Jehovah’s Witnesses also face the problem of reconciling their dogma that the Son of God is a created being with the following words of the Apostle John, who in John 1:3 says of the Logos:
Πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἓν ὃ γέγονεν.
The Serbian translation reads: Everything came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being, that has come into being.
In other words, nothing has been created, which was not created through the Logos.
There also exist critical editions (e.g. Nestle-Aland), where a full stop precedes ὃ γέγονεν, so the text reads: πάντα δι᾽ αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν. ὃ γέγονεν.
In this case, ὃ γέγονεν is linked to the words from the following verse: ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων, and the translation would be: Everything came into being through Him, and without Him nothing came into being. What came into being in Him [the Logos] was life, and the life was the light of men.
Punctuation in the biblical texts is a later addition, appearing only around the beginning of the 15th century, which certainly reflects the understanding of the text itself – hence, for us Orthodox Christians, the quotes and interpretations of the Bible by the Holy Fathers are of great importance, as well as the entire Church Tradition, with its liturgical prayers and hymnography, which are much older than the first appearance of punctuation in biblical texts. As such, they are the key to the understanding of the Bible, including the correct punctuation, which merely reflects that same understanding.
In the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ translation, we find the above-mentioned second version, very clumsily translated:
Everything came into being through him, and without him nothing came into being. What came into being through him was life, and life was the light of men.
In the revised edition of 2019, the translation by Jehovah’s Witnesses reads as follows:
Everything came into being through him, and without him nothing came into being. Through him came life, and that life was the light of men.
We note that they have completely omitted the phrase ὃ γέγονεν – what came into being. Furthermore, Jehovah’s Witnesses have altered the meaning of the words ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν – in Him was life. Namely, in John 1:4 it says: ἐν αὐτῷ ζωὴ ἦν, καὶ ἡ ζωὴ ἦν τὸ φῶς τῶν ἀνθρώπων· – In Him [the Logos] was life, and the life was the light of men.
In this instance, it refers to eternal life – we come across, once again, the imperfect tense of the verb to be (ἦν). It refers, therefore, to the eternal life of the eternal Logos, who in the beginning was with God. This eternal life, the very identity of the Logos, is meant for men as a gift through the Logos, who becomes man for this purpose – this is the mystery of deification or adoption by God, which the Apostle Paul talks about (Romans 9:4).
In the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ translation the verse reads: Through Him came life, and that life was the light of men.
It is true that through the Logos, man was also created as a living being, but this verse does not refer to that life, which was created, but rather to the eternal, divine life into which men, through Christ and in Christ have been called – in Him was life is the accurate translation of the Greek original. However, it is impossible for Jehovah’s Witnesses to talk about the mystery of the deification of man in Christ, since they deny His divinity. That is the real reason they have altered the true meaning of the word ζωὴ (life) in the mentioned verse.
Going back to John 1:3, we can see that regardless of which of the two cited punctuation versions in John 1:3 we consider, the meaning we pointed out earlier is not lost – nothing was created, which was not created through the Logos – that is everything came into being through Him. If we say that everything that was created was created through the Logos, that logically excludes the assertion of Jehovah’s Witnesses that the Logos itself was created, because in that case the everything would include Him as well, which would mean that the Logos was created through himself, which would be absurd. This is the argument which St. Augustine used against the identical Arian heresy in his work De Trinitate (On the Trinity):
“Those who claimed that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or is not the true God, or that He is not the one and only God with the Father, or that He is not truly immortal, because he is changeable, have been condemned by the clearest divine testimonies and the corresponding words [of the Gospel]. These include: In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God (John 1:1). It is clear that by the Logos of God we mean the Son of God, of whom is later said: And the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14), because of His birth in the Incarnation, which took place in time from the Virgin (Mary). Here [the Apostle John] claims that not only is [the Son] God, but that he is also of the same essence as the Father, since he said: And the Logos was God. He was, he adds, in the beginning with God. Everything came into being through him and nothing came into being without him. Therefore, he does not say everything but everything that was created, that is, every creature. Thus, it becomes clear that the One through whom everything came into being was not created. If he was not created, he is not a creature: if he is not a creature, he is of the same essence as the Father. Any essence, however, which is not God, is a creature; and which is not a creature, is God. If the Son is not of the same essence as the Father, He is then a created essence; if he is a created essence, not everything came into being through Him. But if indeed everything came into being through Him, then He is of the same essence as the Father.” (De Trinitate 1, 6.9)
As we can see, things are very clear and logical. The reality (or the essence, being) can be divided into the created and the uncreated. That which is uncreated we call God, and that which is created we call the created being, the world, the Creation. If everything created, has been created through the Logos, then it naturally follows that the Logos has not been created, and is therefore not a creature. Furthermore, it follows that He is uncreated, which means that He is God. The Arian dogma, as well as its contemporary incarnation in the dogma of Jehovah’s Witnesses, collapses here like a house of cards.
If we examine St. Augustine’s text carefully, we will notice other parts of the Arian heresy which coincide with contemporary Arianism – the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Namely, St. Augustine mentions those who claimed that our Lord Jesus Christ is not God, or not the real God, or that together with the Father he is not the one and only God – here, we are clearly dealing with the Arian heresy from the fourth and fifth centuries. The Arians had, just like Jehovah’s Witnesses no problem in calling the Son of God God, but they said that He is not the real God – or rather, that he is not God in essence, the way the Father is. The Son was, according to the Arian teaching, considered to be a God in terms of his moral perfection and his obedience to God. It is the same with Jehovah’s Witnesses, who consider the Father (Jehovah) to be God (with a capital G), but the Son of God to be god (with a small g). The meaning is the same, only the means of expression have changed.
Another forgery in the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ translation can be found in verse John 1:15. It may seem like a minor ‘error’, but it hides a great and ancient Arian heresy, which Jehovah’s Witnesses confess. Namely, in John 1:15 it says that John bore witness about Him [the Logos], and goes on to say: οὗτος ἦν ὃν εἶπον· ὁ ὀπίσω μου ἐρχόμενος ἔμπροσθέν μου γέγονεν, ὅτι πρῶτός μου ἦν.
The correct translation reads: This is He of whom I said: He who comes after me precedes me, because He was before me (literally: He was the one of whom I said…)
The translation by Jehovah’s Witnesses reads: This is the man of whom I said: the One who comes after me, has surpassed me, because he existed before me.
At first sight, the only difference concerns the fact that the Greek original uses the demonstrative pronoun οὗτος – this, while Jehovah’s Witnesses use the noun man instead. Why would the sequence alteration between This is He… and This is the man be problematic? It is problematic not only because the noun man in not to be found in the original, but also because John the Baptist clearly does not refer to a man, or Christ’s human nature, when referring to Him. If he was referring to a man, or to Christ’s human nature, his words because He was before me would be untrue. Namely, St. John the Baptist and our Lord Jesus Christ were relatives. John is the son of Elisabeth, a relative of Jesus’ mother Mary. When the Archangel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary and announced the good news – that she would bear a Son, the Saviour of the world, the Virgin Mary asked in amazement – How will this be, since I have not known a man? (Luke 1:34). The Archangel answered her: The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you…And behold, Elisabeth, your relative, has also conceived a son in her old age, and she is in her sixth month, she who was called barren. (Luke 1:35-36). Elisabeth conceived John the Baptist, and was in her sixth month of pregnancy, when the Virgin Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit. This means that, in human terms, John the Baptist is six months older than our Lord Jesus Christ. But if St. John was referring to Christ’s humanity, how could he then go on to say He who comes after me precedes me, because He was before me? Obviously, St. John, inspired by the Holy Spirit, does not speak of Christ’s human nature – he does not speak, as Jehovah’s Witnesses incorrectly translate, of a man. What then does he speak of? Obviously, about what the Logos is before His Incarnation – of His divine nature. God the Logos is indeed before John the Baptist.
Beware that you are not deceived. (Luke 21:8) Deacon Dr. Aleksandar Milojkov
