E
Enoch
Guest
Uhhh… Divinity
How do we know that when Jesus is called "God" in the NT it means they were calling Him the Almighty God?
- Status
M
MH84
Guest
John 17:11
I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name—the name you gave me—so that they may be one as we are one.
John 17:20
20"My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. **22I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23I in them and you in me. **May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.
my own emphasis
www.biblegateway.com
M
MH84
Guest
A lot of people do this: changing the subject. You said you were going to look up some info, have you happened to find any yet?
A
agangbern
Guest
The Church that Jesus built has the final say of which one ought to be capitalized and which one ought not be capitalized. Trust that Church for it is the bride of Jesus.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
Well obviously not according to this verse:
John 17:11
*"I am no longer in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to You. Holy Father, keep them in Your name, the name which You have given Me, **that they may be one even as We are. ***
Unless you think that you and another catholic is one in divinity as well.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
In v. 7, experts have supposed that the name “God” is addressed to the king himself because he is consecrated to the Lord and therefore in a certain way belongs to the sphere of the divine: “Your throne, O God, shall endure for ever”. Or it might be an invocation to the one supreme king, the Lord, who bends down to the Messiah-King. It is certain that the Letter to the Hebrews, in applying the Psalm to Christ, has no hesitation in recognizing the full and not merely symbolic divinity of the Son who has entered into his glory (cf. Heb 1: 8-9).
Following this Christological interpretation, let us conclude by referring to the voice of the Fathers of the Church, who attribute further spiritual values to each verse. Thus, St John Chrysostom interweaves this Christological application with the sentence of the Psalm in which it says that “God has blessed” the Messiah-King “for ever more” (cf. Ps 45[44]: 3).
(John Paul II, General Audience - 29 September 2004)
In v. 7, experts have supposed that the name “God” is addressed to the king himself because he is consecrated to the Lord and therefore in a certain way belongs to the sphere of the divine: “Your throne, O God, shall endure for ever”. Or it might be an invocation to the one supreme king, the Lord, who bends down to the Messiah-King. It is certain that the Letter to the Hebrews, in applying the Psalm to Christ, has no hesitation in recognizing the full and not merely symbolic divinity of the Son who has entered into his glory (cf. Heb 1: 8-9).
Following this Christological interpretation, let us conclude by referring to the voice of the Fathers of the Church, who attribute further spiritual values to each verse. Thus, St John Chrysostom interweaves this Christological application with the sentence of the Psalm in which it says that “God has blessed” the Messiah-King “for ever more” (cf. Ps 45[44]: 3).
(John Paul II, General Audience - 29 September 2004)
J
jimmy
Guest
Whether the Psalm verse you speak of actually refers to David or not is irrelevant. John1 is not exactly the same thing. John1 specifically says that the Word was in the beginning with God and the Word was God and all things that were made were made through the Word and the Word was made flesh. Christ is not just a man according to John, He is the creator. He is God.
E
Enoch
Guest
Jn 1: 14-15 Jesus is the ONLY son of God.
Jn 8:19 Jesus refers to Himself as I AM (the one true God) and says He was around before Abraham
Jn 14:8-12 If you see Jesus you see God
Col 2:9 In Jesus dwells the fullness of deity bodily
Tit 2:13 Jesus is God and Savior. No one else has that title.
Jn 8:19 Jesus refers to Himself as I AM (the one true God) and says He was around before Abraham
Jn 14:8-12 If you see Jesus you see God
Col 2:9 In Jesus dwells the fullness of deity bodily
Tit 2:13 Jesus is God and Savior. No one else has that title.
J
jimmy
Guest
We say that God is three in one. That verse offers nothing different than what we believe.The Father, Son and Holy Spirit can certainly be a We. In Genesis it says, ‘let Us make’. There is no contradiction here between what Enoch said and what John says.
M
MH84
Guest
This is a really good and DIRECT attempt at answering my question. The problem I have though, is when the Holy Father said this:
In what way is it certain? I can’t see it being more certain that the author is saying Jesus is Almightly God here as opposed to the psalmist calling the king of Israel “god” in a lower sense than the Creator in Ps. 45.
M
MH84
Guest
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
but of the Son: “Your throne, O God, stands forever and ever; and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom. You loved justice and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, anointed you with the oil of gladness above your companions”;
The Holy Father refers to Hebrews 1:8-9:
but of the Son: “Your throne, O God, stands forever and ever; and a righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom. You loved justice and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, anointed you with the oil of gladness above your companions”;
M
MH84
Guest
Yes, I know the verses he was referring to. But how do we know that the title “God” used here, was not of the same weighting as when the psalmist in 45:6 called the king “god” (with capital G)? Why was the Holy Father “certain”?
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Hello,
Perhaps with ONLY the two verses from the Psalm and Hebrews one couldn’t be certain. But, in light of the entirety of Scriptures and Tradition, it isn’t even a question. The Gospel of John is a prime example - you cannot read that Gospel and come away without the certainty that Jesus is God incarnate.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
- Who are “they” ?
- The Psalm can be applied to Christ - it does not follow that the proper sense of the passage is a reference to Him.
- The Psalm as a pre-Christian text is not about Him at all, & to think it is makes the Psalm unintelligible - the OT is Christ-centred, but not in a way which implies that the OT is obviously about Him.
- IOW - the use of Psalm 45.1 in Hebrews so as to speak of Him, cannot be read back into the OT; to do so, is like reading references to the bush in Exodus 3 as a prophecy of US Presidents;
- There was no “God the Son” in the religion of Israel
- Even if the phrase had been used in the OT, it would not mean that He is mentioned in the OT, as the notion of sonship is a very broad one, even in Israel. The people Israel is called God’s son, & so are kings & members of the Heavenly “court”. We miss these things only because we read the OT as though it were written by Christians
“God” is not used for Jesus, but for His Father. By calling Jesus Kurios, Lord, confusion between them is avoided, while allowing some at least of the references to Jesus as “Lord” to be understood as implying His Deity.
The problem with so much Christian apologetic for His Deity is that it does not respect the NT texts; it is so keen on unambiguous assertions of His Deity that it looks out for them while ignoring the way in which texts about Him use the OT. It also ignores what is said of Him; the Evangelists don’t say anything as crude as “Jesus is God” - which as a string of words would mean nothing unusual: for deified men were not unknown: the first three Evangelists often use the phrase “Son of Man”, & that seems to have been His preferred self-designation.The NT texts are documents of the first century AD, not of the 4th or the 20th, so it’s very unfair to the writers to read them as though they had been influenced by later doctrinal developments; which is doubly true of pre-Christian texts such as those which form the OT
For the first 400 or so years, NT manuscripts were
- WRITTENLIKETHIS
- ENTIRELYINCAPITA
- LSANDWITHNOBR
- EAKSBETWEENTHE
- WORDS
- breaks between words, distinctions between capital & other letters came later
- bible-researcher.com/codex-b.html
The last line reads: - [apo]stello ton aggelon = “* send [my] messenger”
Greek OT manuscripts were written in the same way
- biblical-studies.ca/dss/introductions/11QPs-a.html
should help
*
M
MH84
Guest
I am not saying Psalm 45:^ applies to Christ, but it seems to btw.
- Who are “they” ?
- The Psalm can be applied to Christ - it does not follow that the proper sense of the passage is a reference to Him.
- The Psalm as a pre-Christian text is not about Him at all, & to think it is makes the Psalm unintelligible - the OT is Christ-centred, but not in a way which implies that the OT is obviously about Him.
- IOW - the use of Psalm 45.1 in Hebrews so as to speak of Him, cannot be read back into the OT; to do so, is like reading references to the bush in Exodus 3 as a prophecy of US Presidents;
- There was no “God the Son” in the religion of Israel
- Even if the phrase had been used in the OT, it would not mean that He is mentioned in the OT, as the notion of sonship is a very broad one, even in Israel. The people Israel is called God’s son, & so are kings & members of the Heavenly “court”. We miss these things only because we read the OT as though it were written by Christians
“God” is not used for Jesus, but for His Father. By calling Jesus Kurios, Lord, confusion between them is avoided, while allowing some at least of the references to Jesus as “Lord” to be understood as implying His Deity.
How do you know that the Christians were calling Jesus “Lord” to distinguish between Him and God? You are assuming that when they used “Lord” they meant “God the Son” (in effect). How do you know this? Maybe, just maybe, they thought Jesus was not of the same substance as God.
The problem with so much Christian apologetic for His Deity is that it does not respect the NT texts; it is so keen on unambiguous assertions of His Deity that it looks out for them while ignoring the way in which texts about Him use the OT. It also ignores what is said of Him; the Evangelists don’t say anything as crude as “Jesus is God” - which as a string of words would mean nothing unusual: for deified men were not unknown: the first three Evangelists often use the phrase “Son of Man”, & that seems to have been His preferred self-designation.
"Son of Man" doesnt mean “God”. It was a messianic reference or it could of meant “man”.
The NT texts are documents of the first century AD, not of the 4th or the 20th, so it’s very unfair to the writers to read them as though they had been influenced by later doctrinal developments; which is doubly true of pre-Christian texts such as those which form the OT## For the first 400 or so years, NT manuscripts were
- WRITTENLIKETHIS
- ENTIRELYINCAPITA
- LSANDWITHNOBR
- EAKSBETWEENTHE
- WORDS
Codex Vaticanus, Matthew 11:8b-10a - here:
- breaks between words, distinctions between capital & other letters came later
As for Jewish MSS:
- bible-researcher.com/codex-b.html
The last line reads:- [apo]stello ton aggelon = “* send [my] messenger”
Greek OT manuscripts were written in the same way
This is proving my point Im trying to make here! Im asking that if David was called “god” in all capital letters, how do we know that they werent using a similar title for Jesus without neccessarily calling Him the Almighty God. They were all capitals (or lower case), so it was up to the copyists to decide which letters should be capitalised or not.
- biblical-studies.ca/dss/introductions/11QPs-a.html*
should help
A
agangbern
Guest
Actually, Psalm 45.6, or that passage which says, “Thy throne, Oh God…”, refers to the Son, Jesus Christ… This truth can be verified in Hebrews chapter 1.
S
Syele
Guest
It wasn’t calling David “God”. Depending on interpretation, it is either a prophecy about Jesus (the Messiah) and calling Jesus God, or else it was pausing to refer to God the Father, not David.
- Status