Are Jehovah's witnesses real Christians?

[Brakelite]

The same with John 12:49. Not much of a God who was sent, submits to the will of another person, only says what he’s told and even HOW to say it. As you point out, if Jesus were the all powerful Creator, it is odd that he cannot even chose who sits next to him. And he admits he is less than and knows less than another.

Acts 17:31 explicitly says God - not the Father - but God - in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature raised Jesus from the dead.

IMO, only someone totally indoctrinated could be exposed to such explicit text and conclude Jesus is God.

Humility and submission to His Father is therefore a fault?

 

[Brakelite]

See it is a fine line sir, we believe Jesus is Divine, but we believe satan is as well, where we likely differ is who is the Almighty God, the Supreme God, and that is Jehovah in our eyes sir.

Yes. That is a deep concern to me that those who reduce Christ's nature to being "divine" only, while not recognizing that His Sonship is the greatest evidence to His deity, are placing Christ on the same level as Satan and his angels.

 

[Robert Gwin]

The same with John 12:49. Not much of a God who was sent, submits to the will of another person, only says what he’s told and even HOW to say it. As you point out, if Jesus were the all powerful Creator, it is odd that he cannot even chose who sits next to him. And he admits he is less than and knows less than another.

Acts 17:31 explicitly says God - not the Father - but God - in his wholeness, in his unitarian nature raised Jesus from the dead.

IMO, only someone totally indoctrinated could be exposed to such explicit text and conclude Jesus is God.

We are definitely in agreement on this point Wrangler.

 

[Robert Gwin]

.
Continued From No.131

• John 1:1a . . In the beginning was the Word

The Greek translated "word" in that verse is logos (log'-os) which is
somewhat ambiguous. One of its meanings pertains to vocal expression; for
example:

• Gen 1:3 . . God said: Let there 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.

• 2Pet 3:5 . . By the word of God the heavens existed long ago, and the
earth was formed out of water and by water

• John 1:1b . . and the Word was God.

Now, the thing is: we pretty much have to spell the God in that verse with
upper case so that there's absolutely no mistaking whose speech we're
talking about. If someone wants to say that God's speech is a deity; okay,
but we cannot allow for God's own vocal expressions to be any less divine
than Himself.

NOTE: The Watchtower Society claims the Word is a celestial being named
Michael; which implies that whenever Jehovah speaks, an angel comes flying
out of His mouth.

According to John 1:14, God's spoken words took on the nature of human
life. How it's possible for God's spoken words to be anything other than His
vocalizations, I haven't a clue; but if God's spoken words can become
human, then there are no doubt many other things they could become
should God want them to: for example clouds, flames, winds, or even bolts
of lightning.

I haven't a clue how it is that God's spoken words constitute a divine being;
nevertheless, John 1:1-3 says the Word is exactly that. But we are not
talking about two divine beings in that passage; only one; and that's
because (to my knowledge) God has only one voice with which to speak His
words.

The Watch Tower Society alleges that the Logos (a.k.a. the Word) is a
celestial being named Michael the arch angel. Well; I seriously doubt that an
angel comes flying out of God's mouth whenever He says something. Also,
were God's voice to be an angel, that would mean that all the while that
Michael wasn't existing as an angel when he was in human form, God was
speechless.
_

Your translators felt the same way you do Weber, so they deliberately capitalized the God of Jn 1:1 and inconsistently translated it a god at Acts 28:6. Theos/theon without the definite article ho in front of it should not be capitalized. And your translators knew that sir, it was a deliberate manipulation.

Yes we believe Jesus is Michael, he was not called Jesus prior to coming to earth sir, and resumed his identity when he returned to heaven. Would you like some reasoning on Michael being Jesus?

 

[Robert Gwin]

Good Morning Robert, and how are you all? I believe there are "Two Ways of Life" as Jesus says,

Matthew Seven

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

But to answer your question I would say that the Bible identifies that Faith that was once delivered unto the Saints

• “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude One:3) Note the word “beloved.” Contending for truth and warning of error is a work of genuine Christian love.

Matthew Sixteen:24-26

Deny Yourself, Take Up Your Cross, And Follow Me. Some Here Will See Me In My Kingdom
24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wants to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and be following Me. 25 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it. But whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. 26 For what will a person be profited if he gains the whole world, but forfeits his life? Or what will a person give in-exchange-for his life?

Read full chapter

Love always, Walter

And again you b 100% correct. But of course there are many who would say they have done that and are on the road to life sir, so while that is true, it doesn't really narrow the field much. For instance those of the one faith will worship a particular God. Who is the God, that the one faith would worship and serve exclusively Walt? Mat 4:10

 

[Robert Gwin]

The truth of the cross in the Bible is not about worshiping the cross. I don’t know of any Protestant who bows down before the cross (Unless they are Catholic sympathizers and or they are buddying up with them). The idea is ignoring a truth in the Bible. All truth revealed by God to us by His Word matters. You can play the original languages game to avoid the truth all you like, but your ENGLISH translation should be perfect and without error if you guys really are for the truth. But your New World Translation says NAILS in his hand in John 20:25. Yet a picture at JW.org shows only ONE NAIL in his hands. So they are lying to you. This is flat out a lie to say one thing and contradict it by saying something else. While there are tons of things that should tell a person to run away from the JW religion, this one thing should be sufficient to make my argument even. Your organization is lying to you on this point. You are just biased to your group because you too deeply involved in it (Whereby you cannot see the forest from the trees). You will lose your JW friends if you accept the Bible for what it really says and if you will admit the truth that there are flaws or major errors in the JW religion.

At any rate cross is not in the Bible, and many have idolized it sir. Again the Bible does not say how many nails were used, and of course like your cross it is irrelevant anyway, it has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Yes, the word Jehovah is in the Bible and it does refer to GOD. But JW’s place an unnecessary emphasis upon this word when God has other names, as well. It was not until the JW religion was formed in the late 1800’s whereby they started to place an added emphasis on this particular name of GOD. Nowhere does the Bible teach that this is the only special name of God we should focus upon. English is not even a chosen language by GOD. So to say that the English rendering Jehovah is somehow the only special name for God means one is simply running in fantasy candy land. Show in the Bible where it says that the English name Jehovah was to be the future name GOD wanted us to use. While I do agree Jehovah is a correct rendering in the KJB (for an English translation), it does not mean that is how that word actually sounds or how it is pronounced in the original Hebrew (Old Testament) or in Greek (New Testament). The Bible does recognize the differences between one language and another. We see this in Revelation 16:16 (with the Greek Scriptures recognizing the original Hebrew word).

As for Jesus being called things like the firstborn son of all creation: Well, while this truth is true in Scripture, you cannot ignore those verses on His deity just because your cult does not like the idea about how Jesus is both GOD and man (Note: I have provided plenty of Scripture to show the truth of the Trinity and how Jesus is GOD here). Think. Your own religion has created their own bible to fit their theology. That’s a red flag right there. You guys used to use the KJB, and that was based on the TR manuscripts, which is totally different than the manuscripts you are using now (the Westcott and Hort text). But seeing you guys are Arian, you would naturally switch to those texts that fit that viewpoint. So your religion is not being consistent and or fair or unbiased. They switched to fit their theology. Of course you are blinded to this fact. Your JW religion has trained your mind that everyone else is lying and they are the only ones who are telling you the truth. But again… I already proved to you that they are lying to you with John 20:25 and their JW photo of him showing only one nail in his hands while John 20:25 in your own translation says NAILS in his hand. Again, your JW organization is lying to you by this. You have to be willing to face this fact. If not, you are only deceiving yourself.

God has only one name sir, Jehovah. Perhaps you might show another name for Him from the Bible?

 

[Robert Gwin]

Sure it does. I have the Bible in my house right now.
It has not disappeared.

I mean, are you saying that even your Bible does not exist?
Then why do you guys bother to even read and or study from it if it does not exist?
That makes no sene.



You do realize that JW’s used the KJB before your own false Bible came out that catered conveniently to your own pet theological beliefs.
So were Jehovah’s Witnesses in error for using the KJB for about a hundred years?



Look. The only reason…. You think this way is because your JW’s leaders are telling you this junk. You need to see that your organization is lying to you before you can see the truth of the Bible for what it says. Until then… you are only going to look at things like this through the lens of the Watch Tower instead of letting a normal Bible speak for itself. Right now you have a biased bible that caters to the extra biblical thoughts of the Watch Tower organization.

For example: What is the difference between your cult vs. say the Jim Jones cult?
What makes his cult any different than yours? How do you know you are not being deceived by the Watch Tower? Are you telling me that if the Watch Tower told people to commit suicide that they would not do it? I believe many of them would do that. They would just blindly trust them because they teach that what they are like the very words of GOD. This is why you cannot see.

Like you stated sir, you have a version of the Bible in your house. If you have the actual Bible, you

Sorry they are not- it requires belief in His physical resurrection. Teh Watchtowewr says spiritual, but Gods Word does not!

Jesus gave his flesh and blood in our behalf sir. You can say he took it back if you want, but I disagree. I do not agree with your watchtower sir.

 

[Robert Gwin]

So then you are like the mormons. Okay!

And as I have showed you many times- Jesus is called Yahweh.

You haven't and are unable to as that is not the case.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Sorry. You are not educating me on Bible facts here. I already mentioned the Biblia Hebraica before on the forums already (and how that is not a good text). I was referring to the New Testament portion of the Scriptures when I referred to Westcott and Hort text. Your New World Translation (New Testament) is based on the Westcott and Hort text (Whereby these men were into Catholicism). Your Old Testament is based on the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (is merely the 4th edition) started by Rudolf who was anti semitic and his son joined the Nazi party (with his son also being involved in the Bible). So you are still drinking from this well (Which is not good). Think slaughter of the Jews. Your Bible is drawing from a man who was anti-Semitic and his son was a Nazi.

The King James translators were god fearing men and the manuscripts they used was taken from men like Tyndale who was martyred by the Catholic Church for making an English translation. Big difference between my Bible and yours.

That is from our publications sir, I do not know personally where it came from but I have no reason to doubt them. Your Version of choice is severely altered, but you can find truth in it if you truly desired to.

 

[WalterandDebbie]

And again you b 100% correct. But of course there are many who would say they have done that and are on the road to life sir, so while that is true, it doesn't really narrow the field much. For instance those of the one faith will worship a particular God. Who is the God, that the one faith would worship and serve exclusively Walt? Mat 4:10

Good morning Robert, how are you all? Let me say this: Searching for the Name of God

There are actually seven places in the King James Bible where it actually has the name YEHOVAH with the Y changed to a J in the English Bible. In about the 14th. Century, the J was added as a I with a long tail. A long tail was added to differentiate the first I from the second I. When the printing press came along the long-tailed I was made a J and the King James Bible was one of the first books printed on the first printing press.

Exodus Six:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty (El Shaddai), but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them. It is in capital letters because the translation is from YHVH, but here the actual vowels are printed out that goes with the tetragrammaton YHVH (Yod-hay-vav-hay) translated into English-Yehovah.

Psalm Eighty Three:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Jehovah, art the most high over all the earth.

Isaiah Twelve:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.

Isiah Twenty Six:4 Trust ye in the Lord for ever: for in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength.

One Lord, One Faith, One God: The Exclusivity of Christianity (gty.org)

Love, Walter

 

[Bible Highlighter]

At any rate cross is not in the Bible, and many have idolized it sir.

The JW false religion used to believe that Jesus was on a cross.
According to JW's older books, they show pictures of Jesus on the cross.
You can look these images up on Google if you like. Start with the Harp of God.

1927 Picture of Christ on a cross. (Creation; 1927; 2,175,000 ed.; p. 265)

1927 Picture of Christ on a cross. (Creation; 1927; 2,175,000 ed.; p. 336)

1928 Picture of Christ on a cross. (The Harp of God; 1921; 1928 ed.; p. 113)

1929 Picture of Christ carrying a cross. (Life; 1929; 1,000,000 ed.; p. 198)

1929 "Jesus was crucified upon the cross; but it is a well-known fact that, contrary to the custom in respect to the victims of crucifixion, not one bone of his body was broken." (Life; 1929; 1,000,000 ed.; p. 216)​

So it looks like you guys were deceived for a very long time.
Therefore, you cannot be the one true followers of God.

Source:
Doctrinal Flip Flops of Jehovah's Witnesses!

Again the Bible does not say how many nails were used, and of course like your cross it is irrelevant anyway, it has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation.

It says right in your own English translation this fact. If you don't believe your own English translation and you favor the original manuscripts that you should not tell people to believe the English translation alone (Seeing it can deceive them with lies).

I already showed you that your JW religion LIED to you with a picture of Jesus having ONE NAIL in his hands and yet your own JW translation on John 20:25 says NAILS in his hands. But your excuse is that even your own English JW translation is not perfect and has errors in it? The translation on your JW website does not say to not trust this translation entirely or give you a warning to not believe it. Therefore, this is a lie if they do not put a disclaimer with a pop up window telling the reader that not all words in this Bible may reflect the originals. Think. They placed that translation on their website for people to believe in it. Are you saying that your JW organization is telling us to believe lies? That's what it sounds like to me.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Your translators felt the same way you do Weber, so they deliberately capitalized the God of Jn 1:1 and inconsistently translated it a god at Acts 28:6. Theos/theon without the definite article ho in front of it should not be capitalized. And your translators knew that sir, it was a deliberate manipulation.

Yes we believe Jesus is Michael, he was not called Jesus prior to coming to earth sir, and resumed his identity when he returned to heaven. Would you like some reasoning on Michael being Jesus?

Col 1:16, in talking about Jesus, says that "... All [other] things have been created through him and FOR HIM". If Jesus was Michael the Archangel at the time of creation, would an angel have created all things for himself? Isa 43:7 says God created "everyone ... for my OWN glory...".

If Jesus Christ is Michael the Archangel, how can Mt 25:31 say, "When the Son of man arrives in his glory, and ALL the angels with him, ...". Since "all the angels" would certainly include Michael the Archangel, is it possible that Jesus could return with himself?

Source:
Stumper questions Jehovah's Witnesses do not like to be asked!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

At any rate cross is not in the Bible, and many have idolized it sir. Again the Bible does not say how many nails were used, and of course like your cross it is irrelevant anyway, it has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation.

Your organization places their own words on the same level as Scripture. If your organization is lying to you then they have proven to not be God's true followers and therefore, you are following a destructive cult and that is a salvation issue. Look at the abuses of the JW religion online. People have left the Watch Tower because of the abuse by them. Granted, it is unfortunate many of them abandoned even the Bible, but the point here is that your JW religion is not as you are making it out to be. You can see testimonies of people who came out of the Watch Tower and read their stories of the abuse. That does not sound like the true followers of God to me if they abuse people. How do you discount this kind of thing? Do you just say they are all lying? Watch their testimonies on YouTube and or read about them online. Get the real facts and do not blindly follow your leaders who are lying to you.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 (WEB)
“Test all things, and hold firmly that which is good.”

 

[Bible Highlighter]

At any rate cross is not in the Bible, and many have idolized it sir. Again the Bible does not say how many nails were used, and of course like your cross it is irrelevant anyway, it has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation.

As I said to you before, Catholics idolize the cross.
This is not generally case with those who believe the Bible Alone as their final Word of authority and they seek to obey Jesus as a part of entering the Kingdom.

Idolizing the cross would be bowing down to a cross. In either case, you guys also used to believe in the cross, and so you are only criticizing your own selves. Think. You guys used to use the King James Bible that had the word “cross” in it. This is why you needed to create a new translation that fit your new pet doctrines that popped into your heads.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

God has only one name sir, Jehovah. Perhaps you might show another name for Him from the Bible?

There are many names of God found in the Bible and so this would not be a true statement.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Like you stated sir, you have a version of the Bible in your house. If you have the actual Bible, you

In the Bible: We can see a pattern of God preserving copies of His Word, and not the original autographs.

(a) Moses destroyed the original 10 Commandments on tablets of stone (the original autograph) (Exodus 32:19), and yet a copy was perfectly made to replace it (Exodus 34:1-4).​

(b) King Jehoiakim burns the scroll of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 36:22-23), but God had Jeremiah make another copy (Jeremiah 36:27-28).​

(c) Proverbs 25:1 says, “These are also proverbs of Solomon, which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied out.” (Proverbs 25:1).​

In the New Testament, Philip heard the Ethiopian eunuch read from a manuscript of Isaiah.

“And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?” (Acts of the Apostles 8:30).​

Although Scripture does not specifically say this was a copy of Isaiah, and not the original autograph of Isaiah, logic dictates that the most plausible explanation is that the Ethiopian eunuch had a copy of a manuscript of Isaiah (and not the original). For the odds of him just happening to have the original would seem highly unlikely.

Philip calls this copy of Isaiah he possessed as Scripture.

“Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.” (Acts of the Apostles 8:35).​

2 Timothy 3:16 says all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.
So the copy of this Scripture was inspired by God.

So the belief of “OAO (Original Autograph Only) Proponent” that says that we need to look to the original autograph because it is perfect, and the copies are flawed and full of errors is unbiblical. Believers in God's Word can trust that God has preserved a copy of His Word for us today that is perfect (Which would be consistent in the way God operates involving the preservation of His Word). This then leads us to conclude that there must be a perfect Bible that we can find today. Well... that is if you believe the Bible and not the teachings of men.

Jesus gave his flesh and blood in our behalf sir. You can say he took it back if you want, but I disagree. I do not agree with your watchtower sir.

I don't have a Watch Tower. You do. Your Watch Tower organization has shown to be liars ten times over. There are tons of ways you can find this out for yourself.

You believe that Jesus rose in a spiritual body. Yet, your JW bible on your own website says this:

Luke 24:39 (New World Translation)
“See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; touch me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones just as you see that I have.”

So are you going to say this bible does not exist? Are you telling people to not trust the JW translation? If so... I agree. It's a false translation. It’s a false bible.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That is from our publications sir, I do not know personally where it came from but I have no reason to doubt them. Your Version of choice is severely altered, but you can find truth in it if you truly desired to.

First, your blind trust in your organization is your downfall.
Many previous JW’s have found reason to doubt the JW organization and left them.
You do not research to see if your JW organization is potentially lying to you.

Second, you guys used to follow the King James Bible before you created your own translation that catered to your Pet Theologies. So if you criticize the King James Bible you are only criticizing your own organization because that was their chosen Bible that they used for a long time in history. This is why your blind trust in the JW organization has not allowed you to see any kind of reason.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Continued From No.213

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

REPLY: 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
not be 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
that spelling is agreeable with their version of his status; whereas regular
Christians prefer the upper case because that spelling is agreeable with their
version of the Word's status; whereas in reality, either spelling is acceptable.
_

 

[Brakelite]

God has only one name sir, Jehovah. Perhaps you might show another name for Him from the Bible?

KJV Exodus 34:5-7
5 And the LORD descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of the LORD.
6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.