Wednesday, January 06, 2010

A Watchtower interpretation issue: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in heaven?

Many who are unfamiliar with Jehovah's Witnesses are not aware of the fact that they hold to a "two class" theology, whereby only 144,000 will reign in heaven for eternity, while the rest of true Christianity, or the "great crowd," resides on earth. More specifically, the Watchtower holds to the idea that none of the Old Testament saints, namely, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, have gone or will ever go to heaven. With that said, let's take a look at the verse in question:

"I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 8:11)


There is also a parallel in Luke:

"In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out. And they will come from east and west and from north and south, and will recline at the table in the kingdom of God." (Luke 13:28-29)


Personally, I don't have a problem with the actual location of the kingdom of God. Since the eternal hope for all true Christians may very well be a restored earth, I have no problem with the locality of "the kingdom of God" being in reference to all that God has rule over. However, the Watchtower is very strict in locating "the kingdom of God" in the heavens alone. Therefore, as we shall see, if "the kingdom of God" is strictly located in heaven, then what is the most natural and reasonable interpretation of the above passages? Would it not be quite conclusive that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob do, in fact, go to heaven? After all, how can you recline "in" the Kingdom of God without actually being...in the kingdom of God, just as the text says?

The Watchtower CD-ROM provides us with their explanation as to how this can be. I will insert my comments in between, but it will be for the reader to decide whether or not the Watchtower's explanation is the most reasonable.

*** w62 3/15 pp. 191-192 Questions From Readers ***

Questions From Readers

● How can Matthew 8:11, which speaks of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of the heavens, be harmonized with Matthew 11:11, which indicates that not even John the Baptist will be in it?


Matthew 11:11 reads:

"Truly I say to you, among those born of women there has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist! Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

Remember, it is the Watchtower who insists that "kingdom of heaven" is a locality that is limited to the heavenly realm. This will be important to keep in mind as we proceed.

In Hebrews 11:8-19 we read: “By faith Abraham . . . dwelt in tents with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the very same promise. For he was awaiting the city having real foundations, the builder and creator of which city is God. . . . But now they are reaching out for a better place, that is, one belonging to heaven. Hence God is not ashamed of them, to be called upon as their God, for he has made a city ready for them. By faith Abraham, when he was tested, as good as offered up Isaac . . . But he reckoned that God was able to raise him up even from the dead; and from there he did receive him also in an illustrative way.”


We have a translation dilemma. Here's the difference:

"But now they are reaching out for a better place, that is, one belonging to heaven." (Hebrews 11:16, New World Translation)

"But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one." (NASB)

The difference here is crucial. In exegeting the NASB, one would be left with the impression that the saints listed in Hebrews 11 have a heavenly hope. After all, if the "better country" that one desires is "heavenly," then how can this mean anything other than the fact that they desired heaven? But the NWT rendering is more subtle. That is, one could be left with the impression that since earth "belongs" to heaven when it will be restored, this is what they are desiring. Which translation is right? Though i'm very willing to be corrected on this, I don't see any basis for adding the word "belonging" to the text. That is, the NASB translation seems to be far more justified. To substantiate this, compare the Kingdom Interlinear Translation, which is published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society:



As you can see, there is no word for "belonging" in the Greek. And if there is, then every single Bible translation I looked up seemed to miss it. Therefore, at this point, it seems reasonable to conclude that the word was added to support the Watchtower's "two-class" theology.

How did Abraham expect to receive Isaac back from the dead? In heaven as a spirit? No, but here on earth as a human creature. In an illustrative way he got Isaac back from the dead here on earth. So Abraham was not looking for any spiritual, heavenly resurrection to put him among the celestial angels any more than he was expecting Isaac to have such a resurrection and rejoin him in heaven.


Do you see how the Watchtower's theology forces the text in Hebrews 11:16 to say something that it doesn't? The problem isn't with how Abraham expected to receive Isaac back from the dead as much as it is, how the Watchtower can reconcile their locationally limited "kingdom of God" view. Again, if God's Kingdom encompasses all that He has rule over, both heaven and earth, then whether Abraham is reunited with Isaac on earth or heaven isn't an issue.

Abraham had come out of Ur of the Chaldeans, and he did not want that city any more. He and his son Isaac and grandson Jacob wanted a better place, that is, one belonging to heaven, a city government, namely, the government or city that God has prepared and in which the promised Seed or Offspring of Abraham will be God’s King. This is the “kingdom of God,” or “the kingdom of the heavens,” as these two expressions are interchangeable, the expression “the heavens” having reference to God. Under that kingdom of the heavens or kingdom of God Abraham, Isaac and Jacob expected to live on earth.


Contrary to what the text says, the Watchtower insists that it is the "heavenly government" that Abraham desired, not heaven itself. But the context makes it clear that this is an actual place that is being desired. And this is why most translations add the extra noun, "country," in order to make the text flow easier:

"For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own." (Hebrews 11:14)


Here we see that it is a "country" or a "place" that is desired. What is that place?

"And indeed if they had been thinking of that [country] from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return." (11:15)


Again, this is talking about a place. In this case, it is the earth. Why would the author use an "if" here? Could he be making the point that these men had no interest in returning to the place from which they came, namely, earth? The text verse answers this question for us, as in, what country did they want to go?

"But as it is, they desire a better [country], that is, a heavenly one." (11:16)


Verse 15 is contrasting where they came from as opposed to where they wanted to go. At this point, the Watchtower's interpretation and translation makes very little sense here. For the context makes it clear that we are talking about going to a place, not returning to a place with a new government.

In the year 30 (A.D.) Jesus told Nicodemus that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were not in heaven. (John 3:13) Three years later, on the day of Pentecost of the year 33, the apostle Peter said that the descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, namely, King David, had not ascended to heaven and so was not in any kingdom of the heavens or kingdom of God. (Acts 2:34) Peter said that after Jesus made the statement about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in Matthew 8:11 at the time of healing the servant of a Roman centurion.


Even if all of this is granted, how does this change the fact that Matthew 8:11 explicitly states that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are "in" the Kingdom of Heaven? Since "Kingdom of Heaven" cannot include an earthly locality in Watchtower theology, they are forced to reinterpret the Bible to fit their views. Furthermore, is there a basis for viewing Matthew 8:11 in the present tense? Does it not say that "many will come from east and west?" Could this not be interpreted to be a future event, and also in line with the Watchtower's view that no one has gone to heaven before Christ?

Hence those three patriarchs could not be in the Kingdom class as joint heirs with the Lord Jesus Christ. They were his ancestors, who preceded him by more than seventeen hundred years.


This is a claim that is made without basis, and certainly not in accord with any explicit statements in the Scriptures.

It is therefore evident that in Matthew 8:11 Jesus referred to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob figuratively. On the occasion when Abraham offered up his son Isaac, Abraham represented Jehovah God and Isaac represented God’s only-begotten Son Jesus Christ, who was offered up in sacrifice. Accordingly Jacob represented the spiritual Christian congregation, the “kingdom of the heavens” class; for, just as the congregation gets life through Jesus Christ, so Jacob got life from Abraham through Isaac. From this standpoint Abraham, Isaac and Jacob mentioned together in Jesus’ illustration would picture the great theocratic government, in which Jehovah is the Great Theocrat, Jesus Christ is his anointed representative King, and the faithful, victorious Christian congregation of 144,000 members is the body of Christ’s joint heirs in the Kingdom.


This interpretation is completely unnecessary and in fact, a desperate attempt to insert one's theology into the Scriptures. Recognizing types and shadows in the Hebrew Scriptures has nothing to do with interpreting Matthew 8:11 figuratively. After all, if the Watchtower didn't hold to their "two-class" view, would they have ever come to this conclusion in Matthew 8:11? It is highly doubtful. Therefore, it would seem that the Watchtower is adopting the following methodology: "When the text says something that contradicts our theology, make the text figurative." How else would anyone come to the conclusion that Matthew 8:11 isn't actually speaking of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? Would any non-Jehovah's Witness be able to come to that conclusion in exegeting the text in its context. It would seem highly unlikely.

When the Christian congregation was founded on the day of Pentecost, its spirit-anointed members were made Christ’s joint heirs and were put in line for a place in the heavenly kingdom, to recline there at the spiritual table with the Greater Abraham and the Greater Isaac. The natural or fleshly Jews of the nation of Israel claimed to be the “sons of the kingdom” or the prospective members of God’s kingdom. From the day of Pentecost forward they saw the beginning and the gradual development of this theocratic arrangement, but because of their lack of faith in Christ they were not in it. Hence, as Jesus said (Matt. 8:12): “The sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the darkness outside. There is where their weeping and the gnashing of their teeth will be.”


This is all fine, but the problem is, the Watchtower insists that these "joint heirs with Christ" will have a separate eternal dwelling place than the rest of Christianity. This is something that is nowhere articulated in the Scriptures, but instead, is formulated by the Watchtower.

For this reason it became necessary that many Gentiles (non-Jews), like the Roman centurion whose faith brought a miraculous cure by Jesus, should come “from eastern parts and western parts,” from all around the earth, to become dedicated, baptized Christians. Thus they could help make up the full number of the Kingdom class. For faithfulness to the death these converted Gentiles are resurrected to heavenly life to recline at the heavenly table, as it were, with Jehovah God and Jesus Christ “in the kingdom of the heavens.”


As stated earlier, insisting on "kingdom of heaven" as a limited locality complicates things beyond necessity. In my opinion, the text is much more consistent when we don't make it figurative, but instead, read it plainly.

When understood this way, Matthew 8:11 agrees with Jesus’ words in Matthew 11:11: “Among those born of women there has not been raised up a greater than John the Baptist; but a person that is a lesser one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is.” Since Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are not greater than John, they will not be literally in the kingdom of the heavens. Jesus used them only as an illustration of those who will actually be in it.


Where does the Watchtower get this idea that, "Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are not greater than John?" Is this something that is affirmed anywhere in the Bible? Why isn't there a contrast made between the present age and what is to come? Will it not be the case that men, in the age to come, will be greater than they are in the present age? After all, the statement made by Jesus was before the resurrection. Instead of coming up with interpretations such as these, we should instead, seek to come to the conclusions that fit most consistently with the rest of Scripture. This is opposed to the Watchtower's methodology, in coming up with the best interpretations which are most consistent with their theology. But this is something that only you, the reader, can decide for yourself.

15 comments:

21CrosschecK21 said...

Mike that was excellent my friend. I have this as one of the "myths" in my series. I now have to reconsider the lame approach I was going to take.

Religion is a Racket said...

Mike, It's interesting that i read your post here as I was just thinking about this issue this morning. One thing that strikes me about the Heb 11 account is that in verse 13 the NWT was the only bible out of 17 different translations i compared that said "land" instead of earth. It's exactly backward of the way they handle Ps. 37:29 Dann

Anonymous said...

Mike,

Have to disagree with you on this respecting Hebrews 11. The point was in regard to having the promised land as a land of their own, which they lacked. They came out of a land that was not their own, but longed for the one promised to them.

Mike Felker said...

Yeah, but it says what they longed for was a "heavenly one."

Anonymous said...

And Hebrews speaks of "heavenly gifts" and a "heavenly calling," neither of which in heaven, but from heaven.

Anonymous said...

Mike,

Here is a nice quote in regard to this I just posted.

http://www.scripturaltruths.com/blog/?p=96

Mike Felker said...

I understand that. But how can you desire a heavenly place and not be going to that place? I realize in some contexts, your point is completely valid. But I just don't see your point as exegetically valid in light of the context of Hebrews 11. I don't expect you to hash out a commentary here, so if you know of any commentaries that would validate your point, i'll be glad to take a look. Or feel free to elaborate your points further.

Anonymous said...

Looks like I posted the link to where I posted the commentary while you were typing. If you can find this reference on Google Books he says more than I can get typed out on this subject.

Mike Felker said...

Couldn't find it in google books, but i'd be very interested reading more about it.

Anonymous said...

If I can figure out where my scanner is (never unpacked it since I moved.... almost a year ago) I'll send you a few pages. I'd highly recommend his work though, if you can find a copy. It is certainly one of my favorite commentaries on Hebrews.

JAKOB said...

GENTLEMEN! I JUST FOUND THIS SITE. THE WORD "HEAVENLY". IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE THERE IS A 'RULE' THAT SAYS THAT ANY NOUN, IF YOU ADD AN "LY" AND IT IS STILL A WORD IT IS NEVER A NOUN ANYMORE BUT AN ADJECTIVE OR AN ADVERB!

EG
GOD... GODLY
MAN..... MANLY
EARTH.... EARTHLY

'HEAVENLY' IS NOT A NOUN NOR IS IT NOT A PLACE!
PLEASE CHECK YOUR STRONG'S CONCORDANCE. TRY THE WORD "HIGH" INSTEAD OF HEAVENLY|!
JAKE PS.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO COMMENT ON KINGDOM OF HEAVEN/GOD... BUT WHERE DO I DO THAT?

JAKOB said...

GENTLEMEN! I JUST FOUND THIS SITE. THE WORD "HEAVENLY". IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE THERE IS A 'RULE' THAT SAYS THAT ANY NOUN, IF YOU ADD AN "LY" AND IT IS STILL A WORD IT IS NEVER A NOUN ANYMORE BUT AN ADJECTIVE OR AN ADVERB!

EG
GOD... GODLY
MAN..... MANLY
EARTH.... EARTHLY

'HEAVENLY' IS NOT A NOUN NOR IS IT NOT A PLACE!
PLEASE CHECK YOUR STRONG'S CONCORDANCE. TRY THE WORD "HIGH" INSTEAD OF HEAVENLY|!
JAKE PS.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO COMMENT ON KINGDOM OF HEAVEN/GOD... BUT WHERE DO I DO THAT?

Mark Hunter said...

My wife and I raised the Matt 8 verse to the two elders who came to enquire as to why we were no longer attending JW meetings.

They didn't have an answer for us. When we pointed out that the WTS has very little to say about this verse, their reply was, "Well, obviously Jehovah doesn't see it as being relevant".

Anonymous said...

I am not as knowledgeable as all of you. I was wondering where does the following fit in what you believe?
1)Adam and Eve on earth.
2)Patriarchal Father's never expressed heavenly hope, but looked for a possession of promised land as foretold.
3)Daniel 2:44 speaks about setting up of a Kingdom never to be brought to ruin.
4)Even the Apostles and the Pharisees thought Jesus should be King "crowned on earth". One tried to crown him, and the other was kept trying to gain position in this Kingdom they (the apostles)thought was to be set-up on earth.

So how the entire history of the Isrealites seeking promised "land" changes to "heaven" on one scripture and yet is not communicated by the disposition of the Pharisees or the apostles would require a bit more explaining on someones part.

Next, the "figurative" position on Matt 8:11 is correct, and within the context of what is being spoken of at "that time".

Consider this: Abraham (the Greater Yahweh, Jehovah), Issac (greater Jesus), after all he was the willing sacrifice; and Jacob, is Israel (representation of "Israelites"). Matt 8-10 is an account with the roman centurion (low commander). and Matt 8:11 speaks to us in this manner: I say to you, many (gentiles which will have greater faith than 'figurative' Jacob, aka sons of the Kingdom)coming from the from east and west (encompassing all nations) will recline at the table with Abraham (God Allah, Yahweh - Jehovah) and Isaac (Christ Jesus, the ransom, the final atonement), and Jacob (Israel, those "few" which did find the narrow road. Jesus stated, few would find it (and some did), speaking of the current nation of Israel), in the kingdom of the Heavens.

This is consistent with what we all know about the hebrew-aramaic scriptures. Even the phrophets did not know the realization of the things they wrote to the full, including Abraham; after all he was a man of "faith". He knew our Father in heaven would make good on his word, but no one knew the sacred secret of the Kingdom except Jesus. See Mark 4:11, and Matthew 13:11. And even with Jesus teaching the Apostles these sacred secrets or mysteries as some would have it - they still thought the "kingdom of the Heavens" would be manifested on earth. It was not until "after" Jesus died and was raised, and appeared, and open the scriptures to them did they begin to get the since of it. Abraham could not know of the sacret secret because it was hidden in the Christ. Therefore, it is a stretch for us to say that Abraham longed for a heavenly existence in contrast to everyone on the time line from Adam to John the baptist, the Pharisees, and the apostles.

You believe what you want. Fact is, its just not consistent. Since Jesus was recognizing the faith in a "non-jew" as being greater than all those he had met. He was merely saying that gentiles would also join God the Father, the Son, and those few faithful Jews of the time at the heavenly table. And that is consistent with the context of the time, what was being addressed, etc, etc.

Lastly: the gnashing should be pretty obvious...they choked on the opportunity to possess a much greater kingdom than they could imagine. For one must be able to understand earthly things, before one can begin to understand heavenly things.

May the zeal in your hearts for those desiring truth be blessed. And Mark, get back to your meetings! And next time, be more patient and be like Abraham, and keep your faith instead of stumbling over some mundane single argument which could not possibly out weigh the "miracle" of the glory of the Father spirit and message of love to the human family in the preaching work.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.