CORRECTING FALSE “JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES” TEACHINGS, PART 2 OF 3

What’s in a name? In short, the answer is “a lot.”

Our misguided friends among the so-called Jehovah’s Witnesses (JWs) emphasize the covenant name of God, YHWH (Yahweh, or Jehovah), above all other descriptors of God’s people. I’m going to expose three problems with this. 

First, if the JWs were accurately bearing witness to the truth of YHWH’s Scripture, I wouldn’t have as much of a problem with the name they use. As things stand, however, it’s problematic. All true Christians are faithful witnesses to Jehovah because we teach His word in truth. They don’t, so, sadly, they’re taking His name in vain (Exodus 20:7). 

Second, there is a name Scripture teaches Jesus’ disciples to wear, and it’s His. This doesn’t forbid our wearing His Father’s name or any other of the several biblical descriptors of His people, but the primary name affirmed by Scripture by which Jesus’ disciples came to be known is “Christian.” Luke recorded in Acts, “And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians (Acts 11:26 ESV).” The apostle Peter wrote, “Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name” (1 Peter 4:16 ESV). Since the bible says to, I plan to continue glorifying God in that name. The text doesn’t say, “If anyone suffers as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” In fact, you’ll never find any mention of “Jehovah’s Witnesses” anywhere in Scripture. As with “Trinity,” that, alone, doesn’t mean it’s necessarily unbiblical, but then again, the Bible does teach us to baptize “in the name of the Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 28:19). It hardly makes sense to believe (as the JWs do) this means “in the name of God and of a god and of a lifeless force.” How does a lifeless force have any name on a level with God the Father and Son? So, Trinity makes sense, and, as I said above, true Christians are witnesses to Jehovah's existence, truth, goodness, justice, and grace, but the Bible calls us Christians. That ought to be good enough, which leads us to the next problem.

The third problem has to do with why the JWs don’t just call themselves Christians. One reason is that they don’t believe true Christians are Christians and distinguish themselves from us on purpose for that reason. They do not think Christians are saved. They accuse any who believe in the biblical doctrine of the Trinity of being polytheists who worship three gods and nothing could be farther from the truth. As I plan to prove next, honoring Christ is honoring Jehovah (John 5:23). 

Jesus said in no uncertain terms, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30 ESV). That’s a huge statement, and it means Jesus is as much God as God the Father is. He is one of the three persons of the Trinity. 

God is one God who has existed eternally in the form of three persons. Though the word Trinity doesn’t occur in Scripture, the concept does. From Genesis to Revelation, the Scriptures bear it out in both subtle and apparent ways. 

The JWs deny the deity of Christ. They claim He was merely the greatest and first created of the created celestial beings, the first “angel.” They argue that after God created the Son, He created all the rest of the celestial beings (various kinds and orders of angels) through Him, and then, again through the Son, everything else. 

Specifically, the JWs say Jesus was the archangel Michael before His incarnation. That cannot be true. Jude 9 has Michael refusing to utter “blasphemous” judgment against Satan but saying instead, “The Lord rebuke you.” Reason with me here. If Michael were the Firstborn through whom Satan was created, Michael would’ve had every right to rebuke Him, being clearly his creator and, thus, unquestionably his superior. 

Colossians 1:15–17 says of Christ, “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together” (ESV). 

Satan is one of those invisible rulers in the heavenly places (see also Ephesians 6:12) that Scripture says were created by Jesus for Jesus. How, then, would it be blasphemy for Michael to rebuke a being he created for himself if he were indeed the Son of God? Michael, though a ruling angel and undoubtedly a great power of good deserving respect, never was God the Son through whom and for whom all beings were created. Michael was, as was Satan, created by Jesus for Jesus, just like we were. All this is not to mention that Michael says, “The Lord rebuke you,” and Jesus is referred to as Lord in both Testaments repeatedly (see, for example, Psalm 110:1; Matthew 22:41–46). Jesus is Lord. JW doctrine is self-contradictory. Please think about this. 

JW’s teachings about Christ are a repackaging of the ancient Aryan heresy and create major problems with the essential doctrines of atonement and reconciliation, but that’s a subject for another time. For now, I’ll just say that JW doctrine is indeed heresy. It’s antichristian doctrine. 

Sadly, the JWs also deny the resurrection of Christ, another essential doctrine of the Faith. They claim Jesus was not raised bodily but as a spirit only. Jesus existed in the form of God and became flesh (Philippians 2:5–8). He lived in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16), died in the flesh (1 Peter 2:24), and rose from the dead in the flesh (Acts 2:30–32), that is, as an embodied human being, now forever immortal (Romans 6:9). This is the meaning of resurrection. The Greek word is “anastasis,” which is a compound of “ana,” which properly means “up,” and “histemi,” which means, “to stand.” So, resurrection means the body laid low in the grave is made to stand again. In other words, it isn’t resurrection unless the body is brought back to life. 

In Acts 17:30–32, we read of the apostle Paul preaching to pagan Greeks in Athens. “‘The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.’ Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, ‘We will hear you again about this’” (ESV).

Practically everyone in the ancient world believed in a spirit existence of some kind or another after the death of the physical body. If that’s all the early Christians were preaching, the pagan Greeks wouldn’t have mocked, but when Paul came preaching the resurrection, that’s precisely what some of them did because they recognized he was talking about God raising the dead back to life bodily. 

The Greeks already believed in life after death. Paul wasn’t just preaching that God had raised Jesus as a spirit. That wouldn’t have proved anything to them. But that God had raised Him up spirit, soul, and body, that was a mighty claim!

Jesus’ resurrected body was free from the limitations He formerly had while in the mortal body, which is evident in passages like Luke 24:31 and John 20:19 and 26. However, that it was, in fact, His material human body is evident in passages like John 20:20 and 27 and Luke 24:36–43. Take it from Jesus’ own mouth: “A spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” 

And in case someone wants to claim that Jesus put off the body when He ascended into heaven, familiarize yourself with Colossians 2:8–9, which teaches, “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily” (ESV). This was written in the present tense after Jesus ascended into heaven, proving He remains an embodied human at God’s right hand in heaven. Jesus is still all the fullness of deity in bodily form. He is and will forever be God being a Man. 

Finally, a quick look at the opening passage in the gospel of John will expose the false and deceptive “New World Translation” of the Bible produced by the JW’s Watchtower.

Accurate Bible versions read similarly to the following:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1 ESV).

The New World Translation (NWT) reads:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god” (John 1:1).

The original Greek looks like this (words for “the God” and “God,” respectively, underlined):

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.

Transliterated:

En arche ēn ho logos, kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon, kai theos ēn ho logos.

I will make two vital points here, which I’ll keep as simple as possible, but fair warning, it’s about to get slightly technical. 

“Logos” is translated as “Word.” Jesus is the Living Word of God. The words for God are “theon” and “theos.” The different letters on the ends of the words signal their distinct functions in the sentence. The “n” ending marks the word as the “accusative” case or, in English, the direct object. So, it’s literally, “The Word was with God” or “The Word was with the God.” The “s” ending marks the word as the “nominative” case or, in English, the subject. It’s “God was the Word.” 

Now, notice that the two words for God are different not only in their endings but also in the presence and lack of the definite article. The first instance of the word has the article (“ton”), and the second instance doesn’t. The JWs claim that the lack of a definite article before the second instance means it should be translated as “a god” rather than God. And they’re doubly mistaken.

First, they’re just not being honest. How do I know? Here’s how I know. Here’s the JW’s NWT of John 3:2, “This one came to him in the night and said to him: ‘Rabbi, we know that you have come from God as a teacher, for no one can perform these signs that you perform unless God is with him.’”

The problem is that the JWs translate both instances of the Greek word for God here with capital letters, but in Greek, the first instance of the word doesn’t have the direct article, and the second one does. Why did they not render the passage: “Rabbi, we know that you have come from a god as a teacher, for no one can perform these signs that you perform unless God is with him”? Could it be because they recognized that the presence or lack of the article in Greek doesn’t work the same way it does in English?

According to Greek grammar and syntax, the absence of the definite article does not necessarily make the noun indefinite (i.e., "a god"). In John 1:1, the phrase "θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος" (theos ēn ho logos) uses a grammatical structure known as a predicate nominative. In Greek, a predicate nominative without the article often indicates qualitative significance, which means it focuses on the “quality,” or nature or essence of the subject, which means John 1:1 is saying the Word shares the same essence or nature as God.

The JW’s deceptive version says “a god” in John 1:1 because that wording supports their false Christology. They disingenuously claim the lack of the article in Greek supports this while proving they know the article doesn’t necessarily function that way in Greek by the way they’ve translated John 3:2. In other words, whoever made the NWT is a liar and a deceiver. If memory serves, there are even more examples of this, but this one is sufficient to prove my point. 

The apostle John wrote, “Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works” (2 John 9–11 ESV). 

This is a difficult passage. While God is indeed gracious towards our imperfect knowledge, we all should follow biblical doctrines perfectly. Of course, none of us are capable of that on our own. God has always been gracious towards honest mistakes but wrathful towards willful rebellion if we persist in it. There are essential doctrines of the Faith we can’t get wrong and still be right with God. At the very least, 2 John 9–11 teaches us that the biblical teachings about Christ Himself are among these absolute essentials of the Faith. Anyone who continues to deny the truth about Jesus cannot be saved. It seems safe to conclude that one cannot be saved as a part of the JWs, and therefore, it is the loving thing to do to warn them and try our best to refute the false teachings they’ve embraced and bring them into the light of the truth. 

---JLP

For more information about the correct translation of John 1:1, see any of the following, each of which offers specific analyses of John 1:1 and/or the qualitative use of predicate nominatives:

Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Zondervan, 1996).

A.T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Broadman Press, 1934).

Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John (New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1995).

F.F. Bruce, The Gospel of John: Introduction, Exposition, and Notes (Eerdmans, 1983).

D.A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Pillar New Testament Commentary, Eerdmans, 1991).

Andreas J. Köstenberger, John (Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Baker Academic, 2004).

Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration (Oxford University Press, 2005).