| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Carl" |
| Date: |
10 Sep 2007 11:27:29 PM |
| Object: |
Cultists' Mistranslations Corrected |
The following come from Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes where they address
several cults' false teachings concerning Jesus Christ and correct the
cults' misinterpretation of scripture.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
JOHN 1:1-Is Jesus God or just a god?
MISINTERPRETATION: The Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation renders
this verse, "The Word [Christ] was a god" (insert added). The Watchtower
magazine states that "because there is no definite article 'the' (ho) it
means Christ is only a god, not the God" (The Watchtower, 7 December 1995,
4). They in fact believe that Jesus is only a created being, Michael the
Archangel (The Watchtower, 15 May 1969, 307). The Greek of John 1:1 "is not
saying that the Word (Jesus) was the same as the God with whom he was but,
rather, that the Word was godlike, divine, a god" (Reasoning from the
Scriptures, 1989, 212).
CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: It is not proper to translate this verse
"The Word was a god" so as to deny the deity of Christ. The full deity of
Christ is supported by other references in John (e.g., 8:58; 10:30; 20:28)
as well as the rest of the New Testament (e.g., Col. 1:15-16; 2:9; Titus
2:13; Heb. 1:8). Further, it is not necessary to translate Greek nouns that
have no definite article with an indefinite article (there is no indefinite
article in Greek). In other words, theos ("God") without the definite
article ho ("the") does not need to be translated as "a God" as the Jehovah's
Witnesses have done in reference to Christ. It is significant that theos
without the definite article ho is used of Jehovah God in the New Testament.
Because the lack of the definite article in Luke 20:38 in reference to
Jehovah does not mean he is a lesser God, neither does the lack of the
definite article in John 1:1 in reference to Jesus mean he is a lesser God.
The fact is, the presence or absence of the definite article does not alter
the fundamental meaning of theos. If John had intended an adjectival sense
(the Word was godlike or divine-a god) he had an adjective (theios) ready at
hand that he could have used. Instead, John says the Word is God (theos).
Contrary to the claims of the Watchtower Society, some New Testament texts
do use the definite article and speak of Christ as "the God" (ho theos). One
example of this is John 20:28 where Thomas says to Jesus, "My Lord and my
God." The verse reads literally from the Greek: "The Lord of me and the God
[ho theos] of me" (see also Matt. 1:23 and Heb. 1:8). So it does not matter
whether John did or did not use the definite article in John 1:1-the Bible
clearly teaches that Jesus is God, not just a god.
Greek scholars have thoroughly refuted the Watchtower translation. Dr.
Julius Mantey says of the Jehovah's Witnesses' translation of John 1:1,
"Ninety-nine percent of the scholars of the world who know Greek and who
have helped translate the Bible are in disagreement with the Jehovah's
Witnesses" (Mantey, 3:3, 5).
That Jesus is Jehovah (Yahweh) is clear from the fact that the New Testament
consistently applies to Jesus passages and attributes which in the Old
Testament apply only to Jehovah (compare Exod. 3:14 with John 8:58; Isa.
6:1-5 with John 12:41; Isa. 44:24 with Col. 1:16; Ezek. 43:2 with Rev. 1:15;
Zech. 12:10 with Rev. 1:7).
***
JOHN 1:1-Does this verse teach that God is impersonal, as Mary Baker Eddy
claimed?
MISINTERPRETATION: Christian Science leader Mary Baker Eddy concluded that
the identification of the Word with God in this verse implies that God is an
impersonal deity. Eddy said, "This great truth of God's impersonality and
individuality . . . is the foundation of Christian Science" (Eddy, 117).
CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: Affirming that the "Word [Logos] is God"
in no way implies that God is impersonal. "God" (theos) is the same Greek
word used of God throughout the New Testament. And God is always presented
as a personal being who has a mind (John 10:15), will (John 4:34; 7:17), and
feeling (John 4:23). He is a personal being unto whom believers may cry,
"Abba," an Aramaic term loosely meaning "daddy" (Mark 14:36; Rom. 8:15; Gal.
4:6).
Second, two of the three characteristics of personality can be found in this
very passage. God is manifested as the Word (Logos) which means a rational
discourse or reason. And God chose by his will to create (John 1:3).
Finally, there is nothing impersonal about the Logos (the Word), for he
became flesh (human) and lived among us (John 1:14). He engaged in personal
relations with other persons (humans).
***
JOHN 1:1-Did Jesus preexist only in God's foreknowledge, as some cults
claim, or was he really eternal God?
MISINTERPRETATION: According to The Way International founder Paul
Wierwille, Jesus was not God.
How was Jesus with God in the beginning? In the same way that the written
Word was with Him, namely, in God's foreknowledge. . . . In the Old
Testament, Jesus Christ was in God's foreknowledge and in the foreknowledge
of God's people as God revealed this prophetic knowledge to them. When Jesus
Christ was born, he came into existence. Foreknowledge became a reality.
[cited in Martin, 87]
CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: All the evidence is contrary to Wierwille's
conclusion. John asserts that the "Word" (Logos) was a person (John 1:14),
not a mere idea in God's mind, as knowledge would be. The text does not say,
as Wierwille claims, that "foreknowledge" was in God's mind eternally and
that "foreknowledge" became flesh and dwelt among us. It says that the "Word
[Christ] was God" (John 1:1) from all eternity-and that this same person
(not God's foreknowledge of him) "became flesh and dwelt among us" (1:14).
John speaks of Christ "the Word [Logos]" being "with God" (1:1) eternally.
Knowledge would not be "with" God. God would have wisdom, but it would not
be with him. The word "with" implies another along side in an intimate
relationship. Christ was another person in the Trinity, not the same person
as the Father.
Numerous other verses in the New Testament declare the full deity of Christ
(for example, John 20:28; Col. 2:9; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:8).
***
JOHN 1:14-Does this verse mean that when Jesus became a human being he lost
his deity, as Herbert Armstrong argued?
MISINTERPRETATION: In John 1:14 we read, "And the Word became flesh, and
dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of the only begotten from
the Father, full of grace and truth." Herbert Armstrong, founder of the
Worldwide Church of God, took the phrase "the Word became flesh" and
concluded that it meant "conversion into flesh." Christ the Word did not
merely assume an additional, human nature; rather, he experienced
metamorphosis into human flesh. He became exclusively human.
CORRECTING THE MISINTERPRETATION: The Old Testament backdrop helps us to
understand what John is saying in this important verse. John's choice of
words in describing the incarnation is highly revealing. The phrase Jesus
"dwelt among us," is more accurately translated "made his dwelling among us"
or "pitched his tent [tabernacle] among us." In using this terminology, John
was drawing heavily from the Old Testament. That Jesus "pitched his
tabernacle" among us harkens back to the Old Testament tabernacle of Israel's
wilderness wanderings. God's people had been instructed to erect the
tabernacle as a reminder that God's dwelling-place was among them. Exodus
25:8 quotes God as saying, "Let them construct a sanctuary for Me, that I
may dwell among them" (nasb). Hence, as God formerly dwelt among his people
in Old Testament times in the tabernacle that was erected for him, so now in
a fuller sense he has taken up residence on earth in a tabernacle of human
flesh.
Furthermore, John's use of the Greek word eskenosen ("pitched his
tabernacle") becomes even more significant when it is realized that the
glory that resulted from the immediate presence of the Lord in the
tabernacle came to be associated with the shekinah, a word that refers to
the radiance, glory, or presence of God dwelling in the midst of his people.
When Christ became flesh (John 1:14), the glorious presence of God was fully
embodied in him, for he is the true shekinah. The same glory that Moses
beheld in the tabernacle in Exodus 40:34-38 was revealed in the person of
Jesus Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17).
What is more, it is critical to recognize that Christ the Logos did not
cease to be the Logos when he "became flesh." Christ still had the fullness
of the shekinah glory in him, but that glory was veiled so he could function
in the world of humanity. The Word did not cease to be what he was before;
but he took on an additional nature-a human nature. This is the mystery of
the Incarnation: Christ the Logos was fully God and fully human. The
shekinah glory dwelt in the tabernacle of the flesh of Jesus. Of course,
while Jesus' human body was, in one sense, a "temple" in which the shekinah
glory dwelt, his body was not an exact parallel to the Old Testament
tabernacle. For, in the Old Testament, God always remained distinct from the
tabernacle, even though he dwelt in the tabernacle. In the New Testament, we
learn that Jesus in the incarnation permanently took upon himself a human
nature. Hence, Jesus' human body was not a mere temple that embodied the
shekinah glory, but rather became a very real part of his person as the
God-man.
.
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Cultists' Mistranslations Corrected |
11 Sep 2007 12:46:49 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 00:27:29 -0400, "Carl" <saints@nettally.com>
wrote:
The following come from Norman Geisler and Ron Rhodes where they address
several cults' false teachings concerning Jesus Christ and correct the
cults' misinterpretation of scripture.
May God bless,
Carl
my website -- http://www.nettally.com/saints/
my blog -- http://www.anniemayhem.com/cgi-bin/wordpress/
Carl,
I see you are still speaking the truth in hate.
If you think that the Jehovah's Witnesses are bad; then YOU prove it
from the Scriptures by speaking the truth in love rather being a
coward that hides under the skirts of men.
Did you ever consider that someone might actually believe something
you say if you rightly divide the word of truth? It could happen.
Do you realize that you are one big phoney? You are supposed to be an
ambassador for Christ but have proven yourself to be an ambassador for
every Tom, *****, and Harry that will allow you to advertise for them.
Read the following verses and see if they don't cause something to
well up in your heart.
2Co 5:17-21 KJV
17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old
things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by
Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto
himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed
unto us the word of reconciliation.
20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech
you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we
might be made the righteousness of God in him.
You cannot reconcile men to God with hate. It is the goodness of God
that leads man to repentance.
Rom 2:2-6 KJV
2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth
against them which commit such things.
3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such
things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of
God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and
longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to
repentance?
5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto
thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous
judgment of God;
6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
BB
<snip unimportant philosophies of men>
BB
http://www.biblebob.net
Nothing so completely baffles one who is full of trick and duplicity
himself, than straightforward and simple integrity in another.
Charles Caleb Colton, author and clergyman (1780-1832)
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
