Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Deuteronomy 6:4 - The Meaning of Echad



Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. - (Deuteronomy 6:4, Green's Literal Translation)
Hebrew and Greek words are transliterated throughout.
The claim is often made that the Hebrew word translated "one" [echad] means "composite unity", and therefore this shows that Jehovah consists of more than one person, and thus it is claimed that the usage of echad in Deuteronomy 6:4 offers proof of the trinity in the Hebrew Scriptures.

It is true that "one" can mean "composite unity", or "compound unity", whether in Hebrew or English. There is no evidence, however, that the Hebrew word echad means anything different from the English word "one". There is nothing mystical about the Hebrew word "one" as used in Deuteronomy 6:4 that would mean that Jehovah is more than one person.

Echad [Strong's #259 "united, i.e., one; or (as an ordinal) first"] simply means one [whether composite or absolute] just the same as our English word means one. Look at its usage in a Hebrew concordance: "one door" Ezekiel 41:11); "one reed" (Ezekiel 40:5-8); "one gate" (Ezekiel 48:31); "one saint" (Daniel 8:13) -- just a few examples. (See also Numbers 7:11,13,14,26,32,38,44; 9:14; 16:22, for a start) It is used exactly the same as our English word "one". Being a single individual, object, or unit. noun: A single unit, a single person or thing.
https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/echad.html

The English word "unit" is defined as:
a : a single thing, person, or group that is a constituent of a whole
b : a part of a military establishment that has a prescribed organization (as of personnel and materiel)
c : a piece or complex of apparatus serving to perform one particular function
d : a part of a school course focusing on a central theme
e : a local congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses
-- Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary
https://www.yourdictionary.com/
The word composite means "made up of distinct parts." A composite unity, therefore, consists of various parts, each in itself making up a part of one total. The separate parts do not equal the total, and do not necessarily equal each other, as is claimed for the trinity. One part is not the other part. Many trinitarians point to Numbers 13:33, which speaks of "one cluster" of grapes. It is often claimed that this provides an illustration of "one" as applied to the Hebrew word Echad and their trinity doctrine. However, one grape on a cluster is a part of the cluster, but it would not be proper to say that the one grape is the cluster. This is true in both Hebrew and English. One grape could hardly be said to wholly and fully the one cluster, as is claimed for each of the alleged persons of the triune God. Deuteronomy 6:4 says that there is only one Jehovah. (Deuteronomy 6:4) It is this one Jehovah who speaks to Jesus in Psalm 110:1 -- two separate beings. It is this "one Jehovah" who is the God of the Messiah. (Micah 5:4) Jehovah is not presented as being more than one person, nor is Jesus presented as being Jehovah.

Sometimes we read of some who say that echad means "compound unity". The word "compound" means to put parts together to form a whole; to form by combining parts, etc. Thus this word means practically the same as "composite."

Jehovah is different from the false deities of the heathen, which were often worshiped as triads consisting of three parts. Jehovah is one Jehovah -- not two, not three.

Jay Green's interlinear says: "Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God (is) Jehovah one." His translation reads: "Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." Echad is used here as an adjective modifying Jehovah. It really shows that there is but one Jehovah, not two - not three. However, in this context, Jehovah is warning about Israel's worship of the idol-gods of the nations. (Deuteronomy 6:12-15) He certainly foreknew that Israel would get involved in such idolatry and would even use His Holy Name in worship of those idols. Thus, it was important to note that Jehovah is not more than one Jehovah; there are not a multiplicity of Jehovahs being represented as is found in the heathen lands around Israel. While some of the heathen may have used forms of the name Jehovah (Yahweh) in their worship, without a covenant Jehovah is not their God, except in the broad sense that Jehovah is the God of all his creation. As such, however, He is still only one Jehovah, but he is not represented by any idol even if the heathen may have used a form of His name as applied to an idol.

While it is true that the word "one", whether in English or "echad" in Hebrew, can mean a composite/compound unity, and "one" can have more than one part, as in one cluster of grapes (Numbers 13:23), each grape is a part of the cluster, not the whole. Grape one does not equal the cluster, grape two does not equal the cluster, etc., each grape is only a part of the whole. One people (Genesis 34:16) does not mean one person is wholly the people as is claimed in the trinitarian dogma, that each of the alleged persons are "wholly" God -- not a part of God.

Likewise, your body is made up many parts, all of which go to make up the composite whole. Your arm is not your whole body, nor is your leg, etc., but only a part.

If this idea of composite unity is applied to the idea that God is more than one person, then you would have the Father as a part of God, but not all of God; you would have the Son as a part of God, but not all of God; and the Holy Spirit as a part of God, but not all of God. Thus allowing that all three persons are equal, we would have 1/3 of God as the Father, 1/3 of God as the Son and 1/3 of God as the Holy Spirit. Yet the trinitarian dogma does not define the trinitarian godhead as such, for they claim that Jesus is "fully God." They do not claim that the Father is part of God, they claim that he is fully God, etc. Therefore, their usage of "composite unity" or "compound unity" as a means to see the trinity in the word "echad" does not, in reality, exist, except that they should create their own definitions to suit their trinitarian dogma.

Is Jehovah a Unity? We can say that Jehovah is love, but Jehovah is not "all" love and nothing else. "Love" is not equal to the whole of who Jehovah is. It is only one component of who Jehovah is. The many components of Jehovah's being, personality and character are discussed in Paul S. L. Johnson's Book entitled *GOD*, which can be ordered from the Bible Standard.

Additionally, did the Hebrew writers themselves consider the usage of echad to mean more than one person in one God? There is not one hint that they believed such. It is only by adding the trinitarian philosophy and then reading the trinitarian philosophy into the expressions used that one can find the concept of a triune God as defined by trinitarians in the Bible.

One Flesh in Marriage

Genesis 2:24 - Therefore a man will leave his father and his mother, and will join with his wife, and they will be one flesh.

The argument is often put forth that Genesis 2:24 illustrates that echad means more than one person in unity. Of course, we allow that echad can mean more than one person in unity, but this does not mean that the persons involved are the same being, sharing the same sentiency as is claimed for the trinity dogma: three persons in one omniscient being, all three of which are individually wholly and fully the one omniscient being. The unity involved in marriage, if divided equally, still would be 1/2 + 1/2 = the whole. The marriage still consists of two separate parts that equal the whole. The same holds true for the many other "illustrations" of composite unity that our trinitarian friends come up with. We do not deny that echad means composite unity when that term is used properly; the meaning of composite unity, however, does not describe the dogmatic definition given of the trinity.

A married couple does not literally become one flesh human being. The man, after marriage, still has his own sentiency, his own thoughts, and his own self, and a woman after marriage still has her own sentiency, her own thoughts, and her own self. The marriage union does not make the two one sentiency or one human being as is claimed for each of the members of the alleged triune God, that is, they are all three claimed to be the one Supreme Being. And trinitarians further claim that each of the three alleged persons is individually wholly and fully the Supreme Being (not a part of the Supreme Being).

Some claim that the expression "one flesh" means that the two are the same substance, as is claimed for the trinity. The problem is that a man and woman are both of the same substance before they get married, thus their becoming "one flesh" does not mean that they become of the same substance when they are joined together in marriage. Obviously, the expression "one flesh" in Genesis 2:24 does not mean the same thing that "one substance" is claimed for the trinity, for the trinity claims that all three persons of the alleged trinity are all omniscient, thus all one sentient being, since all three, being omniscient, would have all have the same sentiency. Nor does the idea of "one flesh" in the marriage union mean that they both, as a result of the marriage, then become the same flesh substance (or "nature" as trinitarians often express it), as some have argued, since the man and woman already are of the same fleshly substance before marriage. Thus all mankind is spoken of as "one flesh", in the sense of actual substance, but all mankind do not constitute one sentient human being. -- 1 Corinthians 15:39.

When a man and woman become married, they definitely do not become one sentient being, and no longer two sentient beings, for then there would be no such thing as a married "couple". Nor do either one of the two equal the whole of the union, as is claimed for each person of the alleged trinity, in that is claimed that each person of the trinity is wholly God, not part of God. The man and woman who come together are still each only part of that union; neither is equal the whole union.

Strictly speaking, the "one flesh" that is being spoken of is in the marriage union, in which the two come together in the marriage bed as though one body. That this is what is being spoken of can be seen by 1 Corinthians 15:39, where Paul refers to this scripture in describing fornication with a prostitute. In the case of such fornication, the man and woman usually do not remain together as in marriage, but they do become as one body during the act of fornication. For such a union to take place, however, there have to be the two who are already flesh before they unite with each, neither of which is equal to the whole.

Of course, we can also see that the marriage union as a whole could also be included. But still, neither party is equal to and wholly the union, but each remains a "part" of the union. The trinitarian dogma claims that the Father is not "part" of God, but all of God, the Son is not "part" of God, but all of God, and the holy spirit is not "part" of God, but all of God. Therefore, is the "one flesh" union of Genesis 2:24 a composite unity? Absolutely! Does it offer any illustration that would apply to the trinity? No.

Additionally, composite unity does not mean that the various parts of the unity are neccessarily equal to each other, for in the husband-wife relationship a man is not equal in all respects to the woman, nor is the woman equal in all respects to the man, etc. Not all of a man's organs are the same as that of a woman, and thus, not all of a woman's organs are the same as a man.

Additionally, in a cluster of grapes, one grape may be bigger than another, but then a cluster of grapes includes not only the grapes but the stems that link the whole the cluster together. The stem is not equal to the grape, nor the grape to the stem. So again we find that the one cluster of grapes does not provide any illustration of the trinity.

Echad corresponds with the Greek heis -- one. It is simply the common Hebrew word for "one".

"He is unique... He is not many, but one... Yahweh is a single unified person... one Lord is also opposite to diffuse... He is single... God's person and his will are single... Israel is called to concentrate it's undivided attention in Yahweh himself. He alone is worthy of full devotion and He is one-single and unique." -- The Broadman Bible Commentary

YACHIYD

Another word related to echad is Yachiyd (Strong's #3173). This word corresponds with our English word "only". It is most commonly used in the expression "only son". (Genesis 22:2,12,16; Judges 11:34; Jeremiah 6:26; Amos 8:10; Zechariah 12:10) Like Echad, it is also closely associated with Yachad, meaning "to join, unite" (Strong's 3161), thus carries a similar connotation of unity as does Echad. Strong gives its basic meaning as "united", "sole", and further as "beloved", "lonely". The *Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon* adds also "only" and "unique". The KJV translates this word in Psalm 86:6 as "solitary", in the sense of "lonely".
https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/yachiyd.html

The word (often transliterated as Yachiyd) is not used of Jehovah in the Bible, and it usually refers to an only son. It corresponds most closely with the English word "only", especially in the sense of only son, only beloved, or lonely, which is perhaps the reason it is not used of Jehovah, since Jehovah is not a son of anyone.

