Explaining the true meaning of Rev 3:14 which says " English Standard Version “And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God’s creation." I do notice that the Greek word "archē" is correctly translated as "beginning " whereas in some other more biased translations will say "origin or ruler" Anyone with a basic understanding of Koine Greek knows that "archē" is translated as "beginning" HOWEVER that creates a real problem for those who teach that somehow Jesus is God, so they DISHONESTLY change the word to mean something other than what it means ! The Greek word for "ruler" is archōn and NOT arche, If you will check the New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (1981), you will find that even the very trinitarian New American Standard Bible (NASB) never translates John's uses of arkhe as "ruler" Nowhere else does John use arkhe as "source," "origin," or "beginner."[4] In the 23 times it is found in the writings of John (in the text used by the King James translators), it is always understood in the sense of "beginning" and is always so translated in the KJV. (And every time arkhe is found in the writings of John - 21 times in the text used by the NASB - it is also always translated "beginning. Honestly, you really do need to try a little harder. Maybe you could rename your channel "darkness over light ministry "
It took 1:45 seconds to state the first deception.. Every time John used “arche” it has been translated to mean *beginning* and when John used “Archon” the translation has been *rulers* Never has John or any other NT writer used “arche” for ruler Although correct “arche” can mean ruler, then why does not all Trinitarian bibles see it as Ruler and not Beginning. Obviously the right meaning based on context is meant. NLT, ESV, NASB, KJV, et al all see it *Beginning* No one would say “the hole is the arche of the water” and accept “arche” simultaneously means Ruler, Rulers, Originator and beginning. Obviously out of the acceptable uses the appropriate one is picked which is *beginning* Based on the *TRINITARIAN TRANSLATORS* understanding, many have translated “arche” as beginning. Their honesty in translation will not go unrewarded.
Question every Jehovah’s Witness should think about: Knowing the Watchtower’s track record of failed prophetic predictions (1914, 1925, 1975) and their track record of abandoning prophetic dates once heralded as “truth” (1799, 1874, 1878) but left behind as “old light”. How can they be certain that what they believe now as “new light” won’t later be discarded as “old light” by the Society or the GB? If so, can the WT/GB be trusted if they’ve been wrong in the past?
Can Paul be trusted even when he repeatedly stated to members of 1 Century Christian Congregation that they would be alive for Jesus’ parousia or presence ? (1 Corinthians 15:51; 1 Thessalonians 4:15)
@@jwdefensor8055 Aah, yes. The tactic of JW deflection being used here. Pointing the finger at someone else's questionable statements in order to shift the focus from one's own (or in this case WT's) questionable statements.
JWs made mistakes in their doctrine and at least they fixed their mistakes unlike other religions who remain in their mistakes. GOD forgives his people in a large way and as long as they fix their mistakes they are still GOD's people. Just look at the congregations in Rev 2 & 3 and how many mistakes they made and guess what they are still GOD's people.
@@spellbound111 JWs made mistakes in their doctrine and at least they fixed their mistakes unlike other religions who remain in their mistakes. GOD forgives his people in a large way and as long as they fix their mistakes they are still GOD's people. Just look at the congregations in Rev 2 & 3 and how many mistakes they made and guess what they are still GOD's people.
Amazing. Thank you so much. I just argued a bit with a JW and he said this is proof for him, so I had to check this out for myself, and dang it Jesus is still God
Yes sir your like Pharisees or the sadidis it is what it says why dident Jesus say that at John 8 v 58 plus sir you have menshion John 1 v 1 is in the beginning the word was a god not what you have put up ? Back to John 8 v 58 why dident Jesus said he was God not that iam
Why would they think that is proof? Because obviously "beginning" does not mean beginning. And "firstborn" does not mean firstborn. And "only begotten" doesn't mean only begotten. And "son" does not mean son. What a bunch of goof balls! Thinking words mean what they say.
I didn't know the NT was written in English... oh wait, it wasn't! What does the word Arche mean in Luke 12:11? Does it mean "beginnings" or "rulers"? Firstborn - You think that Joseph went back in time and was born before Reuben in order to become Jacob's firstborn in 1Chr 5:1? Monogenēs - You think that Isaac was Abraham's only born son (Heb 11:17)??? Have you not read Gen 16? Son - You think that God had sex with some other goddess or human and produced a son like in paganism? Wow. You need to do some studying.
