SATAN'S SEMANTICS

by
Scott Jones

All Biblical Greek lexicons produced since the Reformation are corrupt. Words have been redefined. That is to say, the definitions assigned to Greek words by the architects of Biblical Greek lexicons have been perverted. As noted above, this is a work in progress, but take the following as a prime illustration...

"Before Abraham was, I am." John 8:58

So spake Jehovah Incarnate, even the Lord Jesus Christ, thus establishing his eternality. There are many passages in God's Word where the Eternal Deity of Jesus Christ is proclaimed. Accordingly, any doctrine or theology or definition which opposes the eternality of the Son of God is - simply put - inaccurate and blasphemous.

And yet, this is exactly what the latest in Biblical scholarship has achieved. Probably the most respected lexicon by Biblical Greek scholars over the years has been BAGD, or "A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature" by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker.

The latest edition of this work, now called BDAG (same title but different word order of the authors), is merely the continuation of the previous work.

This latest edition assures its readers that Jesus Christ is a created being. Observe...

Revelation 3:14 in the Authorised Version reads, "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God."

On page 138 of the latest edition of BDAG, under the Greek word arch - which means "beginning" - in its discussion of this very verse, i.e., Revelation 3:14, we find the following entry concerning this word - "the mng. beginning='first created' is linguistically probable."

In other words, according to this lexicon it is "linguistically probable" that Jesus Christ was the "first created" being.

Of course, this is sheer blasphemy; not to mention that the assertion is grossly inaccurate. This assertion merely demonstrates the unregenerate state of the men who have been redefining Greek words in the field of Biblical scholarship for the past two hundred years - the same men, we might add, who have been assigning these same new definitions to modern bibles, such as the NASB, NIV, NKJ, et al.

Further still, the Greek word arch simply means "beginning." There is no great mystery or obscure meaning hidden within the Greek word arch. This gratuitous assertion by BDAG is therefore theological, not linguistical. In other words, this subtle Edenic intrusion by BDAG that "beginning" in Revelation 3:14 "probably" means "first created" is a theological supposition, not a linguistical fact. This attempt by the minions of darkness to pawn this definition off as linguistical rather than theological is what the Apostle referred to as a "device" in 2 Corinthians 2:11.

When Satan dresses to kill, he dresses well.

Interestingly, the previous edition of BAGD stated in this very same place that it was "linguistically possible" that Jesus Christ was the "first created" being. Notice the sinister progression - from possible in the previous edition to probable in the latest marvel of Anglo-Biblical scholarship. Notice the progress of mainstream Anglo-Biblical scholarship; that is, notice not only the "intellectual evolution" of those who profess themselves to be wise, but the direction of this "intellectual evolution" -- ever devaluing, ever degrading the Eternal Son of God. In them Romans 1:22 is verily fulfilled.

As any born again believer with a measure of maturity and schooling by the Holy Ghost knows, this statement by the Lord of Glory - "the beginning of the creation of God" - affirms that Jesus Christ is the First Cause, the Creator, and the Inviolable Ruler of all that exists, not only in the material realm, but in the spiritual as well. As it is written, "And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." Colossians 1:17

The above perversion of truth by mainstream Biblical scholarship is only one example of many.

Consider the following two contradictory statements:

a) The black man thought it not robbery to be equal with the white man.

b) The black man did not consider equality with the white man a thing to be grasped.

The first statement is true and accurate; the second statement is false and degrading.

How much more degrading is the second statement, then, when the exact same terminology is applied to Jesus Christ. The degradation foisted on the Son of God by modern bibles and modern scholars in the consonant bible passage has blasphemy written all over it. Here are the respective translations of Philippians 2:6 -

Make no mistake: this is very likely the worst corruption in the entire Word of God by modern scholars, and there is zero justification for this rendition by modern bibles in the Greek. The Greek is perfectly straightforward here, in spite of the malicious and unregenerate attempts at linguistical gymnastics by modern scholars to the contrary. There is nothing complex about the syntax in this passage in the least. In fact, the syntax and the idiom are elementary. Notwithstanding this fact, the prince of the power of the air still works in the children of disobedience and thereby has complete control of modern biblical scholarship - and has had for many years now - and so the golden calf of Anglo-Greek lexicography - BDAG - once again attempts to justify this lie linguistically by disregarding plain Greek etymology through the multiplication of terminology and by casting to the wind "the simplicity that is in Christ." (2 Corinthians 11:3)

Of course, the truly born again Christian need not even go the Greek, for he knows that this rendition by modern bibles is doctrinally corrupt. That's all it takes for the truly born again believer, for he knows the voice of the Shepherd, and the voice of the Shepherd utterly condemns this degrading rendition in modern bibles. Jesus made a point of stating unequivocally, "All men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father." (John 5:23) The Shepherd had absolutely no problem whatsoever "grasping equality with God," and the bibles and the scholars who say that He did are liars. Yea, even more than liars, because the falsehood presented by modern bibles in this passage - that is, the philosophy presented by modern bibles in this passage - is the exact opposite of God's truth. And don't think for one second that this rendition in modern bibles is anything other than pagan philosophy, because that is all it is. The Authorised Version discloses a visceral theological truth in this passage; modern bibles inject into this passage a vain philosophy which positively reeks of existentialism.

Conversely, Jesus Christ deemed it imperative that His Deity be recognized and embraced by His disciples; Jesus Christ affirmed His Deity numerous times, and for many necessary and substantive reasons, not the least of which had to do with the efficacy of His redemption, for except the Lord of Glory "be equal with God," redemption has no merits. But we haven't time to take that detour. For now, know simply that the truly born again Christian perceives in his spirit the blasphemy dished out by this rendition in modern bibles, and thus the truly born again Christian needs no other witness, for both the Son and the Holy Ghost have already checked him on it.

Accordingly, before examining the details, it cannot be iterated and reiterated too strongly at the outset that the spirit behind this rendition in modern bibles, along with those who promote and insist on defending this rendition, have - to borrow from George Sayles Bishop concerning the scholars of his day - blasphemy written on their foreheads. This cannot be stated too strongly, nor is the statement a euphemism. The statement is literal, and those who fear the Lord God ought to take it to heart. Those who are guilty of corrupting God's Word should repent while there is still time, for the Lord is not slack concerning His promise; He is merely patient, but the end of His patience has an appointed time, and His promises will be fulfilled, and thus in addition to the goodness of God, there is also the certain promise of God's severity, and God's severity will grind the fallen to powder in the day of the Lord. (Romans 11:22) Whoever has ears to hear, let him hear.

The godly and the ungodly alike should therefore understand - the truly born again Christian is driven by the Holy Spirit to draw the line when the Lord he belongs to is denigrated, and the truly born again Christian knows it, for the Holy Spirit indites no higher doctrine than the doctrine of Christology. The Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus, and He - even the Spirit of Truth - will not tolerate even the slightest diminution of the Godhead of Jesus Christ by those who belong to Him. The Holy Ghost will suffer the unregenerate to blaspheme the Lord of Glory so as to "fill up the measure of their fathers" and thus reserve unto themselves "wrath against the day of wrath," but the same Holy Ghost will not allow His own to labor under any misconceptions concerning the Godhead of the Lord of Glory, nor will the same Holy Ghost suffer His own to trifle with degrading statements concerning that Godhead, for the Holy Ghost pays the uttermost homage to the Lord Jesus Christ in the spirits of those He indwells. There are no exceptions.

The truly born again Christian who therefore possesses real experience in matters of the Spirit, and who is "not ignorant of Satan's devices," cannot countenance this blasphemous assault on the Lord of Glory anymore than the elect can be deceived (Matthew 24:24), for there comes a point when the Holy Ghost steps in and prevents His own from being ensnared. This passage is such a point, and so it is written - "When the enemy shall come in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD shall lift up a standard against him." Isaiah 59:19

The Greek word for "robbery" is arpagmos. In the Greek text of Philippians 2:6, this word is a noun.

The Greek word for "equal" is isos. In the Greek text of Philippians 2:6, this word is an adverb.

As with 1 Timothy 3:16, modern scholars had to corrupt the grammar in Philippians 2:6 in order to produce the reading they desired. The one constant to be found among modern bibles and modern scholars - the one goal that they are ever gravitating towards, the one overriding objective of all their efforts - is to devalue the Eternal Son of God, regardless of the steps that must be taken or the means that must be employed to do so.

It should also be noted that there is an idiomatic construction in this passage involving the Greek phrase "to einai," but this idiom is so common and so simple that - even though modern Anglo-scholars attempt to make hay out of it in order to produce a reading which devalues Jesus Christ - there is simply no warrant and no justification for doing so. In short, this idiom is extraordinarily commonplace, and the attempt by modern Anglo-scholars to manipulate this idiom - in addition to their altering the noun and the adverb - into something complicated is self-damning on the very face of it. For example, they don't attempt to manipulate the exact same idiom in other passages, such as Romans 8:29 where Jesus is proclaimed as "the firstborn among many brethren." Of course not, for Romans 8:29 is not a threat to the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; Romans 8:29 doesn't deal directly with the Deity of Jesus Christ and therefore the idiom is left intact by modern bibles and modern scholars - unlike Philippians 2:6 where modern bibles and modern scholars violate both the idiom and the Eternal Son of God all in one fell swoop.

