- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 5 days, 2 hours ago by
.
- Posts
Quote (jammin @ July 24 2013,06:16) Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,12:54) Quote (jammin @ July 23 2013,07:23) Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,07:21) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work……….
NO Kerwin!It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself.
Either/or does not work in this case.
(Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.
)
Mike,The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God.
Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God. It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word.
wrong. no version that supports your opinion.
the Word is Christ
that is what the bible says
Jammin,We are not talking version, we are talking of a type of communication. It is called thinking like a First Century Jew and not a 21st Century Trinitarian.
you do not think like the first century christian.
i said version bec you always say stories.
no bible supports your doctrine.you cant read your opinion. you think but non sense
Jammin,1st Century Christians were 1st Century Jews and Gentiles. Christianity is not a new religion it is a new covenant of an old religion. Trinitarianim had not yet evolved by the 1st Century.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 24 2013,05:12) Quote (kerwin @ July 22 2013,19:57) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 23 2013,06:40)
Being a god is one thing. Being God is another.
Mike,As I said I am assuming translators translated the emphasis correctly and the Jews accused him of claiming to be God.
And when did Jesus ever claim to be God Himself, Kerwin?
Mike,John 10:33-36
King James Version (KJV)33 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.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
He is not claiming to be God he is claiming to be like God in relationship to those Scripture calls gods.
Quote (terraricca @ July 23 2013,12:46) Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,05:33) T,
Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love.Gene,
I have read your earlier post, thank you.
2beeQuote T,
Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love.prayer have to be words spoken or in thoughts,;songs are words but if they are prayers ???I know they are an expression of joy,
love are actions according to God
T,
Prayers do NOT have to be WORDS either spoken or in thought.
Prayers can be silence.
Do you believe that? Because I do.Singing is like a prayer, if it is done in the right way, from the heart to God.
Quote (2besee @ July 24 2013,17:07) Quote (terraricca @ July 23 2013,12:46) Quote (2besee @ July 23 2013,05:33) T,
Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love.Gene,
I have read your earlier post, thank you.
2beeQuote T,
Prayer can be words, silence, thoughts, song, most importantly, love.prayer have to be words spoken or in thoughts,;songs are words but if they are prayers ???I know they are an expression of joy,
love are actions according to God
T,
Prayers do NOT have to be WORDS either spoken or in thought.
Prayers can be silence.
Do you believe that? Because I do.Singing is like a prayer, if it is done in the right way, from the heart to God.
2beeQuote Singing is like a prayer, if it is done in the right way, from the heart to God. do you have a scripture to back it up
i know we can sing to the glory of God ,but do not remember seeing what you say ,
Quote Prayers can be silence. Quote Prayers do NOT have to be WORDS either spoken or in thought. so you talking in the way they do for Boudda
again do you have a scriptural verse to back it up
2bee understand that if we cannot back it up in scriptures then our faith is not of God ;it is not our will but God's will we true believer accomplishing
“Can I back it up with scripture that prayer can be silent and does not always have to include words and speaking”? YES it is called LISTENING. It is in your Bible. Go look for it.
Here is one example:
“Do not keep on babbling like the pagans do, for they think that they will be heard for their use of many words.”
I have no more to say about this now Terraricca,………..n………….!
Quote =terraricca,July 24 2013,04:01 Genesis 2: 24 Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH
Terraricca,
First you quoted:
Quote AT THAT TIME ADAM WAS PERFECT ,so no need to interpreting what does not need to be , In the above you stated that GOD WAS REFERRING TO ADAM SINCE HE WAS PERFECT!
Then you quoted:
Quote YOUR SCRIPTURE ;IN GENESES 2 MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS ,AND IS FOR THAT PURPOSE ONLY, Then in the above you stated that the verse says exactly what it means:
SO A MAN LEAVES HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND CLEAVES TO HIS WIFE, and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH
SO SINCE IT MEANS WHAT IT SAYS IT DOES NOT REFER TO ADAM, BECAUSE ADAM NEVER HAD A MOTHER!
Now your last quote:
Quote God was not talking to Adam about marriage he already marry them ,SO HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THOSE THAT COME AFTER THEM their offspring , SO NOW GOD IS NOT EVEN REFERRING TO ADAM, BUT TO SINFULL ADAM’S DESCENDATS
SO YOU ARE CONTRADICTING YOURSELF !
YOU ARE CONFUSED YOURSELF!
READ AGAIN:
GOD ACCORDING TO YOU WAS NOT REFERING TO ADAM ! BUT TO SINFULL OFFSPRINGS
SO AGAIN YOU CONTRADICTED YOURSELF SINCE YOU SAID:
Quote AT THAT TIME ADAM WAS PERFECT ,so no need to interpreting what does not need to be , WHY THEREFORE GOD REFERRED TO SOMETHING WHICH IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE! YET!
OR:
WHY SHOULD GOD IN GENESIS 2;24 WHEN ALL WAS CREATED VERY GOOD ACCORDING TO HIS WILL, THEREFORE NO MORTAL SINFUL ELEMENTS INVOLVED, SAID THINGS WHICH ARE REFERRED TO SINFULL MORTAL OFFSPRINGS?
IN THE SAME TIME , IF HE REALLY MEANT SO,
YOU ARE REJECTING THE FACT, SINCE YOU CANNOT PERCEIVE IT, THAT HE ALSO ENVISAGED THAT HE STILL ACHIEVES HIS WILL, AND ACCOMPLISH HIS KINGDOM?
SOMETHING WHICH HE COMFIRMED IN GENESIS 3 WHEN HE DECLARED THAT HE HIMSELF THROUGH THE WORD WILL CRUSH THE HEAD OF THE DEVIL!
DO YOU WANT ME TO ACCEPT, THAT GOD DID THIS TO ALL THOSE WHO READS SCRIPTURES, AND IN THE SAME TIME, HE HIMSLEF WANT THEM TO READ SCRIPTURES TO BE AWARE OF THE TRUTH?
ISN’T IT THEREFORE AS I STATED THAT GOD WAS REFERRING TO HIS WHOLE PROCESS, AS A PRELUDE TO WHAT WAS ABOUT TO HAPPEN?
SO IT IS EVEN MORE AS I STATED, IF I ACCEPT THAT HE WAS REFERRING TO HIS OFFSPRINGS WHICH IS WHAT YOU STATED
OR IS IT RATHER , THAT YOU PREFER CONFRONTATION, THAN TO DISCERN THE TRUTH!
SO YES THAT VERSE IN GENESIS 2:24 IS REGARDING THE WHOLE PROCESS OF OUR CREATION, REDEMPTION, AND ACCOMPLISHMENT OF GOD’S KINGDOM WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT!
YOU ASKED:
Quote what do you think is THE SON'S SPIRIT NOW THIS TOPIC IS REGARDING, WHO THE WORD IS!
WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT THIS IS THE WORD!
John 1;1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.
NOW THE ABOVE IS DEFINITELY A REFERENCE TO THE SON!
SO DEFINITELY THE SON IN THAT STATE WAS YET A SPIRIT!
AND THIS SPIRIT WAS ETERNALLY WITH THE FATHER AND IN THE SAME GLORY OF THE FATHER BEFORE THE WORLD WAS, SINCE IT WAS IN THE BEGINNING
John 17: And now glorify thou me, O Father, with YOURSELF, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee.
THE ABOVE IS THE SON, THE WORD MADE FLESH
SO THE SON’S SPIRIT IS THE WORD
IS IT CLEAR ENOUGH?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (2besee @ July 24 2013,19:27) “Can I back it up with scripture that prayer can be silent and does not always have to include words and speaking”? YES it is called LISTENING. It is in your Bible. Go look for it. Here is one example:
“Do not keep on babbling like the pagans do, for they think that they will be heard for their use of many words.”
I have no more to say about this now Terraricca,………..n………….!
2beeso if you listening you do what
listening to what are you knowing what your saying ,??? before insulting me ,look what you say then may be you realize that you really don't know what you talking about ,
PRAYER HIS COMMUNICATION WITH GOD ,DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS
IT MEANS WE MEN,TALK OR WITH OUR MIND FORMING REQUESTS OR OPEN OUR HEARTS ,THIS CAN NOT BE DONE IF YOU KEEP SILENT IN YOUR MIND AND YOUR LIPS ,YOU ARE RUNNING BEFORE YOU CAN WALK ,YOUR TRAVEL WILL BE LONG AND FULL OF FALLS ,IT SEEMS THAT YOU ARE VERY YOUNG AND i AM OLD ,AND SO YOU TRY TO TEACH ME WHAT i DO NOT KNOW ,AND YET YOU NEVER READ THE BIBLE FROM ONE COVER TO THE OTHER WHAT i HAVE DONE OVER 40 TIMES AND SOME BOOKS 100 TIME I STOPPED COUNTING NOW ,MOST OF THE TIME YOUR ANSWERS ARE “”” I “””(ME,MOI,)YES THE OUTSIDE YOU THE EGO ONE ,SAYS BELIEVE THIS OR THAT ,THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS IN SCRIPTURES THIS IS WHY I ASK ,
YOU CAN CALL ME WHAT EVER YOU WANT ,IT ONLY SHOWS WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN FACE OF WHAT IS WRITTEN FROM ME OR OTHERS ,ALL THE ANGELS ARE WATCHING ,THIS IS WHY YOU HAVE TO LEARN TO BE TRUTHFUL ,IN ALL THE THINGS YOU DO ,
Quote (carmel @ July 24 2013,22:35) Quote =terraricca,July 24 2013,04:01 Genesis 2: 24 Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH
Terraricca,
First you quoted:
Quote AT THAT TIME ADAM WAS PERFECT ,so no need to interpreting what does not need to be , In the above you stated that GOD WAS REFERRING TO ADAM SINCE HE WAS PERFECT!
Then you quoted:
Quote YOUR SCRIPTURE ;IN GENESES 2 MEANS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS ,AND IS FOR THAT PURPOSE ONLY, Then in the above you stated that the verse says exactly what it means:
SO A MAN LEAVES HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND CLEAVES TO HIS WIFE, and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH
SO SINCE IT MEANS WHAT IT SAYS IT DOES NOT REFER TO ADAM, BECAUSE ADAM NEVER HAD A MOTHER!
Now your last quote:
Quote God was not talking to Adam about marriage he already marry them ,SO HE WAS TALKING ABOUT THOSE THAT COME AFTER THEM their offspring , SO NOW GOD IS NOT EVEN REFERRING TO ADAM, BUT TO SINFULL ADAM’S DESCENDATS
SO YOU ARE CONTRADICTING YOURSELF !
YOU ARE CONFUSED YOURSELF!
READ AGAIN:
GOD ACCORDING TO YOU WAS NOT REFERING TO ADAM ! BUT TO SINFULL OFFSPRINGS
SO AGAIN YOU CONTRADICTED YOURSELF SINCE YOU SAID:
Quote AT THAT TIME ADAM WAS PERFECT ,so no need to interpreting what does not need to be , WHY THEREFORE GOD REFERRED TO SOMETHING WHICH IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE! YET!
OR:
WHY SHOULD GOD IN GENESIS 2;24 WHEN ALL WAS CREATED VERY GOOD ACCORDING TO HIS WILL, THEREFORE NO MORTAL SINFUL ELEMENTS INVOLVED, SAID THINGS WHICH ARE REFERRED TO SINFULL MORTAL OFFSPRINGS?
IN THE SAME TIME , IF HE REALLY MEANT SO,
YOU ARE REJECTING THE FACT, SINCE YOU CANNOT PERCEIVE IT, THAT HE ALSO ENVISAGED THAT HE STILL ACHIEVES HIS WILL, AND ACCOMPLISH HIS KINGDOM?
