Wednesday, June 15, 2011

Question #26

In Col 1:15-17, the NWT inserts the word "other" 4 times even though it is not in the original Greek (See Gr- Engl Interlinear). Why is the word "other" inserted? How would these verses read if the word "other" had not been inserted? What does scripture say about adding words to the Bible? See Prov 30:5-6.
____________________________

The span of verses in question read as follows: “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist, 18 and he is the head of the body, the congregation. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that he might become the one who is first in all things; 19 because [God] saw good for all fullness to dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile again to himself all [other] things by making peace through the blood [he shed] on the torture stake, no matter whether they are the things upon the earth or the things in the heavens.”

As regards the use of the bracketed “other” it is perfectly justified considering the context. (See question #27) The questioner is apparently ignorant of the fact that all translations insert words into the text in order to add clarity. For example, let the reader take note of the fact that the word “God” in verse 19 also appears within brackets. That is because theos does not appear in the Greek text in that verse, so in keeping with their device to inform the reader that the word has been inserted at the descretion of the translator it appears in brackets. The NIV  also inserts “God” and other translations insert “Father,” however, they do not use brackets. So, for the questioner to imply that the NIV is practicing some dark, sinister art of translation simply reflects their ignorance.

Those who wish to believe and perpetrate the lie that Jesus is God, and other similar hoaxes, typically practice their deception upon the unwary by trying to focus attention on letters, words and fragments of verses taken out of context. So, it is always a good idea for Jehovah's Witnesses to get the questioner to read the context. 

So, according to the context cited above Jesus is the image of the Father. Hebrews 1:3 is even more specific, saying that Jesus is the exact representation of his very being.

Most rational and reasonable people will admit that an image and a representation cannot be the same as that which is represented. For instance, a duplicate or a representation of a Picasso is not the same thing as the original painting. It may be an exact copy, but it is still not the original. 

Jesus is an exact representation of Jehovah, but he is not Jehovah, nor is he God’s equal. Furthermore, the scripture plainly states that Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. To speak of God as having a beginning or being born is nonsensical. But, again, rational and honest reasoning people readily admit that sons do not come to life before their Fathers. The trinity hoax, of course, states that the son had no beginning. Why God would relate himself as a son of a father if there is not a true father/son relationship defies all reason.

The key to understanding why it is appropriate to insert “other” in the context above is better understood by a comparison of 1 Corinthians 15:27-29, which states: “For [God] “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that it is with the exception of the one who subjected all things to him. But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.”

In saying “it is evident that it is with the exception” Paul as stating the obvious fact that God is not subject to Jesus. Likewise, it is evident that Jesus did not create himself. Hence, Jesus, though the firstborn of God, created all other things - with the exception of himself.


No comments:

Post a Comment