John 3:13 and Jesus' Supposed Omnipresence

John 3:13: No one has ascended into heaven, but he who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven. -- World English

John 3:13 is often presented by trinitarians and others as proof that Jesus is God Almighty since it supposedly shows that Jesus is omnipresent, and, it is claimed that such omnipresence is an incommunicable attribute of the Most High.

Taken as it reads in several translations, this would have Jesus in heaven and on earth at the same time. While such does not necessarily prove that Jesus would be omnipresent (present everywhere at the same time and at all times), it would, as presented, appear to indicate that he could at least be in two places at once.

The words "ascended" and "descended" are the Greek ana-bai no and kata-baino; meaning to ascend, to spring up; and to descend, to come down. The Greek words translated "except" are *Ei me*, meaning but, except, save, excluding. Jesus actually spoke these words about three years before his ascension. Therefore, we have no reason to think that he was referring to his later ascension or that even that Jesus was referring to his own ascension. Nevertheless, Jesus had previously been in heaven before he came to earth, and thus we do have reason to think that Jesus did refer to his heavenly origin. "Jehovah formed me as the beginning of his way, the first of his works of old" (Proverbs 8:22 American Standard Version Margin).

We need to consider the context, for Jesus had just stated: "If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?" (John 3:12) What Jesus is speaking of in the context is his own witness concerning heavenly things. He is saying that no human has ever ascended into the spiritual heavens where God and the angels are (Matthew 18:20) so that he could tell of such things, excluding the Son of Man, not because he had already ascended to where he had been before (Mark 16:19; John 6:62; 13:1; Acts 3:20,21; Ephesians 1:20; Hebrews 4:14; 9:24; 1 Peter 3:22), but because he had descended from the heavens -- from the presence of his Father, the only true God. (John 17:1,3) Thus no man had ever so ascended into the spiritual realm of God's presence where Jesus had been before he came to the earth, and where he returned after being raised from the dead. Jesus alone had previously been in heaven, and had descended from the heavens.
==========
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/kjv/ei-me.html

However, this scripture actually proves that Jesus was with his God and Father (Ephesians 1:3) before he came to earth, not that he was in two places at once. The reference to the one who descended from heaven is concerning Jesus. And then concerning mankind in general, Jesus said: "No one has ascended into heaven." This agrees with Proverbs 30:4.

Adam Clarke states in his commentary concerning John 3:13: "This seems a figurative expression for, No man hath known the mysteries of the kingdom of God; as in De 30:12; Ps 73:17; Pr 30:4; Ro 11:34. And the expression is founded upon this generally received maxim: That to be perfectly acquainted with the concerns of a place, it is necessary for a person to be on the spot. But our Lord probably spoke to correct a false notion among the Jews, viz. that Moses had ascended to heaven, in order to get the law. It is not Moses who is to be heard now, but Jesus: Moses did not ascend to heaven; but the Son of man is come down from heaven to reveal the Divine will."
==========
http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?book=joh&chapter=003

Another point of concern here is regarding the alleged dualism that is often attributed to Jesus. Trinitarians often like to point to the term "son of man" as representing Jesus' being as human, not his alleged being as the Most High. If the term "son of man" here refers to Jesus' human being, then this would have his human being in heaven at the same he is on earth; it would not indicate a divine being in heaven and a human being on earth as some have argued.

However, the oldest Greek MSS (the Sinaitic and the Vatican as well as many other manuscripts) omit the last four words of verse 13 with evident propriety, for although our Lord is now in heaven, he was not in heaven at the time he addressed Nicodemus. Thus many translations render this verse similar to Rotherham: "And no one hath ascended into heaven save he that out of heaven descended,  The Son of Man."

In view of the above, we can see that there is nothing in John 3:13 that proves that Jesus is Jehovah, nor is there anything in this verse that proves that Jesus was existing on two planes of existence at once.

God Never Descended?

One has stated that the one true living God never descended or ascended since he is spirit and is everywhere.

It is true the one and only true God never descended as Jesus spoke of himself. Of course, our trinitarian friends may say that God, as represented in the first person of their triune God, did not descend, but that God, as represented in their alleged second person of the trinity, did descend. Of course, this is all based on the use of extra-Biblical reasoning to produce such assumptions.

However, the scriptures do speak of Jehovah (Yahweh) as descending, but not in the manner of which Jesus spoke of himself as descending.

Exodus 19:18 World English Bible (WEB)

Mount Sinai, the whole of it, smoked, because Yahweh descended on it in fire; and its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked greatly.

Exodus 34:5 (WEB)
Yahweh descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of Yahweh.

We will also add that just being a spirit being does not mean that one is always everywhere. The angels are spirit beings, but are they always everywhere?

One has responded, using the New King James Version of John 1:13, which reads:

No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

The claim is made that this should be understood in this manner:

No one has ascended to heaven (the Son is talking about the future), but He who came down from heaven, (the Son is talking about the past) that is, the Son of Man who is heaven.(the Son is talking about the present) 

And we are asked, "How could the Son be on earth and be in heaven at the same time?" The assumed answer is that "the Son has dual natures, one God and one Man. His humanity might be on earth while he was speaking, but his Deity can be everywhere even in heaven."

No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven : the Son of Man. — John 3:13, New American Standard.

No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven-the Son of Man. — John 3:13, Holman Christian Standard.

No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven–the Son of Man. — John 3:13, New International Version.

And, no one, hath ascended into heaven, save he that, out of heaven, descended, – The Son of Man. — Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible.

Actually, it is the insistence that Jesus is omnipresent that leads some to imagine that Jesus was saying something that he did not say in John 3:13.

The phrase “no one has ascended to heaven” is definitely speaking of the past, not the future. Jesus was not saying that no one was to ascend into heaven at any time in the future; what would be the point of his stating such? Indeed, what he was saying is that no one — no human being — had ever (in the past, not the future) ascended into heaven (in order to tell of heavenly things — John 3:12), but, rather, that there is one who came down from heaven, who can tell of heavenly things because he had been with the Father in heaven (John 17:1,3,5), and that this one who descended to tell us of these heavenly things is the Son of the Man, David.

Even most trinitarian scholars acknowledge that Jesus was speaking of the past, when he stated, “no one has ascended to heaven”.

Robertson thus stated:

There is no allusion to the Ascension which came later.

http://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/robertsons-word-pictures/john/john-3-13.html

Adam Clarke stated:

Our Lord probably spoke to correct a false notion among the Jews, viz. that Moses had ascended to heaven, in order to get the law. It is not Moses who is to be heard now, but Jesus: Moses did not ascend to heaven; but the Son of man is come down from heaven to reveal the Divine will.
http://www.studylight.org/com/acc/view.cgi?bk=42&ch=3

A side note to this is that this verse also shows that Enoch and Elijah did not ascend into the heavens where God and the angels are. Nothing is said about Enoch ascending at all. Elijah ascended in a whirlwind into the sky, not into the invisible spiritual heavens where God and the angels are.  See our studies: Elijah's Ascension Into the Sky and Is Enoch Still Alive?

The phrase “which is in heaven” added to John 3:13 in many manuscripts and translations is considered by many, if not most, Bible scholars as being spurious. Many translations do not add that phrase, as seen the translations given above.

However, assuming that the added words are not spurious, some believe that John added his phrase parenthetically, not as the words of Jesus, but his own words, to show that at the time John wrote this, Jesus was in heaven. Others believe that since the earlier manuscripts do not have the phrase, that a later copyist added it to be understood parenthetically, to denote that Jesus was in heaven, not at the time Jesus spoke his words, but at the time that the copyist added the phrase. Others believe that John wrote those words, but did not mean that Jesus said the words, but rather with the thought that when John wrote the words, Jesus was in heaven.

There is no need, however, to use the spirit of human imagination so as create the idea that Jesus was in two places at once, and then to further imagine that Jesus possesses two “natures” (planes of existence? planes of sentiency? beings: Supreme Being and Human Being?) at the same time, and then further to read into the scripture that Jesus is present absolutely everywhere in the whole universe.


Related:

Jesus: Body, Soul and Spirit

Resource Page Regarding Alleged Dual Natures of Jesus

Ephesians 1:23 - Is Jesus the Fullness of Him Who Fills All?

Ephesians 1:23 is sometimes offered as proof that Jesus is the Supreme Being with the assertion that Jesus Christ is the fullness of him who fills all. In some vague manner it is thought that this assertion means that Jesus is God Almighty. Actually, Ephesians 1:23 does not say that Jesus is the fullness of him who fills all, although if one should read it that way, it still would not mean that Jesus is the Supreme Being.

Ephesians 1:22 - He [the God and Father of Jesus -- Ephesians 1:3,17] put all things in subjection under his [Jesus'] feet, and [the God and Father of jesus] gave him [Jesus] to be head over all things to the assembly [the church, the saints],

Jesus did not call himself to the position of headship of the Church but was appointed to it by God. "No man takes this honor on himself." -- Hebrews 5:4.

Ephesians 1:23 - which is his [Jesus'] body, the fullness [completeness, plenitude] of him who fills [accomplishes] all in all.

This could be read several different ways.

"Which" is referring back to the church [the saints]; "his" refers to Jesus. The body of Jesus is made up of the church.

