Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Colofornian
If your assumption of which scripture he cited is correct and your assumption of what it means is also correct, then why would Jesus use that scripture to defend Himself? If it refers to “unjust gods”, then Jesus would be calling himself and unjust god. That makes no sense. I think your explanation is wrong.
179 posted on 08/17/2008 5:57:24 PM PDT by DanielLongo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies ]


To: DanielLongo
If your assumption of which scripture he cited is correct...

Why do you assume it's only my assumption that John 10 is a direct citation to the unjust judges of Psalm 82? Would you believe it if I told you that these same linkages are already conceded by the Deseret Book Co -- the official publishing arm of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

There is absolutely no doubt among all camps that Jesus in John 10 is directly referencing Psalm 82:
Common sense tells you that (I mean what is Jesus referencing to these Jewish leaders if not Ps. 82?)
Historic Christianity and contemporary Christianity links the two passages.
And so does Deseret Book Co: The Deseret Book Co. published over 30 years ago "A Topical Guide to the Scriptures of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." In its index under "Eternal Progression: Man, Potential to Become Like Heavenly Father" in the "M" section under "Man," it specifically lists BOTH John 10:34 AND Ps. 82:6...The only other verses in the OT cited by the LDS church in this section are Ps. 8:5-6, Gen 1:26, and Gen. 3:22 -- none of which uses the specific word of "gods".

...and your assumption of what it means is also correct, then why would Jesus use that scripture to defend Himself?

He is appealing to their already established sense of justice based upon their law. He is saying: "Listen, your forefathers didn't even consider these unjust mortal 'god-judges' as 'stone-able,' did they? That being the case, if those unjust human gods were not subject to stones, why would you deem me -- a divine-human (Just) Judge who does the works of God -- as subject to stoning for blasphemy?"

(It's that simple)

If it refers to “unjust gods”, then Jesus would be calling himself and unjust god. That makes no sense. I think your explanation is wrong.

No.

(1) He is referencing the mortality of these judges (see Ps. 82:7 which talks about their deaths to come). Jesus was likewise fully man, and allowed Himself to die -- also because of unjust man...the difference was that the judges in Ps. 82 died because of their own sin...whereas Jesus died because of the sin of other men. So, tell me, what's wrong with Jesus saying that he was fully man who died because of sin -- albeit men's sin not his own?

(2) Likewise, He was recognizing that the judges referenced by God were infused with divine authority. What's wrong with Jesus also claiming that He was infused with divine authority (see Matthew 28:18)?

(3) Finally, LDS continuously fail to distinguish between the Biblical distinction between God-by-nature and gods-who-are-no-gods-by-nature. Perhaps the best verse for this is Gal. 4:8: "Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods." (Gal. 4:8) This is the major distinction of Jesus to the judges He referenced.

183 posted on 08/17/2008 6:45:45 PM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson