Comments on the Watchtower Magazine
dated 15th April 2004
Scriptural quotation
“Now the God of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and your whole
spirit, and soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord
Jesus Christ.” 1 Thes. 5: 23.
Background
The following comments were provoked by the visit of two Watchtower
representatives to my door. They left the above mentioned copy of their
magazine with me. I responded by asking some relevant questions in writing and
left a copy at their Kingdom Hall but received no response. I have since left a
copy of the questions with my next door neighbour who is a member of the
society but to date no response has been given.
As these people appear from time to time at most people’s door the
following treatment of the points in their magazine may be of interest.
Statements from the
magazine
On page four we read the following: - ““God is a Spirit,” said Jesus Christ. (John 4: 24)” This is followed by the statement, “- - - Though invisible to human eyes, a
spirit has a body – “a spiritual one.” (1Corinthians 15: 44; John 1: 18)”
“God is spirit.”
Let us consider the text quoted from John 4: 24. In Greek there is no indefinite article and so the
literal translation of this verse is, “God
is spirit.”
The omission of the article
gives this a characteristic force; the intention here is to express the nature
of God i.e. not that he is a spirit
but rather, that he is spirit. This is in contrast with what Christ Jesus became as we
see in the Epistle to the Philippians Chapter
2, where we read this of him - “Who,
subsisting in the form of God (i.e. spirit) - - - taking his place in the likeness of men” etc. He took on himself the flesh and blood condition that is, he
took a natural body in contrast with the form of God which is spirit, a
condition that he had never known before. While never ceasing to be God, he
came “of David’s seed according to the
flesh.” Rom. 1: 3.
The notion that a
spirit has a body
If we now look at 1 Cor.15: 44,
we read this, “[If] there is a natural
body, there is also a spiritual [one.] Does the society really think that,
on the basis of this scripture, it is legitimate to assert that a spirit must
have a body? Where does scripture say any such thing? Does the society have any
other scriptures to back up its statement? For ourselves we are of the opinion
that to make such an assertion is to take a quantum leap without any scriptural
basis and the onus is on it to demonstrate otherwise. It is surely a leap of
the imagination, if not an irreverence, to speak as the magazine does on page
seven about “God’s spirit body.”
The reference to John 1: 18,
“No man has seen God at any time, etc.”
merely supports the society’s claim that God is invisible. It does not support
the idea that this is the case with spiritual bodies. Its argument is based on
the false premise that God has a spiritual body and by extension that as he is
invisible then all spiritual bodies are invisible. Its arguments are not really
surprising since it denies both the deity of Christ and the personality of the
Holy Spirit.
The natural body and
the spiritual body
1 Cor.15: 44, is cited in the society’s magazine. The
apostle in this scripture when contrasting the natural and spiritual bodies
speaks in the context of man and man alone and that in respect of the
resurrection i.e. “It is sown a natural
body, it is raised a spiritual body.” The society on the other hand in
using, presumably, part of this scripture (i.e. “There is a spiritual body.”) in its effort to convince us that all spirits
have bodies totally ignores both this context and the contrast with the natural
body. The apostle is not here speaking about the nature of God or even angels,
he is speaking only about man and his physical constitution.
With respect to the spiritual body, F.W. Grant makes the following remarks; “A spiritual body” is contrasted with the “natural body,” out of
which nevertheless (as the plant out of the seed) it is developed. And this
last expression, more exactly given, is rather “a soul body” We have no adjective for soul in English, and we can
only use the word soul itself as an adjective therefore; meaning by the phrase
a “body related to the soul,” as “a spiritual body” really means a “body
related to the spirit.” ”
When we come to the section entitled “Christ in resurrection in
relation to the spiritual body” we will see that the expression “spiritual
body” is not synonymous with invisibility.
Absent from the body,
present with the Lord
Paul speaks about being, “absent
from the body and present with the Lord,” 2 Cor. 5: 8, and in Philippians
1: 23-24, he says that this is “far
better” than remaining in the flesh. This is the interim state between
death and resurrection, absent from the natural body and waiting for the
spiritual body the spirit having returned to God that gave it. Eccl. 12:
7. An example of this is given by dying Stephen when he said, “Lord
Jesus receive my spirit.” Acts 7: 59. (Another proof of the deity
of Christ; we could heap proof upon proof.) But then the society does not believe
this, it believes that when you die there is no consciousness. Is this what the
apostle means by, “far better?”
Reader, judge the case for yourself. Is this not rather the case of the spirit
without the body and not the proof desired by the society that a spirit has a
body? This demonstrates, does it not, that the personality is identified with
the spirit. Is it not also the case that the society in choosing 1 Cor.15: 44 as its proof text has
scored an own goal? In Gen. 2: 7, we see that the soul is also
identified with the personality and although the scripture shows that the soul
and the spirit are distinct they are thus of necessity indissolubly bound
together.
If this rash assertion, about a spirit having a body, comes through the
mouthpiece (The Watchtower Magazine) of “The Discreet Slave,”
how can we accept its word on anything else? Could we not be forgiven in
thinking that perhaps it is a false prophet?
Christ in
resurrection in relation to the spiritual body.
When Christ appeared to his disciples in the resurrection they were
terrified thinking that they had seen a spirit. He is quick to reassure them
that this is not so saying, “Behold my
hands and my feet, that it is I myself
.Handle me and see, for a spirit has not flesh and bones as ye see me having.”
Luke 24: 39.
If the man of flesh and blood, with a natural body so constituted for
life on the present earth, will not inherit the heavenly side of the kingdom then
the man whose body is flesh and bone, i.e. the spiritual body, will do so. Such
was our Lord and in that body he passed through the heavens and, “As we have born the image of the earthy, we
shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” 1 Cor 15: 49.
Although these differences exist between the
natural body and the spiritual body there is still continuity. Gordon R. Lewis points out in this
connection, “In both pre- and post -
crucifixion states Christ’s body was visible tangible and audible. He could eat
with his disciples. Uniquely distinctive was “the print of the nails.” ”
The natural body is raised but it is changed.
Paul says, “We await the Lord Jesus
Christ [as] Saviour, who shall transform our body of humiliation into
conformity to his body of glory, according to the working of [the] power which he has even to subdue all
things to himself.” Phil. 3: 20- 21.
And as 1Cor.15: 51, also points
out, “We shall all be changed.”
Angels and the Son of
God
Scripture tells us that these are, “all
ministering spirits, sent out for service on account of those who shall inherit
salvation.” Heb. 1: 14. These
are all under authority and do not command but obey. For an angel to leave his
first estate was an act of disobedience. Such are held in chains reserved unto
the judgement of the great day. See the Epistle
of James.
Christ Jesus, on the other hand, left the scene of glory assuming the
form of a servant to be in the position of obedience. And that obedience took
him all the way to death.
The society tells us that Jesus is in fact Michael the archangel.
Scripture on the other hand asks the
question, “To which of the angels
said he ever, Thou art my son: this day have I begotten thee?” Scripture
then tells us that, “when he brings in
the firstborn into the habitable world, he says, And let
all God’s angels worship him.”-
- - “As to the Son, he says, [quoting
Psalm 45] Thy throne O God is to the age
of the age etc Heb.1. Here again
the society does not believe and it should note that the Lord Jesus himself
said to some very religious men that, “If
ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” John 8: 24.
Further statements
from the magazine
Under the heading “You can make
God rejoice” the magazine says – “One
dictionary definition of the word “God” is “the supreme or ultimate reality.”
What if that awesome reality were simply a force? Could we expect an impersonal force to rejoice? Hardly.”
On page twenty nine under the heading of, “Questions from Readers,” the
first question reads as follows - “How
can we grieve God’s holy spirit, since it is not a person?” If one accepts
that the question is genuine then the questioner asks the question because the
society has told him that the Holy Spirit is not a person. Certainly scripture
never told him so. He has obviously either some difficulty with the concept
himself or he has some difficulty in answering it convincingly on the doorstep.
However, let’s go back to the
reader’s question and the society’s answer.
The society does not answer the question but makes a vague reference to
publications of “the faithful steward” without quoting any particular issues
where one may look. I checked on the society’s official web site and found only
two results under “faithful steward” neither of which mentioned the words “holy
spirit.” Of course these may be in some other issue of “the faithful steward”
and so I asked the society’s representatives if they would ask their local
congregational elder if I could see a copy that deals with the exact question
but did not receive a reply. The reply also refers to a brochure entitled
“Should You Believe in the Trinity” but this publication does not mention
grieve or grieving.
In conclusion, as the question was not answered in the magazine section
and neither was any help forthcoming from the publications mentioned nor from
the society’s representatives, one wonders why the magazine wasted space on the
matter.
However, unwittingly perhaps it has provided the true answer in that, if we could hardly expect an impersonal
force to rejoice then we could hardly expect that the Holy Spirit could be
grieved if he were not a person.
In the light of this it is difficult to see how the editorship of the
magazine did not recognise the inconsistency between their statement about the
impersonal force and their reader’s question. Is their some unapparent reason
for this?
Overall this is a completely unsatisfactory output from “The Watchtower
Bible and Tract Society.”
G.W.D. Dunfermline
May 2005