Polemics - Discernment - Jehovah's Witnesses

Alright, like I was saying, this is a fascinating group to study. They're not that old, and so late 1800s, and like I say, I have everything that Charles Taze Russell wrote. that's Jehovah's Witness material. Like I've said, that's over 25,000 pages. I have hundreds of megabytes of Jehovah's Witness material.

And so over the course of this week, it was just kind of interesting to continue to look over that and reflect on it and whatnot. One of the things is that it is an offshoot of the Seventh-day Adventists. The Seventh Adventists was a group that developed out of the Great Disappointment of 1844. William Miller, the Baptist preacher that had everybody convinced that at least everybody in their group convinced that Christ was going to come back and they had what was called the Great Disappointment. Various groups developed out of that. The Seventh-day Adventist is one of them. There are various Seventh-day Adventist offshoots and other groups that developed. One of the groups that developed was the Seventh-day Baptists.

They're Baptists, they call themselves, but they observe the Sabbath. Are they behind the group that occasionally isolates themselves on the mountaintop and waits for the Lord to come? Well there may be other various ones that do that sort of thing. Believe it or not there's a Seventh Day Baptist church up in Boulder. They're already done with their church gathering because they get together on the Sabbath. So they were done last night. But the Seventh-day Baptists, they've actually got a church over in Boulder.

And you'll have various ones that do this gathering up on a mountaintop kind of pattern. There are other split-offs from the Seventh-day Adventists, the David Koresh and the Branch Davidians that had a conflagration 20 some odd years ago. down in Texas and Waco, that that is another one of the splinter groups. And since the interpretive approach of that group is partly it's an improper interpretation of scripture, but a lot of them have an additional profit or something of that sort. and they tend to tell their people what to believe rather than explaining the scriptures as we seek to do here. And so the people will tend to follow whatever they say.

So anyway, the Jehovah's Witnesses are the largest splinter group from the Seventh-day Adventists is one way to characterize it. They were an offshoot of the Baptists, were an offshoot of the Reform Movement, were an offshoot of the Lutherans, founded by Martin Luther, who wasn't initially intending to be an offshoot from their own Catholic Church. The Jehovah's Witnesses are the largest of several offshoots, 7.8 million members as of last year, by August was that number, of the Seventh Adventist, which is 18.5 million members as of 2014. The split from the SDA was 1879, and so all the material I have from Charles Taze Russell, the founder, goes from 1879 until his death in 1916.

And I'd like to say that's over 25,000 pages. So what I titled the next section there is if you like change, you'll love the Jehovah's Witnesses. Lots of change. Jehovah's Witnesses are historically not that old. They have published lots of material over the 136 years they've been in existence. One thing that this does is to document lots of change and lots of things. Plenty of change. If you like change, you'll just love the Jehovah's Witnesses.

The cross and the crown were the symbols that JWs, as I put it here often, 1891 to 1931 was their time of using the cross and the crown as their symbol. You'll see that up in the corner of their watchtower, up in the upper left. What you see in the middle is what's marked on the tomb of Charles Taze Russell as the cross and the crown.

But since then, since 1931, they decided that Jesus was actually impaled on a torture stake. And that's what you see with this vertical thing. One nail through the wrists. And so they've given up on the idea of a cross, even though that was initially their symbol. And so they believe that Jesus was impaled on a torture stake. And that's what they, for decades, have taught.

The historical record does not fit that. We have it from early church leaders writing that Jesus was crucified on a cross with a cross piece. The earliest artifacts that we have graphically showing Jesus' crucifixion or anybody's crucifixion was that it was a cross piece. Randy? of Simon of Cyrene carrying the cross piece of Christ if there was no cross piece? Yeah, they basically have it as a pole and then one nail through the wrists. That's what they've been saying for some decades now. But yeah, it doesn't fit with what we know historically. No solid, sound historian believes it. But that's what they teach.

Now, the J.W.' 's founder sold Christmas cards to raise money. And of course I've got, like I say, 25,000 pages of his writing. And here's from 1892 for example. the Watchtower advertisement Christmas cards, assorted, illuminated, five cents and ten cents. And they sold Christmas cards regularly, advertised them in the Watchtower.

And so that was the case. After Charles Chase Russell died in 1916, here's a picture in the lower left, three Watchtower presidents after him in 1926. showing up in this picture. And this is Rutherford, Knorr, and Franz. Those three, they're in this picture of a JW sponsored, a Jehovah's Witness sponsored Christmas celebration.

In 1928, however, they decided that Christmas was not good for Jehovah's Witnesses to celebrate. So since then, it's too bad, bad news. Even though their founder sold Christmas cards to raise money for the Jehovah's Witnesses. All right, back side. On January 7, 1906, Charles Chase Russell wrote, Since then, the majority of Christian people have habituated the celebration of December 25th as our Lord's birthday.

We need make no protest, but join with all in celebrating that day with rejoicing of heart, giving gifts and remembrance to one another, thus copying divine favor which gave to mankind the Son of God as a gift of mercy and love for our redemption. But since 1928, observing Christmas was forbidden for Jehovah's Witnesses. So you won't find them observing Christmas, you won't find them observing birthdays. No birthdays, no holidays, no Christmas.

Here's the next one. In Millennial Dawn, Volume 5, Chapter 4, page 366, Charles Taze Russell wrote that his niece had given him a birthday present. Charles Chase Russell encouraged D.W.s multiple times to buy his books to give as birthday presents as well as Christmas presents. But a 1951 observing birthday was forbidden. No more observing birthdays. Sorry, can't have a birthday party. That's bad. You might lose your salvation if you observe a birthday party now.

So critical end times date, 1874, and that was based on a vision that Charles J. Russell had. 1874 to 1914, 1917, 1918, 1925, 1975, and the year 2000. By the way, the 1925 date was a real downer for them. They lost lots of people because they were saying this is the time, it's going to be the start of the end times.

And what they believe is that anybody who's not a JW when we get into this end times situation will be annihilated and your soul will just be gone. Your soul will just end. There's no hell in the sense of some eternal punishment. You'll just be gone and there will only be JWs left on the earth. Heaven is full. 144,000 get to go to heaven and that's it. And that's already full and taken up.

So your best hope is to be on this earth and if you're not a JW you won't make it. It's just not going to happen. But if you're not of the 144,000, then are you annihilated? No, you're going to be on the earth at best. But if you're not a JW and you haven't been faithful and doing everything right, then you're going to be annihilated. Your best hope, if you're a Jehovah's Witness now, because of the 144,000, that quota has already been full. is to be on the earth forever and ever. Oh, and by the way, you've got to live perfectly during that thousand year period of time, the millennial kingdom. You better live perfectly. If you don't do that, you'll be annihilated too. Even if you've been good before that.

So they have no clue what Romans 5 and 6 talk about? They have no clue. They have no assurance of salvation. You could make it into the Millennial Kingdom and still lose your salvation and then be annihilated if you blow it. I have sat with one pair of them. They come to the door. I said, do you believe that you can lose your salvation? I feel very, very sorry for you. You just wouldn't believe the expression on their face when I said that.

So anyway, and they keep changing the dates. Here's one of the more recent ones, Life Everlasting, I also have that in a PDF file, and Freedom of the Sons of God, page 29. According to this trustworthy Bible chronology, 6,000 years from man's creation will end in 1975, And the seventh period of a thousand years of human history will begin in the fall of 1975 CE, Common Era. So 6,000 years of man existence on Earth will soon be up, yes, within this generation. And the first generation that they talked about was 1914. You have 144,000. What you see in the bottom there, in the middle, this generation will not pass away in 1914. Until they did.

And then for the year 2000, November 8th, 1986, I visualize the world transformed into a beautiful paradise, but I don't think that either the present world or its rulers will live to see that day. We are living in the last days of the system of things. So they keep putting another date out there, and another one, and another one, and another one. And the last one was 2034. But they put it out there real vaguely so that it could be denied. So anyway, yeah, they keep changing the dates, keep putting out different dates, and generations come and generations go.

They also came out with, as you see a picture there, the New World Translation. So let's go to the top of page three. So the Jehovah's Witness organization generally used the King James Version until they came up with the New World Translation, though not always pivotal to the doctrinal positions of the JWs because they will have doctrines that don't necessarily relate to their New World Translation. Consisting of the New Testament and by 1961 the Old Testament and the New Testament, the 61 edition of the New World Translation has been revised a number of times. I had the 1970 version and I downloaded a PDF file and threw it away. But anyway, they've got different ones. There are places where the neural translation has some curious but inconsistent translations and mistranslations.

