The curious case of John 5:4

[GodsGrace]

No of course not. Read Matthias' response again.

God does not breed other (G) gods! God, the Father is the only one true God. He cannot create another God with independent divinity etc, as the Father is the only source. Yes, he can create immortal beings however....

Agreed.

But we were discussing that God is a father.
A human father breeds a human son.
If God does any "breeding" He will breed a divine person.

See my post 816....

M is saying that God DID NOT intervene MIRACULOUSLY....
My goodness....HOW does M think God intervened??

 

[GodsGrace]

I agree that God intervened miraculously.



I’m a Christian.



I’ve ruled out physically and I don’t know of any third method.



Yes. Another important point here is that the angel says that it if for this reason that Jesus is called the Son of God.

That's not the reason your theology gives for Jesus being the Son of God.. That the reason that my theology - Jewish monotheism - gives. This is the origin of the Son of God.

Oh.

So now you DO believe God intervened miraculously.
OF COURSE....what other method could it possibly have been.

OK M.

One of us is tired.
Maybe it's me.

Must bow out of this thread.

 

[GodsGrace]

The Hebrew word for worship has the same meaning as the Greek words for worship.

I don't see any scripture....

 

[Matthias]

Agreed.

But we were discussing that God is a father.
A human father breeds a human son.
If God does any "breeding" He will breed a divine person.

See my post 816....

M is saying that God DID NOT intervene MIRACULOUSLY....
My goodness....HOW does M think God intervened??

I don’t understand how you can take my statements - I’ve said it several times now - amd then say that I am saying that God did not intervene miraculously.

I’ll say it again and see what happens: God intervened miraculously.

 

[Matthias]

Oh.

So now you DO believe God intervened miraculously.

I’ve always believed that God intervened miraculously. I’ve never in my life said, nor believed, that God did not intervene miraculously. The birth narratives in Matthew and Luke are decisive for me.

OF COURSE....what other method could it possibly have been.

OK M.

One of us is tired.
Maybe it's me.

Must bow out of this thread.

I’m sorry to see you bow out of the thread but I want to thank you for the conversation. Please do feel free to come back to it any time you want to. You’re welcome here and will be missed during your absence.

 

[Matthias]

I don't see any scripture....

A recommendation for you (and for everyone): Gerhard Kittle’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Scripture and word usage (Hebrew and Greek), biblical and post-biblical, galore.

 

[GodsGrace]

A recommendation for you (and for everyone): Gerhard Kittle’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Scripture and word usage (Hebrew and Greek), biblical and post-biblical, galore.

M, I won't be reading that...basically because I don't read much anymore.
I do want to say that the conversation with you was very pleasant and cordial,
as it should be between two that consider Jesus to be our Lord.
I'm not going far....and may be back!
Doing some ironing now and waiting for tomorrow...
I feel that so much depends on this election...
Never felt like this before.
Catch you next time!

 

[Matthias]

M, I won't be reading that...basically because I don't read much anymore.

It’s a massive work; ten volumes. A classic (and standard) resource for consultation by theology students (formal or informal) since the 1960’s.

There is also a one volume abridged version.* It’s not as comprehensive but it’s excellent too.

I have both the ten volume set and the abridged volume in my personal library and still consult them occasionally in retirement.

It’s a little dated now but still highly regarded by scholars.

I do want to say that the conversation with you was very pleasant and cordial,
as it should be between two that consider Jesus to be our Lord.
I'm not going far....and may be back!

Thank you! The feeling is mutual.

Doing some ironing now and waiting for tomorrow...
I feel that so much depends on this election...
Never felt like this before.
Catch you next time!

* Publish in the 1980’s.

 

[Lambano]

For example, the same Hebrew word used for worship applies to homage paid to God and to homage paid to man. There is no negativity associated with the word in the Bible unless it is used in reference to an idol.

This is true. Both in Hebrew (שָׁחָה, "saha") and in Greek (προσκυνέω, "proskuneoo"). @GodsGrace, you can use Blue Letter Bible (great tool) to look up the usage of these terms and note when it is applied to paying homage to a man or to God.

@Matthias, you've stated that you would bow down to pay homage to Jesus, but as a man, not as God. Did I understand correctly?

As I mentioned, we don't bow down to other men here in the 21st century western world. (Or do they still do that for the Pope?) Would you bow down to any other man? (I would hope not!) So, are you treating Jesus Christ as more than just a man?

 

[GodsGrace]

This is true. Both in Hebrew (שָׁחָה, "saha") and in Greek (προσκυνέω, "proskuneoo"). @GodsGrace, you can use Blue Letter Bible (great tool) to look up the usage of these terms and note when it is applied to paying homage to a man or to God.

