- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Just re-read my posting and saw that it was a bit untidy and confusing in sections. It was also a bit abrasive in parts so I hope you don't take offense (not my intention). Anyway, Version 2:
To the writer of “Who is Jesus” in the Trinity Doctrine section of your web page (and anyone else interested). I have read this article and have to take issue with you on a number of points. The ascribing of deity to Jesus is, in my opinion, no less than a fundamental tenet of Christianity. It’s crystal clear to me that Jesus IS God and I believe I have some venerable support on this, from:
1.God the Father (Heb 1:8)
2.Jesus (Jn 8:58, Rev 1:8)
3.Paul (Titus 2:13)
4.John (Jn 1:1)
5.Thomas (Jn 20:28)Can I ask that we eliminate as much confusion as possible by interpreting scripture in an objective, literal manner? Otherwise these passages can be ‘spiritualised away’ and we’ll get nowhere. Consider these 10 pieces of evidence for the Deity of Jesus Christ:
1. In Deut 8:19 God warns “If you ever forget the LORD your God and go after other gods and serve them and worship them, I testify against you today that you shall surely perish” Therefore God the father has made it very clear that worship of anyone but God is forbidden. Then why is it that Jesus allowed himself to be worshipped? (Mat 9:18, 14:33, 28:9, 28:17). In Mat 28:10, Jesus had the perfect opportunity to rebuke the disciples for this act of blasphemy…did He? No. Incidentally, He also forgave sins….this would also be blasphemy if He were not God.
2. In Zech 14:3-4: The word LORD is used to describe Jesus returning to the mount of olives. ” Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as on when He fights on a day of battle. And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives” This is clearly a description of Jesus, a fact that is confirmed in Acts 1:11. This is a clear refutation of your declaration (and I quote): “It must be noted that Lord and LORD are two different words. The father is LORD and Jesus is Lord. Translators capitalise the name of God and LORD”.
3. In John 10:30 Jesus said “I and the Father are ONE” thus he claimed equality with God. Yes, there is an obvious hierarchy (e.g. Jn 14:28) between the three distinct members of the Godhead (lets us this term for want of a better one). However, the Father’s authority over Jesus is not evidence against His deity. Here is a crude analogy I think might clarify my point here. When you were young, your Father had authority over you – but that didn’t disprove your humanity did it? For you to prove to me that Jesus’ submission to God is evidence for Him not being God, you would have to link his submission with his non-deity.
4. In Genesis 1:26, 3:22 and 11:7 the word Elohim is used for God (in the hebrew). This word is a ‘plural’ noun, not singular. Another example is Is 54:5. The plurality of God is a consistent theme of both the Old and New Testaments. Read Psalm 110:1, it reports a conversation between God and Jesus “ And the LORD says to my LORD: ‘Sit at My right hand, Until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet’”. Moreover, read Psalm 2 carefully and you will see that it’s actually a trialogue between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
5. John clearly credits Jesus’ status as God in Jn 1:1: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”. The word God here is capitalised in every translation I have read including the NIV you referenced in your acticle. Please correct the lower case ‘g’ you used in you article, its misleading – at best
6. In Mat 4:7 Jesus announces his deity to satan. Verse 1 of this chapter makes it abundantly clear that it was Jesus who was tempted by satan, not God the Father. Any other assumption would be extra-Biblical inference.
7. You wrote that demons, before they are cast out, never addressed Jesus as God, however on this issue I would argue that they had a vested interest in not announcing it. They would likely have known that a written account of Jesus’ miracles would be disseminated and this admission by them would be deleterious to their cause.
8. A well known prophecy of Jesus in the Old Testament: “For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.” Is 9:6. Here his deity is not only in view but also His eternality. Jesus' eternity past is also evident in Micah 5:2.
9. In Exodus 3 who is talking from the burning bush? (vs 2 makes it clear that this was not the Father). In John 8:58 I believed Jesus announced His deity to the pharisees using this passage and this is underscored by their reaction. Why did the pharisees attempt to stone Him? Because in first century Judea you didn’t say “I am” in that context (unless you happened to be God that is). “I AM WHO I AM” in the hebrew is derived from the verb HAYAH, and points to the very name of God “YHWH”. The pharisees would not have stoned him if he merely compared himself with, for instance, an angel (who also pre-existed Abraham). Do you think this was an oversight on Jesus part?…hardly. He was announcing Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Interestingly, Paul ascribes this Title to the Holy Spirit also (Heb 3:7-11).
10. “God was manifest in flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory” 1 Tim 3:16 (KJV). This verse speaks for itself.
Why is it important to accept Jesus is God? Well if Jesus was not God then His death would not have been sufficient to pay the penalty for the sins of the whole world (1 Jn 2:2) – and we’re all in serious trouble. If, by your argument, He was not eternal – then concievably there could an accumulated sum-total of sins that would be too large to be covered by His blood? Thankfully, we know this is not the case. I think you should consider every angle on this, as I believe the denial of Jesus’ Deity is the first step down a slippery spiritual slope.
I hope you will thoughtfully and prayerfully consider these points without letting your presuppositions cloud your judgment. Thank You and God Bless.
The answers to your statements and questions can be found at this page.
https://heavennet.net/writings/trinity-5.htm
The page deals with the scriptures that you quoted and gives indepth information to prove that Jesus is the Son of God, not the God that he is the son of, as you say.
Also these questions have been answered in the Trinity Discussion too, but the page above is more condensed.
As you said yourself, “I hope you will thoughtfully and prayerfully consider these points without letting your presuppositions cloud your judgment.”
thx
T8, It is clear that you have a well developed theology and huge investment in what you believe is the truth. However, you can be erudite and have conviction, and still be wrong.
I believe the below statement alone was enough to invalidate your premise that Jesus is less-than God.
'We must also remember that we are also gods. This doesn't mean that we are also part of a Trinity. It just means that we will partake of the divine nature. Just as the Word was/is divine. To be divine is different to being The Divine”
Of the 18 translations found on http://www.biblegateway.com (bible online), NONE translate the word as divine. I tend to trust the mainstream translators, a groups of people highly-devoted to accuracy and preserving the word of God, not their particular theology.
Could I ask you to personally address just one of my points (point 2) in my first posting? because I didnt see anything you wrote that explains it adequately to me.
Thanks and God BlessTo Is 1:18,
They do not have to use the word Divine as it just means God anyway.
If you do not have an article before the word 'God', then it is an adjective e.g godly.
Similarly, Jesus said “One of you is a devil”. In the Greek, it doesn't have an article. If Jesus used an article, then he would have been referring to a person and saying “one of you is the Devil”. So Jesus was obviously talking about devil as an adjective. He was talking about the nature of the Devil.
So whether we use the word 'Divine' or 'God' it is actually irrelevant. I used it because it brought this point out clearer. Also most scholars as far as I know do not have a problem with using the word Divine to mean God and divine to mean the nature of God as well as Devil to mean a person and devil to mean nature or type of being.
I will post again and address point 2.
thx
BTW, I totally agree with your statement:
Quote However, you can be erudite and have conviction, and still be wrong. I am open to being wrong about anything, but anything you or I say has to align with scripture. I am seeking the truth with all my heart and have no time for the wisdom and traditions of men. I am only interested to know truth and reject error because I want to live forever with God. I couldn't think of a better reason to live.
'Once we realise that imperfect understanding is the human condition, there is no shame in being wrong, only in failing to correct our mistakes'
George Soros
'We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one. And we know that the Son of God has come ,and has given us understanding, in order that we might know Him who is true[the Father],and we are in Him who is true[the Father], in His son Jesus Christ.This is the true God ,and eternal life. Little children ,guard yourselves from idols.' 1 Jn 5 19-21.
The idea of trinity is a derived false teaching and irrelevant to us who are in the Father through the work of His Son. It is arrogant presumption and an insult to God. It has become a false idol and does not represent God,in my opinion.A false idol?, how can the Father, Son and Holy Spirit 'co-existing with unity' be considered a false idol?
Some of the greatest christian (and secular) minds have wrestled with the trinity and there are some great scholars on both sides of the debate – its probably the toughest known theological issue to understand, of all time. We are, after all, dealing with the infinite.
Given this, I think its prudent not to be too dogmatic and see how it plays out at the end of this age.
“The fear of God is the beginning of Wisdom”. Where is the fear of God on this earth anymore?
“work out your own salvation in fear and trembling” Phil 2 12. God reveals what we can know in the Word and fiercely guards His truth. It takes a brave man to assert as truth what cannot be fully known.
” My ways are not your ways,My thoughts are not your thoughts” Trinity is at best a theory, but like that of Darwin's has been taught as fact.
Reason and logic are pale shadows of truth. Understanding is not wisdom and our knowledge will always fall short of truth.You wrote:
“Reason and logic are pale shadows of truth. Understanding is not wisdom and our knowledge will always fall short of truth.”If no-one but God can know truth then everything you have written is invalidated. The christian world view should embrace objective, unmutable truth – lets leave relativism to the postmodernist. Hermeneutics aside, why have we been given the Bible if we are totally incapable of understanding it or drawing any truth from its pages?
God is knowable and He has given us brains so we can read the word and understand it, reason is a natural (God-given) extension of this. The Holy Spirit then illuminates its essential truths for us (if we let Him):
'It is the glory of God to conceal a matter. But the glory of Kings is to search out a matter' Prov 25:2
Oops must have run out of room. There is some value in analysis of the Word but we should submit our minds to it as it is The Holy Spirit teaching us.
Quote (t8 @ June 30 2004,04:17) To Is 1:18, They do not have to use the word Divine as it just means God anyway.
If you do not have an article before the word 'God', then it is an adjective e.g godly.
Similarly, Jesus said “One of you is a devil”. In the Greek, it doesn't have an article. If Jesus used an article, then he would have been referring to a person and saying “one of you is the Devil”. So Jesus was obviously talking about devil as an adjective. He was talking about the nature of the Devil.
So whether we use the word 'Divine' or 'God' it is actually irrelevant. I used it because it brought this point out clearer. Also most scholars as far as I know do not have a problem with using the word Divine to mean God and divine to mean the nature of God as well as Devil to mean a person and devil to mean nature or type of being.
I will post again and address point 2.
thx
BTW, I totally agree with your statement:
Quote However, you can be erudite and have conviction, and still be wrong. I am open to being wrong about anything, but anything you or I say has to align with scripture. I am seeking the truth with all my heart and have no time for the wisdom and traditions of men. I am only interested to know truth and reject error because I want to live forever with God. I couldn't think of a better reason to live.
What scholars are you referring to T8?You have made it very clear throughout my long discussions with you in the trinity thread that that you reject all orthodox scholars views on Bible translation except where they agree with your own views.
Hi Global,
Most of the denominations I have visited have taught this while I was there at some stage. These teachers were Trinitarians too.
I also read a book by one of the scholars who translated the NIV and the issues and difficulties with that, and he didn't have a problem with it, even though they use the word God.
All sermons I have heard regarding John 1:1 who in addition have compared translations and quoted translations that use Divine and divine have not had a problem with it either in my experience. As far as I know and from what I have read, I have never heard anyone condemn those bibles that use the word Divine.
If it is disputed, then please clarify. I am open minded here. But even if it is a major dispute (of which I am obviously ignorant) then it still doesn't change what I am saying.
'The Devil' is a person.
'devil' or 'a devil' is a quality or nature.
'The God' is a person.
'god' or 'a god' is a quality or nature.The Father is The God. (identity).
The Word was god. (nature).In the beginning was THE WORD and THE WORD was with THE GOD and THE WORD was god. (Not THE GOD). There is a reason for this difference. It is to distinguish between identity and nature and that is why we are also called gods. Because we are made after God's image. So in quality or nature we are meant to be like God, but not God in identity.
This is the point I am making and even if I don't use Divine and divine, my point is still the same.
BTW: I don't have a problem with scholars, just those who teach false doctrine and teachings of men. Likewise Jesus didn't have a problem with the Law, but he did condemn some teachers of the Law. I don't hold to what scholars say because they are scholars, rather I check out what they say to see if it is so.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ June 30 2004,10:26) Could I ask you to personally address just one of my points (point 2) in my first posting? because I didnt see anything you wrote that explains it adequately to me.
Thanks and God Bless
I haven't forgotten point 2. I will reply when time permits. I will need a bit of time for this one, as I haven't answered this one before, so I need to do some extensive research.I do however appreciate your points because my mission here is to learn truth and then teach it. If I have erred in anyway, then I want to know about it.
Hi T8, hope you had a good week.
I think the word “Word” in John 1 has a more specific meaning than just “devine” or even “God”, John 1 vs14 tells us:“And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory….”.
No matter how you translate the word “Word”, it's obviously Jesus Christ. Its irrelavent if the word 'was' is used in vs 1 (Word was God), it's His eternal geneology after all. If Jesus was God, he still is.
Jesus was also called:the 'great' God in Titus 2:13
the 'blessed' God in Roman 7:9
the 'true' God in 1 John 5:20By the way, im still waiting patiently for your explanation of pt 2 (also see Rev 19:16)
God Bless
T8, I admire your considerable depth of knowledge and love of God's word, but dont you think you better do things in your specified order:
i.e “learn truth, then teach it”,
Not the other way around.
The issue of Jesus' true identity is, after all, collosally important and surely you realise that your refutation is not mainstream christian doctrine. The denial of His deity is in actual fact one of the common identifying characteristics of the various cults.
Believe it or not, we both share viseral aversion to false doctrine and religiousity. However, ascribing deity to Jesus' is utterly biblical. The issue of the trinity (I use this word for lack of a better one) is less overt, however the plurality of God is evidenced all over the Old and New Testaments. In fact the word 'One' used in the 'One God' references you often cite (e.g Jas 2:19) is usually 'echad' in the Heb. and 'heis' in the Greek, and both cases the word does not exclude the plural. For instance, in Gen 2:24, “…and THEY shall become ONE (echad) flesh” It is not used the same way we use it in our English. Anyway, something for you to consider I suppose.
Take care and God bless.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 09 2004,23:02) Hi T8, hope you had a good week.
I think the word “Word” in John 1 has a more specific meaning than just “devine” or even “God”, John 1 vs14 tells us:
Perhaps you didn't understand what I am saying.
There are 2 mentioned in John 1:1The Word (Logos)
The GodI teach that Jesus is the Word and God is the Father.
The Word/Logos is with God, so there are obviously 2. But then Trinitarians generally believe that the Word was actually God (one).The point I am making and has been debated extensively in the Trinity Discussion, is that the last word “god” is not proceeded with an article and is therefore an adjective or description of nature, rather than an identity.
In Greek, identities are identified using an article. E.g. The Jesus. In English we just say Jesus. The Word (person) was was god (not a person, rather an adjective or nature). But many teach that The Word is the God, which the Greek texts do not support.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 09 2004,23:31) but dont you think you better do things in your specified order: i.e “learn truth, then teach it”,
Not the other way around.
I am not sure what you are saying here, because that is exactly what I said in a previous post. i.e. learn truth, then teach it.Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 09 2004,23:31) The issue of Jesus' true identity is, after all, collosally important and surely you realise that your refutation is not mainstream christian doctrine. The denial of His deity is in actual fact one of the common identifying characteristics of the various cults. Believe it or not, we both share viseral aversion to false doctrine and religiousity. However, ascribing deity to Jesus' is utterly biblical. The issue of the trinity (I use this word for lack of a better one) is less overt, however the plurality of God is evidenced all over the Old and New Testaments. In fact the word 'One' used in the 'One God' references you often cite (e.g Jas 2:19) is usually 'echad' in the Heb. and 'heis' in the Greek, and both cases the word does not exclude the plural. For instance, in Gen 2:24,
Take care and God bless.
True faith is not declaring that Yashua is God, but that he is the Son of God and the Messiah.Yashua is the son of Yahweh and not Yahweh himself. You cannot say that Yahshua is Yahweh.
A lot of confusion in understanding scripture is due to conflict with Greek and Hebrew thinking. The Trinity Doctrine is not a Hebrew/Jewish concept. But this doctrine developed over time with a lot of Greek and other Gentile influence. It was a few centuries later before this doctrine became officially recognised after developing during that time.
Just to clarify, Jesus has the nature of God but is not God in identity. Just as a devil may not actually be the Devil, although that can be the case sometimes, but not all the time. Hence we are gods and Jesus is the mighty god, but the Father is actually the God, originator/source. He is the Most High God and there are many gods including humans.
So just as we understand that there are many devils, but the Devil is the Father of all devils, there are many gods, but the Father is the Most High God. Even the Word came from God.
Quote (Is 1:18 @ July 09 2004,23:31) “…and THEY shall become ONE (echad) flesh” It is not used the same way we use it in our English. Anyway, something for you to consider I suppose.
Yes one in nature, but 2 in identity.
This is no different with God and his son. Just as the woman came from the Man, Yashua came from God. He is of God and the woman is of man and hence, why she is called woman.The woman is the glory of the man and Yahshua is the glory of God.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
