Boards

My church

Greek

Reformation Theology

Disputes:
  v. JW
  v. Rome
  v. ignert

Systematics

Pleasures of God

Theo Links

Apolo Links

Software

Hardware

Photo

New

Comments and Responses Welcome

"And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: from The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (NASB)

The Watchtower's comments on Rev 3:14 in SYBT are found in this section under the subheading "Jesus a Separate Creation". Their comments are as follows.

He was "the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14, RS, Catholic edition). "Beginning" [Greek, ar·khe'] cannot rightly be interpreted to mean that Jesus was the 'beginner' of God's creation. In his Bible writings, John uses various forms of the Greek word ar·khe' more than 20 times, and these always have the common meaning of "beginning." Yes, Jesus was created by God as the beginning of God's invisible creations. (SYBT, p.14)

The Watchtower's comments here focus on Christ's description of himself as "the beginning of God's creation" in Revelation 3:14. Let's look at the passage in its context before opening it up.

The Passage In Full

"And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: from The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this: 'I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I would that you were cold or hot. 'So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth. 'Because you say, "I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing," and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked, I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire, that you may become rich, and white garments, that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see. 'Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; be zealous therefore, and repent. 'Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him, and will dine with him, and he with Me. 'He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne. 'He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.' " (Rev 3:14-22, NASB)

The Watchtower's argument here that Christ is the first created being rests on the Greek word ar·khe'. Referring to a Greek lexicon that is frequently quoted with approval by the Watchtower, I found several entries under the word ar·khe', two of which demand close examination. Let's look at them one at a time. The first definition appears to match the way the Watchtower is explaining ar·khe'.

2. The person or thing that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader: Col 1:18; Rev 1:8 (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the NT, entry under ar·khe')

In its explanation of Christ as "the beginning of the creation of God," the Watchtower is applying a specific portion of this definition from Thayer to the use of ar·khe' by John. They are stating that Christ is the first creature in the series of creation. They believe Jesus, as the "beginning [ar·khe'] of the creation of God", is the first created thing of creation. They see this word ar·khe' as placing the one so described within the group being described. The group identified here is "the creation of God." If Jesus is the "beginning" [ar·khe'] of this group, then, being a member of it, he is the first created of creation, and not the creator of creation.

A Question of Definition, not Translation
I want you to notice that the Watchtower's argument does not center on the translation of ar·khe' as "beginning" (though they make it sound like that is the issue), but on the definition of "beginning." It is not a question of "beginning" being an accurate or inaccurate translation. It is not the word "beginning" that the Watchtower is fighting for, as if Trinitarians were arguing for a different word here. Most Bibles used by Trinitarians translate ar·khe' here as "beginning." The question is, what does "beginning" mean?. What does John intend us to understand here when we see this word "beginning?" The Watchtower's position rests on their insistence that "beginning" must be understood as "the first person or thing in a series". It is a battle over definitions, not over the translation of the word itself. This can be easily overlooked due to the way the Watchtower frames its arguments. They make it sound like Trinitarians are fighting for some other word here, when in fact, that is not the case. The definition of the word and not the word itself is the battleground.

Let's See Where It Takes Us
The Watchtower has stated here that ar·khe' as used by John ALWAYS has the common meaning of "beginning" (specifically the definition 'first in a series'). They are not limiting their application of ar·khe' as "beginning" to this one verse. They say that the meaning of "beginning" (i.e. first in a series) should always be held when John uses the word ar·khe'. For the sake of this discussion, let's agree with the Watchtower. Let's agree that ar·khe' will always mean "beginning", as in the first in a series. The Watchtower has made a clear, dogmatic claim here that ar·khe' must be understood in this way. But dogmatic claims lead to questions. Is their claim supportable in all uses of ar·khe' by John? Let's keep it simple and start looking in the most obvious place, the rest of the book of Revelation. Is ar·khe' used by John here? Will the "rule" the Watchtower has attempted to establish hold up? Let's look at the following verses for other occurrences of ar·khe': Rev 21:6, 22:13.

Who Is "Beginning?"
Please look up the verses and read them. As you are reading, ask yourself if "beginning" can be understood in these verses as the Watchtower has dogmatically claimed? In those verses (Rev 21:6, 22:13), who is in view? Who is described as the ar·khe', the "beginning", the "first in a series?" (Note: ar·khe' can also be found in Revelation 1:8 in the Greek text underlying the King James Version.)

Jehovah is "Beginning?"
Who is in view in these verses? Who is being described using this same word ar·khe'? According to the Watchtower, Rev 21:6 and 22:13 both have Jehovah God in view. Now I want you to remember the Watchtower's definitive rule concerning John's use of ar·khe'. If, as the Watchtower claims, ar·khe' must be understood as "beginning," meaning "first in a series" and not "origin" or "cause", then in what sense is Jehovah the "beginning", the "first in a series?" Is Jehovah a created being, or is He the creator, the source, the "beginning" of all creation?

The "Beginning" of Blasphemy
If we stick with the Watchtower's definition of ar·khe' and carry their argument to its logical conclusion, Jehovah loses his unique exalted position over all of creation. He becomes, in some sense, just another Joe. First in line, perhaps, but only Joe First In Line. Is this the glorious Jehovah the Watchtower claims to believe in and defend? The Watchtower claims to be a religion upholding the glory of Jehovah. Yet when their own claims are consistently applied to Scripture, we find a god who is quite a bit less than the deity they claim to represent. "Jehovah first in a series" is profoundly inferior to the Holy, Separate, and Glorious God of Scripture.

Who's Been Sitting In My Chair?
Considering the claim of the Watchtower that it exalts Jehovah God more than any other religion, it might seem surprising that they (the Watchtower) would put a creature on God's throne. Yet that is exactly what happens in Revelation 3. In their eagerness to assign Christ to the realm of creatures, they diminish the glory of Jehovah God immeasurably as a result. Why? Look at where the Watchtower's "creature Jesus" ends up in Rev 3:21.

'He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.'

Isai 42:8 "I am the Lord, that is My name; I will not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images. (NASB)
Isai 48:11 "For My own sake, for My own sake, I will act; For how can [My name] be profaned? And My glory I will not give to another.

No Surprise to Trinitarians
The exaltation of Christ to the throne of God is no surprise to Trinitarian Christians. In fact, it's what we would expect to find. "The greatness of the Lamb is indicated in the way he is joined with God. thus there are references to 'the throne of God and of the Lamb' (Rev 22:1,3) and to people standing before the throne and before the Lamb (Rev 7:9). The one hundred and forty-four thousand are described as 'first-fruits to God and to the Lamb' (Rev 14:4). Again and again the writer (of Revelation) puts the Lamb on a level with God." (Morris, New Testament Theology, p.292, emphasis added)

Jehovah=Beginning, Jesus=Beginning, Both First in a Series?
Has the Watchtower's "rule" on interpreting ar·khe' held fast? No, they cannot hold to their "rule" on these texts that apply to Jehovah! The Watchtower's dogmatic claim concerning ar·khe' has proven to be false. Jehovah's Witnesses should not be allowed at this point to back off on the definition claimed by the Watchtower. If the Watchtower is correct in their definitive rule concerning ar·khe' as used by John, that definition should and must be applied to all the verses where the word is used by John! Well, Jehovah's Witnesses, is Jehovah God the "beginning" just as Jesus is or not?

The Watchtower's lack of consistency here has not gone unnoticed. Morey notes in his analysis of the Watchtower's position on ar·khe' that they are forced into inconsistency where the term is applied to Jehovah.

The word [ar·khe'] "the beginning" does not imply that Jesus was the first thing created. If it did, then the JWs will have to reduce Jehovah to a creature because in Rev 22:13, they apply the word [ar·khe'] to Jehovah. (Morey, Trinity, p.499)

So What Does Ar·khe' Mean?
So much for agreeing with the Watchtower. Since we have found that the Watchtower's dogmatic rule for interpreting ar·khe' is a real dog, we can rightly ask how we should understand ar·khe' in Rev 3:14. What is meant by "the beginning" here as it applies to Jesus? Greek scholar Spiros Zodhiates provides us with the following helpful comments.

[Concerning the word archee] "The most important distinction, however, is that made by nearly all lexicographers--that in the absolute sense the word archee, "beginning," can be either passive or active. Whether it is one or the other has to be determined by its context. When it is passive, we are to understand its meaning as "the result of another force," and when it is active, we have to take it as meaning "the cause of all things." When used in connection with the creation, it can mean either the beginning of the created world or the first cause of the created world. The word archee, "beginning," then, can mean either the result or the cause of something.
"Does John here (Rev 3:14) refer to Jesus Christ as the first result of the creation of God or as the First Cause, the Creator? By virtue of other Scriptures, we are forced to adopt the active meaning of the word archee, that Jesus Christ was the Cause of God's creation and not the result of it.
There are two passages of the New Testament that make this crystal clear, John 1:1-3 and Colossians 1:15, 18. (Zodhiates, Was Christ God? p.45)

Zodhiates description of the active meaning of ar·khe' is echoed by Dr. Ron Rhodes, whose book Reasoning from the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses is the best general response to the Watchtower.

In responding to the Watchtower's interpretation of Rev 3:14, it is critical to note that there is a wide range of meanings for the Greek word ar·khe', which is translated "beginning" in the NWT. Though ar·khe' can mean "beginning," the word is truly unique and also carries the important active meaning of "one who begins," "origin, " "source," "creator," or "first cause." (Rhodes, Reasoning from the Scriptures with the JWs, p.123)

Active Cause or Passive Result?
We should look briefly at the passages which Zodhiates mentioned, John 1:1-3 and Colossians 1:15-18. These passages explicitly exclude Christ from the realm of creatures and place him as the active creator of everything. These passages are describing Jesus not as the passive result of creation, but as the active cause of creation. They have a direct bearing on how we should interpret ar·khe' in Rev 3:14.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. (John 1:1-3, NASB)

And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, [both] in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities-- all things have been created by Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything. (Colossians 1:15-18, NASB)

In the future, I will be writing detailed articles on both of these passages. But it is sufficient at this point to simply highlight the contrast they draw between Jesus and all created things. These contrasts require us to abandon the "passive" meaning of ar·khe' at Revelation 3:14 which the Watchtower advocates. We are moved by the clear statements of God's inspired Word to understand ar·khe' with the "active" meaning.

[Other] Word Games
The Watchtower has discerned the importance of Colossians 1:15-18 to this discussion. They insert the word [other] into the text here several times, supposedly to clarify the meaning of the passage. Inserting a word that is not present in the Greek and which alters the meaning of the sentence to the exact opposite of its natural meaning is not "clarifying the meaning." It is corrupting the Bible with false additions. More will be said about this in the article on Colossians.

Another Look at Thayer
Let's return to look at another definition of the word ar·khe' in Thayer's Lexicon (the one quoted from earlier).

3. that by which anything begins to be, the origin, active cause [en arche tis ktiseos, of Christ as the divine logos, Rev 3:14. (Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the NT, entry under "ar·khe'")

Did you notice the verse reference that Thayer gives for this definition of arche? Revelation 3:14! The Watchtower dogmatically stated that ar·khe' in John's writings always means "beginning" and never "beginner" or "origin". Others agree with Thayer here.

ar·khe' means "a beginning." The root arch primarily indicated what was of worth. Hence, the verb archo meant "to be first," and archon denoted "a ruler." So also arose the idea of "a beginning," the origin, the active cause, whether a person or a thing, e.g., Col 1:18. (Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, p. 58)

{The beginning of the creation of God} (\hê archê tês ktiseôs tou theou\). Not the first of creatures as the Arians held and Unitarians do now, but the originating source of creation through whom God works (Col 1:15,18, a passage probably known to the Laodiceans, John 1:3; Heb 1:2, as is made clear by 1:18; 2:8; 3:21; 5:13). (Robertson, Word Pictures In The New Testament, Rev. 3:14)

The beginning of the creation of God, he arche--Rev 3:14. Compare with this, "I am, saith the Lord, the beginning and the end" he arche kai to telos)--Rev 1:8; 21:6; 22:13.
The above comprise all the instances of the use of arche in the Apocalypse, and sufficiently prove that, as used in chap. 3:14, it regards the pre-existent eternity, the "from everlasting" of the Lord, and as such declares him to be the beginning or origin, or originator, or precisely as we say, the First Cause of the creation of God. (Bickersteth, The Trinity, p.105)

"Ruler" or "First Cause"
Bowman raises another possibility concerning ar·khe', specifically the instances when it is used to describe persons.

In short, arche in Rev 3:14 could mean either "ruler" or "first cause." The meaning of "first thing created" is the least likely interpretation, if context and the use of arche in the NT with reference to persons are taken into consideration. Certainly Rev 3:14 cannot be used to prove that Christ is created. (Bowman, Why You Should Believe in the Trinity, p.67)

What is he talking about? Why is the use of ar·khe' with reference to persons important? Ar·khe' in its various forms can also carry the meaning of "ruler". In fact, excepting its uses regarding God and Jesus, every use of ar·khe' describing persons in the NT is translated as "ruler" or similar terms of authority. This is true even in the NWT. I encourage you to look up the following passages to see how ar·khe' is used in relation to people. The passages include: Luke 12:11; 20:20; Romans 8:38; 1 Cor 15:24; Ephesians 1:21; 3:10; 6:12; Colossians 1:16,18; 2:10,15; Titus 3:1.

Some translations of the Bible, most notably the NIV, understand ar·khe' as a description of Christ's authority.

"To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God's creation. (Rev 3:14, NIV)

In verse 14 Jesus describes himself as the Amen (the final word), the faithful and true witness (John 18:37; Rev 1:5), and ruler of God's creation (John 1:3; Col 1:15-18; Heb 1:3). That God and Christ rule the whole of creation is important in Revelation to correct any false impression that evil is in control and might win in the end. It will not (see 5:11-13; 20:10, 14). (Evangelical Commentary on the Bible - Elwell, ed. P.1206.)

Take a few moments and review Christ's introductions of himself to all 7 churches in the book of Revelation. Pause and reflect on these descriptions the glorified Jesus gives himself.

2:1 "To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: The One who holds the seven stars in His right hand, the One who walks among the seven golden lampstands, says this:

2:8 "And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write: from The first and the last, who was dead, and has come to life, says this:

2:12 "And to the angel of the church in Pergamum write: from The One who has the sharp two-edged sword says this:

2:18 "And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write: from The Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet are like burnished bronze, says this:

3:1 "And to the angel of the church in Sardis write: He who has the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars, says this:

3:7 "And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write: from He who is holy, who is true, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, and who shuts and no one opens, says this:

3:14 "And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: from The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:

Consider the message of Jesus to the church at Laodicea in its entirety. The following insights and observations on this passage were penned two and a half centuries ago by Matthew Henry, whose commentary on the entire Bible is still in wide use today.

Laodicea was the last and worst of the seven churches of Asia. Here our Lord Jesus styles himself, "The Amen;" one steady and unchangeable in all his purposes and promises. If religion is worth anything, it is worth every thing. Christ expects men should be in earnest. How many professors of gospel doctrine are neither hot nor cold; except as they are indifferent in needful matters, and hot and fiery in disputes about things of lesser moment! A severe punishment is threatened. They would give a false opinion of Christianity, as if it were an unholy religion; while others would conclude it could afford no real satisfaction, otherwise its professors would not have been heartless in it, or so ready to seek pleasure or happiness from the world. One cause of this indifference and inconsistency in religion is, self-conceit and self-delusion; "Because thou sayest." What a difference between their thoughts of themselves, and the thoughts Christ had of them! How careful should we be not to cheat our owns souls! There are many in hell, who once thought themselves far in the way to heaven. Let us beg of God that we may not be left to flatter and deceive ourselves. Professors grow proud, as they become carnal and formal. Their state was wretched in itself. They were poor; really poor, when they said and thought they were rich. They could not see their state, nor their way, nor their danger, yet they thought they saw it. They had not the garment of justification, nor sanctification: they were exposed to sin and shame; their rags that would defile them. They were naked, without house or harbor, for they were without God, in whom alone the soul of man can find rest and safety. Good counsel was given by Christ to this sinful people. Happy those who take his counsel, for all others must perish in their sins. Christ lets them know where they might have true riches, and how they might have them. Some things must be parted with, but nothing valuable; and it is only to make room for receiving true riches. Part with sin and self-confidence, that you may be filled with his hidden treasure. They must receive from Christ the white raiment he purchased and provided for them; his own imputed righteousness for justification, and the garments of holiness and sanctification. Let them give themselves up to his word and Spirit, and their eyes shall be opened to see their way and their end. Let us examine ourselves by the rule of his word, and pray earnestly for the teaching of his Holy Spirit, to take away our pride, prejudices, and worldly lusts. Sinners ought to take the rebukes of God's word and rod, as tokens of his love to their souls. Christ stood without; knocking, by the dealings of his providence, the warnings and teaching of his word, and the influences of his Spirit. Christ still graciously, by his word and Spirit, comes to the door of the hearts of sinners. Those who open to him shall enjoy his presence. If what he finds would make but a poor feast, what he brings will supply a rich one. He will give fresh supplies of graces and comforts. In the conclusion is a promise to the overcoming believer. Christ himself had temptations and conflicts; he overcame them all, and was more than a conqueror. Those made like to Christ in his trials, shall be made like to him in glory. All is closed with the general demand of attention. And these counsels, while suited to the churches to which they were addressed, are deeply interesting to all men. (Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, Rev 3: 14-22)

Here it will be right to mention the love which springs from a sense of possession of Christ. "0 Lord, thou art my God, early will I seek thee," is the vow which results from a knowledge of our possessing God as our own. As God we ought to love him, but as our God we do love him. It is Christ as our Christ, his righteousness as imputed to us, and his atonement as our ransom, which at first cause our souls to feel the heat of love. "I cannot love another man's Christ," saith the anxious soul, "he must be mine, or my Soul can never be knit unto him;" but when an interest in Jesus is perceived by the understanding, then the heart cries out, "My Lord and my God, thou art mine and I will be thine." (Spurgeon, The Saint and His Saviour, p.303.)