It's been a while, but I've written a new article for Freeminds, you can read it (and vote and leave comments!) here.
For those squeemish about clicking through, here's the body of the text;
-----
When a person ceases to attend the meetings organised by the Govering Body of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, Incorporated, oftentimes they are described as having "left the truth". Jehovah's Witnesses, the name of the religious order controlled by the Watch Tower Society, call their religion "the truth". It is called "the truth" because Jehovah's Witnesses are told by the Governing Body that all other religions are false and they alone have the truth, according to the Bible.
I have already written on this blog about the frequently heard claim from Jehovah's Witnesses that even if the Governing Body was proven to be wrong in their unique interpretation of scriptures, they'd still want to be a Witness. In that post you'll notice that I draw the reader's attention to Jesus claim that he was the truth, and not a religious order founded in the late 1800s.
However, I recently witnessed a debate where Jehovah's Witnesses were asked to prove that they had "the truth", in other words, that their religious order, out of all religious orders, is the truth.
The responses weren't particularly surprising;
- we don't go to war
- we love one another
- we alone preach the good news
- we have the Bible as our ultimate authority
- we don't believe the Trinity
If you are a Jehovah's Witness, perhaps these responses closely match the ones that you'd supply. I myself, when I was a Jehovah's Witness, would use similar arguments to prove that the teachings of the Governing Body were truth.
Let's address each claim as posited above and see whether they 1) carry any real weight in establishing the Witnesses as being "the truth", and 2), whether the Witnesses are perhaps missing the point.
- we don't go to war
Neither do Buddhists. We can expand our focus to include any group of conscientious objectors:
- Christadelphians
- Seventh Day Adventists
- Mohammid Ali (admittedly not a group, but he still refused to go to war)
- Mennonites
- Amish
- various groups within the Brethren movement
Within Christianity as a whole were many individuals who chose, according to their conscience, to object to going to war. Obviously these ones made up their own minds on the matter. Jehovah's Witnesses are told it's wrong to go to war; they are not allowed to actively engage their own conscience in this matter as joining the army would automatically result in them being viewed as disassociated.
- we love one another
Most Christian groups love one another. They also love their neighbours and spend time and money supporting charitable organisations whose aim is to make a loving difference in the lives of people within their community, Christian or not.
Do Jehovah's Witnesses involve themselves in loving acts of charity or do they view the door-to-door ministry as a substitute for manning a soup pot in a drop-in centre? For example, would Jehovah's Witnesses put any money in a donation tin marked "Christian Aid"?
Also, do Jehovah's Witnesses gossip and slander one another? As of todays date there are 107 different Jehovah's Witness life stories on this website. Read any one of them to see how Jehovah's Witnesses (mis)treat each other.
- we alone preach the good news
Patently false. I personally know of several outreach gospel ministries in my local area, some of which I'm involved in and can testify that the level of work and ministry (and commitment to that ministry) shown by Christians far outstrips anything I've ever seen done by local Jehovah's Witnesses. And with much better results in terms of lives being transformed and being coming to know Jesus.
Remember, Paul chose to know nothing but Jesus Christ "and him crucified" (1 Cor 2:2). The sole message he delivered was of Jesus crucifixion and resurrection. That was the model for every Christian evangeliser. Yes, Jehovah's Witnesses throw up the notion that door-to-door evangelising is the key, but a cursory glance at the Greek text in the verses used to support this belief paint a very different picture (this is well worth studying).
But if door-to-door evangelising absolutely has to be the mark of the truth, then the Latter Day Saints (Mormons) embark on a similar work with much more success; 11 million Mormons worldwide.
- we have the Bible as our ultimate authority
The truth of this claim is very easy to establish. Where are the Great Crowd, as described in Revelation?
The Bible shows us that they are before the throne, in the temple. Clearly this is heaven. However, the Bible is not the ultimate authority on this subject for Jehovah's Witnesses. They are compelled to repeat what the Governing Body has to say on the inspired text, namely that the Great Crowd are on earth.
Turning to Revelation 19:1 shows that the Great Crowd are absolutely in heaven.
But will a Jehovah's Witness accept this? No. They have to accept the Governing Body's interpretation of the Bible. Therefore the Bible is not the ultimate authority for Jehovah's Witnesses.
(Test this for yourself if you're a Jehovah's Witness; according to Jesus' words in Matthew 8:11, where are Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? Does this tally with what the Governing Body teach? Who's authority will you accept as the ultimate one?)
- we don't believe the Trinity
Neither do;
- Unitarians
- Mormons
- Christian Scientists
- Armstrongists (formerly Worldwide Church of God)
- Christadelphians
- Oneness Pentecostals
- Unification Church
- Scientologists
I personally don't think it takes a lot of time or effort to show that the evidence supplied by a Jehovah's Witness to show that they have "the truth" is false and flimsy.
Therefore, it should be important to look for the key proof of whether a person or group has "the truth". All of the evidence will come from the Bible.
Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life" (John 14:6). Read it over carefully. The question should always be "who is the truth", not "who has the truth". Jesus is the truth. So, any group or person claiming to be "the truth" is stepping on Jesus' toes.
But can a person "have the truth"?
I believe they can and I believe I can look to Jesus for proof of this. Jesus said that;
"He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him." (John 6:56)
The New World Translation makes a bit of a cod of the translation of the Greek as you'll notice if you check it in any Greek Interlinear Bible. The essence of Jesus statement is that he would be in the person - and the person would be in him. How? By eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood.
Once per year Jehovah's Witnesses gather in their Kingdom Halls around the world. They've invited people to join with them and roughly 14-17 million people in total sit while the emblems of Jesus' flesh and blood are presented to them. Now, to receive Jesus, to receive "the truth" - and with it life itself - what should a person do?
Jesus explains;
"“Most truly I say to YOU, Unless YOU eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, YOU have no life in yourselves. 54 He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I shall resurrect him at the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink. 56 He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him." (John 6:53-56).
Now we've seen what Jesus said we should do, what do Jehovah's Witnesses do? Well, asides from around 10,000 of them, they all reject Jesus.
Ponder on that, if you will. When presented with the emblems of Jesus life and death, the means for atonement for sins, the means to receive eternal life, each Jehovah's Witness rejects it. Jesus didn't ask a lot from us. One of the few things he asked us to do was to eat the bread and drink the wine. Yet Jehovah's Witnesses are taught by the Governing Body that the bread and wine are not for them. Surely this is the whole point.
Jesus is the truth and he is received when we choose eat the bread and drink the wine. If Jehovah's Witnesses are appalled at the idea of taking the emblems, how can they ever claim to have "the truth"?