- Sep 24, 2017
- 233
- 145
- 62
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
1 " I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not"- Jude 5
2 "nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents" -1 Corinthians 10:9
1 JUDE 5
Instead of the reading "Kurios" (Lord), the original reading of Jude was, "Iesous" (Jesus). This reading has the far greater and diverse ancient evidence.
Of the Greek Manuscripts, we have the codices, Vaticanus, of the 4th century, and Alexandrinus, of the 5th.
The support of the Ancient Versions, the Latin Vulgate, which is of the 4th century. The Coptic (Egyptian) Sahidic Version, 4th. The Armenian Version, 5th. Ethopic Version, about the 5th.
The Church fathers who knew of the reading "Jesus", were, Didymus, "the blind", (A.D.313-398); Cyril of Alexandris (died 444); who were both of the Greek Church. Then, of the Latin Church we have, Jerome, who was responsible for the Latin Vulgate (342-420); John Cassian (360-435), and Bede (673-735). Even the heretic, Origen (185-354), knew of this reading. The witness of Origen is important, in that it represents a very early date for this reading, in the Greek text.
Johann Griesbach (1745-1812), was the first to produce a critical edition of the Greek New Testament, and was a Liberal theologian, who was one of those responsible for the rejection of the Textus Receptus. In his editon he has "Jesus". Other "critical" Greek New Testament Texts that inculde "Jesus", are, Karl Lachmann (1793-1851), and like Griesbach, another Liberal scholar! And Henry Alford (1810-1871).
Of the English Versions that have the reading "Jesus", we have the Douay (1582. Roman Catholic); New Living Translation, and the English Standard Version.
We also have the ancient reading of the Papyri Manuscript, known as P72 "Theos Christos" (God Christ), of which please see more below.
Some may argue: there is not much difference between the readings, and even if we retained "Lord", it could refer to Jesus Christ. Indeed, it could, but, then again, it might not. You see, with the reading "Lord", when it says that "the Lord" saved the people, etc, it more than likely to be understood as speaking of God the Father. This is exactly what Dr Simon J. Kistemaker who adopts the reading, "Lord", does in his Commentary on Jude, where we read;
"The question remains, however, whether the expression Lord refers to God or to the preexistent Christ. Scripture presents support for both readings. For instance, Paul says that the spiritual rock that accompanied the Israelites in the desert was Christ (I Cor. 10:4). Yet the Old Testament narrative reveals that God destroyed the unbelievers in the desert (Num. 14:29–37; Heb. 3:17–19). If the subject of verse 5 in Jude’s epistle is uncertain, verse 6 definitely points to God. Not Jesus but God consigned fallen angels to dark prisons (compare II Peter 2:4). Accordingly, I interpret the term Lord in verse 5 to refer to God. (Kistemaker, S. J., & Hendriksen, W. (1953-2001). Vol. 16: New Testament commentary : Exposition of the Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of Jude. Accompanying biblical text is author's translation. New Testament Commentary (page, 377)
But, with the reading, "Jesus", there is no question, or doubt, as to Who is meant. This is the same as we will see in the next text we are looking at, from 1 Corinthians 10:9.
In, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, which is edited by Bruce Metzger and issued by the United Bible Societies, has this rather strange remark on the reading "Jesus"
"Despite the weighty attestation supporting Ἰησοῦς...a majority of the Committee was of the opinion that the reading was difficult to the point of impossibility, and explained its origin in terms of transcriptional oversight (ΚΧ being taken for ΙΧ). It was also observed that nowhere else does the author employ Ἰησοῦς alone, but always Ἰησοῦς Χριστός...Critical principles seem to require the adoption of Ἰησοῦς, which admittedly is the best attested reading among Greek and versional witnesses (see above). Struck by the strange and unparalleled mention of Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt (yet compare Paul’s reference to Χριστός in 1 Cor 10.4), copyists would have substituted (ὁ) κύριος or ὁ θεός." (pages 723-24)
Even though it admits that the reading "Jesus" has "weighty" support, and "the best reading attested among Greek and versional witnesses"; it still prefers the reading "Lord", as they deem to be "Struck by the strange and unparalleled mention of Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt"! This sort of language can be expected by those who would reject the Biblical teaching, that it was indeed Jesus Christ, Who appeared in the Old Testament as "The Angel (or Messenger) of the Lord"; was the One Who led the children of Israel out of Egypt, and remained with them throughout the Old Testament era. In another publication by this very Liberal "society", we can read, "It is hard to think of Jude referring to Jesus as leading the Israelites out of Egypt, unless of course we are to think of the preexistent Jesus, but that is quite unlikely" (Arichea, D. C., & Hatton, H. (1993). A handbook on the letter from Jude and the second letter from Peter. UBS handbook series; Helps for translators (22). New York: United Bible Societies.). What a rather bold and foolish statement! They seem to decide, not on Biblical evidence, but because of their foolish "theology", that it "hard to think", that Jude did mean it was Jesus, and not Joshua, or anyone else, Who was involved in the Exodus of the Israelites! It is their warped thinking that can conclude that this is "quite unlikely". But, sadly it is these Liberal publications that are used by the majority of the modern translations in many languages, and accepted as representing facts! I don't use this strong language, for then sake of it, but do so because of the way these, and other publications actually wilfully deceive their readers. On this very text, we know that the UBS has adopted the reading "Lord", as their "theology" cannot allow them to accept that Jesus indeed was in the Old Testament. It ought to be noted, that with their acceptance of this reading, "Lord", they have given a "D" rating to it. Of this rating they say: "{D} shows that there is a very high degree of doubt concerning the reading selected for the text. In fact, among the {D} decisions sometimes none of the variant readings commended itself as original, and therefore the only recourse was to print the least unsatisfactory reading." (Introduction, p.xxviii). There is no justification for their rejection of the reading "Jesus", which they themselves consider as having "weighty" support, and "the best reading", in the textual evidence. The reading they have chosen, they again themselves admit to having "a very high degree of doubt", and the "least unsatisfactory reading". This last admission has much. The fact that the reading "Lord" at this place is the "least unsatisfactory reading", only further proves that the reading "Jesus", is indeed the better one, as it cannot be any "less" than the "least unsatisfactory reading"! (my emphasis).
