Paradise Café Discussions A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

I was speaking to someone on another forum a few days ago, and he was trying to convince me that none of Mathew 24 has happened yet. He took Jesus very literally, and one of his arguments was that, since "heaven and earth" had not yet passed away (see verse 35), the prophecies that Jesus gave on the Mount of Olives (often called the "Olivet Prophecy") cannot have happened yet.

On the other hand, many here believe they were at least partly fulfilled in the 1st century upon Jerusalem and Judea, but that there will be a larger application in the future - while some (including myself) believe Jesus was talking exclusively to the 1st century disciples, at least for Mathew 24.

Most of us here are familiar with the JW point of view, and may still hold to it - which is that Jesus was initially speaking to the Jews, and it was partly fulfilled in the tribulation upon Jerusalem between 66 and 70AD; but that in the future, another "disgusting thing" will stand in a spiritual "holy place", and that spiritual brothers and sisters will somehow have to "flee" in a future "great tribulation". I think the JW position has changed on the identity of the modern-day "Jerusalem" - from themselves, to Christendom (since Jerusalem was essentially apostate near the end.)

So let us be clear - for most of us, this idea that Mathew 24 has a modern-day fulfillment comes from the Watchtower Society. (It is also used by them to "prove" that Jesus became king from 1914, as the "composite sign" has been in evidence since then, they claim.) And while it might make sense to us that there is a modern-day or future fulfillment, we must make sure that it's what Jesus actually intended.

So I would like to use this thread to examine the evidence of what Jesus intended with the Olivet Prophecy.

Let's start with how this prophecy comes about...

Jesus Arrives In Jerusalem

Jesus' final arrival into Jerusalem (at least for his earthly life) occurs in Mathew 21. The crowds welcome him with the words, "Save, we pray, the Son of David! Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah's name! Save him, we pray, in the heights above!" (21:9)

Jesus enters the Temple, throws out the money-changers, and then disputes with the chief priests and elders. He gives an illustration of a man who planted a vineyard and sent his slaves to collect the fruits, but the cultivators mistreat the slaves - so the owner sends the son, and they kill him! The hearers admit that the owner will therefore destroy the cultivators and let out the vineyard to others.

Jesus then tells them that "the kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits. Also, the person falling upon this stone will be shattered. As for anyone upon whom it falls, it will pulverize him." (21: 33-44) The scribes and Pharisees recognize he was speaking about them.

Jesus gives them yet another illustration about a marriage feast given by a king for his son. The ones invited beg off, and even mistreat the slaves doing the inviting. So "the king grew wrathful, and sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and burned their city." Instead, others are invited to fill up the wedding room.

These illustrations were clear, and left no room for ambiguity or dual meanings. The scribes and Pharisees were about to lose their rule, in the destruction of their city that was to come.

After they tried to trap him in his speech, Jesus talks to the crowds about the scribes and Pharisees, in the most strong language. He says, "Woe!" to them at least seven times!

Then, the final condemnation comes before his Olivet Prophecy, where he mentions the wicked generation to which he was speaking:

"Serpents, offspring of vipers, how are you to flee from the judgment of Gehenna? For this reason, here I am sending forth to you prophets and wise men and public instructors. Some of them you will kill and impale, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city; that there may come upon you all the righteous blood spilled on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. Truly I say to you, All these things will come upon this generation." (23:33-36)

Could Jesus be any plainer? This generation to which he had been speaking, and who would reject him, were to receive prophets, wise men and instructors from Jesus... and they would kill them, so that their bloodguilt would merit their destruction.

There was only one possible group of people, and only one possible generation who could receive this bloodguilt - there is no ambiguity in Jesus' words.

However, just in case we doubt, Jesus spells it out for us by his next words:

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her,- how often I wanted to gather your children together under her wings! But you people did not want it. Look! Your house is abandoned to you. For I say to you, You will by no means see me from henceforth until you say, 'Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah's name!'" (23:39)

So we cannot ignore the context and build up to the Olivet Prophecy. Jesus is in Jerusalem, taking about Jerusalem, and telling them their house was abandoned to them.

"When Will These Things Be?"

The narrative now continues with the disciples showing him the buildings of the Temple. Jesus foretells: "Do you not behold all these things? Truly I say to you, By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down". (24:2)

This is a prophecy. It is no wonder then, that the disciples later approach him and ask:

"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?" (24:3)

Now, the WT have us believe that (a) the discples asking about "the conclusion of the system of things" meant something more than the Jewish end of the age, and (b) Jesus took advantage of this ambiguity to describe a larger end of the age - or both.

