Parousia What It Is And Is Not

WHAT DOES parousia MEAN?

In the study of things to come there is no word that encompasses any greater truth than the word parousia. This is a Greek word that has been brought over into English without any change in its spelling, and it will be found in most dictionaries, even though the definition given is far from accurate. It is a word that should be found in the vocabulary of every diligent Bible student. There is no English word that will accurately express the Greek word parousia; therefore, it should be transliterated and a maximum effort should be made to fix in our minds its meaning as used by the Spirit of God in the New Testament.

This word is found twenty-four times in the Greek New Testament and is used in numerous contexts making it possible for us to discover its true meaning from its usage, the only way that any word in any language should ever be defined. 

In the King James Version it is translated "coming" twenty-two times and "presence" twice. Other translations as a rule have used the words coming, presence, arrival, and personal presence to represent the word parousia. And at this point it needs to be stated unequivocally that it does not mean coming in any occurrence in the New Testament. To so translate it was an egregious error that is constantly perpetuated by lexicographers and theologians. I do not believe that the definition of "coming" would be given in any lexicon, there being not one shred of evidence to support it, if it had not been for the fact that the King James Version translators arbitrarily rendered it this way so that it would not flatly contradict their creedal position.

The translators of the King James Version were men who held firmly to the theology that arose out of the reformation, and especially to the later ideas developed by John Calvin, a man who studiously avoided ever coming to grips with the great eschatological problems of Scripture. A very simple doctrine of future events was worked out which was a slight refinement of Roman Catholic doctrine. According to this, there was to come what was called "the day of judgement", and this was equated with the second coming of Christ, even though it was not held that He returned in person. On this day of judgement all mankind, living and dead, were to be summoned before God to be judged. A great separation was to be made, with all the righteous finding a place forever in heaven, and all the wicked being consigned to live forever in a place of torment called hell. The earth was then to be destroyed by fire, an event that was supported by mistranslating sunteleias tou aionos "the end of the world".

In view of beliefs such as these there was no place in the thinking of these men for a time to come when Jesus Christ would be personally present upon the earth. So they eliminated the parousia by translating it "coming" and making it to be a coming universal judgement.

There is no truth to be gained by pointing to 1 Cor. 16:17 (as many do) as proof that parousia means coming, where Paul declares that he was glad for the parousia Stephanas and Fortunatus.. The fact that the word "coming" seems to fit well in this sentence is no proof that this is what it means. The word health or prosperity would fit just as well, but the fact is that parousia does not mean health or prosperity and neither does it mean coming. These men were a deputation from the Corinthian ecclesia to the Apostle Paul. Thus they were there because of who they were and the help they could be to Paul. He was rejoicing in their personal presence, a presence which he exalts and honours by calling it a parousia. The importance of this designation will be seen when we get to the actual technical meaning of this word.

The word parousia does not mean "arrival" as the occurrence in 2 Cor. 10:10 will clearly show. The weakness of Paul's "bodily presence" was not limited to his arrival. It continued through his entire parousia in Corinth. And this word does not mean "presence" or "bodily presence" even though it does contain these two ideas. It means more than "presence" and more than "bodily presence" and to so translate it is to weaken this strong word. It is actually a simple word and should present no problem to the translator as long as he can rise fully above the confusion that was imposed upon it when it was made to mean "coming". It is made up of the word para which means "beside", and the participial form of the word "to be", ousia, which means "being". The compound word parousia means being beside, being with, or being present. However when all occurrences of this word in the New Testament, in Classical Greek, in the Septuagint, and in the papyrus manuscripts are examined it will be found that this word means more than presence and more even than personal presence. It is used of a certain kind of personal presence, and only such a presence can be properly called a parousia.

Adolf Deissmann's pertinent comment that parousia is "a technical expression" has been repeated by many commentators, but invariably they leave us without any explanation of the technical (exact) meaning of this word. This is a fault of which I do not wish to be guilty so I will give at once the technical definition of this important term.

The Greek word parousia means a personal presence when one is present because of who he is and what he does. Thus, a personal presence may not be a parousia if the one present is not there in relationship to his position or office and the service he performs as such.

The word for "personal presence" in the New Testament is pareimi, not parousia, a fact that is easily established by its many occurrences. (See list on page 594 of the Englishman's Greek Concordance.) These occurrences show that pareimi always means a personal presence when it is used of men, and an actual presence when it is used of things. 

At first glance these two words may seem to be only different inflections of the same word, but usage has established them as two words with distinct meanings. We must not stultify parousia by giving it the same meaning as pareimi. The distinction between the two is of the utmost importance, so I will give several illustrations of these two words.

If I should go to the courthouse and sit in on a trial, my presence there would most certainly be a personal one, and it could be described by the Greek word pareimi, but not by parousia. I am not there because of who I am, any position I hold or service I will perform. However, the judge, the prosecutor, the attorneys, and the witnesses are all there because of who they are and the service they will render in view of this. Thus, their personal presence there can be called a parousia.

Consider another illustration. A teacher of a class in New Testament Greek begins by calling the roll to which each member responds, "Pareimi" (present), a word they had learned in the previous lesson. The teacher then says, Your personal presence, that is, your pareimi having been established, I now trust that your pareimi will at once become a parousia, that you will be here because you are students and, therefore, are here to learn.

The definition of a word can be determined only by an analysis of its usage. This is the method by which dictionaries are compiled. In getting the definition of New Testament words we are primarily interested in the usage made by the Holy Spirit in its pages. Nevertheless, consideration needs to be given to occurrences outside of the Bible.

CLASSICAL GREEK USAGE

Of special interest is a quotation by Sophocles, cited by Liddell and Scott, where one said, "that we have no friends present (parousia) to assist us. This man desired the presence of friends who would be there because they were friends and who would undertake to do what a friend would do under such circumstances.

Adolf Deissmann cites many of these occurrences, prefacing them by saying, "From the Ptolemaic period down to the second century A.D. (about 500 years) we are able to trace the word in the East as a technical expressional for the arrival or visit of the king or the emperor." (Light from the Ancient East, Pages 368 to 373.) However, all the examples cited by Deissmann are indicative of an official visit rather than a mere arrival. On the occasion of such visits parousia coins were struck and parousia taxes were levied. And it will also be seen in every occurrence that these visits were described as parousias because they were present because of who they were and were there to perform the duties of their position.

The occurrences in the papyrus are most interesting. These are pointed out by Moulton and Milligan (Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, page 497). In one a man says, "The repair of what has been swept away by the river requires my parousia". The owner would need to be there because of who he was and what he would direct to be done.

In another occurrence someone says, "It is no use if a person comes too late for what required his parousia." The correctness of the definition that has already been given is evident in this sentence.

Another occurrence is quite intriguing, causing us to wonder about the incident that generated it. A woman declares that her husband, "swore in the parousia of the overseers (episkopon) and of his own brothers, 'Henceforward I will not hide all my keys from her.' " One can only surmise from this that there was serious trouble between a man and his wife and that the overseers and his brothers were called in to arbitrate the matter. Thus they were there because of their positions and relationship, also the services they were to perform.

In the pre-recorded history (prophecies) of the benevolent services which the Lord Jesus Christ will yet perform on behalf of mankind the most important service will be accomplished in His parousia. He is to be personally present upon the earth for a thousand years and He will be present because of all that He is and the services to be performed in view of each glory given to Him. The good that will come out of this is beyond comprehension and volumes would not suffice to tell about it. For now, it is enough to say that this thousand year term in God's school of life, when the master teacher is personally present, will produce a people who know God to the fullest extent that He can be known by man.

Since the Lord Jesus Christ is not now upon the earth, a coming will be required in order for Him to be personally present. I believe in the second coming of Christ (Acts 1:11). His coming will result in His parousia, and we should not confuse the two.

SEED & BREAD Number 25: NEXT

THE PAROUSIA OF THE LORD JESUS

In the pre-recorded history (prophecies) of the future benevolent services which the Lord Jesus Christ will yet perform for mankind, one of the most important is that which will be accomplished in His thousand year parousia. Having established in Issue No. 23 the meaning of the Greek word parousia, I shall henceforth use it as an English word in the confidence that my readers will understand that by it I mean a personal presence when one is present because of who or what he is and what he does in view of this.

The great truth of the parousia of the Lord Jesus is unknown and unrecognised by most readers of the English Bible since the word is not found there. It is wrongly translated "coming" in twenty-two of its twenty-four occurrences. It is the parousia of Jesus Christ that will prepare and qualify mankind for the place he will have and the services he will perform in the new heaven and new earth. Under that new order the tabernacle of God will be with men and He will dwell with them and they will be His people and He will be their God (Rev. 21:3). Not even that long term of school in the kingdom of God will fully prepare men for this position and service. We will yet need the learning and discipline that comes from Christ being personally present because of Who He is and what He will do.

When we consider that the event which is commonly called "the rapture" is one that is related to the parousia, and which so many are saying is the next event in God's prophetic program, it causes us to realise the need for an objective study of the parousia of the Lord Jesus.

It is in Matthew 24:3 that we find the first mention of this great event. The Lord's twelve apostles came to Him privately upon the Mount of Olives and asked the question, "What will be the sign of your parousia, even the consummation of the eon?"

The eon here is the kingdom eon, that pre-advent time of divine government that prepares mankind for the parousia of Jesus Christ. The eon consummates in the parousia, and it is the consummation of that eon. In justification of the above translation I would cite the following:

• There is a rule of Greek grammar which is as follows. When two nouns in the same case are connected by the word kai (and), and the second noun lacks the definite article, then the second noun refers to the same person or thing as the first noun and is a definition of it. An example of this will be found in 1 Cor. 15:24 where Paul speaks of "God, even the Father" (Theo kai patri).

This rule applies to the two nouns found in the question asked by the apostles (parousia and sunteleia). They are asking about one thing, not two things. The parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ is the consummation of the eon -- not this present evil eon, but the glorious eon of the day of Christ, that eon of divine government which is next to come upon the earth.

I am fully convinced that the word sunteleia means a coming together of all that is necessary to produce a desired goal or end, so I have used the word consummation to translate it. The word here is not telos (the actual end) but sunteleia, the act of completing to produce a desired result.

It will help us to fix the meaning of sunteleia in our minds if we will remember that the consummation of a woman's pregnancy is the birth of a living child. A child born dead would be the end of her pregnancy but it would not be the consummation of it. The goal would not have been reached.

There is nothing in this passage about the coming of Christ. How could there be when He was then present with them? The disciples' question concerns His parousia, which they further describe as being "the consummation of the eon". As said before, the eon spoken of here is the eon of the kingdom of God. The consummation of the kingdom eon is the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. However, His parousia will not be ushered in without a great struggle of opposition on the part of Satan. The developments and the outcome of this struggle are set forth in the ensuing portion of Matthew 24.

In answer to their question the Lord sets forth certain significant events that will precede His parousia. They asked for the signs of it and this is what He gives to them. These are:

1. Men coming in His character claiming they are the Anointed One,
2. Battles and reports of battles,
3. Nation rising up against nation and government against government,
4. Famines,
5. Pestilences, and
6. Earthquakes.

And since these things have always been prominent in the earth from the time of the entrance of sin (they were prominent when the Lord spoke these words and have been prominent ever since) the logical mind will wonder how they can possibly be signs of the nearness of His parousia.

The answer is that they cannot be and it is illogical to cry "signs of the times" every time a famine or earthquake or pestilence occurs. However, when we understand the flow of events set forth in the time periods of the New Testament we realise that these things have ceased under God's government which precedes these events and the parousia. The rigid restraints (Isa. 30:31) and the swift punishments that will characterise the government of God will keep all such things from happening. But when these restraints are lifted and the restrainer Himself (the Holy Spirit) is removed, evil men and evil conditions will again appear and be highly significant. It should also be apparent that the great drama that is written out in detail in Matthew 24 can never be acted out until the twelve apostles have been raised from the dead and are in their positions as judges of the twelve tribes of Israel. These words and warnings were spoken to them, and not to us. Nevertheless, all readers are cautioned, "Whoso readeth, let him understand" (Matt. 24:15).

The actual period of time being dealt with here is the seventieth week, a seven year period, of Israel's seventy weeks as revealed in Daniel 9. This seven year period is divided into two parts and it is the last three and one-half years that makes up "the great tribulation". This begins the great struggle for it in the middle of the week that Satan is cast down to earth, raging with great wrath because he knows his time is short (Rev. 12:12).

It is then that all the governing people in Israel ("them which be in Judea" Matt. 24:16) must flee to the mountains. This will be an orderly migration, a work of faith, and the apostles will be in absolute charge. They are to take nothing, since the same Lord who fed and clothed their murmuring fathers in these same mountains for forty years can certainly supply the needs of this righteous band for forty-two months.

It is the presence of Satan, the great deceiver, upon the earth, that makes this to be a time of affliction such as has never been before. But they are safe in their divinely appointed place in the mountains and the forces of antichrist do not dare to go in and bring them out, so they spend their time marching up and down the streets of Jerusalem. This is the time when "Jerusalem shall be trodden of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled". See Eze. 30:2, Luke 21:24, Rev. 11:2. But it seems they begin to look foolish marching up and down the streets of Jerusalem when the ones they seek to capture and destroy are in the mountains. And it is when they assemble at Megiddo in preparation for turning into the mountains that the Lord comes and fights against them. This is the battle of Armageddon, in which not one life is lost except those who are in revolt against Israel and against God's government. Remember that the "man of sin" is destroyed by the blazing forth (epiphaneia) of His parousia (2 Thess. 2:8).

