Tag Archive for: Jehovah’s Witnesses

Conversations with Jehovah’s Witnesses

Conversations with Jehovah’s Witnesses

By J. Brian Huffling

“There are some Jehovah’s Witnesses in the neighborhood if you want to talk them,” my wife said. I was excited. I have had numerous and long-standing discussions with Mormons, but never anything meaningful with Jehovah’s Witnesses. After a while, they finally came to my door. While I couldn’t talk to them at the time, we scheduled a meeting for them to come back. I have been meeting with them for about a month now. It has been great! I have studied their teachings for a while, but I have never had the chance to get it from the horse’s mouth and really ask questions to help me better understand their belief system. It really has been a lot of fun, and I would like to share my experiences with you, including their beliefs and the questions I have asked them.

The Name of Jehovah

The first teaching they shared with me was the importance of the name “Jehovah.” In Hebrew (the original language of the Old Testament) God’s personal name is Yahweh. The original Hebrew did not contain vowels, and so this name was spelled YHWH. It was thought to be sacred, and so the Hebrew scribes did not want to pronounce the divine name. Instead, they added the letters of Adonai, which means “Master” or “Lord.” Thus, we get the English spelling “Yahoveh.” Rumor has it that “Jehovah” came about because the Germans had a hard time pronouncing the “Y” and instead made a “J” sound, hence, Jehovah.

However, this name Jehovah came about; Jehovah’s’ Witnesses are adamant that we should call him by his divine name. They teach that English translations have lost this teaching, and it is important to get it right. This is one reason they have their own version of the Bible, which is called the “New World Translation.” Translating words like YHWH as Jehovah is just one difference, and relatively minor in comparison to other teachings that drastically change the text.

Jesus Is “a” God, Not God Almighty

I was surprised that they threw this one at me right out of the gate, but on the second meeting, they brought an elder who admitted that in their view, Jesus is not God. I had known this teaching for years but was not sure exactly how open they would be about it. Happily, for me, they were very open about it. After some general teaching through a pamphlet that they gave me, the elder and I agreed to focus on the topic of Jesus’ deity on our next meeting. I did some preparation, so I could try to prove to them that Jesus did, in fact claim to be God.

He ended up coming by himself on this particular visit, and we went over two passages of Scripture from which he wanted to demonstrate that Jesus was a created being and thus not God. One passage was Proverbs 8:22-23, which says: “The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old. 23 Ages ago, I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth” (ESV). His point was that “Wisdom” refers to Jesus. I do not remember getting a very clear answer as to why he thought this, but I pointed out that as wisdom literature, “Wisdom” is personified often, and even as a woman. In fact, verse twelve says, “I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion.” I asked, “If Wisdom is Jesus, then who is Prudence?” There was no real answer.

His second, and more well-known passage cited by them on this topic, was Colossians 1:15, which says, “He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” Since Jesus is “the firstborn of all creation,” Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that he is the first created being. However, the Greek word for ‘firstborn’ actually means “preeminent”, not the first in a series of things. In fact, the Greek translation of Psalm 89:27 uses the exact word for David: “And I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.” However, David was not only not the firstborn, he was the last born. So I argued these two passages are not teaching that Jesus was created. The first was simply a personification of wisdom, which happens all the time in Hebrew wisdom literature. And the second simply doesn’t mean what they say it means. The elder was not convinced, and even said that we can’t go by what the dictionary says. I could not knock him off his script on this point. He simply refused to concede what the word means.

I offered several lines of argument that Jesus claimed to be God. For example, Isaiah 44:6 says, “I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.” However, in Revelation 1:17-18 Jesus claimed, “I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.” This is Jesus talking and not Jehovah (Jehovah never died according to Jehovah’s Witnesses). That Jesus was the one speaking was agreed upon by the elder. My point was that if Jehovah was claiming to be the first and the last and so was Jesus, then Jesus was claiming to be Jehovah. The reply was that Jesus merely was thinking like Jehovah, not claiming to be Jehovah. However, as I pointed out, this is not what the text says. (See this post for more material on Jesus’ claims to deity.)

After making several connections like the one above, I asked the elder what would make him believe Jesus was God if such clear identity claims did not serve as evidence. His answer was that God would not allow himself to be put to death by men. (To be clear, Christians don’t believe God was put to death; rather, the human nature of Jesus was put to death. His deity can not be touched by death.) We never agreed on the deity of Jesus.