The reading of the early Greek Papyri Manuscript, know as Bodmer, P72 , and dating from around A.D.300, "Theos Christos", (God Christ), is what the reading "Jesus" really means. A similar reading can be found in Colossians 2:2, "Theou Christou" (of God Christ), and can be found as early as around A.D.200, in the Greek Papyri Manuscript, know as Chester Beatty, P46 .Jude no doubt is showing that it was the Lord Jesus Christ, Who was in the Old Testament, and brought out the Children of Israel from the bondage of Egypt. This reading is a very clear are direct testimony to the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who, as seen from the passages shown below, is none other than "Malakh Yahweh (The Angel or Messenger of the Lord)", Who appears numerous times in the Old Testament, and Who, beyond any doubt, is none other than Yahweh! For those who hold that Malakh Yahweh, is in all of its occurrences, no more than a created being, I ask them to carefully consider, passages such as found in Judges, chapter six, where we read of Gideon, who had been speaking with Malakh Yahweh, and, upon realizing this, he says: "Alas, O Lord GOD! For I have seen the Angel of the LORD face to face." (v.22). But, what does Yahweh say to him? "Then the LORD said to him, “Peace be with you; do not fear, you shall not die"(v.23). No where in the entire Holy Bible, do we ever read that one would die if they saw an angel face to face; as many did have encounters with created angels. But, we do read these words in Exodus 33:20, where the Lord God Almighty says to Moses: "But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live"! (see, also Judges 13: 21-23 in context). It is evident, that only because this Person, Who is known as, Malakh Yahweh, is Himself as much "Yahweh", as the "Yahweh" He comes from, that it could be said that those who saw Him face to face, could have died. It is noteworthy, that in the passage of Judges chapter six, that it was "Yahweh" (The Father?), Who assured Gideon that he would not die, even though he had seen the Malakh Yahweh, face to face! The Lord did not say to Gideon, there is no need to worry, as nothing could ever happen to you, since Malakh Yahweh is only a created being. No doubt He would have, if this were the case.
Now, it is very clear that Jude is referring to the great Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. I would like to present the following texts to be considered.
Deuteronomy 4:37
"And because He loved your fathers, therefore He chose their descendants after them; and He brought you out of Egypt with His Presence, with His mighty power"
Deuteronomy 5:15
"And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day"
Deuteronomy 5:15
"You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you; therefore I command you this thing today"
There are many other passages that testify to the fact that it was the Lord, God Almighty Who brought out the Israelites from their bondage in Egypt. To this we must add another text from Deuteronomy, where we read: "So the LORD alone did lead him, and there was no foreign god with him" (32:12). The point here is that no where in Scripture do we find, that there was any created being involved in the Redemption of the children of Israel from their bondage in Egypt. It was the Mighty hand of the Great God Whom they served, Who alone, did this great work. This does not mean that alone must exclude the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is Himself Almighty God. The emphasis is on the words, "there was no foreign god with Him", to help Him in His great work. It is interesting to note, that the word "foreign", originally had the meaning, "outside", and "not one's own". This, I believe would suite the present study, as it shows that the Lord did not require any "outside" help, other than His own, to accomplish His work. The Lord Jesus Christ, being Almighty God, and One of the Persons in the Holy Trinity, would certainly not be regarded as being in any way "foreign", or from the "outside". We can see from the great passage in Isaiah 63, where The Three Persons of the Holy Trinity were involved in the Redemption of the Israelites:
"In all their affliction He was afflicted, And The Messenger of His Presence saved them; In His love and in His pity He redeemed them; And He bore them and carried them All the days of old. But they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit; So He turned Himself against them as an enemy, And He fought against them. " (9-10)
Here, we read "The Messenger of His Presence" was Who delivered them. We also read in Deuteronomy 4:37, the words, "He brought you out of Egypt with His Presence". Could this also refer to Malakh Yahweh?
It is evident, that the Three Persons in the Trinity all work together in whatever is done, since they are One and the same God. The passages that I have shown below from the Book of Judges, do clearly show that the Lord Jesus Christ, Who appeared in the Old Testament as Malakh Yahweh, says that He did bring the children of Israel from their bondage in Egypt.
Judges 2:1-2
"Then the Angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said: “I led you up from Egypt and brought you to the land of which I swore to your fathers; and I said, ‘I will never break My covenant with you. And you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall tear down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed My voice. Why have you done this? Therefore I also said, ‘I will not drive them out before you; but they shall be thorns in your side, and their gods shall be a snare to you.’” So it was, when the Angel of the LORD spoke these words to all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voices and wept."
Now, compare this passage with the following also from the Book of Judges. You will notice the similar language used in these passages.
Judges 2:11-12
"Then the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and served the Baals; and they forsook the LORD God of their fathers, who had brought them out of the land of Egypt; and they followed other gods from among the gods of the people who were all around them, and they bowed down to them; and they provoked the LORD to anger"
Judges 6:8-10
“Thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘I brought you up from Egypt and brought you out of the house of bondage; and I delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of all who oppressed you, and drove them out before you and gave you their land. Also I said to you, “I am the LORD your God; do not fear the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell.” But you have not obeyed My voice.’” (see 2:2 above)
2. 1 CORINTHIANS 10:9
Like Jude 5, which clearly testifies to the Deity and pre-existence (pre Incarnation) of the Lord Jesus Chrst, as it read in the original work of Jude; we have another clear testimony in 1 Corinthians 10:9, which again takes us back to the Old Testament, and which clearly shows that Jesus Christ is Almighty God. And, like Jude 5, and many other texts that testify to the Deity of the Lord Jesus, has been tampered with earlier on, by those who were no doubt enemies of the Truth about the Person of Jesus.
Instead of the reading, "Christon" (Christ), we have "Kurion" (Lord) and "Theon" (God). As I have said above on Jude 5, with the readings "Lord" and "God", these do not clearly show that Jesus Christ is here meant. In fact, no one would consider either of these two terms to refer to Christ, but would take them to refer to God the Father. The words of Paul in this passage: "nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents", are no doubt to the Old Testament, where we read in the Book of Numbers, “So the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and many of the people of Israel died” (21:6). The Hebrew word for "Lord", is "Yahweh", used for the One, eternal God of the Holy Bible, and which can not be taken in any lower sense. Now, had Paul used "Lord", or even "God" (this reading is only found in one principle Greek manuscript, the Alexandrinus, of the 5th century; and a handful of later ones), because the passage in Numbers which Paul is referring to, says "Lord", which would be taken to mean, the "Father", it would be natural to say that "Lord" in our text here in 1 Corinthians, also referred to God the Father, or to "Elohim (God", without any reference to any of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. However, it is very clear Which Person of the Trinity Paul had in mind, when he wrote what he did in 1 Corinthians, Jesus Christ.
The oldest evidence for the reading "Lord", is the Greek codex Manuscript (Mss.), the Vaticanus, which dates from the middle of the fourth century, and also another Mss of the same time, the Sinaiticus. Of the Ancient Versions, we have the Armenian (5th), and of the Church fathers, Epiphanius (315-403), and Hesychius of Jerusalem (d.451), both of the Greek Church. ( On the other hand, for the reading, "Christ", we have the oldest Greek Mss. in existence for this Epistle of Paul, which is know as the Chester Beatty Papyri, P46, and which dates from around 200 A.D.. The other principle Greek Mss. that we have for this reading, is the codex Claromontanus, which is of the 6th century, and many Mss. of later date. Now, to this evidence, we must add the Old Latin Version, which dates before the P46, and which itself was based on Greek Mss. Then we have the Latin Version which was done by the scholar, Jerome, in the fourth century, which he based on the Old Latin Version, and Greek and Latin Mss., which would pre-date his time. To this we add the Syriac Peshitta Version, which some date from the second century, and the Syriac Harclean Versions, which is of the seventh century. Then, we have the old Egyptian Versions, the Coptic Sahidic and Bohairic, of the third and sixth centuries. The Georgian Version, of the 6th century. These versions represent a wide area of their usage, and in different languages, all of which would have been made from Greek Mss., that were available to them. The Patristic (Church father's) evidence dates from a very early time, and would represent Greek Mss. that would have been very early. For starters we have the great Bishop of Lyons, Irenaeus, who was born about A.D. 140, and who was from the Greek Church. Clement of Alexandria (150-215), also knew of "Christ", who also was from the Greek Church. We have the reading "Christ" also supported by two heretics, Marcion (who actually was before Irenaeus' time, as he died in 160), who came from Pontus (in Asia Minor); and Origen (185-254), who was from Alexandria in Egypt, both were from the Greek Church, and both denied the Deity of Jesus Christ! Actually, we can add another whose Christology was also heretical, the Church historian, Eusebius (260-340)who was also from the Greek Church. He denied that Jesus is co-eternal with the Father, which, of course would deny His Deity. It was Eusebius' "creed" from his church in Caesarea, that was the basis for the Nicene Creed, which contains his subordinationism, of the Person of Jesus Christ to the Father. Phrases like, "God from God", where in the Greek, the preposition, "ek" (lit., out of, which is used to denote "source"), was used for the purpose in showing that Jesus Christ derives His "life", from the Father, Who alone is seen as the Fons Deitatis (the fountain of Deity), which he would never use for Jesus. A heresy that has been accepted and taught as fact by many Evangelicals, even in our own time! Eusebius, in his creed also included the phrase, "life from (ek) life", which was not adopted in the Nicene Creed, but his other words, "begotten before all ages from (ek) the Father", was used, in the Nicene clause, "begotten from (ek) the Father". None of these phrases have any Biblical warrant, and must be rejected as being, what the Apostle Paul calls, "doctrines of demons"! From the Latin Church, we have, Ambrose, Bishp of Malan (339-97), Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354-430), both who knew Greek and used the Greek New Testament. Jerome, as mentioned above. A writer of the fourth century, who is known as Ambrrosiaster, issued a commentary on the Epistles of Paul in the Old Latin text. And, then the British writer, Pelagius (4th cent), who also wrote issued a commentary on the Epistles of Paul, but using the Latin Vulgate text. Then, we also the the Syriac father, Ephraem (306-373), who came from Edessa.
Of the English Versions that have the reading, we have the, King James Version, New King James, Darby, Douay,New Living Translation, 21st Century King James, Webster, Contemporary English Version, New Century Version, Common English Bible, Young's Literal Translation, Holman Christian Standard Bible, Today’s New International Version, New International Version (though the 1984 edtion has "Lord"), and the English Standard Version.
Bruce Metzger, the editor of the United Bible Societies', A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, accepts the reading, "Christ", but then comments, "The reading that best explains the origin of the others is Χριστόν, attested by the oldest Greek manuscript (P46) as well as by a wide diversity of early patristic and versional witnesses (Irenaeus in Gaul, Ephraem in Edessa, Clement in Alexandria, Origen in Palestine, as well as by the Old Latin, the Vulgate, Syriac, Sahidic and Bohairic). The difficulty of explaining how the ancient Israelites in the wilderness could have tempted Christ prompted some copyists to substitute either the ambiguous κύριον or the unobjectionable θεόν. Paul’s reference to Christ here is analogous to that in ver. 4." (page 560. 3rd edition)
For the reading, "Christon", the UBS committee, have allocated a "C" rating, which "means that there is a considerable degree of doubt whether the text or the apparatus contains the superior reading" (ibid, Introduction, p.xxviii.). However, in the second edition, it was given a "B" rating, which "indicates that there is some degree of doubt concerning the reading selected for the text"! Incidentally, there is no difference between the textual evidence given in the two editions, so, why was the rating down-graded from "B" to "C"? This is the Liberal scholarship that we have to contend with, by those who are responsible of producing Texts for the Holy Bible, which will be used by translator's around the world, who will not challenge the "scholarship", of the likes of Metzger and co.. It is evident from what we read they have said on this text, that their judgement cannot be trusted, and they are no doubt driven by some theological bias, rather than presenting the facts are they are. It is very clear from what they have said, that "The reading that best explains the origin of the others is Χριστόν", and showing textual support from a very early time for it, and, yet they feel content in throwing "considerable doubt" on the Inspired Word of Almighty God. For, this is exactly what they have done here, and elsewhere, when they challenge the reading that is best attested, and no doubt the original, without as much as giving any justification for their actions!
It is very simple what the Apostle Paul is saying here. He warns against putting the Lord Jesus Christ to the test, in the same way that the Israelites did in the Old Testament, where he here refers to the incident as recorded in the Book of Numbers, chapter twenty-one. However, when we turn to this in our Bible, it is
very clear, that it was the Lord God Almighty, Who was tested, and Who sent the serpents to bite the people. Only if Jesus Christ is Himself, the Lord God Almighty, could Paul have written as he did. For, if Jesus Christ is not Yahweh, and coeternal, coessential and coequal, to God the Father, Whom most would have attributed the incident in Numbers to. Then the Apostle Paul has committed the highest level of blasphemy. Firstly, by breaking the First Commandment, which is: "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me." (Exodus 20:1-3). And, secondly, by attributing what was done by Almighty God, to a created being! This, however is impossible for Paul to have done, as to him, and the testimony of the entire Word of God, Jesus Christ IS Almighty God, The Second Person in the Blessed Holy Trinity.
CONCLUSION
The evidence that we have seen is very clear to the fact, that, both verses, 1 Corinthians 10:9, and Jude 5, when taken together with the Old Testament passages that I have shown (and others), does indeed testify that Jesus Christ can only be considered as Almighty God. This refutes any suggestion that He is a "secondary deity", Who is in some way "less", or not as "great", or not "equal", to God the Father. If, in Scripture, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, are all considered to be Yahweh, a Name that in itself shows One Who is eternal, Who is from everlasting to everlasting, Who us therefore uncreated. Then it must follow that There Three Persons, are, as I have already said, coeternal, coessential and coequal. I feel that for a correct understanding of what these three terms mean, it is best that I define them. For the first: coeternal, it is best defined as, "existing together throughout eternity", where neither Persons can be said to have existed before the other. Then, we have: coessential, which means, "to have the same essence or nature". So, if the One Person is essentially Almighty God, then the other Two are also essentially Almighty God. There is no difference in Who The Three are in essence or nature. Lastly, we have: coequal, which means that the Three Persons are, "equal in rank or status to each other".
A good example of this can be seen by comparing two passages in the Gospel of John. In chapter 5, Jesus' working on the Sabbath day, drew the anger of the Jews, who sought to kill him (verse 16). Jesus, then justifies what He was doing, by claiming that He was no different from His Father, Who was also at work on the Sabbath (17). Now, because of what Jesus said here, the Jews sought "the more" to kill Jesus. And the reason we have is, that, not only did Jesus break the Sabbath (in their view); but, He, by His answer to them in verse 17, said that God was His "own" Father (Greek, idion, "pertaining to one's self", "what is one's own, as opposed to belomging to another". When Jesus teaches us to pray, He says that we should say "our father". But for Him it is different). This is lost in many English versions. We go on to read, that, by Jesus claiming that God were His own Father, He thereby made Himself "equal with God" (ison toi theoi), which in their eyes would be blasphemy. Note that Jesus did not try to correct their understanding, because what they said was perfectly true of Him and His relationship with the Father. The Unitarian (one who denies the Holy Trinity and therefore the Deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit) scholar, Dr J H Thayer, has this to say on the Greek word, "ison" (equal), here. "to claim for one's self the nature, rank, authority, which belongs to God" (Greek-English Lexicon, page 307). Then, in chapter 14 of this Gospel, we read the Words of the Lord Jesus, where He says, "the Father is greater than I" (verse 28). It is evident that Jesus is here speaking as the Incarnate Son, Who became "subordinate" to God the Father during His time on earth. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Apostle Paul says this about Jesus. "You did for some little time make Him (Jesus) lower than the angels" (2:7,9). So, not only do we have Jesus saying that the Father was "greater" (Greek, megas, "something higher, more exalted") than Him. But, here in Hebrews we also read that for a little time (during the Incarnation), Jesus was also "lower" (Greek, elattoo, make less or inferior). In verse nine we are told the reason for this. "because of suffering of death". John 17:5, shows that Jesus shared "equal glory" with the Father from all eternity (with the Glory I had with You, before there was the world), which He "gave up" during His life on earth. Further see Luke 24:26.
2 "nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents" -1 Corinthians 10:9
1 JUDE 5
Instead of the reading "Kurios" (Lord), the original reading of Jude was, "Iesous" (Jesus). This reading has the far greater and diverse ancient evidence.
Of the Greek Manuscripts, we have the codices, Vaticanus, of the 4th century, and Alexandrinus, of the 5th.
The support of the Ancient Versions, the Latin Vulgate, which is of the 4th century. The Coptic (Egyptian) Sahidic Version, 4th. The Armenian Version, 5th. Ethopic Version, about the 5th.
The Church fathers who knew of the reading "Jesus", were, Didymus, "the blind", (A.D.313-398); Cyril of Alexandris (died 444); who were both of the Greek Church. Then, of the Latin Church we have, Jerome, who was responsible for the Latin Vulgate (342-420); John Cassian (360-435), and Bede (673-735). Even the heretic, Origen (185-354), knew of this reading. The witness of Origen is important, in that it represents a very early date for this reading, in the Greek text.
Johann Griesbach (1745-1812), was the first to produce a critical edition of the Greek New Testament, and was a Liberal theologian, who was one of those responsible for the rejection of the Textus Receptus. In his editon he has "Jesus". Other "critical" Greek New Testament Texts that inculde "Jesus", are, Karl Lachmann (1793-1851), and like Griesbach, another Liberal scholar! And Henry Alford (1810-1871).
Of the English Versions that have the reading "Jesus", we have the Douay (1582. Roman Catholic); New Living Translation, and the English Standard Version.
We also have the ancient reading of the Papyri Manuscript, known as P72 "Theos Christos" (God Christ), of which please see more below.
Some may argue: there is not much difference between the readings, and even if we retained "Lord", it could refer to Jesus Christ. Indeed, it could, but, then again, it might not. You see, with the reading "Lord", when it says that "the Lord" saved the people, etc, it more than likely to be understood as speaking of God the Father. This is exactly what Dr Simon J. Kistemaker who adopts the reading, "Lord", does in his Commentary on Jude, where we read;
"The question remains, however, whether the expression Lord refers to God or to the preexistent Christ. Scripture presents support for both readings. For instance, Paul says that the spiritual rock that accompanied the Israelites in the desert was Christ (I Cor. 10:4). Yet the Old Testament narrative reveals that God destroyed the unbelievers in the desert (Num. 14:29–37; Heb. 3:17–19). If the subject of verse 5 in Jude’s epistle is uncertain, verse 6 definitely points to God. Not Jesus but God consigned fallen angels to dark prisons (compare II Peter 2:4). Accordingly, I interpret the term Lord in verse 5 to refer to God. (Kistemaker, S. J., & Hendriksen, W. (1953-2001). Vol. 16: New Testament commentary : Exposition of the Epistles of Peter and the Epistle of Jude. Accompanying biblical text is author's translation. New Testament Commentary (page, 377)
But, with the reading, "Jesus", there is no question, or doubt, as to Who is meant. This is the same as we will see in the next text we are looking at, from 1 Corinthians 10:9.
In, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, which is edited by Bruce Metzger and issued by the United Bible Societies, has this rather strange remark on the reading "Jesus"
"Despite the weighty attestation supporting Ἰησοῦς...a majority of the Committee was of the opinion that the reading was difficult to the point of impossibility, and explained its origin in terms of transcriptional oversight (ΚΧ being taken for ΙΧ). It was also observed that nowhere else does the author employ Ἰησοῦς alone, but always Ἰησοῦς Χριστός...Critical principles seem to require the adoption of Ἰησοῦς, which admittedly is the best attested reading among Greek and versional witnesses (see above). Struck by the strange and unparalleled mention of Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt (yet compare Paul’s reference to Χριστός in 1 Cor 10.4), copyists would have substituted (ὁ) κύριος or ὁ θεός." (pages 723-24)
Even though it admits that the reading "Jesus" has "weighty" support, and "the best reading attested among Greek and versional witnesses"; it still prefers the reading "Lord", as they deem to be "Struck by the strange and unparalleled mention of Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt"! This sort of language can be expected by those who would reject the Biblical teaching, that it was indeed Jesus Christ, Who appeared in the Old Testament as "The Angel (or Messenger) of the Lord"; was the One Who led the children of Israel out of Egypt, and remained with them throughout the Old Testament era. In another publication by this very Liberal "society", we can read, "It is hard to think of Jude referring to Jesus as leading the Israelites out of Egypt, unless of course we are to think of the preexistent Jesus, but that is quite unlikely" (Arichea, D. C., & Hatton, H. (1993). A handbook on the letter from Jude and the second letter from Peter. UBS handbook series; Helps for translators (22). New York: United Bible Societies.). What a rather bold and foolish statement! They seem to decide, not on Biblical evidence, but because of their foolish "theology", that it "hard to think", that Jude did mean it was Jesus, and not Joshua, or anyone else, Who was involved in the Exodus of the Israelites! It is their warped thinking that can conclude that this is "quite unlikely". But, sadly it is these Liberal publications that are used by the majority of the modern translations in many languages, and accepted as representing facts! I don't use this strong language, for then sake of it, but do so because of the way these, and other publications actually wilfully deceive their readers. On this very text, we know that the UBS has adopted the reading "Lord", as their "theology" cannot allow them to accept that Jesus indeed was in the Old Testament. It ought to be noted, that with their acceptance of this reading, "Lord", they have given a "D" rating to it. Of this rating they say: "{D} shows that there is a very high degree of doubt concerning the reading selected for the text. In fact, among the {D} decisions sometimes none of the variant readings commended itself as original, and therefore the only recourse was to print the least unsatisfactory reading." (Introduction, p.xxviii). There is no justification for their rejection of the reading "Jesus", which they themselves consider as having "weighty" support, and "the best reading", in the textual evidence. The reading they have chosen, they again themselves admit to having "a very high degree of doubt", and the "least unsatisfactory reading". This last admission has much. The fact that the reading "Lord" at this place is the "least unsatisfactory reading", only further proves that the reading "Jesus", is indeed the better one, as it cannot be any "less" than the "least unsatisfactory reading"! (my emphasis).
The reading of the early Greek Papyri Manuscript, know as Bodmer, P72 , and dating from around A.D.300, "Theos Christos", (God Christ), is what the reading "Jesus" really means. A similar reading can be found in Colossians 2:2, "Theou Christou" (of God Christ), and can be found as early as around A.D.200, in the Greek Papyri Manuscript, know as Chester Beatty, P46 .Jude no doubt is showing that it was the Lord Jesus Christ, Who was in the Old Testament, and brought out the Children of Israel from the bondage of Egypt. This reading is a very clear are direct testimony to the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, Who, as seen from the passages shown below, is none other than "Malakh Yahweh (The Angel or Messenger of the Lord)", Who appears numerous times in the Old Testament, and Who, beyond any doubt, is none other than Yahweh! For those who hold that Malakh Yahweh, is in all of its occurrences, no more than a created being, I ask them to carefully consider, passages such as found in Judges, chapter six, where we read of Gideon, who had been speaking with Malakh Yahweh, and, upon realizing this, he says: "Alas, O Lord GOD! For I have seen the Angel of the LORD face to face." (v.22). But, what does Yahweh say to him? "Then the LORD said to him, “Peace be with you; do not fear, you shall not die"(v.23). No where in the entire Holy Bible, do we ever read that one would die if they saw an angel face to face; as many did have encounters with created angels. But, we do read these words in Exodus 33:20, where the Lord God Almighty says to Moses: "But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live"! (see, also Judges 13: 21-23 in context). It is evident, that only because this Person, Who is known as, Malakh Yahweh, is Himself as much "Yahweh", as the "Yahweh" He comes from, that it could be said that those who saw Him face to face, could have died. It is noteworthy, that in the passage of Judges chapter six, that it was "Yahweh" (The Father?), Who assured Gideon that he would not die, even though he had seen the Malakh Yahweh, face to face! The Lord did not say to Gideon, there is no need to worry, as nothing could ever happen to you, since Malakh Yahweh is only a created being. No doubt He would have, if this were the case.
Now, it is very clear that Jude is referring to the great Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt. I would like to present the following texts to be considered.
Deuteronomy 4:37
"And because He loved your fathers, therefore He chose their descendants after them; and He brought you out of Egypt with His Presence, with His mighty power"
Deuteronomy 5:15
"And remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there by a mighty hand and by an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day"
Deuteronomy 5:15
"You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you; therefore I command you this thing today"
There are many other passages that testify to the fact that it was the Lord, God Almighty Who brought out the Israelites from their bondage in Egypt. To this we must add another text from Deuteronomy, where we read: "So the LORD alone did lead him, and there was no foreign god with him" (32:12). The point here is that no where in Scripture do we find, that there was any created being involved in the Redemption of the children of Israel from their bondage in Egypt. It was the Mighty hand of the Great God Whom they served, Who alone, did this great work. This does not mean that alone must exclude the Lord Jesus Christ, Who is Himself Almighty God. The emphasis is on the words, "there was no foreign god with Him", to help Him in His great work. It is interesting to note, that the word "foreign", originally had the meaning, "outside", and "not one's own". This, I believe would suite the present study, as it shows that the Lord did not require any "outside" help, other than His own, to accomplish His work. The Lord Jesus Christ, being Almighty God, and One of the Persons in the Holy Trinity, would certainly not be regarded as being in any way "foreign", or from the "outside". We can see from the great passage in Isaiah 63, where The Three Persons of the Holy Trinity were involved in the Redemption of the Israelites:
"In all their affliction He was afflicted, And The Messenger of His Presence saved them; In His love and in His pity He redeemed them; And He bore them and carried them All the days of old. But they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit; So He turned Himself against them as an enemy, And He fought against them. " (9-10)
Here, we read "The Messenger of His Presence" was Who delivered them. We also read in Deuteronomy 4:37, the words, "He brought you out of Egypt with His Presence". Could this also refer to Malakh Yahweh?
It is evident, that the Three Persons in the Trinity all work together in whatever is done, since they are One and the same God. The passages that I have shown below from the Book of Judges, do clearly show that the Lord Jesus Christ, Who appeared in the Old Testament as Malakh Yahweh, says that He did bring the children of Israel from their bondage in Egypt.
Judges 2:1-2
"Then the Angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said: “I led you up from Egypt and brought you to the land of which I swore to your fathers; and I said, ‘I will never break My covenant with you. And you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall tear down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed My voice. Why have you done this? Therefore I also said, ‘I will not drive them out before you; but they shall be thorns in your side, and their gods shall be a snare to you.’” So it was, when the Angel of the LORD spoke these words to all the children of Israel, that the people lifted up their voices and wept."
Now, compare this passage with the following also from the Book of Judges. You will notice the similar language used in these passages.
Judges 2:11-12
"Then the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD, and served the Baals; and they forsook the LORD God of their fathers, who had brought them out of the land of Egypt; and they followed other gods from among the gods of the people who were all around them, and they bowed down to them; and they provoked the LORD to anger"
Judges 6:8-10
“Thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘I brought you up from Egypt and brought you out of the house of bondage; and I delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians and out of the hand of all who oppressed you, and drove them out before you and gave you their land. Also I said to you, “I am the LORD your God; do not fear the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell.” But you have not obeyed My voice.’” (see 2:2 above)
2. 1 CORINTHIANS 10:9
Like Jude 5, which clearly testifies to the Deity and pre-existence (pre Incarnation) of the Lord Jesus Chrst, as it read in the original work of Jude; we have another clear testimony in 1 Corinthians 10:9, which again takes us back to the Old Testament, and which clearly shows that Jesus Christ is Almighty God. And, like Jude 5, and many other texts that testify to the Deity of the Lord Jesus, has been tampered with earlier on, by those who were no doubt enemies of the Truth about the Person of Jesus.
Instead of the reading, "Christon" (Christ), we have "Kurion" (Lord) and "Theon" (God). As I have said above on Jude 5, with the readings "Lord" and "God", these do not clearly show that Jesus Christ is here meant. In fact, no one would consider either of these two terms to refer to Christ, but would take them to refer to God the Father. The words of Paul in this passage: "nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed by serpents", are no doubt to the Old Testament, where we read in the Book of Numbers, “So the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and many of the people of Israel died” (21:6). The Hebrew word for "Lord", is "Yahweh", used for the One, eternal God of the Holy Bible, and which can not be taken in any lower sense. Now, had Paul used "Lord", or even "God" (this reading is only found in one principle Greek manuscript, the Alexandrinus, of the 5th century; and a handful of later ones), because the passage in Numbers which Paul is referring to, says "Lord", which would be taken to mean, the "Father", it would be natural to say that "Lord" in our text here in 1 Corinthians, also referred to God the Father, or to "Elohim (God", without any reference to any of the Persons of the Holy Trinity. However, it is very clear Which Person of the Trinity Paul had in mind, when he wrote what he did in 1 Corinthians, Jesus Christ.
The oldest evidence for the reading "Lord", is the Greek codex Manuscript (Mss.), the Vaticanus, which dates from the middle of the fourth century, and also another Mss of the same time, the Sinaiticus. Of the Ancient Versions, we have the Armenian (5th), and of the Church fathers, Epiphanius (315-403), and Hesychius of Jerusalem (d.451), both of the Greek Church. ( On the other hand, for the reading, "Christ", we have the oldest Greek Mss. in existence for this Epistle of Paul, which is know as the Chester Beatty Papyri, P46, and which dates from around 200 A.D.. The other principle Greek Mss. that we have for this reading, is the codex Claromontanus, which is of the 6th century, and many Mss. of later date. Now, to this evidence, we must add the Old Latin Version, which dates before the P46, and which itself was based on Greek Mss. Then we have the Latin Version which was done by the scholar, Jerome, in the fourth century, which he based on the Old Latin Version, and Greek and Latin Mss., which would pre-date his time. To this we add the Syriac Peshitta Version, which some date from the second century, and the Syriac Harclean Versions, which is of the seventh century. Then, we have the old Egyptian Versions, the Coptic Sahidic and Bohairic, of the third and sixth centuries. The Georgian Version, of the 6th century. These versions represent a wide area of their usage, and in different languages, all of which would have been made from Greek Mss., that were available to them. The Patristic (Church father's) evidence dates from a very early time, and would represent Greek Mss. that would have been very early. For starters we have the great Bishop of Lyons, Irenaeus, who was born about A.D. 140, and who was from the Greek Church. Clement of Alexandria (150-215), also knew of "Christ", who also was from the Greek Church. We have the reading "Christ" also supported by two heretics, Marcion (who actually was before Irenaeus' time, as he died in 160), who came from Pontus (in Asia Minor); and Origen (185-254), who was from Alexandria in Egypt, both were from the Greek Church, and both denied the Deity of Jesus Christ! Actually, we can add another whose Christology was also heretical, the Church historian, Eusebius (260-340)who was also from the Greek Church. He denied that Jesus is co-eternal with the Father, which, of course would deny His Deity. It was Eusebius' "creed" from his church in Caesarea, that was the basis for the Nicene Creed, which contains his subordinationism, of the Person of Jesus Christ to the Father. Phrases like, "God from God", where in the Greek, the preposition, "ek" (lit., out of, which is used to denote "source"), was used for the purpose in showing that Jesus Christ derives His "life", from the Father, Who alone is seen as the Fons Deitatis (the fountain of Deity), which he would never use for Jesus. A heresy that has been accepted and taught as fact by many Evangelicals, even in our own time! Eusebius, in his creed also included the phrase, "life from (ek) life", which was not adopted in the Nicene Creed, but his other words, "begotten before all ages from (ek) the Father", was used, in the Nicene clause, "begotten from (ek) the Father". None of these phrases have any Biblical warrant, and must be rejected as being, what the Apostle Paul calls, "doctrines of demons"! From the Latin Church, we have, Ambrose, Bishp of Malan (339-97), Augustine, Bishop of Hippo (354-430), both who knew Greek and used the Greek New Testament. Jerome, as mentioned above. A writer of the fourth century, who is known as Ambrrosiaster, issued a commentary on the Epistles of Paul in the Old Latin text. And, then the British writer, Pelagius (4th cent), who also wrote issued a commentary on the Epistles of Paul, but using the Latin Vulgate text. Then, we also the the Syriac father, Ephraem (306-373), who came from Edessa.
Of the English Versions that have the reading, we have the, King James Version, New King James, Darby, Douay,New Living Translation, 21st Century King James, Webster, Contemporary English Version, New Century Version, Common English Bible, Young's Literal Translation, Holman Christian Standard Bible, Today’s New International Version, New International Version (though the 1984 edtion has "Lord"), and the English Standard Version.
Bruce Metzger, the editor of the United Bible Societies', A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, accepts the reading, "Christ", but then comments, "The reading that best explains the origin of the others is Χριστόν, attested by the oldest Greek manuscript (P46) as well as by a wide diversity of early patristic and versional witnesses (Irenaeus in Gaul, Ephraem in Edessa, Clement in Alexandria, Origen in Palestine, as well as by the Old Latin, the Vulgate, Syriac, Sahidic and Bohairic). The difficulty of explaining how the ancient Israelites in the wilderness could have tempted Christ prompted some copyists to substitute either the ambiguous κύριον or the unobjectionable θεόν. Paul’s reference to Christ here is analogous to that in ver. 4." (page 560. 3rd edition)
For the reading, "Christon", the UBS committee, have allocated a "C" rating, which "means that there is a considerable degree of doubt whether the text or the apparatus contains the superior reading" (ibid, Introduction, p.xxviii.). However, in the second edition, it was given a "B" rating, which "indicates that there is some degree of doubt concerning the reading selected for the text"! Incidentally, there is no difference between the textual evidence given in the two editions, so, why was the rating down-graded from "B" to "C"? This is the Liberal scholarship that we have to contend with, by those who are responsible of producing Texts for the Holy Bible, which will be used by translator's around the world, who will not challenge the "scholarship", of the likes of Metzger and co.. It is evident from what we read they have said on this text, that their judgement cannot be trusted, and they are no doubt driven by some theological bias, rather than presenting the facts are they are. It is very clear from what they have said, that "The reading that best explains the origin of the others is Χριστόν", and showing textual support from a very early time for it, and, yet they feel content in throwing "considerable doubt" on the Inspired Word of Almighty God. For, this is exactly what they have done here, and elsewhere, when they challenge the reading that is best attested, and no doubt the original, without as much as giving any justification for their actions!
It is very simple what the Apostle Paul is saying here. He warns against putting the Lord Jesus Christ to the test, in the same way that the Israelites did in the Old Testament, where he here refers to the incident as recorded in the Book of Numbers, chapter twenty-one. However, when we turn to this in our Bible, it is
very clear, that it was the Lord God Almighty, Who was tested, and Who sent the serpents to bite the people. Only if Jesus Christ is Himself, the Lord God Almighty, could Paul have written as he did. For, if Jesus Christ is not Yahweh, and coeternal, coessential and coequal, to God the Father, Whom most would have attributed the incident in Numbers to. Then the Apostle Paul has committed the highest level of blasphemy. Firstly, by breaking the First Commandment, which is: "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me." (Exodus 20:1-3). And, secondly, by attributing what was done by Almighty God, to a created being! This, however is impossible for Paul to have done, as to him, and the testimony of the entire Word of God, Jesus Christ IS Almighty God, The Second Person in the Blessed Holy Trinity.
CONCLUSION
The evidence that we have seen is very clear to the fact, that, both verses, 1 Corinthians 10:9, and Jude 5, when taken together with the Old Testament passages that I have shown (and others), does indeed testify that Jesus Christ can only be considered as Almighty God. This refutes any suggestion that He is a "secondary deity", Who is in some way "less", or not as "great", or not "equal", to God the Father. If, in Scripture, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, are all considered to be Yahweh, a Name that in itself shows One Who is eternal, Who is from everlasting to everlasting, Who us therefore uncreated. Then it must follow that There Three Persons, are, as I have already said, coeternal, coessential and coequal. I feel that for a correct understanding of what these three terms mean, it is best that I define them. For the first: coeternal, it is best defined as, "existing together throughout eternity", where neither Persons can be said to have existed before the other. Then, we have: coessential, which means, "to have the same essence or nature". So, if the One Person is essentially Almighty God, then the other Two are also essentially Almighty God. There is no difference in Who The Three are in essence or nature. Lastly, we have: coequal, which means that the Three Persons are, "equal in rank or status to each other".
A good example of this can be seen by comparing two passages in the Gospel of John. In chapter 5, Jesus' working on the Sabbath day, drew the anger of the Jews, who sought to kill him (verse 16). Jesus, then justifies what He was doing, by claiming that He was no different from His Father, Who was also at work on the Sabbath (17). Now, because of what Jesus said here, the Jews sought "the more" to kill Jesus. And the reason we have is, that, not only did Jesus break the Sabbath (in their view); but, He, by His answer to them in verse 17, said that God was His "own" Father (Greek, idion, "pertaining to one's self", "what is one's own, as opposed to belomging to another". When Jesus teaches us to pray, He says that we should say "our father". But for Him it is different). This is lost in many English versions. We go on to read, that, by Jesus claiming that God were His own Father, He thereby made Himself "equal with God" (ison toi theoi), which in their eyes would be blasphemy. Note that Jesus did not try to correct their understanding, because what they said was perfectly true of Him and His relationship with the Father. The Unitarian (one who denies the Holy Trinity and therefore the Deity of Jesus and the Holy Spirit) scholar, Dr J H Thayer, has this to say on the Greek word, "ison" (equal), here. "to claim for one's self the nature, rank, authority, which belongs to God" (Greek-English Lexicon, page 307). Then, in chapter 14 of this Gospel, we read the Words of the Lord Jesus, where He says, "the Father is greater than I" (verse 28). It is evident that Jesus is here speaking as the Incarnate Son, Who became "subordinate" to God the Father during His time on earth. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Apostle Paul says this about Jesus. "You did for some little time make Him (Jesus) lower than the angels" (2:7,9). So, not only do we have Jesus saying that the Father was "greater" (Greek, megas, "something higher, more exalted") than Him. But, here in Hebrews we also read that for a little time (during the Incarnation), Jesus was also "lower" (Greek, elattoo, make less or inferior). In verse nine we are told the reason for this. "because of suffering of death". John 17:5, shows that Jesus shared "equal glory" with the Father from all eternity (with the Glory I had with You, before there was the world), which He "gave up" during His life on earth. Further see Luke 24:26.
