Friday, 13 December 2013
"Begotten"
Find article here
Begotten" and "Created" as Used in Scripture
"Begotten" and "created" are English words carefully chosen by Bible translators to convey the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words of the original manuscripts as closely as possible. So first we should determine what the words "created" and "begotten" actually mean in English. The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1963 ed. that I have at home says:
"create ... 1: to bring into existence...3 : cause, make" - p. 195. And beget ... begot ... begotten ... 1 : to procreate as the father : sire 2 : cause" - p. 77.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company:
be·get
1. To father; sire.
2. To cause to exist or occur; produce
World English Dictionary:
1. to father
2. to cause or create
These two words can share the identical meaning of "cause to be." That is, we may say the mother (or father) has created a child or (more often) someone has begotten some thing that he built or produced somehow.
The Hebrew word yalad means "to bear, bring forth, beget"- Gesenius, #3205, but it can be used (as the equivalent English word also can) for "cause to be." For example, when God says he "begot"/"fathered" (yalad) the nation of Israel (Deut. 32:6, 18), he clearly means that he caused it to be or created it as a nation. There is no implication that it was somehow begotten out of the very substance of his body. In like manner God calls the nation of Israel his son, his firstborn because it was the very first nation created by him and for him (cf. Ex. 4:22). Again, anything Jehovah causes to be may be said to be "begotten" by him and is his "offspring."
"Do you thus repay [YHWH], O foolish and senseless people? Is not he your father, who created you, who made you and established you?" - Deut. 32:6, NRSV.
"Begotten" and "created" are English words carefully chosen by Bible translators to convey the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words of the original manuscripts as closely as possible. So first we should determine what the words "created" and "begotten" actually mean in English. The Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1963 ed. that I have at home says:
"create ... 1: to bring into existence...3 : cause, make" - p. 195. And beget ... begot ... begotten ... 1 : to procreate as the father : sire 2 : cause" - p. 77.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company:
be·get
1. To father; sire.
2. To cause to exist or occur; produce
World English Dictionary:
1. to father
2. to cause or create
These two words can share the identical meaning of "cause to be." That is, we may say the mother (or father) has created a child or (more often) someone has begotten some thing that he built or produced somehow.
The Hebrew word yalad means "to bear, bring forth, beget"- Gesenius, #3205, but it can be used (as the equivalent English word also can) for "cause to be." For example, when God says he "begot"/"fathered" (yalad) the nation of Israel (Deut. 32:6, 18), he clearly means that he caused it to be or created it as a nation. There is no implication that it was somehow begotten out of the very substance of his body. In like manner God calls the nation of Israel his son, his firstborn because it was the very first nation created by him and for him (cf. Ex. 4:22). Again, anything Jehovah causes to be may be said to be "begotten" by him and is his "offspring."
"Do you thus repay [YHWH], O foolish and senseless people? Is not he your father, who created you, who made you and established you?" - Deut. 32:6, NRSV.
"You forsook the creator who begot [yalad] you and ceased to care for God who brought you to birth." - Deut. 32:18, NEB.
"Men of Athens [non-Christians], .... The God who made the world and everything in it ... does not live in shrines made by man. .... Being then God's offspring, we ought not to think that the Deity is like gold or silver, or stone..." - Acts 17:22, 24, 29, RSV.
It’s especially important to note the dual application of Psalm 2:7. Here Jehovah speaks to the Israelite king and says “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten [yalad] thee.” It’s true that the Israelite king (David?) prefigures Jesus Christ here, but notice that this scripture must directly apply to David also. Jehovah hasn’t really begotten him out of his very own substance so that now King David’s very body and substance are identical to God’s.
No, the king has, at this point, been accepted by God in a new way. God has caused him to be in a new status.
So when this scripture is also applied to the Christ, it is to be applied in a similar (although greater) manner.
In Ps. 90:2 we also see yalad used in the sense of created:
"Before the mountains were born [yalad] or you brought forth the earth" - NIV, AT, JB, NJB, NAB (1991), NASB; "begotten" - NAB (1970); "were given birth" - MLB. Or, "Before the mountains were created, before the earth was formed." - Living Bible, cf. TEV. So, the Hebrew word most often translated "begotten, brought forth" may also be understood (as in English) to mean created or produced.
And whether or not God means that the earth (or “mountains”) was literally “begotten” from his very own spirit body or created out of nothing really matters very little. The point is that at one time it did not exist and then was brought into existence by the Creator, God!
The very title of God (“Father”) used as “source of all things” shows this common meaning throughout both testaments. God is the Father of all. What does this mean? He is the Father of the Universe, the Father of all creation, and even the Father of the Angels. (They truly are called “sons of God” and they were in existence before the earth was created - Job 38:4, 7, cf. Living Bible and NIVSB f.n.) They are spirit persons. Should we assume then that the angels were “begotten” from God in the sense that they have existed eternally and are actually composed of his very own spirit substance, etc.? After all, it doesn’t actually say that they were “created.” We know they were created because their Father created/“begot” everything: He is the “Father of all” including the spirit persons in heaven. - Eph. 4:6; Heb. 1:7; 12:9.
1 Cor. 8:6 (compare Eph. 4:6) tells us, again, that God is the Father of ALL things. He is the Creator of all things. The very common usage of "Father," "son," "begotten," "born," etc. is again used here for creation. Not only is God the Father of all created things here, but these things have literally "come out" (ek) from him. ("But to us there is but one God, the Father, [out of - ek] whom are all things".) Yes, the original New Testament word used here is "ek" which literally means "out of" (W. E. Vine, p. 1270) and is commonly used in the sense of generating, begetting. For example, Matt. 1:3 literally reads in the original manuscripts: "Judah generated Perez and Zerah out of [ek] Tamar." Judah was the father, but the children were literally out of the body (essence, flesh) of their mother Tamar.
Someone could speculate that since God existed alone before creation, he used some of his own substance (Spirit), which apparently is an incomprehensibly powerful and infinite energy "substance," to create or produce the other spirit creatures in heaven (his 'sons,' the angels - yes, angels are called 'sons of God' - e.g., Job 38:7; Ps. 89:6). If so, he may have modified it before producing them (just as he must have modified somewhat the earth 'substance' from which he created Adam's substance [and yet Adam is called ‘the son of God’ - Luke 3:38, NASB; KJV; RSV.]), so that their spirit "substance" is different from his own (just as there are different forms of energy found within this universe). Then we might speculate that he directed his "Firstborn Son" (through whom he created everything else) to use more of that Spirit (unlimited energy) to create the material universe which scientists know started in an incomprehensible blast of energy ("the Big Bang") which was then converted into the matter and energy of our universe. God then (through his firstborn son) created (or "begot") all the complex details within that universe, including mankind.
{Does it help to consider Adam and Eve? Eve “existed” for quite some time as a part of Adam - his very own rib. She was “begotten” out of (ek) Adam from his very substance. Her new existence began her own conscious life - she was not aware of her previous existence “within” Adam. She was not equal to Adam in authority. She did not know everything he did. She was not as powerful as he.
She shared his “substance” (literally), but she was by no means equal to him in any real sense. She was his “only-begotten” in the sense of being truly “bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh” and being the only one so “begotten,” but we must not consider them as both equally Adam. She was an entirely different person, created (or “begotten”) some time after Adam, and in subjection to him (1 Cor. 11:3).
Whether Jesus was literally created out of Jehovah’s own substance is pure speculation, but even if he had been, it wouldn’t have to mean anything more than this example of Adam and Eve does.}
The terms "generated" and "begotten" had different meanings for Christians before the 4th century advocates for a trinity idea transformed them into the trinitarian terms that are generally used today. Church historian (and trinitarian) Dr. Williston Walker writes in his classic work, A History of the Christian Church, 4th ed.:
"[The beginning of the 4th century debates over the deity of Christ] hinged in turn on interpretation of the Greek term gennetos ['generated'] as that was applied to the Son. [Although] traditionally translated 'begotten,' in Greek philosophical terminology [as well as in Scriptural terminology: Luke 7:28; Jn 3:5; 1 Jn 5:1; Ps. 90:2; Prov. 8:25] it had a broader and hence vaguer sense. It denoted anything which in any way 'came to be' and hence anything 'derivative' or 'generated.' Christian thought had early learned to express its monotheistic stance by insisting that God is the sole agennetos ('underived,' 'ungenerated' ['unbegotten']): that is, the unique and absolute first principle. By contrast with God, all else that exists - including the Logos, God's Son - was described as generated ['begotten']." - p. 132, Charles Scribner's Sons, Macmillan Publishing Co., 1985. [Emphasis and bracketed material added.]
Justin Martyr (c. 100-165 A.D.) wrote:
God alone is unbegotten and incorruptible, and therefore He is God, but all other things after him are created and corruptible {Justin has just concurred that the world itself was begotten by God} .... take your stand on one Unbegotten [the Father], and say this is the Cause of all. - ANF 1:197 ('Dialogue').
But,
Jesus Christ is the only proper Son who has been begotten by God, being His Word and first-begotten - ANF 1:170 ('Apology').
And thus do we also, since our persuasion by the Word, stand aloof from them (i.e., the demons), and follow the only unbegotten God through His Son - ANF 1:167 ('Apology').
Furthermore,
"NT 1. ginomai is used in the NT in a variety of connections.
"(a) It means to be born (Gal. 4:4); .... to be made, be done (Jn 1:3; Matt. 11:21) ....
"3. genesis means birth in Matt. 1:18 and Lk. 1:14. It also means created life or being." - p. 181, Vol. 1, The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Zondervan, 1986.
And, that, of course, is why the first book of the Bible is named "Genesis" - the Greek word for 'birth' is here intended for 'creation.'
"The first book [of the Bible]....is generally known among Christians by the name of Genesis....because it gives an account of the origin [creation] of all things." - Today's Dictionary of the Bible, p. 254, Bethany House Publishers, 1982.
And, Bara is the Hebrew OT word which means, according to Gesenius, "(2) to create, to produce" and (3) "to beget" and "NIPHAL - (1) to be created, Gen. 2:4; 5:2; .... (2) pass. of Kal No. 3, to be born, Eze. 21:[30]...." - p. 138, 139, Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, Baker Book House, 1979.
Remember, the angels and men are called sons of God in scripture. This obviously does not mean the spirit person who created everything literally gave birth (in the sense of earthly creatures) to them!
The Father has 'begotten' us all as his creation (through his firstborn son).
The Watchtower Society's commentary on the Book of revelation.
A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article
REVELATION TO JOHN
REVELATION TO JOHN
The last book of the Bible as arranged in most translations, though not the last written. It is also called the Apocalypse of John the Apostle.
Writer, and When and Where Written. The apostle John names himself as the writer of the book and designates the place of writing as the island of Patmos, where John was in exile at the time for being a preacher of God’s Word and a witness of Jesus Christ. (Re 1:1, 9) The time of writing was possibly about 96 C.E.
Style and Appropriateness. The book is in letter form, detailing a series of visions set forth in a proper order in regular progression, finally coming to the climactic vision. It supplies a fitting conclusion to the entire Bible.
The book seems to proceed on the basis of series of sevens. Seven seals open into the blowing of seven trumpets, then into seven plagues. There are seven lampstands, seven stars, seven thunders, and many other things by sevens, evidently because the number seven here represents completeness, and the book deals with the completion of the sacred secret of God.—Re 10:7; see SACRED SECRET.
Author and Channel. Jehovah God the Almighty is the book’s author, and the channel of information is Jesus Christ, who sent it to John and presented it to him by means of his angel. (Re 1:1) The spirit of God is represented as being sevenfold, hence acting in its fullest capacity to convey this disclosure. John was given divine command to write.—1:4, 11.
Purpose. While some of the things seen by John in the vision may seem terrifying—the beasts, the woes, the plagues—the book was written, not to terrify, but to comfort and encourage those who read it with faith. It can lead the reader to blessings. In fact, the writer of the book states at the outset: “Happy [“blessed,” KJ] is he who reads aloud and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and who observe the things written in it.” (Re 1:3) John also says that the book is for the purpose of showing God’s slaves the things that “must shortly take place.”—1:1, 2.
Bears Witness to Jesus. In Revelation 19:10, the angel tells John: “The bearing witness to Jesus is what inspires prophesying [literally, “is the spirit of the prophecy”].” That is, the intent and purpose of all prophecy is to point to Jesus Christ. This does not mean that Jehovah God is bypassed or ignored. Earlier in 19 verse 10 the angel had told John, who fell down before him: “Worship God,” and the apostle Paul had said that “God exalted [Christ] to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” Magnifying Jesus Christ, therefore, and getting acquainted with the knowledge of him result in a better knowledge of God and His purposes, thereby giving the glory to God above all.—Php 2:9-11; see PROPHECY.
The reason why prophecy bears witness to Jesus is that Jesus is the one through whom God accomplishes his purposes in sanctifying his name, destroying wickedness, and blessing mankind. “Carefully concealed in him [Christ] are all the treasures of wisdom and of knowledge.” (Col 2:3) He is the Seed of promise, the One in whom the sacred secret is revealed. From the very beginning of God’s dealings with men following Adam’s rebellion, God has caused Christ to be foretold and foreshadowed and has pointed men to the Kingdom of God in the hands of his Son.—Ge 3:15; 22:18; Ga 3:16; 2Sa 7:12-16; Ps 2:6-12; 110:1-7; Eze 21:27; Acts 2:29, 36; 3:19-26; 1Ti 3:16.
In simple language, what is the meaning of “Revelation”?
The opening chapter of the book concluding the Bible introduces us to the One over all, the Originator of the Revelation message, Jehovah God the Almighty, “the Alpha and the Omega.” It gives a vision of the Channel of the communication, Jesus Christ, showing him as having died but now being alive, in great power in heaven. The sharers with him in his tribulation and in the Kingdom are next brought into view, and Christ’s interest in them and loving-kindness toward them are displayed in his messages to “the angels” of the seven congregations.—Re 1-3.
Then by the spirit of inspiration John is ushered into the heavens to begin seeing “the things that must take place.” He is given a vision of the throne of God and its surroundings, and he describes the One sitting upon it as glorious, supreme, throning in perfect sereneness and composure.—Re 4.
The glorious position of “the Lamb” of God, Jesus Christ, is portrayed as that of the one second only to Jehovah God, the only one in heaven and earth qualified to approach God to open up the revelation of God’s purpose. Attention is given to a warrior-king (apparently also Jesus) riding forth “conquering and to complete his conquest.” The result to earth, especially to God’s enemies, when this king begins his ride is shown and so is God’s purpose to avenge the blood of his people upon his enemies.—Re 5, 6.
How God views his servants on earth who have been chosen by him to share in the heavenly Kingdom is shown in his holding up destructive action until these servants are ‘sealed in their foreheads.’ The full number of sealed ones is revealed to be 144,000. Others not sealed, and unlimited as to number, who become servants of God and escape the destructiveness of “the great tribulation” are then shown. The judgments of God against various sections of his enemies on earth, as well as the fight that these enemies wage against his people, are related. This leads up to the efforts of the archenemy, the dragon Satan the Devil, to thwart God’s purpose to bring forth the “son, a male, who is to shepherd all the nations with an iron rod.” Next, wild beasts are seen, symbolizing instrumentalities that this archenemy uses to fight the remaining ones of the seed of the woman and to prevent the completion of the sealing work.—Re 7-13; see BEASTS, SYMBOLIC.
All these attempts of Satan utterly fail. The 144,000 are seen victorious, standing with the Lamb upon Mount Zion, displaying the name of the Father and of the Lamb on their foreheads, and singing as if a new song before the heavenly ones. After these and a “great crowd” of earthly associates are all gathered in “the harvest of the earth,” the time has arrived for the great “vine of the earth” to be trodden out in the winepress.—Re 14.
With another symbolism, God’s final judgments are portrayed. Seven angels are provided with seven bowls of God’s anger. They go forth to carry out this final work. One of the chief foes of God and of the “bride” of Christ comes in for attention, namely, “Babylon the Great, the mother of the harlots,” “the great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.” Her alliance with the seven-headed beast collapses, the beast becoming enraged with her, eating her flesh, and burning her with fire. The mourning of those who made gain by their dealings with her is great, but heaven rejoices.—Re 15-18.
Babylon the Great, as “the mother of the harlots,” would logically make every attempt to seduce the “bride” of Christ to become unfaithful to her promised husband (2Co 11:2, 3; Eph 5:25-27) and thereby make her another harlot. Hence, the heavenly rejoicing is accentuated because Babylon the Great’s corrupting efforts have been frustrated. The great harlot is now out of the way, and the bride has gained the victory. She has prepared herself for her espoused One. Therefore it is time for the Lamb’s marriage to take place. All those invited to the marriage rejoice. Jehovah now begins a new epoch in his reign, the great harlot having disappeared as a rival to pure worship.—Re 19:1-10.
But God’s other enemies must come in for execution of judgment. The Bridegroom goes forth to complete his conquest, to rid the earth of all foes, political and otherwise. The destruction is thorough. Finally, the Devil, having experienced the defeat of all of his agents and instruments, is himself bound for the thousand years of Christ’s reign. The vision passes over this Millennial Reign for the moment to detail a judgment that comes at the end of the thousand years; the Devil is temporarily loosed, then, together with all those joining his attack on “the camp of the holy ones and the beloved city,” he is completely annihilated.—Re 19:11–20:10.
Turning back to events during the thousand years, the vision depicts the resurrection and judgment that take place under the rule of Christ and his bride, the New Jerusalem. The beauty and grandeur of this heavenly “city” is described, with the healing, life-giving benefits it brings to mankind.—Re 20:11–22:5.
In conclusion, Jehovah God speaks of ‘coming quickly with reward according to each one’s work.’ As “the faithful and true witness,” Jesus bears testimony to the completion of the sacred secret concerning the kingdom, saying: “I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star.” He is David’s permanent heir, the eternal one in the Kingdom covenant and the one foretold at Numbers 24:17. All efforts by Satan, the wild beast, and Babylon the Great (Re 12:1-10; 17:3-14) have therefore been unable to prevent this “star” from rising out of the house of David to sit down on the throne in the heavens forever.—Re 22:6-16.
The spirit, the active force of God, along with “the bride,” extend the invitation to all hearing to take of life’s water free. With a final warning not to add to or take from the words of the prophecy, and a declaration of the nearness of his coming, Jesus closes the revelation; and John responds, “Amen! Come, Lord Jesus.”—Re 22:17-21.
The book of Revelation is of great importance in that it provides spiritual strength and insight for God’s people. It highlights God’s interest in the congregations of his people and the close and loving care that Jesus Christ exercises toward them as the Fine Shepherd. Jesus knows exactly what conditions prevail and what must be done. This is especially manifest in the first three chapters of the book.
Some persons view Revelation as being so highly symbolic that it cannot be understood, or they view it as being impractical. But Jehovah God wants his people to understand, and he caused the Bible to be written to be understood and to provide guidance for them. The key to understanding Revelation is the same as the key to understanding other parts of the Bible. The apostle Paul points to that key. After explaining that God reveals the hidden wisdom through his spirit, Paul says: “These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by the spirit, as we combine spiritual matters with spiritual words.” (1Co 2:8-13) If we search the Scriptures (and in some cases the customs and practices of those days), we find in them many of the things used as symbolisms in Revelation. By comparing these Scripture texts, we can often understand what the Revelation symbol means. It should be noted, however, that a term or expression may refer to or symbolize different things, according to the context in which it appears.
[Box on page 800, 801]
HIGHLIGHTS OF REVELATION
A disclosure of God’s view of conditions as well as a foreview of what he permits and what he will accomplish through Christ during “the Lord’s day”
A series of visions recorded by the apostle John in about 96 C.E.
The Ephesus congregation has endured but has left its first love
The spiritually rich Smyrna congregation is encouraged to remain faithful in the face of tribulation
The Pergamum congregation has held fast to Christ’s name under persecution but has tolerated sectarianism
The Thyatira congregation has a record of increased activity, but it has tolerated a Jezebel influence
The Sardis congregation is dead spiritually; it must wake up
The Philadelphia congregation, which has kept Christ’s word, is urged to keep holding fast what it has
The Laodicea congregation is lukewarm; let it obtain from Christ what is needed for spiritual healing
Jehovah is seen in awesome splendor on his throne, surrounded by 24 elders and four living creatures; he holds a scroll sealed with seven seals
The Lamb is declared worthy to take the scroll and open it
As he opens the first seal, a rider on a white horse receives a crown and goes forth conquering and to complete his conquest
The opening of the next three seals introduces three more horsemen, bringing war, famine, and death to mankind
The fifth seal is opened; those martyred for Christ cry for their blood to be avenged; each is given a white robe
At the opening of the sixth seal, a great earthquake heralds the day of the wrath of God and of the Lamb
John hears that the four winds will be held back until the slaves of God are sealed; the number of those sealed is 144,000
Then, John sees a great, unnumbered crowd out of all nations; these come out of the great tribulation
There is a half-hour silence; fire from the altar is hurled to the earth; seven angels prepare to blow trumpets
The first four trumpet blasts herald plagues on the earth, the sea, the freshwater sources, as well as on the sun, moon, and stars
The fifth trumpet calls forth a plague of locusts, and the sixth unleashes a terrifying cavalry attack
John eats a little scroll and learns he must prophesy some more
He measures the sanctuary; two witnesses prophecy in sackcloth, are killed, and are raised again
The seventh trumpet sounds and the Kingdom of Jehovah and the authority of his Christ are announced
A woman gives birth to a male child in heaven
The dragon tries to devour the child; there is war in heaven; Michael casts the dragon and its angels down to earth
The dragon wages war on the remnant of the woman’s seed
A wild beast with seven heads and ten horns comes out of the sea
The dragon gives the beast its authority, and a beast with two horns like a lamb makes an image to it; many are forced to worship the wild beast and accept its mark
The 144,000 on Mount Zion sing a new song
Angels flying in midheaven declare vital messages
Someone like a son of man reaps the harvest of the earth
An angel treads the winepress of God, with much bloodshed
Jehovah, from his heavenly sanctuary, commands seven angels to pour out the seven bowls of his anger (15:1–16:21)
The first six bowls are poured out into the earth, the sea, and freshwater sources, and upon the sun, the throne of the wild beast, and the Euphrates
God’s servants must stay awake, as demonic propaganda gathers human kings to Har–Magedon
The seventh bowl is poured out upon the air with devastating results
Babylon the Great, drunk with the blood of the holy ones, sits on a scarlet beast having seven heads and ten horns; the ten horns turn on her and devastate her
Her fall is announced; God’s people must get out of her
Her final destruction is mourned by many on earth
Heavenly voices praise Jah for the destruction of Babylon
A thunderous chorus of praise heralds the marriage of the Lamb
The Word of God goes to war against the nations; the wild beast and the false prophet are hurled into the lake of fire; all of God’s enemies are killed off; animals eat their fleshy parts
Satan is abyssed for 1,000 years
Jesus’ fellow rulers judge with him for 1,000 years, after which, Satan is released; he sets out to mislead mankind again, but finally he and all who follow him are destroyed
All those in death, Hades, and the sea are raised and judged before the One seated on the great white throne; death and Hades are cast into the lake of fire
John sees a new heaven and a new earth
The glorious New Jerusalem comes down from heaven, illuminating the nations; a river of water of life flows through it, with trees for healing on each bank
Revelation closes with final messages from Jehovah and Jesus; the spirit and the bride invite anyone thirsting to take life’s water free
Thursday, 12 December 2013
On "the only true God"
Find article here
Who is the "True God"?
John 4:24 tells us we must worship God in truth (aletheia in the Greek text). There can be no doubt what "truth" means here. It can be properly contrasted here with "falsity." If we are not worshiping God correctly (in truth), then we are worshiping him falsely. There are only two choices here. This is confirmed by John 17:3 and 2 Thess. 1:8, 9 where we are told that it means eternal life to us to know the true God and Jesus Christ, and, conversely, it means eternal destruction to not know God and obey Jesus. Obviously, if we "know" God and Christ falsely, we cannot worship them in truth. We must know them accurately!
But what about the word "true" [alethinos (contrasted with aletheia, 'truth')] in NT Greek? If something is true, does that mean all other things in that same category are necessarily false? Some trinitarians insist that this is so when the term "the true God" is used in Scripture. In other words they are insisting that if he is the true God, anyone else called 'a god' would necessarily be a false god! (And, therefore, Jesus cannot be called "a god" in scripture as JWs have translated.)
