Dr. Brown Talks with Dr. James White (Part Two)

[Download MP3]

Dr. Brown continues his discussion with leading Christian apologist Dr. James White, also taking listener calls on a wide range of subjects. Listen live here 2-4 pm EST, and call into the show at (866) 348 7884 with your questions and comments.

 

Hour 1:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Pray for the Muslim people, your friends, your neighbors, your coworkers. Pray for them around the world that God would open their eyes and that they would discover who Jesus really is.

Hour 2:

Dr. Brown’s Bottom Line: Whatever you do, whether you eat or drink, do it all to the glory of God.

SPECIAL OFFER! THIS WEEK ONLY!

This week, when you give a donation of any size, we’ll send you 5 of Dr. Brown’s most popular sermons on CD! Postage Paid! (US ONLY). Order Online Here!

Other Resources:

Dr. James White Is Guest Host!

From the Quran to the Pentagon

Dr. Brown Interviews Dr. James White on the Reliability of the Text of the Scriptures

63 Comments
  1. About midway through, a good discussion about their friendship despite theological differences. Also discuss strange fire and Benny Hinn appearance.

  2. I will never be able to get past White does not believe in the will of man given by God. If he did not choose to follow after Christ he is not saved. He can distort that fact any way he wants to and know the Bible quite well but still be wrong. I am surprised Brown is accepting of something which is such an eternal issue. The bibles definition of a Christian how do you know them. White does not fit the bill. Speak in tonques, heal the sick… the disciples required proof why do we not today?

  3. All the believers of the circumcision who had come with Peter were astonished, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in other tongues and magnifying God. Then Peter continued, “Can anyone forbid water for baptizing these, who have received the Holy Spirit as we have?” So he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.
    Acts 10:45-48 MEV

  4. Brannon,

    I would say that in the vast majority of Calvinists, when they believed, were not believers in Calvinism. That usually comes after when they become trained in doctrine from a Calvinistic school of thought.

    So initially most believed that they placed their faith in Christ. It is only after typically that they then look back upon their faith and believe that it was not themselves that made a choice enabled by God, but God who irresitable made them believe.

    In both scenarios, there is true belief, it just boils down later to a difference in thought of how we came to believe, whether God makes us believe, or enables us to believe.

    So the primary thing to keep in sight is that there was true belief, the aftermatter is how we came to belief.

    Also, the apostles never required speaking in tongues, or healing the sick as proof of salvation.

  5. These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them, and confirmed the word by the signs that followed.
    Mark 16:17, 20 NASB

  6. It happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus, and found some disciples. He said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said to him, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.” Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying. There were in all about twelve men.
    Acts 19:1-7 NASB

  7. Brannon,

    Please note that in the passage you quoted Paul baptized the Ephesian disciples before they spoke in tongues. The signs follow those that believe…not necessarily immediately upon belief. Who knows how long they were believers before this incident? I have not heard of a case where a 5 minute old believer has cast out a demon. It may have happened sometime, but it is probably not the rule.

    I do think that speaking in tongues is available to all believers that have been baptized in the Holy Spirit and that it is the only scriptural sign that proves such a baptism. That said, there can be those that are baptized with the Spirit that have not spoken in tongues…we just have no sign that it is so.

    The disciples did cast out demons before being baptized with the Spirit, but they did not speak in tongues before it. They laid hands on the sick and saw them recover before the baptism with the Spirit. These are not signs of being baptized with the Spirit, but they still happen in believer’s lives. Certainly there are other gifts of the Spirit, but speaking in tongues is singled out as a sign to those that believe not. Peter and those that accompanied him knew that the Gentiles had received the baptism with the Spirit when they heard them speak in tongues. it seems that they would have remained as those that “believed not” that the gentiles could be saved if this sign gift had not taken place.

    1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.

    It is a sign gift and it is for edifying oneself. Only with the gift of interpretation of tongues does it become a gift that edifies the body of Messiah. So it seems that it is initially a sign and then a personal thing for spiritual edification. Paul equates it with praying with the Spirit.

    1Co 14:4 He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that prophesieth edifieth the church.

    1Co 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.
    14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
    15 What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also.

    Jude also mentions it as a personal edification gift.

    Jude 1:20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost,
    21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

    Shalom

  8. The thing I most appreciated today from this broadcast was the unity and diversity shown by these gentlemen. They have disagreements but respect each other as brothers, and modelled how the strange fire debarcal could of been avoided to some degree. These fine brothers listened to each other, used scripture, teological tenets, hermeneutical interpretation, tradition and experience back their positions. Thank God, for their example. It grieves me see the division caused by the strange fire conference. I understand their concerns, but in Acts when there was a major shift causing a rift in the church, they gathered together and discussed the issue from all perspectives, not from one position. If we plan to use scripture to critique each other then let’s follow the teachings of Jesus, did he not say if you have a problem with a brother, go to him and discuss the issue, not throw mud at him from a distance. The only thing achieved by throwing mud is you both get dirty and lose a lot of ground in the process. Once again thank you Dr Brown, and Dr White for emphasising the importance of BIblical truth and genuinely loving your fellow Christian brother who as Paul says, also has the Spirit of God in dwelling them. My final point is we must remember when we speak to or of a brother the third person of the Trinity is in them. So, when we speak to them we are also speaking to Christ in them. Let us follow James recommendation, be quick to hear slow to speak, tame our tongues and examine our action, attitudes and motives for God is watching. If so, God was highly exalted in this series of broadcasts.

  9. Jesus is not God or “Yahweh”

    According to the church, Jesus is god in the “OT” . Their primary proof text is Psalm 102:25-27 and it’s NT counterpart Heb 1:8-12.

    James White (and other Trinitarians) uses these two proof texts as a means to convince JW’s and Unitarians that Jesus is not only “God” but “Yahweh”.

    Psalm 102:25-27
    25 In the beginning you (LORD or YHVH) laid the foundations of the earth,
    and the heavens are the work of your hands.
    26 They will perish, but you remain;
    they will all wear out like a garment.
    Like clothing you will change them
    and they will be discarded.
    27 But you remain the same,
    and your years will never end.

