The name "Jehovah's Witnesses" is NOT scriptural!

by Nathan Natas 21 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    It is not infrequently that Jehovah's Witnesses make the statement that the name of their organization is "scriptural." But is it?

    Tony Wills, in his book "A People For His Name" makes an interesting point about the misrepresentation of that name as "scriptural" and the appropriateness of this name-change by the impostor "Bible scholar" Rutherford -

    [Rutherford] showed the need of a new name by such texts as the following:

    “the Lord God shall slay thee and call his servants by another name.” (Isaiah 65: 15).

    “thou shalt be called by a new name which the mouth of the Lord shall name.” (Isaiah 62:2).

    Had Rutherford bothered to read two verses on from the last-quoted passage he would have read, “thou shalt be called Hephzibah.” (Isaiah 62: 4). Had he done so his organization would have been called Hephzibah. But he did not do so.
    ...[A] point the Society has not yet seen is that the statement “You are my witnesses, says Jehovah” does not mean that he was giving them a name. He was merely describing their function. The name of the nation he was talking to was Israel.
    Isaiah 62:2-4
    “And the nations will certainly see your righteousness, [O woman,] and all kings your glory. And you will actually be called by a new name, which the very mouth of Jehovah will designate. And you must become a crown of beauty in the hand of Jehovah, and a kingly turban in the palm of your God. No more will you be said to be a woman left entirely; and your own land will no more be said to be desolate; but you yourself will be called "My Delight Is in Her" (Hephzibah), and your land Owned as a Wife. For Jehovah will have taken delight in you, and your own land will be owned as a wife."

    So, ATTENTION ROBERT KING (eWATCHMAN) and other fundy thumpers! You can co-opt the name HEPHZIBAH for your organization and beat the Dubsat their own game! Time is running out! Act NOW!

    >knock knock!<

    "Hi I'm a Hephzibah and I'm here to share our two journals "The Night Watch" and "ARBEH!"

  • sacolton
    sacolton

    I can't recall the scripture, but I believe the name comes from one that goes:

    "You are my Witnesses ..."

    Thus came Jehovah's Witnesses.

    Should have died with Rutherford.

  • 1914BS
    1914BS

    very good!

  • Bring_the_Light
    Bring_the_Light

    I could join an organization called "my delight is in her". I've found this is very true........

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    I can't recall the scripture, but I believe the name comes from one that goes:

    "You are my Witnesses ..."

    Thus came Jehovah's Witnesses.

    Should have died with Rutherford.

    That's right, Sacolton, just as Tony Wills explained,

    ...[A] point the Society has not yet seen is that the statement “You are my witnesses, says Jehovah” does not mean that he was giving them a name. He was merely describing their function. The name of the nation he was talking to was Israel.

    The nation Jehovah was addrressing ALREADY HAD A NAME - ISRAEL.

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    Yeah, BTL. Then Elliot Spitzer could be a circuit servant.

  • BONEZZ
    BONEZZ

    Nathan...

    What's that sound I hear? Why it's the sound of reniaa rustling thru the pages of her Proclaimers & Aid books...stand by...any moment now...

    -BONEZZ

  • Awakened at Gilead
    Awakened at Gilead

    Think about this... Since the Israelites were Jehovah's Witnesses, they didn't have to preach. None of the original JWs preached.

    So the modern day JW claim that all JWs must by definition go and preach from D2D is in conflict with scripture.

    A@G

  • Dagney
    Dagney

    A quick read through Isa. 43 gives a broader picture of the intent of vs 10, IMHO.

    "Jah" is calling out to the nations to provide their witnesses of their own righteousness and truth in vs 9. Then he declares the Jews his witnesses to all his wonderful acts.

    But..then beginning in vs 22 he tells them how they have failed him. They weren't very good "Jehovah's Witnesses" according the chapter 43.

    It might have been an catchy name Rutherford plucked out of the scriptures to call this group. But the verse he used as the source of his inspiration is tragically missapplied, IMO.

    So what else is new?

  • watson
    watson

    Luke 18:22

    Scriptural proof!!

    Our name should be "Jesus'Followers!!"

    No?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit