http://jehovah.to/xlation/wo.html#_ftn8 (Watchtower Writer in black, DYD in blue)

JESUS:  Worship or do obeisance to?

At issue is whether or not the Bible instructs us to "worship" Jesus or "do obeisance to".  The implication is quite obvious - if we are told to worship Jesus in one verse, yet we are told that "only God is to be worshipped" in another, then Jesus must be God.

Now, the first thing one must recognize is that the declarations to worship Jesus are not the sole determinant of whether or not Jesus is God.  There are the facts that He shares the same UNIQUE QUALITIES of God, the fact that declared himself to be God, he is referred to as God by the prophets and apostles and Jehovah Himself.  The declarations that Jesus is God are so definitive and clear, in fact, that the Watchtower has abandoned the denial of these declaration, but resorted to calling Jesus some type of "lesser god".

With that said, let's deal with the issue at hand - are we to worship Jesus or merely "do obeisance to" (bow down to show respect to) Jesus?

The following article spends a great deal of time explaining that the Greek word used in the scriptures indicating what we are to do to Jesus is proskuneo and that word can be translated "worship" (as an act directed toward one perceived to be God) or "do obeisance to" (as an act toward one who deserves respect).  We stipulate that as accurate.  In fact, that part of the article has been highlighted in GREEN so you know what portion we agree with in principle.

NOTE:  To see the Watchtower writer's footnotes, you must click the link and read the article on his site.

Worship or Obeisance?

CARM, a website critical of the New World Translation, makes the following observation:

"The word "proskuneo"occurs 55 times in the Watchtower Kingdome [sic] Interlinear.  Of those 55, 15 are in reference to Jesus with 40 used of others.  27% of the usage is of Jesus and not a single reference is translated as 'worship' even though in reference to the devil, demons, idols, etc., they do translate it as worship.  If this doesn't demonstrate their bias, then what does?"

The statistics mentioned on the above website are not entirely correct.  Actually, the Greek word 'προσκυνέω, proskuneo' occurs 60 times in Westcott & Hort Edition of the "New Testament", on which the Kingdom Interlinear Translation is based.  Sometimes, the New World Translation uses the verb 'worship', other times, the expression 'do obeisance'.  So let us discuss whether the above website's criticism of the New World Translation is valid.  To do this, we need to examine (a) the range of meaning of the Greek word proskuneo, (b) criteria for determining which of the possible renderings should be used in any given situation, (c) whether the New World Translation has adhered strictly to these criteria.

Range of Meaning of προσκυνέω, proskuneo

To establish what proskuneo means, we shall examine both lexical definitions and the use of the word in the Bible, both the Greek Septuagint and the New Testament.

The United Bible Societies (UBS) Lexicon gives the following definitions for proskuneo:

worship; fall down and worship, kneel, bow low, fall at another's feet

The Friberg Lexicon states:

(1) from a basic sense bow down to kiss someone's feet, garment hem, or the ground in front of him; (2) in the NT of worship or veneration of a divine or supposedly divine object, expressed concretely with falling face down in front of someone worship, venerate, do obeisance to

Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon says:

Plut.:-to make obeisance to the gods, fall down and worship, to worship, adore, ...

2. of the Oriental fashion of making the salam or prostrating oneself before kings and superiors,

The renowned  Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, by Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich, 3rd edition, (BDAG) gives the following definition:

Freq. used to designate the custom of prostrating oneself before persons and kissing their feet or the hem of their garment, the ground, etc.; the Persians did this in the presence of their deified king, and the Greeks before a divinity or someth. holy.) to express in attitude or gesture one’s complete dependence on or submission to a high authority figure, (fall down and) worship, do obeisance to, prostrate oneself before, do reverence to, welcome respectfully.

It adds that such respect is paid:

to human beings, but by this act they are to be recognized as belonging to a superhuman realm ... —Jesus, who is rendered homage as Messianic king and helper.

An examination of above dictionary references indicates two basic possible meanings for proskuneo:

1.  Worship.  There can be no doubt that proskuneo is the word most frequently translated worship in the New Testament.

2. Obeisance, homage, bowing down to a superior, for instance, a king. 

Defining the English Terms

To prevent any possible confusion, let us now examine the meaning of the English terms worship, obeisance, homage, according to the Shorter Oxford Dictionary, third edition.

Worship (verb):

1. To honour or revere as a supernatural being or power or as a holy thing; to adore with appropriate acts, rites, or ceremonies. ...

2. To honour; to regard or treat with honour or respect; to salute, bow down to.

Obeisance:  a respectful salutation; a bow or curtsy

Homage: acknowledgement of superiority; dutiful respect or honour shown

Although the verb 'to worship' in the sense of 'honour, regard, respect' has been widely used in the past, this usage is basically obsolete in modern English.  Hence, the only way the term 'worship' is currently used in English is that cited under definition number 1 above, namely "to honour or revere as a supernatural being or power ... to adore with appropriate acts."

 WAIT A MINUTE!!!  WHAT?  Ok, the problem is that the Watchtower writer is just making his/her own conclusion about usage - the dictionary doesn't state this - he/she does.  Now, not that this necessarily matters to the argument, but it appears that what the author is trying to do here is justify why the 6th Century KJV translators used "worship" (note: the Watchtower used the KJV for the 1st 70 years of their existence until their doctrine was proven wrong by it).

Use of Proskuneo in the New Testament

The article referred to above identifies a number of different persons to whom the verb προσκυνέω, proskuneo is applied:

CARM's supposed "generic" category reveals a methodological error, bringing together a number of different items.  In John 12:20, Acts 8:27, Acts 24:11, Revelation 11:1 and possibly Revelation 3:9, the verb is used in the sense of worship, with the object 'God' implied, e.g. "he came to Jerusalem to worship [sc. God]".  However, CARM has also 'smuggled' another, quite significant, verse into this category: Matthew 18:26.  We shall discuss this verse in greater detail shortly.  

Although proskuneo can mean to worship, its basic meaning is unquestionably  'to bow down'    Who said this?  This author?  It's placed in quotes to make it appear like someone else of authority said it.

The NT usage of the verb proskuneo demonstrates the range of meaning given in the BDAG and other lexicons.  There are cases where the verb clearly means 'to worship', but there are also cases where it can not mean anything other than 'to bow down' to.

In the Western world of the 21st century, we are not accustomed to bowing down to people.  We might stand up when a judge enters the room, or nod our heads as a sign of respect, but that is usually as far as it goes.  But we should not impose our understanding and culture on our reading of the New Testament, which was written in the 1st century C.E. and reflects the culture and customs of the time.

One verse that demonstrates this quite clearly is Matthew 18:26.  This is Jesus' parable of the unforgiving slave.  When his master tells him that he intends to sell him, his family and possessions, we read the slave's reaction:

Is this verse telling us that the slave worshipped his master, in the sense of 'honouring or revering as a supernatural being'?  No.  It is true that the King James Version tells us that the slave worshipped his master, but that is because when the KJV was produced, the word 'worship' still included the simple meaning of bowing down.  Thus, the modern-language New International Version correctly says that the slave "fell on his knees" before his master.  I love seeing a JW citing the NIV!  Hey, How about citing the NIV on John 1:1 or John 8:58!?

 This text, then, confirms the comments of numerous lexicons cited above, that proskuneo can mean, simply to bow down.  "Can" being the operative word here.

This usage of proskuneo is also found in the Greek Septuagint.  For example, at Genesis 23:7, we read about an incident in the life of Abraham:

Similarly, we read in 1 Kings 1:23 about Nathan's approach to King David:

Some other instances where the Septuagint uses proskuneo to refer to bowing down as a mark of respect are:

·         Genesis 33:3: Jacob bowed to his brother Esau

·         Exodus 18:7: Moses bowed to his father-in-law

·         Ruth 2:10: Ruth bowed to Boaz

·         1 Samuel 20:41: David bowed to Jonathan

·         1 Samuel 24:8: David bowed to King Saul

·         1 Samuel 25:3: Abigail bowed to David (No, that's I Samuel 25:23)

·         Daniel 2:46: Nebuchadnezzar bowed to Daniel

These, and many other, occurrences of the verb proskuneo in the Septuagint help us to understand two points:

1.   In a variety of cultures in Bible times it was customary to bow down before someone as a gesture of respect, with absolutely no religious meaning at all.

2.   The verb proskuneo is frequently used to describe such actions. 

Selecting the Correct Rendering

If translating the word proskuneo implies separating two shades of meaning, then on what basis can the translation decision be made?  In other words, how can the translator decide whether to render the word "worship" or "do obeisance, bow before, pay homage"?

First, we must acknowledge that rendering proskuneo as 'did obeisance' or 'bowed before' is never wrong when describing a physical action.       If such an action is prompted by reverence for God or a divinity, then the rendering 'worship' is appropriate.  But even in that case, the rendering 'bowed before' is not inappropriate.  The difference between simple bowing down and worship is a matter of the heart and mind of the one performing the action.  WRONG!  The Jews (and Christians) were told not to bow down to other gods (Exodus 20:5, 23:24, Deuteronomy 5:9, 11:16, Joshua 23:7, 23:16).  In Exodus 20:5 even the Watchtower's New World Translation can't help but translate it correctly - "you must not bow down to them".  II Kings 5:18 shows us that Naaman knew that even accidental bowing (in that case, his body being bowed by someone else he was assisting) before another god was a sin.

Worship is not difficult to distinguish from respect, obeisance or homage.  The basic distinction is this:  the person performing an act of worship views it as an acknowledgement of divinity.  He considers that he is worshipping God or possibly one or more of many gods.  Let's look at is this way: is there a Jehovah's Witness on earth that would walk into a Catholic church and kneel before a statue of the virgin Mary?  Or how about bending a knee before a cross hanging on the wall?  Absolutely not!  But why not...if bowing out of mere respect is fine...?

In cases when the object of the verb proskuneo is God: the rendering 'worship' is obviously appropriate, and probably no-one disputes it.  True, certain verses might be translated "bow before God", even as Abraham's servant is said to have 'bowed down before Jehovah' (Genesis 24:26).  Even if that is so, the meaning is certainly that of worship, as there could be no conceivable reason for bowing down before God, except to worship him.

In cases where the verb's object is an idol, an image, or a false god, such as the devil, the demons, the wild beast of Revelation: again the rendering 'worship' is appropriate, because the one performing the action is attributing (wrongly) to the thing worshipped the qualities of God.  Here, too, a rendering like 'bow down' or 'do obeisance' might be used.  But all of the above are false gods.  They are false gods because people worship them.  That is what makes them gods.  The meaning of respect or honour here is improbable, since false gods are unlikely to be respected by anyone but their worshippers.

In cases where the verb's object is a human or an angel, either translation might conceivably be possible, but that would depend on what we are able to establish about the motives of the one performing the act of obeisance.  In Genesis 23:7, LXX, the gesture seems to have indicated little more than politeness.   In 1 Kings 1:23, we have the action of a loyal subject to his king, a gesture of submission and respect, but certainly not worship.  Likewise, in Matthew 18:26, quoted above, it would simply be wrong to translate the word as 'worship'.  The slave was not attributing any divine qualities to his master; he was simply throwing himself on his mercy.

On the other hand, there are cases where people do worship other humans.  Emperor worship was rife in the Roman world.  Did Cornelius intend to worship Peter?  (Acts 10:25).  In view of the context, that is unlikely, as Cornelius is said to be a God-fearing man.  The New World Translation says that he 'did him obeisance'.  The New International Version and the Good News Translation have similar renderings.  Oh, I am so glad you brought this verse up!  OK, since you don't seem to have a problem with the NIV, let's look at the whole account...

Acts 10:25-26 ²⁵ As Peter entered the house, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet in reverence. ²⁶ But Peter made him get up. "Stand up," he said, "I am only a man myself."

The Fifteen Cases Involving Jesus Christ

The above principles provide us with more than enough guidance in order to decide how to translate the 15 occurrences of proskuneo with regard to Jesus Christ. 

Three instances of the verb proskuneo involving Christ have to do with his birth.  It is said that the three magi came to visit Jesus in order to 'do him obeisance' and that Herod, too, wished to 'do him obeisance'.  (Matthew 2:2, 8, 11).  Did the astrologers believe that Jesus was the Son of God?  Did Herod?  All they knew was that Jesus was called "King of the Jews".  (Matthew 2:2).   We have already established that it was customary to do obeisance to kings.  Nothing in these accounts indicates that the translation 'worship' would be appropriate.  They did not refer to the child even as the 'Son of God', not to mention God himself!  First, that is not "all they knew".  They had seen a sign of some sort in the sky (Matthew 2:2) that they referred to as a star.  Now, unless these "stars" were popping up all over the place, this is a pretty significant event!  One might even consider it supernatural!  Perhaps even special enough to warrant thousands of miles of travel...by foot...through the desert.  The Watchtower writer would have us believe that the Magi, observing this supernatural space show, traveled thousands of miles on foot through the desert just to let Jesus know they "respected" Him.  I'd say it's more likely they went to "worship" Him...wouldn't you?

Second, there is a fallacy here associated with the Watchtower's author's reasoning.  In short, the author assumes that because all that Matthew recorded was that the Magi told Herod they were looking for the "king of the Jews" that that is all they knew about him!   We know from the Bible itself that not all of Jesus life was actually recorded (John 24:25).  In fact, we have very little of Jesus life.  While we cannot assume what the Magi knew, we can assume it was significant enough for them to make a trip from the Far East to Bethlehem. 

We also must assume that the Magi communicated something pretty significant to Herod...beyond "he is 'the king of the Jews'".   First, they had to warrant getting an audience with Herod.  In those days, you didn't just show up on Herod's doorstep and get brought before him.  Merely saying "we've come thousands of miles to see the one born king of the Jews" would not likely get you a ticket into Herod's presence.  Also, consider Herod's reaction - he is so terrified he wants to kill Jesus and because he can't find him, he ends up killing all the children in the area that are of Jesus age.  Would the Watchtower have us believe that Herod is wandering around his palace when three strangers come in and say "where is this child who is born king of the Jews?" and Herod then just ends up flying off the handle ordering the murder of thousands of children? 

It's clear that by the reactions of both the Magi and Herod, that they knew something was "special".  Therefore, to assume that the Magi traveled thousands of miles following a moving sign in the sky and were communicated to in a dream regarding him that they thought Jesus was merely worthy of their respect is...well...ridiculous.

Now let's get to the text...!

Matthew 2:11 in the Greek says the Magi, "pesontes proskunasan auto".  Pesontes means to "fall(ing) to one's knees (same USB dictionary the Watchtower writer cites above).  Therefore, the verse can be translated, "falling to their knees they (proskuneo) him".  Now, according to the Watchtower writer, we must now determine whether or not Matthew intended to say, "worshipped" or "obesiance to by prostration" when he used proskunasan (which is a form of the verb proskuneo.  It is the same exact meaning of proskuneo, the spelling difference is based on the function of the word in the sentence).  So which sounds right to you:

"falling to their knees they fell..." or "falling to their knees they worshipped..."?

Well, based on the context the circumstances of the entire event (ref. the four above paragraphs) certainly "worshipped" makes sense.  However, as a matter of grammar and syntax it does not makes sense that Matthew would include "pesontes" (the act of falling) and proskunuasan (also the act of falling) unless proskuneo carried additional meaning!  In other words, if the Magi were just paying  respect to Jesus, pesontes would suffice (although "worship" could be implied from this word as well according to the USB).  But by virtue of the fact that both words are used, one of the words must carry some greater significance than a merely "paying respect", otherwise the sentence becomes oddly redundant ("falling they fell...").

Numerous people approached Jesus and bowed down before him during his earthly ministry.  Matthew 8:2 recounts how a beggar did obeisance to Jesus and asked to be healed.  This man "entreated him on bended knee" (Mark 1:40).  Nothing indicates that the man believed Jesus to be God.  He was simply begging Jesus for a favour, just as the slave in Jesus' parable did obeisance to his master and begged for a favour.  YES!  THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP MARK 1:40!  This shows that there clearly is a difference in the word proskuneo!  See, what the Watchtower writer does not tell us here is that Mark 1:40 does not use the word proskuneo.  Mark says the beggar gonupepton Jesus - "fell on his knees (out of respect)".  Mark made the conscious effort to not use proskuneo because THIS man was not worshipping Jesus.

Similarly, Matthew 9:18 tells us that Jairus 'did obeisance' to Jesus.  Again, a parallel account gives a synonym: he 'fell at his feet' (Luke 18:41).  These are the actions of a man requesting a great favour.  Nothing points to an act of worship in this passage.  The Phoenician woman mentioned in Matthew 15:25 also belongs here; she was begging Jesus to cure her demonized daughter.  So, too, the mother of the sons of Zebedee, who asked a favour (Matthew 20:20), and a man from whom Jesus expelled demons (Mark 5:6)   These are undetermined!  NOTHING INDICATES US THAT THESE PEOPLE WERE NOT WORSHIPPING JESUS!  The actions of these people are certainly consistent with the actions of people seeking God's favor as well!  The Watchtower writer jumps to a conclusion not supported by the facts.

Mark 15:19 tells us that the Roman soldiers 'did obeisance' to Christ.  It is scarcely possible that anyone would contend that this was an act of worship (NOR WAS IT AN ACT OF OBEISANCE!) !  As far as the Romans were concerned, Jesus was being executed for claiming to be "King of the Jews".  WHAT?  WRONG!  Read earlier in the passage...

If claiming to be "King of the Jews" was an executable offense, Pilate would have crucified Jesus right away.  Pilate in verse 14 (after Jesus affirming that He is the King of the Jews) indicates Jesus has not committed a crime.

As we have already established, the correct way to behave in the presence of a king was to bow down.  The soldiers were mocking Jesus' claim to be a king by cynically bowing down to him.

We have seen, then, that in the above cases, there is absolutely no reason to conclude that the persons involved - most of them not believers - were actually worshipping Christ.  They simply fell at his feet, in harmony with the prevailing custom of the day.  What about cases where Christ's disciples 'did obeisance' to him, before and after his resurrection.  Do these prove that Christ was worshipped?

Matthew 14:33 informs us that the disciples 'did obeisance' to Christ after he had silenced a great storm.  John 9:38 tells us that a blind man who had been healed by Christ put faith in him and 'did obeisance' to him.  Matthew 28:9 tells us that women who saw the resurrected Jesus 'did obeisance' to him, and Luke 24:52 tells us that other disciples did so too.

Is the New World Translation correct in rendering these verses as 'did obeisance' rather than 'worshipped'?  Remember that 'do obeisance' is a broader term than 'worship'.  It describes a specific act, which, in certain circumstances could imply worship, but does not always.  If we can demonstrate that the disciples believed Jesus to be God, then we are justified in using the word 'worship'.  Great!  We'll do that in just a few sentences and then at the end of this article.   Otherwise, we are better off sticking with 'did obeisance' or something similar.  Since a physical act of bowing down is being described, the rendering 'did obeisance' is definitely correct, regardless of whether the disciples believed that Jesus was God or not, whereas the term 'worshipped' would only be correct if the disciples did believe such a thing.  Right.  So the New World Translation can not be faulted for choosing the rendering that is definitely correct in these verses.True - but by that logic, why not render ALL the occurrences of proskuneo to merely "did obeisance to" - even when directed toward God?  (I'll show you "why not" at the end of the article).

WHAT!?!? YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET INTO THESE VERSES?  YOU JUST MENTION THEM IN PASSING!?!?  NO, NO, NO, NO, YOU'RE NOT GETTING AWAY WITH THAT!  And let's keep in the front of our minds, " If we can demonstrate that the disciples believed Jesus to be God, then we are justified in using the word 'worship'."...

MATTHEW 14:33:  Jesus has just walked on water, allowed Peter to walk on water and calmed a storm.  They called Jesus the "son of God".  The nature of the son is always equal to the nature of the father.  A bird-father always has a bird-son, a human father always has a human-son.  When God is identified as Jesus' Father, what does that make Jesus?

The phrase, "son of God" itself carries no small significance at that time  As Ron Rhodes points out that "ancient Semitics and Orientals used the phrase 'son of' to indicate likeness or sameness of nature and equality of being" ^{(Reasoning from the Scriptures with Jehovah's Witnesses, p. 135)}. References like 1 Kings 20:35 ("sons of the prophets" meaning "of order of the the prophets") and Nehemiah 12:28 ("sons of the singers" meaning "of the order of the singers") show this in literary practice.  The Jews clearly recognized this as they prepared to stone Jesus for blasphemy when He claimed to be the "Son of God" (John 19:7).

With all of that said, Jesus has walked on water, allowed Peter to walk on water has calmed the storm.  They fall to their knees and profess Him to be the Son of God.  Is it likely they are communicating, "You walk on water, calm the storms and are the Son of God so we RESPECT YOU!" or "You walk on water, calm the storms and are the Son of God so we WORSHIP YOU!".  Imagine yourself being one of the disciples and actually living through this event - which would you do?

JOHN 9:38:  Jesus just miraculously healed a man blind from birth!  Is it likely that this man merely paid respect to Jesus? 

MATTHEW 28:9:  Mary (likely Martha's sister) and Mary Magdalene have just heard Jesus has raised from the dead and are running back from the empty tomb to tell the disciples when Jesus meets them.  Is it more likely they wanted to communicate their RESPECT to a man they watched brutally tortured to death then miraculously raised from death to life or that they worshipped Him?

LUKE 24:52:  The disciples, after seeing, talking to, eating with and calling Jesus "God" (John 20:28), now see Him ascend to Heaven!  Are we to assume they all looked at one another and said, "We respect that." and fell to their knees to show it?  Or should we assume the WORSHIPPED Him?

Did the disciples believe that Jesus was God?  YES!  That is a topic for another discussion, but there is one very interesting point raised by Professor Jason Beduhn.  It concerns Matthew 28:17:

Can a person worship and doubt at the same time?  As we have established above, the narrower rendering 'worship' can be justified only if we can prove that the disciples believed Jesus to be God.  This verse indicates that some of them not only doubted that he is God, but they even doubted that it was Jesus.  In these circumstances, the rendering 'worshipped' is very hard to justify.  WHAT!?  By that logic, it is hard to justify that they "did obeisance to" Jesus either!  If they doubt that this is even Jesus, what justifies them doing obeisance to him? 

The reality is that the passage is not clear as to what exactly the "some" who doubted actually doubted.  Was it that it was Jesus?  Was it that He was the son of God?  Was it that He was the Messiah?  Perhaps the most logical explanation is that in previous post-resurrection appearances there is commonly some sort of miraculous event tied into the appearance.  Here there is not.  Remember, Jesus is resurrected in a spiritual-body (a physical form dominated by the spirit-nature) and is clearly a "refinement", of sorts, to the one that was crucified.  It is the same, but is different.  To visualize how doubt in identity might arise, imagine that for tomorrow you suddenly looked exactly like you looked when you you were in high school.  People you know and love may not recognize you - but it's the same "you".  Likewise, when this transformation took place on Jesus' body, it's not surprising that some of them did not recognize Him immediately.  We know that it was the same body because HE SAID SO (Luke 24:36-40), people recognized Him the fact that he bore the scars of crucifixion (John 20:27).

The only way to explain either "worship" or "obeisance" is to realize that some recognized Jesus, some did not.  But the text itself does not necessitate "worship" nor "obeisance".

The apostles could not have 'worshipped' and 'doubted' at the same time!   Again, this is the Watchtower author who said this.  He places it in this format to make you think he is quoting someone else.

This leaves us with Hebrews 1:6, which in the New World Translation reads: "Let all God's angels do obeisance to him [that is, Christ]."  The footnote very honestly admits that the phrase could be rendered by the alternate reading "worship him". HAHAHAHA!  "Very honestly" indeed!  The fact is that the NWT itself had "let all of God's angels worship him" up until 1970!  That's 17 years of "worshipping" Jesus. Since Christ, as the Son of God, occupies a position much higher than that of the angels, it is only right that they should do him obeisance.  But, again, we can not read more into Hebrews 1:6 than it is actually saying.  If you believe Christ is God, then, clearly you will feel that the proskuneo here refers to worship.  Then Jehovah Himself must feel that proskuneo here refers to "worship" because Jehovah God calls Jesus God just 2 verses later:

But if you are trying to use the proskuneo here to prove that Jesus is God, then your argument would be circular.  It would be like saying that the verb must mean 'worship' because Jesus is God, and that he must be God because he is worshipped!  You would be assuming the very thing you're trying to prove!  I'm glad you said it before I did!  YOUR WHOLE ARGUMENT IS CIRCULAR!  YOU "ASSUME THE VERY THING YOU ARE TRYING TO PROVE" by relegating every proskuneo pertaining to Jesus as "do obeisance to" merely because YOU DON'T BELIEVE JESUS IS GOD SO HE'S NOT WORTHY OF WORSHIP!

No wonder, then, that Professor Beduhn comments: "There are passages where many translators have interpreted the gesture referred to by the Greek term proskuneo as implying 'worship'.  They have then substituted that interpretation in the place of a translation."

Other Translations

Other translations, too, have recognized that a rendering like 'do obeisance' or 'bow before' is appropriate.

Is it true, then, as the CARM website asserts:

"As you can see, the NWT is very bias [sic] in how it translates the word "proskuneo."  Whenever it is in reference to Jesus, they absolutely will not let it be translated as worship.  Why?  Because they erringly deny that Jesus is God in flesh and their Bible reflects their bias.  This is not how proper theology is done.  ...      The Watchtower Organization has changed the Bible to suit its needs"?

 Let us summarize the evidence:

(1) Lexicons.  All reliable lexicons list at least two meanings for proskuneo.  One meaning is 'worship'; the other is 'bow low, prostrate oneself, do obeisance'

(2) Bible usage.  It is clearly seen from a number of examples in the NT and the Septuagint that the verb is frequently used without any religious significance, simply as a gesture of respect, submission, and humility.

(3) Other Bible translations.  It may be seen that other Bible translations, on occasion, agree with the NWT in not translating proskuneo as worship, when it refers to Jesus Christ.

So who is really biased - the New World Translation Committee or its critics?  Let scholar Jason Beduhn answer:  

"In our exploration of this issue, we can see how theological bias has been the determining context for the choices made by all of the translations except the NAB and NW.  There are passages where many translators has interpreted the gesture referred to by the Greek term proskuneo as implying 'worship'.  They have then substituted that interpretation in place of translation.  ... The translators seem to feel the need to add to the New Testament support for the idea that Jesus was recognized to be God.  But the presence of such an idea cannot be supported by selectively translating a word one way when it refers to Jesus and another way when it refers to someone else. (OR VICE-VERSA!)  ... When we observe how these same translators choose 'worship' when the gesture is made to Jesus by certain persons, and choose other English words to translate the very same Greek term when the gesture is directed to someone other than Jesus ... their inconsistency reveals their bias.

 Hmmm.  I wonder which NWT Jason embraces - the 1953-1970's versions where Jesus is worshipped by God's angels, or the later versions that have changed it to "obeisance"?

END OF ARTICLE************************************************************************

Ok, now let's evaluate this in full scope.

The partially-presented truth in this article is that proskuneo can be translated either "worship" or "do obeisance to", depending on the context and object.  As stated, one must necessarily believe Jesus to be God in order to attribute "worship" to proskuneo when Jesus is the object.  So the question that we face is whether or not the Bible teaches Jesus is God...

Well, the Bible says Jesus has the unique characteristics of God:

Biblical prophets and apostles claimed Jesus was God...

The prophet Isaiah

Isaiah 9 : 6

“...and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

The prophet Jeremiah

Jeremiah 23: 5 – 6

“...This is the name by which he shall be called: THE      LORD our Righteousness.”

The use of the Tetragrammaton of  “YHWH”- translated here  to  “THE LORD” is literally the divine name (what JW’s insist is  “Jehovah”).  The verse literally reads “Jehovah our Righteousness”.

 The Apostle John

John 1 : 1

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

John 1 : 18

“No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only (or, “God the only begotten”), has made him known.”

John 5: 18

“ ... he was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.”

The Apostle Thomas

John 20: 28

“Thomas answered him (Jesus), 'My Lord and my God!' Jesus said to him, ‘Have you believed because you have seen me?  Blessed are those who have not seen yet believed.’

Notes:

1) Jesus' reply here is as significant as Thomas' affirmation.  If Thomas was not, in fact, calling Jesus his God, then he was blaspheming! Jesus does not rebuke Thomas here for calling him God.

2) An unsophisticated Jehovah's Witness may attempt to say that Thomas was merely exclaiming 'my Lord and my God!' in surprise.  First, Thomas does not literally say this.  Secondly, that form of exclamation was not in use at this time in history.  Lastly, Jesus does not rebuke him, which he surely would have had Thomas been using God's name in vain.

The Apostle Peter

2 Peter 1 : 1

“Simon Peter, the servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received faith as precious as ours...”

 Paul

Titus 2: 13

“... awaiting our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us...”

Jesus claimed to be God...

John 8 : 58

“Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”

(Jehovah's Witnesses have tried to argue that what Jesus said was "before Abraham was born, I have been" - they even translate it that way in the NWT.  They've even gone as far as to make up a rule of grammar.  The reality is that regardless of how they try to retranslate it the Jews at the time knew that Jesus was claiming to be deity as in the next verse they pick up stones to stone Him  for blasphemy!)

John 10:30-33

“I and my Father are one.  Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.  Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?   The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.’”

And God Himself called Jesus God...

Jehovah God

Hebrews 1 : 8 – 9

“But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever…therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.”

 To be sure, the translation to "worship" or "obeisance" is subject to the translator - but all translators render it "worship" when the object is God.  Since Jesus is clearly called God, such a rendering makes sense to him as well - especially when one considers the specifics of each circumstance as we did right in the article above.  Seeing command over nature, healings and rising from the dead does not invoke someone to merely show respect to someone - those circumstances invoke worship!

Removing all doubt...the "basic meaning" of proskuneo.

Let's recall that we are told not to even bow down to other gods.  Since proskuneo 's "basic meaning", according to this Watchtower writer, is to "bow down", let's remove the question of "bowing down" or "worship" entirely - let's just accept its "basic meaning" (to bow down).  Better yet, let's remove the English meaning entirely!  You'll see how this gives us clarity on who Jesus is...

 Exodus 20:3

“Thou shall proskuneo no other gods before me.”

Luke 4:8

“Jesus answered, 'It is written: proskuneo the Lord your  God and serve him only.”

Revelation 22:8-9

I fell down to proskuneo at the feet of the angel ... but he said to me, 'Do not do it!...Proskuneo God!’”      

Hebrews 1:6

“Let all God's angel's proskuneo him.”

So the Bible tells us not to proskuneo anyone other than God.  Angels (remember, JW's believe Jesus is an angel) refuse proskuneo, the disciples and others proskuneo Jesus (and he accepts it) and God tells all of his angels to proskuneo Jesus.

The only way the Bible can be consistent is if Jesus is God and appropriately receives the proskuneo due to him.

______________________________________________________________________

If you would like an in-depth analysis of this and other problems with Jehovah's Witness  doctrine, please click here for our Battling the Watchtower program.

If you have any questions or comments about this article and our response, feel free to comment here: