Jehovah's Witnesses/The Watchtower Society

[Odë:hgöd]

.
For a home-spun, Bible-based religion whose origin is relatively recent, the
Watchtower Society has done pretty well for itself. Beginning with one man shortly
after the American Civil War, it currently numbers approximately 8.7 million
evangelical members spread out in approximately 118,000 congregations
worldwide. The grand total-- evangelicals and non evangelicals --is estimated to be
something like 20 million.

My first encounter with a Watchtower Society agent (a.k.a. Jehovah's Witness)
occurred in 1969. At the time I was young and inexperienced; and thus assumed
that the missionary coming down my dad's driveway was a typical Christian.

But when I talked this over with an elder; he became alarmed; and urged me to
read a little book titled "30 Years A Watchtower Slave" by William J. Schnell; whom
the Society at one time demonized as an agent of Satan. I would not be surprised if
it still does.

After getting my eyes opened by Mr. Schnell's book, I was afterwards steered
towards another book titled "Kingdom Of The Cults" by Walter Martin. No doubt the
Society demonizes Mr. Martin too.

Around late 1980, my wife and I attended a series of lectures sponsored by a local
church titled "How To Witness To Jehovah's Witnesses". The speaker (call him Pete)
was an ex JW who had been in the Watchtower Society system for near three
decades before terminating his involvement; so he knew the twists and turns of its
doctrines pretty good.

Pete didn't train us to hammer the Society's missionaries in a discussion because
even if you best them scripture for scripture, they will not give up on the Society.
Their mind's unflinching premise is that the Society is right even when it appears to
be totally wrong. They are thoroughly convinced that the Society is the voice of
God, while your voice has no more validity than that of a squeaky little gerbil.

Later on, I read a book titled "Why I Left The Jehovah's Witnesses" by Ted Dencher.
I also read the Society's little brown book titled "Reasoning From The Scriptures".

(This was all before the internet and the ready volume of information available
online, e.g. YouTube.)

From all that vetting, study, and training I quickly discovered that although the
Watchtower Society uses many of Christianity's standard terms and phrases, those
terms and phrases mean something entirely different in the JW mind than what
you'd expect because the Society has re-defined the meanings of those
terminologies.

So your first challenge with Jehovah's Witness teachings is to scale the language
barrier. That by itself is an Herculean task because you'll not only be up against a
tangle of semantics, but also a Jumanji of twisted scriptures, double speak,
humanistic reasoning, rationalizing, and clever sophistry.
_

 

[Lamb]

Jehovah's Witness don't believe in the Trinity.

Jehovah's witnesses speak of Christ as God's Son, but deny the eternal preexistence of the 2d Person in the Trin. and speak of the Logos only as God's chief administrator. Hell is said to be a place of entire destruction or annihilation. Jesus is said to have voluntarily given up His right to live and to have deposited it with God; thus He made it possible for God to restore the right to live to all men. Besides Christ, also the 144,000 of Rv 7:4–8, by perfect obedience to God's theocracy, earned the right to live. But they also give up the right to life; with Jesus they constitute “the Christ.” They alone will receive immortality. The rest of mankind will be resurrected; that is, new bodies will be created for them and their right to life will be restored to them. They will be given opportunity for 100 yrs. to be obedient to God's theocracy in the “new world.” Those who at the end of the probationary period are not obedient will be annihilated. The obedient will live under God's theocracy for ages to come.

Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Christian Cyclopedia

 

[NewCreation435]

I am glad you realized that they are a cult and not really Christian at all.

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Acts 2:32 . . . God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the
fact.

Were John Q and/or Jane Doe Watchtower Society missionary to be questioned if
they believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, I can assure you they would
answer in the affirmative. However, they and the interviewer wouldn't be speaking
the same language as the conversation would be talking about two very different
processes that go by the same name. In other words: the interviewer would soon
find themselves thrown off by semantic double speak.

The classical Christian understanding of Christ's resurrection is common throughout
the gospels; viz: Jesus Christ's dead, crucified body was restored to life as per John
2:19-22.

"Jesus said to them: Break down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
Therefore the Jews said: This temple was built in forty-six years, and will you raise
it up in three days? But he was talking about the temple of his body. When, though,
he was raised up from the dead, his disciples called to mind that he used to say
this; and they believed the Scripture and the saying that Jesus said."

Now; if Jesus' dead, crucified body had not been restored to life, that entire
passage would be easily proven false. But according to the Watchtower Society's
way of seeing things; Christ's dead, crucified body didn't return to life at all; and
here's why.

In Watchtower Society theology, an angel named Michael volunteered to come to
the earth to die for humanity's sins. But in order to do so; he had to relinquish his
angel existence to become a human existence seeing as how in Society theology it
is impossible for someone to exist as a spirit being and a physical being
simultaneously. However, when Michael expired, he didn't go completely out of
existence. Instead, his so-called "life force" remained intact and was transferred to
a human form.

"the transferal of the life of his firstborn Son from the spirit realm to earth. Only in
this way could the child eventually born have retained identity as the same person
who had resided in heaven as the Word." (Aid to Bible Understanding, 1971, p.920)

"He had to become a perfect man and yet not lose his continuity of life. His life
force was not to be extinguished but would be transferred to the ovum of the virgin
girl, Mary." (Watchtower magazine, 2-15-82, p.7)

But Michael's existence as a physical being was only temporary. When his human
form passed away on the cross, the Society claims that God transferred Michael's
life force back into his angel form thus restoring him to his former spirit existence;
leaving the corpse of his human existence in a permanent state of decease.

NOTE: The Society teaches that death terminates existence; but apparently not
entirely because the Society also believes that at death, an angel's life force was
transferred to another form-- in Michael's case, from a spirit form to a physical
form; in effect, preserving a portion of Michael's existence so it could be re
transferred later when God went about restoring Michael to his former existence.

It could be argued that Jesus lives on in the body of an angel; but that wouldn't be
true seeing as how Jesus' life force would've been Michael's to begin with.

The Society has to accept the obvious fact that their doctrine implies that Jesus
Christ was never really fully human, rather, he was an amalgam of angel and
human seeing as how it was the life force of an angel that kept Jesus' human body
alive. In other words: the Society's Jesus wasn't an organic human in the normal
sense, rather; he was an organic angel.

FYI: The Society maintains that Michael's crucified human form had to stay dead so
he could be an angel again. But that's not the only reason the Society gives for
keeping Michael's human remains perpetually deceased. An additional explanation
is given on page 237 of the April 15, 1963 issue of the Watchtower magazine;
where it's stated:

"If Jesus were to take his body of flesh, blood, and bones to heaven and enjoy
them there, what would this mean? It would mean that there would be no
resurrection of the dead for anybody. Why not? Because Jesus would be taking his
sacrifice off God's altar."

There is a really, really big flaw in the Society's theology; and that's Michael's
human remains. In order to confirm that his crucified human body stayed dead, the
Society is going to have produce it. A piece of evidence of that significance can't be
allowed to just slip through a crack unnoticed as if it makes no difference. As Carl
Sagan once said: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Till then,
we should reckon that when the Bible speaks of Jesus Christ's resurrection, it's
talking about a human corpse rather than an angel's.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Acts 1:1-3 . .The first account, O Theophilus, I composed about all the things
Jesus started both to do and to teach, until the day that he was taken up, after he
had given commandment through holy spirit to the apostles whom he chose. To
these also by many positive proofs he showed himself alive after he had suffered.

The Watchtower Society's version of those "positive proofs" is interesting.

In order to show his friends that their savior was back from death, the arch angel
Michael is alleged to have materialized an artificial Jesus that was in all respects
just as physical, and just as functional, as the real Jesus.

However:

1• The New Testament never even one time, on any occasion, nor under any
circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states that
an angel named Michael appeared to Christ's disciples cloaked in a human avatar.

2• The Society's Michael never once let on to his friends that he was an angel in
disguise. He led them to believe that his avatar was the actual Jesus Christ they all
knew prior to his crucifixion.

3• Passing one's self off in the guise of a dead man is the lowest form of identity
theft imaginable. It's what I expect from human beings, but that is not the kind of
behavior I have a right to expect from an arch angel.

4• A so-called materialized body is a counterfeit.

5• Neither Paul, nor Peter, nor John, nor James, nor Jude, ever even one single
instance in any of their writings identify Jesus Christ as an angel named Michael:
not once. You'd think that if Jesus Christ is currently an angel who goes by the
name of Michael, those men would have said so because that would be a really big
deal.

FAQ: Why make an issue of the nature of Christ's resurrection?

A: Were I the Devil, I would do my utmost best to disprove the resurrection of
Jesus Christ's crucified dead body because his crucifixion is only half enough to
protect people from the wrath of God. Though his physical body's death obtains
forgiveness for people's sins, its death doesn't gain exoneration.

● Rom 4:25 . . He was delivered up for the sake of our trespasses, and was raised
up for the sake of declaring us righteous.

The Greek word translated "righteous" is dikaiosis (dik-ah'-yo-sis) which means
acquittal; defined as an adjudication of innocence.

People merely forgiven still carry a load of guilt; viz: they have a criminal record.
Christ's physical resurrection deletes their record so that on the books, it's as
though they've never been anything but 100% innocent.

This clearing of one's guilt that I'm talking about is obtained via the kindness and
generosity of God through belief in the resurrection of Christ's crucified dead body.
If the Devil can succeed in convincing people that Jesus' crucified body is still dead
or, even better yet, make them question whether the man even existed at all; then
they will fail to obtain an acquittal, and consequently end up put to death in
brimstone because records are to be reviewed when people stand to face justice at
the Great White Throne event depicted at Rev 20:11-15.

Of all the doctrines invented by the Watchtower Society, I'd have to say that their
resurrection story is the most insidious because belief in the recovery of Christ's
corpse is one of the essential elements of the gospel that must be accepted if one is
to have any chance at all of escaping the sum of all fears.

● 1Cor 15:17 . . Further, if Christ has not been raised up, your faith is useless; you
are yet in your sins.

NOTE: According to 1Cor 15:34, people that disbelieve Jesus Christ's corpse was
restored to life aren't fully conscious; viz: they're like someone in a stupor; i.e.
dazed.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
FAQ: 1Cor 15:50 says that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
Wouldn't that fact alone preclude the possibility of Christ's crucified dead body
restored to life and taken to Heaven?

A: The kingdom of God is one of the "earthly things" that Jesus discussed with a
Pharisee by the name of Nicodemus in John 3:3-12; so we're not talking about
Heaven in 1Cor 15:50. It's an era when Christ will return to this very planet to take
the reins and govern the entire world under God's direct supervision.

Also, the Greek word translated "inherit" is kleronomeo (klay-ron-om-eh'-o) which
speaks of heirs; roughly defined by Webster's as someone who is entitled to receive
something from an ancestor.