And yet most translators write them as "beginning", "firstborn", "only begotten", and "son". But what would they know. You are only spinning it, as you have a false doctrine to protect.
@@777Tralfaz777 You didn't answer my questions because you know you would look foolish. Most translations say, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, *and the Word was God"* (John 1:1). But what would they know. Oh wait, I forgot that the majority is only a source of appeal when JW's want them to be. Funny how inconsistent JW's are. Furthermore, your first post was about the _meaning_ of the words, not the word used. So answer my questions: - What does the word Arche mean in Luke 12:11? Does it mean "beginnings" or "rulers"? - Firstborn - You think that Joseph went back in time and was born before Reuben in order to become Jacob's firstborn in 1Chr 5:1? - Monogenēs - You think that Isaac was Abraham's only born son (Heb 11:17)??? Have you not read Gen 16? - Son - You think that God had sex with some other goddess or human and produced a son like in paganism? - Oh, and how do the majority of translations translate monogenēs in John 1:18?
@@kevinfromcanada4379 I do not care what you have to say Kevin. Your efforts are to prop up a false doctrine. If you change the meaning of all words, then you can make the Bible say anything you want. And to be honest, your efforts are quite foolish. i.e. Adam is called son of god. So your foolish " had sex with some other goddess" is an absurd attempt. And this is how you justify your false beliefs. Good bye Kevin.
You can also point to the uses of arche in Revelations and the consistency which St. John uses it to determine if it means ruler or a starting point in time. St. John says in Revelations 1 : 18 that the LORD GOD is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. Since GOD has no beginning or end this verse is saying that GOD is the ruler.
“Arche” means “beginning, first in a series, the person or thing that commences”. It’s used 4 times by the author of Revelation and all 4 times the author used in in the sense of a literal beginning.
Correct, glad you found the rest of content. Word also means ruler, all depends on the context. Jesus being the origin of all creation, fits with “the person or thing that commences” Also it’s used 3 times, here, rev 21:6, and 22:13. The other 2 it’s talking about God. So does God now have a beginning?
@@LightoverDarkMinistry “arche” is never, not once, used by the author of Revelation to mean ruler. He used in 4 times and every single time it meant the literal beginning. This goes along with Col 1:15 where Jesus is the “prototokos” or first-born of God. Prototokos literally means, “the firstborn of man or beast”.
@@craiglittle7367 Do words change their meaning when a another author uses them? What you’re doing is called an illegitimate totality transfer. Please answer the questions, the other 2 times arche is used, it’s of God explaining his nature, so does God have a beginning, or is he the beginner?
@@LightoverDarkMinistry I told you. ALL FOUR TIMES “ARCHE” WAS USED BY THIS AUTHOR IT MEANT LITERAL BEGINNING. It was never used as you claim. Jehovah is the “Alpha and Omega” or the “Beginning and the End”. Alpha is the BEGINNING of the Greek alphabet and Omega the END. It’s an idiom. Alpha is beginning. Arche is beginning. Not one Bible translator translated Rev 1:8 21:6 or 22:13 as you claim. They all translate arche as beginning.
@@craiglittle7367 So because a word, which across language has several meanings, is used by an author in 2 locations in one short book, the 3rd location, regardless of context, must have the same meaning. Sorry but that’s not how language works. You’re trying to argue something that doesn’t apply to Greek, English or basically any writing at all. You’re making your own rules of basic grammar and language to try and prove a point.
Jesus Christ is the Son of the One, True, God. That makes him very important...higher than the angels, so like Almighty God that they are almost inseperable, one from the other, but a witness cannot be the true witness of himself, and every action of Jesus has to be sanctioned by his Father and so we are talking about two people who share their righteous teaching to the letter, and this is another way of saying that contained in the 'word' of our Deity is a wonderful science.
