Having said that, I can tell you this: It was a Church of Christ minister (and college professor) who first revealed to me that the JWs had mistranslated the New Testament when they just inserted the name Jehovah all through it out of their own sectarian interest in that name. I researched it on my own and discovered (to my great disgust) that he was absolutely right. - james_woods
The Kingdom Interlinear Translation explains the reason for inserting Jehovah. The theory seems quite sound.
I tend to agree with the insertion of Jehovah in the NT, where there is a citation of the OT.
As a dug deeper I found that even the WTS made this an EVIDENTLY/APPARENTLY doctrine...nothing for certain. - blondie
Blondie, they make a compelling argument for Michael being Jesus. It goes down to that whole trinity thing. If Jesus isn't equal in divinity to God, and was created, then there is nothing wrong with him being Michael.
Jesus being Micheal only conflicts when Jesus is also supposed to be God.
However, that being said, I agree that the Governing Body is
1.) unscriptural (has no scriptural backing, besides the weak foundation of Acts),
2.) sets themselves up as the ultimate authority for a Witness (and not Scripture or God or personal conscience, which is bull),
3.) and simply tolerates no dissension.
If Jehovah need you to be a JW to be saved, then I pity the poor bastards that spent their life believing in false "Christendom". That just doesn't make sense.
It's like they take salvation into their own hands and then say, "if you don't eat what we have to give you, you are doomed."
WTF?