Replies

How can I make such a remarkable claim?...

Newsweek claims that Jesus opposed family values....

To illustrate how English versions of the Bible allegedly mistranslate words to suit theological biases, Newsweek focuses on the Greek word proskuneo which is “used about 60 times in the New Testament” and “equates to something along the lines of ‘to prostrate oneself’ as well as ‘to praise God’” and in the King James Version is rendered “worship.” (Actually, the word never means “to praise God.”)..

And so, “with a little translational trickery, a fundamental tenet of Christianity—that Jesus is God—was reinforced in the Bible, even in places where it directly contradicts the rest of the verse.” Indeed, it is claimed, “That kind of manipulation occurs many times.”

First, this is highly inaccurate. There is only one instance in the New Testament where the King James translators rendered proskune.. with “worship” with reference to bowing down to other humans..

Second, the meaning of all the relevant passages, where people “worship” Jesus (see, for example, Matthew 8:2; 9:18) is not affected at all if we translate with, “bowed reverently before him” or the like..

Third, this is not a matter of “translational trickery” or “manipulation.” Rather, this is simply the work of translation, since every word has one meaning in one confined context (although we recognize things like double entendre and poetic meanings in certain contexts) and translators must find the best word to use in each specific context. So, if I say in English, “The rock is hard,” I am using the word “hard” differently than when I say, “The test is hard.” The former means “solid”; the latter means “difficult.”..

Fourth, for Christians, the belief that Jesus is the divine Son of God, worthy of worship and adoration, is found throughout the Bible and is hardly dependent on the precise translation of proskune.... Yet there are, in fact, verses in the New Testament that speak of Jesus being worshiped and praised as divine, using that very verb. (See especially Revelation 5:11-14, all creatures in the universe worshiped God, sitting on the throne, and Jesus, depicted as a lamb, in the exact same way. This one text alone undercuts Newsweek’s entire argument.

Nonetheless, Newsweek makes the gratuitous claim that “the publishers of some Bibles decided to insert their beliefs into translations that had nothing to do with the Greek. The Living Bible, for example, says Jesus ‘was God’—even though modern translators pretty much just invented the words.”

The reference here is to Paul’s teaching in Philippians 2 that Jesus existed in the “form” of God, which the Living Bible then renders with “was God.” The problem is that the Living Bible is not a translation but rather a paraphrase, and so is a poor example to use (in that respect, the New Living Translation, which also translates with “was God,” is also a paraphrastic translation). The great majority of evangelical translations state that Jesus existed in “the form of God,” while the NIV, which renders with “in very likeness God,” is simply explaining what it understands the Greek words to mean. Since the larger context (see Philippians 2:6-11) points to the divine nature of Jesus, Bock is correct to point out that, “These contextual features are what a translator considers as he or she decides between possible rendering options, looking for the best specifically appropriate renderings for this context. This is not manipulation for doctrinal reasons. It is reading the text with literary sensitivity.”

Prof. Ben Witherington, longtime faculty member at Asbury Theological Seminary and the author of more than 40 books, explains further that what the Greek word “morphe [form] means is the outward manifestation of the actual nature of something. It doesn’t refer to the mere appearance of something. This is why diverse translations, not just conservative ones have rendered the verse in question ‘being in very nature God, he did not consider the having of equality with God something to be taken advantage of”. In other words, here as elsewhere Paul is perfectly happy to include Jesus within the definition of deity. Indeed this very passage refers to how he pre-existed and took on human form.”...

Is the Trinity in the Bible?

There is yet a bigger problem for Newsweek, namely, the Trinity, which is branded “a fundamental, yet deeply confusing, tenet.” (To say that God is three in one certainly is confusing to many, but that doesn’t mean it is not true. I prefer to think of God’s complex unity as profoundly mysterious rather than confusing.)

Newsweek then asks: “So where does the clear declaration of God and Jesus as part of a triumvirate appear in the Greek manuscripts?”

The answer? “Nowhere. And in that deception lies a story of mass killings.”

Actually, the doctrine of the Trinity is deduced from the witness of the entire Bible, beginning in the Old Testament where: 1) God appears to individuals (or the nation of Israel) and yet elsewhere is said to be unseen (we believe that the Father is hidden and the Son is seen); 2) where prophecies indicate that the Messiah will be divine; and 3) where the Holy Spirit is spoken of in personal terms (he leads; he instructs; he can be grieved). The New Testament simply unfolds this in greater depth, based on which we believe in God’s tri-unity.

As for a specific statement in the Greek New Testament, Matthew 28:19 is sufficient. There, Jesus instructs his disciples to baptize new believers in “the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” (Remember that Matthew was a Jewish monotheist, writing for fellow-Jewish monotheists, and so this formula is quite striking, speaking of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit on equal terms. Can you imagine immersing people into a new faith in “the name of God and of our denominational founder and of our favorite teacher”? That would be blasphemous.)

Newsweek either misunderstands what Christians believe about the Trinity or else intentionally oversimplifies those beliefs so to create a conflict where it doesn’t

What about the Mass Killings?...

But weren’t there very real theological conflicts in the Church that led to many deaths?...

The problem is that Newsweek’s investigation brings more heat than light. It is more destructive than constructive, it is terribly one-sided, and it is so laced with errors as to render it unusable..
.http://www.newsweek.com/response-newsweek-bible-299440

**As for a specific statement in the Greek New Testament, Matthew 28:19 is sufficient. There, Jesus instructs his disciples to baptize new believers in “the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.”**

The apostles obeyed the Lord’s command in Matthew 28:19, and baptized in the name (singular) “of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”, which is “Jesus”. Every DETAILED baptism (or DETAILED instruction of baptism) in Acts, was done in the name of Jesus: 2:38; 8:12,16; 10:48; and 10:5.

Jesus Christ declared that his name was not his own, but that he came in his Father’s name: “I am come in my Father’s NAME, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his OWN name, him ye will receive”. John 5:43.

The Son of God shows that to be the case here as well: “Father, glorify THY NAME. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” John 12:28

And again: “I have glorified THY NAME unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world..”. John 17:6. (And, by obedience to Christ’s command in Matthew 28:19, what NAME did those men use in baptism?...JESUS!

Joseph was commanded by the angel to call the Son’s name JESUS (Matt. 1:21). The writer of Hebrews says that the Son “hath by INHERITANCE obtained a more excellent name than they” (the angels). Heb. 1:4. (remember John 5:43?)

And the name that sends the Holy Ghost, is JESUS: “..the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in MY NAME..”. John 14:26,

Paul reminded the saints at Rome, “Know ye not, that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” Romans 6:3

When reprimanding the saints at Corinth (that had become proud, bragging about who baptized them, instead of who they were baptized into), Paul said: “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” 1Cor. 1:13

**(Remember that Matthew was a Jewish monotheist, writing for fellow-Jewish monotheists, and so this formula is quite striking, speaking of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit on equal terms.**

(’formula’? now there’s some private interpretations at work)
Oh, it’s striking alright......strikingly unfortunate that trinitarians fail to see the command first initiated in Acts 2:38.

**Can you imagine immersing people into a new faith in “the name of God and of our denominational founder and of our favorite teacher”? That would be blasphemous.)**

(What do you call baptizing in the name of Jesus?)

On the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit was poured out, Peter preached the first post-ascension sermon to the lost. Who were convicted in their hearts, and responded by asking: “Men and brethern, what shall we do?”

Then Peter said unto them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call”. Acts 2:38,39.