Is Jesus God Almighty, Everlasting Father?

[(Omega)]

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. (Isaiah 9:6)

Jesus is "Everlasting Father", however Jesus is not God the Father.

The term "father" has more than one meaning when applied in certain context. The term "father" is applied to God 8 times in the Old Testament, it was used refer to His parental character to His children, especiallyâ€â€Israel (Isa. 63:16). The usage of "father" was primarily used to denote God as Creator. The word translated "name" (shem) as in "His name shalll be called" (qara) is not a formal title, but rather describes His essence or essential characteristics of who someone is. His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace are the essential characteristics of the Messiah. The term "father" not only applied to "Creator," but also corresponds to the idea of "founder of," or "possessor of," as with His creation. In 2 Samuel 23:31 the name Abiethon means "father" or possessor of strength and In Exodus 6:24 the name "Abiasaph" translates as "father of gathering," or he who gathers, therefore the Messiah is (ab) of eternity. The word "father" (ab) is found 9 times in the Aramaic and 1,191 times in the Hebrew. It is often referred to as a literal father or a respectable title for a priest, prophet or governor. The title "Everlasting Father" in Isaiah 9:6 is understood to mean the founder of the ages or the "father of eternity", not God the Father the other member of the triune God. The word "eternal" is preceded by the word "father" (father eternal) and is an indication of the Messiahs eternal nature. Jesus and His "Father" are one in essence, and they are both Creator and founder of the ages.

God Bless!

 

[Michael A Disciple]

Omega said:

Jesus is "Everlasting Father", however Jesus is not God the Father.

Me:

So even though Jesus is the Creator and Father of the Universe he is still not God the Father! Pray tell WHERE IS God the Father in the Ot? Take me somewhere when God was not Jesus. Yes I know there are PROPHECIES like Psalms 2 and Psalms 110 where the Father and Son appear. But I believe in the Father and the Son in the New Testament.

If Jesus is the Eternal Father of the Universe and yet he has a Father (thats not him in another mode) then he is our GRANDFATHER!

Omega said:

The title "Everlasting Father" in Isaiah 9:6 is understood to mean the founder of the ages or the "father of eternity", not God the Father the other member of the triune God.

Me:

Oh how clear you are making this. Although Jesus is called Eternal Father and Mighty God both in the same sentence you say there is someone else who is God.

Eternal Father-the Father
Mighty God-God

God the Father.

Anyone reading Isaiah without a preconceived idea would read it the way Oneness does.

It is so easy to see how uncomfortable Trinitarians AND Arians are with this verse! Why do they go to such lengths to make it mean something else?

Because they know when people read it APART FROM their explanations they will see the same thing we see.

Omega said:

Jesus and His "Father" are one in essence, and they are both Creator and founder of the ages.

Me:

The Old Testament:

24: Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isaiah 44:6

Here YHWH (singular) states he created the heavens ALONE and the Earth by HIMSELF.

That means no one else did it.

The New Testament:

10: He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. John 1:10

If Yeshua made the world then he must be the singular YHWH who Isaiah said made it by HIMSELF.

The World was made by HIM not by THEM. See?

 

[Michael A Disciple]

You either believe God's tesimony or you don't. There can only ever be one Lord - no Christian could ever discredit that scriptual fact. But it was God who testified of his Son before Christ even did, after he was baptised by John. Then the spirit descended from heaven like a dove and rested upon him - also testifying of Jesus. So with all that testifying happening, why do you still doubt he is the Son and not the Father?

Me:

I do not doubt he is the Son at all. He is the Son of God a thousand times over!

But I define the Son of God as did Isaiah the Prophet.

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, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaih 9:6

The Son shall be called Eternal Father. I am fulfilling that prophecy. You seem uncomfortable with that.

Trins and Arians profess a son who is not the same one Isaiah foretold. One who is not the Father.

 

[(Omega)]

Greetings Michael A Disciple!

So even though Jesus is the Creator and Father of the Universe he is still not God the Father! Pray tell WHERE IS God the Father in the Ot? Take me somewhere when God was not Jesus. Yes I know there are PROPHECIES like Psalms 2 and Psalms 110 where the Father and Son appear. But I believe in the Father and the Son in the New Testament.

If Jesus is the Eternal Father of the Universe and yet he has a Father (thats not him in another mode) then he is our GRANDFATHER!

You obviously didn't read my post carefully, the word "Father" In Isaiah refers to "possessor or founder of" and not a literal father as you have made it out to be. In order for your argument to be true, the context of Isaiah 9:6 must refer to a literal father, which it does not, therefore God the Father being a grandfather doesn't work.

Oh how clear you are making this. Although Jesus is called Eternal Father and Mighty God both in the same sentence you say there is someone else who is God.

Eternal Father-the Father
Mighty God-God

God the Father.

Anyone reading Isaiah without a preconceived idea would read it the way Oneness does.

It is so easy to see how uncomfortable Trinitarians AND Arians are with this verse! Why do they go to such lengths to make it mean something else?

Because they know when people read it APART FROM their explanations they will see the same thing we see.

Before you fly off the handle try and relax and lets reason using common sense ok? If I understand correctly, you believe that Jesus and the Father are the same person correct? Take a careful look at this passage.

Nevertheless (I) tell (you) the truth; It is expedient for (you) that (I) go away: for if(I) go not away, (the Comforter) will not come unto (you); but if (I) depart, (I) will send (him) unto (you). And when (he) is come, (he) will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment Of sin, because they believe not on (me); Of righteousness, because (I) go to my (Father), and (ye) see (me) no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged. (I) have yet many things to say unto (you), but (ye) cannot bear them now. Howbeit when (he), the Spirit of truth, is come, (he) will guide (you) into all truth: for (he) shall not speak of (himself); but whatsoever (he) shall hear, that shall (he) speak: and (he) will shew (you) things to come. (He) shall glorify (me): for (he) shall receive of (mine), and shall shew it unto (you). All things that the (Father) hath are (mine): therefore said (I), that (he) shall take of (mine), and shall shew it unto (you). (John 16:7-15)

If The Father, Jesus The Son and The Holy Spirit are all the same person, there would be no point in making the distinction between YOU, ME or HE. The Triune Nature of God is Clearly manifested in Scriptures.

The Bible makes it VERY CLEAR:

The Son is called GOD
The Father is called GOD
The Holy Spirit is called GOD

The Son is Distinct from the Father
The Son is One with the Father
The Holy Spirit is Distinct from Jesus

John 17:15 - I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.

Who was Jesus praying to? Himself?

If you state that the human spirit of Jesus was praying to the Divine Spirit of Jesus then how many spirits does that make? You have one body inhabited by two spirits praying to Himself and referring to Himself as we, do you realize how ridiculous this sounds?

Mark 13:32 - But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the

angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

Care to explain as to why ONLY THE FATHER knows and not the Son?

• John 5:31 - If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. [/*:m:9d4da]
• John 8:18 - I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me. [/*:m:9d4da]
• John 8:17 - It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. [/*:m:9d4da]

If the Son is the Father then that makes ONE WITNESS. If Jesus is the Father than His witness would be FALSE, since Jesus Himself stated CLEARLY that the testimony o "2" men is true, not two modes. Two forms is NOT TWO WITNESSES! Two forms would still make ONE PERSON. Jesus said that the Testimony of TWO PERSONS not TWO FORMS. Jesus clearly was not referring to two divine natures, such as His divine nature testifying to His human nature since the Jews clearly understood the meaning of 2. Modalism denies Christ as a mediator, since the definition of a mediator is a person distinct from the recipient who is being mediated. Furthermore it denies Jesus as and Intercessor (Rom. 8:34), how can Jesus intercede before the Father on behalf of the believer if Jesus is the Father? Who is He interceding for? These are among many fallacies in the Oneness doctrine which not only contradicts biblical truth, but denies the loving relationship between the Father and the Son. There is a love relationship between the Father and the Son (John 10:17) in the same manner the Holy Spirit loves the believer (Rom. 15:30), this is not the mode of the Father loving the mode of the Son, since to separate natures are incapable of having love and fellowship for each other. Natures are incapable of expressing emotion intellectually. The scriptures are not filled with obscure theological doctrines with are too inexplicable for the believer to comprehend, but with truths which the believer can grasp at, IF the person reading will submit to it.
The problem that many people have with the doctrine of the Trinity is that they fail to understand the spiritual meaning of the word "ONE"

The word for ONE is "heis" is used to describe a NUMERICAL ONE, however the word one which is a numerical one is used in numerous passages in Scripture to describe not a numerical one but ONE IN UNITY.
The Bible goes to great lengths to describe Unity and True Oneness, and Christ even prayed that perhaps one day we will be One in Unity just as He and His Father are ONE.

And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: (John 17:22)
Each member of the Godhead are co-equal and co-eternal, and all alike are uncreated and omnipotent.

• But he that is joined unto the Lord is (one spirit). (1 Corinthians 6:17)[/*:m:9d4da]
• 1 Corinthians 6:16 - What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one{heis}flesh.[/*:m:9d4da]
• 1 Corinthians 10:17 - For we being many are one{heis]bread, and one{heis}body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.[/*:m:9d4da]
• John 11:52 - And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one{heis} the children of God that were scattered abroad.[/*:m:9d4da]
• Romans 12:4 - For as we have many members in one{heis}body, and all members have not the same office: and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ.[/*:m:9d4da]
• 1 Corinthians 12:13 - For by one{heis}Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one{heis}Spirit. SPIRIT OF TRUTH![/*:m:9d4da]
• 1 Corinthians 12:14 - For the body is not one{heis}member, but many. [/*:m:9d4da]

But now are they many members, yet but ONE body. (Corinthians 12:20)
(THERE ARE THREE ETERNAL MEMBERS OF THE GODHEAD, YET ONE GOD! )

Is the word for one "heis" used nominally or is it CLEARLY used to describe UNITY? The difference between God and creation? God is UNCREATED, His creation isn't.

Your trying reason against the logic that God cannot be Three Persons and yet remain One Being in Absolute Unity, because that would seem illogical. What you fail to realize is to say that it is an impossibility is illogical in itself. Since you are denying the Triune Nature of God, you are basically utilizing your finite reasoning in that finite brain of yours and limiting the infinitude, complex and vastness of God.

Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make (our abode)with him. (John 14:23)

How many does "our" make? If the Son is the Father then only the One person would make their indwelling in the believer, in other words Jesus could have said "I" will come unto him, and make "my" abode. God gave man common sense and logic, perhaps we should use it don't you think?

Luke 23:46 - And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

If Jesus is the Father, who was He committing His spirit to? Himself?

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath (BOTH the Father and the Son). (2 John 1:9)

What does "both" the Father "and" (kai) the Son mean to you?

John 6:38 - For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

If Jesus is God the Father then Jesus is doing His "own" will, this verse clearly states that Jesus is not doing His own will but His Fathers. Even if you were to argue that His Fathers will is the divine will, that would still make it "His will", since they are the same person. The scriptures makes clear distinctions between the Son and the Father so as to not confuse them as one person or different modes.

Distinction:

John 6:38 - For{hoti}I came down{katabaino}from{ek}heaven{ouranos},not{ou}to{hina} do{poieo} mine own{emos}will{thelema},but{alla}the will{thelema}of him that sent{pempo}me{me}.

