Jehovah's witnesses and Revelations 3:14

  • Thread starter Thread starter excaliber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

excaliber

Guest
Jehovah’s witnesses
say that “The Amen” spoken of in Revelations 3:14 is Christ.

The verse also say’s that the Amen is the first CREATION by God.

What dose this verse actualy mean?

Obviously it is not saying that Christ was created!!!
 
excaliber said:
Jehovah’s witnesses
say that “The Amen” spoken of in Revelations 3:14 is Christ.

The verse also say’s that the Amen is the first CREATION by God.

What dose this verse actualy mean?

Obviously it is not saying that Christ was created!!!
Click to expand...
No, “the Amen” is Christ, yes but they are misinterpreting the second part of the Passage. In my Bible it points to Chapter 14 Verse 6 of John, because “Amen” means when literally translated into English, is “In Truth”. Jesus says in John 14:16 “I am the way the Truth and the life”. So “The Amen” is “The Truth” which is Jesus.

However the second part of the text actually says “the beginning of the creation of God”, NOT “The First creation”.

“Beginning” and not “First”. There is a huge diffrence here. Beginning implies that creation could not have occured without Christ who was there at the beginning, not created first.

If we, as Church tradition allows, assume that the Author of Apocalypse WAS the same author as the Gospel of John(Abiet a co-author if you consider that his community was definatly involved) This becomes even more concrete because if you look at the first few verses of the Gospel, it says the exact same thing, that the Word was with God and was God, in the beginning… Before Creation occured.
 
colliric said:
No, “the Amen” is Christ, yes but they are misinterpreting the second part of the Passage. In my Bible it points to Chapter 14 Verse 6 of John, because “Amen” means when literally translated into English, is “In Truth”. Jesus says in John 14:16 “I am the way the Truth and the life”. So “The Amen” is “The Truth” which is Jesus.

However the second part of the text actually says “the beginning of the creation of God”, NOT “The First creation”.

“Beginning” and not “First”. There is a huge diffrence here. Beginning implies that creation could not have occured without Christ who was there at the beginning, not created first.

If we, as Church tradition allows, assume that the Author of Apocalypse WAS the same author as the Gospel of John(Abiet a co-author if you consider that his community was definatly involved) This becomes even more concrete because if you look at the first few verses of the Gospel, it says the exact same thing, that the Word was with God and was God, in the beginning… Before Creation occured.
Click to expand...
That’s the problem when a bible (the NWT) is a paraphrase of an outdated English text (the KJV). What the KJV renders in 17th-century English as “the beginning of the creation of God” means, in modern English, “the source (or origin) of God’s creation”.

As John wrote in his gospel, “He created everything there is. Nothing exists that He didn’t make.” (John 1:3)

If Jesus created every created thing, then Jesus cannot be a creature.
 
PaulDupre said:
That’s the problem when a bible (the NWT) is a paraphrase of an outdated English text (the KJV). What the KJV renders in 17th-century English as “the beginning of the creation of God” means, in modern English, “the source (or origin) of God’s creation”.

As John wrote in his gospel, “He created everything there is. Nothing exists that He didn’t make.” (John 1:3)

If Jesus created every created thing, then Jesus cannot be a creature.
Click to expand...
This is of cause correct. However one should have no problem with the older english Text(my version is the Douay Rheims) when it’s correctly understood as indicating that Christ was there at the Beginning, and is the Beginning, or “source” as modern english puts it.
 
colliric said:
This is of cause correct. However one should have no problem with the older english Text(my version is the Douay Rheims) when it’s correctly understood as indicating that Christ was there at the Beginning, and is the Beginning, or “source” as modern english puts it.
Click to expand...
Agreed, and I love the DR. The problem I was pointing out is that the NWT is just a paraphrase, and not a translation. Had the JW authors of the NWT bothered to learn Greek and consult a few ancient manuscripts, they would not have made such an error.
 
I don’t like the fact that it is so EASY to interpret that incorectly.

I have a Jw background, so what they taught me will always be in my head.

But verses like that should help you understand why Jw’s feel like they do. That seems to be an honest mistake, not one they did on purpose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top