"Full" debate with a Jehovah's Witness "Letusreason1234" on the two class theology

Unfortunately, Letsureason backed out of the debate half way through without any notice.  I was really hoping we'd make it through to the end, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised that a JW would act this way when 99.9 percent of them are nameless and faceless on the internet.  Anyway, i've posted what we did of the debate, which I hope to be useful to some people.  If you watch or listen until the end, i'll provide a short post-debate commentary.

You can watch the debate HERE

You can listen to the debate HERE

2nd discussion with JW "Letusreason1234" on the eternal hope of Christians

Like our FIRST DISCUSSION, this one will continue along the same lines in contrasting the Jehovah's Witness view with what I believe to be the biblical view of all Christians living forever on the new earth.

You can watch the discussion HERE

You can listen to the discussion HERE

Discussion with a JW on the eternal hope of Christians

Recently, I had another discussion with a Jehovah's Witness on the eternal hope of Christians.  The Watchtower teaches that there will be a literal group of 144,000 anointed Jehovah's Witnesses who rule with Christ in heaven over the rest of Jehovah's Witnesses who will live on a paradise earth.  However, I believe in accordance with the Scriptures that all Christians will live forever on the new earth.

You can watch the interaction HERE

You can listen to the interaction HERE

Lord willing, we will be having more interactions like these in the near future.

Another evangelical apologist advocating belief in the new earth.

Hat tip to Jay Hess for advocating the biblical doctrine of the new earth.  I hope more apologists will stop defending the idea that Christians will spend eternity in heaven, as this is not only unbiblical, but unproductive.  I was also very surprised to see that Charles Stanley, one of the most prominent figures in evangelical circles, defend the doctrine of the new earth.  So much for the belief of many JW's that they are the only ones believe in the new earth.

My second appearance on the Theopologetics podcast discussing the JW's "two-class" theology.

From the Theopologetics website:

Episode 50 of the Theopologetics Podcast is now available! Mike Felker from The Apologetic Front joins me once again to discuss the Jehovah's Witnesses, this time focusing in particular on their "two-class" doctrine of life in the eternal state. This episode contains part 1 of the interview; see episode 51, "144,000," for part 2.

Response to a Jehovah's Witness

Below is my video response to THIS VIDEO from a JW on YouTube.  If anyone is interested in aspects relating to the Watchtower's two-class theology, I think you'll enjoy this:

Do all faithful Christians go to heaven? Review of the June 2011 Watchtower Public Edition

In this review, I would like to address an article written by the Watchtower titled, "Do all faithful Christians go to heaven?"  While it is common for the organization to mention their so-called "two-class system," whereby Christians will be eternally separated into a class in heaven (consisting of 144,000 anointed Jehovah's Witnesses) and a class on earth (the rest of faithful Jehovah's Witnesses); it is not all that common for a full article to be written on the subject.

While there is nothing new here, it is important that these issues be addressed.  As I mentioned in this REVIEW, there are some profound implications in holding to this doctrine that goes far beyond one's eternal location.  Another reason for addressing this is to equip those interested in reaching JW's on an issue that is often overlooked in so-called "counter-cult apologetics."  Lord willing, this review will provide something insightful for both JW's and non-JW's.

 Many have read Jesus’ comforting words: “God loved the world so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16) Did Jesus mean that all faithful worshippers of his Father, Jehovah God, would go to heaven to enjoy everlasting life in true happiness? 

Note Jesus’ thought- provoking statement: “No man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man.” (John 3: 13) This implies that faithful worshippers in the past, such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David, had not gone to heaven. (Acts 2:34) Where, then, did they all go? In brief: The faithful of old are in the grave, sleeping in death, un- conscious, awaiting resurrection.—Ecclesiastes

9:5, 6; Acts 24:15.

For the sake of avoiding an issue that could potentially cloud the discussion, I would like to assume the Watchtower is correct on these points.  However, one thing they say is correct; Jesus' statement does not say or imply that Christians will go to heaven for eternity.

The Bible’s first reference to heavenly life after death was also by Jesus. He told his apostles that he would prepare a place for them in heaven. (John 14:2, 3) This was something new for God’s people.

While it is true that life in heaven would be a new concept to any Jew, it is not true that John 14:2-3 has something to do with this.

“In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.“If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.”

(John 14:2–3)

A quick glance at this verse may reveal that what the Watchtower says is true.  But a closer look may reveal otherwise.  Notice what Jesus will do after the "preparation"; he will "come again."  Where will he come to?  Could it be that Christ comes to earth, since "heaven must receive [him] until the period of restoration (Acts 3:21)?"  If Christ comes to earth, where will the "receiving" take place?  It seems that this will take place on earth since Christ is said to, "descend from heaven...then we...will...meet the Lord in the air." (1 Thess. 4:16-17)

But what are the "dwelling places...prepared for you?"  Whatever it is, could it be the same city that is being prepared for Abraham and others for whom the Watchtower claims an "earthly hope?"

“But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them.”

(Hebrews 11:16)

There are also several texts which speak of a "place prepared" that is specifically referring to the preparation of believers.

“For He has been counted worthy of more glory than Moses, by just so much as the builder of the house has more honor than the house. For every house is built by someone, but the builder of all things is God. Now Moses was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken later; but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house — whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.”

(Hebrews 3:3–6)

“you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.”

(1 Peter 2:5) 

“So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone,in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.”

(Ephesians 2:19–22 NAS95)

 If one is to insist that Jesus is preparing and building a literal place, then cross references should be provided as have been done above.  However, there is nothing inconsistent in the view that the preparing is actually the body of believers and the kingdom itself.

The apostle Paul later explained that after Jesus’ death and resurrection to heaven, Jesus ‘inaugurated for his disciples a new and living way’—a way no other human had traveled before.—Hebrews 10:19, 20.

While it is true that these verses are speaking of a "new way," it is not the case that it is referring to "going to heaven."  In fact, the very next 2 verses explicitly assert what v. 19-20 are speaking of.

“and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.”

(Hebrews 10:21–22)

The "new way" is the privilege of believers to now "draw near" to God through Christ as their high priest.  If one has this privilege in this life, why would one think that they must go to heaven to do so?  Also consider Revelation 21:3, where God draws near to us by "dwelling among" us.  This happens after the "holy city" (Hebrews 11:16, 12:22) comes "down out of heaven from God" onto the new earth.

Does this mean that from then on all faithful ones would go to heaven? No, for resurrection to heaven is closely related to an assignment given only to some humans. On their last evening together, Jesus told his apostles that they would “sit on thrones to judge” in his heavenly Kingdom. Thus, ruling with Jesus in heaven was to be their assignment.—Luke 22:28-30.

This interpretation assumes two things:

1. Jesus' eschatological kingdom will be in heaven.
2. The judgment thrones will be in heaven.

Contrary to what the Watchtower says, Luke 22:28-30 specifies neither of these.  However, it is interesting that Jesus mentions "eating and drinking" in the kingdom (also mentioned in Luke 14:15; Matthew 26:29).  Will there really be eating and drinking in heaven?  Furthermore, it is interesting that Luke 13:28-29 mentions, "Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God...reclining at the table"; a group of people the Watchtower claims will not be in heaven.

Besides the apostles, other humans would also be given this marvelous commission. In a vision, the apostle John saw Jesus with a group of resurrected ones in heaven described as ‘a kingdom and priests to rule over the earth.’ (Revelation 3:21; 5:10)  

Again, neither of these texts mention heaven.  Furthermore, the Watchtower takes it for granted that "over" can just as easily be translated as "upon," which is how many translations render it. In fact, the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, published by the Watchtower, renders it as such (see the left column):

But regardless of what epi can be translated as; what is important is what it means in the context.  One lexicon defines epi in the context of Revelation 5:10 as,

⑨ marker of power, authority, control of or over someone or someth., over

ⓐ w. gen. (Hdt. 5, 109 al.; Mitt-Wilck. I/1, 124, 1=BGU 1120, 1 [5 b.c.] πρωτάρχῳ ἐ. τοῦ κριτηρίου; 287, 1; LXX; AscIs 2:5 τοῦ ἐ. τῶν πραγματε[ι] ῶν=Denis p. 109) βασιλεύειν ἐ. τινος (Judg 9:8, 10; 1 Km 8:7) Rv 5:10

-William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 365.

