The verse in question reads: “After these things I heard what was as a loud voice of a great crowd in heaven. They said: “Praise Jah, you people! The salvation and the glory and the power belong to our God, because his judgments are true and righteous.””

The term “great crowd,” or great multitude as some translations word it, does not always refer to the specific great crowd mentioned at Revelation 7:9. For example, the gospel accounts say that on occasion a great crowd of people followed Jesus. In that same vein, the great crowd of Revelation 19:1 is apparently a multitude of angels and not the same great crowd that are described as coming out of the great tribulation.

Interestingly, on the occasion of Jesus’ birth a great crowd of angels appeared to the shepherds and sang God’s praise as they hovered in mid-heaven. The Worldwide English Version reports that account, saying: “All at once a great number of angels from heaven were with the angel. They were praising God.” A New International Version words it: Suddenly a great company of the heavenly host appeared with the angel, praising God.” So, it is not without precedent that Revelation 19:1 refers to a great multitude of angels offering praises to God.

If we further reason on the matter, the great crowd of Revelation 19:1 is described in the 3rd verse as saying: “Hallelujah!” Literally that expression means “Praise Jah, you people!” If all of mankind is eventually raised to heaven, as many wrongly suppose, then why is the great crowd in heaven giving the command for the peoples to praise Jah? Furthermore, if the earth is depopulated after God’s judgment, why does Revelation 20:7-9 refer to Satan being released from prison at the end of Christ’s thousand-year reign and making an earth-wide assault on the holy ones? Who is living on the earth at that time if everyone is supposedly in heaven?

Jehovah’s Witnesses teach the truth about God’s purpose for a great crowd to survive the end of the world and literally inherit the earth. For more, click here.

Similar to previous questions; if we are to intelligently approach God’s Word, we must recognize that not all things should be read literally. For instance, Deuteronomy 32:5 gives God the title of “The Rock.” Are we then to conclude that God is an inert mineral? Or, what about Hebrews 12:29, that says that “God is also a consuming fire,” ought we then to suppose that God is some sort of super-heated plasma? Thinking persons recognize that the Scriptures speak to us in comparisons. Thus, we grasp the idea that God is like a rock, or he is like a consuming fire in certain specific ways.

By the same token the Bible also uses a common literary device known as personification. That means that things and even intangible concepts are sometimes portrayed as persons. Here are a few examples: When Jehovah tried to warn Cain of the grave moral dangers that were facing him, God personified sin saying that it was crouching at the door, as if craving to pounce upon Cain. Or, another example: the Proverbs say that laziness will invite poverty that will come upon us like an armed robber. One more example: Paul referred to death ruling as a king over mankind. These are biblical examples of personification.

God lives in heaven, yet by means of his dynamic active force he is able to extend his control over the vast reaches of the universe as well as our tiny earth. Because the holy spirit comes from God and causes his Will to be done; it being imbued with God’s own character; always at his service, even speaking for him; it is entirely appropriate that God’s active force be personified at times.

There are other instances, though, where God’s spirit is referred to as an “it.” For example, 1st Corinthians 12:11 says: “But all these operations the one and the same spirit performs, making a distribution to each one respectively just as it wills.” If the holy spirit were a person it would be inappropriate to refer to him as an “it.” Jehovah and Jesus are never referred to that way, and yet the spirit is. By far most references in the Bible to the holy spirit are impersonal.

For more on what the holy spirit is, click here.

The pronunciation of God’s proper name naturally depends upon the language in which it is spoken. But, we may be nearly certain that the divine name was originally pronounced using three syllables and not two, as in Yah-weh. Much is made over the fact that Hebrew was written using only consonants without vowels, similar to our modern technique of abbreviation, whereby the Hebrew reader supplied the correct vowels to complete the word. All Hebrew was written that way and not just the so-called Tetragrammaton—YHWH. Apparently, though, there is no controversy over the correct spelling and pronunciation of hundreds of proper Hebrew names in the Bible. That being the case, many Hebrew names have incorporated part of God’s personal name either as a prefix or suffix. A few examples of how the first two syllables of the Divine name are used as a prefix are, Je-ho-ram, Je-ho-ash, Je-ho-shua, Je-ho-nadab, Je-ho-iakim, Je-ho-iarib, Je-ho-iada, Je-ho-iachin, Je-ho-hanan, Je-ho-shaphat, Je-ho-nathan and Je-ho-ahaz.

Accounting for the fact that the Hebrew “Y” is usually translated as “J” in English, the prevalence of “Je-ho” as a prefix strongly suggests that YHWH was commonly pronounced with three syllables and that the middle vowel affixed to the “H” was an “O,” giving the “H” a ho sound—as in Je-ho-vah. Or if you prefer the Hebrew form: Ye-ho-wah

While the precise pronunciation may have to wait for a future revelation from heaven, the Watchtower is fully justified in using the commonly accepted name of Jehovah. For more on the use of the name of Jehovah, click here.

The context of Isaiah has to do with Jehovah challenging all the would-be-gods of the nations to produce the proof of their godship by demonstrating their ability to declare their purposes before witnesses and then carry out their declarations. In the 45th chapter of Isaiah, Jehovah does that very thing by announcing approximately 200 years in advance that a man named Cyrus would conquer Babylon and liberate the Jews from captivity. That was even before Babylon ascended to world power and before Judah was conquered. So, in that context, God is saying that none of the phony idol gods of the nations were with him in the sense that they had no share in Creation. And not coincidently, Cyrus actually typifies Christ, which is why Jehovah referred to Cyrus as his anointed one.

It should be recognized, though, that myriads of angels were with Jehovah during the creation of the universe. When recounting Creation, Jehovah revealed to Job that all of his angels shouted in applause over his work. God’s Only-begotten Son was with him too, but not as an independent rival god. Jesus’ role in Creation as the Logos was revealed after he came to earth as a man.

For more information regarding the real relationship of Jehovah and Jesus, click here.

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that the body and soul are identical. The soul encompasses the whole person, including our future life’s prospects. Matthew 10:28 indicates that God can destroy both our body and soul, which contradicts the popular notion that the soul is immortal. God’s destroying a soul, by symbolically casting it into the refuse dump of Gehenna, means that that person will never be brought back to life, but will remain nonexistent—dead forever.

For more information on what the Bible teaches about life after death, click here.

All translations have inserted words that do not appear in the original text. It is done in order to convey the meaning of the original expressions. The New World Translation has employed the device of using [brackets] around most inserted words to let the reader know that an equivalent word did not appear in the original language. A few translators use italics for the same purpose, but most are not as forthright as the NWT.

What we want, as readers of the Bible, is to be able to understand the message the way it was intended to be understood—without having translators actually interpret the Bible for us. It is not always easy for translators to deliver. In the case of Colossians 1:15, we want to understand Paul’s words just as clearly as if we were sitting in a congregational gathering with the Colossians when Paul’s letter was originally read aloud. In that primitive setting there would have been no confusion as to whether Jesus was Jehovah. But, because centuries of accumulated Trinitarian dogma have created confusion regarding the relationship of Jehovah and Jesus, the New World translators deemed it necessary to clarify the passage in order to allow the reader the opportunity to understand what Paul actually conveyed concerning Christ’s role in Creation.

In his book, Truth in Translation, Jason David BeDuhn analytically compares modern translations, including the New World Translation, and he specifically examines the controversy regarding the insertion of [other] in the text of Colossians 1:15-17. After pointing out that numerous insertions were made into that very same text in various translations, Beduhn concludes: “And if we, under other conditions, might have said that making the implied “other” explicit is not altogether necessary, we now recognize by the gross distortion of the passage in other translations that what the NT translators have done is certainly necessary after all.” According to a non-JW scholarly researcher, the Watchtower’s New World Translation is justified in inserting [other] into the text at Colossians.

The Name of God was known by the Jews for hundreds of years before Jesus came to earth. As pointed out in answer to the 23rd question, it was quite common for Hebrew parents to name their children some form of the name Jehovah. However, with the coming of the Messiah the Jews were introduced to the Son of Jehovah God. If the Jews wanted to receive any further recognition from Jehovah, they had to honor the Son as well as the Father.

The very verse you cited, Philippians 2:9, explains how and why the name of Jesus became so important. After describing how Jesus humbled himself and became obedient to God’s Will for him, even to death, Paul wrote: “For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.”

The name Jesus does not replace the name of God. The text reveals that God rewarded Christ by exalting him to a superior position and granting him honor above all others. We will leave the burden on the Trinitarian to explain the obvious absurdity that God, somehow, rewarded himself for obeying himself, by giving himself something that he already possessed.

In a brief response to this somewhat unusual and unwieldy question: As regards the so-called “Our Father Prayer,” in the preceding verse Jesus specifically told us not to say the same words over and over again in prayer. But, isn’t that exactly what Catholics are taught to do? However, Jesus did not recite prayers to God and neither do Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Some of the customs and practices of the early Christians were just cultural; the laying on of hands and using anointing oil were common customs back then. Other issues, such as drinking wine or assuming a specific posture when praying, are individual matters. But, yes Jehovah’s Witnesses have deacons, which we call ministerial servants. We eat the Lord’s Evening meal annually on the anniversary of his death. And if there are needy widows and orphans in our congregations, arrangements are made to look after them.

The answer to that question is contained in what the Bible calls a sacred secret. At 1st Corinthians 15:51, Paul revealed that not all of the 144,000 chosen ones belonging to Christ will sleep in death awaiting a resurrection. Paul explained further, in the 4th chapter of 1st Thessalonians, that anointed Christians who are destined to rule with Christ in heaven, but who die before Christ’s parousia begins, must sleep in death until Christ awakens them during the first resurrection, at the start of his parousia. However, Christians living during the time of Christ’s parousia are resurrected instantaneously, as they die—in the twinkling of an eye—as Paul worded it. They do not sleep in gravedom as do their anointed predecessors.

Revelation 14:13 is in harmony with that sacred secret as it indicates that there is a specific point in time when those who die who belong to Christ do not sleep in death. The entire verse reads: And I heard a voice out of heaven say: “Write: Happy are the dead who die in union with the Lord from this time onward. Yes, says the spirit, let them rest from their labors, for the things they did go right with them.”

The expression, “from this time onward,” certainly suggests that before that time the dead in Christ were still dead, and hence could not be declared happy. The verse in question in no way supports the idea of consciousness after death. It shows the very opposite in fact.

First, the Watchtower did not invent the prophecies of the last days and a war called Armageddon. Those prophecies originated within the mind of God and our faith is unfazed that God’s words are certain to eventually come true. Because of our interest in the Bible and its promises of a new world, we have been keenly interested in the outworking of prophecy, particularly as it relates to the return of Christ. The fact that our heightened kingdom expectations have so far led to disappointment does not of itself discredit our faith. For a certainty our failed expectations have been an embarrassment for us and a stumbling block for many, but in that respect it seems that the Watchtower is guilty of falling into nearly the same trap as did the apostles.

Please consider the implications of the account found in the last chapter of the book of John, where we read in the NWT: Accordingly, when he caught sight of him, Peter said to Jesus: “Lord, what will this man do?” Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” In consequence, this saying went out among the brothers, that that disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?”

The man in question was the writer—John. Jesus had just told Peter the sort of death Peter would undergo and Peter wanted to know what would become of their friend John. Jesus’ comment gave the apostles the impression that John would still be alive when Christ returned. Consequently, the account says that the word went out from the apostles among the brothers, to the affect that John would survive to see the Lord’s return.

According to the NIV, the 23rd verse reads: “Because of this, the rumor spread among the brothers that this disciple would not die.”

What is interesting about this is that John wrote his book about 60 years after Christ said those words. Apparently the rumor was as long-lived as the aged apostle himself. We might even suppose that toward the end of his life, the brothers that still believed the rumor took John’s pulse at frequent intervals to gauge the nearness of Christ’s return. The very fact that John, the last-surviving apostle, saw fit to dispel the rumor and set the record straight toward the end of his life, indicates that the rumor the apostles started persisted during the entire apostolic period. The question, then: So what?

Well, the apostles were given authority over the entire organization of believers back then. Their words carried a lot of weight because they personally knew Jesus and could recall to the later believers all the things that Jesus said and did. So, when the apostles spoke, the brothers and sisters listened. And when the apostles started a rumor that John would survive until the coming of Christ, what Christian could doubt their interpretation? But, obviously, the apostles were wrong. They misunderstood Jesus. And their earnest desire to see the realization of Jesus’ promised return inclined them to jump to hasty conclusions.

The misunderstanding that arose is not really any different than what has occurred among Jehovah’s Witnesses with our assumptions concerning the 1914 generation that would not pass away. The apostle John was their generation that would not pass away—before he passed away. And his finally dispelling the rumor is not that much different than what the Watchtower has done by redefining a generation.

Another question we ought to ask is this: Did God judge the apostles as false prophets? No, obviously not. So, if we are honest and straightforward in our reasoning, we will not jump to shallow-minded conclusions about the Watchtower’s past indiscretions and failed expectations. If anything, our premature expectations fit the pattern of those who anxiously await the Master’s return.

The flip side of that question is, If the Name was unimportant why did it appear in the Hebrew Scriptures nearly 7,000 times? And if the name was unimportant to the Jews, to whom it was originally revealed, why are there many dozens of proper Hebrew names that have incorporated God’s name?

There is no question that there has been a centuries-long effort to remove God’s name from the very Book he authored. Bible scholars know that the practice of removing the YHWH began a few hundred years after Christ. And the bias against the personal name of God extends down to this very day and is evidenced by the many translators that have preferred to expunge the sacred Name of the Creator from their particular Bible versions in preference for the non-specific Lord.

Since it is documented that the YHWH was removed from the OT Hebrew Scriptures in later Greek translations, it is more than likely that scribes also removed it when they copied the NT Scriptures as well. The problem is, we have the documents that prove that the name was removed from the translations of the Hebrew, but we do not have ancient original Greek texts or even copies that have the YHWH before it was removed.

But, our reasoning is that since Jesus and all the Bible writers read both the Hebrew and Greek Septuagint, both of which most likely retained the YHWH at that time, and they all quoted specific passages where the Name appears in Hebrew, it is unthinkable that they would not have faithfully pronounced and copied the proper name of God where the Scriptures used it. In those passages in the New Testament where Hebrew texts are quoted that contain the YHWH, the NWT uses the name Jehovah in those places.

In all fairness, even though Jason BeDuhn (cited in the 23rd answer) gives the New World Translation high marks as one of the finest translations available, he does not agree with the Watchtower’s use of the name of Jehovah in the NT either. Of course, such things will be debated until God ultimately settles the controversy, but given the fact that God’s name has been removed from the OT Scriptures, both in ancient and modern times, the benefit of the doubt should weigh in favor of those who would restore the Name to where it seems to them to be appropriate. Isn’t that what we would expect from those who serve as witnesses for Jehovah?

Here is a link to a website that discusses the issue of the name of Jehovah in the NT more deeply.

Here is a link to the Watchtower’s comment on the use of Jehovah in the NT.

The original Greek words used in the Bible, stauros and xylon, mean stake and tree, respectively. There is really not any debate about their meaning. Greek lexicons list the primary meaning of stauros as stake, not cross. Furthermore, the New World Translation is not the only Bible that uses tree instead of cross.  In fact, King James and the popular NIV even translate xylon at Acts 5:30 using the word tree.

Also, there are ancient engravings and statues that depict men hanging from upright poles planted in the ground without cross-beams. There is no evidence that crosses where used as a means of execution. However, the use of the cross as a pagan religious symbol predates Christianity by many centuries and was only later adopted by the Catholic Church as a symbol of Christianity.

Our use of the word torture stake to describe the means by which Christ was executed is not based upon the number of nails that may have been used to fasten him to it. Besides, before Pentecost the apostles made a lot of statements in the Gospel accounts that can only be described as uninspired.

No. But, Jehovah’s Witnesses are hardly unique in that respect. Most religions do not allow much latitude for dissent. Neither did the apostles for that matter. Paul wrote Timothy to “command certain ones not to teach different doctrine, nor to pay attention to false stories and to genealogies, which end up in nothing, but which furnish questions for research rather than a dispensing of anything by God in connection with faith.”

Paul was even more pointed in writing to Titus, saying: “It is necessary to shut the mouths of these, as these very men keep on subverting entire households by teaching things they ought not for the sake of dishonest gain.”

The incredibly bizarre Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation says that the wine and bread representing Christ’s flesh and blood miraculously change into Jesus’ literal flesh and blood once consumed. Some of Christ’s disciples also assumed Jesus was advocating such cannibalism when he told them that they must eat his flesh and drink his blood, which is why they were shocked and refused to follow him any longer. But, in the very next verse in the account of John 6:63, Jesus explains that he was not speaking literally. It reads: “It is the spirit that is life-giving; the flesh is of no use at all. The sayings that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you that do not believe”

If the flesh is of no value when it comes to salvation, as Jesus said, why then do Catholics insist that they must literally eat Jesus’ flesh through the magic of transubstantiation? By taking Jesus’ words literally, Catholics betray their own lack of spiritual discernment. Instead of recognizing that the sayings of Christ are spirit and not physical, Catholics have embraced the very folly that characterizes those who do not believe.

If you insist that the loaf is the actual flesh of Christ, because Jesus said “this is my body,” then what about the next verse where Jesus said, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood.” Are we to assume, then, that the wine is magically transubstantiated into a new covenant inside the stomachs of our Catholic friends? That’s what it says, “this cup is the new covenant.”

For certain, the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation is not only difficult to pronounce, it is hard to stomach as well.

The reader that has persevered up to this point should be able to appreciate the pattern that has emerged, whereby the questioner is inclined to take Bible symbolism and imagery literally.

Revelation is filled with symbolic representations of things both heavenly and earthly. If the questioner supposes that the lake of fire is an actual burning lake, then no doubt the wild beast that is thrown into the lake of fire, along with the Devil, is also quite literal. Following that line of reasoning to its natural conclusion, are we to expect that at some point the Devil will unleash as his secret weapon some gigantic seven-headed monster to terrorize the world; some sort of amphibious multi-headed Godzilla? If that is the case, perhaps “Daniel” from the Catholic Apocryphal may be summoned from mythology to save the day by serving up another grease-soaked hairball to the beast, as he did in the gripping tale of Bel and the Dragon? Or perhaps seven grease-soaked hairballs—one for each head?

Sarcasm aside, there is no need for anyone to expend very much mental energy trying to interpret what the lake of fire symbolizes. The enlightening angel who gave John the Revelation also interpreted his imagery, saying at Revelation 20:14: “This means the second death, the lake of fire.” Or if you prefer: “This is the second death, the lake of fire.”

In order to understand what second death is, we must first understand what the first death is. The first death is the death that we undergo as a result of inherited sin. However, through Jesus’ sacrifice, Jehovah has established the basis for undoing the sting of death, by means of the resurrection. The Bible promises that the so-called Adamic death is going to be abolished, in fact, death is also thrown into the lake of fire. But, after Adamic death is abolished some people who will have been resurrected into paradise will, in the end, receive a resurrection of judgment, as Jesus called it at John 5:29. That means that they will be judged unworthy of continued life on earth. They will die again; for them it will literally be a second death. Unlike the first death, though, the second death is not the result of inherited sin, but rather willful rebellion against God. The second death is permanent. So, that’s what the lake of fire means—everlasting destruction.

For the Devil and others, though, their first death is also their second death; again, meaning permanent annihilation. In that respect Jehovah’s judgment upon Satan is an everlasting sentence. In that sense Satan and his system are tortured knowing beforehand that they will forever be remembered by God and all surviving creatures in complete ignominy.

Click here for the truth about hell and the lake of fire.

The simple truth is that Jehovah and Jesus share several titles. That can be discerned from Psalms 110:1, which reads in the NIV as follows: The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies
a footstool for your feet."

The NIV uses the same device of the old King James Version in using all caps were the YHWH appeared in the original language. So instead of saying “Jehovah said to my Lord,” it reads, “The LORD says to my Lord.” Using your line of reasoning, the Bible says there is only one Lord. So, how is it that one Lord is inviting another Lord to join him?

We must assume that the questioner does not understand the nuances of what it means to be led by God’s spirit—as opposed to being inspired by the spirit to prophesy. To illustrate: 1st Peter 3:18 says that Jesus died in order “that he might lead you to God.” Does following Christ’s lead, though, mean that his followers are inspired to unerringly speak God’s message, as were the Bible’s penmen? No reasonable person would come to that conclusion.

At Revelation 19:10 we are told by an angel that “bearing witness to Jesus is what inspires prophesying.” But, does that mean that Christian evangelizers are inspired in the sense of being able to make prophetic declarations like Jeremiah or Isaiah, or one of the other prophets? No, that’s not what that means at all. It means that when we speak about Christ we naturally bring the Bible’s many prophecies to the fore concerning Christ. Jehovah’s Witnesses bear witness to Christ by announcing Jehovah’s kingdom. And our Christian testimony is inextricably bound up in Bible prophecy. Because we fulfill the Bible’s patterns and prophecies and follow in the steps of the original Christians, in that respect we serve as prophets. But, we are not inspired to make pronouncements other than those that are already recorded in the inspired Scriptures.

It does not appear to be a case of inconsistency, but rather the opposite; the Watchtower consistently makes a distinction between the absolute worship that is to be given to God and the relative worship given to Christ.

But, the underlying issue does not have anything to do with translations or words. Besides, Paul counseled Christians not to fight over words, because such a thing is useless. The real problem has to do with the insidious way in which the worship of God has been subtly subverted and replaced with the worship of saints, angels, the mother of Jesus and Jesus himself. In fact, we would not be too far off the mark to say that the Catholic Church, in particular, has promoted the worship of practically every personage in the New Testament—except Jehovah!

Here is the central issue: Christians are to follow the life and example of Jesus Christ. The question is: Who did Jesus worship? If we can answer that correctly then we are privy to what Paul called a great sacred secret concerning Godly devotion. But, was Christ devoted to himself? Did he worship himself? Was he his own god? If that is the case then following his example of Godly devotion, we would become self-absorbed narcissists. Right? It is appropriate to ask these types of questions because the Trinity doctrine has made an absolute mockery of the religion that Jesus practiced. Yes, that’s right, Jesus had a religion. He worshipped the One whom he specifically called “my God.” What was Jesus’ religion?

Actually the Bible reports to us that Jesus prostrated himself to the One whom he called “the only true God,” his God and his Father. In the account in the Garden of Gethsemane, it says of Jesus: And going a little way forward, he fell upon his face, praying and saying: “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass away from me. Yet, not as I will, but as you will.”

The act of falling upon one’s face is the Hebrew way of saying that a person prostrates themselves flat out in an act of worshipful obeisance. Only someone intent on deceiving themselves would argue that Jesus was not doing an act of worship before the Living God Jehovah.

In the 5th chapter of Hebrews Paul even said that Jesus feared God and that’s why God listened to his prayers and pleadings. The Contemporary English Version (CEV) says of Christ at Hebrews 5:7: “He truly worshiped God, and God listened to his prayers.”

The Scriptures are clear: Jesus worshipped Jehovah. Any teaching to the contrary is a devilish lie. However, in recognition of his Son’s undying devotion to him, Jehovah has decreed that all creatures in heaven and on earth must bow before Jesus and honor him the same way they honor the Father. That’s why the prophetic Psalm advises: “Serve Jehovah with fear and be joyful with trembling. Kiss the son, that He may not become incensed.”

However, our worship of the Son is not to the exclusion of Jehovah God. That’s why the NWT makes the subtle distinction between worship and doing obeisance. Jesus himself would never consent to receiving worship at Jehovah’s expense. In fact, the Scriptures say that Christ’s role as King will eventually come to an end and that all honor paid to him will eventually revert back to God. That’s what Paul was foretelling at 1st Corinthians 15:27-28, which reads: For God “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that it is with the exception of the one who subjected all things to him. But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.

If the glorious Christ Jesus, to whom every knee in heaven and on earth will eventually bend in subjection, himself bends his knee, so-to-speak, in subjecting himself to God, it is evident that Jesus not only worships God, but that the worship given Christ is not absolute.

Jehovah’s Witnesses honor the Father and the Son, not by binding them together in the same personage of an incomprehensible triune godhead, but by honoring Christ and following his example, we honor the God who gave birth to Jesus and appointed him as our King and Savior.

It is the duty of the translator to help the reader sort through the confusion caused by the blasphemous Trinity dogma in order to assist us to see the distinction between the Lord Jesus and the Lord Jehovah. Most translations have contributed to muddling the truth. The NWT has been an invaluable aid to help people see more clearly the true relationship that exists between Jehovah and Jesus.

To find out how to get a personal copy of the New World Translation, click here.

If “ego eimi” were translated at John 8:54 in the NWT to read as a title, “I Am,” like most translations render it, then, it too would be guilty of rendering a grammatically tortured and nonsensical passage. The question Jehovah’s Witnesses pose to you is: Why have other translations been inconsistent in translating “ego eimi”? For instance, one of the proof texts you cited reads in the NIV:  (Actually John 6:35, instead of verse 34) "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.”

In that verse “ego eimi” is translated to read as a mere pronoun and verb. What justification is there, then, for the translator to render that very same phrase as if it were a title synonymous with the name of Jehovah, as they have done at John 8:58? There is no justification.

If Jesus intended to take the title of “I Am,” he would have said something like, ‘Before Abraham lived, I was the I Am.’ As it stands, converting the “am” into a proper noun leaves the sentence without any sort of modifying verb for the pronoun. That is why John 8:58 in most translations is mere gibberish, unless you imagine that Jesus suddenly started speaking in some sort of Ebonics. If the concocted title of “I Am” at John 8:58 is simply another name of God, then we ought to be able to substitute the word God or Jehovah and get the same sense. So, read the verse in question substituting “I Am” with God and what do you get? The NIV would read: “Before Abraham was born, God”

You don’t have to be a Greek scholar to appreciate that the translation of ego eimi as “I Am” is a hackneyed and clumsy attempt by Trinitarians to prop up a limp doctrine that cannot stand up on its own. The truth is that the expression in question can denote a past action and according to the context, Jesus was asked about his past. The NWT is not the only translation to realize this. The New Living Translation (NLT) nicely phrases it, saying: The people said, "You aren't even fifty years old. How can you say you have seen Abraham?"
58Jesus answered, "The truth is, I existed before Abraham was even born!"

The Watchtower is perfectly justified in translating ego eimi as “I have been.”

As pointed out in previous answers, Jehovah and Jesus share titles, although there are subtle differences. Alpha and Omega, the Greek equivalent to saying A to Z in English, is a descriptive title that Jehovah and Jesus may share, but for different reasons. Jehovah is the ultimate First and Last, in that he is the only person in existence that had no beginning. And, he alone innately possesses immortality and life in himself. No one gave Jehovah life, but he gives life to all others, including his firstborn and only-begotten Son.

As the firstborn Son of all Creation, Jesus is unique among all of God’s sons, in that he was the first and only creature directly created by Jehovah. All [others] were created through the Son. That is why, in fact, that Jesus is called the only-begotten Son of God. Jesus is also the first creature raised from the dead to immortality. That’s why the Bible calls him the “firstborn from the dead.” At Colossians 1:18, Paul said of Christ: “He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that he might become the one who is first in all things.” The next verse goes on to show that it pleased God to make his son first in all things.

Jesus is “last” in the sense that he will never be surpassed in glory by any fellow creature. He will always be the closest to Jehovah.  

There was no punctuation in the original, so it is up to the translator to determine how best to make sense of it. Since a doctrinal matter involving the nature of the soul and the resurrection is involved, the NWT translators placed the comma after today, so as to read: “Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise.” Other translations, though, place the comma after the first “you,” which causes the sentence to read as if Christ was promising the impaled evildoer that he would be in paradise that very day. Which translation is correct? The NWT is correct because Christ simply could not have been in paradise that day, nor the day after that, nor the day after that. Jesus died that day. And just like Jonah was in the belly of the huge fish for three days, so Jesus was entombed in the earth for parts of three days. Some translations even say that Jesus was in hell. Most reasonable people would likely be in agreement that there is a big difference between paradise and hell.

Since Jesus is the firstborn from the dead, it is impossible that the impaled evildoer was resurrected to paradise before Christ came back to life. The truth is: the evildoer is still dead, waiting to hear the voice of the Son of man calling him to life in paradise, just as Jesus promised him that day.

Trinitarian believers have always said that the Trinity is an inexplicable mystery and cannot be explained. We wish they would just leave it at that. The problem is, that they try to explain the special relationship between Jehovah and Jesus in terms of the incomprehensible Trinity, and, in so doing, make a mess of the truth.

The simple truth of God is not mysterious at all. It is wonderful. And it is so simple that a child barely old enough to speak can understand it. Jehovah is the Father. Jesus is his Son. It is that simple. And like a good father teaches his son and helps him learn a craft or trade, and ultimately gives him his inheritance, so it is that Jehovah taught his firstborn son everything there is to know about himself, and empowered the pre-human Jesus to create all other things. Jesus has inherited the very throne of God, not because he is God himself, but because God loved him as a son and graciously showered upon him everything.

The Trinity is one of the most evil doctrines ever conceived because it prevents us from truly appreciating the great love that exists between Jehovah and Jesus. The Trinity is obviously a device of Satan the Devil, because the unfortunate soul steeped in the absurd notion that Jesus is God has no basis for understanding the fundamental reason why Jesus sacrificed his life in the first place.

The issue that the Devil raised in Eden, and later on in the book of Job, brought into question the sincerity of worship of all of God’s creatures. Satan basically challenged God before all of Creation that no one worshipped God because they loved him, but only because God hands out all the goodies to his children. The issue was not whether God loves himself, but whether his intelligent Creation loves him.

That’s where Jesus comes into the picture. He left his privileged place in heaven to stand before the Devil in answer to his challenge. That’s why the Devil wasted no time in tempting him right after he was baptized as the Messiah. The scripture says that God cannot be tempted. Surely Satan knew that. But, the Devil knew Jesus was temptable. That’s why, among other things, he made the tempting offer to give him all the kingdoms of the world for a mere act of worship. Paul wrote to the Hebrews that Jesus was tested in every respect.

For Jesus’ faith and obedience to God to mean anything, it had to be possible for him to be unfaithful and to disobey God. The reason God rewarded Jesus is because he made the right choice.

And should we suppose that that means that Jesus was God? How then do we account for the fact that the Bible says very simply that no man has ever seen God? King James says: “No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

The expression “with us is God” should not mystify us. It is actually a very common thing to wish God’s blessing upon others by saying something like ‘May God be with you.’ In Spanish, the word for goodbye, “adios,” literally means ‘go with God.’ No one in their right mind, though, confuses the person for God himself. Jehovah could be said to be with the Jews in the person of Jesus because everything Jesus did was representative of his Father. In fact Hebrews 1:3 says that Jesus was the “exact representation” of the Father. A representation is not the same as the original, but an exact representation is as good as the real thing. That is why Jesus said that “if you have seen me you have seen the Father,” because he was just like Jehovah in every respect—‘a chip off the old block’—as the expression goes.

Actually, the Bible speaks of many saviors. For example, Judges 3:15 says: “And the sons of Israel began to call to Jehovah for aid. So Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Ehud the son of Gera, a Benjamite, a left-handed man.” Also David is called a savior at 1st Samuel 23:5: “Accordingly David went with his men to Keilah and fought against the Philistines and drove off with their livestock, but struck them down with a great slaughter; and David came to be the savior of the inhabitants of Keilah.”

Also, in prophecy, Obadiah the 21st verse speaks of Christ’s associate kings as saviors: “And saviors will certainly come up onto Mount Zion, in order to judge the mountainous region of Esau; and the kingship must become Jehovah’s.”

Isaiah 19:20 is a prophecy related to God’s final judgment, and it explains how Christ becomes our savior, it reads: “And it must prove to be for a sign and for a witness to Jehovah of armies in the land of Egypt; for they will cry out to Jehovah because of the oppressors, and he will send them a savior, even a grand one, who will actually deliver them.”

Just as Jehovah provided the ancient Hebrews with saviors, he has provided Jesus Christ as the agent of our salvation. To better understand the role Christ plays as savior, we merely have to read the Gospel and note how many times Jesus said that his Father sent him forth and that he did noting of his own initiative but only did what he had beheld his Father doing. Jesus is a savior because Jehovah, the ultimate Savior, provided his Son as such.

For more about what Jehovah’s Witnesses teach about Christ being our Savior, click here.

The Bible plainly says that Jesus was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit. However, the apostles could not then comprehend the heavenly, spiritual nature of God’s kingdom. They thought in physical terms—as do you.

The apostles never would have grasped that Jesus had gone to heaven unless he first materialized before them, cloaking himself in flesh to first convince them he was alive, and then, afterwards, ascending to heaven in their view. However, long after Jesus had returned to heaven he appeared to Paul. In that encounter, Jesus was definitely not human. He was a spirit more glorious in appearance than the sun. In fact, Paul was blinded for three days by the close encounter he had with Christ on the road to Damascus.

Jesus appeared to his disciples on many occasions after his resurrection. In each instance he appeared in a different body, that his disciples did not recognize. In each instance, the disciples were called upon to recognize Christ for what he said rather than by his appearance. Jehovah forced them to think in terms of the spirit rather than by fleshly sight. The only exception was when Jesus appeared on one occasion bearing the marks of his impalement, which was done specifically to confront Thomas, who had previously announced that he would never accept the evidence of Christ’s resurrection unless he could personally feel his wounds.

There is a saying: If a tree falls in the forest with no one around, does it make any sound?

The point is: we might assume that it does make a crashing sound, but if no one is there to hear it, can it be proven and does it really matter?

By the same token, if God lived in complete solitude for an eternity before becoming Creator, who could have appreciated his wisdom? Like the tree falling in a forest with no one around, what difference does it make? Jesus is rightly called the beginning of God’s achievements from long ago because he was the first creation that could appreciate the wisdom that Jehovah inherently possesses.

That’s what the Sadducees must have been asking themselves too. The Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, and that’s why they were questioning Jesus about it. The issue was not whether man had an undying immortal soul but whether the dead would ever live again at some time in the future. That’s why the Sadducees asked: “Consequently, in the resurrection, of which one of them does she become wife”?

Jesus explained that they are raised up from the dead because to God it is as if they never died, because they are living in his memory. That is the point. The 14th chapter of Job describes the utter nothingness of death, but in verse 15 Job said that God would have a yearning for his dead creations. If God yearns to see the dead again, that means that they are still alive in his memory.

In Matthew’s account, Jesus told the Sadducees that they knew neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. We must conclude the same thing about those today who would twist the Scriptures to support nonsensical doctrines like the immortal soul. Jehovah’s Witnesses teach the truth about death and the resurrection.

These are the questions that spring from a mind that is incapable of grasping metaphor. How should we understand Genesis 4:10, where God said to Cain after he killed his brother: “Listen! Your brother’s blood is crying out to be from the ground?” Are we to suppose that the red blood cells possess some capacity we are not aware of that allows blood to silently communicate with God? More reasonably, isn’t that simply a graphic way of saying that Abel’s spilled blood demanded God to establish justice in his case by avenging his murder?

Since that is obviously the case, Revelation 6:9 uses that same sort of allusion to symbolize how Jehovah must eventually avenge the deaths of his anointed sons at the war of Armageddon.

Abraham “saw” Christ’s day, in that he experienced the fulfillment of God’s promise to produce a son. If you recall, Jehovah promised Abraham that Sarah would give birth even though she was long past child-bearing age. But, God kept his word and miraculously gave him Isaac. Jesus’ birth was also a miracle of God. So, it was the very same miracle-working God who produced Jesus that first caused the birth to Isaac. In that sense Abraham saw Christ’s day in that he rejoiced in the miraculous birth of the heir of Christ.

Not only that, but Abraham “saw” Christ’s day by attempting to offer up his only begotten son of Sarah. In that respect, Paul said that Abraham acted out a prophetic drama, which obviously foreshadows Jehovah sacrificing his only-begotten Son.

The table of Abraham is a reference to the kingdom of God. That’s because the covenant that Jehovah originally made with Abraham is what ultimately produces the messianic kingdom. For example, Paul addressed the non Jewish anointed sons of God as the actual seed of Abraham. Galatians 4:26-29 reads: You are all, in fact, sons of God through your faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one perso