Just the fact that you had to go so far out of your way to brand this video as objective and unbiased, despite your reputation for being exactly that anyway, says a lot.
I think what it says is that to pretty much everyone who isn’t JW many of their beliefs seem absurd so that sometimes simply accurately describing their beliefs can seem like mockery. This is similar to Scientology
My thoughts with the title is that there are so many videos about Jehovah's Witnesses out there, that most people don't care to watch another one. However, there are far fewer neutral videos out there, and so hopefully some people unfamiliar with this channel will be more interested in clicking through and watching, knowing where it comes from.
That is because his other videos were horrible. they were not unbiased. He went out of his way to make JWs look crazy. This video is a lot more neutral. Its pretty good I would say. (I noticed he sped past the pagan idolatrous holidays)
@@ReadyToHarvest Thanks! Your other video was horrible though. I hope you remove it. You went out of your way to make JWs look bad and there was no objectivity in one of your previous videos. Many of the teachings you pin pointed i could think of a group viewed as "Christian" who held that belief. It just differed from the popular churches. You went out of your way to make us look bad, but didn't point out which other religions had similar beliefs. I do appreciate this videos as many people will see a lot we have in common.
@@c177-v6ltrue. But it’s meant to be strictly doctrinal and unbiased which means a lot of abuse facts or other controversies can’t come up here. It’s not tacit approval for those individual
You’re the only RUclipsr I’d ever trust to do this. You’re a master at keeping a straight face and just presenting the facts, enough that I had to learn from your comments that you’re a Baptist and not some other form of Christian
It's really an alien concept in this day and age, when just dispassionately explaining another point of view often gets you accused of being an advocate of it. He does a remarkable job keeping above the fray.
The bit about Jesus having returned invisibly in 1914 is telling because it only started being taught AFTER the failure of their 1914 prophecies and teachings.
Arguably, Russell taught that 1914 would mark the end of the "Gentile Times" as mentioned by Jesus in Luke 21 :24 to 28 . They did not have a complete or full understanding of everything that would occur . Paul says we see partially until that which is complete arrives . Russell was correct in regards to 1914 , in the sense that WW1 did see the collapse of gentile domination over Jerusalem and Palestine . The war resulted in the overthrow of the Ottoman Empire , leading to the Belfour declaration in 1917 , which ultimately paved the way for the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 . In regards to Jesus becoming King of God's Kingdom ,this occurred at his ascension. A very interesting article was recently written in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz , about CT Russell and his contribution to Zionism. Most JWs are unaware of this history in relation to the founder of WT .
A post at the christianity stackexchange site asked "Was the 1914 prophecy (derived from the book of Daniel) ever mentioned in any newspapers before World War I?" One of the answers shows copies of old newspaper clippings with Russell's sermons. He was lot less absolute (claiming that this or that will happen in 1914) in his writings than what he is given credit for.
I knew a JW and his family. Decent people. I am not JW and do believe their beliefs are heretical but they are honestly held and they are trying to find the truth. The JW I knew became one when his wife had questions that her RC priest failed or refused to answer. JWs came to the door and happily answered her questions. Now honestly held beliefs can be wrong but mockery is not the way for correction - thanks for another great video.
I find it very interesting. Within each major tradition of Christianity, there's an assumption that Christians have always held the doctrine they hold and have always thought the same way about it, but that isn't true. There wasn't just one "Early Church" with shared doctrine and leadership. There were many early churches with significant differences in their perspectives who branched off in many different ways. After all, there wasn't a "New Testament" for nearly 400 years of Christian History, so groups of Christians held different scriptures to be more authoritative than others or based theology off of books now considered to be Apocrypha. But what happens to these churches with different ideas? They're denounced as heretics by other factions of the church, are forcibly cast out if they refuse to adopt the dogma of the persecuting faction, and their writings and Apocrypha scriptures are destroyed. Some factions of the church later formed creeds, a biblical canon, and hierarchy, was given political influence, and formed into what is known as the proto-orthodox church, around the 4th century. This would be the ancestor to Orthodox, Catholic, and ultimately Protestant Christianity. Throughout the ages since there have been a number of movements that have shaken Christianity and a huge focus of a lot of offshoots including the JW is finding their way back to what Jesus actually taught and what the Early Church actually believed. And to that extent, JWs haven't introduced all that many ideas original to them. There have been non-Trinitarian Christians for as long as Christianity has existed (and longer than the modern form of the "Trinity" has been taught), the idea that Jesus was the archangel Michael didn't come out of nowhere, and many of the JWs's other "cooky" sounding beliefs have some kind of thread that you can follow to understand why a group of people attempting to study history and scripture without their modern biases and assumptions might arrive at, even if you find them to be wrong or even obviously wrong. And that's not something I can say about the other offshoots that formed along similar movements. I wouldn't say it about the Latter Day Saints ("Mormon" church) or Christian Science. I can absolutely see how someone could ask their priest questions and feel unsatisfied by the answers, and then a JW comes along and has an answer that person has never heard before that has a surprising amount of history and theology backing their answer. I think there's a lot to criticize about the Jehovah's Witnesses religion. I think it's right that more countries are treating their disfellowship (and "shunning") of children as child abuse, and while JW claims that people have freedom of conscience for matters such as pursuit of higher education and regarding blood transfusions, in many places, those can still result in disfellowship and some JW parents have had to make the choice to give blood transfusions to their children in an emergency situation, even though it meant they could everyone around them. There's an enormous amount of "high control" tactics present.
The Lord has endowed you with a true calling to bring gospel and theological issues comprehensively in comparative dogmas within modern Christianity. May the Lord continue to use you brother to remain faithful in this calling! ✝️❤️🔥✋🏻👍🏻
I agree, as someone who is a former JW, current atheist and someone who has kind and gentle family members who are JW i appreciate when someone provides a fact based and unbiased explanation. Whilst i obviously believe they are incorrect in their beliefs we should all remember that they are human beings to that just happen to believe something different
@@randommusic4567 Tell me..... What brought you from a worshiper of Jehovah God To someone who believes There definitely is NO creator?? Was it personal experiences......aka: hang ups OR a deep dive down the atheistic rabbit hole??
@randommusic4567 I'm currently studying origin of life science. To be perfectly honest, I am not impressed. There are holes the size of manhattan in each theory. So you believe simple molecules organized themselves randomly into more complex life forms?
@@MultipleGrievance i dont think that we use the word belief in the same way so i will avoid using it and leave it for use in the religious context. (Ie faith without evidence) But yes that is the best theory that we have for how life evolved, that over time as live persisted it grew in complexity
@@cipmaster1 About 5 minutes in, the video explains how JW teaching says that since God is Spirit, and therefore has a spirit body, He cannot therefore be omnipresent.
Excellent video! Thank you so much! This information is so helpful. Someone very close to me is attending a Kingdom Hall. I need to understand what's going on. Thank you for being so thorough and objective.
I wish your videos had been available 50 years ago when I was in college and had to study the histoty and beliefs of so many different denominations. Your videos are really good and very fair.
although unitarianism emerged much earlier in the 15-16th century with the radical reformers. though the first english speaking unitarians did not emerge until about 1770
We each have our own beliefs, persuasions, and flavors of faith - so, I know it's difficult to present a faith we may not embrace without bias. I think you did a terrific job!
Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the Bible Student movement, which later evolved into Jehovah's Witnesses, had teachings that differed from today's Jehovah's Witnesses in several ways: 1. *No concept of "Jehovah" as a personal name*: Russell used the term "Jehovah" as a title, not a personal name. He emphasized God's name as "Yahweh" or "Jah." 2. *No door-to-door preaching*: Russell focused on preaching in churches, halls, and public spaces, not door-to-door. 3. *Emphasis on Bible study*: Russell encouraged individual Bible study and critical thinking, whereas today's Jehovah's Witnesses have a more centralized and controlled approach to scripture interpretation. 4. *No organization*: Russell's movement was more decentralized and lacked the hierarchical structure of today's Jehovah's Witnesses. 5. *Different eschatology*: Russell believed in a more traditional Adventist view of the end times, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses now teach a unique interpretation of the "end times" and the role of the organization in it. 6. *No rejection of holidays and birthdays*: Russell and early Bible Students celebrated holidays and birthdays, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses now reject these as "pagan" practices. 7. *More emphasis on social justice*: Russell was involved in social reform movements, like women's suffrage and labor rights, which is not a focus for today's Jehovah's Witnesses. These differences reflect the evolution of the organization over time, with significant changes occurring after Russell's death in 1916. Today's Jehovah's Witnesses have a more centralized authority, a distinct eschatology, and a unique cultural identity that diverges from Russell's original teachings.
Awesome. I’m a Bible student and we still study the original watchtower and studies in the Scriptures. However, many people don’t know that there’s a massive difference between today’s Jehovah’s Witnesses and what Russell founded. I’m not sure about number seven that you wrote because that was one of the big differences between him and his wife.
@@Sirach144 yeah it’s sad, it sounds like he had so many good ideas that the JW messed up. That’s life sometimes I guess smh. Good to hear yall are still around.
As the truth becomes clear some things have changed over the years. Why you keep going back in their past? Knowledge is something that grows over time.
Most of your differences, can be explained to the passage of time and the evolution of a group of believers. Quite normal actually. Do yourself a favor and go compare methodists within their first one hundred years with the methodist of today. Hell, Do that with literally any other denomination. I dare you.
I appreciate that this video is not about JW history and the doctrine changes, but there are more curious and interesting details that the viewer may want to learn about current doctrines. Doctrines of significance. For example, JW's stance on blood transfusion is murky when one considers that sometimes what is transfused are blood components (as opposed to whole blood), and unless am mistaken, they leave it to the individuals conscience regarding these. Another interesting practice is their attitude towards higher education. While they do not teach against it, there is a clear and unambiguous opposition to it, so much so that it is very hard to find a baptised and believing JW who, as an example, is in medical school, studying to be an engineer or a university professor.
hi just wanna address im not a witness but was born into it and sometimes go to meetings, in the congregation i go to our elder is a medical doctor but he obviously doesn't talk about it. Lots of witnesses have different opinions on it. It really depends if youre an active witness and wanna fully devote yourself to Jehovah.
@Nyanpumpkinpie I didn't say there is a direct teaching against higher ed. Obviously, there are people with professional education in kingdom halls. What I stated was that it is very rare to see one, and this is because of their informal but real bias against higher ed.
Define opposition. Any witness can choose higher education if they want to and they will not be criticized. That's how choices work. As long as it's not a gross sin, There will be no opposition.
@@danielkaranja7978 No. It's not very rare. I don't think the society has taken a poll. But I guarantee you, there are thousands of medical doctors. Thousands of nurses. Thousands of lawyers. Etc.
@@sbccave4015 I don't if this guy was was JW but when denying the divinity of christ some one brought up tomas to which he replied "ha ha thomas was wrong! Ha ha"
@@Noe-jw7up huh? Thomas was wrong? He said my Lord and my God. The expression is not vocative as if it was being expressed to Jesus, but even if it was Jesus is our King--he has been given authority in heaven and on earth. We admit say Jesus is a god. That doesn't make him triune. Isa 9:6 calls the coming Messiah--mighty god! No JEW believes that means Messiah is God Almighty! Satan is also a god. Is he a part of the Trinity?
@@kstevenson3504 hello I know we disagree on quite a bite of theologic things, but since your the only JW I've seen in comments I'm curious why are you JW?
“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and they that are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again lean upon him that smote them, but shall lean upon JEHOVAH, the Holy One of Israel, in truth. A remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the MIGHTY GOD.” Isaiah 10:20-21 ASV
Here are some important facts that most people don’t know about. The Corporation, aka the organization of the JW created their first custom made new world translation “bible” in 1950, which contained the NT. The KJV that they were using before then was giving them a lot of problems, which is why they needed cease all use of the KJV, and to create their very own custom made “bible,” which had drastic changed all in which were done to support their key doctrines. Over the years they came up with the many Newer Revised Editions, one of which was the first complete nwt that contained the OT and NT in 1961. Since then newer revised editions have came out. Here are the rest of their New Revised Editions in order: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1984, 2013… all of which contained more and more changes like verses removed, words removed, words changed, new words added, commas and periods moved around, verses restructured, parts of chapters removed, etc.
He already did. Some time ago. As far as I know the SDA and the JW have these two things in common; 1)that Jesus and Michael are the same person/being and 2)the soulsleep.
@@SGOV86 Adventists have much in common with Baptists but worship on Saturday (Sabbaths) instead of Sundays. Adventists pray to Jesus, because he they believe in the Trinity and believe Jesus is God. JW on the other hand never pray to Jesus, because they are clinging to the Arian heresy that the Lord Jesus is not God. A big difference that makes them a cult and separates them from being Christians.
@@SGOV86to be fair, the Michael/jesus thing isn’t as much of a problem for SDA’s as it is for JW’s. While early SDA’s (and most Adventist groups in general, of which the JW’s are a “first day” variant) leaned Arian, SDA’s today are fairly staunch in their trinitarianism. Thus, in calling Jesus “the archangel”, SDA’s mean he is God, Prince of the Angels, vs the JW doctrine of Jesus/Michael as the Highest Angel created by God
One brief encounter I had with a couple of JW’s was in a jungle village of Papua New Guinea, I wasn’t expecting it but they were using the Tok Pisin Bible for their materials not a translation of their bible.
Nah, they believe in "true science." According to the video, they accept geology, but not evolution. In my experience, anyone who tries to make a distinction between micro and macro evolution doesn't actually accept evolution as understood by biologists.
@@thatoneskinnykid"basically" huh? 😂 A nose is "basically" a mouth because it's a hole in your face that air passes through, right?😊 Naw... that's not how science works; they're two very different things. It's been covered on thoroughly on Daily Dose of Wisdom & other channels. I'd post a link but YT won't allow but I encourage you to look into it.
@@DamePiglet Your analogy makes no sense compared to what I said. I never said "basically" because macro evolution is literally just a lot of micro evolution. The "Macro Vs. Micro" distinction is never made by any credible scientist. Just desperate Creationists.
@@thatoneskinnykid It is mostly Christians raised on the resources available in the 90's that reference "micro" and "macro" evolution, along with fixity of species and such...it'd be fair to say our stances have , ahem, evolved a bit, with most actual scientists who are creationists looking to develop falsifiable models based around variance within created kinds. A lot of people will balk at that, and maybe find it "unscientific", but there is a world of difference in the mentality and work being done now vs. when I was in High School and everyone was looking for silver bullets to refute natural selection.
JWs did not have the "New World Translation" until 1950s. So before that they used Bibles like KJV, ASV and others. They still use the other translations too.
@@NihilusAeturnum Actually they're not litigious at all. The only time they use legal remedy is when the state itself tries to pen in their worship. And their fights always lead to more rights for everyone else. You're welcome.
Excellent and thorough breakdown of the JW faith. I would have to listen again - but i5 doesn't sound like The religion has changed much since I stopped studying with them in 2015 Before studying with them, I was exposed to the Seventh-day Adventist teachings but didn't want to become one. After years of studying with JW's, so many of the teachings were similar and so many of their arguments made in the Watchtower studies actually contradicted official JW positions and SUPPORTED Adventism, I said I mind as well become an Adve test and I haven't look3d back ever since.
In the book of Daniel Michael is called a *prince* . In Isaiah chapter 9 the child that is born and the son that is given will also be called *Prince* if Peace. In Matthew chapter 24 when Jesus will return it is written in verse 31 that He will send *His angels* to gather the elect from the four corners of the earth. In Revelation it is written that Michael and *his angels* went to war against satan and his angels. In 1 Tess 4:16 it is written that the Lord will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel. And Michael is the only archangel mentioned so far in the bible. The name "Michael" means "who is like God". I do not agree with this all but to give you an idea where they came with this doctrine.
It was a belief that was common during the early Reformation era. Consider, for instance, this note from Daniel 10.13 in the Geneva Bible: "Though God could by one Angel destroy all the world, yet to assure his children of his love, he sendeth forth double power, even Michael, that is, Christ Jesus the head of Angels." John Calvin himself was unsure on the matter, but he did say, "Some think the word Michael represents Christ, and I do not object to this opinion." (In commenting on Daniel 12.1, Calvin again says that either interpretation is acceptable. He is far more concerned about heretic Michael Servetus claiming to be the Michael of the Bible.) Compare Matthew Henry's commentary on the verse, which offers this interpretation as an option: "Some understand it of a created angel, but an archangel of the highest order, 1 Th. 4.16; Jude 9. Others think that Michael the archangel is no other than Christ himself, the angel of the covenant, and the Lord of the angels, he whom Daniel saw in vision, v. 5. He came to help me (v. 13); and there is none but he that holds with me in these things, v. 21. Christ is the church's prince; angels are not, Heb. 2.5. He presides in the affairs of the church and effectually provides for its good." So too, Methodist founder John Wesley said of this verse, "Michael here is commonly supposed to mean Christ." Another notable early Methodist, Adam Clarke, said in his commentary, "Michael, he who is like God, sometimes appears to signify the Messiah, at other times the highest or chief archangel." See too the 18th century Baptist minister John Gill, who remarks in his commentary that Michael "is no other than Christ the Son of God, an uncreated Angel."
@@Noe-jw7upI'm not well informed as the other people who have replied, but I would add that some fundamentalist Mormons (not 100% in communion with the main LDS Church) hold the idea of Michael as the preterrestrial Jesus.
Didn't Jesus insult the Pharisees? Didn't John the Baptist, of which Jesus Christ says in Matthew 11:11 "Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist", insulted the Pharisees and Sadducees by calling them "brood of vipers"?
@@adan1444 Jesus, and to a lesser extent John, had prophetic insight into the hearts of the Pharisees. They had knowledge and responsibility that we simply do not have. If they considered such hyperbole appropriate to get their attention and call them to repentance, they had the power and authority to do that. We have neither the prerogative nor the judgement to hurl insults because we think that people aren't right with God (not to mention that alienating or "othering" people is one of the least effective ways possible to invite them back to Christ). Our responsibility is to share what we know about the Savior and lovingly invite others to approach Him, not to point fingers at our neighbors even if their doctrine is wrong.
@Parmandur Ah. Well, technically thier has only been one. Every other splinter group came out of the hundreds who left after Russell died. THAT group Continued to schism. The main group stayed solid. I get why they would challenge the term "split" It implies relatively equal sizes on both sides. It was nothing like that at all. The group to leave were very tiny by comparison.
@Parmandur Just read the wiki article. Technically they are incorrect when they said, "with several groups breaking away" Thier were not. It was one group. I can only assume they are conflating all of the other schisms that happened with the group that left.
It’s interesting how during this period of time in American history so many “restoration” churches rose. JW, SDA, LDS, Christian Science, etc. it must have been a really weird time in the world.
I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I must say you did a fine job of giving the facts in a neutral way. I appreciate your efforts. If anyone has any question, feel free to ask me.
As in ALL denominations; some truth, some falsehoods. Though, I will say, some of their beliefs hold more biblical accuracy based on the original languages than many of the mainstream beliefs.
I am ok with many interpretations, but i find it very sad that they deny anyone the opportunity to partake in communion The Bible says, "unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink of His blood, you shall not have life within you." Why deny even the opportunity that there are some who are in the 144,000? What a traffic misinterpretation
WHom did Jesus give the bread and wine? It started with the Apostles and eventually extended to other disciples. What are they going to do? They will be JUDGES as mentioned in Luke 22, they were given the Kingdom and they will BE priests and kings. rEV 5 - and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God,q and they are to rule as kings over the earth.” They were given authority to JUDGE and become KINGS - rev 20:4 - And I saw thrones, and those who sat on them were given authority to JUDGE. Yes, I saw the souls* of those executed* for the witness they gave about Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had not worshipped the wild beast or its image and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand.h And they came to life and ruled as KINGS with the Christ for 1,000 years. Rev 20:6 - Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection;l over these the second deathm has no authority,n but they will be priestso of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years. THOSE WHO WILL RULE AS KINGs AND PRIESTS and they are part of the FIRST RESURRECTION, THEY ARE the firstfruits. rev 14:4 mentions that these firstfruits are "These are the ones who did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins.i These are the ones who keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes.j These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb," HOW MANY ARE THEY? REV 14:3 MENTIONS "And they are singing what seems to be a new songe before the throne and before the four living creaturesf and the elders,g and no one was able to master that song except the 144,000,h who have been bought from the earth." 144K
(Matthew 28:19, 20) Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.” (Matthew 24:14) And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.
@@ryannel3899 yes but it is important to realize that there is zero evidence that their belief system ever existed before Charles Russell. You give them fuel when you tell them they are a group from the 4th century. They are a man made group from a man who worshiped pyramids in 1880.
The number of partakers in the Memorial Meal has been trending up from 8,570 in 2004 to 22,312 in 2023. If, as the organization states, the vast majority of 144,000 are long dead this should not be happening. It would appear that there is a disconnect between position of the leadership and the rank and file. Based in past history there is likely to be "new light" in the future to realign things.
For a long time, they thought that the anointing of the 144000 had mostly stopped around 1935. Around 2007, they backed off of thay belief, and so more people baptized after 1935 started claiming to be anointed.
As for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, we see them the same way that we other religious groups. We see them as having some truth, such as the Bible, but we see them as lacking truth in other areas, such as their rejection of the divinity of Christ. Elder Boyd K Packer eloquently illustrated our view of other faiths in his 1971 talk, “The Only True and Living Church” in these words: “The gospel might be likened to the keyboard of a piano-a full keyboard with a selection of keys on which one who is trained can play a variety without limits; a ballad to express love, a march to rally, a melody to soothe, and a hymn to inspire; an endless variety to suit every mood and satisfy every need. How shortsighted it is, then, to choose a single key and endlessly tap out the monotony of a single note, or even two or three notes, when the full keyboard of limitless harmony can be played. How disappointing when the fullness of the gospel, the whole keyboard, is here upon the earth, that many churches tap on a single key. The note they stress may be essential to a complete harmony of religious experience, but it is, nonetheless, not all there is. It isn’t the fullness.”
I have a close friend who’s a Jehovah’s Witness, and I think he’s a pretty cool guy. We sorta have a bit of common ground for being viewed as “weird,” although for completely different reasons-Latter-day Saints have expanded scripture and temple ordinances and a claim of revelation, while Jehovah’s witnesses have their own translation of the Bible and different Christology than Latter-day Saints. While I wouldn’t become a Jehovah’s Witness, I admire my friend’s devotion to God, no matter how wrong it may seem. After all, the thirteenth Article of Faith (canonized synopsis of LDS beliefs) states that “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”
@@anyanyanyanyanyany3551 Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but definitely not for the Church, I appreciate anyone who's sincerely doing their best to follow the Savior and lift those around them. I empathize with how they get the word "cult" slung at them like an insult. I disagree with their understanding of Christ's nature, and I think that their common practice of shunning those who stray causes damage to those who most need healing, but at the end of the day they're still people in need of Christ's grace just like me.
I have appreciated the good research you do in authoritative sources for different religions. Do you ever look for people to assist you for any particular religion, either to offer insight into less formal practices or to help you identify authoritative statements for topics?
Revelation 7:3-4 “3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads. 4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.”
My biggest issue with the JW faith is not some of their thoughts surrounding secondary beliefs or tertiary beliefs like their stances on a lot of social issues like abortion, homosexuality, divorce or views on eschatology or even the name of God. The issue I have is the purposeful mistranslation of Scripture. The New World Translation intentionally alters passages that speak on the personhood of the Holy Spirit (John 14:26) and the Godhood of Christ (John 1:1, Phil. 2:6-7).
You said "The issue I have is the purposeful mistranslation of Scripture." Was it mistranslated, or more accurately translated? Look at the book Truth in Translation. The author declared the NWT the most accurate and least biased.
@@777Tralfaz777 One scholar does not make for scholarly or academic consensus, nor account for the past 2,000 years of church history. If anything the documents unearthed over the last 500 years and with the early patristic writings, we have a 99% agreement across thousands of documents. The NWT is an aberration and is divergent from the myriad of historical and modern acceptance. From the inception of the Bible students and watchtower, the dishonesty of Russell in knowing the languages calls into question the integrity of the theological formation and interpretational veracity.
@@tylerbird606 You said "One scholar does not make for scholarly or academic consensus, " Does such consensus make something true? Was that the case in the first century? Did the "scholarly class", by and large, accept Jesus as the Messiah in the first century? What was unearthed is not in conflict with the JW translation. The questions are more along the line of how to properly translate the original languages. Would you like a demonstration?
@@tylerbird606 Matt 11:25 At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to young children.
@@777Tralfaz777 I very much agree, as Jerome said, “The Scriptures are shallow enough for a babe to come and drink without fear of drowning and deep enough for a theologians to swim in without ever touching the bottom." With that being said, Scripture offers clarity and is straightforward in the original text. John 1:1 Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. The statement θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος is literally, “The Word was God.” There is not the determiner “a” present in the text. Adding “a” to the translation, “The Word was a god.” Is a purposeful addition to support the theological positions of the JWs, that Jesus was not God, but a creation of God, namely the Arch angel Michael. As someone who has spent the last 15 years studying and having to demonstrate linguistic, transitional, and hermeneutical competence in my an academic setting, I cannot recommend the NWT as an unbiased or an accurate translation.
@@wendyleeconnelly2939 I mean that, if this video is accurate, and Ready to Harvest's usually are, I don't see the gospel of salvation in any of what they're being taught. According to scripture (which is why reading only the modified version offered to them is dangerous - inconvenient truths are changed to agree with their doctrine) Jesus is the Son of God, He didn't have a human father, Joseph was His stepfather, God is His Father. Jesus is the door to heaven, the only way to the Father is through that door. His Father gave Him all authority to judge the earth. Jesus had (and still has) all power; the authority to forgive sins, as well as to heal, raise the dead, etc. And most importantly, the authority to give His life to atone for every sin ever committed or to be committed by mankind. He bought all of humanity when He laid down His life as the Lamb of God, the perfect sacrifice on the cross, then picked up His life again 3 days later. Whether a person believes in Christ or not, their sins have already been paid for. Christ set the payment for entry really low - believe in Him. All of this is purely scriptural - people don't go to hell simply because they're sinners - all men are sinners. People go to hell because they're sinners who don't believe in the Son of God who died in their place. Works can't get you to heaven. Obeying the laws set forth by any group of humans can't do it. Only believing in Jesus. John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
@@wendyleeconnelly2939 I tried to post this earlier, but I think YT blocked my post because of a direct bible quote of John 3:18, so I'll try again, without it. I mean that, if this video is accurate, and Ready to Harvest's usually are, I don't see the gospel of salvation in any of what they're being taught. According to scripture (which is why reading only the modified version offered to them is dangerous - inconvenient truths are changed to agree with their doctrine) Jesus is the Son of God, He didn't have a human father, Joseph was His stepfather, God is His Father. Jesus is the door to heaven, the only way to the Father is through that door. His Father gave Him all authority to judge the earth. Jesus had (and still has) all power; the authority to forgive sins, as well as to heal, raise the dead, etc. And most importantly, the authority to give His life to atone for every sin ever committed or to be committed by mankind. He bought all of humanity when He laid down His life as the Lamb of God, the perfect sacrifice on the cross, then picked up His life again 3 days later. Whether a person believes in Christ or not, their sins have already been paid for. Christ set the payment for entry really low - believe in Him. All of this is purely scriptural - people aren't condemned simply because they're sinners - all men are sinners. People are condemned because they're sinners who don't believe in the Son of God who died in their place. Works can't get you to heaven. Obeying the laws set forth by any group of humans can't do it. Only believing in Jesus.
@@wendyleeconnelly2939 I mean that the gospel of grace, that Christ, God's Son, gave Himself on the cross to be the atonement for all sin, thereby making a way for all to get to God, isn't preached to JWs. Instead they are taught to obey the laws of men, under the guise of holiness and good works. It must be a hard snare to get out of, so I'm praying that God make a way for them to hear and understand, and believe the truth. :)
It kinda cracks me up but also makes me sad when people obviously don't understand biology. The "proper" definition of "species" is still fuzzy and debated. It's part of why there are so many papers on phylogeny still to this day.
Watching this, it's interesting to discover how they do get some things "right", despite being woefully misguided on other (notably, some of the most important) parts of Christianity. I did not expect them to cite 1 Cor 13:8 against speaking in tongues for instance - this much is something I'd agree with. But their rejection of Christ as God is anathema, and will be their own undoing in the end. Not to mention all their other weird concepts, like the population cap on heaven lol.
I'm impressed with much of what they believe but dumfounded at some of it. How would they ever arrive at the conclusion that we should not all be taking the Lord's supper?
The "Lord's Supper" is a Catholic invention. Yahshua and the disciples celebrated Passover and we are Commanded to do the same When Yahshua said, “This cup is the renewed covenant in My blood. As often as you drink it, do this in remembrance of Me.” He was referring to the Passover Feast, not the weekly nibble of bread and sip of cordial. (Not a JW by the way.)
williambrewer I agree with you, I agree with many of their teachings. However, I strongly disagree with some aspects of their teachings, such as the Lord's supper, and some other issues as well. I certainly admire how J.W.'s have questioned every aspect of Protestant beliefs and compared the beliefs to what the Bible says. It's shocking how many churches' beliefs are "traditions of men".
@@pugetsound1272 Right, but it seems like when it's all said and done, they've ended up with more traditions of men than the Protestants when it's all said and done.
Because they originally believe all Jws were anointed and going to heaven, but when their numbers grew past 144,000 members, instead of saying “hey maybe that number is not literal”, they decided that there must be 2 classes of jws lol. Some going to heaven and some staying on the earth. Only the ones going to heaven are to partake in the lords supper
They believe a LOT of stuff that directly contradicts the Bible. 22:13 in the video I thought of Matthew 24:35 & just shook my head. That's not even the only passage to clearly debunk that belief.
I need more information and details on where the Governing Body gets their authority, how the got it, and the circumstances under which all of this happened. In as minute a detail as possible.
@777Tralfaz777 I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that. If I simply go by the teaching, all I need to do is point out the century plus of error, and it's clear that the Governing Body have no real authority in such things. Over 100 years ago, "Millions now living will never die". Surely, if there's a biblical governing body with any authority, it's the hierarchy of the Catholic and/or Orthodox Church.
@@cooltaylor1015 You > "I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that." No sir. It is as simple as that. You find who teaches the truth first, that is the horse that pulls the cart, meaning then you can determine who the true congregation is, and who the faithful slave is (cart). That is the logical progression. You > "If I simply go by the teaching, all I need to do is point out the century plus of error," We are by no means infallible. Nor inspired prophets. But JW teach more Bible truth than any other religion, bar none.
@@777Tralfaz777 define truth. Then tell me how you know one group speaks it and another doesn't. How does one know the Governing Body is espousing truth? Where does this truth come from, if not divine inspiration. I've been JW adjacent for 35 years, and I've never gotten anywhere close to a satisfying answer. Catholics have Apostolic Succession. Mormons have a President who regularly meets with Jesus, if you believe him. But The Governing Body just seemed to form itself a bit more than a century ago with no real reasoning. For some reason, they get all of this insight, but nobody knows where it comes from. Where do they get their authority? Where do they get their information? Why must they be believed and followed? How does one know they are truthful? Why are they any less a part of Satan's System than any other group of religious leaders? What, exactly, is it that makes the Governing Body special?
They get it by inventing a prophecy that is a combination of several unrelated cherry picked scriptures and out of context. It also requires ancient Jerusalem to be destroyed in 607. All that mess and some magic math add up to Jesus picking JWs in 1919. After they got out of prison for printing seditious materials... Long story short 607 is a massive lie that is so easy to disprove. Even the Bible backs up 587 as the destruction of Jerusalem at Zechariah 7.
Would really love a deep dive or a reply from an American about the sheer number of splits and let's say "unique" Christian movements like these in America at this time, mid to late 19th Century. Was it the end of the Civil War, or?
As an American "theology geek" and history enthusiast, a lot of the reason there are so many denominations, cults, movements and the like has to do with America's unique history in terms of religious freedom. In colonial times, many of the colonies that later became US states were founded by religious splinter groups fleeing persecution in Europe. Massachusetts was founded by Separatists, who were later outnumbered by vast numbers of Puritans who fled Britain for the colony, especially after the Restoration of the Monarchy after Cromwell passed away. Pennsylvania was founded as a refuge for Quakers and Anabaptists, who, while very different from each other in terms of beliefs, tended to be closely allied in worldly matters due to the fact that both groups were persecuted by both Catholics and Protestants. Rhode Island was founded as a refuge for those persecuted by the Puritans in Massachusetts (who were just as intolerant of non-Puritans as non-Puritans were of them in England). Maryland was founded as a refuge for English Catholics. This led to the Colonies being a very religiously diverse place. After the Colonies won their independence from Great Britain and formed the USA, it was essential that the new nation have freedom of religion (then a very revolutionary idea, as practically every other nation at the time had a state religion) to ensure that the nation stayed united, since the people there followed many different forms of Christianity. This freedom of religion led to a plethora of different denominations, some that formed in the US and others that formed (or already existed) abroad, mostly in Europe, and whose adherents were persecuted in their home countries, leading them to sail to the US where they would have freedom to worship as they saw fit. Some of these groups, like the Mennonites and the Amish, immigrated in colonial times while others came much more recently, such as the Inspirationalists, a radical Pietist spinoff of Lutheranism that began in northern Germany in the 1700s and, after fierce persecution from mainstream Lutherans in Germany, fled to the US in the 1840s, eventually settling in eastern Iowa and forming a settlement called the "Amana Colonies", which are now a significant regional tourist attraction. After the mid 19th Century, most Western European countries had become much more religiously tolerant, slowing the influx of religious immigrants to the US. The Americans' "head start" on religious freedom, however, is probably the biggest single factor on why there are so many denominations in the US. Events that impacted the formation of new denominations in the US included the First and Second "Great Awakenings", major religious revivals (the first, which also occurred in Europe, from the 1730s to 1740s, a generation before the Revolutionary War; the second from around the turn of the 19th Century until the 1840s) that led to masses of people attending sermons preached, usually outdoors or in large tents. Some of these "revivalists" belonged to existing denominations, some to fringe or spinoff groups, and some were charlatans who were taking advantage of the religious fervor to get money or puff up their own egos by attracting followers. Many new denominations formed as a result, some of which were temporary, like the "Millerites", whose leader, William Miller, claimed that Christ would return in 1843 (later amended to several different dates in 1844 before the lack of a return led to the collapse of the group), others that still exist to this day, like the LDS/Mormons. Another significant event, which you mentioned in your OP, was the American Civil War. Many denominations split into "Northern" and "Southern" branches as a direct result of the Southern states' secession and many of them stayed split after the War. Others, such as the Stone/Campbell Christian Church/Church of Christ/Disciples of Christ, remained unified through the war years, but ultimately split first in the early 20th Century, when many churches (mostly Southern, rural and poor) split off to form the Church of Christ due to their opposition to the use of instrumental music by other churches in the movement (mostly Northern, urban and somewhat better off financially) and second in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the mostly northern group split into the independent Christian churches and churches of Christ (which I belong to) and the more liberal Disciples of Christ. Increased liberalization in many denominations over the past 100 years has led to further splits within denominations, and is the main reason for church splits from then to the present day. The Presbyterian Church, for example, split into the conservative PCA and the liberal PCUSA. The Methodist Church split into the liberal Methodists and the conservative Wesleyan/Holiness churches. Several of them have fragmented even further.
The fact that they modified John 1 shows that their exegesis is extremely lacking. John 1 is a tie-in to the greek idea of Logos (remember, John’s gospel audience is primarily non-Jews). To get this wrong is to show that you shouldn’t be making translations of any Scripture, let alone publishing editorials about what it means.
I used to know a JW. He didnt really tell me he was JW though. But, we kinda hung out at work a bit, but I remember the way he talked was kind of off. Almost awkward, but more than that, like naive too, with a hint of eagerness. We used to run during our lunch break, and the way the dude ran was soooo strange. Like he was making it very clear he was not being competitive. And, we were just running for fun. It was a really strange friendship. Eventually he left the organization, and I didnt see him any longer. I wonder what he's up to...
Thanks for laying out straightforward info. It's a fascinating example of how anyone can say "We just believe exactly what the Bible teaches", while whipping up their own wild interpretation.
From my personal (if limited) experience, the character of a congregation's elders makes a HUGE impact on how a congregation behaves and how they interpret certain doctrines. The Governing Body likes to make it out that everyone is, as it were, singing from the same hymnbook, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The JWs close to where I live do a lot more mixing with non-JWs than is apparently orthodox, for example. Honestly I think if the Governing Body collapsed, you'd see a lot of decent congregations climbing out of the rubble.
You > "the character of a congregation's elders makes a HUGE impact on how a congregation behaves and how they interpret certain doctrines." Not from my experience. All my brothers believe the exact same doctrine. You > "do a lot more mixing with non-JWs Please explain. Mixing in what way?
Similarities of interpretation, practice, and organizational rigidity can be found among other denominations. But what makes the JW"s non-orthodox is their clinging to the Arian heresy that the Lord Jesus is not God. This is what is important.
Heretics gonna heretic. I don't know how a plain reading of the Bible leads to the conclusion that Jesus isn't God. Different interpretations for different understandings, though I really don't like the JW ones.
I feel like I can sorta answer. I grew up in it and analyzed it alot. I personally don't think they have a REAL biblical reason to say Jesus isn't god. I believe it comes down to patholgy and wanting to control. What removing Jesus as part of god really does is removes God from having a direct connection with humans. Growing up in it, it always felt like to me that their approach puts God the Father, "Jehovah", behind Christ, when it comes to human approaching him. Thus, you or me, CAN'T actually approach God. Psychologically this is important because we are seperate from him, and thus can't have a personal relationship with him. We NEED the JW's. That gives them control. Control is what they want. Trust me.
I find the simultaneous "we don't reject that the earth is billions of years old because we're cool with science" and "evolution isn't real" to be quite funny. If you accept that the earth is billions of years old, and that small-scale evolution happens over small time scales, is it not reasonable to believe that large-scale evolution happens over billions of years? It's like saying that you believe that tectonic plates and earthquakes exist while denying that earthquakes are caused by the movement of tectonic plates.
As a former JW, current atheist and someone who sees macroevolution (for want of a better word) as correct, i don't think that their belief in micro evolution only is particularly absurd. I believe it is wrong but not absurd. I can see how somebody could believe that any changes that happen only happen within a predefined context, ie that there are finite edges to what something could change to
@@BenjaminKeller that's not what I said. Creationism is more than just young earth literal 6 day beliefs. Old earth creationists hold that geology is correct in it's estimation of the age of the earth, but often say that either each day is an eon of unspecified length, or that there was a long gap between the creation of the earth and the creation of life on earth. Gap old earth creationism is a type of creationism belief and it lines up with the statements of belief presented in the video.
The only ways I can think to reconcile these two edeas are: 1) a wolrd that lasted for billions of years, full of creatured that couldn't die, and which therefore reproduced none or very little, or 2) an orb in space with no sun, the dry land not separated from the waters, inhabited only by spirit beings, for the billions of years.
They admitted to making mistakes, just like everyone else; but falsely prophesying the date of the Lord's return, and broadcasting false teaching to go along with it, are not normal mistakes, and it's not like everyone else at all. It is what Jesus WARNED us would come!
JWs fixed their mistakes and continue to improve. you think GOD does not forgive his people when they fixed their mistakes and continue to improve just like the congregations in rev 2 & 3? they made many mistakes and guess what after fixing their mistakes, THEY WERE STILL GOD's people
@Mr.DC3.1914 , throughout their history, JW leaders have been poaching people from other churches, using date-setting, false prophecies and fear of Armageddon. Those aren't trivial mistakes, they’re exactly what Jesus warned against when he said that false teachers will use his name and say the end has come…and He explicitly warned us not to follow them. (Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) Regarding false prophets and teachers ‘improving,’ repentance is the first step. But instead of repenting, they adjusted their prophecies after the fact so that now, instead of an epic Second Coming, they claimed the prophecies were fulfilled in a totally different manner that cannot be verified-invisibly and silently. I hope you escape to Jesus because that corporation is not of God.