Jesus Was Raised from the Dead Spiritually, Not Physically

The elder brought another Jehovah’s Witnesses for this meeting where we further discussed Jesus’ deity and the resurrection. They believe that Jesus pre-existed his human life as the archangel Michael. His life was transferred to the virgin Mary, and he became a human. The elder said that after Jesus’ death he was raised, but spiritually, not physically. He argued that flesh and blood cannot enter the kingdom of God, and since Jesus is in Heaven, he must be spiritual. He also pointed to Scriptures where those who talked to him on the road to Emmaus did not recognize Jesus after his resurrection. Thus, he was not in his former body. For example, Luke 24:13-16 reads, “That very day two of them were going to a village named Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem, 14 and they were talking with each other about all these things that had happened. 15 While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. 16 But their eyes were kept from recognizing him.” As I pointed out, the text does not say he looked different, but “their eyes were kept from recognizing him.” Further, Scripture teaches that Jesus was raised in his same physical body he had.

Luke 24:39-43 states: “See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” 40 And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. 41 And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” 42 They gave him a piece of broiled fish, 43 and he took it and ate before them.” Clearly, Jesus was claiming to be a physical being. This was not contested by the elder. However, his response was simply that Jesus materialized in the way angels could in the Old Testament.

I pointed out that John 2:19-21 says, “Jesus answered them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ 20 The Jews then said, ‘It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?’ 21 But he was speaking about the temple of his body.” So, the same body that was killed would be raised up after death. It is also important to note that in Acts 2:24 Peter says that God raised up Jesus: “God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death because it was not possible for him to be held by it.” This is another claim to Jesus’ deity since he said, “I will raise” my body, and here Peter says, “God raised up Jesus.”

In the end, I asked them what evidence would count for the physical resurrection, even in principle, since Jesus saying that the same body that was killed was the same one raised, and he demonstrated his body to be physical in many ways and on many occasions. But if showing his physical body after his resurrection doesn’t count as evidence (in conjunction with the claim that the same body would be raised), then it seems like nothing in principle could ever be used as evidence for a physical resurrection. The younger Jehovah’s Witness tried to change the subject, but I politely asked for an answer. There really wasn’t one.

The New World Translation, The Trinity, and Jesus

We will be discussing the Trinity next time, although it came up in our last meeting. Jehovah’s Witnesses deny the Trinity. They teach it is a pagan lie and that Christianity stole the idea from other religions that also had trinities; however, such is false. Other religions had a triad of beings but nothing like the Christian view of the Trinity. But Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot hold to the Trinity since they deny Jesus is God. They further teach that the Holy Spirit is not a person but rather God’s active force. In their own translation of the Bible, the New World Translation, “Holy Spirit” is actually translated “active force.” In the NWT, Genesis 1:2 actually says, “…and God’s active force was moving about over the surface of the waters.” This is a gross mistranslation that betrays the NWT‘s bias. The Hebrew is accurately translated in the ESV: “And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” There is simply no justification for translating “spirit” as “active force.”

Another, perhaps the most famous, example of bias in the NWT is John 1:1. The ESV reads, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” The NWT adds the word “a” to make the text read: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” The reason they give is that in Greek the word “God” does not have the word “the” (the definite article) in front of it, which would make it definite. (Greek sometimes has the definite article before nouns even though English doesn’t always translate it. Greek can read “the God” which is merely translated “God.”) They claim that without the definite article, “God” should be translated indefinitely as “a god.” However, as one scholar has pointed out, the NWT only follows this principle 6% of the time. In fact, in John 1:6 the word “God” appears in Greek without the article and the NWT still translates it “God” as referring to Jehovah. This is clear bias. Without going into Greek grammar suffice it to say that a word can be definite even without the article in front of it. In Greek the article has a very rich and broad way of functioning. In Daniel Wallace’s Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, over 100 pages are dedicated to how the article functions (and by the way he argues against the NWT‘s translation here—which incidentally is where my earlier 6% came from). In short, Greek scholars are not impressed with the NWT, to put it nicely.

Conclusion

I hope that this brief article has helped make you more aware of the teachings of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. For direct info regarding their beliefs see their website. An excellent resource to explain and counter their views is Ron Rhodes’ Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Robert Bowman, Jr also has excellent material, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Jesus Among Other Gods: The Absolute Claims of the Christian Message (book) by Ravi Zacharias

Counter Culture Christian: Is There Truth in Religion? (DVD) by Frank Turek

World Religions: What Makes Jesus Unique? mp3 by Ron Carlson

Jehovah’s Witnesses & the Trinity (mp3) by Ed Havaich

Can All Religions Be True? mp3 by Frank Turek

 

J. Brian Huffling, PH.D. have a BA in History from Lee University, an MA in (3 majors) Apologetics, Philosophy, and Biblical Studies from Southern Evangelical Seminary (SES), and a Ph.D. in Philosophy of Religion from SES. He is the Director of the Ph.D. Program and Associate Professor of Philosophy and Theology at SES. He also teaches courses for Apologia Online Academy. He has previously taught at The Art Institute of Charlotte. He has served in the Marines, Navy, and is currently a reserve chaplain in the Air Force at Maxwell Air Force Base. His hobbies include golf, backyard astronomy, martial arts, and guitar.

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2num9My

/by
An Encounter With Jehovah’s Witnesses

An Encounter With Jehovah’s Witnesses

,

By Terrell Clemmons

It was a bright and cold December morning, and I was up to my elbows in bread dough when my doorbell rang. The dog barked at full volume, and my preschool daughter zipped past me as I brushed the flour from my hands and followed her to the door. There waited a tall, professionally dressed, blond young woman, smiling confidently as if she were arriving for a job interview. She offered me some free literature on the Bible and asked if she could read me a Bible verse or two. I put the dog out, forgot about my bread, and said, “Sure!”

I saw from her pamphlet that she was associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses, so I quizzed her a little. “Oh yes, we believe salvation is totally by grace – there is nothing we could ever do to earn it.” She came across as sincere and earnest, used all the right words, and we agreed on most everything we discussed in that short exchange. I found that I liked her. But I knew there were problems with the message she was bringing to my home. “Is it Jehovah’s Witnesses who teach that Jesus is the same person as Michael the archangel?” I asked. I knew one of the aberrant groups taught this, but I wasn’t sure which one.

“Yes!” her face lit up as this connection was made.

When I asked her why Jehovah’s Witnesses teach this, she rattled off some verses without hesitation. I tried to pay attention, but with my dog barking from the garage and my daughter tugging on my arm. I just couldn’t concentrate.

“Hmmm,” I had an idea, “I’d love to discuss this further, but now really isn’t a good time. Could we schedule a time to meet in a few weeks?” My kids would be back in school; the house would be quiet, and most important, I’d have some time to prepare. We swapped phone numbers and email addresses and made an appointment for her to return after Christmas. She gave me two booklets to read in the meantime. “These will explain everything,” she assured me.

As she trekked off to the next house on my street, I got out my Bible and opened one of her booklets. My bread would have to wait a little longer.

Witnesses of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society

This was my first encounter with Chelsea, a young Jehovah’s Witness dedicated to preaching the gospel according to the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, and this dispute over the identity of Jesus Christ became subject matter for our first Bible discussion.

The “Watchtower Society” or “Watchtower,” for short, is the name of the organization to which Jehovah’s Witnesses devote their lives – in fact, Jehovah’s Witnesses would more accurately be called Watchtower Witnesses. It is a rigidly structured organization that demands absolute loyalty from its members. Its website boasts more than seven million ministers in 236 lands distributing some twenty billion pieces of Bible-based literature over the past ten years. On any given day, Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide are studying the same Watchtower-published materials in their meetings – they attend up to five per week – and offering the same magazines and booklets door to door. Witnesses are expected to conform to the organization’s standards with regard to dress, meeting attendance, field service (another term for door to door witnessing), and unquestioning obedience to elders and overseers.

A Strategic Approach

Most Jehovah’s Witnesses are sincere, well-meaning people who believe they are serving their God – they call him Jehovah – and telling you the way to be saved. When one or two arrive on your doorstep, they are well-prepared for common responses, and many conscientious Christians who try to engage them in conversation wind up frustrated over their inability to go beyond pat answers. Most just send them on their way unchallenged.

Yet they need very much to be challenged because many of them have never heard the real truths of the Christian faith. They’ve been sold a counterfeit and need the genuine article. And offering it to them may not be as difficult as you think. There are chinks in the Watchtower armor, and if you’re willing to poke around a little, you can expose one or two, revealing to the Jehovah’s Witnesses the flaws in their own belief system.

In an old Peanuts© comic strip, Linus boasts of his invincibility from inside a U-shaped snow fortress until Lucy comes from behind and pelts him with a snowball through the opening at his back. If you recite the gospel or the Apostles Creed to Jehovah’s Witnesses, or say, “Well, my church says…” it’s like throwing snowballs right at that fortified snow wall. Not only are they thoroughly prepared to defend that line of attack, they’ll likely ignore you until they have an opening to give their rehearsed response. A more strategic tactic is to aim at undermining the Watchtower’s authoritative claims and theology. Require them to defend their teachings using only the Bible and no Watchtower publications, and they’ll suddenly find themselves treading unfamiliar territory. They’ll also find themselves in the position of trying to prove an unprovable case, as I discovered during Chelsea’s and my exchanges about Jesus Christ as Michael.

Attempting to Defend the Indefensible

When Chelsea arrived three weeks later, along with her younger sister, Katherine, I was ready. I had read both her booklets and prepared myself with the help of apologetics resources on Jehovah’s Witnesses. I knew she was prohibited from accepting any literature from me, so I summarized my main points on a sheet of paper. I noted the speculative nature of this Watchtower teaching, listed several Bible passages that contradict it, and asked how the Watchtower maintains it in light of these troublesome passages. I set my paper aside, though, because I wanted to let her talk first.

We settled around my kitchen table, and I started us off. “Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus is Michael the archangel?”

Chelsea had brought her Bible and an article from The Watchtower, one of their monthly magazines. She turned to the article.

“I appreciate your bringing that, and I’ll be happy to read it,” I said, “but can we keep our discussion to the Bible without bringing in Watchtower publications?”

She paused. “Oh, okay.”

What happened next was fascinating. Side by side, Chelsea and Katherine scanned the article looking for the Bible references, leafed through their Bible until they located the first one, and each of them read it silently. Chelsea tucked her hair behind her ears as I watched in silence. They did likewise for the second and third references and so on. For a moment it seemed they had forgotten about me as they searched the Scriptures for what may have been the very first time. Finally, Chelsea took a deep breath, paused another moment to gather her thoughts, and looked back up, “Well, the Bible never really comes right out and says it, but if you put several verses together, you can see it.” Katherine’s face was more telling. She couldn’t find it, and she looked stunned and perplexed.

After we reviewed each of those verses that needed to be put together, Chelsea and Katherine had exhausted their resources, and I still didn’t see the connection. “Could not Michael also be an angel under Jesus’ command?” I suggested. Again, Katherine’s reaction was more telling. She nodded her head thoughtfully, but wordlessly. After all, this was another reasonable interpretation of all those verses they were putting together.

Chelsea apologized for not being more prepared and offered to return with a more thorough answer. “If I can’t prove it from the Bible, I don’t know what to believe it,” she affirmed, obviously a little embarrassed, but sure the elusive proof existed somewhere. As they got up to leave, I offered them my written notes and questions. They took them, thanked me, and left.

Two days later, Chelsea returned with Betty, clearly a long time Witness, somewhere around sixty years of age. (Much to my disappointment, I never saw Katherine again.) Though Betty didn’t have any new light to shed on the issue – just the same verses connected like a Bible dot to dot – she exuded confidence. “Why it’s just as plain as the nose on my face!” she nearly shouted when I remained unconvinced. Sadly, I sensed she really meant it, so thoroughly was she immersed in the Watchtower worldview.

At this point, it was clear that no more proof existed in the Bible. Chelsea had brought out a big gun in Betty, but the effect was more like a popgun – a lot of excitement but very little substance. I was pleasantly surprised when she gave me a hearty hug upon leaving. “You are one of the most interesting people I have ever met,” she enthused, but she never returned either.

An Enlightening Dialogue

My next two meetings with Chelsea focused on those troublesome passages and questions I had previously put forward. Handwritten notes on the page told me she’d worked on them, and we enjoyed a vigorous volley of thoughts, ideas, and questions. By this time I was learning to navigate the murky waters of Watchtower theology and beam a little light on them to expose flaws. I felt a little like Toto in Oz pulling the curtain aside to reveal the Wizard as just a lost man behind a curtain.

We ultimately left the Jesus Christ/Michael issue unresolved. Chelsea still maintained they were the same person, but now it was clear she believed it because of the Watchtower, and not the Bible, says it is so. After all our discussions, one thing was clear to me, and I hoped and prayed was dawning on her too: Jehovah’s Witnesses place far more faith in the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society than they admit or perhaps even realize.

The remainder of our discussions followed this same pattern. Chelsea would present a Watchtower teaching, and I would respond with written questions and sometimes refutations, prepared with the help of apologetics books and websites Chelsea never knew about. Then we would stay with a disputed doctrine until we agreed to leave the issue unresolved.

What It Takes to Succeed

Our relationship ended abruptly the following May. We’d agreed to study Romans together, and were reading in chapter 1, where Paul makes the case that everyone is guilty before God. “I don’t see any point in discussing this anymore,” Chelsea hastily changed the subject. She mentioned something about “other students” who were progressing and that her time would be better spent with them. Then she packed up her books and left, and I have not seen her since.

Was my time and effort wasted on Chelsea? Possibly, but I don’t think so. What did happen was that Chelsea and some of her fellow Witnesses were offered a more through look into the Word of God that does not return void. Her father, who joined in some of our talks, bought an NIV Study Bible – a far better account of truth than the Watchtower-published New World Translation. And my own conviction and ability to defend the truth underwent a miracle of multiplication.

I knew next to nothing about Jehovah’s Witnesses when I plunged into this relationship, but I learned as we went along. It wasn’t easy, and it did consume many hours of my time. I remember feeling overwhelmed at points, and occasionally I was tempted to give up. But each time I returned to the Scriptures, I found them reliable and sharper than a two-edged sword. He who promised, “Seek and you shall find,” is faithful. It’s not as important to know all the pertinent verses at the outset as it is to know that sound answers for the truth do exist, and sound answers for falsehoods do not.

The essential ingredient for success is not your Bible knowledge, your power of persuasion, or whether you have the gift of evangelism. It’s your willingness to rise to the challenge and be Jesus’ witness to the Watchtower Witnesses. Not all Jehovah’s Witnesses will be as congenial as Chelsea, but the theology they’re avowing will be riddled with the same holes. Regardless of their demeanor, when they come to your door, if you are willing to engage them in dialogue, you too can learn as you go and can respond with a strategy that gently pitches some snowballs of truth right through the Watchtower’s defenses. And it will sharpen your mind and multiply your own faith in the process.

 

Original Blog Source: http://bit.ly/2JAus3e

/by
Tetragrammaton And Jehovah's Witnesses

Tetragrammaton And Jehovah’s Witnesses

By Prayson Daniel

Unwarrantedly Watchtower Society’s Translation Committee added “Jehovah” in 237 places in New Testament. By doing so, New World Translation (NWT), Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Bible, blurs many passages that depicts Christ Jesus as Lord (Kyrios) of Old Testament.

In Journal of Biblical Literature, Kurt Aland showed that the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, does not appear in any of the 5,255 known New Testament Greek manuscripts (Aland 1968: 184). The Tetragrammaton is also absent in the writing of the early Christians. For example, Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians written ca. 100 A.D quoted Joshua 2 cf. Heb. 11:31(“I[Rahab] know assuredly that the Lord(“κύριος”) your God hath given you this city […](1 Clement 12), Ezekiel 33:11 “For as I live, said the Lord (Ky′ri·os), I do not desire the death of the sinner so much as his repentance”.(1 Clement 8). NWT’s unwarrantedly added “Jehovah” in front of “Lord”.

In the same period, the author of the epistle of Barnabas quoted Exodus 24:18, 31:18, 32:7; Deut. 9:12. and Isa. 42:,6-7, 61:1- 2 in just chapter fourteen and in all times he used “κύριος”(Lord) . While years later Irenaeus quoted Matthew 1:20; 4:10, Romans 11:34, and Acts 2: 25 in Against Heresies using “Lord” and not “Jehovah”, contrary to Watchtower Society’s Translation Committee. Both Philo and Josephus, like New Testament writers and early Christians, probably used the complete Septuagint (LXX ) which had “κύριος”(Lord). Some of older fragments of LXX do contain the tetragrammaton while others simply had blank spaces in place of the tetragrammation (e.g. Papyrus Rylands 458 )

Even though Watch Tower Society do know as entailed by their own question , viz., “[w]hy, then, is the name absent from the extant manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures or so-called “New Testament”?”(Watchtower 1971: 887) that the tetragammaton does not appear in any known Greek manuscripts, they, without warrant, press forward and reject the use of Kyrios (Lord) in 5000+ Greek manuscripts dating from 2rd century and early Christians’ writings as corrupted. Watch Tower Society found their support, that New Testament must have had tetragammation, in 25 Hebrew J Versions of the Bible and 2 non-version (J1 to J27), the translations of New Testaments into Hebrew , which came to scene earliest late 14th century onwards

New World Translation translators should be commend for restoring the tetragrammation in Hebrews Scriptures(Old Testament) but I think from their own reasoning which is in a form of a question and answer, namely:

How is a modern translator to know or determine when to render the Greek words κύριος and θεός into the divine name in his version? By determining where the inspired Christian writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures. Then he must refer back to the original to locate whether the divine name appears there.(Watchtower 1969: 18-19)

With the use of Lord and not YHWH (tetragrammaton) in all known copies of copies of originals (since historians have no surviving original or copies of originals) of New Testaments Greek manuscripts, contrary to Watch Tower’s Society, adding of thetetragrammaton in New Testament would not be restoration of God’s name but distorting and blurring the author’s meaning.

Blurring of 1 Corinthians 10:9: Who Is Put To The Test?

One of the passage which I believe Watchtower Society’s Translation Committee blurs with this maneuver is 1 Corinthians 10:9: “Neither let us put Jehovah to the test, as some of them put [him] to the test, only to perish by the serpents.”(NWT). With this move Jehovah’s Witnesses are led to believe that it is Jehovah the Father that the Israelites put to test and not Christ Jesus who is the rock to which Israelites drank a spiritual drink (v4).

Faithfully Watchtower Society’s translators added a footnote in their translation of this verse. They explained that “Jehovah” appears in Hebrews J Versions of the Bible 18, 22and 23, while Codex Sinaiticus(א), and Vatican ms 1209(B) both of 4th century and Codex Ephraemi rescriptus(C) of 5th century have ton Ky′ri·on (Lord), Papyrus 46 of 3rd century and Bezae Codices(D) of 5th and 6th century have “the Christ” and last Codex Alexandrinus(A), of 5th century has “God.”

“On closer examination,” The NET Bible Bible First Edition Notes explained, “the variants appear to be intentional changed.”

Alexandrian scribes replaced the highly specific term “Christ” with the less specific terms “Lord” and “God” because in the context it seems to be anachronistic to speak of the exodus generation putting Christ to the test. If the original had been “Lord,” it seems unlikely that a scribe would have willingly created a difficulty by substituting the more specific “Christ.”(Biblical Studies Press 2006)

They argued that scribes were likely “to assimilate the word “Christ” to “Lord” in conformity with Deut 6:16 or other passages”.

The evidence from the early church regarding the reading of this verse is rather compelling in favor of “Christ.” Marcion, a second-century, anti-Jewish heretic, would naturally have opposed any reference to Christ in historical involvement with Israel, because he thought of the Creator God of the OT as inherently evil. In spite of this strong prejudice, though, {Marcion} read a text with “Christ.” Other early church writers attest to the presence of the word “Christ,” including {Clement of Alexandria} and Origen.(ibid)

If The NET Bible First Edition Notes is correct, which I believe it is, then Watch Tower Bible translators blurred 1 Cor. 10:9 that depicts Christ Jesus as the Yahweh of the Old Testament by selectively embracing a late 14th century J version of the Bible when convenient. Watch Tower Society ignored places in J versions, for example J14’s reading of 1 Corinthians 12:3, “[…] no one can say “Jesus is Lord Jehovah, except by the Holy Spirit.” and J7 and J8’s reading of Hebrew 1:10; J13 , J14 and J20’s reading of 1 Peter 2:3 which all applied the tetragrammaton to Jesus.

Question To Jehovah’s Witnesses: If the name “Jehovah” was changed to “Lord” in all 5000+ Greek manuscripts ranging from 2nd century, why don’t we have even a single early manuscripts with “Jehovah” nor do the first Christians make use of it?

Note: >> Scroll all the way down to get a Free Resource << To know more about NT Greek Manuscripts, here is a table with a name of a manuscript, its branch, category, content and location arranged by date.

Christian Apologetics Alliance BLOG Banner

Visit the Christian Apologetics Alliance Now >>

Resources for Greater Impact:

mp3-icon

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES & THE TRINITY

cd-icon

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES AND THE REAL JESUS

Bibliography:

Aland, Kurt (1968). Greek New Testament: its present and future editions. Journal of Biblical Literature 87.2: 179-186.

Biblical Studies Press. (2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (1 Co 10:9). Biblical Studies Press.

Watchtower Society (1969) Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scripture. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.

____________________ (1971) Aid To Bible Understanding. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.

_____________________ (1984) New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures – With References. Rendered from the Original Languages by the New World Bible Translation Committee. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.

______________________ (1989) Reasoning From the Scripture. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. Brooklyn, New York.

/by