Jehovah's Witnesses And The Deity Of Christ
Homer Duncan
1978
The Lord Jesus Christ posed the question of questions when He asked, "What think you of Christ?" (Matthew 22:42). Men have given many answers to this question, While recognizing that Jesus was the greatest of all teachers, some believe Him to be a man just like other men. The Gnostics denied that Jesus had a real body. They taught that he was a phantom without physical existence. Liberal theologians deny His virgin birth; they deny His atoning death, His literal resurrection, and His Second Coming. All of the cults are in error concerning the person and work of Christ. Orthodox Christianity teaches the absolute deity of Christ, that He is God, and that He is eternal and equal with God.
A companion question to that of the Lord Jesus was asked by Pontius Pilate at the trial of Jesus. "What shall 1 do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" (Matthew 27:22). Every man is called on not only to decide who Jesus is, but he must, of necessity, make a decision as to what he will do with the Lord Jesus. Every man must either accept or reject Christ. There is no middle ground. The decisions that we make concerning Him determine our eternal destiny.
These same two questions, in different form, were asked by Saul of Tarsus on the Damascus road. He first asked, "Who art thou, Lord?" and the Lord said, "I am Jesus whom thou persecutes." Immediately Saul asked the second question, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" Saul first determined who Jesus was, and then, recognizing that Christ was Lord, put his life at the disposal of the Lord Jesus.
ORTHODOXY VERSUS HERESY
Webster defines orthodox in this way: Sound in opinion or doctrine; hence, holding the Christian faith as formulated in the great church creeds and confessions. Orthodox Christianity has from the very beginning of the Christian dispensation believed that Jesus Christ is very God of very God, and that He is eternal and equal with God. Early in the fourth century, a controversy developed in the church of Alexandria. Arius, a presbyter of the church and an eloquent preacher, taught that Christ as the Son had a beginning, but that God is without beginning. He taught that the Son is not a part of God. A synod was called in Alexandria and Arius and his friends were condemned and deposed. However, the conflict over this issue was so severe in the eastern part of the Roman Empire that it threatened to divide the Catholic Church in that region. In order to avoid such a division, Constantine called a council of three hundred bishops to meet at Nicea in the year 325. Though the conflict between these two factions was very severe, Arius and his followers were defeated. Kenneth Scott Latourette, late Sterling professor in Missions and Oriental History, Yale University, who has been referred to as The Dean of American Church Historians, states that the Arian cause was irretrievably lost at that time.
In recent years (beginning with C. T. Russell, 1870-1916) THE WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY of Brooklyn, New York, has been successful in reviving the Arian heresy. This Society now has over two million baptized followers, and over nine million people read the WATCHTOWER MAGAZINE each month. The Watchtower Society teaches that since Jesus is a creature of God, He is not eternal and, therefore, is not equal with God.
THE ISSUES TO BE DECIDED
Is Jesus Christ a creature of God, or is He the Almighty Creator of all things?
Is Jesus Christ merely "a god," or is He very God of very God?
Is He a "mighty God" but not Almighty God?
Is He only the Son of God but not God the Son?
Is Jesus Christ "a lesser deity"?
Did He "shut himself out from being God or even a part or a Person of God"?
Is it true that “Jesus did not class himself with God"?
The purpose of this booklet is to present a clear statement of what the Bible teaches about the deity of Christ, and to compare the teaching of the Bible with the teachings of the Watchtower Society. If the claims and teachings of the Watchtower Society are in harmony with the Word of God, all of us should become Jehovah's Witnesses. But if, as 1 shall prove, the claims and teachings of the Watchtower Society are contrary to the teaching of the Bible, those in the WTS should turn from this false Satanic system, and turn to Christ, the Son of the Living God.
SOME PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS
At this point we wish to recognize that a doctrine is not correct merely because it is held by Orthodox Christianity, nor is it wrong merely because it is held by the Watchtower Society. And, conversely, it is not wrong because it is held by Orthodox Christianity, nor is it right merely because it is held by the Watchtower Society. To the average reader, it may seem superfluous to make the above statements. However, there are thousands of sincere people in the world who believe that a doctrine is correct if it is the view of Orthodox Christianity, and other thousands believe that a doctrine is correct if it is promulgated by the Watchtower Society. A doctrine must be accepted or rejected on the basis of whether or not it is taught in the Word of God. It is not to be believed on the basis of what we would like for the Bible to teach, but on the basis of what the Bible actually does teach.
Most Bible students rightly use many helps (concordances, dictionaries, commentaries, and other books), but if all of our information comes from one organization, it is inevitable that our thinking will be biased in favor of the viewpoint of that organization. If we are to know the truth, our minds must be kept open to the truth from all sources. Since the truth has nothing to fear from the light, it should be evident that we are being kept from the truth when any church ~r organization encourages us to study only the literature that is put out by them.
SOME FALLACIES IN THE THINKING OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES
Yes, these are strong, harsh charges, but if you have the courage to face the truth, the Holy Spirit will convince you that these statements are true.
JESUS CHRIST- THE GOD-MAN
Since JW's fail or refuse to recognize the teaching of the Holy Scriptures that Jesus Christ is both God and man, they ask such foolish questions as, "If Jesus Christ is God, who ran the universe while he was dead and in the tomb for three days and nights?" Or they ask, "If Jesus is God, was he praying to himself when he said, 'Our Father which is in Heaven'?"
The honest seeker after the truth must ask himself this question: "Am 1 to believe only that which 1 can understand, or will 1 believe what the Bible teaches regardless of whether 1 can understand it?" The honest seeker after the truth will determine to conform his views to the teaching of the Word of God, and not to twist the teaching of the Word to conform to his views. As we will show in this treatise, the WTS has repeatedly twisted the Word of God to conform to their doctrine. How fearful will be their fate at the Judgment Bar of Almighty God!
In order to help my Jehovah's Witness friends to understand the truth, 1 will quote from their NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES when this translation bears any semblance to the truth.
“The things concealed belong to Jehovah our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our sons to time indefinite, that we may carry out all the words of the law" (Deuteronomy 29: 29-NWT). There are many things that Jehovah, in His sovereign grace, has not been pleased to reveal to us. He wants to teach us to trust Him even when we cannot understand. Jehovah is infinite (unlimited) and we are finite (limited). That which is infinite cannot be fully comprehended by the finite. Jehovah would not be God if we could fully comprehend Him. We can know nothing about Jehovah except those things that He has been pleased to reveal to us through His Word, the Bible. Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, Professor in Princeton Theological Seminary, writes, "It must never be forgotten that there is but one living true God. Christians do not worship three Gods. How in the unity of the Godhead there can be three persons of one substance, power, and eternity is a mystery beyond human comprehension. A God who would be fully understood by our finite intelligence would be unworthy to be called God. If the Christian doctrine of God and Jesus Christ were something invented by men irrespective of the data of Scripture, it could, of course, be formulated as to give no offense to Jehovah's Witnesses." C. S. Lewis wrote, "We cannot compete in simplicity with people who are inventing religions. How could we? We're dealing with fact. Of course, anyone can be simple if he has no facts to bother about!"
JW's recognize that Jesus Christ was a man, and that He repeatedly referred to Himself as the Son of man. JW's recognize that Jesus is the Son of God, but refuse to believe that He is God the Son. It is difficult to see how they profess to believe in the Virgin Birth of Christ, and yet refuse to believe in His incarnation. The incarnation means that Christ who was God was made flesh and dwelt among us. The Bible does not teach that Christ as a man became God, but that Christ who was God became man. In becoming a man He did not lay aside His deity, but He temporarily laid aside His glory. This will be discussed in detail when we consider Philippians 2:5-8.
SEVEN REASONS WHY CHRIST BECAME MAN
The Lord Jesus became a man for many reasons.
Dr. F. F. Bruce, Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, England, writes, "If there is, among the distinctive articles of the Christian faith, one which is basic to all the others, it is this: that our Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, became man for our salvation. This is the affirmation that we have in mind when we speak of the doctrine of the incarnation.
"While 'incarnation' (a term of Latin origin, meaning 'becoming-in-flesh') is not itself a biblical word, it conveys a biblical truth, the truth which finds classic expression in John 1: 14, 'the Word became flesh.'
"The incarnation of Christ implies His deity and humanity alike. To assert that any of us 'became flesh' or 'came in the flesh' would be a truism; it is no mere truism that John voices when he insists that 'Jesus Christ has come in the flesh,' and makes this confession the crucial test of truth. He means, rather, that one Who had His being eternally within the unity of the Godhead became man at a point in time, without relinquishing His oneness with God. And by the word 'flesh,' he does not mean a physical body only, but a complete human personality.
"Nor is John the only New Testament writer so to speak. Paul speaks of God as 'sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh' where 'likeness' does not suggest that His manhood was less than real, but that His human nature was like our sinful nature except that His nature was unstained by sin. Again, in the early Christian confession reproduced in 1 Timothy 3:16, the 'mystery of our religion' (that is, Christ himself, the 'mystery of God,' as He is called in Col. 12) is said to have been 'manifested in the flesh.' The writer to the Hebrews bears the same witness when he says of the Son of God, through whom the worlds were made, that since those whom He came to deliver are sharers in flesh and blood, He also Himself in like manner partook of the same'-in order that He might accomplish His saving purpose through death, which He could not otherwise have undergone.
"The doctrine of our Lord's incarnation, then, is broadly based throughout the New Testament. When John, Paul, and the writer to the Hebrews present such agreement as this, it is usually safe to trace their agreement back to a germinal principle in the life and teaching of Christ." [1]
Dr. John F. Walvoord, President of Dallas Theological Seminary, writes, "The overwhelming proof for both the deity and true humanity of Christ makes it self-evident that in His person these natures so widely differing as to their attributes are nevertheless brought together into a personal union which will continue forever. Though Christ sometimes operated in the sphere of His humanity and in other cases in the sphere of His deity, in all cases what He did and what He was could be attributed to His one person. Even though it is evident that there were two natures in Christ, He is never considered a dual personality. The normal pronouns such as 1, Thou, and He are used of Him frequently.
