by Sea Breeze 48 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
You can use the bible to prove whatever you want regarding the divinity of Jesus because the bible isn't a book - it's a library written by authors over a long period of time during which the theology of the church evolved.
The developed doctrine of the trinity is post-biblical mumbo-jumbo.
It's quite obvious to me that Jesus was/is a unique individual - separate from God. The bulk of the evidence in the NT indicates that.
Here is a passage about the identity of Jesus:
Jesus came into the country of Caesarea Philippi. He asked His followers, “Who do people say that I, the Son of Man, am?” They said, “Some say You are John the Baptist and some say Elijah and others say Jeremiah or one of the early preachers.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter said, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus said to him, “Simon, son of Jonah, you are happy because you did not learn this from man. My Father in heaven has shown you this. -Mt 16:13-17
Had Jesus been God, this would have been the perfect opportunity for him, the great teacher, to clear up any confusion. Whom or what did he say he was? Well, Peter said “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And did Jesus correct him? No; he basically said "you're right." Jesus was the son of God, not God. How can that be any clearer?
Notice, as a secondary point, that Jesus referred to God as "My Father", indicating two distinct beings. He also referred to his father as being "in heaven" while he was on earth - again, indicating two distinct, separate individuals.
I think also of Jesus' death when he was hanging on the torture implement. As recorded at Mt 27:46, he cried out in fervent prayer. If he was God, to whom was he praying.
I could go on and on with such reasoning.
There seem to be a handful of verses that one might use to show the Jesus was/is God. However, the overwhelming bulk of the evidence, to me, shows that he wasn't/isn't. Therefore, logically, I attempt to explain those verses in the light of the bulk of the evidence.
In view of the fact that the Holy Spirit is M.I.A. in virtually all Bible verse where "Father & son" are mentioned, perhaps binitarianism would be more acceptable for some people.
* Matthew 28:19 - internal & external evidence strongly show that this verse is spurious.
1 John 5:7 - Spurious: found in no Greek manuscript before the fifteenth or sixteenth century.
@Nicolaou
Sea Breeze is not a "he"
He said he is a she in another thread.
Thanks for the correction Stan 👍
The developed doctrine of the trinity is post-biblical.@ cofty - The doctrine of the Trinity is encapsulated in Matthew 28:19, where Jesus instructs the apostles: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
And elsewhere in Scripture:
2 Corinthians 13:14 May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
And in writings of early church leaders trained by the apostles:
Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Ephesians 1 [A.D. 110])
“To the Church at Ephesus in Asia . . . chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God”. “For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary in accord with God’s plan: of the seed of David, it is true, but also of the Holy Spirit” (ibid., 18:2).
Justin Martyr
“We will prove that we worship him reasonably; for we have learned that he is the Son of the true God himself, that he holds a second place, and the Spirit of prophecy a third. For this they accuse us of madness, saying that we attribute to a crucified man a place second to the unchangeable and eternal God, the Creator of all things; but they are ignorant of the mystery which lies therein” (First Apology 13:5–6 [A.D. 151]).
It's quite obvious to me that Jesus was/is a unique individual - separate from God.I think Jesus' prediction that he would resurrect himself from the dead, while he was dead is the very best evidence he was God. It is far better than a simple proclamation which anyone can do, as I previously pointed out. This is nail in the coffin on any doubt as to the deity of Jesus.
Sea Breeze is not a "he". He said he is she in another thread.
Stan, I think you got me mixed up with someone else. Definitely a "he".
@TTWSYF
God has no legs or arms to build or create, he just speaks and his word carries ALL of his authority. Honor the son same as the father...that’s pretty bluntly spoken divinity, isn’t it?
I agree. I don't really understand the resistance on the deity of Christ or the Trinity for that matter. After all, we are talking about infinite power through nothing more than the spoken word. That's some serious power!
Sea Breeze is not a "he". He said he is she in another thread.
Stan, I think you got me mixed up with someone else. Definitely a "he".
ah--buggerit--you got me trawling through your old posts to see where i went wrong.
But if you really are a bloke--the gloves are off now fella.,
Jesus used two terms to describe himself: Son of God and Son of Man. This really irritated the Pharisees.
Before Pontius Pilate, “The Jews insisted, ‘We have a law, and according to that law He must die, because He claimed to be the Son of God’” (John 19:7). Why would His claiming to be the Son of God be considered blasphemy and be worthy of a death sentence? The Jewish leaders understood exactly what Jesus meant by the phrase “Son of God.” To be the Son of God is to be of the same nature as God. The Son of God is “of God” or out from the person of God. The claim was to be of the same nature as God, to in fact be God.
They would have just written him off as a nut normally. But his miracles made him impossible to ignore. They felt they had to confront him and get rid of him because people naturally are attracted to that kind of power, which they didn't have. People are still attracted to his power.
From Trinity Berean:
The common understanding is that “Son of God” implies his deity—which it does—and that “Son of Man” implies his humanity, which it does too.
He was a son of man, that is, a human being. And he is the Son of God, in that he has always existed as the Eternally Begotten One who comes forth from the Father forever. He always has, and he always will. He is the Second Person of the Trinity with all of the divine nature fully in him… So that’s the common understanding: he is both divine and he is human—two natures, one person.
The more sophisticated and important historical insight is that the term “Son of Man” doesn’t merely align him with humanity. It is probably taken from Daniel 7. And if you read that chapter you’ll see that the Son of Man is a very exalted figure: not just a human figure but an exalted figure. It was Jesus’ favorite self-designation…
“Son of Man” has the double meaning of human being and, according to Daniel 7, exalted heavenly one. And Jesus means to communicate both of those.
You can use the bible to prove whatever you want regarding
Cofty, that is so true. You and I can read the same scripture and get divergent opinions on its meaning/translation/impact. And isn’t that the major problem? YES. How do we know what’s right or wrong in translation?
Wouldn’t you go to the source? The Bible is a Catholic book, it’s not a Presbyterian book or an Anglican book or even a Watchtower book. It’s a Catholic book. Yet, in spite of this obvious fact, many people look to other sources for authority. Where or who gives this authority? It’s their book and they know what it means more than some ‘new apostle’. That’s why 40,000- Christian denominations have divergent interpretations on what’s dogma (must be believed) as opposed to doctrines (which you can have divergent opinions)
40,000 + forms of Chrisianity started by a man or woman compared to one religion started by Jesus Christ himself.
WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY?!?!?
Ask yourself
TTWSYF
Personally, I could never attend a denomination type church after my experience with Watchtower. Only local run independent and self-governing churches for me:
Non-Denominational
Baptist
Bible Churches
Calvary Chapel
There are probably others too. But, having said that, I know many fine Christians in denoiminational churches as well.
Christian churches are united on issues regarding salvation and differ mainly on issues of governing structure. The idea that there are thousands of churches with different ideas on salvatuion is promoted mainly by the cults for obvious self-serving reasons.