Let's compare what the disciples asked in both Mark and Luke:

"Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are destined to come to a conclusion?" (Mark 13:4)

"Teacher, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when these things are destined to occur?" (Luke 21:7)

For both Mark and Luke, the question asked is clearly triggered by Jesus' prophecy about the Temple being thrown down - they wanted to know WHEN this would happen, and they want to know the SIGN when these things are going to happen.

There is no indication they wanted to know when the world would end, or the New System or anything like that. In fact, if we recall from Acts 1:6, they thought Jesus was going to be restoring the kingdom to Israel some time soon!

What Was The Real Sign?

Jesus first tells them not to be misled. He warns about false prophets, wars and rumours of wars and says, "See that you are not terrified. For these things must take place, but the end is not yet."

He then talks about nations and kingdoms against one another, food shortages and earthquakes as the beginning of pangs of distress.

However, there is a problem for modern-day parallels. Since wars, famines and earthquakes are pretty common, how can they be signs?

A case in point is with Charles Taze Russell. He interpreted World War I as the "end", because of its intensity and global nature. Yet it wasn't the end. To many, World War II might have seemed like the "end" - but it wasn't.

I'd suggest that Jesus was pointing these things out, not as signs, but simply for things that would have to happen before the actual sign he was going to give.

So then, they would also face tribulation, being killed, being objects of hatred, increasing of lawlessness, stumbling of brothers, and the good news being preached... before the "end".

I propose that these were not signs, but were things that "must take place, but the end is not yet". (24:6)

The actual SIGN, was in verse 15, because it was something the Christians absolutely needed to heed:

"Therefore, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, as spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place, (let the reader use discernment,) then let those in Judea begin fleeing to the mountains." (24:15)

So wars, famines and so on were not signs as such, but things that "must take place", whereas the disgusting thing standing in the holy place was a clear and distinct SIGN.

It was their warning signal to flee.

And church historian Eusebius tells us that the early Christians clearly understood Jesus' words and knew what the "disgusting thing" was, because when the Roman armies under the President of Syria ("king of the north") Cestius Gallus surrounded Jerusalem in 66AD, they fled to Pella the moment the Roman armies withdrew unexpectedly. Even Josephus records that many people fled away at this point.

So then, the early Christians were not looking at the wars, persecution and preaching as a "composite sign" - those were merely things that would happen and must happen before the "end". The SIGN that they needed to pay attention to, and that required immediate action was the disgusting thing in the holy place, correctly interpreted by them to mean the Roman armies surrounding Jerusalem.

"Those In Judea Begin Fleeing..."

Jesus continues with specific counsel: "... then let those in Judea begin fleeing to the mountains. Let the man on the housetop not come down to take the goods out of his house; and let the man in the field not return to the house to pick up his outer garment." (24:16-18)

Now, the 1st century application is obvious... the message is, get outta there quick!

But what is the "modern day" application? If there is one, it is quite disturbing that the WTS have revised their understandings several times. How can one heed Jesus' call if it is indistinct?

For someone to obey Jesus' words today, they need to know the correct "modern day" application of...

... the disgusting thing
... the holy place
... Judea / Jerusalem
... the mountains

So which version of WTS doctrine shall we follow? That "Judea / Jerusalem" is Christians, or that Jerusalem is Christendom (which they revised within the last 10 years).

Or... is this whole WTS notion of a "modern day" application false in the first place?

Jesus also tells us: "Woe to the pregnant women and those suckling a baby in those days! Keep praying that your flight may not occur in wintertime, nor on the sabbath day..."

I would suggest that these words are also pretty strong evidence that Jesus is talking only about 1st century Judea, because why would Christians need to pray about not fleeing on the sabbath day?

Jesus also used similar language when the women were weeping for him, before his execution:

"Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for me. On the contrary, weep for yourselves and for your children; because, look! days are coming in which people will say, 'Happy are the barren women, and the wombs that did not give birth and the breasts that did not nurse!' Then they will start to say to the mountains, 'Fall over us!' and to the hills, 'Cover us over!' Because if they do these things when the tree is moist, what will occur when it is withered?" (Luke 23:28-31)

Here we get to see how Jesus uses apocalyptic language. These weeping women were soon going to weep over their own children - something that we know took place just three decades or so later.

Great Tribulation!

I think one of the main reasons we find it hard to accept that the Olivet Prophecy only applied to the 1st century is because of the description of the "great tribulation" itself...

"For then there will be great tribulation such as has not occured since the world's beginning until now, no, nor will occur again. In fact, unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short." (24:21,22)

Unfortunately, the WTS do us a dis-service here. They tell us about the horrific tribulation upon Jerusalem in 66-70AD, but they fail to tell people about the tribulation elsewhere at that time.

The fact is, the Roman empire nearly collapsed during this period, Rome was filled with bloodshed (even one of the emperors had his head cut off by the mob!), and Jews were slaughtered across the empire, while Christians in Rome had just finished being burned alive in Nero's Vatican Gardens.

This tribulation needed to be cut short, and it was cut short, by Vespasian's surprising rise to the throne, as foretold by Josephus.

But we have to ask, what is this "great tribulation" primarily about? Luke gives us more insight:

"... because these are days for meting out justice, [lit. "days of vengeance"] that all the things written may be fulfilled. 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..." (Luke 21:22,23)

So Luke clarifies for us - the "great tribulation" was to be primarily upon the land of Judea and the Jews.

And he helps us to understand that it can neither mean Christendom (as JWs currently believe), or "spiritual" Jerusalem, as they used to believe, because Jesus continues...

"... and they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled." (Luke 21:24)

Clearly, if we are supposed to get a modern-day parallel, we have to ask why "spiritual" Jerusalem would fall by the sword, when the Christians escaped in the 1st century? And if it's Christendom, what happened to Babylon the Great falling in one hour, like a millstone? Is this a slow-sinking millstone then?

Or maybe the entire WTS doctrine of this passage having a "modern day fulfillment" is the millstone.

What I can tell you is this had a definite fulfillment in 70AD, when the generation to which Jesus himself had preached fell by the Roman sword, was led captive into the nations, and Jerusalem was trampled by the 10th legion for 3 1/2 years.

Resolving The Problems

Of course, the WTS has tightly wound their interpretation with other scriptures, so I appreciate it might be hard to "unwind" their interpretation from our minds.

Let me tackle a couple of important issues that people might ask, if this only had one fulfillment...

(1) Objection: "The good news was not preached in all the inhabited earth (24:14) in the 1st century, therefore it cannot have been fulfilled then."

Well, it depends on what you mean by "all the inhabited earth". Luke says the following:

"Now in those days a decree went forth from Caesar Augustus for all the inhabited earth to be registered." (Luke 2:1)

To the extent that we take Luke 2:1 literally, is the extent to which we should take Mathew 24:14 literally. I'm sure that everywhere that Caesar had authority to require registration, had received the word by the time the "end" came in 66AD. Also, compare Paul's words in Colossians 1:23, that the good news was "preached in all creation that is under heaven."

(2) Objection: "The sun, moon and stars were never darkened in the 1st century".

Neither did the daughters of Jerusalem literally call for the mountains for fall over them, as Jesus prophecied. (Luke 23:28-31)

Just as crying for the mountains to fall over them was a Jewish idiom for going into hiding, sun, moon and stars darkening was a Jewish idiom for the fall of cities, nations and rulers. The Hebrew scriptures contain many examples of this kind of language.

(3) Objection: "Jesus didn't come on the clouds in the 1st century".

Well, that's what Jesus promised to the Sanhedrin, that he would do! "From henceforth you will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven." (Mathew 26:64)

Certainly Jesus was sitting at the right hand of power by the time Stephen was condemned by the Sanhedrin (again):

"But he, being full of holy spirit, gazed into heaven and caught sight of God's glory and of Jesus standing at God's right hand." (Acts 7:55,56)

So it is not much of a stretch to imagine that he did come in the clouds in the 1st century.

Josephus reports one of the many signs that were given the Jews before the downfall of the city, which was also recorded by a pagan historian, of "chariots and troops of soldiers in their armor were seen running about among the clouds, and surrounding of cities." (Wars Of The Jews, Book 6, Chapter 5)

Plus, for some reason, the stones that were hurled at Jerusalem by the Romans were with the phrase, "The Son Cometh" by the watchmen.

The concept of "coming in the clouds" is also another Jewish idiom used in the Hebrew scriptures

OK, this post has become quite long, so I'll post it now, and we can discuss it if you like.

