The Yahweh Name

[TrevorL]

The Yahweh Name Part 1 Initial Declaration and Fulfilment
The following is a consideration of the Yahweh Name that was revealed in Exodus 3:14-15. It is hoped that the following comments will help to explain some of the language of both the OT and NT and the true role of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

The Name of God was revealed to Moses in the following terms:
Exodus 3:14-15 (KJV): 14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. 15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.

Most translations and commentators accept the present tense “I am that I am”, but notice in the margin of the RV (or ASV) and RSV, an alternative is given “I will be that I will be” or “I will be what I will be”, showing that some modern scholars suggest this alternative reading. Although not popular it appears that this future tense is the correct translation. Not only modern scholars, Tyndale also translated this in the future tense, and I also like the interesting spelling of his time and the specific spelling “I wilbe”:
Exodus 3:12-14 (Tyndale): 12 And he sayde: I wilbe with the. And this shalbe a token vnto the that I haue sent the: after that thou hast broughte the people out of Egipte, ye shall serue God vppon this mountayne. 13 Than sayde Moses vnto God: when I come vnto the childern of Israell and saye vnto them, the God of youre fathers hath sent me vnto you, ad they saye vnto me, what ys his name, what answere shall I geuethem? 14 Then sayde God vnto Moses: I wilbe what I wilbe: ad he sayde, this shalt thou saye vnto the children of Israel: I wilbe dyd send me to you.

The word “ehyeh” that occurs is in Exodus 3:14 and is the same that occurs in the earlier statement in v12 rendered in the KJV “I will be”, and here most other translators also give the future tense:
Exodus 3:12 (KJV): And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be a token unto thee, that I have sent thee: When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain.
Not only does this fix the tense in this context, but it also introduces the concept that the Name of God is associated with some future activity.

This future tense and future activity was to be God acting to deliver Israel out of Egypt, “I will be with thee”, so that Israel would become a people for His Name. They would be a living witness to the purpose of God, and a witness to the existence of God. The following passage emphasises this work of delivering Israel with the future aspect of the Name:
Exodus 6:1-8 (KJV): 1 Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land. 2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the LORD: 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH (or Yahweh) was I not known to them. 4 And I have also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land of their pilgrimage, wherein they were strangers. 5 And I have also heard the groaning of the children of Israel, whom the Egyptians keep in bondage; and I have remembered my covenant. 6 Wherefore say unto the children of Israel, I am the LORD, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will rid you out of their bondage, and I will redeem you with a stretched out arm, and with great judgments: 7 And I will take you to me for a people, and I will be to you a God: and ye shall know that I am the LORD your God, which bringeth you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. 8 And I will bring you in unto the land, concerning the which I did swear to give it to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob; and I will give it you for an heritage: I am the LORD.

When Israel was delivered out of Egypt the Name of God remains the same, but the particular activity has been accomplished:
Exodus 15:1-3 (KJV): 1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. 2 The LORD is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation: he is my God, and I will prepare him an habitation; my father’s God, and I will exalt him. 3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD (Yahweh) is his name.
The future tense of God’s Name “He will be or become” has been accomplished, and Yahweh had become Israel’s salvation.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

The Yahweh Name Part 2 The Fulfilment in our Lord Jesus Christ
The initial fulfilment was not the ultimate completion of the Yahweh Name. God’s purpose with the earth was not complete with the salvation of Israel out of Egypt. God’s purpose was declared in the following, but sadly this was spoken at a time when the very generation that had been born through God’s deliverance failed.
Numbers 14:21 (KJV): But as truly as I live, all the earth shall be filled with the glory of the LORD (Yahweh).

The above raises the question of how and when will the earth be filled with the glory of God. One indication is found when the Psalmist uses the same words as Moses’ Song to speak of another deliverance:
Psalm 118:14-25 (KJV): 14 The LORD is my strength and song, and is become my salvation. 15 The voice of rejoicing and salvation is in the tabernacles of the righteous: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 16 The right hand of the LORD is exalted: the right hand of the LORD doeth valiantly. 17 I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the LORD. 18 The LORD hath chastened me sore: but he hath not given me over unto death. 19 Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the LORD: 20 This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall enter. 21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation. 22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. 23 This is the LORD’S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. 24 This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. 25 Save now, I beseech thee, O LORD: O LORD, I beseech thee, send now prosperity.

The above is quoted at length to show that there was to be a greater salvation in fulfilment of the Yahweh Name. It is evident from the context that this salvation is by means of the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the man of God’s right hand, the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

The greater deliverance is revealed even in the conception and birth of the child:
Matthew 1:20-21 (KJV): 20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. 21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

The meaning of the name Jesus is revealed: “for he shall save his people from their sins”. Was Jesus to be an independent Saviour? No, the name Jesus incorporates the Yahweh Name, Je-sous, Jo-shua, or Yah-oshea. He was to be Yahweh’s Salvation. Here then is the extension or fulfilment of the Yahweh Name, Yahweh was to be, to become. He was to “become salvation” Exodus 15:2, in and through Jesus, the Son of God. Yahweh is the Saviour, Jesus is the Saviour. In other words Yahweh, God the Father is the Saviour through His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. Yahweh has become salvation.

Salvation is now offered in the Name of Jesus Christ:
Acts 4:10-12 (KJV): 10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. 11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

The subject of God’s Name has many other aspects, but I suggest the more we start to understand some of these aspects, the more we realise that the spelling and pronunciation of the Name, while important, is not as important as understanding the Name. Here are a few examples of other aspects:

Psalm 9:10 (KJV): And they that know thy name will put their trust in thee: for thou, LORD, hast not forsaken them that seek thee.

John 12:27–28 (KJV): 27 Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour. 28 Father, glorify thy name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

The Yahweh Name (cont’d)
In my first post I mentioned that the margin of the Revised Version has "I will be" for Exodus 3:14, and one of the supporters of this rendition could have been AB Davidson as he was one of the Hebrew scholars engaged in the production of the RV. Please note that I do not endorse all of his theology, as he was most probably a Trinitarian and also had other wrong ideas, but his Hebrew abilities have been respected and some of his Hebrew books were published in new editions until recently.

The article by AB Davidson is in the Hastings Bible Dictionary Volume 2 page 199:
"The name is connected with the Hebrew ‘hayah’, ‘to be’, in the imperfect. Now with regard to this verb, first, it does not mean ‘to be’ essentially or ontologically, but phenomenally; and secondly the imperfect has not the sense of a present (‘am’) but of a future (‘will be’). In Exodus 3:10ff, when Moses demurred to go to Egypt, God assured him saying, ‘I will be with thee’. When he asked how he should name the God of their fathers to the people, he was told Ehyeh asher Ehyeh. Again he was bidden say, ‘Ehyeh hath sent me unto you’. From all this it seems evident that in the view of the writer Ehyeh and Yahweh are the same: that God is Ehyeh, ‘I will be’, when speaking of Himself and ‘Yahweh’, ‘he will be’, when spoken of by others. What He will be is left unexpressed - He will be with them, helper, strengthener, deliverer."
Now this last comment by AB Davidson ties in with what I suggested that what God would do or be was that Yahweh would be their salvation.

Another additional aspect is that this could also be connected with the expression in the promises to David:
2 Samuel 7:12–16 (KJV): 12 And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. 14 I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: 15 But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. 16 And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
The development of the Name Yahweh will not only be associated with what God would accomplish, that is salvation, but also associated with the development of the Messiah, the Son of God, through whom salvation will be accomplished, Yahweh will be his father, and he will be Yahweh’s son.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

The Yahweh Name (cont’d)
The first two Posts established that Yahweh is the One God who acted to deliver Israel out of Egypt. There are many passages after these events where the Yahweh Name appears and perhaps one of the most important of these is mentioned below, and this is extensively quoted and expounded by Jesus and the Apostles.
Psalm 110:1 (KJV): The LORD (Yahweh) said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
The above speaks of two distinct individuals, one called “LORD” and the other called “Lord”, David’s Lord. As suggested above “LORD” is the Hebrew word “Yahweh”, while “Lord” is the normal word representing Lord, Master, Ruler. The KJV usually represents Yahweh by LORD in capitals S#3068, and only in a few places by the incorrect rendition Jehovah. Occasionally the KJV also uses GOD S#3069 to represent Yahweh, and these are when YHWH has the vowel points of Elohim instead of the more frequent Adonai.

Our Lord Jesus Christ quotes and expounds Psalm 110:1 in the following:
Matthew 22:41–46 (KJV): 41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. 43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, 44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? 46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
This identifies Yahweh as the One God, the Father and David’s Lord is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who is now seated at the right hand of God, His Father, in God the Father’s Throne.

Peter also quotes and expounds Psalm 110:1 after the death and resurrection of Jesus:
Acts 2:29–36 (KJV): 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

God has raised Jesus from the dead and God has exalted him to sit at the right hand of God the Father.
Revelation 3:21–22 (KJV): 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. 22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

This again confirms that the One God is Yahweh, God the Father, and David’s Lord is our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Jesus calls Yahweh “my Father”, showing that he is the Son of God. This verse also shows that Jesus is yet to return from heaven and only then will he sit upon the Throne of David.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD out of the heavens. (Gen. 19:24 NKJ)

If One Person is called Yahweh, how is it Yahweh on earth rained down fire on Sodom and Gomorrah from Yahweh in heaven?

Two "Persons" are called Yahweh, one on earth the other in heaven.

This is one of the Texts that combined with many others, imply God is One Substance, but in Him are Persons also called Yahweh, in a "compound unity". This is implied in the Baptism formula, One Name (singular), but three Persons subsist equally in the One Infinite Name:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)


Who has ascended into heaven, or descended?
Who has gathered the wind in His fists?
Who has bound the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is His name, and what is His Son's name, If you know? (Prov. 30:4 NKJ)

 

[Alfred Persson]

Psalm 110:1 (KJV): The LORD (Yahweh) said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.
The above speaks of two distinct individuals, one called “LORD” and the other called “Lord”, David’s Lord. As suggested above “LORD” is the Hebrew word “Yahweh”, while “Lord” is the normal word representing Lord, Master, Ruler. The KJV usually represents Yahweh by LORD in capitals S#3068, and only in a few places by the incorrect rendition Jehovah. Occasionally the KJV also uses GOD S#3069 to represent Yahweh, and these are when YHWH has the vowel points of Elohim instead of the more frequent Adonai.

Our Lord Jesus Christ quotes and expounds Psalm 110:1 in the following:
Matthew 22:41–46 (KJV): 41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David. 43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, 44 The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? 46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.
This identifies Yahweh as the One God, the Father and David’s Lord is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who is now seated at the right hand of God, His Father, in God the Father’s Throne.

This text does not disprove the Holy Trinity, Christ subsists in Divine and Human nature.

David was speaking to the LORD Jesus Christ, in His human nature He is seated at the right hand of the Father.

But in His Divine Nature, The Word is God who created all things, and not one thing was created without Him:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. (Jn. 1:1-3 NKJ)

If you aren't created, then you are God. The Word is not created, He is Creator of all things created so cannot be one of the things created.

 

[Alfred Persson]

The above raises the question of how and when will the earth be filled with the glory of God.

Obviously the earth is filled with the glory of God when every eye sees Yahweh [the Son], The Almighty---even those who pierced Him:

"In that day the LORD will defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem...then they will look on Me whom they pierced. (Zech. 12:8, 10 NKJ)

7 Behold, He is coming with clouds, and every eye will see Him, even they who pierced Him. And all the tribes of the earth will mourn because of Him. Even so, Amen.
8 "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End," says the Lord, "who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." (Rev. 1:7-8 NKJ)

 

[Alfred Persson]

Salvation is now offered in the Name of Jesus Christ:
Acts 4:10-12 (KJV): 10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. 11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

"Jesus" means "Yahweh is Salvation" (Strong's 2424)

As it is written, from Yahweh (Jesus) comes escapes from death:

This God of ours is a God who saves; from Lord Yahweh comes escape from death (Ps. 68:20 NJB)

 

[Alfred Persson]

This again confirms that the One God is Yahweh, God the Father, and David’s Lord is our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Jesus calls Yahweh “my Father”, showing that he is the Son of God. This verse also shows that Jesus is yet to return from heaven and only then will he sit upon the Throne of David.

You contradict yourself, if Jesus is the Son of the Father then He is God the Son.

Just as human fathers do not beget "sub-humans", God the Father did not beget a "sub-god".

 

[Alfred Persson]

You speak of God as a single Person, but scripture shows God is plural as to Persons, the "US" in God made man in His image:

Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." (Gen. 1:26 NKJ)

What do you see when you look in a mirror? Your "reflex or reverse image". So what does God see when He looks at man? The reflex of His image, His likeness.

How? Man is One Person subsisting in three substances, which is the reflex of God who is Three Persons in One substance:

Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Thess. 5:23 NKJ)

The Reverse Image of Man is the Holy Trinity: Three Persons subsisting in the One Infinite Ocean of Essence that is Yahweh God.

Hence there are Three Divine Persons in the One Name of God:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)

This doctrine is so important Jesus commanded we all be baptized as Trinitarians.

 

[TrevorL]

Greeting Alfred Persson,

A brief answer to some of the portions of your posts, due to time constraints.

Two "Persons" are called Yahweh, one on earth the other in heaven.

The "Yahweh" upon the earth is an Angel who represented God and spoke and acted on his behalf. There are two "Yahwehs" in Zechariah 3 and again one is God in heaven, and the other the Angel of Yahweh who Jude identifies as Michael the Archangel.

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)

There is only One Name of God Exodus 3:14-15, Matthew 6:9, and that is God the Father's Name, Yahweh. Jesus is a development of the Yahweh Name as explained in my earlier posts in this thread.

This text does not disprove the Holy Trinity, Christ subsists in Divine and Human nature.

The concept that Jesus has two natures is both impossible and contradictory. Jesus was and is a human, now exalted.

If you aren't created, then you are God.

Jesus was "created" in that he had God for his father and Mary as his mother, and hence he is a creature, the firstborn of the New Creation Psalm 8.

You contradict yourself, if Jesus is the Son of the Father then He is God the Son.
Just as human fathers do not beget "sub-humans", God the Father did not beget a "sub-god".

Jesus is a human, the Son of God by his conception/birth with God as his father and Mary his mother. You cannot create or beget a "God".

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greeting Alfred Persson,

After the word Reply is my rebuttal:

Alfred Persson said:
Two “Persons” are called Yahweh, one on earth the other in heaven.

Trevor said:
The “Yahweh” upon the earth is an Angel who represented God and spoke and acted on his behalf. There are two “Yahwehs” in Zechariah 3 and again one is God in heaven, and the other the Angel of Yahweh who Jude identifies as Michael the Archangel.

Reply

Not according to scripture. In Genesis 18:22 two “men” leave, the one remaining is identified as Yahweh.
Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD. (Gen. 18:22 NKJ)

We know from the NT Yahweh the Son is the Word of God (John 1:1).
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (Jn. 1:1 NKJ)

Yahweh The Word or “Voice” also walked in the Garden of Eden as a man:
And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. (Gen. 3:8 KJV)

Therefore, Yahweh is on earth as a “man”, the other Yahweh is in heaven. There are Two Persons named Yahweh.

The scriptures you use to reject the plain teaching of Scripture, are taken out of context and have nothing to do with the above events.

In Zechariah there is only the Angel of Yahweh who is speaking as Him. Unlike Adam and Abraham who saw “men” one of whom was Yahweh, FOUR TIMES Zechariah reports its “the angel” of Yahweh who is speaking for Yahweh:

1 Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him….3 Now Joshua was …standing before the Angel...5 the Angel of the LORD stood by. 6 Then the Angel of the LORD admonished Joshua… Zechariah 4:1 Now the angel who talked with me came back… (Zech. 3:1-4:1 NKJ)

There is a difference between being Yahweh, and speaking FOR Yahweh. That invalidates your “proof”.

AND Jude isn’t speaking about any of these events when he reports Michael the Archangel (NOT Yahweh), disputed over Moses’ body, and Michael speaks ABOUT Yahweh:
Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” (Jude 1:9 NKJ)

So the proof at least two Persons are called Yahweh remains undiminished. Now is the real test, will you listen to scripture or refuse its plain teaching?

Alfred Persson said:
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)

Trevor said:
There is only One Name of God Exodus 3:14-15, Matthew 6:9, and that is God the Father's Name, Yahweh. Jesus is a development of the Yahweh Name as explained in my earlier posts in this thread.

Reply

Your “proof text” IN CONTEXT contradicts God has only One Name, His name also is “I Am”

13 Then Moses said to God, “Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them,`The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me,`What is His name?' what shall I say to them?”
14 And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.” And He said, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel,`I AM has sent me to you.'“
15 Moreover God said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the children of Israel:`The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all generations.' (Exod. 3:14-15 NKJ)

Matthew 6:9 isn’t discussing God’s name:
“In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. (Matt. 6:9 NKJ)

You quote texts out of context to prove a pretext. That is illegitimate.

Christ’s logic can be diagrammed, its simple math. In the One Name of God subsists Three Persons, Father Son and Holy Spirit.
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)

That is the doctrine of the Holy Trinity:

Don’t care about other posts, this scripture clearly says in the One Name of God are subsisting Three Divine Persons.

Alfred Persson said:
This text does not disprove the Holy Trinity, Christ subsists in Divine and Human nature.

Trevor said:
The concept that Jesus has two natures is both impossible and contradictory. Jesus was and is a human, now exalted.

Reply
All things exist in God like a thought exists in our minds, therefore God's substance cannot be confused or merged with human nature just as the organ of our brain cannot be confused or merged with the thoughts it generates.

The “sphere of infinite radius” that is Yahweh the Son became “centered” in the humanity of Jesus that was conceived by Holy Spirit in the virgin Mary.

Neither the Divine or human “substance” can each other or becoming confused with each other. They remain separate like “spirit” remains separate from “matter”, like thought remains separate from the brain thinking the thought.

Mary is "theotokos", "God bearer" in that sense, not "Mother of God" as some suppose. She conceived only Christ's human flesh, which He then added to His Person so that He now has two natures, Human and Divine.


That Christ the Word became flesh is central to Christian truth:
And the Word became 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. (Jn. 1:14 NKJ)

John says everyone who denies the Incarnation of Yahweh the Son, the Word or Voice of God, is antichrist:

2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,
3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.
(1 Jn. 4:2-3 NKJ)

Now you have a decision to make, whether to repent and believe the Scripture, or continue denying Jesus Christ The Word of God, became flesh.

Alfred Persson said:
If you aren't created, then you are God.
Trevor said:
Jesus was “created” in that he had God for his father and Mary as his mother, and hence he is a creature, the firstborn of the New Creation Psalm 8.

Reply

You speak of the human nature of Jesus. Not Jesus the Word who is the “container” where everything is “actualized”, made concrete by His “verbalizing” God’s thought:

16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist (συνέστηκεν)

4921 συνιστάω (συνίστημι) sunistao {soon-is-tah'-o} or (strengthened) συνιστανω sunistano {soon-is-tan'-o} or sunistemi {soon-is'-tay-mee}
Meaning: … to put together, unite parts into one whole 4a) to be composed of, consist

“(b) exist, have existence, continue (CO 1.17; 2P 3.5)”- Friberg, Analytical Greek Lexicon
Our Matrix exists in the Word of God “like a thought” His infinite Mind “holds together”. When God decided the create, it is the Word of God who commands all things come into existence, IN HIM:

“for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said,`For we are also His offspring.' (Acts 17:28 NKJ)

As John 1:1-3 explicitly says, all things come into existence THROUGH Him, they had to….everything exists IN HIM:

All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. (Jn. 1:3 NKJ)

Now you have a decision to make. Will you believe the Scriptures and its revelation about reality, how everything exists in the Word of God, and in Him all thing consist and have their being….

Alfred Persson said:
You contradict yourself, if Jesus is the Son of the Father then He is God the Son.
Just as human fathers do not beget “sub-humans”, God the Father did not beget a “sub-god”.
Trevor said:
Jesus is a human, the Son of God by his conception/birth with God as his father and Mary his mother. You cannot create or beget a “God”.

