The Bible does not teach Monotheism

I agree with your prefatory remarks regarding the offense that could arise from these sort of discussions. However, I will not be offended as this is a place to debate ideas. Nevertheless, because I am a born-again Christian, it is my intention to bring light to this issue, not to simply win a debate, but to explain what I believe to be the truth. I trust my you are doing the same. Rebuttals: A. The passage from Gen. 1:26 cannot be isolated from the rest of the creation account. In verse 2, we read that the "Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." The Spirit of God is something distinct from God, or it would have just read "God." Yet, the Spirit is still "of God," implying a unity. Verse 26 says "God said, 'Let us make man...'" Note, it was one God (not 'gods) saying "let us." The context does not hint anywhere else to multiple deities, and to insert that here is to impose an interpretation onto the text. B. Exodus 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before me." Again, context is key. The Hebrews were just rescued out of polytheistic Egypt where the worship of many deities was practiced. For the LORD to tell his people to not worship any other gods does not give us any detail to their ontological nature. The commandment is a matter of worship (like of of the commandments), not a statement of metaphysical reality. C. In John 10:34, Jesus quotes Psalm 82 where God is seated in his heavenly council, among beings he calls "sons of God." However, the Hebrew word "elohim" is used in the Scriptures to address humans, in places like Psalm 82. The "gods" in the passage judge among men, making them more likely to be men. Moreover, they "die" and "fall," both things that God cannot do. Therefore, this does not lead to henotheism. D. The 1 Cor. 8:4-6 identifies this issue. For, Paul even says "we know that 'an idol has no real existence,' and that 'there is no God but one.'" What Paul explicitly says is that there are many gods and lords, but they are nothing more than idols. "There is no God but one." That excludes the possibility of of any other god. E. Kasmic's interpretation of Jer. 10:10 is faulty. To show that this text is completely monotheistic, all we need to do is see the opposites of the adjectives. "True" would become "false," "living would become "dead," and "everlasting" would become "fading." So, we can know these things: 1) the LORD is the true God, not a false god 2) He is a living(real) God, not a dead(nonexistent) idol 3) He has always been God and will always be God. He has never been created nor will he cease to be. Therefore, this passage, and indeed all of the Bible, teaches that we should follow God because he is the only true, living, and everlasting God. All other "gods" are idols with no divine significance. As verse 11 goes on to say "the gods who did not make the heavens and the earth shall perish from the earth and from under the heavens." F. The reading of "form of God " in Phil. 2:6 is "morphe theou," meaning that Christ has the same nature and ontological status as God. But, if Christ was a man, then he could never achieved the same godhood as the LORD. For, something to become God is "less god" than a God that has always been God (Jer. 10:10). But since the text says Christ is of the same nature as God, that means he is the same God as God. He always has been and always will be. G. Paul's statement in Phil. 3:14 does not necessitate an interpretation of his becoming a God. In verse 12, Paul says, "Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own." We must ask what Paul means by "this." Paul speaks about attaining the resurrection from the dead in verse 11, and that flows through his thought until the end of the chapter. So, when Paul says that he "press(es) on to make it my own because Christ Jesus has made me his own," he is talking about making the resurrection his own. Because Jesus has gracious made Paul his own, Paul presses on to make Jesus, and the resurrection of Jesus, his own. This continues through verse 14, making it plain that the "upward call of God in Christ Jesus" is the resurrection of the dead. It is in Christ Jesus that the resurrection is found. So, in short, the upward calling of God is the resurrection (not godhood), which is found in Christ, and to whom pull presses on. H. Romans 8:15 identifies the Spirit as the "Spirit of adoption." Keep in mind the historical background in which this epistle was written. In ancient Rome, when someone was adopted, they were written into the will and could never be written out of the will. Once in, always in. A will deals with inheritance. So, to be identified as heirs, children of God, and fellow heirs with Christ, then we receive the inheritance that God gives to his children. And that can never be taken away from us. This passage does not say anything about ontological status. To become children of God is does not signify anything about our substance. It simply identifies that we have been adopted into his family and will receive the inheritance he has for those he adopts. Contentions: A. Exodus 15:11 says, "Who is like you, O LORD, among the gods? Who is like you, majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?" For Moses to say "who is like you...among the gods?...majestic in holiness, awesome in glorious deeds, doing wonders?" does not imply that there are numerous deities, though one may be tempted to think that way. We know this because, Moses is drawing a comparison here. "Who is like you, O LORD?" The answer is clear: none. Moses is praising God for being greater than the "gods" the Egyptians worship. God, the true God, is authoritative, in control, and present. He is also absolute and personal..1 Anything not authoritative, in control, present, absolute and personal, is not God, human or non-human. B .Isa. 44:6-8 says, "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. Who is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and set it before me, since I appointed an ancient people. Let them declare what is to come, and what will happen. Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any." First, we must note that when the LORD says something, it is final. He is all knowing. So when he says, "Is there a God besides me?...I know not any," that means there are no other gods to be known. If God does not know something, then that something does not exist. Therefore, there are no other gods beside the one God, Yahweh. C. Isaiah 43:10 says, "Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me." God clearly states here that no god was created before him and no god was created after him. This clearly excludes the possibility of man becoming a god, or of God once being a man. D. A note on presuppositions: Both Kasmic and I have presuppositions coming into this debate. These are beliefs that take precedence over other beliefs. I have them, Kasmic has them, everyone does. My presupposition is that the Bible is the only infallible Word of God. Kasmic's presupposes that the Bible is not the only Word of God, but the Book of Mormon is also. So, we are operating on two completely different worldviews. When it comes to the interpretation of the Bible, I believe that the Bible interprets itself because God is his own interpreter. However, Joseph Smith's exegetical and editorial/translational method has placed him as a higher authority than the Bible. Because, to change what the Bible says is to claim to have truth that the Bible does not have. All of this to say, when we come to the biblical text with a presupposition that the Bible does not teach, we run into epistemological errors. In order to understand the Bible, we must take the Bible on it's own terms. To truly understand the Bible, we must consider it as the only inspired, inerrant, infallible, authoritative, comprehensive, sufficient, Word of God.1 1. I am greatly indebted to John M. Frame for his work in theology and philosophy. Much of the thought behind what I have written is owed to him. To read his work on this subject, see chapter 20 and 26 of his Systematic Theology.