THEIR FOUNDER 

Charles Taze Russell was born on February 16th, 1852 and he died on October 31st, 1916.  
In July of 1879, he began publishing a monthly religious journal called "Zion's Watchtower and Herald of Christ' Presence" this eventually evolved into what it is called today "The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom." 

Financial Motivations

I have chosen to begin this webpage with their Founder, because I have found his character to be highly questionable. He was raised as a Presbyterian, but he began to question their beliefs about predestination and eternal judgment early in his life. He eventually became associated with an Adventist group that predicted that the Lord would return in the year 1874.

1) In 1876, Russell and a man by the name of Nelson Barbour combined their wealth and devoted themselves to publishing materials related to their belief that the Lord would return and the dead would be raised in 1878.   Some say that Russell sold a chain of clothing stores and supplied the financial capital for this venture in the amount of $300,000.00 (U.S. equivalent of 7 Million Dollars in 2010). That sounds generous, but the claim has been disputed. Others claim that the organization started with only $5,000.00 in capital. A man by the name of William H. Conley, who was the co-owner of the Riter-Conley Company in Allegheny, provided $3,500.00, Joseph Russell $1000.00 and Charles Taze Russell $500.00.

2) In addition to this, as early as 1892, Russell's views and management style were strongly criticized by certain individuals associated with him. They accused Russell of being a dictatorial leader, a shrewd businessman who appeared eager to collect funds from the selling of the Millennial Dawn books, that he had cheated one of them out of financial gains, and that he issued thousands of Millennial Dawn books under a female pseudonym. A booklet entitled "A Conspiracy Exposed and Harvest Siftings" was written by Russell and issued as an extra to the April 1894 Zion's Watch Tower magazine in order to preempt attempts to have their views circulated to a wider audience of Bible Students.

3) Another interesting event occurred on November 1st, 1916. This is when a newspaper called "The Brooklyn Daily Eagle" published an article accusing Charles Taze Russell of a scam involving the sale of "Miracle Wheat" seeds for $1.00 a pound (quite expensive in that day) claiming that these seeds could produce five times as much wheat as the average seed. The newspaper also published a cartoon picturing the 'Pastor' and his 'Miracle Wheat' in such a way that Pastor Russell became offended and brought a lawsuit against the newspaper for libel asking them for $100,000.00 in damages. Russell lost this lawsuit due to the fact that the government investigated and found that the wheat "was not miraculous or overly excellent."  Russell claimed that he received no revenue from the sale of the miracle wheat, and that no one had been disappointed with the product or had returned it which they could have done. The revenue, as Russell claimed, went to the Watchtower Society. It should be noted, however, that Charles Taze Russell owned 990 of the 1,000 shares of the Watchtower Society Stock; so, in reality, he did benefit from the sale of it.

4) In Addition to this, on February 19th, 1912, the Brooklyn Daily Eagle reported that Russell traveled extensively and sent back sermons that he supposedly delivered back to the United States. The Eagle contended that Russell never delivered these sermons in places like Hawaii to a "large audience." The Editor of the Hawaiian Star wrote that Russell appeared for a few hours in Hawaii but didn't make his expected public address. This was typical of many other documented accounts.

Sexual Misconduct

Charles Taze Russell was married to Maria Frances Ackley on March 13th, 1879. In 1897 they separated, following disagreements over her insistence for a greater role in the management of Zion's Watch Tower magazine. In 1913, Mrs. Russell sued for a divorce on the grounds of "his conceit, egotism, domination, and improper conduct in relation to other women." Upon hearing the evidence, the judge ruled in her favor.  

When the fact that Pastor Russell's wife was suing him for a separation became public much general interest was aroused and the courtroom was thronged during the proceedings.

The testimony which elicited the most comment concerned the relations of Pastor Russell with Rose Ball, a young woman stenographer employed by Pastor Russell in the Bible House on Arch Street. This testimony was given by Mrs. Russell on direct examination on Thursday, April 26, 1906. It was ruled out by the court on the ground that the incidents to which reference was made were said to have occurred on a date which precedes the dates mentioned in Mrs. Russell's bill of complaint. Pastor Russell recurred to the incidents when he went on the stand several days later, and gave his version of what had happened. Rose Ball was not called to the stand, as she left for Australia shortly before the case came to trial.

The verbatim record of this testimony taken from the official report of the case on file in the office of the Prothonotary of Allegheny County is as follows:

Q. I want you to tell us what your husband did in company with this woman Rose, in your presence and in your home.

A. In the first place I considered it--(objected to and witness was not permitted to finish.)

Q. Tell us what you saw and what he said was done.

(Mrs. Russell): One evening he spent the evening downstairs and our library and bedroom were next to each other upstairs on the second floor. and I spent the evening downstairs reading, and I went upstairs about 10 o'cloçk to my room, and I supposed that: he was either in the library or had retired, and when I went up there I found that he was in neither place, and I stepped out in the hall, and I found that he was in his night robe, sitting beside Miss Ball's bed and she was in bed. On other occasions I found him going in there and I found she called him in and said she wasn't well and wanted him in, and I objected to this, and I said that it was highly improper, and I said: "We have people about the house, and what kind of a name will be attached in this house if you do that sort of thing?" and he got angry.

Pastor's Wife Tells of His Alleged Nightly Visits

Q. You state that you found him doing this at other times. How often after that?

A. I found him a number of times; I don't remember how often.

Q. In her room?

A. Yes, sir. And I found him in the servant girl's room as well,. and I found him locked in the servant girl's room.

Q. Did he make any explanation why he was in the girl's room?

A. No. He did not; he just got angry.

Q. What did you say to him about this conduct and what did he say.

A. I said to him, "We have a great work on our hands," and I said, "In this work you and I have to walk very circumspectly before the world and if you are going to do things like this, what will happen? Suppose you are all right, don't you suppose people will talk about things like this?" and I said, "I am not satisfied with it," and he said he wasn't going to be ruled by me. But I felt distressed about that.

Q. What did Rose do at the Watch Tower.

A. She attended to the correspondence.

Q. Where was her desk with reference to the desk of Mr. Russell of the Watch Tower Society?

A. It wasn't near his; it was in the office.

Q. When would he go to the Watch Tower, in the morning?

A. I don't remember; he generally went down alone.

Q. Who would return with him?

A. She came with him in the evening and they came about 11 o'clock and the young men that were in the office -- she was the only girl, and the young men would go home, and he wouldn't allow her to go home with them, and she must wait and always go with him.

(Objected to.) Q. I want the mere fact, did this girl Rose go home with your husband?

A. Yes, Sir.

Q. What year was that?

A. In the fall of 1894. (By Mr. Porter, attorney for the plaintiff.)

Q. Did you state to your husband at this meeting any endearing terms?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. What were they?

A. I said "She tells me that one evening you came home --" I asked her when did these things occur. I said to him, "She says they occurred down at the office when she stayed down there with him in the evening after the rest had gone, and at home at any time when I wasn't around."

Q. Now, about the endearing terms?

(Mrs. Russell): She (Rose) said one evening when she came home with him (Russell), just as she got inside the hall, it was late in the evening, about 11 o'clock, he put nis arm around her and kissed her. This was in the vestibule before they entered the hall, and he called her his little wife, but she said "I am not your wife." and he said "I will call you daughter, and daughter has nearly all the privileges of a wife.

Q. What other terms were used?

(Mrs. Russell): Then he (Russell) said, "I am like a jellyfish. I float around here and there. I touch this one and that one, and if she responds I take her to me. And if not, I float on to others"; and she (Rose) wrote that out so that I could remember it for sure when I would speak to him about it. And he confessed that he said those things.

Q. And the young men came home ahead of them?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. State to the court and jury what talk, if any, you had with this girl Rose, in regard to her relations with your husband, which you communicated to your husband?

This question was objected to and it was changed to read as follows:
Q. You are to tell what you stated to your husband that Rose had said and his reply to you.

Mrs. Russell Says Girl Told Her of Pastor's Caresses

A. I told him that I had learned something that was very serious and I didn't tell him right away. I let a day elapse until I felt I had control of myself and could talk and then I told him that I had something very serious to tell him about this matter, and he said, "What is it?" and I said, "Rose has told me that you have been intimate with her, that you have been in the habit of hugging and kissing her and having her sit on your knee and fondling each other, and she tells me you bid her under no account to tell me, but she couldn't keep it any longer. She said if I was distressed about it she felt that she would have to come and make a confession to me, and she has done that." (By the court.)

Q. What did he say?

A. He tried to make light of it at first and I said, "Husband, you can't do that. I know the whole thing. She has told me straight and I know it to be true." Well, he said he was sorry; it was true, but he was sorry. He said he didn't mean any harm. I said, "I don't see how you could do an act like that without meaning harm."

In his book entitled "Jehovah's Witnesses" by Maurice Barnett, it is pointed out that Russell
tried to avoid paying alimony to his ex-wife by transferring all of his wealth to the Watchtower
society which he controlled. He wrote, 

"She had to sue again to get her allotted alimony when Russell had all his property transferred to the Society. Russell had turned all of his assets over to the Society so she would be left with nothing. Great guy!"

Documented Perjury

Another matter that brings Charles Taze Russell's character into question is the fact that he perjured himself in court. In 1912, a Pastor from Ontario named Reverend J.J. Ross released an enlightening pamphlet exposing Russell's lack of qualifications as a minister, and his shaky theological teachings. Ross exposed Russell as an inferior scholar who "never attended the higher schools of learning, knows comparatively nothing of philosophy, systematic or historical theology, and is totally ignorant of the dead languages." Out of pure fury, Russell sued Ross for defamatory purposes. Russell was unable to present evidence to deny these words from Ross, 
leaving only his own statements made under oath. The pamphlet was read during the trial, and Russell denied everything stated within it except for the Miracle Wheat scandal where Russell actually stated that this was "a grain of truth in a sense". Although Russell had sworn under oath to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, the evidence is overwhelming that he did not. As the cross examination continued, Russell further contradicted himself:

(Attorney Staunton): "Do you know the Greet alphabet?"
(Russell): "Oh yes."
(Staunton): "Can you tell me the correct letters if you see them?"
(Russell): "Some of them; I might make a mistake on some of them."
(Staunton): "Could you tell me the names of those on top of the page. Page 447. I have got here?" (Russell): "Well. I don't know that I would be able to."
(Staunton): "You can't tell what those letters are? Look at them and see if you know."
(Russell): "My way... (Russell was interrupted at this point and not allowed to explain)
(Staunton): "Are you familiar with the Greek language?"
(Russell): "No."

In regards to this subject, we should not overlook the fact that Russell claimed to have translated the Bible more accurately than any Greek scholar of his day. How could this be possible since it was proven that he did not even know the Greek alphabet. In my conversations with Jehovah's Witnesses, they have typically pointed out that their founder was never prosecuted for perjury. I suppose this is true. But does this change the fact
that he obviously lied under oath? It's a matter of public record.

By now, I hope that you can see why I started with their founder. The evidence seems to be mounted against him, and it is not pretty. He is depicted as promoting at least one financial scam through the Watchtower Magazine, using ministry funds for personal and exotic travelling excursions (like Hawaii), being an adulterer and a womanizer, being divorced by his wife for this reason as well as others, trying to avoid paying alimony 
by transferring all of his finances into the Watchtower society which he controlled and lying under oath. In my opinion, none of this passes the "smell test."

I have featured the previous video, because I believe that this man made an excellent point. The Jehovah's Witnesses try to insinuate that our Christian belief in the trinity is what theologians refer to as "modalism." This is the idea that the Father literally became Jesus the Son, and that He left heaven and came to this earth.    It is true that Jesus said to His disiciple Phillip, "...'if you've seen Me, you've seen the Father" in John 14:9. Jesus also made statements like this one, however, that is found in John 5:19; He said, "Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.'" This helps us to understand that Jesus did not act independently from the Father's instructions; He is equal to the Father in terms of His Deity and though a separate personage within the trinity, they act in unison. The example I like to use is that of a husband and wife being called "one flesh" in the scriptures. My wife and I are separate persons, but we act in unison regarding our decision making. Our Christian belief in the trinity is described well in the old hymn entitled "Holy, Holy, Holy" which refers to our God as, and I quote "God in three persons blessed trinity."

 

THEIR PROPHET

The Jehovah's Witnesses claim that their magazine "The Watchtower" is a Prophet. The evidence for this can be found in a Watchtower publication which is dated April 1st, 1972. It says...

"He had a 'prophet' to warn them. This 'prophet' was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at the time as the International Bible Students. Today, they are known as Jehovah's Christian Witnesses."

Another example of this is found in a book published by the Jehovah's Witnesses entitled "The Nations Will Know That I am Jehovah." On page 58 of this publication, it says...

"Who is Ezekiel's present day counterpart, whose message and conduct coorespond with that of that ancient prophet of Jehovah? Of whom today was he a 'sign' or 'portent'? Not of some individual man, but of a group of people. Being made up of a unified company of persons, the modern Ezekiel is a composite personage, made up of many members, just the same as the human body is" 

It is important for us to establish this fact, because the Bible has some specific things to say about the role of a true prophet as opposed to a false prophet, and this is found in the Old Testament book of Deuteronomy 18:20-22 which says this.

"20 'But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.' 21 "You may say in your heart, 'How will we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?' 22 "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him" 

I want you to notice that the true Prophet of God is required to be right 100% of the time when he speaks in the name of the Lord. If he was wrong even once, he was to be designated as a false prophet, and he was to be put to death. This can only mean one thing in reference to Jehovah's Witnesses, and that is that their magazine "The Watchtower" is indeed a false Prophet. For you see, the Jehovah's Witnesses through this magazine are known for setting specific dates for the Lord's return and none of these have occurred.

In a Watchtower publication dated July 15th, 1894, for example, they predicted that the battle of Armageddon would occur, and that God's Kingdom would be established on this earth in the year 1914.

"Now, in view of recent labor troubles and threatening anarchy, our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in 1914 date… We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe God’s dates not ours. But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not  the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble”

The end did not come in 1914; so, they quickly moved the date to the end of the year 1918, and then again to 1925. This is found in a book that was published by the Watchtower in 1920. The title of the book was "Millons Now Living Will Never Die", and it was followed by what is known historically as "The Millions Campaign". On page 89, the book says,

“As we have heretofore stated, the great jubilee cycle is due to begin in 1925.  At that time, the earthly phase of the kingdom shall be recognized”

Also, in the Watchtower Publication dated September 1st, 1922 page 262

"The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures because it is fixed by the law God gave to Israel. Viewing this present situation in Europe,  one wonders how it will be possible to hold back the explosion much longer: and that even before 1925 the great crisis will be reached and probably passed”

Since that time, they have predicted that the Lord will return on other dates as well including....

1957 -  The Watchtower magazine stated that some time between April 16 and 23, 1957, Armageddon would sweep the world! Millions of persons will perish in its flames and the land will be scorched.'

1975 - The Watchtower predicted that Armageddon would occur.

1984 - The Jehovah's Witnesses made sure in 1984 that no one else would be able to top their record of most wrong doomsday predictions. The Witnesses record is currently holding at ten. The years are: 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1925, 1975, and 1984. Lately, the JW's are claiming they're out of the prediction business, but it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks. They'll be back.

Question = How many times can a Prophet be wrong according to scripture and still be called a true Prophet?
Answer = Zero 

If a Prophet claims to speak in the name of the Lord and is wrong only once, he is to be considered a false Prophet. And, under the Old Testament system, he was supposed to be put to death.

Question = How many times has the Watchtower Magazine, which claims to be a Prophet, been wrong?
Answer = Over ten times and counting

Conclusion = THE WATCHTOWER PUBLICATION IS A FALSE PROPHET!!!

 

THEIR HERESY 

They Reject Our Scriptures

I have found that it is almost impossible to reason with members of the Jehovah's Witness cult, because they have been taught not to trust any literature except their own. This is why I dealt with the errors in their own predictions first. These can be found in their own literature.

Another thing we need to understand is that they have their own version of the Bible called "The New World Translation." Charles Taze Russell, as I already pointed out, claimed to have translated the Bible more accurately than any scholar of his day. And yet, it was proven that he did not even know the Greek alphabet.     They can now claim that other Greek scholars have been involved in producing "The New World Translation",  but it really represents a clear case of doctoring the text to support their own theological heresies.

So, this is where a basic understanding of the Greek language and an Interlinear Bible may prove to be helpful - if they are willing to listen to you - and this is a big IF.

John 1:1 and John 1:14 are a good example.

John 1:1 in the New American Standard Bible reads like this 

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" 

If any of us should have any doubt about who the Apostle John was referring to as "The Word" or literally "The Logos" in Greek, we can look at John 1:14 which says,

"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth"

A quick cross reference with John 3:16 should seal the deal. Jesus is the "only begotten Son of God" and the agent of creation according to John 1:1. If a Jehovah's Witness were to accept this truth, he would have to recant his beliefs, because only God can create the universe and they (JW's) deny the deity of Christ. So, their so called "Greek scholars" have chosen to translate John 1:1 like this...

"In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god"

That definite article "a" and that word "god" with a small "g" is heretical, and some so called "Greek Scholar" (and I use that phrase with great sarcasm) has overlooked a letter in the Greek text that a Greek student in his first week of study would have clearly recognized.

This is what the Greek text looks like in an Interlinear Bible.

En    arche          en      ho    logos    kai    ho    logos
In     beginning    was    the   Word    and  the   word

en      pros        ton    theon   kai    theos    en    ho    logos"
was    toward    the    God     and   God      was  the   Word

That little word "ho" (Pronounced "Ha") that is translated as "The" is of tremendous importance. It can only be translated one way, and that is as the definite article "The". The word "Theos", of course, from which we get the word "Theology" (the study of God) means "God" - Capital "G." The Word (Logos) is identified as "THE GOD" in John 1:1, and there is no way that a true Greek scholar could deny that. In fact, I am of the opinion that the definite article "ho" makes this point emphatic.

While I am delving into this, I don't want my three semesters of Greek in Seminary to go to waste; so, let's take a closer look at the phrase "only begotten" that appears in John 1:14 and in John 3:16. It is a compound word in the Greek; the word "Monogenase", and it is properly translated "The only one of His kind." This means that a clear distinction is being made between Jesus as the Divine Son of God, and the only one of His kind, and the rest of us as sons of God or children of God.

Why make this point? Well, we need to make this point, because Jehovah's Witnesses will bring up verses like this one that is found in Matthew 5:9 which says, "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God". Then, they will say "Ah ha, we are all sons of God just like Jesus; therefore, we cannot say that Jesus is divine." (They may try to sound diplomatic, but this is what they mean)

As the young people like to say in our time "NOT" - we are sons of God in the sense that we are children of God and even joint Heirs with Christ, but we are NOT the "Monogenase" we are not the "only one of our kind."   There is only one Divine Son of God, in other words, who is equal to God the Father and He is the Lord Jesus.

Let's move on to another text. Colossians 1:16-17 reads like this in the New World Translation (The Jehovah's Witness doctored version of the scriptures)...

“16 because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon' the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist” (NWT)

Does that little word "other" that has been inserted by the Jehovah's Witnesses make a difference in how these verses are interpreted?  It most certainly does. It makes a difference because it leaves room for Jesus to be described as a created being who did not pre-exist before all things thereby affirming His Deity.

This is what those verses look like in the New American Standard Translation...

"16 For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together"  (Colossians 1:16-17) 

Those verses clearly teach us that Jesus is the agent of creation; everything in the created order was made "for Him", and He is the one holding all of this together. So, I do not intend to be irreverent when I write this, but  this means the Jesus is the glue that is holding this universe together; and of course, only God (with a capital "G") is capable of doing this. 

Conclusion = The Jehovah's Witnesses have created their own translation of the Bible that is blatantly inaccurate so that they can justify their heretical belief that Jesus is only mortal and not Divine.

They Reject Our Savior 

The Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus was merely a man and not God.  In fact, they actually teach that Jesus was a created Angel, Michael the Archangel to be specific, and that this was his name before he was "created." At www.watchthetower.com, they offer a $144,000.00 cash prize to any Jehovah's Witness who can find one verse in the Bible stating that "Jesus is Michael the Archangel." Of course, they're totally safe, because it isn't there. Teaching that Jesus is a created being is also a very serious error. My Bible teaches that Jesus pre-existed as God. In John 8:58, Jesus said "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

Please notice that Jesus used what Bible scholars call the "tetragrammaton" to refer to Himself. This can be traced back to Moses and the burning bush in Exodus 3, because this is when God revealed Himself as "The I AM". He said to Moses "I AM WHO I AM" (Exodus 3:14). This is where we get the word "Yahweh" or "Jehovah" from. In Colossians 1:16, the Apostle Paul wrote...

"For by Him (referring to Jesus) all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities — all things have been created through Him and for Him"

In their New World Translation, the Jehovah's Witnesses have inserted the word "Other" in several places in Colossians 1:16 in order to support their heretical teaching which I just described. In addition to these errors, they also teach that Jesus did not die on a cross, but rather, a stake; and worst of all, they deny the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ which is the cornerstone of our faith. In 1 Corinthians 15:16-19, Paul wrote...

"16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; 17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied" (Emphasis Added)

If Jesus Christ has not been resurrected, our faith is absolutely worthless. That is what Paul, in essence, is saying, and the Watchtower's teaching that Jesus' body was disposed of by God, dissolved into elements or atoms and recreated as a "spirit being" three days later is absolutely unacceptable. For you see, this teaching is no different than that which the gnostics taught in Biblical times, and the Apostle John called this a teaching of those who are quote "antichrist" in 2 John 7...

"For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist"

The word "coming" in 2 John 7 is a present tense participle; therefore, this tell us that John was referring, not only to the incarnation, but also to Jesus' resurrection as well as "the parousia" - the second coming. The Watchtower Society also teaches that Jesus is never called Jehovah in the Bible, and that statement is outlandish to those who truly understand the scriptures. For you see, every "I Am" statement that appears in the gospel of John is related back to the tetragrammaton which I mentioned earlier. They all relate back to Exodus 3:14 which is when the name "Yahweh" or "Jehovah" is first presented, and there are many.

  • "I Am the bread of life"  John 6:48
  • "I Am the light of the world"  John 8:12
  • "I Am the door" John 10:9
  • "I Am the Good Shepherd" John 10:11
  • "I Am the way, and the truth; and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me" John 14:6
  • "I Am the vine" John 15:5
  • "I AM He" John 18:6

Every One of those "I Am" statements represents Jesus' own claim to deity.

The clincher comes, however, in John 8:24; because in this verse, Jesus said, 

"Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins”

The word "He" does not appear in the original Greek, and the words "I am" are the words "Ego Eimi"; so, it literally reads like this; it says,

“...unless you believe that I am the I Am you will die in your sins” 

or

“…unless you believe that I am ‘Jehovah’ you will die in your sins”  

Finally, in Acts 1:8, Jesus said this just prior to His ascension; He said, 

"but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth"

Question = Who's witnesses did Jesus say that we are to be
Answer = "My Witnesses" - His Witnesses - Jesus' Witnesses

They Reject Our Salvation 

Like all other cults, the Jehovah's Witnesses have rejected our gospel of grace in favor of a false gospel based on works. According to a Watchtower Magazine dated February 15th, 1983 Pages 12-13, those who hope to receive everlasting life must identify themselves with "That Organization" (The Watchtower Society) and serve God as part of it. They also stated in a Watchtower Magazine dated April 1st, 1947 "to get one's name written in the Book of Life will depend upon one's works." They also teach that the only ones who will get to go to Heaven are in an elite group of just 144,000, and that these are selected because of their good works. The Jehovah's Witnesses are obviously and seriously mistaken at this point. For you see, these 144,000 are clearly described in Revelation 7:4-8 as 12,000 from each tribe of Israel; and in the very next verse, Revelation 7:9, the Bible says, 

"After these things I looked, and behold, a great multitude which no one could count, from every nation and all tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, and palm branches were in their hands"

I am able to count to 144,000, and most people are; yet, in this verse, John tells us that he saw a great multitude larger than any group we could count standing before the lamb in Heaven clothed in white robes.  So, the Jehovah's Witnesses are clearly in error at this point. The bottom line, of course, is this. The Bible clearly teaches that we are not saved by works but by faith alone in Jesus Christ. This could not be stated more clearly than it is in Ephesians 2:8-9 and in Galatians 2:16. 

Ephesians 2:8-9 "8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast"

Galatians 2:16 "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified"

My purpose at this point is not to get involved in the debate over whether the state should dictate what a religious organization believes or practices. I just want to make a simple point, and this is it...

BAD THEOLOGY CAN KILL YOU OR SOMEONE YOU LOVE