I read through the posts and I do not see where anyone has brought up Isaiah 9:6-- if it was, I apologize:
For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
how does this figure into the equation?
TK
what of the incarnation?
Hi Homer,
I appreciate your expression of your understandings --- well thought out.
I didn't mean to press "modalism" upon you. But I am interested in what your position or understanding actually is.
So I want to ask two final questions. Jesus prayed a lot to His Father. If God is a single Individual, and Jesus is that divine Individual, then to whom was He praying?
The second question. Doesn't the following passage indicate that Jesus Himself recognized that the Father and He were two distinct Individuals? That He and His Father comprise TWO witnesses in keeping with the Mosaic law?
It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. John 8:17,18
TK, if Isaiah 9:6 is a reference to Jesus (and I believe it is), and if the translation from the Masoretic Hebrew text is correct, then Jesus IS the Father. This would contradict every other scripture on the matter.
The Septuagint is more accurate than the Masoretic text. But there are variations even within it. One recenscion of the Septuagint renders the verse this way:
For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.
Another recesension bears a greater similarity to the Masoretic text, except that instead of "Mighty God", it says "Mighty One", and instead of "Everlasting Father", it says "Father of the age to come". The latter phrase reminds me of the following from Hebrews.
...in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he made the ages. Heb 1:2
Indeed, this statement from Hebrews proves the pre-existence of Christ. The ages were created through Him. So He must have existed before the ages.
I appreciate your expression of your understandings --- well thought out.
I didn't mean to press "modalism" upon you. But I am interested in what your position or understanding actually is.
So I want to ask two final questions. Jesus prayed a lot to His Father. If God is a single Individual, and Jesus is that divine Individual, then to whom was He praying?
The second question. Doesn't the following passage indicate that Jesus Himself recognized that the Father and He were two distinct Individuals? That He and His Father comprise TWO witnesses in keeping with the Mosaic law?
It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. John 8:17,18
TK, if Isaiah 9:6 is a reference to Jesus (and I believe it is), and if the translation from the Masoretic Hebrew text is correct, then Jesus IS the Father. This would contradict every other scripture on the matter.
The Septuagint is more accurate than the Masoretic text. But there are variations even within it. One recenscion of the Septuagint renders the verse this way:
For a child is born to us, and a son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder: and his name is called the Messenger of great counsel: for I will bring peace upon the princes, and health to him.
Another recesension bears a greater similarity to the Masoretic text, except that instead of "Mighty God", it says "Mighty One", and instead of "Everlasting Father", it says "Father of the age to come". The latter phrase reminds me of the following from Hebrews.
...in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he made the ages. Heb 1:2
Indeed, this statement from Hebrews proves the pre-existence of Christ. The ages were created through Him. So He must have existed before the ages.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
i remember a little tune i learned in sunday school years ago- set to the tune of "frere jacques"..
God the father, God the Father
God the Son, God the Son
God the Holy Spirit, God the Holy Spirit
Three in One
Three in One
I think Isaiah 9:6 reflects the idea in these verses. the problem is that we(or at least I) simply cannot comprehend exactly how God exists. i'm a trinitarian, but i am resigned to the fact that i am presently unable to fathom this mystery.
