Do you believe that Jesus is YHVH?

[Deeje]

Please answer each of the following questions:

1. Who is the Alpha and Omega, and the first and the last, the Almighty in Revelations 1:8 ?

"I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”

Since there is only one "Almighty" God...this is YHWH.

2. Who is the first and the last in Revelations 1:17-18 ?

Reasoning on the whole of Revelation, it says in Revelation 21:6-7..."Then He said to me, “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give to the one who thirsts from the spring of the water of life without cost. 7 He who overcomes will inherit these things, and I will be his God and he will be My son."

Jesus does not ever call his anointed ones "sons"...he calls them "Brothers". (Matthew 25:40)

This expression "First and Last" is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17-18. But similarly, the expression “apostle” is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person or are of equal rank, does it? (Heb. 3:1)

So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title “Alpha and Omega” applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son. Jesus can be "the first and last" (ho archē kai ho telos.”) without being "Alpha and Omega". (ho alpha kai ho ō)

3. Who is the first and the last according to Isaiah 44:6 ?

"‘I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me."

In Isaiah's day, Jesus did not exist. There was no God but YHWH to Israel.

4. Now who is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last in Revelation 22:12-13 ?

In verse 6 of Revelation 22 it says...."And he said to me, “These words are faithful and true”; and the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent His angel to show to His bond-servants the things which must soon take place...... 12 “Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

This is "the God of the spirits of the prophets"...YHWH.

Jesus is never called "Almighty God" but he is the representative chosen by his Father to carry out an incredibly important mission.

6. If the risen Messiah said I have all power in heaven and in earth, is he not the Almighty?

Do you mean Matthew 28:18, where, just before he returned to heaven, Jesus said.... “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." (NASB)

Again you use a bad translation. ESV says..."All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me."

(NLT) “I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth."

Why does Jesus need authority to be "given" to him if he is God? He had to be "given" this authority by one who had it to give....his Father.

It was prophecied in Isaiah 9:6 that the son to be born would also be the mighty God, and the everlasting Father.
YHWH said in Isaiah 43:10-12 that there was no God (el) formed before him, and neither would there be after him. (The same Hebrew word for God is used in both verses. )
Just because it has mighty before it, doesn't change anything.

I already explained Isaiah 9:6...go back and read it. There are mighty 'gods' both in heaven and on earth...but there is only one "Almighty" God....who bears a name that no one else shares. (Psalm 83:18)

John 14:28..."If you really loved me, you would be happy that I am going to the Father, who is greater than I am."

(Isaiah 10:20-21 is an example of where it calls YHWH the mighty God.)

YHWH is the 'Mighty God' spoken of here, but Isaiah spoke about only a remnant returning to the only true God in existence to them.....he is the only one who can rightfully claim the title "Almighty". Jesus was only a prophesy at that time. The man Jesus did not exist. The pre-human Jesus, who is a spirit being created by his Father certainly did. He is "the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God's creation." (Revelation 3:14) That means he existed before anything else.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Hi Truebeliever37 :

You misunderstand me : I DO agree with you that early Judeo-Christian literature represents Jehovah of the Old Testament as the Messiah of the New Testament. I was simply agreeing with Deejes specific point that in early Judeo-Christian tradition, the son (Jesus) was also viewed as the creator of the world under the authority and direction of his Father.

In Isaiah 44:24, the Masoretic uses a term biased towards "creating" (עשה), however, the Septuagint uses a term that means a “completion” of a thing (συντελων). Taken together, the terms better describe what neither alone reveals. The Father had a plan which the son completed.

This is the reason I liked Deejes’ point. It described this specific historical point in good clarity. I did not mean to approve of everything Deeje said, but I was trying to be specific in approval of a single concept.

Good Journey Truebeliever37.


Clear
σετζτωω[/QUOTE]

No Problem Clear,

I was trying to show that the Messiah was YHWH.
The OT declares YHWH created everything alone and by himself. Isaiah 44:24
The NT says the Messiah created everything. Colossians 1:14-16 So if he created everything then he has to be YHWH.
The only way both scriptures can be true, is for the Messiah to have been YHWH, which is what the scripture shows over and over. But when you show scriptures, people find so many ways to twist them. I think where I went wrong was trying to prove too many different things in one post. I plan to go back and focus on specific points.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The most powerful entity in the Universe, who has no equal, did not need to become the equivalent of an amoeba to save mankind. He sent his son, as his most trusted representative to buy back what Adam lost, so that his purpose for this earth could go ahead without any abuse of free will getting in the way, ever again.

In Genesis Jehovah is speaking to the one who was used as the agent of creation...his beloved son.
The apostle Paul wrote of Jesus...."He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him all things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All things have been created through him and for him. 17 Also, he is before all things, and by means of him all other things were made to exist." (Colossians 1:15-17)

Jehovah is the Creator and Jesus (in his pre-human state) used the raw materials that his Father brought into existence, to fashion all things in heaven, in the universe and on earth. (Proverbs 8:30-3; John 1:2-4)

It is like accrediting the architect for a building, even though he never directly laid a hand on the building itself but made sure that the builder had the plans and all the materials needed to construct his building. The building was the work of the architect, who designed and engineered everything in it. The one who put the materials together is not the one who thought it up and drafted out the plans.

What it boils down to, is it sounds like you just don't believe YHWH, when he said he created all things, alone, and by himself. Isaiah 44:24
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1 You evidently just don't believe he did it. You think it was someone else that actually did it.
YHWH said, I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. Isaiah 45:11-12

There are many more verses I could give, but if you won't accept these, what is the use? The sad part is you say you are a witness, but then you deny what he says.

 

[Deeje]

What it boils down to, is it sounds like you just don't believe YHWH, when he said he created all things, alone, and by himself. Isaiah 44:24

No....I just don't get fixated on one scripture and prefer to look for how everything fits into the big picture...not just into a little box that you can't seem to see out of.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1:1 You evidently just don't believe he did it. You think it was someone else that actually did it.

