Very quick and easy way to refute their beliefs

by Sirona 24 Replies latest jw friends

  • Sirona

    I thought this was great

    Witnessing Tip of the Month: Jehovah's Witnesses - How Many True Gods Are There?

    The next time the Jehovah's Witnesses come to your you may ask them, "Does your organization teach more than one true God?"

    Almost without fail the sharp Witness will reply, "We only believe in one true God, Jehovah.

    Explain that you agree with this statement saying, "I also believe in only one true God and all other gods are false gods.

    The ask, "How do you understand John 1:1 that teaches, the Word [Jesus] was God?

    Usually they will quote their own New World Translation saying that the "original Greek" states the Word was "a god."

    Rather than debating the proper Greek translation you can simply respond, "Well if Jesus is 'a god,' is He a true God or a false god?"

    From this discussion the Jehovah's Witness can be shown that Watchtower theology forces them to have two true Gods in John 1:1, or teach that Jesus is a false God.

    The Witness can not say that Jesus is a false God, and because the Watchtower's well know stance against Polytheism [the belief in more that one God], they cannot say that Jesus is also a true God.

    The proselyte may try to answer this problem by showing you others in the Bible who were called God or by saying that Jesus is a lesser God. Their book, Reasoning From the Scriptures teaches that Jehovah is the "Almighty God" while Jesus is simply a "mighty god." (p. 413-14).

    Simply point out that while some are called gods (i.e. Satan, wicked Judges etc.) they were certainly false gods not true Gods.

    Also, if Jesus is a "lesser god" is He a lesser True God or a lesser false god?

    This dialogue can be used by itself to quickly plant a seed at the front door or as an spring board for further discussion on the Deity of Christ, other problems with the New World Translation, or additional reasons you do not follow the Watchtower Society.

  • Terry

    It is clever.

    However, Jehovah's Witnesses are all about the clever.

    Their entire theology was clever from the beginning.

    The Great Pyramid chronology was fascinating and darned clever.

    The question of Jesus and who or what he is/was has hit the Christian religion right between the eyes from the starting line.

    The Jews stumbled. The apostles stumbled. The Roman Empire stumbled. The Church stumbled. All the sects and schisms stumbled.

    This isn't SETTLED theology. That's why a CREED was demanded!

    If you cannot persuade through evidence you demand by orthodoxy.

    All orthodoxy is founded on FEAR of being wrong.

    Control is the opposite of FREEDOM.

    So, what am I saying?

    Trying to out-clever a JW at the door is just jumping into the swimming pool and peeing. Everybody comes out slightly yellow.

    I assert the only way to pull a JW out by their roots is to take on the issue of the Bible itself. The Bible CAN BE DEMONSTRATED to be unreliable as to what words are "accurate". That is ALL you have to do.

    If you cannot trust the WORDS you cannot PROVE a doctrine by pointing to the words.

    What are the FACTS?

    1.The New Testament is "preserved" in 5,000 Greek manuscripts and 8,000 manuscripts of "versions".

    2.Textual critics are forced to admit NO TWO manuscripts agree in every detail.

    Quibble? Hardly! You have to have a foundational fact to build an argument. You cannot accurately begin with a doubt and confidence your doctrine is based on settled authority.

    What use are the 8,000 manuscripts of "versions"?

    1.They are themselves translations of one or more Greek manuscripts. The cannot help in deciding if the Parent Greek Manuscript had this or that VARIATION.

    Why? Because VARIATION can be added either through ERROR or deliberate RELIGIOUS FRAUD at any point in making a copy. All you can establish is whether a particular variant existed at a certain point in time and place.

    2.You cannot simply take the oldest manuscript and declare it to be unblemished in content and trust it.


    They could, in themselves, be very poor copies riddled with error or pious fraud or be based on something entirely bogus invented to prop up a particular viewpoint. Ironically, much later copies could be the more pristine! It is impossible to know. Only guesswork can apply.

    Example: A 10th Century miniscule may be an excellent copy of a 4th Century uncial and prove superior to a 5th Century uncial. (Uncials are manuscipts written in CAPITAL LETTERS)

    How about simply taking the MAJORITY READING as correct?

    A BAD manuscript (faked, tampered, error-ridden, etc.) could easily have been COPIED MANY TIMES and distributed. This would flood the market, as it were, with a majority of error-laden documents.

    It isn't necessary to go into any greater detail at this point.

    It is sufficient to point out the Watchtower Society itself has given at least two beautiful examples of tampering with existing manuscripts by ADDING an unorthodoxy in their own variant NEW WORLD TRANSLATION.

    Example 1 is the John 1:1 controversial rendering.

    Example 2 is the comma movement in "Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise." Which fits Watchtower doctrine and confutes mainstream Christianity's view.

    It doesn't matter what you BELIEVE to be correct.

    THE POINT IS YOU CANNOT PROVE IT BY POINTING TO A TRANSLATION and claiming it is error proof or even "likely" to be in agreement with some preserved text itself beyond suspicion.

    Why isn't this approach taken?

    Because the majority of people dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses (even here with Ex-JW's) don't want to face the Bible's problems themselves! They can't stand to have another rug pulled out from under them.

    That is my guess.

    Well, it is simply intellectual dishonesty at work no matter who asserts the Bible to be the inerrent word of God.


    Just consider the difference in meaning between these two renderings.

    1.All Scripture IS inspired by God and useful for teaching, reproving and setting things straight.

    Contrasted with:

    2.All Scripture THAT IS inspired by God IS useful for teaching, reproving and setting things straight.

    See what I mean?

    Unless we know WHICH scripture __is__inspired by god we don't know which is __useful__for teaching, etc.

    That is the flaw in the Jehovah's Witness program of TRUTH from the Watchtower.

    It stands or falls on a mere unprovable assertion.



  • John Doe
    John Doe

    Terry, I think that's one of the most intelligent and thoughtful posts I've read on this forum. You make me want to get off my lazy ass and do some research. lol

  • trevor

    Another great post by Terry - the Almighty Apostate proving that some Bibles wash whiter than others.

    Trevor - the merely Mighty Apostate.

  • ezekiel3

    Thanks Sirona.

    Monotheism (worship of only one God) is a JW pseudo-doctrine.

    As is the "resurrection"

    Anyone care to guess what the third myth?

  • Sirona


    Great post!

    JWs, however, would reply that Jehovah allowed certain parts of the bible to be in existence because it was his will. The bits that were gotten rid of were not needed etc. and the version we have today is his word.

    They simply won't accept that God isn't controlling what happens to the bible.


  • Sirona


    The non-immortality of the soul doctrine?


  • Terry


    Great post!

    JWs, however, would reply that Jehovah allowed certain parts of the bible to be in existence because it was his will. The bits that were gotten rid of were not needed etc. and the version we have today is his word.

    They simply won't accept that God isn't controlling what happens to the bible.


    My favorite analogy along these lines.

    The Doctor writes a prescription (medicine) to save your life. (Jehovah gives you scripture).

    The actual perscription passes to the Pharmacist who will fill the perscription according to what is written. (The religious leaders "interpret" Jehovah's words)

    The Pharmacist is confused by the handwriting of the Doctor and makes his best guess because he is pretty sure what the Doctor intended. (The religious leader, anointed, whatever inserts his own understanding in place of the written text.)

    The patient dies!

    The Pharmacist decries responsibility because he was making an "honest" evaluation of what was on the actual slip of paper (perscription).

    The actual text makes the difference between life and death. A general idea just won't do it.


  • John Doe
    John Doe

    Smuckers, you're 20 years old. You've not said anything everyone in this thread has not already considered, pondered, dissected, and portrayed from every possible angle. Perhaps you'll grow as a person more quickly if, instead of chipping skulls, you'll listen a little more and talk a little less. :-)

  • Sirona


    Rather than throwing phrases like "brain dead people" around, why don't you consider that some people here could put you to shame with their advanced knowledge of such things.

    Moreover, not all of us even believe in the bible.

    Sirona (Pagan)

Share this