Truth Magazine

By Leonard White

To find the roots of the modern-day Jehovah’s Witness organization we need only go back 140 years. On February 16, 1852 Charles Taze Russell was born in Allegheny City, Pennsylvania. His parents were Scotch-Irish Presbyterians, but at an early age Charles joined a nearby Congregational Church because of its “more liberal views,” While still a teenager, Russell became troubled and confused by the teaching and preaching he heard, particularly the idea that God would create human beings which he foreknew and predestined to be eternally tormented. According to Russell’s own account, a turning point in his thinking came at the age of 18 when he chanced to hear a ‘Second Adventist” preacher named Jonas Wendell. About this same time Russell organized a Bible class in Pittsburgh. Six years later, at the ripe age of 24, he ‘vas elected ”Pastor” of this group, a title which he wore until the time of his death. Russell was fascinated by the prophetic speculations and chronologies of the Adventists. For a brief time he joined with Adventist N.H. Barbour in the publication of a magazine called The Herald of the Morning. Though this collaboration did not last long, there is little doubt that Russell’s later penchant for date-setting and his views on such things as biblical chronology, the soul of man and eternal punishment were largely influenced by these early associations with heirs of the ”Millerite” movement.

In 1879 Russell began publication of a magazine which he called Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence, known today as The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom, with an initial circulation of 6000 copies. In 1884 he incorporated Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society, followed in 1896 by the formation of The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, the name still used today. It could perhaps be said that this marked the time of the founding of the Jehovah’s Witness organization. Russell served as president of the Society and for a time personally owned 99 percent of its capital.

Russell’s life was very colorful, to say the least. He was a dynamic (some would even say charismatic) leader who had proven his abilities as an entrepreneur by establishing, with his father, a chain of clothing stores. Now he was able through his writing and lecturing to promulgate his aberrant religious views and at the same time build a vast financial empire. The career of the organization’s founder and first president was a turbulent one indeed. He was involved in numerous legal battles, publicly exposed as a perjurer, charged by his wife and others with immoral conduct, implicated in fraudulent business schemes — all of which were viewed by his devoted followers as simply signs of the persecution which was to be expected from the wicked enemy, “organized religion.”

Russell’s greatest contribution to the movement’s theology came in a serious of seven books, known collectively as Studies in the Scriptures. The first volume appeared in I 886 and the seventh was added in 1917, after his death. It is somewhat of an embarrassment to modern Jehovah’s Witnesses that the “Pastor” encouraged the study of these books as being of greater value than reading of the Bible alone (Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1910).

In 1908 the Society purchased property in Brooklyn, New York and established headquarters there. Under the name Bethel, this continues today to serve as the hub of their world-wide operations.

Upon his death in 1916 Russell was succeeded as president by (Judge) Joseph Franklin Rutherford, who had previously acted as legal counselor for the organization. Rutherford was quick to take complete control, eliminating those who might be a threat to this authority. He proved to be a more prolific writer than his predecessor, producing over 100 books and pamphlets.

During World War I Rutherford’s outspoken denunciation of war made the Society very unpopular in the United States and even created suspicion in the minds of many as to whether he and his organization were loyal to this country. In 1918 Rutherford and several other leaders of the organization were brought to trial, found guilty of violation of the Espionage Act and sentenced to twenty years in the Atlanta Federal Penitentiary. Although they actually only served less than a year of this sentence, the Brooklyn head-quarters was temporarily closed and the activity of the Society was curtailed for several months. This episode made Rutherford a hero and martyr to his followers. Thereafter he served as a model for others in the organization who might be called upon to suffer for their faith.

In 1920 Rutherford followed in Russell’s footsteps by at-tempting to prophesy the time of the end. In a booklet en-titled Millions Now Living Will Never Die, he boldly pro-claimed that in 1925 faithful Old Testament worthies would be resurrected, and the existing world order would come to an end. Needless to say, Rutherford’s predictions about 1925 failed to materialize, just like those made earlier by Russell. Seemingly unwilling to admit the failed predictions, in 1929 the Society purchased a mansion in San Diego, California, ostensibly for purpose of providing a residence for the Old Testament “princes” when they returned to earth. While awaiting their arrival. Rutherford lived in the house, which came to be called Beth Sarim. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the others never made the promised appearance, and the house was finally sold after Rutherford’s death.

One significant development which took place during Rutherford’s tenure was the adoption of a new name for the individual members of the movement. Based upon the statement in Isaiah 43:10, “Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah,” in 1931 they became officially designated as “Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

When Judge Rutherford died in 1942 he was followed in the presidency by Nathan H. Knorr. Though never the highly visible autocrat the first two leaders had been, Knorr was a powerful and effective administrator. He soon established a thorough program of training for those members who would devote time to spreading the Society’s message to the world. In 1946 a new magazine, Awake!, was begun as a companion to The Watchtower.

For a long time the Witnesses had struggled to answer the charge that their peculiar doctrines were in disagreement with the Bible. They had found some help in the use of the Emphatic Diaglott, an interlinear text produced by Christadelphian Benjamin Wilson. What was really needed, however, was a new translation that harmonized with Watchtower theology. In 1950 the first volume of The New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures came from the press. In 1961 the translation of the entire Bible (The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures) was completed. Witnesses claim that previous English translations had been corrupted in order to uphold traditional religious errors, but that with the introduction of the NWT fidelity to the original text was at last achieved. Much can be, and has been, written to show- the fallacy of such claims. The NWT is a transparent attempt to bring the Bible into conformity with Watchtower doctrine. One reviewer aptly observed, “A close examination, which gets beneath the out-ward veneer of scholarship, reveals a veritable shambles of bigotry, ignorance, prejudice, and bias which violates every rule of biblical criticism and every standard of scholarly integrity.” The Society has consistently refused to reveal the names of the “scholars” who worked to produce the NWT. However William Cetnar, who was employed at Bethel when the translation took place, has given their names as: Nathan H. Knorr, Fred W. Franz, Albert D. Schroeder, G.D. Gangas and M. Henschel. None of these men had the training to quality them to undertake such a work. Fred Franz is said to have been the best qualified member of the team, but it was he who was embarrassed before a Scottish court by being forced to admit that he could not translate Hebrew into English.

In the early 1960’s Witness leaders became concerned over declining growth. Something had to be done to rejuvenate the movement. The decision was made to employ the technique used so successfully by Russell and Rutherford: prophetic speculation and date-setting to create great expectation of momentous events looming on the horizon. A series of books and articles (beginning in 1966 with Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God) rolled from the Brooklyn presses announcing that September 1975 would mark the end of 6000 years since the creation of Adam. It was clearly suggested time and again that the seventh millennium of mankind’s existence could be expected to run parallel with the millennial reign of Christ. Readers were assured that they were living in the “last days.” The book, The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life (containing a chapter entitled, “The Last Days of This Wicked System of Things”) stated that these “last days” began in 1914 and will end with-in one generation. The warning is then given, “this means that only a short time is left before the end comes!” (p. 95)

The result of these startling pronouncements was a phenomenal increase in activity and conversions. The number of world-wide baptisms went from 58,904 in 1966 to 295,073 in 1975. During those same years the number of “publishers” (Witnesses involved in preaching activities) rose from 1,058,675 to 2,062,449.

But just as had happened with 1874, 1914 and 1925, the year 1975 came and went without the climactic events that had been predicted. As might be expected, disappointment and disenchantment swept through the organization. By 1978, the number of baptisms reported was back down to 95,052. Since 1975 the Society has been denying that they ever made any definite statements to the effect that the end would come in that year, claiming that “there has been considerable individual speculation on the matter.” There can be no doubt, however, that the expectations for 1975 were the result of the published statements of the Watchtower Society.

The current president of the Jehovah’s Witness organization is Fred W. Franz, who succeeded Knorr at his death in 1977. In spite of glaring errors in doctrine and a long trail of failed prophecies, the organization still boasts millions of active workers, enormous holdings world-wide and an incredibly prolific publishing enterprise.

The Watchtower Society likes to point with pride to the uniformity of doctrine among its members around the globe. However, they usually fail to mention how this is achieved. Jehovah’s Witnesses are absolutely bound to accept without question the pronouncements handed down from Brooklyn. In recent years the Society has seen the defection of many of its members, some of whom were leaders. One notable example of this is Raymond Franz, nephew of Fred Franz. A former member of the Society’s top policy-making “governing body,” Raymond Franz has written a book, en-titled A Crisis of Conscience, which tells how he became increasingly disillusioned by observing the machinations and blatant dishonesty of the organization’s top leadership. As the title of the book suggests, Franz ultimately found himself in a crisis of conscience which led him to resign his position and sever all association with the Witnesses. Many others who have left the Society in recent years describe their experience as brainwashing and total domination by a heavy-handed organization which demands blind loyalty. Stories are told of members being disfellowshiped for such things as sending a birthday card or voting in an election. It is not difficult to see why those who remain in the organization are careful to adhere to what they are told by those above them.

This article has obviously been only a brief overview of the history of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, but even a cursory look at the activities and doctrines of this organization are sufficient to establish it as one more modern example of that concerning which the apostle John wrote long ago: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (I Jn. 4:1).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 8, p. 2
April 15, 1993

By Frank Jamerson

This is an outline study of divorce and remarriage, with special emphasis on four theories that circumvent the teaching of the Bible.

A. Who has the scriptural right to marry?

One who has never been married (Matt. 19:4-6; 1 Cor. 7:36).

One whose companion has died (Rom. 7:1-3).

One who has divorced his companion “for fornication” (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; Mk. 10:11,12; Lk. 16:18).

One who has divorced may remarry the one he/she has divorced (Matt. 19:9; 1 Cor. 7:10,11).

B. Unscriptural doctrines on the subject:

1. Some are re-defining “adultery” as the act of divorcing and remarrying. (They interpret “commits adultery against her,” Mk. 10:11,12, to mean just divorcing her and going through a wedding ceremony with someone else. They say it has nothing to do with a sexual act.)

The word “adultery” is defined by authorities as “unlawful sexual intercourse with the spouse of another” (see W.E. Vine and Thayer).

What was the woman “caught in adultery” doing? (Jn. 8:4) (Did they catch her in “the very act” of getting married to another woman’s husband?)

In Matthew 5:28, what was the man doing who “committed adultery” in his heart? (Was he fantasizing about a wedding ceremony with someone’s wife?)

Matthew 5:32 says the man who marries a “woman who is divorced, commits adultery.” (This does not say that he caused her divorce, nor that he had been married before. He would not have had to divorce a wife in order to have committed adultery with her; nor would he have had to marry her in order to commit adultery!) Furthermore, if a man commits adultery and his wife forgives him, the covenant is not broken (they are not divorced), but he still committed adultery.

Why was the man “committing adultery against” his wife in Mark 10:11,12?

Leviticus 18:20 — The man who “lies carnally” with his neighbor’s wife defiles himself; it is against himself.

Psalms 51:4 — David said that his sin was “against you, you only.” His major concern was that he had sinned against God.

I Corinthians 6:18 — One who commits fornication “sins against his own body.”

Mark 10:11,12 — The man who divorces his wife and marries another “commits adultery against” her — he sins against his wife. (Wuest’s Word Studies says “the expression may mean either ‘to the prejudice of her [the first wife], or with her [the second],”‘ Vol. 1, p. 198).

2. Some contend that Matthew 19:3-12 does not apply to non-believers. It is called a “covenant passage,” meaning that one must be in “covenant relationship”with God before it applies to them.

When Jesus was asked about divorce, he went back to the beginning of time — not the beginning of the Jewish law.

Paul specifically said that unbelievers had been guilty of adultery (1 Cor. 5:10,13; 6:9-11; Rom. 1:26-32).

The fact that God permitted polygamy, concubinage, and divorce and remarriage in the Old Testament period does not prove that it was not against his universal moral law.

A six-year-old who shoots another would not be punished as an adult. This does not mean that the law against murder is not in effect.

God obviously allowed some things before the complete revelation in Christ that he does not permit today.

God progressively revealed much of his law, but today it has been completely revealed in Christ and it applies to everyone (Matt. 28:18-20).

d. There are things in the law of Christ that do not apply to unbelievers, just as there are things that do not apply to all believers. God’s teaching on repentance and baptism only applies to believers; his teaching on the Lord’s supper only applies to those in the kingdom; his law on loving your wife only applies to those who are married; likewise his teaching on divorce and remarriage only applies to those who are married.

3. Some say that when the guilty party is put away, he/she is no longer married, and therefore may remarry, just as the innocent party.

This is based entirely upon human reasoning. No passage of Scripture gives the “put away fornicator” permission to remarry. In fact, Scripture specifically says that the one who marries the put away fornicator “commits adultery.” (Would it not be strange if the single man who married the divorced fornicator was sinning, but the divorced fornicator was not?)

Argument by analogy (“if two people are chained together and the chain is broken, both are free”) is not scriptural proof. (An analogy that fits the Scripture is a ball player who is under contract to a team. He may refuse to play for that team, but that does not free him to play for another — unless he is freed from the contract of the first team.)

Just because two people are divorced does not give them the right to marry someone else (1 Cor. 7:10,11).

God is the one who has “bound” us, and he did not free the guilty party to remarry!

4. Some say that baptism washes away sins, therefore those who were living in adultery before baptism may continue to live with that companion after baptism.

 

a. Some also say that the Christian can repent and pray and continue to live in a relationship that was formerly adulterous. (If God’s law of pardon for the alien would permit his remaining in adulterous relationships, then his law of pardon for the erring Christian would permit the same.)

b. When the Jews violated the law of God on marriage, what did they have to do? (See Ezra 10:3-5,18,19.)

c. But, some say “celibacy is too difficult a penalty.”

Is it too difficult for the innocent party who hasbeen put away but cannot marry another (1 Cor. 7:10,11)?

What did the man in Corinth have to do (I Cor.5:1)? (Questions: Was the woman a believer? If so, why was she not disciplined? Or, was she, but it is not mentioned? Would it have made any difference whether, or not, she was a Christian?)

d. “Committeth adultery” (Matt. 19:9) is in the pre-sent tense which indicates continuous action. Romans 7:1-3 tells how long it would be adultery.

e. Baptism washes away sins, but we must repent and turn away from them. Baptism does not change a relationship from sinful to righteous. What would a polygamous man have to do if he repented of polygamy? If people were involved in homosexual “marriages” and wanted to be baptized, what would repentance require?

f. I am sympathetic to Christians and non-Christians who have violated God’s marriage laws, but I can-not change what the Bible says.

Conclusion

The Pharisees understood that the teaching of Jesus on this subject was strict, and said, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (Matt. 19:10). Jesus said that not everyone could accept their saying, but some were eunuchs and others could “make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake” (v. 12). The worst thing in the world is not being celibate, but being lost (Matt. 18:8,9).

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 7, p. 22-23
April 1, 1993

By Mark White

Jehovah’s Witnesses doctrine is a complicated maze of misapplied and wrested Scriptures, amalgamated together for their own religious purposes. For the Watchtower, nothing is straightforward and simple. Their view of the world, the coming judgment, and the resultant “new order” is formulated by their determination to make passages of Scripture fit their preconceptions. They evade the “simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3). Discontent with plain Bible teaching that Jesus Christ will return to raise the dead, execute judgment on the living and the dead, and usher in the complete destruction of the elements of the heavens and earth (Jn. 5:27-29; 2 Pet. 3:5-13), they offer false hope and deceive the hearts of thousands of souls. And, like building blocks fitted neatly together, their doctrines are co-dependent. If one block crumbles, the entire wall will come tumbling down.

Like many other sectarian religions of our time, the Witnesses are enamored with the Bible word Armageddon (Rev. 16:14,16). Unlike the dispensational premillennialist who sees Armageddon as the beginning of “World War III,” with nation warring against nation, Watchtower devotees believe that Armageddon represents a righteous war fought by God. Their doctrine of the news heavens and near earth hinges on their understanding (or should I say, misunderstanding) of this pivotal point in human history. Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that:

This war of God will prepare the way for a righteous new order. Unlike wars of men, which kill both the good and the bad, Armageddon will destroy only the bad (Psa. 92:7). Jehovah God will be the Judge, and he will remove any who willfully refuse to obey his righteous laws. . . After Armageddon, no part of this wicked world will remain. Only persons who serve God will continue to live (1 Jn. 2:17) (You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Brooklyn, NY, 1982, p. 155).

Just what do the Witnesses mean by this “new heaven and new earth” anyway? The “new heavens” are not new physical heavens, but:

The “new heavens” refer to a new rulership over the earth. The “heavens” now are made up of man-made governments. At Armageddon these will pass away (2 Pet. 3:7). The “new heavens” that will replace them will be God’s heavenly government. Its king will be Jesus Christ. But ruling with him as part of the “new heavens” will be 144,000 of his faithful followers (Rev. 5:9,10; 14:1,3) (Ibid., p. 160).

