Jesus isn’t Yahweh. Yahweh is his God. What passage, or passages, are you alluding to?
Did you know Moses is called “God”?
More on the deity of Christ
- Thread starter KUWN
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Jesus isn’t Yahweh. Yahweh is his God. What passage, or passages, are you alluding to?
Did you know Moses is called “God”?
33 seconds of your time @KUWN. That’s all it will take for you to hear this trinitarian scholar (Dr. Ben Witherington, III) support my assertion that Jesus isn’t Yahweh.
Do you understand how he can say this and still be a trinitarian?
***
Dr. Ben Witherington III - Asbury Theological Seminary
Dr. Witherington joined the Asbury Seminary faculty in 1995 after teaching at Ashland Theological Seminary for more than a decade. He has also taught at High Point College, Duke Divinity School and Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. A prolific author, Dr. Witherington has written more than 60...
The quote does not prove your contention at all. What am I not understanding from your viewpoint?
Rules don’t mean anything if they aren’t followed and there is no enforcement of them.
I’m not a prophet but the whip will eventually come down on Christians going at Christians over the doctrine of the Trinity.
I’m not a prophet but the whip will eventually come down on Christians going at Christians over the doctrine of the Trinity.
Yes, G, G, and G comprise the Godhead, each member has the title God by virtue of their intrinsic Honor, Attributes, Names, Deeds, and Seat (the Throne).
Ok, give me the reference to Moses being called God. Next I will give you the reference to Jesus being Yahweh.
Just in case you are referring to Ex. 7.1.
"I have made you a god to Pharaoh" means that God is appointing Moses to act as a representative with divine authority in front of Pharaoh, essentially giving Moses the power to speak and act on God's behalf, even though Moses is not a god himself; this is primarily found in the Bible in Exodus 7:1, where God tells Moses that he will be like a god to Pharaoh, meaning he will be able to perform miracles and deliver God's messages to the Egyptian ruler with the power of a deity in Pharaoh's eyes.
”Then Yahweh said to Moses, ‘See, I set you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet.” (LSB)
Yahweh made Moses God to Pharaoh. Moses isn’t Yahweh. He is standing in Yahweh’s place as his agent / representative.
Are you familiar with Moses typology?
Just as Yahweh made Moses God to Pharaoh, Yahweh made Jesus of Nazareth God to mankind.
Moses is Yahweh’s shaliah. Jesus of Nazareth is Yahweh’s supreme shaliah. That is the Jewish law of agency.
That’s how Jewish monotheists who believe Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God, understand the Messiah being occasionally referred to as elohim / theos in scripture.
I agree, but I hope you don’t get banned and have this thread closed. It’s already happened to one Christian today.
I’m not able to link to your post #68 @KUWN.
Dr. Witherington states very clearly in the clip I provided (and elsewhere) why Jesus wasn’t and isn’t Yahweh. Such a thing isn’t possible in the Jewish setting of the New Testament. Yahweh is the Father alone. Dr. Witherington knows that. Jesus of Nazareth isn’t the Father and therefore wasn’t and isn’t Yahweh.
Dr. Witherington himself doesn’t believe Jesus of Nazareth was or is Yahweh. He does, however, believe God is Triune - Yahweh, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
How does he get there? He splits the Shema.
I fully agree with him that Yahweh is the Father alone. I don’t agree with him on splitting the Shema.
Jesus of Nazareth didn’t split the Shema. Dr. Witherington (and some other trinitarian scholars) believes that Paul did. I don’t.
Dr. Witherington states very clearly in the clip I provided (and elsewhere) why Jesus wasn’t and isn’t Yahweh. Such a thing isn’t possible in the Jewish setting of the New Testament. Yahweh is the Father alone. Dr. Witherington knows that. Jesus of Nazareth isn’t the Father and therefore wasn’t and isn’t Yahweh.
Dr. Witherington himself doesn’t believe Jesus of Nazareth was or is Yahweh. He does, however, believe God is Triune - Yahweh, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.
How does he get there? He splits the Shema.
I fully agree with him that Yahweh is the Father alone. I don’t agree with him on splitting the Shema.
Jesus of Nazareth didn’t split the Shema. Dr. Witherington (and some other trinitarian scholars) believes that Paul did. I don’t.
Moses is functionally God, not literally God @KUWN. No one, not even Pharaoh, would think Moses was literally God. I think we are in agreement about that.
In scripture, the choice is between Yahweh and idols. We should be able to agree on that. Do we?
Both Moses and Jesus have a God. Neither Moses nor Jesus is an idolater. We should be able to agree on that. Do we?
The God of Moses and the God of Jesus can be no one other than Yahweh himself. We should be able to agree with that but I’m not sure at this point that we do.
Yahweh himself doesn’t have a God. Yahweh himself is the one, only, and unique God. My post #41 provided the scriptural support I rely on to support my position. Do you disagree with the trinitarian source I quoted? If so, why do you disagree with it? Seeing an objection to it, if you have one, would help me reexamine my position.
Would you be able to agree that Jesus ascended to Yahweh?
In scripture, the choice is between Yahweh and idols. We should be able to agree on that. Do we?
Both Moses and Jesus have a God. Neither Moses nor Jesus is an idolater. We should be able to agree on that. Do we?
The God of Moses and the God of Jesus can be no one other than Yahweh himself. We should be able to agree with that but I’m not sure at this point that we do.
Yahweh himself doesn’t have a God. Yahweh himself is the one, only, and unique God. My post #41 provided the scriptural support I rely on to support my position. Do you disagree with the trinitarian source I quoted? If so, why do you disagree with it? Seeing an objection to it, if you have one, would help me reexamine my position.
Would you be able to agree that Jesus ascended to Yahweh?
“We are not to suppose that the apostles identified Christ with Jehovah; there were passages which made this impossible, for instance, Ps. CX.1; … .”
(Charles Bigg, International Critical Commentary, 1 Peter, p. 99)
The International Critical Commentary Complete : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
The complete Public Domain commentaries of the International Critical Commentary (ICC)
archive.org
”Of David. A Psalm. A declaration of Yahweh to my lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.’”
(Psalm 110:1, LEB)
In this prophetic oracle, Yahweh is speaking to someone, an unnamed person, who isn’t Yahweh.
In the New Testament we are told who this person is that Yahweh was speaking to -> Jesus of Nazareth.
Yahweh is one person. Jesus of Nazareth is a different person.
The AMP is a little misleading but still helpful in confirming the distinction between Yahweh and Jesus:
”A Psalm of David. The LORD (Father) says to my Lord (the Messiah, His Son), ‘Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet [subjugating them into complete submission].’”
***
Charles Bigg - Wikipedia
Jesus is Yahweh
Isa 45.23
“I have sworn [an oath] by Myself,
The word is gone out of My mouth in righteousness
And shall not return,
That to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear [allegiance].
I (Yahweh) sworn an oath by Myself (Yahweh).
So, nothing too controversial here.
Philip 2.10,11
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, to those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess and openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (Yahweh), to the glory of God the Father.
The verse that speaks of Yahweh in the OT, applies this verse to Jesus Christ is Lord (Yahweh)
Isa 45.23
“I have sworn [an oath] by Myself,
The word is gone out of My mouth in righteousness
And shall not return,
That to Me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear [allegiance].
I (Yahweh) sworn an oath by Myself (Yahweh).
So, nothing too controversial here.
Philip 2.10,11
10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, to those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess and openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord (Yahweh), to the glory of God the Father.
The verse that speaks of Yahweh in the OT, applies this verse to Jesus Christ is Lord (Yahweh)
I think you know as well as I that your response has nothing relevant with my post. The two passages I put together is air tight and the only reason someone will wiggle out of it, is if you ignore the implication of these two verses. Do away with the literal method of interpretation. You should have seen that. If your spiritual interpretations are correct, then my position fails. The issue is which interpretation method will you use. If this is suppose to be a literal interpretation then you are wrong. So, I am betting on the Literal interpretation method.“We are not to suppose that the apostles identified Christ with Jehovah; there were passages which made this impossible, for instance, Ps. CX.1; … .”
(Charles Bigg, International Critical Commentary, 1 Peter, p. 99)
The International Critical Commentary Complete : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
The complete Public Domain commentaries of the International Critical Commentary (ICC)archive.org
”Of David. A Psalm. A declaration of Yahweh to my lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.’”
(Psalm 110:1, LEB)
In this prophetic oracle, Yahweh is speaking to someone, an unnamed person, who isn’t Yahweh.
In the New Testament we are told who this person is that Yahweh was speaking to -> Jesus of Nazareth.
Yahweh is one person. Jesus of Nazareth is a different person.
The AMP is a little misleading but still helpful in confirming the distinction between Yahweh and Jesus:
”A Psalm of David. The LORD (Father) says to my Lord (the Messiah, His Son), ‘Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet [subjugating them into complete submission].’”
***
Charles Bigg - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Even in your response, you make a distinction between Yahweh and Jesus Christ.
Jesus isn’t Yahweh. Yahweh is the God and Father of Jesus.
What passages like this show is that the Messiah does what his God and Father does.
My post was in direct response to your post. The trinitarian scholar I quoted conceded that it is impossible for Jesus to be Yahweh, and pointed to the passage of scripture that backs him (and me) up. That’s a direct contradiction of what you’re telling me. That’s relevant.
My spiritual interpretation is shared by the trinitarian scholars I quoted. It doesn’t mean that your position fails in full; only in part. The trinitarians I quoted still believe, as you do, that the Trinity is the God of Israel.
Jesus himself is a Jewish monotheist. It makes sense to me to interpret scripture through the same lens that he does.
A very short introduction to the Jewish law of agency @KUWN.
skipmoen.com
You don’t have to “bet on it” - everyone should believe what they are persuaded is true - but I do. If nothing else it will help you understand why I believe what I believe about Yahweh and Jesus of Nazareth.
And the following is a much more detailed study of the Jewish law of agency.
Shaliah | Hebrew Word Study | Skip Moen
As You sent Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. John 17:18 NASB Sent – The Jewish law of agency, known as shaliah, is crucial for understanding the idea of an apostle. In fact, the verb itself, apostéllō, used here to speak of the mission of Yeshua and the mission of his
skipmoen.com
You don’t have to “bet on it” - everyone should believe what they are persuaded is true - but I do. If nothing else it will help you understand why I believe what I believe about Yahweh and Jesus of Nazareth.
And the following is a much more detailed study of the Jewish law of agency.
“We are not to suppose that the apostles identified Christ with Jehovah; there were passages which made this impossible, for instance, Ps. CX.1; … .”
(Charles Bigg, International Critical Commentary, 1 Peter, p. 99)
The International Critical Commentary Complete : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
The complete Public Domain commentaries of the International Critical Commentary (ICC)archive.org
”Of David. A Psalm. A declaration of Yahweh to my lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.’”
(Psalm 110:1, LEB)
“A declaration of Yahweh to my lord (Heb. adoni) … .”
Heb. adoni -> lord.
Occurs 195 times in the Hebrew Bible.
Number of times it is used in reference to Yahweh -> 0
Number of times it is used in reference to someone who isn’t Yahweh -> 195
“Jesus is the exegesis of God. He is the perfect visible exposition of the invisible Father.” - Mike Riccardi
“The invisible Father” is Yahweh @KUWN. Yahweh is the God and Father of Jesus.
”Blessed be the God and Father of our lord Jesus Messiah.” - Peter and Paul
Short form of their comment -> “Blessed be Yahweh.” He is the one, only and unique God of all.
“The invisible Father” is Yahweh @KUWN. Yahweh is the God and Father of Jesus.
”Blessed be the God and Father of our lord Jesus Messiah.” - Peter and Paul
Short form of their comment -> “Blessed be Yahweh.” He is the one, only and unique God of all.
- Aug 10, 2012
- 6,089
- 7,477
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
It is different than the old rule of no discussion being permitted at all. Now the discussions are permitted, but they must be in support of the close handed issues explicitly in the SOF.
For example those who disagree, and believe Jesus is just a man. They have to keep that opinion to themselves while representing themselves as Christians here.
We send many confusing and mixed messages to visitors on the site. And there is a danger that the site will lead them astray. And I would rather the site not exist than for it to be detrimental to our walks.
Similar threads