"The hypostatic or personal union of the human and divine natures in Christ is given explicit divine revelation in at least seven major passages of Scriptures (Phil. 2:6-11; John 1:1-14; Romans 1:23; 9:5; 1 Timothy 3:16; Hebrews 2:14; 1 John 1: 1-3). These passages which are studied in connection with other doctrines make it evident that the eternal Son of God took upon Himself a complete human nature and became Man. The act of incarnation was not a temporary arrangement which ended with His death and resurrection but, as the Scriptures make evident, His human nature continues forever, His earthly body which died on the cross being transformed into a resurrection body suited for His glorious presence in heaven. The continuance of His humanity is reflected in such passages as Matthew 26:64 (ASV) where it is stated that Christ will sit on the throne of His glory and return to earth as the Son of man: 'Henceforth you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.' (Cf. Mark 14:62, Luke 22: 69-70). The appearances of Christ after His resurrection also substantiate the continuity of His true humanity. When the worshiping women met Christ in Matthew 28:9b (ASV) it is recorded: 'They came and took hold of his feet, and worshipped him.'
"Further evidence is found in the other appearances in the post-resurrection ministry as well as in the fact of His bodily ascension into heaven (Mark 16:19; Luke 24:30-31, 39-43, 50-53; John 20:22; 27-28; Acts 1: 1-11; 7:56). According to Philippians 2: 10, the human name Jesus is continued in connection with the final judgment. His humanity seems also to be essential to His work of mediation. According to 1 Timothy 2:5 (ASV), 'There is one God, one mediator also between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus.' The term 'Son of man' which Christ uses Himself in Matthew 26:64 as describing His reign in heaven is mentioned also in Revelation 1: 13; 14:14.
"Though certain aspects of His mediatorial work will terminate according to 1 Corinthians 15:25-28, there is no indication anywhere in the Bible that His humanity will ever be terminated. By its very nature a human personality once brought into existence never ceases to exist, and what is true of ordinary human experience is also true of Christ who became Man. His continuance as a human being in eternity seems to involve also the continuance of a human body. This is demonstrated, first, in the resurrection of Christ where His body was raised and prepared for heaven; second, in the fact of His ascension which was a bodily ascension into heaven; third, in the fact that He will return bodily to the earth; and fourth, that His body is a pattern of the body of believers who are raised or translated. There is every reason, therefore, to believe that the humanity of Christ will continue throughout all eternity to come.
"Among conservative theologians the facts of the hypostatic union of the divine and human natures in Christ is well established. The problem does not lie in the fact of the union, but rather in the relationship of the two natures of Christ, the nature of the self-consciousness of Christ and how the two natures relate, to the will of Christ." [2]
When the student of the Scriptures recognizes that the Lord Jesus Christ is both God and man, he has no problem with the Scriptures that clearly teach the deity of Christ. Each of the four Gospels was written to present Christ from a different viewpoint. In Matthew Christ is presented as King; in Mark as a servant; in Luke as the perfect man, and in John as God. No book in the Bible so emphasizes the deity of Christ as does the Gospel of John. For this reason the WTS makes a special attack on the deity of Christ as presented in John in the booklet THE WORD WHO IS HE? ACCORDING TO JOHN. This booklet will be examined in detail in a later section. Our purpose in this section is to determine whether or not the Gospel of John actually teaches the deity of Christ.
THE DEITY OF CHRIST IN JOHN 1: 1
John 1: 1 in the King James Version reads, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (published by the WTS) reads, "In (the) beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." Our problem is to determine which of these translations is correct. The entire debate over the deity of Christ can be settled by determining the correct translation of this one verse. If it can be proven and demonstrated beyond any shadow of doubt that the NWT translation of this verse is wrong, the entire Watchtower structure will fall like a house of cards. In order to check thoroughly the correct translation of this verse we will do three things:
Nineteen translations which state that "the Word was God”
KING JAMES VERSION - the Word was God.
THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION - the Word was God.
ROTHERHAM - and the Word was God.
DOUAY - and the Word was God.
JERUSALEM BIBLE - and the Word was God.
AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION - and the Word was God.
REVISED STANDARD VERSION - and the Word was God.
YOUNG'S LITERAL TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE - and the Word was God.
THE NEW LIFE TESTAMENT - the Word was God.
MODERN KING JAMES VERSION - the Word was God.
NEW TRANSLATION (Darby) - the Word was God.
NUMERIC ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT - the Word was God.
THE NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE - and the Word was God.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN BASIC ENGLISH - and the Word was God.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN SPEECH (Weymouth) - and the Word was God.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN ENGLISH (Montgomery) - and the Word was God.
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN ENGLISH (Phillips) - that word, was with God, and was God.
THE BERKLEY VERSION - and the Word was God.
EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT (published by the WTS) - and the LOGOS was God.
Translations which do not use the exact expression "the Word of God," but which emphasize the deity of Christ.
Translations which do not clearly teach the deity of Christ
The Watchtower Society quotes five other translators who do not give a clear definition of the deity of Christ. Translations which deny the deity of Christ
Notice that all four of these versions are published by the WTS. Summary of facts about these translations
At least nineteen translations (including the text of THE EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT, published by the WTS) state "the Word was God." At least four translations are even stronger on the deity of Christ than are the 19. Nine translations are not clear on the deity of Christ. Only three translations (all published by the WTS) deny the deity of Christ, and say that He was "a god."
A Look at the Translators of These Translations
Of the 19 translations which state "the Word was God" at least 13 were made by godly, Bible-believing Christians; three were made by liberals (men who deny the inspiration of the Scriptures).
As would be expected, all five of the translations which emphasize the deity of Christ were made by Bible-believing Christians.
Three of the four translations, quoted by the WTS which do not clearly teach the deity of Christ, were made by liberals.
How about the translators of the three translations quoted by the WTS which state "the Word was a god"? THE EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT was made by Benjamin Wilson., a Christadelphian (a false cult). For a number of years the names of the translators of THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES was a closely guarded secret. At the famous 1954 trial in Scotland, F.W. Franz was asked why their names were kept secret. He replied, "Because the committee of translation wanted it to remain anonymous and not seek any glory or honor at the making of a translation, and having any names attached thereto."
Mr. William Cetnar, who worked for many years in the WTS headquarters in Brooklyn, states that the reason for anonymity of the translators is twofold:
(1) The qualifications of the translators could not be checked and evaluated, and (2) There would be no one to assume the responsibility for the translation.
Mr. Cetnar states that it was common knowledge at the Brooklyn headquarters that the names of the translators are N. H. Knorr, F. W. Frartz, A. D. Schroeder, G. D. Gangas, and M. Henschel.
It has been an old trick of the Watchtower people to pose as Hebrew or Greek scholars. Pastor Russell set them a bad example in this. He claimed to be able to read Greek, but in a court trial had to admit that he could not do so. Mr. Cetnar states, "Franz's ability to do a scholarly job of translating Hebrew is open to serious question. This fact came out in the Scottish Court of Sessions in November, 1954. The following exchange of questions and answers between the attorney and Franz is taken from the trial transcript:
Q. Have you also made yourself familiar with Hebrew?
A. Yes ....
Q. So that you have a substantial linguistic apparatus at your command?
A. Yes, for use in my biblical work.
Q. I think you are able to read and follow the Bible in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Spanish, Portuguese, German and French?
A. Yes (Pursuer's Proof, p. 7)
Q. You, yourself, read and speak Hebrew, do you?
A. I do not speak Hebrew.
Q. You do not?
A. No.
Q. Can you, yourself, translate that into Hebrew?
A. Which?
Q. That fourth verse of second chapter of Genesis?
A. You mean here?
Q. Yes?
A. No. I wouldn't attempt to do that (Pursuer's Proof, p. 61).
What Franz 'wouldn't attempt' to translate into Hebrew was a simple exercise with which an average first or second year Hebrew student in seminary would have no difficulty. This conclusion was stated by a qualified teacher of Hebrew.
In his book THE FOUR MAJOR CULTS, Dr. Anthony Hoekema states, "Their NEW WORLD TRANSLATION of the Bible is by no means an objective rendering of the sacred text into Modern English, but is a biased translation in which many of the peculiar teachings of the Watchtower Society are smuggled into the text of the Bible itself."
It is a common practice for trained Witnesses to carry with them a copy of THE KINGDOM INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK SCRIPTURES. They make a great show of wisdom in saying, "The Greek says this and the Greek says that." When I was a young seminary student, 1 heard Dr. Archer Anderson recount his experience with a JW who came to his door early one Sunday morning. The JW was telling Dr. Anderson what the Greek said on a number of passages. Dr. Anderson reached in his coat pocket and pulled out his Greek New Testament, and said, "Show it to me." The JW, with great embarrassment, had to admit that he could not read Greek. The writer, taking his cue from Dr. Anderson, has pulled this trick on JW's many times. Not only are they unable to read the Greek, but they cannot even find the books in the New Testament!
THE WORD WHO IS HE? ACCORDING TO JOHN.
The deity of Christ is attacked by the WTS in many of the books and magazines published by the WTS. In the sixty-two page booklet THE WORD WHO IS HE? ACCORDING TO JOHN we read the following subtle attack on the deity of Christ. "Against the background of the teachings of the apostle John, yes, of all the Scriptures of the Holy Bible, the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES renders John 1: 1-3 as follows: 'In (the) beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. This one was in (the) beginning with God. All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.'
"Certainly the Word or Logos, whom God his Father used in bringing into existence all other creatures, was the chief or the firstborn among all the other angels whom the Hebrew Scriptures call Elohim or 'gods.' He is the 'only begotten Son' because he is the only one whom God himself created directly without the agency or cooperation of any creature. (John 3: 16, AV; AS; Dy) If the Word or Logos was not the first living creature whom God created, who, then, is God's first created Son, and how has this first creation been honored and used as the first-made one of the family of God's sons? We know of no one but the Word or Logos, 'The Word of God.' Like a word that is produced by a speaker, the Word or Logos is God's creation, God's first creation. Since unjust judges on earth against whom God's word of judgment came were Scripturally called 'gods' (Elohim), the Word of Logos whom God has appointed to be a just Judge and by whom God's word has come to us is also Scripturally called 'a god.' He is more mighty than human judges."
In the appendix of THE KINGDOM INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK SCRIPTURES, the following note is given on John 1: 1. "THE COMPLETE BIBLE-AN AMERICAN TRANSLATION renders this expression 'divine,' making the entire verse read: 'In the beginning the Word existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was divine.' (1943 Reprint) A NEW TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE by Dr. James Moffatt reads likewise: 'The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the Logos was divine.' (1935 edition) Every honest person will have to admit that John's saying that the Word or Logos 'was divine' is not saying that he was the God with whom he was. It merely tells of a certain quality about the Word or Logos, but it does not identify him as one and the same as God.
"The reason for their rendering the Greek word 'divine,' and not 'God,' is that it is the Greek noun theos' without the definite article, hence an anarthrous theos.' The God with whom the Word or Logos was originally is designated here by the Greek expression a ‘theos' preceded by the definite article ho, hence an articular theos.' Careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas an anarthrous construction points to a quality about someone. That is what A MANUAL GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT by Dana and Mantey remarks on page 140, paragraph vii. Accordingly, on page 148, paragraph (3) this same publication says about the subject of a copulative sentence, that in a copulative sentence sometimes the article makes the subject distinct from the predicate."
What was Dr. Mantey's reaction to the above unauthorized quotation? In an article by the title, A SHOCKING MISTRANSLATION, Dr. Julius R. Mantey says: 'A MANUAL GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT, of which 1 am co-author, is quoted in the appendix, pp. 1158-1159 by the translators of THE KINGDOM INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK SCRIPTURES
They quoted me out of context. Painstaking research has recently discovered plenty of convincing evidence that translating John 1: 1, 'god was the Word' or that 'The Word was a god' is without grammatical support."
In a letter to the Watchtower dated July 11, 1974, Mantey wrote: "(1) Your statement: 'their work allows for the rendering found in the KINGDOM INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK SCRIPTURES at John 1:1 'There is no statement in our grammar that was ever meant to imply that 'a god' was a permissible translation in John 1: 1 . . . ., (2) it is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1: 1 'The Word was a god.' Word-order has made obsolete and incorrect such a rendering. Your quotation of Colwell's rule is inadequate because it quotes only a part of his findings .... (3) .... Both scholars wrote that when indefiniteness was intended the gospel writers regularly placed the predicate noun after the verb, and both Colwell and Harner have stated that theos in John 1: 1 is not indefinite and should not be translated 'a god.' Watchtower writers appear to be the only ones advocating such a translation now. The evidence appears to be 99% against them.'
"In view of the preceding facts, especially because you have been quoting me out of context, 1 herewith request you not to quote the MANUAL GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT again, which you have been doing for 24 years. Also that you not quote it or me in any of your publications from this time on.
"Also that you publicly and immediately apologize in the WATCHTOWER magazine, since my words had no relevance to the absence of the article before theos in John 1:1.
The above examples are good illustrations of the extent at which wicked men will go to pervert the Holy Scriptures in order to sustain their false doctrinal position. Competent Greek scholars cite two elementary rules of Greek grammar to demonstrate that the Jehovah's Witnesses translation is false.
(1) The function of the article the is to point out individual identity, not uniqueness, necessarily. When the is used with God, it means God previously mentioned, whom the readers already know, in contrast to the vague general concept of God. "God" or "Lord" is tantamount to a proper name in the Bible and obeys this same rule. For example in John 3:2, the Greek has "come from God" (no article). Is Jesus, therefore, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, only coming from a god? No, He came from His Father. The stress here is on the essence of God, not on His personality.
(2) The second rule, propounded by the famous scholar, E.C. Colwell, absolutely dissolves the Jehovah's Witnesses position. Colwell's rule states, "(a) Definite predicate nouns take the article only if they follow the main verb; (b) otherwise, they lack it; (c) proper nouns lack the article." When this Greek principle is applied to John 1: 1, it is perfectly clear that the King James translation is correct, and that the EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT and the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION are wrong.
In order that you may see this more clearly, let me quote from THE KINGDOM OF CULTS by Walter R. Martin, and printed by permission of Bethany Fellowship Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota. This book was copyrighted in 1965.
"The subject of the sentence is Word (Logos), the verb, was. There can be no direct object following was since according to grammatical usage intransitive verbs take no objects but instead predicate nominatives which refer back to the subject in this case, Word (Logos). It is, therefore, easy to see that no article is needed for Theos (God) and to translate it 'a god' is both incorrect grammar and poor Greek since Theos is the predicate nominative of was in the third sentence-clause of the verse and must refer back to the subject, Word (Logos). Christ then if He is the Word 'made flesh' (John 1: 14) can be no one else except God unless the Greek text and consequently God's Word by denied.';
Dr. Bruce M. Metzger in his booklet THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES AND JESUS CHRIST helps us with these words, "In the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION the opening verse of the Gospel according to John is mistranslated as follows: 'Originally the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.' A footnote which is added to the first word, 'Originally,' reads, 'Literally, 'In (At) a beginning.' By using here the indefinite article 'a' the translators have overlooked the well-known fact that in Greek grammar nouns may be definite for various reasons, whether or not the Greek definite article is present. A prepositional phrase, for example, where the definite article is not expressed, can be quite definite in Greek, as in fact it is in John 1: 1. The customary translation, 'In the beginning was the Word,' is therefore to be preferred to either alternative suggested by the New World translators.
"Far more pernicious in this same verse is the rendering.'. . . and the Word was a god,' with the following footnote: 'A god. In contrast with the God.' It must be stated quite frankly that, if the Jehovah's Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists. In view of the additional light which is available during this age of Grace, such a representation is even more reprehensible than were the heathenish, polytheistic errors into which ancient Israel was so prone to fall.
"In a lengthy Appendix in the Jehovah's Witnesses' translation, which was added to support the mistranslation of John 1: 1, there are quoted thirty-five other passages in John where the predicate noun has the definite article in Greek. These are intended to prove that the absence of the article in John 1:1 requires that Theos must be translated 'a god.' None of the thirty-five instances is parallel, however, for in every case the predicate noun stands after the verb, and so, according to Colwell's rule, properly has the article. So far, therefore, from being evidence against the usual translation of John 1: 1, these instances add confirmation to the full enunciation of the rule of the Greek definite article.
"Furthermore, the additional references quoted in the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION from the Greek of the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament, in order to give further support to the erroneous rendering in the opening verse of John, are exactly in conformity with Colwell's rule, and therefore are added proof of the accuracy of the rule. The other passages adduced in the Appendix are, for one reason or another, not applicable to the question at issue. One must conclude, therefore, that no sound reason has been advanced for altering the traditional rendering of the opening verse of John's Gospel, and the Word was God!"
In 1971 I wrote to the Watchtower Society and made this proposition. For every bonafide Greek scholar that they could find who supported their position and their translation that the Word was a god, 1 would obtain the testimony of ten such scholars who would testify that the translation "The Word was God" was correct. Though the WTS declined to accept my offer, 1 give here the testimony of several of the scholars who wrote to me. The WTS was not able to produce a single bonafide Greek scholar who would verify their position.
Dr. Everett F. Harrison of Fuller Theological Seminary of Pasadena, California, wrote:
"I am pleased to be able to affirm the Colwell rule and its applicability to John 1:1. A Greek word does not necessarily required the article to be definite. Ifi fact, God lacks the article in the opening statement of John 1:18, yet the Jehovah's Witnesses presumably would not think of failing to understand it as applying to the true God rather than being satisfied with the rendering 'a God.' Further, if John had intended to make the Logos a creature less than God, it is strange that he would incorporate the saying of Thomas in 20:28."
Dr. Charles Lee Feinberg of Talbot Theological Seminary of La Mirada, California, wrote:
"In answer to your recent letter 1 can assure you that the rendering which the Jehovah's Witnesses give John 1: 1 is not held by any reputable Greek scholar. Of course, the rule stated by Dr. Colwell is a valid one and recognized by anyone who has more than a minimum of Greek.
"Personally, 1 never enter into such long discussions with those who are so steeped in error. They are so engrossed in their conviction that they have little time to listen to new evidence. At least this has been my experience. 1 hope you have a better success."
Dr. Paul L. Kaufman of Western Conservative Baptist Seminary of Portland, Oregon, wrote:
"In response to your letter of April 8, 1971, let me observe that 1 think the Jehovah's Witness people evidence an abysmal ignorance of the basic tenets of Greek grammar in their mistranslation of John 1:1. The anarthrous construction of theos heightens the quality of the noun without the article, so that what John is actually insisting on is that the logos was God. It could hardly be a stronger kind of an assertion of the deity of the second Person of the Trinity. It is passing strange, too, 1 think that they quote Dana and Mantey when it is to their advantage to quote them, but they have no qualms about quoting them out of context or quoting them incompletely."
