- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Many people use Titus 2:13 as a trinity or “Jesus is God” proof text……..but is it really? Let's get to the bottom of Titus 2:13 and be done with it.
Here's what the Jehovah's Witnesses and their sources say:
In this place we find two nouns connected by καί (kai, “and”), the first noun being preceded by the definite article τοῦ (tou, “of the”) and the second noun without the definite article. A similar construction is found in 2Pe 1:1, 2, where, in vs 2, a clear distinction is made between God and Jesus. This indicates that when two distinct persons are connected by καί, if the first person is preceded by the definite article it is not necessary to repeat the definite article before the second person. Examples of this construction in the Greek text are found in Ac 13:50; 15:22; Eph 5:5; 2Th 1:12; 1Ti 5:21; 6:13; 2Ti 4:1. This construction is also found in LXX. (See Pr 24:21 ftn.) According to An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, by C. F. D. Moule, Cambridge, England, 1971, p. 109, the sense “of the great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ . . . is possible in κοινή [koi‧ne′] Greek even without the repetition [of the definite article].”
A detailed study of the construction in Tit 2:13 is found in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, by Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp. 439-457. On p. 452 of this work the following comments are found: “Take an example from the New Testament. In Matt. xxi. 12 we read that Jesus ‘cast out all those that were selling and buying in the temple,’ τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράζοντας [tous po‧loun′tas kai a‧go‧ra′zon‧tas]. No one can reasonably suppose that the same persons are here described as both selling and buying. In Mark the two classes are made distinct by the insertion of τούς before ἀγοράζοντας; here it is safely left to the intelligence of the reader to distinguish them. In the case before us [Tit 2:13], the omission of the article before σωτῆρος [so‧te′ros] seems to me to present no difficulty,—not because σωτῆρος is made sufficiently definite by the addition of ἡμῶν [he‧mon′] (Winer), for, since God as well as Christ is often called “our Saviour,” ἡ δόξα τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν [he do′xa tou me‧ga′lou The‧ou′ kai so‧te′ros he‧mon′], standing alone, would most naturally be understood of one subject, namely, God, the Father; but the addition of ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ to σωτῆρος ἡμῶν changes the case entirely, restricting the σωτῆρος ἡμῶν to a person or being who, according to Paul’s habitual use of language, is distinguished from the person or being whom he designates as ὁ θεός [ho The‧os′], so that there was no need of the repetition of the article to prevent ambiguity. So in 2 Thess. i. 12, the expression κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου [ka‧ta′ ten kha′rin tou The‧ou′ he‧mon′ kai ky‧ri′ou] would naturally be understood of one subject, and the article would be required before κυρίου if two were intended; but the simple addition of ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ to κυρίου makes the reference to the two distinct subjects clear without the insertion of the article.”
Therefore, in Tit 2:13, two distinct persons, Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, are mentioned. Throughout the Holy Scriptures it is not possible to identify Jehovah and Jesus as being the same individual.
The “Jesus is God” scholars are saying that since the sentence doesn't have the definite article before “savior”, the sentence continues to be about one person. They imply that if it were talking about two different subjects, it would say “THE great God and [THE] Savior of us, Jesus Christ.”
What the above source is pointing out is that the second definite article was not always used if it was “common sense” that the writer was speaking of two subjects. This source lists a few other scriptures that are similarly worded, yet it is clear there are two subjects. Here is one of them, 2 Peter 1:1-2:
1Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:2Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.
You can see the bolded part in verse 1 makes it sound almost as if Peter is saying Jesus is our God. But the bolded part in verse 2 clearly distinguishes “Jesus” as someone other than “God”. So two subjects, but only one definite article. And it's clear that Peter didn't think Jesus was God from the following,
1 Peter 1:3
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!The above source lists Matthew 21:12 as an example. This scripture speaks of THE buyers and [THE] sellers, who are most obviously two different subjects, but only ONE definite article is used. It also mentions 2 Thess 1:12 as an example where virtually every translation adds the omitted second definite article based on the context:
2 Thess 1:12 NET
that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NIV
We pray this so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NASB
so that the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.BBE
So that glory may be given to the name of our Lord Jesus through you, and you may have glory in him, by the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NRSV
so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NKJV
that the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.Almost every respectable translation adds the word “the” in front of Lord……..even though it's not in the Greek. Why? Because it is clear that two subjects are mentioned, even though only one definite article was used.
So the definite article problem has at least been “neutralized” using SCRIPTURAL examples.
Next, I would like to point out that Paul made it very clear dozens of times in his writings that Jesus was someone other than God. I don't know how much clearer he could have been than in 1 Co
r 8:6,1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.But just in case, he also wrote these,
Romans 15:6
so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.Ephesians 4:6
one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.2 Corinthians 1:3
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,2 Corinthians 11:31
The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever, knows that I am not lying.Ephesians 1:3
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,It's hard to believe that because of a missing definite article in ONE sentence Paul wrote, and against everything else he wrote, certain people try to use Titus 2:13 as evidence that Paul thought Jesus was God Himself.
Well, if all this isn't enough to bring those people to the honest truth, I have one more “fallback”.
Let's just say for argument's sake that Paul DID call Jesus “god” in this one and only instance. Do you remember Isaiah 9:6? THE Almighty God Jehovah had already foretold 700 years before Jesus came as flesh that he would be called “mighty god”. So, even if Paul WAS calling Jesus “our great god and savior”, then he would have only been fulfilling the prophecy spoken by Jehovah through Isaiah.
But don't forget that this same Jehovah later went on to clarify that this “mighty god” that Isaiah prophesied about was someone OTHER THAN and LESSOR TO Himself. (Micah 5:4, Ezekiel 34:24, Jeremiah 30:9)
Any way you slice it, Titus 2:13 is NOT a “Jesus is God” proof text.
peace and love,
mikeYou are very very good!!!!!!!!!!!
Mark 10:18 NIV
“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.But thank you very much T.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 26 2010,12:53) Many people use Titus 2:13 as a trinity or “Jesus is God” proof text……..but is it really? Let's get to the bottom of Titus 2:13 and be done with it. Here's what the Jehovah's Witnesses and their sources say:
In this place we find two nouns connected by καί (kai, “and”), the first noun being preceded by the definite article τοῦ (tou, “of the”) and the second noun without the definite article. A similar construction is found in 2Pe 1:1, 2, where, in vs 2, a clear distinction is made between God and Jesus. This indicates that when two distinct persons are connected by καί, if the first person is preceded by the definite article it is not necessary to repeat the definite article before the second person. Examples of this construction in the Greek text are found in Ac 13:50; 15:22; Eph 5:5; 2Th 1:12; 1Ti 5:21; 6:13; 2Ti 4:1. This construction is also found in LXX. (See Pr 24:21 ftn.) According to An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, by C. F. D. Moule, Cambridge, England, 1971, p. 109, the sense “of the great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ . . . is possible in κοινή [koi‧ne′] Greek even without the repetition [of the definite article].”
A detailed study of the construction in Tit 2:13 is found in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, by Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp. 439-457. On p. 452 of this work the following comments are found: “Take an example from the New Testament. In Matt. xxi. 12 we read that Jesus ‘cast out all those that were selling and buying in the temple,’ τοὺς πωλοῦντας καὶ ἀγοράζοντας [tous po‧loun′tas kai a‧go‧ra′zon‧tas]. No one can reasonably suppose that the same persons are here described as both selling and buying. In Mark the two classes are made distinct by the insertion of τούς before ἀγοράζοντας; here it is safely left to the intelligence of the reader to distinguish them. In the case before us [Tit 2:13], the omission of the article before σωτῆρος [so‧te′ros] seems to me to present no difficulty,—not because σωτῆρος is made sufficiently definite by the addition of ἡμῶν [he‧mon′] (Winer), for, since God as well as Christ is often called “our Saviour,” ἡ δόξα τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν [he do′xa tou me‧ga′lou The‧ou′ kai so‧te′ros he‧mon′], standing alone, would most naturally be understood of one subject, namely, God, the Father; but the addition of ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ to σωτῆρος ἡμῶν changes the case entirely, restricting the σωτῆρος ἡμῶν to a person or being who, according to Paul’s habitual use of language, is distinguished from the person or being whom he designates as ὁ θεός [ho The‧os′], so that there was no need of the repetition of the article to prevent ambiguity. So in 2 Thess. i. 12, the expression κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου [ka‧ta′ ten kha′rin tou The‧ou′ he‧mon′ kai ky‧ri′ou] would naturally be understood of one subject, and the article would be required before κυρίου if two were intended; but the simple addition of ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ to κυρίου makes the reference to the two distinct subjects clear without the insertion of the article.”
Therefore, in Tit 2:13, two distinct persons, Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, are mentioned. Throughout the Holy Scriptures it is not possible to identify Jehovah and Jesus as being the same individual.
The “Jesus is God” scholars are saying that since the sentence doesn't have the definite article before “savior”, the sentence continues to be about one person. They imply that if it were talking about two different subjects, it would say “THE great God and [THE] Savior of us, Jesus Christ.”
What the above source is pointing out is that the second definite article was not always used if it was “common sense” that the writer was speaking of two subjects. This source lists a few other scriptures that are similarly worded, yet it is clear there are two subjects. Here is one of them, 2 Peter 1:1-2:
1Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:2Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.
You can see the bolded part in verse 1 makes it sound almost as if Peter is saying Jesus is our God. But the bolded part in verse 2 clearly distinguishes “Jesus” as someone other than “God”. So two subjects, but only one definite article. And it's clear that Peter didn't think Jesus was God from the following,
1 Peter 1:3
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ!The above source lists Matthew 21:12 as an example. This scripture speaks of THE buyers and [THE] sellers, who are most obviously two different subjects, but only ONE definite article is used. It also mentions 2 Thess 1:12 as an example where virtually every translation adds the omitted second definite article based on the context:
2 Thess 1:12 NET
that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NIV
We pray this so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NASB
so that the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.BBE
So that glory may be given to the name of our Lord Jesus through you, and you may have glory in him, by the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NRSV
so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.NKJV
that the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.Almost every respectable translation adds the word “the” in front of Lord……..even though it's not in the Greek. Why? Because it is clear that two subjects are mentioned, even though only one definite article was used.
So the definite article problem has at least been “neutralized” using S
CRIPTURAL examples.Next, I would like to point out that Paul made it very clear dozens of times in his writings that Jesus was someone other than God. I don't know how much clearer he could have been than in 1 Cor 8:6,
1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.But just in case, he also wrote these,
Romans 15:6
so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.Ephesians 4:6
one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.2 Corinthians 1:3
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,2 Corinthians 11:31
The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, who is to be praised forever, knows that I am not lying.Ephesians 1:3
Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,It's hard to believe that because of a missing definite article in ONE sentence Paul wrote, and against everything else he wrote, certain people try to use Titus 2:13 as evidence that Paul thought Jesus was God Himself.
Well, if all this isn't enough to bring those people to the honest truth, I have one more “fallback”.
Let's just say for argument's sake that Paul DID call Jesus “god” in this one and only instance. Do you remember Isaiah 9:6? THE Almighty God Jehovah had already foretold 700 years before Jesus came as flesh that he would be called “mighty god”. So, even if Paul WAS calling Jesus “our great god and savior”, then he would have only been fulfilling the prophecy spoken by Jehovah through Isaiah.
But don't forget that this same Jehovah later went on to clarify that this “mighty god” that Isaiah prophesied about was someone OTHER THAN and LESSOR TO Himself. (Micah 5:4, Ezekiel 34:24, Jeremiah 30:9)
Any way you slice it, Titus 2:13 is NOT a “Jesus is God” proof text.
peace and love,
mike
Mikeboll,Nice job.
barley
Mike Boll,
The JW explation was wordy but your explanation was brief and covered the point completely. I agree with Barley that you did a fine job.
Quote (Tim Kraft @ Dec. 18 2010,04:19) A thought: Who can forgive sin but God alone? Did Jesus forgive us our sin? TK
TimExactly! We can forgive those who sin against us but we cannot forgive sins against God.
Jesus could forgive all sin including those against God.
WJ
Thank you barley and Kerwin!
And to Tim and Keith:
John 20 NIV
21 Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”This has the same exact Greek words for “sin” and “forgive” as Matthew 9:6, to which I assume Tim refers. Does this mean that the disciples are now also members of the “Godhead”?
And to both of you: This is not a “generic” Jesus is God thread. Please address the topic and show me how Titus 2:13 means that Paul thinks Jesus is God Almighty.
I'll add this tidbit into the fray:
Titus 2:13 CEV
13We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. [a]The footnote “a” says:
Titus 2:13 the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ: Or “the glorious return of our great God and our Savior Jesus Christ” or “the return of Jesus Christ, who is the glory of our great God and Savior.”
This info is from the 50+ Trinitarian scholars who translated the CEV Bible. At least these guys are honest enough to admit the other options that the Greek words could mean. Are you that honest, Keith? If so, then we shouldn't be seeing Titus 2:13 pop up in other threads anymore as a solid trinity “proof text”, right?
peace and love,
mikeMike,
I do believe that it is easily proven that the early church recognized Jesus as the God from God…the begotten from the unbegotten, so I would think that would cause you to rethink your position here. Consider what Pliny says to the Emperor Trajan. Pliny was an official of the Emperor and someone that sought out Christians, questioned them and then persecuted them if he couldn't get them to recant Jesus Christ. He mentions that one of those who turned away from Christ admitted that those who gathered together would sings hymns about Jesus as if He was a god:I read about Pliny who was an officer that followed orders from the emporer Trajan. Pliny captured Christians and persecuted them. I will paste something he said about this. Please note the bolded portion:
BOOK TEN
LETTER 96TO THE EMPEROR TRAJAN
IT is a rule, Sir, which I inviolably observe, to refer myself to you in all my doubts; for who is more capable of guiding my uncertainty or informing my ignorance? Having never been present at any trials of the Christians, I am unacquainted with the method and limits to be observed either in examining or punishing them. Whether any difference is to be made on account of age, or no distinction allowed between the youngest and the adult; whether repentance admits to a pardon, or if a man has been once a Christian it avails him nothing to recant; whether the mere profession of Christianity, albeit without crimes, or only the crimes associated therewith are punishable in all these points I am greatly doubtful.
In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have been denounced to me as Christians is this: I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For whatever the nature of their creed might be, I could at least feel no doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved chastisement. There were others also possessed with the same infatuation, but being citizens of Rome, I directed them to be carried thither.
These accusations spread (as is usually the case) from the mere fact of the matter being investigated and several forms of the mischief came to light. A placard was put up, without any signature, accusing a large number of persons by name. Those who denied they were, or had ever been, Christians, who repeated after me an invocation to the Gods, and offered adoration, with wine and frankincense, to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for that purpose, together with those of tbe Gods, and who finally cursed Christ none of which acts, it is said, those who are really Christians can be forced into performing these I thought it proper to discharge. Others who were named by that informer at first confessed themselves Christians, and then denied it; true, they had been of that persuasion but they had quitted it, some three years, others many years, and a few as much as twentyfive years ago. They all worshipped your statue and the images of the Gods, and cursed Christ.
They affirmed, however, the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind. Even this practice, however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations. I judged it so much the more necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition.found here: ]http://www.vroma.org/~hwalker/Pliny/Pliny10-096-E.html
You know that I can show you several of the early church father's referring to the unbegotten God and the begotten God. So, why can you not accept that He would be called “our great God?”
Hi Kathi,
When I saw you responded, I was happy because I hadn't heard from you in a while. And I'm still happy to hear from you. And I KNOW that Jesus is “a god”, for Jehovah says so. But he is NOT YHVH Almighty, God of gods, is he?
And “God from God” says that very loud and clear, Kathi. YHVH God is not FROM anyone or anything. All things are FROM Him, just like scripture says.
So I have no problem with Jesus being “the only begotten god” that GOD ALMIGHTY SENT into the world as a sacrifice. I have no problem thinking of Jesus as “a god” because this particular SERVANT of the one he calls “my God” is the second most powerful being in existence.
But Keith and SF were implying that Titus 2:13 taught that Jesus was God Almighty Himself, and I'm sure you don't think it means Jesus is the only UNbegotten God, do you?
peace and love and glad that you are okay,
mikeHi Mike,
Well, I'm happy to correspond to you too and it has been a while…I've been over in the “Other Writings” section.Are you clear that Jesus is the ONLY begotten god/God and therefore there are no other gods in His category if He is the ONLY BEGOTTEN God/god. All other so called 'gods' were not considered unbegotten certainly, and we know that all other 'gods' were not begotten either because Jesus is an ONLY begotten God/god. So those in the category of 'gods,' as I see it, is a completely different category than Jesus. Do you see this?
As you say, you have no problem with Jesus being 'the only begotten god' then would you have a problem with Titus 2:13 saying “our great begotten god and savior, Jesus Christ?”
I have no problem with that at all. Just as I have no problem with Thomas calling him “my god”. Because neither Paul nor Thomas considered him “God Most High”.
I ONLY have a problem with anyone who would dare to think that Paul somehow thought Jesus was God Almighty from this one scripture when he clearly did NOT think that at all if you read the rest of what he wrote.
peace and love,
mikeSo, if you have no problem with “our great begotten god and savior, Jesus Christ” why go to the extent of challenging the wording of “our great god and savior, Jesus Christ?” Couldn't that be saying the same thing?
Hi Kathi,
Like I said, this thread was not intended for those of us who know Jesus is not “God Most High”.
And it's not so much ME that is going to any “extent”. It is the majority of trinitarian sponsored translators that go to the “extent” of wording it in such a way that it could be misunderstood that Jesus IS “God Most High”. Look at 1:4,
Titus 1:4 NET
To Titus, my genuine son in a common faith. Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior!The major difference between 1:4 and 2:13 is that Paul adds the words “the Father” behind “God”. Had he done that in 2:13 like he many times had done, there would be no need for discussion on 2:13.
But it irritates me that these translators would take the wording of 2:13 and think, “Hey, even though Paul NEVER calls Jesus 'God', or 'a god' in his own words in any of his writings, we can SNEAK this one in – even though it most likely should be translated as, 'our glorious God AND our Savior Jesus Christ'”.
And it further irritates me that people like Keith are willing to jump on this as a trinity “proof text”.
And so, I “went to the extent” that I did for those reasons, okay?
By the way, I have read the same Pliny transcripts in a book entitled “Man's Religions”. I cringe just thinking of the torture and death those people went through simply for following Jesus' teachings to NOT steal or cheat or hurt anyone. “Love your neighbor as you love yourself”. And for following those words of LOVE, they were brutally tortured and killed.
But that's okay. They are probably the ones under the alter asking God “How long?” right now. They are wearing white now.
Oh, and I think I found one flaw the JW's have in that same book. One of Pliny's soldiers wrote to him about the Christians making the “sign of the cross” on their chests. The Greek word translated as “cross” means “stake”, and never means “two pieces of wood tied or nailed together in a T”. And so the JW's have always railed against the “Cross” of Christianity, asserting he was nailed to a verticle stake. But this soldier's letter to Pliny seems to disagree.
It's one of those things that's not so important in the scope of all things, but I thought it was interesting.
peace and love,
mikeMike,
So, then if you have no problem with “our great god and savior, Jesus Christ” as speaking of one person then maybe you should be a little irritated that the JW's go to great lengths to pick apart the construction of the verse so they can come up with this conclusion:Therefore, in Tit 2:13, two distinct persons, Jehovah God and Jesus Christ, are mentioned. Throughout the Holy Scriptures it is not possible to identify Jehovah and Jesus as being the same individual.
Quote was found in your first post on this topic.
The “Jesus is God” scholars are saying that the verse is about one person and you can see that it certainly can be about one person.
Therefore, shouldn't this discussion on this verse be more about whether it refers to the 'begotten' god/God or the 'unbegotten' God. And you and I would agree that it refers to the 'begotten' god/God which is obvious to us. But then many do not believe that the Son is referred to as the only 'begotten God/god' as is found in John 1:18 NASB and the NWT. We do know that the early church father's used the term 'begotten God' and 'unbegotten God,' especially the term 'unbegotten God' frequently. So, I would say that it was obvious that this verse would mean 'begotten God/god' to the reader/hearer of the day.
About the cross, oh my, don't get me going…I get so irritated at those who criticize the cross as a symbol of Christianity…and those that claim that it was a stake and not a cross beam, as if that really matters. Imagine the logistics of hanging someone on a stake…it would have to be longer for the arms to go overhead and also to be sunk deeper in the ground to hold it steady. If it were cross shaped, then the tree log wouldn't have to be so long and the hole to sink it in wouldn't have to be so deep because the balance would have been easier to achieve. Obviously, I see the cross as an altar of the most precious sacrifice, not as some torture stake. God has had man make elaborate altars in the OT and so, an altar is not a symbol of offense to Him, nor was He having men make an altar with concern that it would become a graven image or idol that some would worship. The Christian cross is merely a memorial of the sacrifice that won the victory over death. See there…you got me going
Back to the topic…
Okay Kathi,
Can you find me any other instance in scripture where Paul calls Jesus by the title “god”………IN HIS OWN WORDS, not quoting scripture?
And why are YOU so “intent” on 2:13 NOT refering to Jehovah?
peace and love,
mikeMike,
As you know, I do believe that Jesus has the name 'Jehovah' within Him and appears as 'Jehovah'- Jehovah the Son of Jehovah the Father, in the OT. So, maybe your question is more about me being so intent on 2:13 not referring to the God that is the SOURCE of all good things. I think that it is obvious that Paul understands that there is a Father and a Son, he has clearly made a distinction that there are two and that the Son is not the Father and the Father is not the Son but both are rightly deity and can be referred to as God. As you probably know, I read Son of God when speaking about the only begotten Son of God to obviously mean the God from God, or the begotten God, and I think that the writers of the NT did also. That is what seems evident in the behavior and writings of the early church. My Bible study program is on my laptop which is without a power cord for several days so to pull up scriptures for you will take much longer than usual. As I find them, I will post them. I do know that Paul understands that Jesus is the Son of God.Quote (Lightenup @ Dec. 20 2010,09:05) About the cross, oh my, don't get me going…I get so irritated at those who criticize the cross as a symbol of Christianity…and those that claim that it was a stake and not a cross beam, as if that really matters. Imagine the logistics of hanging someone on a stake…it would have to be longer for the arms to go overhead and also to be sunk deeper in the ground to hold it steady. If it were cross shaped, then the tree log wouldn't have to be so long and the hole to sink it in wouldn't have to be so deep because the balance would have been easier to achieve. Obviously, I see the cross as an altar of the most precious sacrifice, not as some torture stake. God has had man make elaborate altars in the OT and so, an altar is not a symbol of offense to Him, nor was He having men make an altar with concern that it would become a graven image or idol that some would worship. The Christian cross is merely a memorial of the sacrifice that won the victory over death. See there…you got me going
I can remember I made a post once saying it was wrong to wear a cross. But I brought a bracelet a couple of weeks ago, from the Christian bookshop. It's a cross and I wear it happily. It shows in a way… well to me… that I am a Christian.Sorry, carry on kathi=)
Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 26 2010,06:53) Let's just say for argument's sake that Paul DID call Jesus “god” in this one and only instance. Do you remember Isaiah 9:6? THE Almighty God Jehovah had already foretold 700 years before Jesus came as flesh that he would be called “mighty god”. So, even if Paul WAS calling Jesus “our great god and savior”, then he would have only been fulfilling the prophecy spoken by Jehovah through Isaiah.
Mike,
(I have been busy living life and trying to “grow up” which is why i have been away)Lets get something straight, are you stating that you (Mike) believe that Jesus is a God, but not THE God.
correct yes or no?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
