An Open Letter to Al Jenke (Apologist for the Concordant Publishing Concern.)
Dear Sir,
In a blog post you entitled "The Arian Controversy," you claimed that all the evidence is on the side of the Arians because scripture refers to Our Lord as the only begotten Son of the Father.
You also went on a long tirade against the perceived dogmatism of Trinitarians (apparently without realizing how dogmatic you were being.)
What you failed to consider is that a man must reach a certain age before he can beget a child, and God is not a man.
The Father did not have to reach a certain age before begetting His Son--and if He is without beginning (as I would assume we all believe), He could not in fact have reached a certain age before begetting The Son.
Certainly not if time is part of His creation, and He created all things through The Son (as we're told in scripture.)
This is why Trinitarians believe in what's called eternal generation.
Does scripture have anything to say on the subject?
Oh yes!
In using Melchisedek as a type of Christ, Paul said the following:
having neither beginning of days nor end of life, and being made like to the Son of God, doth remain a priest continually. (Heb. 7:3, Young's Literal Translation.)
He uses this Melchisedek as a type of Christ precisely because the Hebrew scriptures contain no record of his birth or death, and his point is that Christ is actually without "beginning of days" or "end of life" (just as Melchisedek is seemingly, or typically.)
There is in fact only one passage in the entire New Testament that could be taken to mean that Christ was created (or birthed in the way that you and your friends mean), and that's Rev. 3:14.
Without the biased translation of A.E Knoch and the JW's, that verse reads as follows:
`And to the messenger of the assembly of the Laodiceans write: These things saith the Amen, the witness -- the faithful and true -- the chief of the creation of God (Young's Literal Translation.)
I should also point out that the distinction you attempted to make between creation and birth is meaningless given the concordant teaching that all that exists was created (or birthed) "out of God."
So?
Echad is a Hebrew word that speaks of one in a non-singular view. A bunch of grapes are echad, but each grape by itself is not echad.
The JW’s and the Concordant movement teach that Christ is a created being. The Bible teaches that Christ is God the Son. He is worthy of our worship (Rev 5:11-14, at al), and to worship any but God is anti-Christian (Matt 4:10). Now, when Jesus said to worship God alone, He was speaking from His position as a Human being and not from His position as part of the Trinity. We find that He did that on occasion, but that does not indicate that Christ was “created.” All it proves is that he could ‘rightly divide” the word of God…something many cannot do today.
Arianism is an anti-Christian movement that seeks to degrade the Lord of glory. It is not a Christian movement.
Within the “echad” that is the fullness of God, there is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--operating in a unity of purpose that language cannot explain, nor those who are not privy to His Spirit can understand. Arianism was founded by the blind to lead the blind, and we know the result of that deception.
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. (John 1:3.)
Arianism is a total and absolute denial of that fact. Arians teach that Christ Jesus was “made.” However, the Bible tells us unequivocally that Christ made all that was made!
If He made all that was made, and IF Arians actually use that concept, they must also believe that Christ Jesus “made” Himself. Do you see how ignorant Arianism is? At its core is a denial of the Holy Word (Capital W) of God.
If Christ Jesus made all that was made, He cannot be “made” or created. Creation is a making.
Arianism is illogical!
JW’s, the Concordant movement, and all other Arians deny Scripture!
They're also blind to the fact that Elohim (the Hebrew word for God) is plural.
Though it is often used with singular verbs and adjectives, there are the following exceptions:
Then God (Elohim) said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." (Gen. 1:26.)
And the LORD God (HaShem Elohim) said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." (Gen. 3:22.)
While those who follow AEK totally ignore the scriptural fact that God is Echad, those who claim to follow Alexander Thomson totally ignore the equally scriptural fact that God is Elohim.
If it be said that some Trinitarians are overly dogmatic, I can only reply:
Judge not, that ye may not be judged, for in what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged, and in what measure ye measure, it shall be measured to you. `And why dost thou behold the mote that [is] in thy brother's eye, and the beam that [is] in thine own eye dost not consider? or, how wilt thou say to thy brother, Suffer I may cast out the mote from thine eye, and lo, the beam [is] in thine own eye? Hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then thou shalt see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. (Matt. 7:1-5.)
Note: My thanks to Darroll and Carolyn Evans for their contributions to this article.
bravenet.com