Treasures from God’s Word and Digging for Spiritual Gems – “Remain Spiritually Awake during the Last Days” (Matthew 24)
Matthew 24:39 (w99 11/15 19 par. 5, ‘no note’)
Here we find Translation bias in the NWT to support the teachings of the organization. The NWT says:
“and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.”
A quick review of the Kingdom Interlinear shows the phrase “they took no note” is translated “and not they knew” (i.e ‘they knew nothing’). This conveys a different meaning.
That this is the true meaning of this passage is confirmed by Jesus' next words in verses 42-44. Jesus three times emphasizes this point when he says ‘you do not know’, ‘if the householder had known’, ‘you do not think it to be’, regarding his coming. Verse 39 only makes sense in context if translated ‘they knew nothing’, because his coming would be like that of Noah’s day. It would be a shock to them.
A review of translations on Bible Hub will reveal (all 28!) either ‘they knew not’ or the equivalent. The Berean Bible reads particularly nicely and says “And they were oblivious, until the flood came and swept them all away. So will be the coming of the Son of Man.” The meaning here is crystal clear.
This verse does not, therefore, refer to people ignoring a "life-saving preaching message", as the Organization contends.
Matthew 24:44 (jy 259 par. 5)
“On this account YOU too prove yourselves ready, because at an hour that YOU do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming.”
If Jesus stated that he will come at a time we do not expect, then how were the early Bible Students able to discern 1914? The simple answer is that it is a guess, backed up by making it a matter of faith, because it cannot be proven. How did they get insight that even Jesus did not have? Furthermore, if it could be worked out from the book of Daniel as well as from what Jesus told his disciples in Matthew 24, then surely Jesus as God’s son could have done so?
Matthew 24:20 (Wintertime, Sabbath day) (nwtsty)
“Keep praying that YOUR flight may not occur in wintertime, nor on the Sabbath day”
From the wording of this verse, it clearly was applying to the first century Jews who had become Christians. There is no room for any antitypical fulfillment; no room for thinking that it will apply to use in our future. Nowadays, the Sabbath can be Friday, Saturday or Sunday depending on where one lives. Also, with Christians living all over the world, some of them will be in wintertime and some in summertime no matter when Armageddon strikes.
Matthew 24:36 (nor the Son)
“Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.”
In the first century Jehovah God had not yet seen fit to let Jesus know when he would come. Therefore how can we calculate it today? If the organization says we can calculate it today then they are saying that Jesus Christ was not able to calculate it in the first Century. I for one am not prepared to take such a stand against our Lord, Christ and Mediator.
Matthew 24:48 (evil slave)
“But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart, ‘My master is delaying,’
The current teaching of the organization is that the faithful slave is real and consists of 7 or 8 men. Yet, in the same parable, Jesus decided to make the evil slave a hypothetical construct. Does that make sense? They also claim the faithful slave is a composite slave. Let us examine every instance where Jesus used the word ‘slave’ in a parable.
- Matthew 18:23-35: parable about slaves owing debts to the master and each other.
- Matthew 25:14-30: parable about slaves given money to do business while the master was away.
- Mark 12:2-8: parable about vineyard and cultivators who killed the owners slaves then his son.
- Luke 12:35-40: parable about slaves watching for the master returning from his marriage.
- Luke 12:41-48: parallel passage to Matthew 24:45-51.
In every passage, when Jesus says ‘slave’, he means ‘slave’ singular, and he uses the plural ‘slaves’ for multiple slaves.
Indeed in the parallel passage to Matthew 24 in Luke 12:41-48 it is clear Jesus is talking about individual types of slave. After talking about slaves (v37) awaiting the return of their master, then he asks a rhetorical question ‘who is the faithful slave?’ In context he is expanding on the subject of slaves and their attitude to awaiting the master's return.
How does he expand on this?
- The faithful slave will be the individual entrusted with caring for the master’s attendants, and who does so, and who is still awake on the return of the master.
- The ‘evil’ slave is self-indulgent, eating and drinking, and then abusing the attendants. He will be punished severely. He is punished severely for abusing his authority. A sin of commission.
- There are two additional types of slave mentioned in Luke's version of this parable. (Luke 12:41-48) Both fail to do the master's will; one knowingly, and the other in ignorance. One is punished severely and the other lightly.
These are clearly types of slaves, and it depends on their actions as to what type they are. So on the basis of this passage in Luke, the faithful slave is not a group of men living in Warwick, New York. Indeed, rather than staying alert for the arrival of the master they have been constantly giving false alarms as to his arrival, and in doing, have so exhausted the attendants by crying wolf too many times that many have fallen away. Additionally the evil slave is a type of slave who forgets about Jesus' return and instead abuses his fellow slaves.
Matthew 24:3 (conclusion of the system of things)
The NWT 2013 edition Glossary defines it as "The period of time leading up to the end of the system of things, or state of affairs, dominated by Satan. It runs concurrently with Christ’s presence."
Hebrews 9:26 talking about Jesus says "But now he [Jesus] has manifested himself once for all time at the conclusion of the systems of things to put sin away through the sacrifice of himself". So the Apostle Paul considered the first century (before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans) as the conclusion of the system of things, not as an event centuries in the future. The book of Hebrews was written about 61 CE, only 5 years before the Jewish revolt started and 9 years before the destruction of Jerusalem and the majority of the nation of Israel.
Who is correct? Romans 3:4 says "But let God be found true, though every man [and organization made of men] be found a liar.
Video – Close to the End of this System of Things
This is a portion from a previous Monthly Broadcast. It is an attempt to reinforce the overlapping generations teaching.
But before examining it, let us check the meaning of the following words from the dictionary.
- Generation: - All of the people born and living at the same time regarded collectively and viewed as lasting 30 years; the average age period between the birth of the parents and the birth of the offspring.
- Contemporaries: - A person of roughly the same age as another. From Latin – con = together with, and tempus = time.
The implications of these definitions are:
- For a generation:
- Will be limited to people with a 30-year span of birth dates.
- Any group of people considered to be a generation will not include those young enough to be the children of that group of people.
- Will be born and live at the same time, not overlap.
- For contemporaries:
- Someone who is 50 and another who is 20 would not fall into the category of ‘roughly the same age’.
- While we cannot be precise, for a 50-year old, his contemporaries would likely be aged between 45 and 55, those he would have known at school for instance, being slightly younger and slightly older.
Having set the basis by which we can understand Jesus words, let us examine the video.
David Splane opened by asking what scripture comes to mind to understand a generation. He suggests Exodus 1:6. This is an interesting choice, as it allows the organization to stretch the meaning and the time (although not legitimately). If he had chosen Exodus 20:5 for instance which talks about “the error of fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation.” It is quite clear from this scripture that fathers is the first generation, sons are the second generation, then the grandsons the third generation, and great-grandsons the fourth generation. So looking at Exodus 1:6 it talks of Joseph and his brothers and all that generation. The normal understanding would be that Joseph and his brothers and those born around the same time. So the interpretation put forward by David Splane that the generation had to live sometime in Joseph’s lifespan is disingenuous. Joseph’s children were not in his generation and yet they lived in their father’s lifespan.
David Splane moves on to Matthew 24:32-34 stating that all the things Jesus mentioned started to occur from 1914 onwards, which meant Jesus was near at the doors. He further says only the anointed saw the signs and discerned the signs which meant something invisible was happening. Although no scriptural support is given for the invisible aspect. One of those claiming to be anointed was Fred Franz born in 1893 and baptised in November 1913. David Splane mentions others such as Rutherford, McMillan and Van Amburgh who were also ‘anointed’ at the time of 1914. They would qualify as the generation of Fred Franz according to the dictionary definition. But then he goes on to include Swingle, Knorr and Henschel as contemporaries of the first group mentioned even though they were born much later and anointed later. However, we can see by the dictionary definitions above that cannot be the case. David Splane does that so they can stretch contemporaries to include the current governing body.
At the 9:40 minute David Splane makes the bold and unsupported claim that in order to be part of ‘this Generation’ someone would have to have been anointed before 1992. This is language gymnastics. Even if 1914 were the start of the last days, which is another whole subject in itself, it would have to be the generation that was alive at the time of the start of those days. This, even at a stretch, would restrict it to those born between about 1900 and 1920. All this generation have now passed away. Were any of the present Governing Body ‘born and living at the same time’ as Fred Franz? Not anywhere near according to normal English usage of the terms. All of the current Governing Body were born long after 1920. He then states the newly anointed would have to be a contemporary of Fred Franz. Hence as even those so-called contemporaries are almost passing away now, then Armageddon must be at the doors is the conclusion. However this whole video is a travesty of the English language and the words that Jesus spoke.
P.S. The day after completing this review Meleti released his video discussing this doctrine of ‘overlapping generations’ as it has been named. No doubt you will find it interesting that independently we come to the same conclusions based on common sense, and more importantly God’s Word and its self-explanation.
Jesus, The Way (jy Chapter 13) – Learn from the way Jesus faced Temptations.
Nothing of note.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2018-03-19 11:16:48
Hi Tadua, thanks for getting the ball rolling on a week with so many dodgy teachings, including your reminder on the "Took no note" in 24:49.
May I add the following :-
Matthew 24:23 states clearly that if anyone says "Here is the Christ" do not believe him. That seems pretty conclusive.
Matthew 23:36 says "Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation". Jesus was speaking to the Scribes and Pharisees. So on whom would all these things come ? very old Pharisees ? Maybe . Younger Pharisees ? - definitely. Young children ? Jesus did not extend the time period that far.
Book Study Matthew 3:15 where the heavens were opened up. Other Scripture references to the heavens being opened up often refer to visions, as at Ezekiel 1:1 or Stephen at Acts 7:56. So who received a vision ? John the Baptiser, Maybe Jesus also. What did they see. A dove, and they heard God's spirit call. We do not know if anyone else saw those things, but there is no evidence to say that they did.
The ideas suggested last week that suddenly Jesus pre human existence came before him in a massive download is not supported by the verse. It might have happened in the wilderness. I don't know. But there is no need to be so categoric with explanations. The book could easily have said that "maybe" this or that happened, and it would have been fair to have mentioned the thoughts, then, of other commentators.
Honest Bible study is what we seek, which means acknowledging all possibilities. Therefore thanks to you and Meliti for all your hard work here, which helps maintain our confidence in God's Word.Reply by Tadua on 2018-03-19 12:19:52
Hi Leonardo
Thanks for your comments. Yes, it truly was a week for: how much time and space have I got for all the dodgy teachings. Re the heavens opening up, I couldn’t agree more with you. My relevant research on another topic indicates the Greek word used here for heavens is only used in the context of the sky, I.e. atmospheric heavens, not outer space heavens, or Jehovah’s presence heavens. This would therefore automatically exclude ‘a download of knowledge’ on the basis of the heavens being opened up. If it happened then and it’s a big if, then the only way would be via the Holy Spirit and as you point out, it’s all speculation conveyed in a manner that brothers and sisters take it to be fact. Answers at our congregation showed that this was taken as fact.
Comment by Bernardbooks on 2018-03-19 13:41:09
Thank you Tadua for the article with many nice points to consider.
I especially enjoyed the part on the way Jesus placed his words about those before the flood not knowing in vs. 39
in between the words about no one knowing when he would come in vs. 36 and 42 and how it doesn’t make sense to change Jesus words in the one verse to “took no note”.
I have always thought that if God had given Noah a specific assignment to warn everyone else about the coming flood why is that assignment not found in the instructions he received. I feel that when he is spoken of as being a “preacher of righteousness” in 2 Peter 2:5, it means he spoke about God throughout his life, not just during a specific time period leading up to the flood. In 1 Peter 3:20 it says “God was patiently waiting in Noah’s day, while the ark was being constructed”. It doesn’t seem to indicate in any scripture that I’m aware of that God was waiting for the ark and a preaching assignment to be completed. In any case, I’m sure throughout his life and walk with God he did like Psalm 116:10 and 2 Corinthians 4:13,14 say regarding all those who have the spirit of faith.
“Now because we have the same spirit of faith as that of which it is written: “I exercised faith, therefore I spoke”; we too exercise faith and therefore we speak, 14 knowing that the One who raised Jesus up will raise us up also with Jesus and will present us together with you.”Reply by Tadua on 2018-03-19 14:38:31
Hi gracefulbranches and welcome.
You raised an interesting point with the 1Peter 3:20 scripture moving me to take a closer look. According to various Lexicons on biblehub, the original Greek seems to convey the meaning that God showed long suffering while waiting eagerly to decisively put that wicked world to an end. In other words, God was not sitting back twiddling his thumbs enjoying the rest, rather he was restraining himself from bringing that world to destruction because of its wickedness. On that basis it is difficult to see how God would have been too happy with Noah if Noah stopped building the ark for a few months while he auxiliary pioneered, or worked part time on the ark so he could regular pioneer as the organization would have us believe. The account in Genesis as you stated does not show God gave Noah any preaching assignment, nor wait till Noah had completed such a task. Rather Genesis 6:13-22 records the command to build the ark, instructions on what to fill it with and record Noah did just so, which means what he was asked, no more and no less. Then the flood came. Again thank you for your comments.
Comment by javierjiminy on 2018-03-19 17:16:48
Wonderful article. I personally would like to add Matthew 24:11, which talks about false prophets. Not long ago many people were mislead into thinking 1975 was the year Armageddon was to come and so many of them sold their homes and properties in anticipation of that year. But as we know in a few verses later at verse 36, no one knows except the father.
Comment by Joseph Anton on 2018-03-19 17:19:38
The account of Noah as told by the Faithful and Discreet Slave is one of the first big awakenings I had as a Christian. Oddly it came from reading a book about Norwegian Black Metal years and years ago. To condense it if anyone studies any pagan cultures and their mythology you can't help but walk away with the very real conclusion that these early Gods (Satan, Demon-Kings... etc) seemed to take care of their people and have an invested interest in their success in the world. Lending them technology and information unavailable for the most part to other cultures. (consider the story of Babel, and also that Christ himself was a builder - building was big tech back in those days) Why then would they absolutely ignore the warning of the only servant of Yahweh left on the planet? Why wouldn't they have built their own ships? (I'm not saying that this would have saved their children - but as has been stated here, the people of that day had no idea what was coming till they were drowning in it) The answer I got to that question when I asked it was that demons just don't care. They shrugged off their human derma and floated safely up into the sky. Add to the strange apathy of the gods toward their offspring (an offspring set to be the next alpha lifeform on the throne of Earth, subjugating their human inferiors would have been incredibly easy for the Nephilim, which is why God made the drastic decision to flood the world and wipe them all out) we should consider the limited space on the ark. God clearly defines its dimensions, and these didn't seem open to any revision in case other believers were found. Consider too the fact that if there were a preaching campaign it was clearly a spectacular failure. Also that there's just no mention anywhere in Genesis of any "warning work." Most Witnesses have the image of the "worldly" people of those antediluvian days, pointing at, laughing, and ridiculing Noah and his children as they worked on the construction of the ark. It's hard to contend with the strength of this one image - or any image really. Which is why ancient pagan cultures relied on them so extensively. Images have extraordinary power. You will not find the events in this single painting from My Book Of Bible Stories anywhere in the Holy Scriptures.
Reply by Joseph Anton on 2018-03-19 17:33:08
Also I believe this teaching of an "overlapping generation" added with the monthly broadcasts has been one of the lead factors of so many of the faithful slipping away in recent years.
Reply by Leonardo Josephus on 2018-03-20 05:06:03
And all they had to say was “We do not know the day or the hour. Neither Jesus nor Jehovah has told us, so we must just wait”. This might have affected the urgency of the preaching work, but the honesty would have encouraged many more not to leave, and , after seeing the effects of that honesty, might have encouraged them to be more careful about what they said in the future.
Reply by Robert-6512 on 2018-03-21 17:51:33
Every time I try to wrap my head around the overlapping generation concept, it just doesn't compute - literally or figuratively. Here is how I get to that:
Let's say 1914 was "the year". If you were a person alive in 1914 with the wherewithal to figure out that 1914 started the Last Days, you'd be pretty smart, since hardly anyone else on earth DID figure it out. You couldn't be a baby. I am figuring that someone would need to be around 20 years old in order to have time to obtain sufficient Bible knowledge and to reason on it to come to the kind of conclusions WT has supposed for these people. For round numbers, let's say they were born in 1895, so they'd be 19 years old in 1914. If they lived 70 years, that would mean they died in 1965.
Then for the 'next' generation. Suppose a 70 year old person died in 2015, again for round numbers. That means they were born in 1945.
Now consider these two people "overlapped" for 20 years. Or, did they?
In order for two people to be part of the same generation, they would have to have some interaction with each other. How much interaction does a 5-year old or younger person have with their "generation"? Hardly any. And the fact as, as people get older, they become sick, weary and home-bound. It's likely that the last 5 years of their life was spent indoors.
If you take those two assumptions together, these two people now overlapped by only 10 years.
Let's go further. It's not 2015 now but 2018. Assuming the prior facts, if the second person dies in 2018 the overlap is now only 7 years. If people live on average about 70 years, then 7 years is just 10% of one's life. If I am say a young person of 10 to 15 years old, how much in common do I have with another old person living in a nursing home for the remainder of their years? Essentially none.
That's the biggest problem with the overlapping generation problem. THE OVERLAP IS BASICALLY OVER, RIGHT NOW, THIS VERY MINUTE. Every minute of every day, there is less and less of this supposed overlap remaining. That means Armageddon should be happening RIGHT NOW. But, hmm, it isn't.
Maybe there's no overlap, and the whole thing is a bad joke? That would be my guess.
I don't know if others have pointed this out before, but to me, the overlapping generation dogma fails, not for any deep biblical analysis, but because of old-fashioned arithmetic. It just doesn't add up.Reply by Warp Speed on 2018-03-24 12:14:32
In a way I am grateful for this Overlapping Nonsense. It made me finally start to wake up to all the rest of the nonsensical doctrines.
Comment by Robert-6512 on 2018-03-19 17:36:41
What is most important about understanding "generation" is not what a dictionary says, but what the Bible says. And it says a generation is about 40 years, period. Not 70, 80 or 100 - nor does it overlap anything.
Apologies for the lengthy post below ...
How do we know what a biblical generation is? Ex. 20:5, Num. 14:18 and Job 42:16 show this to be the transition from father to son. Apparently, the average time between a father's first son and his son's first son is a generation. How long was that? About 40 years. That is longer than we might have expected or be accustomed to, but given the marriage and family customs in ancient times, this estimate seems reasonable. The length might have occasionally been shorter, but it was not likely to be much longer. If couples were going to start a family, they would have to do so while they were still young and strong enough to care for their children. They would certainly not wait 70 or 80 years to bring their first child into the world.
It took 40 years for the generation that angered God to expire in the wilderness (Num. 32:13, Ps. 95:10).
"From the deportation to Babylon until the Christ was fourteen generations". (Mt. 1:17). The deportation to Babylon occurred in 587 BC (not 607), and Jesus became the Christ when he was baptized in 29 AD. Omitting the zero year, 587 + 29 = 616 years. 616 / 14 generations = 44. So, the time span from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ shows the average length of a generation was about 40 years. (The length of a generation must be understood as an average length, just as when Psalms 90:10 says a lifespan is 70 or 80 years, it does not mean people live exactly 70 or exactly 80 years, but about that long.) Even if the flawed 607BC date were used, it would only slightly change the length of a generation, from 44 years to about 46.
How does this affect the "prophetic generation" issue? Jesus repeatedly referred to the people of his day with words like, "With whom shall I compare this generation?" (Mt. 11:16). Thus, "this generation" must have had a fulfillment on people that lived in the first century, at the very least. (Whether that expression applies to anyone else is a separate question.)
Jesus talked about the disgusting thing causing desolation (Mt. 24:15) and then says, "this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur." Recalling that Matthew 24 recounts the words of Jesus just before he was put to death, those words were likely spoken in 33 AD. The Roman armies came, first in 66 AD. and then in 70 AD. to destroy Jerusalem. 70 - 33 = 37 years. Thus, the generation that existed in 33 AD. did not go on existing more than 40 years before Jerusalem was destroyed. So, THIS generation in the first century did NOT pass away without the prophesy of Jesus being fulfilled upon it. Even more compelling is that Jesus began his ministry just before 30 AD, exactly 40 years before Jerusalem was destroyed.
