Jehovah's Witness Church

[NickHassan]

Hi casey,
There is only one God.
You say
“254“The Lord Jesus Christ” is now the full name or title of Jehovah the Son. “

There is no Jehovah the Son in scripture so where are you coming from?

[942767]

Hi Casey:

God has revealed to the church through the Apostle Peter that Jesus is His only begotten Son and His Christ. (Matthew 16:13-18)  Jesus as God's Christ did not teach his own thoughts.  He taught and obeyed the Word of God which comes from from God, and so when we worship him (do obeisance) we are obeying God.  (John 7:16-17, Deut. 18:18-19)  He is worthy of all honor and praise and that is worship also as Jesus states in John 5:23, “That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father.  He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father who sent him”.  

If God has revealed who Jesus is to the church, why then do we keep trying to discover who he is?  There is a profound difference in saying that he is the Son of God and saying that he is God the Son.  There is only one God.  (John 17:3, Ephesians 4:6)

When you say that he is God, many will not confess him as thier Lord, namely Jews and Muslims, because they believe that by confessing him as Lord they will be violating the 1st of the Ten Commandments.  He is not God, but is the express image of God's person.  (Hebrews 1:1-3)  When we confess him as Lord, we are subjected to God through him.

Speaking about the doctrine of “original sin” you refer me to Romans 6, but I believe that you probably meant Romans 5:12 which states: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned”.

This says that “death passed upon all men in that all have sinned” which is true, but as an infant and as a child we are in innocence.  Sin is a spiritual matter caused by the fact that we yeild to temptation.  God created me a living soul with a mind, a free will, and emotions.  He did not make me evil.  I believe that all infants are born into this world in innocence.  Whether or not we are alive to God as infants, however, is dependant on the relationship that our parents have with God.  Children are the responsibility of the parents.  (1 Co. 7:14, Ephesians 6:1-2)

All we who were born of the sperm of man yeilded to temptation and sinned.  (Isaiah 53:6)  Jesus was also born in innocence.  We know that God was his Father which makes him God's own flesh and blood, but his earthly parents brought him up under the Law of Moses. (Galatians 4:4) Unlike all of the rest of humanity, Jesus did not yield to temptation.  (Hebrews 4:15)

While we can inherit such things as diseases from our parents, sin is not something that we inherit.  If it is Adam's fault that I am a sinner, why then am I accountable to God for the works that I do in this body?  At one time there was a commedian on TV by the name of Flip Wilson whose punch line was “the devil made me do it”.  Is that what the apostle Paul is saying in Romans 7?  I believe that he is saying that he knew what the Law taught and wanted to obey the Law, but because of the weakness of his flesh he yeilded to temptation and sinned.  That sin then becomes part of his nature.  The only remmedy for this is the blood of Jesus.  (Romans 7:23-25)

Part of my communication with David when I answer his questions will be on the 144,000.  I hope to answer your question about this there rather than to be repetitive.

[david]

Quote

David, considering I am just going on an average here it is impossible to get exact numbers. What I do know is I met 2 witnesses who claimed elect status in five weeks of talking alone. Those numbers are staggering considering the population I mentioned and I am a mere ONE man amongst MANY men in this city alone with God only knows how many witnesses. 2 out of 10 is mind boggling to me.

Mind boggling to me too. Considering I've only ever met one and that was a long time ago.
Your averaging things out doesn't really make any sense at all. You have to take larger numbers to be accurate.
Someone wins the lottery. He wins it on his 5th try. So, he averages that out and expects to win every fifth time? No. Not correct.
If you met 2 in five weeks, that's interesting, but it makes no sense to apply that to everyone.
Suppose the very first witness someone meets is one of the 144,000. Is he to use your same math and decide that that's 1 out of 1, or 100%. wow. NOt really wow. He's just met one. And since we go to billions of people, you can expect a few of them to have met an odd number of the 144,000. But average it out, with what others actually have met, and you have a true picture.

casey, there are about 130 people in my congregation. Of those, precisely zero are of the annointed. So, average that out, and forget reason and we have to expect that there are no annointed anywhere. I mean, there aren't any in my congregation. average that out to the 96,000 congregations and there are zero annointed anywhere. right? Wrong. Bad math, my friend.

Quote

Just how do this witnesses KNOW they are indeed of this small number of chosen – 144,000?

I don't know, Casey. What does the Bible say?
ROMANS 8:14-17
“For all who are led by God’s spirit, these are God’s sons. For YOU did not receive a spirit of slavery causing fear again, but YOU received a spirit of adoption as sons, by which spirit we cry out: “Abba, Father!” The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are God’s children. If, then, we are children, we are also heirs: heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ, provided we suffer together that we may also be glorified together.”

GALATIANS 4:1-7
“Now I say that as long as the heir is a babe he does not differ at all from a slave, lord of all things though he is, but he is under men in charge and under stewards until the day his father appointed beforehand. Likewise we also, when we were babes, continued enslaved by the elementary things belonging to the world. But when the full limit of the time arrived, God sent forth his Son, who came to be out of a woman and who came to be under law, that he might release by purchase those under law, that we, in turn, might receive the adoption as sons. Now because YOU are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of his Son into our hearts and it cries out: “Abba, Father!” So, then, you are no longer a slave but a son; and if a son, also an heir through God.”

Really, we are speaking of the bride of Christ. (rev 21:1-7) Imagine the bridesmaids and the bride, in a wedding party. Do the brides believe they are getting married? Is there any question? The bride KNOWS she is the bride.

Quote

And on that note what Scriptural jump rope is being done to say that the Eucharist or Lord’s Supper is only done once a year? And on that note what other hoola hoop is being twirled so that on this ONE day a year only the anointed are able to partake of it?

Let's just stick to one subject for a second.

Quote

And to reiterate Nick’s point, how in the world is the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation connected to the ONLY leaders and kings/priests in eternity?

This is what I said:
“REVELATION 5:9,10:
“You [Jesus Christ] were slaughtered and with your blood you bought persons for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”
(At Revelation 14:1-3 these “bought from the earth” to be rulers with the Lamb on heavenly Mount Zion are said to number 144,000.)”
You'll notice in Rev 14:1-3, we see a number of people,144,000 who are “bought from the earth” and who are singing a new song, a song that no one was able to master, but the 144,000!
In Rev 5,9,10, we see ones who are singing a “new song.” And they say that you “bought persons for God” out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation. (not fleshly Israel therefore.) And they were made a kingdom of priests and will rule.
Back to Rev 14:
REVELATION 14:4
“These are the ones that did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins. These are the ones that keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes. These were BOUGHT FROM AMONG MANKIND as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb,”

[david]

Quote

Hi casey, There is only one God. You say “254“The Lord Jesus Christ” is now the full name or title of Jehovah the Son. “ There is no Jehovah the Son in scripture so where are you coming from?

yes, could you please explain your statements.

[NickHassan]

Hi david,
You said
“You'll notice in Rev 14:1-3, we see a number of people,144,000 who are “bought from the earth” and who are singing a new song, a song that no one was able to master, but the 144,000!
In Rev 5,9,10, we see ones who are singing a “new song.”  And they say that you “bought persons for God” out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation.  (not fleshly Israel therefore.)  And they were made a kingdom of priests and will rule.”

Rev 5
“8And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.

9And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

10And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

11And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; “

So only the 24 elders and the 4 beasts and millions of angels are present when the song is sung. Yet the song does not relate to them but to the saints. No mention of 144,000 bondservants there.

Is it proven from scripture that it is the same song?

JW's seem to cut and paste adding a bit of presumption, as with Jesus and Michael, to the mix to try and hold it all together but somehow it never quite does work.

[NickHassan]

Quote (942767 @ Oct. 13 2006,01:12)

Hi Casey: God has revealed to the church through the Apostle Peter that Jesus is His only begotten Son and His Christ. (Matthew 16:13-18)  Jesus as God's Christ did not teach his own thoughts.  He taught and obeyed the Word of God which comes from from God, and so when we worship him (do obeisance) we are obeying God.  (John 7:16-17, Deut. 18:18-19)  He is worthy of all honor and praise and that is worship also as Jesus states in John 5:23, “That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father.  He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father who sent him”.   If God has revealed who Jesus is to the church, why then do we keep trying to discover who he is?  There is a profound difference in saying that he is the Son of God and saying that he is God the Son.  There is only one God.  (John 17:3, Ephesians 4:6) When you say that he is God, many will not confess him as thier Lord, namely Jews and Muslims, because they believe that by confessing him as Lord they will be violating the 1st of the Ten Commandments.  He is not God, but is the express image of God's person.  (Hebrews 1:1-3)  When we confess him as Lord, we are subjected to God through him. Speaking about the doctrine of “original sin” you refer me to Romans 6, but I believe that you probably meant Romans 5:12 which states: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned”. This says that “death passed upon all men in that all have sinned” which is true, but as an infant and as a child we are in innocence.  Sin is a spiritual matter caused by the fact that we yeild to temptation.  God created me a living soul with a mind, a free will, and emotions.  He did not make me evil.  I believe that all infants are born into this world in innocence.  Whether or not we are alive to God as infants, however, is dependant on the relationship that our parents have with God.  Children are the responsibility of the parents.  (1 Co. 7:14, Ephesians 6:1-2) All we who were born of the sperm of man yeilded to temptation and sinned.  (Isaiah 53:6)  Jesus was also born in innocence.  We know that God was his Father which makes him God's own flesh and blood, but his earthly parents brought him up under the Law of Moses. (Galatians 4:4) Unlike all of the rest of humanity, Jesus did not yield to temptation.  (Hebrews 4:15) While we can inherit such things as diseases from our parents, sin is not something that we inherit.  If it is Adam's fault that I am a sinner, why then am I accountable to God for the works that I do in this body?  At one time there was a commedian on TV by the name of Flip Wilson whose punch line was “the devil made me do it”.  Is that what the apostle Paul is saying in Romans 7?  I believe that he is saying that he knew what the Law taught and wanted to obey the Law, but because of the weakness of his flesh he yeilded to temptation and sinned.  That sin then becomes part of his nature.  The only remmedy for this is the blood of Jesus.  (Romans 7:23-25) Part of my communication with David when I answer his questions will be on the 144,000.  I hope to answer your question about this there rather than to be repetitive.

Good post thanks 94

[NickHassan]

Hi david,
Who decides who is “anointed” among the JWs and how?

[Proclaimer]

Giving a man-made organisation the power to dictate your faith, doctrine, and beliefs is dangerous. Not only that, such a person is contributing the division and confusion.
The JWs are just one of many groups that claim excusivity and add to that all the denominations that allow/believe that others can exist, and you have all these groups with their own names.
The Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Christ, The Children of God, The Light, The Roman Catholics, The Way, The Christadelphians, The Pentecostals, The Happy Clappers, …

1 Corinthians 3:4
4 For when one says, “I follow Paul,” and another, “I follow Apollos,” are you not mere men?
5 What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task.
6 I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God made it grow.
7 So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God, who makes things grow.

It is in the nature of man to follow man. But those who have the Spirit are led by the Spirit, not by man.

Romans 8:14
because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

Therefore brothers, we should be led by the Spirit. We should meet together and there will be Christ in the midst.
Keep away from the world. The world is a system and that system also encompasses the denominations of men.

Come out from her and be separate. Meet together as the Spirit leads.

Do not do things in your own name, nor the name of an organisation. Do all in the name of Jesus Christ and you shall receive reward.

[NickHassan]

Hi casey,

You say
“36Here, and in 1:17 and 22:13, the glorified Christ calls Himself “the First and the Last”—comparing with Isa. 44:6 we have one of several demonstrations that Jesus Christ is Jehovah [Mormons and JWs deny that He is Jehovah].

“And to the messenger of the church in Thyatira write: These things says the Son of God,46

46If anyone was still in doubt as to the identity of the One who is dictating these letters, the doubt stops here.

And they take no rest, day or night, saying: “Holy, holy, holy; Holy, holy, holy; Holy, holy, holy;81 The Lord God Almighty; He who was and who is and who is coming.”

81Three ‘holies’ for each member of the Trinity.”

Of all the justifications for the trinity doctrine the most bizarre and amusing has to be the ones that count the number of “holies” apporting a third to each “person” in God.

God is not the first.

He is before the first.

We too deny Jesus is Jehovah.

He is who he said he is, the Son of God.

[Casey S Smith 29]

My quotes below if you all would have read carefully, which fromall your posts, none of you did you would have seen the entry was from a textual variant scholar who has been in this game longer than all of us here have even been on this earth, I think it wise to heed his studies. Let's review:

Quote

REVELATION textual variant study – Wilber N. Pickering ThM PhD “And to the messenger of the church in Smyrna write: These things says the First and the Last,36 who became dead and came to life 36Here, and in 1:17 and 22:13, the glorified Christ calls Himself “the First and the Last”—comparing with Isa. 44:6 we have one of several demonstrations that Jesus Christ is Jehovah [Mormons and JWs deny that He is Jehovah]. “And to the messenger of the church in Thyatira write: These things says the Son of God,46 46If anyone was still in doubt as to the identity of the One who is dictating these letters, the doubt stops here. And they take no rest, day or night, saying: “Holy, holy, holy; Holy, holy, holy; Holy, holy, holy;81 The Lord God Almighty; He who was and who is and who is coming.” 81Three ‘holies’ for each member of the Trinity. from the tribe of Joseph107 107“Joseph” stands for Ephraim. Since Levi is counted here (usually he isn’t) and Joseph has two tribes, Manasseh and Ephraim, someone has to be dropped—Dan. From both Jacob (Gen. 49:16-17) and Moses (Deut. 33:22) he got the least impressive ‘blessing’. even where their141 Lord was crucified.142 141Over 99% of the Greek manuscripts have “their” Lord, not “our” as in KJV and NKJV. If these two “olive trees” are the ones in Zech. 4:3 and 14, then the “LORD of the whole earth” there is Jehovah the Son. 21:5 Then He who sat on the throne224 224Since the last throne mentioned is the Great White Throne, and since all judgment has been committed to the Son (Jn. 5:22), I conclude that the speaker is Jehovah the Son. 6 Then He said to me, “I have become the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End.226 226“I have become”—this seems awkward, so a small minority of the Greek manuscripts changed it to the familiar “It is done”. But in order to be the Boss at both the beginning and the end, you have to be the greatest, and survive all challenges. All human history has been involved in Satan’s challenge of that supremacy. Because of that challenge, and because only at this point has that challenge been definitively put down, Jehovah the Son says, “I have become”. 254“The Lord Jesus Christ” is now the full name or title of Jehovah the Son

Quote

“The Lord Jesus Christ” is now the full name or title of Jehovah the Son

Nick says:

Quote

There is no Jehovah the Son in scripture so where are you coming from? Well, I think there is some trouble on this site and for most part of followers of Christ to read the texts in English as if that was God's chosen language. Let's consult the Greek here and I think you will find your answer. Nick if I recall you have said on more than one occassion that there are references to YHWH applied to the Son. Now you say, “There is no Jehovah the Son in scripture”. The Greek on more than one occasion denotes YHWH to Yeshua. If you consult the Septuagint (Greek Olt Testament from which Chirst and the Apostles most likely quoted from, you will see that KYRIOS is the same concept. The phrase God the Son is likewise not in Scripture nor is Trinity. However we aren't looking for phrases to justify doctrine, we are looking to see if the concepts are found in the Scriptures…which they are. 942767:

but as an infant and as a child we are in innocence.

Quote

Based on what Scripture?

I believe that all infants are born into this world in innocence

Quote

Oh, that makes more sense. It is just your opinion.

Jesus was also born in innocence

Quote

Now you are contradicting yourself 9. Jesus was not born of the seed of man otherwise he would have been in sin. He was born of the seed of the Spirit. Otherwise he would have been like every other prophet who was anointed after birth, though in sin.

When you say that he is God, many will not confess him as thier Lord, namely Jews and Muslims, because they believe that by confessing him as Lord they will be violating the 1st of the Ten Commandments. He is not God, but is the express image of God's person. (Hebrews 1:1-3) When we confess him as Lord, we are subjected to God through him.

Quote

English semantics 9. Lord – sir, master, leader. Believe me, I have studied Islam throughly and have many Muslim friends who have no problem with this concept.

God is not the first.

He is before the first.

Again, semantics and context is the key. You are not taking into consideration of the region/culture and idioms. God is the Alpha & Omega…A-Z. Yes, God is the First. You are going beyond Scripture my friend.

[Casey S Smith 29]

Nick says:

“There is no Jehovah the Son in scripture so where are you coming from?”

The Greek/Hebrew on more than one occasion denotes YHWH to Yeshua. If you consult the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament from which Chirst and the Apostles most likely quoted from, you will see that KYRIOS is the same concept. The phrase God the Son is likewise not in Scripture nor is Trinity. However we aren't looking for phrases to justify doctrine, we are looking to see if the concepts are found in the Scriptures…which they are.
[/QUOTE]

9 says:

Quote

There is a profound difference in saying that he is the Son of God and saying that he is God the Son. There is only one God. (John 17:3,

There is something I find that infests followers like a virus that causes theoligical problems…unecessarily I might add. Christians turned to English as if it is some inspired language. If we consult the orginial languages we will not find these problems. JW's are biased in not translating passages referring to the Son as YHWH, and transliterating all references to the Father as Jehovah but to the Son as Lord. As if that will make those in the know not catch it. Luther scholded Augustine saying, “if he had consulted the languages he would have not struggled with some verses…”

[Casey S Smith 29]

Adendum:

It seems gentlemen that the correct view of the Trinity is skewed, distorted and being inferred upon your own opionions of what the Trinity is and not what it TRULY states.

Many of you are fond of showing the submission of Yeshua to the Father while on earth. If you recall the Trinity does not deny this. While the Son was in flesh he submitted himself to the Father not considerding equality with God but emptied himself and became obediant unto death on the cross (not torture stake David). The Trinity holds that Jesus is both man and God. Not a (g)od but (G)od from whence is a (god) decalred devine without divinity? Satan is the (g)od of this world and he is likewise worshipped as such through the heathen.

To reiterate: The Son was flesh. He is now Glorifed and worshipped by the host of Heaven…Aleluya, Aleluya He reigns!

[Casey S Smith 29]

Quote

Quote And on that note what Scriptural jump rope is being done to say that the Eucharist or Lord’s Supper is only done once a year? And on that note what other hoola hoop is being twirled so that on this ONE day a year only the anointed are able to partake of it? Let's just stick to one subject for a second.

What are you afraid of? Isn't the 144,000 being avoided by your sir? If so, then I must move on.

[Casey S Smith 29]

144,000…ALL ARE JEWS!

You like to say that there house has been left desolate and the kingdom was taken away from them. So now God can revoke his promise. I thought Scripture says God's givings are without repentance. In other words what God gives he will not take away…at least for ever.

Romans 11 says he WILL graft the original branches in sir. We are a wile olive shoot contrary to the plant but with God all things are possible.

The wile olive shoots are not of the 144,000. The twelve tribes are and most likely from the grafted in Israelites. The Jews were dispersed throughout the earth but God is bringing them back home. I think YHWH God is omniscient enough and Sovereign to know where these descended Israelites are. But rest assure, they are not in the kingdom hall of the Gentiles David.

[Casey S Smith 29]

Quote

JW's seem to cut and paste adding a bit of presumption, as with Jesus and Michael, to the mix to try and hold it all together but somehow it never quite does work.

Couldn't have said it better myself Nick

[Casey S Smith 29]

t8 says:

Quote

Giving a man-made organisation the power to dictate your faith, doctrine, and beliefs is dangerous. Not only that, such a person is contributing the division and confusion. The JWs are just one of many groups that claim excusivity and add to that all the denominations that allow/believe that others can exist, and you have all these groups with their own names. The Witnesses, the Church of Jesus Christ, The Children of God, The Light, The Roman Catholics, The Way, The Christadelphians, The Pentecostals, The Happy Clappers, …

Quote

Giving a man-made organisation the power to dictate your faith, doctrine, and beliefs is dangerous.

I do not disagree here t8. Letting anyone dictating your faith is depending upon flesh. However, I think it is arrogant, prideful and just plain rebellios to ignore 2000 years of people just like you and I do the same things you and I are doing now, only with much more time being consumed due to the methods of writing and distrubting that had to be done. To ignore these defenses they gave to one another and the apologetics as such is to deny a wealth of knowledge that is much more valuable than material “stuff”.

We become an entity of ourself. We become our own denomination. We forsake the gathering of ourselves for strength, protection, exhortation, rebuked when necessary and being corrected likewise. The wolf will eat a lamb that is astray from the pack.

And please, the avatar or whatever it is called implies no puns and needs no sarcastic jabs. I find them immature and rediculous at best.

[Casey S Smith 29]

A Response to an Article Critiquing the Dividing Line Broadcast of Saturday, June 24, 2000

Colin Smith

I was recently directed to an article written by a Jehovah’s Witness concerning the Greek grammar of some passages in John’s Gospel. The author of the article was attempting to refute Dr. James White who had referenced these passages in a recent broadcast of The Dividing Line with regard to the Watchtower teaching that Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Dr. White was attempting to demonstrate that these passages preclude the notion that Jesus is something other than God. In his article, the Jehovah’s Witness (hereafter referred to as JW), provided quotes from Greek sources as well as a transcription of the portion of the Dividing Line program in question.
As I reviewed JW’s article it became apparent to me that he was not correctly handling the grammar to which he was appealing, and he, therefore, did not truly grasp the force of Dr. White’s argumentation. Indeed, he accuses Dr. White of eisegesis, or reading into the text his own Trinitarian theology, yet I think JW is guilty of the same in his comments.

For the sake of those who are interested, and for any Jehovah’s Witnesses (or other non-Trinitarians) that may be reading, I would like to submit my response to JW.

John 14:28

John 14:28 is cited by Dr. White on the broadcast as one of the favorite passages used to relegate Jesus to the position of a mere creature. John 14:28 reads:

“You heard that I said to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you.' If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.” (NASB)

Jehovah’s Witnesses take passages such as John 14:28 and see in them evidence of Christ being less than God, and God being a unity, not a Trinity. Indeed, Jehovah’s Witnesses speculate that Christ was indeed no more or less than Michael the Archangel. They argue that, naturally, Michael the Archangel would say that the Father is greater than he is, and such would be true.

On the program, Dr. White explained how at the Incarnation, God the Son divested Himself of certain divine prerogatives and, veiled in flesh, He voluntarily positioned himself in submission to God the Father. The Father and the Son were still partaking of the same divine essence; Jesus was still God, but He had taken on human flesh and, as is eloquently testified to in Philippians 2:8, He humbled Himself and became obedient even unto death.

Our friend, JW, says that Dr. White turns this passage on the Jehovah’s Witness by first looking to the context of John 14. Unfortunately, JW does not seem to deal with the issue of the context of John 14, which is a shame since an understanding of the context of John 14 is necessary if we are to understand why Dr. White found it necessary to appeal to John 17:5 for clarification.

Sola Scriptura, Tota Scriptura

Those who are familiar with Dr. White and Alpha & Omega Ministries know that he is a Reformed Theologian. That is to say, White believes, preaches and teaches the Doctrines of Grace (otherwise known as Five-Point Calvinism) and the Five “Solas”. One of those “Solas” is Sola Scriptura, or scripture alone. This means that White believes that Scripture is the sole infallible basis and authority for our knowledge of God, His will for us, and our salvation. Coupled with this idea is the Latin phrase Tota Scriptura, which means “all of Scripture.” That is to say, our understanding of God, His will for us, and our salvation is not derived from random proof-texts, but from the entirety of Scripture. He believes that Scripture stands as a whole, and our understanding of one part must be consistent with everything else that Scripture says on that subject, or consistent with the character of God as revealed elsewhere in Scripture. Scripture does not contradict itself.

With this in mind, we can see why Dr. White would first try to put Jesus’ words in John 14:28 in their context, firstly as they stand in chapter 14, and secondly as they correspond to related passages elsewhere in Scripture.

In John 14, Jesus is teaching His disciples about His departure from this world. He promises them the Holy Spirit and warns them of the reaction of the world to them. Jesus’ point here is to give His disciples comfort knowing that the events about to unfold will undoubtedly cause them a lot of pain. In the course of comforting them, Jesus says that He is returning to His Father. What does it mean that Jesus is returning to the Father? Does John tell us anything elsewhere with regard to Jesus’ prior existence with the Father? I get the impression that JW does not understand the relevance of these questions, but they are crucial to our understanding of Jesus’ relationship to God.

John 17:5

At this point Dr. White cites John 17:5 to demonstrate the significance of Jesus’ going to the Father. There is something significant about being in the presence of God for Jesus. John 17:5, part of Jesus’ High Priestly prayer, says:

“Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” (NASB)

Here JW accuses White of mishandling the Greek and performing eisegesis (i.e., reading into the text one’s theological presuppositions) as opposed to exegesis (i.e., drawing one’s interpretation of the passage from the passage itself). White, as cited by JW, renders this verse: “Glorify me Father with the glory which I shared with you which I had in your presence before the world began.” JW then cites the NASB and the NRSV to demonstrate that White supplies the word “share” in his translation, something which these other translations do not do. Further, JW shares with us an excerpt from an IRC conversation with Dr. White. Dr. White draws JW’s attention to the Greek phrase para; seautw/?漯font>. JW renders this “alongside yourself. para = preposition of alongside…” Dr. White asserts that the prepositional phrase here is indicating what is to be glorified, i.e., me… para; seautw/?漯font> “BOTH the Father and the Son are glorified here, with the glory they shared before creation. Jesus does not seek glorification *apart from* the Father, but *along with* the Father. JW insists that the word share is “not in the Greek.” To further bolster his claim, in the article JW cites Dr. Daniel Wallace in his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics where, on page 175, he says that where the dative case follows a preposition (as in para; seautw/?), the function of the dative should not be determined by case usage alone. That is to say, one should not translate the dative apart from the shade of meaning provided to it by the preposition accompanying it. On its own, the dative case is usually the case of indirect object (to, for), instrument (by) or location (where). However, when used in conjunction with a preposition, its meaning can change to reflect the nuance of the preposition. In this case, when used with parav, it can supply the idea of being “alongside”, such that it is commonly translated “in the presence of.” Wallace advises that one should refer to BAGD (Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich-Danker’s Greek Lexicon) for information on the use of the dative with a specific preposition.

JW makes a second reference to Wallace where, on page 378 of his Greek Grammar he states that, with regard to parav, “in general, the dative uses suggest proximity or nearness… c. Association: with (someone/something).”

He finally appeals to BAGD, as Wallace suggested, which, on “page 615,” states that it means “nearness in space at or by… beside, near…” and it references John 17:5.

Let me first address JW’s handling of the information from Wallace. As a sensitive grammarian, Dr. Wallace understands that the Greek language is not defined by grammar, but grammar comes from study of the language. It is important to note, therefore, that he says that parav generally proximity or near
ness. Indeed, it is important to our discussion that he sees “Association: with” as a legitimate translation, since White is asserting that the preposition here is defining what will be glorified in John 17:5: “Me with You.” And the glory they will be glorified with is the glory that Jesus had parav the Father, in association with the Father. (By the way, Dr. Wallace does not make reference to John 17:5 at all in any of this discussion.)

But what about BAGD? BAGD references John 17:5 and cites it as referring to a spatial relationship. On page 610 (not 615) of BAGD, there is a reference to Matthew 6:1 which it says should be translated “with (of spatial proximity) the Father.” Indeed, the context of Matthew 6:1 would require the understanding of spatial proximity. The two John references, however (8:38a and 17:5), could be spatial, or they could be understood in terms of “association.” BAGD does not appear to say that these passages must be translated with the understanding of “association.” Since both spatial proximity and “association” are legitimate translations of parav with the dative, we must allow context to be our guide and admit that “association” is at least a legitimate translation.

A “Shared” Glory?

As we noted, JW objected to Dr. White using the word “share” in his translation of John 17:5. White would be the first to admit that this word is not actually in the Greek text, but it is necessarily implied. Dr. White added the word to be sure that it was understood that the passage is speaking of the Son and the Father partaking of the same glory, since this severely undermines the notion that Jesus is a mere angel. Of course, the conversation, taken jointly from a radio discussion and a chatroom discussion, does not provide a formal translation of John 17:5 in the first place.

Jesus wants the Father to be glorified “with” Him, and the glory with which they are to be glorified is a glory that Jesus had “with” the Father before creation. Clearly the idea is that this is a glory Jesus is able to share with the Father and the Father with Jesus, the Son. While the word “share” may not be in the text, it is ignoring the obvious not to see that a shared glory is the intent. And, since JW acknowledges that “association with” is a legitimate use of parav with the dative (as per Wallace), then White’s interpretation is a valid one. In light of this, White’s subsequent comments stand: “… the angels we see in Isaiah 6, they cover their faces in the presence of the glory of God… If Jesus is Michael the Archangel he could never say the words in John 17:5 without committing blasphemy.”

John 17:5 and the Greek Imperative

JW also calls Dr. White to task on his comments with regard to the use of the imperative in John 17:5: “Could Michael the Archangel say to Jehovah God using the imperative voice, the voice of command in the Greek language, “Glorify Me!” Would any angel ever stand in the presence of God and say GLORIFY ME! Well yeah, one, Lucifer, hehehehe. Yeah he was cast down for it, remember?”

JW objects to this portrayal of Christ as demanding or ordering His heavenly Father. Again, he appeals to Wallace, page 487: “Request (a.k.a. Entreaty, Polite Command) The imperative is often used to express a request. This is normally seen when the speaker is addressing a superior. Imperatives (almost always in the aorist tense) directed toward God in prayers fit this category.” JW correctly points out that in John 17:5 the aorist dovxason is used and “James, therefore, shows that he has a defective knowledge of the uses of the Greek imperative.”

I would like to draw attention to Wallace’s statement that the Imperative of Request “is normally seen when the speaker is addressing a superior.” Could it be that JW is assuming that Jesus is addressing to the Father as a creature, not as God the Son? I would like to know what it is in the text of John 17:5 that would justify such an assertion. The use of the aorist in the context of addressing a superior would qualify this as an Imperative of Request. But, as Wallace clearly states on page 485, an imperative in the aorist tense can also be used as a simple command with the force of commanding “the action as a whole, without focusing on duration, repetition, etc.” So it appears that the key to knowing whether Jesus was begging the Father or commanding the Father is not the use of the aorist tense, but one’s understanding of Jesus’ relationship to the Father. Either Jesus was a being less than the Father and therefore pleading with the Father to glorify Him, or He had the authority to speak to the Father in such terms because He shared the same essence with the Father. I think to assume the former is to ignore the copious passages in John’s Gospel alone that exalt Jesus to a position of equality with God, even though He has voluntarily assumed a role of submission to His Father.

In light of this, I think JW has failed to truly interact with Dr. White’s comments because he has failed to understand the importance of the texts we are dealing with. It appears that JW is more concerned with fine points of grammar than with exegesis. Indeed, he is willing to accept the use of parav as “with” (i.e., Association), but does not deal with what Jesus means when He says “with the glory I had with you before the world was.” John 1:14 speaks of this glory of which Peter, James and John were given a glimpse on the Mount of Transfiguration. Further, Wallace does not cite John 17:5 as fitting in the category of the use of the imperative as a polite command. JW ignores the fact that here we have (in Witness theology) a created being praying to Jehovah for glory which he (the created being) claims to have had “with” the Father before the world came into existence!

I would also like to add that the whole concept of angels as presented to us in Hebrews chapters 1 and 2 mitigate against the notion that Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Indeed, I encourage the reader to examine Hebrews 1, where it is clearly demonstrated that Jesus is not one of the angels: “And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.” (vv. 3-4 NASB) Notice how the Son is the radiance of the Father’s glory. Is this not consistent with the testimony of John 17:5? “For to which of the angels did He ever say, ‘YOU ARE MY SON, TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU’? And again, ‘I WILL BE A FATHER TO HIM AND HE SHALL BE A SON TO ME’?” (v. 5 NASB) Notice the clear distinction between the Son and the angels.

If we are to be honest in our theology, we need to deal with the whole of Scripture, not just our pet passages. Scripture has been given to us by God and we must not abuse this gift to serve our own theological ends. We must examine carefully what the Scripture says as a whole on a subject before drawing our conclusions. It seems that we have a clear case here with JW of someone who has focused on a couple of passages without giving consideration to their application within the broader range of Scripture. His pre-conceived notions of the nature of Christ lead him to make assumptions that language does not necessitate and context refutes. Let the whole of Scripture speak, for anything else is mere presumption.

Colin Smith

8/2/00

[Casey S Smith 29]

This may help all of you or most all of you get a better understanding of the REAL Trinity not your supposed (t)rinity.

Quote

A Brief Definition of the Trinity by James White I know that one of the most oft-repeated questions I have dealt with is, “How does one explain, or even understand, the doctrine of the Trinity?” Indeed, few topics are made such a football by various groups that, normally, claim to be the “only” real religion, and who prey upon Christians as “convert fodder.” Be that as it may, when the Christian is faced with a question regarding the Trinity, how might it best be explained? For me, I know that simplifying the doctrine to its most basic elements has been very important and very useful. When we reduce the discussion to the three clear Biblical teachings that underlie the Trinity, we can move our discussion from the abstract to the concrete Biblical data, and can help those involved in false religions to recognize which of the Biblical teachings it is denying. We must first remember that very few have a good idea of what the Trinity is in the first place – hence, accuracy in definition will be very important. The doctrine of the Trinity is simply that there is one eternal being of God – indivisible, infinite. This one being of God is shared by three co-equal, co-eternal persons, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. It is necessary here to distinguish between the terms “being” and “person.” It would be a contradiction, obviously, to say that there are three beings within one being, or three persons within one person. So what is the difference? We clearly recognize the difference between being and person every day. We recognize what something is, yet we also recognize individuals within a classification. For example, we speak of the “being” of man—human being. A rock has “being”—the being of a rock, as does a cat, a dog, etc. Yet, we also know that there are personal attributes as well. That is, we recognize both “what” and “who” when we talk about a person. The Bible tells us there are three classifications of personal beings—God, man, and angels. What is personality? The ability to have emotion, will, to express oneself. Rocks cannot speak. Cats cannot think of themselves over against others, and, say, work for the common good of “cat kind.” Hence, we are saying that there is one eternal, infinite being of God, shared fully and completely by three persons, Father, Son and Spirit. One what, three who's. NOTE: We are not saying that the Father is the Son, or the Son the Spirit, or the Spirit the Father. It is very common for people to misunderstand the doctrine as to mean that we are saying Jesus is the Father. The doctrine of the Trinity does not in any way say this! The three Biblical doctrines that flow directly into the river that is the Trinity are as follows: 1) There is one and only one God, eternal, immutable. 2) There are three eternal Persons described in Scripture – the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. These Persons are never identified with one another – that is, they are carefully differentiated as Persons. 3) The Father, the Son, and the Spirit, are identified as being fully deity—that is, the Bible teaches the Deity of Christ and the Deity of the Holy Spirit. One could possibly represent this as follows: The three sides of the triangle represent the three Biblical doctrines, as labeled. When one denies any of these three teachings, the other two sides point to the result. Hence, if one denies that there are Three Persons, one is left with the two sides of Full Equality and One God, resulting in the “Oneness” teaching of the United Pentecostal Church and others. If one denies Fully Equality, one is left with Three Persons and One God, resulting in “subordinationism” as seen in Jehovah's Witnesses, the Way International, etc. (though to be perfectly accurate the Witnesses deny all three of the sides in some way—they deny Full Equality (i.e., Jesus is Michael the Archangel), Three Persons (the Holy Spirit is an impersonal, active “force” like electricity) and One God (they say Jesus is “a god”—a lesser divinity than Yahweh; hence they are in reality not monotheists but henotheists). And, if one denies One God, one is left with polytheism, the belief in many gods, as seen clearly in the Mormon Church, the most polytheistic religion I have encountered. Hopefully these brief thoughts will be of help to you as you “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

[Casey S Smith 29]

Quote

Purpose and Meaning of “Ego Eimi” in the Gospel of John In Reference to the Deity of Christ by James White The Gospel of John has come under great fire in recent centuries for its incredibly high Christology. On this basis alone certain form-critics have rejected the book as having any historical authenticity whatsoever, assuming (without foundation) that such a high Christology could only have evolved after quite some time of “theological formulation” and hence placing its writing well into the second century. Fortunately, not all scholars share the same unfounded presuppositions. The person of Christ as presented in John's Gospel is indeed of an exceptionally high character – John asserts that Jesus is “the Word become flesh” (John 1:14). He says that this Word is eternal, has always been “with” God (pros ton theon) and indeed shares the very being of God (John 1:1). John describes Jesus as the unique God (monogenes theos) in John 1:18. He portrays Jesus saying that He is the way, the truth, and the life – that man's very life and salvation is dependent upon his relationship with Him (a claim nothing short of blasphemy for a mere created being!), and the Gospel climaxes in Thomas' confession of Jesus as his “Lord and God”. Though the evidences of the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ are numerous in this book, one set of these evidences has always fascinated theologians. Jesus utilizes the specific phrase ego eimi of Himself frequently in John's Gospel, and a number of times He does so in a pregnant way, not providing any immediately identifiable predicate. John's recording of these sayings is also significant, as he provides rather obvious settings for these sayings, emphasizing their importance. Is there a significance to this phrase? What is it's purpose and meaning? Does this phrase present yet another aspect of the Deity of Christ? This shall be the topic of the following investigation. Usage of ego eimi in the Gospel of John The specific phrase ego eimi occurs 24 times in the Gospel of John. Seventeen of these times it is followed by a clear predicate. 1 Some of these instances would be John 6:35, “I am the living bread” (ego eimi ho artos tes zoes) or John 10:11, “I am the good shepherd” (ego eimi ho poimen ho kalos). 3 times the usage does not fall into a clear category – these would be 4:26, 6:20, and 9:9. In 4:26 Jesus says to the woman at the well, “I am, the one speaking to you” (ego eimi, ho lalon soi) which is strangely reminiscent of the LXX rendering of Isaiah 52:6 (ego eimi autos ho lalon). In 6:20 it seems to be a rather straight-forward self-identification to the frightened disciples in the boat. 2 And in 9:9 we find the man who had been healed of his blindness insisting that he was indeed the man of whom they spoke. This last instance is similar to the sayings as Jesus utters them, in that the phrase comes at the end of the clause and looks elsewhere for its predicate. Given the above usages, we are left with 7 usages that have been described as “absolute”. 3 These would be John 8:24, 8:28, 8:58, 13:19, 18:5, 18:6, and 18:8. It is these seven passages that make up the bulk of the discussion concerning the use of ego eimi by John. For the sake of accurate examination, the transliterations of these phrases are provided below: John 8:24: ean gar me pistuesete hoti ego eimi John 8:28: tote gnosesthe hoti ego eimi John 8:58: prin Abraam genethai ego eimi John 13:19: hina pisteusete hotan genetai ego eimi John 18:5: legei autois Ego eimi John 18:6: hos oun eipen autois Ego eimi John 18:8: eipon humin hoti ego eimi John uses this phrase of Jesus more than any other writer. The phrase does occur in Mark 14:62-64 as well, however. It is to be noted that in the above list, the phrase itself comes at the end of the clause in each instance. This will have significance when the Septuagint background of John's usage is examined. The main verses that will undergo examination here are 8:24, 8:58, 13:19, and 18:5-6. In the author's translation these passages read as follows: John 8:24: “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins, for unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins.” John 8:58: “Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am.” John 13:19: “From now on I tell you before it comes to pass in order that when it does happen, you may believe that I am.” John 18:5-6: “They answered Him, “Jesus the Nazarene.” He said to them, “I am.” And Judas also, the one who betrayed Him, was standing with them. Therefore when He said to them, “I am,” they went backwards and fell upon the ground.” Translation of ego eimi Before the exact meaning or significance of ego eimi in John's gospel can be adequately addressed, the proper translation of the phrase must be determined. There are a very small number of translations that avoid a direct translation of the present indicative ego eimi. Moffat renders it, “I have existed before Abraham was born!” The Twentieth Century New Testament has, “before Abraham existed I was.” Kleist and Lilly have “I am here–and I was before Abraham!” C. B. Williams gives “I existed before Abraham was born.” Schonfield renders the last clause “I existed before Abraham was born.” And the spiritist Johannes Greber (who claimed to get his translation through a spirit medium!) has, “I am older than Abraham.” The Jehovah's Witnesses' own translation, the New World Translation, renders ego eimi as “I have been”. Allegedly many of these translations are viewing the phrase as what Robertson calls a “progressive present”. Robertson writes, This is a poor name in lieu of a better one for the present of past action still in progress. Usually an adverb of time (or adjunct) accompanies the verb…Often it has to be translated into English by a sort of “progressive perfect” ('have been'), though, of course, that is the fault of English…”The durative present in such cases gathers up past and present time into one phrase” (Moulton, Prol., p. 119)…It is a common idiom in the N.T. In Jo. 8:58 eimi is really absolute.”4 There are many instances in historical narrative or conversation where the Greek will use a present tense verb that is best rendered in English by the perfect. John 15:27 would be a good example: “because you have been with me from the beginning.” The verb, este, is in the present tense, but the context makes it clear that it is in reference to both the past and the present, or, as Moulton said above, it “gathers up past and present time into one phrase.” Robertson correctly notes that this is a common idiom in the New Testament, though he also adds the fact that, in his opinion, John 8:58 is “absolute” and should be rendered as such (which he always does in his works 5). It should also be noted that it is the deficiency of the English that is to blame for the rendering – to place weight on the meaning of the English perfect tense when rendering the Greek present in this way would be in error. So why should John 8:58 not be rendered in this way? Why do so few translations follow this path? Because to so translate is to miss the entire context and content of what is being said! The vast majority of translators see, as many commentators do, that there is a clear differentiation being made here between the derivative existence of Abraham and the eternal existence of the Lord Christ. That this is understood by the translators of our modern editions can be seen from a look at the translations that render this phrase either as “I am” or “I Am” or “I AM”: King James, New King James, New American Standard Bible, New International Version, Philips Modern English, Revised Standard Version, Today's English Version, Jerusalem Bible, New English Bible, American Standard Version, New American Bible, Douay, Young's Literal Translation, Berkeley Version, Norlie's Simplified New Testament, New Testament in Modern English (Montgomery), New Testament in Modern Speech (Weymouth), Wuest's Expanded Translation, Amplified New Testament, New Testament (Swann), Aldine Bible, Four Gospels (C. C. Torrey), Confraternity Version, Four Gospels (Rieu), New Testament (Knox), Concordant Literal New Testament, Anchor Bible, Rotherham, Holy Bible in Modern English (Fenton), Bible in BASIC English, Better Version (Estes), Sacred Writings (A. Campbell), New Easy-to-Read Version, New Testament for the New World. This writer is not aware of a single version, produced by a team or group of scholars, that renders ego eimi at John 8:58 in a perfect tense. Even those who do not see here a reference to the Deity of Christ (such as Barrett 6) do not change the translation to something else. Rather, many scholars rightly point out the same contrasting of verbs as seen in the prologue of John (between the aorist ginomai and the imperfect en) as well as the same kind of differentiation found in the LXX rendering of Psalm 90:2. 7 They also recognize that the response of the Jews would be rather strong if this was simply a claim of bald pre-existence. The oft-repeated charge of blasphemy as found in John makes this clear. Rather, the usage of a term used of God Himself (as will be shown later) would be sufficient to bring the response of verse 59. The phrase was so understood by the early church as well. Irenaeus showed familiarity with it as “I am” 8 as did Origen 9 and Novatian. 10 Chrysostom wrote, “As the Father used this expression, “I Am,” so also doth Christ; for it signifieth continuous Being, irrespective of time. On which account the expression seemed to them to be blasphemous.” 11 The context of this passage is far too strong to allow this to be rendered as a simple historical narrative, resulting in the conversion of the present indicative into a perfect tense. Alford added, “As Lucke remarks, all unbiassed (sic) explanation of these words must recognize in them a declaration of the essential pre-existence of Christ. All such interpretations as 'before Abraham became Abraham' i.e., father of many nations (Socinus and others), and as 'I was predetermined, promised by God' (Grotius and the Socinian interpreters), are little better than dishonest quibbles. The distinction between was made (or was born) and am is important. The present, I am, expresses essential existence, see Col. 1:17, and was often used by our Lord to assert His divine Being. In this verse the Godhead of Christ is involved; and this the Jews clearly understood, by their conduct to Him.”12 Old Testament Background of ego eimi An extensive discussion of this topic is beyond the scope of this paper. 13 Suffice it to say that the position taken by this writer reflects a consensus opinion of many scholars, that being that the closest and most logical connection between John's usage of ego eimi and the Old Testament is to be found in the Septuagint rendering of the Hebrew phrase ani hu in the writings (primarily) of Isaiah. 14 It is true that many go directly to Exodus 3:14 for the background, but it is felt that unless one first establishes the connection with the direct quotation of ego eimi in the Septuagint, the connection with Exodus 3:14 will be somewhat tenuous. The Septuagint translates the Hebrew phrase ani hu as ego eimi in Isaiah 41:4, 43:10 and 46:4. In each of these instances the phrase ani hu appears at the end of the clause, and is so rendered (or punctuated) in the LXX (just as in these seven examples in John). The phrase ego eimi appears as the translation of a few other phrases in Isaiah as well that are significant to this discussion. It translates the Hebrew anoki anoki hu as ego eimi in 43:25 and 51:12. Once (52:6) ani hu is translated as ego eimi autos (basically an even more emphasized form). And once (45:18) we find ego eimi kurios for ani Yahweh! This last passage is provocative in that it is in the context of creation, an act ascribed to Jesus by John (John 1:3) and other New Testament writers (Colossians 1:16-17, Hebrews 1:2-3). The usage of ani hu by Isaiah is as a euphemism for the very name of God Himself. Some see a connection between ani hu and Yahweh as both referring to being. 15 That it carried great weight with the Jews is seen in 8:59 and their reaction to the Lord's usage of the phrase. If one wishes to say that Jesus was not speaking Greek, but Aramaic, the difficulty is not removed, for the identification would have been just that much clearer! There seems to be a direct connection between the Septuagint and Jesus' usage of ego eimi. In Isaiah 43:10 we read, “that you may know, and believe, and understand, that I am He” (personal translation). In the LXX this is rendered thus: hina gnote kai pisteusete kai sunete hoti ego eimi. In John 13:19, Jesus says to the disciples, “from now on I tell you before it comes to pass in order that when it does happen, you may believe that I am.” (personal translation). In Greek the last phrase is hina pisteusete hotan genetai hoti ego eimi. When one removes the extraneous words (such as hotan genetai which connects the last clause to the first) and compares these two passages, this is the result: Is. 43:10: hina pisteusete … hoti ego eimi Jn. 13:19: hina pisteusete … hoti ego eimi Even if one were to theorize that Jesus Himself did not attempt to make such an obvious connection between Himself and Yahweh (which would be difficult enough to do!) one must answer the question of why John, being obviously familiar with the LXX, would so intentionally insert this kind of parallelism. Another parallel between the usage of ego eimi in John 13:19 and its usage in Isaiah has to do with the fact that in 13:19 Jesus is telling them the future – one of the very challenges to the false gods thrown down by Yahweh in the passages from Isaiah under consideration (the so-called “trial of the false gods) This connection is direct in Isaiah 41:4, “Who has done this and carried it through, calling forth the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD, – with the first of them and with the last – I am He.” Here the “calling forth” of the generations – time itself – is part of the usage of ani hu. The same is true in John 13:19. In the same chapter of the book of Isaiah references above, in verse 22 we read, “Bring in your idols, to tell us what is going to happen. Tell us what the former things were, so that we may consider them and know their final outcome. Or declare to us the things to come…” That this reference to knowledge of the future would appear in the same section that uses ani hu as the name for God, and that this would be introduced by the Lord Himself in the same context in John 13:19, is significant indeed. Hence, though some would easily dismiss the ani hu/ego eimi connection, 16 or ignore it altogether, 17 the data seems strong that this connection is intended by John himself by his usage. Johannine Usage of ego eimi – Interpretation It is not hard to understand why there have been many who have not wished to make the connection that John makes between Jesus and Yahweh. One cannot make this identification outside of a trinitarian understanding of the Gospel itself, as one can certainly not identify Jesus as the Father in John's Gospel, hence, if Jesus is identified as ego eimi in the sense of the Old Testament ani hu, then one is left with two persons sharing the one nature that is God, and this, when it encounters John's discussion of the Holy Spirit, becomes the basis of the doctrine of the Trinity! Indeed, many of the denials of the rather clear usage of ego eimi in John 8:24, 8:58, 13:19 and 18:5-6 find their origin in preconceived theologies 18 that are nearly unitarian, subordinationist, or so enamored with naturalistic rationalism as to be antisuper-natur al. An interpreter who is unwilling to dismiss the words of Scripture as simply “tradition” (and hence non-authoritative) or to interpret Scripture in contradiction with itself (as in a violation of strict monotheism in the positing of a being who is quasi-god, mighty, but not “almighty”) will be hard pressed to avoid the obvious conclusions of John's presentation. Lest one should find it hard to believe that John would identify the carpenter from Galilee as Yahweh Himself, it might be pointed out that he did just that in John 12:39-41 by quoting from Isaiah's temple vision of Yahweh in Isaiah 6 and then concluding by saying, “These things Isaiah said because he saw His glory and he spoke about Him.” The only “Him” in the context is Jesus; hence, for John, Isaiah, when he saw Yahweh on His throne, was in reality seeing the Lord Jesus. John 1:18 says as much as well. It is self-evident that such a far-reaching and in reality astounding claim as is made by the Lord Jesus in John 8:24, 58 is hard to accept outside of the highest estimation of His person. Indeed, Augustine wrote, “…the whole unhappiness of the Jews was not that they had sin, but to die in sins…In these words, 'Except ye believe that I am,' Jesus meant nothing short of this, 'Except ye believe that I am God, ye shall die in your sins.' It is well for us, thank God, that He said except ye believe, and not except ye understand.”19 But can the usage of ego eimi withstand that much weight? Though being a “scholar” does not guarantee infallibility in judgment, it should at least provide assurance of factual understanding. Given this, the scholars seem to feel that it can. Leon Morris has written, ” 'I am' must have the fullest significance it can bear. It is, as we have already had occasion to notice…in the style of deity.” (in a footnote on same page:) “ego eimi in LXX renders the Hebrew ani hu which is the way God speaks (cf. Deut. 32:39; Isa. 41:4, 43:10, 46:4, etc.). The Hebrew may carry a reference to the meaning of the divine name Yahweh (cf. Exod. 3:14). We should almost certainly understand John's use of the term to reflect that in the LXX. It is the style of deity, and it points to the eternity of God according to the strictest understanding of the continuous nature of the present eimi. He continually IS. Cf. Abbott: “taken here, along with other declarations about what Jesus IS, it seems to call upon the Pharisees to believe that the Son of man is not only the Deliverer but also one with the Father in the unity of the Godhead” (2228).”20 Warfield has written concerning this, “…and again, as the most impressive language possible, He declares…: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am,” where He claims for Himself the timeless present of eternity as His mode of existence.”21 The great expositor J. C. Ryle noted, “Let us carefully note what a strong proof we have here of the pre-existence and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ. He applies to Himself the very name by which God made Himself known when He undertook to redeem Israel. It was “I AM” who brought them out of the land of Egypt. It was “I AM” who died for us upon the cross. The amazing strength of the foundation of a sinner's hope appears here. Believing on Jesus we rest on divinity, on One who is God as well as man. There is a difference in the Greek verbs here employed which we should carefully notice. The Greek for “was” is quite different from the Greek for “am.” It is as if our Lord said, “Before Abraham has born, I have an existence individual and eternal.” “22 Luther, like Augustine before him, wrote in no uncertain terms: “The Lord Christ is angry below the surface and says: “Do you want to know who I am? I am God, and that in the fullest sense. Do as you please. If you do not believe that I am He, then you are nothing, and you must die in your sin.” No prophet, apostle, or evangelist may proclaim and say: “Believe in God, and also believe that I am God; otherwise you are damned.” “23 A.T. Robertson certainly did not see any linguistic problems here: I am (ego eimi). Undoubtedly here Jesus claims eternal existence with the absolute phrase used of God. The contrast between genesthai (entrance into existence of Abraham) and eimi (timeless being) is complete. See the same contrast between en in 1:1 and egeneto in 1:14. See the contrast also in Psa. 90:2 between God (ei, art) and the mountains (genethenai).”24 And finally, William Hendrickson put it rather bluntly: “The “I am” here (8:58) reminds one of the “I am” in 8:24. Basically, the same thought is expressed in both passages; namely, that Jesus is God!”25 This writer feels that there is no way that John could have been any more obvious in his intention to invest in ego eimi a significance far beyond the simple function of identification that it can, and does at times, perform. In 8:58 the Jews pick up stones to stone Jesus. The other two times this occurs are right on the heels of claims to deity as well – first in John 5 where Jesus has just claimed equality with the Father both by calling God His own Father in very special terms as well as claiming the same right to work on the Sabbath as the Jews understood to be God's in upholding the universe; secondly in John 10 after Jesus claims that He and the Father are one in their role of bringing salvation to God's elect – His “sheep”. In both instances John spells it out clearly that these claims were understood to be claims to equality with God – can 8:58 then be different? In John 13:19 the introduction of the phrase in correlation with the revelation of future events just as is found in Isaiah, even to the point of nearly quoting the LXX rendering, is far too specific to be overlooked. And in 18:5-6, John repeats the phrase in verse six to make sure that the reader understands the reason for the soldiers' falling backwards. And why would the soldiers fall backwards if not for the awesomeness of the words of Jesus? Some of the naturalistic explanations brought forward for this incident are so ludicrous as to be absurd. John's meaning cannot be mistaken. If each of these instances were examined solely in a vacuum, separated from the others, without any thought of the entire book of John, one might see how their collective significance could be missed. But this is not the way of scholarly interpretation. These statements are not made in a vacuum – they are placed in a book that is rich with meaning and purpose. It has been well said that John intends the entire Gospel to be read through the “interpretive window” of the Prologue of 1:1-18. Given the teachings of that passage, can one seriously doubt the meaning of ego eimi in the above examined passages? It would seem not. ——————————————————————————– Conclusion It could fairly be admitted that an immediate and unqualified jump from the ego eimi of John 8:58 to Exodus 3:14 is unwise. The connection that is much more properly traced is the one given here, that of ego eimi/ani hu as found in Isaiah. The connection between Isaiah and Exodus 3:14 is so obvious as to be undeniable. We have seen that John uses ego eimi in more than one way – the majority of the time providing a predicate. Even these are astounding in their majesty in regards to the person of Christ. Here Jesus is said to be the way, the truth, and the life; the light of the world; the bread of life; and the good shepherd, each of which it should be noted, has parallels to statements made by Yahweh in the Old Testament. But the bulk of this paper has been devoted to those passages where the phrase is used in a specific sense – in an “absolute” sense. Upon examining these we have seen that they find their origin and background in the book of Isaiah's usage of the Hebrew term ani hu and its translation as ego eimi in the LXX. We have see n the close parallel between Isaiah 43:10 and John 13:19, both in form as well as thought content. We have also seen how the context of the passages themselves – the setting and teaching of the entire book of John – makes the identification of ego eimi and its resultant presentation of the deity of Christ inevitable. We have seen how John purposefully emphasizes these phrases, helping us to grasp their significance. In closing, we might do well to look, then, with this understanding in mind, at Jesus' words at John 8:24: “unless you believe that I am, you will die in your sins.” Jesus here gives us the content and object of saving faith – faith, real faith is that which comes to the real Jesus. A faith that demands a change in Jesus before a commitment is made is not real faith at all. The Jews standing about Him during this conversation most assuredly would not have denied that He was a man – but that was not sufficient for faith. Some had just recently proclaimed Him as Messiah – but that was not sufficient for faith. Some might hail Him as a prophet or a miracle worker, blessed by God – but that was not sufficient for faith. Some today say He was a great moral teacher and philosopher – but that is not sufficient for faith. Some call Him “a god” or a great angel – but that is not sufficient for faith. No, Jesus Himself laid down the line – unless one believes Him for whom He says He is – the ego eimi – one will die in one's sins. There is no salvation in a false Christ. If we are to be united with Christ to have eternal life, then we must be united with the true Christ, not a false representation. It is out of love that Christ uttered John 8:24. We would do well to heed His words. ——————————————————————————– 1. These are: John 6:35, 6:41, 6:51, 8:12, 8:18, 10:7, 10:9, 10:11, 10:14, 11:25, 14:6, 15:1, 15:5. 2. See F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1983) pg. 193. 3. Philip Harner, The “I Am” of the Fourth Gospel, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1970) pg. 4. 4. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934) pp. 879-880. 5. See A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1932) 5:158-159. 6. C. K. Barrett, The Gospel According to St. John. (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1978) pg. 342. 7. See J. C. Ryle, Ryle's Expository Thoughts on the Gospels, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.) pg. 573 as well as A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament 5:159. 8. “Irenaeus Against Heresies” in Philip Schaff, The Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers, 14 volumes. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1983), 1:478. 9. “Origen Against Celsus” in Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 10 volumes. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1981) 4:463. 10. “A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity” in Roberts and Donaldson, The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 5:624-625. 11. Chrysostom, “Homilies on St. John” in Schaff, The Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers, 14:199. 12. Henry Alford, New Testament for English Readers, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1983) 2:547. 13. See Harner, The “I Am” of the Fourth Gospel, pp. 6-36. 14. This connection is either directly made or alluded to by Leon Morris, The New International Commentary on the New Testament: The Gospel According to John, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1971) pp. 447, 473; by Merrill C. Tenney, The Expositor's Bible Commentary: John, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Company, 1981) pg. 99; and by F. F. Bruce, The Gospel of John, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's Publishing Company, 1983) pp. 193, 288. 15. Morris, The Gospel According to John, pg. 473. 16. M. James Penton, “The “I Am” Of John 8:58″ in The Christian Quest, Winter, 1988, pg. 64. 17. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of John's Gospel, (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1943) pp. 614-615. 18. A good example is given by C. K. Barrett: “It is not however correct to infer either for the present passage or for the others in which ego eimi occurs that John wishes to equate Jesus with the supreme God of the Old Testament…Note that in v. 28 it is followed by 'I do nothing of myself, but as the Father taught me I speak these things…I always do the things that are pleasing to him', and in 13:19 by 'He who receives me receives him who sent me' (13:20). Jesus is the obedient servant of the Father, and for this reason perfectly reveals him. ego eimi does not identify Jesus with God, but it does draw attention to him in the strongest possible terms.” The assumption of the unipersonality of God as well as the ontological subordination of the Son that underlies Barrett's comments and clouds his normally clear exegesis, is striking. 19. As quoted by Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels, pp. 531-532. 20. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, pg. 473. 21. B. B. Warfield, The Person and Work of Christ, (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1950), pg. 60. 22. Ryle, Expository Thoughts, pg. 573. 23. Martin Luther, “Sermons on the Gospel of John Chapters 6- 8” in Luther's Works, Jerislav Pelikan, editor, (Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959) pg. 365. 24. A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures, 5:158-159. 25. William Hendrickson, New Testament Commentary: The Gospel of John, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953) pg. 67.

[Casey S Smith 29]

Quote

http://www.parentalguide.com/Documents/Bible_Prophecy/144000_Jews.htm BIBLE PROPHECY 144,000 MALE, VIRGIN JEWS (Subjects in this Section) 1-THE 144,000 SEALED 2-THE 144,000 JEWS (COMMENTARY) 3-INFORMATION ABOUT THE 144,000 (SCRIPTURE) 4-THE 144,000 GO FORTH TEACHING THESE THINGS IN ALL THE WORLD 5-MANY BECOME SAVED: MANY SHOULD BE THE RESULT OF THE 144,000 6-ONE-THIRD OF ISRAEL BECOMES SAVED AND REFINED 7-THE 144,000 GREATLY PERSECUTED 8-THE JEW WAS TO EVANGELIZE THE WORLD 9-THE 144,000 MALE, VIRGIN JEWS: WHAT HAPPENS TO THEM? 10-SUMARY OF THE 144,000 1-THE 144,000 SEALED Following the destruction of the Russian military and its allies, which attack Israel during or near the beginning of the Tribulation, 144,000 male, virgin Jews should come to faith in Jesus Christ. There will be 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes of Israel. They will go forth to preach the Gospel. However, it appears, that just prior to the Russian invasion, the 144,000 will be sealed by God. This may be something that both they and the world are unaware of. This sealing may take place before they come to faith in Jesus, by the foreknowledge of God. It is written, AND AFTER THESE THINGS I SAW. This does not indicate that the next items happened after the seven seals, but rather that John saw them after the seals. John saw FOUR ANGELS STANDING ON (or at) THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, representing all four directions, HOLDING THE FOUR WINDS OF THE EARTH. No specific information is given to us about these angels, other than they are controlling the wind. They are holding the wind that it SHOULD NOT BLOW ON THE EARTH, NOR ON THE SEA, NOR ON ANY TREE (or that no wind should blow)-Rev 7:1. Prior to the servants of God being sealed in (or on) their foreheads, all wind on the planet should cease. AND I SAW ANOTHER ANGEL ASCENDING (or coming up) FROM THE EAST, HAVING THE SEAL OF THE LIVING GOD: AND HE CRIED (or shouted) WITH A LOUD VOICE TO THE FOUR ANGELS, TO WHOM IT WAS GIVEN TO HURT THE EARTH AND THE SEA-Rev 7:2. SAYING, HURT NOT THE EARTH (or land), NEITHER THE SEA, NOR THE TREES, TILL WE (plural) HAVE SEALED THE SERVANTS OF OUR GOD IN (or on) THEIR FOREHEADS-Rev 7:3. The fifth angel is not identified. Some believe it could be Jesus. The Scriptures indicate, once the servants of God are sealed, great hurt or damage will come forth from the four winds of the earth. It indicates that the sea, the trees, and the earth will go through some form of a great catastrophe. This would indicate that the sealing of God’s servants may come just prior to the Russian invasion of Israel. It may indicate that they will be protected from what is about to come. God’s wrath is about to be unleashed, but certain preordained servants of God will be protected. Some may presume that these become saved at this point. Nevertheless, this is not made clear. By His foreknowledge of knowing who will be saved, God will protect the future saints, even though they have not yet given their life to Jesus. He has specific works ordained for them to do at some future date. The kind of seal that will be used (or if they will even be aware of the seal) is not made clear. It obviously is necessary to protect them, as was already mentioned. This sealing would also indicate ownership and may be necessary for the work that they are called of God to do. Many believe it is the seal of the Holy Spirit, but with no visible evidence. Nevertheless, it is visible to the spiritual realm. AND I HEARD THE NUMBER (or how many) OF THEM WHICH WERE SEALED: AND THERE WERE SEALED AN HUNDRED AND FORTY AND FOUR THOUSAND (144,000) OF ALL THE TRIBES OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL-Rev 7:4. These are Jews. The names Jew and Israel are synonymous and are used interchangeably throughout the Scriptures. Twelve thousand were sealed out of each of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel. These tribes included (1) Juda, (2) Reuben, (3) Gad, (4) Aser, (5) Nepthalim, (6) Manasses, (7) Simeon, (8) Levi, (9) Issachar, (10) Zabulon, (11) Joseph, (12) Benjamin-ref Rev 7:5-8. Obviously missing is the tribe of Dan. Some speculate that the Antichrist will arise from this tribe; thus, during the Tribulation period, the tribe of Dan is omitted from being sealed-ref Gen 49:17. During the Millennium, however, the tribe of Dan will be included among the children of Israel. Ephraim, the son of Joseph, the second born, is also missing. The Scriptures indicate that these Jews are single and are virgins. There is no lie in their mouth at all-ref Rev 14:4,5. They will go forth to preach the Gospel of the kingdom-ref Mt 24:14. 2-THE 144,000 JEWS (Commentary) The 144,000 Jews were sealed with the seal of the living God-ref Rev 7:2-4. They have their FATHER'S NAME WRITTEN IN (or on) THEIR FOREHEADS-Rev 14:1. There are 12,000 from each of the twelve tribes of Israel. The tribe of Dan is omitted. They are male, virgin Jews that have not known a woman; no guile is found in their mouth. They are without fault before the throne of God. Following God's supernatural destruction of the invading forces against Israel, the 144,000 believe and go forth preaching the Everlasting Gospel and the Gospel of the Kingdom over all the earth. They will preach to fear God, to give glory to God, the message of salvation, and the message of the judgments that are now being brought upon the earth. Many will get saved as a result of the 144,000 anointed ones of God. However, those that do come to Christ, by faith, will suffer horrible persecutions. Many will have to flee for their lives as time progresses. Many will eventually be beheaded for their faith in Jesus. What ultimately happens to the 144,000 is not clear. 3-INFORMATION ABOUT THE 144,000 (Scripture) These Jewish witnesses are called, AN HUNDRED AND FORTY AND FOUR THOUSAND-Rev 7:4. They are called, THE SERVANTS OF OUR GOD-Rev 7:3. These ARE…NOT DEFILED WITH WOMEN…THEY ARE VIRGINS-Rev 14:4. AND IN THEIR MOUTH WAS FOUND NO GUILE (or lie): FOR THEY ARE WITHOUT FAULT (or defect, or blameless) BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD-Rev 14:5. They are from ALL THE TRIBES OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL-Rev 7:4. OF THE TRIBE OF JUDA (Judah, Y’hudah) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF REUBEN (Re’uven) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF GAD WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF ASER (Asher) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF NEPTHALIM (Naphtali, Naftali) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF MANASSES (Manasseh, M’nasheh) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF SIMEON (Shim’on) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF LEVI (L’vi) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF ISSACHAR (Yissass’khar) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF ZABULON (Zebulun, Z’vulun) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF JOSEPH (Yosef) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND. OF THE TRIBE OF BENJAMIN (Binyamin) WERE SEALED TWELVE THOUSAND-Rev 7:5-8. It may be noted that the tribe of Dan is omitted. Some believe this is an indication that the Antichrist may be from the tribe of Dan. 4-THE 144,000 GO FORTH TEACHING THESE THINGS IN ALL THE WORLD AND THIS GOSPEL (or Good News) OF THE KINGDOM SHALL BE PREACHED (or announced) IN ALL THE WORLD FOR A WITNESS UNTO ALL NATIONS; AND THEN SHALL THE END COME-Mt 24:14. It can be expected that the 144,000 will proclaim, in detail, the Tribulation period, including the various events that will be happening. They may also teach the following. AND I SAW ANOTHER ANGEL FLY IN THE MIDST OF HEAVEN (or in midair), HAVING THE EVERLASTING (or eternal) GOSPEL TO PREACH (or proclaim) UNTO THEM THAT DWELL (or live) ON THE EARTH, AND TO EVERY NATION, AND KINDRED (or tribe), AND TONGUE (or language), AND PEOPLE-Rev 14:6. This angel is pictured as flying in midair. The message that comes forth is the everlasting Gospel. This Gospel will be preached to every nation, tribe, language, and people. Whether this is 1) a literal angel preaching as he flies in the air, or 2) a symbolic angel, or 3) an angel overseeing the 144,000 or others preaching this message, is not made clear. The third conclusion would most likely be the correct one. God's anointed should be bringing forth this message. The angel is SAYING WITH A LOUD VOICE. Note the emphasis on a loud voice. This message needs to be shouted and proclaimed loudly. In doing so, some that have been deaf, that is, their ears have been closed, will begin to hear. (1) FEAR GOD. (Spiritual warfare). Fearing God is a message seldom heard in the Laodicean, lukewarm generation. Preaching on the fear of God has all but ceased. Occasionally, reverencing God is heard in place of the fear of God. Perhaps, these two scriptures convey the fear of God. It is written, GOD IS GREATLY TO BE FEARED IN THE ASSEMBLY OF THE SAINTS, AND TO BE HAD IN REVERENCE OF ALL THEM THAT ARE ABOUT HIM-Ps 89:7. It is also written, BUT I WILL FOREWARN YOU WHOM YE SHALL FEAR: FEAR HIM, WHICH AFTER HE HATH KILLED HATH POWER TO CAST INTO HELL; YEA, I SAY UNTO YOU, FEAR HIM-Lk 12:5. The word “fear” means exactly what it says. In a few scriptures, the words denoting “fear God” can be translated as “reverence.” However, in most, it means to “be afraid.” In some, it means to “tremble.” Many people, in this lukewarm church age, want to make God appear smaller than He really is; they want to elevate or magnify themselves. The fear of God will be taught correctly by the 144,000 during the Tribulation. (2) AND GIVE GLORY TO HIM; FOR THE HOUR OF (or when He will pass) HIS JUDGMENT IS COME. The Tribulation is a time of God's judgments and wrath. The world is also being admonished to glorify and worship the God of heaven. God's judgment is at hand. Note, “glorify Him” and “judgment” are connected. (3) AND WORSHIP HIM THAT MADE HEAVEN (or the heavens), AND EARTH, AND THE SEA, AND THE FOUNTAINS (or springs) OF WATERS-Rev 14:7. In the Laodicean church age, the teaching that God is the Creator has been supplanted by Satan’s lie of evolution. These four items that are referred to as being made—heaven, earth, the sea, and the fountains—are also mentioned many times in the Revelation during the Tribulation period. Three of these are affected by the first four trumpet judgments and other judgments as well. The angel is confirming that God made these things. The devil did not make them. This may be a warning not to glorify and worship the Antichrist and Satan for these things. Many people are not thankful for these things, which God has given them. Perhaps this is one reason that judgments come upon three of them. The truth of God's creation is once again proclaimed: God created all things. AND THE THIRD ANGEL FOLLOWED THEM, SAYING WITH A LOUD VOICE. Once again, we see the words, “with a loud voice,” as was the case with angel one. The message here is, the words that the angel has to say are to be proclaimed loudly, so that all can hear. This clear message is, IF ANY MAN WORSHIP THE BEAST AND HIS IMAGE, AND RECEIVE HIS MARK IN (or on) HIS FOREHEAD, OR IN (or on) HIS HAND-Rev 14:9. THE SAME SHALL DRINK OF THE WINE OF THE WRATH (or fury) OF GOD, WHICH IS POURED OUT WITHOUT MIXTURE (or undiluted, or full strength) INTO THE CUP OF HIS INDIGNATION (or rage, or wrath)-Rev 14:10. Those that choose to ignore God's warning, God is clearly and loudly telling them that His wrath or fury shall be poured undiluted into the cup of His rage or wrath. Then these people will have to drink of the contents of this cup. They SHALL BE TORMENTED WITH FIRE AND BRIMSTONE (or sulfur). The verse continues, IN THE PRESENCE OF (or before) THE HOLY ANGELS, AND IN THE PRESENCE OF (or before) THE LAMB-Rev 14:10. We can expect that the 144,000 will be warning the people, in advance, of what is coming. They will be warning people not to take the mark or worship the image of the Antichrist when the time comes. AND THE SMOKE OF THEIR TORMENT ASCENDETH (or goes, or rises) UP FOR EVER AND EVER: AND THEY HAVE NO REST DAY NOR NIGHT. These followers of Satan that were clearly shown the truth and chose to disregard it, they shall be tormented for time without end. There shall never be a day or a night for ever and ever that they shall not be tormented. They will never have any rest; they will never have a moment of relief. Smoke will come forth from the lake of fire from their torment, and it shall also rise up for ever and ever. These are those WHO WORSHIP THE BEAST AND HIS IMAGE, AND WHOSOEVER RECEIVETH THE MARK OF HIS NAME-Rev 14:11. HERE IS THE PATIENCE (or perseverance…needed) OF THE SAINTS (or God's people). The saints can rest assured that the disobedient shall receive the just reward for their actions. HERE ARE THEY THAT KEEP (or obey) THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD, AND THE FAITH OF JESUS (or remain faithful to Jesus)-Rev 14:12. The true saints do keep God's commandments, which testifies of their love for God-ref Jn 14:15. The true Christians do remain faithful to Jesus, even when confronted with death. Note the words in Rev 12:17- WHICH KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD, AND HAVE THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST. All of these verses cover things which the 144,000 should teach and much more. 5-MANY BECOME SAVED: MANY SHOULD BE THE RESULT OF THE 144,000 As a result of the teaching of the 144,000, a great multitude of people, during the first part of the Tribulation, will be saved. Many of them, however, will be killed in the second part of the Tribulation. This includes both Jew and Gentile alike. A remnant, that is, one-third of Israel, will also be saved. AFTER THIS I BEHELD, AND, LO, A GREAT MULTITUDE (or a huge crowd), WHICH NO MAN COULD NUMBER (or too large) (which no one could count-NASB), OF ALL NATIONS, AND KINDREDS (or tribes), AND PEOPLE, AND TONGUES (or language), STOOD BEFORE (or in front of) THE THRONE, AND BEFORE (or in front of) THE LAMB, CLOTHED WITH (or dressed, or wearing) WHITE ROBES, AND PALMS (or palm branches) IN THEIR HANDS…AND HE SAID TO ME, THESE ARE THEY WHICH CAME OUT OF (the) GREAT TRIBULATION (or great persecution), AND (they) HAVE WASHED THEIR ROBES, AND MADE THEM WHITE IN THE BLOOD OF THE LAMB (Jesus). THEREFORE ARE THEY BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD, AND SERVE HIM DAY AND NIGHT IN HIS TEMPLE: AND HE THAT SITTETH ON THE THRONE SHALL DWELL AMONG THEM (or spread His tent over them-NIV)-Rev 7:9,14,15. 6-ONE-THIRD OF ISRAEL BECOMES SAVED AND REFINED One-third of Israel will be refined as silver is refined. They will go through many judgments and trials. However, two-thirds of the Jews will not turn to Jesus. Sadly, they will ultimately be cut off and die. AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS, THAT IN ALL THE LAND, SAITH THE LORD, TWO PARTS THEREIN SHALL BE CUT OFF AND DIE; BUT THE THIRD SHALL BE LEFT THEREIN. AND I WILL BRING THE THIRD PART THROUGH THE FIRE, AND WILL REFINE THEM AS SILVER IS REFINED, AND WILL TRY THEM AS GOLD IS TRIED: THEY SHALL CALL ON MY NAME, AND I WILL HEAR THEM: I WILL SAY, IT IS MY PEOPLE: AND THEY SHALL SAY, THE LORD IS MY GOD-Zech 13:8,9. THEREFORE THUS SAITH THE LORD GOD; BECAUSE YE ARE ALL BECOME DROSS (or scum on molten metal – rubbish), BEHOLD, THEREFORE I WILL GATHER YOU INTO THE MIDST OF JERUSALEM-Ezek 22:19. AS THEY GATHER SILVER, AND BRASS, AND IRON, AND LEAD, AND TIN, INTO THE MIDST OF THE FURNACE, TO BLOW THE FIRE UPON IT, TO MELT IT; SO WILL I GATHER YOU IN MINE ANGER AND IN MY FURY, AND I WILL LEAVE YOU THERE (in the midst of Jerusalem) AND MELT YOU-Ezek 22:20. YEA, I WILL GATHER YOU, AND BLOW UPON YOU IN THE FIRE OF MY WRATH (as silver is refined to make it pure, so the child ren of Israel will be refined). AND YE SHALL BE MELTED IN THE MIDST THEREOF. AS SILVER IS MELTED IN THE MIDST OF THE FURNACE, SO SHALL YE BE MELTED IN THE MIDST THEREOF; AND YE SHALL KNOW THAT I THE LORD HAVE POURED OUT MY FURY UPON YOU-Ezek 22:21,22. ESAIAS ALSO CRIETH CONCERNING ISRAEL, THOUGH THE NUMBER OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL BE AS THE SAND OF THE SEA, A REMNANT SHALL BE SAVED-Ro 9:27. AS THE LORD HATH SAID, AND IN THE REMNANT WHOM THE LORD SHALL CALL-Joel 2:32. 7-THE 144,000 GREATLY PERSECUTED It is unclear whether the following verses are covering the 144,000, or the converts of the 144,000, or both. It is written, BUT BEFORE ALL THESE, THEY SHALL LAY THEIR HANDS ON YOU, AND PERSECUTE YOU, DELIVERING YOU UP TO THE SYNAGOGUES, AND INTO PRISONS, BEING BROUGHT BEFORE KINGS AND RULERS FOR MY NAME'S SAKE-Lk 21:12. AND IT SHALL TURN TO YOU FOR A TESTIMONY. SETTLE IT THEREFORE IN YOUR HEARTS, NOT TO MEDITATE BEFORE WHAT YE SHALL ANSWER. Jesus is telling them, do not worry what you will say. Do not try to figure out beforehand what answers you will give. FOR I WILL GIVE YOU A MOUTH AND WISDOM, WHICH ALL YOUR ADVERSARIES SHALL NOT BE ABLE TO GAINSAY NOR RESIST (or contradict)-Lk 21:13-15. THEY SHALL DELIVER YOU UP TO COUNSELS; AND IN THE SYNAGOGUES YE, SHALL BE BEATEN-Mk 13:9. IN THAT HOUR, THAT SPEAK YE: FOR IT IS NOT YE THAT SPEAK, BUT THE HOLY GHOST-Mk 13:11. Jesus had told His disciples nearly two thousand years ago, BEHOLD, I SEND YOU FORTH AS SHEEP IN THE MIDST OF WOLVES: BE YE THEREFORE WISE AS SERPENTS, AND HARMLESS AS DOVES-Mt 10:16. BUT BEWARE OF MEN: FOR THEY WILL DELIVER YOU UP TO THE COUNCILS, AND THEY WILL SCOURGE YOU IN THEIR SYNAGOGUES; AND YE SHALL BE BROUGHT BEFORE GOVERNORS AND KINGS FOR MY SAKE, FOR A TESTIMONY AGAINST THEM AND THE GENTILES. BUT WHEN THEY DELIVER YOU UP, TAKE NO THOUGHT HOW OR WHAT YE SHALL SPEAK: FOR IT SHALL BE GIVEN YOU IN THAT SAME HOUR WHAT YE SHALL SPEAK. FOR IT IS NOT YE THAT SPEAK, BUT THE SPIRIT OF YOUR FATHER WHICH SPEAKETH IN YOU. AND YE SHALL BE HATED OF ALL MEN FOR MY NAME'S SAKE: BUT HE THAT ENDURETH TO THE END SHALL BE SAVED. BUT WHEN THEY PERSECUTE YOU IN THIS CITY, FLEE YE INTO ANOTHER: FOR VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, YE SHALL NOT HAVE GONE OVER THE CITIES OF ISRAEL, TILL THE SON OF MAN BE COME-Mt 10:17-20,22,23. 8-THE JEW WAS TO EVANGELIZE THE WORLD Originally, it was given to the Jew to preach the Gospel to all the world. Jesus said, AND THAT REPENTANCE AND REMISSION OF SINS SHOULD BE PREACHED IN HIS NAME AMONG ALL NATIONS, BEGINNING AT JERUSALEM. AND YE ARE WITNESSES OF THESE THINGS-Lk 24:47,48. BUT YE SHALL RECEIVE POWER, AFTER THAT THE HOLY GHOST IS COME UPON YOU: AND YE SHALL BE WITNESSES UNTO ME BOTH IN JERUSALEM, AND IN ALL JUDAEA, AND IN SAMARIA, AND UNTO THE UTTERMOST PART OF THE EARTH-Acts 1:8. AND HE SAID UNTO THEM, GO YE INTO ALL THE WORLD, AND PREACH THE GOSPEL TO EVERY CREATURE-Mk 16:15. GO YE THEREFORE, AND TEACH ALL NATIONS, BAPTIZING THEM IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, AND OF THE SON, AND OF THE HOLY GHOST: TEACHING THEM TO OBSERVE ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER I HAVE COMMANDED YOU: AND, LO, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, EVEN UNTO THE END OF THE WORLD. AMEN-Mt 28:19,20. 9-THE 144,000 MALE, VIRGIN JEWS: WHAT HAPPENS TO THEM? Rev 14:1-AND I LOOKED, AND, LO, A LAMB (which is Jesus) STOOD ON THE MOUNT ZION. The following may be noted, a voice from heaven-v.2, harpers-v.2, before the throne-v.3, the four beasts-v.3, the elders-v.3, and the 144,000 which were redeemed from the earth-v.3. Collectively, these indicate that this is a heavenly Mount Zion. There is also an earthly Mount Zion, the temple site. It is a hill in Jerusalem. It is mentioned in the Bible approximately 156 times. There are times when “Zion” appears to represent Jerusalem, such as in Isa 1:26,27 and Ps 126:1. The verse continues, AND WITH HIM (with Jesus) AN HUNDRED FORTY AND FOUR THOUSAND (144,000). The 144,000 are now pictured with Jesus on Mount Zion. They HAVING HIS FATHER’S NAME (who had His name and His Father's name-NIV) WRITTEN IN (or on) THEIR FOREHEADS. Note, 144,000 (12,000 from each of the twelve tribes of Israel) are also mentioned in Rev 7:1-8. The one exception is the tribe of Dan. It was left out. In Rev 7:3, the 144,000 are called THE SERVANTS OF OUR GOD. They are SEALED…IN THEIR FOREHEADS-Rev 14:3. Here, we are told, they have the name of the Father in their forehead. It appears the 144,000 are pictured before the heavenly Mount Zion. The Scriptures do not seem to specify how they got there. Were they beheaded? Were they raptured or translated in some unexplained way? We can only speculate. They may have been killed, during the second part of the Tribulation, by being beheaded. Also the Scriptures do not seem clear as to exactly what time period this represents during the second part of the Tribulation. Some consider that verse one is the earthly Mount Zion after the return of Jesus, and then verse two switches to a heavenly scene. This, however, might be inconsistent, as v.3 appears to portray the 144,000 in heaven singing. Others consider that the 144,000 did not die yet, but are upon the earthly Mount Zion singing. Rev 14:2-AND I HEARD A VOICE FROM HEAVEN, AS THE VOICE OF MANY (rushing) WATERS, AND AS THE VOICE OF A GREAT (or pealing) THUNDER: AND I HEARD THE VOICE (or sound) OF HARPERS HARPING (or playing) WITH (or on) THEIR HARPS. Again, we may note the harp in heaven. The harpers are not identified. Some believe they are some of the saints that were martyred during the Tribulation. Harps are also mentioned in Rev 15:2. Rev 14:3-AND THEY (the 144,000) SUNG AS IT WERE A NEW SONG BEFORE THE THRONE. Here they are before the throne of God in heaven. AND BEFORE THE FOUR BEASTS (or living creatures), AND THE ELDERS: AND NO MAN (or no one) COULD LEARN THAT SONG BUT THE HUNDRED AND FORTY AND FOUR THOUSAND, WHICH WERE REDEEMED (or ransomed, or purchased) (or, we might say, were paid for and taken) FROM THE EARTH (or world). It is noted that Jesus is still in heaven. The 144,000 have fulfilled their mission upon the earth during the first part of the Tribulation. Rev 14:4-THESE ARE THEY (or the ones) WHICH WERE NOT DEFILED WITH WOMEN; FOR THEY ARE VIRGINS (or they kept themselves pure-NIV). These appear to have never been married and never been intimate with a woman. (There are those that disagree with this.) Some consider the virginity mentioned here is not of a sexual nature but is referring to spiritual purity. However, the fact that women are mentioned, in connection with this, indicates this means exactly what it says. THESE ARE THEY WHICH FOLLOW THE LAMB (which is Jesus) WHITHERSOEVER HE GOETH. THESE WERE REDEEMED (or ransomed, or purchased) FROM AMONG MEN (or humanity), BEING (offered as) THE FIRSTFRUITS UNTO GOD (or as firstfruits for God) AND TO THE LAMB (or Jesus). This could signify that they were originally the first to be saved after the Rapture. Rev 14:5-In an age when cursing and blaspheming God is commonplace, it is interesting to note in this verse, AND IN THEIR MOUTH WAS FOUND NO GUILE (or lie): FOR THEY ARE WITHOUT FAULT (or defect, or blameless) BEFORE THE THRONE OF GOD. These 144,000 are probably alive right now in Israel. Many of them may be orthodox Jews in the Holy Land today. Though they are zealous for God, at this time, BLINDNESS IN PART IS HAPPENED TO ISRAEL-Ro 11:25. 10-(Summary of the 144,000) 144,000 on the earth 12,000 from all the twelve tribes of Israel, excluding Dan They are sealed in their forehead They are the servants of God The 144,000 are with the Lamb They are pictured on Mount Zion They have the Father's name written in their foreheads They sung a new song They were before the throne No one could learn that song, except the 144,000 They were not defiled with women They were virgins (it appears these were not married) They follow Jesus They were ransomed or purchased from among men They are the firstfruits unto God There was no guile or lies found in their mouth They are without fault or defect (or are blameless before the throne of God)

[Author]

Posts