Letter To The Jehovah's Witnesses

To Whom It May Concern,

Just a few minutes ago I opened my door only to find a flyer fall at my feet. First I saw a picture of a well-groomed man. I immediately knew whom it portrayed. It was supposed to be Jesus. I unfolded the flyer to see the words “Follow the Christ!” in bold print. Then I continued to read the promises below of improved family life, ability to deal with difficult problems, nearness to God, opposition to the devil, and eternal life. The priority of promises listed (i.e. putting improved family life before everlasting life) did not impress me, but this impression paled when I read whom this invitation was from. It read “You are cordially invited to attend the Follow The Christ! district convention of Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

I was close to being outraged! How deceitful it is to put a portrayal of Christ and an invitation to follow him knowing that you do not believe in him as being the one true God, that is YHWH. The following are biblical reasons that I believe Jesus is God (not excluding his humanity), which in turn is why I nor my family will ever attend your convention.

Jesus is the possessor of divine attributes.
• Colossians 2:9.
• Specific attributes before and after his earthly life.
• Omniscience (Jn 21:17; Acts 1:24)
• Omnipresent (Eph 4:10)
• Immutability (Heb 13:8)
• Even more: During his earthly life Jesus was sinless and holy (Acts 3:14; 2 Cor 5:21; Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1 Pet 2:22; 1 Jn 3:5) just as God the Father is holy (Lev 19:2; Isa 6:3; 57:15).

Jesus is eternally existent.
• Pre-existence. Two texts speak of Christ’s existence or activity prior to his incarnation (Jn 12:41 – see Isa 6:1-3; 1 Cor 10:4). There are also texts which speak of the Father’s sending of the Son into the world (Jn 3:17; Rom 8:3; Gal 4:4; 1 Jn 4:9) or of the Son’s coming into the world (Jn 1:9; 2 Cor 8:9), or his appearance on the earthly scene (Heb 9:26; 1 Pet 1:20), all of which presuppose his prior existence.
• Eternal pre-existence. Other texts affirm Christ’s existence prior to creation (Jn 1:1; 17:5; Heb 1:2). These texts imply the eternal pre-existence of Jesus, but do not explicitly affirm it. The nearest the NT comes to affirming this truth in explicit terms is by using the timeless present tense (Jn 1:18; 8:58; cf. Ex 3:14; Phil 2:6; Col 1:17; Heb 13:8).

Jesus is equal in dignity with the Father.
• The divine name (Mt 28:19)
• Specific names.
o Lord (Ex 6:2; Isa 45:5; Acts 2:36; 1 Cor 12:3)
o Lord of lords (Dt 10:17; Ps 136:3; Rev 17:14; 19:16)
o Shepherd (Ps 23:1; Ezk 34:11-31; Jn 10:11-16; Hb 13:20; 1 Pt 5:4)
o Alpha and Omega (Rev 1:8; 21:6; 22:13; cf. 1:17)
o The Spirit (Rom 8:9)
o The Kingdom (Eph 5:5; Rev 11:15)
o The Throne (Rev 22:1,3)

Jesus is universally supreme.
• (cf. Ps 97:9; 1 Pet 3:22; Rom 14:9; Rev 1:5. Also see Rom 9:5; Col 1:17; Eph 1:20-22).

Jesus is the perfect revelation of God.
• (cf. 1 Tim 1:17; 6:16; 1 Jn 4:12; Jn 1:18; 14:8-9; 1:1 – also see Heb 1:1-3; Col 1:15).

Jesus is the embodiment of truth.
• Everywhere in the OT, the Lord is presented as ‘the God of truth’ (Ps 31:5; Isa 65:16). Among other things, this expression implies that his character is upright, his word is dependable, and his actions are consistent. The NT also claims this for Jesus (Jn 1:9; 6:32-33; 15:1,4). In addition, the NT argues that because Jesus was God’s fully accredited agent (Acts 4:27; 10:38), what he taught about God corresponds to reality and is utterly trustworthy (Mt 22:16; Lk 20:21; Jn 8:40,45). But it’s not simply the case that Jesus spoke the truth and that in an absolute sense truth came through him. In 2 texts, John declares that Jesus is full of truth (Jn 1:14) and actually is the truth (Jn 14:6).

Jesus is the recipient of praise and worship.
• In the 1st century, Jews recited Dt 6:4 twice daily. This confession affirms that there is only one God and that he is unique in the universe. It also implies that God alone is the proper object of worship; to worship the creature rather than the Creator is blasphemy. The first Christians also shared this same sense of utter repulsion at the idea that a human being should be worshipped (cf. Acts 14:14-15; Rev 19:10). Against this background we must take seriously two astounding points.
• When Jesus was on earth he received the praise and worship given to him without ever rebuking the persons who acted in this way (Mt 14:33; 21:15-16; 28:9,17; Jn 20:28; cf. 5:22-23).
• After Jesus’ return to heaven as the exalted Lord, praise and worship of him intensified (Eph 5:19; Phil 2:9-11(Is 45); Rev 5:8-9, 12-14). Also see Hebrews 1:6 and its quotation of Dt 32:43 (LXX).

Jesus is the addressee in prayer.
• All the formal prayers that are recorded in the NT are addressed to God the Father. But occasionally prayer was directed to Jesus himself by groups of Christians (Acts 1:24-25; 1 Cor 1:2; 16:22; Rev 22:20). Furthermore, sometimes individual believers addressed Jesus in prayer (Acts 7:59-60; Acts 9:10,13; Acts 22:17-19; 2 Cor 12:8). Only if the person addressed in prayer was divine, would human beings make requests of him for salvation, forgiveness, deliverance from evil, healing, providential guidance or protection, and security after death.

Jesus is the object of saving faith.
• OT affirms repeatedly that “salvation comes from the Lord” (Jon 2:9; cf. Ps 62:2,6-7). When we turn to the NT, an additional object of saving faith is introduced – Jesus (Jn 14:1; Acts 10:43; 16:31; Rom 10:12-13). In fact, in NT God himself is relatively infrequently held up as the object of faith (only 12 x). This is not because Jesus has displaced God the Father as the one we must trust, but because it is in Christ that God meets us in salvation. There are not two competing personal objects of saving faith. Only because Jesus is fully divine, intrinsically sharing God’s nature and attributes, does he become a legitimate object of trust.

Jesus is the joint source of blessing.
• At the beginning of Paul’s letters is a salutation that ends with a standardized formula: “Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:3; 2 Cor 1:2; Gal 1:3; Eph 1:2; Phil 1:2; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:2; Phil 3; 1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; Titus 1:4). Paul is not saying that there are 2 distinct sources of grace and peace, one divine and one human. The preposition – from – is not repeated before ‘Lord Jesus Christ.’ Rather, Father and Son jointly form a single source of divine grace and peace. Of no mere human being could it be said that, together with God, he was a fount of spiritual blessing. Only if Paul had regarded Jesus as fully divine could he have spoken in this way. This is also seen in 1 Thess 3:11; 2 Thess 2:16-17.

Jesus is the object of doxologies.
• A doxology is a formal ascription of praise, honor, glory, or blessings given to a divine person, but never to a merely human figure. NT doxologies are regularly addressed to God, sometimes through Jesus Christ, but on at least 4 occasions a doxology is addressed directly to Christ (2 Tim 4:18; 2 Pet 3:18; Rev 1:5-6; 5:13). This can mean nothing less than the NT viewed Jesus as having equal status with God the Father.

Jesus is the creator.
• (Jn 1:3; Col 1:16; Heb 1:3).

Jesus is the sustainer.
• (Col 1:17; Heb 1:2-3).

Jesus dispensed the Spirit.
• (Joel 2:28-29; Ezk 36; Jn 3:1-10; Mt 3:11; Acts 2)

Jesus raises the dead.
• (see Lk 7:11-17; Mk 5:21-24, 35-43); Jn 11:1-44; cf. Jn 5:21, 28-29; cf. 6:39-44, 54).

Jesus forgives sins.
• (see Mk 2:5-10; Acts 5:31; Col 3:13).

Jesus grants salvation or eternal life.
• OT: God alone as the sole source of physical and spiritual salvation (Ps 62:2,6; 95:1; Jon 2:9; Isa 51:6). NT: writers trace the benefits of the new covenant to Jesus as well as to God (cf. Tit 1:3-4; 2:10, 13; 3:4, 6). Also see Heb 5:9. Within John’s writings, eternal life is seen as a gift that God gives (1 Jn 5:11) or that Jesus Christ grants (Jn 10:28; 17:2).

Jesus exercises judgment.
• (cf. Dt 1:17; Jer 25:31; Rom 14:10 with Acts 10:42; 17:31; Rom 14:10 with 2 Cor 5:10; Jn 5:22-23; Mt 7:22-23; 25:41).

In relation to Yhwh… Jesus and Yhwh.
• Character of Yhwh. Ex 3:14 with Jn 8:58; Isa 44:6 with Rev 1:17; Ps 102:26-27 (LXX) with Heb 1:11-12; Isa 28:16 with Rom 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet 2:6.
• The holiness of Yhwh. Isa 8:12-13 with 1 Pet 3:14-15
• The worship of Yhwh. Isa 45:23 with Phil 2:10-11; Dt 32:43 (LXX) and Ps 97:7 (LXX) with Heb 1:6.
• The creation work of Yhwh. Ps 102:25 (LXX) with Heb 1:10.
• Salvation of Yhwh. Joel 2:32 with Ro 10:12-13; Acts 2:21; Is 40:3 with Mt 3:3
• The judgment of Yhwh. Isa 8:14 with 1 Pet 2:8; cf. Rom 9:33.
• The triumph of Yhwh. Ps 68:18 with Eph 4:8.

The Divine Title “God” Used of Jesus.
• The NT is replete with titles of Jesus, descriptive terms that indicate his status, character, or function. But only one of these titles explicitly describes his character or nature – the Greek term theos. There are at least 7 texts where Jesus is called theos.
• John 1:1-2
• John 1:18
• John 20:28
• Romans 9:5
• Titus 2:13
• 2 Peter 1:1
• Hebrews 1:8a

I thank God for the heroes of the faith who have preserved this great truth concerning Jesus Christ.!1 I pray He will convince you of the truth.

Sincerely,



Andrew Elston



1The hero of the faith that I am indebted to for compiling these biblical arguments is Dr. Stephen J. Wellum of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Evolutionary Evidence? ~ Part 6

So you really thought that Darwin's theory of evolution was supported by empirical evidence, neutral facts? Well, so did Darwin. Most likely you've seen this image somewhere, supporting Darwin's theory of evolution--Haeckel's Embryos. To put it nicely, Ernst Haeckel, who drew the above picture, fibbed when he portrayed the similarities in human and animal embryo's. For a better representation, click here. Again I resort to Pearcey for an explanation.

As a junior high student, I was immensely impressed when my parents took me to a museum featuring an exhibit sure to be familiar to everyone: It showed vertebrate embryos lined up side by side--fish, amphibian, reptile, bird, and human. The point of the exhibit was to show how similar the embryos are, in order to suggest common ancestry. Darwin himself said the similarity among vertebrate embryos was "by far the strongest single class of facts in favor of" his theory.

But it turns out that Darwin was misled. The embryo series was created by one of his most ardent supporters, a German scientist named Ernst Haeckel. His goal was to support a polysyllabic slogan he had coined--ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny--which means each individual embryo replays all the prior stages of evolution. Shocking as it may seem, however, Haeckel fudged his sketches, making them look far more similar than they really are...

Even more shocking, in Haeckel's own day, more than a hundred years ago, scientists already knew that he had faked the sketches--and his colleagues accused him of fraud. Yet only recently has the scientific community begun to expose the falsehood publicly. An embryologist writing in the journal Science called Haeckel's drawings "one of the most famous fakes in biology." Yet the same drawings, or similar ones, continue to be used in biology textbooks.

Haeckel's principle of recapitulation (that the human embryo replays the steps of evolution) has likewise been debunked, yet it continues to live a kind of postmortem zombie existence--often in arguments used to justify abortion. ("After all, at that stage it's only a fish or a reptile.") Columnist Michael Kinsley even used it in an attempt to support embryonic stem cell research. Technically speaking, Kinsley acknowledged, the principle of ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny has been discredited. Nevertheless, he argued, it contains a kernal of truth: Restated in ordinary language, in the development of the individual human being, "something similar" to evolution really does happen--namely, "that we each start out as something less than human, that the transformation takes place gradually."

But if a principle is false, then restating it in the vernacular does not make it true. Biologically speaking, it is simply incorrect to say that we all start out as something less than human. The embryo is human from day one--a self-intergrating organism whose unity, distinctness, and identity remain intact as it develops.1

"Remember also your Creator in the days of your youth, before the evil days come and the years draw near of which you will say, 'I have no pleasure in them'" Ecclesiastes 12:1



1Pearcey, Nancy. Total Truth. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005.

Evolutionary Evidence? ~ Part 5

How about this image? Ever seen it used as proof of evolution?

Peppered Moths

The case for naturalistic evolution has been seriously damaged in recent years by reversals in key evidence. Take the peppered moths in England, which most of us remember from photos in our high school science textbooks. The moths appear in two variants--a light gray and a darker gray--and the standard textbook story goes like this: During the Industrial Revolution, the new factories poured out smoke and soot, which darkened the tree trunks where the moths perched and made it easier for birds to see the lighter variety and eat them. Over time this process led to a larger proportion of the darker moths. This has long been touted as the showcase example of natural selection.

In recent years, however, a small problem has come to light: Peppered moths don't actually perch on tree trunks in the wild. (They are thought to perch in the upper canopy of trees.) How, then, do we explain the photographs we see in the textbooks? It turns out that they were staged: To create the photos, scientists glued dead moths onto the tree trunks. One scientist who helped make a television documentary acknowledged that he glued dead moths on the trees in producing the film.

Why was such a shoddy piece of scientific research accepted in the first place? And how did it attain to iconic status in evolutionary biology? Because scientists desperately wanted to believe it, says journalist Judith Hooper in a recent expose. The problem with Darwin's theory is that evolutionary change requires thousands or millions of years, so we never actually see it happening. In the case of the peppered moth, however, for the first time evolutionary change seemed fast enough to be actually observed. It was just what Darwinists had been waiting for, and before long it had become "an irrefutable article of faith."

The scandal has now been thoroughly aired in the scientific literature, to the great embarrassment of evolutionists. The peppered moth was a "prize horse in our stable of examples," lamented one well-known evolutionary biologist. Learning the truth, he said, was like learning "that it was my father and not Santa Claus who brought the presents on Christmas Eve."

Yet amazingly, the moths continue to appear in science textbooks. One enterprising reporter interviewed a textbook writer who admitted he knew the photos were faked--but used them anyway. "The advantage of this example," the writer said, "is that it is extremely visual." "Later on," he added, students "can look at the work critically." Apparently even falsified evidence is acceptable, if it reinforces Darwinian orthodoxy.1

"He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power." Hebrews 1:3



1Pearcey, Nancy. Total Truth. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005