Yes my brother; these things are all true. And I might add: Daniel 11-12 also seems to have been fulfilled in the 1st Century (too many reasons to discuss here). However, the Revelation (which was written after 70-CE) does speak of another coming of Jesus, and the 1st Century events appear to be a "type" of this. Leaving all the prophecies as having been fulfilled in the 1st Century only indicates a dead or uncaring God.

Greetings dear brother Interpretum, may you continue in the enlightenment of our Lord and King Jesus the Christ:

You said,

Dear brother, and excellent commentary and I would say right on. In addition, as you well know, Jesus said that, "This gerneration was the most wicked generation to have ever come upon the earth". Yes they were in fact the most wicked, because they not only had the opportunity to kill God's son, but they actually did kill him, and thus Jesus said that all the "things" that he prophesied, would come upon that wicked generation, and it did.

May you be well my brother, your brother Fred in Christ

only one objection, intpm

He said they would see him coming in the clouds,

now the word you used "idom" would also apply to that would it not.

Maybe it is like seeing his influence on mens hearts. which I think was clearly seen at the time and continues to be seen to this day.

I too also agree with JIM,

IF he had come on the clouds at that time and has begun ruleing it only leaves a very hatefull God to have allowed the things that have transpired since that time. and the light seems to be obscured since that point in time.

IT seems to me that it would also mean that he would have started to rule with an IRON scepter I think. I don't think I see the evidence of that.

just some thoughts

====================================================
Steam says; Here is how C.T. Russell treated Matthew 24.
"Verses 1 to 14 cover the entire Gospel Age; verses 15 to 22 have a double application, literally to the close of the Jewish Age and figuratively to the end of the Gospel Age of which the Jewish Age was a shadow; verses 23 to 26 contain words of warning against false Christs, and in verse 27, our Lord reaches their question, regarding his parousia. B160.

The Master traces various experiences of his people down to the consumation of the Gospel Age. R5522:2
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi Jim

I absolutely agree with you. You might be interested in reading my commentary on Daniel 11, which shows that references to the rule of all 7 emperors up until Nero are alluded to:
http://www.paradisecafediscussions.net/s...p?tid=4115

Why are you so sure it was written after 70AD? I appreciate that JWs teach this, and many scholars suggest it was written during Domitian's rule (in the 90's), but many other scholars suggest it was written during Nero's rule (in the 60's).

Certainly, the fiery language of Revelation sounds like a much more youthful John (a "son of thunder") than the older John who wrote the gospel and letters. This would make sense if Revelation was written in the 60's, while the gospel of John in the 90's, nearer the end of his life.

You are taking my discussion about Mathew 24 and extending it to every prophecy. I did not say "all the prophecies" were fulfilled in the 1st century.

I'm saying Mathew 24 was fulfilled in the 1st century.

Revelation is larger than Mathew 24, and contains these prophecies, but go much further. It starts with the fall of Jerusalem, but goes far beyond that.

I'm sure you yourself have noticed the similarity between certain things in Mathew 24, and in Revelation... I would suggest because they are referring to the same things.

In fact, God is very caring, because Revelation tells us the history of the world up until our day.

He covers the fall of Jerusalem in Revelation 6 - 12, the rise of the Roman empire as imperial persecutor in Revelation 13 (caring for Christians between the 1st and 4th century), and the rise of the Roman Papal power (caring for Christians between the 4th and 16th centuries).

He covers the final fall of Babylon the Great (caring for Christians who actually witnessed the initial fall at the turn of the 19th century), and he has outlined the path to Armageddon (caring for Christians like us who have not yet witnessed this.)

So I'd say God has cared very well for Christians of all ages, through the pages of Revelation.

Those who suggest Revelation has not yet happened yet are saying God doesn't care for 20 centuries of Christians!

An article that also gives a similar explanation. Written by a former Pioneer.

Are We Living In The Last Days?

http://www.geocities.com/veniceexjw/lastdays.html

This is a very interesting subject. One my father has spent the last year doing extensive research on. First off if you've read my story you'll see that what hit me last year and made me realize the JW's didn't have the truth was Matt 24!!! The main thing we realized at first was that the FDS was an illustration (off topic). but the rest of the chapter is Jesus talking about the destruction of JERUSALEM. THAT IS THE TOPIC, because in CH 23 they are LOOKING at the Tempe and Jesus that it will be destroyed and not a stone left upon a stone. So in Chapter it is the SAME CONVERSATION, remember chapters and verses weren't in the original, text and are basically a commentary to the verse.

