Search This Blog

JW.ORG and Watchtower Library in one search box:

Monday, September 30, 2013

How Do We Know That The Paradise Mentioned For the Future Earth is Literal and not Figurative?

It is evident that the restoration prophecies recorded by the Hebrew prophets include elements that will also
find a physical fulfillment in the restored earthly Paradise. There are features that Isaiah recorded in Isaiah 35:1-7, for example, such as the healing of the blind and the lame, that did not have a literal fulfillment following the restoration from ancient Babylon, nor are they fulfilled in such a manner in the Christian spiritual paradise.

So it would be inconsistent for God to inspire such prophecies as those of Isaiah 11:6-9, Ezekiel 34:25, and Hosea 2:18, with the intention that they have only a figurative or spiritual meaning, without having a literal fulfillment of these things in the physical experiences of God’s servants.

In other words, these recorded Bible prophecies described LITERAL paradise-like conditions that will find fulfillment in a future restored earth.

Note what these Bible scholars say concerning this:

Joseph A. Seiss said, “The whole earth under the Messiah must then ultimately become . . . what it . . . would have been if Adam had never sinned.”

In the commentary The New Testament for English Readers, Henry Alford wrote: “That kingdom of God . . . shall work onwards till it shall become actually a kingdom over this earth, and its subjects shall inherit the earth . . . , finally in its renewed and blessed state for ever."

And famous scientist and keen student of the Bible Isaac Newton wrote: “The earth shall continue to be inhabited by mortals [humans] after the day of judgment and that not only for 1000 years, but even for ever.”

Recommended Related Articles:

Paradise - Links to Information (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

The Bible’s Viewpoint - Will Earth Be a Paradise? (ip-1 chap. 28 pp. 369-381; Watchtower Online Library)

What is the Paradise that Jesus promised to the evildoer who died alongside him? (Insight-2 pp. 574-577; Watchtower Online Library)

Life in a Restored Paradise (JW.ORG)



Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Sunday, September 29, 2013

It's The Bible That ORIGINALLY Said That Apostates Are “Mentally Diseased” - Not the Watchtower Article

First, [many] are mistaken as to who said that apostates are “mentally diseased.” The Watchtower article was quoting GOD’S WORD at 1 Tim. 6:3-5. So it is God Himself who uses the term “mentally diseased” or “mentally depraved” of those who teach contrary doctrine!!

Second, you notice that critics of [Jehovah's] Witnesses must always in some way misrepresent what was said by Witnesses. The article was not talking about "those who leave" the Witnesses but about a specific group: Apostates.

So as usual, you will notice that those who criticize the Witnesses require from their hearers an ignorance of the Bible (or blindness). Because when they criticize the Witnesses they end up criticizing God Himself and His Word!! That is called blasphemy!

Lexicons, dictionaries, commentaries and other versions make it clear what God has said here. The Greek word (NOSWN) literally does denote a sickness or disease–in this case of the mind! The NIV says they have "corrupted minds" in verse 5!

NWT: "If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth."

RSV, ESV: "...among people who are depraved in mind."

ROTHERHAM: "... diseased about questionings,..."

Gill: "but doting about questions and strifes of words: or he is "sick or diseased"; his mind is distempered; he is like one in a fever, that is delirious;"

Barnes' Notes: "But doting. Marg., sick. The Greek word— nosew —means properly to be sick; ...The meaning here is, that such persons had a sickly or morbid desire for debates of this kind. They had not a sound and healthy state of mind ...They were like a sickly man, ...a diseased appetite."

MH: "Observe, Men of corrupt minds are destitute of the truth.."

OLB Lexicon: "1) to be sick 2) metaph. of any ailment of the mind 2a) to be taken with such an interest in a thing as amounts to a disease"

Vines': "noseo signifies "to be ill, to be ailing," whether in body or mind; hence, "to be taken with such a morbid interest in a thing as is tantamount to a disease, to dote," 1 Tim. 6:4 (marg., "sick"). Notes: (1) Noseo, "to be sick," is used metaphorically of mental ailment, in 1 Tim. 6:4, "doting" (marg., "sick")."

