One argument against the divinity of Jesus

[cbacavis]

Saying, Where is he that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen his star in the east, and are come to adore him. (DRB)
Where is the king of the Jews that has been born? for we have seen his star in the east, and have come to do him homage. (Darby)

worship also means love, it does not mean take as a god.

and when again He may bring in the first-born to the world, He saith, 'And let them bow before him -- all messengers of God;' (YLT)

And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him. (DRB)

one should not take English translations of something too literally ...

Not disputing this at all. But, pray tell, when is any word for "worship" - the Hebrew shâchâh or the Greek proskuneō or latreuō - encouraged in the Bible toward anything other than God? I've searched in vain to find it.

When John on Patmos tried "adoring" and "prostating himself before" an angel, what did that angel say? (Revelation 22:8-9)

But why did Christ never reject this worship or reproof his disciples in any way? Curious...

[barnasha]

Not disputing this at all. But, pray tell, when is any word for "worship" - the Hebrew shâchâh or the Greek proskuneō or latreuō - encouraged in the Bible toward anything other than God? I've searched in vain to find it.

Matthew 9:18 - a man (other than Jesus)

When John on Patmos tried "adoring" and "prostating himself before" an angel, what did that angel say? (Revelation 22:8-9)

He said to worship God, not take God as a god. The latter is implied....

But why did Christ never reject this worship or reproof his disciples in any way? Curious...

Why would you reject love, homage, or supplication? As for you, would you reprove someone who showed you these things?

[cbacavis]

Matthew 9:18 - a man (other than Jesus)

This, my friend, is the strangest "proof-text" I've EVER seen. Jesus is clearly the "he" in verse 18, who just spoke in figurative language about wine and wineskins. Then a ruler comes and worships him [Jesus] while asking Jesus to raise his daughter from the dead. Then Jesus follows the man. What a skewed and inadequate example! Give me a real one, please.

He said to worship God, not take God as a god. The latter is implied....

The angel advises John to revere God, but not in any sense revering while holding that God is God? Outrageous if that's actually what you're saying. I don't understand your dichotomy at all here.

Why would you reject love, homage, or supplication? As for you, would you reprove someone who showed you these things?

I didn't address it, but "worship" in the Hebrew or Greek never means "love" in any context. There are five Greek words for "love" and not one is the word for worship. Same for the three Hebrew words. NOT ONE.

I love my wife but that can never imply worship unless she's an idol that I've put in place of God. Only in that case am I actually worshipping her.

[barnasha]

This, my friend, is the strangest "proof-text" I've EVER seen. Jesus is clearly the "he" in verse 18, who just spoke in figurative language about wine and wineskins. Then a ruler comes and worships him [Jesus] while asking Jesus to raise his daughter from the dead. Then Jesus follows the man. What a skewed and inadequate example! Give me a real one, please.

I made a mistake in reading it. I was trying to do you a favor and help you find something you were looking for... no reason to get an attitude

I just grabbed the first example I could find that seemed to be referring to someone else. I misread that one.

the definition of the word is as such, per Strong's:
- to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence
- among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence
in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication
- used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank
--to the Jewish high priests
--to God
--to Christ
--to heavenly beings
--to demons

The angel advises John to revere God, but not in any sense revering while holding that God is God? Outrageous if that's actually what you're saying. I don't understand your dichotomy at all here.

You can worship something without taking it as a god. You can also worship a god.

Why would you reject love, homage, or supplication? As for you, would you reprove someone who showed you these things?

I didn't address it, but "worship" in the Hebrew or Greek never means "love" in any context. There are five Greek words for "love" and not one is the word for worship. Same for the three Hebrew words. NOT ONE.

I love my wife but that can never imply worship unless she's an idol that I've put in place of God. Only in that case am I actually worshipping her.

You did not answer my question.

Usually a man would not pay homage to his own wife, as a husband-wife relationship is usually not so formal. One would pay homage to a king, a good friend, a teacher, etc.

[cbacavis]

I made a mistake in reading it. I was trying to do you a favor and help you find something you were looking for... no reason to get an attitude

I apologize, because there's no way I could have come across as anything other than angry. I thought you must've been trying to mislead me because the passage was quoted a little out of context anyway. Jumped the gun. Again, sorry

Here is a man denying worship because he is not God: Acts 10:24-27. So why did Jesus never do the same?

I've found just two places in the Bible where someone other than God is "worshipped" and it isn't condemned: 1 Chronicles 29:20 and Revelation 3:9. But in both instances they're recieving homage alongside God, and it's strictly because of their standing with him. But Christ was being worshipped as God.

You can worship something without taking it as a god. You can also worship a god.

Well, this is really just a matter of personal philosophy. The apostle Paul called even greed an idolatrous thing (Colossians 3:5), and idolatry is revering something as a god with no regard to the true God.

You did not answer my question.

Usually a man would not pay homage to his own wife, as a husband-wife relationship is usually not so formal. One would pay homage to a king, a good friend, a teacher, etc.

I see now that I didn't. Yes, I would accept homage from someone who is honoring me only as a fellow human. But it's irrelevant. Jesus wasn't accepting reverence just because he was some remarkable person:

"The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, EVEN AS they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him." John 5:22-23

He demanded the worship due to God, not just a king or a prophet or what have you. If you aren't worshipping God incarnate then you aren't worshipping God the Father either.

Furthermore, can we PRAY to anyone other than God?
Acts 1:1-2, 6, 21, 24
Acts 7:59-60
Acts 22:14-21

"Whatever you ask in my name, I WILL DO IT, that the Father may be glorified in the Son; if you ask anything in my name, I WILL DO IT." John 14:13-14

[Huguenot]

The following is an argument against the divinity of Jesus

God is the greatest being conceivable
Jesus is God
Greater beings than Jesus can be conceived
Therefore, Jesus is not God.

Well, paradoxically, Jesus did say that God the Father was greater, and we Christians - we enlightened and divine Christians - yes, we take this that while Jesus was on Earth and in a human body, God the father was greater in degree, yet Jesus was ONE with the Father. - John 10:30 NIV

The Son loves the Father and respects - even adores and worships the FATHER! The Father showers love and glory on the Son. Yet, the Son gives all glory to the Father!

Now consider the following.................

Acts 1:4 NIV

On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5 For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."

Question: If the Holy Spirit is in one substance with the Father and the Son - co-equally, why must the disciples wait?

If Jesus is God, one with the Father and promised the Holy Spirit in John 16 NIV and John 17 NIV, why not just order it done? In fact, Paul refers to the Holy Spirit - metaphorically - as the "Spirit of Christ".

This is because Jesus promised to ask the Father to send the Holy Spirit, that would testify of the Son sent from the Father! John 3:16 NIV

John 5:19 NIV

Jesus gave them this answer:

"I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, to your amazement he will show him even greater things than these. 21For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it. 22Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son, 23that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father, who sent him.

24 "I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life. 25 I tell you the truth, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. 26For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself. 27And he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.

&

Ponder the TRUTH if you can?

John 16:15 NIV

All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit [the Holy Spirit] will take from what is mine and make it known to you.

In brief, if God were monad - singular one as the Muslims assert, than God could not be Love. In the tri-une reality the Father loves the Son - the Son loves the Father and the Holy Spirit is loved and teaches of the Son who was sent by the Father, who testifies of the Son! God is LOVE * expediently to the infinite power!

Allah is monad - one loving self - self loving self? Have you ever attempted to wrap your arms around yourself and proclaim this Love?

[Ibn Abu Talib]

This all depends on what proof there is that the second premise, of course, is true. And if Jesus is God, then the premise can't apply to Him anyway... Confused.

The Letter to the Hebrews says this about Jesus:

1. Jesus is superior to the Old Testament prophets (Hebrews 1:1-3)
2. Jesus is superior to all the angels (Hebrews 1:4-14)
3. Jesus is superior to and worthy of more glory than Moses (Hebrews 3:1-6)
4. Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek, and thus is superior to Abraham. He is also superior to the Levite and Aaronic priesthoods and has a superior ministry (Hebrews 7-8)

So what being is left? Only God. And Jesus is God according to the Scriptures. You certainly can't say that anyone is greater than Jesus unless you first deny his divinity. Your argument is flawed.

That's a circular argument. Just because the bible says he is god, does not necessarily mean it is so. The bible could be wrong, after all.

I asked this to Apologia Monk, but I am also interested to know how you respond to the following question: Can we come to the conclusion Jesus was God solely by looking at his actions without taking into account the statements he made or what other people said about him?
I think in order to answer, you must first consider the qualities of Christ as determined from what he did.

Question: If the Holy Spirit is in one substance with the Father and the Son - co-equally, why must the disciples wait?

Whatever is composed of a substance is created. Moreover, if the father, son and Holy Spirit, share the same substance, we must conclude that the substance preceded them in existence. Maybe the inert substance is God!

In brief, if God were monad - singular one as the Muslims assert, than God could not be Love. In the tri-une reality the Father loves the Son - the Son loves the Father and the Holy Spirit is loved and teaches of the Son who was sent by the Father, who testifies of the Son! God is LOVE * expediently to the infinite power!

You believe God is comprised of the father, son and Holy Ghost. Accordingly, if the three persons love each other, and they make up God, God is in love with Himself!

[barnasha]

That's a circular argument. Just because the bible says he is god, does not necessarily mean it is so. The bible could be wrong, after all.

The bible calls Jesus (and others) son of God - not God

and by the way "son of God" does not mean waladullah ("biological offspring of God"), it means abdullah (roughly..."subject of God" or "a man of God")

[Sparko]

The bible calls Jesus (and others) son of God - not God

and by the way "son of God" does not mean waladullah ("biological offspring of God"), it means abdullah (roughly..."subject of God" or "a man of God")

The bible does both. He is called the Son of God and GOD.

2 Peter 1:1 Simon 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:



Titus 2:13 while we wait for the blessed hope--the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
John 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

John 20:27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe." 28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

God even calls Jesus "God"

Hebrews 1:6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, "Let all God's angels worship him." 7 In speaking of the angels he says, "He makes his angels winds, his servants flames of fire." 8 But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.

He even commands the angels to worship him.

[cbacavis]

The bible calls Jesus (and others) son of God - not God

and by the way "son of God" does not mean waladullah ("biological offspring of God"), it means abdullah (roughly..."subject of God" or "a man of God")

The word "Son" used in the phrase Son of God, is always the Greek word "uihos" in the New Testament. And it always means an immediate/remote or figurative kinship. It is never in any sense used to call Jesus a subject of God or a man of God. There are other words for this that would be 100% more applicable.

See Matthew 1:25 and Matthew 13:55. The same word is used here where Jesus is actually Mary's biological son. But Christ was concieved by the Holy Spirit, and merely delivered by Mary; I don't want anyone to misconstrue my words there.

Now, granted, the Koran does apply the word "'Abdu'llah" you've mentioned to Jesus:

Surah 19: 30 (Where Jesus speaks from the cradle, using these words), Verily, I am the SERVANT of God, He has brought me the Book, and He has made me a prophet, and He has made me blessed wherever I be.

So my question to you is essentially the same as Abu Talib's but in reverse. What makes the Koran correct and the Bible invalid in this case? The New Testament does not call Jesus a "servant" of God in any of the applicable verses, but "THE son" of God. It is a lie that the title "Son of God" means "Servant of God" in the Greek. There is a word for "servant" and that is "pais."

"Sons of God" is applied to others only in the plural, or if it is singular, we know that these people were created (like Adam - Luke 3:38). But the New Testament calls Jesus God's "only begotten" son (John 1:14, John 3:16, John 3:18, 1 John 4:9) and in other places calls him the creator of all things (Eph 3:9, Col 1:15-16, Rev 4:10-11). So Jesus is not at all like these other ordinary people.

[barnasha]

The word "Son" used in the phrase Son of God, is always the Greek word "uihos" in the New Testament. And it always means an immediate/remote or figurative kinship. It is never in any sense used to call Jesus a subject of God or a man of God. There are other words for this that would be 100% more applicable.

I'm talking about the figurative meaning of "son of God" as it translates into English (i.e. from Hebrew), not Greek

See Matthew 1:25 and Matthew 13:55. The same word is used here where Jesus is actually Mary's biological son. But Christ was concieved by the Holy Spirit, and merely delivered by Mary; I don't want anyone to misconstrue my words there.

Now, granted, the Koran does apply the word "'Abdu'llah" you've mentioned to Jesus:

Surah 19: 30 (Where Jesus speaks from the cradle, using these words), Verily, I am the SERVANT of God, He has brought me the Book, and He has made me a prophet, and He has made me blessed wherever I be.

So my question to you is essentially the same as Abu Talib's but in reverse. What makes the Koran correct and the Bible invalid in this case? The New Testament does not call Jesus a "servant" of God in any of the applicable verses, but "THE son" of God. It is a lie that the title "Son of God" means "Servant of God" in the Greek. There is a word for "servant" and that is "pais."

"Sons of God" is applied to others only in the plural, or if it is singular, we know that these people were created (like Adam - Luke 3:38). But the New Testament calls Jesus God's "only begotten" son (John 1:14, John 3:16, John 3:18, 1 John 4:9) and in other places calls him the creator of all things (Eph 3:9, Col 1:15-16, Rev 4:10-11). So Jesus is not at all like these other ordinary people.

yes but it does not say "only begotten" except in English versions translated by Christians who thought that way.

since the text does not actually SAY "only begotten", that is moot. It says unique. And indeed Jesus was a unique man

and 'abd does in a sense mean servant but it also means more like subject. (Obed in Hebrew.)

[cbacavis]

Can we come to the conclusion Jesus was God solely by looking at his actions without taking into account the statements he made or what other people said about him?
I think in order to answer, you must first consider the qualities of Christ as determined from what he did.

In a sense, you seem to be limiting what I can discuss here. I really can't bring up anything said by others about Jesus? Then I can't bring ANY of the New Testament books into this, right? I'll instead give you a comparison of Christ with God on my terms and not dishonest terms. I'm surprised anyway that no one's addressed this yet, so I'll give it a start. This is by no means covering everything:

Qualities
God does not change (Malachi 3:6) and neither does Christ (Hebrews 13:8).
God is the Holy One (Hosea 11:9) and so is Christ Acts 3:12-15).
God is righteous (Psalms 116:5) and so is Christ (1 John 2:1).
God is a "true and faithful witness" (Jeremiah 42:5) as well as Christ (Revelation 3:14).
God is called our strength (Psalms 46:1) and so is Christ (Phillipians 4:13).
God is the Light (Psalms 27:1) and so is Christ (John 8:12).
God is our Hope (Psalms 71:5) and so is Christ (1 Timothy 1:1).
God is a fountain of living water (Jeremiah 17:13) and Christ is a spring of water that gives eternal life (John 4:14).

Actions
God created everything (Genesis 1:1) and so did Christ create everything (Hebrews 1:8-10).
God preserves the universe (Nehemiah 9:6) and so does Christ (Hebrews 1:1-3).
God alone redeems Israel from all sin (Psalms 130:7-8) and so does Christ (Titus 2:13-14).
God alone forgives (Jeremiah 31:34) and yet Jesus forgives by his own word (Luke 5:20-21).
God hears prayer (Psalms 65:2) and yet Jesus hears prayer and can respond to it himself (John 14:14).
God made storms still (Psalms 107:29) and Christ did the same (Luke 8:24).
God is called a wonderful counselor (Isaiah 28:29) as well as the prophesied Christ (Isaiah 9:5-7).
God is with us (Isaiah 41:10) just as Christ is with us (Matthew 28:20).
God knows our hearts (1 Kings 8:39) just as Christ does (John 2:24-25).
God gives to each person according to their ways (Jeremiah 17:10) as well as Christ (Revelation 2:23).
God reproves those he loves (Proverbs 3:12) just as Christ does (Revelation 3:19-20).
God inflicts vengeance upon the ungodly (Isaiah 35:4) and so does Christ (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8).
God judges (Psalms 96:13), but yet the Father does not judge, only Christ the Son judges (John 5:22-23).

And I've even left out the matching titles between God and Christ, as well as a number of passages where we are told Christ recieves exactly the same honor that God recieves. You, like the Israelites of Jesus' day, are seeing God right in front of you and denying Him anyway.

You believe God is comprised of the father, son and Holy Ghost. Accordingly, if the three persons love each other, and they make up God, God is in love with Himself!

Of course, knowing especially what 1 John 4:7-8 tells me about God's nature! God as a trinity is the most perfect and complete example of love. So what?

[barnasha]

You believe God is comprised of the father, son and Holy Ghost. Accordingly, if the three persons love each other, and they make up God, God is in love with Himself!

Of course, knowing especially what 1 John 4:7-8 tells me about God's nature! God as a trinity is the most perfect and complete example of love. So what?

I'm curious as to what this excerpt has to do with the trinitization of God

[cbacavis]

I'm talking about the figurative meaning of "son of God" as it translates into English (i.e. from Hebrew), not Greek

Why would we need to talk about Hebrew? If you're talking about New Testament language, you're talking about Greek. The Greek says what it says.

yes but it does not say "only begotten" except in English versions translated by Christians who thought that way.

since the text does not actually SAY "only begotten", that is moot. It says unique. And indeed Jesus was a unique man

This is an objection (which actually originated with the Gnostics, imagine that!) that just misses the mark with Greek language. "Monogenes" is a compound word that just combines "monos" and "genao" - so it means single-begotten, only-begotten, only-produced, only child. If we were to say that Jesus was an extraordinary or special person, "monogenes" is not the word for it; that instead is "monadikos." The word being used in all of these places - John 1:14, John 1:18, John 3:16, Hebrews 11:17, 1 John 4:9 - it means only-born, sole, only-begotten. In all the other places it's used, it's not talking about special people at all (Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, Luke 9:38). The word "monogenes" is indeed in the original Greek where it's referring to Jesus being the Only begotten of God.

Tell me... why did the writers of the Nicene Creed, first composed in Greek in 325 AD (before ENGLISH!), also call Jesus "the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God" and not recognize the Greek as it supposedly truly was? Take it up with John and Luke and the writer of Hebrews, not the later English translators.

In any instance, who else on earth is ever said in the Bible to have been conceived in someone's womb by God's spirit?

and 'abd does in a sense mean servant but it also means more like subject. (Obed in Hebrew.)

But the Hebrew "obed" is never used in place of "Son of God" in the New Testament. Neither is any Greek word for "servant" used in place of Son. If the writers meant it, they would've written it.

[cbacavis]

I'm curious as to what this excerpt has to do with the trinitization of God

I didn't claim that anything in 1 John 4:7-8 denotes a trinity. Clearly, because of my viewing God as a trinity according to other passages, I make a logical connection. I agree that because God's nature is love epitomized, His trinity is also love epitomized.

Again, so what? Is there anything grotesque or improper about God loving Himself? Even if God were not a trinity, why can he not love Himself and still remain perfect in that love?