    Hebrews 1:8-10

    8 But about the Son he says, …..
    10 He also says,
    “In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
    and the heavens are the work of your hands.
    11 They will perish, but you remain;
    they will all wear out like a garment.
    12 You will roll them up like a robe;
    like a garment they will be changed.
    But you remain the same,
    and your years will never end.”

    Thus, White will point out the son is the subject of Heb 1 and YHVH is the subject of Ps 102, therefore Jesus is not only “god” but is “Yahweh”.

    Why this fails using their own theology:

    A) Jesus nearly always refers to G-d as “father”. A couple of times as “My God”.
    The problem for the church, is that YHVH is called “father” or YHVH Himself refers to Himself as “father” in Tanakh (OT).

    Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD, you are our father; we are the clay, and you our potter; and we all are the work of your hand.

    Jer 31:9 They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters in a straight way, wherein they shall not stumble: for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.

    Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD, you are our father; we are the clay, and you our potter; and we all are the work of your hand.

    Isa 63:16 Doubtless you are our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: you, O LORD, are our father, our redeemer; your name is from everlasting.

    Deu 32:6 Do you therefore requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he your father that has bought you? has he not made you, and established you?

    1Ch 29:10 Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be you, LORD God of Israel our father, for ever and ever.

    Jer 3:19 But I said, How shall I put you among the children, and give you a pleasant land, a goodly heritage of the hosts of nations? and I said, you shall call me, My father; and shall not turn away from me.

    Mal 1:6 A son honors his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is my honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear? says the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And you say, Wherein have we despised your name?

    Pro 3:12 For whom the LORD loves he corrects; even as a father, the son in whom he delights.

    Psa 103:13 Like as a father pities his children, so the LORD pities them that fear him.

    The church claims in their theology that there is one “God” but in three “persons” and specifically that the father is not the son.

    So, both Jesus (allegedly “god the son”) and the father (allegedly “god the father”) can not be the same personage of “father” or make the claim to be the same person.

    In other words….Hebrews claims Jesus is YHVH but the “OT” makes it clear that YHVH is “father”…and Jesus makes it clear, his god is called “father”. Therefore, Jesus can not be father and therefore the book of Hebrews is fatally flawed and church dogma is fatally flawed.

    B) Never once in the Tanakh (OT) does YHVH make any reference to a personage known as “god the son” . There are numerous “sons of G-d” but never a “god the son”.

    C) And regarding His name, G-d said of YHVH or LORD: Exo 3 “ The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is My memorial-name to all generations.

    This is not merely a reference to YHVH having the property or nature of “God”, something that a future church could claim as merely something that can be shared among three personages in a trinity. This name, YHVH is the final revelation of His name that reveals His will through Torah and Tanakh.

    It is His name. His primary revealed name.

    It is this name, YHVH that is called father. No other personage can use or adopt this name ever. So even using the definition of the church and it’s trinity, Jesus can not be called YHVH since the OT makes it clear…that is the father and no one else.

  10. Here is one in conjunction.

    John 12:39-43

    39 For this cause they could not believe, for that Isaiah said again,

    40 He hath blinded their eyes, and he hardened their heart; Lest they should see with their eyes, and perceive with their heart, And should turn, And I should heal them.

    41 These things said Isaiah, because he saw his glory; and he spake of him.

    42 Nevertheless even of the rulers many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess it, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:

    43 for they loved the glory that is of men more than the glory that is of God.

    The context of John 12 above is Jesus. When did Isaiah see Jesus’s glory cited in verse 41? John takes us back to Isaiah 6 when he quotes verse 10:

    Isaiah 6:10

    10 Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they sea with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn again, and be healed.

    And prior to this we see who Isaiah see’s in glory:

    Isaiah 6:1-5

    1 In the year that king Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and his train filled the temple.

    2 Above him stood the seraphim: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly.

    3 And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah (YHVH) of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.

    4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke.

    5 Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, Jehovah (YHVH) of hosts.

    If you asked Isaiah “Who did you see?” he would answer, “YHVH”. And if you asked John, “Who did Isaiah see?” he would answer, “Jesus”.

    The one sitting upon the throne, was Jesus. And interestingly, in the Greek Septuagint, which the Apostles mostly quoted from says at the end of Isaiah 6:1 “and I saw his glory.” John made sure that his audience knew exactly what he was referring to.

  11. Thank you Benjamin for furthering my argument. Both the writer of John and Hebrews make the same fatal error. Jesus can not possibly be YHVH because YHVH Himself claims numerous times in Tanakh (OT) to be the Father. Jesus called his God father. They both can not be the Father.

    The church is in error. Worshiping Jesus is idolatry of the highest order.

  12. Ahh, so I see this ultimately ends up requiring a completely different discussion. But along the same vein as above I find this one interesting.

    Does Jesus share of any YHVH’s titles?

    The first verse is Revelation 1:8. It reads, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, saith the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty”. What does Alpha and Omega mean? “The beginning and the end.” How many Alphas and Omegas can you have? “Only one.” There is only one Alpha and Omega.

    Now turn to Revelation 22:12-13 which says, “Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to each man according as his work is. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end”. Ask yourself, “Who do you say the Alpha and Omega is?” Now take a careful look. The Alpha and Omega in verse twelve is coming quickly. Let’s see who is speaking in verse twelve.

    Look at verse sixteen, “I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright, the morning star.” It is Jesus speaking in verse twelve. If there is any doubt go to verse 20 which says, “He who testifieth these things saith, Yea: I come quickly. Amen: come, Lord Jesus.” So it is clear that the Alpha and the Omega in verse twelve is Jesus. Here is a strong proof text that Jesus is God because both YHVH and Jesus are called the Alpha and the Omega.

    Another to consider:

    Isaiah 44:6 says, “Thus saith Jehovah (YHVH), the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah (YHVH) of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God.” Ask yourself how many firsts and lasts can you have? It’s obvious to anyone you can only have one first and one last. Who is the first and the last? You will say, “YHVH.” Now turn to Revelation 1:17-18 which says, “And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as one dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying, Fear not; I am the first and the last, and the Living one; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades.” Who is speaking here? Obviously, it is Jesus for He died but is now alive, and guess what? He is called the First and the Last. Here again we see Jesus is YHVH.

    He shares other titles used exclusively for YHVH as well.

