Examination of the incarnation doctrine.

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Oct. 02 2011,17:15)

You know nothing of Greek as I demonstrated in the “Freak Greek” thread.

You mean the thread YOU started and then ran away from – leaving Keith and Kathi to fend for themselves?    Keith ended up running away also, and Kathi and I agreed that 1:1 speaks of TWO, DIFFERENT BEINGS.  

But, I'll give you the short lesson anyway.  From the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars of NETNotes:
Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb.

Do you understand this, Jackaroo?  They are saying that, due to Colwell's rule, 1:1c could be translated one of THREE different ways:  1) THE God  2)  A god  3) god in a qualitative sense

Now, do I have to copy and paste the four OTHER scholars I quoted in the other thread (THREE of them TRINITARIANS) that AGREE to the “a god” translation  of 1:1c as a possibility?  Because that makes a total of TWENTY NINE scholars so far (TWENTY EIGHT of them TRINITARIANS).  OR…………do you and your “expert Greek knowledge” agree that there are THREE ways 1:1 can be translated?

Now, are you ready for the kicker?  Also from NETNotes:
The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”)

Do you see it, Roo?  Out of the THREE possibilities, the only ONE that these TRINITARIAN scholars rule out is the one YOU like!    They rule out the possibility of it being “THE God” because they are smart enough to realize that “THE God” could never logically be said to have been WITH “THE God”.  

So that leaves us with MY favorite – “a god” – or with the qualitative nuance, with basically means “and the Word was divine” – as Moffatt translates it.  So Jack, was the Word “a god”?  Or was the Word “divine”?  Because it is clear that the Word wasn't – how did the 25 TRINITARIAN scholars of NETNotes put it again? – “the person of God”.  

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Oct. 02 2011,17:15)

I was studying the scriptures when you were still feeding on your mother's breasts.

So about the same amount of time as Gene, who thinks Jesus was never anything more than a human being “exactly like us”?  And about as long as Ed J, who thinks the Word of God in Revelation 19 is God's Holy Spirit?  When I was feeding on my mother's breasts, it was 1964 – an age of many drugs like LSD.  Perhaps that explains some things about you three?    Jack, were you studying the scriptures while high on drugs? Is that what happened?  

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Pastry @ Oct. 02 2011,20:05)

Hi Mike! Since I have been so busy, I have not been on Heaven Net at all… So I will help out…

Okie-dokie!

[terraricca]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 03 2011,18:41)

To all………..Something to be considered in John 1:1 ………In (the) beginning was the Word (Logos) and the word was with God and the word (WAS) God. Now think about this for a minuet, What was John referencing to in an overall sense, was it not “the Beginning” that he was having us focusing on . So when he said the Word (Logos)  was God. He is simply telling us about (the) (a definite article ) Beginning, nothing more . He did not change any of his focus but was simply saying in that beginning the Word (logos) was indeed GOD, that has nothing to do with Jesus at all. But with the subject John was talking about and that was the beginning when all thing began no where did He change his focus to another subject or Person, just the ONE and ONLY True GOD. John was not addressing Jesus at all in that sentence. IMO peace and love to you all…………………………………………………………..gene

gene

you still struggling with truth ,and so can not find neither the beginning or the end

[Ed J]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 03 2011,01:51)

Mike……..So say you that it is a Metaphor but i say GOD the FATHER was Truly (IN) Jesus By the His SPIRIT which gave him the WORDS (reema) to speak to us from the LOGOS that was (IN) Him. What do you think He meant when he said the Father who is (IN) me HE does the works, do you think that was just a “metaphor” also. GOD the Father and  His LOGOS are one and the Same and who ever has the LOGOS (IN) them are also ONE with the Father and Jesus. This is what Jesus meant when he said the Father (IS) in me  and I (IN) YOU and Both GOD the Father and Jesus by the LOGOS which is SPIRIT of GOD can be in all and through all. Just as scripture say . “THAT GOD MAY BE IN ALL AND THROUGH ALL”.  God and the Logos can not be separated becasue the LOGOS was and IS GOD which is a SPIRIT (intellect) THAT RESIDES IN THE MINDS OF ALL WHO HAVE HIS HOLY SPIRIT IN THEM. The is not a Metaphor Mike it is fact. Mike was this also a Metaphor, ” destory this temple and in three day i shall raise it up” or this   ” O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stones, them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered thy childern together , even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings and you would not! Tell us mike was that GOD the FATHER speaking through the Mouth of Jesus by the LOGOS, or was it Jesus speaking from and for himself,  Or is that one of your so-called Metaphors? I noticed also Mike you failed to answer my questions about the Father who was (IN) Jesus He does the Works, and what Thomas Said,  was these all metaphors also.  Everything i am telling you will meet all these criteria but what you believe will NOT meet them, without you changing and forcing the text , and another thing your stupid Icons you continually post only goes to show your own ignorance even though you thing it is belittling other it really is belittling yourself. IMO   peace and love to you and yours……………………………………gene

God bless, Gene,

When are they going to come to the knowledge of the truth!   …Good post, Gene!

Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[GeneBalthrop]

ED j ………….If i say to them you and your word are one and the same , becasue your word express you yourself , they can easily understand that , But is i say GOD and His words are one and the same also, these same people have no clue that its the same thing with GOD. He and His words are one and all who have his words in the by the LOGOS (spirit of GOD) are one with GOD also Just as Jesus said He was . They simple do not believe Jesus nor what he said the Father is (IN) me Mike and his co-harts believe that is just a Metaphor, They do not believe GOD who (IS) Spirit can indwell a person even though Jesus said that over and over again , and finely Thomas Got it and Said  my Lord and my GOD But these can never get it becasue of their preconceived false understandings prevent them from believing it. So Like mike they say that was just a metaphor or something else but anything to doge the truth and the words of Jesus himself.  I believe when Jesus said the Father who (IS) in me (HE) does the works is exactly what Jesus meant to say and it was not a Metaphor becasue GOD was truly (IN) Jesus' Flesh. He was co-habiting that same body which he considered as a temple, and it was GOD the Father who spoke through Jesus and said “destory this body and in three days I (GOD) shall raise it (Jesus' Body) UP”>  ED J they simply do not believe Jesus nor do they believe this…..> For it is not you that speak, but (THE SPIRIT) of your FATHER which speaks (IN) you they simply do not even begin to understand what this truly means. God is SPIRIT and can and does indwell his creation that concept they can not understand it seems.

peace and love to you and yours………………….gene

[Pastry]

To All!  However in John 1:1 The Word of God is not just the word of God, it is the only begotten of the Father…And who is the only begotten of the Father? It is not Gods Holy Spirit, but Jesus Christ our Lord and King…..no other being fits that descrip0tion… when are YOU all going to learn  that….

Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  
Jhn 1:2   The same was in the beginning with God

Jhn 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.  

THE ONLY BEGOTTEN OF THE FATHER, JESUS CHRIST…….

Rev 19:13   And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.  
Rev 19:14   And the armies [which were] in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.  

Rev 19:15   And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.  

Rev 19:16   And he hath on [his] vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.  

THE WORD OF GOD, WHO ALSO IS KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS, JESUS CHRIST…..

This is so easy to understand that a 3 year old who just learned how to read, will understand….and YOU ALL can't??   There is something wrong here with your understanding…..Peace Irene

[Ed J]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Oct. 03 2011,10:15)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 03 2011,03:13) Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ Oct. 01 2011,16:51) Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 02 2011,04:53) Gene, You need to research John 1:1 a little more.  The Word is never called “THE God” in that verse.  And “THE God” is the only one we call “God”, with a capped “G”. All others are called “gods” in English, with a lower case “g”. And since the Word was WITH “THE God” in the beginning, he couldn't possibly have BEEN “THE God”. 1:1 speaks of TWO persons.  One of them was “THE God” while the other one was was WITH “THE God”.  That other one was also a mighty one, and therefore called a “god” in Biblical times – just like Satan was called a “god” in Biblical times. Logical fallacy. The Woman was with the Adam and was also the Adam. God called the male and the female “the Adam” (Gen. 5:1-2). KJ SonnyJack, I find it very amusing that you would come to a thread where I usually stand alone trying to defend the pre-existence of Jesus Christ to people who think he was never anything more than a human being “exactly like us”; and instead of helping me in this discussion, you would instead attack me.   Jack, everyone here but you can understand the difference between “THE Adam” (the first man) and “adam” (mankind). If the Word was said to be WITH “THE Adam”, and was himself “adam”, then we would understand that the Word was A man who was with THE Man. t8 has tried and tried to explain this to you.  In fact, I seriously believe that you DO understand it.  But your doctrine won't allow you to ADMIT that you understand it. Your Daddy, Mike Mike, You have ALREADY been disproven of the “Freak Greek” thread. The word “God” in John 1:1c does not need a definite article because ]the nominative is inherently definitive all by itself. This assertion that the absence of the definite article must infer that it is indefinite is a load of novice crapola! See this argument a JW gave on CARM and my reply: The JW said: Quote Careful translators recognize that…a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb [a verb which is a form of, as we would say in English, ‘to be’. Or, as Greek grammarians would say, a form of ei*miV (eimi ay.MEE: the first person singular of the infinitive ei^nai, (einai, I.nigh), “to be”] points to a quality about someone …In the Greek text there are many cases of a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb, such as in Mr. 6:49; 11:31; Joh 4:19; 6:70;l 8:44; 9:17; 10:1, 13, 33; 12:6. In these places translators insert the indefinite article “a” before the predicate noun in order to bring out the quality or characteristic of the subject—New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures With References, (large print edition), 1984, “Appendix 6A”, p. 1579. See also: Kingdom Interlinear Translation, 1985, “Appendix 2A”, p. 1139. The 1950, 1951 and 1971 editions of the NWT, identify the type of noun under consideration as “the predicate noun” (bis), not nouns of other cases. pp. 776, 1363 respectively. I replied: Quote You overlooked an example from John 8:54: “Jesus replied, 'If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God (theos), is the one who glorifies me.' ” John 8:54 The word “God” is the predicate and is anarthrous and it precedes the verb eimi. If we apply your “rule” to Jesus' statement it must read thus: “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim is a god of you, is the one who glorifies me.” So give it up Mike. You know nothing of Greek as I demonstrated in the “Freak Greek” thread. I gave the same argument to you there as I did to the JW at CARM. Mike said: Quote Your Daddy, Mike My “Daddy”? I was studying the scriptures when you were still feeding on your mother's breasts. Learn some humility dude and listen to us who have formally studied Greek. Your grammar in John 1:1c is based in the NWT. Only one of the NWT translators had a high school education and NONE had any formal training in the Greek or Hebrew. Jack

Hi Jack, excellent point!

Ελληνική έχει μερικά αρκετά ακριβείς κανόνες, καλό σημείο και πάλι!

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Hi Irene,

           “The Word”(Ho Logos) of God is God's Seed.
      The seed is “The Word”(Ho Logos) of God. (Luke 8:11)

Hebrews 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but
The Word(TheSeed “IS” HolySpirit) of the oath, which was since the law,
maketh the Son(Jesus Christ), who is consecrated for evermore.

1Pet.1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of
incorruptible, by “The Word” of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Of his own will begat he us with “The Word” of truth,
that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18)

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
[URL=http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[terraricca]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 04 2011,08:07)

Hi Irene,            “The Word”(Ho Logos) of God is God's Seed.       The seed is “The Word”(Ho Logos) of God. (Luke 8:11) Hebrews 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but The Word(TheSeed “IS” HolySpirit) of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son(Jesus Christ), who is consecrated for evermore. 1Pet.1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by “The Word” of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. Of his own will begat he us with “The Word” of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18) God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) [URL=http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

that s a good explanation for the ones who do not understand scriptures and gabble anything on the way,

if you can prove with scriptures all of them ,that what you said in your quote is as you say ,then I will believe it ,how is that

but if you only think that it is so ,then you have nothing just an opinion ,right

[terraricca]

