The 144,000 in JW theology

[Wootah]

My understanding only 144,000 JWs go to heaven in total over the sum of human history.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/q ... to-heaven/

Is that correct?

There are 9 million JWs worldwide (rounded up).

https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... w-many-jw/

Will the vast majority of them not go to heaven and be annihilated? What happens to the JWs that don't make the 144, 000?

[JehovahsWitness]

... the Jehovah's Witnesses recognize that the 144,000 are males:

Not literal males, no. Jehovahs Witnesses understand that presenting the 144,000 as men is merely a metaphor for resurrected spirit creatures (who are not characterised by biological sex) ie in reality they are neither male nor female but spirits .

"Jehovah's Witnesses understand Jesus’ words at John 3:3—"except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God"—to apply to the 144,000 who are "born again" as "anointed" sons of God in heaven" - Source:"Look to Jehovah for Comfort". The Watchtower: 10. November 1, 1996

In the Jehovah's Witnesses lexicon, the biblical term "sons of God" is not to a reference to biological sex but a metaphoric designation for all God's spirit adopted children (whether male or female).

...the word “sons” frequently serves a descriptive purpose, as: Orientals (literally, “sons of the East” [1Ki 4:30; Job 1:3, ftn]); “anointed ones” (literally, “sons of the oil” [Zec 4:14, ftn]); members (“sons”) of occupational classes, as, “sons of the prophets” (1Ki 20:35) or, “a member [“son”] of the ointment mixers” (Ne 3:8).... Angels, created by God, are sons of God. (Job 1:6; 38:7) ...Those whom God selects to be joint heirs with his Son Jesus Christ are called “God’s sons.”​—Ro 8:14-17.

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES believe both men and women are selected to be part of the group of 144,000 to rule from heaven.

Regarding the identity of those mentioned, Jesus is “the Son of man,” the King. Those referred to as “my brothers” are spirit-anointed men and women, who will rule with Christ from heaven. (Rom. 8:16, 17) - The Watchtower March 15, 2015 p. 26 par 7 ,

By looking at the following scriptures, you will see the names of a few of the men and women who will rule with Jesus in his Father’s Kingdom.​—Matthew 10:2-4; Mark 15:39-41; John 19:25.- The Watchtower December 1, 2010 p. 30

[Difflugia]

The author uses fornication (the only kind of sex that biblically defiles a person) as a metaphor for spiritual immorality.

Also, it is not true that the 144,000 are all men, and it isn't true that they were virgins in the sense that you are taking it. It is clear that those of the 144,000 in the first century included women.

Firstly, as explained the whole thing is a metaphor. Further , the reference to no "man" in verse 3a in Greek is just a general pronoun meaning no one (no person)''.

While I understand the theological desirability of that position, I find the insistence on reading the text that way to be bizarre, quite frankly. When one speaks or writes in what might be mistaken for metaphorical idiom, one explains the phrase in literal terms. That's exactly what the author of Revelation did. The author looks to me to be removing ambiguity and multiple meanings rather than capitalizing on it. There are many examples of metaphors in both Hebrew and Greek Testaments and while some are literal enough to divide theologians, I'm not aware of any with such parallelized literalism that are still treated as metaphorical. The most graphic one that I can think of is the weird rape/marriage/adultery imagery in Ezekiel 16, but even there, the author explicitly marks the metaphor multiple times ("The Lord Yahweh says to Jerusalem..." and "Your elder sister is Samaria...").

None of that is visible here, but the author is, instead, being as literal as possible. It's a list of attributes written in the unmistakably Hebrew style of poetic doublets.

These are those who were not defiled with women,

for they are virgins.

These are those who follow the Lamb wherever he goes.

These were redeemed by Jesus from among men,

the first fruits to God and to the Lamb.

In their mouth was found no lie,

for they are blameless.

