Is your belief in God, entirely dependent upon

[Elijah John]

Is your belief in God entirely dependent upon your belief that Jesus himself is God, the 2nd person of the Trinity?

If the arguments of skeptics here on these boards, or the arguments of Historical Jesus Scholars such as Bart Ehrmann or John Dominic Crossan, or even the arguments of Jehovah's Witnesses, Muslims or Jews suddenly clicked in your mind, with a light-bulb-"aha" realization that Jesus is not God, never claimed to be God, and none of his contemporaries every called him "God", what would you do?

Would you retain your general belief in God, as Father? Would you join another religion such as Islam or Judaism? Would you attempt to salvage what you can of Chrisitanity in a unitarian (small "u" not necessarily UU) fashion?

Or would that discovery cause you to become an atheist or an agnostic?

[JehovahsWitness]

JUDGE

The Bible teaches that “God� is judge (1 Sam 2:10; Ps 50:6; Ecc 12:14; many others). But so is Jesus (Jn 5:22, 27; 9:39; Acts 10:42; 2 Tim 4:1). Therefore He is God.

When the LORD raised up judges for them, he would be with the judge and save them from the power of their enemies as long as the judge lived. -Judges 2 :18

QUESTION: If Jesus must be Almighty God and (and part of a trinity) because he is called a Judge in scripture, was Samuel (also called a judge in the bible) Almighty God too?

This faulty reasoning is much like saying

Code: Select all

 


Apples are green; my car is green .... therefore my car must be an apple 

The reality is that a number of titles are applied both to Almighty God and others, this doesnt make these others God any more than the fact that somebody else is called "mother" means they gave birth to you. The bible refers to humans with titles such as s such as "father, "Lord", "Saviour" "God" "king" and "judge" it is most unreasonable to conclude that possessing such a title is proof enough that the individual is in fact Almighty God or part of a trinity.

NOTE There are titles in the bible that are applied uniquely to YHWH "The Almighty" and "The Creator" being two. Interstlingly these titles are never used in association with Christ (Yeheshua). The personal name of God (YHWH/Yahweh (Catholic Jerusalem Bible 1966 edition) is again never applied to the person is Jesus.

JW






FURTHER READING Title Confusion Trick
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... trick.html



RELATED POSTS


Is LORD a translation of YHWH?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 698#872698

TITLES: Allah, God, Elohim..
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 613#798613

Are there any judges today?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 566#913566

[RightReason]

[Replying to post 61 by JehovahsWitness]

JW, I am afraid your continued critiques regarding Christian teaching that Jesus is God run hollow. You comment on each passage in isolation – that is not how one is to interpret Sacred Scripture. Your critique is also opinion that does not come from Christ’s Church. Your critique stems from Watchtower writings. It wasn’t until 1950 when the Watchtower society came out with its own translation of the Bible. A translation that does not have the respect of Biblical scholars.

Here are some translation differences:


Interlinear Translation
Col. 2:9 “all the fullness of the divinity� dwells in Christ.


New World Translation
Col. 2:9 “all the fullness of divine quality� dwells in Christ.

Note: Greek scholar Joseph Henry Thayer states that the Greek word used here “Theotes� literally means “deity i.e. the state of being God, Godhead� —The New Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, 1974 p. 288

Interlinear Translation
Col. 1:16-17 Christ created “all (things).�

New World Translation
Col. 1:16-17 Christ created“all [other] Things.�

Note: The Watch Tower Society inserts the word “other� four times into this passage, in order to make it compatible with their doctrine of Christ having been created. However, in John 1:3, we read that Christ created “all things� —not all other things.


