This has been moved to:
https://jesusnotyhwh.blogspot.com/2022/03/john10-38.html
God willing, we will be moving all posts in this site and hope to eventually remove this site altogether.
Monday, December 28, 2015
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Who is the Single Person Jehovah God in the Bible?
This page is briefly address the scriptures presented in posting called "Who is the Single Person Lord God Who Directly Appears to and Covenants With God's People in the Entire Bible?" The posting is written by "Rev". Mario I Quitoriano, evidently of what is being styled as "The Trinitarian All For Jesus Ekklesia Of The Lord God". "Desptite the title, what is actually given are assumptions that are thought prove that Jehovah is more than one person (trinitarian added-on dogma). The conjecture being presented is that Jehovah is more than one person, and thus it is being further assumed that it was not the Father who appeared, but rather it was the second person of the alleged triune Jehovah who appear. It is being imagined and assumed that it is only the "first person" of the imagined and assumed trinune God that cannot be seen, but that the imagined and assumed second person of the imagine and assumed triune God can be seen. While a lot of scriptures are presented, none of them offer any support that Jehovah God is more than one person, and that it was Jesus who made the appearances as "Jehovah" in the Bible.
As I stated in my study, the default scriptural reasoning is not to imagine and assume that Jesus is Jehovah, and then to further imagine and assume that Jesus is a person of Jehovah, but rather it is that Jesus is not Jehovah.
Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, is the only true Supreme Being who sent Jesus; Jesus speaks the words given to him from the only true Supreme Being. — Exodus 3:13,14; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Isaiah 61:1; John 3:34; 5:19; 6:29; 7:16,28; 8:26,28,42; 10:36; 12:44-50; 14:10,24; 17:1,3,8; Acts 3:13-26; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 1:1,2; 1 John 4:9,10.
It is the God and Father of Jesus who has made Jesus both Lord and Christ (Ezekiel 34:23,24; Isaiah 61:1,2; Acts 2:36), and has exalted him to the highest position in the universe, next to the only Most High.– Acts 2:33,36; 5:31; Philippians 2:9; Ephesians 1:3,17-23; 1 Corinthians 15:27; Hebrews 1:4; 1 Peter 3:22.
The default reasoning is that Jesus is NOT Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob who sanctified and sent His son into the world of mankind. — Isaiah 61:1; John 3:17; 5:36,37; 6:38,57; 8:42; 10:36; 17:1,3; Romans 8:3; Galatians 4:4; 1 John 4:9-14.
Alleged Plurality of God and Elohim
The claim is presented and assumed that "plurality of Subjects or Persons in the Biblical GOD (ELOHIM) [Gen. 1:26] and/or LORD (YAHWEH) GOD (ELOHIM) [Gen. 3:22] and/or LORD (YAHWEH) [Gen. 11:6-7]."
Genesis 1:26, Genesis 3:22 and Genesis 11:6,7 simply show that the unipersonal Elohim spoke to or of someone else who is not Himself. There is nothing there about God as being more than one person. Elohim in Genesis 1:26 does not mean more than one person as can be seen from its usage in Genesis 1:2; Exodus 7:1 and Psalm 45:7. See the following studies:
“Let Us”: God Speaks to His Son
Genesis 3:
More to follow, God willing...******
Scriptures presented:
Saturday, February 28, 2015
Genesis 18:1-3,22,33; 19:1,18 - Three Men Who Visit Abraham
Several scriptures are being presented in Genesis 18 and 19 that are claimed to present, or being speaking of, the trinity.
The first is Genesis 18:1-3:
Jehovah, of course, may make appearances through as many of his angels as he wishes. There is nothing in these verses about Jehovah being three persons in one Supreme Being. The idea that there is something here about a triune God has to be imagined beyond what is written, assumptions have to be formulated beyond what is written, and then those assumption have to added to, and read into, what is stated.
As to statements given in Genesis 18 and 19, I will say that some reasoning is involved if one is to come to some conclusion regarding what is stated. One could simply let the scripture lie without seeking any conclusion, but since some have added their trinitarian dogma into it, it has become somewhat incumbent upon the non-trinitarian to also reach a conclusion regarding these angels. Such reasoning should be harmony with the entire Bible. It still remains that the default reasoning is that Jesus is not Jehovah, as I have shown in the study: Jesus is Not Jehovah (Yahweh).
The context establishes that these "men" were not actually human beings, but angels who spoke the words of Jehovah. Genesis 19:1,15, establishes that these "men" were angels. Genesis 19:13 establishes that they were sent by, and representing, Jehovah. With this established in the context, it should be understood that these men could be spoken of as "Jehovah", with the contextual understanding that they were angels of Jehovah, representing Jehovah.
