Many people before Jesus were called "Sons of GOD" in the Bible. Let us look at few of them:
1- Exodus 4:22 "Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, even my firstborn." Israel was GOD's Son before Jesus since Israel is the "first born". Does this make Israel divine?
2- Jeremiah 31:9 "I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn." Ephraim is another name for Israel.
3- Psalm 2:7 "....Jehovah had said onto me (David), thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." Since GOD Almighty chose David to be His begotten Son, does this make David divine too?
4- Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' " Again, "gods" here in Hebrew is "Elohim", which is plural of "EL". It is the same exact thing as "EL" used for Jesus in Isaiah 9:6, since "gods" is a combination of several "EL"s. And as clearly shown here, for someone to be called "god" or "God" in the Bible it wouldn't make him GOD Almighty Himself, the LORD or Jehovah. I also want to point out that ANY "Son of GOD" in the Bible is a "god" or "God" as clearly shown in Psalm 82:6.
Note: The trinitarian liars who translate the Bible into English play dirty tricks about capitalizing and lowering the "g" in "God" to prove their trinity lie, while they fully know that it is the same word used for ALL!
The "Son of GOD" title that was given to Jesus wasn't the only title for him. Jesus was also called "Son of David." Keep in mind that Jesus came at least 1,000 years after King David. Jesus was also called "Son of Man". See Matthew 1:1, Matthew 9:27, Matthew 12:23, Matthew 15:22, Matthew 20:30-31, Matthew 22:42, and many other verses.
Is the Man whom Jesus was called his son (possibly David) divine? Is David divine since Jesus is his Son?
How come Christian Roman Catholics have created the Theological Science of Maryology, and never created the Theological Science of Davidology? I mean think about it, if Jesus the "Almighty GOD" was called "Son of David", then shouldn't this make David a divine person, since he is one from the many billions that GOD created in this world?
Jesus was called:
Son of GOD
Son of David
Son of Man
Why consider Jesus as the actual biological Son of GOD, when the same expression was used for King David being Jesus' Father who existed 1,000 years before Jesus?
Why can't "Son of GOD" that was used for Jesus be just an expression just like the "Godly" titles and "Son of GOD" expressions that were used for others before Jesus as well as shown above?
The "God" title for Jesus and others in the New Testament:
As clearly shown in the section "Did Jesus ever claim to be "Mighty God" or "God"?" above and all of the articles I linked at the bottom of it, Jesus peace be upon him never claimed to be GOD or anything part of GOD. He never gave the "God" title to himself.
There are however verses in the New Testament that give Jesus the "God" title such as the following:
" 'Return home and tell how much God has done for you.' So the man went away and told all over town how much Jesus had done for him. (From the NIV Bible, Luke 8:39)"
But it is important to know that this "God" title in the New Testament was given to others beside Jesus as well. It is not the unique "The LORD" or "Jehovah" title that was given only to the Father, was given to Jesus. No where in the Bible was Jesus given such title.
Let us look an instance where the "God" title was given to others beside Jesus in the New Testament:
When I debate with Christians about this "God" expression given to Jesus compared to other Prophets and people, they claim that the word "God" with a capital "G" refers to God himself, and the word "god" with small "g" refers to humans. They also claim that they came to this type of translation from the Greek translation. Some lies and discrepancies had been inserted into the Bible through capitalizing the letter "G" when it is supposed to be a small "g" when referring to Jesus:
The following is from the work of Sheikh Ahmed Deedat; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Let us look at John 1:1 "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." This is often presented from the Gospel of John to prove that Jesus was God. There are however several problems with this claim: By this verse it is assumed that Jesus was the "word" and since the word was God and became flesh, Jesus is God. The statement that John reproduced in his gospel however was uttered not by John but by A. Philo of Alexandria, years before Jesus or John were born. It is therefore completely unlikely that Philo was even remotely referring to Jesus.
There is also another reason for not capitalizing the "G" in John 1:1, considering the Greek of the above verse which disproves the assertion that Jesus is referred to as God in the verse. In the verse above, the first time the word God is used, the Greek is HOTHEOS (the same exact word given to Satan as God in 2 Corinthians 4:4. The NIV Bible Author wrote "god" for Satan instead of "God"), which means The God. The second time the word God is used,"....and the word was God," the word for God is TONTHEOS, which means "a god". Europeans have evolved a system of capital and small letters non-existent in Greek. The God, HOTHEOS is translated as God with a capital G, whereas Tontheos, which means A or ANY God is translated with a small g, god. In this case however, we see the unlawful translators trying to prove Jesus being God by putting capital G for both whereas it doesn't belong in the case of the "word".
Here is how 2 Corinthians 4:4 is read in the current English translation of the NIV Bible:
"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (From the NIV Bible, 2 Corinthians 4:4)"
It should've been written as "The God of this age....." since the same Greek word was used for Jesus in describing him for being a "God".
Let us look at Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' " "gods" here in Hebrew is "Elohim", which is plural of "EL". It is the same exact thing as "EL" used for Jesus in Isaiah 9:6, since "gods" is a combination of several "EL"s. And as clearly shown here, for someone to be called "god" or "God" in the Bible it wouldn't make him GOD Almighty Himself, the LORD or Jehovah. I also want to point out that ANY "Son of GOD" in the Bible is a "god" or "God" as clearly shown in Psalm 82:6.
Note: The trinitarian liars who translate the Bible into English play dirty tricks about capitalizing and lowering the "g" in "God" to prove their trinity lie, while they fully know that it is the same word used for ALL!
So can we trust the current English Translations then?
Absolutely not! Given that facts above about verse John 1:1, how can we expect from an ordinary English speaking Christian who wants to spread his religion with all his heart honestly and faithfully to understand this lie of capitalizing the small "g" in John 1:1 and other verses, and not capitalizing the "g" in 2 Corinthians 4:4 for Satan for instance? Must we allow our faith to be all based on what other authors decide to insert from their own personal views into the Bible?
The Gospel of Luke is corrupted anyway according to the Bible's Theologians:
Regarding the verse Luke 8:39 above, we can't really trust it's validity anyway, because the entire gospel of Luke is corrupt according to the Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible.
The Gospel of Luke:
"The author's name does not appear in the book, but much unmistakable evidence points to Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1529)"
Again, we don't know for sure whether it was Luke or not who wrote the "Gospel of Luke" since his name doesn't appear in the Book. The Gospel itself seems to be a compromising one to the Word of GOD. Let us look at the following:
"Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, (Luke 1:3)"
Few problems with this Gospel from the quote above:
1- The author was not inspired, and knew for sure that he was not inspired by GOD Almighty to write the Book since he didn't mention about any divine inspiration, and he said "...since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning..." Where do we see GOD's inspiration in this?
2- The author wrote it for the purpose of "his most excellent Theophilus." Since when we compromise GOD Almighty and document His Holy Words for the purpose of other higher (in rank) human beings?
I say it again, I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!
Also, beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering as the True Living Word of GOD.
Further from brother Vipor Poison; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Luke 1:3
Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
The following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625b.htm
http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm
If Theophilus existed in either the 2nd or the 4th centuries then how could the writer of this gospel be the same Luke who is supposed to be with Jesus in the 1st century.
Maybe he lived to about 200 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment