This article serves as a continuation of our initial exploration into the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses, specifically focusing on their interpretation of "proof texts" used to argue against the divinity of Christ.
This article delves deeper into various challenges faced by Jehovah's Witnesses, some of which may not be widely recognized within their community. When read in conjunction with our initial article—recommended for reading first—this piece aims to provide a robust defence of the Gospel and shed light on the fundamental issues inherent in Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs.
In the following post, red text indicates official Watchtower content or statements.
Remember to prioritize the Gospel in your discussions with Jehovah's Witnesses. Dismantling their worldview without offering the Gospel in its place achieves nothing of lasting value.
Problem 1: Who/what is the authority of the JW?
Inquire of Jehovah's Witnesses about their source of authority. Their response will likely fall into one of two categories:
The Bible
The Watchtower
The Watchtower and Bible Tract Society prohibits the reading of external literature, asserting that solitary study of the Bible results in apostasy. However, its history of inaccurate prophecies undermines its claims to exclusive authority and truth. Consequently, as a Jehovah's Witness, adhering consistently to either source presents a contradiction.
Not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see, also, that if anyone lays the “Scripture Studies” (his books) aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years – if he then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the “Scripture Studies” with their references and had not read a page of the Bible as such, he would be in the light at the end of two years, because he would have the light of the scriptures.
Watchtower, Sep. 15, 1910, p. 298
If Jehovah's Witnesses claim Scripture as their authority, this stance conflicts with their own doctrine. Should they identify the Watchtower as their source of authority, its history of false prophecies poses a significant issue. This leads into the subsequent problem, which further compounds the issue highlighted above.
Problem 2: The WTBTS claim to be a prophet.
So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come? These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet? . . . This "prophet" was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah's Christian witnesses . . . Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a "prophet" of God. It is another thing to prove it...
Watchtower, Apr. 1, 1972, p. 197.
Deuteronomy 18:20-22 provides criteria for identifying a true prophet versus a false one, according to the Hebrew Bible. This passage is often referenced in discussions about prophetic legitimacy. It says:
But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.
Deuteronomy 18:20-22, English Standard Version (ESV)
The Jehovah's Witnesses organization has acknowledged significant inaccuracies in their historical predictions. In their official publication, the Watchtower, specifically in the issue titled "Man’s Salvation Out of World Distress!" released in 1975, they openly confess to several mistaken forecasts made over the years. They concede that Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the movement, erroneously predicted Christ’s second coming in 1874. Additionally, they acknowledge incorrect predictions made for the years 1914, 1925, and 1975 regarding significant biblical events. [1][2][3]
In May 1974 the Watch Tower Society told members regarding the 1975 date that:
Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world's end.
"How Are You Using Your Life?". Our Kingdom Ministry. May 1974. p. 3.
The disappointment stemming from the unfulfilled prophecy of 1975 led to a decline in the number of Jehovah's Witnesses starting from 1976, a trend that continued until it began to reverse in 1980. [4]
This situation presents a profound challenge to the Jehovah's Witnesses' belief system. On one hand, their adherence to the Bible as the ultimate source of truth is called into question by the Watchtower's statements, which suggest that solitary study of the Bible can lead to apostasy. On the other hand, the Watchtower's credibility as a prophetic authority is compromised by its admissions of error, failing to meet the standards set by the Bible itself. This leaves adherents in a precarious position, struggling to find a reliable foundation for their beliefs. Without a clear authority to reference, Jehovah's Witnesses face difficulties in justifying the foundational aspects of their knowledge, leading to what can be seen as an inherently inconsistent worldview.
Problem 3: The JW confesses that God is only person within the one being that is God, compared to the Scriptural teaching that God is three persons within the one being that is God.
The initial article delves into the topic extensively, but in this piece, our focus shifts to the concept of God's love. When discussing with Jehovah's Witnesses, one could ask if they believe God embodies love. Should they affirm this, it presents an opportunity to explore the nature of love in the context of God's oneness. The argument posits that for God to inherently be love, there must exist a plurality within His being. This is based on the premise that love, by its nature, requires an object to be directed towards. Therefore, if God has always been love, even before the creation of mankind, there must have been an inherent plurality within Him to facilitate love. Without such plurality, the notion of God as love becomes difficult to reconcile with His state before creation, where no other beings existed to receive His love.
The Christian doctrine articulates that God's capacity to love does not rely on the presence of other beings prior to Creation. Instead, the concept of the Trinity—three distinct persons within one divine essence—profoundly enriches our understanding of God's self-sufficiency. This belief posits that God is inherently love, independent of anything or anyone outside Himself. He embodies eternal satisfaction and is completely self-contained. Thus, God’s nature of love is understood not as dependent on objects of love but as an integral and eternal aspect of His being, facilitated by the relational dynamic within the Trinity itself.
Problem 4: Ask the JW whether God can die.
The NWT claims God cannot die.
Are you not from everlasting, O Jehovah? O my God, my Holy One, you do not die. O Jehovah, you appointed them to execute judgment; My Rock, you established them for punishment.
Habakkuk 1:12, NWT
The NWT claims God (the Alpha and Omega) died.
“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says Jehovah God, “the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.”
Revelation 1:8, NWT
When I saw him, I fell as dead at his feet. And he laid his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last, and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of the Grave.
Revelation 1:17-18, NWT
This of course amounts to a contradiction if you deny the divinity of Christ, who died as per his human nature.
Problem 5: Changes to Watchtower doctrine.
Regarding the 1914 date:
But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble.
Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226
After the 1914 prophecy failed to come true, they changed their stance:
Jehovah's witnesses pointed to the year 1914, decades in advance, as marking the start of the conclusion of the system of things.
To ensure clarity, it's important to address a common counterpoint that may arise during discussions. Some Jehovah's Witnesses might assert that the year 1914 was never predicted to be the end of times. However, this claim is contradicted by historical documents from the faith itself. Specifically, the publication "Studies in the Scriptures - Thy Kingdom Come," which was released before the year 1914, contains indications that this year was indeed anticipated to be significant in the context of end-time prophecies.
That the deliverance of the saints must take place some time before 1914 is manifest...
And the post-1914 version (1923) indicates:
That the deliverance of the saints must take place very soon after 1914 is manifest...
The discrepancy between the original prediction regarding the year 1914 and subsequent explanations represents a significant doctrinal shift. This alteration in stance is a clear example of a contradiction and a direct change in doctrine, illustrating how interpretations and teachings can evolve over time within a religious organization.
Problem 6: Jehovah's Witnesses are not to read any material given to them by apostates.
It would be a mistake to think that you need to listen to apostates or to read their writings to refute their arguments. Their twisted, poisonous reasoning can cause spiritual harm and can contaminate your faith like rapidly spreading gangrene. (2 Timothy 2:16, 17) Rather, imitate God's response to apostates. Job said of Jehovah: "Before him no apostate will come in." - Job 13:16."
Watchtower 2004 Feb 15 p.28
There are numerous other quotations as well and can be found here.
This argument highlights a perceived contradiction in the approach advocated by Jehovah's Witnesses. They frequently direct individuals to their official website, JW.org, encouraging the reading of their materials for information. However, applying their own standards consistently appears to undermine the foundation for open dialogue. This approach seems at odds with the methods employed by the Apostle Paul in the New Testament. Indeed, Paul cited pagan philosophers—not to endorse their views but to use their statements as a means to defend and spread the gospel. This implies that Paul engaged with and understood these teachings, leveraging them to clarify and propagate Christian truths. He referenced the works of Epimenides, Menander, and Aratus, incorporating their thoughts into his messages, not as affirmations of their beliefs but as strategic points of engagement.
Such a practice underscores the importance of understanding various perspectives to effectively communicate the gospel. If Paul, a foundational figure in Christianity, found value in this approach, it suggests that engaging with a wide range of materials, when done with discernment, can serve a valuable role in theological discussion. This includes placing quotes in their correct context to highlight inaccuracies or to build connections that facilitate the sharing of the gospel. This practice, however, appears to create tension for Jehovah's Witnesses, caught between the scriptural example and the guidelines set forth by their organizational publications, such as the Watchtower.
Conclusion
The examination of Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine reveals several contradictions and inconsistencies. Such discrepancies challenge the integrity of any belief system, as contradictory and inconsistent foundations undermine the coherence of a worldview, potentially leading it towards absurdity. Given these contradictions, the argument posits that Jehovah's Witnesses' teachings fail to offer a solid basis for knowledge, suggesting that a re-evaluation of adherence to these doctrines is warranted.
However, the transition from recognizing these inconsistencies to embracing an alternative belief system, particularly the Christian understanding of Christ, is not automatic. It is important to recognize that merely exposing flaws within a worldview does not guarantee an immediate acceptance of the gospel. Therefore, proactive efforts to share the gospel are essential. This involves not assuming familiarity with the true message of Christ, as terminologies might overlap with significantly different understandings. A thorough presentation of the gospel, explaining the significance of Christ's sacrifice on the cross for humanity, is crucial.
In addition, when engaging with Jehovah's Witnesses, it is vital to approach discussions with love and respect. Such an attitude acknowledges the transformative power of grace and reflects an awareness that anyone could find themselves holding and promoting erroneous beliefs without divine intervention. The use of tracts or other summary materials can be beneficial in conveying the core message of the gospel succinctly.
References
Man’s Salvation Out of World Distress at Hand, op. cit., p. 312.
1975 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses (WBTS, 1974), p. 76.
Ibid., pp. 145-146.
Singelenberg, Richard (1989). "It Separated the Wheat From the Chaff: The 1975 Prophecy and its Impact Among Dutch Jehovah's Witnesses". Sociological Analysis. 50 (Spring 1989): 23–40.
Discussion
Engage in theological discourse.