Posted by

THE DEITY OF CHRIST : A Review Of A Dishonest INC Infographic


By Bro. Nathan 

So I came across recently ng isang widely spread na infographic na ginawa ng isang INC member wherein may assertions about sa differentiation ng God the Father kay Jesus Christ. this shows a example of not knowing fully ang Deity of Christ at mali-maling views sa Christology. Verses were taken out of context, strawman arguments, and so on. now let's start 

Humanity And God : 
Hos. 11:9 & Jn. 8:40

On Hoseah 11:9, ang theme ng buong chapter ay about sa morality ng Dios compared sa morality ng isang tao. In context ay may contrast between sa tao na walang point ang pagrerevenge but here ay ang Dios—promised not to destroy Ephraim again. So no. Its about morality. God is morally perfect (Ex. 33:19; Ps. 25:8; Mt. 5:48). Jesus as well ay morally perfect (Mt. 3:12-17; Lk. 4:34; Acts 4:27; 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:14-15; 7:26,9:14; 1 Pt. 2:21-22; 1 Jn. 2:1; 3:5). No man is morally perfect and no man did not inherit yung effects ng Fall — Ps. 14:1-3; 53:1-3; Rom. 3:10-12

Pakibasa yung Jn. 8:40 starting from v. 1 down to v. 58 at tingnan natin kung Sino ba yung έγω ειμί (I Am) in the same text ay sinasabi dito ang role ni Jesus Christ as ang revealer ng God the Father (Jn. 1:18). Jesus can't reveal the Father if He can't intersect with Humanity (1 Tim. 2:5-6; cf Jn. 14:6) and so He joins both sides — Jn. 1:14; Phil. 2:5-11; Heb. 2:7-9; 2 Jn. 1:7

Corporeality : 
Jn. 4:24 & Lk. 24:39

In Lk. 4:24 ay about ito sa nature ng isang Resurrected body which means na ang Resurrected body ay may tangible flesh and bones. However, kapag i-attempt ito na i-connect sa Jn. 4:24—it fails! Why? ang Lk. 24:39 ay about sa physical composition samantalang ang Jn. 4:24 does not. it's all about God's qualities and how God should be worshipped sa context ng Jn. 4:24. 

Ang Greek word na πνεύμα (pneuma - spirit) sa Jn. 4:24 (πνεύμα ό Θεός- pneuma o Theos) ay grammatically isang qualitative nominative predicate na nakaplace before the Greek word na Θεός (God). Contextually, Jesus here teaches how men should worship God. prinesent ni Jesus ito sa isang Samaritan woman kasi naging problem between sa Jews at Samaritans yung place of worship nila. ang Samaritans ay nakaprivelege sa Mount Gezirim samantalang ang Jews naman ay sa Temple sa Jerusalem (v.20) then Jesus then tells the woman na huwag na siyang magaalala dahil ang Dios can be worshipped anywhere dahil hindi Siya nakakulong sa iisang lugar lang (v. 21-24) He is omnipresent through his spiritual influence. ang worship kay God must be done spirit to Spirit — cf. Phil. 3:3

Ang teaching na may physical body si Heavenly Father at Jesus Christ is found throughout the Bible. consider the following passages mula sa Bible :

" Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." (Gen. 1:26-27) NKJV 

The hebrew reads :

יֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַֽעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעֹוף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ הָֽרֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם בְּצַלְמֹו בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתֹו זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָֽם׃ 

Ang hebraism sa verse na ito as the hebrew word dito for image denotes na ang man have the same "image" and likeness to God, and says na ang physical likeness ng tao is the same lang sa Dios (cf. Gen. 6:9; Eph. 4:24; Jm. 2:9) thus saying that Heavenly Father has a physical body. one scholar commented :

[T]he Hebrew word for ‘image’ is also employed by P of Seth’s likeness to Adam (Gen 5.3), following a repetition of Genesis 1’s statement that humanity was created in the likeness of God (Gen. 5.1), which further supports the notion that a physical likeness was included in P’s concept. It is also noteworthy that the prophet Ezekiel, who was a priest as well as prophet at a time not too long before P, and whose theology has clear parallels with P’s, similarly speaks of a resemblance between God and the appearance of man. As part of his call vision in Ezek. 1.26, he declares of God, ‘and seated above the likeness of a throne was something that seemed like a human form’ (the word demut, ‘likeness’, is used, as in Gen. 1.26). Accordingly, there are those who see the image as simply a physical one. However, although the physical image may be primary, it is better to suppose that both a physical and spiritual likeness is envisaged, since the Hebrews saw humans as a psycho-physical totality.

The use of selem elsewhere in Genesis and of demut in Ezekiel certainly tells against the view of those scholars who see the divine image in humanity as purely functional in nature, referring to humanity’s domination over the natural world that is mentioned subsequently (Gen. 1.26, 28), an increasingly popular view in recent years. Although the two ideas are closely associated, it is much more likely that humanity’s rule over the world (Gen. 1.26-28) is actually a consequence of its being made in the image of God, not what the image itself meant. (John Day, From Creation to Babel: Studies in Genesis 1-11 [London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2013], 13-14).

Ito ay supported ng mga pericopes na nagpapakita sa verses 21-25:

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moves, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind (לְמִינֵהו): and God saw that it was good. And God blessed the, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind (לְמִינָהּ), cattle, and creeping thing and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and everything that creepeth upon the earth after his kind (לְמִינֵהו): and God saw that it was good. (Gen 1:21-25) KJV

According to this pericope dito sa context, bawat klase ng mga nilalang ay ginawa "after its kind" (alternate translation can be species - מִין)." Subsequently, ay binigyan sila ng duty na humayo at magpakarami at punuin ang mundo. yung aso di magiging kamukha ng kabayo, yung daga, di magiging magiging kamukha ng ibon, vice-versa etc., dahils sila ay ginawa after their own kind. may kanya kanya silang species. This is important as plays an important exegetical role vis-a-vis the relationship between God at ang physical nature ng tao sa mga susunod na verses sa context na sinundan din ng pericope in the previous verses in the context : 

And God said, Let us make man in our image (צֶלֶם), after our likeness (דְּמוּת): and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image (צֶלֶם), in the image (צֶלֶם) of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Gen. 1:26-28) KJV

Sinabi ng isang scholar :

" By setting the image-likeness formula in the context of sonship, Genesis 5:1-3 contradicts the suggestion that the image idea is a matter of representative status rather than of representational likeness or resemblance. For Seth was not Adam's representative, but as Adam's son he did resemble his father. The terminology "in his likeness" serves as the equivalent in human procreation of the phrase "after its kind" which is used for plant and animal reproduction and of course refers to resemblance. (Meredith G. Kline, “Creation in the Image of the Glory-Spirit” Westminister Theological Journal, 39 [1976/77]: note 34)

Supremacy : 
Isa. 40:28 & Jn. 20:17; Gen. 14:20 & Jn. 14:28

For Isa. 40:28, ito ay isang rant ni Yahweh/Jehovah against sa neighboring nations ng Israel—because of idolatry. At hindi against sa ontological existence of other deities. 

Unlike the idols the people were attributing the saving acts taking place, God instead is the one who performs these saving actions, thus, fulfilling his promises. As we read in a scholarly commentary on Isaiah 40-66 (so-called “Deutero-Isaiah”):

[3–5] The fulfillment of earlier prophecies serves as a precedent that the future prophecies will also come to pass, specifically the promise of redemption. Here, however, instead of using this claim of authenticity in his usual polemic against idolaters and their gods, comparing their impotence with God’s omnipotence and omniscience (e.g., 41:21–24; 42:8–9; 43:9–10; 46:9–11), Deutero-Isaiah castigates the people’s disbelief and their propensity to attribute the events to their idols. For a similar theme in a Neo-Assyrian prophecy, see Ishtar’s prophecy to King Esarhaddon: “[Esarhaddon] … you [saw] you could trust my previous statement (dababu pānīu) to you. Now you can rely on this latter one (urkīu) as well” (Parpola, Assyrian Prophecies, 10, lines 3–12). So too in an oracle addressed to King Esarhaddon, the prophetess encourages the king by declaring: urkīute lu kî pānīute, “The future ones shall be like the past ones” (ibid., 6, line 37’).

[3] Long ago I foretold things that would happen—For מאז (“long ago”) (repeated three more times throughout this unit, vv. 5, 7, 8), see 44:8; 45:21; cf. Ps 93:2: “Your throne stands firm from long ago (מאז).” For the verbal construction הגיד רִאשֹׁנות, see Isa 41:22; and for the term ראשֹׁנות (ה), see 41:22; 42:9; 43:9, 18; 46:9; 65:17; and the introduction, §4.)

