Seeing is Believing

You shall not carve idols for yourselves in the shape of anything in the sky above or on the earth below or in the waters beneath the earth; you shall not bow down before them or worship them. (Exodus 20:4-5)

Protestants break this commandment out as a separate one of the ten given to Moses (and combine coveting of neighbor's wife and goods). Many of them will typically point to this commandment when arguing that Catholics use statues and icons in their worship which is forbidden.

I can see where their confusion comes from, but I believe they are misinterpreting this verse in the Old Testament. My understanding of this rule is that God is telling the Israelites to neither (a) create a statue and worship THAT STATUE, nor (b) do not worship created things in place of the Creator. On both counts, Catholics are not at fault. We do not create icons and statues in order to worship the statue itself, nor do we worship any of God's created things.

Some non-Catholics are misguided in thinking that we worship Mary or the saints, both things that are created by God. In fact, we do not worship these men and women, but rather honor them as examples of brothers and sisters who provide models for a grace-filled life and faith in God.

When we place artwork in our churches of Jesus or the Holy Spirit (in the form of a dove or a tongue of fire), we are not worshiping the artwork but using it as a visual representation -- something that we can focus our senses on to assist in our prayer life. God incorporates man's senses in to all His covenants. Whether we see a rainbow in the sky, read about Jesus curing a blind man with mud and spit, or see John the Baptist baptizing Christ in the Jordan, we see how God understands that we as humans are created to incorporate our senses into how we worship Him. The very fact that He sent His Son to become man suggests that He desired for us to SEE him in a tangible way.

So do not design a sculpture out of dollar bills and worship the materials in the sculpture. Do not embalm a cow and pray for "udder" happiness. And do not wear a lucky rabbit's foot, a charm bracelet, or carry a special coin in your pocket and place your faith in the object itself. But if you hang a crucifix in your home, or burn incense, or place a holy card of St Christopher in your car to serve as reminders that we should trust in God and turn to Him at all times, then delight your senses while proclaiming Him as the Lord your God!

"As We Forgive Others..."

And whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone; so that your Father also who is in Heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father who is in heaven forgive your trespasses. (Mark 11:25-26)

Do you ever stop to think about the meaning behind the words in the Lord's Prayer? During Mass we pray, "... forgive us our trespasses as we forgive others who trespass against us." We are literally asking God to forgive us in the same manner as we forgive others. That kind of goes back to the Golden Rule. When I review some of the grudges I have held on to in the past and consider how I would feel about God holding similar grudges against myself, I begin to see how I need to focus more on the words "as we forgive others" rather than the "forgive us."

Witness to the Trinity

The title "Son of God" signifies the unique and eternal relationship of Jesus Christ to God his Father: he is the only Son of the Father; he is God himself. To be a Christian, one must believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (CCC 454)

from Has the Witness Committed Perjury?:
"When I look up a definition for 'Christian' I begin to see how Jehovah's (and other unlikely faiths) claim Christianity on a technicality. The term Christian is defined generically as 'a person who is a follower of Jesus and his teachings,' and Christ is defined merely as 'the anointed one or messiah.' I'm certain a Jehovah would admit that Jesus is a key figure in their beliefs, being that he is the "new Adam" now residing in Heaven as God's right hand man."

I was thinking about my blog entry earlier this month regarding the faith of the Watchtower Society. It still bothers me that they claim to be Christians when so much of what they claim to believe is contrary to what a Christian professes.

Before a friendly, neighborhood Jehovah argues that Jesus (aka Michael, the archangel) can be the son yet not God, I submit for evidence John 1:1 and John 1:14 to be read together in context. (I looked these verses up in the Witness' translation of Holy Scripture and see that they refer to the word as "was a god" rather than "was God" (note the lack of uppercase letter in the former):

John 1:1
New World Translation:
In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

New American Bible:
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14
New World Translation:
So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth.

New American Bible:
And the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, and we saw his glory, the glory as of the Father's only Son, full of grace and truth.

Based on the New World Translation, I gather that a JW may claim belief in Jesus' sonship, but must not profess faith in the Trinity. However, the early Church was very clear in stating that the "consubstantial trinity" exists as three persons in one God.That Truth is a central dogma of the Christian faith.

