Jehovah of the OT, is Jesus Christ of the New Testament

[Revelations won]

Jehovah of the Old Testament, is Jesus Christ of the New Testament

There are some today who do not understand or accept that Jehovah of the Old Testament is in fact Jesus Christ of the New Testament. My observation is that He is in very deed the great Jehovah, who was and is King of kings and Lord of lords, even the very Messiah, our lord and redeemer, the Holy One of Israel and the the author of our resurrection and the only name whereby man can be saved. This is my “take� on this topic. I welcome all would care to debate and provide your evidence to support contrary or opposing views. The following scriptures are presented as evidence supporting my “take� on the above subject:

Isaiah 43:3 “For I am the LORD thy God, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour:"

Isaiah 43:11 “I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour�

Isaiah 9:6-7 “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.
7
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.


Isaiah 25:8-9 “He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it.

9And it shall be said in that day, Lo, this is our God; we have waited for him, and he will save us: this is the LORD; we have waited for him, we will be glad and rejoice in his salvation.


Isaiah 26:19 “Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.�


Matthew 27:52-53 “And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

53And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.


Acts 4:10-12 “Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

11This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.

12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.


Exodus 3:14 God calls himself “I AM� “3 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.�


John 8:54-58 (Before Abraham was “I AM�. 54 “Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:
55
Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.
56
Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
57
Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was,
I AM.�


Exodus 6:3 “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.�


Deuteronomy 32:2-4 “My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:

3Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.

4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.�


1Corinthians 10:1-4 “Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;
2And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
3And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

4And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.�


Hebrews 5:8-9 “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;�


Psalms 118:22-24 “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.
23
This is the LORD'S doing; it is marvellous in our eyes.
24
This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it.�





Acts 4:10-12 “Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

11This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
12Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.�


John 10:1-11 “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber.
2
But he that entereth in by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
3
To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4
And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5
And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.
6
This parable spake Jesus unto them: but they understood not what things they were which he spake unto them.
7
Then said Jesus unto them again, Verily, verily, I say unto you, I am the door of the sheep.
8
All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.
9
I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.
10
The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.
11
I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.


Ephesians 2:18-20 “For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.
19Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;


Hebrews 1:1-4 “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2
Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3
Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
4
Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.�


Hebrews 2:8-11 “And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

9Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.�

John 1:1-5 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2
The same was in the beginning with God.
3
All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4
In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5
And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.�


Colossians 2:8-14 “Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

10And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
11In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;�

[tam]

Peace to you,

I have tried to cut out the things that are repetitive or circular.

I am a little taken aback that you said what you said, diminishing His words...

I did no such thing. If you received that message, you did so in error.

...so that you (or others before you) can insert your own meaning and interpretation onto his actions.

Never would I do such a thing. What Jesus said and did while on earth was crystal clear.

I am sure you did not mean to diminish His words, but that is certainly what it seems you (and others) are doing when you do not listen to what He SAID, and instead read something other than what He said into His actions.

He taught that He is the Son of God. I take Him at His word.

Sure. I agree. But we have to understand what it means to be the Son of God.

He meant just what He said. He is the Son of God. God (whose name is JAH) is His Father, the Begetter. Christ is the Begotten.

Why add to that?

...but there is no distinction regarding essence of the two.

What does that even mean? How are you defining essence?

essence (noun) -- the individual, real, or ultimate nature of a thing especially as opposed to its existence; the most significant element, quality, or aspect of a thing or person

Can you give an example (one for Christ and God, and another for humans)? And also explain how are you applying the word 'essence' to the claim (that Christ did not make) that Christ is [YHWH]?

Come on, Tammy. Come on. What I said is very clear. You don't accept it. We can leave it there, unfortunate as it may be.

You seem to be under the impression that everyone grew up in religion, learning "the language" of religion. Religions have their own internal languages and meanings to words that are taken for granted by members and not known by people outside their group. I did not grow up in religion. I do not have that background (I am glad for this, because it is harder to unlearn something than it is to learn from scratch, in my opinion). So when I ask you for examples, it is because I have no idea what you are trying to say and/or how what you are trying to say about 'essence' applies to the claim you are making.

But Christ was born of His Father. He is the firstborn of all creation. That is why He is a Son, and not a creation (such as an angel).

This, Tammy, is a contradiction. You are contradicting yourself and don't realize it. To speak of Christ being the firstborn in purely a physical sense is to make Christ created and thus part of creation. Christ is not created -- which you acknowledged earlier -- and therefore not part of creation:

Being born (as Christ was born, begotten) is not the same thing as being created (like an angel was created). There is no contradiction, except in (mis)understanding.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." (John 1:1-3, emphasis added)

"Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things and through Whom we exist..." (1 Corinthians 8:6)

"And all things are from God." (1 Corinthians 11:12)

Yes, now take this last bit that says everything is from God. That is true. FROM God - THROUGH - Christ. That right there differentiates between the two: God and Christ.

And I don't know how much more clear Paul could have been there at 1 Corinth 8:6, though you left out the first part of the quote, which states that there is One God: the Father.

"...yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.

So yes, all things come from God (who is the Father)... through Christ.

THROUGH Christ, but FROM God (who is the Father).

God (begat) the Son, through whom God created the universe (and all in it, with exception to Himself of course, and to His Son who was born from Him, begotten, not created).

especially the son of a monarch who would inherit ruling sovereignty. This is how the expression is used of David: "I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth" (Psalm 89:27), and as you surely know, David was actually the lastborn (physically speaking) of his brothers.

So it makes sense that he would be made the firstborn.

Christ IS the firstborn, the only begotten Son (of God).

You seem to be avoiding mine which is pretty simple: a union between Christ and [YHWH] does not make Christ out to be [YHWH].

Your point is too simple -- simplistic. This is on a lower level of course, but what does Paul say about marriage in Ephesians 5? Quoting from Genesis, he says, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." Right? So, now extrapolate that back up to the Father and Christ. Not that the Father and Christ are "married," of course -- that is beside the point. But a man and his wife, though two, are now one. The Father and Christ were always One, along with the Spirit.

One as in having union, sure. But not one as in each being an individual in the One God [YHWH].

Which takes us back to Deuteronomy 6:4...

Deuteronomy 6:4 was made clear because there were many other gods, including many other trios of gods, being worshiped. God (YHWH) was ONE God, not multiple, not three, not two, not four. ONE God.

Isaac shared characteristics and even made the same decisions in similar situations as his father, Abraham. But Isaac is not Abraham.

Agreed.

So follow the same logic. Jaheshua is not [YHWH].

I know you don't mean to, but you're making God and Christ out to be part of creation, which I know you agree they are not. That's the problem.

You have explained why you think I am doing this with Christ, but explain now how you think I am doing this with God?

Us being in Jaheshua, and Him being in us, does not make us Jaheshua. The same goes with Christ and His Father.

Well now this is interesting. I agree with your first statement here in one sense, and disagree with it in another. I agree that we are not literally Jesus; Jesus is Jesus... He is our Savior. However, the fact that we are in Christ and He in us is to say that in the Father's eyes, we actually are Christ, figuratively and spiritually speaking -- His righteousness is imputed to us and we are covered by His blood, which is then to say that the Father regards us as He regards Christ. So in that sense, I disagree.

I'll explain here what you missed in my reference to Ephesians 5. A man and his wife are one flesh. Yes, they are two different people, physically, of course, but the Father has made them figuratively and spiritually one (if it is truly a covenant marriage).

Regarding your second statement here, the same NOW applies to Christ and the Father. The only difference being that they (along with the Spirit) are one God in three Persons, three Persons in one God, and there was never a time when this was not the case. It has always been true from eternity past.

You say,

God and His Father are (along with the Spirit) one God in three Persons, three persons in One God.

You are using a man and his wife to demonstrate the above, so please complete the following sentence for me if you will:

A man and his wife are one "??" in two persons, two persons in one "??"

What goes in the quotations?

Because if you do not have a corresponding term, then it seems to me that you are the one comparing apples to oranges.

It does not even show that there are 2 (or 3) different persons all named [YHWH].

LOL! Is that your understanding of what I am saying? Hey, let me ask you this, then. Rhetorical in nature, of course; food for thought. Are we all, individually (all Christians, anyway), brides of Christ?

The Bride is not a name.

I didn't say it was... Wow. You're missing the point totally. Or avoiding it. Again. Or perhaps not thinking about it. The point is not complicated. We Christians are all individuals, of course, but there is only one bride of Christ. YHVH is made up of three Persons, but YHVH is still... One.

It is not a comparable example (apples and oranges as you said). Again, there is no issue with people being one (having union), or being one in Christ, or with Christ being one with the Father.

That does not make Christ out to be one of three persons in YHWH. YHWH is the name of the Father, the name of Being who is God (Most High).


Feel free to move on if you do not wish to continue, I am not attempting to force you to reply.

Grace and peace to you, Tammy.

And peace to you as well,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[PinSeeker]

I am sure you did not mean to diminish His words...

Then why did you accuse me of it, Tammy? You said (and I quote): "I am a little taken aback that you said what you said, diminishing His words, but that is certainly what it seems you (and others) are doing..."

You also accused me of not listening to what He said, saying (continuing that quote): "...when you do not listen to what He SAID..." I would turn that around to you and say that you apparently do not listen to ALL He said, or disregard or ignore some of what He said to fit with your own desired narrative. Whether this is intentional or unintentional is not really my concern, here, so I am making no real assertion either way in this respect; it just is what it is.

...and instead read something other than what He said into His actions.

And to this I'll just say that what he said and did is documented in far more than the specific passage we are talking about. When it comes to what Jesus said and/or did -- and to anything else in God's Word, cherry-picking and removing anything from its larger context cannot and should not be done. It may be unintentional, but that's indeed what you're doing.

He taught that He is the Son of God. I take Him at His word.

Sure. I agree. But we have to understand what it means to be the Son of God.

He meant just what He said. He is the Son of God.

But that's not all He said, right, Tammy? And that's the point. So we have to understand what it means to be the Son of God in light of all other Scriptures, Old Testament and New.

God (whose name is JAH) is His Father, the Begetter. Christ is the Begotten. Why add to that?

I will address this no further, except to say four things (which I have said before, and there are many others but I will limit it to three here for time's sake) and then making one further comment. You can disagree if you want, and I'm sure will, as you have many times before, but, respectfully, you quite are wrong in doing so:

• 1.) Jesus said and did many, many things that only God can do, including foretelling future events, controlling the weather, forgiving sins, and of course making restitution and atoning for all the sin of mankind and reconciling the Father's Elect to Him (accomplishing salvation), not to mention reassuming the glory He possessed with the Father from all eternity. Were Jesus not fully God, He could not have possibly done any of those things.
  
  2.) Jesus assigned to Himself in John 8:58 the Name the Father assigned Himself in answer to Moses's request to know God's name in Exodus 3:14.
  
  3.) In Psalm 23, David acknowledges the LORD (YHVH) as his Shepherd, and Jesus asserts in John 10 the He Himself is the Good Shepherd. Subsequently, as also documented in John 10, He said, "I and the Father are one."
  
  4.) Jesus, in John 6, proclaimed Himself the leader, protection and sustenance of God's Israel in the same manner as YHVH as the pillars of cloud (by day) and fire (by night), the bread of heaven, and water from the Rock in Exodus 13-17... and finally made this crystal clear in John 14 by saying, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
  
  COMMENT: It would have been far less credible for Him to have actually said, "Hey, guys, I am God." There have obviously been many that came after Him that have said such things, claiming to be Jesus/God and subsequently laughed off the stage, proving my point.

You seem to be under the impression that everyone grew up in religion, learning "the language" of religion... So when I ask you for examples, it is because I have no idea what you are trying to say and/or how what you are trying to say about 'essence' applies to the claim you are making.

LOL! Well, everyone is religious, possibly about many things... The question is, is this person or that person religious about the Right Thing or not. I understand the trouble you have with the word 'essence,' at least to some extent, but I think you have a good grasp on the English language. I gave you examples; look into it further on your own. What I would suggest to you is that the concept of essence goes hand in hand with and closely follows from the fact that Christ proceeds from the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father also and is sent by the Father in Christ's name. I think I have made that clear, really only because John 14 does.

But Christ was born of His Father. He is the firstborn of all creation. That is why He is a Son, and not a creation (such as an angel).

This, Tammy, is a contradiction. You are contradicting yourself and don't realize it. To speak of Christ being the firstborn in purely a physical sense is to make Christ created and thus part of creation. Christ is not created -- which you acknowledged earlier -- and therefore not part of creation:

Being born (as Christ was born, begotten) is not the same thing as being created (like an angel was created). There is no contradiction, except in (mis)understanding.

It's a contradiction begotten... ... of/by the misunderstanding. What I pointed out to you, Tammy, is that Christ being the "firstborn" of all creation does not literally mean that Christ was born first and then the rest of creation. Christ (again) proceeds from the Father; He was not born of Him. As I said:

• "...it is terribly wrong to think in physical terms here (regarding Colossians 1:15), as if Paul were asserting that the Son had a physical origin or was somehow created (the classic Aryan heresy) rather than existing eternally as the Son, with the Father and the Holy Spirit. What Paul is speaking of here are the rights and privileges of a firstborn son, especially the son of a monarch who would inherit ruling sovereignty. This is how the expression is used of David: 'I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth' (Psalm 89:27), and as you surely know, David was actually the lastborn (physically speaking) of his brothers (but was given the rights and privileges the oldest, Eliab). Jesus is the Greater David."

So, I understand your assertion that "being born is not the same thing as being created," and I agree, but that's the force of what you are really saying when you say "born" in the manner that you are using the word.

Yes, now take this last bit that says everything is from God. That is true. FROM God - THROUGH - Christ. That right there differentiates between the two: God and Christ.

I wholeheartedly agree with this, but my assertion is that the Father could not make anything through Christ without Christ proceeding from the Father and, in essence God also, the second Person of the triune Jehovah (YHVH). And further, likewise, the Father could not make anything natural except by His power via the third Person of the triune Jehovah (YHVH), His Holy Spirit, Who was also present at creation, as we see in Genesis 1:2 ("the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters").

And I don't know how much more clear Paul could have been there at 1 Corinth 8:6, though you left out the first part of the quote, which states that there is One God: the Father.

"...yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

Right, and I say that "one God" is not to be understood as exclusive of the Son (or the Spirit). Paul is here referring directly to Malachi 2:10, where Malachi poses two rhetorical questions: "Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us?" So what Paul says is not a denial of the triune nature of God, but an affirmation of it. Likewise -- in the same manner -- "one Lord" is not to be understood as exclusive to the Father (or the Spirit). Paul is in verse 6 refuting the position stated in verse 5 that there are many "gods" and many "lords." To say that Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:6 only applies "God" to the Father in exclusion of Christ (and/or the Spirit) and "Lord" to Christ in exclusion of the Father (and/or the Spirit) is to say Paul then contradicts himself in Colossians 1:19-20, where Paul writes, "For in (Christ) all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through (Christ) to reconcile to (the Father) all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of (Christ's) cross." Yet again, it's both/and, and not either/or.

So it makes sense that he would be made the firstborn. Christ IS the firstborn, the only begotten Son (of God).

Not in the manner that you suppose. See above.

You seem to be avoiding mine which is pretty simple: a union between Christ and [YHWH] does not make Christ out to be [YHWH].

Your point is too simple -- simplistic. This is on a lower level of course, but what does Paul say about marriage in Ephesians 5? Quoting from Genesis, he says, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." Right? So, now extrapolate that back up to the Father and Christ. Not that the Father and Christ are "married," of course -- that is beside the point. But a man and his wife, though two, are now one. The Father and Christ were always One, along with the Spirit.

One as in having union, sure. But not one as in each being an individual in the One God [YHWH].

Yet again, both/and.

Which takes us back to Deuteronomy 6:4...

Deuteronomy 6:4 was made clear because there were many other gods, including many other trios of gods, being worshiped. God (YHWH) was ONE God, not multiple, not three, not two, not four. ONE God.

I agree completely. But this does nothing to negate the fact that that One God -- YHVH -- exists eternally as three distinct Persons. See above.

I know you don't mean to, but you're making God and Christ out to be part of creation, which I know you agree they are not. That's the problem.

You have explained why you think I am doing this with Christ, but explain now how you think I am doing this with God?

Because you suppose the Father to have actually given physical birth to the Son.

You say, God and His Father are (along with the Spirit) one God in three Persons, three persons in One God. You are using a man and his wife to demonstrate the above, so please complete the following sentence for me if you will: A man and his wife are one "??" in two persons, two persons in one "??" What goes in the quotations? Because if you do not have a corresponding term, then it seems to me that you are the one comparing apples to oranges.

In both places, 'flesh.' Paul explains the answer to your query here himself: "In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body." And then, quoting from Genesis, he says, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." You knew the answer to that. Or... didn't you? Surely you did. Regardless, this is of course a spiritual reality, not a physical one. The same is true of Christ and the church, as Paul goes on to say, and on a much higher level of the triune Jehovah. Perfect love, union and fellowship. As Paul says, it is, right now, a profound mystery to us. But someday it will no longer be.

LOL! Is that your understanding of what I am saying? Hey, let me ask you this, then. Rhetorical in nature, of course; food for thought. Are we all, individually (all Christians, anyway), brides of Christ?

The Bride is not a name.

I didn't say it was... Wow. You're missing the point totally. Or avoiding it. Again. Or perhaps not thinking about it. The point is not complicated. We Christians are all individuals, of course, but there is only one bride of Christ. YHVH is made up of three Persons, but YHVH is still... One.

It is not a comparable example (apples and oranges as you said). Again, there is no issue with people being one (having union), or being one in Christ, or with Christ being one with the Father. That does not make Christ out to be one of three persons in YHWH. YHWH is the name of the Father, the name of Being who is God (Most High).

Yeah, okay. No, but okay.

Feel free to move on if you do not wish to continue, I am not attempting to force you to reply.
This sounds a bit like a plea...

Grace and peace to you, Tammy.

And peace to you as well,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy
[/quote]

[myth-one.com]

• 1.) Jesus said and did many, many things that only God can do, including foretelling future events, controlling the weather, forgiving sins, and of course making restitution and atoning for all the sin of mankind and reconciling the Father's Elect to Him (accomplishing salvation), not to mention reassuming the glory He possessed with the Father from all eternity. Were Jesus not fully God, He could not have possibly done any of those things.

The man Jesus Christ did not have power of His own to heal people, raise people from the dead, and perform other miracles.

One can know this to be true, because Jesus prayed!

If He was a God during His thirty-three years on the earth, He could have performed such feats directly with His own godly powers. Since this was not the case, He had to pray to God His Father to perform acts beyond His human capabilities. One of many examples, is the raising of Lazarus from the dead:

Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me. (John 11:41-42)

Jesus had already prayed to God the Father about raising Lazarus from the dead, and God had already answered His prayer! In principle, Jesus Christ had no more power than any Christian of today while He lived on the earth as a human. The power we all have, including Jesus while He was a human on the earth, is that of prayer:

Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. (Mark 11:24)

[onewithhim]

• 1.) Jesus said and did many, many things that only God can do, including foretelling future events, controlling the weather, forgiving sins, and of course making restitution and atoning for all the sin of mankind and reconciling the Father's Elect to Him (accomplishing salvation), not to mention reassuming the glory He possessed with the Father from all eternity. Were Jesus not fully God, He could not have possibly done any of those things.

The man Jesus Christ did not have power of His own to heal people, raise people from the dead, and perform other miracles.

One can know this to be true, because Jesus prayed!

If He was a God during His thirty-three years on the earth, He could have performed such feats directly with His own godly powers. Since this was not the case, He had to pray to God His Father to perform acts beyond His human capabilities. One of many examples, is the raising of Lazarus from the dead:

Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me. (John 11:41-42)

Jesus had already prayed to God the Father about raising Lazarus from the dead, and God had already answered His prayer! In principle, Jesus Christ had no more power than any Christian of today while He lived on the earth as a human. The power we all have, including Jesus while He was a human on the earth, is that of prayer:

Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. (Mark 11:24)

I agree. Jesus always prayed to the Father for support and power, so he could bring honor and glory to the Father.

[PinSeeker]

Not to lend relevancy or credence to the assertion that Jesus is not God because He prayed, but, well, did He pray before He calmed the sea? No. Did He pray when He turned the water to wine? No. Did he pray when He multiplied the fish and the bread and fed over 20,000 people? No. Did He pray when He pronounced the forgiveness of sins? No.

Maybe you all know Isaiah 35 as I do. It is one of my favorite passages in Scripture. Isaiah is speaking of what God will do for those He saves: "Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped; then shall the lame man leap like a deer, and the tongue of the mute sing for joy." So, continuing, did Jesus pray when He healed the lame? No. Did He pray when He made the blind to see? No. Did He pray when He healed the mute man? No. Did He pray when He made the deaf to hear? No.

The list goes on.

But yes, Jesus prayed. And He prays now for us, as He is seated at the Father's right hand, making constant intercession on our behalf before the Father. This does nothing to undermine in any way, much less refute, the fact that Jesus is God, but only -- "only," as if it were some mere thing -- that He always was, is, and will always be in perfect submission to the Father's will. The fact that during His life here on earth the Son took on a human nature and made Himself subservient to the Father in no way denies the deity of the Son, nor does it diminish His essential equality with the Father. The “greatness” spoken of in John 14:28 relates to role (position in the Godhead), not to essence.

Grace and peace to all.

[PinSeeker]

Jesus always prayed to the Father for support and power, so he could bring honor and glory to the Father.

Not always, as noted above. Not even close.

But yes, everything He did was to glorify the Father; one of the many things He did was to show us that this is our chief end.

But as you well know, He also prayed -- with absolute confidence that the Father would grant it, so much so that it can be read as a command of sorts -- for the Father to glorify Him in the Father's own presence with the glory that He had with the Father before the world existed. Right? Well, yes, right. And as I have said, Jesus knew full well what the LORD said in Isaiah 42:8, that "I am the LORD; that is My name; My glory I give to no other..." Now, was He mistaken about possessing the same glory as the Father before the world existed? Of course not. And even beyond that, why would Jesus have prayed for something -- even commanded it -- that, if He were not God He would have known He would not be granted? He would not have.

Jesus is the second Person of the triune Jehovah (YHVH).

Grace and peace to you.

[myth-one.com]

Jesus always prayed to the Father for support and power, so he could bring honor and glory to the Father.

Not always, as noted above. Not even close.

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: . . . (Matthew 11:27)

[tam]

Peace to you,

I am sure you did not mean to diminish His words...

Then why did you accuse me of it, Tammy? You said (and I quote): "I am a little taken aback that you said what you said, diminishing His words, but that is certainly what it seems you (and others) are doing..."

You answered the question yourself in what you quote (re: the bold and underlined).

You also accused me of not listening to what He said, saying (continuing that quote): "...when you do not listen to what He SAID..."

Yes, that is part of the original quote (but that is certainly what it seems you and others are doing when you do not listen to what He SAID, but instead...).

I would turn that around to you and say that you apparently do not listen to ALL He said, or disregard or ignore some of what He said to fit with your own desired narrative. Whether this is intentional or unintentional is not really my concern, here, so I am making no real assertion either way in this respect; it just is what it is.

But this is not true, Pinseeker, or you could provide an example of something He said (that I am not listening to). But as it is, the only thing I am not listening to is something you (and/or others and/or religions) have read into/interpreted what is written.

...and instead read something other than what He said into His actions.

And to this I'll just say that what he said and did is documented in far more than the specific passage we are talking about.

Of course.

When it comes to what Jesus said and/or did -- and to anything else in God's Word, cherry-picking and removing anything from its larger context cannot and should not be done. It may be unintentional, but that's indeed what you're doing.

A - Christ is God's Word. Not the bible.

B - what you just said is exactly what jws say in the same situation to someone who objects to their theology (same as many other sects). You all say the same thing: you have to take the bible as a whole, don't cherry-pick, if you did take it as a whole you would see that we are teaching what is actually true, what the bible REALLY says.

I am going to remain with Christ and listen to His word. I don't care what any other religion, sect, religious leader, or persons claims the "bible says". I care what Christ said (and says).

He is the One to whom God told us to listen yes?

"This is my Son, my Chosen One. Listen to Him."

He taught that He is the Son of God. I take Him at His word.

Sure. I agree. But we have to understand what it means to be the Son of God.

He meant just what He said. He is the Son of God.

But that's not all He said, right, Tammy? And that's the point. So we have to understand what it means to be the Son of God in light of all other Scriptures, Old Testament and New.

Or we could just understand what it means in the Light (the light that is Christ). That is what I will do, at least.

God (whose name is JAH) is His Father, the Begetter. Christ is the Begotten. Why add to that?

I will address this no further, except to say four things

Now that's funny, lol. Hopefully you see the humor in that as well.

• 1.) Jesus said and did many, many things that only God can do,

Who says only God can do them?

Who says God did not make it so that His Son can also do as He does?

including foretelling future events,

Except for one (that we know of): Christ did not know the day or hour that He would return. God knew, but Christ did not. He may know now; the Father may have told Him after He returned to the Father in heaven. But at the time He said those words, Christ did not know this. God knew, Christ did not.

controlling the weather, forgiving sins, and of course making restitution and atoning for all the sin of mankind and reconciling the Father's Elect to Him (accomplishing salvation), not to mention reassuming the glory He possessed with the Father from all eternity. Were Jesus not fully God, He could not have possibly done any of those things.

Again, says who?

As others have stated, His power and His authority were given to Him by God (His Father).

2.) Jesus assigned to Himself in John 8:58 the Name the Father assigned Himself in answer to Moses's request to know God's name in Exodus 3:14.

No. Christ did not name Himself "I AM" - that is something people are again reading into the text - simply because He said that He is before Abraham. And that was the context of the discussion.

Question: "You are not yet 50 years old and you have seen Abraham?"

Answer: "Before Abraham was born, I am."

The sentence does not even make sense if you take the words "I am" and turn them into a name. "Before Abraham was born, Name."

3.) In Psalm 23, David acknowledges the LORD (YHVH) as his Shepherd, and Jesus asserts in John 10 the He Himself is the Good Shepherd. Subsequently, as also documented in John 10, He said, "I and the Father are one."

You are going to find things that describe both Christ and His Father, because Christ does as His Father has taught Him, speaks as his Father has told Him. He is also the heir, so there are many titles that apply to the Son, just as they apply to the Father. Same as with a human father and son. If a human father is King, then when his son ascends to the throne, that son will be King as well.

Lord can be used to describe both Christ and God. King can be used to describe both Christ and God. Holy can be used to describe both Christ and God (though only JAH is the MOST Holy, while His Son is the Holy; just as only JAH is the Almighty while His Son is the Mighty). Both Christ and God are spirit.

There are some descriptions that are necessarily just for Christ: the Holy One of God. The Word of God. The Son of God. The Chosen One of God.

4.) Jesus, in John 6, proclaimed Himself the leader, protection and sustenance of God's Israel in the same manner as YHVH as the pillars of cloud (by day) and fire (by night), the bread of heaven, and water from the Rock in Exodus 13-17... and finally made this crystal clear in John 14 by saying, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."

Yes, of course Christ is these things. If the Son does as the Father does, why would Christ not also protect and lead Israel?

(As for Christ being the Life - yes, He is indeed, the TREE of Life in the Garden of Eden, from whom Adam and Eve could have - originally - reached out to eat and then live forever.)

COMMENT: It would have been far less credible for Him to have actually said, "Hey, guys, I am God." There have obviously been many that came after Him that have said such things, claiming to be Jesus/God and subsequently laughed off the stage, proving my point.[/list]

Yet you think people understood that this is what He meant - and yet for some reason that did not get him laughed off the stage?

(This reasoning kinda contradicts your "I AM" argument, doesn't it?)

And I don't know how much more clear Paul could have been there at 1 Corinth 8:6, though you left out the first part of the quote, which states that there is One God: the Father.

"...yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

Right, and I say that "one God" is not to be understood as exclusive of the Son (or the Spirit).

Paul makes it exclusive to the Father right here in this passage.

Paul is here referring directly to Malachi 2:10, where Malachi poses two rhetorical questions: "Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us?" So what Paul says is not a denial of the triune nature of God, but an affirmation of it.

There is absolute no 'triune nature' in view in either of those two passages.

That is something you and others are reading into the text, based on what you have been taught to see, and based on an erroneous teaching of what 'one' means when referring to One God.

Likewise -- in the same manner -- "one Lord" is not to be understood as exclusive to the Father (or the Spirit).

Paul makes it exclusive to the Son right here in this passage.

Paul is in verse 6 refuting the position stated in verse 5 that there are many "gods" and many "lords."

Paul is not refuting the position that there are many 'gods' and 'lords'. He is emphasizing, BUT FOR US, there is One God (the Father) and One Lord (the Son).

"For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many so-called gods and lords), 6yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist. And there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we exist. 7But not everyone has this knowledge.

To say that Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:6 only applies "God" to the Father in exclusion of Christ (and/or the Spirit) and "Lord" to Christ in exclusion of the Father (and/or the Spirit)...

That is exactly what Paul said.

.

..is to say Paul then contradicts himself in Colossians 1:19-20, where Paul writes, "For in (Christ) all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through (Christ) to reconcile to (the Father) all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of (Christ's) cross." Yet again, it's both/and, and not either/or.

Paul is not contradicting himself. The error is in whatever you are seeing here in Colossians. Paul is very clear in the Corinthians verse, and even in Colossians, Paul makes clear that God IS the Father (verse 3). That is the same thing Christ taught.

God = the Father (whose name is JAH)
Christ - the Son (whose name is Jaheshua, and who is the Chosen One of JAH)

Just because the 'fullness' of God dwells in Christ does not mean that Christ IS God (YHWH). Christ also dwells in us (by means of holy spirit, the breath/blood/seed of JAH) and we in Him (as part of His Body).

Which takes us back to Deuteronomy 6:4...

Deuteronomy 6:4 was made clear because there were many other gods, including many other trios of gods, being worshiped. God (YHWH) was ONE God, not multiple, not three, not two, not four. ONE God.

I agree completely. But this does nothing to negate the fact that that One God -- YHVH -- exists eternally as three distinct Persons. See above.

If you agree completely, then there is no reason for you to try and use that verse as if it proves the trinity. (It actually speaks against such a concept, but at the very least, even you can see that it is not speaking OF a trinity.)

I know you don't mean to, but you're making God and Christ out to be part of creation, which I know you agree they are not. That's the problem.

You have explained why you think I am doing this with Christ, but explain now how you think I am doing this with God?

Because you suppose the Father to have actually given physical birth to the Son.

Well it would be spiritual (not physical) since God and His Son are spirit.

How would that make God out to be part of creation?

You say, God and His Father are (along with the Spirit) one God in three Persons, three persons in One God. You are using a man and his wife to demonstrate the above, so please complete the following sentence for me if you will: A man and his wife are one "??" in two persons, two persons in one "??" What goes in the quotations? Because if you do not have a corresponding term, then it seems to me that you are the one comparing apples to oranges.

In both places, 'flesh.'

So you're using "God" in the same way that you are using "flesh", in this example?

Paul explains the answer to your query here himself: "In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body." And then, quoting from Genesis, he says, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." You knew the answer to that. Or... didn't you? Surely you did.

Yes of course. But I don't see how that is supposed to prove the trinity (or that Christ IS YHWH).

Regardless, this is of course a spiritual reality, not a physical one. The same is true of Christ and the church, as Paul goes on to say, and on a much higher level of the triune Jehovah. Perfect love, union and fellowship. As Paul says, it is, right now, a profound mystery to us. But someday it will no longer be.

No, the profound mystery had nothing to do with the concept of a 'trinity'. The profound mystery is that that Paul was referring to Christ and the Church, rather than just a husband and his wife.

After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Feel free to move on if you do not wish to continue, I am not attempting to force you to reply.
This sounds a bit like a plea...

It was just in response to you having said, 'enough'.


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

[PinSeeker]

I am going to remain with Christ and listen to His word. I don't care what any other religion, sect, religious leader, or persons claims the "bible says". I care what Christ said (and says).

Right, and that's the problem. You're... mis-hearing.

He is the One to whom God told us to listen yes? "This is my Son, my Chosen One. Listen to Him."

Sure. Okay, so why then do you (apparently) not listen to Him when He says, "These things I have spoken to you while I am still with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you." (John 14:26)

I will address this no further, except to say four things

Now that's funny, lol. Hopefully you see the humor in that as well.

Yeah originally it was only two. But a couple other things occurred to me also that bore mentioning. Actually, what I meant was that I would address it there, which I did, but no further.

Jesus said and did many, many things that only God can do,

Who says only God can do them?

Uh, God Himself. LOL! Well, the prophets of the Old Testament, who, as prophets, relayed God's words to His people. Oh wait, that's right, you only listen to Christ... I mean that's good that you listen to Christ; at least you're listening to one of the Persons of the triune YHVH... Anyway, this is why the Jews wanted to stone Jesus. They knew exactly what He was doing and saying -- things that only God can do (all the things I mentioned, in addition to claiming to be God). Do you think they were merely mistaken?

Anyway... Who says anyone other than God can forgive sins? Hopefully no one. Oh, we can forgive each other on a human level, but that's a far different thing. No one but God can forgive sins. Who says anyone other than God can judge (come on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory)? Hopefully no one. But of course Christ will do so at the end of the age. Who says anyone other than God can possess the same glory of the Father? Hopefully no one. Yet Jesus did (and does now, as it was restored to Him) even before anything was yet created. I could go on, but that's sufficient.

Who says God did not make it so that His Son can also do as He does?

LOL! I agree with the plausibility of that question, but if God did such a thing, that would imply that there was a time in eternity past where that was not the case. Which... is not the case.

including foretelling future events,

Except for one (that we know of): Christ did not know the day or hour that He would return. God knew, but Christ did not. He may know now; the Father may have told Him after He returned to the Father in heaven. But at the time He said those words, Christ did not know this. God knew, Christ did not.

Yes, and this is no real point at all. Not insignificant, by any means, but it does absolutely nothing to refute the fact that Christ is the second Person of the triune Jehovah. Christ did not know the will of the Father concerning, specifically, the time of His return. Yes, while He was on earth, having put aside the glory that He had with the Father from eternity past and His equality with the Father for a time, emptying Himself and taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, He did not know the time of His return. But He did know that He would be returning...

controlling the weather, forgiving sins, and of course making restitution and atoning for all the sin of mankind and reconciling the Father's Elect to Him (accomplishing salvation), not to mention reassuming the glory He possessed with the Father from all eternity. Were Jesus not fully God, He could not have possibly done any of those things.

Again, says who?

LOL! See above. Well, I'll answer:

1.) We know that God shares His glory with no one, yet Jesus reassumed the glory He possessed with the Father before anything was made. I guess you may be suggesting that Jesus's prayer went unanswered or was rejected, maybe.

2.) As far as controlling the weather, well, read Psalm 107, specifically verses 23 through 32.

3.) As for atoning for all sin and reconciling the Father's Elect, we know this is true from the covenant God made with Abram in Genesis 15, where He put Abram into a deep sleep, and the smoking fire pot and flaming torch passed between the animal halves, signifying that God Himself would fulfill both His end of the covenant and Abrams -- death -- if the covenant was not kept perfectly by both parties.

Jesus assigned to Himself in John 8:58 the Name the Father assigned Himself in answer to Moses's request to know God's name in Exodus 3:14.

No. Christ did not name Himself "I AM" - that is something people are again reading into the text - simply because He said that He is before Abraham. And that was the context of the discussion.

Question: "You are not yet 50 years old and you have seen Abraham?"

Answer: "Before Abraham was born, I am."

Okay, stop there. The short answer is yes (in response to your 'no'). Kudos to you for actually writing it, but yes, Jesus's answer was, "Before Abraham was, I am." You would do well to take proper note of the different tenses of the two verbs, there ('was' and 'am'). Why did Jesus, to Whom you claim to listen (and hear), not say "Before Abraham was, I was"? You will probably wave that away; do what you will, but I would admonish you to not do so.

The sentence does not even make sense if you take the words "I am" and turn them into a name. "Before Abraham was born, Name."

So continuing with this last sentence, The sentence does not make sense if you do not take it as the name God assigned Himself in answer to Moses (in Exodus 3:14).

In Psalm 23, David acknowledges the LORD (YHVH) as his Shepherd, and Jesus asserts in John 10 the He Himself is the Good Shepherd. Subsequently, as also documented in John 10, He said, "I and the Father are one."

You are going to find things that describe both Christ and His Father, because Christ does as His Father has taught Him, speaks as his Father has told Him. He is also the heir, so there are many titles that apply to the Son, just as they apply to the Father. Same as with a human father and son.

And you are going to continue, as far as I can tell, to deny what is right in front of you, even Christ's own words. Hey, it just occurred to me, too: He said He was the Good Shepherd, right? Well, He also said there is no one good except God, right? Chew on that one a bit; it shouldn't take long.

If a human father is King, then when his son ascends to the throne, that son will be King as well.

Right but the human father would have to have died. Or abdicated, I guess. Good point. Yes, there is only one King. And in the case of God, He exists in three Persons.

Jesus, in John 6, proclaimed Himself the leader, protection and sustenance of God's Israel in the same manner as YHVH as the pillars of cloud (by day) and fire (by night), the bread of heaven, and water from the Rock in Exodus 13-17... and finally made this crystal clear in John 14 by saying, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."

Yes, of course Christ is these things. If the Son does as the Father does, why would Christ not also protect and lead Israel?

A mere man would not be able to lead protect and lead Israel, providing for them and even being their very sustenance, as God did in their wandering in the desert. Not even King David, the man after God's heart, was able to do that.

COMMENT: It would have been far less credible for Him to have actually said, "Hey, guys, I am God." There have obviously been many that came after Him that have said such things, claiming to be Jesus/God and subsequently laughed off the stage, proving my point.[/list]

Yet you think people understood that this is what He meant - and yet for some reason that did not get him laughed off the stage? (This reasoning kinda contradicts your "I AM" argument, doesn't it?)

Well they didn't think he was crazy, Tam, did they? They were angry and thought He was committing blasphemy, and rather than just dismiss Him as nuts (laugh Him off the stage), they wanted to stone Him according to God's Law. So no. No, it doesn't contradict anything I said.

Paul is not refuting the position that there are many 'gods' and 'lords'. He is emphasizing, BUT FOR US, there is One God (the Father) and One Lord (the Son).

Yes he is. The implication is that others believe there are many gods and many lords. Which, you know, all you have to do is read any decent history book and know that was very true in those days. The phrase "but for us" -- thanks for emphasizing it -- indicates very clearly that he is contrasting "us" with another group of folks (unbelievers).

To say that Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:6 only applies "God" to the Father in exclusion of Christ (and/or the Spirit) and "Lord" to Christ in exclusion of the Father (and/or the Spirit)...

That is exactly what Paul said.

Nope. The Father is both God and Lord, and Jesus is both God and Lord. And Paul doesn't specifically say it here, but it absolutely follows that the Holy Spirit is both God and Lord, too.

..is to say Paul then contradicts himself in Colossians 1:19-20, where Paul writes, "For in (Christ) all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through (Christ) to reconcile to (the Father) all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of (Christ's) cross." Yet again, it's both/and, and not either/or.

Paul is not contradicting himself. The error is in whatever you are seeing here in Colossians. Paul is very clear in the Corinthians verse, and even in Colossians, Paul makes clear that God IS the Father (verse 3). That is the same thing Christ taught.

Well, I agree, of course, that Paul is not contradicting himself, but that is the implication of your position. I also agree that Paul makes clear that God is the Father, and/or the Father is God. And, I agree that that is what Christ taught. But none of this does anything at all to refute the assertion that Christ is also God. On Colossians in particular, how can you see what Paul says there ("...in (Christ) all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell...) and still deny that Jesus is as much a part of the Godhead that the Father is is mystifying. But I do realize that it is the Spirit Who gives us this discernment.

You say, God and His Father are (along with the Spirit) one God in three Persons, three persons in One God. You are using a man and his wife to demonstrate the above, so please complete the following sentence for me if you will: A man and his wife are one "??" in two persons, two persons in one "??" What goes in the quotations? Because if you do not have a corresponding term, then it seems to me that you are the one comparing apples to oranges.

In both places, 'flesh.'

So you're using "God" in the same way that you are using "flesh", in this example?

Um... well sort of, but really it's about numbers. Where the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are together one God, man and wife are together one flesh, one person (spiritually speaking, not physically, of course).

Paul explains the answer to your query here himself: "In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body." And then, quoting from Genesis, he says, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." You knew the answer to that. Or... didn't you? Surely you did.

Yes of course. But I don't see how that is supposed to prove the trinity (or that Christ IS YHWH).

It attests to the fact that God is more than one person. We are relational beings because God is relational (among the Persons of the trinity) even within Himself. The idea of being created in God's image can easily be linked here. We are relational beings. It all goes together.

Regardless, this is of course a spiritual reality, not a physical one. The same is true of Christ and the church, as Paul goes on to say, and on a much higher level of the triune Jehovah. Perfect love, union and fellowship. As Paul says, it is, right now, a profound mystery to us. But someday it will no longer be.

No, the profound mystery had nothing to do with the concept of a 'trinity'. The profound mystery is that that Paul was referring to Christ and the Church, rather than just a husband and his wife.

After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

The conjunction there is 'and,' Tammy, not 'but,' as if Paul were presenting a contrast. "This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church." So what Paul is saying there applies to the husband and wife, but also (albeit on a greater level) to Christ and the church. Our marriages -- husband and wife -- are models of and indications to (should be anyway) the much greater reality, mysterious as it is, of the marriage between Christ and His church. My goodness.


Grace and peace to you.

[PinSeeker]

Jesus always prayed to the Father for support and power, so he could bring honor and glory to the Father.

Not always, as noted above. Not even close.

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: . . . (Matthew 11:27)

Well that's a non sequitur, myth-one. What Jesus is saying in this passage in Matthew 11 has to do with salvation, and access to the Father, ultimately. Jesus is saying He is the only way to God. "...no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him." On the other hand, onewithhim said Jesus always prayed for support and power. Well, not always, as I demonstrated. You're contribution here to that exchange has nothing to do with that. Thanks, though. And grace and peace to you.