  

 In the context of Revelation 5:10, it is not location that is in view, but authority.

How many of them were there? As in every government, only a limited number govern. So, too, with this heavenly Kingdom. Jesus, the Lamb of God, rules with 144,000 corulers “bought from among mankind.”—Revelation 14:1, 4, 5.

There is an interesting contrast between what John "saw" and what he "heard."

• John saw, "the Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand..."
• John heard, "a voice from heaven, like the sound of many waters..."

What John saw must have been relative to his location, which would have been earth since this is contrasted to what he heard from heaven.  Therefore, it is reasonable to infer that v. 1 depicts an earthly scene rather than one in heaven.

True, 144,000 is a small number compared with the number of all faithful ones, past and present.

What the Watchtower fails to mention is that the "anointed" class must be a group larger than a literal 144,000 in light of the following,

“But the Jerusalem above is free; she is our mother. For it is written, “REJOICE, BARREN WOMAN WHO DOES NOT BEAR; BREAK FORTH AND SHOUT, YOU WHO ARE NOT IN LABOR; FOR MORE NUMEROUS ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE DESOLATE THAN OF THE ONE WHO HAS A HUSBAND.””

(Galatians 4:26–27)

According to the Watchtower, the "children of the desolate" are the anointed class of 144,000 whereas the "one who has a husband" is in reference to natural Israel.  However, it is doubtful that the Watchtower is prepared to argue that natural Israel was smaller in number than 144,000.

But this is understandable because the 144,000 are resurrected to heaven for a specific sacred assignment of work. If you were to build a house, would you contract all the skilled builders in your area? No. You would need only as many as were required for the job. Similarly, not all faithful ones are chosen by God for the unique privilege of ruling with Christ in heaven.

This heavenly government will accomplish God’s original purpose for mankind. Jesus and his 144,000 corulers will oversee the transformation of the earth into a global paradise, where an untold number of faithful ones will live forever in happiness. (Isaiah 45:18; Revelation 21: 3, 4) This will include those in God’s memory, who will be resurrected.—John 5:28, 29.

Every faithful worshipper of Jehovah—past or present—can receive the marvelous gift of everlasting life. (Romans 6:23) A few will receive life in heaven for a special assignment, and the great majority will receive life on earth in a global paradise.

While is true that the earth will one day be restored to a paradise (Revelation 21:1), it is not the case that there will be a "heavenly government" whereby a literal 144,000 will rule in heaven with Christ over the rest of faithful Christians living on the earth.  Instead, the eternal dwelling for all Christians on the new earth is far more consistent with the Scriptures.

If you would like to read this issue of the Watchtower in its entirety, you can download the PDF HERE

Love Wins chapter 2

Chapter 2 is dealing with questions relating to heaven and what it means.  Aside from Bell's "twitter-esque" writing style, I found this chapter to be relatively enjoyable.  This is probably because I can relate to many of Bell's thoughts as it relates to heaven.  As he correctly observes, many Christians hold to the misconception that eternal life means going somewhere else.  With that, we are left with a fuzzy, spacey, cloudy, and floaty picture of what the "where" in eternal life is.

However popular this notion might be in Christian circles, this is not the Scriptural position (again, as Bell correctly observes).  Instead, eternal life for believers starts right here, right now; on earth.  Unfortunately, Bell says very little, if anything, about the gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and its connection to the kingdom.  If the kingdom of God is coming to this earth (Matthew 6:10), then we should live in accordance with this reality; not in terms of living out a so-called "social gospel," but actively proclaiming the good news of eternal life and what one's must do to enter (Matthew 7:21).

