2011 Watchtower publisher statistics with analysis

by jwfacts 220 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  davidl7

  JWFacts...just wanted to respond on some of your posts...I haven't been on this discussion board for a few days...been very busy.

  JWfacts said " When you are mentioning people that come to the same conclusion, or agree with Witnesses you are misrepresenting the facts. What you mean is some people agree with a few Watchtower teachings. No one has ever come up with anything remotely close to all the current teachings. (I would like you to find someone that came up with almost any of the Watchtower interpretation of Revelation on their own, or that concluded that Jesus was not their mediator). Just because a few people think a Watchtower Scripture or doctrine is correct does not mean it is correct, or that they agree with the whole body of teachings."

  No I am not representing the facts. Many of my friends and people who I have met that are now full Witnesses came to understand certain teachings of the Bible, such as like Jesus is the Son of God or that the soul dies prior to becoming Witnesses. They came to to those beliefs based on their own personal reading and studying of the Bible. True, they may have not know everything we teach, but knew and agreed with enough fundamental teachings of the Bible and knew we wer teaching the truth when they began to discuss the Bible with us, and as result decided to join the Christian Congregation. If you are refering to the books I mentioned of individuals who I stated ARE NOT JWs, but have come to same conclusion as the Witnesses due to their Bible study - those was just mentioned as an aside. I believe I mentioned that the author of Christianity Without Fairy Tales is an Episcopalian. And yet he admits, based on his understanding of some passages in Isaiah, that it predicts a paradise earth, and then mentions that Witnesses teach that. And, although, he appears to be leaning towards the Trinitarian doctrine, he seems to admit that it is not clearly stated in the NT and even says in a footnote that John 1:1 should be translated "the Word was a God." I was just mentioned him and one other author, Don Cupitt, the author of The Debate About Christ, who clearly came to the conclusion that the Witnesses are the group "which is the closest to NT Christianity", as an aside, to point out that even those who haven't become Witnesses do agree that we teach doctrines based on what the Bible says. But, again, many that have come to those same conclusions, have decided to join our Christian congregation.

  JWfacts wrote " It may be difficult to come to the concept of the Trinity reading the Bible, but it is very plain that Jesus is God from the New Testament. John 20:28-29 "In answer Thomas said to him: "My Lord and my God!" For over half of its history the Watchtower taught that Jesus was a god and should be worshipped, contradicting the current teachings that you are quoting. http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/worship-jesus.php

  Likewise the Bible is full of references to the resurrection being in the twinkling of an eye, and to torture, such as the account of Abraham and Lazaurus and descriptions of the lake of fire. You do not need to be a theologian to get the impression of an immortal soul, or that Abraham is in heaven.

  Matthew 8:11 " But I tell YOU that many from eastern parts and western parts will come and recline at the table with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of the heavens"

  Again, as I mentioned before, the word translated worship has different shades of meaning. I quoted 1 Chron. 29:20 where the nation of Israel is said to worship Jehovah and the king. Worship can mean simply to honor one or bow down to someone in respect, as Jason Beduhn, who I mentioned earlier, states in his book. Beduhn points out in his book that the word worship did not have the same meaning as today, referring to worship only to God. Russell clearly stated by applying the term "a god" to Jesus, that he was referring to him as a mighty being, as the OT applies that word to angels and even powerful judges. And even Jesus used that word and applied to powerful judges when he quoted Ps. 82: 1-6 in John 10:31-33.

  John 20:28 - many scholars say that was an exclamation said to Jesus but really directed to God. Just like some gals may say to me "Oh my God"...but they are really directing to God. The OT records visits from God's messengers or angels. Those visted by the angels sometimes said that they have seen God (compare Gen 16:7-11, 13; Judges 13:20-22). The angels were not God, but represented Jehovah God, so those who spoke to angels said they have seen God or spoken to God. That sheds light on what John 20:28 met. Clearly Jesus is not Almighty God and is not part of a Trinity. Jesus has a God, and is called the Son of God too many times in the Bible. When he was dying on the stake he cried out to his God, "my God, my God, why have you forsaken me. (Matt. 27:46, 47) Who is the God he cried out to? In Heb. 5:4-8 says that Jesus cried out the One who was able to save him...who was the greater One he cried out to that was able save him? In John 20:17 he says that he has to back to "my God and your God..." In Ephe. 1:3, 2 Cor. 1:3, Eph. 1:17, etc...all written after he was resurrected, says that the Christian congregation was to give praise and honor "to the God and Father of Jesus Christ". Who is the God and Father of Jesus Christ? Jesus mentioned in Rev. 3:12 his God several times. In John 17:3 he calls his Father, "the only true God". In 1 Cor. 8:6 it says that the "One God" is the Father, not Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The book of John clearly says in John 20:31, that we must believe that Jesus Christ is the "Son of God". The most widely quoted Bible text John 3:16, says the God sent his Son, not that God himself came down from heaven. 1 John 4:4-14 stresses that we must believe Jesus is the Son of God and that no man has ever seen God. The clear teaching of Bible is that Jesus is the Son of God. He believed in the Shema, that Jehovah our God is One Jehovah" a clearly unitarian biblical teaching. In Matt. 16:16-18 Jesus clearly said that a fundamental teaching of the Christian congregation is that Jesus is the Son of God.

  Jesus’ words Abraham represents the Greater One in whom all families of the earth will be blessed, Jehovah God the Great Father. Therefore Isaac, Abraham’s only son by his wife Sarah, represents God’s only-begotten Son Jesus Christ, whom God anointed to be King of kings. The Bible clearly says that the soul dies in numerous places including Ezek. 18:4, 20; Acts 3:23; Matt. 10:28; Immortality is something that we are not. Satan the Devil was the one who said we will not die if we commits sins, but instead we will be like the gods. That what he told Eve, according to Gen. 3. If we do not really die, and always are existing in some form, are mind or being always being conscious, then we are immortal. But that is not what the Bible teaching. The twinkling of the eye is only found in book of Thess. and the contact clearly speaking of who are suddelnly awaken from death/sleep. Jesus clearly taught that the dead our asleep or unconscios (John 11:11-14) Eccle. 9:5,10 clearly says that the dead know nothing. What would be the point of the resurrection if the dead are really not dead and are living? The Bible says in John 3:16 that only those who believe that Jesus is the Son of God will live forever, and the other will perish or die. Clearly the text talking the rich and lazarus must be parables. Jesus clearly taught in John 3:13 that no man has ascended to the heavens. The Bible clearly teaches that most will be resurrected in the future and are asleep in death until awaken in the resurrection (John 5:28, 29; Acts 24:15) Not even King David is in heaven, according Matt. 11:11. Since Jesus clearly said in John 3:13, that no one has gone to heaven, then clearly, Matt. 8:11 in a spiritual sense, in view of what the aforementioned Bible texts says. Jesus’ words means the flwg. as I understand it : Abraham represents the Greater One in whom all families of the earth will be blessed, Jehovah God the Great Father. Isaac, Abraham’s only son by his wife Sarah, represents God’s only-begotten Son Jesus Christ. Since Jacob received life from Abraham through Isaac and so was Abraham’s grandson. Likewise, the Christian congregation receives life from God through Jesus Christ. “The Christ also loved the congregation and delivered up himself for it.” “The Christ also is head of the congregation, he being a savior of this body.”

  JWFacts worte:The Watchtower Society has split into many groups.

  Any tiny group that has left is not part of the Christian congregation Even those groups, some of which have died out or will eventually cease to exist, do not consider themselves part of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. In addition, they leave to promote erroneous teachings that do not agree with what th eBible says. Therefore, those groups are not part of the one faith and united Christian Congregation.

  JWFacts wrote: You say the changing doctrine over the resurrection is not important, yet the apostle Paul called Hymenaeus and Philetus Apostates for a misunderstanding of the Resurrection.

  In their case it was not a minor misunderstanding, but some major misunderstanding. In any case, they had the apostles were living then, and they refused to listen to the correct teaching of the resurrection, and rejected the apostles' teachings. Therefore, they were apostates.
• 

  davidl7

  JWFacts - One of the points you did not address is the inclusion of the word Jehovah in the New Testament, which gets almost universal condemnation from anyone with a knowledge of the Bible. Most people reading the Bible will read a translation with the words Lord and worship in their rightful places. That makes coming to the Watchtower understanding of Jesus almost impossible to arrive at.

  Yes, I have heard the arguments against the inclusion of the divine name in the NT. But I think the NWT does have a good basis and sound scholarship for using it in the NT. Evidence clearly show that copies of the LXX that were in existance prior and during the 1st Century, all contained a form of the divine name. Now, Jesus said in Matt. 6:9 that God's name should be sanctified. He said that he does not follow the Pharisees nor the Jewish leaders that make the word of God invalid. In John 17:6, 26, he said he made "God's name known", so he did not hide God's name. At Heb. 2:12 it says that Jesus praised God's name in the congregation. In Acts 15:14 its says the congregation will be a "people for God's name" and quotes for the OT which mentions YHWH several times. Rev. 14:1-3 says that the begotten Christians will have both God's name and Jesus new name on their foreheads. And Rev. 19:1-6 says Hallelujah several times, which many Bible scholars says means "praise Yahowah (Jehovah). So the Christian Congregation will be praisers of Jehovah, folllowing Jesus sample.

  Now, I know the arguement used by some. Well the name does not appear in the extant copies of the NT. The earliest existing extant copy of the NT is dated at most in the very late 1st century (although some argue it may actually be a 2nd century document). No original autograph of the NT exist. We do know, however, that copies of the LXX that existed in 1st century or prior to that included a form of the divine name, unlike the later editions and copies of the LXX, dated around the 2nd century and later, which replaced YHWH with Kyrios (Lord). Now, in view of the NT internal evidence, with the emphasis given in the NT on the name of God by Jesus and the apostles. And in view of the fact that most of the original Christians were former Jews, and must have known that Jesus name means "salvation of Jehovah." Jesus, who opened and read from the book of Isaiah, and saw the name YHWH in a 1st century scroll would not have said LORD. He made God's name known. That is clearly from the evidence in the NT text. The Christian congregation was to be a people for "God's name." (Acts 15:14). Interesting, one Jewish historical texts, refers to the "Minim" who included the Tetragrams in their gospels. Many believe that the Minim were the Christians. If that is the case, then we have some other evidence that the name did appear in the NT. And there are a few scholars, such as George Howard, who believe that the divine name was in the original autographs of the NT, especially when it quoted from the OT. but was later replaced by surrogates by Gentile Christians. There are numerous Bible versions that include the name in the NT, including several German NTs. Interestingly, the NKJV capitalizes the name LORD in the NT whenever it quotes from the OT, and preface of some editions state that LORD is a substitute for the divine name YHWH. Several Hebrew NT also use it the NT. The Jewish NT uses in the footnotes. There is, I believe, ample evidence that clearly points to the fact that the original NT did include the divine name, but just like the later editions of the LXX, the name was removed by apostate Gentile Christians, some of which despised the Jews.
• 

  jwfacts

  David, thanks for the response, but you are just throwing back Watchtower doctrine at me of which I am very well coherent with. Don;t forget, I spent most of my life sprouting off what you wrote above in endless Christian debates. I have absolutely no interest in a doctrinal tennis match. It is simply your way of masking the real issue here.

  You still seem to be missing my point. You say " many that have come to those same conclusions, have decided to join our Christian congregation." Your definition of many is far different to mine. Out of 7 billion people, less than 100,000 join that were not indoctrinated as JWs from birth. That is not many, it is an insignificant amount. Most of these have just the shallowest Biblical knowledge as received from a Watchtower publication, and just join for the companionship and paradise hope. I doubt more than a handful join each year that have a scholarly knowledge of the Bible and feel JWs are the closest represention of the Bible. For that reason, saying "many" join is no more compelling an indication of it being true than the "many" that become Scientologists, Hare Krishnas or Pentecostals.

  You did not address my question about worship. I know that " proskuneo " can be translated as obeisance instead of worship, as detailed in the article that I referred you to. My point is that even JW's felt the term should be worship, and worshipped Jesus, until 1954, more than half the Watchtower history. Why would Jehovah allow such a critical error?

  In their case it was not a minor misunderstanding, but some major misunderstanding. In any case, they had the apostles were living then, and they refused to listen to the correct teaching of the resurrection, and rejected the apostles' teachings. Therefore, they were apostates.

  As must therefore be the Governing Body, as they have the completed Bible with its correct teaching of the resurrection.

  Well the name does not appear in the extant copies of the NT.

  Regarding YHWH in the NT - if it was there, and is so important, why didn't Jehovah care to have a single shred of evidence in a single manuscript remain?

  You claim reading the Bible leads a person to Watchtower teachings on their own. I call you out on that. Even on absolutely critical teachings like the Resurrection and Worship of God, the Watchtower leaders do not agree. Each successive generation of Governing Body have replaced the doctrine their predecessors were so confident of, and forced their followers to believe without question at the threat of excommunication.
• 

  cedars

  David, your back! I've been thinking about you man.

  Please can you go back to the other jwfacts thread, and continue with our conversation on there? You went all quiet on me.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/219616/1/2011-Watchtower-publisher-statistics-with-analysis

  Look forward to hearing from you.

  Cedars
• 

  jwfacts

  David - To be realistic, any person reading the Bible on their own would not come up with all Watchtower doctrine. They may arrive as some same conclusions, but not all, including disagreeing with some major ones. What shows the high control / mind control nature of the Watchtower followers is that they openly confess belief in every Watchtower doctrine. I expect from your comments that you were raised a JW, and you certainly so far give open adherence to all the doctrine, whether you really accept it or not. Are there any Watchtower doctrine that you feel may not be correct?
• 

  punkofnice

  I think the NWT does have a good basis and sound scholarship for using it in the NT.

  Scholarship? Phwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha............oooooooooooooh, dear, (wipes tears from eyes). Scholarsh...AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

  Sorry (giggling)

  BTTT
• 

  jwfacts

  No I am not representing the facts.

  So tell me, since that is a direct answer to my statement about the mediator, which of your friends came to the conclusion that Jesus was not their mediator. No only are you misrepresenting the facts, I am now prepared to say you are lying.
• 

  Hoffnung

  Hello Bobby, (if this your name)

  Thanks for the reply, and apologies to the others that we side tracked a little this thread.

  You wrote: "If you examine the use of the word "earth" in Revelation, it is clear that the present physical earth (prior to the recreation) is being described. It would be an wrong to teach as anything but assumption, that the new earth will not be literal as well."

  That is a nice starting point, but unfortunately there was not even one scripture quoted from Revelation to support this. My arguments, that Revelation 21 stated that there is no sun or moon, and no night that give light to this new earth, and from revelation 22 about the river of water of life that flows from Gods throne in heaven from outer space onto the new earth were not adressed.

  And then you went on to say: "BTW the concept of a new heavens and a new earth is not only found in Revelation."

  And you quoted mostly Hebrew scriptures for that support. Which speak about a hope and belief system that Jesus has replaced by something way better. Concerning the verses in Romans 8 & 2 Pet 3:13, there is nothing in there either that points to a literal earth.

  Both Jesus and Paul said and wrote, that in order to inherit the Kingdom of God, one would have to lay down his physical body and take up a spiritual one. To be very honest, I do not understand all the details of what this brings along either, but that is how the Greek Scriptures and the hope therein come to me.

  Hoffnung
• 

  Hoffnung

  and for Davidl7,

  I would like to point out to the verses I quoted from the Greek Scriptures where "Jehovah" was inserted in places where it definitely does not belong. (mostly as a reply to Slimboyfat). None of the explanations given by you about this subjects adresses that issue. There are no quotes of the Hebrew Scriptures near to this verses at all. And these are just a sample, there are many more verses like these.

  Hoffnung
• 

  davidl7

  JW Facts wrote " You still seem to be missing my point. You say " many that have come to those same conclusions, have decided to join our Christian congregation." Your definition of many is far different to mine. Out of 7 billion people, less than 100,000 join that were not indoctrinated as JWs from birth. That is not many, it is an insignificant amount. Most of these have just the shallowest Biblical knowledge as received from a Watchtower publication, and just join for the companionship and paradise hope. I doubt more than a handful join each year that have a scholarly knowledge of the Bible and feel JWs are the closest represention of the Bible. For that reason, saying "many" join is no more compelling an indication of it being true than the "many" that become Scientologists, Hare Krishnas or Pentecostals."

  Well that is assuming your estimate of less than 100,000 who were not raised as Witnesses is correct. Either way, even if it just 90,000 that have come in a gotten bapitized, that is still relatively many people. It also does not count the thousands of others that are joining us in the worship of Jehovah through his Son and regarding attending the meeting, some of which are actually preaching, but do not yet report or are not yet counted as a non-baptized publisher. A new Bible student has been preaching to his former Baptist church friends and family, for the past 3 months, even though he is still not reporting his preaching activity...But many that I have met have read the Bible on their and came to the conclusion that Jesus is really the Son of God, and the soul dies and is not immortal, and one must be resurrected in order to live again. Some, like a few former Adventists in my congregation, did learn the truth about what happens when we died from their former church...but they still had questions about the trinity as the read their bible. My brother-in-law said he kept reading his NT, and really could not understand where the teaching of the Trinity came from, since the most obvious teaching from the NT was the Jesus was the Son of God, and not God himself. I know of several individuals who were former clergymen of others churches, most with master of divinity degrees, so they must have at least some Bible training and at least at one point believed and agreed with Trinitarian point of view, but eventually came to the conclusion that the Witnesses were teaching the truth.

  JW facts "You did not address my question about worship. I know that " proskuneo " can be translated as obeisance instead of worship, as detailed in the article that I referred you to. My point is that even JW's felt the term should be worship, and worshipped Jesus, until 1954, more than half the Watchtower history. Why would Jehovah allow such a critical error?"

  I believe I did address. As explained, the Witnesses back in 1954 already understood the different shades of meaning of the word "worship". Back then when they were referring to worshipping Jesus it was in the same sense as the Israelites gave honor and bowed down to the king of Israel. It was not the same as the worship or sacred service given to Jehovah, the God of Jesus Christ. Many lexicon do agree, and rightly so, with the different meanings of the word worship. However, since the word "worship" as changed in meaning in most peoples minds, as just applying to Jehovah, it is that form of worship that we believe that only Jehovah alone must receive. As I pointed out earlier, Jason Debuhn in chapter 4 of his book, Truth In Translation, as very good write-up on the Greek work prokyneou, and how the shades of the different meaning is not fully understood today. And even the book Reasoning With the Scriptures, which I quoted earlier, states "we must understand that it is pro·sky·ne′o [worhship] with a particular attitude of heart and mind that should be directed only toward God." (p. 215)

  JW facts wrote " Regarding YHWH in the NT - if it was there, and is so important, why didn't Jehovah care to have a single shred of evidence in a single manuscript remain?"

  But my point was that anyone can see the shreds of evidence even in the current extant NT manuscripts. In Rev. 19:1-3 the form Hallelujah appears several times and most scholars agree that it means "Praise Jah" or "Praise Jehovah (Yahowah)". In. Rev. 14:1-3 and Rev. 5:9, 10 Jesus clearly says that not only his name would be written in the foreheads of the 144,000, but also his Father's name would be written on their forehead...which remains us of the Jewish high priests who were a turban the bore the name YHWH. So true Christians would be praisers of Jehovah and his Son Jesus. Acts 15:14 says God's people were to be a people of his name. And in Matt. 6:9 Jesus said God's name is to be kept holy. In John 17:6, 26 his said he did not hide his name, but made God's name known. In Heb. 2:12 Jesus is said to praise the name of God among the Christian congregation. So I so those as shreds of evidence, if you will, that God's name was known and used in the Christian congregation. In addition, early Jewish writings talk about the Minim that included the YHWH in "their gospels". Minim is believed to be one of the terms 1st and 2nd century Jews used for those who became Christian. If that is correct, that adds to the evidences that the name was included in the original autographs of the NT, but then later removed, sometime after 1st or 2nd centuries. Much like the LXX, which include the divine name in copies dated prior or during the 1st century, but are is later removed. I think the evidence is clear that Name must have been included since Jesus openly rejected the tradition of the Hharisees and Saduccees which made the Word of God invalid, including their laws prohibiting the pronounciation of God's name.

  JW Facts wrote -You claim reading the Bible leads a person to Watchtower teachings on their own. I call you out on that. Even on absolutely critical teachings like the Resurrection and Worship of God, the Watchtower leaders do not agree. Each successive generation of Governing Body have replaced the doctrine their predecessors were so confident of, and forced their followers to believe without question at the threat of excommunication.

  Yes, but even some who never joined the Witnesses, have come to the conclusion or similar conclusion to the Witnesses. Evangelical writer Edward Fudge pretty much agrees with our teaching regarding the soul and conditiion of the dead. Clark Pinnock also agrees. As well as others. Many scholars and others of come to the conclusion that the trintiy is absolutely a non-biblical teaching. Some who have come to to those conclusion have joined the ranks of the Witnesses.

  True there have been some changes. But even Russell knew that as time want on, the light of the truth would keep getting brighter, meaning our understanding of the Bibe. He himself said that he would reject something that is revealed to be incorrect. But the way I see, the basic Bible truths were always taught...Jesus is the Son of God, the soul dies. the wicked will not live forever in a buring fire in eternal agony, the wicked will be destroyed and put out of existance, God's name is Jehovah, the earth will become a paradise, etc. All the fundamental teachings were always taught. If something turned out to be wrong, then it is a good thing to reject. Such as the teaching that the Great Pyramid was the Word of God in Stone...it was a good thing to reject that teaching. (Prov. 4:18)