Episode 42 (January 22, 2024), "Is Jesus God?"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Hooooo boy. This week, we're asking one of the biggest questions in Christianity. Is Jesus God? Specifically, we'll be looking at two questions. First, we examine the gospel most frequently cited to support the idea: the gospel of John. Literally, the first verse of John says "The Word was with God, and the Word was God", doesn't that kind of end the debate? Well, if you know this show, you KNOW it's going to be more complicated than that! We'll go verse by verse discussing why what you've always been told may not be the full story. It may not be the story at all!
And since we're courting controversy already, why not go whole-hog? In our second segment, we're going after the Trinity. Where did the concept of a triune God come from? Is it in the Bible? If not, is it at least the best solution to the problem it was trying to solve? How did the idea become canon? Are we finally going to talk about something that actually happened at the Council of Nicaea?
For early access to an ad-free version of the show, exclusive content, and an opportunity to support our work, please consider becoming a monthly patron at:
/ dataoverdogma
Follow us on the various social media places:
/ dataoverdogmapod
/ data_over_dogma
Thanks Dan & Dan.
As suggestion for a future episode I’d like to know how the Holy Ghost became god and got incorporated in the trinity. Nobody really talks much about it if ever. To my knowledge there’s no famous Bible quotes about the HG and nobody prays to it. How did this support character get promoted to the top spot and on which scriptural/theological basis?
Yes and Yes and Yes?!?
Second this
Also want an episode on the topic of Salvation from Sin
Yes, and why the Comforter can’t come until Jesus leaves.
Yes! I've always wondered this.
I remember Archie Bunker (All in the Family). Someone said "Jesus was Jewish" and Archie replied "Only on His mother's side".
The funny part is that he wasnt wrong as jewishness is determined by the mother.
The real question is, was he infering that his father was a roman soldier as was claimed in the talmud.
Loved the "visited me in the night three times" and Dan laughing about golden plates buried in a hill. Comedic relief but also revealing.
Just looked at David Bentley Hart's translation notes of John Chapter 1 and he definitely points out the myriad of ways it can be interpreted and seems to be written in such a way that it is avoiding directly calling Jesus the same as the Father.
I'm sure this will be a very uncontroversial episode, and everybody in the comments will be charitable and reasonable. 😊
You must be new here. Just wait for the apologists to weigh in 🤣
@@Noneya5555 It's hard to convey sarcasm in text)
Agreed. Discussions on theology and doctrine are some of the easiest conversations to have.
@@svezhiepyatki I knew you were being sarcastic. Was just messin' with ya, lol.
Oh, I read the sarcasm. 😂
Just looking at the timeline of things it’s crazy that the Trinity even came to be. So much that we “know” today and believe was just created after the fact. That continues to blow my mind every time I’m reminded of it. The Trinity has never been foundational to me. I’m cool just living the examples of Jesus.
The argument is that it was inherent but we later “codified” it. Which I think Dan speaks to in other vids
This is also true of christianity more broadly.
Jews around the 1st century bce-ce were taking scripture and reinterpreting it to mean all kinds of things, mostly in ways that accorded with the eschatological craze that had been sweeping the Mediterranean for the past few centuries. One fringe cult from among many hit on the idea of presenting their messianic figurehead as a sort of subversion of Greco-Roman hero tropes and bam, christianity starts taking off.
The interpretation of a coming messiah, created after the fact. Portraying the messiah as a jewish inversion of popular Greco Roman literary heroes, created after the fact. Distinguishing the group from judaism? Another thing that happened after all of these antecedents had already been established.
And then you start looking into judaism and find the exact same sorts of things happening.
It's all one long thread of people reimagining stories or as Dan puts it, negotiating with the text, in order to make them more meaningful to their current situation.
We see the same thing happening today in the US. Christian nationalists reimagine these stories to be about the US. They imagine that Americans are uniquely blessed by their god and that the country is failing to live up to that recognition by upholding secular political establishments.
All of these things are related to one another, they all stem from the same drive.
Good lesson on "all translation is interpretation."
Every time I hear the word METATRON what comes up in my mind is Alan Rickman takes off his pants to show that he is an angel 😇
Is that from Dogma? (The movie?)
I've seen Alan Rickman with his pants off. He's not an angel! 😂
When I hear Metatron it makes me think of an invisible leader of the decepticons.😂
I liked that little exchange between Metatron and Bethany, where he talks about having to deliver the news to young Jesus of who he was and what was in store for him. A moment of dramatic relief in the middle of a screwball comedy.
Metatron makes me think of either the RUclips channel or Supernatural
Thank you, I commend your courage, not only for taking on this topic, but for continuing to engage with your detractors with such civility.
This changed the way I see the entire bible. Great content!
Excellent way explaining I agree
Thanks for this wonderfully clear and detailed exposition of New Testament christology. You said what needs to be said.
29:21 "Hey guys! I got my Dad's Divine Name for the weekend!"
Where does Scripture teach such a thing as a divine name?
@@JudeOne3Four where does scripture teach such a thing as the Trinity? Where does it teach the many and varied Catholic sacraments? Where does it teach that the "biblical definition" of marriage is one man and one woman? So long as we approach scripture with presuppositions, we will find the things we want. If the Bible were truly inerrant, infallible, and univocal, there wouldn't be over 40,000 different sects and denominations. Just because it doesn't use the exact term "divine name" doesn't mean it wasn't a concept to early Hebrews and Israelites. Remember, the Bible you hold today has been translated and trimmed to fit specific agendas, especially if you're a KJV-only kind of guy.
@@MrBlakeD82 There is no such thing as trinity in Scripture, AT ALL. You gave a me your heartfelt opinion with zero evidence nor Scripture. I asked WHO told you that God has a sacred divine name? A: God Himself B: Jesus Christ C: The Apostles D: The Pharisees aka Rabbi's
Mr. Beecher has such a kind face. 😊Just wanted to say that.
Feels like a round of biblical "who's on first"
Dan is always impressive, but sneaking in a 'They Live' reference is the cherry on top.
A lot of these official doctrines feel like O'Brien in 1984 asking Winston how many fingers. "Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane."
I'd love about three more episodes of this topic. It is the single, weirdest concept for me, at least. The Trinity is kinda a wack concept in my head. Come on Dan, you always give me something else for my reading list-give me more. 😂😂😂
Ide - Just read the whole warp and woof of the standard canonical text - no trinity would be there if there was not a litany of arguments/assumptions pushed back into the text beginning around the beginning of the third century
@greglogan7706 Already read the stuff years ago, though I will again when I get the New Revised Standard. I want some deeper dives but still for lay people. I'm atheist, but I grew up going to a real peach of a church (Church of God Holiness), and questions were...strongly discouraged. Also, since half the church was helped run by my family, questions got me tattled on tomorrow grandmother and worse, my great-grandmother. She was 5 foot even and scary AF. 🤣🤣🤣
@@lde-m8688
Here is the simplest low-down - foscus on the Christology rather than the theology (Historically and logically the theology emerged from the christology).
Key Word (doctrine) - Anhypostasis
Review "Desiring God" white paper
Then ask - "fully human" = really??
In contrast - first post ascension sermon -
Jesus of Nazareth - a MAN - attested to by GOD... (Acts2.22)
Ooopppssss
There you have it.... but if they can believe Trump, they can believe anything....
In my mind, the real motivation was, for Christian authorities, to not have a God that was lesser than the God of the Jews. Religion always had a economic component, and people supported the temples they attended. Christian authorities needed a reason to make people go to the temples of Jesus (where they had the monopoly) and not to the temples of Yahweh (where they didn't), because regular people would need a reason to not go for the temple of the most powerful god there is.
PLEASE do a Holy Ghost episode!!
That would be fascinating. When I was a kid, every attempt at an explanation wound up sounding like scooby doo cartoons
Would L-O-V-E to hear about the canonization process of the Bible!? Also any chance you can recommend a book, lecture, series etc on the subject? Thanks so much!
You said we wouldn't have a Trinity today except for a catholic church, but the same thing could be said about the NT.
"Is Jesus God?" is a problem question because trinitarians have 15 or more different meanings for "God"
In Exodus 3:14 God tells Moses what he intends to become to save the Israelites. In the next verse God goes on to state his NAME Jehovah. Then stresses that this is his name FOREVER.
People who match English terms in order to make Jesus into God shows desperation.
There is no way that Jesus, IF he was God, could become better than the angels. Hebrews 1:4.
Only an angel could. That is why Jesus is called a SON of God. All angels are SONS of God. Job 1:6.
I think your right on and more Christian’s should know this
More Christians may hear this, but they won't listen.
When the Apostate church brought in the trinity, its members were forced to accept it. Anyone who tried to reason or tried to check the Bible (few available) was termed a heretic and burned.
An IMMORTAL God coming and dying and thereby becoming a mortal is mind blowing.
No man has SEEN God AT ANY TIME - 1John 4:12,20 cannot be any clearer. Jesus was never God.
Our problem in understanding this is complicated by our failure to look at all the book. It is helpful to review Acts 2:22-28 with Joshua 10:14.
I am not an expert, but I found "Jesus Wars" by Philip Jenkins to be very enlightening on this subject.
I applaud your comments and your scholarship. Very few have made it as far as you have without being trapped in the quagmire of false doctrine.
The movie Dan M refers to at the end is Million Dollar Baby. It's the Clint Eastwood character who asks the question.
*Snap Crackle Pop Trinity*
That was Clint Eastwood’s character in Million Dollar Baby
Thank you guys very much.
Thanks Dans!
If you want to believe the new testament authors provide support for the concept of the trinity I think you have to believe that every one of them is really, really, really bad at explaining what they mean.
"I am the one who is" vs. "I am what I am". so... basically it's either God or Popeye...
I'll take Popeye. He seems like an ok dude for the most part.
His taste in veggies is great. I go with the sailor man
Popeye for me too, just way more plausible.
About the first part : I've heard it said that John was not the strongest when it came to Greek grammar. Maybe he meant to add the definite article but had dyslexia or something.
Beautiful 👏🏾 👏🏾 👏🏾
My only problem with Dan reading of John 8:58 is it makes no contextual sense for Jesus to claim the divine title there. Especially as it relates to his age relative to Abraham. The translation makes more sense as "I was" or "I have been". Ego eimi statements do make sense in other parts of John though.
Basically saying that I posses this knowledge and authority, that I am greater than Abraham because the divine name is within me. Either way, it's most likely not a claim to be God, it could also be him saying that he was destined to be "him" even before Abraham was.
He was probably claiming to be the metatron, the first created being that created everything else. This would line up with paul saying all things were made through him( jesus). I know orthodox jews that do believe jesus was the metatron and that paul was absolutely correct and in line with the sages. They say that christians just misunderstand paul and have twisted his words and created something strange.
Good stuff
*”I am”*
My main problem with this argument is that references the Hebrew. It seems that John was more familiar with the Septuagint.
In the future, maybe also include John 1:1 and 1:14. John seems to contradict himself in 1:1 The Word (creed?) was both with God and God was the Word.
(Maybe I’m misunderstanding the Greek. The word order is “God was the Logos” but of there’s inflection the word order in English may be as it is usually translated, _the Word was God_
The trinity = snap crackle pop! 🤣
With respect to Dan (whom I appreciate), I don't think he has completed his endeavours regarding John’s Christological discussion in Jn1. That being said, it seems evident he is generally going in the right direction (ok, up to his biff in 8.58 (detailed separately in previous comment)…🙂).
Re Dan’s Recognition the Reference to and Relevance of the Hellenic Logos Models
I suspect the author of John is indeed essaying in the context of the Hellenic notions of the logos - BUT he is doing so to provide a specifically "Christian" portrayal of the significant and very active idea of Logos dominant in this period. And, that is, specifically in contrast to the common Hellenic logos conceptions in the larger culture. The author is specifically drawing from the HEBREW conception - as expressed in the TNK - which Word (Hebrew DVR) is indeed from the beginning (cf Gen 1 (of all places...speaking of “the beginning” (εν αρχη)) - and then seen about TEN THOUSAND TIMES subsequent to that use as the very EXPRESSION of God - and entirely NON-personal.
A great example of the NON-personal use which is riffing off of Gen 1 is Ps33.6 - 6
“By the word of the LORD the heavens were made…
The author of John is presumably riffing off the same concept in the Gen 1 passage here in v2.
The idea of the logos (DVR) suddenly becoming in any sense a person seems, at best, patently absurd - the term is NEVER, as in EVER, used in that sense - anywhere or at anytime.
OK - then to continue re v1b -
V1b - προς τον θεον
I expect those genuinely interested in exegeting this text would review the entire breadth of the usage re προς. Consider, as an example, Heb1.6 and prob 1.8 in which προς appears to express the sense of "concerning" an object - which sense can be found in other passages as well. I recognize people may want to simply see the sense of direction of a subject speaking or acting TOWARDS the object - but that sense does not work in Heb1.6 - since the statement is NOT speaking toward the angels but is rather a commentary ABOUT (“concerning”) the angels. Likewise, I expect this is likely the sense intended in v8 since v8 is parallel to v6.
Thus, the logos is all “about” or ”concerning” God!
Think about Jesus - Jesus was all about explaining and expressing who God is. We need not look forther than to 1.18 wherein Jesus exegetes - describes - God to His disciples.
Jesus EXPRESSES the Father - as JESUS - who is NOT the Logos, He is rather the LOGOS BECOME FLESH.
v1c - λογος ην ο θεος - The Dreaded Anarthrous Logos!
I concur with not only Dan but most exegetes in understanding the logos in this construction excludes the sense of a person. However, Dan appears to simply translate λογος as "divine" or "deity" - but does not expound as to his intended sense - since “divine” or “deity” can carry various senses.
Thus, the whole question remains - IN WHAT SENSE is the notion of divine or deity being expressed by the author. Trinitarians have a nifty packaged answer - which, of course (and, as usual) has zero basis in the text (or ANY text in the canon), that is, the sense of an ontological identity with ο θεος but which excludes a PERSONal identity.
In contrast, I expect the author is much more likely expressing the sense of "characteristics" without any NON-ontological sense at all.
Again, think Jesus - "I and my Father "WE" are one (in purpose, orinetation - as Jesus is ALIGNED with God as He make so clear in Ch5... AND perhaps more so “if you have seen Me, you have seen the Father” - as Jesus is manifesting the character of God in his sentiment and behavior.
Thus, JESUS - is NOT the Logos, rather He is the LOGOS BECOME FLESH - a very different reality.
When this is grasped, the Prologue and Jesus relationship to the logos is both very simple - and very powerful...
By extension, the followers are LIKEWISE to become THE LOGOS MADE FLESH. God is light, Jesus is light - and His followers are to be light of the world (ideally…).
Jesus "Beware the scribes and Pharisees"
This guy "Guess I'll become a scribe"
Dont leave out the rest of the text. He wasnt teaching against their teaching, he waz warning about them not practicing what they were teaching and that it was all show and no substance.
Jesus also said that the pharasees " sit in the seat of moses" meaning they have the authority of moses.
Im so intrigued by how many differences are in the Greek. Now I really need to find a proper bible with the Greek and English translation in it.
I have found many so called "translations" are rife with translation bias to a Theological desire as well. So even then you have to be careful.
Hey Dan and Dan, thanks so much for this informative Podcast!
My Question: what do you both think is or are the most dangerous or disturbing outcomes of theologies of the hypostatic union and the trinity (besides threats, smacks and banishment ;-) )
Thank you. Dan became one of main sources. Btw, if have hard the idea that the word in John 1 1 doesn't refer to Jesus, but that the word refers to Gods command and his will. So God creates everything by his command. And when the word became fleah, it just means that God created Jesus by his word. So the word of God is just everything God wants it to be. And Interestingly, we find many verses in the Ot which back that up. In the Pslam the word of God is for example called his command. And it says in the Ot God created the earth by his word. And when we look into Genesis 1, its just his command "let there be light" etc.
Yes, it’ll be kind of hard to sit to the right of yourself. 🤣scripture says “ when he ascended to heaven, he’s now seated to the right hand of the father. Jesus never really says he’s the “top God” he’s in human form. OT often has God or his spokesman saying how we aren’t even close to being like the “top God”. I pray often for wisdom as I read scripture! I just really like Jesus’ personality so much better than the “mean” Old Testament God. He scared me as a child.
The Trinity evolved hundreds of years after Jesus was long gone...
Bart Ehrman points out that in the synoptic Gospels, Jesus does not claim to be God. These are the earliest Gospels. Since claiming to be God is a rather extraordinary claim, one would reasonably think the early Gospel writers would have mentioned it.
So, people who put Jesus above God are essentially idol worshipers? Whooo! That's gonna get a lot of people riled up. Lol.
Data speaks, but our beliefs interpret.
Prepare to push back. You dont even need to say the word prepare.
Apparently the movie was Million Dollar Baby.
*John not Univocal*
Is seems clear that the simplest explanation for some verses in John is that the author(s) wants to call Jesus God and for others that they want to say the opposite.
So let each passage speak for itself. Authors/books aren’t necessarily univocal.
11:10 just proved John believed in the trinity and that he believed that Christ is consubstantial with the father. “Something that is a part of me that comes out of me that is an extension of my will and things like that but is also semi autonomous.”
Basically Jesus and YHVH, and the Holy Spirit are like a conglomerate. Imagine the power rangers robot megazord.
In my experience a discussion of the trinity is either knowledgeable, intellectual and reasoned, or; if you are speaking to religious folks it becomes passionate and an attempt to emotionally re-understand what has been established by the oldest Greek manuscripts available.
What I find so humorous is that the very people who snicker at Catholics when they call them selves Christian because Catholics have so many “pagan“ traditions/origins; yet they swallow whole this ridiculous doctrine which was so obviously Greek, so philosophically nonBiblical !
You’re accepting a Catholic view of God guys, realize that the first fundamentalists in the late 17th 18th century didn’t do enough homework, (even Isaac newton knew better,; he had at his disposal the oldest available Greek manuscripts, think about it friends), do some encyclopedic research and realize you were sold a bill of goods by a bunch of first. second and third century Catholics!
Catholics encyclopedia calls protestants" reprobate catholics".
I left the trinity doctrin long before i left christianity.
This episode more than most just shows how complicated “Religion” can be
EXCELLENT JOB
'Substance'/hupostasis was 'person', so to say consubstantial was to say the same person. one person.
Okay Dan now I have to take you to task on 8.58 my brother. In this case you really bit that text. If Jesus was claiming this, he would use the phrase in the Septuagint which tells us exactly what Jesus would use if he was trying to make that claim.
Presumably the same author writing in Book of Revelation provides specific examples in Rev 1.4 and 8 which refers directly back to the Septuagint.
Thus that's NOT what Jesus is saying here - not even close
The Triune Doctrine is not even accepted by all denominations but most, to be sure.
"Εγο ειμι" means Jesus had power of attorney
Serious question: If the academic and scholarly consensus is that "The Word was God" is a bad translation and that "himself God" is a bad translation... then why do the scholars and academics who created this translation put this into the Bible? It would be one thing if this were any other translation but these quotes come from the translation you recommend people read for being the most accurate. Are these scholars on the translation team intentionally manipulating us? Just wrong? Or would it be more accurate to say "the academic consensus is split" here? I really admire your work and have learned a lot and been challenged a lot watching you, but this seems to be a topic where you're speaking with certainty something that at most is mysterious and unclear.
The academic consensus on the Bible is always split because there are two major groups within biblical scholarship, the more critical scholars and the more evangelical/fundamentalist scholars.
Bible translation is a massive task so it’s done in large committees, often either made up of people with religious commitments or they answer to people with religious commitments. These translations are often commissioned by religious organizations, so they usually aren’t really fans of changes that affect doctrine like this one.
Not to mention that their goal isn’t only to make a translation of the Bible, but to sell one and there are a very large number of Christians that think translations that translate the line in Isaiah as “will be born of a young woman” instead of “will be born of a virgin” come straight from satan himself, even though the Hebrew word actually translates as young woman and doesn’t even imply virginity.
So there are a lot of reasons that poor translation decisions are made, but they all boil down to being afraid or not being allowed to rock the boat any and having to keep things in line with traditional doctrine
To hear a secular, well-informed direct reason provide John 1: one is not Trinitarian infused is so refreshing being raised JW. to know this information since the age of 12 and know that I was on the right side of - what should we say - history, reality, the truth, is amazing. Don’t get me wrong I no longer care for religion. But I always knew that this tiny little sect definitely had a corner on the market of imitating first century Christians as accurately as possible including, definitely, no trinity and certainly no belief in a horrific hell or even in mortal soul. first century Jews believed, if you check the Torah in the resurrection of all dead to a new, restored earth. It appears once the Greeks influenced Israel things were never the same. And once you toss in Roman control and power, Forget it. But facts is facts folks. And Greek is koine Greek
I'm not a scholar, but I -- a non-theist -- have no problem accepting that the Jesus of John proclaims his identification with the god of Israel. Although, I don't think the Jesus of the other canonical gospels made this claim. The arguments against John's Jesus making this identification seem a bit convoluted, especially when taking all the passages in John together.
I find it highly unlikely that the historical Jesus would've claimed any sort of divinity comparable to YHWH , but of the four gospels Jesus in John is the most elevated theologically. There's a reason John is the most quoted authority for apologists.
The trinity is a different matter. It's a clear example of dogmatic naval-gazing with no clear basis in the NT.
I often hear the trinity was articulated at the council of nicea, but it wasn't. The ruling of council of nicea was Binitarian. It only comcerned the godhood of Jesus and not the holy spirit
Really great info! Just discovered your channel and subscribed.
My own personal interpretation is that Jesus believed himself to be the literal Adam reincarnated and the only son of god in that sense. Being before Abraham agrees with that. Hence his often repeated ‘son of man’ literally ‘son of Adam’ was preferred term. I believe only Adam is the one person besides Jesus called the son of god in that unique sense and named.
In practical terms, see Jer 31:22 to see a woman who compasses or encircles a man. The metaphorical story of Adam’s creation had god breathing his spirit into Adam and the concept of god walking in the garden and conversing is a state of consciousness. Not that Adam was the first human, but that at some point a human had this divine connection hard wired within.
I personally do believe in reincarnation and I believe Adam is the one who has suffered ‘since the foundation’ seen in Rev. Adam was also Jacob, who had a dream describing his own future of returning himself many times and he was told that directly. His name then was changed to Israel, and that’s the name he bore in each reincarnation. The suffering servant passages all show this one individual with his name interchangeably used with Jacob. Adam was sacrificing for his own sins like Ezekial says.
Jacob returns as a messenger over and over and was likely some of those prophets including David. Surrounded by that woman described in Jeremiah is a mystical and repeatable thing that drove Jesus and the prophets into solitude and why they lived in caves and wilderness. The test of Israel was on him alone like obstacle courses and Jesus was doing that. But he was saved from birth like Jeremiah and known before he was born. His last words about feeling god had forsaken him was literal and not taking time out to give a Bible study. That was when the woman that had encircled him left, revealing he was totally human after all.
Can we get a show on the miracles? (Not Smokey tho) lol
Christians get upset when the Quran informs them to abandon the Trinity, that Jesus (as) was not God's son, did not die on the cross, and was only a great Prophet.
But they ignore that the Quran confirms the virgin birth, Jesus performed many great miracles, is the Messiah and was taken up into Heaven and shall return in End Times.
Why would the Quran say all this is not True?
This was a big sticking point for me as a kid. They couldn't explain how Jesus was God but also the son without resorting to because I said so. Stop asking questions.
"just have faith" 🤣🤣 Don't look behind the curtain. Very much stop asking questions, to young to see it was a real red flag.
I was raised in a Christian household. Highly spiritual parents, but in my opinion and my dad also believe that he is polytheist and he claims that Christianity is polytheistic. The SON the FATHER and the HOLY SPIRIT and that Yeshua and his father Yahweh are equal but are not the same beings. There’s just things that made me question that why would Jesus look up and say father forgive them. Nowhere in the Bible does it state that Jesus was god or the creator of the universe but only refers to him as the father and savior. Brought down to him by his FATHER and yeshua was brought down here to carry GODS will.
Now I can't stop seeing your "spiritual parents" floating around the house in a ball of light. 😆
27:45-27:50 It is a semitic Gospel. Paul does the same thing in 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16. Paul was semitic.
Is manifesting or bearing the Divine Image the same idea as being an Avatar of one of the gods in Hinduism?
What doesn't make sense is NONSENSE.
This episode was not easy to understand 😭
Prajapatir vai idam agre asit
Tasya vag dviitiya asit
Vag vai paraman Brahman
In the beginning was Prajapati (Brahman)
With whom was the Word;
And the Word was verily Brahman.
(Krishna Yajurveda, Kathaka Samhita, 12.5, 27.1; Krishna Yajurveda, Kathakapisthala Samhita, 42.1; Jaiminiya Brahmana II, Samaveda, 2244)
Also from Bhagwad Gita:
“I am Om, the Word that is God.”
(Bhagavad Gita 7:8)
Let's not forget that the stuff about Jesus being "in" his father and his father being "in" Jesus came just after he had gotten naked in a room full of children, pressured them into some unwanted physical intimacy, and instructed them to perpetuate the practice. "Love each other as I have loved you." Poor little Judas killed himself after ratting out his abuser.
What is to be of those cannibals who synogogue on shabbos but congregate the first day of the week to eat the flesh & drink the blood of their G_ D. - Seutonius ( first generatiion naysayer / skeptic ) Circa 1st century Anno Domini "year or The Lord"
The Trinity was a model of God made up in order to justify the idea of believing in ONE God, and still having made Jesus God, and also the Spirit as God, and also considering the Father of Jesus God. That meant that Christians are not polytheist but still monotheist. This is an incoherent concept that completely confuses Christianity and who the Almighty really is.
I never understood why Jesus would pray to himself in the garden before he’s arrested. This would explain that.
The SV (Scholars Version) does a great job with John 1:1.
In the beginning there was the divine word and wisdom. The divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was.
Just sayin'. From **The Complete Gospels**, Robert J. Miller ed., Polebridge Press.
So is the council of Chalcedon where the story of the virgin birth originated?
nope, the virgin birth was already written about in Matthew and Luke, all the way back in the 80s AD.
Did it originate or was that when it was included. Surely like other gods a virgin birth popped up in one of the versions very early on.
There are many Gods. Gods though they be, like mortals they will die. Satan is the ruler of this world. The Father you spring from is the Devil. He is the ruler of this world. Are you under mind control that you cannot read those sentences and comprehend them? You can see but not perceive?
Jesus is a third party mediator to this world and these heavens, between you and your Father. Jesus ascends beyond the heavens. Where he is going, you cannot come. Jesus is the Lamp of the Light of the Father or, the word of the will of the Father.
Inherit the kingdom prepared for you at the foundation of the world. No one comes to the Father except through me.
What is Yahweh that the Son of Man is mindful of him?
Yahweh is the God of metallurgy. The gates of the nether world (Abyss/Death/Hell/Netherworld) will not prevail against his Everlasting Lake of Fire and Brimstone (sulfur) where you will be smelted and refined, have your dross removed and, be purified. There, you will be tormented or, tested for purity by questioning.
Brimstone 1a) divine incense, because burning brimstone was regarded as having power to purify, and to ward off disease
Tormented: 1) to test (metals) by the touchstone, which is a black siliceous stone used to test the purity of gold or silver by the color of the streak produced on it by rubbing it with either metal 2) to question by applying torture
Just as silver, bronze, iron, lead, and tin are gathered into a furnace and smelted in the roaring flames, so I will gather you together in my furious wrath, put you in, and smelt you. (Eze 22:20 NABO)
(it is better to marry than to be on fire (1Co 7:9 NABO) Be fruitful, and multiply (Gen 1:28 KJV)
John 1:18 (NET Bible Notes - Full Notes)
.75 א1 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in66 א* B C* L pc.
people coud say anything about Jesus deity based on their interpretation, some say he is a carpenter, prophet, God...
well, why don't ask the person Jesus Himself ? let him gives His own statement. Statements prevails interpretations.
Jesus, who is God ? Jesus: "please tell my brothers, I'm going to Father, your Father, my God and your God" John 20:17.
Father, who is Jesus ? Father said through Peter "Jesus is Messiah, Son of the living God". Mat 16:16-17.
unknown man ask Jesus "Good teacher", Jesus replied "Why you call me good ?, nobody good except God alone !".
Peter "Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" 1Peter1:3.
problems with human interpretations, it is not absolute true or false, it's changing depends on how broad the person's knowledge, how many facts and capcity of thinking.
when presenting new facts, the theology will crumbled by itself.
The reason of trinity doctrines thrive, because of indoctrination (brainwashing), which impacting the cognitive receptiveness of the person brain.
plus prejudice that everybody who disagree with Trinity doctrine is heretics, blasphemying Jesus. Well the truth is they are blasphemying God and denying Jesus, the Son of God.
if Christains need to learn Greek first, we are doomed. Jesus gave us hints,.
1. put His words (not the person) as cornerstone of all believe, because cornerstone used as measuring tool to verify the truth, person could not be used as measurement, but Jesus words can. the practical example, is by asking What Jesus said regarding this matter ?
2. Jesus said, Holy Spirit will guide Christians to the truth, have Christians tried to meditate scripture with the help of Holy Spirit ?
3. read carefully and in details
4. have holistic view, Jesus never against His own words, therefore don't stick to one vague sentence to deny hundreds contradictory sentences.
5. being receptive, have room for corrections. That's the only way to escape from brainwashed minds.
thanks for insight of the Greek understanding, which confirm the theological blunders made by someone in the past, but inherited without questions till today.
Short answer: yes, because it and Jesus said that God is good -- and Paul said that Jesus is God.
Where does paul say jesus is God/ YHWH?
Jesus also said no one is good but the father
Sorry, Jesus isn’t God, nor equal to God. He called our God and Father his God and Father at John 20:17.
See also:
1 Corinthians 8:4-6
4 Now concerning the eating of food offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God but one. 5 For even though there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God, the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him.
And……
John 17:3 “This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ.”
The only true God…..
"I am he" is Jesus claiming he that he is the Messiah, not God. Everyone was waiting for the Messiah in that day. Jesus claims he is the Messiah several times in the New Testament. He tells us to pray "Our Father who is in heaven". Why would Jesus say that if he is God and he is currently on earth next to them. He said if you hate me, you hate my Father also. He prays to his Father for his disciples. It is foolish to believe that Jesus is claiming to be the Creator, God the Father, but rather it makes perfect sense to understand that Jesus has the divine spirit in him (the word of God) which we can also have in us if we believe in the teaching of Jesus. If we listen to his words and repent and accept the word of God like Jesus did, then that word becomes flesh in us. Then will we be saved, and we can claim that Jesus is our savior because we now have that heart of flesh. Do not be deceived. Jesus calls the ones who Obey God his "brothers and sisters" not his children. It's all right there in the book if you read it for yourself. Find out more on thehighestofthemountains including the world-famous brain maps that show the incredible technology we are created with.
In short NO, Jesus is not the almighty Yehovah. You only have to read the Bible to see this is the case. Eph 1:3 says "blessed be the God and father of our lord Jesus Christ " So WHO is the God of Jesus. Case closed!
Ironically, most research indicates that Ephesians is most likely not Pauline. However, even Paul seems to avoid speaking about Jesus as the same as God. Quite an interesting subject of study.
@@jericosha2842 you find that phrase all over the Nt. Jesus has a God. He himself says it
@@jericosha2842 God used Paul. Remember ALL scripture is inspired by God .
@@STROND all scripture is inspired by god is in a scroll not even considered " scripture" at the time it was written. The only way to get around this is to loosely call scripture anything written. If this is the case then all written religious text is " scripture" and would mean every religions texts are inspired by God. Is that what you are claiming?
Dan Wallace whom trinis use sasy he prefers The Word was Divine. Yes. Trinis have ripped unitarians who point this out even though it's true.
The bible doesn't tell the reader to assume what it already expects like to pick it up one has already come to the conclusion based on observations in the world around them that it is a power greater than themselves. This contextual orientation of the first five books does thsn tell us how it is rationalizing a pagan world around them where each believer already knew these ultimate knowing truths yet in trying to argue attributes, labels ,categorical names & titles inherently confuse and project themselves into creating many gods in their own image.
Ur family new God , uruk family new God neither believed the other got it right.
Which Is why all recorded attempts at monotheism is literally THE corruptions, those adversaries against God.
The very notion of Jesus bluntly projecting himself onto god the father. The alpha & omega would've in fact made him such a false prophet by the standards of the day.
Mosaic commandments and Jesus is literally in opposition to this monopolization and subjugation of meglamanic rulers divine right claims his verse face to face this in his very title as Jesus Christ king of kings.
Idk how many time the bibles sentence structure repeats standardized weights and measure curses & blessings and Prager logic but its alot. Maybe as many times as it gives context in God not being in the fire ,water ,storms but yet that he can act upon and move through at his own discretion yet still many think he is in meteors or some superstitious items and it new testament says bluntly don't.
But it's very clear on us only being able to deduct what God isn't.
Jesus definitely contextualixes that he is incarnated just as Moses, Solomon and all 1st temple kadokite would've expected him to be. Unfortunately the reforms under Hezekiah and influences from syncrab forever change this and leads to great divides. Almost every exploration leads back here.
When the vandals and everyone was denying the nicean creed our refusal to fall under such power dynamics and political polarization we see works like Gospel of Thomas inverted the city of bird where Jesus obviously built and mended stone ,he obviously Freed the city of bird from isis bird sacrifice or agury. So here you start reading inverted so basic hermeneutics guidelines tells you all the rest of the text is opposite or symbolic to free the author from persecution.
This happens a lot, platos Republic uses a myth everyone knows to engage readers getting through mass sychosis.
Ppl are to corrupt it calls for certain contextual measures to convey messages that stand the test of time.
Jesus is challenging the norms ,pagan subjugation and enslavement practices and habits alone has taken us 2024 years to reduce but still it creeps up in us all .
Beating around the bush with lots of context here on aligorical ,symbolic yet literal comparables to why Jesus wouldn't give a skeptical textual critique atheist what they want to read in such a blunt way.
Spelling pronunciation is a very active translational corruption in our modern time where they are pumping out enough diss association that it's going to lead to a very separated layman kid not being able to identify jehova in older works. This has always been a major concern why letter for letter translator and less is better
The trinity is just failing at counting, that comes from failing in categorizing.
Is Yahweh a full God? Yes, he is*
Is Jesus a full God? Yes, he is*
Is Jesus the same thing as Yahweh? No, it's not, because we can find differences: notably, one was dead (for a little while) while the other one was presumably alive. Also, Christian dogma also says they are not the same.
That makes two Gods in any sane arithmethic.
Edit: nobody cares about the Holy Ghost
*(according to Christianity)
I was once told the trinity is like an egg, the shell, the white liquid and the yolk, but they are all the one egg.
This analogy is of a Partialist view (heresy) where the the shell, whites, and yolk are all part of what is the egg, but taken alone are not the egg
@@Lmaoh5150 exactly. It's modalism and a heresy
@@JopJio Modalism and Partialism are two distinct views in my understanding. Partialism being like the egg example, and modalism being like a man who is a father, a brother, and a son (each which are the modes) all at the same time, or like water, which can take the form (mode) of liquid, gas, or ice.
@@Lmaoh5150 this makes sense. 👍👍
Yeah, turns out, you can come up with all sorts of analogies for concepts which are poorly defined in the first place.
As another reply points out, you will find people who agree and disagree with the analogy. All of the arguments being circular of course, since none of it is actually pointing at anything but vague conceptions which only exist in people's heads.
Can you believe people kill each other over this stuff? Wild.
*Gospel Verses Which Show That Jesus Christ (Peace Be Upon Him) Is Just A Prophet Of God.*
*Mark 10:18*
"And Jesus (peace be upon him) said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone."
*Mark 12:29*
"And Jesus (peace be upon him) answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord."
*Matthew 24:36*
"[Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) said] But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."
*Matthew 21:11*
"The crowds answered, 'This is Jesus (peace be upon him), the Prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.'"
*Matthew 21:46*
"They looked for a way to arrest him, but they were afraid of the crowd because the people held that he [Jesus Christ (peace be upon him)] was a Prophet."
*Luke 24:19*
"‘What things?’ he asked. ‘About Jesus (peace be upon him) of Nazareth,’ they replied. ‘He was a Prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people.'"
*John 4:19*
"Sir,’ the woman said, ‘I can see that you [Jesus Christ (peace be upon him)] are a Prophet."
*John 5:30*
"[Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) said] I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me."
*John 6:14*
"After the people saw the sign Jesus (peace be upon him) performed, they began to say, 'Surely this is the Prophet who is to come into the world.'"
*John 9:17*
"So they said again to the blind man, 'What do you say about him since he has opened your eyes?' He said, 'He [Jesus Christ (peace be upon him)] is a Prophet.'"
*John 10:29*
"[Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) said] My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand."
*John 14:24*
"[Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) said] Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me."
*John 14:28*
"[Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) said] You heard me say, ‘I am going away and I am coming back to you.’ If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I."
*Conclusion:*
*John 17:3*
"[Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) said] And this is eternal life, that they know you, the Only True God, and Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) whom you have sent."
Greetings, Every real Christian knows that Jesus Christ is a prophet like Moses, but Jesus Christ is more than that. Jesus is the Son of God, the Exalted King of Isreal, High Priest, Mediator between God and men, Lamb of God, the Second Adam, ect. So Jesus Christ has many titles and fulfilled them, He is not JUST a prophet.
Since you qoute the words of Christ and Christ never lied. Jesus said: John 17:3 3 And *this is life eternal,* that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
Do you believe that?
@@JudeOne3Four
Read all those verses first. Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) also spoke in allegory/metaphorically.
@@mohammedfaisall1651 What allegory/metaphorically. Don't come and try to teach me about the Scriptures. See, muslims cherrypick what they want from Jesus Christ but reject His words when it comes to the real God and salvation. This is how deceptive muslims are. But he, if their master is a deceiver, his followers will be deceivers too
It is just a fiction.... Jesus at best another lose Messiah nailed by the Romans.
@@JudeOne3Four
It is just a fiction.... Jesus at best another lose Messiah nailed by the Romans.
You explain God the Father( Jehovah), God the Son (Jesus Christ), God the Holy Spirit) using language. The Bible written by Man. The Holy Spirit wrote Bible. What Spirit say is true. Both of you is not Filled with the Holy Ghost . Everything is true without error. God can’t lie. When God everything is true He spoke into existence.
It is advisable to worship the God who sent Jesus, the same God to whom Jesus and his disciples directed their prayers. According to 1 Timothy 2:5, Jesus serves as the mediator, not the ultimate object of worship. In Matthew 15:24, it is stated that Jesus was specifically sent for the Jews, akin to Moses' mission. As highlighted in John 14:6, Jesus is portrayed as the path to God, rather than God Himself. It is essential to understand that Jesus serves as the intermediary or guide to God, not as God incarnate, as emphasized in Hosea 11:9. According to Malachi 3:6, God's nature does not undergo change, remaining constant from spirit to man. Christians are urged to repent without delay, as the time of Jesus' second coming approaches. In Matthew 7:22, it is suggested that Jesus may disavow those who merely acknowledge Him as "Lord."
Both God and kings are worshipped.
Jesus is the King of kings.
Most people do not read or pay much attention to John 20:30-31 where the author of this gospel gives a reason for writing it, which is to show that Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God. Being the Messiah means being a descendant of king David, the promised heir of his kingdom, and to be the son of God has several meanings, one of which is a creation from the Almighty just as Adam was called also a son of God. Luke 1:35 actually defines why Jesus is called the son of God and this is because he is a creation of the Almighty, it is because the Almighty conceived him in Mary without a male parent, Jesus is the only begotten son of God in this sense.
is david not in mary's genealogy?
So the critical issue here is what "I am" because these statements are the mystical backbone of John
But let me just state so that its clear, tritarian creed is theological 💩. Its design is to silence discussion. If we turn then to the text of John and try to extract an authority for whats in the text, that is a quagmire. And so we are really asking the question is Jesus divine, and I am going to answer yes, but from a mystical perspective it doesn't mean much.
So Dan references Exodus 3, but I would reference exodus 6:3. Here is the relator the bible puts on notions of gods. Those other high gods like El, An-Enlil, Zeus, Ouranos, Cronos, those are me. In other words the author is trying to consolidate the celestial father god notion and supreme god into YHWH Elohim, the best identification (for the Jewish peoples). And we should note here that the divine family of old (Elohim) is being consolidated explicitly by this text. Thus the torah essentially is taking the divine council of El, the most high, and his godlings (elohim) and reorganizing them into YHWH elohim and the council of angels.
And so the new testament in great preference is associating Theos with father, or the El-Zeus god-head and avoids deferentially the association with YHWH. So its authors are trying to reenvelope father god imagry of the past. Margaret Barker has done some work on this.
So lets get back to the book of John. These saying "I am" are mystical and participative, and so we need a definition of divinity suitable for this. Lets take a god.
A god is not a person because.
1. Creator (later ideas)
2. Doesnt die (they do, but they live longer than humans)
3. Explains the hard to explain, explain what no human can explain (Job 38:40)
4. Foundation of world views.
5. A focal point of revelation and exoteric mysticism.
I am going to extract divine from these.
1. thoughts or rational of creation (versus the created itself - like tiamat)
2. lives on
3. inexplicability
4. mystical perspectives
5. exotericism
In some way all religions are trying to go from the old gods (that is Egypt, Sumer, Kura-Araxes) to divine gods. And so we ask the question was Jesus divine. And the question is at times Jesus appears to be exoteric, he almost certainly had a mystical perspective, many of the ideas are inexplicable and wrapped in parable, these ideas live on, and in an esoteric sense his thoughts created a mystical movement. So he qualifies. The problem is so does peter and many of his followers. And more over we have precedents in Zoroastruanism and Buddhism and other religions, and in fact if you are on the left hand path its just an extension of thinking but removing all the iconic identifyers.
So now that the divinity problem is dealt with we must deal with the "I am". I am relates supreme beings, in esoteric mysticism there is the goal to approach and understand supreme divine beings. In the work of Marguerite Poirete, to eliminate the conscious objections to divinity and become it. The "I am" are mystical hammers designed to break down the wall between the self and the divine to create a new mystical self that is part of the divine.
In Johns theology it links itself through the christ being (a derivative of Paul's theology that paths through greco-roman philosophy of its day) and it differentiates itself purposefully from jewish mysticism in which Paul is a derivative. And so specifically it has a "us" component that specifies joiners with the protochristian community and it "thems" the jewish community and their mystical paths. IOW, if you really want to know and be a part of god, you need to leave Judaism behind.
And so, we need to ask the question is this a primary belief of Jesus or a derivative. Having established above that there is a sense of a divine Jesus does the book of John represent that sense? No. The jesus mystical plane and the johannian mystical plane cross at points, but they are not the same plane. This is my lefty leaning, but all mystics are on different paths, a mystic writing about Jesus mystical path is telling you more about his own. Lefties disown unitarianism as a idealization or a cosmic unifying desire mystics have. The book of John nestles itself well into the evolution of neoplatonic and other contemporary philosophical thought.
What, then, is then left of value in the text? The book of John is a doorway, the "I am"s are the handle, once you open the door, release the handle and make the door and handle dissolve and with open mind search. The mystical jesus is "seek, find, marvel, empower, rest". He's a point in the eastern Mediterranean mystical communities, he's in the jewish community, he believes that a time of mystical revolution is coming in which those at the bottom of the here and now will be elevated over those at the top. Read the secret sayings of Tomas and other thought. Each of these are radiata of the mystical jesus. What he is can never be more that that, but absolutely less than the sum of those. The divine jesus lives on in radiata, to search for Jesus in the mystical divine is a doorway opening to delusion.
"I am" just means ego eimi/I am and are words spoken by others too:
Luke 1:19, “I am (ego eimi) Gabriel"
Exodus 3:14 Lxx has not I am:
And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.
Brenton Septuagint Translation has:
And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you
The Septuagint translates ehyeh asher ehyeh of Exodus 3:14a into Greek as “ego eimi *ho on”*
I am would normally just mean
Ps 46 10 Cease striving and know that I am (ano ki) God (elohim)
Is 45 5 I am (ani) God (yhwh), the only God there is.
So it could just refer to predestination since two verses earlier he said Abraham wanted to see the day and saw it, which could indicate a prophetic vision. Some commentaries also have the same view
@@JopJio Elohim originally meant gods "im" signifies plural. but formally The Elohim means to canaanites proper of the late bronze age "The Divine Council". As Yahweh comes into Samaria, and is adopted by its king, he would have been one of the Elohim under El. If you will recall the kings of canaan and syria, 11 of them, including Isra'el went to war with an expanding Assyria. Each of them was a city state with its god. They kings on earth represent the council, including Israel's king represents Yahweh. The agreement between the kings is under El. The god of Assyria was Asshur, also represented by many gods. When Israel is defeated, Meggido is taken and now Israel is Samaria, its cities in the north belong to assyria, and at this time judea is no longer politically unified with Samaria. Later you see Samaria adapts ba'al (Hadad) the god of damas. This indicates the loyalty, but the wife if the king follows Jezebel, who follows Asherah (A popular god amoung women of Ephraim).
The text from psalm are assumed to be from David, but actually cover a larger period of time in which the editor assembled and redacted these texts, this is to have been done late during the early greek period. Consequently the redactor probably fiddled with the text.
If you were to walk into Samaria and say i follow El and the Elohim they would immediate understand that you were a supporter of, to them at the time, historic confederation of Israel. The gods in that earlier period were Anath, Gad, Hadad, Yam, Mot, Hamon, Asherah, Yahu and unnamed others, there were bu legend 70, like the seventy descendants of Jacob. However they would probably ask you what city you were from as that would tell them about your piety. If you said I pray to Anath, they would suspect you live near Beth Anath. If you said, I seek Fortune, depending on the period the would infer you come from the territotory of ba'al gad. If you said you were a sage of the wisest god, they would understand Yehudah and Urushalim. People who used the word Elohim and identified with El were the shepherds and traders, and they might avoid pointing to a single Elohim, because between cities they were loyal to El, and within cities they would try to follow the customs of those cities as not to cause conflict and to increase sales.
When using the name of angels, again context was important. The angel Raphael, for instance was originally a syro-cannanite angel of the holo-diety El. The Yahwist adopted that angel, and then christians adopted that angel from the Jews.
🤦🏾♂️ it's so unbelievable how far people have to go even to other languages to understand the context for people..its in the bible. I'm a hardcore believer in the trinity but if you don't believe in the Trinity and you believe in Jesus Christ its fine but you'll be confused reading the Bible..I asked God to open my eyes about if the trinity is true and I'm telling you he opened my eyes so clearly..... in every message that Jesus preached he himself talked about the one true God then he calls himself the son. He is the son of God but having the same Authority and power given from the father.. because as a good father does he gives his son he's inheritance which we all have in God...but that doesn't make Jesus less than being the son.
.. Jesus has titles he is the king of kings he's the high priest he's the Chief Cornerstone .. Jesus did what we couldn't do.. when God spoke from heaven and some apostles were with Jesus God said this is my son listen to him.... now is that Jesus talking to himself?... in what way are you claiming that Jesus is God because I see Jesus speaking for his father in those moments yes that is God speaking through Jesus...its so clear and Jesus is called the second Adam
And there is three that bear record in heaven the Father the word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one and as in on Earth the the spirit the water and the blood and these three agree as one understand why they are one because they agree as one.... he that is jointed unto the Lord is one spirit...meaning when you accepted the Holy Spirit you have come into an agreement with the father and you guys are one.
Dans arguments that the text doesn’t say “Jesus is God “ just aren’t convincing.
All well and good, but I am going to ask this particular question until I get a response from you. "What is the difference between dying and rising and resurrection." I am subscribed to you, and I accept your posts. But, I can not let a scholar off the hook for their claims. You had better make a distinction between the two or you are going to lose credibility. The more you choose to not answer the question, the more everyone else knows that you are wrong.
Truth in translation says NWT is most accurate
NO, it like most is rife with translation errors.
Oddly the JW's won't name the "scholars" who did the translation. Wonder why?
@@stultusvenator3233 why would they say who translated the nwt?
All praise should go to Jehovah God
99% of scholars were trinitarians so most audiences will be trinitarians so they got to male the audience happy
NWT is based on up to date manuscripts plus they added the divine name Jehovah God in where it was 7000 times
Most translations remove it and replaced it with LORD
No translation teaches the trinity dogma so doesn't matter what bible u read
Its what bible actually teaches that matter
@@AstariahJW
The publishing houses that print this
waste of paper, list the translators for giving credit and for CREDIBILITY.
Anyone not doing this is hiding something.
I recall some decades ago JW's claimng a world renown Greek Scholar was involved in the translation. He heard about this lie, denied he had anything to do with it, demanded an appology and said it was the WORST most Inaccurate translation of Greek had ever seen. Come on now...
Many miss translations, verses removed, inaccuracies and meaning changes are very evident. There is such a long list of criticism JWORG has to post excuses by the mile.
JW's are a joke amongst the jokes.
1891: 1914 would be "the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men"
1904: "World-wide anarchy" would follow the end of the Gentile Times in 1914.
1916: World War I would terminate in Armageddon and the rapture of the "saints".
1917: In 1918, Christendom would go down as a system to oblivion and be succeeded by revolutionary governments. God would "destroy the churches wholesale and the church members by the millions". Church members would "perish by the sword of war, revolution and anarchy". The dead would lie unburied. In 1920 all earthly governments would disappear, with worldwide anarchy prevailing.
1961: Awake! magazine stated that Armageddon "will come in the twentieth century.... This generation will see its fulfillment.
1974: There was just a "short time remaining before the wicked world's end" and Witnesses were commended for selling their homes and property to "finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service"
2563: Awake magazine...........
1 hours explain but not answer the question, its a simple question, the answer is simple between yes or no. But look, what are you doing guys? so please, refund the time I spent watching this, or at least my internet data.
No, Jesus is not God.
Why? because he is the Christ, the Son of God.
@@jesusisthechristthesonofgod During the hour they talked, I didn't find a strong argument that Jesus isn't God, but I agree that Jesus isn't the Father.
@@chokidrew Jesus not being the Father is proof Jesus is not God. Because God is the Father.
@@jesusisthechristthesonofgod Father is God and Jesus comes from the Father, no one comes to the Father except through Jesus and no one comes to Jesus unless drawn by the Father, we worship the Father in the name of Jesus.