Reply
Incorrect. Jesus was the Son of the Father BEFORE the virgin birth of His human nature. God gave His Son, and then the incarnation happened as a result of that gift:

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (Jn. 3:16 NKJ)

John makes Clear Jesus is the Only Begotten Son of the Father BEFORE the incarnation:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
…
14 And the Word became 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. (Jn. 1:1-14 NKJ)

That is why Orthodox Trinitarianism speaks of Jesus as being the Father’s Eternal Son, because this “begetting” never ceases and never will. The Person of the Father eternally generates the Person of the Son…NOT the substance of the Son, only His “Person”. Jesus truly is “the Son of the Father”, not in name only.

All this is confirmed by Jesus who speaks of the glory He shared wit the Father BEFORE the world existed:

“And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. (Jn. 17:5 NKJ)

There is an overwhelming mass of irrefutable evidence Jesus is Yahweh God the Eternal Son, and every attempt in history to prove scripture teaches otherwise has failed.

Believe the Scriptures, to do otherwise is foolish.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greeting Alfred Persson,

As a former JW who once quoted "He is...firstborn over all creation" to prove Christ is the "first created", I ask you to study the entire context, see what Paul is saying about Christ:

15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. (Col. 1:15-17 NKJ)

Paul says Christ created all things, that He existed before they did, and that IN HIM "all things consist".

You saw the movie the Matrix. Reality was generated by computers. Our reality is like a matrix, it is generated by the Mind of God.

Christ created all things by verbalizing God's thought, He is the Word of God. When God wants something to exist, the Word of God gives it concrete existence, IN HIS MIND.

Then it exists.

"for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said,`For we are also His offspring.' (Acts 17:28 NKJ)


That is how Christ is the "firstborn heir of what the Father had Him create, the " πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως, (Col. 1:15 BGT)

It is NOT hinting He is created at all. That idea completely violates the context.

 

[TrevorL]

Greeting again Alfred Persson,

Due again to time constraints and other interests I will only answer where I obviously disagree with your posts. Also part of the reason is that some of the things you have raised are difficult for me to answer or explain.

Not according to scripture. In Genesis 18:22 two “men” leave, the one remaining is identified as Yahweh.
Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD. (Gen. 18:22 NKJ)

I understand that these two "men" are the two Angels that visited Lot in Sodom:
Genesis 19:1 (KJV): And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground;
These two and the other Being who visited Abraham are called "three men" in the following:
Genesis 18:1–2 (KJV): 1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; 2 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,
I understand therefore that this is saying that the three "men" were angels, and one of these bears the Yahweh name, and it is this Angel that speaks and acts on Yahweh's behalf.

In Zechariah there is only the Angel of Yahweh who is speaking as Him. Unlike Adam and Abraham who saw “men” one of whom was Yahweh, FOUR TIMES Zechariah reports its “the angel” of Yahweh who is speaking for Yahweh:
1 Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him….3 Now Joshua was …standing before the Angel...5 the Angel of the LORD stood by. 6 Then the Angel of the LORD admonished Joshua… Zechariah 4:1 Now the angel who talked with me came back… (Zech. 3:1-4:1 NKJ)
There is a difference between being Yahweh, and speaking FOR Yahweh. That invalidates your “proof”.

You failed to quote verse 2 where it specifically calls the Angel "Yahweh":
Zechariah 3:2 (KJV): 2 And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the LORD that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

AND Jude isn’t speaking about any of these events when he reports Michael the Archangel (NOT Yahweh), disputed over Moses’ body, and Michael speaks ABOUT Yahweh:
Yet Michael the archangel, in contending with the devil, when he disputed about the body of Moses, dared not bring against him a reviling accusation, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” (Jude 1:9 NKJ)

I disagree, Jude is alluding to Zechariah 3 and then quotes what the Angel with the Yahweh Name states:
Jude 9 (KJV): Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

So the proof at least two Persons are called Yahweh remains undiminished. Now is the real test, will you listen to scripture or refuse its plain teaching?

I find this type of statement interesting, but I consider that I have affirmed what the Scriptures teach on this aspect.

Your “proof text” IN CONTEXT contradicts God has only One Name, His name also is “I Am”

I do not want to be too scholarly here, or two pedantic, but the One Name of God is "ehyeh asher ehyeh", "I will be who I will be", or shortened "I will be" when God speaks about Himself (1st Person), and "Yahweh" "He (who) will be" (3rd Person) when others speak about Him. Most OT Names have a meaning, for example "Abram" and "Abraham". I reject the KJV translation "I Am" - refer my posts #1-3 in this thread.

Matthew 6:9 isn’t discussing God’s name:
“In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. (Matt. 6:9 NKJ)
You quote texts out of context to prove a pretext. That is illegitimate.

But even here Jesus does not say "Hallowed be OUR Name". The One Name is Yahweh, and as per the prayer, Jesus is addressing God the Father.

Christ’s logic can be diagrammed, its simple math. In the One Name of God subsists Three Persons, Father Son and Holy Spirit.
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (Matt. 28:19 NKJ)
That is the doctrine of the Holy Trinity:

Jesus is included within the Yahweh Name, and so are all the faithful. The source of this envelopment and development is the One God, Yahweh, God the Father.

Mary is "theotokos", "God bearer" in that sense, not "Mother of God" as some suppose. She conceived only Christ's human flesh, which He then added to His Person so that He now has two natures, Human and Divine.

I cannot endorse your assumptions on two natures.