"The fullness" could be seen as referring to the church; "of him" could be referring to Jesus (or God).

"The fullness" could be referring to either Jesus' fullness or God's fullness, although this would hardly fit the context.

Nevertheless, Christ is the bond of unity to his Church -- Christ is in each individual, and each individual in Christ. Each member has been grafted into the true Vine, though in different places. Each member has some function in the mystical Body. All were reckoned in Jesus when he died, and rose, and entered the Father's presence. In him each member has access into the grace wherein they stand. The gift of Christ, on the other hand, has been made to each one of these, that he might realize himself through all the experiences of his members. God provided four Gospels to reveal to the church (not to the world in this age) who and what Jesus Christ is; nevertheless,all believers are required to set forth and exemplify to the world all the excelling glories of Emmanuel. It is for this reason that we are told that the Church is his Body, "the fulness [completeness, full development, plenitude, Greek pleroma, Strong's #4138] of him who fills [brings to completion, consumates, accomplishes, Greek, pleero, Strong's #4137] all in all." -- Ephesians 1:23.

It was Jesus himself who said: "The glory which you have given me, I have given to them; that they may be one, even as we are one; I in them, and you in me, that they may be perfected into one." (John 17:22,23) Due to the covering of Jesus' righteous blood, in such radiance the Church already now stands before God. He sees her essential unity. Its denial does not disintegrate it. Its obscuration does not impair it. The very members of the Church that compose the unity may be unaware of it, and may denounce each other; but even so, the twelve stones are in the same breastplate and the twelve loaves stand side by side on the same table. The members of a large family of boys and girls may dispute with each other, and may be scattered far and wide over the world, but to the mother, in her daily and nightly prayer, there is but one family, and to her they seem sheltered still under the wings of her brooding love.

Jesus himself gives us an illustration: "Most assuredly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit." (John 12:24) The "much fruit" owes all its prospects to that one grain of wheat. Possibilities of bread inherent in the one grain of wheat. That one grain of wheat is not of itself a harvest. The "much fruit", is the full development of that grain of wheat, and indispensable if it would realize its possibilities. So also with Christ. The church's all is in him, as he declared, "apart from me (or severed from me) you can do nothing." (John 12:24) The hand is of no use severed from the body; it will simply corrupt. Jesus illustrated this well in his picture of the vine; "Remain in me, and I in you. As the branch can't bear fruit by itself, unless it remains in the vine, so neither can you, unless you remain in me." (John 15:4) "If a man doesn't remain in me, he is thrown out as a branch, and is withered." (John 15:6) The life is in the vine, and only in the vital union with the vine can the branch bear fruit. And yet in this same picture we have a seed thought for the Apostle's other declaration that the Church is the full development of the Christ. It is the branches that bear the fruit. True, the fruit is not their own, but the fruit of the vine, for the life in the branches is the life of the vine, yet in order that the vine may express its life fully in fruit bearing, the branches have their part to play. The branch is only a channel for the expressing of the one life, not a life of its own; but the life of the vine. And the member of the Body of Christ is only a channel for the expressing of the one life, not a life of his own that he is living in the power of the spirit, as Paul said of himself: "I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I that live, but Christ living in me." So it is of the Christ, it is not because of any inherent value in any member. It is simply the extended operation of the Christ life that makes the Church, which is his Body, "the full development of him who accomplishes all [these things, Greek panta] in all [Greek, pansin]."

What we do not find in Ephesians 1 is any thought that Jesus is the Supreme Being; indeed, throughout, Jesus is distinguished from God. Additionally, God is not exalted to higher position of power by another, but it is God who exalts Jesus to such great power.

Jeremiah 23:6 - Our Righteousness

Lo, days are coming -- an affirmation of Jehovah, And I have raised to David a righteous shoot, And a king hath reigned and acted wisely, And done judgment and righteousness in the earth. In his days is Judah saved, and Israel dwelleth confidently, And this his name that Jehovah proclaimeth him, `Our Righteousness.' -- Young's Literal Translation

Jeremiah 23:5- Behold, the days come, says Jehovah, that I will raise to David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and act wisely, and He shall do justice and righteousness in the earth.
Jeremiah 23:6 - In His days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely. And this is His name by which He shall be called, Jehovah our Righteousness. -- .Green's Literal translation.

Many quote the above scripture to support the claim that Jesus is Jehovah. The claim is that Jesus is being called "Jehovah (Jehovah)" in Jeremiah 23:6, thus Jesus must be Jehovah. Actually, while one could consider "Jehovah" a part of the name that is applied to Jehovah's Messiah, the name "Jehovah" itself is not applied to the Messiah.