Another word that sometimes means "only" is the word often transliterated as "bad" (Strong's #905), meaning "alone, by itself, besides, a part, separation, being alone". It is used in Deuteronomy 8:3, which word is translated into Greek as *monos*. (Matthew 4:4; Luke 4:4) *Monos* is the word used to describe the Father in John 17:3 as the "only true God." *Bad* is also used of Jehovah in Nehemiah 9:6, Psalm 83:18; 136:4; Isaiah 2:11,17; 37:16; 44:24.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/bad.html

The Triple Point of Water

It has been argued that water provides a good illustration of composite unity as applied to the trinity. It is claimed that water can be in three forms at once yet all forms are still one thing: water. The test-tube experiment is cited: in a single test tube, the water can be in all three states at the same time! Actually, this is deceptive, to say the least, since not all of the molecules of water in the test tube are in all three states all at once. For this to be a valid demonstration of the trinity, such would have to occur. What these trinitarians are referring to is called the triple point of water. We present below some quotes from the WEB on the triple state:
All three boundary lines meet at a point called the triple point. At this temperature and pressure, all three phases are in equilibrium with one another
https://mars.nasa.gov/education/modules/mars.pdf
Triple point-the temperature and pressure in which all 3 states of matter co-exist in equilibrium.
http://www.learnchem.net/tutorials/som.shtml
Note that this does not say that all of the water molecules are in all three states at once; it says that they are in equilibrium. Thus, about 1/3 of the molecules would be in the state of, or changing to, the bonding as ice; about 1/3 of the molecules would be in the state of, or changing to, the bonding as liquid; and about 1/3 would be in the state of, or changing to, the bonding as gas. (If applied to the trinity, then 1/3 of God would the Father; 1/3 of God would be the Son, and 1/3 of God would be the Holy Spirit.) Never are all the molecules in the given container in all three states at once! Never is one molecule in all three states at the same time. Putting the three phases in equilibrium at the triple point actually does nothing to change the fact that there are still three phases of a single substance, which coexist in different parts of the vessel that holds them. For this analogy to have any merit toward providing a demonstration of the trinity, you would have to produce a solid liquid gas, that is, the whole body of H2O under consideration would have to be liquid through all of its molecules, and at the same time solid throughout all of its molecules, and at the same time gas throughout all of its molecules.

At least one trinitarian has noted the fallacy of the triple state argument as applied to the trinity, and has written about it online. We will quote a part of what he states:
The three phases of water analogy of the Trinity, although often suggested, is, in fact, an inadequate explanation as understood by traditional orthodox Christianity.... In the water (three states or phases) analogy we see a similar problem. Water, in the aggregate (not individual molecules but in bulk) will be in a phase (solid, liquid, or gaseous) depending on the temperature and pressure. [Along a phase line (of temperature and pressure) it can exist in two phases and at the triple point in all three.] Water can transform from one phase to another, just as the "persons" can in a modalist Trinity. However, in the orthodox understanding of the Trinity, the "persons", while all God, do not change into each other. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. But the Father is not the Son, the Son is not the Father, the Father is not the Spirit, the Spirit is not the Father, etc. Nor do they change into/from one another. Water can change from one phase to another. Thus, the three phases of water are an inadequate, i.e. heretical, model for the Trinity even though it has some partial value. -- a post by Edward Pothier
The above statement was made by a trinitarian in the newsgroups, and can be found online at:
https://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.christian/msg/d247185e57b134dc?oe=UTF-8

We also received the following email on this concerning whether all the molecules were in all three states at once:
In really short answer, any one molecule can only be in one state at once. The Triple Point is the temperature and pressure at which all three phases can exist together, however each molecule will be in one phase. For more about triple point see this website:
http://onsager.bd.psu.edu/~jircitano/phase.html (Site no longer exists)
Marcy M. Seavey
Education Director
Iowa Project WET and GLOBE Iowa
Iowa Academy of Science
Having shown that this does not give an adequate illustration of the trinity, we now ask: what if there should be a substance that could be in three states throughout all at once? Possibly God could create such. Would it be proof of the trinity? No. It would only prove that such a substance could be in all three states throughout all at once, nothing more. It would not offer a reason to add the idea of the trinity to the scriptures.

The "One Lord" Deception

Some trinitarians will quote Deuteronomy 6:4 from the King James Version (or similar translation) like this: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD." Then they will turn to 1 Corinthians 8:6, where we read that to the church there is "one Lord Jesus Christ." There is "one Lord", they say, and that "one Lord" is Jesus. Most scholars should know that the two scriptures are not speaking of the same thing. In Deuteronomy 6:4, the KJV, as well as many other translations have substituted "LORD" for the divine name. This should not be done, but because it is most often done, to those ignorant of the truth, the above reasoning seems logical. Some will claim that the Greek word "kurios", often rendered "the Lord" in the New Testament, means "Jehovah", since in the extant Greek NT manuscripts we find that kurios is often substituted for the divine name. Such is sophistry, however, for kurios is used of others than Jehovah in the NT, as well as in other Greek writings.* The word "kurios" does not mean "Jehovah", any more than the Hebrew words for "Lord", such as "adon" or "adonai"**, mean "Jehovah". 1 Corinthians 8:6 is not identifying Jesus as the one Jehovah of Deuteronomy 8:6.
==========
*See our studies on the holy name:
https://nameofyah.blogspot.com/p/on-this-site.html

Likewise, sometimes our trinitarian neighbors will compare Deuteronomy 6:4 and 1 Corinthians 6:8 with Zechariah 14:9, using the King James Version, or a similar translation, to reach the conclusion that the "one Lord" of these scriptures is Jesus. Zechariah 14:9, reads, according to the King James Version, "And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one." By use of the word "LORD" in all caps, the KJV shows that in the Hebrew text, the divine name appears, and that "the LORD" has been substituted for the divine name. Thus the World English Bible translation renders this verse in this manner: "Yahweh will be King over all the earth. In that day Yahweh will be one, and his name one." Green's Literal renders this verse as: "And Jehovah shall be King over all the earth. In that day there shall be one Jehovah, and His name one." By this, we can readily see that Zechariah 14:9 is not speaking about the Lord Jesus, as in 1 Corinthians 8:6, but rather of Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus. - Micah 5:4; Ephesians 1:3
==========
See:
Jesus is Not Jehovah
https://jesusnotyhwh.blogspot.com/2016/09/jesusnotjah.html

Others will say that Jehovah is referred to as "Lord" many times in the Hebrew scriptures, such as Genesis 15:2,8, Exodus 4:10; 5:22; 15:17; 23:17; 24:17; Deuteronomy 3:24; 9:26; 10:17; Joshua 3:13; 7:7; and many more. Thus, they ask, how can only Jesus be the "one Lord", as stated in 1 Corinthians 8:6, if Jehovah is also "Lord"? Actually, 1 Corinthians 8:6 does not state that there is only "one Lord". Let us read 1 Corinthians 8:5,6 from Young's Literal Translation: "for even if there are those called gods, whether in heaven, whether upon earth -- as there are gods many and lords many -- yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom [are] the all things, and we through Him." What it says is that "to us [to the church] there is one Lord "through whom are all things, and we through him." Jehovah is "Lord", but he is not the one Lord "through whom" are the all (Greek transliteration: ta panta). Thus to the church, God has appointed one Lord through whom all things are provided from the God and Father of Jesus to the church (as well as the blessings of the age to come), including the existence of the believers as new creatures in Christ. -- John 1:17; Romans 3:22; 5:10,21; 2 Corinthians 1:20; 5:17,18; Galatians 4:7; 6:15; Ephesians 1:5; 2:10; Philippians 1:11; Titus 3:6.

Paul had just written concerning the idol-gods of the nations, and declares that the informed Christian knows that these idols gods are nothing, they have no power or might to good or to do evil. (Jeremiah 10:5) It is these that Paul refers to as those who are "called" gods (mighty ones). On earth, of course, the idols are something in that the carved images are made of wood or stone, and wood and stone is indeed "something", but as far as having the will and might to bring about or influence events in the world to a purposeful outcome, these gods are nothing. Thus, while they are "called" gods, they are not so by nature, which nature is special "might, strength", power, as based on the Hebraic meaning of the words that are translated as "God/god"*. (Galatians 4:8) They have no special might of themselves to perform any prophecy, any purpose, that might be attributed to them. In the heavens, the sun, the moon, stars and constellations, etc., have been called "gods". The sun, the moon, the stars, etc., are indeed something, as far as the substances that are combined in their make-up is concerned. But they are nothing as far as the claim that these are "gods", in that they do not have any will or might bring about any purposeful outcome amongst the intelligent creation, they are "nothing". Yet these have been called "gods" and "lords". The word Adonis comes from the Hebrew word "Adon", meaning "Lord". Thus these are "called" gods and lords, although they are not so by nature, as they, of themselves, cannot perform or accomplish any will, prophecy, or purpose that might be attributed to them. Most are familiar with the usage of the word "baal" (meaning "the Lord", "lord", or "the master") and its usage regarding false gods.
=========
*See
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"

But Paul continues, "as there are gods many and lords many." The Westcott and Hort Interlinear has this as: "as even are gods many and lords many." Paul acknowledges that there are those who are "called" gods who have no might, no power, and yet he also goes on to acknowledge that there are indeed "many gods and many lords". Does the Bible speak of others than Jehovah as god or lord? Yes, it does. Moses was said to made a god -- a mighty one -- to Pharaoh. (Exodus 7:1) The judges of Israel were spoken of as the ELOHIM, the might (as a collective body), in Israel. (Exodus 21:6; 22:8,9,28 -- see Acts 23:5) The angels are spoken of as "gods" (elohim) in Psalm 82:6,7. (compare Hebrews 2:9; also Psalm 50:1 and 96:4.) The wicked spirit that impersonated Samuel is called elohim, a god, a mighty one. (1 Samuel 28:13) Various kings are referred to as "gods" -- "the strong" (KJV) -- in Ezekiel 32:21. All of these are indeed "gods", and while they have might, strength, power, they do not have such of their own being, but only as they have received such from the Might of the universe, Jehovah. Likewise, many are indeed "lords" in various capacities. The Hebrew word "adon", means "lord" or "master". This word is used of a master over slaves (Genesis 24:14,27), rulers (Genesis 45:8), and husbands. (Genesis 18:12) The original Hebrew text contained only consonants, and adon appears is represented by the four consonants: "aleph-dalet-vav/waw-nun", corresponding somewhat to our A-D-W-N (). Some transliterate this as "'adown". Two other forms of adon are adoni (my Lord), and adonai, my Lords (plural), or a plural intensive -- the plural form used as a superlative -- of "my Lord") The form "adoni" ("my Lord") is represented by the Hebrew characters "aleph-dalet-nun-yod" (corresponding, roughly to the English characters ADNY. The Masoretes, in about the third century or later after Christ, added the vowel point roughly called "quamets" (sounds like the English "a" in the word "all") to form the word "adonai". They added this vowel point wherever they believed that the word referred to Jehovah, and not someone else. Where ADNY appeared to be referring to someone else than Jehovah, they added the vowel point roughly called "hireq", corresponding to the English letter "i" carrying the English short "i" sound, as in the word "machine". This is usually transliterated from the Masoretic text as "adoni".

KURIOS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT

Once in a while, someone will claim that, while "lord" in the Old Testament may be used of others than Jehovah, in the New Testament the word "kurios" is only used of Jesus and his Father. Let us examine to see if this is true.

The Hebrew form adoni is used of Jesus in Psalm 110:1: "Jehovah says to my Lord [adoni], "Sit at my right hand, Until I make your enemies your footstool for your feet." This scripture is translated into the Greek as "kuriw [an inflection of kurios] mou" [literally, "lord of me"] in Matthew 22:44; Mark 12:36; Luke 20:42; and Acts 2:34, where it is applied to Jesus as David's Lord. Thus we can say that Kurios of the New Testament corresponds to the Hebrew word adown (and its variations).

While there are several instances in the parables of Jesus that have the word "kurios" applied to master of a house, or the master of the workers, etc., some may claim that these instances actually apply the word indirectly to Jesus. It is interesting to note, however, that the King James Version renders kurios as "sir" in Matthew 21:30; John 4:11,15,19,49; 5:7; 12:21; as "master(s)" in Mark 12:35; Luke 14:21; 16:13; and as "owners" in Luke 19:33. In many of these instances, it is clear that the speaker is not addressing Jesus as "Jehovah", but simply as an address to a man. Nevertheless, in Matthew 27:63; Acts 17:16,19,30; Ephesians 6:5,9; Colossians 4:11, we have definite instances where the Greek word Kurios is used of others than God or Jesus. Thus it is indeed true that there are indeed "many lords", as stated in 1 Corinthians 8:6. None of these "lords", however, is the "one Lord" "through whom" the church receives all things, nor are the members of the church "through" any of these other lords.

Paul further states: "yet to us [is] one God, the Father, of whom [are] the all things, and we to Him." Several words are usually added by translators to the Greek here, and Young's translation above shows two words added by the brackets []. However, it does not show that the word "things" is also added, although the word "things" is actually added by the translators. The Westcott & Hort Interlinear has "ta panta" as "the all (things)", with the word "things" in parentheses, denoting that it is added to the rendering. The Greek phrase "ta panta" literally means "the all", pertaining to the church. The all that the church has is "of" or "from" the one God, the God and Father of Jesus. "The all" is "from" any of the other who are indeed "gods", and certainly not from any of the idols that are "called" "gods". The believer has offered himself "to" the God and Father of Jesus, through Jesus. -- Acts 20:32; Romans 5:10; 6:10,11; 12:1; 14:8; 2 Corinthians 2:15; 9:11; Galatians 2:19; Ephesians 5:20; Philippians 4:18; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; Hebrews 7:19,25; 11:6; 12:28; 13:15; James 4:7,8; 1 Peter 2:5; 3:18; 4:6.

The scriptures identify the only true God -- the Supreme Being, the "might" or "MIGHTY ONE" of the universe -- as Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, and the prophets. (Jeremiah 10:10; 42:5) Jesus identified the God he prayed to as the same God as that of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and by stating that his Father is "the only true God" signified that there is only one true Supreme Being, one true Might of the universe. (Luke 20:37; John 8:54; 17:1,3) Who sent the prophets? None other than Jehovah, the Father of Jesus. (Judges 6:8; 1 Samuel 3:20; 1 Kings 16:12; 2 Kings 14:25; 17:3; 2 Chronicles 25:15; Jeremiah 28:12; 37:2,6; 46:1; Ezekiel 14:4; Hosea 12:13; Haggai 1:3,12; 2:1,10; Zechariah 1:1; Acts 3:8) It is this same Jehovah -- the only true God, the God and Father of Jesus -- who also sent Jesus. This same God is therefore the God and Father of Jesus. -- Matthew 23:39; Mark 11:9,10; Luke 13:35; John 3:2,17; 5:19,43; 6:57; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,38; 10:25; 12:49,50; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8,26; Hebrews 1:1,2; Revelation 1:1.

Jesus is appointed as the one Lord of the church by Jehovah, the God of Jesus. There is one God, the Father, Jehovah, the God of Israel, who sent Jesus (John 17:1,3), and this one God has appointed for the church (as well as for the world regarding the age to come) one Lord, Jesus. -- Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Psalm 2:2,6,8; 45:7; Isaiah 9:7; 61:1; Matthew 28:18; Luke 1:32; John 3:35; 5:22,26,27,30; Acts 2:36; 5:31; 10:42; 17:31; Romans 14:9; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:17,20-22.

ELEINU in Deuteronomy 6:4

Some note that the Hebrew form of the word for "God" in Deuteronomy 6:4 is transliterated as ELEINU (a form of ELOHIM, Strong's #430), and that this word does not mean an absolute singularity, but that it allows for "God" to be more than one. One gives the usage in the Hebrew of Numbers 20:15 (our fathers) and Isaiah 53:5 (our iniquities) for comparison. Actually, if this word is used as a plural, it would mean "our gods", and not "our God". Such would be stating that Jehovah is more than one god*, not more than one person. This would not at all fit in the context of Deuteronomy 6:4, which distinguishes Jehovah as being one as compared to the heathen around them who worshiped a multiplicity of gods. Nevertheless, in Hebrew, a plural form of a word can be used to represent a singular with an intensified meaning. Many scholars refer to such usage as "plural intensive." This can be seen from Mark 12:29, where the Greek word for "God" is not at all plural, but singular. Thus, forms of ELOHIM, as applied to Jehovah who is one, although actually plural as to form, do not mean "gods", but rather the forms of ELOHIM take on the intensified singular meaning of God, as Superior God ("Mighty One") or Supreme God (Mighty One). (See our study: Elohim – Does This Word Indicate a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?

Since it is a reference to Him who is the source of all might (1 Corinthians 8:6), it would mean Supreme God (Supreme Mighty One). Comparing scriptures, such as Numbers 20:15 (Abith'inu = our Fathers); and Isaiah 53:5 (Aunthi'inu = our iniquities), and 1 Samuel 12:9 (Chtath'inu = our sins), is irrelevant since in the latter scriptures the forms are not being used as a plural intensive. Indeed, applying the plural usage in the scriptures given to ELEINU in Deuteronomy 6:4 would result in the meaning of "gods". The plural intensive forms of ELOHIM are used in such verses as: Genesis 1:26; 3:5; Deuteronomy 10:17; Joshua 24:19; 2 Samuel 7:23; Job 35:10; Psalm 29:1; 58:11; and many other scriptures; nevertheless, the use of the plural intensive in these verses gives no evidence at all that Jehovah is more than one person. Thus, there is nothing in the word, ELEINU, that gives any reason to think that Jehovah was saying that He is more than one person. The plural usage of ELEINU does not designate persons all whom are wholly and fully the one God, but rather it designates gods, more than one god.
==========
*Trinitarians usually object if one says that they believe that there are three Gods.

Monday, November 28, 2016

John 2:19-22; 10:17,18 - Did Jesus Raise Himself from the Dead?

John 2:19-22
John 2:19 - Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
John 2:20 - The Jews therefore said, "Forty-six years was this temple in building, and will you raise it up in three days?"
John 2:21 - But he spoke of the temple of his body.
John 2:22 - When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he said this, and they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.
Many believe that the above scripture says that Jesus raised himself from the dead. In actuality there is nothing the verse about Jesus' raising himself from the dead, but rather John speaks of Jesus' raising up the "temple of his body" after it had been destroyed for three days. The phrase "raise up" does not necessarily refer to "resurrection."

The Jews demanded of our Lord by what authority he set up so high a standard as he required of them in the cleansing of the temple. (John 2:13-18) He answered them as noted in the above text. It was a dark saying of our Lord and few understood the meaning. The Jews thought he was speaking of the glorious temple of Herod under construction for forty-six years. They were incensed at him, and we recall that this was one of the charges against him a few days later. They took his words as blasphemy against the temple, that he could raise it up again in three days if it were destroyed.

Nevertheless, Jesus spoke of the temple of his body. Jesus did 'raise up' his body [cause his body to appear] when he temporarily appeared in his body of flesh and bones (blood is not mentioned, since he was at this point a spirit being) to his disciples in the locked room. (Luke 24:36-49; John 20:19,20) Eight days later he also caused his body to appear on behalf of Thomas. (John 20:24-29) This was after his Father had already raised him from the dead in a spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15:38,44), thus Jesus did not have to raise himself from the dead in order to raise up his body of flesh. (1 Peter 3:18*) Therefore we view that there was an fulfillment of this in the actual body of Jesus.
==========
*See our study:
Jesus Died a Human -- Raised a Spirit Being

In stating the above, we want to emphasize that Jesus was not raised from the dead in a fleshly body. The Bible informs us that Jesus sacrificed his body as an offering to God, which offering he presented to God, as represented in its blood, after he ascended to heaven. (Hebrews 9:11,12,23,24,25; 10:1,10) It speaks of the "days of his flesh" as something past and gone. (Hebrews 5:7) Having offered his body in sacrifice, he does not take it back, so as be permanently encased in a body of flesh. Nonetheless, we note that Jesus did not actually present his body to God until after he ascended. Thus, before his ascension, he could raise his body, and assume that body, for the appearances in the locked room.
==========
See:
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/greek/1453.html
See also our study on:
Jesus' Appearances in the Locked Room

However, we also believe the Lord was using the event of raising his body of flesh to illustrate the raising of his church -- the temple of which the apostle Peter wrote, that we as living stones are built together upon Christ for a habitation of God through the Spirit.

