1In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 3The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.
5For to which of the angels did God ever say,
“You are my Son; today I have become your Father”?
Or again,
“I will be his Father, and he will be my Son”
6And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”
7In speaking of the angels he says,
“He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire.”
8But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.”
10He also says,
“In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11They will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment.
12You will roll them up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same, and your years will never end.”
13To which of the angels did God ever say,
“Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool
14Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation? (Hebrews 1:1-14, NIV)
The Daily DAVEotional
Did you know that the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus is actually the archangel Michael?
Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is Jehovah’s first created being, and that after creating Jesus, Jehovah used Jesus to create everything else.
Additionally, Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that as a created being, Jesus is actually the archangel Michael, who assumed the name Jesus when he became a man in order to pay the ransom that was required to redeem mankind by reversing the disastrous consequences of Adam’s sin.
The first chapter of Hebrews provides a sound refutation to the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ doctrine that Jesus is an exalted angel as the author effectively argues that Jesus is much better than the angels. In the process, this passage provides even more evidence for the traditional Christian doctrine that Jesus is God.
I previously wrote about the first 3 verses of Hebrews 1 in my blog post, “Better Than…” which sought to explain the purpose of the writing of the book of Hebrews, which was to demonstrate the superiority of Jesus over angels, Moses, the Old Covenant and the entire Jewish legal system, all in an effort to convince Jewish Christians not to revert back to the old Jewish legal system as a means of attempting to gain favor with God.
In this first chapter, the writer to the Hebrews provides at least 6 reasons why Jesus is better than the angels.
REASON #1 – Jesus is a son, the angels are not
In verse 5, the writer quotes two different Old Testament verses (Psalm 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14) to show that Jesus was the promised Messiah who fulfilled the prophecies related to the Davidic covenant.
In the Old Testament, angels are often referenced as “sons of God”, but angels are never referenced as “God’s Son”. Jesus is distinctly unique in this respect. Hence, he is greater than the angels.
REASON #2 – The angels worship Jesus
In verse 6, the angels are directly commanded to worship Jesus. Since the lesser always worships the greater, Jesus must be greater than the angels.
Incidentally, this verse provides still more evidence for Jesus’ divine nature for it’s clear in Scripture that only God is to be worshiped (see Exodus 20:3-5, Exodus 34:14, Deuteronomy 6:13 and Matthew 4:10). Also, in Revelation 22:8-9, John falls down in worship to an angel who had shown him the things he was seeing. John is rebuked by the angel who tells John,
“Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God.”
If only God is to be worshiped and the angels are commanded to worship Jesus, it not only confirms that Jesus is better than the angels but provides strong evidence that Jesus must possess the nature of God.
REASON #3 – The angels are God’s ministers but the Son is God, ruling with righteousness
The writer to the Hebrews explains that angels are ministering spirits whose purpose is to serve those who will inherit salvation (verse 14). By contrast, verses 8-9 show that Jesus’ purpose is to reign in righteousness.
These verses further demonstrate the divine nature of Jesus as the son is referred to as “God” in verse 8 and again in verse 9.
The writer also attributes to Jesus a throne that will last forever and ever. Jesus is depicted as reigning forever on a throne of righteousness while being called “God”.
Jesus is indeed better than the angels because Jesus is God!
REASON #4 – Jesus is creator of the heavens and the earth
The writer states in verse 2 that God “made the world” through Jesus and that Jesus “upholds all things by the word of his power.”
Later, in verse 10, Jesus is referred to as “Lord” by God himself and is demonstrated to be the author of all creation. Jesus “laid the foundations of the earth” and “the heavens are the work of your [Jesus’] hands!”
Jesus is the creator while angels are created. Hence, Jesus is better than the angels.
REASON #5 – The creation perishes, but the creator, Jesus, remains
Because we are finite creatures, we tend to look at the world and see it as permanent and unchangeable. But the truth is, the world and the universe is decaying and energy is running down. The writer to the Hebrews tells us that the creation will eventually wear out just like an old garment, but Jesus remains the same. This is strong evidence for his immutability, which further buttresses the case for his divinity.
Verse 12 says that the creation not only changes but it will come to an end. On the other hand, Jesus’ years will NOT come to an end because he is eternal.
So Jesus is both immutable and eternal, both characteristics which demonstrate divinity.
REASON #6 – Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father and all enemies are subjected to him
Verse 14 shows that angels are ministering spirits who come before God and serve him while Jesus is seated at the right hand of God with his enemies under his feet.
This demonstrates that Jesus has ultimate authority and sovereignty over every living thing. Being seated at the right hand of God demonstrates his equality with God, which is yet another evidence for his divinity.
This entire passage clearly shows that Jesus is greater than the angels, and yet, Jehovah’s Witnesses contend that Jesus actually IS an angel.
If Jesus is better than angels, as the writer to the Hebrews clearly demonstrates, how is it possible that he himself is an angel?
Jesus is better than the angels not just because he has a higher position, as Jehovah’s Witnesses may argue, but Jesus is better than the angels because he has a better nature.
Jesus is divine. He is God. Therefore, he cannot be the archangel Michael.
More blog posts related to Jehovah’s Witness Beliefs
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 do you think it means when it says that Jesus is the exact representation of the nature of God? In what ways does this description of Jesus argue against the idea that Jesus is an angel?
Do you think an angel can have the attributes and qualities that the writer of Hebrews assigns to Jesus? For example, do you think it’s possible that an angel has the power to “uphold all things by the power of his word?” What descriptions about Jesus argue most strongly against Jesus being an angel?
If Jesus is actually the archangel Michael, why do you think God would command all the angels to worship him?
If only God is to be worshiped, which is clear from Scripture, what does it tell you about the nature of Jesus that God commands all the angels to worship him?
If Jesus actually is the archangel Michael, as Jehovah’s Witnesses assert, why would the writer of Hebrews not disclose that in this passage, especially when the whole purpose is to contrast Jesus with angels?
If Jesus is the archangel Michael, how do you interpret the verse that says,
“For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are my Son; today I have become your Father”?”
Wouldn’t the answer to this question obviously be “Michael. That is the angel to which God has said this”?
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?
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 Myfirstborn,
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”
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:
Jesus claimed that he and the Father are one which I argued was a clear claim of divinity by Jesus.
Jehovah’s Witnesses typically respond that Jesus was only claiming to be “one in purpose” with the Father – he was not claiming deity.
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.
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?
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?
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!”
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?
34Israel failed to destroy the nations in the land,
as the LORD had told them to.
35Instead, they mingled among the pagans
and adopted their evil customs.
36They worshiped their idols,
and this led to their downfall.
37They even sacrificed their sons
and their daughters to the demons.
38They shed innocent blood,
the blood of their sons and daughters.
By sacrificing them to the idols of Canaan,
they polluted the land with murder.
39They defiled themselves by their evil deeds,
and their love of idols was adultery in the LORD’s sight.
40That is why the LORD’s anger burned against his people,
and he abhorred his own special possession.
41He handed them over to pagan nations,
and those who hated them ruled over them.
42Their enemies crushed them
and brought them under their cruel power.
43Again and again he delivered them,
but they continued to rebel against him,
and they were finally destroyed by their sin.
44Even so, he pitied them in their distress
and listened to their cries.
45He remembered his covenant with them
and relented because of his unfailing love.
46He even caused their captors
to treat them with kindness.
47O LORD our God, save us!
Gather us back from among the nations,
so we can thank your holy name
and rejoice and praise you.
48Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel,
from everlasting to everlasting!
Let all the people say, “Amen!”
Praise the LORD!
(Psalm 106:34-48, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
Have you ever heard someone question the morality of God as He is portrayed in the Old Testament?
Perhaps you (or someone you know) have wondered if the Bible is actually describing two different gods, since God as He is depicted in the Old Testament seems so different than how He is portrayed in the New Testament in the person of Jesus.