To be clear, this idiom is so commonplace and so well grounded, as native Greeks know, that a technical discussion of it is not even necessary. Modern Anglo-scholars who try to turn this idiomatic rendering in Philippians 2:6 into a technical discussion do so on utterly invalid and false principles, for the technicality simply doesn't exist. The modern Anglo-Sanhedrin merely multiplies the terminology in an attempt to give the discussion a facade of legitimacy, but this multiplication of terminology is just another device, a device which veers away from the simplicity that is in Christ and of which the born again Christian should not be ignorant.

Moreover - as if they actually needed additional incentives to denigrate the Lord of Glory - that bastion of Anglo-Greek lexicography - BDAG - has eagerly provided yet another corrupt definition under the guise of linguistics in its support of modern scholars and their concerted efforts to devalue Jesus Christ.

The number of outright theologically bankrupt statements in BDAG under the Greek word "arpagmos" are many. Remember, the Greek word "arpagmos" is a noun and it means "robbery." Under the first heading of this word in BDAG on page 133, we are met immediately with - not a linguistical commentary - but a theological statement. In its attempt to define the Greek word "arpagmos," BDAG assures its readers - "the state of being equal w. God cannot be equated w. the act of robbery."

Not only is this remark theological instead of linguistical, but it also reveals an astounding inability to comprehend simple context, for that is not even remotely close to what is being stated by the Apostle in Philippians 2:6. To speak plainly, this statement in BDAG demonstrates a complete ignorance of the Apostle's meaning, as well as a complete ignorance of the nature of man's fall and God's plan of redemption for man's recovery. For a short exposition of the word "robbery" in this passage, take a moment to read the brilliant and Spirit-filled commentary by the Puritan scholar, John Owen, who verily hits the mark -

And thus, as the Authorised Version so accurately states, Jesus did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, even though modern scholars still strive to charge Him with robbery on this very point, for they are relentless in their own sinister attempts to rob Jesus Christ of His equality with God and thus devalue Him at every twist and turn.

The theological suppositions by BDAG continue. After asserting that the noun "arpagmos" should be changed into a verb meaning "to be grasped," BDAG informs its readers - "This mng. cannot be quoted fr. non-Christian lit., but is grammatically justifiable." Nonsense. And once again, the statement is not linguistical; it is theological.

This type of perversion of truth and grammar is pandemic in modern Anglo-biblical scholarship. As we mentioned before, this rendition by modern bibles is blasphemous, and the born again Christian does not need to know a syllable of Greek to comprehend fully what is going on here. In short, this is merely more tap-dancing by the puppets of rationalism in their presentation of sheer existentialism and in their habitual meddling with those passages that testify to the Deity of Jesus Christ. This whole matter is that simple.

Finally, it will perhaps be instructive to simply translate the clause in question literally. Each word in English corresponds exactly to the Greek, both in definition and in morphology. In other words, if it's a noun in the Greek, it's written as a noun in the English, and so forth. Observe -

The translation of this clause is literally that simple. Certainly, not every sentence or clause in the Greek can be translated literally or even that easily, but this one can. And rightly so, for the Holy Ghost by the mouth of Paul was here declaring an eternal truth, and the Holy Ghost spake this eternal truth exactly as He usually spake when declaring eternal truths concerning the Son of God - plainly!

Only a darkened mind could transform this passage into the blasphemy presented by modern bibles. Only a mind that has the ability to transform himself into an angel of light could completely reverse the meaning of an eternal truth by changing a noun into a verb and an adverb into a noun in a passage declaring the Eternal Deity of the Son of the Living God and still manage to convince his minions that they weren't actually in violation of God's law by partaking from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

In summary, modern bibles had to not only violate the idiom - a violation which they do not apply to passages where the Deity of Jesus Christ isn't at stake - but as well, modern bibles had to entirely subvert the syntax of Philippians 2:6 by changing a noun into a verb and an adverb into a noun in order to sculpt yet another reading which denigrates the Eternal Son of God, even the Lord Jesus Christ. These bibles and the men who produced them are false prophets, and the Lord Jesus, whom they continue to assault, has a warning for those of us who belong to Him -

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." Matthew 7:15

Stay tuned.