"Be very careful to be accurate in all statements you make. Use evidence honestly. In quotations do not twist the meaning of a writer or speaker or use only partial quotations to give a different thought than the person intended. Also if you use statistics use them properly. Statistics can often be used to give a distorted picture."
- from the Watchtower publication: Qualified to be Ministers 1967 page 199
The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society claim that they are the only organisation God is using on this earth today, they claim that they alone are guided by Gods Holy Spirit (Watchtower July 1, 1973 p.402) and that they alone are the modern Prophet of Jehovah God (Watchtower April 1, 1972 p 197). If God is using this organisation, under the direction of His Holy Spirit, we should expect that those things told in Watchtower publications would be unchanging and that the delivery of those truths would be honest and above reproach. However, when looking closer at many writings and prophecies of this organisation, repeatedly it is found to be dishonest and, at times, even deceitful.
In this article we shall show some of these dishonest statements and leave the reader to judge if they are of God or of mere man.
In an article entitled 'Have You Been Saved,' in The Watchtower of Feb. 1, 1996, the writer quotes other writers without referencing his source. However, we have obtained those references and provide here one of the statements, as it appears in The Watchtower article, along with the original quotation. Has the writer quoted honestly? You be the judge!
(Emphasis ours in all quotations)
The Watchtower Page 3 Para 3 : 'A clergyman wrote that at "the moment of simple faith in Christ . . . ones destiny is permanently settled" He claimed that the Bible says that salvation depends on a single, one time "act of faith, not on the continuity of faith".
Here is what the author actually wrote in his book Absolutely Free by Zane C.Hodges :
'I count it a privilege, therefore, to be numbered among those who believe that the moment of simple faith in Christ for eternal life is the very point at which God and human beings can meet. And in that moment of meeting ones destiny is permanently settled and the miraculous life of eternity is created within.
The Watchtower Society, by disregarding their own rules and leaving out part of the quotation make the writer say that at the moment of faith in Christ ones destiny is permanently settled when in fact Hodges states that 'the moment of simple faith . . . is the very point at which God and human beings can meet. On page 63 the writer further states "Of course our faith in Christ should continue".
On page 5 of the same article in The Watchtower, it is claimed (with reference to Christs sacrifice), 'Surely we would not want to agree with one of Americas best known evangelists, who said that you do not have to "clean up, give up, or turn around"
In his book How To Be Born Again, Billy Graham actually says on page 156 : 'All you have to do to be born again is to repent of your sins and believe in the Lord Jesus as your personal Lord and Saviour. You dont clean up, give up, or turn around yourself, you just come as you are. This is why we sing the hymn 'Just As I Am'
The publishers of The Watchtower article imply that Billy Graham is speaking of future sins and that he was claiming that we do not have to clean up our act once we are saved. In fact, Graham was referring to our position prior to being saved and how, as sinners, we cannot possibly wash ourselves clean before God. Again, by partially quoting Billy Graham, the publishers of The Watchtower have made his statement to mean something other than he intended.
On page 6 of this article The Watchtower Society asserts that 'Paul did not make converts, as some TV evangelists do, by saying 'Accept Jesus right now, and you will forever be saved. Nor did he have the confidence of the American clergyman who wrote "As a teenage boy . . . I was already saved"
Zane C Hodges actually wrote on page xiii of Absolutely Free :
'Many years ago, as a teenage boy, I attended a series of evangelistic meetings in a small Baptist church in Hagerstown, Maryland. Although I was already saved, the meetings made a lasting impression on me as a young believer.
Once again by leaving out part of the quotation the Watchtower have implied a completely different meaning to that of the original writer. We ask you, in all honesty, has the Watchtower Society handled these quotations in an honest and fair manner ?
