Wow, life has been busy for the past week or so. I have a lot going on a work right now which is new to me. I am busier, more involved, and working harder after 2 weeks of work then I ever did at my previous job. I am glad my job will be this way. I am constantly being challenged and people are starting to rely on me which I have seldom experienced. Aside from work, things have been busy at home. I have been trying to work out, which got interrupted by a few days of sickness, which was followed by a 3 day Easter weekend with Liz’s family. With all of that said, I have thought about posting every day, but kept running out of time to do so.
I have two separate projects to work on today that I hope to get finished up so I can be ready for to bigger projects I know are coming my way. Because of the work on my desk, this can not be the post that I want it to be. Tj, thank you for your comments and answering the first section of my questions. I have read through your response twice now and I find it to be a really good reply. I do have a couple of questions and debatable points, but I have not had time to fully develop them, and so they will have to wait. I have been trying to better understand the definition of the body, spirit, and soul. I have heard scriptural based arguments for differing definitions and honestly do not know what is correct. Either the soul = body + spirit or the person = body + spirit + soul. I intend to study this definition more thoroughly and then address the comments and questions that follow. In the meantime, my Uncle responded to the email I sent him with the same questions. He also addressed the first section, so I have information from two sources to consider.
While I am dabbling in the definition of the soul, I have a request for any reader out there that would like to defend the Jehovah’s Witness faith. This certainly includes you Tj as I have respect for your well worded biblical answers. Address the second section of my report from the previous post. I personally feel that any doctrinal or theological issue is important to consider and discuss, but some have more significance than others. To put another way, there is truth to be found in the definition of the soul, and I would like to know what happens to my body and sprit when I die, but my opinion on these matters will not make the difference of heaven or hell. Discovering truth in whether Jesus IS God, is A God, A Prophet, or A Lunatic is imperative for a Christian to understand. An error in your understanding of this point, I believe, could mean this difference of life and death.
Thank you to anyone that is willing to take on this challenge. I will be studying the other issues in the meantime. Good luck and God bless.
Julia's Valentine Box
9 years ago
3 comments:
Hi Zack,
I've been quite busy myself lately, but I'd be more than happy to answer the second section of your questions. I'll start working on them.
Take care,
TJ
All right, here we go. :)
Verse: Isaiah 42:8 “I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to no one else shall I give my own glory, neither my praise to graven images.
Verse: Isaiah 48:11 For my own sake, for my own sake I shall act, for how could one let oneself be profaned? And to no one else shall I give my own glory.
Verse: John 17: 5 So now you, Father, glorify me alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.
Question: if no one else can have God’s glory as he said in the OT, how is it that Jesus can ask to be glorified alongside of God if God will give no one else his glory? Why does Jesus talk about the past glory they shared?
If you take a look at the context of those verses in Isaiah, you’ll find that the Israelites are turning to the idols, the false gods, of the nations. These are the “graven images” spoken of in Isaiah 42:8 that you quote above. Those who support these false gods are giving them glory that rightfully belongs to Jehovah alone. Therefore, he is telling his people that he will not condone such false worship, which would mean ‘giving’ away his glory to false gods, and that they need to turn away from such wickedness.
Yet these passages do not mean that servants of God, such as angels and even men, cannot possess a relative amount of glory. In John 17:5, Jesus does not ask to share Jehovah’s glory, rather he asked to be ‘glorified alongside yourself with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.’
When Jesus came to the earth to live as a human, he gave up a high position in the heavens. Paul explains that “there are heavenly bodies, and earthly bodies; but the glory of the heavenly bodies is one sort, and that of the earthly bodies is a different sort.” (1 Corinthians 15:40) Jesus was asking Jehovah to receive back that glorious heavenly body, by means of a resurrection, that he had previously given up. So there is nothing here that Jesus is asking for that should only rightfully belong to God, and in the Isaiah passages Jehovah is speaking specifically of rival gods that he will not share his glory with.
Verse: Revelation 1: 17 And when I saw him, I fell as dead at his feet.
And he laid his right hand upon me and said: “Do not be fearful. I am the First and the Last, 18 and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Ha´des.
Verse: Revelation 22: 13 I am the Al´pha and the O•me´ga, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.
Note: If you read the whole passage, the “I” in the above verses is Jesus speaking.
Verse: Revelation 1: 8 “I am the Al´pha and the O•me´ga,” says Jehovah God, “the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.”
Question: How is it that both God and Jesus claim to be Alpha and Omega? They must be the same, or else are their two Alphas and Omegas?
In regards to Revelation 22:13, your note says that Jesus is the speaker, but I would challenge that. Throughout Revelation 22, there are many quick shifts in speakers. And it is a few verses after the ‘Alpha and Omega’ title is used that Jesus says, “I, Jesus . . . ”. This seems to be an introductory phrase, indicating a change in speaker, just as John uses in verse 8. Additionally, the two other places where the Alpha and Omega title is used, it is clearly used of the Father, Jehovah. (Revelation 1:8; 21:6)
And yes, “the First and the Last” title is used in reference to Jesus twice. But just as he is elsewhere called an “apostle” in a qualified sense, and yet this does not make him of equal rank with Peter, Paul and John, neither does this title make him equal with God. Why? It is used with an entirely different meaning.
When God is called “the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end”, it is in reference to his Godship. (Compare Isaiah 44:6) What about Jesus? Immediately after being called “the First and the Last”, the title is qualified with the meaning, “and the living one; and I became dead, but, look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.” (Revelation 1:18)
Jesus was the first person to be resurrected to everlasting life by his Father, and was also the last one. From that point on, his Father gave him the “keys of death and of Hades” so that he would be the only one with the authority to resurrect people to life thereafter. This meaning harmonizes with my previous answers where it was brought out that Jesus entrusted his Father to receive his spirit so that his Father would resurrect him, while Stephen entrusted, not the Father, but Jesus to receive his spirit so that Jesus would resurrect him. (Luke 23:46; Acts 7:59) So this title emphasizes that Jesus has indeed been resurrected by God and has since become our hope for a resurrection.
Jesus is referred to as “the First and the Last” once more at Revelation 2:8, where again it is qualified with the resurrection-based meaning when it says, “who became dead and came to life again.”
Verse: Isaiah 9:6 For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
Question: Why is the son born to us given the name Mighty God if he is not God? He is also given the name Eternal Father, how can the son’s name be Eternal Father?
First let’s deal with the Mighty God question. Most people would be surprised to find out that servants of Jehovah are sometimes called gods in Scripture.
“Consequently Jehovah said to Moses: ‘See, I have made you God to Pharaoh, and Aaron your own brother will become your prophet.’” (Exodus 7:1)
Many translations will add the word “like” before “God” here, but this is not what the Hebrew literally says. The NET Bible observes in its footnote, “The word אֱלֹהִים (’elohim) [the Hebrew word for "God"] is used a few times in the Bible for humans (e.g., Pss 45:6; 82:1), and always clearly in the sense of a subordinate to GOD – they are his representatives on earth.” So other humans are called gods.
“I [Jehovah] myself have said, ‘You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.’" (Psalm 82:6)
This refers to Israelite judges. The word “god” basically refers to a person with power, a mighty one. There are false gods in the Bible, meaning that they have no real power, there is the true God Jehovah, meaning that he is the Almighty (all powerful) God, and there are gods in a relative sense, meaning that Jehovah has allowed them to have a measure of real power. Angels are even referred to as gods.
“You also proceeded to make him [man] a little less than godlike ones.” (Psalm 8:5)
Hebrews 2:7 quotes this verse and calls the “godlike ones” angels. So it is in this same relative sense that Jesus can be called “Mighty God” in Scripture. He has been given a large measure of power by Jehovah. Still, only Jehovah is referred to as the Almighty God and the Most High. Jesus himself calls his Father “the only true God.” (John 17:3)
This extended meaning for “God” will no doubt take some getting used to, but it is indeed scriptural. As for the title “Eternal Father”, this refers to the authority Jesus has to give mankind eternal life. Just as our first father, Adam, lost that prospect for us, the “last Adam” gives it back to us. (1 Corinthians 15:45) So he becomes a father to us in a sense similar to Adam, instead of passing on sin and death, he passes on eternal life.
Verse: Isaiah 44:24 “I, Jehovah, am doing everything, stretching out the heavens by myself, laying out the earth. Who was with me?
Verse: John 1: 2 This one was in [the] beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
Question: Why is it that God claims in Isaiah that he created the heavens and earth by himself and that no one was with him if Jesus says in John that all things were created through him? Wouldn’t that mean that they were both around during creation and therefore God was not alone?
As we reviewed above, those chapters in Isaiah pit Jehovah against the false gods of the nations and those who back them. The discussion does not take into consideration whether or not he worked through an agent of his. For example, at Isaiah 43:11 Jehovah says that “besides me there is no savior.” That’s a very definite statement. Yet again, this is understood as a comparison to the false gods and has nothing to do with whether or not Jehovah uses others to save through. Other saviors do exist in the Bible, ones sent by Jehovah to save, such as the judges Othniel and Ehud. (Judges 3:9, 15) Even earlier in this same book, Jehovah promises to send Egypt a savior to deliver them. (Isaiah 19:20)
So no, none of the false gods were with Jehovah when he created things. But “the firstborn of creation”, Jesus, was with him as a servant working under him. Paul points out their respective roles when he says, “there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.” (1 Corinthians 8:6) Jehovah is the source and initiator of creation, while Jesus is the agent he worked through.
Question: If nothing came into existence apart from Jesus, how is it that Jesus was the first created thing? Was he able to create himself?
This is talking about all things created after Jesus, who is "the firstborn of creation" and "the beginning of creation". (Colossians 1:15; Revelation 3:14) This is why Jesus is called the only-begotten Son of God. Though others are called sons of God, only Jesus was created directly by Jehovah. (Compare Job 1:6; Luke 3:38)
Such exceptions were expected to be obvious to the reader, as was the exception to "all things" that were subjected to Jesus. (1 Corinthians 15:27)
Verse: John 20: 28 In answer Thomas said to him: “My Lord and my God!”
Question: Why does Thomas call Jesus his God? If Jesus isn’t his God, why didn’t he correct him?
This verse is actually ambiguous. It can’t be concluded for sure whether or not Thomas’ exclamation was meant only in reference to Jesus or to both Jesus and Jehovah. Either way, this statement has to be interpreted in light of what is written just three verses later.
“These have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God.” (John 20:31)
These aren’t written to prove that Jesus is God the Son, but the Son of God. If Thomas’ was referring to Jesus as his God, it has to be taken in the restricted sense we defined above. He is not “the only true God.” (John 17:3)
Verse: Matthew 1: 23 “Look! The virgin will become pregnant and will give birth to a son, and they will call his name Im•man´u•el,” which means, when translated, “With Us Is God.”
Question: Why does Jesus’ name mean “God is with us” if he isn’t God?
‘God was with them’ in the sense that his representative, Jesus Christ, was sent to them to do God’s will. This concept is fairly easy for us to comprehend even in a modern context. For example, it is common to hear in the news that ‘Bush invaded Iraq’. Does that mean that the person saying that believes President Bush actually went charging into Iraq in a tank himself? Of course not! They mean that he sent the military under his command into Iraq.
Take a minute and read the account found at Matthew 8:5-13 and then ask yourself, who was it that approached Jesus? Now turn to the corresponding account at Luke 7:1-10. Did your perspective on that answer change? Understanding this representative concept in relation to Jesus and Jehovah will really help you to begin to differentiate between the two. Jesus tells us plainly, “I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me I speak these things. And he that sent me is with me . . . because I always do the things pleasing to him.” (John 8:28, 29)
Verse: John 5: 18 On this account, indeed, the Jews began seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath but he was also calling God his own Father, making himself equal to God.
Question: Wouldn’t Jesus be sinning if he made himself equal to God and was not God?
Of course, but this accusation was false just as the accusation that he was “breaking the Sabbath” was false. John was simply recording the accusations of the Jews that were seeking to kill Jesus, not confirming them as true.
Take a look at what John records next. “Therefore, in answer, Jesus went on to say to them: ‘Most truly I say to you, The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner.’” He is actually arguing against the claim that he was making himself equal to God!
Verse: John 5: 22 For the Father judges no one at all, but he has committed all the judging to the Son, 23 in order that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He that does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him. 24 Most truly I say to YOU, He that hears my word and believes him that sent me has everlasting life, and he does not come into judgment but has passed over from death to life.
Question: Why does God want everyone to honor the Son in the same way they honor the Father? If Jesus in below God, then shouldn’t we honor the Father more than the Son?
Since Jesus is the Father’s perfect representative and the one he exalted by appointing him over all things, we show our honor for Jehovah in how we act towards the Son. He sits on Jehovah’s throne. Take note of what Paul writes:
“God exalted [Jesus] 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.” (Philippians 2:9-11)
And remember too that right before Jesus made the comments in the verse you quote, he said, “The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner.” (John 5:19) Later Jesus confirms again that “the Father is greater than I am.” (John 14:28)
I hope these answers are satisfactory for now and will give you some new points to consider. I don’t expect you to fully understand and accept our position based on these short answers, but it should be a good starting point.
What is interesting is that if you begin to put yourself into a first-century Jewish person's shoes as you read, you’ll see that they were not expecting the Messiah to be God. They were expecting a prophet like Moses. (Deuteronomy 18:15) Understanding God to be three separate persons would have required much detailed explanation and would have posed great difficulty for those who were always taught that “Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.” (Deuteronomy 6:4)
Many encyclopedias note how the first-century mindset differs from what later became accepted:
“The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”— New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.
“Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.”— The Encyclopedia Americana (1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to answer and feel free to ask me for clarification on any aspect of these answers.
TJ
Thank you TJ for your comments and for addressing my questions. I have not yet had a the time to dig into the answers, but I have read through them once or twice. This will be very helpful to at least understand where your viewpoint is coming from. I really apprciate your time and efforts. Thanks again.
Post a Comment