All from one and One for All

All men are implicated in Adam's sin, as St Paul affirms: "By one man's disobedience many [that is all men] were made sinners": "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned..." The apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.: (CCC 402)

Romans 5:18 shows us yet another reason to dismiss the concept of an elect group God has chosen for salvation. If we can agree that ALL men are prone to sin as a result of one man's disobedience in the garden, then it should be apparent that God's plan of salvation, in motion since the first moment of man's fall, would be to reconcile ALL men to Him again.

There are too many verses in Scripture which indicate that Christ died for all men to afford a belief in a predetermined elect group. Instead, the elect are merely those men who respond to the invitation each of us has received. Our free will determines our membership in the elect groups Scripture repeatedly references.

We Go Together (Like Rama Lama Lama)

Man and woman were made "for each other" - not that God left them half-made and incomplete: he created them to be a communion of persons, in which each can be "helpmate" to the other, for they are equal as persons ("bone of my bones. . .") and complementary as masculine and feminine. In marriage God unites them in such a way that, by forming "one flesh", they can transmit human life: "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth." By transmitting human life to their descendants, man and woman as spouses and parents cooperate in a unique way in the Creator's work. (CCC 372)

The key word in this Catechism reference is that man and woman are complimentary. The Catechism states in paragraph 370 that God is neither male or female. Considering that both sexes are "created in His image," I wonder if the true essence of God is not best seen when man and woman join together in marriage and become one flesh? Only at that point do we as created get to work with God to create.

Any intelligent life form, God-faring or not, can see that man and woman are designed to fit together. Without making this a class on sexuality, it should be obvious to anyone that our body design does not support the concept of same sex unions. The Church in its wisdom pointed out that the advent of birth control and abortion would spell the doom of modern society. Once you take away the procreative aspect of our sexuality, you lose appreciation for the sanctity of marriage. By putting our own selfish pleasures above all of God's creation we downplay the significance of God.

It is therefore critical, as people of faith, that we recognize the dignity of both male and female while also recognizing that we each have unique strengths that were designed to be used together in complimentary fashion. While it may be true that a woman is capable of fixing her own carburetor and a man is perfectly able to iron his own clothes, we should never downplay the fact that we are not asexual creatures. Only in recognizing the uniqueness of our sex can we hope to fulfill God's plan in our life.

When Your Life Is "In The Pit"

"And now, we pray you, forgive the transgression of the servants of the God of your father." Joseph wept when they spoke to him. His brothers also came and fell down before him, and said, "Behold, we are your servants." But Joseph said to them, "Fear not, for am I in the place of God? As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today. So do not fear; I will provide for you and your little ones." (Genesis 50:17-21)

Now I don't know of many pits where I live, but I'm pretty sure that if my siblings tossed me in one and left me for thieves to find me and sell me into slavery, I'd probably be inclined to hold a grudge against them and plot ways to get even should I ever be given the opportunity. Yet here we have Joseph, who never considered a negative response to his predicament. He was a slave and a prisoner as a result of actions out of his control, yet as a result of his faith and good will, God used his situation, not just to Joseph's personal success, but to the safety and well being of all of Egypt and Canaan.

In the story of Joseph and Egypt, we see that God can (and often does) take a bad situation and use it to His advantage. But for His plan to work, we have to accept the unfortunate situations that we are given, and remain faithful to God in the midst of our suffering. In that regard, our free will does play a role in God's salvation plan.

Consider if Joseph had taken his brothers into slavery when they came to him for food. Similarly, what if Noah had chosen not to heed God's advice to build an ark? What if Mary had said "No" to God's plan? Would God have failed in His plan to reconcile man to Himself? Unlikely -- He is God and He can do anything. Likely He would have worked with other events in history to bring about salvation, and we would now be honoring a Rebekah or a Therese as our blessed mother.

Our call then is to graciously accept our lot in life, and know that although it may seem pointless that we should have to suffer unnecessarily, perhaps if we handle our grief with humility and faith, a thousand years from now humanity will look back and credit our heroic struggles as part of God's redemptive plan.

