Is the Jehovah Witness Religion a Christian Religion?

[polonius]

Do Jehovah Witnesses consider Jesus Christ to be God? If so, does it maintain that there are two divine persons? God and Jesus Christ?

Are both God and Jesus eternal and coequal?

[historia]

[T]here was always someone on Earth that believed as we do now. So we are not a "new" sect.

Who in late Antiquity believed as you do now? Who in the High Middle Ages?

[onewithhim]

I just read their book on the prophet Isaiah. I have NEVER IN MY LIFE seen so many things taken out of context to support ones ideas. Even taking a SINGLE WORD to bolster their opinion. Endless references that have nothing to do with their agendas. And the exclaimation
points are everywhere..

THEY EVEN PUT WORDS IN GOD'S MOUTH. WORDS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE GOD TALKING ABOUT THEM -THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES. AND THEY CLAIM THAT GOD GAINED PROMINANCE BECAUSE OF THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES. READ:

"Then on July 26, 1931 at a convention in Columbus Ohio, the societys president Joseph F Rutherford, presented a resolution entitled 'A New Name'. The words 'we desire to be known as and called by the name, to wit,Jehovah's witnesses' thrilled the conventioners, who approved the resolution with a resounding 'Aye!' Since then Jehovahs name has gained worldwide prominance. Jehovah cares for those who bear his name honorably, viewing them as "THE PUPIL OF HIS EYE."

Your average Christian is misled. But Jehovah's Witnesses I have recently learned are the biggest fools. Talk about gullible. Seriously.

Why their organization is what propelled Jesus to the throne. And jesus wasnt on the throne until 1914 i believe they said. Oh my God are they fools. God talks of the promises made to Israel so in order to hijack that they invented a way for God to be talkibg about them. Yes, they are the 'Israel of God" ISRAEL OF GOD. Wowwwww.... Israel of God. Yep the Jews are out because they rejected Jesus. And they are the heirs!! And they call the Jews selfish and greedy. Drunks and idol worshipers. And who dont obey God. That takes some nerve. They were looking into a mirror when they wrote that. They are lawless man worshippers. And as for alcohol they should go check statistics. Selfish and greedy? Fine words from a bunch of liare

Yeah, they are the Israel of God. Rolling my eyes.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/12CUAkMK4tA3W6VY6
[/url]

First of all, I commend you for actually reading one of our books. Could you please show specific examples of things that are "taken out of context?"

You make accusations that are very depricating to Jehovah's Witnesses, but don't get into details about WHY they feel they are now the "Israel of God." For instance, why did Israel reject Jesus, and why has the Christian congregation taken up the position of God's "people for a special possession?" The Apostle Peter identified the Christian congregation as the "chosen race, a royal priesthood." (I Peter 2:9,10) You are not only denouncing Jehovah's Witnesses but also any faith path that respects Peter as a well-qualified Christian. He must've had good reason to say such a thing.

What are the "references that have nothing to do with their agendas?" That's not clear.
The fact that God's name gained prominence because of JWs is very plain and really cannot be disputed. The Jews prohibited God's name to be pronounced or used in any way for centuries before Jesus and for another 2,000 years now, because of an unscriptural law that no one should utter His name...because it would be taking His name in vain. How silly. Just speaking His name is certainly not "taking it in vain." In fact, YHWH stated quite clearly to Moses that His name should be known and used throughout the generations.

"God said further to Moses, 'Thus shall you speak to the Israelites: "The LORD [YHWH], the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you: This shall be my name forever, this is my appellation [name] for all eternity."'" (Exodus 3:15, Tanakh/The Holy Scriptures [The new JPS translation according to the traditional Hebrew text) In the footnote in this Bible it says that God's name is YHWH, but is not pronounced because of tradition. So why go with "tradition" rather than God's own instructions?

Other Bible translations include the divine name rather than "Lord." Just one example is The Living Bible:

"Tell them, 'JEHOVAH, the God of your ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is my eternal name, to be used throughout all generations."

It doesn't matter if it is pronounced "Jehovah," "Yahweh," or another way according to one's own language, as long as it is honored and used. Having said all that, couldn't it be said that Jehovah's Witnesses have definitely used the name of God, and made it more prominent, whereas other religions, including yours, have stopped doing that for centuries? Please state why that is not true.

You are right about JWs' position that Jesus gained his throne in 1914. As a knowledgeable Jew, I would think you would know the prophecies in Daniel whereby people can know exactly when the Messiah would arrive (Daniel 9:24-27) and when God's own Kingdom would once again be involved in mankind's affairs (Daniel 4:20-25), signifying when Jehovah would begin to rule again through His Messianic King.

JWs get all of their beliefs from the Hebrew Scriptures, and.....do we take them more seriously than you do? I'm just asking. Surely you remember that God said that physical Israel was His special possession and "heirs" to the Kingdom as long as Israel was faithful to Him and obeyed His commands. Is that not so? There was a definite caveat involved there. And Jehovah lived up to His end of the bargain. Israel did not. It is plain, throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, that Israel disobeyed, that she honored other gods, burned their children in fires as sacrifices to pagan gods, treated each other with contempt, fraud, mercilessness, and bloodshed. Shall I list Scriptures to that effect? Or do you already know of them? If you do, why do you get so upset because Jehovah took away His blessings from Israel rejected her?

"'Therefore as surely as I am alive,' declares the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, 'because it was my sanctuary that you defiled with all your disgusting idols and with all your detestable practices, I will also reject you.'" (Ezekiel 5:11)


I hope I am wrong that you will not take into consideration my points and Jehovah's pronouncements, like King Jehoiakim who burned the scroll that contained the words of Jehovah in a fire (Jeremiah 36:22-24).

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 27 by marco]

How is anyone a polytheist when they believe what the Bible itself says about the existence of "gods?" Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that there is another god equal to the Most High, Jehovah. Therefore, we are not polytheists. Didn't Jesus himself say that the scripture calls MEN "gods?" (John 10:34-36) It simply means a powerful, important individual, whether an angel, a judge, a governor, or the Son OF God.

Please be careful when contradicting Scripture. Sometimes folks can get a bit too flippant in their manners.

[tigger2]

[Replying to post 27 by marco]

God and gods

I believe majority of modern Bible scholars (most of them trinitarian, of course) recognize that men and angels who have been entrusted with representing God are sometimes called "god" [elohim - Hebrew, and theos - Greek] in the scriptures! This understanding is also found in the writings of Christians up to the 2nd century A.D.

The NIV Study Bible, Zondervan, 1985, clearly recognizes the above truth:

"In the language of the OT ... rulers and judges, as deputies of the heavenly King, could be given the honorific title 'god' .... " - footnote for Ps. 82:1.

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, tells us:

"The reason why judges are called 'gods' in Ps. 82 is that they have the office of administering God's judgment as 'sons of the Most High'. In context of the Ps[alm] the men in question have failed to do this.... On the other hand, Jesus fulfilled the role of a true judge as a 'god' and 'son of the Most High'." - Vol. 3, p. 187.

The respected (trinitarian) W. E. Vine tells us:

"The word [theos, 'god' or 'God'] is used of Divinely appointed judges in Israel, as representing God in His authority, John 10:34" - p. 491, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words.

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible , Abingdon, 1974 printing,
"430. [elohim]. el-o-heem'; plural of 433; gods in the ordinary sense; but spec. used (in the plur. thus, esp. with the art.) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, ... x (very) great, judges, x mighty." - p. 12, "Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary."

The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, 1979, Hendrickson, p. 43:

Elohim: "a. rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power.... b. divine ones, superhuman beings including God and angels.... c. angels Ps. 97:7 ..."

The New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., 1970, says in a footnote for Ps. 8:6 -
"The angels: in Hebrew, elohim, which is the ordinary word for 'God' or 'the gods'; hence the ancient versions generally understood the term as referring to heavenly spirits [angels]."

Some of these trinitarian sources which admit that the Bible actually describes men who represent God (judges, Israelite kings, etc.) and God's angels as gods include:

1. Young's Analytical Concordance of the Bible, "Hints and Helps...," Eerdmans, 1978 reprint;
2. Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, #430, Hebrew and Chaldee Dict., Abingdon, 1974;
3. New Bible Dictionary, p. 1133, Tyndale House Publ., 1984;
4. Today's Dictionary of the Bible, p. 208, Bethany House Publ., 1982;
5. Hastings' A Dictionary of the Bible, p. 217, Vol. 2;
6. The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-English Lexicon, p. 43, Hendrickson publ.,1979;
7. Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, #2316 (4.), Thayer, Baker Book House, 1984 printing;
8. The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, p. 132, Vol. 1; and p. 1265, Vol. 2, Eerdmans, 1984;
9. The NIV Study Bible, footnotes for Ps. 45:6; Ps. 82:1, 6; and Jn 10:34; Zondervan, 1985;
10. New American Bible, St. Joseph ed., footnote for Ps. 45:7, 1970 ed.;
11. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, Vol. 5, pp. 188-189;
12. William G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 1, pp. 317, 324, Nelson Publ., 1980 printing;
13. Murray J. Harris, Jesus As God, p. 202, Baker Book House, 1992;
14. William Barclay, The Gospel of John, V. 2, Daily Study Bible Series, pp. 77, 78, Westminster Press,1975;
15. The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible (John 10:34 and Ps. 82:6);
16. The Fourfold Gospel (Note for John 10:35);
17. Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Jamieson, Fausset, Brown (John 10:34-36);
18. Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:6-8 and John 10:35);
19. John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible (Ps. 82:1).
20. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament ('Little Kittel'), - p. 328, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985.
21. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, pp. 794-795, Vol. 1, Eerdmans Publishing Co.
22. The Amplified Bible, Ps. 82:1, 6 and John 10:34, 35, Zondervan Publ., 1965.
23. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, John 10:34, 35.
24. B. W. Johnson's People's New Testament, John 10:34-36.
25. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986, Vol. 3, p. 187.
26. Fairbairn’s Imperial Standard Bible Encyclopedia, p. 24, vol. III, Zondervan, 1957 reprint.
27. Theological Dictionary, Rahner and Vorgrimler, p. 20, Herder and Herder, 1965.
28. Pastor Jon Courson, The Gospel According to John.
29. Vincent’s New Testament Word Studies, John 10:36.
30. C. J. Ellicott, John 10:34, Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(Also John 10:34, 35 - CEV: TEV; GodsWord; The Message; NLT; NIRV)


And, the respected and popular Jewish writer, Philo, had the same understanding for "God"/"a god" about the same time the NT was written.

And the earliest Christians like the highly respected NT scholar Origen and others - - including Tertullian; Justin Martyr; Hippolytus; Clement of Alexandria; Theophilus; the writer of "The Epistle to Diognetus"; and even super-Trinitarians St. Athanasius and St. Augustine - - also had this understanding for "a god." And, as we saw above, many respected NT scholars of this century agree.

[marco]

[Replying to post 27 by marco]

How is anyone a polytheist when they believe what the Bible itself says about the existence of "gods?" Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that there is another god equal to the Most High, Jehovah. Therefore, we are not polytheists. Didn't Jesus himself say that the scripture calls MEN "gods?" (John 10:34-36) It simply means a powerful, important individual, whether an angel, a judge, a governor, or the Son OF God.

Please be careful when contradicting Scripture. Sometimes folks can get a bit too flippant in their manners.

Jesus facetiously quoted Psalm 82 to escape a stoning for blasphemy. He opted to use the term "god" to mean a special human. If Jehovah's Witnesses decide that angels and many humans are gods then you join the world of Greek mythology where there were many deities. By deciding Jehovah is your chief deity, while respecting other god-beings like Jesus, you are not monotheistic. You cannot have it both ways - create a swarm of deities and you destroy monotheism. In fact this belief would be worse than simply having a Trinity made of a single God - at least that dogma tries to preserve monotheism. I am surprised to learn Jehovah's Witnesses regard Jesus as a deity, albeit of minor status.

[marco]

[Replying to post 33 by tigger2]

I am aware that in common parlance a person can be called a god, perhaps for his handsome looks. This is a metaphor. When the psalmist sings that men are very gods, he is being metaphorical, attributing power and beauty to mere mortals who, he says, will nonetheless die, for they are not immortal deities.

When someone says X is a deity, without metaphorical meaning, then we are dealing with what is commonly understood as a god, a heavenly being. It would seem Jehovah's Witnesses, in recognising the deity of Jesus, are just placing him on a lower scale from Jehovah, while recognising he is nonetheless a god. Because they do not wish to overturn the unique position Jehovah holds, it seems they simply write god instead of God, reserving the capital for Jehovah. That allows them to sleep, but it does not allow them to believe they are monotheists. They assuredly are not.

[onewithhim]

Yes we believe Jesus is a diety ( a god), just not the diety that is Almighty God.

Goodbye to monotheism, then. Jesus is a deity, but not the important one. There is a skill in taking words and hammering them into a meaning that suits us. I suppose there's a case for saying we are all daffodils. The psalmist sings: "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Quite!

However if we are just taking god to mean Elvis was a god to his fans then we aren't saying very much.

Though it is interesting to see how people argue about definitions there is also in observing what they say a certain sadness. Cardinal Newman thought universities would inform. Of course I don't know whether Jehovah's Witnesses restrict people from taking certain university courses but I think a diet of Scripture isn't the best food for the brain.

Well, according to the Bible, God's Word is the most important food for the brain.

"The law of Jehovah is perfect, restoring strength. The reminder of Jehovah is trustworthy, making the inexperienced one wise. The orders from Jehovah are righteous, causing the heart to rejoice....The judgments of Jehovah are true, altogether righteous. They are more desirable than gold, and sweeter than honey. By them your servant has been warned; in keeping them there is a large reward." (Psalm 19:7-11)


JWs are not prohibited from taking college courses. We are reminded of the coming collapse of the old system of things, which the Bible outlines for us, and the importance of putting our efforts into preaching about the Kingdom throughout all of our communities (Matt.24:14). There is nothing nefarious about our outlook on college. Indeed, if some choose to go, that is their decision. No one should judge. Many go to, for example, learn a language, or up-grade their knowledge concerning their area of expertise. There are reasons to go, and reasons not to, depending on a person's own life course.

If you would like to brow-beat JWs because they teach that it isn't wise to rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, go ahead, but it's really not fair....they are just taking the Bible seriously. Is that wrong?

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus ... quoted Psalm 82 ...He opted to use the term "god" to mean a special human.

JOHN 10:34-36

Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods�’? If he called ‘gods’+ those against* whom the word of God came—and yet the scripture cannot be nullified— do you say to me* whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?

The Jehovahs Witness position is that Jesus knew what he was talking about. You are correct, he quoted Psalms 82 and said it was a term that was applied to humans, indeed the Hebrew term "EL" (god) means "powerful one", and as a Hebrew Jesus arguably knew this. Indeed the Pharisees(who were apt to contradictJesus at every given opportunity) did not attempt to suggest he had misapplied that scripture. (see below)

PSALMS 82

2 “How long will you continue to judge with injustice+

And show partiality to the wicked?(Selah)

3 Defend* the lowly and the fatherless.

Render justice to the helpless and destitute.+

4 Rescue the lowly and the poor;

Save them out of the hand of the wicked.�

5 They do not know, nor do they understand;+

They are walking about in darkness;

All the foundations of the earth are being shaken.+

6 “I have said, ‘You are gods,

All of you are sons of the Most High.

7 But you will die just as men do

We hold if an argument is good enough for the Son of God, it's good enough for us. We will take the biblical view that one is only a "polytheist" if one WORSHIPS anyone or anything but the One True and living God the Father (YHWH). And we will hold this view regardless of what Catholic dogma (or greek theological classification) suggest that makes us. In short whatever it is we are charged with, we share the space with Christ, and that's just fine with us!



JW

Are Jehovahs Witnesses monotheists?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 664#867664

Monotheism and John 1:1 (onewithim)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 160#824160

Is it academically sound to say the Hebrew EL can also apply to humans or angels? (tigger) [this thread]
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 106#996106

[onewithhim]

I put in parentheses that Jesus spoke about the overpowering, if you will, of true Christianity by false Christians, in Matthew chapter 13.

The term "false Christian" presumably means that when Christian A disagrees with Christian B, then A calls B a false Christian. I cannot see that Jesus would recognise Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans, Jehovah's Witnesses, Adventists or whatever else as expressing what he expressed. They all follow bits and pieces, it would seem, but if they pay attention to Matthew (Jesus said watch out for false reporters!) I don't think they will be following Christ.

The false Christians overtook the true Christians and prevailed as stronger than the true sons "until the harvest."

But Jesus said that the gates of hell would NOT prevail against his Church, which is the verse the RC Church maintains gives her authority. If you say that some other has indeed prevailed then that means Jesus was wrong. Can that be?

To be straightforward, the Catholic Church is NOT Jesus' church. So your argument falls flat. The RCC has taken that verse for themselves, but does that make it so? Pope Benedict said that the popes replaced Christ. Because he said it, does that make it so?

Jesus' statement makes it clear to us that true Christ-followers, few though they may have been, were always somewhere, throughout the centuries. Jesus' true church never was completely choked out. This church will be totally revealed at "the harvest"-time that Jesus spoke about in his parable.


.

[onewithhim]

[T]here was always someone on Earth that believed as we do now. So we are not a "new" sect.

Who in late Antiquity believed as you do now? Who in the High Middle Ages?

I believe that Sir Isaac Newton is very possibly one of the persons that believed as we do. He wrote a lot of stuff on the subject of religion. He did not believe in the Trinity.