tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post2525330829704968793..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: On God, gods, and God's sonRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-33759213945279474162017-06-20T09:14:11.186-04:002017-06-20T09:14:11.186-04:00You say these Things but you don't argue for t...You say these Things but you don't argue for them. The fact that there is no precedant for God contracting himself to a single nation is irrelevant, because he explicitly did so, he said he was making a covenant, and he didn't use Language that contradicted that. It's a Whole different issue.<br /><br />Who says John's Word and Philo's Word don't belong in the same stadium? It's the same Language, it's the same kind of writing, so why not? If you want to say they don't then you must argue for it. You can't assume it.<br /><br />Jesus being absolutely Unique is not an argument that he is Yahweh, not at all. The difference between Jesus and any other Divine Being (real or fake, deamon or angel) is that he is God's annointed Messiah send to the world to rescue mankind. And, according to John, the Firstborn of God through which all creation came into being, Yahweh's agent of Creation. <br /><br />That's rather unique, but uniqueness is not evidence of being Yahweh himself.Romanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08465384281243187922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-83300891379405380902017-06-19T09:36:41.258-04:002017-06-19T09:36:41.258-04:00If this is Your exegesis of John 10:34-36 then you...If this is Your exegesis of John 10:34-36 then you're in trouble.<br />Here is my reply:<br /><br />https://theologyandjustice.wordpress.com/2017/06/19/what-on-earth-is-jesus-saying-in-john-1034-36/Romanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08465384281243187922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-78615104289726992702017-06-18T17:55:12.599-04:002017-06-18T17:55:12.599-04:00"Also there is no precedent on Judaism for a ..."Also there is no precedent on Judaism for a messiah who is Yahweh himself."<br /><br />There's no precedent before Abraham for God contracting himself to a single nation. Like God needed to get the 2nd Temple seal of approval before revealing the NT.<br /><br />"So yes it can mean a “divine” son, in the sense that created angelic creatures are “divine”, but there is an infinite gap between that “divine” and the kind of divinity that applies to Yahweh."<br /><br />There's an infinite gap between the God who creates and the gods who don't. Philo doesn't help with this as John's "Word" and Philo's "Word" don't even belong in the same stadium as one another.<br /><br />"Except it doesn’t say the Word was with the Father, it says the Word was with “God”"<br /><br />That's about the right level of stupid you'd expect from a unitarian.<br /><br />"and the Word was deity. And Deity can be used of angels as well."<br /><br />So... you think the carefully crafted prologue, that obsesses over Jesus' uniqueness, says nothing more than Jesus is another divine being like Baal or Milcom?Derekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15128440109055839127noreply@blogger.com