Dr. Glenn A. Koch of Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, wrote:
"I have read Dr. E. C. Colwell's article, 'A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament' (Journal of Biblical Literature 52 (1933), 12-2l.) You will note that notice of this article is included in the Blass, Debrunner, Funk grammar. Also to be noted are pages 761, 767, 768, 794, 795 in A.T. Robertson's A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research 3rd ed. N.Y.: George H. Doran, 1914, where John 1: 1 is discussed with a slightly different. approach than Colwell's, although the effect is the same-theos is not to be translated 'a god.' Therefore, 1 agree with Colwell's Rule."
Dr. Stewart Custer of Bob Jones University of Greenville, S.C., wrote:
“I have taught Greek at Bob Jones University for many years and have urged the two principles of grammar that you mentioned against the Jehovah's Witnesses to class after class. You may like to add another point against them: They translate John 1: 1 'the Word was a god.' To read this the Greek should have used the word for 'a god,' a semi-divine being (theios), instead of 'God,' (theos) which John used. The Greeks had a word for it!"
Dr. Duane A. Dunharn of Western Conservative Baptist Seminary of Portland, Oregon, wrote:
"Thank you so much for including me in the important research in which you are engaged. May our great God continue to bless you in it!
"In John 1: 1 you are exactly correct in finding fault in the JW interpretation, inasmuch as it does not accord with Greek grammar or the sense of the passage.
"Anyone who has given time to the inductive study of the Greek language would agree with what 1 have written and with what you have stated in your letter to Mr. Knorr. 1 have been studying the Greek language for sixteen years and have been teaching here for the past seven years on a post-graduate level."
Dr. James L. Boyer of Grace Theological Seminary of Winona Lake, Indiana, wrote:
"I am glad to contribute whatever 1 can to the support of the position you refer to in your letter regarding the meaning of John 1: 1 and its teachings as to the essential Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.
"To a student who is familiar with the Greek language, John 1: 1 is the strongest possible expression of the absolute Deity of the word, far more so than it would be if the article were used. The non-use of the article in Greek describes and qualifies; it emphasizes the nature and characteristic of the noun used. The use of the article particularizes and identifies, it points the finger at the individual. Had John written the definite article with the word God, it would have meant that the word and God were the same individual, a denial of the Trinity. But when he used the word God without the article, it tells what the character of the word is, He is God. He is One whose character is described by the word God.
"In all my forty years of experience in the use of the Greek New Testament and twenty years in teaching Greek 1 have never heard, or heard of, or read of any Greek scholar who would agree to the interpretation of this verse insisted upon by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Except, of course, the Jehovah's Witnesses themselves, and I have never encountered one of them who had any knowledge of the Greek language.
“I doubt if your efforts will convince them. There is no one so blind as the one who will not see. But 'the good news of Christ is the ability of God unto salvation to everyone who believes.' May the Lord bless and use your testimony to the miracle of salvation in the case of many Jehovah's Witnesses."
Does the WTS ever quote recognized Greek scholars in their writings? Indeed they do! We have seen that they quoted Dr. Julius R. Mantey, and that they were reproved by him for doing so. Dr. A.T. Robertson was for many years head of the Greek department of the Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. Without his knowledge or permission, the WTS misquoted a statement in Dr. Robertson's GRAMMAR OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT. In the appendix of THE KINGDOM INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK SCRIPTURES they give this quote from Dr. Robertson's grammar.
"(i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also."
But the WTS translators failed to add the next statement by Dr. Robertson, "As already explained, the article is not essential to speech." The deleting of part of the quote led to the conversion of Mr. Ted Dencher. Dencher, who was a zealous Jehovah's Witness for ten years, met his Waterloo through the testimony of Mr. Alex Dunlap, Director of THE CONVERSION CENTER, Havertown, Pennsylvania. Mr. Dencher's testimony, as given below, is taken from his book WHY 1 LEFT JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES and is printed by permission of CHRISTIAN LITERATURE CRUSADE, Fort Washington, Pennsylvania. "If they did not know what they were talking about, I could handle them! So on the night arranged, we met-1, the two men, and the two listeners. We started at eight o'clock and finished at one a.m. Five hours of rapid-fire debate. We did not lose a second's time. We used the Bible only, and stuck to one subject-the deity of Christ. If we had jumped from one subject to another, we would have accomplished nothing. We would have wasted all that time.
"I felt that it was my duty to set them straight. They thought Christ was God! They really needed my help! Naturally, 1 was right and they were wrong! But somehow that night 1 failed to convince them of this. Of course, they had not convinced me of their way, either. So 1 was not worried.
"It had appeared they were caught on John 1: 1. The NEW WORLD TRANSLATION reads:'. . . the Word was a god.' That should have settled it for everybody, but it didn't! So, in desperation 1 turned to the appendix that appeared in the back of THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION OF THE CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES, and read what the translator(s) had put there to back up their translation. Here is what 1 read, from page 1159 of the Appendix. 'In further proof that the omitting of the definite article in the predicate of John 1: 1 by the apostle was deliberately meant to show a difference, we quote what Dr. Robertson's GRAMMAR says on page 767: '(i) NOUNS IN THE PREDICATE. These may have the article also.'
"Was 1 ever shocked when one of the men produced a copy of Robertson's GRAMMAR! He then turned to the quotation above and continued to read from where they left off: 'AS ALREADY EXPLAINED, THE ARTICLE IS NOT ESSENTIAL TO SPEECH.'(That is, it could be either used or not used, without making any real difference). Now what was 1 going to do about that?
"Nothing! What could I do? This was a tricky problem. 1 hadn't known matters were going to get this complicated. In our book studies we had been using THE EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT (a Greek-English interlinear translation, printed by the Watch Tower Society). We noticed that the word theos in the sentence 'the Word was God' did not have the definite article ho before it; therefore we Witnesses concluded that the word was indefinite and meant 'a god.' Hence, the above material.
"Now if, as Robertson's GRAMMAR stated, 'the article is not essential to speech,' the picture changed. Why had not the Watch Tower Society completed the quotation from the GRAMMER? It changed the idea altogether. However, I was no scholar (1 had just found that out!), so 1 suggested that 1 would send this in to the Watch Tower Society, and as soon as 1 received an answer, 1 would bring it to the next meeting, or mail it in.
"A month later the answer came. They said they were 'inclined to answer, So what? We still stick to what is said in the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION appendix!' What an answer! How could 1 ever show that to the man who was studying with me? How embarrassing! So the society had no answer for John 1: l! Well, well!
"It had been decided that we would hold another meeting. This time the discussion was led by a new participant, Mr. Alex Dunlap, a Christian business man well known in that area. Mr. Dunlap permitted me to use the Watch Tower Bible; then promptly proceeded to prove to me from it that Jesus is Jehovah God the Son! We were reading Revelation 1: 1, 17,18; 21:6; 22:12-16. He asked me to read the verses slowly and carefully, then had me concentrate on Revelation 1:8. Regarding that text lie asked me, 'Does it or does it not prove that Christ is God.
I had never had to contend with the likes of this before! I wished 1 could get out of it. 1 could not. 1 sweated. This was the Bible! 1 could not deny what it said! Why should 1? To remain a Jehovah's Witness, that's why! 1 was facing things I had never faded before. He was calling me to make a decision. 1 admitted that it did appear that the text says Christ is God. 1 decided 1 had enough of these meetings, and 1 quit."
The WTS has consigned such men as Dencher to "The Evil Slave Class," and all JW's are forbidden to talk with them or read anything they have written.
My dear friend, you have a choice to make concerning John 1: 1. You can choose between:
1. The testimony of the Christian Church from its very beginning, or
2. A cult which did not begin to use the name Jehovah's Witness until 1931.
3. The translation given by 19 recognized Bible translators, all of whom are Greek scholars, or
3. Five men unknown and unrecognized in the academic world.
4. The testimony of dozens of Greek scholars who are recognized by the academic world for their scholarship, or
4. The JW's draw a blank here. 1 have challenged them to produce one recognized Greek scholar who would testify that the NWT translation of John 1: 1 is correct. They have not come up with even one such translator.
In the light of the above contrast, why does the WTS maintain that the NWT translation of John 1: 1 is correct? They have to do so to prove that Jesus Christ is "a god," and that He is a "lesser deity." My friend, you will one day stand in the presence of the One whom you now consider to be a created being. Even the NWT says that in that day you will "keep saying to mountains and rock masses: 'Fall on us and hide us from the face of the One seated on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, because the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand'" (Rev 6:16,17). My friend, it is absolutely fantastic that sensible people can be deceived by the WTS.
Even though the evidence concerning John 1: 1 is more than enough to convince any honest person that the rendering of John 1: 1 in the NWT is false, we will not stop here, but will continue to examine the evidence concerning the deity of Christ as it is found in the rest of the Bible.
OTHER SCRIPTURES ON THE DEITY OF CHRIST IN THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
Permit me to begin this section by giving some quotes from THE WORD WHO IS HE? ACCORDING TO JOHN published by the WTS. "Did John bear witness that Jesus was Jehovah or that Jesus was God? No! John the Baptist told his disciples: 'This one is the Son of God.' John said, not 'God the Son,' but 'the Son of God' " (p. 19).
"Thus John the Baptist, Jesus' apostles, Lazarus' sister Martha, and even the enemies all agreed in their witness that Jesus was 'the Son of God.' Not God himself! (p. 20).
"Today there are men who use John's writings about the Word to argue that Jesus Christ was more than God's Son, that he was God himself and that he became a God Man" (p. 29).
“According to his own words, Jesus did not class himself with God" (p. 33).
"So again we note that Jesus never spoke of himself as God or called himself God. He always put himself below God rather than on an equality with God. He put himself in the position of a disciple of God, when Jesus said: 'I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, 1 speak these things' (John 8:28 AV). God was the Teacher of Jesus, and Jesus as a pupil was not above his Teacher, God, nor the equal of Him. Jesus thus classed himself with the other children of God's organization Zion" (p. 40).