@Matthias, you've stated that you would bow down to pay homage to Jesus, but as a man, not as God. Did I understand correctly?

As I mentioned, we don't bow down to other men here in the 21st century western world. (Or do they still do that for the Pope?) Would you bow down to any other man? (I would hope not!) So, are you treating Jesus Christ as more than just a man?

Lambano,,,,I know what proskuneo means and how it was used.
My whole point is that by the time of the Apostles, or, I should say, when the Apostles used it....
they meant it only for God.

It becomes pretty irrelevant,. to me at least, as to the usage of the word BEFORE the Apostles....
I believe we have to take it to mean how the Apostles meant it to be used....

I think this is a correct way of thinking.

 

[Matthias]

@Matthias, you've stated that you would bow down to pay homage to Jesus, but as a man, not as God. Did I understand correctly?

Jesus is God, figuratively. I would bow down and pay homage to Jesus as God’s supreme representative / agent, the Messiah, the Son of the living God. He is the King of Kings.

As I mentioned, we don't bow down to other men here in the 21st century western world. (Or do they still do that for the Pope?)

1. It wasn’t long ago that I watched a news clip of people bowing down before the King of England. Would that offend you?

2. I recently watched a symphony concert and the maestro bowed down before the audience. Would that offend you.

3. I watched a movie a couple of weeks ago where a Japanese man bowed before his aged grandfather. Would that offend you?

Would you bow down to any other man? (I would hope not!)

Would you ask me that question if we were living in biblical times?

I’m a biblical times man living in non-biblical times.

So, are you treating Jesus Christ as more than just a man?

The Messiah is a man, a human person. I treat him as the second most powerful being in the universe, second only to his God and Father and my God and Father, Yahweh.

 

[Matthias]

@Lambano and @GodsGrace the day is coming when Jesus will force men to bow down before me (Revelation 3:9). Does that present an issue for either of you?

 

[Lambano]

@Lambano and @GodsGrace the day is coming when Jesus will force men to bow down before me (Revelation 3:9). Does that present an issue for either of you?

That's an interesting scripture reference. If I understand correctly that the context is enduring persecution and slander (especially from those who claim to be God's people) on account of loyalty to Jesus, that verse is about The Christ vindicating His people and humiliating their persecutors when He comes back to rule.

I have not (yet) endured that kind of persecution and slander for Christ's sake; maybe you have. I have worked with a ministry that resettles Christians who are persecuted for their faith in other countries over to here in the US. I remember this one young man from Eritrea over in the horn of Africa who had some of his family killed and was himself beaten and imprisoned for being a Christian in a Muslim-controlled area. He resettled in SoFla and became a member of my church and a co-worker at my employer. If Messiah Jesus should decide to make this man's persecutors kneel down and quite literally kiss his ass, I would not object.

I should watch what I ask for, though, because The King might rule that I haven't been as respectful to His brothers and sisters as I should have been. Sobering.

 

[Matthias]

The subject of the thread was how to help someone who has lost trust in the reliability of the Bible.

 

[Wick Stick]

View attachment 75083

All this addresses the reliability in transmitting what-was-written down through the centuries.

But it does not address the reliability of the original documents.

 

[Matthias]

All this addresses the reliability in transmitting what-was-written down through the centuries.

But it does not address the reliability of the original documents.

We have to start somewhere.

 

[RLT63]

We have to start somewhere.

If you don't believe the originals were infallible what hope do you have?

 

[Wick Stick]

If you don't believe the originals were infallible what hope do you have?

Seems like this question is for me.

I don't find that infallibility for every book is necessary. If 1Kings has errors, that doesn't mean that Isaiah is flawed, or that Matthew is somehow wrong.

The idea of infallibility really rests on the idea of inspiration. It turns out that a bunch of books in the Bible DON'T claim to be inspired, and aren't written by prophets. So, I don't find that the Kings and Chronicles are inspired or infallible, because... they don't claim to be. If they contain a bunch of small discrepancies (they do), it's not a big deal.

 

[St. SteVen]

If you don't believe the originals were infallible what hope do you have?

My hope is in the "author", not in the book.
The book is man-made.

 

[RLT63]

Seems like this question is for me.

I don't find that infallibility for every book is necessary. If 1Kings has errors, that doesn't mean that Isaiah is flawed, or that Matthew is somehow wrong.

The idea of infallibility really rests on the idea of inspiration. It turns out that a bunch of books in the Bible DON'T claim to be inspired, and aren't written by prophets. So, I don't find that the Kings and Chronicles are inspired or infallible, because... they don't claim to be. If they contain a bunch of small discrepancies (they do), it's not a big deal.

The first 11 chapters of Genesis, literal or figurative?