JESUS IS NOT YHWH

[onewithhim]

Jesus prayed to YHWH, the Father, not to himself. (E.g., Matthew 26:39,42; John 11:41,42; John 17:1-26.) Would he have been praying to himself?

He continually referred to himself as "God's SON," not YHWH Himself. (John 5:19; John 8:28,29; John 10:36; John 17:1.) Even the Jews who hated him recognized that fact (John 19:7). Can he be his own Son?

He applied Isaiah 61:1,2 to himself, at Luke 4:17-21, showing that he was the one anointed BY YHWH, and sent BY YHWH. There are incontrovertibly two Persons mentioned in the passage, and YHWH is the One calling the shots. The anointed one does what YHWH wants. How could they be the same Person?

Psalm 110 is also applied to Jesus at Acts 2:34,35. He is the "Lord," or Messiah, that YHWH speaks to. Was YHWH talking to Himself?


I think that just these few points would show plainly that Jesus is not YHWH. Can anyone explain how THESE REFERENCES, ABOVE, can possibly agree with the premise that Jesus is YHWH? I'm not asking for other Scriptures to be brought in without commenting ON the verses I am asking about. Please give me your reasoning concerning these particular Scriptures. Thank you.

[onewithhim]

Delete

[onewithhim]

Delete

[onewithhim]

[Replying to post 161 by JehovahsWitness]

Yes, but wouldn't he be referring to other Gentiles, writing to the congregation in Rome which was probably mostly Gentiles?

It is a bit difficult to determine in Romans chapter 10 exactly how the message Paul was pushing to have preached would be worded, and I am therefore not willing to write my thoughts about it in stone. I have to admit that I am groping for the fuller understanding just as I hope others are. After all, truth is
what we are looking for otherwise we are just wasting our time.

I see the way belief pulls on us causing us to search so hard for proof of what we believe that we become blind to see a truth which differs from our belief. And I feel that the search for proof that Jesus was actually being shown by Paul and other new testament writers to be God, is a very good example of a belief that is able to blind us.

Left and right we are bombarded with comments concerning the various miraculous things surrounding Jesus' life, death, and resurrection, claiming that these things prove Jesus was God and is God. But I find it interesting that to view those things in that way we must step right over Paul's belief as to what that power surrounding Jesus' life, death, and resurrection proved. Concerning what those things proved about Jesus, Paul plainly told us: Romans 1:4 but who with power was declared Gods Son according to the spirit of holiness by means of resurrection from the dead "yes, Jesus Christ our Lord.

Paul's words there at Romans 1:4 go hand-in-hand with what Jesus said at John 8:28 to explain what Jesus meant: Jesus then said: After you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me, I speak these things.

I find it interesting that Jesus referred to himself as the Son of man there at John 8:28 in context with speaking about his being lifted up by those who opposed him. After all, they could defy a Son of man and his enemies were only willing to recognize him as a Son of man. But when they tried they would find out that he was more than a Son of man. They would learn he had not lied to them when he told them that God was his Father and he was God's Son.

Just as Paul told us at Romans 1:4, the powerful events surrounding Jesus' life, death, and resurrection proved that he was indeed God's Son, The wicked ones of the Pharisees often told him that only God had the right to forgive sins and so forth. Those wicked ones refused to recognize Jesus as God's Son, else they would have known that Jesus' power came from his Father and as his father's Son he had the right given him of his Father. And the shame of us thinking those things proved that Jesus was and is God is that we must agree with those wicked ones that only God has the right to do those things, in effect disallowing that God has full right to empower his Son to continue his work, even as to a smaller extent God had empowered Elijah. So it portrays a lack of faith and undermines the work of Jesus in directing glory to his Father by means of his Father's goodness toward him. In fact, the lack of faith which it portrays is of the most subtle nature, for it is a lack of faith mixed into an element of real faith. As such it hides itself so that it is difficult for it's victims to become aware of to escape it.