SOMETHING WHICH HE COMFIRMED IN GENESIS 3 WHEN HE DECLARED THAT HE HIMSELF THROUGH THE WORD WILL CRUSH THE HEAD OF THE DEVIL!
DO YOU WANT ME TO ACCEPT, THAT GOD DID THIS TO ALL THOSE WHO READS SCRIPTURES, AND IN THE SAME TIME, HE HIMSLEF WANT THEM TO READ SCRIPTURES TO BE AWARE OF THE TRUTH?
ISN’T IT THEREFORE AS I STATED THAT GOD WAS REFERRING TO HIS WHOLE PROCESS, AS A PRELUDE TO WHAT WAS ABOUT TO HAPPEN?
SO IT IS EVEN MORE AS I STATED, IF I ACCEPT THAT HE WAS REFERRING TO HIS OFFSPRINGS WHICH IS WHAT YOU STATED
OR IS IT RATHER , THAT YOU PREFER CONFRONTATION, THAN TO DISCERN THE TRUTH!
SO YES THAT VERSE IN GENESIS 2:24 IS REGARDING THE WHOLE PROCESS OF OUR CREATION, REDEMPTION, AND ACCOMPLISHMENT OF GOD’S KINGDOM WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT!
YOU ASKED:
Quote what do you think is THE SON'S SPIRIT NOW THIS TOPIC IS REGARDING, WHO THE WORD IS!
WHETHER YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT THIS IS THE WORD!
John 1;1 IN the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2The same was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.
NOW THE ABOVE IS DEFINITELY A REFERENCE TO THE SON!
SO DEFINITELY THE SON IN THAT STATE WAS YET A SPIRIT!
AND THIS SPIRIT WAS ETERNALLY WITH THE FATHER AND IN THE SAME GLORY OF THE FATHER BEFORE THE WORLD WAS, SINCE IT WAS IN THE BEGINNING
John 17: And now glorify thou me, O Father, with YOURSELF, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee.
THE ABOVE IS THE SON, THE WORD MADE FLESH
SO THE SON’S SPIRIT IS THE WORD
IS IT CLEAR ENOUGH?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
CHARLESyou use my quotes the way you like them to appear to you ,but you should quote them in all what they say
any way I disagree with you so much it is not even fanny ,
you have been deceived long ago and still believe in that deceiving culture,
it seems we have nothing in common ,not even the scriptures ,it seems you have another version that I never heard of ,
have a great day
T,
So now you boast over people. So WHAT if you have read the scriptures over 40 times – that is not going to save you, unless you change your heart.Prayer can “”involve moments”” of silence, Terraricca. It does not have to be all talk on our part.
Good bye Terraricca.
Quote (2besee @ July 25 2013,04:46) T,
So now you boast over people. So WHAT if you have read the scriptures over 40 times – that is not going to save you, unless you change your heart.Prayer can “”involve moments”” of silence, Terraricca. It does not have to be all talk on our part.
Good bye Terraricca.
i was right about you in my quote .Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,21:44) 33 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. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
He is not claiming to be God he is claiming to be like God in relationship to those Scripture calls gods.
Here is my point, Kerwin.If verse 33 can honestly and faithfully be translated as “makest thyself a god“, or “makest thyself God“, we have to decide from the CONTEXT which translation is correct.
The context of the NT tells us that Jesus never ever implied that he was God – or even equal to God. He over and over made it clear that he was someone other than and lesser than his own God, Jehovah – who SENT him into the world.
Therefore, we would be hard pressed to believe that the Jews accused him of making himself out to be God Himself, because that is something Jesus never did. Are you with me so far?
Secondly, look to the immediate context of the passage you quoted. Jesus did not respond with a NEGATIVE answer, as in, “What are you talking about? I never made myself out to be God!”
Instead, he responded with an AFFIRMATIVE answer, combined with a justification of that affirmative answer.
In other words, he didn't DENY their claim, but instead justified making himself out to be a god by pointing to a scripture where God called other, LOWER beings “gods”. He said, in effect, “If He called these lower ones gods, then why can't this higher one that God specifically set apart from all those other ones and sent into the world as His very own be considered a god?”
