Debates on Christianity, Creation vs Evolution, Philosophy, Politics and Religion, Ethics, Current Events, and Religious issues

Goto page 1, 2  Next

Reply to topic
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 1: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:51 am
Reply
Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
I was thinking about the difficulty of explaining to our wide array of Christians that Jesus is God. Anyway, try this argument.

The North American religions, JW. 7th Day and Mormons, don't see Jesus as God (I think) and I wonder if that has more to do with the growth of the enlightenment and democracy than anything else. We live in a time of freedom from Kings and rulers and lords and lieges. In this age every person is their own god.

But what we miss from this is the nature of saying Jesus is Lord, or X is my King, is the complete ownership that was implied in the past by someone who said they were King. Game of Thrones is perhaps the closest we have seen of the absolute sovereignty of an Emperor, or a master within their own household. When Cersei says jump, kill, die, the soldiers and people do.

Tom Holland in his book Dominion talks about how a Roman citizen had absolute rights over his slave property says this.

https://scroll.in/article/953904/christianity-gave-women-a-dignity-that-no-previ...

Quote:
A Roman man had the right to sexually use anyone who was subordinate to him: Slaves, social inferiors. He could just use their mouths, their various orifices, as receptacles for his excess sperm. And so, the Romans had this one word “mayo” for urine and ejaculate. This is how it’s seen. And so it casts those who have to receive the Roman males’ attentions in a rather unpleasant light.


We say we understand God and sovereignty but the argument I making here is that we don't. Can you or I really fathom the totality of a leadership position back in antiquity?

The Bible in Matthew 8:5-13 talks about a centurion who approaches Jesus to heal his servant. The centurion says to Jesus, "But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, ‘Go,’ and he goes; and that one, ‘Come,’ and he comes. I say to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does it.” and Jesus is amazed by him. But if Jesus was amazed can you or I understand actual authority in this day and age?

Consider all the Kings in the old testament and how they could sign into law the death of whole people groups (book of Esther) or could sign a law that everyone had to worship a statue (book of Daniel). Absolute power or an attempt to do so.

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.

Thoughts?

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 2: Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:31 am
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
Wootah wrote:

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.

Thoughts?



In bible times LORD (which means "owner" or "master") was a very common title; it was used as a term of respect for someone that had a degree of power or influence, whether that be a woman's husband or the king. The Hebrews wouldnt have equated the title with being almighty God, YHWH the creator. It is as easy to draw a distinction between LORD and GOD today as it was back in bible times. It is ridiculous to suggest the ancients, at least in biblical culture, did not kmow how to distinguish between the two or that for them the two titles were synonyms.

Wootah wrote:
To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.


Not in Jewish culture it wasn't. The Kings, under Mosaic law did not have absolute power (Kings of Israel for example had no authority to offer sacrifice or oversee worship at the temple nor to demand worship). Unlike many pagan kings, Jewish Kings were not considered gods. Those that addressed Jesus as "Lord" were using a commin form of address, recognising /acknoweleging him as a respected teacher, spiritual leader and/or Prophet.





JW

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 3: Tue Mar 31, 2020 1:00 pm
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
Peace to you,

Quote:
[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.

Please note though that you use a little 'g' god when you describe those kings and emperors and masters. So you recognize that calling them Lord does not equal calling them God (Most High).


Christ is not God Most High (the MOST Holy One of Israel). He is the HOLY One of God; the Chosen One of JAH (Messiah); the Son of the MOST Holy One. My Lord has a God (Psalm 45:7; Hebrews 1:8,9 ). His God and Father (the MOST Holy One of Israel) does not have a God.


But I have no problem with say, Thomas, saying my Lord and my God (even if he was referring to Christ for both). Because this does not mean that Christ is JAH (the MOST Holy One of Israel, God MOST High). If the Adversary (the one called Satan) is a god, and if men to whom the Word of God came are also gods (called sons of the Most High in the OT), how much more so the Christ, the actual firstborn and begotten Son of God?




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 4: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:13 pm
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
tam wrote:

Peace to you,

Quote:
[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.

Please note though that you use a little 'g' god when you describe those kings and emperors and masters. So you recognize that calling them Lord does not equal calling them God (Most High).



When we use little g we are living in 2020. When we were standing in Pharoah's court, assuming we were not suicidal, we would have used capital G. I am not claiming to fully understand the past and that I fully understand words like king, god, emperor, lord, but our understanding - ain't it. Even the Magna Carta was a revolutionary concept that deep in her sweet little heart I am sure Queen Elizabeth resents it. But we are living on the other side of the Magna Carta and have had 800 years of not understanding what these words truly meant.

Oh yeah Joe is my boss. But deep down that word boss means the guy that pays me and I can work somewhere else and I would be better at the job than him anyway. But when we said Joe was my Lord we knew that guy was the final say on my life ... once upon a time.

Quote:
But I have no problem with say, Thomas, saying my Lord and my God (even if he was referring to Christ for both). Because this does not mean that Christ is JAH (the MOST Holy One of Israel, God MOST High). If the Adversary (the one called Satan) is a god, and if men to whom the Word of God came are also gods (called sons of the Most High in the OT), how much more so the Christ, the actual firstborn and begotten Son of God?


Yes but as you start to understand this thread and history you will. That is the point of the thread. We are all out of touch with the reality of what Lord means. But we won't be in the next life!

God is love and so approaches us not as this world would or as Satan would. Were Satan God he would show you the full horror of a King, Emperor, God. You would understand this thread completely.

The God I know you love does not act that way and does not want to act that way even though He has the right.

In essence we have 'no problem' because we are in a cultural context that has lost contact with the meaning of these words. Something to think about at least I hope.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 5: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:17 pm
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
JehovahsWitness wrote:

Wootah wrote:

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.

Thoughts?



In bible times LORD (which means "owner" or "master") was a very common title; it was used as a term of respect for someone that had a degree of power or influence, whether that be a woman's husband or the king. The Hebrews wouldnt have equated the title with being almighty God, YHWH the creator. It is as easy to draw a distinction between LORD and GOD today as it was back in bible times. It is ridiculous to suggest the ancients, at least in biblical culture, did not kmow how to distinguish between the two or that for them the two titles were synonyms.

Wootah wrote:
To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.


Not in Jewish culture it wasn't. The Kings, under Mosaic law did not have absolute power (Kings of Israel for example had no authority to offer sacrifice or oversee worship at the temple nor to demand worship). Unlike many pagan kings, Jewish Kings were not considered gods. Those that addressed Jesus as "Lord" were using a commin form of address, recognising /acknoweleging him as a respected teacher, spiritual leader and/or Prophet.

JW


Sure the Bible had restrictions because God is love. But we both know how badly Israel failed and we both know of Samuel's warning about what a King would do.

Quote:
Samuel's Warning Against Kings
10 So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. 11 He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots. 12 And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. 15 He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. 16 He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men[a] and your donkeys, and put them to his work. 17 He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. 18 And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”


It is a warning that the King that they place over them will rule them totally like a god and the King they rejected, God, will not answer them on that day.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 6: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:18 pm
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
Wootah wrote:


"And so, the Romans had this one word “mayo” for urine and ejaculate."



Words with "y" are usually foreign borrowings. Perhaps this is a joke, given that mayo is an English slang word. Augustus sent the poet Ovid into exile for writing his love poems, so Romans did have moral standards. Some emperors were insane of course and they abused people, but the passage you quote implies that it was standard practice to behave like something from the Satyricon of Petronius. It wasn't. I am puzzled as to how this relates in any way to Jesus being a deity. He wasn't. Nor was Augustus, though Augustus may have had more claim to the title.


Quote:

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.


Then "god" is being used metaphorically in the same way that we say the Beetles were gods, or Justin Bieber is a god. Jesus might fit that bill, since he was a kind of pop star who may well have had a fine singing voice.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 7: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:26 pm
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
marco wrote:

Wootah wrote:


"And so, the Romans had this one word “mayo” for urine and ejaculate."


I know of no Latin words that use the letter y. Perhaps this is a joke, given that mayo is an English slang word. Augustus sent the poet Ovid into exile for writing his love poems, so Romans did have moral standards. Some emperors were insane of course and they abused people, but the passage you quote implies that it was standard practice to behave like something from the Satyricon of Petronius. It wasn't. I am puzzled as to how this relates in any way to Jesus being a deity. He wasn't. Nor was Augustus, though Augustus may have had more claim to the title.


Quote:

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.


Then "god" is being used metaphorically in the same way that we say the Beetles were gods, or Justin Bieber is a god. Jesus might fit that bill, since he was a kind of pop star who may well have had a fine singing voice.


I have to admit that I have not read Dominion yet but I have watched several of Tom Holland's interviews. One assumes a little in trusting he is correct. It would be awkward if he is not but it would not invalidate the direction of the thread. But as for your puzzlement, I had hoped the thread itself was clear. We do not relate to words such as Lord, King, Emperor, Pharoah, Liege, Master etc today as our forebears would have.

Yes we are living in a cultural context that does not understand the meaning of these words is my point here in this thread.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 8: Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:53 pm
Reply
Re: Understanding the past to understand Jesus is God

Like this post
Peace to you,

Quote:
[quote="Wootah"]
tam wrote:

Peace to you,

Quote:
[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

To call Jesus Lord is to call Jesus God because for all intents and purposes a King or Emperor or Master in antiquity was god for the people under them.

Please note though that you use a little 'g' god when you describe those kings and emperors and masters. So you recognize that calling them Lord does not equal calling them God (Most High).



When we use little g we are living in 2020. When we were standing in Pharoah's court, assuming we were not suicidal, we would have used capital G. I am not claiming to fully understand the past and that I fully understand words like king, god, emperor, lord, but our understanding - ain't it. Even the Magna Carta was a revolutionary concept that deep in her sweet little heart I am sure Queen Elizabeth resents it. But we are living on the other side of the Magna Carta and have had 800 years of not understanding what these words truly meant.

Oh yeah Joe is my boss. But deep down that word boss means the guy that pays me and I can work somewhere else and I would be better at the job than him anyway. But when we said Joe was my Lord we knew that guy was the final say on my life ... once upon a time.


Yes, I think I have understood the point you're trying to make (that calling someone lord makes them your god). But I'm not sure how that point works in favor of the claim that "Jesus is God."

Sarah called Abraham her lord, but that did not mean that she was calling Abraham, God (God, as in the Most Holy One; "YHWH").


Likewise, calling Christ my Lord does not mean that I am calling Christ, God (God, as in the Most Holy One of Israel; "YHWH").


And Christ does have the final say on my life, because His God and Father gave Him that authority (though God may have mercy upon whomever He will have mercy).


Quote:

Quote:
But I have no problem with say, Thomas, saying my Lord and my God (even if he was referring to Christ for both). Because this does not mean that Christ is JAH (the MOST Holy One of Israel, God MOST High). If the Adversary (the one called Satan) is a god, and if men to whom the Word of God came are also gods (called sons of the Most High in the OT), how much more so the Christ, the actual firstborn and begotten Son of God?


Yes but as you start to understand this thread and history you will. That is the point of the thread. We are all out of touch with the reality of what Lord means. But we won't be in the next life!


I agree that many may not fully grasp what it means to be the property of another being. That is a valid discussion on its own. But I do not see how that contributes to the claim that "Jesus is God".

(Perhaps I will ask what you mean by that claim? Who is the God that you claim [Jesus] to be?)


Quote:
God is love and so approaches us not as this world would or as Satan would. Were Satan God he would show you the full horror of a King, Emperor, God. You would understand this thread completely.


I agree (to the bold)- since God does not deceive us or lie to us; God sent us Son to bear witness to the truth; and God desires that we choose life, etc.

The Adversary on the other hand - who is described as being the god of this world - is out to defeat us, devour us, deceive us, etc.

If you mean something more than that, you might need to spell it out some more.

But again, I do not see what that has to do with the claim that "Jesus is God".

Quote:
The God I know you love does not act that way and does not want to act that way even though He has the right.


See above.

Quote:
In essence we have 'no problem' because we are in a cultural context that has lost contact with the meaning of these words. Something to think about at least I hope.



My response was in relation to the claim that "Jesus is God". I have no problem with Thomas calling Him 'My Lord and my God', without thinking that Thomas was calling Christ, God Most High ("YHWH").


That is all I meant.

I am not sure how (or why) you are connecting the idea of A - someone having complete control over another person (Master and Slave), with B - [Jesus] necessarily being God ("YHWH"). A does not lead a person to conclude B.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 9: Tue Mar 31, 2020 5:15 pm
Reply

Like this post
Some of Jesus words Tam needs to remember:

Luke 10:21 In that very hour he became overjoyed in the holy spirit and said: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have carefully hidden these things from wise and intellectual ones, and have revealed them to babes. Yes, O Father, because to do thus came to be the way approved by you.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 10: Tue Mar 31, 2020 5:33 pm
Reply

Like this post
Peace to you,

Eloi wrote:

Some of Jesus words Tam needs to remember:

Luke 10:21 In that very hour he became overjoyed in the holy spirit and said: “I publicly praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have carefully hidden these things from wise and intellectual ones, and have revealed them to babes. Yes, O Father, because to do thus came to be the way approved by you.



I'm sorry, but what was it about my post that prompted you to say that I needed to remember those words?


Peace again to you!

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page 1, 2  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version