Customer Reviews

Jehovah's Witnesses Defended: An Answer to Scholars & Critics

5 star:		(19)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I like JWD because it deepened my appreciation for how the Bible is woven together and translated! This is definitely a scholarly/technical defense of Jehovah's Witnesses. It also advances Bible scholarship.

Please note: JWD is NOT a re-hash of Watchtower literature. While Stafford does quote from Watchtower literature, I think he certainly breaks new ground and discusses scriptures in a unique way. He also buttresses his presentation with nice figures and charts. Even though I am not a language scholar, I found the bulk of it to be absorbing reading!

JWD covers more material than its 1st edition (blood abstinence, chronological prophesy, salvation, and more on the Trinity) and includes a partial reply to White's criticism of the 1st edition. (The rest of Stafford's reply is on the Web.)

Stafford in the Introduction (p.xxv) says he's been "one of Jehovah's Witnesses for the past nine years." He also says in his Acknowledgements (p.xxi): "Neither the first nor the second edition of this book was written at the request of the Watchtower...Society." He respectfully acknowledges in the Introduction (p.xxvii-i) that the Watchtower Society could doubtlessly produce a book superior to his, but that they are rightly focusing on Bible education--on what God requires of us. Also on p.xxvii he says, "I have endeavored at all times to encourage balance and an absence of diatribe in discussions." This is a good foundation for JWD, and must be recalled when reading it.

Stafford appraises numerous criticisms using various translations of the Bible and ancient Judeo-Christian literature. He then professionally shows why every criticism fails completely. Why they fail is clear: the critics were lacking accurate knowledge of both the Bible and Jehovah's Witnesses.

Stafford writes enthusiastically, and never looses his cheerful, confident edge. He's also very respectful. He never describes the critics as "absurd," but as "surprising" and "remarkable," even "extraordinary."

Stafford gives a lot of attention to scriptures like: John 1:1, Col. 3:15, "Wisdom" verses in Proverbs, Rev. 3:14, and many more. Addressed too is whether Jesus is the "Alpha and the Omega." He also has written an Excursus that delves into "Sharp's rule" on Greek grammar and how it relates to John 1:1.

Some portions of JWD may be difficult to understand at first. That's why it's important to read it cover to cover. When that is done, the difficult parts may be easier to understand.

Anyone who is opposed to Jehovah's Witnesses or is not sure about them owes it to himself/herself to check this book out. Opposers have no choice if they want to be honest: they MUST read this. Bible scholars in general should read this too.

If you are one of Jehovah's Witnesses and like knowing how the Bible is woven together and translated, and how various objections have been answered, then you will find this to be useful. (You'll also like knowing how the KL book discussed John 1:1 in a new way!) If you do get this, get out your Watchtower Library CD-ROM and your Kingdom Interlinear Translation (an unabridged dictionary would also be helpful).

Regardless of who you are, one thing is sure: your appreciation and understanding of Jehovah's Witnesses--as well as the Bible--will be deepened.

Among the 76 titles on Jehovah`s Witnesses in the Amazon. com catalogue, most are more or less critical, and just one defends the group. However, this last-mentioned book is really a jewel and deserves to be read both by those who support and those who oppose Jehovah's Witnesses (J.W.). I have studied the literature on J.W. for more than three decades, and it brings me great joy to see a book written on a scholarly level by one who advocates the Witnesses'beliefs. Stafford`s discussion of John 1:1 and other passages related to the position of Jesus Christ cannot be ignored by any serious scholar desirous of contesting the Witnesses' view of the trinity or their view of Jesus Christ in general. I believe those who champion trinitarian theology will have a hard time trying to counter the arguments found in this book. The author has an extensive knowledge of relevant literature and an excellent command of New Testament Greek. His excursus on Granville Sharp`s rule concerning the Greek article is ground breaking, gramatically speaking. This book is like a breath of fresh air in a desert landscape where everything looks similar. It is highly recommended. Rolf Furuli Lecturer in Semitic languages University of Oslo

I am very pleased to see such a well scholarly written publication. I have been a professor of biblical languages for over thirty seven years at a seminary in Richmond, Virgina. I was approched by a fellow professor and freind who studies the bible with the Jehovah's witnesses.We have many times discussed the theology of the witnesses but on this particular occasion he knocked on my office door with this book in his hand. After discussing some things with me he placed the publication with me. I read the entire book within three days. This book has definetly helped me gain a view of the witnesses I never thought about before. After reading the book I can truly say that the witnesses have been dubbed falsely.I have orderd five more books for friend's and the seminary has orderd one for its library.I belive that Mr.Stafford has done the religous community a great favor in writting a book such as this.

