it particularly is a sturdy question. this would a approach or the different help the asker and others to comprehend what “return” meant in Jesus’ words. The Greek word used grow to be “parousia” or presence. Abernathy has responded the question uncomplicated and easy. yet i think of the asker will reject what's implied via the word “return,” inasmuch as he has rejected the different implications of word “worship.” (Matthew 18:26 vs Matthew 4:10). For them, the word “worship”s in the Bible have one that potential. So i think of they have comparable discernment with the word “return” in the Bible. =) Addt: The apostles asked Jesus: "what would be the sign of your coming," (Matthew 24:3). If Jesus' coming is seen, why would the apostles ask for signs and indicators? what's using signs and indicators if Jesus' coming could be actual seen? Luke 17:20 extra says: "the dominion of God would not incorporate fact" Addt: signs and indicators? i'm confident the asker know what those signs and indicators are. (Matthew 24:3-14). those signs and indicators grew to grow to be strongly obtrusive because of the fact that 1914. Even secular/non-JW commentators and historians view 1914 as a unexpected substitute and a substantial turnng poingt in human background. yet i think of the asker would not settle for this actuality, yet fairly stay on differences made via JWs. returned, if Jesus' coming could be needless to say seen, why would the apostles ask for signs and indicators?