@@biblehistoryscience3530 JWs are still GOD'S PEOPLE as we continue to improve, and yet you guys STAY on the mistakes like making GOD a torturer, making 1=3, rejecting the FATHER AS SALVATION, etc
@Mr.DC3.1914 , you side-stepped the facts I stated by changing the subject and then just restated your faith in the corporation. It's the same with Mormons, Adventists, Moonies, etc. People enter with an open mind, then the leaders forbid them from thinking for themselves again. And again, I hope you escape to Jesus because that religion doesn't know Him, and the days of escape are getting short.
They actually NEVER admit mistakes. They recently stated “we don’t need to apologize for not getting it exactly right”, I believe that was said at the last annual meeting. Any mistake or change is labeled as “clarification or new light” or they just outright blame the members like they did about 1975
What's interesting to me is that both JW & LDS reject Christianity in opposite, yet still fundamentally Arian, directions. LDS replaces the Trinity with three separate gods, while JW substitutes it with one solitary god.
Here are some important facts that most people don’t know about. The Corporation, aka the organization of the JW created their first custom made new world translation “bible” in 1950, which contained the NT. The KJV that they were using before then was giving them a lot of problems, which is why they needed cease all use of the KJV, and to create their very own custom made “bible,” which had drastic changed all in which were done to support their key doctrines. Over the years they came up with the many Newer Revised Editions, one of which was the first complete nwt that contained the OT and NT in 1961. Since then newer revised editions have came out. Here are the rest of their New Revised Editions in order: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1984, 2013… all of which contained more and more changes like verses removed, words removed, words changed, new words added, commas and periods moved around, verses restructured, parts of chapters removed, etc.
Im not sure of your point, if your saying that older with no changes is better then i would point out that part of JWs whole point is that they are seeking the most correct translation by constant study of the bible. The English language also changes over time, the reason why old bible translations still stick to words like thee and thou even though no one uses them in normal modern English, additionally with ancient languages scholars of all sorts often change their mind based on new discoveries on how they should be translated into modern language. Couple this with the fact many older translations were deliberately altered over time to suit the Powerful at the time. Finally important early versions of the bible such as the dead sea scrolls have been discovered since the original translations were done and can differ in minor ways. Im not saying that their translation is correct just that what is changed is not the original bible but merely the translation into modern English and that seems entirely reasonable for any version to do that from time to time
I absolutely agree that revisions are necessary in order to be the most accurate translation. The English language shifts, so the most accurate translation for today would not be the most accurate translation if published 50 years ago or 50 years before that. There are also so many better source texts scholars have access to now and advances in textual criticism that most revisions are better than the copies that preceded them. I wouldn't hold it against the NWT Committee for pushing out new updates. That said, there are many reasons to criticize the NWT. They didn't publicly disclose the names of their translators, their credentials, or their translation philosophy, and of the translators that were later named, none of them were experts in the fields of Greek or Hebrew exegesis or translation and none of them even held a degree in any field. There's a strong argument to be made that the translation of the NWT was commissioned because passages in the KJV contradicted JW doctrine and it was done in house in order to preserve Watch Tower's biases. While that may or may not be exaggerated, they certainly did not take steps to prevent biases in their translation employed by other translation committees. I picked up a copy of NWT the other day from Goodwill, since it was only a couple bucks and it's at least an interesting piece of history.
@AlexsGoogleAccount It is purposefully changed to support their own key doctrines. Catholic bible does the same. I can give an example or two when I am more free about the nwt changes just from what I looked up on my own without any help. For example, look up things related to the dead, the 144000, the Deity of Christ. Just those alone have all the needed changes to deceive the reader. Maybe if I do spend time doing that research I can put it together like on word perfect, so I won't have to be doing so much research and retyping. I am a busy person and not rather spend so much time on a jw subject as there are other false religions to deal with.
@randommusic4567 I'll get back to this since I just received a comment about this. I'll post some examples to prove my point that those changes were done directly and purposefully to deceive the reader when I have a chance get this down on my desktop rather than on a smartphone.
Greatly appreciate this objective explanation of their many beliefs now if only so many were not backwards to the Bible. There are merits to few of their actions but most of it sounds like college students tried to fit the church into agnosticism…
Recently they have kinda changed things a bit. Now you can say hello to a disfellowshipped person who comes into the Kingdom Hall. Also the men are allowed to wear beards and women are allowed to wear pants at the Kingdom Hall. Views are constantly changing. All this being said as a 4 th generation JW in my 60’s recently out, you did an awesome video here🎉🎉. Great work If someone is considering studying with them and I am ask I will point them to your video
I actually think it all depends on why a person left the jws. If it had to do with doctrinal issues and you start going to another church then whether you are disfellowshipped or not no one will talk to you. If you just quietly left or were disfellowshipped for some other reason then I’m guessing it would be ok to say hi to those people. Not quite sure of the reasoning there. Do you know much about the Jehovahs witnesses?
Are mystical religions cults? Is Islam a cult? Where do you draw the line? Cults have a distinct character. It is brainwashed devotion to some idol and very difficult to leave due to peer pressure and threats of loss. False predictions are bad, but it doesn't make them a cult. JW is a cult because they refuse Jesus as divine and are devoted to a group of manipulative liars publishing a magazine.
@@americanswanI most have missed communicated. What I meant by "with all their false prophecies" is that that fact is a easy way to dispove them, and if the watch tower didn't hide information and pressure their members it would be hard for people to be a JW
My boss is a JW and I know she’s in a cult, but she was open with me about it when we were at work, so I will pray for her salvation and continue to show her who Jesus truly is as I work for her (Colossians 3:23-24)
Most truly I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him.q John 13:16 . Jesus was SENT BY GOD - and called as SERVANT OF GOD. Acts 4:27 WHO IS OVER ALL? Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. GOD and FATHER is OVER/ABOVE ALL and that "All" includes the SON so they are NOT EQUAL THE BIBLE teaches that Jesus was MADE As Lord and Christ and as Son (ACTS 2:36, Prov 8, HEB 1:5), CREATED/PRODUCED/INSTALLED (Prov 8) , COME INTO BEING/MADE (Mat 21:42 - egeneto) and GIVEN LIFE by the Father - John 5:26 and it uses TODAY (Heb 1:5), and uses future tenses and is a prophecy in Isa 9:6 (Isa 9:6, - WILL BE) . If you are called MADE AND CREATED AND GIVEN LIFE, and NEVER CALLED in the BIBLE as Creator or Maker , then you are A CREATION. ALL FROM THE BIBLE From the Lord was this (this is referring to the chief cornerstone who is Jesus) , the word WAS is egeneto (made or came into being) - Matthew 21:42 and the exact Greek word used in John 1:3 - MADE, egeneto (came into being) - JESUS WAS MADE/CAME INTO BEING FROM THE FATHER , yes, Jesus was MADE/CREATED!, See also Acts 2:36, Heb 1:5, 1 john 5 Jesus in FACT mentioned the FATHER IS GREATER than I am. JOhn 14:28. BEFORE he WAS SENT, the Father is ALSO GREATER than Jesus. Most truly I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him.q John 13:16 . Jesus was SENT BY GOD - and called as SERVANT OF GOD. Acts 4:27 AFTER his resurrection the FATHER IS STILL GREATER than Jesus - WHO IS OVER ALL? Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. GOD and FATHER is OVER/ABOVE ALL and that "All" includes the SON so they are NOT EQUAL
@@777Tralfaz777 there's zero proof your god beats Thor, Odin, ra, Buddha whoever else. When you leave a religion you have the mental space to ask yourself important questions. Like, if the god of the bible is real isn't he just tolerating evil at this point? Yes he is. He'd have to be evil himself. Which makes sense because of all the babies he likes to murder. Or maybe it's just a story. A means to extract riches from the poor. Maybe no one knows what God is, maybe we'll never know. Whatever it is, it's indifferent to us. The truth hurts. That's the truth. The psycho In the bible... That guy is clearly a man made creation. Jealous, petty, vengeful, breaks his own laws. Kills babies, deals in sex slaves. Generally a disgusting individual. Worship that if you want. I'm not going to. All the bible is is some dudes telling you what they believe based upon a faith they created. Anyone can do this. Anyone.
@@misterauctor7353 Your buddy, ramrod, just spiled his beans. He said about God "The psycho In the bible... That guy is clearly a man made creation." Is he still your brother? Yes?
I wonder if there is a church that is built based from what critical bible scholars have found out from studying the bible and based on historical findings.
Just the fact that you had to go so far out of your way to brand this video as objective and unbiased, despite your reputation for being exactly that anyway, says a lot.
I think what it says is that to pretty much everyone who isn’t JW many of their beliefs seem absurd so that sometimes simply accurately describing their beliefs can seem like mockery.
This is similar to Scientology
My thoughts with the title is that there are so many videos about Jehovah's Witnesses out there, that most people don't care to watch another one. However, there are far fewer neutral videos out there, and so hopefully some people unfamiliar with this channel will be more interested in clicking through and watching, knowing where it comes from.
@@ReadyToHarvestvery true
That is because his other videos were horrible. they were not unbiased. He went out of his way to make JWs look crazy. This video is a lot more neutral. Its pretty good I would say. (I noticed he sped past the pagan idolatrous holidays)
@@ReadyToHarvest Thanks! Your other video was horrible though. I hope you remove it. You went out of your way to make JWs look bad and there was no objectivity in one of your previous videos. Many of the teachings you pin pointed i could think of a group viewed as "Christian" who held that belief. It just differed from the popular churches. You went out of your way to make us look bad, but didn't point out which other religions had similar beliefs. I do appreciate this videos as many people will see a lot we have in common.
Hey man! This video was very well researched and professional. I'm an ex-Jehovah's Witness, and you really nailed down all the details. Excellent work
Hey, Panda! Glad to see you here, love your videos! ❤️
Oh hey there! I didn't expect to see you here.
@@c177-v6ltrue. But it’s meant to be strictly doctrinal and unbiased which means a lot of abuse facts or other controversies can’t come up here. It’s not tacit approval for those individual
HIT RUclipsR EX-JW PANDA IS THAT YOU?!
You’re the only RUclipsr I’d ever trust to do this. You’re a master at keeping a straight face and just presenting the facts, enough that I had to learn from your comments that you’re a Baptist and not some other form of Christian
He is excellent indeed. This channel is one of my absolute favorites.
It's really an alien concept in this day and age, when just dispassionately explaining another point of view often gets you accused of being an advocate of it. He does a remarkable job keeping above the fray.
This is probably the only neutral video on the JWs on the internet 😂😂😂😂
Nope. There's many more - ALL produced by the same channel - Ready to Harvest.
The bit about Jesus having returned invisibly in 1914 is telling because it only started being taught AFTER the failure of their 1914 prophecies and teachings.
Incorrect. Charles Russell believed that Jesus returned an 1874 invisibly. It was only changed to 1914 when Rutherford took over.
Arguably, Russell taught that 1914 would mark the end of the "Gentile Times" as mentioned by Jesus in Luke 21 :24 to 28 .
They did not have a complete or full understanding of everything that would occur .
Paul says we see partially until that which is complete arrives .
Russell was correct in regards to 1914 , in the sense that WW1 did see the collapse of gentile domination over Jerusalem and Palestine . The war resulted in the overthrow of the Ottoman Empire , leading to the Belfour declaration in 1917 , which ultimately paved the way for the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 .
In regards to Jesus becoming King of God's Kingdom ,this occurred at his ascension.
A very interesting article was recently written in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz , about CT Russell and his contribution to Zionism.
Most JWs are unaware of this history in relation to the founder of WT .
A post at the christianity stackexchange site asked "Was the 1914 prophecy (derived from the book of Daniel) ever mentioned in any newspapers before World War I?" One of the answers shows copies of old newspaper clippings with Russell's sermons. He was lot less absolute (claiming that this or that will happen in 1914) in his writings than what he is given credit for.
@Sirach144 You misunderstood me by a wide mile.
Am aware how the 1914 prediction began, which is what you are referring to.
It's sort of like how Jesus said he would come back within one generation and then didn't.
I knew a JW and his family. Decent people. I am not JW and do believe their beliefs are heretical but they are honestly held and they are trying to find the truth. The JW I knew became one when his wife had questions that her RC priest failed or refused to answer. JWs came to the door and happily answered her questions. Now honestly held beliefs can be wrong but mockery is not the way for correction - thanks for another great video.
I find it very interesting.
Within each major tradition of Christianity, there's an assumption that Christians have always held the doctrine they hold and have always thought the same way about it, but that isn't true.
There wasn't just one "Early Church" with shared doctrine and leadership. There were many early churches with significant differences in their perspectives who branched off in many different ways. After all, there wasn't a "New Testament" for nearly 400 years of Christian History, so groups of Christians held different scriptures to be more authoritative than others or based theology off of books now considered to be Apocrypha.
But what happens to these churches with different ideas? They're denounced as heretics by other factions of the church, are forcibly cast out if they refuse to adopt the dogma of the persecuting faction, and their writings and Apocrypha scriptures are destroyed. Some factions of the church later formed creeds, a biblical canon, and hierarchy, was given political influence, and formed into what is known as the proto-orthodox church, around the 4th century. This would be the ancestor to Orthodox, Catholic, and ultimately Protestant Christianity.
Throughout the ages since there have been a number of movements that have shaken Christianity and a huge focus of a lot of offshoots including the JW is finding their way back to what Jesus actually taught and what the Early Church actually believed. And to that extent, JWs haven't introduced all that many ideas original to them. There have been non-Trinitarian Christians for as long as Christianity has existed (and longer than the modern form of the "Trinity" has been taught), the idea that Jesus was the archangel Michael didn't come out of nowhere, and many of the JWs's other "cooky" sounding beliefs have some kind of thread that you can follow to understand why a group of people attempting to study history and scripture without their modern biases and assumptions might arrive at, even if you find them to be wrong or even obviously wrong.
And that's not something I can say about the other offshoots that formed along similar movements. I wouldn't say it about the Latter Day Saints ("Mormon" church) or Christian Science.
I can absolutely see how someone could ask their priest questions and feel unsatisfied by the answers, and then a JW comes along and has an answer that person has never heard before that has a surprising amount of history and theology backing their answer.
I think there's a lot to criticize about the Jehovah's Witnesses religion. I think it's right that more countries are treating their disfellowship (and "shunning") of children as child abuse, and while JW claims that people have freedom of conscience for matters such as pursuit of higher education and regarding blood transfusions, in many places, those can still result in disfellowship and some JW parents have had to make the choice to give blood transfusions to their children in an emergency situation, even though it meant they could everyone around them. There's an enormous amount of "high control" tactics present.
I studied for awhile with jws. They are very nice people until you don't want to study anymore. My heart goes out to them, they have been deceived
The Lord has endowed you with a true calling to bring gospel and theological issues comprehensively in comparative dogmas within modern Christianity. May the Lord continue to use you brother to remain faithful in this calling! ✝️❤️🔥✋🏻👍🏻
Wow! You really worked hard on this video. Great job. I always find your videos informative and appreciate your impartiality.
I agree, as someone who is a former JW, current atheist and someone who has kind and gentle family members who are JW i appreciate when someone provides a fact based and unbiased explanation. Whilst i obviously believe they are incorrect in their beliefs we should all remember that they are human beings to that just happen to believe something different
@@randommusic4567
Tell me.....
What brought you from a worshiper of Jehovah God
To someone who believes There definitely is NO creator??
Was it personal experiences......aka: hang ups OR a deep dive down the atheistic rabbit hole??
@@MultipleGrievance simply that i grew up, studied the sciences and gradually drifted away from belief into evidence and the scientific method
@randommusic4567
I'm currently studying origin of life science. To be perfectly honest, I am not impressed.
There are holes the size of manhattan in each theory.
So you believe simple molecules organized themselves randomly into more complex life forms?
@@MultipleGrievance i dont think that we use the word belief in the same way so i will avoid using it and leave it for use in the religious context. (Ie faith without evidence)
But yes that is the best theory that we have for how life evolved, that over time as live persisted it grew in complexity
Another excellent and informative video. Thank you for all of the work that went into presenting this to us.
'If there is a physical body there must be a spiritual one" bible
Jahova witness watch tower
"Let's switch that around"
What do you mean?
@@cipmaster1
About 5 minutes in, the video explains how JW teaching says that since God is Spirit, and therefore has a spirit body, He cannot therefore be omnipresent.
Wrong
Excellent video! Thank you so much! This information is so helpful. Someone very close to me is attending a Kingdom Hall. I need to understand what's going on. Thank you for being so thorough and objective.
Great video! Your professional manners and method are really the core of your channel!
Thanks to your honest overview❤
This video is AGGRESSIVELY unbiased
Nicely explained. Thank you for this
I wish your videos had been available 50 years ago when I was in college and had to study the histoty and beliefs of so many different denominations. Your videos are really good and very fair.
Arianism meets Unitarianism?
JW are one of many likeminded anti trinitarian Restorationist movements which emerged in the 19th C.
although unitarianism emerged much earlier in the 15-16th century with the radical reformers. though the first english speaking unitarians did not emerge until about 1770
And some other heresies
Pseudo-adoptionism also
Aren't unitarians, a direct offshoot of arianism, though??
Without Arias There could not have been unitarians.
This is great explanation of the JW. Very helpful.
We each have our own beliefs, persuasions, and flavors of faith - so, I know it's difficult to present a faith we may not embrace without bias. I think you did a terrific job!
JWs are truly one of the religions of all time
Agreed
I love the part where the Jehovah's Witnesses said "It's witnessing time!", and witnessed to people who didn't want to be bothered that day.
So the Jehovah's Witnesses have the truth?
@@alfred5048 how does that follow?
@@alfred5048 I know what your doing
Thank you for all the work you do!
Mormon next?
I'd vote for that
Yes please
@@spiderb3367 you should add "like this comment if you want a video on mormonism"
@@spiderb3367 Just the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or also the various splinter groups?
@@adamkotter6174 all of em
😊wow...that's what I call a Bible study. Thanks for reading so much information! You're doing a good job! Thank you 😎👍
Charles Taze Russell, the founder of the Bible Student movement, which later evolved into Jehovah's Witnesses, had teachings that differed from today's Jehovah's Witnesses in several ways:
1. *No concept of "Jehovah" as a personal name*: Russell used the term "Jehovah" as a title, not a personal name. He emphasized God's name as "Yahweh" or "Jah."
2. *No door-to-door preaching*: Russell focused on preaching in churches, halls, and public spaces, not door-to-door.
3. *Emphasis on Bible study*: Russell encouraged individual Bible study and critical thinking, whereas today's Jehovah's Witnesses have a more centralized and controlled approach to scripture interpretation.
4. *No organization*: Russell's movement was more decentralized and lacked the hierarchical structure of today's Jehovah's Witnesses.
5. *Different eschatology*: Russell believed in a more traditional Adventist view of the end times, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses now teach a unique interpretation of the "end times" and the role of the organization in it.
6. *No rejection of holidays and birthdays*: Russell and early Bible Students celebrated holidays and birthdays, whereas Jehovah's Witnesses now reject these as "pagan" practices.
7. *More emphasis on social justice*: Russell was involved in social reform movements, like women's suffrage and labor rights, which is not a focus for today's Jehovah's Witnesses.
These differences reflect the evolution of the organization over time, with significant changes occurring after Russell's death in 1916. Today's Jehovah's Witnesses have a more centralized authority, a distinct eschatology, and a unique cultural identity that diverges from Russell's original teachings.
Awesome. I’m a Bible student and we still study the original watchtower and studies in the Scriptures. However, many people don’t know that there’s a massive difference between today’s Jehovah’s Witnesses and what Russell founded.
I’m not sure about number seven that you wrote because that was one of the big differences between him and his wife.
@@Sirach144 yeah it’s sad, it sounds like he had so many good ideas that the JW messed up. That’s life sometimes I guess smh. Good to hear yall are still around.
ChatGPT.
As the truth becomes clear some things have changed over the years. Why you keep going back in their past? Knowledge is something that grows over time.
Most of your differences, can be explained to the passage of time and the evolution of a group of believers. Quite normal actually.
Do yourself a favor and go compare methodists within their first one hundred years with the methodist of today.
Hell, Do that with literally any other denomination. I dare you.
Great video. Gonna check out more of your content.
Thanks for the work on the video. As always very informative.
I appreciate that this video is not about JW history and the doctrine changes, but there are more curious and interesting details that the viewer may want to learn about current doctrines. Doctrines of significance.
For example, JW's stance on blood transfusion is murky when one considers that sometimes what is transfused are blood components (as opposed to whole blood), and unless am mistaken, they leave it to the individuals conscience regarding these.
Another interesting practice is their attitude towards higher education. While they do not teach against it, there is a clear and unambiguous opposition to it, so much so that it is very hard to find a baptised and believing JW who, as an example, is in medical school, studying to be an engineer or a university professor.
hi just wanna address im not a witness but was born into it and sometimes go to meetings, in the congregation i go to our elder is a medical doctor but he obviously doesn't talk about it. Lots of witnesses have different opinions on it. It really depends if youre an active witness and wanna fully devote yourself to Jehovah.
@Nyanpumpkinpie I didn't say there is a direct teaching against higher ed. Obviously, there are people with professional education in kingdom halls. What I stated was that it is very rare to see one, and this is because of their informal but real bias against higher ed.
Define opposition.
Any witness can choose higher education if they want to and they will not be criticized. That's how choices work. As long as it's not a gross sin, There will be no opposition.
@@danielkaranja7978
No. It's not very rare.
I don't think the society has taken a poll. But I guarantee you, there are thousands of medical doctors. Thousands of nurses. Thousands of lawyers. Etc.
Excellent work. I love it. Thanks 👍
As I enter the comment section one thought enters my mind.
"This is where the fun begins"
@@andrewwinslow9315 Hello there!
"I have waited a long time for this moment"
Hope I'm not too late .... 😉
"Oh no, I'm not brave enough for politics."
@@toaster317Nah political debates online are just boring
Then why did Jesus never stop someone from worshipping him?
@@sbccave4015 I don't if this guy was was JW but when denying the divinity of christ some one brought up tomas to which he replied "ha ha thomas was wrong! Ha ha"
@@Noe-jw7up huh? Thomas was wrong? He said my Lord and my God. The expression is not vocative as if it was being expressed to Jesus, but even if it was Jesus is our King--he has been given authority in heaven and on earth. We admit say Jesus is a god. That doesn't make him triune. Isa 9:6 calls the coming Messiah--mighty god! No JEW believes that means Messiah is God Almighty!
Satan is also a god. Is he a part of the Trinity?
@@kstevenson3504 hello I know we disagree on quite a bite of theologic things, but since your the only JW I've seen in comments I'm curious why are you JW?
“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel, and they that are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again lean upon him that smote them, but shall lean upon JEHOVAH, the Holy One of Israel, in truth. A remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the MIGHTY GOD.”
Isaiah 10:20-21 ASV
Here are some important facts that most people don’t know about. The Corporation, aka the organization of the JW created their first custom made new world translation “bible” in 1950, which contained the NT. The KJV that they were using before then was giving them a lot of problems, which is why they needed cease all use of the KJV, and to create their very own custom made “bible,” which had drastic changed all in which were done to support their key doctrines.
Over the years they came up with the many Newer Revised Editions, one of which was the first complete nwt that contained the OT and NT in 1961. Since then newer revised editions have came out. Here are the rest of their New Revised Editions in order: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1984, 2013… all of which contained more and more changes like verses removed, words removed, words changed, new words added, commas and periods moved around, verses restructured, parts of chapters removed, etc.
Can You do the same video about SDA? Would be so interesting.
He already did. Some time ago. As far as I know the SDA and the JW have these two things in common; 1)that Jesus and Michael are the same person/being and 2)the soulsleep.
@@SGOV86
Adventists have much in common with Baptists but worship on Saturday (Sabbaths) instead of Sundays.
Adventists pray to Jesus, because he they believe in the Trinity and believe Jesus is God.
JW on the other hand never pray to Jesus, because they are clinging to the Arian heresy that the Lord Jesus is not God.
A big difference that makes them a cult and separates them from being Christians.
@@thomasdemetz6145no they aren’t Baptist don’t think Jesus is Michael and don’t follow a crazy woman named Ellen
@@SGOV86to be fair, the Michael/jesus thing isn’t as much of a problem for SDA’s as it is for JW’s. While early SDA’s (and most Adventist groups in general, of which the JW’s are a “first day” variant) leaned Arian, SDA’s today are fairly staunch in their trinitarianism. Thus, in calling Jesus “the archangel”, SDA’s mean he is God, Prince of the Angels, vs the JW doctrine of Jesus/Michael as the Highest Angel created by God
@@thomasdemetz6145
Thank you for being honest, we SDA are Christians. Many people are confused about what we actually believe…
God bless you
One brief encounter I had with a couple of JW’s was in a jungle village of Papua New Guinea, I wasn’t expecting it but they were using the Tok Pisin Bible for their materials not a translation of their bible.
JW: Non-creationist because we accept science.
Also JW: Blood transfusion is the same as eating blood lol.
Nah, they believe in "true science." According to the video, they accept geology, but not evolution. In my experience, anyone who tries to make a distinction between micro and macro evolution doesn't actually accept evolution as understood by biologists.
@@stephanier8156 True, as "macro evolution" is literally just a lot of micro evolution.
@@thatoneskinnykid"basically" huh? 😂
A nose is "basically" a mouth because it's a hole in your face that air passes through, right?😊
Naw... that's not how science works; they're two very different things.
It's been covered on thoroughly on Daily Dose of Wisdom & other channels. I'd post a link but YT won't allow but I encourage you to look into it.
@@DamePiglet Your analogy makes no sense compared to what I said.
I never said "basically" because macro evolution is literally just a lot of micro evolution.
The "Macro Vs. Micro" distinction is never made by any credible scientist. Just desperate Creationists.
@@thatoneskinnykid It is mostly Christians raised on the resources available in the 90's that reference "micro" and "macro" evolution, along with fixity of species and such...it'd be fair to say our stances have , ahem, evolved a bit, with most actual scientists who are creationists looking to develop falsifiable models based around variance within created kinds. A lot of people will balk at that, and maybe find it "unscientific", but there is a world of difference in the mentality and work being done now vs. when I was in High School and everyone was looking for silver bullets to refute natural selection.
The "history" listed on the website is not honest.
God bless you Thanks.
These eschatological beliefs are interesting in light of how dispensationalism became mainstream between 1830-1880 in the US. Just a thought.
Popularized then, but not mainstream for another century.
All in all, there seems to be little risk in rejecting the teachings of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
wrong jesus gets you to the wrong destination.
Only if their doctrine is incorrect.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 respect your objectivity
JWs did not have the "New World Translation" until 1950s. So before that they used Bibles like KJV, ASV and others. They still use the other translations too.
Another great video! Thank you!
Can you do one for us mormons
Yes please
Yes please
This was good :)
The fact the title say "neutrally exspained" says something about jahova witnesses
What do you mean? Surely they aren't a litigious or harassing bunch are they? No way, not these guys. Can't be, not at all. /sarcasm
The video says "Neutral" because if you look at his other one, it CLEARLY IS NOT!
I think it says more about the existing videos on JWs.
@@NihilusAeturnum
Actually they're not litigious at all. The only time they use legal remedy is when the state itself tries to pen in their worship. And their fights always lead to more rights for everyone else.
You're welcome.
I am not JW, but I have beloved relatives who are. You were most fair.
Im going to get a blood transfusion during my birthday party after watching this video
Excellent and thorough breakdown of the JW faith. I would have to listen again - but i5 doesn't sound like The religion has changed much since I stopped studying with them in 2015
Before studying with them, I was exposed to the Seventh-day Adventist teachings but didn't want to become one. After years of studying with JW's, so many of the teachings were similar and so many of their arguments made in the Watchtower studies actually contradicted official JW positions and SUPPORTED Adventism, I said I mind as well become an Adve test and I haven't look3d back ever since.
I wounder where the whole st micheal is jesus thing come from?
In the book of Daniel Michael is called a *prince* . In Isaiah chapter 9 the child that is born and the son that is given will also be called *Prince* if Peace.
In Matthew chapter 24 when Jesus will return it is written in verse 31 that He will send *His angels* to gather the elect from the four corners of the earth. In Revelation it is written that Michael and *his angels* went to war against satan and his angels.
In 1 Tess 4:16 it is written that the Lord will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel. And Michael is the only archangel mentioned so far in the bible.
The name "Michael" means "who is like God".
I do not agree with this all but to give you an idea where they came with this doctrine.
It was a belief that was common during the early Reformation era. Consider, for instance, this note from Daniel 10.13 in the Geneva Bible: "Though God could by one Angel destroy all the world, yet to assure his children of his love, he sendeth forth double power, even Michael, that is, Christ Jesus the head of Angels." John Calvin himself was unsure on the matter, but he did say, "Some think the word Michael represents Christ, and I do not object to this opinion." (In commenting on Daniel 12.1, Calvin again says that either interpretation is acceptable. He is far more concerned about heretic Michael Servetus claiming to be the Michael of the Bible.)
Compare Matthew Henry's commentary on the verse, which offers this interpretation as an option: "Some understand it of a created angel, but an archangel of the highest order, 1 Th. 4.16; Jude 9. Others think that Michael the archangel is no other than Christ himself, the angel of the covenant, and the Lord of the angels, he whom Daniel saw in vision, v. 5. He came to help me (v. 13); and there is none but he that holds with me in these things, v. 21. Christ is the church's prince; angels are not, Heb. 2.5. He presides in the affairs of the church and effectually provides for its good."
So too, Methodist founder John Wesley said of this verse, "Michael here is commonly supposed to mean Christ." Another notable early Methodist, Adam Clarke, said in his commentary, "Michael, he who is like God, sometimes appears to signify the Messiah, at other times the highest or chief archangel." See too the 18th century Baptist minister John Gill, who remarks in his commentary that Michael "is no other than Christ the Son of God, an uncreated Angel."
@SGOV86 thank you for that clear, concise and well formatted response...It was very informative 👍
@@Noe-jw7upI'm not well informed as the other people who have replied, but I would add that some fundamentalist Mormons (not 100% in communion with the main LDS Church) hold the idea of Michael as the preterrestrial Jesus.
Lucifer was also called the Prince of Persia in Daniel though...??
Let's keep it clean in the comments, please. Name-calling and so forth isn't becoming of disciples of Christ.
Asking Christians to be Christlike??? That’s rather bold of you!
Didn't Jesus insult the Pharisees? Didn't John the Baptist, of which Jesus Christ says in Matthew 11:11 "Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has risen no one greater than John the Baptist", insulted the Pharisees and Sadducees by calling them "brood of vipers"?
@@adan1444 Jesus, and to a lesser extent John, had prophetic insight into the hearts of the Pharisees. They had knowledge and responsibility that we simply do not have. If they considered such hyperbole appropriate to get their attention and call them to repentance, they had the power and authority to do that. We have neither the prerogative nor the judgement to hurl insults because we think that people aren't right with God (not to mention that alienating or "othering" people is one of the least effective ways possible to invite them back to Christ). Our responsibility is to share what we know about the Savior and lovingly invite others to approach Him, not to point fingers at our neighbors even if their doctrine is wrong.
@@adan1444 ancient hebrew culture was more Blunt then ours. While it stll wasn't nice what st john said wasn't as rude then as it is to us now
@@adamkotter6174 The cult of "nice" christianity lol
Just a fun fact, there is a whole Wikipedia article devoted to Jehovah's Witness splinter groups and schisms.
Uh yeah.
That's literally how wikipedia works. Encyclopedia, Whether online or not tend to have information about literally everything.
@@MultipleGrievance right, I just thought it was funny on light of the Jay-Dub claim documented in the video that they have had no splits.
@Parmandur
Ah. Well, technically thier has only been one. Every other splinter group came out of the hundreds who left after Russell died. THAT group Continued to schism. The main group stayed solid.
I get why they would challenge the term "split"
It implies relatively equal sizes on both sides. It was nothing like that at all. The group to leave were very tiny by comparison.
@@MultipleGrievance no, as documented on the Wiki page, there were other splits.
@Parmandur
Just read the wiki article.
Technically they are incorrect when they said, "with several groups breaking away"
Thier were not.
It was one group.
I can only assume they are conflating all of the other schisms that happened with the group that left.
Interesting book you’re quoting. Really seems to affirm jw story.
It’s interesting how during this period of time in American history so many “restoration” churches rose. JW, SDA, LDS, Christian Science, etc. it must have been a really weird time in the world.
That's just America for ya. Things got even weirder in the 1960s/1970s.
I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses. I must say you did a fine job of giving the facts in a neutral way. I appreciate your efforts.
If anyone has any question, feel free to ask me.
As in ALL denominations; some truth, some falsehoods. Though, I will say, some of their beliefs hold more biblical accuracy based on the original languages than many of the mainstream beliefs.
Your post is mere assertion.
Very interesting stuff!
As a Mormon, I can’t wait for the Mormon version of this.
I am ok with many interpretations, but i find it very sad that they deny anyone the opportunity to partake in communion
The Bible says, "unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink of His blood, you shall not have life within you."
Why deny even the opportunity that there are some who are in the 144,000? What a traffic misinterpretation
WHom did Jesus give the bread and wine? It started with the Apostles and eventually extended to other disciples. What are they going to do? They will be JUDGES as mentioned in Luke 22, they were given the Kingdom and they will BE priests and kings. rEV 5 - and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God,q and they are to rule as kings over the earth.” They were given authority to JUDGE and become KINGS - rev 20:4 - And I saw thrones, and those who sat on them were given authority to JUDGE. Yes, I saw the souls* of those executed* for the witness they gave about Jesus and for speaking about God, and those who had not worshipped the wild beast or its image and had not received the mark on their forehead and on their hand.h And they came to life and ruled as KINGS with the Christ for 1,000 years.
Rev 20:6 - Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection;l over these the second deathm has no authority,n but they will be priestso of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years. THOSE WHO WILL RULE AS KINGs AND PRIESTS and they are part of the FIRST RESURRECTION, THEY ARE the firstfruits. rev 14:4 mentions that these firstfruits are "These are the ones who did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins.i These are the ones who keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes.j These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb," HOW MANY ARE THEY? REV 14:3 MENTIONS "And they are singing what seems to be a new songe before the throne and before the four living creaturesf and the elders,g and no one was able to master that song except the 144,000,h who have been bought from the earth." 144K
Nice video. I thought you would say more about the door to door evangelism.
(Matthew 28:19, 20) Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.”
(Matthew 24:14) And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.
After watching, I have to say well done on being so neutral. I couldn't be. Not once did you use the term "Arian"
They aren’t Arian. Arian didn’t believe in 144000 or passing around a cup for lord supper that no one can drink or that pyramids are the Bible.
@@kennynoNope true. tho it is a variant of Arianism in the same way that Baptists and Orthodox are both Trinitarian
@@ryannel3899 yes but it is important to realize that there is zero evidence that their belief system ever existed before Charles Russell. You give them fuel when you tell them they are a group from the 4th century. They are a man made group from a man who worshiped pyramids in 1880.
@@kennynoNope
Arius also believed in worshipping Jesus.
He didn't believe what modern unitarians want him to believe.
@@IamGrimalkin you are correct there religion is from Charles Russel in the 1880 not anything close to the first 1500 years of Christianity.
The number of partakers in the Memorial Meal has been trending up from 8,570 in 2004 to 22,312 in 2023. If, as the organization states, the vast majority of 144,000 are long dead this should not be happening. It would appear that there is a disconnect between position of the leadership and the rank and file. Based in past history there is likely to be "new light" in the future to realign things.
For a long time, they thought that the anointing of the 144000 had mostly stopped around 1935. Around 2007, they backed off of thay belief, and so more people baptized after 1935 started claiming to be anointed.
I wonder what Mormons think of JWs and vice versa.
Heretics. Just the same as every denomination views every other denomination.
As for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, we see them the same way that we other religious groups. We see them as having some truth, such as the Bible, but we see them as lacking truth in other areas, such as their rejection of the divinity of Christ. Elder Boyd K Packer eloquently illustrated our view of other faiths in his 1971 talk, “The Only True and Living Church” in these words: “The gospel might be likened to the keyboard of a piano-a full keyboard with a selection of keys on which one who is trained can play a variety without limits; a ballad to express love, a march to rally, a melody to soothe, and a hymn to inspire; an endless variety to suit every mood and satisfy every need.
How shortsighted it is, then, to choose a single key and endlessly tap out the monotony of a single note, or even two or three notes, when the full keyboard of limitless harmony can be played.
How disappointing when the fullness of the gospel, the whole keyboard, is here upon the earth, that many churches tap on a single key. The note they stress may be essential to a complete harmony of religious experience, but it is, nonetheless, not all there is. It isn’t the fullness.”
I have a close friend who’s a Jehovah’s Witness, and I think he’s a pretty cool guy. We sorta have a bit of common ground for being viewed as “weird,” although for completely different reasons-Latter-day Saints have expanded scripture and temple ordinances and a claim of revelation, while Jehovah’s witnesses have their own translation of the Bible and different Christology than Latter-day Saints.
While I wouldn’t become a Jehovah’s Witness, I admire my friend’s devotion to God, no matter how wrong it may seem. After all, the thirteenth Article of Faith (canonized synopsis of LDS beliefs) states that “If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”
@@anyanyanyanyanyany3551 Speaking as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints but definitely not for the Church, I appreciate anyone who's sincerely doing their best to follow the Savior and lift those around them. I empathize with how they get the word "cult" slung at them like an insult. I disagree with their understanding of Christ's nature, and I think that their common practice of shunning those who stray causes damage to those who most need healing, but at the end of the day they're still people in need of Christ's grace just like me.
You should read the Book of Mormon & then read the Bible.
Have you done a video on infernalism/ECT v annihilationism v universalism v calvinism ?
Now it makes sense why my JW aunt was uncomfortable when I was talking about how awesome the crusades were
I have appreciated the good research you do in authoritative sources for different religions. Do you ever look for people to assist you for any particular religion, either to offer insight into less formal practices or to help you identify authoritative statements for topics?
"Neutrally explained" How to say you're describing a cult without saying the word...
😂😂😂😂
Define cult.....
Eddie Murphy was the Jonestown eyewitness...cults are fake news. Manson was Sharon Tate's father, Colonel Paul Tate. O J Simpson's wife is Megyn Kelly
Maybe I missed something, but what is the source of the 144,000 number?
Revelation 7:3-4 “3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.
4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: and there were sealed an hundred and forty and four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.”
The bible
My biggest issue with the JW faith is not some of their thoughts surrounding secondary beliefs or tertiary beliefs like their stances on a lot of social issues like abortion, homosexuality, divorce or views on eschatology or even the name of God. The issue I have is the purposeful mistranslation of Scripture. The New World Translation intentionally alters passages that speak on the personhood of the Holy Spirit (John 14:26) and the Godhood of Christ (John 1:1, Phil. 2:6-7).
You said "The issue I have is the purposeful mistranslation of Scripture."
Was it mistranslated, or more accurately translated? Look at the book Truth in Translation. The author declared the NWT the most accurate and least biased.
@@777Tralfaz777 One scholar does not make for scholarly or academic consensus, nor account for the past 2,000 years of church history.
If anything the documents unearthed over the last 500 years and with the early patristic writings, we have a 99% agreement across thousands of documents. The NWT is an aberration and is divergent from the myriad of historical and modern acceptance.
From the inception of the Bible students and watchtower, the dishonesty of Russell in knowing the languages calls into question the integrity of the theological formation and interpretational veracity.
@@tylerbird606 You said "One scholar does not make for scholarly or academic consensus, "
Does such consensus make something true? Was that the case in the first century? Did the "scholarly class", by and large, accept Jesus as the Messiah in the first century?
What was unearthed is not in conflict with the JW translation. The questions are more along the line of how to properly translate the original languages. Would you like a demonstration?
@@tylerbird606 Matt 11:25 At that time Jesus said in response: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to young children.
@@777Tralfaz777 I very much agree, as Jerome said, “The Scriptures are shallow enough for a babe to come and drink without fear of drowning and deep enough for a theologians to swim in without ever touching the bottom."
With that being said, Scripture offers clarity and is straightforward in the original text.
John 1:1
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος.
The statement θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος is literally, “The Word was God.” There is not the determiner “a” present in the text. Adding “a” to the translation, “The Word was a god.” Is a purposeful addition to support the theological positions of the JWs, that Jesus was not God, but a creation of God, namely the Arch angel Michael.
As someone who has spent the last 15 years studying and having to demonstrate linguistic, transitional, and hermeneutical competence in my an academic setting, I cannot recommend the NWT as an unbiased or an accurate translation.
Thank you!!
My heart breaks for these confused, decieved people. Praying for them.
@jeannine1739 what do you mean by that
@@wendyleeconnelly2939 I mean that, if this video is accurate, and Ready to Harvest's usually are, I don't see the gospel of salvation in any of what they're being taught. According to scripture (which is why reading only the modified version offered to them is dangerous - inconvenient truths are changed to agree with their doctrine) Jesus is the Son of God, He didn't have a human father, Joseph was His stepfather, God is His Father. Jesus is the door to heaven, the only way to the Father is through that door. His Father gave Him all authority to judge the earth. Jesus had (and still has) all power; the authority to forgive sins, as well as to heal, raise the dead, etc. And most importantly, the authority to give His life to atone for every sin ever committed or to be committed by mankind. He bought all of humanity when He laid down His life as the Lamb of God, the perfect sacrifice on the cross, then picked up His life again 3 days later. Whether a person believes in Christ or not, their sins have already been paid for. Christ set the payment for entry really low - believe in Him. All of this is purely scriptural - people don't go to hell simply because they're sinners - all men are sinners. People go to hell because they're sinners who don't believe in the Son of God who died in their place. Works can't get you to heaven. Obeying the laws set forth by any group of humans can't do it. Only believing in Jesus.
John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
@@wendyleeconnelly2939 I tried to post this earlier, but I think YT blocked my post because of a direct bible quote of John 3:18, so I'll try again, without it.
I mean that, if this video is accurate, and Ready to Harvest's usually are, I don't see the gospel of salvation in any of what they're being taught. According to scripture (which is why reading only the modified version offered to them is dangerous - inconvenient truths are changed to agree with their doctrine) Jesus is the Son of God, He didn't have a human father, Joseph was His stepfather, God is His Father. Jesus is the door to heaven, the only way to the Father is through that door. His Father gave Him all authority to judge the earth. Jesus had (and still has) all power; the authority to forgive sins, as well as to heal, raise the dead, etc. And most importantly, the authority to give His life to atone for every sin ever committed or to be committed by mankind. He bought all of humanity when He laid down His life as the Lamb of God, the perfect sacrifice on the cross, then picked up His life again 3 days later. Whether a person believes in Christ or not, their sins have already been paid for. Christ set the payment for entry really low - believe in Him. All of this is purely scriptural - people aren't condemned simply because they're sinners - all men are sinners. People are condemned because they're sinners who don't believe in the Son of God who died in their place. Works can't get you to heaven. Obeying the laws set forth by any group of humans can't do it. Only believing in Jesus.
@@wendyleeconnelly2939 I mean that the gospel of grace, that Christ, God's Son, gave Himself on the cross to be the atonement for all sin, thereby making a way for all to get to God, isn't preached to JWs. Instead they are taught to obey the laws of men, under the guise of holiness and good works. It must be a hard snare to get out of, so I'm praying that God make a way for them to hear and understand, and believe the truth. :)
@@jeannine1739
Let me ask you a question.
What do you think is more important to the lord, Getting doctrine correct or living as a Christian should?
It kinda cracks me up but also makes me sad when people obviously don't understand biology. The "proper" definition of "species" is still fuzzy and debated. It's part of why there are so many papers on phylogeny still to this day.
I thought you weren't going to make any videos about Jehovas witnesses or Mormons? Have you changed on this?
No, I have made videos on all groups that identify as Christian from the very beginning.
Watching this, it's interesting to discover how they do get some things "right", despite being woefully misguided on other (notably, some of the most important) parts of Christianity. I did not expect them to cite 1 Cor 13:8 against speaking in tongues for instance - this much is something I'd agree with. But their rejection of Christ as God is anathema, and will be their own undoing in the end. Not to mention all their other weird concepts, like the population cap on heaven lol.
Does anyone know what Joshua's own personal denomination I'm dying to know
According to wikitubia he's a Baptist
First explanation, “It’s a cult”
It's also not christan
I cannot be neutral about a cult that claims to be Christian and is anything but.
Not quite Scientology levels, but also not acceptable levels of Christianity to be considered a 'normal' sect.
@@ST52655 me too,
What is the difference between a religion and a cult. There really isnt one
Thanks
I'm impressed with much of what they believe but dumfounded at some of it. How would they ever arrive at the conclusion that we should not all be taking the Lord's supper?
The "Lord's Supper" is a Catholic invention. Yahshua and the disciples celebrated Passover and we are Commanded to do the same
When Yahshua said, “This cup is the renewed covenant in My blood. As often as you drink it, do this in remembrance of Me.” He was referring to the Passover Feast, not the weekly nibble of bread and sip of cordial.
(Not a JW by the way.)
williambrewer I agree with you, I agree with many of their teachings. However, I strongly disagree with some aspects of their teachings, such as the Lord's supper, and some other issues as well. I certainly admire how J.W.'s have questioned every aspect of Protestant beliefs and compared the beliefs to what the Bible says. It's shocking how many churches' beliefs are "traditions of men".
@@pugetsound1272 Right, but it seems like when it's all said and done, they've ended up with more traditions of men than the Protestants when it's all said and done.
@@williambrewer Yes, I agree.
Because they originally believe all Jws were anointed and going to heaven, but when their numbers grew past 144,000 members, instead of saying “hey maybe that number is not literal”, they decided that there must be 2 classes of jws lol. Some going to heaven and some staying on the earth. Only the ones going to heaven are to partake in the lords supper
They believe a LOT of stuff that directly contradicts the Bible. 22:13 in the video I thought of Matthew 24:35 & just shook my head. That's not even the only passage to clearly debunk that belief.
A “Christian” group using CE is wild 💀
Maybe they say that “CE” stands for “Christ’s era”!
@@nicolassanchez2292 they're probably being contrarian since ad is from the catholic gregorian calendar
I need more information and details on where the Governing Body gets their authority, how the got it, and the circumstances under which all of this happened. In as minute a detail as possible.
The evidence is in the teachings. JW have more Bible truth than any other religion. Thus, is the true congregation.
@777Tralfaz777 I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that.
If I simply go by the teaching, all I need to do is point out the century plus of error, and it's clear that the Governing Body have no real authority in such things.
Over 100 years ago, "Millions now living will never die".
Surely, if there's a biblical governing body with any authority, it's the hierarchy of the Catholic and/or Orthodox Church.
@@cooltaylor1015 You > "I'm afraid you'll have to do better than that."
No sir. It is as simple as that. You find who teaches the truth first, that is the horse that pulls the cart, meaning then you can determine who the true congregation is, and who the faithful slave is (cart). That is the logical progression.
You > "If I simply go by the teaching, all I need to do is point out the century plus of error,"
We are by no means infallible. Nor inspired prophets. But JW teach more Bible truth than any other religion, bar none.
@@777Tralfaz777 define truth.
Then tell me how you know one group speaks it and another doesn't.
How does one know the Governing Body is espousing truth?
Where does this truth come from, if not divine inspiration.
I've been JW adjacent for 35 years, and I've never gotten anywhere close to a satisfying answer.
Catholics have Apostolic Succession.
Mormons have a President who regularly meets with Jesus, if you believe him.
But The Governing Body just seemed to form itself a bit more than a century ago with no real reasoning. For some reason, they get all of this insight, but nobody knows where it comes from.
Where do they get their authority? Where do they get their information? Why must they be believed and followed? How does one know they are truthful? Why are they any less a part of Satan's System than any other group of religious leaders? What, exactly, is it that makes the Governing Body special?
They get it by inventing a prophecy that is a combination of several unrelated cherry picked scriptures and out of context. It also requires ancient Jerusalem to be destroyed in 607. All that mess and some magic math add up to Jesus picking JWs in 1919. After they got out of prison for printing seditious materials...
Long story short 607 is a massive lie that is so easy to disprove. Even the Bible backs up 587 as the destruction of Jerusalem at Zechariah 7.
Please do Hebrew Israelite.
Would really love a deep dive or a reply from an American about the sheer number of splits and let's say "unique" Christian movements like these in America at this time, mid to late 19th Century. Was it the end of the Civil War, or?
As an American "theology geek" and history enthusiast, a lot of the reason there are so many denominations, cults, movements and the like has to do with America's unique history in terms of religious freedom. In colonial times, many of the colonies that later became US states were founded by religious splinter groups fleeing persecution in Europe. Massachusetts was founded by Separatists, who were later outnumbered by vast numbers of Puritans who fled Britain for the colony, especially after the Restoration of the Monarchy after Cromwell passed away. Pennsylvania was founded as a refuge for Quakers and Anabaptists, who, while very different from each other in terms of beliefs, tended to be closely allied in worldly matters due to the fact that both groups were persecuted by both Catholics and Protestants. Rhode Island was founded as a refuge for those persecuted by the Puritans in Massachusetts (who were just as intolerant of non-Puritans as non-Puritans were of them in England). Maryland was founded as a refuge for English Catholics. This led to the Colonies being a very religiously diverse place.
After the Colonies won their independence from Great Britain and formed the USA, it was essential that the new nation have freedom of religion (then a very revolutionary idea, as practically every other nation at the time had a state religion) to ensure that the nation stayed united, since the people there followed many different forms of Christianity. This freedom of religion led to a plethora of different denominations, some that formed in the US and others that formed (or already existed) abroad, mostly in Europe, and whose adherents were persecuted in their home countries, leading them to sail to the US where they would have freedom to worship as they saw fit. Some of these groups, like the Mennonites and the Amish, immigrated in colonial times while others came much more recently, such as the Inspirationalists, a radical Pietist spinoff of Lutheranism that began in northern Germany in the 1700s and, after fierce persecution from mainstream Lutherans in Germany, fled to the US in the 1840s, eventually settling in eastern Iowa and forming a settlement called the "Amana Colonies", which are now a significant regional tourist attraction. After the mid 19th Century, most Western European countries had become much more religiously tolerant, slowing the influx of religious immigrants to the US. The Americans' "head start" on religious freedom, however, is probably the biggest single factor on why there are so many denominations in the US.
Events that impacted the formation of new denominations in the US included the First and Second "Great Awakenings", major religious revivals (the first, which also occurred in Europe, from the 1730s to 1740s, a generation before the Revolutionary War; the second from around the turn of the 19th Century until the 1840s) that led to masses of people attending sermons preached, usually outdoors or in large tents. Some of these "revivalists" belonged to existing denominations, some to fringe or spinoff groups, and some were charlatans who were taking advantage of the religious fervor to get money or puff up their own egos by attracting followers. Many new denominations formed as a result, some of which were temporary, like the "Millerites", whose leader, William Miller, claimed that Christ would return in 1843 (later amended to several different dates in 1844 before the lack of a return led to the collapse of the group), others that still exist to this day, like the LDS/Mormons.
Another significant event, which you mentioned in your OP, was the American Civil War. Many denominations split into "Northern" and "Southern" branches as a direct result of the Southern states' secession and many of them stayed split after the War. Others, such as the Stone/Campbell Christian Church/Church of Christ/Disciples of Christ, remained unified through the war years, but ultimately split first in the early 20th Century, when many churches (mostly Southern, rural and poor) split off to form the Church of Christ due to their opposition to the use of instrumental music by other churches in the movement (mostly Northern, urban and somewhat better off financially) and second in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the mostly northern group split into the independent Christian churches and churches of Christ (which I belong to) and the more liberal Disciples of Christ.
Increased liberalization in many denominations over the past 100 years has led to further splits within denominations, and is the main reason for church splits from then to the present day. The Presbyterian Church, for example, split into the conservative PCA and the liberal PCUSA. The Methodist Church split into the liberal Methodists and the conservative Wesleyan/Holiness churches. Several of them have fragmented even further.
The fact that they modified John 1 shows that their exegesis is extremely lacking. John 1 is a tie-in to the greek idea of Logos (remember, John’s gospel audience is primarily non-Jews). To get this wrong is to show that you shouldn’t be making translations of any Scripture, let alone publishing editorials about what it means.
I used to know a JW. He didnt really tell me he was JW though. But, we kinda hung out at work a bit, but I remember the way he talked was kind of off. Almost awkward, but more than that, like naive too, with a hint of eagerness. We used to run during our lunch break, and the way the dude ran was soooo strange. Like he was making it very clear he was not being competitive. And, we were just running for fun. It was a really strange friendship. Eventually he left the organization, and I didnt see him any longer.
I wonder what he's up to...
Thanks for laying out straightforward info.
It's a fascinating example of how anyone can say "We just believe exactly what the Bible teaches",
while whipping up their own wild interpretation.
And which interpretation would that be....,
@@MultipleGrievance are u a JW?
@Kanal7Indonesia
More like a JW historian.
It's my favorite religion, so I study it, inside & out.
@@MultipleGrievance nice, me too man. Can I be your friend?
@@Kanal7Indonesia
Of course.......
From my personal (if limited) experience, the character of a congregation's elders makes a HUGE impact on how a congregation behaves and how they interpret certain doctrines. The Governing Body likes to make it out that everyone is, as it were, singing from the same hymnbook, but that doesn't seem to be the case. The JWs close to where I live do a lot more mixing with non-JWs than is apparently orthodox, for example. Honestly I think if the Governing Body collapsed, you'd see a lot of decent congregations climbing out of the rubble.
You > "the character of a congregation's elders makes a HUGE impact on how a congregation behaves and how they interpret certain doctrines."
Not from my experience. All my brothers believe the exact same doctrine.
You > "do a lot more mixing with non-JWs
Please explain. Mixing in what way?
Similarities of interpretation, practice, and organizational rigidity can be found among other denominations.
But what makes the JW"s non-orthodox is their clinging to the Arian heresy that the Lord Jesus is not God. This is what is important.
Yes
Heretics gonna heretic. I don't know how a plain reading of the Bible leads to the conclusion that Jesus isn't God. Different interpretations for different understandings, though I really don't like the JW ones.
Yes and why it is true and why most churches are FALSE. Jews believe a unitarian deity not a trinitarian monster god! That is a pagan atrocity.
I feel like I can sorta answer. I grew up in it and analyzed it alot. I personally don't think they have a REAL biblical reason to say Jesus isn't god. I believe it comes down to patholgy and wanting to control. What removing Jesus as part of god really does is removes God from having a direct connection with humans. Growing up in it, it always felt like to me that their approach puts God the Father, "Jehovah", behind Christ, when it comes to human approaching him. Thus, you or me, CAN'T actually approach God.
Psychologically this is important because we are seperate from him, and thus can't have a personal relationship with him. We NEED the JW's. That gives them control. Control is what they want. Trust me.
@@NihilusAeturnum Well, it is easy when you know what you want a verse to say, or more importantly, not say. Anyone can write their own Bible.
"Unrepentant wrongdoer" could be anything they decide, tho. Asking too many questions is "wrongdoing" that will get you shunned for life.
I find the simultaneous "we don't reject that the earth is billions of years old because we're cool with science" and "evolution isn't real" to be quite funny. If you accept that the earth is billions of years old, and that small-scale evolution happens over small time scales, is it not reasonable to believe that large-scale evolution happens over billions of years? It's like saying that you believe that tectonic plates and earthquakes exist while denying that earthquakes are caused by the movement of tectonic plates.
They claim to not be creationist, but these views sound suspiciously like old earth gap creationism 🤔
As a former JW, current atheist and someone who sees macroevolution (for want of a better word) as correct, i don't think that their belief in micro evolution only is particularly absurd. I believe it is wrong but not absurd. I can see how somebody could believe that any changes that happen only happen within a predefined context, ie that there are finite edges to what something could change to
So basically your brain can't comprehend that some people have a different belief than the most common two
@@BenjaminKeller that's not what I said. Creationism is more than just young earth literal 6 day beliefs. Old earth creationists hold that geology is correct in it's estimation of the age of the earth, but often say that either each day is an eon of unspecified length, or that there was a long gap between the creation of the earth and the creation of life on earth. Gap old earth creationism is a type of creationism belief and it lines up with the statements of belief presented in the video.
The only ways I can think to reconcile these two edeas are:
1) a wolrd that lasted for billions of years, full of creatured that couldn't die, and which therefore reproduced none or very little, or
2) an orb in space with no sun, the dry land not separated from the waters, inhabited only by spirit beings, for the billions of years.
I wait you for replay?
They admitted to making mistakes, just like everyone else; but falsely prophesying the date of the Lord's return, and broadcasting false teaching to go along with it, are not normal mistakes, and it's not like everyone else at all.
It is what Jesus WARNED us would come!
JWs fixed their mistakes and continue to improve. you think GOD does not forgive his people when they fixed their mistakes and continue to improve just like the congregations in rev 2 & 3? they made many mistakes and guess what after fixing their mistakes, THEY WERE STILL GOD's people
@Mr.DC3.1914 , throughout their history, JW leaders have been poaching people from other churches, using date-setting, false prophecies and fear of Armageddon.
Those aren't trivial mistakes, they’re exactly what Jesus warned against when he said that false teachers will use his name and say the end has come…and He explicitly warned us not to follow them. (Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 21)
Regarding false prophets and teachers ‘improving,’ repentance is the first step. But instead of repenting, they adjusted their prophecies after the fact so that now, instead of an epic Second Coming, they claimed the prophecies were fulfilled in a totally different manner that cannot be verified-invisibly and silently.
I hope you escape to Jesus because that corporation is not of God.
@@biblehistoryscience3530 JWs are still GOD'S PEOPLE as we continue to improve, and yet you guys STAY on the mistakes like making GOD a torturer, making 1=3, rejecting the FATHER AS SALVATION, etc
@Mr.DC3.1914 , you side-stepped the facts I stated by changing the subject and then just restated your faith in the corporation. It's the same with Mormons, Adventists, Moonies, etc. People enter with an open mind, then the leaders forbid them from thinking for themselves again.
And again, I hope you escape to Jesus because that religion doesn't know Him, and the days of escape are getting short.
They actually NEVER admit mistakes. They recently stated “we don’t need to apologize for not getting it exactly right”, I believe that was said at the last annual meeting. Any mistake or change is labeled as “clarification or new light” or they just outright blame the members like they did about 1975
What's interesting to me is that both JW & LDS reject Christianity in opposite, yet still fundamentally Arian, directions. LDS replaces the Trinity with three separate gods, while JW substitutes it with one solitary god.
Here are some important facts that most people don’t know about. The Corporation, aka the organization of the JW created their first custom made new world translation “bible” in 1950, which contained the NT. The KJV that they were using before then was giving them a lot of problems, which is why they needed cease all use of the KJV, and to create their very own custom made “bible,” which had drastic changed all in which were done to support their key doctrines.
Over the years they came up with the many Newer Revised Editions, one of which was the first complete nwt that contained the OT and NT in 1961. Since then newer revised editions have came out. Here are the rest of their New Revised Editions in order: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1984, 2013… all of which contained more and more changes like verses removed, words removed, words changed, new words added, commas and periods moved around, verses restructured, parts of chapters removed, etc.
Im not sure of your point, if your saying that older with no changes is better then i would point out that part of JWs whole point is that they are seeking the most correct translation by constant study of the bible. The English language also changes over time, the reason why old bible translations still stick to words like thee and thou even though no one uses them in normal modern English, additionally with ancient languages scholars of all sorts often change their mind based on new discoveries on how they should be translated into modern language.
Couple this with the fact many older translations were deliberately altered over time to suit the Powerful at the time.
Finally important early versions of the bible such as the dead sea scrolls have been discovered since the original translations were done and can differ in minor ways.
Im not saying that their translation is correct just that what is changed is not the original bible but merely the translation into modern English and that seems entirely reasonable for any version to do that from time to time
I absolutely agree that revisions are necessary in order to be the most accurate translation. The English language shifts, so the most accurate translation for today would not be the most accurate translation if published 50 years ago or 50 years before that.
There are also so many better source texts scholars have access to now and advances in textual criticism that most revisions are better than the copies that preceded them.
I wouldn't hold it against the NWT Committee for pushing out new updates.
That said, there are many reasons to criticize the NWT. They didn't publicly disclose the names of their translators, their credentials, or their translation philosophy, and of the translators that were later named, none of them were experts in the fields of Greek or Hebrew exegesis or translation and none of them even held a degree in any field.
There's a strong argument to be made that the translation of the NWT was commissioned because passages in the KJV contradicted JW doctrine and it was done in house in order to preserve Watch Tower's biases. While that may or may not be exaggerated, they certainly did not take steps to prevent biases in their translation employed by other translation committees.
I picked up a copy of NWT the other day from Goodwill, since it was only a couple bucks and it's at least an interesting piece of history.
@AlexsGoogleAccount It is purposefully changed to support their own key doctrines. Catholic bible does the same. I can give an example or two when I am more free about the nwt changes just from what I looked up on my own without any help. For example, look up things related to the dead, the 144000, the Deity of Christ. Just those alone have all the needed changes to deceive the reader. Maybe if I do spend time doing that research I can put it together like on word perfect, so I won't have to be doing so much research and retyping. I am a busy person and not rather spend so much time on a jw subject as there are other false religions to deal with.
@randommusic4567 I'll get back to this since I just received a comment about this. I'll post some examples to prove my point that those changes were done directly and purposefully to deceive the reader when I have a chance get this down on my desktop rather than on a smartphone.
@@AlexsGoogleAccount THE NWT is in fact faithful to the original Bible texts
Greatly appreciate this objective explanation of their many beliefs now if only so many were not backwards to the Bible. There are merits to few of their actions but most of it sounds like college students tried to fit the church into agnosticism…
Recently they have kinda changed things a bit. Now you can say hello to a disfellowshipped person who comes into the Kingdom Hall. Also the men are allowed to wear beards and women are allowed to wear pants at the Kingdom Hall. Views are constantly changing.
All this being said as a 4 th generation JW in my 60’s recently out, you did an awesome video here🎉🎉. Great work
If someone is considering studying with them and I am ask I will point them to your video
I'm surprised they ever banned saying hello to anyone who came into the Kingdom Hall, JW or not. But still no hello anywhere else, huh?
I actually think it all depends on why a person left the jws. If it had to do with doctrinal issues and you start going to another church then whether you are disfellowshipped or not no one will talk to you. If you just quietly left or were disfellowshipped for some other reason then I’m guessing it would be ok to say hi to those people. Not quite sure of the reasoning there. Do you know much about the Jehovahs witnesses?
Some teachings are similar to Islam .Especially regular prayer , need to adhere to rules and continuously repent for sins .
I do know if it's possible to be jahova witness if it wasn't cult with all their failed prophecies and contradictions
Are mystical religions cults? Is Islam a cult? Where do you draw the line?
Cults have a distinct character. It is brainwashed devotion to some idol and very difficult to leave due to peer pressure and threats of loss.
False predictions are bad, but it doesn't make them a cult. JW is a cult because they refuse Jesus as divine and are devoted to a group of manipulative liars publishing a magazine.
@@americanswanI most have missed communicated. What I meant by "with all their false prophecies" is that that fact is a easy way to dispove them, and if the watch tower didn't hide information and pressure their members it would be hard for people to be a JW
You're generally excellent at being neutral. I know i cannot be neutral about them
My boss is a JW and I know she’s in a cult, but she was open with me about it when we were at work, so I will pray for her salvation and continue to show her who Jesus truly is as I work for her (Colossians 3:23-24)
Most truly I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him.q John 13:16 . Jesus was SENT BY GOD - and called as SERVANT OF GOD. Acts 4:27
WHO IS OVER ALL? Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. GOD and FATHER is OVER/ABOVE ALL and that "All" includes the SON so they are NOT EQUAL
THE BIBLE teaches that Jesus was MADE As Lord and Christ and as Son (ACTS 2:36, Prov 8, HEB 1:5), CREATED/PRODUCED/INSTALLED (Prov 8) , COME INTO BEING/MADE (Mat 21:42 - egeneto) and GIVEN LIFE by the Father - John 5:26 and it uses TODAY (Heb 1:5), and uses future tenses and is a prophecy in Isa 9:6 (Isa 9:6, - WILL BE) . If you are called MADE AND CREATED AND GIVEN LIFE, and NEVER CALLED in the BIBLE as Creator or Maker , then you are A CREATION. ALL FROM THE BIBLE
From the Lord was this (this is referring to the chief cornerstone who is Jesus) , the word WAS is egeneto (made or came into being) - Matthew 21:42 and the exact Greek word used in John 1:3 - MADE, egeneto (came into being) - JESUS WAS MADE/CAME INTO BEING FROM THE FATHER , yes, Jesus was MADE/CREATED!, See also Acts 2:36, Heb 1:5, 1 john 5
Jesus in FACT mentioned the FATHER IS GREATER than I am. JOhn 14:28. BEFORE he WAS SENT, the Father is ALSO GREATER than Jesus.
Most truly I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him.q John 13:16 . Jesus was SENT BY GOD - and called as SERVANT OF GOD. Acts 4:27
AFTER his resurrection the FATHER IS STILL GREATER than Jesus - WHO IS OVER ALL? Ephesians 4:6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. GOD and FATHER is OVER/ABOVE ALL and that "All" includes the SON so they are NOT EQUAL
I was raised this. So glad to be out. Sadly my family is still in it.
Glad you are out. I hope your family sees the light soon!
Praying for them
Jws makes more sense than most other denominations or churches. I've always been drawn to the jw and sda churches over others.
I escaped this cult after 40 years. It's just a cherry picked bible verse doctrine. They ignore anything that doesn't jive with their cult teachings.
How?
@@ramrod576 Yes, you escaped it to reject the Bible and the God of the Bible altogether. You didn't just leave JW, but God Himself.
@@777Tralfaz777 there's zero proof your god beats Thor, Odin, ra, Buddha whoever else.
When you leave a religion you have the mental space to ask yourself important questions. Like, if the god of the bible is real isn't he just tolerating evil at this point? Yes he is. He'd have to be evil himself. Which makes sense because of all the babies he likes to murder.
Or maybe it's just a story. A means to extract riches from the poor. Maybe no one knows what God is, maybe we'll never know. Whatever it is, it's indifferent to us. The truth hurts. That's the truth.
The psycho In the bible... That guy is clearly a man made creation. Jealous, petty, vengeful, breaks his own laws. Kills babies, deals in sex slaves. Generally a disgusting individual. Worship that if you want. I'm not going to. All the bible is is some dudes telling you what they believe based upon a faith they created. Anyone can do this. Anyone.
@@misterauctor7353 Your buddy, ramrod, just spiled his beans. He said about God "The psycho In the bible... That guy is clearly a man made creation."
Is he still your brother? Yes?
I wonder if there is a church that is built based from what critical bible scholars have found out from studying the bible and based on historical findings.
Well microevolution and macroevolution are not scientific but religious terms. In biology, evolution leads to speciation.