The Scriptures repeatedly tell us that the Church is "the body of Christ." (Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 10:16; 12:12,27; Ephesians 3:6; 4:12) The apostle Peter declares that each of the Lord's saints is a living stone prepared for and being placed in the glorious "temple" which God is building -- whose chief cornerstone and cap stone is Christ Jesus our Lord. (1 Peter 2:5; 2 Corinthians 6:16; Ephesians 2:19-22; Hebrews 3:6) While this "temple" is a temple not completed in its perfected spiritual condition, it already has an existence in this present age -- even now believers are reckoned as the "the body of Christ, and members individually." In harmony with this it could be that this is what Jesus meant when he spoke, as recorded in John 2:19, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" -- "he spoke of the temple of his body" -- that is, the Church, of which he is the Head.

The three days we understand to represent the days of the larger week, one thousand years to each day. The "last day" -- the day in which the saints are resurrected -- is spoken of in Revelation 20:4 as a thousand years. (John 6:39,40,44,54; 11:24) In this "last day", when Satan is bound, and there are no deceptions, the temple of God is finally completed and raised up in glory. This we believe will occur in the third millennium after the literal temple's destruction in Jerusalem, thus in three "days". It is to be early in the morning of this third day -- the Millennium -- that the body of Christ, the temple of God, is to be brought together as a spiritual temple and filled with the glory of God, to the end that from it may flow the blessing of reconciliation to all the families of the earth. -- Genesis 12:3; 22:18; Isaiah 2:2-4; Galatians 3:7-9,16,29; Hebrews 6:13-20; Acts 3:19-25.
See our study: The Day of Judgment

Further insight is provided in 2 Corinthians 4:14, which reads: "Knowing that he who raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by [with, through] Jesus, and shall present us with you." In John 6:44 we read a similar thought: "No man can come to me, except the Father . . . draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." This shows that God's power would not be exercised independently but through Jesus in the resurrection of the body -- the church -- of Christ.

Hence it is Jesus who will take an active role in raising his Church from the dead. John shows in John 14:2,3 when that will be. He says: "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there ye may be also." So we are not are still alive with Jesus at the moment of death, but, as Jesus said, it is at Jesus' second advent that his faithful followers will be with him. Other Bible texts detail the timing of the Church's resurrection yet further. Peter declares that "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years" (2 Peter 3:8). If we divide the time from man's creation into one-thousand-year days, Jesus was crucified and resurrected on the fifth (thousand year) day. If he returns in three days to raise his body members, counting inclusively from the fifth day, we arrive at the seventh (thousand year) day, which is the grand Millennial Day of blessing.

Another statement, similar to this and interpretable, we believe, in the same manner, was the Lord's answer to Herod -- "I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I complete my mission." (Luke 13:32) This last statement could not be interpreted in any other way than that above suggested. The cures and blessings of divine grace have prevailed during the fifth, the day in which our Lord and the apostles lived, and also during the sixth thousand-year day; and on the seventh, the grand millennial sabbath, Christ and his Church will be perfected and the cures correspondingly increased. Thus the body of Christ -- God's true temple -- the house of Jehovah -- will then be fully erected -- "raised up," and all nations will begin to flow into it. -- Isaiah 2:2.

John continues to write: "When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he said this, and they believed the Scripture, and the word which Jesus had said." (John 2:22) Some have felt that this means that Jesus was raised from the dead in his fleshly body, but that is not what it says. Jehovah, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, raised Jesus from the dead, in a spirit body. We note that the disciples did not remember Jesus' statement as recorded in John 2:22 on the very instant, the very moment of the resurrection of Jesus, for they did not even know he had been raised in the very moment he was raised, but rather sometime after. The Greek word "when" does not set a specific instant of time, but a duration of time. Thus the thought is in some time period following the event of his being raised -- when he had been raised, Jesus' disciples recalled that he had said this.
==========
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/greek/3753.html

We must remember that when Jesus said the above words, the disciples had no concept of a spiritual temple, or any reward on a spirit plane. They still had the belief that all of this was to be fulfilled in literal Jerusalem here on earth. This we can see since in Acts 1:6, they asked Jesus if he was then going to restore the kingdom to Israel. They had not yet received the enlightenment of the holy spirit, which was to bring to their memories all that Jesus had said to them. (John 7:39; 14:26) Subsequently, they came to realize they were to be a part of the body of Christ and that God would "raise up us also by Jesus" (2 Corinthians 4:14). That is what they remembered Jesus' words to mean.

Matthew 27:40
Matthew 27:40 - and saying, "You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross."
Sometimes someone points to this scripture and claims it has something to do with the idea that Jesus resurrects himself from the dead. Actually, there is nothing in this that says such. The words quoted are not the words of Jesus' disciples but of those who were mocking Jesus. These Jewish opposers did not have the holy spirit and thus we should not take their words above as giving the true meaning of what Jesus had said. (Mark 14:57,58) It seems from this that at least some of these Jewish opposers were still under the erroneous concept that Jesus claimed that he would destroy the literal temple in Jerusalem and rebuild it in three days. This certainly has nothing to do with the idea that Jesus would raise himself from the dead, nor is it a correct application of what Jesus was speaking of in John 2:22 (as some writers have implied), as this is not Jesus himself or even his disciples speaking, nor is this said after Jesus' resurrection.

Matthew 27:63
Matthew 27:63 - and said, "Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, 'After three days I am to rise again.'"
This scripture is also sometimes offered and it is assumed to refer to John 2:19, and therefore in some vague way is thought to prove that Jesus meant that Jesus would raise himself in the flesh from the dead. This, of course, calls for a lot of conjecture. We have seen that the Jews had thought that Jesus' claim, as recorded in John 2:19, was concerning the temple of Herod. But here they are referring to his claim that he would be raised after three days. There does not appear to be any reference here to Jesus' words in John 2:19 at all. How did they know about Jesus' claim that would be raised after three days? Jesus had on several occasions began to teach his disciples concerning his coming death and resurrection. In Matthew 17:22, 23, Jesus said, speaking of his approaching death: "The Son of Man is about to be delivered up into the hands of men, and they shall kill him, and they will kill him, and the third day he will be raised up." (See also Luke 9:21,22; 18:33; Matthew 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Mark 8:31) The angels quoted our Lord's words to the women who witnessed his resurrection

Luke 24:6
Luke 24:6 - He isn't here, but is risen. Remember what he told you when he was still in Galilee,
Luke 24:7 - saying that the Son of Man must be delivered up into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again?"
These verses fit in with the Bible testimony that God raised Jesus on the third day. Evidently, these sayings of Jesus had reached some of the non-believing Jews. Nevertheless, what he had spoken of to the unbelieving Jews was the "sign of Jonah". (Matthew 12:38-40) It is apparent that the Jewish opposers of Jesus knew of his teaching that he would be raised from the dead in three days, and that they did not understand what he had said as recorded in John 2:19 to apply to his being raised from the dead, but to the actual temple in Jerusalem.

One more scripture that is used to claim that Jesus raised himself from the dead is:

John 10:17,18
John 10:17 - Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it again.
John 10:18 - No taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received from my Father." -- King James Version
Based on the English translation as it appears in most translations, many trinitarians and oneness believers claim that since only God could raise up Christ and thus if Jesus could lay down his life and take it up again he must be God. This, of course, contradicts John 17:1,3, in which Jesus proclaimed that the Father is the only true God, and contrasts himself as the one sent by the one true God. It also contradicts.

Obviously, since Jesus was in the oblivious condition of death in Hades/Sheol (Psalm 16:10; Ecclesiastes 9:5,10; Acts 2:31), Jesus had no "power" at all to do anything and thus his God and Father had to save, or deliver, Jesus out of the oblivious death condition. -- Hebrews 5:7.

One should see our pages with links:
Studies Related to Sheol
Studies Related to Hades

Whatever power or authority Jesus had in this regard, we must agree that this authority or power was received from the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, He who is the source of all. (Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 8:6; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; 1 Peter 1:2) This is, in fact, what Jesus himself stated: "This commandment have I received from my Father." Jesus is not his God who gives to him this authority. -- See Matthew 28:18; Luke 10:22.

The Greek word translated "received" in this sentence is Strong's #2983, which the King James Version translates as "receive" 133 times, and as "take" 106 times. In our passage this same word is earlier translated "take" in most translations: "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take [Strong's 2983, receive] it again. No man taketh [not 2983, but Strong's #142, take] it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take [Strong's #2983] it again. This commandment have I received [Strong's #2983] from my Father."

The Greek word lambano (Strong's #2983) is not as strong as the Greek word airo (Strong's #142) and is not as personal in action as airo. While the word lambano can mean "take", it is not necessarily the result of one's own action, but most often results from the action of another. See the usage of both words and how they are translated in the King James Version by consulting The Englishman's Greek Concordance of the New Testament or by visiting:
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/greek/2983.html
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/greek/142.html

The text should be translated: "Therefore my Father does love me, because I lay down my life, that I might receive it again. No man takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to receive it again." Thus this passage shows that Jesus receives his life again from the unipersonal Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Abraham (Exodus 3:14,15), the only true God (John 17:1,3), in agreement with Acts 2:24; 3:13,15,26; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:34,37; 17:31; Romans 4:24; 6:10; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 15:15; 2 Corinthians 4:14; 13:4; Galatians 1:1; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; Hebrews 5:7; 1 Peter 1:21.

Rotherham renders John 10:18: "No one forced it from me, but I lay it down of myself, -- Authority have I to lay it down, and authority have I again to receive it: This commandment received I from my Father."

The New English Bible renders the passage this way: "The Father loves me because I lay down my life, to receive it back again. No one has robbed me of it; I am laying it down of my own free will. I have the right to lay it down, and I have the right to receive it back again; this charge I have received from my Father."

Interestingly, the New Living Translation renders verse 17: "The Father loves me because I lay down my life that I may have it back again." But it renders verse 18: "No one can take my life from me. I lay down my life voluntarily. For I have the right to lay it down when I want to and also the power to take it again. For my Father has given me this command."

The Good News Bible in Today's English does similarly: "The Father loves me because I am willing to give up my life, in order that I may receive it back again. No one takes my life away from me. I give it up of my own free will. I have the right to give it up, and I have the right to take it back. This is what my Father has commanded me to do."

The claim has been made that John 10:18 proves that Jesus did not receive back a "new" life, evidently with the thought that if he did not come back in his body, he would receive a "new life" instead of his former life. Thus it is claimed that he received back his "human" life. The assumption is placed upon the scripture that would have it say that that since Jesus received back his life that the life he received back had to be human. What Jesus actually said is "I lay down my life." (Italics ours for emphasis) He is referring to his life. Thus, from this context, for it to have a been a new life -- a different life -- that he received back, then, would, in effect, mean that he did not receive back his life, but a life as some one else. Jesus, of course, did not get a new life, a life that was not his life, for he was still himself when he was raised from the dead. So it is still true that did not receive his life back as a human, but as a spirit being. It was still his life, whether that life be physical (earthly-terrestial) or spiritual (heavenly-celestial). In Jesus' case, Jesus was not raised in the flesh, but in the spirit. -- 1 Corinthians 15:40-48; 1 Peter 3:18.

Who did raise Jesus from the dead? Jesus himself was dead and in the oblivious realm of hades for parts of three days. He could not literally raise himself from the dead for he was dead. The dead are unconscious and cannot raise themselves from the dead. (Ecclesiastes 9:5,10) That Jesus was likewise unconscious while he was dead is confirmed by the words of Hebrews 5:7, which shows that he had to be saved from death.

The Bible plainly tells us that it was the God and Father of Jesus, that raised Jesus from the dead. -- Acts 2:24,32,36; 3:15; 4:10; 10:40; 13:30,33,37; 17:31; Romans 4:24; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 15:15; Galatians 1:1; Colossians 2:11,12; 1 Thessalonians 1:9,10; 1 Peter 1:21; 3:18

Some of our trinitarian neighbors tell us that it was the "divine nature" of Jesus that raised his "human nature" from the dead. We have no reason to add all of this conjecture to Bible. There is no scripture that says that Jesus raised himself from the dead, nor is there any scripture that says that Jesus had two planes of being (a spirit being and a human being -- two sentient beings, two persons?) present in one divine person (one sentient [omniscient] being/person?).

Thus we see that there is nothing in the Bible that says that Jesus raised himself from the dead.



Other Authors:

Some present a different view than we have presented above; we do not necessarily endorse each and every statement made by these authors, nor do we necessarily agree with all the teachings expressed on the web sites.

Did Jesus Christ Raise Himself From the Dead? by Ivan Maddox.

Importance of Jesus' Resurrection by C. T. Russell

The Temple of His Body by C. T. Russell

**************


Sunday, November 27, 2016

Jesus Received Worship

Matthew 4:10 - "You must Worship Jehovah your God and you must serve him only."
Hebrews 1:6 - "And let all the angels of God worship him."


It is claimed by some that the fact that our Lord Jesus received worship without rebuke signifies that he is Jehovah. Our Lord's words above quoted from Matthew 4:10 are supposed by many to imply that for any being but Jehovah to receive worship would be wrong. We answer, Not so! To so interpret these words is to think into them a meaning which they do not contain, and to set Jesus' words up as being contradictory to many other scriptures. Jehovah's decree respecting Christ, "You are my Son, this day I have begotten you," had already been recorded through the prophets; and also his decree, although not directly stated as such, "Let all the angels of God worship him." (Psalm 2:7; Daniel 7:14,27; Hebrews 1:5,6) Our Lord Jesus knew this. He also knew that the angelic messengers of Jehovah had in the past been worshiped as representatives of Jehovah; and that he himself was the chief of the messengers, the Only Begotten Son, as well as the "Messenger of the Covenant," whom the Father had sanctified and sent into the world: he knew consequently that whoever honored him honored the Father also.

Indeed, his own words were, "He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." -- John 5:23; Malachi 3:1.

The main Greek word translated worship in the New Testament is proskuneo, which literally signifies "to kiss the hand," as a dog licks the hand of his master. However, when viewing its usage, we see that it is used in the same manner as its Hebrew and Aramaic equivalents, not only of Jehovah, but also of men and angels, with significance of homage, bowing down, obeisance, worship.
Other Greek words sometimes translated as "worship" are:

Ethelothreskeia (Strong's Greek #1479)
This word is used only once (Colossians 2:23), and has no relevance to our discussion.
Eusebeo (Strong's Greek #2151)
This word is used twice: Acts 17:23 and 1 Timothy 5:4, where the King James Version translates it as "worship" and "piety" respectively. It has no relevance to our discussion.
Sebazomai (Strong's Greek #4573)
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/sebazomai.html
This word only appears once (Romans 1:25), and has no relevance to our discussion.

Latreuo (Strong's Greek #3000)
The basic meaning of this word as used in the Bible is "sacred service". It is mostly used in the Bible of God, or of servitude to idols or service in the temple. This is the word that Jesus used in Matthew 4:10, which is usually rendered as "serve".

Matthew 4:10 - "You must Worship Jehovah your God and you must serve [latreuo] him only."

Jesus spoke these words in response to Satan's temptation: "I will give you all of these things [all the kingdoms of the world -- verse 8], if you will fall down and worship me."

The Greek word for serve - latreuo -- here is usually only used in the New Testament of the Father [except in idolatrous servitude -- Acts 7:42; Romans 1:25], or in relation to service to the Father. One could see Hebrews 8:5; 13:1 as exceptions, although one could also see that also as being service to the Father. Some claim that in Revelation 22:3, this word is used of the Lamb, but in view of its usage in Revelation 7:15, it should be realized that it is referring to service to "God".

However, outside the Bible the Greek word is used in many different ways. It is not used exclusively of service to God or false gods. 

Liddell-Scott-Jones Definitions
λατρ-εύω,

Elean λατρείω (q.v.),

1. work for hire or pay, Sol. 13.48: to be in servitude, serve, X. Cyr. 3.1.36; παρά τινι Apollod. 2.6.3.

2. λ. τινί to be subject or enslaved to, S. Tr. 35, etc.: c. acc. pers., serve, E. IT 1115 (lyr.), f.l. in Id. El. 131: metaph., λ. πέτρᾳ, of Prometheus, A. Pr. 968; μόχθοις λατρεύων τοῖς ὑπερτάτοις βροτῶν S. OC 105; λ. νόμοις obey, X. Ages. 7.2; λ. καιρῷ, = Lat. temporibus inservire, Ps.-Phoc. 121; τῷ κάλλει λ. to be devoted to.., Isoc. 10.57; λ. ἡδονῇ Luc. Nigr. 15.

3. serve the gods with prayers and sacrifices, λ. Φοίβῳ E. Ion 152 (lyr.): c. acc. cogn., πόνον λ. τινί render due service, ib. 129 (lyr.); πόνον.. τόνδ' ἐλάτρευσα θεᾷ IG 2.1378.
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/greek/3000.html

Additionally, the Hebrew word for "serve" in Deuteronomy 10:20 is used in many different ways, and is not applied solely to service of God or false gods.
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/5647.html

This gives further indication that the application of the Greek word latreou only to the Father in the New Testament may be simply coincidence, and may not be mean that this word could only be used of the true God.  This would further lead us to believe that the word "only" as used by Jesus in Matthew 4:10 is referirng to a uniqueness of worship that restricted to Jehovah versus the gods that are not in harmony with Jehovah, such as Satan. In other words, one should give service to angels (who are gods), and others to whom service is due, as long as it does not call upon serving a false god, an idol, or a god that is not in harmony with Jehovah.

Revelation 22:3

And no curse shall be any more; and the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve [Latreuo, Strong's #3000] him. -- Darby Translation.

This is the only scripture that a form of the Greek word Latreuo may be read as applying to Jesus, although more than likely "his" in the phrase "his servants" refers back to "God", not to Jesus. It is being claimed that in Revelation 22:3 that Jesus is being worshiped with the worship that is only due to God alone, and thus this proves that Jesus is God. Actually, "God" in this verse speaks of only one person, and the Lamb of God is not being depicted as God, thus the Lamb is not being depicted as being worshiped with the worship that only belongs to his God. If "his" in the phrase "his servants" does refer to Jesus, it still does not mean that Jesus is receiving the worship that only belongs to the God of Jesus, since the word for serve is not necessarily used exclusively of rendering sacred service to God.  Crosswalk's Lexicon cited above gives among meanings, the following: "to serve, minister to, either to the gods or men and used alike of slaves and freemen." See also the usage of this word in Hebrews 8:5 and Hebrews 13:10 (Are we to think that the tabernacle of God IS God, or that the tabernacle is a person of God?)

In reality, we need to remember that Koine Greek does not necessarily follow any rule of nearest antecedent of a pronoun.* It should be evident that "his" refers back to God himself, with the Lamb being added in the middle. This would be in keeping with the way that the word is usually used in the New Testament writings.
=====
*As an example, see the ending "he saw" Revelation 1:2 of the KJV; is "he" referring to Jesus, or is it referring to John?

God's symbolic throne is also the Lamb's symbolic throne, even as Solomon sat on Jehovah's throne (1 Chronicles 29:23), and yet it is also referred to as Solomon's throne (1 Kings 1:37), as well as the throne of David. (1 Kings 2:12) Furthermore, not only did Jesus say that he sits on the throne of his Father, but he also said that all the overcomers of this age would also sit with him on his throne (which is also the throne of his God and Father. -- Revelation 3:12,21

Sebomai (Strong's Greek #4576)
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/sebomai.html

Translated in the KJV as "worship", "devout" and "religious". It is never directed toward Jesus, so we do not include it in our discussion.

Shachah (Strong's Hebrew #7812)

 The major Hebrew word rendered as worship in the Old Testament is often transliterated as shachah and signifies to bow down.
The word shachah occurs 170 times and only about one-half of this number refer to the worship of Jehovah. But this fact is hidden from the English reader of the King James Version by reason of its having been 74 times translated bow down, bowed himself, did reverence, did obeisance, etc., when referring to homage to great earthly beings. We will give examples:

Abraham "bowed himself [shachah] toward the ground, and said, My Lords [adonai]...let a little water be fetched and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree." These words and acts were while he thought them merely "three men." -- Genesis 18:2-4.

Lot "bowed down [shachah]" to two of the same three. -- Genesis 19:1.

Abraham "bowed himself [shachah]" to the people of Canaan. -- Genesis 23:7,12.

Isaac blessed Jacob, saying, "Let nations bow down [shachah - worship] to you;...and let your mother's sons bow down [shachah - worship] to you." -- Genesis 27:29.

"David stooped and bowed himself [shachah] to the earth" to king Saul. -- 1 Samuel 24:8.

Abigail "bowed herself [shachah] to the ground" to David; and again to David's representatives. -- 1 Samuel 25:23,41.

The woman of Tekoah "fell on her face...and did obeisance [shachah - worshipped]" to king David. And Joab and Absalom did likewise, translated "bowed himself [shachah -worshipped]." -- 2 Samuel 14:4,22,33

"When Mephibosheth...was come unto David, he fell on his face and did reverence [shachah -- worshipped]." -- 2 Samuel 9:6

Isaiah 60:14 and Revelation 3:9 offer conclusive proof that it is permissible to give relative worship to [give homage to] God's representatives, as the Israelites did to Jehovah's angels who came to them with God's message. (Genesis 18:2; 19:1; Joshua 5:13-15) Hence, Jesus' receiving homage by God's sanction no more implies that he is God Almighty, than the Church, the herald angels, David, etc., receiving homage by God's sanction are thereby proven to be God Almighty.

From these evidences it should be apparent to all that the prohibition of the First Commandment -- "You must not bow yourself down [shachah] to them nor serve them," was not understood, nor meant to be understood, as a prohibition of reverence, homage, etc., to the honorable, or to those in honored positions among men. Nor did the Jews err in giving such a relative reverence [shachah] to angels who came with messages in Jehovah's name and acknowledging him. And such reverence was approved -- never reproved. The Commandment warns against image worship or any worship of any rival gods. This Jehovah cannot tolerate. Hence there was no impropriety for any Jew who recognized Jesus as the "Sent of God" to do him reverence, obeisance; and much more proper is it for all those who recognize our Lord Jesus according to his claims -- as the Son of God.

Daniel 7:14,27 - Pelach (Strong's Aramaic #6399)
The word used in Daniel 7:14,27, and which is evidently alluded to in Hebrews 1:6, is transliterated as pelach. It is an Aramaic word, and is translated "serve" or "minister" in the KJV. -- Ezra 7:24; Daniel 3:12,14,17,18,28; 6:16,20; 7:14,27.
Strong's #6087 is rendered worship in the KJV at Jeremiah 44:19, whereas the NASB is probably more correct in translation. However, this has no relevance to our study.
The only other Hebrew word that is translated as "worship" is the Chaldean s'geed (Strong's #5457). It is only used in the book of Daniel: 2:46; 3:5,7,6,10,11,12,14,15,18,28. It is relevant only to show that Daniel received such "worship" from Nebucadnezzar. (Daniel 2:46) It does appear to be used interchangeably with Strong's #6399.
But there are some who insist that the Greek word proskuneo (Strong's Greek #4352) is always used in the New Testament in the sense of worship of God Almighty, not in the sense of homage toward men. But is this true? Let us examine some instances in the New Testament where the Greek word proskuneo is used similarly to the Hebrew word shachah, wherein worship of God is not intended.
Matthew 2:2-11

The wise men who came to see Jesus as a child bowed (proskuneo) before him as a king, not as God Almighty. -- Matthew 2:2-11.
Herod claimed that he wanted to bow before this newborn King; there is nothing in the scripture that would lead us to think that Herod was talking about worshiping God Almighty. -- Matthew 2:8.
In Matthew 9:18, we find a rich young ruler who came and bowed (proskuneo) before Jesus. It stretches the imagination to suppose that this rich young ruler supposed that he was actually worshiping the Almighty Jehovah. The crowds early gave the praise to God, who had given the power to Jesus to perform these works, saying: "A great prophet has arisen among us!'. (Matthew 9:8; Luke 7:16,17) Thus they believed him to a be a prophet of God, and did not claim Jesus as God Almighty, nor do we have any reason to believe that Jairus would think Jesus was God Almighty.

We have no more reason to believe that Jairus thought he was bowing before God Almighty than when the Shunammite woman bowed [Strong's Hebrew #7812 - worshiped] to Elisha. -- 2 Kings 4:37
Some have attempted to say that Jairus bowed before Jesus as God Almighty, since he expected Jesus to raise his daughter from the dead. We should note that when Jairus first approached Jesus, it was with the hope that he would heal his daughter as she had not yet died. -- Mark 5:21-43; Luke 8:40-56.

Nevertheless, some have argued that Jairus was worshiping Jesus as God Almighty, since Jesus was healing and raising the dead. This, of course, has to be read into the text, evidently only to satisfy the doctrine that Jesus is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The fact that Jesus healed and raised the dead does not mean that he was Jehovah. The authority and power to heal and raise the dead was *given* to Jesus by his Father, the only true Supreme Being. (Matthew 11:27; 28:18; Luke 10:22; John 3:35; 5:19-22,25-27; 13:3; 17:2) The authority to heal and raise the dead was also given by Jesus to the apostles. Does this mean we should imagine and assume the apostles are God Almighty? -- Luke 9:1; Acts 3:6,15,16: 4:7-11; 9:36-41; 20:7-12.

After performing the miracle of raising Jairus' daughter, two blind men spoke of him, not Jehovah, nor as "God," but as "the Son of David." -- Matthew 9:27.

Some note that they called Jesus, "Lord." (Matthew 9:28) The use of the title Kurios does not in itself carry any meaning of Jehovah. The same Greek word (kurios) is used in Revelation 7:14, where John address the elder who spoke to him. It is also used in Acts 16:30, when the jailer spoke to Paul and Silas. Thus the blind men's use of this word toward Jesus as a man was not unusual. Similarly, the young man who came to David with the news of Saul's death bowed down (shachah - worshiped) before him and called David "Lord" -- Adon. -- 2 Samuel 1:2-10. See our study: "Lord" in the New Testament.
In Matthew 14:33, we find that after Jesus calmed the winds, the men in the ship came and bowed (proskuneo) before Jesus, calling him, not God Almighty, but "Son of God" -- Son of the Supreme Being.

In Matthew 15:22-28, we read of the Phoenician woman who came to Jesus. She did not call Jesus God Almighty, but rather "Son of David." Then she bowed (proskuneo) before him to plead on her daughter's behalf. There is nothing here for us to suppose that this Phoenician woman really believed that she was bowing before the Almighty God of the universe! Again, we read that the crowds glorified the God of Israel for the miracles being performed through Jesus. -- Matthew 15:31.

Matthew 18:26 - "The servant therefore fell down and kneeled before [proskuneo, Strong's Greek #4352] him, saying, 'Lord, have patience with me, and I will repay you all.'" These words are part of a parable. Many believe the King in the parable to be Jesus, or God Almighty. However, it is important to note that not all translations render proskuneo in this verse as "worshipped". The World English Bible translation at least shows here that proskuneo does not always mean the worship that only belongs to Jehovah by rendering proskuneo here as "kneeled before". The New American Standard Bible translation renders it as "prostrated himself". The New King James Version renders it as "fell down before". The Third Millennium Bible translation renders it as "did homage to". The New Living Translation gives it as "fell down before". The New Revised Standard Version and The Good News Translation translate proskuneo in this verse as "fell on his knees before". The Revised Standard Version reads "fell on his kness, imploring". Young's Literal Translation renders the words as "having fallen down, was bowing to". All of these translations acknowledge that proskuneo is in the parable itself used in a sense other of the worship that only belongs to Jehovah. Likewise, we have no reason to believe that proskuneo , in reference to the Son of God, carries the meaning of the worship that is only due to God.

In Matthew 20:20-23 we read of the mother of Zebedee's children who came to Jesus and, bowing (proskuneo), asked that her two sons sit beside him in his kingdom. That she bowed before him, not because she thought Jesus was God Almighty,  but as the rightful heir of the kingdom should be apparent from the scripture itself. We need to note that Jesus' heirship to God's kingdom does not include dominion over Jehovah himself; Jesus continues to be in subjection to his Father, Jehovah. -- 1 Corinthians 15:27,28; Revelation 1:1; 3:12; 5:7.

In Matthew 28:9 we read of the women who went to the tomb where Jesus' body lay, found it empty and to whom an angel appeared who told them to go tell his disciples of the risen Jesus. Jesus met them on the way and the women held onto his feet, and bowed down (proskuneo) to him. In this instance, the text implies that the women had simply bowed before Jesus at his feet, and there is nothing to suggest that they were worshiping him as the Almighty Jehovah.

In Mark 15:16-19, we read of the soldiers who mockingly called him "King of Jews" and who bowed their knees and [mockingly] gave homage (proskuneo) to Jesus. These soldiers certainly did not have any idea of "worshipping" Jesus as Almighty God. They were mocking the claim that Jesus was King of the Jews, not that he was God Almighty! In their mocking, they were bowing before him as one would bow before a king.

In John 9:35-38 the blind whom Jesus healed, when finding out who Jesus was, bowed down (proskuneo) before him. Jesus did not present himself to this once blind man as the Supreme Being, but rather the Son of the Supreme Being (Textus Recptus), or more than likely as the Son of the Man (Westcott & Hort Text). There is no indication that this man thought that he was bowing before the Supreme Being.

And note that over and over it is the God and Father of Jesus, to whom the glory is given:

"But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men." -- Matthew 9:8.

"Insomuch that the multitude wondered, when they saw the dumb to speak, the maimed to be whole, the lame to walk, and the blind to see: and they glorified the God of Israel." -- Matthew 15:31.

"They were amazed, and glorified God." -- Mark 2:12.

"And immediately he rose up before them, and took up that whereupon he lay, and departed to his own house, glorifying God. And they were all amazed, and they glorified God." Luke 5:25,26.

"And immediately she was made straight, and glorified God." -- Luke 13:13.

"When he saw that he was healed, returned, and with a loud voice glorified God." -- Luke 17:15.

"And immediately he received his sight, and followed him, glorifying God. And all the people, when they saw it, gave praise to God." -- Luke 18:43.

"Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in him." -- John 13:31.

Indeed, we may be sure that those Pharisees who took up stones to kill our Lord because they found fault with his claim to be the Son of God would have been wild beyond bounds, and not only have stoned our Lord Jesus, but also his worshipers, claiming idolatry, had they entertained as a people any such extreme thought of worship, obeisance (proskuneo), as is entertained by those whose extreme views respecting this word we are combating and have proven to be erroneous.

Nevertheless, the scriptures also reveal a kind of reverence, obeisance or worship that is rendered to a e recognized representative of a false god -- as a pseudo-Christ or false Christ -- Antichrist. Homage to the popes would, we believe, come under this head of false or wrong worship; because in his office he claims falsely to be "Vicegerent Christ." It was on this ground that our Lord Jesus refused to acknowledge Satan and his great power in the world. It was an actively evil power, directly opposed to the laws of Jehovah. Hence the proposition that by not opposing evil, by respecting or reverencing evil customs already established under Satan's regime, Satan would cooperate with our Lord in the establishment of his kingdom, was at once declined and Jesus' answer signified -- I am in full accord with Jehovah God and therefore in full accord with the prophetic declaration: "You must reverence Jehovah your God and him you must serve" -- and since you are his willful opponent I can render no reverence to you or your methods, nor could I either serve your cause or cooperate with you. Our causes are distinctly separate. I will have nothing to do with you. -- Compare Matthew 4:10; Deuteronomy 10:20,21.

Had our Lord Jesus set himself up as a rival to Jehovah instead of accepting himself as Jehovah's Son and servant, any homage to him would have signified disrespect to the Father and would have been sinful -- idolatrous. On the contrary, however, while accepting homage as the Son of God he declared most positively and publicly, "The Father is greater than I," and taught his disciples to make their petitions to the Father, saying, "Whatsoever you shall ask of the Father in my name, he will give it you." -- John 16:23.
Revelation 3:9 - "Behold, I give of the synagogue of Satan, of those who say they are Jews, and they are not, but lie. Behold, I will make them to come and worship [proskuneo] before your feet, and to know that I have loved you." We have mentioned this earlier, but we want to make some further comments concerning this. The New American Standard Bible translation, The New Revised Standard VersionThe Revised Standard VersionThe Good News Translation and the New Living Translation render proskuneo here as "bow down". The New Century Version , Young's Literal Translation and the God's Word Translation render the word as "bow". The Complete Jewish Bible renders it as "prostrate themselves." Again, these translations give evidence that the translators recognize the word proskuneo as not always referring to the worship that only belongs to God, and fall back on the Hebraic usage.

The Message translation renders the word proskuneo as "forced to acknowledge." While this translation is questionable, it still shows that the translators considered the word to mean other than the worship due only to God.

However, an argument has been put forth concerning this verse that would have the worship being given to God, not the saints. Evidently this would have Revelation 3:9 read: "I will make them to come and worship God before your feet." The thought appears to be that those in the Synagogue of Satan would come to the Philadelphia church to worship God, due to the door opening as mentioned in Revelation 3:7. In actuality, that is not what the verse states; it does state that those of the synagogue of Satan will bow before the saints, who will have dominion with Jesus in the age to come. (Daniel 7:14,22,27; Revelation 20:1-6) "For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly... but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart." (Romans 2:28, 29) These false "Jews", liars, are not now worshipping God in spirit and truth in this age, but are still blinded by Satan. (2 Corinthians 4:4; Revelation 12:9) The synagogue of Satan, very evidently, is made up of professing Christians, picked or selected by Satan, to falsify the doctrines of Christ; being a part of the permission of evil. They oppose the spiritually-enlightened ones, and brotherly love is not in them. Usually these claim some eternal doom upon any who do not accept their added dogma. As those who crucified the Lord will yet be eventually -- in the age to come -- caused to confess and abhor their wickedness, so the oppossers of this period will have the shame of seeing, and confessing their wrong doing; and yes, they will worship God, by bowing before and acknowledging the righteousness authority of God's appointed kings and rulers in the age to come. This is further confirmed by Isaiah 60:14. When the blessings are flowing out to all the earth, it will seem to be impossible not to bow before Jesus and his saints to the glory of God. -- Philippians 2:10.

Revelation 22:8,9

Then why did the angel refuse to accept the homage from John as recorded by John at Revelation 22:8,9? We know that earlier in the book of Revelation, proper homage (Greek, Proskuneo, worship) given to God's representatives is not condemned. (Revelation 3:9) Evidently John was giving the angel worship that should only be given to Jehovah, or that he was giving to the angel such worship that detracted from the worship of Jehovah. The angel recognizing this told him that this was not to be done. Likewise, when Cornelius worshipped Peter (Acts 10:25); evidently Peter recognized this as worship that should only be due to God, for most certainly, as we have seen, various men were worshipped, or given homage to, in the Old Testament, without any thought that this kind of homage was that which was only due to God. Peter, realizing that Cornelius was not just giving him homage as a man given authority, or as an apostle, etc., but more so as that which should belong only to God, thus rebuked Cornelius.

Or, in Revelation 22, the action of John and the angel is designed to be prophetic of how Christians may wish to worship various ones who have taken presented various truths from the Bible, such as Arius, Martin Luther, John Wesley, etc. It may be a prophetic warning not to bow down to the any such messenger as though the messenger were infallible, so as to limit our thinking only to what any such messenger has presented.

God's people are to love and esteem each other, and that in proportion as they recognize in each other the spirit of God, the spirit of Christ, the spirit of holiness and devotion to truth and righteousness; as the Apostle says, the faithful should be esteemed "very highly for their work's sake" (1 Thessalonians 5:13); but while there may be danger that some will fail to render "honor to whom honor is due" (Romans 13:7), there is undoubtedly danger also that some might render too much honor to human (or angelic) instruments, whom God is pleased to use in connection with the service of presenting various truths from the Bible. Thus we note the danger of man-worship or angel worship. (Colossians 2:18,19) This matter is very forcibly brought to our attention in Revelation 22:9. John, who, representing the living saints all down through the Gospel age, is caused to see unfolding the various features of the divine plan, in conclusion falls down to worship the angel who showed him those things. So there has been and is a tendency on the part of many to give more than love, respect and honor to the servants of God who from time to time have been used as special servants of God in bringing to the attention of the Church things new and old, or to the particular brother or sister who was the means of conversion or other spiritual benefit. There was this disposition in the early Church, some exalting one Apostle and some another as their chief and master, and naming themselves as his disciples, saying, "I am of Paul;" or "I am of Apollos;" or "I am of Peter," etc. (1 Corinthians 3:4) The Apostle Paul assures them that this disposition indicates a measure of carnality, and he inquires, who then are Paul, Apollos and Peter, but merely the servants or channels through whom God has been pleased to send you the blessings of the truth. (1 Corinthians 3:5) "Neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth, but God that giveth the increase." (1 Corinthians 3:6) He indicates thus that they should recognize, not the channels through whom the blessings came, but Jehovah, the Author of their blessings, and loyally believe in the name of him who died for and redeemed them. -- 1 John 3:23; 4:11; 5:13.

Likewise, when the Church began to get rid of the gross darkness of the dark ages under the help and instruction of the reformers, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and others, they naturally and properly had great respect for those whom God had honored as the instruments in the work of reformation. But again the tendency to "worship" the messengers, the human agents, was manifested, and today there are hundreds of thousands who call themselves by the name of Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Campbell, and others, and who give more respect to the teachings and writings of these men than to the Word of God, and this with corresponding injury to themselves.

Likewise, today, in the light of truths revealed through the Bible itself, no doubt there is need to be on guard against this carnal tendency which has had so deleterious an influence in the past.

When John fell down to worship the angel who had shown him the wonders of the divine plan, the angel's refusal to accept worship should be a lesson to all ministers (servants -- messengers) of God. He said, "You must not do that; for I am thy fellow-servant [not the "one God" of whom are all -- 1 Corinthians 8:6], and [fellow-servant] of your brothers the prophets, and [fellow-servant] of [all] them who keep the sayings of this book. Worship God [the source from which come all these blessings and all this light]." All servants of God are fellow-servants regardless of the time or extent of their service (including Jesus). The Apostle calls attention to this tendency towards creature-worship in his epistle to the Colossians (2:18,19), saying, "Let no man allure you of your reward, in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels [messengers]." The intimation is that this temptation will come insidiously, craftily, and not by brazen demands for reverence. Such is the reverence accorded in general to the ministry of the nominal churches. Many ministers who seem very meek, and who would not think of demanding reverence or worship, nevertheless accept of their flocks titles of exaltation, such as "Reverend", "Right Reverend", etc., and encourage it, and feel offended if reverence or worship of this sort is not rendered. The effect has been and still is to injure the household of faith, to give an over-confidence in the judgment and word of the minister in spiritual things, so that many neglect to prove their faith by God's Word, and to trust implicitly to its authority.

And there is danger among those who do not use titles of exaltation. It should always be remembered that control resides in the congregation and not in self-appointed leaders, whether they seek to serve a dozen or thousands. The churches of Christ should recognize the leading of their Head, and know that if the congregation is following scriptures in selecting their leadership, such leaders will be of his choice (See Hebrews 13:7,17,24, Diaglott), but they should beware of any disposed to usurp the rights of the congregation or to ignore those rights by taking the place of leaders without the specific request of the congregation; alluring the company into supposing that the leader alone is competent to judge and decide for the congregation as to the Lord's choice, and thus failing to hold the Head (Christ) as the only real teacher, who is able and willing to guide all the meek in judgment, because they are his Church -- "his body."

Nor is this alluring of the attention of the flock, away from the only Shepherd, to a fellow sheep always the fault of the "leaders:" there seems to be a general tendency on the part of all who have the true, humble, sheep nature to follow someone, and if the sheep have not developed maturity in the spirit, they may easily succumb to carnal worship of human leaders. It is a lesson, therefore, for all to learn, -- that each sheep recognize as leaders only such as are found in full accord with the voice and spirit of the Chief Shepherd (Christ), and the under-shepherds (the Apostles), and that each sheep see to it that he eats only "clean provender" and drinks only "pure water" as directed by the Shepherd. (See Ezekiel 34:17-19.) This implies the exercise of the individual conscience of each member of Christ's flock on matters of doctrine and practice, and tends to keep each one in sympathy and fellowship with the Shepherd, who knows each sheep and "calls his own sheep by name." The same intimate relationship of the individual Christian with the Lord is illustrated in the figure of Christ the Head and the Church as members of his body. -- 1 Corinthians 12:12-27; Ephesians 4:15,16.

John 5:23

"That all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father."

Many claim that Jesus the above means that we should give to Jesus the worship that only belongs to the Most High. We agree that Jesus is to be honored by our exalting him highly in our motives, thoughts, words and deeds, and is to receive our worship in a relative sense. This is illustrated in 2 Chronicles 29:20: "David said to all the assembly, Now bless Jehovah your God. All the assembly blessed Jehovah, the God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped Jehovah, and the king." Both Jehovah and the king are worshipped, but are we to claim that the worship only due to Jehovah is also being given the king, or that the king is equal to Jehovah?

Jesus is to receive the honor spoken of in John 5:23, not as being the Most High, but as the Father's representative and plenipotentiary. As a result of the honor given to Jesus, it will result in giving "glory to God in the highest," that is, it will be to the glory of the only true Supreme Being (Luke 2:14; Philippians 2:11; Revelation 5:13; 15:3,4; Ephesians 1:12; 1 Corinthians 15:28; John 17:1,3). The honor due to Jesus is a high, honor being the next to the highest honor due to any being, since only his God is to receive a higher honor. The expression "as they honor the Father," does not mean that the Son is to be honored in the same degree, but as a matter of fact as the Father, because he is the Father's Vicegerent. That it does not mean that the Son is to receive equal honor with the Father can be seen from the following scriptures: Philippians 2:9-11; Ephesians 1:19-23; 1 Corinthians 15:28; Revelation 5:13. Thus they honor him as the Father in the sense that he is the Representative of Jehovah.
So have claimed that the Greek word often transliterated as Kathos -- translated "as" in our text -- means equivalent, and thus it is claimed that Jesus and his God and Father or equal, and further claimed that this means that Jesus is God. Actually, the Greek word does not necessarily mean this, as can be seen by its usage all through the New Testament. Indeed, if the same reasoning were used with some scriptures, this would make the church also the Supreme Being, and/or equal in power to Jesus. (See: John 17:11,22; Ephesians 5:25,29; 1 John 4:17) A survey of the usage of this word should convince one that rarely, if ever, is it used in the sense of exact equivalency. Indeed, so far the only scripture that we have seen anyone try to apply this definition is John 5:23.
==========
Thayer and Smith. "Greek Lexicon entry for Kathos". "The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon".
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/kathos.html.

The context shows that this honor is due Jesus because of the authority and power that has been given to him by God, not because he is God. If he were God, the above statement would be totally meaningless, because Jesus recognized his God and Father as the only true God -- the only true Power. (John 17:1,3) After his resurrection and exaltation, Jesus was given even greater power than he had before. (Ephesians 1:17-23; Philippians 2:9,10; Daniel 7:14; 1 Peter 3:22) Jesus received his power from the only true source of all Power. If Jesus received his power from Jehovah, then this indicates that at one time he did not have this power, and needed to have the power given to him. Jesus is given this power, not because he is the Almighty, but because he carries out the work that the Almighty has given him to do. -- John 5:36; 10:25,37; Acts 2:22.

We might add in this regard that Joseph is usually recognized as a type of Jesus. Thus, we find in the relationship of the Pharaoh of Egypt to Joseph to be a type of Jesus' relationship with the Father. -- Genesis 41:39-41; Psalm 105:20,21.

Some object that to give this honor to Jesus would be idolatrous, if Jesus is not God Almighty. Despite the fact that "honor" (Greek, "Timao", Strong's #5091*) is not an exact synonym for worship, the idea that to give honor to Jesus in the same manner as we are to honor the son is in no way idolatry. Since Jehovah the only Most High (John 17:1,3) who made the laws concerning idolatry put these words in the mouth of Jesus, then he who made the laws concerning idolatry does not recognize this honor given to Jesus, his Son, as idolatry. (Deuteronomy 18:18,19; John 3:32; 5:43; 7:16; 8:26,28,40; 12:49; 15:15; 17:8,14) Jesus in the one who was sent by Jehovah, and Jesus speaks for Jehovah, he is not Jehovah. (Deuteronomy 18:15,18; Matthew 23:39; Mark 11:9,10; Luke 13:35; John 3:2,17; 5:19,43; 6:57; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,38; 10:25; 12:49,50; 14:10; 15:15; 17:8,26; Hebrews 1:1,2; Revelation 1:1) Jesus is the one anointed by Jehovah, he is not Jehovah. (Psalm 2:2; 45:7; Isaiah 61:1; Acts 2:36) Jesus puts his trust in Jehovah. He is not Jehovah in whom he trusts. -- Hebrews 2:13; Psalm 16:1
==========
*Thayer and Smith. "Greek Lexicon entry for Timao". "The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon".
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/timao.html. 1999.

When Jehovah told Moses concerning Joshua: "You shall put of your honor on him, that all the congregation of the children of Israel may obey." this did not make Joshua into Moses. (Numbers 27:20) Nor does it necessarily mean that the honor given to Joshua is equal to that which is given to Moses. Moses was the mediator of the Law Covenant; Joshua was not. Nor does giving honor to Joshua take away from Moses the special honor that is to be given to Moses as the lawgiver and as the one who led Israel out of Egypt. Likewise, the honor that is given to Jesus is not equal to the honor that is given to the God of Jesus.

On the other hand, if we honor Jesus in an equal sense as God Almighty, that is, to promote an honor him that only belongs to God Almighty as the Supreme Being, rather than to honor after the manner that we honor God Almighty, then this could be idolatry; this is indicated in the scripture where John bowed before an angel sent by God through Jesus, evidently with the heart intent of worshiping the angel as God Almighty, thus exalting the angel to a higher honor than was due to him. The angel did not condemn John, but he did rebuke the act of John in what he did. -- Revelation 22:8,9

Philippians 2:10

"That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things under the earth."

This scripture indeed shows that every knee will bow to Christ; but it is to him as God's representative, and not to him as the final goal of every creature's honor, as Philippians 2:11 shows: "And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Thus Christ's exaltation is a means to a higher end -- that God be the one finally worshiped and glorified. But as we have seen, a divinely pleasing [relative] worship is not a thing given exclusively to Jehovah; for God says that he will cause the enemies of the Church to worship her [in a relative manner]. -- Isaiah 60:14; Revelation 3:9.

Hebrews 1:6 and Psalm 97:7

Hebrews 1:6 is often claimed to be quoting Psalm 97:7. The claim appears to be that since Psalm 97:7 is telling the gods to worship Jehovah, that this means that its application to Jesus in Hebrew 1:6 means that Jesus receives worship as being Jehovah. Such would have to be an indirect quote, to say the least.

First let us examine Psalm 97:7.

Psalms 97:7 - Let all them be put to shame that serve graven images, That boast themselves of idols: Worship him, all ye gods. -- American Standard Version.

Here this speaks of those who serve graven images , and then addresses some whom he calls "gods", and tells them to worship Jehovah. 

Evidently due to context, some appear to conclude that the gods are the graven images. This really would not make sense, since Isaiah 44:9-12; 1 Corinthians 8:10 and several other scriptures tell us that the idols are not god (mighty); they are truly nothing, having no might or power to even think, reason, speak, hear etc. Galatians 4:8 refers to the man-made idols of the heathen, which by nature have no mightiness or power. How are such "gods" supposed to worship Jehovah? 

In view of what is stated in Deuteronomy 32:17 and 1 Corinthians 10:20, some have thought that perhaps it is speaking of the demons, the angels that sinned. (2 Peter 2:4) These demons certainly have power that they received from God, but which they misuse. We note that the evil spirit that impersonated Saul is called "a god", that is mighty being. (1 Samuel 28:13) In that all who are in heaven and earth will eventually bow in the name of Jesus to the glory of Jehovah, they will indeed eventually be forced to worship Jehovah. 

However, we do not believe that Psalm 97:7 is speaking about the demons.

Brenton's translation from the Christianized Septuagint reads:

Let all that worship graven images be ashamed, who boast of their idols; worship him, all ye his angels.

Many claim that Hebrews 1:6 is actually quoted from the LXX of the first century. The truth is that we do not have the LXX of the first century, but we doubt very highly that the Bible writers ever quoted from the Septuagint. It is possible that this is speaking of the angels, but we don't think so.
 
More than likely the command to worship Jehovah is directed to the sons of God -- the saints -- on earth, since the context is pertaining to engraved images that would be here on earth. (Psalm 82) They are instructed to worship God, that is, Jehovah, not these idols.

Beza says that these gods refer to "all who are esteemed in the world".

Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Psalms 97". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/gsb/psalms-97.html. 1599-1645.

There is definitely no direct statement in the Old Testament where Jehovah says to the angels that they are to worship Jehovah's anointed one.

More than likely, however, Hebrews 1:6 is a paraphrase of the prophecies of Daniel, where all dominions, which would include the angels, are foretold to serve Jesus. -- Daniel 7:14,27.

Revelation 4:11 and 5:8,9,12,13

"You are worthy, O Jehovah, to receive glory and honor and power; for you have created all things, and for your pleasure they are and were created." -- Revelation 4:11.

"And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, every one of them with harps, and golden vials full of odors, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sung a new song, saying: 'You are worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof, for you were slain, and have redeemed some for God by your blood, out of all families, and language, and people, and nation.'" -- Revelation 5:8,9.

"Saying with a loud voice: 'Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory and blessing.' And every creature that is in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and those which are in the sea, and all that are them, I heard saying: 'Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb forever and ever.'" -- Revelation 5:12,13

Many have read into these scriptures that Jehovah and Jesus are receiving the same exact worship and glory, etc.

The fact that similar words are used both of the respect given to Jehovah and Jesus does not mean they are the same being. If one is consistent in such reasoning, one should also have David and  the same being: "And David said to all the assembly, Now bless Jehovah your God. And all the assembly blessed Jehovah, the God of their fathers, and bowed down their heads, and worshipped Jehovah, and the king." (1 Chronicles 29:20, American Standard Version ) No one would think that when they worshiped Jehovah and the King, that the same worship due the King would be equal to that of Jehovah, and then from that conclude that the King is another person who is also God; neither should we think that of the homage given to Jehovah (the Father == the only one who is the source of all -- 1 Corinthians 8:6) and his Son Jesus.

The Lamb is not the one seated on the throne of Revelation 4:9,10. He stands between the throne and the four living creatures. (Revelation 4:6) He takes the scroll from the One seated on the throne. (Revelation 4:7) The lamb was slain (God is never slain nor can he die). (5:9,12) The lamb joins with Jehovah, the only true Supreme in receiving honor and glory. Jesus receives his position as an inheritance received from his Father, Jehovah. (Psalm 2:8; 110:4; Luke 22:28-30; Revelation 2:27) The Father and Son are later joined by the joint-heirs who sit on the throne with the Lamb. These too are counted worthy of the kingdom and the glory of God and are to receive homage (worship); thus are they also to be considered God Almighty? -- John 17:22; 1 Thessalonians 2:12; Revelation 3:9. -- Ronald R. Day, Sr.


Bibliography:

Epiphany Studies in the Scriptures, Series I: God
, by Paul S. L. Johnson, pages 485, 534-536.

"Worshiping Fellow Messengers," (Zion's Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence ),
December 15, 1896, page 305 - Reprint 2079; Available online from:

Related RL Studies

Edited: February 19, 2009; February 16, 2014

A Related Video:

**********