Today, I spoke with a Jehovah's Witness named Ivan for fifteen or twenty minutes about a variety of topics related to the Bible and the Witnesses themselves. Ivan was a kind man, listening to my thoughts about what I'd learned of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and I valued speaking with him. At one point in our conversation, I asked him if he felt compelled to evangelize, and said that my impression of the Jehovah's Witness church is that the governing body is controlling. Though I didn't know it at the time, I was thinking of something I read months ago about the Witnesses' governing body being the only ones to interpret the Bible. Whether this is true or not, it left me with the impression that the Witnesses' church was controlling. I tried to express that I was asking about this out of honest interest and did not mean to offend him. He said understood this and did not seem offended. In response to my question, he likened his evangelism to that of Jesus' disciples, saying that they felt urged to speak because of what they'd seen, not out of obligation; that the Witnesses believe in free will; and that neither he nor other Witnesses feel the need to fulfill a quota, unless they choose this. Although I did not speak with him much about other controversial areas of belief, this man seemed down-to-earth, logical, and empathetic.
Afterward, I read a little more about their beliefs. The most important of these relates to who Jesus is, which has been one litmus test for me about whether a Christian denomination aligns with Scripture.With that said, here is some of what I've learned about Jehovah's Witnesses. There is much more than what is here, but these are aspects of their faith that I read about most.
Jesus is God's perfect son, but he is not God: Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus came from God to save us, but interpret "the Father is greater than I" in John 14:28 to mean that Jesus is not God (John 14:28: "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.").*
Christians use John 1:1 to demonstrate that Jesus is God, so this verse is a source of contention between Jehovah's Witnesses and other denominations. Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the lack of the definite article "the" before God at the end of John 1:1 ("In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.") to mean that Jesus is not God himself. They therefore render the latter part of the verse as "and the Word was a god."
Other denominations, however, explain this lack of the definite article a use of good grammar. In contrast to English, which uses word order to show which word is the subject of a sentence, Greek uses case endings ("theos" and "logos" both use the same case ending, for instance). In the sentence, "Jules ate pancakes," "Jules" would have a different case ending than "pancakes," which would reveal "Jules" as the subject, or actor. When two nouns have the same case ending (as with "theos" and "logos" in John 1:1: "kai theos 'en 'o logos"), the writer regularly uses an article ("a," "an," or "the") to identify the subject. This is what John did in John 1:1. He used "the" in front of "Word" to make clear which word was the subject. Thus, Greek readers would understand that "God" was in the definite form, even though there was no definite article "the" in front of it, because they knew that John was using "the" to identify the subject "Word."**
They choose not to undergo blood transfusions. This is because God commanded Israel not to consume blood in Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:10, and Deuteronomy 12:23 (Acts 15:28-29 communicates the same idea) and because blood represents a creature's life (Leviticus 17:24).*
They have been heavily persecuted. This persecution occurred not only in the Holocaust under Nazi Germany, but here in the United States as well. In 1940, during World War II, the Supreme Court ruled in Minersville School District v. Gobitis that a school district may compel children to recite the pledge of allegiance, even though some Witnesses held that doing so was tantamount to idolatry. Three years later, after many Jehovah's Witnesses had been physically attacked--ostensibly because of the decision--the Court reversed its earlier ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnett. It was in this case that Justice Robert Jackson penned his now-famous statement: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion or other matters of opinion."***
*"Frequently Asked Questions about Jehovah's Witnesses." © 2014 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. All rights reserved. . Jehovah's Witness official website, found at http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/. Web. 2 July 2014.
**Luke, Frank. "A god or God in John 1:1." Biblical Hermeneutics Beta. 14 February 2012. Web. 2 July 2014; and Bechtle, John. "Should John 1:1 be translated 'The Word was God' or "The Word was a god'"? Christian Answers Network. Marysville, WA. Web. 2 July 2014.
***"Minersville School District v Gobitis." Wikipedia.
Afterward, I read a little more about their beliefs. The most important of these relates to who Jesus is, which has been one litmus test for me about whether a Christian denomination aligns with Scripture.With that said, here is some of what I've learned about Jehovah's Witnesses. There is much more than what is here, but these are aspects of their faith that I read about most.
Jesus is God's perfect son, but he is not God: Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus came from God to save us, but interpret "the Father is greater than I" in John 14:28 to mean that Jesus is not God (John 14:28: "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.").*
Christians use John 1:1 to demonstrate that Jesus is God, so this verse is a source of contention between Jehovah's Witnesses and other denominations. Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the lack of the definite article "the" before God at the end of John 1:1 ("In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.") to mean that Jesus is not God himself. They therefore render the latter part of the verse as "and the Word was a god."
Other denominations, however, explain this lack of the definite article a use of good grammar. In contrast to English, which uses word order to show which word is the subject of a sentence, Greek uses case endings ("theos" and "logos" both use the same case ending, for instance). In the sentence, "Jules ate pancakes," "Jules" would have a different case ending than "pancakes," which would reveal "Jules" as the subject, or actor. When two nouns have the same case ending (as with "theos" and "logos" in John 1:1: "kai theos 'en 'o logos"), the writer regularly uses an article ("a," "an," or "the") to identify the subject. This is what John did in John 1:1. He used "the" in front of "Word" to make clear which word was the subject. Thus, Greek readers would understand that "God" was in the definite form, even though there was no definite article "the" in front of it, because they knew that John was using "the" to identify the subject "Word."**
They choose not to undergo blood transfusions. This is because God commanded Israel not to consume blood in Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:10, and Deuteronomy 12:23 (Acts 15:28-29 communicates the same idea) and because blood represents a creature's life (Leviticus 17:24).*
They have been heavily persecuted. This persecution occurred not only in the Holocaust under Nazi Germany, but here in the United States as well. In 1940, during World War II, the Supreme Court ruled in Minersville School District v. Gobitis that a school district may compel children to recite the pledge of allegiance, even though some Witnesses held that doing so was tantamount to idolatry. Three years later, after many Jehovah's Witnesses had been physically attacked--ostensibly because of the decision--the Court reversed its earlier ruling in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnett. It was in this case that Justice Robert Jackson penned his now-famous statement: "If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion or other matters of opinion."***
*"Frequently Asked Questions about Jehovah's Witnesses." © 2014 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Inc. All rights reserved. . Jehovah's Witness official website, found at http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/. Web. 2 July 2014.
**Luke, Frank. "A god or God in John 1:1." Biblical Hermeneutics Beta. 14 February 2012. Web. 2 July 2014; and Bechtle, John. "Should John 1:1 be translated 'The Word was God' or "The Word was a god'"? Christian Answers Network. Marysville, WA. Web. 2 July 2014.
***"Minersville School District v Gobitis." Wikipedia.
Comments
Post a Comment