Beth Sarim, the WTS evens adds to the scripture by saying "one hope: In this context, “one hope” refers specifically to the heavenly hope of anointed Christians. (Heb 3:1) Additionally, when the anointed serve as heavenly kings and priests, all mankind who desire to serve God and who exercise faith will be “set free from enslavement to corruption” and will enjoy “the glorious freedom of the children of God.”—Ro 8:20, 21, 24. (in their "study" bible, Notes)
Proof of two destinies for believers in the Bible, heavenly and earthly
by slimboyfat 59 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
vienne
Sadly, this post has been hijacked. To answer the original question, see Separate Identity, volume two, page 34. There you will find a brief summary of the 19th Century background to the two destinies theology. There are older writers teaching the same thing, but I do not believe Russell read any of them.
-
Earnest
A Separate Identity [Schulz and Vienne, 2020], volume two, page 34 :
This view [that if the Father was in heaven and Jesus was to receive his disciples home to himself, then they would join him in heaven] became an issue for [George] Stetson [1814-1879] in 1875, and it is likely that it was also the topic of discussion among the Allegheny Bible Study Group. Stetson wrote a lengthy article for The Restitution defending the traditional Age-to-Come belief system which taught that the earth was man's proper home. ...
Another probable route to Russell and Barbour's belief that a little flock would be called to heaven while a remainder of mankind would find blessings in an earthly paradise is Dunbar Isidore Heath's [1816-1888] The Future Human Kingdom of Christ which profoundly influenced Henry Dunn [1801-1878] and, we think, through the Storrs-Dunn connection it influenced Russell.
My Note : In a supplement to the first edition of Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence, Russell writes :
“Bros. George Storrs, Henry Dunn and others were preaching and writing of ‘the times of restitution of all things which God hath spoken by the mouth of all His holy Prophets’ (Acts 3:21) and that ‘In the ages to come, God would show the exceeding riches of his grace.’ (Ephesians 2:7)”
It should also be noted that Storrs started a magazine entitled The Bible Examiner [1843-1880] and Russell wrote articles for this magazine in the 1870s until Storr's death in 1879.
-
vienne
Most Age-to-Come adherents believed that Bride of Christ's proper home was earthly and that the kingdom was an earthly kingdom. Barbour (and perhaps Russell) believed that until 1877 when he published an article clearly explaining the two destinies salvation theory. The Herald of the Morning issue containing the article has been lost, but key elements are quoted by Peters in his Theocratic Kingdom. Barbour's article rejected the commonly believed earthly destiny doctrine. He called it an "agricultural heavens." [Theocratic Kingdom, vol 2. page 120 and following.]
The issue was current in millennialist circles. It does not show up in Bible Examiner until after Barbour's 1877 article.
George Storrs and George Stetson's history, biography and relationship to Russell are the subject of chapters two and three of Separate Identity volume one.
-
aqwsed12345
1. Misinterpretation of John 3:3-16 and the "Two Hopes"
Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that Jesus presents two distinct hopes in John 3:3-16—one for a heavenly class (born of the spirit) and another for an earthly class (everlasting life)—misreads the passage. John 3:3-5 speaks of being "born of water and Spirit" to enter the kingdom of God, while John 3:16 presents the promise of eternal life to "whoever believes in Him." However, these verses are not describing two separate hopes. Rather, they reflect the same hope: entry into the kingdom of God through belief in Christ and the transformative work of the Holy Spirit. Both verses describe the universal Christian hope of salvation and eternal life, not a divided hope for some in heaven and others on earth. The New Testament consistently teaches that all believers, whether they lived before or after Christ, share in this unified hope of eternal life with God.
2. The Thief on the Cross (Luke 23:42-43)
Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that Jesus' promise to the thief on the cross—“you will be with me in Paradise”—supports an earthly hope. They claim that this “paradise” refers to a future earthly paradise. However, traditional Christian interpretation sees "Paradise" here as a reference to heaven, the immediate presence of God. First of all, Christ promises the thief that he will be together "with him", so perhaps Christ himself is also a member of this alleged "earthly class"?
