Tag: divinity

Posted on

Does Philippians 2 Prove Jesus is God? Examining the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Claim

Philippians 2

5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:

6Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, 7but made himself nothing, taking the very nature* of a servant, being made in human likeness. 8And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!

9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

For those who deny the deity of Christ, such as today’s Jehovah’s Witnesses, Philippians 2 offers one of the clearest passages in the New Testament to attest to the divine nature of Jesus.

Verse 6 is the key statement as Paul says that Jesus, “who being in very nature God…”

According to this verse, Jesus possessed the very nature of God, which means, of course, that Jesus IS God.

How do the Jehovah’s Witnesses explain this passage?

Jehovah’s Witnesses strongly deny that this passage teaches that Jesus is divine. They point to the Greek word “morphe” that the NIV translates as “nature”.

This Greek word “morphe” actually means “form”.

Here then is how the passage is translated by the New American Standard Bible:

5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11, NASB)

Let’s look at this passage where it is translated with the word “form” and  try to determine which interpretation makes more sense – the traditional Christian understanding or the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ understanding.

While most Biblical translators contend that this passage strongly communicates that Jesus, in his very nature, existed as God, which explains why the NIV uses the phrase “being in very nature God”, the Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that this passage demonstrates that Jesus is NOT God.

Their argument is as follows:

Verse 6 says that Jesus existed in the “form” of God.

What is God’s form?

According to John 4:24, “God is Spirit.”

Hence, when Philippians 2:6 says that Jesus existed in the “form of God”, it’s saying that Jesus existed as a spirit.

This argument is not convincing and fails on many levels.

First of all, their understanding of the word “form” does not align with the underlying meaning of the Greek word morphe.

Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words gives this definition for the word “morphe” [G3444, morphe]:

[morphe] denotes the special or characteristic form or feature” of a person or thing; it is used with particular significance in the NT, only of Christ, in Philippians 2:6–Philippians 2:7, in the phrases “being in the form of God,” and “taking the form of a servant.” An excellent definition of the word is that of Gifford: “morphe is therefore properly the nature or essence, not in the abstract, but as actually subsisting in the individual, and retained as long as the individual itself exists. … Thus in the passage before us morphe Theou is the Divine nature actually and inseparably subsisting in the Person of Christ.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses assign a meaning to the word “form” that is more akin to “shape”, “pattern”, or “that which is seen externally.” The problem is that there is a different Greek word that communicates that idea (G1491, eidos) and Paul did not use that word.

Secondly, if Paul was trying to communicate that Jesus existed as a spirit, why does he say that Jesus existed in the “form of God” instead of the “form of a spirit”? Would that not communicate exactly what the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach without any of the confusion?

Alternatively, why would Paul not just say that Jesus existed in the “form of an angelic being” since Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is the exalted archangel Michael?

Furthermore, in verse 7, Paul says that Jesus “emptied himself, taking the form of a bond-servant”.

What exactly is the form of a bond-servant?

The Jehovah’s Witnesses will likely respond that the form of a bond-servant is a person, or a man.

If that’s the case, why does Paul not just say that Jesus took the “form of a person” or the “form of a man”?

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

If we’re to adopt the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ interpretation of this passage, we are forced to believe that Paul used the phrases “form of God” and “form of a bond-servant” as euphemisms to communicate the simple concept that Jesus was once a “spirit”who then became a “man”.

This is a curious interpretation indeed. Instead of assuming that Paul used the phrases that he did for a particular purpose, we’re asked to believe that Paul used the phrases as sort of intermediate codes that actually point to a different meaning that is not as obvious as the original text. It’s as if we need secret decoder rings to decipher what these phrases actually mean.

There’s another reason why the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ understanding of these terms is flawed.

Later in verse 7, Paul says that Jesus was “made in the likeness of men”. So he explicitly says later in the same verse, using a different phrase, that Jesus became a man. So how can one argue that the phrase “taking the form of a bond-servant” means that Jesus became a man when Paul communicates that very idea later in the same verse but with a different phrase?

According to the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ interpretation, if we swap out Paul’s “form of” phrases for the meaning that the Jehovah’s Witnesses ascribe to them, we’re left with the following bizarre rendering of verse 7:

Jesus emptied himself….he became a man, and being made in likeness of men.

We end up with a garbled redundancy that makes no sense. The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ explanation of this passage is a classic example of Scripture twisting. In their effort to make the passage say something other than what it clearly states, we end up with meaningless phrases and incoherent sentences.

It’s obvious that the phrase “form of” carries the meaning of “nature”, which means that Jesus possessed the nature of God but then took on the nature of a bond-servant. There is no other reasonable explanation for why Paul would couple the terms “God” and “bond-servant” with the phrase “form of” if he only intended to communicate that Jesus existed as a “spirit” but then became a “man.”

Paul must be using these phrases for a specific reason, otherwise, why use them?

This understanding of the word “form” is confirmed by Vines, which states:

The true meaning of morphe [nature] in the expression ‘form of God’ is confirmed by its recurrence in the corresponding phrase, ‘form of a servant.’ It is universally admitted that the two phrases are directly antithetical, and that ‘form’ must therefore have the same sense in both.” * [* From Gillford, “The Incarnation,” pp. 16,19,39.] (bold brackets added)

It’s clear that a bond-servant is a particular type of man. A bond-servant is a “man” who possesses specific characteristics which Jesus then embodied.

Similarly, God is Spirit, but not just any spirit. He is DIVINE spirit. Therefore, Paul is communicating that Jesus is a spirit who embodied the qualities of God. His statement is literally one of the clearest declarations of the divine nature of Jesus in all of Scripture.

There’s no doubt why Paul is using these terms and exactly what is being communicated – Jesus existed with the form, i.e. the nature of God, but he emptied himself, meaning he gave up his rights and his position as God in order to take on the form, i.e. the nature of a bond-servant, someone who was completely obedient to the Father, in order to accomplish the purpose of redeeming and reconciling mankind.

If there was any doubt that this is the correct understanding of verses 6 & 7, we only need to look at the verses that follow, which indicate that as a result of Jesus’ death on the cross, the Father exalts Jesus so that EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord.

Jesus will be worshiped by EVERYONE. Since only God can legitimately receive worship, Paul is clearly communicating that Jesus possesses the nature of God and will eventually be worshiped as such by the entire created order.

If one adopts the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ understanding of this verse, you have the awkward situation where Jesus, who is NOT divine, is exalted to a position where he is clearly worshiped by all of creation.

How exactly does that work? How can Jesus receive worship if he is not God?

Clearly, the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not allow the biblical text to inform their theology. Instead, they have a consistent pattern of conforming the biblical text to their pre-determined theological conclusion, namely, their view that Jesus is NOT God.

To make the Scriptures conform to this theological outcome, they must add words to various texts, while changing the meaning of words in other texts, all the while ignoring context and plain logic.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

Are you convinced by the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ explanation of this verse? Why or why not?

If Jesus is NOT divine, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses contend, how do you explain the fact that Jesus will be exalted and EVERY knee will bow and EVERY tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord? In other words, how can Jesus be worshiped if he is not God?

The author of the post says that Jehovah’s Witnesses do not allow the biblical text to inform their theology but instead they conform the biblical text to their theology. What do you think that means? In what ways do you see people, including Christians, doing the same thing? What is the danger of interpreting the Bible in this way?

Paul invites the reader to have the same attitude that Jesus had. What is that attitude? How can you demonstrate that same attitude in your life today? This week? 

 

Image created by Grok

Posted on

Evidence that Jesus is God – Part 2

John 10

22Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. 24The Jews gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.”

25Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father’s name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. 29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30I and the Father are one.”

31Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him, 32but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33“We are not stoning you for any of these,” replied the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are gods’? 35If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37Do not believe me unless I do what my Father does. 38But if I do it, even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” 39Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp. (John 10:22-39, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

Lately I’ve had a number of online conversations with some Jehovah’s Witnesses regarding the nature of Jesus. Most of the discussions have come about as a result of a Jehovah’s Witness responding to one of my many blog posts on the topic, including the following:

One recent discussion has centered around my blog post “Evidence that Jesus is God” which is based on Jesus’ interaction with the religious leaders in John 10:22-33.

I encourage you to read the entire post to get the full argument, but the summary of that post is as follows:

    1. Jesus claimed that he and the Father are one which I argued was a clear claim of divinity by Jesus.
    2. Jehovah’s Witnesses typically respond that Jesus was only claiming to be “one in purpose” with the Father – he was not claiming deity.
    3. But the context of the passage shows that the explanation offered by the Jehovah’s Witnesses is unlikely as the Jewish leaders picked up stones to kill him.
    4. When Jesus asks why they want to stone him, they respond, “for blasphemy – you being a mere man claim to be God.” It’s clear from the context that the Jewish religious leaders understood Jesus to be making a claim of deity. Why else would they accuse him of blasphemy?
    5. I point out that if Jesus was only “one in purpose” with the Father, if he was NOT claiming to be God, then why did Jesus not correct their misunderstanding as Paul and Barnabas did in Acts 14 when the locals mistook them for gods?
    6. I argued that the reason Jesus didn’t correct the religious leaders was because their understanding of the claim he was making was clearly correct.

In this recent online encounter, a committed Jehovah’s Witness responded to my post by quoting the fuller text of John 10:22-38, arguing that in the verses that followed (which I had not included in my original post) Jesus DID correct their misunderstanding by claiming to be a “little g” god instead of a “big G” God.

His argument is that Jesus explained to these Jewish leaders that he is God’s son in the same way that others in the Old Testament were called “gods.” This is conclusive proof, according to this Jehovah’s Witness, that Jesus has defined for us what he means when he calls himself the Son of God – he does NOT claim equality with the Father, but is simply claiming a status as a “little g” god, which has been attributed to many other “mere men” in the past.

What are we to make of this argument? Is he on to something that has been overlooked and ignored by the traditional church for the last 2000 years?

I think the answer is clearly NO, and I’ll explain why.

As you read through the gospels, it’s apparent that the Jewish religious leaders are opposed to Jesus. They don’t like him and in fact, they resort to seeking to kill him.

The deeper question is why don’t they like him? Why are they so opposed to him? Regardless of what you believe about Jesus’ nature, most agree that he was the greatest moral teacher to ever live. Jesus traveled around healing and helping people. Isn’t that a good thing? So why are these religious leaders so intent on killing him?

In Jesus’ encounters with the religious leaders there is one thing in common – he seeks to expose their hard-heartedness. He does this in various ways by unmasking their selfishness, their hypocrisy and their duplicitous nature.

Jesus’ harshest words are reserved for these very religious leaders, who not only opposed him but are often seen trying to entrap him into saying or doing something that could be used against him.

Though Jesus has healed the sick, raised the dead, exorcised the demon-possessed and performed numerous miracles, they still come to him demanding a sign. I wrote about their unreasonable demands and Jesus’ response in my blog post “When Someone DEMANDS Evidence!”

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

So what is Jesus doing in this passage? What’s he saying to these religious leaders?

Jesus is setting a logical trap for these religious leaders.

How exactly does he do this?

Let’s look at the full interaction.

Jesus is walking around minding his own business when he’s encountered by the religious leaders who once again ask,

“how long will you keep us in suspense? If you’re the Christ, tell us plainly.”

Jesus responds that he’s already told them plainly but they just don’t want to believe. He then appeals to the many miracles he had done in the Father’s name, evidence which he says speaks for itself.

The next two verses are important to the foundation Jesus is laying for the intellectual trap that he’s setting: Jesus says that the reason they don’t believe is because they are NOT his sheep. His sheep hear his voice and follow him, but they’re incapable of hearing his voice and following him because they are NOT his sheep.

Remember, he had a similar encounter with the religious leaders just two chapters earlier in John 8, where Jesus told them that their true father is the devil. I wrote about this critical exchange in my post “Who’s Your Daddy?”

Jesus is addressing the hardness of their heart. They see the miracles just like everyone else yet it has no effect. They come to Jesus and demand more evidence, more miracles, more proof. Jesus isn’t playing their game. He’s telling them that the miracles he has done speak for themselves and so he has no need to provide any more evidence.

In verse 28, Jesus continues speaking about his sheep, his true followers, saying that he gives them eternal life, they will never perish and that no one can snatch them out of his hand.

Who but God can grant eternal life and promise eternal protection for his followers?

Jesus is telling these religious leaders that he performs activities that are attributed only to God. This is an additional evidence for Jesus’ deity. Not only does Jesus make direct claims of deity, but he performs acts and possesses qualities that can only be attributed to God.

Jesus then says that the Father has given him the sheep and no one can snatch them out of the Father’s hand. So in two consecutive verses, Jesus has said that no one can snatch the followers out of his hand AND no one can snatch them out of the Father’s hand.

In the very next verse (John 10:30) Jesus says,

I and the Father are one.

This is not simply “oneness of purpose” as Jehovah’s Witnesses argue. This is oneness of essence and activity. Jesus is appealing to a special relational unity.

It’s clear from the response that the Jewish religious leaders understood what Jesus was saying as they picked up stones to stone him. When Jesus asks why they’re picking up stones, they reply that it’s not because of his works,

but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.

Now this is where we get into the response from my recent online conversation with a Jehovah’s Witness.

He argues that what follows in the text is Jesus’ explanation of his true nature, that he is just a man who is a servant of God and so when he calls himself the son of God, it’s just like Psalm 82:6 (which Jesus himself references) when other men were called “gods”.

Unfortunately, my online Jehovah’s Witness friend completely misunderstands and misinterprets what is happening in this exchange.

Remember, Jesus’ encounters with the religious leaders often showed him exposing the hardness of their heart – their greed, their selfishness, their hypocrisy, their lust for power, their stubborn unwillingness to believe. This encounter is no different. Jesus has now set the trap that will reveal their true intentions.

How so?

They’ve already said that they believe that Jesus is a mere man who is claiming to be God. This was their basis for charging him with blasphemy. So Jesus appeals to Psalm 82:6 and essentially says, “well if I’m just a man, what reason do you have to accuse me of blasphemy? Wouldn’t I be just like these other ‘mere men’ who were servants of God?”

For emphasis, Jesus adds “this is in your Law!”

The argument made by my online Jehovah’s Witness opponent is that Jesus has just admitted to being a “mere man” who is a servant of God. Therefore, he is a “little g” god. This fits perfectly with the doctrine of Jehovah’s Witnesses, which denies that Jesus is God but says that he’s “god-like”.

But Jesus has not stated that he’s a “little g” god. He has simply referenced a passage from Psalm 82:6 in order to set the trap.

Jesus continues with his response by saying that if the Scriptures, which cannot be broken, called these other people “gods” then

“what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?”

Instead of calling himself a “god”, Jesus has just established that he’s superior to the so-called “gods” of Psalm 82:6 by virtue of his unique and special relationship with the Father. Jesus then reasserts that he does what the Father does.

Jesus then tells these religious leaders essentially, “look, if you don’t believe what I say, at least believe the miracles that I’m doing. This should prove to you that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”

This last statement is another declaration of the special unity that Jesus has with the Father. This is more than just “oneness of purpose” as if Jesus has simply adopted allegiance to a corporate mission statement.

Jesus has consistently communicated a unity with the Father that the religious leaders interpreted as a claim of deity. This is clear throughout the gospels as Jesus encounters the religious leaders. And it’s the exact reason why they sought to kill him and eventually did kill him.

Verse 39 makes this clear as it says,

Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

The point that was made in the initial post, “Evidence that Jesus is God” still stands. Jesus made a statement about himself that his opponents interpreted as a claim of deity. Jesus does not correct their misunderstanding. Yes, Jesus refers to Psalm 82:6, which references people as “gods” but he does so as a tactic to reveal to the religious leaders that their problem was not that Jesus wasn’t clear and it was not that he hadn’t provided enough evidence of who he was.

Their problem was that their will (heart) refused to believe what their minds knew to be true. This is hard-heartedness, which will cause us to defy logic and all rationality in our attempt to hold to a pre-suppositional belief.

The Jewish religious leaders are an illustration for humanity – we have been given all the evidence we need to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, God in the flesh, and yet if we refuse to believe, it’s because we don’t want to. That is the very definition of a hard heart.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

When is a time that you did not want to believe a truth that was clearly presented to you? What are examples in your own life where you’ve demonstrated a hardness of your heart?

If Jesus did admit to the religious leaders that he was not deity, but only a “god” in the sense demonstrated in Psalm 82:6, as Jehovah’s Witnesses contend, how do you explain the Jewish leaders’ continued desire to seize him and kill him for blasphemy?

What do you think Jesus means when he claims that he and the Father are one? 

What do you think Jesus means when he says “that the Father is in me, and I in the Father”?

What do you think is the benefit of engaging in this kind of discussion about the nature of Jesus? Do you think it really matters how we view him? Why or why not?

 

Photo by Tim Hüfner on Unsplash

Posted on

Does Revelation 3:14 Prove Jesus is a Created Being?

Revelation 3

14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:

(Revelation 3:14, NASB)

The Daily DAVEotional

I’ve written a number of blog posts on Revelation 3:14-22, including this post on why Jesus would rebuke the “lukewarm” Christian but not the “cold” Christian, and this post, which explains why it’s legitimate to use Revelation 3:20 in gospel conversations with non-believers.

So why yet ANOTHER post on this passage, and why highlight only one verse?

Some background

Last week, I happened to post on X a tweet referencing my blog post from Proverbs 8 where I explain that Proverbs 8 is NOT a passage that demonstrates that Jesus is a created being, as Jehovah’s Witnesses will claim. In fact, Proverbs 8 is not about Jesus at all.

My tweet got some replies, including a Jehovah’s Witness from Nigeria who decided to take the opportunity to set me straight on my theology.

We had quite the online back and forth exchange, with many verses being offered up as evidence for our respective views.

If you weren’t aware, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus is God. They teach that he is the first created being of Jehovah and as such, he is not to be worshipped.

They are the modern day torch-bearers of the ancient heretical doctrine known as Arianism. I first wrote about the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their views on Jesus in my post “A Modern Day Version of an Ancient Heresy.”

In my online exchange with this Nigerian Jehovah’s Witness, he presented to me all the usual verses in an attempt to demonstrate that Jesus is not God, including Colossians 1:15, which I addressed in my blog post, “What Does it Mean that Jesus is the Firstborn”, and John 10:30, which I addressed in my blog post “Evidence that Jesus is God” .

One verse that this online JW evangelist offered as evidence that Jesus is not God but is a created being, was Revelation 3:14, the verse that is highlighted in this devotional.

Jehovah’s Witnesses routinely cite Revelation 3:14 as conclusive proof that Jesus is created. After all, the verse literally says that Jesus is the BEGINNING of creation.

What this means, according to the Jehovah’s Witness, is that Jesus is the first created thing of Jehovah’s creation. He is the “beginning” of creation.

However, as is often the case when dialoguing with Jehovah’s Witnesses, the verse does not mean what they THINK it means.

How can that be?

Well, the Greek word in Revelation 3:14 that is translated as “beginning” is the Greek word “arche” (pronounced by sounding out the letters “R” and “K”). It is where we get our English word “architect.”

This word has a number of possible meanings, one of which is “beginning”.

If you look up this word in a Greek lexicon, it says that the word means origin, source, beginning. It also can mean rule.

Biblical translators are in agreement that the meaning of this word is not that Jesus is the first to be created but that Jesus is the source of creation, the author of creation, the BEGINNER of creation or the ORIGIN of creation. Because Jesus is the author of creation, he is the RULER of creation.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

So why does it say that Jesus is the BEGINNING of creation? Why not use one of these other words?

Actually, the NASB, which uses the word “BEGINNING” has a footnote provided by the translators in which they offer up the words “source” and “origin” as alternatives. In other words, the footnote demonstrates that the authors understood that the word “beginning” was meant to be understood in the sense that Jesus is the origin or source of creation.

When you click on the “asterisk”, the note is revealed:

Additionally, most translations do NOT use the word “beginning” in their translation.

The NLT translates Revelation 3:14 as:

“Write this letter to the angel of the church in Laodicea. This is the message from the one who is the Amen—the faithful and true witness, the ruler* [Or the source.] of God’s creation:

Note the translator’s “asterisk” that indicates that the word could mean “ruler” or “source”.

The NIV translates it this way:

14“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:

These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation.

The Holman Christian Standard Bible translates it as:

14“Write to the angel of the church in Laodicea:

“The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Originator [Or Ruler, or Source, or Beginning] of God’s creation says:

The brackets are inserted by the translators to indicate different words that would be equally acceptable as translations of the Greek word “arche”.

The NET Bible offers this translation:

“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write the following:

“This is the solemn pronouncement of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the originator54 of God’s creation:

Notice the number “54” just after the word “originator.” The NET Bible has extensive translation notes, which explain the decision process the translators used to arrive at their translation choices.

The summary of this note number 54 is that “beginning”, “ruler” or “originator” are all three linguistically possible. The editors explain that this term (Greek = arche) is well established in both the Septuagint (LXX) and intertestamental Jewish literature as meaning “ruler, authority.”

The truth is that  most translations do not use the word “beginning” for this verse and the translations that do use the word don’t use it to convey the meaning Jehovah’s Witnesses attribute to the verse.

In actuality, the word beginning is a fine word to use if you understand that Jesus literally is the first cause of creation. It is in that sense that he is the beginning. He is the source, the originator, the architect of creation. As such, he is ruler over creation.

One should also keep in mind that the author of Revelation is the apostle John, the same John who wrote the gospel of John and three shorter epistles near the end of the New Testament.

This same John identified Jesus as God in the opening verses of his gospel account, saying:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. (John 1:1, NASB)

To be fair, Jehovah’s Witnesses dispute the traditional Christian teaching of this verse, but I explain why their view is incorrect in my post “A Modern Day Version of an Ancient Heresy”.

This same John also wrote in his first epistle that

This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. (1 John 1:5, NASB)

But in John 1, the author says this about Jesus:

In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. 5The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. (John 1:4-5)

John also said of Jesus that

All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (John 1:3, NASB)

This does not sound like John believed that Jesus was created. Instead, John taught that Jesus created ALL things. If Jesus was the first created thing of Jehovah then John 1:3 would be a false statement as Jesus would be “something” that came into being.

A primary rule of Bible study is that Scripture interprets Scripture. In other words, if there is a verse that is confusing, we interpret it in light of other passages that are clear.

In Revelation 3:14, how are we to understand the word “beginning”? That is the debate between Jehovah’s Witnesses and traditional Christianity.

It’s clear that the translators all understood the word “beginning” in the sense that Jesus is the “beginner” or “first cause” of creation. This understanding is supported by all of the other words that could be used as a translation for the Greek word “arche”, including source, origin and ruler.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses explanation for the word “beginner” violates all of the other possible meanings while the traditional Christian understanding of the word “beginning” is in alignment with the other possible word choices.

In addition, the Jehovah’s Witness explanation of this verse contradicts other passages that clearly promote the same traditional Christian view.

In the final analysis, Revelation 3:14 doesn’t teach that Jesus is the first created being of Jehovah. On the contrary, it provides yet another substantial proof that Jesus is divine!

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

Given the fact that arche can mean “source”, “ruler” and “origin”, what logical explanation could explain how “beginning” means anything other than “first cause”? In other words, how do you explain the fact that the Jehovah’s Witness explanation of the Greek word “arche” does not match any of the other accepted definitions for the word?

Do you find the argument posed in this post against the Jehovah’s Witness’ interpretation of Revelation 3:14 convincing? Why or why not?

Some people argue that debating the nature of Jesus is fruitless and unnecessary. The argument is that as long as we believe that Jesus saves us, that’s all that matters. Everything else is just theological nit-picking. Do you agree with this sentiment? Why do you think it’s important to have a firm understanding of the nature of Jesus?

What has been your experience with Jehovah’s Witnesses? What verses or arguments have they made that you were not able to adequately respond to or refute?

 

Photo by Greg Rakozy on Unsplash

Posted on

The Trilemma of Jesus

Matthew 26

57Then the people who had arrested Jesus led him to the home of Caiaphas, the high priest, where the teachers of religious law and other leaders had gathered. 58Meanwhile, Peter was following far behind and eventually came to the courtyard of the high priest’s house. He went in, sat with the guards, and waited to see what was going to happen to Jesus.

59Inside, the leading priests and the entire high council were trying to find witnesses who would lie about Jesus, so they could put him to death. 60But even though they found many who agreed to give false witness, there was no testimony they could use. Finally, two men were found 61who declared, “This man said, ‘I am able to destroy the Temple of God and rebuild it in three days.’”

62Then the high priest stood up and said to Jesus, “Well, aren’t you going to answer these charges? What do you have to say for yourself?” 63But Jesus remained silent. Then the high priest said to him, “I demand in the name of the living God that you tell us whether you are the Messiah, the Son of God.”

64Jesus replied, “Yes, it is as you say. And in the future you will see me, the Son of Man, sitting at God’s right hand in the place of power and coming back on the clouds of heaven.”

65Then the high priest tore his clothing to show his horror, shouting, “Blasphemy! Why do we need other witnesses? You have all heard his blasphemy. 66What is your verdict?”

“Guilty!” they shouted. “He must die!”

67Then they spit in Jesus’ face and hit him with their fists. And some slapped him, 68saying, “Prophesy to us, you Messiah! Who hit you that time?” (Matthew 26:57-68, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Perhaps the greatest question you can ask and answer is the question, “Who is Jesus?”

Jesus asked this question of His disciples in an encounter that is recorded in Matthew 16:13-20 and also in Mark 8:27-30. I previously wrote about that encounter in a blog post entitled “The Most Important Question to Ask Yourself”.

One of the hallmark doctrines of Christianity is the divinity of Jesus. Christians believe that Jesus is God.

Those who deny the divinity of Jesus, such as Muslims, Jehovah’s Witnesses and others, often will say that divinity was something Jesus’ followers attributed to Him but that He Himself did not claim. To them, Jesus was simply a prophet, a good teacher or something else, but He certainly was not God.

The problem is that there are a number of passages where Jesus clearly identifies Himself as God. One such passage is John 10:30, where Jesus claimed to be “one with the Father”. Jehovah’s Witnesses have an explanation for that passage that I don’t think fits the facts. I wrote about that passage in a blog post “Evidence that Jesus is God”.

The account here in Matthew 26 of Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin is another passage that gives strong evidence that Jesus claimed deity for Himself.

How exactly does this passage demonstrate that Jesus claimed divinity for Himself?

In this section, Matthew records the trial of Jesus. After His betrayal and arrest, Jesus appears before the Sanhedrin, which is the Jewish religious authority.

A cursory reading of the gospels makes it clear that the religious rulers were out to get Jesus. They sent experts to try to entrap him, looking for any possible offense that they could use against him.

It’s interesting to see Jesus’ response to the high priest, who demanded that Jesus respond to his question about whether Jesus thought of Himself as the Messiah, the Son of God.

As soon as the high priest makes this demand, Jesus responds in the affirmative. “Yes, it is as you say.”

But Jesus doesn’t stop there. He continues,

And in the future you will see me, the Son of Man, sitting at God’s right hand in the place of power and coming back on the clouds of heaven.

It turns out that Jesus is referencing Daniel 7:13, in which the Messiah receives authority from the Ancient of Days to reign as the supreme king over all the earth.

The high priest had all the evidence he needed. He, along with the other religious leaders were very familiar with the passage Jesus was referencing. Here was Jesus, clearly associating himself as God. The high priest and the ruling religious leaders did not accept that Jesus was divine so they charged Him with blasphemy and sentenced Him to death.

The question that we have to wrestle with is the same one that C.S. Lewis postulated, and that is, who do you think Jesus is?

Regarding Jesus and his identity, Lewis formulated what has come to be known as the trilemma – Lord, Liar or Lunatic.

The basic premise is that when confronted with the person of Jesus, we have only these three possibilities. Either Jesus was a liar,  He was a crazy person (a lunatic) or He is Lord.

“A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. — C.S. LEWIS, “Mere Christianity”

There can be no doubt that Jesus made claims of deity for himself. This passage is one of the clearest examples and it is the reason why the religious leaders crucified Him. If he was not making direct claims of deity, there would have been no reason to sentence Him.

Since it’s indisputable that Jesus made claims of deity for Himself, we must each decide how to interpret those claims. Was Jesus lying? If you believe He was lying then you cannot call Him a good teacher. Lewis states that it would be more appropriate to call Him the devil, for He convinced people to follow Him, entrusting their eternal destiny to Him and his teachings. That would be the most devious thing one could imagine….to convince others to follow you because you had the power to save them when in reality, you knew that to be false.

The second option is that Jesus was crazy. Lewis says that this level of craziness would be similar to a person who believed himself to be a poached egg.

Does Jesus see Himself as a poached egg? Does He exhibit any of the signs we normally associate with mental instability or cognitive impairment?

Hardly.

Actually, Jesus comes across as the most rational, logical and mentally coherent person who ever lived.

The only other possibility, then, is that Jesus is Lord.

How about you? Who do you think Jesus is?

Reflection

What has been. your understanding of the nature of Jesus before reading this passage and devotional post? How have you characterized the nature of Jesus to others in the past?

How would you respond to someone who did not believe that Jesus was divine? What arguments and passages would you use to demonstrate His divinity?

Explain the argument that if Jesus was lying about His divinity, then He cannot be a “good teacher.”

If Jesus is not God, what reasons would a person have for following Him and trusting Him as Savior?

What other passages, besides this one and the John 10:30 passage mentioned, give evidence that Jesus claimed to be God in human flesh?

 

Photo by Bree Anne on Unsplash

Posted on

A Modern Day Version of an Ancient Heresy

John 1

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood it.

6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.

10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God — 13children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-14, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

A few years ago I received a knock on my front door early on a Saturday morning. There, on my porch to greet me were two friendly gentlemen from the local Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses who wanted to talk to me about my religious views and how I could experience eternal life.

They gave me a small red book entitled, “You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth” and asked me to read it (see photo above). They promised to return the following week and get my thoughts on what I had read.

I was already familiar with the Jehovah’s Witnesses and their teachings but I had not read the book they were offering so I agreed to take the book, read it and reconvene the following week for a discussion.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses are an offshoot organization of Biblical Christianity that traces its roots to a pastor named Charles Taze Russell, who, in the late 1870’s began printing a monthly magazine known as “Zion’s Watchtower”. A few years later, Russell formed the Watchtower Tract Society, which is the publishing arm of what is now known as the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

On a number of levels, the Jehovah’s Witnesses beliefs and teachings don’t seem much different from any other Christian church one might attend. However, when it comes to the person of Jesus, there is a huge difference in what the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe compared to the traditional Christian view of Jesus.

I’ve written a number of times (here and here) on why our view and understanding of Jesus matters. The Jehovah’s Witnesses actually teach a view of Jesus that is known as Arianism, which takes its name from an Alexandrian priest from the 3rd century named Arius, who believed that Jesus was a created being, and thus did not possess a divine nature.

Arianism was condemned as heresy by the early church because it denied the divinity of Christ. The Jehovah’s Witnesses are the modern day torch-bearers of this ancient heresy known as Arianism.

What does any of this have to do with our passage today?

This first chapter of John is rich with imagery and insights into the true nature of Jesus.

Right away, in the first verse, John directly states several things very plainly:

    1. The Word existed in the beginning – implying that Jesus was in existence when nothing existed. This clearly alludes to his eternal nature.
    2. The Word was with God – implying that Jesus is distinct from the Father.
    3. The Word WAS God – implying that Jesus is essentially the same in nature as the Father.

These three ideas form the basis of two long-standing theological doctrines of the Christian church, namely, the divine nature of Jesus, as well as the triune nature of God, both of which the Jehovah’s Witnesses deny.

How do Jehovah’s Witnesses explain this verse (John 1:1)?

The answer is that they don’t. Instead, if you look at their own translation of the Bible (New World Translation), you will see John 1:1 stated this way:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. (John 1:1, NWT)

The Jehovah’s Witnesses change the meaning of John 1:1 in order to fit their preconceived theological view that Jesus is a created being.

NOTE: For those who might wonder how we know that the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation of John 1:1 is incorrect, first know that no reputable Greek scholar has translated the Greek text the way the Jehovah’s Witnesses do. For an explanation of why their view is not correct, check out this thorough, yet detailed blog post that explains why the traditional biblical translation (“the Word was God”) is the correct translation.

 

The truth is that a Jesus who is not divine is not able to save us. This is why it’s important to understand Jesus for who he really is.

In this passage, we learn quite a number of essential truths about the nature of Jesus.

In addition to the truths that Jesus is eternal and that Jesus is God (from verse 1), we learn from verse 3 that Jesus is the creator of everything:

Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

In verse 4, we learn that Jesus is the source of life:

In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

In verse 12, we learn that those who receive Jesus and believe in His name are granted the rights to become His children:

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.

And verse 14 tells us that this Jesus, who displays the glory of the One and Only (God) came to earth to dwell among us. This is what theologians refer to as the incarnation – God becoming man and living among us:

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

If there is any doubt as to the meaning of this verse, that Jesus is indeed God and became a man to dwell among humanity, think about this prophecy from Isaiah 7:14, which describes the future Messiah:

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

The word “Immanuel” literally means “God with us.” One of the names for the Messiah, according to the prophet Isaiah, would be “Immanuel” or “God with us.” That would be a pretty unfitting name if Jesus is not actually God as the Jehovah’s Witnesses assert.

Imagine – the God of the universe, the one who created EVERYTHING and has always existed, the one who is the source of life, this Jesus became a man and dwelt among us!

This concept was absolutely unthinkable to the average person living in the time of Jesus. And yet, the Old Testament prophets predicted it, and the apostle John not only witnessed it, but wrote about it so that we might come to believe in Jesus, receive Him and become His children!

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

What has been your view and understanding of the nature of Jesus?

In what ways does this verse demonstrate to you that Jesus is indeed divine?

In your view, what is the significance about the fact that God came and dwelt among us? 

How would you respond to someone who asserted that Jesus was not God but was a created being? What Scriptures would you use to demonstrate that Jesus is indeed divine?

 

Photo by Dave Lowe

Posted on

Is Your View of Jesus Really that Important? (Part 2)

1 John 5

1Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well. 2This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. 3This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, 4for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. 5Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

6This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. 7For there are three that testify: 8the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. 9We accept man’s testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. 10Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. (1 John 5:1-10, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

There’s a confusing passage of scripture in 1 John 5 that quite frankly, I’ve been in the habit of skimming over for years because I never really understood it and I didn’t have the patience, determination or even knowledge to know how to go about determining its true meaning.

I’m talking about this passage in 1 John 5:7, 8 which states that “there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”

I couldn’t even begin to explain what that really meant, largely because I didn’t have a firm grasp on the larger context of the letter. But once you understand why John is writing his letter and what the background is, the meaning of this passage becomes more clear.

If you read my previous post regarding 1 John 4:1-6, you’ll know that one of the main reasons John wrote this letter was to address and refute a false teaching about Jesus that was circulating within the church.

This false teaching asserted that Jesus was just a man and “the Christ” was a spiritual entity who entered into the body of Jesus at His baptism and left just before Jesus was crucified. Hence, Jesus and the Christ were separate individuals, not the same person. John opposed this teaching so strongly that he not only labeled the teachers as “false prophets” but he referred to the teaching itself as “deception” and even “antichrist.”

It’s interesting to look at this passage from 1 John 5 and see that right off the bat in verse 1, John says that “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.”

Notice that John affirms that Jesus IS the Christ. They are one and the same person. Humanity and divinity together, at the same time in the same person. John states that belief in this specific doctrine, that Jesus is human and divine at the same time, is essential to being “born of God.” (verse 1)

In verse 5, John once again affirms the divinity of Jesus as he states that the one “who believes Jesus is the Son of God” is the one who overcomes. Referencing Jesus as the “Son of God” is an affirmation of His divine nature.

But then we come upon the sticky passage, the one that’s talking about water and blood and the spirit and testimonies and witnesses, etc.

What’s he talking about here and how does this relate to anything he’s been saying?

As I mentioned before, these false teachers were teaching that “the Christ” descended upon Jesus (the man) at his baptism and left him just before the crucifixion. Hence, they were teaching that the person who was crucified was NOT the Son of God, but just the normal human Jesus.

John’s reference to water, blood and the spirit makes sense when you understand how he’s trying to combat the view of Jesus that was being promoted.

Do you remember what happened at Jesus’ baptism in Matthew 3? I wrote about this in a previous post here.

Jesus was baptized with water by John the Baptist. Immediately after coming up out of the water, the Holy Spirit, in the form of a dove, descends upon Jesus and God the Father audibly affirms that Jesus is His Son, in whom He is well-pleased.

So the water in this passage of 1 John 5 is a reference to Jesus’ baptism, which happens to be the point the false teachers said “the Christ” overtook the human Jesus’ body.

The blood is a reference to Jesus’ crucifixion, which marked the end of Jesus’ public ministry.

The Spirit is a reference to the Holy Spirit, who affirmed Jesus’ identity at His baptism.

By referencing water, the blood and the Spirit, John is directly refuting the false teachers by establishing that Jesus was the Son of God before His baptism AND at His death.

So John is saying that there are 3 witnesses that are all in agreement concerning the identity of Jesus. There is the water when Jesus was baptized and affirmed to be the Son of God, and there was the blood when Jesus was crucified and also affirmed to be the Son of God.

John continues by arguing that the law typically required 2 or 3 human witnesses to establish a fact. Since God is greater than humans, and He has given us 3 witnesses, or facts that establish the identify of Jesus as “the Christ”, and “the Son of God”, how much more should we believe Him?

John concludes by saying that if you do NOT believe that Jesus is the Son of God, you are making God out to be a liar because He has already provided evidence (testimony) to demonstrate this truth about the nature of Jesus.

Understanding and believing these truths is critically important because if Jesus was just a man when he was crucified, as the false teachers asserted, how could his death atone for the sins of the world? It couldn’t.

Good Friday would not be so good. It would be Bad Friday, or at best, Normal Friday because Jesus’ death would have accomplished nothing and it would have been so insignificant that we would probably not even be aware of it 2000 years later!

NOTE: Have you ever wondered what makes Good Friday good? I wrote about this in a previous post and you can read about it here.

Reflection

What do you think the term “Son of God” means? What does it communicate about the nature of Jesus?

If Jesus wasn’t God, how would that impact His mission to save the world from sin? How would you explain to someone why it is critically important for Jesus to be God if we are to have any hope of our sin actually being paid for?

Do you agree with the author John who says that in order to be “born of God” you must believe that Jesus is the Christ? Why or why not? What do you think it means that Jesus is the Christ?

What modern day examples come to mind that demonstrate a false teaching or understanding of the nature of Jesus?

 

Photo by Yannick Pulver on Unsplash