Jehovah Witnesses

Rev. Chuck Taber

Contents

The Name of God

Basic Theological Beliefs About Jesus

Trinity

John 1:1

Colossians 1:15ff

Hebrews 1:5–8

Philippians 2:6ff

Review

Why is the deity of Jesus so important?

How do the Jehovah Witnesses Study Scripture?  

Example 1:  The Nature of Christ

Example 2:  Leviticus 17:10-11 and Blood Transfusions

Did Jesus die on a Torture Stake or a Cross?

Was there a Spiritual or Physical Resurrection?

Who are the 144,000?

Apocalyptic Language

Revelation 7:2ff

Revelation 14:1ff

Revelation 21:1ff

Footnotes

"Jehovah" is technically called the tetragrammaton, that is, the four-letter name of God, %&%*, which is transliterated, without the vowels, in German as "JHVH" and in English as "YHWH." Originally Hebrew did not have vowel points in the manuscript, but in order to unify the pronunciation and translation, they were added to the text later. The Jews believed, and continue to believe, that the tetragrammaton was the essential name of God, and was too holy to be uttered except by the High Priest while in the Holy of Holies during the Day of Atonement.³ Thus they added vowel points to remind the reader of another word to substitute for the divine name. The substituted word most often used was "Lord." If we combine the vowels for Adonay, *1$!, "Lord" and use the Germanic transliteration of the consonants, we get "Jehovah."⁴ but if we combine the vowels for "the Name" Ha-Shem, along with the English transliteration of the consonants we get "Yahweh."

Although the proper pronunciation of the divine name is long lost, scholars believe that "Yah," from which we get "hallelujah," "let all praise Yah/Jah" is a shortened form of YHWH. If so then the pronunciation for the first syllable would be "Yah". We also have evidence from Theodoret of Cyrus (fourth Century A.D.) that the Samaritans pronounced the word "hiabe, and

Clement of Alexandria (early third century A.D.) transliterated the "name of the four letters" as hiaoue. Moreover Egyptian Magic Papyri from the end of the third century A.D. attests to the patristic spelling . . . Following these hints, modern scholars believe the approximate pronunciation was "Yahweh."⁵ 

Although there is nothing wrong with using "Jehovah" to translate the tetragrammaton, we need to remember that it is a composite word, a made up word, arbitrarily combining vowels and consonants with its German pronunciation, to form the word. We do not know how the word was originally pronounced, and thus it is wrong to say "Jehovah" is the true proper name for God.

Jehovah Witnesses (JWs) ridicule the Jews for being superstitious and refusing to use the "proper" name of God. In direct contrast, the JWs claim they have "restored" the proper name of God and go out of their way to use it. In their New World Translation of the Bible, they ignore the Jewish and the Christian traditions of substituting "the Lord" for "YHWH," by consistently translating it as "Jehovah." If they did that only for the OT, we would consider it a mere peculiarity, but they often use "Jehovah" for the Greek word for "lord," kurios, even when there is no direct OT quotation. The Greek translation of the OT, the Septuagint (LXX), as well as the Greek NT, primarily used kurios, "lord" in translating the divine name. Nowhere in the Greek NT does "Jehovah" appear in the text, so anywhere we read "Jehovah" in the JWs’ translation, The New World Translation  ⁶    (NWT), it has been inserted.

Whether reading in Hebrew or Greek, Jews regularly read "Lord," for the divine name, not "Jehovah." When the Hebrew was translated into Greek to form the Septuagint (LXX), they used kurios, which can refer to one of four relationships. It can be a general polite address to a male, and translated in such incidences as "sir" (cf. Mt 13:27; 21:30; Jn 4:11). It can refer to a slave and owner relationship, one’s master. It can refer to an man of a higher rank — an officer or a king — one to whom allegiance is due; and since our highest allegiance is to God, kurios can also refer to God.

There are some overlapping between these relationships and often some ambiguity in the use of kurios. For example, when the gospel writers quote John the Baptists reference to Isaiah 40:3, "Make straight the way of the Lord," they are not only reminding readers of the action of Jehovah within history, but also that Jesus himself is "lord." John the Baptist is not preparing the people around for him for the direct arrival and ministry of Jehovah. He is preparing the way for the reception of Jesus (Mt 3:3; Lk 3:2). This is especially clear in John 1:23, where the context is people questioning whether John the Baptist is "the Christ" (1:20 & 25). The NWT obscures this connection between Jesus and Jehovah by having John the Baptist say, "Prepare the way of Jehovah."

Christians readers may be surprised that, according to the NWT, Christ does not deliver us from the veil that keeps people from responding to the gospel in 2 Corinthians 3:16f. Nor is it Christ that we model our service after and to whom we seek to glorify in Ephesians 6:7f and Colossians 3:23f.

Spreading the word "of the Lord"

Christians will also be shocked to read that the early church’s missionary enterprise was not to spread the word of Christ, but rather the word of Jehovah:

Again, a careful reading of the context will demonstrate that the Apostles went around proclaiming the good news of salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. It was the message of the death, resurrection and new life as granted in Jesus that spread to the Jews first and then to the whole world. Even the NWT cannot hide this.

Right before his ascension, Jesus tells the disciples, ". . . you will be witnesses of me . . ." (Acts 1:8, NWT).

"Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins . . . (Acts 2:38, NWT).

". . . let it be know to all of you . . . that in the name of Jesus Christ the Nasarene . . . by this one does this man stand here sound in front of you . . . Furthermore, there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is not another name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved" (Acts 4:11f, NWT).

The Sanhedrin forbade Peter and John "to make any utterance or to teach upon the basis of the name of Jesus" (Acts 4:18).

". . . Philip . . . was declaring the good news of the kingdom of God and of the name of Jesus Christ . . ." (Acts 8:12).

Paul and Barnabas were selected to be missionaries because they had "delivered up their souls for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 15:26).

Jewish exorcists were greatly humiliated by evil spirits by trying to cast out demons by calling upon "the name of the Lord Jesus," "saying by Jesus whom Paul preaches" (Acts 19:13, NWT). "This became known to all, both the Jews and the Greeks that dwelt in Ephesus; and a fear fell upon them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus went on being magnified" (Acts 19:17, NWT, emphasis mine).

Paul prays "that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you . . ." (2 Thess 1:12, NWT).

Paul exhorts the Corinthian Church not to go back to their old pagan ways because they "have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God" (1 Corinthians 6:11, NWT).

Likewise he instructed, ". . . whatever it is that you do in word or work, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus . . . ." (Colossians 3:17, NWT).

Some Questions for Reflection

In light of the above, what name should believers go around and publish? Should they encourage the over use of the composite word "Jehovah"? Or should they go around proclaiming, exemplifying, and encouraging the name of Jesus?

Finally, why do JW explicitly deny what Jesus has explicitly commanded. When the disciples asked them how to pray, Jesus did not tell them to address God with his proper divine name of Jehovah, but he said, "You must pray, then, this way: ‘Our Father in the heavens . . ." (Matthew 6:9, NWT). Paul presses the intimacy we are to have with God by saying we can address God, through the Holy Spirit, as "Abba" (Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6 cf. Mark 14:36). "Abba" is Aramaic for "Daddy," signifying a loving, all-caring, forgiving, gentle and patient Father who relates to us as His little children, not as a stern judgmental Patriarch.

When my children were little, they recognized that others called me "Chuck," and they wanted to call me that as well. But I explained that they had a very unique relationship with me that all my friends and workmates did not have. I was their daddy, and they were my children. No one else could call me that, just the two of them. Thus to properly express our relationship and love, they should call me "Daddy." Without any fuss or relapse, they continued to do so. Why would they ever want to call me "Mr. Charles Rhett Taber Jr"?

So then, since God is our Abba, our Heavenly Daddy, why would we want to use a formal name of God?

They have a twofold understanding of "salvation:" people who believe in Jesus and do good works, will be resurrected and live on the new earth, and exceptional people of faith, who number exactly 144,000, will live in heaven. Note very carefully, according to JWs, the 144,000 have already been determined. All current JWs are not looking to a "new birth," or to live with God "in heaven." They are working for a much lower status: eternal life, under the rule of God, but apart from intimate presence of God, living in the new paradise.

Although they have many other aberrant beliefs and distortions, the central problem stems around their understanding of the Trinity and Jesus Christ. Their view of Jesus is central and it is this area that we need to concentrate, now in our study, and also when we witness to the Witnesses.

The JWs have a caricature of the Trinity and routinely misrepresent it. The Trinity affirms that there is one, and only one, Being who is God, who exists as Father, Son and Spirit. Christians are monotheists, not tri-theists. The Second Helvetic Confession, a confession of faith for the protestant church in Switzerland, written in 1566, says,

. . . there are not three gods, but three persons, consubstantial, coeternal, and coequal; distinct with respect to hypostases [personifications; distinct individual beings; persons], and with respect to order, the one preceding the other yet without any inequality. For according to the nature or essence they are so joined together that they are one God, and the divine nature is common to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

In other words, the Father, Son and Spirit are three distinct separate persons within the godhead, that is, from all of eternity, there were and continue to be three fully-formed, coherent personalities that interact with, relate to, are in concert with, and equal to one another. The "what" of God is One, and the "who" of God is three. Since the oneness and three-ness are referring to two different aspects of God, they are not contradictory, and even though we cannot fully comprehend it, we can apprehend it. God remains unique, mysterious and beyond our complete comprehension (Isaiah 55:8f; Job 37:5).

There are more than four texts that shows the deity of Jesus, but four are crucial and easy to remember: John 1:1, Colossians 1:15ff, and Hebrews 1:8, and Philippians 2. Although the text can be understood in our English translations, because JWs make much to do over their understanding of Greek, this paper will make ample reference to it. It is recommended though that if you are arguing Scripture with a JW, either use an interlinear NT or a translation you both can trust. JWs used The King James Version prior to the NWT, so that should be acceptable. You do not need to know Greek to understand the texts, but I include Greek to answer JWs objections.

There are many verses we can examine to see that Jesus was not only perceived by his enemies as making himself out to be equal to God (John 5:18), but that Jesus himself and the early Church taught that Jesus was divine. The first verse we will look at is John 1:1, which I have translated and given a transliteration of the Greek below:¹⁰

In the beginning was the Word        and the Word   was with    God              and the Word was God

En       arxâ          ân    ho logos         kai ho logos    ân    pros ton theon       kai theos         ân    ho logos

The third sentence is supposedly the controversial one. The JWs point out that the definite article (ho) does not come before the word God (theos), and thus should be translated as an indefinite noun, and thus translates the verse, "In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." They believe Jesus was"a god" but not "The God" — a demigod, someone who was similar to God, had some of the qualities of God, but was not God and was never to be viewed as God.

It is true that an article before a noun makes it definite, but it is not true that the lack of an article automatically makes it indefinite. Nouns without the article often are translated as a definite noun,¹¹ which even the NWT, recognizes. A few examples from the Gospel of John, where the definite article is absent, yet refers to Jehovah. proves the point:

1:6    "sent from God"                          (para theou);

1:12  "children of God"                        (tekna theou);

1:13  "born . . . from God"                   (ek theou);

1:18  "no one has seen God"                (Theon oudeis eoraken);

3:2    "have come from God"                (apo theon);

3:21  "worked in God"                         (en theo);

6:45  "taught by God"                           (didakoti theou);

9:33  "from God"                                  (para theou);

10:33 "make yourself out to be God"    (seauton theon).

It is helpful to recognize what John did not write. He did not write, "logos ân hos theos," which could be translated "God was a word." He did not write, "Ho logos ân theos," which would have been more naturally translated as "The Word was a god;" but even in this case, it would presuppose that John believed in the existence of more than one god. Neither did he write, "Ho logos ân theios (note the "i", a Greek diminutive) which would be translated "The Word was divine," that is, had qualities or functions that are common to God.¹²  

Finally, note John did not write, ho logos ân ho theos, nor ho theos ân ho logos, which would mean there is a direct one-to-one correspondence and equivalency between the Word and God, without distinction. Because of this last possibility that John did not write, many commentators and translators do not like to translate the sentence as "The Word was God," but rather, "What God was, the Word was" as in The New English Bible. In other word, John is telling us that the Word’s essential nature is God, but the Word does not fully and completely comprehend and exhaust the nature and being of God. God is more than what the Word is. God the Father and God the Son are not identical. They are distinct.¹³    

F. F. Bruce’s comment on this sentence in John 1:1 is instructive:

What is meant is that the Word shared the nature and being of God, or (to use a piece of modern jargon) was an extension of the personality of God. The NEB paraphrase "what God was, the Word was," brings out the meaning of the clause as successfully as a paraphrase can. John intends that the whole of his gospel shall be read in the light of this verse. The deeds and words of Jesus are the deeds and words of God; if this be not true, the book is blasphemous.¹⁴

Now let us turn to the second passage, Colossians 1:15–20:

"He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross (emphases added).

Eikon, the word for "image," encompasses similarity, representation and also manifestation. It is the essential embodiment, the exact counterpart, of something or some one, which also mediates the presence of that it represents (2 Cor 4:4; Heb 10:1). It is in contrast to "shadow" or a "reflection," that gives a distorted and changing representation. An eikon always has a similar "likeness" (homoiosis), but not every "likeness" is an eikon. A likeness can be distorted, depict something that is not real, and does not mediate another’s presence; whereas eikon is a perfect representation.¹⁵  Although God is invisible (Col 1:15; 1 Tim 1:17), God has condescended to have Jesus stand in His place, embodying, illuminating, and mediating his presence. To be with Jesus is to be with God. To see Jesus is to see God in the flesh. Compare Heb 1:3, "He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature;" and Jn 14:9, "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father."

Notice how "image" fits with "fullness" (pleroma). In the LXX, "fullness" refers to everything related to a subject; for example, "the earth and its fullness" (Ps 24:1), and "the sea and its fullness" (Ps 96:11; 98:7). It also uses the term to refer to the fact that God, or His glory, fills the whole earth (Jer 23:24; Ps 72:19). To make his point clear, Paul uses both "all" and "fullness" to describe Jesus here.¹⁶ Everything that has to do with God dwelt in Jesus, thus Paul later writes, "For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Col 2:9).¹⁷ 

The term "firstborn" (prototokos) literally means the first person born. Cults have seized upon this term to say that Jesus was the first in chronological order in God’s creation. Mormons teach Jesus was literally the first person born to the Mother and Father gods, and JWs say Jesus was the very first thing God created, and thus add the word "other" in their translation of the verse. "All [others] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist . . . (Col 1:16–17, NWT).

But Scripture does not keep to a strict denotative definition for this word. It does not always mean the first person born. It is also used to point to the prerogatives, status, and rank that was associated with a firstborn male in the Jewish society. In Psalm 89:27, firstborn is used of King David being the most exalted king of the earth. In Exodus 4:22, God calls the nation of Israel "his firstborn," even though Israel was not the first nation that was formed on the earth, nor the first group to have a covenant with God. Also even though Manasseh was literally the firstborn son of Joseph (Gen 48:8ff), Jeremiah 31:9 says "Ephraim" is the firstborn. "Firstborn" can mean, and does mean in this context, preeminent, standing superior to, above and distinct from others.

Jesus is uniquely superior to and above all creation, because all creation came to existence by him, for him and are sustained and continue to have their existence by being related "in him." Jesus created all things. There was nothing that was created that was not created by Jesus. Note very carefully the implication of this. There are created things, and non-created things. In the Biblical world view, the only non-created thing that exist is God. Thus we are back to our point. Jesus is the second person of the Trinity. In Jesus "all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell."

The author of the Book of Hebrews is out to prove that Jesus is superior to angels, to Moses and to the Law, and thus convince believers to stay within Christianity and not apostatize by going back to Judaism. The first chapter demonstrates Jesus is superior to the angels, and thus destroys the idea that Jesus was Michael the archangel.

In verse five, the author says no angel was ever called God’s son, but Jesus was. Then verse six says that not only is Jesus called God’s son, but he is considered the firstborn, and commands the angels to worship him.¹⁸ God the Father commands his angels to worship Jesus! This in spite of the fact that God commands worship only to be directed at him, and him alone (Deut 5:7–9), and that God is a jealous God (Ex 34:14; Deut 4:24).

In verse six, it is noted that God calls angels servants, but God the Father calls Jesus "God."

"But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.’" Again, apart from the Trinity, this verse doesn’t make sense. The Father speaks to the Son and recognizes his divinity.

Those who do not accept Jesus’ divinity, point out that Jesus did not act like God. He needed to sleep and eat. He got tired. How Jesus can be both God and Man and why he did not exhibit all the power and majesty of God can be found in Philippians 2:6ff: "though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men" (ESV, emphasis added).

First note that the text says Jesus was "in the form (morph‘) of God," and then took "the form (morph‘) of a servant." Our definition of "form" must fit both cases: Jesus being God and being servant. Morph‘ in classical Greek was "the way in which a thing, being what it is in itself, appears to our senses."¹⁹ Jesus came to serve, not himself, but others (Mt 20:28; Mk 10:45). He was obedient to the Father, always remained "humble" and died the death reserved for the worst criminals and for slaves. His life on earth was the epitome of servanthood. He expressed himself as a servant. After coming to earth, his essential identity and self-expression was as a servant. Thus to parallel the same idea of "being in the form of a servant," and to maintain the contrast ("but"), "being in the form of God" means that Jesus’ essential identity and self-expression, before coming to earth, was as God.

This understanding of "form" is confirmed by the next phrase. It is precisely because Jesus was "in possession of all the characteristics and qualities belonging to God,"²⁰ that "he did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped." Note how "equality" confirms our understanding of "being in the form of God."

The word "grasped" (harpagmos) occurs only here in the NT, and translators used to think it meant "to snatch at something as a prize," usually by illicit means. But recent research has demonstrated that it is synonymous with a more frequent word harpagma, which means "to use something for one’s own advantage."²¹ Thus the NRSV translates, "did not regard equality of God as something to be exploited."

Instead of using his equality with God as something for his own advantage, he "emptied (kenoÇ) himself." Classic theology questions exactly what Jesus lost in his incarnation. What did he give up? But it is better not to take the verb so literally. In the other four occurrences of the word in the NT (Rom 4:14; 1 Cor 1:17; 9:15; 2 Cor 9:3), it is used metaphorically meaning "to nullify," or "to make of no account." Also note that the participle in verse six, "being in the form of God" is in the present active tense, meaning Jesus continued to be in the form of God. He was and continues to exist in such a state. He therefore lost nothing of his divinity. Thus we should take "emptied" (kenoÇ) metaphorically here as well.

How he "made himself nothing" is expressed by the immediate following participles: taking the form of a servant; being born like men; and "being discovered and recognized as a human."²² In other words, instead of exploiting his equality with God, Jesus expended himself for our benefit. He did not overwhelm and scare us by manifesting his full glory, but limited it for our sake. He condescended to leave all the grandeur, status and power of heaven to live among us, like us, and then to die for our sins. He became poor, that we might become rich (2 Cor 8:9); he laid down his life for us (1 Jn 3:16).

Peter T O’Brien has some penetrating questions for us to consider about this connection of "equal to God" and "giving up": "How could Christ refuse to exploit equality with God if he never possessed it? How could he posses it without an eternal existence? And why would Paul speak of Christ ‘being found in appearance as a man’ if he never existed as anything but a man?"²³ 

The passage continues on. Because Jesus did not take advantage of being equal to God, "God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

What is the most exalted name that was given to Christ by God? The context is clear that the "name" is "Lord": "every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord" (v. 11). Technically "lord" is a title, not a name, but by saying it a name, the text is proclaiming Jesus true nature. Not only has Jesus acquired the status of a lord, the supreme leader, but that he himself is Lord. Jesus has been given the name "Lord," the very same name that had been in use for Jehovah, and Jesus has been exalted, not to a position higher than what he was in heaven but higher than what had previously been recognized by people on earth. Jesus is now recognized and called Lord over all.

This interpretation is confirmed by Paul’s use of Isaiah 45:22ff: Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.. . . To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance. Only in the Lord, it shall be said of me, are righteousness and strength . . . . Clearly Paul wants us to recognize Jesus is the Lord that is spoken of in the LXX, that Jesus is Lord of the universe, that Jesus is Jehovah.

In other words, Philippians 2:6ff reveals not only that Jesus has been and continues to exist "in the form of God," and was "equal to God," but that he is also "Lord," the very same "Lord" of the Septuagint (LXX), that is Jehovah. Thus all cognitive beings who are able to express worship, either in heaven or on earth, are to worship Jesus, and this to the glory, praise and enjoyment of God. God the Father, Jehovah, is pleased when people directly worship Jesus. Note very carefully, the text says people are to worship Jesus directly, not that God the Father is to be worshiped through Jesus, as if Jesus becomes an appropriate and sanctioned idol for God the Father. And as we have said for Hebrews 1, this in full recognition of, and in contrast to, the character and description of God in the OT. The only "logical" explanation of how God the Father demands to be worship alone and directly while at the same encouraging the worship of Jesus is the formulation of the Christian Church in the Trinity.

Let me conclude with Romans 10:9ff:

if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame" [Isa 28:16, LXX]. For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved [Joel 2:32, LXX].²⁴  

Again note how Paul takes an OT quote, and with the usage of "Lord" links it to Jesus, thus indicating that Jesus has taken the place of Jehovah. We have come full circle. Jesus is the "Lord," the kurios of the Septuagint, that is, Jesus is Jehovah God. By his name all are saved. We must question then, whose name should we exalt, proclaim and be known as belonging to? To Jehovah? Or to the Lord Jesus Christ? We are not to be witnesses of Jehovah, but rather, witnesses of Jesus as the Christ, our Savior, and Lord.

1. How many times does the word "Jehovah" appear in the NT? (None.)

2. Give three or four possible references to the Greek word kurios, usually translated as "lord." ("Sir", as in a polite address; "Master," as in a slave to his owner; "Captain," as a soldier to his superior, and "God," as in the One Whom we owe our highest allegiance.)

3. When you read "Lord" in the NT, as it is alluding to or quoting an OT text, about what are you supposed to think? (That the word "Lord" was usually the word used for "Jehovah"/"Yahweh" in the Septuagint, and that whereas it applied to God Almighty in the OT, it may very well be used in the NT to refer directly to Jesus Christ. Thus giving an indication for the deity of Jesus.)

4. Give three major texts that show’s the deity of Jesus, just the book and chapter.

(John 1:1; Col 1:15ff; Hebrews 1:5ff; Philippians 2:6ff; and Col 2:9.)

 

Only as God does Jesus’ death give a sufficient basis for salvation. Only as both God and man can Jesus cleanse us from all sin and guilt, not only for our inherited sinful nature, but also from our willful sinful deeds. As a human, Jesus understands and represents humanity. His death as a sinless man was a sacrifice made on our behalf. His death was the death we deserved before God. As God, his sacrifice was of eternal and infinite value, capable of cleansing us from all sin for all eternity. Hebrews 10:19 says, "For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified."

But the Mormons and the JWs, believe Jesus was less than the second person of the Trinity, and therefore his death only atoned for Adam’s imputed guilt. We have to do good works to make up for our own guilt. Thus for them, salvation is a combination of both grace and good works, and can never give assurance of eternal life with God. The question will always remain with them whether or not they have done enough good works to please God and to make themselves acceptable to live on the new earth.

In contrast, Christianity teaches that it is not what we do for God that matters, but rather what God has done for us. It is not our attempts at reaching God, but rather, grabbing hold of and trusting in what Jesus has done on our behalf. Christianity is not a religion that demands "Do!", but rather one that proclaims the good news that all things are "done!" "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast" (Ephesians 2:8–9).

Closely associated with having assurance of salvation is having confidence before God. What Jesus does is what God does; what Jesus affirms, God affirms; what Jesus says, God says. If Jesus was not God in the flesh, then God the Father could say, "Well, it is very good that Jesus’ loves you, but I don’t. Jesus is lenient and gracious, but I’m harsh, stern, demanding and judgmental. Therefore you must depart from me and die." But we know that to know the Son is to know the Father (John 14:8ff; Mt 11:27), and thus we have confidence to stand at the day of judgment, as 1 John 4:15–17 says, "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world."

This brings us to the third point. Because we have been created in the image of God, humans have a built in need to know God and have a loving relationship with God. Our hearts are not satisfied, we remain restless, until we rest in God. People will do almost anything to have an experience beyond themselves with the hope of touching the mystery of God. They will study other religions and attempt a host of esoteric, ascetic and occult practices to gain other revelations and to experience the divine. But we have no need. Through Jesus, we have complete knowledge. In Jesus "all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form," Paul writes in Colossians 2:9, but then immediately goes on to write, "and in Him you have been made complete."²⁵ In Ephesians 3:19, Paul prays that we might know "the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God,"²⁶ and then a little later he writes that the gifts of various leaders in the church have been given to us so that each one of us might become mature "to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ" (4:13). Knowing God is as simple as knowing Jesus. Through Jesus, the Bible and the Church, we have all we need to get the full picture of God and to fully experience God.

Now that we have given a short review and considered a couple points why the deity of Jesus matters to us, let us look at a couple other things about the Jehovah Witnesses. We will look first at their method of Bible study, then at their claim that Jesus did not die on a cross, but rather on a "torture stake." Second, we will investigate their claim that Jesus was not resurrected with a physical body, but solely with a spiritual body; and third, their claim that only the 144,000 will live for all eternity with God in heaven.

JWs normally study the Bible, either in groups or by themselves, with study materials, looking up verses in order to answer prepackaged questions or fill-in-the-blanks study sheets. In other words, they do not struggle with the text to understand what the original author meant and why he wrote what he wrote, and how it applies to us today. Instead, they look solely on the surface meaning, in order to answer the question at hand. They don’t realize that the material they are using is biased, that the questions are misleading, and that the verses are being pulled out of context. Thus students are not learning what the Bible teaches, but are being indoctrinated into the Watchtower organization’s system of thought.

Let me give you two examples. These examples do not come from printed material of the JWs, but are based upon various conversations I have had with different JWs.

Example 1:  The Nature of Christ:

  What is Jesus Christ? The power of God and the __________ of God.

1 Corinthians 1:24 

  When did God create wisdom?  At the _______________ of his ways.

Proverbs 8:22–23 

 When, therefore, did God create Jesus? At the _______________ of his ways.

  In other words, Jesus is God’s _____________ , the first thing God created.

Colossians 1:15 

Answers: wisdom; beginning; beginning; firstborn   

Now look at the second example which is focused upon Leviticus 17:10–11.

Example 2:  Leviticus 17:10-11:

  Food gives nourishment, and sustains life, but not every kind of food is sanctioned by God.

  What food is forbidden to the people of God in this text? The eating of ___________.

  What will happen to a person who ignores this commandment?

  They will be eternally ______________.

  Why does God make this commandment?

  Because blood sustains the ______ of the animal, and is thus sacred, and because blood was used for

    _______________, like the blood of Jesus, and thus is sacred.

  Because of this, therefore, blood transfusions are ___________. Even though they may sustain our life

   momentarily, it will lead us into eternal damnation, and must be avoided at all cost.

Answers: blood; condemned; life; atonement; forbidden.    

Not only is the reader being misled by this series of fill-in-the-blank questions and answers, the conclusion puts the reader and their children in jeopardy of losing their lives in the event of a disease or accident that requires an operation. It also does not take into account that Jesus has made all food clean. Jesus says in Mark 7:18b–19, "‘Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him, since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?’ (Thus he declared all foods clean.)" Cf. Acts 10:9–16, "What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy" (NASB, 1995 Update).

Even though forbidding blood transfusions has no theological or medical basis, JWs will vehemently oppose it. This demonstrates that their real authority, the basis of their decisions, is not the Bible, but rather the Watchtower Society. They believe what they have been taught, not because they have carefully studied and reasoned it, but because they have been indoctrinated into believing it by fill-in-the-blank, simple question and answer format literature from the

Watchtower Society, which takes verses out of contexts and makes them directly and naively apply to biased leading questions.

Because they are used to this kind of Bible study method, we should not be afraid to actually study the Bible with JWs, but we do not want to get into following their line of reasoning and begin looking up scripture after scripture, and have the conclusion of an argument fed to us. Instead, it is important to stick to a passage and study it in context, verse by verse, and not import verses into the conversation in order to change the plain meaning of the text. To be an effective witness to a JW, we must get them off their planned approaches, and get them to look at scripture in a different way. As questions that require careful observation and reflection from the text, and don’t let them quickly change the subject or the text being studied.

What does the Bible indicate? Does it indicate the crux simplex, crucifixion on a single vertical stake, or the crux compacta, crucifixion on a cross?

Matthew 27:37 says, "And over his head they put the charge against him, which read, ‘This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.’" If Jesus was crucified only on a stake, then the tutilus, the sign specifying the charge against the criminal, would have been over his hands, not his head.

Finally, also note the prophecy of Peter’s eventual martyrdom in John 21:18–19: "‘You used to dress yourself and walk wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will dress you and carry you where you do not want to go.’ (This he said to show by what kind of death he was to glorify God.)" Although Jesus’ prophecy to Peter does not demonstrate exactly how Jesus himself was crucified, it does demonstrate that the crux compacta was used during Jesus’ day.

(1) the Alexamenos graffiti depicts the Christian God on a cross, pictured as a man with a donkey’s head, with the inscription "Alexamenos worships [his] god.." It was found in Rome, in an old guard room, inscribed in plaster, and dates between ad 68–202 .³⁰

(2) The sign of the cross was carved into a headstone in a first century catacomb.³¹

(3) The Epistle of Barnabas (X.8). written ca. ad 70–131, says the cross was like the Greek letter Tau.

(4) Ireneaus’ writes in Against the Heresies (II.24.4), written ca. AD 180, that Jesus’ cross had five ends, "two longitudinal, two latitudinal, and a fifth to support the weight of the victim."³²

In conclusion, then, there is insufficient evidence to give up the established tradition that Jesus died on a cross, the crux compacta. The NWT’s of stauros as "torture stake" is misleading and is another attempt to distinguish JW from Christians and to make Christians look misinformed.

To sustain their argument, the JWs have to ignore the clear understanding that the word "resurrection" had in the ancient world, as well as discount the clear resurrection appearances of Jesus in the gospels. In The Resurrection of the Son of God,³⁴ N. T. Wright exhaustively shows that for Jewish and Gentile world, at least through the first century, the word "resurrection" did not refer to life after death, nor to an idea or ideal teaching of a person continuing on after the person’s death. Instead, resurrection always referred to a physical bodily life after life after death. It was the common assumption that people lived as a spiritual being after they died. After all, this was the philosophy of Plato and much of the ancient religions: to escape physical life, to break out of the confiding bounds of the human body, and soar in the heavens as a pure spiritual being. In contrast, resurrection was regaining a physical body to live on a physical earth, after having died, and after having lived as a spiritual being. Romans and Greeks, therefore, thought the whole idea of resurrection was abhorrent or ridiculous. Who wants to return to the physical, corrupt world of the flesh, once they have escaped?³⁵  

In contrast, most Jews believed in a physical resurrection, but they thought it would occur only at the end of all space/time existence. Thus Jewish audiences thought the proclamation that Jesus was resurrected apart from everybody else was ridiculous. When the resurrection occurs, they thought, everybody will be resurrected, the good and the bad (Daniel 12:2).

The common ethos shared by the Romans, Greeks and Jews disdained the resurrection of Jesus. This explains why the disciples were so reluctant to believe Jesus had indeed been raised from the dead. In Luke 24:36ff, when Jesus appeared to the disciples, they thought they were seeing a ghost, and were frightened. So Jesus said,

"Why are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; touch Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have." And when He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. While they still could not believe it because of their joy and amazement, He said to them, "Have you anything here to eat?"  They gave Him a piece of a broiled fish; and He took it and ate it before them. (NASB, 1995 Update).

JWs will try to ignore the plain meaning of the text, by calling attention to 1 Corinthians 15:50, "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." Thus they argue Jesus couldn’t have had a physical body. But here again, they are comparing two different contexts and points. In Luke the contrast is between a physical body and a mere spiritual being, a ghost. In 1 Corinthians 15, the great resurrection chapter, the contrast is between the natural body that we all now have and the coming resurrected body that we will have. There is a great change that will occur in our bodies, when we gain our new physical, resurrected bodies. The contrast is between what we now have, our normal everyday flesh and blood bodies, which will die, with what we will have, bodies completely animated, filled and empowered by the Holy Spirit, which will never die. This contrast is clearly spelled out in the very next phrase in 1 Corinthians 15:50, "the perishable" does not "inherit the imperishable."

Another text that clearly indicates that Jesus had a physical body, and did not come back solely as a spiritual being, is John 20:19ff, where Jesus suddenly appears in a locked room, breathes upon the disciples, and says, "Receive the Holy Spirit." But Thomas wasn’t there, and when he was told about the incident, declares he will never believe unless he can actually see and feel the wounds of the crucifixion upon Jesus. Eight days later, again when the doors were shut, Jesus suddenly

came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you." Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands;

and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe." Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"

(Jn 20:26-28).

Does John say Jesus passed through the door, as if he was a ghost? No. Nowhere does it say Jesus passed through the door, it just says the door was shut and Jesus nevertheless suddenly appeared to them. A physical body does not pass through doors, so how then could Jesus’ physical resurrected body done so? Since we live after the time of Star Trek, we can envision being "materialized" into a room, and I think this is a valid analogy. The realm of God is not a physical location "above" the earth, "up in the sky, by and by." It is a completely different dimension of existence. So Jesus left the spiritual realm of God and came directly in the earthly realm where the disciples were gathered in prayer. No law of nature was broken. We do not have to postulate a ubiquitous body of Jesus, nor a body that is only spiritual, that is, a ghost.

Because Thomas was able to see and touch Jesus, he believes and confesses his faith by proclaiming Jesus is his Lord and his God. This is not a exclamation of praise or astonishment, as if Thomas was taking God’s name in vain, but rather a firm conviction of faith. Jesus does not put down Thomas’ new found faith, but acknowledges it, and pronounces a blessing on those who do not need similar evidence. "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (20:29, NIV).

Before we look at exactly what Revelation says about the 144,000, I want to first give a general statement about apocalyptic language, and then exactly what Revelation 7 and 14 says about the 144,000. Because of time, I will speak in more detail about the first reference and less so in the second. At the end we will note how the future promise of Revelation, not only contradicts what the JW’s believe, but also issues a call for salvation and encouragement that we all need to heed.

Outside of the prologue, epilogue and letters to the seven churches, I interpret the other verses in the Book of Revelation as apocalyptic language, that is, exaggerated, symbolic language warning readers and the hearers of an approaching calamity, that will shortly occur within their own history, that will be so terrible that it could be described as the end of the world as they know it, and which will remind them of the eventual End of the World. The language points a black and white picture between good and evil, and warns people of the drastic consequences that will befall them if they forsake God, as well as encourages them with the coming blessings if they remain faithful. Thus the visions are to be interpreted more like political cartoons than historical chronicles. Symbolic images give overall impressions and purposefully evoke feelings and reactions within us. The images are not supposed to be taken in a simplistic and literal one-to-one correspondence from symbol to reality, as if there really will be a dragon and scorpion locusts. We need to get behind the images to discover the OT allusions that explain the language and the images. The symbolic images of Revelation must be understood from the background of the OT.

In Revelation 7:2ff, we have the first mention of the 144,000, where we read that they were "sealed," as "the servants of God" (7:3). Throughout Revelation "the servants of God" applies to all believers (1:1; 2:20; 6:11; 10:7; 11:18; 19:2, 5, 10; 22:3, 6, 9), not to a specific subgroup within Christianity.

Then we read they came from different tribes of Israel, but this list does not conform to any other lists of the tribes of Israel. It is reminiscent of Ezekiel 48 which lists the tribes of Israel at the end times around the new temple of God, but it begins with Dan, whereas Revelation does not mention Dan, and the tribe of Joseph is included along with his son Manasseh, but not his other son Ephraim. If John wanted to convey to his reader that the 144,00 were from the natural tribes of Israel, he would have followed the list from Genesis, and if he wanted to convey that this was the eschatological new Israel, at the end times, he would have been expected to follow the list from Ezekiel. But he doe neither. This list, then, does not give a natural division of people, but rather points to something greater.

The numbers in this text can be interpreted symbolically. The number "twelve" reminds us of the twelve tribes of Israel, and also the twelve apostles. The number "thousand" is the largest numeric unit in the Bible, and may reference, not a literal number, but an innumerable group, a "myriad." Thus Scriptures says God owns the cattle "on a thousand hills" (Ps 50:10) meaning, not only a thousand specific hills, but all animals everywhere. Similarly, the phrase "a thousand generations" means "forever" (1 Chronicles 16:15; Psalm 105:8), and Job says that one could not win an argument with God once "in a thousand times" (19:3). Job does not mean to say that on the thousand and first time, one could win an argument against God, but rather, we have no hope of ever winning an argument with God. The word "thousand" therefore can mean "innumerable" or "forever."

The vision immediately following the 144,000, in Revelation 7.9f, has John seeing "a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, ‘Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!’" Earlier in Revelation 5:5–6, John was told to stop weeping and to look at the Lion of Judah, but when he turns he sees the Lamb that was standing even though it has been slain. The Lion and the Lamb is the same entity, Jesus Christ, but seen from two different vantage points and metaphors. Likewise here John is first told about the 144,00 and then sees the great multitude. The same group being described from two different perspectives. First as a specific group of people, closely associated with the Jewish religion, which at the time of John, possibly could have been counted. Second the very same groups is then seen from God’s perspective, at the end of time, as a universal innumerable group, coming from all areas of the world.

With these things in mind, we can easily interpret the number 144,000 as a symbolic number pointing to the complete people of God.

Identifying the 144,000 as the whole people of God also fits with the next reference about the 144,000 in Revelation 14:1ff. Here the 144,000 are described as those who have the names of Jesus and God the Father written on their foreheads (14:1), that is, they are identified as people who are owned by Jesus and the Father and who think and act accordingly. Thus they know the song of redemption (14:3), have been purchased from the earth (14:3), have stayed married to God and not gone after other religions, or in the words of the text "they have not been defiled with women" (14:4 cf. Ezekiel 23; Hos 1–2; 4:11-19; Jer 3:1; 23:10-15; Malachi 2:11; 2 Corinthians 11:2). The text also says they "follow the Lamb wherever he goes" (14:4), are the "firstfruits" (14:4), that is, the first thing redeemed from the cosmos, and as such promises the redemption and renewal of all of creation. It is " not an anticipation of more people to be redeemed."³⁷ In short, the 144,000 are "blameless" (14:5).

In summary, therefore, the 144,000 are not a special class of Christians, but a reference to all true believers of God.

Admonitions and encouragement of Revelation 21:1ff

One final note regarding the JW’s understanding of the 144,000. Remember they believe the 144,000 are in heaven, whereas the rest of the redeemed are on the new earth, living under the protection and rule of God, but not living in direct relationship with God. But this contradicts Revelation 21:1ff, where we read:

. . . I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God."

If the 144,000 are in "heaven," not on the new earth, then they will be separated from God, not be with God, because God’s home will be on the new earth with his people. "God himself will be with them as their God" (21:3).

Everyone who wants to be among the true people of God, living on the renewed earth, living in the very presence of God the Father, must do as the Book of Revelation encourages. Revelation 21:6f says, "To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment. The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son." Those who overcome and conquer are those who believe in Jesus, as 1 John 5:4–5 tells us: ". . . this is the victory that has overcome the world — our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?"

Likewise Revelation 22:14 encourages, "Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and that they may enter the city by the gates." Earlier in Revelation 7:14, we learned that the "great multitude," the 144,000, were those who "have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." In other words, "to wash our robes" means to confess our sins and trust in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the sole and complete basis for our salvation and sanctification. It is to have saving faith in Jesus (cf. 1 Peter 1:18; Hebrews 9:14; 10:22; 1 John 1:6–9; John 15:3; Isaiah 1:18). In other words, if a JW renounces his trust in the Watchtower Society and relies fully and wholly upon Jesus Christ, they will be "born again," become completely holy and acceptable to God through the blood of Christ, and will live forever, not only on the new paradise, but also in the very presence of God Almighty. This is the promise and hope of Christianity, and this is one of the greatest distinctions between Jehovah Witnesses and Christianity.

We all need to heed the call of Revelation 22:17: "The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who hears say, ‘Come.’ And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price."

8.  In the chart above, bolded words are the translation given for kurios. Note the shift in practice in Colossians 3:24. There they dare not translation kurios with Jehovah and thus use "Master." Exactly what kurios is referring to has to be determined by the context, not by presupposition. Paul starts an exposition of being in subjection one to another in Ephesians 5:21. He amplifies the general statement, to include first wives to their husband, "as unto the Lord," which is clearly referring to Jesus Christ as the example to follow. Second, he tells husbands to love their lives (5:25), again giving Jesus as the example. Third he tells children to obey their parents "in the Lord" (6:1). Since Paul quotes the OT, "Lord" in this case is ambiguous. It could be referring to Jehovah or Christ. Fourth, Paul turns to fathers to their children: they should raise them in the discipline and training "of the Lord" (6:4). Interestingly the NWT leaves "lord" in for the children to their parents in 6:1) but uses "of Jehovah" in 6:4. Fifth, Paul turns to slaves to their masters and tells them to obey them in the same manner they would obey Christ (6:5). They are to be slaves of Christ, and thus are to render service, not in order to please people, but rather "as to the Lord" (6:6). The context, therefore, favors the Lord as referring to Christ, not to Jehovah.

37.  G. K. Beale, The Book of Revelation, A Commentary on the Greek Text (Wm. B. Eerdmans: 1999) 743.