John 10:34

The Gregorian · #11 18th November 2009, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by Webers_Home

†. John 1:14 . .The Word became flesh

Something beyond belief happened at that moment: the one true god became a mortal; and though mortals be gods, they are not true gods because according to John 17:3, there is only one true god rather than numerous true gods.

Which is exactly why I compare John 1:1 to 10:34. Yes, there is only one True God, only on "ho theos" or "ton theon" ... however, not all that is "theos" (yet not "ho theos" or "ton theon") is necissarily a "False God."

The judges were "gods" (theoi), yet not "false gods" ... because, although they are qualitatively "theos" ... they are not worshipped instead of the true God.

1 Corinthians 8:5 shows that there are many lords, and many gods. What makes opposing "gods" "False gods" ... is being worshiped instead of the "true God." However, other beings (such as human kings and judges, and Jesus) can be referred to as qualitatively divine... without laying claim to worship which rightfully belongs to the one TRUE God (which would, thus, make them "False gods," like satan).

Spartan Warrior · #12 18th November 2009, 12:38 AM

There are many names and descriptive titles of God in the scriptures. He is called Counselor, King, Shepherd, Rock, Shield, High Tower, Strong Arm, Saviour, Redeemer, Father, Yahweh, Elohim, El Shaddai, El Elyon, Jesus (Yahshua), and many, many others. Someone has said that there are about two hundred names for God in the Bible! The moment one begins to splinter the absolute wholeness that God is, to examine all His multi-faceted aspects and attributes, the number of splinters are as infinite as God is infinite. Each name of God, as He progressively revealed Himself, was a fresh and fuller revelation of the nature of God. One was a revelation of His Self-existence, another of His might, another was the unveiling of His grace. One revealed something more of His wisdom, another of His holiness, another of His tenderness, another of His exaltation and honor, another of His judgment, and so on.

Psalm 82
1 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. (notice little “g” or Elohim)
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods (Elohim); and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

Webers_Home · #13 18th November 2009, 01:04 PM

.
I cannot accept your reasoning. According to the Bible's Christ; there is only one true god.

†. John 17:3 . . that they might know thee, the only true god

Therefore, all other gods are false gods; including those of Psalm 82.

†. 1Cor 8:6 . . But to us there is but one god

RE: other beings (such as human kings and judges, and Jesus) can be referred to as qualitatively divine

The Bible's Jesus wasn't a judge when he was here; therefore, some people's interpretation of Psalm 82 doesn't apply to him.

†. Luke 12:13-15 . . And someone in the crowd said to Him: Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me. But He said to him: Man, who appointed me a judge or arbiter over you?

When Jesus referred to Psalm 82 in that argument with his opponents in the 10th chapter of John, both he and they consistently used the Greek word theos as a noun; not as a superlative. His opponents didn't accuse Jesus of making himself out to be divine, no, they accused Jesus of making himself out to be a god. The Greek word theos never means divine in the New Testament; it always, and without exception, is a noun meaning not godlike; but rather, a god. The word for divine is theios (e.g. Acts 17:29, 2Pet 1:3, 2Pet 1:4)

Pop Quiz: where in the Bible can the instance be found recorded when God said human beings were gods (Ps 82:6)? Answer: in the book of Genesis.

†. Gen 3:22 . . And Yhvh God said: Behold, the man is become as one of us

That is a very important pronouncement especially since it comes from the very mouth of Yhvh God so early in human history. It means that Man, when he was created, did not come into his existence as a god; no, he became one later. And when did that happen? Answer: when he tasted the forbidden fruit. That incident was an extremely defining moment in human history because at that moment, Man became one of God's competitors; which, in essence, is the nature of an antichrist.

†. 2Thss 2:2-4 . . Don't be so easily shaken and troubled by those who say that the day of the Lord has already begun. Even if they claim to have had a vision, a revelation, or a letter supposedly from us, don't believe them. Don't be fooled by what they say. For that day will not come until there is a great rebellion against God and the man of lawlessness is revealed— the one who brings destruction. He will exalt himself, and defy every god there is, and tear down every object of adoration and worship. He will position himself in the Temple of God, claiming that he himself is a god.

Will the man of lawlessness be a god? Yes. But will he be a true god? No.

A god is, by nature, autonomous, and insists on having its own way.

†. Isa 53:6 . . All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way

But did Man become a true god or a false god when he tasted the fruit? Well obviously he became a false god because according to the Shema (Deut 6:4-5) and according to the Bible's Jesus (John 17:3) and according to the apostle Paul (1Cor 8:6) there is only one true god. Apparently some (e.g. Jehovah's Witnesses) believe there's a third category of gods lying somewhere between the true and the false; but I have yet to find one in the Holy Bible.

FYI: some say that Roman Catholicism is the religion of the antichrist. Not even! When the man of lawlessness takes power, he will defy every god there is, including Catholicism's god; and Islam's god too plus all of Hinduism's gods. And he will tear down every object of adoration and worship; so, good-bye to all the sacred paintings and frescoes of Mary and the child.

The Pietà and that statue of Ste. Peter in Rome whose big toe has been eroded over the centuries by thousands of kisses? Sold for scrap. Vatican City? Torn down to make way for a Walmart. The world's mosques? Converted to 24-hour fitness gyms. Christ of the Andes? Replaced with a cell phone tower. Rosaries? Melted down for LEGOS. Necklace-size crucifixes? Made into car keys. Bibles, Sanskrit, and Korans? Recycled for newsprint.

C.L.I.F.F.
/

The Gregorian · #14 18th November 2009, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Webers_Home

.
I cannot accept your reasoning. According to the Bible's Christ; there is only one true god.
†. 1Cor 8:6 . . But to us there is but one god

I'm glad you brought that up... notice the context:

5. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many "gods" and many "lords"), 6. yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

Notice it specifically shows that there is but one God: The Father. Then it shows Jesus to be "Lord" ... not "God."

Ran77 · #15 19th November 2009, 06:05 AM

Originally Posted by The Gregorian

In one of my many discussions of John 1:1, the topic of John 10:34 came up. Here's the immediate context:

33. "We are not stoning you for any of these," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God." 34. Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'? 35. If he called them 'gods,' to whom the word of God came--and the Scripture cannot be broken-- 36. what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, 'I am God's Son'?

Here's the greek:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...Tpdf/joh10.pdf

Notice when Jesus quoted the law calling humans "Gods" he used the term "theoi" with no definite article, as a nominative predicate noun. Similarly, in John 1:1c, "theos en ho logos" uses the term "theos" in "the word was theos" is also a nominative predicate noun with no definite article (although the subject here is singular, so they use the singular "theos" instead of the plural "theoi")

So... Is there a correlation? As many consider John 1:1 to suggest that Jesus literally was the God with whom he was... are these two grammatically identical phrases, identical in meaning? Do most people consider John 10:34 to be stating that these humans literally were part of the godhead? Or, how do you guys interpret what was being stated at John 10:34?

I have heard this topic discussed several times and it seems that the underlying logic of Jesus' argument is normally left out of it. The basic premise of what Christ offers here is: 1) your own scriptures state that you are gods; so then why do you have a problem with Me being 2) the Son of God?

If Jesus does not mean god in the sense of deity, then what sense does his argument make? Why would His accusers accept this answer and not stone Him. It is their charge that He is claiming to be born of divinity. An answer that does not respond to that specific charge would not turn them away from their suggested course of stoning Him.

Webers_Home · #16 19th November 2009, 10:48 AM

.
RE: If Jesus does not mean god in the sense of deity, then what sense does his argument make?

True.

RE: It is their charge that He is claiming to be born of divinity.

No; their charge was that he was claiming to be born not of divinity, but rather, of a deity; viz: a deity's offspring.

The collective people of Israel are Yhvh's son.

†. Ex 4:22 . . And you shall say unto Pharaoh: Thus saith the Yhvh, Israel is my son, even my firstborn.

David was God's son too; in a very special way.

†. Ps 89:20-27 . . I have found my servant David; with my holy oil I have anointed him . . also I will make him my firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.

Israel's and David's sonships are positional. But it appears from the incident in John 10:31-39 that Jesus was claiming not positional sonship, but rather, to actually be Yhvh's biological offspring; and that's why the Jews accused Jesus of making himself a god.

Like produces like; for example: raccoons produce raccoons, rattlesnakes produce rattlesnakes, iguanas produce iguanas, and humans produce humans: more of themselves. So then, if Yhvh were to reproduce, he would engender more of Himself so that His offspring would be of the God species; hence: a god; but not just another false god like those of Gen 3:22 and Ps 82, but an honest to gosh true god just like its father. I am a true human being because my biological father was a true human being; so then Jesus would be a true god if indeed his father were a true god.

I've explained this in common biological terms to make it easier to appreciate the gravity of Jesus' final claim.

†. John 10:38 . . the Father is in me, and I in Him.

What Jesus claimed there was no less than utterly shocking, and no other Jew in Israel would dare to make it unless they were thoroughly delusional. It works like this: I have the nature of a human being because my biological father was a human being, which is why the offspring of raccoons have the nature of a raccoon, and why the offspring of iguanas have the nature of an iguana, and why the offspring of rattlesnakes have the nature of a rattlesnake. So then, the Jews fully understood Jesus to not only be claiming to be a god (which they apparently conceded after his citation of Psalm 82) but also to be a chip off the Yhvh block.

Opponents of Christianity often pontificate that Jesus never claimed to be God. Baloney! His claim to be God in John 10:31-39 is as obvious as the nose on your face to anybody who knows the slightest thing about the birds and bees; which apparently many of Christianity's opponents don't, but those Jews sure did.

†. John 10:39 . .Therefore they sought again to seize him, but he eluded their grasp.

C.L.I.F.F.
/

plmarquette · #17 19th November 2009, 06:36 PM

Ye are Gods...
sons of God ....
God's handiwork....
God's in that the mystery of God's word revealed to you
God's children
God's chosen people
full of God's authority...to go and do

The Gregorian · #18 19th November 2009, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by Webers_Home

†. John 10:38 . . the Father is in me, and I in Him.

Indeed... and he says it quite a few times in John 17. Throughout chapter 17, Jesus speaks of the he and the Father being one...

Originally Posted by John17:20-23

20. My prayer is not for them only, but for all who will have faith in me through their word; 21. May they all be one! Even as you, Father, are in me and I am in you, so let them be in us, so that all men may come to have faith that you sent me. 22. And the glory which you have given to me I have given to them, so that they may be one even as we are one;23. I in them, and you in me, so that they may be made completely one, and so that it may become clear to all men that you have sent me and that they are loved by you as I am loved by you.

... Yes, Jesus is one with his Father (John 10:38)... as we all are. (John 17:23). Yes, Jesus is theos (John 1:1), just as other humans (John 10:34).

Webers_Home · #19 19th November 2009, 11:25 PM

.
†. John 10:30. . I and my Father are one.

I seriously doubt it's a good idea to appropriate that passage to prove that Jesus and Yhvh are one and the same individual. I think it is far and away better to appropriate it to prove that Jesus wasn't a radical as some have supposed, but rather, was in full agreement with his father's wishes; and fully supportive of His agenda, His law, and His policies.

†. John 8:29 . . He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please Him.

After Jesus testified that he and his father are one, the Jews sought to execute him.

†. John 10:31 . .Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

What was that all about? Answer: Jesus claimed to possess a power that God alone has at His disposal.

†. John 10:28 . . My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life

To the Jewish mind, mortals do not have the power to dispense eternal life; only Yhvh can do that; or, at the very least: someone who's a god.

But unbeknownst to the Jews at the time, the mortal Jesus is the immortal Word's human alter ego— a being with sufficient power to not only bestow life, but also to create life.

†. John 1:3-4 . . All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

The kind of life that's in the Word, is not human life; which is created kind of life that had its beginning in the book of Genesis. No, the kind of life that's in the Word is an eternal kind of life rather than a human kind of life.

†. 1 John 1:1-2 . .That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and reveal unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us.

The obvious advantage of eternal life is lmmortality. But there is another advantage that goes one better. Eternal life is a kind of life that cannot sin because eternal life is the life of God.

†. Heb 6:18 . . It is impossible for God to lie

†. Jas 1:13 . . God cannot be tempted with evil

†. 1John 3:8-9 . .Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

Another advantage to eternal life is that since it is a kind of life that cannot die, it is therefore impervious to the wages of sin.

†. Rom 6:23 . . The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

†. John 5:24 . . I assure you, those who heed my message, and rely upon God who sent me, have eternal life. They will never be condemned for their sins, but they have already passed from Death into Life.

So then, people passing themselves off as Christians, while not possessing eternal life, are in grave danger of the wages of sin.

In point of fact, professing Christians who lack eternal life don't even have God's son; no, according to God's testimony as an expert witness in all matters pertaining to His own son; Christians without eternal life are quite christless.

†. 1John 5:11-12 . . And this is what God has testified: He has given us eternal life, and this life is in His son. So whoever has God's son has the life; whoever does not have the life, does not have His son.

Christians who refuse to accept the truth of God's testimony insinuate that Jesus' father is a dishonest person of low moral integrity who cannot be trusted to tell the truth.

†. 1John 5:10-12 . . Anyone who does not believe God makes Him a liar, because he has not accepted the testimony God has given about His son. And this is what God has testified: He has given us eternal life, and this life is in His son. So whoever has God's son has the life; whoever does not have the life, does not have His son.

C.L.I.F.F.
/

Ran77 · #20 20th November 2009, 01:22 AM

Originally Posted by Webers_Home

.
RE: If Jesus does not mean god in the sense of deity, then what sense does his argument make?

True.

RE: It is their charge that He is claiming to be born of divinity.

No; their charge was that he was claiming to be born not of divinity, but rather, of a deity; viz: a deity's offspring.

The collective people of Israel are Yhvh's son.

†. Ex 4:22 . . And you shall say unto Pharaoh: Thus saith the Yhvh, Israel is my son, even my firstborn.

David was God's son too; in a very special way.

†. Ps 89:20-27 . . I have found my servant David; with my holy oil I have anointed him . . also I will make him my firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.

Israel's and David's sonships are positional. But it appears from the incident in John 10:31-39 that Jesus was claiming not positional sonship, but rather, to actually be Yhvh's biological offspring; and that's why the Jews accused Jesus of making himself a god.

Like produces like; for example: raccoons produce raccoons, rattlesnakes produce rattlesnakes, iguanas produce iguanas, and humans produce humans: more of themselves. So then, if Yhvh were to reproduce, he would engender more of Himself so that His offspring would be of the God species; hence: a god; but not just another false god like those of Gen 3:22 and Ps 82, but an honest to gosh true god just like its father. I am a true human being because my biological father was a true human being; so then Jesus would be a true god if indeed his father were a true god.

I've explained this in common biological terms to make it easier to appreciate the gravity of Jesus' final claim.

†. John 10:38 . . the Father is in me, and I in Him.

What Jesus claimed there was no less than utterly shocking, and no other Jew in Israel would dare to make it unless they were thoroughly delusional. It works like this: I have the nature of a human being because my biological father was a human being, which is why the offspring of raccoons have the nature of a raccoon, and why the offspring of iguanas have the nature of an iguana, and why the offspring of rattlesnakes have the nature of a rattlesnake. So then, the Jews fully understood Jesus to not only be claiming to be a god (which they apparently conceded after his citation of Psalm 82) but also to be a chip off the Yhvh block.

Opponents of Christianity often pontificate that Jesus never claimed to be God. Baloney! His claim to be God in John 10:31-39 is as obvious as the nose on your face to anybody who knows the slightest thing about the birds and bees; which apparently many of Christianity's opponents don't, but those Jews sure did.

†. John 10:39 . .Therefore they sought again to seize him, but he eluded their grasp.

C.L.I.F.F.
/

That is what I indicated. At least the portion where you discussed His divinity (deity).