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 04 2011,05:20)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 03 2011,01:51) Mike……..So say you that it is a Metaphor but i say GOD the FATHER was Truly (IN) Jesus By the His SPIRIT which gave him the WORDS (reema) to speak to us from the LOGOS that was (IN) Him. What do you think He meant when he said the Father who is (IN) me HE does the works, do you think that was just a “metaphor” also. GOD the Father and  His LOGOS are one and the Same and who ever has the LOGOS (IN) them are also ONE with the Father and Jesus. This is what Jesus meant when he said the Father (IS) in me  and I (IN) YOU and Both GOD the Father and Jesus by the LOGOS which is SPIRIT of GOD can be in all and through all. Just as scripture say . “THAT GOD MAY BE IN ALL AND THROUGH ALL”.  God and the Logos can not be separated becasue the LOGOS was and IS GOD which is a SPIRIT (intellect) THAT RESIDES IN THE MINDS OF ALL WHO HAVE HIS HOLY SPIRIT IN THEM. The is not a Metaphor Mike it is fact. Mike was this also a Metaphor, ” destory this temple and in three day i shall raise it up” or this   ” O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stones, them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered thy childern together , even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings and you would not! Tell us mike was that GOD the FATHER speaking through the Mouth of Jesus by the LOGOS, or was it Jesus speaking from and for himself,  Or is that one of your so-called Metaphors? I noticed also Mike you failed to answer my questions about the Father who was (IN) Jesus He does the Works, and what Thomas Said,  was these all metaphors also.  Everything i am telling you will meet all these criteria but what you believe will NOT meet them, without you changing and forcing the text , and another thing your stupid Icons you continually post only goes to show your own ignorance even though you thing it is belittling other it really is belittling yourself. IMO   peace and love to you and yours……………………………………gene God bless, Gene, When are they going to come to the knowledge of the truth!   …Good post, Gene! Your brother in Christ, Jesus. Ed (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

edj

Quote

God bless, Gene, When are they going to come to the knowledge of the truth! …Good post, Gene! Your brother in Christ, Jesus. Ed

what truth ??

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (Pastry @ Oct. 04 2011,00:43)

Jhn 1:1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.   Jhn 1:2   The same was in the beginning with God

Irene……….Get it God and his words are one and the SAME, Yes Just as your words are with You so GOD'S words are with him and Yes even in the “BEGINNING was those words of His with Him Just as your words are with YOU there is no difference GOD'S word are with him also. Both John 1:1 and 2 back up what i have been trying to said all along. GOD and HIS LOGOS are one and the same Being. And that was at the very beginning of all things. God Spoke and they were created by His POWERS> He spoke all thing into existence. What you fail to understand is a WORD is Simply the expression of SPIRIT (INTELLECT) with us or Jesus and even GOD the FATHER also.

Irene how do you think that GOD the FATHER was (IN) Jesus as Jesus said He was, How was he in Jesus reconciling the World unto himself? it was BY his LOGOS or (SPIRIT)and that LOGOS can Be (IN) Us also , Just as Paladin said . You need to go back and reread what Paladin has said and this time think about it.

peace and love to you and George………………………………..gene

[GeneBalthrop]

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 04 2011,01:27)

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 04 2011,05:20) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 03 2011,01:51) Mike……..So say you that it is a Metaphor but i say GOD the FATHER was Truly (IN) Jesus By the His SPIRIT which gave him the WORDS (reema) to speak to us from the LOGOS that was (IN) Him. What do you think He meant when he said the Father who is (IN) me HE does the works, do you think that was just a “metaphor” also. GOD the Father and  His LOGOS are one and the Same and who ever has the LOGOS (IN) them are also ONE with the Father and Jesus. This is what Jesus meant when he said the Father (IS) in me  and I (IN) YOU and Both GOD the Father and Jesus by the LOGOS which is SPIRIT of GOD can be in all and through all. Just as scripture say . “THAT GOD MAY BE IN ALL AND THROUGH ALL”.  God and the Logos can not be separated becasue the LOGOS was and IS GOD which is a SPIRIT (intellect) THAT RESIDES IN THE MINDS OF ALL WHO HAVE HIS HOLY SPIRIT IN THEM. The is not a Metaphor Mike it is fact. Mike was this also a Metaphor, ” destory this temple and in three day i shall raise it up” or this   ” O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets, and stones, them which are sent unto you, how often would I have gathered thy childern together , even as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings and you would not! Tell us mike was that GOD the FATHER speaking through the Mouth of Jesus by the LOGOS, or was it Jesus speaking from and for himself,  Or is that one of your so-called Metaphors? I noticed also Mike you failed to answer my questions about the Father who was (IN) Jesus He does the Works, and what Thomas Said,  was these all metaphors also.  Everything i am telling you will meet all these criteria but what you believe will NOT meet them, without you changing and forcing the text , and another thing your stupid Icons you continually post only goes to show your own ignorance even though you thing it is belittling other it really is belittling yourself. IMO   peace and love to you and yours……………………………………gene God bless, Gene, When are they going to come to the knowledge of the truth!   …Good post, Gene! Your brother in Christ, Jesus. Ed (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org edj Quote God bless, Gene, When are they going to come to the knowledge of the truth!   …Good post, Gene! Your brother in Christ, Jesus. Ed what truth ??

Terricca………….The truth you are to blind to see at this time. Because of your preconceived past trinitarian associations. IMO

peace and love……………………………………..gene

[Ed J]

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 04 2011,01:25)

Quote (Ed J @ Oct. 04 2011,08:07) Hi Irene,            “The Word”(Ho Logos) of God is God's Seed.       The seed is “The Word”(Ho Logos) of God. (Luke 8:11) Hebrews 7:28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but The Word(TheSeed “IS” HolySpirit) of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son(Jesus Christ), who is consecrated for evermore. 1Pet.1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by “The Word” of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. Of his own will begat he us with “The Word” of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18) that s a good explanation for the ones who do not understand scriptures and gabble anything on the way, if you can prove with scriptures all of them ,that what you said in your quote is as you say ,then I will believe it ,how is that but if you only think that it is so ,then you have nothing just an opinion ,right

Hi PR,

What do you mean by  “all of them” ?

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[Ed J]

Quote (terraricca @ Oct. 04 2011,01:27)

edj Quote God bless, Gene, When are they going to come to the knowledge of the truth!   …Good post, Gene! Your brother in Christ, Jesus. Ed what truth ??

Hi Pierre,

What truth?  …that's the same thing (in essence) that Pontius Pilate said to Jesus in John 18:38!  …coincidence?
The Hebrew has no word for coincidence, and they believe that if their language does not have a word for something than it doesn't exist.

God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

[kerwin]

Mike,

Quote

Before I ask my question, consider also: Hebrews 11:3 by faith we understand the ages to have been prepared by the Word of God, in regard to the things seen not having come out of things appearing;

I see the similarities.

Quote

But let's try this one on for size: Hebrews 1:2 in these last days He has spoken to us through His son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the ages. The vast majority of English translations render the Greek word “aeons” as “worlds” or “universe” in both of these scriptures.  NETBible, which uses “world”, explains:

Is “aeons” “singular” or “plural”?  Does it make a difference?

Quote

Ephesians 1 King James Version (KJV) 20Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, 21Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

Quote

Ephesians 2 King James Version (KJV) 4But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, 5Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) 6And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: 7That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

Quote

Hebrews 6 King James Version (KJV) 4For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, 5And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Pastry @ Oct. 03 2011,07:43)

To All!  However in John 1:1 The Word of God is not just the word of God, it is the only begotten of the Father…And who is the only begotten of the Father? It is not Gods Holy Spirit, but Jesus Christ our Lord and King…..no other being fits that descrip0tion… when are YOU all going to learn  that….

Hi Irene,

I went round and round with Kerwin until I finally got him nailed down on this exact point that you just made.  And guess what?  Instead of acknowledging the simple truth that JESUS ALONE is the “only begotten of the Father”, and therefore HAS TO BE the Word, he opted for the conclusion that John 1:14 speaks of some UNKNOWN only begotten of God!    Can you believe that?  He would rather have the scriptures speak of God's UNKNOWN only begotten Son than admit the TRUTH that you just posted.

peace,
mike

[mikeboll64]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Oct. 03 2011,08:50)

Irene……….Get it God and his words are one and the SAME, Yes Just as your words are with You so GOD'S words are with him and Yes even in the “BEGINNING was those words of His with Him Just as your words are with YOU there is no difference GOD'S word are with him also.

Gene,

ANYTHING that can be said to be WITH you cannot possibly BE you.  That is just simple common sense, dude. ESPECIALLY when that thing is described with a masculine, personal pronoun like “HE”. Is the Word of God a “HE” that was both WITH God AND God?

[mikeboll64]

Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 03 2011,18:24)

Is “aeons” “singular” or “plural”?  Does it make a difference?

It is plural in Hebrews 1:2.  It refers to MORE THAN ONE AGE that was created through God's Son.

[Lightenup]

I think that ya'll should study how the Jews spoke about 'the Word of God' in their paraphrase of the scriptures. I believe it is called the Talmud or the Targums but if you want to know more, I can dig it up for you.

From what I remember, the Jews would replace 'Jehovah' with 'the Word of God' when Jehovah was seen or heard since they knew that no man has seen God or heard His voice.

Kathi

[Lightenup]

Ok, I dug some up here:

This “Word of YHWH” was, according to Targum Jonathan, the Creator:

And the Word [Memra] of YHWH created man in his likeness,
in the likeness of YHWH, YHWH created,
male and female created He them.
(Targ. Jonathan Gen. 1:27)

This idea is also put forward in the Jerusalem Targum:

And the Word [Memra] of YHWH said to Moses:
“I am He who said unto the world 'Be!' and it was:
and who in the future shall say to it 'Be!'
and it shall be.” And He said: “Thus you shall say
to the children of Israel: 'I Am' has sent me to you.”
(Jerusalem Targum Ex. 3:14)

The Fragmentary Targum of the Torah also expresses that the Word of YHWH was the Creator:

The first night, when the “Word of YHWH”
was revealed to the world in order to create it,
the world was desolate and void,
and darkness spread over the face of the abyss
and the “Word of the Lord” was bright and illuminating
and He called it the first night.
(Fragmentary Targum Ex. 12:42)

That the Word of YHWH was the Creator can also be seen in the Tanak itself:

By the Word (DAVAR) of YHWH were the heavens made,
and all the hosts of them by the Spirit of His mouth.
(Ps. 33:6)

Whenever the Targums come to passages where YHWH is anthropomorphisised or seen, or where two or more YHWHs are indicated by the text, the Targums will substitute “The Word [Memra] of YHWH” for YHWH. For example in Gen. 19:24 the Tanak has:

And YHVH rained brimstone and fire upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah, from YHVH, from the heavens.
(Original Bible Project preliminary edition)

The Hebrew grammar here indicates that one YHWH rains fire from another YHWH. But Targum Jonathan substitutes “The Word of YHWH/the L-RD” for the first of the two YHWHs as follows:

And the Word of the YHWH caused to descend upon the peoples of Sodom and Gommorah, brimstone and fire from the YHWH in heaven.

In another example the Torah has:

Ex. 24:1a (YHWH is the speaker, see Ex. 20:1-2)
Now He [YHWH] said to Moses, “come up to YHWH…”

But Targum Jonathan paraphrases the speaker in Ex. 20:1 with the substitution “the Word [Memra] of YHWH” in place of “YHWH.”

“And the Word of the Lord spoke all these glorious words…”

So it would seem that one of these entities called “YHWH” in these Torah passages was actually understood by the Targumists as being the “Word of YHWH.”

Moreover Abraham prayed in the name of the Word of YHWH:

And Abraham worshipped and prayed
in the name of the Word [Memra] of YHWH,
and said, “You are YHWH who does see,
but You cannot be seen.”
(Jerusalem Targum Gen. 22:14)

Note that here Abraham prays “in the name of the Word of YHWH” to the YHWH who “cannot be seen.” Here two YHWH’s are very apparent. Abraham is praying in the name of the Word of YHWH but is praying to the YHWH who cannot be seen. This idea is reinforced elsewhere as follows:

And Hagar praised and prayed in the name of the Word [Memra] Of YHWH who had revealed Himself to her…
(Jerusalem Targum Gen. 16:3)

Of this very incident Philo writes:

But Hagar flees out of shame. And a proof of this is, that the angel, that is the WORD of God, met her, with the intent to recommend her what she ought to do, and to guide her in her return to her mistress's house. For he encouraged her, and said unto her: “The Lord has heard the cry of thy humiliation,” which you uttered, not out of fear, nor yet out of hatred. For the one is the feeling of an ignoble soul, and the other of one which loves contention, but under the influence of that copy of temperance and modesty, shame.
(On Flight and Finding (5))

It was this Word of YHWH that Jacob also trusted in:

And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, “If the Word [Memra] of YHWH will be my support, and will keep me in the way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father's house in peace; then shall the Word [Memra]of YHWH be my Elohim.
(Targum Onkelos on Gen. 28:20-21)

from here: http://nazarenespace.com/profiles/blogs/the-word-of-yhwh-revealed-part

I think that ya'll would find this interesting.
Kathi

[Author]

Posts