Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Spotify | Email | RSS
In this episode, the final portion of my debate with apologist Anthony Rogers.
Topics include what I call “the fulfillment fallacy,” the meanings of “Lord” in the New Testament, what Rogers means by saying that “Jesus is God,” whether or not Mark portrays Jesus as having been given authority by God, whether or not Mark portrays Jesus as not knowing certain truths, and just what the clear main thesis of Mark is.
The episode starts with our cross-examinations of one another, followed by some open discussion, closing statements, and Q&A time. (I have edited out a question or two which overall did not add to the discussion.)
Which side made the stronger case, and why?
Next week I’ll share some thoughts on the debate.
Links for this episode:
Source video, Marlon Wilson’s The Gospel Truth YouTube channel
How Anthony Rogers interprets Scripture as self-contradictory
podcast 225 – Biblical Words for God and for his Son Part 2 – Old “Lord” vs. New “Lord”
the apologetics blind-spot on numerical identity
“Identifying Jesus as Yahweh” as heresy
podcast 124 – a challenge to “Jesus is God” apologists
podcast 271 – Does your Trinity theory require relative identity?
This week’s thinking music is “Sub Aqueonic” by Little Glass Men.
Regarding Anthony’s argument concerning Mark 2:5-8 and 1 Kings 8:39
And Jesus, seeing their trust, says to the paralyzed man, “Child, your sins are forgiven.”
But there were some of the experts in the law sitting there and reasoning in their hearts,
“Why does this man speak this way? He speaks defaming words. Who is able to forgive sins but God alone?”
“And immediately Jesus, perceiving in his spirit that they were reasoning that way within themselves, says to them, “Why are you reasoning about these things in your hearts?
Anthony says these verse mean Jesus is God and he points to 1 Kings 8:39 which reads:
“then hear in heaven your dwelling place,
and forgive, and do, and render to every man
according to all his ways whose heart you know
(for you, even you only, know the hearts of all the children of men),” 1 Kings 8:39 REV Bible
To compare Mark 2:5-8 to this OT verse that says YHWH alone reads the hearts of all the children of men and conclude Jesus is therefore God, is a false equivalence and absurd.
Jesus obviously saw those “experts in the law” and he heard them “reasoning among themselves.”
Even the casual Christian reading this passage can perceive their intentions from the context.
Let’s examine what Paul says about believers knowing the hearts of man.
“For who among people knows the thoughts of a person except the spirit of the person that is in him? So also the thoughts of God no one knows, except the Spirit of God. Now we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God. We also speak these things, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. But the one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is discerned by no one. For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ. 1 Corinthians 2:11-16
Perceiving evil intentions in the hearts of men is a God given gift of the spirit. God gave Jesus the spirit of God without limit. John 3:34 Therefore, Anthony Roger’s should not be surprise that Jesus perceived in his spirit that they were reasoning in the hearts.
To conclude Jesus is God from a reading of Mark 2 and 1 Kings 8.
God empowered Jesus to forgive sins and reading evil intentions is something all of us do.
The teaching of the bible is that when God creates a moral being he must constantly judge it or he would cease to be God.
The idea that God outsources forgiveness is anti-biblical.
James Crossly wrote: It remains unclear, does it not? Taking on divine ‘attributes does not necessarily equal being equal with God in the strongest possible sense. There are (as is sometimes noted) rabbinic stories about figures who act similar to Jesus in the Gospel stories (e.g. Pesiq. R. 36.1; Pirqe R. El. 10; b. BM 59b). From b. BM 59b we might also note the naughty R. Eliezer who has mastery over the elements without appeal to God.
It had been taught: On that day R. Eliezer brought forward all the arguments in the world, but they did not accept them. Said he to them:‘If the halakah agrees with me, let this carob-tree prove it!’ Thereupon the carob-tree was torn a hundred cubits out of place – others affirm, four hundred cubits. ‘No proof can be brought from a carob-tree,’ they retorted. Again he said to them: ‘If the halakah agrees with me, let the stream of water prove it!’ Whereupon the stream of water flowed backwards. ‘No proof can be brought from a stream of water,’ they rejoined.
Another rabbinic story worth mentioning in relation to walking on water is Gen. R. 2.4 (on Gen. 1.2) where the spirit of the Messiah hovers just above the water. I know what you are thinking, Alan: aren’t such stories late, much later in certain cases? Of course! But, even after ‘Christianity’ (or whatever you want to call it) had emerged, such miraculous stories could continue without problem. And there are, of course, earlier stories. Philo’s description of Moses, who is called ‘god and king of the whole nation’, included some mastery over creation:
For, since God judged him worthy to appear as a partner of His own possessions, He gave into his hands the whole world as a portion well fitted for His heir. Therefore, each element obeyed him as its master, changed its natural properties and submitted to his command… (Vit Mos 1.155-156)
http://historicaljesusresearch.blogspot.com/2016/02/dear-james-alan-from-norwich-writes.html
interesting perspective , paul.
Correction to the last line in my above comment:
Anthony Roger’s doesn’t seem to care if “he” creates conflicts and contradictions between the different authors.
Atheists enjoy doing the same thing but for a different purpose.
Anthony Roger’s sets up Mark’s Gospel to conflict with Jesus statements according to John’s Gospel.
Jesus said he has a God and he calls Him Father. John 20:17
Jesus said his Father is the only true God. John 17:3
Jesus said his Father is greater than all. John 10:29
Jesus said his Father is greater than I. John 14:28
Jesus said he can do nothing on his own. John 5:30
Jesus said he speaks his Father’s words. John 7:15; John 14:10;
John 14:24; John 12:49-50; John 17:14
Jesus said his teaching is from his Father. John 7:15; John 12:49-50
Jesus said his Father told him what to speak. John 12:49-50
Jesus said the Father living in him does his works. John 14:10
To assume Jesus is God because Jesus did OT miracles that God did without working through humans in the OT is also false because God worked through Moses to part the Red Sea and feed the Israelites in the desert. God did many miracles through Moses.
Peter says God did many signs and wonders (miracles) THROUGH Jesus. Acts 2:22
Peter says God made Jesus both Lord and Messiah. Acts 2:36
(Messiah means savior Luke 2:11)
Anthony Roger’s doesn’t seem to care if you creates conflicts and contradictions between the different authors.
Atheists enjoy doing the same thing but for a different purpose.
Comments are closed.