“The Son is equal to his Father”

[YoursTrue]

But it is.

And Moses said unto Elohim, Behold, [when] I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, The Elah of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say to me, What [is] his name? what shall I say unto them?
And Elohim said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
Exodus 3:13-14

I'm just wondering what you think -- is elohim a name?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

If it were not for the Bible, the truth about God and the right way to worship Him would never be known.

I wonder how Christianity survived in the hundreds of years following the crucifixion before the Bible that we know was assembled? Must have been magic.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I think that essence to sinning is more important then sin.


I disagree , it's not as simple as you say it.Most probably Matthew new Koine Greek , since he was a tax collector.

I'm curious about this. In my mind, the essence of sinning is to make yourself available to temptation and allow it to control you without thought to the spiritual or physical consequences. To continually grow the susceptibility of temptation without even realizing it.

The physical consequences arise from secondary sources and I have no inkling that the sin itself causes a physical reaction. But continually opening yourself to temptation and partaking of sin has consequences that can manifest in the physical.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That is why you can't rely on Greek only.

Again read this:

In the early part of the Koine, παρθένος had not yet shifted to refer specifically to a virgin. It was used just like נַעֲרָה* (naʕará) and עַלְמָה (ʕalmá) and בְּתוּלָה (btulá) in Hebrew.

So Hebrew is more important in this case.

I've no skill at philology, but that would seem to be the case that the Hebrew has priority and greater significance.

 

[Dimi95]

I'm curious about this. In my mind, the essence of sinning is to make yourself available to temptation and allow it to control you without thought to the spiritual or physical consequences. To continually grow the susceptibility of temptation without even realizing it.

The physical consequences arise from secondary sources and I have no inkling that the sin itself causes a physical reaction. But continually opening yourself to temptation and partaking of sin has consequences that can manifest in the physical.

This is the Orthodox idea of original sin.
The guilt bare only the one who did it.
But the essence to sinning might be as genetical inheritance
James 1:14-16
"but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed.Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."

 

[ppp]

OK


Then you will certainly need to explain better. It seemed to me like i answered the question

It seems to me as though you are not making an attempt to understand.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

This is the Orthodox idea of original sin.
The guilt bare only the one who did it.
But the essence to sinning might be as genetical inheritance
James 1:14-16
"but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed.Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."

I suppose I take this as a metaphor and not a literal genetic inheritance.

I had this discussion with others before and the main thing to come out of it is there is no known gene or alteration (mutation) that can be associated with any specific sin.

However, I do note that there are sins that could result in genetic issues. Incest being the one that comes to mind, but then it is the offspring of that union that is bearing the genetic price for the sins of others. Sins the child did not commit.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's Orthodox idea of original sin
The Son does not bear the guilt of his Father.
The focus is on essence of sinning, or thought of sinning.

That is my notion of sin as well.

 

[Dimi95]

I suppose I take this as a metaphor and not a literal genetic inheritance.

Well the focus here is on the essence.
My mother tolded me that i inherited bad trairs from my father.

I had this discussion with others before and the main thing to come out of it is there is no known gene or alteration (mutation) that can be associated with any specific sin.

I think you misunderstood me
Beeing too agressive can lead to sin
That what i wanted to explain

However, I do note that there are sins that could result in genetic issues. Incest being the one that comes to mind, but then it is the offspring of that union that is bearing the genetic price for the sins of others. Sins the child did not commit.

In my opinion sin is just an end-product of our actions.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Well the focus here is on the essence.
My mother tolded me that i inherited bad trairs from my father.

My parents told me that there was a tendency to alcoholism in both sides of the family, but it didn't seem to manifest in my generation. Even under selection.

I think you misunderstood me

That is very possible. Apologies if that is so.

Beeing too agressive can lead to sin
That what i wanted to explain

You are correct. This evidence indicates that I did misunderstand you.

Certain traits do seem to set some up for sin. I'm not sure if this extension is in line with your idea, but it does seem so.

In my opinion sin is just an end-product of our actions.

I see sin as a basal spiritual condition where discipline is overwhelmed by temptation. The emphasis being on short-term returns as opposed to the longer-term rewards that are derived from rejecting temptation. My folks, especially my mother, loved to refer to it as instant gratification.

 

[Ebionite]

'I am that I am' is King James expression.
Rotherham's translation says, ' I will become whatsoever I please. '
The Hebrew TANACH says, ' I Shall Be as I Shall Be .'
In other words, now more insight/meaning given to the Tetragrammaton YHWH (God's Name) - KJV Psalm 83:18 B
Don't forget Genesis 22:14 and Exodus 6:3 because Abraham knew God's name
Even Pharaoh knew God's name but he did Not know it in the same way/ same meaning as Abraham and Moses knew it.
Elohim is Not the Tetragrammaton name YHWH which is often spoken as Yahweh.

The name of Elohim is I AM. Exodus 3:14

 

[Ebionite]

I'm just wondering what you think -- is elohim a name?2

Elohim is a descriptive title for a group of beings which have a common nature, eg YHWH speaking through Moses in Exodus 20 or YHWH speaking through an angel in Exodus 3. Sometimes Elohim is described like it is a council.

 

[YoursTrue]

Elohim is a descriptive title for a group of beings which have a common nature, eg YHWH speaking through Moses in Exodus 20 or YHWH speaking through an angel in Exodus 3. Sometimes Elohim is described like it is a council.

So would you say it's a personal name? Seems that you do not, but rather it's a descriptive title, like king, person, population, etc.

 

[Kenny]

It seems to me as though you are not making an attempt to understand.

If you think so. Enjoyed that time together.

 

[Sargonski]

As always, you address the parenthetical manifestation of The Word as Jesus forgetting that He left His eternal position and capacity to come as a man. And then you want to speak as if it is the same.


Yes! and Amen! That is the reason The Word had to become man.


Yes! and Amen! - 3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

Only God has neither beginning of days nor the end of life

This is just all wrong .. but kudo's for the attempt .. "Jesus a second Adam" if true would interesting but not in the context you are thinking - and way above pay grade at this point .. lacking knowledge of the the standard creation myth motif's of the day for proper perspective on what one is actually saying ... when equating Jesus to the Primordial Adam.. but when said and done we need not worry because ...

In the original story - Jesus is not co-eternal - nor in the revised edition with inclusion of "other stories" - nor in the revised edition with the inclusion of "more stories" .. thus making up what are known as The Synoptic Gospels.

In the original story - Jesus is a Man of 30 - fully human - no one knows of any God-Spark in this middle aged adult .. .. except perhaps John the Baptist having some premonition of things to come. This is what the early first century Christian has to go on.

Then - as is totally commonplace in religious mind of everyone .. gentile and Jew - God Adopts a human .. gives him the God-spark but, What God ? Who is and what is the name of this God.. of this Son who is a Priest forever in the Order of Melchi-Zedek.

So .. who is the God of this Order that has adopted a human .. in the same motif as Sargon - Moses - David - Abraham - and lest we forget Emperor Cyrus .. the last annointed one of God prior to Jesus. That is what every 1st century Jew is thinking .. and every first century Gentile with a little knowledge of the Jewish religion .. as they did .. in great detail .. cause that is what folks focused on .. the stories in their collective consciousness were different than your stories friend .. but it is no there story we must focus .. and not yours.

At the baptism of Jesus the sky opens up and --
he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”

12 At once the Spirit sent him out into the wilderness, 13 and he was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted[g] by Satan

OK -- clear as day .. a spirit of an un-named God comes down -- a voice from heaven tells Jesus is now the adopted Son of God. .. this is where the "Adoptionists" get there fodder .. and it is hard to say otherwise .. as is totally the Perspective of a First Century person .. just as written.

So this spirit .. then has Jesus first go through the traditional Ritual .. prior to having the God Spark be actualized. The "King making Ritual " of the Pharaoh was dangerous but after which the Pharaoh was part God.

During this ritual .. Jesus is confronted by the Adversary - A son of God who's job Title is to test humans .. this entity having some heavy duty God Powers - and is Chief God over the Earth ..

Who does the early Christian think this God is ? The Father of this son of God who has the job Title The Adversary .. and who's Job it is to test humans.. reporting to The Supreme one who has been naughty and who has been nice ?

Jesus passes the Trial with flying colors - goes out into the world as a Healer .. keeping his God-spark a secret except to a select few at first..

Nowhere this far into the story .. nor anywhere else .. is it suggested that Jesus was pre-existent with the father. .. nor that he was part God due to some kind ofd immaculate conception or coupling of God with Woman as in the early days of Genesis. Jesus is not the Son of God in a genetic perespective like these other Gods .. either the offspring of God with God .. .. or God with Human . Jesus is a man .. fully human .. who has been adopted by God .. thus the title "Son of Man" but one who has been ordained by God .. the Messiah .. this is the language used during the baptismal scene .. Jesus a messiah .. ordained by God in the way of Cyrus

It is in the Second Edition where we have the Divinity of Jesus moving from born of man the normal way .. to Immaculate conception .. God messing around in there somewhere .. but this addition to the original story does not come until ~ 80 Ad. .. and who knows how long this takes to get into general circulation .. an accepted addition to the story .. as this is quite the theological change of perspective.

but no one has this perspective prior to ~80 - having only the original story to go on .. the writings of Paul of very little help on the matter .. saying almost nothing about the life of Jesus .. and no Judeo Christian is listening to anything Paul says at this point anyway.

"Co-Equal" - Elevating the divinity of Jesus yet a step further - to pre-existence with God .. does not come along until John .. 100-120 AD - this a completely different Gospel .. with inclusion of a very different perspective .. heavily influenced by Platonic / Helenistic Philosophical ideas .. being used to describe the nature of Christ's divinity .. his "God-Spark" that was growing .. as the years go by. Sorry friends .. this Gospel was not written by John the Disciple who as tradition holds .. was martyred with the others long ago but, it does Greek religious ideas and terminology with the average person will be familiar .. increasing the appeal of this new religioun to the average person .. speaking in language and terms with which they were familiar.

but this is as much as a century after these events happened .. and 60 years of revisons later to the original story .. that the divinity of Jesus is elevated to pre-existant status .. but not yet elevated to "Co-Equal" status no no no.. This takes another 200 years for the divinity of Jesus to be elevated that high .. higher than Lord Satan .. higher than Lord YHWH.

Impressive what time and the dogma of man can do with the Divinity of a God.

 

[Ajax]

except perhaps John the Baptist having some premonition of things to come.

At the baptism of Jesus the sky opens up and -- he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”.....
.....OK -- clear as day .. a spirit of an un-named God comes down -- a voice from heaven tells Jesus is now the adopted Son of God. ..

And then, a couple of years later in the life of Jesus, we have this ...

Luke 7: 16-20 "Fear seized them all; and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” and “God has visited his people!” 17 And this report concerning him spread through the whole of Judea and all the surrounding country. 18 The disciples of John told him of all these things. 19 And John, calling to him two of his disciples, sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” 20 And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?"

Matthew 11: 2-3 "Now when John heard in prison about the deeds of the Christ, he sent word by his disciples 3 and said to him, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?"

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Elohim is a descriptive title for a group of beings which have a common nature, eg YHWH speaking through Moses in Exodus 20 or YHWH speaking through an angel in Exodus 3. Sometimes Elohim is described like it is a council.

Yes, Elohim is a 'title' such as 'Lord' and 'God' are titles and Not a personal name.
In other words, Elohim and Adhonai are a substitution and Not the Tetragrammaton YHWH

 

[Sargonski]

And then, a couple of years later in the life of Jesus, we have this ...

Luke 7: 16-20 "Fear seized them all; and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!” and “God has visited his people!” 17 And this report concerning him spread through the whole of Judea and all the surrounding country. 18 The disciples of John told him of all these things. 19 And John, calling to him two of his disciples, sent them to the Lord, saying, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?” 20 And when the men had come to him, they said, “John the Baptist has sent us to you, saying, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?"

Matthew 11: 2-3 "Now when John heard in prison about the deeds of the Christ, he sent word by his disciples 3 and said to him, “Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?"

Not sure what your point is other than Luke Copies Matt ?

 

[Ajax]

Not sure what your point is other than Luke Copies Matt ?

Irrelevant with the thread, but isn't he the same John who supposedly said he needs to be baptized by Jesus, he is not worthy even to untie the straps of his sandals, who bore witness to the spirit descending like a dove and heard God's voice proclaiming Jesus as his beloved son?
Even if he was expecting a warrior son of God, he had experienced enough evidence.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, Elohim is a 'title' such as 'Lord' and 'God' are titles and Not a personal name.
In other words, Elohim and Adhonai are a substitution and Not the Tetragrammaton YHWH

Yes. The tetragrammon (the four Hebrew letters for the personal name of God) is recorded in the Bible thousands of times.