Hello NotaNess
You wrote:
"Excuse my lack of the exact scriptures here. Scripture stated by God, I believe he states there are NO gods before me and NO gods after me. So doesn't this conflict with all the mention of apostles calling Jesus and Satan Gods? (also as taught by the WTS) If scripture is God breathed and/or inspired, why would he go against what he said in the OT? And as for honoring, scripture says to honor Christ the same as honoring God and John 1:1...it's illogical that God would make his words here, with such controversy, and with such difficulty to understand the context Would his goal be that he didn't want followers to be clear of the Deity of his representaion of Christ as a symbol of his sacrifice to man for sin? ie, he wanted it to be confusing? I can't believe it myself. I think it was meant to be as clear as Christianity has portrayed it, and the way it is most commonly translated."
Thank you for this response. It's a thoughtful and reasonable reply. I'm famiuliar with Isaiah 43:10-11 in which Yahweh purports to say thru "Isaiah" "I am Jehovah. Before me there were no gods formed and neither shall there be after me." However, there are many contexts in which Elohim is in fact plural, and the OT does speak of many gods. In the NT, these gods are transmuted into evil spirits. This is a normal development in religions; to demonize the gods of ones enemies, just as "Allah" is being demonized by evnagelical Christians.
One cannot treat the Bible as a flat surface. Actually, one can, but what one ends up with is almost nonsensical and cetainly unworthy of notice. Also, one cannot simply make a pronouncement that the Bible is the word of God and expect that to be believed uncritically and automatically in this day and age. Educational standards are higher now, and less people are indoctrinated in youth with pro-biblical propaganda. I was not propagandized in youth.
There are many strands of thought in the Bible, both OT and NT. Some diamterically opposed to the other. As a familiar example compare the epistle of James with such epistles of Paul as Galatians and Romans. We have many strands of thought in the NT as to who and what the Logos/Christ is. As Leolaia stressed in this thread it's very important to understand each author on their own merits, not simply to try to work their thoughts into a "system." Theos and it's derivatives are indeed applied to the Father, the Logos/Christ, and even to the Adversary and to humans, As to what each author means when they do that is a matter of study beyond the scope of this post and this reply.
Unfortunately, the Bible is indeed confusing. If it weren't, Christendom would not be divided on every conceivable doctrine imaginable. Yet it is, and each makes a good case from the Bible for their own sects interpretation. The Bible is the sacred writings of European culture. Each culture has their own sacred writings that are as powerful to them as the Bible is to us. It needs to be understood, first and foremost, as a human literary work. Matters of faith need to be held in abeyance, a matter of personal opinion, before clear studies can proceed. Otherwise all we end up with is dogmatic pronouncements that the Bible is God' Word, is inerrant and infallible and clearly teaches XYZ.
There is a great deal of the Bible that, no matter what transaltion you use, is given a particular spin, and is inaccurate besides. That's why I'm tackling Koine Greek. After that (should I live so long!) Biblical Hebrew. I recommend the same to everyone. I'm not here to convince you of any doctrine or theological system. I'm merely asking questions of Leolaia and Narkissos, two scholars from whom I always learn a great deal. Divine blessings to you NotaNess.
Martin