Why do so many people believe that jesus is god? (page 3)

RWC

plmkrzy- Thank you for the posts. They explain the doctrine behind the Trinity wonderfully. They do not include the Biblical references to support that theology but those are readily available.

Legendary- Your idea of the Trinity is incomplete. The Trinity involves three manifestations of the God. My personal thought is that people should not insult others as being "fools" for their religious beliefs.

ItsJustlittleoldme

Ok, I'll join the fray here...

If the WT is correct, and John 1:1 is correct, that means that Jesus (a god) prayed to another God..

Moreover, doesn't that mean that you must pray to Jesus (a god) to get to Jehovah, "The God", who also states there will be no other gods before him..

So, why would Jehovah allow his son the title of "a god" when the bible clearly states that no other "god" will be before Jehovah..

Praying through "a god" to get to "The god" would seem to indicate to me that there is a 'god' in the middle...

I'm not saying the trinity is right, nor am I saying it is wrong.. Personally, I've never really thought about it a great deal before, but I would like to NonTrinitarian's here to answer this question...

Robert_V_Frazier

This should be a good place to start. Hope this is what you were looking for

Thanks, but that's rather more than what I was looking for. Origen wrote a ton of stuff, and he was not always consistent. I'd just like to see, in Origen's works (not in summaries of it), where he wrote the comment on John 1:1 that New Way alludes to. Origen's writings are available on the internet, but finding the comment New Way has in mind in that pile could take a long time, especially when I don't know exactly what to look for.

Thanks anyway.

Robert Frazier

NewWay

Robert, and others who have raised the question about Origen. I can't remember offhand exactly were the treatment of John 1:1 is, but is within his Commentary On John. As has been pointed out, there are internet resources that have the text to the complete set of volumes of the "Church Fathers". However, if you follow the link I gave in my earlier post, and look under the Scripture Notes, you will find a reference to John 1:1. The article will give the exact location in the works of Origen. The web site also has an article on John 10, showing how in context, Jesus was not claiming to be God - one has to read the whole account and ask why Jesus made reference to the Psalms in his answer if they were discussing "the God". As has been brought out by another poster, our understanding of certain words change in time. Modern languages can only try to express the original ideas of ancient language texts, but there are problems. For instance, the word 'god' had a special meaning to the people of the first century, and we have to put ourselves in their shoes when we discuss words like this.

(Edited for typos)

Edited by - NewWay on 1 August 2002 18:37:18

LittleToe

ThiChi:

Little Toe: "oh my god, another post from you!!"

You sound surprised. Do I offend you, or am I missing your point?

NewWay:
The burden of proof is on your shoulders, since you made the assertation. What was the quotation, please?

Facial hair poll: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=33229&site=3

plmkrzy

I'd just like to see, in Origen's works (not in summaries of it), where he wrote the comment on John 1:1 that New Way alludes to.

Robert_V_Frazier I was looking myself through many various links in an attempt to find what he was refering to but was not able to. So it's all on NewWay's shoulders. I figured if it was going to be there it would have been noted in the links I provided but it wasn't. Unless I really missed something.

RWC your welcome

Pistoff

This question has always amazed me.
For one, is it really that important?
I believe, so do you.
I don't believe that there is any trinity, but some do, for whatever reason.
But i believe that to believe the trinity you must have been influenced by something other than the bible, because as a doctrine it just isn't there. The references to Jesus and God being one is likened to the body of believers and Jesus as being one; that sort of close unity is easy to understand.
Still, what is the big deal??

Bang

But i believe that to believe the trinity you must have been influenced by something other than the bible

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you"

bang

LittleToe

Bang's quote is quite interesting, when you read it in context with an open mind.

Peter was acknowledging that Jesus was more than just a perfect man.

My understanding of the Trinity (not the half-baked WTS version that has distracted so many from the real doctrine) came from reading the bible, not the Early Church Fathers. Strangely enough I came to the same conclusions, and the more I read, the more it became apparent.

The greatest obstacle, that has to be surmounted, is acknowledging that God is "too big" for us to comprehend. We try squeezing Him into a cranial shaped box.

Just some fuel for the fire:

"It" can refer to a person or object.
"He" can refer to a person, or a personified quality.

Since the Holy Spirit is not a quality and is refered to as "it" and "he", doesn't is seem reasonable to suggest (Wt style language intended ) that the Holy Spirit is likely a person?

The same kind of language is employed of "wisdom", which is likely an allusion to Christ.

How is it that the Son is the wisdom and power of God? (1Cor.1:24)

Facial hair poll: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=33229&site=3

Edited by - LittleToe on 2 August 2002 5:10:25

NewWay

Some notes on John 10:31-39:

First, let it be noted that any Greek language Bible texts I use are from well-known sources outside of the WTS - I don't use the Kingdom Interlinear Translation (KIT). My own main personal sources of information on the Greek text of the New Testament are (1) The United Bible Societies' 4th Edition Greek New Testament and (2) The New Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (which incorporates the UBS Greek text) published by Tydale House.

In John 10:33, as with John 1:1, the Greek definite article is absent from the word 'god' (Greek = 'theos'), so a translation of "make yourself [a] god" (Greek = "poieis seauton theon"; note no "ton" [the] before "theon") is not taking an unreasonable liberty in view of the structure of the sentence. In fact when we bear in mind the Jewish understanding of what a "son of God" actually meant (i.e. an angel, or a being from the spirit realm), then it is understandable why they said "because you being [a] man ..." (Greek = "hoti su anthrohpos ohn ..."). It was their association with the word 'god' being one who inhabited the spirit realm rather than a man on earth that makes sense of what Jesus said next. Jesus straightaway in answer (verse 34) refers to a scripture which obviously used the word "god" in relation to human beings. Again, immediately (verses 35 & 36) after quoting the scripture, he asked them the pertinent question, "can you say that the one whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world is blaspheming because I said, 'I am God's son'?" (New Revised Standard Version of the Bible).

Also, what would be the point of defending himself against a charge of blasphemy for claiming to be "the god" if he were really God? His quoting from the Psalms would be irrelevant, since the ones called 'gods' (Greek = "theoi") were not being called "the god", but those human beings to whom "the word of God came" (NRSV). In fact, it is interesting to note that Strong's Concordance (Greek listing 2316) gives as a figurative meaning for 'god' one who is a 'magistrate' (Compare John 5:30, where Jesus is able to act as a 'judge' yet not by virtue of his own will by the will of him [God] who sent him).

Link to article on John 1:1: http://www.semachiah.fsnet.co.uk/notes/scripturenotes-joh1v1.htm

(Edited to correct link)

Edited by - NewWay on 2 August 2002 7:9:2

Why do so many people believe that jesus is god?

Share this