For the umteenth time..."God created" everything "THROUGH" the agency of his son. Do you have any idea what agency means? Please refer back to the architect scenario in my previous post.

YHWH said, I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded. Isaiah 45:11-12

There are many more verses I could give, but if you won't accept these, what is the use?

I have to agree with you....you do the very same thing yourself.....you are free to accept whatever you wish, just as I am.....We will all be accountable to the same judge....so we will stand or fall by what we accept as truth.

 

[Clear]

No Problem Clear,

I was trying to show that the Messiah was YHWH.
The OT declares YHWH created everything alone and by himself. Isaiah 44:24
The NT says the Messiah created everything. Colossians 1:14-16 So if he created everything then he has to be YHWH.
The only way both scriptures can be true, is for the Messiah to have been YHWH, which is what the scripture shows over and over. But when you show scriptures, people find so many ways to twist them. I think where I went wrong was trying to prove too many different things in one post. I plan to go back and focus on specific points.

Yes, I agree that the early Christian literature also shows they believed that the messiah of the New Testament was the God of the Old Testament. I think that your conversation with Dejee reflects a lack of shared context.

I am not a Jehovah's witness, but Deeje has explained the J.W. thread that Jehovah Witness theology has adopted the early (and authentic) usage of the specific word "God". That is, that there are multiple beings that have the designation "God" though only ONE "almighty" God. It is a form of monotheism called "henotheism". The Almighty God is the one worshiped and has authority over all other beings. The Almighty God (the Father - God #1) has more power and authority and more knowledge (etc) than the Son (a separate being that is a "god" - God #2).

Thus, when you quote "God created the heavens and the earth", you are applying it to the Father (God #1) and they (and I) apply to God #1 as the architect and God #2 as the actual agent of creation.

Whether one designates the Father as Elohim or Jehovah, or El, or Ja, or jaweh, baal,etc, (no one know what the pre-historical names actually were), the specific J.W. model of two beings is, I think, more consistent with the early Christian descriptions in their literature. (though I disagree on the application of the name they use, still I like the historical parts of their theological model)

I think your plan to focus on very specific points is wise and will lead to the least amount of confusion and is a good plan to create understanding and make progress on a specific point of disagreement. Good luck to you and Deeje both, in coming to understand one another.


p.s. Your interpretations occassionally go beyond the text. (almost all of us are guilty of this habit) For example, you mention that "the The OT declares YHWH created everything alone and by himself. Isaiah 44:24" (post #103). Isaiah does not say he created every "alone", nor does it say he did it by "himself". The text merely says he did it. It does not exclude the concept of him directing the process of creation or using others to assist him.

Clear
ακσιφυω

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Yes, I agree that the early Christian literature also shows they believed that the messiah of the New Testament was the God of the Old Testament. I think that your conversation with Dejee reflects a lack of shared context.

I am not a Jehovah's witness, but Deeje has explained the J.W. thread that Jehovah Witness theology has adopted the early (and authentic) usage of the specific word "God". That is, that there are multiple beings that have the designation "God" though only ONE "almighty" God. It is a form of monotheism called "henotheism". The Almighty God is the one worshiped and has authority over all other beings. The Almighty God (the Father - God #1) has more power and authority and more knowledge (etc) than the Son (a separate being that is a "god" - God #2).

Thus, when you quote "God created the heavens and the earth", you are applying it to the Father (God #1) and they (and I) apply to God #1 as the architect and God #2 as the actual agent of creation.

Whether one designates the Father as Elohim or Jehovah, or El, or Ja, or jaweh, baal,etc, (no one know what the pre-historical names actually were), the specific J.W. model of two beings is, I think, more consistent with the early Christian descriptions in their literature. (though I disagree on the application of the name they use, still I like the historical parts of their theological model)

I think your plan to focus on very specific points is wise and will lead to the least amount of confusion and is a good plan to create understanding and make progress on a specific point of disagreement. Good luck to you and Deeje both, in coming to understand one another.


p.s. Your interpretations occassionally go beyond the text. (almost all of us are guilty of this habit) For example, you mention that "the The OT declares YHWH created everything alone and by himself. Isaiah 44:24" (post #103). Isaiah does not say he created every "alone", nor does it say he did it by "himself". The text merely says he did it. It does not exclude the concept of him directing the process of creation or using others to assist him.

Clear
ακσιφυω

I guess I just believe what the scripture says, that there is only 1 God. The one God (YHWH) said over and over, that there is no other God than him. So I don't see how there can be a God #2. He said is there a God beside me? I know not any. So to me, you either believe him or you don't. Of course you all are free to believe in multiple Gods if you want. But I definitely don't see it as scriptural.

Also if I remember correctly the Hebrew word for created (bara) is 3rd person/masculine/singular, which is why it would be translated he created. So when it says God created - there was only one involved.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

No....I just don't get fixated on one scripture and prefer to look for how everything fits into the big picture...not just into a little box that you can't seem to see out of.

For the umteenth time..."God created" everything "THROUGH" the agency of his son. Do you have any idea what agency means? Please refer back to the architect scenario in my previous post.





I have to agree with you....you do the very same thing yourself.....you are free to accept whatever you wish, just as I am.....We will all be accountable to the same judge....so we will stand or fall by what we accept as truth.

You can't just ignore a scripture when it is such a direct clear statement. I guess I am a stickler for detail. It matters when our soul is at stake.

Please show me the scripture that says he created everything through the agency of his son. I didn't see anything in the scripture about an architect scenario.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

No sorry, it says that Jesus is "Lord" ("kyrios") not YHWH. It also says that all that Jesus did was to the glory of his Father, not himself.

You are wrong Deeje,

That is the Greek word they replaced Gods name with. They shouldn't have, but they did.

Look at Mark 12:29-30 where they are quoting Deuteronomy 6:4. That is the word they replaced YHWH's name with in the Greek.
Look at Mark 12:36 where they are quoting Psalms 110:1 Once again that is what they replaced the name YHWH with in the Greek.
Look at Matthew 22:44 - The same thing, they substituted that word for his name. There are many more verses I could show.

Tell me what they replaced God's name with in the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the OT.

I thought I would check to see what the JW's did in the New World Translation. Guess what - they evidently thought it was ok to replace kyrios with Jehovah in those verses.
So they pick and choose where they will put Gods name back in where it says Kyrios in the Greek.
I know they didn't replace it with his real name, but this does show that they knew his name was supposed to be there.

Anyway, as Philippians 2:11 says every tongue will confess he is YHWH

 

[Deeje]

You can't just ignore a scripture when it is such a direct clear statement. I guess I am a stickler for detail. It matters when our soul is at stake.

"Direct clear statements" are what you have been shown....yet you stick to one scripture in Isaiah and can't see past it. The Father alone is the Creator and he alone is God. He has a unique name that he shares with no one.
Jesus, OTOH has many names and many roles in his position as the Logos. He is created and is subservient to his God and Father.

Here is the most direct statement from the apostle Paul, educated by Jesus himself, saying the opposite of what you choose to believe.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6..."For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; 6 yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." (ASV)

"For although there be that are called gods, either in heaven or on earth (for there be gods many, and lords many);
Yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him." (DRA)

"There may be so-called gods both in heaven and on earth, and some people actually worship many gods and many lords. 6 But for us, There is one God, the Father, by whom all things were created, and for whom we live.
And there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created, and through whom we live." (NLT)

Do you see any other way to interpret that scripture?

Please show me the scripture that says he created everything through the agency of his son. I didn't see anything in the scripture about an architect scenario.

I have many times, but you ignore them.
Proverbs 8:30-31 is thought by many scholars to refer to God's son as "wisdom personified".....

"Then I was by him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before him,
Rejoicing in his habitable earth; And my delight was with the sons of men." (ASV)

"I was a skilled craftsman beside Him. I was His delight every day, always rejoicing before Him.
31 I was rejoicing in His inhabited world, delighting in the human race." (HCSB)

"Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men." (KJV)

“The Lord formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else.
This cannot be referring to actual godly wisdom because in verse 22 it says that "The Lord formed me from the beginning, before he created anything else." (NLT)

The Hebrew word "qanah" means....."to get, acquire, create, buy, possess." (Strongs) So if you look at this word in other scripture, it has to do with acquiring something....so unless God was lacking in wisdom for the eternity before he became a Creator, Jesus was the "master workman" or "skilled craftsman" the one "brought up with him" "acquired" or "formed" by God before he created anything else.

Revelation calls Jesus "the beginning of God's creation". (Revelation 3:14) These are clear direct statements.

Paul says that "all things were created through" Jesus......(Colossians 1:15-17) Only by removing the trinity blinkers will you "see" what is right in front of you....its your call.

 

[Deeje]

You are wrong Deeje,

That is the Greek word they replaced Gods name with. They shouldn't have, but they did.

Look at Mark 12:29-30 where they are quoting Deuteronomy 6:4. That is the word they replaced YHWH's name with in the Greek.
Look at Mark 12:36 where they are quoting Psalms 110:1 Once again that is what they replaced the name YHWH with in the Greek.
Look at Matthew 22:44 - The same thing, they substituted that word for his name. There are many more verses I could show.

Tell me what they replaced God's name with in the Septuagint, which is the Greek translation of the OT.

I thought I would check to see what the JW's did in the New World Translation. Guess what - they evidently thought it was ok to replace kyrios with Jehovah in those verses.
So they pick and choose where they will put Gods name back in where it says Kyrios in the Greek.
I know they didn't replace it with his real name, but this does show that they knew his name was supposed to be there.

Anyway, as Philippians 2:11 says every tongue will confess he is YHWH

Oh good grief! How do you not understand the substitution of a title for a name? That is a really sad bit of deduction IMO.

Let me illustrate it this way....America has had many Presidents and if I said that the President did or said something, you would have to ask me which one?...such as "Lincoln"? "Truman"? "Eisenhower"? "Obama"? or "Trump"?

When you use the title "Lord" its a bit like saying "President"....since there are "many gods and many lords" in this world, we have to name the God we worship to distinguish him from the "many" others. When you take his name away, you take away his identity.

Calling him "Lord" is not his name...its just a title.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Oh good grief! How do you not understand the substitution of a title for a name? That is a really sad bit of deduction IMO.

Let me illustrate it this way....America has had many Presidents and if I said that the President did or said something, you would have to ask me which one?...such as "Lincoln"? "Truman"? "Eisenhower"? "Obama"? or "Trump"?

When you use the title "Lord" its a bit like saying "President"....since there are "many gods and many lords" in this world, we have to name the God we worship to distinguish him from the "many" others. When you take his name away, you take away his identity.

Calling him "Lord" is not his name...its just a title.

You have got to be kidding. Can you not understand they substituted Kyrios for his name when they put the scriptures in Greek. I showed you several examples in post #108. His name was there originally. So that is what I am doing is putting his name back.

Why is it ok for the JW's to do that for the verses they chose to? They took the word kyrios and put Jehovah in its place. They may not have used the real name of YHWH, but they did know that his name was supposed to be there in those verses where kyrios was.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Deeje,

How many times do I have to tell you I don't believe in the trinity? You keep saying that when you know its not true. Either that or you aren't paying good enough attention.

Yes Paul says he created all things. The reason is because he was God manifest in the flesh. Not a 2nd person - it was actually YHWH dwelling in that body.

Those verses in Proverbs are regarding wisdom being with God in the beginning (not another person). Read Proverbs 8:1-36 - It was still wisdom in verses 30, and 31.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

"Direct clear statements" are what you have been shown....yet you stick to one scripture in Isaiah and can't see past it. The Father alone is the Creator and he alone is God. He has a unique name that he shares with no one.
Jesus, OTOH has many names and many roles in his position as the Logos. He is created and is subservient to his God and Father.

