Obviously I am not suggesting that Jesus is prejudice, it simply has to be looked at via a more inclusive, loving and engaging point of view. The fallback position is to suggest that it is an attack on Jesus, when in reality it is a challenge to narrow world views of Christianity.
Since your Jehovah is surely the universal God of all mankind, how could your religion, (or Christians in general), make the claim that the Jehovah Witness, (or Christianity), priesthood of elders has the sole right to interpret God’s word, or is in fact the sole representatives for God on earth?
When Jesus said, "I am the way . . . . should He have then prefaced this by saying, and so is Buddha and so is Krishna and so is Zoroaster and so is Moses, and so is the Great Spirit of the American indigines, and there have been many other Messengers lost to history who were also the way? Or should the process of embracing the teachings of Christ and those other religions mentioned have made that kind of obvious?
Of course John 14:6 and John 17:3 are true statements, but not in an absolute way, not to the exclusion of other religious expressions and other Messengers. John 14:6 and John 17:3 are true for those who choose the Christian path.
Krishna claimed to be the Cause of all Causes. Muhammad claimed to be the last Prophet. Zoroaster said, there is only one path and that is the path of Truth. Now if taken as absolute statements of fact the world would end up a religious blood bath. Oh it is isn't it. Because all these teachings were aspects of a single teaching but the leaders of these religions found that by making their religion exclusively the only path to God, they created abject misery that is still with us today.
So, Jesus is not in anyway prejudiced, but the vast majority of His followers are and your JW belief is the most exclusive and excluding Christian religion that I know of. That can't make it the path of truth, can it?
