Christ's return is NOT invisible! (page 2)

NeonMadman

The thing that really gets me about the WT's "invisible coming" teaching is that there really are no scriptures at all that point to an invisible return. They base the whole teaching on Russell's understanding of the Greek word parousia as meaning "presence," rather than "coming," as it is commonly translated. But most scholars disagree. It means "presence" in the sense of the arrival of a royal personage with much pomp and ceremony. It might apply to a king whose 'presence' is being honored with a parade. It definitely does not imply a situation in which someone has sneaked into town unobserved.

The only other scripture that I have heard them use to support the teaching is John 14:19, "A little while longer and the world will behold me no more..." They teach that this means that the world would never again see Jesus, but that is not what the verse says. It must be understood in the light of all the other scriptures that describe a visible return. The JW's try to wash away all those other verses by applying a forced meaning to this one.

ballistic

This is another case of them falling foul of their own failed predictions. They needed something to have happened in 1914 as they had been preaching that 1914 would be the end of this system up to that point. And if nothing visible had happened, then it had to be invisible. Genius!

NeonMadman

Christ's appearance which ushers in

Judgment/Jehovah's Day (during which Christ's judgment on behalf of his Father will be readily visible to onlookers), and then

HOW does this differ from what Christians have been preaching down through the millenia?

One important way is that the JW's are defining Christ's "appearance" in a figurative way. He will still be invisible, but it will become obvious to all that it is he who is executing judgment. Whereas Christians, of course, believe that Christ will appear literally.

Though I don't know how the people of the world are supposed to conclude that it is the Jesus of the Watchtower who is executing judgment just because a series of natural disasters begins to occur. Why couldn't it be the God of Christendom bringing this judgment? Or the god of some other cult? Or, for that matter, Allah, or Shiva, the destroyer? They're going to know it is the JW God because the JW's tell them that it is? When have they ever been right about anything? But if you could see Jesus returning, now that would make sense!

Yep! Inching closer to mainstream Christianity on this one.

Maybe, maybe not. They could just be confused about their own doctrine, or there might be different factions of belief within the writing dept., as we have observed on other issues.

This was an issue I actually discussed once or twice with my ex-wife (a mindlessly loyal organization worshipper), and I think even she may have agreed with me on this issue, at least at the time. As you did, I expressed that I thought the organization might be drawing closer to teaching a visible second coming. She then said something about 'waiting on Jehovah' and he would eventually give new light. To which I asked why God's organization should be getting new light to explain something that the churches of Christendom have known for 2000 years. That pretty much ended the conversation.

fjtoth

Outnfree,

Thanks for your thoughtful and interesting analysis. It's just too bad they're only "inching" their way when they've got miles and miles to go with regard to understanding Christ's return.

Frank

fjtoth

NeonMadman,

Thanks for some great insights. Just as the WT Society leaders "sneaked in" Christ's presence, they "sneaked in" his appointment of them as his organizational "faithful and discreet slave." You can't get sneakier than that!

As you say, they define Christ's appearance in a figurative way. As I see it, their explanation paints Christ in 1914 as moving further away from the earth rather than nearer. Jesus said, "Lo! I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Since 1914, instead of being near and "with" Christians, he remains in the remote high heavens from which he merely "gives attention to" what's happening on earth and "directs the dividing of the nations." You've got to have a tremendous imagination to see that as a "return" to the earth.

Frank

observador

Frank,

thank you for opening this thread and giving us your insight on this subject. Also thanks to the other posters for furthering this discussion. Very interesting!

Observador.

Carmel

If the "return" were to be as a literal even where "every eye shall behold Him" riding on clouds, descending (which clouds don't normally do) how would there ever be a doubter left? How would this qualify as a "thief in the night"? Surely if He is to "return" (ie come down from heaven) as he came the first time (from heaven) then it will be through the womb of an early mother. The "clouds" will be the veils that separate the literalists from realizing He has come and gone like the thief, undetected until it is too late.

The "return" is a test, a time of "ingathering" a great "woe", "trumpet blast", all done in a manner that is as subtle at the rest of religious revelation. Sooner or later the awareness will set in and then the lamentation of those who denied.

cheers.

carmel

fjtoth

Carmel,

I like your spunk. The world needs more people like you. People wouldn't have so many problems with the Bible if they could just jump in like you do and give any old interpretation that comes to mind. Here I always thought we had to compare scripture with scripture and let the Bible interpret itself. But, alas, you found a better way!

Congratulations!

Frank

fjtoth

Observador,

Thanks for your kind words. I went to your website. While I don't understand Portuguese very well, I can tell you've done an excellent job toward being helpful to truthseekers. May God bless you for doing such a good and much needed work.

Frank

ballistic

UKers please take note:

"Carmel,

I like your spunk"

LOL

Christ's return is NOT invisible!

Share this