Asking Jehovah’s Witnesses to interpret specific passages is a great way to demonstrate their interpretive abuse
Got any clear examples?
Examples of Watchtower flawed interpretation of Bible passages?
by Vanderhoven7 12 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Vanderhoven7
WATCHTOWER OTHER SHEEP
And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. (John 10:16)
The words “other sheep” on the lips of Jesus in John 10:16 are not defined for us...so admittedly there is a certain amount of ambiguity which both Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons capitalize on. Now there is a reason for the ambiguity, which I won't go into now. But, letting scripture interpret scripture, we remember Jesus was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel....not to the Gentiles. It was actually some time after Pentecost that the disciples came to realize that Jesus also laid down His life for the Gentile nations and that the gospel was intended for them as well as the Jews; that they both would be one body in Christ as Paul brings out in Eph 2:16 and they would share one hope Eph 4:4 of their calling.
That's the Bible interpreting the Bible. But the WTS feels it has the authority over the Bible to add to or impregnate this passage with all kinds of extra-biblical teaching: According to the WTS Jesus was intending in Jn 10:16 to communicate much more information. To Jehovah's Witnesses Jesus was actually saying here:
And other sheep have I, which are not of this fold: no, because:
1. They will only begin being called early on in the 20th century...not before.
2. They will not be saints of God,
3. They will not have the indwelling Holy Spirit.
4. My righteousness will not be imputed to them.
5. They will not be justified to life,
6. They will not merit being raised in the first resurrection
7. I will not be their personal mediator;
8. They will not be part of my New Covenant arrangement.
9. They will not be entitled to partake of the emblems of my death.
10. They will not have a heavenly hope
11. They will be not Spirit Begotten Son's of God.
12. They will need to be affiliated with the Watchtower Society to be saved from ultimate destruction at Armageddon.
That's what this verse means to Jehovah's Witnesses.... But none of this is in the Bible. So where do the JWs get these ideas about the other sheep? You guessed it...from men. Their trust is in men, not the Bible.
-
-
Vanderhoven7
Matthew 24:45–47 provides with another flagrant example of Watchtower self-authenticating eisegesis.
45 “Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them food [i]in due season? 46 Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find so doing. 47 Assuredly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all his goods.
Here is their”scholarly”interpretation of this passage which was only discovered in 2012 by the then current Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses:
“Who Really is The Faithful and Discreet Slave?”
Jesus was referring, not to an individual, but to a composite “slave”—a group working together as one body. Jesus said that the slave (1) is appointed to a supervisory role “over [the master’s] domestics” and (2) gives the domestics spiritual “food at the proper time.”
From 1919 on, there has always been a small group of anointed Christians at the world headquarters of Jehovah’s Witnesses. They have supervised our worldwide preaching work and have been directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food. In recent years, that group has been closely identified with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
The evidence points to the following conclusion: “The faithful and discreet slave” was appointed over Jesus’ domestics in 1919. That slave is the small, composite group of anointed brothers serving at world headquarters during Christ’s presence who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food. When this group work together as the Governing Body, they act as “the faithful and discreet slave.”http://www.jw.org/en/news/events-activities/annual-meeting-report-2012/
Here is some of the fine spiritual food the Watchtower was dispensing in 1919
- Jesus presence began in 1874
- Jesus was made king in 1878
- The archangel Michael is the Pope
- ‘Sleeping saints’ were resurrected to heaven in 1878
- Russell was the ‘faithful and wise servant’
- The Great Pyramid of Giza confirms biblical chronology
- Christmas should be celebrated
- The ‘time of the end’ began in 1799
- That Armageddon would happen in 1925 and the gradual general resurrection would be well underway in 1926
- The ‘Jews to be restored to their homeland’ is literal
- The ‘great company’ (great crowd) has a heavenly hope
- Jesus died on a cross
- Jerusalem was destroyed in 606 BCE
- Congregation discipline should be determined by the whole congregation
- The prohibition on eating blood is only a “suggestion” to gentile Christians
- Birthdays could and should be celebrated
Gillies Gray writes:
The only valid reason to believe something is true is when there is sufficient evidence to support the claim.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
The burden of proof to back up the assertion that a group of religious leaders were appointed by a supernatural being, second only to the Almighty Himself, would be astronomical. The evidence required would need to be of the highest order.
As things stand, Jehovah’s Witnesses lack valid arguments for the assertion that the Governing Body was ever appointed by Jesus. The best they have is extremely weak abductive reasoning which fails to demonstrate the claim.
Contrast the Governing Body with the examples of God’s appointed representatives found in the Bible, all of whom had some kind
The claim that the Governing Body were appointed by Jesus is a baseless assertion motivated by mere wishful thinking.
-
Sea Breeze
Watchtower likes to play games by changing definitions of words and phrases. They highlight something and repeat it over and over until it takes on an altered meaning. and a life of its own. This is how they created a false Christ figure in Russell; by putting a spin on a simple phrase: "THAT SERVANT".
The WT used the KJV until they replaced it with their own bible in the 1960's.
Mt. 24: 45-47 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?
Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods.
THE MAKING OF A FALSE CHRIST FIGURE:
“The Lord Jesus, in his great prophetic statement in Matthew 24:45-47, made known the fact that at the end of the age he would be present and would have a special servant whom he would “make ruler over all his house to give meat in due season to the household.” For many years Christian people of all denominations have been looking for the manifestation of that promised servant. For several years some have recognized, and now many more are recognizing, that Pastor Russell is that servant.” -The Watchtower November 1, 1917 page 319.“The view generally held, that Pastor Russell himself was the “faithful and wise servant” of Matthew 24:45-47, created considerable difficulty for some years. The insistence that Russell had been “that servant” led many to regard Russell in what amounted actually to creature worship. They believed that all the truth God had seen fit to reveal to his people had been revealed to Russell, and now nothing more could be brought forth because “that servant” was dead.” -Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Divine Purpose page 69.
“There was some resistance from those who were not progressive and who did not have a vision of the work that lay ahead. Some insisted on living in the past, in the time of Pastor Russell, when the brothers in general had viewed him as the sole channel of Scriptural enlightenment. It was the published and accepted thought down till 1927 that he was “that servant” of Matthew 24:45.” -Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Divine Purpose page 95.
“Jesus clearly indicated that during his second presence he would have amongst the church a faithful and wise servant, through whom he would give to the household of faith meat in due season. The evidence is overwhelming concerning the Lord’s second presence, the time of the harvest, and that the office of “that servant” has been filled by Brother Russell. This is not man worship by any means. It matters not who Charles T. Russell was-whether he was a doctor, a hod-carrier or a seller of shirts. St. Peter was a fisherman: St. Paul a lawyer. But these matters are immaterial. above all, these men were the chosen vessels of the Lord.
Regardless of his earthly avocation, above all, Brother Russell was the Lord’s servant. Then to repudiate him and his work is equivalent to a repudiation of the Lord, upon the principle heretofore announced. -The Watchtower May 1, 1922 page 132.
"And just like that, Jesus was gone".
-
Biahi
My PIMI mother recently passed away. I gave her a witness funeral, as were her wishes. The brother who gave the funeral talk used Ecclesiastes 9:5, which says the dead have no conciousness. He, of course, used the NWT.
My Bible, The Living Bible, has a footnote for that scripture. It says, “this scripture reflects Solomon’s discourage opinion at the time. It does not reflect God’s truth on the matter.”
-
Anony Mous
Their flawed interpretation starts at Genesis 1:2 as they already rewrote that chapter to fit their theology and it continues until Revelation.
Genesis 1:2 NWT says and God’s active force was moving about over the surface of the waters.
Whereas the Bible says: the Spirit of God (a separate entity within the Godhead) was hovering over the waters.
Given their re-interpretation of the deity of both God, Holy Spirit and Son (Jesus according to Christians), they basically reject all scripture and simply pick and choose select verses that seem to fit (and even then they may have multiple interpretations of the same verse or use the same verse to support multiple beliefs).
-
Vanderhoven7
TTWSYF brought this up as well AM. I wonder how they interpret the fact that we can grieve the Holy Spirit?
And what scriptures do they use to determine Jesus is a created angel?
-
Journeyman
Of course, there are a number of teachings from the GB which I have my doubts about. But for me, there are also a lot of teachings from the JWs which are possible, but not dogmatically the only way of interpreting matters.
For some on here though, no JW interpretation of a scripture is ever acceptable and they "move heaven and earth" to prove everything they teach has to be wrong, probably to validate their own rejection of JWs.
A lot of Trinitarians tend to take that view too. They refuse to accept the wealth of scriptures that indicate the trinity is a wrong, coming up with increasingly far-fetched or stretched "explanations" to negate every verse that contradicts the trinity, or at least suggests that it may not be a correct understanding.
It's that kind of "counter-dogmatism" that I don't like either, any more than the GB's own dogmatic view that they themselves are right in everything.
For example, Biahi says:
My Bible, The Living Bible, has a footnote for that scripture. It says, “this scripture reflects Solomon’s discourage opinion at the time. It does not reflect God’s truth on the matter.”
What makes that quote in the LB any more valid an interpretation than the NWT using Ecclesiastes 9:5? The writers/translators of the LB have simply asserted that.
The JWs have at least developed a doctrine based on numerous scriptures regarding the dead which is internally consistent. Is it 100% absolutely correct? I don't know - I'm not God, and I've never died and been resurrected to "test" the idea. But it is no more or less valid that simply saying "yeah well, what Solomon said doesn't reflect God's truth".
Also, regarding this:
I wonder how they interpret the fact that we can grieve the Holy Spirit?
In Genesis, God says to Cain that his brother's blood is "crying out" to Him. Does that mean blood is a Person? https://biblehub.com/genesis/4-10.htm
Also, the Holy Spirit is said to be "poured out" in numerous Scriptures. Can a creature or person be "poured out" to a crowd of people? Two examples:https://biblehub.com/ezekiel/39-29.htm , https://biblehub.com/acts/10-45.htm
This article has more under the heading "Impersonal attributes of the Holy Spirit": https://www.ucg.org/learn/bible-study-aids/who-god/who-god/holy-spirit-not-person
So assuming personification from a phrase like "grieve the spirit" is, while superficially understandable, not necessarily correct. You need to read the rest of the context of how the Spirit is used, described and/or appears in heavenly vision, etc, throughout scripture. And of how God himself speaks and acts. For me, doing so makes it clear the Holy Spirit is something God uses, not a separate, independently thinking and acting entity equal to God and Jesus. -
Journeyman
Having said the above, let me talk about what I think the GB have definitely got wrong.
Matthew 24:45–47 is a major example for starters - perhaps the biggest - where I think the GB have overreached themselves.
Could the "slave" be illustrative of a group? Perhaps, but that does not mean it's them.
The verses say "the master" appoints the slave - not that the slave effectively appoints themself, which is what the GB has done, especially in recent years by displacing the rest of who they consider the 144,000.
Also, the slave is said to be looking after Jesus' "household", and is contrasted with a possible "evil slave" who would "beat his fellow slaves". The more the GB has been dogmatic and applied rigid rules and punishments over the years, the more they have separated themselves from that definition by default and tended to look like the latter description of an "evil slave" (which of course they themselves dismiss as not an option).
Importantly, the parable of the faithful slave has something else in common with many others from Jesus which the GB has ignored: the point in time when the "Master" appears.
- In the parable of the virgins, the master/groom appears just before the wedding and goes into the feast.
- In the parable of the sheep and goats, the master appears just before judgement to begin separating the two groups.
- In the parable of the talents, the master appears at the end to reward each slave for how they've used the talents.
What's the common factor? That the master/groom arrives, coming from a long distance, near the end of events to render judgement/outcome.
So it's far more likely that in the FDS parable too, Jesus is talking about coming at the end of the system just before Armageddon to assess those claiming to represent him and reward faithful servants, not at some time that is now over 100 years ago! That faithful "slave", whether an individual or a group, is then appointed to feed the people after that time forward.
There are a wealth of scriptural reasons why the GB interpretation of the parable of the FDS is wrong. Another could be that it implies Jesus is going to wholly reward a single specific organisation, but the scriptures suggest that Jesus will take faithful ones from wherever he finds them, not just one single group. At Matthew 13, for example, the wheat are "scattered" among the weeds and indistinguishable until the "harvest". If the JW Org alone was the only one standing out, that would contradict those words.