Hey Jim,
sorry I didn't reply to this before; if you reply to a post it's best you hit "reply" that way the posters get the right kinds of alerts when they are on the site.
No problem. for me Jesus is one of a kind. He is the only One who was begotten. Just because He was one of a kind doesnt mean He wasn't begotten.
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.
born
yalad, Hebrew 3205, Strong’s
yalad, yaw-lad'; a primitive root; to bear young; causative to beget; to act as midwife; specifically to show lineage :- bear, beget, birth ([-day]), born, (make to) bring forth (children, young), bring up, calve, child, come, be delivered (of a child), time of delivery, gender, hatch, labour, (do the office of a) midwife, declare pedigrees, be the son of, (woman in, woman that) travail (-eth, -ing woman).
Your post is quite long so I'm hoping not to miss something important. So can you tell me please what is your point here with the strong''s concordance elaboration of the ילד (yalad) root? You copied the the definition for us to read but didn't use that definition to make a point about how the clear manner of the verse is impacted. I want to contribute here in the area where I think I can and you caught my eye with the Hebrew reference so just want to know what's the point?
What about ...
Isn’t God the ultimate?! If anything or anyone was greater than God, wouldn’t that be God?
I don't think anyone is making Yeshua greater than the Father in this thread right?
The hierarchy is Father over son as Yeshua says He sits at the right hand of the Father.
Why does Paul still refer to God as the God of Jesus?
Ephes. 1:17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
Romans 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.
So these 2 verses don't really help your case; I think everyone here agrees that G-d the the Father is over Yeshua the son; and also there is no questioning that G-d is the man Yeshua's father. Did I miss something here? How you think these verses aid your position?
2 Cor. 1:2-3 Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. [3] Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
I don't see how this helps you; I could point out as
@Verifyveritas76 had done that the Greek behind "L-rd" here can mean simply "master" or it can mean "the L-rd", i.e. "The Name" (Hashem) since Jews don't write out G-d's name. All the Greek bible references to the 4 letter name of G-d say
Kyrios or
Theos.
It can also be the title for G-d "Adon
ai" in Hebrew, which again, translates literally as "My L-rds" (plural) if it were "my L-rd" it would be "Adon
iy"
We just don't translate it as "My L-rd
S" in English because that sounds weird to us.
So the verse you reference can actually have the opposite effect than you suppose when we put it back into the Hebrew / Jewish Aramaic context.
Let's see how it could go (I'm only minimally updating your translation to focus on my point; I don't want to translate the whole verse in my own words as it will distract from the point at hand by obscuring the differences):
2 Cor. 1:2-3 Grace be to you and peace from G-d our Father, and from our L-rdS Jesus Christ. [3] Blessed be G-d, even the Father of our L-rdS Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the G-d of all comfort;
This reconstruction is interesting because we see the divine respect being given to Yeshua (Jesus Christ) as "our L-rd
S".
Now you don't have to take my word for it. while I wrote this from an understanding of how the Greek NT models Hebraic thought and LXX,
I'll include an official Hebrew New testament translation to show you I'm not just reconstructing this willy nilly; I did a quick google search for "Hebrew New testament online" and clicked the first thing.
You can see
your verse in Hebrew here I'll copy it here for all (I didn't check which Hebrew translation this is as I knew they would all do it this way):
חֶסֶד לָכֶם וְשָׁלוֹם מֵאֵת הָאֱלׂהִים אָבִינוּ וַאֲדׂנֵינוּ יֵשׁוּעַ הַמָּשִׁיחַ׃
בָּרוּךְ הָאֱלׂהִים וַאֲבִי אֲדׂנֵינוּ יֵשׁוּעַ הַמָּשִׁיחַ אַב הָרַחֲמִים וֵאלׂהֵי כָּל־נֶחָמָה׃
The word I highlighted "Adoneynu" means literally "Our L-rds" the letter which I made color RED would be gone if the Greek->Hebrew translators expected it to say "Our L-rd". Modern Hebrew still works this way and you can check me by going to translate.google.com and type in English "My Lord" and look at the Hebrew it produces then type "My Lords" and look at the Hebrew.
Your following verses from Eph., Peter just do more of the same that the verses you quoted prior to the one I responded to above..that is they simply demonstrate the Father is father to the Son. Doesn't help or hinder your case so I won't address those.
Still in Revelation? These are words in red aren’t they?
Rev. 3:12
Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
You would be surprised, they don't make a Koine Greek bible with Yeshua's words in red. I've searched high and low; this may be a product idea for a small niche market for one of our Biblical Family entrepreneurs. That aside, I think this is your strongest verse for making your case.
On the surface it does seem odd that G-d would address Himself as "my G-d". When you take into account however, the "son of man" aspect of Yeshua that while He may be G-d Himself, He also now dwells in a resurrected human body; a body in which He had to be submissive to the Father. When you consider this, the verse is not strong enough to unseat other verses that have been presented against your position.
Rev. 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
Rev. 1:5-6 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, [6] And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
I don't see how these verses are problematic for Yeshua's pre-existence / co-deity position.
How was Jesus tempted, if He was God?
James 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
Hebrews 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
Your point seems to be that the verses you are listing demonstrate G-d doesn't directly tempt humans but your question asks how can G-d be tempted. Please clarify.. seems like some of these verses are just being thrown in for a shotgun effect even when lacking relevancy.
Jesus says God is the only true God?
John 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
1 Tim. 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
yes...and? I don't' think anyone was expecting Him to announce the Greek Pantheon
One of the attributes of God is that He is eternal, unchangeable, theologians say immutable... how could He be made like a man, and remain God?
Hebrews 2:17-18 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. [18] For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
This is a physics issue, see
@andrew 's post about a sphere intersecting a plane.
There's no problem here. Are you a Jehovah's witness (not a slam, just curious)?
It'd be interesting to have our first known polygamous witness. Please don't take offense either way I'm only curious.
How could Jesus be co-equal with God and say this?
John 14:28
Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
Who says they are co-equal? There is an implied hierarchy in our perception of G-d's existence as revealed in scripture.
He forgave sins as an agent of God, and said we could do the same. Angels (agents of the L-rd) have a meal with Abraham.
So what? He ate fish and so can we; how does this qualify His nature from deity taking on flesh as his eternal existence intersects with our world?
Even in the end, there is a difference in rank of God and His Son! God is the creator and the Father!
Colossians 1:16 responds to what I bolded in your comment:
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα ⸆ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ⸇ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες εἴτε ἀρχαὶ εἴτε ἐξουσίαι· ⸀τὰ πάντα διʼ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς αὐτὸν ἔκτισται·
For by Him (Yeshua) were created everything in the heavens and the Earth, the perceivable and imperceivable; whether the enthroned or angelic rulers or the first ones or dominions, everything through Him (Yeshua) and for Him was created.
This verse seems to clearly respond to the "Father is creator" only feel or any notion that Yeshua was created at the moment of conception.
The idea that a conscious, pre-existant, co-equal God laid aside His power and became a man or a God/man creates more questions than answers.
The fact that there are many verses supporting this very notion is why the issue of G-d's nature of existence has been discussed for eons.
I'm certain the Creator of space-time does not fit neatly in the confines of trinity, binary, or any other -ary; we do what we can to reconcile the scriptures.
I haven't seen anything in your post however which seriously challenges the concept that Yeshua existed before the Universe, nor which challenges that He is G-d.
Sometimes I have trouble following you though so if I'm missing/misrepresenting your position let me know; kind of feels like Jehovah's witness positions without the New World translation.
Would it be possible in your future posts to please state your positions clearly then provide the support? I find it a bit hard to follow with the long series of questions interspersed with scripture. That method seems more appropriate for teaching students perhaps but in an internet forum it's not as useful. Maybe it's just me.
Shalom