Though it may be premature for me to say at this point, I anticipate a reason for which Bell will not speak too much about the exclusive nature of the kingdom; that is, if he believes it is exclusive at all.  The next chapter is on "hell."  I'm very curious to see how Bell views this difficult subject.

Jehovah's Witnesses: are you the only ones who hold to Paradise Earth?

This is a video I made in promoting the fact that not only JW's believe in Paradise Earth as the eternal hope for Christians.  The clips are from a round-table eschatology discussion between John Piper, Doug Wilson, Sam Storms, and Jim Hamilton. If you are interested in eschatology, i'd recommend watching/listening to the full 2 hour discussion whereby the various eschatological views are discussed and debated. You can watch it HERE.

Dialogue/Debate on the Watchtower's "two class" theology

Recenly, I engaged an apologists named STANDFIRM on the Watchtower's "two class" theology on the TOPIX discussion forum. Also joining me was an apologist by the name of "TruthSeeker," who holds a very similar position to me on this issue. Of course, some others chimed in on the discussion, but it was primarily the three of us. As far as I could tell, we covered most aspects of this issue, focusing on many of the "heaven texts," in which me and TruthSeeker argued that all Christians have an eternal hope on a restored earth rather than the WT's view of 144,000 in heaven and the rest living on earth.

Admittedly, I do not hold to the traditional view amongst many of those who oppose JW's, where they argue that Christians will not spend eternity on earth; instead, they will all go to heaven. The reason being, I've found this view (i.e. restored earth) to be more consistent and theologically defensible. Anyway, you can read the entire discussion titled, "Debate on the Eternal Destiny of Christians" HERE.

This also led me to the idea of doing more of a formal debate on this issue, whether audio/video or written. However, getting a JW to do any sort of debate like this is practically a shot in the dark and has no better chance of happening than a snowball in a blast furnace. But hey, I thought i'd give it a shot.

One of the most powerful refutations of the Watchtower's two-class system yet...Luke 13:28

But I tell YOU that many from eastern parts and western parts will come and recline at the table with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of the heavens. (Matthew 8:11)

According to the Watchtower, none of the Old Testament figures are in, nor will ever be, in the kingdom of God. If this is the case, how do they explain Matthew 8:11?

*** w62 3/15 p. 191 Questions From Readers ***

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.
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.

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.

To summarize the Watchtower's position:

1. No one who has lived up until the time of Christ goes to heaven (i.e. the kingdom of God, according to the WT)

2. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are described in Matthew 8:11 as being in the kingdom of God.

3. Because of these men "can't" be in the kingdom, figurative explanations must be implemented.

4. Therefore, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob aren't really in the kingdom.

As most can see, this is a classic example of imposing figurative explanations when the text contradicts your theology. But this gets much worse. Thankfully, Jehovah saw it fit to provide parallel accounts of the gospels. And in many instances, these parallel accounts offer further clarity to the others. It turns out that the Luke parallel not only clarifies the Matthew account, but renders any further figurative explanations as more absurd than they already are:

(Luke 13:28-29) There is where [YOUR] weeping and the gnashing of [YOUR] teeth will be, when YOU see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves thrown outside. 29 Furthermore, people will come from eastern parts and western, and from north and south, and will recline at the table in the kingdom of God.

Here, we have the same Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob mentioned, which the Watchtower views as the figurative expressions of Jehovah, Jesus, and the Christian congregation of anointed ones. But there is one important group added: "all the prophets." Not only is there absolutely nothing in the context which would demand a figurative explanation, the plan meaning of the text contradicts it. Who are "all the prophets" figurative expressions of? Are not all the options exhausted by this point? One will search the Watchtower CD Library in vain for any explanation.

Would it not be wiser to go with what the Bible teaches, in that all true worshippers of Jehovah under the Old Covenant administration will be in the Kingdom of God, along with all true Christians under the New Covenant? The following text makes this more than clear:

(Matthew 25:31-34) “When the Son of man arrives in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit down on his glorious throne. 32 And all the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate people one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will put the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left. 34 “Then the king will say to those on his right, ‘Come, YOU who have been blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for YOU from the founding of the world.

