EXACTLY Why JW's Are NOT Christian

by Perry 63 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Perry

    The Searcher Says:

    Nine Scriptures reveal that Christ Jesus will do the judging; John 5:28,29, Acts 10:42, Acts 17:31, Romans 14:9, 2 Cor. 5:10, 2 Tim. 4:1, 1 Pet. 4:5, Rev. 11:18 & 20:12. I'll leave it in his hands.

    bellasmile says:

    Since it is for Christ to judge I will leave it in his hands. He is far more capable than I.

    There is of course some truth in these kinds of statements. They can be taken too far though, even to the point of condoning blatant rebellion against God; like when the WT blasphemously positions themselves as mankind's Savior". "There is only one name given under heaven whereby we are saved, Jesus".

    God does not leave us to wonder IF we will personally be saved or not.

    In the same chapter where Jesus said not to judge others, he was also careful to warn EVERYONE the following:

    Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

    Notice that they were not once children of God and then got booted out of the family. Jesus never knew them.

    John 3: 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already.

    Notice, how people can avoid condemnation simply by believing Jesus. However, it is entirely possible that people can believe Jesus was / is a real person, but not believe his words.

    In Matthew 26: 27 & 28 Jesus offers his covenant (guarantee) ....."for the forgiveness of sins". Accepting the agreement and believing Jesus is essential to avoiding being condemned, personally.

    But, if someone comes along and says,"hey wait a minute...Jesus wasn't talking to you. He was only talking to a small group mentioned in Revelation called the 144K". Then, it is entirely appropriate, even necessary to make a personal choice on whom believe. Your personal condemnation is what is at stake here.

    We can choose to believe something different than what was preached by the apostles and come under condemnation:

    But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Gal. 1: 8

    Or, we can believe Jesus: "the sheep follow him: for they know his voice. And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers. - John 10

    Mormons position their Mormon priesthood alongside Jesus so that members hear another voice - for Salvation. Catholicism positions the pope, mary, and the church itself alongside Jesus - for Salvation.

    The singular identifying characteristic of a cult is that they provide another voice one must listen to - for Salvation.

    It makes no difference whether it is Mary, the pope, the mormon priesthood, the faithful & discreet slave, Jim Jones, Marshall Applewhite, etc.... makes no difference at all.

    Salvation is ONLY through the blood covenant as is made clear in Eph 1: 8

    "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace"

    None of us needs to wonder whether or not we will be condemned after we die. God tells us beforehand what the outcome will be.

  • paradisebeauty

    very good points!!!

    What Bible version are you using? It is difficult for me to follow the old language - there are newer Bible translations that are good.

    Otherwise, very good points!.

  • Perry


    I find the King James to be the most doctrinally consistent, and hardest to misconstrue. For example: While all men are appointed to judgment (Hebrews 9: 27), only some men are condemned.

    That is a pretty big distinction that can be confusing in modern translations that use judgment and condemnation totally interchangeably.

    It's not hard once you get used to it. I even now prefer it because of its unique sentence construction and seemingly poetic phrases.

    Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Indicator
    Matt. 16.716.46.811.810.3
    (table from New Age Bible Versions, p. 196, highlight added)

    Mrs. Riplinger writes:

    "Why is the KJV easier to read? The KJV uses one or two syllable words while new versions substitute complex multi-syllable words and phrases." (Ibid, p. 196) She lists over 270 examples in the New Testament. Mrs. Riplinger also attributes the King James’s ease of understanding to "Simple sentence structure. . .." (Ibid, p. 204) She again lists many examples.

    In her book, The Language of the King James Bible, Mrs Riplinger continues her research in the readability of the King James Bible. Mrs. Riplinger documents under the subtitle "Statistical Verification of Readability":

    "Readability statistics generated from Grammatik and Word for Windows show why the KJV is 5th grade reading level, while the NKJV and NASB are 6th grade, and the NIV is 8th grade reading level! The KJV averages:

  • less syllables per word
  • less letters per word
  • less words per sentence
  • smaller percentage of long words
  • greater percentage of short words than the NKJV, NIV, NASB and NRSV
  • According to readability statistics generated by Pro-Scribe, the KJV is easier to read than USA Today, People Magazine and most children’s books."
    (Riplinger, The Language of the King James Bible, p. 159

  • paradisebeauty

    From what I know KJV has some verses deliberately changed to sustain the doctrine of the trinity.

    Even them changed those verses back in newer editions of KJV ...

  • The Searcher
    The Searcher

    "There is of course some truth in these kinds of statements."

    Only some? I'd have thought it was 100% truth.

    Another Biblical truth - "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Matthew 24:13.No such Bible teaching as "once saved, always saved." Nice thought, but the verse shows it's not true.

  • fulltimestudent

    It always intrigues me when people start saying that someone or something is not Christian. The evidence points to a spectrum of beliefs in the early church.

    Anyway, I wondered what the definition of a Christian was in Antioch, you know, ...

    "The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." (Acts 11:26 NIV)

    I wonder what they called themselves before that? Since Paul was a bit new at this game, did his arguments change during the preaching he did at Antioch?

    Later in time, those who supported Athanasius and those who supported Arius were coming to blows and even shedding blood in their doctrinal struggle over new light and old light (cant resist the dig). Who was right, in view of what the gospel writers had recorded?

    btw, can anyone recall who said this, and why it was said?

    Quote: "Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.”
  • OnTheWayOut

    The Bible can be made to say anything from Perry's beliefs to Watchtower's doctrines to the nutso teachings of self-appointed messiahs and televangelists either after your money or your sex (or both). To be a Christian means to follow what one believes were the teachings of Jesus. But most are based on 4 bogus books not written by the men whose names are on them, not inspired, and surviving above other books because the Romans attempted to destroy the other books that had slightly different stories.

    Perry, your beliefs come from men, not from Jesus or God. Men make doctrines.

    Oh, I admire people who try to live up to the standards of Buddha or Jesus that they think lead to peace, but not so much the men who try to insist that their standards come from the divine.

  • opusdei1972
    I think that Witnesses are as Christians as many Christian sects that existed in the first and second century. Christianity is a salad of theologies.
  • Perry

    paradise beauty,

    You may be taking about 1 John 5: 7. I was taught as a JW that this was added by some unnamed monk in the 16th century. No one ever challenged me on this at the doors.

    I researched it a few years ago and found plenty of early evidence for this scripture, not only in early biblical manuscripts, but also evidence of 2nd century Christians.

    Early manuscript evidence that exists for I John 5: 7,8

    Early church writers that used it:

    Cyprian 200 - 258 AD. "The Lord says, 'I and the Father are one;' and again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one'." If Cyprian quotes I John 5:7 from his Bible in 200• 258 AD, it must be a valid reading. His Bible was copied from an older manuscript containing this verse.
    Cyprian lived only 100 years after John wrote the book of I John. Cyprian would have had access to the original manuscript to check.
    • Priscillian 350 AD, a Spanish bishop quotes I John 5:7,8.
    • Idacius Clarus 360 AD, who opposed Priscillian quotes it.
    • Varimadum 380 AD.
    • Cassiodorus 485 AD.
    • Cassian 435 AD.
    • Victor Vita 489 AD.
    • Jerome 450 AD.
    • Fulgentius 533 AD.
    • Ps. Vigilius 484 AD.
    • Ansbert 660 AD.

    Early bible versions that include it:
    Old Syriac 170 AD.
    Old Latin 200 AD, in North Africa and Italy.
    Italic 4th and 5th century. – Italic • Monacensis 7th century.
    Italic • Speculum 9th century.
    Latin Vulgate 4th, 5th century.

    Greek miniscule manuscripts that include it:
    • 221 in the 10th century.(variant).
    • 88 in the 12th century.(margin).
    • 629 in the 14th century.(Ottobanianus)
    • 429 in the 14th century (margin).
    • 636 in the 15th century. (margin).
    • 61 in the 16th century.(Codex Montfortianus)
    • 918 in the 16th century. (an Escorial ms).
    • 231 (a Bucharest manuscript).


    Opusdei Says:

    many Christian sects that existed in the first and second century. Christianity is a salad of theologies.

    It is pretty easy to determine sound doctrine from the bible by reading what the early Christians wrote about. There will always be miniscule differences on minor issues between people. But, all of the major doctrines were firmly established in the 1st century and passed on to future generations of disciples. When doctrinal threats did occur, it is easy to find out where they came from, and who was the culprit; because Christians wrote a lot against herisies.

    I highly recommend this book to determine what was "sound doctrine" in the early centuries and who were the "Jehovah's Witnesses" of that period.

    The Searcher Says:

    "There is of course some truth in these kinds of statements."
    Only some? I'd have thought it was 100% truth.

    We have to use common sense. While we are told not to judge others, 1 Timothy 5: 1 tells us

    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 2 Tim. 4: 3 says - For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine.

    Proving things and determining sound doctrine involves using judgment.

    But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
    let him be accursed. Gal. 1: 8

    Again, judgment and discernment is needed.

    But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
    2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
    3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 2 Peter 2: 1-3

    Since God wanted us to be on the look out for "damnable heresies", it is reasonable to exercise our abilities to judge our teachers so as to determine sound doctrine. Making a habit of judging others, for small vain reasons, like to pump up our estimation of ourselves, is clearly wrong, and will actually bring a like judgment upon ourselves.

    The bottom line is that, even today, sound doctrine is relatively easily determined.

    I also recommend this book as it chronicles several groups from the Apostles down through the dark ages.

  • The Rebel
    The Rebel

    Why does answering a question " EXACTLY, why JW'S are NOT CHRISTIANS" take so much " blah, blah, blah"?

    At least this thread is written in English, not Greek, nor French so we can understand .

    Please can i have a one sentence answer to:-

    A) " WHY" " exactly are not JW'S Christians?

    B) And " WHY" non J.W " Christians" say they are Christians?

    C) Would I be wrong in assuming your God would think this understanding of " Christianality" makes you a better and more worthy person than I?

    The Rebel.

Share this