Some might go so far as to deny the God of the Old Testament, using words like “blood-thirsty”, “genocidal” and even “psychopathic” to describe His behavior.
In a previous blog post entitled “Is the God of the Old Testament Petty“, I wrote about how some people view the Old Testament God as petty or jealous.
The bottom line is that many people simply cannot reconcile the actions of God in the Old Testament with the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament. How is it possible, the reasoning goes, that Jesus could teach about the need to love others while the God of the Old Testament routinely wipes out whole cultures and whimsically punishes people for no apparent reason? That doesn’t seem very loving. Ergo, many simply dismiss the Old Testament entirely since it paints a picture of God that is inconsistent with their view and understanding of who they think God is or should be.
The primary reason that people cannot reconcile the God of the Old Testament with the God of the New Testament (Jesus) is because they have created a caricature of each that is based on limited information and a false understanding of God’s nature.
These caricatures often set up the Old Testament God as being a bloodthirsty God of vengeance while depicting Jesus as mild-mannered and universally accepting of all peoples. It’s no wonder people are confused. Both versions and understandings of God are wrong and incomplete.
Regarding the God of the Old Testament, here are a few things people don’t often recognize:
First, God expelled the people who inhabited the land that Israel occupied because they were extremely wicked. This Psalm passage says that they even sacrificed their sons and daughters to the idols of Canaan. The land was desecrated and they defiled themselves.
Should God not bring punishment on the wicked?
The Israelites ultimately adopted the same wicked practices of the people they displaced, and despite God’s numerous warnings, their lack of repentance led to the same fate – punishment.
The second thing people don’t realize about the Old Testament is that the events portrayed extend out over a span of thousands of years. Yes, there is judgment, but it is not the constant rampage that people have depicted, as if God is out of control and in a continual fit of rage.
The Old Testament God is actually quite patient and reserved, if you think about the time frame related to the events. Over, and over and over and over again, God warns his people about impending judgment and punishment that will come as a result of their sin and wickedness. He provides many, many, many opportunities over years and years and years for them to humble themselves and repent. And yet, he doesn’t just talk a big talk. He delivers on his promised retribution.
The perception of Jesus, however, is that he doesn’t exhibit any of the out-of-control jealousy and rage that the Old Testament God does. Jesus is seemingly patient and kind, without a mean bone in his body. Jesus is often seen as someone who exhibits the pacifism of Ghandi, the esoteric teachings and pithy proverbs of Buddha and the generous giving spirit of Santa Claus, all at once.
But this caricature of Jesus is also false and incomplete.
Jesus affirmed the teachings of the Old Testament as being the authoritative words of God (see John 5:39, Matthew 5:17 and Luke 24:44-46). Additionally, Jesus quoted from the Old Testament and referenced many of the stories as if they were real. There is no indication that Jesus disputed any of the stories, writings or teachings of the Old Testament. If Jesus is so different than the God of the Old Testament, in terms of their nature and purpose, wouldn’t we expect Jesus to note that? Shouldn’t we expect that Jesus would point out the flaws in the Old Testament version of God and demonstrate where and how He is superior? He doesn’t.
In addition, the idea that Jesus is a kind, grandfatherly figure who never utters a harsh word is also false. Jesus had many harsh words, particularly for the religious elites of the day. Jesus demonstrated kindness and gentleness to those who were humble and those who were in despair, but for those who were arrogant and thought of themselves as sinless, Jesus often took a different tone – one of rebuke.
Jesus came to the earth to offer humanity the opportunity to partake in the kingdom of God, which required Him to go to the cross and secure payment for the sins of the world. It is clear that Jesus’ first advent was not as judge, but as a prophet and priest.
However, Jesus himself acknowledged and taught that He would come again, but this time, He would be coming as a conquering king, bringing judgment to the world. This is most clear in his extended discourse on the future in Matthew 24 and Matthew 25, but also in Revelation 19:11-21, which depicts Jesus on a white horse with the armies of heaven behind him as he defeats his enemies.
Jesus is in perfect alignment with God as He is portrayed in the Old Testament. He claimed to be sent from the Father and He also affirmed their unity of purpose.
Much more could be said to demonstrate this but that is beyond the scope of this limited blog post.
Suffice it to say, the idea that the God of the Old Testament is a vile, evil, rageaholic, while Jesus is Mr. Rogers on steroids is a false caricature that is based on limited information and personal preferences rather than an accurate reading and understanding of the Biblical texts.
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
How would you respond to someone who says the God of the Old Testament is a different god than Jesus?
How have you reconciled in your heart and mind the differences in the Old Testament depiction of God and the New Testament portrayal of Jesus?
In what ways do you think your views and understanding of God might be deficient or incomplete?
What steps do you think you and others can take to reconcile the supposed differences between the God of the Old Testament and the person of Jesus?
1The heavens tell of the glory of God. The skies display his marvelous craftsmanship.
2Day after day they continue to speak; night after night they make him known.
3They speak without a sound or a word; their voice is silent in the skies;
4yet their message has gone out to all the earth, and their words to all the world. The sun lives in the heavens where God placed it.
5It bursts forth like a radiant bridegroom after his wedding. It rejoices like a great athlete eager to run the race.
6The sun rises at one end of the heavens and follows its course to the other end. Nothing can hide from its heat. (Psalm 19:1-6, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
One of the great gifts that 2020 gave us all is the phrase, “Follow the Science”! (#Sarcasm)
What does it mean exactly to “follow the science”? What is science?
Science is a method of determining how the natural world around us functions based on repeated observations and experimentation. If you make enough observations, you begin to notice patterns. If a pattern is established, you can develop a hypothesis regarding the natural order of the physical universe. Further observations and testing will either substantiate the hypothesis or refute it.
So to “follow the science” really just means that one should follow the evidence or the data to its logical conclusion.
In Psalm 19, David is following the science. David gazes wonderfully on the celestial beauty in the skies. Based on his own repeated observations and the observations of others over thousands of years, David concludes that the heavens are the result of a magnificent creator. David sees the design of the universe and assumes that it must have a designer. Have you ever seen something that looked designed and assumed that it came into existence without a designer?
Philosophers call this argument the teleological argument for God’s existence, which basically says that because the universe is designed, it must have a designer.
Atheists and skeptics have argued over the years that the universe isn’t really designed, but only appears to be designed. Just because one might attribute elements of design to something they see doesn’t mean it is designed. It could just be a naturally occurring phenomenon. But often, these conclusions, ironically, are not following the science, for they immediately dismiss the most logical and obvious explanation for the world and universe which we observe.
If you walk into Best Buy and see a case full of cell phones, what do you conclude? You conclude that those phones were designed and then manufactured by intelligent people who created them for that purpose.
If you walk onto a car lot, what do you assume about the wide array of vehicles you might decide to purchase? You assume that they were designed by intelligent teams of people who created them for the purpose of transporting people and goods.
Everywhere you go, you see things that are designed and built by people…intelligent people.
Now look at our world, its ecosystems and its incredibly diverse array of animals and plants. Beyond our world is the vastness of space with its trillions of stars and galaxies, all of which we can observe.
Whenever we observe something intricate that has purpose, we assume it has a designer because our experience dictates that intricate, complex systems that have functional purposes are designed by intelligent beings, usually humans.
So why would we look at the earth and the universe and conclude something different?
If we’re following the science, as David did, our conclusion should be the same as his conclusion – that “the heavens declare the glory of God” and “the skies declare his marvelous craftsmanship.”
Reflection
What has been your understanding of the phrase “follow the science?” What do you think it means to “follow the science?”
What has been your experience with scientific observation? What are some science classes you’ve taken and what kinds of things did you observe?
Do you think it’s possible to prove God’s existence “scientifically?” How would you go about it?
What is your understanding of the teleological argument for God’s existence? How would you explain it someone else?
What do you think is the best explanation for the physical universe? How do you explain all that you see in creation and the night sky?
1Happy are people of integrity, who follow the law of the LORD.
2Happy are those who obey his decrees and search for him with all their hearts.
3They do not compromise with evil, and they walk only in his paths.
4You have charged us to keep your commandments carefully.
5Oh, that my actions would consistently reflect your principles!
6Then I will not be disgraced when I compare my life with your commands.
7When I learn your righteous laws, I will thank you by living as I should!
8I will obey your principles. Please don’t give up on me!
9How can a young person stay pure? By obeying your word and following its rules.
10I have tried my best to find you—don’t let me wander from your commands.
11I have hidden your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you.
12Blessed are you, O LORD; teach me your principles.
13I have recited aloud all the laws you have given us.
14I have rejoiced in your decrees as much as in riches.
15I will study your commandments and reflect on your ways.
16I will delight in your principles and not forget your word.
17Be good to your servant, that I may live and obey your word.
18Open my eyes to see the wonderful truths in your law.
19I am but a foreigner here on earth; I need the guidance of your commands. Don’t hide them from me!
20I am overwhelmed continually with a desire for your laws.
(Psalm 119:1-20, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
Psalm 119 has the distinction of not only being the longest of the 150 Psalms, but at 176 verses, it’s also the longest chapter in the entire Bible.
Though it’s not apparent in the English version, this psalm is actually an acrostic poem consisting of 22 stanzas, each of which begins with a successive letter of the Hebrew alphabet.
Each stanza is 8 verses and the unifying theme throughout this psalm is the love for and the importance of God’s laws in our lives.
Though I’ve only included the first 20 verses in this post, just about every one of the 176 verses has a direct reference to God’s word, using terms like “commandments”, “decrees”, “principles”, “rules”, and “righteous word”.
Throughout the poem, the psalmist highlights the importance and the benefits of following God’s laws, including:
enabling us to live as we should (verse 7)
instructing us on how to remain pure (verse 9)
empowering us to avoid sin (verse 11)
daily guidance (verse 19)
source of wisdom and advice (verse 24)
revives us when we’re discouraged (verse 25)
encourages us in our grief (verse 28)
tempers greed and love for money (verse 36)
helps us know God as He is (verse 55)
source of comfort, peace, hope (multiple verses)
Of course, this list is not complete as the psalm repeatedly extols the virtues of God’s commands and our need to know them and follow them. The author’s view and love for God’s word can be summarized by verse 72, which says:
“Your law is more valuable to me than millions in gold and silver!”
This psalm highlights one of the most important truths of the Christian faith, which is that God’s word is central to those who want to know Him and follow Him. Not only is it the primary source of our knowledge about God, but it’s also the main avenue for understanding our fallen nature and the means for experiencing reconciliation with God and with others.
Reflection
How well do you know God’s word?
What has been your habit in terms of connecting with God regularly through His word?
If you wrote your own psalm extolling the virtues of God’s word in your own life, what would you say? What adjectives would you use to reflect your view of God’s word and its importance in your life? How long would your psalm be?
What steps can you take to develop your understanding of God’s commands and your knowledge of His word?
What obstacles or barriers keep you from regularly and consistently reading and studying God’s word?
1Come, let us sing to the LORD! Let us give a joyous shout to the rock of our salvation!
2Let us come before him with thanksgiving. Let us sing him psalms of praise.
3For the LORD is a great God, the great King above all gods.
4He owns the depths of the earth, and even the mightiest mountains are his.
5The sea belongs to him, for he made it. His hands formed the dry land, too.
6Come, let us worship and bow down. Let us kneel before the LORD our maker,
7for he is our God. We are the people he watches over, the sheep under his care. Oh, that you would listen to his voice today!
8The LORD says, “Don’t harden your hearts as Israel did at Meribah, as they did at Massah in the wilderness.
9For there your ancestors tried my patience; they courted my wrath though they had seen my many miracles.
10For forty years I was angry with them, and I said, ‘They are a people whose hearts turn away from me. They refuse to do what I tell them.’
11So in my anger I made a vow: ‘They will never enter my place of rest.’”
(Psalm 95:1-11, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
If you read through the Psalms regularly, you no doubt have certain psalms that become your favorites. Psalm 95 is one of my favorites because it praises God for who He is and what He’s done.
Here is a simple list of items to recognize about God from this psalm:
He is the ROCK of our salvation
He is a GREAT God
He is the KING above all gods
He owns the depths of the earth
He owns the mightiest mountains
The sea belongs to Him because He created it
He also created the land
The Lord made US as well
The Lord is OUR God
He watches over us, His sheep
Though there are plenty of reasons to praise God, this psalm also comes with a command and a caution.
The command is to “listen to His voice today!”
The caution is that we not harden our hearts as the Israelites did at Meribah.
The reference here is to a situation that occurred in Exodus 17. The Israelites had been miraculously delivered from the Egyptians but found themselves wandering in the desert and doubting God’s motives and ability to provide. In the previous chapter they had complained about having a lack of food so God miraculously provided quail and manna for them to eat.
In Exodus 17, they found themselves thirsty with no visible source of water. Again, they complained to Moses and to God despite all of the miracles God had already performed to demonstrate His ability and desire to provide for His people.
In this psalm, the Lord gives the caution that we should heed as well. Despite the Lord’s miracles that we’ve seen in our own lives, we are all susceptible to a hardening of our hearts. This hardening will often come in times of distress or struggle, when things are not going the way we want. In those times, it’s easy to question whether God is there or whether He cares!
These words are especially timely, given all that’s happened this last year. It’s a reminder that God is still great. He’s still the king of all gods. He’s still the rock of our salvation. And He’s still the creator of all that we see, including US!
Therefore, God deserves our praise, even if our own personal circumstances aren’t what we would hope or desire.
Reflection
What are some times in your life where you’ve been tempted to harden your heart and question God or even doubt His existence? What were the circumstances?
What are some practical things you can do to avoid a hardening of your heart?
Besides the list from this psalm, what are some of God’s other attributes and actions that make Him worthy of our praise?
God’s command in this passage is to “listen to His voice today!” What are some ways you are able to listen to God’s voice? How do you typically hear the Lord’s voice?
1Only fools say in their hearts,“ There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their actions are evil; no one does good!
2God looks down from heaven on the entire human race; he looks to see if there is even one with real understanding, one who seeks for God.
3But no, all have turned away from God; all have become corrupt. No one does good, not even one!
4Will those who do evil never learn? They eat up my people like bread; they wouldn’t think of praying to God.
5But then terror will grip them, terror like they have never known before. God will scatter the bones of your enemies. You will put them to shame, for God has rejected them.
6Oh, that salvation would come from Mount Zion to rescue Israel! For when God restores his people, Jacob will shout with joy, and Israel will rejoice.
(Psalm 53:1-6, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
In this Psalm, David is pondering the moral implications of life without God.
Two observations are worth noting.
First, David plainly states that only a fool says in their heart that there is no God.
It’s interesting to notice that the fool doesn’t conclude God’s non-existence through reason or evidence but what makes a person a fool is that they say “in their heart” that there is no God.
What exactly is meant by this phrase “in their heart”?
I think the best way to think of the heart is the will – the control center of a person’s life. Your will, which equates to your desires, will motivate and compel you to act in ways that are contrary to reason and what you know is right. If you decide “in your heart” that you want to pursue a certain course of action (whether good or bad), nothing will convince you otherwise.
So in this context, the fool is someone who has decided that there is no God, despite whatever evidence may be presented. Reason and facts don’t matter because he or she has already made a decision of their will (a decision of the heart) what they intend to believe and how they intend to respond and move forward.
David says that the belief that there is no God is foolish. Why? Because it is a denial of that which is observably apparent, namely that we exist and the universe exists and that something grander and larger and much more powerful than the universe must have created it.
The second thing that David addresses is the moral implications of believing in no God.
