Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | is God and Jesus are one person? | Heb 1:8 | bstudent | 119192 | ||
Just thought you might want to know. Any comments on 1 Cor 15:28? Everywhere I read, in any translation, I keep seeing the Bible writers acknowledging the Father's superior position to his Son. The Father gives Jesus any and all authority he possesses because it belongs to Him. Jesus repeatedly pointed out his position relative to his God. For the Scriptures to use the relationship of a father and son to illustrate equality and "coeternity" to the patriarchal Jews is ludicrous, "it doesn't make sense." A handful of passages translated to support the trinity, even when it may be a legimate grammatical alternative to do so, cannot overcome the overwhelming evidence supporting Jesus being the firstborn of creation, a separate and obviously inferior creature to the Creator who had no beginning. In addition to your comments on 1 Cor 15:28, I'm interested to know how you respond to the spurious verses in the KJ at 1 John 5:7 and Rev 1:11? The translation influenced a lot of people. Why the need to bolster the trinity doctrine by adding to the things written under inspiration if its so clear? The sordid history of the development of this apostate doctrine is well documented in encyclopias. That history does not sound like the way truth was discerned in the days of the apostles! |
||||||
2 | is God and Jesus are one person? | Heb 1:8 | kalos | 119197 | ||
1 John 5:7-8 NET Bible For there are three that testify, the Spirit and the water and the blood, and these three are in agreement. Question: "I'm interested to know how you respond to the spurious verse in the KJ at 1 John 5:7...?" Answer: An honest question deserves an honest answer. The Bible doctrine of one God in three Persons does not stand or fall on one verse in one translation. --kalos Notes from the NET Bible: "("in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 5:8 And there are three that testify on earth"). This reading, the infamous Comma Johanneum, has been known in the English-speaking world through the King James translation. However, the evidence--both external and internal--is decidedly against its authenticity... "Our discussion will briefly address the external evidence. This longer reading is found only in eight late MSS, four of which have the words in a marginal note. Most of these MSS...originate from the 16th century; the earliest MS,...(10th century), includes the reading in a marginal note, added sometime after the original composition. Thus, there is no sure evidence of this reading in any Greek MS until the 1500's; each such reading was apparently composed after Erasmus' Greek NT was published in 1517. "Indeed, the reading appears in no Greek witness of any kind (either MS, patristic, or Greek translation of some other version) until A.D. 1215 (in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, a work originally written in Latin). This is all the more significant, since many a Greek Father would have loved such a reading, for it so succinctly affirms the doctrine of the Trinity. "The reading seems to have arisen in a 4th century Latin homily in which the text was allegorized to refer to members of the Trinity. From there, it made its way into copies of the Latin Vulgate, the text used by the Roman Catholic Church. The Trinitarian formula (known as the Comma Johanneum) made its way into the third edition of Erasmus' Greek NT because of pressure from the Catholic Church. After his first edition appeared, there arose such a furor over the absence of the Comma that Erasmus needed to defend himself. He argued that he did not put in the Comma because he found no Greek MSS that included it... "Modern advocates of the Textus Receptus and KJV generally argue for the inclusion of the Comma Johanneum on the basis of heretical motivation by scribes who did not include it...In reality, the issue is history, not heresy: How can one argue that the Comma Johanneum did not appear until the 16th century in any Greek MSS and yet goes back to the original text? "Such a stance does not do justice to the gospel: faith must be rooted in history...But the KJV translators, basing their work principally on Theodore Beza's 10th edition of the Greek NT (1598)...popularized the Comma for the English-speaking world. Thus, the Comma Johanneum has been a battleground for English-speaking Christians more than for others." |
||||||
3 | is God and Jesus are one person? | Heb 1:8 | bstudent | 119203 | ||
I only pointed out two, but there are a few more. Each of the dozen or so trinity text can be refuted easily, but its the volume of the verses that speak of Jesus subjection under God that one should consider. I'm sure you'll disagree, but the removal of that "honored and awesome name" has contributed much to the confusion about Jesus identity. Psalm 110:1 is a classic example. Check out this take on the name Jesus stated as the first priority in the model prayer: “MONGREL,” “hybrid,” “monstrous.” What would cause Biblical Hebrew scholars to use such emphatic terms? At issue is whether “Jehovah” is a proper English pronunciation of God’s name. For over one hundred years, this controversy has raged. Today, most scholars seem to favor the two-syllable “Yahweh.” But is the pronunciation “Jehovah” really so “monstrous”? According to the Bible, God himself revealed his name to humankind. (Exodus 3:15) Scriptural evidence shows that God’s ancient servants freely used that name. (Genesis 12:8; Ruth 2:4) God’s name was known by other nations as well. (Joshua 2:9) This was especially true after the Jews who had returned from exile in Babylon came into contact with peoples of many nations. (Psalm 96:2-10; Isaiah 12:4; Malachi 1:11) The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible says: “There is considerable evidence that in the postexilic period many foreigners were attracted to the religion of the Jews.” However, by the first century C.E., a superstition about God’s name had developed. Eventually, not only did the Jewish nation stop using God’s name openly but some even forbade pronouncing it at all. Its correct pronunciation was thus lost—or was it? In the Hebrew language, God’s name is written éäåä. These four letters, which are read from right to left, are commonly called the Tetragrammaton. Many names of people and places mentioned in the Bible contain an abbreviated form of the divine name. Is it possible that these proper names can provide some clues as to how God’s name was pronounced? According to George Buchanan, professor emeritus at Wesley Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C., U.S.A., the answer is yes. Professor Buchanan explains: “In ancient times, parents often named their children after their deities. That means that they would have pronounced their children’s names the way the deity’s name was pronounced. The Tetragrammaton was used in people’s names, and they always used the middle vowel.” Consider a few examples of proper names found in the Bible that include a shortened form of God’s name. Jonathan, which appears as Yoh·na·than´ or Yehoh·na·than´ in the Hebrew Bible, means “Yaho or Yahowah has given,” says Professor Buchanan. The prophet Elijah’s name is ´E·li·yah´ or ´E·li·ya´hu in Hebrew. According to Professor Buchanan, the name means: “My God is Yahoo or Yahoo-wah.” Similarly, the Hebrew name for Jehoshaphat is Yehoh-sha·phat´, meaning “Yaho has judged.” A two-syllable pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton as “Yahweh” would not allow for the o vowel sound to exist as part of God’s name. But in the dozens of Biblical names that incorporate the divine name, this middle vowel sound appears in both the original and the shortened forms, as in Jehonathan and Jonathan. Thus, Professor Buchanan says regarding the divine name: “In no case is the vowel oo or oh omitted. The word was sometimes abbreviated as ‘Ya,’ but never as ‘Ya-weh.’ . . . When the Tetragrammaton was pronounced in one syllable it was ‘Yah’ or ‘Yo.’ When it was pronounced in three syllables it would have been ‘Yahowah’ or ‘Yahoowah.’ If it was ever abbreviated to two syllables it would have been ‘Yaho.’”—Biblical Archaeology Review. These comments help us understand the statement made by 19th-century Hebrew scholar Gesenius in his Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures: “Those who consider that éäåä [Ye-ho-wah] was the actual pronunciation [of God’s name] are not altogether without ground on which to defend their opinion. In this way can the abbreviated syllables éäå [Ye-ho] and éå [Yo], with which many proper names begin, be more satisfactorily explained.” Nevertheless, in the introduction to his recent translation of The Five Books of Moses, Everett Fox points out: “Both old and new attempts to recover the ‘correct’ pronunciation of the Hebrew name [of God] have not succeeded; neither the sometimes-heard ‘Jehovah’ nor the standard scholarly ‘Yahweh’ can be conclusively proven.” No doubt the scholarly debate will continue. Jews stopped pronouncing the name of the true God before the Masoretes developed the system of vowel pointing. Thus, there is no definitive way to prove which vowels accompanied the consonants YHWH (éäåä). Yet, the very names of Biblical figures—the correct pronunciation of which was never lost—provide a tangible clue to the ancient pronunciation of God’s name. On this account, at least some scholars agree that the pronunciation “Jehovah” is not so “monstrous” after all. |
||||||