John 1:1 and the Jehovah’s Witnesses

The concerned aunt in my church wanted someone to interact with her niece about her niece’s conversion to Jehovah’s Witnesses, and I was the one she wanted to interact with her.  I agreed, and what ensued over the next several months was a lengthy letter correspondence (this was before email) with Christie.  I’ve included all the correspondence in the appendix.   My letters were very much focused on who Jesus is according to Scripture.  Her responses were very frustrating to say the least.  And, from the standpoint of bringing the niece to her senses, my letters were a failure.  However, I got a chance to clearly exposit and clarify the truth of this tremendous passage, John 1:1, and its powerful witness to the deity of Jesus Christ.

You would think John’s words, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” could not be any plainer.  But for someone who wants to deny the deity of Jesus Christ, it is a passage that must be overcome as to its plain meaning.  Jehovah’s Witnesses assert that the translation I gave, and that most Bible translators agree with,^1[1] is a mistranslation of the Greek text and that it should read, “and the Word was a god.”  Is that the right translation, or even a possible translation?  NO!  And that is what I endeavor to show in this book.

I’m going to be explaining some pretty technical aspects of the Greek language, but, in a way that you’ll get and understand, and be able to defend and explain to others, especially to Jehovah’s Witnesses.  And I’m going to also show you Biblical and theological reasons why the traditional translation of John 1:1 is the only possible translation.

I can’t wait to show you.  But first, a brief history of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

 

A Brief History of Jehovah’s Witnesses

Jehovah’s Witnesses was birthed out of the restorationist movement of the 1800’s, which also birthed the Churches of Christ, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the Mormans or Latter Day Saints, Adventist and Seventh Day Adventist churches and a host of other such movements.[2] These groups were of varied orthodoxy but all operated from a belief that the church as represented in the major denominations of Protestantism was failing to conduct itself like the New Testament church, so they needed to restore it.

Jehovah’s Witnesses themselves came out of the Watch Tower Society International Bible Students, a group that emphasized literal reading of Scripture, rejection of creeds, a rejection of the Trinitarian belief of the orthodox churches, rejection of a literal hell, and a belief that Jesus was coming soon (adventist beliefs).  Charles Taze Russell, influenced by this teaching, developed his own unique beliefs, including a conviction that Jesus was returning in 1914, at which time every human would be resurrected to earth to have a chance to live an eternally perfect life.[3]  In 1879 he began publishing his own monthly magazine, Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence, and in 1881 formed Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society as an unincorporated administrative agency to disseminate his writings.[4]  With his death in 1916 the movement made a large organizational shift.  Joseph Franklin Rutherford succeeded Russell and declared its adherents to be Jehovah’s witnesses, separating themselves from the other Bible Student members, and made appointment of leaders in each congregation his prerogative, and so took greater control over their message.[5]

Eschatology (Beliefs About the Last Days)

The key beliefs of the Jehovah’s Witnesses have varied some through the years, especially concerning that 1914 date and what occurred.  Witnesses acknowledge this,[6] though they are not as forthcoming on the details of those changes.  The graphic[7] that follows highlights the struggle Jehovah’s Witnesses have had explaining the multiple dates they set for Christ’s coming.  For example, from 1879 to 1929 Witnesses’ publications were teaching that the last days had begun in 1799.  From 1929 to 1930 they taught that the last days had begun in 1914.  From 1930 to the present they have been teaching that the last days, as well as the presence of Christ on earth and his being made king, began in 1914.  And you can see, their teaching on the separating of the sheep and the goats in judgment has made an about face twice, from 1879-1923 seeing it as taking place during the millennium (which hasn’t happened yet), from 1923 to 1995 seeing it taking place during the time of Christ’s presence (the date for which they have changed through the years), but now they teach that it will take place during the Great Tribulation.  The constant struggle for Witnesses has been explaining that somehow Jesus came, was enthroned, and the 144,000 were resurrected without anybody being able to see this.  It had to be explained as a spiritual coming.  Interestingly, Rutherford made an apology of sorts for the confusion after the expectations of many followers were dashed when these fulfillments didn’t occur.[8]

Witnesses have developed the very odd view that only 144,000 humans will be chosen for heaven, while the rest of humanity will be resurrected to dwell on the earth in God’s kingdom and have a chance to live perfect lives.  The 144,000 are believers from all Christian ages and their number has mostly been filled.  Their resurrection was supposed to have occurred in 1918, a spiritual resurrection, not a bodily one.

Salvation

The teaching about the 144,000 who get to heaven and the remainder of mankind who get resurrected to the earthly kingdom for a chance to live a perfect life, raises naturally the question of what Jehovah’s Witnesses believe is the way of salvation.  In their publications they teach that “Jehovah provided the way to free us from sin and death,” through sending his Son Jesus, “his very first creation” and a “perfect human, without sin,” to pay the ransom to God to “remove death for all of Adam’s children.”⁹ They teach:

Jesus gave his Father the value of his life. In the year 33, on Nisan 14 of the Jewish calendar, Jehovah allowed Jesus’ enemies to kill him. (Hebrews 10:10) Three days after that, Jehovah brought Jesus back to life, not as a human, but as a spirit person. Later, when Jesus returned to his Father in heaven, he presented the value of his perfect human life to Jehovah as the ransom. (Hebrews 9:24) Now that the ransom has been paid, we have the opportunity to be set free from sin and death.[9][10]

To benefit from this ransom we must “be truly sorry for what we have done wrong and humbly ask Jehovah to forgive us,” we must “accept Jesus’ ransom sacrifice,” which means to believe in the Son (which they define as doing what Jesus taught us to do),” and “attend [not participate in] the Memorial of Christ’s death,” which is communion or the Lord’s supper but where only the 144,000 are allowed to take the bread and wine.[11]

When we die we do not go to heaven (that is only for the 144,000) but cease to exist.[12]  But we will be resurrected, and not just us who believe, but also all who had no chance to learn of Jesus.  Each of us will be replicated from God’s memory and restored to life on a perfect earth.[13]

Anti-Trinitarianism

It is hard to talk to a Jehovah’s Witness without being introduced to their belief that the doctrine of the Trinity is a pagan concept.  In their publication Should You Believe in the Trinity the focus is really on their belief that Jesus is a created being and not God:

Various Trinitarian concepts exist.  But generally the Trinity teaching is that in the Godhead there are three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; yet, together they are but one God.  The doctrine says that the three are co-equal, almighty, and uncreated, having existed eternally in the Godhead.

Others, however, say that the Trinity doctrine is false, that Almighty God stands alone as a separate, eternal, and all-powerful being.  They say that Jesus in his pre human existence was, like the angels, a separate spirit person created by God, and for this reason he must have had a beginning.  They teach that Jesus has never been Almighty God’s equal in any sense; he has always been subject to God and still is.  They also believe that the holy ghost is not a person but God’s spirit, his active force.[14]

The “they” who teach that the doctrine of the Trinity is false are the Witnesses, of course.

The Name of God

Jehovah’s Witnesses believe it is of “utmost importance” to use God’s divine name, which they declare is Jehovah.[15]  They say his name has been removed from most Bible translations “because the original way to pronounce it is unknown today,” or because we should follow the “long-standing tradition of the Jews” of not pronouncing his name aloud.  But they argue that “knowing its meaning and using it freely in our worship are powerful aids in drawing closer to our heavenly Father, Jehovah.”[16]

Oddly, they themselves have failed to understand God’s name.  God’s name in Hebrew is יהוה (the consonants yodh, heh, vav, and heh written from right to left, as all Hebrew is) but because in post-biblical Jewish tradition the Jews did not want to pronounce the divine name out loud when reading Scripture, they gave it vowel pointings that would remind readers to say adonai, which means “Lord.”  If you use the consonants of the divine name with the vowels of adonai, however, you get Yehovah, or Jehovah, and that is the incorrect pronunciation of the divine name.  We do know how the divine name should be pronounced because we see it used in Biblical names and expressions such as “hallelujah.”  It should be pronounced Yahweh, not Jehovah.

It is Jehovah’s Witnesses’ belief that Jesus is God’s highest created being that has forced them to explain away all references in the New Testament to the deity of Jesus, especially John 1:1, which in our translations reads, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  In their own translation of the Bible, John 1:1 reads, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.”[17]

It will be the burden of this book to show that this New World Translation is incorrect and that the view of the Witnesses that Jesus is not the true and almighty God is incorrect.

 

The New Beginning

“In the beginning was the Word…”  (John 1:1a)

[en archē ēn ho logos]

 

When you hear or read the words, “In the beginning,” where does your mind go?  Do you not think of Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”?  How could you not?  And the same is true of the readers of John’s Gospel when he first penned it.  It was written for the church and the church swam in the waters of Genesis.[18]

The Same Genesis Beginning

John is mentioning the same “beginning” that Moses is describing in Genesis 1:1. It is the beginning of the existence of our universe, or perhaps, more particularly, the beginning of our own planet and solar system.  And at the beginning, John is saying, the Word was.  Jesus was, Jesus existed, “in the beginning.”  John does not say, “In the beginning Jesus became,” but rather, “In the beginning Jesus was.”  The difference is huge.

If I were to describe the beginning of my family, I could say, “In the beginning of my family, my wife and I were.”  But couched in that statement is also the idea that my wife and I had something to do with the beginning.  And couched in John’s statement is not just the idea that Jesus was already existing at the beginning, but that he had something to do with the beginning.

Of course, John makes that more plain just two verses later:

All things came into being through him, and nothing that came into being came into being without him. (John 1:3, author’s translation)

Of course, the Jehovah’s Witnesses view is that Jesus is the first and highest created being who came into existence at the beginning and he helped with creation.  On their official website they say,

He was God’s first creation, and he helped in the creation of all other things. He is the only one created directly by Jehovah and is therefore appropriately called God’s “only-begotten” Son.[19]

The implication is that Jesus was directly created by the Father, then the Father used him to “help” create all other things.  Of course, that is not what John says.  He doesn’t say Jesus helped God create.  He said, “nothing came into being without him.”

But, we might ask, if, according to Witnesses, Jesus helped God create, how would he do that?  What would he bring to the table?  Did he advise God how to do His creation?  “Father, why don’t you make a moon for earth, and how about making a billion different kinds of flowers.”  Did he actually bring things into existence, create things out of nothing?  Can a created being do that?  If a being can create something out of nothing, doesn’t that, by definition, make him God?  Or did he somehow take something God made out of nothing and add some finishing touches to it?

When we ask the question, “Exactly how did Jesus help God create,” none of the answers sound very acceptable.  God doesn’t need advice on how to order His creation.  He very plainly tells Job that in Job 40&41.  Jesus couldn’t help by creating things out of nothing because only God can do that, as He indicates in several places:

• • Exodus 20:11, For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore, the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
  • Revelation 10:6, and swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there would be no more delay.
  • Psalm 104:24, O Lord, how manifold are your works! In wisdom have you made them all; the earth is full of your creatures.
  • Acts 17:24, The God who made the world and everything in it

And certainly, Jesus didn’t help God create by taking what God already created it and working with that, because Scripture clearly tells us that Jesus created all things:

Colossians 1:16, For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

Indeed, Jesus has created living beings, certainly included in “all things” and specified in “rulers” and “authorities.  And he created us!  Can a created being do that?

Jehovah’s Witnesses would have us believe that “in the beginning” God first created Jesus, then used Jesus somehow to create everything else.  But if we interpret John 1:1 this way, “In the beginning the created Word was,” then are we justified in interpreting Genesis 1:1 the same way: “In the beginning the created God created the heavens and the earth”?  Hardly (though perhaps Latter-Day Saints would approve)!  There is plenty of evidence throughout Scripture that the Father is uncreated and that Jesus is uncreated.

Of the Father, one testimony to this is worth noting.  Paul says in 1 Timothy 6:16,

The only one who has immortality, the one who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen nor is able to see, to Him be honor and eternal sovereignty.  Amen. (author’s translation).

To say that God alone has immortality (non-death, the Greek word is athanatos) seems at first to be a contradiction of what He has promised to us, that is, immortality through Christ.  But that is only immortality on the back end.  God has immortality on the front end.  He has no beginning.  He is the beginning.  That’s why Paul can say He alone has immortality.  Hence His claim to be the Alpha and the Omega, the first and last letter of the alphabet of eternity (Revelation 1:8).  No one else has that kind of immortality, no human that is.  But as we will see, Jesus claims this same immortality as Alpha and Omega.

The Alpha and Omega

Of course, Jehovah’s Witnesses acknowledge this fact about the Father, just not about the Son, even though the Son claims to be the Alpha and Omega, as well (Revelation 22:13).

Behold, I am coming quickly, and my reward with me, to repay each one according to his work.  I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End. (Revelation 22:12,13)

You can’t have two “firsts” and two “lasts,” can you?  And if the Father claims to be the first, because He was in the beginning, then isn’t Jesus stealing glory from the Father by also claiming to be the first?

But Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that Jesus is not the one saying he is the Alpha and Omega here, but that it is the Father speaking here.  They are arguing that there is confusion as to who is speaking, an angel speaking in verses 8 and 9 and possibly 10 and 11, so that the option is open for who is speaking verses 12 and 13.[20]   It is true that an angel speaks in verses 8 and 9, but it is clearly a divine presence declaring that He is coming.  Could it be the Father who is speaking?  The Father was, and is, and is to come (1:4,8; 4:8), but Jesus “comes” like a thief (16:15), will “come” to the churches (2:6,15,25; 3:3,20),and is “coming” (1:7; 3:11), and most certainly must be the one who says he is “coming soon” in Revelation 22:6 and 12, because at the last the “Spirit and the Bride say ‘Come’” to Jesus in 22:17 and to the one who says he is coming soon in verse 20, John says, “Come, Lord Jesus.”

If further proof is needed that it is Jesus who is proclaiming his coming in Revelation 22, not the Father, we can see an obvious parallel structure[21] to verses 6-20 that serves to highlight that it is Jesus who is coming:

 

22:7 “Behold I am coming soon (Proclamation)	22:12 “Behold I am coming soon”             (Proclamation)
22:7b “Blessed is he who keeps the words of prophecy”	22:14 “Blessed are those who wash their clothes” a basis of entry to and exclusion from the city
22:8 “I John…” “Fell down to worship the angel” “Saw the things”	22:16 “I Jesus…” “Sent the angel” “Testify to you about these things”
22:9b John, the angel, and “fellow            servants” are to worship the one coming	22:17 The Spirit and the Bride and John plead with Jesus to come
22.10-11 The Book Do not seal, Time is near, let the filthy remain filthy and the holy ones holy	22:18-19 The Book To the one who adds, God adds plagues, to the one who takes away, God takes away their share of life

 

Rev 22:20 “Yes I am coming soon” (Proclamation) “Amen come Lord Jesus” (Response)

From this parallelism it seems clear that the Son, Jesus, is speaking in both instances and he is addressed at the end in the appeal from John to “come.”  And so, Jesus is the one who declares that he is “the Alpha and the Omega” in complete equality with the Father who declares that of Himself in Revelation 1:8.

Jesus is not the first created being but is equally the Alpha, the First, and the Beginning, just as the Father is, and Jesus is worthy of worship for it, unlike the angel who is a created being.  The angel rebukes John for falling down before him, rather than worship Christ, Revelation 22:9.

Sleight of Hand

But do you notice the sleight of hand the Witnesses’ website uses about Jesus:  “He is the only one created directly by Jehovah and is therefore appropriately called God’s ‘only-begotten’ Son.”[22]

The implication of this statement is that “only-begotten” equals “only direct creation.”  But nothing could be further from the truth.  When you create, you create something different than yourself.  Even if I could create a human-like android that looked like and acted like me, it would still be different than me.  But when I beget, I beget something exactly like me at the DNA level.  What I beget is other than me but is not different from me.  We’re of the same stuff.  We’re “related” in the most basic of ways.

This is how the Biblical writers think of Jesus’ sonship.  Sonship means equality.

…God spoke to the fathers by the prophets, but in these last days He has spoken to us by the Son, whom He appointed the heir of all things, through whom also He created the world, He being the radiance of God’s glory and the exact imprint of His nature… (Hebrews 1:1-3, author’s translation)

The word translated “exact imprint” is the Greek word character, and is used in the New Testament only in Hebrews 1:3.  It originally referred to the engraving tool and then came to mean the mold or form with which something was shaped.  You cannot be the exact imprint of someone’s nature and not be just like them.  My sons and daughters are the exact imprint of mine and my wife’s nature.  They share our DNA.  We are all the exact imprint of Adam’s nature, our original father.

Creating is totally different from begetting or birthing.  So, it is incorrect for Jehovah’s Witnesses or anybody to define “only begotten” as “only created.”  If being the unique Son of God meant the first and highest created being, Jesus could have avoided accusations of blasphemy and the cross.  It was when he claimed a unique sonship to the Father that the leadership among the Jews decided he needed to be killed.  The apostle John recounts for us:

And because of this the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he did these things on the Sabbath.  But Jesus responded to them, “My Father is working until now and I too am working.”  For this reason, then, the Jews began seeking rather to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was saying God was his own Father, making himself equal with God. (John 5:16-18, author’s translation)

Sonship with the Father means equality with the Father.  Because Jesus and the Father are the same thing, him being begotten, not created, by the Father, they share the same divinity.  What the Father is able to do, the Son is also able to do.  Their work is the same work because they are the same kind of being, deity.  John understands this.  It is not only the interpretation of the Jews that he is sharing, but his own interpretation.  “Saying God was his own Father” was the same as “making himself equal with God.”  If John did not share that same interpretation, he should have challenged it.  But, of course, he didn’t challenge it.

The Firstborn of Creation

But don’t the Scriptures call Jesus the “firstborn of creation”?  Indeed, they do.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.  Because by him all things were created, whether in the heavens or on the earth, visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities, all things were created through him and for him.  And he is before all things, and all things are held together by him, and he is the head of the body, the church.  He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, in order that in all things he might be preeminent. (Colossians 1:15-18, ESV)

Prepositions are something we learned about in grammar class and probably didn’t give much concern to them.  But they are very important.  In its simplest definition, a preposition is “a word which can link verbs, nouns and pronouns together.”[23] And there are all kinds of relationships these prepositions can define, such as place, time or direction.  The Greek language can express a prepositional concept, can link, for example, two nouns in two ways, one, by using an actual Greek preposition, and two, by the use of a particular form of a noun.

So, for example, in the passage above the word “of” (which is a preposition in English) does not reflect an actual Greek preposition.  New Testament Greek does not have a preposition “of.”  But the ending of the noun “creation” that Paul uses here tells us that it expresses a relationship to the noun “firstborn” and we translate that relationship with the word “of.”  The word “of” can express several kinds of relationship.

If I say, “I am the king of the world,” I mean that I am king over the world.  If I say, “I am the husband of Mary Ann,” I mean the husband who belongs to the wife, Mary Ann.  If I say, “The love of Christ compels us” (2 Corinthians 5:14), do I mean “love for Christ compels us” or do I mean “Christ’s love for us compels us”?  Here is where the word “of” does not describe with enough specificity and we must use a different preposition (like “for”) or a different way of expressing it (like “Christ’s love for us”).

In Paul’s description of Christ as “the firstborn of all creation,” am I to understand “the firstborn in creation,” meaning the first created being, or “the firstborn over all creation,” meaning the one who holds title and authority over all creation.  Well, I think you can see from the remainder of Paul’s description of Jesus that he is concerned to show Jesus’ authority over all creation.  And it might be true that being the first created being could give him this authority in some limited sense, but Paul is trying to emphasize that Jesus created all things, has authority over all things in creation, in fact, holds all the creation together by his divine power.

So just what does the word “firstborn” mean?  In Scripture it can mean several things.  The Hebrew word normally translated “firstborn” in our Bibles is b^ekor, and the Greek word so translated is prototokos.  In the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament the Greek word prototokos is used to translate the Hebrew b^ekor.  The concept behind “firstborn” comes simply from the first male child born to parents or the first offspring of an animal.  This is the most common way it is used in the Old Testament.  Custom said the firstborn son would have a double inheritance from his father.  Reuben was the firstborn of Jacob by his wife Leah (Genesis 35:23, but lost his firstborn privilege because of sin against his father, Genesis 49:4).  When God sent a plague that killed all the firstborn children and animals of Egypt, He passed over the firstborn sons of Israel if they sacrificed a lamb and put its blood on their doorways (Exodus 12:1-13).

But “firstborn” is used another way, as well.  In Exodus 4:22 Yahweh tells Moses to assert to Pharaoh that Israel, the nation, is God’s firstborn son.  But as a nation, Israel is not the first nation birthed by God.  There were many nations birthed before Israel.  Is God saying Israel is the only nation He has birthed?  No, the term for that would be what we have already seen, monogenes, or “only begotten.”  God takes credit for birthing all nations:

From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. (Acts 17:26)

But “firstborn” can indicate one holding a special place of blessing and responsibility.  Israel is special to God in that way, as He explains through Moses,

For you are a people holy to Yahweh your God. Yahweh your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. It was not because you were more in number than any other people that Yahweh set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because Yahweh loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that Yahweh has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Deuteronomy 7:6-8)

God has given Israel the honor of being “firstborn” because He has chosen her from among all the nations to cradle the Messiah.  Throughout the Old Testament it is predicted that Israel will be head over all the nations in the end:

Yahweh will have compassion on Jacob; once again he will choose Israel and will settle them in their own land.  Foreigners will join them and unite with the descendants of Jacob. Nations will take them and bring them to their own place.  And Israel will take possession of the nations and make them male and female servants in Yahweh’s land.  They will make captives of their captors and rule over their oppressors. (Isaiah 14:1,2)

“Firstborn” in this sense, then, is a position of favor.  Is this the meaning in Colossians 1 when applied to Jesus?  It certainly does not mean first created.  Even if it is not saying Jesus is literally born first, it is saying his is the honor of the first born, not the first created.  Whichever meaning it takes it cannot have the meaning “first created.”  But Paul’s second use of the word for Jesus is “firstborn from the dead” and that phrase has absolutely no connotation of first created.  It is obvious that the Witnesses have an axe to grind and are imposing this meaning on the word.

In the Beginning Was the Word

So, John’s very first phrase as he begins his Gospel is that the eternal Word is the beginner in the beginning of all things.  He is indeed the Alpha, the Firstborn, the preeminent one, in fact, the Almighty God, Yahweh.  But the very next thing he will tell us sets up a kind of complication that is critical for us in understanding who this Word is.

 

The Eternal Fellowship

“…and the Word was with God…”  (John 1:1b)

[kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon]

 

John has startled us in John 1:1a by describing the Word, Jesus, as the beginner, in the beginning, of all things.  That is a declaration that Jesus, the Word, is the Creator God.  As if that were not enough of a curveball, John now introduces the Someone whom we have always associated with the beginning, the Creator God, and told us that the Word was with Him.  What is going on here?  Isn’t the Word the very Creator God who made the beginning happen?  Yes, John has told us so.  But now we learn he was in fellowship with the Creator God.  Fellowship?

The Mighty Preposition

We talked earlier of prepositions, how they relate verbs, nouns and pronouns together.  And here in John 1:1b is a genuine preposition, pros, which relates the Word and God.  We have translated it “with.”  The Word was “with” God.

Venerable lexicographer (that’s a dictionary person) Joseph Henry Thayer[24] says of this preposition’s use in John 1:1, “equivalent to…with…after verbs of remaining, dwelling, tarrying, etc. (which require one to be conceived of as always turned toward one).”[25]  Bauer, Arndt and Gingrich,[26] also great lexicographers, describe the use of pros here as to “be (in company) with someone.”[27]

Why is it important to John for us to know that the Word was in fellowship with, in company with, God?  His description has already told us that the Word is the Creator God, which he expands upon in verse 3:

All things came into being through him, and nothing that came into being came into being without him. (John 1:3, author’s translation)

But now John wants us to know that there are two persons who might be legitimately called God, and boy oh boy, is that ever a mindblower.  It has been the genius of Judaism that there is only one God.  John is a good Jewish boy who grew up affirming the truth of the Scriptures that God is one.  But now his perspective has taken a definite shift.  Is he denying that God is one?  By no means.

Plurality in the Godhead

There are definite hints in the Old Testament that the one God is not a singular individual.  We see it, of course, in Genesis 1:26, when God plans man’s creation:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.

Or Genesis 3:22, when He disciplines man’s rebellion:

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.

A history of Jewish interpretation of this apparent plurality includes that God was consulting with angels, that He consulted figuratively with the tangible (animals, trees, etc.) and intangible (angels) creatures already created, that He consulted the pre-existing souls of humans, that He consulted His own heart, that He consulted wisdom or His own Word, personalized in a metaphorical way, that He consulted with the Torah or Law, and there were suggestions made that the plural “us” was not the correct way of understanding the Hebrew (a minority view, for sure).[28]  A very common view is that God is using a plural of majesty, speaking of Himself in plural terms to convey how majestic a person He is.[29]

But there are plenty of other clues in the Old Testament that God is not a singularity but a composite unity. Perhaps the clearest evidence is in the visitations of the Angel or Messenger of Yahweh.

The Angel of Yahweh

The word “angel” literally means messenger, and “messenger” would be a better translation of the Hebrew word melek in this context.  We first meet the Messenger of Yahweh in Genesis 16, when Sarah harshly mistreats Hagar, her servant, who has become pregnant with a child on her behalf as a concubine of Abraham.  The pregnant Hagar flees into the wilderness in despair.  The Messenger of Yahweh finds Hagar seeking shelter at a spring and initially asks her questions about what is going on.  We may assume from what Hagar says later, that the Messenger of Yahweh appears to her in human form, because it is not until He begins prophesying to her about her child and commanding her to return that she realizes it is Yahweh who is speaking to her.  In fact, though throughout it keeps describing this man who is speaking to her as the Messenger of Yahweh, in verse 13 a shift occurs:

So she called the name of Yahweh who spoke to her, “You are a God of seeing,” for she said, “Truly here I have seen him who looks after me.”

Now, instead of identifying the person speaking to her as the Messenger of Yahweh, Scripture says it is “the name of Yahweh who spoke to her.”  And Hagar believes she has seen God.

What do we make of this odd phrase, “the name of Yahweh who spoke to her”?  The name of Yahweh is described as a personal being who can speak.  This person yet seems to be separate from Yahweh, being described, of course, initially as the Messenger or Angel of Yahweh.

During the Exodus of Israel from Egypt, Yahweh told Moses:

“Behold, I send an angel [messenger] before you to guard you on the way and to bring you to the place that I have prepared. Pay careful attention to him and obey his voice; do not rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgression, for my name is in him.  “But if you carefully obey his voice and do all that I say, then I will be an enemy to your enemies and an adversary to your adversaries. (Exodus 23:20-22)

This angel or messenger is protecting and leading Israel and must be obeyed.  If he is rebelled against, he will not forgive Israel.  Yahweh’s name is in him.  He is to be viewed as Yahweh Himself.  Obeying the messenger’s voice is obeying Yahweh.  This seems to be the same person who has appeared to Hagar.

Our next encounter with the Angel or Messenger of Yahweh is in Genesis 22, where Abraham has traveled with his son Isaac to Mount Moriah to sacrifice Isaac.

When they came to the place of which God had told him, Abraham built the altar there and laid the wood in order and bound Isaac his son and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slaughter his son. But the angel of Yahweh called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.” (Genesis 22:9–12)

The Angel or Messenger of Yahweh calls to Abraham from heaven.  Though he is Yahweh’s messenger, he says to Abraham that Abraham has not withheld his only son from him, as if he, the messenger, is God, the one who told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac (Genesis 22:1,2).

And the angel of Yahweh called to Abraham a second time from heaven and said, “By myself I have sworn, declares Yahweh, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice.” (Genesis 22:15–18)

Here the Angel of Yahweh identifies as Yahweh (“By myself I have sworn,” “declares Yahweh,” “I will surely bless you,” and “you have obeyed my voice”).  We could argue, perhaps, that as the one speaking for Yahweh (but why does Yahweh have someone speaking for Him?) the Angel or Messenger speaks as Yahweh, because he faithfully speaks Yahweh’s message.  But we will see in Exodus 3, our next encounter with the Angel of Yahweh, that there is actual identity of the Messenger with Yahweh Himself.

Now Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law, Jethro, the priest of Midian, and he led his flock to the west side of the wilderness and came to Horeb, the mountain of God. And the angel of Yahweh appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed. And Moses said, “I will turn aside to see this great sight, why the bush is not burned.” When Yahweh saw that he turned aside to see, God called to him from the bush, “Moses, Moses!” And he said, “Here I am.” Then he said, “Do not come near; take your sandals off your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.” And he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God. (Exodus 3:1–6)

Whereas it says the Angel of Yahweh appeared to Moses in the flame inside the bush, it then says that God Himself called to Moses out of the bush.  And the place is made holy ground by the presence of the Messenger of Yahweh in the bush.  Moses is afraid to look at God.

The messenger sent from Yahweh is Yahweh, is God.  They are separate and distinct, the One sending the other, yet to see the messenger is to see God.

Two Yahwehs

Nowhere is this more clear than in Genesis 18 and 19.  Abraham is visited by three men:

 And Yahweh appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat at the door of his tent in the heat of the day. He lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing in front of him. When he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them and bowed himself to the earth and said, “O Lord, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass by your servant. (Genesis 18:1–3)

One of the three “men” is Yahweh, the other two, we learn soon, are angels.  Abraham seems to recognize that Yahweh is visiting him, and he addresses Yahweh as Lord, in the Hebrew, adonai (lord, master).  When Yahweh tells Abraham that He is going to judge Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham questions if He will destroy these communities if they have righteous people in them and Yahweh says that even if they have 10 righteous people in them He will not destroy them.  But the only righteous among them are Lot and his family, less than 10.  So Yahweh sends the two angels to evacuate Lot and his family from Sodom before the coming judgment, and Yahweh goes and stands overlooking these two cities and brings judgment.

Then the men set out from there, and they looked down toward Sodom. And Abraham went with them to set them on their way. Yahweh said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, seeing that Abraham will surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of Yahweh by doing righteousness and justice, so that Yahweh may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.” Then Yahweh said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” (Genesis 18:16–21)

 And Yahweh went his way, when he had finished speaking to Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place. (Genesis 18:33)

 Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from Yahweh out of heaven. (Genesis 19:24)

There is the Yahweh who has visited Abraham, the Yahweh who has been accompanied by two angels, all of them appearing in human form, come to judge the twin cities of the plain.  And there is Yahweh in heaven.  Yahweh on earth rains sulfur and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah from Yahweh in heaven.  His investigation is complete, Lot rescued from the city, and Yahweh on earth authorizes sulfur and fire from Yahweh in heaven.

It seems there is a Yahweh who interacts with people on earth and a Yahweh who is in heaven, the former personage usually designated the Angel or Messenger of Yahweh (or, as in Genesis 31:9-13, the Angel of God).  In Genesis 32, the level of interaction this earthly Yahweh has with Jacob is extraordinary.

Jacob has fled from his father-in-law, Laban, to return with his now large family to his home in Canaan.  As he enters the land, we read:

Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him.  And when Jacob saw them he said, “This is God’s camp!” So he called the name of that place Mahanaim. (Genesis 32:1–2, ESV)

The same night he arose and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. He took them and sent them across the stream, and everything else that he had. And Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day. When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket, and Jacob’s hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. Then he said, “Let me go, for the day has broken.” But Jacob said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” And he said to him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Jacob.” Then he said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed.” Then Jacob asked him, “Please tell me your name.” But he said, “Why is it that you ask my name?” And there he blessed him. So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered.” (Genesis 32:22–30, ESV)

Jacob clearly recognizes the divine nature of this person with whom he is wrestling and demands a blessing from him.  The man changes Jacob’s name to Israel, so Jacob/Israel now wants to know the man’s name.  This is the same thing Moses asks of Yahweh in Exodus 3.  There is a desire to know the divine name.  The man does not tell Jacob/Israel his name, but he does bless Jacob/Israel, a divine action.  And Jacob is convinced he has seen God face to face without being killed.

In the prophet Hosea’s commentary on this event in Jacob’s life, he writes:

In the womb he took his brother by the heel, and in his manhood he strove with God.  He strove with the angel and prevailed; he wept and sought his favor.  He met God at Bethel, and there God spoke with us —Yahweh, the God of hosts, Yahweh is his name. (Hosea 12:3–5)

God with God

So when we come to John 1:1b and read that the Word was in fellowship with God (ton theon, in the Greek), we certainly have precedent for this from the Old Testament.  And in what follows in John’s Gospel we see John’s description of this intimate connection Jesus has with the Father, and Jesus’ own description of it, repeated again and again.

• • And the Word became flesh and pitched his tent among us, and we saw his glory, glory as the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14)
  • No one has ever seen God.  The only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has explained Him. (John 1:16-18)
  • But Jesus responded to them, “My Father is working until now and I too am working.”  For this reason then the Jews began seeking rather to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was saying God was his own Father, making himself equal with God.
  • Jesus answered them, therefore, saying, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son is not able to do anything by himself, but only what he sees the Father doing, for whatever he sees Him do, these things he likewise does.  Because the Father loves the Son and has shown him what He Himself does, and greater works than these He will show him so that you might be amazed.  For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also to whomever the Son chooses he gives life.  For the Father does not judge anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all might honor the Son even as they honor the Father.  The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.  Truly, truly I say to you that the one who hears my word and believes in the One who sent me has eternal life and will not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.”  (John 5:17-24)
  • I and the Father are one thing. (John 10:30)
  •  And now, glorify me, Father, from Yourself, with the glory I had with you before the world existed.”  (John 17:5)

Jesus and the Father have the fellowship of those who are on the same level, though there is an obvious deference Jesus gives to the Father.  Is it possible to be equal to someone and yet for that person to be your leader?  Of course.  Human beings are all equal to each other, despite our attempts to place ourselves in positions and classes above and separate from one another.  And yet fellow humans act as “superiors” or leaders over us.  In the divine Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are equally God, but the Father directs the Son (“the Son is not able to do anything by himself, but only what he sees the Father doing, for whatever he sees Him do, these things he likewise does”) and the Son directs the Spirit (“But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, Whom the Father is sending in my name, He will teach you all things and remind you of all the things I have told you”).

God Is One

But how does this square with the Biblical, and thus very Jewish, perspective that God is one.  In fact, the Jewish creed is found in Deuteronomy 6:4, which the English Standard Version translates this way:

“Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one.

The Hebrew word translated “one” is the word echad.  And in point of fact it can be translated and often is translated “one” in many Old Testament passages.  But it does not always represent a numerical oneness, a solitary oneness.  There are many passages where it obviously means a oneness of many in unity:

• • Judges 20:8, And all the people arose as one man
  • 1 Samuel 11:7, they came out with one consent (literally, as one man)
  • Ezra 2:64, The whole congregation together (literally, as one)
  • Ecclesiastes 11:6, whether they both shall be alike (literally, as one) good
  • Isaiah 65:7, Your iniquities, and the iniquities of your fathers together (literally, as one)
  • Isaiah 65:25, The wolf and the lamb shall feed together (literally, as one)

So to say that God is one does not necessarily mean He is a solitary personality who alone possesses deity or the divine nature.  It is not unlike Moses’ declaration of the marital relationship of husband and wife, that the two become one flesh (Genesis 2:24).  And we have clearly seen in our examination of the Old Testament passages a suggestion of plurality in the Godhead, that such a oneness in the Godhead is not only plausible, but demanded.

Nevertheless, a more likely translation of Deuteronomy 6:4, consistent with the usage of echad in the Old Testament, would be,

Hear, O Israel, Yahweh is our God, Yahweh alone.

Another instance of “one” translated this way would be 1 Kings 4:19, he was the only (literally, one) officer in the land.

This plurality in oneness is why Paul could say,

Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that “an idol has no real existence,” and that “there is no God but one.” For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”—yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. (1 Corinthians 8:4–6, ESV)

And notice the subtlety of the prepositions (the mighty prepositions).  Of the Father it is said that all things are “from” Him and we exist “for” Him.  And of the Son it is said that all things are “through” Him and we exist “through” Him.  Their equality is affirmed, and yet also their line of authority and distinctiveness is affirmed.

This is the very thing John is seeking to affirm in John 1:1. Jesus, the Word, is the beginner of all things, the Yahweh of Genesis 1:1 who created all things.  Yet He is distinct from the Father as a separate personality with whom the Father may have fellowship.  In the beginning, the Word was with God.

Jehovah’s Witnesses can affirm the distinction, but not the equality.

 

The Word Was…a god?

“…and the Word was God…”  (John 1:1c)

     Kai theos ēn ho logos

 The Word, Jesus, the Son of God who adopted human nature, was in the beginning, was, we should say, the beginner at the beginning, and was in fellowship with ho theos, God, and so was separate from, yet equal to, God.  And John finishes this description by stating very clearly…well, what did he clearly state?  That is the question.

The Proper Predicate Nominative and the Elusive Definite Article

With John’s third statement about the Word, we are once again thrown into the realm of grammar.  There are some 722 predicate nominatives (see Predicate Nominatives in the New Testament and the “Problem” of John 1:1 and Other Passages) in the New Testament and about 40% of them are in John’s writings (his Gospel, three letters, and Revelation).

A predicate nominative is a noun that is linked by a verb of being to the subject of that verb and thus forms a referencing description of that subject.  In English we normally have the order subject, verb of being, and predicate nominative, as in the statement, “Jesus is the Lord.”  Our most common verb of being is the verb ‘to be’ in all its forms.  We could form it in past tense (Jesus was a teacher), future tense (Jesus will be king), the infinitive (We knew Jesus to be the savior), and the participle (Jesus being our master).

But in the Greek language, word order is not essential, and in fact, we see every possible word order in the New Testament.  Here in John 1:1 the word order, if written in English, would be, “and God was the Word.”  We suppose that “the Word” is the subject, since that has been John’s subject throughout, though the nature of a predicate nominative is that it equates the subject and the predicate.  If the Word was God then it is also true that God was the Word.

The other grammatical issue in this verse, the one that Jehovah’s Witnesses capitalize on, is that the predicate nominative, “God,” does not have the definite article on it, as it did in the second part of this verse.  Here is the verse in English with a transliterated Greek underneath it:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,    and the Word was God

      en archē ēn ho logos,          kai ho logos ēn pros ton theon,      kai theos ēn ho logos

We see the definite article “the” (highlighted in bold) with “the Word,” logos, throughout, but with the word “God” we see the article with the first mention of God but not the second.  How significant is that?  It could be very significant.  Let me explain the Greek usage of the definite article.

The definite article makes a word definite.  Which book am I talking about?  I’m talking about “the” book.  If I don’t intend any book in particular, in English I can say “a” book.  Greek does the same thing, but the Greek language of the New Testament does not have an indefinite article “a” (“an” before words beginning with a vowel).  The Greek language is less precise in this regard.  For the Greek speaker to make a word intentionally indefinite he or she has to omit the definite article “the” from the noun.

But the odd thing about it is that just omitting a definite article from a noun doesn’t mean for the Greek speaker that he or she intends the noun to be indefinite.  Here is an example:

“for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas” (John 18:13)

In the Greek there is not a definite article “the” with the noun “father-in-law,” but it would be a mistake to translate this, “He was ‘a’ father-in-law of Caiaphas,” unless Caiaphas had more than one wife, and therefore Caiaphas had more than one father-in-law.  So we see that John, in this case, intended “father-in-law” to be definite but he did not use the article.  And this situation is repeated over and over in the New Testament.

What this means is that it is up to the reader to interpret the author’s intended meaning.  Does the author intend the noun to be viewed as definite or indefinite?  And to compound the problem of interpretation, leaving off the article could also be a way the Greek speaker signaled that the noun should be understood as qualitative.  Here is an example of that:

Jesus began to speak first to his disciples, saying: “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” (Luke 12:1)

“Hypocrisy” is the predicate nominative noun in this sentence (yeast…is hypocrisy) and Luke does not put a definite article on it (If he had it would be translated, “which is the hypocrisy”).  But it does not make sense to say Luke meant, “which is ‘a’ hypocrisy.”  The yeast of the Pharisees, the thing about them that permeates all they do, is not ‘a’ hypocrisy, but is the quality of hypocrisy.

Here is another example of how leaving off the article leads to a qualitative sense to the noun:

“What was good to me became death” (Romans 7:13)

What was good to Paul, the law of Moses, did not become ‘a’ death, nor ‘the’ death, to Paul, but the quality of death, death itself.

This use or lack of use of the definite article is especially confusing for English speakers when it comes to proper names and titles.  Here in John 1:1 the apostle puts an article on “God” in the second part of his sentence, but in English we don’t translate it, “and the Word was with ‘the’ God.”  We would say that of course there is only one God so we don’t need the definite article in this case.  If we thought John was emphasizing the one and only true God, that the Word was with the one and only God, we would put the article in our translation.  And maybe John was emphasizing this, but it would still work for our translation to simply say, “the Word was with God,” because for English speakers that communicates the true God.

So what does it mean when John leaves the article off of the word “God” in the last part of John 1:1?  Well, it could mean one of three things.  Either John still intends the word “God” to be considered definite, “and the Word was [the] God,” or he meant it to be indefinite, “and the Word was a god,” or he meant it to be qualitative, “and the Word was Godness/divine/deity.”  How do we decide?

Figuring Out John’s Intent

Since John could have intended either meaning for “God” by leaving off the article, we need a clue for understanding his intent.  Some have sought the answer in the very word order John uses in the Greek.  It has been proposed[30] that predicate nominatives that are put before the verb are intended to be either definite or qualitative.  That would be a great clue for John’s meaning in John 1:1, but unfortunately it isn’t borne out in practice.  In my study of over 700 predicate nominatives in the New Testament, the evidence doesn’t bear out this proposal.[31] 

There are plenty of examples of predicate nominatives without the definite article coming before the verb that are certainly indefinite.  Here are a couple of them:

When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear. (Matthew 14:26)

It is not “the” ghost, some particular ghost that they are seeing, and highly unlikely that they are expressing that it is the quality of ghost that scares them.  Only an indefinite translation makes sense of their intention.

“For I myself am a man under authority” (Luke 7:8)

The Centurion who wants Jesus to heal his servant is not “the” man under authority (as if he were the only one) and certainly not ‘man’ under authority, as the qualitative everyman (“I am man the species under authority), but ‘a’ man under authority.  And we need an example from John:

“Did we not rightly say that you are a Samaritan” (John 8:48)

Here we have a definite noun, Samaritan, but Jesus’ enemies are not saying Jesus is ‘the’ Samaritan, some particular Samaritan, nor are they saying he is Samaritan-ish, the qualitative perspective, but rather simply ‘a’ Samaritan.  That is an insult, in their minds.

In each of these cases the Greek word order is predicate nominative then verb, but it is clear that the Greek speaker is not thereby making it clear that he intends the predicate nominative to be definite or qualitative.  We determine his intent by thinking clearly about what he could intend.

So what could John intend about his last segment of John 1:1, “and the Word was…”?

Could Jesus Be ‘a’ god

From John’s perspective, could he, would he, describe Jesus as ‘a’ god?  Jehovah’s Witnesses claim so in their online commentary:

the Word was a god: Or “the Word was divine [or, “a godlike one”].” This statement by John describes a quality or characteristic of “the Word” (Greek, ho loʹgos; see study note on the Word in this verse), that is, Jesus Christ. The Word’s preeminent position as the firstborn Son of God through whom God created all other things is a basis for describing him as “a god; a godlike one; divine; a divine being.” Many translators favor the rendering “the Word was God,” equating him with God Almighty. However, there are good reasons for saying that John did not mean that “the Word” was the same as Almighty God. First, the preceding clause and the following clause both clearly state that “the Word” was “with God.” Also, the Greek word the·osʹ occurs three times in verses 1 and 2. In the first and third occurrences, the·osʹ is preceded by the definite article in Greek; in the second occurrence, there is no article. Many scholars agree that the absence of the definite article before the second the·osʹ is significant. When the article is used in this context, the·osʹ refers to God Almighty. On the other hand, the absence of the article in this grammatical construction makes the·osʹ qualitative in meaning and describes a characteristic of “the Word.”[32]

This commentary appears to be taking both the view that “God” should be viewed as indefinite and as qualitative, two very different meanings.  Since they believe that Jesus is a created being they cannot mean by “divine” (their qualitative translation) equal in essence, but rather choose to view it as “godlike,” less than God.  And to be fair, in English we do use the word “divine” to mean, often, godlike, not equal to God.  But is that what John would mean?

The Biblical Perspective on ‘gods’

To get at John’s intent it would be helpful to understand the Jewish perspective on gods and godlike beings.  And helpfully, we have in one place in the Old Testament, a clear teaching from no less than Moses on the nature of gods, and that forms the consistent perspective throughout the rest of the Old Testament.  In Deuteronomy 32 Moses recites the words of a song to the whole assembly of Israel.  His song begins:

^32:1 Pay attention, heavens, and I will speak; listen, earth, to the words from my mouth.

Moses is not only speaking the words of this song to earth’s inhabitants, but heaven’s inhabitants, as well.  Which inhabitants of heaven would he be addressing?  He isn’t instructing God, but other members of the heavens, whom he will describe later.

² Let my teaching fall like rain and my word settle like dew, like gentle rain on new grass and showers on tender plants.

 His song is one of instruction, designed to spark growth in the one’s listening, and that certainly does not include God.

³ For I will proclaim Yahweh’s name.  Declare the greatness of our God!  ⁴ The Rock—his work is perfect; all his ways are just.  A faithful God, without bias, he is righteous and true.

What is God’s name?  Moses states it here, though it is hidden in our English translation.  Whenever you see the word LORD with the ‘ORD’ in small capital letters in most English translations, that is a representation of the Hebrew word for God’s name, Yahweh.  So Moses wants to declare Yahweh’s name, which means he wants to declare the character of Yahweh, what it is that makes Yahweh special.  Yahweh is a Rock, not shifting sands or drowning waters, and His ways are perfect and just, a Rock who never falters, faithful and without bias, righteous and true.

⁵ His people have acted corruptly toward him; this is their defect—they are not his children but a devious and crooked generation.  ⁶ Is this how you repay Yahweh, you foolish and senseless people?  Isn’t he your Father and Creator?  Didn’t he make you and sustain you?

Do you recall how, almost immediately after released by Yahweh from slavery in Egypt, when Israel had come to Mt. Sinai and saw the display of Yahweh’s power on the mountain, that Moses went up on the mountain to receive the ten commandments?  While Moses is getting the Law from Yahweh, the people convince Aaron to form out of gold a god or gods for them to worship (Exodus 32).  And there were several occasions on which they were “foolish and senseless” about their Father and Creator.

⁷ Remember the days of old; consider the years of past generations.  Ask your father, and he will tell you, your elders, and they will teach you.  ⁸ When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance and divided the human race, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the people of Israel.  ⁹ But Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob, his own inheritance.

Yahweh is God of all the nations, determining their boundaries, the lands they inherit.  But He is especially the God of Israel, His people, viewing them as His special inheritance who receives His special affection.  They are the center of His world, the focus of His attention, the ones He has chosen to use as the example for all the other nations.  The people of Israel are the ones Yahweh intended to teach the other nations about Him, the true God.

¹⁰ He found him in a desolate land, in a barren, howling wilderness; he surrounded him, cared for him, and protected him as the pupil of his eye.  ¹¹ He watches over his nest like an eagle and hovers over his young; he spreads his wings, catches him, and carries him on his feathers.  ¹² Yahweh alone led him, with no help from a foreign god.  ¹³ He made him ride on the heights of the land and eat the produce of the field.  He nourished him with honey from the rock and oil from flinty rock, ¹⁴ curds from the herd and milk from the flock, with the fat of lambs, rams from Bashan, and goats, with the choicest grains of wheat; you drank wine from the finest grapes.

Yahweh had done everything possible to make Israel a flourishing nation, without the help of any foreign god.  Israel was aware of the various gods the peoples around them worshiped.  Egypt worshiped Osiris, Isis, Horus, Re, Amon, and Anubis, among others.  The peoples of Canaan worshiped Baal, Asherah, Chemosh, Dagon, El, and Moloch. None of those gods helped Israel make it through the desert.

In Exodus 12:12 Yahweh told Moses, before the eve of Passover and Israel’s departure or exodus from Egypt, “For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the LORD.”  Whom did Yahweh judge?  If these “gods” are not real entities, the entities Moses is addressing in the heavens, there is no real judgment on them.  Rather, the judgment is on Egypt, not their gods.

¹⁵ Then Jeshurun became fat and rebelled—you became fat, bloated, and gorged.  He abandoned the God who made him and scorned the Rock of his salvation.  ¹⁶ They provoked his jealousy with different gods; they enraged him with detestable practices.

My wife and I support a young woman in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.  We had led her to the Lord in 2008.  Her parents had died of AIDS and her grandmother could not afford to feed her, so her grandmother gave her to God one day, which means she took her out in the middle of the city and she abandoned her on the street and left her to God to take care of her.  Well, He did.  She made her way to our ministry there in Addis and she got saved.  We helped her with room and board and school and now she is studying accounting in college.  What do you think we would feel if we started seeing Facebook posts from her thanking Fred Smith from FedEx for sustaining her?  I’m pretty sure Fred is a good guy, but he had nothing to do with Mitu’s rescue from the streets.  He hasn’t been taking care of her for 12 years.  He hasn’t answered her questions, commiserated with her when she’s down, or prayed for her all this time.  What could possibly motivate her to do such a thing?  We’ve been faithful and loyal to her.  It would be the utmost betrayal.

But that is exactly what Israel did to Yahweh.  They gave credit to Baal for making their crops grow, for making their cows birth calves, and for sustaining their lives.  They brought sacrifices to Baal and Molech, in some instances even sacrificing their infant children to Molech to move him to act on their behalf.  But Moses explains what was really happening.

¹⁷ They sacrificed to demons, not God, to gods they had not known, new gods that had just arrived, which your ancestors did not fear.

The gods that Israel began sacrificing to were not who Israel thought they were.  Baal was not the god of fertility and storms.  He was a fallen angel who was masquerading as a god who deserved worship and to whom you must sacrifice to get his blessing.  No doubt this demon was able to persuade his followers with supernatural acts of power.  No doubt he was able to communicate to his prophets and priests to express his desires and wishes.  But was this demon a Rock, something solid to stand on in a desert storm, not shifting sands or drowning waters.  Was everything about him perfection and justice.  Was he true and faithful to those who worshiped him and not moved to bias or prejudice when it came to how he treated each and every one of his people.  Was the demon representing himself as Baal the standard of what is right and true?  No way.

¹⁸ You ignored the Rock who gave you birth; you forgot the God who gave birth to you.  ¹⁹When Yahweh saw this, he despised them, angered by his sons and daughters.  ²⁰ He said, “I will hide my face from them; I will see what will become of them, for they are a perverse generation—unfaithful children.  ²¹ They have provoked my jealousy with what is not a god; they have enraged me with their worthless idols.

So here is the final verdict.  Israel has worshiped worthless idols that represent what is not really a god.  The demons who masquerade as gods are not really gods in the sense of the true God, Yahweh.  They are real, supernatural beings with abilities beyond that of humans, we might even say “divine,” but who are nothing compared to Yahweh.  Only Yahweh can create something out of nothing.  Only Yahweh knows all things, is everywhere present, is eternal, is indeed uncreated.  Only He is capable of providing the rain that gently waters the new grass and tender plants, that causes the crops to produce their yield, that makes plants and animals and humans fertile for reproduction.  Only He is capable of rescuing us from the consequences of our rebellion.

This is the perspective Israelites had of gods.  The gods are not good things, but bad things.  They are evil spirits pretending to be gods who deserve worship.  They are what the apostle Paul describes as “so-called gods” (1 Corinthians 8:5) and why Paul says you cannot go to the worship services of idols because that is participating in “the table of demons” (1 Corinthians 10:21).  Such gods always demand worship and claim to be the creators, but they are not.  Would the apostle John really have depicted Jesus as a god?  Well, it is still possible.  Perhaps he is giving a new spin to gods, making a new definition.  Jehovah’s Witnesses would define ‘god’ in this sense as one who has the “preeminent position as the firstborn Son of God through whom God created all other things,” thus “describing him as a god; a godlike one; divine; a divine being.”  Is this the way John describes Jesus throughout the rest of his Gospel?

 

John’s View of Jesus in the Rest of His Gospel

If we would understand how John intended us to understand John 1:1c, “and the Word was God,” we need to see John’s representation of Jesus in places outside of John 1:1, that is, in the remainder of his Gospel.

The Only Begotten

John further describes Jesus in his Gospel in some pretty stunning ways.  In verse 14 of chapter one he says,

And the Word became flesh and pitched his tent among us, and we saw his glory, glory as the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.

And just a few verses later he says,

Because from his fullness we have received even grace after grace.  Because though the law was given through Moses, grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.  No one has ever seen God.  The only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has explained Him. (John 1:16-18)

To be sure, the description “only begotten God” is not in all Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of John.  Some read “the only begotten Son,” some “the only begotten Son of God,” and some simply “the only begotten.”  But remember, begotten does not equal created.  If we call it a creation at all it is not to be considered a making of something different than me, but rather making someone just like me, someone of the same stuff, and so we call this generating rather than creating.

If Jesus is, as John says, the only begotten from the Father, he would have to be of the same stuff as the Father.  Is the Father eternal?  Then the Son would have to be eternal, as well.  Is the Father omnipotent (all powerful)?  Then so is the Son.  Omnipresent (everywhere present)?  So is the Son.  So there could not be a time when the Son did not exist, else he would not be eternal.  And so there would be no reason not to consider him God, and it would be defamatory to consider him ‘a’ god.

The Messiah to Whom the Spirit Is Given Without Measure

John the Baptist is challenged by his own disciples with the fact that now Jesus and his disciples are baptizing more people than John the Baptist.  John the Baptist gives this reply:

John answered, “No one can receive anything unless it is given to him from heaven.  You can bear witness that I said, ‘I am not the Messiah, but I am one sent before him.’  The one who has the bride is the bridegroom.  But the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, greatly rejoices at the bridegroom’s voice.  So this joy of mine is full.  He must increase and I must decrease.”

 “The one who comes from above is above all.  The one who is from the earth is from the earth and speaks from the earth.  The one who is from heaven is above all.  What he says and hears he bears witness to, and yet no one receives his testimony.  Whoever receives his testimony has put his seal on this, that God is true.  For the one God sent speaks the words of God, for God gives him the Spirit without measure.  The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.  The one who believes in the Son has eternal life.  The one who disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him.”  (John 3:27-36)

John clearly denies being the Messiah, the promised Anointed One, but indicates that Jesus is that Anointed One.  Jesus is the bridegroom, Israel his bride, while John the Baptist is the less important friend of the bridegroom, charged with bringing the bride to the groom.  It is the bridegroom who must become the most important person to the bride.

But John the Baptist further characterizes Jesus as the one who is “above all.”  Does he exclude God from being under Jesus?  Not specifically, he doesn’t.  But he does speak of Jesus being sent by God and speaking God’s words, to whom God has given the Holy Spirit without measure.  These are the acts of a superior, we would suppose.  Jesus obeys the Father and is supplied by the Father with the Holy Spirit.  Yet, at the same time, the Father has given all things into Jesus’ hand.

There are two things at work here.  One, even though Jesus is the same stuff as the Father, the same DNA, to use an analogy, and is as eternal as the Father, nevertheless, he was generated by the Father, begotten, and so the generator has superiority/authority over the generated.  But since this generation resulted in someone exactly like the Father, the “exact imprint of his nature” (Hebrews 1:3), then he must be considered equal in every sense.  Superior authority does not make for superior nature.

So the Apostle John communicates through the sharing of John the Baptist’s testimony, his own understanding of Jesus as the center of all God’s plan for redeeming humankind.  Believe in Jesus and you will have eternal life.  Don’t believe, and you will have the Father’s wrath.

Equal with God

When, as recounted in John 5, Jesus heals a man who had been an invalid for 38 years, and does so on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders are incensed and challenge Jesus and his legitimacy as sent from God.  Jesus responds this way:

And because of this the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he did these things on the Sabbath.  But Jesus responded to them, “My Father is working until now and I too am working.”  For this reason then the Jews began seeking rather to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was saying God was his own Father, making himself equal with God.

 Jesus answered them, therefore, saying, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son is not able to do anything by himself, but only what he sees the Father doing, for whatever he sees Him do, these things he likewise does.  Because the Father loves the Son and has shown him what He Himself does, and greater works than these He will show him so that you might be amazed.  For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also to whomever the Son chooses he gives life.  For the Father does not judge anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all might honor the Son even as they honor the Father.  The one who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.  Truly, truly I say to you that the one who hears my word and believes in the One who sent me has eternal life and will not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.”  (John 5:16-24)

Why does Jesus’ statement that the Father is working and Jesus is working too, shock the Jewish religious leaders into seeking to kill Jesus?  Because this is blasphemy, if Jesus is a created being.  It is making himself equal with God.  What is the working that the Father is doing until now?  Well it started with God the Father creating all things and then it continued with the Father upholding all things.  He upholds creation (keeping it running, we might say; Genesis 9:8-17; Job 38&39; Psalm 104; Psalm 135; Matthew 10:29-30; Acts 17:28), He upholds Israel forever (2 Chronicles 9:8), He upholds the righteous individual (Psalm 37:17), He upholds the needy (Psalm 140:12), and He upholds David’s throne (Isaiah 9:7).  But Jesus does this, as well:

Colossians 1:¹⁵ The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. ¹⁶ For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. ¹⁷ He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. ¹⁸ And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. ¹⁹ For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, ²⁰ and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

Are the Jews wrong to believe that Jesus is making himself equal with the Father?  That is what the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim:

While properly referring to God as his Father, Jesus never claimed equality with God.[33] (Joh 5:17) Rather, it was the Jews who accused Jesus of attempting to make himself God’s equal by claiming God as his Father. Just as the Jews were wrong in stating that Jesus was a Sabbath breaker, they were wrong in making this accusation. Jesus makes this evident by what he says as recorded in verses 19 through 24​—he could do nothing of his own initiative. Clearly, he was not claiming to be equal to God.​—Joh 14:28.

But Jesus himself has said to the Jews, “He [the Father] has given all judgment to the Son, so that all might honor the Son even as they honor the Father.”  If the Father wants all to honor His Son as they honor Him, does that not make Jesus equal with the Father?  The Jews have not mistaken Jesus in this matter.  Yes, Jesus is doing what he sees the Father do, and as John the Baptist said, the Father has sent the Son and given him the Spirit, but that is a function of superior authority, not superior essence or nature.  Husbands and wives are equal in essence, nature or substance, but God gives husbands authority over their wives.  That does not make wives any less equal to their husbands.

And this is why Jesus can say, in John 14:28, the passage cited at the end of the Witnesses commentary on John 5, “the Father is greater than I am,” not meaning, greater in essence or substance, but greater in authority, and so he does what his Father commands him (14:31).

No, John obviously accepts the conclusion of the Jews that Jesus is claiming to be equal with God.  That is why he has included this incident in his Gospel.

The Only One Who Has Seen the Father

After Jesus feeds the 5,000 and walks on water, the crowds come to him seeking more free food, choosing to see Jesus as only a provider of their physical needs.  But Jesus does not give them that option.  He is the source of all their life, of eternal life.

And they were saying, “Isn’t this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know?  How can he now be saying that he is come down from heaven?”  Jesus responded, “Don’t grumble with each other.  No one is able to come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.  It is written in the prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’  Everyone who has heard from the Father and learned will come to me.  Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God, he has seen the Father.  Truly, truly, I say to you, the one who believes has eternal life.  I am the bread of life.  Your fathers ate manna in the wilderness and died.  This is the bread that has come down from heaven, that anyone who eats of it may not die.  I am the bread of life come down from heaven.  If anyone eats of this bread he will live forever, and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.” (John 6:42-51)

What does Jesus mean when he says no one but him has seen the Father?  What about angels who attend Yahweh and sing “holy, holy, holy, is Yahweh Almighty”?  What about those who have reported seeing Yahweh, like Abraham and Moses?  Even John has been given a glimpse of the Father according to his account in Revelation 4&5.

No, Jesus must mean something different than this.  What does it mean to truly see God?  John has told us in chapter 1, verse 18, that no one has seen God.  Paul describes God in 1 Timothy 6:16 as, “The only one who has immortality, the one who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen nor is able to see, to Him be honor and eternal sovereignty.”  The vision that angels and chosen saints like Abraham, Moses and the apostle John have seen of God, is not the ultimate seeing of Him.  It is seeing a representation of Him.  Only God can see Himself in the ultimate sense.  And that is what Jesus claims of himself.  He alone has seen the Father.

I Am

In John 8 Jesus gets into another debate with the Jewish leaders.  They dispute Jesus’ testimony and its validity, they dispute his origin from God, and they dispute his claim that they are not really Abraham’s children.  This leads to one really amazing claim by Jesus.

The Jews answered and said to him, “Did we not say well that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?”  Jesus responded, “I don’t have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me.  But I don’t seek my own glory. There is One who seeks it and who judges.  Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will not see death forever.”  The Jews said, “Now we know that you have a demon.  Abraham died and the prophets, and you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word he will not taste death forever.’  You aren’t greater than our father Abraham who died, or the prophets who died.  Who do you think you are?”  Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing.  My Father is the One who glorifies me and you claim Him as your God.  And yet, you don’t know Him, but I know him.  If I said I didn’t know Him, I would be a liar like you all.  But I know Him and I keep His word.  Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it and rejoiced.”  Then the Jews said, “You aren’t fifty years old and you’ve seen Abraham?”  Jesus told them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”  Then they took up stones to cast at him.  But Jesus was hidden from them and went out of the temple.  (John 8:48-59)

The Jewish leaders’ anger at Jesus’ suggesting that he is greater than their father Abraham prompts Jesus’ cryptic statement, “Abraham rejoiced to see my day.”  They point out the obvious, that Jesus isn’t even 50 years old yet (my guess is he was about 39) and so he couldn’t in any way be contemporary with Abraham.  But they take up stones to kill the blasphemer when he says, “Before Abraham was, I am.”

In Exodus 3 we read of Moses’ encounter with the Angel of Yahweh in the burning bush and Moses’ recognition that he is interacting with God.  He asks God what His name is, who he should say is sending him to Egypt to bring Israel out of slavery, and God responds, “‘I am who I am. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”  The Jewish leaders get the reference Jesus is making.  Jesus is claiming to be Yahweh, the great I AM.

Not surprisingly, Jehovah’s Witnesses must do some gymnastics to explain this away:

The opposing Jews wanted to stone Jesus for claiming that he had “seen Abraham,” although, as they said, Jesus was “not yet 50 years old.” (Joh 8:57) Jesus’ response was to tell them about his prehuman existence as a mighty spirit creature in heaven before Abraham was born. Some claim that this verse identifies Jesus with God. They argue that the Greek expression used here, e·goʹ ei·miʹ (rendered “I am” in some Bibles), is an allusion to the Septuagint rendering of Ex 3:14 and that both verses should be rendered the same way. (See study note on Joh 4:26.) In this context, however, the action expressed by the Greek verb ei·miʹ started “before Abraham came into existence” and was still in progress. It is therefore properly translated “I have been” rather than “I am,” and a number of ancient and modern translations use wording similar to “I have been.” In fact, at Joh 14:9, the same form of the Greek verb ei·miʹ is used to render Jesus’ words: “Even after I have been with you men for such a long time, Philip, have you not come to know me?” Most translations use a similar wording, showing that depending on context there is no valid grammatical objection to rendering ei·miʹ as “have been.”[34]

There may be no grammatical objection in general to rendering eimi as “have been,” but what we are then being asked to believe in this context is that the Jewish leaders deliberately misunderstood Jesus’ intent.  They are willing to stone Jesus because he said he has been in existence as a “mighty spirit creature in heaven before Abraham was born?”  Doesn’t make sense.  They would not stone an angel, who has existed as a mighty spirit creature in heaven before Abraham was born.

I and the Father Are One

As Jesus interacts with the Jewish leaders again and claims to be the good shepherd who brings life to the sheep and whose true sheep know him, the leaders enter into conflict with him, challenging his claim to be the Messiah.  Jesus’ response is extraordinary:

The works I do in my Father’s name, these bear witness to me.  But you do not believe because you are not of my sheep.  My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me.  And I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.  My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.  I and the Father are one thing.”

 Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him.  Jesus told them, “I’ve shown you many good works from my Father.  For which of them do you want to stone me?”  The Jews said, “We don’t want to stone you for good works but for blasphemy, since you, a man, make yourself out to be God.”  Jesus answered, “Isn’t it written in your law, “I said, ‘You are gods’?  If God called them gods to whom the word of God came, and the Scriptures cannot be broken, then the one whom the Father set apart as holy and sent into the world, can you say he blasphemes, just because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?  If I am not doing my Father’s works, don’t believe in me.  But if I am doing them, even if you don’t believe in me, believe the works, so that you may really know that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.” (John 10:25-38)

Jesus’ comment about being “one” with the Father hinges on the fact that the word “one” in Greek has to take a gender: masculine, feminine or neuter.  Now we know Jesus spoke in Aramaic, but John is representing his words in Greek, and the word “one” Jesus uses is in the neuter gender, which is why I translated it, “one thing.”  Jesus is not one man with the Father (nor one woman) but one thing.  Jesus is claiming to be the same stuff as the Father, the same DNA, the same essence or nature.  The Jewish leaders again get his drift.  They pick up stones to kill him for blasphemy.

Jesus then uses what to us seems an odd form of reasoning.  He points out the one “positive” reference to gods in the Old Testament, and argues a typical Jewish argument from Scripture, the argument from the lesser to the greater.  Jesus refers to Psalm 82:6 where Yahweh addresses the rulers, the gods, of Israel and chides them for ruling without knowledge and judging unjustly.  The “gods” have been interpreted as either the human leaders of Israel or the angelic rulers like those mentioned in Daniel 10.  In either case, Jesus is pointing out that created beings are viewed as “gods” by Yahweh because they rule under His direction and so have god-like characteristics.  So if created beings can be considered “gods” how much more the one who is the Son of God, who is in the Father and the Father is in him.  Jesus is not backing away from his claim to be deity, equal to the Father.  He is doubling down on it.

We should not be surprised that the Jehovah’s Witnesses have a different slant on Jesus’ statement:

one: Or “at unity.” Jesus’ comment here shows that he and his Father are unified in protecting sheeplike ones and leading them to everlasting life. Such shepherding is a joint task of the Father and the Son. They are equally concerned about the sheep, not allowing anyone to snatch them out of their hand. (Joh 10:27-29; compare Eze 34:23, 24.) In John’s Gospel, the unity in fellowship, will, and purpose between the Father and the Son is often mentioned. The Greek word here rendered “one” is, not in the masculine gender (denoting “one person”), but in the neuter gender (denoting “one thing”), supporting the thought that Jesus and his Father are “one” in action and cooperation, not in person. (Joh 5:19; 14:9, 23) That Jesus referred, not to an equality of godship, but to a oneness of purpose and action is confirmed by comparing the words recorded here with his prayer recorded in John chapter 17. (Joh 10:25-29; 17:2, 9-11) This is especially evident when he prays that his followers “may be one just as we are one.” (Joh 17:11) So the kind of oneness referred to in chapter 10 as well as in chapter 17 would be the same.[35]

For Jesus to say, “I and the Father are one thing” does not indicate they are merely one in purpose, and again, those listening to Jesus understand what he is claiming.  It is not blasphemy to say my purpose is the same as the Father’s.  That should be true of all of us.  And it is not legitimate to say that the oneness Jesus prays we may have with the Father in John 17 is intended to convey the same thing he is saying here.  The Jews clearly understand Jesus is making a bid to equality with the Father.

The Glory of Yahweh

During the last week of his life, Jesus goes to Jerusalem and many of the residents of the city receive him with “hosannas” but they are also confused by his comments that he must die.  Jesus tries to help them understand that the light is only among them for a little while longer.

Jesus told them, “For a short while the light is among you.  Walk while you have the day, so that the darkness doesn’t overcome you.  The one who walks in darkness does not know where he is going.  While you have the light, believe in the light, so that you may become sons of light.”  When he had said these things he left and was hidden from them.

 Even though he had performed so many signs in front of them, they did not believe in him, in order that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled when he said, “Lord, who has believed our report?  And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”  For this reason they are not able to believe, because again Isaiah said, “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, that they might not see with their eyes and understand with their hearts, and so turn and I would heal them.” 

 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke about him. (John 12:35-41)

John is referring to the vision Isaiah had, recorded in Isaiah 6, of Yahweh high and lifted up, seated on His throne in the heavenly temple, surrounded by angels called seraphim who are declaring, “Holy, holy, holy, is Yahweh almighty.”  The Jehovah’s Witnesses commentary on this verse says,

Isaiah . . . saw his glory: When Isaiah saw a vision of the heavenly courts where Jehovah was sitting on his lofty throne, Jehovah asked Isaiah: “Who will go for us?” (Isa 6:1, 8-10) The use of the plural pronoun “us” indicates that at least one other person was with God in this vision. So it is reasonable to conclude that when John wrote that Isaiah “saw his glory,” this refers to Jesus’ prehuman glory alongside Jehovah.[36]

But is that really what John means?  John says Isaiah saw “his” glory, and he is referring to Jesus, as the Witness commentary agrees.  But Isaiah was not focused on those less than God who might be attending Him.  Isaiah is focusing on Yahweh, the one seated on the throne, and the term “glory” must certainly pertain to Yahweh alone, not lesser glories that are in attendance.

So here is John’s own testimony that he considers Jesus to be Yahweh, the one whom the seraphim addressed as holy, the one whose robe filled the temple, the one who called Isaiah to his role as prophet, the King, Yahweh Almighty.

My Lord and My God

The apostle John gives further evidence to his own view of who Jesus is when he recounts the post-resurrection appearance of Jesus to his disciples in the upper room.  At his first appearance Thomas is not present, so Thomas expresses skepticism when told what happened, but then Thomas is present the next time Jesus appears to his disciples.

Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came.  The other disciples were telling him, “We have seen the Lord.”  But he said to them, “Unless I see the marks of the nails in his hands, and put my finger in the marks of the nails and my hand in his side, I will not believe.”

 Eight days later his disciples were inside with Thomas.  Jesus entered, though the door was locked, and stood in their midst and said, “Peace to you.”  Then he said to Thomas, “Bring your finger here and see my hands and bring your hand and put it into my side, and don’t be unbelieving but believing.”  Thomas answered, “My Lord and my God.” (John 20:24-28)

Are we to suppose that John includes this account for any reason other than to attest to the truth about who Jesus is?  If he didn’t agree with this perspective, it hardly seems possible he would have included it.  We shouldn’t be surprised that Jehovah’s Witnesses must do a bit of hemming and hawing about this passage:

My Lord and my God!: Lit., “The Lord of me and the God [ho the·osʹ] of me!” Some scholars view this expression as an exclamation of astonishment spoken to Jesus but actually directed to God, his Father. Others claim that the original Greek requires that the words be viewed as being directed to Jesus. Even if this is so, the intent of the expression “my Lord and my God” is best understood in the context of the rest of the inspired Scriptures. Since the record shows that Jesus had previously sent his disciples the message, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God,” there is no reason to believe that Thomas thought that Jesus was the almighty God. (See study note on Joh 20:17.) Thomas had heard Jesus pray to his “Father,” calling him “the only true God.” (Joh 17:1-3) So Thomas may have addressed Jesus as “my God” for the following reasons: He viewed Jesus as being “a god” though not the almighty God. (See study note on Joh 1:1.) Or he may have addressed Jesus in a manner similar to the way that servants of God addressed angelic messengers of Jehovah, as recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures. Thomas would have been familiar with accounts in which individuals, or at times the Bible writer of the account, responded to or spoke of an angelic messenger as though he were Jehovah God. (Compare Ge 16:7-11, 13; 18:1-5, 22-33; 32:24-30; Jg 6:11-15; 13:20-22.) Therefore, Thomas may have called Jesus “my God” in this sense, acknowledging Jesus as the representative and spokesman of the true God.

Some argue that the use of the Greek definite article before the words for “lord” and “god” indicates that these words refer to the almighty God. However, in this context the use of the article may simply reflect Greek grammar. Cases where a nominative noun with the definite article is used as vocative in Greek can be illustrated by a literal translation of such scriptures as Lu 12:32 (lit., “the little flock”) and Col 3:18–4:1 (lit., “the wives”; “the husbands”; “the children”; “the fathers”; “the slaves”; “the masters”). In a similar way, a literal translation of 1Pe 3:7 would read: “The husbands.” So the use of the article here may not be of significance in determining what Thomas had in mind when he made his statement.[37]

The Witnesses’ commentary here would divert us from the obvious meaning by noting that some commentators (which ones, why no references?) suppose that Thomas is not addressing Jesus but exclaiming like many in our culture, “Oh my God!”  But the Witnesses’ commentary knows that is not the case, so they resort to the view that Thomas is acting like others who have been in the presence of the Angel of Yahweh and addressed him as God.  But we have already seen that the Angel of Yahweh was Yahweh, not a created being, so addressing him as Yahweh was entirely appropriate.  Knowing this, the Witnesses’ commentary explores the idea that the use of the definite article in Thomas’ remark, “the Lord of me and the God of me,” is more a function of the vocative voice in Greek than a testimony to Thomas’ belief that Jesus is Yahweh.

The vocative in Greek is the form Greek speakers give to expressions of declaration or address like this one by Thomas.  There is a question as to whether the vocative is being used here.[38]  We would expect the vocative to read, ho kuri’e kai ho the’e, as in Matthew 27:46, but it reads instead, ho kurios kai ho theos, which are typically nominative in form, not vocative.  However, many Greek speakers used the nominative like a vocative.

But it doesn’t matter!  Thomas is here addressing Jesus as his God.  And if Jesus is not God, Jesus should correct Thomas.  This is what those mistaken for God did in Scripture.  In Revelation 19:9,10, the apostle John says he fell at an angel’s feet to worship him, but the angel corrected him, saying, “Don’t do that (literally, watch out), I am a servant like you and your brothers who holds to the testimony of Jesus.”  Then the angel says, “Worship (literally, bow down to) God.”  But Jesus doesn’t correct Thomas.  He receives what Thomas says of him.  He is Thomas’ Lord and God.  He is not ‘a’ god but ‘the’ God.

So could John have intended in John 1:1c that the Word was ‘a’ god?  Hardly.  Everything else in the rest of John’s Gospel screams that his view of Jesus is that he is the true God, God Almighty, Yahweh Himself, worthy of worship.  And we have already seen that this is consistent with John’s other writings, specifically Revelation, where John acknowledges that Jesus is the Alpha and Omega that the Father also claims to be (see chapter 2 and Revelation 22:12,13) and depicts Jesus as receiving the same praise and worship as the Father (Revelation 5:12,13).

But there is more evidence concerning John’s worldview that would prevent him from ever believing that Jesus was ‘a’ god, a created being, no matter how powerful or exalted.

 

 

John’s Old Testament Heritage

Could John have intended that the Word was ‘a’ god?  Wouldn’t it make sense that John’s worldview was shaped by the Old Testament Scriptures?  It is not inconsistent for him to view Jesus as Yahweh, because as we have seen, there are two Yahweh’s in the Old Testament, one of whom is often designated as the Angel or Messenger of Yahweh.  And as we will see, there are multiple Messianic prophecies that also suggest there is more than one person who makes up the Godhead.

The Priest Forever

This is a psalm of David, according to the heading, and Jesus takes it this way in his questioning of the Pharisees (Matthew 22:41-46).  The importance of this is that David speaks of Yahweh and David also speaks of his Lord, two different personages, both of whom David views as more authoritative than him.  As the most powerful man in his kingdom, David should submit to no one other than God.

Yahweh to my Lord:  Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.  The rod of your strength Yahweh will send from Zion.  Rule in the midst of your enemies.  Your people will be willing in the day of your power, dressed in the garments of holiness, your young men like dew from the womb of the morning.

  Yahweh has sworn and will not retract it:  You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.

 My Lord is at your right hand.  He will crush kings on the day of his wrath.  He will judge among the nations, piling up bodies and crushing the head of the earth.  He will drink from the brook along the way and so lift high his head.

The Pharisees recognized the “the Lord” about whom this psalm was speaking was the Messiah.  They understood the Messiah to be an offspring of king David who would have the right to David’s throne and fulfill the prophecies of the restoration of that throne.  So Jesus asks them the logical question:  How can this “Lord” be David’s offspring and yet be David’s Lord?  The one who is the progenitor is lord over the descendant.

The only way Messiah can be David’s Lord is if he is God.  But David clearly makes a distinction between David’s Lord and Yahweh.  Yahweh, who speaks here to David’s Lord, defeats David’s Lord’s enemies, and declares David’s Lord a priest (in addition to a king) in the order of Melchizedek, who himself was both a king and a priest (see Genesis 14:17-24).  David’s Lord sits at Yahweh’s right hand, leads his armies in battle, and judges all the nations.

We know that the Messiah, Jesus, was able to be David’s Lord as well as David’s offspring, because Yahweh God, the Son, took on human nature and was born in David’s line to David’s offspring Mary.  Jesus was both divine and human, was both God and man.  He did not give up being God to become human, but retained two natures, deity and humanity.  After all, how could God stop being God.  That’s impossible!

God with Us

The prophet Isaiah has been sent to the king of Judah, Ahaz, to warn him against fearing the alliance of Israel with Syria, against fearing their coalition’s attack of Judah, and against Judah allying with Assyria.  Yahweh offers Ahaz a sign to strengthen his faith that the two kings of these nations will come to nothing, but Ahaz, with false piety, refuses, saying he will not tempt Yahweh this way.  Isaiah says this wearies Yahweh and that Yahweh himself will nevertheless give Ahaz a sign.

Therefore, my Lord will give you a sign.  Look, a virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and she will call his name Immanuel.  He will eat curds and honey when he learns to reject evil and choose the good.  For before the boy learns to reject evil and choose the good, the land of the two kings you fear will be forsaken. (Isaiah 7:14-16)

Some interpreters see this as a direct prophecy of Jesus’ birth.  After all, Matthew quotes it (Matthew 1:23) as fulfilled by Jesus.  However, I view this prophecy and the child born to the virgin in Isaiah’s day, as a typological prophecy.  By that is meant that the prophecy, because it relates to a prophet, Isaiah in this case, must also find expression in the Messiah in the future.  It is Isaiah’s child who is born and who provides a sign to Ahaz, timewise, as to how short a time it will be before these kings come to nothing.  But Messiah is the ultimate prophet, and so this event must somehow be ultimately fulfilled by Jesus.

And so, whereas Isaiah’s wife, the virgin at the time of his marriage to her, conceives in the normal way, through sexual intercourse with her husband, and names her son Immanuel, which means God With Us (signifying that God will be with and protect Judah), the ultimate fulfillment is that Jesus’ mother is a virgin when she conceives and remains so, having had no sexual intercourse, and her son truly and literally is God with us.  The ultimate fulfillment always takes it to a more literal and extraordinary level.

Another example of this is the prophecy in Psalm 34:20, of the righteous man, “[the Lord] protects all his bones, not one of them will be broken.”  The righteous man, for whom God promises protection in exaggerated terms, is, like the prophet, a type of the truly righteous One, Christ, with whom God fulfills this promise in literal terms.  John 19:36 shows us that what was figuratively true of the righteous person has been literally fulfilled in Christ.  Not one of his bones was broken on the cross.  Just as it is literally fulfilled this way with Jesus, so the prophecy of Messiah being God With Us is literally fulfilled in Jesus.

The Everlasting Father, the Mighty God

Isaiah has another prophecy about the Messiah that is equally as astounding as his prophetic word that the Messiah will be God with us, and is, in fact, a continuation of that prophetic word.  It begins with Isaiah seeing that the northern region of Israel, inhabited by the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali, and otherwise known as the area of Galilee, will see a great light and a removal of their oppressors (Isaiah 9:1-5).  And the way this will come about?

For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be upon his shoulders.  And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.  Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end.  He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever.  The zeal of the Yahweh Almighty will accomplish this. (Isaiah 9:6-7)

Isaiah’s children have been used by Yahweh as signs to His people, including, as we have seen, to Ahaz, king of Judah.  Here will be another child, a son, who will fulfill the prediction of Genesis 3:15, that the seed of the woman would crush the head of the serpent and restore God’s kingdom.  This son, this seed of the woman, will rule on his father David’s throne and establish worldwide peace and righteousness forever.  And he will rightly be called “Mighty God” and “Everlasting Father.”  These terms are quite inappropriate for any created being to wear.  They belong rightly and only to Yahweh Himself.  But this is Yahweh who has taken on human nature, Yahweh the Son.  Jesus rightly fulfills this prophetic word.  He is not ‘a’ god, but the God.

One Like a Son of Man

Daniel has a vision, in chapter 7 of the book of Daniel, concerning the kingdoms of the world and God’s rule over them.

“As I looked, thrones were placed, and the Ancient of Days took his seat; his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames; its wheels were burning fire.  A stream of fire issued and came out from before him; a thousand thousands served him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him; the court sat in judgment, and the books were opened….

“I saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was presented before him.  And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed. (Daniel 7:9–10,13-14, ESV)

Daniel’s vision has two main actors, the Ancient of Days, or Yahweh, and this one like a son of man, that is, to all appearances, a man.  But this man is given all authority over every kingdom and people on earth, a kingdom that will last forever and will never be destroyed.  This is surely God’s kingdom.  And all persons shall “serve” him.  The word for “serve” here is used also in Daniel 3:12,

There are certain Jews whom you have appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. These men, O king, pay no attention to you; they do not serve your gods or worship the golden image that you have set up. (ESV)

The idea of serving gods is parallel to worship.  The one like a son of man to whom the Ancient of Days gives all the kingdom is served, that is, worshiped.  When this chapter 7 vision is interpreted for Daniel, at the end he is told this,

And the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High; his kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.’ (ESV)

 Here it is the Most High to whom the kingdom belongs and whom all the peoples of the earth serve and obey.  The Most High and the one like a son of man both share the same obedience and worship, and are both said to possess this everlasting kingdom.

The Messenger of the Covenant

In Malachi’s prophecy Yahweh is reprimanding His people, responding to their complaints and murmurings.  In chapter 3 Yahweh declares that He will send a messenger to prepare for His coming:

“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says Yahweh of hosts. (Malachi 3:1)

So who is coming?  Yahweh says He is coming and that is why He is sending His messenger (Malachi’s name and the word usually translated “angel” in our texts is the word used here and translated, “my messenger”).  Israel is seeking the Lord (Master, adonai) and they delight in the messenger, who is coming.  Yahweh is coming to His temple and the messenger is coming.

But he is not coming in a way that Israel will enjoy.  He is coming in judgment.

But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire and like fullers’ soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, and they will bring offerings in righteousness to Yahweh. (Malachi 3:2–3)

Malachi is predicting the end of the age and the final judgment, with Israel being restored to faith and righteousness.  Yahweh is doing this, and the messenger of the covenant is doing this.  They are equated in their actions and in Israel’s desire to see them.

Interestingly, when Jesus refers to this passage, he relates it to John the Baptist.  John the Baptist is the messenger that Yahweh has sent to prepare His way.  But that means then that Jesus is Yahweh, whom John the Baptist is preparing God’s people to receive.  Jesus does say, “If you will receive it,” this John the Baptist is Elijah whom Malachi later predicts (4:5,6) will come before the “great and terrible day of Yahweh,” that is, before this day of judgment at the end of days.

Jesus’ first coming did not result in this judgment because he first had to die for our redemption.  It is Jesus’ second coming that will result in the final judgment.  There will likely be another Elijah like prophet to announce that coming.

What we are seeing is that the Apostle John’s perspective is informed by the teachings and prophecies of the Old Testament.  He could not conceive of Messiah, the Son of Man in Daniel 7, as ‘a’ god.  Though a predicate nominative coming before the verb and having no article, as in John 1:1c (“and the Word was theos”) cannot be understood as indefinite, ‘a’ god.  That does not fit with John’s consistent testimony in the rest of his Gospel, nor with John’s Old Testament perspective and heritage.

 

 

John’s Unity with Other New Testament Authors

As we’re seeking to understand how to translate John 1:1c, we’ve seen that three possibilities exist, “and the Word was a god,” “and the Word was divine,” and “and the Word was God.”  We’ve been trying to show why it could not or would not make sense for John to be saying that Jesus was ‘a’ god.  Would the apostle John be out of step with the other apostles and view Jesus as a created being?  John spoke of the unity of the apostles in 1 John 1,

What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have beheld and our hands have handled concerning the Word of life – and the life was manifested, and we have seen and bear witness and announce to you that eternal life which was with the Father and manifested to us – what we have seen and heard, we announce also to you, that you also might have fellowship with us.  And this fellowship of ours is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ. (verses 1-3)

We can see that the rest of the apostles whose writings we have in our New Testament, did not view Jesus as a created being but as the One who was worthy of worship, the living and Almighty God, Yahweh Himself, the Yahweh who called fire and brimstone from Yahweh out of heaven (Genesis 19).

The Apostle Peter

We hear Peter’s voice through the Gospel of Mark (tradition tells us that Mark recorded Peter’s expression of the gospel) and through Peter’s letters, 1&2 Peter.  And in both places we see clear recognition that Jesus is God.

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, Son of God.  As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, “Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, a voice of one crying out in the wilderness, ‘prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.'”  John the baptizer came in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for forgiveness of sins. (Mark 1:1-4)

 Mark’s quotation is actually a combination of Malachi 3:1, which we saw earlier, and Isaiah 40:3.  Yahweh is sending His messenger before the face of the Messenger of the Covenant, Malachi tells us, and Isaiah says this voice crying in the wilderness is preparing the way for Yahweh (translated “Lord” in our text).  Mark identifies the voice crying in the wilderness as John the Baptist’s voice, and of course, John the Baptist is preparing the way for Jesus.  Jesus is that Messenger of the Covenant of Malachi 3 and Yahweh of Isaiah 40.

They came carrying with them a paralytic, borne up by four of them.  And because they were unable to bring him before Jesus on account of the crowd, they took the roof apart where he was, and digging out the roof they lowered the mat on which the paralytic was lying.  Seeing their faith, Jesus said to the paralytic, “Child, your sins are forgiven.”  The Scribes sitting there reasoned in their hearts, “Why is he saying this?  Blasphemy!  Who is able to forgive sins except God alone?” (Mark 2:3-7)

The reasoning of the Scribes is valid.  Only God can forgive our sins.  Jesus offers proof that “the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth” (verse 10) by healing the paralytic.  Jesus uses this title that we have seen comes from Daniel 7, the one like a son of man to whom all the kingdoms of earth are given and whom all the people of earth give service or worship to.  Jesus is exercising his authority now.  He expresses that authority again in another instance.

When Jesus’ disciples are picking heads of grain on the Sabbath, because they are so hungry, the Pharisees take exception.  But Jesus gives them biblical evidence that their understanding of the law of the Sabbath is incorrect, and then seals that by declaring, “The Son of Man is Lord indeed of the Sabbath” (Mark 2:28).  There is only one Lord of the Sabbath, only one person who can declare the meaning of the Law, and that is Yahweh.

Then there is Peter’s address to the recipients of his second letter.

Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have been chosen for the equally privileged faith as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ, grace to you and peace be multiplied in the knowledge of our God and Jesus our Lord. (2 Peter 1:1,2)

It is acknowledged that this could be translated, “the righteousness of our God and of our Savior Jesus Christ,” making this a righteous act of both the Father and the Son, in line, perhaps, with verse 2, “the knowledge of our God and Jesus our Lord.”  And even if it were, this would be an acknowledgement that Jesus and the Father are equal, both choosing us in righteousness, both multiplying grace and peace to us through knowing them.

But there is every reason to translate Peter’s greeting in the way I have above, making an even clearer statement by Peter that Jesus is both God and Savior.  In his letter it has been noted[39] that (1) Peter uses the term “savior” only without the definite article (soter) and only referring to Jesus, (2) “savior” never stands by itself but is always connected to a preceding noun with the definite article, and (3) the two nouns so linked always refer to the same person, Jesus.  Here are the four usages:

 

1:1     tou        theou       hemon      kai soteros Iesou Christou

The       God          of us         and savior Jesus Christ

 

1:11   tou       kuriou       hemon      kai soteros Iesou Christou

The      Lord           of us         and savior Jesus Christ

 

2:20 tou       kuriou       hemon      kai soteros Iesou Christou

The       Lord          of us         and savior Jesus Christ

 

3:2   tou       kuriou                        kai soteros

The       Lord                           and savior

 

3:18 tou       kuriou       hemon       kain soteros Iesou Christou

The       Lord          of us          and savior Jesus Christ

 

Peter’s clear pattern is to conceive of the two titles as describing one person.  Peter does not consider Jesus ‘a’ god, but the God.  And that is equally clear from the doxology Peter gives to Jesus in 3:18:

Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, to whom be glory both now and for eternal days.

Doxologies belong to God only.  New Testament doxologies are regularly addressed to God the Father (Romans 16:27; Jude 25; and 1 Peter 4:11, for example), but there are four doxologies made to Jesus (2 Timothy 4:18; 2 Peter 3:18; Revelation 1:5-6; and 5:13).  The latter two doxologies are found in the apostle John’s writings, showing that he is in absolute agreement with the rest of the apostles as to Jesus’ deity.

The Apostle Paul

Paul has one of those doxologies to Jesus,

The Lord will deliver me from every evil work and save me to His heavenly kingdom.  To Him be glory for ever and ever, Amen. (2 Timothy 4:18)

The “Lord” whom Paul is praising is the one who, according to verses 16 and 17, stood by him during his first trial in Rome and enabled him to proclaim the gospel and enabled his release.  It is Jesus who did this.

And Paul, like Peter, includes both the Father and Jesus in his blessings to his letter readers:

• • Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. (Romans 1:7; 1 Corinthians 1:3; 2 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 1:3; Ephesians 1:2; Philippians 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 1:2; Philemon 3)
  • Paul and Silas and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, grace to you and peace.  (1 Thessalonians 1:1)
  • Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior. (Titus 1:3)
  • Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord. (1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:2)

For Paul, both the Father and the Lord Jesus are the equal source of grace, mercy and peace.

Paul also identifies Yahweh with Jesus on several occasions:

• • He quotes Joel 2:23, “Whoever calls on the name of Yahweh will be saved,” in Romans 10:13 in reference to Jesus. As he says there, “If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (10:9).
  • Paul alludes to Jeremiah 9:24, “‘Let him who boasts boast of this, that he understands and knows Me, that I am Yahweh who exercises lovingkindness, justice and righteousness on earth; for I delight in these things,’ declares Yahweh,” when he says in 1 Corinthians 1:31, “As it is written, ‘Let the one who boasts make his boast in the Lord.'” Paul has just described Jesus as the one who has become wisdom for us from God, has become our righteousness, holiness and redemption, and as he says in the second chapter, the one whom he preaches.
  • Paul quotes Isaiah 40:13, “Who has known the mind of Yahweh so as to instruct him?” and then declares, in his next words, “But we have the mind of Christ,” (1 Corinthians 2:16).
  • Paul tells us in Philippians 2:9-11 that God has exalted Christ and given him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. He is referencing Isaiah 45:23, which says, “By myself I have sworn; from my mouth has gone out in righteousness a word that shall not return:  ‘To me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear allegiance.’”  Paul is attributing to Jesus what Yahweh has attributed to Himself.

In 1 Corinthians 1:2 Paul describes believers as those who call upon the name of Jesus in prayer.  Should we pray to ‘a’ god?  Of course not!  No one but God Himself should receive prayer.

Paul makes an extraordinary statement in 1 Corinthians 8:6. He says, “But to us there is one God the Father, from whom are all things and we are for him, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we are through him.”  This is a clear reference to Deuteronomy 6:4, which says, “Hear, O Israel, Yahweh our God, Yahweh is one.”  Jehovah’s Witnesses would have no trouble explaining that there is only one God the Father, but how could it be possible that there is only one Lord?  Witnesses might perhaps say there is only one Lord Jesus Christ.  But why is he called “Lord”?  Isn’t the Father the Lord?  Of course He is, and that is what makes this statement so extraordinary.  Both the Father and Jesus are the Lord.  Paul includes both here with unique prepositions (“from” whom and “through” whom) but has them on equal footing.

In Colossians 2:9 Paul has begun defending against the false philosophies the Colossians have been influenced by and argues that they shouldn’t accept these non-Christ-centered alternatives, “Because,” as he says, “in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”  What is the fullness of the Godhead?  We may describe God’s fullness using the Westminster Shorter Catechism answer to the question, “Who is God”:  God is a spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.  God’s fullness is all the attributes of God that make Him God.  And all those attributes belong to Jesus in addition to His human nature.  He is God and He is human.  To not acknowledge Jesus’ deity is to embrace a false theology.

And this is why Paul uses a Christian hymn in Philippians 2:5-11 to describe the humility of Jesus Christ.  As Paul writes, “Think this way in yourselves as also Christ Jesus did, who, though he existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be greedily grasped, but emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant, becoming in the likeness of humans, and while found in guise as a human, humbled himself by becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross” (Philippians 2:5-8).

Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation purposely obscures the plain meaning with their translation of verse 6:

who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God.[40]

Jesus existed in equality with the Father, in the form of God, “infinite, eternal and unchangeable in His being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth.”  God cannot become not-God, and Jesus did not become not-God, but gave up acknowledgement and worship as God by taking on human nature.  It is this humbling of himself that resulted, Paul says, in him being exalted by the Father and given the name that is above all names (verse 9), and there is no name higher than God’s name.  Jesus is God.  That is Paul’s testimony.

The Apostle Matthew

We’ve already seen that it is Matthew who sees in Jesus the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 of the virgin bearing a son who is God with us.  And like Mark, Matthew identifies Yahweh, who is coming and being announced by John the Baptist, as Jesus (Matthew 3:1-6).  And also, like Mark, in Matthew 9:1-8 Matthew also recounts Jesus forgiving a man’s sins to the shock and horror of the Pharisees, who consider this blasphemy, and such it is if Jesus isn’t God.

Matthew recounts Jesus’ trial before the chief priests and the Sanhedrin where Jesus is asked to declare whether he is the Messiah and the Son of God (Matthew 26:57-68).  There Jesus declares that their description is true but that in the future they will see the Son of Man seated at God’s right hand and coming on the clouds of heaven, a clear reference as we have seen to the figure in Daniel 7 to whom all kingdoms will be given and whom all will serve and worship.  The chief priest says at this response, “He has blasphemed!  What more do we need of witnesses?  See now, you hear this blasphemy.”  This means the religious leaders recognize in Daniel’s prophecy that this figure, one like a son of man, is deity, is God, who alone deserves worship, and whom to claim to be is blasphemy if one is not God.

Matthew also records Jesus’ declaration that he is the sender of prophets, sages and teachers whom the ungodly will persecute (Matthew 23:34).  This is an action that is only elsewhere attributed to Yahweh, as in Jeremiah’s calling and Isaiah’s sending, and all the other prophets (Genesis 45:8; Isaiah 6:8; Jeremiah 1:7; 2 Samuel 12:1; Ezekiel 2:3; Amos 2:11; 3:7).

And Matthew relates Jesus’ commission to his disciples to make disciples of all nations and to baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19).  To be baptized in these names makes them equal in authority and glory.

The Author of Hebrews

We don’t know who the author of Hebrews was, or whether he was an apostle, but his letter has been received by the church as Scripture.  And in the opening of his letter he is at pains to make the point that Jesus is superior to angels.  The reason for this argument is that his audience, Jews who have professed faith in Jesus as Messiah, but who are considering abandoning Christianity for their previous Judaism, are steeped in the notion that angels delivered the Law.  So they might be willing to consider that Jesus is such an angel, a created being, whom God has used to proclaim the gospel.

But the author of Hebrews insists that Jesus is the Son and superior to angels (chapters 1 and 2), superior to Moses and Joshua (chapters 3 and 4), superior to the priesthood of Israel (chapters 5 through 7), superior as the mediator of the New Covenant (chapter 8), and superior as the sacrifice that truly takes away sin (chapters 9 and 10).  Angels have no equality with the Son, nor do any of Israel’s prophets or leaders.

Understanding that the kings of Israel were types or foreshadowings of the Messiah, the author of Hebrews quotes Psalm 45, a wedding song for the king and his bride, as applicable to the Messiah, Jesus the Son of God, and what it says there of the king of Israel must be taken more literally and supremely of the Christ.  And it says,

But to the Son, Scripture says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the upright scepter will be the scepter of your kingdom.  You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness.  For this reason God your God has anointed you with the oil of gladness with your companions.”  And also, “In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands.  They will all pass away, but you remain, and they all like an old cloak will be rendered obsolete, and you will roll them up like clothing, and like a cloak they will be removed.  But you are the same and your years will not cease.”

The second quote comes from Psalm 102:25-27.  Each of these quotes then refer to Jesus as God.  Even if we take the first one to read, “God is your throne,” which is a possibility, the passages overall are meant to refer to Jesus as God and therefore superior to angels.  The Psalm 102 passage is referring directly to Yahweh and the author of Hebrews applies it to Jesus.  God is the same, He does not change.  This is a divine attribute.  And the author of Hebrews doubles down on that when he says, in 13:8, “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”

In Hebrews 1:6 the author says of Jesus, “Let all the angels of God worship him,” worship Jesus, and the author is quoting the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 32:43, which is clearly referring to worship of Yahweh.  This is why this author refers to Jesus as, “the exact imprint of [God’s] nature” (1:3).  For him, Jesus is God, not ‘a’ god.

The “Apostle” James

The James who authors the epistle in our New Testament is not the Apostle James, brother of the Apostle John.  That James was killed by Herod early in the days after Jesus’ resurrection and ascension (Acts 12:1,2).  This James is the half-brother of Jesus, son of Mary and Joseph, we may presume, who became a leader in the Jerusalem church (Acts 15; Galatians 1:19; 2:12).

James says, “My brothers, do not associate partiality with the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ” (James 2:1).  To call Jesus glorious is to speak of his deity.  God and His name are “glorious” (Deuteronomy 28:58; 33:29; 1 Chronicles 29:13; Nehemiah 9:5; Psalm 66:2; Isaiah 3:8; 4:2; 11:10; etc.)

It is true that other passages, however, speak of things glorious besides God:  Psalm 45:13 (the king’s bride); Isaiah 28:1,4 (Ephraim); 64:11 (the temple); Jeremiah 14:21; 17:12; Matthew 19:28; 25:31 (the throne of Yahweh); Jeremiah 48:17 (the Davidic king); Luke 9:30 (the splendor of Moses’ and Elijah’s appearance); Acts 2:20 (the Day of the Lord); 2 Corinthians 3:8,9 (the ministry of the Spirit in the gospel); 3:9,10 (the ministry of the Law); Ephesians 1:18 (the inheritance of God’s people); Ephesians 3:16 (God’s riches); Philippians 3:21 (Christ’s resurrection body); 1 Peter 1:8 (the believer’s joy in faith).  There is a relative glory to humans and things associated with God.

Could James conceivably view Jesus as relatively glorious but not divine?  Possibly, but James would need to explain this since his bare statement sounds like he is giving Jesus the glory that properly belongs to the Father.  Yahweh tells us in Isaiah 42:8, “I am Yahweh.  That is my name.  I will not give my glory to another or my praise to idols.”

James also attributes actions and roles to Jesus as Lord that are attributed to Yahweh in the Old Testament:

Be patient, then, brothers and sisters, until the coming of the Lord.  Look how the farmer waits patiently for the precious fruit of the earth, until it receives the early and late rain.  You also be patient, strengthen your hearts, because the Lord’s coming has drawn near.  Do not grumble among yourselves, brothers and sisters, lest you be judged.  Look, the judge stands at the door.  Take as an example, brothers and sisters, the suffering and patience of the prophets who spoke in the Lord’s name.  We consider blessed those who endured.  You have heard of the endurance of Job and you know the end accomplished, because the Lord is very compassionate and merciful. (James 5:5-11)

It is the Lord (Jesus) who is coming soon.  It is the Lord (Jesus) as Judge who is standing at the door.  It is the Lord (Yahweh) who was compassionate to Job.  For James, it is the Lord across the board.  Jesus is Yahweh.

 

So if John is in unity with the rest of the apostles as he claims in 1 John 1, then he could not mean by “and the Word was theos” the sense of “and the Word was a god.”  That is not what the rest of our New Testament writers believed.  Besides, Yahweh clearly declares in Isaiah 43:10, the founding verse of Jehovah’s Witnesses, “‘You are my witnesses,’ declares Yahweh, ‘and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he.  Before me no god was formed, nor will there be after me.’”  Jesus cannot be ‘a’ god whom Yahweh formed.  He hasn’t and won’t do that.  There is only one God and this one God is a plurality within the one.

 

 

Is the Word (the) God or Divine?

If “and the Word was a god” is not a viable translation for John 1:1c, then what is?  Is the predicate nominative, “theos (God),” definite (even though there is no definite article there) or qualitative (purposely left without the definite article to emphasize a qualitative meaning)?  Either one is a viable choice, with multiple other examples in John and the New Testament as parallels.

The Case for “the Word Was Divine”

The qualitative sense for predicate nominatives without the direct article is fairly common in the New Testament.  Here are some examples:

• • John 1:14, ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο (“The Word became flesh”) – Jesus did not become “a” or “the” flesh, but flesh as an element.
  • John 2:9, τὸ ὕδωρ οἶνον γεγενημένον (“the water had become wine”) – not “a” or “the” wine but wine as a substance
  • John 3:6, τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τῆς σαρκὸς σάρξ ἐστιν, καὶ τὸ γεγεννημένον ἐκ τοῦ πνεύματος πνεῦμά ἐστιν (“that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit”) – That which is born of the flesh is not “a” flesh or “the” flesh, but the quality “flesh”

But here is the question:  Would the word “God” be used in that qualitative way?  There is no example of this in the New Testament unless John 1:1c is that example, but it is not impossible.  It is possible that John left the definite article off of theos purposely to direct us to a qualitative meaning.  His concern would be that if he made the word “God” definite (‘the’ God) as he did in the second part of the verse (“and the Word was with [the] God”) it might communicate that the Father and the Son were the same person.

What would the qualitative sense communicate?  John would be saying that the Word, Jesus, was the quality of God.  We might communicate that with the ideas of Jesus being of the same essence as the Father, divine in the sense that he has all the attributes of God.  And again, this would lead to an understanding that the one God has a plurality of personalities.  He is not one person but one being with three personages.  Of course, John doesn’t mention the Holy Spirit here, but once we see that there can be two personages in the Godhead we can then see three as well.

We don’t have a qualitative version of the word “God” in our language.  The best we could do would be something like, “and the Word was Godness.”  But that is not really a word we use.  We have resorted to using the word “divine” to convey the sense of being God or the word “deity” to convey that same meaning.  If we translate, “and the Word was divine,” we run into the danger, however, that this word would not convey full deity, because we often use “divine” for things less than God.  “Deity” doesn’t seem to have that same limitation, so perhaps the better translation would be, “and the Word was deity.”  This communicates that Jesus was fully God but not the same person as the Father.

The Case for “the Word was God”

It is equally possible that John intended us to see theos as definite even without the definite article.  There are plenty of examples of this in the New Testament, as well:

• • John 1:41, εὑρήκαμεν τὸν Μεσσίαν, ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον χριστός (“We have found the Messiah, which being translated is [the] Christ”) – If there is equivalence between the Hebrew and the Greek, τὸν Μεσσίαν, the Messiah, must translate as ὁ χριστός, the Christ.
  • John 18:13a, ἦν γὰρ πενθερὸς τοῦ Καϊάφα (“for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas”) – Unless Caiaphas had more than one wife, and therefore more than one father-in-law, definite is the only possibility.
  • John 18:13b, ὃς ἦν ἀρχιερεὺς τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου (“he was the high priest that year”) – Unless there was more than one high priest, definite is the only possibility.

But as has been remarked earlier, making theos definite in meaning here might lead readers to think that the Word and the Father (God) were one and the same person.  There are, however, several factors that militate against this:

1. 1. John has made it clear in the second part of his statement about the Word (“and the Word was with God”) that the Word and God are separate persons.
   2. John shows us the apostle Thomas’ response to the risen Lord Jesus in John 20:28, where Thomas says, “My Lord and my God.” The definite article is on the word theos, “God.”  John is endorsing “the God” as a legitimate title for Jesus without, apparently, concern for confusion about Jesus being a separate person from the Father.
   3. The Old Testament gives precedent for two Yahwehs without concern that they would be confused as one person. This suggests that “the God” is not always intended as a specific identification of the Father, just as Yahweh is not always intended as a personal name for one person.  Recall Genesis 19:24, “Then Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from Yahweh out of heaven.”

The translation of this sense would be the traditional translation of John 1:1c, “and the Word was God.”  By not using a definite article on “God” we achieve almost the same meaning as the qualitative interpretation.  Jesus is God, fully divine, absolute deity, but not the same person as the Father.

Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot accept either the qualitative or the definite meaning for kai theos ēn ho logos.  Each one contradicts their view of Jesus as being the highest created being in the universe.

 

 

It might seem sad that so many false teachers have arisen to challenge the church and her adherence to Jesus Christ, but in fact, it is these false teachers and their false doctrines that have served to strengthen the church in two ways.  Our interaction with the false teaching has honed our understanding of the truth and how to defend it.  And the abandonment of some to follow false teachings has revealed who are and who are not true believers.  What the devil meant for evil, God has used for good.

We will never be free of false teachers.  People who desire control and acclaim will always need to have something unique about them to draw people to them.  A distorted perspective on the Scriptures is a convenient avenue for gathering followers.  Like Russell and Rutherford and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, you can play on people’s ignorance of Scripture by slipping in your own clever interpretations.  So believers, know the Scriptures!

[1] see https://www.4witness.org/101-translations-of-john-11-and-the-word-was-god/ and the few translations the Jehovah’s Witnesses produce that support their translation, https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989307

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorationism

[3] ttps://web.archive.org/web/20060320020952/http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/history/3worlds.pdf, page 158.

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jehovah’s_Witnesses

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jehovah’s_Witnesses

[6] https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jw-doctrine-changes/

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jehovah’s_Witnesses

[8] Vindication, Vol. 1, by J.F. Rutherford, (1931), p.338–339, “There was a measure of disappointment on the part of Jehovah’s faithful ones on earth concerning the years 1914, 1918, and 1925, which disappointment lasted for a time. Later the faithful learned that these dates were definitely fixed in the Scriptures; and they also learned to quit fixing dates for the future and predicting what would come to pass on a certain date, but to rely (and they do rely) upon the Word of God as to the events that must come to pass.”

[9] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-study/meaning-jesus-ransom-sacrifice/

[10] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-study/meaning-jesus-ransom-sacrifice/

[11] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-study/meaning-jesus-ransom-sacrifice/

[12] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-study/what-happens-when-we-die/

[13] There Will Be a Resurrection! (jw.org)

[14] https://www.scribd.com/document/299915150/Watchtower-Should-You-Believe-in-the-Trinity-1989

[15] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-teach/jehovah-meaning-of-gods-name/

[16] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/bible-teach/jehovah-meaning-of-gods-name/

[17] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/1/

[18] http://www.creationstudies.org/Education/quotations.html

[19] https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/good-news-from-god/who-is-jesus-christ/

[20] https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101978608

[21] Adapted from Rabach Symon Odek’s article, The Promise “I Am Coming Soon” in Revelation (http://archive.atsjats.org/Odek%20-%20The%20Promise%20final%20format.pdf)

[22] https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/good-news-from-god/who-is-jesus-christ/&sa=D&ust=1593548193545000&usg=AFQjCNGrDmbriFhlSrHQAqwAok6Y_7On3A

[23]https://7esl.com/prepositions/#:~:text=In%20the%20English%20language%2C%20prepositions%20are%20words%20which,%28%20prepositions%20of%20movement%20%29%2C%E2%80%A6%20in%20a%20sentence.

[24] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Henry_Thayer

[25] https://biblehub.com/greek/4314.htm

[26] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bauer%27s_Lexicon

[27] https://www.wenstrom.org/downloads/written/word_studies/greek/pros.pdf

[28]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329148193_History_of_the_Jewish_interpretation_of_Genesis_126_35_322_in_the_Middle_Ages

[29] https://www.compellingtruth.org/majestic-plural.html#:~:text=The%20Latin%20language%20has%20another%20term%20for%20the,ancient%20Hebrew%2C%20Punjabi%2C%20Telugu%2C%20Hindustani%2C%20and%20Egyptian%20Arabic.

[30] A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament, E. C. Colwell and Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1, Philip B. Harner

[31] See Appendix 2

[32] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/1/#v43001001

[33] https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001070673

[34] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/8/#v43008058

[35] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/10/

[36] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/12/#v43012041

[37] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/john/20/#v43020028

[38] https://www.billmounce.com/blog/%ce%ba%cf%85%cf%81%ce%b9%ce%bf%cf%82-nominative-or-vocative-john-20-28

[39] Murray J. Harris, Jesus as God, pp. 234-235

[40] https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/philippians/2/