The Watchtower Soc and others say that the Bible teaches that Jehovah is allowing time to pass so that evidence can build up to prove that man cannot live and govern himself independently of God. The argument is made that God has tolerated wickedness so that the evidence can gradually accumulate against Satan's claim that God's might does not necessarily give him the right to rule and that man can rule himself successfully without God's direct governance. When Armageddon breaks out, it is said that the evidence will be conclusive that man could not rule himself independently of God and the Devil's claims were false.
The analogy is put forward that this drama is being played out like some great universal court case in heaven, with Judges sitting examing evidence being presented to assess the Devil's claims. (I think the Creation book in particular uses this illustration.)
I think in many ways this is probably rather true in terms of what the Bible does actually teach, however, there is a logical problem with the Watchtower's version: Since Jehovah has never directly ruled over mankind, there is no evidence that his rule would be any better than man's independent rule since man rebelled right from the very start, in the Garden of Eden.
In other words, there is no direct evidence yet that God's direct rule would work better because God hasn't yet done that (except arguably in a microcosm with the Nation of Israel in the ancient past!) At Armageddon there will only be evidence to show that man has failed to govern himself successfully on his own, not evidence that God's rule would be better!
So, logically, this divine Universal Court could not possibly render it's decision until at least after the 1,000 year reign, by which time Jesus and the Kingdom would have been ruling for some time and evidence gathered to practically prove God's side of the issue.
To put it bluntly, the issue of universal sovereignty cannot be said to have been settled until the 1,000 year reign of God's Kingdom has ended!
