For Everything There is a Season

Posted by Clark Bates
January 18, 2020




I was asked last year how I got involved in apologetics, and to be honest, I hadn’t reflected on that for quite some time. In one form or another, I have been engaged in apologetic ministry for roughly a decade, and in all that time of reading, studying, speaking and writing, it becomes easy to lose sight of how everything began. One day you’re just an apologist. You don’t know when you went from studying to be an apologist to being one, but at some point, everything shifted.

As I reflect on it now, I have to say that I entered the world of apologetics a few years after coming to Christ. You see, prior to my being a follower of the Lord I was not a good man. My sins were many and some were illegal. While I had been justified a few years prior, the crimes I committed caught up with me and I had to face justice for them. While I was in prison, I was given a pair of headphones that were useful for two things: listening to AM/FM radio and the television in the common area. I wasn’t much for television, so I used them for radio. The only problem was that the prison house was cinderblock, as was my cell, which creates an excellent barrier to prevent radio signals from getting in. This meant that it was very difficult to find a radio station that I could receive in my cell, let alone a Christian one.

I was able to dial in one Christian radio station, but it only came in if I laid on my bed in my cell, pushed right next to the window. On Sunday afternoons, there was a program that broadcasted in San Diego right around lunch, for 1 hour. That radio program was called Stand to Reason. Yes, this is the same Stand to Reason operated by Greg Koukl, Amy Hall, and Alan Shlemon. For one hour, every Sunday Greg answered calls and dealt with the evidence for the Christian faith. In the darkest corner of my world, his voice was a beacon of light, reminding me that my faith was not vain. It strengthened me in ways that I can never express or repay.

After my release, I returned to my life, began working, and returned to serving my local church as I was able. I bought Josh McDowell’s book, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, and read it cover to cover. Before long, I was sharing in the adult Sunday Schools what I was learning. I read vociferously, digesting all four volumes of Norm Geisler’s Systematic Theology, Frank Turek’s I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist, and everything from Ravi Zacharias. It wasn’t long before I was teaching regularly in the church and fighting a pull on my heart to serve the Lord in some form of teaching ministry. The effectual calling upon me was confirmed by the elders of my church and I approached the pastor to share what was on my heart. To be honest, I thought I was crazy, because there was no way a felon could serve the church (at least that’s what I thought). But my pastor encouraged me to pursue the calling and begin the degree process to receive an MDiv. Not having had any education prior, this meant 7 years of schooling, but I signed up and my journey began.

As the years, and my training progressed I grew in wisdom and stature (metaphorically) with the Lord and others. I began to preach and teach in my church and others. I visited gatherings that were

interested in answering objections to the faith and helped strengthen the Body as I was able. Several years in, I was gifted with a scholarship to attend Frank Turek’s Cross Examined Instructor’s Academy, and I can honestly say that it changed my life. I learned how to focus my time and work in apologetics and to become a master of just one topic, rather than mildly familiar with many. I was fortunate to attend two Academies at different years and build a strong working relationship with many fellow apologists. From then to now, I have operated this website, completed my Master’s degree and continued to speak at various events in the areas I’ve lived. I’ve seen apologetics ministry go from being something almost unheard of to existing in every corner of the internet. For good or bad, apologetics and apologists are everywhere, and the Christian faith, to one degree or another, is being defended. For that I thank God.

But now we come to where I am at today. As I sit at my keyboard, I am in the final stages of a Master’s Thesis for my second Master’s degree. I took on this second degree as I felt the call of God on my heart with more clarity and a call to academic study. To attain a PhD, I must have a Master’s of Theology, so here I am, at the end of that road. To reach this destination I was given the inexpressible gift of a Fellowship at Phoenix Seminary to work under the intellectual giants, Dr. Peter Gurry and Dr. John Meade. I have been blessed beyond measure to travel to Oxford, England and learn paleography; to work with the Museum of the Bible and the University of Birmingham as a transcriber of Greek manuscripts; I have held the oldest fragment of the Gospel of Matthew in my hands, and I have humbly sat under the teaching of great and godly men and women. The baby Christian in that San Diego prison cell could never have fathomed where his life was headed.


All of that to say this, Lord willing, I will be working toward a PhD next year, and it will demand all of my focus and time for several years. Assuming anyone regularly reads this blog, it has probably been noticeable that I have posted less and less in the last year. This is because the sheer demand on my time is already very heavy and as much as I love apologetics, I simply cannot keep up. I have taken a great deal of time delaying this decision. I have prayed about it. I have sought counsel about it. And I believe that it is the right thing to do. At the end of this month, I will shut down this website and close the social media platforms for ExeJesus ministries. If asked, I will gladly speak at any gathering that would have me, but my time as an apologist has come to an end. I will always be thankful for everyone who encouraged me, supported me, and challenged me along this journey. And I will always defend the faith with love and compassion whenever I am asked about the hope that rests within me.

If I may pass on some parting words from ten years of observation, it is this: the best apologetic is the one that listens to the other person before speaking. It is the one that cares about the skeptic in the same way that it cares about the Christian. Apologetics is a part of evangelism, but it is not evangelism. Evangelism shares the beauty of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with a lost and dying world. You can be an excellent apologist and have answers for every question, but never share the Gospel. My parting plea to the numerous young apologists out there is simply this: love your enemy, because they will know we are Christians by our love. There is no other way.

---

May the Lord Bless You

May He Keep You

       May He Make His Face to Shine Upon You

  And be Gracious to You

         May the Lord lift up His Countenance Upon You

And Give You Peace.

The Deity of Christ in the New World Translation: Alpha and Omega, Beginning and End

Posted by Clark Bates
July 10, 2017



It is only fitting to conclude this short series with a passage from the book of Revelation.  As has been demonstrated in the previous article in this series, as well as those before it, the divinity of Christ bleeds from the pages of Scripture in such a way that it cannot be hidden.  The New World Translation (NWT) of the Bible is the unique translation of the Watchtower Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses), created with the express purpose of denying that truth.  When we engage with those trapped in this deception, ground cannot be gained by arguing against their translation, doing so will only shut down the conversation.  This is why I recommend using the Bible that they bring to your doorstep to show them the Truth.  As in all the posts in this series, all biblical passages are drawn from the NWT without any reference to other translations of the Bible.

Revelation 1:8 and 1:17

When we come to the book of Revelation, we see the capstone of God’s redemptive plan.  In it, we find possibly the most direct association of Jesus Christ with Yahweh (Jehovah) of the Old Testament.  The first instance of this comparison is found in the opening chapter of John’s apocalypse.  From the NWT we read:


“I am the Alʹpha and the O·meʹga,” says Jehovah God, “the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.”
Rev. 1:8 (NWT)


And also,


“When I saw him, I fell as dead at his feet.  And he laid his right hand on me and said: “Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last, and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of the Grave.”
Rev. 1:17-18 (NWT)[1]


When dealing with verse 8 of Revelation 1 it is clear that the one speaking is Jehovah God of the Old Testament.  The one, true God according to the Watchtower Society.  Lest there be any doubt that this is the conclusion of the Jehovah’s Witnesses and not merely a personal interpretation, the footnotes of the NWT contain this marginal reference attached to verse 8:


“Listen to me, O Jacob, and Israel, whom I have called.  I am the same One.  I am the first; I am also the last.”
Isaiah 48:12 (NWT)[2]


The reference to Jehovah as the “Alpha and Omega” is a clear reference to the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, and indicative of God’s sovereignty over the beginning and end of time.  It would not be out of line to acknowledge that this suggests His sovereignty over all that transpires in between as well.


The marginal note connecting verse 8 to Isaiah 48:12 is additionally clarifying given its acknowledgment of Jehovah God as “the first and the last.”  As we can see by looking at vv. 17-18, the one speaking to the Apostle John also identifies as “the first and the last.” 

The question to ask the Watchtower member is, “Who is speaking to John in verse 17?”


Before it can be asserted that the Being-in-Question is Jehovah, we must answer the additional title in v.18, “I became dead, and Look! I am living forever and ever. . .” 

Watchtower doctrine does not conclude that Jehovah has ever died and returned to life, therefore it cannot be Jehovah who is speaking.  Also, the marginal verses attached to this passage are 1 Cor. 15:45, 1 Pet. 3:18, and Rom. 6:9, all of which are references to Jesus Christ.  Therefore, while Rev. 1:8 attributes the title “Alpha and Omega” to Jehovah, a reference to “the first and the last” of Is. 48:12, Rev. 1:17 attributes the same title “the first and the last” to Jesus Christ; a clear indication of the equal divinity and sovereignty of our Lord.


But wait, there’s more!

Revelation 21:6 and 22:13

Only to further prove the connection between Jehovah and Jesus in the book of Revelation, we turn to chapters 21 and 22.  In them we read:


“And the One seated on the throne said: ‘Look! I am making all things new.’ Also, he says: ‘Write, for these words are faithful and true.’  And he said to me: ‘They have come to pass! I am the Alʹpha and the O·meʹga, the beginning and the end. . .’ ”
Rev. 21:5-6 (NWT)


And,


“‘Look! I am coming quickly, and the reward I give is with me, to repay each one according to his work.  I am the Alʹpha and the O·meʹga, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. . . ‘I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to you . . .’ ”
Rev. 22:13; 16a (NWT)

By combining the opening descriptor, “the One seated on the throne” with “the Alpha and Omega” the reader is forced to recall both the description of Jehovah in Rev. 4:1 and Ez. 1.[3]  In so doing, the author is clearly speaking to Jehovah.  Yet again, as in Rev. 1:8 and 17, we read in Rev. 22:13 the ascription of “Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end . . .” to Jesus.  The identity of the speaker in v.13 is made clear by the self-attestation of v.16.  The author parallels the pattern at the close of Revelation that he utilizes at its opening creating an inclusio or “book-end” to the writing.


