By Reese Currie, Compass Distributors
The Jehovah's Witnesses publish a document called What Does God Require Of Us? that outlines what they believe God requires of us before we can be saved. The message was very far from the simple message of repentance Jesus ordered us to preach (Luke 24:46-47). I decided to write this answer to expose the erroneous and deceptive teachings I found in their booklet.
It is my hope that any brother or sister, for whom Jesus Christ died, is not led astray by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. If you are being visited by Jehovah's Witnesses, please request the document, What Does God Require of Us? and then read it along with this document.
The last time I spoke with Jehovah's Witnesses, they did not trust any Greek text except for the Westcott-Hort Greek Text that underlies their own translation, the New World Translation. One of the most accurate Bible versions in history was the American Standard Version of 1901, which the Jehovah's Witnesses used prior to the translation of the NWT. I will use the American Standard Version in this document. This version in no sense hides the name of Jehovah and uses the Westcott-Hort Greek text that the Watchtower Society so highly approves.
Lesson 1:1 tells us, "The Bible alone tells us what we must do to please God." I agree with that statement; it can be proven with Scripture itself that Scripture alone is sufficient for this purpose. In Luke 16, Jesus related a story about a rich man who dies and goes to Hades, and requests of Abraham that Lazarus, a poor beggar, be sent to his family to warn them about this place of torment. "And he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house; for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment. But Abraham saith, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them" (Luke 16:27-29). Abraham's answer, as related by Jesus, proves that Scripture alone is sufficent! Some Christian denominations refer to this doctrine as sola scriptura, the "sufficiency of Scripture".
But in truth, the Jehovah's Witnesses' organization does not believe in the sufficiency of Scripture. First, it is contained in a booklet that claims to tell us what God requires of us. I thought the Bible alone did that, according to their statement.
There are six photographs of Jehovah's Witnesses studying the Bible in this booklet. Of the six, only one is studying the Bible alone. The rest have Watchtower publications in addition to the Bible. A footnote on page 31 (in Lesson 16) says you should read The Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life before you are baptized. Why, if the Bible alone tells you everything you need to know? The answer is, Jehovah's Witnesses really believe you need these publications in addition to the Bible in order to be a Christian. They claim to believe that the Bible alone is sufficient, but they do not really believe this in practice.
Lesson 2:2 tells us that God's name is Jehovah, and implies that current Bible versions have been improper in rendering the tetragrammaton (YHWH) with the titles LORD and GOD. However, the use of "Lord" and "God" as a translation for the tetragrammaton was in use at Christ's time, and He never objected; it was translated this way in the Septuagint, an ancient Greek version of the Old Testament. The Septuagint was the Bible translation used for all the Bible quotations by the writers of the New Testament.
In fact, you will find that YHWH is never found in the Aramaic portions of the Bible. In the original language text, you will not find a single instance of YHWH from Daniel 2:4 through Daniel 7:28, because it was written in Aramaic. The Hebrews appear never to have rendered the Divine Name into any other language!
Technically, these facts make the rendering of the tetragrammaton as "Jehovah" in English Bible versions questionable; it would seem to be a better practice, and more consistent with the practice of the Septuagint translators and Daniel the Prophet, to simply indicate that the tetragrammaton is present by rendering it as LORD. Remember, the Septuagint is the only translation we know positively had the Apostles' approval.
If you ever make this argument to the Witnesses about there having been no tetragrammaton in the Greek, you should be warned that they may attempt to show that "LORD" appears in the New Testament of even the King James Version in a couple of places (including Mark 12:36), implying that YHWH appeared in the Greek text at this point. This was done by the KJV translators apparently to make the renderings agree with the referenced verse in the Old Testament (Psalm 110:1), but the word in the underlying Greek text is still adonai, which means "Lord".
The American Standard Version, which renders the tetragrammaton faithfully everywhere it appears, renders Psalm 110:1, "Jehovah saith unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, Until I make thine enemies thy footstool." At Mark 12:36, the ASV also faithfully records the tetragrammaton's absence, "David himself said in the Holy Spirit, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet."
The presence of the word "Jehovah" at all is not found in any Greek manuscript of the New Testament. It is simply a translational dishonesty to include it where it is not found in the original text.
Lesson 2:3 contains another lie: that the Holy Spirit is not a Person, but that it is God's "active force". They quote Psalm 104:30 to "prove" this, although the quotation proves nothing of the sort. If anything is proven, it is that the Holy Spirit is a Person, because the Spirit is spoken of being "sent": "Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created; And thou renewest the face of the ground." (Psalm 104:30)
Other verses prove definitively that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Look at John 14:26: "But the Comforter, [even] the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you."
Wait a second! Did Jesus use the words "whom" and "he" in relation to the Holy Spirit? Well, yes He did, and He did again at John 15:26: "But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall bear witness of me:"
If this doesn't prove it beyond all shadow of doubt, try John 16:13: "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, [these] shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come." How does God's "impersonal active force" hear, or speak, or have His own authority? Why would a personal pronoun (He) be used in relation to an impersonal force? Simply because He is not an "impersonal active force." The Holy Spirit is a Person.
In Lesson 3:1, the Jehovah's Witnesses claim that Jesus is a creation of God's, like an angel. Sometime after you have been indoctrinated, they will tell you that Jesus is Michael the archangel. There are a number of Watch Tower books that make this assertion, including You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth and Reasoning From the Scriptures.
But Jesus is not an angel. "For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son? And when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." (Hebrews 1:5,6)
If Jesus was merely an angel, no one would be allowed to worship Him. Colossians 2:18 points this out: "Let no man rob you of your prize by a voluntary humility and worshipping of the angels, dwelling in the things which he hath seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind."
Jesus is certainly not an angel. Now, examine John 1:1-3. I know how John 1:1 has been modified in the New World Translation, but using these three verses it is so simple to prove that Jesus is God that only a deliberate deceiver would object to the logic. In these verses, Jesus is referred to as "the Word".
In this literal translation of the Westcott-Hort Greek text, John 1:1-3 reads, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made."
If all things were made through Jesus, Jesus cannot be a created being, because He couldn't have made Himself. He made absolutely everything that has been made, according to John 1:3. If Jesus was already with God in the beginning, how could He have been created? He would have had to come along moments after the beginning, after God had created Him. Not even the NWT disputes what John 1:3 says, and if John 1:3 is true, it is logically impossible that Jesus Christ is a created being.
Lesson 3:6 One problem the Jehovah's Witnesses have is that they do not know what "resurrection" is. Resurrection is the re-uniting of the body with the spirit. Here they say that Jesus was "resurrected as a spirit creature", which is incorrect in two ways; first, about the nature of resurrection, and second, about Jesus being a "creature" although in reality He was not created. Jesus' spirit went right on living after His bodily death, just like everyone else's.
If you examine their scripture reference of 1 Peter 3:18, continuing on to verse 19, in the American Standard Version rather than the New World Translation, you will see that their own scripture reference disproves their point. "Because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God; being put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison". Spirits in prison! Where are they? Conscious, and alive, in Hades, where Jesus Himself was until He was resurrected, that is, until His spirit was rejoined with His body. That's why Jesus' body was missing from the tomb in Matthew 28:6, where the angel says, "He is not here; for he is risen, even as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay." (Note: "lay" here is in the past tense.)
To say that Jesus did not receive a bodily resurrection is to deny John 2:19-22. "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. The Jews therefore said, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three days?" Now, take special note of John 2:21, and read it for what it really says: "But he spake of the temple of his body." Jesus spoke of raising up His body. John 2:22 goes on, "When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he spake this; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said."
It is too bad the Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe either the Scripture or the word Jesus had said. Jesus directly referred to raising His body, and that is what really happened.
This section is on the devil, and here we see some poorly thought out artwork that reflects the careless theology of the Jehovah's Witnesses. You will note that in the artwork, the serpent appears in a tree, tempting Eve. The serpent looks like a regular snake of today, but in the Bible, the serpent had legs! God's punishment to the serpent for tempting Eve was to remove his legs and make him crawl on his belly: "And Jehovah God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life" (Genesis 3:14).
I agree with Lesson 4:3, which includes the text, "If a religion teaches lies about God, it really serves the purpose of Satan." We've already proven a number of times that the Jehovah's Witnesses teach lies about God and about the Bible. Whom, then, do they serve?
Lessons 5 and 6 deal with the Jehovah's Witnesses unique view of prophecy. Their prophecy is borrowed largely from the Seventh Day Adventists, with a few Witness-specific additions and date changes. Incidentally, these dates are frequently revised by Witnesses, who have predicted the end of the world on many occasions, including 1914, 1915, 1925, and 1975. If you consider the historic unreliability of Witness predictions in light of Scripture, it is strong evidence against them.
What did God have to say about prophets making false predictions? In Old Testament times, the punishment was immediate and final. "But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die. And if thou say in thy heart, How shall we know the word which Jehovah hath not spoken? when a prophet speaketh in the name of Jehovah, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which Jehovah hath not spoken: the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him" (Deuteronomy 18:20-22).
What I would suggest is to read Revelation without benefit of Watchtower publications to "guide" you. Trace what happens without any preconceived notions in your head and think of what a reach it would be to leap from what the Bible really says to what the Jehovah's Witnesses teach.
Lessons 7 and 8 deal with family life, and these chapters don't conflict with any major Bible teachings that I noticed.
Lesson 9:5 says, "Because they represent God, Christians should keep their bodies and clothing clean. We should wash our hands after using the toilet, and we should wash them before eating meals or handling food."
An interesting exhortation. The Pharisees were equally picky, and managed to rile Jesus' anger. They asked Him, "Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. And he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?" (Matthew 15:2,3). Jesus went on to rebuke them for a number of their unscriptural practices, and concluded by saying, "these are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashen hands defileth not the man" (Matthew 15:20).
Again, the Witnesses place a burden on you that is unnecessary and contrary to the teaching of Christ. How different they are from our Lord and Saviour, Who said, "Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light" (Matthew 11:29,30).
In Lesson 10:3, the JW's exhort us not to gamble, because it is a greedy thing to do. This statement is given without any definite Biblical backup. There is no single verse stating, "Thou shalt not gamble," and to assign a greed motive to gambling violates Matthew 7:1, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." To judge is really to assign a motive to someone's actions. Judging is to be contrasted with "proclaiming." When we say for example that homosexuals will not enter God's Kingdom, we are simply proclaiming the judgment God already made, not judging them ourselves. In this case, there is no scriptural basis for making this proclamation against gambling, so it is invalid doctrine.
I do not recommend gambling, because it is a dangerous activity that can lead to truly sinful activity, like covetousness. But to apply the same rule to a covetous situation, like a gambling addiction, that we do to a fundraising draw or a weekly lottery ticket is not correct.
That the apostles were familiar with the gambling practices of their time is evident in that they cast lots to name the replacement for Judas in Acts 1:26. Otherwise, the New Testament (and Old Testament) are silent on the matter. Witnesses make inferences to gambling being evil because the guards cast lots for Jesus' clothing, but after that the apostles cast lots to name the next apostle, so they did not make the same connection.
Again, the JW's take a shot at the Trinity, in Lesson 11:2. I've already proven that Jesus was not created, and I've proven that the Holy Spirit is a Person. Not even the Witnesses claim the Holy Spirit was created, but if they did, I would point out Hebrews 9:14 which says the Spirit is eternal, saying "how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish unto God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" The word translated "eternal" here is the Greek word aionios. When applied to the Holy Spirit, aionios means "without beginning and without end". (The same word is applied to "eternal punishment", but in this case it is speaking in the future tense and means only "without end".) What then, other than the Trinity, does this leave us with? All other philosophies, including Arianism, the Witness philosophy, are proven false.
The Jehovah's Witnesses will tell you that their rejection of the Trinity doctrine is unique, and sets them apart from other Christian groups, but they are far from unique in reality. Three hundred and sixty nine other cultic groups presently operating in the United States and Canada also deny the Trinity doctrine. Of these, over twenty are adherents of Arianism specifically. Compared to that, the number of denominations that actually adhere to the Trinity doctrine is really quite small.
In fact, as some of the more liberal mainstream denominations begin to fall away due to Socinianism (rationalizing away the supernatural aspects of Christ, such as the virgin birth, the resurrection, the Trinity, and so on), the number of true Trinity adherents is actually falling. This is the sort of thing one would expect as Satan's time runs short and his efforts to deceive the world increase.
Lesson 11:5 makes a correct point, that the dead are not to be worshipped, and that we cannot help them nor can they hurt us. However, the Jehovah's Witnesses follow up with their false doctrine that the soul dies at death, awaiting a "spiritual resurrection." This is not the belief held by any of the apostles, and the quotation of Ezekiel 18:4 proves nothing.
Ezekiel 18:4 says, "Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die." Read the whole chapter rather than one verse taken out of context. The Witness doctrine does not hold up under this scrutiny, especially when we read God providing an alternative by which the soul may live! Ezekiel 18:27 says, "Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive."
So, who do you believe, God, or the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society? Does your soul absolutely have to die, or can you repent and live? Obviously, God is correct, and the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is wrong.
Jesus plainly taught that souls in Hades were conscious (Luke 16:20-25). The Jehovah's Witnesses would have you believe that Jesus would use a deceptive teaching in a parable, but there is no example in the Bible of Jesus ever having done this. Does Jesus' teaching really conflict with Ecclesiastes 9:10, the verse the Jehovah's Witnesses say supports their concept that the dead are conscious of nothing? Ecclesiastes 9:10 says, "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do [it] with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou goest."
But if you check out Ecclesiastes 9:9 and 9:11, you will note that the context of "under the sun" is established on both sides of the verse in question.
Read the verse again in the plain context of "under the sun": "Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of thy life of vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all thy days of vanity: for that is thy portion in life, and in thy labor wherein thou laborest under the sun. Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do [it] with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou goest. I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all."
The working, planning, knowledge and wisdom we lose in the grave (actually "Sheol") are of things "under the sun", meaning here on earth, not the nature of Sheol itself.
Paul was not deceived about the nature of resurrection. He knew that the spirit lives on after death. It does not merely live on in God's memory; it really does live. Paul wrote, "But I am in a strait betwixt the two, having the desire to depart and be with Christ; for it is very far better: yet to abide in the flesh is more needful for your sake" (Philippians 1:23,24). How could it have been better for Paul personally to die and live on in God's memory? The verse clearly says that when Paul departs from the flesh, he will be with Christ.
Does Paul's statement about resurrection conflict? Paul wrote about "men who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already, and overthrow the faith of some" (2 Timothy 2:18). Actually, the Jehovah's Witnesses misinterpret this verse. There was a sect in Paul's time that claimed that the resurrection was spiritual, not bodily, just as Jehovah's Witnesses claim today. Paul wrote this verse refuting the very theory Witnesses believe. When Paul speaks of resurrection, he is referring to the resurrection of the body, that is, the re-creation of the body and the joining of the body and the still living spirit. Every single resurrection that Jesus performed in the Bible was a bodily resurrection.
There is no Witness doctrine capable of refuting the imagery of Revelation 6:9,10. "And when he opened the fifth seal, I saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had been slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a great voice, saying, How long, O Master, the holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" Revelation 8:3 confirms that this altar is in heaven before the throne, "And another angel came and stood over the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should add it unto the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne." So, either the dead are conscious, and the redeemed go to heaven, or the Bible lies. I prefer to believe the Bible and disbelieve the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.
The Witnesses may attempt to explain away Revelation 6:9,10 with the backward Witness notion that only 144,000 go to heaven, and these souls must be theirs. The 144,000 are not mentioned until Revelation 7, which is certainly chronologically later than chapter 6 (the first words in Revelation 7:1 are "After this"). One other thing should be noted about this group: In Revelation 7, the 144,000 sealed are on earth, and the great crowd in white robes appears in heaven before the throne, the exact opposite of the Watchtower teaching of the "anointed remnant and the great crowd".
The "soul sleep" doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses, which itself was borrowed from another cultic group, disintegrates under the light of Scripture. Their entire set of afterlife doctrines is a hopelessly twisted mass of confusion that lacks any real Biblical support.
Lesson 11:6 speaks ill of the cross, claiming that Jesus was not crucified on a cross but on a single stake. Take a look on page 7 of What Does God Require Of Us?. Here we see Jesus, impaled through the wrists with a single nail. This is a completely unscriptural depiction.
Read John 20:24,25: "But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe."
First, note that the word "nails" is plural. Second, note that these nails went through His hands, not His wrists, according to Scripture, so these Witnesses who claim to be so fundamentalist trifle with Scripture by altering the position of the nail in this artwork.
History and archaeology explain why the word in the Greek rendered cross, stauros, while meaning one plank, in actual practice was two planks in a cross configuration. The prisoner would be required to carry the crossbeam on his shoulders out to the crucifixion site, where an upright pole awaited. The prisoner would then be placed on the ground and painfully nailed to the crossbeam. The crossbeam had a hole in the center of it so it could be lifted over and placed onto the upright stake. The prisoner and plank would be lifted and placed on the upright pole, and the victim would be left until dead. A terrible, torturous method of execution, the person would be left to hold themselves up with leg strength or suffocate. That is why the Romans broke the legs of the other prisoners who were not already dead; without leg strength to hold up the body, the position of the arms causes rapid suffocation. Usually, the onset of unconsciousness would cause the body to slump and result in the suffocation. Of course, suffocation would not occur with the arms in the unscriptural position set forth by the Jehovah's Witnesses.
While it is not mentioned in this document directly, Witnesses also say it is evil that Christians display the instrument of Jesus' execution. "If Jesus had been shot," they reason, "would you wear a gun around your neck?" On the surface, this seems like a very good point, but to Paul, the cross was a symbol of Christ's victory over sin and death. He wrote, "But far be it from me to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world hath been crucified unto me, and I unto the world" (Galatians 6:14). So, this boasting in the cross existed in Paul's time, and therefore should continue to exist today. I think it is fine to have a cross on a church to symbolize the sacrifice Jesus Christ made for us.
Lesson 12:5,6: Here we have the famous Jehovah's Witness doctrine forbidding blood transfusions. If you were to look at all the verses forbidding the eating of blood in context, you would see why the Bible's admonition against eating blood does not apply in any way to blood transfusions. God only fully explains once why He does not want the Israelites eating blood. The blood of animal sacrifices was used as a temporal atonement for sin in the Old Covenant. "For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh atonement by reason of the life. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood" (Leviticus 17:11-12).
The reason for not eating blood expired when Jesus died for our sins, ending the Old Covenant and starting the New Covenant. See Hebrews 10:8-14, noting particularly verses 9 and 10, which I have bolded:
The atonement provided by animal sacrifice in the Old Testament was only temporal; it held back God's anger against Israel in this world, but it did not take away the sins completely and forever. The animals are temporal, and the effect of their sacrifice is also merely temporal. Jesus is eternal, and His sacrifice atones for sins eternally. If Jesus were not eternal, the Alpha and the Omega as He says in Revelation, then His sacrifice would not have an eternal atonement attached to it. (If you believe that Jesus is Michael the archangel, as the Watchtower Society preaches, you do not have an eternal atonement because Michael is not an eternal being but a created being.)
Whether you accept this or not, you have to agree that the blood of fellow humans has absolutely never been given to us for this atoning purpose, except for the blood of Jesus Christ (who was not just human, either, but was fully God and fully Man). The reason that the blood of animals had some currency in temporal atonement is that animal blood is without sin. No human other than Jesus is without sin, so other human blood, having no atoning nature, is not included in the very reason why we must abstain from blood.
All this disproves the Jehovah's Witnesses theory without even asking the simpler question, what likeness is there between eating blood and taking a transfusion? Eating blood would be a process of taking blood in through your mouth into your stomach, digesting the nutrients, and expelling the rest as waste. Having a blood transfusion is a direct injection of blood into veins, without any of the digestive processes involved.
How can you find the true religion? The first thing to understand is that the true religion is not a church or denomination. This is hard for most people to understand, but a real church is a support structure of the true religion, not a religion unto itself. This idea that a church is necessary for salvation is a fallacy; the belief that church ordinances like baptism are necessary for salvation gave rise to this false idea. Unfortunately, though this began with the Catholic Church, this belief has carried on into some Protestant denominations.
Salvation is not wrought through a church or any church ordinance; it is only available through Jesus Christ. A good church can help bring people to Christ through effective preaching, but a church is not necessary for salvation. Church attendance for a saved Christian is a matter of obedience to the Scriptures (Hebrews 10:25 in particular), not a matter of salvation, and it pertains to helping others and being helped in your Christian walk.
So, let's reframe the question, shall we? Now knowing that a religion and an earthly organization are two different things, how do you find the true religion?
To find the true religion, you must first repent. This is a necessary step. To repent is to feel regret for your sins and turn away from them to follow God. For Jehovah's Witnesses or people who have considered the Jehovah's Witnesses through their books and Bible studies, you also must repent of any false beliefs you've adopted with regard to Jesus, for example, the idea that Jesus is an angel. You cannot believe in the real Jesus if you won't repent of false ideas about Him.
Then, after repenting, you must believe in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior. He is not a "subordinate savior". He is not a means of obtaining salvation through someone else. He is not a means by which God provides grace for you to save yourself. You must believe in Jesus as your only Savior.
Jesus is not a Savior in the future tense, He is the Savior in the present tense throughout the New Testament to those who believe. When Jesus saves you, it does not mean that if you toe the line and never make a mistake, you will be saved after you die. It means you are saved right now, while you're alive, the moment you truly believe, and no one and nothing can take that salvation away. Salvation is identified in the Bible as a free gift from God in Romans 5:18, and Romans 11:29 says that God's gifts are never taken away. If you believe God will take your gift of salvation away, you are mistaken.
There are subtle differences between being a saved Christian and an unsaved person who thinks he is a Christian. If you are a saved Christian, the good works you perform are done in thanks to God for your salvation, not to buy favor with Him so He will eventually save you. If you are a saved Christian, sins are avoided not out of duty or to toe the line, but because we do not want to be defiled by them and we are embarassed by sin before Someone we love, the Lord Jesus Christ.
After you have taken these important steps, you can go about finding a church to attend. Do not subscribe to the notion that you must find a church quickly. If you really repent and believe, you are saved even if you never find a church. Only cults put you under pressure to find a church quickly, "before it's too late."
I recommend you give yourself some time to recover from the Witnesses, then read a good translation of the Bible. I highly recommend the New King James Version; this version taught me the true Christian doctrine for the first time. Read the Bible differently; don't read it to prove your traditions, but read it to learn about God with an unbiased mind. If reading the entire Bible is too big a task, try just reading the New Testament. You might not understand some of the allusions to Old Testament events, but you'll get the main message. Ask God in prayer to have the Holy Spirit work in you to help you interpret His word. When you are finished, you will find that a true church will not teach anything you cannot find yourself in the Bible.
I attend a Southern Baptist church because I find the Baptist beliefs conform most closely to the teachings I have found in the Bible, but I have also found that some other evangelical denominations preach the correct view of God, the "repent and believe" salvation doctrine, trusting Christ only and not in your own works, and your safety in Christ, the eternal security of your salvation.
But I want to to emphasize that you are not seeking a church but a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. You do not need any organization to know Jesus for you; you cannot delegate this most important relationship. You must ask Jesus Himself to save you. You don't need to know "everything" about Jesus to ask Him for this gift. You just need to turn from doing things your own way and in your own strength and ask Him to save you.
After you have established a relationship with Christ, I would like you to research the Bible for yourself and make your own choice with regard to a church to attend, as I have, based on the convictions and leading the Holy Spirit reveals to you in Bible study.
This lesson tells you how the Jehovah's Witnesses are organized. There are some unscriptural practices here as well. In Lesson 14:4, they show that they forbid paid clergy. This may sound good to some, but it is contrary to Biblical teaching.
1 Corinthians 9:11 says, "If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?" Obviously, to the Jehovah's Witnesses, it is a great matter but not to Paul.
When the Bible refers to a church, it often means an individual congregation which had "bishops" (or "overseers") and "deacons". (See Philippians 1:1: "Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:"). The Jehovah's Witnesses' concept of a "travelling overseer" was really unknown in that time. Paul occupied the position of a missionary, not a "travelling overseer". The "overseer" position is usually described as the "pastor" in a true New Testament church today, and "deacon" in fact means "servant". This structure was unheard of in the Jewish community, and did not resemble the hierarchical church government of the later Roman Catholic Church or any of the denominations that splintered directly from it (Lutheran, Anglican and Presbyterian), or for that matter, that of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
The original New Testament church had no buildings, but was a "house church," and its organization was just like the organization in a house or a mansion, with a master of the house and servants. There was proclaimation of the Word in a public setting, such as Solomon's Porch (Acts 3:11; 5:12), and the rest was done in homes. This structure was evident when Paul wrote about "how I shrank not from declaring unto you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly, and from house to house" (Acts 20:20).
It is interesting that the Jehovah's Witnesses require all of their membership to be teachers, going door to door preaching. This sounds like a very good thing, but you may be surprised to learn it is actually contrary to Scripture. James 3:1 reads, "Be not many [of you] teachers, my brethren, knowing that we shall receive heavier judgment."
Yet the Jehovah's Witnesses demand that all members engage in preaching work. This means that James, the Bible writer, would not have been an acceptable Jehovah's Witness. An acceptable Jehovah's Witness does not believe anything that is counter to what the Watchtower Society says, so I suppose if James had been a JW, he would have to be drummed out of the organization as many have been in the past.
You really have to know your stuff before you can teach the Bible, and the patchwork, "verse here, verse there" approach the Jehovah's Witnesses and other cults use does not qualify you as understanding the Bible. Understanding the Bible requires an understanding of context, and the patchwork approach eliminates context and invalidates the understanding of the great principles and loving spirit underlying the Bible. It becomes just words and letters to be wrangled over, while Paul says, "who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life" (2 Corinthians 3:6), and "Of these things put them in remembrance, charging [them] in the sight of the Lord, that they strive not about words, to no profit, to the subverting of them that hear" (2 Timothy 2:14).
I am well aware of the arrogant challenges Jehovah's Witnesses make to prospects, to bring any Christian minister who may want to oppose them on the Bible and they will defeat him soundly. I am reminded of 1 Timothy 6:3-5, "If any man teacheth a different doctrine, and consenteth not to sound words, [even] the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is puffed up, knowing nothing, but doting about questionings and disputes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, wranglings of men corrupted in mind and bereft of the truth, supposing that godliness is a way of gain."
Here, we have the decision to serve the Lord. Lesson 16:2 states the correct method for baptism, full immersion of only a professing believer. This is one of the things that makes the Jehovah's Witnesses appear to be the "right religion", because this is the correct approach; baptism by sprinkling an unbelieving infant really is not a Scriptural practice. But even here, we can find an erroneous position of the Watchtower organization. In a footnote, it says that "A study of Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life, or similar book published by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, is recommended in preparation for baptism."
This is totally unscriptural. In Acts 8:26-38, Philip shared the gospel with a eunuch who was immediately convinced. "And as theywent on the way, they came unto a certain water; and the eunuch saith, Behold, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?" (Acts 8:36)
What happened next? Did Philip order the eunuch to study a bunch of tracts first, or even command him to study more of the actual Bible?
Acts 8:37 says, "[And Philip said, If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.]" The square brackets are present, however, because the verse is not in the Westcott-Hort Greek text, nor is it in any of the modern "critical texts", nor is it in the Majority Text. It was believed to be part of the text of the Bible in the time the King James Version was translated, but we know today that it lacks any substantial manuscript support.
So, we have every reason to believe that Philip responded immediately to the man's request with no questions asked. "And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they both went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him" (Acts 8:38).
Part of the reason that the Jehovah's Witnesses are such a successful recruiter is that they provide seemingly logical arguments that most Christians attempt to parry with arguments that are more emotional than logical. We have attempted to show logically that the Witness religion is wrong and deceptive.
Witness doctrines are incredibly detailed, and this can seem more "intellectually satisfying" than the simple "repent and believe" message of Christ. For this document, I have chosen to challenge detail with detail, hopefully to prove unquestionably to you that the unique Witness doctrines, no matter how apparently convincing and well thought out they may seem, often prove to be neither in the face of frank Biblical examination.
A Criticism of "What Does God Require of Us?" is Copyright © 1997, 1999, 2000 by Compass Distributors.
All Scripture taken from the American Standard Version, (Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson & Sons, Inc.) 1901.