Land and Bible

To hear the podcast click here . There are two places in Scripture, both in the book of John, to which people go to claim that Jesus raised himself from the dead. The claim is that if Jesus could raise himself from the dead, he must be God. Or, because Jesus is God, he could raise himself from the dead. There are big problems with the interpretation that Jesus raised himself from the dead. I’ll break the problems into two categories: 1. Biblical interpretation methodology (hermeneutics). The biggest problem from the perspective of biblical interpretation methodology is that the claim that Jesus raised himself from the dead contradicts a multitude of other Scriptures. The claim breaks one of the main rules of good biblical interpretation: “Interpret a less clear passage from the clear passage(s)”. 2. Theological problems – besides directly contradicting a multitude of other Scriptures, the claim that Jesus raised himself from the dead does not theologically align with

Below are summary notes for Part 2 of our study of chapter 1 of the Book of Hebrews. In the first episode we examined Hebrews 1:1-7 . In this episode we examine Hebrews 1:8-14. To hear the podcast, click here , or find One God Report on your podcast platform. We note that the word “saying”, or “he says” which appears in English translations in Hebrews 1:8 is not in the Greek text.  The Greek is only "of the Son".  The speaker of the words quoted from Psalm 45 is not God, but the Psalmist. Adding “he says” or “saying” to Hebrews 1:8 makes it sound, incorrectly, that God is calling the Son, “God”. But the speaker at this point is not God. The speaker is the Psalmist who shows honor to the Israelite/Judean king. Hebrews 1:8-9 is a quote from Psalm 45, which is a marriage hymn addressed to a king descended from David (perhaps Solomon, or Hezekiah?). The Davidic king has a God who has blessed him (45:2) and anointed him (45:7). The Davidic king is lauded for his str

I listened to a recent discussion between Carlos Xavier and Dale Tuggy on the Socinian view of John 1:1-14. I enjoyed the discussion, learned some things, agreed with some things, but thought the analysis’ “mild” rejection of the Socinian view was lacking in a number of ways. Since I’ve somewhat recently written and podcasted on John’s Prologue, and have a couple more sessions God willing forth-coming, I thought to note a few comments: 1.        Dale and Carlos too easily dismissed or ignored the use of “the beginning” in other places in John, in the Johannine epistles, and in the Book of Revelation in which “the beginning” is associated with the person and ministry of Jesus, (in John’s Gospel and Epistles, “the beginning” never relates to the Genesis creation. In Revelation 3:14, Jesus is “the beginning of God's creation”). They also ignored the parallel “beginning” of the other Gospels (or in Matthew’s case, the genesis of Jesus), and the use of “the beginning” and “in th

To hear the full podcast episode for these notes, click here . In this two-part series, the One God Report podcast examines Hebrews chapter 1, a chapter which many Christians maintain presents the “deity of Christ”. In episode 1, we examine Hebrews 1:1-7. In episode 2, we examine Hebrews 1:8-14 . 1.       The overall point that the author is making in Hebrews chapter 1 is not that Jesus is God, but rather that God has appointed the human being Jesus, as the representative of humanity, to be God’s vice-regent ruler, to “sit at God’s right hand.” This privilege was not granted to an angel or angels. This theme, that God has granted a human being to be at His right hand, fits the overall theme of the book of Hebrews that Messiah, Jesus, is greater than Moses, is a better high priest than Aaron, gives a better rest than Joshua, brings into effect and mediates a better covenant with a better sacrifice compared to what Israel experienced through the earlier covenant.   If the au