In answering their question concerning the signs of His parousia He warns them to disregard all declarations that He has returned to the earth and is in the desert or hidden away in some secret chamber in the city, thus to avoid all stratagems that would lure them out of their divinely appointed place of safety. He then states with absolute finality:

• "For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall the parousia of the Son of Man be." (Matt. 24:27.)

From this we know that His parousia will be sudden, dramatic, and public. The idea of a secret parousia is unknown in the Word of God.

As the Lord continues His message He declares that it is "immediately after the tribulation of those days" that they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Matt. 24: 29, 30). This is the coming that results in His parousia.

One evident fact that will be apparent to all who examine the four occurrences of the word parousia in Matthew 24, is that it is an event that comes after the great tribulation and not before. It cannot be moved around to suit the whims of faulty prophetic schemes. It is also seen to be one definite event. Any attempt to make two parousias will not stand the test of Scripture.

One of the most important references to the parousia of the Lord is found in 1 Thess. 4:15-17 where Paul prefaces his declaration by saying, "This we say unto you by the word of the Lord," which indicates a new revelation not made by anyone before. He continues by saying that those who are alive and remain unto the parousia of the Lord shall in no wise be a step ahead of those who are asleep. He declares that the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the chief messenger, and with the trump of God. This is His coming, His coming in order to be personally present. As He descends those who are then "dead in Christ", a martyred group who gave up their lives in the great tribulation, will be raised and these with the living shall be caught up with them in clouds to meet the Lord in the air. It is wrong to twist this into the idea that He is coming to take these people to heaven. He is coming to be personally present upon the earth and here to accomplish all the great works that His many offices indicate. He is not coming to govern. After the kingdom experience those who still need government have not acquired the maturity that is necessary for a place on earth when He is personally present in view of all that He is and all that He will do.

The words of the scoffers who ask, "Where is the promise of His parousia?" (2 Pet. 3:4) are tantamount to saying, "There is no promise of a parousia in the Bible." The amillennial school of interpretation is doing this today. They are a sign that we are in the closing days of this dispensation. Don't listen to them. NEXT

Click here to return to INDEX

Click here to return to EON Home Page

WHAT DOES parousia MEAN?

In the study of things to come there is no word that encompasses any greater truth than the word parousia. This is a Greek word that has been brought over into English without any change in its spelling, and it will be found in most dictionaries, even though the definition given is far from accurate. It is a word that should be found in the vocabulary of every diligent Bible student. There is no English word that will accurately express the Greek word parousia; therefore, it should be transliterated and a maximum effort should be made to fix in our minds its meaning as used by the Spirit of God in the New Testament.

This word is found twenty-four times in the Greek New Testament and is used in numerous contexts making it possible for us to discover its true meaning from its usage, the only way that any word in any language should ever be defined. 

In the King James Version it is translated "coming" twenty-two times and "presence" twice. Other translations as a rule have used the words coming, presence, arrival, and personal presence to represent the word parousia. And at this point it needs to be stated unequivocally that it does not mean coming in any occurrence in the New Testament. To so translate it was an egregious error that is constantly perpetuated by lexicographers and theologians. I do not believe that the definition of "coming" would be given in any lexicon, there being not one shred of evidence to support it, if it had not been for the fact that the King James Version translators arbitrarily rendered it this way so that it would not flatly contradict their creedal position.

The translators of the King James Version were men who held firmly to the theology that arose out of the reformation, and especially to the later ideas developed by John Calvin, a man who studiously avoided ever coming to grips with the great eschatological problems of Scripture. A very simple doctrine of future events was worked out which was a slight refinement of Roman Catholic doctrine. According to this, there was to come what was called "the day of judgement", and this was equated with the second coming of Christ, even though it was not held that He returned in person. On this day of judgement all mankind, living and dead, were to be summoned before God to be judged. A great separation was to be made, with all the righteous finding a place forever in heaven, and all the wicked being consigned to live forever in a place of torment called hell. The earth was then to be destroyed by fire, an event that was supported by mistranslating sunteleias tou aionos "the end of the world".

In view of beliefs such as these there was no place in the thinking of these men for a time to come when Jesus Christ would be personally present upon the earth. So they eliminated the parousia by translating it "coming" and making it to be a coming universal judgement.

There is no truth to be gained by pointing to 1 Cor. 16:17 (as many do) as proof that parousia means coming, where Paul declares that he was glad for the parousia Stephanas and Fortunatus.. The fact that the word "coming" seems to fit well in this sentence is no proof that this is what it means. The word health or prosperity would fit just as well, but the fact is that parousia does not mean health or prosperity and neither does it mean coming. These men were a deputation from the Corinthian ecclesia to the Apostle Paul. Thus they were there because of who they were and the help they could be to Paul. He was rejoicing in their personal presence, a presence which he exalts and honours by calling it a parousia. The importance of this designation will be seen when we get to the actual technical meaning of this word.

The word parousia does not mean "arrival" as the occurrence in 2 Cor. 10:10 will clearly show. The weakness of Paul's "bodily presence" was not limited to his arrival. It continued through his entire parousia in Corinth. And this word does not mean "presence" or "bodily presence" even though it does contain these two ideas. It means more than "presence" and more than "bodily presence" and to so translate it is to weaken this strong word. It is actually a simple word and should present no problem to the translator as long as he can rise fully above the confusion that was imposed upon it when it was made to mean "coming". It is made up of the word para which means "beside", and the participial form of the word "to be", ousia, which means "being". The compound word parousia means being beside, being with, or being present. However when all occurrences of this word in the New Testament, in Classical Greek, in the Septuagint, and in the papyrus manuscripts are examined it will be found that this word means more than presence and more even than personal presence. It is used of a certain kind of personal presence, and only such a presence can be properly called a parousia.

Adolf Deissmann's pertinent comment that parousia is "a technical expression" has been repeated by many commentators, but invariably they leave us without any explanation of the technical (exact) meaning of this word. This is a fault of which I do not wish to be guilty so I will give at once the technical definition of this important term.

The Greek word parousia means a personal presence when one is present because of who he is and what he does. Thus, a personal presence may not be a parousia if the one present is not there in relationship to his position or office and the service he performs as such.

The word for "personal presence" in the New Testament is pareimi, not parousia, a fact that is easily established by its many occurrences. (See list on page 594 of the Englishman's Greek Concordance.) These occurrences show that pareimi always means a personal presence when it is used of men, and an actual presence when it is used of things. 

At first glance these two words may seem to be only different inflections of the same word, but usage has established them as two words with distinct meanings. We must not stultify parousia by giving it the same meaning as pareimi. The distinction between the two is of the utmost importance, so I will give several illustrations of these two words.

If I should go to the courthouse and sit in on a trial, my presence there would most certainly be a personal one, and it could be described by the Greek word pareimi, but not by parousia. I am not there because of who I am, any position I hold or service I will perform. However, the judge, the prosecutor, the attorneys, and the witnesses are all there because of who they are and the service they will render in view of this. Thus, their personal presence there can be called a parousia.

