt 25:31-46), where the dispatching of those considered unfit is at 'the Son of Man's arrival.' Also note that in the parable of the wheat and weeds, the "sower" is "the Son of Man" and the "reapers" are the "angels." And it is the angels, not the "sower" who are sent out to do the dispensing of those 'collected out from the Kingdom.'
And whereas the Society only connects the "harvest" with an ingathering, this harvest starts with a 'collecting out.'
Another point of note is the allusion to Daniel 12:3 in reference to the "sons of the kingdom" 'shining like the sun.' The parable places their shining after the 'collecting out' of the weeds. Comparably, Daniel 12:3 places their 'shining after the unique time of distress during which only God's people escape (12:1), and on or after the resurrection (12:2; it should be noted that the WT holds this resurrection to be a figurative one occurring at about 1919 or so.)
(Matthew 24:3) . . .While he was sitting upon the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached him privately, saying: “Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?”
Matthew 24:3 is the next reference to "the conclusion of the system of things." It is included in the second of two questions that the disciples ask of Jesus (When will these things be? and What will be the sign of your presence and the conclusion of the system of things?; Matthew 24:3 is paralleled in Mark 13:4 simply with the term "conclusion.")
Here the disciples are identifying "the conclusion of the system" with Jesus' "presence." The WT holds that Jesus' "presence" begins in 1914, which in turn, for the WT, means that "the conclusion of the system of things" represents "the last days" before Jesus' coming to execute judgment. But in contrast to the WT position, consider the following link which surveys all the verses discussing "presence" (Greek parousia) in connection with Jesus. They connect it with Jesus' coming,judgment, and the resurrection:
http://meletivivlon.com/2014/03/03/wt-study-worship-jehovah-the-king-of-eternity/#comment-9487
(Matthew 28:20) . . .teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded YOU. And, look! I am with YOU all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.. . .
With Matthew 28:20, one merely needs to ask the question, Which makes more sense, Jesus saying he will be with his disciples 'until the last days,' or 'until the time he returns.'? In my opinion, the answer is obvious.
The only other verse of interest on this subject is:
(Hebrews 9:26-28) . . .Otherwise, [Jesus] would have to suffer often from the founding of the world. But now he has manifested himself once for all time at the conclusion of the systems of things to put sin away through the sacrifice of himself. 27 And as it is reserved for men to die once for all time, but after this a judgment, 28 so also the Christ was offered once for all time to bear the sins of many; and the second time that he appears it will be apart from sin and to those earnestly looking for him for [their] salvation.
Here the anonymous writer of Hebrews speaks of "the conclusion of the systems of things (note plural) at which time Jesus appeared to offer himself as a sacrifice. Evidently the writer viewed the time before Jesus' sacrifice as a collection of "ages" or "systems." These verses don't directly address the subject of this post (a yet coming "conclusion of the system of things"), but they provide an interesting look into how the past was viewed, that it culminated with Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection, and that the next big event was/is "the second time that he appears."
A survey of the instances of "the conclusion of the system of thing" should show that it does not refer to "the last days" (for which see the above post), but it refers to the beginning of Jesus' "presence" which brings about the end of this system of things."Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2014-03-12 10:09:04
Hi Bobcat,
Why do you say the writer of Hebrews is anonymous?Reply by Bobcat on 2014-03-12 11:48:14
Well, first off, because he is, that is, the writer did not identify himself in the letter. Perhaps that would be an interesting subject of a thread. The Society is adamant that it was Paul. And for my part, from what I've studied on the subject, that is one possibility. Or, it could be that he had a hand in the original construction of the letter.
The Society, in what little they say about it, always points to what they feel is evidence of Pauline authorship. But there is much that commentaries view as evidence of someone else being the writer. Luke is one of, if not THE prominent candidates besides Paul. Many, in fact, favor Luke over Paul. The writeups I've seen so far leave me undecided, but leaning slightly away from Paul and more towards Luke. Although, I hardly see it as a major issue. The book is inspired either way.
You've probably noticed that whenever the Society quotes from Hebrews, it is always "Paul said . . ." this or that. But that is by no means certain. And I had gotten into the habit of saying, "The anonymous writer of Hebrews said . . ." simply as a matter of 'not going beyond the things written.' ( And, if I were completely honest, there was probably some trace of getting back at the Society for the many untruths they taught me.)
This manner of introducing Hebrews is, in fact, an indisputable truth, regardless of whether Paul was the writer or someone else. But I noticed it never fails to cause the elders in my Hall consternation and raised eyebrows simply because it crossed paths with the company line.
I have no such issues with you. So if some other phrase works better here, I'll comply.
I hope that answers your question.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2014-03-12 13:13:06
It does and I have no problem with your using "anonymous writer of Hebrews". I was just curious because I too assumed it was Paul, but only because that's what I'd been told. I'd never taken the time to investigate, or for that matter, even doubt.
It is the things we take for granted that can mislead us when we start researching. So it's good to have one more bias eliminated.
Thanks,
MeletiReply by Bobcat on 2014-03-12 19:13:25
The SI book's treatment of who wrote Hebrews is a study in indoctrination and/or propaganda techniques. Pauline writership is assumed right from the beginning and only "evidence in favor of that is presented. Any who disagree are presented as 'Bible critics.'
Yet, in the commentaries that I have that give extensive coverage to the topic (The New American Commentary - a very recent commentary, and The New International Greek Testament Commentary - both excellent academic commentaries), the writers are anything but "critics." Their respect for the Bible and fairness in considering various arguments for and against, are quite notable.
Reply by Bobcat on 2014-03-12 12:06:32
Incidentally, on the matter of "the conclusion of the system of things" and the parable of the wheat and the weeds, moving "the conclusion of the system" to the time of Jesus' arrival has some very interesting ramifications regarding any possible 'selection' of Christian sects taking place in 1919, It also impacts the identification of "the sons of the kingdom" (or the so-called "wheat class").
Concerning the wheat, compare the two harvests in Revelation chapter 14. You will have to check the Greek. The first one is 14:14-16. The second one is 14:18-20. The first one is "thoroughly ripe." The second one is "ripe." The second one is both grammatically and contextually referring to a grape harvest. But the "thoroughly ripe" in verse 15 is referring to a grain harvest. But the picture on page 220 of the Revelation Climax book incorrectly depicts both as grape harvests. Of course, the Society holds that the "wheat" only refers to the 144,000.Reply by Bobcat on 2014-03-12 12:08:45
Sorry, that's page 213 of the RC book. I should really turn a light on when I type. :)
Reply by Bobcat on 2014-03-12 19:05:29
Regarding "the conclusion of the system of things":
In the posting above I forgot to include the instance of it in the parable of the dragnet, but the result is the same.
(Matthew 13:47-50) . . .Again the kingdom of the heavens is like a dragnet let down into the sea and gathering up [fish] of every kind. 48 When it got full they hauled it up onto the beach and, sitting down, they collected the fine ones into vessels, but the unsuitable they threw away. 49 That is how it will be in the conclusion of the system of things: the angels will go out and separate the wicked from among the righteous 50 and will cast them into the fiery furnace. There is where [their] weeping and the gnashing of [their] teeth will be.
Here, the Kingdom is likened to a dragnet that hauls its catch up on the shore and then the fish are separated according to suitableness. Note how in the application that Jesus gives to it (verses 49-50), the catching of the fish is ignored as a past event. The fish (representing the wicked and righteous) are already on shore, ready to be separated, and the angels are sent to take care of this. The "conclusion of the system of things" is the time during which this separating by the angels is done. The dragnet's catching of fish is previous to this.
So in this parable, "the conclusion of the system of things," and what happens during that time is the same as in the parable of the wheat and weed. It does not represent a time of influx, but rather, a time when what was already brought in gets separated for life or death.
Comment by Are We Apostates? | Beroean Pickets on 2014-05-22 00:08:56
[…] we are not now living in a special period of “last days” but that the “last days” started 1900 years ago C.E. 33 as indicated by Peter at Acts 2:17 when he quoted from the […]