How the Bible disproves the JWs' 1914 invisible presence doctrine.
I just wanted to point out there is a whole whack of information about what the WTS did and tried to cover up concerning what the organization taught and proclaimed prior to 1914. on JWfacts
Why the leaders of the WTS. did this should be obvious in intent.
Here is a link ....
Fisherman: You only posted your conslusions which does not disprove Jw's.
Fisherman, Please point out any flaws you see in my conclusions. Or please point out how the JWs' 1914 invisible presence teaching can still hold up in light of what texts like 2 Peter 3:9 and James 5:7 are implying. I strive to let the text mean what they say, instead of reading foreign ideas into them. If my conclusions are incompatible with any of the texts I cited I want to know.
Let me issue more specific challenges:
Please explain how the encouragement at James 5:7 to exercise patience until the presence of christ is not an empty encouragment if anointed christians are still on earth exercising patience a whole century after the presence began.
Please explain why Peter at 2 Peter 3:9, links the delay in bringing the presence with God giving people an opportunity to repent and avoid destruction, if the start of teh presence does not end the opportunity to repent and does not result in destruction.
And please show where in the NT the bible talks about christ's presence starting with an extended period of invisible rule from heaven.
Here's another point that I forgot to mention:
JWs teach that they alone are true christians and they teach that we are now living in the last days. So from whom did the ridiculers, living in the last days (our time according to JWs), learn about the promised presence?
They could not have learned it from JWs because JWs teach an invisible presence that started the same time as the last days started. So if they learned it from JWs they would know the claim that the presence already started invisibly and they're already living during it. Therefore they would not be asking where is the promised presence. Instead they would be asking where is the promised coming or where is the promised end of the system of things.
So the ridiculers' question necessarily implies that they are not challenging the JWs' invisible presence teaching. They are challenging the very visible, destructive presence that christendom teaches! And Peter does not mention that the ridiculers have a wrong understanding of how the presence begins. He does not say: "These foolish ridiculers know not that they are already living during the presence, for the presence will begin invisibly in the heavens...". No. Peter is also just as oblivious to the JWs teaching of an invisibly presence. Also we see Peter using presence interchangeably with Jehovah's (the Lord's) day of destruction.
So the ridiculers' question and Peter's response, reveal that JWs are teaching the wrong kind of presence while christendom is teaching the right kind.
lt never ceases to amaze me how easily jehovahs witnesses go along with whatever the governing body says.lf they say jump they all say how high.They are like trained fleas in a box.
Most of the WTS doctrines are arranged to support themselves, such as Christ taking his heavenly throne in 1914 the choosing of the WTS as its earthly organization, the self identifying of the FDSL , mankind living in the last days, the anointed of certain WTS members. etc.
Its like the WTS leaders were making up their own religion and self empowering themselves as they go along .
........oh wait they are
I was just discussing this excellent thread with my wife. During our last convention in 2014 we were perplexed by the constant mention of '100 years of Christ's rule'.
We had always been told Jesus would reign for 1000 years post armageddon. If he has in fact already reigned for 100 years then that would only leave 900 years providing the big A came that year. Seems like the orgs writers are getting confused on this whole 1914 and Christ's reign business.
This is not new. For as long as JWs have taught Jesus was installed as a King in heaven in 1914 then his heavenly reign has been going. The 1000 year reign is explained differently as it's post Armageddon, once earthly enemies have been destroyed and Satan confined in the abyss.
The 1000 year reign is essentially a different phase of his overall reign.
Now the question is if that understanding is really supported by the Bible? (if you actually care...)
Need I say more? -Except that your opinions do no discredit JW teaching.
The Bible clearly admonishes that those who claim that Christ comes and then doesn't appear is a false prophet. I believe it is in the Bible book of Revelation which states that every eye will see Him. Nothing in the Bible at all talking about an invisible return or invisible reign.
Object and Manner of Our Lord’s Return (1877) .... Russell's assertions are utterly ridiculous.
That was Russell. When his prediction that the rapture would occur in 1914 after the 1800's fiasco failed, he went with 2nd Advent minds of his day and made it an "invisible" presence which is wholey unscriptual.
I believe the 1874 date came from Nathan Barbour.
He says all sorts of interesting stuff like
Page 9 "But although we are to know no difference in our pre* sentation of it to all people, God has beeu guiding and directing its course. Under £hat direction, we of Europe and America, have been more favored than the inhabitants of other parts of the earth. Why did the light of truth and salvation, started by our Lord and His apostles in Palestine, travel nothward and wesward through Europe and America, rather than southward and eastward through Africa and Asia ? Bid it happen so ? oh not Our JTatheris at the helm; He is guiding His truth. "
Last time I checked the 7 churches of Rev were in Asia Minor, lol!!!
Page 60 Guy tries soooo hard to rationalize his guessing
"The manner we think, equally well established* whether it be an event of our lifetime or not. But for the church to be left without Ifeht on so important a subject, would seem strange, would it not? It would be'-.contrary to pre cedent. Noah knew of the flood; Lot of the fire, etc. They may not hare known the DAY A>D Horn, but they certainly had some knowledge of the nearness of the events before they came. Are we who expect to be gathered utterly at sea without means of knowing anything whatever about the time? Did Jesus not say, that day should not come upon those who watched, unawares? [with-ont their knowtugj. He did; but he also said **ye know not when the time is; what I say unto one I say unto ail, watch!" Yes, but shall we suppose that He meant watch, because you will never know, or because you know not? watch that you mmj know. Let u* look at the strongest of this class of texts; " Of that day and hour kooweth no man; no not the ao<rels in heaven; neither the Son, but my Father only: Watch ye therefore." Xow notice: This does not read or that day and hour no man rtiall «er know—but no mau kwnceth. Jems said that He him-self did not know then; will he never know until he comes? Will he not know the hour before he comes—at b-ast?"
Lot didn't know squat til the angels snatched him up & made him leave.