Seeing the Kingdom on the earth

Though this argument has not been "field tested," it seems quite plausible.

First, the Watchtower is very clear that the Hebrew patriarchs (specifically Moses and Elijah for this argument) are never going to heaven, but will spend eternity on this earth:

*** w74 5/15 p. 298 The Purpose of the Transfiguration ***

However, the occurrence was a vision, Moses and Elijah being only visionary. (Matt. 17:9) For Moses had died and was still in his grave. (Deut. 34:5, 6; compare Acts 2:29.) Elijah was carried up in a fiery chariot into the sky, but not into the heaven of God. Actually, he was transferred or transported to another assignment on earth. In fact, years afterward Elijah, still alive, wrote a prophetic letter to Jehoram, king of Judah. (2 Chron. 21:12) Later Elijah died, just as do all mankind. Neither he nor Moses was resurrected to everlasting life ahead of Christ, who is “the firstborn from the dead.” Jesus himself, while on earth, said: “No man has ascended into heaven.”—Rev. 1:5; John 3:13.

Next, consider what the Watchtower says with regards to the location of the "kingdom of God":

*** bh chap. 8 p. 77 par. 5 What Is God’s Kingdom? ***

From where will God’s Kingdom rule? Well, where is Jesus? You will remember learning that he was put to death on a torture stake, and then he was resurrected. Shortly thereafter, he ascended to heaven. (Acts 2:33) Hence, that is where God’s Kingdom is—in heaven. That is why the Bible calls it a “heavenly kingdom.” (2 Timothy 4:18) Although God’s Kingdom is in heaven, it will rule over the earth.—Revelation 11:15.

If the Kingdom is "in heaven," then it would follow that no one living on earth will "see" the kingdom. Thus, the rest who are "born again" (John 3:3) can see the kingdom, which is God's government in heaven (according to the Watchtower).

Now, the thrust of the argument:

"But I say to you truthfully, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God." (Luke 9:27)

According to the Watchtower, when did this take place?

*** gt chap. 60 A Preview of Christ’s Kingdom Glory ***

JESUS has come into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, and he is teaching a crowd that includes his apostles. He makes this startling announcement to them: “Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here that will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.”
‘What could Jesus mean?’ the disciples must wonder. About a week later, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John along with him, and they climb a lofty mountain. Possibly it is at night, since the disciples are sleepy. While Jesus is praying, he is transfigured before them. His face begins to shine as the sun, and his garments become brilliant as light.

Though I disagree with this interpretation, I will grant it for the sake of argument. According to the Watchtower, Luke 9:27 took place at the transfiguration.

Here are the implication/questions:

1. Where were the disciples when they "saw" the "kingdom of God?"

2. In this instance, was the kingdom on earth or in heaven?

3. If this is meant to be a foreshadow of "things to come" in the full realization of the kingdom, would not the location of the foreshadowing carry any implications?

4. If Moses and Elijah aren't in heaven (or will ever be), but were taking part in the "kingdom of God" that the disciples saw, then what does this say about true Christians who will supposedly never "see" the kingdom of God (John 3:3)?

5. Even granting that this was a vision, did Moses and Elijah not see the kingdom that they were in? That is, if the disciples saw the kingdom on the earth, containing Moses and Elijah, then would it not follow that Moses and Elijah "see" the kingdom that they are in?

I'm sure this argument could be tweaked and further developed. But for now it seems pretty solid.

Where is the kingdom of God?

*** bh chap. 8 p. 77 par. 4 What Is God’s Kingdom? ***

God’s Kingdom is a government established by Jehovah God with a King chosen by God.

*** bh chap. 8 p. 77 par. 5 What Is God’s Kingdom? ***

that is where God’s Kingdom is—in heaven.

The kingdom of God

What? - God's government

Where? - in heaven

(Matthew 13:41-43) . . .The Son of man will send forth his angels, and they will collect out from his kingdom all things that cause stumbling and persons who are doing lawlessness, 42 and they will pitch them into the fiery furnace. There is where [their] weeping and the gnashing of [their] teeth will be. 43 At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let him that has ears listen.