Wait a minute. Revelation 3:14 KJV And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and TRUE WITNESS, the BEGINNING of the creation of God; Psalms 119:160 KJV Thy word is true from the BEGINNING: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. 1 John 1:1-2 KJV That which was from the BEGINNING, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and BEAR WITNESS, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) I think that the testimony of Jesus Christ was the beginning of the creation of God, the testimony of Jesus Christ was spoken from the word of life and we are his witness even when he manifests himself in the flesh. Jesus Christ name represents his identity that Isaiah 9:6 describes, his testimony is our counselor. Psalms 119:24 KJV Thy testimonies also are my delight and my counselors. Isaiah 9:6 KJV For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. No wonder why people were slain during Revelation chapter 6:9 and other people resisted against Satan himself in Revelation chapter 12, they kept the testimony of Jesus Christ and didn't even fear death. Because they believe that Jesus Christ testimonies were richer than gold and silver, wiser than the people from of old, and their life will be persevered. Revelation 3:14-20 is a message towards a pacific group of people, for them to be zealous in his words so that when he test them in fire they will come out like gold and silver ( Zechariah 13:8-9 and Isaiah 48:9-10) Whoever hears his voice and recognize it will welcome him in their house. They are known as a true witness because they kept his testimony which evidently spoke things into existence including precepts, commandments and status and judgements which was brought forth out of his words. Revelation 6:9 KJV And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for THE WORD OF GOD, and for the TESTIMONY which they held: Revelation 12:11 KJV And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by THE WORD OF THEIR TESTIMONY; and they loved not their lives unto the death. Revelation 12:17 KJV And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the COMMANDMENTS OF GOD, AND HAVE THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS CHRIST. Edited: Psalms 34:4-6 KJV ( Jesus is the word of the Lord) 4 For the word of the Lord is right; and all his works are done in truth. 5 He loveth righteousness and judgment: the earth is full of the goodness of the Lord. 6 By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry No it doesn't. God created everything, but when it came to salvation He SENT His son and after Jesus ascended into heaven to sit on the right hand side of God, He SENT the Holy Spirit, also called the comforter. Jesus is the Messiah. Nowhere in scripture was God referred to as ''Messiah''. Besides, how can the mediator between God and mankind, also be God?
@@normanmcdermid1951 Well in regard to the mediator, Christ being both fully man and fully God acts as the perfect mediator, one that lived as we did, yet is also fully divine and knows every heart (rev 2:23) something only God can do ( 1 kings 8:39 ). And the Father would be the messiah, that’s not his role. Nor is it the Fathers role to indwell believers. That’s the Holy Spirit. And something to think about, YHWH says regarding divine justification, that he is the savior, and apart from him there is none ( Isaiah 43:11 ) yet Jesus is our savior ( Titus 2:13)
@@normanmcdermid1951 I don’t know why you’re talking because you believe and follow a false religion of the Watchtower that goes against the bible and twists it to line up with their teachings. You’re blind. Jesus said in John 10:28 that he gives eternal life. How can an angel/human being have the power to give eternal life? Answer that if you really think you’re about it
I have a few questions…why would an intelligent all knowing divine being use a book to convey his message to mankind but not preserve it? If he is capable of relaying his message but incapable of preserving it so that the meaning could not be changed over time, does that make sense? Why would a divine being allow his word to be manipulated and changed so that others can manipulate and hurt innocent children as cults do? There is close to 45,000 Christian sects around the world because of the vagueness used in the scriptures leaves it open for interpretation. A car manual written by humans can be easily understood and is not open for interpretation because that could result in loss of life. Yet a book from a divine being can easily be misinterpreted and the result is eternal loss of life. Is that a sign of intelligence or lack thereof?
Actually only 3500 demonstrations, who all pretty much believe the exact same thing. The differences come from styles of worship or locations or whatever none essential issues. We also have more manuscripts of the New Testament of any ancient book by far, nothing else even comes close. Even Bart Erhman admits the New Testament we have now, is the one from the 1st century. I’d research further into the this, you might be surprised by what you find.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry Why don’t we have the original manuscripts? None of the manuscripts we have are the same . Why would God not preserve his word? I have spent hundreds of hours looking researching the Bible and what I have concluded is no divine being would use a book to convey his message. Why doesn’t the Bible tell mankind about germs or that mosquitoes carry diseases? This information would have saved millions of lives.
@@kimberlyfarris1280 We don’t have the original manuscripts because they’re too old. We have copies, and lots of them, that’s could , if there are a hundreds of copies, 99% are the same, you could easily tell which one was different. Most scholars agree, only about a half a page worth of textual variants, none of which effect the message. Also, if you look at Old Testament clean laws, like washing your hands in rubbing water, that was in the Bible 3500 years ago, yet hospitals haven’t been practicing that for it even a hundred years.
Did Jesus remain A MAN? What does the Bible say? Rev 2, 3:22 called Jesus a spirit. 1 Cor 15 called Jesus a LIFE-GIVING SPIRIT. 1 TIM 6:16 - says "he one alone having immortality,s who dwells in unapproachable light,t whom no man has seen or can see." NOTICE, NO MAN CAN SEE NOR EVEN DWELL IN THE UNAPPROACHABLE LIGHT. JESUS can see and lives in that Light, so JESUS IS NOT PART OF THAT MAN AND NOR A MAN (human being in Original Greek). If Jesus remained as HUMAN, then u r saying 1 Tim 6:16 is a LIE. Jesus DWELLS AND CAN SEE THAT LIGHT, but it says NO MAN (HUMAN BEING) CAN SEE. No exceptions. To be able to see that LIGHT and DWELL IN THAT LIGHT. JESUS IS NOT A MAN(human being) anymore.
The Council of Nicaea in 325 stated the crucial formula for that doctrine in its confession that the Son is “of the same substance [homoousios] as the Father,” even though it said very little about the Holy Spirit. Over the next half century, St. Athanasius defended and refined the Nicene formula, and, by the end of the 4th century, under the leadership of St. Basil of Caesarea, St. Gregory of Nyssa, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus (the Cappadocian Fathers), the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.
Question: A guy I know got disfellowshipped as a JW. He was working as a plumber with an elder, who own a business and because he was disfellowshipped the guy fired him. Is it possible he can sue for this?
@Sabastiano DiGaetano: It sounds like the business owner broke federal law. "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin". So it seems he could be held liable.
First, let me commend you for the zealous you have in sharing what you believe is correct. I am sure it takes time and effort to be producing videos. Now, assuming “arche” here is in reference to Jesus being “ruler, king” of God’s creation, *does that mean Jesus exercises rule, kingship over himself, since he is a member of creation* ?
That's not the point of the video. The point is that JW’s use Revelation 3:14 as a proof text to teach that Jesus was Jehovah’s first created creature-which isn't the case. While Jesus is part of creation (since he incarnated himself as a human), the Son is not. The Son is the uncreated creator of all things (John 1:3, Heb 1:10-12). Now, I know you read my post but I will post it here as well: Rev 3:14 says, “These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler (ἡ ἀρχὴ, hē archē) of God’s creation.” Let's set aside the “Amen” for now and look at “faithful and true witness,” which is an echo of Isaiah 43:10. In contrast to the nations, who are false witnesses (43:9), God identifies himself in 43:10, along with his servant (the Messiah) and Israel as true witnesses. The Greek says, “γένεσθέ μοι μάρτυρες, κἀγὼ μάρτυς, λέγει κύριος ὁ θεός, καὶ ὁ παῖς, ὃν ἐξελεξάμην” (‘You [Israel] are my witnesses and I am a witness,’ says the Lord God, ‘and the servant [the Messiah] whom I have chosen’). In the context, God is a witness from the beginning (ἔτι ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς; 43:13) to his original creation and he, his servant (the Messiah) and Israel are witnesses to his creation (43:1), which was Israel when he redeemed them out of Egypt. These past acts serve as evidence that he will perform a future act of creation-a new creation (43:19-21). The “Amen” is a title that occurs only two times in the whole Bible-here in Rev 3:14 and Isaiah 65:16 as a title for God.(1) The phrase “the God of truth” is literally “God Amen.” Jan Fekkes points out that this is “another example of an OT divine title transferred to Jesus, thus further underscoring John’s high Christology.”(2) The third appositional title ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κτίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ (the ruler of God’s creation) also finds a link in Isaiah. In Isaiah 9:6 Jehovah promises to give his Son the supreme rulership (ἡ ἀρχή), which he would bear upon his shoulders-same word as in Rev 3:14. In Isaiah 43, the faithful witness (v. 10) is the King of Israel (v. 15), and is the sovereign inauguration of the new creation, like the “Amen” in Isaiah 65. JW’s victimize Rev 3:14 with wrong interpretation, claiming that Jesus is being called the “beginning of the creation of God” because he is the first created creature. Michael J. Svigel points out that “although a propartial meaning (‘the first part of the creation of God) is linguistically possible, semantic considerations alone render it highly improbable, since the nuance itself is employed in only 6 percent of the 305 instances and *none of these is personal…* Thus the understanding of ἀρχή in Revelation 3:14 as ‘created being’ is improbable. On the other hand the governmental nuance is common and personal in both singular and plural, making ‘the supreme Authority over the creation of God’ not merely possible, but probable.”(3) Michael J. Svigel points out that, “if the intended meaning were ‘first created being,’ then πρῶτος would have best communicated such an idea.”(4) But that’s not what John wrote, because that’s not what he had in mind. If a JW were to actually read the context of the passage (vv. 14-21) they would realize that Jesus is the ruler who sits on the throne beside his Father as co-regent (v. 21). This is consistent with Rev 1:5 which says that Jesus is the “‘the Faithful Witness,’ ‘the firstborn from the dead,’ and ‘the Ruler of the kings of the earth’” (NWT). “Ruler” in this verse is ὁ ἄρχων, the participle form found in Rev 3:14. The context of Revelation 3:14-21 is clear that ἀρχή means “ruler” of God’s creation, not that he is created. JW’s rip Revelation 3:14 out of its context in order to support their errant theology but anyone who actually looks at the context or does a word search of ἀρχή can see their error. (1) G.K. Beale, Revelation : A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Mi: Eerdmans, 1999), ePub, 3:14. (2) Jan Fekkes III, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation : Visionary Antecedents and Their Development (United Kingdom: Bloomsburry, 1994). (3) Michael J. Svigel, “Christ as Αρχή in Revelation 3:14,” Bibliotheca Sacra 161 (2004): 223. (4) Svigel, “Christ as Αρχή,” 230.
@Kevin From Canada, Thanks for your response and interesting details, although, I do *not* see the connection with Revelation 3:14. Now, going back to Revelation 3:14, my question has to do with this video, for the video is stating “arche” means “ruler”. Hence, I ask, *how can Jesus being a member of creation, exercise rulership over himself* ?
@@jwdefensor8055 LOL. Wow. You still haven't responded to my other post and now you're not dealing with what the video actually addresses. Does Rev 3:14 suggest that Jesus is a created creature? No. So this is one more verse that JW's can't use to claim that the Son is part of creation. Is there anything in the Bible that says the Son is a created being? No. JW's must rip verses out of their context to make such a claim.
That’s for the compliment, it is hard work, very time consuming, lots of study and sacrifice, and I’ll continue to produce them until every last Jehovah’s witness sees the truth and comes to Christ. I love these people, and I hate the lies they’ve been fed.
@@kevinfromcanada4379 The ARCHE belongs to the GROUP which is in the case of Col 1:18 from the group of the dead Col 1:18 - arche - beginning (FROM the dead) New King James Version And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, Luke 12:11 - authorities/rulers refers to HUMAN rulers who are also part of Creation New King James Version “Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you
A good 📹 video. What I don't understand is that people who read the bible still come to the conclusion that Jesus is created. It's just boggling my mind. Only in Jesus I have access to the Father. He is His fullness
Because Jesus said it himself. In John 6:57 we read: “ *I live because of the Father* .” Of course, there are more scriptures I can show you to reinforce Jesus is a created person.
@@jwdefensor8055 Jesus is Gods Son. Of course when he talks about His Father He humbles Himself and acknowledge His Father is higher then He is. Jesus is the living portal to the Father because of the power of His Father. We believers live by Jesus and Jesus by His Father that's difference.
@@jwdefensor8055 That's true. His life originates from Father. I don't know this is appropriate though but does this ring a bell at you; does a mother create her own children? She gives birth to her children but she doesn't create them. When the bible talks about 'the beginning' the bible is meaning after the birth of Christ. True sonship isn't just a title.
