Jehovah's Witnesses: Agreement with Bible?

Question

I saw a comment on another thread saying that everything Jehovah's Witnesses believe comes from the Bible. One of those beliefs is that Jesus is God's son, but not God himself. 1 John 5:20 says, "We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true--even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life." So, the Bible says directly that Jesus is true God. What is your church's explanation on this?

This is one example and please don't take offense. I'm merely interested.

Thus far, I like Jeremy's answer, as it actually delves into the Greek, (the original language the book was written in). A more literal translation of the Greek would be:

"And that the Son of God is come, and has given to us an understanding in order that we might know the true one; and we are in the true one, in the Son of him Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life." So, here the 'Son of him Jesus Christ' is equated to the 'true one'.

TrustDell1: You're trying to use English semantics here. Saying "even in his son" is akin to saying "ergo." I considered this before I used the verse. I never (intentionally) take a verse out of context and am pretty careful.

Teem: verse 19 says "We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one." So, I think I misunderstand your reference.

My space is short, so: Why then, can Jesus forgive sins, if he is not God?

HannahJPaul: Will see if I can respond in another edit..9876543..

HannahJPaul and kclr16: Jesus was both Son of God and Son of Man. There was a purpose for Jesus becoming man and that was for our salvation. It was necessary according to his own requirements for our salvation. As a man he died, but as God he subsequently defeated death. So, there are some actions that will be encountered that are appropriate for man, though unnecessary for God. I like the prayer comment, though, and will consider that more.

Please review Philippians 2:6-8. "Who being in very nature God...and being found in appearance as a man" (Please read full context if concerned). In these verses it speaks both about his being God and him taking on the appearance of man (or, "in fashion being found as a man" in the Greek; basically he took on the form of a man in its essential aspects).

Thanks for the feedback, so far!

cbooth151: How can God send his Spirit while remaining in Heaven? How can his Spirit reside on multiple disciples at the same time? The argument that because humans cannot be both, does not mean that he cannot be. Also, are we saying that God's son is something other than God? Then, what would he be? Why is he "watered down" so to speak to something less than God because he is called his Son?

Barrett G: I just realized that I overlooked that you have somehow taken offense at my question, despite my request not to take this as an attack. Sorry you feel that way, it was not intended. Yes, religions have changed their stances on things as they've come to (hopefully) better understand their own writings. My question is straightforward - what is the explanation of your church regarding Jesus when it seems like the Bible is saying something else?

Answer 1

Believers in the Trinity doctrine hold that the demonstrative pronoun “this” (hou′tos) refers to its immediate antecedent, Jesus Christ. They assert that Jesus is “the true God and life everlasting.” This interpretation, however, is in conflict with the rest of the Scriptures. And many authoritative scholars do not accept this Trinitarian view. Cambridge University scholar B. F. Westcott wrote: “The most natural reference [of the pronoun hou′tos] is to the subject not locally nearest but dominant in the mind of the apostle.” Thus, the apostle John had in mind Jesus’ Father. German theologian Erich Haupt wrote: “It has to be determined whether the [hou′tos] of the next proposition refers to the locally and immediately preceding subject . . . or to the more distant antecedent God. . . . A testimony to the one true God seems more in harmony with the final warning against idols than a demonstration of the divinity of Christ.”

Even A Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament, published by Rome’s Pontifical Biblical Institute, states: “[Hou′tos]: as a climax to verses 18-20 the ref[erence] is almost certainly to God the real, the true, in opposition to paganism (v. 21).”

Often hou′tos, generally translated “this” or “this one,” does not refer to the immediately preceding subject of a phrase. Other scriptures illustrate the point. At 2 John 7, the same apostle and penman of the first letter wrote: “Many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This [hou′tos′] is the deceiver and the antichrist.” Here the pronoun cannot refer to the closest antecedent—Jesus. Obviously, “this” refers to those who denied Jesus. They collectively are “the deceiver and the antichrist.”

In his Gospel, the apostle John wrote: “Andrew the brother of Simon Peter was one of the two that heard what John said and followed Jesus. First this one [hou′tos] found his own brother, Simon.” (John 1:40, 41) It is evident that “this one” refers, not to the last person mentioned, but to Andrew. At 1 John 2:22, the apostle uses the same pronoun in a similar way.

Luke makes similar use of the pronoun, as seen at Acts 4:10, 11: “In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you impaled but whom God raised up from the dead, by this one does this man stand here sound in front of you. This [hou′tos′] is ‘the stone that was treated by you builders as of no account that has become the head of the corner.’ ” The pronoun “this” clearly does not refer to the man who was healed, though he is the one mentioned just before hou′tos. Certainly, “this” in verse 11 refers to Jesus Christ the Nazarene, who is the “cornerstone” on which the Christian congregation is founded.—Ephesians 2:20; 1 Peter 2:4-8.

Acts 7:18, 19 also illustrates the point: “There rose a different king over Egypt, who did not know of Joseph. This one [hou′tos] used statecraft against our race.” “This one” who oppressed the Jews was, not Joseph, but Pharaoh, the king of Egypt.

Such passages confirm the observation made by Greek scholar Daniel Wallace, who says that for Greek demonstratives, “what might be the nearest antecedent contextually might not be the nearest antecedent in the author’s mind.”

“The True One.” As the apostle John wrote, “the true One” is Jehovah, the Father of Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, the Creator. The apostle Paul acknowledged: “There is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are.” (1 Corinthians 8:6; Isaiah 42:8) Another reason that Jehovah is “the true one” referred to at 1 John 5:20 is that he is the Source of truth. The psalmist called Jehovah “the God of truth” because He is faithful in all He does and cannot lie. (Psalm 31:5; Exodus 34:6; Titus 1:2) Referring to his heavenly Father, the Son said: “Your word is truth.” And regarding his own teaching, Jesus stated: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me.”—John 7:16; 17:17.

Jehovah is also “life everlasting.” He is the Source of life, the One giving it as an undeserved gift through Christ. (Psalm 36:9; Romans 6:23.) Significantly, the apostle Paul said that God is “the rewarder of those earnestly seeking him.” (Hebrews 11:6) God rewarded his Son by raising him from the dead, and the Father will give the reward of everlasting life to those who serve Him with all their heart.—Acts 26:23; 2 Corinthians 1:9.

Hence, what conclusion should we come to? That Jehovah, and no one else, is “the true God and life everlasting.” He alone is worthy to receive exclusive worship from those whom he created.—Revelation 4:11.

If you would like further information, please contact Jehovah's Witnesses at the local Kingdom Hall. Or visit http://www.watchtower.org

Answer 2

Jehovah's Witnesses do not base their beliefs on one scripture alone. They take into consideration all the scriptures that deal with a particular subject. This is no less so when it comes to the identity of God and of Jesus Christ.

Jehovah's Witnesses do not deny the divinity of Jesus Christ. Nor do they deny that he shares attributes of the most High God. That does not make him equal to God, however, any more than all humans are equal to each other just because we share the same human attributes.

Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that Jesus Christ is God because the scriptures do not teach it. If we were to consider the scriptures, independent and apart from John 1:1 (a scripture which is a favorite of many), to what conclusion would we be led? That Christ is God almighty? Consider the following . . .

The scriptures at Hosea make it plain that it is impossible for God to die and yet Jesus died. The scriptures at James make it plain that it is impossible for God to be tempted and yet Jesus was tempted. (Compare Luke 4:1-13). How then can he have been God?

Jesus himself prayed to God at John 17:3, calling him "the only true God." At John 20:17, after his resurrection but before his return to the heavens, Jesus referred to his heavenly father as "his God." After his resurrection and return to the heavens, Jesus continued to describe his heavenly father as "his God." See Revelation 3:12. How do so many claim that Jesus is God Almighty when Jesus himself made it clear that he was not?

Some say that Jesus' human nature limited him and this is why he spoke this way. But is it reasonable to suggest that his human nature limited him and, at the same time, insist that he was always God almighty? What nature, human or not, could possibly limit the True God? And if he was limited by his human nature, why did he continue to describe God Almighty as his God even AFTER he returned to heaven?

There are many reasons why Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept the teaching that Jesus Christ is God Almighty but these should be sufficient to begin.

Hannah

Answer 3

The root of the JW understanding that Jesus isn't God lies in their mistranslation of key passages, such as John 1:1 "In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." (NWT) Notice that last part: "a god." The NKJV reads: "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

JWs believe Jesus is the incarnate Michael the Archangel. I'm not sure how they came to that conclusion, but they do not believe the Word (Jesus) existed alongside God from the beginning.

Peace.

EDIT: "Jeremy," if you wish to read what Westcott REALLY wrote, go here: http://blueletterbible.org/study/cults/exposejw/expose46.pdf

Here's a second scholar who objects to being misquoted by the WTBS -- J. R. Mantey: http://blueletterbible.org/study/cults/exposejw/expose44.pdf

Sadly, the WTBS has lied to you. Both Westcott AND Mantey UPHELD the traditional understanding that "The Word was God."

Answer 4

Ok, 1 John 5:20 says in the new World Translation, "But we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us intellectual capacity that we may gain the knowledge of the true one. And we are in union with the true one, by means of his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and life everlasting." Ok, the first time it says the true one, it is talking about Jehovah, the true God. We are in union with Jehovah, which is because we are able to pray in Jesus's name. When it says this is the true God, it is talking about Jehovah, and by him, we get everlasting life.

Are you to say that Jesus prayed to himself while here on Earth?

People think certain things about us because they don't know the truth. They take every scripiture for what it is, disregarding the context. Nothing in the bible can contradict itself. That is why we study it, finding out the true answer. Hope this helps. Any other doubts you have, just ask and I will answer.

Answer 5

Don't worry about some taking offense! lol

The JWs "translated" their own Bible in the mid 20th century to reflect what they had believed prior to that "translation." It's a poor "translation" made without the translators even knowing much Greek. For shame.

In contrast, most reputable translations are made by scholars from the various Christian denominations joining together to guard against sectarian bias. Bias is found throughout the New World Translation of the JWs.

Your example is very good, and there are many more.

Answer 6

Many people claim that the Bible says that Jesus is both God
and the son of God. Does that sound reasonable to you? Who are you? Are you MikeG or the son of MikeG? The answer is obvious. So, again, who is Jesus? God or the son of God? He can't be both.

Ps. 83:18 calls Jehovah the Most High. Is Jesus the Most High too? No. When questioned by his enemies, Jesus told them at John 10:36: "I am the SON of God.

Who came down from heaven to die for mankind's sins so they could have the prospect for everlasting life? Was it God? No. At John 3:16, it says: " For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life." So who came down from heaven to die for us, MikeG? Was it God or the son of God. The answer should be crystal clear.

Now to 1 John 5:20. Is Jesus the "true God" in this verse? Obviously not because it CLEARLY says that Jesus is the SON of God. So the one "who is true"," the true God", is the Father of the son of God. And who is that? Jesus himself? Of course not! It is none other than Jehovah. This harmonizes completely with John 17:3, where Jesus called his Father the ONLY true God.

Some misguided people accuse Jehovah's Witnesses of changing the Bible. That is not true. We can show you anything you want to know from your own Bible. Jehovah's Witnesses do not base their beliefs on isolated scriptures. We take the WHOLE Bible into account. We have no problem doing that because "all Scripture is insired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for SETTING THINGS STRAIGHT." See 2 Tim. 3:16.

Answer 7

The last sentence in vs 20 is referring to the first sentence in vs 19.

Jesus has explained who the true God is.

taking one verse out of the bible can prove anything you want.


When you compare the context, you get the true understanding.

1st John was written after Revelation, and in Rev 1:1 we see that God gave to Jesus who gave to the angel, who gave to John the Revelation.

In Rev 1:6 John tells us that Jesus made us a kingdom, priests to his (Jesus') God.

John did not believe Jesus to be God.

Jesus himself at Rev 3:12 calls Jehovah his God.
and of this John is well aware of.

1 John 5:20 doesn't teach Jesus is God but that "the Son of God has come down".

Please note:

2 Cor 4:4in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

What question should you ask ourself if we can not see that Jesus' glory is that of an image and not that of God.


I appreciate honest questions. Thanks

Answer 8

The JWs are under direct control of The Watch Tower orginization... it is a group that made up its own interpretaion of , what they claimis, the bible. The teaching and interpritations of The watch Tower take precidence over all others. The "members" of the JW are forbidden to study outside of The WatchTower provided materiels. And to read no other "bible" but the one The watch tower sells...... They are a deceptive cult that has taken in very amny otherwise good people and keeps them from Knowing The True Path to Salvation, which is The Way. All who follow that teaching to The end of mortal life will be eternaly seperated from God.

Jesus is clearly refered to as The Word... read link to John 1:1-5
http://www.htmlbible.com/kjv30/B43C001.htm

Answer 9

1 John 5:20 states
ASV: And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the TRUE God, and eternal life.

KJV: And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the TRUE God, and eternal life.

Please read the context, the text said "we may know him that is TRUE, and we are in him that is True, EVEN in his Son Jesus".
Notice it states that the TRUE one has EVEN HIS SON Jesus. This TRUE one has a SON, ( IN HIS SON), Jesus. Therefore the TRUE one is NOT the SON, he is a different person. This TRUE one, is the true God. Jesus MADE KNOWN his Father (Pls read John 17) so that all his disciples made KNOWN Him that is true.

In the original translation notably there is no EVEN, so it is not akin to ergo.

"and we are in the true one, in the Son of him Jesus Christ"

the True one is described to have "the SON of HIM", so the true one is not the Son.



The same construction of this is in 2 John 7

At 2 John 7, the same apostle and penman of the first letter wrote: “Many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This [hou´tos´] is the deceiver and the antichrist.” Here the pronoun cannot refer to the closest antecedent—Jesus. Obviously, “this” refers to those who denied Jesus. They collectively are “the deceiver and the antichrist.”

Answer 10

This is true, I had a friend over last week, she is a witness, so I was interested and asking her about her beliefs, she goes exactly by the bible and believes that everything in the bilbe has either happened or will happen, I find some of her comments confusing, living with my Catholic family, they believe that all other religions are fake religions, Catholicism, Islam, Mormans I'm not sure about Jewidism, alot of the things that I believe in, she tries to get me to disbelieve in them, but I am open to anything others have to say.

Answer 11

Wow.
How about this.
Your unchangeable and holiest of documents has been changed and re-written so many times it's about as useful as news in Libya being reported to the US through a giant game of telephone. How about finding something better to do with your time than nitpick at your FELLOW Christians.

And for BIG MIKE
"Lets just say that like all cults, one would be prudent to do some serious research and check out he number of " changes" made by a religious group since their founding. It will tell you how close to God they really are."

If you're insinuating that changes=not close to G*D.....then you need to do some "serious research" on every last "Christian" religion.....right down to the Catholics and the Orthodox Church that spawned all your little cults...er... denominations.

Stop trying to sound calm and educated.
I am not upset by your question....I couldn't care less. I just think it's ridiculous that you claim to follow Christ's teachings, yet you ask questions like this one. The bible has been interpreted many different ways by many different people. And was written not only in Greek as you have stated, but in Hebrew and Aramaic as well. You have no idea what was written in the original text. And you have only your limited analytical capacity to decipher all the crap your chosen denomination shoves down your throat.

If you were truly a follower of Christ you would get of your smug high horse and try to teach through compassion....not condescending questions thought to be cleverly disguised as simple curiosity.