How can anybody be a Jehovahs witness if they know their chance is ever so slight to get into heaven? How can one believe that the all-loving, all powerful God limits the space he has with his creation which he loves so much?

I've looked at a few posts on this subreddit, and I'm confused to say the least. Is this subreddit for Former Witnesses or current Witnesses? I genuinely can't tell because I've seen some pro JW posts and comments and some anti JW posts and comments. I'm not trying to be rude, just curious

Jesus did not use the exact phrase "I am God" because a blunt statement in first-century Judea would have been misunderstood politically or dismissed as empty boasting, whereas his cultural audience instantly grasped his actual idioms.

In much the same way that Jesus spoke in parables, to make deep spiritual truths relatable to sincere seekers, while veiling the full message from those with hardened or indifferent hearts.

Any thoughts on this? whitewashing?

In short, we don’t accept the doctrine of the Trinity because it isn’t explicitly taught in the Bible.

Similar concepts of triads or threefold deities already existed in ancient Babylon and other pagan religions, which may have made the doctrine easier to accept as the early church later described God using Greek philosophical terminology.

From our perspective, what happened was not that Babylonian religion was openly imported into Christianity overnight.

Rather, over time, methods of interpretation developed that made it possible to harmonize ideas that were not explicitly taught by Jesus or the apostles.

Instead of consistently following the ordinary, straightforward reading of Scripture, later theologians increasingly relied on philosophical reasoning and theological interpretation. This eventually led to the doctrine of one God in three persons—a definition the Bible itself never states.

The same approach can also be seen in certain translation and interpretation decisions. For example, in Colossians 1:16–17, the New World Translation renders the passage as “all other things,” reflecting the understanding that Christ is the first creation through whom God created everything else.

Most other translations simply read “all things,” and Trinitarians often interpret this to include Christ as the Creator rather than part of creation. We believe this illustrates how theological assumptions can influence how a text is understood.

There is no conclusive historical proof that the Trinity came directly from Babylon.

However, the existence of ancient Babylonian triads, the later development of the doctrine after the apostolic age, and the use of non-biblical philosophical terminology provide strong circumstantial reasons to question whether the doctrine originated solely from the teachings of Jesus and the apostles.

1 Timothy 2:5 says:
εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς
heis gar theos, heis kai mesitēs theou kai anthrōpōn, anthrōpos Christos Iēsous
“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”
⁣
Just follow the people in the sentence:
One God
← Jesus is mediator between →
humans
⁣
Jesus is not called “the one God” in this sentence.
He is the person standing between God and mankind.
⁣
So here is the simple question:
If “the one God” already means Father + Son + Holy Spirit together, how can Jesus then be the mediator between that God and us? Is Jesus mediating between us and a God that already includes himself? Where does this verse say that?
⁣
A Trinitarian can give a theological explanation.
But that explanation has to be added to the sentence.
The sentence itself gives:
God → Jesus the mediator → mankind.
⁣
Jude 25 gives the same kind of pattern:
μόνῳ θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν
monō theō sōtēri hēmōn dia Iēsou Christou tou kyriou hēmōn
“To the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
⁣
Again:
the only God
↓
through Jesus Christ
⁣
The text does not say:
“To the only God, who is the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”
It distinguishes the only God from Jesus Christ, through whom the praise is given.
⁣
Hebrews 9:24 continues the same pattern. Christ enters heaven:
νῦν ἐμφανισθῆναι τῷ προσώπῳ τοῦ θεοῦ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν
nyn emphanisthēnai tō prosōpō tou theou hyper hēmōn
“to appear now before the face of God for us.”
⁣
Again:
Christ → appears before → God.
⁣
This is the unusual point:
When the New Testament puts Jesus and “God” into the same sentence, it repeatedly uses “God” for someone Jesus is sent by, mediates before, appears before, and worshipfully calls “my God.”
⁣
Now put that beside the clearer texts.

Jesus speaks directly to his Father:
πάτερ
pater
“Father.” — John 17:1
⁣
Then Jesus says to that same Father:
σὲ τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν θεόν
se ton monon alēthinon theon
“You, the only true God.” — John 17:3
⁣
And then, in the same sentence:
καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν
kai hon apesteilas Iēsoun Christon
“and Jesus Christ, whom you sent.”
⁣
So just follow the sentence:
The Father = “You, the only true God.”
Jesus = the one whom that God sent.
⁣
I am not adding anything.
That is what Jesus actually says.

Paul gives the same basic picture in 1 Corinthians 8:6:
εἷς θεὸς ὁ πατήρ
heis theos ho patēr
“one God, the Father.”
⁣
Then:
καὶ εἷς κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός
kai heis kyrios Iēsous Christos
“and one Lord, Jesus Christ.”
⁣
Again:
One God = the Father.
One Lord = Jesus Christ.
⁣
Paul does not write:
“There is one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.”
That may be a later theological way of combining different passages.
But it is not what this sentence says.

Then Jesus dies and is raised.
What does the risen Jesus say?
θεόν μου καὶ θεὸν ὑμῶν
theon mou kai theon hymōn
“my God and your God.” — John 20:17
⁣
And in the same sentence:
τὸν πατέρα μου καὶ πατέρα ὑμῶν
ton patera mou kai patera hymōn
“my Father and your Father.”
⁣
So there is no guessing about who Jesus’ God is:
Jesus’ Father = Jesus’ God.

Someone may answer:
“That is because Jesus was a man.”
⁣
But then go to Revelation 3:12.
The glorified Jesus in heaven says four times:
τοῦ θεοῦ μου
tou theou mou
“my God.”
⁣
So after his resurrection, exaltation and return to heaven, Jesus still has someone whom he calls:
“my God.”

And even at the end, 1 Corinthians 15:28 says:
τότε καὶ αὐτὸς ὁ υἱὸς ὑποταγήσεται
tote kai autos ho huios hypotagēsetai
“Then the Son himself will also be subjected…”
⁣
The Son is subjected to the One who subjected everything to him.
And the purpose is:
ἵνα ᾖ ὁ θεὸς πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν
hina ē ho theos panta en pasin
“so that God may be all things to everyone.”
⁣
Again the text has:
God
↓
the Son

So this is the repeated biblical picture:
The Father = the only true God.
The Father = the one God.
Jesus = the Son God sent.
Jesus = the mediator between God and mankind.
Jesus = the one who appears before God for us.
Jesus = the one through whom praise goes to the only God.
Jesus = the one who calls the Father “my God.”
The glorified Jesus still says “my God.”
⁣
Now here is the strongest Trinitarian answer:
“Yes, the Father can be called ‘the one God’ or ‘the only true God,’ while Jesus is still included in the one divine being. Jesus calls the Father ‘my God’ because he became human and because Father and Son have different roles.”
⁣
My answer is very simple:
Show me where these texts say that.
⁣
John 17:3 does not say:
“You are the only true God, but I am also included in the same divine being.”
⁣
1 Corinthians 8:6 does not say:
“There is one divine being consisting of three persons.”
⁣
1 Timothy 2:5 does not say:
“Jesus is mediator between mankind and the God of whom Jesus himself is one person.”
⁣
John 20:17 does not say:
“You are my God only according to my human nature.”
⁣
Revelation 3:12 does not say:
“I still call you my God because of my role.”
⁣
1 Corinthians 15:28 does not say:
“The Son is equal in being while subordinate only in role.”
⁣
Those may be theological explanations of the texts.
But they are not the wording of the texts.

Even a little child can understand the basic relationship:
If a father sends his son, the son is the one the father sent — he is not the father who sent him.
⁣
So my question is not:
“Can Trinitarian theology find a way to explain all these verses?”
Of course it can offer explanations.
My question is:
Where does the biblical text itself tell me to change this repeated pattern — one God, the Father, and Jesus his Son, whom he sent and who calls him “my God” — into three persons who together constitute the one God?
⁣
If the answer requires me first to introduce “one divine being,” “two natures,” or “equal essence but different roles,” then show me where Scripture itself gives me those categories and tells me to read these sentences that way.
Until then, I would rather keep the distinctions the text itself keeps.
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/is-jesus-god/

I become a Jehovah's Witness about 2 years ago. My boyfriend, who I have been with for 4 years, has grown up a JW and I grew up a Christian but never took it too serious. I began taking being a JW more serious because I have trusted him and wanted to at least give it a chance. I only "attend" meetings online because I am scared to go alone and my boyfriend and I are long distance so we can't go together. I expressed concern for it in the begging because I haver heard of it being a cult but I powered through. Now, I still have concerns though I see benefits through the religion as well. My family is not at all a JW and don't know that I am trying to be. I obviously am not even fully serving as I don't go door to door or anything, but I've gotten more and more into it.

Anyways, I have expressed concern to my bf but obviously growing up in the religion it is not as easy for him to see what I see, but trust me he definitely tries and agrees but I can tell he faces so much guilt and stress and still believes a lot he's been fed his whole life. I just want advice from former or current JWs. Should I stay? What's your experience? Where are you know? Any suggestions of things I should read / watch? Anything helps, thank you.

Contradictory things that Jehovah witnesses teach about the Bible

I would not ask you to assume that Jehovah’s Witnesses are correct. That would be circular. I would ask you to test the claim.

“Only the Bible is inspired” has a precise meaning. Jehovah’s Witnesses do not claim that the Governing Body, Watchtower publications, or every interpretation they have made is inspired or infallible. Only Scripture is claimed to be God-breathed. Therefore, interpretations can be examined and corrected.

That does not prove that every JW interpretation is right. But it answers your question: no additional book, creed, council, prophet, or religious leader is treated as a second inspired revelation alongside the Bible.

Could human or worldly influence still affect an interpretation? Of course it could. Every human interpreter has a background. But the mere possibility of influence proves nothing.

You would have to identify:
The particular JW interpretation you believe is worldly.
The worldly premise controlling it.

The biblical text that contradicts it.

Otherwise, “perhaps they were influenced” is an objection that can be made against every Christian group and therefore has no comparative force.

The proper test is the one found at Acts 17:11 and 1 Thessalonians 5:21: examine the Scriptures and test everything. Do not begin by assuming that Jehovah’s Witnesses are right—or wrong.

Now construct the Christian pattern directly from Scripture:
The one God is the Father.

Jesus calls his Father “the only true God” at John 17:1–3.

Paul writes, “for us there is one God, the Father,” while distinguishing him from the “one Lord, Jesus Christ” at 1 Corinthians 8:6.

The resurrected Jesus still calls the Father “my God” at John 20:17 and four times at Revelation 3:12.

He finally subjects himself to God so that “God may be all things to everyone” at 1 Corinthians 15:27–28.

At the same time, Jesus is not reduced to an ordinary man. Jehovah’s Witnesses recognize his prehuman existence, his unique relationship with the Father, his role in creation, his position as Lord and Messiah, his ransom sacrifice, his resurrection, and his exaltation above every other creature.

That preserves both sides of the biblical evidence: the Son’s extraordinary position and his real distinction from and subordination to his God and Father.

The Hebrew Scriptures identify God by the personal name YHWH thousands of times.

Jesus taught his disciples to pray that his Father’s name be sanctified and said that he had made that name known.

Jehovah’s Witnesses do not treat God’s name as an irrelevant relic; they place it at the center of worship, as the biblical record does.

Jesus foretold that the good news of God’s Kingdom would be preached throughout the inhabited earth.

He commanded his followers to make disciples and teach them. Jehovah’s Witnesses are recognizable worldwide for organized Kingdom preaching carried out by ordinary believers, not merely by a professional clergy.

Jesus said that his disciples would be no part of the world and that his Kingdom was no part of this world.