God the father, God the Father
God the Son, God the Son
God the Holy Spirit, God the Holy Spirit
Three in One
Three in One
I think Isaiah 9:6 reflects the idea in these verses. the problem is that we(or at least I) simply cannot comprehend exactly how God exists. i'm a trinitarian, but i am resigned to the fact that i am presently unable to fathom this mystery.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
"Were not our hearts burning within us? (Lk 24:32)
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
Hebrews 1:2
But in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. (NIV)
6. Since aionas means “ages” and not “world,” it is fair to ask in what sense God has made the ages through Jesus. First, it must be understood that the word “made” is extremely flexible. It is the Greek word poieo, which, both alone and in combination with other words, is translated more than 100 different ways in the NIV, and thus has a wide range of meaning. Some of the ways poieo is translated are: accomplish, acted, appointed, are, be, bear, began, been, bring, carry out, cause, committed, consider, do, earned, exercise, formed, gain, give, judge, kept, made, obey, performed, preparing, produce, provide, put into practice, reached, spend, stayed, treated, was, win, work, wrote, and yielded. Although most people read poieo in Hebrews 1:2 as referring to the original creation, it does not have to mean that at all. The context dictates that the “ages” being referred to are the ages after Christ’s resurrection. In verse 2, Christ became heir after his resurrection. In verse 3, he then sat at God’s right hand after his resurrection. Verses 5 and 6 also refer to the resurrection. The context makes it clear that God was not speaking through His Son in the past, but that He has spoken “in these last days” through His Son, and “given form to” the ages through him (Note #1 on Hebrews 1:10 provides more evidence for this.
Broughton and Southgate, pp. 286-298
Hyndman, pp. 123-127
Norton, pp. 194-196
Racovian Catechism, pp. 93 and 94
Snedeker, pp. 457-459
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... ge&pid=137
Isaiah 9:6
“And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace….” (NIV)
4. The context illuminates great truth about the verse, and also shows that there is no justification for believing that it refers to the Trinity, but rather to God’s appointed ruler. The opening verse of the chapter foretells a time when “there will be no more gloom for those in distress.” All war and death will cease, and “every warrior’s boot…will be destined for burning” (v. 5). How will this come to pass? The chapter goes on: “for to us a child is born and to us a son is given” (v. 6). There is no hint that this child will be “God,” and reputable Trinitarian scholars will assert that the Jews of the Old Testament knew nothing of an “incarnation.” For them, the Messiah was going to be a man anointed by God. He would start as a child, which of course Yahweh, their eternal God, could never be. And what a great ruler this man would grow to be: “the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty Hero, Father of the Coming Age, Prince of Peace.” Furthermore, “he will reign on David’s throne (v. 7), which could never be said of God. God could never sit on David’s throne. But God’s Messiah, “the Son of David,” could (Matt. 9:27, et al). Thus, a study of the verse in its context reveals that it does not refer to the Trinity at all, but to the Messiah, the son of David and the Son of God.
Buzzard, pp. 45 and 51
Farley, pp. 47-49
Morgridge, pp. 105 and 106
Snedeker, pp. 397-403
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... age&pid=66
Seems you all are thinking more pagan than Christian, to me.
But in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. (NIV)
6. Since aionas means “ages” and not “world,” it is fair to ask in what sense God has made the ages through Jesus. First, it must be understood that the word “made” is extremely flexible. It is the Greek word poieo, which, both alone and in combination with other words, is translated more than 100 different ways in the NIV, and thus has a wide range of meaning. Some of the ways poieo is translated are: accomplish, acted, appointed, are, be, bear, began, been, bring, carry out, cause, committed, consider, do, earned, exercise, formed, gain, give, judge, kept, made, obey, performed, preparing, produce, provide, put into practice, reached, spend, stayed, treated, was, win, work, wrote, and yielded. Although most people read poieo in Hebrews 1:2 as referring to the original creation, it does not have to mean that at all. The context dictates that the “ages” being referred to are the ages after Christ’s resurrection. In verse 2, Christ became heir after his resurrection. In verse 3, he then sat at God’s right hand after his resurrection. Verses 5 and 6 also refer to the resurrection. The context makes it clear that God was not speaking through His Son in the past, but that He has spoken “in these last days” through His Son, and “given form to” the ages through him (Note #1 on Hebrews 1:10 provides more evidence for this.
Broughton and Southgate, pp. 286-298
Hyndman, pp. 123-127
Norton, pp. 194-196
Racovian Catechism, pp. 93 and 94
Snedeker, pp. 457-459
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... ge&pid=137
Isaiah 9:6
“And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace….” (NIV)
4. The context illuminates great truth about the verse, and also shows that there is no justification for believing that it refers to the Trinity, but rather to God’s appointed ruler. The opening verse of the chapter foretells a time when “there will be no more gloom for those in distress.” All war and death will cease, and “every warrior’s boot…will be destined for burning” (v. 5). How will this come to pass? The chapter goes on: “for to us a child is born and to us a son is given” (v. 6). There is no hint that this child will be “God,” and reputable Trinitarian scholars will assert that the Jews of the Old Testament knew nothing of an “incarnation.” For them, the Messiah was going to be a man anointed by God. He would start as a child, which of course Yahweh, their eternal God, could never be. And what a great ruler this man would grow to be: “the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty Hero, Father of the Coming Age, Prince of Peace.” Furthermore, “he will reign on David’s throne (v. 7), which could never be said of God. God could never sit on David’s throne. But God’s Messiah, “the Son of David,” could (Matt. 9:27, et al). Thus, a study of the verse in its context reveals that it does not refer to the Trinity at all, but to the Messiah, the son of David and the Son of God.
Buzzard, pp. 45 and 51
Farley, pp. 47-49
Morgridge, pp. 105 and 106
Snedeker, pp. 397-403
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... age&pid=66
Seems you all are thinking more pagan than Christian, to me.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
JF, the Greek verb poieo may have been translated in more than 100 ways in the NIV, but that doesn't imply that it has more than 100 meanings. But the verb actually has only two meanings: "make" and "do".It is the Greek word poieo, which, both alone and in combination with other words, is translated more than 100 different ways in the NIV, and thus has a wide range of meaning. Some of the ways poieo is translated are: accomplish, acted, appointed, are, be, bear, began, been, bring, carry out, cause, committed, consider, do, earned, exercise, formed, gain, give, judge, kept, made, obey, performed, preparing, produce, provide, put into practice, reached, spend, stayed, treated, was, win, work, wrote, and yielded.
According to my Online Bible, the word occurs 505 times in the New Testament, and in each instance, the word makes sense in its context if it is translated as either "make" or "do". In some cases, it sounds a little awkward in English, and so some translators substitute a different English word, hoping to make the passage in which it occurs sound more current. However, we cannot conclude from that, that the substituted word is one of the meanings of poieo.
No, God made the ages through His Son, all right. Or if it should be "universe" instead of "ages", then it would be necessary to exist before 4 B.C. to do that.
However, no matter what you think it may mean, could it be said of any other man that God made the universe, or the ages, through that man?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
It is referring to the new creation, as the one new man of the Jew and Gentile. That is the Administration of Grace. Our Church age if you will. The Millennium will be another age, and the final paradise yet the final. Made possible through Jesus the Messiah. No pre-existence, except of course in the foreknowledge of God. Still sounds like Platonism to me. The Mystery is the secret, the Sacred Secret that was made known to Paul and the Apostles, the one new man out of the two, Jew and Gentile, not that the Gentile would be part of Israel. That the Gentile would be accepted by God was written in the O/T. A mystery has no answer a secret is revealed at some point. No incarnation. Building theology on the Translation of one word is poor scholarship at best friend, but whatever makes you happy, isn't that what the scripture says?
But back to incarnation
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... ew_topic=5
I'm sure you can find it.
But back to incarnation
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... ew_topic=5
I'm sure you can find it.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
JF,
So you think that the Rock that accompanied them, the Rock that Paul said was Christ, 1 Cor. 10:4, was nothing but an idea in the mind of God?No pre-existence, except of course in the foreknowledge of God.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
1 Corinthians 10:4b
They drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ. (KJV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. This verse is only a problem if it is misunderstood or mistranslated. Some Trinitarians use it to teach that Christ was actually with the Israelites, following them around. However, the Old Testament makes no mention of Christ being with the Israelites in the wilderness. And if he had been, he certainly would not have been “following” them.
2. The word “follow” means “to go after,” and that can mean either in time or space. The Israelites did “drink,” i.e., get nourishment, from knowing about the Christ who was to come after them. The very Trinitarian NIV translates the word “follow” as “accompany,” as if Jesus were accompanying the Israelites on their journey. The Greek word usually translated “follow” is akoloutheo. It appears in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament 90 times. Even in the NIV it is translated as some form of “follow” (like “follows,” “following,” etc.) 83 times. The NIV translates akoloutheo as “accompanied” only twice, here and in Mark 6:1, and we submit that the NIV does so here because of the translators’ Trinitarian bias and not because the context calls for it. Although it is true that akolutheo can be translated as “accompany,” it should not be translated that way here, but would be better translated as “followed.” The vast majority of translations agree. As we have said, there is no verse in the Old Testament that records Jesus Christ traveling with the Israelites, so the translation “accompanied” does not fit with the rest of Scripture. Christ was the hope of Israel, and people who looked forward to him were strengthened by their anticipation of their coming Messiah.
3. Since this verse mentions the Israelites in the desert, the desert wanderings become the “remoter context” against which one must check any interpretation. As we have already noted, there is no reference that can be brought forward to show that Christ was either with the Israelites or was somehow following them around. Are there verses that show that the Israelites were looking forward to the Messiah? Yes, many. The Passover Lamb foreshadowed the Messiah. The manna anticipated Christ being “the true bread from heaven.” The Tabernacle, with all its offerings, foreshadowed Christ in many ways, including being the place where people would meet God. The High Priest was a type of the Great High Priest, Jesus Christ. It was in the wilderness where that great prophecy of the coming Messiah was given: “A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel,” and “their kingdom will be exalted” (Num. 24:7,17). There is no question that the lesson from these verses is that the people looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and “drank,” i.e., got strength and nourishment, from knowing that he was coming.
Buzzard, pp. 52 and 53
Snedeker, pp. 440 and 441
Homer, think correctly will you? What is your problem with the simple truth that God had a plan for all of mankind and that plan was the Messiah, who would be a duplicate copy of Adam and defeat the devil in open warfare, reconciling man back to God the Father of all?
They drank of that spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock was Christ. (KJV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. This verse is only a problem if it is misunderstood or mistranslated. Some Trinitarians use it to teach that Christ was actually with the Israelites, following them around. However, the Old Testament makes no mention of Christ being with the Israelites in the wilderness. And if he had been, he certainly would not have been “following” them.
2. The word “follow” means “to go after,” and that can mean either in time or space. The Israelites did “drink,” i.e., get nourishment, from knowing about the Christ who was to come after them. The very Trinitarian NIV translates the word “follow” as “accompany,” as if Jesus were accompanying the Israelites on their journey. The Greek word usually translated “follow” is akoloutheo. It appears in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament 90 times. Even in the NIV it is translated as some form of “follow” (like “follows,” “following,” etc.) 83 times. The NIV translates akoloutheo as “accompanied” only twice, here and in Mark 6:1, and we submit that the NIV does so here because of the translators’ Trinitarian bias and not because the context calls for it. Although it is true that akolutheo can be translated as “accompany,” it should not be translated that way here, but would be better translated as “followed.” The vast majority of translations agree. As we have said, there is no verse in the Old Testament that records Jesus Christ traveling with the Israelites, so the translation “accompanied” does not fit with the rest of Scripture. Christ was the hope of Israel, and people who looked forward to him were strengthened by their anticipation of their coming Messiah.
3. Since this verse mentions the Israelites in the desert, the desert wanderings become the “remoter context” against which one must check any interpretation. As we have already noted, there is no reference that can be brought forward to show that Christ was either with the Israelites or was somehow following them around. Are there verses that show that the Israelites were looking forward to the Messiah? Yes, many. The Passover Lamb foreshadowed the Messiah. The manna anticipated Christ being “the true bread from heaven.” The Tabernacle, with all its offerings, foreshadowed Christ in many ways, including being the place where people would meet God. The High Priest was a type of the Great High Priest, Jesus Christ. It was in the wilderness where that great prophecy of the coming Messiah was given: “A star will come out of Jacob; a scepter will rise out of Israel,” and “their kingdom will be exalted” (Num. 24:7,17). There is no question that the lesson from these verses is that the people looked forward to the coming of the Messiah and “drank,” i.e., got strength and nourishment, from knowing that he was coming.