Once again, great video. I do think the context of the passage favours "ruler" but that's me. Rev 3:14 says, “These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler (ἡ ἀρχὴ, hē archē) of God’s creation.” Let's set aside the “Amen” for now and look at “faithful and true witness,” which is an echo of Isaiah 43:10. In contrast to the nations, who are false witnesses (43:9), God identifies himself in 43:10, along with his servant (the Messiah) and Israel as true witnesses. The Greek says, “γένεσθέ μοι μάρτυρες, κἀγὼ μάρτυς, λέγει κύριος ὁ θεός, καὶ ὁ παῖς, ὃν ἐξελεξάμην” (‘You [Israel] are my witnesses and I am a witness,’ says the Lord God, ‘and the servant [the Messiah] whom I have chosen’). In the context, God is a witness from the beginning (ἔτι ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς; 43:13) to his original creation and he, his servant (the Messiah) and Israel are witnesses to his creation (43:1), which was Israel when he redeemed them out of Egypt. These past acts serve as evidence that he will perform a future act of creation-a new creation (43:19-21). The “Amen” is a title that occurs only two times in the whole Bible-here in Rev 3:14 and Isaiah 65:16 as a title for God.(1) The phrase “the God of truth” is literally “God Amen.” Jan Fekkes points out that this is “another example of an OT divine title transferred to Jesus, thus further underscoring John’s high Christology.”(2) The third appositional title ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κτίσεως τοῦ θεοῦ (the ruler of God’s creation) also finds a link in Isaiah. In Isaiah 9:6 Jehovah promises to give his Son the supreme rulership (ἡ ἀρχή), which he would bear upon his shoulders-same word as in Rev 3:14. In Isaiah 43, the faithful witness (v. 10) is the King of Israel (v. 15), and is the sovereign inauguration of the new creation, like the “Amen” in Isaiah 65. JW’s victimize Rev 3:14 with wrong interpretation, claiming that Jesus is being called the “beginning of the creation of God” because he is the first created creature. Michael J. Svigel points out that “although a propartial meaning (‘the first part of the creation of God) is linguistically possible, semantic considerations alone render it highly improbable, since the nuance itself is employed in only 6 percent of the 305 instances and *none of these is personal…* Thus the understanding of ἀρχή in Revelation 3:14 as ‘created being’ is improbable. On the other hand the governmental nuance is common and personal in both singular and plural, making ‘the supreme Authority over the creation of God’ not merely possible, but probable.”(3) Michael J. Svigel points out that, “if the intended meaning were ‘first created being,’ then πρῶτος would have best communicated such an idea.”(4) But that’s not what John wrote, because that’s not what he had in mind. If a JW were to actually read the context of the passage (vv. 14-21) they would realize that Jesus is the ruler who sits on the throne beside his Father as co-regent (v. 21). This is consistent with Rev 1:5 which says that Jesus is the “‘the Faithful Witness,’ ‘the firstborn from the dead,’ and ‘the Ruler of the kings of the earth’” (NWT). “Ruler” in this verse is ὁ ἄρχων, a synonym of the word found in Rev 3:14. The context of Revelation 3:14-21 is clear that ἀρχή means “ruler” of God’s creation, not that he is created. JW’s rip Revelation 3:14 out of its context in order to support their errant theology but anyone who actually looks at the context or does a word search of ἀρχή can see their error. (1) G.K. Beale, Revelation : A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, Mi: Eerdmans, 1999), ePub, 3:14. (2) Jan Fekkes III, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation : Visionary Antecedents and Their Development (United Kingdom: Bloomsburry, 1994). (3) Michael J. Svigel, “Christ as Αρχή in Revelation 3:14,” Bibliotheca Sacra 161 (2004): 223. (4) Svigel, “Christ as Αρχή,” 230.
I agree, I do tend to favor the ruler. Could also be Jesus saying he's the beginning, as in the beginning and the end, the alpha and omega, but ruler is should it based on who it's written to.
In Is.43, the witnesses and the servant are both Israel. The One speaking is the Son, the Christ. The one speaking uses these Titles to identify Himself. Holy One of Israel. Savior. I am He. Redeemer. King. The Son.
Assuming “arche” in Revelation 3:14 means “ruler of God’s creation” based on Revelation 3:21, then, this raises some important questions. Since Jesus anointed Conquerors will sit with him to rule, then, by necessity, *logic follows that they too will be* “ *rulers of God’s creation* .” So, the question is: 1. Can you provide a scripture confirming Jesus anointed conquerors are called “ruler of God’s creation” ? 2. How will Jesus and his anointed conquerors will rule *over themselves* ?
@@jwdefensor8055 lots of assumptions their buddy. Don’t think I follow that “logic” follows. For instance, Jesus has a different role in creation than anyone else, wether you believe he’s created or not. As Col 1:16-19 says, all creation is for him. So we’ll others rule with him, they are not credited with having creation made for them. This is like some people, it logically follows we are little gods, because we are made in gods image. We would agree, that’s not correct. Secondly, believers are adopted as co-heirs with Christ, Romans 8, Gal 3-4, to rule over all of it. It’s paradise restored, as Adam and Eve failed, Christ is victorious, and reconciles us back. Now Adam and Eve were to rule over the earth, (Gen 1:28) however there were no humans on the earth. So were they ruling over themselves? No, the earth, the land, the animals, all belongs to them. Why is it now different for co-heirs? Do they require people to rule over? Adam and Eve didn’t.
JW DEFENDER, do JW's take classes in illogic? You keep presenting very poorly reasoned arguments. Yes, logic does dictate that those that sit with Christ in Rev 3:21 will rule over God's creation with Jesus. 1. Can I provide a scripture confirming Jesus anointed conquerors are called “ruler of God’s creation” ? No. Do I have to? No. This is called the exact word fallacy. We are told that Christians will reign with Christ (2Ti 2:12) and that the overcomer will be given authority to rule over the nations (Rev 2:26). So do Christians rule over God's creation? Yes, with Christ. 2. "How will Jesus and his anointed conquerors will rule over themselves ?" This is a very dumb argument. David was the King of Israel. Was David an Israelite? Yes. Asking, 'If David was an Israelite, how could David rule over himself?' is a really dumb question. Can David be an Israelite and rule over Israel? Yes. Can people be part of creation and rule over creation? Yes. Do you even see the problem with your argument?
Col 2:10 - Jesus is the HEAD of those arche (rulers) so Jesus cannot be this type of arche as Jesus is the Head - "the one who is the head of all government and authority"
@@kevinfromcanada4379 Isa 45:18 - I AM JEHOVAH and there is NO ONE ELSE. If you cannot understand that then you are blind. 1 cor 11:3 - in turn, the head of the Christ is God.
@@Mr.DC3.1914 I do understand Isa 45:18. It means that Jehovah is the only true God. Does that mean that God is unitarian? No. If Jehovah is a trinitarian God then Isa 45:18 means that he is the only true God. This I affirm. Now how in the world does 1Cor 11:3 mean that Christ is not God?
@@kevinfromcanada4379 I AM JEHOVAH, Jehovah GOD used I AM, and that is USED for ONE PERSON And NOT three persons. How blind are you ? Do you even know basic grammar and logic?
The ARCHE belongs to the GROUP which is in the case of Col 1:18 from the group of the dead Col 1:18 - arche - beginning (FROM the dead) New King James Version And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, Luke 12:11 - authorities/rulers refers to HUMAN rulers who are also part of Creation New King James Version “Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. So Jesus even if he is the ARCHE , he still belongs to the GROUP of creation , whether those are group of the dead or creation
“Now look! the true God is with us, leading us, with his priests and the signal trumpets for sounding the battle alarm against you.” (2Ch 13:12) The LXX has “καὶ ἰδοὺ μεθ̓ ἡμῶν ἐν ἀρχῇ κύριος” (Now look! The Lord is with us, ruling us). Jude 1:6 talks about angels who didn't stay within their place of rule (ἀρχήν). They're not human are they? So according to 2Ch 13:12, is God the ruler (ἀρχῇ)? Yes. So is God included as part of human rulers?
@@kevinfromcanada4379 RULING OR RULE is not the same as RULER as the RULER is a NOUN. Luke 12:11 shows those are HUMAN rulers, so to equate human rulers to Jesus as if their rulership is the same is wrong
@@Mr.DC3.1914 lol, it is a noun. Thanks for again demonstrating that you don't know any Greek. My fault though because I know you don't know Greek. I was free in my translation to keep it close to the NWT. If we literally translate the Greek “καὶ ἰδοὺ μεθ̓ ἡμῶν ἐν ἀρχῇ κύριος” it says, "And behold! The Lord is with us as ruler". Look it up!
