How Do You Read Watchtower Language?

A hedged sentence in a Watchtower publication tells you the writer’s step from a verse to a conclusion. The verbs are the signal: seems to imply, suggesting, it is only logical, supports the conclusion, it is only reasonable, it is reasonable to conclude, possibly, suggests, evidently. The question to put to that sentence is the same one each time. Which verse says that directly?

Key points

• Insight on the Scriptures, under Michael, says the singular “archangel” “seems to imply” one chief, that 1 Thessalonians 4:16CloseFor the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:1 Thessalonians 4:16 · King James VersionOpen source is “suggesting” the Lord is the archangel, that this is “only logical,” that Daniel 12:1 “supports the conclusion” that Michael is Jesus, and that Revelation 12 makes it “only reasonable.”
• Rutherford’s 1920 booklet says “it is reasonable to conclude” that millions then living would still be on the earth in 1925, and then calls the further conclusion “positive and indisputable.” (2)
• “Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?” answers its own question about Armageddon with “Possibly,” and calls the chronology “reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible).” (3)
• Later generation articles say “This suggests” and “He evidently meant.” The verse they are reading is Matthew 24:34CloseVerily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.Matthew 24:34 · King James VersionOpen source. (4) (5)
• The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ study note on Philippians 2:9CloseWherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:Philippians 2:9 · King James VersionOpen source says a literal “every name” “could give the impression” that Jesus’ name is above God’s, and that the context and other uses “support the rendering” “every other.” (6)

“Seems to imply” and “suggesting”

Insight does not open the Michael entry with “the Bible says Jesus is Michael.” It opens the identification this way: (1)

Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be “the archangel,” meaning “chief angel,” or “principal angel.” The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host.

“Indicates” and “seems to imply” are the writer’s estimate of how far the singular word will stretch. The next sentences say the Lord’s voice is described as an archangel’s, “suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel,” and that “it is only logical” that the voice be described by a word that would not diminish his authority. 1 Thessalonians 4:16CloseFor the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:1 Thessalonians 4:16 · King James VersionOpen source lists a commanding call, an archangel’s voice, and God’s trumpet. It does not say the Lord is the archangel. Which verse says that directly? The entry’s answer is the suggestion, not a clause that says it. Is Jesus Michael the archangel? reads each of those sentences against the verse it cites.

“Supports the conclusion” and “only reasonable”

The same entry says Michael’s standing up in Daniel “supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ,” because Jesus is the appointed King. It says that since the Son is to fight the nations, “it is only reasonable” that he was the one who battled the dragon. “Supports the conclusion” names an inference. “Only reasonable” names the author’s judgment that the inference should be drawn. Daniel 12:1CloseAnd at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.Daniel 12:1 · King James VersionOpen source names Michael. Revelation 12:7CloseAnd there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,Revelation 12:7 · King James VersionOpen source names Michael. Revelation 12:11CloseAnd they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.Revelation 12:11 · King James VersionOpen source names the Lamb. Which verse says that Michael is Jesus? The entry does not quote one. It quotes the steps.

“It is reasonable to conclude”

Rutherford’s 1920 booklet, Millions Now Living Will Never Die!, uses the hedge and then drops it. After dating a resurrection of the faithful worthies to 1925, it says “it is reasonable to conclude that millions of people now on the earth will be still on the earth in 1925.” The next sentence says “we must reach the positive and indisputable conclusion that millions now living will never die.” (2)

“Reasonable to conclude” is an argument from the chronology the booklet has just set out. “Positive and indisputable” is a stronger claim standing on that argument. (2) The Watch Tower’s later article says the hopes did not materialize. How have Watchtower teachings changed? quotes that retrospective. A reader who marks only the word “reasonable” still has to ask which verse says Abraham would return in 1925. The booklet’s answer is the jubilee count, not a sentence in Hebrews 11 that names the year.

“Possibly” and “not infallible”

“Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?” asks whether Armageddon will be over by the autumn of 1975 and the thousand-year reign begun by then. (3)

Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes. Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh creative “day.”

“Possibly,” “not infallible,” and “does not necessarily mean” are hedges. They sit in the article that also says the fall of 1975 will be 6,000 years since Adam. The hedge limits the claim. It does not erase the date the article has just offered. Which verse says Armageddon falls in 1975? The article does not quote one. It quotes a chronology and then says possibly.

“Suggests” and “evidently”

“Christ’s Presence—What Does It Mean to You?” moves “this generation” from unbelievers to anointed Christians and then says: “This suggests that some who are Christ’s anointed brothers will still be alive on earth when the foretold great tribulation begins.” (4) Matthew 24:34CloseVerily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.Matthew 24:34 · King James VersionOpen source (8) says this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled. It does not say “anointed brothers.” “Suggests” is the article’s word for the step.

The next explanation says: “He evidently meant that the lives of the anointed who were on hand when the sign began to become evident in 1914 would overlap with the lives of other anointed ones who would see the start of the great tribulation.” (5) “Evidently” marks a reading the writer is offering, not a clause in the verse. The history of those readings is How have Watchtower teachings changed?.

“Could give the impression”

The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation study notes use the same pattern when an English word is supplied.

The note on Philippians 2:9 says a literal rendering, “every name,” “could give the impression that Jesus’ name is above God’s own name,” and that the context and other uses “support the rendering” “every other.” (6) The Greek is πᾶν ὄνομα, every name. The impression is what the note will not let the English say. “Support the rendering” is the note’s case for adding “other.”

The note on Luke 23:43 says the evidence “suggests” that “today” marks when the promise was made, not when the criminal would be in Paradise. (7) The Greek has no comma. The note also says the editions of Westcott and Hort, Nestle and Aland, and the United Bible Societies put the comma before “today.” “Suggests” is the note’s weight for the other comma. Has the New World Translation been changed to fit doctrine? sets those notes beside the Greek and the King James Version.

The Colossians 1:16 note, quoted on How reliable is the New World Translation?, says a literal “all things” could give the impression that Jesus was the Creator. Same shape. The impression is named. The Greek is then not followed in the English.

Which verse says that directly?

The question is a reading question. If the sentence says “suggests,” “seems to imply,” “it is reasonable,” “supports the conclusion,” “evidently,” or “could give the impression,” the verse has not yet said the conclusion. Ask for the verse that says it in so many words. If the publication’s answer is another “suggests,” the chain is still the writer’s. If the verse does say it, the hedge was unnecessary, and the sentence can be read without it.

That is not a claim about why the sentence was hedged. The words are what the page printed. The Watch Tower and Scripture is the place of those publications next to the Bible. Acts 17:11CloseThese were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.Acts 17:11 · King James VersionOpen source says the Bereans searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Frequently asked questions

Is every careful sentence a hedge? A writer may say “this verse says” and then quote the verse. That is not a hedge. A hedge is the verb that stops short of the verse: seems, suggests, evidently, reasonable, supports the conclusion, could give the impression. The test is whether deleting the verb leaves a statement the cited verse actually makes.

Did the 1920 booklet stay hedged? It says “it is reasonable to conclude” that millions then living would still be alive in 1925, and in the next sentence “the positive and indisputable conclusion that millions now living will never die.” The hedge and the stronger claim are both in the booklet. The later Watchtower article says the hopes did not materialize.

Do the study notes hide the literal English? The Philippians 2:9 note prints the literal rendering, “every name,” and then says why “every other” was chosen. The Luke 23:43 note names the editions that put the comma before “today.” The notes are public. The question they leave is whether the reason they give is a statement in the Greek or a conclusion the English was written to carry.

Keep reading

• Is Jesus Michael the archangel?
• How have Watchtower teachings changed?
• Has the New World Translation been changed to fit doctrine?
• How reliable is the New World Translation?
• The Watch Tower and Scripture