8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 1/10

 

Questions 41-50

41. Col 1:16, in talking about Jesus says, "... ALL [other] things have been

created through him and FOR HIM". If Jesus were Michael the Archangel

at the time of creation, would an angel have created all things for himself?

Isa 43:7 says God created "everyone ... for my OWN glory ..." If the NWT is

the most accurate word for word translation of the Bible, why does it alterthe written word of God by adding the word “[other]” even though it does

not appear in the original Greek? See Gr-Engl Interlinear. How would this

verse read if the word “[other]” had not been added? What does the word

“all” mean to you? 

Again, Jehovah's Witnesses do not have a reading comprehensionproblem. We understand what words like "all" mean.

The context of the extracted verse plainly indicates that Jesus is himself a

creation of God. Colossians 1:15-16 read: "He is the image of theinvisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of himall [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, thethings visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they arethrones or lordships or governments or authorities." Since Jesus is in the image of God, the same as Adam was initially, it isobvious that Jesus is not the Creator. It is, in fact, ludicrous to supposethat Paul was teaching Christians that God is an image of himself. Yet,that is exactly the sort of nonsense that Trinitarians would have usbelieve. Too, Trinity defenders have tried to peddle the ridiculous notionthat "firstborn" doesn't mean  the firstborn, but it simply means the mostprominent. If that's the case we will leave the Trinitarian with the burden ofexplaining why God would sanction such an awkward way of illustratinghis own undisputed position of superiority.

Anyone acquainted with the mind-wrenching reasonings of Trinitarianscan appreciate why the Watchtower felt the need to inject some clarity intosuch frequently distorted passages such as Colossians 1:15.

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 2/10

42. Heb 1:3, in speaking of Christ says, “…and he sustains ALL things by

the word of his power…” What does the word “all” mean to you? How could

Christ “sustain all things” unless he is almighty? Since only God is almighty,

what does this verse say about Christ? 

"All" means everything. No doubt all  readers understand the meaning ofsuch simple words. The Bible's simple teaching is that Jehovah is Godand that Jesus is his son. Jehovah created Jesus before all others andthereafter empowered his firstborn son to create everything else and toserve as his representative and spokesmen. When Jesus was on theearth he said that his Father had given him all things. What does the word"given " mean to you? If Christ was given his power and position by God itis obvious that Jesus is not God. So, Jesus is in effect almighty by virtueof the fact that he has total access to Jehovah's power. The distinction isthat Jehovah is almighty by nature, whereas Jesus is what he is becauseof Jehovah's generosity.

43. If the NWT is the most accurate word for word translation of the Bible,

why does it alter the word of God by adding the word “[others]” in Acts

10:36 when this word does not appear in the Greek? See Gr-Engl

Interlinear. How would this verse read if the word “[others]” had not been

added to it? What does the word “all” mean to you? Again, most readers have no trouble comprehending what simple wordslike "all" mean. The verse in question reads: "At this Peter opened hismouth and said: "For a certainty I perceive that God is notpartial, but in every nation the man that fears him and worksrighteousness is acceptable to him. He sent out the word to the sonsof Israel to declare to them the good news of peace through JesusChrist: this One is Lord of all [others]." Actually, though, the apostle Paul discussed what the word "all" means asit relates to Jesus' dominion. The questioner may be startled to know that"all" does not always mean everything  and everyone . At 1 Corinthians15:27-28, the inspired apostle wrote: "For God "subjected all thingsunder his feet." But when he says that 'all things have beensubjected,' it is evident that it is with the exception of the one whosubjected all  things to him. But when all things will have beensubjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself tothe One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all thingsto everyone." Paul reveals that the Father, Jehovah God, has indeed subjected all 

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 3/10

things to the rule of his son, Jesus. There is, however, one exception .Paul even noted that the exception is evident . God himself is theexception. What does the word "exception" mean to you?

44. Does Prov 4:18 really justify an organization replacing doctrines and

failed prophecies with new doctrines and prophecies, or does it simply

contrast the benefit to the "righteous" of obeying a wise father (Prov 4:10-

19)? A false teaching can be called a "false word" and Prov 13:5 says, "A

false word is what the righteous hates..." When the WTS changes a teaching

to something that is totally different or even the exact opposite of a previous

teaching, is it like a light that is “getting brighter and brighter” or more like

having one false light (word) completely turned off and a totally different

light turned on? Do you think the WTS would be critical of any otherreligious organization that changed its teachings as many times on as many

different issues over the last 100 years as the WTS has? In addition, Jude 3

says, “…to put up a hard fight for the faith that was ONCE FOR ALL

TIME DELIVERED to the holy ones.” Since the faith was established and

“once for all time delivered” to the first century Christians, and since the

Bible doesn’t change and God doesn’t lie or change his mind (Num 23:19, Ps

89:34, Heb 6:18), why the need for constant “new light” and ever changing

teachings of the WTS, many of which directly contradict former WTS

teachings? 

We are critical of other religions for not changing erroneous doctrines. Theproblem is that we are two thousand years removed from the time ofChrist and the apostles. In the intervening centuries, the truth has beenburied under a virtual mountain of religious lies. The early Bible Students,as Jehovah's Witnesses were originally called, set out on a course todiscover and uncover the truth and overturn the lofty things thatchurchianity has raised up against Bible truth. Overturning the babylonishdoctrines of the trinity, the immortal soul and hellfire was the easy part.Unraveling prophecy is still a work in progress. There are many changesyet to be made, but Jesus has assured us that the spirit of the truth will

eventually guide us into all the truth . At that point there will be no need forany new light of any sort.

45. According to Strong’s Greek Dictionary, the Greek word “theotes”

(Strong’s # 2320) used only once in the Bible in Col 2:9, is translated as “the

state of being God, Godhead”. If the NWT is the most accurate word for

word translation of the Bible, why does it mistranslate this Greek word

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 4/10

“theotes” as “divine quality” in Col 2:9, instead of “Godhead”? 

The NWT does not differ substantially from other translations. Here is theNWT rendition of Colossians 2:9-10: "because it is in him that all the

fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily. And so you arepossessed of fullness by means of him." Here is the popular NIV rendering: "For in Him all the fullness of Deitydwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete." Naturally, the Trinitarian is disposed to jump to the unthinking conclusionthat Jesus is God because he is filled with the same divine quality whichGod also possesses. But, the verse also says that Christians are filled ormade complete by Christ. Using the same illogic, Trinitarians would haveto suppose that anointed Christians are also God, since they are alsofilled with the same quality—or person, depending on how literal you wishto take the expression.

It should be obvious, though, to discerning readers anyway, that the verseis merely saying that Jehovah lived vicariously through  Christ, in thatChrist completely reflected God's personality and qualities. That is inharmony with many other verses that describe Jesus as being made inGod's image and being his exact representation and reflection.

46. In the WTS book You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth states on

page 147, “…Bible evidence shows that in the year 1914 C.E. God’s time

arrived for Christ to return and begin ruling.” It also states “In the same

way, Christ’s return does not mean that he literally comes back to this earth.

Rather, it means that he takes Kingdom power toward this earth and turns

his attention to it.” This event is described in Zechariah 14:4, which states,

"And HIS FEET WILL ACTUALLY STAND in that day upon the

mountain of the olive trees which is in front of Jerusalem on the east…" If 

Jesus has no body and if he will not literally come back to earth, as only the

WTS teaches, how do you explain this verse? What does the phrase “his feetwill actually stand” mean to you? In addition, Zech 14:3 says that it is

Jehovah’s feet that will stand upon the mountain of the olive trees. Since

Jesus is the one who is coming, how can this be unless Jesus and Jehovah are

one and the same? Similarly, if Christ will not have a visible return to earth,

but returned invisibly in 1914, then how was he seen by "ALL the tribes of 

the earth" (Mt 24:30), and by "EVERY eye" (Rev 1:7) when he returned?

What do the words “all” and “every” mean to you? How can Christ

"APPEAR" a second time (Heb 9:28) if he will not have a visible “return” to

earth? 

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 5/10

An insurmountable difficulty facing those who try to interpret apocalypticprophecy literally is that the Bible very simply says that no man has ever  seen God. Not only that, Jehovah told Moses that no man may see Godand live . It is simply out of the realm of possibility that mere humans canever have an up-close-and-personal encounter with God. We cannot even

glance directly at the sun for more than a few seconds without doingpermanent damage to our eyes. How do you suppose we shall look uponthe Creator of billions upon billions of suns without instantly vaporizing?

Jehovah made us with the intention of our having a spiritual relationshipwith him. In order for us to be able to relate to him, God has revealedhimself in human terms. Jehovah likens himself to humansanthropomorphically. Thus, we read in Genesis that Jehovah strolledabout in the Garden of Eden about the breezy part of the day. Since wealready know that Adam could not literally see God and survive, it isevident that the expression is intended to help us appreciate the intimate

spiritual communion that Adam had with God before he rebelled. In thatsame sense, then, we may be sure that Jehovah is not literally comingdown to stand upon the Mount of Olives.

47. According to Strong’s Greek Dictionary, the Greek word “klao”

(Strong’s # 2806) means “to break; used in the NT of the breaking of bread

or communion” and the Greek word “artos” (Strong’s # 740) means “food

made with flour mixed with water and baked” or “bread”. Jesus himself used these same words “”klao” and “artos” in Lk 22:19 at the Last Supper

and Paul also uses these words in 1Cor 11:23-24. In these verses, the NWT

translates these words accurately as “broke” and “loaf”. If the NWT is the

most accurate word for word translation of the Bible, why then does it

translate the Greek phrase “klao artos” of Acts 2:46 and Acts 20:7, as “took

their meals” and “have a meal”, instead of the much more accurate “break

bread”? See Gr-Engl Interlinear. If the NWT is the most accurate word for

word translation of the Bible, what is the reason for the inconsistency of the

translation of these words between Lk 22:19 and Acts 2:46, 20:7? In Acts

2:46, how often did the early Christians meet to break bread? 

Translators do not merely convert words into other words. They shouldseek to convey thoughts and concepts, as they were originallyunderstood. As for the verse in question: Bread was the staple for ancientpeoples. Because of that, it came to represent all food in some instances.For example, when Jesus taught his disciples to pray the model prayer,he told them to pray to his Father asking for Jehovah to supply them theirdaily bread. Are we to understand Jesus' words to mean that we shouldsubsist entirely on literal bread or that the only food God will supply uswith is bread?

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 6/10

It should be evident to discerning persons that taking bread or breakingbread together simply represents sharing meals together. The New LivingTranslation (NLT) renders Acts 2:46 as: "They  worshiped together atthe Temple each day, met in homes for the Lord's Supper, andshared their meals with great joy and generosity." 

48. Acts 1:11 says, “This Jesus who was received up from the you (apostles)

into the sky will come thus IN THE SAME MANNER as you have beheld

him going into the sky.” What does the phrase “in the same manner” mean

to you? Did Jesus literally, physically, and in plain view ascend to heaven

(see Acts 1:9)? What does the phrase “while they were looking on, he was

lifted up” in Acts 1:9 mean to you? If Jesus physically and in plain view

ascended to heaven, then how can Jesus have an “invisible” return to earth if his return will be “in the same manner” as his ascension? 

A sacred secret as enigmatic and profound as the nature of Christ's returncan never be understood by those who take a one-dimensional, this-verse-explains-it-all, approach to interpretation. Rather, one-versedoctrines are characteristic of those who are bent on deception.

The answer to your question is that Jesus did not physically ascend intoheaven in the first place, and so, therefore, will not return in that manner.

We may be assured that Jesus will never become human again basedupon Jesus' comments to Nicodemus, in the 3rd chapter of John, where heexplained that "what is flesh is flesh and what is spirit is spirit."  Thatmeans that those who are born again, as Christ was, leave off theirhuman flesh and become spirits. Paul also wrote at 2 Corinthians 5:16,saying in the now awkward phraseology of the King James: "Whereforehenceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we haveknown Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him nomore." If anointed Christians will never again know Christ according tothe flesh, then that rules out the notion that Jesus will be returning in theflesh—as many wrongly assume.

So, what did the angels mean when they said that Jesus would return inthe same manner? Well, what was the manner of his departure? Carefullyconsider the instance that led up to the angelic proclamation at Acts 1:9-11, which reads: And after he had said these things, while they werelooking on, he was lifted up and a cloud caught him up from theirvision. And as they were gazing into the sky while he was on hisway, also, look! two men in white garments stood alongside them,and they said: "Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into thesky? This Jesus who was received up from you into the sky willcome thus in the same manner as you have beheld him going into

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 7/10

the sky." Bible students ought to take note of the fact that Jesus had alreadydeparted from their view at the time the angels spoke to the disciples. Thedisciples were in fact standing there, no doubt awestruck at the spectacle

of Christ's ascension, even long after Jesus had disappeared into a cloud.At that moment the angels questioned why they were still peering into thesky, as if they were hoping to get another glimpse of Jesus. Since Jesuswas not visible at the time the angels spoke, their saying that Jesus wouldreturn in the same manner  would mean that gazing into the sky forChrist's return would be as futile as the vigil the apostles and otherdisciples were holding at the moment the angels intervened. In otherwords, Christ was invisible at the point the angels said that he wouldreturn in the same manner.

The fact that Christ was caught up in a cloud harmonizes with the

prophecy of Daniel 7:13, which reads in the NIV as follows: "In my visionat night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man,coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient ofDays and was led into his presence."

The vision in Daniel depicts the Son of man coming with the clouds of heaven and approaching Jehovah God in his residence in heaven. Oughtwe to suppose that Jehovah's heaven has literal precipitous rain cloudsfloating about? Of course not. The Watchtower has insightfully pointed outmany times that clouds are really a symbol denoting invisibility— as is

obvious in that text. For instance, clouds can literally obscure the sun,moon and stars. And, so, if the Son of man is coming on the clouds ofheaven, rather than imparting the idea that Christ is coming backphysically, discerning students of God's Word recognize that theprophecies teach us just the opposite—that Jesus' return will be invisible.

49. According to Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary, the Hebrew word “ruwach”

(Strong’s # 07307) used in Gen 1:2 means “spirit”. If the NWT is the most

accurate word for word translation of the Bible, why does it mistranslate thisword as “active force”? Similarly, in 1 John 4:1, the NWT translates the

Greek word “pneuma” as “divine expressions” even though this same Greek

word is translated as “spirit” in 1Jn 3:24, 1Jn 4:2,3, and 6. Why the

inconsistency in the translation of this word? Isn’t John's whole point here

that even though the Spirit's presence in us gives us assurance of God's love,

we are not to believe every "spirit" that claims to be from God, but test them

by the teachings which their prophets espouse, "because many false prophets

have gone out into the world"? Is the NWT obscuring this point in order to

avoid the implication that God’s "spirit" is a person rather than a force (just

as the demonic "spirits" are personal entities and not impersonal forces). In

addition, in 1Tim 4:1, the NWT translates the simple Greek word “pneuma”as “inspired utterance”, instead of “spirit”. What is the reason for this

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 8/10

inconsistency in translation of the word “pneuma”? Is it because a

straightforward “the spirit says” would too obviously imply the personality

of the Holy Spirit? 

The questioner supposes that words do not have multiple meanings orthat there are not subtle nuances to certain words. In this he is very muchmistaken. According to Jason BeDuhn, in his Truth in Translation , theproblem is that modern translators have erroneously consolidated manybiblical references to the spirit into the simplistic concept of the holy spirit. Actually, the Hebrew word "ruach" comes from a root word that means to breathe . It also can mean wind or the vital force that initiates breathing.Depending on the context, oftentimes ruach  is translated as wind. TheGreek equivalent is "pneuma," which is where English words likepneumatic and pneumonia come from—of course, also having to do withair or breathing air. Interestingly, many translations render pneuma  aswinds instead of spirits at Hebrews 1:7. (In speaking of the angels hesays, "He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire.") NIV

So the original languages used those terms to simply indicate that spirit isan invisible force, much like breath or wind. The term "active force" moreliterally translates the flavor of the Hebrew and Greek words at Genesis1:2. As far as 1 John 4:1, the NWT reads: "Beloved ones, do not believe

every inspired expression, but test the inspired expressions to seewhether they originate with God, because many false prophets havegone forth into the world." Translators of the Bible recognize that thesame word may have different meanings depending on its usage. That'swhy the notion of a word-for-word literal translation is misleading. It is truethat the word generally translated as "spirit" is used in this text. However,translating the Bible demands that translators make the original thought  available to the reader—not merely the corresponding word in anotherlanguage. Hence, in that context the Hebrew word generally translated asspirit carries the thought of being breathed upon by a spirit in the sense ofbeing inspired. The English word "inspiration," similar to the word

"respiration," carries the connotation of the original language, in that theone inspired acknowledges being touched or influenced by an outsidesource. In the Bible inspiration literally means that God breathed upon theone inspired. Revelation indicates that the demons can also breathe uponmen and inspire them to tell lies. So, that is the sense of 1 John 4:1:Inspired expressions are the end result of the spirit breathing upon thoseindividuals.

The New Living Bible (NLB) similarly expresses John 4:1, saying: "Dearfriends, do not believe everyone who claims to speak by the Spirit.You must test them to see if the spirit they have comes from God.

For there are many false prophets in the world." In the original therewas no word that would correspond with the English word "speak,"

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 9/10

however, the translators of the NLB recognized that in order to impart tothe reader the real sense of the original expression, it was necessary toindicate that the verse was not referring to the spirits themselves, butrather to the utterances the spirits inspired. 

50. To what was Jesus referring to by the term "this temple" in Jn 2:18-19?

In Jn 2:21 John explicitly states that when Jesus used the term "this

temple", he was referring to his body. If the WTS teaching that Jesus' body

was destroyed after his death is correct, then how do you explain these

verses? 

Jesus was speaking in spiritual  terms that the Jews and even his ownapostles could not at first understand. Most people think of a temple  interms of a physical structure where some type of formal worship orsacrifice is carried out. In Jesus' day the temple of God was the stone-and-mortar edifice located in Jerusalem. Jesus originally spoke thosewords to the Jews to give them pause to reconsider how God expected tobe worshipped from that point on. Jesus foretold that the Jewish templewas going to be razed to the ground, with not a stone left upon a stone.The Christian congregation was going to replace the Jewish nation asGod's organization. But, instead of having a physical temple, Christ andhis anointed followers would constitute a spiritual temple for God to inhabit

by spirit, and Jesus, as the head of that organization, is called the chiefcornerstone of the "building." That's why Jesus compared himself to theJewish temple. Furthermore, Jesus' fleshly body was sacrificed to God, as if on a templealtar. After his resurrection Jesus became God's high priest, ministeringon the basis of his own sacrifice. That is why Jesus referred to the templeof his body. Here are a few relevant verses that indicate the spiritualnature of God's temple. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17: "Do you not know that you people are God's

temple , and that the spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroysthe temple  of God, God will destroy him; for the temple of God isholy, which temple you people are." 1 Corinthians 6:19: "What! Do you not know that the body of youpeople is the temple of the holy spirit within you, which you havefrom God?" 2 Corinthians 6:16: "For we are a temple of a living God; just as Godsaid: "I shall reside among them and walk among them, and I shall

be their God, and they will be my people." 

8/8/2019 The Watchtower Answers Its Critics (Part 5) 10 Pag

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-watchtower-answers-its-critics-part-5-10-pag 10/10

Ephesians 2:20-22: "While Christ Jesus himself is the foundationcornerstone. In union with him the whole building, beingharmoniously joined together, is growing into a holy temple forJehovah. In union with him you, too, are being built up together intoa place for God to inhabit by spirit."