1914-2014: Celebrating the End of an Error!

A 100-YEAR ANNIVERSARY is usually something to take pride in — something to celebrate! And, yes, the 100-year milestone of the 1914 date truly is something to celebrate. But not for the same reasons that the majority of Jehovah’s Witnesses are giving special attention to the date. We’ll explain the reasons we are celebrating, of course. But first, some background:

1979wtIn 1979, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society* celebrated the 100-year anniversary of the Watchtower magazine, which was first published in July 1879 as “Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence. wts-centennial-1984In 1984, the Watch Tower Society celebrated the 100-year anniversary of the charter of the Watch Tower Society itself.


And now, in 2014, the Watchtower celebrates the 100-year anniversary of 1914. A phrase that has been heard multiple times among Jehovah’s Witnesses from their headquarters (Bethel) is that 2014 is “The Year of the Kingdom.”

The following links (to jw.org) are examples of this kind of emphasis since the beginning of 2014.


(Something is just a bit ironic in this article. It’s in the ellipses, hidden in those three little dots after “Behold, the King reigns! ” . . . Give up? The answer is linked here.)



Many of us with years of experience among Jehovah’s Witnesses have yet another reason to celebrate 2014. Primarily, we’re celebrating Truth — finding “pleasure in truth.” Isn’t that what had attracted us to Jehovah’s Witnesses in the first place?

Psalm 51:6 says: “Look! You find pleasure in truth in the inner person.” (NWT, 2013)

It should become clear to anyone who spends much time looking at the research that has been reproduced, referenced and presented on these pages that the 1914 teaching was simply a mistake. So exactly why would we celebrate? Are we gloating?

For most of us, we are happy with the demise of the 1914 teaching because it corrects an error. And correcting an error is always a good thing.

Researching and studying about 1914 was, in fact, quite painful at first for some of those whose experience are available here. But it was a step to real progress. Many of us now have a much better understanding of the Bible, and we are now more conscious of our spiritual needs. We feel more empathy and better understand one another, especially those who, like ourselves, had found ourselves defending belief systems that required continual change and correction over time. And this empathy has often included our own families, friends and loved ones. For many of us, it was specifically the deep and sincere research into the 1914 doctrine that ultimately produced the proper humility that allowed us to make greater progress in our continued quest for truth.


But wait! Aren’t we getting ahead of ourselves? Many readers of this article will surely think that the Watchtower’s celebration of this 100th Anniversary is just evidence that the 1914 teaching is not going away any time soon. Why are we acting like this anniversary is somehow a “death knell” for the Watchtower’s traditional 1914 doctrine?

There are plenty of reasons:

Any JW who has ever tried to seriously defend the 1914 doctrine has likely already discovered that there is no Biblical or secular evidence for pointing to that specific date. Worse than that, there are dozens of lines of evidence against it. (If you get to the level of studying the pivotal 607 BCE date, it turns out that there are literally tens of thousands of pieces of evidence against it. We might have thought that date was set in stone, and as it turns out, the very stones [link] cry out against it.) Every single claim about the doctrine turns out to be problematic from a doctrinal perspective. Defending it creates insurmountable contradictions, and this is something that many Witnesses have had to keep to themselves.

But the Watch Tower publications haveexplaining now asked Jehovah’s Witnesses to focus on 1914 one more time, and to try to defend it one more time. The October 2014 Our Kingdom Ministry states: “Realistically, we may find it challenging to explain deep Bible truths, such as how we know that the Kingdom started ruling in 1914.”

Most, but not all, Jehovah’s Witnesses who write for the Watch Tower publications believe the 1914 teaching, and some “cracks” have already showing up in the publications.

Even for those who still believe it, however, the renewed focus has clearly created some awkward discoveries. Claims that once appeared regularly in Watch Tower publications have almost disappeared, replaced with reworded claims that make it clear the writer discovered the problem with old claim.  Even some of the more recent doctrinal changes in just the last couple of years provide additional indications that Watch Tower writers have begun to see how the doctrine creates contradictions.

Luke 9:21 indicates the perils for a “man who has put his hand to a plow and looks at the things behind.” If you’ve ever tried to plow (or mow a lawn, at least) while continually looking back at where you’ve been, you will find that the lines aren’t straight. The Watch Tower’s own writers are looking back and finding out that the lines aren’t straight.

Most of us, whether JWs, ex-JWs, or non-JWs, already understand implicitly that the current 1914 teaching can’t last forever with world conditions going as they have been for the last hundred years. The teaching has already required adjustment in several ways, and it would be impossible to continue the current teaching without additional changes in the next couple of decades. The doctrine is like a sinking millstone. It can’t remain afloat.


Remember this famous graphic from the 1968 “Truth Book”?generation_truth_book
Someone (on another website) produced an updated version based on the 2010 “clarification” of the meaning of “that generation.” The image indicates, graphically, why there is very little room — or appetite — for further adjustments.overlapping-generations

If anyone isn’t up-to-date with some of these more recent changes to the “generation” doctrine, it’s also discussed here.

A decade before the most recent changes to the “generation” the January 1, 2000 Watchtower stated:

“In recent years, we have been encouraged to look again with deeper understanding at—among other things—the generation that will not pass away before the end comes…. It may be difficult at times to understand such updated explanations, but the reasons for them become clear in due course.” [emphasis added]

In due course, of course, the definition of that “generation” changed again. There was an explanation that worked up until 1995, and then the 1995 explanation that was considered potentially “difficult” in the quote above, which itself preceded a new explanation in 2008, which lasted only a couple of years before the currently accepted explanation first appeared in 2010. Historically, the Watchtower has offered 7 distinct explanations, as depicted in the graphic below, found at the following web address: http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/generation.php


As already stated, one excellent reason for our celebration is simply “pleasure in truth.” Jehovah’s Witnesses are repeatedly encouraged to do as the Beroeans did:

“Now these [Beroeans] were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” — Acts 17:11

As if to drive home the point even further, Paul later wrote to those in Thessalonica, telling them to “make sure of all things.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

That desire — that pleasure, that eagerness of mind — to “carefully examine” and “make sure” will be clear to anyone looking at those many experiences that many have shared here on this site. And if you have never seen Carl Olof Jonsson’s most comprehensive book, Gentile Times Reconsidered, take a quick look at the book here and you will surely be impressed at the level of research and scholarship.


There’s another good reason to celebrate, and it’s in a more serious vein. We are all aware of how the Watchtower magazine often “celebrates” the lives of those persons in history who sacrificed much for the sake of truth and for the sake of their faith.

It’s a common theme found in many Watchtower articles — one that truly touches the hearts of those who have given up so much for their faith, their conscience, and especially for those related to them in the faith. That same theme was recently highlighted in the June 1, 2014 Watchtower article: Three 16th-Century Truth Seekers—What Did They Find? (links to jw.org) Another recent example is found the April 1, 2014 issue: Thomas Emlyn—Blasphemer or Advocate of Truth? (links to jw.org)

The parallels between experiences posted on this site and “16th-Century Truth Seekers” will likely seem quite unexpected to many Witnesses. We’ve included a short post about the Watchtower’s article on Thomas Emlyn, for example, because the similarities to the experience of Witnesses who studied the 1914 teaching are really quite amazing.


  • We’re celebrating the lives and experiences of many who suffered the consequences of speaking and writing honestly about their research. We have made an entire section devoted to such experiences and expect to add several more over the coming months.
  • Another way we’ll celebrate is by highlighting some of the excellent work and research that has been done to promote the truth about this matter. Some of that research has been contributed to this site, and much more will be referenced from a special section of the site: Websites, videos, books and discussions.
  • And for those with a strong historical or scholarly interest in the development of the doctrine, we’ll also will continue to add material to the section titled: Analysis of the1914 Teaching – Biblical, Secular, Historical.
  • Of course, the most important way we are celebrating is by an effort to help everyone understand each other a little better. For example:
    • Everyone can get a better understanding of the historical development of the doctrine and the religious organization itself and therefore more empathy for people who are confused by it or object to it.
    • The included experiences should help Witnesses and ex-Witnesses understand each other better, especially those who might now find themselves in “estranged” circumstances.
    • Witnesses and ex-Witnesses alike often find themselves believing they are “on their own” when doubts or concerns arise. Hopefully this site will show otherwise, and encourage discussion with an entire community of persons who would gladly offer support and encouragement.

Truth doesn’t always lead to peace, but where both sides give truth a chance, it can offer the most stable basis for peace, understanding, empathy and love. Who could ask for anything more?

New! Important CHANGES in March 15th, 2015 Watchtower, Explained & Clarified

Articles in this series:

If you are one of those few people who REALLY keeps up with the recent changes to current doctrines among JWs, then you should appreciate the upcoming series of articles we are about to post on the subject. If you are one who does NOT always keep up with the recent changes to current doctrines among the JWs then you should REALLY appreciate these articles even more.

