Questions for My Jehovah's Witness Friends

    

“We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated. Are its teachings in full harmony with God’s Word, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination. It should be the sincere desire of every one of us to learn what God’s will is for us, and then do it” (The Truth that leads to Eternal Life, Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society 1968, p. 13).

Please give honest and satisfactory answers to these questions . . .

1.  Do you agree with the statement above? Regardless of what you may have done in the past, are you now willing to question your current beliefs? If your answer is “no,” how can you unhypocritically expect others to do so?

2.  Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses use instrumental music in their worship to Jehovah? Do you agree that “the Law covenant was terminated at Pentecost, 33 C.E.” and that the “‘law of the Christ’ covers the whole course and scope of the Christian’s life and work”? (Aid to Bible Understanding, Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society 1971, p. 1037). If you agree, why do Jehovah’s Witnesses follow the old Jewish practice and the innovation of Roman Catholics and Protestant Denominations of worshiping with musical instruments when such is not authorized in the New Testament? “Regardless of whom a group profess to worship, if they hold to doctrines of men instead of the inspired Word of God, their worship is in vain” (Reasoning from the Scriptures, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society 1985, p. 323).

3.  Do you support the following statement? “Beyond all doubt, the evidence points to 1914 as the year when the kingdom of God went into operation . . .” (The Truth that leads to Eternal Life, Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society 1968, p. 93). If this is true, why did Jesus make the following statements while he was still on earth? “The appointed time has been fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has drawn near” (Mark 1:15, New World Translation). “Truly I say to you, There are some of those standing here that will not taste death at all until first they see the kingdom of God already come in power” (Mark 9:1, NWT). Telling the apostles things about the kingdom of God: “Do not withdraw from Jerusalem, but keep waiting for what the Father has promised, about which you heard from me . . . but you will receive power when the holy spirit arrives upon you . . .” (Acts 1:1-8, NWT). Why does the kingdom appear to have been established shortly thereafter, in accordance with these scriptures? “He delivered us from the authority of the darkness and transplanted us into the kingdom of the Son of his love” (Colossians 1:13, NWT), i.e. “the kingdom of the Christ and God” (Ephesians 5:5). “I John, your brother and a sharer with you in the tribulation and kingdom and endurance in company with Jesus . . .” (Revelation 1:9, NWT).

4.  Wouldn’t it be contrary to Watchtower theology for you to refer to Jesus as “My Lord and my God”? (cf. Should You Believe in the Trinity?, Watchtower Bible & Tract Society 1989, p. 16). Why was it acceptable for Thomas to address Jesus as “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28-29, NWT)? If this was not a legitimate affirmation, why wasn’t Thomas charged with blasphemy or with using the name of the Lord God in vain (Exodus 20:7)? Note: The designations “Lord” and “God” are translated from the Greek words kurios and theos, and whenever these words are used together in the NT, they are equivalent to the Hebrew names YHWH [“Jehovah”] and Elohim [“God”] (Mark 12:29-30; Luke 1:68; 10:27; Acts 3:22) and always refer to the Supreme Deity (Acts 2:39; 4:24; 7:37).

5.  Do you agree with the following statement? “So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title ‘Alpha and Omega’ applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son” (Reasoning from the Scriptures, Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society 1985, p. 413). If so, how do you harmonize that conclusion with the following clear scriptural statements? “‘Look! I am coming quickly, and the reward I give is with me, to render to each one as his work is. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end . . . I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to you people of these things for the congregations” (Revelation 22:12-13, 16, NWT; cf. 1:8, 17-18; Isaiah 44:6).

6.  Do you agree with the following statements? “Who is this prophet? . . . This ‘prophet’ was not one man, but a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses” (The Watchtower, 1 April 1972, p. 197). “However, the prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak or who speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet must die. And in case you should say in your heart: ‘How shall we know the word that Jehovah has not spoken?’ when the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, that is the word that Jehovah did not speak. With presumptuousness the prophet spoke it . . .” (Deuteronomy 18:20-22, NWT). 