The word cross is replaced with torture state. Remember, they forget the crucifixion, it's now a torture state. And crucified is replaced with impaled. So I preach Christ not crucified, but impaled. Though the pictures of Christ impaled on the torture stake show one nail in Christ's hands, the New World Translation of John 20.25 has His hands the print of the nails. How does he have one nail through both wrists, but Thomas is insisting on seeing the print of the nails, plural, in his hand, plural. So this is a good translation, but it doesn't fit with the rest of the New World translation. Christ is not presented as deity, but as a God who is at unity with the Father. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a God.

John 10.30, when Jesus says the Father and I are one, and that means in the Greek, one in essence, they say they are at unity or in agreement or something of that sort. The Holy Spirit is sometimes presented as a force, which is what they teach, but not consistently. Here, for example, is John 14, 16, and 17, New World Translation.

I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever, the spirit of truth which the world cannot receive because it neither sees it nor knows it. You know it because it remains with you and is in you. So you've got that divine force, impersonal force.

That's not what John 14, 16, and 17 says in the rest of our Bibles. I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever, which is the Spirit of truth, and the world whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him nor know Him, but you know Him, because He abides with you and will be in you. Quite a difference there. However, the New World Translation in John 16, 13 is different.

However, when he comes, the Spirit of Truth, he will guide you into all truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come. That one will glorify me, because he will receive from what is mine and will declare it to you. So, which is it?

So the JWs could give blood and receive transfusion until it was forbidden in 1945. Then you couldn't do it. Taking someone else's blood and giving blood for someone else is determined to be unbiblical. But there have been certain exceptions. For example, in Bulgaria. It's okay in Bulgaria if you're a Jehovah's Witness. And then you can have certain portions of the blood, but just not the whole blood. in different parts of the world. Voting. These spiritual brothers do not run for political office or vote for political candidates.

That's from 1973. Do we today feel the same way as these faithful servants of God in the past, when national law or community pressures seem to make it imperative that we vote for political leaders or support nationalistic schemes, we will compromise and get disqualified and sidetracked from the race for life?

Etc. However, that's been changed. you'll be glad to know, they now have the freedom to make a personal decision. As of November 1st, 1999, that was changed. There appears to be no principle against the practice of voting itself. So since that date, it's a personal decision. Before that, you would have lost your salvation if you voted. So, so that, I'm sorry, seems is very subjective.

Yes. In the vocabulary. Yes. So before this, you know, provided by the Spirit in some spiritual, you know, prognostication or prophetic thing. Yes. You shouldn't vote. Yes, you'll lose your salvation if you vote. Now, as a man, we've waited. As men we've weighed this thing and now it's okay, it seems okay maybe. Yeah. Yeah. They're ready to run for office. Yeah, yeah. A Christian has to make his own decision. That's the way they put it. Each Christian has to make his own decision before Jehovah God. Oh, but one other thing.

One of the things you'll notice here at Holly Hills is we very rarely will have the word Jehovah, you know, in songs or anything, and the reason is because it's a nonsense word. It's one that got developed over time. In the Hebrew, in the Hebrew, it basically has, you know, w or y h, w h is how we would carry it across. and the vowels in between were not written and so what the Jews did is they took the vowels from Adonai and Elohim and put those in YHWH and So it was inserted there as a signal that this is a name you should not pronounce because the Jews had a prohibition against pronouncing the name of God.

So Jehovah is basically a nonsense word. It was inserted based on just some other assumptions and it was written as a signal that you should not pronounce this name because the Jews were not permitted to announce the name. And so even Jehovah's Witness is all made up. It's a nonsense word. It would be like, for example, if I take Randy's name and put other vowels in there, like Rhonda. That's what it is. And so even Jehovah is not God's name. It's a nonsense name. So anyway, I just thought I'd bring that up.

So what does Jehovah's Witness Group have in common with its parent, SDA, and or similar religious cult groups? And this we brought up here. One is Jehovah's Witness Group here has in common one, salvation is gained or sustained by keeping the laws adopted by the organization. That's the same thing with the SDA and a lot of these other groups.

You know, you'll have a Seventh-day Baptist, like I say, they've got a church up in Boulder, but they don't follow the whole law of Moses. They pick certain things to abide by and then dismiss the rest of them. Yes? But isn't that the same with every cult? Yeah, that's the same with every cult is they're legal because that's a part of the control of the cult, right? And they're legal and you have along with that loss of salvation. The loss of salvation is profoundly unbiblical. But, every cult does it.

Why? Because they want to hold that over you as control. You've got to follow our rules, and so what the Seventh-day Adventist, you've got to follow their dietary laws and add to that, from Ellen G. White, being vegetarian. You go eating that meat stuff, that'll put you in hell fast.

Oh, excuse me, get you annihilated. Then salvation is only available through the one organization rather than from God alone. There is nothing in the Bible that says you've got to have some particular organization to be saved. Nothing. But, that's what every one of these cult groups will teach you. You've got to have this particular organization, otherwise you're not saved. Next one, interpretation of elements of prophecy is by allegory adopted by the organization.

So the 144,000 in Revelation chapter 7 that says it's 144,000 of Israel and it gives the names of the tribes, 12,000 of each of the tribes, that's not literal. you know, whether you're Jews or Gentiles or whatever, that's some particular group. And so the Jehovah's Witnesses have 144,000 of those who are going to heaven, everybody else has a chance, if they follow all the rules perfectly, has a chance of staying on the earth or otherwise would be annihilated. It doesn't matter that it says Jews and Israel and gives them the number of my tribe. No, that's the group of those who are saved. They hope to be, as what's given in the other part of that same chapter, the great crowd. The Jonadabs, as they call it.

Fifth, the organization has some exclusive role in interpreting scripture, supplementing scripture, and or dispensing rituals that keeps the organization in some degree of control of its adherents. With the Jehovah's Witnesses, you have this president, a series of presidents, about a half dozen of them so far, and you've got the ruling council, and those people tell you what to believe, and it can change over time. They'll come up with prohibitions decades after the group started, and they might reverse it. And one of them they reversed was this voting thing.

They've done some softening, and it depends on what part of the world, on the blood transfusions. Made certain exceptions, except in Bulgaria where they've made a complete exception. So if you're a Jehovah's Witness and you really have to have a blood transfusion, go to Bulgaria. That'll fix it. Yeah.

Is that because of that statement, what is it, in Deuteronomy where life is in the blood? Is that why it comes? In other words, the Jews were prohibited from having meat that was strangled because you take in the blood. Well, it's one thing to eat something with blood in it, but it's another thing to have a transfusion, so they choose it because of that. Why pick that law? They don't let their land life follow, let their lawn dry up every seven years. That's because life is in the blood. Yes, that's the supposed reasoning.

They're founded by Nelson Barber and Charles Taze Russell, formerly of the Seventh-day Adventists. It was 1879 when they left the Seventh-day Adventists. A Jehovah's Witness organization, the Watchtower Society. The leadership of the organization has been passed along to a series of men as president and increasingly to the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses in recent decades. Having less power and control by the president and more this governing body. So here's the Watchtower, July 1, 1973, page 402.

Jehovah's organization alone in all the earth is directed by God's Holy Spirit or force. Only this organization functions for Jehovah's purpose and to his praise. To it alone God's sacred word, the Bible, is not a sealed book. How very much true Christians appreciate associating with the only organization on earth that understands the deep things of God.

Direction by God's Spirit enables Jehovah's servants to have divine light in a world of spiritual darkness. Or, put it more briefly, November 15, 1981, page 21, come to Jehovah's organization for salvation. There's the invitation, right there. Doesn't get any better than that, I guess, huh?

Alright, so just what kind of things does Jehovah's Witness teach? Nearly identical to the 4th century Arian heresy, the JWs teach that only God the Father is God, whose name is Jehovah. Jesus Christ is Jehovah's first created being, and the Holy Spirit is an impersonal, invisible, active force from Jehovah. The JWs teach that before Jesus Christ came to earth, he was Michael the Archangel, as do the Seventh-day Adventists.

Though the SDA hold that Jesus is the second person of the Trinity, and the JWs do not. So there is a distinction. Both of them teach that Jesus is Michael the Archangel, but the Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus as Michael the Archangel is not God, whereas the Seventh-day Adventists do. So you see where they got it, but they changed the doctrine from the SDAs.

Salvation in the JW teaching requires being baptized as Jehovah's Witness, followed by continuing door-to-door work. You've got to do that. Salvation for the 144,000 JWs filled the capacity of those who could actually go to heaven, these being the anointed ones. So for example, you have a heavenly citizenship? That's not for you. That's only for the 144,000. That's it. That's it.