There are a some specific doctrinal changes spelled out in the March 15, 2015 Watchtower (the “Study Edition” available on the JW.ORG website).  But the biggest, most important change is about a method for explaining Scripture that will affect many more doctrines than the specific examples mentioned in the magazine.

With this issue, literally thousands of pages of previously printed doctrinal material are rendered obsolete. It also sets a new direction for Bible commentary in The Watchtower that has the potential to completely “reset” SEVERAL of the unique doctrines of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and MOST of the prophetic interpretations. Even the chronological interpretations are at risk of becoming obsolete.  (For example, until the last decade, “1918” was taught as a prophetically significant date that was once mentioned just about as often as 1919 was mentioned. Yet, many JWs are not even aware that 1918 has already been quietly dropped as a prophetically significant date, for reasons that are aligned with the changes set forth in this March 15, 2015 issue.)

To get an idea of how sweeping the general change already is, you would have to know just how much prior doctrine is affected by these sentences from the March 15th Watchtower:

“In times past, it was more common for our literature to take what might be called a type-antitype approach to Scriptural accounts.” (p.3) “Humans cannot know which Bible accounts are shadows of things to come and which are not. The clearest course is this: Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so.” (p.18)

The following is a list of 42 of these “prophecies” or “prophetic dramas” found in one of the Watchtower publications that we (JWs) actively taught and studied when I was a younger Witness. Most of these have never been dismissed and they still represented accurate doctrine until now. Learning these teachings took up a large portion of the curriculum for the students of the Watchtower Bible School of Gilead while I was at Bethel from 1976 to 1980. One of the weekly meetings, the “Congregation Book Study,” was often devoted entirely to discussions of this type.


Also note that the 42 examples listed only include those that specified the “great crowd” who would have an earthly hope instead of the “anointed” with the heavenly hope. Because these “prophetic dramas” have been emphasized less, especially in the last couple of decades, many Witnesses didn’t realize that most of these explanations were still “on the books.” In other words they were still considered valid, correct doctrines. At least until now.


It probably sounds like hyperbole to attach such a potential significance to these new changes. However, we have an excellent reason to believe that these changes are indicative of more changes underway. What’s that reason? Simple. We saw what happened when they tried this before. The Watch Tower Society didn’t try it officially, because not everyone was on board with it. Nevertheless, beginning in the late 1960’s and 1970’s, several members of the Writing Department were already reading Bible narratives and writing and teaching about their meaning in the exact way described in this new issue of the Watchtower.

In fact, the idea of changing this teaching method already came up during the research and writing of the Watch Tower’s first Bible dictionary, Aid to Bible Understanding, completed in 1971. This “Aid Book” as we called it (now slightly revised as Insight on the Scriptures) is nearly devoid of types and antitypes. By 1972, the research behind the Aid Book had already resulted in major changes to the Watch Tower organizational structure, including a re-definition of what the governing body would soon become, and the new “elder arrangement,” which was just being put into place. The following is from an article in the August 15, 1972 Watchtower that reflects some of the thinking on this subject at the time:

*** w72 8/15 p. 502 God Readjusts the Thinking of His People ***
Another thing that has given rise to questions is the use by Jehovah’s witnesses of parallels or prophetic types, applying these to circumstances and to groups or classes of people today. Many people who read the Bible view its accounts all as simply history, but when they begin to study with Jehovah’s witnesses a readjustment of viewpoint takes place as they see that there is more to the accounts than history.

The question that is sometimes asked is, Did Jehovah stage that ‘dramatic’ event, so that we would have a warning now? Well, would he cause such bad things to happen? Would he maneuver them himself? No. …

It helps us to understand more fully when we keep in mind that the people in ancient times were real, living their daily lives in association with their families and fellowmen, having hopes and desires as we do today, the same general problems with sin working in their members, and many of them faithfully waging a fine fight to serve God.

The article just quoted actually tried to play both sides of the issue in order to introduce the change but also dismiss the need to make too many changes at once. (The 1972 article tended to favor the “type-antitype” status quo.) During the late 1970’s, the brothers in Writing who were the most productive and who were the most capable of Biblical research included the brothers who had worked on the Aid Book, and by that point in time had already been getting assignments to write Watchtower articles on many Bible topics. These articles tended to minimize the “type-antitype” pattern.