Buzzard, pp. 52 and 53
Snedeker, pp. 440 and 441
Homer, think correctly will you? What is your problem with the simple truth that God had a plan for all of mankind and that plan was the Messiah, who would be a duplicate copy of Adam and defeat the devil in open warfare, reconciling man back to God the Father of all?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
JF,
I don't believe your T&T friends' explanation works. It makes no more sense to say the idea of Jesus followed them than it does to say Jesus did.
They said:
The Greek word akaloutheo means "to follow one who proceeds, join him as his attendant, accompany him." (Thayer) It does no good to discuss what the English word follow means. What's more their drinking in 1 Cor. 10:4 is in the imperfect tense which indicates a continuous action in the past. The rock accompanying them occurs as a present participle, which likely indicates continuous accompanying while they were drinking.
If nothing more than an idea accompanied them, why didn't Paul say so? Paul referred to a spiritual rock accompanying them. God is Spirit, He also is referred to repeatedly as a Rock. God is a Spiritual Rock. God accompanied them, as the Old Testament repeatedly informs us. Paul tells us that Rock was Christ. What does that tell you? Think real hard.
I don't believe your T&T friends' explanation works. It makes no more sense to say the idea of Jesus followed them than it does to say Jesus did.
They said:
I don't recall anyone saying it did. The Old Testament doesn't say a lot of things. This proves nothing.the Old Testament makes no mention of Christ being with the Israelites in the wilderness.
The Greek word akaloutheo means "to follow one who proceeds, join him as his attendant, accompany him." (Thayer) It does no good to discuss what the English word follow means. What's more their drinking in 1 Cor. 10:4 is in the imperfect tense which indicates a continuous action in the past. The rock accompanying them occurs as a present participle, which likely indicates continuous accompanying while they were drinking.
If nothing more than an idea accompanied them, why didn't Paul say so? Paul referred to a spiritual rock accompanying them. God is Spirit, He also is referred to repeatedly as a Rock. God is a Spiritual Rock. God accompanied them, as the Old Testament repeatedly informs us. Paul tells us that Rock was Christ. What does that tell you? Think real hard.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
-
_Jesusfollower
- Posts: 207
- Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 11:11 pm
- Location: NW
Well Homer it tells me you are so indoctrinated with the trinity formulated between 325 and 500 ad that you try to make it fit with the participle of explanation I think you are full of useless information in this area, and by the way smart guy Truth or tradition is a website and is not my friends. Our ministry is Spirit and Truth International Fellowship of which I am proud to have a part in. And the things written at Biblical Unitarian are things written by snedeker, Buzzard and many others from what are called the Church Fathers to scholars of our time. Not to observant are you? I sure would not rely on your scholarship with those kind of misreadings, and misrepresentations.
Now Think real hard, this may give you a hint on truth;
Luke 1:47
My spirit rejoices in God my Savior. (NIV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Some Trinitarians believe that Christ must be God because they are both called “Savior.” There are many references to God the Father being called “Savior.” That makes perfect sense because He is the author of the plan of salvation and is also very active in our salvation. For example, God, the Father, is called “Savior” in Isaiah 43:11, 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4; Jude 25. Jesus Christ is called “Savior” because he is the agent who carried out God’s plan, and without whom it could not have come to pass.
