My purpose in this post was to get a discussion going about how the JWs interpretation of Christ being a separate created being assisting in the creation of all things seems to run up against the Hebraic concept of a creator.
In doing some reading into some of the old rabbinical teachings I came across an interesting interpretation that made me think about JWs.
It revolves around Genesis 1:26 where Gods states "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness".
We know that in traditional Christian orthodoxy this verse is seen as revealing that God is plural in nature.
In addition the Jewish rabbinical teaching is that the plural 'us' is in reference to man himself, meaning that the verse is referencing mans participation in creation. Kind of like saying 'let us go to the store', one person does all the driving to get there are the other person participates in going by simply being there. I could be wrong on this but from the reading I have done this appears to be what the thinking on this verse is from a Jewish perspective.
We also know that this verse in JW teaching is supposed to refer to the creature Michael the archangel (Jesus), who had a hand in all God created.
Although Christian orthodoxy and Judaism disagree on how this verse deals with the nature of God, neither believe that there actually was a totally different and separate hand in the creation by a created being as JWs do.
My purpose in this post was to get a discussion going about how the JWs interpretation of Christ being a separate created being assisting in the creation of all things seems to run up against the ancient Jewish concept of a creator. I'm hoping the discussion can stay clear of a trinity discussion, but instead push towards how the JWs teachings appears from an ancient and modern Jewish perspective.
a second hand in creation
by drew sagan 8 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
drew sagan
-
changeling
Colossians 1:16 seems to imply Jesus having a big role in creation. Not that it matters to me personally since I consider myself agnostic.
-
drew sagan
Colossians 1:16 seems to imply Jesus having a big role in creation
Yes, but from an orthodox trinitarian viewpoint Christ is not a seperate created being like the JWs teach. In this view 'let us' in Genesis refers to the plurality of God not a separate creature.
My point here is that the JW idea of Gods chief angel being his right hand man in creation is very alien to the historical interpretations the Jews had on the book. While orthodox Jews and Christians debate about the nature of the God of the Bible neither suggest that there is another smaller created but great godlike creature who worked beside the almighty in creating all things.
Again, I could be wrong in the assumptions hence the reason I posted the topic! -
Narkissos
I don't remember the Jewish tradition you're referring to. Philosophically interesting but exegetically difficult (meaning that man is involved in the making of man and in the "image" after which he is made). Quite possible though at a certain stage of Judaism, especially Enochic (cf. the later Adam qadmôn, the Original man before the creation of earthly mankind).
At an earlier stage, though, I think the sentence is simply polytheistic, referring to the gods (or the assembly of 'El) before the latter were reinterpreted as "angels" in monotheism.
An intermediate stage is that of the role of Wisdom in creation (cf. Proverbs 8), which contributed to the later Hellenistic concept of Logos (Philo, John, Hebrews).
-
drew sagan
Narkissos:
The interpretation of mans participation in creation can be found in the Talmud, but I am unsure from what period. I've been reading the book 'Everyman's Talmud' which is an introductory book to Talmudic teachings and stories, and this particular reference is mentioned. It may have simply been a later 'counter Christian' development.
I guess my main interest in the thread is actually the philosophical histories in monotheistic Judaism and it's comparison to JW creation theology, being a JW discussion board and all.
Interesting your take on the verse simply being polytheistic, making it not to far from the JW interpretation in the end. -
-
Narkissos
Strictly speaking, the figure of Adam Qadmôn (usually transliterated Kadmon in English) is
qkabbalistic but it can probably be traced back earlier rabbinical midrashim and Talmudic haggadah.http://www.newkabbalah.com/adam.html
http://ejmmm2007.blogspot.com/2007_01_01_archive.htmlIn any case it certainly echoes a timeless myth of the primordial man which can be found under many forms in different cultures and most likely plays a role in the Enochic description of the "Son of Man".
I think the JW christology, being basically (arch-)angelic, rather corresponds to the "second stage" where the earlier gods are reinterpreted as "angels" in a monotheistic perspective. After all, JWs never really call Jesus "a god," unless they are dragged to expose their interpretation of texts like Isaiah 9:6 or John 1:1,18; 20:28. In effect, when they have to apply the word "god" to Jesus they obviously take it as a figure of speech, but when they call him an "archangel" they take that literally (whatever that means).
-
choosing life
I don't know much about the Jewish beliefs about creation, but the jws interpretation never really made complete sense to me. It always seemed like there were 2 creators at times. I always thought of God as the creator, but there are verses that say everything was created by Jesus.
Very confusing, in the least.
-
AllAlongTheWatchtower
Doubt this is backed biblically, but could "our" be an oblique reference to Asherah (thought by some to be [El] god's wife)? One thing that always puzzled me about biblical/Christian doctrine, is that adherents are often taught to 'do as Christ did' or 'be more godlike' (summed up in the popular "what would Jesus do" key chains and such)...if believers are to truely strive to be godlike, then it seems that apparently, they should all be celibate and never marry. Yet there are these elusive, nebulous references out there to god having a wife...in which case, striving to be more like god suddenly makes more sense.