     Now consider these Jehovah’s Witness prophecies: “there will be a resurrection of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and other faithful ones of old, and that these will have the first favor, we may expect 1925 to witness the return of these faithful men of Israel from the condition of death, being resurrected and fully restored to perfect humanity and made to visible, legal representatives of the new order of things on earth” (Millions Now Living Will Never Die 1920, p. 88); “The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914” (The Watchtower, 1 Sept. 1922, p. 262); “According to this trustworthy Bible chronology six thousand years from man’s creation will end in 1975, and the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 C.E.” (Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God 1966, p. 29). 

     Do you honestly believe that Proverbs 4:18 gives justification for making false prophecies? “Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to see whether they originate with God, because many false prophets have gone forth into the world” (1 John 4:1, NWT).

7. Would you like to learn more about the Bible and God's will for your life?

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Responding to Arianism, Questions For My Mormon Friends 

Related articles: The NWT refutes the NWT

Image credit: http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/5/3/9/8/2/8/i/5/4/3/o/100_1515_(2).jpg    

Responding to Arianism (e.g. Jehovah’s Witnesses)

The view briefly stated:¹

“Jesus had an existence in heaven before coming to the earth. But was it as one of the persons in an almighty, eternal triune Godhead? No, for the Bible plainly states that in his pre-human existence, Jesus was a created spirit being, just as angels were spirit beings created by God. Neither the angels nor Jesus had existed before their creation …. to worship God on his terms means to reject the Trinity doctrine” (Watchtower, “Should You Believe in the Trinity?” [1989]: 14, 31).

Arguments Considered:

“Jesus is not God because Colossians 1:15 states that he is ‘the first-born of all creation,’ i.e. the first one to have been created by Jehovah.” To conclude that the term “firstborn” here has reference to the first to have been created is to ignore the biblical usage of the term. The Greek word is prototokos, which signifies priority or superiority (cf. Ex. 4:22; Deut. 21:15-17). The future tense of Psalm 89:27 shows that “firstborn” is a title of preeminence, not a reference to origin (applied here to David, the youngest son of Jesse). Ephraim is called the “firstborn” (Jer. 31:9), even though he was the youngest brother (Gen. 48:14). In Colossians 1:15 Christ is called “firstborn” because he is superior or preeminent to all created things (cf. Rom. 8:29). Why? “Because by him all things were created …” (v. 16). If Jesus had been created, yet he created all created things, he would have created himself! Further, Paul goes on to say that Jesus is “the firstborn [prototokos] from the dead” (v. 18b), not that he is the first to have ever risen from the dead (cf. Matt. 11:5; John 11:44) but “that in all things He may have the preeminence” (v. 18c; cf. Rom. 6:9).

“Jesus is a created being, not God, because Revelation 3:14 refers to him as “the beginning of the creation by God” (New World Translation).” This verse is mistranslated in the NWT. The instrumental “by God” is not the original wording of the text, rather the genitive “of God.” The term translated “beginning” is the Greek word archē, meaning “origin” or “first cause.” This passage actually says that Christ was the moving cause of God’s creation, which parallels John 1:3 and Col. 1:16. In Rev. 21:6 God is described as “the beginning [archē] and the end.”

“John 1:1 should be translated, ‘the Word was a god.’ When the Greek word theos appears with a definite article (‘the’), it should be rendered ‘the God’ or ‘God.’ Since there is no indefinite article (‘a’) in Greek, in the absence of the definite article, theos should be translated ‘a god.’” This is not a legitimate rule for the use of the article in the Greek NT.² Of the 282 occurrences of the anarthrous theos (without the article), the New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is 94% unfaithful to their own rule. In the first chapter of John alone, theos appears five times without an article (vv. 1, 6, 12, 13, 18), yet the NWT translators render it “God” in every instance except in v. 1, where it clearly refers to Christ! Further, if the Bible teaches that there is only one God (Deut. 6:4) and if Jesus is “a god” (i.e. an additional one), the advocates of this view are advocating polytheism.³

“Jesus can’t be God or equal with God because he is inferior to God (John 14:28).” A fundamental error undergirding this and similar arguments is the false assumption that a subordinate role is equivalent to an inferior nature. All Christians have been directed to submit to one another (Gal. 5:13; Eph. 5:21; 1 Pet. 5:5) yet remain equal in essence or worth (Gal. 3:28). Despite this equality, however, different functions have been allocated to the various believers, e.g. wives submit to husbands (Eph. 5:22), members submit to leaders (Heb. 13:17), etc. There is a clear distinction between substance (equality) and function (subordination). The contrast within the Godhead is functional, not one of nature or essence. When the one we know as Jesus “became flesh,” he took on an inferior role and could thus say, for instance, “My Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). The word “greater” refers to position, whereas the word “better” would be applicable to nature (cf. Heb. 1:4). All passages dealing with Christ’s subordination (1 Cor. 11:3; etc.) refer to his role in the flesh but do not detract from his divine essence. Moreover, his temptations, visibility, subjection to death, etc., merely relate to his subordinate role that began when he took on human flesh. The descriptive expression, “the Son of God,” signifies both subordination (of position) and equality (of nature). See John 5:17-18; 10:17-33; etc.

“Jesus cannot be God because he referred to the Father as ‘the only true God’ (John 17:3).” This statement, like all other scriptural affirmations of divine exclusiveness, is in contrast to the false gods of polytheism and has nothing to do with Jesus allegedly denying anything about himself. If there is no Savior besides Almighty God (Isa. 43:11), would the deniers of Christ’s deity dismiss Jesus as Savior? (Eph. 5:23; Phil. 3:20; 2 Tim. 1:10; etc.). If Jesus is the “one Lord” (Eph. 4:4; Jude 4), does this mean the Father cannot be Lord? (Matt. 11:25; Luke 1:32; Acts 1:25; 2:20, 25, 39; 4:24). These exclusive statements merely eliminate those outside, not within, the Godhead.

Further Observations:

     Jesus is called “My Lord and my God” in John 20:28. The designations “Lord” and “God” are translated from the Greek words kurios and theos, and whenever these words are used together in the NT, they are equivalent to the Hebrew terms Yahweh (“Jehovah”) and elohim (“God”) (Mark 12:29-30; Luke 1:68; 10:27; Acts 3:22; cf. Ex. 20:7) and always refer to the Supreme Deity (Acts 2:39; 4:24; 7:37). Moreover, the designation “the Alpha and the Omega” is a clear reference to God that is equally applied to Jesus (Rev. 1:8, 17-18; 22:12-13, 16; cf. Isa. 44:6).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Arianism is the view that Jesus the Son was created by God the Father and is therefore inferior in essence to God the Father. Arius of Alexandria (ca. 250-336) is the first on record to have espoused and promoted this view (thus “Arianism”). In modern times a form of this doctrine is held by religious groups such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and various Unitarian sects.

     ² In the Greek NT, word order is used for emphasis and the article distinguishes the subject from the predicate nominative. The only legitimate rendering of kai theos ēn ho logos in John 1:1 is, “and the Word was God.” The emphatic position of theos stresses essence or quality, and the absence of the article avoids the conclusion that the Word is the Person of God [the Father]; the word order shows that the Word has all the divine attributes of God. If the order and/or employment of the article were different, ho logos ēn ho theos (“the Word was the God”) = Sabellianism (Jesus is the Father); or ho logos ēn theos (“the Word was a god”) = Arianism.
    ³ The typical Jehovah’s Witness response is to point out Jesus’ words in John 10:34-35, where human judges are called “gods.” But this is the Lord’s response to antagonistic unbelievers, in stark contrast to passages like 1:1 and 20:28. Jesus is quoting Psa. 82:6, where the plural elohim (Hebrew) and the corresponding plural theoi (Greek) essentially refers to “mighty ones.” Nowhere in the New Testament is the plural theoi ever applied to God the Father or Jesus Christ. Moreover, Jesus’ customary approach when responding to his enemies was indirect and ambiguous (cf. 8:3-9, 21-29; 9:39-41; 10:1-6, 24; 18:19-21, 33-34; 19:9; also Matt. 12:1-8; 13:10-15; 21:23-27). In John 10:30-39 Jesus does not deny their inference but simply quotes scripture to show their inconsistency; he does not give in to their devious request to “tell us plainly” (v. 24). Neither John 1:1-3, nor 20:28, nor comparable passages, equate to the dispute in John 10.

Related Posts: The Triune Godhead, Responding to Anti-Trinitarian Arguments, Deity of Christ

Image credit: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Cima_da_Conegliano,_God_the_Father.jpg