The Watchtower Society claims that Paul did not make converts, as some evangelists do,
by saying 'Accept Jesus right now.' However we should note the following scriptures,
especially the letter to the Ephesians where Paul states we do not have to work for our
salvation but rather, that it is a free gift from God. As sinful humans it is impossible
for us to earn, through our own works, Gods grace. On the contrary, as scripture
after scripture shows, God in His loving mercy provided it free for all who would ask and
take it:- Pauls letter to the Ephesians 2:8-9, 'For by
grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not
of works, lest any man should boast.' John 3:16, 'For God so
loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life.' Romans 3:24,
'Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:' Acts 4:12, 'Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is
none other name (Jesus) under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.' Romans 10:9, 'That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord
Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt
In 1989 the Watchtower Society attacked the belief of the Christian church through the publication of a booklet entitled Should You Believe in the Trinity? At first glance, the arguments put forward in this publication appear to be well founded and the impression is given that they are repeatedly backed up by non Witness scholars. This is what the Watchtower Society would have its followers believe of course and, as they have already told their members that they speak for Jehovah God, why should they doubt them? It is, however, interesting to note that they break all their own rules about quoting other writers and, in some cases, miss out large sections of the quote to make it mean something quite opposite to what was originally stated. This method is dishonest and deceitful. Following, we provide the Watchtower quote from the Trinity booklet - followed by the actual quote from the original publication. You be the judge as to whether they are acting truthfully and honestly.
The following statement is from the Trinity booklet, page 6, under the subheading: Testimony of the Greek Scriptures
Jesuit Fortman states: "The New Testament writers . . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons . . ." (Note ellipsis )
What Jesuit Fortman actually stated was: (WT quote is underlined)
If we take the New Testament writers together they tell us there is only one God, the creator and lord of the universe, who is the Father of Jesus. They call Jesus the Son of God, Messiah, Lord, Saviour, Word, Wisdom. They assign Him the divine functions of creation, salvation, judgement. Sometimes they call Him God explicitly. They do not speak as fully and clearly of the Holy Spirit as they do of the Son, but at times they coordinate Him with the Father and the Son and put Him on a level with them as far as divinity and personality are concerned. They give us in their writings a triadic ground plan and triadic formulas. They do not speak in abstract terms of nature, substance, person, relation, circumincession, mission but they present in their own way the ideas that are behind these terms. They give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal persons. But they do give us an elemental Trinitarianism, the data from which such a formal doctrine of the Triune God may be formulated.
We note, from the above, that by leaving out 138 words (between the two short quotes) the Watchtower publication has put a completely different meaning to what the writer intended - and this is not an isolated case. This method of citation is blatant dishonesty, again on page 28 of the Trinity booklet we find another example, in their efforts to prove that Jesus was a god - not Almighty God.
On page 28, the final sentence in the first paragraph reads, And Jesuit John L. McKenzie wrote in his Dictionary of the Bible: "Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated . . . the word was a divine being."
Heres what McKenzie actually wrote: (again WT quote is underlined)
It is for this reason that the title ho theos, which now designates the Father as a personal reality, is not applied in the NT to Jesus Himself: Jesus is the Son of God (of ho theos). This is a matter of usage and not of rule, and the noun is applied to Jesus a few times. Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated "the word was with the God [= the Father], and the word was a divine being". Thomas invokes Jesus with the titles which belong to the Father. "My Lord and my God" (Jn 20:28). The glory of our great God and Saviour which is to appear can be the glory of no other than Jesus.
Notice how they intentionally leave out the sections revealing McKenzies intent - to show that the Word (Jesus) bears the Fathers title "ho theos" and was invoked as such by Thomas. These two examples demonstrate that the Watchtower Society is not always truthful when quoting from other publications.
