Error of Jehovah’s Witnesses (a.k.a. The Russellites) Part 7

If you run into a Jehovah’s Witness, Russellite, that thinks themselves familiar with the Greek language, in John 12:1,he will try and make a case for the definite article, ho (the), before the noun as a rule of grammar which would indicate that there is an indefinite article before the term “God” in the Greek and since it is indefinite it must take the indefinite article. So, the New World Translation reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was a god.” In his book: A Definite Rule for the use of the Article in the Greek New Testament, in the Journal of Biblical Literature, L11 (1933, 13:21, Colwell’s Rule states the definite article DOES NOT have to precede the noun). They translated John 1:1 the way they did because it fits their error!! Logos is the term applied to Christ in John 1:1-14, Revelations 19:13, and 1 John 1:1. There is also a possible personification of ‘Word of God’ in Hebrews 4:12. Paul taught the pre-existent Christ in 2 Corinthians 8:9, Philippians 2:6, and Colossians 1:17 to describe the pre-existent Logos. When Thomas confessed the Lord in John 20:28, “My Lord and My God” no definite article is found. They also translate in other places of their translation where the definite article is not found “God” as the proper, definite, name of Christ being. “Write not, The King of the Jews; but that He said I am King of the Jews.” John 19:21 This passage is an exact duplicate to John 1:1. In the first statement made, “The King of the Jews, (ho basileus ton ioudaion) the article precedes “King”. In the second, “I am king of the Jews” (basileus eimi ton ioudaion) the article does not appear before “king”). Basileus is the predicate noun preceding a copulative verb EMIMI (to be, have been, has no beginning) which is exactly what brother John wrote!! Matthew 16:16, Acts 26:23 has no definite article in the original, yet they do not translate it a god!!
In John 5:18, 10:30-38, John 8:24, and John 8:58; the Jews had no trouble understanding Christ DEFINITELY meant them to know He IS GOD. In fact in the first two instances the Jews took up stones to kill Him!! In John 20:28 Jesus accepted the statement of Thomas instead of rebuking him. Also, Thomas was convinced Jesus was the Christ BECAUSE of what he SAW, that it was truly the Lord, not what Jesus said!! (The Russellites tell us Jesus was resurrected in another form suited for the occasion!!)
“…Who existing in the form of God, counted not the being an equality with God a thing to be grasped.” Philippians 2:6 Jesus existed from before the beginning in the form of God, He did not think it anything special, prized, or to be clutched to Himself!! Thayer translates this passage: who, although (formerly when He was God, eternal, did not think that this equality with God was to be eagerly clung to or retained, but emptied Himself of it so as to assume the form of a servant, in that He became like unto men. page 418 “Form”, Greek word morphe, denotes the special characteristic form of a person or thing; it is used with particular significance in the N.T., only of Christ!! In Mark 16:12 Jesus was “manifested in another form unto two of them…” Jesus appeared unto them in the form of God, not man-He never appeared in the form of an angel! “Equal” in the R.V. is translated ‘on an equality with God, instead of ‘equal with God’. “Grasped”, harpagmos, a thing seized, to deem a prize, to be held on to rather than something to be won. Jesus DID NOT try to seize equality with God by robbery; He was God, the nature of His BEING!! “Being”, the present active participle of EIMI of John 1:1, 8:58, Hebrews 1:3 It refers to the continuing existence of Christ, having never begun, always having been. In Hebrews 1:3, Paul goes on to write Christ was the actual substance, reality, nature, essence of God, “the express image of His person”.

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

No comments yet

Add comment