  13. Any verse or verses in the NT that appropriate the name of YHVH for Jesus is wrong and in fact idolatrous and heretical. Again, lets look at who claims the personage of father in the OT.

    Isa 64:8 But now, O LORD (YHVH), you are our father; we are the clay, and you our potter; and we all are the work of your hand.

    Isa 63:16 Doubtless you are our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: you, O LORD (YHVH), are our father, our redeemer; your name is from everlasting.

    Dt 32:6 “Do you thus repay the LORD (YHVH),
    O foolish and unwise people?
    Is not He your Father who has bought you?
    He has made you and established you.

    No ask yourself, who is the 1st person in the Trinity? Father. What is his personal name? YHVH.

    Therefore ANY text that equates Jesus with YHVH MUST be in error. The 2nd person can not be the 1st person. YHVH can not be Jesus, the father is not the son. (And I’m not arguing from the oneness pov but the Jewish pov.

  14. Thanks Blasater,

    I wasn’t quite sure where you were coming from so I appreciate your ending comment.

    Since what I want to convey will take a wall of text, I think it will be much more beneficial for both of us if I post for you a link to a presentation that focuses in on this topic focusing on the Jewish perspective.

    I hope you will take participate and watch the video (Proverbs 18:13) as we quite often learn most when we consider arguments from differing perspectives. If you only watch a little here and a little there, great.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUkhWBKCuXc

  15. I’m familiar with Heiser. Nevertheless, I watched it but it did not address my point.

    Heiser uses the heresy of the two powers that was discussed during the Hellenist period and as such tries to bridge into the Trinitarian view from there. It simply doesnt work.

    But nowhere in the video does he provide an answer as to why it is okay to equate YHVH with Jesus when the OT makes it clear that YHVH is the Father. If you can find such an argument, I’m all ears.

  16. Heiser did address this. He showed how at many occassions in the Tanakh and Torah YHVH appeared more than once in the same scene. He also mentioned that the Son is not the Father (hence why Yeshua speaks to the Father), but that the Son is YHVH, the Father is YHVH and the Spirit is YHVH.

    So it is true that YHVH is the father, as it is true that YHVH is the Son and Spirit as well. This is why we speak of the tri-unity of YHVH. And why Yeshua says that He and the Father are one.

    For more on this tri-unity:
    http://www.messiahnj.org/af-tri-unity.htm

  17. Blasater,

    Ge 19:24 Then the LORD rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the LORD out of heaven.

    YHWH on earth rained fire from YHWH in heaven.

    Ex 33:11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

    De 5:4 The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

    Why is it not the Son YHWH that appeared and spoke to Moses? No one can see the Father YHWH and live.

    Ex 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

    But Moses spoke to Him face to face and he lived to tell about it. It is YHWH’s voice or word that appears or takes on flesh. This is YHWH the Son. YHWH’s word is exalted above His name.

    Ps 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

    Ge 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.

    Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

    Being the only begotton, He is of the same essence or genes, if you will. We are only in His image after His likeness and not of the same stuff like the word made flesh.

    Ge 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
    27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

    Ge 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens…
    7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

    YHWH made man “in OUR image.” It was not just Elohim, but YHWH Elohim that did this and spoke to Himself or within Himself as plural…yet He is YHWH echad.

    No human can totally understand how YHWH can be one and somehow, at least to us, more than one at the same time. He is plural but singular. He exists in more dimensions than us. He exists throughout all time as if it is only now. He exists when there is no time…He made it and is outside of it and involved in it at the same time. If we could fully understand Him with human intelligence we would be greater than or equal to Him.

    I am not for using the term trinity. I just have to accept that He reveals Himself to us as Father, Son and Spirit. How much more than that He is is not revealed to us. One thing is for sure He is one…even if He is more than one means to us.

    Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
    11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.

    How can it be that the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father? We cannot explain it. It is just the way it is. We are just to accept it or at least believe it because of the works that Messiah did. How can anyone but YHWH be inside himself from two directions. It cannot happen physically. It is only possible in more than three dimensions…and we cannot truly understand more than three dimensions other than time being a fourth. But to have two things that are mutually exclusive happen at the same time is beyond us. We cannot be covered with the same molecules of water that we also have just swallowed. We are either in it or it in us at any given moment. YHWH is in Himself and encompassing Himself continually.

    Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    Joh 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

    Even the terms Father and Son in relation to YHWH are stretched beyond our comprehension. The Son is somehow begotten and also existent from the beginning.

    Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

    Messiah claimed to be the “I am.” The religious leaders knew that He claimed equality with YHWH.

    Joh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

    Now of course, he only broke the religious leaders version of Shabbat, but kept Torah perfectly. His claim to Sonship was bigger than just inheritance. It was claiming to be of the same kind and essence.

    Lastly, YHWH means: I will be what I will be. He can certainly be YHWH echad and plural at the same time if He wants to be. Evidently He does.

    Shalom

  18. Heiser does not get you off the hook. He merely uses one heresy of 2 to go to another heresy of 3. He is only speculating about the identity of the alleged two YHVH’s. Hashem is not going leave such a matter to mere speculation which is why he says:

    35 To you it was SHOWN that you might KNOW that the LORD (YHVH), He is God; there is NO OTHER besides Him.

    In the peshat, plain understanding is clear. There is no other besides him. Not only no other G-d, which Christians would affirm but no other ANYTHING including any separate conscientiousness or person-hood. Ein od milvado!

    And even though Heiser et al try to establish a Trinity by inference, it still does not solve the problem of person-hood. You say YHVH is father, son and HS but the Tanakh says YHVH is the father. That is it. Tanakh does not say there is a HS who is YHVH and certainly does not say there is a “god the son” who is YHVH.

    Ein od milvado and the many passages I already quoted where YHVH is identified as father, precludes ANY additional personage as being YHVH. YHVH (His personal name Ex 3) as revealed at Sinai, is father. The church is checkmated on this point. There is no getting around it.

    No assertion by someone in the NT can possibly change the fact the YHVH is father only in a singular unity and there is no way to then say,1500 years after Sinai, oh well there is a son component and a HS component. YHVH is not an entity to be divvied up. Any attempt to do so is heretical and can only be done through poor hermeneutics. In this case, it is using passages in the dark to make doctrine, instead of the clear passages like Dt 4:35 and 32:39.

  19. Bo– All of your (OT) Tanakh references are based on faulty exegesis and hermeneutics. So no point in going over that ground.

  20. Blasater,

    My props for you for admiting that you are indeed rejecting what at least some NT authors wrote. That’s much more intelectually honest than trying to reconcile with arianism/unitarianism their clear claims of Jesus as YHWH in flesh.

    Just to understand your position, though, what exactly do you claim Jesus to be ? Do you accept his preexistence before incarnation ?

  21. Marcelo– I’m coming from the Jewish point of view. To me, Jesus is just a failed messianic figure. The incarnation narrative is just another very serious problem, fatal one actually, for the church.

    A) Dt 30 says: 11 “For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?’

    Now how can Jesus be in heaven and be brought down 1500 years later, because Torah was too hard or just a “tutor”? If Jesus was the “living Torah” that had to be brought down later, then Dt 30 is not telling us the truth. Dt 30 says there is nothing more in heaven needed to be brought down.

    B) The church says that Jesus was a pre-existent spirit personage, with the father and HS. But at the incarnation, he was fused to a human being. Forming a god-man. This is loaded with problems. For starters, having a member of the godhead fuse to a human being constitutes change. A spirit only godhead before the incarnation, a godhead with the “son” fused to a human being, with human nature, after the incarnation and still today. That is change. The make-up of the godhead has changed. Fatal error. And actually, the Trinitarian Triangle is in error. It reflects a pre-incarnation view. The Triangle should show “Son-Human” or “Son Spirit-Son Human” in the corner.

  22. Blasater,

    Who is using flawed techniques of interpretation?

    The passage you quote does not say that no one needs to come down from heaven. It says that the commands that were spoken to them were not distant but right in front of them. They were not mysterious but were completely understandable. They were not somewhere else, but right in front of them.

    De 30:11 For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off.
    12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
    13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?
    14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.

    It says that when it is something that they love/want to do (in their heart) and they can recite or are knowledgeable enough to converse about (in their mouths) that it is not too hard for them to keep. You see YHWH came down multiple times and sent angels multiple times to instruct us concerning His will. Why? Because we failed to have his law in our hearts and in our mouths. It is not that the commandments need someone to go get them, it is that we fail on our part and YHWH graciously comes down or sends someone down to help us.

    And thus the New Covenant is supposed to produce a people that have YHWH’s law in their hearts. It is supposed to produce a people that want to know His word for themselves and do not need anyone to teach them.

    So you completely misrepresent what Moses penned in Deuteronomy 30.

    Also, YHWH does not change in character. He does not cease to be what He always was and always will be by His voice/word becoming flesh and dwelling among us. YHWH appeared many times on earth. Him taking the form of a man to speak to Abraham or Him taking on flesh as the Gospels speak of is not Him changing who He is. It is revealing who He is.

    How about a little context about YHWH not changing:

    Mal 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.
    2 But who may abide the day of his coming? and who shall stand when he appeareth? for he is like a refiner’s fire, and like fullers’ soap:
    3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.
    4 Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.
    5 And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
    6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
    7 Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the LORD of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return?

    YHWH is declaring that He will not fail to be a righteous judge. He will not go back on His promise to the sons of Jacob. The sins of Israel deserved His judgement. YHWH has chosen Israel and He will be faithful to His promise to those who love Him and keep His commandments, but He will bring those who hate Him and His word to them to judgement eventually. But He has promised to use Israel to bring Messiah and light to the world. Israel should have already been consumed…but YHWH keeps His promises.

    Isn’t it funny that the very passage that talks about YHWH not changing begins with Him speaking of coming to earth. What form will He take when He does this? Who is the messenger of the covenant?

    Mal 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.
    5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
    6 And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

    And lo and behold, YHWH has sent Elijah in the form of John the baptist before He came suddenly to His temple. And Israel has not fared well since…at least according to the Talmud.

    You accuse others of “faulty exegesis and hermeneutics” but you have proven yourself to be the real purveyor of such.

    Shalom

  23. Bo–

    Thanks but you are making my point for me.

    Bo wrote “The passage you quote does not say that no one needs to come down from heaven. It says that the commands that were spoken to them were not distant but right in front of them.”

    Yeah, well it is Paul who makes the connection, not me.

    Rom 10: 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down),

    The point is, and you just helped me make it, that G-d is telling the people of the sufficiency of the revelation of Torah. There is nothing else needed or required from them to “do” the commandments. It is in their hearts and mouth.

    But the church says, not so fast G-d! Something else IS required and that is the god-man Jesus.

    Jesus said: 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.

    For what purpose? To change the paradigm. So if Jesus had to come down to facilitate a new paradigm, then the paradigm given at Sinai and confirmed in Dt 30, was NOT sufficient and that Jesus was withheld from the Jewish people in heaven for some 1500 years after Sinai.

    So the ability to do the law was not in our hearts and mouth after all. That ability would only come from a faith in a messiah, who would come a do it since we could not! Only Jesus coming down from heaven could fix it.

    G-d said otherwise.

    Regarding Mal 3, it is very unfortunate for you to use this passage since it shows the failure of the Nazarene.

    3 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness.
    4 Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years.

    Did Jesus purify the sons of Levi? Were the offerings restored to former glory? No and No. In fact, the sons of Levi continued to become even more corrupt.

    At any rate, your quote has nothing to do with the fact that G-d does not change and that certainly means not fusing into a god-man personage totally unknown to our fathers at Sinai, hence failing the test of Dt 13.

  24. Blasater,

    Mal 3:5 And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.
    6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
    7 Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the LORD of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return?

    Jer 31:36 If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.

    You did not deal with the quote about YHWH not changing. His context is that He will preserve Israel though they are corrupted. The idea that YHWH does not change is in the context of His promise to Israel to preserve them. Taking the quote out of its context to say that YHWH does not come down or send others down to remind us of His word is error. He did this multiple times after Deuteronomy was written.

    Paul says that no one needs to ascend to descend to bring Messiah, who is YHWH’s word made flesh, to us. He already both descended and ascended. His allusion to Deuteronomy 30 is not a quote or a teaching on it. It is a parallel idea. He is saying that in the same way that the Torah has been laid out in front of us so has Messiah been made evident. We have no excuse. We cannot say that we need more evidence for Torah or Messiah.

    De. 30:12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it?

    Moses does not say that no one needs to COME from heaven for any reason whatsoever. He says that no one needs to GO to heaven to get YHWH’s torah to bring it back to us…YHWH has already revealed it plainly. We are without excuse when we disobey.

    Y’Shua did not go to heaven to get YHWH’s Torah or change it. He came from heaven and very specifically said that He did not come to change Torah in the slightest. John specifically says that Torah came through Moses and grace and truth came by Y’shua. No one says that Messiah came from heaven to bring us YHWH’s Torah.

    And so, at the time of Deuteronomy, there had been almost 40 years of hearing Torah. The new generation of Israelites had been taught it. Deuteronomy was read in there hearing. They had no excuse for not obeying. And at the time of Romans, there had been decades of testimony and teaching about Messiah. They had no excuse for not knowing Him.

    As far as Messiah not purifying Levi. He will when He returns. Just like there has been 2 comings of Elijah. There are two comings of Messiah. If Y’Shua was not Messiah, there will never be one. He is the only candidate that came at the right time to the right temple according to prophesy. The Talmud tells us that after Him being cut off, the doors of the temple opened on their own and that the lot for YHWH’s goat was always in the left hand for 40 years straight. It is a testimony that Messiah came and the Jewish leaders had missed it.

    Shalom

  25. Blasater,

    Did Y’Shua fail the test of De. 13? Here it is:

    De. 13:1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
    2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
    3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
    4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.
    5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

    Messiah showed many wonders, but never told us to serve other elohim or to disobey YHWH’s commandments. Here is what He did say:

    Mt 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
    18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
    19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
    20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

    Joh 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
    18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
    19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
    20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

    Mt 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
    22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’
    23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

    As anyone can see. Y’Shua did not fail the test. Do some of His supposed followers fail the test? Verse 22 and 23 give us a very sad answer…yes.

    Shalom

  26. Bo wrote “Paul says that no one needs to ascend to descend to bring Messiah, who is YHWH’s word made flesh, to us. He already both descended and ascended. His allusion to Deuteronomy 30 is not a quote or a teaching on it. It is a parallel idea.”

    Yes, I realize that. It’s another Pauline plagiarism. And he botches it completely. It is a cheap parallel but one that again makes my case.

    By Pauls assertion that Jesus hass already “arrived” and “descended into the abyss” something Torah did not say. And then adding– “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; ”

    He totally changes the meaning of Dt 30. Moses was not teaching “the word of faith of some messiah and salvation by belief in a resurrected personage.

    It is preposterous. It makes my point. Moses said in Dt 30. You have what you need (Torah) period! No need for a future god-man.

    Paul says, you have what you need (Jesus) using a completely different paradigm then that given by G-d to Moses. So clearly, my original point stands. Paul IS effectively teaching that something was withheld in heaven (Jesus) that needed to be brought down to save man. So in Rom 10:6 he just highlighted a massive error of the church.

    Bo wrote “As far as Messiah not purifying Levi. He will when He returns.”

    uhh yeah, like everything else he failed to do. Well, I have bad news for you. No one. NO ONE can be called or crowned mashiach ben David without having actually accomplished the Davidic tasks.

  27. Blasater,

    Therefore there will never be a Messiah by you standards, for He had to come at the time prophesied and that time is long past. Daniel told us when Messiah would come. It just happened to be about 2000 years ago. And you still did not deal with the context of YHWH does not change…because you have to twist the scripture to reject the Messiah that has already come.

    Paul does nothing that the rabbis of his time or ours did not do with the scripture. He draws a parallel. That is different than explaining what it means. You have been given enough info to realize this, but you use unjust weights and measures and therefore are passing unjust judgement and not loving your neighbor as yourself.

    If Y’shua has to do everything prophesied of Him in one coming, then we must assuredly be without one. Any messiah that comes now fails to come to the second temple and fails to come at the right time according to Daniel. He will also probably fail to come from Bethlehem and will be of unknown genealogy as far as the house of David is concerned. I could go on, but it is just plain logic and the plain reading of what is written in the scripture that leaves you without the hope of every having a Messiah.

    And for the record, Messiah ben David is only half of what Messiah is supposed to accomplish. There is also Messiah ben Joseph. Read your rabbis and you will know this. So Y’Shua came the first time as ben Joseph and the second He will come as ben David.

    Shalom

  28. Hi Blasater.

    I understand Deut. 30, from 11 onward as the initial command given to the Israelites upon entering the land promised to Abraham and his descendants and not as a stagnant commandment. It had two parts, obedience or departure, life or death. We see that the Bible is the unfolding story of the Israelites and the entire narrative is that of their continuing struggle between the two. Seeing as the Israelites departed from the LORD and were sent into captivity a number of times, the LORD declared that He would (at a later date) “make a ‘new covenant’ with Israel and Judah, not like the covenant that I made with your fathers, which covenant they broke.” If the LORD hadn’t made a new covenant the nation would have been destroyed completely. In the unfolding narrative, we see that the LORD determined to keep a remnant of the nation so He could keep His promise to Abraham. The LORD kept His promise and has given Israel a New Covenant, instituted with the blood of the Lamb of God, and what we look for now is the pouring out of God’s forgiveness on the remnant of the house of Israel in the latter days, which it looks as though we are living in now, not on account of their own merit, but because of the LORD’s mercy He will do this.

    If you read the prophets carefully, you’ll find that we look for Messiah from heaven, not on earth. This is found in the First Testament and is reiterated in the New. No where in the prophets do we see an earthly leader or hear of one on the “Day of the LORD.” It is the LORD from heaven that saves the nation in the latter days.

    I’ll give my understanding of some statements you’ve made:

    “A) Jesus nearly always refers to G-d as “father”. A couple of times as “My God”.
    The problem for the church, is that YHVH is called “father” or YHVH Himself refers to Himself as “father” in Tanakh (OT).”
    So, both Jesus (allegedly “god the son”) and the father (allegedly “god the father”) can not be the same personage of “father” or make the claim to be the same person.”
    In other words….Hebrews claims Jesus is YHVH but the “OT” makes it clear that YHVH is “father”…and Jesus makes it clear, his god is called “father”. Therefore, Jesus can not be father and therefore the book of Hebrews is fatally flawed and church dogma is fatally flawed.
    B) Never once in the Tanakh (OT) does YHVH make any reference to a personage known as “god the son” . There are numerous “sons of G-d” but never a “god the son”.
    C) And regarding His name, G-d said of YHVH or LORD: Exo 3 “ The LORD, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is My memorial-name to all generations.
    This is not merely a reference to YHVH having the property or nature of “God”, something that a future church could claim as merely something that can be shared among three personages in a trinity. This name, YHVH is the final revelation of His name that reveals His will through Torah and Tanakh.
    It is His name. His primary revealed name.
    It is this name, YHVH that is called father. No other personage can use or adopt this name ever. So even using the definition of the church and it’s trinity, Jesus can not be called YHVH since the OT makes it clear…that is the father and no one else.”

    In answer to your statements, we have clear indication from Scripture that the LORD refers to Messiah in the same terminology in the First Testament:

    Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a Child is born,
    Unto us a Son is given;
    And the government will be upon His shoulder.
    And His name will be called
    Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
    7 Of the increase of His government and peace
    There will be no end,
    Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom,
    To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
    From that time forward, even forever.
    The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

    We see that Messiah is a “child” and a “son” and more clearly Messiah is also named by God, “Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. To emphasis that Messiah’s “NAME” will encompass God’s epithets isn’t to be taken lightly. He further says, “The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.” God will bring it about that a child, who is His son, will be exalted and his “name” will be equal to God’s is more than you make of it. There’s no way around that that I can see.

    Was it you I was talking with on Rabbi Blumenthal’s blog about this same thing? After my laptop hard drive failed, I lost the majority of everything in it including all my word pad documents that I’d studied on and written up and when I began with a new external hard drive and that also failed I was honestly so disheartened that I never started over. It’s been several years now, but I believe the time is here and now, and if you’ll allow me to I’ll pick it up with you in this conversation.

    You touched upon a topic of extreme importance that seems to me to be casually glossed over by pretty much everyone because I can’t find much about it in any commentaries. If you can continue from here I’ll work it up and we can discuss it. Do you have time to do that?

  29. Sheila,

    Good points. I was on the verge of posting about Isaiah 9, but had other things to attend to first.

    Ps. 2:7 ¶ I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
    8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
    9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel.
    10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
    11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
    12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

    Above is a Messianic prophesy declares a begotten Son of YHWH. Blasater needs to realize this and kiss the Son of YHWH lest he perish from the way.

    Shalom

  30. Hi Bo.

    I’ve also run across a scholarly interpretation of the word, “begotten” and it’s proper definition as being “one of a kind” and not merely “born to” as we take it to mean. We know that Isaac had more than one son, but Jacob was “unique” being the son of the promise.

    Thanks.

  31. And I just got myself confused!!! LOL We know that Abraham had more than one son!!! But, “Isaac” was unique…being the son of the promise!!!

  32. Blasater,

    YHWH is known as describing Himself as father in the Tanak.

    Also he calls Himself as our husband or our man.

    Hosea 2:16
    והיה ביום־ההוא נאם־יהוה תקראי אישי ולא־תקראי־לי עוד בעלי

    And it will be on this day says YHWH, you will call Me, Ishi, /my husband or my man literally/ and you will not call me anymore my master.

    My point is that just cause YHWH calls Himself as a father figuire, and also calls Himself as “ishi, husband /literally man/ does not mean that He is literally a father or literally a husband or man to us.

    He is also a cloud and a fire during the time of the Mishkan.

    We don’t say God the Father, God the Ishi, God the cloud, God the fire. Right?

    HE is One God. He is revealed in different ways as HE chose.

    The Talmud says by Shim’on ben Laqish that the “spirit of God” mentioned in Genesis 1:2 as hovering over the face of the waters is the spirit of King Messiah.

    וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם

    So now we have Ruach Elohim as a name for the Moshiach whom existed before any human birth, before Adam and Hava even in Genesis 1:2.

  33. The Zohar writes,

    The Ancient Holy One is revealed with three heads, which are united into one, and that head is three exalted. The Ancient One is described as being three: because the other lights emanating from him are included in the three. But how can three names be one? How three can be one can only be known through the revelation of the Holy Spirit.

  34. Hi Sheila–

    Yes, that was me, I remember you. I would be happy to dialogue with you. Regarding Is 9, a couple of points.

    The problem with interpreting Isaiah 9 with a bent to prove a god-man is that it overturns Torah. It is no accident that the vast number of proofs the church uses are either “prophetic” works or “mystical” events. This is my problem with the exegesis of the church, I mentioned earlier to Bo.

    To properly exegete the Torah, we must take the most plain, clear, unambiguous text first regarding G-d’s essence and nature and then go from there. Let the passages in the light illuminate the passages in the dark (mystical events and prophetic works)

    So I start with Dt 4:35, 32:29 et al, there are probably 40 other verses that say some variant of this.

    35 To you it was SHOWN that you might KNOW that the LORD (YHVH), He is God; there is no other besides Him.

    We were shown what? At Sinai a national revelation occurred that showed G-d…Hashem…is all that there is. A voice from the fire with no body. That we might KNOW.

    This is something to deeply take in and understand. Why? Because it is G-d setting the boundaries for all future works of scripture, prophetic and otherwise. It is his “stick in the ground” as it were. It is the guideline from which to know truth for all time. What is it? His solitary unity. Not complex but solitary. Ein Od Milvado. Nothing else besides Him. Not only, no other gods, which the church would affirm but no other anything! No other centers of consciousness. Nothing. There is ONLY Hashem. One Divine Indivisible Infinite Consciousness.

    So what about the angel of the LORD? What about the other anthropomorphism’s? They are merely tools. (And Jesus never claimed to be the angel of Hashem) G-d uses these tools to suit His divine purpose at any given moment.

    So now that one establishes Hashem is G-d, Ein Od Milavdo and there is nothing else beside him, one can proceed to exegete all other passages with that in mind. This is the primary revelation of Hashem. Period! Nothing can overturn this. No prophecy or writing.

    So, now going back to Is 9. What do we do with mighty God? Does that imply a 2nd personage or 2nd center of consciousness that shares essence with Hashem? Chas v’shalom! G-d forbid. We were SHOWN that will will KNOW that YHVH is G-d…and there is NOTHING ELSE besides him.

    Hope that is helpful.

  35. In the Talmud, Metatron is identified as the Angel who went before the Israelites in the wilderness in Exodus 33:20, the Angel who’s voice was to be obeyed, the Angel who had authority to pardon transgressions. Because Yahweh’s name is “in him,” the Talmud refers to Metatron as the Angel “whose name is the same as his Master’s.” – Sanhedrin 38b

    Metatron’s master is YHWH which means that YHWH is also Metatron’s name. Metatron is a forgiver of sins.

  36. Eliyahu wrote: “My point is that just cause YHWH calls Himself as a father figuire, and also calls Himself as “ishi, husband /literally man/ does not mean that He is literally a father or literally a husband or man to us……We don’t say God the Father, God the Ishi, God the cloud, God the fire.”

    Yes, exactly…but it is the church, that is trying to affirm father as more than just a metaphoric title.

    My point is obvious. YHVH is called father in Tanakh. Jesus calls God his “father”. Father in church theology is more than just a metaphoric title, it is a “person” in the godhead.

    So, if YHVH is father, Jesus the alleged “G-d the son” can not be YHVH. YHVH is a personal name. The personal name. If it is attached to father….and it is…Jesus can not possibly be YHVH.

  37. Eliyahu– The Zohar and Metatron are post-Tanakh documents that the church does not use. They in no way make the case for the church, they are mystical concepts that the church will cut and paste to give the appearance of church like doctrine. I’m well aware of these tricks.

  38. Blasater,

    I’m not the church. The Talmud is my oral Torah. The Zohar is rumored to be written by Shimon bar Yochai.

    The ten sephirot are part of my belief system.

    I believe no one has ever seen YHWH.

    Exodus 33:2o

    ויאמר לא תוכל לראת את־פני כי לא־יראני האדם וחי

    And HE said you won’t be able to see my face because you can not see me and live.

    The upper part of the sephirot of Elokim has never been seen. YHWH sent Metatron who also has the name YHWH to be the visible manifestion such as the fire and cloud that lead AM Yisrael. Metatron has power to forgive sins. YHWH is so big and beyond our comprehension that the few times He revealed Himself it was His Yesod. The lowest part of the sephirot of Hashem.

    This is what I learned from my Rabbis because no one can ever see YHWH and live. So when He was seen it was Metatron that they saw who has the name YHWH as well.

    The Ruach Elokim in Bereshit 1:2 is the spirit of Moshiach. His spirit pre existed humanity.

    Ein od levado does not mean that the spirit of Moshiach did not exist or Metatron for that matter. It just means that besides the ten sephirot of Hashem there is no other beside Him that is Hashem. We are saying the same thing but I have a kabbalistic way of looking at Hashem. Mainly that He is Ein Sof, without end or beyond comprehension.

  39. The statement ein od milevado does not mean that He did not have malachim with Him when HE said “let us” make man”in our image”.

    That’s one interpretation of reason.

    The other is that YHWH has three heads that are united as one. Totally echad. The top three sephirot of Hashem, the Ein Sof. Beyond our comprehension.

    As written in the Zohar –

    The Ancient Holy One is revealed with three heads, which are united into one, and that head is three exalted. The Ancient One is described as being three: because the other lights emanating from him are included in the three. But how can three names be one? How three can be one can only be known through the revelation of the Holy Spirit.

    This was Judaism teaching far before the church stoled it and created the Trinity concept.

  40. Hi Blasater,

    Great, I’m delighted we can pick it up!

    I’m not using Is. 9 as a proof text for a God-man, I’m merely pointing out the significance of Messiah possessing God’s epithets. It appears that the LORD is perfectly comfortable with exalting Messiah to equal status and this is in keeping with many FT statements and revelations.

    I very much agree that we should read the text as it’s written and take it at face value. There’s no reason to force any foreign interpretation on it because the totality of the revelation of God isn’t a static one, but is rather an unfolding one and it’s not until we’ve read the whole of Scripture that it all comes together as a much fuller and more coherent revelation.

    In Deut. 4 we read this:

    35 To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD is God; there is no other besides him.
    39 know therefore today, and lay it to your heart, that the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other.

    Those statements say nothing about the nature of the LORD, it says only that no one “other” than the LORD is God on earth and in heaven. If we look at it in context, the preceding verses are warning the Israelites concerning the nations they are going in to dispossess, all of which worshiped false gods, Baal-Peor and others, so the main injunction is that the LORD is the “only” God, while saying nothing about His person or God-head. It says Baal is not God~~YHWH is the only God. The other gods who are made of wood or clay are nothing, they can neither see nor hear and they can in no way be compared to the LORD.

    We have to consider, though, the prior revelations of God we received before Sinai as well. We can’t negate the previous manifestations and personal interactions between God and the patriarchs without doing damage to the truth. That God is multi-faceted and much more complex in nature than we sometimes want to allow is what we come to understand when all these things are taken as a whole. We’re not “dividing” Him, we’re merely acknowledging what was previously revealed to us. The only other choice we have is to “deny” what was written. There’s much more to say on that, but for now I’ll keep it short.

    Concerning the Angel of the LORD, while Jesus didn’t specifically refer to Himself as such, He did verbalise on many occasions that He and the Father were of “One” essence which is what we’re shown concerning the Angel-YHWH of the FT. Only “YHWH” is God. It has to mean that the same YHWH who “appeared” to the patriarchs on earth is “One” with YHWH in heaven. It’s not a far stretch to see that Messiah on earth is One with the Father in heaven just as Angel-YHWH was.

    That brings me to what I was working on before, that the “Name,” YHWH, is what we’re talking about. It encompasses all that He is and was and will be and in no way does it preclude a God-head, in fact, I believe the reason God stated it as He did was for our benefit in pointing out that the one who “possessed” His “Name” was for all intent and purposes One and the same as He is.

    I can’t think of any other explanation for God “lending out” His sacred Name to just an ordinary angel. Why would an angel with any other name not be able to speak for God when we know, in fact, that they did do that? The Angel who possessed God’s sacred Name, was for all intent and purposes One with God.

    I’ve barely touched on much, but I look forward to our conversation!

    Thanks.

  41. Eliyahu,

    I understand the trinity as evolving from Jesus’ injunction to baptize disciples in the “name” of God, when He said,

    Mat 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

    These three are one.

  42. Eliyahu,

    If you believe the New Testament Scripture and the statements of Messiah, Jesus, as being one with the Father, wouldn’t that leave the Holy Spirit hanging out there by Himself if he wasn’t part of the God-head? To include the Holy Spirit only makes sense to me. I’m not big on trinitarian doctrine though. It just makes sense to me.

  43. Hey everyone, I’d like to hear your thoughts on the following:

    It seems to me that Jesus in His preexistence as Word/God wasn’t considered son of God… or maybe just in a figurative way. This ideia might surprise some of you but take a look at texts like Luke 1:35 (which plainly states the generation of Jesus by the Holy Spirit in Mary’s womb as the reason for him being called the son of God) or read John 1 in Parallel with Philippians 2 and you’ll notice that the Word was God and not Son of God… and only after made flesh is the Son (See John 1:14 !!). Also read the quotations from Hebrews regardig the messiah sonship from God and you’ll see that they were speaking of it in the future (as the Isaiah quotation about the Messiah’s birth) and some were spoken also about the Davidic kings (but completely fulfilled in Christ’s literally beig begotten by God) like “I will be to him a father,
    and he shall be to me a son” see 2 Sam 7:14.

  44. Sheila,

    In the sefirot of Hashem the first is Keter which is the Father to Yeshu and Keter to me, the Son to Yeshu was Himself and Binah to me and the Holy Spirit is Chochmah to me representing the three heads of Hashem that are one. Binah is also known in ancient midrash as Ben Yah or otherwords son of God and CHochmah means wisdom and we know that wisdom was with Hashem from the beginning.

    Keter means crown and at the top is the Keter or as Yeshu says the Father.

    in the aramaic the word name is singular because Hashem is one with three heads metamorphically not litarally.

    When he said this it was normal thinking, normal Judaism of His day, it wasn’t weird. The Memra teachings in the Aramaic targums wrote and set up this mind set of the word or memra being the extension of YHWH that is known or revealed to us.

    I believe the three headed YHWH concept came first from Judaism then from Yeshu and then from Christians afterwards at their council of nicene meetings.

  45. I am surprized that there are only three that made it into the New Testament. In Hebrew or in the Tanach you have the names ELohim, El Shadai, YHWH, Adonai, El Elyon, Ruach ELohim, Ruach YHWH and then the titles of the Moshiach which are many as well. The three headed HAshem could have been more, why three in JUdaism.

    There is also the shechinah. Then in Enoch there is talk of the YHWH and the lesser YHWH which is Metatron.

    Genesis 1:2 the Spirit of Elohim, to me is what Yeshu calls the Holy Spirit. There is also the term Ruach CHochmah, Spirit of Wisdom.

    You have included the Spirit of Elohim in the Hashem.

    I believe Hashem is greater than we can ever fathom. But He tells us that no matter how many names He has been known by He is One ein od levado.

  46. In Judaism of today, there is more of an issue with the Moshiach being included in Hashem than the Ruach YHWH. Yeshu can only be included in Hashem if he was as the Talmud says the Ruach Elohim in Bereshit 1:2.

  47. Hi Seila– Great!

    Sheila wrote “the totality of the revelation of God isn’t a static one, but is rather an unfolding one ”

    I would agree to a point. The revelation of His Essence and Nature were froze at Sinai. Hence the tests of Dt 13 and 18. Admonitions to not add or subtract etc…

    Sheila wrote: “Those statements say nothing about the nature of the LORD, it says only that no one “other” than the LORD is God on earth and in heaven.”

    I would differ with you there. It is much broader. The Hebrew words Ein Od Milvado are extremely powerful. I would humbly suggest that you dig into the the Jewish understanding there. It is truly mind blowing when one fully comprehends the meaning. It leaves no room for a complex unity of three conscious centers within YHVH. Chas v’shalom. There is only one infinite consciousness.

    “there is no other besides him.” Again, no other is not merely a reference to “God is one” which we both would affirm but one in EVERYTHING including consciousness. That is being true to the text. Complexity or triunity can not apply.

    Furthermore, the church understanding is not just a complex unity of spirit being but also includes a human being. So technically speaking it looks like this:

    ((God the Father)(God the Son-Jesus the human)(God the holy spirit))

    Since the “son” is a god-man or hypostatic union, that only appeared after Torah at the incarnation, still existing today, that certainly violates the text of Dt 4:35.

    “there is no other besides him.”

    But at the incarnation, a human being became fused to “God” permanently. This is obviously a condition that did not exist before the world began. So an “other” was added to “God” in the form of Jesus, the man.

    That’s a big problem.

    Sheila wrote ” He did verbalise on many occasions that He and the Father were of “One” essence which is what we’re shown concerning the Angel-YHWH ”

    Well, actually hid did not say of one essence. That is subject of debate as to what Jesus actually meant. JW’s say “of one mind”. Like many other times, Jesus should have been specific but wasnt. In an era of pen and paper he should have wrote his own books but that is a different discussion.

    Sheila wrote ” that the “Name,” YHWH, is what we’re talking about. It encompasses all that He is and was and will be and in no way does it preclude a God-head,”

    I would differ on that. YHVH is a personal name (Ex 3) and at the time only referred to one “entity”.

    It applies to no one or nothing else. For example.

    Where is a verse in Torah saying: “I will bring about my son YHVH…or YHVH my son. Or…My Spirit YHVH says xyz…

    There are no declarative statements regarding a god the son and no declarative statements regarding god the holy spirit. If there were such declarative statements a godhead would have emerged.

    These concepts can only be pieced together through mystical or prophetic events.

    Sheila wrote “Why would an angel with any other name not be able to speak for God when we know, in fact, that they did do that?”

    I am not bothered by that at all. Different angels have different authority. It would be similar to President Lincoln sending General Grant to Gettysburg or to Appomattox. He had authority to execute the will of Lincoln.

    Thats all for now, ttyl

Comments are closed.