“This is the last of the . . . ‘Alpha and Omega’ passages, and fittingly all three types of this saying are found here . . . . The titles refer to the sovereignty of God and Christ over history . . . . Since this is the only passage to contain all three titles, it has the greatest emphasis of them all on the all-embracing power of Christ over human history.”[4]

 

The divinity of Christ is the foundation upon which the redemption of mankind rests, and no work of man to suppress this truth will ever succeed.

 

Conclusion

When presenting the divinity of Christ from the New World Translation of the Bible to a Jehovah’s Witness, it is always paramount that we do so with grace, mercy and love.  These passages are not to be used with an arrogant superiority but with a desire to plant the seed of truth within the heart of the unbeliever so that it might grow through the inner-working of Christ.  While it will be almost certain that the Watchtower member will attempt to deflect these passages as referring exclusively to Jehovah, a careful explanation, as has been given here, of the surrounding context will demonstrate the futility of such attempts.  The divinity of Christ is the foundation upon which the redemption of mankind rests, and no work of man to suppress this truth will ever succeed.  This is why even a biblical translation, created explicitly with this intent, cannot and will not succeed.





[1] All verses taken from https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/books/revelation/1/


[2] https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/books/isaiah/48/#v23048012


[3] Incidentally, these passages are also used as marginal references in the NWT demonstrating that even the Watchtower Society agrees on this point.


[4] Grant  R. Osborne, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: Revelation, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 789.

The Deity of Christ in the New World Translation: Philippians 2:9-11

Posted by Clark Bates
July 2, 2017



The heart of this series is to aid readers in evangelizing members of the Watchtower Society in the most direct way possible.  I believe that a particular avenue of this approach is to use their own Bible, the New World Translation (NWT), to demonstrate the deity of Jesus Christ (a doctrine the Watchtower Society expressly denies).  The simple truth is that the deity of Jesus is so replete in the pages of Scripture that it cannot be denied, even when a group attempts to create their own Bible.  Because the Jehovah’s Witnesses have translated their text from the Greek (even if fraudulently so) they have not been able to erase this truth.  There have been two other installments in this series and they can be read here and here.

The Carmen Christi

This week’s article will focus on a passage in Philippians often referred to as the Carmen Christi or the “Song of Christ”.  For our purposes here, the portion of the hymn to focus on is found in Phil. 2:9-11 and reads in the NWT as follows:


“For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend—of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground—and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.”


It is unlikely that the hymn Paul includes in his letter to the church at Philippi was created by him, but rather is a common song, well-known to the churches.  The verses that precede the passage above serve, for many in orthodox Christianity, as undeniable proof of Jesus’ equality with God.  It is said that Jesus “was in the form of God”, a translation of the Greek word μορφη (morphe) to be understood as having the exact nature of God.  For greater clarification, this is paralleled with the phrase “taking on the form of a servant.”  Unless we are to adopt the heretical view of Docetism, which viewed the human form of Jesus to be nothing more than a phantasm, we must accept that the use of μορφη in reference to Jesus’ human nature is the same as its use in regards to his heavenly nature.  That is to say, if Philippians 2:7 tells us that Jesus was truly human, Philippians 2:6 tells us that he is also truly divine.


The conclusion to the depiction of Christ’s voluntary humiliation on the cross is his exaltation with the Father, elucidated in verses 9-11.  Christ’s voluntary humiliation will, one day, result in the involuntary submission of all creation to his name.[1]  While much debate could be carried on with a member of the Watchtower Society regarding the early verses of the hymn, there is a specific reason that emphasis should be placed on these closing statements.

Isaiah 45:23

The conclusion of Philippians 2:9-11 is virtually a quotation of Isaiah 45:23. In the New World Translation, this passage reads,


“By myself I have sworn;
The word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness,
And it will not return:
 To me every knee will bend,
Every tongue will swear loyalty.”


The “I” of Isaiah’s prophecy is none other than Jehovah (v.21), therefore the person to whom every knee is to bow and every tongue confess is Jehovah God.  Yet Paul has applied this to Christ.

It must be stated as well, that during the first century, while Hebrew scrolls were somewhat available the texts more commonly used by the New Testament authors were the various Greek translations of the Hebrew scrolls.  Many such translations existed for various books of, what we call, the Old Testament, which we currently refer to collectively as the Septuagint (LXX).[2]

Observe the comparison of Philippians 2:10-11 with the LXX of Isaiah 45:23:

Philippians 2:10-11 (GNT)	Isaiah 45:23 (LXX)
10. Ινα εν τω ονοματι Ιησου παν γονυ καμψη επουραωινιων και επιγειων και       καταχθονιων 11. και πασα γλωσσα εξομολογησηται οτι        κυριος Ιησους Χριστος . . .	23.  . . .οτι εμοι καμψει παν γονυ και εξομολογησεται πασα γλωσσα τω θεω

Even if you are unable to read the Greek, simply by comparing the text in bold, you can see the exact same word usage between them.  There is no doubt that the apostle Paul, when recording this early Christian hymn in his letter, quoted directly from the Greek Old Testament, and chose a passage originally intended for Jehovah God but applied it to Jesus Christ.


If any argument is made regarding the use of “Lord” (κυριος in the Greek) as a title rather than a divine name, it should be pointed out that in Isaiah 45:25 of the NWT it states that


“In Jehovah, all the offspring of Israel will prove to be right,
And in him they will make their boast.”


Yet, in the LXX rendering of this same text “Jehovah”, or YHWH, has been replaced with “kurios”, the Greek word for Lord.  This demonstrates quite clearly, that within the context of the Greek OT, the very OT used in Philippians 2:10-11, the ascription of “Lord” to the name of Jesus Christ, is an ascription of deity, or the divine name of Jehovah.  The implications of such a comparison are as deep as they are wide, and cannot be ignored.

Conclusion

Quite a few debates have begun from the application of Old Testament Scripture to New Testament circumstances.  On many occasions, it is asserted the OT is misquoted.   At other times, it is asserted that the NT author is using the OT improperly, but for his own ends.  In some circumstances, this can be resolved with an examination of the Greek OT in contrast to the Hebrew, but often a clearer picture of the NT author’s purpose can be observed by expanding the reading in the OT beyond just the quoted text to the entire thought that surrounds it.[3]  Just as singing a single line from a popular song can bring to mind the entire song, a quotation from a Hebrew prophet would bring to the Jewish mind the entire prophecy from which it sprang.


In light of this, we must conclude by pausing to appreciate the stunning implications of applying Is. 45:23 to Jesus in its greater context.  Beginning in v.18, from the NWT, the text reads,

“ ‘I am Jehovah, and there is no one else. . . .

I am Jehovah, who speaks what is righteous and declares what is upright. . . .

They know nothing, those who carry around carved images

And pray to a god that cannot save them. . .

There is no other God but me;

A righteous God and a Savior, there is none besides me.

Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth,

For I am God, and there is no one else.

By myself I have sworn. . . .

To me every knee will bend,

Every tongue will swear loyalty.’ ”

The Carmen Christi, the Christ-hymn, patently expresses the conviction of the early church that the worship of Jesus Christ does not compromise Israel’s monotheistic faith.  On the contrary, Jesus Christ, the righteous Savior, bears the name of the one Lord, Yahweh, “to the glory of God the Father.”[4]


And the New World Translation of the Bible affirms this.

[1]   According to Moises Silva, quoting John Calvin, “Paul is not speaking here of voluntary obedience.” Moises Silva, Baker Exegetical Commentary Series: Philippians, (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 111.


[2] As an aside, when you find New Testament quotations of Old Testament passages that do not align with what you read in the actual passage, this is often because the source for the Old Testament in English is the Masoretic (Hebrew) text, while the source for the New Testament citation is the Greek text.  A study of these variations and their usage by the apostles is both profitable and recommended.


[3] A perfect example of this can be found in Matthew’s use of Hosea 11:1-2 in Matt. 2:13-15.  If one reads the entirety of Hosea 11, particularly vv.1-9, the deep Christology intended by Matthew becomes more clear.


[4] Silva, Philippians, 112.

The Deity of Christ in the New World Translation: John 12:41

Posted by Clark Bates
June 26, 2017



A cardinal tenet of Jehovah’s Witness doctrine is the belief that Jesus was not God, but a created being.  According to the Watchtower Society,


“God created Jesus before he created Adam. . . As God’s firstborn Son, Jesus was a spirit creature in heaven before he was born as a human on earth.”[1]


While orthodox Christianity and the Watchtower Society differ in many areas, none is more distinct or insurmountable than their denial of the deity of Jesus Christ.  At the root of this doctrine is the Society’s own translation of the Bible, known as the New World Translation.  This translation has been widely rejected by all Greek scholars for its multiple points of deviation and error from the manuscript data, but is cherished within the community of the Kingdom Hall.


That being said, most evangelistic engagements with Jehovah’s Witnesses, devolve into an argument over the deity of Jesus and the proper biblical translation to use.  In my experience, these kinds of debates are fruitless, because they revolve around attacking the Watchtower member’s cherished text, and while this may be justified, given the heretical deviations contained within the book, placing the Witness in a defensive position prevents any real dialogue from taking place.  If we are truly seeking to bring them to saving faith in Jesus Christ, it is not an argument we should wish to win, but their hearts.


If I may suggest a better approach, it is far more effective to testify to the deity of Jesus Christ with the Watchtower Society’s own Bible than to run into your house, grab your favorite translation and return for battle.  How is this possible?  The reality is, the deity of our Lord is so prevalent within the text of the New Testament that it practically bleeds from the pages.  Even the Watchtower Society, in spite of their best efforts, cannot overcome this.  One could legitimately point out that it would be impossible for those without the indwelling of God’s Holy Spirit to even realize these matters, but perhaps that discussion should be saved for another time.


The focus of this series will be to identify various passages taken from the New World Translation of the New Testament that clearly point to the divinity of Jesus Christ.  The purpose of this endeavor is to aid fellow believers in avoiding fruitless argumentation and open doors for Jehovah’s Witnesses to see the truth from the pages of their own Scriptures.  This week’s passage is John 12:36 – 41.

John 12:36-41

In the New World Translation (NWT), the passage reads:


“ ‘While you have the light, exercise faith in the light, so that you may become sons of light.’ Jesus said these things and went off and hid from them.  Although he had performed so many signs before them, they were not putting faith in him, so that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, who said: ‘Jehovah, who has put faith in the thing heard from us?  And as for the arm of Jehovah, to whom has it been revealed?’ The reason why they were not able to believe is that again Isaiah said: ‘He has blinded their eyes and has made their hearts hard, so that they would not see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and turn around and I heal them.’  Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory, and he spoke about him.”


Theologically and exegetically, this passage follows on the heels of the triumphal entry (John 12:12-19), and contains several statements from Jesus regarding, not only his manner of death, but the inability of some to believe he is who he claims to be; the Messiah.  While much could be said regarding the theological consequences of the Isaianic quotations and their illumination of the sovereign act of God in hardening the hearts of men and preventing them from seeing the light, that is not the key point of interest for this particular discussion.


John 12:38-40 contain two references from thebook of Isaiah, found in chapter 53 and in chapter 6.  This is a fact also acknowledged in the marginal notes of the NWT.[2]  The use of these passages in Isaiah is quite revealing of the gospel author’s intent for his audience.

Isaiah 53:1; 6:1-3; 8-10

Again, using the NWT, the text in Isaiah reads:


“Who has put faith in the thing heard from us? And as for the arm of Jehovah, to whom has it been revealed?”

Is. 53:1 (NWT)/ John 12:38b

“In the year that King Uz·ziʹah died, I saw Jehovah sitting on a lofty and elevated throne, and the skirts of his robe filled the temple.  Seraphs were standing above him; each had six wings.  Each covered his face with two and covered his feet with two, and each of them would fly about with two.  And one called to the other: ‘Holy, holy, holy is Jehovah of armies.  The whole earth is filled with his glory.’ . . . . Then I heard the voice of Jehovah saying: ‘Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?’ And I said: ‘Here I am! Send me!’  And he replied, ‘Go, and say to this people: ‘You will hear again and again, but you will not understand; you will see again and again, but you will not get any knowledge.’  Make the heart of this people unreceptive, make their ears unresponsive, and paste their eyes together, so that they may not see with their eyes and hear with their ears, so that their heart may not understand and they may not turn back and be healed.’”

Is. 6:1-3; 8-10 (NWT)/John 12:40


Many will recognize the first quotation as the opening for the famous “Suffering Servant” passage of Isaiah.  This is widely recognized by both orthodox Christianity and the Watchtower Society as a prophetic utterance from the prophet referring to the crucifixion of Christ.  Given that in John’s gospel, only five verses earlier, the Lord is said to be referring to “the manner in which he would die”, the connection to Isaiah 53 is clear and undeniable.


The second quotation is less recognizable, which is why I have chosen to include the opening verses of Isaiah 6 as a means of context and suggest that you do the same if using this particular method of engagement.  In Isaiah 6:1-3 we are given the vision of Isaiah as he enters the heavenly throne room of Jehovah.  It is said that the prophet sees the Lord sitting high and lofty on his throne with a train filling the temple and that his glory can be seen filling the entire earth.  It is a glorious sight.  It is in the presence of Jehovah that the prophet volunteers himself for service and is given the oracle to proclaim to Israel that they will be hardened against the Lord for their sins.

Wait. . .Who's glory?

In the gospel of John, the author is using the Isaianic as prophetic of the Jewish rejection of Jesus.  It is clear from the citations that the referent in Isaiah is the prophet’s experience with Jehovah, but then comes the intriguing statement of John 12:41,


“Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory, and he spoke about him.”


In John, the antecedent to the pronouns “he” and “him” is Jesus (from v.36b), which means the author is stating that in the heavenly throne room of Jehovah, the prophet Isaiah saw the glory of Jesus.  The only beings revealed by the prophet Isaiah to be part of the heavenly vision are Jehovah, the prophet himself, and several Seraphim (angels).  Clearly the prophet Isaiah could not be Jesus, as he is both mortal and the one having the vision, and Jesus could not be one of the Seraphim, as even the Watchtower Society acknowledges that this would contradict the teaching of Hebrews 1:4-8 in which Jesus is placed higher than the angels, which leaves only one being left in the throne room: Jehovah.  Yet, far from suggesting that Jesus is Jehovah, the apostle John is unambiguously tying Jesus to Jehovah and saying that, while in the presence of Jehovah, the glory spoken of by the angels, seen by the prophet Isaiah, was the pre-incarnate Christ.

Even if the Watchtower member is unwilling to acknowledge this point and suggests that the “he” of v.41 is a reference to Jehovah and not Jesus, the suggestion remains that Christ is the glory of Jehovah.  Why?  Because the Apostle is tying the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, recognized by the Watchtower Society as being Christ, to the throne room passage of Isaiah 6.  This is even more likely given the “dozen or so overtones of Isaiah 52:13 - 53:12 found within John 12 that show the Evangelist had the Servant Song in mind when he composed the chapter.”[3]

The Apostle John is clear, the prophet Isaiah, while in the presence of Jehovah God, was given a vision of His glory, and that glory was the pre-incarnate Christ.

Conclusion

What we have done with this post, and intend to do with several that follow, is utilize nothing more than the Bible carried by the Jehovah’s Witness to contradict the fundamental doctrine of the Watchtower Society.  What advantage does this provide?  It eliminates the argument over which translation should be used, and allows the believer to stay in contact with the Society member for the duration of the conversation.  The goal is no longer to show them how their Bible is wrong, but to show them how their Society is wrong about the Bible, and in particular, the Lord Jesus Christ.



[1] https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/jesus-gods-son/


[2] https://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/books/john/12/


[3] D.A. Carson, The Pillar New Testament Commentary: The Gospel According to John, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 450.

What Really Happened at Nicaea?

 

What Really Happened at Nicaea?

Posted by Clark Bates June 10,2016

      It's not uncommon for various Christian lecturers and apologists to be faced with the accusation that the canon of Scripture was not derived until the Council of Nicaea. It is believed by many, largely influenced by popular films, that at this council Jesus was given divine status over human status and what we now call the New Testament was derived by purposefully removing any texts that revealed Jesus to be merely mortal. Dan Brown's elderly character Lee Teabing from the best-selling Da Vinci Code famously states, “Jesus' establishment as the 'Son of God' was officially proposed and voted on at the Council of Nicaea. . . . A relatively close vote at that (233).” While it must be remembered that this is a work of fiction, written for popular appeal, the persistence of this accusation, in light of our series on canonical authorship, deserves a response.

      Before examining the historical account of what happened at Nicaea, a few practical considerations should be observed regarding this claim. First, if these allegations were true, it would require a nearly impossible feat of subterfuge. Given that the writings of the Christian Church had existed, been copied, and widely distributed for more than 2 centuries up to this point, to remove any texts that might have proven the mortality of Jesus over His divinity would necessitate the confiscation and destruction of every document, and copy, spread across the entire empire. This would have to be done completely and successfully, for if even one document remained, it could be re-circulated and re-copied. Second, to prove the claim that the canon of the New Testament derived from this council, it would need to be demonstrated that multiple “Christian” texts that spoke of Jesus only as human were in circulation prior to this period that held the same level of authority and recognition as those that exist today. Given the extremely high level of implausibility for the first consideration, and the lack of extant evidence for the second, any careful observer should take pause when this accusation is presented.

Getting back to the actual council, however, let's examine what history tells us regarding the Council of Nicaea:

      This council occurred in AD 325 in the province of Bithynia, now known as Isnik, Turkey. It holds a substantial place in Christian history for three reasons:

1. It was the first “ecumenical” (universal) council in the history of Christendom.
2. It served as a symbol of imperial involvement in church affairs (given that it was convened and presided over by the emperor Constantine).
3. It marked a crucial development in doctrinal history, by adopting a creed, backed up by anathemas, something heretofore nonexistent.¹

To the dismay of many popular conspiracy advocates, the Council of Nicaea was not convened to discuss the canon of Scripture. At no time during the three month adjournment did the bishops address the validity of any biblical text. The main purpose of the council was to attempt to heal the schism being created by a bishop named Arius.²

      To better understand what this schism regarded, it is helpful to regress to the time of the church leader, Origen. Greek philosophy had taught that God was impassible (unchanging), and this premise controlled intellectual theology. In an effort to ratify this philosophical tradition with biblical christology, Origen spoke of the incarnate Logos (Son of God) as that of the same Logos of the one true God. It was Origen that popularized the term “begetting” in relating the Son to the Father. Even assuring that the Son was of the same nature as the Father, Origen still posited a subordination of the Son to the Father. Arius, diverging from the teaching of his mentor Alexander, disputed that the Son could not be the same essence of the Father and share eternity without challenging the impassibility of God.

      The teaching of what came to be known as Arianism revolved around the central tenet that the divine being is unique, incommunicable, indivisible, and transcendent.³ Because of this, the Son could not be of the Father's being or essence but could only exist by the Father's will. As Arius famously stated, “There was a time when [the Son] was not.” Arianism also taught that the Son was a created being, less than divine, but more of an archangel. This doctrinal stance may sound familiar to some as it has been adopted by pseudo-Christian groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons). This teaching began to grow in favor, largely due to Arius' eloquence and skill with a pen, and became the reason for the convening of Nicaea in 325.

      So was the council, as Dan Brown said, the moment when Jesus was made divine by a narrow vote? Not quite. While the dispute with Arius did revolve around the divinity of Christ, the debate was not regarding His deity versus His humanity, but rather His divinity versus His angelic nature. Had Arius won the day, it would not have meant that Jesus was believed to be human, only that He was not viewed as equal with the Father. Was there a truly equal disagreement in Christendom relating to the divinity of Christ? Not according to the leading voices of the Christian Church leading up to the council:

Igantius (AD 105) - “God himself was manifested in human form.”⁴

Clement (AD 150) - “It is fitting that you should think of Jesus Christ as God.”⁵

Justin Martyr (AD 160) - “The Father of the universe has a Son. And He is . . . . even God.”⁶

          

Irenaeus (AD 180) - “He is God, for the name Emmanuel indicates this.”⁷

                    

Tertullian (AD 200) - “. . . Christ our God.”⁸

Origen (AD 225) - "No one should be offended that the Savior is also God...”⁹

Novation (AD 235) - "...He is not only man, but God also..." 

Cyprian (AD 250) - "Jesus Christ, our Lord and God."¹⁰

 Methodius (AD 290) - "...He truly was and is...with God, and being God..."¹¹

Lactantius (AD 304) - "We believe Him to be God."¹²

Arnobius (AD 305) - "Christ performed all those miracles...the...duty of Divinity."¹³

      Was the divinity of Jesus Christ determined by a narrow vote? No. A unique feature of the Council of Nicaea was the near unanimity of the vote to condemn Arius of heresy and to excommunicate him from the church. All but two bishops voted against Arius and to uphold the Orthodox teaching of the divinity of Christ, maintained for the first three hundred years of the Church's existence. Lastly, was the canon determined at Nicaea? As was mentioned above, no. In fact, as the series on New Testament authorship has shown, the existing New Testament was in circulation by name as early as 200 years prior to the convening of the council. Much to the chagrin of novel writers and those prone to conspiracies, history undermines the popular view. For Christians, the Council of Nicaea can be viewed in various ways, but ultimately it produced a historic creed that became the basis for those used in churches around the world for thousands of years:

We believe in God the Father almighty

maker of all things, visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,

The only-begotten of the Father,

that is, begotten of the substance of the Father,

God from God, light from light, true God

from true God,

begotten, not made,

of the same substance as the Father,

through whom all things were made, in

heaven and earth,

who for us humans and our salvation came

down, took flesh, and was made human,

suffered and rose again on the third day,

ascended into heaven,

and will come to judge the living and the dead.

And in the Holy Spirit.

1Everett Ferguson, Church History I: From Christ to Pre-Reformation, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 196-7.

2Walter Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, “Council of Nicaea” by C. Blaising, 2^nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 839.

3Elwell, Theology, 839.

4Ignatius, The Epistle of Ignatius, “Three Celebrated Mysteries” from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.v.ii.xix.html?highlight=god,himself,was,manifested,in,human,form#highlight

5Clement of Alexandria, The Second Epistle of Clement, Chapter I, from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf09.xii.vi.i.html?highlight=clement,it,is,fitting,that,you,should,think,of,jesus,christ,as,god#highlight

6Philip Schaf, The History of the Christian Church II, “The Divinity of Christ,” from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc2.v.xiv.ix.html?highlight=justin,martyr,the,father,of,universe,has,a,son#highlight

7Alexander Roberts and W.H. Rambaut, The Writings of Irenaeus (Edinburgh, 1868-9) from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/richardson/fathers.xi.i.ii.html

8Tertullian, Elucidations, from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf03.v.ix.xxxiii.html?highlight=tertullian,christ,our,god#highlight

9http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf203.vi.xii.ii.xvii.html?highlight=origen,the,son#highlight

10Cyprian, Epistle III, from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.iii.html

11Methodius, From the Discourse on the Resurrection, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.xi.v.i.html

12Lactantius, The Divine Institutes, from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf07.iii.ii.html

13Arnobius, The Seven Books of Arnobius Against the Heathern, from http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf06.xii.iii.i.i.html

Can you deny the Trinity and still be a Christian?

 

Can you deny the Trinity and still be a Christian?

Posted by Clark Bates

March 10. 2016

This question often gets posed in various forms, but in its most ambiguous rendering, it revolves around the question of what is fundamentally necessary for someone to experience salvation through justification, and what then becomes the foundation of doctrinal beliefs upon which a believer stands and matures.  Primarily, it begins with what you believe about Jesus. Jesus claimed to be God and to believe that He is God is to believe, either, that He is alone God or that there is some form of plurality in God.  Believing in the deity of Jesus is essential to salvation, therefore, to at least some extent, a comprehension of divine plurality parallels this.

If you deny the Trinity, then you have to answer the question, “Who was Jesus?” Oftentimes those who deny the Trinity diminish the deity of Christ (i.e. Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses. . .) or make Jesus the one, true God within strict monotheistic terms (i.e. Oneness Pentecostalism).  The divinity of Jesus is clearly taught in Scripture and affirmed throughout the early church, as is the doctrine of the Trinity, so let's examine first the biblical foundations of trinitarian belief and the apostles concept of the Trinity.  In so doing, we might come to a clearer picture of what is fundamentally necessary, verses what is a matter of spiritual maturity.

Does the Bible teach Trinitarianism?

To begin, the biblical passages in which monotheism (the belief in only one God, in contrast to a belief in a pantheon of gods) is illustrated are replete.   This was clearly the position of early Judaism, in spite of the polytheistic practices of Egypt and outlying nations, as expressed in the “Shema” of Deuteronomy 6:4, “Hear, O Israel, The LORD our God, the LORD is one.” And also seen later, pre-exilic Hebrew thought ,as observed in Isaiah 43:10, “You are my witnesses declares the LORD. . . before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.”   Even 1^st century Christianity asserts monotheism in passages such as James 2:19, “You believe that there is one God. Good! . .”, and the writings of Paul in 1 Cor. 8:4b, “We know that 'an idol is nothing at all in the world' and that 'There is no God but one.'”

However, at the first advent of Christ, the strict monotheism of Judaism was amended.  As Jesus walked on this earth He prayed exclusively to Yahweh, the Hebrew God, often referring to Him affectionately as “Father”.¹  In addition, He spoke of himself in divine terms and received worship reserved exclusively in the Hebrew faith for Yahweh alone.²  He also spoke of a third member, the Paraklete (Counselor) or Holy Spirit, that would come after His death.³  This third person was also spoken of in divine terms, broadening the monotheistic bedrock of Judaism into a trinitarian monotheism that became characteristic of first century Christianity.⁴  While the textual support for a triune God is far greater than the brief synopsis provided here, even in light of only the minimal facts, a denial of the Trinity on biblical grounds becomes problematic.

Did the apostles understand the Trinity?

Given that the earliest followers of Christ were the ones to hear this teaching directly, and subsequently the first “Christians” to receive salvation, it behooves us to ask whether or not they themselves understood or accepted the doctrine of the Trinity as part of their saving faith. It's fairly clear that the apostles were not able to receive every teaching of their Lord.  We read in Matthew 8:25-27 that in the face of Jesus' ability to calm a storm, they puzzled about what sort of man He was.  Again in Matthew 16:1-8 they misunderstand His teaching about the “leaven” of the Sadducees.  Once more, in Mark 8: 27-33 we find no less than the apostle Peter confessing the divinity of Jesus but within moments failing to completely grasp the totality of what it meant.

 

It was not until the later writings of the Apostle Paul that the implications of this trinitarian theology were expounded and creedal formulas were committed to the dogma of the church universal.⁵  The end result of this maturation of faith and understanding were recorded within the Apostles Creed and those that followed, stating belief in the divinity of Jesus, the Son, God the Father, and God, the Holy Spirit.   Prior to this, we read the words of Justin Martyr clearly speaking of the Christian God as triune(100-165), “The most true God is the Father of righteousness. . . . We worship and adore Him, the Son . . . and the prophetic Spirit.”⁶  Martyr was  followed shortly after by Irenaeus, student of Polycarp, student of John the Apostle,

 

"The church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit."⁷

Conclusion

In light of the progressively revalatory nature of the Trinity, what can we know? If the apostles did not understand the doctrine of the Trintty, need we?  In response, it must be stated that a lack of full understanding is not equivalent to denial.  It is not enough to say that the apostles did not fully understand the doctrine of the Trinity at the time of Jesus' teachings, or prior to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost.  While this remains true, it cannot be asserted as a reason for a prospective believer to deny the doctrine's truth. W hile the disciples may not have understood the Trinity in it's fullest sense at the time of their belief in Christ, they had accepted His divinity most certainly after the resurrection, and it was upon this foundation that the building blocks for greater understanding of trinitarian doctrine were laid.

 

As was stated at the beginning, for one to receive justification and redemption (i.e. salvation), they must answer the question, “Who was Jesus?”  According to Paul, one must declare that Jesus Christ is Lord (i.e. God) and believe that he rose again (i.e. died for your sins) to be saved.  On this basis, it cannot be argued that a person must have a fully formed, theologically defined, concept of the Trinity, but that they must accept that Jesus was God, and yet still prayed to God while speaking of another being (the Holy Spirit) as God. 

 

After this point of justification, if one proceeds in their faith and still denies the tri-une nature of God, they are in sin.  This does not make them unsaved, but it does place them outside the realm of orthodox, biblical Christian belief, and if at any point in a believer's life they find themselves living in such a manner, or professing a fundamental, theological position outside biblical Christianity, they need to re-examine their worldview in light of biblical teaching and consider where they may have erred.  While there will always exist nuances to this question and various forms of re-phrasing, it should be acknowledged that a denial of the Triune God is a denial of the teachings of Jesus Christ, but a lack of clear understanding in the matter is neither a barrier to one's salvation nor uncommon among many believers.

 

1Matt. 5:45-48; 11:25-27; Mk. 14:36; Lk. 22:29; 23:46; Jn. 5:17; 6:37.

2Jn. 5:18; Jn. 8:58; Matt. 23:63-65; Matt. 2:11; 28:9, 17.

3Jn. 14:15-21; 25-27; 15:26-27; 16:7-11.

4Acts 5:3-4; 2 Cor. 3:17.

5Rom. 8:2; 15:30; Eph. 4:30; 1 Cor. 2:11; 3:16; 6:19; 12:4-6; Gal. 3:2-5.

6Justin Martyr, Dialogue of Justin Martyr in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, Ed. Rev. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1885), 652.

7Irenaeus, Against Heresies in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1, ed.. Rev. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1885), x, 1.

How to discuss Jesus' deity with Jehovah's Witnesses