The Millerites, Adventists etc believed Jesus return would be visible in 1844. When this failed they said it would be visible in 1874. When this failed Barbour made the claim that he had actually returned, but invisibly. This was nothing but a poor excuse for their wrong prediction. It is interesting to see how Russell explains this change in doctrine.
Zion?s Watch Tower 1881 February p.3 ?Well 1873 came, the end of 6,000 years, and yet no burning of the world, &c.; but prophecies were found which pointed positively to 1874 as the time when Jesus was due to be present, and the resurrection of Daniel was also due as proved by the ending of jubilee cycles and the 1335 days of Dan. 12. The autumn of 1874 anxiously expected, finally came, but the earth rolled on as ever; "all things continued as they were from the beginning of creation." All their hearts were sad; they said, surely we have been in error--but where? Surely it is clearly taught that Jesus will come again; perhaps our calculation of time is at fault. Carefully they examined the chronology but it seemed faultless and positively declared that the 6,000 years ended in 1873. Then the prophetic arguments were carefully re-examined: Was an error found? No , they stood the test of all investigation and the jubilee argument and "1335 days" of Daniel could not possibly be prolonged beyond the fall of '74 or spring of 1875 and these periods were both past. ? This was communicated to others of the disappointed ones, and with the remembrance that the time arguments above referred to had been found faultless and unalterable and proved that Jesus was due here in the fall of 1874 , came the thought-- can it be possible that Jesus does not come in a fleshly body at His second advent? Can it be possible that His presence began at the time indicated in those prophecies and yet we went on eating and drinking, etc., and "knew not" of His presence?... As to the manner of Christ's coming other scriptures were found to be in perfect accord with the accounts of Matt. and Luke, of its being an unseen presence : For instance, the angel's message--Acts 1:11.?
Barbour, and hence Russell, were absolutely convinced that 1874 was the time of the return. So they changed it to being invisible after the event. Rutherford kept the invisible concept, but dropped 1874, despite Russell saying it was proven, "faultless and unalterable".