A New World?

"The day you learn to surrender yourself totally to God, you will discover a new world. You will enjoy a peace and a calm unknown, surpassing even the happiest days of your life."
St Jaime Hilario

Unfortunately, I haven't yet learned how to surrender myself totally to God...

Not Such A "Little Angel" After All

St. Augustine says: "'Angel' is the name of the office, not of their nature. If you seek the name of their nature, it is 'spirit'; if you seek the name of their office, it is 'angel': from what they are, 'spirit,' from what they do, 'angel.'" With their whole beings the angels are servants and messengers of God. Because they "always behold the face of my Father who is in Heaven" they are the "mighty ones who do His word, hearkening to the voice of His word." (CCC 329)

As good as It's A Wonderful Life is, it imparts an incorrect understanding of angels. Angels are not what becomes of men when they die and go to Heaven. Angels are a separate creature created by God to be his heavenly messengers. Among the many examples in Scripture, we can see that they closed the earthly paradise (Gen 3:24), protected Lot (Gen 19:15), saved Hagar and her child (Gen 21:17), stayed Abraham's hand (Gen 22:12), led the People of God (Exodus 23:23), assisted the prophets (Judges 6:11; Isaiah 6:6; 1 Kings 19:5), and announced the birth of Christ and His precursor (Luke 1:19, 26; Luke 2:13-14) .

While the creation of angels are not explicitly stated in the Bible, their existence is. The Church proclaims that angels were created prior to man in the fourth Lateran Council (1). Since they do not have corporeal bodies like us, their response to God's love did not require time and reflection to grow and mature. As soon as they were created and received grace, they had the opportunity to respond to God's love and thus be welcomed into bliss (2). Tradition also tells us that some of these spiritual creatures rebelled against God when they learned that their role included serving mankind. The leader of these fallen spirits was Satan, who was the tempter in the garden.

From "On the Celestial Hierarchies" authored by St Dionysius, we have a listing the hierarchy of the angelic ranks in order of their proximity to God: Seraphim (Isaiah 6:2), Cherubim (Numbers 7:89), Thrones (1 Col 1:16), Dominions (1 Col 1:16), Virtues (Eph 1:21), Powers (1 Col 1:16), Principalities (1 Col 1:16), Archangels (1 Thess 4:15), and Angels.

The general doctrine that the angels are our appointed guardians is considered to be a point of faith, but that each individual member of the human race has his own individual guardian angel is not of faith. (3) However, several doctors of the Church taught that the angels were indeed our guardians and in the Gospels we find some support: "See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven always look upon the face of my heavenly Father" (Matt 18:10).

While angels are a unique creation of God in that they are purely spiritual, man is equally unique in that among all of God's creation only humans are both spiritual and corporeal (CCC 327). Just as Jesus ascended bodily into Heaven, we believe that upon our final judgment our glorified bodies will be resurrected and joined once again with our spiritual nature, and thus we will not be angels, but sons of God in eternal communion with Him. All I can say to that is "Alleluia!" for I am not having much success with this non-glorified body I've been given here on Earth!

Sorry Clarence, but there's no need to listen for the ring of Zuzu Bailey's bell. Her teacher was mistaken.

Faith of Our Fathers

God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt offering, my son. (Genesis 22:8)

A man waits faithfully for one hundred years to have his only son by his wife as promised by God. And then God commands him to go out and kill that son as a sacrifice for Him, and he does it without question, even up to the point that he has the son strapped to the altar with a knife raised. THAT is steadfast faith in God. I do not have it, and must admit that it would be a hard thing even to ask for as truthfully I do not want to be put to a similar test of faith.

But is the story of Abraham and Isaac not a fantastic foreshadowing to the redemptive act of God when He offers His only Son as a sacrifice to us? Even more so that we celebrate that act of supreme love each week upon an altar? And that in God's mercy, we celebrate that act not with knives and fire, but with the simple species of bread and wine? Our God certainly likes His paradoxes.

Blasphemy!

but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin. (Mark 3:29)

As a Catholic I have always been taught that this verse tells us that the only unforgivable sin is that of despair. To despair by turning one's back on God and refusing to accept that He can forgive our sins is in effect blaspheming His name. It is blasphemous to suggest that God is incapable of granting us forgiveness when we err. If we choose to turn our back on Him and deny Him, we will be left unforgiven and hardened of heart.

Gomorrah No-More-Ah

for we are about to destroy this place, because the outcry against its people has become great before the Lord, and the Lord has sent us to destroy it. (Genesis 19:13)

I often wonder just how bad the people in Sodom were to incur the wrath of God? Then I think of modern times and wonder how far we are from suffering a similar fate?

An Argument For Free Will

We believe that God created the world according to His wisdom. It is not the product of any necessity whatsoever, nor of blind fate or chance. We believe that it proceeds from God's free will; He wanted to make His creatures share in His being, wisdom, and goodness: "For You created all things, and by Your will they existed and were created" (Rev 4:11). Therefore the Psalmist proclaims: "O Lord, how manifold are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all" (Psalms 104:24); and "The Lord is good to all, and his compassion is over all that He has made" (Psalms 145:9). (CCC 295)

God created the world of His own free will -- not out of necessity, or by blind will or chance. God was not forced to create this world and us men. He freely chose to do so. God has free will.

"Okay. So?" you say. Furthermore, God created man in His own image. Logic would suggest that if A contains B and C is like A, then C also contains B. By that reasoning, God has given man free will so that we also may know God, love God and serve God -- not by blind will or chance -- but because we choose to. After all, my wife's love for me would not me nearly as important to me were she forced to love me. It is only because she loves is out of her own free will (I think!) that I cherish it so greatly. Would God not think similarly?

This suggests that while proponents point out that the term "free will" is not mentioned in the Bible, it (like "Trinity") is implied by logic.

Now the rebuttal will be that predestination is likewise supported by Scripture citing examples such as Pharaoh's hardened heart (Exodus 7-11). The Church teaches in this instance that Pharaoh freely chose his sins and that God, ironically out of love and justice, allowed Pharaoh's heart to be hardened as a natural byproduct of his sins. In this scenario, it is plausible that one could state that God, who exists outside of our time line, could foresee Pharaoh's choice to turn his back on God and thus harden his own heart. But the hardening came as a result of the choices Pharaoh made out of free will; not because he was predestined to do so.

Origin of Life Worth the Wait

The question about the origins of the world and of man has been the object of many scientific studies which have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life-forms and the appearance of man. These discoveries invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator, prompting us to give Him thanks for all His works and for the understanding and wisdom he gives to scholars and researchers. With Solomon they can say: "It is He who gave me unerring knowledge of what exists, to know the structure of the world and the activity of the elements ... for Wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me." (CCC 283)

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen 1:1). The first verse in Scripture is the whole of what we as Catholics must believe. As long as we recognize that God was the beginning and the end of all things (and that man alone has an eternal soul), the details in between those bookends is left up to ourselves.

To believe in anything contrary to pure Creationism flies in the face of many Christian evangelicals. But I do not believe (nor does the Catholic Church require me to) that the early chapters of Genesis were ever intended to be taken literally. Instead, I think it is much more likely that the Bible's explanation for the origins of the universe were being explained to man at a time when their minds could not possibly have grasped the truths we now take for granted today. Their scientists (or "magi" on this day after the Feast of the Epiphany) could not have had the technical aptitude to understand the difference between a star, a planet or some other heavenly body (and apparently we still can't today) so the origins would have to have been explained in such a way as they could make sense of it.

My personal belief is that of intelligent design, in which evolution may have played a part in the scientific sense, but that God guided the process of cosmic jelly to human being. To deny plausible scientific evidence that certain creatures evolved from other creatures is akin to claiming that the universe is not heliocentric despite concrete proof of modern science.

I was surprised to learn that it was initially the Protestants, not the Catholics, who were opposed to the belief that the sun was the center of our galaxy. Both groups however based their ignorance on sacred Scripture, citing that to believe in other than a geocentric universe was to deny the literal interpretation of the Bible, most notably that the "earth is firm in its foundation and can not be moved" (Psalms 93:1, Psalms 96:10, 1 Chronicles 16:30). The Church did denounce Galileo of heresy for promoting Copernicus' findings, and did not admit to her error officially until 1757 due to findings by Isaac Newton.

I, for one, can appreciate the Church's stance on taking time to accept new information quickly. The same Church that took almost 200 years to recognize the sun as center of our galaxy, also applies that same slow, methodical approach to her recognition of saints and her acceptance of apparitions, which I (admittedly) am skeptical of. As a wise ent, Treebeard, once said in the Lord of the Rings, "It takes a long time to say anything ..., and we never say anything unless it is worth taking a long time to say."

I'd rather take a long time to ensure something is correct before I accept it than to readily accept every claim I hear as truth only to find out later that I had been deceived. Thank God for a slow and thorough universal Church that does not give in so easily to the changes of a liberal society!

Random Thoughts - I

Thence he removed to the mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; and there he built an altar and called on the name of the Lord. (Gen 12:8)

According to wikipedia, Bethel is north of Jerusalem and Bethlehem is south of Jerusalem. I thought we had learned in Bible Study that it was the same city which I found interesting since it would suggest that Jesus' Jewish ancestry, going all the way back to Abraham, all revolved around the same exact spot. Either way, the Old Testament makes one pause to consider the spans of generations it covers, especially for Americans, whose country is just over 200 years old.

But the Lord afflicted Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sar'ai, Abram's wife. (Gen 12:17)

It's no wonder Judaism was never adopted in Egypt! The house of Pharaoh was inflicted not once, but twice by the God of the Jews! Makes one wonder why Pharaoh in Moses' time was so unbelieving after the first of God's plagues. Just further proof that history repeats itself yet man never seems to take notice...

With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband and he ate. (Genesis 3:6)

The last words of Peter Parker's uncle Ben before he dies make up the title of this entry. I don't think we need to be able to shoot webs from our wrists for that statement to apply to ourselves.


I can remember at one time believing (and making jokes about) the fact that woman was responsible for the fall of man! After all, she was the one that ate from the tree first, and then brought a piece to share with her husband who would have trusted her, as his wife, not to lead him into danger.

Only later did a wise person point out that had Adam been vigilant in his role as protector of his wife, perhaps the serpent might never have been able to tempt her. A tough pill to swallow for all of us husbands!

I also read a recent thread on Phatmass' forums questioning a hypothetical scenario in which the woman ate of the tree, but the man refused. Would we now be an all male society? Would God have taken another rib and perfected the woman? Would Eve have been kicked out of the garden without alimony thus making divorce acceptable in God's eyes?

Amidst these humorous responses, the idea was brought forth that if man and woman become one flesh in marriage, do they share in their sins? As mentioned above, Adam was at fault even before taking a bite of the fruit by not being a protector to his wife. If my wife sins because I as her husband was not their to help her in her holiness, am I also guilty for my lack of aid?

Feminists don't realize what they are giving up by trivializing the role of the man. Then again are we as men not responsible for giving them a reason to downplay our role in society? Perhaps if we were the providers and protectors that we were created to be, rather than the selfish, immature boys that we tend to be, women would not have the notion to downplay our necessity.

I think it's time men took Uncle Ben's last words as their personal mantra, and learn from the mistakes our forefathers made. Might I suggest all men consider becoming an e5 man, and put charity toward women in your lives higher on your priority list? Looking in the mirror, I realize this will require large quantities of discipline and prayer. Will you join me?

If Wisdom Comes With Age, Adam Was A Wise Guy!

Thus all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died. (Gen 5:5)

A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to be a part of a men's Bible Study group. At the time, one of the gentleman asked why we separated the men and women for this study. Aside from just personal choice, we pointed out that men tend to want explanations on the literal sense of the Bible while women tend to accept the message without sweating the details. The lifetimes of the early humans is a perfect example.

The question came up early in Genesis regarding the ages of the patriarchs of our faith. We naturally looked for any official Church teaching and finding none, began to put forth reasons this might be. Some leaned on the fact that the story of Creation was not meant to be take quite so literally, and that ages were merely symbolic of the importance of each person. Others suggested that in those years, time was not measured in the same sense that we think of it -- the Roman calendar and the cuckoo clock were yet to be discovered Still others reasoned that God ordered long life spans in order to allow time for the people to be fruitful enough to populate the world!

I like to think that it stems from the fact that our original parents ate from the Tree of Life while in Eden. The fruit from that tree would have gained them eternal life with the Father. When they were tossed out on their heels for their sin, the effects of that fruit did not immediately subside. Therefore we see throughout Genesis that the ages of our earliest ancestors were great in number, but generally dropped off as the amount of time since the fall of man increased.

Note that this is not official Church teaching. They do not speculate on age just as they do not specify whether a Catholic in good standing must believe in Creation or Evolution or some combination of the two. She only requires that "by faith we understand that the universe was ordered by the Word of God, so that what is visible came into being through the invisible" (Hebrews 11:3). Further more, the Church recognizes that the early chapters of Genesis "remain the principal source for catechesis on the mysteries of the 'beginning': creation, fall, and promise of salvation" (CCC 289).

But alas, the debate between Creation and Evolution is best left for another entry.

Has the Witness Committed Perjury?

The Trinity is One. We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the "consubstantial Trinity." The divine persons do not share the one divinity among themselves, but each of them is God whole and entire: "The Father is that which the Son is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e., by nature one God." In the words of the fourth Lateran Council (1215): "Each of the persons is that supreme reality, viz., the divine substance, essence, or nature. (CCC 253)Ironically, I was approached by two Jehovah's Witnesses yesterday just as I was returning from the Mass for the feast day of Mary, Mother of God. I admit I had a smug face as they approached, with my decidedly Catholic bible held conspicuously in my left hand. How the pair must have thought they were coming to do battle with Satan the moment they inquired where I had come from only to find I had been "worshiping Mary" (their belief; not mine).

Contrary to how my wife probably thought I would respond, as she dashed the boys into the house, I think I spoke with charity. I have learned, in part as a defender, that attacking another's beliefs does not work to convert them. Instead, I merely tried to find common ground and suggest issues that made them question their own beliefs.

We discussed faith and works as well as the concept of suffering. I admitted that their idea of evangelization had its merits, and we spoke about how a message of joy and peace would always attract followers quicker than a message of abstinence, obedience and redemptive suffering. We also touched on the fact that Truth cannot contradict Truth to which we agreed that it was likely that one faith (I didn't SAY it was mine) had it right and all others were wrong in areas where they disagreed. Unfortunately, there was never an opportunity to charitably discuss the flaws in their theology. Among many is their non-belief in the Trinity. How can one even consider themselves Christian if they do not believe that Jesus Himself is God?

"Jesus clearly was a man, but he was unlike other men in that previously he had been a spirit person, known in heaven as the Word." This is the closest their website ever comes to suggesting Jesus was not just another prophet to Christians. "Note that prayer is directed through Jesus, not to him. Prayer is offered in Jesus' name because his shed blood opened the way of approach to God." This footnote to an article on angels would suggest that Jehovah's do not believe in the triune nature of God with Jesus as the Son. "'Michael the archangel' is Jesus Christ in his heavenly position." This statement is the proverbial nail in the coffin testifying as to what Jehovah's truly believe about the Son of God.

When I look up a definition for 'Christian' I begin to see how Jehovah's (and other unlikely faiths) claim Christianity on a technicality. The term Christian is defined generically as 'a person who is a follower of Jesus and his teachings,' and Christ is defined merely as 'the anointed one or messiah.' I'm certain a Jehovah would admit that Jesus is a key figure in their beliefs, being that he is the "new Adam" now residing in Heaven as God's right hand man.

However, traditionally speaking, a Christian is one who professes a belief in the Trinity. No matter how nice my neighbor and his evangelizing friends are when they occasionally show up at my door, I believe it is time to call a spade a spade. The beliefs of a Jehovah's Witness more accurately puts them in line with a cult: A religious group which denies the essential doctrines of Christianity.