@@Mr.DC3.1914 Christ created all things, visible and invisible, the kingdoms, the rulers, thrones and dominions in the spirit realm. "For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him." Col.1:16 "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places." Eph.6:12 no
"While it is true that arche can have a meaning other than 'beginning', a check of all the occurrences in NT of arche followed by a genitive expression (as we have in Rev 3:14) shows that it ALWAYS denotes a beginning or first part of something. Even when used without a genitive expression arche means 'beginning' some 32 times. Of the remaining 13 occurrences of arche in NT, two are used of the 'four corners' ('extremities' NWT) of the earth. The final 11 are used to denote 'governments' or 'rulers' and with such a meaning are ALWAYS used with other expressions denoting 'power' (dynamis) or 'authority' (exousia). Thus, the use of the singular arche in general and when used with a genitive expression specifically, favors (statistically at least) the meaning 'beginning' in Revelation 3:14. We have found no exceptions to this observation, particularly when the subject is a person and not a non-personal object." Greg Stafford 'Jehovah's Witnesses Defended' 2nd ed. pg 236, 237 "After acknowledging that 'beginning=first created' is a possible alternative to the definition 'first cause',, BAGD refers us to the article by CF Burney... Burney believes Revelation 3:14 is an allusion to Proverbs 8:22 and with reference to the meaning of Revelation 3:14 he states the truth of the matter when he says that exegetes 'have not a shadow of authority for limiting in meaning to the source of God's creation.'" (Stafford, JWD 2nd Ed pg 239; see CF Burney 'Christ as APXH of Creation' JTS 27 (1925-26) 160-177)
I won't get into a Greek lesson, but Stafford just said "favors (statistically at least)" You don't understand language by statistically analysis, you interpret based on the rules of the language and the context. Having the genitive expression means nothing in context of understanding arche. He's basically arguing "It means beginning a bunch, and usually set up like this, therefore it probably does." Same argument I just made, it might mean that, it might not, the result is the same, using it as a proof text is nonsense. Again, building an argument around, "Maybe" is foolishness. Greg should know better, but he is the guy who left the Witnesses and started his own cult.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry When engaging a problem text, engaging in a statistical analysis is EXACTLY what translators do. So your wrong. If New Testament authors ALWAYS MEAN BEGINNING when arche is used in a genitive expression, there is ZERO reason to deviate from that pattern outside of Trinitarian bias.
I am throwing out a critical question to you to humbly sit back and think deeply about. The question is very simple and easy to understand. The question is... "Could Watchtower and JWs be wrong about believing that Jesus was created?" Has JWs been wrong before in their beliefs and doctrines? There is not one verse in any Bible translation that specifically says "God created Jesus Christ" But we read in John 1:3 Jesus creating all things and apart from him not one thing created was created. This verse logically puts Jesus outside the creation category. Unless you want to believe that Jesus also created himself.
@@LightoverDarkMinistry ...and the text is only a "problem" because you Trinitarians are trying to alter the text. As CF Burney noted, one connection of note for the title arche is Proverbs 8:22. The Jews believed "beginning" was one of the names for the Word-Wisdom! "..God's firstborn, the Word (logos) who holds eldership among the angels, the Archangel. And many names are his, for he is called 'the beginning' (arche) and 'Name of God' and 'His Word' and the 'Man after his Image' and 'he that sees' that is, Israel" (Philo Conf. 146) "And so interpreters came to the conclusion that not only was Wisdom the FIRST THING GOD CREATED, but the phrase "in the beginning" in Gen 1:1 was intended to imply that it was by means of, or with the help of, wisdom God had created the world." (Kugel 'Traditions of the Bible' pg 46)
The ARCHE belongs to the GROUP which is in the case of Col 1:18 from the group of the dead Col 1:18 - arche - beginning (FROM the dead) New King James Version And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, Luke 12:11 - authorities/rulers refers to HUMAN rulers who are also part of Creation New King James Version “Now when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities, do not worry about how or what you should answer, or what you should say. So Jesus even if he is the ARCHE , he still belongs to the GROUP of creation , whether those are group of the dead or creation
Wow. I thought I heard it all, but today you have proven that wrong. This might be the biggest reach I’ve ever heard. You’re totally wrong, like rev 21:6, uses God almighty calls himself the beginning. So is he now part of a group?
@@LightoverDarkMinistry Just the word beginning by itself does not mean he is part of the group. Notice though the one used in COl 1:18 , he is the BEGINNING, and the next phrase says, FROM THE DEAD. So he is part of that group. Besides, the one you gave is about HUMAN RULERS, so you actually include Jesus as part of human rulers
“Now look! the true God is with us, leading us, with his priests and the signal trumpets for sounding the battle alarm against you.” (2Chronicles 13:12) The LXX has “καὶ ἰδοὺ μεθ̓ ἡμῶν ἐν ἀρχῇ κύριος” (Now look! The Lord is with us, ruling us). Jude 1:6 talks about angels who didn't stay within their place of rule (ἀρχήν). They're not human are they? So according to 2Chronicles 13:12, is God the ruler (ἀρχῇ)? Yes. So is God included as part of human rulers?
@@kevinfromcanada4379 Just the word beginning by itself does not mean he is part of the group. Notice though the one used in COl 1:18 , he is the BEGINNING, and the next phrase says, FROM THE DEAD. So he is part of that group. Besides, the one you gave is about HUMAN RULERS, so you actually include Jesus as part of human rulers