Proffesor D.Johnson

I read parts of Mr. Stafford's book and I read them with an open mind. Two things stand out about his research:

1) He clearly understands the arguments of the critics of the group Jehovah's Witnesses as well as Witness teaching. This places his argumentation far superior to the arguments of the critics since they do not clearly understand the JW position as reflected in their books. Stafford frequently uses this knowledge to demonstrate that critics often argue against something the Witnesses do not even believe. Further, he proceeds to follow their own thinking to their inevitable and troublesome conclusions.
2) He takes a scholarly approach in reasoning from the scriptures. I found that he does not belittle the scholars and critics to whom he is giving an answer. Instead, he supplies copious references to scholarly comment and COMMENTARY on WHAT THEY MEAN. This reviewer carefully checked the scholarly references and found they were quoted honestly and in context. This reviewer found that he came to a clearer understanding, not only of what Witnesses really believe (something difficult if not impossible to do from critic's books), but about what the bible teaches on Christology as well.

For example, in his chapter "The LOGOS of God," Stafford presents and quotes what scholars have actually said with respect to John_1:1. He deals with Colwell's rule, explains what it is and its theological implications, and exposes the assumptions and contradictions the critics make to defend this "rule." He further deals with the merits and problems with the "qualitative only" understanding of John_1:1c "theos" (divine/godlike/deity) and demonstrates, both scripturally and scholarly why "a god" is in harmony with Judeo-Christian monotheism.

This book is not for everyone, however. It is not for the casual bible reader. This reviewer recommends it for Bible Scholars, Professors of Theology and N.T. Greek, Seminary Students, and persons seriously interested in the bible's doctrine about God and Christ in-depth. Stafford deals straightforwardly with John_1:1 God/ divine/ a god, is "a god" really polytheism?, the "ego eimi" argument, Jesus as "the only-begotten god," the Firstborn of all creation, the beginning of the creation by God, Titus_2:13 and Sharp's rule versus Paul's theology of God and Christ.

This reviewer has read the comment's of scholars such as Wallace and Rhodes about the doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and this reviewer understands those arguments. After reading Stafford's answer to such scholars and critics, it is the opinion of this reviewer that the Jehovah's Witnesses are seriously and grossly misrepresented by them, likely due to their own theological bias and predispositions. It will be a long time, if ever, that they will be ever to respond honestly to the answer Stafford presents in defense of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Those critics are muzzled and silenced, for now.

Mr. Stafford has indeed produced a standard by which all future Jehovah's Witness apologetics will be measured against. It is especially pleasing to see this long overdue illumination of the trinitarian abuses of the Colwell and Glanville-Sharp rules. Further, Mr. Stafford points out the word games trinitarians play with respect to "person" and "God" in an attempt to defend their doctrine (an area in which I eagerly await a more expansive effort by Mr. Stafford). I was particularly impressed by the breadth and usefulness of the footnotes, as they provided me with resources to do further independent study. Finally, as a lawyer, I can appreciate the fairness and logic of Mr. Stafford's well-supported arguments for the true biblical Christology. I am eagerly awaiting future projects by this scholar.

The book covers the major areas of criticisms aimed at JWs with regard to the trinitarian doctrine and the NWT. The level of research from other non-JW sources is astounding. The defence is thorough, clear, and concise. The most interesting point that Greg Stafford raises implicitly and needs clarification from the major JW critics is for them to state acceptable Bible translations and which one each critic recommends and reasons for this choice. An area for further research would be the historic background and motivation of the major bible transalations available today. It should cover the religious organisation, if any, that the members of a translation committee belong to and the doctrinal beliefs that it adheres to. This would then tackle in more depth if bias exists in other translations.

I find the author's work makes skillfull use of very many scholarly materials. (Apart from his use of the Watch Tower Society's publications, there are over 240 other publications and journals he quotes, which reflect a scholarship ranging from the most dubious to the certainly genuine.) Judiciously quoting from them, Stafford has woven an argument in defense 1) of the beliefs and practices of Jehovah's Witnesses, and 2) of the translation they commonly use, which is the New World Translation (NWT). Throughout Chapters 1 through 10 plus an Excursus and four Appendixes, we are presented with a set of arguments that should bear up very well under review made by even the most accomplished of scholars, which is not so for the basis of opposition's arguments that Stafford critiques. (For example, he makes very detailed and cogent argument against certain criticisms levelled at Titus 2:13 NWT, which are criticisms supposedly dependent upon fair application of the Granville Sharp Rule. Also, he gives what is for me the most extensive presentation I have ever read as respects the facts that expose the speciousness in the opposition's charge that Watchtower Society publications are the work of false prophets.) I can recommend Stafford's book to anyone who wishes to own a book that amounts to more than 340 pages of well-written, well-researched, scholarly argumentation in defense of Jehovah's Witnesses and NWT. Al Kidd 2-2-98

Every time I pick up this book I deepen my understanding of the exegetical issues regarding the translation of Hebrew and Greek into English. This is not a book that can be absorbed all in one reading. I particularly like how the author exposes the faulty reasoning of critics and presents very complex and technical arguments in such a manner that even those who do not have formal training in the original languages of the bible can understand. This book is in some ways almost an intermeadiate Greek grammar of sorts. Outstanding !

I highly recommend it.

I found this book to be very informative.This book surely would make a fine addition to ones' libary of religous study. Mr. Stafford reasons that the fundamental differences between the Jehovah'S Witnesses and other religous groups needs to be examined in the light of Biblical and grammatical evidence.While Stafford is no doubt Zealous, he never comes across dogmatic.He seems to balance both logic and reason as a rule.I did feel some of the reading was rather technical. yet this may encourage one to grasp a greater understaning of various Semantics and the bibilical greek grammar all together. True there are number of books written that cast a negative light on the faith of the witnesses.Perhaps it would be well for some to reflect on the example set in the fisrt century "We think it proper to hear from you what your thoughts are, for truly as regards this sect it is known to us that everywhere it is spoken against" {Acts 28:22}. These community leaders in first century Rome set a fine example.They wanted to hear from the source,Rather than from outside critics alone. I would encourage any who have not already done so,read the account for yourself, consider all the factors, and then draw your conclsion. [If anyone has any questions or comments about my above review, please email me personally. Also, MR. greber was there someting you wanted to talk about? hmmmmm? my email is evansm1@hotmail.com.]

Sincerly

I found Mr. Stafford's book very intense and detailed. This is good on one hand since his audience is the "scholarly community". Yet, for the average person such as myself, I was forced to read a number of points two or three times before I could comprehend the points. Such is to be expected in a book dealing with such deep subjects such a Bible translation.

A number of critics of this book have stated their opinion on the book, but I wonder how valuable they are. For instance, one person states that if Jesus is "a god", then he must be a false god since there is only one true God. I can only assume that this person did not read the book. Mr. Stafford deals with this point, hilighting that the greek word for "true" does not mean that something else not called "true" is false. Biblical examples of this are found at John 1:9 where John calls Jesus the "true light." Yet, Jesus says his disciples are the "light of the world. (Matt 5:14)" Does this mean that since Jesus is the "true light", his disciples are a false lights? Obviously not! They are a refelction of the true light, Jesus. Mr. Stafford also gives other examples where the Bible says something is true and yet it does not mean that the other things are false. It doesn't bother me if this critic does not agree with how the Bible uses the word "true"; what bothers me is that in his review he argues this point as if the book didn't cover it. If he thinks he has a way to refute Mr. Stafford's argument, then please do so. But if he can't refute it then he doesn't need to bring it up because he will only embarrass himself when others who have read the book recognize that he hasn't!

A critic mentions angels worshipping Jesus at Hebrews 1:6, but this depends on what Bible translation one uses. I.E., the Twentieth Century New Testament, The New English Bible, The Bible-An Amerciab Translation. The Bible in Living English and The New Jersusalem Bibles all say "homage", "bow before" or "reverence" rather than "worship". At Rev 3:9, the same greek word at Heb 1:6 is said to be given to Christians. Few Bibles translate the word as "worship" there! So obviously it is the preference of the translator as to what word to use. I guess this critic forgot to read that part of the book too.

Which brings us another critic that stated that no reputable scholar gives any credability to the New World Translation. Did this critic not read Mr. Stafford's book either? Mr. Stafford quotes many popular bibles that translate the 'debated verses' like the NWT. I'd list these but there are way too many of them. My point is that if these other Bibles translate various verses like the NWT, then apparently some repuatble scholars do agree with the NWT.

For those who are reading these reviews in order to determine if the book is worth purchasing, I recommend going ahead and getting the book. See for yourself the number of scholars who do support the NWT in various instances. See how tricky a number of Trinitarian apologest are in their books that they write to condemn JW's. And be wary of many of the reviews and their critical analysis of this book. It seems that most of them haven't read it!

One last point. One critic quotes Jesus' words of 'if you've seen me you've seen the father.' This is the critic's proof that Greg Stafford's book is wrong. Does this critic then believe that Jesus is the father? If so, he's not a Trinitarian. Is it possible that Jesus meant 'seen the father' the same way John meant it at 3 John 11? If so, what is this critic's point? This is another example of throwing out statements that choose not to deal with the facts presented. Please, READ THE BOOK before opening your mouth and showing how silly you are!