Not all Watchtower writers agreed with this change. However, many letters were received that thanked the Watchtower Society for producing these “refreshing and clear” articles that “make it easier to apply the Bible in our daily lives as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses.” (Editor’s note: I have a copy of one of these letters, which was sent to Brother Lyman Swingle, a member of the Governing Body when he was overseeing the Writing Department.)

The brothers in Writing who had helped with the Aid Book had become especially involved in those new articles with the “refreshing” style, as some called it. One of these brothers had an excellent knowledge of the Biblical languages, including not just Hebrew but also Aramaic and Syriac. Another other one could write an article in minutes on almost any Bible topic, pretty much from memory, and those articles could usually be used in the Watchtower without any edits or changes. Their work was approved through the appropriate review committee(s), including Governing Body members, and resulted in dozens of Watchtower articles, and several books, which are still easily identifiable by their style when looking through the bound volumes of the Watchtower from those years, or the Watchtower Library CD. Two books were written in this same “refreshing” style in a Bible commentary format. Those two books, Commentary on the Letter of James and Choosing the Best Way of Life (which was a commentary on 1st and 2nd Peter) were released at the summer District Assemblies in 1979. They became the first major examples of books that scrupulously avoided “type-antitype” patterns, even when touching upon subjects that had previously required it. This includes an “untypical” reference to the “faithful and discreet slave” that called upon all Christians to be this sort of person. A recently deceased brother who had been at Bethel during the period described it to Randall Watters like this:

 “There were a couple new books published that were nothing like the typical FWFranzesque prophetic calculus manuals. These books were not typical fare, and you could see the puzzled looks when they reached the book study groups and meetings. Biblical commentary within scriptural context…”

Unfortunately, the Watch Tower Society in general was not yet ready for this type of reading and writing about the Bible narratives. “Heads rolled” when the significance of those changes was noticed by “old school” supporters of these now obsolete doctrinal methods. This included the two mentioned above, and a few others, too, who were not disfellowshipped, but who were dismissed from Bethel. However, this March 15, 2015 issue of The Watchtower now renders that “old school” doctrinal pattern obsolete. The pattern utilized in the Aid Book and in subsequent Watchtower articles and books for the next 7 years, especially from 1976 through 1980 is now considered ‘the way Jehovah approved.’ (Watchtower 3/15/2015 p.7,8)

While we cannot vouch for the exact numerical claims in the quote below, one person has put it this way, on a site where JWs often discuss issues with other JWs:

Now, with this article, nearly half the Watchtower articles that Rutherford wrote (since about 1931) and about a quarter of the Watchtower study articles that Fred Franz wrote (since 1942 – under Knorr) have been downgraded. When I worked with the Gilead students we were still spending about half their time going over these old Bible stories to make sure they understood when the anointed class was meant and when the great crowd was meant. (Anyone who has a copy of the Gilead Notes from up to about 1980 will know what I mean.)

Historically, I find that very interesting, but from a progressive perspective, it was bound to happen now that there is less concern about distinguishing anointed from other sheep, I find it quite refreshing that we no longer need to be worried that we draw the right application to the various people in so many of these Bible accounts.

If you do not have the magazine in printed format, it is available at the following location on jw.org:


That link (on the JW.org site) displays a page that has the following articles listed. Over the next few weeks we will provide a commentary on each of them and link the titles to our commented versions of these articles.


“This Is the Way You Approved”

Why have our publications in recent years often given simpler, clearer explanations of some Bible accounts?

Will You “Keep on the Watch”? 

Read this clarified understanding of Jesus’ parable of the ten virgins, which focuses on the parable’s simple, urgent message. 

Questions From Readers

In the past, our publications often mentioned types and antitypes, but in recent years they have seldom done so. Why is that? 

Learn From the Illustration of the Talents 

This article refines our understanding of the parable of the talents.

Loyally Supporting Christ’s Brothers 

How do those whom Christ judges to be sheep support his brothers?

In attempting to comment on those Watchtower articles listed above, this site will attempt to cover each of the articles listed above that cover the updated doctrines.

Watch for the following subjects to be covered across the five articles:

  • The Prior Importance of the “Type Anti-Type” Approach
  • The Good Samaritan – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • Naboth, Ahab, Jezebel – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • The Prodigal Son – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • Elijah and Elisha – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • The Ten Virgins – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • The Talents – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • What happened at Bethel when this same approach was used as an aid to Bible understanding?
  • How can this approach potentially change the explanation of the “Faithful and Discreet Slave”?
  • What will this approach do to the method of explaining all prophecies in Isaiah, Jeremiah and other prophetic books with a formula linking any mention of faithful kings, priests and prophets to the faithful anointed in our day, or linking unfaithful ones to Christendom, or linking any mention of captivity to the imprisonment of Rutherford and others in 1918/1919, etc.?
  • What can this approach do to the “anti-type” fulfillment of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the 1914 teaching?
  • Will this ultimately make 1919 go the way of 1918? (As mentioned, 1918 was once a large part of Watch Tower doctrine and it has been gradually but effectively dismissed over the last several years.)
  • Will this ultimately make the current distinction between Great Crowd and Anointed less important?

The Gentile Times Reconsidered – Carl Olof Jonsson (390 pages) with bonuses

This book proved to be one of most important single sources of research on the subject of chronology that anyone had ever asked the Watch Tower Society to evaluate. The book consolidates the most salient arguments about the pivotal year, 607 BCE, and produces insurmountable evidence against the claims made for it. But the book goes much further. Many have found it to be an important work because it opens up readers to a very tangible world of facts and evidence that most of us, as Witnesses, would have thought nebulous and unreachable.

This most recent edition includes a discussion of several of the the letters between Carl and various “anonymous” members of the Watch Tower staff including members of the Governing Body.

The book is available on the site managed by Carl at the following link: http://kristenfrihet.se/english/gtr4/contents.htm .


Fourth Edition (Revised and Expanded)

4th Edition: A Contextual Examination of Luke 21:24

To avoid overloading his site we are also making it available as a full pdf here: THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED.PDF

BONUSES   (from Carl Olof Jonsson; links are to his website)

Some additional articles about chronology

(For even more materials and more recent updates, please visit the site directly.)

Those who have read works by Rolf Furuli may also be interested in several articles on Jonsson’s site that expose the failures and contradictions of Rolf Furuli’s  attempts to propose a chronology that would defend the Watch Tower’s chronology claims.


A critique of the two-part article published in the public editions of The Watchtower of October 1, 2011, pages 26-31 and The Watchtower of November 1, 2011, pages 22-28. Carl Olof Jonsson, Göteborg, Sweden, 2011

The amount of work and energy that Carl Olof Jonsson has expended in this research has culminated in works that are unparalleled in their ability to help Jehovah’s Witnesses understand the linchpins of their chronology doctrines. Those who know Carl and have spoken to him will know he is a modest man who desires no notoriety or commendation. No one can doubt the value of his work, however.



JWINSIDER #001: ALL aspects of 1914 doctrine are now problematic from a Scriptural point of view

This site now has permission to reprint various postings and articles from JWFacts, JWStudies, JWInsider, and several others. We are still working on getting more content from still other posters, bloggers, and site creators, and are especially looking for JWs who have taken up the same studies about chronology that we focus on here.
JWFacts has contributed articles found throughout the site, and several of the contributions from JWStudies are also found in various places on this site. The following series of articles presented below have been culled from JWInsider’s postings about 1914 from jw-archive.org and theworldnewsmedia.org.  JWInsider presents himself as a JW who remains in good standing with his congregation. While we do not always agree with the views of JWInsider, his perspective usually reflects a fair consideration of both the scriptural sources and Watchtower sources.
Note: JWInsider’s posts are often lengthy, and we have been given permission to edit them down, fix typos, etc., but have not exercised this permission yet in the posts we have decided to publish. Due to the nature of discussion forums, we are able to post only JWInsider’s side of a discussion, without the counter-arguments. With only a couple exceptions, we do not have permission to post responses from other participants in the discussion forum.

JWINSIDER #001 on 1914: From the posts in the topic ALL aspects of 1914 doctrine are now problematic from a Scriptural point of view.

The original context is found here:  https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/39516-all-aspects-of-1914-doctrine-are-now-problematic-from-a-scriptural-point-of-view/

Even before C.T.Russell was born, commentaries on Bible prophecy included  dozens of potential dates. A couple of them even included 1914 as potentially significant time, nearly 200 years ago, now. The “1914 presence” doctrine, however, is only about 75 years old.

All the ideas behind the Watch Tower’s version of the 1914 doctrine have already been discussed for decades now, and all of them, so far, have been shown to be problematic from a Scriptural point of view. Since the time that the doctrine generally took its current shape in 1943, the meanings and applications of various portions of Matthew 24 and 25 have already been changed, and the timing of various prophesied events and illustrations have changed. Most recently, the meaning and identification of the “faithful and discreet slave” has changed. And the definition of “generation” has changed about half-a-dozen times. This doesn’t mean that the current understandings are impossible, of course, only that it has become less likely from the point of view of reason and reasonableness.

Besides, for most of the years of teaching this doctrine, we have had the flexibility of extending the “1914 generation” from a possible 40 years, up to 70, then 75, then 80 years. And this has been applied to teenagers who saw 1914, 10-year-olds who saw 1914, then even newborns who saw 1914. With every one of these options already tried and stretched to their limits, we finally were forced to convert the meaning of generation from its most common meanings and give it a new “strained” meaning that has no other Biblical parallel. (See Exodus 1:6; Matthew 1:17; 16:4; 23:36; Luke 11:50)

But that flexibility is still seen as the last reason for hope that the Watch Tower Society might have still been correct in hanging on to 1914. Since the Bible says that a lifespan is 70 or 80 years and 1914 + 80 = 1994, the “generation” doctrine in its original form (1943) could remain stable until about 1994. Of course, a lifespan could technically reach to 120 years or more, and Gen 6:3 even gives vague support to the idea that the “1914 generation” could last 120 years, until 2034.

The current alternative solution is to make the generation out of the length of two lifespans, which technically could be double 120 years, or nearly 240 years from 1914. That would have had the potential to reach to the year 2154 (1914+240) except for the caveat that it can, by its new definition, only refer to anointed persons who discerned the sign in 1914 and whose lives overlapped (technically, by as little as one second) with the lifespan of another anointed person representing the second group. If persons from each group don’t really discern their own “anointing” until age 20, for example, this would effectively remove 40 years from the overall maximum. 1914+120-20+120-20 = 2114. We could also assume a possible lifespan of more than 120 years, but otherwise, the new two-lifespan generation could potentially make the generation last 200 years. This “technical maximum” is not promoted currently, because for now we look at examples like Fred Franz who was part of that original generation already anointed and who saw the sign, and the typical example of an anointed brother who was apparently “anointed” prior to Franz’ death in 1992 would be someone like Governing Body member, Brother Sanderson, who was born in 1965, baptized in 1975, and was already a “special pioneer” in 1991. His is currently 52.

However, the generation problem is just one more problem now which we can add onto the list of all the other points that make up the 1914 doctrine. Here are several points related to 1914 that appear problematic from a Scriptural point of view:

  • All evidence shows the 1914 date is wrong when trying to base it on the destruction of Jerusalem. (Daniel 1:1; 2 Chron 36:1-22; Jer 25:8-12; Zech 1:12, 7:4; Ezra 3:10-13)
  • Paul said that Jesus sat at God’s right hand in the first century and that he already began ruling as king at that time. (1 Cor 15:25)
  • Jesus said not to be fooled by the idea that wars and rumors of wars would be the start of a “sign” (Matt 24:4,5)
  • Jesus said that the “parousia” would be as visible as lightning (Matt 24:27). He spoke against people who might say he had returned but was currently not visible. (Matt 24:23-26)
  • Jesus said that his “parousia” would come as a surprise to the faithful, not that they would discern the time of the parousia decades in advance. (Matt 24:36-42)
  • Jesus said that the kingdom would not be indicated by “signs” (Luke 17:20, almost any translation except NWT in this case)
  • The “synteleia” (end of all things together) refers to a concluding event, not an extended period of time (Matt 28:20)
  • Jesus was already called ruler, King and even “King of Kings” in the first century. (1 Tim 6:15, Heb 7:2,17; Rev 1:5; 17:14)
  • Wicked, beastly King Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity and humiliation does not represent Jesus as the “lowliest one of mankind.” (Heb 1:5,6; 2:10,11; Daniel 4:23-25; cf. Heb 2:7; 1 Pet 3:17,18)
  • The demise of a Gentile kingdom cannot rightly represent the time of the rise of the Gentile kingdoms (Daniel 4:26,27)
  • The Gentile kings did not meet their demise in 1914. (Rev 2:25,26)
  • The time assigned to the Gentile Times that Jesus spoke about in Luke 21:24 is already given as 3.5 times, not 7 times (Revelation 11:2,3)
  • The Devil was already brought down from “heaven” in the first century. (1 John 2:14,15; 1 Pet 5:8; Luke 10:18; Heb 2:14)
  • The Bible says that the “last days” began in the first century. (Acts 2:14-20; 2 Tim 3:1-17; 1 Peter 3:3-5; Heb 1:2, almost any translation except NWT in this case.)