“And to the angel of the congregation in Laodicea write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation.” NWT.
The Key word here is “beginning”, an English equivalent for ‘arche.’ The so-called “Web master” here uses the watchtowers distorted interpretation of this scripture to imply that Christ had a beginning. He then goes on to cite scriptural evidence. Here is the evidence against this.
To begin with, this man tells us nothing of his credentials. He claims that this word cannot be rightfully rendered ‘origin’ or ‘first cause’ here in context of Rev. 3:14.
However, men who do allow us to see their PhDs like Bruce M. Metzger render ‘arche’ here as “origin”, in the New Revised Standard Version. Mr. Metzger is one of the foremost Greek Language Scholars of our time. But even the KJV, which is similar to the NWT here, rightly renders “beginning.” The difference here is that this words rendering is understood in context of meaning “origin, source, first cause, leader.” Berry's Greek-English New Testament Lexicon defines this word here in context of Rev. 3:14, 21:6, 22:3, Col. 1:18, as “leader.” Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon renders “beginning, origin, first cause.”
What is most interesting here is the selectivity in which the writer of this Web-page quotes sources. He quotes Metzger, Berry, Liddell and Scott in many places in his Web-pages when their definitions or commentaries work for his argument but definitely not here.
Another interesting and diagnostic omission here is any reference to the LXX. This author of this Web-page {Trinity Exposed web page} introduces the renderings of the LXX often in support of his stance on particular words.
In personal communication with the “Web master” he would not commit to any level of credibility he affords the LXX, because at times it works against his arguments. That he does afford it a certain amount of credibility is obvious in that he uses it as a weighty item in a series of arguments to forward his “brand” of Theology. If we were to check what the LXX renders for the word “beginning” in Gen. 1:1 we would find it uses ‘arche.’ That this supports a valid rendering of ‘arche’ could be in the sense of “origin” is apparent. That this is very discomforting to the Web master can be demonstrated that it was at this point in which his communications with me halted. Moreover, that a similar structure can be found in John 1:1 where ‘arche’ is also used is even more discomforting to the Watchtower's Theology.
It must be remembered and emphasized that no matter what verses he quotes, credible Greek translators do render this word, much to his dismay, as “origin, source, first cause” in the Genitive here. That the word can rightfully be render a finite beginning is also true, but not in context here.
Some interesting twists can be seen in this verse. He states that the creation isn’t called Jesus’ creation but God’s creation. He claims that this eliminates the creation from being Jesus’. But we understand Jesus as being God so we see no dilemma here.
Another point is that The Greek Lexicon of Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich isn’t the only source that maintains “origin” as a valid rendering. As we have seen Liddell and Scott, as well as A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament by Newman also says this (and these are just the ones I know of). Additionally, these Scholars are not required to show all “scriptural evidence to support” their meanings. That these learned men say it is linguistically possible certainly means it can be rendered as such. That they note of no cases where it isn’t possible should dispel the Webmaster’s notion that it cannot be rendered as such in the Genitive case because it is linguistically possible. Hope this adds to the Web-page.