This loosely parallels Revelation 21:8 in condemning the literal sins of sexual immorality, idolatry, unbelief, and dishonesty, which is a list that is also present in Paul's writings and the Synoptic Gospels. Between the syntax, Hebrew style, and mirroring descriptions that are elsewhere taken as literal by Christians, I find that it strains credulity to accept that these descriptions of virginity even may, let alone must be treated as metaphorical.

Regarding the use of ἀνθρώπων (anthropon), its general meaning of "mankind" or "humanity" is common, but it was also treated in Greek (much as in English) as an antonym of γυναικῶν (gynaikon), "women." Placing the two words in contrast was common enough in classical Greek that Liddell and Scott noted it in their Lexicon. The English word "men" is a perfect analog of the Greek. "Men" is (or used to be) often used to mean "people," but if it's placed in contrast with "women," that's no longer a common reading. If the passage is written that way in English, it still captures the way it would read to a Greek reader and shows the difficulty of justifying a generic meaning for anthropon:

These are those who were not defiled with women, for they are virgins. These are those who follow the Lamb wherever he goes. These were redeemed by Jesus from among men, the first fruits to God and to the Lamb.

As with any other literary conventions, it's always possible that the author didn't recognize the contrast between "women" and "men." Unfortunately, though, that once again puts you in the unenviable position of having to argue that a New Testament author is a particularly unskilled writer in order to maintain your favorite theological position.

[JehovahsWitness]

And from the Wikipedia article:

"The members of the Governing Body who exercise teaching authority over Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide claim to be among the anointed 144,000, and also consider themselves as a group to be the faithful and discreet slave of Matthew 24:45 and Luke 12:42."

This is true. How does that support your claim that JW s believe the 144,000 are all [literal] males?

[JehovahsWitness]

Regarding the use of ἀνθρώπων (anthropon), its general meaning of "mankind" or "humanity" is common, but it was also treated in Greek (much as in English) as an antonym of γυναικῶν (gynaikon), "women." Placing the two words in contrast was common enough in classical Greek that Liddell and Scott noted it in their Lexicon. The English word "men" is a perfect analog of the Greek. "Men" is (or used to be) often used to mean "people," but if it's placed in contrast with "women," that's no longer a common reading.

Granted but in 14:4b the writer does not contrast anthropon with women; rather it is pointed out that this group X were selected from among anthropon . In short, 144,000 "men" are a subgroup of a larger pool of selection. Obviously it is not saying they are "men" selected from women and while it possible that certain males were rejected, if only males were selected then the larger group of non-selected individuals obviously included both men and women. Thus the "non-elect" amounts to both men and women and humankind /mankind becomes a more logical reading. It amounts to the difference between ".. some fish selected from the marine life" rather " some fish selected from ... fish". Given that there are only fish in the selection, the non-selected group MUSTcontain all other marine life.

JW

[Tcg]

So? Your point?

The point is who else could be considered as defiling themselves with women other than men?

Of course if we are to pretend that this text is figurative rather than literal, one can produce any meaning they prefer. It's the magic of Biblical interpretation. This is figurative because we don't like the implications of it being taken literally.


Tcg

[Miles]

... the Jehovah's Witnesses recognize that the 144,000 are males:

Not literal males, no. Jehovahs Witnesses understand that presenting the 144,000 as men is merely a metaphor for resurrected spirit creatures (who are not characterised by biological sex) ie in reality they are neither male nor female but spirits .

Pretty neat ploy the JWs use here. When a concept doesn't agree with JW theology simply redefine it so it does.

"Jehovah's Witnesses understand Jesus’ words at John 3:3—"except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God"—to apply to the 144,000 who are "born again" as "anointed" sons of God in heaven" - Source:"Look to Jehovah for Comfort". The Watchtower: 10. November 1, 1996

In the Jehovah's Witnesses lexicon, the biblical term "sons of God" is not to a reference to biological sex but a metaphoric designation for all God's spirit adopted children (whether male or female).

And again the ploy is put into operation.

...the word “sons” frequently serves a descriptive purpose, as: Orientals (literally, “sons of the East” [1Ki 4:30; Job 1:3, ftn]); “anointed ones” (literally, “sons of the oil” [Zec 4:14, ftn]); members (“sons”) of occupational classes, as, “sons of the prophets” (1Ki 20:35) or, “a member [“son”] of the ointment mixers” (Ne 3:8).... Angels, created by God, are sons of God. (Job 1:6; 38:7) ...Those whom God selects to be joint heirs with his Son Jesus Christ are called “God’s sons.”​—Ro 8:14-17.

And not a thing in this Watchtower Online entry for "son" that in any way suggests it refers to anything other than a male.

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES believe both men and women are selected to be part of the group of 144,000 to rule from heaven.

Yes, I'm aware of what your claim is.

Regarding the identity of those mentioned, Jesus is “the Son of man,” the King. Those referred to as “my brothers” are spirit-anointed men and women, who will rule with Christ from heaven. (Rom. 8:16, 17) - The Watchtower March 15, 2015 p. 26 par 7 ,

But there isn't a thing about brothers or women in Rom. 8:16-17 in the NWT.

Rom. 8:16-17
16 The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit+ that we are God’s children.+ 17 If, then, we are children, we are also heirs—heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs+ with Christ—provided we suffer together+ so that we may also be glorified together.+

.

[JehovahsWitness]

Not literal males, no. Jehovahs Witnesses understand that presenting the 144,000 as men is merely a metaphor for resurrected spirit creatures (who are not characterised by biological sex) ie in reality they are neither male nor female but spirits .

Pretty neat ploy the JWs use here. When a concept doesn't agree with JW theology simply redefine it so it does.

However we came to our theology, the fact is this is our official belief. I am unconcerned whether you agree with them or not, but object your suggesting Jehovahs Witnesses believe something which we do not.

• Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe only men will be resurrected to heavenly life

• we do not believe the 144,000 are literal males.

• And when we refer to the spirit anointed "sons of God" or "C hrist's brothers" we (Jehovahs Witnesses) apply the designation to anyone (male or female) that has been anointed as a born again Christian.

the above points are not up for debate, they are facts.

[Miles]

And from the Wikipedia article:

"The members of the Governing Body who exercise teaching authority over Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide claim to be among the anointed 144,000, and also consider themselves as a group to be the faithful and discreet slave of Matthew 24:45 and Luke 12:42."

This is true. How does that support your claim that JW s believe the 144,000 are all [literal] males?

It doesn't. It merely points up the error that "presenting the 144,000 as men is merely a metaphor for resurrected spirit creatures," because members of the Governing Body claim to be among the anointed, and they're hardly "resurrected spirit creatures." Or is this one of their claims as well, that they are, in fact, resurrected spirit creatures?


.

[Tcg]

• Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe only men will be resurrected to heavenly life

• we do not believe the 144,000 are literal males.

• And when we refer to the amounted being adopted as "sons of God" we (Jehovahs Witnesses) apply the designation to anyone (male or female) that has been anointed as a born again Christian.

And yet scripture implies that they are unless you suggest they are lesbians. Another oddity in JW doctrine.


Tcg

[Miles]

Not literal males, no. Jehovahs Witnesses understand that presenting the 144,000 as men is merely a metaphor for resurrected spirit creatures (who are not characterised by biological sex) ie in reality they are neither male nor female but spirits .

Pretty neat ploy the JWs use here. When a concept doesn't agree with JW theology simply redefine it so it does.

However we came to our theology, the fact is this is our official belief. I am unconcerned whether you agree with them or not, but object your suggesting Jehovahs Witnesses believe something which we do not.

• Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe only men will be resurrected to heavenly life

• we do not believe the 144,000 are literal males.

• And when we refer to the spirit anointed "sons of God" or "C hrist's brothers" we (Jehovahs Witnesses) apply the designation to anyone (male or female) that has been anointed as a born again Christian.

the above points are not up for debate, they are facts.

Oh, I don't now doubt for a second that JWs wholeheartedly believe it all, but am disappointed (I know you don't care) at the lengths religions go to in constructing their "facts."



.