Hello,


Is Jesus the son of God or is Jesus God? What does the Bible say?

Take care,
Hope12

RickJ

1st to NeedKarma:

I do indeed wish Peace on all. My statement was within the contect of this post to help set the mood...to affirm that my disagrements are not condemnations.

If you and I were debating about who God is, I would likewise early in the argument confirm the same.

RickJ

Chris, I haven't figured yet how to "quote selected text" - and not the whole thing. How you do dat?

Even when I was Protestant I never understood the heavy leaning on
2 Timothy 3:16-17 as the main reference to support SS.

What in it leads one to believe it implies it's the sole authority?

Paul confirmed that the Scripture that existed at the time was
1. Inspired by God, and
2. Useful.

300 years later, the teaching Church that Christ founded confirmed that Paul's letters to Timothy, too, were to be added to Scripture. So we can now say Timothy's writing was
1. Inspired by God, and
2. Useful.

So, again, where do we get that we should take this to mean the only authority?

And Revelation? That's a dual-edged sword.

He said "If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book". By "this book" he was not referring to what we know today as the Bible. He was referring to the "book" he just wrote.

You're not implying that he was speaking of Scripture, are you? If you are, then we're all doomed, because The Church has added to scripture.

NeedKarma

I can help you with that.

When you choose to reply by using the Quote button you'll notice that the previous poster's text is "wrapped" by [ quote] at the beginning and [ /quote] at the end. What I do is removed both those "tags" which makes it just like regular text.

Now here comes the neat fun part. Remove the text that you won't be commenting on (highlight it and press Delete). Now highlight the part of text that you wish to quote and click on the Quote icon at the top right, the one that looks like cartoon talk bubble. That's it, you've quoted selected text.

Go ahead and experiment, use the Preview button to see what it looks like before you post.

Cheers.

RickJ

Thanks NeedKarma...duh Rick ...just delete what you don't want to post!

chrisl

Well, those are only two of the points he makes. Let's look at 2 Tim 3:16-17 and highlight some other relevant points.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

First of all, Paul says that "All Scripture" is God's word. For us today, "All Scripture" includes both the Hebrew (OT) and Christian Greek (NT). Paul goes on to say the scriptures are to be used for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction. This would make a Christian "complete" and "thoroughly equipped for every good work." If the Bible is to be used for "doctrine" and "correction" and to make one complete for every good work, would you not agree that it is the authority to be used by Christians to resolve conflicts in teachings and traditions?

And it's important not to focus just on this scripture. What does the rest of the Bible say? What examples do we have? If the examples of Jesus and the apostles and disciples are taken into consideration, I believe the pattern that Christians are to follow is very clear. Without exception, they all relied on the scriptures and were careful that their teachings not go beyond what God said in them. For example:

These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. -- Acts 17:11

Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other. -- 1 Corinthians 4:6

But maybe I don't fully understand your view point. Is it your opinion that the NT is incomplete or not canonical in some way? Or that later teachings and traditions would eventually have the same authority as the Bible?

Let me ask this: if a tradition or teaching of a church is found to contradict the scriptures, which has the greater authority?

Yes, but this principle applies to all the scriptures. Otherwise, we would have to believe that God is saying, "You are free to modify my other words, but not Revelation." Is that possible? Consider these:

"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it. -- Deuteronomy 12:32

Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar -- Proverbs 30:6

But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. -- Galatians 1:8

No, we're only doomed if we nullify scripture in favor of tradition.

But again, I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying the addition of the NT as a whole to the scriptures was somehow improper, or are you referring to traditions and teachings that were added later? If you are questioning the authenticity of the NT, then that's more than I can address within the limits of this forum, but if you mean the later teachings, I definitely agree.

It then becomes a question of whether or not to abandon teachings and traditions that contradict scripture.

Which leads to the question, do you think that all forms of worship are acceptable to God? If so, then you likely don't see a need to question any teaching. But if not, you must be careful to evaluate your worship. The Bible definitely teaches the latter view: God sets the standards for acceptable worship and we must meet them, not the other way around.

Even in Jesus' day his disciples had to choose between the worship Jesus taught and the worship the Jewish leaders taught. We have the same issue today. If we find that our form of worship does not please God--perhaps it is incomplete or even incorrect--we need to make the needed corrections.

The account of Priscilla, Aquilla and Apollos (Acts 18:24-28) is interesting because Priscilla and Aquilla corrected a misconception that Apollos had about a Christian teaching. The example for us is that if we have an improper understanding of a Christian teaching, we should be willing to correct it.

Take care,
Chris

arcura

The statement in Revelation regards that book only.
Rev.22: 19. And if anyone takes words away from THIS book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
Revelation was written long before the entire Bible was put together.
Also Sola Scriptora is non biblical. The Bible even mentions another authority than it.
See the books of Timothy to find it. Hint: It is the pillar or ground of the truth.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

s_cianci

Jesus is referred to as the "Son of God." However, he is not the "son" of God in the same sense that you are the son (or daughter) of your parents. Jesus is God incarnate ; thus he is fully God and also fully human. He is equal in power and stature to God the Father ; that part of the trinity that's often referred to as simply "God." Jesus is referred to as "son" because he willingly subordinated himself to the will of the Father, just as a good earthly son or daughter would willingly subordinate him/herself to the will of his/her earthly father and mother.

chrisl

I assume you mean 1 Tim 3:15 which reads:

but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. (NKJV)

I find no permission here for anyone to supersede God's Word. It says that the Christian congregation is the pillar and ground of the truth, which is simply Paul's way of agreeing with Jesus' statement that those who worship God acceptably do so "in spirit and truth." (John 4:23-24) What truth? You will find Jesus' answer at John 17:17.

What do you see in this passage that leads you to say that any Christian congregation has the same or greater authority than the Bible?

Chris

arcura

Since Jesus Christ refered to himself as the Son and as God the Father as His Father I see no reason why we should change what the Bible records that Jesus said., "The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."
Of course you are welcome to your opinion as everyone else is.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)

arcura

Since the word of God says that The Church is" the pillar and foundation of the truth" (NIV) The Church also is an authority on what is the truth.

If you don't believe that just ask The Church. It was even given the inspirational authority to compile the books of holy sacred Scripture into what we call the Holy Bible.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura)