Resource from Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry at http://www.carm.org (Joshua highly recommends for reference)
A cult is very different from the occult, which is Satan worship. A cult is a religious sect that often consists of enough sprinkling of truth that it is accepted by many, but that never teaches the full Gospel. To determine whether a sect is a cult, you can ask several questions:
1. Who do they say Jesus is?
Do they teach that He is fully God and became man to save the world from the penalty of sin? Or do they teach that although He is from God yet not divine or co-equal with God? That He was just a messenger, maybe even a prophet or an angel and that we should all try to be like Him? When Jesus asked Peter, "Who do you say I am?" Peter replied, in Matthew 16:16, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God."
There should not be other account of Jesus Christ which makes Him lesser than the only Son of God, the Second Person in the Trinity, co-equal and co-existent with God the Father and the Saviour who is the only way for human salvation.
2. What is their stand on the infallibility of the Bible?
Is the Bible the only true Word of God which is a living book that is relevant to today and fully inspired by God? Or have they somehow come up with more sources or even have other books of divine authority to interpret the Bible their own way? 2 Timothy 3:16 states, "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness."
There should not be other book of authority except the Bible with 66 books in it as the only true inspired Word of God that we should obey it alone with no equal. The Bible is the only divine book of authority inspired by God as His Word.
3. How does one become saved?
Is salvation received only through faith in the saving power of the blood of Jesus or is there some method of works or tradition attached to salvation? Ephesians 2:8-9: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-not by works, so that no one can boast."
There should not be other ways or requirements to be saved except by God’s grace through faith to believe in the biblical Jesus Christ, Son of God according to the account of the four Gospels as the only way for salvation accepted by God the Father.
Just for example, let's look briefly at the Jehovah's Witnesses. They believe that Jesus was a good man, but not that He is the Son of God. They also place divine authority on sources other than the Bible. Furthermore, they believe that they acquire salvation through their good works. These beliefs obviously indicate that Jehovah’s Witnesses is a cult.
But, a religion does not have to meet all of the above criteria to be considered a cult; just one characteristic will do it. Many mainstream denominations are depriving people by not teaching the truth thus contribute to the factor of why people are easily deceived by the cults. God does not make exceptions to His Word so we ought to be grounded in our biblical doctrines and beliefs that we may not be ignorant or deceived, worse – to cause another to be led astray as we fail to provide them biblical answers to life, truth, God or Christianity.
To know more about the various cults and their false beliefs, which some are active in our country Malaysia, namely Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, Seventh Day Adventist Church and The Unification Church, take your time to understand them at http://www.greatcom.org/resources/handbook_of_todays_religions/default.htm or http://www.carm.org/ (under the category of Religious Movement)
Why is it that so many 'religious' people misconstrue what Jehovah's Witnesses believe? Do you feel justified in doing that because you have judged as a "cult"?
Each statement you have made about us, every single Jehovah's Witness would object to. But I suppose you know better?
TJ
Dear friend,
Thank you for your comment and I do apologise if I have offended you as I believe you are sincere in your faith. I do understand it must be hurtful to be labeled. But I really would like you to know that I am not against the choice of your belief but only against unbiblical teachings. Or else I would be contradicting and compromising the truth of the Bible.
As truth is very important, we need to sincerely seek with open heart and mind to ensure the one we put our trust in is the truth according to the Bible and not justification of it since humans can justify, interpret and explain certain things in own ways to mean something else and called it truth although it contradicts the Bible.
As you would agree, any other religion can justify their own belief and it will seem true according to their belief. But our standard and authority to what is truth is based solely on the Bible and not any other justification.
With this understanding clear, I believe the members of Jehovah's Witnesses are good sincere people and they trust in the belief system of this religion. But then again, this religion claim itself to be true, but who and what is it based upon? The God of the Bible or own belief system? I know everyone has their justification and objection to a statement made, in this case, statement by Christianity.
But if the explaination is according to own justification and interpretation of truth then anyone can claim anything to be truth. Thus unless it is biblical, it isnt truth. Or else we have nothing solid to stand upon as authoritative.
I could not discuss any specific conflict of belief here to clarify further as there isnt any proposed so it will be appropriate for me to end my comment here. If you would like my explanation on certain conflict of belief that can serve as a clarification to you, you are welcome to ask as we are here to learn and seek truth. But do understand I can only reply after this weekend as I wont be around. Appreciate your understanding.
Thank you.
I appreciate your kind response. :) I too believe that beliefs should be measured against the truth found in the Bible, and I don't mind others testing mine.
The problem I have with your depiction of us, apart from the ugly labeling, is that you have attributed to us beliefs that we do not actually hold. In other words, you've put up strawman arguments. Let me explain.
You said, "They believe that Jesus was a good man, but not that He is the Son of God." Wrong. We firmly believe that Jesus is the Son of God, not just simply a good man. The Bible applies the title "Son of God" to Jesus numerous times. What we don't agree with is how many *interpret* that title, taking it as meaning 'God the Son'.
You said, "They also place divine authority on sources other than the Bible." Nope. At least not in the sense that we hold other writings as inspired. We do believe that our congregation is guided by the holy spirit, and in that sense we have divine direction apart from the Bible, but I don't think that's what you're referring to.
You said, "Furthermore, they believe that they acquire salvation through their good works." Absolutely not. We can only gain salvation through faith in Jesus' ransom sacrifice. This teaching would have struck the Jewish audience, many of whom attempted to gain salvation through the 'good works' required by the Mosaic Law. We do not do that. Still, the Bible points out that "faith without works is dead." (James 2:26) A healthy, living faith is shown by doing good works (apart from Law), just as Jesus and his followers strived to do. These good works resulted from their real faith.
I'd be happy to explain our Bible-based beliefs more fully. Thanks.
TJ
Yes, you are quite right in your explaination at the surface and I agree with you on some but your stand ought to be clearer according to what Jehovah's Witnesses fully believe in rather than omitting some. Of course it would unfairly seem like my statement is unsupported and unjustified then.
I am correct to say that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jesus is not God, the Second Person of the Trinity. I understand you do not believe in Trinity. Thus since Jesus is not God, He is reduce to just man or at least a created being rather than self-existent as God. He is believed to become the Christ only at baptism rather than since conception as He is God in human flesh. This denies the deity of Jesus. So since Jesus is not God, He is just man. Jehovah's Witnesses also believe that Jesus is Michael the Archangel with satan as his brother.
It is in view of this that Jesus which the Jehovah's Witnesses believe in is not the biblical and historical Jesus but the Jesus of what Jehovah's Witnesses says He is.
I am also correct to say that the Bible is not the only source of authority for the Jehovah's Witnesses as various theological views of The Watchtower and Awake are believed in. Thus the doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses is not from the Holy Bible alone but their own interpretation of it. In fact, the NWT Bible of Jehovah's Witnesses is not the same as The Holy Bible of Christianity from the early church. This "Bible" omited or changed many words to deny the cardinal truths of the early church to support its own theology, it has many visible errors in it.
It is in view of this that Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in the Holy Bible alone but other sources as well.
I am correct to say that the Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe that salvation is by faith only but they have a total of 4 requirements to be saved according to The Watchtower. One of them can be concluded that salvation must be through Jehovah's Witnesses.
It is in view of all the above mentions that the earlier statement (the ones you quoted) was made on Jehovah's Witnesses. I am only declaring what Jehovah's Witnesses is declaring thus the post was written. It isnt for argument or apologetic purposes. As my blog is not a religious/spiritual forum on this topic, I would like to refer you to the links below for your reading and post them any questions you like as they are the proper channel for such a discussion.
http://www.greatcom.org/resources/handbook_of_todays_religions/01chap05/default.htm
http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/jehovahs-witnesses
If we were to continue on and clarify our points in details, this comment area would not be enough. And since everything about Christianity in comparison with Jehovah's Witnesses is clearly and well written in the above mention websites, it would be best to discover the errors of Jehovah's Witnesses there. I believe you are sincere enough to explore and test it at these websites rather than here as we wont get anywhere in this limited place. Besides, my blog is meant for different purposes. Thus I would like to end my comment here on regards to this topic and move on to other topics. I believe you understand.
Thank you.