The next scripture is Genesis 18:22:
Jehovah, of course, can certainly make an appearance by means of his angel; this does not mean that His angel is actually Jehovah. Nevertheless, the idea that these angels of Jehovah were not actually angels, but Jehovah himself (Jehovah theophanies) has to be imagined beyond what is written, and contrary to what is actually written in Genesis 19:13.
That these angels, messengers, of Jehovah represent Jehovah is more in harmony with the rest of the Bible. However, since angels of Jehovah are referred to as ELOHIM (gods -- Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7), the appearance of an angel in physical form could be referred to as a theophany, although that is not the way the word "theophany" is generally used.
Nothing is said, however, to the effect that any one of these angels was the prehuman Jesus (although it is possible that Jesus could have appeared as such an angel of Jehovah), or that any one of these angels was Jehovah's Holy Spirit. See my study: The Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
Nevertheless, the scriptures show that there is only one Jehovah:
Along with this is presented Genesis 18:33:
While it is reasonable to conclude that this angel of Jehovah returned to heaven, that is not specifically stated. At any rate, an angel of Jehovah is a messenger who relates the words of Jehovah.
Genesis 19:1:
Genesis 19:1 actually identifies the "men" as "angels". An angel is a messenger, one who delivers a message for another who is not himself. However, it is not clear that Lot himself knew that these men were angels until later.
Related to this however, we should also note:
Genesis 19:18 is given from the JWs' New World Translation as:
In Genesis 19:18, however, based on Ginsburg's list in which he claimed the Sopherim changed the Holy Name to a form of adon, the NWT puts "Jehovah" into Genesis 19:18.
As I have shown in my study, "Adonay, The Tetragrammaton, and the Great Isaiah Scroll", some of these places are validated by the Great Isaiah Scroll, but many are not. Thus, it appears that Ginsburg may have been over zealous in his claims. Additionally, he may have been biased by the trinity dogma in some of his claims.
Nevertheless, I do not believe that Lot addressed the angels as "Jehovah", as the NWT would have it. One should note that the original Hebrew -- which has no written vowels -- does not distinguish between the words often transliterated as "Adoni" (my lord) and "Adonai" (my lords, or, when used as plural intensive, superior/supreme lord). In other words, there was actually no written distinction between the plural or singular form of this word.
The vowel points that are now present in the Biblical Hebrew were added by the Masoretes almost 500 years after the first century. The Masoretes have the word in the plural here, which has led many to think Lot was referring to the angels as being Jehovah. There is nothing in the scriptures however that say that the plural form has to only be used as a plural intensive of Jehovah. Just as the plural form of the word transliterated as ELOHIM is used of the sons of the Most High in Psalm 82:6, so the plural form transliterated as ADONAI may be used of the angels.
Since the context indicates that there are two angels, it should be understood that Lot spoke of them in the plural, adonai, "my lords".
Finally, Genesis 19:24 is presented with the claim we see two Jehovahs raining fire and brimstone down upon Sodom and Gomorrah.
There is only one Jehovah:
Jesus declared the one Jehovah of Isaiah 61:1 as being the only true God. -- John 17:1,3.
The default reasoning is still that the Jesus is not Jehovah, the only true God.
Thus seen, none of these scriptures actually present anything about a triune God, or that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is more than one person.
See also the following related studies:
Abraham and the Three Angels
Jehovah Rained Fire From Jehovah
(1) And Jehovah appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre. And he was sitting at the door of the tent in the heat of the day.[2] And he lifted up his eyes and looked; and, behold, three men were standing by him. And he saw, and he ran to meet them from the entrance of the tent. And he bowed to the ground.[3] And he said, My Lord, if now I have found favor in Your sight, I beg You, do not leave from near Your servant. - (Genesis 18:1-3, Green's Literal)It is claimed that there are three person who appear to Abraham, and that they are identified as being Jehovah (singular).
Jehovah, of course, may make appearances through as many of his angels as he wishes. There is nothing in these verses about Jehovah being three persons in one Supreme Being. The idea that there is something here about a triune God has to be imagined beyond what is written, assumptions have to be formulated beyond what is written, and then those assumption have to added to, and read into, what is stated.
As to statements given in Genesis 18 and 19, I will say that some reasoning is involved if one is to come to some conclusion regarding what is stated. One could simply let the scripture lie without seeking any conclusion, but since some have added their trinitarian dogma into it, it has become somewhat incumbent upon the non-trinitarian to also reach a conclusion regarding these angels. Such reasoning should be harmony with the entire Bible. It still remains that the default reasoning is that Jesus is not Jehovah, as I have shown in the study: Jesus is Not Jehovah (Yahweh).
The context establishes that these "men" were not actually human beings, but angels who spoke the words of Jehovah. Genesis 19:1,15, establishes that these "men" were angels. Genesis 19:13 establishes that they were sent by, and representing, Jehovah. With this established in the context, it should be understood that these men could be spoken of as "Jehovah", with the contextual understanding that they were angels of Jehovah, representing Jehovah.
The next scripture is Genesis 18:22:
And the men faced around from there and went toward Sodom. And Abraham was still standing before Jehovah. - (Genesis 18:22, Green's Literal)It is claimed the man who remained identifies the first Jehovah, and that the other "theophanies" got on their way to Sodom.
Jehovah, of course, can certainly make an appearance by means of his angel; this does not mean that His angel is actually Jehovah. Nevertheless, the idea that these angels of Jehovah were not actually angels, but Jehovah himself (Jehovah theophanies) has to be imagined beyond what is written, and contrary to what is actually written in Genesis 19:13.
That these angels, messengers, of Jehovah represent Jehovah is more in harmony with the rest of the Bible. However, since angels of Jehovah are referred to as ELOHIM (gods -- Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7), the appearance of an angel in physical form could be referred to as a theophany, although that is not the way the word "theophany" is generally used.
Nothing is said, however, to the effect that any one of these angels was the prehuman Jesus (although it is possible that Jesus could have appeared as such an angel of Jehovah), or that any one of these angels was Jehovah's Holy Spirit. See my study: The Hebraic Usage of the Titles for "God"
Nevertheless, the scriptures show that there is only one Jehovah:
There is only one Jehovah: Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. -- Deuteronomy 6:4, American Standard Version.
Along with this is presented Genesis 18:33:
And when Jehovah had left off speaking to Abraham, He was finished. And Abraham returned to his place. - (Genesis 18:33, Green's Literal)It claimed that here we see Jehovah #1, who was standing before Abraham left and went back to heaven.
While it is reasonable to conclude that this angel of Jehovah returned to heaven, that is not specifically stated. At any rate, an angel of Jehovah is a messenger who relates the words of Jehovah.
Genesis 19:1:
And the two angels came to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot saw them, and rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face to the earth. -- American Standard.It is claimed that "The other two men who appeared as angels (theophanies) and went to Sodom and later identified themselves too as Jehovah in Gen 19:18.
Genesis 19:1 actually identifies the "men" as "angels". An angel is a messenger, one who delivers a message for another who is not himself. However, it is not clear that Lot himself knew that these men were angels until later.
Related to this however, we should also note:
Genesis 19:12 And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son-in-law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whomsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of the place:Here these angels tell us that it was "Jehovah" who had sent them. Of course, one may imagine, assume and add to the scripture that it was the alleged first person of Jehovah who had sent the two alleged two other person of Jehovah, but that is not what is stated.
Genesis 19:13 for we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxed great before Jehovah: and Jehovah hath sent us to destroy it.
Genesis 19:18 is given from the JWs' New World Translation as:
Then Lot said to them, "not that, please, Jehovah"However, let us read it from the American Standard Version:
And Lot said unto them, Oh, not so, my lord.I am not with the Jehovah's Witnesses, and I rarely ever use their translation.
In Genesis 19:18, however, based on Ginsburg's list in which he claimed the Sopherim changed the Holy Name to a form of adon, the NWT puts "Jehovah" into Genesis 19:18.
As I have shown in my study, "Adonay, The Tetragrammaton, and the Great Isaiah Scroll", some of these places are validated by the Great Isaiah Scroll, but many are not. Thus, it appears that Ginsburg may have been over zealous in his claims. Additionally, he may have been biased by the trinity dogma in some of his claims.
Nevertheless, I do not believe that Lot addressed the angels as "Jehovah", as the NWT would have it. One should note that the original Hebrew -- which has no written vowels -- does not distinguish between the words often transliterated as "Adoni" (my lord) and "Adonai" (my lords, or, when used as plural intensive, superior/supreme lord). In other words, there was actually no written distinction between the plural or singular form of this word.
The vowel points that are now present in the Biblical Hebrew were added by the Masoretes almost 500 years after the first century. The Masoretes have the word in the plural here, which has led many to think Lot was referring to the angels as being Jehovah. There is nothing in the scriptures however that say that the plural form has to only be used as a plural intensive of Jehovah. Just as the plural form of the word transliterated as ELOHIM is used of the sons of the Most High in Psalm 82:6, so the plural form transliterated as ADONAI may be used of the angels.
Since the context indicates that there are two angels, it should be understood that Lot spoke of them in the plural, adonai, "my lords".
Finally, Genesis 19:24 is presented with the claim we see two Jehovahs raining fire and brimstone down upon Sodom and Gomorrah.
Then Jehovah rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Jehovah out of heaven. -- American Standard Version.Yes, it was Jehovah who made it rain, and the rain came from Jehovah. This is not speaking of two different Jehovahs.
There is only one Jehovah:
Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. -- Deuteronomy 6:4.The one Jehovah is shown to be distinct from Jesus in Isaiah 61:1.
Jesus declared the one Jehovah of Isaiah 61:1 as being the only true God. -- John 17:1,3.
The default reasoning is still that the Jesus is not Jehovah, the only true God.
Thus seen, none of these scriptures actually present anything about a triune God, or that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is more than one person.
See also the following related studies:
Abraham and the Three Angels
Jehovah Rained Fire From Jehovah
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
The Real Reasons for Not Believing the Trinity
Trinitarians often complain that the reason non-trinitarians do not accept the trinity doctrine is that the word "trinity" does not appear in the Bible. Having set up this strawman argument, they then use various words that are often thought to be Biblical concepts, but which words/concepts are not actually found in the Bible.
I do not believe in adding a trinity concept to the Bible, since the Bible no where ever even suggests such a concept. The idea has to be created by thinking beyond what is written (1 Corinthians 4:6), and it has to be formulated into concepts that are no where stated in the Bible, and then those concepts have to be added to, and read into, any and every scripture that one would wish "see" those concepts. The Bible is in full harmony with itself without adding to it all the trinitarian concepts.
Additionally, the added-on "hypostatic union" concept would, in effect, justify sin in the flesh rather than condemn sin in the flesh. It would actually leave proof that a sinless man cannot obey God Almighty, except that such a man be God Almighty. -- Romans 8:3.
Finally, the concept that Jesus is still a man and that he still has the body in which he died would leave us without a redemption, since the Bible says that Jesus offered -- sacrificed -- that body of flesh to God for our sins. -- Luke 22:19; John 6:51; Hebrews 10:10.
See the following sites:
Jesus and His God
Trinity in the Bible?
Son of Jehovah
Jesus is not Jehovah
Saturday, March 29, 2014
Why do Trinitarians take John 8:58 out of context in regards to the trinity?
Why do Trinitarian take John 8:58 out of context in regards to the trinity?
The above question was asked in "Yahoo Answers":
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130201160011AAMlWSi
We have changed "Trinitarian" to "Trinitarians" in our title.
My response to the above follows:
First of all, any thought that Jesus was saying that he was, before Abraham existed, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jaocb of Exodus 3;14,15, has to be imagined beyond what is written, assumptions have to formulated beyond what is written, and those assumptions have to accepted as fact and added to, and read into what Jesus actually stated.
Normally, most modern translators translated a present tense verb used in a past tense context in some past tense form. Most -- not all -- of these translators, however, make an exception to his in John 8:58 in order to make it appear that Jesus was claiming to be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In the first link given below, I have presented several translations that do show the contextual past tense setting.
One claims that "I AM" is being altered to "I am"; this is not actually true; indeed it would be more appropriate to say that translators have altered their translations to read "I AM" in John 8:58 instead of "I am", based on their assumption that Jesus was claiming to be EHYEH of Exodus 3:14.
This brings up another point: In Exodus 3:14, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was responding to the question of what was His name. In John 8:58, Jesus was responding to the question concerning his age, not his name. It would indeed be out of context to claim that Jesus repsonded by saying that his name is EHYEH.
Only in the imaginitve realm of trinitarian dogma would anyone think that he was raised up as the prophet like Moses by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. -- Exodus 3:14,15; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Acts 3:13-26; Hebrews 1:1,2.
The only reason that I can see for ignoring the contextual past tense setting of EGO EIMI (I am) in John 8:58 would be because of the desire to find support for the trinitarian dogma, which dogma is no where to be found in the Bible.
As to whatever reason the Jews thought to kill Jesus, this is not important, since they were seeking some legal excuse to kill Jesus. Jesus, in effect, showed why they wished to kill him in John 8:37-40 and John 10:32. So, if the Jews sought to kill Jesus because they wished to present him as claiming to be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, then one has to decide who they wish to believe, Jesus, or those lying Jews?
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130201160011AAMlWSi
We have changed "Trinitarian" to "Trinitarians" in our title.
My response to the above follows:
First of all, any thought that Jesus was saying that he was, before Abraham existed, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jaocb of Exodus 3;14,15, has to be imagined beyond what is written, assumptions have to formulated beyond what is written, and those assumptions have to accepted as fact and added to, and read into what Jesus actually stated.
Normally, most modern translators translated a present tense verb used in a past tense context in some past tense form. Most -- not all -- of these translators, however, make an exception to his in John 8:58 in order to make it appear that Jesus was claiming to be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. In the first link given below, I have presented several translations that do show the contextual past tense setting.
One claims that "I AM" is being altered to "I am"; this is not actually true; indeed it would be more appropriate to say that translators have altered their translations to read "I AM" in John 8:58 instead of "I am", based on their assumption that Jesus was claiming to be EHYEH of Exodus 3:14.
This brings up another point: In Exodus 3:14, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was responding to the question of what was His name. In John 8:58, Jesus was responding to the question concerning his age, not his name. It would indeed be out of context to claim that Jesus repsonded by saying that his name is EHYEH.
Only in the imaginitve realm of trinitarian dogma would anyone think that he was raised up as the prophet like Moses by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob would be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. -- Exodus 3:14,15; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Acts 3:13-26; Hebrews 1:1,2.
The only reason that I can see for ignoring the contextual past tense setting of EGO EIMI (I am) in John 8:58 would be because of the desire to find support for the trinitarian dogma, which dogma is no where to be found in the Bible.
As to whatever reason the Jews thought to kill Jesus, this is not important, since they were seeking some legal excuse to kill Jesus. Jesus, in effect, showed why they wished to kill him in John 8:37-40 and John 10:32. So, if the Jews sought to kill Jesus because they wished to present him as claiming to be the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, then one has to decide who they wish to believe, Jesus, or those lying Jews?
Thursday, November 21, 2013
John 1:18 - Only Begotten Theos
Some have cited the earlier manuscripts of John 1:18 as proof that Jesus is Yahweh, since some of these manuscripts have "monogenes theos" (transliterated). Yes, there are ancient manuscripts that have "monogenes theos" in John 1:18. Most manuscripts have *huios* (son), but then most of these manuscripts are of more recent dates.
For earlier manuscripts that give support for either rendering,
See: http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/reference/mscript1.pdf http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/bsl/Library/Referenc/AVCor/AVcorr.pdf
I couldn't make out some of the coding but I came up with at least the following manuscripts that have "monogenes theos" in John 1:18:
Papyrus 66 containing John 1:1-21:9
Papyrus 75 containing Lk 3:18-Jo 15:8
Vatican 1209
Sinaiticus
Bohairic Coptic
Therefore, we assume that John 1:18 was originally 'only-begotten god [theos, one of might]", which would mean that in the Bible Jesus is not only referred to as the only-begotten son, but also as the only-begotten mighty one [theos]. We should note that there are still other verses than John 1:18 that speak of Jesus as "only begotten son". (In the NAS, see John 3:16,18; Hebrews 11:17) His being "only-begotten mighty one" would not do away with his being "only begotten son," nor contradict each other, nor does it mean that Jesus possesses an alleged "dual nature" of being the Most High and also the son of the Most High. -- Luke 1:32,35.
Before being begotten as a human, Jesus was indeed begotten as the only-begotten THEOS, having been brought forth as the firstborn of every creature (Colossians 1:15), as a mighty spirit being, similar to, but of greater rank than the angels who are called ELOHIM in Psalm 8:5 (see Hebrews 2:7,9). The angels are mighty spirit beings, and thus they are called elohim, which is the same word that is rendered as God [plural intensive, where the plural is used in a singular setting as denoting superiority or the superlative] or gods [plural]. None of these elohim, however, were begotten, brought forth into being, directly by Yahweh, but all these powers of heaven were created through, by means of, the pre-human Jesus. -- Colossians 1:16.
In order to take the meaning of being brought forth into being out of monogenes, some have argued that the word monogenes only signifies "uniqueness", not that Jesus was actually brought forth into being. Kittel's THEOLOGICAL DICTlONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT (Vol. 5, pp. 738-741) 1967, a work produced by trinitarians, observes that monogenes can have a broader meaning than only begotten. However, it goes on to state that when monogenes is used in the New Testament, "It means 'only begotten' in (John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9; John 1:18 the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only begotten to the father. In John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9 monogenes denotes more than the uniqueness or incomparability of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the Son, and He is regarded as such in John 1:14. In John monogenes denotes the origin of Jesus. He is monogenes as the only begotten."
As Kittel notes, monogenes is used in reference to Jesus in John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9. The word monogenes is used of others than Jesus in Luke 7:11,12; 8:41,42; 9:38; Hebrews 11:17. The instances in Luke confirms Kittel's observation that in the New Testament usage, monogenes does generally denote an only begotten son or daughter. Hebrews 11:17 is used of Isaac as the only-begotten son of Abraham, Ishmael no longer being present, and was not counted as heir. -- Genesis 21:10,12; Galatians 4:22,23,30.
Believing that John 1:18 did originally have the word THEOS, does this mean that John was saying that Jesus is Yahweh, the only Most High? No, it only means that John was attributing to Jesus the might, strength, power that he had before coming into the world of mankind to declare his God, and additionally John could also have been referring to the might and power that has been given to him after his resurrection. (Psalm 45:7; Matthew 28:18; Hebrews 1:2,6,9; Philippians 2:9; Colossians 2:10; Psalm 2:7,8; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; Luke 1:32; Jeremiah 23:5; Daniel 7:13,14) We need to remember that the Hebrews used the same words for "God" of others than the Most High, but in a secondary sense of might, strength, power.
Realizing that Jesus ascended to the only true God, not that Jesus is the only true God, should tells us that John is not using THEOS of Jesus as he did of the God and Father of Jesus.
See: Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”
Jesus in his pre-human existence, indeed, was "a mighty one" who received life (was "begotten") from the Father (Colossians 1:15; John 17:1,3,5), and, not only that, at the time that John wrote his Gospel, Jesus had been raised from death as a mighty spirit being, and was indeed "a mighty one" residing in heaven with his God and Father, and thus figuratively, was in the bosom of his God and Father. -- John 17:11, 22; 20:21,17.
See also my studies:
The Only Begotten God
Did Jesus Have a Beginning?
Some studies written by others:
"The Only Begotten God"
God's Only Begotten Son
See: http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/reference/mscript1.pdf http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/bsl/Library/Referenc/AVCor/AVcorr.pdf
I couldn't make out some of the coding but I came up with at least the following manuscripts that have "monogenes theos" in John 1:18:
Papyrus 66 containing John 1:1-21:9
Papyrus 75 containing Lk 3:18-Jo 15:8
Vatican 1209
Sinaiticus
Bohairic Coptic
Therefore, we assume that John 1:18 was originally 'only-begotten god [theos, one of might]", which would mean that in the Bible Jesus is not only referred to as the only-begotten son, but also as the only-begotten mighty one [theos]. We should note that there are still other verses than John 1:18 that speak of Jesus as "only begotten son". (In the NAS, see John 3:16,18; Hebrews 11:17) His being "only-begotten mighty one" would not do away with his being "only begotten son," nor contradict each other, nor does it mean that Jesus possesses an alleged "dual nature" of being the Most High and also the son of the Most High. -- Luke 1:32,35.
Before being begotten as a human, Jesus was indeed begotten as the only-begotten THEOS, having been brought forth as the firstborn of every creature (Colossians 1:15), as a mighty spirit being, similar to, but of greater rank than the angels who are called ELOHIM in Psalm 8:5 (see Hebrews 2:7,9). The angels are mighty spirit beings, and thus they are called elohim, which is the same word that is rendered as God [plural intensive, where the plural is used in a singular setting as denoting superiority or the superlative] or gods [plural]. None of these elohim, however, were begotten, brought forth into being, directly by Yahweh, but all these powers of heaven were created through, by means of, the pre-human Jesus. -- Colossians 1:16.
In order to take the meaning of being brought forth into being out of monogenes, some have argued that the word monogenes only signifies "uniqueness", not that Jesus was actually brought forth into being. Kittel's THEOLOGICAL DICTlONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT (Vol. 5, pp. 738-741) 1967, a work produced by trinitarians, observes that monogenes can have a broader meaning than only begotten. However, it goes on to state that when monogenes is used in the New Testament, "It means 'only begotten' in (John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9; John 1:18 the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only begotten to the father. In John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9 monogenes denotes more than the uniqueness or incomparability of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the Son, and He is regarded as such in John 1:14. In John monogenes denotes the origin of Jesus. He is monogenes as the only begotten."
As Kittel notes, monogenes is used in reference to Jesus in John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9. The word monogenes is used of others than Jesus in Luke 7:11,12; 8:41,42; 9:38; Hebrews 11:17. The instances in Luke confirms Kittel's observation that in the New Testament usage, monogenes does generally denote an only begotten son or daughter. Hebrews 11:17 is used of Isaac as the only-begotten son of Abraham, Ishmael no longer being present, and was not counted as heir. -- Genesis 21:10,12; Galatians 4:22,23,30.
Believing that John 1:18 did originally have the word THEOS, does this mean that John was saying that Jesus is Yahweh, the only Most High? No, it only means that John was attributing to Jesus the might, strength, power that he had before coming into the world of mankind to declare his God, and additionally John could also have been referring to the might and power that has been given to him after his resurrection. (Psalm 45:7; Matthew 28:18; Hebrews 1:2,6,9; Philippians 2:9; Colossians 2:10; Psalm 2:7,8; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; Luke 1:32; Jeremiah 23:5; Daniel 7:13,14) We need to remember that the Hebrews used the same words for "God" of others than the Most High, but in a secondary sense of might, strength, power.
Realizing that Jesus ascended to the only true God, not that Jesus is the only true God, should tells us that John is not using THEOS of Jesus as he did of the God and Father of Jesus.
See: Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”
Jesus in his pre-human existence, indeed, was "a mighty one" who received life (was "begotten") from the Father (Colossians 1:15; John 17:1,3,5), and, not only that, at the time that John wrote his Gospel, Jesus had been raised from death as a mighty spirit being, and was indeed "a mighty one" residing in heaven with his God and Father, and thus figuratively, was in the bosom of his God and Father. -- John 17:11, 22; 20:21,17.
See also my studies:
The Only Begotten God
Did Jesus Have a Beginning?
Some studies written by others:
"The Only Begotten God"
God's Only Begotten Son
Friday, November 15, 2013
John 1:1 and the Son of God, Immanuel
This is in response to:
My Trinity Question
I am not here addressing what is stated there in detail, but mostly giving links to where I have discussed the points before. Please note that I am not just addressing what is present in the original post, but rather what is presented in the comments.
Preliminary:
Jesus is Not Yahweh
The God (Supreme Being – The Might) of Jesus (Scriptures)
Who is Jesus?
John 1:1
John 1:1 proves that Jesus was deity (mighty) with (or towards) the only true Might of the universe (John 1:1,3,5), the source of all might; it does not prove that Jesus is in the only might of the universe.
If Jesus is the Might whom he is with, then Jesus is the Father, for Jesus identified whom he was with in John 17:1,3,5. Jesus was with the only true God, thus, the default is that Jesus is not the only true God whom he was with. Even most trinitarians say that the first theos in John 1:1 is not being used in the same manner as the second theos, for they use their imagination and form the assumption that the first theos is not speaking of three persons, but rather of one of the alleged persons of their triune God, while the second theos does not speak of the three persons, but the alleged second person of their triune God. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the second theos is not used in the same manner as the first theos. In the text John emphasizes the difference between his usage of theos by repeating that the Logos was with God, thus indicating that the Logos was NOT "God" whom he was with, and that "god" applied to the Logos means something different than expressing "the only true God" (John 17:5).
There is Only One True God
The Logos of God
What Beginning?
John 1:1 and Trinitarian Assumptions
The Logos was Theos
John 1:1 - In the Beginning
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”
If Jesus is the Might whom he is with, then Jesus is the Father, for Jesus identified whom he was with in John 17:1,3,5. Jesus was with the only true God, thus, the default is that Jesus is not the only true God whom he was with. Even most trinitarian say that the first theos is not being used in the same manner as the second theos, for they use their imagination and form the assumption that the first theos is not speaking of three persons, but rather of one of the alleged persons of their triune God, while the second theos does not speak of the three persons, but the alleged second persons of their triune God. Yes, it is obvious that the second theos is not used in the same manner as the first theos. In the text John emphasizes the difference between his usage of theos by repeating that the Logos was with God.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/>=tag=john-11
Romans 9:5
See:
Who is Over All
2 Corinthians 3:17
Yahweh, the Spirit
1 Timothy 6:15,16
The Only Ruler Who Possesses Immortality
ELOHIM
Elohim – Does This Word Indicate a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?
Genesis 1:26 – Let Us and Elohim
Hebrews 1:8 – Why is Jesus called “Elohim” and “Theos”? Psalm 45:6,7
Genesis 1:1 – Elohim
Emmanuel
Matthew 1:23 – Immanuel, God with us
Son of God
In the expression, Son of God, the word "God" signifies one person, not a triune God, which agrees with the usage of the singular word "God" all through the Bible. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as one person, and not once as more than one person. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as a distinct individual from His son.
The Unipersonal God Spoke Through His Son
Son of God and Son of Man
John 5:18
The Jewish Leaders' "Cause" to Kill Jesus
I Am
“I am”
Creator
The "all" that the unipersonal God (Colossians 1:2,13-15) created by means of Jesus does not include the first born creature, since it is evident (1 Corinthians 15:27) that God is not created at all, and that Jesus was created before that "all" which was created through, by means of, him. -- Colossians 1:15,17.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=colossians-116
The all that came into being through Jesus in John 1:3 refers to the world of mankind, as described in John 1:10, and which Jesus refers to in John 17:5. Paul refers to this world in Romans 5:12, showing how it had become corrupted through sin. (see 2 Peter 1:4) Paul again refers to this world in Romans 8:19-22 and refers to this as "all creation" in verse 22. This "all creation", however, does not include the angels, for the angels who see the face of God (Matthew 18:10) have not been subjected to futility. -- Ecclesiastes 1:2,13-15.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=john-13
Yes, there is only one being in the universe so has not been created. The Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, identifies that one being as one person, and never as more than one person. Nevertheless, while it may be that the thought of self-existence is included in Ehyeh (I am, I will be) and Yahweh (He is, He will be), I believe that the Holy Name declares that the Creator is and will be Who He is, that is, He is and will who He is and thus does not deny Himself (2 Timothy 2:13); His word is trustworthy. -- Isaiah 55:11; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18.
Focus on the Holy Name
Originally posted 11/13/2010; Updated 11/15/2013
My Trinity Question
I am not here addressing what is stated there in detail, but mostly giving links to where I have discussed the points before. Please note that I am not just addressing what is present in the original post, but rather what is presented in the comments.
Preliminary:
Jesus is Not Yahweh
The God (Supreme Being – The Might) of Jesus (Scriptures)
Who is Jesus?
John 1:1
John 1:1 proves that Jesus was deity (mighty) with (or towards) the only true Might of the universe (John 1:1,3,5), the source of all might; it does not prove that Jesus is in the only might of the universe.
If Jesus is the Might whom he is with, then Jesus is the Father, for Jesus identified whom he was with in John 17:1,3,5. Jesus was with the only true God, thus, the default is that Jesus is not the only true God whom he was with. Even most trinitarians say that the first theos in John 1:1 is not being used in the same manner as the second theos, for they use their imagination and form the assumption that the first theos is not speaking of three persons, but rather of one of the alleged persons of their triune God, while the second theos does not speak of the three persons, but the alleged second person of their triune God. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the second theos is not used in the same manner as the first theos. In the text John emphasizes the difference between his usage of theos by repeating that the Logos was with God, thus indicating that the Logos was NOT "God" whom he was with, and that "god" applied to the Logos means something different than expressing "the only true God" (John 17:5).
There is Only One True God
The Logos of God
What Beginning?
John 1:1 and Trinitarian Assumptions
The Logos was Theos
John 1:1 - In the Beginning
Hebraic Usage of the Titles for “God”
If Jesus is the Might whom he is with, then Jesus is the Father, for Jesus identified whom he was with in John 17:1,3,5. Jesus was with the only true God, thus, the default is that Jesus is not the only true God whom he was with. Even most trinitarian say that the first theos is not being used in the same manner as the second theos, for they use their imagination and form the assumption that the first theos is not speaking of three persons, but rather of one of the alleged persons of their triune God, while the second theos does not speak of the three persons, but the alleged second persons of their triune God. Yes, it is obvious that the second theos is not used in the same manner as the first theos. In the text John emphasizes the difference between his usage of theos by repeating that the Logos was with God.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/>=tag=john-11
Romans 9:5
See:
Who is Over All
2 Corinthians 3:17
Yahweh, the Spirit
1 Timothy 6:15,16
The Only Ruler Who Possesses Immortality
ELOHIM
Elohim – Does This Word Indicate a Plurality of Persons in a Godhead?
Genesis 1:26 – Let Us and Elohim
Hebrews 1:8 – Why is Jesus called “Elohim” and “Theos”? Psalm 45:6,7
Genesis 1:1 – Elohim
Emmanuel
Matthew 1:23 – Immanuel, God with us
Son of God
In the expression, Son of God, the word "God" signifies one person, not a triune God, which agrees with the usage of the singular word "God" all through the Bible. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as one person, and not once as more than one person. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as a distinct individual from His son.
The Unipersonal God Spoke Through His Son
Son of God and Son of Man
John 5:18
The Jewish Leaders' "Cause" to Kill Jesus
I Am
“I am”
Creator
The "all" that the unipersonal God (Colossians 1:2,13-15) created by means of Jesus does not include the first born creature, since it is evident (1 Corinthians 15:27) that God is not created at all, and that Jesus was created before that "all" which was created through, by means of, him. -- Colossians 1:15,17.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=colossians-116
The all that came into being through Jesus in John 1:3 refers to the world of mankind, as described in John 1:10, and which Jesus refers to in John 17:5. Paul refers to this world in Romans 5:12, showing how it had become corrupted through sin. (see 2 Peter 1:4) Paul again refers to this world in Romans 8:19-22 and refers to this as "all creation" in verse 22. This "all creation", however, does not include the angels, for the angels who see the face of God (Matthew 18:10) have not been subjected to futility. -- Ecclesiastes 1:2,13-15.
http://jesus.rlbible.com/?tag=john-13
Yes, there is only one being in the universe so has not been created. The Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, identifies that one being as one person, and never as more than one person. Nevertheless, while it may be that the thought of self-existence is included in Ehyeh (I am, I will be) and Yahweh (He is, He will be), I believe that the Holy Name declares that the Creator is and will be Who He is, that is, He is and will who He is and thus does not deny Himself (2 Timothy 2:13); His word is trustworthy. -- Isaiah 55:11; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18.
Focus on the Holy Name
Originally posted 11/13/2010; Updated 11/15/2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)