“Does Jesus claim to be God (Co Equal with the Father) in the Gospels?”

The subject of this post is the resolution of a debate that was scheduled for Sunday, September 28, 2025, with "DeenResponds."  (it was held then as well, as can be seen at this link)  This post was drafted before the debate, so there may have been some last minute changes, revisions, rewordings, etc. that do not precisely match what was said in the debate.

The question is not whether Christians believe that Jesus Christ is God.  Everyone knows that we do.

The question is not whether Christians have always believed that Jesus Christ is God. Nor is the question whether there have ever been people who called themselves Christians but who denied this important truth. 

The question is not whether Jesus himself claims to be God.  We see him say this in the first chapter of Revelation.

The question is not whether Jesus' apostles believed that Jesus was God.  We see that testimony from the apostle Peter, from the apostle John, and from the apostle Paul.

The question is narrowly focused on the Gospels, and I am - of course - limiting myself to the four canonical gospels, which were given by inspiration of God to his people.

John's Gospel explains the reason that the Gospel was written:

John 20:30-31 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Moreover, the very beginning of John's Gospel begins with an affirmation that Jesus is God:

John 1:1-2 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.

The question that I've been asked to defend is even more narrow than just whether the Gospels claim that Jesus is God.

The question is whether in the Gospels, Jesus himself claims to be God.  And, of course, he does.  The phrasing of the question suggests specific reference to one account that is recorded in John's gospel: 

John 5:10-24 

The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry [thy] bed. He answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk. Then asked they him, What man is that which said unto thee, Take up thy bed, and walk? And he that was healed wist not who it was: for Jesus had conveyed himself away, a multitude being in [that] place. Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee. The man departed, and told the Jews that it was Jesus, which had made him whole. And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus, and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day. But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God. Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth [them]; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: That all [men] should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

The key element to this passage relevant to this debate is the phrase that Jesus "said ... that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." 

This is the first time that Jesus does this in John's Gospel, although it is not the last time.  Indeed, it is a frequent claim by Jesus.

[Five minute mark]

The Gospel According to Matthew

1. [Mat 7:21 KJV] 21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
2. [Mat 10:32-33 KJV] 32 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. 33 But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
3. [Mat 11:27 KJV] 27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him].
4. [Mat 12:50 KJV] 50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.
5. [Mat 16:17 KJV] 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
6. [Mat 18:10, 19 KJV] 10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. ... 19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
7. [Mat 20:23 KJV] 23 And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but [it shall be given to them] for whom it is prepared of my Father.
8. [Mat 24:36 KJV] 36 But of that day and hour knoweth no [man], no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.
9. [Mat 25:34 KJV] 34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
10. [Mat 26:39, 42, 53 KJV] 39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou [wilt]. ... 42 He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done. ... 53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

The Gospel According to Luke

1. [Luk 10:22 KJV] 22 All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and [he] to whom the Son will reveal [him].
2. [Luk 22:29 KJV] 29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
3. [Luk 24:49 KJV] 49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

The Gospel According to John

1. [Jhn 6:32, 65 KJV] 32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven. ... 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
2. [Jhn 8:19, 28, 38, 49, 54 KJV] 19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also. ... 28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am [he], and [that] I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. ... 38 I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. ... 49 Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me. ... 54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
3. [Jhn 10:17-18, 29-30, 32, 37 KJV] 17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. ... 29 My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand. 30 I and [my] Father are one. ... 32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me? ... 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
4. [Jhn 12:26 KJV] 26 If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will [my] Father honour.
5. [Jhn 14:7, 12, 20-21, 23, 28 KJV] 7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him. ... 12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater [works] than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. ... 20 At that day ye shall know that I [am] in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. ... 23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. ... 28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
6. [Jhn 15:1, 8, 15, 23-24 KJV] 1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. ... 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. ... 15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. ... 23 He that hateth me hateth my Father also. 24 If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin: but now have they both seen and hated both me and my Father.
7. [Jhn 16:10 KJV] 10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
8. [Jhn 18:11 KJV] 11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?
9. [Jhn 20:17, 21 KJV] 17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God. ... 21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace [be] unto you: as [my] Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

There are also three more such references in Revelation: while the question was limited to the gospels, Jesus' words are not limited to the gospels:

1. [Rev 2:27 KJV] 27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
2. [Rev 3:5, 21 KJV] 5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels. ... 21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

The keen observer will note that in the preceding discussion, I did not include the Gospel According to Mark, because the exact phrase "my father" is not used in that gospel.  However, Jesus prays to God as "Father" in Mark 14:36 and refers to God as "Father" and himself as "Son" in Mark 13:22, and similarly in Mark 8:38.  I have not included such similar usage in the other gospels, in order to avoid multiplying the already overwhelming evidence.

In fact, the debate could be stopped right here.  We have established that Jesus called God his Father, making himself equal with God.

None of this denies that there is an economic subordination of the Son to the Father.

John 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come [again] unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

John 10:29 My Father, which gave [them] me, is greater than all; and no [man] is able to pluck [them] out of my Father's hand.

John 20:17 Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and [to] my God, and your God.

However, this debate is not about reconciling such economic subordination with Jesus' divinity.  Christian systematic theology tackles this question in fascinating ways, but how to reconcile them is not the question before us.

(about another 5 with a lot of glossing over)

Moreover, this is not the only way that Jesus identified himself as God in the Gospels.

John 8:33-59 

They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: [but] the Son abideth ever. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you. I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, [even] God. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell [you] the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear [them] not, because ye are not of God. Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me. And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth. Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death. Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death. Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad. Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Notice the similarity of the reaction of the people in this account.  When they say that Jesus has a devil, they are saying he is crazy.  The key observation is Jesus saying: "Before Abraham was, I am," and the key reaction to that is to try to stone him.  The reason is that Jesus is calling himself God, I am is one of the titles of God and the un-declined way that he's using it here indicates he intends the double meaning.  The reason is that Jesus is referring to a very special name of God, the tetragrammaton, which has the meaning, "The Being One."

[Another 5 or so minutes on this]

I've focused on the Gospel of John because Jesus being the Son of God is a central theme of that gospel.  On the other hand, I barely mentioned Mark's Gospel.  One of Jesus' parables in Mark, however, demonstrates the fact that Jesus is more than just a Servant of God:

Mark 12:1-12 

And he began to speak unto them by parables. A [certain] man planted a vineyard, and set an hedge about [it], and digged [a place for] the winefat, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country. And at the season he sent to the husbandmen a servant, that he might receive from the husbandmen of the fruit of the vineyard. And they caught [him], and beat him, and sent [him] away empty. And again he sent unto them another servant; and at him they cast stones, and wounded [him] in the head, and sent [him] away shamefully handled. And again he sent another; and him they killed, and many others; beating some, and killing some. Having yet therefore one son, his wellbeloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying, They will reverence my son. But those husbandmen said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours. And they took him, and killed [him], and cast [him] out of the vineyard. What shall therefore the lord of the vineyard do? he will come and destroy the husbandmen, and will give the vineyard unto others. And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner: This was the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? And they sought to lay hold on him, but feared the people: for they knew that he had spoken the parable against them: and they left him, and went their way.

Notice how Jesus identifies himself uniquely as the Son and how the Jews sought to kill him, not because they didn't understand, but because they did understand.

What are some of the other ways that Jesus announced his divinity?

Saying that he came down from heaven:

John 3:10-17 

Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you [of] heavenly things? And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven. And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

John 6:38&42 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. ... And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Saying that he was with the Father before the world existed:

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

Affirming that he was the Christ, the Son of God

Matthew 26:63-64 

But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

Matthew 16:16-17 

And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

This may seem surprising that the title, "Christ," or "Messiah," which means "anointed" should have a link with divinity.  The reason is from passages like:

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Or:

Psalm 110:1 [[A Psalm of David.]] The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Jesus himself posed this question:

Luke 20:41-44 

And he said unto them, How say they that Christ is David's son? And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool. David therefore calleth him Lord, how is he then his son?

Similarly, Isaiah 40:3

Isaiah 40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

John's Gospel records that John the Baptist called himself the voice crying in the wilderness, and pointed people to Jesus.  

Matthew 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Revelation 16:5 Debate - Opening Argument

The following is my planned opening argument in the Revelation 16:5 debate:

The angel of the waters said (and John heard), “hosios” (or perhaps hesed) and John wrote by inspiration of the Holy Spirit and command of Jesus Christ, “hosios.” Therefore, Beza was wrong to replace “hosios” with “esomenos,” and the King James translators ought not to have followed Beza’s reading.

Today’s debate is significant because of Revelation’s warning against adding to or diminishing from God’s word.  Today’s debate is also significant because this is one of the places where the evidence is overwhelmingly against the King James text.  In fact, unlike most textual variants, we can pinpoint the particular document that introduced this textual variant into the textual tradition: a manual markup by Theodore Beza of his own previous printed edition.  The external and internal evidence could hardly be any stronger than they are in this example.

The External Evidence

The overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts (including the four earliest manuscripts) have hosios.  The few that do not have hosios do not substitute esomenos for hosios.  

The same is true of the translations of the Bible before the age of printing: Syriac, Armenian, Georgian, Ethiopic, Multiple Old Latin translations, Jerome’s Vulgate, and Old Church Slavonic have an equivalent of hosios. There are two branches of Coptic, one of which has the equivalent of hosios, and one which does not. Likewise, Arabic appears to have the equivalent of hosios.  On the other hand, one Middle English version does not have the equivalent of hosios, but it also does not replace it with the equivalent of esomenos.

The same is true of the commentaries on the text.  The commentaries, whether in Greek or in any other language, either reflect the presence of the word hosios or, if they do not, do not reflect esomenos as a substitute for hosios. Aside from commentaries, there are no patristic quotations of the text of Revelation 16:5 (that I could find).  

In 1505, Erasmus published Lorenzo Valla’s comments on Revelation 16:5.  As published by Erasmus in 1505, Valla seems to be suggesting that his Greek manuscript of Revelation had hagios not hosios.  As there is no such manuscript tradition, my suspicion is that Valla (or Erasmus) had notes in Latin and back translated from sanctus to the more common Greek word hagios.

That’s not to suggest that there is no textual difficulty with hosios in Revelation 16:5.  There are a cluster of variant readings (all including hosios), presumably because using the adjective hosios with an article is not standard Greek.  This bothered Beza, who called attention to this issue when arguing for his substitution of esomenos for hosios.  This, of course, leads us to the question of the internal evidence.

The Internal Evidence

Revelation 13 had introduced to us that the Beast demanded everyone’s worship and killed those who didn’t worship him.  Revelation 14 warned of the coming judgment for the beast worshippers. Revelation 15 introduces seven angels with seven bowls full of the wrath of God. Revelation 16 then provides discussion of these seven angels pouring out these bowls of God’s wrath.  

Revelation 15:2-4 

And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, [and] over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous [are] thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true [are] thy ways, thou King of [ages]. Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for [thou] only [art] holy: for all nations shall come and worship before thee; for thy judgments are made manifest.

The word translated “holy” in “thou only art holy” is the word hosios.  It is the only other time that John uses the word hosios, and the word is only used a few other times in the New Testament:

[Act 2:27 KJV] 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One[G3741] to see corruption.

[Act 13:34-35 KJV] 34 And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, [now] no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies[G3741] of David. 35 Wherefore he saith also in another [psalm], Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One[G3741] to see corruption.

[1Ti 2:8 KJV] 8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy[G3741] hands, without wrath and doubting.

[Tit 1:8 KJV] 8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy,[G3741] temperate;

[Heb 7:26 KJV] 26 For such an high priest became us, [who is] holy,[G3741] harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;

It may not be immediately obvious, but hosios carries the sense of “keeping the covenant” (i.e. the same meaning as Hebrew hesed) or otherwise being “religiously correct.” That’s why the word is translated as “holy one” in Acts 2:27 and 13:35 but as “sure mercies” in Acts 13:34, both of which are quoting from the Old Testament where the Hebrew word is hesed or hasid (Psalm 16:10 “Holy One” (ḥāsîḏ) and Isaiah 55:3 “mercies” (ḥeseḏ)).  Paul and the author of Hebrews, not quoting from the Old Testament, use the word in its more general sense of religious correctness.

In context, in Revelation 15, the word hosios is connected with God’s covenant-keeping duty of bringing judgment on those who hurt his covenant people: as it is written, Vengeance is Mine, saith the Lord, I will repay.  Thus, it does not carry its more general sense of religious correctness (as in the epistles), but rather to the covenantal relationship between God and His people.

In Revelation 16, the angels pour out their bowls of wrath.  The third angel is described this way:

Revelation 16:4-7 

And the third angel poured out his vial upon the rivers and fountains of waters; and they became blood. 5 And I heard the angel of the waters say, Thou art righteous, [[O Lord,]] which art, and wast, [[and shalt be O Holy One!]], because thou hast judged thus. For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy. And I heard another out of the altar say, Even so, Lord God Almighty, true and righteous [are] thy judgments.

The voice from the altar seems to allude to the martyrs mentioned with reference the fifth seal back in Revelation 6:9-11, where the martyrs “cried with a loud voice” for God’s vengeance and were located “under the altar.” 

[Rev 6:9-11 KJV] 9 And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? 11 And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they [were], should be fulfilled.

The parallel between “true and righteous [are] thy judgments” in Revelation 16 and “just and true [are] thy ways” in the song in Chapter 15 should immediately apparent. Others have noted additional parallels.  With that in mind, hosios in Revelation 16:5, while an usual word in itself, is the correct word to make the connection back to Revelation 15.

In addition, referring to God as the one who is Hosios here makes sense because this is the fulfillment of God’s promise of judgment on those who hurt His people.

There is an additional parallel problem to be addressed.  The phrase preceding hosios is found similarly in four other passages: Revelation 1:4, 1:8, and 11:17 have the phrase, “ho on kai ho en,” and Revelation 4:8 has the phrase “ho en kai ho on.”  God as the “Being One” and “He who has been” are divine titles that, like ego eime (I AM) are connected to the tetragrammaton YHWH.  

In itself this, of course, would seem to be basically irrelevant to the wording here. What makes it more relevant is that Beza believed that in all four of those previous instances, the phrase had been followed by “ho erchomenos” (the Coming One).  It has been tempting to commentators to link the present participle and imperfect indicative of the verb “to be” together with “the coming one” to form a “past, present, future” set.  Moreover, the tetragrammaton has been taken by many as having, including, or at least being based on a future sense, “I shall be,” making some kind of reference to the future seem fitting.    

However, Beza was wrong to believe that all four previous instances were followed by the expression, “the coming one.”  Although a minority of manuscripts do have “the coming one” in Revelation 11:17, the majority of manuscripts (quite properly) do not have that title there.  The reason it is is proper not to have it there is that by Revelation 11, God has already come in judgment.  For the same reason, of course, such a title is not appropriate in the mouth of the angel in Revelation 16, because judgment has already begun to have been meted out.  

Beza recognized the impropriety of including ho erchomenos here, but still felt that it was not right to leave “the being one” and “He who has been” without a third partner, and so he substituted esomenos for hosios.  Beza’s annotations say that this is a reading that was “restored from an old reliable manuscript.”

Is it possible that such a manuscript once existed or even still exists somewhere? Many things are possible.  What is startling, however, is that no one who has collated manuscripts of Revelation (including Hoskier, who collated almost all the manuscripts that were known before World War II) has ever seen such a manuscript. On top of that, Beza is not known to have have personally possessed any Greek manuscripts of Revelation.  

Henry Stephanus collated manuscripts in that time, and seems to have provided collation notes to Theodore Beza.  However, while Stephanus’ published apparatus notes one textual variant at Revelation 16:5, this variant is not identified.  It is believed that Stephanus had additional textual variants noted in his unpublished collation notes, but that document itself seems to have been lost.

Ultimately, while it makes for an interesting historical question (whether Beza’s annotations mischaracterize the manuscript record), it’s essentially a moot point.  Even if such a manuscript existed, we would not find such a manuscript a persuasive reason to overturn all the rest of the manuscript and version tradition, nor would we find such a reading persuasive on internal grounds.

After all, the conjugation esomenos never appears in the New Testament. Septuagint Job seems to use the word once, but not as title of God.  The use of esomenos as potentially a divine title seems to have its origins in Christian adoption of Greek philosophy, particularly (in this instance) Plato’s Timaeus. Aldo Manuzio printed Plato’s collected works, first in 1513, even before Erasmus’ first edition of the Greek New Testament in 1516. We know that Beza read Plato.  Jeffrey Mallinson states: “Despite these negative sentiments, there are other instances in which Beza speaks positively of Plato.  This practice follows a Renaissance trend to harmonize Plato and Aristotle.  An important example of this harmonization is found in Jean de Serres’ … three-volume edition of the works of Plato, which contains translation and accompanying explanation of the text. … A Latin poem lauding Plato and de Serres, composed by Beza, is affixed to the first volume. Also, at de Serres’ request, Beza passed on a copy of the Platonis opera to Peter Young, tutor to Scotland’s James VI, and sent the work with a letter of recommendation.” Faith, Reason, and Revelation, Chapter 2 “Beza’s Academic Challenge” (p. 61)

I have argued for the propriety of the word "hosios" in Revelation 16:5, contending it was wrongly replaced with "esomenos" by Theodore Beza and subsequently adopted by the King James translators. The evidence presented includes the overwhelming support for "hosios" in early Greek manuscripts, ancient translations, and commentaries, contrasted with Beza's singular alteration. Internally, "hosios" connects to its usage in Revelation 15 and other New Testament verses, emphasizing God's covenant-keeping and just judgment, aligning with the context of wrath being poured out in Revelation 16. Beza's substitution is traced to a potentially non-existent manuscript and his philosophical leanings, which are deemed less credible than the weight of existing textual evidence.

Debate Proposal for Debate with Will Kinney

Here's an outline of debate proposal for a hoped-for debate with Will Kinney regarding whether (and on what basis) the King James Version (Pure Cambridge Edition, 1900) and Scrivener's Textus Receptus (1881/94) can be improved.

I. Names

One of the more difficult questions in translation is how to translate names.  When it comes to the names of people, should the names be they transliterated as closely as possible?  Should the Bible reflect a post-Biblical human tradition in preference to a more accurate transliteration?  The name "James" itself is not a close transliteration of the New Testament name ("Ἰάκωβος" Yakobos) but Archbishop Bancroft demanded that the names be kept in their traditional form, and for the most part the King James translators complied.  Even then, though, they were sometimes oddly inconsistent, such as the case of Simeon/Simon, Balac/Balak and Timothy/Timotheus.  When it comes to the names of animals, the King James translators did their best, but sometimes they got things wildly wrong: unicorns and satyrs are two fairly clear examples.  The name of the Passover is an interesting third example of naming issue in the KJV.  

In some of these cases, the KJV is clearly wrong and needs improvement.  In other cases, maybe it is merely a matter of translation preference.  However, if it is merely a matter of preference, can we agree that preferences can change and it is ok to change the KJV according to our preferences? 

A. Names of People

1. Acts 15:14 & 2 Peter 1:1 Simeon or Simon?

At Acts 15:14, should the English text be "Simeon" (as the KJV has) or "Simon" (as the KJV translation rules dictate)?  If the former, then in 2 Peter 1:1, should the English text be "Simon" (as the KJV has) or "Simeon" (as the Greek has)?

In both cases, it seems apparent that we are talking about Simon Peter.  While it is true that the Greek sometimes uses one transliteration rather than the other (i.e. the Greek is itself a transliteration of a Hebrew name), why would we not follow the Greek everywhere or follow a single transliteration consistently? Partially following the Greek and partially not doing so seems like an odd and confusing combination.  On this point the KJV can use improvement. 

2. Revelation 2:14 "Balac" or "Balak"  (if the former why not "Balac" in Numbers 22:2?)

Consistency seems appropriate when we are talking about the same person.  The use of a different transliteration for the Hebrew than for the Greek when referring to the same person is (at best) an odd translation decision.  

3. Timotheus (19x) or Timothy (9x) but never Timotheos (more accurate than Timotheus)

Again, consistency seems like the best policy. The same Greek word is used, but in some places the more English "Timothy" is used, in other places the more Latin "Timotheus" is used, but never is the more Greek "Timotheos" used.  Why not pick one and stick with it? 

B. Names of Animals

1. Isaiah 34:7 "Unicorns" should be "Reems" or "Aurochs" or "Wild Oxen" (discussed more fully here)

I've already discussed this at great length, but there cannot be serious doubt that the King James translators meant the animal on King James' royal coat of arms, and that the animal they had in mind has never existed. Instead, the word "reem" refers to the Aurochs, a species of wild bull that was hunted to extinction in the middle east, and finally died out in the 1600s in Poland.

2. Isaiah 34:14 "Satyr" should be "wild goat" (discussed more fully here)

The King James translators wrongly followed Jewish superstition on this point, against the weight of the linguistic and historic evidence.

C. Name of Passover (debated at greater length here)

Acts 12:4 refers to Passover as "Easter" - it would be better especially in 1900 and beyond to call it "Passover," because no one refers to Passover as "Easter" any more, even though everyone did when Tyndale translated Acts. 

II. Differences between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus in Revelation 

While the KJV/TR/NA28 usually align with the majority reading of Greek texts, in some cases they depart from them.  The book of Revelation provides an unusually high number of examples of places where the KJV departs from the majority of Greek manuscripts.  How do we know when to follow the majority of Greek texts and when not to do so?  Treating the King James as the standard is inadequate at best and leads us into error in some cases.

A. Where the TR agrees with the NA28 against the Majority

Revelation 15:4 Agios (αγιος) or Osios (οσιος) 

The Majority of Greek Manuscripts have Agios rather than Osios at Revelation 15:4.  Both mean "Holy."  Which is correct? (or is it something else?) Should Agios at least be referenced in a marginal note?

B. Where the TR disagrees with the NA28 and the Majority  

Revelation 16:5 "Lord" should not be added (the vast majority of manuscripts do not have it) and "and shalt be" should not be substituted for "O Holy One" (none of the Greek manuscripts, fathers, or versions have this substitution)(see also this specific post regarding Will's position)

Debate Against Icons

Images for Religious Veneration are a Grave Evil

First, they distract from the true image of God.  Human beings are said to be in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27 and 9:6), the husband in a special way (1 Corinthians 11:7), and Christ in the most special way is the Image of God (2 Corinthians 4:4 and Colossians 1:15).  Notice, though that Paul, in Colossians, says that Christ is the image of the invisible God.  Invisibility is one of God’s attributes.

Thus, Hebrews 11:27 describes Moses as enduring, “as seeing him who is invisible,” and Paul in 1 Timothy 1:17 praises God as “the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God.”

The non-portrayal of God, including the non-portrayal of Christ is anticipated by the New Testament.  Thus, the apostle Peter writes (1 Peter 1:7-8): “That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:”

Jesus likewise anticipated that people would not see him: John 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. Moreover, it is the very next two verse that explain that we are to believe by the word, not the picture (John 20:30-31): “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”

John continues the same thing in his first epistle:

1 John 4:12 No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

And again: 

1 John 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Maybe someone will think that although it is not a picture of God, it is still a picture of Christ’s body.  But again, the true image of Christ’s body is two-fold: 

First, the people of God (the church) is the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:12, 1 Corinthians 12:12 and 27, Romans 12:5).  Moreover, the sacrament of the Lord’s supper illustrates both us (1 Corinthians 10:16) and (secondly, but primarily) Christ (Matthew 26:26, 1 Corinthians 11:24).

Second, they are an abomination to God.  

When Samuel wanted to call out the sinfulness of Saul’s rebellion, he compared it to witchcraft, and he compared Saul’s stubbornness to idolatry.  

The prohibitions against the making of idols in the Old Testament are numerous:

Leviticus 26:1 Ye shall make you no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down (LXX: προσκυνῆσαι) unto it: for I am the LORD your God.’

Notice that the prohibition was not against art absolutely, but against art for the purpose of religious veneration “to bow down” to the idols or images - this is key.  After all, there were artistic renderings in God’s tabernacle and temple.  

Psalm 97:7  Confounded be all they that serve graven images, that boast themselves of idols: worship him, all ye gods.

You might think that this means idols are prohibited because they represent false gods.  No, even idols of the true God are prohibited:

Deuteronomy 4:15-24

Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air, The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth: And lest thou lift up thine eyes unto heaven, and when thou seest the sun, and the moon, and the stars, even all the host of heaven, shouldest be driven to worship them, and serve them, which the LORD thy God hath divided unto all nations under the whole heaven. But the LORD hath taken you, and brought you forth out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt, to be unto him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day. Furthermore the LORD was angry with me for your sakes, and sware that I should not go over Jordan, and that I should not go in unto that good land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance: But I must die in this land, I must not go over Jordan: but ye shall go over, and possess that good land. Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the LORD your God, which he made with you, and make you a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, which the LORD thy God hath forbidden thee. For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.

Notice that God’s prohibition on images is in the strongest possible terms, and is justified by jealousy.  Why jealousy? Because whenever God is worshiped using images, the glory that is to be given to God is instead given to a lie. 

And it’s not limited to images in the round, notice how Ezekiel describes it:

Ezekiel 8:10 So I went in and saw; and behold every form of creeping things, and abominable beasts, and all the idols of the house of Israel, pourtrayed upon the wall round about.

And the worship doesn’t have to be sacrificing animals, it can be bowing down to them:

Isaiah 2:8-9

Their land also is full of idols; they worship (LXX: προσεκύνησαν) the work of their own hands, that which their own fingers have made: and the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself: therefore forgive them not.

It can be kissing them:

Hosea 13:2 And now they sin more and more, and have made them molten images of their silver, and idols according to their own understanding, all of it the work of the craftsmen: they say of them, Let the men that sacrifice kiss the calves.

Greet one another with a holy kiss, but icons won’t kiss you back.

Indeed, the Old Testament records two times when the people of Israel represented God by the use of golden calves, and in both cases, God’s extreme displeasure was recorded.

Exodus 32:4 And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

1 Kings 12:28 Whereupon the king took counsel, and made two calves of gold, and said unto them, It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem: behold thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.

2 Kings 10:28-29 Thus Jehu destroyed Baal out of Israel. Howbeit from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin, Jehu departed not from after them, to wit, the golden calves that were in Bethel, and that were in Dan.

But some will say, that was the Old Testament.  God was against idols then, but now He approves or even commands their use!

On the contrary, Jesus taught:

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Icons and other idols are neither.

Likewise, Luke described Paul on Mars hill this way:

Act 17:16 Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.  

Paul’s sermon stated of God:

Acts 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;

Paul contrasts Christian worship from heathen worship, not by changing who their idols were of, but contrasting Christian worship to worship that involves idols:

1 Thessalonians 1:9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;

1 Corinthians 12:2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.

Indeed, Paul explains that the use of idols to represent God is part of man’s corruption:

Romans 1:20-23 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Small wonder, then, that Demetrius the silversmith was so concerned about the spread of Christianity that he assembled a mob at Ephesus:

Acts 19:23-27

And the same time there arose no small stir about that way. For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen; Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth. Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands: So that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought; but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.

Demetrius realized that Paul’s religion was not simply the replacement of one statute with another, but a worship of an invisible God, and consequently a threat to his livelihood.

Paul is not alone in his condemnation of idolatry.  In the Revelation of Jesus Christ that John gave, he writes:

Revelation 9:20 And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship (προσκυνήσωσιν) devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk:

And in his first general epistle, John writes more tenderly and to the point:

1 John 5:21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

(the above was the negative constructive in my debate with Craig Truglia) 

TurretinFan vs. Joshua Gibbs - Perseverance of the Saints Debate (predicted affirmative constructive)

I look forward to this debate with Mr. Gibbs.  

What is the position I’m defending?

Westminster Confession of Faith - Chapter 17

1. They whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.a

a. John 10:28-29; Phil 1:6; 1 Pet 1:5, 9; 2 Pet 1:10; 1 John 3:9.

2. This perseverance of the saints depends, not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father;a upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ;b the abiding of the Spirit and of the seed of God within them;c and the nature of the covenant of grace:d from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof.e

a. Jer 31:3; 2 Tim 2:18-19. • b. Luke 22:32; John 17:11, 24; Heb 7:25; 9:12-15; 10:10, 14; 13:20-21; Rom 8:33-39. • c. John 14:16-17; 1 John 2:27; 3:9. • d. Jer 32:40. • e. John 10:28; 2 Thes 3:3; 1 John 2:19.

3. Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalency of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins;a and for a time continue therein:b whereby they incur God’s displeasure,c and grieve his Holy Spirit;d come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts;e have their hearts hardened,f and their consciences wounded;g hurt and scandalize others,h and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.i

a. Mat 26:70, 72, 74. • b. Psa 51 title with v. 14. • c. 2 Sam 11:27; Isa 64:5, 7, 9. • d. Eph 4:30. • e. Psa 51:8, 10, 12; Song 5:2-4, 6; Rev 2:4. • f. Isa 63:17; Mark 6:52; 16:14. • g. Psa 32:3-4; 51:8. • h. 2 Sam 12:14. • i. Psa 89:31-32; 1 Cor 11:32.

One thing I will briefly suggest is that we do not lapse into a side debate as to what constitutes Calvinism and what other folks outside this debate may have said.  The position I’ve read above is a widely agreed upon definition of the Calvinistic understanding of the text, though I think it would also be held by others, and possibly some folks who call themselves “Calvinists” would not agree with it.

We are saved by grace, through faith, and that is a gift of God:

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

We also shall be saved:

Acts 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Faith means Trust in God:

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

Faith is not merely Believing that God Exists

James 2:19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

Justification is not the Only Aspect of Salvation - Salvation also includes Adoption

Galatians 4:5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

Ephesians 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Adoption comes by the Spirit

Romans 8:9-17

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: and if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. 

Moreover, the Spirit Aids Us

Romans 8:26-39

Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God. 

And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. 

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. 

Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. 

Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

What is Faith?

Hebrews 11:1-2

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained a good report.

Notice the connection between faith and a good report.  The good report is not the cause of the faith, it’s the other way ‘round.  Moreover, remember that our faith does not depend on us.

Jesus is the author and the finisher of our faith

Hebrew 12:1-2

Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Jesus will Finish What He Started

Philippians 1:3-8

I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine for you all making request with joy, for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now; being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: even as it is meet for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart; inasmuch as both in my bonds, and in the defence and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are partakers of my grace. For God is my record, how greatly I long after you all in the bowels of Jesus Christ.

False Faith is “Dead” Faith - it’s not the real thing

James 2:14-26

What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

How is it reasonable to link faith with works?  The answer is the Spirit.

Galatians 5:16-25

This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. 

Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 

And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 

Warning to False Believers

Jude 5-13

I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.

If you have believed, bring forth the appropriate Fruit

Romans 6:15-23

What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. I speak after the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh: for as ye have yielded your members servants to uncleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity; even so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto holiness. For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Fruit is not how we are Justified before God, nor is it the cause of our Salvation but it is Evidence

Matthew 7:15-20

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

James 2:24 Debate with William Albrecht

Roman Catholics shouldn't cite James 2:24, because it doesn't mean what they think it means. Last Saturday I conducted a debate with William Albrecht (Roman Catholic) on the topic of the meaning of James 2:24. (link to mp3) I hope you enjoy it, particularly the cross-examination section. With all due respect to Mr. Albrecht, I think you will share my lack of satisfaction with the answers he provided. I even had the opportunity to ask him an additional (related) question during the "audience question" portion of the debate, so hopefully you will find the entire recording useful!

The following are some of my notes for the debate, much of which you will hear me present during my affirmative presentation:

James 2:24 is often referenced by Roman Catholic apologists whenever the topic of Sola Fide or Justification by Faith Alone comes up. They keep on citing this verse, but it does not mean what they think it means. Thus, they shouldn’t cite it for at least the following reasons:
1. Context of Book
2. Immediate Context
3. Distinction between James and RC Justification

1) Context of Book

The book of James is primarily wisdom literature. It’s not exactly the same as Proverbs, but like Proverbs it has a focus on the same kind of practical wisdom: how to live a godly life. The opening passage (James 1:2-8) lays out the major themes of the book:

a) Trials when applied to faith produce patience.
b) If you lack wisdom ask in faith
c) Contrasted presented to a wavering, double-minded man

None of these themes bring up the kind of theological discussions we see in Romans or Galatians, where Paul provides the theological framework for Sola Fide.

2) Immediate Context

James 2:24 is part of a longer passage that stretches from verse 14 to verse 26. The opening line of the passage is this “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?”

James then compares such a statement to another statement: the statement to a hungry and naked person “be warmed and filled.” It sounds like a nice blessing, but it’s obviously insincere if it’s not accompanied by you actually helping them out, assuming you can.

James says that such an insincere profession of faith is “dead” because it is alone, like the dead blessing he just provided.

James then compares the profession of faith to the demonstration of faith. “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works”

James then notes that it’s good to believe that God exists – but insists that even this level of true belief can be the wrong kind if it leads merely to trembling, like the devils, not to right action.

James then provides two examples of works demonstrating faith:

1) James argues that Abraham’s faith was justified by works, when he offered up Isaac.
2) James argues that Rahab’s faith was justified when she aided the spies.

James then concludes by again reiterating that faith without works is dead.

The part I’ve skipped over (vs. 24) falls right between those two illustrations. In that context, James’ point should be clear – man is not justified by a faith that doesn’t bear fruit in works but by one that does.

3) Conflict with RC Dogma on Justification

Although sometimes Roman Catholics say they believe in Justification by Faith and Works, their system doesn’t provide a good match for what James is saying, at all. Even if James were speaking theologically and not practically, the examples James provides do not provide examples either of RC initial justification or RC subsequent justification.

Keep in mind that in RC theology initial justification is by infusion of faith, hope, and charity in baptism. Subsequent justification is work-based in a sense, but it is by simply avoiding mortal sin.

Two Recent Debates

I recently did two very different debates:

1. Is the Father Alone Almighty God? David Barron vs. TurretinFan (link to debate page)(direct link to mp3)

2. Intercession of the Saints - William Albrecht vs. TurretinFan (link to debate page)(direct link to mp3).

I'd like to provide more comments on the debates, but I lack time at present.

-TurretinFan

BTR: Canon Debate: Is the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha God's word? 01/05 by HealingXJWS | Blog Talk Radio

The following is a link to a debate I will (Lord Willing) be doing this coming Saturday, January 5, 2013: BTR: Canon Debate: Is the Deuterocanon/Apocrypha God's word? 01/05 by HealingXJWS | Blog Talk Radio.

I previously debated William Albrecht on this question, and so I hope to spend some time this week leading up to the debate reviewing that previous debate in preparation for this Saturday's debate.

Apparently there will be an opportunity for audience participation during/after the debate. I hope Roman Catholics will take the opportunity to call in with any questions they may have.

-TurretinFan

Responding to Zakir Hussain's "Land of Canaan" Argument

The second prophecy that Zakir Hussain used in his recent debate with Dr. White is the fact (in the linked mp3, see 12:40 - 13:19) that God promised to give the land of Canaan to the descendants of Abraham. This was indeed a prophecy given first to Abraham (then called Abram):

Genesis 15:18-21
In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: the Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.

Mr. Hussain argued that for the past 1000 years this land has been held by Muslims. First of all, this assertion is faulty. The crusaders established the kingdom of Jerusalem in 1099 and held land in the area for roughly 200 years. Moreover, at the present day there is a Jewish nation in the region.

More importantly, though, it was the Israelites under Joshua's leadership that drove out the peoples of the land.

Joshua 24:11
And you went over Jordan, and came unto Jericho: and the men of Jericho fought against you, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, and the Hittites, and the Girgashites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; and I delivered them into your hand.

The expansion of Israel increased from the time of Joshua to that of David/Solomon. Thus, we read:

1 Kings 9:20-21
And all the people that were left of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, which were not of the children of Israel, their children that were left after them in the land, whom the children of Israel also were not able utterly to destroy, upon those did Solomon levy a tribute of bondservice unto this day.

1 Chronicles 18:3
And David smote Hadarezer king of Zobah unto Hamath, as he went to stablish his dominion by the river Euphrates.

2 Chronicles 7:8
Also at the same time Solomon kept the feast seven days, and all Israel with him, a very great congregation, from the entering in of Hamath unto the river of Egypt.

Of course, subsequently the area was controlled by others. For example:

2 Kings 24:6-7
So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land: for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt.

And we may mention the fact that after the Babylonian, Chalean, and Persian empires both the Greek and Roman empires conquered the area. So the fact that Islamic forces likewise overran the area for a time (even for a long time) does not have particular significance.

It lacks particular significance because the boundaries of Euphrates to the Nile was never the boundary of any of the Islamic empire(s). Those empires that included that region (such as the Ottoman Empire) always included additional land on the other side of the Nile or on the other side of the Euphrates or both, like all the other empires that subsequently controlled the whole region.

It also lacks particular significance because it was the Israelites who actually drove out the Canaanite nations and took their land from them. Thus, the prophecy was in the immediate sense, clearly fulfilled in Israel, particularly in the height of the kingdom under David/Solomon.

Thus, there is no reason to apply this prophecy to Mohammed, whose successors conquered the area.

- TurretinFan

N.B. It should go without saying, but this post should not be taken as in any way a criticism of Dr. White's response during the debate. I was able to spend an unlimited amount of time preparing my response, and I am not required to fit my responses to each of Mr. Hussain's arguments into a fixed amount of time or space. In a real debate, the debaters have to prioritize based on limited preparation time and limited response time.