Promises You Can’t Trust: The Watchtower’s Record of Failed Expectations
Applying the Watchtower's Own Test of Reliability to the Watchtower
In the January 15, 2004 Watchtower, an article appeared with the reassuring title "Promises That You Can Trust." Its argument is simple and compelling: human promises often prove unreliable, but Jehovah's promises are different. Jehovah has demonstrated through his record that when he says something will happen, it happens.
The article quotes Joshua's powerful statement:
"Not one word out of all the good words that Jehovah your God has spoken to you has failed."
— Joshua 23:14
That is an excellent standard.
In fact, the article explains how we normally determine whether another person deserves our trust. We get to know the person, examine his record, and observe whether he consistently fulfills what he says he will do.
That raises an important question.
What happens if we apply exactly the same test to the Watchtower organization itself?
Not to Jehovah. Not to the Bible. But to the human organization that repeatedly asks Jehovah's Witnesses to trust its interpretation of the Bible and accept its direction as coming from Jehovah.
The distinction is critical.
Jehovah's Promises Versus Human Predictions
The 2004 article argues that Jehovah can be trusted because his promises do not fail.
That does not automatically establish that every prediction or interpretation made by people claiming to represent Jehovah can also be trusted.
The Bible itself warns against making that leap.
Jeremiah wrote:
"Cursed is the man who puts his trust in mere humans, who relies on human power, and whose heart turns away from Jehovah."
— Jeremiah 17:5
Psalm 146:3 similarly warns:
"Do not put your trust in princes nor in a son of man, who cannot bring salvation."
The issue, therefore, is not whether Jehovah can be trusted.
The question is whether an organization composed of imperfect men should receive the same degree of confidence that belongs to God.
And there is one obvious way to answer that question:
Examine the record.
1914 — What Was Actually Promised?
Today, Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that 1914 marked the beginning of Christ's invisible heavenly rule and the beginning of the last days.
But that was not what Bible Students were originally expecting 1914 to mean.
For decades before 1914, Watch Tower publications confidently associated that date with the end of the Gentile Times and dramatic earthly changes.
When 1914 arrived, the expected events did not occur as anticipated.
Instead of abandoning the chronology, its meaning was gradually reconstructed.
1914 survived.
But what 1914 meant changed.
That distinction matters.
Predicting a date and later assigning a different significance to that same date is not the same thing as having accurately predicted what would happen.
1918 and 1920
The years immediately following 1914 brought additional chronological expectations.
Watch Tower publications connected 1918 and 1920 with dramatic events involving Christendom and the existing world order.
Those expectations likewise failed to materialize as described.
They eventually disappeared from current teaching.
Yet at the time, these were not generally presented to readers merely as interesting possibilities.
They were presented as conclusions drawn from biblical prophecy.
1925 — "Millions Now Living Will Never Die"
Perhaps one of the most striking examples involved 1925.
Under Joseph Rutherford, the proclamation "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" became famous.
The expectation was connected with 1925 and the anticipated return of faithful men of old such as Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
1925 came.
Abraham did not return.
Isaac did not return.
Jacob did not return.
The promised transformation did not occur.
The organization later acknowledged that expectations surrounding 1925 had been mistaken.
But acknowledging a failed expectation afterward does not make the original expectation reliable.
It demonstrates precisely the opposite.
Beth-Sarim
The expectation concerning the return of the ancient "princes" was taken seriously enough that a house was constructed in San Diego known as Beth-Sarim, meaning "House of the Princes."
The property was associated with the anticipated earthly appearance of faithful men such as Abraham and David.
They never arrived.
Eventually the property was sold.
Today Beth-Sarim is largely a historical curiosity.
But it remains physical evidence of how seriously prophetic expectations were once taken.
1975
Then came another date that many longtime Jehovah's Witnesses remember personally:
1975.
Watchtower publications emphasized that 6,000 years of human existence would apparently conclude in the mid-1970s.
Articles discussed how significant this chronology might be.
Members rearranged their lives. Some sold homes. Some postponed education or careers. Some increased their preaching activity because they believed the remaining time was extraordinarily short.
1975 came and went. Armageddon did not.
The new system did not arrive.
Eventually the organization acknowledged that expectations had gone beyond what could actually be established from Scripture.
But once again, the question is not whether an explanation could be supplied afterward.
The question is:
Was the original expectation trustworthy?
"The Generation That Will Not Pass Away"
For decades Jehovah's Witnesses were taught that the generation that witnessed the events beginning in 1914 would still be alive when the end came.
This teaching created an unmistakable sense of urgency.
As that generation grew older, however, a problem became increasingly obvious.
They were dying.
So the explanation of "this generation" changed.
Then it changed again.
Eventually Jehovah's Witnesses were introduced to the concept commonly called the overlapping generation.
Under the current explanation, two groups of anointed Christians whose lives overlap can constitute the generation Jesus referred to.
Whether someone accepts that interpretation is a separate question.
The historical point is simpler:
It is not the explanation Jehovah's Witnesses were taught for decades.
The prophecy did not change.
The words of Jesus did not change.
The interpretation changed because the previous understanding became increasingly difficult to reconcile with the passage of time.
"The End Is Very Near"
For more than a century, Watchtower publications have repeatedly emphasized that only a very short period remains before Armageddon.
Individual Jehovah's Witnesses have consequently made enormous life decisions based upon that expectation.
Education has been discouraged.
Careers have been abandoned.
Retirement planning has sometimes been viewed as unnecessary.
Marriage and children have sometimes been postponed.
Young Witnesses have repeatedly been told that this system could end before they grow old.
Generation after generation has heard essentially the same message:
We are almost there.
And generation after generation has grown old.
That does not prove that Christ will never return or that biblical prophecy will never be fulfilled.
It proves something much narrower:
Humans have repeatedly demonstrated that they do not know when it will happen.
Jesus himself said:
"Concerning that day and hour nobody knows."
— Matthew 24:36
The Problem of Calling Failed Predictions "New Light"
Jehovah's Witnesses are frequently taught that doctrinal changes demonstrate the progressive revealing of spiritual truth.
Proverbs 4:18 is commonly invoked:
"But the path of the righteous is like the bright morning light that grows brighter and brighter until full daylight."
But increasing light should make something clearer.
It should not require yesterday's confident explanation to become today's discarded explanation.
Suppose someone tells you:
The event will happen in 1925.
It does not.
Later he says:
We misunderstood.
Then another expectation is promoted.
It fails.
Another explanation follows.
Eventually the response becomes:
The light became brighter.
At some point we have to ask whether "new light" is describing increased understanding—or simply providing theological language for correcting previous mistakes.
The Watchtower Gives Us the Test
This is where the January 15, 2004 Watchtower becomes particularly interesting.
The article explains that one way we learn whether someone is dependable is by observing whether that person faithfully fulfills his promises.
Exactly.
That is how trust works.
Trust is not established by demanding it.
Trust is established by demonstrating reliability.
Jehovah does not need failed predictions explained away.
Jehovah does not need old publications rewritten.
Jehovah does not need a doctrine of "new light" to account for statements that did not come true.
According to Scripture:
"God...cannot lie."
— Titus 1:2
That is precisely why a distinction must be maintained between Jehovah and an organization claiming to speak for Jehovah.
"Not One Word...Has Failed"
Joshua could look back at Jehovah's promises and say:
"Not one word...has failed."
Could the Watchtower organization say the same thing about its own prophetic record?
Could it say:
Not one prediction failed?
No.
Could it say:
Not one chronological expectation proved mistaken?
No.
Could it say:
Not one generation was given expectations that failed to occur within its lifetime?
No.
Could it say:
Our understanding of 1914, 1925, 1975, and "this generation" has remained consistent?
Clearly not.
And that brings us back to the principle contained in the Watchtower's own article.
Jehovah Has Not Failed
Perhaps the most important conclusion is this:
Jehovah did not predict 1925.
Jehovah did not tell Bible Students that millions then living would never die.
Jehovah did not tell Jehovah's Witnesses that Armageddon would arrive before the generation of 1914 disappeared.
Jehovah did not tell Christians that 1975 marked the probable beginning of the Millennium.
Men interpreted Scripture and reached those conclusions.
That distinction matters enormously.
When a religious organization makes a prediction that fails, the failure should not be transferred to God.
The organization was wrong.
God was not.
Promises You Can Trust—and Promises You Can't
The title of the 2004 Watchtower article was right:
There are promises you can trust.
The promises of God deserve examination and faith.
But the Bible never tells Christians to give imperfect religious leaders the unquestioning trust that belongs to God.
Quite the opposite.
Scripture repeatedly tells us to test religious claims.
"Make sure of all things."
— 1 Thessalonians 5:21
The Christians in Beroea were praised because they examined the Scriptures daily to determine whether even the apostle Paul was teaching the truth.
— Acts 17:11
And the apostle John wrote:
"Do not believe every inspired statement, but test the inspired statements to see whether they originate with God."
— 1 John 4:1
That principle remains remarkably useful.
We do not have to choose between trusting Jehovah and examining the claims of men.
Examining the claims of men may be part of what trusting Jehovah requires.
So when an organization asks for our confidence, perhaps we should use the test supplied by the Watchtower itself:
- Look at the record.
- Compare what was promised with what actually happened.
- Distinguish God's Word from human interpretation.
- Determine whether explanations given afterward match what was originally taught.
- Then decide where our trust belongs.
Because Jehovah's promises and the Watchtower's predictions are not the same thing.
One has never failed.
The other has a history that deserves very careful examination.