John 8:17 - {kai}It is{grapho also{de}written{grapho}in{en} your{humeteros}law{nomos}, that{hoti}the testimony{marturia}of two{duo}men{anthropos}is{esti}true{alethes}.

John 5:31 - If{ean}I{ego}bear witness{martureo}of{peri}myself{emautou}, my{mou}witness{marturia}is{esti}not{ou}true{alethes}.

John 17:24 - Father{pater}, I will{thelo}that{hina}they also{kakeinos},whom{hos}thou hast given{didomi}me{moi},be{o}with{meta}me{emou}where{hopou} I{ego}am{eimi};that{hina}they may behold{theoreo}my{emos}glory{doxa}, which{hos}thou hast given{didomi}me{moi}:for{hoti}thou lovedst{agapao}me{me}before{pro}the foundation{katabole}of the world{kosmos}.

Matthew 17:5 - While he{autos}yet{eti}spake{laleo}, behold{idou}, a bright{photeinos} cloud{nephele}overshadowed{episkiazo}them{autos}: and{de}behold{idou}a voice{phone} out of{ek}the cloud{nephele}, which said{lego}, This{houtos}is{esti}my{mou} beloved{agapetos} Son{huios}, in{en} whom{hos}I am well pleased{eudokeo}; hear ye{akouo}him{autos}.

Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love. (2 John 1:3)

The above passage uses the word "and" (kai) to show distinction between persons, although Modalists argue that the word "and" can mean "even", according to sharps rule #5, when multiple personal pronouns exist in a clause conjoined by the word "kai", each noun must refer to a distinct person, especially when the first noun lacks the article "the" (ho) as seen in the above verse.

The Son was Talking to Himself from Heaven as the Father?

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

If the Son is the Father than the Father was "with" (pros) Himself?

The Old Testament:

24: Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself; Isaiah 44:6

Here YHWH (singular) states he created the heavens ALONE and the Earth by HIMSELF.

That means no one else did it.

The New Testament:

10: He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. John 1:10

If Yeshua made the world then he must be the singular YHWH who Isaiah said made it by HIMSELF.

The World was made by HIM not by THEM. See?

Jesus also said "I and my Father are one." Since you say that the world was not made my "THEM", by your own admission, Jesus is not God the Father since the pronoun "OUR" is referred to both the Father and the Son.

John 14:23 - Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

How many does "THEM" make? How many does "OUR" make? Sorry but.... : : : SEE? :wink:

There is ONE GOD and that one God ALONE created the Heavens and the Earth. The bible must be understood as a whole and not singled on a certain passage in particular to firmly establish a doctrine, this leads to error. BTW, take a look at the Hebrew translation of the word "by myself" in Isaiah 44:24 and see what you find and then give me your translation.

God Bless!

 

[Michael A Disciple]

1 John 4:12...No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1 Timothy 6:16...Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen

Several places in the word of God we are told God has never been seen.

Isaiah 6:1-5...In the year that King Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne high and lifted up and his train filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphims, each one had six wings, with twain he covered his face and twain he covered his feet and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another and said Holy Holy Holy is the Lord of Hosts: the whole earth is fully of his glory. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried. and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I Woe is me! For I am undone, because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips for mine eyes have seen THE KING THE LORD OF HOSTS.

So the question must be asked who or what did Isaiah and various others see when they proclaimed they had seen God? In the revelation of this mystery we will discover a truth that will honor Yeshua to the highest place in the universe.

1 Kings 8:27...But will God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain thee; how much less this house that I have builded?

Solomon recognized that in his essence as ominipresent spirit God was bigger than the universe he created. Before creation he dwelt alone in indescribable power and glory with himself. Since he never had a beginning he had an eternity to plan the creation of the universe. Since he as omnipresent spirit would be bigger than creation itself he desired to find a way to come inside what he would make and be part of it.

John 1:1-3...In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Before the beginning God had no need of a form. He was omnipresent spirit dwelling alone so there was no one else to have seen him. But since he desired to be seen in his creation it was necessary for him to create a visible manifestation of himself.

This form or visible manifestation would be everthing that he himself was except in reduced, visible form. This was not another person who was God but God himself dwelling in the visible form. This form he took would be the same as the angels who would be the first of his living creation. That way when they were created he would be sitting there on his throne and would explain to them who they were and what he was. So they would not be seeing him as omnipresent spirit, they would be seeing him in angelic form as the image of the invisible God.

The Greek for WORD in these scriptures is LOGOS. Many meanings are given for this word in Strong's concordance. In context the one that seems to fit here is THE DIVINE EXPRESSION. For this visible angelic manifestation of the ominpresent spirit of God would be the full expression of his character and glory. Today certain companies will have a little picture or design stamped on their product and we call that a logo. The purpose of the logo is that when people see it the actual company itself will come to mind. In the same way God's (logos) or WORD is what he has given creation as a small yet all-powerful expression of his own person.

So when we are told in the beginning was the Word it means the beginning of time. The Word existed from the beginning of time but the one who dwelt in the Word existed from eternity. So at creation the WORD spoke and the omnipresent spirit moved to bring all things into being. We are told the Word was with God. It was a separate PORTION of his own being. So when John says and the WORD was God he is not implying the existence of two God's. Rather he is showing that the image of the invisible Gode is the ETERNAL GOD HIMSELF. Now we will show powerful proof that WORD was an angelic form that God used to manifest himself visibly to creation.

Exodus 3:1-4...Now Moses kept the flock of Jethro his father in law, the priest of Midian: and he led the flock to the backside of the desert, and came to the mountain of God, even to Horeb. And the ANGEL OF THE LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the bush is not burnt. And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off they feet, for the place where on thou standest is holy ground. Morever he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God.

When God introduced himself to Moses we are told the Angel of the Lord is what he saw in the bush. Yet, even though what he saw was the Angel of the Lord yet we are told it was God who called to him out of the bush. So this is how Moses knew God face to face. He saw him in the person of the Angel of the Lord.

Isaiah 63:7-9...I will mention the lovingkindnesses of the Lord, and the praises of the Lord, according to all that the Lord hath bestowed on us, and the great goodness toward the house of Israel, which he hath bestowed on them according to his mercies, and according to the multitude of his lovingkindnesses. For he said, Surely they are my people, children that will not lie: so he was their Saviour. In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old.

Who was it that carried Israel? Who was it that was afflicted in all their afflictions? Who was their Saviour? Isaiah the prophet tells us it was the Lord. Yet, it was the Lord doing all these things through the ANGEL OF HIS PRESENCE. When the angel of the Lord was present, the Lord Himself was present. As Israel saw the angel of his presence, they saw him, that is God Himself.

Genesis 32:24-30...And Jacob was left alone: and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day. And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of Jacob's thigh and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him. And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me. And he said unto him, What is thy name? and he said, Jacob. And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed. And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blesed him there. And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

So here we have the story of Jacob wrestling with an angel. Yet upon remembering this event, he said he had seen God face to face. Why? Because the angel of God WAS GOD.

Hosea 12:3-5...He took his brother by the heel in the womb, and by his strenth he had power with God. Yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed: he wept, and made supplication unto him: he found him in Bethel, and there he spake with us; Even the Lord God of hosts; the Lord is him memorial.

Here Hosea reiterates the story of Jacob wrestling with the angel. It says by his strength he had power WITH GOD. And why did he make supplication to the angel? Because he was THE LORD GOD OF HOSTS.

Genesis 48:15-16...And he blessed Joseph, and said, God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God which fed me all my life long unto this day, The Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads: and let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.

On his death bed Jacob says plainly the ANGEL OF GOD who had been with him all his life was God himself. So what is our point in all of these scriptures? The biblical writers tells us "no man hath seen God at any time". So what is it about God no one has ever seen? Is it not his essence of omni-present spirit? In his omni-presence God fills the whole universe and even beyond, because it is too small to contain him!

So what is it about God that men claim to have seen? In his wisdom the omnipresent creator formed an angelic image of himself as his visible expression that he may have personal, face to face, communication with that which he has created.

John 1:1... In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The Angel of the Lord was the Word. The Word was the Angel of the Lord in Old Testament times.

John 1:14...And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

When the time came for God to redeem fallen mankind, something happened to the Word. The Word had always dwelt in unapproachable light (omni-present spirit). To become our Saviour he would have to have a human nature including a body of flesh. At just the right moment, the onmi-present Holy Spirit transformed the Word into a seed small enough to fit into the womb of a young virgin named Mary.

Matthew 1:18...Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Luke 1:35... And the Angel (Gabriel) answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

Notice that in both of these verses it is the Holy Ghost (omni-present spirit) who is the father of our Lord Jesus Christ. All during the years of his life when he spoke of, and prayed to his father he was talking about the Holy Ghost. Now the Word which was God's visible image had been changed from spirit to flesh. And Gabriel told Mary that holy thing shall be called THE SON OF GOD. So this child who was born, this son who was given, had pre-existed as the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father. Now Yeshua had two natures. Or to modes of existence.
John 3:13...And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that come down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

As a human being on earth he was a man, the Son of God. At the same time in heaven he still remained God-the Everlasting Father. He was what is called fully man and fully God at the same time. While he was here as a human being he knew the same limitations and temptations as any other man yet without sin. Yet the nature of the heavenly Father also dwelt in the body of the Son. So even though in Christ there are two separate natures or modes of existence he still tells us they are somehow linked together. The mighty works healing and casting out of devils and prophetic visions were done through his connection to the Father.

John 14:10...Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

This is what Yeshua meant when he said MY FATHER IS GREATER THAN I. The God nature that he still held in his heavenly existence in which also was linked to and dwelling in his human body was greater than his human nature.

 

[Michael A Disciple]

Jay P. Green Interlinear page 248.

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was the Word. John 1:1

Lamsa Aramaic version.

In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and God was that very Word. John 1:1

The Word was NOT another God in addition to God. God himself was the Word.

Look unto ME and be saved all the ends of the Earth: For I am God and there is NONE ELSE. Isaiah 45:22

 

[Klee shay]

I do not doubt he is the Son at all. He is the Son of God a thousand times over!

Yes but how can he be the Son if he is also the Father? His position is made void by the interpretation of the scriptures as one God. Can you tell me why God himself refered to Jesus as his Son and not "God"?

But I define the Son of God as did Isaiah the Prophet.

Only one prophet? What about Jesus...he was a prophet too. He said he was the Son and God was his Father, why undermine that understanding with another prophet's message?

At no point in the life of Christ did he call himself God. Why is that? Do you think it's important that we follow HIS lead as he lived it?

Matthew 13:57 "And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house."

Are you living in the house of the Lord and yet offended by his testimony of being the Son and not the Father? His testimony is that he was one with God but that is a very long way from saying he WAS God.

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, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaih 9:6

I would be curious to know if God was ever refered to as the Everlasting Father by Jesus or any of the Apostles? I had always heard him refered to as our Father which art in Heaven.

The Son shall be called Eternal Father. I am fulfilling that prophecy. You seem uncomfortable with that.

Yes I am, as stated above. Jesus was Jesus and God was God - the Comforter being the final part of God's nature revealed to mankind. It was God's WILL that it be this way. Can I ask why you think God called himself his own Son? And why didn't Jesus testify in his lifetime (bearing two witnesses) by saying he was The Father also?

 

[Vic C.]

I would be curious to know if God was ever refered to as the Everlasting Father by Jesus or any of the Apostles? I had always heard him refered to as our Father which art in Heaven.

I had posted something along that line, but pulled it from here because I didn't feel like debating this anymore. Maybe I'll repost it.

Good post overall Klee. Unfortunately, those who don't understand the concept of a triune God (Godhead) will contine to insist we teach multiple Gods. Like this:

The Word was NOT another God in addition to God. God himself was the Word.

 

[(Omega)]

Greetings Michael A Disciple!

I'm not sure what your trying to prove in your long-winded post. Your interpretation of "seen" is inaccurate in regards to the Sons relation to the Father. Furthermore the rest of your post which only takes up space describes "theophanies" of God and of the preincarnate Christ, not God the Father. I can also use a verse to form a personal opinion about the trinity, EXAMPLE:

And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, And said, My LORD, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: Let a little water, I pray you, be fetched, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree: And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts; after that ye shall pass on: for therefore are ye come to your servant. And they said, So do, as thou hast said. (Genesis 18:1-5)

LORD: [03068]Y@hovah {yeh-ho-vaw'}The proper name of the one true God.

appeared: [07200]ra'ah {raw-aw'} to appear, present oneself, to be seen or make visible.

In verse 1 we CLEARLY read, that the LORD (Y@hovah) appeared to Abraham as three men (three persons), then in verse 3 Abraham addresses these three men as "[his] Lord" ('Adonay). Furthermore we read in verse 3 that the three men (They) answered Abraham at the SAME TIME. That passage is a commonly referred to as a "theophany" as with the burning bush, and it is a clear manifestation of the Triune God since the title "Adonay" is never applied to angels. Even with scriptural prooftexting, I won't use this as Absolute proof of the Trinity, because the absolute proof of the Trinity is found in scriptures as a WHOLE when studied in CONTEXT, it is both inscrupable and inescapable.

1 John 4:12...No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us.

1 Timothy 6:16...Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen

Several places in the word of God we are told God has never been seen.

What does the word seen mean?

John 14:9 - Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

There are no verse in the scriptures that specfically mentions Jesus stating that He Himself was the Father. Furthermore, there are exegetical proofs which refutes how that passage is handled by Modalists, at face value. Jesus said in John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." He then explains in verse 7 to His disciples that they "have seen" and "know" the Father by knowing Him, notice how "have seen" and "know" are parallel when spoken by Jesus. Then in verse 8 Philip continues to fail to understand what Jesus is saying, He says, "shew us the Father". Jesus corrects Philip by repeating that by seeing Him (Jesus) he can "see", i.e., recognize or "know" the invisible Father (v.9) . The context in this passage is apparent, i.e., we could actually see (know, recognize) the invisible Father who is incapable of being seen (1 Tim. 6:16), by knowing and seeing Jesus who is the only way to the Father. God the Son was always (ho on) "who being" in His preexistent state the perfect "exact representation" of the very Person of the Father (hupostaseos), He (Jesus) is the exact replica [autou; hence, "of Him" and not "as Him"] (Heb. 1:3). Therefore, when the disciples saw Jesus, they had "seen" the exact representation and the only way to the invisible Father who is incapable of being seen. Furthermore, in verse 10, Jesus made a clear distinction between Himself and the Father by declaring, the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me (living in me), he doeth the works." Another stunning distinction between Jesus and the Father is found in the fact that The Father is a "SPIRIT", When Jesus said, "he that hath seen me hath seen the Father", the only thing His disciples actually saw was the physical body of Jesus. The Father is incapable of being seen (invisible) and most certainly does not have a physical body. Thus Jesus could not have meant that by seeing Him they were literally seeing the Father. Also found throughout the entire chapter of John 14 is the usage of personal pronouns, Jesus clearly makes the distinction between Hims from the Father by using first person personal pronouns such as "I, Me and Mine" to refer to Himself, and 3rd person personal pronouns such as "He, Him and His" to refer to His Father (John 14:7, 10, 16). Furthermore, found throughout John chapter 14 are the use of different prepositions, this is used by Jesus to distinguish Himself from His Father. Different prepositions are used to demonstrate a relationship between them and to point to distinction. Example: "no man cometh unto (pros) the Father, but by (dia) Me" (John 14:6); "he that believeth in (eis) Me" ; "I go to (pros) the Father". The bible makes it clear that the Father and the Son are distinct persons who share a loving relationship with each other and collaborate in Unity to achieve a divine purpose, but you are free to believe whatever you desire. IF you cannot see the triune GOD depicted in scriptures as of Yet, then you will more than likely never admit to it. You are teaching a doctrine that is contrary to biblical teaching and sound doctrine, and the Gospel warns those who teach other doctrines, especially doctrines concerning Christ. My only concern is that perhaps you might submit to the truth which is RARE since I rarely see someone in a debate admit to being wrong and accept correction. Think about what I said with a sincere heart, thats all.

Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath (both) the Father and the Son. (2 John 1:9)

Take Care God Bless!

 

[wavy]

and it is a clear manifestation of the Triune God since the title "Adonay" is never applied to angels

That depends on whether or not one considers these men angels or not in Genesis.

Anyway, I disagree with this entirely. This is mere speculation. A play on numbers, if you will.

I do believe ONE of the men was YHWH (the Malach-YHWH, commonly and erroneously referred to as the "Angel of 'the LORD'").

"Elohim" refers to angels once. Are we to assume "Adonai" is too great to refer to angels while Elohim can be applied to them, as well as men?

I believe it was Yahshua with two angels. YHWH the Father was in heaven, of course.

