Reasoning from the Scriptures Part 2
One of the main teachings of The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society that differs from traditional historical and orthodox Christianity is that Jesus is a created being. The Watchtower teaches that Jesus was the first ‘thing’ that Jehovah God created and then Jesus, or Michael as he was first called according to the Watchtower, created all ‘other’ things. In this respect, Jehovah’s Witnesses recognize Jesus as the Son of God. He is considered to have all the same attributes as Jehovah just as any son would have of his father, yet he is not equal to Jehovah in deity. Jesus may be considered “The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived” but he is not God according to the Watchtower. The Watchtower quotes a number of Scripture passages to back this up. In order to understand how and why our Jehovah’s Witness friends understand this, we’ll need to see what Scriptures the Watchtower writers use and how they present them.
John 1:1
“In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”, So renders the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures of John 1:1 published by The Watchtower Bible and tract Society. I recall asking about this verse in one of my very first meetings with a Jehovah’s Witness. He told me that there were at least six other modern translations of the New Testament that agreed with this translation. When I showed him my shelves with over thirty different translations I asked him if he could show me which ones they were. He couldn’t offer me one. I helped him out by offering him one that did agree with the NWT in this verse and that was one translated by Jonhannes Greber who translated the New Testament with the aid of a ’spirit guide’ that helped him while under the influence of drugs. [1]
It is obvious that John 1:1 refers to the person of Jesus Christ. It seems that the ‘Translation Committee’ of the NWT has something in common with the drug induced spirit-medium Johannes Greber in trying to demote Jesus by inserting the word ‘a’ in front of ‘god’ with a little ‘g.’ I’d first like to note that there are no ‘upper’ and ‘lower’ case characters in the original Greek so using the lower case ‘g’ is an obvious preference of the translators rather than something required by the original text. Also, should anyone question whether or not the word ‘a’ was really part of the original Greek manuscripts or inserted by translators, one need go no further than the Watchtower’s own admission of insertion in their own publication The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the GREEK SCRIPTURES (1985) where on page 401, the word-for-word rendering of John 1:1 reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward the God, and god was the Word.”
“Well,” your Jehovah’s Witness friend may respond, “that’s not the only verse in Scripture that proves Jesus was a created being. What about Scriptures like Colossians 1:15 (Jesus is the firstborn of every creature) and Revelation 3:14 (Jesus is … the beginning of the creation by God) and Proverbs 8:24, of which most scholars agree this points to Jesus Christ? (Jesus was … brought forth)?” So let’s look at these verses and see what the Watchtower has to say about them.
Colossians 1:15
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;” NWT
The Watchtower teaches that this verse clearly shows that Jesus was created at some point in time as an angel. The publishers reason that “firstborn” in this verse means “first created.” [2] The Watchtower writers also reason in the book Reasoning from the Scriptures, that the word “firstborn” means that “Jesus is the eldest in Jehovah’s family of sons.” [3] The Watchtower’s Reasoning book also tells us that the term “firstborn” occurs over thirty times in the Bible. Just as the “firstborn” of Pharaoh refers to the first one born to Pharaoh, so is Jesus the first one “born” or created by Jehovah. Indeed, Jesus is “ranked with God’s creation, being first among them and also most beloved and most favored among them.” [3] Another book published by the Watchtower reinforces this teaching. In the book The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived we read Jesus was “a very special person because he was created by God before all other things.” [5]
Now on the surface, this seems reasonable to any thinking person. That is, it is reasonable if we are only looking at 20th century English words used by 20th century English speaking people. The Bible however was not written by 20th century English speaking people. The Watchtower writers however are 20th century English speaking people so they impose their own meanings into ancient Hebrew and Greek Scriptures without consideration for the meanings and purpose and usage of the original Hebrew and Greek words at the time they were written. We must always consider the original writer and the times and customs they lived in to understand the intention of the words he or she used. The word “firstborn” here is one that means something different to the Bible writers than what it means to us today.
“Firstborn” to the Hebrews refered to the son in the family who was in the “preeminent position” whether or not he was the literal first son born to the family. The term “firstborn” was used as a ‘rank’ or ‘title’ to describe the sons standing in the fathers eyes. It was a title given to indicate that everything that belonged to the father also belonged to the son. The “firstborn” son was equal to his father.
We see this meaning illustrated in the life of David. He was the youngest son of Jesse (last-born). Even so, we read in Psalm 89:27 concerning David, “Also, I myself shall place him as firstborn, the most high of the kings of the earth.” NWT Even though David was the last-born in his family, God gave him the preeminent position of ‘firstborn.’
We see another example of this meaning of “firstborn” in comparing Genesis 41:50,51 with Jeremiah 31:9. Manasseh was actually the first son born to Joseph, and Ephraim was born some time later. Nevertheless, Ephraim is called the “firstborn” in Jeremiah 31:9 because of his preeminent position. We also see this in the case of Ishmael and Isaac. Ishmael was thirteen years older than Isaac, but Isaac is called the firstborn. Another example is when Jacob claims the title of firstborn over his older brother Esau.
Before we move on to the next verse that our Jehovah’s Witness friend has challenged us with, let’s see what a Bible scholar has to say on the subject of the word “firstborn.”
Bible scholar F.F. Bruce tells us, “The word first-born had long since ceased to be used exclusively in its literal sense, just as ‘prime’ (from the Latin word primus - ‘first’) with us. The Prime Minister is not the first minister we have had; he is the most preeminent …. Similarly, first-born came to denote [among the ancients] not priority in time but pre-eminence in rank.” [6] he goes on to explain that if Paul had meant ‘first created’ in this verse, he would have used the word ‘protoktisis’ which means “first-created” instead of ‘prototokos’ which means “firstborn.” The word protoktisis meaning ‘first-created’ is term that is not even once used in reference to Christ in the New Testament [7]
Questions for our Jehovah’s Witness friend:
1.) In view of the fact that David was the last-born son of Jesse, what do you think Scripture means when it calls him the firstborn (Psalm 89:27)?
2.) In view of the fact that Ephraim was born to Joseph after Manasseh, what do you think Scripture means when it calls him the firstborn (Jeremiah 31:9)?
3.) Why didn’t the apostle Paul use the term “first-created” (protoktisis) in Colossians 1:15 if he intended to communicate that Christ was the first one created by Jehovah?
Revelation 3:14
“And to the angel of the congregation in Laodicea write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God,” NWT
This is another verse that the Watchtower uses to ‘prove’ that Jesus is a created being. Indeed, Jesus was “the first of Jehovah-God’s creations.” [8] The Watchtower writers relate this verse to passages like John 1:14, where we are told that Jesus is the “only begotten” of the Father. [9]
The Watchtower further supports this interpretation in their publication Should You Believe in the Trinity? where they have written, ” ‘Beginning’ [Greek: arche] cannot rightly be interpreted to mean that Jesus was the ‘beginner’ of God’s creation. In his Bible writings, John uses various forms of the Greek word arche more than 20 times, and these always have the common meaning of ‘beginning.’ Yes, Jesus was created by God as the beginning of God’s invisible creations.” [10]
In contrast to the Watchtower writer’s contention that the Greek word ‘arche’ always has “the common meaning of ‘beginning’ ” real Bible scholars [11] agree that the Greek word ‘arche’ is a truly unique word that can mean ‘beginning’ but can also carry the more important active meaning of “one who begins,” “origin,” “source,” “creator,” or “first cause.” Bible scholars agree that this is the intended meaning of the word in Revelation 3:14. [12]
The authoritative Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Christian Literature by William Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich says the meaning of ‘arche’ in Revelation 3:14 is “first cause.” [13] Furthermore, the word ‘arche in Revelation 3:14 is used to refer to “the active beginning of the creation, the One who caused the creation, referring to Jesus Christ not as a created being, but the One who created all things (John 1:3).” [14] Other Bibles, translated by qualified and educated translators, translate the word ‘arche’ in this verse as “the ultimate source,” “the prime source,” ” the moving cause,” “the source,” and as “the beginner” (of God’s creation). [15]
It’s also important to notice that the only other times arche is used in the Book of Revelation, it is used to describe God as “the beginning and the end” (Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13). Certainly the use of arche with God Almighty does not mean that He had a created beginning. Instead, these verses tell us that God is both the beginner and consummation of creation. He is the first cause of creation; He is its final goal. The Greek word arche is used in the same sense in Revelation 3:14: Christ is the beginner of God’s creation (compare with John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2). [16]
Based on this study of recognized and qualified scholars, it would seem appropriate to accept the primary meaning of arche in Revelation 3:14 as being “beginner,” first cause.” or “originator” of God’s creation. Some scholars have also translated this word as “ruler.” The New International Version translators demonstrate that Christ is the “ruler of God’s creation.” It is more probable that both senses are intended here since we see Christ portrayed in elsewhere in Scripture as both Creator (Hebrews 1:2) and Ruler (Revelation 19:16) of all things.
As we can see, the interpretation and translation of this word ‘arche’ as ‘beginner’ of God’s creation referring to Jesus harmonizes perfectly with other New Testament passages about Christ as Creator, whereas the Watchtower rendering of the word as ‘beginning’ simply doesn’t fit the whole of Scripture.
One thing that is very important to keep in mind when interpreting Scripture and that is that God does not contradict Himself. Scripture cannot contradict Scripture. So if we are to accept the Watchtower’s rendering of ‘arche’ as ‘beginning,’ then we will have trouble understanding Isaiah 44:24 where Jehovah says, “I, Jehovah, am doing everything, stretching out the heavens by myself, laying out the earth. Who was with me?”NWT Here Jehovah is telling us that He alone is the Creator, yet we see in other Scriptures (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16; Hebrews 1:2) that Christ is the Creator of all things. These Scriptures may ’seem’ to e contradicting each other but they are not. They are in perfect harmony because God is perfect. They are only contradicting Watchtower teaching.
Questions for our Jehovah’s Witness friend.
1.) Since we can see the use of the word ‘arche’ does not mean that God Almighty had a created beginning (Revelation 1:8; 21:6: 22:13), then why go against John’s intended usage in Revelation and insist that when used of Christ the word ‘arche’ indicates a created beginning?
2.) Did you know that the same John who wrote Revelation 3:14 also wrote John 1:3 - “All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.” NWT?
3.) Jehovah says in Isaiah 44:24, “I, Jehovah, am doing everything, stretching out the heavens by myself, laying out the earth. Who was with me?” How do you reconcile this with the Watchtower teaching that Jehovah first created Christ and then Christ created everything else?
Proverbs 8:22-24
“Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. When there were no watery deeps I was brought forth as with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water.” NWT
Watchtower writers have used these verses to reinforce the teaching that Jesus was a created being. We can read in Should You Believe in the Trinity? the following, “most scholars agree that it [Wisdom] is actually a figure of speech for Jesus as a spirit creature prior to his human existence.” [17] Furthermore in Aid to Bible Understanding we can read, “Many professed Christian writers of the Common Era understood this section [in Proverbs 8] to refer symbolically to God’s Son in his prehuman state. … There can be no denying that the Son was ‘produced’ by Jehovah ‘at the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago,’ nor that the Son was ‘beside [Jehovah] as a master worker’ during the earth’s creation.” [18]
As is common in Watchtower teaching, these verses are taken out of context. When the Watchtower writers use phrases like “most scholars agree” and “many professed Christian writers understood” what they are really trying to do is mislead the reader into believing that this is common knowledge and so it would be foolish to question it. Strangely absent are any names for these “scholars” and “professed Christians.”
When we read these verses in context of the whole book of Proverbs we see that the first nine chapters of Proverbs deal with wisdom personified. A personification is a rhetorical figure of speech in which inanimate objects or abstract concepts are endowed with human qualities or are possessing human form. [19] In Proverbs chapters 1-9, wisdom is figuratively endowed with human qualities. [20]
Seeing that these chapters are referring to wisdom being personified, there is no indication or reason for us to believe that Solomon was referring to Jesus in chapter 8 but not in 1-7 and 9. If chapter 8 refers to Jesus then so must the other chapters. If this is the case then we must also assume that Christ is a woman who cries in the streets (1:20-21), and who lives with someone named ‘Prudence’ (8:12) in a house with seven pillars (9:1). So we can see that as soon as we try to read Jesus into chapter 8 of Proverbs, then none of Proverbs 1-9 makes any sense. This is why it is important to read Scriptures in the context of the entire verse, chapter, book and the whole Bible and not cut and paste them the way the Watchtower writers do.
To sum up then, Proverbs 8:22-24 is speaking metaphorically of God’s eternal wisdom and how it was “brought forth” (verse 24) to take part in the creation of the universe. Proverbs 8 is not saying that wisdom came into being at a point in time. And it certainly is not saying that Jesus is a created being, since the passage is not dealing with Jesus but with wisdom personified. [21]
Questions for our Jehovah’s Witness friend.
1.) If “wisdom” in Proverbs 8 is referring to Christ, and if the “wisdom” in Proverbs 8 is the same “wisdom” as in the first nine chapters of Proverbs (as the context clearly indicates), then who is the “Prudence” that Jesus lives with (Proverbs 8:12)?
2.) Do you believe that Jesus is a woman who cries in the streets (Proverbs 1:20,21)?
3.) If ‘wisdom” in Proverbs 8 was created by God at a certain time, doesn’t this mean then that there was a time that God didn’t have wisdom? What kind of a God is that?
The Apologetic Response
There are many more examples of how the Watchtower has consistently used Scriptures out of context to teach doctrines that are contrary to Christianity. We must always remember that the Jehovah’s Witness at our door is not our enemy, Satan is. These folks coming to our doors are eagerly and sincerely trying to please God. It’s not their fault that they have been deceived. Let us always be prepared to ‘reason from the Scriptures’ with these folks. Jesus died for them too.
Notes:
————————–
1.) The Watchtower writers have used Johannes Greber for years to support their teachings even though they knew he used a spirit-medium. At one point, the Watchtower did renounce Johannes Greber as a spiritualist but then later on continued to use his writings to support their own. For a reference list to verify this, click here.
2.) Aid To Bible Understanding, (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), pg. 918
3.) Reasoning from the Scriptures (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989), pg. 408
4.) Let God Be True, (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1946), pg. 33
5.) The Greatest man Who Ever Lived, (Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1991), Introduction
6.) F.F. Bruce, in Inerrancy, ed. Norman L. Geisler (Grand Rapids: Zondervon, 1979).
7.) Ibid.
8.) Let God Be True, pg. 200
9.) Ibid., pg. 107
10.) Should You Believe in the Trinity? (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989), pg. 14.
11.) In his book ‘Crisis of Conscience,’ former Governing Body member Raymond Franz reveals the names and photos of all the members of the ‘Translation Committee’ for the NWT and also reveals that none of them had any formal education in either Hebrew or Greek. That is, none of them were qualified to translate the Scriptures in the first place. This is really why the translators are not named, not because ‘they are humble men who want all the glory to go to Jehovah’ as they would have their members believe. Regular readers of the Watchtower magazines will note that often times the Watchtower will quote ‘real Bible scholars’ by name when it suits the writer’s purpose. Should any Watchtower reader take the time to look up the names of these men who the Watchtower quotes to support them, they would discover that these scholars are not Watchtower scholars but actually ordained Trinitarian Christians of various denominations.
12.) Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 1992), pg. 260.
13.) William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Christian Literature (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957), pg. 112.
14.) Zodhiates, pg. 261.
15.) See The Jerusalem Bible, The New English Bible, Barclay’s, Knox’s, Williams’s and Goodspeed’s translations of the New Testament.
16.) Notice in Colossians 1:16 how the Watchtower ‘translators’ inserted the word ‘other’ in reference to Christ creating things indicated by the square brackets [ ]. The original manuscripts do not contain this word. Even the Watchtower interlinear translation demonstrates this.
17.) Should You Believe in the Trinity?, pg. 14
18.) Aid to Bible Understanding (Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1971), pg. 918
19.) The American Heritage Dictionary (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1978).
20.) The Bible Knowledge Commentary, Old Testament, eds. John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), pg. 922.
21.) Ron Rhodes, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah’s Witnesses (Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers, 1993), pg. 129.
July 14th, 2007 at 9:39 am
Comments: Reasoning from the Scriptures Part 2
Due to the upcoming holidays and other priorities and commitments, I will not be posting any new articles of interest or responding to comments posted here or elsewhere until the new year.
May you all have a blessed Christmas as you remember the greatest gift of all time and eternity, the incarnation of our living Lord, Jesus Christ.
Posted by David Upton at November 29, 2004 10:54 AM
Have you ever thought if a JW can answer those questions? What would you do then?
Posted by Blake at January 18, 2005 10:21 AM
Good question Blake. I have posted on my web site before that although I do invite readers to post comments, I do not use this site to engage in ongoing discussions.
Any JW is welcome to post answers to these questions if they wish here on the web site but if the person wants to continue an ongoing discussion and/or debate, then I am open to that in private email.
So the short answer is yes, I have thought what I would do if a JW actually answered those questions. I would engage in ongoing dialogue in private email.
I hope this helps.
Posted by David Upton at January 18, 2005 10:54 AM
Jehovah’s Witnesses interested in continued dialogue over doctrinal issues with evangelicals will be interested in the following Yahoo groups forum found here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evangelicals_and_jws/
From the main page:
Evangelical and JW Theologies
Description Category: Jehovah’s Witnesses
This discussion group offers evangelicals and Jehovah’s Witnesses an opportunity for respectful, intelligent discussion of their theological differences.
Please note the following rules:
* Standard rules of Netiquette apply.
* Topics must be theological and focused on differences between all JWs and all evangelicals. Thus, topics about differences among evangelicals on secondary issues (tongues, predestination, the rapture, etc.) are not discussed here. See “What Evangelicals Believe” located in the Files section of this Group.
* Posts regarding the moral or ethical failures of individuals on either side (JW or evangelical) are not permitted. Posts on the moral or ethical *teachings* of either side are, of course, permitted.
* Posts attacking list members’ character are not permitted. Egregious personal attacks against list members will result in the immediate removal of the offending member. This applies even if the personal attacks are made in another forum.
* The moderators reserve the right to call an end to a thread (discussion topic) when in their judgment the exchange has become too heated or is not advancing in a fruitful way.
* Try to keep your posts to ten a day. Exceeding this number frequently, or flagrantly, will be considered a list violation.
* Cut unneeded text from previous posts at the bottom of your post. (This is more important than is often recognized.)
Mild and first-time violations will be met with a simple and friendly reminder. Serious and repeated violations will result in the list member having his posts moderated for one week (i.e., the moderators will have to read and approve the post before it goes to the membership). Highly offensive violations, or frequent and repeated serious offenses requiring moderated status to be imposed several times, will result in a member being removed from the list.
All decisions in such matters are at the discretion of the moderators.
In Christ’s service,
Robert M. Bowman, Jr.
List Owner
Posted by David Upton at January 24, 2005 07:05 PM
Thank - you David for your web site as it has good info. to share with my friends who are in contact with a lot of JW’s .
Posted by Henry B Fossen at June 11, 2005 11:48 AM
September 29th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Hi David,
Thanks for the info on the Holy Spirit (His qualities, and references to the Holy Spirit being a ‘he’. If I was there listening to Jesus talking about the Holy Spirit with the disciples, everyone there as puzzling as Jesus words may have sounded (”Who is this person he’s going to send us?”) would know that Jesus was not speaking metaphorically, or else He would have explained Himself further, as with his parables, to leave no ambiguity in what He was telling the disciples.
I find it also very telling that, although the Watch Tower does not like the word Trinity (and produced a brochure against it), there is one significant place where the three names of the Godhead are mentioned, together: Matthew 28:19.
Notice that Jesus introduces these as being names, and also that the word ‘the’ is included before ‘holy spirit’ (although the translater of the NWIT tries to lower the Spirit’s importance by having no capital letters - how does he/they know this from the original Greek, which were all capital letters to begin with?).
And saying that the Holy Spirit is only an active force, if the spirit is just God’s active force, why did Jesus include his name here at all (because, in my view, it’s important to signifying the oneness of the three being involved, and to their witness, power, and presence every time baptisms were to be done)? Jesus could just as easily have said, “…in the name of the Father and the Son”, but we know that the three go together.
I appreciated also your information on Wisdom (a Witness was going there once with me to try to explain away the personage of the Holy Spirit. I will be better equipped to respond the next time he and I meet - this coming Sunday, Oct. 4th, at 2:00 p.m. at Tim Hortons). Surprisingly, I came across the gender of Wisdom in Prov. 9:4 (she), of course keeping one’s wits about themself, I know that this writing in Proverbs is in a metaphorical tstyle as you’ve already mentioned.
Good point as well about Prov. 8:22 ‘Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way’ and your question, “Does this mean that Jehovah did not have wisdom before this?” (of course not), or, is Jehovah alluding to Jesus? (of course not x 2, again for the reasons that you mentioned).
I got a chuckle from your question, “If Jesus is Wisdom then who is prudence?” (actually ’shrewdness’ [Prov. 8:12] in my NWIT), Great question in any case.
Thanks for helping to add to my conversation with my buddy in witnessesing to the Witnesses, Barb. I had a lengthy call from a Witness this morning before I went on-line, and in reference to Jesus as Michael the Archangel, was able to direct her to Hebrews 1-2, explaining that Jesus clearly could not, according to these chapters, be an angel, even less, Michael the Archangel.
Are you aware of the Saturday Oct. 17th breakfast and talk, 8:30 -12:30 at Forward Baptist Church, 1891 Gerrard St. East, on Sharing the Gospel With Jehovah’s Witnesses. The speaker will be an ex-Jehovah’s Witness (I do not know her name). A freewill offering will be taken to cover the cost of the Continental Beakfast.
Please pray that our meeting this Sunday at Tim Hortons will go according to God’s plan. We will be talking about the ransom (their choice) and, He is the one we are publicizing, (Col. 1:28, our choice). Thanks.
Blessings,
Jeff
December 28th, 2009 at 7:47 am
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Many who take issue with Jehovah’s Witnesses’ “New World Translation” of ‘theos’ in John 1:1c (as, “a god”) often miss the point that the structure of this whole clause is that it is ‘a singular anarthrous predicate noun (meaning, without the Greek definite article), but one which is also *preceding the verb and subject noun (implied or stated)*’ - that is, not just that use of the noun ‘theos’ in the third clause is lacking the Greek definite article. (In the Greek language of this period, there was no such thing as an indefinite article; therefore, depending upon the grammar, syntax, immediate and global context of the phrase, when translating to English, the decision on whether to add an indefinite article or not would be made by the translator.)
Quite interestingly, at other places within the “New Testament” where the syntax (Greek word order) is also the same as that found within John 1:1c, it is not uncommon to read where Bible translators will typically add the English indefinite article, either as an “a” or “an”. You may wish to examine the following within your own preferred translation(s) of the Bible, that is, to see whether, within those works, such had actually been done. Here are a few scriptures to look into:
Mark 6:49
Mark 11:32
John 4:19
John 6:70
John 8:44a
John 8:44b
John 9:17
John 10:1
John 10:13
John 10:33
John 12:6
Now, when we encounter that very same Greek grammatical construction in John 1:1c, we find that there are many translators who do not follow the same guideline, that is, as when they did when translating the above verses. Apparently, this inconsistency is due to their own theologically induced predisposition, their Trinitarian bias.
Furthermore, with respect to the suggestion that such a rendering though would fly in the strict Jewish monotheistic system of belief, in connection with Jesus’ own words, recorded for us at John 10:34, 35 (when quoting from Psalm 82:6), there is this:
“The Hebrew for ‘gods’ (‘elohîm) could refer to various exalted beings besides Yahweh [or, Jehovah], without implying any challenge to monotheism,…”
Taken from: Blomberg, Craig L. (b.?-d.?). “The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel: Issues & Commentary.” (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, c2002), “The feast of Dedication” ([John] 10:22-42), p. 163. BS2615.6.H55 B56 2002 / 2001051563.
Obviously, there need be more evidence to substantiate such a rendering as, “and the Word was a god,” as well as to address many of the other issues often raised by such wording. This is just a number of the many points we hope to address within our forthcoming work, “What About John 1:1?”
To discover something of its design and progress, you are invited to visit:
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
Agape, JohnOneOne.
john1one@earthlink.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
December 28th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Of course Jesus can not be Jehovah God.
If Jesus were God from where would salvation and redemption come?
Not from the pattern in the wilderness as Heb 8:5 says.
All of that text above focuses on that which is not important.
If it does not follow the pattern that was set out by the Law, then Jesus did not fulfill the Law and nothing can come of it.
Jesus’ being ‘a god’ fulfills that as the son of God was the sacrifice and high priest. Quite elementary.
December 29th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Hello JohnOneOne and Matt Sullivan,
Thanks you for taking the time to read my blog entries and also for taking the time to respond. I see that JohnOneOne has taken to the internet to defend the Watchtower’s position on the doctrine of the Trinity and obviously put a lot of time and effort into it.
There is another Jehovah’s Witness who has dedicated much time and effort online defending the watchtower using Youtube. You can see the posted videos released on Youtube here http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=howdytheresir#g/u
I’d especially like to highlight the latest video posting entitled “1914 and Crisis of Conscience” found here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZqs2-WhKWA
As I appreciate the time and effort you have spent reading my postings, responding to them and the incredible amount of work you have put into your own defense of the Watchtower, I hope you will also spend some time reviewing this person’s point of view and even read the book called “Crisis of Conscience” written by a retired member of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Many Jehovah’s Witnesses have read and highly recommend this book.
Thanks again for posting your responses. Please feel free to write me anytime at apologeticresponse@rogers.com
Looking forward to hearing from you.
David
January 20th, 2010 at 7:19 am
Let me just say of course Jesus can be Jehovah God.
Matt Sullivan there is no ‘if’ when it comes to Jesus being God, and yes Jesus is the pattern to follow. People fail to read the next verse in Heb. 8:6 it says, But now He (Jesus) has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He (Jesus) is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. Only God can have the highest marks given, for no man is righteous in God’s sight (Romans 3:10). I think people often forget that being undiscerning as in Romans 1:31 also qualifies them for a worse judgment, death. So look to Jesus as the only salvation the world has right now, and for you too. And ALL text given by God is important! Jesus fulfills the law that was given for by the law is the knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20), without this knowledge we do not know much about being saved (Romans 2:12,14) and are a law to themselves.
Those who believe in Jesus being God and died for us, understands that we are justified freely by His grace and we are now apart from the ‘curse’ of the law only in God’s righteousness. Read Romans 3:21-26.
Therefore Jesus is God the Son and is God and is not seen as any lesser ‘god’ like title, to teach this only brings a greater judgment against you. So don’t do it. Easy. Accept what God has provided as a sacrifice for all of our sins, Jesus, the One the Only Savior. Amen. With much love, D.