In a nutshell, the kingdom of God is not the kind of estate that natural parents can
share with their natural posterity by means of either a trust fund or a will. People
can only inherit the kingdom of God from God; and not just from God as a supreme
being, but from God as a parent, i.e. a Father. So then; in order to be entitled to an
inheritance from God, people must first qualify as His legal kin.

Now, this matter of inheritance is a serious problem for rank and file JWs because
they do not expect, neither in this life nor the next, to undergo the supernatural
birth spoken of in John 1:12-13 and John 3:3-12.

It's both tragic and ironic that the Watchtower Society's rank and file missionaries
go worldwide advertising a kingdom that they themselves will never be allowed to
enter.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
Watch for the deliberate misquote in the passage below.

● 1Cor 15:42-44 . . So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption,
it is raised up in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised up in glory. It is
sown in weakness, it is raised up in power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised
up a spirit body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spirit one.

Catch the misquote? Well; there is no mention of a spirit body in that passage. The
actual word is "spiritual".

The Greek word translated "spiritual" is ambiguous. It doesn't necessarily refer to
the characteristics of thin air. Below is a list of spiritual things that bear absolutely
no resemblance whatsoever to the bodily chemistry of an angel or a demon.

Spiritual gifts (Rom 1:11)
Spiritual law (Rom 7:14)
Spiritual things (Rom 15:27)
Spiritual people (1Cor 2:15)
Spiritual nourishment (1Cor 10:3)
Spiritual water (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual rock (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual counselors (Gal 6:1)
Spiritual blessings (Eph 1:3)
Spiritual music (Eph 5:19)
Spiritual understanding (Col 1:9)
Spiritual housing (1Pet 2:5)
Spiritual sacrifices (1Pet 2:5)

There are some other things in addition to immortality that are known about the
spiritual body.

1) The spiritual body is patterned after Christ's glorified body.

● Phil 3:20-21 . .Our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a savior from
there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring
everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like
his glorious body.

2) The spiritual body is fully human.

● Heb 2:5-8 . . For it is not to angels that he has subjected the inhabited earth to
come, about which we are speaking. But a certain witness has given proof
somewhere, saying: “What is man that you keep him in mind, or the son of man
that you take care of him? You made him a little lower than angels; with glory and
honor you crowned him, and appointed him over the works of your hands. All
things you subjected under his feet.” For in that he subjected all things to him God
left nothing that is not subject to him. Now, though, we do not yet see all things in
subjection to him;

● Heb 5:1-6 . . For every high priest taken from among men is appointed in behalf
of men over the things pertaining to God

3) The spiritual body is capable of dining upon ordinary foods and beverages.

● Matt 26:29 . . I tell you: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until
that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom.

● Luke 22:15-16 . . I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I
suffer. For I tell you: I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of
God.

● Luke 22:28-29 . . However, you are the ones that have stuck with me in my
trials; and I make a covenant with you, just as my Father has made a covenant
with me, for a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom,

4) The spiritual body is visible to the naked eye.

● Acts 1:11 . . Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus,
who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as
you have watched him go into heaven.

● 1John 3:2 . .We shall see him just as he is.

● Rev 1:7 . . Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even
those who pierced him
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
Jesus Christ is a priest-- not just a rank and file priest, rather: a high priest.

● Heb 5:10 . . He has been specifically called by God a high priest

High priesthood is an office that's never been held by angels. It's always been held
by human beings; specifically male human beings.

● Heb 5:1 . . . For every high priest taken from among men is appointed in behalf
of men over the things pertaining to God

● Heb 5:4 . . Also, a man takes this honor, not of his own accord, but only when he
is called by God, just as Aaron also was.

Christ, then, is a mediator between the supreme being and the human being;
specifically the mediator seeing as how the high priesthood is a solo position, i.e.
held by one man at a time.

● 1Tim 2:5 . . There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man,
Christ Jesus.

The Greek word translated "men" and "man" in that verse is derived from
anthropos (anth'-ro-pos) --a common word for humans in the New Testament;
which is why that passage doesn't say the one mediator is an angel Christ Michael.
No it doesn't say an angel Christ Michael; rather, it says a man Christ Jesus; who
everyone knows to be a human being rather than an angelic being by the same
name.

A search of the entire New Testament for the angel Michael turns up but two
references: Jude 1:9 and Rev 12:7. That angel is nowhere in the gospels, nowhere
in Acts, and nowhere in the epistles other than Jude. If that angel is so all-fired
important; then why is it so marginalized? Even the Society itself is a bit perplexed
as to why the name of an angel so highly revered in their theology is nigh unto
absent in the New Testament.

The Society claims that the names Jesus and Michael are interchangeable; but
that's the most ridiculous case of apples and oranges on record; not to mention a
very serious case of identity fraud.

Even if an angel had once existed as a human being named Jesus; it no longer
does. Now it exists as a an angelic being named Michael. The two names aren't
interchangeable because the one name denotes a human being and the other name
denotes an angelic being. Go ahead; search the New Testament and see how much
luck you have finding somebody's name hyphenated like this: Jesus-Michael Christ.
You won't because the Society's high priest/mediator is an utter fantasy.

Oh what a wicked web we weave
When first we practice to deceive.
(Sir Walter Scott)

That poem rings so true. Once Charles T. Russell and/or Joseph F. Rutherford
declared that Michael the angel, and Jesus Christ the human, are the same person;
they were faced with the Herculean task of forcing the Bible to agree; and that was
quite a challenge; which was accomplished by means of clever blends of fiction,
sophistry, half-truths, semantic double speak, and humanistic reasoning.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
A mediator is defined as one who interposes between two parties at variance to
reconcile them, viz: an intercessor.

Here's a question that someone wrote in to the questions from readers section of
the April 01, 1976 issue of Watchtower magazine, asking:

"Is Jesus the mediator only for anointed Christians? (a.k.a. the 144,000)"

The answer given in the magazine is YES.

The magazine's answer is corroborated on page 1130 of the Society's publication
titled "Aid To Bible Understanding" where it says that the 144,000 are the only ones
who have the mediator; a.k.a. Jesus Christ. (1John 2:1)

Intercession for non anointed Witnesses is accomplished on the coattails of the
144,000; viz: Jesus Christ is an indirect, second party mediator for the rank and file
via their affiliation with the Watchtower Society.

It's sort of like buying insurance from Allstate. The company doesn't sell direct; its
business is conducted through brokers. In essence, that's what the Society
presumes itself: Jesus Christ's mediation brokerage.

So then; when a JW either defects or is disfellowshipped, their pipeline to the
mediator is broken, and they right quick lose all contact with God; thus placing
themselves in grave danger of the calamities depicted in the book of Revelation.

Bottom line: According to Watchtower Society theology; it is impossible for non
anointed people to be on peaceful terms with God apart from affiliation with the
Society's anointed class, a.k.a. the faithful and wise steward.

In other words: Christ's mediation for rank and file JWs as per 1Tim 2:5 is
accomplished via a chain of communication that begins with Christ's association
with the faithful and wise steward; and from thence to the rest of humanity.
Removing the faithful and wise steward from the chain cuts humanity off from
Christ; thus leaving them with no way to reconcile with God.

NOTE: I've had JWs tell me that the Watchtower magazine isn't their authority in
matters of faith and practice. But the Jan 1, 1942 issue of the magazine, on page 5,
speaks for itself as a trustworthy source of Watchtower Society theology by saying:

"Those who are convinced that The Watchtower is publishing the opinion or
expression of a man should not waste time in looking at it at all. Those who believe
that God uses the Watchtower as a means of communicating to his people, or of
calling attention to his prophecies, should study The Watchtower."

In other words: the haulers of water and the hewers of wood-- John Q and Jane
Doe rank and file --are not only expected to know what's in the Watchtower
magazine, but they're also required to accept it as the God's truth.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn of all creation

The Greek word translated "firstborn" in that verse is prototokos, which never
means created first; no, it always means born first. The correct Greek word for
created first is protoktistos.

The average JW probably doesn't know the difference between prototokos and
protoktistos; and no doubt would care little about it anyway. To some; born first
and created first are essentially one and the same.

The thing to note is that "firstborn" doesn't always refer to birth order. The term
also refers to pay grade, so to speak, and as such is transferrable from an elder
sibling to a younger, e.g. Esau to Jacob (Gen 25:23) Manasseh to Ephraim (Gen
48:13-14) and Reuben to Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1).

There was a time when David was God's firstborn (Ps 89:20-27). The position was
later transferred to one of David's sons (Ps 110:1). You'd think that the Jews'
religious experts of Jesus' day would have known about this.

● Matt 22:41-46 . . Now while the Pharisees were gathered together Jesus asked
them: “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him:
“David’s" He said to them: “How, then, is it that David by inspiration calls him
‘Lord,’ saying, ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your
enemies beneath your feet” ’? If, therefore, David calls him ‘Lord,’ how is he his
son?”

Jesus was referring to Psalm 110:1, wherein we will find two very different Hebrew
words for "Lord"'

The first is Yehovah (yeh-ho-vaw') a.k.a. Jehovah, Yhvh, and Yahweh; which is a
name reserved for the one true God only; and no other.

The second is 'adown (aw-done'); a very common title of respect for one's
superiors in the Old Testament. Sarah revered her husband Abraham as 'adown
(Gen 18:12) Rachel revered her dad Laban as 'adown (Gen 31:5) and Jacob
revered his brother Esau as 'adown (Gen 33:8).

So then; Psalm 110:1 can be translated like this:

"The utterance of Jehovah to my superior: Sit at my right hand until I place your
enemies as a stool for your feet."

David is the paterfamilias of his own line of royalty, making him superior to all of
his male progeny; none of them outrank him, all are his subordinates. But Ps 110:1
speaks of one of David's male progeny who somehow breaks the rules; and the
Jews' religious experts were utterly baffled by it.

● Matt 22:46 . . And no one was able to answer him a word

The Jews' religious experts were no doubt aware, by means of their Old Testament
studies, that the rank of firstborn can be moved around among siblings, but nobody
even dreamed that a father's supremacy could be taken from him and given to one
of his children; in effect making the child superior to its parents.

This was something strange to their Jewish way of thinking; yet there it is in black
and white in their own scriptures. They had somehow failed to catch the
significance of Ps 110:1 until Jesus drew their attention to it.

Now; the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy does not permit children to be superior to
their parents.

● Ex 20:12 . . Honor your father and your mother

So then, Christ would have to outrank his father David by another route than
family; and he does.

Renaming is fairly common in the Bible, e.g. Abram to Abraham, Jacob to Israel,
Ben-oni to Benjamin, Simon to Cephas, and Rev 2:17. But with Christ, we
encounter an astonishing renaming.

● Phil 2:8-11 . . God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the
name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee
should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground,
and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory
of God the Father. (cf. Eph 1:20-21)

FAQ: What is "the name" that is above every other name?

A: Jehovah

FAQ: Is that the reason why Jesus outranks his father David?

A: Yes. Jesus has the God-given right to use Jehovah's name as his own name;
which allows him all the respect and reverence that the name deserves; viz: failure
to revere Jesus as Jehovah dishonors the name of God the Father.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
Below is the text of Col 1:16-17 quoted verbatim from the Watchtower Society's
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures ©1969.

"Because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon
the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are
thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been
created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means
of him all [other] things were made to exist."

The word "other" is in brackets. This alert readers that "other" is not in the Greek
manuscript; viz: the Society's translators took the liberty to pencil it in; which gives
the impression that God's son was His first creation; and thereafter, the Son
created everything else.

NOTE: I heard it from a JW that the Society's translators added "other" because
that's what Col 1:16-17 means to say even though it doesn't say so in writing. In
other words; that portion of the Society's Bible is an interpretation rather than a
translation.

One day, a pair of Watchtower missionaries came to my door consisting of an
experienced worker and a trainee. I immediately began subjecting the trainee to a
line of questioning that homed in on the Society's rather dishonest habit of
embellishing the Bible in order to reinforce its line of thinking.

I had him read the Society's text of Col 1:16-17 and then pointed out that the word
"other" is in brackets to alert him to the fact that "other" is not in the Greek
manuscript. The experienced worker corroborated my statement.

I then proceeded to have the trainee read the passage sans "other". It comes out
like this:

"By means of him all things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the
things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or
lordships or governments or authorities. All things have been created through him
and for him. Also, he is before all things and by means of him all things were made
to exist."

The trainee's eyes really lit up; and he actually grinned with delight to discover that
Col 1:16-17 reveals something quite different than what he was led to believe.

Had I pressed the attack; I would have pointed out that the Society is inconsistent
with its use of the word "other" by failing to pencil it into John 1:3 in order to make
it read like this:

"All [other] things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even
one [other] thing came into existence."

Now; as to tampering with Paul's letters, and forcing them to mean things they
don't say in writing; this is what Peter has to say about that.

● 2Pet 3:15-16 . . Furthermore, consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, just
as our beloved brother Paul according to the wisdom given him also wrote you,
speaking about these things as he does also in all his letters. In them, however, are
some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as
they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

FYI: The 1984 revised version of the New World Translation omits brackets
around the word "other" in Col 1:16-17. However, it's readily seen from the
Watchtower Society's Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures that
"other" is nowhere to be found in the Greek text. Caveat Lector.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● John 1:18 . . No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is in
the bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him.

The Greek word for "only-begotten" in that verse is monogenes (mon-og-en-ace')
which is also found in John 1:14, John 3:16, John 3:18, and 1John 4:9. It's a
combination of two words.

The first is mono, which music buffs recognize as a single channel rather than two
or four in surround sound stereo. Mono is very common; e.g. monogamy,
monofilament, monotonous, mononucleotide, monochrome, monogram, monolith,
monologue, monomial, et al.

The other word is genes; from whence we get the English word gene; which
Webster's defines as a biological term indicating a part of a cell that controls or
influences the appearance, growth, etc., of a living thing. In other words:
monogenes refers to one biological gene set rather than many.

Monogenes always, and without exception, refers to parents' sole biological child in
the New Testament. If parents have two or more biological children, none of them
qualify as monogenes because in order to qualify as a monogenes child, the child
has to be an only child.

Examples of monogenes children are located at Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, and Luke
9:38.

So then, scientifically speaking, Christ is unique in that he is God's sole biological
offspring, while God's other sons are not; viz: they're placed as sons, i.e. adopted.
(Rom 8:15-16, Gal 4:4-6, Eph 1:4-5)

FAQ: God literally fathered a child?

A: I think it's probably a bit more accurate to say that God literally co-fathered a
child.

FAQ: How did he do it? Is there a Mrs. God? And who was the other father?

A: Jesus' conception, described at Luke 1:26-35, wasn't only miraculous, it was a
very mysterious collaboration of human and divine.

David contributed the human component. (Luke 1:32, Acts 13:22-23, Rom 1:1-3,
and 2Tim 2:8)

God contributed the divine component. (Luke 1:35 and 1John 3:9)

Jesus then, is just as much God's progeny as he is David's; and just as much
David's progeny as he is God's.

FAQ: What about Heb 11:17 where Isaac is stated to be Abraham's monogenes
child? Wasn't Ishmael a biological child of his too?

A: At the time of the event recorded in the 22nd of Genesis, Ishmael was no longer
Abraham's son. Paternal laws back in that ancient culture allowed a man to disown
a son if the lad was born of a mother in slavery. The catch is: the father had to
emancipate the mother, which Abraham had already done at Sarah's urging, and
God's approval. So then according to the laws of nature, Ishmael was one of
Abraham's biological sons whereas according to the will of God, he wasn't.

Now, here's the inescapable ramification:

Like reproduces its like. In other words: If Christ really is David's progeny, then
Christ is just as much a human being as David. In the same vein; if Christ really is
God's progeny; then Christ is just as much a divine being as God.

To say that this is all very baffling, illogical, unscientific, and unreasonable would be
an understatement. In my mind's normal way of thinking, Christ's rather odd case
of mixed-species genetics is an outlandish fantasy that, biologically, makes no
sense at all. It's sort of like crossing an iguana with an apricot to produce a reptilian
fruit tree. But; the circumstances of Christ's conception are in the Bible, so those of
us who identify ourselves Christians have got to accept it.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
FAQ: Can God die?

A: No.

● Ps 90:1-2 . . O Jehovah, you yourself have proved to be a real dwelling for us
during generation after generation. Before the mountains themselves were born, or
you proceeded to bring forth as with labor pains the earth and the productive land,
even from time indefinite to time indefinite you are God.

Now; if the Son of God is really and truly God's offspring, then he can't die either
because just as human life reproduces human life, so God life would reproduce God
life.

FAQ: Can God sin?

A: No.

● Ps 11:7 . . Jehovah is righteous

● Ps 145:17 . . Jehovah is righteous in all his ways and loyal in all his works.

● Jas 1:13 . . With evil things God cannot be tried

So then if the Son of God is really and truly God's offspring, then he can neither sin
nor be tempted with evil because if the righteous God were to reproduce, He would
reproduce righteous God life just as unrighteous human life reproduces unrighteous
human life; and in point of fact, the Bible says as much.

● 1John 3:9 . . Everyone who has been born from God does not carry on sin,
because His reproductive seed remains in such one, and he cannot practice sin,
because he has been born from God.

FAQ: Can God lie?

A: No.

● Titus 1:2 . . God, who cannot lie

● Heb 6:18 . . it is impossible for God to lie

So then, if the Son of God is really and truly God's offspring, then neither can he lie
because if the honest God were to reproduce, He would reproduce honest God life
just as dishonest human life reproduces dishonest human life.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
FAQ: Does 1John 3:9 indicate that people who've undergone the birth spoken of in John
1:11 and John 3:3-12 are divine, i.e. God's progeny, so to speak?

A: Were that question to be answered with a YES, then it could no longer be said that
the Son of God is God's only begotten.

The Greek word translated "only begotten" in places like John 1:14, John 1:18, and
John 3:16 etc, is monogenes (mon-og-en-ace') which always, and without exception,
refers to the only biological child in the home as opposed to adopted children in the
home. If there's more than one biological child in the home, then none are monogenes.

People who've undergone the birth spoken of in John 1:11 and John 3:3-12 aren't God's
biological offspring; they are, in point of fact, creations adopted into God's home rather
than His actual progeny.

● 2Cor 5:17 . . . If anyone is in union with Christ, he is a new creation

● Gal 6:15 . . For neither is circumcision anything nor is uncircumcision, but a new
creation is something.

● Eph 2:10 . . . For we are a product of His work and were created in union with Christ
Jesus

● Eph 4:24 . .You should put on the new personality which was created according to
God’s will.

● Col 3:10 . . Clothe yourselves with the new personality, which through accurate
knowledge is being made new according to the image of the One who created it.

● Gal 4:4-5 . . But when the full limit of the time arrived, God sent forth His son, who
came to be out of a woman and who came to be under law, that he might release by
purchase those under law, that we, in turn, might receive the adoption as sons.

● Eph 1:5 . . . He foreordained us to the adoption through Jesus Christ as sons to
Himself, according to the good pleasure of his will.

Were the beneficiaries of the birth spoken of in John 1:14, John 1:18, and John 3:16
etc, God's actual progeny they would never sin nor be attracted to sin. But according to
1John 1:8-10, they sin on a regular basis.

NOTE: Two of the passages above mention union with Christ. Well; that position is restricted to
people who've been blessed with the anointing spoken of in 1John 2:26-27; so rank and
file JWs-- the great crowd, viz: the hewers of wood and haulers of water --should not be
thinking of themselves as new creations adopted into God's home because in
Watchtower theology, the anointing is limited to no more than 144,000 Witnesses total;
and those positions have already been filled.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Jer 10:10 . . Jehovah is in truth God. He is the living god.

The Hebrew word for "living" in that passage is chay (khah'-ee) which first appears
in the Bible at Gen 1:20 where it speaks of aqua life and winged life. Then it
appears at Gen 1:24 where it speaks of life on land. It appears again at Gen 2:7
where it speaks of human life.

Flora life is never spoken of as chay. So I think we can limit the kind of life spoken
of by chay as conscious existence; viz: sentient life.

Jehovah is called the living god something like fifteen times in the Old Testament,
and fifteen more times in the New.

I'm unaware of any other gods in the whole Bible identified as living gods; not even
the people of Psalm 82 to whom God said "You are gods".

Because of that; I think it safe to conclude that no other god is a living god. In
other words: labeling Jehovah as the living god is a way of saying He is the only
god that's actually eternal, i.e. always was, always is, and always shall be. This has
some serious ramifications because when speaking of Christ, the Bible says:

● Col 2:9 . . It is in him that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily.

The Greek word for "divine quality" is theótes (theh-ot'-ace) which means: divinity

Seeing as how theótes is modified by the Greek definite article "ho" then what
we're looking at here in Col 2:9 isn't nondescript divinity, but rather the divinity. In
other words: we're looking at the fullness of the divinity of the living god.

Just about everybody on both sides of the aisle agrees that the Word spoken of at
John 1:1 is a god. However: the Word isn't just any god; no, the fullness of the
divinity of the living god dwells in the Word; viz: the Word is a living god, i.e. the
life that's in the Word always was, always is, and always shall be.

● John 5:26 . . For just as the Father has life in himself, so He has granted also to
the Son to have life in himself.

When the Father granted the Son to have life in himself just as the Father has life
in Himself, things got a bit complicated because unless Jehovah and the Word are
somehow different names for the same personage; there is now one too many
living gods out there.

NOTE: I highly recommend not debating the trinity with Jehovah's Witnesses
because it's far more important, and easier, to first prove that God is a twosome
rather than three. Christianity, after all, is primarily about Christ.

● John 16:13-14 . . When that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you
into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he hears
he will speak, and he will declare to you the things coming. That one will glorify me,
because he will receive from what is mine and will declare it to you.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
The Watchtower Society will never accept classical Christianity's teaching that Jesus
Christ is Jehovah incognito simply because the Society's undying premise is that it
is impossible for someone to exist as a spirit being and a human being
simultaneously.

According to the premise: Jehovah's spirit existence would have to be terminated
before He could become a human existence; and I can easily guarantee that
nobody is ever going to convince the Society otherwise unless they first prove that
the Word of John 1:1-4 is impervious to death. In other words; in order to prove to
the Society that it's possible for a spirit being to exist as a human being
simultaneously, it is necessary to prove to the Society that the Word is an
everlasting life; which is a kind of life that cannot die. Fortunately it's very easy to
do because the apostle John did that part for us in his first epistle.

● 1John 1:1-2 . .That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which
we have seen with our eyes, which we have viewed attentively and our hands felt,
concerning the word of life, (yes, the life was made manifest, and we have seen
and are bearing witness and reporting to you the everlasting life which was with the
Father and was made manifest to us,)

The Greek word for "everlasting" in that passage is aionios (ahee-o'-nee-os) which
essentially means perpetual; viz: without interruption.

The Word's human existence as per John 1:14 was as a mortal life and thus easily
interrupted; but seeing as how the Word's spirit existence as per 1John 1:1-2 is an
everlasting life, then it's impossible for the Word's spirit existence to be interrupted.

Jehovah cannot interrupt His existence as God because Jehovah is an everlasting
life (Gen 21:33, Rom 16:26). In the same manner, the Word cannot interrupt his
existence as the Word because the Word is an everlasting life too. (John 5:26,
1John 1:1-2)

The Word may have temporarily divested himself of his glory when he came to the
earth to live and die as a human being, but he did not, and could not, divest
himself of his spirit existence because in order to do that, he would have to die;
which is an impossibility for everlasting life. If that were not so, then it would be
possible to assassinate Jehovah. In point of fact, it would even be possible for
Jehovah to commit suicide.

BTW: According to chapter 1, verse 1, of John's gospel, the Word is a god. Well;
seeing as how the Word is an everlasting life, then he's obviously an everlasting
god too; viz: the Watchtower Society's religion has two everlasting gods in it, and
both of those everlasting gods are credited with the creation of the cosmos with all
of its forms of life, matter, and energy.

Precisely how an immortal life can exist simultaneously as a mortal life is one of the
mysteries of classical Christianity that has to be taken on faith rather than reason
because the 3-pound lump of fatty, flabby organic tissue housed in a man's bony
little skull, and sufficing for a mind, is just too limited to get it; and not even all
three of those pounds are devoted to cognitive processes.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● 1Cor 15:45a . . The first man Adam became a living soul.

That verse refers to Gen 2:7, which reads like this:

"Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow
into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul."

The Watchtower Society alleges that Jehovah God wasn't directly involved in
creating the first man, rather, His involvement was indirect. According to them, the
actual work was done by the hand of a divine being called the Word.

"In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a
god. This one was in the beginning with God. All things came into existence through
him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come
into existence by means of him was life" (John 1:1-4)

Seeing as how that's the case; then the breath of life spoken of in Gen 2:7 was
blown into the first man's nostrils by the Word. In all respects then, we owe the
beginning of the first human race to the Word just as much as we owe it to Jehovah
God because the Bible gives both credit for its existence.

● 1Cor 15:45b . .The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Christ is not only the last of the human race as we know it, but also the founder of
a new human race about which we know comparatively very little.

● 1Cor 15:47 . . .The first man is out of the earth and made of dust; the second
man is out of heaven.

But before proceeding, I think it very important that we nail down the meaning of
"became a life-giving spirit".

The phrase is not much different in reverse than forward, viz: a life-giving spirit
became the last Adam. (John 1:1-4 and John 1:14)

In other words: Adam's existence began by the hand of the Word, whereas Christ's
came into existence as the Word.

The thing is: when the Word came into the world as a human being, he didn't
relinquish his existence as a spirit being, viz: the creator-god spoken of in Gen 1:1
and John 1:1 remained the creator-god and that's simply because it is impossible
for a real god to cease existing as a god-- a real god is immortal, i.e. it's eternal,
viz: a real god always was, always is, and always shall be.

The Watchtower Society does not believe it's possible for a spirit being to exist
simultaneously as an organic being, but the Bible totally disagrees.

According to John 5:26 and 1John 1:1-4, the Word is an everlasting life which,
according to Gen 21:33 and Rom 16:26, is an indestructible category of life that's
impervious to death. So the Word didn't go out of existence when he came into the
world as an organic being; which means of course that Jesus Christ was an organic
being and a life-giving spirit simultaneously right from the moment of his
conception.

● John 3:13 . . . Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but he that
descended from heaven; the Son of man.

● John 6:38 . . I have come down from heaven

● John 6:42 . . They began saying: Is this not Jesus the son of Joseph, whose
father and mother we know? How is it that now he says: I have come down from
heaven?