The wicked gathered from - God's kingdom

The anointed will be in - God's kingdom

If the Watchtower's view of the kingdom is correct:

The wicked gathered from - God's government in heaven

The anointed will be in - God's government in heaven

However, the most logical and biblically consistent position would be:

The wicked gathered from - the earth

The anointed will be on - the earth

Who inherits the Kingdom? A study of Matthew 5

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.

A Watchtower interpretation issue: did Enoch die?

The Watchtower has long argued that none of those mentioned in Hebrews chapter 11 have gone, or will ever go to heaven. In fact, their position of this is very precise:

*** pe chap. 20 p. 172 par. 18 Resurrection—for Whom, and Where? ***

18 Who are the “righteous” that are to be resurrected? These will include faithful servants of God who lived before Jesus Christ came to earth. Many of these persons are mentioned by name in Hebrews chapter 11. They did not hope to go to heaven, but hoped to live again on earth. Also among the “righteous” to be resurrected are faithful servants of God who have died in recent years. God will see to it that their hope of living forever on earth is realized by raising them from the dead.

However, my dispute is not so much with the eternal dwelling place of those mentioned in Hebrews chapter 11, but with a particular event surrounding the person of Enoch. And here I’d like to present to you an exercise in objective thinking. That is, forgetting about your preconceived theological notions and going with what the Bible is explicitly stating. So, here, I’d like to contrast two things:

1. What the Watchtower is saying

and

2. What the Bible is saying

It may be your position, even at the end of this exercise, that the Watchtower’s interpretation fits right in with the Biblical explanation. But I’d still like for you to consider this question: are you allowing the text of Scripture to speak on its own terms? Or are you importing a preconceived theological idea into the text?

And with that said, I’d like to discuss the person of Enoch. And there are two places in the Bible which mention Enoch that I’d like to discuss: Genesis 5:24 and Hebrews 11:5.

“And Enoch kept walking with the [true] God. Then he was no more, for God took him.” (Genesis 5:24, NWT)

It would be difficult at this point to establish what exactly happened to Enoch. It could be that God ended his life just as easily as he could have taken him away into heaven. But when we turn to Hebrews 11:5, we find that more details are presented in which we can know what happened to Enoch.

“By faith Enoch was transferred so as not to see death, and he was nowhere to be found because God had transferred him; for before his transference he had the witness that he had pleased God well.” (Hebrews 11:5, NWT)

Now, forgetting about your preconceived theological notions, what is the simplest and clearest reading of this text? First, it would seem obvious that we can rule out death. The reason being, the text says that Enoch did not see death. And typically, when we speak of someone “not seeing death,” we are speaking of someone who did not die! But secondly, we have even more of a confirmation that Enoch did not die, “for he was nowhere to be found.” If Enoch had died, could anyone say that Enoch was nowhere to be found? And third, the fact that God “transferred him” should rule out any possibility that this could have been some sort of change in Enoch’s mental state. For if Enoch was “nowhere to be found because God had transferred him,” this must mean that Enoch was physically taken away.

If this reading of the text is correct, then we are left with only one option: Enoch was taken into heaven. Though the text doesn’t explicitly state that heaven was where he was taken to, it seems to be the only option, since Genesis 5:24 says that, “he was no more.” Therefore, if someone is “no more…because he was transferred,” then heaven seems to be the most likely option. But one thing is certain: death is not an interpretive option, for the text explicitly rules it out.

Next, I’d like to share with you the Watchtower’s interpretation of the text. And because I’m not going to offer any criticisms of their position, I’d like you to think very carefully and objectively about what they say. That is, think about what the Scriptures are saying. Which view is reading their theology into the text of Scripture and making it fit with their ideas, and which view is allowing the text so speak on its own terms:

*** w01 9/15 p. 31 Enoch Walked With God in an Ungodly World ***

Enoch was apparently in mortal danger when “God took him.” (Genesis 5:24) Jehovah did not allow his faithful prophet to suffer at the hands of rabid enemies. According to the apostle Paul, “Enoch was transferred so as not to see death.” (Hebrews 11:5) Many say that Enoch did not die—that God took him to heaven, where he kept on living. However, Jesus plainly stated: “No man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man.” Jesus was the “forerunner” of all who ascend to heaven.—John 3:13; Hebrews 6:19, 20.
So, what happened to Enoch? His being “transferred so as not to see death” may mean that God put him in a prophetic trance and then terminated his life while he was in that state. Under such circumstances, Enoch would not experience the pangs of death. Then “he was nowhere to be found,” apparently because Jehovah disposed of his body, even as he disposed of Moses’ body.—Deuteronomy 34:5, 6.

An insight on some of my theological developments

On 1/10/09, I called into the Narrow Mind radio program and asked a question concerning the Watchtower's view of paradise earth. In case you are unaware, Jehovah's Witnesses believe that 144,000 "anointed" Christians will rule in heaven for all eternity, while the rest live on a paradise earth. But i've been talking to one Jehovah's Witness who doesn't believe this, but instead, believes that all Christians will inherit paradise earth. In other words, there are not two classes of Christians. And honestly, i'm not quite sure of where I stand on the location of the "one hope." But I thought that Gene's answer to this question was pretty insightful.

The whole reason i'm even bringing this up is to be open about some of the possible changes that might be happening to some pretty important theological issues. And its not that the location of the "one hope" is all that crucial to the main issue at hand, but it is relevant and consequential. To what theological issue am I speaking? The millennium and the covenants. You see, I have grown up believing in a premillennial rapture, a future anti-Christ, a 7 year tribulation, and all that. But ever since I embraced reformed theology, I have been regularly challenged in this area, which is causing me to take some very serious considerations on my current position.

But what does this have to do with Jehovah's Witnesses? As one who is regularly involved in apologetics, I am constantly reminded that consistency is extremely important. No matter how well you can argue your case on one theological issue; if it is inconsistent with your position, then it is a failed argument. I know i'm speaking broadly here, but I think most people would agree with that. And though one might consider eschatology (the study of "last things") a relatively minor issue, its certainly not irrelevant in apologetics. Let me give you an example.

How many books have you read that defend Christianity against the beliefs of the Watchtower? You may notice something; most, if not all, are written from a dispensational framework. And there is no way to get around this, if you are a dispensationalist. Your eschatology will determine how you engage Jehovah's Witnesses on certain points. Let's take the 144,000 for instance. If you are a dispensationalist, you are forced to interpret this text in some way to represent 144,000 "Billy Grahams" who are literal Jews, who will evangelize during the tribulation. And if you are discussing this text with a Jehovah's Witness, you are attempting to show him why this isn't in reference to a separate "heavenly class" who will rule in heaven for all eternity. Furthermore, if you are dispensationalist, you are forced to "get around" those biblical texts which seem to establish a paradise earth, which will exist for all eternity. In other words, you will go to heaven after the millennium is over. And the one who doesn't have their eschatology developed and can't be consistent with his other theological views, will find himself in some difficult situations when discussing these issues in depth with a Jehovah's Witness.

And this is exactly what is happening with me right now. And I suppose I can thank Jehovah's Witnesses for encouraging me in this, though they probably don't even know it. Its really forcing me to look at these areas that I may not otherwise look. And its forcing me to take my consistency very seriously, even on those "minor" issues. So if there are changes that are to be made, it may take some time. I have done almost no reading in what the "other" side has to say. The most reading i've done in this area are Tim LaHaye books, which include his commentary on Revelation, among other books. So I think its about time I boldly go into those areas of discomfort where I may be forced to say, "yep, I was wrong." But its also very exciting, because i'm not afraid of truth. I love truth, and want to believe it no matter what the consequences. Anyway, enough rambling on this. Besides, my studies may leave me to embrace dispensational theology even more strongly.

If you want to hear first-hand what i'm going through in this area, I think you will find my call into the Narrow Mind radio show to be interesting. And you won't have to fast forward too far, as i'm the first caller. Let me know what you think!