Interlinear Translation
Gal. 2:20 & 2 Cor. 13:5 Christ is living “in me.�
Phil. 3:9 “be found in him�


New World Translation
Gal. 2:20 & 2 Cor. 13:5 Christ is living “in union with me.�
Phil. 3:9 “be found in union with him�

Note: To be found “in Christ� means that one is trusting in Christ alone for his righteousness and is therefore positionally “in Christ.� Thus, when God looks at this person who is “in Christ,� He sees this person in the context of Christ’s righteousness instead of his own (see Col. 3:3). There is a big difference between being “in union� with Christ and actually being positionally “in Christ.�


Interlinear Translation
Phil. 2:9 God gave Christ the name “over everyname.�

NWT
Phil 2:19 God gave Christ the name “above every [other] name.�

Note: The Watch Tower Society teaches that Jehovah God has the name above every name and therefore, they had to insert the word “other� to justify their doctrine. However, according to John 17:11, Jesus has Jehovah’s Name!

Interlinear Translation
John 1:1 “god was the Word.�

NWT
John 1:1 “the Word was a god.�

Note: The Society argues that because the definite article “the� doesn’t appear before God in this half of the verse, that justifies their insertion of the article “a� in their translation. However, the Society is inconsistent with their “rule� for if they were consistent, they would have to translate John 1:6 as, “there arose a man that was sent forth as a representative of a God.� Since this translation wouldn’t make sense, the Society picks and chooses how it wants to apply its “rule� in accord with its doctrine.


Interlinear Translation
John 8:58 “Before Abraham to become I am.�

NWT
John 8:58 “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.�

Note: The Greek words for “I am� are “ego eimi� . In every place where these words appear in the text of the Bible, the Society correctly translates them as “I am,� EXCEPT in this verse.19. Why the inconsistency in translation? Jesus was identifying Himself with the “I am� of Exodus 3:14 who is Jehovah God, and this is why the Jews tried to stone Him for blasphemy (see verse 59, compare with Leviticus 24:16). The Society mistranslated this verse because its correct translation contradicts their doctrine.

Interlinear Translation
John 14:14 “If ever anything you should ask me….�

NWT
John 14:14 “If you ask anything….�

Note: Because the Society teaches that Jesus isn’t God, they teach that one should not pray to Jesus. Since prayer is a form of worship, Jesus shouldn’t be prayed to unless, of course, He is God (see Exodus 23:13). As one can clearly see, since Jesus asked his followers to request things of Him in prayer, the Society had to omit the words “ask Me� in their translation so that this verse would be compatible with their doctrine.

Does the Society’s New World Translation pass the test of accuracy when measured by the Society’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation? Could this be why no recognized Greek scholars support the Watch Tower Society’s New World Translation, and instead affirm along with Dr. Julius Mantey that the Society’s translation is “a grossly misleading translation�?

http://www.4jehovah.org/facts-the-watch ... u-to-know/

There is much more stuff like this, but I'll leave it at that. This is what happens when we try to make Scripture fit into our invented theology. It gets messy. . .

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 62 by RightReason]

I don't believe I have quoted from the Jehovahs WITNESS New World Translation once in this thread. Indeed I have taken great care to referenced ONLY and EXCLUSIVELY the Catholic Douay-Rheims and the NABRE bibles to build my argumentation.

Do you have any objection to these translations?



JW

FURTHER READING: Catholic Bibles available online

New American Bible (Revised)
http://www.usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/index.cfm

Douay-Rheims Online
http://www.drbo.org

New Jerusalem Bible
https://www.catholic.org/bible/books_bible.php

Vatican Archives
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... ndex/h.htm

[RightReason]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness]

I don't believe I have quoted from the Jehovahs WITNESS New World Translation once in this thread.

It doesn’t matter. Your theological conclusions are based upon it. This affects how you then interpret other translations. It is why you give all the interpretations you do. It wouldn’t matter what translation you use now – if you are looking for ways to deny the divinity of Christ you simply make interpretations that support that. I posted what I did to show the tweaks and twists JW’s go thru to maintain their theology.