Consider another illustration. A teacher of a class in New Testament Greek begins by calling the roll to which each member responds, "Pareimi" (present), a word they had learned in the previous lesson. The teacher then says, Your personal presence, that is, your pareimi having been established, I now trust that your pareimi will at once become a parousia, that you will be here because you are students and, therefore, are here to learn.

The definition of a word can be determined only by an analysis of its usage. This is the method by which dictionaries are compiled. In getting the definition of New Testament words we are primarily interested in the usage made by the Holy Spirit in its pages. Nevertheless, consideration needs to be given to occurrences outside of the Bible.

CLASSICAL GREEK USAGE

Of special interest is a quotation by Sophocles, cited by Liddell and Scott, where one said, "that we have no friends present (parousia) to assist us. This man desired the presence of friends who would be there because they were friends and who would undertake to do what a friend would do under such circumstances.

Adolf Deissmann cites many of these occurrences, prefacing them by saying, "From the Ptolemaic period down to the second century A.D. (about 500 years) we are able to trace the word in the East as a technical expressional for the arrival or visit of the king or the emperor." (Light from the Ancient East, Pages 368 to 373.) However, all the examples cited by Deissmann are indicative of an official visit rather than a mere arrival. On the occasion of such visits parousia coins were struck and parousia taxes were levied. And it will also be seen in every occurrence that these visits were described as parousias because they were present because of who they were and were there to perform the duties of their position.

The occurrences in the papyrus are most interesting. These are pointed out by Moulton and Milligan (Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament, page 497). In one a man says, "The repair of what has been swept away by the river requires my parousia". The owner would need to be there because of who he was and what he would direct to be done.

In another occurrence someone says, "It is no use if a person comes too late for what required his parousia." The correctness of the definition that has already been given is evident in this sentence.

Another occurrence is quite intriguing, causing us to wonder about the incident that generated it. A woman declares that her husband, "swore in the parousia of the overseers (episkopon) and of his own brothers, 'Henceforward I will not hide all my keys from her.' " One can only surmise from this that there was serious trouble between a man and his wife and that the overseers and his brothers were called in to arbitrate the matter. Thus they were there because of their positions and relationship, also the services they were to perform.

In the pre-recorded history (prophecies) of the benevolent services which the Lord Jesus Christ will yet perform on behalf of mankind the most important service will be accomplished in His parousia. He is to be personally present upon the earth for a thousand years and He will be present because of all that He is and the services to be performed in view of each glory given to Him. The good that will come out of this is beyond comprehension and volumes would not suffice to tell about it. For now, it is enough to say that this thousand year term in God's school of life, when the master teacher is personally present, will produce a people who know God to the fullest extent that He can be known by man.

Since the Lord Jesus Christ is not now upon the earth, a coming will be required in order for Him to be personally present. I believe in the second coming of Christ (Acts 1:11). His coming will result in His parousia, and we should not confuse the two.

SEED & BREAD Number 25: NEXT

THE PAROUSIA OF THE LORD JESUS

In the pre-recorded history (prophecies) of the future benevolent services which the Lord Jesus Christ will yet perform for mankind, one of the most important is that which will be accomplished in His thousand year parousia. Having established in Issue No. 23 the meaning of the Greek word parousia, I shall henceforth use it as an English word in the confidence that my readers will understand that by it I mean a personal presence when one is present because of who or what he is and what he does in view of this.

The great truth of the parousia of the Lord Jesus is unknown and unrecognised by most readers of the English Bible since the word is not found there. It is wrongly translated "coming" in twenty-two of its twenty-four occurrences. It is the parousia of Jesus Christ that will prepare and qualify mankind for the place he will have and the services he will perform in the new heaven and new earth. Under that new order the tabernacle of God will be with men and He will dwell with them and they will be His people and He will be their God (Rev. 21:3). Not even that long term of school in the kingdom of God will fully prepare men for this position and service. We will yet need the learning and discipline that comes from Christ being personally present because of Who He is and what He will do.

When we consider that the event which is commonly called "the rapture" is one that is related to the parousia, and which so many are saying is the next event in God's prophetic program, it causes us to realise the need for an objective study of the parousia of the Lord Jesus.

It is in Matthew 24:3 that we find the first mention of this great event. The Lord's twelve apostles came to Him privately upon the Mount of Olives and asked the question, "What will be the sign of your parousia, even the consummation of the eon?"

The eon here is the kingdom eon, that pre-advent time of divine government that prepares mankind for the parousia of Jesus Christ. The eon consummates in the parousia, and it is the consummation of that eon. In justification of the above translation I would cite the following:

• There is a rule of Greek grammar which is as follows. When two nouns in the same case are connected by the word kai (and), and the second noun lacks the definite article, then the second noun refers to the same person or thing as the first noun and is a definition of it. An example of this will be found in 1 Cor. 15:24 where Paul speaks of "God, even the Father" (Theo kai patri).

This rule applies to the two nouns found in the question asked by the apostles (parousia and sunteleia). They are asking about one thing, not two things. The parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ is the consummation of the eon -- not this present evil eon, but the glorious eon of the day of Christ, that eon of divine government which is next to come upon the earth.

I am fully convinced that the word sunteleia means a coming together of all that is necessary to produce a desired goal or end, so I have used the word consummation to translate it. The word here is not telos (the actual end) but sunteleia, the act of completing to produce a desired result.

It will help us to fix the meaning of sunteleia in our minds if we will remember that the consummation of a woman's pregnancy is the birth of a living child. A child born dead would be the end of her pregnancy but it would not be the consummation of it. The goal would not have been reached.

There is nothing in this passage about the coming of Christ. How could there be when He was then present with them? The disciples' question concerns His parousia, which they further describe as being "the consummation of the eon". As said before, the eon spoken of here is the eon of the kingdom of God. The consummation of the kingdom eon is the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ. However, His parousia will not be ushered in without a great struggle of opposition on the part of Satan. The developments and the outcome of this struggle are set forth in the ensuing portion of Matthew 24.

In answer to their question the Lord sets forth certain significant events that will precede His parousia. They asked for the signs of it and this is what He gives to them. These are:

1. Men coming in His character claiming they are the Anointed One,
2. Battles and reports of battles,
3. Nation rising up against nation and government against government,
4. Famines,
5. Pestilences, and
6. Earthquakes.

And since these things have always been prominent in the earth from the time of the entrance of sin (they were prominent when the Lord spoke these words and have been prominent ever since) the logical mind will wonder how they can possibly be signs of the nearness of His parousia.

The answer is that they cannot be and it is illogical to cry "signs of the times" every time a famine or earthquake or pestilence occurs. However, when we understand the flow of events set forth in the time periods of the New Testament we realise that these things have ceased under God's government which precedes these events and the parousia. The rigid restraints (Isa. 30:31) and the swift punishments that will characterise the government of God will keep all such things from happening. But when these restraints are lifted and the restrainer Himself (the Holy Spirit) is removed, evil men and evil conditions will again appear and be highly significant. It should also be apparent that the great drama that is written out in detail in Matthew 24 can never be acted out until the twelve apostles have been raised from the dead and are in their positions as judges of the twelve tribes of Israel. These words and warnings were spoken to them, and not to us. Nevertheless, all readers are cautioned, "Whoso readeth, let him understand" (Matt. 24:15).

The actual period of time being dealt with here is the seventieth week, a seven year period, of Israel's seventy weeks as revealed in Daniel 9. This seven year period is divided into two parts and it is the last three and one-half years that makes up "the great tribulation". This begins the great struggle for it in the middle of the week that Satan is cast down to earth, raging with great wrath because he knows his time is short (Rev. 12:12).

It is then that all the governing people in Israel ("them which be in Judea" Matt. 24:16) must flee to the mountains. This will be an orderly migration, a work of faith, and the apostles will be in absolute charge. They are to take nothing, since the same Lord who fed and clothed their murmuring fathers in these same mountains for forty years can certainly supply the needs of this righteous band for forty-two months.

It is the presence of Satan, the great deceiver, upon the earth, that makes this to be a time of affliction such as has never been before. But they are safe in their divinely appointed place in the mountains and the forces of antichrist do not dare to go in and bring them out, so they spend their time marching up and down the streets of Jerusalem. This is the time when "Jerusalem shall be trodden of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled". See Eze. 30:2, Luke 21:24, Rev. 11:2. But it seems they begin to look foolish marching up and down the streets of Jerusalem when the ones they seek to capture and destroy are in the mountains. And it is when they assemble at Megiddo in preparation for turning into the mountains that the Lord comes and fights against them. This is the battle of Armageddon, in which not one life is lost except those who are in revolt against Israel and against God's government. Remember that the "man of sin" is destroyed by the blazing forth (epiphaneia) of His parousia (2 Thess. 2:8).

In answering their question concerning the signs of His parousia He warns them to disregard all declarations that He has returned to the earth and is in the desert or hidden away in some secret chamber in the city, thus to avoid all stratagems that would lure them out of their divinely appointed place of safety. He then states with absolute finality:

• "For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall the parousia of the Son of Man be." (Matt. 24:27.)

From this we know that His parousia will be sudden, dramatic, and public. The idea of a secret parousia is unknown in the Word of God.

As the Lord continues His message He declares that it is "immediately after the tribulation of those days" that they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory (Matt. 24: 29, 30). This is the coming that results in His parousia.

One evident fact that will be apparent to all who examine the four occurrences of the word parousia in Matthew 24, is that it is an event that comes after the great tribulation and not before. It cannot be moved around to suit the whims of faulty prophetic schemes. It is also seen to be one definite event. Any attempt to make two parousias will not stand the test of Scripture.

One of the most important references to the parousia of the Lord is found in 1 Thess. 4:15-17 where Paul prefaces his declaration by saying, "This we say unto you by the word of the Lord," which indicates a new revelation not made by anyone before. He continues by saying that those who are alive and remain unto the parousia of the Lord shall in no wise be a step ahead of those who are asleep. He declares that the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the chief messenger, and with the trump of God. This is His coming, His coming in order to be personally present. As He descends those who are then "dead in Christ", a martyred group who gave up their lives in the great tribulation, will be raised and these with the living shall be caught up with them in clouds to meet the Lord in the air. It is wrong to twist this into the idea that He is coming to take these people to heaven. He is coming to be personally present upon the earth and here to accomplish all the great works that His many offices indicate. He is not coming to govern. After the kingdom experience those who still need government have not acquired the maturity that is necessary for a place on earth when He is personally present in view of all that He is and all that He will do.

The words of the scoffers who ask, "Where is the promise of His parousia?" (2 Pet. 3:4) are tantamount to saying, "There is no promise of a parousia in the Bible." The amillennial school of interpretation is doing this today. They are a sign that we are in the closing days of this dispensation. Don't listen to them. NEXT

Click here to return to INDEX

Click here to return to EON Home Page

Salvation Bringing Grace

WHAT DOES sOtErion MEAN?

The word sOtErion is the Greek word that is translated "salvation" in Acts 28:28. It is of the utmost importance since it is the subject of the sentence that makes up this passage. If we do not know for sure what it means then we can never be certain as to what Paul was saying in this important announcement. If we do not arrive at a faithful translation of this word, we will be guilty of changing the subject and have Paul saying something that he is not. This word does not mean "salvation", as it is translated in the KJV and most other versions. If Paul had been speaking of salvation here he would have used the noun sOtEria, not the adjective sOtErion.

The noun sOtEria is found forty-five times is the New Testament and is translated "salvation" in forty of these occurrences. The adjective sOtErion is found five times as shown in the following concordance:

• Luke 2:30 -- For mine eyes have seen thy salvation
• Luke 3:6 -- all flesh shall see the salvation of God
• Acts 28:28 -- the salvation of God is sent to the Gentiles
• Eph. 6:17 -- And take the helmet of salvation
• Tit. 2:11 -- the grace of God that bringeth salvation

From this list it will be seen that the translators have treated this divinely-inspired adjective as if it were a noun when it is not. This is not a grammatically correct translation, and it robs the reader of the exact truth that the Spirit of God intend ed to convey by the use of this adjective.

There is no doubt but that this word literally means saving, even as we would use it in speaking of "saving grace" or "the saving work of Christ", and it is also clear that in four of the five occurrences in the New Testament it is substantivised; that is, it is used as if it were a noun. Nevertheless, the fact remains that it is an adjective, and there is one fixed rule about adjectives that cannot be altered; they never stand alone. If they seem to stand alone, as they do in the five passages cited above, then the noun which they qualify must be found in the context. More on this later, but first of all we must define this word more accurately. There is no question but that it has a technical meaning and is so used in the New Testament.

The King James Version came very near to the true meaning of this word in Titus 2:11 where it was translated by using three words "that bringeth salvation," for the technical meaning of sOtErion is salvation-bringing. The lexicons are practically unanimous in regard to this:

• Abbott-Smith: "saving, bringing salvation."
• Cremer: "saving, bringing salvation."
• Lidell and Scott: "savings, delivering, bringing safety."
• Thayer: "saving, bringing salvation."
• Bullinger: "saving, delivering, bringing salvation."
• Arndt and Gingrich: "saving, bringing salvation."
• W. E. Vine: "saving, bringing salvation."

Moulton and Millegan say that in the papyrus this word is used in the neuter as a substantive with reference to what produces sOtEria, e.g., a sacrifice or a gift.

As stated before, this word is an adjective and no adjective ever stands alone in a sentence. In fact this is so true that one meaning of the word adjective is "something that cannot stand alone." In any sentence where it seems to stand alone we must always seek for that which it modifies. In such statements as, "It is beautiful," or "This is good," we have adjectives which appear to stand alone, yet these words say nothing about anything until we find something in the physical context that supplies the subject. If we are gazing at a sunset or eating a meal when these words are spoken they become full of meaning at once.

