Error of Jehovah’s Witnesses (a.k.a. The Russellites) Part 14

The Russellites make a big argument about whether or not there is a definite article before some references to Christ. They make this in vain in reference to John 1:1 which states; “In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was God.” (*They want it to read; “and the Word was THE God”). The subject of the sentence is “Word” (Logos); the verb is “was”. There is no direct object in this verse; it is a predicate nominative that refers back to the subject, God. “God” (Theos) is the predicate nominative of “Word” and needs no article. In the Greek a noun may be definite for many reasons and it matters not if the definite article is present!! According to Colwel’s Rule (of the Greek language) a definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. Context makes no demand on the definite article being in the writing either, for instance when Thomas confessed Christ in John 20:28 no definite article is found!! As already noted, what is stated in the opening of John’s gospel reaches its climax in the 20th chapter when Thomas confesses Christ before all the living disciples as “my Lord and my God”!! In John 1:6,12,13,18 there is the noun Theos, God, found. In no place is the definite article found!! In keeping with Russellite doctrine, the definite article MUST appear or the person or persons to which it is referring is not Deity. The New World Translation translates all these verses “God” not “a God”: wonder which little witness made this blunder?? In Matthew 16:16 and Acts 26:23 “the” is mentioned before Christ in the Greek New Testament; yet, in Romans 5:6 there is NO article in the original, YET, THE ATHEIST RUSSELLITES DO NOT TRANSLATE THIS “A CHRIST”!! It must be said that the Witnesses put in and take out the article as it pleases them and their damnable doctrine. When they want to make a doctrinal point to uphold, then it becomes crucial. Some cocky Russellites try to make “God” and “Logos” interchangeable terms (one is the same as the other), this is not true, “Logos” is the NAME of one being who has the nature called “God”, is this not like our individual social security number?
When Jesus made the statement “I and the Father are one.” John 10:30, He was not just saying He and the Father were one in purpose and attitude, Jesus was stating what the Jews took up stones to deny; that like the Father, Jesus is God!! In John 5:17-18 Jesus had had a previous confrontation about this truth. He had not changed His mind in John 10:30. In John 5:17 Jesus stated: “My Father worketh even until now, and I work.” That is, Jesus had as much right to work on the Sabbath as the Father. This put Him on equality with the Father. By the way, when Jesus called God, Father, He did is not the usual pronoun used. This pronoun is idios and is defined as equal in quality or in quantity, to claim for one’s self the nature, rank, authority, which belongs to the other, and the person making the claim is said to belong to one, above all others. The fact of God, the Father, being His father was unique, one of a kind!! The Russellites say that Jesus was claiming equality with the Judges and Prophets of Israel calling them gods, only. If this were true then Christ would be in error making them sin for no man can worship another, and if these men were gods, they were then to be worshipped!! I bet this frost old Charles Taze every time this verse is mentioned in Hell!!
Thomas was not present at the first encounter with the risen Christ and he doubted it to be true. He stated unless he SAW the risen Lord, he would not believe. It would have been good for the Russellites if this verse had not appeared in John’s writings, for it proves more that they are atheist than any other. We will start here next.

Print Friendly

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet

Add comment