Thayer's: "{3552} nosew , ..."to be sick"; metaphorically, of any ailment of the mind be taken with such an interest in a thing as amounts to a disease, to have a morbid fondness for, 1Timothy 6:4"

The Watchtower article only applied this to Apostates--those who have once been JWs and rather than just leave peacefully have now turned on and attacked true Christians using deceptions, misrepresentations and lies.

While the Watchtower only applied this to "Apostates" God's Word actually applied it to ANYONE who "teaches false doctrines" (NIV)!!!

No, people who believe incorrectly and even criticize the true Christian religion are not “automatically mentally diseased." Some are just ignorant like the Apostle Paul before his conversion. However, ANYONE who purposely continues to use misrepresentations and lies to argue against Biblical Truth is mentally warped!


It is ludicrous to accuse God of being unfair for calling non-believers "mentally diseased" and "corrupted in mind." And it is just as ludicrous to criticize the Witnesses when they pass on God's thinking by quoting the Bible!

Source: This is an answer given by Bar_Anerges to a question from Yahoo! Answers.


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Saturday, September 28, 2013

What is a "Principle" and Why is it Important?

A principle is defined as "a general or fundamental truth: a comprehensive and fundamental law, doctrine, or assumption on which others are based or from which others are derived." - Webster's Third New International Dictionary

Principles differ from laws in that they provide the BASIS for laws. They provide direction on things that are not specifically covered by a Law. Rules may be provided for some particular time or situation, but principles are timeless. (Psalm 119:111) Divine principles do not become outdated or pass away as the following Scripture can well attest: "The green grass has dried up, the blossom has withered; but as for the word of our God, it will last to time indefinite." (Isaiah 40:8)

Many machines are designed to obey instructions. Animals have instincts. But when Jehovah declared "Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness," humans were created to be guided by principles. (Genesis 1:26) In addition, since they contain the potential for personal decisions as to application, they allow a person to knowingly or unknowingly show what is in their hearts.

For our benefit, Jehovah has had hundreds of these principles recorded in His Word. It is interesting that while all godly principles are beneficial, some carry more weight than others. For instance, in Matthew 22:37-39, Jesus showed that among the commandments and corresponding principles of the Mosaic Law, some were more important than others.

Mt. 22:37-39 says: "He said to him: "`You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.' This is the greatest and first commandment. The second, like it, is this, `You must love your neighbor as yourself." (NWT)

Out of the hundreds of principles found in the Bible, it may be difficult to actually know them all. But keeping in mind the Scripture above, the key principles of the Bible are those that have a direct bearing upon our relationship with Jehovah. If we take these to heart, God becomes the prime influence on our moral compass. Secondary, there are the principles that affect our relationships with other people.

For more concerning principles, see:

Bible Principles — INDEX; Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

How Do Bible Principles Benefit Us? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Godly Principles Can Benefit You — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Your Choice of Principles — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Guide Your Steps by Godly Principles — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

How to Be a Good Father: Five Bible Principles (JW.ORG)

Before and After—Bible Principles Made a Difference — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Find Contentment by Applying Bible Principles — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Friday, September 27, 2013

Why Do Jehovah's Witnesses Use the Term 'Governing Body' and is There Scriptural Example?

First there is abundant evidence that Christ did in fact place a responsible group of men to serve as a
responsible governing body. The power to make authoritative decisions--"bind and loose" was first given to the "small group" of twelve apostles (Mt.18:15ff.). Jesus states that he would appoint a "steward" (manager--NIV) who would have authority "over" the majority (Lk.12:41ff.; Mat.24:45ff). In the first six chapters of Acts the apostles appear as a governing body to whom the congregations are subject. They held an "office" of oversight; an "apostleship" which required the congregations to "devote themselves" to this small group's teachings. (Ac 1:20,25,26; 2:14, 37, 42, 43; 4:35,37; 5:2; 6:2-6).

The accounts in Acts 6:2-6 and 8:5,14-17 then tells us that the twelve invested others with authority and position: "search out for yourselves seven certified men...that *we* may appoint them." In turn these appointed men were not independent; they reported to and received authority from the Governing agency (Ac 8:5, 14-17; 21:18-19).

The account of Acts 15 shows that local “churches” did not independently make their own determination on doctrine, but went to Jerusalem for a decision from the "Apostles and Older men" on the Jerusalem counsel. The Jerusalem Governing Body went beyond the original question of circumcision and unilaterally made an all encompassing "rule" regarding doctrine and the Mosaic Law and then appointed authoritative representatives (Ac 15:25) to travel to all congregations and report the binding decrees of the Jerusalem Governing Body. "Now as they traveled on through the cities they would deliver to those there for observance the decrees that had been decided upon by the apostles and older men who were in Jerusalem"(Ac 16:4 cf. Jn.13:16).

These *decrees* were not optional nor subject to approval by local congregations--they were binding! (Ac 2:42; Jude 17; 1Co 1:10; Ro 16:17). Those who were “overseers” of the Christian congregation were “appointed” to "preside/rule", "give orders," "command" and discipline/expel those who were disobedient in the local congregations: ((Ac 20:28; 1Th 4:1,2; 1Th 5:12; Tit 1:5; 1Ti 5:17; 2Th 3:14; 1Tim.1:3; Tit. 1:13; 3:10,11).

Obviously, Scripture makes it clear that authority was centralized around a small governing body and overseers appointed by them! There was an organizational authority within the Christian Congregation (Ac.14:23; Eph.4:11-13; 1Cor.12:18-31; Tit 1:5,9).

Witnesses pattern our organization after that indicated in the Bible: First, a "governing body" of experienced spiritual men oversee the worldwide evangelizing work (Ac.15:2,6,7,22-31; 16:4,5; 8:14; Gal 2:9). Each congregation is taught and organized by a group of spiritual men who are "elders" (PRESBYTER) or "overseers" (EPISKOPOS) and "ministerial servants" (DIAKONOUS) 1Tim.3:1-13; Tit.1:5-9; 1Pt 5:2,3).

Any religion which does not follow these mandates cannot be truly Christian.

However, we do NOT look to either the WTS nor the Governing Body as the final authority.

Witnesses believe that the Bible is the *final* authority on doctrinal belief and it cannot be overridden by any human or organization (w98 3/15 p.18; km 9/02 p.2; g80 9/22 p.12; it-1 p.1205; g75 10/22 p.22; g70 4/22 p.25).

The Governing Body itself has reproved Witnesses for even using terminology that would even appear to place the WTS as their authority on any subject, reemphasizing that JW's should use only the Bible as their source.--(w98 3/15 p.18)

The Witnesses actual teaching is very clear for all to read: "What God's Word has to say on any issue should be considered as final and binding on all members"--(w68 2/1 p. 84)

Just as in the first century Christian congregation, the decisions of these elders are not arbitrary but are completely based on Scriptures and the obvious direction of the Holy Spirit. Their decisions can be double-checked and verified by an examination of the Scriptures. So, confidence and obedience to these teachers in the congregation comes from personally confirming that the decisions are based ONLY on the Scriptures.

The only authority Jehovah's Witnesses give to Christian overseers is that which is mandated by Holy Scripture. Anyone who criticizes JWs on this arrangement must also criticize the Apostles, the first century Christians and the Bible itself.

All Witnesses do is to invite others to do the same, critically examine your beliefs in light of the plain and explicit teaching of Scripture and the evidence in the actions of your religion and its members, then choose to follow Christ closely (Rom.10:1-3; Eph.1:17).

Source: This is an answer given by Bar_Anerges to a question from Yahoo! Answers.

Also see:

GOVERNING BODY - Links to Information (INDEX; Watchtower Online Library)

How the Governing Body Differs From a Legal Corporation (w01 1/15 pp. 28-31; Watchtower Online Library)

“We Have Come to a Unanimous Accord” (bt chap. 14 pp. 108-115; Watchtower Online Library)

How Does the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses Today Look to Jehovah God and Jesus Christ For Direction in all Matters? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

Does the Governing Body Really Claim a “Right to Rule” Over Jehovah's Witnesses as Some Opposers Suggest? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

If a Member of the Governing Body Leaves, Does That Really Mean That the Organization is a 'Failure'? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Thursday, September 26, 2013

"No Man Has Seen the Father"

John 5:37 - "The Father who sent me ... his form you have never seen"-RSV

Numbers 12:8 - "with [Moses] I speak mouth to mouth ... and he beholds the form of [Jehovah]."

Therefore, some trinitarians claim, Moses saw the form of Jehovah. And since Jesus said that men have never seen the form of the Father, the Father must not be Jehovah. Jehovah God of the Old Testament must really be Jesus, they say.

First, we should note that Jesus was speaking to first century Jews at John 5:37. Of course they had never seen the "form" of Jehovah. That does not necessarily mean that Moses did not see the "form" of the Father more than a thousand years earlier!

Second, John tells us that no man has ever seen God (John 1:18, 1 John 4:12). And yet many men have seen Jesus (hundreds saw him even after his resurrection). Therefore, Jesus cannot be God, but Jehovah certainly is God. Therefore Jesus cannot be Jehovah!

Furthermore, we know Jehovah is not Jesus:

Psalm 110:1 - "Jehovah saith unto [Jesus - compare Acts 2:34-36]" - ASV;

Ps. 2:2 - "the rulers take counsel together against Jehovah, and against his anointed [Messiah - compare Acts 4:24-27]" - ASV;

Ps. 2:7 - "I will tell of the decree: Jehovah said unto me, thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee' [compare Acts 13:33,34]" - ASV;

Micah 5:2, 4 - "And he [Jesus] shall stand, and shall feed his flock ... in the majesty of the name of Jehovah his God." - ASV.

We also know that Jehovah is the Father, not the Son. Jehovah is never called "the Son," "the Messiah," "the only-begotten," "the firstborn," etc. But he is called the Father: "O Jehovah, thou art our Father" - Is. 64:8 ASV (compare Is. 63:16; Jer. 3:19, 20; Deut. 32:6; Ps. 89:26, 27).

And we know that Jehovah alone is the only true God.

"Father,.... This is eternal life to know thee who alone art truly God..." - Jn 17:1, 3, NEB. Cf. Ps. 86:6, 10; Is. 45:5, 6, 21, 22.

Numbers 12:8 Examined

So, how can we reconcile Nu. 12:8 ("[Moses] beholds the form of Jehovah") with the rest of the Bible? Especially when Jehovah Himself said just before he showed Moses His "form": "man shall not see me and live" (Ex. 33:20 - ASV)!

First, Robert Young tells us in Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible, "Hints and Helps to Bible Interpretation":

"What a SERVANT says or does is ascribed to the MASTER."

That is why angels sent directly from God and perfectly speaking God's very words to humans are frequently called "God" or "Jehovah": Ex. 3:2, 4; Gen. 32:24-28, 30 and Hosea 12:3, 4; Gen. 31:11, 13; Gen. 16:11, 13; Judges 13:21, 22. Therefore, seeing the form of one of God's perfect representatives was spoken of as seeing God. (E.g. Manoa knew he had spoken with an angel of Jehovah and yet said: "we shall surely die because we have seen God." - Judges 13:21, 22 ASV.)

Second, the Hebrew word translated "form" at Nu. 12:8 is temunah which is used 10 times in the entire Old Testament. It can be translated "form," "likeness," "image," or "similitude" (as in KJV). "Similitude" means "one that is like or similar; a facsimile."

In fact, Dr. William F. Beck, noted Lutheran scholar, translated Nu.12:8 - "[Moses] sees what the LORD is like." - The Holy Bible in the Language of Today.

And the Holy Bible: Easy-to-Read Version translates Nu. 12:8 - "Moses can look at the very image of the Lord." (Examine uses of temunah at Ex. 20:4; Deut. 4:16, 23, 25; and 5:8.)

So, just because Jehovah's angel, speaking and acting for Jehovah, showed Moses a portion of his glory as a "likeness" or "image" of God does not mean that Moses literally saw God "face to face." (For another interpretation of Nu. 12:8 examine the footnote in the NIVSB.) In fact, we see that, even though Moses had just spoken "face-to-face" with God (Ex. 33:11), God says that no man (including Moses, of course) can actually see His "face" and live! (Ex. 33:20, 23).

We can see, then, that when John said that no man had ever seen God, he meant it in the literal, physical sense: no man has actually seen the very person of God (who is the Father, Jehovah, only) with his physical eyes. We can also be confident that, since many men have seen Jesus (both before and after his resurrection - and, probably, in his pre-existent form as the Angel of Jehovah whom Moses saw, as even some trinitarian reference works show ), Jesus cannot be God!

(To read the entire research article, click here.)

Similar Articles:

Since "No Man Has Seen God at Any Time", Then How Was it That Moses Knew God "Face to Face"? (Deut. 34:10) (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

"Seen Me: Seen Father" - John 14:7-9 (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

"Omnipresence"/ "Abiding In"/ "See Me: See Father" (Search For Bible Truths)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Addressing the False Claim That Jehovah's Witnesses Avoid Answering Questions

Any claim that [Jehovah's] Witnesses run from any subject or avoid answering questions is just a pipe-dream of those who constantly present ridiculous and absurd lies and misrepresentations. The fact that Witnesses have answered EVERY type of question on this forum proves that [these] claims are incorrect and misrepresent the facts.

While we are not obligated to continue proving what is obvious, most JWs will continue to present evidence to "everyone who demands a reason for our beliefs" (1 Pet. 3:15), depending on how obnoxious the individual is.

To be a Witness, you must talk to people of all religions who will challenge your beliefs and force you to continue to research your own beliefs. After a while, we do begin to see that all claims against what Witnesses believe are consistently dishonest or unscriptural, so many Witnesses will not give these claims more than cursory attention. Once you've proven a dollar bill is genuine do you have to keep proving it to every unreasonable critic? No. You just quickly point out the obvious differences and ignore the aliterate.

Even in our field ministry, most Witnesses will provide an answer to almost any question which someone asks them, even if it was repeated from an apostate source. My *personal* view here is that I choose to answer almost any question because there is an audience who should be able to hear the correct answer even if the questioner is beyond accepting proper reasoning. (The only ones I don't regularly answer are those who are so cowardly that they have blocked me!).

On the other hand, it is the standard practice of [certain] people... to avoid doctrinal subjects which can be proven or disproved by the Bible. This [is] because they realize that we do teach the Bible - so they can only present emotive arguments and biased and false opinions about our practices. When someone questions our current beliefs, they always find that we can provide overwhelmingly sound and logical evidence to support our beliefs from Scripture.

This question only follows the usual pattern of those who cannot defend their beliefs by Scripture or sound arguments. They resort to hypocritical and prejudicial statements.

Ex-Christians want to ask their own disingenuous and slanderous questions in an attempt to prejudice others against Jehovah's Witnesses but they run like scared rabbits when anyone asks them similarly pointed questions.

It is very obvious that ex-JWs avoid questions on their beliefs for several reasons. They are embarrassed of their beliefs. Or they realize it will show that they are not united. Or they realize that if they answer then their beliefs will be disproved by explicit teachings God's Word. Or it will reveal that they make common cause with apostate Christendom. Or they quite simply don't know what they should believe.

Source: This is an Answer given by Bar_Anerges to a question from Yahoo! Answers.

Also see:

When Others Demand an Explanation (be study 27 p. 174-p. 178 par. 2; Watchtower Online Library)

“With a Mild Temper and Deep Respect” (w01 7/15 pp. 21-23; Watchtower Online Library)

When others demanded that a Christian give a reason for his hope, he was to do so “with a mild temper and deep respect.” (it-2 pp. 782-783; Watchtower Online Library)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Does the Name 'Jehovah' Belong in the New Testament?

Does God's Name 'Jehovah' Belong in the New Testament? 

'Jehovah' is a rendering of God's name that has been recognized for centuries. In the original Hebrew text, the name appears nearly 7,000 times. Its use throughout the Scriptures far outnumbers that of any of the titles, such as "Sovereign Lord" or "God," applied to Him.

Here are the four instances the name "Jehovah" is used in the King James Bible:

In Hebrew, God's name appears as four consonants: יהוה. These consonants are transliterated YHWH and are known as the Tetragrammaton.

At some point a superstitious idea arose among the Jews that it was wrong even to pronounce the divine name. Evidently, later copyists kept to following the tradition of eliminating the distinctive name of God by replacing it with Ky´ri·os and The·os´ ("LORD" and "GOD"). Unfortunately, because of the superstitions and traditions (things which Jesus condemned - Mt. 15:1-9) concerning the Divine Name, God's name was generally removed from the texts altogether.

Does the Name 'Jehovah' Belong in the New Testament?

Yes, most of the physical evidence found in existing N(ew) T(estament) manuscripts does not support "Jehovah" in the New Testament. But what makes such a difference is the belief that BOTH "Testaments" are the word of God and must not contradict each other in important areas of knowledge.

We can accept both "Testaments" as the inspired word of God and still see understandable differences occurring between the two, but not basic contradictory differences. For example, we know how and why animal sacrifices to God have been done away with. It has been carefully, logically explained in the NT and, therefore, does not contradict the OT teachings where such sacrifices were required (essential). But where is the careful, logical explanation that shows that the necessary knowledge and use of God's name (as clearly acknowledged by word and example throughout the OT) was done away with in the NT?

It's not there. How can it be that God reveals His personal name and commands that it be publicly acknowledged and used forever by His servants (and they respectfully do so for over a thousand years) and then, for no scriptural reason, His worshipers suddenly begin refusing to use that name and even hide it?

Therefore, if we are to keep the Scriptures from terribly contradicting themselves in an extremely important area, we must conclude that either the OT scriptures are wrong or the oldest available NT manuscripts and fragments (at least those which actually contain places that quote from the OT where "YHWH" was originally used) are copies that have been CHANGED FROM THE ORIGINAL. Since the name of God being used as YHWH even in everyday life is attested to by archaeological findings back to the 8th century B. C. at least, we are really forced to conclude that, yes, the existing NT manuscripts are terribly wrong in this particular area.

Therefore, we know that the Name belongs in the NT. Besides, the MSS we have today were copies of copies, etc., written hundreds of years after the originals, and therefore may well have been changed when the name became a hated "Jewish" name to "Christians" (around 135 A.D.).

And even with these changes, the Name has not been entirely left out of the N.T. since Revelation 19:1, 3, 4, 6 still retains "Alleluia":

"ALLELUIA, the Greek form (Revelation 19:1, 3, 4, 6) of the Hebrew Hallelujah = Praise ye *JEHOVAH*, which begins or ends several of the psalms (106, 111, 112, 113, etc.)." – Easton's Bible Dictionary, Thomas Nelson Publ., 1897.

For more, see:

Should the Name Jehovah Appear in the New Testament? (THE WATCHTOWER 2008-08-01; JW.ORG)

"Jehovah" in The New Testament (Category) (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

God's Name (Category) (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

The New World Translation and the Restoration of God's Name 237 Times in the New Testament (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

Hallelujah / Jah - The Removal of God's Name and Why "Hallelujah" Remained (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

Should the name Jehovah not be used because it is said that the letter "J" isn't in Hebrew? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Monday, September 23, 2013

What Do Jehovah's Witnesses Believe Regarding the Concept of the Immortality of the Soul?

Jehovah's Witnesses believe EXACTLY what God's Word the Bible teaches.

The Bible NEVER, EVER, says that souls are immortal but over a hundred times the Bible explicitly states that souls die (Ezek.18:4,20; 22:27; Job 36:14; Ps.56:13; 78:50; 116:8; Ac 3:23; Js 5:20; Num 23:10 etc.). It even states explicitly that the righteous dead do not praise Jehovah (Ps. 6:5; 115:17; Isa.38:18,19).

God Himself defined death as a "return to dust" (Gen.3:19) and the Bible explicitly states that "the dead are conscious of nothing at all" (Ec.9:5,10) and that when humans die "their thoughts perish" (Ps.146:4).

According to the Bible, at death the person or "soul" ceases to exist–it dies. This is 'soul-extinction' not "soul sleep" because there is no "sleeper."

The Biblical definition of the word "soul" is always used in reference to a living being, human or animal. The original language words for "soul" denote a "breathing creature" or "living being" and also can be used in the extended or metaphorical senses of "life."

The NEPHESH is the person, not an immaterial part of him that survives when his body dies.

Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology: "Soul in the OT is never the ‘immortal soul' but simply the life principle or living being...Hebrew thought could not conceive of a disembodied nephesh."

"There is NO DICHOTOMY [two parts] of body and soul in the OT...The term nepes, though translated by our word soul, NEVER MEANS SOUL AS DISTINCT FROM THE BODY...The soul in the OT means NOT A PART of man, but the whole man-man as a living being."--The New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967.

Therefore, when the Bible states that the soul dies, it is never speaking of a "separation" of body and soul. Death is the ceasing to exist of the whole person.

With the number of verses which explicitly state that the soul dies the doctrine of an immortal soul is impossible to defend Scripturally - all that can be done is to use ambiguous, parabolic and symbolic scriptures.

The belief that the soul is immortal is based on Satan’s lie that humans would not die if they rebelled against God (Gen. 3:4, 5). The pagan Babylonians, Egyptians and Greeks held this doctrine. It was introduced into Christendom as another corruption by the Platonic Philosophers.

"An immaterial and immortal soul which is thought of as some part of man separable from his mortal body is neither a biblical nor a Christian idea."--R. T. Dell, 'Soul Concept' in Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church.

True Christians accept the explicit statements of God’s Word and reject all such corruptions of the Truth.

Source: This is an Answer given by Bar_Anerges to a question from Yahoo! Answers.

For more, see:

Soul - Links to Information (INDEX; Watchtower Online Library)

SOUL (Insight-2 pp. 1004-1007; Watchtower Online Library)

Myth 1: The Soul Is Immortal (THE WATCHTOWER 2009-11-01; JW.ORG)

Do You Have an Immortal Soul? (w07 7/15 pp. 3-5; Watchtower Online Library)

Soul - Links to Information (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

What is the Difference Between Soul and Spirit? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Sunday, September 22, 2013

If God Intended For us to Live in Heaven And Not on Earth, Why Not Create us There in the First Place?

The Bible DOES show that SOME will be "bought from the earth" (Rev. 14:1-3), but this Scripture plainly shows that this number is limited to ONLY 144,000.

The Bible plainly shows that not all good people go to heaven. Acts 2:34 specifically mentions one good person that did not go to heaven:

"David [whom the Bible refers to as being `a man agreeable to Jehovah's heart'] did not ascend to the heavens."

If God intended for us to live in heaven and not on earth, wouldn't it make sense that He would just create us there to begin with? So why didn't He?

The Bible shows that God's original purpose was for mankind to live on earth (Gen. 2:17) and that the vast majority of mankind have the prospect of being resurrected in the future to life in Paradise on earth:

"But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth, And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace." (Ps. 37:11)

Ps. 115:16 says: "The heavens are the Lord's heavens, but the EARTH he has given to human beings." (NRS)

"For thus saith Jehovah that formed the earth and made it, that formed it to be inhabited. " (Isa. 45:18) ASV

Matt. 5:5: "Happy are the mild-tempered ones, since they will inherit the EARTH."

Matt. 6:9, 10: "Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified. Let your kingdom come. Let your will take place, as in heaven, also upon EARTH."

2 Pet. 3:13: "There are new heavens and a new EARTH that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell."

For more, see:

HEAVEN(S) (INDEX; Watchtower Online Library)

Heaven (Insight-1 pp. 1059-1065; Watchtower Online Library)

Heaven (Search Results From the Watchtower Online Library)

Myth 3: All Good People Go to Heaven (THE WATCHTOWER 2009-11-01; JW.ORG)

What Do Jehovah's Witnesses Believe Regarding Physical And Heavenly Afterlives? The 144,000? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses



Saturday, September 21, 2013

Addressing the Question: "Is the Name 'Jehovah' an Invention of the Watchtower Society?"

No, the name “Jehovah” is no more of an invention than the names “Jesus,” “Joshua,” or “Jonathan.” Such a
claim requires others to be extremely ignorant.

And the “Watchtower” hides absolutely nothing regarding the origin of the English pronunciation Jehovah. [The] suggestion [made in this question] is untrue and dishonest as can be seen by just a couple of the many quotes in the Witnesses’ literature:

"In 1278 it appeared in Latin in the work Pugio fidei (Dagger of Faith), by Raymundus Martini, a Spanish monk.

"Raymundus Martini used the spelling Yohoua. Soon after, in 1303, Porchetus de Salvaticis completed a work entitled Victoria Porcheti adversusi impios Hebraeos. In this he, too, mentioned God's name, spelling it variously Iohouah, Iohoua and Ihouah.

"Then, in 1518, Petrus Galatinus published a work entitled De arcanis catholicae veritatis in which he spells God's name Iehoua. The name first appeared in an English Bible in 1530, when William Tyndale published a translation of the first five books of the Bible. In this he included the name of God, usually spelled Iehouah, in several verses, and in a note in this edition he wrote: ‘Iehovah is God's name . . . Moreover as oft as thou seist LORD in great letters it is in Hebrew Iehovah.’"The Divine Name That Endures Forever, WTB&TS.

Jehovah is an accurate rendering of the Divine Name and did not "originate" with the thirteenth century.

The form "YeHoWaH" is in the earliest vowel pointed Hebrew texts, including the Aleppo Codex and the Codex Leningradensis.

The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) says:

"Jehovah (Yahweh): The proper name of God in the Old Testament;.... Finally, the word is found even in the "Pugio fidei" of Raymund Martin, a work written about 1270. PROBABLY THE INTRODUCTION OF THE NAME JEHOVAH ANTEDATES EVEN R. MARTIN. No wonder then that this form has been regarded as the true pronunciation of the Divine name by such scholars as Michaelis, Drach, and others."

So the origin of the English pronunciation is rooted in all the ancient languages.

The name Jehovah is NOT an erroneous “invention.” It correctly retains the exact four letters or Tetragrammaton of God’s name in Hebrew.

Then, recent discoveries and studies have given solid evidence that YHWH had to have three syllables, not two! So, Yahoveh/Yehoveh now seems to be the most accurate. In fact, in light of the evidence, in English Jehovah may be as close to the original pronunciation as one could get in translating any name from Hebrew to English or other languages.

(See George Wesley Buchanan; "How God's Name Was Pronounced", Biblical Archaeology Review Mar./Apr. 1995 Volume 21 Number 2; page 30. Harris, Archer, Waltke; "Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament" #484. James Trimm; "Nazarenes and the Name of YHWH" and "In Fame Only?" by Gerard Gertoux)

When we accept the overwhelming evidence for a tri-syllable pronunciation, the acceptable vocalizations vary relatively little in their pronunciation from the sound of "Jehovah." So, it is clear that "Jehovah" does accurately represent the Divine Name.

"Jehovah" can be verified as an accurate rendering for YHWH by examination of theophoric names.

The original Hebrew name for God’s son is a theophoric because it contains the Divine Name. It is written YHWSA. No one knows exactly how it was pronounced but either Yeshua or Yehoshua are acceptable. And even though "Jesus" does not retain the Hebrew pronunciation it is the most recognizable is a perfectly accurate pronunciation.

If you accept "Jesus" as correct, then you have to accept Yeh(o)-/Jeh(o)- as the first part of the Divine Name. Other theophoric names in the Bible support this prefix as well as The Name having three syllables.

Therefore, we can properly render the Hebrew "tetragrammaton" YHWH/JHVH as Yehowah, Yahweh or Jehovah.

Replacing the Divine name with a common title "LORD" is the most blatant of blasphemies and elicits the strongest of condemnation (Rev. 22:18,19). It is imitating Satan, who refused to used that Name, and it is a refusal to imitate Jesus who "made that name known" to all his followers and placed it first, of primary importance, in his model prayer (Jn.17:6,26; Mt.6:9).

God made it clear that Jehovah would be his Eternal Name (Ex. 3:15, Mic. 4:5; Jer.23:27). It was manifestly Christ’s determination to make Jehovah's name known to Christians (Jn. 17:6, 26 (Cf. Jn. 12:28; 17:4, 26; Rev. 1:5).

In the end times True Christians would be associated with the Father’s Name (Acts 15:14; Amos 9:11, 12). Refusal to use some proper form of that Name would therefore be a denial of being truly Christian.

Source: This is an answer given by Bar_Anerges to a question from Yahoo! Answers.

Related Articles:

God's Name - Links to information (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

How Was God's Name (YHWH) Pronounced? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

What is God's name? Is it "God", "Lord", or something else? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

"Jehovah" in The New Testament (Category) (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

Jehovah - Importance of Name (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

The New World Translation and the Restoration of God's Name 237 Times in the New Testament (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

Hallelujah / Jah - The Removal of God's Name and Why "Hallelujah" Remained (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)

Should the name Jehovah not be used because it is said that the letter "J" isn't in Hebrew? (Defend Jehovah's Witnesses)


Defend Jehovah's Witnesses