Trinity claims that the Jews believed that a Son is equal to his Father

[Flankerl]

A little confusing in your statements but here is a thought..
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Yes Isaiah literally names his child.

Crazy stuff.

 

[rosends]

Under your definition, are you able to provide reference to Jesus blaspheming Gods name in a manner different from him claiming to be God?

I'm not sure what you mean. Under Jewish law, claiming to be God isn't "blasphemy." What examples would you want? Does Jesus say or do anything which qualifies as "blasphemy" under Jewish law? I don't think he does.

 

[Kenny]

Yes Isaiah literally names his child.

Crazy stuff.

Hmmm... I don't think he would call his child "everlasting Father".

But, yes, crazy stuff... mind boggling even.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

I'm not sure what you mean. Under Jewish law, claiming to be God isn't "blasphemy." What examples would you want? Does Jesus say or do anything which qualifies as "blasphemy" under Jewish law? I don't think he does.

Read Mark 14 :56-65

This question is not asking whether or not it is a Jewish belief...it is asking whether or not the Jews believe Jesus thought he was God...or he was claiming to be God. The High Priest in Mark 14 tore his robes and condemned Jesus for Blasphemy because he (Jesus) was claiming to be God. The text is very self evident on the blasphemy charge.

 

[rosends]

Hmmm... I don't think he would call his child "everlasting Father".

But, yes, crazy stuff... mind boggling even.

Why wouldn't he? It is a reasonable Hebrew name. The text has people named Avimelech (my father is King) and Aviel (My father is God, Samuel 1, 9:1) so Aviad (my father is eternal) doesn't seem unusual.

 

[rosends]

Read Mark 14 :56-65

This question is not asking whether or not it is a Jewish belief...it is asking whether or not the Jews believe Jesus thought he was God...or he was claiming to be God. The High Priest in Mark 14 tore his robes and condemned Jesus for Blasphemy because he (Jesus) was claiming to be God. The text is very self evident on the blasphemy charge.

But that's my point. Under Jewish law, that simply isn't blasphemy. Blasphemy is a very specific thing in Judaism. Just calling something "blasphemy" doesn't change the law.

 

[Spiderman]

A little confusing in your statements but here is a thought..
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

Could you explain more what "the government shall be upon his shoulder" means, and if that applies to any of the governments in our world today?

 

[blü 2]

In order to attempt to class Jesus Christ as being God, trinity teaching claims that the Jews are correct in claiming that Jesus, being the son of God, means that Jesus is equal to God, and therefore is God.

I cannot understand that [il]logic and also can find nothing in Jewish tradition that makes any such claim of a Son being equal to his Father.

Furthermore, trinity claims that Jesus was not ‘born’ from the Father… which further confuses the issue (pardon the pun!) since then Jesus being ‘son’ of God therefore has no meaning in terms of equality with the Father.

Can anyone give any enlightenment on where there is evidence of a Jewish tradition of a son being equal to his Father … and how Jesus, who was not a ‘birthed’ son of God could be part of this tradition.

The Trinity doctrine is not found in or supported by the New Testament, where all five versions of Jesus expressly deny that they're God and never claim to be God.

I'm not aware of any claim anywhere in the bible that sons are equal to their fathers / children are equal to their parents. It seems to contradict the Decalogue commandment, "Honor thy father and thy mother" ─ and indeed the power of Jewish parents to sell their daughters under the slavery provisions. And I seem to recall parents can put their children to death under some circumstances, though correct me if that's wrong.

The Trinity doctrine is not invented till the 4th century, where it's the result of political pressure to raise Christianity's principal figure to god status. It makes the incoherent claim that there is only one God but that God exists as three distinct persons, each of which is 100% of God. (The churches also admit the claim is incoherent, though they use the words "a mystery in the strict sense".)

 

[Kenny]

Why wouldn't he? It is a reasonable Hebrew name. The text has people named Avimelech (my father is King) and Aviel (My father is God, Samuel 1, 9:1) so Aviad (my father is eternal) doesn't seem unusual.

"my father" is King and "My father is God" is not the same as "everlasting Father" nor does it say "my father" everlasting... nor does any King also have all the designations stipulated...

except one, of course, IMO

 

[Clara Tea]

In order to attempt to class Jesus Christ as being God, trinity teaching claims that the Jews are correct in claiming that Jesus, being the son of God, means that Jesus is equal to God, and therefore is God.

I cannot understand that [il]logic and also can find nothing in Jewish tradition that makes any such claim of a Son being equal to his Father.

Furthermore, trinity claims that Jesus was not ‘born’ from the Father… which further confuses the issue (pardon the pun!) since then Jesus being ‘son’ of God therefore has no meaning in terms of equality with the Father.

Can anyone give any enlightenment on where there is evidence of a Jewish tradition of a son being equal to his Father … and how Jesus, who was not a ‘birthed’ son of God could be part of this tradition.

Opinion of Clara Tea:

God wants us to worship (and learn) concepts, and not worship idols (like the golden calf that the Jews made while Moses was getting the 10 commandments).

If we worship the Son, we take from the Father.

Christ figurines became graven images, and the followers became idolators.

Nazis worshipped a very good and beneficial symbol that stood for progress....the running feet of the swastika.....but look how that turned out. The swastika came to be a symbol of bigotry, hatred, slavery, theft, and mass murder.

Symbols (like swastikas and golden calfs) can start out with one meaning, and end up with another.

This is the dilemma of Vietnam War protestors...they felt that the American flag stood for freedom, not the draft. They felt that the symbol of America remained constant and fixed, while America, itself, changed. This is why they burnt the flag.

Many soldiers objected to flag burners because the soldiers had flags on their jeeps in the war, and they fought for the symbols of America....things that, at one time, stood for freedom.

We stand on the precipice of a great chasm of dictatorship. The Cancel Culture shut down Mike Lindell and President Donald Trump. They did so with the concept that all things on the internet must be true.

My friend saw a picture of a unicorn on the internet (is that true?.....are there real unicorns?) She posted a picture of a purple owl, but had her post taken down, and was banned for a while, because the purple owl, though pretty, was not real. Reality is now a pretext to take away free speech and free press.

But the banning of free speech isn't new in this era, it was present for many years. For example, during the Vietnam War, many protestors felt that it was wrong to have perpetual wars for peace, and draft young men at the request of old men (sitting back like armchair generals in their livingrooms, playing with the health and lives of young men who are too young to vote and who don't believe in war. Governor Ronald Reagan (Republican of California, later president of the United States) had ordered UC Berkeley students beaten on their heads by police to break up freedom riots.

The silencing of the Vietnam protestors was almost deafening. Bands were writing protest songs (Sound of Silence by Simon and Garfunkel). (music in the link above). "Silence like a cancer grows."

Most Christians don't understand Christianity. Even preachers, with PhDs in theology, have no clue about "thou shalt not kill" and insist that we pray to win wars.

The conflation of the Father and Son is a result of worshiping symbols, and that is also the reason that people accept tyrrany. We must worship the concepts of freedom, not some symbol that stands for it.

 

[Wandering Monk]

In order to attempt to class Jesus Christ as being God, trinity teaching claims that the Jews are correct in claiming that Jesus, being the son of God, means that Jesus is equal to God, and therefore is God.

I cannot understand that [il]logic and also can find nothing in Jewish tradition that makes any such claim of a Son being equal to his Father.

Furthermore, trinity claims that Jesus was not ‘born’ from the Father… which further confuses the issue (pardon the pun!) since then Jesus being ‘son’ of God therefore has no meaning in terms of equality with the Father.

Can anyone give any enlightenment on where there is evidence of a Jewish tradition of a son being equal to his Father … and how Jesus, who was not a ‘birthed’ son of God could be part of this tradition.

Maybe a more appropriate analogy might be between a principal and his shaliach.

 

[Clara Tea]

The Trinity doctrine is not found in or supported by the New Testament, where all five versions of Jesus expressly deny that they're God and never claim to be God.

I'm not aware of any claim anywhere in the bible that sons are equal to their fathers / children are equal to their parents. It seems to contradict the Decalogue commandment, "Honor thy father and thy mother" ─ and indeed the power of Jewish parents to sell their daughters under the slavery provisions. And I seem to recall parents can put their children to death under some circumstances, though correct me if that's wrong.

The Trinity doctrine is not invented till the 4th century, where it's the result of political pressure to raise Christianity's principal figure to god status. It makes the incoherent claim that there is only one God but that God exists as three distinct persons, each of which is 100% of God. (The churches also admit the claim is incoherent, though they use the words "a mystery in the strict sense".)

The two most powerful (nuclear) forces in the world are battling and threatening, and while all this is going on, there is not even a word about it in this religious forum. Instead, people are arguing the age-old trinity debate. Far more important that the concept of the trinity, is obeying God (thou shalt not kill).

When we focus on the entire body of religious concepts, we lose track of the meanings of any of them.

It is like Kunta Kinte asking to speak to the master while getting beaten for not accepting his new name "Toby," while the master was reading the scriptures (very piously, of course). Lost in the scriptures, the master failed to understand the concepts that God wanted us to know.

Those who fight for God's agendas are silenced by those who oppose God. This is the idea behind the son "Sound of silence." (music link above).

Can't we accept that holy messages came from both God and Jesus, and those are messages of peace that are intended to make our lives beter.

The world is a mess, and a direct result of defying God in recent times.

 

[Wildswanderer]

No Jews believe Jesus is the son of God.

Not true.

 

[firedragon]

In order to attempt to class Jesus Christ as being God, trinity teaching claims that the Jews are correct in claiming that Jesus, being the son of God, means that Jesus is equal to God, and therefore is God.

I have never heard Jews claiming Jesus, son of God, means Jesus is equal to God. I think in their tradition and theology, that would be one of the biggest blasphemies.

A little confusing in your statements but here is a thought..
Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The most vague prophecy of a Son of God, being God.

 

[blü 2]

The world is a mess, and a direct result of defying God in recent times.

On the contrary, given an omnipotent omniscient perfect God, this mess couldn't exist unless [he] had always intended it, planned it, and brought it to this condition.

 

[rosends]

"my father" is King and "My father is God" is not the same as "everlasting Father" nor does it say "my father" everlasting... nor does any King also have all the designations stipulated...

except one, of course, IMO

"nor does it say my father everlasting"? Really?
Here is the Hebrew word -- אֲבִיעַד
Avi-Ad
Avi, in case you didn't know, is pretty basic Hebrew for "My father". Shall I wait while you look that up somewhere else?
Ad literally means "until" but it also has other meanings
https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/t...5f8b50feaf77ea299213957799d4473d2bfdf9c9.html

So I guess you can translate it as "my father until". Does that work better for you?

If one can give a name which is "my father [is] king" or "my father [is] God" then "my father [is] eternal" is equally a valid name.

Joshua 17:2 has Aviezer, "my father [is] helper" עזר | Abarim Publications Theological Dictionary (Old Testament Hebrew)

if you need more help, please let me know

 

[Brian2]

Yes Isaiah literally names his child.

Crazy stuff.

Are you saying that Isaiah's son will rule on the throne of David forever? (Isa 9:7) I have heard a few different Jewish views on who this son is but never that he would be Isaiah's son.

 

[InChrist]

No Jews believe Jesus is the son of God.

Some do...

Our Stories

 

[stvdv]

A more nuanced approach, though, might be that the 3 "persons" are not, strictly speaking, polytheism, but that they (and another aspect of Christianity) lead to a concept of partnership which is anathema to Judaism

Is a concept of friendship also anathema to Judaism?

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

Could you explain more what "the government shall be upon his shoulder" means, and if that applies to any of the governments in our world today?

Jesus will be the king in God's kingdom. That is the government that will be on his shoulders.