How can YHWH be the FATHER?

[1213]

This is obtuse - What then is this being .. if not a son of god .. ...

I believe he was like Michael, before rejecting God.

.. nor act against God ..

If in the end he is thrown to the lake of fire, I think it means he rebelled.

they do make a wager however ..

Why is that not said in the Bible, if that is what you think happened?

A divine being with Power over the whole earth ..

I don't think there is Biblical reason to think he has that power, at least not anymore.

...Who told you "Sons of God" were the same as God.

Ok, sorry, I thought you think so. In this case we agree, there is only one true God.

but Ha Satan is the head Honcho according to the Gospel of Matt

Sorry, I don't think that is the correct understanding, for example because:

Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.
Matt. 28:18

 

[Muffled]

Yes of old age because they were deprived of the tree of life. The tree of knowledge did not kill them, being exiled killed them.

I believe they were exiled because they ate of the tree of knowledge.

 

[Muffled]

I believe it is more likely that Yeshua was the serpent.

I believe He was not living at the time. I believe the serpent was Hel who was a shape shifter. That is the only way one can have a speaking serpent.

 

[Muffled]

No offense, dude, I realize that it is important for you to feel that there is a seamless transition from the OT to the NT. But there's not. The overall thrust of the NT (largely due to Paul) is that the OT is abrogated in favor of a new covenant. And indeed the NT teaches something entirely new that is incompatible with the teachings of the Tanakh.

I believe in your fantaasies that is true but the continuity is there even if the covenant is different.

 

[Sargonski]

I believe he was like Michael, before rejecting God.

If in the end he is thrown to the lake of fire, I think it means he rebelled.

Why is that not said in the Bible, if that is what you think happened?

I don't think there is Biblical reason to think he has that power, at least not anymore.

Ok, sorry, I thought you think so. In this case we agree, there is only one true God.

Sorry, I don't think that is the correct understanding, for example because:

Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.
Matt. 28:18

OH My Word --- "Like Micheal" - What does that mean with respect to Godly Powers ? .. and Ha Statan was never thrown down .. What in the OT are you talking about .. and why don't you understand this basic fact ? I get that you would not understand that the Devil in the NT is not our Friend from Job in the OT.. but .. how is it that you do not understand that Ha Satan of Job is not thrown down anywhere in this book of the people of the Book. >>> ???

What powers did Micheal Have .. and do these powers qualify our favorite Angel as a lesser God .. meaning a God .. but not having as much power as the Most High .. not having as much power as Daddy .. speaking of whcih .. are you trying to claim that Angels can be Sons of God ? .. or that they are Sons of God .. themselves lesser Gods ..

What on earth are you trying to say here .. Like Michael .. what does that mean . what kind of Powers does Lord Michael have that qualify him as Son of God .. and sorry Ha Satan and God make a bet .. a bet which God accepts .. what part of the doornob is what you turn to open the door did you not understand ?

and NO .. the Son's of God not being as powerfull as the Most High God does not make the Most High God the only God. Good grief this is becoming painful Brother 123.

Now .. tell us how you figure Ha Satan and Michaeal are the same . with respect to having Godly powers equivalent to a lesser God.

 

[Sargonski]

Jesus came to them and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to me in heaven and on earth.
Matt. 28:18

?? That Jesus usurps the position of Tester of Souls .. a changing of the Guard . one "son of God" replaing the other , changes not the fact that Ha Satan was the Chief God over the earth when he held the position of Tester of Souls ..

In addition .. I must protest the inclusion of Pious Fraud ... you will need to find another piece of scripture to support that Jesus usurps the position of Lord Sataniel ... "the Long ending of Mark" for example .. and what you have posted for the same reason..

Look toward Matt 25 .. the Sheep and Goats parable .. where Lord Jesus sittith at the right hand of the Father .. judging the nations .. Lord of Justice and Righteousness.

Can we say that Jesus has taken over the position of Tester of Souls ? .. I would certainly say it is possible .. but not defacto.

"Pious Fraud" - just saying .. something should have gone ding ding ding .. not so much because Jesus has been given power over the earth .. this is plausible .. the "implausible" part is that he is also given power over the heavens .. Sorry .. NO.. just No.. have some faith Brother 123 .. No one believe Jesus usurpse the position of "The Father" . sorry .. big heresy that one in the early Church .. .. as in before ~ 250 AD .. Pope Dionysis being the one calling Tuterllians Trinity idea heresy .. after which a different form becomes a thing

Sorry .. Jesus does not usurp the position of "The Father" .. hallowed be thy name .. a name of which you are clearly unfamiliar .. until now of course

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Does not necessary mean he was one of the sons of God.

If he were not, the text would have say the sons of God and Satan. it doesn't.

Nowhere in the Bible it is said they made a bet.

While it doesn't use the word bet, it is clear that that is what the text is describing.

According to the Bible Satan has acted against God's will.

Actually the exact opposite. Satan is unable to do anything until he gets God's express permission.

The book of Job does place Job's suffering as being God's will. And it doesn't ever give the real reason why God allowed Job to suffer. The "bet" is really a lame attempt to explain it, and is a horrible addition to the story because it makes God look fickle, petty, and unjust. It's far better to simply say, "We have no idea why God allows the innocent to suffer."

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe in your fantaasies that is true but the continuity is there even if the covenant is different.

The very fact that your Christian texts say that the old covenant is abrogated and that you are under a new covenant MEANS that the two are incompatible.

 

[teage]

I believe He was not living at the time. I believe the serpent was Hel who was a shape shifter. That is the only way one can have a speaking serpent.

"Before Abraham was, I am" Jesus.

 

[teage]

I believe they were exiled because they ate of the tree of knowledge.

Yes, I agree

 

[1213]

If he were not, the text would have say the sons of God and Satan. it doesn't.

Neither it says Satan was one of them.

While it doesn't use the word bet, it is clear that that is what the text is describing.

Sorry, I don't think there is anything indicating that. If there was a bet, what was the stake?

...The book of Job does place Job's suffering as being God's will.

I don't think there is anything that indicates so.

And it doesn't ever give the real reason why God allowed Job to suffer.

I believe the reason why God allowed it is, that way Satan proved to be evil and and not knowing. I think it is also a good lesson about suffering, even if God allows it, He will also compensate, if someone is unjustly suffering.

 

[1213]

?? That Jesus usurps the position of Tester of Souls .. a changing of the Guard . one "son of God" replaing the other , changes not the fact that Ha Satan was the Chief God over the earth when he held the position of Tester of Souls ..

I think Satan is chief god only for those who keep him as their chief god.

Can we say that Jesus has taken over the position of Tester of Souls ?

I don't think Satan had the position you say. But, it is interesting that Bible tells Jesus is the defense attorney and Satan is the accuser.

My little children, I write these things to you so that you may not sin. If anyone sins, we have a Counsellor{Greek Parakleton: Counselor, Helper, Intercessor, Advocate, and Comfortor.} with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous.
1 John 2:1
The great dragon was thrown down, the old serpent, he who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, "Now is come the salvation, the power, and the Kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ; for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them before our God day and night.
Rev. 12:9-10

...No one believe Jesus usurpse the position of "The Father" ...

I agree with that, God is still the highest:

For, "He put all things in subjection under his feet." But when he says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that he is excepted who subjected all things to him. When all things have been subjected to him, then the Son will also himself be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.
1 Cor. 15:27-28

 

[1213]

...and Ha Statan was never thrown down...

I saw Satan having fallen like lightning from heaven.
Luke 10:18

....Ha Satan and God make a bet ...

Bible doesn't say so.

and NO .. the Son's of God not being as powerfull as the Most High God does not make the Most High God the only God...

It makes him the one and only true God, if god means the highest authority. What do you think the word god means?

...tell us how you figure Ha Satan and Michaeal are the same...

I don't think they are the same. But I believe, in some way there are similar beings.

 

[Sargonski]

I think Satan is chief god only for those who keep him as their chief god.

I don't think Satan had the position you say. But, it is interesting that Bible tells Jesus is the defense attorney and Satan is the accuser.

My little children, I write these things to you so that you may not sin. If anyone sins, we have a Counsellor{Greek Parakleton: Counselor, Helper, Intercessor, Advocate, and Comfortor.} with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous.
1 John 2:1
The great dragon was thrown down, the old serpent, he who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him. I heard a loud voice in heaven, saying, "Now is come the salvation, the power, and the Kingdom of our God, and the authority of his Christ; for the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down, who accuses them before our God day and night.
Rev. 12:9-10

I agree with that, God is still the highest:

For, "He put all things in subjection under his feet." But when he says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that he is excepted who subjected all things to him. When all things have been subjected to him, then the Son will also himself be subjected to him who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all.
1 Cor. 15:27-28

You have lost the point .. warped on to a completely separat page. is not the Devil .. nor the adversary being referred to in John --- but this question is not part of the discussion as John and Corintians have no bearing on who the Israelies believed the Sons of God were .. YHWH being one of the Sons of God -- Deut 32:8

When the Most High[l] gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided up humankind,[m]
he set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of the heavenly assembly.[n]
9 For the Lord’s allotment is his people, Jacob is his special possession.[o]

---------------
the footnote (n) for heavenly assembly states “Sons of God” is undoubtedly the original reading;

The Lord in this passage is YHWH -

The Most High - is obviously not YHWH - as the Most High gives YHWH his piece of the pie which is Israel

Note that the above is a more modern translation which corrects the "Pious Fraud" found in Translations made from the MT - Masoretic Text .. 700-1000AD - the above goes back to the original reading of the passage found in the LXX - and Qumran texts ~300 BC

The NT scripture you cited has no bearing on the early Jew thought the Son's of God were. .. just completely out in left field .. a logical out of bounds if you will. why is this so difficult to understand that an Israelite attending the Temple of YHWH in 900 BC has never heard of Jesus nor the Gospel of John .. are you unable to understand ? .. and similar varients of this same mind bending false logic ?

Focus on the passages given -- the identity of Ha Satan in Job .. explain how you categorize his God like powers in relation to the God Michael .. and why would you make this comparison to begin with .. ? Please define your terms .. what level of power must an entity have to be considered a God .. does hurling fire down from the sky count as God like powers .. and why are we comparing this to the powers of Michael .. I don't recall Michael appearing anywhere in the Canaanite Pantheon ?

Is being able to hurl fire down from the sky .. and control people causing them to do what you like through force of will .. not the powers of a God .. YES .. NO .. quit deflecting from clarification questions and define your terms .. what is the line between Most High God - Lesser God - Angel

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Neither it says Satan was one of them.

It says Satan was among them. That particular wording can be interpreted both ways. To me it looks analogous to "All the kids in the class went to the zoo, and Joe was among them" meaning that Joe is in the class. To me, this seems abundantly obvious. But in all fairness to the loyal opposition, they read it as "There was a bag of oranges, and an out of place apple was among them."

Sorry, I don't think there is anything indicating that. If there was a bet, what was the stake?

You don't have to place a stake to have a bet. People make bets all the time like, "I bet you he chickens out," or "I bet you Johnson wins the election," or "I bet you the home team wins tonight," without any stake at all.

I believe the reason why God allowed it is, that way Satan proved to be evil and and not knowing. I think it is also a good lesson about suffering, even if God allows it, He will also compensate, if someone is unjustly suffering.

Since God already knows that "Satan is evil" (according to Christians), and no one on earth could see the wager, there would be no sense in making the wager, since there would be no one it would prove anything to.

In the original version of Job, it did not have the ending where God restores Job. And indeed in real life, there is usually no compensation for suffering. People die long, slow painful deaths from cancer. People die of starvation in Africa. People have their careers utterly ruined by gossip and false charges, and end up destitute for life. People lose their homes and all their belongings in a Hurricane, and NEVER recover. The person who edited in the end of Job couldn't face the truth of those things, which I think is very sad. I prefer the original version, because it is honest.

 

[1213]

You don't have to place a stake to have a bet. People make bets all the time like, "I bet you he chickens out," or "I bet you Johnson wins the election," or "I bet you the home team wins tonight," without any stake at all.

What does it even mean then?

In any case, Bible doesn't say they made any bet.

In the original version of Job...

Why do you think the original had different ending? Where can the original be seen?

 

[firedragon]

The Bible does not support YHWH as the FATHER. It does however support him as the Adversary.

He lied to Adam and Eve.

Adam and Eve could hear YHWH moving about so they hid.

YHWH could not find Adam and Eve?

Adam and Eve come out from hiding to greet YHWH. It doesn't specifically say, but one can gather that it was face to face. Jesus says more than once that no man has seen the FATHER.

Jacob seen YHWH face to face, even wrestled him. Again, Jesus says more than once no man has seen the FATHER.

Moses has talked to YHWH face to face, as a friend. That is pretty clear no metaphor needed. Again, Jesus says more than once that no man has seen the FATHER.

They asked Jesus the FATHER'S name. He does not tell them. Jesus says we don't speak the FATHERS name as it is holy(pure). Jesus says that even he does not speak his FATHER'S name. So who is this YHWH?

The FATHER is Holy, he is without sin, YHWH is by his own words a jealous God, and angry, and murderous.

YHWH says with his own words in
Hosea 13:8 I will fall upon them like a bear robbed of her cubs; I will tear open their breast, and there I will devour them like a lion, as a wild beast would rip them open.

Revelation 13:2 And the beast that I saw was like a leopard; its feet were like a bear's, and its mouth was like a lion's mouth. And to it the dragon gave his power and his throne and great authority.
I believe Revelation 13:2 speaks for itself.

You sound like a Marcion.

 

[teage]

You sound like a Marcion.

They called him a heretic. He was not wrong.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What does it even mean then?

A bet without a stake can happen when two people make a prediction or a wager purely for the satisfaction of being right. For example:

Two friends, Alex and Sam, are discussing who will win a local soccer game. Alex says Team A will win, while Sam believes Team B will come out on top. They don't wager any money, favors, or tangible stakes—they just want to see who’s right. Each is expressing confidence in something that isn't certain. The payoff is being publicly right, and the risk is being publicly wrong. My understanding is that it is these two elements (prediction and risk) that mean it is a true bet.

In any case, Bible doesn't say they made any bet.

It doesn't have to. It describes one.

Why do you think the original had different ending? Where can the original be seen?

This is what textual critics and analysts have determined. I'm not one myself, so I don't know all the ins and outs. But they look at things like writing style, vocabulary, grammar, syntax, anachronisms, variations in theological themes, shifts in point of view or narrator voice... okay, I know there's more but I'm blanking out.

Job chapters 3–42:6 is what they call the Poetic Core, meaning that this was the original text before the Prose Prologue or the Epilogue were added.

 

[firedragon]

They called him a heretic. He was not wrong.

Interesting. So you also believe there were two Gods?