2. The term “savior” is used of many people in the Bible. This is hard to see in the English versions because, when it is used of men, the translators almost always translated it as “deliverer.” This in and of itself shows that modern translators have a Trinitarian bias that was not in the original languages. The only reason to translate the same word as “Savior” when it applies to God or Christ, but as “deliverer” when it applies to men, is to make the term seem unique to God and Jesus when in fact it is not. This is a good example of how the actual meaning of Scripture can be obscured if the translators are not careful when they translate the text. God’s gracious provision of “saviors” is not recognized when the same word is translated “Savior” for God and Christ but “deliverer” for others. Also lost is the testimony in Scripture that God works through people to bring His power to bear. Of course, the fact that there are other “saviors” does not take away from Jesus Christ, who is the only one who could and did save us from our sins and eternal death.
If all the great men and women who were “saviors” were openly portrayed as such in the English versions, the grace and mercy God demonstrates in saving His people by “saviors” He has raised up would be openly displayed. Furthermore, we believe no reader would confuse the true God with the people He was working through. A good example that shows God raising up “saviors” to rescue Israel through history occurs in Nehemiah in a prayer of confession and thanksgiving to God. The Israelites prayed, “But when they [Israel] were oppressed they cried out to you. From heaven you heard them, and in your great compassion you gave them deliverers [saviors], who rescued them from the hand of their enemies” (Neh. 9:27). Some other examples of men designated as “savior” are in 2 Kings 13:5; Isaiah 19:20 Obadiah 21. It is incorrect to say that because Christ and God are both called “Savior,” they are one and the same, just as it would be incorrect to say that the “saviors” God raised up throughout history were the same individual as Jesus Christ.
Norton, pp. 304 and 305
Snedeker, pp. 378-380
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... age&pid=81
Snedeker and Norton are refered to here, see?
Now Think real hard, this may give you a hint on truth;
Luke 1:47
My spirit rejoices in God my Savior. (NIV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Some Trinitarians believe that Christ must be God because they are both called “Savior.” There are many references to God the Father being called “Savior.” That makes perfect sense because He is the author of the plan of salvation and is also very active in our salvation. For example, God, the Father, is called “Savior” in Isaiah 43:11, 1 Timothy 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4; Jude 25. Jesus Christ is called “Savior” because he is the agent who carried out God’s plan, and without whom it could not have come to pass.
2. The term “savior” is used of many people in the Bible. This is hard to see in the English versions because, when it is used of men, the translators almost always translated it as “deliverer.” This in and of itself shows that modern translators have a Trinitarian bias that was not in the original languages. The only reason to translate the same word as “Savior” when it applies to God or Christ, but as “deliverer” when it applies to men, is to make the term seem unique to God and Jesus when in fact it is not. This is a good example of how the actual meaning of Scripture can be obscured if the translators are not careful when they translate the text. God’s gracious provision of “saviors” is not recognized when the same word is translated “Savior” for God and Christ but “deliverer” for others. Also lost is the testimony in Scripture that God works through people to bring His power to bear. Of course, the fact that there are other “saviors” does not take away from Jesus Christ, who is the only one who could and did save us from our sins and eternal death.
If all the great men and women who were “saviors” were openly portrayed as such in the English versions, the grace and mercy God demonstrates in saving His people by “saviors” He has raised up would be openly displayed. Furthermore, we believe no reader would confuse the true God with the people He was working through. A good example that shows God raising up “saviors” to rescue Israel through history occurs in Nehemiah in a prayer of confession and thanksgiving to God. The Israelites prayed, “But when they [Israel] were oppressed they cried out to you. From heaven you heard them, and in your great compassion you gave them deliverers [saviors], who rescued them from the hand of their enemies” (Neh. 9:27). Some other examples of men designated as “savior” are in 2 Kings 13:5; Isaiah 19:20 Obadiah 21. It is incorrect to say that because Christ and God are both called “Savior,” they are one and the same, just as it would be incorrect to say that the “saviors” God raised up throughout history were the same individual as Jesus Christ.
Norton, pp. 304 and 305
Snedeker, pp. 378-380
http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/module ... age&pid=81
Snedeker and Norton are refered to here, see?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: