YHWH

[Wootah]

Y - the hand
H - reveals
W - the nail
H - reveals

How is anyone that believes YHWH is God able to negate the evidence above that YHWH is Jesus?

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/je ... -is-yahweh

YHWH is the name above all names correct?

Philippians 2:9-11 says — Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

Anyone want to directly confront both pieces of evidence?

[Wootah]

It would be great to get a comment from Wootah about the last couple of posts.

Very disappointing to see people claiming the name of God points to not God.

Do you think that likely?

'Hi what's your name?'
'My name is Steve.'
'So your name is Steve?'
'No my name points to someone else called Steve.'

But I fully agree that Jesus is a revealed concept. No one expected Jesus. No one would have said the hand reveals, the nail reveals and worked out God would be nailed to a cross.

God becoming a signpost is just not a likely answer to this thread.

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Wootah in post #141]

Wootah, your post is reasoning that I would expect from my 3-yr.-old granddaughter. "My name is Steve but I am not Steve"?? What you have said is not in line with Jesus' name at all. We do not say, "his name is Jesus but he isn't Jesus." We say, "his name is Jesus, and he IS Jesus, but his name MEANS 'Jehovah is salvation.'" Therefore two individuals are established in the conversation. Jesus and Jehovah.

.

[Wootah]

[Replying to Wootah in post #141]

Wootah, your post is reasoning that I would expect from my 3-yr.-old granddaughter. "My name is Steve but I am not Steve"?? What you have said is not in line with Jesus' name at all. We do not say, "his name is Jesus but he isn't Jesus." We say, "his name is Jesus, and he IS Jesus, but his name MEANS 'Jehovah is salvation.'" Therefore two individuals are established in the conversation. Jesus and Jehovah.

.

And yet you can't see that is where you are at theologically.

This thread is about the name of YHWH. Go watch the video in the first post and think about it further.

[onewithhim]

What I said in my post stands. I hope you think about it further.


"The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord [the Messiah] is: 'Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet.' The rod of your strength Jehovah will send out of Zion, saying: 'God subduing in the midst of your enemies.'" (Psalm 110: 1,2, NWT; see also Young's Literal Translation.)

What does this mean to you?

[onewithhim]

I can't understand why no one will reply to my post above. Isn't it a perfectly viable thought?

[1213]

I can't understand why no one will reply to my post above. Isn't it a perfectly viable thought?

Psalm 110:1-2 is very good scripture about Jesus and God. I think it can’t be refuted.

[onewithhim]

I can't understand why no one will reply to my post above. Isn't it a perfectly viable thought?

Psalm 110:1-2 is very good scripture about Jesus and God. I think it can’t be refuted.

Thank you, 1213. I appreciate your comment. Hopefully others will add to the discussion as well.

[PinSeeker]

I can't understand why no one will reply to my post above. Isn't it a perfectly viable thought?

Psalm 110:1-2 is very good scripture about Jesus and God. I think it can’t be refuted.

Absolutely correct, 1213. To get real specific, at the end of verse 1, the Hebrew word used there for "my Lord" is אֲדֹנָי ('Adonay), which is an emphatic form of the Hebrew אָדוֹן, ('Adown) and is a title spoken in place of Yahweh in Jewish display of reverence. And this is exactly the word used by Thomas in John 20:28, although there we see it in Greek, of course. You're right, it can't be refuted. It can certainly be denied, but in both places Jesus is irrefutably referred to as a separate and distinct Person, but also the second Person of the triune Jehovah God. If it is "understood" in the light as some here would have it, David is actually either saying Jesus is superior to God the Father or even denying God the Father and embracing Jesus as his master/sovereign, which is surely not the case; he is acknowledging both as Yahweh (as is Thomas).

Grace and peace to you.

[tam]

Peace to you,

I can't understand why no one will reply to my post above. Isn't it a perfectly viable thought?

Psalm 110:1-2 is very good scripture about Jesus and God. I think it can’t be refuted.

Absolutely correct, 1213. To get real specific, at the end of verse 1, the Hebrew word used there for "my Lord" is אֲדֹנָי ('Adonay), which is an emphatic form of the Hebrew אָדוֹן, ('Adown) and is a title spoken in place of Yahweh in Jewish display of reverence.

It is also used to refer to Abraham (by Sarah), and many other men, kings, etc, including the Messiah. We know it refers to the Messiah here because Jaheshua said that it did.

Adown was not being used in place of [YHWH] here at Psalm 110:1-2. That does not make sense, since the scribes had already used LORD in place of YHWH.

And this is exactly the word used by Thomas in John 20:28, although there we see it in Greek, of course.

No problem with that, since "Lord" can refer to other men, to kings, to husbands, and certainly to the Messiah - the King whom God appointed.

You're right, it can't be refuted. It can certainly be denied, but in both places Jesus is irrefutably referred to as a separate and distinct Person, but also the second Person of the triune Jehovah God.

That is not accurate. Christ is referred to irrefutably as a separate and distinct person <- that much is true.

But it is not true that Christ is irrefutably referred to as a 'second person of the triune Jehovah God'. That is something that men have added, interpreted, read INTO the text.

If it is "understood" in the light as some here would have it, David is actually either saying Jesus is superior to God the Father or even denying God the Father and embracing Jesus as his master/sovereign, which is surely not the case; he is acknowledging both as Yahweh (as is Thomas).

But that doesn't follow at all. Men can (and do) refer to other men as lords - such as Sarah referring to Abraham as her Lord - without suggesting that those men are superior to God, and without denying God.


I certainly am not suggesting that Christ is superior to the Father (to God), because I refer to Christ as my Lord. Nor am I denying the Father (God), because Christ is my Lord.

God = the Father = the MOST Holy One (reflected in the Temple as the MOST Holy Place), whose name is JAH(veh)
Christ = the Son = the Holy One of God (reflected in the Temple as the HOLY Place, through which one must pass in order to come before the MOST Holy), whose name is Jaheshua


Peace also to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[PinSeeker]

Peace to you also.

Adown was not being used in place of [YHWH] here at Psalm 110:1-2.

Point taken, but that’s not what I said.

That does not make sense, since the scribes had already used LORD in place of YHWH.

Sure.

But it is not true that Christ is irrefutably referred to as a 'second person of the triune Jehovah God'.

Oh, yes, it absolutely is. Christ is referred to with a title that is reserved only for YHWH.

...Sarah referring to Abraham as her Lord...

Sarah referred to Abraham as the head of her... well, I should say his... household... and her husband:
.

“So Sarah laughed to herself, saying, "After I am worn out, and my lord is old, shall I have pleasure?" (Genesis 18:12)

.
In exactly the same sense, I am my wife’s lord. And if you have a husband, he is your lord. That surely does not mean we as husbands should be worshiped as Christ is or that we are equal to Him in any way. Paul is very clear about the proper relationship of husbands and wives in Ephesians 5. As Paul says:
.

”For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.” (Ephesians 5:23)

.
It’s a very similar concept to the fact that God is our ultimate Authority, of course, but there are of course many kinds of earthly authorities that we men and women come under as citizens, employees, etc.

As Paul also says:
.

”For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” (Romans 13:1-2)

.

I certainly am not suggesting that Christ is superior to the Father (to God), because I refer to Christ as my Lord.

You don’t mean to be, no. I didn’t say you were. But that is the effect, however unintended it may be.

Very puzzling how folks try to put words in others’ mouths in this forum...

Grace and peace to you.