What Does it Mean that Jesus is the Firstborn? (Part 2)

Colossians 1

¹⁵He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. ¹⁶For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. ¹⁷He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. ¹⁸And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. ¹⁹For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, ²⁰and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. (Colossians 1:15-20, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

About a year ago, I posted my thoughts on this very passage, explaining the meaning of the term “firstborn” and why it doesn’t teach that Jesus is a created being, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses argue.

I don’t want to rehash all of my points from that post so if you haven’t read it, I encourage you to read the original post, “What Does it Mean that Jesus is the Firstborn?” to get up to speed on the debate between the traditional Christian understanding of Jesus and the Arian view that Jehovah’s Witnesses hold.

My purpose in this post is to provide a response to some of the arguments levied by Jehovah’s Witnesses who argue against my interpretation of this passage.

In my initial post, I made the claim that the primary meaning of “firstborn” in Colossians 1:15 and 18 is “preeminence”. I reasoned that this makes the most sense since Paul uses “firstborn” in conjunction with two different terms, “creation” and “death”, neither of which have anything to do with a parent. Therefore, it seems most natural that Paul is using the term to demonstrate Jesus’ supremacy (pre-eminence) over creation and death.

In recent weeks, I’ve encountered a number of committed Jehovah’s Witnesses online who disagree with my interpretation and have offered up their own explanations for this passage.

The standard Jehovah’s Witness talking point as it relates to the meaning of “firstborn” in Colossians 1 is that the term means something like “first in line.”

The argument is that the term “firstborn” most often refers to the first offspring of a particular person. Therefore, the word should be interpreted in a similar manner when it’s used in a verse that is not referencing offspring.

If you agree with the Jehovah’s Witness logic, then the interpretation of Colossians 1 yields the following:

Jesus is the firstborn of creation, which means that he was the first one to be created by Jehovah.

Jesus is the firstborn from among the dead, which means he’s the first one to overcome death.

To some, particularly Jehovah’s Witnesses and others who hold to an Arian view of Christ, the debate is over. In their mind, the logic is irrefutable.

But is it?

Sound Bible study methods dictate that we investigate their claims. Is their understanding of the word the standard interpretation?

Let’s see.

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

I did a Bible search and found that the word “firstborn” shows up in 111 Bible verses, all but 9 of which are found in the Old Testament. In some verses, the word “firstborn” appears multiple times. Hence, the term is used more than 120 times throughout the Bible.

I’ve catalogued every verse where the term shows up, so you can see for yourself. You can access this list of verses in my blog post “Bible References to the Term “Firstborn”“.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses are right in this respect – a majority of the references to the term “firstborn” do actually refer to the first one born to a particular person. However, it is rather obvious from the context of all of those passages that this is the meaning.

Take Genesis 10:15 for example, which is the very first occurrence of the term. The verse says,

Canaan became the father of Sidon, his firstborn.

In a majority of the occurrences of the term “firstborn”, it’s used in this same manner where the term is by itself, but referencing a parent. Occasionally, the term is referenced to another living creature as in Exodus 11:5 which states that God was going to kill the firstborn of Pharaoh as well as the firstborn of all cattle.

It’s clear in these situations that the term does mean “first offspring” primarily because the verse gives the name of the parent and the son or daughter.

But how is the word understood when it is not used in conjunction with a living being (man or animal)? Is it understood in the same way?

Typically not.

One of the first occurrences where firstborn is used in a non-traditional way is Exodus 4:22, which says,

“Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the LORD, “Israel is My son, My firstborn. ²³“So I said to you, ‘Let My son go that he may serve Me’; but you have refused to let him go. Behold, I will kill your son, your firstborn.”’”

Notice that the term shows up twice. In the second instance it’s used in the same way we typically see the word being used, in reference to the first offspring of a person. In this case, it’s referring to the first offspring of Pharaoh.

But in the first instance of the term “firstborn”, it is not used in the typical fashion.

According to Jehovah’s Witness’ argumentation, the word should have the same meaning even when it’s used in a non-traditional way.

It turns out that the first instance of “firstborn” in this passage CANNOT mean what the Jehovah’s Witnesses attribute to the term. God specifically states that Israel, the nation, is his firstborn. If we understand “firstborn” to be “first in line”, in what sense is Israel the “first in line”?

Israel was not the first nation to be created. And God doesn’t “birth” nations anyway, so the word cannot mean “first offspring”.

It’s clear by the context that the first occurrence of “firstborn” in this verse is to be understood as Israel having a favored status. God selected Israel for a distinct and unique purpose – to be a nation through which all the other nations would be blessed and come to know the one true God.

In this case, the meaning of “preeminent” is clearly the correct understanding.

Genesis 48 provides an insightful story that helps us understand the significance of the firstborn.

In this passage, Joseph brings his sons Manasseh and Ephraim to Jacob in order to receive a blessing before Jacob passes.

Jacob is old and his vision is failing. As he reaches out to bless Joseph’s sons, he crosses his arms so that his right hand is on Ephraim instead of Manasseh who is the first offspring of Joseph and therefore the firstborn.

Genesis 48:14 says,

But Israel stretched out his right hand and laid it on the head of Ephraim, who was the younger, and his left hand on Manasseh’s head, crossing his hands, although Manasseh was the firstborn.

In Genesis 48:18, Joseph tries to correct his father, saying,

“Not so, my father, for this one is the firstborn. Place your right hand on his head.”

Jacob tells Joseph that he is aware of the situation and he knows what he is doing. He tells Joseph that Ephraim, though he is the younger, will have a higher position over his brother. He will be the firstborn, the favored son.

Just a few verses later, in the next chapter, Jacob is giving his final words to each of his sons. Here is what he says to Reuben, his first son, in Genesis 49:3-4,

“Reuben, you are my firstborn; My might and the beginning of my strength, Preeminent in dignity and preeminent in power. ⁴“Uncontrolled as water, you shall not have preeminence, Because you went up to your father’s bed; Then you defiled it —he went up to my couch.

Jacob not only defines the term “firstborn” for us but expounds on its significance. The firstborn IS the might of the father AND the beginning of the father’s strength. The firstborn is PREEMINENT.

