DISPENSATIONALISM IS AN UNBIBLICAL DOCTRINE

[Eddie Ramos]

Dispensationalism is a word which describes that God had a different plan of salvation for the people on the Old Testament side of the cross than he did for the people on the New Testament side of the cross. For example it is believed by many that from the time of the fall of Adam and Eve, that people were saved by their good works (obedience to God's law, the Bible), then after the cross, obedience to the law of God was no longer necessary for salvation. That is, after the cross, one only had to believe in Jesus in order to be saved.

To demonstrate this doctrine, I copied and pasted a comment in a thread I found in this forum which said, "Good works earned one salvation under the Old Testament. That is, if a person never violated any of God's laws, he or she gained eternal life..... Under the New Testament, man came under grace and not the demands of the law.".

I will debate the side that states that there was only ever one way for God's elect to become saved throughout the history of the world. It was always by grace through the faith of Christ. As my opening support, I would like to put forth this passage:

Genesis 6:6–9 (KJV 1900)
6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Here we are told that the whole world was corrupt, yet Noah found grace in God's eyes. The word grace is the word "favor". Noah found favor in God's eyes. Noah did not find grace because of his good works, else grace is no more grace (Rom 11:6). God describing Noah as just and perfect, isn't describing what Noah had earned as a result of his good works, because the Old Testament clearly tells us that:

....there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not. Ecclesiastes 7:20 (KJV 1900)

AND,

If they sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them to the enemy, so that they carry them away captives unto the land of the enemy, far or near; 1 Kings 8:46 (KJV 1900)

So, when God describes someone as being perfect and just, it's because God is looking at the heart (1 Sam 16:7). A perfect heart which could only come as a result of having been saved by God's grace. This is why good works could never have earned anyone salvation before the cross. Else not a single person could have become saved prior to the cross because all have sinned.

Psalm 14:2–3 (KJV 1900)
2  The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3  They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy:
There is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The initial question for this debate is, what are the biblical texts used to support the doctrine of dispensationalism?

[JehovahsWitness]

... God doesn't leave us in the dark regarding what happens when man reasons with man about God's Words while leaving the Word of God out of that reasoning.

So despite being finite beings we can indeed reason about God's Words as long as we are careful not to leave Word of God out of that reasoning. Here is what the word of God says about the identity of the One True God ...

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

The problem is that you think that by citing one or two verses (which are only part of the whole equation), that you have absolute understanding of the whole picture.

Let us not get personal, I am simply asking you to explain the verse in question. Preferably without resorting to wild hypothesis.

[Eddie Ramos]

... God doesn't leave us in the dark regarding what happens when man reasons with man about God's Words while leaving the Word of God out of that reasoning.

So despite being finite beings we can indeed reason about God's Words as long as we are careful not to leave Word of God out of that reasoning. Here is what the word of God says about the identity of the One True God ...

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

The problem is that you think that by citing one or two verses (which are only part of the whole equation), that you have absolute understanding of the whole picture.

Let us not get personal, I am simply asking you to explain the verse in question. Preferably without resorting to wild hypothesis.

I didn't mean to make it come across as personal, for that I apologize. That statement is true for everyone who approaches the Bible in that same manner. I should have said, "The problem is that many think that by citing one or two verses (which are only part of the whole equation), that they have absolute understanding of the whole picture." But I answered your question already in detail in post #30. I would however like an answer to mine now before we can make any progress here. Thanks.

[JehovahsWitness]

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

Who then is the one true God? Well, Jesus said it was the one who sent him. Why is it important for them to know both, the one true God AND Jesus Christ whom God sent? Because they are one God.

How can we refer to "both" if Jesus is the "sender" and the "sendee"? You admit that "The one True God sent" Him (Jesus) , which is a de facto admission Jesus didn't send himself. If Jesus did not send himself but the One True God did, then Jesus cannot BE the one true God.

[Eddie Ramos]

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

Thus we can conclude that Jesus (the sendee) is not "The One True God".

Who then is the one true God? Well, Jesus said it was the one who sent him. Why is it important for them to know both, the one true God AND Jesus Christ whom God sent? Because they are one God.

How can we refer to "both" if Jesus is the "sender" and the "sendee"? You admit that "The one True God sent" Him (Jesus) , which is a de facto admission Jesus didn't send himself. If Jesus did not send himself but the One True God did, then Jesus cannot BE the one true God.

I will assume then that since you are choosing not to directly answer all of my questions in previous posts, that you are not really interested in what the Bible has to say as a whole about the fact that Jehovah and Christ are one God, but rather in what you are able to make logical sense out of. That is not the way to come to truth, but it's a good way to ignore it. Your confidence in your own logic tells you that the sender cannot be the sendee, yet I showed you biblical examples which you dismissed because they disagreed with your logical conclusion. The High priest who offered the lamb as a sacrifice points to the true High priest which is Christ, and the lamb he offered to make atonement for sins was also a picture of Christ, who is called "the lamb of God". The sacrifices in both cases, were done to satisfy the demands of the Word of God. And who is the Word of God? That's correct, it's also Christ.

Revelation 19:13 (KJV 1900)
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

Also, the fact that you're not keeping in mind that Jesus did not speak without parables, but instead, you're taking his words at face value, like when he spoke about the one true God who sent him, and that the Father was greater than him, to you, these are plain statements, but in truth, they are all parabolic statements designed to conceal truth. If the fact that he did not speak without a parable is not in your equation, then you have fallen into the snare set by the Word of God. Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God. He is JEHOVAH in the flesh.

Jeremiah 23:5–6 (KJV 1900)
5 Behold, the days come, saith JEHOVAH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called (speaking about Christ), JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

The purpose of parables is to conceal truth and cause confusion, which is exactly why Jesus spoke the way he did rather than plainly. Especially when it came to understanding who he is. And how about this for logic? The Son of the Father is also the everlasting Father himself. And the son of the mighty God is the mighty God himself. And the list goes on for a long time.

Isaiah 9:6 (KJV 1900)
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
And the government shall be upon his shoulder:
And his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The Bible is truly amazing in how it was written.

[JehovahsWitness]

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

I will assume then that since you are choosing not to directly answer all of my questions in previous posts, that you are not really interested in what the Bible has to say as a whole

I am assuming that since you refuse to address the points raised you are uninterested in what Our Lord Himself has to say about the identity of The One True God.

If you have any other referenced that use the appellation "One True God" that imply anything other than that it refers to someone that is not Jesus, I will be happy to address them but random unrelated scripture given a bias trinitarian interpretations in a cirular argument does not negate the fact thay you have thus far failed to answer the most basic points in John 17 verse 3.

- If Jesus was sent by the one True God, how could he *BE* the One True God?



JW

To learn more please go to to other posts related to ...

GOD, JESUS and ...THE "TRINITY TEXTS" DEBUNKED

[JehovahsWitness]

...I showed you biblical examples which you dismissed because they disagreed with your logical conclusion. ..

I dismissed it because your theory was both scripturally unsound and displayed a rather shakey grasp language.

... both, the "sacrificer and the sarificee" represent the same thing. Not logical, but biblical.

Firstly, The High Priest and the lamb did not represent the same thing and there is always logic in scripture. But even putting poor a understanding of the Hebrew system aside, neither the High Priest nor the sacrificial lamb were depicted as being the recipient: we STILL had a seperate individual that was neither one nor the other! In short there was the mediator (the high priest) the validator (the lamb) and the recipient (God).

Further since Jesus was not literally a small farm animal (nor was he of the Priestly line of Levi), we are talking about theses things being illustrative. An illustration can selectively apply to different aspects of the same individual. Which is why someone can be ... crazy like a fox and as beautiful as Julia Robert and as rich as Roosevelt without being part of a "trinity".

If you would like to challenge my counterarguement above feel free but let us not pretend no counterargument was offered.

JW

[Eddie Ramos]

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

I will assume then that since you are choosing not to directly answer all of my questions in previous posts, that you are not really interested in what the Bible has to say as a whole

I am assuming that since you refuse to address the points raised you are uninterested in what Our Lord Himself has to say about the identity of The One True God.

The real problem is not that I haven't given you plenty of biblical evidence to specifically address the points you raised, because all you have to do is go back and re-read them. Furthermore, you acknowledged that I did in your next post. You said:

I dismissed it because your theory was both scripturally unsound and displayed a rather shakey grasp language.

So the real problem is that none of it was satisfactory to you, but the truth of the scriptures seldom is for anyone who rejects any portion of it. Jesus said that JEHOVAH who sent Him is the one true God, and that's 100% truth. But what you have done (and continue to do) is to insert logic at this point and make it superceded everything else the scriptures say about who Jesus Christ is. He is JEHOVAH In the flesh. And neither your logic nor anyone else's can grasp how three can be one, nor how the Son can be the Father and the Father the son, yet at the same time be distinct deities of the same Godhead. Yet, it's all there for us to see and acknowledge that the only thing we can do to understand an infinite diety like God, is to put all the pieces (verses) together in order to see the whole picture. And when we do, the only harmonious conclusion is that the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are the one true God.

So, naturally (because that's the kind of mind we were conceived with) we will start to ask questions that must make sense to us before acknowledging this truth about God. Yet, no where are we told to do that. We are actually told the opposite, that if we try to use our own wisdom in this, that we will be confounded.

1 Corinthians 3:18-19 (KJV) 18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

[i]1 Corinthians 1:20 (KJV) 20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?[/i]

So, the only thing we can rely on is the wisdom of God to teach us who he is. And we do this by applying all scriptures.
Including the one that teaches us that Jesus (The Word of God) did not speak without parables. This important fact helps to know that we can't take what he said at face value but rather seek the scriptures to see what he meant by what he said.

If you have any other referenced that use the appellation "One True God" that imply anything other than that it refers to someone that is not Jesus, I will be happy to address them but random unrelated scripture given a bias trinitarian interpretations in a cirular argument does not negate the fact thay you have thus far failed to answer the most basic points in John 17 verse 3.

- If Jesus was sent by the one True God, how could he *BE* the One True God?



JW

Nothing in scriptures is random and unrelated. It's all one cohesive truth given by the three (which are one) that bear the record in heaven as well as on earth.

[i]1 John 5:7-8 (KJV) 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. [/i]

I don't really care what trinitarian believe or what Calvanists believe, or any other theological group. The only thing that I care about is what the Bible teaches. If it's one God in three ditties, then so be it. If it's election, then so be it. If it's no literal place of eternal suffering called hell, then so be it. There is only one truth, my job is to find it and have it scrutinized by anyone who wished to do so, in order for me to see if the Bible has to correct me in anything that I am saying.

So, if Jesus said, using parables, that the God who sent Him is the one true God, then will the Bible (not our logic) allow us to dismiss everything else it has to say about them? Of course not. Further search reveals that JEHOVAH sent JEHOVAH in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Jeremiah 23:5-6 (KJV) 5 Behold, the days come, saith JEHOVAH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name (Christ's name) whereby he shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

This makes our understanding of the relation between Jesus and JEHOVAH much more difficult, and so we keep digging for more information. This is how we discover and understand that they are they one true God in a diety of three. This is why Jesus purposefully (in parables) not only went along with those who only acknowledged him as a "good master", but even went as far as adding to their confusion by saying, "Why callest thou me good, there is none good but one, that is God". And his words, being truth, kept those who thought they could see, in their blindness.

But for those whose eyes he had opened, he was rightfully recognized for who he was, God himself.

John 20:28-29 (KJV) 28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. 29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Luke 8:39 (KJV) 39 Return to thine own house, and shew how great things God hath done unto thee. And he went his way, and published throughout the whole city how great things Jesus had done unto him.

Always look for one harmonious truth.

[Eddie Ramos]

... both, the "sacrificer and the sarificee" represent the same thing. Not logical, but biblical.

Firstly, The High Priest and the lamb did not represent the same thing and there is always logic in scripture. But even putting poor a understanding of the Hebrew system aside, neither the High Priest nor the sacrificial lamb were depicted as being the recipient: we STILL had a seperate individual that was neither one nor the other! In short there was the mediator (the high priest) the validator (the lamb) and the recipient (God).

Further since Jesus was not literally a small farm animal (nor was he of the Priestly line of Levi), we are talking about theses things being illustrative. An illustration can selectively apply to different aspects of the same individual. Which is why someone can be ... crazy like a fox and as beautiful as Julia Robert and as rich as Roosevelt without being part of a "trinity".

If you would like to challenge my counterarguement above feel free but let us not pretend no counterargument was offered.

JW

So, I didn't say that the High priest and the Lamb represented the same thing, I said they both represented Christ. Is this a false statement? Let's see, again:

John 1:29 (KJV) 29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

As a matter of fact, Jesus was likened to a sacrificial lamb before any lambs were created or used in ceremonial offerings.

Revelation 13:8 (KJV) 8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

This means that your denial of the land being a picture of Christ is just that, your denial because it doesn't follow the logic you are certain is always in the scriptures. Yet, it would be great to see even one scripture that even suggests such thing.

How about the high priest being a figure of Christ? Well, you say that he isn't of the tribe of Levi, therefore they cannot represent Christ because Christ was of the tribe of Judah. So, you are trusting in the authority of your logic rather than the authority of the scriptures.

Hebrews 4:14 - 5:5 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.
​ For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: Who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee.

Is this passage likening Aaron, the first ceremonial high priest from the tribe of Levi, to Christ? Yes. So ,why would you have a problem with the Bible making that connection? Because that means that what I stated earlier is true, that Christ (the true high priest) sacrificed Christ (the true lamb) in order to satisfy the demands of the word of God (also Christ).

Now, since logic tells us that the sender cannot be the sendee, the same logic tells us that the one who is sacrificed cannot be the one who receives the sacrifice. But both (all) logics do not agree with the scriptures. The Bible confounds our logic by speaking of things that are very illogical. That the one who offers the sacrifice and the sacrifice itself, point to the same person, Christ.

How about the sender and the sendee? Does the Bible go against our logic once again and teach us that they are indeed one and the same? Yes.

Jeremiah 23:5-6 (KJV) 5 Behold, the days come, saith JEHOVAH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his (Christ's) name whereby he shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

The name of the Christ is JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. JEHOVAH SENT JEHOVAH. And how about the son? Can the son be a father? Not logically, but God is not bound by our foolish logic.

Isaiah 9:6 (KJV)
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given:
and the government shall be upon his shoulder:
and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

JEHOVAH sent JEHOVAH, the name of Christ is JEHOVAH, the child and son born is the everlasting Father. In the person of Christ, JEHOVAH humbles himself to take on the form of Christ as a servant and die on the cross.

Philippians 2:5-8 (KJV) 5 -- Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

This is why, when Christ spoke in parables, he being equal with God because he is God, made himself as a servant to God, to be lower than God and humble himself to a shameful death. There is not a single contradiction when we can see that they are the same one true God. But there is a world of contradiction when we deny who Jesus really is.

John 8:24 (KJV) 24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I AM, ye shall die in your sins.

I hope this was thorough enough.

[JehovahsWitness]

So, I didn't say that the High priest and the Lamb represented the same thing, I said they both represented Christ. ...

I have no problem with that; however WHO was lamb sacrifced *TO* ? Who was the High Priest worshipping? Unless your point is the lamb was sacrificed to the lamb ; and the High Priest was worshipping ....the High Priest there is another individual involved in this scenerio that is neither represented by the High Priest OR the Lamb.

So continue with the application, but you have much work to do to try and establish that this provides a biblical precedent to prove Jesus can be both the sender and the sendee in John 17 verse 3

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

JW



Why is there a need for atonement in biblical theology ?
viewtopic.php?p=1042433#p1042433

[Eddie Ramos]

So, I didn't say that the High priest and the Lamb represented the same thing, I said they both represented Christ. ...

I have no problem with that; however WHO was lamb sacrifced *TO* ? Who was the High Priest worshipping? Unless your point is the lamb was sacrificed to the lamb ; and the High Priest was worshipping ....the High Priest there is another individual involved in this scenerio that is neither represented by the High Priest OR the Lamb.

So continue with the application, but you have much work to do to try and establish that this provides a biblical precedent to prove Jesus can be both the sender and the sendee in John 17 verse 3

This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. - John 17:3

Jesus clearly identifies someone other than Christ as the One True God. Jesus (the word) was sent from heaven, so while in heaven there was The one Ture God (the sender) and another individual that was not the One True God (the sendee).

JW

Ok, so now we're making some progress insofar as how God wrote the Bible. But you continue to say that Christ spoke "clearly" when he said, that he was sent by the one true God. And you're sure that he must have meant that is the one true God sent Jesus, then Jesus cannot be the one true God. But you're giving me nothing to look at without giving me scriptures. How do we know that he said what he said to be clearly understood? Furthermore, since the one true God did send him, how do you know that this means that Jesus is not the one true God? Some scriptures would help, rather than just reasoning with yourself. Didn't I show you from the scriptures that JEHOVAH SENT JEHOVAH? If I am incorrectly understanding those scriptures, then we are in the perfect place to correct what I stated. But I feel that since you're not addressing those verses directly, then it's because they present a problem with your doctrine.

Now, I actually did explain the "WHO" part of your question as well. If you have no problem now with the fact that the Bible likens a sheep to Christ as well as the earthly high priests to Christ, then you can see just from those slight examples that the Bible isn't written to follow what we would consider to be a logical layout. So, who is the recipient of the sacrifice offered by the spiritual High Priest, it's God himself. God sent himself (in the person of Christ) to die for the sins of his people, to satisfy the demands of His own law.

1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV 1900)
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.


This is where the Godhead comes in. 3 distinct deities yet one God. 3 roles throughout the Bible, yet one God. As I explained earlier, Jehovah, our savior and redeemer, redeemed his people by sending himself in the person of his son Jesus Christ. This is one of the passages I've been trying to get you to address for quite some time.

Jeremiah 23:5-6 (KJV) 5 Behold, the days come, saith JEHOVAH, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name (Christ's name) whereby he shall be called, JEHOVAH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

So, why is JEHOVAH speaking of someone else as a king of Israel, and saying that in the days of this king, Judah shall be saved. And then he goes on to tell us the name of this king, which is none other than JEHOVAH himself. But this passage is about Christ. And when God describes the roles of the Godhead, at times they are different (like Jesus saying the one true God sent him), and at times they are the same. Let me show you.

Isaiah 44:6 (KJV 1900)

Thus saith JEHOVAH the King of Israel,
And *****HIS ******redeemer JEHOVAH of hosts;
I am the first, and I am the last;
And beside me there is no God.

So, what is the name of JEHOVAH'S redeemer? It's none other than JEHOVAH of hosts (this is again Christ).

Isaiah 47:4 (KJV 1900)
As for our redeemer, JEHOVAH of hosts is his name,
The Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 54:5 (KJV 1900)
5  For thy Maker is thine husband;
JEHOVAH of hosts is his name;
And thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel;
The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

This is saying that JEHOVAH is our husband, but then we read that Christ is our husband.

2 Corinthians 11:2 (KJV 1900)
For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

And if Christ came from heaven, how was he still in heaven while on earth?

John 3:13 (KJV 1900)
And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is IN heaven.

Everything, when compared correctly, leads us to the only conclusion, that JEHOVAH is the Christ.