"The very fact that he was sent proves he was not equal with God but was less than God his Father" (p. 41). "So even in heaven Jesus was less than his Father" (p. 41).
"All this gives added proof that Jesus was not God whose will was to be done, but was lower than God, doing God's Will" (p. 41).
"Even God the Father did not honor or glorify the Son as his equal. But God did honor or glorify his Son Jesus Christ more than all his other sons" (p. 43).
“Jesus' own continuance in life depended on his obedience to God his Father" (p. 44).
"For anyone to say that the Word was God, 'the only true God,' would be contrary to what the apostle John proves by the rest of his writings" (p. 53).
In the light of the above statements, it is very interesting to observe that JW's stoutly claim that they DO honor the Son even as they honor the Father (John 5:23), but out of the corner of their mouths they say, "He did not say we were to honor the Son as much as the Father!" (p. 42).
No matter what present day JW's say, the Jews of Jesus' day believed that He claimed to be equal with God. "But Jesus answered them, My Father works hitherto, and 1 work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God" (John 5:17,18). Certainly no comment is needed on verse 18.
"Another text in John's writings the trinitarians bring up is their arguing that John's writings teach that Jesus Christ is God (sic). That text is found in Jesus' argument with the Jews given in John 8:56-58 (AV): 'Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and has thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." (p. 34).
The JW's were careful not to quote verse 59 with verse 58 because verse 59 makes it plain that Jesus was claiming to be Jehovah. Why else would the Jews seek to stone Him? Verse 59 reads, "Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by." Every student of the Scriptures should know that John 8: 58 refers back to Exodus 3:14. Even the JW's admit this. "And God said unto Moses, 1 Am That 1 Am: and he said, Thus shall thou say unto the children of Israel, 1 Am hath sent me unto you" (Exodus 3: 14).
A comparison of John 8:58 with Exodus 3:14 puts the JW's in an impossible situation, and they seek to get out of it by saying, "Well, then, in John 8:58, was Jesus claiming to be Jehovah God? Not according to many modern Bible translators, as the following quotations will prove" (p. 34). And they go on to quote a half a dozen translators who are either liberal or unknown. The following translations follow the KING JAMES VERSION revealing Christ as the "I Am."
THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION
THE NEW TESTAMENT: A NEW TRANSLATION-Norlie
AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN ENGLISH-Phillips
THE EMPHASIZED BIBLE-Rotherham
THE NEW TESTAMENT-AN EXPANDED TRANSLATION-Wuest
THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN SPEECH-Weymouth
THE NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE
YOUNG'S LITERAL TRANSLATION OF THE BIBLE GOOD NEWS FOR MODERN MAN
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN ENGLISH-Montgomery
NUMERIC ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT
THE BERKLEY VERSION IN MODERN ENGLISH THE DOUAY VERSION
THE REVISED STANDARD VERSION
THE NEW TESTAMENT IN BASIC ENGLISH A NEW TRANSLATION-Darby
THE AMPLIFI.ED NEW TESTAMENT
Even the EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT, published by the WTS, renders this verse "Before Abraham was born, 1 am he." Is it not strange that only the NWT and KIT (KINGDOM INTERLINEAR TRANSLATION) both published by the WTS, render this verse "Before Abraham came into existence, 1 have been"? My friend, if you are honest and if you realize that one day you will stand at the Judgment Bar of Almighty God to render an account for all of your deeds, you will give prayerful consideration as to what the Bible really teaches. Whose translation will you accept on John 1: 1 and on John 8: 5 8? Will you accept the translations that are made by recognized, bonafide Greek scholars, or will you accept the made-up translation of deceivers who have made a translation to suit their doctrine, rather than changing their doctrine to conform to what the Bible really teaches? My friend, this is a serious matter, and the day will come when you will wish that you had harkened to those who have tried to warn you that the WTS is not JEHOVAH'S THEOCRATIC ORGANIZATION, but rather a Satanic system.
"I and the Father are one" (John 10:30-NWT). The WTS explains this verse away by saying that Jesus and His Father were one in agreement, or that they were one in the care of the sheep. "They had one purpose." All of this is true, but it is evident that the Lord Jesus means much more than this, and it is evident that the Jews understood Him to mean more than the JW assertions claim. If the Lord Jesus was merely saying that He was one with the Father in purpose, why did the Jews pick up stones to stone him? When the Lord Jesus said, "that you may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and 1 in Him," the Jews again sought to take him (v. 38, 39). The JW's quote John 17:20-22 in an attempt to prove their position. "Neither pray 1 for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou has sent me. And the glory which thou gave me 1 have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one." In explaining these verses, the WTS says, "The plain truth reveals itself, that is, just as Christ and his body members are regarded as one, so are Jehovah and Christ regarded as one.
They are all one in agreement, purpose and organization." The folly of such reasoning is readily shown, for if each could say that he is one with Christ in the same sense that Jesus said that he was one with the Father, they could also say, 9 and the Father are one." Christians are one with Christ and are one in Christ, but no one stones us for saying that we are one with Christ.
"Philip said unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it suffices us. Jesus said unto him, Have 1 been so long time with you, and yet has thou not known me, Philip? lie that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how says thou then, Show us the Father? Believe thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that 1 speak unto you 1 speak not of myself: but the Father that dwells in me, he does the works. Believe me that 1 am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake" (John 14:8-11).
In THE WORD WHO IS HE? we find this explanation of the above verses. "Ah, yes, but that is far different from Jesus' saying, 'I am the Father.' Jesus had just told Philip and the other faithful apostles that he was going away to God his Father; and so how could Jesus in the same breath say that Philip, when looking at Jesus, was looking at the Father? Jesus could not have meant that, for he dissociated God his Father from himself, just as when he said: 'You believe in God, believe also in me.' (John 14:1, AV). Why the expression 'also in me' if Jesus were God himself."
All Bible students recognize that the Lord Jesus was and is a distinct person from God the Father. No one has ever made the claim that He was the Father, when He was praying to the Father. We have no problem with these verses when we recognize the truth that the Lord Jesus was and is the God-man. The JW's refuse to recognize this truth, and therefore, resort to ridicule, sarcasm, and to twisting the Scriptures in order to maintain their false position.
In John 18:3-13 we have the account given of the soldiers arresting the Lord Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus asked the soldiers, Whom seek you? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus said unto them, 1 am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, 1 am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. You will notice that "he" is in italics. Most of the translations follow the example of KJV and use "I am he." It is interesting to note that the interlinear translation of KIT translates "Ego eimi" by "I am." When the Lord Jesus revealed Himself by the name "I am," the same name that by which Jehovah revealed Himself 'to Moses at the burning bush, the soldiers went backward and fell to the ground.
All of us are acquainted with the post-resurrection appearances of the Lord Jesus; if we are not, we should be. The account of one of these appearances is given in John 20: 19-28. In this appearance all of the disciples were present except Thomas. The other disciples excitedly told Thomas, "We have seen the Lord!" Thomas likely said something like this, "You fellows just imagined that you saw the Lord. All of us have been under a great strain for the last week or two. We are all keyed up emotionally, and it is easy for us to imagine things. 1 will not believe that Jesus is alive unless 1 shall see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my fingers into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side." "After eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then said he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither they hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God." Verse 28 is so clear that no one should doubt what Thomas meant when he said, "My Lord and my God." THE WORD WHO IS HE? states that Thomas would not believe that Jesus had been resurrected from the dead until Jesus materialized before him! This booklet states, "Thomas knew who his own God was. His God was not Jesus Christ, but his God was the God of Jesus Christ." It is interesting that the WT writer knows more about who Thomas' God was than he did himself. The WT writers cannot allow the truth as it is revealed in the Word of God to stand, for to do so would blast their false manufactured doctrine. How fearful will be their fate when they stand before the Lord Jesus Christ and face Him as their judge. Men are judged according to the light that they have. How great will be the reader's condemnation if he rejects the truth after it has been presented so clearly.
The deity of Christ is demonstrated in that Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Jesus of the New Testament. This subject is discussed in detail in chapter seven of the author's book HEART TO HEART TALKS WITH JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES.
THE DEITY OF CHRIST IN ISAIAH
"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" (Isaiah 7: 14). This verse is quoted in Matthew 1:23 with the explanation that Immanuel means "God with us." I am not acquainted with the method that JW's use to explain away this verse.
The JW's make much of the fact that Jesus is called 'The mighty God' to prove that He is not the Almighty God. Isaiah 9:6 is a definite prophetic reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." All are agreed that the title, 'The Mighty God' refers to the Lord Jesus Christ. However, the JW's fail to notice that the title, 'The Mighty God' is used in apposition with 'The Everlasting Father.' (This would better be translated 'Father of Eternity.') Both titles refer to the One Creator God. Jesus is called 'The Everlasting Father.'
The word 'Mighty' is a translation of the Hebrew adjective 'gibbor.' It can refer to a human hero, or a conquering general, but when it is used with God it denotes Him as One who fights for his people.
In Jeremiah 32:18 we find the following couplet, "The Great, the Mighty God, the LORD (Jehovah) of hosts is his name." This should be very embarrassing to the JW's because 'mighty God' whom they say refers to the Lord Jesus is used synonymously with Jehovah (LORD). In Isaiah 10:20-21 The LORD (Jehovah), the Holy One of Israel, is referred to as 'the Mighty God'! In Nehemiah 9: 32 'Our God (Elohim)' is in apposition with 'Gibbor EU (Mighty God). In Psalms 24:8, 'Gibbor' (Mighty) is used twice of Yahweh (Jehovah-LORD)! In Deuteronomy 10:17 we read, "For the LORD (Jehovah) your God (Elohim) is God of gods, a mighty (Gibbor), and a terrible (or awesome)." These references teach us exactly the opposite of what the JW's claim that Isaiah 9:6 teaches. They fail to call to the students' attention that the Lord Jesus is referred to as Almighty God in the book of Revelation. The NWT of Revelation 1:8 reads, "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, said the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty" (Revelation 1:8). In this verse Jehovah is called Alpha and Omega and He is called the Beginning and the Ending. In Revelation 22:13 the Lord Jesus is called Alpha and Omega and the Beginning and Ending.
THE DEITY OF CHRIST IN EZEKIEL
"Then he brought me back the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary which looked toward the east; and it was shut. Then said the Lord unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the Lord the God of Israel hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut" (Ezekiel 44:1,2). These two verses are of great importance for two reasons:
First, the closing of this gate is one of the many remarkable fulfilments of Old Testament prophecy that prove the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. The east gate which is also called "The Golden Gate" is generally accepted as the gate of Christ's triumphal entry into Jerusalem a few days before his crucifixion. It is believed that the foundation stones of the gate are those that existed in the time of our Lord, but it is likely that the present edifice was built in the seventh century.
Keep in mind that the city of Jerusalem had been in the hands of the Turks or Muslims (with brief exception during the Crusades) from the time of its fall in 70 AD. until it was taken by General Allemby in World War 1. In 1543 the Moslem sultan decided to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem. Since the road that led to the Golden Gate through the Kedron Valley had fallen into disuse, most people entered the city through the St. Stephens gate.
Since the Golden gate was no longer used or needed its double entrance was walled up, and has remained closed to the present time. The Muslims who walled it up had no idea that they were fulfilling the prophecy of Ezekiel when they did so. The Lord Jesus entered by this gate nearly 2,000 years ago; the gate has now been shut over 400 years thus fulfilling in a most precise manner the prophecy made by Ezekiel over 2500 years ago.
Second, and perhaps of even greater importance, these verses prove the absolute deity of Christ. The NWT translates verse two in this way: “Then Jehovah said to me: 'As regards this gate, shut is how it will continue. It will not be opened, and no mere man will come in by it; for Jehovah himself, the God of Israel, has come in by it, and it must continue shut." The JERUSALEM BIBLE reads, "This gate will be kept shut. No one will open it or go through it, since Yahweh the God of Israel has been through it. And so it must be kept shut." All students of the Scripture recognize that LORD is properly translated Jehovah or Yahweh. The Lord Jesus Christ is called "Jehovah, the God of Israel." It will be interesting to see the method that the JW's will use in explaining away these verses!
THE DEITY OF CHRIST IN THE EPISTLES OF PAUL
In Romans 9:5 the Lord Jesus is called “God blessed forever." The NWT has to pervert this verse to maintain their doctrine. Colossians 2:9 states that the fullness of the Godhead bodily dwells in Christ. The NWT has to pervert this verse to maintain their doctrine.
First Timothy 3: 16 is one of the strongest verses in the Bible on the deity of Christ. "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." The JW's tell us that "God" is not found in the best Greek manuscripts. Orthodox scholars are divided on the question as to which are the oldest and best manuscripts.
We usually think of Titus 2:13 as being a great verse on the Second Coming of Christ. It is also a great verse on the deity of Christ.
In 1798 Granville Sharp detected and formulated a rule in Greek Grammar. This rule states that when the copulative 'kai' (Greek for 'and') connects two nouns of the same case, if the article precedes the first noun and is not repeated before the second noun, the latter always refers to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun. Therefore the rendering of the Revised Standard Version (in this case) is correct which renders this verse, 'Awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.' Jesus Christ is called the great God. The point is that the Apostle Paul writes in this way just as a matter of fact, naturally stating, without defending or explaining, that Jesus Christ is the great God.
If one Scripture is stronger than another on the deity of Christ, it is Hebrews 1:8, "But unto the Son he said, Thy throne, 0 God, is forever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." Here God the Father speaks to God the Son, and calls Him 'God.' What could be clearer than this? This reference is so clear that the WTS must of necessity pervert the text to maintain their doctrine, and here is how they do it, "But with reference to the Son: God is your throne forever, and (the) scepter of your kingdom is the scepter of uprightness." To what extent will wicked men go in order to maintain their false doctrine?
In 1 John 5:20, the Lord Jesus Christ is called the true God. 'And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life."
JESUS CHRIST AS LORD
Over 700 names and titles are given to the Lord Jesus in the Bible. Lord is His divine name; Jesus is His human name; and Christ is His title. Christ is the equivalent of the Hebrew Messiah, or Anointed One. The Apostle Paul delighted in calling Jesus by His full name: The Lord Jesus Christ, or Jesus Christ our Lord.
The word "Lord" is found in the King James Version of the New Testament 668 times. It is a translation of the Greek word "kurios" 663 times, and of the Greek word "despotes" five times. In most instances kurios is the equivalent of Jehovah. The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, that is published by the Watchtower Society, demonstrates that this is true by translating kurios as Jehovah in 193 instances in the New Testament. Necessity demanded this in every case where a reference in the Old Testament containing the word "Jehovah" was quoted in the New Testament. In each of these instances no one will debate the fact that Jehovah is the proper translation in the New Testament. That the word "Lord" is a divine name, no one will deny, and that the name "Lord" is applied to Jesus Christ hundreds of times in the Gospels, in the Epistles, and in the book of the Revelation no one will dare deny. Therefore, the very fact that Jesus Christ is Lord, that He is Lord of all (Acts 10:36), and that one day every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, clearly demonstrates His Deity.
This is further corroborated by the Septuagint which is a translation of the Old Testament Scriptures into the Greek, language. This translation was made between 250 BC. and 100 BC., and was used by Greek-speaking Christians such as the Apostle Paul. In every instance in the Septuagint the Hebrew word "Jehovah" is translated by the Greek word "kurios." This translation which was made by Jewish scholars shows that they consider kurios to be the equivalent of Jehovah. Jesus is thy Lord; worship thou Him.
THE WORSHIP OF JESUS AS LORD WHEN HE WAS ON THE EARTH
If Jesus was not God, why did He receive worship as God? In Matthew 8:2 we read, "And behold, there came a leper and worshipped him saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou can make me clean."
In Matthew 9:18 we read, "While he spoke these things unto them, behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him saying, My daughter is even now dead: but come and lay thy hand upon her, and she shall live."
In Matthew 14:33 we read, “Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God."
In Matthew 15:25 we read "Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me."
In Matthew 20:20 we read, "Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him."
In Matthew 28:9 we read, "And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet and worshipped him. "
In Matthew 28:17 we read, "And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted."
If Jesus is not God, He is not as honorable as Paul and Barnabas, for they refused to be worshipped (Acts 14: 10-18), but Jesus accepted worship. If Jesus is not God, He is not as honorable as the heavenly messenger who gave the revelation to John the Apostle, for when John fell down to worship him, he said, "See thou do it not: for I am thy fellow servant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus. Worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy" (Revelation 19: 10).
Yes, He is thy Lord; worship thou Him.
THE ATTRIBUTES OF JESUS' DEITY
We believe in the absolute Deity of Christ because He has the same attributes that are ascribed to God. God is the only true and living God. Dozens of places in the Bible He is called the living God (Joshua 3: 10; Psalms 41:2, 84:2; Hosea 1: 10). Jesus has life within Himself. "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself" (John 5:26). "In him (Christ) was life; and the life was the light of men" (John 1:4). "1 am the life" (John 14:6). "When Christ who is our life - - -" (Colossians 3:4).
"God is love" (1 John 4:8, 16). The Apostle Paul prayed for the saints at Ephesus in this way: "That you being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge" (Ephesians 3:17-19). In 2 Corinthians 5:14 we read, "For the love of Christ constrains us."
God is the true God (1 Thessalonians 1:9). Jesus was full of grace and truth (John 1: 14). He said, "I am the truth" (John 14:6).
God is eternal (Romans 16:26; Deuteronomy 33:27). Jesus is called the eternal Father or Father of eternity (Isaiah 9:6). "And this is the record that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son" (I John 5: 11).
Since the birthplace of the Lord Jesus Christ is predicted in Micah 5:2, no one can deny that this is a reference to Him. This verse states that His "goings forth have been from everlasting." Eternality is an attribute that is ascribed only to God, and since it is here ascribed to Christ, this proves that Christ is God.
An attribute of God is wisdom (Romans 11:33). The Bible says that Christ is made unto us wisdom (I Corinthians 1:30).
God is omnipotent. That means that He has all power. Dozens of times in the Bible He is called Almighty God (Genesis 17:1, 28:3; Ezekiel 10:5). Jesus is omnipotent. He is called "Almighty" (Revelation 1:8). If we were to take verse eight by itself, it could be applied either to the Father or to the Son. The Jehovah's Witnesses cannot allow it to refer to the Son, because to do so would destroy their false doctrinal position. Therefore, the translators of the NWT have translated this verse in this way, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, says Jehovah God, the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty." This is a correct translation, but in this case "Jehovah God" refers to Jesus rather than to the Father. There is not one single instance where the Bible speaks of the Second Coming of the Father, but there are hundreds of references to the second coming of the Son. In Revelation 22:12,13 Jesus says, "And behold, 1 come quickly; and my reward is with me to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last." If we make Revelation 1:8 refer to Jehovah, and if we make Revelation 22:13 refer to Jesus, we have two "firsts and lasts," Isaiah 41:4, 44:6 and 48:12 refer to Jehovah as "the first and the last." It is impossible to have two "first and lasts." therefore these references show us that the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Jesus of the New Testament. In Matthew 28:18 Jesus said, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." In Philippians 3:21 we read, "He is able to subdue all things unto himself."
God is omniscient, that is, He knows all (Psalms 33:13-15, 139:2, 147:4; Isaiah 46:9,10). Jesus is omniscient. Peter said, "Lord, (kurios-the same word that is translated Jehovah 237 times in the New World Translation) thou knows all things" (John 21:17). When Nathanael was under the fig tree, evidently some distance away, Jesus said, "Before that Philip called thee, when thou was under the fig tree, 1 saw thee" (John 1:48). This caused Nathanael to exclaim, "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel." If Mark 13:32 should be quoted where it is recorded that Christ did not know the day or the hour of His return, this simply means that Christ as a man willingly kept from Himself the knowledge of this particular time while He was a man on the earth.
God is omnipresent. That means that He is everywhere (1 Kings 8:27; Psalms 139:7-12; Isaiah 66: 1; Acts 17:28). The Bible says that Christ fills all things (Ephesians 1:23). He has promised to be with us always (Matthew 28:20 ASV).
God is immutable. (He does not change-Malachi 3:6). Jesus is "the same yesterday, and today, and forever" (Hebrews 13:8).
It is the prerogative of God to forgive sins (Mark 17); but to demonstrate His Deity, Jesus healed and forgave the sins of the palsied man (Mark 19,10).
God is the Creator (Genesis 1:1). Jesus created all things (John 1: 3, 10; Colossians 1: 16; Ephesians 3:9; Hebrews 1: 2,10).
God raises the dead (24 Corinthians 1:9). Christ also raises the dead (John 5:21).
SCRIPTURES USED TO DISPROVE THE DEITY OF CHRIST
The Watchtower System of doctrine cannot allow the Biblical doctrine of the deity of Christ to stand, for if the Bible teaches the deity of Christ and the deity of the Holy Spirit we have the doctrine of the Trinity, and if the doctrine of the Trinity is true, the Watchtower crumbles into dust. We have shown how the WT writers twist and pervert the verses that clearly teach the deity of Christ in order to maintain their false position. In this section we wish to study seven references that the JW's quote in order to disprove the deity of Christ.
It is strange that the Jehovah's Witnesses would quote Luke 18:18,19, "And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall 1 do to inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why call thou me good? none is good, save one, that is God." These are good verses for Unitarians to use, since they believe that Jesus was nothing more than a perfect man, but they are not good verses for Jehovah's Witnesses to use for they themselves teach that Jesus Christ was a lesser deity who was not equal to God. We can paraphrase the words of Jesus in this way, 'Believing me to be but a human teacher, why call thou me 'good' for there is none good but one, and that is God."
2. JOHN 14:28
One of the JW's favorite texts is the last line of John 14: 28, "For my Father is greater than I" They boldly proclaim, "Since Jesus, himself, said that God was greater than he was, who am I to argue with what Jesus said?" With arrogance they make it appear that they have an air-tight case. It would be easy for us to pass this verse by with the simple explanation that Jesus was speaking as a man, and that as a man, He said that God was greater than He was. Though this explanation is true, we will delve more deeply into the truth. Please remember that no Bible doctrine can be based on one verse, or a part of a verse that is taken out of context. When I say 'taken out of context,' the entire Gospel of John was written to establish the Deity of Christ (John 20:31). In this case the Jehovah's Witnesses have based their doctrine on the one word 'greater' which is a translation of the Greek word 'meizon.' When we study this one verse in the light of the context, it is apparent in which sense Jesus spoke of the Father as being greater than He. The Greek word 'kreitton' which is translated 'better' in Hebrews 1:4 helps us to understand this. Christ was better than the angels, and the Father, because of the incarnation of Christ, was greater than the Son in position. For example, the president of a college may or may not be a greater man than the members of the faculty, but from the standpoint of the position that he holds, he is in a greater or higher position than they. When we see the difference in these two Greek words, the argument of the Jehovah's Witnesses loses its meaning.
3. JOHN 17:3
John 17:3 is another verse the JW's like to use to disprove the deity of Christ. 1 show how they make this effort by quoting from THE WORD WHO IS HE? on pages 32 and 33. "In this prayer to his heavenly Father, Jesus called him 'the only true God' and said: 'Thou, Father, art in me, and 1 in thee,' and, 'we are one.' Did Jesus mean that he and his Father were one God, or two Persons of one triune God, the third member of which God is not even mentioned? Did Jesus mean that he and his Father were, as trinitarians, say 'one in substance'? How could that be so in the face of what else Jesus, then of fleshly substance, said in this prayer to God who is spirit? (John 4:24) By calling his Father 'the only true God' he shut himself out from being God or a Person of God. Otherwise, the Father would not be the ‘only true God.' The word 'only' means, according to the dictionary, 'alone in its class; without others of the same class or kind; sole; single; alone, by reason of superiority; preeminent; chief.' According to Jesus, his Father was, not only the true God,' but also the 'only' one. According to his own words, Jesus did not class himself with God."
Alas!. It appears that the JW's have an air tight case. In this prayer the Lord Jesus clearly makes a distinction between Himself and "the only true God" who is His heavenly Father. My dear friends, all trinitarians recognize the truth stated in this verse. Everyone recognizes that Jesus as a man, who had come into the world to be the Savior of men, was praying to His Father in Heaven. What the JW's refuse to recognize is that Jesus Christ was the God-man; that He was God and man at the same time. When the Lord Jesus called His heavenly Father "the only true God," He was not teaching against the Trinity but against polytheism or against the many gods of the heathen nations who surrounded the Jewish people.
JW's quote 1 Corinthians 11:3 "the head of Christ is God" to prove their point. This Scripture refers to the meditorial relationship of the Son to the Father. The man is the head of the woman, but this does not mean that the woman is any less human because the man is positionally over her.
5. 1 CORINTHIANS 15:28
A JW wrote to me, "Did you bother to read 1 Corinthians 15: 28? Tell me what it means! Who is subject to whom? You tell me that is equality. 1 believe the Bible."
EERDMAN'S NEW BIBLE COMMENTARY helps us with this difficult passage with these words: "In verses 24-28 he carries our minds beyond the bounds of space and time to the final victory of Christ culminating in God's being all in all (28). Notice how the personal pronoun 'he' in these verses sometimes refers to God the Father, sometimes to God the Son. '(Christ) must reign. . . for (God) hath put all things under (Christ's) feet ... It is manifest that (God) is excepted, which did put all things under (Christ) ... The Son himself shall be subject unto (God) that put all things under (Christ).' The relation between Christ and the Father expressed in this passage is of the greatest interest in our formulation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. We are given a view of the 'subordination of the Son' - - to use the theological term -- but this does not conflict in any way with belief in the full diety of Christ, who shares with the Father the 'substance' of the Godhead. The 'subordination' is of office, not of person. The reference is to His work as Redeemer and as King of God's kingdom. He has been appointed to these roles by the Father (27). Cf. I Corinthians 3:23."
The WYCLIFFE BIBLE COMMENTARY gives this explanation: "I Corinthians 15:27,28. The statement that the Son also himself shall be subject to God has been thought by some to lower the dignity of the Son of God, as well as, possibly, to cast a reflection on his deity. The subjection, however, is not that of the Son as Son, but as the incarnate Son. This, of course, does not involve inequality of essence. The son of a king may be officially subordinate and yet equal in nature to his father (cf. Charles Hodge, AN EXPOSITION OF THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS, pp. 333-335). Paul's point is this: The Son as incarnate Son has all power now (cf. Mt. 28:18). When lie delivers up the administration of the earthly kingdom to the Father, then the triune God will reign as God and no longer through the incarnate Son. Messialiship is a phase of the Son's eternal Sonship (cf. Moffatt, MNT, p. 249)."
6. PHILIPPIANS 15-8
JW's read into Philippians 15-8 meanings that were never intended by the Holy Spirit. If you will keep your mind open to the truth. 1 will show you that this is true. The King James Version of this verse reads, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God. But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
THE NEW WORLD TRANSLATION reads in this way, "Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God's form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal with God. No, but he emptied himself and took a slave's form and came to be in the likeness of men. More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake."
The unknown writer of LET GOD BE TRUE makes this comment on the above translation, "This one was not Jehovah God, but was existing in God's form. How so? He was a spirit person, just as 'God is a Spirit', he was a mighty one, although not almighty as Jehovah God is; also he was before all others of God's creatures, for he was the first son that Jehovah God brought forth." Thayer, the famous Greek lexicographer, states that the form of God (en morphe) is the form by which a person or thing strikes the vision, the external appearance."
On page 34 of this same book we read, "Prior to coming to earth, this only-begotten Son of God did not think himself to be co-equal with Jehovah God. He did not view himself as 'equal in power and glory' with Almighty God; he did not follow the course of the Devil and plot and scheme to make himself like or equal to the Most High God and to rob God or usurp God's place. On the contrary, he showed his subjection to God as his Superior by humbling himself under God's almighty hand, even to the most disgraceful death on a torture stake. To quote the EMPHATIC DIAGLOTT translation, at Philippians 2:5-8: 'Christ Jesus, who, though being in God's form, yet did not meditate a usurpation to be like God, but divested himself, taking a bondman's form, having been made in the likeness of men. And being in condition as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.'"
Whose interpretation will you follow? Will you accept the explanation of unknown writers, who use the wrong method of Bible study, and who stoop to changing the Sacred text, or will you be guided by the Holy Spirit, and by godly men who are taught by the Spirit of God, and who are recognized as scholars by the academic world? You had better ponder your decision well, because you will have to face this issue at the Judgment bar of God.
Bishop Lightfoot states, "He emptied, stripped Himself of the insignia of Majesty." Moorehead remarks, "When occasion demanded He exercised His divine attributes." The editors of the SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE state, 'Nothing in this passage teaches that the eternal Word (John 1: 1) emptied Himself of either His divine nature or His attributes, but only of the outward and visible manifestations of the Godhead. God may change form, but He cannot cease to be God. At all times His (Christ's) divine attributes could be exercised according to His will."
Walter R. Martin has this comment on this passage, % should also like to call attention to an extremely bold example of misquoting so commonly found in Watchtower propaganda. On page 22 the Russellite oracle declares,'. . . . Paul makes clear that Christ Jesus in his pre-human form was not equal to his Father. Philippians 1111 (NWT) he counsels Christians not to be motivated by egotism but to have lowliness of mind even as Christ Jesus had, who, although existing in God's form before coming to earth was not ambitious to become equal with his Father.'
"Now as far as the original Greek text of Philippians 2: 1 -11 is concerned, this is an absurd and plainly dishonest statement. Paul never even mentions Christ being ambitious to attain anything at all or even His lack of ambition, since no Greek term there can be translated "ambition." Jehovah's Witnesses themselves do not use the word ambition in their own NEW WORLD TRANSLATION, nor does any other translator that we know of. Despite this, however, they introduce the term which clouds the real meaning of the Greek terms. Further than this, and worse, the Watchtower plainly attempts to use Paul's declaration of Christ's Deity as a means of confusing the issue. They maintain that Paul here taught that Jesus was inferior in Nature to His Father, when in reality Paul's entire system of theology says the opposite. If we are to believe the Greek text, Paul declares that Jesus did not consider equality with God something 'to be grasped after, or robbed' (Greek arpazo) since He previously existed as the eternal Word of God (John 1:1) prior to His incarnation (John 1: 14), and as such shared the Father's prerogatives and attributes. Hence He had no desire to strive for what was His by Nature and inheritance." This quotation was taken from THE KINGDOM OF CULTS by Walter R. Martin, and printed by permission of Bethany Fellowship, Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota. This book was copyrighted in 1965.
In order to maintain their false doctrinal position, the translators of the NEW WORLD TRANSLATION of the HOLY SCRIPTURES have changed the sacred text to make it appear that Jesus was so humble that He could not possibly have the thought that He should be equal with God. In reality the Holy Spirit was saying exactly the opposite of this through the Apostle Paul. The Holy Spirit is saying that Jesus did not think that equality with God was a thing that He had to grasp after. A person does not have to seek for something that He already has. If a son has received an inheritance from his father, he does not have to seek it. Jesus did not have to seek for equality with God because He was equal.
This passage in Philippians is one of the key passages of the Bible, and we can be assured that Satan will do all within his power to cloud its meaning. We need to understand why Jesus Christ became a man, and why He lived as a man on the earth. He came to be a man that He might restore man to what God intended that man should be. Though He was God, He lived as a man among men. He came to teach men to depend on Him in every area of their lives, even as He, though God, depended on the Father in every area of His human physical life.
The context shows us that there is absolutely nothing in this passage that denies the Deity of Christ. Even the NWT shows this. 1 quote verses 2:9-11. "For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven, and those on the earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."
In 197 instances the translators of the NWT have rendered Lord as Jehovah. Why didn't they do it here? But even though they did not render it in that way, it is still true. The name that God has given Jesus that is above every name is the name Jehovah. At the Judgment bar of God every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Jehovah to the glory of God the Father. When we study Isaiah 45:23 in the light of its context we see that this is true. What a fearful thing then, to say that Jesus is a lesser deity!
6. COLOSSIANS 1:15-19
The King James Version of these verses is as follows "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature. For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers. All things were created by him and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist: And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell."
The text in the NWT of these verses is as follows: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. Because by means of him all (other) things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All (other) things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all (other) things and by means of him all (other) things were made to exist, and he is the head of the body, the congregation, he is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that he might become the one who is first in all things. Because God saw good for all fullness to dwell in him."
On the basis of this false translation, the Jehovah's Witnesses frequently make the assertion that this passage teaches that the Father created the Son. On page 32 of LET GOD BE TRUE we read these words - "Also in Colossians 1: 15 he is spoken of as 'the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.' Thus he is ranked with God's creation, being first among them and also most beloved and most favored among them. He is not the author of the creation of God; but, after God had created him as his firstborn Son, then God used him as his working partner in creating all the rest of creation." What a perversion of the truth!
In these verses the Apostle Paul is not degrading Christ and making Him to be a creature of God, but is, through the Spirit, exalting Christ in what is called the central Christological passage of the Bible. Instead of picking out one statement in part of verse fifteen, and imagining that it teaches that Christ is a creature, read all of these verses for yourself, and see if they do not teach exactly the opposite of what Jehovah's Witnesses profess that they teach. By inserting the word "other" into the text four times where it does not occur in the Greek text, the translators of the NWT have attempted a subtle perversion of the Greek text. What an awful thing to do! And how great will be the condemnation of those who stoop to such underhanded devices. You must not be led astray by them.
"Firstborn" and "first created" are two entirely different words in the Greek language. Greek scholars tell us that the word for "first created" is protoktistos, and that the word the "firstborn" is prototokos. The Apostle Paul deliberately avoided using the word for "first created," instead he used the word for "firstborn." The Holy Scriptures teach that Christ was not created, but that He is the creator. He is eternal.
The Jews understood the term "firstborn" to refer to position and rank. The firstborn son was the father's heir. All that the father possessed was his. As the "firstborn," Christ is the appointed heir of all creation. In these verses, the Apostle Paul speaks not only of Christ's priority to all creation, but also of His sovereignty over all creation. Verse nineteen states, "For it pleased the Father that in him (Christ) should all fullness dwell." What does this fullness include? Colossians 2:9 tells us -- "For in him (Christ) dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily." What a tremendous revelation this is -- the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Christ. Dear friend, you will be judged in the light of this revelation.
7. REVELATION 3:14
In Revelation 3:14 the King James Version and the New World Translation, refers to Jesus as "the beginning of the creation of God." This is the same problem that we faced in Colossians 1: 15, but the difficulty here is a problem of translation. The margin of the New American Standard New Testament states that the word "beginning" should be origin or source. THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE declares that Christ is "the prime source of all of God's creation." William F. Beck translates this as "The origin of God's creation." THE AMPLIFIED NEW TESTAMENT states, "These are the words of the Amen (Christ), the trusty and faithful Witness, the Origin and Beginning and Author of God's creation." The Greek word for "beginning" is arche and can be correctly rendered origin. The NWT translators recognize this meaning because they render it in this way in John 1: 1. The problem of this text is solved when we recognize that Christ is the origin of God's creation, and not the beginning of it.
THE TWO ALTERNATIVES
There are but two alternatives. Either Jesus Christ is what he claimed to be, and what the Scriptures present Him to be. The Messiah of God (John 4:26), the virgin-born Son of God (John 1:49, Luke 1:35), God manifest in the flesh (I Timothy 3:16), God (John 1:1, Hebrews 1:8) or He is the illegitimate son of an adulterous woman. He is a fraud and a deceiver, if He is not what He claimed to be.
The position taken by the Jehovah's Witnesses that Jesus Christ is merely the son of God, but not God the Son, that He is a lesser deity, that He is "a god," that He is a Mighty God, but not Almighty God, that He is a creature of God and not the Creator is both without reason and Scriptural basis, God is either God or He is not God. If He is not a mighty, He is not God. If He is not sovereign, He is not God. If He -is not omniscient, He is not God. Since God cannot be a creature, and if Jesus Christ is a creature then He is not and cannot be God. It is blasphemous to assert that Jesus Christ is a lesser deity. It is the will of God that all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father (John 5:23). Christ is not honored when the New World Translation says of Him, "and the Word was a god" (John 1: 1). He is not honored when He is called a lesser deity. This title is pure fabrication, without one single line of Scripture to substantiate it, but it is rather a necessary invention of the Watchtower Society since they deny that absolute Deity of Christ.
DESTINY DETERMINED BY YOUR DECISION
Jesus asked his disciples the question, "What think you of Christ?" They had to make a decision about what they thought of Him. Was He a deceiver and an imposter, or was He as He claimed to be, the Christ, the Son of the living God?
Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, asked this question, "What shall 1 do then with Jesus which is called Christ?" He had Jesus on his hands and he had to make a decision as to what he would do with Him. Pilate's wife sent him this message, "Have nothing to do with that just man," but Pilate could not heed her advice. He had a decision that must be made. Either he must release Jesus and give Him His freedom, or he must deliver Him to the Jews who clamored for His blood. There was no middle ground; there was not an alternative.
In the same way, dear friend, you and 1 have a decision to make as to who Jesus is, and what we will do with Him. 1 am sure that you want to make that decision on the basis of what the Word of God teaches about Jesus. You are faced with the alternative of accepting what an organization that had its beginning in the latter part of the 19th century teaches about Jesus, or you can believe what historic Christianity has taught about Christ from the beginning of the Christian Church to the present time. May 1 give you something to think about? Does it seem reasonable to believe that the great Jehovah-God would leave Himself without a witness on the face of the earth for nearly two thousand years? Does it seem reasonable to follow the teachings of a society that will readily admit that they have changed their doctrines dozens of times? The truth does not change.
You must make a decision concerning Christ on the basis of what the Watchtower Society teaches, or on the basis of what the Bible teaches. The Watchtower Society makes the claim that it is the divinely appointed depository for the truth of God, and that it alone has a right understanding of the Word of God. 1 have never met a single Jehovah's Witness who knows and understands the message of the Bible. Before you make the final decision that you will be guided by the teachings of the Watchtower Society, 1 plead with you in the name of Jehovah-God to spend several weeks or months studying the Bible for yourself entirely independent of helps of any kind.
Remember that Satan is a deceiver. He blinds the minds of those who reject the Gospel of Christ (11 Corinthians 4: 3.4). Christians who study the Bible should be guided by the Spirit of God. Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit "will guide you into all truth" and the great work of the Holy Spirit is to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ (John 16:13).