‘Jesus was WITH GOD’ therefore Jesus WAS GOD?

[Soapy]

Did God have spirit babies? Did he have a Wife and they procreated together?

I think the problem is you don't understand scripture. When John 1:1 says the Logos was God, that is pretty clear. However, the use of the Greek denotes the nature of God, or "the Divine". So John 1:1 could be translated, "The Logos was with (pros or 'with' means in an intimate 'face to face' relationship with) God, and the Logos was Divine in nature".

Does it make sense that the nature and being of God should be easily comprehended by your mind? Is your mind the measure of Divine truth? To use your language, 'don't be ridiculous'.

So, if you don't understand something complex, the other person is lying? What may I ask is wrong with you?

Again, what is wrong with you?

Yes, you are right…. Or rather, scriptures is right: Wisdom is foolishness to those in ignorance!

 

[Soapy]

No they don't. Modalists believe there is only one God that manifest in three modes: Father in creation; Son in redemption; Holy Spirit in emenation. Jesus was God in human flesh, according to them. So as a man, the human Jesus he was also the Father to whom he prayed. The flesh prayed to the eternal in him.

I know this because I used to be part of a church that were modalists.

This is very interesting what you say:

So as a man, the human Jesus he was also the Father to whom he prayed. The flesh prayed to the eternal in him.

Jesus was the Father to whom he (Jesus) prayed….??

There was a human Jesus who was also the Spirit Father???

How many Jesus’ are there in Modalism?

How is your description of Modalism different from ‘Jesus-Only’ belief?

 

[Zwing]

Yes. There is no actual present tense of to be is Hebrew so the past (haya=was) and future (yihiyeh=will be) and the word for "present tense" which is hoveh.

Wow, thank you! Upon reading your post, I just experienced a couple of distinct mental occurrences, one of which was utterly unexpected.

Firstly, I note that the final result seems to be an extreme contraction of sorts. Really, a type of acronym, but not one using the initial letters (as we would in forming an acronym in modern English), but rather bits of the constituent words selected seemingly at random, perhaps even employing a type of “shared signification” of the letters present.

There is no actual present tense of to be is Hebrew so (within the Tetragrammaton is used) the word for "present tense" which is hoveh.

(Italicized text mine)

One observation that I have regarding this, is that I have read that הֹוֶה was a common ancient defective spelling of הוֹוֶה (hoveh), the present participle of “to be”, and so meaning either “being” (used verbally) or “now” (used nominally). The full term for “present tense” is לשון הוה‎ meaning literally “present time language”, no?

One question I have regarding this particular point is, was the custom not to use the imperfect tense אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה (ehyeh, “was being” or “have been being” in a continuous sense) in place of the absent present tense in Hebrew, as famously in Exodus 3:14? Though it does in fact make more semantic sense, I yet wonder why would the fashioner of the Tetragrammaton instead utilize the present participle in representing the present tense?

Finally, despite my remonstrations of being an atheist, I am shocked to have experienced a feeling of having been made privy to some special esoteric knowledge which carries some magical significance (!) I’m really not sure where that emotion is coming from, other than it being a relic from my religious upbringing. It is true that the Tetragrammaton always held a certain forbidden magic for me, a magic which I am evidently not utterly free of…

 

[Sargonski]

It was by definition. Hebrew “El” and it’s derivatives “Eloha” and “Elohim” and its cognates eastern Semitic Akkadian ilum, southern Semitic Arabic إِل‎ (ʔil), إِلَٰه‎ (ʔilāh) and it’s own derivative اللّٰه‎ (allāh), as well as fellow northwest Semitic Aramaic אלה‎ (aláh) all descend from From Proto-Semitic *ʾil-, which simply meant “a deity”, “a god”. Since the word “el” meant “God” to a hypothetical (and that’s a whopper of a hypothesis!) Abraham, and YHVH, Baal, ands other contenders were all unknown to him, well then…

El can mean "diety" and in fact always means divine in some way .. is the derivative of words "Elohim" and so on -- part of epiphets to Gods El Elyon .. El Shaddai .. but can also be the Personal Name of the God EL .. Chief God of the Divine Pantheon for the Canaanites .. Phonecians and by extention Mesopotamia and further .. "EL being the Canaanite name for the Sumerian Enlil - Elil

The term in context "The Bible" does not simply mean a diety .. the majority of the time used... for example the Epiphet EL Elyon --- is referring to a specific Diety .. El Supreme .. "The Most High" "Father" "Creator" .. then other times EL is used as a personal name .. the Assembly of EL in Psalm 82 for example .. references who's council it is .. who is the High God on the Council ... and every time you use the term EL - even for generic God .. one is reminded of the HIgh God on the Totem Pole .. EL is the High God in "The Most High" "The Father"

 

[Zwing]

El can mean "diety"…but can also be the Personal Name of the God EL .. Chief God of the Divine Pantheon for the Canaanites

I view this as being directly analogous to the way in which the word god in English can mean “a deity”, or can mean “God Almighty”. The fact of capitalization, of course, is simply a phenomenon unknown in Hebrew. What I don’t know is if “‘il” (the apparent original form) can be considered a Proto-Semitic root word or not.

 

[rosends]

Wow, thank you! Upon reading your post, I just experienced a couple of distinct mental occurrences, one of which was utterly unexpected.

Firstly, I note that the final result seems to be an extreme contraction of sorts. Really, a type of acronym, but not one using the initial letters (as we would in forming an acronym in modern English), but rather bits of the constituent words selected seemingly at random, perhaps even employing a type of “shared signification” of the letters present.

(Italicized text mine)

One observation that I have regarding this, is that I have read that הֹוֶה was a common ancient defective spelling of הוֹוֶה (hoveh), the present participle of “to be”, and so meaning either “being” (used verbally) or “now” (used nominally). The full term for “present tense” is לשון הוה‎ meaning literally “present time language”, no?

The word hoveh (one or two vavs) is a label for the tense, and (though I will check this in a little while) not an actual form of the verb used as a functional word. We use it as a word in one liturgical context which I can think of off the cuff but I always chalked that up to poetic license.

One question I have regarding this particular point is, was the custom not to use the imperfect tense אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה (ehyeh, “was being” or “have been being” in a continuous sense) in place of the absent present tense in Hebrew, as famously in Exodus 3:14? Though it does in fact make more semantic sense, I yet wonder why would the fashioner of the Tetragrammaton instead utilize the present participle in representing the present tense?

Eh'yeh is first person future (I will be) so the textual phrase is literally "I will be that which I will be." This is made a bit more challenging by the use of אהיה as a sort of name immediately after "Eh'yeh sent me."

------edit
I did a quick search. The word h-v-h appears biblically to mean "calamity" as in Ezekiel 7:26 as "hovah". It is also the Aramaic form of "hayah" (was).

As Hoveh it is used in Nechemiah 6:6 but it seems to means "to be" (וְאַתָּ֗ה הֹוֶ֤ה לָהֶם֙ לְמֶ֔לֶךְ - and you are to be to them as a king).

With two vavs it does not appear in the biblical text (though the talmud often quotes it from Ezekiel as with 2 vavs!)

In medrash (Bereisheet Rabba 46:8-9) it is seems to be used as "I am" but that is written in post biblical Hebrew and in some versions of the Hebrew, the word is actually written as ehyeh (I will be) (compare "ר' יודן אמר אם מקבלין בניך אלהותי אני הווה להם לאלוה פטרון" from the Bar Ilan responsa and " אֲנִי אֶהְיֶה לָהֶם לֵאלוֹהַּ וּלְפַטְרוֹן" from the Sefaria page so it could be that the meaning of Hoveh there IS actually "will be".

The one exception I remembered was in the poem/song Adon Olam which is part of daily prayers:

Siddur Ashkenaz, Weekday, Shacharit, Preparatory Prayers, Adon Olam

Master of the Universe Who reigned before any creature was...

www.sefaria.org

וְהוּא הָיָה וְהוּא הֹוֶה, וְהוּא יִהְיֶה בְּתִפְאָרָה:
He was, He is, and He shall be in glory.

As to your initial point, I think of the word as a portmanteau instead of as an acronym or initialism.

 

[rosends]

thanks for proving my point... vowels were added. and every time one ADD to the Word of God, as said you put the spiritual noose around one's neck.

101G.

If that's what you want to take by my post then have fun with that. Nothing was added to the word of God. The vowel points were added to the pronounced word so as to avoid saying what, according to the word of God, we are not to pronounce. When we study the text to learn the word of God, we study the word as written, not as pronounced.

 

[101G]

No back to the title, and let the TRUE and ONLY LIVING God remove any "god", or "gods" out of the picture. the title of this discussion is "Jesus was WITH GOD’ therefore Jesus WAS GOD?".
all this nonsense about god, or gods, is just that ... nothing. Deuteronomy 32:39 "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."

1 Chronicles 16:26 "For all the gods of the people are idols: but the LORD made the heavens."

101G has notice a lot of posters know more about "Idols" than the TRUE and LIVING God who made them.

101G.

 

[Sargonski]

I view this as being directly analogous to the way in which the word god in English can mean “a deity”, or can mean “God Almighty”. The fact of capitalization, of course, is simply a phenomenon unknown in Hebrew. What I don’t know is if “‘il” (the apparent original form) can be considered a Proto-Semitic root word or not.

El is not directly analogous to the word God .. or rather .. only partly analogous in that EL can be used to mean generic God .. or used to preface an epiphet El Shaddai/ God Almighty - but is also used as a proper name.. and 100% is considered a Proto Semitic root word .. The Sumerian High God Elil / Enlil --

This is one of the Oldest dieties we have on Record

 

[Windwalker]

This is very interesting what you say:

Jesus was the Father to whom he (Jesus) prayed….??

Jesus was the human being born of Mary 2000 some odd years ago. But just as you have a body and you have spirit, so too did Jesus. His spiritual nature was Divine, or "the Father", or "God", or whatever title you prefer.

There was a human Jesus who was also the Spirit Father???

This isn't hard to understand. Do you believe you are flesh only, or do you believe you have a spiritual nature too that is beyond your fleshly confines?

How many Jesus’ are there in Modalism?

Only one.

How is your description of Modalism different from ‘Jesus-Only’ belief?

It's the same thing. However, what makes them call themselves "Jesus only", is because they claim that is the "name" of God. I've heard them say countless times, "There's only one God who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and His name is Jesus!", as they pound excitedly on the pulpit. That, and they have this whole "name" magic thing going on. "Jesus, Jesus, Jesus!," they say over and over as they pound on the pulpit. It's kind of bizarre.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jesus has been given authority to rule in place of Almighty God, his Spiritual Father, YHWH, the one true God.

The purpose of this rule is to ‘bring all things back under the true rulership of himself. It’s all written in the scriptures.

And yes, after all things have been brought back under his rulership Jesus hands back the rulership to God.

But that’s not the end.

All peoples will then be tested as to keeping to that rulership. Satan will be allowed to tempt all people for a thousand years.

Of course these time periods are symbolic so we mustn’t try to use them as any kind of prediction.

The final end comes when God sets Jesus as the judge over all people including the angels and sets them apart according to their deeds: the good to eternal life and the wicked to eternal destruction.

Thus fulfilling the prophecy from Isaiah wherein the messiah is entitled ‘Everlasting Father’.

‘Father’, meaning:

• ‘He who gives life’

Therefore, Jesus GIVING EVERLASTING LIFE to all those whom he deems worthy, makes him ‘Everlasting Father’.

Thereafter, all wickedness, all sin, all who are sinful, all who are unworthy… and finally DEATH itself will be destroyed NEVER TO BE REMEMBERED.

Then, finally then, Jesus takes his seat on the ethereal throne of his ancestor, King David, as ruler over all creation, with the elected saints as kings in rulership with him - that is, these kings will replace the order of the angels who are currently in positions of authority, ‘Stations’, over creation.

Yes, death will be done away with. Happiness and joy will replace any sad memories. Revelation 21:1-5. Jesus will, after all things are made subject to him because of his faithfulness unto death plus his resurrection, hand back everything to the Father.

 

[101G]

There was a human Jesus who was also the Spirit Father???

this is called the "ECHAD" of God. the Human Jesus is the EQUAL share that was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') v. while in flesh, on earth, with blood. hence the reason of PRAY the Father, and not Pray "to" the Father, only in intercession for someone else behalf. this is called the Ordinal Last, as Son. and Jesus in the "ECHAD" of Spirit/Father is the Ordinal First. this is just 2 simple not to understand.

101G.

 

[101G]

Yes, death will be done away with. Happiness and joy will replace any sad memories. Revelation 21:1-5. Jesus will, after all things are made subject to him because of his faithfulness unto death plus his resurrection, hand back everything to the Father.

not to get in your conservation. but ... understand that verb "BE" that is in front of Subject and search it out and see if the context of what you said is TRUE?

just do a little research on that ok... a revelation awaits.

101G.

 

[101G]

To all,
as the topic states, Jesus was with God? just as John 1:1c states, "and the Word was God.". this is as clear as it can GETS in understanding the "ECHAD" of God as Ordinal First, and Ordinal Last. ... which in turns explain why the the Lord Jesus was with and was God. just as ...

Isaiah 41:4 states the same. "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." AND,

Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." AND CONCLUDING WITH,

Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last."

ONE PERSON, in the "ECHAD" of FIRST and LAST, in "TIME", "PLACE", ORDER", and or "RANK". if one can understand all the scriptures above, all mystery and failed misunderstand of God will become clear and edifying to the disciple.

101G.

 

[Soapy]

this is called the "ECHAD" of God. the Human Jesus is the EQUAL share that was G2758 κενόω kenoo (ke-no-ō') v. while in flesh, on earth, with blood. hence the reason of PRAY the Father, and not Pray "to" the Father, only in intercession for someone else behalf. this is called the Ordinal Last, as Son. and Jesus in the "ECHAD" of Spirit/Father is the Ordinal First. this is just 2 simple not to understand.

101G.

Can you show me some scripture verses stating what you said?

 

[Sargonski]

To all,
as the topic states, Jesus was with God? just as John 1:1c states, "and the Word was God.". this is as clear as it can GETS in understanding the "ECHAD" of God as Ordinal First, and Ordinal Last. ... which in turns explain why the the Lord Jesus was with and was God. just as ...

Isaiah 41:4 states the same. "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." AND,

Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." AND CONCLUDING WITH,

Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last."

ONE PERSON, in the "ECHAD" of FIRST and LAST, in "TIME", "PLACE", ORDER", and or "RANK". if one can understand all the scriptures above, all mystery and failed misunderstand of God will become clear and edifying to the disciple.

101G.

G ?! Isaiah has precisely ZERO relevance to the question of the divinity of Christ.... might as well have quoted Peter Pan as would have given just as much support to the claim that Jesus was God .. made up fantasy.

Jesus tells us to build our foundation on Rock .. not man made fantasy Brother G .. To the words of Jesus hearken .. not to Brother Paul or Isaiah -- these do not speak for Jesus ...

 

[Sargonski]

101G has notice a lot of posters know more about "Idols" than the TRUE and LIVING God who made them.

101G.

Let us not project our failings onto others Brother G .. when that big log in own eye need be removed. You have not managed to tell us the name of this True- Living God .. the Father - the Creator - to which the High Priest Jesus prays .. Tell us the name of this "True - Living God" .. the Supreme one.

Hearken to the words of the Bible .. let us not make things up about the Most High .. while ignoring scripture .. and calling others believers in Idols of man made dogma ... such as Sola Fide and Idol Martin .. offering the "Free Pass" through judgement ....

So you "Sola Fide" G ?

 

[101G]

Can you show me some scripture verses stating what you said?

see post #454 above for starters. one you masted, or failed those scriptures, then 101G will know which way to teach you...... (smile)......

101G.

 

[101G]

G ?! Isaiah has precisely ZERO relevance to the question of the divinity of Christ.... might as well have quoted Peter Pan as would have given just as much support to the claim that Jesus was God .. made up fantasy.

(smile)....LOL, LOL, LOL, if Y cannot understand the simple, then let's see if U can up your understanding? listen, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"
the Hebrew term "ONE" here is,
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.
2. (as an ordinal) first.
[a numeral from H258]
KJV: a, alike, alone, altogether, and, any(-thing), apiece, a certain, (dai-)ly, each (one), + eleven, every, few, first, + highway, a man, once, one, only, other, some, together.
Root(s): H258

take note of definition #2 .... and also #1

the "LORD" all caps is the "Ordinal First"/title Father, why? because he is CREATOR and MAKER of all things. now definition #2, the united one is "ALSO" the Last, the Ordinal Last. supportive scripture, Isaiah 41:4 "Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I am he." now this, Isaiah 48:12 "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last."

I, I, I, ... "ALSO" am the Last? this is the "ECHAD" in plain sight, a first grader can see that.

we suggest u read Isaiah..... (smile)

my source for the definition above is the Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's Dictionaries of the Greek and Hebrew Testaments.

Jesus tells us to build our foundation on Rock .. not man made fantasy Brother G .. To the words of Jesus hearken .. not to Brother Paul or Isaiah -- these do not speak for Jesus ...

#1. that Rock is Christ, supportive scripture. 1 Corinthians 10:4 "And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." u didn't even know that did you? oh yes you quoted the verse a couple of time. but U never connected the Rock to Christ ...... definitively ... did U? ,,, no.

#2, don't LIE on the Lord Jesus the Christ. U said, "To the words of Jesus hearken .. not to Brother Paul or Isaiah -- these do not speak for Jesus". who told you that lie? Listen and Learn... Luke 10:16 "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me."

1 Thessalonians 4:8 "He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit." now did Isaiah have the Holy Spirit? let's check the record. 1 Peter 1:10 "Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:" 1 Peter 1:11 "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow."

so Isaiah was a Prophet, and had the Spirit of Christ/Holy Spirit in him. as well as the apostle Paul. scripture, Acts 9:17 "And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."

so Sargonski, 101G ask, "Why do you despise God?". remember u said, "To the words of Jesus hearken .. not to Brother Paul or Isaiah -- these do not speak for Jesus". but our Lord Jesus said, Luke 10:16 "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me." so my question stands, "Why do you despise God?"
101G.

 

[Sargonski]

(smile)....LOL, LOL, LOL, if Y cannot understand the simple, then let's see if U can up your understanding? listen, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"
the Hebrew term "ONE" here is,
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.

101G.

Sorry G -- pile after pile of blathering nonsense does not an argument make.

Isaiah claiming YHWH is one God .. does not support your claim that Jesus claimed to be

(smile)....LOL, LOL, LOL, if Y cannot understand the simple, then let's see if U can up your understanding? listen, Deuteronomy 6:4 "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"
the Hebrew term "ONE" here is,
H259 אֶחָד 'echad (ech-awd') adj.
1. (properly) united, i.e. one.


#1. that Rock is Christ, supportive scripture. 1 Corinthians 10:4 "And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." u didn't even know that did you? oh yes you quoted the verse a couple of time. but U never connected the Rock to Christ ...... definitively ... did U? ,,, no.

#2, don't LIE on the Lord Jesus the Christ. U said, "To the words of Jesus hearken .. not to Brother Paul or Isaiah -- these do not speak for Jesus". who told you that lie? Listen and Learn... Luke 10:16 "He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me."

"Why do you despise God?"
101G.

Sorry G -- pile after pile of blathering nonsense does not an argument make.

Isaiah claiming YHWH is one God .. does not support your claim that Jesus claimed to be YHWH ... This is a foundation of made up fantasy is not what Jesus meant by Rock. Yet you run from the words of Jesus ... and then ask "Why do you despise God" .. a God you are too ashamed of to name.

It is not you who dispises God Brother 101G ?- so ashamed that you can not bear to speak the name of the God of Abraham .. the God of the 3 Abrahamic Religions -- while this is fine .. do what you will but, don't project your blasphemy onto others friend .. that is not nice.

Why are you so ashamed of Jesus -- run from the words of our savior -- hiding in some wonky interpretation of Paul .. a mix of that and man made dogma .. rather than hearken to words of Christ.