Well, alethinos "is unquestionably used sometimes in the Gospel and First Epistle [of John] to signify that a thing truly corresponds to the idea of the name given to it" - p. 819, Vol. 4, A Dictionary of the Bible, Hastings, Hendrickson Publishers, 1988 printing.
And respected NT Greek expert W. E. Vine tells us that alethinos
"denotes true in the sense of real, ideal, genuine; it is used (a) of God, John 7:28 ...; 17:3; I Thess. 1:9;...." - p. 1170, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Nelson Publ., 1983 printing.
Therefore, if we should see, for example, someone being called the 'true prophet,' that should mean that the person so described is truly a prophet. In either case this certainly does not have to mean that all other prophets must be false! Even if it was said that this one was the "only true Prophet," we would probably consider him the only prophet in the highest sense of the word, but that still would not make all other prophets of God false prophets!
Or, since the Proverb quoted at 2 Peter 2:22 is "the true (alethous) Proverb," does that really mean that all other Proverbs must be false?
And at Heb. 8:2 we see Jesus as "a minister in the sanctuary [in heaven], and in the true (alethinos - Young's; Vine) tabernacle" - NASB. Here again, although the heavenly "tabernacle" is the "true tabernacle," that does not mean that the earthly tabernacle was a false tabernacle. As W. E. Vine puts it when discussing Heb. 8:2,
"not that the wilderness Tabernacle was false, but that it was a weak and earthly copy of the Heavenly [cf. Heb. 9:24]." - p. 1171, An Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.
Therefore, the heavenly tabernacle was the only true Tabernacle. There could be other, earthly, tabernacles which were still not false tabernacles. Or as Heb. 9:24 puts it:
"For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands [the earthly tabernacle], a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself" - NASB.
No, just because the heavenly tabernacle is the true one, does not make holy tabernacles on earth false tabernacles. They were merely tabernacles in a lesser sense of the word - "in the image of" the only true Tabernacle (in heaven)!
“Christ proclaims Himself [‘the bread the true’ - 'the true bread'] (John vi. 32), not suggesting thereby that the bread which Moses gave was not also ‘bread of heaven’ (Ps. cv. 40), but only that it was such in a secondary inferior degree; it was not food in the highest sense, inasmuch as it did not nourish up unto eternal life those that ate it (John vi. 49). He is [‘the vine the true’ - 'the true vine'] (John xv. I), not thereby denying that Israel also was God's vine (Ps. lxxx. 8; Jer. 21), but affirming that none except Himself realized this name, and all which this name implied, to the full (Hos. x. I; Deut. xxxii. 32)” - p. 29, Trench’s Synonyms of the New Testament. [Thanks to 'Reality.']
Perhaps the best illustration of this would be the use of the term "Christ" (or 'Messiah' in Hebrew) ["christos, christou, christw, and christon in the original Greek]. As far as Christians are concerned there is only one "true Christ," our Savior, Jesus! We know that the Bible has also warned us about "false christs."
However, less well-known is the fact that God himself appointed King Saul (1 Sam. 24:7, christos) and King David (2 Sam. 23:1, christon), among many others, as His christ. "Christ" (or "Messiah" in Hebrew) simply means "anointed" or "anointed one," and those who properly bear that title are those who have been chosen by God for a special assignment. This included the high priests, prophets, and righteous kings of Israel. They all had the title "Christ" or "Christ of God" in the ancient Greek of the Septuagint Bible. Why, even the foreign king, Cyrus, was called the christ (christw) of God (Is. 45:1, Septuagint) because God chose him for a special assignment!
So, even though we would say that Jesus is the only true Christ and that there have been many false Christs who have arisen, it still would not be proper to insist that any person other than Jesus who is called "christ" or "a christ" must be a false christ! We would then be saying that King David, Moses, and innumerable others chosen by God to do his will were false christs!
What we are saying, then, is that Jesus is the only true Christ in that he is the only person who is God's anointed in the highest sense of the word! And all others called "christ" are either false christs or faithful servants of God in a lesser sense of the word (as compared to Jesus himself)!
So, for God to say that he is the true (alethinos) God does not demand that all others called 'god' or 'gods' are false gods as a few trinitarian apologists imply. The inspired scriptures when speaking of faithful angels, prophets, God-appointed judges, kings, and magistrates clearly calls them "gods" on occasion (see the BOWGOD and DEF studies). These are called "gods" in the sense of faithful servants of God, representing the true God.[1]
Of course "God" [theos] (the "Most High God" - Luke 8:28; Ps. 82:6; Luke 6:35[2] - and the "God of gods" - Deut. 10:17; Ps. 136:2) was distinguished from "a god" [theos] by the use of the definite article ("the") in the original languages - see the DEF and THEOS studies. (Also remember that capital letters were not used to distinguish things in the original manuscripts of the Bible as they are in modern English Bibles: God, Christ, etc.)
But let's examine the scriptural uses of the "true God" more closely.
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible shows only 5 places where this is used in the entire Bible: (1) 2 Chron. 15:3; (2) Jer. 10:10; (3) 1 Thess. 1:9; (4) 1 John 5:20; and (5) John 17:3. Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jehovah the God of the Bible is one person only (as his singular, masculine, personal name, "Jehovah" clearly shows): the Father in heaven. So does the term "the only true God" ever refer to the Son or the Holy Spirit or a 'multiple-person' God? Or do the JW's teach the truth about the knowledge of God that means our very eternal lives (Jn 17:3; 2 Thess. 1:8, 9)?
Here, then are all the uses of "the true God" to be found in the entire Holy Scriptures (according to Strong's; Young's; and the New American Standard Concordances):
(1) ---2 Chron. 15:3, 4 says:
"Now for a long season Israel was without the true (alethinos - Sept.) God, and without a teaching priest, and without law: but when in their distress they turned unto Jehovah, the God of Israel, and sought him, he was found of them." - American Standard Version (ASV).
(2) ---Jeremiah 10:10 says:
"But Jehovah is the true God; he is the living God, and an everlasting king..." - ASV. (This passage is not in the Septuagint.)
These two scriptures (the only two in the OT to use 'the true God' according to Young's; the New American Standard; and Strong's concordances) clearly identify the true God as Jehovah. And the only person to be identified as Jehovah in the entire OT is the Father alone! (Is. 63:16; 64:8, ASV; Deut. 32:6, ASV; Ps. 2:7 and 89:26, 27 {compare Heb. 1:5}.)
And, in fact, it is also clearly shown that the Messiah is not Jehovah! (Psalm 110:1, ASV {compare Acts 2:33-36 and Eph. 1:17, 20}; Micah 5:4, ASV; Psalm 2:1, 2, ASV {compare Acts 4:25-27}; Psalm 2:7, ASV {compare Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5}; Is. 53:6, 10, ASV {most Christian churches recognize that all of Is. 53 refers to the Messiah}.)
But what about the New Testament? Is "the true [real] God" ever clearly identified here (in contradiction to the OT) as the Son? As the Holy Spirit? As a "multiple-person" God?
(3) ---1 Thess. 1:9, 10 -
"They tell how you [the Thessalonian congregation] turned to God from idols to serve the living and true [alethinos] God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead - Jesus..." - NIV.
Well, here again the true God is clearly the Father alone as context demands (and who has been identified as Jehovah alone above). And the Son, Jesus, is clearly differentiated from that 'true God"!
So what about the only two remaining references in the NT: 1 John 5:20 and John 17:3?
The only hope for the trinitarian argument that the "true God is Jesus" is found at 1 John 5:20.
(4) ---1 Jn 5:20 -
"We are in him that is true [alethinos], even in his Son, Jesus Christ. This [outos] is the true [alethinos] God, and eternal life." - KJV.
Some trinitarians actually insist that the word "this" (outos) here refers to Jesus. In other words, "[Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life." For example, Robert M. Bowman in his Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus Christ, and the Gospel of John states that at 1 Jn 5:20 Jesus is called 'the true God and eternal life' "indisputably identifying Christ as the Almighty God of the Old Testament." - p. 41, Baker Book House, 1991 printing. I understand why some trinitarians are so desperate in their search for non-existent scriptural "evidence" that they have to make it up, but this is incredibly poor!
It is obvious that grammatically the word "this" (outos) could be referring to either the Father or Jesus in this particular scripture (see the footnote for 1 John 5:20 in the very trinitarian NIV Study Bible). But the fact that the true God (or "the true One") has just been identified as the Father of Jesus (1 Jn 5:20, TEV and GNB; and the footnote in the NIV Study Bible[3]) makes it highly probable that "this is the true God" refers to the Father, not Jesus. The highly trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris sums up his 13-page analysis of this scripture as follows:
"Although it is certainly possible that outos refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence point to 'the true one,' God the Father, as the probable antecedent. This position, outos = God [Father], is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter."[4] - p. 253, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992.
Notice how this trinitarian scholar actually admits that the probability is that the Father (not Jesus) is being called the true God here. He even tells us (and cites examples in his footnotes) that New Testament grammarians and commentators (most of them trinitarian, of course) agree!
So this single "proof" that the "true God" is a title for anyone other than the Father alone is not proof at all. The grammar alone merely makes it a possibility. The immediate context makes it highly improbable since (as in all other uses of the term) the true God (or the true one) was just identified as the Father ("We are in the one who is true as we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the true God and this is eternal life." - NJB; and "We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we know the true God. We live in union with the true God - in union with his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and this is eternal life." - TEV. "And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we live in fellowship with the true God because we live in fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life." - New Living Translation).
So the immediate context alone makes it probable that the true God is the Father in this scripture also. As we have seen, if we include the context of all the uses of the 'true God,' it is certain that He is the Father alone (whose personal name is Jehovah - Ps. 83:18, Ex. 3:15).
To clinch John's intended meaning at 1 John 5:20, let's look at his only other use of the term: John 17:1, 3, where, again (as in 1 Jn 5:20), he mentions Father, Son, and eternal life.
(5) ---At John 17:1, 3 Jesus prays to the Father:
"Father, .... this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." - New International Version (NIV).
Here the Father alone is not only very clearly identified as the only true [alethinos] God, but Jesus Christ is again pointedly and specifically excluded from that identification ("AND Jesus Christ whom you [the only true God] have sent")!
Notice how this popular trinitarian Bible has rendered John 17:1, 3 - "Father,....This is eternal life: to know thee who alone art truly God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." - New English Bible (NEB).
So, the title "the true God" does not have to mean that there are no others who may be called "gods" or "a god" in a subordinate but righteous sense. It is, however, an exclusive title for God, the Most High, only true God, Jehovah. And clearly it refers exclusively to the Father! No one else is the God or the True God! (Compare Ps. 86:10; 2 Kings 19:19; Is. 37:16.)
Therefore, the argument by certain trinitarian "guides" that the term 'true God' must mean that all others called 'gods' in the Scriptures are false gods is clearly false itself. Those who use it have not examined it with anything that could be called proper scholarship. They are either terribly misinformed (the fault of their spiritual "guides") or, in the case of the trinitarian authors, lecturers, and ministers who are aware of methods of proper research, Bible language grammar, etc., terribly dishonest ("deliberately-blind guides")! How does this fit with the command that we must worship God in truth (aletheia)- Jn 4:24? Or the warning that when the knowingly blind (false religious leaders) lead the blind (the ones following those leaders with blind faith) both will fall into the pit? Shouldn't we ALL carefully and diligently examine all sides of any essential, life-saving Bible teaching?
Who is the "True God"?
John 4:24 tells us we must worship God in truth (aletheia in the Greek text). There can be no doubt what "truth" means here. It can be properly contrasted here with "falsity." If we are not worshiping God correctly (in truth), then we are worshiping him falsely. There are only two choices here. This is confirmed by John 17:3 and 2 Thess. 1:8, 9 where we are told that it means eternal life to us to know the true God and Jesus Christ, and, conversely, it means eternal destruction to not know God and obey Jesus. Obviously, if we "know" God and Christ falsely, we cannot worship them in truth. We must know them accurately!
But what about the word "true" [alethinos (contrasted with aletheia, 'truth')] in NT Greek? If something is true, does that mean all other things in that same category are necessarily false? Some trinitarians insist that this is so when the term "the true God" is used in Scripture. In other words they are insisting that if he is the true God, anyone else called 'a god' would necessarily be a false god! (And, therefore, Jesus cannot be called "a god" in scripture as JWs have translated.)
Well, alethinos "is unquestionably used sometimes in the Gospel and First Epistle [of John] to signify that a thing truly corresponds to the idea of the name given to it" - p. 819, Vol. 4, A Dictionary of the Bible, Hastings, Hendrickson Publishers, 1988 printing.
And respected NT Greek expert W. E. Vine tells us that alethinos
"denotes true in the sense of real, ideal, genuine; it is used (a) of God, John 7:28 ...; 17:3; I Thess. 1:9;...." - p. 1170, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Nelson Publ., 1983 printing.
Therefore, if we should see, for example, someone being called the 'true prophet,' that should mean that the person so described is truly a prophet. In either case this certainly does not have to mean that all other prophets must be false! Even if it was said that this one was the "only true Prophet," we would probably consider him the only prophet in the highest sense of the word, but that still would not make all other prophets of God false prophets!
Or, since the Proverb quoted at 2 Peter 2:22 is "the true (alethous) Proverb," does that really mean that all other Proverbs must be false?
And at Heb. 8:2 we see Jesus as "a minister in the sanctuary [in heaven], and in the true (alethinos - Young's; Vine) tabernacle" - NASB. Here again, although the heavenly "tabernacle" is the "true tabernacle," that does not mean that the earthly tabernacle was a false tabernacle. As W. E. Vine puts it when discussing Heb. 8:2,
"not that the wilderness Tabernacle was false, but that it was a weak and earthly copy of the Heavenly [cf. Heb. 9:24]." - p. 1171, An Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.
Therefore, the heavenly tabernacle was the only true Tabernacle. There could be other, earthly, tabernacles which were still not false tabernacles. Or as Heb. 9:24 puts it:
"For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands [the earthly tabernacle], a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself" - NASB.
No, just because the heavenly tabernacle is the true one, does not make holy tabernacles on earth false tabernacles. They were merely tabernacles in a lesser sense of the word - "in the image of" the only true Tabernacle (in heaven)!
“Christ proclaims Himself [‘the bread the true’ - 'the true bread'] (John vi. 32), not suggesting thereby that the bread which Moses gave was not also ‘bread of heaven’ (Ps. cv. 40), but only that it was such in a secondary inferior degree; it was not food in the highest sense, inasmuch as it did not nourish up unto eternal life those that ate it (John vi. 49). He is [‘the vine the true’ - 'the true vine'] (John xv. I), not thereby denying that Israel also was God's vine (Ps. lxxx. 8; Jer. 21), but affirming that none except Himself realized this name, and all which this name implied, to the full (Hos. x. I; Deut. xxxii. 32)” - p. 29, Trench’s Synonyms of the New Testament. [Thanks to 'Reality.']
Perhaps the best illustration of this would be the use of the term "Christ" (or 'Messiah' in Hebrew) ["christos, christou, christw, and christon in the original Greek]. As far as Christians are concerned there is only one "true Christ," our Savior, Jesus! We know that the Bible has also warned us about "false christs."
However, less well-known is the fact that God himself appointed King Saul (1 Sam. 24:7, christos) and King David (2 Sam. 23:1, christon), among many others, as His christ. "Christ" (or "Messiah" in Hebrew) simply means "anointed" or "anointed one," and those who properly bear that title are those who have been chosen by God for a special assignment. This included the high priests, prophets, and righteous kings of Israel. They all had the title "Christ" or "Christ of God" in the ancient Greek of the Septuagint Bible. Why, even the foreign king, Cyrus, was called the christ (christw) of God (Is. 45:1, Septuagint) because God chose him for a special assignment!
So, even though we would say that Jesus is the only true Christ and that there have been many false Christs who have arisen, it still would not be proper to insist that any person other than Jesus who is called "christ" or "a christ" must be a false christ! We would then be saying that King David, Moses, and innumerable others chosen by God to do his will were false christs!
What we are saying, then, is that Jesus is the only true Christ in that he is the only person who is God's anointed in the highest sense of the word! And all others called "christ" are either false christs or faithful servants of God in a lesser sense of the word (as compared to Jesus himself)!
So, for God to say that he is the true (alethinos) God does not demand that all others called 'god' or 'gods' are false gods as a few trinitarian apologists imply. The inspired scriptures when speaking of faithful angels, prophets, God-appointed judges, kings, and magistrates clearly calls them "gods" on occasion (see the BOWGOD and DEF studies). These are called "gods" in the sense of faithful servants of God, representing the true God.[1]
Of course "God" [theos] (the "Most High God" - Luke 8:28; Ps. 82:6; Luke 6:35[2] - and the "God of gods" - Deut. 10:17; Ps. 136:2) was distinguished from "a god" [theos] by the use of the definite article ("the") in the original languages - see the DEF and THEOS studies. (Also remember that capital letters were not used to distinguish things in the original manuscripts of the Bible as they are in modern English Bibles: God, Christ, etc.)
But let's examine the scriptural uses of the "true God" more closely.
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible shows only 5 places where this is used in the entire Bible: (1) 2 Chron. 15:3; (2) Jer. 10:10; (3) 1 Thess. 1:9; (4) 1 John 5:20; and (5) John 17:3. Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jehovah the God of the Bible is one person only (as his singular, masculine, personal name, "Jehovah" clearly shows): the Father in heaven. So does the term "the only true God" ever refer to the Son or the Holy Spirit or a 'multiple-person' God? Or do the JW's teach the truth about the knowledge of God that means our very eternal lives (Jn 17:3; 2 Thess. 1:8, 9)?
Here, then are all the uses of "the true God" to be found in the entire Holy Scriptures (according to Strong's; Young's; and the New American Standard Concordances):
(1) ---2 Chron. 15:3, 4 says:
"Now for a long season Israel was without the true (alethinos - Sept.) God, and without a teaching priest, and without law: but when in their distress they turned unto Jehovah, the God of Israel, and sought him, he was found of them." - American Standard Version (ASV).
(2) ---Jeremiah 10:10 says:
"But Jehovah is the true God; he is the living God, and an everlasting king..." - ASV. (This passage is not in the Septuagint.)
These two scriptures (the only two in the OT to use 'the true God' according to Young's; the New American Standard; and Strong's concordances) clearly identify the true God as Jehovah. And the only person to be identified as Jehovah in the entire OT is the Father alone! (Is. 63:16; 64:8, ASV; Deut. 32:6, ASV; Ps. 2:7 and 89:26, 27 {compare Heb. 1:5}.)
And, in fact, it is also clearly shown that the Messiah is not Jehovah! (Psalm 110:1, ASV {compare Acts 2:33-36 and Eph. 1:17, 20}; Micah 5:4, ASV; Psalm 2:1, 2, ASV {compare Acts 4:25-27}; Psalm 2:7, ASV {compare Acts 13:33; Heb. 5:5}; Is. 53:6, 10, ASV {most Christian churches recognize that all of Is. 53 refers to the Messiah}.)
But what about the New Testament? Is "the true [real] God" ever clearly identified here (in contradiction to the OT) as the Son? As the Holy Spirit? As a "multiple-person" God?
(3) ---1 Thess. 1:9, 10 -
"They tell how you [the Thessalonian congregation] turned to God from idols to serve the living and true [alethinos] God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead - Jesus..." - NIV.
Well, here again the true God is clearly the Father alone as context demands (and who has been identified as Jehovah alone above). And the Son, Jesus, is clearly differentiated from that 'true God"!
So what about the only two remaining references in the NT: 1 John 5:20 and John 17:3?
The only hope for the trinitarian argument that the "true God is Jesus" is found at 1 John 5:20.
(4) ---1 Jn 5:20 -
"We are in him that is true [alethinos], even in his Son, Jesus Christ. This [outos] is the true [alethinos] God, and eternal life." - KJV.
Some trinitarians actually insist that the word "this" (outos) here refers to Jesus. In other words, "[Jesus Christ] is the true God and eternal life." For example, Robert M. Bowman in his Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus Christ, and the Gospel of John states that at 1 Jn 5:20 Jesus is called 'the true God and eternal life' "indisputably identifying Christ as the Almighty God of the Old Testament." - p. 41, Baker Book House, 1991 printing. I understand why some trinitarians are so desperate in their search for non-existent scriptural "evidence" that they have to make it up, but this is incredibly poor!
It is obvious that grammatically the word "this" (outos) could be referring to either the Father or Jesus in this particular scripture (see the footnote for 1 John 5:20 in the very trinitarian NIV Study Bible). But the fact that the true God (or "the true One") has just been identified as the Father of Jesus (1 Jn 5:20, TEV and GNB; and the footnote in the NIV Study Bible[3]) makes it highly probable that "this is the true God" refers to the Father, not Jesus. The highly trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris sums up his 13-page analysis of this scripture as follows:
"Although it is certainly possible that outos refers back to Jesus Christ, several converging lines of evidence point to 'the true one,' God the Father, as the probable antecedent. This position, outos = God [Father], is held by many commentators, authors of general studies, and significantly, by those grammarians who express an opinion on the matter."[4] - p. 253, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992.
Notice how this trinitarian scholar actually admits that the probability is that the Father (not Jesus) is being called the true God here. He even tells us (and cites examples in his footnotes) that New Testament grammarians and commentators (most of them trinitarian, of course) agree!
So this single "proof" that the "true God" is a title for anyone other than the Father alone is not proof at all. The grammar alone merely makes it a possibility. The immediate context makes it highly improbable since (as in all other uses of the term) the true God (or the true one) was just identified as the Father ("We are in the one who is true as we are in his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the true God and this is eternal life." - NJB; and "We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we know the true God. We live in union with the true God - in union with his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and this is eternal life." - TEV. "And we know that the Son of God has come, and he has given us understanding so that we can know the true God. And now we live in fellowship with the true God because we live in fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ. He is the only true God, and he is eternal life." - New Living Translation).
So the immediate context alone makes it probable that the true God is the Father in this scripture also. As we have seen, if we include the context of all the uses of the 'true God,' it is certain that He is the Father alone (whose personal name is Jehovah - Ps. 83:18, Ex. 3:15).
To clinch John's intended meaning at 1 John 5:20, let's look at his only other use of the term: John 17:1, 3, where, again (as in 1 Jn 5:20), he mentions Father, Son, and eternal life.
(5) ---At John 17:1, 3 Jesus prays to the Father:
"Father, .... this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." - New International Version (NIV).
Here the Father alone is not only very clearly identified as the only true [alethinos] God, but Jesus Christ is again pointedly and specifically excluded from that identification ("AND Jesus Christ whom you [the only true God] have sent")!
Notice how this popular trinitarian Bible has rendered John 17:1, 3 - "Father,....This is eternal life: to know thee who alone art truly God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." - New English Bible (NEB).
So, the title "the true God" does not have to mean that there are no others who may be called "gods" or "a god" in a subordinate but righteous sense. It is, however, an exclusive title for God, the Most High, only true God, Jehovah. And clearly it refers exclusively to the Father! No one else is the God or the True God! (Compare Ps. 86:10; 2 Kings 19:19; Is. 37:16.)
Therefore, the argument by certain trinitarian "guides" that the term 'true God' must mean that all others called 'gods' in the Scriptures are false gods is clearly false itself. Those who use it have not examined it with anything that could be called proper scholarship. They are either terribly misinformed (the fault of their spiritual "guides") or, in the case of the trinitarian authors, lecturers, and ministers who are aware of methods of proper research, Bible language grammar, etc., terribly dishonest ("deliberately-blind guides")! How does this fit with the command that we must worship God in truth (aletheia)- Jn 4:24? Or the warning that when the knowingly blind (false religious leaders) lead the blind (the ones following those leaders with blind faith) both will fall into the pit? Shouldn't we ALL carefully and diligently examine all sides of any essential, life-saving Bible teaching?
The Watchtower Society's Commentary on Paul's epistle to the Romans.
A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article
ROMANS, LETTER TO THE
ROMANS, LETTER TO THE
A book of the Christian Greek Scriptures written by the apostle Paul to Christians in Rome. Paul’s writership has never been seriously challenged, and the book’s authenticity as a part of the sacred canon has been almost universally acknowledged by Bible scholars, with the exception of some who could not fit it in with their own doctrinal beliefs. Actually, the letter is in full harmony with the rest of the inspired Scriptures. In fact, Paul quotes copiously from the Hebrew Scriptures and makes numerous other references to them, so that the letter can be said to be most solidly based on the Hebrew Scriptures and the teachings of Christ.
Time and Place of Writing. The letter was written about 56 C.E., from Corinth. Tertius was evidently Paul’s secretary, writing at Paul’s dictation. (Ro 16:22) Phoebe, who lived at Cenchreae, the seaport town of Corinth about 11 km (7 mi) away, was possibly the carrier of the letter. (Ro 16:1) Paul had not yet been to Rome, as is evident from his remarks in chapter 1, verses 9 to 15. The evidence also points to the fact that Peter had never been there.—See PETER, LETTERS OF.
Establishment of the Congregation at Rome. The congregation may have been established by some of the Jews and proselytes from Rome who had visited Jerusalem on Pentecost 33 C.E., had witnessed the miraculous outpouring of holy spirit, and had heard the speech of Peter and the other Christians gathered there. (Ac 2) Or others who converted to Christianity later on may have taken the good news about the Christ to Rome, for, since this great city was the center of the Roman Empire, many moved there in time, and many were the travelers and businessmen visiting there. Paul sends respectful greetings to Andronicus and Junias, his ‘relatives and fellow captives,’ who were “men of note among the apostles,” and who had been in the service of Christ longer than Paul had. These men may well have had a share in establishing the Christian congregation in Rome. (Ro 16:7) At the time Paul wrote, the congregation had evidently been in existence for some time and was vigorous enough that its faith was being talked about throughout the whole world.—Ro 1:8.
Purpose of the Letter. It becomes clear in reading the letter that it was written to a Christian congregation composed of both Jews and Gentiles. There were many Jews in Rome at the time; they returned after the death of Emperor Claudius, who had banished them sometime earlier. Although Paul had not been in Rome to experience personally the problems the congregation faced, he may have been informed of the congregation’s condition and affairs by his good friends and fellow workers Priscilla and Aquila, and possibly by others Paul had met. His greetings in chapter 16 indicate that he knew a good many of the members of the congregation personally.
In Paul’s letters he attacked specific problems and dealt with matters he considered most vital to those to whom he wrote. As to Jewish opposition, Paul had already written to the Galatian congregations in refutation, but that letter dealt more specifically with efforts made by Jews who professed Christianity but were “Judaizers,” insisting that Gentile converts be circumcised and otherwise be required to observe certain regulations of the Mosaic Law. In the Roman congregation there did not seem to be such a concerted effort in this direction, but there were apparently jealousies and feelings of superiority on the part of both Jews and Gentiles.
The letter, therefore, was not merely a general letter written to the Roman congregation with no specific aim toward them, as some suppose, but it evidently dealt with the things they needed under the circumstances. The Roman congregation would be able to grasp the full meaning and force of the apostle’s counsel, for they were doubtless wrestling with the very questions he answered. It is obvious that his purpose was to settle the differences in viewpoint between Jewish and Gentile Christians and to bring them toward complete unity as one man in Christ Jesus. However, in writing as he did, Paul illuminates and enriches our minds in the knowledge of God, and he exalts the righteousness and undeserved kindness of God and the position of Christ toward the Christian congregation and all mankind.
Earnestness and Warmth of Feeling. Commenting on the authenticity of the letter to the Romans, Dr. William Paley, English Bible scholar, said: “In a real St. Paul writing to real converts, it is what anxiety to bring them over to his persuasion would naturally produce; but there is an earnestness and a personality, if I may so call it, in the manner, which a cold forgery, I apprehend, would neither have conceived nor supported.”—Horae Paulinae, 1790, p. 50.
Paul very straightforwardly and directly outlined the position of the Jews and showed that Jews and Gentiles are on the same level before God. This required him to say some things that might have been considered an occasion for offense by Jews. But Paul’s love for his countrymen and his warmth of feeling for them was shown in the delicateness with which he handled these matters. When he said things that might sound derogatory of the Law, or of the Jews, he tactfully followed up with a softening statement.
For example, when he said: “He is not a Jew who is one on the outside, nor is circumcision that which is on the outside upon the flesh,” he added: “What, then, is the superiority of the Jew, or what is the benefit of the circumcision? A great deal in every way. First of all, because they were entrusted with the sacred pronouncements of God.” (Ro 2:28; 3:1, 2) After saying: “A man is declared righteous by faith apart from works of law,” he quickly continued: “Do we, then, abolish law by means of our faith? Never may that happen! On the contrary, we establish law.” (3:28, 31) Following his statement: “But now we have been discharged from the Law,” he asked: “Is the Law sin? Never may that become so! Really I would not have come to know sin if it had not been for the Law.” (7:6, 7) And in chapter 9, verses 1 to 3, he made the strongest possible expression of affection for his fleshly brothers the Jews: “I am telling the truth in Christ; I am not lying, since my conscience bears witness with me in holy spirit, that I have great grief and unceasing pain in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were separated as the cursed one from the Christ in behalf of my brothers, my relatives according to the flesh.”—Compare also Ro 9:30-32 with 10:1, 2; and 10:20, 21 with 11:1-4.
By a study of the book we find, therefore, that it is not a desultory, or aimless, discussion but that it is a discourse with a purpose and a theme, and that no one part can be fully understood without a study of the entire book and a knowledge of its purpose. Paul stresses the undeserved kindness of God through Christ, and he emphasizes that it is only by this undeserved kindness on God’s part, coupled with faith on the part of the believer, that men are declared righteous; he notes that neither Jew nor Gentile has any basis for boasting or for lifting himself above the other. He strictly warns the Gentile Christians that they should not become lofty-minded because they profited from the Jews’ failure to accept Christ, since the Jews’ fall allowed Gentiles to have the opportunity of membership in Christ’s “body.” He says: “See, therefore, God’s kindness and severity. Toward those who fell there is severity, but toward you there is God’s kindness, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise, you also will be lopped off.”—Ro 11:22.
[Box on page 820]
HIGHLIGHTS OF ROMANS
A letter explaining that righteousness comes, not as a result of ancestry or through works of the Mosaic Law, but through faith in Jesus Christ and as a result of God’s undeserved kindness
Written about 56 C.E., some 20 years after the first Gentiles became Christians
Righteousness is through faith in Christ and as a result of God’s undeserved kindness (1:1–11:36)
Faith is essential for salvation; the scripture says, “The righteous one—by means of faith he will live”
The Jews, although highly favored by God, have not been able to attain to righteousness by means of the Law
Jews as well as non-Jews are under sin; “there is not a righteous man, not even one”
By God’s undeserved kindness both Jews and non-Jews can be declared righteous as a free gift through faith, just as Abraham was counted righteous as a result of faith—even before he was circumcised
Men inherit sin and death from one man, Adam; through one man, Jesus, many sinners are declared righteous
This does not give a license to sin; any remaining slaves to sin are not slaves of righteousness
Those formerly under the Law are “made dead to the Law” through Christ’s body; they must walk in harmony with the spirit, putting sinful practices of the body to death
The Law served the purpose of making sins manifest; only through Christ, though, is there salvation from sin
God calls those who come to be in union with Christ and declares them righteous; His spirit bears witness that they are His sons
Fleshly Israel received the promises but most of them try to attain righteousness by the Law, hence, only a remnant of them are saved; a public declaration of faith in Christ is necessary for salvation
The illustration of the olive tree shows how, because of the lack of faith of fleshly Israel, non-Israelites were grafted in so that the true Israel might be saved
Attitude regarding superior authorities, self, other persons (12:1–15:13)
Present your body as an acceptable sacrifice to God, make your mind over, use your gifts in God’s service, be loving and aglow with the spirit, endure, and keep conquering the evil with the good
Be in subjection to the superior authorities
Love one another; walk decently, not planning ahead for fleshly desires
Do not judge others in matters of conscience, nor abuse your Christian freedom and so stumble those with weak consciences
Be guided by Christ’s example in not pleasing self; be willing to bear others’ weaknesses, doing what is good for their upbuilding
Paul’s loving interest in the congregation at Rome (15:14–16:27)
Paul’s reason for writing is to fulfill his commission as an apostle to the Gentiles and in order that these Gentiles might be an acceptable offering to God
No longer having territory where the good news had not already been proclaimed, Paul wants to fulfill his longing to visit Rome and from there to go to Spain, after first traveling to Jerusalem with a contribution from the brothers in Macedonia and Achaia for the holy ones
Paul greets numerous believers by name, encouraging the brothers to avoid those causing divisions and also to be wise regarding what is good
Wednesday, 11 December 2013
On Healing.
The restoring of health to the sick; the making sound, or whole, that which is broken or injured; the curing of various diseases and defects; the returning of a person to the general state of well-being. The Hebrew verb ra·phaʼ′ and the Greek verb i·a′o·mai are the principal words in the Bible that describe such healing in both a literal and a figurative sense. The Greek verb the·ra·peu′o is rendered ‘cure.’ (Mt 4:23, 24) Sometimes the healing was a gradual matter; at other times it was instantaneous.
Among the blessings Jehovah bestowed on all mankind is the regenerative power of their physical organisms, the ability of the body to heal itself when wounded or diseased. A physician may recommend certain measures to speed recovery, but in reality it is the God-given recuperative powers within the body that accomplish the healing. Hence, the psalmist David acknowledged that though he was born imperfect, his Creator was able to sustain him during illness and heal all his maladies. (Ps 51:5; 41:1-3; 103:2-4) Jehovah restored the bodily health of afflicted Job (Job 42:10) and God also provided physical healing for his people Israel.—Ex 15:26.
Of Jehovah it is written that he both wounds and heals, and he does this literally and figuratively. Hence, with him there is a time to wound and a time to heal. (De 32:39; compare Ec 3:1, 3.) Unfaithful Jehoram, king of Judah, for example, was punished by Jehovah with a physical disorder of the intestines for which there was no healing. (2Ch 21:16, 18, 19) Moses recognized that it was Jehovah who had stricken Miriam with leprosy; hence, he pleaded with the only One who could cure her, saying: “O God, please! Heal her, please!” (Nu 12:10, 13) In the matter of childbearing, Jehovah healed King Abimelech, his wife, and his slave girls after the crisis had passed involving Sarah and the seed of promise.—Ge 20:17, 18.
In the Bible, spiritual rather than physical breakdown, and spiritual healing in turn, are subjects of particular significance. Attention is called to the responsibility of natural Israel’s leaders in these matters. “From the prophet even to the priest, each one [was] acting falsely” in Jeremiah’s day, they at the same time making a pretense of healing the breakdown of God’s people, claiming that all was well. (Jer 6:13, 14; 8:11) In this they were very much like Job’s comforters, “physicians of no value.”—Job 13:4.
In a few instances inanimate objects were healed, in the sense of being made whole again, like the torn-down altar Elijah mended. (1Ki 18:30) Also, the prophet Elisha healed the waters near Jericho so that they no longer caused miscarriages. (2Ki 2:19-22) Jeremiah, however, shattered the potter’s flask so completely that it was beyond repair, that is, beyond healing, and thus furnished a fine illustration. “In the same way,” Jehovah declared, “I shall break this people and this city as someone breaks the vessel of the potter so that it is no more able to be repaired [a form of ra·phaʼ′; literally, healed].”—Jer 19:11; compare 2Ch 36:15-17.
Jesus and His Fellow Healers. Jesus Christ recognized that “teaching . . . and preaching the good news of the kingdom” was of first importance in his ministry and that “curing every sort of disease and every sort of infirmity among the people” was secondary. That is why he felt pity for the crowds primarily “because they were skinned and thrown about like sheep without a shepherd.”—Mt 4:23; 9:35, 36; Lu 9:11.
This Great Teacher also showed compassion on the multitudes that followed him because they hoped that he would heal their physical ailments. (Mt 12:15; 14:14; 19:2; Lu 5:15) His miraculous healing work served as a visible sign to his generation and gave added evidence of his Messiahship, as prophesied. (Mt 8:16, 17) It also foreshadowed the healing blessings that will be extended to mankind under God’s Kingdom rule. (Re 21:3, 4) In a very real sense Jesus healed and restored the health of many persons—the lame, the maimed, the blind, the dumb (Mt 15:30, 31), the epileptic, the paralytic (Mt 4:24), a woman suffering from a hemorrhage (Mr 5:25-29), one with a withered hand (Mr 3:3-5), a man with dropsy (Lu 14:2-4), and on many occasions those who were demon possessed were released from their Satanic enslavement and bondage.—Mt 12:22; 15:22-28; 17:15, 18; Mr 1:34; Lu 6:18; 8:26-36; 9:38-42; Ac 10:37, 38.
Jesus’ manner of curing people took various forms at different times. “Get up, pick up your cot and walk,” is all that Jesus said on one occasion, and a sick man near the pool of Bethzatha was cured. (Joh 5:2-9) In another instance, Jesus just spoke the word and the ailing one, though a distance away, was healed. (Mt 8:5-13) At other times he personally laid his hand on the sick one (Mt 8:14, 15) or touched a wound and healed it. (Lu 22:50, 51) Several diseased persons simply touched Jesus or even the fringe of his garment and were healed. (Mt 14:36; Mr 6:56; Lu 6:19; 8:43-47) And it made no difference that the persons had been afflicted with the disease for many years.—Mt 9:20-22; Lu 13:11-13; Joh 5:5-9.
Some persons opposed Jesus, not appreciating the wonderful healing work he was doing. The religious leaders were greatly angered when Jesus healed persons on the Sabbath. (Mt 12:9-14; Lu 14:1-6; Joh 5:10-16) On one such occasion Jesus silenced opponents by saying: “Hypocrites, does not each one of you on the sabbath untie his bull or his ass from the stall and lead it away to give it drink? Was it not due, then, for this woman who is a daughter of Abraham, and whom Satan held bound, look! eighteen years, to be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?”—Lu 13:10-17.
It was not the application of Jesus’ own power, knowledge, or wisdom that healed the sick. Neither was hypnotherapy, psychotherapy, or any similar method used. Rather, it was the spirit and power of Jehovah that effected such healing. (Lu 5:17; 9:43) Not all, however, were grateful enough to give God the glory for these cures. (Lu 17:12-18) Today, not everyone recognizes the everlasting healing benefits made available through the ransom sacrifice of Christ.—1Pe 2:24.
Jesus delegated this divine power of healing to others who were closely associated with him in his ministry. When the 12 apostles were sent out, and later the 70 disciples, they were empowered to cure the sick. (Mt 10:5, 8; Lu 10:1, 8, 9) After Pentecost of 33 C.E., certain ones, including Peter, John, Philip, and Paul, were given this divine power to heal completely. (Ac 3:1-16; 4:14; 5:15, 16; 8:6, 7; 9:32-34; 28:8, 9) After Christianity became firmly rooted, and with the passing of the apostles off the scene, such “gifts of healings” also passed away.—1Co 12:8, 9, 28, 30; 13:8, 13.
It was important that the one performing the cure have full faith and confidence in Jehovah and acknowledge, as Jesus did, that the curing was accomplished by God’s power. (Mt 17:14-20; Joh 5:19) It was not necessary, however, for the afflicted ones to have faith before being cured. (Joh 5:5-9, 13) Many, though, did have strong faith.—Mt 8:5-13; 15:28; Mr 5:34; Lu 7:1-10; 17:19; Ac 14:8-10; see FAITH.
Miraculous healing was to be a “sign” of divine backing. (Ac 4:22, 29, 30) Those who refused to recognize and acknowledge this sign were spiritually blind and deaf. (Isa 6:10; Joh 12:37-41) For the reason, then, that divine healings were to serve as a sign to unbelievers, they were not ordinarily performed in behalf of those who were already spirit-begotten Christians. So when Timothy had stomach trouble, instead of performing a miraculous cure, Paul recommended that he take a little wine for his ailment.—1Ti 5:23.
Spiritual Healing. On the other hand, true spiritual healing comes from Jehovah to repentant ones. It means a return to his favor and the enjoyment of his blessings once again. (Isa 19:22; 57:17-19; Jer 33:6) Such healing has the effect of strengthening the weak hands and wobbly knees, opening blind eyes, restoring hearing to the deaf, healing the lame, and giving speech to the dumb, in a spiritual way. (Isa 35:3-6) But those incorrigible in their apostasy never experience a healing, or restoration to good health and prosperity spiritually. (2Ch 36:15-17; Isa 6:10; Jer 30:12, 13; Ac 28:24-28) Similarly, there was to be no healing for Egypt, her Pharaoh, and for the “king of Assyria.”—Jer 46:11; Eze 30:21; Na 3:18, 19.
The Scriptures prescribe the remedy for persons who are spiritually sick.—Heb 12:12, 13; Jas 5:14-16; Re 3:18.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)