From My mouth they issued, and I announced them—Vocalize וָאשמיעם in the past tense, parallel to הגדתי in the prior hemistich. For the expression יצא מפה (“to issue from one’s mouth”), which signifies a binding and irrevocable proclamation, see 45:23: “From My mouth has issued truth, a word that shall not turn back”; 55:11: “So is the word that issues from My mouth. It does not come back to Me unfulfilled, but performs what I purpose”; cf. Judg 11:36; Jer 44:17. The Akkadian etymological and semantic equivalent, ṣīt pî, can also denote an (irrevocable) declaration of a deity (CAD P:459; Ṣ:219).

Suddenly I acted, and they came to pass—Cf. Isa 42:9: “See, the things once predicted have come to pass.” For the expression בוא פתאֹם (“to come about suddenly”) in the context of Babylon’s destruction, see 47:11: “Coming upon you suddenly is ruin of which you know nothing”; cf. also, e.g., 30:13; Jer 4:20; 6:26. For the verb עשי (“to act”) without an object, see Isa 41:4; 46:4. (Shalom M. Paul, Isaiah 40-66: Translation and Commentary [Eerdmans Critical Commentary; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 2012], 307)

Ang Jn. 14:28 deals with roles at hindi nature. Sinabi dito ang role ng Father (v. 1-3), ang role ng Son (v. 6-12) at ang role ng Holy Spirit (v. 16-26). The Father is greater than the Son in roles, and not in nature (Phil. 2:5-7)

Regarding sa Jn. 20:17, of course, Jesus is Subordinate to the Father. Latter Day Saints don't believe that the Father and the Son are of the same being and essence. At also, it shows the subordination of the Son (cf Jn. 14:28; 1 Cor. 11:3) but not of nature since Christ is a Divine individual. God is the God of gods (Dt. 10:17; Josh. 22:22) so we have no problem with that. He is not subordinate in the case na God siya by Nature (Phil. 2:5-11) but in terms sa kanyang place over the Divine council — Ps. 136:2; Dan. 2:47; 11:36; Isa. 41:29; 42:8; 43:10-24; 44:8-19; 45:9-22

Omniscience : 
1 Jn. 3:20 & Mt. 24:36

One na kailangang I-give up sa incarnation ay ang knowledge. Meron tayong tinatawag na Kenosis (Phil. 2:5-11) which means yung fully self emptying ni Jesus Christ, so at this point ng kanyang humanity, He learned to progress (Lk. 2:52; Heb. 2:7-9; cf Phil. 2:9-11). Jesus as well ay omniscient as said sa ibang places sa Bible — Jn. 16:30; 21:17-18

I'm Being Human : Isa. 40:28 & Jn. 4:6; 1 Tim. 1:17 & Jn. 19:33; Ps. 121:4 & Mt. 8:24; Num. 23:19 & Mt. 1:21

Isa itong dishonest na review ng INC sa deity of Christ. Nakakaalam ba ng Christology yung gumawa ng infographic na ito? parang hindi. hindi alam yung nature ng in Incarnation. Ang incarnation ay ang pagtatake ni Jesus Christ ng human body at human nature para bumaba dito sa earth at maintersect ang humanity to God. by this, subject si Jesus Christ to human sufferings kagaya ng nagugutom, napapagod, naaantok, nauuhaw, etc. (Jn. 1:1-14; Phil. 2:5-11; cf Mt. 8:24; Jn. 4:6; 19:28). In Heb. 2, when recently sa pagpopoint-out ni Apostle Paul sa Divinity ni Jesus Christ, ipaliwanag niya ang nature ng Incarnation at ang purpose nito, kung bakit kailangan ang incarnation for the suffering at death ni Jesus Christ —in order to fulfill the Atonement (cf Phil. 2:5-11) which reads :

“For He has not put the world to come, of which we speak, in subjection to angels. But one testified in a certain place, saying: “What is man that You are mindful of him, Or the son of man that You take care of him? You have made him a little lower than the angels; You have crowned him with glory and honor, And set him over the works of Your hands. You have put all things in subjection under his feet.” For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we do not yet see all things put under him. But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.” (Heb 2:5-9) NKJV

— Jn. 3:15-17; 10:17-18; Phil. 2:5-11; 1 Jn. 4:2; 2 Jn. 1:7

The Infographic is misleading as shown above. In conclusion, INCs don't truly understand the stand of Christianity on the deity of Christ 

Like and support our Facebook page : fb.com/ldswarriors2000
 

Popular Posts