The Society has long taught that the immense, heaven-reaching, majestic tree of Daniel 4 that it says represents God’s rulership over the earth was cut down in 607BCE, but that the copper band around the tree stump was unbanded in 1914CE when it says the kingdom was born and Jesus began to rule.
Matthew 13: 31 - He presented another illustration to them, saying: “The Kingdom of the heavens is like a mustard grain that a man took and planted in his field.+ 32 It is, in fact, the tiniest of all the seeds, but when it has grown, it is the largest of the vegetable plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of heaven come and find lodging among its branches.”
Notice the similarity of Jesus’ words above with the description of the majestic tree of at Daniel 4. There is even a cross-reference at Matthew 13:32 to Daniel 4 in the New World Translation.
Jesus is here comparing the kingdom of heaven to a tree that would have a tiny beginning as a seed but would grow bigger than all the other vegetation. Tree seeds take a long time to grow, and so do unbanded tree stumps.
If the tree of Daniel 4 was unbanded in 1914, did it instantly grow back into a giant, majestic tree over night? No, it would take a long time for it to regrow to it’s former height and glory. Logically, the tree of Daniel 4 if unbanded in 1914 would not represent the kingdom of God until it had re-grown slowly until eventually attaining it’s former height and glory.
The tree in Daniel 4 was an immense, majestic, heaven-high tree when it was cut down. It provided food for everyone on earth. But in 1914 when unbanded it was just a lowly stump. It would take time to regrow and reach it’s former glory. Is it reasonable to liken the son of man taking up kingdom rule in 1914 with that of a tree-stump? Daniel 7 says that when the son of man was given rulership, he was also given “dignity”. Being likened to a tree-stump is hardly very dignified.
Think also about Revelation 12. There it describes the birth of a baby, a male son. The JW’s say that the birth of this baby means the birth of the Kingdom in heaven in 1914. Similar to the point above about the unbanded tree stump, is it sensible to compare the dignified coronation of the newly enthroned King, Jesus Christ, and birth of his kingdom with the birth of a helpless baby who must be whisked away to safety for fear of being devoured by the dragon? Hardly.
Revelation 12: “1. Then a great sign was seen in heaven: A woman was arrayed with the sun, and the moon was beneath her feet, and on her head was a crown of 12 stars, 2 and she was pregnant. And she was crying out in her pains and in her agony to give birth. 3 Another sign was seen in heaven. Look! A great fiery-colored dragon, with seven heads and ten horns and on its heads seven diadems; 4 and its tail drags a third of the stars of heaven, and it hurled them down to the earth. And the dragon kept standing before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she did give birth, it might devour her child. 5 And she gave birth to a son, a male, who is to shepherd all the nations with an iron rod. And her child was snatched away to God and to his throne. 6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has a place prepared by God and where they would feed her for 1,260 days.
Babies take a long time to reach full maturity. Same with an unbanded tree stump that starts to regrow. Using this reasoning, scriptural logic dictates that the enthronement of Jesus as King could not have occurred in 1914.