Hello again STRS.
"On page 23 Cameron writes:Today they teach that he returned to begin his Second Coming in 1914.They believe 1914 marks Jesus' invisible presence, not his Second Coming. The Second Coming consists of the presence, and then the Return. Cameron fails to make this vital and important distinction in his book. Why? Because if he were to present Jehovah's Witness teachings as they teach and not as Cameron portrays them, then he'd be exposed for the liar that he is."
Again Cameron is correct and your accusation about his deceit in this matter is unfounded. Please note the comments in the article, 'How Does Christ Come the Second Time?' (Watchtower 1955, 2/15, p. 104):
"To sum up: We have seen that Jesus came the first time as a human ... that he could not have inherited heaven had he remained a human nor, much less, as such, accomplish the glorious purposes of his second presence; that HE CAME as an invisible spirit and in the sense that he directed his attention to earth's affairs, and that AFTER HIS SECOND COMING three features appear, the first, the parousia, or presence, beginning in 1914." [emphasis mine]
The Second Coming therefore results in a continuing Presence from 1914. Moreover, the Second Coming is synonymous with the Return:
"It is just such a composite sign that marks the time of Jesus' SECOND COMING OR, MORE ACCURATELY, HIS PRESENCE. The Greek word parousi′a that many translations render "coming" at Matthew 24:3 does not mean a time when he would come or arrive but means that he has already arrived and is on hand, is present. In Jesus' case it means that he is invisibly present as Jehovah's enthroned King and is reigning from heaven. This is in keeping with Jesus' statement at John 14:19: "A little longer and the world will behold me no more." Since he would not be physically visible, he gave a sign that would indicate HIS RETURN AND INVISIBLE PRESENCE as Jehovah's reigning King. ... ... The fulfillment of this composite sign given by Jesus, plus some additional conditions given by three of the apostles, began in a remarkable way from 1914 onward." [emphasis mine] - Awake! 1993, 3/22, p.6.
To succinctly drive the point home:
"So it was in 1914 that Jesus returned invisibly" - w.1991, 5/15, p.9.
"Actually President Russell and Rutherford both believed that Christ would return in 1914"
As has already been pointed out to you (the posts appear to have been deleted now), they were NOT expecting Jesus to return in 1914. I remind you of the following references.
The September 15, 1922 WT, p.278 states:
"No one can properly understand the work of God at this present time who does not realize that since 1874, the time of the Lord's return in power, there has been a complete change in God's operations."
And as the Proclaimers book points out on p.631,
"Calculations based on this cycle of years led to the conclusion that perhaps a greater Jubilee for all the earth had begun in the autumn of 1874, that evidently the Lord had returned in that year and was invisibly present, and that "the times of restitution of all things" had arrived.-Acts 3:19-21, KJ."
Even the quotations you give from POST-1914 literature do not help your argument. They demonstrate that Russell and Rutherford were NOT in expectation of Jesus' 'return' and 'setting up' of the Kingdom BEFORE 1914. To them these were LONG PAST events, to which other period literature testifies.
You simply cannot be 'setting the record straight' by persistently misrepresenting the facts about what the Bible Students taught and believed and doing the very thing that you accuse Cameron of! It's very bad form.