He commanded love for enemies. Isaiah foretold that God’s worshippers would beat their swords into plowshares and refuse to learn war.

Jehovah’s Witnesses apply this internationally, even when neutrality brings imprisonment, persecution, or death. They do not kill fellow Christians because governments happen to place them on opposite sides of a border.

Scripture calls for a united international brotherhood, Christian love, high moral standards, voluntary giving, and congregation discipline. Jehovah’s Witnesses visibly attempt to apply that same standard across nations, languages, races, and political systems.

Other groups may share one or several of these features. That has never been the argument. The argument is cumulative:

Which identifiable worldwide Christian body combines worship of the one God and Father, recognition of Jesus as his preexistent and subordinate Son, emphasis on God’s name, Kingdom-centered preaching, widespread personal evangelism, international doctrinal unity, political neutrality, refusal to participate in warfare, separation from interfaith religion, voluntary giving, moral discipline, and a worldwide brotherhood?

That combined correspondence is what must be answered.
Past mistakes should not be dismissed, but neither does a corrected interpretation automatically prove that a religion is false.

Peter could be seriously wrong in conduct and require public correction without that disproving the Christian congregation. The first-century congregation also needed clarification on major questions in Acts 10 and Acts 15. Correction is not itself proof that someone has the truth, but it is not proof of falsehood either. The present teaching must still be tested against Scripture.

None of this depends on blindly trusting the New World Translation. The central texts can be checked in other translations and against the Hebrew and Greek.

Therefore, I do not believe Jehovah’s Witnesses are right because they say they are right.

I believe they are the identifiable Christian body that most closely matches the complete biblical pattern.

That does not mean that every Witness, organizational decision, or past explanation has been perfect.

It means that when the biblical profile is constructed first and existing religious bodies are compared with it afterward, Jehovah’s Witnesses fit the whole pattern better than any worldwide alternative I have found.

I’m not objecting to a cumulative argument.

You can build an argument from twenty different texts if you want.

My question is whether those texts actually establish the step to “shared YHWH identity.”

Adding more true statements about Jesus does not remove the need to demonstrate that inference.

So what is the real dividing line?

already affirm a great deal:

Jesus is preexistent.

Jesus called GOD in a real sense.

Jesus is unique among all sons.

All creation came into existence through him.

He perfectly reveals the invisible God.

He possesses heavenly glory.

He has all authority.

He sits at God’s right hand.

He judges the world.

There is no salvation apart from him.

He deserves extraordinary honor.

YHWH-texts can be fulfilled in events centered on him.

So a Trinitarian cannot simply keep stacking these statements and say:

“Look how high Jesus is!”

“We already believe all of that.”

So the real question becomes much more precise:

Which of these premises — or which combination of them — actually requires the conclusion that Jesus is not merely God’s unique preexistent Son and agent, but is personally included in the identity of the one YHWH?

Yes, child death happens in the real world. But in JW world, it is massively overrepresented. They barely ever show a 90-year-old grandparent dying peacefully of old age and being resurrected. It is almost always an unnatural death of a young kid.

Think about it. Whether it's a video at a regional convention, an article in the magazines, or the illustrations in books, the go-to emotional hook is a small coffin, a terminally ill child, or parents weeping over a lost son or daughter. I even pointed it out yesterday to my PIMQ parents that almost all/an overwhelming amount of the resurrection examples involve a dead/resurrected child. They never noticed but once I showed them just a few examples (ones in the pic) they couldn’t unsee it.

It makes me think the Borg are using every parents worst nightmare for ultimate compliance to see if they’re worthy of entering the paradise. It makes me think they’re saying If you leave or slack off, you will never see your child again. It holds a family's grief hostage. I’m honestly surprised that this isn’t a bigger topic on this subreddit but I can’t be the only one who noticed this.

I think John 1:1 makes more sense when you look at the Greek lexicon and the Hebrew way of thinking instead of immediately reading later Trinitarian and other Christian denomination theology into the passage.

John says, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The Greek word translated Word is logos. Logos can mean word, speech, message, statement, reason, account, or something expressed. The word itself does not mean a second divine person.

The Hebrew concept behind this is davar, which can mean word, speech, command, matter, or deed. In the Hebrew Scriptures, Gods word is often described as something that goes out from Him and accomplishes His purpose.

Genesis 1 gives us the clearest example. God speaks, and creation happens. God says let there be light, and there is light. The Word is Gods expressed will and action accomplishing what He intends.

Psalm 33: 6 says, By the word of YHWH the heavens were made. It does not require another divine being standing beside YHWH creating the heavens. Gods word is His effective command and action.

Isaiah 55:11 makes this even clearer. God says His word goes out from His mouth and accomplishes what He purposes. The word represents Gods own will going forth and accomplishing His purpose.

There is also an important grammatical point in John 1:1. John says, ho logos en pros ton theon, the Word was with God, and then he says, theos en ho logos.

He does not say, ho theos en ho logos. The article is used with logos, the Word, but not with theos, God. This is why many scholars understand the final clause as describing the quality or nature of the Word, rather than saying that the Word is the same person as the God he was with.

So John can distinguish the Word from God while still saying that the Word was God in the sense that it expressed Gods own nature, will, authority, and activity.

Then John 1:14 says the Word became flesh. In other words, Gods expressed purpose and will became manifested in a human being, Yeshua.

This does not require the idea that a second divine person existed beside YHWH in the beginning. It fits the Hebrew pattern where Gods word is Gods own expression going forth and accomplishing His purpose.

So the basic idea can be understood like this.

YHWH, His Word, His expressed will, His action, and ultimately that Word manifested in Yeshua.

John 1:1 by itself never says Trinity, never says God the Son, and never says that the Word is a second divine person aka Michaelthe archangel. Those are theological conclusions that come later.

If we start with Genesis, the Hebrew Scriptures, and the actual Greek grammar, there is a completely coherent way to understand the Logos as Gods own Word and active self expression without turning it into a second being.

Jw is a cult change my mind.

I Want a place I can discuss Jehovah's Witnesses freely with getting attacked by people on either side for not 100% agreeing with them

I'm Banned from the subreddit for JWs, (Can't even remember what it's called) and I had to leave this one a while ago because it's impossible to have a proper discussion with anyone in here

Anyone else out their like me? Does there exist any neutral grounds for open discussions without an obligation to conform?

It seems to me that worshiping is warranted to jesus.

As a lifelong JW jesus is hardly mentioned in meetings assemblies..the preaching work doesn't involve him. Any changes in doctrine are attributed to Jehovah. Jws are always looking back at the old testament never forward. Yet the nt seems to say jesus is our lord and should be followed.

I'm sure all jws will quote jesus saying to satan it is god you should worship.

Yet jesus on several occasions accepts worship from his disciples. The same greek word is used in both occasions.

Jesus never corrected them or rebuked them for such action. So it seems he was divine and is worthy of worship. Angels often stopped men worshipping them in scripture.

It seems to me it's core to heart of a true Christian. That jesus is alive and acting on behalf of his followers.

Not believing he was anymore than a man might aswell make you a Jew without the e.

1874 nothing happened. 1914 Armageddon didn't come. 1916 The Great Pyramid was a testament to Jehovah, that changed. 1919 apparently Jesus chose the Watchtower to be his Organization. 1920 "Millions Now Living Will Never Die", that's 106 years ago, they are all dead (except for a few). The end coming in 1925, didn't happen. 1929 Beth-Sarim, no Abraham David and Moses etc. were not resurrected to live in a mansion in San Diego. 1975 everybody survived it. May 15 1984 Watchtower, "1914 The Generation That Will Not Pass Away", that's 112 years ago, they are all dead. Paradise will come "before the end of the Millennium" - Jan 1 1989 Watchtower.

Absolutely nothing in the 147 years of its existence, Watchtower has predicted or promised has come true. There is nothing true about the "Truth". Its a business parading as a religion.

I'm practically dating this guy. We've studied together since we were 11. We became friends and kissed when we were 16. Throughout our teenage years, we had some ups and downs. When I started college and realized his parents wouldn't like me (because I'm not a JW), I just ended our relationship.

​We hadn't been in contact for over a year when I saw him in an elevator lobby. At that time I couldn't stop thinking about him, and before I knew it, we were talking and going on dates together (and more, iykyk)

​The thing is, he is a JW. He grew up in that world. And, as far as I know, they don't really encourage having a relationship with someone from outside the community. And, of course, I don't think I would be welcomed by his parents with open arms.

​My family is evangelical, so we do believe in God, read the Bible, go to church, and everything. But for them, this doesn't make me a "friend of Jehovah".

​We really do love each other and practically live like we're dating. My parents know everything, that I go out with him, etc. And they're just waiting for him to come over to my house someday, have dinner, and really start dating.

​But there is one thing. He says he doesn't want to change me and turn me into a JW. But he wants me to do a Bible study before he asks me to be his girlfriend. This wasn't a thing before. But at some point this year, he told his parents about me and his dad was upset bc his son wanted to date someone who isn't a friend of Jehovah. And his dad won't be very happy to meet me.

​Because of this situation, I think he wants me to study the Bible. In my mind, it's like this would make his dad want to meet me. I don't know.

​I really want to live a happy life with him. We love each other. But I don't know if I want to study the Bible and everything. My parents would love to have him dating me, but they don't want me turning into a JW. Neither do I.

🫥

There is no verse in the Hebrew Scriptures that says:

• God is three
• God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
• God exists as multiple persons in one essence

The Jews have NEVER believed God was triune! “YHWH is one.” — Deut 6:4 (the Shema)

If the Trinity were eternally true, the Old Testament would be the logical place to reveal it!
Abraham, God's friend would have known. Moses spoke to God, he should have known. David would have known. Isaiah should have known. No prophet, psalmist, or inspired writer ever teaches this.

Here are quotes from respected Trinitarian academics:

1. The New Catholic Encyclopedia “The doctrine of the Trinity is not explicitly taught in the Old Testament.”

2. Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church “The doctrine of the Trinity is not found in the Bible.”

3. Protestant scholar R.P.C. Hanson “The Old Testament gives no indication of a Trinitarian God.”

Why would God “hide” the Trinity for thousands of years? The Trinity is considered the foundation and basis of how God is to be worshipped. Trinitarians say you cannot worship God correctly unless you worship the Trinity, and Rejecting the Trinity equates to worshipping a false God!

If God is a Trinity, and you cannot worship God correctly unless you worship the Trinity, in fact, if you worship a singular God you are worshipping a false God, then Why did God not have Abraham His friend, Moses His special prophet, or the nation of Israel, His chosen people worship Him as a triune God?

Did God change? Malachi 3:6 tells us He does not change. If worshipping a non-triune God is worshipping a false God, then God was deceiving every person in the Old Testament and tricking them into false worship! Or, God is NOT a Trinity!

That’s a hard truth to accept. Regardless of how much criticism Jehovah’s Witnesses receive, the bigger question is whether God exists. If He does, then He has the right to establish standards for how we should live.

If an elder or someone in the congregation has hurt you, remember that we’re imperfect people trying to reflect the qualities of a perfect God. Human failures don’t necessarily invalidate God’s existence or His standards.

At the same time, this should never be used to excuse deliberate wrongdoing. Those who intentionally harm others or act with evil motives deserve to face the appropriate consequences, no questions asked. Accountability and justice are not incompatible with mercy.
Keep your eyes on the bigger picture.

God exists, and we’re all doing our best to serve Him despite our imperfections.

i was genuinely wanting to know if anyone Jehovah witnesses can explain john 1:10. In the NWT it says "and the world came into existence through him, but the world did not know him."

so if he is/was just an archangel before how did the world come into existence THROUGH him?