ALL evidence to support the divinity of Jesus

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25089
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 73 times

ALL evidence to support the divinity of Jesus

Post #1

Post by Zzyzx »

.
In one of the threads someone complained that "The Atheists" refuse to consider evidence presented by religionists.

Here is an opportunity to bring forth all the evidence relating to a VERY important subject -- the divinity of Jesus. I promise to evaluate everything presented as fairly and objectively as possible -- and trust that others, believers and non-believers alike, will do the same.

Lay out the evidence and let's go over it point-by-point. Fair enough?
.
Non-Theist

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

User avatar
Ooberman
Banned
Banned
Posts: 4262
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 6:02 pm
Location: Philadelphia

Post #21

Post by Ooberman »

Jashwell wrote: When you say the divinity of Jesus, you mean to say Jesus is godlike or related to god, correct? (This is the most common definition of divine)

So don't we first need a definition of God? (or what it means to be divine)
I myself don't accept the following as qualities that can only be godlike:

Walking on water
Turning water to wine
Magically cloning food
Magically healing the sick
Claiming to be godlike or related to god
Driving out demons

Even if we take all those for granted,
Jesus could've been a wizard.

Agreed. Even if true, he could have had a very unique chemical structure that repelled water (which may explain - somehow - how he cured people by spitting on them and touching them.. hey, it's a hypothesis).

But, most likely, those stories aren't true, or too questionable to accept as true.

Half of his miracles are cheap tricks.
Thinking about God's opinions and thinking about your own opinions uses an identical thought process. - Tomas Rees

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle
Been thanked: 1 time

Post #22

Post by Danmark »

Wolfbitn wrote: yeah like i said, and you prove my point... you guys dont know the manuscripts, you dont know the johnaniine comma, or cyprian, nor the SHEMA for pete's sake, you dont believe, nor do you want to... and you think you are superior in spouting that Christ is just a man.

This thread bleeds with sneering as it is... and like I said, you're not really going weigh any evidence at all... you want to sneer more... which brings me back to my question... what then is the point of this thread?

At least it is obvious youre not really out for any sort of serious discussion... that should say enough in itself.
Uncivil tone and blanket personal attack.
:warning: Moderator Warning



Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

Elijah John
Savant
Posts: 12235
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 8:23 pm
Location: New England
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 16 times

Post #23

Post by Elijah John »

Wolfbitn wrote: [Replying to post 12 by Elijah John]

Elijah...

Good to meet anyone familiar with the Shema. I'm just curious if you are Jewish and have the popular conservative view on the Shema?

And what do you think of the particular word "Echad" used here?
.

No, I am not Jewish, though I do tend to see things with "Jewish eyes" , my outlook is very similar to theirs. Especially regarding the importance of deeds over creeds, and I tend to doubt the typical Christian outlook of the so called prophecies of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. Psalm 22 for example, is not even a prophetic form of literature, it is a lament and prayer. But it has been twisted out of context to apply to Jesus and is called "prophecy" by their apologists.

I am a deistic kind of Christian, but I know some would not give me the courtesy of defining my own nomenclature , even though I pray Jesus prayer, and try to abide by his Golden Rule. I consider Jesus my main prophet, but Trinitarian Christians still tend not to view me as a Christian, because even though I try to adhere to Jesus teachings, and way of life of primitive Christianity, (as expressed in the Didache), I do not accept the doctrines of the blood atonement and the divinity of Christ.

"Echad" means one, as in YHVH is One, which is a belief that I also share with Jews and with Jesus, whom I consider a Jewish reformer and not a Christian who supposedly claimed Divinity.
My theological positions:

-God created us in His image, not the other way around.
-The Bible is redeemed by it's good parts.
-Pure monotheism, simple repentance.
-YHVH is LORD
-The real Jesus is not God, the real YHVH is not a monster.
-Eternal life is a gift from the Living God.
-Keep the Commandments, keep your salvation.
-I have accepted YHVH as my Heavenly Father, LORD and Savior.

I am inspired by Jesus to worship none but YHVH, and to serve only Him.

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

All the evidence? Sorry, 404, this page not available...

Post #24

Post by ttruscott »

Non-believers do not get all the evidence and if someone tells them about it, they deny it is evidence. So how could this ever be tested?

When believers claim to evidence that non-believers cannot get, they are accused as being dishonest but that would only be true if they did not in fact, get that evidence the non-believers can't. Their inability to see spiritual things when they have a bias to believe we are all the same which means believers must be lying by their specialness.

Christianity believes in spiritual evidence (evidence of a spiritual side of reality) that science and physical study cannot expose or understand. The problem is exacerbated by the spiritual discernment of Cain, those pew Christians who fill the Churches and whose job on earth is to confuse things and keep everyone in the system addicted to being bad.

The non-believer can only accept all Christians as the same, that is, human, but with different beliefs because they cannot see the spiritual reality behind the beliefs and how that changes the equation. Christianity believes that there are two kinds of people on earth and this split in reality accounts for a great deal of why the Bible is such a separation between people and GOD is so different for other gods. Of course this difference is also only spiritually perceived so the non-believer and those in Cain cannot see the difference in any real way.

I could quote the appropriate verses in support for this contention of Christianity but I doubt they are needed.

Peace, Ted
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

BigRed
Student
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 6:53 pm
Location: Florida

Post #25

Post by BigRed »

Wolfbitn wrote: [Replying to post 12 by Elijah John]

Elijah...

Good to meet anyone familiar with the Shema. I'm just curious if you are Jewish and have the popular conservative view on the Shema?

And what do you think of the particular word "Echad" used here?
.
Jesus quoted the Shema and I think you can understand "echad" from this communication.

Jesus had an interesting conversation with a Scribe which is relevant to this thread.
Mark 12:28-34 (New American Standard Bible)
28One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, "What commandment is the foremost of all?"
29Jesus answered, "The foremost is, 'HEAR, O ISRAEL! THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE LORD;
30AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.'
31"The second is this, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' There is no other commandment greater than these."
32The scribe said to Him, "Right, Teacher; You have truly stated that HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM;
33AND TO LOVE HIM WITH ALL THE HEART AND WITH ALL THE UNDERSTANDING AND WITH ALL THE STRENGTH, AND TO LOVE ONE'S NEIGHBOR AS HIMSELF, is much more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices." 34When Jesus saw that he had answered intelligently, He said to him, "You are not far from the kingdom of God." After that, no one would venture to ask Him any more questions.

The question that you have to ask is.....What was the Scribe's understanding of the nature of God? I think that it is obvious that the Scribe believed ""HE IS ONE, AND THERE IS NO ONE ELSE BESIDES HIM; ""[Deut 4:35]

Jesus concurs with the Scribe's assessment when he ""saw that he had answered intelligently"" and Jesus said...."You are not far from the kingdom of God."

BigRed
It's not what you think you know..It's what can be proven to be true.

Wolfbitn
Banned
Banned
Posts: 646
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 12:26 pm

Post #26

Post by Wolfbitn »

Red, Eli,

I have an interesting twist for you regarding "Echad". There are more than one word that can be translated as "one".

Here is one:

Yachiyd
adj only, only one, solitary, one only, unique, one solitary (TWOT) only begotten son subst one one and child1, only5, only son4

Here it means simply a single unit.

Echad however means a single unit made up of more than one part. For instance 100 pennies can = ONE dollar. Echad is used in the Shema when it says the Lord is "one".

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Post #27

Post by Goat »

[Replying to post 26 by Wolfbitn]

[youtube][/youtube]


And, for the entire length of time the Jewish faith has been using the Shema, it is very strongly emphasized that it is the SINGULAR one, not a compound one.

So, that straw should be clutched.

From http://www.torahofmessiah.com/elohim.html

Another main argument from the Hebrew used to teach that God is a "plural" entity is that the Hebrew word echad in the shema of Deuteronomy 6:4 means, not a simple "one", but rather a "compound unity" of one, a "togetherness". Those who teach this will often also teach than there is a different word for a "simple" one, yachid, so that the absence of this word in Deuteronomy 6:4 is, apparently to them, significant.

First, it should be noted that when one learns the Hebrew numbers, it is echad, not yachid, that is the Hebrew for the number "one": echad is one, shenayim is two, shalosh is three, arba is four, etc. Any Hebrew grammar book, whether of Biblical or modern Hebrew, would demonstrate that echad, not yachid, is the everyday Hebrew word for the numeral "one".

And when one looks in the Tanakh itself at the frequency and usage of the two words - echad and yachid - it is very quickly and easily seen that echad, not yachid, is in fact the standard Hebrew word for a simple one. Echad is used over 900 times in the Hebrew Bible, making it the most frequently used adjective in the Tanakh. Here are some examples of its usage where the word "one" is translated from echad: "one place" (Gen. 1:9); "one man" (Gen. 42:13); "one law" (Ex. 12:49); "one side" (Ex. 25:12); "one ewe lamb" (Lev. 14:10); "one of his brethren" (Lev. 25:48); "one rod" (Num. 17:3); "one soul" (Num. 31:28); "one of these cities" (Deut. 4:42); "one way" (Deut. 28:7); "one ephah" (1 Sam. 1:24); "one went out into the field" (11 Kings 4:39); "one shepherd" (Ezek. 37:24); "one basket" (Jer. 24:2); "one [thing]" (Ps. 27:4); "Two are better than one" (Ecc. 4:9); "one day or two" (Ezra 10:13).

Sometimes it is simply part of a number, like "eleven" (echad + 'asar, one plus ten), in , for example Genesis 32:22. Sometimes it is as well translated by an indefinite article (a[n]): "a new cart" (1 Sam. 6:7); "a juniper tree" (1 Kings 19:4,5); "a book" (Jer. 51:60).

Perhaps most importantly, echad clearly has the meaning of single, alone, ONLY one, or JUST one, the ideal of a limit of one (Num. 10:4; Josh. 17:14; Esth. 4:11; Isa. 51:2). In Deuteronomy 17:6, for example, it really isn't precise English to translate echad merely as "one". For if the "one" witness referred to is the second of the third witness, then that one witness is enough to convict the hypothetical person of murder. The meaning is that a person must not be put to death of the evidence of only one witness (which is the way the NRSV translates it). Echad means "one" and ONLY one.

Some make the argument that because echad is used in passages such as Gen. 1:5 (evening and morning were "day one [echad]", or "first day"), Gen. 2:24 (a husband and wife shall be "one" flesh) and Ezek. 37:17 (two sticks are to become "one" stick), echad is therefore meant to be understood as some kind of a compound unity. To begin with, such examples make up but a very small minority of the uses of echad, the vast majority being of the variety listed above. It is improper exegesis to define a word on the basis of a small percentage of its usage. But even this extreme minority of usage does not mean that echad actually has a different meaning than a simply one in these passages. In Gen. 1:5, "day" is the word that has "parts" to it (i.e., "evening" and "morning" make up the day), not echad. In Gen. 2:24, "flesh" acts as the collective noun (what the man and the woman as comprise together). [12] The key factor in all such passages - a factor missing from Deut. 6:4 - is that two or more "parts" are mentioned, such that the reader can immediately discern that there is some kind of "coming together" of the people or things mentioned, usually for just one purpose or goal. Echad, in fact, must maintain its meaning of "just one" for these expressions to convey their intended sense. To make our point clear: Deut. 6:4 does not say, "YHWH our God, though three (or two or whatever plural number you like), is one." There is no hint of "coming together" here. The verse says that YHWH our God is plainly, simply, one.

Once again, scholarship is in agreement. The Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Lexicon, the standard Hebrew lexicon of the Bible used in seminaries, list eight ways echad is used - e.g. meaning "each/every," or "a certain," or "only," etc. - but there is no mention or hint in the entire echad article that echad ever means any kind of compound unity. [13] And the "echad" article in the Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament also nowhere teaches that echad implies a compound unity. It says that Deuteronomy 6:4 is essentially saying that YHWH is the one and only God for Israel (Vol. I p. 196).

Yachid, on the other hand, is a very rarely used word in the Tanakh, and it is employed in a special sense when it is used. It is found a grand total of 12 times in the entire Tanakh, three of those times in the same passage (Gen.22, referring to Isaac as Abraham's "only" son), so virtually any argument based on its absence from a Bible text is necessarily weak. Its meaning is restricted to a unique, priceless possession, whether a person or thing (Isaac in Gen. 22:2, 12, 16; one's soul - lit. "only one" - in Ps. 22:20(21), 35:17); or to solitary, desolate, isolated or lonely people (Ps. 25:16, 68:6(7)). There is a "neediness" seen in all that yachid applies to in the Tanakh. YHWH our God is not dependent on anyone. Based on Biblical usage, therefore, it would be entirely inappropriate to use yachid as an adjective for God for any reason.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

Mugview
Scholar
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 8:11 pm

Post #28

Post by Mugview »

Wolfbitn wrote: Red, Eli,

I have an interesting twist for you regarding "Echad". There are more than one word that can be translated as "one".

Here is one:

Yachiyd
adj only, only one, solitary, one only, unique, one solitary (TWOT) only begotten son subst one one and child1, only5, only son4

Here it means simply a single unit.

Echad however means a single unit made up of more than one part. For instance 100 pennies can = ONE dollar. Echad is used in the Shema when it says the Lord is "one".
This is the quote from: Rabbi Menachem, Commentary on the Pentateuch, Venice edition. 267
"‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.’ This verse is the root of our faith, therefore Moses records it after the ten commandments. The reason (that there is said יהוה, Lord, �להינו, our God, and יהוה, Lord) is, because the word שמע does not here signify ‘Hear;’ but ‘to gather together, to unite,’ as in 1 Samuel 15:4, ‘Saul gathered together the people.’ The meaning implied is The Inherent-Ones are so united together, one in the other without end, they being the exalted God. He mentions the three names mystically to indicate the three exalted original Ones."
Thus, again "echad" is the united form of "One".

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Post #29

Post by Goat »

Mugview wrote:
Wolfbitn wrote: Red, Eli,

I have an interesting twist for you regarding "Echad". There are more than one word that can be translated as "one".

Here is one:

Yachiyd
adj only, only one, solitary, one only, unique, one solitary (TWOT) only begotten son subst one one and child1, only5, only son4

Here it means simply a single unit.

Echad however means a single unit made up of more than one part. For instance 100 pennies can = ONE dollar. Echad is used in the Shema when it says the Lord is "one".


This is the quote from: Rabbi Menachem, Commentary on the Pentateuch, Venice edition. 267
"‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.’ This verse is the root of our faith, therefore Moses records it after the ten commandments. The reason (that there is said יהוה, Lord, �להינו, our God, and יהוה, Lord) is, because the word שמע does not here signify ‘Hear;’ but ‘to gather together, to unite,’ as in 1 Samuel 15:4, ‘Saul gathered together the people.’ The meaning implied is The Inherent-Ones are so united together, one in the other without end, they being the exalted God. He mentions the three names mystically to indicate the three exalted original Ones."
Thus, again "echad" is the united form of "One".
Ah.. this is a forgery... used by some Messianic Jews. It was first claimed by a so called 'messianic Jew'
Is it true that the Zohar's commentary on the Shema confirms the Christian doctrine of Trinity?
Is it true that the Zohar's commentary on Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema) confirms the Christian doctrine of the Trinity?



IAnswer: Not at All! This is a trinitarian related fraud, possibly created by the founder of the American Board of Missions to the Jews (now known as the Chosen People Ministries), Itsak Leib Jaszovics, alias "Rabbi Leopold Cohn," a saloonkeeper, convicted of forgery in Hungary (For further information see, David Max Eichhorn, Evangelizing the American Jew, Middle Village, New York: Jonathan David Publishers, 1978, pp. 172-174.).

The claim that the Zohar's commentary on Deuteronomy 6:4 confirms the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is based on a spurious passage attributed to that volume. It appears in Cohn's tract, Do Christians Worship Three Gods? (pp. 4-5), published by the Chosen People Ministries. On the basis of his forgery, Cohn concluded that "

According to the Zohar the Messiah is not only called Jehovah but is a very part of the triune Jehovah" (p. 5).

This forgery is also perpetuated in the literature of the Jews for Jesus missionary organization. Using Cohn's spurious passage, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, a born-Jewish Christian missionary, writes:

"The Zohar, the great book of Jewish mysticism, recognized the concept of plurality in the Shema and commented as follows: Why is there need of mentioning the name of God three times in the verse? The first is the Father above. The second is the stem of Jesse, the Messiah who is to come from the family of Jesse through David. And the third one is the one which is below (meaning the Holy Spirit who shows us the way) and these three are one. "(Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Jewishness and the Trinity, San Francisco: Jews for Jesus

1978, p. 8. This article was first published in the Jews for Jesus publication Issues: A Jewish Christian Perspective, 1:8, 1978).

Fruchtenbaum quotes faithfully Cohn's fraudulent passage. However, a simple examination of the relevant Zohar commentary on the Shema reveals that no such text exists in the Zohar. It should be noted that many other missionary organizations have quoted Cohn's forgery in their literature.
Why resort to forgeries?
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

Mugview
Scholar
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 8:11 pm

Post #30

Post by Mugview »

Goat wrote:
Mugview wrote:
Wolfbitn wrote: Red, Eli,

I have an interesting twist for you regarding "Echad". There are more than one word that can be translated as "one".

Here is one:

Yachiyd
adj only, only one, solitary, one only, unique, one solitary (TWOT) only begotten son subst one one and child1, only5, only son4

Here it means simply a single unit.

Echad however means a single unit made up of more than one part. For instance 100 pennies can = ONE dollar. Echad is used in the Shema when it says the Lord is "one".


This is the quote from: Rabbi Menachem, Commentary on the Pentateuch, Venice edition. 267
"‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord.’ This verse is the root of our faith, therefore Moses records it after the ten commandments. The reason (that there is said יהוה, Lord, �להינו, our God, and יהוה, Lord) is, because the word שמע does not here signify ‘Hear;’ but ‘to gather together, to unite,’ as in 1 Samuel 15:4, ‘Saul gathered together the people.’ The meaning implied is The Inherent-Ones are so united together, one in the other without end, they being the exalted God. He mentions the three names mystically to indicate the three exalted original Ones."
Thus, again "echad" is the united form of "One".
Ah.. this is a forgery... used by some Messianic Jews. It was first claimed by a so called 'messianic Jew'
This is a misstatement.
The quote above is from the respected Rabbi Menachem, a different source than the quote below.
Goat wrote:
Is it true that the Zohar's commentary on the Shema confirms the Christian doctrine of Trinity?
Is it true that the Zohar's commentary on Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema) confirms the Christian doctrine of the Trinity?

IAnswer: Not at All! This is a trinitarian related fraud, possibly created by the founder of the American Board of Missions to the Jews (now known as the Chosen People Ministries), Itsak Leib Jaszovics, alias "Rabbi Leopold Cohn," a saloonkeeper, convicted of forgery in Hungary (For further information see, David Max Eichhorn, Evangelizing the American Jew, Middle Village, New York: Jonathan David Publishers, 1978, pp. 172-174.).

The claim that the Zohar's commentary on Deuteronomy 6:4 confirms the Christian doctrine of the Trinity is based on a spurious passage attributed to that volume. It appears in Cohn's tract, Do Christians Worship Three Gods? (pp. 4-5), published by the Chosen People Ministries. On the basis of his forgery, Cohn concluded that "

According to the Zohar the Messiah is not only called Jehovah but is a very part of the triune Jehovah" (p. 5).

This forgery is also perpetuated in the literature of the Jews for Jesus missionary organization. Using Cohn's spurious passage, Arnold Fruchtenbaum, a born-Jewish Christian missionary, writes:

"The Zohar, the great book of Jewish mysticism, recognized the concept of plurality in the Shema and commented as follows: Why is there need of mentioning the name of God three times in the verse? The first is the Father above. The second is the stem of Jesse, the Messiah who is to come from the family of Jesse through David. And the third one is the one which is below (meaning the Holy Spirit who shows us the way) and these three are one. "(Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Jewishness and the Trinity, San Francisco: Jews for Jesus

1978, p. 8. This article was first published in the Jews for Jesus publication Issues: A Jewish Christian Perspective, 1:8, 1978).

Fruchtenbaum quotes faithfully Cohn's fraudulent passage. However, a simple examination of the relevant Zohar commentary on the Shema reveals that no such text exists in the Zohar. It should be noted that many other missionary organizations have quoted Cohn's forgery in their literature.
Why resort to forgeries?
Yes, why? Perhaps a better understanding in the quotes would be better for the discussion, instead of labeling a quote forgery due to lack of knowledge.

In fact, the Shema clearly uses the word "echad" (unity) not "yachid" (singularity).
It is in the Hebrew language.

Post Reply