 

[John the Baptist]

John Here: I was asked on another site this question:
_______

And why is it wrong to see that God is the 'Father' of Jesus Christ, and that Jesus
Christ is the Son of the Father ?

********
John here: (slightly altered)
There is nothing wrong with this statement if it is understood as the Word of God taught it! The Word was With God and the Word was God! And the WORD was made Flesh! John 1.

As you are well aware of, this is what The Doctrine OF CHRIST WARNED ABOUT in 2 John 1:9-11!

You say later on: "I guess what troubles me most,... is the possibility of calling something 'God' that is not God." (You sound like you know more than God does with that remark. Call 'something' God..?' If so, where does that originate from?? See Gen. 4:7 with Cains wrong sacrifice in place of the Lamb?) No offensr mrant.

Me again: The ten commandments that Christ wrote, would even condemn Christ Himself if He were not God, in the first four commandments one sees where WORSHIP can only belongs to GOD! Not angels, not created ones, nor Christ if He WAS & IS not God! Rev. 14:6-7's Everlasting Gospel alone has the universe 'seeing' the worshiping of Christ!

Or do you as with others strike the WORD WORSHIP from your belief as they do from their bibles? If so, then you too need the WARNING from John's other inspired Words of Rev.'s last few verses of adding to or removing from...! Very Dangerous, and FATAL when the 'sin is finished'! James 1:15.

Christ forgave sins! Christ healed the BLIND! (BOTH WAYS!!) Christ RAISED THE DEAD! (BOTH WAYS!!) Only GOD/MAN could do this!! The devil in Matt. 4 requested Christ to fall down and worship him, what was Christ' reply, and where was it written?? Worship is only meant for whom?? Again John had the same testing in his penned book of Rev. 22:8-9 when he fell down at the feet of the angel, as it appears in being awestruck? Anyhow, the message from the angel was a warning not to do so!

He said to John:
".. See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, [and of them that keep the sayings of this book: WORSHIP GOD]." But not Christ??? :
[CHRIST IS GOD/IN/THE/FLESH!!] Where again does one find the WORSHIP GOD COMMANDMENT? Right back to the Royal Universal Everlasting Covenant That Christ Himself wrote in the ten Commandments of Stone! Heb. 13:20's ETERNAL COVENANT! Christ IS GOD ETERNAL!

Stephen while being stoned to death in Acts 7 was 'filled with the Holy Ghost' and said: "THIS IS HE, THAT WAS [b][IN][/b] THE CHURCH IN THE WILDERNESS].."

David stated in Christ's Word, by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost...
"Give ear, O Sherpard of Israel, [THOU THAT LEADEST JOSEPH LIKE A FLOCK; *THOU THAT DWELLEST BETWEEN THE CHERUBIM'S, SHINE FORTH."

It is interesting how any could miss this when reading Prov. 8? See verse 5? "O ye simple, understand wisdom: and ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart." ???
Then comes prophetic wisdom of the future of 1000 years & the life of Christ the SON OF GOD!! Even as a child playing and maturing!
Yet, some even try to project this as teaching that Christ had a beginning as the Son of God before he came to earth and actually was born!, or at least in eternity somewhere!!

Notice verse 23 for the Godhead's PLAN IN ETERNITY... " I WAS SET UP FROM EVERLASTING, FROM THE BEGINNING, OR EVER THE EARTH WAS." From *EVERLASTING! From before! Or EVER THE EARTH WAS! *BY HIM WERE [ALL THINGS CREATED, THAT WERE CREATED: THAT ARE IN THE HEAVEN, AND THAT ARE IN THE EARTH, VISIBLE AND INVISIBLE, *WHETHER THEY BE THRONES, OR DOMINIONS, OR PRINCIPALITIES, OR POWERS: *ALL THINGS WERE CREATED FOR HIM AND BY HIM: AND HE IS BEFORE ALL THINGS: AND BY HIM ALL THINGS CONSIST. ... AND IT PLEASED THE FATHER THAT IN HIM SHOULD ALL THE *FULLNESS DWELL." Colossians 1:15-19 in part. And this is BEFORE and AFTER Christ became God/Man!
THIS Above [IS THE EVERLASTING DOCTRINE OF CHRIST!] 2 John 1:9

The God/Head in their Eternal plan not only Prophesied the plan in Proverbs, but told that they would DECLARE THE DECREE!! "I WILL DECLARE THE DECREE: the Lord hath said unto me, [THOU ART MY SON]; [*THIS DAY] [HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE]." Psalms 2:7

Then the day came! When did God become the Son of God in actual conception? Most know.

But in Heb. 1:5 it states the time as in past/tense setting. Verse 5's last part of the verse it says:
"... THOU ART MY SON, THIS DAY HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE?." There is a question mark there! Read 1-5 for it to be removed!!![/color]

 

[(Omega)]

and it is a clear manifestation of the Triune God since the title "Adonay" is never applied to angels

That depends on whether or not one considers these men angels or not in Genesis.

Anyway, I disagree with this entirely. This is mere speculation. A play on numbers, if you will.

I do believe ONE of the men was YHWH (the Malach-YHWH, commonly and erroneously referred to as the "Angel of 'the LORD'").

"Elohim" refers to angels once. Are we to assume "Adonai" is too great to refer to angels while Elohim can be applied to them, as well as men?

I believe it was Yahshua with two angels. YHWH the Father was in heaven, of course.

Elohim:'elohiym {el-o-heem'}
1) (plural)
a) rulers, judges
b) divine ones
c) angels
d) gods
d) the (true) God), God

And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw [them], he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground, And said, My Lord (Adonay), if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant: (Genesis 18:2,3)

Adonay:'Adonay {ad-o-noy'}
a) of men
b) of God
2) Lord - title, spoken in place of Yahweh in Jewish display of reverence.

Where? Where does (Adonay) ever refer to angels?

God Bless!

 

[wavy]

I think you missed the point...

Those definitions obviously come from a concordance. Those are what English words are used in place of the Hebrew word. Those are substitutes and translations, not references.

Regardless, those are based off of the opinions of man.

The Strong's for instance, says the name "YHWH" is pronounced "Yeh-ho-vah". That's wrong.

 

[(Omega)]

I think you missed the point...

Those definitions obviously come from a concordance. Those are what English words are used in place of the Hebrew word. Those are substitutes and translations, not references.

Regardless, those are based off of the opinions of man.

The Strong's for instance, says the name "YHWH" is pronounced "Yeh-ho-vah". That's wrong.

I don't think I missed your point, but I KNOW that you missed mines. Opinion of man or not, that is not my point, we are dealing with the definition of the word "Lord" in Genesis 18,3. I am well aware of the Hebrew pronunciations and english pronunciations from concordances, this has nothing to do with the definition of the word in context. Actually you missed my point, you said that (Adonay) can refere to angels, do a research on the Hebrew meaning of Adonay and see if it ever refers to angels. The word for "Lord" in the original Hebrew language is translated as the name "Yahweh", so regardless of the pronunciations, the definition of (Adonay) "Lord" in Genesis 18:3 never refers to angels. Ask a Hebrew Scholar and see if you can squeeze the word "angels" into the Hebrew meaning of the Word "Lord" (Adonay) [Yahweh].

God Bless!

 

[wavy]

I still think you are missing the point. The point is that playing with the number 3 to make this into a trinitarian passage is kind of silly.

And anyway, if I am not mistaken, "YHWH" appears where the term "Adonai" appears in these passages in Genesis 18.

The substitution of YHWH for "the lord/Adonai" was done by the Masorites.

As far as your point, the definition of a word in context is not the issue here. The word in reference to some one is the issue.

 

[(Omega)]

I still think you are missing the point. The point is that playing with the number 3 to make this into a trinitarian passage is kind of silly.

And anyway, if I am not mistaken, "YHWH" appears where the term "Adonai" appears in these passages in Genesis 18.

The substitution of YHWH for "the lord/Adonai" was done by the Masorites.

: So you won't admit that (Adonay-Adonai) "YHWH" NEVER refers to angels, that was my point, understand? For once I would like to have someone admit their wrong. In the King James and other versions of the Bible, the translation of the word "YHWH" by the word Lord is due to the conventional reading of the tetragrammaton as (Adonay-Adonai), this can be dated back to the oldest translation of the Bible, the LXX Septuagint, and the CLEAR definition points to the true meaning of the word to NEVER apply to angels. So whether you find it "Silly", I should use that passage to point to a triune verse is besides the point, my point is for you to admit that I am correct in stating that "Lord" (YHWH:hwhy) can never refer to angels and that you are wrong in stating that it can, is humility calling? :wink:

God Bless!

 

[wavy]

I think we need to review what I originally stated to clear this up...

That depends on whether or not one considers these men angels or not in Genesis.

Anyway, I disagree with this entirely. This is mere speculation. A play on numbers, if you will.

I do believe ONE of the men was YHWH (the Malach-YHWH, commonly and erroneously referred to as the "Angel of 'the LORD'").

"Elohim" refers to angels once. Are we to assume "Adonai" is too great to refer to angels while Elohim can be applied to them, as well as men?

I believe it was Yahshua with two angels. YHWH the Father was in heaven, of course.

What I said was that ONE of the men was YHWH. And I said whether or not one thinks "Adonay" refers to angels depends on whether or not the men in this passage are angels.

Angels are also referred to as ELOHIM once. So can we say that in the passage where angels are referred to as elohim, that it can't be referring to angels because it's not used anywhere else?

That's my original point in addition to calling it silly to think this is a trinitarian passage.

Therefore, you still miss the point. Don't get puffed up. I have nothing to admit...


As far as this:

In the King James and other versions of the Bible, the translation of the word "YHWH" by the word Lord is due to the conventional reading of the tetragrammaton as (Adonay-Adonai), this can be dated back to the oldest translation of the Bible, the LXX Septuagint, and the CLEAR definition points to the true meaning of the word to NEVER apply to angels.

What are you talking about? The LXX is not the oldest translation of the bible for one thing. Secondly, since it was written in Greek, "adonai" does not appear in it. Finally, as I said, the DEFINITION of the word doesn't matter. You are playing semantics.

Yahshua is called a lamb. No way in the world can the definition of "lamb" be "Yahshua". That's not the point. The point is for the title's sake.

"Elohim" cannot and does not mean "angel". But it is used in REFERENCE to angels and judges etc.

Thus, your whole notion is wrong and irrelevant.

Oh, yeah, I skipped over a point. The rendering of YHWH as "lord" is pure tradition. YHWH has nothing to do with "Adonai".

 

[(Omega)]

Your not clearing anything up wavy, your making matter worse by denying truth.

I think we need to review what I originally stated to clear this up...

That depends on whether or not one considers these men angels or not in Genesis.

Anyway, I disagree with this entirely. This is mere speculation. A play on numbers, if you will.

I do believe ONE of the men was YHWH (the Malach-YHWH, commonly and erroneously referred to as the "Angel of 'the LORD'").

"Elohim" refers to angels once. Are we to assume "Adonai" is too great to refer to angels while Elohim can be applied to them, as well as men?

I believe it was Yahshua with two angels. YHWH the Father was in heaven, of course.

What I said was that ONE of the men was YHWH. And I said whether or not one thinks "Adonay" refers to angels depends on whether or not the men in this passage are angels.

Angels are also referred to as ELOHIM once. So can we say that in the passage where angels are referred to as elohim, that it can't be referring to angels because it's not used anywhere else?

That's my original point in addition to calling it silly to think this is a trinitarian passage.

Therefore, you still miss the point. Don't get puffed up. I have nothing to admit...

Wrong again, all three men are referred to as "Lord", read the context of the passage. And as for being "puffed up", chill out dude with your word choice. In verse 1, the LORD (hwhy) "appeared, presented [himself]" (ra'ah) to Abraham as three men. In verse 3, Abraham addresses all three men as "[his] Lord" ('Adonay). And in verse 5, all three men answered Abraham at once. And as for considering my interpretation of Genesis 18 as silly, I suggest you go back and read my post.

I'm not sure what your trying to prove in your long-winded post. Your interpretation of "seen" is inaccurate in regards to the Sons relation to the Father. Furthermore the rest of your post which only takes up space describes "theophanies" of God and of the preincarnate Christ, not God the Father. I can also use a verse to form a personal opinion about the trinity,

One of the reasons as to why I used Genesis 18:1-5 to who the triunity of God is for an example of how others use verses to show in the same manner how "angels" refer to God the Father. You or anyone else can call it conjecture and personal opinion, my point if you paid close attention to my previous post is:

Even with scriptural prooftexting, I won't use this as Absolute proof of the Trinity, because the absolute proof of the Trinity is found in scriptures as a WHOLE when studied in CONTEXT, it is both inscrupable and inescapable.

What are you talking about? The LXX is not the oldest translation of the bible for one thing. Secondly, since it was written in Greek, "adonai" does not appear in it. Finally, as I said, the DEFINITION of the word doesn't matter. You are playing semantics.

Yahshua is called a lamb. No way in the world can the definition of "lamb" be "Yahshua". That's not the point. The point is for the title's sake.

"Elohim" cannot and does not mean "angel". But it is used in REFERENCE to angels and judges etc.

Thus, your whole notion is wrong and irrelevant.

Oh, yeah, I skipped over a point. The rendering of YHWH as "lord" is pure tradition. YHWH has nothing to do with "Adonai".

Duh! Didn't I post that "Elohim" was in refernce to angels? Angels is but one of the meanings, go back and read my post. Secondly if the DEFINITION of the word doesn't matter, then why make the reference that Adonay can refer to angels? Nowhere can the "Lamb" be referred to as "Yahshua"? The definition of "Yahshua" is that of Deity, do you deny the deity of Christ? The first translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into another language was called the LXX Septuagint, do your research. 70 Scholars were brought to Alexandria, Egypt, to create this Greek translation. The LXX Septuagints translation of the original Hebrew rendering of "YHWH" is the same in the Septuagint.

God Bless!

 

[wavy]

Wrong again, all three men are referred to as "Lord", read the context of the passage.

Well, I had never looked at in this way. I had assumed he was speaking to the one who stayed with him when the other two left.

One of the reasons as to why I used Genesis 18:1-5 to who the triunity of God is for an example of how others use verses to show in the same manner how "angels" refer to God the Father. You or anyone else can call it conjecture and personal opinion, my point if you paid close attention to my previous post is:

That's fine. I saw your original post. I just pointed out how I disagreed. I know it is your opinion.

Duh! Who said that Elohim meant strictly angels?

Beware of word choices... :roll:


Anyway, you missed the entire point if you have to ask this question.

Angels is but one of the meanings, go back and read my post.

It is NOT a meaning. This is where you fail to get the point...

Secondly if the DEFINITION of the word doesn't matter, then why make the reference that Adonay can refer to angels?

Exactly. Now I know you did not get it. Reference and definition are not the same thing. I can call a skunk "stinky". Does this mean "stinky" means skunk? No. Definition is irrelevant in this case.

Nowhere can the "Lamb" be referred to as "Yahshua"?

Yeah, you missed it.

The definition of "Yahshua" is that of Deity, do you deny the deity of Christ?

What? The definition of "Yahshua" is "Yah saves".

The first translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into another language was called the LXX Septuagint, do your research.

Sir, it seems you are the one afraid to admit error. This is not what you said at first. You said the LXX was the oldest translation of the bible. And even then, this is wrong. There were Aramaic Targums that were around before the LXX (if I am not mistaken) and at the same time the LXX was translated for sure.

70 Scholars were brought to Alexandria, Egypt, to create this Greek translation. The LXX Septuagints translation of the original Hebrew rendering of "YHWH" is the same in the Septuagint.

Now you are confusing "YHWH" with "Adonia"...

This is also not something you said originally. You are changing points. What you said earlier:

the translation of the word "YHWH" by the word Lord is due to the conventional reading of the tetragrammaton as (Adonay-Adonai), this can be dated back to the oldest translation of the Bible, the LXX Septuagint,

The tetragrammaton does not read "Adonai". Adonai was put in place of the tetragrammaton by the Masorites in about 130+ different places in the Masoretic Hebrew text. I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[(Omega)]

Hey man, I'm sorry for using the word "duh", your alright with me! Secondly I am never afraid to admit I am wrong If someone can correct me, this is How I came to acquire any or all scriptural knowledge in the first place.

Anyways, I am aware that reference and definition do not mean the same which brings me back to square one. How do you squeeze the word or title "angels" in Genesis 18:3? You said that "Are we to assume "Adonai" is too great to refer to angels while Elohim can be applied to them, as well as men? I believe it was Yahshua with two angels" Where is any reference of angels in that passage? It's a straight forward question which you sidestep everytime. The definition of "Elohim" makes references to angels, I think you missed my point wavy. I posted the definition of "Elohim", where did I state that "Elohim" is defined as angels? The LXX Septuagint is the FIRST (Oldest) translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Another Language, If I am not mistaken.

God Bless!