The dual nature of Christ's existence is a fatal hang-up for the Watchtower Society
due to its spurious belief that it's impossible for the Word to exist as a human being
and a spirit being simultaneously. But the evidence is very difficult to refute.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
The Watchtower Society's theology is a based on a version called monolatrism,
which basically alleges that all gods are actual deities; though not all deities are
deemed worthy of worship. This is not quite the same as polytheism where
numerous gods are all considered worthy of worship.

Monolatrism is distinguished from monotheism (asserts the existence of only one
god) and distinguished from henotheism (a religious system in which the believer
worships one god alone without denying that others may worship different gods of
equal value)

While classical Christianity recognizes but two categories of gods-- the true and the
false, viz: the authentic and the imitation, the intrinsic and the artificial --the
Watchtower Society's theologians took the liberty to create a third sandwiched
between the true and the false called "mighty ones". The mighty-one category is a
sort of neutral zone where qualifying personages exist as bona fide deities without
violating the very first of the Ten Commandments. For example:

"I myself have said: You are gods" (Ps 82:6)

The gods referred to in that passage are humans; which everybody should know
are only imitation deities rather than the genuine article; so in order to avoid
stigmatizing humans as fake gods, the Society classifies them as mighty ones.

This gets kind of humorous when we plug "mighty one" into various locations. For
example:

"In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a
mighty one." (John 1:1)

And another:

"No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten mighty one who is in the
bosom position with the Father is the one that has explained him." (John 1:18)

The "mighty one" category was an invention of necessity. In other words: without
it, the Society would be forced to classify the only-begotten (John 1:18) and the
Word (John 1:1) as a false god seeing as how Deut 6:4, John 17:3, and 1Cor 8:4-6
testify that there is only one true god.

POSIT: Jesus verified the authority of Ps 82:6 in a discussion recorded at John
10:34-36. If the word of God cannot be nullified, then those gods have to be real
gods.

RESPONSE: Oh; they're real alright: real imitations because according to Deut 6:4,
John 17:3, and 1Cor 8:4-6 there is only one true god. Therefore the gods in Ps 82
are artificial gods. Plus; true gods don't die; viz: they're immortal, impervious to
death. The gods in Psalm 82 are neither immortal nor impervious to death.

"Surely you will die just as men do" (Ps 82:7)

So then, what does all this say about the Word of John 1:1? Well; if the Word is
only a mighty one, as the Watchtower Society alleges; then he's an artificial god--
i.e. a false god --and his divinity is no more divine in reality than a totem pole or a
statue of Shiva.

POSIT: If true gods don't die, then Jesus is not a true god because he was mortal.

RESPONSE: If Christ's origin had begun only with Adam, then that conclusion would
be 100% correct. However, I know from John 1:1-14 and Heb 3:3-5 that Christ's
origin is an eternal being who not only pre-existed the first man, but also got him
started.

I have thus far been unable to comprehend how it's possible for the eternal being
who created the first man to then biologically descend from that very same man.
It's easy to say that Christ is fully God and fully Man, but not so easy to make
sense of it. It's just as difficult for regular Christians as it is for JWs.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
FAQ: Why does the Watchtower Society translate the Word in John 1:1 as a god in
lower case instead of God in upper case?

A: The Watchtower Society's translation is based upon an imaginary grammatical
technicality.

The common Greek word for "god" is theós (theh'-os). When it's modified by the
little Greek definite article "ho" the Society translates theós in upper case, viz: in
the Society's theological thinking; ho theós pertains to the one true God, while
theós by itself is somewhat flexible, for example John 1:18 and John 20:17 where
the Society translates theós in upper case though it be not modified by ho.

However, according to Dr. Archibald T. Robertson's "Grammar Of The Greek New
Testament", page 767: in regards to nouns in the predicate; the article is not
essential to speech. In other words: when theόs is in the predicate, ho can be
either used, or not used, without making any real difference.

So then; a translator's decision whether to capitalize either of the two theόs in John
1:1 or not to capitalize them, is entirely arbitrary rather than dictated by a strict
rule of Greek grammar. Of course the Society prefers that the Word be a lower case
god because it's agreeable with their version of Christ's divinity.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● John 1:1 . . In the beginning the Word was

The "word" is translated from the Greek word logos (log'-os) which basically refers
to something spoken, i.e. speech; for example:

● Gen 1:1-3 . . In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And God
proceeded to say: “Let light come to be.” Then there came to be light.

So the cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --came into existence by
means of God's voice, viz: by means of His speech rather than His thoughts and/or
His will.

● 2Pet 3:5 . . There were heavens from of old by the word of God

Had God curbed His tongue, there'd be no stars out in space, nor clouds in the sky,
for us to look at.

Exactly how God's speech has enough power, force, and energy to bring things into
existence is just as mystifying to me how His speech is a sentient being. The
difference is quite large, viz: it's one thing to speak a sentient being into existence
while quite another for the voice itself to be a sentient being; but there it is. Don't
ask me how God's spoken words are sentient because it is just too far beyond the
capability of my below-average IQ to figure out.

The Jehovah's Witnesses say that God's speech is a god. Well; that's true, but it's
not the whole truth. In order to be spot on, we have to spell god with an upper case
G in order to prevent mistaking whose speech we're talking about. If someone
wants to say that God's speech is a divine being; okay, but we cannot allow God's
own speech to have less personal value as a divine being than Himself.
_