We have shown elsewhere that Jesus is the Son of the unipersonal God, he was sent by Jehovah, he spoke for Jehovah, etc.
See:
Jesus is Not Jehovah

But let us examine how Young renders Jeremiah 23:5,6:

Lo, days are coming -- an affirmation of Jehovah, And I have raised to David a righteous shoot, And a king hath reigned and acted wisely, And done judgment and righteousness in the earth. In his days is Judah saved, and Israel dwelleth confidently, And this his name that Jehovah proclaimeth him, `Our Righteousness.' -- Young's Literal Translation

We should note that verse 5 definitely tells us that it is Jehovah who raises to David a righteous shoot. This, in itself, should tell us that the "righteous shoot" of David is not Jehovh. In answer our trinitarian neighbors explain call up the spirit of human imagination so as to read into the scriptures that Jehovah is more than one person, thus one person of Jehovah raises another person of Jehovah as the "righteous shoot of David." They do not seem to realize that this explanation has to be added to the scriptures, since the Bible no where speaks of Jehovah as being more than one person.

Nevertheless, notice that Young renders the the expression: "this is the name that Jehovah proclaimeth him, 'Our Righteousness.'" This translation does away with any thought that Jesus is being called Jehovah.

Regarding Jeremiah 23:6, Paul S. L. Johnson states (Books of the Bible expanded to full name):

This trinitarian doctrine contradicts the fact that in the Bible God's Name, Jehovah, applies to the Father alone, and is never used as the personal name of the Son, who repeatedly in contrasted passages is shown not to be Jehovah; for He is in them distinguished from the Father, who by contrast is alone called Jehovah. In Isaiah 42:6-8, not only is the name Jehovah applied to the Supreme Being as His exclusive name; but as Jehovah he is shown not to be the Son, who is here represented as being called, held, kept, given by Jehovah, which is the Hebrew word used in the text always where we have the word LORD written entirely in capitals in the A. V., as is the case with the word LORD used in Isaiah 42:6-8. Jeremiah 23:6, when properly translated, markedly distinguishes between God as Jehovah exclusively, and Christ. Trinitarians have grossly mistranslated and miscapitalized this passage to read their trinitarianism into it, as they have done in other cases. The proper translation shows that Christ is not Jehovah: "This is the name which Jehovah shall call Him [Christ], Our Righteousness." Please compare this with 1 Corinthians 1:30. Thus He is Jehovah's appointed Savior for the world, not Jehovah Himself. See the literal translation of Dr. Young, who, though a trinitarian, translates it substantially as we do. While mistranslating Jeremiah 33:16, they have not miscapitalized it, and that because they doubtless feared the same kind of capitalization would suggest that the Church was also Jehovah, which their translation actually makes of her, if their procedure in Jeremiah 23:5,6, be allowed to rule as a parallel case. Here the proper translation is: This is the name that Jehovah shall her, Our Righteousness. The following are the violations of grammar committed in almost all trinitarian translations in rendering these two closely resembling passages: They have rendered an active verb, shall call, as a passive verb -- shall be called; they have made the subject of this active verb, Jehovah, an attributive object, hence one of its objects, and they have made the object of this verb, him, its subject, he shall be called; so greatly did their error on the trinity blind the translators to these elementary matters of Hebrew syntax. Rightly translated, the first passage proves that Jesus is not Jehovah, while the false translation of both passages makes Jesus and the Church, Jehovah, which on trinitarian principles would give us 144,003 in one! Rightly translated, how clearly Jeremiah 23:6 distinguishes between Jehovah and Christ, and Jeremiah 33:16 between Jehovah and the Church!
--- from "Epiphany Studies in the Scriptures",Vol. I - God, (by Paul S. L. Johnson) pages, 478,9.

Another suggested way of translating the Hebrew phrase is "Our righteousness of Jehovah".

The following is a quote from the book, The Lord Our God is One. We have expanded scriptural references to the full name of the Bible books.

We are told that in Jeremiah 23:5,6, our Lord Jesus is called Jehovah, for that prophecy respecting Messiah reads, "And this is the name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS (Jehovah-Tsidkenu)."

They fail to point out, however, that in Jeremiah 33:16 the church, pictured by Jerusalem, is called by the same name: "and this is his name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord our righteousness (Jehovah-Tsidkenu)."

Certainly the church is not a part of or persons of Jehovah. To bolster their prejudice, the translators had the words printed in capitals in the first instance, but tucked it away with small letters in the second. Jehovah-Tsidkenu could more properly be translated, "Our Righteousness of Jehovah" —a fitting title for our Lord Jesus, who in execution of the Father’s will has become the source of justification for believers in his name. The title is appropriate also for the church, to whom is committed the ministry of reconciliation, the great commission of bringing sinners back into harmony with God. —- 2 Corinthians 5:20; Revelation 22:17*

*For other examples of the use of Jehovah in a compound word, see Genesis 22:14; Exodus 17:15; Judges 6:23.24.

Notwithstanding, even if we allow for the translation as it appears in the World English Bible translation: "Yahweh our righteousness," or as it appears in the New Revised Standard Version: "The Lord is our righteousness", it does not follow that this means that Jesus is Jehovah, it would only mean that this is a name given to him, similar to the titles given in Genesis 22:14, Exodus 17:15, and Judges 6:23,24. The title given to the altar by Moses, "Jehovah our Banner", does not mean that the altar is Jehovah. (Exodus 17:15) Nor does the title given to the altar by Gideon, "Jehovah is peace", mean that that altar was Jehovah. Nor should we think that the title given to the seed of David in Jeremiah 23:6 would mean that the promised one was actually Jehovah himself. We need to remember that the same title is given to Jerusalem (antitypically the church). (Jeremiah 23:16) If it means that Jesus is Jehovah, then it would also mean that the church (Jerusalem) is Jehovah.

In truth, there is nothing in Jeremiah 23:16 that shows that Jesus is Jehovah. There is definitely nothin in Jeremiah 23:6 that presents Jehovah as being more than one person, or that Jesus is a person of Jehovah.

Objection

In Samson Levey's The Messiah, An Aramaic Interpretation, in giving rabbinic parallels to the targum on Jer 23:1-8, we read (page 70):

'What is the name of the King Messiah? R. Abba b. Kahana said: His name is "the Lord"; as it is stated. And this is the name whereby he shall be called. The Lord is our righteousness (Jer 23:6)' Lamentations Rabbah 1:51.

Isn't this proof that this scripture means that Jesus is Jehovah?

Actually, no, for this is only someone's opinion. We should not place our trust in Jewish tradition, which is often wrong. -- Matthew 12:1-8; 15:2-20; Mark 7:3-9; Luke 6:1-11; Colossians 2:8; 1 Timothy 1:4; 4:7; Titus 1:14; 1 Peter 1:16,18.

We do not have a copy of the "Lamentation Rabba", or "Lamentations Rabbah" so that we are not fully able to evaluate what is said there, but the online nationmater.com [this web site evidently no longer exists] encyclopedia, under "Midrash", states concerning this: "Eicha Rabba, Lamentations Rabbah (seventh century) Lamentations Rabbah has been transmitted in two versions. One edition is represented by the 1st printed edition, 1519 Pesaro; the other is the Buber edition, based on manuscript J.I.4 from the Biblioteca Casanata in Rome. This latter version (i.e. Buber) is quoted by the Shulkhan Arukh, as well as medieval Jewish authorities. It was probably redacted sometime in the 5th century."

See also:
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Midrash

At any rate, this Jewish literature is not the source for a basis of how Jeremiah 23:6 should be viewed. The scriptures themselves gives us the proper viewpoint when taken as a whole, as demonstrated above.

Revelation 2:8 - The First and the Last Was Dead

Revelation 2:8 -To the angel of the assembly in Smyrna write: "The first and the last, who was dead, and has come to life says these things: " -- World English Bible translation

According to many trinitarians, the phrase "the first and the last" applied to Jesus in Revelation 1:17 and Revelation 2:8 offers proof that Jesus is Jehovah (Yahweh), since Jehovah speaks of himself as first and last. (Isaiah 44:1; 44:6; 48:12) In reality, the most straightforward scriptural conclusion would not be that Jesus is Jehovah, but that both Jesus and his God are in some way respectively first and last. Nevertheless, many have claimed that there can only be one first and last, and thus they further claim this phrase shows that the one who is speaking in Revelation 2:8 is Jehovah, the Most High. Their reasoning is that when similar usage of used of Jehovah, it means that He is without beginning or end -- eternal past and eternal future. Thus, they claim is that it means the same thing when applied to Jesus, and therefore, they reason that Jesus is Jehovah.  The point we should note is that most trinitarians would seem to read into the phrase "the first and the last" in Revelation 2:8 some meaning of eternity, which, to the trinitarian, would mean that Jesus either exists outside of all time, or that he has always existed from the infinite eternity past with an uninterrupted continued existence into the infinite future.  And this is where the paradox of Revelation 2:8 comes in as the trinitarian seeks to apply such a thought to this verse.

When asked how the Eternal One who is from everlasting to everlasting was dead, the trinitarian almost always will state that it was not the "God" nature of Jesus that was dead, but rather that it was the "human nature" of Jesus. The claim is that Jesus is 100% God Almighty and at the same 100% human being.  Many of them refer to this assumption as the "dual nature" or "hypostatic union" of Jesus. Thus, in order to apply this hypothesis to Revelation, the trinitarian or anyone who believes in the alleged "dual natures" of Christ, has to split the sentence stated by Jesus up into two parts so as to apply the phrase "the first and the last" to the idea of Jesus as God to that phrase, and then the latter part of the sentence, "who was dead", they would have to claim applies only to the human "nature" of Jesus, and not "the first and the last." The title "the frst and the last", they would claim, applies only to the "God" nature of Jesus, and most of the trinitarians do not believe that the God "nature" or "being" of Jesus died, but rather that it was only his human "nature" or "being" died. Thus, this idea, applied to this scripture, would have it that "the first and the last" did not die as the scripture actually states, but rather that it was the human body into which "the first and the last"  was "incarnated" that died.

We are sure that most trinitarians do not consciously reckon with this scripture as we have presented, but, in effect, this is what they have to do in order to get the sentence to appear to support their trinitarian dogma, and their "hypostatic union" assumption. However, it is also true that, in effect, such an application to Revelation 2:8 actually denies that it was "the first and the last" who died. In actuality, what Jesus said was: "The first and the last, who was dead."  He declares that "the first and the last" was dead. He did not say, as the trinitarian would seem to have him say: "I am the first and the last who did not die, but who as a human being, was dead." In other words, the trinitarian, as well as any others who would see the dualistic view into this verse, actually end up denying what Jesus said, that the "first and the last" "was dead".

Jesus, of course, was the first and the last, the only one, whom God directly brought forth from death by means of His holy spirit, never to die again. (Acts 2:24,32,26; 3:15; 4:10; 10:40; 13:30,33,37; 17:31; Romans 4:24; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Corinthians 6:14; 15:15; Galatians 1:1; Colossians 2:11,12; 1 Thessalonians 1:9,10; 1 Peter 1:21; 3:18) All the rest who are brought forth to life in the last day will be brought forth through Jesus as the Agent of Jehovah. (John 5:21,22,25,27,28,29;  6:39,40,44,54; 11:24; 12:47,48; Acts 10:42; 17:31; Romans 2:16) Jesus is thus, also, the first and the last of God's firstborn from the dead, for there will never be another who will be the firstborn of the dead. (Colossians 1:8; Revelation 1:5) Indeed, since, in the context, Jesus describes himself as the firstborn of the dead, then the most direct application of "the first and the last" as applied to he who "was dead and has come to life" is that Jesus is the first and the last of the firsborn of the dead.

There is nothing in any of this, however, to support the idea that Jesus is Jehovah, or the formulated dogma of dual "natures" of Jesus, hypostatic union, trinity, Jesus is Jehovah, oneness doctrine, etc. Like all of the scriptures presented to allegedly support the added-on doctrines, the dogma has to be assumed, added to, and read into what Jesus actually stated.

For related studies, see our resource page: Alpha and Omega

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

Revelation 1:8 - God, Who Was, Is, and Is to Come

Revelation 1:7
Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, including those who pierced him. All the tribes of the earth will mourn over him. Even so, Amen.

Revelation 1:8
"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says Jehovah God, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." -- Restoration Light Improved.

It is obvious that in Revelation 1:8, that the Holy Name is changed to KURIOS in the extant Greek manuscripts. Thus, we believe that the anarthrous KURIOS in Revelation 1:18 was originally some form of the Holy Name.

Many, however, argue that the one quoted in Revelation 1:8 is not the God and Father of Jesus, but was Jesus himself, who is said to be come in the clouds in verse 7.  They claim that it actually means that the Almighty of Revelation 1:8 is Jesus of Revelation 1:7.

The most simple and straightforward scriptural conclusion -- based on what actually stated in Revelation 1:8 as well as the context and the entire book of Revelation -- is that in Revelation 1:8, He “who is and was and who is to come” is not Jesus, but rather the one person who is “God” of Revelation 1:1, He who is, was and is to come of Revelation 1:4. Since He who is, was, and is to come of verse 4 is not Jesus of Revelation 1:5, the simply answer is that He who is, was and is to come in Revelation 1:8 is not Jesus.

However, many trinitarians and some others do not accept the simple and straightforward conclusion, but would imagine and assume  that in Revelation 1:8 Jesus himself claimed to be the Almighty. Many trinitarians, in effect, would have the book of Revelation speaking of two Jesuses, one who is sitting on the throne and another who is the Lamb who takes the sealed book from the Himself who is sitting on the throne.  -- Revelation 1:4,5,8; 4:2,8-10; 5:1,6,7.

Trinitarians make much ado about the phrase "is to come" in Revelation 1:8 and claim that this is referring to the one who comes in the clouds of Revelation 1:7. Actually, to give “is to come” in verse 8 the application to he who comes in the clouds of verse 7 means that one takes "is to come" out of context of what is said in verse 8 in order to force it to refer to the one coming in Revelation 1:7, thus giving the inference that both are speaking of the same “coming”.

It is often further claimed that since in verse 7 it is Jesus who is being referred to as “coming”, that it is Jesus who is being quoted in verse 8 who states that he “is to come”..

Yes, the words in Revelation 1:7 are indeed the words of Jesus.

Nevertheless, in Revelation 1:8, John begins to quote the God and Father of Jesus (Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3; Revelation 3:5,12): “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.

All through the Revelation given to John, Jesus is distinguished from “God”.

All through the Revelation, Jesus is distinguished from 'he who is, was and is to come'.

Revelation 1:1

Revelation 1:1
This is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things which must happen soon, which he sent and made known by his angel to his servant, John. -- World English Bible version.

We find that, in Revelation 1:1, “God” is clearly distinguished from “Jesus Christ”, as it should be.

It is “God” who gives the revelation to “Jesus Christ”. “Jesus Christ”, in turn gives the revelation to his servants by means of John. -- Revelation 1:1.

Revelation 1:1 speaks of Jesus with the title “Christ”, that is: “Jesus Christ”. “Christ” means “Anointed”.

Who anointed Jesus?

Isaiah 61: 1 - The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is on me; because Jehovah has anointed me to preach good news to the humble; he has sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening [of the prison] to those who are bound.

The Messiah is prophetically quoted as saying: “Jehovah ... has anointed me.” -- Isaiah 61:1, World English.

Thus, the Anointed One -- the Christ -- recognizes Jehovah as the one who anointed him.

In the words recorded as Luke 4:14-23, Jesus identified himself as the one whom Jehovah anointed as spoken of in Isaiah 61:1.

This means that “God” in Psalm 45:7; Acts 2:36; 10:38; and Hebrews 1:9 is Jehovah of Isaiah 61:1. It also means that the unipersonal “God” of Revelation 1:1,2,4,6,8,9 is not Jesus, but the “Lord Jehovah” of Isaiah 61:1 who anointed Jesus, thus making him “Jesus Christ” of Revelation 1:1.

Also in Isaiah 61:1, note that the Messiah refers to his God as “the Lord Jehovah”.

Since we have identified "God' who anointed Jesus as as Christ (Revelation 1:1) as being Jehovah, this further means that in Revelation 1:8, it is this same one -- "the Lord  Jehovah" of Isaiah 61:1, who is referred to in the World English and many other translations as the “the Lord God”.

Thus, “Jehovah God” of Revelation 1:8 is the Lord Jehovah of Isaiah 61:1, and is not Jesus, but rather the one who anointed Jesus, making him “Jesus Christ” as shown in Revelation 1:1.

Revelation 1:4-6 - John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace, from him who is and who was and who is to come; and from the seven Spirits that are before his throne;[5] and from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood;[6] and he made us [to be] a kingdom, [to be] priests unto his God and Father; to him [be] the glory and the dominion for ever and ever. Amen. -- American Standard Version.

Revelation 1:4,5 clearly distinguishes Jesus from he 'who is, was and is to come'. It is the one person who is “God” of Revelation 1:1 who is identified in Revelation 1:4 as being “who is and who was and who is to come.”

Thus, in Revelation 1:8, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." is not Jesus, but rather the God of Jesus, “God” who has given the revelation to Jesus. -- Revelation 1:1.

Nor does “is to come” in Revelation 1:8 refer to the same event as the “coming” in Revelation 1:7.

As far as we know, no one claims that when the Almighty says “who was”, that this means that He was coming from some place or that he was going to some place in the past. Likewise, we know of no one who claims that when He says “who is”, that this means He is presently going some place or coming from some place.

In other words, the Almighty was not saying that he was coming from or to some place in the past (although it could applied to his having come from eternal past, that is, that He is "from everlasting," -- Psalm 90:2), or that he is coming from or to some place in the present (although he exists in the present and comes in the present in the sense of His activity), and thus, He was likewise not saying that he will be coming from or coming to some place in the future (although, as related to time, not a place, he will eternally be coming as far as His eternal future existence is concerned).

Consequently, many, if not most, Greek Bible scholars conclude that Revelation 1:8 speaks of God's being, his eternal existence, past, present and future, even if they believe that this phrase in Revelation 1:8 is in reference to Jesus. Thus Adam Clarke, in his discussion concerning this phrase in verse 4, states:

This phraseology is purely Jewish, and probably taken from the Tetragrammaton, יהוה Yehovah ; which is supposed to include in itself all time, past, present, and future. -- Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Revelation 1". -- "The Adam Clarke Commentary".  1832.

Nevertheless,  Revelation 1:8 itself as well as the context (Revelation 1:1,4) tells us that, in Revelation 1:8, it is the Almighty Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus who is speaking as the one who was, is and is to come. Accordingly, the conclusion is that Jesus is not the one who was, is, and is to come in Revelation 1:8.

The peculiar phrase in Revelation 1:8 only belongs to Jehovah, not to Jesus.

Jehovah has actively existed from all eternity past, he actively exists now, and he actively exists for all time to come. This is basically what Jehovah is saying in Revelation 1:8.

“Is to come” simply extends the thought of God’s active existence into the infinite future, just as “who was” is speaking of God’s past, and “is” is speaking his being in the present. Thus, it is all inclusive of past, present and future.

The summation is that the most direct scriptural conclusion is that “the Lord God, ‘who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty’” in Revelation 1:8 is "God" of Revelation 1:1,4, not Jesus, as has been demonstrated.

For further study, see our studies related at:
https://jesusnotyhwh.blogspot.com/p/revelation.html#rev1-8

Revelation 1:17,18; 2:8 - The First and the Last

Revelation 1:17 - When I saw him, I fell at his feet like a dead man. He laid his right hand on me, saying, "Don't be afraid. I am the first and the last,
Revelation 1:18 - and the Living one. I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. -- World English Bible translation.

Revelation 2:8 - "To the angel of the assembly in Smyrna write: "The first and the last, who was dead, and has come to life says these things.

The thought trinitarians would like to read into this evidently is that when Jesus refers to himself as "the first and the last" that this somehow means that Jesus is Jehovah, who says in Isaiah 44:6: "I am the first, and I am the last." Additionally, the assumption is made that Jesus' reference to himself as "the first and the last" means that Jesus is, has always been and always will be.

What does Jesus himself indicate regarding his reference to himself? Did he say he has always been -- that he was uncreated, and that he could never cease to exist? No, he, as the first and the last, plainly says: "I was dead." Thus he is telling us of a time when he was not. By such Jesus is, in effect, denying that he is Jehovah, who cannot die. But Jesus says, in reference to his being brought out of the death condition, "I am alive forevermore."

This is reiterated in Revelation 2:8 where Jesus refers to himself as: "The first and the last, who was dead, and has come to life." For him to come to life would mean that he, the first and the last, had no life while dead. If he was actually alive while dead then he never was actually dead.

Of course, our trinitarian neighbors would tear what Jesus said apart and have the expression "the first and the last" apply to the the alleged "God" nature of Jesus while they would separate the expression "who was dead" as not meaning "God" whom they allege Jesus is claiming to be in the expression "the first and the last", but rather only the body/flesh/humanity of Jesus. The First and the Last, they claim is God, who did not die, but rather it was the "man" Jesus who died. In effect, they would end up denying what Jesus actually said, that 'the first and the last' was indeed dead. In reality, there is no reason to divide this up so, except to satisfy the added on trinitarian concepts. It was Jesus himself who died, ceased to have sentiency, and it was Jesus himself who came back to life.

The contextual evidence is that Jesus is speaking about his being the first and last in some way concerning his being dead and brought back to life. How could this be?

Revelation 1:5 refers to Jesus as the "firstborn" of the dead. No one had been brought back to life directly by Jehovah never to die again, except Jesus. Jesus was the first. At the time of the writing of the Revelation, Jesus was also the last that had been actually brought back to life, never to die again, and he is certainly the last firstborn to be made alive. There will never be another firstborn from the dead. Believers are now "counted" or "reckoned" as justified and alive, but are not actually raised to life until the "last day" -- the day of the world's judgment. Jesus was also the "last" to be directly brought back to life by Jehovah, since God has given the authority of the resurrection and judgment to Jesus. -- John 5:19-30; 6:39,40,44,54; 11:24; 12:47,48; Acts 17:31.

Jehovah, of course, is the first and last EL/ELOHIM (strength, power, might) in the universe. (Isaiah 44:6) No one can have any power or might aside from him. Even the demons have to depend on Jehovah for any power they have (which power they misuse). They have no power (strength, might) of their own, except that they have received such power from God. Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus, is the only ultimate Supreme Being. Additionally, none of the idol-gods of men were formed before Him, since He had no beginning of existence, nor can any be formed after Him, since he has no ending of existence.

What we do not find in these verses is any thing that says that Jesus is a person of the Most High, or three persons in one God. The idea of "trinity" or that Jesus is Jehovah has to be imagined, assumed, added and placed over the scriptures in order to make the scriptures seem to support those ideas.

For more concerning this, see:

Alpha and Omega, First and Last

Hypostatic Union/Dual Natures

*******

Russell on "He Who Was, Is, and Is to Come"