Skip to main content

The Times of the Gentiles - by Dawn Partington

Image
By


Jehovah's Witnesses teach that “the times of the gentiles” is a time period of 2,520 years, beginning in 607BC and ending in AD1914. According to their doctrine, Jesus was enthroned as King in AD1914 when the “gentile times” ended.1.


Only one verse in scripture mentions “the times of the gentiles”:

'They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.' Luke 21:24 NIV.

The Jehovah's Witness organisation has linked this one verse with other prophetic passages to calculate the supposed length of these “gentile times”, notably a time period which began hundreds of years before the incarnation and ended over 1900 years after it.2.

Simple examination of the text of Luke 21 reveals what Jesus was referring to when he used the phrase “the times of the gentiles”. Let's look at the passage together and distil this into four points which you may keep in mind when you are having discussions with Jehovah's Witnesses.

1. Who is Jesus addressing in Luke 21?

Luke 21: 5 Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said 6 “As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down.”

7“Teacher,” they asked, “when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to take place?”

Note that the context of the passage relates to Jesus prophesy regarding the destruction of Jerusalem which would occur in AD70. Sections of the passage to follow relate directly to the reality that the Roman armies would invade the city of Jerusalem. Who is Jesus addressing? His disciples; Jewish converts. These verses are specific to those people standing right there in front of Jesus who would be alive when these things occurred.

2. Is the time of “trampling” past or future?

After speaking of the persecution they would face for the sake of his name, Jesus continues:

Luke 21:20 “When you see Jerusalem being surrounded by armies, you will know that its desolation is near. 21 Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those in the city get out, and let those in the country not enter the city. 22 For this is the time of punishment in fulfillment of all that has been written. 23 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! There will be great distress in the land and wrath against this people. 24 They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. “

In AD66 the Gentile (non-Jewish) Roman Armies invaded Jerusalem and “trampled” it for a time period of 4 years. Notice that Jesus, speaking circa AD32, speaks of the “Times of the gentiles” as entirely in the future. He says, “Jerusalem will be trampled... until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled”. This is in direct contradiction to the Jehovah's Witness teaching that the “times of the Gentiles” (or as their website puts it, “Appointed Times of the Nations”) had already started in 607 BC!

 Why did Jesus speak of this trampling as future, if the trampling had begun hundreds of years earlier at the point of the Babylonian captivity? Context shows that Jesus is speaking of Jerusalem being surrounded by invading armies (v20) and clearly saying that a future “trampling” would occur until the “times of the Gentiles” are fulfilled.

3. Is there a valid link between Luke 21:24 and the Babylonian captivity?

Jehovah's Witnesses suggest that the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem by the Babylonians occurred in 607BC, despite scholars rejecting that date in favour of 587BC. Regardless of exact dating, they suggest that at the time of the Babylonian captivity, God's Kingdom ceased ruling through the Davidic line1.

At this point they say the “times of the Gentiles” began, since Gentile kings were ruling in place of God's King. There are several problems with this teaching, not least the fact that God's Kingdom has never ceased ruling, regardless of the actions of Babylon.

The line of King David ceased ruling over Israel, but nowhere does the text indicate that God's Kingly rule had ended or that his Sovereign Authority had ceased. In Luke 21:24, Jesus is not referencing a past event but rather a future one. The link between the phrase “times of the Gentiles” and the conquering of Jerusalem by Babylon seems non-existent.

4. Inconsistent doctrine

As we have seen thus far, the Jehovah's Witness teaching says that in 607 BC at the destruction of the earthly temple and the captivity by the Babylonians, the “times of the Gentiles” mentioned in Luke 21:24 began. They further claim the following:

* That the literal capture of Jerusalem in 607BC marked the start of the “trampling” and the literal invasion of Jerusalem was a lesser fulfillment of the “trampling”.

* That Jesus was speaking of a “figurative Jerusalem” in Luke 21:24. This symbolic or figurative Jerusalem would be “trampled” until AD 1914.

* The end of the reign of an earthly King meant the end of the reign of God's Kingdom from the heavens, since according to their literature, “Israelite kings represent God's rulership” and the Kingdom of God only “began ruling” again in 1914.2.

* That following Jesus resurrection, Jesus was not King! Moreover, the Kingdom of God was not going to rule for another (approximately) 1900 years

* That for no explainable reason, Jesus “waited” until AD1914 for God's Kingdom to begin ruling again in the heavens

* No corresponding earthly Kingship would be re-established in 1914

* No visible effect of Jesus being established as King occurred in 1914

Not one of these teachings is found in the Bible. They are simply fabricated doctrine by the Jehovah's Witness organisation. The Kingdom (Authority, Rulership) of God is forever and ever. (Psalm 10:16, 29:10, 45:6, Heb 1:8, Matt 12:28). Once Jesus ascended to heaven he was seated upon the Throne as King (Col 1:13, Matt 28:18, Rev 19:16).

To conclude

The teaching of the 2,520 years as the “times of the Gentiles” is false. Jehovah's Witness leaders are once again exposed as having used one bible verse (out of context) as a foundational doctrine. For them, the 1914 teaching helps to establish authority over millions of ordinary Jehovah's Witnesses, despite the fact that it has no basis in scripture.

1. “Appointed times of the nations”, Watchtower Online Library Appointed Times of the Nations — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

2. “Enjoy Life Forever!” Interactive Bible Course, “What does bible prophesy indicate?” Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Obama's mother posthumously baptized into LDS Church - Salt Lake Tribune

By
In the wake of his remarkable success it seemed that the world and his wife wanted to claim President Obama as their own with even an Irish connection being dug up. Now the Mormons have got in on the act by posthumously baptising his mother. They have in the past upset the Jewish community, the Catholic Church and now the American President with this wacky and unbiblical practice but there is no indication that they will review it. And, of course, it is always someone else’s fault and they promise a thorough inquiry to uncover the real culprits. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror. President Barack Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, who died in 1995, was baptized posthumously into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints last year during her son's campaign, according to Salt Lake City-based researcher Helen Radkey. The ritual, known as “baptism for the dead,” was done June 4 in the Provo temple, and another LDS temple rite, known as the “endowment,” was...
Post a Comment
Read more

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

By
The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...
70 comments
Read more

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

By
The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...
18 comments
Read more