But what to make of Mt. 24:36? "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father." Jesus had described the fall of Jerusalem in great detail, including the fact that "your enemies will build around you a fortification with pointed stakes", and instructions on how to escape. That is a lot of information for someone who supposedly did not know anything concerning this generation.
But "that day and hour" means something else. How can we know? Because, rather than saying THIS day and hour, it says THAT day and hour. "This" and "that" in the Greek text are different words. Jesus DID know about THIS generation, but did NOT know about THAT generation.
It seems clear that THIS generation was the one in the first century that Jesus knew a great deal about, including when and how Jerusalem would fall, but THAT generation would not exist for some time in the far future - the events surrounding which Jesus knew nothing.
And there is more. (This part is admittedly an interpretation, but it's an interesting one.)
If only God knows that "day" and "hour", what do we know about God's view of a "day"? A thousand years with God is like one day. (2 Pet. 3:8). If 1000 years is like "one day", what would one "hour" be? In the first century, the custom of dividing a day into 24 hours was already well established from the Babylonians and the Greeks. Jesus referred to the daytime part of a day as having 12 hours (John 11:9). So, if a day is like 1000 years, then an hour must be like 1000 / 24 or about 41 years. What does this mean?
"THAT DAY AND HOUR" WAS A GENERATION.
This means that only God knows the "generation" that comprises the last days of this entire world.
Because both Jesus and the angels had complete knowledge of the creation of the earth and mankind, they could have performed the necessary calculations to determine when THAT generation would commence - IF it were a fact that could be derived by accurate knowledge and simple mathematics. Yet, in spite of being wise, powerful and in possession of complete knowledge of the facts, Jesus and the angels could not make this determination. Why? Because it is not a matter of accurate facts and clever reasoning, but is a matter that belongs to the jurisdiction of God alone - not to the angels, not to the Son, and NOT to the Watchtower Society. Otherwise, we would be left with the only excuse for Christ and the angels being incapable of reasoning this out is that either (a) they were ignorant, or (b) they are incapable of adding. Either supposition would be demeaning and disrespectful to them, aside from being really far-fetched.Reply by Psalmbee on 2018-03-19 20:00:04
If you apply Job 42:16 then you would come up with 35 years in a generation. This is perhaps the most revealing scripture in the Bible that tells us how long a generation is in my opinion.
Reply by Robert-6512 on 2018-03-22 00:35:40
The account in Job mentions 140 years and 4 generations, and if all we do is divde 140 by 4 then yes that gives us 35, but the account is light on specifics. Job "saw" four generations, but how long was Job alive during the fourth generation? It doesnt say. There is enough uncertainty that the exact average length of a generation cant be determined here. Still, what information is available shows it to be close to and consistent with the 40 year generation length in other bible accounts.
Reply by Joseph Anton on 2018-03-22 13:25:15
The thing with the overlapping generation teaching is that if the end keeps failing to arrive, you can keep on overlapping generations till it does. Or something like that.
Comment by if ever on 2018-03-19 22:04:32
One interesting point when looking at Exodus 1:6 is to read the verses before to get context. Was the phrase meaning overlapping ages of Joseph’s brothers or if you take context by reading verses prior when you read Exodus 1:5 was it referring to those born to Jacob? 70 born to Jacob. Verse 6 then covers Joseph and his brothers dying and then the 70 born to Jacob “that” generation is referred to in this verse. Pretty clear to me on what a generation is those born to Jacob being the 70.
Comment by JackSprat on 2018-03-20 00:06:17
Interesting regarding Noah
The covenant was made only with Noah and his family only. God never told Noah the invite was for everybody. The Bible specifically states in Genesis 6:17-18, “Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish. But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife, and your sons’ wives with you.” That seems to be pretty clear that God’s plan was to save eight people, and eight people only.
Comment by JackSprat on 2018-03-20 03:16:57
The Apostle Matthew makes it abundantly clear in Mathew 1:17 where he lists the groups of 14 Generations from Abraham to Jesus Christ. so who is adding to God's inspired word?
Comment by Jerome on 2018-03-20 07:51:17
Now if you were asked by someone to identify a scripture that tells us what a generation is, what scripture would you turn to? David Splane’s choice in the September 2015 broadcast was Exodus 1:6 which talks about Joseph, his brothers and all that generation. Interestingly, exactly one year later in the September 2016 broadcast at the 2:20 mark, David Splane again makes a comment about Joseph’s generation. Yet how does this harmonize with what was said a year earlier? It was also released as a talk on the JW app entitled: Enhance Your Bible Reading.
Comment by Eleasar on 2018-03-20 18:57:44
Good work Tadua.
I have been spending the last 4 years trying to re read Matthew 24 and 25. It is a struggle to remove what has already been put there. My findings to date are as follows:
1. The word parousia and how it came to have the meaning of invisible presence is interesting. The expectation was that 1874 was the return of Christ based on Barbour’s chronology. This failed and the various people involved tried to figure out the problem. Then someone called brother Keith spotted the translation in Benjamin Wilson’s 1865 Emphatic Diaglott the use of the word presence. It was then reworked that it is not a coming but an invisible presence that builds in intensity with full revelation by 1914. All parties believed Barbour’s chronology to be spot on. This was the fix. This then got moved to 1914 in early 1930s. The first issue is what is the difference between Jesus words in Matthew 28:20 and when he is invisibly present.
2. From the mid 1890s Adolf Deismmann’s research built up new insights into biblical Greek. He was the person who realised that the biblical Greek was the common language of the day, hence koine Greek. In his study of “light from the ancient east” he shows that parousia had a technical meaning of coming at the time of NT writing. The primary meaning is presence and a technical meaning for a coming of a high official. This meaning is known to WTBTS. In 1st July 1949 WT, it is mentioned in the footnote.
3. In verse 3, the word for sign (semion) is in the singular. Now if we read it as a sign not signs, Matthew 24 flows really well. In verse 30 the last part of the question is answered.
4. In verses 32-35, contextually there are two words, fig tree and generation. Israel is referred to as a Fig tree in the OT. In context of destruction of Jerusalem this fits. The word generation is used in matthew 23:36 and logically refers to the Jewish community. 37 years later that generation saw the destruction. Other places could be in the wildness it took 40 years for the rebellious generation to die off.
5. In verse 36, the end day cannot be known. Everything from verses 37-44 backs this up and invites Christians to keep awake.
6. From verse 45 onwards there are 4 parables. The first 3 shows how to stay awake. The first parable should be called the faithful and faithless slave. Both are singular. The other parables highlight, vigilance, diligence and the quality of mercy in the 4th. All of these are for individual Christians.
7. With the revised understanding of verses 45-51, there is a further problem. Do the elite class from 1919 get something more than all the others? This means they get something more than 1st century Christians as it is only applied to those living post 1919. They get more than those who are ‘anointed’ but not part of the fds/gb arrangement. This is riddled with inconsistencies and holes!
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2018-03-21 08:17:55
A little bit of consistency on David Splane's part would have been interesting, to use his terminology. He states re Exodus 1:6 that all Joseph's brothers were part of the same generation, and then proceeds to explain the obvious - namely that someone who died before Joseph, or was born after him, could not be part of the same generation. However Exodus 1 does not try and state who made up that generation - it is just a general term - so there is no suggestion that the children of Joseph's brothers were part of the same generation. Therefore we must look elsewhere.
Considering David Splane was looking at Matthew's gospel in considering the subject, the most obvious scripture to choose was, as is pointed out by Jack Sprat, Matthew 1:17, which shows clearly that a generation is one level down from the previous generation. There can be no clearer understanding than that, although, personally, I think the only application for Matthew 24:34 is in the first century anyway.
This week could have been a fine opportunity for the GB to undo some of the thoughts behind the overlapping generation, but no, as usual, they have to stick to what was said before. They will not change, much like the two witness rule. So no matter what evidence is given, there is a total reluctance to admit error, and so all teachings stand as if they were messages from God himself, not withstanding the admission that the GB are not inspired or infallible. But God's word is, as long as we let it interpret itself.