I hope you realize that they are getting this mostly from the New Testament, shocking as it may appear.
The purpose of Jesus’ incarnation on earth was threefold in the view of Witnesses: (1) To teach the truth about God; (2) to provide a model of a perfect life for people to follow; and (3) to sacrifice his life to set humans free from sin and death
All this is "sola scriputra" based New Testament reading.
Jesus was not made King, however, until 1914.
What an odd thing to say. Where did they get that from?
Witnesses disagree with mainstream Christianity that the Holy Spirit is one of the three Persons in the Godhead. Instead, they believe the Holy Spirit to be “God’s active force.”
That is straight form the Old Testament and the Judaic understanding of the Hebrew term. It was the St. Paul, among the first, and the Church later in his steps, who changed ancient Hebrew terminology such as the "son of God," the "son of Man" (son of Adam, ben adam or bar adam in Aramaic Hebrew), the "Spirit of God," the messiah (meshiyah), the anointed one (which was never divine), the Age to Come, etc.
If you look up old Hebrew meanings of these terms you realize that, in the creation of Christianity as a separate religion, these terms were borrowed from Hebrew and their meanings radically changed for a purpose.
But the breakaways and the non denominationals which now make up the vast majority of Protestantism do not.
Even the "mainstream" Protestants/Baptists seem to have their own individualized "ideas" of the Holy Trinity rather than a theologically agreed upon concept. Scratch the surface of many of the Protestant "mainstreamers" and you will be amazed what they think of the Holy Trinity. It doesn't even come close to anything orthodox. Rather it is closer to Donatist, Adoptionist and Arian heresies.
Of course, the various unitarian sects and cults, not to mention the LDS, are not even on the same page.
***Witnesses teach that Jesus was not God, but rather God’s first creation. Jesus existed in pre-human form as God’s agent of creation and God’s chief spokesman (the Word), and took on human form as the man Jesus by means of a virgin birth.
I hope you realize that they are getting this mostly from the New Testament, shocking as it may appear.***
All of the major heresies get their support from selected verses of Scripture.
***
Jesus was not made King, however, until 1914.
What an odd thing to say. Where did they get that from?***
There is much confusion, however, the best explanation that I got was from http://www.reachouttrust.org/articles/jw/jw1914-2.htm
“1914 and onwards
As was said at the start of this article, 1914 has been a critical date for the Watchtower Society. How did it arrive at the date 1914? Edmond Gruss [3] gives a brilliant assessment and is well worth reading. The following, from is how Trevor Willis explains it.
“One of the most important dates upon which the Watchtower Society build their own dating system is 607 BCE. This is the date that Pastor Russell originally claimed Jerusalem was destroyed. The Society has never changed their mind on the accuracy of this inherited date.” - Opening, p.93.
It is by counting from 607 BCE as the beginning of the Gentile times that they arrive at 1914. They calculate the reference in Daniel 4:16 of “seven times” to be seven lots of 360, the number of days in a Jewish year. This comes to 2,520 years. Counting from 607 BCE the date 1914 is arrived at. [607 BCE + 2,520 = 1914 CE]. However, if 607 BCE is inaccurate then 1914 and all that it stands for falls to the ground.
Trevor Willis lists six sources that all point to the fall of Jerusalem as taking place in 586 BCE, not 607 as the Society would have us believe [Opening, pp.93-94]. For a full investigation into this date see here. Another source that gives the orthodox Christian dating of the fall of Jerusalem is the New Bible Dictionary 2nd Ed:
“Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon captured Jerusalem in 597 and in 587 BC destroyed the city and Temple” - p.569.”
There we have it.
***Witnesses disagree with mainstream Christianity that the Holy Spirit is one of the three Persons in the Godhead. Instead, they believe the Holy Spirit to be “God’s active force.”
That is straight form the Old Testament and the Judaic understanding of the Hebrew term. It was the St. Paul, among the first, and the Church later in his steps, who changed ancient Hebrew terminology such as the “son of God,” the “son of Man” (son of Adam, ben adam or bar adam in Aramaic Hebrew), the “Spirit of God,” the messiah (meshiyah), the anointed one (which was never divine), the Age to Come, etc.
If you look up old Hebrew meanings of these terms you realize that, in the creation of Christianity as a separate religion, these terms were borrowed from Hebrew and their meanings radically changed for a purpose.***
Certainly. But those without a program cannot tell the players.
***But the breakaways and the non denominationals which now make up the vast majority of Protestantism do not.
Even the “mainstream” Protestants/Baptists seem to have their own individualized “ideas” of the Holy Trinity rather than a theologically agreed upon concept. Scratch the surface of many of the Protestant “mainstreamers” and you will be amazed what they think of the Holy Trinity. It doesn’t even come close to anything orthodox. Rather it is closer to Donatist, Adoptionist and Arian heresies.
Of course, the various unitarian sects and cults, not to mention the LDS, are not even on the same page.***
Nope. The heresies of the first millennium are being reinvented, repeated and built upon with every man being his own pope. Without the Church and the doctrine of the Fathers, we are doomed to irrelevance.