The truth is we see the divinity of Christ throughout Scripture . . .


http://www.ncregister.com/blog/darmstro ... sus-is-god


https://www.catholic.com/magazine/onlin ... -to-be-god


https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/reso ... -of-christ


https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... sus-is-god


And once again it is what all of Christendom taught and believed. Your religion is an off shoot of Protestantism which also believed Jesus is God. Until one person decided to break off from that branch and start up their own church -- keeping some of the original beliefs and rejecting others and on and on they fall away further and further from Christ’s established Church.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 59 by RightReason]

There is a good reason NOT to accept the Bible in it's entirety. It did not drop intact, from Heaven. It was compiled over centuries by inspired but fallible humans. AND that it was compliled before the Magisterium of the RCC even existed.

THe gift of enlightened reason, and God-given common sense is given to all who seek Wisdom, not only to those who wear eccleiastical robes.

If you want to accept the Bible in it's entirety, how do you explain the slave beating verses? Did God approve of slavery if it was practiced by the very same people he just liberated from slavery in Egypt? Smaks of human contamination, and priimitive, cultural bias.

Or, if you want to go the NT, why didn't Jesus return when he said he would? In the lifetime of his apostles? (Matthew 16.28 and many other verses)

So, let's get back to the topic. It was never "is Jesus God" though you and others haveattempted to answer the unasked question.

The question is whether your (one's) beleif in God in general is dependent on the notion that Jesus is God.

In other words, if any of us skeptics (or historical Jesus scholars) convince you that Jesus is not God, would your faith in God fall apart? And if yes, why would that need to be so?

[RightReason]

[Replying to Elijah John]

There is a good reason NOT to accept the Bible in it's entirety.

And yet you quote and argue from it. Why accept any of it? How do you know which parts to accept and which to not?

It did not drop intact, from Heaven.

True dat. Christ gave authority to His Church to give it to us. Soooo . . . you will accept some of what they have given you, but not all? That’s illogical.

It was compiled over centuries by inspired but fallible humans. AND that it was compliled before the Magisterium of the RCC even existed.

The Bible or official list of Scripture consisting of the OT and the NT was compiled and given to us by the Catholic Church toward the end of the fourth century—at Hippo in 393, Carthage in 397, whence it was sent to Rome for confirmation in 419.



The Church maintains absolutely the inspiration of Scripture. The [First] Vatican Council thus defines it: "These books are held by the Church as sacred and canonical, not as having been composed by merely human labor, and afterwards approved by her authority, nor merely because they contain revelation without error, but because written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author and have been transmitted to the Church as such."


For a Christian face to face with a Bible passage the question "Is it true?" does not arise; God wrote it, and he cannot lie. The question in every instance is only, "What does it mean, what did the biblical author, inspired by, God, wish to convey and teach?" Now to ascertain this the guidance of the Church is essential, and time and patience are often needed.


When a question arises we await the Church’s interpretation.


https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... -the-bible

THe gift of enlightened reason, and God-given common sense is given to all who seek Wisdom, not only to those who wear eccleiastical robes.

Hmmmm . . . not sure Jesus spoke about enlightened reason or God given common sense., but if you mean we all receive the graces to seek truth and know God not only the clergy, I would of course agree 100%. This of course doesn’t mean we can just exercise personal interpretation, heck the clergy can’t even do that, and think “it’s all good�.

If you want to accept the Bible in it's entirety, how do you explain the slave beating verses?

Seriously? Easy. Do you have any idea of the Barbaric time period we are talking about? It was actually God’s people who chose to have rules to implement better treatment of slaves and women. So, why you see a rule about “beating slaves� they were generally rules to prevent what was going on among the pagans at that time – which was pretty much to treat slaves as if they weren’t even human. There were no rules regarding slavery. It was anything goes. And yet God’s people vowed to set themselves a part from the pagans and set forth “rules� regarding how slaves and women should be treated. Yes, I know crazy that they even thought it ok to have slaves, but seriously baby steps – dude. They were just beginning to realize God was calling them to more – to be better. It wasn’t going to happen over night. In fact, man is still on a journey in that respect regarding how we treat others.

Did God approve of slavery if it was practiced by the very same people he just liberated from slavery in Egypt? Smaks of human contamination, and priimitive, cultural bias.

See my comments above. LOL! You seriously haven’t looked into this have you?

The question is whether your (one's) beleif in God in general is dependent on the notion that Jesus is God.

In other words, if any of us skeptics (or historical Jesus scholars) convince you that Jesus is not God, would your faith in God fall apart? And if yes, why would that need to be so?

Asked and answered. See my very first post in this thread.

[JehovahsWitness]

if you are looking for ways to deny the divinity of Christ you simply make interpretations that support that.

Emphasis MINE


I am not looking to deny the "divinity of Christ" if you use the word in its most basic meaning. I am pointing out that the scriptures you referred to do not support the TRINITY teaching that Christ is Almighty God or that God is truine in nature. Feel free to clarify if you are not a proponent of the teaching of the trinity and are not attempting to prove it can be supported using a Catholic bible translation.

Is Jesus "divine"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 896#870896

... you simply make interpretations that support that.

Code: Select all

Are you saying it is possible to interpret certain passages of  scripture alternatively to that presented by trinitarians? 

If yes, then I will continue to present these alternatives readings based on Catholiic translations (as I have done up to this point) and let the readers decide if they find my argumentation compelling or not.

If no, why are you suggesting I will actually do so something that is impossible?









JW

[JehovahsWitness]

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/darmstro ... sus-is-god


https://www.catholic.com/magazine/onlin ... -to-be-god


https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/reso ... -of-christ


https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print ... sus-is-god

My response to your links above is...
http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com ... ex_15.html


You will see any suggestion that the bible teaches that Jesus is Almighty God and truine in nature thoroughly debunked. All the scriptures mentioned in the articles you linked to can be found therein.


JW

[polonius]

The traditional teaching of Judaism is the Shema “Hear O Israel. The Lord is One.�

Following the death of Jesus the early Christians remained and were accepted by Temple Judaism as a sect called “The Way� or the “Nazarenes.� (see Acts of the Apostles).

However, about 85 AD, the early Christians began to teach that Jesus too was divine.

This was viewed as heresy by the Jewish leadership and the Christians were condemned (see the 12th Benediction) and excluded from the synagogues (see the Gospel of John). “The parting of the ways.�

The multiple persons in one God, first Binitarianism and later Trinitarianism, began and has remained with us until the day.

From Wikipedia: Binitarianism is a Christian theology of two persons, personas, or two aspects in one substance/Divinity (or God). Classically, binitarianism is understood as a form of monotheism—that is, that God is absolutely one being; and yet with binitarianism there is a "twoness" in God, which means one God family. The other common forms of monotheism are "unitarianism", a belief in one God with one person, and "trinitarianism", a belief in one God with three persons.

There is however one noticeable flaw in this teaching. The three persons in the Trinity are supposed to be “coequal.� But if carried to its logical conclusion, they become identical.

[RightReason]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness]

code]
Are you saying it is possible to interpret certain passages of scripture alternatively to that presented by trinitarians?
[/code]

Not correctly, but duh it is possible to incorrectly interpret something. It’s actually probable considering people come to things with pre conceptions, false information, lack of knowledge of language, language usage, history, culture, lack of knowledge of the Bible as a whole, etc. What else explains why there are over thousands of different Christian denominations? For the most part we are all using the same Bible, but many, just like you’re doing, think he can just apply personal interpretation. And poof – a new church is created!

If yes, then I will continue to present these alternatives reading based on Catholiic translations (as I have done up to this point) and let the readers decide if they find my argumentation compelling.

Knock your self out. I’m sure someone could pick up a Catholic translation and claim the Bible says it’s necessary for priests to ceremoniously wash the feet of their congregants daily, or claim the Bible justifies abortion, or claims Mary was not a virgin, or claims dancing is immoral, or claims gay marriage is fine. You name it – people either could, have, or will at some point claim these things are supported in Scripture. Good thing Jesus left One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church to safeguard and interpret Sacred Scripture to ensure we are getting it right.