(w99 8/15 p. 21 par. 10 Jehovah Prepares the Way)
Well, a monumental development was the enthronement of Jesus in heaven, which marked the beginning of his presence in Kingdom power. Bible prophecy shows that this took place in 1914. (Daniel 4:13-17) Anticipation of this event also caused some religious people in modern times to be filled with expectation. Expectation was evident also among the sincere Bible Students who began to publish this magazine in 1879 as Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence. [Boldface mine]
(w92 5/1 p. 6 The 1914 Generation—Why Significant?)
SINCE 1879 the magazine then known as The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence (now known as The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom) frequently pointed to 1914 as a marked year in Bible prophecy. As the year approached, readers were reminded that “an awful time of trouble” could be expected.
This information was published far and wide by Christians, who based it on their understanding of the “seven times” and “the times of the Gentiles” mentioned in the Bible. They understood this period to be 2,520 years—starting with the overthrow of the ancient Davidic kingdom in Jerusalem and ending in October 1914.—Daniel 4:16, 17; Luke 21:24, King James Version.
On October 2, 1914, Charles Taze Russell, then president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, boldly announced: “The Gentile Times have ended; their kings have had their day.” How true his words proved to be! Unseen to human eyes, in October 1914 an event of world-shaking importance took place in heaven. Jesus Christ, the permanent Heir to “the throne of David,” commenced his rule as King over all mankind.—Luke 1:32, 33; Revelation 11:15. [Boldface mine]
(w84 12/1 p. 14 par. 20 Happy Are Those Found Watching!)
Russell and his associates quickly understood that Christ’s presence would be invisible. They disassociated themselves from other groups and, in 1879, began publishing spiritual food in Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence. From its first year of publication, this magazine pointed forward, by sound Scriptural reckoning, to the date 1914 as an epoch-making date in Bible chronology. So when Christ’s invisible presence began in 1914, happy were these Christians to have been found watching! [Boldface mine]
So I came to believe that for decades, Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence had been pointing to 1914 as the start of Christ’s invisible kingly presence in the heavens. What a shock then, to learn from the quote Apollos gave us from the Creation book, published in 1927, that for the first quarter of the 20th century, at least, we still believed Christ’s presence to have started in 1874. The presence that Zion’s Watch Tower was heralding had nothing to do with 1914 at all! The presence the magazine was heralding never happened! We are still touting this historical magazine title as prophetically prescient as if to say, ‘Weren’t we ever so clever to have unearthed this Bible truth when all the rest had it wrong’. That fact is, we had it wrong too! And yet, instead of admitting it, we continue to engage in a nifty piece of revisionist history, claiming we were right all along and that we were pointing to 1914 from the start. Sure, we believed 1914 was significant back then. We thought it was the start of the great tribulation and that it would end in Armageddon. We didn’t believe it marked the presence of Christ; yet that is what we are now, and for decades have been, implying. How can we state something so patently untrue?
Are the publishers of the aforementioned excerpts unaware that Zion’s Watch Tower was, from 1879 until at least 1927, heralding not 1914, but 1874, as the start of Christ’s presence? I find it hard to believe that they would willfully engage in a deception. Perhaps I’m just being naïve, but I would like to think that they just didn’t do their research very well. Whatever the case, it is a sobering thought to see how easily an untruth can creep into our cherished framework of Scriptural understanding.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by apollos0falexandria on 2012-09-14 10:34:47
I am afraid that this does not appear to be just a matter of poor research.
Note how carefully all the quotations are worded. In every case the presence is said to have begun in 1914, and a pointing forward to something significant in 1914 is said to have been going on prior to that, but the statement is never explicitly made that they expected the presence to begin then. The reader is allowed to infer that, and the full title of the Watchtower at the time reinforces that impression.
However, now note the following earlier quotation from 1954:
----------------------------------
*** w54 6/15 p. 370 par. 4 The Revelation of Jesus Christ ***
Why, then, do the nations not realize and accept the approach of this climax of judgment? It is because they have not heeded the world-wide advertising of Christ’s return and his second presence. Since long before World War I Jehovah’s witnesses pointed to 1914 as the time for this great event to occur. And since 1914 physical evidences establishing this truth have been pointed to repeatedly in the columns of The Watchtower.
------------------------------------
Here the wording is not so careful. Combine the 2nd and 3rd sentences and it claims outright that since long before WWI Jehovah’s witnesses pointed to 1914 as the time for Christ’s return and his second presence to occur.
This is of course blatantly incorrect. And in case anyone should argue that it was partially correct, imagining that perhaps they thought a 'presence' was in progress but a 'return' was due in 1914, then I invite you to read the publications from the period for yourself. In 1887 it was clearly stated that the Lord's second presence AND return both occured in 1874. In 1897 it was stated that the Lord took his great power as King in 1878. Even in 1914 itself it was published that the parousia began in 1874. So whatever they were heralding in 1914 was clearly not the second coming, the parousia, the return or the taking of kingship.