You may find this article helpful and relevant to you too :
http://www.carm.org/religious-movements/jehovahs-witnesses/if-you-are-jehovahs-witness-please-read-first
Hello Joshua,
Thanks for your response. I can tell that you have obtained your information primarily through hostile (to Jehovah's Witnesses) sources, as you have again misrepresented us in various ways. I don't think you are doing this purposefully though, and so I have a challenge for you.
Pick one simple topic that you are certain can easily show us to be unbiblical, and allow me to present our evidence. Notice that this is what the Roman Jews allowed the apostle Paul, saying, "we think it proper to hear from you what your thoughts are, for truly as regards this sect it is known to us that everywhere it is spoken against." (Acts 28:22)
What do you say?
TJ
TJ,
I am happy at your positive response and yes it would be great if we can discuss over the Scriptures together. Studying the Word of God is interesting.
But I would not want to enter into any discussion of conflict here in my blog as it is never my intention to do so. This blog is for educational purposes on a wide range of topics and not a suitable place like a forum for such a deep discussion.
As you know, our interpretation of the Bible then would be long and deep, explanation upon explanation will be given as we come from different point of theology. Which means if we are to discuss on one verse, it will touch a whole wide range of theology. The theology of Trinity itself among many others will be difficult to explain in a limited space here and we could not express ourselves fully. Besides, many theologians and scholars from both sides have already discuss on this matter and I have heard both sides and each sides have its arguments. It is never ending as to agree on one verse, one may need to agree on a wide range of other theology. And this is not the place to do so and it serves not the purpose for my blog.
We could both present our arguments and interpretation of it here and then what? I already know these arguments from research and discussion with others. The most important is our discussion here will not produce much benefit and it is not inline with the intention of my blog.
Am I declining an opportunity to discuss intellectually the Word of God? Yes, as although it is good to study the Word of God but this is not the place to "argue" over the interpretation of the Bible. And I would not like to enter into any discussion unnecessarily when it is never intended to in my blog.
2 Timothy 2:23-24 23 Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24 And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.
Titus 3:8-9 so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone. 9 But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.
In respect of these verses and the situation we are in, I choose to refrain from your good invitation for such a discussion. The place is not suitable and not for such discussion thus it would seem unnecessary for me to do so. Besides, such discussion has already been done by other people in forums, websites, interviews and other more appropriate places.
So in view of this, I would like to politely decline from further discussion on this here as there are many other work which I am called to do and my post will move on to other topics. Yes, apostle Paul did present his case in many occasions but he also did avoid many other arguments which is not beneficial and does not serve his missionary purpose. It is the same here in my case in view of this blog.
If your intention is to sincerely present your case, please do so in other dedicated websites. It will be more beneficial there. It is nice to have know you and I appreciate your understanding.
No, I do not believe that the websites misrepresented Jehovah's Witnesses just because it is "hostile" to them. The websites do not misrepresent JW as they have presented truthful and honest evaluation of Jehovah's Witnesses belief according to the Bible (the Bible that the Church accepts, not just a version of the Bible that only JW accepts, of course then the JW's Bible will say what JW want it to say. How can one know the truth when they can only know what JW tells them and deny every other body of Christ?).
Of course truth is hostile to falsehood no matter how much the falsehood justify themselves in their own point of view. One cannot say what one say is true just because one says so but it must stand true with the rest of the body who is besides themselves.
Yes, JW can justify themselves in certain belief and quote from their "bible" but when they deny the cardinal belief of the Church, no matter how fine sounding it seems to be, JW alone cannot be true where else everyone is false. If the Church says Jesus is the Son of God and you believe it too BUT add on to say He is the brother of satan and a created being of God thus saying what they Bible did not say and giving another Jesus not from the Gospel....that is ridiculous.
Are you saying that I am suppose to believe what JW have to say from their own version of the Bible and what The Watchtower says? You want me to follow a somewhat new religion that came out from group of people who teach others to believe in what they believe in and deny the belief of the early church which the Apostles hold true? And dont justify to me with fine sounding arguments that the early church and the Apostles ever taught that Jesus is a created being and a brother of satan among all other false teachings of JW. By believing in JW, I am denying the Church of Christ, the truth it stands for and all the hundreds and thousands of the saints of God who believe in the cardinal truth of God.
The Nicene Creed is one of the confession and the statement of faith of the Church to declare what they hold as cardinal truths to deny all the false teachings of the cults at that time (one of it is Arianism who denied the deity of Christ just as JW denies). The Nicene Creed, A.D. 381 states :
We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Jesus is ETERNALLY CO-EXISTENT with God, He came from God and is God, He is one being with God and NOT CREATED. He is WORSHIPED and GLORIFIED along with the Father and the Holy Spirit as one being. Only God can be worship thus Jesus who is worship is God. JW believes He is created by God and the angels, and He is a brother of satan...just this false belief alone denied the deity of Christ and in such a ridiculous fashion. Where in the Bible did it says about Jesus the things that JW says about Him? JW cannot say something out of its own intrepretation when the Bible did not say so, no matter how justified it seems in the eyes of JW alone.
You may say that this Nicene Creed is not what the Bible says according to your own evaluation. Are you then suggesting me to deny the whole body of Christ and the cardinal belief of the Church and believe in JW who was started by few people out of no where that claims they know the truth and the rest of the Church dont know? Then what stop me from denying Christianity and also JW and believe in Mormonism since they also deny the cardinal truths of the Church?
Yes, Christianity as a faith is exclusive in its belief apart from all the other religions of the world but it is not the same when a single organisation like JW claims exclusive truth, particularly apart from Christianity. Where is the credibility of JW in the eyes of the world then?
If you put away all JW beliefs (all of JW theology) and only believe in the Holy Bible, can you still be certain of your salvation and that you are in the truth? Which means you can know the Truth apart from JW. If yes, I have nothing to say. If no, then JW is bigger than the Church and the Bible. I have a problem with this idea then.
Justify, quote and then twist my words all you want, it does not erase the truth and the larger picture I have presented and I know you can argument with fine sounding arguments to seemingly prove I am wrong and JW is right but....you cant prove JW holds the Truth by proving others wrong, JW must prove itself true by not depending on JW's own doctrines and Bible interpretation alone. If then what stops other religions to be true when they argue by their own doctrines?
Dont twist and confuse using the fact that Christianity also depends on their own doctrines to prove themselves true from all the other religions because in Christian apologetics, they dont. And you know it is one thing about another religion totally apart from Christianity and another thing about an organisation which twist Christinianty and believe in half the things from Christianity and half own. If JW wants to believe in something else apart from Christianity, then dont take part of Christianity and create new doctrines out if it and deny Christianity. It is not without reason that JW is a cult and JW cannot justify itself on its own to deny they are not cults just because they say so and deny the rest of Christianity which it derives from.
Joshua is careful enough not to enter into an argument with you because it will cause his blog to turn ugly with arguments as you only seems to say he is wrong when you dont prove you are right. And whatever you have to say, you have to argue it against Christianity, not just him. Thus it is indeed more beneficial for you to argue your case in these truthful websites that already presented truthful biblical arguments against JW. Dont tell me these websites are hostile to JW when they present truthful facts. If I am going to close my eyes to Christianity to only know non-hostile things of JW from JW sources, then how can I truly say I know the Truth when I have not consider Christianity with an unbias eyes affected by JW? But have I likewise also consider JW in such a manner? Yes that is how I manage to understand the facts I have presented above and it holds true.
Apostle Paul is not a JW as he does not believe in what JW believes in, he never said about Jesus the things JW and The Watchtower say about Him or else it would be recorded in the Bible as God does not hide it and does not reveal Himself specifically apart from the Bible. This is what he advised us as true Christians :
Colossians 2:4 4 I tell you this so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments.
What did he tell us then? The truth about Jesus Christ as the whole Bible describes Him to be without own twisting interpretation of "here and there" verses but also supported by the testimonies of the direct disciples of the Apostles who are the early church fathers and the cardinal truths of the early church was declared in the Nicene Creed among other creeds.
Am I to deny the cardinal truths of the whole body of the early church (eg. Nicene Creed, A.D. 381) that is in line with the Holy Bible in favor of JW new teachings of the late 1800's initiated by a single man's own interpretation of the Bible??? I wonder what theological training he had and in whose authority he holds to interpret the Bible his own way to teach things never taught by the Church? Dont tell me that the early church teachings were corrupted and JW is here to correct it with their own doctrines? JW needs more than own doctrines to prove itself true in denial of the Church.