God is Jesus

by evangelist 178 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Adonai438

Hi Alan F
A bit isn't an exageration never claimed to be fluent but DO know some and no,, my interpretation doesn't come from those people I know that speak the language-- I don't take interpretation from other people-- only scripture.
2 questions cuz I unfortunately don't have time to write out any more now:
What do you make of Matthew 1:23:
The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him "Immanuel" which means "God with us".
Here clearly being spoken of Jesus is says "God with us"
'God' being 'Ho Theos' in the Greek. Literally "With us THE GOD".
And also about John 20:28:
Thomas said to him "My Lord and My God"
In the Greek "Ho Kyrios kai Ho Theos"
Literal word for word translation being:
"Answered Thomas and said "The Lord of me and The God of me" "
Thomas was not reprimanded for using God or 'The God' improperly and was in fact commended for his faith and he clearly called Jesus THE GOD. Not 'a god' or supreme entity etc...
I know that original transcripts do not contain capital vs lower case but in translation it is proper to use the languages gramatical cases for words. If there is a dispute over the capitalization of a particular word we can talk. Otherwise the words still say the same thing regardless of capitalization.
Sorry no more time to chat
Kenneson

Alan F. writes: "...a belief that other gods exist, in the meaning of the Greek theos, is not Biblically wrong. It is the worship of gods other than God that is wrong."
I don't believe that the Bible denies that there are other gods.
Moses was spoken of as God to Pharaoh (Ex. 7:1) Idols are called gods
(Baal in Judge 8:33; Chemosh in Judges 11:24; Dagon in Judges 16:23, etc.). The judges are called gods (Ps. 82) Satan, as you pointed out, is the god of this world (2 Cor. 4:4)
St. Paul probably expressed it best when he said: "...we know that
'there is no God but one.' Indeed, even though there are so-called gods in heaven and on earth (there are, to be sure, many 'gods' and many 'lords'), yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom all things are and from whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and through whom we exist." (1 Cor. 8:4-6)
AlanF

To Adonai438:
: What do you make of Matthew 1:23:
: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him "Immanuel" which means "God with us". Here clearly being spoken of Jesus is says "God with us" 'God' being 'Ho Theos' in the Greek. Literally "With us THE GOD".
As usual, things are not as straightforward as they might seem. My NIV Study Bible cross references Matthew 1:23 to Isaiah 7:14; 8:8, 10. Let's see how the translation is done in the NIV, the Septuagint, and several other references. The references and my abbreviations are:
The NIV Interlinear Hebrew-English Old Testament, Edited by John Kohlenberger (NIVIHEOT)
Analytical Key to the Old Testament, Vol. 4, John Joseph Owens (AKOT)
The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English, Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton (Brenton)
New International Version (NIV)
New Jerusalem Bible (NJB)
The Amplified Bible (Amplified)
New Living Translation (NLT)
The James Moffatt Translation (Moffatt)
Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)
The Revised English Bible (REB)
Tanakh - The Holy Scriptures (from Jewish Publication Society) (Tanakh)
The New Testament: An Expanded Translation by Kenneth Wuest (Wuest)
Note in the following scriptures how translators have rendered the passages in a number of different ways:
Matthew 1:23
kai kalesousin to onoma autou emmanouel,ho estin methermeneuomenon meth hemwn ho theos (Greek text)
and they-will-call the name of-him immanuel, which is being-translated with us the god (literal)
whom they will call Immanuel. a name which means `God-is-with-us' (NJB)
and they shall call His name Emmanuel--which, when translated, means, God with us. (Amplified)
and he will be called Immanuel (meaning, God is with us). (NLT)
and his name is to be called Immanuel (which may be translated, God is with us). (Moffatt)
and they will call him `Immanu El." (The name means, God is with us.") (CJB)
`... and he shall be called Emmanuel,' a name which means `God is with us'. (REB)
and they shall call His name Emmanuel (which being interpreted is, With us is God). (Wuest)
Note in the following that the Hebrew words translated as "Immanuel" or "God (is) with us" are exactly the same in each verse. Also note that Hebrew often does not explicitly use a verb in a sentence; the verb is implied.
Isaiah 7:14:
`imanwu 'el (Hebrew)
and-shall-call his-name Immanuel (AKOT)
and-she-will-call name-of-him Immanu El (NIVIHEOT)
kai kaleseis to onoma autou emmanouel (LXX)
and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel (Brenton)
and will call him Immanuel (NIV)
whom she will call Immanuel. (NJB)
shall call his name Immanuel [God with us]. (Amplified)
will call him Immanuel--`God is with us.' (NLT)
shall ... call his name `Immanuel' (God is with us). (Moffatt)
will ... name him `Immanu El [God is with us]. (CJB)
and call him Immanuel. (REB)
Let her name him Immanuel. (Tanakh)
Isaiah 8:8:
`imanwu 'el (Hebrew)
will-fill the-breadth-of your-land O Immanuel (AKOT)
fullness-of breadth-of land-of-you Immanu El (NIVIHEOT)
plerwsai to platos tes khwros sou, meth hemwn ho theos (LXX)
shall fill the breadth of thy land, O God with us (Brenton)
cover the breadth of your land, O Immanuel (NIV)
cover the whole extent of your country, Immanuel! (NJB)
shall fill the breadth of Your land, O Immanuel [Messiah, God is with us]! (Amplified)
It will submerge Immanuel's land from one end to the other. (NLT)
shall cover the country from side to side; for "God is with us." (Moffatt)
"... will fill the whole expanse of the land." God is with us! [Hebrew: `immanu El] (CJB)
the whole expanse of the land will be filled, for God is with us. (REB)
But with us is God, whose wings are spread as wide as your land is broad! (Tanakh)
Isaiah 8:10:
`imanwu 'el (Hebrew)
but-it-will-not-stand for God is with us (Immanuel) (AKOT)
but-not he-will-stand for with-us God (NIVIHEOT)
ou me emmeine en umin, hoti meth hemwn ho theos (LXX)
it shall not stand among you: for God is with us (Brenton)
it will not stand, for God is with us (NIV)
it will not come about! For God is with us! (NJB)
but it will not stand, for God is with us [Immanuel]! (Amplified)
and then die! For God is with us! (NLT)
it never shall prevail: for "God is with us." (Moffatt)
but it won't happen; because God is with us [Hebrew: `immanu El]. (CJB)
it will not be carried out; for God is with us. (REB)
it shall not succeed. For with us is God! (Tanakh)
A Handbook On The Gospel of Matthew (by Barclay M. Newman and Philip C. Stine, UBS Handbook Series, United Bible Societies, 1988, pp. 27-28) comments on certain details of the proper translation of Matthew 1:23:
More important for Matthew, however, is the significance of the name Emmanuel, which means "God is with us." . . . The phrase his name shall be called is impersonal here and not imperative, as the similar phrase was in verse 21. Called means "named," so translators should find the natural, impersonal way of saying, "He will be named." Perhaps "They (or, one) will name him," or "His name will be," or "People will call him."
Emmanuel should be written as a name, not translated here.
Since the phrase which means, God with us is not part of the quotation from the prophet, many translators will find it necessary to begin a new sentence: "This name means `God is with us' " or "The meaning of this name is `God with us.' "
Many other translations not listed above use "God with us" in Matthew 1:23 and use "Immanuel" in Isaiah 7:14. Some have a marginal note or footnote for the latter, saying something like "That is, God is with us" (RSV) or "which means, `God with us' " (NASB).
Given all of the above, several things are clear to me:
1. The meaning of the Hebrew `imanwu 'el is "God is with us" in Isaiah 8:10. All translators I am aware of agree.
2. Some translators interpret `imanwu 'el in Isaiah 8:8 as a name, while others interpret it as a verb phrase.
3. In Isaiah 7:14 `imanwu 'el is definitely a name because the rest of the verse specifically calls it a name.
4. It is certain that `imanwu 'el means "God is with us" when it is used as a phrase such as in 8:10 and 8:8.
5. It is a matter of personal interpretation whether `imanwu 'el means "God with us" or "God is with us" when it is used as a name as in 7:14.
It therefore follows that, because Matthew 1:23 is directly quoting Isaiah 7:14, it is a matter of personal opinion whether the Greek means "God with us" or "God is with us". However, because of the clear meaning of Isaiah 8:10, and the fact that if in 8:8 the word is interpreted as a verb phrase rather than a name it must mean "God is with us", it seems to me that the most consistent stance is to always interpret the phrase or name to mean "God is with us". Anyone who feels that "God with us" is justified in any passage, given the clear meaning of Isaiah 8:10, should be prepared to defend his opinion.
This is somewhat like trying to figure out the meaning of the name "Sitting Bull" when you don't understand how Indian names work. Does it mean, "The Bull Is Sitting"? How about, "the bearer of this name is like a bull that is sitting"? How about, "the bearer of this name is a sitting bull"?
I understand perfectly that the intent of many translators, and their readers, in claiming that "God with us" is definitely the only correct meaning in Matthew 1:23, is to obtain an argument in favor of the Trinity. The implication is that the name "God with us" applied to Jesus means that Jesus is literally God with us. Well, that phrase has something of that implication in English, but certainly not in Greek or Hebrew. The phrase "God is with us" has much less of that implication, and so Trinitarians don't like it because it means they have one less bullet in their arsenal of argumentation. To me this is not difficult. It's like asking whether the name "Sitting Bull" implies that the Indian is literally a bull. Obviously the answer is no. Similarly, I think that "God is with us" applied to Jesus does not imply that Jesus is God.
: And also about John 20:28:
I haven't considered this scripture much. It certainly raises some problems for non-trinitarians, but then, there are ways to get around the obvious implications, just as trinitarians have ways to get around various scriptures that have clear implications that God is exclusively "the Father". Note that I'm saying "get around" euphemistically.
: I know that original transcripts do not contain capital vs lower case but in translation it is proper to use the languages gramatical cases for words.
In principle you're right, but in practice there are cases where grammar alone is not enough to decide what the capitalization should be. Sometimes even the local context is not even enough. In such cases translators rely on their overall understanding of the Bible to decide.
: If there is a dispute over the capitalization of a particular word we can talk. Otherwise the words still say the same thing regardless of capitalization.
Well, no. In some languages capitalization is irrelvant, but in English the difference between "God" and "god" is huge.
To Kenneson:
: I don't believe that the Bible denies that there are other gods. ...
Given my previous discussion, I'm not sure what your point is.
AlanF
Kenneson

Alan F.,
While it is true that the Bible admits of other gods doesn't mean that it promotes them. I worship one God but I certainly
don't believe in these other gods, nor would I posit the argument of other gods to minimize Jesus' role, as if He is another god
amongst the many.
LucidSky

I think that your extra categories fall down because they involve respect, not worship.
When we talk of godship we imply that worship is involved.
Since we are then faced with the conundrum of not worshipping false gods, we have some decisions to make. That issue doesn't really come up with Lord's and kings, unless they set themselves up as gods.
Hi LittleToe. Do you feel that "worship" must always be used in an absolute sense? Or, like "god," can it also be used with varying degrees, from unqualified veneration to simple homage and respect?
Kenneson What do you make of De10.17?
For Yahweh your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe.
Is Yahweh the God of false gods?
AlanF

Kenneson, I still don't understand why you're commenting this way, because you're simply agreeing with what I've already said.
: While it is true that the Bible admits of other gods doesn't mean that it promotes them.
Exactly. God is the only god that is to be worshiped. The question remains, what does it mean to "worship"? What did the Hebrew and Greek words that are normally rendered in English as "worship" mean to the people who used them every day?
Think about this: Why was it traditional in England to call certain high officials "your worship"? Was this tradition a form of idolatry? Why or why not?
: I worship one God but I certainly don't believe in these other gods,
I think you do. As a Christian, you believe in Satan, I presume?
You're doing exactly what I've warned against -- mixing up "belief in" with "worship of".
: nor would I posit the argument of other gods
What does that mean? What is "the argument of other gods"?
: to minimize Jesus' role, as if He is another god amongst the many.
The fact is that Jesus is one god among the many. So is the Father, God. That's because of the definitions and common usages of the word "god" in English, theos in Greek and 'el in Hebrew. You can't discount those definitions just because you don't like to think of anyone other than God as an entity to be worshiped. A false god such as Molech is not to be worshiped, and a true god such as Satan is not to be worshiped (where "false" and "true" mean whether the Bible says that these are mythological gods or gods that have a real existence). In common usage, "false god" means any entity, real or imaginary, that some people worship but ought not. Thus, when Herod claimed that he was a god, he was a true god in the sense that he certainly existed and was very powerful, but a false god in the sense that he should not have been worshiped with the sort of worship that is to be reserved for God. The point here is that you can't mix the various senses in which a word is used.
It is this kind of sloppiness with language, which really is a result of sloppy thinking, that results in all sorts of horrible arguments. You know very well how this results in some stupid ideas and practices by the Jehovah's Witnesses. I'm trying to show certain people how this same kind of sloppy thinking results in making blatantly bad arguments for their belief in the Trinity.
AlanF
AlanF

To LucidSky:
You make excellent points.
I should point out, though, that the Hebrew terms "God of gods" and "Lord of lords" are standard Hebrew idioms for showing a superlative. A term like "he is the warrior of warriors" means "he is the superlative warrior" or "he is the best warrior in existence". So "God of gods" does not mean "the god whom all other gods should worship", but "the superlative god" or "the chief among gods".
AlanF
Kenneson

Alan F.,
I'm just trying to make sure I understand what you are
saying. Maybe, we are saying the same thing, but in just slightly different ways? You wanted to know if as a Christian I believe in Satan. I believe he exists, but I put no faith in him. He is not my god. But I would think that Satanists go further than this and put their trust in him. I also
believe the Father and the Son exist, but I put my faith in them. And I would think it possible for people to believe in the existence of the Father and Son, and yet not put their faith in them.
Is that what you mean by "worship?"
AlanF

Kenneson:
: s that what you mean by "worship?"
Yes. Now how does that relate to our ongoing discussion?
AlanF
Kenneson

Alan F.,
I suppose I have problems with your phraseology. How can
Satan be a true god and a false god simultaneously? You say he is a true god because he exists and false when he is worshipped. I would merely say he is truly a god to some, but certainly is not true by the mere fact that he exists. As a matter of fact, he is most aptly described as a liar and the father of the lie. John 8:44.

God is Jesus

Share this