Would a definite article prove that Jesus is God?

by solafide 164 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    Welcome solafide,

    As far as I can remember even the WT explanation is not quite that simplistic: they acknowledge that the absence of definite article is first of all a matter of syntaxical function: theos as predicate does not require the article, whether it refers to "God" or "a god" (they consider the latter option grammatically allowed, not required; whether it makes sense in the context of Johannine theology is another matter). An anarthrous predicate noun is qualitative, expressing what rather than who the subject (here the logos)is (a subtle but important nuance).

    Other examples of similar constructions in the Johannine context (you'll note that the English translation may require the article although there is none in Greek) may help you grasp what an anarthrous qualitative predicate is:
    3:6: What is born of the flesh is flesh(sarx estin), and what is born of the Spirit is spirit (pneuma estin).
    3:29: He who has the bride is the bridegroom (numphios estin).
    4:24 (with estin implicit): God is spirit (pneuma ho theos).
    5:27 because he is the Son of Man (huios anthrôpou estin).
    6:63 The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life (pneuma estin kai zôè estin).6:70 Yet one of you is a (the?) devil (diabolos estin).
    17:17 your word is truth (alètheia estin).
    1 John 1:5 God is light (phôs estin).
    4:8,16, God is love (agapè estin).

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    As nark explained, it's about WHAT, ie the NATURE of the logos. However, the wt doesn't really go along w this, either. This makes logos/ jesus god on earth. Wt government does not accept that jesus had the same nature as did god. The implications are entirely too detracting from their own ot/jehovah centered system, and also their own dictatorial position.

    S

  • Chalam
    Chalam

    Wt government does not accept that jesus had the same nature as did god.

    I agree! They do not believe what is written here

    Philippians 2:5-7 (New International Version)

    5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
    6 Who, being in very nature God,
    did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
    7 but made himself nothing,
    taking the very nature
    of a servant,
    being made in human likeness.

    The implications are entirely too detracting from their own ot/jehovah centered system, and also their own dictatorial position.

    Agreed! They are anti Christ, just like is written about the WT here

    1 John 2:21-23 (New International Version)

    21 I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. 22 Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.

    2 John 1:7 (New International Version)

    7 Many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist.

    All the best, Stephen

  • designs
    designs

    The above is not really accurate. Watchtower Christology does accept Jesus prehuman existence as being on a plane like God's or his nature is like God's. They will appeal to Heb.1;2,3.

    For many years they distributed the Translation- An American Bible by Dr. Goodspeed which rendered John 1:1 as 'the Word was divine'.

    Agree with them or not, but we should depict their beliefs as they hold them.

  • solafide
    solafide

    Earnest,

    You're forgetting one other thing. Context determines whether god with a definite article is referring to the one true God. In 2 Cor 4:4, Satan is the god of this world. The context clarifies which god by virtue of what Satan is the god OF. On the contrary, Thomas calls Jesus "the God of me" in John 20:28, not "a god of me". Thomas is referring to Jesus being the one specific God of him, and Jesus never tells him to shut up.

    Your logical conclusion is, any mention with a definite article towards Christ can be brushed aside. I'm affraid it doesn't work that way. Perhaps that might inconvenience you however.

    No Yahweh doesn't always refer to the Godhead as a whole, while it may. Context helps determine this. Which creed says that Yahweh always refers to the oneness of God? Psalm 110 doesn't really specify whether it's the Father or not, since adoni would have been understood to be Yahweh and we don't have the fuller revelation of the Trinity until the NT, just like the Jew wouldn't have known that the real temple was Christ's body until the NT.

    But the aposlte Paul conects Jesus to Yahweh in Rom 10:11-13. That's the clear implication. We can further discuss that here or you can direct me to where it has been discussed before.

  • solafide
    solafide

    Narkissos,

    I believe John 1:1 is qualatiative as well (and God is the Logos). What God is... the Logos is. All the more why the Logos is outside of time, hence "en arche", and is with God too.

  • designs
    designs

    Its called Transference of Regal Authority-

    Check Jewish Literature or a Reference Work like- The Book Of Jewish Knowledge by Ausubel.

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    designs

    Watchtower Christology does accept Jesus prehuman existence as being on a plane like God's or his nature is like God's. They will appeal to Heb.1;2,3.

    That doesn't work either, their really can't believe Jesus had a prehuman existence, even though they teach he was Micheal, they will tell you, nothing came down from heaven.

  • designs
    designs

    DD-

    Witnesses do believe in a kenosis of the Son being transfered from heaven to earth and the womb of Mary. They refer to it as the 'life force' being transferred.

    Agree with them or not, but we should depict their views accurately.

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    designs

    Correct. Yet, the wt does not accept that john1:1 is about being of the same substance. They insist that the logos is A god. Then, they make him a bit of both, like god and a god. As well, they say that the 144000 will be the same as that. Seems to me that, what they mean is that in station and in certain aspects the 144000 become like god, as was the logos. However, not in substance.

    *** it-2 p. 1203 Word, The ***

    All these renderings highlight the quality of the Word, not his identity with his Father, the Almighty God. Being the Son of Jehovah God, he would have the divine quality, for divine means “godlike.”—Col 2:9; compare 2Pe 1:4, where “divine nature” is promised to Christ’s joint heirs.

    *** it-2 p. 1202 Word, The ***

    These renderings would support the fact that Jesus, being the Son of God and the one used by God in creating all other things (Col 1:15-20), is indeed a “god,” a mighty one, and has the quality of mightiness, but is not the Almighty God.

    *** bh p. 202 par. 3 The Truth About the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit ***

    Instead, because of his high position among Jehovah’s creatures, the Word is referred to as “a god.” Here the term “god” means “mighty one.”

    And so, anyone could be made god by god, by wt reasoning. It's simalar to promotions in the military.

    S

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit