A Long Standing Argument....

[Ben Lomond]

In reply to RBerman post #73:


With reference to the use of the word “worship” in the following texts and others:

Mt 2:11. On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.

Mt 14:32. And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down. Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

Mt 28:16. Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.

Rev 19:10. At this I (John) fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”

A point made clear by the revisors of the American Standard Version of the Bible is that in the New Testament, “The Greek word [translated “worship”] denotes an act of reverence whether paid to a creature or the Creator.” See footnote No3 to Matthew 2:11.

So when the disciples “worshiped” Jesus (Mt 14:33) or when John “worshiped” the angel (Rev 19:10), it was not an indication that either were regarded as other than creatures created by Jehovah God.

Mention has already been made of the use of eloheim – “gods – as used of priests, prophets and any others to whom the word of God came see John 10:34 and the 82nd Psalm.

An essential element of the Bible narrative of the relationship between God and mankind is that God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them (Gen 1:27).

Having been endowed with a mind capable of reason, choice and discrimination, we were also given instructions not to taste of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, as death would surely ensue (Gen 2:17).
Mankind in a state of deluded arrogance decided to taste of good and evil and decide the merits of each for himself (Gen 3:5).

Death is the result of this disobedience.

Paul sums the situation up neatly in Romans 1:25. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator — who is forever praised. Amen.

It is mankind that is in a position of transgression with God, and consequently it is mankind that needs to change his ways.
It is sheer arrogant impudence on the part of mankind to assert that God needs to become human (that is to say an image of God’s own self???).

Mal 3:6 assures us - I am the Lord, I do not change.

As for putting trust in priests and scribes, well Jeremiah offers some advice - Jer 8:8. ‘How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

Serve God in sincerity and truth (Joshua 24:14. OT).
God is a spirit and must be worshiped in spirit and truth (John 4:24. NT).
In these simple statements we have no mention of the elaborate forms and rituals upon which many seem to place such great value.

He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? – To act justly and love mercy and to walk humbly with your God, (Mic 6:8).

Jesus himself exhorted people, “So in everything do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Mt 7:12).

In these simple statements I fail to perceive the lofty sophistry that forms the basis of the doctrines of Incarnation, Holy Trinity, Virgin Birth and Transubstantiation.

Ben Lomond.
= = = = = = = = = =

[RBerman]

With reference to the use of the word “worship” in the following texts and others:

Mt 2:11. On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. Then they opened their treasures and presented him with gifts of gold and of incense and of myrrh.

Mt 14:32. And when they climbed into the boat, the wind died down. Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”

Mt 28:16. Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted.

Rev 19:10. At this I (John) fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, “Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”

A point made clear by the revisors of the American Standard Version of the Bible is that in the New Testament, “The Greek word [translated “worship”] denotes an act of reverence whether paid to a creature or the Creator.” See footnote No3 to Matthew 2:11. So when the disciples “worshiped” Jesus (Mt 14:33) or when John “worshiped” the angel (Rev 19:10), it was not an indication that either were regarded as other than creatures created by Jehovah God.

But Jesus was worshiped as God (John 20:28-29), as one who had equality with God (Philippians 2:6), as one who is the radiance of God's glory (Hebrews 1:3), as one who is our God and savior (2 Peter 1:1)

An essential element of the Bible narrative of the relationship between God and mankind is that God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them (Gen 1:27).

Having been endowed with a mind capable of reason, choice and discrimination, we were also given instructions not to taste of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, as death would surely ensue (Gen 2:17).
Mankind in a state of deluded arrogance decided to taste of good and evil and decide the merits of each for himself (Gen 3:5).

Death is the result of this disobedience.

Paul sums the situation up neatly in Romans 1:25. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator — who is forever praised. Amen.

It is mankind that is in a position of transgression with God, and consequently it is mankind that needs to change his ways.
It is sheer arrogant impudence on the part of mankind to assert that God needs to become human (that is to say an image of God’s own self???).

Mal 3:6 assures us - I am the Lord, I do not change.

As for putting trust in priests and scribes, well Jeremiah offers some advice - Jer 8:8. ‘How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

Serve God in sincerity and truth (Joshua 24:14. OT).
God is a spirit and must be worshiped in spirit and truth (John 4:24. NT).
In these simple statements we have no mention of the elaborate forms and rituals upon which many seem to place such great value.

He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the LORD require of you? – To act justly and love mercy and to walk humbly with your God, (Mic 6:8).

Jesus himself exhorted people, “So in everything do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Mt 7:12).

In these simple statements I fail to perceive the lofty sophistry that forms the basis of the doctrines of Incarnation, Holy Trinity, Virgin Birth and Transubstantiation.

It seems pretty safe to say that the Pharisees did not persecute Jesus because he said he was a man.

[Emanuel]

But doesn't the Scriptures say that "all may honor the Son as they honor the Father" (John 5:23)? Considering that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he is the full image of God, I don't see a big problem. He sent Jesus so that He may be honored trough Him. He that honors the son honors the Father and the one that dishonors the Son dishonors the Father who sent him, or am I not telling the truth?

If you have problems praying to Jesus .. then don't pray to Him, pray to the Father, if that makes any difference to you. I don't think someone is going to condemn you for praying to the Father instead of to the Son.

[fm93]

But doesn't the Scriptures say that "all may honor the Son as they honor the Father" (John 5:23)? Considering that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that he is the full image of God, I don't see a big problem. He sent Jesus so that He may be honored trough Him. He that honors the son honors the Father and the one that dishonors the Son dishonors the Father who sent him, or am I not telling the truth?

If you have problems praying to Jesus .. then don't pray to Him, pray to the Father, if that makes any difference to you. I don't think someone is going to condemn you for praying to the Father instead of to the Son.

We've already explained this to RN, but yes, that's correct.

[shunyadragon]

But Jesus was worshiped as God (John 20:28-29), as one who had equality with God (Philippians 2:6), as one who is the radiance of God's glory (Hebrews 1:3), as one who is our God and savior (2 Peter 1:1)



It seems pretty safe to say that the Pharisees did not persecute Jesus because he said he was a man.

They persecuted him for claiming to be the Messiah and the King of the Jews.

[Ben Lomond]

Absolutely CORRECT shunyadragon!!!

The Temple priests didn't hesitate to concoct lies and falsehoods to bring against Jesus.

At all times Jesus claimed authority from God in the same way that Jeremiah, Ezekiel and other persecuted prophets did.

The Sanhedrin had a vested interest in eliminating this country bumpkin from Galilee who constantly made public accusations of endemic corruption in the Temple administration. The Temple priesthood expected Israel's Messiah to come from among their own ranks. They expected Messiah to be ONE OF THEM and they had no stomach for it being otherwise.

John 10:36 is a specific case of Temple spivs and spies trying to entrap Jesus into saying things by which they could have him stoned for blasphemy.

Jesus claimed to live the ethical values of Jehovah God, that is to say he personified God's values. Thus he could say "I and the Father are one."

The the bitter controversies centuries after Jesus lived, that surrounded the development of church doctrines of Virgin Birth, Holy Trinity and Transubstantiation is thoroughly documented.

It makes interesting speculation as to what would happen if Jehovah's Messiah returned in circumstances similar to those in Jesus' time.
For an answer see the Second Psalm.

Ben Lomond.
= = = = = = = = = =

[fm93]

At all times Jesus claimed authority from God in the same way that Jeremiah, Ezekiel and other persecuted prophets did.

Really? Which of the other prophets said of himself that he could send angels, forgive sin, supersede the Law, judge the world, be seated at God's right hand, had glory WITH God before the world began, and is wisdom incarnate?

John 10:36 is a specific case of Temple spivs and spies trying to entrap Jesus into saying things by which they could have him stoned for blasphemy.

Kind of odd that they'd try to trap Jesus into saying that when Jesus himself claimed to be divine, isn't it?

Jesus claimed to live the ethical values of Jehovah God, that is to say he personified God's values. Thus he could say "I and the Father are one."

Representing God's ethical values doesn't seem like something that a mere human could do.

[Ben Lomond]

Those who believe in the doctrine of Holy Trinity are encouraged to think that when Jesus made statements such as “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30), he was saying in effect, that he was the Father or perhaps alternatively that he was a part of the Father. This idea does not stand up to even the simplest examination, for the very texts themselves completely refute this interpretation.
The texts are taken mostly from the Gospel of John, and those that do not provide the answer within them selves, are interpretable by comparison with John’s other writings in which he virtually defines the terms he uses.
Jesus said – You know neither me nor my Father; if you knew me you would know my Father also. (Jn 8:19).
The interpretation is found in (1John 2:13) – I have written unto you little children because you know the Father.
The little children that John addressed had not been alive when Jesus was preaching.
They knew the Father because of their simplicity and purity of thought. (Matt 5:8).

Another type of reasoning is this:
Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.” Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you are not just my own. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. (Jn 14:8/10).

In this quote Jesus actually makes a distinction between himself and the Father (as he and the disciples always did).
It is not Jesus himself who is speaking, - it is God speaking through him. Many other OT men spoke the words of God in a similar way, but not for this particular purpose. (Again, note the prophecy to Moses in Deuteronomy 18:18).
Jesus makes a similar distinction between himself and Jehovah God in John 7:17.

Another self-explanatory passage:
“Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me, that THEY MAY BE ONE EVEN AS WE ARE ..... Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that believe on me through their word, THAT THEY MAY ALL BE ONE, even as thou Father, art in me and I in thee that they also MAY BE IN US. And the glory, which thou hast given me I have given unto them, that they may be one as we are one. I in them and thou in me, that they may be perfected into one ...... that the LOVE wherewith you love me may be in them, and I in them.” (John 17:11;20/21/23; 26.

Jesus is speaking of an affinity of spirit (of love) that binds his disciples, his believers, himself, and the Father into one bondage.
If the interpretation is made on the basis that Jesus IS the Father, then there is as much authority for saying the same thing of the disciples, for all were to be perfected into one.
Has it ever been suggested that Peter is Philip or that Philip is Matthew simply because they were one - of the same spirit? It is just as absurd to suggest that Jesus is the Father, or is joined to the Father in any other way than the bondage of love.

It is most fitting for Jesus to say “I and the Father are one.” (Jn 10:30).
He also said “On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.” (Jn 14:20).

Here again we are faced with the same position.
If Jesus is in the disciples then they also are in the Father.
It is quite clear, particularly from the verses which follow (Jn 10:30), that Jesus was speaking of a spiritual affinity between himself and his Father.

All Christians, being sanctified by the sacrifice of Jesus, should be joined in a bondage of love, for he that sanctifies and they that are sanctified are all one. (Heb 2:11).

In this manner it is possible to gather into one the children of God scattered abroad. (Jn 11:52).
He that keeps the commandments of Jesus abides in him and he in them (1Jn 3:24).

If anyone acknowledges that Jesus is the Son of God (John 10:36), God lives in him and he in God, (1Jn 4:15).
Paul also supports this line of thinking:
Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own. (1Cor 6:9)

The doctrine of Holy Trinity receives no support from the concept of Jesus being one with the Father. Christians are “one with the Father” in the same sense as Jesus is.

An added difficulty is the many times that Jesus proclaimed his subjection to the authority of the Father, whereas the doctrine of Trinity teaches they were coequal.

The Pagan Greek mentality of early Church Fathers failed to comprehend the Hebrew oriented allegories, personification, metaphors, idiom and compenetration in which Jesus spoke and have reached conclusions in conflict with his spirit.

Ben Lomond.
= = = = = = = = = =

[RBerman]

Ben, everything you're saying has been addressed earlier in the thread. The way in which the NT speaks of Jesus' relationship with God is unprecedented in previous prophets, particularly the use of divine titles (e.g. "Alpha and Omega" in Rev 1:8, 21:6, and 22:13) and the attribution of OT texts about God to Jesus (e.g. the way Romans 10:17 uses Joel 2:21). This is why Thomas confessed that Jesus was God (John 20:28), as did Peter (2 Peter 1:1).

[Antony]

Ben, everything you're saying has been addressed earlier in the thread. The way in which the NT speaks of Jesus' relationship with God is unprecedented in previous prophets, particularly the use of divine titles (e.g. "Alpha and Omega" in Rev 1:8, 21:6, and 22:13) and the attribution of OT texts about God to Jesus (e.g. the way Romans 10:17 uses Joel 2:21). This is why Thomas confessed that Jesus was God (John 20:28), as did Peter (2 Peter 1:1).

RBerman,

Sorry, but I do not think Ben's cohesive argument in Post 83 has been adequately answered earlier in the thread.

I would like to see your interpretations of all the texts used by Ben in that Post.

That should go some way towards providing an informed basis for comparing the two opposing points of view.

[RBerman]

RBerman,

Sorry, but I do not think Ben's cohesive argument in Post 83 has been adequately answered earlier in the thread.

I would like to see your interpretations of all the texts used by Ben in that Post.

That should go some way towards providing an informed basis for comparing the two opposing points of view.

I did not find Ben's argument cohesive in the least, and few of the Scriptures he cited even address the issue at hand. I'm not going to get suckered into defending a barrage of questions simultaneously. If there's one specific Scripture you'd like to start with, name it.

[fm93]

RBerman,

Sorry, but I do not think Ben's cohesive argument in Post 83 has been adequately answered earlier in the thread.

I would like to see your interpretations of all the texts used by Ben in that Post.

That should go some way towards providing an informed basis for comparing the two opposing points of view.

No one has any obligation to address anything Ben said until Ben acknowledges my posts, which he's ignored throughout this thread.

[Ben Lomond]

As a continuation of my points opposing the argument that Jesus of Nazareth was Jehovah God in the form of a man ie the doctrine of Holy Trinity:

When the disciples first joined up with Jesus, they described him as:
(a) the Christ,
(b) the Messiah,
(c) he of whom Moses in the law and the prophets wrote,
(d) Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph,
(e) the Son of God,
(f) the King of Israel.
These descriptions are found in the first chapter of John’s Gospel verses 40 to 50.

The noteworthy omission from statement (c) above is any mention of the Psalms, as Jesus himself affirmed that they contain many hidden references to him (Lk 20:32; 24:44).

From the beginning, the disciples accepted Jesus as the Son of God, while at the same time they were prepared to acknowledge his human parentage.
They did not consider this contradictory within itself or a negation of John the Baptist’s previous identification of Jesus as the Son of God (Jn 1:34).

The words Christ and Messiah are derived from Greek and Hebrew words which mean simply “the anointed of God,” and have no unique reference to Jesus. The uniqueness of the office that Jesus occupied was in being anointed with power by the Holy Spirit of Jehovah God (Acts 10:37/38) to establish the Kingdom of God on Earth.
Jesus’ anointing was for eternity and not for some transitory purpose as in the case of kings, priests and other prophets.

Jesus was described by the OT prophets and by his disciples as a chosen servant of Jehovah God.
The prophecies are contained in Zechariah 3:8, Isaiah 42:1 (fulfilled in Matt. 12:18), Psalm 89:20 (Acts 13:22); Ezekiel 34:23/24; and 37:24.
Similar references are found in Acts, among which are numbered the following:
Acts 2:22: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God unto you.
3:13: The God of our fathers hath glorified his Servant Jesus.
3:26: Unto you first God having raised up his Servant.
4:27: against thy holy Servant Jesus whom thou didst anoint.
4:30: signs and wonders done through the name of thy holy Servant.

Jesus was delegated by God as a servant as also were the prophets and John the Baptist. (John 1:6). The delegation of other prophets was temporary and for a transitory purpose, but the delegation of Jesus was permanent and for eternity,

In John 20:28, the disciple Thomas is quoted as saying to Jesus – “My Lord and my God.”
This is a favourite proof text used by those who teach the doctrine of Trinity. However remember that it is JOHN who is telling the story, so note very well what John says only three verses later in 20:31.
Shortly afterwards (John 20:31) he tells us his reason for writing his Gospel - “that you may believe that Jesus is the Anointed of God, - the Son of God.” Superficially there may appear to be a contradiction, but the interpretation offers no embarrassment when it is recalled that Jesus himself in defending his claim to be the Son, said that all were children of God, and that the ones to whom the word of God came were them selves gods. (Ps 82:6 & Jn 10:34).

The wording of Jeremiah 1:5 should also be studied very closely.

None of the terms by which Jesus’ contemporaries addressed him provides any foundation for saying that Jesus was God Almighty incarnated into human form.

Unfortunately people read their Bible with connotations, preconceptions and mindsets that automatically presents them with what they expected to find there.
Their conditioned mind refuses to allow them to see other than what they have been taught to see.

I suggest that Jesus’ comment of not putting new wine into old wine skins is relevant to the problem.

Ben Lomond
= = = = = = = = = =

[RBerman]

In John 20:28, the disciple Thomas is quoted as saying to Jesus – “My Lord and my God.”
This is a favourite proof text used by those who teach the doctrine of Trinity. However remember that it is JOHN who is telling the story, so note very well what John says only three verses later in 20:31.
Shortly afterwards (John 20:31) he tells us his reason for writing his Gospel - “that you may believe that Jesus is the Anointed of God, - the Son of God.” Superficially there may appear to be a contradiction, but the interpretation offers no embarrassment when it is recalled that Jesus himself in defending his claim to be the Son, said that all were children of God, and that the ones to whom the word of God came were them selves gods. (Ps 82:6 & Jn 10:34).

There's no superficial appearance of contradiction to the Hebrew mind. Trades were inherited. The son of a carpenter is a carpenter. The son of a liar is a liar. The son of a murderer is a murderer. The son of thunder is angry. The son of God is God. Don't forget that Jesus is not just the son of God, according to John. He's the only-begotten son of God. (John 3:16) His sonship is unique, which is why he's the only one who is God. You misconstrue Jesus' meaning in quoting Psalm 82 in John 10. His point is not that everyone is a son of God. He's already said that the Pharisees are not children of Abraham at all, but children of the devil, because they act like the devil. (John 8:44) When Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he was making a claim that no other Jew ever dared to make; it was unprecedented in the history of their religion. He knew it, and his audience knew it, which is why they picked up stones immediately to execute him for blasphemy. (John 10:31) Don't try to make his words into less than they are: a declaration that Jesus is uniquely God, just as Thomas confessed.

Unfortunately people read their Bible with connotations, preconceptions and mindsets that automatically presents them with what they expected to find there.
Their conditioned mind refuses to allow them to see other than what they have been taught to see.

But not you. Right?

[Antony]

Ben, everything you're saying has been addressed earlier in the thread. The way in which the NT speaks of Jesus' relationship with God is unprecedented in previous prophets, particularly the use of divine titles (e.g. "Alpha and Omega" in Rev 1:8, 21:6, and 22:13) and the attribution of OT texts about God to Jesus (e.g. the way Romans 10:17 uses Joel 2:21). This is why Thomas confessed that Jesus was God (John 20:28), as did Peter (2 Peter 1:1).

There are numerous texts in the Bible which declare the Oneness of God (antithesis of the Trinity) and/or clearly distinguish Jesus from God. I will list some of these texts in a future post.

You mention a couple of texts to support your contention that the NT says Jesus is God.

Here is comment on one of those texts:


John 20:28

27 Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.”
28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

You propose that in this passage from John’s gospel Thomas confessed Jesus was Almighty God.

John constructed his gospel purposefully and, presumably, one part does not undermine or contradict another part. His description of Thomas’s encounter with Jesus should be examined with this in mind. The interpretation you have given to Thomas’ words is cast in a different light when examined against two other passages in the gospel (see below).

It should also be kept in mind that Thomas’ exclamation was a result of him being caught off balance, after doubting what his fellow disciples had told him about Jesus being resurrected. John’s reason for recording this encounter was to enable Jesus to make his point: “Thomas, because you have seen me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” (John 20:29)


Jesus’ enemies accused him of making himself out to be God

Jesus’ enemies accused him of claiming he was God. John’s gospel tells us how he dealt with this accusation:

31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him.
32 Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?”
33 The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’?
35 If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),
36 do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?
37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me;
38 but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe[d] that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.”
39 Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand. (John 10: 31-9)

Jesus rejected both the proposition that he was God and the accusation that he claimed to be God. However you attribute to Thomas what Jesus clearly rejected. Does this suggest there is something wrong with your interpretation of what Thomas meant?

As Jesus himself deduced from the OT, he was a “god” to the extent that the word of God had come to him, or that he had been sent by God. The same can be applied to Moses and the prophets “to whom the word of God came.” But “god” in this sense is not Almighty God.


No one has seen God at any time

John’s gospel states that “No one has seen God at any time” (John 1:18), a point John repeats in one of his letters:

12 No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us.
13 By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit. (1John 4:12)

If long after the resurrection John was able to write that “no one has seen God at any time”, then this in itself rules out the interpretation that you have given to John 20:28.


PS: Isaiah and “mighty God”

Isaiah gave a number of appellations to one who was to come, including that of “mighty God.” (Isaiah 9:6) No one up to and including Jesus’ time ever thought Isaiah was referring to anything other than a man.
.