That Christ the Word became flesh is central to Christian truth:
And the Word became 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. (Jn. 1:14 NKJ)

I understand the Word in John 1:1 is a personification similar to the wise woman "Wisdom" in Proverbs 8.

John says everyone who denies the Incarnation of Yahweh the Son, the Word or Voice of God, is antichrist:

2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,
3 and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world. (1 Jn. 4:2-3 NKJ)

I suggest that Trinitarians fail here, as they do not really believe that Jesus came in the flesh. They believe he came as two natures.

Now you have a decision to make, whether to repent and believe the Scripture, or continue denying Jesus Christ The Word of God, became flesh.

Again a similar statement claiming how profound is your reasoning and conclusions, but Jesus is the Name of the child born in John 1:14. I do not accept that The Word of John 1:1 = Jesus Christ, but is a personification.

Jesus was the Son of the Father BEFORE the virgin birth of His human nature.

I disagree.

All this is confirmed by Jesus who speaks of the glory He shared wit the Father BEFORE the world existed:
“And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was. (Jn. 17:5 NKJ)

I consider that Jesus is alluding to Psalm 8.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

I understand the Word in John 1:1 is a personification similar to the wise woman "Wisdom" in Proverbs 8.

I will reply to your other arguments, but if "the Word" in John 1:1 is a mere personification it renders all other discussion moot.

A "personification" doesn't directly identify any individual, Proverbs 8 confirms that.

However, John directly identifies Jesus as "the Word" in verse 14. "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us" . A personification does not become flesh and blood and live among people so they can behold His glory:

And the Word became 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. (Jn. 1:14 NKJ)

AND, when we assume the Word is a Personification, it becomes absurd to limit God to only one "birth", who then BEGAT "Truth" "Love" "Justice" "Mercy" if not God?

Also, verses 2-3 describe "the Word" actively creating all things, taking this text out of the realm of poetic metaphor:

2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. (Jn. 1:2-3 NKJ)

Its important to note ALL of the Early Church Fathers interpret Jesus is John 1:1 "the Word" and Christians have done that since John wrote his gospel.

Even the Jehovah's Witnesses, who would love to deny "the Word was God", don't evade this by claiming its a "personification".

 

[TrevorL]

Greeting again Alfred Persson,

Its important to note ALL of the Early Church Fathers interpret Jesus is John 1:1 "the Word" and Christians have done that since John wrote his gospel.

I do not give much credence to the "Early Church Fathers" as they are the authors of the corruption of the Apostate church. Many had a background of Greek Philosophy and Platosim. I doubt that we have many records of what the true "Christians" believed since the Gospel of John was written. These were the faithful few and were not in positions of power and authority, and could have been persecuted or suppressed by the established corrupt Church with its many prominent and chief bishops which is different to the early Ekklesia(s).

I rarely hear or see any expositor who quotes and compares the following similar language and ideas with John 1:
1 John 1:1–4 (KJV): 1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) 3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.
Do you compare "the Word" with "the Word of life"?

Even the Jehovah's Witnesses, who would love to deny "the Word was God", don't evade this by claiming its a "personification".

Yes, but they give a very erroneous translation of John 1:1. You may or may not be familiar with all the JW teachings, but they give a future tense for Exodus 3:14, even though their explanation is not carried through, and is obscure. They also tentatively endorsed Rotherham, who writes extensively of the future tense, in some of their earlier publications. But the JWs now seem to hide this because he uses Yahweh in his translation and this is an embarassment to the JWs who almost always insist on using the erroneous form "Jehovah" and it shows that Rutherford's selection of their name "Jehovah's Witnesses" is based upon an error..

The concept of the One God as the "Father" as the source of all things is the clear simple teaching of the Bible. This simple concept is equivalent to the concept revealed in the Yahweh Name "I will be/become who/what I will be/become" and this also speaks of the envelopment and development of the Yahweh Name as summarised by Paul:
1 Corinthians 15:28 (KJV): And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greeting again Alfred Persson,

I do not give much credence to the "Early Church Fathers" as they are the authors of the corruption of the Apostate church. Many had a background of Greek Philosophy and Platosim. I doubt that we have many records of what the true "Christians" believed since the Gospel of John was written. These were the faithful few and were not in positions of power and authority, and could have been persecuted or suppressed by the established corrupt Church with its many prominent and chief bishops which is different to the early Ekklesia(s).

I rarely hear or see any expositor who quotes and compares the following similar language and ideas with John 1:
1 John 1:1–4 (KJV): 1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2 (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) 3 That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ. 4 And these things write we unto you, that your joy may be full.
Do you compare "the Word" with "the Word of life"?

Yes, but they give a very erroneous translation of John 1:1. You may or may not be familiar with all the JW teachings, but they give a future tense for Exodus 3:14, even though their explanation is not carried through, and is obscure. They also tentatively endorsed Rotherham, who writes extensively of the future tense, in some of their earlier publications. But the JWs now seem to hide this because he uses Yahweh in his translation and this is an embarassment to the JWs who almost always insist on using the erroneous form "Jehovah" and it shows that Rutherford's selection of their name "Jehovah's Witnesses" is based upon an error..

The concept of the One God as the "Father" as the source of all things is the clear simple teaching of the Bible. This simple concept is equivalent to the concept revealed in the Yahweh Name "I will be/become who/what I will be/become" and this also speaks of the envelopment and development of the Yahweh Name as summarised by Paul:
1 Corinthians 15:28 (KJV): And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Kind regards
Trevor

Similar language? Similar isn't the same. For example, an apple is similar to an orange, both are fruit, round, grow on trees. But an apple is not an orange, and they differ in very essential ways. They taste different, for example.

That is why the saying "you cannot compare apples and oranges" rose up. People would make all sorts of silly comparisons, and then claim "an apple is an orange".

The Word of God, in the beginning with God, who created all things, who became flesh and dwelt among us, OBVIOUSLY isn't a poetic personification of the "word of life".

Its just silly to suggest it is, logically unsound.

As for the early Christians, like us they weren't perfect, but none of them believed as you.

 

[TrevorL]

Greeting again Alfred Persson,

Similar language? Similar isn't the same. For example, an apple is similar to an orange, both are fruit, round, grow on trees. But an apple is not an orange, and they differ in very essential ways. They taste different, for example.
That is why the saying "you cannot compare apples and oranges" rose up. People would make all sorts of silly comparisons, and then claim "an apple is an orange".

What I am drawing attention to, is that it is the same writer, John, and he uses the same and similar language in John 1:1 and 1 John 1:1.
John 1:1 (KJV): In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

1 John 1:1 (KJV): That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
It is not a matter of apples and oranges, they are the same words. I needed to check whether the "Word" in 1 John 1:1 was the same Greek word, and yes, it is "Logos". My impression is that most Trinitarians in their mind for John 1:1 simply replace "the Word" and substitute "Jesus" and read John 1:1 as: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God."

In other words, they give no thought to why this particular word, "Logos" is used here in John 1:1 and its development in John 1:14.

Looking at my Enhanced Strong's the following two primary meaning of Logos is given:
3056 λόγος [logos /log·os/] n m. From 3004; 330 occurrences; AV translates as “word” 218 times, “saying” 50 times, “account” eight times, “speech” eight times, “Word (Christ)” seven times, “thing” five times, not translated twice, and translated miscellaneously 32 times. 1 of speech. 1A a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea. 1B what someone has said. 1B1 a word. 1B2 the sayings of God. 1B3 decree, mandate or order. 1B4 of the moral precepts given by God. 1B5 Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets. 1B6 what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim. 1C discourse. 1C1 the act of speaking, speech. 1C2 the faculty of speech, skill and practice in speaking. 1C3 a kind or style of speaking. 1C4 a continuous speaking discourse—instruction. 1D doctrine, teaching. 1E anything reported in speech; a narration, narrative. 1F matter under discussion, thing spoken of, affair, a matter in dispute, case, suit at law. 1G the thing spoken of or talked about; event, deed. 2 its use as respect to the MIND alone. 2A reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating. 2B account, i.e. regard, consideration. 2C account, i.e. reckoning, score. 2D account, i.e. answer or explanation in reference to judgment. 2E relation, i.e. with whom as judge we stand in relation. 2E1 reason would. 2F reason, cause, ground.

It is only after all of the above that the Trinitarian concept is suggested as item 3.

As for the early Christians, like us they weren't perfect, but none of them believed as you.

Have you actually researched what some of the early Christians believed?

Here are a few extracts from the book
History of the Dogma of the Deity of Christ by A Reville 1904 (from translation 1905)
Professor of the History of Religion at the College of France.

Speaking of the developments in the second century:
Page 54: … the ‘celestial being’ increasingly supplanted the human being, except among the Jewish-Christians of the primitive type … These firmly maintained the opinion that Jesus was a man, … fully inspired by God … admitted his miraculous conception.

Page 59: The Platonists began to furnish brilliant recruits to the churches of Asia and Greece, and introduced among them their love of system and their idealism. To state the facts in a few words, Hellenism insensibly supplanted Judaism as the form of Christian thought, and to this is mainly owing the orthodox dogma of the deity of Jesus Christ.

Page 60: Hence the rapidity with which a philosophical doctrine of much earlier origin than Christianity, and at first foreign to the Church, was brought into it, and adapted itself so completely to the prevailing Christology as to become identical therewith, and to pass for the belief which had been professed by the disciples from the beginning.

Page 96: There were some Jewish-Christians who admitted without difficulty the miraculous birth of Jesus, but would not hear of his pre-existence.

Page 105: It is curious to read the incredible subtleties by which Athanasius and the orthodox theologians strove to remove the stumbling-block from the history of a dogma which they desired to represent as having been invariable and complete since the earliest days.

Perhaps this "Professor" has had more access to some of the early documents than both of us.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Alfred Persson]

Greeting again Alfred Persson,

What I am drawing attention to, is that it is the same writer, John, and he uses the same and similar language in John 1:1 and 1 John 1:1.
John 1:1 (KJV): In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

1 John 1:1 (KJV): That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
It is not a matter of apples and oranges, they are the same words. I needed to check whether the "Word" in 1 John 1:1 was the same Greek word, and yes, it is "Logos". My impression is that most Trinitarians in their mind for John 1:1 simply replace "the Word" and substitute "Jesus" and read John 1:1 as: In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God."

In other words, they give no thought to why this particular word, "Logos" is used here in John 1:1 and its development in John 1:14.

Looking at my Enhanced Strong's the following two primary meaning of Logos is given:
3056 λόγος [logos /log·os/] n m. From 3004; 330 occurrences; AV translates as “word” 218 times, “saying” 50 times, “account” eight times, “speech” eight times, “Word (Christ)” seven times, “thing” five times, not translated twice, and translated miscellaneously 32 times. 1 of speech. 1A a word, uttered by a living voice, embodies a conception or idea. 1B what someone has said. 1B1 a word. 1B2 the sayings of God. 1B3 decree, mandate or order. 1B4 of the moral precepts given by God. 1B5 Old Testament prophecy given by the prophets. 1B6 what is declared, a thought, declaration, aphorism, a weighty saying, a dictum, a maxim. 1C discourse. 1C1 the act of speaking, speech. 1C2 the faculty of speech, skill and practice in speaking. 1C3 a kind or style of speaking. 1C4 a continuous speaking discourse—instruction. 1D doctrine, teaching. 1E anything reported in speech; a narration, narrative. 1F matter under discussion, thing spoken of, affair, a matter in dispute, case, suit at law. 1G the thing spoken of or talked about; event, deed. 2 its use as respect to the MIND alone. 2A reason, the mental faculty of thinking, meditating, reasoning, calculating. 2B account, i.e. regard, consideration. 2C account, i.e. reckoning, score. 2D account, i.e. answer or explanation in reference to judgment. 2E relation, i.e. with whom as judge we stand in relation. 2E1 reason would. 2F reason, cause, ground.

It is only after all of the above that the Trinitarian concept is suggested as item 3.


Have you actually researched what some of the early Christians believed?

Here are a few extracts from the book
History of the Dogma of the Deity of Christ by A Reville 1904 (from translation 1905)
Professor of the History of Religion at the College of France.

Speaking of the developments in the second century:
Page 54: … the ‘celestial being’ increasingly supplanted the human being, except among the Jewish-Christians of the primitive type … These firmly maintained the opinion that Jesus was a man, … fully inspired by God … admitted his miraculous conception.

Page 59: The Platonists began to furnish brilliant recruits to the churches of Asia and Greece, and introduced among them their love of system and their idealism. To state the facts in a few words, Hellenism insensibly supplanted Judaism as the form of Christian thought, and to this is mainly owing the orthodox dogma of the deity of Jesus Christ.

Page 60: Hence the rapidity with which a philosophical doctrine of much earlier origin than Christianity, and at first foreign to the Church, was brought into it, and adapted itself so completely to the prevailing Christology as to become identical therewith, and to pass for the belief which had been professed by the disciples from the beginning.

Page 96: There were some Jewish-Christians who admitted without difficulty the miraculous birth of Jesus, but would not hear of his pre-existence.

Page 105: It is curious to read the incredible subtleties by which Athanasius and the orthodox theologians strove to remove the stumbling-block from the history of a dogma which they desired to represent as having been invariable and complete since the earliest days.

Perhaps this "Professor" has had more access to some of the early documents than both of us.

Kind regards
Trevor

In both texts, John is talking about Jesus, the Word of God, who He saw and handled. Not a personification. Its obvious you veil these texts with a theory that blinds you to the clear meaning.

Nothing in my exegesis was from Plato.

 

[TrevorL]

Greeting again Alfred Persson,

In both texts, John is talking about Jesus, the Word of God, who He saw and handled.

What I am suggesting is that the "Word", Greek "Logos", is speaking about the Thought, Plan, Purpose, Character of the One God the Father, similar to "Wisdom" in Proverbs 8. The four Gospels give a different perspective. Matthew gives the conception/birth of Jesus and speaks also of the interaction of Joseph as the future husband. Mark does not speak of his birth but introduces John the Baptist and then Jesus' ministry. Luke speaks of the conception/birth of Jesus detailing the interaction with Mary. John speaks of the Divine will, purpose and character of God and although John 1:14 speaks of the Divine begettal, the focus is on the end result of this Divine parentage, in that at the start of his ministry, Jesus was the embodiment of the Divine character and glory, he was full of Grace and Truth. John is NOT speaking of the transfer of God the Son from heaven into a human, but the transfer and embodiment of the Divine character from God the Father to the Son of God, a human, our Lord Jesus Christ. The "Word" is in the realm of ideas and character, not a physical body.

Its obvious you veil these texts with a theory that blinds you to the clear meaning.

I also consider the word "dwelt", or "tabernacled" an allusion to the Tabernacle, the means whereby God dwelt in the midst of Israel. All the types and patterns and lessons of the Tabernacle are focused and fulfilled in Jesus. The Trinitarian concept of a transfer of God the Son into the womb of Mary is not taught in Matthew, Luke or John's Gospel records. God the Father was the father of Jesus in the conception/birth process.

Nothing in my exegesis was from Plato.

I will leave that as an open question as to how much the development of the Trinity is based upon Greek Philosophy and Platoism. Those that have studied these sources state the development and the connection. You unwittingly echo the end result of this development which happened over 2-3 centuries. Do you fully endorse the Athanasian Creed or only the Nicaean Creed? And which edition, the first or second edition?

Kind regards
Trevor