Shiwiii

7 hours ago, Donald Diamond said:

You may not agree (which is fine).   However, you appear to be arguing that the Son was claiming to be equal with God, while you also maintain that the Son was NOT equal to the Father in authority,    That is a self contradictory argument.  The fact that you can't see that is disappointing.  

I have specifically addressed the question you ask here.  We are told to honour the Son as we honour the Father because the Father has granted the Son authority over the judgement and raising the dead.

John 5:22, 23 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father. (ASV)

I feel you have not addressed any of my arguments which directly deal with the points you made.  However, I am happy to leave it for the readers to make up their own minds.  

D

It is actually not a contradiction. You and I are equal as being human. We are not equal when it comes to authority. If you were a Judge and I was a lawyer, in your court you would have the authority. In the street, we are equal. 

What we are disagreeing on, is not why, but rather the degree of honor. You and others here have inserted different forms of honor to be applied to the Son and to the Father. I am saying that there is no difference, one must honor both equally.

1 hour ago, Donald Diamond said:

Supreme authority is an attribute of God. You find that all over scripture.   You appear to have invented two god-persons, one of whom is supreme, and the other who is not, but is subject to the first.  This is confusion, and the passage does not support such a notion.    

The passage says nothing about whether the Son and the Father are equally God - it is about the inequality in authority between the Father and the Son which leads to the Father granting the Son authority in judgement and raising the dead - something he does not have of his own accord.   This refutes any notion that Jesus is claiming equality with God.

D 

I Don't agree. Why would Jesus say to honor Him the same as his Father? You are trying to invent different kinds of honor. 

7 hours ago, Donald Diamond said:

But you just agreed with me when you said:

" I do not believe that the Father and the Son have equal authority. The Father is over the Son.  "

So your argument is that Jesus was claiming equality with God, even though you accept that Jesus was not equal in authority.  Am I the only one who finds your argument self-contradictory?

D

No, they are not equal in authority,  the Son is subject to the Father. Just like you are subject to your boss. But you are equally humans. Outside of your work, you are both treated equally.

5 hours ago, Donald Diamond said:

The point of the passage is that we are to honour the one sent (the Son) as we honour the sender (the Father) - and as you say, the Father and the Son are not equal.   It is also that we honour the one receiving the auhority (the Son) as we would honour the giver of the authority (the Son).    The Son does not have that authority instrinsically - only the Father has.   In no way is this passage suggesting that Jesus is God.   It is about recognising that authority in judgement and raising the dead that the Father has bestowed on the Son and honouring him accordingly.   Jesus is making a stupendous claim here - but it is not a claim to be God Himself.

D

I never said that the Son and the Father were not equal, just the opposite actually.  

Jesus is claiming to be God, or else why would the Jews want to kill him? It is clear in the text, based upon the statement Jesus made. Then He goes on to say we must honor Him just as we honor the Father.

5 hours ago, Donald Diamond said:

I have not managed to work out how to use selective quotes, so will deal with this part of your response first. 

I don't agree with you.   The Greek verb proskuneo primarily means to bow down by prostration (more like we see Muslims do in their daily prayers).   Falling down is not bowing down.   In the scripture you quote, the action suggested was that Jesus should fall down and prostrate himself.  It was an act of subjection, not religious devotion.  

D.

What is the point of bowing down if one is already bowed down? That is my point. If one is already at the feet of another,  then "prostration" ones self is already done. So then the word proskuneo has to have more of a meaning in those instances. 

"Jesus never said he was equal to God, "

Actually that is exactly what He said, the Jews knew it, John knew it, but you do not. It's ok if you cannot wrap you head around any opinion other than your own. 

To add to this honor worship issue, I want to bring out a scripture that shows a little more clearly why I see worship (true worship) as a form of honor. 

 Mark 7:6 And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,

“‘This people honors me with their lips,
    but their heart is far from me;
7 in vain do they worship me,
    teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

25 minutes ago, Donald Diamond said:

It is very simple.   I honour my mother as I honour my father.  I honour my mother for different reasons than I honour my father.   In both cases, I honour them, but it is not the "same" honour as it is for different reasons.    Scripture tells us to honour those to whom honour is due - the reasons for that honour is different in each case.   Receiving honour is not a definition of deity.   In scripture we honour the Father for being God - we honour the Son for dying for us - something God could not do as He cannot die.

You do honor your parents in different ways, but the respect you give them is equal. The devotion you give to them (in a normal functioning family) is equal, Their value to you is equal (50% dad's input and 50% mom's for your being here). If I understand your point correctly is that your relationship between them in different. I would agree. As far as honor being the definition of deity, you are correct, but who else in the Bible are we told to honor equally with the Father? There is no one else to which this honor is applied equally, except Jesus.

28 minutes ago, Donald Diamond said:

do not see in scripture the concept of "equal worship".  The derivation of the word sometimes translated "worship" is simply "to bow the knee".  Sometimes it ids bowing to God, sometimes to humans beings.  The Israelites worshipped Jehovah (YHWH) and the king (I Chron 29:20) 

The equality is in the description of honor and how that honor is applied. It is a value you place on. Like before, your parents each have a value of 50% of your being brought into this world. This is not an absolute because some people do not place equal value to each of their parents, but for the sake of argument it is what I am using to convey the message. Here in the verse we are talking about equal value is to be placed upon the Son as is to the Father. How one chooses to act this honor out is the difference between what you are I are saying. If we both are called to the Royal palace, how would we show honor to the Queen? Would it be acceptable if we have different ways of doing this? likely not. 

39 minutes ago, Donald Diamond said:

- it is describing one act.  Do you consider this "equal worship"?  It clearly doesn't  mean that the human king is Jehovah.

 I do not consider this equal. This is where the word worship, as you pointed out, is the act of paying homage. I understand and agree with you on "worship" can mean to bow down, or fall face down. Now what do you do with scriptures that use the same word proskuneō after the description of already being bowed down?

Like for instance Matthew 4:9  "And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” 

Is this just homage or is it actual worship? It would be actual worship because the act of bowing down has already been done, thus there would be more to the word proskuneō based on the context. Don't you agree? 

1 hour ago, Donald Diamond said:

Hello  Shiwii,

 

I am glad that you can see that the passage gives us the reason why we honour the Son as we honour the Father.   But the passage is clearly saying that the Son and the Father God are not equal because the Son derives his authority from the Father.  We honour both the Father and the Son but for different reasons.   It is because the Son derives his authority from the Father, that we honour the Son,  not because they are intrinsically equal in authority which is what you appear to be claiming.   I don't see how you can read this passage in any other way.  The Father does not derive His authority from the Son.

D

 I do not believe that the Father and the Son have equal authority. The Father is over the Son. What I said was that the Son and the Father deserve the same honor as stated in verse 23. This honor is placing value as we discussed earlier in this thread. This value is the point being made. If one values the Father greater than the Son then the value is not equal and this is not proper according to the scripture. I pose the same question to you:

How does one honor Jesus and the Father equally, but yet not worship them equally? If the value is the same, then the devotion should be the same. Please describe how this is not so. How do you place equal value, but treat them differently?

9 hours ago, JaniceM said:

I did mention the majority of Bibles may have variant or spurious text.  That doesn't mean all Bibles contain the same variants or spurious text, even if they are in the minority.

But this is what you were implying or else you would have never mentioned it in the first place because it has no bearing on the topic discussed. 

9 hours ago, JaniceM said:

Just because a majority of translations may render a verse in a similar fashion, also doesn't make them accurate or correct if they doesn't convey the original understanding from the original language or the equivalent today.  That's why there have been many updates to the King James Version, and most Bibles translations throughout the centuries and decades.  I think it is a bad idea to accept something just because it is the popular opinion.  Sometimes, we need to take the road less traveled. (I can repeat if necessary)

We are talking about multiple scholars here, not public opinion. These men and women have studied and trained to do this very thing, translate. This is not some flippant group of people who have no Biblical training but want to write their own version. There are some who have done so, with little or no training what so ever other than a semester or two of Hebrew or Greek. Are you really trying to throw their education aside and lump them in with the uneducated opinions? That to me would be dishonest and insulting. 

9 hours ago, JaniceM said:

Reading the context, Jesus honor equates to the honor one gives to a judge or to a king, and by recognizing his position as such we are also honoring his God and Father, the one who placed him in such a position to rule in his place and as representing His authority.

But this is not what the scripture says now is it? It clearly states that one must honor the Son inasmuch as one honors the Father. From John chapter 5 verse 16 through to 28 is dealing with the equality and authority of Jesus. 

16 And this was why the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath. 17 But Jesus answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I am working.”18 This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

Who said that Jesus was equal with God? was it Jesus? yes, but more so it was John recording what the Jewish leaders understood Jesus' words to mean. This was not by accident, Jesus didn't mince words, He knew exactly what they would think. Do you believe that Jesus didn't realize what His statement would mean? Of course He did. This would have been a perfect time for Jesus to correct them if He mislead them. He didn't, because He conveyed exactly what He intended to. 

19 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father[e] does, that the Son does likewise. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing. And greater works than these will he show him, so that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so also the Son gives lifeto whom he will. 22 The Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son, 23 that all may honor the Son, just as they honor the Father.Whoever does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent him.

I see you have also quoted a portion of this and Donald has brought it up as well. Interesting to note in verse 21, Jesus gives life to whom He wishes. Does Jesus have to run it by His Father first? Nope. He has free will to give to whom He pleases. The Son can do what the Father can do, because He and the Father work in conjunction. This is demonstrative of Jesus' own will, which by the way is NOT contradictory to the will of the Father. 

24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.25 “Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. 26 For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. 27 And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man.

Jesus statement of hearing His word AND believing in the Father, one gains eternal life. Think about that for a moment, the Jews had the word of God in the OT, and now Jesus is saying these must hear (not just listening to the audible voice, but understanding) his words in conjunction with belief in the Father to gain eternal life. The Jews would never think of such, it would be blasphemy. Again, Jesus authority and equality is shown here because this is what God had told the Jews. 

Donald Diamond,

I would write the same response to you as I did here regarding these verses. The context is showing both the equality and authority of Jesus. You are right, the context gives us the reason why we honor the Son just the same as we honor the Father. 

7 minutes ago, JaniceM said:

 

I will take your statement as confusion on your part and really bad paraphrasing, out of context imperfect "assumptions".

 

And numerous amounts of study is exactly what you should be doing as that might help you more instead of writing smart remarks in the forum.  You are out of your league here .  .  Since you have not studied, whatever 52/101 . . .  translations of the Bible I have compared, they are all different.  For example, just because the majority of Bibles may contain a variant reading or spurious text, does not mean all Bibles follow suit.  Just because the majority of Bible translations are biased in their renditions of certain verses, doesn't mean all Bibles are.

 

I also have no idea why you cannot understand simple things.  Honor can mean deep respect which is the meaning for John 5:23, not worship or equal worship.  Just as I would honor my mother and father the same, I would honor the son the same as the father.  If I dishonor the son, it would also be dishonor to his Father.  It would be the same as with human kings or their sons.

 

HONOR - The principal Hebrew term denoting “honor” is ka·vohdh′, which literally means “heaviness.” (Compare the use of related terms in 1Sa 4:18 and 2Sa 14:26.) So a person who is honored is regarded as being weighty, or amounting to something. In Greek, the noun ti·me′ conveys the sense of “honor,” “esteem,” “value,” “preciousness.” Thus the verb ti·ma′o can also mean “set a price on” (Mt 27:9); the noun ti·me′ can have the sense of “price,” “value” (Mt 27:6; Ac 4:34); and the adjective ti′mi·os can mean “esteemed,” “dear, or valuable,” and “precious.”—Ac 5:34; 20:24; 1Co 3:12.

 

If you do take the time to study, in the old KJ version of the Bible, you will find many people were actually worshiped because they represented God.

 

I'll be here the rest of the evening, so I don't mind entertaining the ramblings of others for a while longer.

If you have in fact studied all these versions of the Bible, then you would know that the verse we are talking about is neither variant nor spurious. I'm interested in knowing how you know so much about me and my studies? Get off your high horse, you have no idea what league I'm in. It is very telling in your response that instead of addressing the topic, you'd rather try and put me in my place. I've already given you the definition of honor, so repeating it to me only adds fluff to you post with no additional substance.

How can you dismiss the number of scholars it took to translate all of those versions of the Bible and cling to the two that support you?

I'll post this again:

How does one honor Jesus and the Father equally, but yet not worship them equally? If the value is the same, then the devotion should be the same. Please describe how this is not so. How do you place equal value, but treat them differently?

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

 

Excuse me, your paraphrasing of my words doesn't seem to come off as a question especially if there's no question mark:

5 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

"In your statement here, you make it seem as if it was just imperfect men who got it wrong, and God straightened it out."

 

It was Jesus that formed the church or congregations to go preaching the gospel or good news message.  Whether we say church, congregation, Christian society or organization, it means some type of organization was put in place to carry out the work.  It was Jesus that gave the command to go preach to all the nations.  All Christians have been given the authority and responsibility to speak about God and carry out the work of Jesus. 

 

You can read about this commission and authority in the Bible, and about the faithful and discreet slave.

what does this post of yours have to do with what I wrote? I said it seemed as though your statement was made about imperfect men making assumptions and God straightened them out. 

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

Whatever relationship I have with my mother and my father, God says to honor them both and it would be equally or the same.  Honor does not mean I worship my mother and my father.  At John 5:23, honor doesn't translate as worship, no matter how many times you imply it does.

How does one honor Jesus and the Father equally, but yet not worship them equally? If the value is the same, then the devotion should be the same. You view of worship is actually not in question, it is what you do to one you must do to the other, according to John 5:23.

I understand if you choose not to reply, in fact I'd rather you not if you are not going to address what I wrote and come up with some other tangent. 

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

I gave you one example of the verse in Hebrews as an example of how the word worship can be translated.  The majority may not always reflect truth in translation, and sometimes it's best not to always follow the crowd which can lead to the broad road to destruction.

While I agree with you here to a point, however I cannot throw out the numerous amounts of study involved to even translate properly, let alone the many scholars it takes just for one translation of the Bible. now you want to throw out 52 translations of the Bible and cling to the two who support you? 

50 minutes ago, JaniceM said:

I usually watch the baptisms from my seat, but when I was baptized I clearly heard the brother(s)say before I was submerged, in the name of the Father, son, holy spirit.  I never heard anyone say you are baptized in the name of Jehovah's organization.

fair enough, but take a look again. I can dig up the information, but it would be better if you did. 

52 minutes ago, JaniceM said:

The society does believe they have the truth to show the path to the small cramped road to life to be protected by Jehovah through the time of Armageddon.  Being that all religions pretty much say the same or proudly proclaim they are the right way, I've found the only problem is they abhor when JW's say it, which is very hypocritical.   Actual deliverance or salvation is only by means of Christ. 

Any group or organization who claims to be "the way" is fooling themselves and I would steer clear. Jesus is the "truth, the way and the life" no organization is the truth, no organization is the way and no organization is the life. 

54 minutes ago, JaniceM said:

The society has also admitted to incorrect understandings, which they have never said they were perfect or infallible as other religions have done.  I can respect that even though I may not agree with everything.  I can agree more with their understanding of scriptures than the churches I attended, so it's not a big point of contention for me although I understand it is for others.  The churches I attended taught to defend the country by engaging in war, becoming slaves to pagan traditions and taught me God wanted to burn me forever if I didn't give freely when they passed the collection plate.

See this wasn't the question though.  Who was claimed to have given the guidance to the Faithful and Discreet slave which turned out to be wrong teachings?  I was not quoting you, I was asking you about the wrongs that were taught. Who gave them? The FDS no? Who did they claim this authority from, to speak on Gods behalf? Maybe you should read a little slower and closely before you accuse one of deceit. 

50 minutes ago, JaniceM said:

Sorry Shiwii, I had other fish to fry or either I didn't see a need to respond to foolishness when having given a common sense answer, especially if I'm going out of my way to look up the verses which don't seem important enough for you to quote yourself.

you think by finding A translation that gives you support, is the collective meaning of what the verse means? Hardly.  It wasn't the verse you took so much time finding it was a translation that supports your idea. Your example of worship is noted, however the issue is what constitutes honor? It is placed value as per Strong's :

G5091

τιμάω

timaō

tim-ah'-o

From G5093 ; to {prize} that {is} fix a valuation upon; by implication to revere: - {honour} value.

So do you value Jesus inasmuch as the Father? Value here is equal in John 5:23. In what way does one value each of them?

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

However, I did answer your question which I will again and which you did not like the answer.  God said honor your father and your mother.  The honor is equal as I would not honor my mother less than my father because he is head.  To be less honorable to my mother would be showing disrespect to my father also.

Again, your relationship with your Mother and Father are different, but you respect them the same. John 5:23 is saying our relationship should be the same, the same value is to be placed upon both equally and our devotion should be the same.... respect,  honor, worship, fear, admiration, love, subjection,  adherence,  etc.

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

However, if your words don't make sense, I might not feel compelled to respond except to say, there are different levels of love and hate, worship, honor, etc.

You are free to not answer, it will not hurt my feelings. 

1 hour ago, JaniceM said:

Words can be used in different ways including the word that was used for worship in the original languages.

exactly, and that is where context comes into play. 

12 hours ago, JaniceM said:

 

Concerning the word for worship, it was used often in the old language and old KJV Bible.  Worship could be applied to others as well, including prophets or kings in the OT and NT.  So it would depend upon the context and what is meant.  Example:

 

Hebrews 1:6 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA) 6 And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him. - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews

here in your example, did you happen to notice that out of the 54 or so translations only two use anything other than worship? How many scholars worked on these 52 other translations? I would venture to say that they have far more knowledge on words and their meanings than you or I put together. It seems funny though that you went through all of the trouble to find one that you could quote, and ignored the 52 others. 

So lastly,

How does one honor Jesus and the Father equally, but yet not worship them equally? If the value is the same, then the devotion should be the same. You view of worship is actually not in question, it is what you do to one you must do to the other, according to John 5:23.

5 hours ago, JaniceM said:

Also, from the verses you posted, the disciples baptized in the name of Christ (or Father, son, holy spirit), resurrected in the name of Christ, preached and died in the name of Jesus Christ, etc.  We are also doing these things in the name of Christ for we are called Christians.

The WT does not baptize in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit, nor do they baptize in the name of Christ. How can you think that is so? 

5 hours ago, JaniceM said:

We can simply say we are saved by our faith in Christ.  I see no reason to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Doesn't the WT believe that they are the way to salvation? And without association with them, there is no salvation? 

5 hours ago, JaniceM said:

Whatever wrongs we have done or committed, we have to live with as we are not perfect even though people expect us to be, and pray that God corrects and refines us to continue the work Jesus gave us to do and try to correct those wrongs and repair broken trust.

Who was claimed to have given the guidance to the Faithful and Discreet slave which turned out to be wrong teachings?

In your statement here, you make it seem as if it was just imperfect men who got it wrong, and God straightened it out. But on who's authority was the wrong proclaimed? was it not God's according to the society? 

8 hours ago, JaniceM said:

 

Concerning the word for worship, it was used often in the old language and old KJV Bible.  Worship could be applied to others as well, including prophets or kings in the OT and NT.  So it would depend upon the context and what is meant.  Example:

 

Hebrews 1:6 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA) 6 And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him. - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews

You have completely ignored my post about John 5:23. I will post it again and look for your response:

I think where we are having differences is the application of likeness, or equality.  That is what is being conveyed in the scripture based on the Greek word used. 

G2531

καθώς

kathōs

kath-oce'

From G2596 and G5613 ; just (or inasmuch ) {as} that: - according {to} ({according} even) {as} {how} when.

The same, not anything different.  Your relationship with your parents is different,  but you respect them the same. This is saying our relationship should be the same, and our devotion should be the same.... respect,  honor, worship, fear, admiration, love, subjection,  adherence,  etc.

God said for the angels to worship Jesus, Hebrews 1:6, buy yet the angel said to John "do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God" Revelation 22:9. So who's wrong the angels or God. Jesus said "go satan, for it is written,  you shall worship the LORD your God, and serve Him only" did God contradict Himself when He commanded the angels to worship Jesus?

Let me ask you, does the Son deserve riches, wisdom, glory, honor, might and power? The same is said of the Father , "glory and honor and power"

Revelation 4:11 AND  Revelation 5:10

The same, not anything different.  Your relationship with your parents is different,  but you respect them the same. This is saying our relationship should be the same, and our devotion should be the same.... respect,  honor, worship, fear, admiration, love, subjection,  adherence,  etc.

I think where we are having differences is the application of likeness, or equality.  That is what is being conveyed in the scripture based on the Greek word used. 

G2531

καθώς

kathōs

kath-oce'

From G2596 and G5613 ; just (or inasmuch ) {as} that: - according {to} ({according} even) {as} {how} when.

2 hours ago, JaniceM said:

son should be worshiped as the Almighty Father

"Just" should be in place between "worshiped" and "as" in your statement, according to John 5:23

Pretty accurate I'd say

All one has to do is remember who wrote the first books of the Bible, Moses! Of course Moses would write God's name where it belonged and where He spoke with the patriarchs. This is because Moses knew it. I understand your point, and agree that they didn't know the full extent of God's character. However, God appeared to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty.  That was how he was known to them.

They did not, back up in your Exodus quote to verse 2. 

"And God went on to speak to Moses and to say to him 'I am Jehovah. And I used to appear to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as God Almighty,  but as respects MY NAME JEHOVAH I DID NOT make myself known to them"