Saturday, September 24, 2016
Acts 5:3,4 - Ananias Lied to God, Not to Men
But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back [part] of the price of the land? While it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power? How is it that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart? thou has not lied unto men, but unto God. -- American Standard Version.
Our trinitarian neighbors often point to this scripture as being one of the scriptures that prove that the Bible teaches their trinity dogma. Actually, we find nothing at all in the verses that say that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is more than one person, or that Jesus is a person of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
The claim is that the holy spirit is being called "God" in Acts 5. Actually, this scripture does not directly call the holy spirit "God." Nor is it saying that Ananias spoke directly to God or to the holy spirit. It was evidently Peter that Ananias directly lied to. At most, from this scripture, one could gather that the holy spirit is "God", but there is nothing in the scripture that gives reason to assume that God's Holy Spirit is a separate person of God. This thought would have to be added to what is said.
The claim is that the holy spirit is being called "God" in Acts 5. Actually, this scripture does not directly call the holy spirit "God." Nor is it saying that Ananias spoke directly to God or to the holy spirit. It was evidently Peter that Ananias directly lied to. At most, from this scripture, one could gather that the holy spirit is "God", but there is nothing in the scripture that gives reason to assume that God's Holy Spirit is a separate person of God. This thought would have to be added to what is said.
"Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thy heart, to lie to the holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land?" -- Acts 5:3
Of course, the very and actual full being of Satan did not fill the heart of Ananias. Satan filled Ananias' heart in the same manner as God fills and dwells in the hearts of his people -- by his Spirit, his influence. (Romans 8:11; 1 Corinthians 3:16) Satan's Spirit is one of covetousness and selfishness, which does not hesitate at deceit to accomplish its ends. Peter, who had been made the recipient of a special gift by means of the holy spirit of discerning of spirits, (1 Corinthians 12:10) was able to read the heart, to read the spirit, and thus could see that Ananias and Sapphira were acting dishonestly, pretending to do what they were not really doing. In this connection, the apostle uses the words "God" and "holy Spirit" interchangeably, saying, in verse 3, that they had lied unto the Holy Spirit, and, in verse 4, that they had lied unto God. The thought is the same. God's personal Holy Spirit, acting through the apostles, was God's personal representative, most emphatically; and consequently, in lying to the apostle who also represented God as well as his holy Spirit, Ananias and Sapphira were lying to God, lying to the holy Spirit of God, whose agent and representative Peter was.
One should note that the scriptures show that God's Holy Spirit is likened to God's finger, at least in as God's Holy Spirit represents the power of God. (Matthew 12:28; Luke 11:20) One's finger is, of course, an extension of one's self, but one would not say that one's finger is another person of oneself. Regardless, what one's finger does is what is directed by the owner of that finger; what is done by one's finger is what is done by the person to whom the finger belongs. Likewise, with God and His Holy Spirit. The point is that as one's finger is an extension of the person to whom the finger belongs, so God's Holy Spirit is an extension of God to whom the Holy Spirit belongs. God's Holy Spirit could be used as an extension of God as more or less figuratively being God's mouth, His eyes, His ears, His heart, His disposition, His will, etc. Of course, God's holy spirit, being an extension of God Himself, could certainly be spoken of as being grieved. This does not mean that we need to imagine, assume, add to, and read into the scriptures that God is three persons, and that His Holy Spirit is one of the persons of Himself.
It may also be helpful to note other instances in the Bible where an action is attributed to Jehovah but which are also attributed to a human that represented Jehovah. One such instance is 1 Samuel 12:1,13. Verse one says: "Samuel said to all Israel, Behold, I have listened to your voice in all that you said to me, and have made a king over you." It was Samuel who directly appointed Saul as King of Israel. In verse 13 however, we read: "Now therefore see the king whom you have chosen, and whom you have asked for: and, behold, Jehovah has set a king over you." Here we see that it is Jehovah who set a king over Israel. If we applied the same logic that many apply to Acts 5:3, we would conclude that Samuel is Jehovah. However, using common sense we understand that Samuel represented Jehovah when he appointed Saul as king over Israel.
One should note that the scriptures show that God's Holy Spirit is likened to God's finger, at least in as God's Holy Spirit represents the power of God. (Matthew 12:28; Luke 11:20) One's finger is, of course, an extension of one's self, but one would not say that one's finger is another person of oneself. Regardless, what one's finger does is what is directed by the owner of that finger; what is done by one's finger is what is done by the person to whom the finger belongs. Likewise, with God and His Holy Spirit. The point is that as one's finger is an extension of the person to whom the finger belongs, so God's Holy Spirit is an extension of God to whom the Holy Spirit belongs. God's Holy Spirit could be used as an extension of God as more or less figuratively being God's mouth, His eyes, His ears, His heart, His disposition, His will, etc. Of course, God's holy spirit, being an extension of God Himself, could certainly be spoken of as being grieved. This does not mean that we need to imagine, assume, add to, and read into the scriptures that God is three persons, and that His Holy Spirit is one of the persons of Himself.
It may also be helpful to note other instances in the Bible where an action is attributed to Jehovah but which are also attributed to a human that represented Jehovah. One such instance is 1 Samuel 12:1,13. Verse one says: "Samuel said to all Israel, Behold, I have listened to your voice in all that you said to me, and have made a king over you." It was Samuel who directly appointed Saul as King of Israel. In verse 13 however, we read: "Now therefore see the king whom you have chosen, and whom you have asked for: and, behold, Jehovah has set a king over you." Here we see that it is Jehovah who set a king over Israel. If we applied the same logic that many apply to Acts 5:3, we would conclude that Samuel is Jehovah. However, using common sense we understand that Samuel represented Jehovah when he appointed Saul as king over Israel.
Another example is the anointing of David as King of Israel. 1 Samuel 10:1; 12:7 tells that Jehovah anointed David. Samuel 16:13 says Samuel anointed David. Again, Samuel is not Jehovah, but rather he represented Jehovah who anointed him.
We might also take the case of Saul of Tarsus, before he became the apostle Paul, and the statements made concerning his persecuting the church. In Philippians 3:6 Paul described himself as persecuting the church. However, in Acts 9:5, we read: "He [Saul] said, 'Who are you, Lord?' The Lord said, 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.'" Should we conclude from this that the church is Jesus. No, but we remember the words of Jesus to his disciples: "He who receives you receives me, and he who receives me receives him who sent me." -- Matthew 10:40.
See our study on Similarities for more examples.
The trinitarian logic on this, however, is that Ananias lied to the Holy Spirit, but the next verse says he lied to God. Therefore they reason that the holy spirit is God, and then they further reason that God is one, and thus, they further imagine, assume, add to, and read into what is stated that the Holy Spirit of God is a person of God, etc. If we follow through with the trinitarian reasoning, however, the trinitarian logic would also require the holy spirit is Peter, since Ananias actually lied directly to Peter. Viewed from the way trinitarians often use scriptures to prove the trinity, this would produce a trinity: Holy Spirit, God, and Peter. The reality is that lying to Peter and the church was tantamount to lying to God whom Peter represented as an apostle, and lying against the influence of God's Spirit. Nevertheless, the holy spirit is essentially God, since it is God's personal "set apart" [holy] spirit, that he utilizes to do his will. This does not mean that God's Holy Spirit is a separate person of God.
There is nothing in what Peter said that gives one reason to imagine that Peter thought that by his words that he was saying that God is three persons, and that God's holy spirit is one of the three persons of God. Indeed, in Acts 3:13; 5:30, we find that Peter presented the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as only one person.
Thus we find nothing in Acts 5:3,4 that justifies the trinity doctrine. There is certainly nothing at all that even hints of three persons in one God. Nor is there anything to justify the teaching that the Holy Spirit itself is a person of God Almighty.
John 4:24
John 4:24
Some have used John 4:24 in an effort to prove that the holy spirit is God himself. There we read: "God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship him in spirit and truth." An attribute of God's being is that he is spirit, invisible power. The scriptures place the invisible spirit in contrast with what is seen by the flesh. That which is spirit comes and goes as the wind, "and you hear its sound, but don't know where it comes from and where it is going." (John 3:8) Likewise, one born [or, begotten, as many wish it] of the spirit, one who is led by God's spirit, he walks not after the flesh, not by what he sees by the flesh, that which is visible to the human eye, but rather the invisible things he sees by the spirit through faith. (Romans 8:4,14; 2 Corinthians 5:7; Galatians 5:16,25) Thus, "we don't look at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen. For the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal." (2 Corinthians 4:18) God's being an invisible, powerful, spirit being does not give any reason to think that God's holy spirit is a separate person of God.
However, the scriptures also say that "God is a devouring fire", (Deuteronomy 4:24; see also Hebrews 12:29) We would not turn this around and say that a devouring fire is God, or that a "devouring fire" is a person of God. We also read that "God is love". Again, we would not turn this around and say that "Love" itself is God, or that "Love" is person of God.
What we don't see in John 4:24 is any hint that God's being spirit means that the holy spirit of God is a person of God. However, as said before, the holy spirit, being that extension of his power sent by God to accomplish his will, can in this sense been seen as a personal extension of God himself, although it would not give the proper thought to turn this around and say that the holy [set apart, dedicated] spirit itself is God.
God's holy spirit is likened to God's finger, His hand or His arm (as the power of God). -- Ezekiel 3:14; 8:3; 37:1; Matthew 12:28; Luke 11:20.
What God does through His holy spirit is what God himself has done. What is spoken to God's holy spirit, however, is the same as being said to God Himself.
Some related Studies on the holy spirit may be found at:
https://www.htdbv8.com/Volume5/V5_11.htm
https://www.biblestandard.com/uploads/2/1/4/9/21496142/christ-spirit-covenants_[web].pdf
https://www.biblestandard.com/uploads/2/1/4/9/21496142/christ-spirit-covenants_[web].pdf
(We do not necessarily agree with all that is stated in these studies.)
***********
Wednesday, September 21, 2016
Sunday, September 18, 2016
Hebrews 1:8 - Why is Jesus called "Elohim" and "Theos"? Psalm 45:6,7
Hebrews 1:8 but of the Son he says, "Your throne, God [Theos; Psalm 45:6: elohim], is forever and ever; The scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom.
Hebrews 1:9 You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, your God [Theos, Psalm 45:7: ELOHIM, that is, Jehovah -- Isaiah 61:1], has anointed you With the oil of gladness above your fellows." -- Psalm 45:6,7.
Hebrews 1:9 You have loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; Therefore God, your God [Theos, Psalm 45:7: ELOHIM, that is, Jehovah -- Isaiah 61:1], has anointed you With the oil of gladness above your fellows." -- Psalm 45:6,7.
Some have claimed that "he" in the phrase "he says" refers to the Psalmist who wrote Psalm 45:6,7. Actually, however, "he" is a continuing reference in verses 5 through 13 that applies to the one person who is God of Hebrews 1:1,2. The unipersonal "God" is at the center working through "his Son." In Hebrews 1:5, "he" has to be referring the unipersonal God of Hebrews 1:1, since "he" says to the Messiah, "You are my son," as spoken of in Hebrews 1:2. In Hebrews 1:6, "he" who brings his firstborn again into the world has to be the unipersonal "God" of Hebrews 1:1. Likewise In Hebrews 1:7,8, we have no reason to think that "he" does not refer to the unipersonal "God" of Hebrews 1:1.
Thus, the Psalmist is evidently quoting God, at least in Psalm 45:6,7, and he prophetically speaks of the Anointed One, and the God of the Anointed One. Forms of the Hebrew word often transliterated as Elohim are used of both, but it is evident from the context that the same meaning is not to applied to both. The One who does the anointing is spoken of as the God of the One being anointed, thus the One doing the anointing is the Supreme Being of the One being anointed. This is shown in Psalm 45:7 and Hebrews 1:9. One anoints the other with the oil of gladness. The one being anointed has companions. These companions are probably the angels mentioned earlier, or his "brothers" mentioned in Hebrews 2:11; one does not normally think of God Almighty as having "brothers".
Like many of the Psalms, many believe that there is an original minor typical application as well as the major antitypical application of Psalm 45. Some scholars say that the original application of this Psalm was to Solomon. We read that Solomon "sat on the throne of Jehovah." (2 Chronicles 29:23; see also: 1 Kings 1:13) Likewise, Jesus' throne is also God's throne (Revelation 3:21), which he receives from his Father, the only true God. -- Psalm 2:4-6; Daniel 7:13,14; Acts 2:29-31; John 17:1,3.
Jehovah is the God [Supreme Being] of Jesus. Jesus was anointed by his God. Who is the Supreme Being over the Anointed One that is spoken of in Psalm 45:7 and Hebrews 1:9? The scriptures provide the answer in other scriptures. Another prophecy provides the answer, in Isaiah 61:1, which has the Messiah prophetically saying: "Jehovah has anointed me." It is the Supreme Being -- Jehovah -- the God [Supreme Being] of Jesus, who did the anointing, and who called Jesus theos (translated from elohim -- Psalm 45:6,7; See also Luke 4:18; Acts 10:38; Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34; John 17:1,3; 20:17; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; 5:20; Colossians 1:3; Hebrews 1:9; 1 Peter 1:3 Revelation 2:7; 3:2,13). Thus elohim who received the anointing is not the Supreme Being, since Jehovah is referred to as his Supreme Being. Thus, we should realize that elohim, as being applied to the One Anointed, does not carry the same meaning as it does for the One who did the anointing.
Jesus is prefigured by Moses, who is also called elohim, as well as "as" elohim. "And you [Moses] shall speak to him [Aaron], and you [Moses] shall put the words in his [Aaron's] mouth. And I [Jehovah] will be with your mouth, and with his mouth, and I will teach you what you shall do. And he shall speak for you to the people. And it shall be, he shall be a mouth for you, and you shall be a god [elohim] for him." (Exodus 4:16, Jay Green's A Literal Translation of the Bible, 1985) "And Jehovah said to Moses, Come, see I have made you a god [elohim] to Pharaoh." (Exodus 7:1, Jay Green's A Literal Translation of the Bible, 1985) -- Deuteronomy 18:18,19; Acts 3:19-23.
From this and other usages of the Hebrew words for "god", we determine that its meaning does not always mean the restriction of "Supreme Being", or the Almighty; nor does its usage of others mean that the others to whom it is applied are necessarily "false gods". Remembering that the basic meaning of Hebrew words for God is "strength" or "power"*, we need to note that Elohim is applied to Moses in this sense, that is, that God gave to Moses power, or strength, over Aaron and Pharaoh. Only Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus, is God as the Supreme Being, or the exclusive Source of All Power. Moses was not the exclusive source of power; thus, it would be false to refer to him as "God" with the restricted meaning of "the Supreme Being", but he was called elohim, since Jehovah gave him special powers.
*See our document:
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
*See our document:
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
and:
Indeed, the spirit that impersonated Samuel is also called elohim. "The king said to her, Don't be afraid: for what do you see? The woman said to Saul, I see a god [Hebrew, elohim] coming up out of the earth." (1 Samuel 28:13, World English) However, it should be apparent that elohim here applied to this spirit is not in the same manner as it is applied to Jehovah. This spirit does have power granted by God, even though he is misusing the power as a spirit being. Recognizing this, some translations render elohim here as:
- *divine being* (New American Standard; New Revised Standard Version)
- *spirit* (New King James Version; Good News Translation; New Century Translation; The Message translation; Contemporary English Version)
- *godlike being* (Jewish Publication Society Bible).
Others render it as "a god" and some render it as plural "gods"; "gods", however, does not actually fit the context. Of course, how it is rendered in English does not change the word used in the Hebrew.
Likewise, the word is used in the plural sense as applied to the angels. It should be apparent that elohim applied to the angels is not in the same manner as applied to Jehovah. -- Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7.
See our study:
The sons of God to whom the Word of God came, likewise are also called elohim, but again, we can see that they are not elohim in the same manner as the word is applied to Jehovah. (Psalm 82:6) Jesus, in quoting this Psalm, used the plural form of the Greek word THEOS, thus showing that he considered the Greek word THEOS in the same manner as the Hebraic usage of EL and ELOHIM when applied to others than the only true God.
See our study: Who Are the Gods?
Likewise, it should be apparent that in Hebrews 1:1,5,8 (Psalm 45:6) that theos (elohim) applied to the Son is with a different meaning than applied to Jehovah. Paul definitely identifies one person who speaks of his Son, thus the Son to whom "God" speaks is not "God" who does the speaking. There is definitely nothing in either Hebrews 1 or Psalm 45 about three persons in one God. The word *elohim* in the Old Testament usually refers to Jehovah, but as a general descriptive word, it is often applied to others, which would include Jesus, the Son of Jehovah. In giving all power to Jesus, it is evident that the One who gave this power to Jesus is excepted. (1 Corinthians 15:27) The very fact that this power over his fellows is given to Jesus by Jehovah's anointing shows that Jesus is not equal to Jehovah, and thus that Elohim, as applied to Jesus, is not in the exclusive meaning as it is applied to Jehovah, for only Jehovah is the source of all power.
In the above scriptures, we see three individual beings who are called elohim: Jehovah, Jesus and Moses. Only Jehovah has the position of Supreme Being; however, since both Moses and Jesus receive their power from Jehovah. We have no reason to believe that the author of Hebrews chapter one understood Psalm 45 in any other way than it had been viewed at the time it was written. The wording of the psalm draws a clear distinction between the one and only Ultimate Power, the Father (Creator) Who is the Majesty On High, -- and the secondary "Power", the Son who was sent by Jehovah and to whom he learned to obey through what he suffered. (Hebrews 1:1,2; 3:2; 5:8) Therefore, the Ultimate Power, the Creator of the firstborn of creation, has anointed His obedient son (who offered up both petitions and entreaties to the One able to save him from death -- Hebrews 5:7) above his peers.
Additionally, we should also note how some translations render Hebrews 1:8 and Psalm 45:6:
Hebrews 1:8
- Today's English Version: Your kingdom, O God, will last forever! You will rule over your people with justice.
- Revised Standard Version, margin: God is thy throne for ever and ever. as obtained from:https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+1%3A8&version=RSV
- Moffatt translation (1922): he says of the Son, "God is Thy throne for ever and ever."
- Daniel Mace New Testament (1729): but to the son he saith, "God is thy throne for ever and ever; the sceptre of thy kingdom is a sceptre of equity.
- Twentieth Century translation: while of the Son he said--'God is thy throne for ever and ever
Psalm 45:6
- Revised Standard Version: Your divine throne endures for ever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity.
- Good News translation: The kingdom that God has given you will last forever and ever. You rule over your people with justice.
- New Jerusalem Bible - Your throne is from God, forever and ever.
- The Message translation: "Your throne is God's throne, ever and always; The scepter of your royal rule measures right living."
- JPS Version: Thy throne given of God is for ever and ever; a sceptre of equity is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
- New English Bible translation: Your throne is like God's throne
Either way, however, there is nothing in Hebrews 1:8 or Psalm 45:6,7 that would lead us to think that Jesus is Jehovah. There is certainly nothing about three persons in one God.
Related RL Studies
Related Links
Please note that we do not necessarily agree with all that is stated on the following links, nor do the authors of these pages necessarily agree with us in all we say.
Please note that we do not necessarily agree with all that is stated on the following links, nor do the authors of these pages necessarily agree with us in all we say.
The Trinity (David Stein)
Thursday, September 15, 2016
Jehovah and Jehoshua - James Parkinson
Jehovah and Jehoshua -- James Parkinson, General Convention, June 26, 2011. (MP3) LEFT ClICK to play; RIGHT CLICK to download
Brother Parkinson discusses many things in this discourse. Overall, I am in agreement with much that he says. I will make a few comments:
To my understanding, ancient Hebrew actually does not have "tenses" as such; it does have what many refer to as "aspects" and "moods". Most scholars, not all, claim that ancient Hebrew has two of what could be called 'tenses', although there is some room for doubt in calling these "tenses," since it may be misleading. The two different formations of verbs, however, are often presented as reflecting a completed action, or an incomplete action. Such is often called the perfect tense (completed action) and imperfect tense (incompleted action), but some have considered such designations to be misleading. Beyond this, many scholars have presented other various theories of this or that verb "tense" in ancient Hebrew, usually as it applies to some specific word, and/or regarding a specific usage of some specific word. The truth is that verb tense as we know it in ancient Hebrew is determined by context as much as by form. -- page 44, footnote.
Regarding the generation that will not pass away: While I can say there is a possibility that Brother Parkinson may be correct, I have a hard time thinking of the church as passing away. It would have to refer to the church as passing away in death as individuals in this present age. I believe that Jesus was more likely not referring to the church, for the church is of the new generation that will not pass away, that generation will continue forever. Rather, I believe that Jesus was referring to the old generation existing through Adam. The passing away of the Adamic generation is described by Jesus as the passing away of the present heavens and earth.
See my related studies on "This Generation"
Brother Parkinson discusses many things in this discourse. Overall, I am in agreement with much that he says. I will make a few comments:
To my understanding, ancient Hebrew actually does not have "tenses" as such; it does have what many refer to as "aspects" and "moods". Most scholars, not all, claim that ancient Hebrew has two of what could be called 'tenses', although there is some room for doubt in calling these "tenses," since it may be misleading. The two different formations of verbs, however, are often presented as reflecting a completed action, or an incomplete action. Such is often called the perfect tense (completed action) and imperfect tense (incompleted action), but some have considered such designations to be misleading. Beyond this, many scholars have presented other various theories of this or that verb "tense" in ancient Hebrew, usually as it applies to some specific word, and/or regarding a specific usage of some specific word. The truth is that verb tense as we know it in ancient Hebrew is determined by context as much as by form. -- page 44, footnote.
Regarding the generation that will not pass away: While I can say there is a possibility that Brother Parkinson may be correct, I have a hard time thinking of the church as passing away. It would have to refer to the church as passing away in death as individuals in this present age. I believe that Jesus was more likely not referring to the church, for the church is of the new generation that will not pass away, that generation will continue forever. Rather, I believe that Jesus was referring to the old generation existing through Adam. The passing away of the Adamic generation is described by Jesus as the passing away of the present heavens and earth.
See my related studies on "This Generation"
Tuesday, September 13, 2016
Sunday, September 11, 2016
Matthew 4:7; Luke 4:12 - Did Jesus Claim that He Was the Covenant God of Satan?
Matthew 4:7 - Jesus said to him, "Again, it is written, 'You shall not test [Jehovah], your God.'" King James has "the Lord, your God."
Matthew 4:10 - Then Jesus said to him, "Get behind me, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship [Jehovah] your God, and him only shall you serve.'"
Luke 4:8 - Jesus answered him, "Get behind me Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship [Jehovah] your God, and him only shall you serve.'"
Luke 4:12 - Jesus answering, said to him, "It has been said, 'You shall not tempt [Jehovah] your God.'"
Deuteronomy 6:16 - You shall not tempt [Jehovah] your God.
The above scriptures are being presented as proof that Jesus is God, that is, that Jesus is allegedly a person of the only true God (trinitarian), and/or that Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh (Mormon, oneness, and some others). The claim apparently is that Jesus was telling Satan that Jehovah is Satan's God, and Jesus was referring to himself as being Jehovah, Satan's God. In other words, the thought is being presented that "your" in the phrase "your God" is referring to Satan, and that Jesus is referring to himself as the one who is "your God." Misreading the scripture in this manner would mean that Jesus was telling Satan not to tempt Jesus, Satan's God, and that it is only Jesus that Satan should worship as being his God.
Actually, if Satan thought that Jesus was God Almighty, then he would have known how fruitless it would have been to try to deceive God to try to provoke God to sin. However, there is no indication whatsoever that Satan thought that he was trying to get Jehovah to sin, or that he was trying to get Jehovah to bow down to himself.
Satan did not say that Jesus was his God, but rather that Jesus is the son of God:
"If you are the Son of God." -- Matthew 4:3,6; Luke 4:9.
The demons referred to Jesus, not as the Most High, but rather as "son of the Most High" (Mark 5:7; Luke 8:28), which is confirmed to be spoken of the babe Jesus in Luke 1:32.
This was the emphasis that Satan himself was putting on his tests of Jesus, that is, in effect, Satan was saying to Jesus: "I want you to prove that you are the son of God by doing this...."
In reality, it was Satan's hope to trick Jesus, to deceive Jesus, into being disobedient. Satan was not asking Jesus to prove that Jesus was Jehovah God. Certainly, Satan would have known if Jesus was Jehovah, and knowing that, would have also known that it would be fruitless to try to deceive Jehovah into disobeying or denying Himself.
Let us read the context:
Matthew 4:5 - Then the devil took him into the holy city. He set him on the pinnacle of the temple,
Matthew 4:6 - and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, 'He will give his angels charge concerning you.' and, 'On their hands they will bear you up, So that you don't dash your foot against a stone.'"
Matthew 4:7- Jesus said to him, "Again, it is written, 'You shall not test Jehovah, your God.'"
Matthew 4:8 - Again, the devil took him to an exceedingly high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world, and their glory.
Matthew 4:9 - He said to him, "I will give you all of these things, if you will fall down and worship me."
Matthew 4:10 - Then Jesus said to him, "Get behind me, Satan! For it is written, 'You shall worship Jehovah your God, and him only shall you serve.'"
What did Jesus say? Jesus did not appeal to himself, to tell Satan, I am your God whom you should not test," nor did he say, "I am Jehovah your God and it is only I that you must serve," but rather Jesus appeals on his own behalf to the written Word of his God, to the Law Covenant that was made with the children of Israel, recognizing himself as belonging to that covenant with Israel: "Again, it is written, 'You shall not test [Jehovah], your God'" (Matthew 4:7; Deuteronomy 6:16), and "You shall worship Jehovah your God" (Matthew 4:10; Exodus 20:3; 23:25; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13,14; 10:20; 1 Samuel 7:3), thereby showing the reason for his denial to submit to the Satan's suggestion to hurl himself down from the top of the temple.
The expression "your God" refers to Jehovah as the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 3:14,15), who is also the God of Jesus as a member of the children of Israel; Jesus was referring to the God who sent Jesus. -- Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 4:4 (Deuteronomy 8:3; Luke 4:4); Matthew 4:7 (); Matthew 4:10 (Exodus 20:3-5; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13,14; 10:20; Luke 4:8); Matthew 22:29-40; Matthew 26:42; Matthew 27:46; Mark 10:6 (Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7,20-23); Mark 14:36; 15:34; Luke 22:42; John 4:3; 5:30; 6:38; 17:1,3; 20:17; Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; Hebrews 1:9; 10:7; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12.
Jehovah "your God" as found in Jay Green's Literal Translation
Jesus is Not Jehovah
The expression "your God" refers to Jehovah as the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Exodus 3:14,15), who is also the God of Jesus as a member of the children of Israel; Jesus was referring to the God who sent Jesus. -- Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Matthew 4:4 (Deuteronomy 8:3; Luke 4:4); Matthew 4:7 (); Matthew 4:10 (Exodus 20:3-5; 34:14; Deuteronomy 6:13,14; 10:20; Luke 4:8); Matthew 22:29-40; Matthew 26:42; Matthew 27:46; Mark 10:6 (Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:7,20-23); Mark 14:36; 15:34; Luke 22:42; John 4:3; 5:30; 6:38; 17:1,3; 20:17; Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; 11:31; Ephesians 1:3,17; Hebrews 1:9; 10:7; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12.
Jehovah "your God" as found in Jay Green's Literal Translation
Jesus is Not Jehovah
Jesus was referring to the Law as given to Israel, Deuteronomy 6:16, which words were spoken to the nation of Israel, which was the only nation that had Jehovah as their God by covenant relationship. (Exodus 19:5,6; Deuteronomy 7:6; Amos 3:2) Thus, the words "your God" are in reference to Israel's God. Was Jesus here claiming that he [Jesus] was Jehovah, and was Jesus telling Satan that he [Jesus] was Satan's God (as though Satan were under the Law through Moses) and that Satan should not be testing Satan's God? Was Jesus, in effect, claiming that Satan was in a covenant relationship (through Moses) with Jehovah, and thus should not tempt his -- Satan's -- God? In reality, such an idea has to be added to and read into what Jesus said, and such an idea would actually take what Jesus said out of the context of the quote that Jesus gave, to apply to Jesus as being Satan's God.
On the other hand, Jesus was, by birth, an Israelite, born under the law. (Galatians 4:4) Jesus knew who his God was. Jesus was applying the verse to himself as an Israelite, that he, who worshiped Jehovah as his God, should not test Jehovah by submitting to the stunt that Satan was telling him to do.
Therefore, in reality, the fact is that Jesus was not saying to Satan that Jesus is "Jehovah, your God," the God that Satan was not to test.
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Tuesday, September 6, 2016
Alpha and Omega, The First and the Last
The claim is made that the book of Revelation shows that not only is Jehovah the Alpha and Omega, but that Jesus is also. If this were true (we don’t believe it is) all this would prove is that in some way the title Alpha and Omega is applied both to Jehovah and to Jesus; it does not prove that Jesus is his God. In Isaiah 41:4; 44:6; 48:12 we find the expression “first and last” used of Jehovah. From Isaiah 44:6,7 this expression, “first and last” appears to mean “first and last” in mighty omnipotency, being the source of all might, something which the false gods of the heathen cannot claim. However, most of our trinitarian and oneness neighbors appear to often read into this expression ‘eternal’, which they usually give the meaning of having existence in the eternal past as well as the eternal future. Jehovah has certainly been in existence "from everlasting (eternal past) to everlasting (eternal future)". (Psalm 92:1) While Jehovah is certainly the first and the last of those who exist "from everlasting to everlasting", it does not appear to be what "first and last" means in Isaiah 44:6,7. Nevertheless, such meaning applied to Jehovah does not mean that first and last itself would have to be referring to He who is the first and the last who exists "from everlasting to everlasting." Nor does the designation of "first and last", of itself, mean having omnipotence.
In the last book of the Bible, we again find this expression “the first and the last”. At least twice Jesus applies this phrase to himself as recorded in Revelation 1:17 and Revelation 2:8. The King James Version has Jesus applying this to himself also as given in Revelation 1:11, although most scholars agree that it is an interpolation in that verse. Nevertheless, our trinitarian and oneness neighbors would have us accept Revelation 1:17 and 2:8 as proof that Jesus is Jehovah, since the phrase is applied to both Jehovah and Jesus. The phrase appears also in Revelation 22:13, where Jehovah applies it to himself.
Another phrase found in Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13 is “beginning and the end”. Additionally, we find the phrase — Alpha and Omega — in Revelation 1:8; 21:6; 22:13 — all three of which refer to Jehovah. Thus, these phrases are not used of Jesus, but only of Jesus' God.
Looking at Revelation 1:1, we note that the Revelation is from God who gave it to Jesus. (This should be enough to prove that Jesus is not his God.) The message is delivered through an angel to John. In Revelation 1:4 John says the message is from the Father, Jehovah, who is and who was and who is to come. Then in verse 5, John says: “and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood.” Many translations make a distinction between Jesus and “his God” in Revelation 1:6, as, for instance, The World English Bible translation: “he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father.” Thus John identifies two individuals which the messages are from, the Father, Jehovah (Isaiah 61:1; John 17:1,3), and Jesus, God’s Son.
Then in verse 8 we find the quote
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." -- World English.
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." -- World English.
“The Lord” in this verse is Jehovah, not Jesus, as shown from Revelation 1:4, as well the distinction between the Lamb and He who is, was and is to come as shown in chapters 4 and 5 of the Revelation. The phrase “Lord God” is based on the Jewish practice of changing the Holy Name to either the Hebrew word often transliterated as Adonai [Lord] or to Elohim [God]. Christian scribes began to adapt this practice by changing Jehovah to forms of the Greek word transliterated as Kurios, which means "Lord," or to Theos, which means "God." The Hebrew phrase is transliterated as Jehovah Elohim. When Christians scribes later edited the Septuagint, they changed the Holy Name to Kurios [Lord] or Theos [God]. They likewise did this with the New Testament Scriptures. This can be seen by comparing Acts 3:22; 7:37 with the Hebrew of Deuteronomy 18:15. In all instances where the phrase occurs in the NT, it is in reference to Jehovah, the Father of our Lord Jesus. — Luke 1:32; 1 Peter 3:10-15; Revelation 11:17,19; 15:3; 16:7; 18:8; 21:11; 22:6.
Likewise, with the phrases “the Lord our God” and “the Lord your God”. These phrases are always used in reference to Jehovah the God and Father of our Lord Jesus. — Matthew 4:7 (Deuteronomy 6:16); Matthew 4:10 (Deuteronomy 6:13; 10:20); Matthew 22:37 (Deuteronomy 6:5); Mark 12:29 (Deuteronomy 6:4); etc.
Some Christian translators in the past, in translating the Greek New Testament into Hebrew, have inserted a Hebrew form of the holy name, often rendered as "Yahweh" or "Jehovah," into Revelation 1:8. The following are some Hebrew translations that contain a Hebrew form of the Holy Name in Revelation 1:8: NT, by W. Robertson, 1661; NT, by J. C. Reichardt, 1846; NT, by J. C. Reichardt & J. H. R. Biesenthal, 1866; NT, by F. Delitzsch, 1981 edition; NT, by I. Salkinson & C. D. Ginsburg, 1891.
Some Christian translators in the past, in translating the Greek New Testament into Hebrew, have inserted a Hebrew form of the holy name, often rendered as "Yahweh" or "Jehovah," into Revelation 1:8. The following are some Hebrew translations that contain a Hebrew form of the Holy Name in Revelation 1:8: NT, by W. Robertson, 1661; NT, by J. C. Reichardt, 1846; NT, by J. C. Reichardt & J. H. R. Biesenthal, 1866; NT, by F. Delitzsch, 1981 edition; NT, by I. Salkinson & C. D. Ginsburg, 1891.
The fact that in the NT Greek manuscripts God's Holy Name has been changed to other words does not take away the fact that it is Jehovah, not his Son Jesus, who is speaking in Revelation 1:8.
In verses 9 and 10 John refers to himself when he heard a loud voice, as of a trumpet, (verse 11) saying, “Write what you see….” This quote is from Jesus, not Jehovah, as described in the following verses. In verse 18 Jesus says: “I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore.” He who is, was and is to come never dies. However, Jesus was actually dead and not alive anywhere, if this is to make any sense at all, for he contrasts his being dead with being alive forevermore. Now we know that God cannot die, so Jesus is thus by this verse proved to not be God Almighty.
One claims: "Revelation 1:7-8 is the same person."
This idea would result in Jesus being the one person who is sitting on the throne of Revelation 5 and at the same time being the one person who is represented as the Lamb who takes the scroll from the same one person who is sitting on the throne. It would be, in effect, claiming that He who is sitting on the throne is not the Lamb, but yet that both the one sitting on the throne and the Lamb are both the one person, Jesus. Indeed, we have read some trinitarian commentators who make this self-contradictory claim.
But let's plug this idea into Revelation 1:4,5:
This idea would result in Jesus being the one person who is sitting on the throne of Revelation 5 and at the same time being the one person who is represented as the Lamb who takes the scroll from the same one person who is sitting on the throne. It would be, in effect, claiming that He who is sitting on the throne is not the Lamb, but yet that both the one sitting on the throne and the Lamb are both the one person, Jesus. Indeed, we have read some trinitarian commentators who make this self-contradictory claim.
But let's plug this idea into Revelation 1:4,5:
Revelation 1:4 - John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace, from [Jesus?] who is and who was and who is to come; and from the seven Spirits that are before [Jesus'?] throne;
Revelation 1:5 - and from Jesus Christ [another Jesus?], who is the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto [Jesus] that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood;
And now, to Revelation 5:1,6,7:
Revelation 5:1 - And I saw in the right hand of [Jesus] that sat on the throne a book written within and on the back, close sealed with seven seals.
Revelation 5:6 - And I saw in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, a Lamb [Jesus] standing, as though it had been slain, having seven horns, and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God, sent forth into all the earth.
Revelation 5:7 - And [Jesus] came, and [Jesus] taketh it out of the right hand of [Jesus] that sat on the throne.
Does this really make sense?
Does this really make sense?
One claims that Revelation 1:7,8 shows Jesus to be Jehovah who is "returning".
Actually, we do not know of any scripture anywhere that speaks of the Almighty as "returning." Revelation 1:8 has no form of any word that means "return". We have no reason to join with imagining, assuming such a thought, and adding such a thought to any scripture, and reading such a thought into any scripture.
If one reads into the expression "is to come" the meaning of return, one should -- to be consistent -- also read such into the expressions who is, and who was; this reasoning, if consistent, would lead to the conclusion that verse 8 is speaking of he who presently returns, and he who was returning in the past, and of he who is returning in the future. Actually, it is obvious that the expression related to he who is to come in is in relation to he who is, and he who was, referring to time and existence. Jehovah God Almighty exists, has always existed in the past, and will always exist in the future to come.
One claims, evidently based on the assumption that it is Jesus in Revelation 1:8 who declares himself to be Almighty: "You say Jesus is returning but he’s not the Almighty. You have 'another Jesus' therefore you have 'another gospel'."
We have no scriptural reason to read into any scripture that Jesus is the Almighty. The very fact that Paul presents Jesus, not as being the "one God" from whom are all, but as the "one Lord" through whom are (1 Corinthians 8:6), should be enough to convince one that Jesus is not the Almighty. As already shown, the Almighty in Revelation 1:8 is not Jesus of Revelation 1:7, but rather He who is sitting on the throne of Revelation 1:4; 5:1,6,7, while Jesus is not depicted as being the He who is sitting on the throne, but as the Lamb who takes the scroll from He who is sitting on the throne.
Who is actually preaching "another Jesus?" Is it not actually those who create many assumptions and then read those assumptions into the scriptures so as to support the idea that Jesus is Jehovah? The assumption is often presented that Jesus had to be God Almighty in order to provide atonement for sins. Such an idea actually replaces what the scriptures reveal to be the basis of the atonement. Is it not actually these that are really preaching another Jesus and another gospel? The scriptures can be seen to be fully at harmony throughout without creating all the assumptions needed to support the idea that Jehovah is more than one person, and that Jesus is a person of Jehovah, the Almighty, etc.
Revelation 1:11
Many translations have the words added in Revelation 1:11, before the word “Write”: “I am the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last.” However, this sentence does not appear in the oldest Greek manuscripts and therefore does not appear in many Bible translations, and thus we do not include them as part of our discussion.
Revelation 21:6
Let us now examine Revelation 21:6 in its context.
Revelation 21:5 He who sits on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” He said, “Write, for these words are faithful and true.”
Revelation 21:6 He said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give freely to him who is thirsty from the spring of the water of life.
Revelation 21:7 He who overcomes, I will give him these things. I will be his God, and he will be my son.
If these are the words of Jesus, since Jesus is not the "one God" from whom are all (1 Corinthians 8:6), then they could only be applied to him in a manner similar to general usages of the words for God as mightiness. — Matthew 19:28; Romans 8:19-21.
Nevertheless, we do not believe that it is Jesus who is spoken of as being the he who is sitting on the throne in Revelation 21:5, but rather it is speaking of the God and Father of Jesus. He who sits on the throne in the book of Revelation is spoken of as the God of Jesus (Revelation 2:7; 3:2,12, World English), and is distinguished from the Lamb. (Revelation 5:1-7; 5:13, 6:16, 7:10,15) Applying this to the One sitting on the throne in Revelation 21:5 would mean that these words are the words of the God of Jesus, not Jesus himself, although they were delivered by Jesus to the angel who delivered them to John. (Revelation 1:1,2) Many, if not most, trinitarian Bible scholars acknowledge that the words of Revelation 1:5 are spoken by God the Father as distinguished from the Lamb, but some vaguely, and often without giving any reason for doing so (other than their trinitarian assumptions), will claim that the one being quoted in verses 6 and/or 7 is Jesus. It should be apparent that the one being quoted verses 5-7 are all the “one who sits on the throne”.
These words of Revelation 21:7 are not directed to the believers of this age, but to the world in the age to come, in the day of judgment and regeneration of the world, although indirectly they are applicable, since the believers in this age are reckoned, counted, imputed (Strong’s #3049) with the blessings and powers of the age to come, having received the spirit as a token, earnest, as first fruits, of that which is to come. –Romans 4; 6:11; 1 Corinthians 1:21,22; 5:17; 2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:3-14; Hebrews 6:5; 12:23; James 1:18.
Revelation 22:12,13
Now we come to Revelation 22:12,13. Many feel sure that this is Jesus speaking, since the one speaking tells of his “coming”, and in Revelation 22:20, Jesus says: “I come quickly.” And John exclaims: “Amen! Come, Lord Jesus.” This overlooks the fact that the scriptures speak of Jehovah coming, and also of Jesus coming, and that the two are closely associated. This does not mean that Jesus is Jehovah. God, the Diety, in Acts 17 is only one person and that one person is not Jesus, but Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus, who comes to judge the world, not only with and by means of Jesus, but also the saints. God is distinguished from Jesus in Acts 17:30,31. — Malachi 3:1-6; Psalm 96:13; 98:9; Daniel 7:18,22; Isaiah 40:10,11; Micah 1:3; Zechariah 14:5; 2 Peter 3:7,8; 1 Corinthians 6:2; Psalm 90:4; Jude 1:14,15; Revelation 1:1; 20:4,11-13; 22:6.
Below we quote Revelation 22:6-21 with our comments in brackets [].
Revelation 22:6 He [The angel mentioned in Revelation 21:9] said to me, “These words are faithful and true. The Lord [Jehovah], the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angels to show to his servants the things which must happen soon.” [This agrees with Revelation 1:1-5, that the revelation is from God through Jesus, and delivered by an angel.]
Revelation 22:7 [Note the abrupt change; the angel suddenly quotes someone unnamed as coming:] “Behold, I come quickly. Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.” [This is probably quoting Jesus as coming; however, it could be that the angel starting quoting Jehovah of Revelation 22:6. Jehovah, the God of the spirits of the prophets, does come to judge by means of the one whom he has ordained. -- Psalm 96:13; 98:9; Isaiah 40:10; 62:11; Luke 1:32,35; John 5:22,23; Acts 10:42; 17:31; Romans 2:16; 1 Corinthians 4:5; Revelation 22:12.]
Revelation 22:8 [John again changes and speaks of himself:] Now I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. When I heard and saw, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who had shown me these things.
Revelation 22:9 He [the angel] said to me, “See you don’t do it! I am a fellow bondservant with you and with your brothers, the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”
Revelation 22:10 He [The angel] said to me, “Don’t seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, for the time is at hand.
Revelation 22:11 He who acts unjustly, let him act unjustly still. He who is filthy, let him be filthy still. He who is righteous, let him do righteousness still. He who is holy, let him be holy still.”
Revelation 22:12 [The angel begins to quote someone else again:] “Behold, I come quickly. My reward is with me, to repay to each man according to his work. [The God of Jesus judges the world through Jesus, and each man will get his praise from God. -- Acts 17:31; Romans 2:16; 1 Corinthians 4:5; 2 Timothy 4:1. Isaiah 40:10 gives support that this is Jehovah speaking, not Jesus. Jesus never speaks of the "reward" as being his, although one could possibly reason that it is "his" to give, since Jehovah has given all judgment to the Son.]
Revelation 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”
Revelation 22:14 [This is obviously the angel speaking:] “Blessed are those who do his [God's] commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city.
Revelation 22:14 [This is obviously the angel speaking:] “Blessed are those who do his [God's] commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city.
Revelation 22:15 Outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.”
Revelation 22:16 [Now the angel quotes Jesus:] “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify these things to you for the assemblies. I am the root and the offspring of David; the Bright and Morning Star.”
Revelation 22:17 [This is obviously the angel again speaking:] “The Spirit and the bride say, ‘Come!’ He who hears, let him say, ‘Come!’ He who is thirsty, let him come. He who desires, let him take the water of life freely.”
Revelation 22:18 [The angel evidently quotes Jesus, as shown from verse 20:] “I testify to every man who hears the words of the prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to them, may God add to him the plagues which are written in this book.
Revelation 22:19 If anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, may God take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book.”
Revelation 22:20 [John writes] He [Jesus] who testifies these things says, “Yes, I come quickly.” [John responds:] Amen! Come, Lord Jesus.
Revelation 22:21 The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen. — World English Bible translation, with quotation marks slightly adjusted from that used in the World English.
Nevertheless, even if one assumes that it is Jesus who is the one speaking in Revelation 22:12,13, all this would mean is that these titles or phrases applied to Jehovah are also applied to Jesus. Does this mean that Jesus is Jehovah, the God who is identified also as the Father and God of Jesus? Absolutely not!
First, we note that none of the passages say that the Father is the Son (oneness belief) or even that the Son equals the Father. There is nothing in any of the scriptures that declares that God is more than one person (trinity), or that God presents Himself in different modes, etc. None of the scriptures say that Jesus IS the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Nor do any of these passages directly say anything about the non-creation of either the Father or the Son.
One must admit that just because the same title is applied to individuals, this does not make these two individuals one individual. Else every ruler who has ever used the title “king” would have to be the same individual as every other ruler to whom the title "king" is applied. Each ruler who uses this title, however, uses it with respect to his peculiar realm of domain and time. Thus just because the same titles are given to both the Father and the Son does not mean they are the same being. There are many Bible Students that do apply the term Alpha and Omega to Jesus, but do not see this as having any meaning that Jesus is Jehovah.
Revelation 1:17,18; 2:8
While Jehovah has existed from eternity past, the expression, Alpha and Omega applied to him, does not in itself designate that Jehovah is from everlasting to everlasting, nor do the expressions, “the beginning and the end”, or “the first and the last”. Such an application can be made in that it could be stated that Jehovah is the beginning and end, the first and that last, of all who have existed from eternity past. As discussed in our study on “Beginnings”, the word “beginning” does not mean eternity, either past or future, but rather it usually denotes a point in time when something begins, or it is used of a person or thing at the start of something. Additionally, the word “first” does not mean eternity but a person or thing at the start of something. Similarly, it can be said concerning the words “last” and “end”; neither of these denotes eternity, but rather, just as it says, the last or end of something. The Alpha and Omega symbolism only emphasizes the same thing, since Alpha is the first or start of the Greek alphabet, and Omega is the last or end of the Greek alphabet. Thus, although we do not believe that any scripture applies Alpha and Omega to Jesus, they could be applied to Jesus, but not with the same application as they are applied to the only Most High. Nevertheless, the term "first" and "last" is applied to Jesus in Revelation 1:17,18 and also in Revelation 2:8.
How could this term, first and last, apply to both the Father and the Son within the domain of each? Some have noted that Jesus is the first human to be raised to life without end by Jehovah his Father, thus he is called the “firstborn of the dead”. (Colossians 1:18) There can only be one firstborn from the dead, thus Jesus is definitely the first and the last of the firstborn from the dead. He is also the last to be so resurrected directly by God since all others who eventually receive such a resurrection will be through Jesus, not by Jehovah directly. (John 5:21,22; 6:39,44; 11:25) Regardless, there appears to be a connection between his statements that he became dead and was now alive forever and ever. In both instances where the terms “first” and “last” are used of Jesus, his death and eternal life are also mentioned in the context. (Revelation 1:17,18; 2:8) Jesus’ holding the keys of death and Hades (Revelation 1:18) shows the authority given to him by his God of releasing all who are in death and hades. — John 5:27-29 (New American Standard); Revelation 20:11-13.
Each — both Jesus and Jehovah — is the first and the last of his peculiar kind: Jehovah is the first and the last of his peculiar kind, in that he is the first and the last one to be increate, that is, never to have been created. No one was before Jehovah in this sense and no one will be after him in this sense. Jehovah is also unique in that He is the source of all. (1 Corinthians 8:6) The Son is the first and the last of his peculiar kind, in that he is the first and the last to have been directly created by God, all other creatures having been indirectly created by God, that is, through the agency of the Logos. (John 1:1-3; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:15,16) More than likely, however, the expression "the first and the last" as Jesus used it of himself has something to do with his death and resurrection. In this sense, Jesus is the first and last, being the only one, who is firstborn from the dead. There will never be another firstborn from the dead. Thus the Father and the Son are both unique — which is the meaning of these three expressions — but each of them is unique in a different sense: The Father is unique in that he is the only — the first and the last — being never created; the Son is unique in that he is the only — the first and the last — firstborn from the dead, as well as having the only being ever directly created by Jehovah without the assistance of an agent, which creative assistance by the Logos occurred in the case of all the rest of creation — the Logos himself being excepted. (John 1:3; 1 Corinthians 15:27; See our studies related to John 1:1) Thus Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus (Micah 5:4; Ephesians 1:3), is the first and the last, the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end of increation — the only being who never was created. The Logos is the first and the last, the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end of God’s direct creation. These terms used with reference to the Son are equivalent to his being called: “the only begotten of the Father.” (John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9) Their use with reference to the Father implies that he is from eternity, though not directly teaching it, the direct teaching being his uniqueness in that he never was created or begotten, as was the Son.
One claims that "Jesus is the First and Last which only applies to God Almighty" and that "
We know the First and Last the Almighty is returning/coming.".
We do not know of any scripture that says that the phrase "the first and the last" can only be applied to God Almighty. Such is an assumption placed upon the scriptures.The Bible does tell us that Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus (Micah 5:4; Ephesians 1:3), comes to judge the world through, by means of, His messiah whom he ordained to judge as a servant of Jehovah. -- Psalm 2:6; 96:13; 98:9; Isaiah 9:7; 11:1-4; 40:10; 62:11; Ezekiel 34:24; Luke 1:32,35; John 5:22,23; Acts 10:42; 17:31; Romans 2:16; 1 Corinthians 4:5; Revelation 22:12.
The saints also are depicted as coming with Jesus to judge the world. --Daniel 7:22; 1 Corinthians 6:2; 1 Thessalonians 3:13; Revelation 20:4.
The holy angels are additionally said to come with Jesus. -- Matthew 25:31. (Some believe that the "holy angels" are actually the saints of 1 Corinthians 6:2)
Some have replied that there can only be one first and last, although their reasons for saying this are vague, to say the least. It seems they wish to demand a restricted application, usually that this expression means eternal (as from everlasting to everlasting), so that it could only apply to God Almighty. It is true that there can only be one who is first and last as God Almighty, and likewise that there is only one who was never created, who has always been. But we have no reason to restrict the term in application to God Almighty, except to satisfy the whims of those who wish to use it thus to prove that Jesus is Jehovah, which, in effect, would make the whole argument circular, that is, ‘we believe that Jesus is Jehovah, thus we believe that the expression first and last must be used in application to God Almighty only, and thus this proves that Jesus is Jehovah.’
We have already shown above that there can be more than one first and last, depending on what is being spoken of and its application. Each created person is first and last in his unique existence, since each person is unique in some way. There will never be another person who is uniquely you, thus you are the first and last person who is definitely you. Additionally, your father, as a sentient being, is unique in who he is. There will never be another person who is the same sentient being as your father, and your father is first and last in being who he is. Furthermore, if only one student shows up for a class on a particular day, he is the first and last student that showed up for the class on that day. Likewise, both Jehovah and Jesus are first and last in their respective applications of that term. Regardless, our trinitarian neighbors will have to agree that there are two persons who are referred to as ‘first and last’ in Revelation, both God the Father and His Son.
Ronald R. Day, Sr. - Restoration Light Bible Study Services
Ronald R. Day, Sr. - Restoration Light Bible Study Services
Monday, September 5, 2016
Sunday, September 4, 2016
John 20:28 - Did Thomas Refer to Jesus as the Supreme Being?
apekrithee thwmas kai eipen autw ho kurios mouANSWERED THOMAS AND HE SAID TO HIM THE LORD OF ME061 2381 2532 1511_7 0846_5 3588 2962 1473_2kai ho theos mouAND THE GOD OF ME!2532 3588 2316 1473_2John 20:28, Westcott & Hort Interlinear
Unless otherwise noted, The World English Bible translation is used throughout this document.
Did Thomas think he was addressing the Almighty Jehovah, standing before him in the flesh? If Thomas addressed Jesus as God Almighty, we would expect Jesus to have said something that would clearly establish that he was the Almighty, but he doesn't. Earlier in the same day, he confirmed that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was his God (John 20:17), in harmony with Psalm 22:1; 45:7; Isaiah 61:1; Micah 5:4; Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34; John 17:1,3; Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3; Hebrews 1:1,2,9; Revelation 3:12.
If Jesus was God Almighty in the flesh, he surely missed the opportunity to make it clear when Thomas made this expression. Instead, he simply answers: "Because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed." (John 20:29) Jesus emphasizes Thomas' belief that Jesus was really alive (and thus the risen Christ, the Son of God), which he doubted, and yet he doesn't say anything about Thomas' statement concerning his expression "ho theos mou" -- "the god of me".
What belief is it that Jesus considered important? John answers in verse 31: "but these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." By calling Jesus the Christ, this would mean that Jesus was anointed, but by whom? The scriptures answer that he was anointed by Jehovah, his Father. (Isaiah 61:1; Psalm 45:7) Thus, by his being "Christ", he is not Jehovah, but rather the anointed of Jehovah. By calling Jesus the "Son of God", this certainly does not say that he is Jehovah, the Supreme Being, who is his Father (John 17:1,3), but rather that he is the Son of Jehovah, his Father. -- Hebrews 1:1,2.
In his prayer before his death, Jesus said to his Father: "This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ." (John 17:3) Here Jesus recognizes his Father as the only true God, Supreme Being, and that he himself, instead of being any part of that only true Supreme Being, was sent by that Supreme Being. This is in harmony with John 3:16,17: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him," as well as many other scriptures. -- John 4:34; 5:23,24,30,37,38; 6:29,38,39,40,44,57; 7:16,18,28,29,33; 8:16,18,26,29,42; 9:4; 10:36; 11:42; 12:44,45,49,50; 13:20; 14:10,24; 15:21; 16:5; 17:3,18,21,23,25; 20:2.
In John 20:28, "God" is a translation of the Greek THEOS, which Dr. Young defines as "God, a god, object of worship." Forms of THEOS in the New Testament correspond with forms of the word transliterated as EL in the Old Testament. Usually, these terms are used to denote the Supreme Being (such as in Matthew 27:46, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me," and in many additional places). However, they are also used to depict other beings, whether good or bad. THEOS is used to describe Satan, "the god of this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4), the saints, "gods, sons of the Most High" (John 10:34, 35, from Ps. 82:6, RSV), idols, or fabricated "gods who will go before us" (Acts 7:40), and heathen gods, "the gods have come down to us in human form!" (Acts 14:11, 12). More importantly, Jesus applies a plural form of THEOS to the sons of the Most High, to whom the Logos of God came. (John 10:34-36; reference to ELOHIM --a plural form of EL -- in Psalm 82:6) Hence, THEOS is quite general in its application in Scripture, and the fact that it is occasionally used of Jesus should not be taken as proof that he was God the Father. Such usage alone is not conclusive to warrant such a distinction.
It is not the general rule of any of Jesus' disciples to refer to Jesus as "THEOS". This word, with just a few exceptions, is almost always reserved for the "God and Father of the Lord Jesus." (Romans 15:6; 2 Corinthians 1:3; Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3) There are only around ten instances where THEOS may be seen as being applied to Jesus: John 1:1,18; 20:28; Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8,9; 2 Peter 1:1; 1 John 5:20. We might also note that someone, at some time or another, has also come forth to challenge each and every scripture here as actually calling Jesus by the word "THEOS". (Some other scriptures sometimes listed by some include: John 5:18; Ephesians 5:5; Philippians 2:6,7; Colossians 2:9; 1 Timothy 3:16 and Revelation 1:8.
We also need to keep in mind that the Bible writers were not Greeks, but Hebrews. Their expressions, being under the guidance of the holy spirit, would reflect the same Hebraic tradition as found in what had been revealed through the holy spirit to the prophets of the Old Testament. Thus, the expressions in the New Testament, though written in Greek, would carry the same line of thought as the Hebrew Scripture. Consequently, it would be imperative that we see how the Hebrews used the Hebrew words for "god", and see if such could apply to Thomas' exclamation.
Let us start by referring to the incident already referred to in which the Jewish leaders accused Jesus of blasphemy because, being a man, he made himself "God". (John 10:33) If the claim was that Jesus was making himself the Supreme Being, the claim is false, and Jesus denied that he was God -- the Supreme Being -- by stating over and over that he was sent by God, could do nothing of his own self, everything he had was given to him by God, etc. In the immediate response to the accusation made by the Jewish leaders, Jesus responded: "Isn't it written in your law, 'I said, you are gods?' If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture can't be broken), Do you say of him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God?' " (John 10:34-36) Again, instead of claiming to God Almighty, Jesus very clearly clarified that he was sent by God, his Father, Jehovah, and that he was the Son of God -- not God Almighty Himself.
=========
See our study on John 10:30
=========
See our study on John 10:30
But the point we want from the above as applied to John 20:28, is Jesus' usage of the word *theoi* -- gods, which he applies to the "sons of God" -- men -- not God Almighty. John quotes Jesus in Greek as saying *theoi* -- the plural of *theos*. However, Jesus is quoting from the Hebrew Scriptures (commonly called the Old Testament) from Psalm 82:6, which, of course, was written in Hebrew, not Greek. What is the word that is used originally? It is the Hebrew elohim (a plural of EL).
What we need to know is how the Hebrew word elohim (and its variations of el and eloah) are used in the Bible, and if this has any application to John 20:28. The Bible uses these words in many different ways, in applications to men, angels, and even inanimate objects. Thomas, being a Hebrew, was no doubt aware of this. EL signifies strong or powerful. This word is Hebrew #410 in Strong's Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary, which defines it as: "short. from 352; strength; as adj. mighty; espec. the Almighty (but used also of any deity)." Crosswalk's Online Hebrew Lexicon defines it similarly: "shortened from 0352 TWOT - 93a n m ; AV - God 213, god 16, power 4, mighty 5, goodly 1, great 1, idols 1, Immanuel + 06005 2, might 1, strong 1; 245; 1) god, god-like one, mighty one; 1a) mighty men, men of rank, mighty heroes; 1b) angels; 1c) god, false god, (demons, imaginations); 1d) God, the one true God, Jehovah; 2) mighty things in nature; 3) strength, power".
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/430.html
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/410.html
https://www.studylight.org/lexicons/hebrew/410.html
Other authorities give it the same or similar meanings. Consequently, it applies to any powerful being and especially so of the most powerful - the Almighty Jehovah, and is thus used in relative terms applicable to those to whom or what it is being applied. That the word is thus used may be readily seen by anyone who will carefully note the following texts from the King James Version, in which English translations of the Hebrew word El are in denoted by *..*: "It is in the *power* of my hand." (Genesis 31:29) "There shall be no *might* in thine hand." (Deuteronomy 28:32) "Neither is it in our *power*." (Nehemiah 5:5) "Like the *great* mountains." (Psalm 36:6) "In the *power* of thine hand to do it." (Proverbs 3:27) "Pray unto *a god* [mighty one] that cannot save." (Isaiah 45:20) "Who among the sons of the *mighty*." (Psalm 89:6) "God standeth in the congregation of the *mighty*." (Psalm 82:1) "Who is like unto thee, O Lord [Jehovah] among the *Gods* [mighty ones or ruling ones]?" (Exodus 15:11) "Give unto the Lord [Jehovah] of ye *mighty*." (Psalm 29:1) "The *mighty* God even the Lord [Jehovah]." -- Psalm 50:1.
Notice the above texts carefully and critically; all will agree that the context in every case shows the meaning of the Hebrew word El to be a powerful one. How clearly it is stated that Jehovah is the Supreme "El" and rules over all other ones called "el" - powerful ones. And it should be noted that Jehovah is the name applied to none other than the Supreme Being - our Father, and him whom Jesus called Father and God. (John 17:1,3: 20:17; Psalm 110:1; Matthew 22:43-45; 26:64; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; Acts 2:34; 7:55: Romans 8:34; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:13; 10:12,13; 1 Peter 3:22)
Many would read Isaiah 9:6 as saying of Jesus: 'He shall be called Mighty EL [Powerful (One)].' (Isaiah 9:6) And so Jesus is a mighty one, for to him the Father has given all power in earth and heaven. (Matthew 28:19, and 11:27) "He is Lord of all" - next to the Father for "The head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3) They are one in mind, purpose, etc., because Jesus willingly submitted his own will to that of the Father (John 5:30) just as we also must submit our own will, mind, spirit to that of the Father if we would be made heirs and sons of God.
See our studies related to "Mighty God."
See our studies related to "Mighty God."
ELOHIM is the plural of EL and another Hebrew form of the same word, ELOAH. Like EL, the usage of ELOHIM is not confined to that of the Almighty. We have already seen that it is applied to the "sons of god" -- men -- in Psalm 82:6,7. Additionally, we find that Moses is spoken of as *elohim* to Pharoah (Exodus 7:1) and also to Aaron (Exodus 4:16). Furthermore, the angels are also called *elohim*: Psalm 8:5 {compare Hebrews 2:9}; 86:6-8; 95:3; 50:1. Additionally, the judges of Israel are referred to as *elohim*: Exodus 21:6; 22:8,9,28 (See Acts 23:5).
All one needs to do to verify the above is to look into the Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance, under Hebrew words #430 and #410.
Thus, we ask concerning John 20:28: Did Thomas then believe something different from what Jesus claimed for himself? If those to whom the word of God came were called "gods," what would be extraordinary about Thomas calling Jesus "My Lord and my God"?
This, undoubtedly, was a very emotional moment for Thomas and certainly not an attempt on his part to offer advanced theology. The fact that he says "the Lord of me" and "the God of me" seems appropriate to his emotional state, wherein he accepts Jesus as his resurrected "the Lord" and "the God." His very Jewishness prohibits us from concluding that Jesus was the Almighty Jehovah. Since Paul definitely excludes Jesus from being "one God" of whom are all (1 Corinthians 8:6), we should realize that Thomas could not possibly have fused Jesus, the son of the Most High, and the Most High, into one being. Jesus had been Thomas' "Lord" (or "Master"), and now, believing his resurrection, he accepts him as his "God" (or "mighty one", "strength", etc.), recognizing the supreme power as given to Jesus by God. -- Matthew 28:18.
Additionally, John sums up his lesson covering these momentous events, saying, "But these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." (John 20:31). The Apostle Thomas was a Jew who held to the view that "Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." To argue that he forsook his Jewish religious training at the moment in question and received Jesus as (the) God Jehovah is an unlikely scenario. John, who is aged and serene while writing his Gospel, summarizes this entire chapter saying, "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." That’s a clear statement of what he wanted us to believe—and that’s what Thomas believed as well.
Additionally, we might note that Jesus is prefigured by Moses, who is also called elohim, as we mentioned earlier. (Deuteronomy 18:18,19; Acts 3:13-26; Exodus 4:16; 7:1 -- The KJV adds the words "instead of" before "God" in Exodus 4:16, which words do not appear in the Hebrew.)
The scriptures concerning Moses, especially, indicate that elohim, although plural, is applied to the singular person, Moses (who is a type of Jesus). Moses is not more than one person, so why the plural usage here? It is a plural used in a singular setting to denote supremacy (plural intensive), that is, to denote the supremacy of the power given to Moses by Jehovah over the power of Pharaoh and the gods of Pharaoh.
See also the following studies:
Elohim - Does This Word Signify a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
Elohim - Does This Word Signify a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
Elohim is also applied to Jesus as an individual being, again to show the supreme power given to Jesus in his kingdom, as given to him by the Elohim over Jesus: Jehovah. (Psalm 45:6,7; See also Hebrews 1:8,9) The very fact that this power over his fellows is given to Jesus by Jehovah's anointing shows that Jesus is not equal to Jehovah. As the prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy 18:18,19; Acts 3:19-23), we should not find it too surprising that this is the case, but like Moses, this would not make Jesus the Almighty.
In the above scriptures, we see three individual beings who are called elohim: Jehovah, Jesus, and Moses. Only Jehovah has the position of Supreme Being; however, since both Moses and Jesus receive their power from Jehovah.
Thus in view of the above evidence, as gathered from the Hebrew background of the Old Testament, we should not think that Thomas had in mind that he was talking to the Almighty Jehovah as recorded by John in John 20:28. There is certainly no need to adopt an extra-Biblical philosophy of three persons in one being (or God expressed in three modes) to have the Bible harmonized in the above. It is much simpler and scriptural to simply rely on the Bible itself and let it explain itself.
The Definite Article before THEOS
The question has been raised concerning the usage of the definite article ho before theos. It has been claimed by some that since the definite article is used, Timothy was definitely calling Jesus God Almighty. Those who argue this usually assume that the expression ho theos always means God Almighty. Actually, this is not true. The expression ho theos is used of Satan the Devil in 2 Corinthians 4:4. As mentioned earlier, the definite article is used because of the possessive nature of the pronoun.
See #13 "with possessive pronouns" at:
http://bcbsr.com/greek/gsubs.html
See #13 "with possessive pronouns" at:
http://bcbsr.com/greek/gsubs.html
One minority view is that the Greek is written in such a way that it implies that Thomas is referring to Jesus as his Lord and to the Father as his God. The Greek structure is such that Granville Sharp makes an exception to his rule here in order to have God and Lord apply to one person rather than two. There is an article both before kyrios as well as theos, with kai in between; the article is used because of the possessive nature. However, the expression "of me" is also after both kyrios and theos, whereas normally, if one person is referred to, then there would only be a need for one article and one final "of me" after the last noun. Granville Sharp claimed John 20:20 as an exception to his rules, basically because he believed it referred to one person; thus, to satisfy his preconceived belief, he gave this as an exception.
However, by comparing the verse earlier:
John 20:17
legei autee ieesous mee mou haptou oupw gar
IS SAYING TO HER JESUS NOT OF ME BE TOUCHING, NOT YET FOR
3004 0846 6 2424 3361 1473 2 0680 0681 3768 1063
anabebeeka pros ton patera poreuou de pros
I HAVE ASCENDED TOWARD THE FATHER; BE GOING BUT TOWARD
0305 4314 3588 3962 4198 1161 4314
tous adelphous mou kai eipe autois anabainw
THE BROTHERS OF ME AND SAY TO THEM I AM ASCENDING
3588 0080 1473 2 2532 1511 7 0846 93 0305
pros ton patera mou kai patera humwn kai theon
TOWARD THE FATHER OF ME AND FATHER OF YOU AND GOD
4314 3588 3962 1473 2 2532 3962 4771 5 2532 2316
mou kai theon humwn
OF ME AND GOD OF YOU. 1473 2 2532 2316 4771 5
According to this line of argument, not only does this context show that Jesus is not the God who is his God, the entire phrase "the father of me and father of you and God of me and God of you" has only one article that is distributed for its instances. Sharp's rules concerning this structure say that this indicates one person, and when the article does appear before each noun, it indicates more than one person. I say "indicates" because he says that since John 20:28 is apparently speaking of one person, and that this is an exception to the rule, even though the article appears before both kyrios and theos. But this reasoning seems to be to circular, saying in effect: since we believe it is speaking of one person, it is an exception to the rule, and therefore proves that Thomas is referring to one person as both Lord and God.
We neither agree nor disagree with the line of argument regarding Sharp's rule, but we provide it simply to show how this could be true.
While scholars, including some trinitarian scholars, are divided over whether Thomas was referring to Jesus or his Father as "the God of me", if Thomas was actually calling Jesus his God here, then it must be in the sense that Moses, the judges, the angels, and the sons of God are called "gods" -- ones having special power, and not as God Almighty -- the only source of all power, for the context as well as the rest of the Bible indicates that Jesus is not God Almighty. -- Exodus 7:1; 21:6; 22:8,9,28 (compare Acts 23:5); Psalm 8:5 (compare Hebrews 2:9); 82:6,7 (see John 10:34-36); 86:6-8; 95:3; 50:1.
We will add that there is nothing in John 20:28 about Jesus' being a person of God, nor is there anything about there being three persons in God. Thus, the trinitarian idea has to be read into what Thomas said.
Additionally, if John is actually referring to Jesus as his God in the same sense as Jesus refers to the Father as "my God" and "your God" in John 20:17, then this would make Jesus the Father. Of course, our trinitarian neighbors deny that Jesus is the Father, as do we; we simply show where this line of reasoning would lead.
Some related material online can be found at the links below. We do not necessarily agree with all the conclusions presented:
http://jehovah.to/exe/discussion/trinitarian_apol_1.htm
http://jehovah.to/exe/discussion/more_2.htm
http://jehovah.to/exe/discussion/still_more_1.htm
http://jehovah.to/exe/discussion/more_2.htm
http://jehovah.to/exe/discussion/still_more_1.htm
http://jehovah.to/exe/translation/wegner.htm
The above links are to a site representing an offshoot of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Greg Stafford is a former member of the Jehovah's Witnesses. You may need to search for references to John 20:28 using the "find" or "search" feature of your browser.
The above links are to a site representing an offshoot of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Greg Stafford is a former member of the Jehovah's Witnesses. You may need to search for references to John 20:28 using the "find" or "search" feature of your browser.
Jesus' Commendation of Thomas' Belief
According to some, Jesus commended Thomas for the statement, "My Lord and my God." This, they say, shows that Jesus approved of Thomas' thought that, according to our traditionalists, Thomas was calling Jesus God Almighty.
In response, did Jesus say that Yes, I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Actually, here is what Jesus said in response to Thomas' exclamation:
20:29 - Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen, and have believed."
Jesus commended Thomas because he believed. Believed what? "that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." (John 20:31) Jesus emphasizes Thomas' belief that Jesus was really alive (and thus the risen Christ, the Son of God), which he doubted, and yet he doesn't say anything about Thomas' statement concerning his expression "ho theos mou" -- "the god of me". What belief is it that Jesus considered important? John answers in verse 31: "but these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name." By calling Jesus the Christ, this would mean that Jesus was anointed, but by whom? The scriptures answer that he was anointed by Jehovah, his Father. (Isaiah 61:1; Psalm 45:7) By calling Jesus the "Son of God", this certainly does not say that he is Jehovah, who is his Father, but rather that he is the Son of Jehovah, the God of Israel, whom Jesus identifies as his Father.
In his prayer before his death, Jesus said to his Father: "This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God [Power - the source of all power], and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ." (John 17:3) Here Jesus recognizes his Father as the only true God, Supreme Being, and that he himself, instead of being any part of that only true Supreme Being, was sent by that Supreme Being. This is in harmony with John 3:16,17: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him," as well as many other scriptures. -- John 4:34; 5:23,24,30,37,38; 6:29,38,39,40,44,57; 7:16,18,28,29,33; 8:16,18,26,29,42; 9:4; 10:36; 11:42; 12:44,45,49,50; 13:20; 14:10,24; 15:21; 16:5; 17:3,18,21,23,25; 20:2.
Seeing the God of Jesus in Jesus
Another way of understanding the phrase "the Lord of me and the God of me" in John 20:28 is in the fact that to see Jesus is considered the same as seeing the God of Jesus. This is not to say that Jesus is his God, but rather that Jesus came to declare and make known his God. Thus, Jesus' God dwells in Jesus, and thus, to see Jesus is considered the same as seeing the God of Jesus. See our study: Seeing the Father in Jesus
A Unitarian presents this viewpoint in a video on YouTube: Did Thomas Confess that Jesus is God?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)