Romans 9:5

Originally posted by CalJust
Isn't it ironic that two different groups of Christians attack each other on doctrinal interpretation, whilst at the same time exhibiting the exact behaviour that Jesus (whom both groups accept, if not in the same capacity and role) preached against and made it his New Law: [b]that you love one another!

And with a ringside seat the atheists quite justifiably laugh and mock this behaviour![/b]

I don't want you to be ignorant and think the Jehovah's Witnesses are truly Christians.

http://carm.org/is-the-jehovahs-witness-religion-christian

Originally posted by RJHinds
I don't want you to be ignorant and think the Jehovah's Witnesses are truly Christians.

http://carm.org/is-the-jehovahs-witness-religion-christian

Dear Near Genius,

You don't want me to be ignorant....

OK, gee, thanks!

Originally posted by CalJust
Dear Near Genius,

You don't want me to be ignorant....

OK, gee, thanks!

What RJ means is that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society fails to teach the fundamentals of The Faith necessary for true conversion. In fact they inhibit it.

Originally posted by josephw
What RJ means is that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society fails to teach the fundamentals of The Faith necessary for true conversion. In fact they inhibit it.

What arrogance! 🙁

Originally posted by wolfgang59
What arrogance! 🙁

Arrogant or not, josephw is correct. That was what I meant, and so how is it possible for JWs to be Christians?

Originally posted by wolfgang59
What arrogance! 🙁

Not only is it arrogant, its ultimately ignorant as well. A Christian is one who follows the teachings of Christ, that would negate Joseph and Hinds, for they have no love among themselves (Hinds trained in the army to kill other Christians if necessary), they have no public ministry and instead pay a pastor to preach and teach for them in disobedience of Christs command to go forth to the nations, they do not use nor sanctify Gods name, as directed by Jesus, who made Gods name manifest and they have no understanding of the Bible, intent to peddle the doctrines of men such as the trinity. They are about as far removed from Jesus as you can get, they hate Christians in fact because they show up they're weed like nature. Blind guides is what they are destined to fall into a pit.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Not only is it arrogant, its ultimately ignorant as well. A Christian is one who follows the teachings of Christ, that would negate Joseph and Hinds, for they have no love among themselves (Hinds trained in the army to kill other Christians if necessary), they have no public ministry and instead pay a pastor to preach and teach for them in disobedie ...[text shortened]... ey show up they're weed like nature. Blind guides is what they are destined to fall into a pit.

(Hinds trained in the army to kill other Christians if necessary)

Yes, and over in Debates you were celebrating the Battle of Bannockburn - where Christians were slaughtering Christians.

From an earlier post:

But I can read Greek...

Really, so can I - I just don't know what it means 😉 I'm curious as to how you learnt it?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Not only is it arrogant, its ultimately ignorant as well. A Christian is one who follows the teachings of Christ, that would negate Joseph and Hinds, for they have no love among themselves (Hinds trained in the army to kill other Christians if necessary), they have no public ministry and instead pay a pastor to preach and teach for them in disobedie ...[text shortened]... ey show up they're weed like nature. Blind guides is what they are destined to fall into a pit.

That's pretty funny.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Not only is it arrogant, its ultimately ignorant as well. A Christian is one who follows the teachings of Christ, that would negate Joseph and Hinds, for they have no love among themselves (Hinds trained in the army to kill other Christians if necessary), they have no public ministry and instead pay a pastor to preach and teach for them in disobedie ...[text shortened]... ey show up they're weed like nature. Blind guides is what they are destined to fall into a pit.

I'm still waiting for your proof that what the whole of Christendom teaches about what Romans 9:5 says is wrong.

You said can read Greek. You said we are wrong. Back it up! Or are you just so arrogant that you would rather attack a person and not tackle the matter being discussed?

I don't think you're arrogant, just scared.

Originally posted by josephw
I'm still waiting for your proof that what the whole of Christendom teaches about what Romans 9:5 says is wrong.

You said can read Greek. You said we are wrong. Back it up! Or are you just so arrogant that you would rather attack a person and not tackle the matter being discussed?

I don't think you're arrogant, just scared.

Yeah, he's chicken, REAL Chicken! 😀

Originally posted by josephw
What RJ means is that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society fails to teach the fundamentals of The Faith necessary for true conversion. In fact they inhibit it.

I am fully aware of what the Watchtower teaches - and there are many aspects of their teaching that you would do well to take to heart.

Same with the Mormons - don't discount everybody else just because you don't agree with them.

Originally posted by CalJust
I am fully aware of what the Watchtower teaches - and there are many aspects of their teaching that you would do well to take to heart.

Same with the Mormons - don't discount everybody else just because you don't agree with them.

Being devoid of understanding of their own beliefs, they become emotive when challenged, its a waste of time trying to reason with them, because their faith is not based on reason. It really is that simple.

Originally posted by sonship
Romans 9:5 is a verse many translators say says that Jesus Christ is God.
I looked up many translations of this passage for comparison:

[b]Recovery Version
Whose are the fathers, and out of whom, as regards what is according to flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

Do you think ths particular verse says ...[text shortened]... is the Christ, according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed to the ages. Amen. [/quote][/b]

Romans 9:5
Christ, who is God over all, be praised. (NIV)

1. The student of the Bible should be aware that the original text had no punctuation, and thus in some instances there is more than one way a verse can be translated without violating the grammar of the text. Then how do we arrive at the correct translation and meaning, the one that God, the Author, meant us to believe? In the majority of cases, the context, both immediate and remote, will reveal to us what He is trying to say. The entire Bible fits together in such a way that one part can give us clues to interpret another part. The serious student of the Bible will glean information from the scope of Scripture to assist in the interpretation of any one verse. Romans 9:5 is one of the verses that can be translated different ways, and thus the context and scope of Scripture will help us determine the correct interpretation. Note from the examples below that translators and translating committees vary greatly in their handling of Romans 9:5:

RSV: “to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed forever. Amen.”
Moffatt: “the patriarchs are theirs, and theirs too (so far as natural descent goes) is the Christ. (Blessed for evermore be the God who is over all! Amen.)”
KJV: “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”
NAS: “whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”
NIV: “Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.”

Although the exact wording of the above translations differs, they fall into two basic categories: those that are worded to make Christ into God, and those that make the final phrase into a type of eulogy or doxology referring to God the Father. The RSV and Moffatt are outstanding examples of the latter.

2. In The Doctrine of the Trinity, R. S. Franks, a Trinitarian and the Principal Emeritus of Western College in Bristol, writes,

It should be added that Rom. 9:5 cannot be adduced to prove that Paul ever thought of Christ as God. The state of the case is found in the R.V. margin…He [Paul] never leaves the ground of Jewish monotheism. It has been pointed out that Rom. 9:5 cannot be brought in to question this statement. On the contrary, God is spoken of by the Apostle as not only the Father, but also the God of our Lord Jesus Christ” [1]

3. There is good evidence from both the immediate remote contexts that the last phrase of this verse is a eulogy or doxology to God the Father. “God over all” and “God blessed forever” are both used of God the Father elsewhere in the New Testament (Rom. 1:25; 2 Cor. 11:31; Eph. 1:3; 4:6; 1 Tim. 6:15). In contrast, neither phrase is ever used of Christ. It would be highly unusual to take eulogies that were commonly used of God and, abruptly and without comment or explanation, apply them to Christ.

4. Asking why the words are even in the text gives us a key to understanding them. Paul is writing about the way that God has especially blessed the Jews. The verses immediately before Romans 9:5 point out that God has given them the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, the worship, the promises, the patriarchs and even the human ancestry of Jesus Christ. How blessed they are! No wonder a eulogy to God is inserted: “God, who is over all, be blessed forever! Amen.”

5. The entire context of Romans 9:5 is describing God’s blessings to the Jews, who have a heritage of being aggressively monotheistic. An insert about Christ being God seems most inappropriate. This is especially true when we understand that Paul is writing in a way designed to win the Jews. For example, he calls them “my kindred in the flesh” (v. 3 – NRSV), and says he has sorrow and anguish in his heart for them (v. 2 – NRSV). Would he then put into this section a phrase that he knew would be offensive to the very Jews for whom he is sorrowing and who he is trying to win? Certainly not. On the contrary, after just saying that Christ came from the line of the Patriarchs, something about which the Jews were suspicious, a eulogy to the Father would assure the Jews that there was no idolatry or false elevation of Christ intended, but that he was part of the great blessing of God.

Buzzard, pp. 131 and 132

Farley, pp. 67-69

Morgridge, pp. 111-114

Norton, pp. 203-214

Snedeker, pp. 434-440

Originally posted by CalJust
I am fully aware of what the Watchtower teaches - and there are many aspects of their teaching that you would do well to take to heart.

Same with the Mormons - don't discount everybody else just because you don't agree with them.

Cal - you should vet all the Christians on here before they are allowed
to post and bring a whole religion (religions?) in to disrepute. 😉

Originally posted by checkbaiter
Romans 9:5
Christ, who is God over all, be praised. (NIV)

1. The student of the Bible should be aware that the original text had no punctuation, and thus in some instances there is more than one way a verse can be translated without violating the grammar of the text. Then how do we arrive at the correct translation and meaning, the one that God, the ...[text shortened]... 2

Farley, pp. 67-69

Morgridge, pp. 111-114

Norton, pp. 203-214

Snedeker, pp. 434-440

In a previous post I pointed out that Archibald Thomas Robertson, a famous New Testament Greek scholar who wrote "Word Pictures in the New Testament", wrote the following concerning Romans 9:5 ... "Who is over all, God blessed for ever (ho on epi panton theos eulogetos):

A clear statement of the deity of Christ following the remark about his humanity.

Then he points to Titus 2:13 for Paul's use of Theos applied to Jesus Christ.

looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus,

(Titus 2:13 NASB)

A.T. Robertson was a Baptist Trinitarian, so when he is speaking of the deity of Christ, he is referring to him as the Son of God, not as God the Father. Trinitarians realize that there is only one true God. However, the trinitarian doctrine was developed over time to account for the fact that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are distinguished as individual persons, yet are each spoken of as if each is the supreme deity, God. So the idea of God in three persons came about and was adopted by the Christian Church as the only way to resolve the apparent paradox.

The apostle Paul also wrote the following:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. He is also head of the body, the church; and He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.

(Colossians 1:15-18 NASB)

This agrees with Jesus as the Creator in John 1 and in Hebrews. The Jehovah's Witnesses try to explain this by making Jesus the first created angel. I guess this idea is partly because God appeared to Moses as the Angel of the LORD. However, that explanation is not very satisfying to us Christians.