e-Watchman.com

91. Jn 5:23 says, “in order that all may honor the Son JUST AS they honor the Father…” If Jesus is not God, why does the Bible require that all men should honor the Son equally with the Father?

The simple answer is: Because it is Jehovah's Will that all creation honor his Son.

In the preceding verses, Jesus said that he could not do a single thing on his own, but he did what he did in imitation of his Father. That means that Jesus has limitations, in that he is bound by his love for Jehovah to always do his Father's Will and not his own. In the 20^th verse, Jesus said that the Father has affection for the Son and shows him all the things he does. He went on to say that the Father would show him even greater things in the future. Again, this shows that Jesus is dependent upon God to enlighten him.

It should be clear, to reasoning minds at least, that Jehovah is the teacher and Jesus is the pupil. Jesus is a unique son of God in that Jehovah "shows him all the things he himself does." That's why Jesus could be an exact representative of God.

Besides being blasphemous, the Trinity makes a mockery out of the special father/son relationship that exists between Jehovah and Jesus. According to the Bible Jehovah loves Jesus and Jesus loves Jehovah. According to the Trinity, God merely loves himself and showers himself with all sorts of blessings. What utter nonsense!

92. If Jesus and Jehovah are not one God, then why, according to the NWT, is “Jehovah” the name which brings salvation (Acts 2:21), but Acts 4:10-12 says that ONLY the name of Jesus brings salvation (“…for there is NOT ANOTHER NAME under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved.”)?

93. If the soul is the body, why does John make a distinction between the “prospering” of Gaius’ body because of good health and the “prospering” of his soul in 3Jn 2, and why does Paul distinguish between a person and their soul in Acts 20:10 by saying, “Stop raising a clamor, for his soul is IN him”?

94. The WTS teaches that Jesus is the first and greatest creation of God. If Jesus was Michael the Archangel before he became a man, then why does Dan 10:13 refer to Michael as “ONE of the foremost princes” implying that he was equal to other angels? If Christ was Michael the Archangel before the incarnation, then became Jesus, then changed back into Michael the Archangel after his death, why does Heb 13:8 say that, “Jesus Christ is the SAME yesterday and today, and forever.”? How could Christ be “the same” if he changed from being Michael, into being Jesus, then back into being Michael again?

This is an artificial dilemma. To illustrate, the questioner ought to rephrase the question to read: How could Jesus be the same if he changed from being God-the-God into God-the-man and then back to God-the-God again, because that is the suggestion that is being made by such repetitive questions that are meant to somehow "prove" that Jesus is God

The Bible says that Christ existed in God's form, which according to Jesus, God is a spirit. Jesus emptied himself of his heavenly glory and spirit form when he became a man. Before Christ returned to heaven, Jesus asked Jehovah to give him back the glory that he previously had. We will leave the burden on the questioner to reconcile how Jesus could be the same yesterday and today when he obviously went through some radical changes in nature.

As for the question of why Michael is called one of the foremost princes: Jesus is the Son of Jehovah. Jehovah has many other heavenly sons. A prince is a son of a king. Jesus is merely one of many princely sons of Jehovah. Michael could rightly be called one of the foremost princes before he came to earth because it was simply not God's time then to reveal and distinguish his special son and prince.

95. Rom 10:12 says , “…for there is the same Lord (Jesus vs 9) over all, who is rich to all those CALLING UPON him.” If Jesus is not to be prayed to, then why does Paul say that they will be rich who call “upon him”? Similarly, Paul says in 1Cor 1:2, “…together with all who everywhere are CALLING UPON the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours” and in 2Tim 2:22 he says, “…but pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace, along with those who CALL UPON THE LORD out of a clean heart.” If Christians should not pray to Jesus, then why did the early Christians “call upon” Jesus? How can a person call upon Jesus without praying to him?

The answer lies in answering the following question: Who did Jesus pray to?

The Trinitarian can only offer up the nonsensical answer that Jesus prayed to himself. The Bible, though, says that Jesus called upon Jehovah. 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.

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?

We really shouldn't be in the dark as to what religion Jesus practiced. He was a Jew. And as a faithful Jew he worshipped Jehovah God. Jesus said as much to the Samaritan women at the well, when he told her in the 4^th chapter of John: "You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation originates with the Jews." When Jesus used the pronoun "we," saying "we worship what we know," Jesus included himself as a worshipper of Jehovah.

Also, when tempted by the Devil to commit an act of false worship, Jesus cited the Jewish Law and said to Satan: "It is Jehovah your God that you must worship and it is to him alone that you must render sacred service." As a perfect man under the Mosaic Law covenant, Jesus obeyed that law of Israel's God, and flawlessly rendered sacred service to Jehovah.

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 5^th 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 1^st 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, mystical, 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.

96. If hell does not exist but is simply a complete annihilation of the person in which there is no conscious awareness, why does Jesus say in Mk 14:21 that it would be better for Judas if he had never been born?

97. Amos 4:11 says, "'I caused an overthrow among you people, like God's overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah. And you came to be like a log snatched out of [the] burning; but you did not come back to me,' is the utterance of Jehovah." If the Trinity does not exist, then how can Jehovah, speaking in this verse, refer to another person as God ("... like GOD'S overthrow of Sodom ...")?

98. If Jesus Christ is Michael the Archangel, how can Mt 25:31 say, "When the Son of man arrives in his glory, and ALL the angels with him, ..." Since "all the angels" would certainly include Michael the Archangel, is it possible that Jesus could return with himself? Similarly, if Jesus was Michael the Archangel before his birth, then how do you explain Heb 1:13 which says, “But with reference to which one of the ANGELS has he EVER SAID: “Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet”? In addition, if Jesus became Michael the Archangel upon his resurrection, why did none of the New Testament writers refer to the resurrected Christ as “Michael” by name? Can you point out one verse, just one, that says that Jesus and Michael are the same?

In answer to the first question, term "archangel" means the chief angel. The 12^th chapter of Revelation depicts Michael the archangel leading all of God's heavenly sons, angels, into battle against the Devil and his angels. A question reasoning people naturally ask is where is Christ in that scene? Elsewhere in scripture, Michael, or an un-named archangel, is described as doing things that are Christ's exclusive privilege. For example, a series of visions in Daniel portray the succession of world powers leading up to the establishment of Jehovah's heavenly kingdom. Daniel 2:44 foretells that God's kingdom will conquer man's kingdom. The 7^th chapter of Daniel reveals that the kingdom is given to someone called the Son of man and the holy ones. In the 8^th chapter, the kingdom is given to someone called the Prince of princes and the holy ones. In the last chapter the king of the north is vanquished by Michael, who stands up to defend God's people. It is evident by these parallel prophecies that the Son of man, the Prince of princes and Michael are one and the same—Jesus Christ.

As for Hebrews 1:13, the point Paul was making is that Jehovah did not give the kingdom to any angel. He gave it to a man. The point at which the prophecy was fulfilled, whereby Jehovah claimed Christ as his son, was when Jesus was baptized.

99. If Jesus did not become the Christ until he was baptized approximately 30 years after his birth, why does Lk 2:11 say, "because there was born to you today a Savior, who IS Christ [the] Lord, in David's city."? What does the word "is" mean to you?

Rather than pursuing such silly questions as 'what does "is" mean?', a more productive question to answer is what does the word "Christ" mean? According to the dictionary definition, Christ means "anointed one." The question is: when was Jesus anointed? At his birth? No, he was anointed by God's holy spirit on the occasion of his baptism, when he was 30 years of age. That is when he became the Messiah, or Christ. In fact, Jesus made a public announcement that he had become the Christ. Shortly after his baptism, Jesus stood up in the synagogue and read from the scroll of Isaiah the passage that reads: "Jehovah's spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor…"

But why did the angel say that the infant was the Christ? It has to do with the fact that Jehovah calls the things that are not as though they were. That is evident throughout prophecy. For instance, in the Hebrew prophecies God speaks matter-of-factly about Jesus' death, resurrection and his ruling the heavenly kingdom long before Christ even came to the earth. Even though Jesus was a free moral agent and could have chosen not to obey God's Will for him, Jehovah expressed his supreme confidence that his purpose would succeed and that his son would never betray him.

Interestingly, Satan tried to make Jehovah a liar in his bid to have Jesus snuffed out in the cradle. Referring to the infant Jesus as the Christ is simply God's way of declaring his purpose beforehand that Jesus would eventually grow up and become the Christ and that the enemies of truth are powerless to prevent Jehovah's Word from becoming a reality.

100. In Col 1:26, 27, 2:2, and 4;3, the Greek word “musterion” (Strong’s # 3466) is translated as “sacred secret” but in the Kingdom Interlinear, this same word is translated correctly as “mystery”. Why the discrepancy in the translation of this word between the KIT and the NWT? Wouldn’t it have been just as easy to render this word correctly as “mystery” in the NWT? If this word would have been correctly rendered as “mystery” in the NWT, how would the above verses read and what would they say about the fact that some things about God are impossible to completely understand?

The questioner has missed the entire point of the scripture. Colossians 1:26 says: "The mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory." (NIV)

The verse does not say that it is impossible to know the mystery of God. It says the exact opposite. It plainly says that what had been a mystery before Christ has been disclosed or revealed to Christians. There is no problem with the New World Translation of this verse. The problem, obviously, is that the questioner prefers ignorance over knowledge of God and wishes his ignorance upon others.

101. Every true Christian would agree that we should follow the commands of God. In Mk 9:7, God the Father commands us to listen to Jesus. Do you follow this command and listen to Jesus? After all, Jesus died for your personal sins (1Jn 2:2, 1Pet 2:24). Jesus tells us to go directly to him (Mt 11:28-30), and the Father commanded us to listen to Jesus. Why? Because JESUS gives us everlasting life (Jn 10:28), and so that JESUS will enter our house and be with us and give us the right to sit on his throne (Rev 3:20- 21). Do you pray to Jesus as Paul and the early Christians did (1Cor 1:2)? Do you partake of the flesh of Christ as Jesus commanded (Jn 6:51)? If not, then are you following the command of the Father who said "Listen to him"

Just what is a "true Christian" anyway? How can we know who is true and who is false? Jesus once asked the Jews: "Why do you call me "Lord" and yet do not do the things I say?" Jesus' question is just as relevant for Christians today as it was for the Jews back then. A true Christian, then, is someone who obeys Jesus as Lord—not merely someone who says "Jesus is Lord."

First and foremost, Jesus commanded his followers to love our spiritual brothers and our neighbor as ourselves. Yet, how many professed Christians actually obey Jesus in that respect? Sadly, very few. Indeed, history testifies that most professed Christians are disposed to hatred rather than love. And we are not at all being unkind or untruthful to make the statement that Trinitarians are the most warmongering and murderous religionists that have ever plighted this earth.

'But war is different,' you say. 'Jesus said we must give unto Caesar his due. So, if Caesar tells us we have to go to war and kill our neighbor than that's what we have to do.'

And by so doing, the Christians of Christendom have made a mockery of Christianity.

Why is it that Trinitarians are disposed to argue over every letter and comma in the Bible and yet they have no problem with donning an army uniform and murdering their neighbor? What does the word "love" mean to you?

As an example of gross religious hypocrisy, in 1994 the predominately Catholic nation of Rwanda exploded into tribal genocide. Eyewitness accounts reported that many Hutu priests and nuns directly participated in the slaughter of their fellow Catholics from the Tutsi tribe. By the best estimates, nearly a half-million souls were butchered and much blame has been leveled against the Catholic Church. The Seventh Day Adventist and Anglican Church are also charged with some measure of culpability in the genocide.

No doubt, the Catholic murderers of their fellow believers were just as passionate about the Trinity and other church dogma as our questioner with 101 questions. No doubt, too, many of those African Catholics also fought tooth-and-nail against Jehovah's Witnesses and criticized the NWT for supposedly "changing the Bible" by adding bracketed words and the notorious letter "a" before "god" at John 1:1. However, the apostle John put things into perspective where he wrote that anyone who says he loves God and yet hates his brother is a liar.

While some may feel that it is unfair to blame all Catholics for the recent genocide in far away Africa, the truth is that the recent slaughter is quite typical. It is undeniable that war is simply an integral part of the Catholic and Protestant institutions. The Catholic Church in particular is directly responsible for the slaughter and torture of hundreds of thousands, probably millions of people down through the centuries. The many Crusades, the horrific Inquisitions, the Hundred Years War, the Thirty Years War, the First and Second World Wars; the facts of history show that whenever there is a killing, Catholics always seem to be in the vicinity.

Protestants are no better. While all religions give lip service to peace, there does not seem to have ever been a war that they have not willingly participated in. Most recently, since 9-11, warmongering evangelical Trinitarians are predictably in the forefront; whipping up anti-Islamic hatred and rushing headlong into the "prophesied" Clash of Civilizations.

Contrary to popular assumptions about Jehovah's Witnesses being false Christians, the Bible gives us a very simple formula for distinguishing true Christians from the false. It has nothing to do with who has the most accurate word-for-word translation of the Bible or anything like that. 1^st John 3:10 says: "The children of God and the children of the Devil are evident by this fact: Everyone who does not carry on righteousness does not originate with God, neither does he who does not love his brother."

Of course, no Christian would ever admit to being a child of the Devil, yet it is undeniable that Trinitarian religionists have few qualms about killing their fellow man if it comes down to that. The facts are plain for those who wish to accept the truth: The system of worship known as Christendom does not originate with God but is from the Devil.

While most Trinitarian believers are obviously not presently engaged in murdering their fellows and would find such a suggestion offensive, it is only because circumstances at the moment are not right. But, in a wartime setting or in an atmosphere of anarchy, in a kill-or-be-killed scenario, given the historical pattern, there is no reason not to assume that the most ardent Jesus-is-God believers will murder their brother under extreme conditions.

Why is it that the Trinitarian religions of Christendom have such a sordid history of warfare and hatred? Why is it that they seem incapable of following Christ's example of love? Obviously, there has to be something fundamentally wrong with their theology. There is no other satisfactory explanation.

The Bible's simple but powerful message is that God loved the world so much he sacrificed his firstborn son. And Jesus loved his Father so much he was willing to do God's Will no matter the personal cost to himself. The theology of the Trinity, however, completely obscures the love and devotion between God and Jesus. How can Christians imitate and appreciate something they do not understand? Or how is it possible to love a God whom you believe tortures hapless souls in a flaming hell forever? Obviously, it is not possible.

But, just as Christendom's bloody history is well known, it is also common knowledge that Jehovah's Witnesses have never gone to war. We have never killed our fellowman in warfare of any kind. We have never participated in tribal and ethnic cleansing. During the Rwandan holocaust, while Catholics were hacking each other to pieces with machetes, Jehovah's Witnesses from the Hutu and Tutsi tribes risked their lives to protect each other. Throughout the past decades since Jehovah's Witnesses came on the scene, up to the present day, we have been on the receiving end of brutal attacks and dirty tricks by Catholic, Orthodox, and Baptist Trinitarians. Our sole crime is preaching the truth—as Jesus commanded us to do.

So, on one hand we have the vast majority of professed Christians from hundreds of competing sects, who all claim to have the official Bible and practice the true faith, but who belong to institutions that consistently deny Christ by their false doctrines and blood-spilling ways. On the other hand: Jehovah's Witnesses are far and away the most hated and spoken against group of Christians in the world—as Jesus said his true followers would be. We are persecuted and ridiculed because we are no part of the world—as Jesus said true Christians would be. We are reviled and maligned as brainwashed cultists and false prophets—as Jesus said true Christians would be. We are castigated for having supposedly re-written the sacred Word of God, which is an absolute lie. Jehovah's Witnesses have, instead, obeyed Christ by preaching about his kingdom. We strive to love our neighbor as ourselves; yet, we are persecuted by Christendom because we have no share in this world's warring ways.

Jehovah's Witnesses and our Watchtower are not perfect—not by a long way. But, for all of our shortcomings most of us are at least trying to obey Christ and do the right thing. No other religion even comes close to measuring up.