1. Do you agree that Jesus did not DENY their claim, but agreed with it and justified it? YES or NO?
2. Could Jesus have given an affirmative answer to the Jews if the claim had truly been that he was making himself out to be God Himself? YES or NO?
I hope you are starting to see where I'm coming from.
Quote (terraricca @ July 24 2013,17:02) i was right about you in my quote .
Every day we all have the choice to either build up, or tear down.Let's always choose to build up – as far as it depends upon us.
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 25 2013,05:09) Quote (terraricca @ July 24 2013,17:02) i was right about you in my quote .
Every day we all have the choice to either build up, or tear down.Let's always choose to build up – as far as it depends upon us.
Mikeyou right ,I should not even answered him ,or quote him ,but I have no patients with with people that open a bible and start to teach ,and that do not have a clue of scriptures ,but you are right in what you say,
but do not get me wrong ,I have tried to built him up but it seems that he want to teach me because i can not ask any thing
in return ,so what are you suggesting mike i do
may be it is time for me to say good bye and thank you ,
you have been a good friend to me ,for that I thank you ,
Quote (kerwin @ July 24 2013,14:40) Quote (jammin @ July 24 2013,06:16) Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,12:54) Quote (jammin @ July 23 2013,07:23) Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,07:21) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 21 2013,00:00) Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 20 2013,11:56) Either the Word was God or was a god will work……….
NO Kerwin!It either IS God Himself, OR it is a god who is NOT God himself.
Either/or does not work in this case.
(Thank you for admitting that “a god” is an acceptable translation of John 1:1.
)
Mike,The Word is being personified and Jesus even stated that according to the sense in which those that received the Word were called gods he was God. In a similar way the Word can also be called God.
Jesus is not claiming to be Jehovah nor is the Word Jehovah even if John called it God. It is just a way of communicating ideas about Jesus and the Word.
wrong. no version that supports your opinion.
the Word is Christ
that is what the bible says
Jammin,We are not talking version, we are talking of a type of communication. It is called thinking like a First Century Jew and not a 21st Century Trinitarian.
you do not think like the first century christian.
i said version bec you always say stories.
no bible supports your doctrine.you cant read your opinion. you think but non sense
Jammin,1st Century Christians were 1st Century Jews and Gentiles. Christianity is not a new religion it is a new covenant of an old religion. Trinitarianim had not yet evolved by the 1st Century.
did i say christianity is a new religion|?
john believes the Word is Christ.
how about you??your belief is not in the bible.
Oh dear dear, I was trying to communicate with you, Terraricca – you know, trying to make peace after all that you put people through. But you would have none of it – because you are a grudge holder.
You are not alone.Forums are to discuss topics, Terraricca – not to get personal.
Quote You right ,I should not even answered him ,or quote him, I have no patients with with people that open a bible and start to teach ,and that do not have a clue of scriptures So that is your excuse for being wrong – throw insults, and hope that nobody noticed.
And you never answered my questions from weeks ago.
I know why.
Terraricca:
https://heavennet.net/cgi-bin….y409837terraricca,July wrote:[/quote]
Quote you have been deceived long ago and still believe in that deceiving culture, Terraricca
HONESTLY SPEAKING, I always respected your MATURITY, AND YOUR INTELIGENCE!
BUT I WILL NEVER ACCEPT YOUR JUDGEMENT REGARDING MY FAITH!
FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT FROM YOUR POSTS IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS THAT YOU ARE NOT AWARE WHERE YOU ARE SINCE ONLY CONFUSION CAME OUT!
THIS IS CONFIRMED:
FIRST DUE TO THE FACT THAT YOU NEVER ANSWERED ONE QUESTION I POSTED, SECOND YOU NEVER WAS SPECIFIC REGARDING WHAT YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH, AND NEVER CONTRADICTED ME AND SUBSTANTIATED YOUR SENSLESS ARGUMENTS SIMPLY BLA…BLA…BLA…
NOW SINCE IT SEEMED THAT YOU STILL UNDER MILK, WITH EVERY RESPECT AS I HONESTLY SAID, HEREUNDER ARE THE LAST FEW QUESTIONS
NOT FOR YOU, BUT FOR SOMEONE WHO BELIEVE THAT HE IS ON MEAT
AND IS ABLE TO GIVE ME SOME LIGHT REGARDING THAT BIT OF SCRIPTURE, HEREUNDER, WHICH WE WERE ARGUING ABOUT, HOPING THAT HE IS READY TO DO REALLY SOMETHING FOR THE LOVE OF OUR ONLY SAVIOUR GOD,AND JESUS CHRIST
SOMETHING WHICH YOU WERE NEVER REALY DISPOSED TO DO!
NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT DEFINITELY WOULD SHED SOME LIGHT REGARDING THE TOPIC:
WHO IS THE WORD IN JOHN 1:1
Genesis 2: 24 Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be TWO IN ONE FLESH
HERE ARE THE QUESTIONS:
(1) WHY SCRIPTURE USED THE WORD MAN NOT SON SINCE THERE WERE BOTH FATHER AND MAOTHER? as it is it seems that HE IS NOT THEIR SON!
(2) WHY SCRIPTURE USED THE TITLES FATHER AND MOTHER without THE USE OF pronouns HIS FATHER, AND HIS MOTHER AS IT IS IT SEEMS THEY ARE NOT HIS FATHER AND HIS MOTHER!
(3) WHY FROM THE OTHER HAND, SCRIPTURE FELT THAT IT IS NOT THE CASE REGARDING THE WIFE, SINCE IT USED ITS PRONOUN AND STATED HIS WIFE TO MAKE SURE IT IS DEFINITELY HIS AND NOT SOMEBODY'S ELSE?
Peace and love in Jesus
Charles
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 25 2013,05:07) Quote (kerwin @ July 23 2013,21:44) 33 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. 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
He is not claiming to be God he is claiming to be like God in relationship to those Scripture calls gods.
Here is my point, Kerwin.If verse 33 can honestly and faithfully be translated as “makest thyself a god“, or “makest thyself God“, we have to decide from the CONTEXT which translation is correct.
The context of the NT tells us that Jesus never ever implied that he was God – or even equal to God. He over and over made it clear that he was someone other than and lesser than his own God, Jehovah – who SENT him into the world.
Therefore, we would be hard pressed to believe that the Jews accused him of making himself out to be God Himself, because that is something Jesus never did. Are you with me so far?
Secondly, look to the immediate context of the passage you quoted. Jesus did not respond with a NEGATIVE answer, as in, “What are you talking about? I never made myself out to be God!”
Instead, he responded with an AFFIRMATIVE answer, combined with a justification of that affirmative answer.
In other words, he didn't DENY their claim, but instead justified making himself out to be a god by pointing to a scripture where God called other, LOWER beings “gods”. He said, in effect, “If He called these lower ones gods, then why can't this higher one that God specifically set apart from all those other ones and sent into the world as His very own be considered a god?”
1. Do you agree that Jesus did not DENY their claim, but agreed with it and justified it? YES or NO?
2. Could Jesus have given an affirmative answer to the Jews if the claim had truly been that he was making himself out to be God Himself? YES or NO?
I hope you are starting to see where I'm coming from.
Mike,The Jews falsely accused Jesus of claiming to be God. Knowledgeable Jews believed they were gods, the children of the most high. For one to claim he was a god should not of been such a big deal.
Jesus purpose was to teach that he was superior to the children of God, being the Son of God, so he pointed out the children, non-emphasized, were called gods, non-emphasized, and so he the Son, emphasized, could be called God, emphasized.
In doing this he is not claiming to be Jehovah but rather he is speaking of his relationship to the children of God.
The translation of “god” does not seem correct to make the point the Son is superior to the children. It also makes the Jews appear ignorant of the way the word “god” was used to refer to certain human officials, as well as Scripture.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
