AboutBrenda Martin Expertise I have been one of Jehovah`s Witneses now for over 30 years, in those years I have brought up 4 children, teaching each of them the bible.Being one of Jehovah`s Witnesses has helped me cope with my Epilepsy and bring up a daughter with learning difficulties.I have conducted bible studies with people from nearly every denomination i.e. Muslim. Having used the bible all these years to answer peoples questions, I feel I am qualified to give any answer regarding Jehovah`s Witnesses and the bible.
Experience My experience has been one of attending bible lectures 5 times a week,taking part in these lectures in front of an audience and being with thousands of J.W. at conventions where I have seen the bible at work in peoples lives.It is truly a miracle when you see thousands of people meeting together and not one policeman needed, and not even a piece of litter in sight.It is like another world.
Isaiah 7: 14 (Isaiah refers to the messiah as Emmanuel, which means in Hebrew “God with us.”)
Isaiah 9: 6 (Again, Isaiah speaks of a child, a human child, that will be called “God.”)
Matthew 1: 23 (Matthew confirms, through the words of the prophet Isaiah, that Jesus is “God with us.”)
John 20: 28 (Thomas refers to Jesus as his Lord and his God, and Jesus does not rebuke him for this, though He does reprimand him for his lack of faith.)
Why does the New World Translation teach contradicting viewpoints on the deity of Jesus Christ? My Bible doesn't.
Answer 1. "WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE HURLED INTO THE LAKE OF FIRE MENTIONED IN REVELATION 20:14&15?"
The Bible speaks of people being thrown into a fire. But symbolisms are frequent in the Bible. So, is the fire literal or symbolic? And if symbolic, what does it represent?
For example, Revelation chapter 20, verse 15 (King James Version), says: “Whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.” But verse 14 says: “And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire.” Strange! Is hell itself to be tormented? And how can death, a condition, be thrown into a literal fire? The rest of verse 14 reads: “This [the lake of fire] is the second death.” Revelation 21, verse 8, repeats this point.
What is this “second death”? The Catholic Jerusalem Bible adds this footnote concerning “the second death”: “Eternal death. The fire . . . is symbolic.” Very true, for it signifies complete destruction, or annihilation.
2.HOW DO JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES DETERMINE WHETHER VERSES IN THE BIBLE ARE FACTUAL OR METAPHORICAL?
They do not believe that everything in the Bible is to be taken literally. They take the balanced, commonsense view, which is indeed the Scriptural view, that, while the Bible has many direct, literal statements, such as the laws it gives to govern the Christian's life, much in that Book is symbolic or figurative.
For example, the parables of Jesus Christ are admittedly symbolic. The Greek word used in the Bible for “parable” can be translated “illustration.” It is said of Jesus: “Indeed, without an illustration [parable] he would not speak to them [the crowds], but privately to his disciples he would explain all things.”—Mark 4:34; Matt. 13:34.
The Bible's prophecies are often symbolic. Of the prophetic book of Revelation the opening verse explains: “He [Jesus Christ] sent forth his angel and presented it in signs through him to his slave John.” (Rev. 1:1) Either by direct statements such as this, or by the context, it can easily be determined which statements are literal and which ones are symbolic.
Therefore, Jehovah's witnesses are not led into unreasonable and unscientific conclusions, such as the fundamentalists' belief that the earth was created in six literal twenty-four-hour days. The Witnesses know that the expression “day” basically means a period of time. For example, we might say, ‘In our grandfather's day,' which would cover a number of years. The Bible helps us on this point when, after outlining God's acts during the six creative “days,” it speaks of them all together as being performed in one “day,” saying: “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth . . . in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.” Accordingly, a Biblical “day” may be a period of a thousand or many thousands of years.—Gen. 2:4, AV; Dy; 2 Pet. 3:8.
A case in point is the number 144,000 on the book of Revelation—
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses take the number 144,000 mentioned in the book of Revelation literally and not symbolically?
The number, 144,000, is understood literally for several reasons. One is found in the immediate context of Revelation 7:4.
After the apostle John was told in vision about this group of 144,000 individuals, he was shown another group. John describes this second group as “a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues.” This great crowd refers to those who will survive the coming “great tribulation,” which will destroy the present wicked world.—Revelation 7:9, 14.
Note, however, the contrast that John draws between verses 4 and 9 of Revelation chapter 7. He states that the first group, “those who were sealed,” has a definite number. However, the second group, “a great crowd,” is without a definite number. With that in mind, it is logical to take the number 144,000 to be literal.
If the number 144,000 were symbolic and referred to a group that is actually numberless, the force of the contrast between those two verses would be lost. Thus, the context strongly indicates that the number 144,000 must be taken literally.
Various Bible scholars, past and present, reached the same conclusion—that is, the number is literal. For instance, in commenting on Revelation 7:4, 9, British lexicographer Dr. Ethelbert W. Bullinger observed some 100 years ago: “It is the simple statement of fact: a definite number in contrast with the indefinite number in this very chapter.” (The Apocalypse or “The Day of the Lord,” page 282)
More recently, Robert L. Thomas, Jr., professor of New Testament at The Master's Seminary in the United States, wrote: “The case for symbolism is exegetically weak.” He added: “It is a definite number [at 7:4] in contrast with the indefinite number of 7:9. If it is taken symbolically, no number in the book can be taken literally.”—Revelation: An Exegetical Commentary, Volume 1, page 474.
3-9,11,13--I don't answer questions regarding the “Watchtower” only the bible.
10. WHERE DOES IT STATE IN THE BIBLE THAT THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL WAS THE MESSIAH / CHRIST?
Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God's Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be “the archangel,” meaning “chief angel,” or “principal angel.” The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host.
At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with “a commanding call.” It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14)
If the designation “archangel” applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to “an archangel's voice” would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.
There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to “the time of the end” (Da 11:40) and then stated: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel's] people.” (Da 12:1) Michael's ‘standing up' was to be associated with “a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time.” (Da 12:1)
In Daniel's prophecy, ‘standing up' frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah's appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har–Magedon.—Re 11:15; 16:14-16.
The book of Revelation (12:7, 10, 12) specifically mentions Michael in connection with the establishment of God's Kingdom and links this event with trouble for the earth: “And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels battled with the dragon, and the dragon and its angels battled. And I heard a loud voice in heaven say: ‘Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down . . . On this account be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea.'”
Jesus Christ is later depicted as leading the heavenly armies in war against the nations of the earth. (Re 19:11-16) This would mean a period of distress for them, which would logically be included in the “time of distress” that is associated with Michael's standing up. (Da 12:1) Since the Son of God is to fight the nations, it is only reasonable that he was the one who with his angels earlier battled against the superhuman dragon, Satan the Devil, and his angels.
12.CONTRADICTIONS IN THEIR BIBLE: JESUS AS “A GOD” ; BY THOMAS, “GOD?”
No contradiction exists as you will see—
In the expression “the Word was God” in the original Greek, the word for “God” does not have the definite article “the.” In the earlier expression “the Word was with God,” the word for “God” is definite, that is, it does have the definite article. This makes it unlikely that the two words have the same significance.
Hence, some translations bring out the qualitative aspect in their translations. For example, some render the expression “the Word was divine.” (An American Translation, Schonfield) Moffatt renders it “the Logos was divine.” However, indicating that “divine” would not be the most appropriate rendering here, John Robinson and the British textual critic Sir Frederick Kenyon both pointed out that if that was what John wanted to emphasize, he could have used the Greek word for “divine,” thei´os. The New World Translation, correctly viewing the word “God” as indefinite, as well as bringing out the qualitative aspect indicated by the Greek structure, uses the indefinite article in English: “The Word was a god.”
Now as for Thomas--There is no objection to referring to Jesus as “God,” if this is what Thomas had in mind. Such would be in harmony with Jesus' own quotation from the Psalms in which powerful men, judges, were addressed as “gods.” (John 10:34, 35, RS; Ps. 82:1-6)
The context helps us to draw the right conclusion from this. Shortly before Jesus' death, Thomas had heard Jesus' prayer in which he addressed his Father as “the only true God.” (John 17:3, RS) After Jesus' resurrection Jesus had sent a message to his apostles, including Thomas, in which he had said: “I am ascending . . . to my God and your God.” (John 20:17, RS) After recording what Thomas said when he actually saw and touched the resurrected Christ, the apostle John stated: “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31, RS) So, if anyone has concluded from Thomas' exclamation that Jesus is himself “the only true God” or that Jesus is a Trinitarian “God the Son,” he needs to look again at what Jesus himself said (vs. 17) and at the conclusion that is clearly stated by the apostle John (vs. 31).
14. SHOULD I STILL HOLD TO THE FAITH THAT I HAVE IF YOU SHOW ME THAT MY THEOLOGY IS THIS FLAWED?
If our beliefs are not in harmony with inspired scripture, then one has to be wrong, and it is not the bible. Whether or not a person holds to a “theology” that is not bible based is entirely up to them.
I believed as a Protestant for 19 years, Trinity, hellfire, etc. when I saw for myself that none of the teachings I held were taught in the bible, then I decided to leave the religion where falsehoods were taught and attend a place where truths from the bible ARE taught.
ISAIAH 7: 14 EMMANUEL, WHICH MEANS IN HEBREW “GOD WITH US.”)
Lets go with your reasoning here, because the name “emmanuel” means “God is with us” you assume then Jesus must be God, okay, so these two men must also be God ? since Eli´athah means “God Has Come”; and Jehu means “Jehovah Is He” and we know that is not the case.
It was not unusual for Hebrew names to include within them the word for God or even an abbreviated form of God's personal name. But none of these names implied that the possessor was himself God.
In announcing Jesus' coming birth, did Jehovah's angel say that the child would be God himself? No, the announcement was: “He will be great, and will be called the SON of the Most High.” (Luke 1:32, 35, RS; .) And Jesus himself never claimed to be God but, rather, “the SON of God.” (John 10:36, RS; .) Jesus was sent into the world by God; so by means of this only-begotten Son, God was with mankind.—John 3:17; 17:8.
ISAIAH 9: 6 JESUS CALLED “GOD.”
At Isaiah 43:10 Jehovah says: “Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.” Does this mean that, because Jesus Christ is prophetically called “Mighty God” at Isaiah 9:6, Jesus must be Jehovah? Again, the context answers, No! None of the idolatrous Gentile nations formed a god before Jehovah, because no one existed before Jehovah. Nor would they at a future time form any real, live god that was able to prophesy. (Isa. 46:9, 10) But that does not mean that Jehovah never caused to exist anyone who is properly referred to as a god. (Ps. 82:1, 6; John 1:1, NW) At Isaiah 10:21 Jehovah is referred to as “mighty God,” just as Jesus is in Isaiah 9:6; but only Jehovah is ever called “God Almighty.”—Gen. 17:1.
“He [Jesus] . . . gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.” (Philippians 2:6) He is called Mighty God, not Almighty God. Jesus never thought of himself as God Almighty, for he spoke of his Father as “the only true God,” that is, the only God who should be worshiped. (John 17:3; Revelation 4:11)
WHY DOES THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION TEACH CONTRADICTING VIEWPOINTS ON THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST? MY BIBLE DOESN'T.
As I've explained, niether does the New World Translation. Various scholars are impressed at it.
For example, British Bible scholar Alexander Thomson noted that” the New World Translation is outstanding in accurately rendering the Greek present tense.”
Edgar J. Goodspeed, translator of the Greek “New Testament” in An American Translation, wrote: “I am interested in the mission work of your people, and its world wide scope, and much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify.”
Hebrew and Greek scholar Alexander Thomson wrote: “The translation is evidently the work of skilled and clever scholars, who have sought to bring out as much of the true sense of the Greek text as the English language is capable of expressing.”—The Differentiator, pages 52-7.
Professor Benjamin Kedar, a Hebrew scholar in Israel, said: “In my linguistic research in connection with the Hebrew Bible and translations, I often refer to the English edition of what is known as the New World Translation. In so doing, I find my feeling repeatedly confirmed that this work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the text that is as accurate as possible.”