Adjectives can be used as substantives only when the idea that is being qualified or modified is clear from the context, either written or apparent. Even a sentence like, "The young are impatient," if spoken without context would quickly bring the terse question, "Young what?"

With these facts before us we can now take up the examination of the five passages in which this adjective is found, keeping in mind that it means salvation-bringing.

If this definition is followed out it would mean that Luke 2:30 would read, "For mine eyes have seen thy salvation-bringing." This is evidently not a complete statement and yet it is exactly what Simeon said, as literally as it can be translated. And it is bound to cause the question to be asked, "Salvation-bringing what?" However, this is good, for the question sends us at once to the context to find out what it is that is described as "salvation-bringing."

Moffitt recognises the adjective here and renders it "thy saving power," as does also Lenski, translating it "thy saving gift." Both of these are linguistically wrong as there is nothing about "power" or "gift" in the context.

Simeon, the one who spoke these words, was an aged man who had been told that he should not see death before he had seen the Messiah, that is, Jehovah (Luke 2:26). When this man, led by the Spirit of God, came into the temple and saw the infant Jesus he declared to God, the One who before had spoken to him, "Lord now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, according to Thy word, for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation-bringing." This is literally what he said, and the context leaves no doubt about the noun that should be supplied. Simeon had seen God's salvation-bringing Messiah (Christ), the world's long awaited Saviour . He had seen what God had told him he would see -- not power, not a gift, but the Christ.

In the second occurrence of sOtErion (Luke 3:6) the noun that needs to be supplied is not so readily apparent, yet there can be no mistake as to the intent of the Spirit in this place. Literally this passage would read, "And all flesh shall see the salvation-bringing of God." This is grammatically correct, and it is true to the Greek. Yet some will again respectfully inquire: "Salvation-bringing what?" and again the answer must be found in the context. This makes it plain that this statement is in complete harmony with something written in the prophecy of Isaiah, where it says "And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together" (Isa. 40:5). In view of this the noun to be supplied is glory, making the passage under consideration to read, "And all flesh shall see the salvation-bringing glory of God." The reference here is to world salvation.

The occurrence in Eph. 6:17 belongs to a portion on which so many sermons have been preached that few are now able to distinguish between these and the actual message of God. If this is translated literally it would read, "And receive the helmet of the salvation-bringing, even the sword of the Spirit, which is a declaration of God." Here again we must seek an honest answer to the question, "Salvation-bringing what?"

In this passage "the helmet" equals "the salvation-bringing" for they are appositional -- one defines the other. And then by a further apposition these are defined as "the sword of the Spirit" which in turn is described as being "a declaration from God." In view of this we should read here, "And take the helmet of the salvation-bringing declaration (the gospel)." And let it not be thought strange that the salvation-bringing declaration of God is both the believer's helmet and the Spirit's sword. There is no mixing of metaphors here, but two distinct metaphors setting forth two separate uses of the same thing. It is my firm opinion that the salvation-bringing declaration of God is the gospel according to John, the only book in the Bible that was written so that men might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believing have life through His name (John 20:31). The one who is not securely grounded upon this message will not be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. We need this helmet.

In Titus 2:11 we do not need to search for the noun which the adjective qualifies as it is in the passage. This passage should read, "For the salvation-bringing grace of God has shone forth in behalf of all humanity."

We will now consider the occurrence in the main passage under consideration, Acts 28:28. If this is translated literally it will read, "Let it then be known to you that the salvation-bringing of God has been authorised (made freely available) to the nations and they will hear it." But again we must ask, "Salvation-bringing what?"

In the context this "salvation-bringing of God" is something that the nations will hear; therefore, it is a divine communication. Thus we should read here, "the salvation-bringing message of God." Some may prefer some other term such as word, utterance, declaration or gospel, and there can be no objection to these since they all describe a communication that is intended to be heard. They are somewhat synonymous terms and they can be used for emphasis and variety. Thus it is that we have the subject of Paul's great declaration in Acts 28:28. He is talking about the salvation-bringing message of God.

The words "has been authorised" declare an accomplished fact, the effect of which continues, so the tense here is the second aorist. The words "they will hear it" declare a future result so the tense is future.

The great change that took place at Acts 28:28 is declared in the words "has been authorised to the nations." It is quite evident from Acts 10:36 and Acts 13:26 that the salvation-bringing message of God was authorised and made freely available to the nation of Israel from the day of Pentecost. At Acts 10 Peter was authorised to proclaim it to one Gentile household, but his commission did not go beyond this. The Apostle Paul was authorised to proclaim it to Gentiles, but it was severely restricted. It had to be to the Jew first in every place that he visited. Thus that which had been freely available only to Israel became freely available to all other nations at Acts 28:28.

In the words "they will hear it" we have a pledge and guarantee from God made by His agent and spokesman, Paul. These words actually mean that it will get through to the nations for their benefit. God made good on this pledge when He caused the Gospel of John to be written. The salvation-bringing message is no longer in the hands of men. It is written and it stands written. NEXT

Click here to return to INDEX

Click here to return to EON Home Page

The Lord Jesus Is Jehovah

GOD OUR SAVIOUR

"Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" (1 Tim. 1:15). "The Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world" (1 John 4:14). These statements are true; they are from the inspired Word of God. However, the question is now whether this joint effort of the Father and the Son has fulfilled its purpose and become effective in my life, in your life. Can we honestly say in the language of Scripture, "God my Saviour"?

There are no words that are more precious that can come from the lips of an individual than these words spoken in truth. They were spoken by Mary the mother of our Lord when she said in her beautiful magnificat: "My soul cloth magnify the Lord, and my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour" (Luke 1:46,47). If one can in truth say, "God my Saviour", he can rest assured that he has the ultimate Saviour. There can be none that is better, none more perfect, none that can give better assurance of salvation. If God is our Saviour then we are saved, and we can assert this as a fact that is founded upon the solid rock of God's Word. One can only feel sorry for those unstable souls who glory in His power as the Creator, but doubt His ability as a Saviour.

The words "God our Saviour" can well be said to be the most precious and most important in the Bible. The unsettled state of so many professing Christians is the result of never having fully entered into the meaning of these words. The lack of settled peace and conf idence, so common among God's people, is the outcome of not appreciating and not believing the truth declared in them. We need to know Who the Saviour is and what the Saviour is before we can fully trust Him.

To fully appreciate the meaning of the words "God our Saviour", we must approach them through the Old Testament. The prophet Isaiah is the one who most fully develops this theme. It was through him that Jehovah declared: 

• Ye are My witness, saith the LORD, and My servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me. I, even I am the LORD (Jehovah); and beside Me there is no Saviour. Isa. 43 :10, 11.

In response to this declaration that there is no God but Jehovah and no Saviour but Jehovah, let all who read these lines say, "It is truth" (Isa. 43:9). Let us remember that one becomes a believer by believing the truth that is at hand, even if it is the first truth that one has heard. There is no profit in disputing, in doubting, in arguing. There is no value in demanding that all truth be in hand before any is believed. God has spoken, and here we have a truth before us to be believed. There is no Saviour but Jehovah, the God who is seen throughout the Old Testament. This great truth is repeated in the words of Jehovah in Isa. 45:21,22:

• Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD (Jehovah)? and there is no God else beside Me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside Me. Look unto Me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. 

In these words we see God presenting Himself as the Saviour, the one and only Saviour, calling upon men to look to Him and be saved, even those living in the most remote places, which is what the idiomatic phrase "all the ends of the earth" really means. Thus this call is to all mankind, and if mankind as a whole does not respond, then let the individual look to Him and He will not be sent away empty handed.

If the majority rejects and if the minority is slow to believe, then let us break with both of them and believe as individuals in the Saviour, in the salvation He provides, and in the declared way of obtaining both the Saviour and salvation. Let us not follow a multitude to do evil (Ex. 23:2). For while this great offering of Jehovah Himself as the Saviour was primarily to Israel and then to all mankind, it was also to the individual as will be seen in the passage that follows this offer: 

• Surely, shall one say, in the LORD have I righteousness and strength: even to Him shall men come; and all that are incensed against Him shall be ashamed. Isa. 45 :24.

In the italicised word one in the above passage we have an attempt of the translators to express the singular in number which is what it is in the Hebrew text. But they did not follow through when they supplied the word men in the following clause. This is also singular and should read "shall one come".

The great truth that Jehovah was the only God and the only Saviour was well known in Israel at that point of time when the New Testament begins. While there is evidence that they neglected most of the Old Testament, having made it void through their traditions, this was not so concerning the prophecy of Isaiah. This was the one scroll that would be found in the synagogue if they could afford only one portion.

When the Messiah was born in Bethlehem it was the specific instructions of the angel of the Lord that His parents should "call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins" (Matt. 1:21). The name "Jesus" is the Greek form of the Hebrew name "Jehoshua" which means "Jehovah the Saviour". From this His supposed father Joseph must have known that He was an unusual person, for this name was not given to Him to proclaim the fact that Jehovah saves, as in the case of others who bore it, but to emphasise the fact that One who bore it was Himself to do the saving. This is seen in the reason declared for giving it to Him. "For He shall save His people from their sins".

This is in harmony with the message proclaimed by the angels to the shepherds:

• For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. Luke 2:11.

This announcement must have created a dilemma for all who heard it since it announced a Saviour which is Christ the Lord, but it is apparent it did not. The shepherds who first heard it said at once,"Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord hath made known to us" (Luke 2:15). They faced no predicament of two Saviours for these humble men had light and faith which few have today. They knew that Jehovah of old had declared that He alone was the Saviour and that there is no Saviour but Him. Yet they faced no problem in receiving this babe born in Bethlehem as the Saviour, something they could not have done if the one named Jesus was not Jehovah. However, this was the very truth announced by the angel, that this one born in Bethlehem was "Messiah Jehovah", which is what the Greek Christos Kurios actually means.

The people of Israel never had to face the dilemma of two Saviours, one the Jehovah of the Old Testament who declared that He was the only Saviour, and Jesus Christ of the New Testament who is presented by the angels as the Saviour and in turn presented Himself as such. Thus the faithful believed, just as we need to believe, that this One born in Bethlehem was in reality the Jehovah of the Old Testament. If not, then there are two who claim to be the Saviour and one of them must be branded as an impostor. In fact Jesus should be rejected as such if He is not Jehovah. See Issue No. 2for a fuller treatment of this important truth.

As we trace out further the theme of "God our Saviour" through the New Testament we come to the testimony of the Apostle Paul who sets forth beyond all question that the God who is our Saviour is the Lord Jesus Christ. In his epistle to Titus he speaks of "the commandment of God our Saviour" (Titus 1:3) and in the same sentence speaks of "the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour" (Titus 1 :4). Can it be that he is presenting two Saviours here? Certainly not. He would not be guilty of such a thought. God our Saviour and the Lord Jesus Christ are one and the same. Any conception of God that does not recognise this is false and contrary to divine revelation.

It is quite evident that the Spirit of God desired to emphasise this truth since it is brought out again in the next chapter of this epistle. In Titus 2:10 he speaks of "God our Saviour" and in the same sentence speaks of "the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ" (2:13). And as if to establish the truth by three witnesses, in Titus 3:4 he speaks of "the kindness and love of God our Savior" and in the same sentence speaks of "Jesus Christ our Saviour". Truly our God is our Saviour.

There is solid encouragement for every child of God in the realisation of this great truth. The joy of salvation comes from knowing the One who is our Saviour. Think what it means to be able to say that the Great Creator became our Saviour. And if the Creator is not God, then who is God?

In Isaiah 44:24 the great Jehovah declares that He alone is the Creator, that He did it Himself, and no agents were involved. This truth is repeated in Isa. 45:12. Thus it is clear that the One called Jehovah (LORD) in Isaiah is the One called Elohim in Genesis 1:1, where we read, "In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heaven and the earth". Continuing in the Word we come to John 1:1 where one called the Word (Logos) is set before us, and we are told that "the Word (Logos) was God". And as a further means of identification we are told that, "All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made" (John 1:3). Therefore, whether it is Elohim who is presented as the Creator in Genesis 1:1, or Jehovah who is declared to be the only Creator in Isaiah 45:12 or the Logos who is presented as the Creator in John 1:3, it is the same One. Then when we come to John 1:14 we are told that the Word (Logos) was made flesh and became a man upon this earth beheld by others. This is our Lord Christ Jesus, and this is our Saviour. This is the One who fills the pages of God's book.

"Look unto Me and be ye saved, for I am God and there is none else" (Isa. 45:22) is the divine invitation. It was Jehovah who issued this bid, and by it He proclaimed that He alone is the Saviour and that He wants men to be saved. "I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me", is the declaration of the Lord Jesus. All who ever came to Jesus Christ came to God the Father, and no one has ever come to the Father save by the Son of God. "I and My Father are one", is His word concerning this. "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same has not the Father; but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" (1 John 2:23).

I have already said that a man becomes a believer by believing the truth that is at hand. Let every reader of these lines go over the preceding paragraph once again and then ask himself if this is his belief. If so, he may have the right to say, "God my Saviour". NEXT

THE LORD JESUS IS JEHOVAH

In order to qualify as a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ one must believe the record God has given of His Son. To believe in the Lord Jesus Christ is to believe what the Bible says concerning Him. The central and most important feature of divine revelation in regard to Him is that the Jehovah of the Old Testament is the Lord Jesus Christ of the New Testament. There is no fact concerning the man Christ Jesus that is declared more emphatically or that is set forth in more detail than that He is Jehovah.

In spite of this preponderance of testimony, a denomination that calls itself "Jehovah's Witnesses" is most aggressive in the denial of this great Biblical fact. However, in their house to house canvassing they seldom come upon one who is familiar with all the facts of Scripture bearing on this great truth, and this results in many triumphs for them over these ignorant ones. This situation demands that the facts should be made known, so "To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isa. 8:20.

In examining the evidence the student will need to remember that every time he comes upon the name LORD in the King James Version spelled out in capital letters, that this represents the Hebrew word Yahweh which we translate Jehovah. He will also need to note that due to an extreme (but mistaken) reverence for the ineffable name "Yahweh" the ancient custodians of the sacred text, the Massorites, substituted in 134 places the name Adonai. The Companion Bible gives a complete list of these (Appendix 32). They committed no sin in doing this as it was merely the substitution of one name of God (Adonai) for another (Yahweh).

In Genesis 15:2,8 Abraham twice called Jehovah (The One who spoke to him) "Lord GOD", which in the Hebrew reads Adonai Jehovah . This presents a great difficulty for those who try to tell us that Jehovah refers only to "the Father," and Adonai refers only to "the Son." This bit of misinformation is constantly being thrown out by those whose conversation shows that they have never made a personal study of the Hebrew titles given to the Deity. Even a superficial acquaintance with the use of these names in Scripture would show that such an idea is impossible. Can we deduce from the two passages cited above that two distinct beings or personalities dealt with Abraham? Certainly not! The titles Jehovah and Adonai are so inextricably interwoven that no one with knowledge would think of applying them to two separate beings. They are many times used in combination; the prophet Ezekiel alone does so almost two hundred times.

• In Isaiah 6:1-3 the prophet declares: In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphims: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD (Jehovah) of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.

This vision was so overpowering that it caused Isaiah to cry out: "Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD (Jehovah) of hosts. (Isaiah 6:5)

Thus in verse one the prophet says, "I saw the Lord" (Adonai), and in verse five he says, "Mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD (Jehovah) of hosts." This presents an insuperable difficulty to those who would tell us that these two names represent two different beings, since they show that Jehovah and Adonai are one and the same.

In John 12:38 to 41 a part of this passage is quoted and it is declared that this was a vision of the glory of Christ; "These things said Esaias (Isaiah), when he saw His glory, and spake of Him." (Jn. 12:41).

In Isaiah 40:3 the prophet speaks of the preparation of a path for Jehovah. "Prepare ye the way of the LORD (Jehovah)," are his stirring words. Seven hundred years later John the Baptist adopts this passage, applies it to himself as the forerunner and to the preparation for the public appearance of the Lord Jesus. See Mt. 3:3, and Jn.1:23. Truly the One whom Isaiah spoke about (Jehovah) is the One who John heralded (Jesus).

Again in Isaiah, in a passage that begins with the majestic words, "Thus saith the LORD (Jehovah) that created the heavens, God (Elohim) that formed the earth and made it" (Isa. 45:18), Jehovah the Creator declares that "unto Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear" (Isa. 45:23). This is a part of His future glory -- the honouring of One who repeatedly declares that "My glory will I not give to another" (Isa. 42:8). Yet in Philippians 2:9-11 it is declared of the one who died "the death of the cross:" 

• Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 

What else can "Lord" mean in this passage except Jehovah? The universal confession that is yet to be made is that Jesus Christ is Jehovah, a confession that is forced upon men by the unveiling of Jesus Christ. Some of us willingly confess this now. 

The "Jehovah Witness" people claim that they find their name in Isaiah 43:10,12, and 44:8. If so one would think that these witnesses would be patently familiar with everything declared in these two chapters, also with those chapters which form the context, chapters 42 and 45. However, in conversation with quite a few of them I have found them to be ignorant of this quartet of chapters as a whole and to have very little interest in what is said in them outside of the three small fragments they use for their name. Yet, these four chapters contain some of the greatest declarations to be found in Scripture. Consider these words:

• Thus saith God the LORD (Jehovah Elohim), he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein: I am the LORD (Jehovah): that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images. (Isaiah 42:5,8)
• Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD (Jehovah), and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD (Jehovah); and beside me there is no saviour. (Isaiah 43:10-11). 
• Thus saith the LORD (Jehovah) the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD (Jehovah) of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6) Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any. (Isaiah 44:8).
• Thus saith the LORD (Jehovah), thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD (Jehovah) that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; (Isaiah 44:24).
• I am the LORD (Jehovah), and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD (Jehovah), and there is none else. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. (Isaiah 45:5,6,12). 
• Who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD (Jehovah)? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, That unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. (Isaiah 45:21-23). 

The above passages should be read carefully once again noting exactly what Jehovah declares concerning Himself. He declares that He is the Creator of the heavens, the earth, all that comes out of it and man upon it. He declares that He is the maker of all things, that He alone stretched forth the heavens, that He spread abroad the earth by Himself. Words could not be stronger or more explicit in claiming that He acted alone in the creation. Therefore, when we are told by the Spirit of God in John 1:3 that the Word, the very Word who be came flesh, made all things and "without Him was not any thing made that was made," only one conclusion is possible. The one set forth as the Creator in Isaiah is the One set forth as Creator in John. Jehovah is Jesus.

Jehovah proclaims that He is the redeemer of Israel, yet in the New Testament redemption is predicated over and over again to the Lord Jesus, the Christ "in whom we have redemption through His blood" (Eph. 1:7). Surely, Jesus is Jehovah.

It is the word of Jehovah that He alone is God, that there is none beside Him, that there is none like Him, that before Him there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Him. Yet in spite of these declarations the "Jehovah Witnesses" would explain away the explicit statement found in John 1:1 that "the Word was God" by inserting the indefinite article and saying that Jesus was a God. This cannot be true for it results in a second God who is not Jehovah. Jesus and Jehovah are one and the same God.

Jehovah declares three times that beside Him there is no Saviour: Isa. 43.11, 45:21, and Hos. 13:4. And yet the angels declared at the birth of Jesus that a Saviour had been born which Christ the Lord. These words can mean nothing but "Messiah Jehovah". Jesus cannot be a Saviour unless He is Jehovah.

Jehovah declares that He is the "First and the Last". All must agree that there cannot be two firsts and two lasts. How can it be then that the resurrected Jesus declares in Revelation 1:11, 17 and 18 that He is "the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last". There is no way this could possible be true unless the speaker Himself is Jehovah.

Jehovah declares that there is none like Him, none to whom He can be likened, none equal to Him, yet the Lord Jesus declared that those who had seen Hi m had seen the Father, that those who knew Him knew the Father, that men should honour Him even as they honoured the Father. John 5:23, 8:19, and 14:7 and 9. Paul declares that Christ Jesus is the image of the invisible God. Not one word of this can be true if Jesus is not Jehovah.

Again, I repeat, there is no fact that is declared more emphatically or that is set forth in more detail than that the Lord Jesus is Jehovah. This is the record God has given. Salvation becomes ours when we believe the record God has given of His Son. 

NEXT