Revelation 3:14 - Is Jesus the Beginning, Ruler or Beginner of Creation?

Did Jesus Need To Be Uncreated To Pay For The Sin Of The World?

"Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!" -- John 1:29.

The claim is made that Jesus must not have been created, since, according to this reasoning, 'nothing created could pay the penalty of sin for everything was created and subject to corruption.' Many have stated this or something similar: "Jesus had to be God so that He could pay our debt." Thus the conclusion is that Jesus is the uncreated God.

Many say this as though such was written in the Bible. Actually, such a thought is not in the Bible at all. In reality, this thought has to imagined and assumed totally beyond what is written in the Bible. — 1 Corinthians 4:6.

On the other hand, if Jesus had to be the Most High in order to obey the Most High, then rather than condemning sin in the flesh (Romans 8:3), Jesus justified sin the flesh, for he would have proved that in order to obey the Most High, Adam would have needed to have been the Most High. Such, in effect, condemns the Most High for demanding of a being that is not the Most High obedience to the Most High. It would further imply that a sinless, incorrupt, yet corruptible, man could not possible have obeyed the Most High, and thus the Most High was unjust in demanding the death penalty for his disobedience.

However, what does the scripture actually say? Does it say that Jesus had to be the Most High in order to pay the price for sin? Absolutely not! “For since through man is the death, also through man is a rising again of the dead.” (1 Corinthians 15:21, Young’s Literal Translation) It was “the man [not God], Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.” (1 Timothy 2:5,6) Only could an incorrupt sinless man, as was Adam before Adam sinned, actually prove that such a mere man could obey God, and provide the offsetting price – antilutron – for sin (1 Timothy 2:5,6), thereby condemning sin in the flesh. (Romans 8:3) Not only that, unlike Adam, Jesus proved that such a man can put on incorruption (Greek, Aphtharsia; 1 Corinthians 15:54), having overcome even the possibility of dying the second death (Revelation 2:11; 3:21), thereby bringing life and incorruption (Aphtharsia) to light for man. — 2 Timothy 1:10.

How could one man pay the offsetting price for sin? Because all were condemned in one man, who was once incorrupt, but was corrupted through sin (Romans 5:12-19), and thus only one fully faithful incorrupt sinless man — not God — was needed to buy back that which was lost. — 1 Corinthians 15:21,22.

Jesus was not born of this world (John 8:23), the offspring of Adam that has been corrupted through the sin of Adam and Eve. (Romans 5:12-19; 2 Peter 1:4) Adam was not created corrupted; he was created incorrupt, upright, straight. (Ecclesiates 7:29) On the other hand, neither was Adam created incorruptible, for such would have meant that it would have been impossible to Adam to sin. Adam was created incorrupt, but he was created corruptible, that is, it was possible for him to become corrupted through sin.

Jesus was begotten of the holy spirit in the womb of Mary. (Matthew 1:20) His body was specially prepared by God. (Hebrews 10:5) Thus, he was not born under the condemnation of Adam , but he took upon himself the penalty of that condemnation, and suffered as though he were under that condemnation, as though he were under the bondange of corruption (Greek, phithora -- Strong's #5356), in order to pay the price as an offering to his God (Ephesians 5:2; Hebrews 9:14) to release man from that condemnation. Only in this manner is God found to be just, and yet the justifier of sinners. — Romans 3:26; 8:3,20-22; 1 Timothy 2:5,6.

Isaiah 57:15 – Examining The Hebrew Word ‘Ad

Isaiah 57:15: “For thus says the high and lofty One who inhabits eternity, whose name is Holy: I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also who is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite.”

This is one of scriptures that is often used to show that Jehovah is eternal, to which we agree; however, it is often claimed that, by the usage here, that this proves that the Hebrew word ‘ad means eternity, not simply as meaning something different than eternal past, present and future, but it is often claimed that eternity exists outside of time altogether. Although eternal past is implied here, the Hebrew word ‘ad does not, of itself, necessarily mean this, as one can easily determine by looking up the how it is used in various verses.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/ad.html

Some read into Isaiah 57:15 that Jehovah exists outside of time; whether Jehovah actually dwells outside of time or not is not given in the Bible, nor is there anything in the Hebrew to warrant this conclusion. The Hebrew word ‘ad cannot be used to make such claim.

The Hebrew word ‘ad (Strong’s 5710) is also used of the dwelling of the righteous on earth in Psalm 37:29, where no thought would be placed in dwelling outside of time. In Numbers 24:20, the word ‘ad there certainly does not mean eternity outside of time, but it does refer to Amalek as having perished referring to future time? In the Bible, the Hebrew word ‘ad is usually used pertaining to future time.

In Psalm 41:13, 90:2; 93:2, Jehovah is said to be “from everlasting.”  These verses are often cited in connection with Isaiah 57:15. The word used in these verses, usually translated as “everlasting’, is not ‘ad, but rather the word often transliterated as ‘olam or ‘owlam. Does ‘owlam, of itself, designate eternal past, present and future, or an eternity outside of time? We have discussed this word elsewhere*, and have shown from the scriptures that it does not inherently mean either. The word can take on the meaning of eternal past or eternal future, depending on context. The very wording of the verses (Psalm 41:13, 90:2; 93:2) under discussion, however, indicates that it is not being used to mean eternity outside of time, since the time elements of “from” (past time) and “to” (future time) are given related to its use. Of itself, however, the Hebrew word ‘olam does not designate either eternal past or eternal future; the contextual usage in this verse, however, as applied to Jehovah, does give it the meaning of eternal past and eternal future.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/owlam.html

Nevertheless, returning to Isaiah 57:15, the New American Standard renders Isaiah 57:15 as: “For thus says the high and exalted One Who lives forever.” The Hebrew word translated “lives” (Strong’s #7931) simply means to dwell, reside. The Hebrew is simply saying that Jehovah dwells forever, He continues to abide forever, that is, that he lives into the future without end.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/shakan.html

Nevertheless, “eternity” is claimed to be a supposed incommunicable attribute of Jehovah, and thus no one else should have it. We concur that having an eternal past only belongs to Jehovah, the "one God of whom are all" (1 Corinthians 8:6), the God and Father of our Lord Jesus. (John 17:3; Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3) On the other hand, to live forever (as pertaining to the future) is not an incommunicable attribute of Yahweh. We gave Psalm 37:29 which shows that humans will dwell for eternity (‘ad) upon the earth; this certainly doesn’t mean that they will dwell in an eternity outside of time, or that they will share an incommunicable attribute of Jehovah. — See also: Psalm 21:4,6; 22:26.

Zechariah 11:12,13 – Thirty Pieces Of Silver

{Zechariah 11:12} I said to them, "If you think it best, give me my wages; and if not, keep them." So they weighed for my wages thirty pieces of silver.
{Zechariah 11:13} Jehovah said to me, "Throw it to the potter, the handsome price that I was valued at by them!" I took the thirty pieces of silver, and threw them to the potter, in the house of Jehovah. -- Restoration Light Improved Rendering

According to many trinitarians and some others, Zechariah offers convincing proof that Jesus is Jehovah. One states: “In the passage beginning with Zechariah 11:4, “the LORD my God” said, “So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.” It is claimed that in Zechariah 11:13, God says that 30 pieces of silver was paid for for him, but it is claimed that New Testament shows that thirty pieces of silver were paid for Jesus (Matthew 26:15; 27:3,9), and thus this comparison of scriptures is offered as proof that Jesus is Yahweh.

Let us break this down so as to ascertian who is speaking in Zechariah’s prophecy.

Zechariah 11:4
Thus says Jehovah my [Zechariah’s] God: “Feed the flock of slaughter.”

Zechariah is instructed by Jehovah to feed the flock that was to be sold for slaughter.

Zechairah 11:12
I [Zechariah] said to them [the shepherds of Israel and Judah], “If you think it best, give me my wages; and if not, keep them.” So they weighed for my [Zechariah’s] wages thirty pieces of silver. 13 Jehovah said to me [Zechariah], “Throw it to the potter, the handsome price that I [Jehovah] was valued at by them!” I [Zechariah] took the thirty pieces of silver, and threw them to the potter, in the house of Jehovah.

This scripture is often vaguely used to support the trinity doctrine, although there is nothing there about three persons in one God. Since Jesus was priced at 30 pieces of silver, and since Jehovah here says, “I was valued at by them,” they conclude that Jesus is here called Jehovah, and evidently this is supposed to give support to the trinitarian philosophy of three persons in one God. Let us look at this closer.

The above is all part of a prophetic dramatization. which has its fulfillment in the New Testament days. In the context the prophet takes two shepherd’s staves, named Beauty and Bands, and breaking them, shows the cessation of God’s pastoral relationship toward Israel. The staff, Beauty, depicts the cessation of his exclusive covenant relationship with them, while Bands indicates the deterioration of the relationship between the northern kingdom of Israel and the southern monarchy of Judah. The prophecy of the potter’s field is a part of the former. It was this act, brought about by the treachery of Judas, that marked the termination of the law relationship to “them that believed”. — Colossians 2:14; Romans 10:4.

It was Zechariah, as Jehovah’s prophet, and thus the representative of Yahweh, who is depicted as asking for wages from the shepherds of Israel. The shepherds of Israel measured out for Zechariah thirty pieces of silver, for the care of the flocks. (Zechariah 2:7) The thirty pieces of silver was the price which, by the Mosaic law, a man was condemned to pay if his ox should gore a servant (Exodus 21:32), which, evidently fell far short of the price that would actually be due to for such care. In other words, the shepherds of Israel failed to pay the proper wages due for the job done, but instead insulted the prophet of Jehovah by paying the price of a gored bond-servant. By valuing the prophet of Jehovah as such, they were, in effect, valuing Jehovah in the same way.

Of course, all of this was done to provide a prophetic dramatization. The price paid to Judas for Jesus, the sacrifice for all mankind, was paid for out of the temple-money, destined for the purchase of sacrifices. He who “took on himself the form [outward appearance] of a slave”, in likeness of sinful flesh, (Philippians 2:7; Romans 8:3,21) was sold at the legal price of a bond-servant. Since Jesus was a prophet who had come in the name of Jehovah (Deuteronomy 18:15-22; Psalm 118:26; Matthew 21:9; 23:39; Mark 11:9; Luke 13:35; 19:38; John 12:13; Acts 3:17-26), this is also considered as being done to the God and Father of Jesus. — John 5:23; 15:23; See also: Matthew 10:40; 25:40; 18:5; Mark 9:37,48; John 13:20.

If in the prophetic drama of Zechariah, the price valued is fulfilled in Jesus, and if this would prove that Jesus is Yahweh, we would need to consider the rest of the prophecy in the same manner. In the prophecy, it is Zechariah, representing Yahweh, who asks for the wages — “give me my wages”. In the fulfillment, however, who actually asked for the wages? Matthew records it was Judas: “What are you willing to give me, and I will deliver him to you?” (Matthew 26:15, World English) According to the reasoning often presented in trying to prove that Jesus is Yahweh through use of Zechariah 1:12,13, this would, in effect, prove that Judas is Yahweh.

Additionally, Matthew 27:5 says of Judas, “He threw down the pieces of silver in the sanctuary…” Since in the fulfillment it was Judas who actually threw the pieces of silver in the sanctuary, should we then conclude that Judas is Zechariah, or if Zechariah represented Jesus (as some commentators claim), should we conclude that Judas is Jesus? No, for the prophetic drama does not have actual person-for-person correspondences, but rather prophetically depicts the events to occur.

However, actions are often attributed to Jehovah even though Jehovah himself does not carry out the actions. For instance, we read in Exodus 7:17 where Jehovah says He Himself will smite the waters with the rod in His own hand. Yet, it was Aaron that held the rod (Exodus 7:19,20). Should we conclude from this that Aaron is also Jehovah? And we read in Exodus 12:51 that Jehovah brought the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt, and in Deuteronomy 32:12, we read that Jehovah alone led Israel. However, we also read that “Moses led Israel” (Exodus 15:22) Does this mean that Moses is Jehovah?

Despite the claims, there is nothing in Zechariah 11 that offers any proof that Jesus is his God. There is certainly nothing anywhere in Zechariah, or anyplace else in the Bible, that ever presents the conept that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is more than one person, or that Jesus is a person of such a God.