{"id":3599,"date":"2021-06-27T19:52:17","date_gmt":"2021-06-28T01:52:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/integritysyndicate.com\/?p=3599"},"modified":"2022-10-22T17:43:35","modified_gmt":"2022-10-22T23:43:35","slug":"conflations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/integritysyndicate.com\/conflations\/","title":{"rendered":"Bible Conflations"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
Rather than to affirm those Scriptures that are explicit in showing a distinction between Jesus and God in personal identity and ontology (1Tim 2:5-6), many Christian apologists conflate verses together, use syllogisms, and argue that Jesus is God by inference (the act of passing from one proposition, statement, or judgment considered as true to another whose truth is believed to follow from that of the former). A common error is presuming that because Jesus is closely associated with God and has been given divine titles, authority, and powers, this proves that he is God in a literal ontological sense (in his being and personal identity). These apologists continually overlook the Jewish law of agency – a key concept of the Bible (see https:\/\/biblicalagency.com)<\/a><\/p> Conflation<\/b> is merging two or more sets of information, texts, ideas, etc., into one, often in error.\u00a0 In logic, it is the practice of treating two concepts or a similar concept in two different contexts as if they were equivalent, resulting in error.\u00a0 A common type of conflation is combining an Old Testament passage about the LORD God with a New Testament passage pertaining to the Lord Jesus Christ, forming a syllogism between the two, and drawing conclusions by inference.\u00a0 Incongruent conflation<\/em> occurs when the expressions do not mean the same thing but share a common word or theme. This is typically employed by overly simplistic Bible teachers who are so fixated on common words and themes that they fail to appreciate the context in which they are used.<\/p> A principal example of incongruent <\/em>conflation is presuming Jesus is claiming to God, the \u201cI am that I am\u201d of Exodus 3:14, when he identifies himself using the terms \u201cI am\u201d (ego eimi<\/em> in Greek) in the gospels. They do this without reference to the context and clarifications that Jesus makes when describing himself. For example, Jesus said in John 8:28, \u201cWhen you have lifted up the Son of Man<\/strong>, then you will know that I am<\/strong> he (ego eimi),<\/em> and<\/strong> that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me<\/strong>.\u201d Here Jesus is identifying himself as the Son of Man (who does nothing on his own authority) and is also distinguishing himself from the Father who taught him. In John 9:9, a blind man that was given sight says \u201cI am\u201d using the same Greek term \u201cego eimi.\u201d It is most spurious to conflate a phrase so generic such as \u201cI am\u201d used of the Son of Man (the Messiah) with Almighty God. For more on how Jesus identifies himself in the Gospel, including a review of the \u201cI am\u201d statements, see https:\/\/iamstatements.com.<\/a>\u00a0<\/p> Ambiguities are often at the root of fallacious Bible interpretations, conflations, and faulty syllogisms. An Ambiguity <\/em>occurs when a phrase, statement, or resolution is not explicitly defined, making several interpretations plausible. Principal types of ambiguities that open the door for error are lexical and semantic ambiguities. A lexical ambiguity<\/em> occurs when a word or phrase has more than one meaning in the language to which the word belongs.\u00a0 A\u00a0Semantic ambiguity<\/em> occurs when a word, phrase or sentence, taken out of context, has more than one interoperation. Typically, where there are such ambiguities, particular apologists will impose the meaning they want on the verse rather than trying to resolve the ambiguity by looking at the surrounding context. This article will address the typical conflations of those who argue that Jesus is God and resolve apparent ambiguities by appealing directly to context.\u00a0<\/p> Although not the focus of the article, it should also be mentioned that many syntactic ambiguities in the Bible arise when a sentence can have two (or more) different meanings because of the structure of the sentence (its syntax). Some verses are rendered to imply Jesus is God, including Romans 9:5, Titus 2:13, and 2 Peter 1, and 1 John 5:20. Different translations may render these verses differently because the syntax in the original language is ambiguous and there are multiple options for structuring the sentence. These verses exhibit significant syntactic ambiguity and are often translated in the way most favorable to \u201corthodoxy\u201d. It should be noted, however,\u00a0 even if a verse might refer to Jesus as God, it is not necessary in a literal ontological sense. Agents of God can be called God based on the law of agency. The wide body of Scripture demonstrates that Jesus is a representative of God – the human Messiah. (see https:\/\/onemediator.faith<\/a>)<\/p> A\u00a0syllogism<\/b> is a kind of logical argument to arrive at a conclusion based on two propositions asserted or assumed to be true. There are over a dozen types of fallacies associated with syllogisms. Many Christian apologists widely employ the use of syllogisms, and do so in a fallacious manner. A fallacy is the use of faulty reasoning, typically with wrong moves, in the construction of an argument. A fallacious argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is. Some fallacies are committed intentionally to manipulate or persuade by deception, while others are committed unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance.<\/p> An example of a fallacious syllogism is\u00a0<\/p> P1: God is king<\/p> P2: David is king<\/p> C: David is God or God is David<\/p> The erroneous conclusion assumes that to be a king you must be God and that the title king is exclusive to God. There may be an aspect to God being king which is special, but that doesn’t necessitate that another must be king in the same sense. Christian apologists typically employ similar syllogisms in their attempt to infer Jesus is God. In the above example, other words can be used in exchange for \u201cking\u201d\u00a0 including \u201clord\u201d, \u201cjudge\u201d, and \u201csavior\u201d. When parallel language (the same or similar language) is applied to two different entities, it does not make them the same person, power, or authority. We will address the common conflations of Jesus with God using these types of fallacious syllogisms. First, let’s briefly cover the concept of agency as well as ultimate vs. proximate (primary vs. secondary causes).<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t A\u00a0proximate cause<\/b> is that which is closest to, or immediately responsible for causing, some observed result. This exists in contrast to a higher-level ultimate cause,<\/b> which is usually thought of as the \u201creal\u201d reason something occurred.\u00a0 (https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Proximate_and_ultimate_causation<\/a>)<\/p> The general theme of the Bible is that God is always the ultimate cause and that God uses agents to effect his purposes which are the proximate or secondary cause. Let’s take the example of 2 Samuel 3:18 below. The LORD (the principal) is the first\/<\/em>ultimate <\/em>cause of salvation while David (his agent) is the secondary\/proximate<\/em> cause as it says, \u201cBy the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel.\u201d Both God and David are saviors concerning Israel. Now God has brought to Israel a savior, Jesus, as he promised (Acts 13:23)<\/p> 18<\/sup> Now then bring it about, for the LORD has promised David, saying, \u2018By the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel from the hand of the Philistines<\/strong>, and from the hand of all their enemies.\u2019<\/p> 22<\/sup>\u00a0And when he had removed him, he raised up David to be their king, of whom he testified and said, \u200b\u2018I have found in David the son of Jesse a man after my heart, who will do all my will.\u2019\u00a023<\/sup> Of this man\u2019s offspring, God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus<\/strong>, as he promised<\/strong>.\u00a0<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\tConflation<\/h3>
Ambiguities<\/h3>
Fallacious Syllogism<\/h3>
Proximate and ultimate causation<\/h2>
2 Samuel 3:18 (ESV), \u201cBy the hand of my servant David I will save my people Israel\u201d<\/h3>
Acts 13:22-23 (ESV), God has brought to Israel a Savior, Jesus as he promised<\/h3>