RE: What Do YOU believe about God?
As an easier starting point, I'm a Christian. However, I have my own set of beliefs that don't fall in line with any particular denomination. I believe the G-d of the Old Testament (the G-d of the Jewish people) is the One true G-d. I believe that the man known as Jesus was in some very specific way His son. I do not believe that Jesus IS G-d, I believe they are separate beings but because of our limited perspective they would almost seem as such to us. It usually makes me sound like a polytheist but this would be inaccurate. I believe that Jesus' teachings about peace are the culmination of everything G-d wanted to instruct us, but because of the disobedience of man (and the free will that He gave us to be disobedient) there is/was suffering.
I believe that the majority of Christianity has very little to do with the Christ, and most of that comes from a history where people "dumbed down" some of the teachings and made a lot of concessions as opposed to keeping the fight for purity of the teaching.
I've also spent some time studying Zen and the way a Christian can learn from it and live a more practiced devotion to the teachings in the Bible. Zen teaches respect for others and focus on them rather than yourself, that's obviously what Jesus taught.
In general I'm very open about my faith, in the sense that I love learning, hearing and discussing religion, faith and theology with people.
Could Jesus and the God of the Old Testament both be Gods? As His Son, might Jesus have a few of the Father's attributes?
I think we as believers may get too caught up in words and titles used in a book written thousands of years ago and retranslated dozens of times. Does it matter what we call Jesus? Maybe what matters more is He had the power to die for us, and He taught us to love and respect others.
I do find it interesting that the words deus and theos closely resemble the Greek name for their main god, Zeus.
"Dumbed down teachings." Good way to describe it. I think a lot was lost during some of the retranslations. It would be interesting to read a copy of the Bible from its original sources.
When I worked as a missionary, I met many Buddhists and followers of the Zen way of life. I greatly respected their teachings and found them quite in sync with my own Christian views.
Thanks for reading and posting! This is all fascinating.
You have been implying serial translations where errors get introduced like copies of copies.
That's not what we have. We have parallel translations all from the original Greek, each by an independent group of experts. So rather than accumulating errors we have canceling errors because on any issue you can pick up and study dozens of different expert opinions about what the original Greek and Hebrew texts said.
For example, compare all the translations at one glance at this site: http://biblehub.com/john/1-12.htm
I would say yes only in the way a prince would be called Lord to his father, the king. I mean, the Old Testament does talk about G-d presiding over his council of gods, so there is some argument for using the word loosely. I do believe that YHVH, the Father, is the ultimate in authority though. No one is His equal.
It gets really interesting when you consider the correlation between Greek mythology and stories from the Old Testament, particularly the nephilim. They were the offspring of heavenly beings and Earthly women... sounds kinda like a demigod.
Yep! This is why I try to study the Hebrew and Greek words of passages that I struggle with. I don't know either language but I'm hoping eventually I can learn them to get a more full understanding. There are also undocumented culture characteristics and beliefs that play into a lot of the Old Testament in particular. These things make our modern understanding of what we read a bit lacking in terms of cultural understanding of the things presented.
One of the things I've found really interesting is the idea that Zen can be practiced separately from Buddhism and with that knowledge there is a sect that actually refers to themselves as Zen Christian or Christian Zen. I think some of it may tread the line a little too far from the Christian root, but a lot of zen (and yes, even some Buddhism) is definitely compatible.
I agree. I've actually said on a number of occasions that I don't know exactly who Jesus is, but I do know what he did and why. Because of that I want to do my best to live my life like he taught me to.
Rob,
I'd be interested in how you dispense with each of these points from two days ago. Thanks!
Top Ten Reasons Why Jesus is God
Well I'll start off by saying the word "God" in English is almost always used as a proper name, whereas the words theos (Greek, New Testament) and el (singular)/elohim (plural) (Hebrew, Old Testament) are not used that way. Both of these words are used to indicate something "godlike". It's almost more of a title than a proper name. So that's the main point in my explanation for numbers 10-5.
Number 4, Jesus was given the authority to judge by his Father (John 5:26-27), so by that fact he is acting under the authority of his Father to grant freedom and life. As far as saying, "I and the Father are one," we can look at the way people say the same thing about someone and their significant other. The Greek word heis does indicate it is a numeral, and not something relating to a concept of unity so this particular verse is something I can't "dismiss" but I will get into some more of why this doesn't bother me a little later.
Number 3, Again, the Greek word for blood haima lists in its definition as possibly being used figuratively or to indicate kindred. Jesus already calls YHVH his Father plenty of times so we have to at least consider this being used to indicate kin. Plenty of people call their family "their blood" in English as well, and we understand it doesn't literally mean they are talking about their own blood but a blood-tie through lineage/family.
Number 2, I Am in Greek is "ego" and "eimi". Ego is I, me, my and eimi means to be, or to exist. So even though it's easy to translate this Greek phrase to "I Am" it's easy to say it could be translated as "I existed" or "I was present". There's no refutation in this form me because I believe Jesus was the very first emanation of YHVH during creation so he was present during all of creation.
Number 1, Again, calling Jesus "theos" could possibly mean something other than identifying him as "God". If theos is used more as a title or honorific, it's simply the Father recognizing the importance of His son.
Now, to further expound on the idea of a fuzzy translation of the word theos as God with a specific meaning, you can read 2 Corinthians 4:4, "In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God." At the beginning we see Paul talking about the "god of this world", Satan. The word "god" in this statement is the same one as that used at the end of the verse to describe Jesus as the "image of God", theos. So if we assume every time someone uses the word theos, they're indicating the Father, we have to read that Satan as well as Jesus is God, the Father.
Not only have you quoted plenty of places where the Father calls Jesus His son and where Jesus calls YHVH his Father, but there is also indication that Jesus is subject to the Father, and not equal. One of the clearest references for this is 1 Corinthians 15:28, "When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things in subjection under him, that God may be all in all." So at the end of things, the Father will reign over even Jesus and be in ultimate authority over everything.
There are a lot of other points to Jesus being a more literal son, but I don't want to go too crazy with this response. If you're interested to hear more about these points I can either go on or maybe I'll even work on a full post in response to your top ten list.
Overall though, I want to make the point known that my beliefs are in no way intended to belittle Jesus by saying he isn't "God", but it is to restore the ultimate superiority of the singular God of the Jewish people that Jesus himself was a disciple and teacher of.
Thanks. I appreciate such a detailed response.
The reason I'm sure which translation to use is the reaction of the Jewish leaders.
They all knew exactly who He was claiming to be -- and wanted to stone Him for it.
I would say yes only in the way a prince would be called Lord to his father, the king. I mean, the Old Testament does talk about G-d presiding over his council of gods, so there is some argument for using the word loosely. I do believe that YHVH, the Father, is the ultimate in authority though. No one is His equal.
It gets really interesting when you consider the correlation between Greek mythology and stories from the Old Testament, particularly the nephilim. They were the offspring of heavenly beings and Earthly women... sounds kinda like a demigod.
Yep! This is why I try to study the Hebrew and Greek words of passages that I struggle with. I don't know either language but I'm hoping eventually I can learn them to get a more full understanding. There are also undocumented culture characteristics and beliefs that play into a lot of the Old Testament in particular. These things make our modern understanding of what we read a bit lacking in terms of cultural understanding of the things presented.
One of the things I've found really interesting is the idea that Zen can be practiced separately from Buddhism and with that knowledge there is a sect that actually refers to themselves as Zen Christian or Christian Zen. I think some of it may tread the line a little too far from the Christian root, but a lot of zen (and yes, even some Buddhism) is definitely compatible.
I agree. I've actually said on a number of occasions that I don't know exactly who Jesus is, but I do know what he did and why. Because of that I want to do my best to live my life like he taught me to.
I absolutely love how much effort you put into your study of the scriptures! I think this level of devotion leads to a deep level of persoal revelation... God speaks to us in response to how much we seek Him. "Ask and ye shall receive," Jesus taught. "Seek and ye shall find."
I just followed you. I look forward to reading more of your content.
Thanks! I don't know how often I will be posting specifically religious stuff, but my faith influences everything else I would write about. I agree, the harder we search the more answers we are shown.
(Sorry, I meant to reply to the same post you were addressing, one level up. Moved it there...)
Yes. "Christianity", if you mean the people who claim to be Christians, have been killing each other since it all began. But Biblical Christianity, fully devoted disciples of Jesus Christ, not so much. It's important to distinguish between what a belief system teaches and what it's professors actually do. We don't kick anybody out, so therefore we mostly fail to live up to our standards.
Just like a "Health Center" is full of sick people.
No, I don't mean that we're compounding translation errors, I mean more that implications have changed over time. I don't think the issue is as much the way the Bible is translated but more about the way people teach and/or learn about it.
For instance, we have a user that's been posting videos about the Bible being "tampered" with and when I inquired about what they were saying, they gave me a verse reference with its explanation and they completely disregarded the context and therefor gave a completely inaccurate understanding to others about what it said. I've read multiple versions and I've found enjoyment in (almost) all of them because they all give a slightly different perspective on how they interpret or paraphrase a passage. I especially enjoy when I come across a version that makes me uncomfortable. It drives me deeper into study and trying to understand what the text means.
I usually stick to scripture when I'm discussing theological issues and understanding of scripture, but as I said earlier, there are cultural aspects that need to be considered when we are trying to understand 2000+ year old text. Like I said, when I come across a piece of scripture that challenges me, I research that piece of scripture, then I research what debates have taken place in the church over the course of history because of that scripture. Almost every single word in the Bible has been debated and I love reading those debates. I recognize that most of my beliefs are not in line with the status quo, and I'm okay with that. Christianity has been known for killing its own many times in the past and I'm willing to suffer that if need be.
OH, okay. Haha, well I responded to that too. :-)