Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a Protestant Religion?

watchtower ^ | 2009 | watchtower

[Cronos]

they differ from Protestant religions in many significant ways. In fact, The Encyclopedia of Religion refers to Jehovah’s Witnesses as being “distinctive.” Consider three ways in which they are different.

First, although Protestant faiths reject certain features of Catholic worship, Reformation leaders retained certain Catholic dogmas, such as belief in the Trinity, hellfire, and the immortality of the human soul. Jehovah’s Witnesses, however, believe that those doctrines not only contradict the Bible but also promote a distorted view of God.—See Exposed: Six Myths About Christianity.

Second, the religion that Jehovah’s Witnesses advocate is, not one of negative protest, but one of positive instruction. They take seriously the Bible’s counsel: “A servant of the Lord is not to engage in quarrels, but has to be kind to everyone, a good teacher, and patient. He has to be gentle when he corrects people who dispute what he says.” (2 Timothy 2:24, 25, The Jerusalem Bible) Jehovah’s Witnesses do point out contradictions between what the Bible says and what many religious groups teach. Yet, their goal in doing so is not to reform other religious organizations. Rather, their goal is to help sincere individuals to gain accurate knowledge of God and of his Word, the Bible. (Colossians 1:9, 10) When people of other persuasions insistently disagree with them, Jehovah’s Witnesses avoid engaging in fruitless debates.—2 Timothy 2:23.

Third, unlike the Protestant movement, which has splintered into hundreds of denominations, Jehovah’s Witnesses have maintained a united global brotherhood. When it comes to Bible doctrine, Jehovah’s Witnesses in over 230 countries follow the apostle Paul’s counsel to “speak in agreement.” There are no divisions among them. Instead, they are genuinely “united in the same mind and in the same line of thought.” (1 Corinthians 1:10) They strive within their own ranks “to observe the oneness of the spirit in the uniting bond of peace.”—Ephesians 4:3.

[aruanan]

Either He was God or he was a demonic-possessed mad man whose words should be ignored. No place in-between. He was not a "prophet" or "Archangel Michael" if He forgave sins and healed on His own power and if He accepted worship. He was either God or the other guy, no power in-between.

It's taken for granted that God by definition is self-existent. Notice what Jesus says about his own nature in this passage. Also note, in the context of why the Jewish leaders were trying to kill him--his claimed equality with God--the repeated underscoring of this by the use of equivalencies with respect to the Father. Jesus caps it all with a reference to the resurrection and final judgment which was understood by those who were plotting to kill him as something that was going to be effected by Yahweh and claims that it will be at the sound of his voice that the dead will be raised and upon his authority that the good and evil will be judged. This was also a slam against the Sadducees who claimed there was no resurrection: "Yeah, there is. And I'm the one whose going to do it and I'm going to judge you!"

It's actually a pretty funny scene, because just as he did at the healing of the paralytic, he took what was in their hearts and acknowledged it publicly--"Yeah, you're right, who can forgive sins but God alone" and went on to rub their noses in it again and again and again. He didn't say, "Oh, I'm sorry for having given you the impression that I was claiming equality with God. I am but a demiurge."

16 So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. 17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22 Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.

24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life. 25 Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.

28 “Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice 29 and come out—those who have done what is good will rise to live, and those who have done what is evil will rise to be condemned.
John 5

[count-your-change]

If we examine the Greek of Col. 1:15 we find the word “eikon” or as we transliterate it, “icon” or picture, image, often used of a painting.
But the “eikon” is not the thing or person pictured. This word was also used of Caesar's image on a coin.

[Avalon Hussar]

One cannot pick and choose. If one believes in the Genesis account of creation, one must believe in the True Presence in the Eucharist. That was Martin Luther’s theme point too when combatting with Zwingli

No problem believing in a literal Genesis but I suspect that our definitions of the True Presence in the Eucharist would clash, not because the text is clear but because RC's see the True Presence actually in the Eucharist (physical body and blood) while Protestants see the True Presence in the Eucharist (Christ's presence with us during the Eucharist).

I can't say if the Catholic position is true or false, as I've never received the Eucharist as a Catholic, but I can say that I've seen the evidence of Christ's presence during the footwashing and communion services that I've been involved with, including on at least one occasion a true to Scripture occurrence of speaking in tongues, complete with independent translation by a 3rd party.

I know which one that I believe to be correct, but since I can't be completely positive on the matter I refer to Mark 9.

Mar 9:38-40 KJV - [38] And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. [39] But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. [40] For he that is not against us is on our part.

[Cronos]

however, we are deviating from the main topic of this thread -- and our fellow freepers who are Jehovah's witnesses -- eze and count-your-change are presenting their side of the argument in a civil manner and perhaps we can do so too.

This is actually a very important matter -- perhaps we who have been born Christian have never thought about "is Christ God", but as we grow in the Faith and ponder on His word and His life to ME it seems clear that He could only be God or a madman, nothing in-between, not a super-angel, not a prophet

[FreedomPoster]

On a somewhat related note, I once knew a Unitarian missionary.

He would knock on people’s doors, but he didn’t know why . . .

