Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is an open debate for all to participate in, however the two parties focused on the debate, Katonjj and Sciotamicks, must counter each other respectively in regards to the presentations directed at each other.
The topic of the debate
The Deity of Jesus Christ - For and Against
The scope of the debate
The Old Testament and New Testament
Quotes must be sourced and rightfully credited, but within the parameters of the City Data
See guidelines for City Data - Stressing attack the view only
Thanks everyone for your time and participation.
Last edited by sciotamicks; 01-08-2010 at 05:40 PM..
Reason: edited to fully comply with posting guidelines of cd..
I will begin with an exegesis of John 1, a post I had made at the end of last year 2009, and will present it again to be countered. More scriptures will be provided as the debate continues to expound this theology:
Christ is Deity
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. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. There was a man sent from God, whose name [was] John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all [men] through him might believe. He was not that Light, but [was sent] to bear witness of that Light. [That] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name. Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 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 bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
The first thing to do here is to explain the difference between Theon and Theos. Both words mean God equally. The difference is Theon is in the accusitive case (it is the direct object of the sentence) and theos is in the nominative case (it is the subject of the sentence).
In the English, word order within a sentence informs the reader of which words are the subject and which word is the direct object. This is not true in the Greek. The clues used to figure out the subject and direct objects of a sentence are called "case endings".
The root of God in the Greek is : Theo
The ending sigma (singular) shows that Theos within a sentence is the subject of that sentence. Therefore, the case ending is nominative or a singular masculine.
The ending ἦν (nominative) shows that Theon within a sentence is the direct object. Therefore, the case ending is accusative or singular masculine.
And if both nouns in a sentence both end in a sigma, as in John 1:1, the definite article, ho, is called the "indicating subject", and its function is to point out to the reader that logos, not theos, is the subject of the clause. This is plain Greek 101.
Another form is Theou, which is genitive.
Of all those who have studied Greek on this list will testify that the inflectional differences in Greek nounsmerely indicates the place or function it has within the sentence. An example in English is:
the Lord/the Lord's
The former may be used in the nominative case (and other cases in Eng.), while the inflection of the latter indicates that it is in the genitive case. But there is no qualitative nor quantitative difference that can be made simply by virtue of the inflection.
TR below, which was derived from the Vulgate, written primarily by Jerome, in the 5th century AD.
Second, let's get down to the schematics and syntax, as well as proper exegesis to the scripture for those that seem a little befuddled by the nature in which John of Zebedee had so meticulously pointed out in his use of grammar.
John's first assertion is that "In the beginning was the Word." Which beginning? Considering the whole context of the prologue and discourse in its entirety, many have identified this beginning as the same beginning mentioned in Genesis 1:1.
But most see that the assertion of the Apostle goes far beyond that.
The key element in understanding this, the first phrase of this verse, is the form of the word "was," which in the Greek language in which John was writing, is the word ἦν (the "e" pronounced as a long "a" as in "I ate the food"). It is a timeless word - that is, it simply points to existence before the present time without reference to a point of origin. One can push back the "beginning" as far as you can imagine, and, according to John, the Word still is. Therefore, the Word is eternal, timeless. The Word is not a creation that came into existence at "the beginning," for He, God, Christ, predates that beginning.
John is very careful in his language at this point. Throughout this section of his prologue and discourse, John carefully contrasts the Word, and all other things. He does so by consistently using ἦν of the Logos, the Word, and by consistently employing a totally different verb in reference to all other things. This other verb is "to become" (γίνομαι). It is used of John the Baptist in verse 6, of the world in verse 10, and the children of God in verse 12. Only when we come to verse 14 does John use "to become" of the Word, and that is when the Word "became flesh."
This refers to a specific point in time, the incarnation, and fully demonstrates John's intentional usage of contrasting verbs.
John is not alone in this. Jesus contrasted Abraham's "becoming" with His own eternal existence in John 8:58 in the same way.
The Psalmist contrasted the creation of the world with the eternity of God in Psalm 90:2 in the LXX, by using the same verbs found in John 1:1 and 14.
Hardly seems coincidental, does it?
We have seen that the Word is eternal.
John filled the Word with personality and identified the Word not as some fuzzy, ethereal essence that was the guiding principle of all things, (as the Greeks thought it did), but as the eternal Son of God, the One, God, Who entered into time, and into man's experience as Jesus of Nazareth at the time of conception in Mary. The "Word" reveals that Jesus is the mind of God, the thought of God, His full and living revelation, and He is God. Jesus did not just come to tell us what God is like - He showed us in person, because He is, I AM. He is the revelation of God in the flesh.
John did not stop here. He did not leave us to simply know the eternity of the Word. The next phrase says, "and the Word was with God." Again we find the verb "was" cropping up, again pointing to the timelessness of the subject at hand. The Word was with God. The preposition John uses here is quite revealing. It is the Greek word pros. It means "to be in company with someone" or to be "face-to-face."
It speaks of communion, interaction, fellowship.
Remember that this is an eternal fellowship, a timeless relationship. Pros with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, face to face with each other.
This phrase, if taken completely alone, would be very confusing for anyone as we have seen over and over again, since John has already asserted the eternality of the Word. Now he clearly distinguishes between the Word and God. He asserts that they are distinguishable. "God" and "Word" are not interchangeable terms.
Then, is John talking about two "gods?"
Can more than one being be fully eternal?
John was a monotheistic Jew. He could never believe in more than one Being Who can rightly be called "God."
How then is this to be understood?
This phrase must be taken with the one that follows. We read, "and the Word was God." Again, the eternal ἦν.
John avoids confusion by telling us that the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Jesus, as we know Him as the Word, does not constitute everything that is included in the Godhead.
In other words, John is not teaching the ancient heresy known as Sabellianism, which taught that Jesus and the Father and the Spirit are simply three different aspects of one person, i.e., Jesus is the Father, the Father is the Spirit, and so on.
Instead, John here asserts the full Deity of Christ, while informing us that He is not the Father, but that they ("God" and the "Word") have eternally co-existed together since the beginning of time.
This last phrase has come under heavy fire throughout this thread and many others. This passage teaches that the Word, as to His essential nature, is God. He did not use the adjective, theios, which would describe a divine nature, or a god-like one.
Instead, he used theos, the very word John will use consistently for the Father, the "only true God" John 17:3. He uses the term three times of Jesus in the Gospel, here, in 1:18, and in John 20:28.
It can not be doubted that John would never call a creature theos.
His upbringing and Jewish heritage forbad that. John would have us realize that what the Word was in eternity was not merely God's coeternal fellow, but the eternal God's self. John of Zebedee walks a tight line here. By the simple ommission of the article ("the", or in Greek, ho) before the word for God in the last phrase, John avoids teaching Sabellianism, while by placing the word where it is in the clause, he defeats another heresy, Arianism, which denies the true Deity of the Lord Jesus. A person who accepts the inspiration of the Scriptures can not help but be thrilled at this passage. John goes on in verse 2 to reiterate the eternal fellowship of the Father and Son, making sure that all understand that "this one," the Word, was (there it is again) in the beginning pros ton theon, with God.
Their fellowship and relationship precedes all else, and it is timeless.
As icing on the cake, for many of you that adhere to this heresy of Christ not being God, John then precludes anyone from misunderstanding his claim that Jesus is eternally God by writing verse 3.
"All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being."
One can hardly be more inclusive than that. There is simply nothing that is existent anywhere that was not created by the Word. He created everything, as Hebrews 1 points out directly to you all.
Obviously, therefore, if one can be described as creating everything, one must be the Creator, and certainly not a creation. The Word is the Creator. All people reading John's words would understand that the Creator is God, not some lower being created by God to do the work for Him. By not qualifying his statement, John assured that we could correctly understand his intention and his teaching concerning Christ, the Word. He is eternally God, the Creator.
Paul affirms that Jesus eternally has been God. The usual Greek word for "existed" or "being" is not used here. Instead, Paul chose another term that stresses the essence of a person's nature-his continuous state or condition. Paul also could have chosen one of two Greek words for "form", but he chose the one that specifically denotes the essential, unchanging character of something-what it is in and of itself. The fundamental doctrine of Christ's deity has always encompassed these crucial characteristics.
(John 1:1) Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(John 1:3) 3All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
(John 1:14) 14And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
(John 8:58) 58Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."
(Colossians 1:15-17) 15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him. 17He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.
Equality with God
The Greek word for "equality" defines things that are exactly the same in size, quanitity, quality, character, and number. In every sense, Jesus is equal to God and constantly claimed to be so during His earthly ministry
(John 5:18) 18For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
(John 10:33) 33The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."
(John 10:38) 38but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father."
(John 14:9) 9Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
(John 20:28) 28Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
(Hebrews 1:1-3) 1God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways,
2in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world.
3And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
Well, the first thing I would ask is the definitions people are attributing:
What is god?
What is Christ?
What is Yeshua?
I ask these, because people often mistake these words and use then interchangably.
When people say Jesus Christ,,,that is not His first and last name. That is His name and definition. Hense, Jesus the anointed.
When people say god, or God,,,that is not our God's name. His name is Yahweh. God can mean any number of things, like rulers, judges, kings, etc. God is a title for those in position of authority.
When people say Christ,,,this is merely the english translation of anointing. That is it. It is the same word as mashach in Hebrew, correct? But for Jesus, it is used as an adjective, describing WHO Jesus was. Anointed.
It is kinda like putting a halo around His head in the pictures. It shows the anointing going on, full time, with the fullness of the Deity.
My question is when did it start?
Did it start at birth, or at the baptism? If the Christ came into Him at the baptism, which is really what the scriptures CLEARLY show,,then How could Jesus be equal with the Father since birth. IOW, why the need for the Spirit to anoint Him?
So, the anointing IS of and IS God the Father indwelling in the flesh. Since all authority was GIVEN to Jesus of Nazareth, being perfectly Righteous, that would mean the fullness was given as well. So when we receive the Spirit, it is OF the Father AND Son,,not seperate. The Father is still God of all, but now Jesus is God of us,,as the head of authority as His Church, His Bride, His Kingdom. But one day, He gives BACK to the Father the complete Headship. Then, and only then, can God the Father be all, in ALL. Of course, this is after His enemies are destroyed forever.
Makes perfect sense to me,,,but hey,,,that is just me.
Well, the first thing I would ask is the definitions people are attributing:
What is god?
What is Christ?
What is Yeshua?
I ask these, because people often mistake these words and use then interchangably.
When people say Jesus Christ,,,that is not His first and last name. That is His name and definition. Hense, Jesus the anointed.
When people say god, or God,,,that is not our God's name. His name is Yahweh. God can mean any number of things, like rulers, judges, kings, etc. God is a title for those in position of authority.
When people say Christ,,,this is merely the english translation of anointing. That is it. It is the same word as mashach in Hebrew, correct? But for Jesus, it is used as an adjective, describing WHO Jesus was. Anointed.
It is kinda like putting a halo around His head in the pictures. It shows the anointing going on, full time, with the fullness of the Deity.
My question is when did it start?
Did it start at birth, or at the baptism? If the Christ came into Him at the baptism, which is really what the scriptures CLEARLY show,,then How could Jesus be equal with the Father since birth. IOW, why the need for the Spirit to anoint Him?
So, the anointing IS of and IS God the Father indwelling in the flesh. Since all authority was GIVEN to Jesus of Nazareth, being perfectly Righteous, that would mean the fullness was given as well. So when we receive the Spirit, it is OF the Father AND Son,,not seperate. The Father is still God of all, but now Jesus is God of us,,as the head of authority as His Church, His Bride, His Kingdom. But one day, He gives BACK to the Father the complete Headship. Then, and only then, can God the Father be all, in ALL. Of course, this is after His enemies are destroyed forever.
Makes perfect sense to me,,,but hey,,,that is just me.
I agree to abide by the rules of this debate thread involving Katonjj and her presentations.
I also agree. Let the fun begin.. oh wait.. did we already start? LOL
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
