Deity of Christ
There
are Two in One Body of Flesh
I do not believe anyone can find even one conclusive scripture that
will contradict the following,
There are “two”, YHWH the Father and YHWH the Son, Jeremiah
23:6, and Isaiah 9:6 etc.
Both, the Father and Son are “one”, i.e. in one body.
John
10:30 “I and my Father are one”. When we read this verse in context, and read there response and His answer, when
he made this statement of truth, it is speaking of “two” (the Father and Son) in “one” body”,
not one in unity, as some suggest.
Some suggest his words, “I and my father are one”,
means they are one in unity, instead of "two" in one body, or God in Christ, 2 Corinthians 5:19, John 14:10 etc.
People
back then communicated in a language they both understood.
They understood him to be speaking of “one
in number”, NOT one in unity. We know this because,
#1. When he said “I and my Father are one”,
they took up stones to stone him because they said that he blasphemed, and being a man making himself God, and it is not blasphemy
to be in “unity” with God, but it was considered blasphemous for him to claim to be God, therefore he was speaking
of the number one, even though one can, and sometimes does mean unity. You can always tell by the conversation, if it is speaking
of unity, or one, or both!
#2.
He didn't deny being a man and making himself God, i.e. God and man at the same time, but actually confirms that was what
he was saying, when he answered them by saying the scripture says “you are gods”, showing they both understood
what he meant, when he said, I and my Father are one!
He never denied coming in the flesh, or being
man and God, which is anti Christ, 1st John 4:3, and 2 John 1:7, etc. instead of denying it and explaining how He didn't mean
he was both God, and the Son of God, his answer was, “the scripture says you are gods”. They accused him of blaspheming
because he said that he was the Son of God, and they wanted to kill him because he was a man making himself God, i.e. God
being in one and the same body with the Son. In other words, the Father and the Son shared the same body, and that's why they
sometimes spoke of him as man, (born in Bethlehem), and sometimes as God (who created all things).
John 15:24 says, “If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they
had not had sin: but now have they “both “seen” and hated both me and my Father.”
Notice
they seen "both", when they seen "him".
God himself was made flesh, John 1:1-14, and
1st Timothy 3:16 etc.
Notice, when I said, there are two, in one body, I have not said anything that
contradicts scripture, and when we look at it from this perspective, all of the other scriptures that speak of him as God,
and as the Son of God, harmonizes, read John 1:1-14 carefully.
Some
stress that he is the Son of God, while others stress that he is God, when the scripture stresses that he is BOTH!!! (Acts
2:36)
God’s Hands
The following shows God PERSONALLY
made heaven and earth, with His "own hands", NOT through a preexisting Son, an agent, or someone else's hands, other
than His own!
Psalm 102:25 KJVS
[25] Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and
the heavens are the work of “thy hands”.
Isaiah 45:12 “I have made the earth, and created
man upon it: I, even *my hands*, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded."
Isaiah
44:24
[24] “..I am the LORD that maketh all things ; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad
the earth by myself;”
Creation sounds like a personal thing with Him!
On the sixth
work day, "God's" own hands formed man in his "own image", in His own likeness, and God breathed into
the man, the breath of life. This could not have been someone else's breath or hands.
Hebrews 1:10
[10]
And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of “thine hands”:
Psalm
8:3-4
[3] “When I consider thy heavens, the work of “thy fingers”, the moon and the stars, which thou
hast ordained; [4] What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?”
Abraham
and I AM
Notice the following conversation shows the Messiah personally knew Abraham, and was back
then, because he expresses Abraham’s feelings of “gladness etc”!
It appears that
the Messiah talked with Abraham about the day He would be made flesh, and points out that Abraham “rejoiced”,
and “was glad” to see it, or understand by faith.
John 8:53,56-59 “[53] “Art thou
greater than our father Abraham”, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? [56] Your father
Abraham “rejoiced” to see my day: and he saw it, “and was glad”. (The only way He could have known
Abraham “rejoiced”, and was glad”, (about his coming), is he was back there, as God/I AM.) [57] Then said
the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and “hast thou seen Abraham”? (Notice that they clearly understood
that he is telling them that he personally knew and seen Abraham, or how else could he know that he “rejoiced”,
and was glad”?) (By saying what he said, the Messiah is causing them to think that he actually seen and knew Abraham
and knew Abraham’s feeling, when he said Abraham rejoiced, and was glad!) [58] Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily,
I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (He now refers to I AM, a term applied to God, and as God, he actually seen Abraham,
confirming his previous statement.) [59] Then took they up stones to cast at him: (they knew he was claiming to be God) but
Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.”
They
understood he was telling them that he seen Abraham, because they tried to kill him, but why can’t people understand
it today?
Creation Not Delegated
to agent.
Creating the heavens cannot be delegated out, because Creation comes only from the one
creating!
Whoever done the creating is the Creator. There can be No agent between the Creator and his creation!
Thomas
confesses it truly is him, “both” his lord and God!
John 20:25, 27-31
[25] “The
other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, “Except I shall see in his hands
the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe”….
[27]
“Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into
my side: and be not faithless, but believing. [28] And Thomas answered and said unto him, “My Lord and my God”
(In other words, Thomas now believes he is indeed risen, and is the very same person, - my Lord, whose disciple I have so
long been, and my God, who done all those miracles that God was to do when He comes, Isaiah 35:4-6 i.e. You are Him, I now
believe, for I have seen you for myself.) [29] Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed:
( Notice, Thomas not only believed he rose from the dead, but acknowledged that he was “both” his Lord and his
God!) blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed (this is most likely referring to us, that believe, and the
Old Testament saints that believed the prophecies, not yet seen fulfilled). [30] And many other signs truly did Jesus in the
presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book (Proving he is not only the Son of God, but also YHWH All Mighty
in the flesh of His Son): [31] But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus (YHWH) is the Christ, the Son of God;
and that believing ye might have life through his name (YHWH).”
The J.P. Green Hebrew and Greek Interlinear
says on John 20:28,
“The Lord of me, and the God of me”
Note: If he
was the God “of” Thomas, he was the God “of” all of them. Many people say that they accept Him, but
they do not accept Him as their Lord AND God, therefore they do not fully accept Him and all He is!
Or
maybe they do accept him when they accept him as Lord and Savior, because besides God there is no Saviour.
The
resurrection did not make him God, but proved he was God!
John 20:29
Thomas
- This word is omitted by almost every MS., version, and ancient commentator of importance.
Adam Clark
Commentary
“Blessed are they, etc. - Thou hast seen, and therefore thou hast believed, and
now thou art blessed; thou art now happy - fully convinced of my resurrection; yet no less blessed shall all those be who
believe in my resurrection, without the evidence thou hast had. From this we learn that to believe in Jesus, on the testimony
of his apostles, will put a man into the possession of the very same blessedness which they themselves enjoyed. And so has
God constituted the whole economy of grace that a believer, at eighteen hundred years’ distance from the time of the
resurrection, suffers no loss because he has not seen Christ in the flesh. The importance and excellence of implicit faith
in the testimony of God is thus stated by Rab. Tanchum: “Rab. Simeon ben Lachesh saith, The proselyte is more beloved
by the holy blessed God than that whole crowd that stood before Mount Sinai; for unless they had heard the thundering, and
seen the flames and lightning, the hills trembling, and the trumpets sounding, they had not received the law. But the proselyte
hath seen nothing of all this, and yet he hath come in, devoting himself to the holy blessed God, and hath taken upon him
(the yoke of) the kingdom of heaven.”
Reader! Christ died for thee! - believe, and thou shalt be
saved, and become as blessed and as happy as an apostle.”
Albert Barns John 20:28
“My
Lord and my God - In this passage the name God is expressly given to Christ, in his own presence and by one of his own apostles.
This declaration has been considered as a clear proof of the divinity of Christ, for the following reasons:
1.
There is no evidence that this was a mere expression, as some have supposed, of surprise or astonishment.
2.
The language was addressed to Jesus himself - “Thomas ...said unto him.”
3. The Saviour did
not reprove him or check him as using any improper language. If he had not been divine, it is impossible to reconcile it with
his honesty that he did not rebuke the disciple. No pious man would have allowed such language to be addressed to him. Compare
Act 14:13-15; Rev 22:8-9.
4. The Saviour proceeds immediately to commend Thomas for believing; but what
was the evidence of his believing? It was this declaration, and this only. If this was a mere exclamation of surprise, what
proof was it that Thomas believed? Before this he doubted. Now he believed, and gave utterance to his belief, that Jesus was
his Lord and his God.
5. If this was not the meaning of Thomas, then his exclamation was a mere act of
profaneness, and the Saviour would not have commended him for taking the name of the Lord his God in vain. The passage proves,
therefore, that it is proper to apply to Christ the name Lord and God, and thus accords with what John affirmed in Joh 1:1(-14),
and which is established throughout this gospel.”
E.W.Bullinger on John 20:28
My
Lord and my God. First testimony to the Deity of the risen Lord. Possibly Thomas was using the words of Psa 86:15, which in
the Septuagint read Kurie ho Theos, and claiming forgiveness for his unbelief on the ground of Exo 34:6, to which this verse
of the Psalm refers.”
Jamison, Fausset, Brown
“disciples were within, and
Thomas with them ... Jesus ... stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
John 20:28
“Thomas
answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God — That Thomas did not do what Jesus invited him to do, and what he had
made the condition of his believing, seems plain from Joh 20:29 (“Because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed”).
He is overpowered, and the glory of Christ now breaks upon him in a flood. His exclamation surpasses all that had been yet
uttered, nor can it be surpassed by anything that ever will be uttered in earth or heaven. On the striking parallel in Nathanael,
see on Joh 1:49. The Socinian invasion of the supreme divinity of Christ here manifestly taught - as if it were a mere call
upon God in a fit of astonishment - is beneath notice, save for the profanity it charges upon this disciple, and the straits
to which it shows themselves reduced.”
Emmanuel, being interpreted,
means God is with us.
It is obvious that Thomas, along with John and the rest of the apostles, did not
disagree with this interpretation of Emmanuel.
Deity
of Christ History
I found the following on the Internet.
Did the early church
believe in the deity of Christ?
Ask your average Muslim, Unitarian, Jehovah’s Witness, or just about any non-Christian
skeptic who has read (or watched) The Da Vinci Code, and they’ll try to convince you the answer is no. From such sources
we are told that the deity of Christ was a doctrine invented centuries after Jesus’ death — a result of pagan
influences on the church in the fourth century when the Roman Empire adopted Christianity as its official religion.
Emperor
Constantine, in particular, is blamed for being the guy who promoted Jesus to the level of deity, a feat of cosmic proportions
that he managed to pull off at the Council of Nicaea in 325. As Dan Brown put it (through the lips of one of his literary
characters): “Jesus’ establishment as ‘the Son of God’ was officially proposed and voted on by the
Council of Nicaea. . . . By officially endorsing Jesus as the Son of God, Constantine turned Jesus into a deity who existed
beyond the scope of the human world, an entity whose power was unchallengeable” (The Da Vinci Code, 253).
So how
can believers answer such allegations?
The best response, obviously, is to demonstrate from Scripture that Jesus is
God. We can be confident that the early church affirmed Christ’s deity (and that we should do the same) because the
New Testament clearly teaches that truth. The biblical case can be made from many places. Without going into detail in this
post, here is a small sampling of texts that teach the deity of Christ: Isaiah 9:6; Matt. 1:23; John 1:1, 14, 18; 20:28; Acts
20:28; Rom. 9:5; 1 Cor. 1:24; 2 Cor. 4:4; Php. 2:6; Col. 1:15–16; 2:9; Titus 2:13; Heb. 1:3, 8; 2 Pet. 1:1; 1 John 5:20.
But
what about church history outside of the New Testament? Did the early church fathers affirm the deity of Jesus Christ? Or
was it only after the fourth century (and the Council of Nicaea) that Christian leaders began to articulate their belief in
God the Son?
Though it’s not an exhaustive list, here are 25 quotes from a number of ante-Nicene church fathers
demonstrating their belief in the deity of Jesus Christ. These early Christian theologians all lived before the time of Constantine
and the Council of Nicaea. As such, they provide incontrovertible proof (from post-New Testament history) that Constantine
was not the first person in church history to affirm this doctrine. Rather, the early church believed that Jesus is God from
the time of the apostles on.
(For each of these quotes, I have underlined key phrases for the sake of emphasis.)
1.
Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50–117): For “our God, Jesus the Christ”, was conceived by Mary according to God’s
plan, “both” from the seed of David “and” of the Holy Spirit. (Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians,
18.2. Translation from Michael Holmes, Apostolic Fathers, 197)
2. Ignatius (again): Consequently all magic and every
kind of spell were dissolved, the ignorance so characteristic of wickedness vanished, and the ancient kingdom was abolished
“when God appeared in human form to bring the newness of eternal life.” (Ibid., 19.3. Holmes, AF, 199)
3.
Ignatius (again): “For our God Jesus Christ” is more visible now that he is in the Father. (Ignatius, Letter to
the Romans, 3.3. Holmes, AF, 229)
4. Ignatius (again): “I glorify Jesus Christ, the God who made you so wise,”
for I observed that you are established in an unshakable faith, having been nailed, as it were, to the cross of the Lord Jesus
Christ. (Ignatius, Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 1.1. Holmes, AF, 249.)
5. Ignatius (again): Wait expectantly for the one
who is above time: “the Eternal, the Invisible, who for our sake became visible; the Intangible, the Unsuffering, who
for our sake suffered,” who for our sake endured in every way. (Ignatius, Letter to Polycarp, 3.2. Holmes, AF, 265.)
6.
Polycarp of Smyrna (69–155): Now may the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the eternal high priest himself,
the Son of God Jesus Christ, build you up in faith and truth . . ., and to us with you, and to all those under heaven “who
will yet believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ and in his Father” who raised him from the dead. (Polycarp, Philippians,
12:2. Holmes, AF, 295)
7. Epistle of Barnabas (written c. 70–130): “If the Lord submitted to suffer for
our souls, even though he is Lord of the whole world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, “Let us make
humankind according to our image and likeness,” how is it, then, that he submitted to suffer at the hands of humans?”
(Epistle of Barnabas, 5.5. Holmes, AF, 393)
8. Justin Martyr (100–165): And that “Christ being Lord, and
God the Son of God,” and appearing formerly in power as Man, and Angel, and in the glory of fire as at the bush, so
also was manifested at the judgment executed on Sodom, has been demonstrated fully by what has been said. (Justin Martyr,
Dialogue with Trypho, 128. Translation from Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, Ante-Nicene Fathers, I:264)
9. Justin
(again): “Permit me first to recount the prophecies, which I wish to do in order “to prove that Christ is called
“both” God and Lord of hosts.” (Ibid., 36. ANF, I:212.)
10. Justin (again): Therefore these words
testify explicitly that He [Jesus] is witnessed to by Him [the Father] who established these things, as “deserving to
be worshipped, as God and as Christ.” (Ibid., 63. ANF, I:229)
11. Justin (again): The Father of the universe has
“a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God.” And of old He appeared in the shape of fire
and in the likeness of an angel to Moses and to the other prophets; but now in the times of your reign, having, as we before
said, “become Man by a virgin” . . .” (Justin Martyr, First Apology, 63. ANF, I:184)
12. Justin (again):
For if you had understood what has been written by the prophets, you would not have denied that “He was God, Son of
the only, unbegotten, unutterable God”. (Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 126. ANF, I:263)
13. Tatian (110–172):
We do not act as fools, O Greeks, nor utter idle tales when “we announce that God was born in the form of man.”
(Tatian, Address to the Greeks, 21. ANF, II:74)
14. Melito of Sardis (d. c. 180): “He that hung up the earth in
space was Himself hanged up; He that fixed the heavens was fixed with nails; He that bore up the earth was born up on a tree;
the Lord of all was subjected to ignominy in a naked body – “God put to death!” . . . [I]n order that He
might not be seen, the luminaries turned away, and the day became darkened—“because they slew God,” who
hung naked on the tree. . . . This is He who made the heaven and the earth, and in the beginning, together with the Father,
fashioned man; who was announced by means of the law and the prophets; who put on a bodily form in the Virgin; who was hanged
upon the tree; who was buried in the earth; who rose from the place of the dead, and ascended to the height of heaven, and
sitteth on the right hand of the Father.” (Melito, 5. ANF, VIII:757)
15. Irenaeus of Lyons (120–202):
“For I have shown from the Scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God,
or named Lord. But that “He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal,
and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have
attained to even a small portion of the truth. Now, the Scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like
others, He had been a mere man”. . . . He is the holy Lord, the Wonderful, the Counselor, the Beautiful in appearance,
and the Mighty God, coming on the clouds as the Judge of all men; — all these things did the Scriptures prophesy of
Him.” (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.19.2. ANF, I:449)
16. Irenaeus (again): “He received testimony from
all that “He was very man, and that He was very God,” from the Father, from the Spirit, from angels, from the
creation itself, from men, from apostate spirits and demons.” (Ibid., 4.6.7. ANF, I:469)
17. Irenaeus (again):
“Christ Jesus [is] our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King,” according to the will of the invisible Father.”
(Ibid., 1.10.1. ANF, I:330)
18. Irenaeus (again): “Christ Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the
God of the living,” who spoke to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers.” (Ibid., 4.5.2. ANF, I:467)
19.
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215): “This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first (for He
was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, “He alone being “both”, both
God and man—the Author of all blessings to us; by whom we, being taught to live well, are sent on our way to life eternal.
. . . . . . The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught us to live well when He
“appeared as our Teacher; that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never ends” (Clement of
Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen, 1. ANF, II:173)
20. Tertullian (c. 160–225): For God alone is without
sin; and the only man without sin is Christ, since “Christ is also God.” (Tertullian, Treatise on the Soul, 41.
ANF, III:221)
21. Tertullian (again): “Thus Christ is Spirit of Spirit, and God of God,” as light of light
is kindled. . . . That which has come forth out of God is at once God and the Son of God, and “the two are one.”
In this way also, as “He is Spirit of Spirit and God of God”, He is made a second in manner of existence—in
position, not in nature; and He did not withdraw from the original source, but went forth. This ray of God, then, as it was
always foretold in ancient times, descending into a certain virgin, and made flesh in her womb, is in “His birth God
and man united.” (Tertullian, Apology, 21. ANF, III:34–35)
22. Hippolytus (170–235): “The Logos
alone of this God is from God himself; wherefore also “the Logos is God, being the substance of God.” (Hippolytus,
Refutation of All Heresies, 10.29. ANF, V:151)
23. Caius (180–217) [in response to those who would question the
deity of Christ] “Perhaps what they allege might be credible, did not the Holy Scriptures, in the first place, contradict
them. And then, besides, there are writings of certain brethren older than the times of Victor, which they wrote against the
heathen in defense of the truth, and against the heresies of their time: I mean Justin and Miltiades, and Tatian and Clement,
and many others, “in all which divinity is ascribed to Christ.” For who is ignorant of the books of “ Irenaeus
and Melito, and the rest, which declare Christ to be God and man?” All the psalms, too, and hymns of brethren, which
have been written from the beginning by the faithful, celebrate “Christ the Word of God, ascribing divinity to Him.”
(Caius, Fragments, 2.1. ANF, V:601)
24. Origen (c. 185–254): “Jesus Christ . . . in the last times, divesting
Himself (of His glory), “became a man, and was incarnate although God, and while made a man remained the God which He
was.” (Origen, De Principiis, Preface, 4. ANF, IV:240)
25. Novatian of Rome (210–280) “For “Scripture
as much announces Christ as also God”, as it announces “God Himself as man”. It has as much described Jesus
Christ to be man, as moreover “it has also described Christ the Lord to be God”. Because it does not set forth
Him to be the Son of God only, but also the Son of man; nor does it only say, the Son of man, but it has also been accustomed
to speak of Him as the Son of God. So that being of “both”, He is “both", lest if He should be one
only, He could not be the other. For as nature itself has prescribed that he must be believed to be a man who is of man, so
“the same nature prescribes also that He must be believed to be God who is of God.” . . . Let them, therefore,
who read that Jesus Christ the Son of man is man, read also that this “same Jesus is called also God and the Son of
God” (Novatian, On the Trinity, 11. ANF, V:620.)
Salvation
It
appears that the New Testament message for salvation is to believe in our hearts that God himself came in the flesh of his
only begotten Son (which is the virgin birth), to redeem those who believe, and they will inherit eternal life through his
name, and that He so loved us that he gave that only begotten Son, in whom his fullness dwelt, for a sacrifice for our sins,
and raised him up the third day, for our justification, who had no hope at all. We do not have to do anything for salvation,
only believe. Believe the word of God, where God says He will come and save us, in such scriptures as Isaiah 35:4-6, and it's
fulfillment in Luke 7:16-22. The problem people have is that they do not believe the prophets, but rather some misguided preacher!
There
is no Scripture that teaches the Son only doctrine.
Bottom
line nutshell
The apostles and there successors teach He is God and man. Example,
John
says, the Word “is God”, John 1:1, and then says the Word was made flesh, John 1:14, i.e. The Deity of Christ,
and then says that whoever does not confess this, i.e. He came in the flesh, is Anti Christ, i.e. against Christ coming in
the flesh, 1st John 4:2, and 2nd John 1:7. This is very clear.
Now the successors of the apostles taught
the same thing, i.e. the early church fathers believed that Jesus is God from the time of the apostles on.
Examples,
Ignatius of Antioch (c. 50–117): For “our God, Jesus the Christ”, was conceived by Mary according to God’s
plan, both from the seed of David and of the Holy Spirit. (Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians, 18.2. Translation from Michael
Holmes, Apostolic Fathers, 197)
2. Ignatius (again): Consequently all magic and every kind of spell were dissolved,
the ignorance so characteristic of wickedness vanished, and the ancient kingdom was abolished “when God appeared in
human form to bring the newness of eternal life.” (Ibid., 19.3. Holmes, AF, 199)
3. Ignatius (again): “For
our God Jesus Christ” is more visible now that he is in the Father. (Ignatius, Letter to the Romans, 3.3. Holmes, AF,
229)
4. Ignatius (again): “I glorify Jesus Christ, the God who made you so wise,” for I observed that you
are established in an unshakable faith, having been nailed, as it were, to the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ. (Ignatius,
Letter to the Smyrnaeans, 1.1. Holmes, AF, 249.)
5. Ignatius (again): Wait expectantly for the one who is above time:
“the Eternal, the Invisible, who for our sake became visible; the Intangible, the Unsuffering, who for our sake suffered,”
who for our sake endured in every way. (Ignatius, Letter to Polycarp, 3.2. Holmes, AF, 265.)
,
Clement of Alexandria (c. 150–215): says, “This Word, then, the Christ, the cause of both our being at first
(for He was in God) and of our well-being, this very Word has now appeared as man, “He alone being “both”,
“both” God and man—the Author of all blessings to us; by whom we, being taught to live well, are sent on
our way to life eternal. . . . . . . The Word, who in the beginning bestowed on us life as Creator when He formed us, taught
us to live well when He “appeared as our Teacher; that as God He might afterwards conduct us to the life which never
ends” (Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Heathen, 1. ANF, II:173)
2
Peter 1:1, Peter refers to the Son as, “the God of us”.
“Simon Peter, a servant and an
apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness “of God and
our Saviour Jesus Christ:” (According to Adam Clark, this should say, “of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ”,
instead of, “of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”)
Adam Clark says,
“Of
God and our Savior Jesus Christ – “This is not a proper translation of the original” του
Θεου ἡμων και σωτηρος
Ιησου Χριστου, which is literally, “Of our God
and Savior Jesus Christ”; and this reading, which is indicated in the margin, should have been received into the text;
and it is an “absolute proof that St. Peter calls Jesus Christ God”, even in the properest sense of the word,
with the article prefixed. It is no evidence against this doctrine that one MS. of little authority, and the Syriac and two
Arabic versions have Κυριου, Lord, instead of Θεου, God,
as all other MSS. and versions agree in the other reading, as well as the fathers. See in Griesbach.”
Adam
Clark, being a scholar, sees a difference, but to me, they both are saying the same thing, i.e. Jesus Christ is our God and
Saviour.
My Hebrew Greek Interlinear by J.P. Green Sr, reads,
“The God of
us and Saviour of us, Jesus Christ:”
Another way of referring to the Son as our God.
Word
is God
If in the beginning, heaven and earth was created by the spoken Word of God, and the same Word was
God, but the Word was "not" made flesh "until" about 4 or 5000 years after creation, where was the Word
of God, which was God, until then?
Did the Word continue to be God throughout the Old Testament, and did
he do anything else, and how many Gods do we have?
Is this same Word, which is God, and which was made
flesh, according to John 1:1-14, the same God as YHWH of host in the Old Testament?
If the Word of God
is YHWH of host, this means that YHWH himself came and was manifested in the flesh, i.e. was in Christ reconciling the world
back unto himself. See 2 Corinthians 5:19
There is more than sufficient evidence in the Old Testament,
which teaches that YHWH himself would come and save, or redeem his people Israel, and he accomplished it by offering up his
only begotten Son.
Who are we, to tell him how to save his people?
He done it
through his only begotten Son, whom he loved, which was borne of a virgin, of the seed of David, and whom he gave as a sacrifice
to pay the price for our sins, because he loved us so much.
Sin was so bad in his site, that his
Son just dying was not enough, but he had to be bruised, beaten, humiliated, etc. to pay the full price, for our sins. In
other words it took his death plus some more, to pay the price.
I believe if just dying was enough
to pay for our sins, the Father would not have beaten him etc. see Isaiah 53:4-5. It took dying plus being bruised and wounded
for our sins!
At any rate, the Father gave his only begotten Son because he loved us so much.
Back
to our original questions, is God and his Word, one and the same, in John 1:1, and is he the God of the Old Testament?
We
know that the Son of God is born of a woman, after the seed of David, according to the flesh, and was not another God.
Genesis
1:1 says, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." No one else is mentioned.
Isaiah
45:15,17-18 "Verily thou art a God that hidest thyself, O God of Israel, "the Savior". [17] But Israel shall
be saved in YHWH with an everlasting salvation: ye shall not be ashamed nor confounded world without end. [18] For thus saith
YHWH that created the heavens; God "himself" that formed the earth and made it; "he" hath established
it, "he" created it not in vain, "he" formed it to be inhabited: "I" am YHWH ; and there is
none else."
I only see one God here and no Son.
Isaiah 45:12 "I have
made the earth, and created man upon it: "I", even "my hands", have stretched out the heavens, and all
their host have "I" commanded."
I only see one set of hands here!
Jeremiah
10:12 "He hath made the earth by his power, "he" hath established the world by his wisdom, and hath stretched
out the heavens by his discretion."
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days "YHWH" made heaven
and earth, the sea, and all that in them is , and rested the seventh day: wherefore YHWH blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed
it."
Did the Father rest the seventh day, or did the Word rest the seventh day??? I see only one resting.
Was
John 1 separating God's word from God?
It seems that all of the above is referring to one God who created
heaven and earth, by speaking it into existence, and did not need anyone else to help him. How could John have seen it any
other way?
Exodus 31:17 "It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days
"YHWH" made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day "he" rested, and was refreshed."
Again,
did the word rest, and was refreshed, or did God rest, and was refreshed?
Isaiah 42:5 "Thus saith
God YHWH , "he" that created the heavens, and stretched them out; "he" that spread forth the earth, and
that which cometh out of it; "he" that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:"
There's
only one here, and I'm sure John knew that!
Isaiah 44:24 "Thus saith YHWH , thy redeemer, and "he"
that formed thee from the womb, "I" am YHWH that maketh all things ; that stretcheth forth the heavens "alone";
that spreadeth abroad the earth "by myself;"
Notice YHWH says that he done it by himself self.
It does not get any clearer than that, and John would not have gone against it, therefore John 1:1 sees the Word as God i.e.
the
Logos is God, being the substance of God!
Isaiah 45:11-13 "Thus saith YHWH , the Holy One of Israel,
and his Maker, Ask "me" of things to come concerning "my" Sons, and concerning the work of "my"
hands command ye "me". [12] "I" have made the earth, and created man upon it: "I", even "my"
"hands", have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have "I" commanded."
Again,
one God, and one set of hands created heaven and earth, and his name is YHWH the Father.
Isaiah 51:13 "And
forgettest "YHWH" thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth;"
Isaiah
47:4 "As for our redeemer, YHWH of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel."
It appears that
the Father YHWH is the Redeemer, and he redeemed us through his Son. That is the way he chose to do it.
Isaiah
48:2 "For they call themselves of the holy city, and stay themselves upon the God of Israel; YHWH of hosts is his name."
Isaiah
51:15 "But I am YHWH thy God, that divided the sea, whose waves roared: YHWH of hosts is his name."
Isaiah
54:5 "For thy Maker is thine husband; YHWH of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of
the whole earth shall he be called."
Jeremiah 10:16 "The portion of Jacob is not like them: for
he is the former of all things ; and Israel is the rod of his inheritance: YHWH of hosts is his name."
Jeremiah
31:35 "Thus saith YHWH , which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for
a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; YHWH of hosts is his name:"
Jeremiah
32:18 "Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the Fathers into the bosom of their
children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, YHWH of hosts, is his name,"
Malachi 2:2 "If
ye will not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name, saith YHWH of hosts, I will even send a
curse upon you, and I will curse your blessings: yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to heart."
Again,
it appears that YHWH the Father is acting alone.
The question is, did John understand the word was separate
from God in John 1:1, or that the Word was God, and inseparable, especially after reading the Scripture, and did he understand
that God acted alone and created everything by his word???
Compare it with the following.
Psalm
33:6-9 "By the "word of YHWH" were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of "his mouth
(YHWH,S mouth). [7] "He" (singular) gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: "he" layeth up
the depth in storehouses. [8] Let all the earth fear "YHWH" : let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe
of "him". (Singler) [9] For "he spake" (YHWH spake, singular.), and it was done ; "he"
commanded
(singular), and it stood fast."
Notice God and his word is not two separate beings, therefore John
1:1 might not be separating God from his word, but that God is his word, and cannot be separated from him, i.e. the word is
God, and the apostle John is referring to Genesis, and showing how that God made the world by speaking his word, and not that
the word is a separate being from God, would be creating another God.
In other words, John is showing that
God's spoken word created heaven and earth, Not that they are 2 separate beings, but One.
Just as
the light that comes out of light, is still light, so is that which comes out from God is still God!
“This
ray of God, then, as it was always foretold in ancient times, descending into a certain virgin, and made flesh in her womb,
is in His birth God and man united.” (Tertullian, Apology, 21. ANF, III:34–35)
The rays of
the sun, coming out of the sun, is sun, and is always connected to it, so is the Word coming out from God, is God, and can
never be separate from Him!
John 16:25,27-28 KJVS
[25] “These things have I spoken unto you
in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.
[27] For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that *I came out from God*. [28] I came
forth from the Father, and am *come into the world*: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.”
The
apostles understood that anything that comes forth from pure God, has to be God, what else can it be???
This
harmonies with John 1:1, which teaches that the Word, that came out of the month of God, that created everything, was God,
what else could it be?
God is Spirit and Light, and that Light which came out from God, was God, even the
true Light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
John the Baptist bore witness
of that Light, saying that he is “the voice of one crying in the wilderness, prepare the way of YHWH, make straight
in the desert a highway for our God,” Isaiah 40:3.
Even if at once, the Son of God came forth, when
He (God) spoke, the Son would still be God, according to John 1:1 and Gen 1 etc.
How is it possible
that the Word of God, that come forth out of God, can be anything but God, even if He is called the Son of God?
Genesis
1:1-3 says, "In the beginning “God” (singular) created the heaven and the earth. [2] And the earth was without
form, and void; and darkness was upon the "face of the deep". And the "Spirit of God" moved upon the "face
of the waters". [3] And "God said", Let there be light: and there was light." (notice God himself is doing
the creative speaking here, NOT someone else!)
Notice also that God, and the Spirit of God, is one and
the same, just like the face of the deep and the face of the waters are one and the same. It is just another way of saying
the same thing. God is a spirit, and the Spirit of God is God.
This verse also lets us know that God is
a spirit as other verses confirm.
Notice also, that God is doing the creative speaking, and you cannot
separate him from His words. God is simply creating the world by speaking his word, or speaking it into existence. There is
not two separate beings here!
If the above is so, it could be that John is showing how that God, which
is his word, himself came in the flesh of his Son to redeem us back to Himself. It is not an anti-Christ belief, to believe
that YHWH is come in the flesh, 1st John 4:2.
This could be the mystery that the apostle Paul spoke
of in 1 Timothy 3:16, Which says,
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: "God
was manifest in the flesh", justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world,
received up into glory."
Why must we try to interpret these Scriptures to make them fit our theology?
We
mustn't forget, 2 Corinthians 5:19, which says,
"To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling
the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation."
We
know that God dwelleth not in temples made with hands, so why is it hard for us to believe that the Father was living in his
Son, A holy undefiled temple made without hands.
John 14:10 "...the Father that dwelleth in me (the
Son speaking), he doeth the works."
Why is it hard for us to believe that the fullness of the Godhead
lived in him, when the scripture plainly says it, and it needs no private interpretation.
Colossians 2:8-9
"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. [9] For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."
This
sounds like the apostle Paul does not want someone to deceive us into not believing that the fullness of God dwelleth,
or lives, in his Son.
Again, the Almighty does not dwell in temples made with hands. The Son is the undefiled
temple of God, Born of a virgin, in which God lived.
He even said as much when he said, speaking
as God, "destroy "this" temple, the one he was living in, and "I" will raise it up, God speaking
of his temple or the body of his Son, that he was living in. We know from other scriptures that God is the one that raised
His Son from the dead, not the Son, therefore we know that he was speaking as God. See John 2:19-21 for proof.
Other
times he spoke as man, when he said things like the Father is in me, and the Father is greater than I, etc. Remember, he was
"both" Lord and Christ , or both God and man, Acts 2:36
It might be that the antichrist is the
ones that cannot confess that the Almighty YHWH, is come in the flesh.
If the Son is just a man, and nothing
more, it doesn't make sense to me to confess that he is come in the flesh, because all men are come in the flesh. But if he
is both God and man, then I can see how that we must confess that God is come in the flesh of his Son. But to just confess
that the man is come in the flesh doesn't make sense. In other words, the Word, "which is God", is come in the flesh,
John 1:1-14.
From all of the above Scriptures, it does not appear that the word preexisted as his Son in
creation, or another God. It teaches that he (God himself) stretched forth the heavens alone, by himself, without the help
of anyone, Isaiah 44:24.
If John 1:1 teaches that the word is the Son, and God is the Father, then it could
be understood like this.
In the beginning was the word/Son, and the word/Son was with the Father/God, and
the word/Son was the Father/God.
That doesn't sound too good, we know the Son is not the Father.
It fits scripture if we understand it like this,
In the beginning was the Word/God, and the Word was with
God, and the Word was God. In other words, the word is God who created heaven and earth, and this lines up with the Old Testament
Scriptures.
John also refers to the Word, which is God, as light, and life. The Scripture clearly teaches
that "God" is light and life!
If this verse had said, "in the beginning was light",
and the light was with God, and the light was God, would we have thought that the light is something different or separate
from God, when we know that God is light???
Trying to separate God from his word is like trying to separate
light from God, it can't be done.
When we read the account of creation in Genesis 1, and all the other
scriptures, we see that there is only one supreme Being who created heaven and earth, and in him is light and life.
I
believe John could rightly say that, in the beginning was the Word, Life, and Light, and the Word, Life, and Light was with
God, and the Word, Life, and Light, was God, without there being more than one God, or more than one Supreme Being!
This
would harmonize with all the Old testament scriptures that teaches that God made the heavens and earth, "by himself"
and alone. I do not believe it was the intent of John to separate the Word, the Life, and the Light, from God, which came
in the flesh, and was BOTH Father and Son.
2 John 1:7,9 "For many deceivers are entered into the world,
who confess not that Jesus (YHWH) Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist... [9] Whosoever transgresseth,
and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath "both"
the Father and the Son."
The way John worded it, leave the door open for Trinitarians to place a Trinitarians
thought in our minds, which is contrary to the creation account in the Old Testament Scripture, where no such thought exist.
On
the other hand, you have those that teach that the Son is God, which is almost as bad. The Bible teaches that God was in the
Son, not that God was the Son.
It is hard for some of us to believe that the Almighty YHWH himself, actually
came in the flesh to save us.
Here is positive proof, that he is "both" God and man, or Father
and Son.
Isaiah 35:4-6 "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold, "your
God will come" with vengeance, even God with a recompence; "he will come and save you". [5] "Then"
the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. [6] Then shall the lame man leap as an
hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert."
When
John the Baptist "heard" in the prison, that the Messiah was doing these things that God would do "when "he"
comes", (opening blind eyes etc.) he sent two of his disciples, to ask the Messiah if he was Him (God) that was to come?
We
know that the answer was YES, when he said, "you go show John these things are happening," i.e. the blind see, the
lame walk, the deaf hear, and the dumb speak, etc. see Matthew 11:2-6, and Luke 7:16-23, where they actually say that God
has visited his people.
Remember, John knew the Scriptures in Isaiah 35:4-6, and he already knew
that he was the Son of God, by the voice from heaven, but now he is hearing in the priSon, that the Messiah is doing the things
that God himself will do when "He" comes!
Remember also, that the Son said that the Father which
is in me, He doeth the works. see John 14:10
This lets us know that he is "both" YHWH the
Father, and YHWH the Son. Acts 2:36
Yes, the Father did come to save his people.
Isaiah
40:10 "Behold, YHWH God will come with strong hand , and his "arm" shall rule for him:" (Isaiah 53 teaches
His "arm" is the Son!)
Who are we to tell God how to save his people??? See Luke 1:68
If
the Word was not God, or separate from God, and "All things were made by him (the Word); and without him was not any
thing made that was made", John 1:3, what did YHWA the Father make?
The Scripture teaches that YHWA
the Father made all things! It appears that he done it by speaking his word, which was the "beginning of all creation",
not that His word was separate from him, but all creation began by it (the word of YHWH).
The
natural sun in the sky is a light and the light rays that comes from it is sun also, and the sun itself is the dispenser
of light, but when we see the rays, we are seeing the sun.
If we compared the spiritual light,
which is God, and the rays that radiate from him as the spirit of God, then the Spirit of God is God, same as the rays of
the sun is sun, and if the spirit rays, which is God, were made flesh, then we have God in flesh.
The rays
of the sun, is sun, and if those rays could be made flesh, we would have the sun in heaven, and on earth (in a flesh body),
at the same time. John 3:13 KJVS
[13] And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even
the “Son of man which is in heaven.”
God
is the dispenser of his word. We can see the invisible God through his word. Through his word we see that God is love, we
see that God is light, we see that he is righteous etc.
The word also is light
Glorify
me with thine own self, with the glory I had with thee before the world
Romans
9:5 KJVS
[5] Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came , who is over all, God blessed for
ever. Amen.
2 Peter 1:1-3 KJVS
[1] Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them
that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: [2] Grace and
peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, [3] According as his divine power hath given
unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
1
John 5:20 KJVS
[20] And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him
that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.
Spirit
of Christ and God is same!
Romans 8:9,11,14 KJVS
[9] But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit,
if so be that the “Spirit of God dwell in you”. Now if any man have not the “Spirit of Christ” (God),
he is none of his. [11] But if the “Spirit of him (God) that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you”, he that
raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his “Spirit that dwelleth in you”. [14]
For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Anti Christ
is Enemy of the Deity of Christ!
We see from the scriptures that the Enemies of the Deity of Christ, goes
back to New Testament times!
It is called Anti- Christ, and most likely further, into the Old Testament.
John
says, the Word “is God”, John 1:1, and then says the Word was made flesh, John 1:14, i.e. Deity of Christ, and
then says that whoever does not confess this, i.e. He came in the flesh, is Anti Christ, i.e. against Christ coming in the
flesh, 1st John 4:2, and 2nd John 1:7,
“Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: [3] And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the
flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already
is it in the world.” 1 John 4:2-3
“For many deceivers are entered into the world, who
confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.” 2nd John 1:7.
“The
above clearly shows what the enemies of the Deity of Christ are called, i.e. Anti Christ!”
Virgin
Birth though
I believe the virgin birth, and God coming in flesh, is the same thing!
I’m
not sure how anyone can say they believe in a virgin birth, and not believe the child will be BOTH God and man.
If
God is truly the Father of the Son, and woman, the mother, and if that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Father, the
child has to be “both”, God and man, because anything born of God, is God.
John 3:5-6,30-31
KJVS
[5] Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water “and” of the Spirit,
he cannot enter into the kingdom of God (in other words, we must become gods). [6] That which is born of the flesh is flesh
(man); and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit (God). (it appears that we must be born again, and become both, as he
was both God and man) …[30] He must increase, but I must decrease. [31] He that cometh from above is above all: he
that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he (God) that cometh from heaven is above all.”
The
reason I say this is because the seed of God is God, and anything that comes out of God, is God, and now we have both, God
in flesh.
If the Son is flesh only, and no part God, who then is his father???
Whatsoever
is born of flesh, is flesh, and whatsoever is born of God, is God.
Adam Clark on Luke 1:35
“The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee - This conception shall take place suddenly, and the Holy Spirit himself shall be the grand operator.
The power, δυναμις, the miracle-working power, of the Most High shall overshadow thee,
to accomplish this purpose, and to protect thee from danger. As there is a plain allusion to the Spirit of God brooding over
the face of the waters, to render them prolific, Genesis 1:2, I am the more firmly established in the opinion advanced on
Matthew 1:20, that the rudiments of the human nature of Christ was a real creation in the womb of the virgin, by the energy
of the Spirit of God.
Therefore also that holy thing (or person) - shall be called the Son of God - We
may plainly perceive here, that ‘the angel does not give the appellation of Son of God to the Divine nature of Christ;
but to that holy person or thing, το ἁγιον, which was to be born of the virgin, by
the energy of the Holy Spirit. The Divine nature could not be born of the virgin; the human nature was born of her. The Divine
nature had no beginning; it was God manifested in the flesh, 1 Timothy 3:16; it was that Word which being in the beginning
(from eternity) with God, John 1:2, was afterwards made flesh, (became manifest in human nature), and tabernacled among us,
John 1:14. Of this Divine nature the angel does not particularly speak here, but of the tabernacle or shrine which God was
now preparing for it, viz. the holy thing that was to be born of the virgin. Two natures must ever be distinguished in Christ:
the human nature, in reference to which he is the Son of God and inferior to him, Mark 13:32; John 5:19; John 14:28, and the
Divine nature which was from eternity, and equal to God, John 1:1; John 10:30; Romans 9:5; Colossians 1:16-18. It is true,
that to Jesus the Christ, as he appeared among men, every characteristic of the Divine nature is sometimes attributed, without
appearing to make any distinction between the Divine and human natures; but is there any part of the Scriptures in which it
is plainly said that the Divine nature of Jesus was the Son of God? Here, I trust, I may be permitted to say, with all due
respect for those who differ from me, that the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ is, in my opinion, anti-scriptural,
and highly dangerous. This doctrine I reject for the following reasons: - 1st. I have not been able to find any express declaration
in the Scriptures concerning it.
2dly. If Christ be the Son of God as to his Divine nature, then he cannot
be eternal; for son implies a father; and father implies, in reference to son, precedency in time, if not in nature too. Father
and son imply the idea of generation; and generation implies a time in which it was effected, and time also antecedent to
such generation.
3dly. If Christ be the Son of God, as to his Divine nature, then the Father is of necessity
prior, consequently superior to him.
4thly. Again, if this Divine nature were begotten of the Father, then
it must be in time; i.e. there was a period in which it did not exist, and a period when it began to exist. This destroys
the eternity of our blessed Lord, and robs him at once of his Godhead. 5thly. To say that he was begotten from all eternity,
is, in my opinion, absurd; and the phrase eternal Son is a positive self-contradiction. Eternity is that which has had no
beginning, nor stands in any reference to Time. Son supposes time, generation, and father; and time also antecedent to such
generation. Therefore the conjunction of these two terms, Son and eternity is absolutely impossible, as they imply essentially
different and opposite ideas.
The enemies of Christ's Divinity have, in all ages, availed themselves of
this incautious method of treating this subject, and on this ground, have ever had the advantage of the defenders of the Godhead
of Christ. This doctrine of the eternal Sonship destroys the deity of Christ; now, if his deity be taken away, the whole Gospel
scheme of redemption is ruined. On this ground, the atonement of Christ cannot have been of infinite merit, and consequently
could not purchase pardon for the offenses of mankind, nor give any right to, or possession of, an eternal glory. The very
use of this phrase is both absurd and dangerous; therefore let all those who value Jesus and their salvation abide by the
Scriptures. This doctrine of the eternal Sonship, as it has been lately explained in many a pamphlet, and many a paper in
magazines, I must and do consider as an awful heresy, and mere sheer Arianism; which, in many cases, has terminated in Socinianism,
and that in Deism. From such heterodoxies, and their abetters, may God save his Church! Amen!”
Prophecy
Son
is truly God, I checked the word “written”, and here's what I found.
In Matthew 2:4-6,
where King Herod demanded the chief priests and scribes to tell him where Christ would be born? They answered him with the
following scripture, which shows not only where he was to be born, but that Christ is from everlasting/God, and God in flesh!
Micah
5:2 “But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come
forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel “whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting”.
The
chief priest and scribes quote the above prophecy to Herod, about the Messiah/Christ and how his going forth have from old,
from everlasting, and it names the place where he was going to be born in the flesh! Did they understand, the one whose going
forth have been old, from everlasting, was now going to be born???
How can that be, unless the everlasting
God was made flesh, John 1:1-14, and 1st Timothy 3:16.
Only God Almighty is from everlasting, so
I checked my commentary, and here’s what Adam Clark had to say about it.
“Whose goings forth have been from of old - In every age, from the foundation of the world,
there has been some manifestation of the Messiah. He was the hope, as he was the salvation, of the world, from the promise
to Adam in paradise, to his manifestation in the flesh four thousand years after.
From everlasting - עולם
מימי miyemey olam, "From the days of all time;" from time as it came out of eternity. That
is, there was no time in which he has not been going forth-coming in various ways to save men. And he that came forth the
moment that time had its birth, was before that time in which he began to come forth to save the souls that he had created.
He was before all things. As he is the *Creator of all things*, so he is the Eternal, and no part of what was created. All
being but God has been created. Whatever has not been created is God. But Jesus is the Creator of all things; therefore he
is God; for he cannot be a part of his own work.” Adam Clark.
You can check with all the many Commentary
on Micah 5:2, which show the Deity of Christ.
I believe God appeared in Melchisedec,
who was also “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but
made like unto the Son of God;”
The above is obviously speaking of the Deity part of the Son of God,
which has no father or mother. In other words, the God that was made flesh, (John 1:1-14) has neither father nor mother, but
the flesh/Son has both. At any rate, Melchisedec had neither, just like the Son of God.
And as God,
He preexisted, and as man born at Bethlehem.
The
following shows that John the Baptist was the forerunner of God in the flesh.
Matthew 11:9-10 KJVS
[9]
But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. [10] For this is he , of whom it
is written, Behold, I send my messenger (John) before thy face (outward appearance), which shall prepare thy way before thee
(God).”
Malachi 2:17-3:1
[17] “Ye have wearied the LORD with your words….
When ye say,…. Where is the God of judgment? 3:1
“Behold, I (God) will send my messenger (John), and he
shall prepare the way before me (God): and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of
the covenant (God), whom ye delight in: behold, he (God) shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.”
The
above needs no interpretation, only believe. It will harmonize with God was made flesh and dwelt among us in an undefiled
temple (made without hands) born of a virgin in Beth-lehem Ephratah, as sayeth the Prophets.
Side
note: Thy “face” (Strongs G4383) is referring to the outward appearance of someone, and in this case God!
See
also Isaiah 40:3,
“The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness (John), Prepare ye the way of the LORD
(YHWH) , make straight in the desert a highway for our God (YHWH).”
No private interpretation needed
here either.
In the same book, just before Mathew 11:10, in verses 2-5, the Messiah gives positive
proof, from scripture (Isaiah 35:4-6), that he is God All Mighty that was to come and save us, God in the flesh. He quoted
Isaiah 35:4-6, which says God will come, in response to John’s question, after John heard of the works he was doing
(Mathew 11:2) are you Him/God which is to come? Here it is,
“Say to them that are of a fearful heart,
Be strong, fear not: behold, “your God will come” with vengeance, “even God” with a recompence; “he”
will come and save you. [5] “Then” the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.
[6] “Then” shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing: for in the wilderness shall waters
break out, and streams in the desert.”
Notice these things were happening and he was truly
God in the flesh, as John 1:1-14 clearly teaches. Why else would He quote this Scripture, in response to John’s question,
when John heard of the works He was doing, are you Him that is to come (Mathew 11:2)?
John already
knew he was the son of God, but now He is doing the things that God Himself was to do when He comes, according to the prophet
Isaiah in Isaiah 35:4-6! .
EVENING
We must find a conclusive scriptural definition of EVENING before we can keep
the appointments of YHWH.
First of all the original Scriptural definition of evening is found in Genesis one
and was the period of darkness that was called night and the definition of morning was the period of light that was called
Day, no other division of time was mentioned, or needed. As time went on and men
began to multiply they divided the night and day into more specific segments and used terms such as midnight, midday, noon,
twilight, sunrise, sunset, and between the evenings etc. these terms allow them to be more specific in communicating with
YHWH and each other. You had such terms as between the evenings before sunrise (Ex-16) and between the evenings at the going
down of the sun (Deut-16) etc. In today’s fast pace we have hours, minuets and seconds of time but in the beginning
the two basic periods of a day was evening and morning, the evening/darkness/night lasted until sunrise/light/morning/day,
which in turn lasted until evening/dark and it began over again. And I will prove this from Scripture.
I am about to prove from Scripture that
evening is dark.
I will start by showing that the ancient ancestors understood sundown as dark. See Genesis
15:17
“and it came to pass, that, when the sun went down, and it was dark,”
When the
sun is completely down it is dark.
Amos 8:9 says “I will cause the sun to go down at noon, and I will
darken the earth in the clear day:”
Notice if the sun goes down at noon, the earth will be dark, why
will the earth the dark??? Because the sun went down.
Micah 3:6 “the sun shall go down over the prophets,
and the day shall be dark over them.”
Here again we see that when the sun goes down, it is dark. Why?
Because the sun went down.
And for these ye shall be unclean: whosoever toucheth the carcase of them shall
be unclean until the even. And whosoever beareth ought of the carcase of them shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until
the even. [LEVITICUS 11:24-25]
Compare this verse with the following and you will see that sundown and dark
is synonymous with EVENING. “whosoever toucheth any creeping thing, whereby he may be made unclean, or a man of whom
he may take uncleanness, whatsoever uncleanness he hath; The soul which hath touched any such shall be unclean until even,
and shall not eat of the holy things, unless he wash his flesh with water. And when the “sun is down”, he shall
be clean… [LEVITICUS 22:5-7]
Notice: the two above Scriptures conclusively proves that sundown and
evening are synonymous, one says, and be unclean until the even. [LEVITICUS 11:24-25]
And the other says, And when
the “sun is down”, he shall be clean… [LEVITICUS 22:5-7] this proves that sundown and evening are synonymous,
and I have demonstrated how that sundown is dark. i.e. sundown equals evening and sundown equals dark according to scripture
definitions, and by using deductive reasoning we can conclusively prove from Scripture that evening is dark.
Above are just a few Scripture that support my understanding of sundown as being dark and sundown being evening.
We know from Genesis where He said the light He called day, i.e. day is the name for light, and if you still see light you
are seeing that day but when it gets completely dark at conjunction, another day began, same as the conjunction of the moon,
when the light is gone the new month begins.
I believe the Scriptures will interpret themselves as to what
sundown is and as to what evening is.
In Genesis we read, “the light he called day and the darkness he called
night and the evening (darkness) and the morning (light) were the first day (24hr period).”
I believe
this is a Scripture definition of evening, and I believe the above concerning sundown being dark, in one place, and sundown
being evening in another place, is a scriptural definition of sundown and therefore a new 24 hr period begins at dark/sundown/evening.
We cannot count on the Strong's concordance or any concordance's definition of a word if it cannot be proven from Scripture.
The concordance says evening is dusk but you cannot find no conclusive place in scriptures to support this.
People's understanding of words today are different than two thousand years ago. I gave scripture where sundown is referring
to dark and evening but our understanding of sundown is different.
The same is true with the Hebrew word
TWILIGHT. Twilight also was understood as dark but probably at different periods of the night/dark. i.e. when it 1st gets
dark it is twilight dark. This would allow people to communicate what time of the evening it was. We today might say six or
seven o'clock depending on what time it get's dark and they would say twilight.
Examples-
Proverbs
7:9 in the “twilight” in the evening, in the black and dark night:"
This proves that they
understood that Twilight, evening, black and dark night are all synonymous, same as sun down and evening and sundown and dark.
I believe that twilight is the period of darkness just after the sun is completely down and it is dark at conjunction and
there's another twilight in the darkness just before the sun comes up at conjunction, and the light gets brighter from that
point on but in any case the scriptural definition of twilight is dark according to the above scriptures. I realize man has
other understandings of twilight but can anyone show were twilight is not dark in Scripture?
Job 24:15-16
“the adulterer waiteth for the twilight, saying, no eye shall see me and distinguish his face. In the dark they dig
through houses which they have marked for themselves in the daytime.”
If someone want to say twilight
is something different than dark, would it be asking too much for just one scripture? Remember that twilight is also synonymous
with evening, same as sundown.
Twilight (dark/evening) or sundown/dark/evening it's all the same because
the Scripture teaches when the sun is down, it is dark. I believe they understood the true sundown as being synonymous with
dark.
“and in the evening I digged through the wall with my hands and brought it fourth in the twilight"
Again Twilight appears to be the early part of the darkness and begins right after dark, at conjunction, and Possibly
the darkness right before any light appears in the morning, at conjunction.
[EZEKIEL 12:4-8]
Then
shalt thou bring forth thy stuff by day in their sight, as stuff for removing: and thou shalt go forth at even in their sight,
as they that go forth into captivity. Dig thou through the wall in their sight, and carry out thereby. In their sight shalt
thou bear it upon thy shoulders, and carry it forth in the twilight: thou shalt cover thy face, that thou see not the ground:
for I have set thee for a sign unto the house of Israel. And I did so as I was commanded: I brought forth my stuff by day,
as stuff for captivity, and in the “even” I digged through the wall with mine hand; I brought it forth in the
“twilight”, and I bare it upon my shoulder in their sight. And in the “morning” came the word of Yahweh
unto me…
Notice, even is mentioned as the equivalent or synonymous with twilight and as the above
scripture proves, twilight is equivalent or synonymous with darkness and therefore evening is darkness also.
There is not one conclusive scripture that I know of that proves twilight to be anything but dark or that proves sundown
to be anything but dark or that proves evening to be anything but dark but I have proved conclusively from the above scriptures
that all three is referring to dark.
Job-3:9 "the stars of the twilight their of be dark."
The twilight stars are very bright right after it gets dark in the twilight, not some bogus twilight at dusk or BEFORE
dark.
Ps. Ne-13:19 "When the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark “before” the Sabbath"
I believe were says “it began to be dark” could be referring to DUSK before the Sabbath which begins at
DARK. If it BEGAN to be DARK before the Sabbath does not mean dusk, where would dusk come in at? Therefore the Sabbath day
does not began at dusk.
It does not say anything about the sun touching the horizon etc. when it began to
be dark before the Sabbath. i.e. the Sabbath would begin at dark, and he goes on to say that after the Sabbath the gates would
be opened.
Evening is defined as follows, by Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, and Brown, Drivers, Briggs
Hebrew Lexicon:
H6153 / SEC Definition / ‛ereb / eh'-reb / From H6150; dusk:— + day, even (-ing,
tide), night.
H6153 / ‛ereb / BDB Definition: / 1) evening, night, sunset / 1a) evening, sunset / 1b)
night
To Historically prove that evening and twilight end a day I offer the following Historical evidence
from a time period when the Temple was still standing.
WARS OF THE JEWS book 4 CHAPTER 9 (582)
(582) and the last was erected above the top of the Pastophoria, where one of the priests stood of course, and gave a signal
beforehand, with a trumpet, at the “beginning” of every seventh day, in the “evening twilight,” as
also at the “evening” when the “day was finished,” as giving notice to the people when they were to
“leave off work,” and when they were to go to “work again.”
In the above Josephus is saying that the trumpet was blown at evening twilight which is the beginning
of every seventh day and at the evening at the end of every seventh day for the people to go back to work again. Remember
Josephus is writing this during the time of the destruction of the Temple when the priesthood was still active which conclusively
proves the Jews at this time understood the day ends at evening twilight which is dark/conjunction and the day consisted of
24 hours.
Judges 19:8-9
7And when the man rose up to depart, his father in law urged him:
therefore he lodged there again. 8And he arose early in the morning on the fifth day to depart: and the damsel’s father
said, Comfort thine heart, I pray thee. And they tarried until afternoon, and they did eat both of them.
9And
when the man rose up to depart, he, and his concubine, and his servant, his father in law, the damsel’s father, said
unto him, Behold, now the day draweth toward evening, I pray you tarry all night: behold, the day groweth to an end, lodge
here, that thine heart may be merry; and to morrow get you early on your way, that thou mayest go home. 10But the man would
not tarry that night, but he rose up and departed, “
The man tarried until afternoon, and they
did eat both of them, and is told the day is almost over BECAUSE the day draweth toward evening, it was afternoon when he
tries to get him to wait another day and leave tomorrow and tomorrow always means the next day. i.e. ALL tomorrows have an
evening and morning, in that order, because when the day is over at evening, the morrow begins. It is evident in this case.
Brother Arnold
_________________
Lunar Sabbaths is one of the most provable doctrines in Scripture...
Brother Arnold
See www.lunarsabbath.info
