A belief of the Jehovah Witnesses?

[polonius]

Garbe, Detlef (2008). Between Resistance and Martyrdom: Jehovah's Witnesses in the Third Reich. University of Wisconsin Press. pp. 37, 38. ISBN 0-299-20794-3.

" In their opinion, only people who have accepted Jehovah and subsequently submit to his requirements will survive Armageddon and enter into the New World ... Jehovah's Witnesses also believe that a person confessing to worship God has to be associated with the true Christian denomination. Since they claim to be the only true religious denomination, they also claim to have the only means for salvation."

Is this a belief that all Jehovah Witnesses hold?

[Matthew S Islam]

Thanks for sharing.

have indeed thought through the belief that Jesus is God. In fact, I have studied it in depth. There are some 1000 verses that testify to the fact that Jesus is God, the Second Person of a Trinity. See here: 

https://irr.org/biblical-basis-of-doctrine-of-trinity

A natural reading of the Bible would not lead the unbiased reader to conclude the doctrine of the Trinity. The Hebrew Bible precedes the New Testament and it therefore provides the theological standard for the Jewish religion. No one would deny that the OT's central theme was to stress the theological importance of pure and simple monotheism.

Jesus was a Jewish Prophet and the stories in the New Testament are all taking place in a Jewish setting. Although I would agree that the New Testament contains passages/concepts which could be taken as inferring a highly exalted position for Christ, I honestly don't believe those passages are clear or consistent enough to justify the magnitude of the claim. In other words, if Jesus was God (2nd Person of the Trinity), then he should have proclaimed it in a manner so uneqivocal that future generations wouldn't even consider debating over it. The fact that his deity remains the most contraversial topic within Christianity 2000 years later proves that the proposition is false. It is inconceivable for someone familiar with the OT (let alone being its author) to conflict with its theological approach in the manner Christians are alleging Jesus of.

Trinitarian theology began in the first century and is evident throughout the New Testament and in the writings of the early church fathers. Here is a list of quotations attesting to this from the latter, including Ignatius (30-107 A.D.), Justin Martyr (110-165), Ireneaus (110-165), Clement of Alexandria (153-217), Tertullian (145-220), Origen (125-254), Dionysius (200-265), Cyprian (250-258), Novation (210-280), Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria (273-326) and Augustine (354-430). See here: 

https://apostles-creed.org/confessional ... gy/ear... 

I've skimmed through the link and didn't see any clear proof supporting the Trinity. From what I recall most scholars would agree that a number of Church fathers leaned towards the subordinatist view and not the doctrine of the Trinity. Just like the passages in the Bible it is important to contextualize them accurately in accordance to what the author most probably meant. If I'm not mistaken it was one of the Church fathers who coined the term Trinity, however some have argued that what he meant by it did not meet co-equal/co-eternal.

When heretics challenged the belief in the Trinity in the fourth century, the Church took the time to spell it out so that people would not be swayed by their teachings. But belief in it existed from the time of Christ's resurrection. 

Jesus HAD to be both God AND man to be able to provide salvation for us. We are all born with sin natures that we cannot change no matter how much we study the Bible, how many rules and rituals we follow, or how many good deeds we do. In the Old Testament, they sacrificed unblemished lambs (Ex. 12:5) to cover their sins. But an animal couldn't atone for the sins of humanity and those sacrifices had to be done over and over and over again. Only a human could atone for our sins, but that human had to be unblemished as the lamb was (1 Peter 1:19). In human terms, unblemished means free of sin. However, no human beings are free of sin. But Christ was because he wasn't just a man, he was God and, therefore, he was without sin (1 Peter 2:22; 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15). Christ's sacrifice was once and for all (Heb. 10:1-25). If Jesus had not been God Incarnate, he could not have provided salvation for us. 

This argument requires us to presuppose Pauline Christianity to be true and the New Testament as historically reliable. In any case, it is possible for the Messiah to have been rejected by his people and raised to heaven in a manner and for a purpose other than what you've mentioned, or he could have also been a false Messiah. Additionally, even if Jesus was literally sinless (infallible), this wouldn't definitively prove that he was God. It is possible for God to create a temporal being with lofty and unique qualities (even more so if he's the Messiah).

The main contributor to the theology of the cross/crucified Messiah was St. Paul. Although I do consider him as someone who overexagerated about Jesus in order to justify his unexpected departure, I don't believe Paul or any of the authors held Jesus to be completely equal with YHWH (neither in status nor being). Moreover, there were early Jewish-Christian sects who considered Paul to be an apostate/heretic and did not hold Jesus to be God.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

Not a JW here, but I think the misunderstanding (or obfuscation) is coming in under the word 'saved'.


1 - The WTS teaches that at the time of Armageddon (which the WTS teaches can occur any time now), all non-JW's who are alive on the earth (with some possible exceptions) will be killed. In order to survive Armageddon, one has to be a JW (in good standing). Again, with some possible exceptions.



2 - The WTS also teaches that everyone who has died before Armageddon occurs, will be resurrected. These ones get a second chance, so to speak, to live on the earth and not die.


The WTS teaching from when I did a bible study with them (more than a decade ago), was that the people who die at/during Armageddon do not get a resurrection (theirs is a permanent death).





Hope that makes it more clear.


Peace again to you!

Number one is not true. There are many who have not heard the Truth, and those people will not die at Armageddon. It is the heart condition that Jehovah looks at. People who don't have a clue about the Truth will have a chance to learn, during Christ's Millennial Rule.

Therefore those people - the people who have never heard 'the truth' - would be among the possible exceptions that I mentioned in number one. The articles that I quoted do not support this exception, but this is what most jws I have spoken to say they believe.




Peace again to you.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 58 by Overcomer]

Can you list a few of the verses that show that Jesus is God please? That would save a lot of time and energy on our part, seeing that it is you who have to prove your point.

And the early church fathers are not to be trusted from Justin Martyr on, as the great apostasy was setting in. This apostasy was foretold by Jesus, Paul, John and Peter.

Ignatius is presented as having TWO different variations of his writings. One variation is that he worded many things in a way that seem to show that he believed Jesus was God. In the other version he does not. So I have come to the conclusion that the EARLIEST church fathers (Polycarp, Clement and Ignatius) did not say anything about Jesus being God. Jesus' disciples certainly did not, either. It is only later that this line of thinking emerged.


.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 59 by Yahwehismywitness]

What is your point?


.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 61 by Matthew S]

I agree with your post, though your last sentence escapes my understanding. Could you elaborate on your comment about Paul?



.

[marco]

[Replying to post 31 by brunumb]

That is a true statement actually people met in homes in old testament and with current condition find that is still acceptable.

I can see why Atheists do not believe. Mammon has ruined them.

By that analysis mammon should then have prevented atheists from troubling with scientific discoveries. Incidentally, I would imagine that modern theorists never for a moment think of employing the word "mammon" any more than they would address a colleague as "thou".

[Matthew S Islam]

[Replying to post 61 by Matthew S]

I agree with your post, though your last sentence escapes my understanding. Could you elaborate on your comment about Paul?

Following the untimely crucifixion of the Messiah, the apostle Paul claimed to receive a vision and took on the initiative to preach the "Gospel of Jesus Christ". The "Gospel" he preached was supposedly Divine revelation and it seeked to fill the void in the absence of the Messiah.

Some New Testament scholars hold the view that the early Christians exagerrated/expanded on the stories of Jesus partially to strengthen the case of the crucified Messiah. Paul was the earliest author who was included in the New Testament and you could easily notice the difference between how he describes Jesus in comparison to the synoptics. The "development" could also be observed in how Paul uses the "Gospel of Jesus Christ" to promote lawlessness and contradict the worldly teachings of Christ and the actions of his Disciples.

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 61 by Matthew S]

I agree with your post, though your last sentence escapes my understanding. Could you elaborate on your comment about Paul?

Following the untimely crucifixion of the Messiah, the apostle Paul claimed to receive a vision and took on the initiative to preach the "Gospel of Jesus Christ". The "Gospel" he preached was supposedly Divine revelation and it seeked to fill the void in the absence of the Messiah.

Some New Testament scholars hold the view that the early Christians exagerrated/expanded on the stories of Jesus partially to strengthen the case of the crucified Messiah. Paul was the earliest author who was included in the New Testament and you could easily notice the difference between how he describes Jesus in comparison to the synoptics. The "development" could also be observed in how Paul uses the "Gospel of Jesus Christ" to promote lawlessness and contradict the worldly teachings of Christ and the actions of his Disciples.

Not so.

The crucifixion was not untimely but in God's time, first forecast in Genesis 3:15.

No, the Messiah was not absent, but right there to do all his Father had intended.

Furthermore, Paul did not "promote lawlessness and contradict the worldly teachings of Jesus Christ".

[tam]

Peace to you,

I was not asking about you. I was asking about the teachings of the WTBTS, especially in light of what is written (from them).

Jehovahs Witnesses teach the following

144 000: spirit anointed born again Christians

great crowd Armageddon survivors that acknowledge Jehovah and Jesus saved them

JW

And does the WTS (WatchTower Society) teach that non-jws today can be part of the 144 000 (without joining or supporting the JW religion)? Does the WTS teach that non-jws today can be part of the Great Crowd (without joining or supporting the JW religion)?


Peace again to you.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 69 by tam]

I've never read a statement saying that they cannot, have you?



JW