Now if the writers of the later articles had no knowledge that this was false, there would be no need for the careful rewording. Obviously the case would be much stronger if the 1954 claim could be maintained. But none of the quotations in your article make that claim - they simply imply it.
It is circumstantial evidence to an extent, but let the reader use discernment.
Comment by jenni on 2012-09-14 12:11:10
I have not read the whole post as unable to take in any information due to a pain flare. But I did have a short conversation with 2 lovely people about the 'end of the world' and that it's referenced all over the place. I also think it is relevant to this post.
We discussed that when people think the end of the world is coming, how people are planning for the worst. But it could just mean that change is happening and it could be a good change of affairs.
Maybe in some form or other christ will walk the earth again, or on given dates, in different guises. But, we would not be privy to how things will pan out. Due to some poor people who are wrecked with mental health, who say that they are christ, we just ignore them and find them some treatment tailored for them. So God could have decided that if he does send his son back to earth that its not going to be a good option for him to declare himself.
Many people can debate, heatedly about teachings that have not come to pass. Pointing fingers at different religions has brought the world much grief, pain and suffering to many. So please be respectful of others. Do onto others how you would like to be treated.
I hope that makes some sense. My soggy brain has switched offReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2012-09-14 13:50:07
It is one thing to criticize someone and another to criticize an action that has been taken. The Bible says we should not judge another, while at the same time, demanding that we judge the actions of others. If we do not judge between right and wrong actions, how are we to avoid following in the course of the world?
There is no question that Jesus will return and that his presence will be felt by all on earth. That is a matter of clearly stated Scriptural record. What the Bible states clearly, we must believe, or we are fools just wasting our time. Most things in the Bible are not open to interpretation. Most things are stated quite clearly. However, some things are open to interpretation. It is these that we must be careful of. When humans engage in Scriptural speculation, it isn’t necessarily a bad thing. However, if the speculation is treated like doctrine and if in addition, what is being taught is clearly contrary to Scripture, we must speak up. That is the course of the courageous.
We are not talking about matters of personal choice and private opinion. When Catholics or Protestants teach that God tortures his creatures in eternal fire, they are blaspheming the Almighty. It isn’t just a matter of personal opinion. Such a teaching defames God and misleads the masses. However, even in this case, we do not attack the person. Instead, we attack the doctrine; hoping to gain the person. Getting the proper understanding of Scriptural truth in a matter of life and death.
Speaking against untruthful teachings requires that we exhibit courage. It is interesting that the very first sin that is listed among those leading to eternal death is the sin of cowardice.
(Revelation 21:8) . . .But as for the cowards and those without faith…their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur. This means the second death.”
In a parallel verse, those who do nothing wrong in life except to participate in perpetuating a lie are likewise condemned to die forever.
(Revelation 22:15) . . .Outside are the dogs and those who practice spiritism and the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone liking and carrying on a lie.’
If we know untruth is being taught we must be courageous and expose it. Otherwise, we become part of the problem; part of those who carry on a lie. This isn’t a question of personal aggrandisement nor is it hubris. Rather, it is an obligation we must fulfill before God if we are to gain his approval.Reply by jenni on 2012-09-16 08:02:46
Thank you for the references for me to follow in the bible. I am sorry if i have offended you, that was not my intention.
I am former Church Of England and I left the church when I was roughly 15yrs old. I was never taken as a child, all services were attended by myself, in the choir. Then later as a bell ringer in a different parish. So I do have hazy memories of the teachings etc.
I have started bible study with members of witnesses that first visited me on at my door. Then I began more interested and have invited them into my home. Due to my many ailments i have had to postpone my meetings with them. But hope to resume in the nxt month or so
Peace be with youReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2012-09-16 12:01:54
No offence taken whatsoever, Jenni. In fact, I welcomed your comment as it gave me the opportunity to clarify in my own mind and subsequently in print something that had been troubling me for some time. You see, it’s hard to find fault with the teachings one has been raised with since childhood. One doesn’t want to appear disloyal to those men from whom one has received so much valuable instruction; men whom Jehovah is clearly using to care for the needs of the flock. On the other hand, truth should take a back seat to no man or group of men. Still, how does one point this out without creating dissent or division. One must tread careful if one is to balance loyalty to Jehovah’s servants without compromising the greater loyalty due to Jehovah himself.
So I thank you for the opportunity to make that case.
I do hope you can resume your studies soon, because the things we have got wrong in the past, and even the present, are minor by comparison with the truths we have revealed from God’s word to the world. Whether or not we understand a particular Bible prophecy correctly or not, prior to its fulfillment, will not alter its outcome and effect on humanity one iota.
The defining mark of true Christianity isn’t that its followers have the “whole truth and nothing but the truth”, but rather that while striving for truth, they display a Christ-like love throughout the brotherhood. (John 13:35) It is the evidence of that love more than anything else that keeps me within Jehovah’s worldwide organization.
Comment by junachin on 2012-09-19 20:26:13
In a way, it's not so surprising that the "presence" being heralded wasn't the one that supposedly started in 1914. After all, Russell thought the end would come in 1914, so if he believed in an invisible presence it's only logical that he would have believed it to have begun earlier. What IS surprising is that 13 years later they still hadn't figured out what was supposed to have happened in 1914. What was their interim interpretation? More surprising still - yes, shocking - is that as recently as 1999 the publications have given the impression that they foresaw 1914 as the parousia kickoff. I'll have to review the "Out of Darkness" video to see what it says.
Comment by Was 1914 the Start of Christ’s Presence? « Beroean Pickets on 2012-11-05 15:57:57
[...] wasn’t heralding the 1914 presence of Christ, but that’s a topic we’ve covered in another post.) Pretty well every church in Christendom believes in Christ’s second coming, while we preach [...]
Comment by Shahida on 2012-11-15 23:21:30
No wonder the earliest WT publications are not available...
what we now have is a sanitized history.
Comment by Kenner Ensey on 2019-09-16 12:08:43
I've been in "the truth" all my life. My maternal Grandfather was baptized before 1914. He partook of the emblems during the memorial. He was a coal miner in the western part Virginia and I remember him saying that he witnessed to his fellow miners about 1914. I'm unclear if he said it would be the conclusion of this system (i.e. Armageddon) or whether it would just mark a drastic change.
My mother married my Dad in Michigan where I was born in 1954. We moved to Tennessee in 1959. My mother got baptized relatively late, in 1961 at a convention and somehow persuaded my Dad, who came from a non-witness family, to get baptized at the same time. So at about the age of 7 I was subjected to weekly Kingdom Hall visits for the talk and the Watchtower study. We never did participate much in the Ministry School and Service meetings on Thursday night until much later when I was a teenager.
Funny thing though, even as a child something about the Organization didn't ring true with me. I thought its doctrines and conclusions sounded awful complicated. It seemed simpler and easier and more straightforward to just read the bible. Yet, everyone in the congregation were encouraged to study the Watchtower and other Society publications. I don't think reading the bible alone was ever encouraged.
When the "Babylon the Great Has Fallen" book came out, I thought "what a mess!" How did the writers reach the conclusions they reached. How could they say Babylon the Great was false religion and that the beast she was riding was the political system of things. I diligently looked up the scriptures they used as proof and what I read seemed to have nothing to do with what they were saying. Finally, I got so bewildered I laid the thing down. Maybe I'm just too young to understand their reasoning, I thought.
My mother, believe it or not, watched Billy Graham Crusades on TV. I thought this was kinda strange as what he said conflicted with what the Society preached. But what he said made more sense to me. And he used only the Bible.
I looked forward to watching these programs. And I would check the newspaper to let my mother know when they were coming on. My Dad watched them too. But the only thing he griped about was how Billy Graham asked for money at the end. "They don't do that at the Kingdom Hall. You can contribute or you don't have to contribute." "Well, he's got more expenses doing all the broadcasting he does," my mother would counter.
I guess if it had been known at the Kingdom Hall she would have been reprimanded. But I thought, "Well, we ask people to come to our meetings. Turnabout is fair play. We should be able to watch other people's messages and reach our own conclusions." And I couldn't help but think about Matthew 7:24-27 where Jesus talks about a man building his house "upon the rock". If what we had was the real truth then we could listen to anything, and the rains could fall, the floods could come, and the winds could blow, and it would not shake our beliefs.
Nevertheless, the Society warned us not to listen to other messages. They were ploys of Satan to mislead us. It was hard for me to accept this. What was the Society worried about if it had the real truth?
Needless to say, I never said anything to anybody in the congregation about my Mom and Dad watching the Crusades. I frankly thought it was none of their business. And I was a bit resentful of the way I felt the congregation kind of looked down their noses at me and my parents because we didn't participate in so many of the meeting as they did. Somehow to me that just didn't mirror the image I had of how Christians were to treat each other.
Well, to make a long story short, I never became baptized. I did the book studies. I participated in the ministry school some. And, of course, I did the field service, although I felt I was talking by rote and not delivering what I truly believed.
My parents remained witnesses to the end. I went to college for awhile, but I just drifted there-never really honing in on a real profession.
I'm married now to a woman whose father is a Baptist Minister. I'm thinking now about being baptized - as a Baptist- of course. And my objective now is to be able to counter JW'S if they come to my door and show them convincingly how screwed up their doctrine is and to lead them to Christ.