Equal to God in what?
Printable View
Equal to God in what?
When he says Equal to God I think, correct me if im wrong, hes saying that Jesus was God. Which is what we are trying to explain. Christians dont believe in multiple God but we do believe in the Trinity, God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Heres a proof.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. John 1:1-3
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John 1:14
Also, throughout the old Testement are prophecies of the Messiah that was to come. And these prophecies became fullfilled through Christ. Peter Stoner wrote in Science Speaks that the odds of someone fulfilling 8 of the prophecies would be like covering Texas in Silver Dollars 2 feet in depth, marking one of the silver dollars and asking someone to draw randomly and pick that up. The odds show its not going to happen. And thats just 8 of the prophecies. Now the odds of fulfilling 48 of the prophecies, according to Peter Stone, is equal to 1 and the number of minuscule atoms in a trillion trillion trillion trillion billion universes the size of our universe.
Source : http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/radio034.htm
It goes into more depth about the article that Peter Stoner wrote. It seems unbelievable but the facts are there. The old testiment prophecies were made real in the life and death of Jesus, the Messiah, the Christ
There is some ambiguity in quoting this passage. The meaning of the original greek is not specifically the word, rather in latinized greek it reads;Quote:
Originally Posted by rufioag
en arche en ho logos kai ho logos en pros ton theon kai ho theos en ho logos. houtos en arche en pros ton theon.
Literally it says;
Originally (in the beginning) was the logos, and the logos was in the presence of the God, and the God was the logos. This was, in the beginning, the presence of the God.
Now some treatment must be made of the word 'logos' which does mean word, but it means slightly more than that. It also means speech and act. The best interpretation of this passage, and indeed Greek, Koine, Attic, Doric, and any ancient Greek, translates so poorly into English, but the best interpretation is that in the beginning there was God and that the mind, the action, the speech, the idea of speech, of action, and of the word, was in his presence, and was him. It does not mean THE WORD, in the sense of the word of the Bible, rather it says all things originated with God, including Jesus, this story, and all of us. In essence, it is not vouchsafing that the bible existed originally with God, however this passage and most of the bible is ambiguous because it is handled in a language which is ill suited to conveying the meaning of the original, and because so many practitioners of Christianity (and not to insult anyone, it is just a fact) are totally ignorant of its original language, and therefore the true nuances of the writing.
Of course there is the argument that the translators of the Bible were inspired to write the truth, and so be it if you believe that, but there are still linguistic discrepancies, as are inevitable in any translation.
But contine u to John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Could one argue that with your translation, which I thank you for becuase I for one am not fluent and little understanding of translations even though I would not be so quick to judge all christians in such light, would still allow that Jesus Christ became Flesh, because according to the translation, Word means the Mind, speech, actions of God, and since Jesus is God they are onein the same. Am I not correct in this assumption or am I wrong? Please take this as a question.
Also, the word logos means "The Word or Second Person of the Trinity" according to the Oxford Dictionary.
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861699401/Logos.html
Logos:
Defintion:
1. Jesus Christ as divine wisdom: Jesus Christ, so named in St. John's Gospel, as the word of God, the personification of the wisdom of God, and divine wisdom as the means for human salvation
Disclaimer: my choice of the word logos for my member name is merely for its meaning "word" (one of its most simplistic English translations). :goof: No other reason.
hmmm...dellusions of grandure o glorious go...er mod? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Logos
Not sure if this is the best place for this, but here it is:
http://www.torahtots.com/holidays/pe...isc/barech.gif
Happy Passover to those that observe.
I must have been catching some electrical premonitions or something, huh Logos?Quote:
Originally Posted by Logos
Amra, I'm sorry, but I think that I did already answer this question.Quote:
Equal to God in what?
"In the context of Daniel 7:13, in which the one "like a son of man" comes to the Ancient of Days (Almighty God) and is given dominion of the sort that God alone possesses, the significance of Jesus' own "son of man" usage cannot be overstated. It is functionally equivalent to saying that he was the entity described in the prophecy."
"I AM thus provides a powerful self-identification in which Jesus identifies himself with the roles and person of YHWH in the Old Testament."
"Matthew 11:27. "All things have been handed over to Me by my Father: and no one knows the Son, except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father, except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him."
"Matthew 23:34. "Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes..." In Jewish belief, it is God that is responsible for sending prophets. In saying that He will send prophets, Jesus is equating Himself with God - once again, assuming a role reserved for God alone."
"''Matthew 28:18; similar quotes in Luke 24:25, 46. In this post-resurrection address, Jesus says that all power in heaven and on earth has been given to Him - in short, power that only God has."
Matthew 9:2; parallels in Mark 2:5, Luke 5:20 and 7:48. Jesus tells people that "their sins are forgiven." Forgiveness requires the RIGHT to forgive; therefore, Jesus' forgiving the sins of others that He had no personal connection with indicates that He believed that He was the only One who was offended by all sins and therefore had the right to forgive them: God, the author of all moral law. Moreover, this is particularly a noteworthy claim in the context of Judaism, for as Charlesworth notes, "The faithful Jew...acknowledged that only God can forgive the sinner." So in effect, Jesus was assuming the place and role of the entire Temple sacrificial system authorized by God and claiming to be God's broker for forgiveness."
"Revelation 22:13 'I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end'." That just sounds like something only God would say. An ordinary prophet wouldn't talk that way. Can either you, Amra, or you, SheykAbdullah, educate me about "shirk"? What is your definition? Am I and other Christians convicted by it?
The concept of the Trinity hasn't been easy for theologians, believe me! It would have been so much "easier" if Jesus had just affirmed himself as the Son. Then we would have a separate Father and a separate Son. Judging from what can be exegetically determined, the Trinitarian view of the Bible is the only fitting one. Sometimes it gives me brain blisters to try to encompass it all, but I try my best.
I don't think that John was here referring to the Bible, either. The Bible as we know it wasn't even completed until 327 A.D. I think that John meant to be talking about Jesus here, as I believe rufioag correctly identified.Quote:
It does not mean THE WORD, in the sense of the word of the Bible, rather it says all things originated with God, including Jesus, this story, and all of us. In essence, it is not vouchsafing that the bible existed originally with God,
I think the key words there are his glory. I think that it can be logically exegeticaly determined that John was speaking of Jesus as the Logos (especially concerning the nature of the gospel, theological inferences, etc).Quote:
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
I think that the Bible is the way it ought to be. I think that with some effort the original meaning of the words, idoms, nuances, and phrases in the original language can be brought forth. The Bible has been intensely scrutinized for centuries. Thousands of people make it their quest to figure out what is being said and to let it be known to every known language on earth.Quote:
and most of the bible is ambiguous because it is handled in a language which is ill suited to conveying the meaning of the original, and because so many practitioners of Christianity (and not to insult anyone, it is just a fact) are totally ignorant of its original language, and therefore the true nuances of the writing.
The discrepancies can be identified and corrected, in much more sophisticated ways then we are doing here. I believe that God has the Bible the way it is for a reason. It is eminently logical and reasonable for believers to trust, and yet also leaves enough room for atheists to lose trust in it. The Bible is so amazing because it allows people to reject it on some of it's basic premises. God always allows enough space for people to decide either "Yes, this is rational and good and I want to know more!" or "No, I just cannot believe in this junk." Nobody is mentally forced. God dignifies each person, and allows them to freely believe or disbelieve according to their own will. Thank God! I don't understand it all and sometimes wish it weren't so, but if it is ordained from God, my own puny intellect ought not to object.Quote:
Of course there is the argument that the translators of the Bible were inspired to write the truth, and so be it if you believe that, but there are still linguistic discrepancies, as are inevitable in any translation.