Revelation 1:11- Alpha And Omega In Some Translations

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. -- Revelation 1:11, King James Version.

Saying, What thou seest, write in a book and send it to the seven churches: unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamum, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. -- Revelation 1:11, American Standard Version.

Revelation 1:11 is often cited by trinitarians and some others as proof that Jesus is Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Of course, there is actually nothing in the verse that says such, so the idea has to formulated beyond what is actually stated.

The claim usually is that Jehovah is declared to be first and last in Isaiah 41:4; 44:6; 48:12, and that in Revelation 1:11 Jesus declares himself to be first and last. The claim is also often made that there can only be one "the first and the last," evidently giving the term an exclusive meaning of that could only be applied to the Supreme Being. In reality, such a thought is not stated anywhere in the Bible. The terms simply signifies a uniqueness in some way. For instance, George Washington was the first and last to be the first president of the United States. There was no first president before him, not will there ever be another first president of the United States again.

We should also not Hebrews 1:1,2 excludes Jesus as being God who spoke through His prophet Isaiah. 

Regardless, in Revelation 1:11, the words "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and," is not found in the most translations. Most scholars appear to agree that the these words were added, and should not be there. We will provide a few quotes from various scholars:

Adam Clark states: I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and - This whole clause is wanting in ABC, thirty-one others; some editions; the Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Slavonic, Vulgate, Arethas, Andreas, and Primasius. Griesbach has left it out of the text. -- Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Revelation 1:11". "The Adam Clarke Commentary". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/revelation-1.html. 1832.

Charles Ellicott stated:

In this verse we pass from St. John to Him who was the Word, of whom St. John gave testimony. He who is the faithful witness now speaks. “What thou seest, write,” &c. The previous words, “I am Alpha,” &c., are not found in the best MSS. -- Ellicott, Charles John. "Commentary on Revelation 1:11". "Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ebc/revelation-1.html. 1905.

John Gill states:

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last,.... These characters, which are repeated here; see Gill on Revelation 1:8; are left out in the Alexandrian copy, the Complutensian edition, the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions; but are very fitly retained, to point out the person that speaks; to express his dignity, deity, and eternity; to excite the attention of John, and to give weight to what he said. -- Gill, John. "Commentary on Revelation 1:11". "The New John Gill Exposition of the Entire Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/revelation-1.html. 1999.

Gill appears, in effect, to be saying, despite the textual evidence, that the phrase should be there because Jesus is God. If so, it would be circular reasoning, from this standpoint, to use the phrase in this verse as proof that Jesus is God. I do not dispute that Jesus is deity; I do dispute that Jesus' deity means that he is God (the Supreme Being), or that he is not the firstborn creature. -- Colossians 1:15.

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown states:

I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and. B 'Aleph (') A C, Vulgate, omit all this clause. -- Jamieson, Robert, D.D.; Fausset, A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on Revelation 1:11". "Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible - Unabridged". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfu/revelation-1.html. 1871-8.

Philip Schaff states regarding verse 11:

The first clauses of the verse in the Authorised Version must be removed, and the words of the voice begin with what thou seest write in a roll. -- Schaff, Philip. "Commentary on Revelation 1:11". "Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/revelation-1.html. 1879-90.

Walter Scott states regarding verse 11:

The divine titles, "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last," should be rejected as forming no part of what John wrote. The first title was probably inserted from verse 8, and the second from verse 17. -- Scott, Walter. "Commentary on Revelation 1:4". "Walter Scott's Commentary on Revelation". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/sor/revelation-1.html.

Daniel Whedon states of this verse:

The words I… and inclusive, are here a spurious reading. -- Whedon, Daniel. "Commentary on Revelation 1:11". "Whedon's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/whe/revelation-1.html. 1874-1909.

Oddly, it appears that many commentators skip over this part of Revelation 1:11 without any explanation at all. I cannot say why so many do this, but it may have been that they just did not wish get into the lack of textual support for the phrase. Some simply ignore the manuscript evidence and treat the phrase as being genuine. 

However, while many scholars present it as being fact that the phrase does not belong in Revelation 1:11, we actually have no way of knowing this for a certainty. IF Jesus did apply the phrase Alpha and Omega to himself in this verse, it should not be understood, as many claim, that Jesus was saying that he was God, the source of all. Alpha and Omega being the first and the last letters of the Greek alphabet, we should realize that it is synonymous with the expression "first and last." Neither phrase, of itself, signifies the Supreme Being who is eternal, but as designating one who first and last, uniquely, the only one of what is being referred to. The God and Father of Jesus is certainly first and last of all who are the source of all (1 Corinthians 8:6). He is the first and last of those who are "from everlasting to everlasting." (1 Chronicles 16:36; Nehemiah 9:5; Psalms 41:13; 90:2) Jesus, being the firstborn creature (Colossians 1:15) is not "from everlasting," but he is uniquely first and last in other ways. He is the first and last firstborn creature. (Colossians 1:15) He is the first and the last firstborn of the dead. (Colossians 1:18; Revelation 1:5) And he is first and last, unique in many other ways. I believe that in Revelation 1:17,18 and Revelation 2:8, Jesus referred to himself as being first and last in relation to what he said in the immediate context and also to what is stated in Revelation 1:5. He is the first and last firstborn of the dead; there will never be another firstborn of the dead. Thus, if he used the expression Alpha and Omega in verse 11, it should be viewed with this same meaning.

Colossians 1 – Study Of EN And DIA In Colossians 1

Some claim that the Greek words EN (Strong's #1722) and DIA (Strong's #1223) are not used in Colossians 1:15-17 in the sense of agency or instrument, but insist that it means that it is referring to Jesus as the Creator. Below we are presenting a brief examination of the usage of these two words in Colossians 1.

The following is from the English Revised Version Appendix C:
http://www.stfonline.org/resources/rev.html

Dia (#1223 dia,), : Dia can modify a noun in either the genitive or the accusative case.

With Genitive:
1. Agency: by, through
— E.g., “the Lord had spoken by the prophet” (Matt. 1:22).
2. Means: through, by means of
— E.g., “Though I have many things to write to you, I don’t want to do so with paper and ink” (2 John 1:12).
3. Spatial: through
— E.g., “he decided to return through Macedonia” (Acts 20:3).
4. Temporal: throughout, during
— E.g., “they were continually [lit. ‘through everything’] in the temple” (Luke 24:53).

With Accusative:
1. Causal: because of, on account of, for the sake of
— E.g., “They built a fire and welcomed us all because it was raining and cold” (Acts 28:2).
2. Spatial (very rare): through
— E.g., “Jesus was going through the region between Samaria and Galilee” (Luke 17:11).

The only one of the meanings given above for dia in Colossians 1:16 in the context would be the Genitive #1 above, that is, agency. Most “trinitarian” scholars agree with this, but they still believe that Jesus is the creator who is the agent in the creation, since they would add to and read into the scriptures that Jesus an alleged person of the Creator, and that in that one Creator, one alleged person of the Creator uses another alleged person of Creator as an agent. The trinitarian dogma read into the text blinds their minds so that they interpret the words in accordance with the blinding dogma.

The second word “en”:

En (#1722 evn): En only takes the dative case. When en modifies a noun, the noun will be in the dative case and the preposition will be understood in one of these ten ways:

1. Sphere: in
— E.g., “I hope that we are made manifest also in your consciences” (2 Cor. 5:11).
2. Spatial: in
— E.g., “there was a woman in the city who was a sinner” (Luke 7:37).
3. Temporal: in, while, during
— E.g., “in the days of Herod the king” (Matt. 2:1; cp. Matt. 11:22).
4. Association: with
— E.g., “the Father is in me and I am in the Father” (John 10:38; cp. John 14:20).
5. Causal: because of
— E.g., “And they glorified God in me” (Gal. 1:24). ESV: “And they glorified God because of me.” (Cp. Acts 7:29; Heb. 10:10).
6. Instrumental: by, with
— E.g., “[Will not the King] consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand” (Luke 14:31).
7. Agency/Means: by means of
— E.g., “the Pharisees said, ‘He casts out demons by the prince of demons’” (Matt. 9:34).
8. Thing possessed: with, which possesses
— E.g., “there was in their synagogue a man with an unclean spirit” (Mark 1:23; cp. Eph. 6:2).
9. Standard/Dative of Rule: according to the standard of
— E.g., “as to the righteousness which is in the Law, [I was] found blameless” (Phil.3:6; cp. 2 Tim. 3:16).
10. Used in place of eis with verbs of motion
— E.g., “to turn… the disobedient to the wisdom of the just” (Luke 1:17; 9:46).

“En” is often used in sense of “by” it is speaking of instrumental or agency in the sense of “by means of” (6 & 7 above). Most trinitarian scholars recognize this, but usually insist that it means the Father is God the Creator who creates through the Son, who is also God the Creator. A parallel to this usage may be found in Hebrews 1:1,2, where the God of the Old Testament is said to have spoken by means of (en, Strong’s 1722) the prophets of old, and that he now speaks by means of (en, Strong’s 1722) of his Son. The usage of the prophets as agents is clearly shown, and so likewise the usage of the Son of God as a agent/instrument by God is clearly shown. If we were to imagine, assume, add to and read into Hebrews 1:2 that this is speaking of God the Father speaking through God the Son, it would seem that to be consistent one would also say that verse 1 refers to God the Father speaking God the prophets. Actually, "God" is presented in Hebrews 1:1,2 and verse 2 distinguishes God's Son from "God."

What some trinitarians do is claim that #1 above is meaning of “en” in Colossians 1:16, that in him (en autw) was the sphere of creative activity related to the all. It sounds logical on the surface and would seem to be in harmony with the added-on dogma of the trinity, which claims Jesus as the Creator. However, so far we have not seen any scholar who states this who actually connects that view with the context. Let us examine Paul’s usage in the context leading up to Colossians 1:16. We will be examining his usage especially of the words en (Strong’s 1722), dia (Strong’s #1223), “God”, “Jesus”, and “Christ”, as to how they are used in relation to each other.

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus through [Strong’s #1223] the will of God, and Timothy our brother, — Colossians 1:1.

It should be obvious that Paul, in using a form of the word “dia,” is speaking here of God’s will in a manner of instrumentality, that through, by means of, God’s “will” Paul is an apostle of Christ Jesus.

Is Paul using the word “God” to mean more than one person? Or, does he use the word “God” to represent one person? In verse one, while we can say “Christ Jesus” and “God” are apparently speaking of two different persons, we do not from this verse alone, based only in what is said in this verse, find anything to establish that “God” is being unipersonally. In other words, we suppose one could imagine that “God” here includes Christ Jesus as a person of “God,” although the context indicates otherwise.

To the saints and faithful brothers in [Strong’s 1722, KJV: by, instrumentality] Christ [who are] at Colossae: Grace to you and peace from God, our Father, and (Greek, Kai) the Lord, Jesus Christ. — Colossians 1:2.

Here we have the word “en” (Strong’s 1722) which seems to be generally conceded as being used here in the sense of instrumentality, although it could also mean that a figurative locative is used as meaning in associative agreement with.

Some, noting that the word “kai” can also mean “even”, may endeavor to argue that “kai” here should be rendered “even,” making the last part read “even the Lord, Jesus Christ.” While, at least on the surface, this may seem to support the oneness views, no knowledgeable trinitarian would seek to render “kai” as “even” here, since to do so would mean that this make Jesus appear to be God, our Father.

We give thanks to God, the Father of our Lord, Jesus Christ, praying always for you, — Colossians 1:3.

It is in this verse that we can find the relationship of God and Jesus being more clearly delineated. “God” here, most definitely is use unipersonally, speaking of the God and Father of Jesus, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, who spoke through Jesus. — Exodus 3:14,15; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; John 14:24; Ephesians 1:3; Hebrews 1:1,2.

Nevertheless, even the trinitarian has to admit that “God” in this verse speaks, not of three persons, but one person, thus “God” is used unipersonally.

But more importantly, this verse sets forth the identity of the main person doing the action as “God” in later verses, that is: “God, the Father of our Lord, Jesus Christ,” and this “God” is unipersonal.

Having heard of your faith in [en, Strong’s #1722) Christ Jesus, and of the love which you have toward all the saints. — Colossians 1:4.

Here Paul is using “en” as a figurative sphere of location of their faith as being “in” Christ Jesus, that is, the placing of their faith in his words, promises and work of Jesus Christ.

Because of the hope which is laid up for you in [en, Strong’s #1722] the heavens, whereof you heard before in [en, 1722] the word of the truth of the gospel. — Colossians 1:5.

Here we have the word “en” used twice; the first instance refers to the sphere of location, figuratively speaking, of the hope, that is, in the heavens, while the second usage is speaking of instrumentality, that they heard before “by means of” the word of truth.

Which has come to you; even as it is in [en, Strong’s 1722] all the world and is bearing fruit and increasing, as it does in [en, Strong’s 1722] you also, since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth. — Colossians 1:6.

The word “en” is again used twice, first locating the word of the Gospel as being located in all the world, and then he says that this Word is bearing fruit “in” the believers also. These usages are both designated a sphere of location, the first referring to in the world, and the last referring to a figurative sphere of location in the Christians at Colossae.

“God” is referred to as one person, that is God and Father of Jesus (Colossians 1:3,12), not three persons, and it this unipersonal God who is spoken of as the One performing the actions in Colossians 1:12, “who made us fit to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in (en, Strong’s #1722, by means of) [the] light.” Paul continues in verse 16 with the same line of thought as he had begun as shown in Colossians 1:13,14:

Colossians 1:13
who [Jesus’ God] delivered us out of the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his [Jesus’ God] love;
Colossians 1:14
in [Greek, en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] whom [the Son of God’s love] we have our redemption through [dia, Strong’s #1223] his blood [the blood of the Son of God’s love], the forgiveness of our sins;

In Colossians 1:14, Paul uses the the same Greek instrumental words as used in Colossians 1:16,17, that is, the Greek instrumental word “en”, and the instrumental word “dia”. He is showing how God has performed works by means of the Son of his love. God is the source of the actions, and Jesus is the agent that is used by Jehovah, which actions show the pre-eminent place that Jehovah has given to his firstborn creature.

Some trinitarians point to Ephesians 1:10, which they claim supports their theory concerning “en autw” in Colossians 1:16. However, what do we find there? We again find the God and Father of Jesus as one acting by means of Jesus.

Ephesians 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord, Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in [en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] Christ;
Ephesians 1:4 even as he [the God and Father of Jesus] chose us in [en, Strong’s #172, by means of] him before the foundation of the world [kosmos, probably a reference to regenerated world of the age to come], that we would be holy and without blemish before him in [en, Strong’s 1722, by means of] love;
Ephesians 1:5 having predestined us for adoption [placement] as sons through [Greek, dia, Strong’s #1223] Jesus Christ to himself [the God and Father of Jesus], according to the good pleasure of his [God’s] desire,
Ephesians 1:6 to the praise of the glory of his [God’s] grace, by which he [God] freely bestowed favor on us in [en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] the Beloved [Jesus],
Ephesians 1:7 in [Strong’s #1722, by means of] whom [Jesus] we have our redemption through [dia, Strong’s #1233] his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace [the grace of the God and Father of Jesus],
Ephesians 1:8 which he [the God and Father of Jesus] made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence,
Ephesians 1:9 making known to us the mystery of his will [the will of the God and Father of Jesus], according to his good pleasure [the good pleasure of the God and Father of Jesus] which he [the God and Father of Jesus] purposed in [en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] him [Jesus]
Ephesians 1:10 to an administration of the fullness of the times, to [The God and Father of Jesus will] sum up all things in [en,, Strong’s #1722, by means of] Christ, the things in [epi, upon] the heavens, and the things on [epi, upon] the earth, in [en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] him;
Ephesians 1:11 in [en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] whom also we were made a heritage [God makes his saints a heritage through Jesus], having been foreordained according to the purpose of him [the God and Father of Jesus] who works all things after the counsel of his will;
Ephesians 1:12 to the end that we should be to the praise of his glory [to praise of the glory of the God and Father of Jesus], we who had before hoped in [en, Strong’s #1722, in association with] Christ:
Ephesians 1:13 in [en, Strong’s #1722, by means of] whom [Jesus] you also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation, — in [en, Strong’s #1722, in association with] whom [Jesus], having also believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who [ho, which] is a pledge of our inheritance, to the redemption [releasing, deliverance] of God’s own possession, to the praise of his glory [the glory of the God and Father of Jesus].

Thus seen in context, there “en” in Ephesians 1:10 is also seen to be referring to instrumentality.

Some point to Colossians 1:19 as being in the context, and thus would like the application of “en” in Colossians 1:19 to also be applied to Colossians 1:16.

For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell. — New King James Version

Colossians 1:19
hoti en autw eudokeesen pan to pleerwma
BECAUSE IN HIM HE THOUGHT WELL ALL THE FULLNESS
3754 1722 0846_5 2106 3956 3588 4138
katoikeesai
TO DWELL DOWN
2730
Westcott & Hort Interlinear

Most scholars recognize the verb “eduokeesan” to be referring to the God and Father of Jesus, as spoken of in Colossians 1:2,3,10-13. The distinction between Jesus and his God is maintained. “All the fullness”, all the plenitude, is said to dwell “in” Jesus, which is the thought, the will of, the God and Father of Jesus. The reference is to the fact that the God and Father of Jesus has placed in Jesus all the plentitude, all full amount of that which is necessary, for Jesus to carry out what has been given to him by the God and Father of Jesus. This is further attested by the Colossians 1:20, “and through [di, Strong’s #1223] him [Jesus] to reconcile all things to himself [the God and Father of Jesus], having made peace [between the all and the God and Father of Jesus] through [di, Strong’s #1223] the blood of his [Jesus] cross [stauou, Strong’s #4716, not referring directly of instrument of death, but rather the act of dying on the instrument]. Through [di, Strong’s #1223] him [Jesus], I say, whether things on the earth, or things in the heavens.” It is the God and Father of Jesus who does these things “through” Jesus, and “through” Jesus, “the all” — ta panta — being spoken of, whether in heaven or on the earth, will be reconciled to the God and Father of Jesus. Please note that the word “things” can be misleading; the Greek does not have a word in Colossians 1:16-20 to correspond with the English word “things”, but the word is added by translators.

Another scripture often referenced in this connection is Hebrews 2:10

Hebrews 2:10
eprepen gar autw di hon ta panta kai
IT WAS FITTING FOR TO HIM, THROUGH WHOM THE ALL (THINGS) AND
4241 1063 0846_5 1223 3739 3588 3956 2532
di hou ta panta pollous huious eis doxan
THROUGH WHOM THE ALL (THINGS), MANY SONS INTO GLORY
1223 3739 3588 3956 4183 5207 1519 1391
agagonta ton archeegon tees swteerias autwn
HAVING LED THE CHIEF LEADER OF THE SALVATION OF THEM
0071 3588 0747 3588 4991 0846_92
dia patheematwn teleiwsai
THROUGH SUFFERINGS TO PERFECT.
1223 3804 5048
Westcott & Hort Interlinear

Hebrews 2:9 – 9 But we see him who has been made a little lower than the angels, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God he should taste of death for everyone.
Hebrews 2:10 – For it became him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the author of their salvation perfect through sufferings. — World English.

Hebrews 2:10 – For it was becoming in him – For the sake of whom are the all things, and by means of whom are the all things, – when, many sons, unto glory, he would lead, The Princely Leader of their salvation, through sufferings, to make perfect. — Rotherham.

For it became him, for whome are all these thinges, and by whome are all these things, seeing that hee brought many children vnto glory, that he should consecrate the Prince of their saluation through afflictions. — Geneva Bible (1587)

The word “en” (Strong’s #1722) is not used here, but a form of the word “dia” (Strong’s #1223) is used three times.

“Him” in Hebrews 2:10 can be read to mean either Jesus, spoken of Hebrews 2:9, or the God of Jesus, spoken of in Hebrews 2:3-8. I will give a suggested paraphrase of this verse as related by Carl W. Conrad, which seems to focus the attention on Jesus, not the God of Jesus:

“It was appropriate that he, inasmuch as all things are mediated by him and all things exist through his agency, that the author of their salvation should accomplish his mission through experience of suffering, thereby bringing many sons into glory.”

Thus seen, the words of Colossians 1:16,17 do not attribute this creation to Jesus, but rather through or in him. Green’s interlinear: “in [Greek en, Strong’s #1722] him were all things created.” This is similar to the expression “in you” in Romans 9:17: For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER *IN YOU*, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.” — NASV Green’s Interlinear:

“For this very thing I raised up you, so as I may show forth in you the power of me.” Also in Galatians 3:8: The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU.” Green’s Interlinear: “that will be blessed in you all the nations.”

If the creation is done “by means of” Jesus, who is the One who would be doing it “by means” of him? God the Father of Jesus, who is the One being spoken in the earlier verses as doing the action through Jesus. Thus the only true God creates these things by means of his firstborn Son, Jesus. All of this is in agreement with 1 Corinthians 8:6, where the God and Father of Jesus is shown to be the source, and Jesus is the agent.

In the latter part of the verse Paul tells that all these things have been created through [Greek, di, Strong’s Greek #1223] Jesus and for him. It is Jehovah who is the Creator and it is Jesus who is used by Jehovah as the executor of the commands of Jehovah in creation. Jesus acknowledges his God as the Creator in Mark 13:19.

Based on the above, we have endeavored to give a rendering of 

=============

One endeavors to find fault with our use of Westcott and Hort for the Greek text, especially as related to Colossians 2:15,17.  The claim is made that Westcott and Hort "didn’t believe in the deity of Christ, and only began their translating late 1800s." We have seen similar statements several times on the internet. 

Since Westcott & Hort were trinitarians, we have no reason to think that they did not accept the trinitarian idea of the deity of Christ. As far as Westcott is concerned, he makes it very plain that he believed in the traditional trinitarian dogma, which is actually of man, since it is never once presented anywhere in the Bible.

Some quotes from Westcott:

I should be inclined to say that the conception of God as Love complete and self-sufficing includes a Trinity. We cannot, as far as I see, think of love without (so to speak) subject, object, and uniting power, (Westcott, Life and Letters, Vol. II, p. 75).

It is of interest to notice that ‘love’ is connected by St Paul with each Person of the Holy Trinity,” (Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, p. 133).

It may be added that vv. 6—9 contain a testimony to the Holy Trinity in the several works of the Divine Persons: Christ ‘comes,’ the Spirit ‘witnesses,’ God (the Father) ‘hath witnessed concerning His Son,’ (Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, p. 186).

See also B.F. Westcott and the Deity of Jesus Christ -- by James May

John, of course, is speaking God's love for his creation as shown in his given his Son to save them. Since God's ways and thoughts are far above what man could imagine, adding to the Bible that John was speaking of God's being love for all eternity past and that such would mean that his Son had to have existed for all eternity past is non-sequitor. 

Nevertheless, there has been an enormous amount of false information spread about Westcott & Hort. Many false and distorted things can be presented and may appear to true, but in reality are very deceptive.

Nevertheless, since, as best as we can determine, the Textus Receptus reads the same in Colossians 1:16,17 as does the Westcott & Hort text; thus, the idea that there is something wrong with the presentation from of Colossians 1:16,17 from the Westcott and Hort text is irrelevant. At any rate, nothing we have presented is based on anything different that appears in the Westcott & Hort text of Colossians 1:15,16 from what appears in the Textus Receptus text. 

The points we have presented stand, whether one uses the Westcott & Hort text or the Textus Receptus.

We, however, do believe in the diety of our Lord Jesus as represented by forms of the Hebrew word often transliterated as EL (literally meaning might, strength, power) and its corresponding forms in the Greek often transliterated as THEOS. While deity -- as these words are used in the Bible -- may be applied to Jesus, but we do not believe that Jesus' deity -- his mightiness -- presents any reason to add to the scriptures a concept of the trinity or the oneness doctrines, or that Jesus is the Supreme Being.

For links to some of my own studies in which we show how the bible applies the Hebrew and Greek words for deity not only to Jesus but also to many others who are not false gods, see our resource page: Deity/Divinity of Jesus