Posted by Rational [trw] on October 28, 1999 at 08:27:33 {BrTq3yWfsYYgCUWv3.1cm0FN8UzOHE}:
In Reply to: ********"Serious Mistake" posted by Friend on October 28, 1999 at 07:31:03:
Friend,
You have merely reconstructed the question in terms of 1999 understanding, by which you can rationalize away the clear intent of the 1984 wording. That earlier intent was tacitly admitted, as Gedanken quoted from the 1995 WT article:
Does this parable apply when Jesus sat down in kingly power in 1914 as we have long understood?Please note that Survival into a New Earth made it very clear that:
Jesus gave this parable as part of the sign of "the conclusion of the system of things." (Matthew 24:3)The "sign" of the conclusion of the system of things was (and still is!) interpreted as being the earthquakes, famine, wars, disease, lawlessness, etc., that 'uniquely identify' the time period since 1914. Armageddon, the destruction of Babylon the Great, and the Great Tribulation are NOT part of that sign, but follow it, necessarily, as those elements are presumably the sign of the approaching "end" (which the latter events constitute). Also please note the 1984 book stated:
What he describes takes place after he is enthroned but also while his "brothers" are still in the flesh and experiencing the hardships that he mentions.It could hardly be said that the period of destruction at Armageddon is "while his 'brothers' are still ... experiencing the hardships that he mentions." The only rational way to understand what was stated in 1984 is precisely as Nimrod and Gedanken have indicated ... and this is exactly how I and 99.99% of the rest of JWs at the time understood it. (And I'll bet that's the way you understood it, too, but you won't admit it.)
Rational