This quotation introduces the 144,000 — another integral building block in the Witnesses’ theory. Since they believe that only this exact number of God’s people will be in the heavenly kingdom with Christ, there must be some reward for the obedient who are not in this select group. This is the “new earth,” according to Witnesses doctrine. Again, we notice:

What, then, is the “new earth”? It is not a new planet. God made this planet Earth just right for humans to live on, and it is his will that it remain forever (Psa. 104:5). The “new earth” refers to a new group or society of people. . . The “earth” that will be destroyed are the people that make themselves part of this wicked system of things (2 Pet. 3:7). The “new earth” that replaces them will be made up of true servants of God who have separated themselves from this world of wicked people (Jn. 17:4; 1 Jn. 2:17) (Ibid., p. 160).

Jehovah’s witnesses are looking for a paradise on literal Earth. They contend that the planet Earth as we know it will physically continue to exist eternally, with all wickedness and wicked people removed from it. A veritable “Utopia” will exist for the faithful.

Most Jehovah’s Witnesses at your door will seek to pique your interest in studying with them by setting forth these false hopes of a paradise Earth. And it is an appeal which captures the attention of many people. After all, isn’t everyone interested in the complete eradication of sickness, death, crime, environmental pollution, war, and dishonest politicians?

Wouldn’t we all enjoy living in the perfect year-round climate, in a fine home, with plenty of good food to eat? This is the “new earth” promise of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. But how does this Utopia” all come about?

Witnesses believe that the righteous who survive Armageddon will have the job of clearing away the old system and cleaning up the earth. Once this clean-up is accomplished, then:they will have the privilege, under the direction of the Kingdom rule, of cultivating the earth and making it a beautiful place in which to live. What a happy work that will he? God will bless everything that is done. He will provide the fight kind of climate to grow crops and raise livestock, and he will see to it that these are protected from disease and harm. We cannot even imagine how wonderful life will he in paradise on earth (Ibid., p, 159).

We see then, that the Watchtower makes its appeal on the basis of the “new earth.” Living eternally with God in heaven is not even a consideration to them. Rather than appeal to the souls of men on the basis of the eternal , they entice their followers with earthly promise

Notice:

Surely you want to live on. the paradise earth like the garden in which the first man Adam was created. (Gen. 2:8; Lk. 23:43).. Think of it — no more war, come or violence. You will be able to walk anywhere at any time of the day or night without fear of being harmed. The wicked simply will no longer be (Psa. 37:35-38) (Ibid., p.159).

Jehovah’s Witnesses are quite adept at pulling Scriptures completely out of context, and stretching them to it their definitions of the new paradise on earth. By this means, they develop these characteristics of the new society: (1) God’s kingdom will be the only government ruling on the earth. (2) People of all races and nationalities will live together as one family of brothers and sisters. (3) Peace will exist between people and animals. Now dangerous animals will then be completely at peace with mankind. (4) Beautiful homes and gardens will be enjoyed by every inhabitant of the new earth. 5) There will be no more sickness, aging, or death. Even he old will grow young again! (6) Persons now dead will enjoy the paradise earth, because they will be resurrected and reunited with their loved ones. How wonderful it would he if these things were only true! But these promises are based on wrong premises: The Bible simply does not teach this compendium of Utopian ideals for planet Earth.

Where the Witnesses Make Their Mistake

Assumptions often lead to false conclusions. Witnesses assume that the physical world is eternal. It is not the Creator’s intention that his creation exist forever in either its present physical or moral condition nor in some paradisiacal form. Even as clearly as Genesis 8:22, God stated, “While the earth remaineth, seed-time and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. “The phrase “while the earth remaineth” inherently suggests that the earth will not always remain. 2 Peter 3 discusses the: devastation of the antediluvian world, contrasting its destruction by water with the means of the eventual ultimate destruction of the earth by tire. verses 6-7 states, “Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth which are now, by the’ he same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and Perdition of ungodly men.’ !Of course, the Witnesses’ argument is based on their view of “earth” and “heavens.

They do not regard this destruction of earth as the global sphere upon which we live, but of the unrighteous people therein. The word for earth in these passages is the Greek word ge and is translated by the English words “ground,” “land,” “earth,” or ‘country” in the King, James Version. Its basic meaning is “soil.” Strong defines ge as “soil, by extension a region, or the solid part or the whole of the terrene globe (including the occupants in each application): country, earth (-ly),-round, land, world.” Obviously then, the “earth” that’ -‘ is to be destroyed by fire is the physical globe itself. Jesus himself said that the earth would pass, or perish. “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled” (Matt. 5:18); Furthermore, Peter continues his description of the dissolution of the heavens (sky or atmosphere) and earth in 2 Peter 3:10-11. Carefully observe what the apostle says will occur: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass .away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, whit manner of persons ought ye to he in all holy conversation and godliness.” Does this sound like a paradise being born? Is this passage just describing the annihilation of the wicked, or the destruction of the very elements from which this earth and its atmosphere is constructed? Simply stated, the heavens and the earth will he dissolved, meaning hat they will lose their form and be returned to the original state from which God created them! It is simply astounding that, the very passages from which they claim to find proof for their “new earth” theory, actually sets forth the very opposite view!

Indeed, the hope of every Christian is embodied in the promise God has given of ‘new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness”(2Pet. 3:13). But this is not the present earth or heavens whose elements will be destroyed by fire. We fully anticipate dwelling with our Father eternally, in the celestial city called Heaven, where neither sin nor unrighteousness can exist (Rev. 21:14). This is not some false hope, based on false teaching, but a real and much longed for reward. .

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 8, p. 10-11
April 15, 1993

By Ron Halbrook

The Lord’s supper is observed by the Lord’s church on the Lord’s day.  The Jehovah’s Witnesses” are not the true church of the Lord Jesus Christ. They do not observe the true supper of the Lord Jesus Christ. They do not observe it on the true Day of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The church of Christ began on the first Pentecost after Jesus arose from the dead and ascended back to heaven. By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Peter and the other apostles preached the death, burial, resurrection, and coronation of Christ at the Father’s right hand.  When the audience asked what they must do to be saved. Peter said, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” About 3,000 people obeyed the gospel “the same day.” As the gospel was preached day by day, “the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:38, 41,47). God taught his people to wear their Savior’s name: Christian (Acts 11:26; 1 Pet. 4:16). The New Testament records the faith and practice of the Lord’s true church. Those who follow that same pattern of faith and practice constitute the Lord’s true church today.

“Jehovah’s Witnesses° are a modern cult started by Charles T. Russell about 1870. They took the name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in Columbus, Ohio in 1931.  God called the Jews “my witnesses” in the Old Testament, meaning that the miracles God performed in their history confirmed the reality of his existence (Isa. 43:9 13).  In the New Testament, only those who saw the resurrected Lord were referred to as his witnesses, but the term was not used in reference to Christians generally (Acts 1:8, 21‑22). The Jehovah’s Witness Cult has its own “translation” (actually, a paraphrase) of the Bible primarily designed to deny the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are not the Lord’s church.

The true church of the Lord observes the Lord s supper.  After the last Passover meal with his Apostles, Jesus took some of the remaining “unleavened bread” and “fruit of the vine” and gave it a new meaning. He taught them to eat and drink it as a memorial of his death “for the remission of sins.” He taught them to keep this memorial it the future in “that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom” (Matt. 26:26‑28). The hearts of Christians who make up the church are the realm of the Father’s kingdom or rule through Jesus Christ, and that kingdom was fully established on Pentecost in Acts 2. The church is the kingdom, and in that kingdom of God Christ communed with his people by means of the Lord’s Supper from the very beginning of the church. “And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Acts 2:42). This refers to worship, not social meals, and to the Lord’s Supper of the New Testament, not the Passover of the Old. All Christians in every church of the Lord ate and drank in this memorial (1 Cor. 11:17‑34; 4:15; 1:2).

The J. W. cult does not keep the true supper of the Lord. On rare occasions when they profess to prepare the Lord’s Supper, their doctrine bars 99.9999 percent of the members from eating and drinking of it.  In most places no one at all participates. They claim that God offers the hope of heaven to only 144,000 people, only those people may partake of the Supper all through history, and nearly all of them lived in the first century A.D. The great majority of their members are denied both communion with Christ in his supper and a home with him in heaven.