ONEWITHHIM REPLIES:

Your posts #168 and #169 are splendid. Just excellent. You gave me further insight into why Jesus spoke of himself as "the Son of man." Bringing out that the Pharisees were the ones who said "only God has the right to forgive sins and so forth," indeed parallels with those today who say that very thing! They don't understand that Jesus' power came from the Father and as his Father's Son he had been given the right by his Father. It IS shameful that his power to forgive sins is taken to be proof that Jesus is God. Little Pharisees all over again. It truly undermines the work of Jesus in directing glory to his Father, and their viewpoint is insidiously subtle in its blending with an element of real faith.

[Left Site]

ONEWITHHIM REPLIES:

Your posts #168 and #169 are splendid. Just excellent. You gave me further insight into why Jesus spoke of himself as "the Son of man." Bringing out that the Pharisees were the ones who said "only God has the right to forgive sins and so forth," indeed parallels with those today who say that very thing! They don't understand that Jesus' power came from the Father and as his Father's Son he had been given the right by his Father. It IS shameful that his power to forgive sins is taken to be proof that Jesus is God. Little Pharisees all over again. It truly undermines the work of Jesus in directing glory to his Father, and their viewpoint is insidiously subtle in its blending with an element of real faith.

John 8:19 They said therefore unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye know neither me, nor my Father: if ye knew me, ye would know my Father also. (Bible in Basic English)

Why would Jesus tell the Pharisees , if ye knew me, ye would know my Father also.. Let the Scriptures answer that question for us: Matthew 11:27 All things have been given to me by my Father; and no one has knowledge of the Son, but the Father; and no one has knowledge of the Father, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will make it clear. (Bible in Basic English)

The Scriptures do not leave us having to guess at what was meant. They would have known the Father also, because Jesus would have taught them who the Father really is. The revealing of the knowledge about his Father as his Father truly is, was a huge part of the reason Jesus' came to earth to live as a human.

Prior to the New Covenant, Jesus ministry on earth while he was in the flesh was for the Jews only: Matthew 15:24 But he answered and said, I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (American Standard Version)

Before Jesus came to earth, no doubt the Father and the Son looking down from heaven saw the same thing Paul also finally came to see: Romans 10:1-3 Brothers, my heart's desire and my prayer to God for them is, that they may get salvation. For I give witness of them that they have a strong desire for God, but not with knowledge. Because, not having knowledge of God's righteousness, and desiring to give effect to their righteousness, they have not put themselves under the righteousness of God. (Bible in Basic English)

In fact, Jehovah saw that they really did not understand him and his righteousness way back to the beginning of the Mosaic Law Covenant and even before it. Speaking to Moses, Jehovah said : Deuteronomy 18:18 I will give them a prophet from among themselves, like you, and I will put my words in his mouth, and he will say to them whatever I give him orders to say. (Bible in Basic English)

Jesus recognized that, here: John 3:34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for he giveth not the Spirit by measure. (American Standard version)

Speaking in prayer to his Father about the disciples, Jesus said: John 17:8 for the words which thou gavest me I have given unto them; and they received them, and knew of a truth that I came forth from thee, and they believed that thou didst send me. (American Standard version)

Recall and compare to those words of Jesus above, Deuteronomy 18:18 where Jehovah told Moses, in part: I will put my words in his mouth, and he will say to them whatever I give him orders to say.

[liamconnor]

The reference is to names which were given. No one gave God his name and no one can change God's name.

Is every one here under the impression that God has names apart from Creation? As if, apart from creation (we are forced to use temporal terms and say before Creation) God would refer to himself as (in Hebrew!) YHWH or Elohim, or (in Greek!) Pater (and then, Father of what?) or theos?

The names of God tell us how God relates to his creation. YHWH is his covenant name: how he relates in a special relationship to creation. One could say (with Heigel) that apart from Creation God does not exist, but that is to depart from all forms of orthodoxy, including (I believe) that of J.W.



In Phil. 2 JEsus is given the name that is above all names. One needs to answer what that name is. Is it Jesus (i.e. Yeshua)? In which case the fifth book of the O.T. has a greater title than the covenantal name of God!

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 168 by BusB]

I find it interesting that Jesus referred to himself as the Son of man there at John 8:28 in context with speaking about his being lifted up by those who opposed him

The Son of Man is a reference to Daniel 7's "one like a Son of Man" who represents Israel and is given dominion over all the earth. This is widely recognized by N.T. scholarship.

[liamconnor]

It IS shameful that his power to forgive sins is taken to be proof that Jesus is God. Little Pharisees all over again. It truly undermines the work of Jesus in directing glory to his Father

First, if I walked into a hospital room and said to an invalid, "Your sins are forgiven," would this be fitting, or arrogant, given my status as a mere man?

Second, trinitarian theology has long recognized the reciprocity within the divine economy: the Son loves the Father and the Father loves the Son. Thus, all worship given the Son rebounds to the Father, for the Father is honored when His Son is honored.

To talk of orthodox Christianity devaluing the Father is to expose ignorance of what trinitarian theology actually is.

[Left Site]

Is every one here under the impression that God has names apart from Creation? As if, apart from creation (we are forced to use temporal terms and say before Creation) God would refer to himself as (in Hebrew!) YHWH or Elohim, or (in Greek!) Pater (and then, Father of what?) or theos?

The names of God tell us how God relates to his creation. YHWH is his covenant name: how he relates in a special relationship to creation. One could say (with Heigel) that apart from Creation God does not exist, but that is to depart from all forms of orthodoxy, including (I believe) that of J.W.!

You are actually correct in the sense that the name of Jehovah reveals him as the fulfiller of promises; as a progressive character revealing himself by what he does. Elohim, on the other hand, is a title directly addressing God's supremacy. YHWH = God's name Elohim = God's title

The meaning of God's name speaks to what Paul said, "Romans 1:20 "-- for from the world's creation the invisible things of him are perceived, being apprehended by the mind through the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, -- so as to render them inexcusable." (Darby's Version)

In Phil. 2 JEsus is given the name that is above all names. One needs to answer what that name is. Is it Jesus (i.e. Yeshua)? In which case the fifth book of the O.T. has a greater title than the covenantal name of God!

Jesus was not given a name greater than he who gave it to him. Jesus was given a name above all names that were ever given.

And you or I nor any man or angel gave God his name. He is the giver and so is reasonably excepted from what was said about Jesus' name.

After all, even you should know that it is ridiculous to speak of anything becoming above God. So Jesus being given a name above every other name proves he is not God. As I see it, it is a form of blasphemy against God and Jesus to say Jesus is God. On one hand the scribes developed a superstition disallowing them to pronounce God's name, believing it too holy to pass through imperfect human lips. And now the way that so many humans have done his name, even claiming the name of Jesus is above all names as if even above the name of God, those scribes may have been right that man couldn't handle it. LOL

[Left Site]

[Replying to post 168 by BusB]

I find it interesting that Jesus referred to himself as the Son of man there at John 8:28 in context with speaking about his being lifted up by those who opposed him

The Son of Man is a reference to Daniel 7's "one like a Son of Man" who represents Israel and is given dominion over all the earth. This is widely recognized by N.T. scholarship.

You are correct.

But you should realize that those Pharisees who were opposing Jesus' divine connection to God surely were not acknowledging Jesus as being that "son of man" as spoken of in Daniel. And my comment was based on what those Pharisees thought. They only saw him as a son of man and a rather lowly one at that. Why, isn't he the carpenter's son from Galilee? Nothing good has ever came out of Galilee!!!

[Left Site]

It IS shameful that his power to forgive sins is taken to be proof that Jesus is God. Little Pharisees all over again. It truly undermines the work of Jesus in directing glory to his Father

First, if I walked into a hospital room and said to an invalid, "Your sins are forgiven," would this be fitting, or arrogant, given my status as a mere man?

Second, trinitarian theology has long recognized the reciprocity within the divine economy: the Son loves the Father and the Father loves the Son. Thus, all worship given the Son rebounds to the Father, for the Father is honored when His Son is honored.

To talk of orthodox Christianity devaluing the Father is to expose ignorance of what trinitarian theology actually is.

I take it your not Catholic then?

If you were Jesus and my heart were right, God would have revealed you to my mind and heart as being his chosen one. And if you were one anointed to carry on Jesus' work, God would reveal that to me, too.

God has not revealed that to me about you.