[Avalon Hussar]

however, we are deviating from the main topic of this thread -- and our fellow freepers who are Jehovah's witnesses -- eze and count-your-change are presenting their side of the argument in a civil manner and perhaps we can do so too. This is actually a very important matter -- perhaps we who have been born Christian have never thought about "is Christ God", but as we grow in the Faith and ponder on His word and His life to ME it seems clear that He could only be God or a madman, nothing in-between, not a super-angel, not a prophet

Very good point Cronos, eze and CYC have presented their case without hostility and we should be at all times ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us. While I agree with Cronos that it seems self-evident that Jesus can only be either God, a liar or a complete lunatic, we still should provide evidence of why that seems self-evident to us and why rejection of Christ's deity is a heresy that all Christians rightly condemn.

Let's begin with the basics. Christ Himself makes the claim to deity, stating in John 8:58 that "Before Abraham was, I am." which, as may or may not be readily known, is a direct claim on His part to be "I AM". For reference, this is the same name that Yahweh told Moses to tell the Children of Israel when they asked who had sent Moses to them. Exodus 3:14 for reference.

Exd 3:14 KJV - [14] And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM : and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

You will note from the rest of the text in John 8 that the Jews immediately recognized this as a claim to deity due to the fact that they attempted to stone him for blasphemy as soon as they heard this.

Continuing on, again in Mark 14:61-62 we see Jesus claim to be deity and the Jews' reaction to that claim. They understood that He was claiming to be Yahweh. Again, the verse for reference.

Mar 14:61-62 KJV - [61] But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? [62] And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

There is, of course, more evidence for Christ's deity but this should be enough to at the very least get the conversation started properly.

[Scanian]

That’s totally correct unless you’re reading a New World travesty which shamelessly changed verses in order to support JW heresies.

[Gamecock]

Third, unlike the Protestant movement, which has splintered into hundreds of denominations

Hundreds? Sounds like we are consolidating!

[aruanan]

Ping to the post this ping is a reply to.

[eazdzit]

I am not sure of what conclusion you draw from your post in #81.

I am preparing a response that address the responses I have received.

I'm a little short of time, so it will be a day or so.

Chears:>) EasyDoesIt

[eazdzit]

Testing link to .

http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/new-testament

[eazdzit]

This URL can be posted into address, it works
http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/greek-texts/new-testament

Testing for auto link to Greek Septuagint.

I think this is going to work. If it doesn't you can paste the URL from above into your address and it will get you there and I will post accordingly. If it works you can use the drop down and go to to the old testament in Greek.

This will allow you to compare things like the I AM in the old testament in Exodus 3:14 with the I am in John 8:58.

See ya

[Cronos]

note — the numbers are according to the Jehovah’s Witnesses

[Cronos]

"He didn't say, "No, you don't understand. I am but a created being, a demiurge created by God that then created the rest of the universe." "

Exactly -- and if He was just the Archangel Michael who is one of the dutiful angels who KNEW how his brother angel Lucifer fell, well Mikey would have been aghast to have anyone think he was claiming anything LIKE equality with God.

[Cronos]

interesting point, let me read up and get back to you.

[aruanan]

If we examine the Greek of Col. 1:15 we find the word “eikon” or as we transliterate it, “icon” or picture, image, often used of a painting. But the “eikon” is not the thing or person pictured. This word was also used of Caesar's image on a coin.

"The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation."

The meaning of this word is related to the imperial seal. That seal is tantamount in authority to the actual presence of the emperor. It is not a lesser thing.

Imagine the invisible God, his power, his holiness, his love, his compassion, his anger over people screwing people over in his name, pressing himself realtime into the fabric of the created universe in human flesh and becoming visible to those living here and you'll have Jesus, as impossible to separate from the being of God as sunshine is from the sun.

Compare this with Hebrews 1:3: The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word.

And with I Timothy: ...the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth. Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

[AppyPappy]

“yet cyc has pointed out how passionate they are to spread their religion — something for the rest of us to learn from imho”

Spreading heresy should not be admired

[count-your-change]

“eikon”, Col. 1:15:

“The meaning of this word is related to the imperial seal. That seal is tantamount in authority to the actual presence of the emperor. It is not a lesser thing.”

How you arrive at this definition I'll not try to guess but according to the Biblical usage of the term it means a representation, likeness, not the thing pictured anymore than a painting is the actual person or equal to having the actual person.

It is this sense Paul uses the term “eikon” at 1 Cor. 15:49, that while fleshly, earthy they bore the “eikon”, or resembled Adam but in heaven they would bear the “eikon” or image, resemblance of the Christ.
While resembling the Christ they are lesser.

At Hebrews 1:3 Paul uses a slightly different word, “charakter” or a carved emblem, again a representation, not the thing pictured as a sculpture may show the characteristics of another but is not that person or on the same level. I Tim. 3:16 is in agreement with Paul's usage of image, “eikon”.

You may find a Greek/English lexicon and concordance useful here.

[Cronos]

cronos: “yet cyc has pointed out how passionate they are to spread their religion — something for the rest of us to learn from imho”

AP: Spreading heresy should not be admired

Well
1. I doubt he would call it heresy as it is his belief system
2. I'm admiring how they are passionate about what they believe in -- something for us all to learn.

[count-your-change]

Still reading up on “eikons”?