From its beginning, the church of Christ worshipped every first day of the week. It began on Sunday in Acts 2. The regular and consistent practice of every church of Christ is pictured in Troas: “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread….” (Acts 20:7). “Upon the first day of the week” every member of every church was taught to make a financial contribution according to his ability for the work of the church (1 Cot. 16:1‑2; 4:15). Christians met for study and other spiritual activities on other days, but they met only on Sunday, and every Sunday, for the Lord’s Supper and the collection. God’s true people still do so today.

The Jehovah’s Witness cult claims that since Jesus first spoke of the supper at the Passover, “it is reasonable” to assume that he “meant” that the supper should be kept “only on Nisan 14,” the Passover date, “annually, not with greater frequency” (J.W. Aid to Bible Understanding, 1971,  p. 1076). This argument is based purely on human reason, supposition, and guesswork. On that basis, we could say that it is reasonable to assume that he meant we should keep the Passover in connection with the Lord’s Supper. If so, we should fatten the Passover lamb Nisan 10‑14, then kill and eat the lamb on the 14th. The Jewish Nisan is equivalent to our April. On April 15‑21, we should remove all leaven from our houses and eat only unleavened bread (Exod. 12:1‑28; Lev. 23:4‑8).

The mistake of the Jehovah’s Witnesses cult is in trying to bring part of the Old Testament into the New. Jesus told his disciples what to eat and what it would mean when he ordained the Supper, but he said not one word about taking it on the date of the old Passover. They were still living under the Old Testament at the time of this teaching, but Jesus said they would not keep this Supper of communion with him again until the day of the Father’s kingdom (Matt. 26:29). The Father’s kingdom came on Pentecost, a Sunday, in Acts 2. Pentecost always came 50 days after Passover, which means Pentecost was always on the first day of the week (Lev. 23:15‑16). When the kingdom came on Pentecost, the church did not wait a year until the next Passover date to observe the Lord’s Supper. Acts 2:41‑42 shows that the people converted on that very Sunday immediately began sharing the lord’s Supper.  Every church was taught to do the same thing (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 4:15). It requires a man‑made Aid to Bible (Mis‑)Understanding to declare the practice of the early church not “reasonable” for the church today.

The J.W. cult professes to provide the Supper by basing it on the day appointed for an Old Testament feast day. They are binding that much of the Old Law for today. Anyone who hinds part of the Old Law “is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law” (Gal. 5:3 4). Not only do they nullify Christ by denying his deity, but also they nullify Christ by justifying their date for the supper from the Old Law. Paul said of the Old Law,

Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ (Col. 2:16‑17).

The days, appointments, and dates of even Old Testament feast –  including the Passover – only foreshadowed the greater blessings of the gospel of Christ. Not one of those old dates is binding on Christians today for any purpose.

Acts 20:7 gives the J.W. cult no little trouble. They cannot find a single passage where any New Testament church ever observed the Lord’s Supper on the date of the Passover, but here is a passage which plainly shows the Supper was observed each and every Sunday. “And upon the first day of the week, preached when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them.” In a frantic effort to nullify the force of this text, members of the J.W. religion have said that Acts 20:7 refers to a common meal rather than the Lord’s Supper. No, Paul ate something to refresh himself at the start of a journey in verse 11, but verse 7 clear1y refers to the regular assemblies of the whole church for worship.

The New Testament repeatedly distinguishes the Lord’s Supper conducted by the church from common meals provided by individuals:

The Lord’s Supper

1. The breaking of the bread is in the context of worship (Acts 2:42).

2. All disciples assembled to eat the Lord’s Supper on the first day of the week (Acts 20:7).

3. When “ye come together in the church,” eat the Lord’s supper rather than a common meal (1 Cor. 11:17‑34).

A Common Meal

1. Eating food from house to house is separate from worship assembles (Acts 2:46b).

2. Paul alone ate food to prepare for a journey – no one else was said to eat (Acts 20:11).

3. “If any man hunger, let him eat at home, that ye come not together unto condemnation” (1 Cor. 11:34).

We should never confuse the duty of the church to provide the Lord’s Supper with the duty of individuals to provide social meals separate from the work of the church.

The true church of Christ still observes the Lord’s Supper on the Lord’s Day. One way we can know the J.W. organization is not the true church of Christ is that they repudiate the Lord’s Supper on the Lord’s Day as recorded in the Bible. They substitute a man‑made observance on the date of a feast in the Old Covenant. Jesus warned, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 7:23).

[Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 8 (April 15, 1993), p. 14‑15]