What do they ask??? they ask when will these things be and what will be the sing of the conclusion of this system of things, and his return. What I want you to do is to put yourself in their shoes, you are one of the 4 and Jesus has just told you some very APOSTATEthings. He has just condemned the entire Jewish religious system and said the temple would be destroyed. Do you think at this very INTENSE moment you are going to EVEN CARE what happens in 2000 years. NO you want to know what ïs going to happen NOW and in your lifetime, because Jesus has said and will say repeatedly, shortly, soon, THIS GENERATION!!!! When reading the NT all the books make it sound like its going to happen SOON not 2000 years later.

When I read this chapter over last year, I remember reading vs 24:4-8, and I realized that aspect of Jesus conversations was telling them what would be happening prior to his return yes, but that is not the sign, it ïs more a non sign actually he was telling them these things would happen but that didn't mean he was coming at that time, that it was just routine history. Notice the Warning Jesus gave in Vs 4. He said (NASB) And Jesus answered them and said to them, See to it that no one misleads you. For many will come in my name, saying I am the Christ and will mislead many. You will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not frightened, for those things must take place, but this is not yet the end. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there sill be famines and earth quakes. But all these things are merely the beginning of birth pains. He goes on in vs 9 about how they will be persecuted, betrayed, hated etc. Why was this aspect NEVER part of the sign as preached by WTS why, was there some divine Comma placed in there to tell us it was separate? NO!!!!

How did Jesus describe the above events. Notice what word he used he said MERELY. These things are MERELY the beginning. Now if these were the ALL IMPORTANT SIGN wouldn't he have put a bit more emphasis on it. I mean how MANY pages has the WTS used over the years to expound on a few verses of something that Jesus said were merely the beginning.

I would now like to quote the above VSs from The Message by Eugene Peterson. It is a modern street vernacular version, but I love the way he puts it. Jesus says, Watch our for any doomsday deceivers. Many leaders are going to show up with forged identities claiming, I am the Christ, the messiah They will deceive a lot of people. When reports come in of wars and rumored wars, keep you head and don't panic. This is routine history, this is no sign of the end. Nation will fight against nation, and ruler fight ruler over and over. Famines and earthquakes will occur in various places. This is nothing compared to what is coming

Wouldn't it be more appropriate to spend the time on what Jesus ACTUALLY said the sign was? Next he goes on to tell them about how they were to flee when the Romans encircled them and retreated THAT I S WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR!!!!!! That was what the CLUE was. Not the other wars or earthquakes. Jesus goes on in vs16 - 28 telling then how they needed to flee from Jerusalem and take refuge in Pella, he was telling them how important it was to do that!!!! Then in VS 29 we see it says The sun will be darkened the moon will not give its light, the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of heaven will be shaken.And then at LAST, the SIGN of the son of man will appear in heaven and there will be deep mourning among all the nations of the earth.

So Jesus PLAINLY states what the SIGN is. The sign is Jesus appearing in Heaven. HE then goes on in the rest of this chapter and the next to give them illustrations of how they need to be aware and take action when they saw these things. See most of the people at that time wouldn't have the written word for quite a while, so they best way to get his point across was to use illustrations that people could pass on to others. THAT IS ALL THAT THEY ARE!!!! The FDS is just an illustration of paying attention.

What is really interesting is to read Josephus work and other books on how all of what Jesus set out in Matt 24 WAS fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE and how much of it was apocalyptic language.

I remember when I read that last year and REALIZED I had spent sooo much of my time preaching and teaching and studying with people about the NON sign, and never knew how much of the rest of the chapter had been fulfilled. Keep in mind what Jesus said to them about the destruction of Jerusalem. This tribulation that has never occurred before, NO NOR WILL EVER OCCUR AGAIN from that vs. alone I don't see how anyone could say the above versus had a 2 part or typical and anti typical application. If you ACTUALLY read Matt 24 for it really says, and preferably not in the NWT, you will see that EVERYTHING Jesus warns about not being misled, are the VERY things that the WTS teaches. That one chapter condemns them to false prophets and that they will mislead many, that was a great shock to me. You see Jesus SAYS what the sign, is and the sign of the son of man is. No need for guesswork or tons of books or studying no he says it very plainly.

So do I think we are living in the last days, as outlined in Matt 24? No I think the apostles were because that ïs what Jesus said.!!!!

Warm Christian Love
Bangalore

Do you have all of this (without Witness references) in a single text that I could publish online and link to the 2001 Translation?

To help further this study perhaps some would like to post the background to the idiomatic expressions used by Jesus here and through his other sermons. What was their etymology.

'elect or chosen ones'
holy place
beginning of birth pangs
good news of the kingdom
false Messiahs
lightening
vultures
Son of Man
sun darkened, moon dark, stars fall, jeavens shaken
coming in the clouds
heavens and earth
faithful and wise servants
food
ten virgins, bride, bridegroom, lamps and oil
Talents
darkness and weeping and gnashing of teeth
inheritence etc.

designs

Hi designs

This is a pretty good idea, so I'll have a go.

The NWT Reference Bible cross references Mathew 24's "chosen ones" with Isaiah 65:8, which reads (and also verse 9):

"This is what Jehovah has said: “In the same way that the new wine is found in the cluster and someone has to say, ‘Do not ruin it, because there is a blessing in it,’ so I shall do for the sake of my servants in order not to bring everybody to ruin. And I will bring forth out of Jacob an offspring and out of Judah the hereditary possessor of my mountains; and my chosen ones must take possession of it, and my own servants will reside there."

The context (the entire chapter) makes clear God is talking about Israel, "a stubborn people" (vs 2). God would get angry at them because of "their own error and for the error of their forefathers at the same time" (vs 7). This is basically similar to what Jesus said, when that wicked generation received the bloodguilt of their forefathers.

So God would not completely "ruin" that nation, because there was a blessing in it, but would bring forth out of Jacob an offspring, his "chosen ones".

So I would suggest Isaiah 65 and 66 is specifically a prophecy about God destroying their nation and Temple in 70AD, and the birth of New Jerusalem.

The other reference is to a "chosen race" in 1 Peter 2:9, which Peter uses to address his readers: "But you are 'a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for special possession, that you should declare abroad the excellencies of the one that called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. For you were once not a people, but are now God's people."

He is talking here to "believers" (vs 7). This is what Jesus alluded to when he said to the scribes and Pharisees that the kingdom would be taken from them and given to a nation producing its fruits. The kingdom passed from them to the Christians.

I would suggest that the term "elect" or "chosen ones" doesn't have one specific meaning, but obviously depends upon whom is being chosen. In the case of Isaiah 65:8,9 God was choosing them from out of Jacob, whereas in 1 Peter 2:9 the "chosen race" were the entire body of believers, both Jewish and Gentile Christians.

The only etymology we should be concerned with here is the etymology of Daniel, because Jesus' use of "holy place" in Mathew 24 is quoting from Daniel.

The "holy place" is used in Daniel 8, in the vision of the goat and the ram. The "holy place" is foretold to be trampled for 2,300 evenings and mornings by a horn arising from a fragment of the mighty horn that was broken.

The angel gives us the interpretation of the animals: "The ram that you saw possessing the two horns stands for the kings of Media and Persia. And the hairy he-goat stands for the king of Greece; and as for the great horn that was between its eyes, it stands for the first king. And that one having been broken, so that there were four that finally stood up instead of it, there are four kingdoms from his nation that will stand up, but not with his power." (Daniel 8:20)

The angel then says: "And in the final part of their kingdom, as the transgressors act to a completion, there will stand up a king fierce in countenance and understanding ambiguous sayings..." (8:23)

The clue is in the phrase" their kingdom", ie. the previous four kingdoms that arose from the king of Greece (which most agree was Alexander the Great).

These four kingdoms eventually became the "king of the north" ruled from Antioch in Syria, and the "king of the south" ruled by Alexandria in Egypt.

It was the kingdom of Rome that eventually dominated these two powers, and it put on great airs. Using Cestius Gallus, the President of Syria, it initially surrounded Jerusalem in 66, and then it used Vespasian and Titus to take away the established place of God's sanctuary, in 70AD.

The second reference to "holy place" in Daniel is at Daniel 9:26, in which after the appearance and death of Messiah, the city and holy place would be destroyed:

"And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah will be cut off, with nothing for himself. And the city and the holy place the people of a leader that is coming will bring to their ruin. And the end of it will be by the flood. And until the end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations." (Daniel 9:26)

Here, the "city" (Jerusalem) is distinguished from the "holy place", but that the "people of a leader that is coming" would ruin both.

This would fit in well with history, in which not too long after Messiah was killed, the Romans destroyed both Jerusalem and the Temple.

Interestingly, in no mention of the "disgusting thing that causes desolation" in Daniel does it actually use the phrase "holy place" - the only correlation is with the sanctuary: "And there will be arms that will stand up, proceeding from him; and they will actually profane the sanctuary, the fortress, and remove the constant feature. And they will certainly put in place the disgusting thing that is causing desolation." (Daniel 11:31)

Clearly, the 1st century Jews fled Jerusalem when they saw the Roman armies surround Jerusalem, so we can conclude that the "disgusting thing that is causing desolation" is the Roman armies, which later desolated Jerusalem, the Temple, the Fortress of Antonia and caused the Daily Sacrifice to cease.

This one's interesting, because it's used illustratively throughout scripture, just as a woman goes through great pains to bring to birth, but then forgets her pain once the child is born.

A prominent one is in Isaiah 66, just after Jehovah promising to repay his enemies:

"There is a sound of uproar out of the city, a sound out of the temple! It is the sound of Jehovah repaying what is deserved to his enemies. Before she began to come into labor pains she gave birth. Before birth pangs could come to her, she even gave deliverance to a male child. Who has heard of a thing like this? Who has seen things like these? Will a land be brought forth with labor pains in one day? Or will a nation be born at one time? For Zion has come into labor pains as well as given birth to her sons. “As for me, shall I cause the breaking through and not cause the giving birth?” says Jehovah. “Or am I causing a giving birth and do I actually cause a shutting up?” your God has said."

Here is God using the illustration of giving birth, in reference to Zion. That it is sandwiched in-between a prophecy of God repaying his enemies from the temple strongly implies He is referring to the events during the great tribulation from 66 onwards, in which the Temple became the stronghold of the Zealots before being desolated by the Romans, while the symbolic "woman" (of Rev 12) who had just recently given birth was "fleeing" from the face of the dragon.

This was indeed when "the hand of Jehovah will be made known to his servants, but he will actually denounce his enemies." (Isaiah 66:14)

Jesus himself uses the concept of a woman with birth pains in John 16:21:

"A woman, when she is giving birth, has grief, because her hour has arrived; but when she has brought forth the young child, she remembers the tribulation no more because of the joy that a man has been born into the world. YOU also, therefore, are now, indeed, having grief; but I shall see YOU again and YOUR hearts will rejoice, and YOUR joy no one will take from YOU."

Clearly he uses it to illustrate that their grief will be temporary, but will be replaced with joy, just as a woman bears grief giving birth, but then forgets the pains because of the joy of having given birth.

The other time birth pangs are used illustratively is in 1 Thessalonians 5:1-3:

"Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, YOU need nothing to be written to YOU. For YOU yourselves know quite well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night. Whenever it is that they are saying: “Peace and security!” then sudden destruction is to be instantly upon them just as the pang of distress upon a pregnant woman; and they will by no means escape."

This strongly alludes to Jesus' own words, about coming as a thief, in Mathew 24:43,44.

Clearly then, if Mathew 24 was fulfilled in the 1st century, then Paul's words here must have been also.

Jesus himself emphasized the importance of keeping on the watch, particularly for the time when the "disgusting thing that causes desolation" was to stand in a holy place. The fact that, when the Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem in 66, the Christians fled to Pella shortly afterwards, is evidence that they did keep on the watch.

And indeed, the "great tribulation" fell upon the Jews almost immediately afterwards, despite them thinking they had "peace and security" because the Romans had retreated!

The other major example of birth pains is the woman in Revelation 12. This "woman" with a crown of 12 stars must represent Israel, who was often portrayed in the OT as God's wife. She gives birth to a son who is caught away to God's throne - clearly Jesus the Messiah!

The "woman" then flees into the wilderness for 3 1/2 years, which corresponds well with the Jewish Christians (now "Israel" at this point) fleeing Judea, away from the face of the serpent.

So the concept of "pangs of distress" in Mathew 24 is, I would suggest, tied in with the birth of the new Kingdom that was being formed in the 1st century. The King had come in the flesh, had been put to death, raised to be seated at the right hand of God, and subjects of the Kingdom were being produced, first from the Jews, and then from the Gentiles.