The traditional Christian interpretation does not equate "Paradise" in Luke 23:43 with heaven directly, but rather with Limbus Patrum (the "Limbo of the Fathers"). This belief centers on the idea that, before Christ's resurrection, the souls of the righteous were not yet able to enter the beatific vision in heaven, so they resided in a state of rest known as Abraham’s Bosom or the Limbo of the Fathers. In this context, "Paradise" here refers to this temporary state of peace where the righteous awaited Christ's victory over death.
After His death, Jesus descended into Sheol (the realm of the dead) to liberate the righteous souls awaiting the opening of heaven (1 Peter 3:19-20). This aligns with the idea that the thief on the cross would join Him in the "Paradise" of the Limbo of the Fathers, not heaven. The Apostles' Creed reflects this, stating that Christ "descended into hell" (meaning the abode of the dead, not the hell of the damned).
Thus, when Christ speaks of "Paradise" to the thief, He is most likely referring to this state of rest for the righteous, not heaven in the immediate sense. Only after Christ's resurrection would the souls of the righteous enter into heaven.
As for the idea of Jesus being in an earthly paradise in the future, this reflects more of a Jehovah's Witness perspective, which interprets "Paradise" in Luke 23:43 as a reference to a future restoration of Eden-like conditions on earth. According to this view, when Christ returns, the earth will be transformed into a paradise where the righteous will dwell.
However, traditional Christian theology—particularly Catholic and Orthodox—does not support the idea of a future, earthly paradise being the ultimate destination of the faithful. Instead, it teaches that the faithful will experience the New Heavens and the New Earth described in Revelation 21:1. This is seen as the ultimate renewal of all creation, where heaven and earth are united, and the faithful live in eternal communion with God.
The word "paradise" in the New Testament often refers to heavenly bliss (e.g., 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, Revelation 2:7), not a future earthly restoration. Jesus' promise to the thief assures him of entry into God’s presence, consistent with the understanding of heavenly resurrection rather than an earthly hope.
3. The Heavenly Hope and New Covenant (Hebrews 12:22-24)
The New Testament emphasizes the heavenly calling of all Christians, particularly those who are partakers of the New Covenant. Hebrews 12:22-24 describes Mount Zion and the heavenly Jerusalem as the destination for all who belong to the New Covenant. There is no mention in the New Testament of two distinct classes of Christians with separate destinies. Instead, the New Covenant is presented as a universal invitation to all believers, both Jew and Gentile, to partake in the blessings of salvation and eternal life in God’s presence. Hebrews 10:15-20 reaffirms this by showing that the New Covenant provides direct access to God, not merely for a select heavenly class but for all who believe.
4. Revelation 7:9 and the "Great Multitude"
Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that the "great multitude" in Revelation 7:9 represents an earthly class distinct from the 144,000. However, Revelation 7:9 describes this great multitude as standing before the throne and before the Lamb, which is a clear indication of their presence in heaven, not on earth. The imagery in Revelation often uses symbolic numbers, and many scholars interpret the 144,000 as a symbolic representation of the entirety of God's redeemed people, not a literal number of those destined for heaven. The great multitude thus represents the universal body of believers—both Jews and Gentiles—who will worship God in heaven.
5. The Kingdom of God and Eternal Life
While Jehovah’s Witnesses argue for an earthly hope based on verses like Revelation 21:3-4 and 2 Peter 3:13, these passages describe the renewal of all creation in the New Heavens and New Earth. Traditional Christian eschatology teaches that in the end, heaven and earth will be united, and God will dwell with His people in this renewed creation. This is not a division between two separate groups of believers (one heavenly, one earthly), but a full restoration of creation where all of God's people will experience eternal life in the presence of God. The New Heavens and New Earth (Revelation 21) represent a unified eternal destiny for all believers, not a two-tier system.
6. Misapplication of Ephesians 1:5 and Galatians 4:5-7
The claim that only a specific class of Christians is "born of the spirit" and thereby made heirs of the Kingdom, while another class exists as subjects on earth, contradicts the consistent teaching of the New Testament. Ephesians 1:5 and Galatians 4:5-7 speak of all Christians as adopted children of God, heirs with Christ. There is no biblical basis for dividing believers into two classes with separate destinies. The idea of “heirs” is inclusive of all who have faith in Christ, and all believers are promised the same inheritance: eternal life in the presence of God.
7. The Sheep and the Goats (Matthew 25:31-46)
In Matthew 25, the parable of the sheep and the goats does not support the idea of a two-class system. The "sheep" and "goats" are not divided into a heavenly class and an earthly class but are judged based on their response to Christ and their treatment of others. The "sheep" are those who have demonstrated love and righteousness, while the "goats" are those who have rejected Christ’s teachings. The reward for the "sheep" is eternal life, not a separate earthly existence. This parable emphasizes the importance of faith and righteous action, not a division between two distinct groups of Christians.
8. The "Two-Class" System of Hope
The notion of two separate hopes—one for a heavenly class (the 144,000) and another for the vast majority who will live on earth—is a doctrinal innovation by Jehovah’s Witnesses and lacks biblical foundation. While the Bible does speak of heaven and earth, it does so in the context of a unified hope for all believers. Revelation 21:1-4 describes the New Heavens and the New Earth as one restored creation where God dwells with humanity. There is no indication of a divided eternity, with some reigning in heaven and others living on earth.
Further, passages like 1 Corinthians 15:49 and Philippians 3:21 affirm that all believers will share in Christ’s glorified, resurrected body, a heavenly existence. The reference to “new heavens and a new earth” in 2 Peter 3:13 similarly points to the renewal of all creation rather than the establishment of two separate realms for believers.
Conclusion
The notion of two separate Christian hopes—one heavenly and one earthly—is not supported by the broader context of Scripture. The Bible presents a unified hope for all believers, centered on the New Covenant and the promise of eternal life in the presence of God. The New Testament consistently speaks of one body of believers who will share in Christ’s inheritance, not a divided system of heavenly rulers and earthly subjects. The distinctions made by Jehovah’s Witnesses in their theology are based on selective readings and misinterpretations of key biblical texts, which, when examined in context, point to a singular, glorious hope for all who are in Christ.
-
vienne
Catholic troll,
The op did not ask for a refutation but for the origin of the doctrine in Watchtower theology. For once, stick to the topic.
-
vienne
She, the banned troll,
I cannot answer for my mother who is quite dead. Even in that state, she is smarter than you. Moron, I didn't write the book. Dr. Schulz and R. M. de Vienne, Phd (my mother) did.
Her death notice:
-
vienne
TruthHistory.blogspot is not my blog. I do not contribute to it. Either you can use google, or you cannot. There are at least two obituaries on the internet. Find them ... if you can.
I did not write the book or contribute to it in anyway. I was a child when mom and Dr. Schulz were writing it. You are grasping as straws. Theologically and psychologically. The claims of Masonic background are ... well, ... groundless. For you they're a tool to express your anger at being disfellowshipped. Fine. You continue to shout it out. But few if any will believe you. When you cannot refute something said here, you attack. I had a dog like that when I was a child. She was a very mean bitch. We had her put down.
More to the point, Russell was not a mason. The memorial pyramid was designed and built after his death to reflect Watchtower belief that the cap stone of the great pyramid represented Jesus. You believe a myth because it brings you comfort and helps you escape your personality disorders.
You have become an uninventive troll with one message. You should be a sober-minded contributor. Won't happen. (I doubt you'll ever overcome your alcoholism, but you should consider AA.) You'll come back each time you're deleted here only to be tossed again, because you have no self-control. Only boiling anger.
I doubt you'll ever overcome your anti-social personality disorder. It is very sad. You seem to need me as a release for your anger and intellectual nonsense. Super. I charge for counselling, but this session is free.
-
Riley
I think you lost the plot when you said " Proof " and " Book of Revelation ".
The book is more likely just a hated filled revenge letter against the Roman Empire that doesn't have an audience beyond first century Jewish Christians.
-
Earnest
SheEatsDragons : That's too bad that you [Vienne] don't even have a copy of your own "mom's" obituary.
Since Vienne is a pseudonym (just like SheEatsDragons and FreeTheMasons and EasyPrompt) it's obvious she is not going to share her mum's obituary. She is entitled to the same privacy we all have on this platform. Even so, unless you have evidence that the original Vienne didn't die or that Annie isn't her daughter, you are sinking to a very low-level to criticise her because she doesn't produce her mother's obituary.