Part of a series on
Jehovah's Witnesses
Overview Organizational structure Governing Body Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society Corporations History Bible Student movement Leadership dispute Splinter groups Doctrinal development Unfulfilled predictions Demographics By country
Beliefs Practices God's name 144,000 Salvation Eschatology Faithful and discreet slave Memorial of Jesus' Death Blood Discipline Hymns Literature The Watchtower Awake! New World Translation Bibliography Places Kingdom Hall Gilead School
People Watch Tower presidents W. H. Conley C. T. Russell J. F. Rutherford N. H. Knorr F. W. Franz M. G. Henschel D. A. Adams R. L. Ciranko Formative influences William Miller Henry Grew G. W. Stetson George Storrs N. H. Barbour J. N. Darby Notable former members R. V. Franz O. R. Moyle Notable scholars George Chryssides James Penton Zoe Knox
Criticism Handling child sex abuse Unfulfilled predictions
Opposition Persecution in Nazi Germany Supreme Court cases by country

Jehovah's Witnesses have experienced controversy in their relationships with mainstream Christianity, governments, former members, and the general public.^{[citation needed]} They or their representatives have been accused of heresy, racism, child neglect, doctrinal inconsistency and reversals, sedition, double standards, hypocrisy, mistranslation of the Bible, anti-Semitism, self-aggrandising, intolerant religious views, failure to support their own members, making false predictions, poor treatment of former members, having a high rate of mentally ill devotees, brainwashing, interference in family affairs, failure to report cases of sexual abuse to the authorities, and insistence on an unduly restrictive lifestyle.^{[citation needed]}

Jehovah's Witnesses have a number of doctrines that differ from those of mainstream Christianity (Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism). Some of these doctrines differ on points which are considered to be of central importance; others are relatively minor. The table below shows a comparison of a number of doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses vis-à-vis those of mainstream Christianity which are considered to be controversial, and of major importance.

These Witness beliefs are typically considered by mainstream Christians to be blasphemous or heretical in nature. For this reason, many Christian denominations consider these beliefs to place Jehovah's Witnesses outside of Christianity.^{[citation needed]}

Tetragrammaton in the New Testament

The New World Translation Committee's refusal to reveal its members' identities or credentials has brought much criticism of the New World Translation.^[25] Commenting on those whom Raymond Franz named as NWT translators, Rhodes states "it quickly became apparent that the committee was completely unqualified for the task".^[26]

The New World Translation's concordant (word-for-word) approach has been criticised as out-of-date and ineffective for conveying the meaning of the original Biblical languages. It has also been criticised for inconsistently applying the principles of the concordant approach.^{[citation needed]} The criticism of "theological bias" concerns mostly matters of the divinity of Christ (i.e., that Jesus was God), but also concerns other matters such as the eternity of the soul or the return of Jesus to the earth.^[27]

The most frequently criticized rendering is that of John 1:1. The issues stem from the fact that there is no article in the original Greek text before the last "theos." The New World Translation has inserted the indefinite article ("a") in its rendering to give "the Word was a god", similar to the rendering found at Acts 28:6 in the King James Version where the apostle Paul is thought to be "a god" (Greek, "theos", no article). Arguments against the New World Translation's rendering rely on the context of the Gospel of John and generally-held Christian theology, as well as the application of Colwell's Rule.^[28] Other renderings of the phrase say neither "a god" nor "God."^[29]

Other New World Translation renderings that form major points of contention include Luke 23:43, John 8:58, Acts 20:28, Colossians 1:15-20, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 1:8, 1 Peter 2:3, 1 Peter 3:15 and Revelation 3:14.^{[citation needed]}

Jehovah's Witnesses reject transfusions of whole allogeneic blood and its primary components (red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets and plasma), and transfusions of stored autologous blood or its primary components. As a doctrine, Jehovah's Witnesses do not reject transfusion of whole autologous blood so long as it is not stored prior to surgery. (E.g. perioperative extraction and transfusion of autologous blood.) This religious position is due to a belief that blood is sacred and represents life in God's eyes. Jehovah's Witnesses understand scriptures such as Leviticus 17:10-14 (which speaks of not partaking in any blood) to include taking blood into the body via a transfusion.^[30] Controversy has stemmed, however, from what critics state are inconsistencies in Witness policies on blood.

In the case of minor fractions derived from blood, each individual is directed to follow their own conscience on whether these are acceptable.^[31][32] This is because it is difficult to define at what point blood is no longer blood. As a substance is broken down into smaller and smaller parts it may or may not be considered the original substance. Therefore some of Jehovah's Witnesses personally choose to accept the use of blood fractions and some do not.

Such a stance of dividing blood into major components and minor fractions rather than either accepting all blood or requiring all blood components to be poured out onto the ground has led to criticism from organizations such as the Associated Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood.^[33] Witnesses respond that blood as the fluid per se is not the real issue. They say the real issue is respect and obedience for God's personal property- blood.^[34][35] That the matter blood is not at stake, is seen in the fact that members are allowed to eat meat which will still have some blood left in it. As soon as blood is drained from an animal, the respect has been shown to God and then a person can eat the meat even though it will contain a small amount of blood. Jehovah's Witnesses view of meat and blood thus is different than the Jewish view that goes to great lengths to remove any little trace of blood.^[36]

According to author Kerry Louderback-Wood, the Watchtower Society misrepresents the scope of allowed fractions. If taken together, they "total the entire volume of blood they came from".^[37] An example of this can be seen in blood plasma, which consists of 90-96% water. The remaining amount consists mainly of albumin, globulins, fibrinogen and coagulation factors. These four fractions are allowable for use, but only if taken separately. Critics have likened this to banning the eating of a ham and cheese sandwich but allowing the eating of bread, ham and cheese separately.^[38] When considering such an analogy it is important to keep in mind that Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept the whole blood or any of its major components. And if a fraction, "makes up a significant portion of that component" or "carries out the key function of a primary component" it may be objectionable to them.^[39]

The human body contains between 2-3 kg of leukocytes (white blood cells), but only about 3% of these are in the blood. White blood cells are considered a major component of blood and therefore forbidden. Human breast milk contains about 500,000 - 5 million white blood cells per millilitre,^[40] however this is not forbidden.

Jehovah's Witnesses strictly reject the storage of blood as being against the direction from the Bible to pour blood out onto the ground. It is due to this understanding that the use of stored autologous blood is prohibited – that is the storage of one's own blood before surgery in the case of an emergency.

In a similar fashion Jehovah's Witnesses accept blood fractions from donated blood but view the donation of blood to be unbiblical. The only way for fractions of blood to become available for use is through the storing and processing of such blood donations. This has led to criticism of perceived contradictory and inconsistent policies.^[41]

Regardless of the medical considerations, Jehovah Witnesses advocate that physicians should uphold the right of a patient to choose what treatments they accept or do not accept (though a Witness is subject to religious sanctions if they exercise their right to choose a blood transfusion).^[42] Accordingly, US courts tend not to hold physicians responsible for adverse health effects that a patient incurred out of his or her own requests.^[43] However, the point of view that physicians must, in all circumstances, abide by the religious wishes of the patients is not acknowledged by all jurisdictions (for one example, see France).

The situation has been controversial, particularly in the case of children. In the United States, many physicians will agree to explore and exhaust all non-blood alternatives in the treatment of children at the request of their legal guardians. However, some state laws require physicians to administer blood-based treatment to minors if it is their professional opinion that it is necessary to prevent immediate death or severe permanent damage.

An essay entitled, "Jehovah's Witnesses, Blood Transfusions, and the Tort of Misrepresentation", found in the Autumn issue of Baylor University's Journal of Church and State, published December 13, 2005, discusses the potential vulnerability of Jehovah's Witnesses' legal corporations to significant claims for compensation because of the religion's possible misrepresentation of the medical risks of blood transfusions. According to the essay, constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion do not remove the legal responsibility that every person or organization has regarding misrepresenting secular fact.

The Watchtower has stated that "Various medical products have been obtained from biological sources, either animal or human ... Such commercialization of ... blood is hardly tempting for true Christians, who guide their thinking by God's perfect law. Our Creator views blood as sacred, representing God-given life ... blood removed from a creature was to be poured out on the ground, disposed of."^[44]

It has been suggested that "one of the more common criticisms of Jehovah's Witnesses over the years has dealt with their outspoken denunciations of other faiths, religious leaders and clergymen."^[45] In the 1930s and 1940s, the publications of Jehovah's Witnesses were described as "notoriously anti-Catholic",^[46] including such images as a semiclad harlot (the World of False Religion) reeling drunkenly into fire and brimstone. Witnesses during the time were openly critical of churches and clergy who they deemed were coconspirators in the war effort. Many highly critical pamphlets were written at the time.

The book entitled Enemies, published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society in 1938, included some of the more direct denunciations of primarily the Catholic Church but also the Protestants and the Jews. It includes references to the Catholic Church as "the old harlot" who has a "bloody record… many crimes… a filthy record". The same book is quoted as saying, "Today the so-called 'Protestants' and the Yiddish clergy openly co-operate with and play into the hands of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy like foolish simpletons and thereby aid the Hierarchy to carry on her commercial, religious traffic and increase her revenue… the hierarchy takes the lead, and the simpletons follow… poor simpletons."^[45]

Since World War II, publications of Jehovah's Witnesses have not included the same level of attack against the churches of Christendom, but do continue to view all religions except Jehovah's Witnesses as being included in "Babylon the Great, the world empire of false religion", and are represented as the harlot riding the wild beast in Revelation 13. Jehovah's Witnesses continue to denounce other religions and refuse to participate in any interfaith relations. Publications continue to contain elements of what the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights consider to be anti-Catholic sentiments. An example cited by the 1998 Report on Anti-Catholicism included a publication depicting a person kneeling in prayer before a statue of the Virgin Mary, with the caption, "Some worship idols. God says you must not use idols or images in worship..."^[47] The Watchtower organization teaches that "Only Jehovah's Witnesses… have any Scriptural hope of surviving the impending end of this doomed system dominated by Satan the Devil."^[48]

Although the Watchtower claims that they never discriminated against any race, discrimination has been argued to exist within its teachings.^[49] For example, Charles Taze Russell taught that blacks would become white and Hebrew after Armageddon.^[50][51] The Watchtower Society also taught that blacks were degraded because they were descendants from Ham^[52], and that they need to remove their "curse" of dark skin.^[53] The Watchtower Society taught that blacks were in general less interested and had less intelligence concerning the Bible.^[54] These views were discarded after 1929.^[55] Jehovah's Witnesses practiced segregation of blacks until the late 1950s^[56] and taught that blacks have "servant" and "teachable qualities" as recently as 1952.^[57][58] Since then the Watchtower Society claims to have developed high standards against racism, and have stated that some white Witnesses do not support those standards.^[59] Some Afro-American Watchtower Society members have complained that there is a lack of black people in the Governing Body,^[60][61][62]and that they are still second-class in the Watchtower movement.^[63]

The Watchtower Society has made a number of statements in its publications since its inception that have resulted in criticism, particularly from mainstream Christians and former Jehovah's Witnesses. These critics have highlighted a number of controversial statements, changes of doctrine, and failed predictions made by the Watchtower Society. Lists of controversial statements, such as those found below, are found in a number of books^[64] and on numerous websites.^[65]

See also main article Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses

Predictions such as the following have appeared in various Watchtower publications:^[66]

• 1907: Armageddon will culminate in the year 1914.^[67]
• 1917: In 1918, God would begin to destroy churches "wholesale" and church members by the millions.^[68]
• 1922-1923: The resurrection of the dead would occur in 1925.^[69] In preparation for the 1925 date, the Watchtower Society acquired a property in California and built a mansion they called Beth Sarim. The property was to house people such as Abraham, Moses, David, and Samuel, whom they thought would be resurrected to life in 1925. When they failed to resurrect, their leader, Joseph Rutherford moved in.
• 1938: In 1938, Armaggedon was too close for marriage or child bearing.^[70]
• 1941: There were only "months" remaining until Armageddon.^[71]
• 1942: Armageddon was "immediately before us."^[72]
• 1969: Human existence would not last long enough for young people to grow old; the world system would end "in a few years". Young Witnesses were encouraged not to bother pursuing tertiary education for this reason.^[73]
• 1969: Christ's thousand-year reign would begin in 1975.^[74] There was a considerable amount of related speculation in Watchtower publications in the years leading up to 1975.^[75]
• 1984: There were "many indications" that "the end" was closer than the end of the 20th century.^[76]
• 1914 (generation): It was taught that Armageddon would take place before the death of those who were alive in 1914. This teaching was abandoned in 1996. Jehovah's Witnesses currently believe that no certain year can be established for Armageddon to occur.^[77][78]

A number of Christian apologists have argued that in making predictions about the future, the Watchtower Society have acted as a prophet,^[79] often citing Watchtower Society publications that use the word "prophet" in referring to the organization.^[80][81] The Watchtower Society itself has condemned others for making false predictions about the future, stating that such people were "guilty of false prophesying".^[82] Apologists argue that the Watchtower Society does not represent God, based on Deuteronomy 18:22: "When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him." (ESV)

The Watchtower Society has stated as early as 1908, "We are not prophesying; we are merely giving our surmises....We do not even [assert] that there is no mistake in our interpretation of prophesy and our calculations of chronology. We have merely laid these before you, leaving it for each to exercise his own faith or doubt in respect to them."^[83] They have also stated that they do not have the gift of prophecy.^[84] More recently they have defended themselves against claims of "false prophesying", by saying that they do not claim to be inspired prophets,^[85] and that their predictions have never been made "in the name of Jehovah" but rather are given only as an interpretation of Scripture.^[86]

However, the Watchtower Society has also made statements asserting their predictions to be definite. "The date of the close of that 'battle' is definitely marked in Scripture as October, 1914. It is already in progress, its beginning dating from October, 1874."^[87]; "Surely there is not the slightest room for doubt in the mind of a truly consecrated child of God that the Lord Jesus is present and has been since 1874"^[88] (notably, this was written in 1924, indicating that 1914 was not taught as the beginning of Christ's presence until a later period, despite contrary claims by Jehovah's Witnesses that "The Watchtower has consistently presented evidence to honesthearted students of Bible prophecy that Jesus' presence in heavenly Kingdom power began in 1914"^[89]); "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. We see no reason for changing from our opinion expressed in the view presented [earlier]"^[90]

The Watchtower Society has made a number of changes to its doctrines since its inception. The controversy surrounding this issue^{[citation needed]} is that the Watchtower Society has said that:

• People can only fully and accurately understand the Bible and God's purposes through their association with the religion.^[91]
• Witnesses are encouraged to attain to "oneness"^[92] and thus not to "harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding",^[93] or be suspicious of their teachings, but rather to have confidence in what they print.^[94]

A number of changes in chronology have occurred, particularly in regards to dates for important events such as Armaggedon, and the return of Jesus to the Earth (see table, right). For example, prior to 1914, it was said that Armageddon would end in 1914. In a 1915 edition of the same book, it was said that Armaggedon would end that year. Today, Witnesses are taught to expect Armageddon imminently.

Other changes in interpretation of the Bible have been noted by critics.^[who?] These have included statements about the Bible itself;^[95] identification of persons in the Bible;^[96] whether or not people receive a second chance after death;^[97] and perhaps most controversially, their standing on blood transfusions.^[98] The standing of the Watchtower Society on other matters such as the acceptability of vaccinations^[99] or tertiary education^[100] has also changed over time.

Critics of the Watchtower Society (or of Jehovah's Witnesses generally) often cite statements such as those listed above^{[citation needed]} alongside other published statements that the Watchtower Society has made about itself; namely that:

• The Watchtower Society is the "one and only channel" used by God to continually to dispense truth^[101]
• The Watchtower Society is "directed by Jehovah" and "under the direct supervision of Christ Jesus"^[102] and that it "alone, in all the earth, is directed by God's holy spirit or force"^[103]

Critics have used such statements to question the credibility of the Watchtower Society.^{[citation needed]} The Watchtower has responded multiple times to issues regarding critics claims - mostly to the claim that the Watchtower presents itself as inspired. Here is one such statement:

Jehovah's Witnesses, in their eagerness for Jesus' second coming, have suggested dates that turned out to be incorrect. Because of this, some have called them false prophets. Never in these instances, however, did they presume to originate predictions 'in the name of Jehovah.' Never did they say, 'These are the words of Jehovah.' The Watchtower, the official journal of Jehovah's Witnesses, has said: "We have not the gift of prophecy." (January 1883, page 425) "Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible." (December 15, 1896, page 306) The Watchtower has also said that the fact that some have Jehovah's spirit "does not mean those now serving as Jehovah's witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes." (May 15, 1947, page 157) "The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances, nor is it dogmatic." (August 15, 1950, page 263) "The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers. (2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)"—February 15, 1981, page 19.^[104]

Critics of Jehovah's Witnesses (e.g., Randall Watters, Timothy Campbell, David Grosshoeme, Kaynor Weishaupt, Jan Groenveld) object to Witness policy and behavior where, in their view, the integrity of family relationships and the capacity of members to exercise freedom of mind is impacted.

Others believe that some members of anti-cult movements have impinged on the religious freedom of Jehovah's Witnesses through coercive deprogramming and discrimination.^[105]

Witnesses teach that "freedom to make decisions [is] to be exercised within the boundaries of God's laws and principles", ^[106] and that "only Jehovah [is] free to set the standard of what is good and bad."^[107] As mentioned above, however, it is believed that such principles can only be understood through association with Jehovah's Witnesses.^[108] In practice, members may face sanctions if they do not abide by regulations set forth by the leadership, which presents itself as the channel through which God instructs members about "what is good and bad".

Religious scholar Sergei Ivanenko stated, "It would be a serious mistake to represent the Religious Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses as a religion whose leadership forces its rank and file believers to engage in one form of activity or another, or place upon them strict restrictions or directives. Jehovah's Witnesses strive to live in accord with Bible principles on the basis of an individual, voluntary choice. . . . This also applies in full measure to preaching." ^[109] James Beckford, an expert of the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses and a professor at the University of Warwick, England, mentioned, "It is important for each of them to exercise free moral agency in choosing to study the Bible and to live in accordance with their interpretation of its message." ^[110]

The Nation of Islam adapted many beliefs of the Watchtower, to fit their own purposes.^[111] For example both have the beliefs- the millennium had already started, the Battle of Armageddon, a privileged 144000, the new world on earth, non-immortality of souls and 1914 as end time. Elijah Muhammad encouraged black Muslims to read the writings of Joseph F. Rutherford.^[112] Black Muslims deny any causal relationship.^[113]

If a member of Jehovah's Witnesses does not comply with the organisation's interpretations, they can be excommunicated, termed disfellowshipping. This involves being shunned by all members of the religion, including any family members that do not live under the same roof. Due to the social nature of the religion, being shunned can isolate a member in a very powerful way and can be devastating if everyone in a member's social circle participates in the shunning. Jehovah's Witnesses say that disfellowshipping is a scripturally-documented method to protect the congregation from the influence of those who practice serious wrongdoing. [5] The Encyclopedia of Religion notes: "Any community claims the right to protect itself against nonconforming members who may threaten the common welfare. In a religious setting this right has often been reinforced by the belief that the sanction [of excommunication] affects one's standing before God."^[114]

Prior to 1981, if a member disassociated from the religion but was not disfellowshipped, the practice of shunning was not required and normal contact could be maintained. A policy change in 1981 required that all who were considered to have disassociated by their actions were to be treated in the same way as a member who had been disfellowshipped for wrongdoing. The new policy meant that congregation members are not informed whether a person was being shunned due to "disfellowshipping" or "disassociation", or on what grounds. Many of these changes were precipitated by events surrounding Raymond Franz, a former governing body member.

Critics state that fear of being shunned and family break-up causes people who might otherwise freely leave the religion to stay.^{[citation needed]} The only way to officially leave the religion is to write a letter requesting to be disassociated or to be disfellowshipped, but both entail the same set of prohibitions and penalties. Critics contend the judicial process involved, due to its private and nearly autonomous nature, contradict the precedent found in the Bible and the organizations' own teachings^[115] and can be used in an arbitrary manner if there is consensus among just a few to so use their authority.^[116]

Critics have accused Jehovah's Witnesses of employing organizational policies that make the reporting of sexual abuse difficult for members. For a report of abuse to be considered "proven" (to the degree that would merit congregational judicial discipline), there need to be two witnesses or a confession by the accused (only in cases where there is no physical evidence of the abuse).^[117][118]

Some victims of sexual abuse also assert that when reporting abuse they have been directed to maintain silence to avoid embarrassment to both the accused and the organization.^[119][120]

The official policy on child protection for Jehovah's Witnesses, which discusses the procedures for reporting child sexual abuse, states that elders obey all legal requirements for reporting sex offenders, including reporting uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations where required by law and that they are to discipline pedophiles. It also emphasizes the right of the victim to notify the authorities if they wish to do so.^[121] A Religious Tolerance.org website article on the handling of child sexual abuse cases acknowledges this, stating, The WTS recommends that the victim's parent or guardian — or even the accused person themselves — report the abuse to the police.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the United Nations is one of the 'superior authorities' that exist by God's permission (Romans 13:1, 2, NWT), and that it presently serves a purpose in maintaining order, but they refuse to give political support or to consider UN as the means for the achievement of peace and security. Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only God's Kingdom will bring true peace. Jehovah's Witnesses also believe that UN is the "image of the wild beast", that is, the representative of the global political system referred to in Revelation 13:1-18, and the second fulfillment of the "abominable thing that causes desolation" from Matthew 24:15, that is, the political means that will be used for the devastation of the organized false religion on a world scale,^[122][123] and that, like all other political powers, it will be destroyed and replaced by God's heavenly Kingdom.^[124] Jehovah's Witnesses have denounced other religious organizations for having offered political support to the UN.^[125]

On October 8 2001 an article was published in the British Guardian newspaper questioning the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society's registration as a non-governmental organisation (NGO) with the United Nations Department of Public Information and accusing the Watchtower Society of hypocrisy.^[126]

Within days of the article's publication, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society submitted a formal request for disassociation, removing all association with the United Nations Department of Public Information,^[127] and released a letter stating that the reason for becoming associated with the United Nations Department of Information (DPI) was to access their facilities, and that they had not been aware of the change in language contained in the criteria for NGO association.^[128] The purpose of membership is to "promote knowledge of the principles and activities of the United Nations". At the time NGO association was sought, "the organization agreed to meet criteria for association, including support and respect of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations".^[129]

Canadian Peter Mosier agreed to shut down his website of quotes from Watchtower Society publications, http://quotes.watchtower.ca, to avoid a 100,000 Canadian dollar court case in 2005. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania initiated legal proceedings before the Ontario Superior Court on September 8, 2005 against Mosier. Their claim was that "the defendant's main purpose is not fair use but rather to try to embarrass the plaintiffs by quoting selectively from some of the religious works in a manner that misleads internet users as to the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses in Canada ... [and is] likely to cause confusion."^[130][131]

• Apocalypse Delayed: The Story of Jehovah's Witnesses' by M. James Penton. Penton, who is a former Jehovah's Witness and a professor emeritus of history at University of Lethbridge, examines the history of Jehovah's Witnesses, and their doctrines. Read selections from: Apocalypse Delayed: the Story of Jehovah's Witnesses University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-7973-3 (Canada, 1998) (Google book search)
• Wolves Among Sheep by James Kostelniuk. Harpercollins Trade Sales Dept, ISBN-13: 978-0006391074
• The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses by Heather and Gary Botting. Both authors were raised Jehovah's Witnesses and are trained scholars. In fact, the book is based on a doctoral dissertation by Heather Botting. Read selections from: The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses (Google book search) University of Toronto Press, ISBN-13: 978-0802065452
• The Truth Book: Escaping a Childhood of Abuse Among Jehovah's Witnesses by Joy Castro, adopted as a baby and raised by a devout Jehovah's Witness family. Read selections from: The Truth Book: Escaping a Childhood of Abuse Among Jehovah's Witnesses (Google book search) Published 2005 Arcade Publishing, ISBN 1559707879
• Crisis of Conscience by Raymond Franz, a former Jehovah's Witness who was a member of the Governing Body of the Watch Tower Society for nine years. This book gives a detailed account of the authority structure, practices, doctrines and decision-making practices Franz experienced while serving on the Governing Body. Sample chapters online: 1, 9, 10, 11, 12. Publisher: Commentary Press. 420 pages. Hardback ISBN 0-914675-24-9. Paperback ISBN 0-914675-23-0. 4th edition (June 2002)
• The Gentile Times Reconsidered: Chronology & Christ's Return by Carl O. Jonsson. Jonsson considers the origin of the belief that the Gentile Times began in 607 B.C. and examines several lines of evidence and the methodology for deriving it. ISBN 0-914675-06-0 Publisher: Commentary Press (July, 1998, Fourth edition 2004)
• Jehovah's Witnesses Defended by Greg Stafford. The author considers himself one of Jehovah's Witnesses but has renounced affiliation with the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. This book reviews and thoroughly explores the most common, and/or prevalent, criticisms made about Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. http://elihubooks.com/books/
• I Was Raised a Jehovah's Witness by Joe Hewitt. Hewitt gives a frank and compelling account of his life as a Jehovah's Witness and his subsequent persecution and excommunication after he decided to leave the Jehovah's Witness movement. Read selections from: I Was Raised a Jehovah's Witness (Google book search) Published 1997, Kregel Publications, ISBN 0825428769

• Jehovah's Witnesses respond on child abuse, from official site (video)
• Jehovah's Witnesses Official Policy on Child Protection, from official site
• A defense of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures
• NoBlood.org - A forum to investigate, discuss and report the latest techniques in blood conservation and alternatives to blood transfusion.
• Truth in Translation! - A deep, positive, examination of the New World Translation.
• Your Body Choice! - A book that shows how Jehovah's Witnesses may have helped your medical freedom.
• http://www.watchtower.org/ - Official Jehovah's Witnesses website
• http://www.ushmm.org/education/resource/jehovahs/jehovahsw.php -United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and the stories on how Jehovah's Witnesses did not compromise the bible teachings.

• Apologetics index - Criticisms of Jehovah's Witnesses from a mainstream Christian viewpoint.
• Associated Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood - A site that promotes reform of the Watch Tower Society's blood doctrine.
• Disfellowshipped.net - A site for disfellowshipped members.
• Exposé on the Jehovah's Witnesses - From Blue Letter Bible. An examination of the Watchtower Society. Contains relatively brief explanations of each point.
• Exjws.net - A site for ex-members.
• exJW-Reunited - website offers help to followers who lose their faith
• Jehovah Witness and the Deity of Christ Article showing how false translation distorts Deity of Christ.
• Jehovah's Witnesses, Blacks and Discrimination - paper about Blacks and the Watchtower
• How Race Affects Your Position In The Kingdom Hall - a personal testimony
• Favoritism and the "Jim Crow" Laws Among Jehovah's Witnesses - The Story of Greg and Penny Peterson
• Racism in the Jehovah Witness Watchtower by Christian Peper
• Apartheid In The Watchtower by Peter Andrews
• Free Minds, Inc - the largest Watchtower dissident site
• Watchtower Ban on Education Now "Old Light" - Free Minds Journal
• The Gospel According to Jehovah's Witnesses Online book critiquing doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses written by a Roman Catholic layman.
• The Jehovah's Witnesses and the Theocratic Subversion of Ethnicity - A Paper Presented to the American Academy of Religion
• Historical Idealism and Jehovah's Witnesses - Documents the historical development of Jehovah's Witness chronology and the claimed "idealized" history of it by the Watchtower Society
• Religious Tolerance.org Jehovah's Witnesses Policies & examples of child sexual abuse.
• Jehovah's Witness cult (Google video) - A candid look at the Watchtower Society, also known as Jehovah's Witnesses.
• Jesus and the Trinity - Online book responding to Witness teaching
• JW Files--Research on Jehovah's Witnesses - A site "dedicated to research on Jehovah Witnesses".
• jwfacts.com - Facts about Jehovah's Witnesses
• Silentlambs.org Silentlamb's official web site.
• SoundWitness.org - A collection of articles examining the doctrine & practice of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
• TowerWatch Ministries - Jehovah's Witness and Watchtower Information Online.
• Witnessinc.com - A site containing information and articles on the beliefs and practices of the Jehovah's Witnesses.
• Make Sure of All Things - A site that is critical of some JW teachings, but is moderate in views
• The Watchtower in Light of Scripture - Online book by former Jehovah's Witness Circuit Overseer
• Watchtower Influences on Black Muslim Eschatology: An Exploratory Story by William A. Maesen
• Ex-Jehovah's Witness Forum and Recovery Site- A Support and Recovery Forum for Ex-Jehovah's Witnesses; those considering leaving the organization; or simply those interested in the jw's.