Satan was undoubtedly doing his best to eliminate this new Kingdom before it was firmly established. His main window was 66-73AD, which during the latter half of this 7 year period God authorized the Romans to destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. As Revelation foretold in Rev 12, he failed, so he had to create a "wild beast" to eliminate those who bore witness to Jesus, which explains why the Roman state persecuted Christians viciously for some 300 years.

What was the "good news of the kingdom"? This is what the angels said to the shepherds about Jesus: "“Have no fear, for, look! I am declaring to YOU good news of a great joy that all the people will have, because there was born to YOU today a Savior, who is Christ [the] Lord, in David’s city."

The good news, to them, was that they had a Saviour, Jesus Christ.

To Mary, the angel told her:

"Have no fear, Mary, for you have found favor with God; and, look! you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son, and you are to call his name Jesus. This one will be great and will be called Son of the Most High; and Jehovah God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will rule as king over the house of Jacob forever, and there will be no end of his kingdom."

And Simeon said of Jesus:

"Now, Sovereign Lord, you are letting your slave go free in peace according to your declaration; because my eyes have seen your means of saving that you have made ready in the sight of all the peoples, a light for removing the veil from the nations and a glory of your people Israel.” (Luke 2:29-32)

So the "good news of the kingdom" was pretty simple, from what I can see. Jesus was the means of saving all the peoples, both Jews and Gentiles, and that he was to receive the throne of David.

This was the "good news of the kingdom" that Peter, Paul and the apostles preached.

We should not be surprised by the idea that it had reached "all the inhabited earth" by 70AD. After all, even at Pentecost 33AD, Jews from "every nation of those under heaven" heard the speaking in different tongues - this included Medes, Parthians, Asians, Egyptians, Libyans, Romans, Cretans and Arabians!

And that was in one day in 33AD, which resulted in 3,000 becoming disciples! Many of these would no doubt have gone back to their lands at some point, and would have contributed to the spread of the "good news" in those lands.

The "good news" does not include private interpretations such as Jesus' invsible return in 1914 - so it does make you wonder whether the WTS are actually preaching the "good news of the kingdom", or another good news.

Men don't you just love 'em?

Of course we don't forget. It's like saying you forget that a broken leg is painful, when you start to walk again.

Fortunately we know 1Tim 2:15 to be a gloss. "and she shall be saved through the child-bearing, if they remain in faith, and love, and sanctification, with sobriety".

Hehe...

Don't blame me, blame Jesus... he came up with the illustration! ""A woman, when she is giving birth, has grief, because her hour has arrived; but when she has brought forth the young child, she remembers the tribulation no more because of the joy that a man has been born into the world." (John 16:21)

I believe the church later omitted the following text: "But then she remembers that tribulation again once he grows into puberty, and can't wait to throw him out!"

They havent happend yet..but when they do it will be on a big scale, we will know it..people will even think the end is coming,and here is where the sting in the tail is.

The things jesus spoke of will happen, and these occur between opening of 1st -6th seals, the begining of his presence when he finally goes to wage war amidst his enemies. The 2 witnesses will be here also preaching the last message before this system collapses, and it does so at the 6th seal when satan comes down in a great rage.
(Matt 24:5-14)

These occur during the opening of the first 6 seals, at the 7th seal, there is silence then the 1st trumpet blows, and this is the time of the wild beast,and this is the great tribulation, it is 42 months long in duration, in the book of Mark, he even says the days of this last king are one of Tribulation(Mark 13:19) (Matt 22:14-28)

Going back to my point in the first paragraph, by this system going down, and the rise of the last king Satan will fool people into believeing his mimic of Gods kingdom has come here upon the earth...no wonder jesus says even before this king is set up..get up and get out, because if you receive the mark, you will receive he judgemnet that is coming upon those that do, and this comes at the conclusion, and jesus arrives at the end of this Tribulation, at the 7th trumpet to pour the rage of God out upon wicked mankind....it has not happend yet, We may not even be in time of the 1st seal yet, things are bad here on the earth, its Satans world, but we are not in those critical times yet, but we are heading there, but when these things do begin to occur, they will be on such a maginitude not seen before nor will be seen again..and these are words from the son of God himself, and in the book of Luke he seaks of the Eartquakes being big and in one place after another, menaning in rapid succession, and the collapse of this system will show how helpless we really are without Jehovah to rule over us..(Dan12:1)