Need refutations for attacks on the Deity of Christ

[CutlerB]

Dear community,

Here I go again about the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I have their book “Reasoning from the Scriptures” in German, and they address some arguments for the Deity of Christ in them, especially those concerning Titles of God applied to Christ. I need some refutations on these, as they are getting me quite confused and also as they will come up in discussions with a friend of mine (JW).

For any of you who have the book in digital or print, I’ll be translating the German version, so the wording may be different in the original English.

Texts, in which a Title of Jehovah is said be or is really applied to Jesus Christ

Alpha and Omega: Who does the title really belong to? (1) According to Revelation 1:8 to God Almighty. (2) Many translators of Revelation to Hebrew recognised that the One described in verse 8 was Jehovah and thus inserted the personal name of God. (3) Revelation 21:6, 7 shows that Christians, who prove to be victorious in faith, are „sons“ of Him, who is referred to as the Alpha und Omega. That is nowhere said about the relationship of spirit-born Christians and Jesus Christ. Jesus always called them his “brothers” (Heb. 2:11; Mat. 12:50; 25:40). These „brothers“ of Jesus are called „sons of God“ (Gal. 3:26; 4:6). …] (5) In Revelation 22:13 it is said about the Alpha and Omega it is “the First and the Last”, and this expression is applied to Jesus Christ in Rev 1:17, 18. But the expression “Apostle” is also applied to Jesus Christ as well as some of his disciples. Is it therefore really proof that it is the same person being talked about or that these persons are equal?(Heb. 3:1). All of this shows that the Title of “Alpha and Omega” refers to the Father and not to the Son.

Saviour: God is repeatedly called the “Saviour” in the Bible. In Isaiah 43:11, God even says: “There is no Saviour apart from me.” But Jesus Christ is also called Saviour in the Bible. Is that to mean that Jesus and God are the same? Certainly not. Titus 1:3, 4 speaks of “God, our Saviour” and then of “God, the Father, and Jesus Christ our Saviour”. Therefore both persons are saviours. Jude 25 explains this connection, when it says “God, who by our Lord Jesus Christ is our Saviour” (Italics ours) (See also Acts 13:23.) In Judges 3:9 the same Hebrew word as in Isaiah 43:11 (mōschía‛, translated „Saviour“ or „liberator“), is applied to Othniel ?], a judge in Israel, but that would certainly not mean that Othniel was Jehovah. If one reads Isaiah 43:1-12 in context, the meaning of verse 11 becomes clear: Jehovah alone brought salvation to Israel, not a god of the nations.

God: Jehovah says in Isaiah 43:10: „Before me there was created no other god, and so after me there will not be any.“ Does Jesus Christ therefore have to be Jehovah, because he is called “mighty god” in Isaiah 9:5 (NW 9:6)? once again the context says no. No idolatrous pagans had created a god before Jehovah, because there had been no one before Him. Neither could anybody create a living, true god in the future, who would be able to prophesy (Isa 46:9, 10). But that doesn’t mean that Jehovah never brought forth anyone, who was rightly called “god” (Ps 82:1, 6; Jn 1:1, NW) In Isaiah 10:21 Jehovah is called “mighty God” just as Jesus Christ is in Isaiah 9:5 (9:6 NW); but only He is called “God Almighty” (Gen 17:1)

If one finds a certain title in Scripture in more than one place, one should not deduce too quickly that it always refers to the same person. Otherwise one would have to consider Nebukadnezzar Jesus Christ, as both are called “lord of lords” (Dan 2:37; Rev 17:14) and that Jesus’ disciples were actually Jesus as both are called “light of the world” (Mat. 5:14; Jn. 8:12). We should therefore consider the context and other passages in Scripture, that use the same term.

Passages from the Hebrew Scriptures that refer undoubtably to Jehovah, but are applied by the inspired writers to Jesus Christ

Why are the words from Isaiah 40:3 quoted in John 1:23 and applied to the work of John the Baptist in preparing the way for* Jesus Christ*, when in Isaiah 40:3 the way is explicitly to be prepared for Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. he came in the name of his Father and had the assurance that his Father would always be with him, because he did what was pleasing to the Father. (Jn 5:43; 8:29)

Why are the words from Psalm 102:25-27 applied to the Son in Hebrews 1:10-12, when the psalmist obviously addressed them to God? Because it was no one else than the Son, through whom God accomplished the works of creation. (see Colossians 1:15, 16; Proverbs 8:22, 27-30) 2 Samuel 7:14 is quoted twice in Hebrews 1:5b and applied to the Sohn of God. This text was fulfilled first in Solomon, but later in Jesus Christ, but that doesn’t mean that Jesus and Solomon were one and the same person. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and conducted a work, that was foreshaddowed by Solomon’s. (Lk 11:31)

I know this is a lot of text, but maybe the points can be grouped. I hope somebody can show either their error or explain the Trinitarian position. Thank you in advance.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

[BIBLEDRB]John 1:1-3[/BIBLEDRB] and [BIBLEDRB]1 John 5:20[/BIBLEDRB] and [BIBLEDRB]John 14:9[/BIBLEDRB] and [BIBLEDRB]Colossians 1:16[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[CutlerB]

[BIBLEDRB]John 1:1-3[/BIBLEDRB]

I’m sorry, but neither does the verse tell me exactly what you mean (Although I of course agree that Jesus is God) nor do the JWs agree with the translation and this takes people into a complicated debate on Greek grammar.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

I’m sorry, but neither does the verse tell me exactly what you mean (Although I of course agree that Jesus is God) nor do the JWs agree with the translation and this takes people into a complicated debate on Greek grammar.

I edited in some more quotes.

Contrast John 1:1-3 with Colossians 1:16 and Genesis 1:1.

 

[CutlerB]

I edited in some more quotes.

Contrast John 1:1-3 with Colossians 1:16 and Genesis 1:1.

Ah, ok. I get it. But there’s a lot more in the text they wrote up there…

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

Ah, ok. I get it. But there’s a lot more in the text they wrote up there…

[BIBLEDRB]John 14:8-9[/BIBLEDRB]

So, if you have seen Christ you have seen the Father, that is, if you have seen Christ you have seen God.

If you have seen Christ and thus have seen the Father, all names and attributes except ‘God the Father’ are names and attributes of Christ. Or am I talking nonsense now?

 

[CutlerB]

[BIBLEDRB]John 14:8-9[/BIBLEDRB]

So, if you have seen Christ you have seen the Father, that is, if you have seen Christ you have seen God.

If you have seen Christ and thus have seen the Father, all names and attributes except ‘God the Father’ are names and attributes of Christ. Or am I talking nonsense now?

No, you’re certainly not! It makes sense to me, but it just won’t to my JW friend. One thing he’ll point to is Proverbs 8:22, saying that Jesus was created. (And in many German Bibles it uses the word ‘geschaffen’, in English ‘created’)

 

[adrift]

There argument is from their viewpoint that Jesus is not God. Their arguments are meaningless because Jesus IS God

They do not believe in the Trinity. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one. They argue from the mistaken idea that Jesus is not God. Since Jesus IS God their arguments are meaningless.

They have had to translate their bible in such away to eliminate the obvious references that Jesus is God.

Stumper’s for Jehovah Witnesses

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

No, you’re certainly not! It makes sense to me, but it just won’t to my JW friend. One thing he’ll point to is Proverbs 8:22, saying that Jesus was created. (And in many German Bibles it uses the word ‘geschaffen’, in English ‘created’)

In Dutch it uses the word ‘geboren’ which is equal to ‘born’ or ‘begotten’. At least in Proverbs 8:24. The KJV uses ‘brought forth’ there.

The LXX uses tikto, which means to bring forth as well. So I see no problem

 

[CutlerB]

There argument is from their viewpoint that Jesus is not God. Their arguments are meaningless because Jesus IS God

They do not believe in the Trinity. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one. They argue from the mistaken idea that Jesus is not God. Since Jesus IS God their arguments are meaningless.

They have had to translate their bible in such away to eliminate the obvious references that Jesus is God.

Stumper’s for Jehovah Witnesses

Well, the translation of Proverbs 8:22 as “created” is actually also present in the “Einheitsübersetzung”, a Catholic translation, commissioned by the Bishops’ Conference, if I am not mistaken.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

The KJV says:

22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: 28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: 29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: 30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; 31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.

The Douay says:

[BIBLEDRB]Proverbs 8:22-31[/BIBLEDRB]

Nothing about ‘creating’ Christ there, only of eternally begetting.

 

[savedwretch]

How about Jesus’ own claims to divinity?
John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”
John 8:58, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”

Or tying the first chapter of John together.
John 1:1,“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.”, further in John 1:14 we read, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

How about Jesus’ own claims to divinity?
John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”
John 8:58, “Before Abraham was, I AM.”

Or tying the first chapter of John together.
John 1:1,“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.”, further in John 1:14 we read, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

We already had those except John 8:58, which is a VERY GOOD one. Compare John 8:58 with Exodus 3:14.

[BIBLEDRB]Exodus 3:14[/BIBLEDRB]

 

[fhansen]

Dear community,

Here I go again about the Jehovah’s Witnesses. I have their book “Reasoning from the Scriptures” in German, and they address some arguments for the Deity of Christ in them, especially those concerning Titles of God applied to Christ. I need some refutations on these, as they are getting me quite confused and also as they will come up in discussions with a friend of mine (JW).

For any of you who have the book in digital or print, I’ll be translating the German version, so the wording may be different in the original English.

I know this is a lot of text, but maybe the points can be grouped. I hope somebody can show either their error or explain the Trinitarian position. Thank you in advance.

Scripture can be argued plausibly either way on the deity of Jesus but take all of the OT and NT together and their words loudly proclaim one single message: God alone saves; only God can save man. And guess what? The name “Jesus” happens to mean “God is salvation.”

The New Covenant is all about God, rather than man, saving man. And it just so happens that when we’ve seen Jesus we’ve seen the Father (John 14). When Peter received his experience at the Transfiguration this is exactly the profound, humanly unachievable revelation he was given -that Jesus was no mere created man, but the eternal Son of the Living God. He simply* had* to be in order to be worthy and capable of saving man, i.e. God must do this work Himself.

 

[CutlerB]

We already had those except John 8:58, which is a VERY GOOD one. Compare John 8:58 with Exodus 3:14.

[BIBLEDRB]Exodus 3:14[/BIBLEDRB]

They are on those already. Their argument in short:

I and the Father are one: It’s about their goal, purpose or aim.

I am: They cite all sorts of translations from others to support their claim. They translate it: “I have been.” The Jews were asking for his age, not his identity, they said. In addition JWs say: “Nobody ever tried to apply I AM to the Holy Spirit.”

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

They are on those already. Their argument in short:

I and the Father are one: It’s about their goal, purpose or aim.

I am: They cite all sorts of translations from others to support their claim. They translate it: “I have been.” The Jews were asking for his age, not his identity, they said. In addition JWs say: “Nobody ever tried to apply I AM to the Holy Spirit.”

The Greek is ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν, which can impossibly be translated as “I have been”. It should be translated as “I am the being.” That is exactly what God says to Moses in the Septuagint when asked about His Name. That it is being interpreted as a statement that Christ is divine is seen by the reaction of the Jews to him, they tried to stone Him because He said He is God.

 

[CutlerB]

Scripture can be argued plausibly either way on the deity of Jesus but take all of the OT and NT together and their words loudly proclaim one single message: God alone saves; only God can save man.

Well, of course. I fully agree with everything you say, but here’s what JWs say:

“God does save man, but through Jesus Christ. So God is our Saviour afterall.”

 

[CutlerB]

The Greek is ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν, which can impossibly be translated as “I have been”. It should be translated as “I am the being.” That is exactly what God says to Moses in the Septuagint when asked about His Name. That it is being interpreted as a statement that Christ is divine is seen by the reaction of the Jews to him, they tried to stone Him because He said He is God.

I fully agree. Yet every time I bring this up, they jump to another verse and ignore the point. It’s frustrating.

 

[Credo_ergo_sum]

I fully agree. Yet every time I bring this up, they jump to another verse and ignore the point. It’s frustrating.

That means you won the argument and they can’t refute you

Well, of course. I fully agree with everything you say, but here’s what JWs say:

“God does save man, but through Jesus Christ. So God is our Saviour afterall.”

St. Athanasius says: “For He was made man that we might be made God”. How than can we partake of the divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) if God hasn’t been made man? What use would it have been if a mere man had died on the cross? How can a mere man do miracles by himself. “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up (John 2:13-25)”. How can mere man resurrect himself?

 

[fhansen]

Well, of course. I fully agree with everything you say, but here’s what JWs say:

“God does save man, but through Jesus Christ. So God is our Saviour afterall.”

A created being cannot be The Savior. Only God can be the ‘Savior of the world’ (John 4:42). This is the profound revelation Christianity eventually leads one to.