Jacob tells Reuben that he is the firstborn in terms of offspring. But he would NOT be firstborn in terms of preeminence.

These passages, which show up early in the biblical narrative, demonstrate clearly that the idea of “preeminence” was nearly synonymous with the term “firstborn”.

Though Manasseh was Joseph’s first offspring, it turns out that he was not considered the “firstborn” in terms of stature and rank. In Jeremiah 31:9, God confirms that “Ephraim is my firstborn.”

In 1 Chronicles 2:13, we read that,

Jesse became the father of Eliab his firstborn, then Abinadab the second, Shimea the third,

In verse 14, we learn that David was the seventh and last son born to Jesse. Yet, in Psalm 89:27, God says about David,

“I also shall make him My firstborn,
The highest of the kings of the earth.

David was not the first offspring of Jesse, but God made David His firstborn.

What does that mean?

It cannot mean that David was “first in line” because David was neither the first offspring of Jesse nor was he the first king of Israel.

What it means is that David was made by God to assume the highest rank among rulers. David was made firstborn – he was made to be preeminent.

The context dictates the meaning and sense of the word and so far, when the word is used in a way that doesn’t mean “first offspring”, it carries the meaning of “preeminence.”

There’s an interesting passage in Job that uses the term firstborn. It’s found in Job 18:13, which says:

“His skin is devoured by disease,
The firstborn of death devours his limbs.

This occurrence is informative because it uses the term “firstborn” with the prepositional phrase “of….” that doesn’t have a person or animal following. Whenever we see a person or animal (cattle, herd) follow, as in “firstborn of Jacob” or “firstborn of cattle”, the term always refers to the first offspring.

But in this case, the “firstborn of” phrase is not followed by a person or animal.

Does the standard Jehovah’s Witness meaning of “first in line” follow?

Not really.

Death is inanimate. It’s not a living organism that gives birth as humans and mammals do.

So what is this verse saying?

This verse is part of a larger discourse by Bildad in which he’s communicating his ideology that the wicked eventually get the punishment they deserve. He’s using this argumentation to try to prove that the reason Job has experienced so much trauma and suffering is because Job’s sin has finally caught up to him.

In describing the punishment the wicked will endure, Bildad claims that the skin of the wicked gets devoured by disease AND the “firstborn of death” devours his limbs. It’s obvious that Bildad is making reference to Job’s physical ailments as a proof of Job’s supposed secret sin.

But what is meant by “firstborn of death”?

Note that this term is very similar to how Paul uses “firstborn” in Colossians 1:18.

If “firstborn” means “first in line” in these kinds of cases, what exactly does that mean?

The context will not allow that interpretation because if you assume that meaning, you end up with a garbled mess of a sentence that is completely incoherent.

It’s clear in this context that death is afflicting its victim. There is no sense in which the term “firstborn of death” includes the meaning “first in line”. Death does not birth anything and does not produce a literal offspring.

But death CAN rule. Death CAN overwhelm. That is the sense that is being conveyed here. There is no meaningful or coherent sense in which “first in line” as a meaning applies to the term “firstborn” here.

There’s another uncommon use of the term “firstborn” in Isaiah that does not follow the typical examples that are littered throughout the Old Testament.

Isaiah 14:30 in the ESV says,

And the firstborn of the poor will graze,
And the needy lie down in safety;
but I will kill your root with famine,
and your remnant it will slay.

Here is another example of the word “firstborn” being used in connection with something that is a non-person and a non-animal, negating the traditional meaning of “first offspring.”

What exactly, then is the “firstborn of the poor” and does the definition of “first in line” fit here given the context?

This verse is part of a prophecy that the Lord is giving to Philistia. God warns that Philistia will experience complete devastation and that only “the firstborn of the poor will graze.”

What exactly does that mean?

One thing it doesn’t mean is “first in line”. If we apply the meaning of “highest rank” or “supreme” then it means that those who are the MOST poor will graze (be fed). In other words, it’s going to be bad, and only the most poor, or the poorest of the poor will survive.

It appears that in pretty much every case where the term “firstborn” is used in a way that doesn’t include the parent with the first offspring, the term means “preeminent.”

As mentioned at the outset, there are only 9 verses in the New Testament that use the term “firstborn”.

There are two verses in Luke 2 that use the term, and in both cases, the term “firstborn” is used to refer to Jesus as Mary’s first offspring.

In Hebrews 11:28, the term “firstborn” is referencing the Egyptian plague when the angel of death passed over the Israelites and all of the firstborn of the Israelites were shielded from the plague.

That leaves 6 more verses that use the term “firstborn” including the two in Colossians. None of these other verses use the term in the normal sense where it obviously refers to the first offspring of a certain person.

I’ll examine each of the non-Colossians verses before coming back to Colossians and then summarizing what this tells us.

Romans 8:29 says,

For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;

What is this verse saying?

It’s saying that those who become children of God are predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus. That is, believers ultimately are going to be LIKE him. We won’t just be declared righteous, we will BE righteous because in the end, our sin nature will finally be eradicated.

This is the sense that we will fully be Christ’s brethren. Though we will be LIKE him, we will not be equal to him. Jesus will be the firstborn among all these brethren, which simply means, he will be preeminent. He will be supreme.

So this verse, as applied to Jesus, does not state that he is the first of Jehovah’s creation. It’s stating that he will have a preeminent position among all of the brethren.

This interpretation makes complete sense if we understand that Jesus is a son by nature but we are sons (and daughters) by adoption.

Hebrews 1:6 says,

And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says,
“AND LET ALL THE ANGELS OF GOD WORSHIP HIM.”

The term “firstborn” in this verse clearly refers to Jesus, but does it mean that he was the first offspring?

That is a doubtful interpretation for reasons that have already been enumerated. Jesus was not born. Therefore, the more logical understanding of this term as applied to Jesus is “preeminent one”.

This makes sense given the context of Hebrews 1. This passage, starting in verse 5 and ending with verse 13, is demonstrating that Jesus is superior to, or better than the angels.

So when the firstborn, the preeminent one, comes into the world, God says “let all the angels worship Him.” It logically follows that the angels are commanded to worship Jesus because he is preeminent over them.

Now two things should be said about this. First of all, it’s clear from Scripture that only God is to be worshipped. So what does it say about Jesus that God instructs the angels to worship Him?

Secondly, the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus is actually the archangel Michael. They believe that Michael is the highest of angels and that God the Father (Jehovah to the Jehovah’s Witnesses) gave Michael the task of coming into the world to redeem humanity. Michael took on a human nature and changed his name for some reason. When his mission was complete, Jesus returned to heaven and assumed his prior identity as Michael the archangel.

So according to the Jehovah’s Witnesses, a powerful angel came to earth, took on a human body and God the Father instructed all the other angels to WORSHIP him.

This doesn’t sound like an angel or even someone who is god-like, as Jehovah’s Witnesses will say. This sounds like someone who possesses the divine nature. In fact, this is exactly what Hebrews 1:3 -4 teaches, that Jesus is the EXACT representation of God’s nature AND he is BETTER than the angels. How can he be better than the angels if he himself IS an angel?

Hebrews 12:23 says,

to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect,

There is some debate about what the term “church of the firstborn” refers to but we know it does NOT refer to Jesus. It clearly refers to a group of people in heaven. It’s also clear that the idea of “first offspring” is not in view here.

I think the most likely understanding of “firstborn” in this verse is either “favored status” or “inheritance.” Remember that the firstborn son had a favored status and received a double portion of the inheritance. So both of these ideas are already inherent in the term.

In this sense, the phrase “church of the firstborn” likely refers to those who have received the inheritance. In other words, it’s referring to those who, because they have placed their faith in Jesus and belong to him, receive exclusive spiritual blessings that are not available to those who are not in the church.

This view makes more sense than anything resembling “first in line”.

Revelation 1:5 says,

and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood—

This is the last occurrence of the term “firstborn” in the Bible and it’s the one occurrence that most resembles the usage of Colossians, especially Colossians 1:18.

So what does this mean?

Jehovah’s Witnesses will likely argue for the interpretation that they hold for Colossians 1:18, namely that this means that Jesus is the first to overcome death, that Jesus is “first in line”.

But given the context, noting that John follows this phrase by saying that Jesus is the RULER of the kings of the earth, it makes more sense that John is using the term to communicate that Jesus is the one who is preeminent over death. In other words, Jesus rules over death, just as he rules over the kings of earth.

It bears repeating that Jesus was not born. So what would be the purpose of using the term “firstborn” if it does not apply to Jesus as it applied to Reuben, Manasseh and the dozens of other references that referred to the first offspring of some person?

In other words, the term firstborn, in a majority of cases, was used to identify the first offspring of a person in order to distinguish that person from other siblings who were not first. But since Jesus has no spiritual “siblings”, there is no need to use the term “firstborn” to distinguish him from rival siblings.

Clearly, John is pointing to Jesus’ special status. To conclude otherwise is to stretch or twist the context of these passages and phrases to unnatural and incoherent meanings.

Now let’s circle back to the Colossians verses that use the term “firstborn”.

What we’ve seen in every use of the term “firstborn” is that it most often refers to “first offspring”. But it never means “first offspring” when the term “firstborn” is used in conjunction with a non-person or non-mammal. In those cases, some form of preeminence, rule or supremacy is meant.

One thing that is clear is that there are no verses where the term firstborn means “first in line”. Yes, it means “first offspring” when speaking of a person or animal that bears offspring in the natural way. However, when “firstborn” is coupled with a non-person, the idea of “first in line” is never in view.

Yet that is exactly what the Jehovah’s Witnesses contend that it means in these two verses in Colossians. They argue that Colossians 1:15 means that Jesus was first in line to be created and Colossians 1:18 means that Jesus was first in line to be raised from the dead.

Their argument is that this understanding is demanded because it is the normal meaning when you see the term.

But, as we’ve seen, it’s only normal when the term is used to refer to “first offspring”. There is no instance where it carries that meaning apart from the term “firstborn” being connected with a living person or an animal such as “cattle” or “herd”.

When the term “firstborn” is used apart from a living person or animal, it always has the meaning of preeminence, supremacy or highest rank.

This rendering makes the most sense in Colossians, especially when you look at the context and realize that Paul is seeking to demonstrate that “in everything Christ might have supremacy.”

If Paul’s argument is designed to show that Christ will have supremacy in everything (verse 18), then it makes sense that he is going to support that argument by showing that Jesus has supremacy over creation and over death.

So why do Jehovah’s Witnesses still insist that “firstborn”, when attributed to Jesus, means “first in line” when it’s never used that way in any other example?

The answer is that they have manufactured this definition as a way to maintain their theological view that Jesus is a created being.

Jehovah’s Witnesses demonstrate the most egregious form of the Bible study error known as eisegesis, which means to “read into the text.”

In simple terms, the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not approach the text in order to inform their theology. Instead, they add phrases to the text and change the normal meaning of words in order to conform the text to their theology.

It’s clear that, as it relates to Jesus, Paul is using the term “firstborn” in the sense of “preeminence”. This is how the word is used in cases that clearly don’t refer to “first offspring.”

Additionally, the context supports the idea of “preeminence” as the meaning of firstborn.

Paul states that Jesus is the “firstborn of creation” which means Jesus is preeminent over creation.

In the verses that follow, Paul states that Jesus is the creator of all things. So Jesus is preeminent over creation because he is the creator.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses have to manufacture a meaning of firstborn to mean something like “first in line” in order to convince you that Paul is trying to tell you that Jesus is the first created being of Jehovah.

Yet if Paul was trying to communicate that Jesus was “first-created”, he would have used the Greek word “protoktisis” which literally means “first-created.”

That Paul didn’t use that word speaks volumes.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses then have to add the word “other” to the text four times in order to change the meaning of the text to show that Jesus is not really the creator as the original Greek text indicates.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses are like the person who tells a small lie to promote a false narrative but are then forced to create bigger lies in order to maintain the fabricated story.

They first had to offer up a definition for “firstborn” that is literally not used in any of the more than 100 occurrences of the term.

Then, to keep their narrative alive that Jesus is a created being, they have to add the word “other” to the passage four times. Their explanations and justifications for their interpretive choices get increasingly more complicated and logically convoluted in their effort to maintain their theological view.

The most direct, plain and understandable meaning of this passage is that Jesus is preeminent over creation because he is the creator. Additionally, Jesus is preeminent over death because he conquered death. All of this demonstrates that Jesus will come to have first place (i.e. preeminence) in everything!

No extra words and no uncommon and unnatural definitions are required to arrive at this understanding.

So we are back to my original premise in my first blog post, which is that the word “firstborn” does not mean what the Jehovah’s Witnesses think it means.

Jehovah’s Witnesses would do well to heed the advice of Inigo Montoya, who famously said,

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

Do you agree with the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ interpretation of Colossians 1;15 and Colossians 1:18 that the term “firstborn” should be understood as “first in line”? If so, how do you interpret the other passages that use “firstborn” in a context that doesn’t refer to “first offspring”?

Have you ever told a small lie that escalated into much bigger fabrications? What is the motivation for lying in the first place? What are the reasons a person might continue to promote a falsehood?

What are some examples you can think of where a person is so committed to their narrative that they resort to convoluted logic and distorted definitions in an attempt to justify their narrative?

If the term “firstborn” means “first in line” in Colossians, as Jehovah’s Witnesses assert, what exactly is the meaning of the phrase “firstborn from among the dead”? How does the idea of “first in line” apply to Jesus’ death?

Photo is a screenshot from the movie “The Princess Bride”

August 14, 2026

How Does Isaiah 44 Demonstrate that Jesus is God?

Isaiah 44

²⁴The LORD, your Redeemer and Creator, says: “I am the LORD, who made all things. I alone stretched out the heavens. By myself I made the earth and everything in it. (Isaiah 44:24, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

The lion’s share of verses in Isaiah 44 deal with the foolishness of idols, which I wrote about in my blog post “A Discourse on the Foolishness of Idols”.

However, at the end of Isaiah 44, the prophecy shifts as God gives His people hope regarding the future restoration of the holy city of Jerusalem, which has been decimated due to the fact that many of its inhabitants have been exiled to Babylon. It’s this later passage that I want to focus on in this post, specifically, the first verse in that section.

You’re probably asking, “how exactly does Isaiah 44 demonstrate that Jesus is God, especially since Jesus isn’t mentioned at all in the passage?”

That’s a good question. To answer that question, we must first look at a New Testament passage from Colossians 1.

Speaking of Jesus, Paul, in Colossians 1:16-17, says:

¹⁶For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. ¹⁷He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. (NIV)

The clear teaching of these verses is unmistakeable. Jesus is the creator of ALL things. As such, He CANNOT himself be a created thing. In addition, He is BEFORE all things, which means He existed before all things. That means He is eternal. Lastly, He holds all things together, which means He is all-powerful.

By every possible measure, these two verses unequivocally teach that Jesus is God, for He possesses attributes that only God possesses (eternality, omnipotence) and He performs acts that only God could perform, namely creating ALL things.

What’s interesting though is how this same passage is interpreted by the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Jehovah’s Witnesses do not use any of the standard Christian Bible translations that you’re probably familiar with. Instead, they have their own translation, The New World Translation (NWT), which renders Colossians 1:16-17 this way:

¹⁶ because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him. ¹⁷ Also, he is before all other things, and by means of him all other things were made to exist, (NWT)

Do you notice the differences between these two translations?

The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation inserts the word “other” into the text four times despite the fact that the word “other” is nowhere in the original Greek text. So why is this word inserted four times into the text when it’s not in the original Greek text?

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

It’s obvious that the Jehovah’s Witnesses add the word “other” multiple times in order to dilute the clear meaning of the original Greek text, which is that Jesus is the creator of ALL things.

Not only do the Jehovah’s Witnesses unjustifiably add the word “other” to the text, but they do so deceptively.

It’s customary in Bible translations to put any added word in brackets if isn’t in the original Greek text. When the reader sees a word in brackets, it’s a cue that the word is not original to the text but has been added by the translators for some reason, usually for readability.

The online version of the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation. Note that Colossians 1:16-17 does not have brackets around the four occurrences of the word “other” despite the fact that the word “other” appears nowhere in the original Greek text.

It is highly unusual that a translator would add a word to the translation that isn’t in the original Greek and NOT put it in brackets, especially when the addition of the word completely changes the meaning of the text. One can only conclude that the Jehovah’s Witnesses omit the brackets in order to deceive the average person, who will naturally assume that the Jehovah’s Witnesses version of the text accurately reflects what the original Greek text says.

The obvious teaching from Colossians 1:16-17 is uncomfortable to Jehovah’s Witnesses who are so committed to their doctrine that Jesus is a created being that they MUST add the word “other” in order to make the passage fit their doctrinal bias.

Now I’m certain that after I post this online, I’ll encounter many Jehovah’s Witnesses who will attempt to educate me on why it’s ok and even necessary for their translators to add the word “other” to this passage.

Their argument is that the Greek word “panta” can be translated “all other” in some contexts in order to make the reading more “smooth”. They will undoubtedly point to Luke 13:2 as an example where “panta” is translated as “all other Galileans” instead of just “all Galileans”.

While it’s true that panta can be translated as “all other” in some contexts, it’s not true that it can be translated “all other” whenever the word occurs. The general rule is that the addition of the word “other” is acceptable if it makes the verse more readable BUT DOES NOT CHANGE THE MEANING OF THE VERSE.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses violate this rule by adding the word “other” four times to Colossians 1:16-17 because that is the only way to make those two verses align with their teaching that Jesus is a created being.

So what does any of this have to do with Isaiah 44:24, which is supposed to be the subject of this devotional blog post?

I’m glad you asked.

Let’s assume for one moment that grammatically, the Jehovah’s Witnesses addition of the word “other” four times is linguistically allowed. It’s not, since the word appears nowhere in the original Greek text, but let’s just play along for the sake of argument.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses theological position is that Jehovah created Jesus and THEN Jesus created everything else (all other things).

But Isaiah 44:24 directly refutes this position, as Jehovah says:

I am the LORD, who made all things. I alone stretched out the heavens. By myself I made the earth and everything in it.

Did you catch that?

Jehovah says that he acted ALONE and created ALL THINGS by HIMSELF. He made the earth and EVERYTHING in it.

This directly refutes the Jehovah’s Witnesses doctrinal teaching that Jesus was first created and then created all “other” things.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses teaching is therefore logically false. In order to accept their teaching, one must ignore certain scriptures altogether while directly altering other verses in an effort to bring them into alignment with their prescribed viewpoint.

Nowhere in Scripture does it say that Jesus is created and then Jesus created all “other” things. This view is communicated only in the Jehovah’s Witnesses own translation (the NWT) which conveniently changes key verses in order to force them to agree with their heretical christological view.

Colossians 1:16-17 clearly teaches that all things were created by Jesus, which means he himself cannot be created. Adding the word “other” becomes problematic for Jehovah’s Witnesses as it means they must either deny the clear teaching of Isaiah 44:24 or try to explain it using some other kind of pretzel logic.

The problem for Jehovah’s Witnesses is that they have created so many doctrinal pretzels with their edited translation that their isn’t enough theological mustard available in the world to help us choke down what they’re serving.

Reflection

If Jesus created all “other” things, how is it possible that Jehovah alone created all things by himself?

How do you explain the fact that all major Bible translations omit the word “other” from Colossians 1:16-17 but the Jehovah’s Witnesses add the word four times?

If Jesus is indeed the creator of all things, and is indeed before all things, what does that imply about his nature?

If Jesus is a created being, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim, how does Jesus secure salvation for humankind? In other words, how is it possible that a being who is not eternal and who is not infinitely holy can secure forgiveness and redemption for mankind?

Photo Created with Grok

December 17, 2025December 18, 2025

Why Do Jews Reject Jesus as Their Messiah?

Isaiah 53

¹Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?

²He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.

³He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

⁴Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.

⁵But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.

⁶We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

⁷He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

⁸By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken.

⁹He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

¹⁰Yet it was the LORD’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

¹¹After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities.

¹²Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:1-12, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

I saw a post on X.com recently where an influential user listed what he considered the most significant in human history.

Who would you put at the top of that list?

Regardless of your religious views, I think it’s hard to argue against Jesus being the most important figure in all of human history. Incidentally, this user listed Genghis Khan first. Jesus was second on his list.

Jesus and his teachings have literally changed the world. And yet, the Jewish people, his own people, largely reject him. Why is that?

If you happened to be an Israelite living in first century Palestine, you eagerly expected and longed for the Messiah.

The nation of Israel was hundreds of years past its glory days, when it was an independent and respected nation. Now, it was merely one of the many provinces that were subject to Roman rule.

The prophets had foretold of a Messiah, who would one day come and deliver his people and restore the nation to its former glory. At least that was the hope.

Unfortunately, the biblical version of the Messiah did not match the expectations of most Jewish people, who were hoping for a political and military leader who would drive out the Romans, just as the many judges had driven out their oppressors in the early years of their nation’s formation.

This passage in Isaiah 53 gives a much different picture and description of the Messiah compared to the peoples’ expectations.

According to Isaiah, the coming Messiah would not be a person who would stand out. There was nothing physical about the Messiah that would draw people to him. He would be decidedly “normal”.

While the people were expecting a William Wallace type military hero to rally the troops and drive out their Gentile occupiers, this passage shows that the Messiah’s mission would be much different.

Yes, the Messiah would deliver his people; he just wouldn’t deliver them from the enemy they were thinking he would.

Verse 6 lays out the issue – we ALL have gone astray. As a result, the purpose of the Messiah would be to take the iniquity of people upon Himself.

Verse 10 is key because it explicitly states that the Messiah would be a guilt offering. Every Israelite knew that they had to make regular offerings at the temple in order to make atonement for sin. This verse indicates that it’s the Messiah himself whose life would be a guilt offering for the people.

There are a number of verses in this passage that explicitly point to Jesus.

Verse 5 provides one of the clearest references to Jesus’ brutal execution when it says that he was “pierced” for our transgressions. In John’s description of Jesus’ death, we learn that the Roman soldiers were eager to hasten the death of their victims because of the impending Sabbath (see John 19:31-34). It was common to break the legs of those being crucified, rendering it impossible for them to push themselves up to expand their lungs and breathe. Hence, the breaking of the legs brought a swift end to the slow tortures of crucifixion as the victim would immediately die of asphyxiation.

In the case of Jesus. the centurion realized that Jesus was already dead so there was no need to break his legs. Instead, he decided to take his spear and pierce Jesus’ side.

Verse 9 indicates that the Messiah would be assigned a grave for the wicked and the rich. In Jesus’ case, his body was set to be dumped in a pit with other common criminals. But instead, a rich person, Joseph of Arimathea, petitioned Pilate for the body of Jesus, whom he buried in a tomb that he had recently purchased.

Other prophecies in this passage are also fulfilled by Jesus. Verse 7 indicates that the Messiah would be silent when confronted by his accusers. All of the gospel accounts indicate that Jesus, when pressed by Pilate and the authorities, did not defend himself, but chose to willingly give himself up in order to go to the cross to be crucified.

To this day, the Jewish people largely reject Jesus as their Messiah, despite the fact that he fulfills all of the prophecies about the coming Messiah. In fact, there are a number of prophecies concerning the Messiah that only Jesus could have fulfilled.

If you don’t understand the mission of the Messiah, you will reject him.

The Jewish people reject Jesus as their Messiah because he doesn’t fit their hope and expectation of what the Messiah’s purpose would be. Instead of delivering his people from their political oppressors and restoring the glory of their nation, the Messiah’s purpose was first and foremost, to deliver people from the penalty of sin.

Non-Jews reject Jesus simply because they fail to see their need for a Savior. In this case, you may see Jesus as a significant figure in human history, but not as significant as someone like Genghis Khan who wielded tremendous political and military power to conquer the entire known world.

We would all do well to heed the words of Isaiah 53:6:

⁶We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Reflection

What is your understanding of the purpose of the Messiah?

In what ways do you see Jesus matching the description that prophets like Isaiah gave of the coming Messiah?

Who do you know that rejects Jesus as their Messiah and Savior? What are their reasons for rejecting Jesus ?

Why do you think Jewish people, by and large, still reject Jesus, despite clear passages like Isaiah 53 that show Jesus to be a “Suffering Servant” instead of a military conqueror?

Photo by MBVisign: https://www.pexels.com/photo/genghis-khan-statue-in-close-up-photography-6466768/

March 4, 2025March 25, 2025

Whatever Became of Sin?

Isaiah 6

¹In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord. He was sitting on a lofty throne, and the train of his robe filled the Temple. ²Hovering around him were mighty seraphim, each with six wings. With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with the remaining two they flew. ³In a great chorus they sang, “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD Almighty! The whole earth is filled with his glory!” ⁴The glorious singing shook the Temple to its foundations, and the entire sanctuary was filled with smoke.

⁵Then I said, “My destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race. Yet I have seen the King, the LORD Almighty!”

⁶Then one of the seraphim flew over to the altar, and he picked up a burning coal with a pair of tongs. ⁷He touched my lips with it and said, “See, this coal has touched your lips. Now your guilt is removed, and your sins are forgiven.”

⁸Then I heard the Lord asking, “Whom should I send as a messenger to my people? Who will go for us?”

And I said, “Lord, I’ll go! Send me.”

(Isaiah 6:1-8, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Have you noticed that sin is not talked about that much anymore? It’s almost like it’s a dirty word – too offensive to mention to those outside of a church setting.

In 1973, Psychologist Karl Menninger published an important work, “Whatever Became of Sin?” in which he reflected on the diminishing concept of sin in our modern culture. His thesis was that the concept of sin as immoral behavior was being replaced by medical and psychological labels that reduced moral responsibility.

Though Menninger draws upon Christian as well as other religious traditions to support his thesis, his book is not a biblical exposition on the subject. Still, his thoughts on this issue, which were printed over 50 years ago, now seem prophetic in nature.

So whatever became of sin? Why has the concept diminished in our culture and what are the reasons for its demise?

The 6th chapter of Isaiah provides an answer for us. This chapter marks a pivotal moment in the life and calling of the prophet. In this chapter, Isaiah has a vision of the Lord in all of His splendor and glory.

The opening verse gives us a time stamp to date the events that follow. Uzziah had been the king of Israel for 52 years, a full life-time for many of his subjects. While Uzziah was one of the better kings of Judah early on, things did not end well for him. Toward the end of his reign, he stubbornly tried to enter the temple and perform rites that were reserved only for the priests, and as a result, he contracted leprosy and was forced to finish out his days in exile.

At Uzziah’s death, with no king to rule, Isaiah goes to the temple and experiences a vision of the true king, the Lord God Himself. Isaiah catches a rare glimpse of God as He really is, a picture of His absolute holiness.

What’s interesting about this encounter is the text says that when Isaiah sees the Lord in His holiness, he cries out, “my destruction is sealed, for I am a sinful man and a member of a sinful race.”

Some translations use the word “ruined” or “undone” to describe Isaiah’s emotional response.

Isaiah, when confronted with the perfect righteousness of God almighty, is brought to his knees as he recognizes his own sinfulness in light of holy God.

One of the reasons sin is not talked about much these days is because we don’t talk about God’s holiness so much these days. These two concepts are intertwined and interdependent – we don’t see sin so much if we don’t see God as holy and righteous.

Over the last 50 years or more, our culture has done all that it can to soften God’s divine attributes to make Him more palatable to our own personal preferences. In short, we’ve made God less like God and more like us.

For the atheist, dismissing God altogether means that there is no objective anchor or standard by which actions can be judged or labeled as “sin”.

“Who are you to tell me that my behaviors are wrong?” is a common refrain.

In many Christian circles, especially among progressives, God is not so much eliminated as much as He’s recreated or reimagined in a way that better fits the person’s lifestyle choices and behaviors.

One of the ways we often see this is in the elevation of the kind-hearted, compassionate New Testament version of God that we see in Jesus while dismissing or diminishing the “judgmental, ego-maniacal” Old Testament picture of God that seems too harsh and exacting. Some may go so far as to claim that the Bible describes two completely different Gods. I wrote recently about this in my blog post, “Is the Old Testament God a Bloodthirsty, Genocidal Psychopath?”

In light of the stark differences between the Old Testament perception of God and the New Testament portrayal of God in the person of Jesus, one inevitably chooses the deity that is more preferable and less restrictive to their own life choices.

The problem with this approach, as I outlined in my blog post, “Can You Make the Bible an Idol?” is it essentially results in a form of idol worship, where my image of God is created according to my personal choices and inclincations instead of forming a picture of God that represents the fullness of how He has been revealed to us through His holy word.

If we want to talk about sin and the need for a savior, we must highlight God’s absolute holiness and righteousness. If a person doesn’t see God as infinitely holy, they’re more likely to overlook or dismiss their sinfulness as mere character flaws or innocent mistakes. If sin is not seen as an egregious offense against God’s very nature, there is less likelihood of coming to the realization that we are utterly lost and in need of a divine savior.

So whatever became of sin? It fell out of favor, just as God’s holiness has.

Reflection

Describe a time when you encountered the power and presence of God in your life as Isaiah did. In other words, when have you had an “Isaiah” moment with God? What was that like emotionally?

What is your concept of sin? How would you define it? In what ways have you seen our culture minimize sin and personal responsibility?

In what ways have you created an image of God that is not fully reflective of how God has revealed Himself in both the Old and New Testaments?

How can. you ensure that your view of God is not just a personal image that you created to suit your own preferences?

Photo by Dave Lowe

March 8, 2021August 11, 2026

A Discourse on the Foolishness of Idols

Isaiah 44

⁹How foolish are those who manufacture idols to be their gods. These highly valued objects are really worthless. They themselves are witnesses that this is so, for their idols neither see nor know. No wonder those who worship them are put to shame. ¹⁰Who but a fool would make his own god—an idol that cannot help him one bit! ¹¹All who worship idols will stand before the LORD in shame, along with all these craftsmen—mere humans—who claim they can make a god. Together they will stand in terror and shame.

¹²The blacksmith stands at his forge to make a sharp tool, pounding and shaping it with all his might. His work makes him hungry and thirsty, weak and faint. ¹³Then the wood-carver measures and marks out a block of wood, takes the tool, and carves the figure of a man. Now he has a wonderful idol that cannot even move from where it is placed! ¹⁴He cuts down cedars; he selects the cypress and the oak; he plants the cedar in the forest to be nourished by the rain. ¹⁵And after his care, he uses part of the wood to make a fire to warm himself and bake his bread. Then—yes, it’s true—he takes the rest of it and makes himself a god for people to worship! He makes an idol and bows down and praises it! ¹⁶He burns part of the tree to roast his meat and to keep himself warm. ¹⁷Then he takes what’s left and makes his god: a carved idol! He falls down in front of it, worshiping and praying to it. “Rescue me!” he says. “You are my god!”

¹⁸Such stupidity and ignorance! Their eyes are closed, and they cannot see. Their minds are shut, and they cannot think. ¹⁹The person who made the idol never stops to reflect, “Why, it’s just a block of wood! I burned half of it for heat and used it to bake my bread and roast my meat. How can the rest of it be a god? Should I bow down to worship a chunk of wood?” ²⁰The poor, deluded fool feeds on ashes. He is trusting something that can give him no help at all. Yet he cannot bring himself to ask, “Is this thing, this idol that I’m holding in my hand, a lie?” (Isaiah 44:9-20, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

In this chapter of Isaiah, the prophet goes to considerable lengths to explain the process and foolishness of fashioning an idol out of wood and then worshiping it as your god.

Who in their right mind would take a block of wood, using some of it to heat their home and cook their food while fashioning an idol out of the remaining portion, which they then worship as their god? It makes ZERO sense. Isaiah goes so far as to call it “stupidity and ignorance!”

Why would people do this?

For starters, the people living in the Ancient Near East did not have the same technological and informational understanding that we do today. It was quite common to believe in a regional deity as a supernatural being who had to be appeased or worshiped in order to gain favor and blessings that would make life livable.

For example, if there was drought, the people would appeal to the regional deity to bring rain. If crops were failing, the regional deity would be appeased in order to bring a favorable crop.

The god you worshiped and to whom you appealed was largely a function of where you lived, as it was a commonly held belief that there were many deities, each of whom ruled over a particular territory.

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

The fact that the Israelites continually forsook the Lord in order to worship Baal was because Baal was the god of the Canaanites, the people who occupied the land when the Israelites arrived on the scene. Though God had instructed the Israelites to remove the Canaanites from the land, the Jews never fully expelled the Canaanite religious belief system, which became a constant thorn in their side.

Today, there are still cultures that worship regional deities but most of the modern world sees this as foolishness, just as Isaiah has described. But that doesn’t mean that the modern world doesn’t still worship idols. We do. We are just much more sophisticated in how we do it.

What really is an idol anyway, and why is it wrong to worship an idol?

An idol could be defined as an object of substitutionary trust.

Think of the 10 commandments. The first commandment, which is found in Exodus 20:3 is “Do not worship any other gods besides me”. But before the Lord shares the first commandment, He prefaces it by saying, “I am the Lord your God who rescued you from slavery in Egypt.”

At the core of this commandment is a recognition of who provides for you and who sustains your very life. It’s a remembrance and acknowledgement of all that God has done for you, including deliverance from slavery.

When the Israelites worshiped idols, they were essentially saying that God was NOT the one who rescued them; God is NOT the one who sustains them: God is NOT the one who delivers them or protects them or cares for them.

We do the same thing – we just attribute our trust to things other than carved wooden idols.

If an idol is an object of substitutionary trust, what are people today most likely to put their trust in instead of God?

Themselves!

The most common idol that people trust for their success, deliverance and provision is themselves. Many people have become their own gods. They alone determine their destiny. They alone can provide for themselves and their family. They alone are the masters of their own fate. They alone determine what they believe to be right and wrong.

In our modern culture, we no longer take a block of wood and use some of it for heating while fashioning a portion into an idol that we then worship. Instead, we simply reject God as the ultimate standard of right and wrong, while denying God’s involvement in our lives, His sovereignty in the world and His right to receive worship as the one who created us.

In short, we magnify and glorify ourselves and others, who serve as our means of trust to provide for us, deliver us, protect us, and bless us! It may not be as obvious as creating our god from a block of wood, but nonetheless, it’s just as foolish!

Reflection

What do you think of the author’s definition of an idol as a substitutionary object of trust? Do you agree with it? Why or why not?

What are the things that you are most likely to trust to provide for you, care for you and deliver you in place of God?

What can you do to ensure that God has His rightful place in your life and that you worship Him and Him alone? What steps can you take; what practices can you implement?

Photo by Nathan Lemon on Unsplash

February 3, 2021July 8, 2026

The Whip of God’s Anger!

Isaiah 10

⁵“Destruction is certain for Assyria, the whip of my anger. Its military power is a club in my hand. ⁶Assyria will enslave my people, who are a godless nation. It will plunder them, trampling them like dirt beneath its feet. ⁷But the king of Assyria will not know that it is I who sent him. He will merely think he is attacking my people as part of his plan to conquer the world. ⁸He will say, ‘Each of my princes will soon be a king, ruling a conquered land. ⁹We will destroy Calno just as we did Carchemish. Hamath will fall before us as Arpad did. And we will destroy Samaria just as we did Damascus. ¹⁰Yes, we have finished off many a kingdom whose gods were far greater than those in Jerusalem and Samaria. ¹¹So when we have defeated Samaria and her gods, we will destroy Jerusalem with hers.’”

¹²After the Lord has used the king of Assyria to accomplish his purposes in Jerusalem, he will turn against the king of Assyria and punish him—for he is proud and arrogant. ¹³He boasts, “By my own power and wisdom I have won these wars. By my own strength I have captured many lands, destroyed their kings, and carried off their treasures. ¹⁴By my greatness I have robbed their nests of riches and gathered up kingdoms as a farmer gathers eggs. No one can even flap a wing against me or utter a peep of protest.”

¹⁵Can the ax boast greater power than the person who uses it? Is the saw greater than the person who saws? Can a whip strike unless a hand is moving it? Can a cane walk by itself?

¹⁶Listen now, king of Assyria! Because of all your evil boasting, the Lord, the LORD Almighty, will send a plague among your proud troops, and a flaming fire will ignite your glory. ¹⁷The LORD, the Light of Israel and the Holy One, will be a flaming fire that will destroy them. In a single night he will burn those thorns and briers, the Assyrians. ¹⁸Assyria’s vast army is like a glorious forest, yet it will be destroyed. The LORD will completely destroy Assyria’s warriors, and they will waste away like sick people in a plague. ¹⁹Only a few from all that mighty army will survive—so few that a child could count them! (Isaiah 10:5-19, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

Assyria is an ancient nation that at one time was THE biggest, baddest empire around.

As is typical of big, bad empires, they conquered other nations, took captives, plundered and slaughtered people and generally enforced their will wherever they went.

In this chapter of Isaiah, God describes the Assyrians as “the whip of my anger.” Its mighty military power is described by God as “a club in my hand.”

God explains that He is going to use the Assyrians as His tool to punish the Israelites, His people who have continually forsaken Him, despite many warnings about the consequences of abandoning the Lord for other gods.

After the Lord has used the Assyrians to accomplish His purposes, He explains that He will then punish the Assyrians.

Why would He punish the Assyrians if they were simply God’s tool to accomplish His plan of destruction against Israel?

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

Verses 12-15 give the answer. The reason Assyria will be punished is because of pride and arrogance. The Assyrian king won’t acknowledge that He is subordinate to God and that the Lord was simply using Him as His vessel of discipline. Instead, the Assyrian king will embrace the belief that everything he’s accomplished is because of his superior nature over those whom he’s subjugated.

The king of Assyria will essentially make himself out to be a god as he mentions all the gods he has conquered from the various lands he now controls.

God reminds the listener that Assyria is no different than an ax, a saw or a cane. They are all just instruments that are completely useless unless there is an active agent to employ the tool for its purpose.

Assyria, at one time, WAS the big bad empire bullying all the surrounding nations of the Ancient Near East. WAS! Somewhere between 612 and 605 BC, Assyria was destroyed. They were overtaken by the next big, bad empire – the Babylonians, but not before God fulfilled His promise of using the Assyrians to discipline and punish His people who had forsaken Him.

Reflection

Under what circumstances are you tempted to take credit for actions and outcomes that are ultimately orchestrated by God?

The Assyrians were supplanted by the Babylonians, who were supplanted by the Persians, who were supplanted by the Greeks, who were supplanted by the Romans, etc. Why do you suppose empires come and go? What conditions do you think would be necessary for an empire to last?

What do you think is the difference between pride/arrogance/boasting and confidence and self-assurance? How can you ensure that you’re confident in yourself without being boastful or proud?

Photo by Jamil Kabar on Unsplash

January 29, 2021February 21, 2025

Who Knows?

Isaiah 8

¹¹The LORD has said to me in the strongest terms: “Do not think like everyone else does. ¹²Do not be afraid that some plan conceived behind closed doors will be the end of you. ¹³Do not fear anything except the LORD Almighty. He alone is the Holy One. If you fear him, you need fear nothing else. ¹⁴He will keep you safe. But to Israel and Judah he will be a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall. And for the people of Jerusalem he will be a trap that entangles them. ¹⁵Many of them will stumble and fall, never to rise again. Many will be captured.”

¹⁶I will write down all these things as a testimony of what the LORD will do. I will entrust it to my disciples, who will pass it down to future generations. ¹⁷I will wait for the LORD to help us, though he has turned away from the people of Israel. My only hope is in him. ¹⁸I and the children the LORD has given me have names that reveal the plans the LORD Almighty has for his people. ¹⁹So why are you trying to find out the future by consulting mediums and psychics? Do not listen to their whisperings and mutterings. Can the living find out the future from the dead? Why not ask your God?

²⁰“Check their predictions against my testimony,” says the LORD. “If their predictions are different from mine, it is because there is no light or truth in them. ²¹My people will be led away as captives, weary and hungry. And because they are hungry, they will rage and shake their fists at heaven and curse their king and their God. ²²Wherever they look, there will be trouble and anguish and dark despair. They will be thrown out into the darkness.” (Isaiah 8:11-22, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

We are obsessed with the future. It seems like half of the movies and TV shows being released these days depict some sort of dystopian future.

Doomsday prophets seem to fill the airwaves and the media platforms with predictions of the earth’s and mankind’s demise.

My e-mail inbox is flooded with people who want me to pay them for financial advice because they claim to be better than others at predicting the future of the stock market or the technology sector, or the energy industry, or the….well, you get the picture.

The truth is that we are not that great at predicting the future. It’s interesting to watch older movies that are set in a future that is equivalent to our modern day. It’s never close to being right.

Sure, we can plan for the future and we can take all the relevant information at our disposal and make educated guesses about what we think will happen, but there are just too many variables for anyone to be able to make accurate predictions about the future with any degree of consistency.

This is why God, via the prophet Isaiah, asks the question in verse 19:

So why are you trying to find out the future by consulting mediums and psychics?

God is the only person who can tell the future, and that’s because He’s sovereign over everything, including time.

If you’re comparing track records, nobody even comes close as He’s 100% accurate.

Some of our obsession with the future is due to fear. We’re afraid of what might happen to us, to our loved ones and to our community. If this is you, listen again to these words from the prophet Isaiah to the people of God:

Do not be afraid that some plan conceived behind closed doors will be the end of you. Do not fear anything except the LORD Almighty. He alone is the Holy One. If you fear him, you need fear nothing else. He will keep you safe… (Isaiah 8:12-14a, NLT)

Reflection

When have you been tempted to rely on a psychic or medium for advice or information?

When you think of the future, what fears do you have?

What are some practical tips or ideas that will enable you to connect with the Lord and trust Him for your future?

Photo by Dave Lowe