Expert: Andrew - 8/2/2007

Question
Hi Andrew.  Not sure this is a question but I have been studying with witnesses off and on for about 2 yrs.  I just realized that they believe that when they go to the annual memorial for Jesus that the 80,000, (give or take)are part of the 144,000 that are going to heaven, that drink the wine.  That does not settle right with me.  They tell me that I will understand it later.  They definitely do study the bible and I have gone over their Bible with my King James version that was given to my grandmother who is Catholic.  Are there many scriptures that differ? and if so, do you know which ones. I enjoy knowing what is in the Bible but I don't like all the ???'s I have.  Even as a Catholic things don't jive.

Answer
Dear Cheryl,

I'm glad you are taking time to consider the other side of the coin before you make such a major committment as joining the Witnesses. It would definitely raise a red flag for me if someone told me "you'll understand later, but decide to join us now".

The Witnesses often use such convoluted explanations that even the most intellectually astute persons become tired of following their convoluted logic and often ultimately throw up their hands, and capitulate, while reasoning, "I may not understand, but someone wiser than me does, and I trust them". The Witness leadership is counting on this response.

They want the rank and file to throw up their hands and just follow, even though they always claim to promote clear reasoning. Another reason for using convoluted arguments is for plausible deniability reasons. When their teaching is proven as wrong, such as when they make a prediction that fails to come true, they can retrospectively deny having made such a prediction; but that only works when their predictions are made using very convoluted language.

Yes, the Witnesses believe in a group they call the "annointed remnant". This means those members of the 144,000 supposedly chosen ones who are destined for heaven but who are still living on earth. They believe that only the remnant should drink the wine.

The number 80,000 doesn't sound familiar to me. They count their "annointed remnant" as a much smaller group. In fact, I would be surprised if there are more than a few hundred persons yet alive worldwide which they count among their "annointed remant". The youngest of the remnant would now be 93 years old; so we are talking about very old people who in most cases have been Witnesses for many many years. In fact this is or was a key part of their dogma. Because once all the remnant are gone, the end of the world must come, as their teaching went. Of course they are known to update their teaching with changing times so they never appear to have said something false, so this could be out of date. I can't keep up with their frequent revisions of doctrine.

The vast majority of Witnesses attending their memorial service are thought to be destined to "live forever in paradise on earth", never going to heaven. Their doctrine teaches that the heaven-destined class is for the most part a closed group, so any new recruits among the Witnesses are pressured not to partake of the wine.

If you become a "faithful" Witness according to all their dogmas, and have been with them for several years at least, and are less than 93 years old, yet have a strong feeling that you are heaven-bound, they may tolerate your partaking of the wine, although probably with disdainful whispers. If you are new to their group or a person younger than 93 years old and partake of the wine, they would, in effect, pat you on the head, conclude you know no better, and laugh it off.

The Douay version and the New World Translation used by the Witnesses (NWT) recognize different books as canonical, so there are major differences.

The King James version and the NWT recognize the same canon, but have significant differences in diction. Usually the diction differences only modernize and clarify language; but there are a few places where the meaning is fundamentally changed. I can think of two places where the NWT fundamentally changes meaning as compared to other translations:

(1) John 1:1 KJV: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
John 1:1 NWT: "In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."
Notice how the Witnesses' bible inserts the word "a", suggesting that the word was divine or godlike, where the KJV says simply "the Word was God". Very different ideas.

(2) This is the one I find most important...
Luke 17:21 KJV: "Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you."
Luke 17:21 NWT: "Neither will people be saying, ‘See here!’ or, ‘There!’ For, look! the kingdom of God is in YOUR midst."
If the kingdom of god is within us, then the bible can plausibly be said to support the same idea that most of the world's faith traditions support, that we are divine beings, or as some say, "We are spirit beings having a human experience", and therefore worthy of honor and immune to shame. However, the Witnesses translate this verse as "the kingdom of God is in your midst", suggesting that it was pointing to Christ amidst his disciples, not the holy spirit within the disciples. They distort the meaning in this way because cults must be able to control their followers by making the follower low and small, by manipulating them with shame, which they cannot do if we are divine beings, that is, if the domain of God is within each of us.

The Witnesses claim their translation is true to the meaning of the original language, and translation is sometimes ambiguous enough that this may be technically plausible. But if the verse can be translated two ways that are so significantly different, what is the agenda behind their choice of diction? I would want to know their agenda very well before I trust my eternal life to them.

Ultimately, the one place where I trusted them, and where that trust proved in the end to be most misplaced, where I felt most betrayed, was their claim to speak for God. Their literature constantly refers to their organization as the unique mouthpiece of God, as if God himself somehow appointed them to a special position; but with only a little scratching of the surface of that question by a person who has his critical thinking faculties intact shows that there was never any such appointment, and no evidence whatsoever that there was. Their claim is a lie, and to me it was a betrayal that I found out after having trusted them for many years.

I suggest you carefully pursue each of your questions to it's final conclusion, trusting your gut, before you make any decision to become a Witness. Most importantly, you should be aware of the deceptive mind games they use in advance. You will only recognize the Witnesses using these games if you learn about them in advance from a book or an experienced person which understands such games.

One of the most meaningful books for a person in your position might be "Crisis of Conscience" by Raymond Franz, which gives an insider view of the politics within the top eschelons of the Witness organization. You can find the book with a simple Internet search.

Your doubts in Witness doctrine may well be the divine within you objecting to dishonest manipulation. At the very least, you deserve to have your questions answered satisfactorily, and see the issue from all sides, including pros and cons, before you make a committment. This is important especially in relation to family ties; because once you have committed yourself by becoming a Witness, they afterward have absolute power over you and routinely use it to destroy your family ties and pressure you to do and say and believe things you would not have previously agreed to.

Your freedom of mind, family ties, and spiritual health depend on resolving your doubts before moving ahead and trusting your gut now and always.

I'm sorry if this sounds dire, but I do believe you are in a dire situation. Please proceed with caution.

Best wishes,
AndrewXJW