144,000, but that's already full, that's already done, your best hope is to be a Jehovah's Witness, make sure you do the door-to-door work, and make sure, absolutely certain, that you don't get a blood transfusion unless you're in Bulgaria. And then, then you can live on this present heavens and earth, in the new millennial kingdom, but make sure you do it perfectly or you might be annihilated. Even if you make it into the Millennial Kingdom. How are you doing with that? Yes, I'm sorry. How was the first 144,000 determined? I mean what determined why those first... Yeah, it's first come, first served. You know, I'm sorry, 44,000, and they're done, and you're part of the great crowd at best.

Yes. I'm sorry. Hold on a second. Are they as aggressive about getting people to leave the block as some of the other cults are? I mean, do they go out and harass them and threaten them and all that kind of stuff? They have in recent years been softening on some of those things.

For example, the blood transfusions. They've been softening on that because they would have somebody get a blood transfusion because I'm going to die if I don't get one, right? And so their position before, previously, was, you know, you're going to be annihilated because you had a blood transfusion. You lost your salvation. You're done. And now they're more in a kind of restorative, comforting, you know, too bad you made that decision, but let's get you back on track here. So that's changed a bit in terms of their approach. But they haven't reversed completely unless you live in Bulgaria. If you leave the group, you are shunned? Yes. Is that what you were asking? Yeah, you are shunned and we have former JWs that actually come here. Yes.

In other words, that's the passage on eating blood, but it's also a matter of picking which laws I'm going to abide by, right? Because they don't go and do their sacrifices in Jerusalem. They don't let their land life follow every seven years. They don't let their slaves go free.

Right? Yeah? Yeah? When Sue and I and Patty and David were in D.C. we went through the Holocaust Museum and there They said that the JWs were part of the Holocaust. Many of them were persecuted, killed. Yes. I'm wondering if that fits in with this 144,000 since those were Jews, if they're trying to put themselves in with... Their persecution was, you know, if you're in Germany, If you're in Germany, you're going to fight for Hitler. And if not, then they would have you in this persecuted group. So yes, the Jehovah's Witnesses did suffer persecution under Hitler's Germany.

But it's because of their refusal to serve in the military and things of that sort in great part. They see themselves as replacing the Jews. The Seventh-day Adventists, for example, are preterists and they actually have a fairly negative view of the Jews. That was the main reason, because we're not fighting in your military and therefore that's a problem.

The souls of those who are not among the ones saved to heaven or earth will be annihilated. They will cease to exist. JWs cannot have assurance of eternal salvation. In other words, I might do all the right things now, but even into the Millennial Kingdom, if I blow it, I can be annihilated.

So I never have assurance of salvation. That just never happens. It just never happens. Because their salvation depends on continuous works all the way to the end. I might, in 999 years into the Millennial Kingdom, blow it and be annihilated. No assurance. You don't get that.

Charles Taze Russell referenced Revelation 3.5 as a threat of having one's names removed rather than a comforting promise, which it in fact is. So he wrote that it was a threat that you might have your name blotted out, erased from the Book of Life. And in fact it doesn't mean that at all.

Now, here I have below that, what does the Bible actually teach? The Bible actually teaches three persons, one essence, is what we term the Trinity. The term Trinity is not in the Bible, that's fine, I don't really care. But three personal beings, one essence, is what the Bible does in fact teach.

We have there the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, and we've got a scriptural reference for, you know, the Son is not the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit is not the Father, the Father is not the Son, that's what those references are for. And then some references, there are actually a great many of them, that say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are all three deity. The Gospel of John is one of those that makes the deity of Christ quite clear.

One of them is I Am, Ego Emi, the Bread of Life, the Light of the World, the Gate, the Good Shepherd, seven metaphors that begin with Ego Emi. The Ego Emi, how are we so sure that that's a claim to deity when Moses is at the burning bush, and he asks, who will I say has sent me? The Greek Old Testament says, ego emi, I am. So seven different metaphors that Jesus uses in the Gospel of John that match up there with the burning bush incident.

Additionally, why the angel of the Lord is not the same as an angel of the Lord. The angel of the Lord speaks as God, doing things that God does, and we look at numerous references there. The angel of the Lord showed up at times like with Hagar and Ishmael. The angel of the Lord showed up with Moses in the burning bush. The angel of the Lord showed up with Gideon. So different times we have listed there, all the way to Zechariah towards the end of the Old Testament period.

People speak as if they've seen God, and in some cases it switches between the angel of the Lord and God said. So it's quite clear, but the angel of the Lord no longer shows up in the New Testament, Why? Because Christ was born of Mary, right? And we find that in the New Testament there's no the angel of the Lord, it's an angel of the Lord.

One of the rationale that both the Seventh-day Adventists and the Jehovah's Witnesses use for the idea that Jesus is Michael the Archangel is from Jude 8-10, so we have that quoted there. Yet in the same way these men, also by dreaming, defile the flesh and reject authority and revile angelic majesties. But Michael the archangel, when he disputed with the devil and argued about the body of Moses, did not dare pronounce against him a railing judgment, but said, The Lord rebuke you." Michael, if he's an archangel, but he says, The Lord rebuke you, he didn't himself pronounce a judgment, right? So why do you say the Lord rebuked you if that's Jesus and deity? So this is the rationale from the book of Jude for saying that Jesus is Michael the Archangel, that both the Seventh-day Adventist and the Jehovah's Witnesses use as the basis for Jesus is Michael the Archangel.

Do we have people today that try to revile Satan? Now this is the charismatic thing going on, binding Satan, you know, binding him again and again. I have no idea who let Satan loose. But that binding Satan thing, what's that? Binding must not last very long. Yeah, it must not last very long or work very well. Satan will be bound, and one angel will do it, and we don't even know his name. Just one angel will go and bind him up with a chain and put him in the abyss for a thousand years and that will be when it happens and not before then. And not when we pronounce it or ask for it or anything else. Okay, so let's turn to page six.

In John 10, 25 through 30, We have this, and Jesus answered them, this is the Jewish leaders, I told you and you do not believe me, the works that I do in my Father's name, these testify of me. But you do not believe because you are not of my sheep. My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me and I give eternal life to them and they will never perish, middle voice, which means they will never, ume, it's not even remotely possible that they will perish of their own doing. So can you blow it and be annihilated or sent to hell? If you're a believer. No. Not happening, right? Not happening.

And no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father who has given them to me is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. I am the Father are one, John 10.30, and that means of one essence. We said there are three personal beings, the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit of one essence. We are accustomed to thinking of one personal being, one essence. That's what we think of when we think of ourselves. But three personal beings, one essence. Jesus said I am the Father are of one essence.

The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, I showed you many good works from the Father, for which of them are you stoning me? The Jews answered, for good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy, because you being a man make yourself out to be God.

Did Jesus claim deity? Yes. And that's exactly, that's exactly what's happening here. So Jesus answered, has it not been written in your law, I said you are gods, but if ye call them gods to whom the word of God came and the scripture cannot be broken, do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, you are blaspheming because I said I am the Son of God. Did Jesus ever claim to be the Son of God?

Right here. Right here. I've heard people say that he never did. It says it right here. I said, I am the Son of God. If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me. But if I do them, though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand the Father is in me, and I am the Father. Does that sound like there are one essence? It certainly does.

It is a restatement of John 10.30, is it not? I am in the Father and the Father is in me. John 17 says exactly the same thing.

In John 10.30, I was just looking at the Greek, it's really cool because Christ says, I am and the Father are in one cohort or one entity.

Yes, we are of one essence. It says exactly that. What the Jehovah's Witnesses are told is that this says we are in agreement or at unity or for the same purpose. That's not what this says. We are of one essence. not we're in agreement or at unity or of one purpose. And so he states there multiple times, I am the father of one, I am the son of God, the father is in me and I am the father.

Ephesians 2.8 and 9, For by grace you have been saved, perfect passive verb, a completed past action with ongoing results in the future. Passive indicates it's God who does the saving, not I work to keep myself saved.

Through faith and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, the salvation is a gift of God, not as a result of work so that no man may boast. How are you saved? By faith. It's a gift of God. You don't earn it. You don't work to keep yourself saved, it's passive so that it's God who does the saving. I don't work to keep myself saved. And the perfect tense implies permanence unless the context indicates otherwise.

Here's Revelation 3.5 which is the one that Charles Taze Russell quoted to say that you know it's threatened that you might be blotted out or erased from the book of life. He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments and I will not, just like in John chapter 10, I will not erase his name from the book of life and I will confess his name before my father and before his angels. It is not even remotely possible, is what that Umay says, it's not even remotely possible that I will erase his name from the book of life.

Not happening. The only statement of removing your name from the book of life in the entire New Testament and the last part of the Old Testament too. But the only statement that talks about removing or blotting out your name or erasing your name from the Book of Life is a promise that it absolutely won't happen. Not happening. Not even sort of. Not a chance. Never a threat. Not even once.

Yes. But ironically, since they don't have the identification truce, this actually works for them. Yeah, you think about it, with the identification truce, which, you know, we'd look at that throughout the New Testament, We look at the identification truths and it talks about, for example, in Romans and Galatians, you've baptized into Christ. Romans chapter 7, you're joined to Christ. You are in Christ, numerous places. Where's the passage that says you've been unbaptized from Christ? Where's the passage that says you've been taken out of Christ? Where's the passage that even threatens that? Where is the passage that said you've been unjoined from Christ? They don't exist. And the reason they don't exist is because you can't lose your salvation. Yeah?

Where did Paul talk to a church that he had already established and tell them that they had lost their salvation? Here is the church at Corinth that he's going to tell them, you guys are fleshly, You guys are broken up into groups. Some of you are even wondering about the resurrection.

But he starts off the whole book of 1 Corinthians saying, in the perfect tense, you've been sanctified. So does it mean that a believer ought to just go out and wander about and blow it and all that? No. But he never threatens an undoing. of the salvation that you have. Instead, tells these goofed up, crazy, split up believers at Corinth that they've been sanctified in the perfect tense. And God is faithful, He'll do it. He'll pull it off. It's neat. It's really cool what the New Testament says. But this group has really got it wrong.

And the people who come up to your door are doing so because if they don't, they're afraid they're going to be annihilated. Yeah? One of the things that I have observed in interacting with the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons, because they're the most common group that comes up to your door, is It's really good to be able to articulate from the very beginning how we approach the Bible in interpretation.

Because what they're going to do is they're going to argue with you and they're going to use the same vocabulary and they're going to tell you you're wrong using the same vocabulary that you would use. But they need different things. So it's important to understand hermeneutics and be able to say, well, we need to observe, interpret, and apply, and then maybe appropriate, or however you want to articulate that. But then you need to be able to say, OK, well, let's look at the culture, the language, the history, and force them to go back to that. Otherwise they'll regurgitate the same stuff that they've been told to regurgitate.

By the way, they have been cautioned against individual and small group Bible study. They've been cautioned against it. They've been told, if you do individual and small group Bible study, you will be lost. You will lose your way and you will end up being annihilated. So they have a great fear of applying objective hermeneutics. They have a great fear. That fear is driven into them.

Yes. But you will be much more effective with your time if you hit them up with that in the beginning. Because otherwise they will spin their wheels and just say the same thing over and over again. And you'll be like, but we just went over this. And they'll be like, no, you don't agree with me yet, so we're going to say it again.

But if you go and try to hit at the root of the approach to the scriptures, which they don't have any equipping for, then they just fall back on the Dear Father and Satan. It is obvious from the different rules that they've had over the years, and some of that they've been reversed on, it's obvious from the rules that they've had thrown at them over time, that they are told what to believe and told what to say. They're cautioned against actually studying scripture directly. And so they're told what to believe and what to say. They're told what a passage means even if it in fact means the opposite. And that's the way they operate and that's the way they think. And they think they're taught that most assuredly you're lying to them.

So there's a deep distrust of that kind of thing. And to go over their history, and say, look, they taught this and this and this and there was 1874 and 1914 and on and on. And those kind of dates, they've been taught, I've been through this with them, they've been taught that, well, isn't it a good thing that they finally saw what was true? Well, they haven't finally seen what was true. They continue to change and change and change and change and establish new dates. The whole date setting thing is another mess. Instead of saying and seeing, no man knows the day or the hour.

Oh, but you might know the year, right? In 1975, it was early fall. I remember that. It was early fall, 1975, when this whole millennium thing was supposed to start. Came and went. And so then they established another one, 2000 was it, and now it's 2034. So, got another one, got to wait a while for the next blowout. Some day they're going to hit it. Yeah, I guess. Maybe. No man knows the day or the hour, right?

Let's pray. Lord, we thank you that we do in your word have truth that we can count upon. We don't have to look at human beings for understanding of scripture. We don't have to look at human beings for establishing what is true. But you've already laid it out. You've done so because you love us and care for us. We thank you for that. We thank you for the assurance of salvation that we can have and that doesn't depend upon us. And we pray, Lord, in Jesus' name. Amen.