Sullivan church of Christ – Sullivan, MO
Date: September 9, 2007
MY STUDY WITH JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES
Ben Justice
This past Friday, I engaged in a study with a couple of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
This study had already been prearranged and the topic was the Deity of Jesus.
Of course, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not believe that Jesus is an eternal being as
God the Father is. They believe he was created by Jehovah; hence a created
being. The Scriptures clearly teach that Jesus is an eternal being possessing all
the attributes of Deity. This is what I set out to prove to them.
Before actually getting into the study, allow me to explain how this study was
arranged. Jehovah’s Witnesses are well known for their personal evangelism in
traveling from house to house spreading their message. About a week and half
before this past Friday, a man and a woman pulled into my drive way wanting to
share a message from the Bible with me. The man proceeded to quote
scriptures. I then proceeded to stop him and explained that I was the preacher
for the Sullivan church of Christ. I also informed him that there are many areas
of disagreement between churches of Christ and the Watchtower organization.
He acknowledged that. One area that I pointed out was the eternality of Jesus.
Immediately, the gentleman directed me to Col. 1:15, wherein Jesus is referred
to as “the first-born of every creature.” His argument was that “firstborn” meant
“first-created.” (An analysis of this word, verse, and context was presented in
last week’s bulletin.). I informed him that the word “first-born” does not mean
that Jesus was the first one to be created, but rather denotes his preeminence
and superiority. We both agreed that he would come back at another time and so
Friday it was. Now, to the actual study.
The first area of study was back to Col. 1:15 and the word “first-born.” He
immediately handed me a copied page from Strong’s Concordance dealing with
the word “first-born.” He actually had highlighted what Strong said about the
use of the word “first-born” in Col. 1:15. He read it to me. Here is the actual
quote from Strong's Concordance:
(3a) Col. 1:15, where His eternal relationship with the Father is in view, and the clause means
both that He was the firstborn before all creation and that He Himself produced creation . . .
I proceeded to inform them that this statement from Strong did help their case
but rather mine. The statement clearly states Christ’s “eternal relationship with
the Father is in view. . .” Also, this is not all that Strong said about the word
“first-born.” Before Strong referenced Col. 1:15, he had already stated concerning
the word “first-born” in reference to Christ:
Firstborn is used . . . (2) of His relationship to the Father, expressing His priority to, and
preeminence over, creation, not in the sense of being the first to be born. It is used of superiority
of position (cf. Ex. 4:22; Deut. 21:16, 17).
After I presented several arguments and other passages containing the word
“first-born,” it was apparent that they could not answer what I said. Thus, we
moved on to the next passage of discussion.
The fact is, I was able to use their own Bible against them. The New World
Translation (NWT, hereafter) is used exclusively by the Watchtower group.
Before I referenced what their own Bible said, I asked this question: “Is Jehovah
eternal?” “Oh, yes,” they affirmed. I then showed them Isaiah 40:3 (again from
the NWT), wherein Isaiah prophesied of the coming Messiah, “Listen! Someone is
calling out in the wilderness: ‘Clear up the way of Jehovah, you people! MAKE the
highway for our God through the desert plain straight.” Mark, in Mark 1:3, Luke, in
Luke 3:4, and John, in John 1:23, all quote Isaiah 40:3 and use the word
“Jehovah.” “Make the way of Jehovah straight” is what their own Bible states. I
then put forth a very simple syllogistic argument. Note:
1.) Jehovah is eternal. (Remember, I had already asked them about this even
before referencing the passages from their own Bible).
2.) But, Jesus is Jehovah (as per their own Bible).
3.) Therefore, Jesus is eternal.
One of the gentleman just snickered at this cold, hard logic. I then put the
argument another way:
1.) Jehovah was not created.
2.) But, Jesus is Jehovah (as per their own Bible).
3.) Therefore, Jesus was not created.
This really seemed to turn them for a loop. They sought to answer this dilemma
by saying that Jehovah (in the passages cited above) is not a reference to Jesus.
Of course, that is utter perversion.
Then, they sought to make the argument that the passages read, “of Jehovah”
and not “for Jehovah,” thus making a distinction between “of” and “for.”
Granted, while there is a difference between “of” and “for” it didn’t at all help
their case. I pointed out that the word “of” is possessive in nature, thus
signifying ownership. It is the way “of” Jehovah. It other words, it is the way
that belongs to Jehovah. Again, Jehovah is a reference to Christ. This really
baffled them as to why their Bible referred to Jesus as Jehovah. But, they
couldn’t answer it sufficiently. Thus, we moved on to another passage.
In John 8:58, Jesus said, “Before Abraham was, I am.” (see the Jan. 29, 2006 &
Feb. 5, 2006 Sullivan Weekly Bulletin articles on our website for more discussion
on this passage) Instead of “I am”, the NWT states, “I have been.” The two
gentlemen pointed this out to me, which was a mistake. I set forth two
arguments for their consideration why “I have been” is not only the wrong
translation but why this translation shows the bias and prejudice against the
eternality of Jesus. Note:
1.) “Am” is the translation of the Greek verb eimi. This verb is found 52 times in
the Gospel of John. The NWT translation consistently translates eimi as “I am.”
The exception is the very place in which the Lord’s Deity is under consideration
and that is John 8:58, where the translators translated “I have been.” Thus, I
asked the two gentleman, “Why is it that the translators of the NWT translated
eimi correctly (‘I am’) throughout the Gospel of John with the exception of John 8:
58, where it is translated ‘I have been’ in reference to Jesus?” They responded
that there has to be a reason. I informed them that there is a reason all right
and that reason is because of the bias and prejudice against Jesus being eternal
in nature.
2.) I then referred them to their own Greek interlinear Bible. Did you know my
friends that even in their own Greek interlinear Bible it has “I am?” I asked,
“Why is it that your own interlinear Bible has ‘I am’ but in the NWT it is changed
to ‘I have been’.” Again, this boggled their mind.
There were a few other things that were discussed, but this pretty much ended
the discussion. They said they would have to do some more research and come
back next Friday. We shall see if they show up again. When all is said and
done, I hope and pray they will give up their erroneous doctrines, reject the
religious movement they are currently identified with and embrace the ancient
order as set forth in the NT of Jesus Christ.