A further quote from page 6 and another from Jesuit Edmund Fortmans book The Triune God. Under the subheading Testimony of the Hebrew Scriptures the Watchtower writers state:
Similarly, in his book The Triune God, Jesuit Edmund Fortman admits: "The Old Testament . . . tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit" (Note capital T - emphasis ours)
What Fortman actually said on page xv of the introduction was: (WT quote is underlined)
The doctrine of a Triune God has had an amazing history. Convinced that this doctrine is a Christian doctrine that did and could originate only from divine revelation, I start the study from the authentic record of divine revelation that is found in the sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments. What does the Old Testament tell us of God? It tells us there is one God, a wonderful God of life and love and righteousness and power and glory and mystery, who is the creator and lord of the whole universe, who is intensely concerned with the tiny people Israel. It tells us of his word, Wisdom, Spirit, of the Messiah He will send, of a Son of Man and a suffering servant to come. But it tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
As can be seen, the Watchtower writers have omitted 72 words from the original source and, by changing the original t in the (from lower-case to upper-case ie 'the' to 'The'), the Watchtower has given the quote a completely different meaning to that intended by the writer. Is this an honest way to quote from another writer? (Note their own guide lines from their own publication quoted at the beginning of this article)
In many instances, too numerous to list here, the Watchtower writers, under the subheading Taught by Early Christians? pull out odd lines here and there to make it appear as though the early Church Fathers did not support the teaching of a Triune God. This deceit is possible, of course, because many writers stated that the Trinity is not found explicitly in the Bible. However, the same Church Fathers go on in great detail to state that it is certainly there by inference. By reading these quotes from the Church Fathers we can quite definitely see that the belief in a Trinity, even though not mentioned explicitly in the Bible, was certainly well attested to when they put pen to paper - in defending the Christian faith.
On page 5, under the subheading Trinity in the Bible? the writers of the Trinity booklet maintain that:
A Protestant publication states: "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible . . . It did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century." (The Illustrated Bible Dictionary)
What is actually noted in The Illustrated Bible Dictionary (p.1597) is:
TRINITY. The word Trinity is not found in the Bible, and though used by Tertullian in the last decade of the 2nd century, it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the fourth century
and, in the very next paragraph, The Illustrated Bible Dictionary states:
Though it is not a Biblical doctrine in the sense that any formulation of it can be found in the Bible, it can be seen to underlie the revelation of God, implicit in the OT and explicit in the NT. By this we mean that though we cannot speak confidently of the revelation of the Trinity in the OT, yet once the substance of the doctrine has been revealed in the NT, we can read back many implications of it in the OT.
As can be seen, by their judicious editing, the Watchtower writers infer that The Illustrated Bible Dictionary supports their teaching that the belief in a Triune God was a late development which did not appear until the 4th century. Yet, as is plainly seen in the actual quote, the section which was left out states that the word was used by Tertullian towards the close of the 2nd century. Note that once again, the original writers meaning has been changed by placing a capital I (It) immediately after the ellipsis (. . .) in place of the small i (it) in the original, thereby making it appear to be a new sentence that stands alone (rather than part of a sentence). Is this method of citation really honest?
Consider, after examining the deceitful way in which the Trinity booklet has been compiled, could you put your trust in a Society that dispenses such corrupt information in this manner? Read their own indictment against such people from another Watchtower publication, Is This Life All There Is? p.46
Knowing these things what will you do? It is obvious that the true God, who is himself "the God of truth" and who hates lies, will not look with favour on persons who cling to organisations that teach falsehood (Psalm 31:5; Proverbs 6:16-19; Revelation 21:8) And, really, would you want to be even associated with a religion that has not been honest with you?
Whilst we have cited just a few examples of dishonest quotes in their Trinity booklet, an examination would reveal that the majority of sources appealed to throughout this booklet have been similarly misquoted and doctored to fit with the Watchtower Societys teachings.
One can only conclude that the reason for this lies in the fact that there exists NO concrete evidence to detract from the belief of the Trinity and so, the Watchtower Society must resort to dishonest tactics in their efforts to uphold their teachings.
In another booklet, The Bible: Gods Word or Mans (issued at the same time as the Trinity booklet), the Watchtower publishers included a list of the 136 references used. However, no such list was provided in the Trinity booklet? - many have been moved to ask: Why?
Angel Arellano Jr., asked that question and, after much research, found the original
documents and made a list of all the sources referred to throughout the Trinity
booklet. From this, he produced a book containing photo-copies of every quote that the
Society has made set against photo-copies of the original sources for comparison. His
book, Exposing Should You Believe in the Trinity , is a damning
indictment against the dishonesty of the Watchtower Society.
Write to us for a sampling of some of his work and details of how to obtain a copy of his book. (large 230 x 165mm stamped self addressed envelope please)
Back to articles