HOW not to DEFINE "RETURN of CHRIST" Watchtower style

by Terry 5 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Terry
    Terry

    To define something is to explain it by breaking down its meaning into simpler, separate terms.

    For example: To LEAVE is to depart from a location by going elsewhere.

    To RETURN is to come back to a location after having departed.

    Simple enough? Yes!

    _____________________

    What if somebody was visiting you in your home and they told you they were leaving and going away to their

    fabulous castle in Europe, but they were going to return and take you with them next time?

    What is the simple understanding of their statement?

    LEAVING: departing from your house

    RETURNING: coming back to your house

    Simple enough? Yes!

    ___________________

    Now let's go through this exercise using WATCHTOWER STYLE DEFINITION, shall we?

    ___________________

    From: Watchtower reference book, REASONING FROM THE SCRIPTURES, page 340 under the heading: RETURN of CHRIST

    ________________

    Quote:

    "Before leaving the Earth, Jesus Christ promised to return."

    ________________

    Will this Watchtower publication explain the Return of Christ by breaking down its meaning into simpler, separate terms?

    Or, will this reference book DEFLECT, CONFUSE, and REDEFINE the meaning to fit pre-existing Watchtower Doctrine? Let us examine.

    ___________________

    Definition: "Before leaving the earth, Jesus Christ promised to return.

    Thrilling events in connection with God’s Kingdom are associated with

    That promise. It should be noted that there is a difference between

    coming and presence. Thus, while a person’s coming (associated with his

    arrival or return) occurs at a given time, his presence may thereafter

    extend over a period of years . . . "

    __________STOP!______________

    Notice above: Immediately a deflection (in red) creates an argument. Instead of

    giving the complete definition AND THEN building an argument, the indoctrination

    process CORRUPTS the definition before and during the dishonest definition.

    ________________________

    WHAT DOES THE PHRASE: THE RETURN OF CHRIST MEAN?

    Where is the actual DEFINITION?

    __________________________

    Watchtower style"definitions" crowd out the defining process and interrupt it by diverting attention to DOGMA indoctrination instead.

    _______________________

    Let us now continue and observe how jumbled, mixed, confused, and muddy the words RETURN, COMING, PRESENCE become.

    __________CONTINUING from above:___________________

    ". . . In the Bible the Greek word er’kho-mai (meaning“to come”) is also

    Used with reference to Jesus’ directing his attention to an important

    Task at a specific time during his presence, namely, to his work as

    Jehovah’s executioner at the war of the great day of God the Almighty.”

    ________STOP!____________

    Did you notice?

    A definition begins again--only to be interrupted by a side argument!

    Coming? Presence? Return of Christ? These are tossed in willy nilly for a reason.

    Watchtower teaching requires confusing these terms with their own doctrine of invisible return=2nd coming=1914 followed

    by an excuse for JW's to go door to door for an extended period of time, to be followed by Armageddon.

    ___________________

    NOW IT GETS REALLY TRICKY!

    Will the Watchtower publication tell us WHERE it is Jesus RETURNS to at his second coming?

    Remember, Jesus departed and promised to RETURN. When Jesus departed he was ON THE EARTH.

    _________________

    RETURN--verb--To come or go back to a place or person

    ______________________

    Throughout the history of Christianity on Earth there has never been any confusion about what the phrase

    "The Return of Christ" actually means. But, the doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses seek to destroy and replace

    the obvious meaning with an unnecessarily complicated teaching. This teaching became complicated for a reason.

    1. False date of Christ's return failed to produce the actual return of Christ! First, 1874 and later 1914.

    2. To cover up the failure of prediction, a silly"invisible presence" argument was tacked on to save the day.

    3. Once the invisible returned Jesus was argued, there had to some reason given for NOTHING HAPPENING beyond the

    unrest of WWI. Why did things go back to normal?

    4. The preaching work and door to door ministry was invented to fill up the deafening silence and inactivity of a returned King Jesus.

    ______________________

    The entire doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses rests on one tiny point.

    JW's must try very, very hard to distort the meaning of 2nd COMING.

    The Greek word "parousia" can mean either COMING or ARRIVAL, or PRESENCE depending on the CONTEXT.

    Jehovah's Witnesses ignore context and ignore "coming" and insist on PRESENCE to foist the "invisible" rescue argument into it.

    Why?

    Remember, for Jehovah's Witnesses, if Jesus did NOT return when they PREDICTED IT--they are obviously FALSE PROPHETS.

    To avoid being identified as such--they must insist JESUS RETURNED, but the reason you could not see him was (insert invisibility here.)

    ____________________

    Let us ask an important question here.

    IN THE DAYS OF NOAH the flood was coming.

    When the flood finally arrived (parousia) . . . WAS IT INVISIBLE WATER?

    No.

    With that understanding in mind, read this:

    _______________________

    MATTHEW 24:39

    “And they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood

    Came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming

    Of the Son of Man.”

    _____________________

    The Watchtower religion is built entirely on an ERROR in predicting the 2nd COMING.

    The doctrines are silly, contradictory, and illogical because they must bend everything to make that work.

    __________________________

    Think of the burden JW's must carry around lugging the heavy anchor of 607 B.C.E when it is easily refuted.

    607 "proves" 1914 or it refutes 1914. The Watchtower has to insist, no matter what, this date is true.

    ____________

    In the Bible, the SIGN of something comes BEFORE the event itself, but using Watchtower style reverse-definition

    we find in REASONING FROM THE SCRIPTURES:

    Following Christ’s return, some persons show faith; they recognize the

    Sign of his presence. Others reject the evidence, but when Christ goes

    into action as God’s executioner of the wicked, even they will discern

    From the manifestation of his power that the destruction is not from men

    but from heaven. They will know what is happening because they were

    Warned in advance. Because of what is overtaking them, they will ‘beat

    their selves in grief.’”

    ______________

    WHY does the Watchtower put the SIGN of Jesus' return AFTER he arrives?

    Because they have to cover up the fact JESUS DID NOT return in 1914.

    ____________

    Dishonesty, corruption, false teaching, poor reasoning, and outright lying is at the bottom

    of all DEFINITIONS given by this religion. This is what we mean by WATCHTOWER STYLE.

  • runForever
    runForever

    Thankyou Terry. That is like chiseling something down with a jackhammer. Hard but entirely possible.

  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    Great post, as usual!

    Yes, yes, I was chastised by the local BOE for being "critical". Then an Eldub gave a public comment directed at me. He said we should not dissect WT articles. Hmmmm???

    Just look up the definition and synonyms of dissect. Very interesting.

    DD

  • smiddy
    smiddy

    That was a great post terry , lurkers and newbies take note.I have.

    smiddy

  • Ucantnome
    Ucantnome

    Terry

    In the Bible, the SIGN of something comes BEFORE the event itself, but using Watchtower style reverse-definition

    we find in REASONING FROM THE SCRIPTURES

    Following Christ’s return, some persons show faith; they recognize the

    Sign of his presence. Others reject the evidence, but when Christ goes

    into action as God’s executioner of the wicked, even they will discern

    From the manifestation of his power that the destruction is not from men

    but from heaven. They will know what is happening because they were

    Warned in advance. Because of what is overtaking them, they will ‘beat

    their selves in grief.’”

    I think it depends on the meaning of the word sign. In Isaiah 11:10 the word signal is used and the greek word used in the Septuagint can be translated sign or ensign or standard. i believe the way it is used here and in Matthew 2:30-31 with the gathering suggests this.

    (Things In Which It Is Impossible For God To Lie, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society 1965 pg.339. Man's Salvation Out of World Distress At Hand, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society 1975 pg197-200)

    An example of I found of how a standard was used was in the Cambridge encyclopedia under Stuart page 1062 " He landed with seven followers at Eriskay in the Hebrides (July 1745) and raised his fathers standard (sign) The clans men flocked to him, Edinburgh surrendered and he kept court at Holyrood" Seems a similar sort of thing.

    The apostle paul quoted from Isaiah 11:10 at Romans 15:12 regarding the gentiles becoming believes and joining the congregation. The book Man's Salvation Out of World Distress At Hand on page 198 says regarding the prophecy

    'However, the prophecy applies more particularly "in that day." We have been in that day since the birth of God's Messianic kingdom in the heavens in 1914. Then the glorified Jesus Christ, 2the root of Jesse," stood up in Kingdom authority to deal with all the nations of the earth.'

    I believe the sign of Matthew 24:30 was thought to be the act of God's Son in recieving authority from his father (The Watchtower January 15 1966 pg 38) I also believe this has changed now.

    but this may be how the reasoning from the scriptures book that you quote from means that he returns arrives and raises his standard and the sign being after his arrival?

  • Terry
    Terry

    Ucantnome: this may be how the reasoning from the scriptures book that you quote from means that he returns arrives and raises his standard and the sign being after his arrival?

    ________________

    Well, let's make it as simple as we dare.

    The Watchtower alone peddles the 2nd coming as no "coming" at all.

    The Watchtower alone peddles the "every eye shall see him" as a big "no they won't!"

    Both Watchtower approved dates (1874 and 1914) authorized, promoted, published, and vouched for as "god's dates, not man's"could

    not man's"could hardly be verified by "every eye" seeing a returned Jesus.

    ______

    To prop up these non-events, the ONLY possible corroboration offered was a squirrelly"parousia" invisibility.

    The Watchtower offered SIGNS for 1874 and SIGNS for 1914. If you ever get the time to read the list of "proofs by signs" you'll be reduced

    to belly-quivering laughter!

    Jehovah's Witnesses are stuck with a Jesus who DOES NOT COME BACK TO EARTH. He remains in heaven and "turns his attention toward

    the Earth!

    _________

    The 2nd coming (Come quickly, Lord Jesus!) by Watchtower teaching is no "coming" because Jesus doesn't return, and what is more: you can't see him not return, because he's STILL IN HEAVEN!

    So, in direct answer to your suggestion, the Watchtower DEFINITION of parousia by SIGNS is no solution to their abject and disastrous theology,

    no matter how they explain it.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit