News to me, JWs a Christian denomination!

[Jon-E]

Here is the opening paragraph in a Washington Times news article:

"The U.S. and six other countries Friday issued a joint declaration condemning repression of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the evangelizing Christian denomination that has faced severe state opposition in many of the countries where it operates."
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/17/us-joins-appeal-condemning-repression-jehovahs-wit/

A serious sign of the times when the JW soul damning cult are called an "evangelizing Christian denomination".

 

[GoodRanger]

Here is the opening paragraph in a Washington Times news article:

"The U.S. and six other countries Friday issued a joint declaration condemning repression of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the evangelizing Christian denomination that has faced severe state opposition in many of the countries where it operates."
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/17/us-joins-appeal-condemning-repression-jehovahs-wit/

A serious sign of the times when the JW soul damning cult are called an "evangelizing Christian denomination".

I haven’t studied a whole lot about what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe, so I don’t believed I’m qualified to declare them a “soul damning cult.” But they call Jesus savior, correct? Isn’t that enough to say they’re Christians irrespective over whether some of their views are deemed heresy by various denominations?

By the way, I’m not trying to argue. I’m actually genuinely curious about why there is a lot hostility against JWs because of their differences. Let me know.

 

[Jon-E]

I haven’t studied a whole lot about what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe, so I don’t believed I’m qualified to declare them a “soul damning cult.” But they call Jesus savior, correct? Isn’t that enough to say they’re Christians irrespective over whether some of their views are deemed heresy by various denominations?

By the way, I’m not trying to argue. I’m actually genuinely curious about why there is a lot hostility against JWs because of their differences. Let me know.

The JWs teach that the Son of God is a created being, not God incarnate. They believe Jesus is Michael the angel. When you don't know who Jesus is, he can't be your Savior. They have many weird ideas, but that is their damning error. They even rewrite the Bible to support their false teaching.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1, ERV)

In the JW's New World Translation it reads:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

They change the Bible in other areas also, such as the following:

"for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;" (Col 1:16, ERV)

The text makes clear that through or in the Son of God all things were created so He is not a creation Himself. But, the NWT adds a word to change the meaning of the verse. It adds "other" for no other reason than to support their heresy.

"because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him."

 

[GoodRanger]

The JWs teach that the Son of God is a created being, not God incarnate. They believe Jesus is Michael the angel. When you don't know who Jesus is, he can't be your Savior. They have many weird ideas, but that is their damning error. They even rewrite the Bible to support their false teaching.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1, ERV)

In the JW's New World Translation it reads:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

They change the Bible in other areas also, such as the following:

"for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;" (Col 1:16, ERV)

The text makes clear that through or in the Son of God all things were created so He is not a creation Himself. But, the NWT adds a word to change the meaning of the verse. It adds "other" for no other reason than to support their heresy.

"because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him."

Reminds me a bit of the Arian heresy. It was a widespread misbelief during early Christian history where Arianists believed Christ was separate from God instead of one and the same. They were anti-Trinitarian.

The Arian heresy came about because there wasn’t a printing press at the time, and parts of the Bible could sometimes be mistranslated by scribes who weren’t completely literate or educated. This consequently resulted in theological errors, and sometimes those errors became very widespread like with Arianism.

If you’re curious about everything the Arians believed, you can read up on it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#Beliefs

Jehovah’s Witness came about in the late 1800s. People at this time were educated, plus the printing press had been around for centuries, so correct translations of the Bible were everywhere. There shouldn’t have been any reason for a heresy to take off. In your opinion, what is the reason why JWs concocted so many odd beliefs that aren’t consistent with sound theological doctrine?

 

[Runningman]

Here is the opening paragraph in a Washington Times news article:

"The U.S. and six other countries Friday issued a joint declaration condemning repression of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the evangelizing Christian denomination that has faced severe state opposition in many of the countries where it operates."
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/dec/17/us-joins-appeal-condemning-repression-jehovahs-wit/

A serious sign of the times when the JW soul damning cult are called an "evangelizing Christian denomination".

The Washington Times, a secular media outlet, does not understand Christianity enough to know JWs are not a legit Christian denomination. In order to explain why JW are not a legit Christian denomination to their mostly secular audience they'd have to preach to them. Since the Washington Times is probably not going to start preaching any time soon, they just call them a Christian denomination to make the digestion of the article easier. I don't believe Washington Times is not trying to be an authority on Christianity, but rather has poor journalism.

 

[Jon-E]

The Washington Times, a secular media outlet, does not understand Christianity enough to know JWs are not a legit Christian denomination. In order to explain why JW are not a legit Christian denomination to their mostly secular audience they'd have to preach to them. Since the Washington Times is probably not going to start preaching any time soon, they just call them a Christian denomination to make the digestion of the article easier. I don't believe Washington Times is not trying to be an authority on Christianity, but rather has poor journalism.

JWs can't even qualify to be in the National Council of Churches. I do not believe any religious group that denies the Trinity has any right to call themselves Christian. I don't know what to make of the Oneness Pentecostals. The 19th Century Presbyterian theologian Robert L. Dabney seems to rate that error less serious than the Arian heresy:

"Patrpassian.
Noetus, an obscure clergyman, (if a clergyman) of Smyrna, is said to
have founded a sect on the doctrine, that there is only one substance
and person in the Godhead; that the names, Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit, are nothing but names for certain phases of action or roles,
which God successively assumes. Christ was the one person, the
Godhead or Father, united to a holy man, Jesus, by a proper
Hypostatic union. The Holy Spirit is still this same person, the
Father, acting His part as revealer and sanctifier. Thus, it is literally
true, that the Father suffered,

i.e., in that qualified sense in which the Godhead was concerned in
the sufferings experienced by the humanity, in the Mediatorial
Person. This theory, while doing violence to Scripture, and
deranging our theology in many respects, is less fatal by far, than
that of Arians and Socinians: because it retains the proper divinity of
the Messiah and of the Holy Spirit. "

 

[ResidentAlien]

I haven’t studied a whole lot about what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe, so I don’t believed I’m qualified to declare them a “soul damning cult.”

I'll say it, they're a soul-damning cult.

But they call Jesus savior, correct? Isn’t that enough to say they’re Christians irrespective over whether some of their views are deemed heresy by various denominations?

No, it's not enough.

"But he who enters through the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and he leads them out. And whenever he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. But they will by no means follow a stranger, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers."—John 10:2-5

They can say they believe in Jesus all day long, but when they follow after strange teachings that He never taught it's clear they're following a different Christ than the one from scripture.

By the way, I’m not trying to argue. I’m actually genuinely curious about why there is a lot hostility against JWs because of their differences. Let me know.

Look into it. The information's not hiding under a rock.

 

[GoodRanger]

I'll say it, they're a soul-damning cult.



No, it's not enough.

"But he who enters through the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and he leads them out. And whenever he brings out his own sheep, he goes before them; and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. But they will by no means follow a stranger, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers."—John 10:2-5

They can say they believe in Jesus all day long, but when they follow after strange teachings that He never taught it's clear they're following a different Christ than the one from scripture.



Look into it. The information's not hiding under a rock.

For most of Christendom’s history believers were Catholic. The Roman Empire officially became Christian in the year 313, and they established the Catholic Church. That denomination reigned supreme among the faithful for over a thousand years, existing strong well after the fall of Rome. The Protestant Reformation came much later on the year 1517. To this day Catholics outnumber Protestants. The ration is about 1.3 billion to 800 million.

During the initial days of the Reformation, Martin Luther’s teaching were seen as heretical by theologians, and a lot of Catholics today still view some aspects of Protestant doctrines as heretical. In fact, I’ll admit that several of Luther’s teachings are flaws even though I attend the United Methodist Church, a denomination originating in England that has roots in Reformation theology. For example, Martin Luther taught that is isn’t acceptable to pray to saints because he believed it constitutes worship of them, and worship should only be reserved for God. But I’ve prayed to saints and angels in heaven many times, and each time I got a response. One time I prayed to a saint whose biography was particularly inspiring to me, and his ghost came to visit me and we said a prayer together. Thus, intercessory prayer is actually the correct doctrine and Luther’s condemnation of it isn’t.

I can give you more examples of where Protestant theology has flaws, but here is the point I want to make: Even though Protestantism might be heretical in some aspects, God wouldn’t condemn any Christian who believed in Luther’s teachings despite some of those teachings being incorrect.

If God doesn’t condemn Protestants for believing incorrectly in certain theological teachings, why would he condemn Jehovah’s Witnesses for having some heretical views? You called them a soul-damning cult, so let’s hear why you think that’s the case.

 

[Huckleberry]

.......I’ve prayed to saints.......in heaven many times.......

Please define "saint".
Thanks in advance.

 

[shittim]

They created their own Bible, and it is my understanding late in his life Charles Taze Russell, the founder, repented of what he had done.

 

[Rhomphaeam]

If God doesn’t condemn Protestants for believing incorrectly in certain theological teachings, why would he condemn Jehovah’s Witnesses for having some heretical views? You called them a soul-damning cult, so let’s hear why you think that’s the case.

Russell denied many key Christian doctrines including eternal punishment, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, and the existence of the Holy Spirit. He denied the existence of Hell where the wicked suffer eternal torment. He also held that the soul simply ceases to exist after death. He held that Jesus was a created being, and was actually Michael the Archangel in human form. While he taught that this Jesus died on behalf of humanity, he also taught that Jesus rose only spiritually rather than physically. While he denied the divinity of Jesus, he denied the existence of the Holy Spirit, believing that the Spirit is not a person, but simply a name given to express a specific manifestation of God’s power. In denying the divinity of Jesus and the existence of the Holy Spirit, he necessarily denied the Trinity.

Perhaps most shocking about Russell is the inevitable implication of the claim that Jesus as a man born of a virgin - yet was in person Michael the Arcangel in spirit - this Jesus of the heretical and blasphemous cult known as the Watch Tower Society must inevitably fall into the same blasphemy that is produced out of the Mormon claim to a council of the sons of Elohim seeking one of his sons to stand in the gap for his future rebellious children yet to become physical human beings - and of that number of sons are Satan and Jesus sitting in the council in heavenly places before humanity is formed physically and Adam is created in Eden. So in this scheme Satan is the spiritual brother of Jesus - and the same inevitable effect also arises in the JW cult.

I have tested this direction of believing that Jesus was an Angel and its spiritually corresponding meaning in Mormonism that Jesus is the spiritual brother of Satan - as a created being before humanity existed in Eden - and asked JW elders openly to explain the danger of this effect. The last time I did this I was astonished to hear the elder tell me with an open candour that he agreed that Jesus would have to have been spiritually related to Satan as both Satan and Jesus are both formerly Angels.

And you ask why the author of the OP says that the JW cult is soul damning cult!

 

[GoodRanger]

While he taught that this Jesus died on behalf of humanity,

I quoted you where you said Jehovah’s Witnesses profess belief in Jesus as savior of humanity. Anyone who recognizes the redemptive power of Christ is a Christian in my book irrespective over whether they have heretical theological views.

Okay, so maybe JWs think Archangel Michael is one of God’s personages, or whatever. You called that the most shocking thing about their denomination. I don’t think it’s shocking: It’s odd, but not shocking. Why would having an odd belief like that lead to eternal perdition?

What if there is a Christian who rejects supernatural explanations for God but instead thinks God is a natural entity who works within the laws of science rather than omnipotence? This is one of my beliefs that I have: That God is natural and not all-powerful. Powerful, yes: But not all-powerful. My view is an outlier among Christians, and yeah, some theologians might call it heresy. Do you really believe God would send me to hell because I don’t believe in supernatural stuff? Of course not: What earns a believer salvation in heaven is professing belief in Christ as savior.

By the same token, JWs have heretical views; that I will grant you. I’ll also admit that their beliefs are odd. But if they profess belief in Christ as savior, which you yourself conceded is the case, why would their denomination take them to hell for mere heresy?

 

[tanakh]

Reminds me a bit of the Arian heresy. It was a widespread misbelief during early Christian history where Arianists believed Christ was separate from God instead of one and the same. They were anti-Trinitarian.

The Arian heresy came about because there wasn’t a printing press at the time, and parts of the Bible could sometimes be mistranslated by scribes who weren’t completely literate or educated. This consequently resulted in theological errors, and sometimes those errors became very widespread like with Arianism.

If you’re curious about everything the Arians believed, you can read up on it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arianism#Beliefs

Jehovah’s Witness came about in the late 1800s. People at this time were educated, plus the printing press had been around for centuries, so correct translations of the Bible were everywhere. There shouldn’t have been any reason for a heresy to take off. In your opinion, what is the reason why JWs concocted so many odd beliefs that aren’t consistent with sound theological doctrine?

I do know something about the JWs When I was in my early twenties and searching. I had a friend whose Mother belonged to the movement. He tried to convert me and I attended some meetings. Strangely it wasn't their teaching that put me off but his own Father! He warned me against having anything to do with them.

Over the years I have read about them and had doorstep discussions . Its correct in saying that
the Arian Heresy is a foundational factor in their teaching. They believe that he was the only member of the first Council of Nicaea who was 'In the truth' as they call it.

 

[SomeDisciple]

https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jehovah-witness-beliefs/

"Jesus. We follow the teachings and example of Jesus Christ and honor him as our Savior and as the Son of God. (Matthew 20:28; Acts 5:31) Thus, we are Christians. (Acts 11:26) However, we have learned from the Bible that Jesus is not Almighty God" (WRONG!)

Like the Muslims, 21st century "reformation", they have this non-god idea of Jesus. Which is why their doctrine is a mess too.

 

[GoodRanger]

I do know something about the JWs When I was in my early twenties and searching. I had a friend whose Mother belonged to the movement. He tried to convert me and I attended some meetings. Strangely it wasn't their teaching that put me off but his own Father! He warned me against having anything to do with them.

Over the years I have read about them and had doorstep discussions . Its correct in saying that
the Arian Heresy is a foundational factor in their teaching. They believe that he was the only member of the first Council of Nicaea who was 'In the truth' as they call it.

It’s true that some of their practices are quirky, to say the least. I heard they don’t celebrate any holidays. Can you imagine how disappointing it would feel if everyone you knew were celebrating Thanksgiving, but you weren’t allowed to join them because your church said so? They don’t support the use of iconic Christian imagery such as crosses and crucifixes, since they think Jesus was killed on a stick instead.

I confess I feel a bit awkward having defended Jehovah’s Witnesses on this thread. Many of their beliefs are strange, but if other people are castigating them because of their denomination, it feels natural for me to come to their defense. I don’t like seeing people put down for what they believe.

 

[tanakh]

They created their own Bible, and it is my understanding late in his life Charles Taze Russell, the founder, repented of what he had done.

I'm not sure about whether they created their own Bible. I know that they used the Moffatt translation before the New World translation was published by them. I am not a Hebrew or Greek scholar but I know that many Hebrew and Greek words have more than one meaning and that it depends on context and other factors which one you apply to a verse or passage. JWs tend to use the nearest one that fits their theology. The same can apply to other Bibles that are used by various Denominations.

Here is an example...

And when he was demanded of the Pharisees when the kingdom of God should come
he answered them and said the Kingdom of God cometh not with observation. Neither
shall they say Lo here or lo there for behold the Kingdom of God is within you.

Luke 17 vs 20 -21 KJV version

In the RSV version it reads that the Kingdom of God is in the midst of you

In both versions Jesus states that you cant see the Kingdom point to it and say there it is
but in the RSV version he appears to contradict himself by saying its in their midst (among them). This may not seem important but it makes a vast difference to peoples understanding
of the subject if its not coupled with other sections of scripture.

 

[shittim]

This may help-https://www.gotquestions.org/New-World-Translation.html

 

[Handyman62]

I quoted you where you said Jehovah’s Witnesses profess belief in Jesus as savior of humanity. Anyone who recognizes the redemptive power of Christ is a Christian in my book irrespective over whether they have heretical theological views.

Okay, so maybe JWs think Archangel Michael is one of God’s personages, or whatever. You called that the most shocking thing about their denomination. I don’t think it’s shocking: It’s odd, but not shocking. Why would having an odd belief like that lead to eternal perdition?

What if there is a Christian who rejects supernatural explanations for God but instead thinks God is a natural entity who works within the laws of science rather than omnipotence? This is one of my beliefs that I have: That God is natural and not all-powerful. Powerful, yes: But not all-powerful. My view is an outlier among Christians, and yeah, some theologians might call it heresy. Do you really believe God would send me to hell because I don’t believe in supernatural stuff? Of course not: What earns a believer salvation in heaven is professing belief in Christ as savior.

By the same token, JWs have heretical views; that I will grant you. I’ll also admit that their beliefs are odd. But if they profess belief in Christ as savior, which you yourself conceded is the case, why would their denomination take them to hell for mere heresy?

If Christ/God is not supernatural how can he save you?

 

[GoodRanger]

If Christ/God is not supernatural how can he save you?

What I meant was that I don’t believe scientifically impossible things can happen by God’s will; instead I think God works within the laws of science. Let’s say God wants to create a planet. He doesn’t make it happen by simply thinking about it; what he does is use natural phenomenon in the universe to alter matter so that a world can spawn.

As for the virgin birth, I don’t deny the reality of it. It indeed happened, but it happened by natural means (here I’m not referring to intercourse, but hinting that it came about through some scientific way, though I know not how).

 

[Handyman62]

What I meant was that I don’t believe scientifically impossible things can happen by God’s will; instead I think God works within the laws of science. Let’s say God wants to create a planet. He doesn’t make it happen by simply thinking about it; what he does is use natural phenomenon in the universe to alter matter so that a world can spawn.

As for the virgin birth, I don’t deny the reality of it. It indeed happened, but it happened by natural means (here I’m not referring to intercourse, but hinting that it came about through some scientific way, though I know not how).

God created everything , and since science can't explain everything God does then God works both within the context of science or not depending on what he wants to do. He is boundless, but there are times where he works within self imposed boundaries, like when he makes promises in which he obligates himself to keep.