Without God, there is no moral foundation. Hence, the actions of the atheist ultimately devolve to evil. It doesn’t mean that people who believe there is no god are not capable of doing good – they are. It does mean, however, that without the moral foundation that God alone provides, there is no anchor to call anything good. Therefore, moral values can easily shift, where things that were once considered evil are now considered acceptable, even good.
The implications of this are huge. David says that when God looks down on the human race he cannot find anyone who is truly good. This certainly contradicts the prevailing view on morality in today’s culture.
In our culture today, it’s popular to hold the belief that people are generally good and only do bad things because they are exposed to evil, corrupt or unfair environments.
These verses (particularly verse 3) explicitly refute this ideology, affirming that NO ONE is good. This does not mean that people are incapable of doing good things. What it means, however, is that no one is able to meet the standard of goodness as defined by God.
What is God’s standard of goodness?
God’s standard of goodness is himself – perfect righteousness. Humans are not able to meet this standard. Hence no one is good, not even one.
By the way, those who claim that people are good and only do evil things because of the influence of their environment, never explain how those environments were able to corrupt people in the first place.
In other words, if man is basically good, how did the environment that supposedly caused his negative actions become bad enough to influence his negative actions? This is never explained by those who believe in man’s goodness.
So to summarize, David says that someone who makes a decision of the heart to believe in no God is a fool. It’s foolish because it defies logic and reason and that which is observably apparent.
Secondly, without God, there is no basis to call anything good and therefore, people will make their own standards for what they think is right and wrong. These standards will be constantly shifting and fall far short of God’s standard for goodness, which is Himself. As a result, God says NO ONE is good. NOT ONE. We are all sinful and corrupt and have turned away from God.
As I look at the culture we live in today, I’d say David’s words look more like prophecy than ancient poetry.
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 standard of goodness that you’ve used to evaluate your own life?
What is your response to the idea that someone who decides “in their heart” that God doesn’t exist is a fool?
How would you respond to someone who makes the claim that people are basically good but they only do bad things because of the negative influences of their environment?
What would you say to someone who doesn’t believe in God but believes that they can be moral?
1My God, my God! Why have you forsaken me? Why do you remain so distant?Why do you ignore my cries for help?
2Every day I call to you, my God, but you do not answer. Every night you hear my voice, but I find no relief.
3Yet you are holy. The praises of Israel surround your throne.
4Our ancestors trusted in you, and you rescued them.
5You heard their cries for help and saved them. They put their trust in you and were never disappointed.
6But I am a worm and not a man. I am scorned and despised by all!
7Everyone who sees me mocks me. They sneer and shake their heads, saying,
8“Is this the one who relies on the LORD? Then let the LORD save him!If the LORD loves him so much, let the LORD rescue him!”
9Yet you brought me safely from my mother’s womb and led me to trust you when I was a nursing infant.
10I was thrust upon you at my birth. You have been my God from the moment I was born.
11Do not stay so far from me, for trouble is near, and no one else can help me.
12My enemies surround me like a herd of bulls; fierce bulls of Bashan have hemmed me in!
13Like roaring lions attacking their prey, they come at me with open mouths.
14My life is poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint.My heart is like wax, melting within me.
15My strength has dried up like sunbaked clay. My tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth. You have laid me in the dust and left me for dead.
16My enemies surround me like a pack of dogs; an evil gang closes in on me. They have pierced my hands and feet.
17I can count every bone in my body. My enemies stare at me and gloat.
18They divide my clothes among themselves and throw dice for my garments. (Psalm 22:1-18, NLT)
The Daily DAVEotional
Usually when I read the psalms, I think of poetic arrangements that communicate lament or praise from the author. I often try to put myself in the shoes of the author and imagine similar circumstances I may have experienced. I seek to lament with the psalmist when he laments and rejoice and praise God with the psalmist when he praises God.
On the surface, Psalm 22 may look like a typical psalm of lament or anguish but upon deeper reflection, it turns out to be so much more. I don’t usually think of the Psalms as prophetic, but Psalm 22 provides a number of verses in which David’s experience ultimately foreshadows the experience of the Messiah.
In verse 1, for example, David utters the very words that are expressed by Jesus on the cross in Matthew 27:46, when he cried out, “My God, my God! Why have you forsaken me?”
In verse 7, David’s words accurately describe events that occurred in Matthew 27:39-43, when soldiers mocked Jesus after his arrest and onlookers jeered at Him during His crucifixion.
In verses 14-16, David accurately describes details of a crucifixion, such as extreme thirst, asphyxiation and the trauma to the hands and feet. These verses are all the more amazing because crucifixion as a means of execution was not known until Roman times.
Finally, in verse 18, David’s description of clothes being divided and dispersed by the casting of lots is fulfilled in Matthew 27:35.
All of these events were fulfilled by people who would have had no knowledge of the prophecies concerning Jesus. Yet their actions were accurately described over 1000 years earlier by the very man through whose lineage the Messiah would emerge.
David is not fearful of sharing all his emotions when he pens his words. He is honest with God when he’s sad, lonely and angry. Yet he praises God in spite of his circumstances and in the case of this psalm, his words foreshadow the emergence of the Messiah, the one who ultimately experiences everything David is feeling as he writes those words, yet emerges victorious as the Savior and eternal King!
Reflection
What has been your experience in reading and reflecting on the Psalms? How have they helped you to connect to God on a deeper level?
What is your response to the verses in this Psalm that are Messianic in nature, as they predict events that the promised Messiah would endure?
How do these verses strengthen your faith in the Holy Scriptures as an accurate revelation from God?
1O LORD, how long will you forget me? Forever? How long will you look the other way?
2How long must I struggle with anguish in my soul, with sorrow in my heart every day? How long will my enemy have the upper hand?
3Turn and answer me, O LORD my God! Restore the light to my eyes, or I will die.
4Don’t let my enemies gloat, saying, “We have defeated him!” Don’t let them rejoice at my downfall.
5But I trust in your unfailing love. I will rejoice because you have rescued me.
6I will sing to the LORD because he has been so good to me.
(Psalm 13, NLT)
In this Psalm, David cries out to the Lord as his soul is in deep anguish. He feels defeated by his enemies and he feels abandoned by God.
But by the end of the Psalm, David says that he trusts in God’s unfailing love, rejoices that God has rescued him and sings to the Lord because God has been so good to him.
On the surface, this Psalm seems like a contradiction in perspective. One moment, David is complaining that the Lord has abandoned him and in the next moment, he’s praising God for rescuing him and being so good to him.
Which is it? It’s as if David is shifting back and forth between alternate universes in real time. Is he hallucinating? Is he disconnected from reality? Or is there some other explanation?
The truth is that David IS in anguish. He DOES feel abandoned. He DOES feel like his enemies are overtaking him.
These are real emotions David is experiencing and they are are all true.
But what is also true is God’s sovereignty, love and goodness. David recognizes these things too and is able to acknowledge their reality.
This is what Henry Cloud, in his book “Changes That Heal”, calls sorting the good and bad. People who do this well recognize that there is both good and bad in our world. They are able to deal with the reality that both exist in a way that doesn’t allow negative outcomes to become the consuming focus of their reality.
People who don’t do this well tend to go all bad if one little thing goes wrong.
What do I mean by going “all bad”?
Going all bad occurs when we allow a negative experience or circumstance to so consume us that we begin to project our negative emotion on all aspects of our reality. Our attitude and judgment is clouded in such a way that we can only see and focus on things that are negative while being purposely blind to any good elements in our reality.
David doesn’t do this. He recognizes the bad circumstances he’s in and he’s honest about his emotions. But David also acknowledges the good that still exists, namely, the reality that God is good and loving.
Reflection
What keeps you from being completely honest with God about your emotions?
When have you gone all bad as a result of an undesired circumstance? What was the situation you were in and how did your emotions affect your perception of reality?
What do you think are some practical ways you can develop in your ability to sort the good and bad?
What are 10 things you can think of right now that are positive about your current life situation?
Photo of “Changes That Heal” from Amazon website – by Dave Lowe
The Lowedown 