Here is the most direct statement from the apostle Paul, educated by Jesus himself, saying the opposite of what you choose to believe.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6..."For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth; as there are gods many, and lords many; 6 yet to us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him." (ASV)

"For although there be that are called gods, either in heaven or on earth (for there be gods many, and lords many);
Yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him." (DRA)

"There may be so-called gods both in heaven and on earth, and some people actually worship many gods and many lords. 6 But for us, There is one God, the Father, by whom all things were created, and for whom we live.
And there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created, and through whom we live." (NLT)

Do you see any other way to interpret that scripture?

Actually, when it has Lord Jesus Christ in the scriptures, it should read YHWH YHWSH Messiah. YHWSH is the real name of the Messiah.
That is the name that means YHWH saves or YHWH is salvation. If you will notice they only called him this after the resurrection. That was when he inherited the name above all names.
So he does have that unique name.

Of course there are false gods, but only one real God - the Father. But what did he say when they asked him to show them the Father? He said Have I been so long with you and you still don't know me. He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father.

 

[Clear]

POST ONE OF TWO

1) REGARDING USE OF NEW TESTAMENT TEXT

Truebeliever37 said : “You can't just ignore a scripture when it is such a direct clear statement. I guess I am a stickler for detail….. post 107

Truebeliever37, I disagree with J.W. theology on a lot of points, but I have to side with Deeje that you are not stickler for “detail” when it comes to New Testament text. You habitually misquote the text to support your theology (much of which agrees with mine). You say your quote is what the New Testament “should say” but it doesn’t.

For example, you tell us that the New Testament replaced Jehovahs name within the greek at Mk 12:29-30 and 36 but there is NO ancient greek version New Testament manuscript that reads as you quote it. (not a single one of thousands)

We have no reason to suppose the New Testament quotes you use EVER used Jehovah in these references (it is a different story with the Old Testament texts). One can question why the writers of the greek new Testament text wrote what they wrote, but speculation regarding motive doesn’t change the base New Testament text. Perhaps you should consider that there might have been a very good reason for the New Testament writers to have written the text as it stands. Text is not merely transmitted, but it is interpretational as well.


You claim “ Philippians 2:11 says every tongue will confess he is YHWH” (Truebeliever37 post #108)

NO such greek New Testament text exists. You are misquoting the text. Misquoting the text is not a characteristic of someone who is a “stickler for detail”, but it is instead, it in this case, it represents a bending of text to support one’s personal theology.



2) THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF JESUS/THE SON AS THE AGENT OF CREATION

Truebeliever37 said : "Please show me the scripture that says he created everything through the agency of his son. I didn't see anything in the scripture about an architect scenario." (truebeliever37 post #107)

Again, I have to side with Deeje on this point. Your Christian theology is not the same as that of the early Judeo-Christians. Your interpretation is different than theirs. In the early Judeo-Christian literature and multiple religious textual genre’s it is clear that they believed the Son of God was the agent of creation. For examples :


THE SON (the “only begotten”, the “elect one”, the Fathers “right arm”, etc, etc) AS AN AGENT IN CREATION AND HIS SPECIFIC ROLE IN CREATION.

You must keep in mind that your personal, modern, christian religious theory is NOT the same as that of the earliest Judeo-Christianity. Their religion was different than your in multiple ways. One of them is that the early Christians believed that the SON was the agent of creation and this belief is reflected in the ancient Judeo-Christian literature. For examples :

The earliest Christian Doctrine was that the earth was created by the SON, is reflected in Prayer #4 of Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers where they prayed to God thusly : Quote: “you are the Father of wisdom, the Creator, as cause, of the creative workmanship through a Mediator...(aposCon 7.35.1-10);


This doctrine is reflected in yet another Hellenistic Synagogal prayer (#1) that was said after the communion : Quote: ‘We give thanks to you, O God and Father of Jesus our Savior...on behalf of the knowledge and faith and love and immortality which you gave to us through Jesus your Son. O Master Almighty, the God of the universe, you created the world and what is in it through him,...(Apos Con 7.26. 1-3)

Another common prayer said : Quote: “Blessed are you, O Lord, King of the ages, who through Christ made everything, and through him in the beginning ordered that which was unprepared; prayer #3 - (aposCon 7.34.1-8)


Using the common epithet of Jesus as God’s “right hand” Baruch honors God the Father who “with your counsel, you reign over all creation which your right hand has created” (The apocalypse of (Baruch 2) 54:13)

In the same manner, Clement, of the New Testament, speaks of things done by the Father, but THROUGH Jesus as administrator : for example, he refers to God as : Quote: “the creator of the universe...through his beloved servant Jesus Christ...” and that God calls us from darkness to light “through” Jesus, and he refers to “ those who love you through Jesus Christ, your beloved Servant..” (1 Clem 59:2-3)

This same doctrine regarding the cascade of Eternally existing Authority, from God the Father, through his Son as Administrator is woven into many ancient teachings and texts. Even the hellenistic synogogal prayers confirms this authentic ancient doctrine : Quote: the God and Father of your only Son, our God and Savior, the maker of the whole universe through him; 8 the Administrator, the Guardian, ... #9 (AposCon 8.5.1-4)

POST TWO OF TWO FOLLOWS

 

[Clear]

POST TWO OF TWO


3) GOD THE FATHER WIELDS AUTHORITY OVER ALL THINGS, BUT HE DELEGATES SPECIFIC TASKS TO OTHERS
Sacred texts make clear that ancient Judao-Christians believed that God the Father wielded ultimate authority. This is true whether it was Jewish Enoch who proclaimed of the Father “Your authority and kingdom abide forever and ever; and your dominion throughout all the generations of generation;..” (1st Enoch 84:2) or whether it is Christian Hermas who taught “God alone has the power to give healing, for all authority is his. (Hermas 60:3-4).



SPECIFIC SACRED AUTHORITY AND TASKS RELATED TO SPECIFIC AUTHORITY IS DELEGATED FROM GOD THE FATHER (OFTEN THROUGH HIS SERVANTS) TO OTHER BEINGS WHO THEN POSSESS WHATEVER SPECIFIC DEGREE OF AUTHORITY HE GAVE THEM.


1) GOD THE FATHER DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO JESUS TO ACCOMPLISH GOD THE FATHERS PURPOSES

Though the angel tells the prophet Enoch “... All these things which you have seen happen by the Authority of his Messiah so that he may give orders and be praised upon the earth. (1st Enoch 52:4) still, the Messiah himself is given whatever authority he has and is sent by God, his father : “I will send my chosen one, having in him one measure of all my power, and he will summon my people... (The Apocalypse of Abraham 31:1)

Isaiah describes his Pre-creation vision of seeing God the Father sending of the pre-mortal Messiah to earth to accomplish the atonement : “I heard the voice of the Most High, the Father of my Lord, as he said to my Lord Christ, who will be called Jesus, “Go out and descend through all the heavens...14 And afterwards you shall ascend from the gods of death to your place, and ....in glory you shall ascend and sit at my right hand, ... 16 This command I heard the Great Glory giving to my Lord.” (Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 10:6-16) According the ancient Christians, Jesus did not take authority unto himself nor did he send himself, but he was given authority by and sent by God, the Father to accomplish his role as redeemer.

This doctrine was integral to early Christianity. For example, A frightened Bartholomew fell at Jesus’ feet and prayed : Quote: “...Lord Jesus Christ, everlasting one, who gave grace for the whole world to those who love you, ... who at the command of the Father gave up your life above and completed your work, who changed the dejection of Adam into joy and overcame the sorrow of Eve with gracious countenance...” (The Gospel of Bartholomew chap IV)

Jesus confirms this doctrine that he is sent. “Jesus said to him: “Bartholomew, the Father named me Christ, that I might come down on earth and anoint with the oil of life everyone who came to me.” (The Gospel of Bartholomew CH IV )


2) JESUS DELEGATES SPECIFIC PORTIONS OF AUTHORITY TO OTHER MEN (UNDER THE DIRECTION OF HIS FATHER) TO ACCOMPLISH GOD’S PURPOSES.

The ancient Jews understood that men who had authentic authority, such as the prophets, received authority from God. Quote: “May the God under whose authority my fathers, Abraham and Isaac, served in reverence, ...may he bless these lads, Manasseh and Ephraim. (testament of Jacob 4:11-16)


This doctrine of Testament of Jacob is confirmed to continue in the Christian Apocalypse of Abraham : Quote: “And the angel said to me, “Abraham!” And I said, “Here I am, your servant.” And he said, “Know from this that the Eternal One whom you have loved has chosen you. Be bold and do through your authority whatever I order you against him who reviles justice.” (The Apocalypse of Abraham 14:1-4)

When the pre-mortal Jesus is sent to Abraham, he makes clear that he is sent by God to bless Abraham “in the name of God” (i.e. in God’s place and stead he is doing this) : Quote: 5 And he said to me, “Stand up, Abraham, friend of god who has loved you, let human trembling not enfold you!” For lo! I am sent to you to strengthen you and to bless you in the name of God, creator of heavenly and earthly things, who has loved you....8 I am Iaoel (a euphamism for Jehovah)...11 I am ordered to loosen Hades ....13 I am sent to you now to bless you and the land which he whom you have called the Eternal One has prepared for you. .... I am assigned (to be) with you and with the generations which is predestined (to be born) from you. (The Apocalypse of Abraham 10:5, 11,14-17)


The vast descension literature confirms the descension of Jesus into Sheol during the three days between his death and resurrection. And many of the saints arose and were resurrected with him.

The Prophet enoch (“the great scribe”), when told by God to write, was given authority both to write and to judge, according to his specific station. Quote: “...I sat upon a great throne at the door of the seventh palace, and I judged all the denizens of the heights on the authority of the Holy One...The princes of kingdoms stood beside me, to my right and to my left, by authority of the Holy One blessed be he” (3rd Enoch 16:1)


It is not just Apostles of Jesus who have been delegated specific and limited authority, but just as God the Father, delegates specific authority to Jesus, and as Jesus delegates specific authority to the Apostles; the Apostles delegate specific authorities to others, such as bishops (who then issue authority to deacons, etc).

This ancient understanding of descending delegation was even an integral part of the early Christian prayers. For example, the hellenistic Synagogal Prayer #9 relates this doctrine : Quote:

“1 The one who is, Master, Lord, God the Almighty; ...7 the God and Father of your only Son, our God and Savior, the maker of the whole universe through him; 8 the Administrator, the Guardian,... 9 you are the one who gave standards for the Church, through the appearance in flesh of your Christ, subject to the witness by the Paraclete, through your apostles and through us bishops who by your grace are present. (Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers - #9 (AposCon 8.5.1-4) 9:1-13)

Quote: “For the Father anointed the Son, and the Son anointed the apostles, and the apostles anointed us. (The gospel of Phillip)

This descending delegation of sacred authority was the same process God had always used. "... God gave Levi the authority, and to Judah with him [as well as to me and to Dan and to Joseph], to be rulers. It is for this reason that I command you to give heed to Levi, because he will know the law of God and will give instructions concerning justice and concerning sacrifice for Israel until the consummation of times; he is the anointed priest of whom the Lord spake. " (Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs - Reuben 6:7-8)

That the apostles delegated specific local authority to church offices anciently is very clear from their texts. Quote: “Be subject to the Bishop and to one another, as Jesus Christ in the flesh was to the Father, and as the apostles were to Christ and to the Father, that there might be unity, both physical and spiritual. (Ignatius to the Magnesians 13:2)

Quote: “Therefore, as the Lord did nothing without the Father, either by himself or through the apostles (for he was united with him), so you must not do anything without the bishop and the presbyters. (Ignatius to the Magnesians 7:1)

It was also clear that the Bishop could delegate descending authority for certain sacred functions to others. Regarding the Eucharist, Ignatius taught : Quote: “Let no one do anything that has to do with the church without the bishop. Only that Eucharist which is under the authority of the bishop (or whomsoever he himself designates) is to be considered valid. .... It is not permissible either to baptize or to hold a love feast without the Bishop. (Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans 8:1-2)



This all relates to the Opening post only indirectly inasmuch as it describes the Hierarchy of authority and purposes within those individuals who make up the ancient Trinity / God Head. The point is, that sacred authority centers in God the Father; who, sends others to accomplish a task (such as when the Father sends his son Jesus to accomplish the Atonement), and Jesus may, (in accordance with his Father's will), give to others a portion of authority to accomplish a task Jesus sends them to do; and thus authority is given in a very organized, "descending" fashion.

When reading the early texts, you will have to keep in mind that your Christianity is not the same as early Judeo-Christianity was near the time of Christ and the apostles. Thus your theology will not be in strict harmony with their theology.


In any case, truebeliever37, I wish you good luck in coming to your own understanding as to what you will believe on such subjects.

Clear
νεσεακω[/quote]

 

[TrueBeliever37]

POST ONE OF TWO

1) REGARDING USE OF NEW TESTAMENT TEXT

Truebeliever37 said : “You can't just ignore a scripture when it is such a direct clear statement. I guess I am a stickler for detail….. post 107

Truebeliever37, I disagree with J.W. theology on a lot of points, but I have to side with Deeje that you are not stickler for “detail” when it comes to New Testament text. You habitually misquote the text to support your theology (much of which agrees with mine). You say your quote is what the New Testament “should say” but it doesn’t.

For example, you tell us that the New Testament replaced Jehovahs name within the greek at Mk 12:29-30 and 36 but there is NO ancient greek version New Testament manuscript that reads as you quote it. (not a single one of thousands)

We have no reason to suppose the New Testament quotes you use EVER used Jehovah in these references (it is a different story with the Old Testament texts). One can question why the writers of the greek new Testament text wrote what they wrote, but speculation regarding motive doesn’t change the base New Testament text. Perhaps you should consider that there might have been a very good reason for the New Testament writers to have written the text as it stands. Text is not merely transmitted, but it is interpretational as well.


You claim “ Philippians 2:11 says every tongue will confess he is YHWH” (Truebeliever37 post #108)

NO such greek New Testament text exists. You are misquoting the text. Misquoting the text is not a characteristic of someone who is a “stickler for detail”, but it is instead, it in this case, it represents a bending of text to support one’s personal theology.



2) THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF JESUS/THE SON AS THE AGENT OF CREATION

Truebeliever37 said : "Please show me the scripture that says he created everything through the agency of his son. I didn't see anything in the scripture about an architect scenario." (truebeliever37 post #107)

Again, I have to side with Deeje on this point. Your Christian theology is not the same as that of the early Judeo-Christians. Your interpretation is different than theirs. In the early Judeo-Christian literature and multiple religious textual genre’s it is clear that they believed the Son of God was the agent of creation. For examples :


THE SON (the “only begotten”, the “elect one”, the Fathers “right arm”, etc, etc) AS AN AGENT IN CREATION AND HIS SPECIFIC ROLE IN CREATION.

You must keep in mind that your personal, modern, christian religious theory is NOT the same as that of the earliest Judeo-Christianity. Their religion was different than your in multiple ways. One of them is that the early Christians believed that the SON was the agent of creation and this belief is reflected in the ancient Judeo-Christian literature. For examples :

The earliest Christian Doctrine was that the earth was created by the SON, is reflected in Prayer #4 of Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers where they prayed to God thusly : Quote: “you are the Father of wisdom, the Creator, as cause, of the creative workmanship through a Mediator...(aposCon 7.35.1-10);


This doctrine is reflected in yet another Hellenistic Synagogal prayer (#1) that was said after the communion : Quote: ‘We give thanks to you, O God and Father of Jesus our Savior...on behalf of the knowledge and faith and love and immortality which you gave to us through Jesus your Son. O Master Almighty, the God of the universe, you created the world and what is in it through him,...(Apos Con 7.26. 1-3)

Another common prayer said : Quote: “Blessed are you, O Lord, King of the ages, who through Christ made everything, and through him in the beginning ordered that which was unprepared; prayer #3 - (aposCon 7.34.1-8)


Using the common epithet of Jesus as God’s “right hand” Baruch honors God the Father who “with your counsel, you reign over all creation which your right hand has created” (The apocalypse of (Baruch 2) 54:13)

In the same manner, Clement, of the New Testament, speaks of things done by the Father, but THROUGH Jesus as administrator : for example, he refers to God as : Quote: “the creator of the universe...through his beloved servant Jesus Christ...” and that God calls us from darkness to light “through” Jesus, and he refers to “ those who love you through Jesus Christ, your beloved Servant..” (1 Clem 59:2-3)

This same doctrine regarding the cascade of Eternally existing Authority, from God the Father, through his Son as Administrator is woven into many ancient teachings and texts. Even the hellenistic synogogal prayers confirms this authentic ancient doctrine : Quote: the God and Father of your only Son, our God and Savior, the maker of the whole universe through him; 8 the Administrator, the Guardian, ... #9 (AposCon 8.5.1-4)

POST TWO OF TWO FOLLOWS

No I am a stickler for details. Details of the truth. I just sometimes tell the idea of what it is saying in a slightly different way, and then provide the scripture, to provide the exact wording. My way of wording it didn't change the meaning of what it would be if written with the correct word in it. Sometimes wording it slightly different allows someone to better understand exactly what you are trying to get across.

Take Philippians 2:11 for example,
When you put his name back in, where they replaced his name with the Greek word kyrios. - they would be doing what I said. It is just a fact, whether you believe it or not, that they replaced his name over and over and over with kyrios. Surely you don't believe the apostles quoting Deuteronomy 6:4 , replaced his name with the title kyrios, do you? The original NT was not written in Greek anyway.

And there is evidence in the Aramaic Pesh-itta New Testament, that it was YHWH in Philippians 2:11

Also I saw online a copy of a scripture from an older version of the Septuagint, and it still had the name YHWH in the Hebrew characters. But all the copies after the 2nd Century A.D. have kyrios instead of YHWH. That means they changed it sometime around the 2nd Century A.D. after the apostles were dead, from YHWH to kyrios.

The apostles were taught by the Messiah, and then told to teach the world what they had been commanded. (Note: My wording, but it is still correct.) I only go by what the apostles taught. Not so called church fathers, or anyone else, unless it can be found in the word of God.

 

[calledoutones]

I realized recently that not all churches actually teach, that Jesus is JHVH.

Comment if you want, and what a church may have taught you about this.

A Prophetic word from the DIVINE..I AM not Jesus/Yeshua in whom they have Replaced My SAVING NAME WITH, throughout My FATHER'S Holy Scribes/Scriptures when I LEFT YOUR WORLD AGE, which was also when your 'FREE WELL TEST" had begun. Just as they had done. When the "ADDED" the "Title of GOD" into My FATHER'S Holy Scribes/Scriptures, then DECEIVED YOU into WORSHIPING a "GOD", INSTEAD OF your "CREATOR" who is called "ABBA" and not GOD, but "ABBA", which means FATHER, have you not read or have they not taught you this? Saith YAHOSHUA, who is the Christ meaning the "ANOINTED ONE", unto the GENTILE NATIONS/NATIONALITIES of the WORLD, called MANKIND, who are YOU, and unto the Jews, I AM, Messiah, fulfilling the FATHER Scriptures... Galations 4:6 And because ye are sons, the FATHER hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, "ABBA" Father.

There is ONLY ONE GOD in this WORLD, and he is Satan who have been standing behind the "Title of GOD", in whom they have DECEIVED you into "WORSHIPING", UNAWARES, through your "Traditions", have you not read, or have they not taught you this? Saith YAHOHSUA, who is Christ unto YOU, and unto the JEWS, I AM, MESSIAH, but who I AM NOT is JESUS/Yeshua in whom they had REPLACED MY SAVING NAME WITH, throughout My FATHER'S Holy Scribes/Scriptures, when I LEFT YOUR WORLD AGE, saith YAHOSHUA, fulfilling the FATHER Scriptures.. 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of the FATHER, should shine unto them.

Paul was trying to warn you about this. When he said that My FATHER did not DWELL IN YOUR TEMPLES/Churches, have you not read, saith YAHOSHUA, who is the Christ unto the GENTILE NATIONS/NATIONALITIES of the WORLD, and unto the Jews, I AM, MESSIAH, fulfilling the Father Scriptures.. Acts 17:22-24 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands

I have sent unto you, not only My Prophetess, but also thy Elect Sister, in whom I have said to GREET THEE, saith YAHOSHUA, fulfilling the FATHER Scriptures...2 John 1:1-2 The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth. For the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall be with us for ever. 2 John 1:9-13 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not “the Father”. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him Father’s speed: For he that biddeth him “GOD” speed is partaker of his evil deeds. Having many things to write unto you, I would not write with paper and ink: but I trust to come unto you, AND SPEAK FACE TO FACE, that our joy may be full. “THE CHILDREN OF THY ELECT SISTER GREET THEE. Amen.

I have also given you your Visitation through her, saith YAHOSHUA who is Christ unto YOU, and unto the Jews, I AM, Messiah, fulfilling the Father Scriptures.. Luke 19:40-44
And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it, Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.


Shalom.

 

[Clear]

Hi truebeliever37 :

JESUS AS JEHOVAH/ELOHIM/EL/BAAL/LORD, etc.
Please keep in mind that I agree with you regarding the specific theological point that early Christians did believe and teach that Jesus was the God of the Old Testament (regardless of what the name was).

JESUS AS CREATOR UNDER DIRECTION OF HIS FATHER
I agree with Deeje on the specific point that early Christians did believe and teach that Jesus was the agent of creation of the world, under the direction of his Father. Thus we are describing specific, discrete areas of agreement and specific, discrete areas of disagreement. As their literature describes, as I pointed out in posts #114 and #115, the early Christians did believe the Son/Messiah/Jesus was the creator as an agent, directed by his Father.

LARGE AREAS OF TEXTUAL SPECULATION
Since no one know what the original oral stories actually said, nor what the original written texts said, nor what the original languages of original transmission were, we cannot know the earliest, pre-history specifics. The majority of doctrines religionists discuss and disagree on are textual and religious speculations we all make, mixed with a few, specific, facts.

SMALL AREAS OF TEXTUAL KNOWLEDGE
Since we do not know what the original texts looked like nor what they said (specifically), we cannot actually conclude much about the pre-historical documents and, thus, most of our conversations refer to later textual versions of these religious traditions. For example, we don’t know what the Adamic language looked like nor what language the earliest forms of these stories originated in. This causes problems.

Problems with your example from Phillipians 4:11
You assume the greek texts “changed” the name YWHW (“jehovah”) to κυριοσ (lord). However, the fact that NONE of the greeks use the hebrew term, may simply mean that it is an original doctrinal statement in the greek text. (i.e. “The Lord Jesus IS YWHW”). This is an interpretive statement. It may have been the early christian INTENT to write this statement this way and it certainly is the original statement in all known greek versions (NA-s7 lists NO other versions that indicate change in any greek version known, GN-4 also lists no variants for this specific word in this specific sentence).

You also supported this speculation with a single document, the syriac peshi tta (which itself is not the original text). However we know that the Greek versions are not simply translations which originated from the peshi tta due to the many textual discrepancies between these two families of texts. (If one was translated from the other, we would expect more agreement...).

IF you are going to base your speculation on Phillipians 4:11 on a claim that the Peshi tta is the base text upon which the Greek text is based (and justify the claim that the text was “changed”), then you will have to first show the greek is based on the Peshi tta (while the majority of Scholars will disagree with this theory).

I hope you understand that this is a very specific disagreement and that I agree with your base point of Jehovah/Jesus viewed as the same in early literature, merely that the textual example you used, cannot be used to support this point. When you claim “I just sometimes tell the idea of what it is saying in a slightly different way, and then provide the scripture, to provide the exact wording.”, your scriptures should actually “provide the exact wording” of the text and not your wording presented in place of the exact wording, or you should point out that you are not really using the exact wording.

In any case, I hope your own spiritual journey is wonderful truebeliever37.

Clear
ειτζσιφυω

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Hi truebeliever37 :

Problems with your example from Phillipians 4:11
You assume the greek texts “changed” the name YWHW (“jehovah”) to κυριοσ (lord). However, the fact that NONE of the greeks use the hebrew term, may simply mean that it is an original doctrinal statement in the greek text. (i.e. “The Lord Jesus IS YWHW”). This is an interpretive statement. It may have been the early christian INTENT to write this statement this way and it certainly is the original statement in all known greek versions (NA-s7 lists NO other versions that indicate change in any greek version known, GN-4 also lists no variants for this specific word in this specific sentence).

You also supported this speculation with a single document, the syriac peshi tta (which itself is not the original text). However we know that the Greek versions are not simply translations which originated from the peshi tta due to the many textual discrepancies between these two families of texts. (If one was translated from the other, we would expect more agreement...).

IF you are going to base your speculation on Phillipians 4:11 on a claim that the Peshi tta is the base text upon which the Greek text is based (and justify the claim that the text was “changed”), then you will have to first show the greek is based on the Peshi tta (while the majority of Scholars will disagree with this theory).

I hope you understand that this is a very specific disagreement and that I agree with your base point of Jehovah/Jesus viewed as the same in early literature, merely that the textual example you used, cannot be used to support this point. When you claim “I just sometimes tell the idea of what it is saying in a slightly different way, and then provide the scripture, to provide the exact wording.”, your scriptures should actually “provide the exact wording” of the text and not your wording presented in place of the exact wording, or you should point out that you are not really using the exact wording.

In any case, I hope your own spiritual journey is wonderful truebeliever37.

Clear
ειτζσιφυω

Hi Clear,

As I said, the earliest copies of the Septuagint (Greek OT) originally had YHWH in the Hebrew characters. After the 2nd century AD, they all have the name replaced with kyrios. So it is clear that kyrios is the word they replaced his name with.

Then you get to our NT, and the verses that quote OT verses, where we know the name YHWH was in the verse, have the name replaced with guess what? - kyrios.
Are you saying you believe the apostles wrote the original NT verses replacing God's holy name, with a title that means Lord? A title that is even used for false Gods.
Of course, If they replaced his name with a title in the Greek texts, then we won't have a Greek text with his name in it. You have to look at their track record, and other witnesses such as the Aramiac Peshi tta. They had to have seen the name YHWH in Philippians 2:11 at some point, or I don't think they would have included it.

I am not saying the Peshi tta is the original document, but I do believe that Aramaic was the original language for the NT.
Some of my reasons are,
1. Because of the word plays, and the rhyming and poetry when it is in Aramaic.
2. Split words - Words where you have one word in the Aramaic, that has more than one meaning - and you have different Greek manuscripts where one manuscript chose one meaning and the other Greek manuscript chose the other meaning. But in the Greek both words have totally different meanings, and a different number of letters in the word, and totally different letters. ( so it can't just be a typo or something).

Are you pretty much an expert on the Greek, if I have a question about something in the future?

 

[Clear]

Hi truebeliever37 :

Let me again make clear that I agree with you on your specific doctrinal claim that the earliest Christians, describe their belief that Jesus was the God of the Old Testament.

1) Regarding your claim that Phillipians 2:11 should read the tetragram instead of the current text (which all known greek texts use).

The problem I have with your statements supporting your theory on Phillipians 2:11 is that they are irrelevant. For examples :

a) Truebeliever37 said : “As I said, the earliest copies of the Septuagint (Greek OT) originally had YHWH in the Hebrew characters”

We are not referring to a hebrew OLD TESTAMENT verse, but Phillipians 2:11 is a greek NEW TESTAMENT verse (Phillipians 2:11)

b) Truebeliever37 said : “Then you get to our NT, and the verses that quote OT verses…”

We are not referring to a New Testament Verse that is quoting the tetragram from an old testament verse : You first claim Phillipians 2:11 is a quote of Deut 6:4 (the shema). Phillipians 2:11 is NOT a direct quote of the shema.

c) Truebeliever37 said : “You have to look at their track record, and other witnesses such as the Aramiac Peshi tta. “

Existing Aramaic and syriac pesh ittas were created by translating FROM earlier greek texts. If so, then it is the Pesh itta which changed the Phillipians 2:11 text and the greek which is more original.

You claim a single version of the New Testament (the pesh itta) uses the tetragram in Phillipians and therefore all greek texts should use the tetragram in Phillipians 2:11. This logic uses a rare exception (one pesh itta originating from early greek text) to create a general rule (for thousands of earlier greek texts). The logic here is faulty.


d) Truebeliever37 said “I am not saying the Peshi tta is the original document, but I do believe that Aramaic was the original language for the NT.”

This is irrelevant, No theoretical original Aramaic text exists of Phillipians 2:11, but thousands of greek fragments exists from the earliest periods.

IF Phillipians 2:11 is an interpretive statement (Mishna) then it should NOT read the same as Deuteronomy 6:4 at all.


These are difficult inconsistencies which must be overcome if you are to support your textual theory regarding phillipians 2:11.

truebeliever37, I appreciate the areas of agreement we share. I appreciate and accept your base point that Jesus was viewed as the God of the Old Testament by early Christians. Specifically, I simply don't accept your theory on Phillipians as it applies to the tetragram.

In any case, I sincerely hope your spiritual journey in this life is wonderful

Clear
ειειτζνεω