Preexistence

[mikeboll64]

For Frank – the writings of mikeboll64, who has put this in HIS OWN words, knows the scriptures that back up his own words, and is willing and able to DEFEND what he writes:

1.  John was not the light, but came to testify about the light who was coming into the world. The Word was the light of men who came into the world. And we know from later scriptures that JESUS was that light.

2.  In Rev 19:13, Jesus is called “the Word of God” because he is the main spokesman for God.  He is called the Word of God by the same author in John's gospel.

3.  The Word became flesh, dwelled among us, and had the glory of God's only begotten.  Only Jesus had the glory of God's only begotten, because only Jesus IS God's only begotten.

4.  It is this Word that John testified about, saying very specific words.  Later, in verses 29-30, we find out that it was JESUS that John said these words about.

5.  To all who believed in the Word of God, the Word gave the right to become children of God.  JESUS is the one who gave us the right to become begotten of God, and joint heirs of God along with him.

6.  The Word cannot be the Spirit of God, as many non-preexisters claim, because the Spirit of God is what came down and rested on the Word of God who became flesh.

Frank, unlike you, I am able to defend each and every thing I just posted.  Unlike you, I am here to discuss the scriptural validity of what I post.  Because, unlike you, I am not afraid of being proved wrong, if it means I can learn the actual truth of the matter.

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Yahshua the Messiah is Not Almighty Yahweh

Modern day Christians believe that Yahshua the Messiah pre-existed in some form or another. Some say he was Melchizedek, some say he was “the captain of the host of Yahweh” (Josh.5:14), some say he was the archangel Michael, others say he was the “angel of Yahweh”. Perhaps the most erroneous view is that Yahshua was the “Yahweh” (LORD) of the Old Testament. This study is written in the hopes that all who read it will finally understand that Yahweh is the Almighty Creator of the heavens and the earth, and that Yahshua the Messiah is His Son, as it is written.

For some reason people feel they have to magnify the Savior into the position of the Almighty when, in fact, scripture makes it quite clear that the Father is greatest of all and the “head of Messiah” (1 Cor.11:3). Consider Yahshua's own words in Jn. 14:28, “…for my Father is greater than I.”; Jn.10:29, “My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all…”; and Jn. 13:16, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant [Yahshua] is not greater than his lord [Yahweh]; neither he that is sent [Yahshua] greater than he that sent him [Yahweh].” These verses teach us Yahshua's view of his relationship to his Father. Notice he didn't claim to be the Father but instead, made a clear distinction between the two.

Who is Yahshua's Father?

Who does scripture say is the Father? Is.63:16 says, “Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O Yahweh, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting.” Yahweh is the Father. Yet, some might claim that this scripture says Yahweh is the Father of Israel, not of Yahshua. In that case we need to note two other verses. The first is Heb.1:5; “For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?” Who said these things? All would agree that Yahshua's Father said them since He is referring to Yahshua as His Son. Heb.1:5 is a direct quote from Ps.2:7; “I will declare the decree: Yahweh hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” The first “I” here refers to Yahshua speaking through prophecy in which he declares that Yahweh is his Father!

We also previously saw that Yahshua said, “My Father is greater than I.” In reality he was also saying, “[Yahweh] is greater than I”, thereby teaching us that he is not Yahweh. Anyone who believes Yahshua is Yahweh must also believe Yahshua is the Heavenly Father. That is even more absurd and more difficult to prove in the light of scripture.

Who is the Elohim of Israel?

Who does scripture say is the Elohim (God) of Israel? Is. 45:3 says, “And I will give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou mayest know that I, Yahweh, which call thee by thy name, am the Elohim of Israel.” Yahweh is the Elohim of Israel. Since we already learned that Yahshua is not Yahweh, Yahshua cannot be the Elohim of Israel. This is confirmed in Acts 3:13, “The Elohim of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the Elohim of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Yahshua;…” The Elohim of Jacob (Jacob being Israel) glorified His Son.

Since the scriptures reveal the Elohim of Israel and the Father are both called Yahweh, some will go so far as to teach that there are two separate beings called Yahweh in order to support their erroneous belief that Yahshua pre-existed as Yahweh, Elohim of Israel. They use Gen.19:24 as proof of this; “Then Yahweh rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out of heaven;” At first glance there appear to be two Yahwehs, one in heaven and one somewhere near Sodom and Gomorrah. This is merely a figure of speech peculiar to the Hebrew language, an idiom. Similar idioms are seen in Eze.11:24 (two Spirits), Zech.10:12 ( two Yahwehs), Ex.24:1 (Yahweh used as idiom for “me”), Gen.17:23 (two Abrahams), and 1 Kgs.8:1 (two Solomons).

It is impossible to harmonize the two Yahweh doctrine with verses that teach there is only one Yahweh. Consider Nehemiah's prayer;

“Thou, even thou, art Yahweh alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth thee.” Neh 9:6

Ps 83:18 says;

“That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Yahweh, art the most high over all the earth.”

Is 45:6 says;

“That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am Yahweh, and there is none else.”

Zech 14:9 reads;

“And Yahweh shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Yahweh, and his name one.”

A second God cannot be named “Yahweh.”

Is.42:1 teaches us that Yahshua is Yahweh's servant. “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.” And again in Is.49:6, “And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”

Ps.2:2 reads, “The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against Yahweh, and against his anointed.” His “anointed” is Yahshua, making a clear distinction between the two. Peter applied this prophecy to Yahshua in Acts 4:26; “The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against Yahweh, and against His Messiah.” Peter never claimed that the Messiah pre-existed as Yahweh.

Ps.110:1 also distinguishes the two; “Yahweh said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” In Mt.22:41-46, Yahshua reveals this “lord” to be himself, the Messiah. Is Yahweh talking to His Son the Messiah or is He talking to Himself?

Ps.110 makes another intersesting statement in verse 5. This is one of the verses in which the Sopherim removed Yahweh's name and replaced it with “Adonai”. The text would have originally read, “Yahweh at thy right hand shall strike through kings in the day of His wrath.” It is then wrongly deduced that since Yahshua was invited to sit on Yahweh's right hand (Heb.1:13), he, Yahshua, must also be called “Yahweh”. There is no doubt that Yahweh invited Yahshua to sit at His right hand. But what does verse 5 mean? It must be understood in the same way Ps.16:8 and Ps.109:6 are to be understood. When someone is “at thy right hand” it means their power and strength are derived from that source. David derived his power from Yahweh and so it is said that Yahweh is “at my right hand.” A wicked person would derive his power from Satan and so it is said, “Let Satan stand at his right hand.” When Yahshua comes to carry out Yahweh's wrath upon the wicked, Yahweh will be his strength. See, also, Mic.5:4.

Who is the Prophet like unto Moses?

In Acts 3:22,23 Peter quotes from Deut.18:15,19 proving that Yahshua is the “prophet like unto Moses.” Placing the name “Yahshua” in brackets clearly shows him not to be Yahweh. “Yahweh thy Elohim will raise up unto thee a Prophet [Yahshua] from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him [Yahshua] ye shall hearken.. . .I [Yahweh] will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my [Yahweh's] words in his [Yahshua's] mouth; and he [Yahshua] shall speak unto them all that I [Yahweh] shall command him [Yahshua]. . . . And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my [Yahweh's] words which he [Yahshua] shall speak in my [Yahweh's] name, I [Yahweh] will require it of him.” Jn.12:49 is a direct fulfillment of Deut.18:18; “For I have not spoken of myse
lf; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.”

Let's treat Is.53:6, 10 ,12 similarly; “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and Yahweh hath laid on him [Yahshua] the iniquity of us all. . . Yet it pleased Yahweh to bruise him [Yahshua]; he [Yahweh] hath put him [Yahshua] to grief: when thou [Yahweh] shalt make his [Yahshua's] soul an offering for sin, he [Yahshua] shall see his seed, he [Yahshua] shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of Yahweh shall prosper in his [Yahshua's] hand.”

Zech.12:10 is often misunderstood due to an apparent error in the text. It reads, “And I [Yahweh] will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” The word “me” obviously does not harmonize with the pronouns “him” and “his” that follow. The same verse is quoted in Jn.19:37; “And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced.” John gives us the correct understanding of this verse.

Another possible error occurs in Acts 20:28; “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Spirit hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood (KJV).” The great majority of Greek MSS have kurios (Lord) here instead of theos (God). In that case, Lord would refer to Yahshua whose blood was shed. Even if we were to accept the KJV rendering, it would have to be understood in the sense that parents often refer to their children as their “own flesh and blood.” In that sense the blood of Yahshua was the “blood of [Yahweh]'s own.”

YAHWEH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS

Jer.23:6 is often used to prove Yahshua is Yahweh. “In his [Yahshua's] days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his [ Yahshua's] name whereby he [Yahshua] shall be called, YAHWEH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” If this verse teaches that Yahshua is Yahweh because he is called “Yahweh Our Righteousness, then Jer.33:16 teaches that Jerusalem is also Yahweh. It reads, “In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, Yahweh our righteousness.” The translators did not use the same capitalization because they undoubtedly feared that it would suggest Jerusalem is Yahweh.

A difficult passage to understand is found in Jn.12:37-41. A superficial reading leads one to believe that the “his” and “him” of verse 41 refers to Yahshua and ties in with verse 37. For the sake of clarity these verses will be printed out with [brackets] designating the speaker. Jn.12:37,38, “But though he [Yahshua] had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him [Yahshua]: That the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he [Isaiah] spake, Lord, 'who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Yahweh been revealed?' (The underlined is a quote from Is.53:1. The “arm of Yahweh” is Isaiah's reference to the Messiah). The passage continues with verses 39-41; “Therefore they could not believe, because that Isaiah said again, 'He [Yahweh] hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I [Yahweh] should heal them.' These things said Isaiah, when he [Isaiah] saw his [Yahweh's] glory, and spake of him [Yahweh].” Verse 40 (underlined) is a quote from Is.6:10. John is quoting a second passage from Isaiah to show why they could not believe on Yahshua; because Yahweh blinded them. Verse 41 therefore, is referring to Is.6:10, not Is.53:1. In Is.6:1-3 Yahweh is seen in all His glory. That is the glory referred to in verse 41. It was not Yahshua's glory.

Since John the Baptist preceeded Yahshua, Is.40:3 and Mt.3:3 are often used to prove Yahweh is Yahshua. Is.40:3 reads, “The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Yahweh, make straight in the desert a highway for our Elohim.” Of all the N.T. verses that quote Isaiah, Lu.3:4-6 aids our understanding because it includes Is.40:4 & 5. It says, “As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Yahweh, make his paths straight. Every valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; And all flesh shall see the salvation of Yahweh.” “Prepare ye the way of Yahweh” does not mean, “Move out of the way because Yahweh is coming.” And so when Yahshua comes they believe he is Yahweh.

How was “the way” to be prepared? By filling valleys, leveling mountains, straightening paths, etc. This work is not to be understood literally, but spiritually through the humbling of those in exalted positions and the restoration of truth. Who was to do that work? Jn.4:34 says, “Yahshua saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of Him that sent me, and to finish his work.” Almighty Yahweh appointed His Son Yahshua to finish His work. Yahshua was Yahweh's instrument in the accomplishment of His great plan. Yahshua is the “Messenger of the Covenant,” “the servant of Yahweh,” and “the salvation of Yahweh.” Jn.14:6 calls Yahshua “the way.” He is “the way of Yahweh;” the means through which Yahweh will finish His work.

Two Creators

Gen.1:26 is often used to show Yahshua's hand in Creation. It reads, “And Elohim said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.” They say the Father is talking to the Son in this verse based on the pronouns used. Notice, however, that verse 27 says, “So Elohim created man in his own image, . . .” Why isn't the phrase “in their own image” used? Again, in Gen.11:7,8, “us” is used and yet Yahweh alone scattered them abroad. According to Job 38:4-7, “the sons of Elohim shouted for joy” when Yahweh created the earth. This doubtless refers to the angels who were also present at the creation of man. Yahweh could be speaking to them, in Gen.1:26, using the plural of majesty. An example of this is found in Ezr. 4:18; “The letter which ye sent unto us hath been plainly read before me.” In this case, a letter was written strictly to King Artaxerxes and no one else (vs. 11). Yet the King speaks as though it was written to others as well. Another example would be the Queen of England saying, “We, the Queen of England, . . .” It can also be understood in the sense of someone saying, “Let us drive to the lake for a picnic,” and yet, only the speaker does the driving. To believe Yahweh is talking to Yahshua is an assumption. It is reading into the text something that it does not say.

If we do not try to force the scripture to conform to our own doctrines, they are so simple to understand. Instead men try to support “Holy Trinities”, “Incarnations”, “Transubstantiations”, and the like. The Bible does not use terms like “Father” and “Son” to try and trick us. They are used to express a relationship that we can relate to. If Yahshua is Father Yahweh, the scriptures would state it in plain language. Instead, it says that Yahshua is the Son of Father Yahweh.

An article in “Israel Today” tried to explain this relationship by saying Yahweh manifested himself in the fleshly form of Yahshua. The author calls this the incarnation. This same author rightfully puts down the trinity because the word is not found in the Bible and yet, he exalts another unscriptural term, “incarnation.” Perhaps he was misled by the erroneous translation of 1 Tim.3:16 in the KJV. It says, “God was manifest in the flesh.”
A footnote in the Emphatic Diaglott reads, “Nearly all ancient MSS., and all the versions have “He who,” instead of “God,” in this passage.” Even if the incarnation theory was true, would Yahweh continue to manifest himself as Yahshua even after the Millennium? 1 Cor.15:24-28 and Rev.22:1 show both as separate beings after the Millennium. The truth is, they are not parts of one being but two separate and distinct beings. That is why Yahshua could say what he did in Jn.8:17,18, “It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.” Yahweh and Yahshua are two separate beings, not two manifestations of one being.

When the scriptures are accepted at face value, without reading into the text more than it says, the relationship between the two becomes quite clear. In spite of this, many people are not satisfied with Yahshua's rank in the hierarchy of heaven. They feel a need to exalt him into the number one position, that of Yahweh Almighty, and they will twist scripture in a variety of ways to accomplish this.

Yahweh is One

Concerning the “Shema” (Deut.6:4) it reads, “Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our Mighty One is one Yahweh:” or “Yahweh is one.” It is believed by many that the word “echad,” translated “one,” means “a united one” or a “compound unity,” not singularity. The scriptures prove this belief to be false. Note Nu.7:13-82 where “echad” is translated “one” 84 times and each time it means one as in the number one, singularity. Consider also Gen.2:1 – one rib and Dan.9:27 – one week.

Historic Judaism does not give echad the meaning of unity or plurality as is seen in the Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 14, p.1373: “Perhaps from earliest times, but certainly from later, the word echad (one) was understood also to mean unique. God is not only one and not many, but He is totally other than what paganism means by gods.” Note also The Jewish Commentary, Soncino Edition, p.770: “He is one because there is no other Elohim than He; but He is also one, because He is wholly unlike anything else in existence. He is therefore not only one, but the Sole and Unique, Elohim.”

Perhaps the most conclusive evidence that the word echad has the meaning of alone or unique comes to us from the Messiah himself in Mk.12:28-34. When asked which commandment was the most important, Yahshua responded by quoting the Shema. In response to his answer the teacher replied, “You are right in saying that Yahweh is one and there is no other but Him.” Although Yahshua did not specifically say “there is no other but Him” the teacher understood that meaning to be implied in the word echad or one. Yahshua acknowledged that the teacher answered wisely thereby confirming the teacher's correct understanding of the meaning of the Shema.

It is true that echad was used in verses such as Ge.2:24 and Ge.41:25. There we see two people becoming one flesh and two dreams having one meaning. The key here is that two become one. In the Shema, we only see one individual, Yahweh, proclaimed to be one! It doesn't say, “And the two Yahweh's became one.” In the two verses in Genesis, we don't see one becoming two. But that is what people are trying to do with the Shema. They say one means two and therefore, there must be two Yahweh's.

Yahshua said, “I and my Father are one.” (Jn.10:30). Does that mean they are the same being? Yahshua said something similar in Jn.17:22, “And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:”

Here again, Yahshua says he and the Father are one. But he also prays that his followers will be one in the same sense that he and Yahweh are one. That is a oneness of mind, purpose, and will, not a oneness of being. And it certainly does not mean there are two Yahweh's.

Elohim – Plural or singular?

The word “Elohim,” translated “God,” is often attacked as well. It is believed that it denotes a plurality or a god consisting of more than one being or more than one manifestation of a being. This, too, is a false concept based on the philosophy of men. Elohim is used in the Bible with a plural sense when it refers to several deities and in a singular sense when it refers to a singular deity. Its plural sense can be seen in Ex.12:12, “For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods (elohim) of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am Yahweh.” Its singular sense can be seen in 1 Sam.5:7, “. . . and upon Dagon our god (elohim)” and 2 Kgs.1:2, “. . . Go, enquire of Baal-zebub the god (elohim) of Ekron whether I shall recover of this disease.” Are we to believe that Dagon and Baal-zebub are also plural beings who can “incarnate” themselves as Yahweh “supposedly” did?

The word “God” (elohim) is properly applied to Yahshua in Heb.1:9 and Jn.20:28. Both words are from the Greek word “theos” which was also used in reference to Satan (2 Cor.4:4) and Herod (Acts 12:22). It has the same meaning as the Hebrew word “elohim” and can be applied to men, angels, and the Almighty. Ps.82:6 applies it to any child of the Most High; “I have said, Ye are gods [elohim]; and all of you are children of the most High.” It simply means “a mighty one among his people.” It is not wrong to call Yahshua an elohim or a god. The problem lies in believing he is the one true “God,” Yahweh Almighty. Yahshua made it clear that he was not, in Jn.17:3; “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee [Yahweh] the only true Elohim, and Yahshua Messiah, whom thou hast sent.” The Apostle Paul declared the same thing in 1 Cor.8:6; “But to us there is but one Elohim, the Father [Yahweh], of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Master Yahshua Messiah, by whom are all things, and we by him.”

Oneness proponents wrongly interpret 1 Jn.5:20 to mean that Yahshua is the one true “God.” It reads, “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” (KJV). When it says, “his Son Jesus Christ,” it means Yahweh's Son. That being the case, the previous use of the pronoun “him” in the two phrases “him that is true” must also refer to Yahweh. The “his” and “him” refer to the same person. To say that “This is the true God” refers to the Son is grammatically incorrect.

Not only is Yahweh the one true Elohim, but He is also Yahshua's Elohim. If Yahshua is an elohim or god and he himself has a god, then surely his god must be a greater god. This is what scripture teaches in Mt.27:46; Jn.17:3; 20:17; Eph.1:17; Heb. 1:9; and Rev.3:12. Rev.3:12 says, “Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my Elohim, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my Elohim [Yahweh], and the name of the city of my Elohim, New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my Elohim: and I will write upon him my new name.” Yahshua is saying this after he ascended to heaven and sat down at the right hand of Yahweh (Heb 8:1). If he was the Yahweh Almighty of the Old Testament, who is his Elohim and who is he sitting next to? Two scriptures answer that question. The first is Ps.110:1; “Yahweh said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” The second is Mic.5:4; “And he [Yahshua] shall stand and feed in the strength of Yahweh, in the majesty of the name of Yahweh his Elohim; and they shall abide: for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth.”

The Image of Yahweh

What about Jn.14:9? “Yahshua saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?” Is Yahshua declaring that he is Father Yahweh? Heb.1:3 and Col.1:15 both state that Yahshua is the “image” of Yahweh. An image is something th
at resembles something else. Yahshua resembles Yahweh in that their characters are almost identical. “Not that any man has seen the Father” (Jn. 6:46) bodily, but we have seen His character through His Son.

Man (specifically Adam) was made in the “image of Elohim” (Gen 1:26,27; 5:3; 9:6). Messiah Yahshua is also in the “image of Elohim” (2 Co 4:4; Col 1:15). “Elohim” in these verses, when understood in the context of pure monotheism, is a reference to Yahweh the Creator. Adam's inner man resembled Elohim, but he himself is not Elohim. Yahshua's inner man resembles Yahweh, but he himself is not Elohim.

Col 3:10 tells us that after a person's conversion, after he has put on the new man, he is “renewed in knowledge after the image of Him [Yahweh] that created him.” Rom 8:29, 30 echoes this in that those that have been justified (through conversion unto Messiah) have been predestined to be “conformed to the image of His [Yahweh's] Son.” Since the Son is in the image of Elohim, to be conformed to the image of the Son is to be conformed to the image of Elohim or Yahweh the Creator. 2 Co 3:18 says that we “are changed into the same image” as the Master. This also happens upon conversion.

From this info, I deduce the following;

Adam was made in the image of Yahweh. Upon his fall, that image was lost. It can only be restored through conversion unto the Master Yahshua. Yahshua, being sinless, never lost the image of Yahweh. The image of Yahweh has nothing to do with the physical appearance as far as the above references are concerned. It has to do with the inner man.

Look at Ps 73:20. Yahweh despises the image of the wicked. Why? Because they have put off Yahweh's image through sin and have created their own new image. The same is true of all men for all have sinned. We all have fallen away from the image of Yahweh and need to have that image restored through the indwelling Spirit of Messiah.

When Yahweh looks upon a believer, He sees the righteousness of His Son clothing us. He also sees the image of His Son clothing us. Our physical appearance has not changed, but our inner man has.

Yahshua is from everlasting?

What about Mic.5:2; “But thou, Bethlehem 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.” This is undoubtedly a Messianic prophecy. The question is, what does “goings forth” mean? Does it mean Yahshua has existed as long as Yahweh? Some say yes thereby giving more weight to their argument that Yahshua is Yahweh. According to Strong's Concordance, “Goings forth” comes from one Hebrew word, “mowtsaah”. It means, “a family descent.” Since Yahweh is Yahshua's Father, Yahshua's family descent would go back as far as Yahweh's existence. Since Yahweh has always existed, Yahshua's family descent or goings forth must be from everlasting. The New English Bible, the Phillips translation, and Todays English Bible render it similarly. Yahshua himself is not from everlasting. His family descent, or his family tree, is.

There are those who believe that Yahshua was not only Yahweh, but Melchizedek as well. They site Heb.7:4 to prove this. In Gen.14:18 we read that Melchizedek, king of Salem, “was the priest of the most high God.” The “most high God” is shown to be Yahweh three verses later; “…I have lift up mine hand unto Yahweh, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth.” Therefore, Melchizedek is the priest of Yahweh, not Yahweh Himself. If Yahshua is Melchizedek, he cannot be Yahweh. If Yahshua is Yahweh, he cannot be Melchizedek. The fact is, Yahshua is neither one of these beings. He is Yahweh's Son and Yahweh made him a priest “after the order of Melchizedek” (Ps.110:4, Heb. 7:21).

Receiving Worship and Forgiving Sins

Many people believe that only Almighty Yahweh can forgive sins and receive worship. Since Yahshua did both they believe he must be the Almighty. Yahshua indeed is worthy of our worship and honor, but only as Yahweh's representative, not as Yahweh Himself. Yahweh commanded even the angels of heaven to worship Yahshua (Heb.1:6). Rev.5:12 ,13 show both Yahweh and the Lamb [Yahshua] receiving worship. Eventually, those believers comprising the Philadelphia assembly will receive worship as well (Rev. 3:9). The worship they receive however, is not directed at them as though they were Yahweh.

A study of the Hebrew and Greek words that were translated “worship” will show that the Almighty is not always the recipient. Of the 170 occurrences only about half refer to the worship of Yahweh. This is hidden from the reader of scripture because half of those occurrences were translated 'to bow, bow down, do reverence, do obeisance,' as can be seen in the following verses: Gen.18:2; 19:1: 23:7,12; 27:29; 1 Sam.24:8; 25:23,41; 2 Sam.9:6; 14:4,22.

Yahshua said to a man with palsy, “thy sins be forgiven thee” (Mt.9:2). The account continues, “But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. And he arose, and departed to his house. But when the multitudes saw it, they marveled, and glorified Yahweh, which had given such power unto men.” Were they correct? Had Yahweh given Yahshua the power to forgive sins? Yahshua said, “I can of my own self do nothing,” “I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things,” “the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works” (Jn.5:30a; 8:28b; 14:10b). Yahweh gave Yahshua the authority to forgive sins, judge men, heal the sick, raise the dead, etc. He is Yahweh's Representative with the power to act in His name. The word “power” in Mt.9:2 is from the same Greek word that was translated “authority” in Jn.5:27 and throughout the New Testament. This same power was given to the Angel of Yahweh in Ex.23:20-21, “Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.”

While we are on the subject of sin, many believe Yahshua was the one true “God” because “only the death of God could atone for man's sins. The death of a man wouldn't suffice.” This is another example of the philosophy of men contrary to scripture. Heb.9:22 says, “And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission (of sins).” One requirement was shed blood. The other requirement was that the sacrifice had to be “without blemish” which, regarding Messiah, meant sinless. Yahweh Almighty did not have to die. Only the blood of a sinless man was required. Yahshua was that only sinless man (1 Jn.3:5).

The Attributes of Yahweh

The terms “omniscient” (all knowing), and “omnipotent” (all powerful) are often applied to Yahshua to prove he is the Almighty. In Jn.5:30 Yahshua said, “I can of mine own self do nothing” therefore, he cannot be omnipotent as Yahweh is. Mt. 24:36 proves Yahshua is not omniscient; “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but my Father.” In order to explain such verses “Oneness” proponents must turn Yahshua into the “God-Man.” This unscriptural idea claims that Yahshua's divine half is omniscient and omnipotent but that he suppressed his powers during his life in the flesh. Nowhere in scripture is the Messiah called a God-Man or shown to have two such natures at the same time. He is repeatedly referred to as a man in such verses as 1 Tim.2:5. When he is called “God” it is in the sense of a mighty one among his people as was shown earlier. This is not to say that Yahshua was a mere man. Scripture is clear that Yahshua's birth was a miracle in that he was not made from the seed or sperm of man. He
is Yahweh's only begotten Son; the only being ever to be “Fathered” by Yahweh.

Titles in Common

Should we refer to Yahshua as the Almighty, a title only applied to Yahweh? Nowhere in scripture is this ever the case. One scripture that seemingly supports such an application is Rev. 1:8; “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith [the Lord]*, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” (KJV). *The Greek has “kurios o theos” (“the Lord the God” or “[Yahweh] Elohim”). The phrase “Lord God” is never used of Yahshua in the New Testament. Aside from that, John is giving a greeting starting in verse four and ending in verse seven. Verse four is a greeting from the Father “which is, and which was, and which is to come.” Verse five is a greeting from Yahshua the Messiah. Verse eight is spoken by the Father which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” Scripture makes a clear distinction between the Almighty and Yahshua in Rev.21:22; “And I saw no temple therein: for [Yahweh] Elohim Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.” Yahshua is not Yahweh Almighty.

This misapplication of titles is often the cause of making these two beings into one. For example, Acts 3:14 reads, “But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;” Here the title “Holy One” is applied to Yahshua the Messiah. In Is.43:3 it says, “For I am Yahweh thy Elohim, the Holy One of Israel, thy Saviour:. . . ” Here the title “Holy One” is applied to Yahweh. Without further study one would conclude these two references are to the same person. However, we are not to study scripture superficially. In what way is Yahshua the Holy One? The answer is found in Mk.1:24; “Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Yahshua of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of Yahweh.” Yahweh is the Holy One of Israel and Yahshua is the Holy One of Yahweh, not of Israel. Ps.16:10 confirms this understanding; “For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.” This is a Messianic prophecy. “My soul” refers to Yahshua's soul and “thine Holy One” refers to Yahweh's Holy One. Scripture reveals two Holy ones that are separate beings.

Another shared title is “Savior.” Is.43:11 says, “I, even I, am Yahweh; and beside me there is no saviour.” That seems quite clear. Since Yahweh is the only Savior and Yahshua is called our Savior, the two must be one and the same being. This is true only in the minds of men who do not study deeply. Is.19:20b reads, “for they shall cry unto Yahweh because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them.” It was prophesied that Yahweh would send someone other than Himself to be a savior to Egypt. Yahweh is the one true Savior who works through Yahshua the Messiah, His appointed Savior.

A few other shared titles, all basically equal in meaning, are “Alpha and Omega,” “the first and the last,” and “the beginning and the end.” Each of these titles are applied to both Yahweh and Yahshua (Is.41:4;44:6;48:12; Rev.1:8,17;2:8;22:13) and have the meaning of uniqueness. Each is the first and last of his peculiar, unique kind. Yahweh is unique in that He is the only being that was not created and Yahshua is unique in that he is the only being ever to be directly begotten by Yahweh the Father (Jn.1:14). (Adam was created, all others were begotten by men).Titles that Yahweh and Yahshua have in common do not supply a firm foundation for a “Oneness” doctrine. If that were true, Cyrus, the king of Persia, would have been the pre-existent Yahshua since both are called “Messiah.” In Is.45:1a it reads, “Thus saith Yahweh to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him;” The Hebrew for “anointed” is the same word that was translated “Messiah” in Dan. 9:25,26 and “anointed” in Ps.2:2.

The scriptures tell us Yahshua would also be called Emmanuel, meaning “God with us,” or more correctly, “El with us.” As a result, people teach that Yahshua is “God.” This name is to be understood in the light of Acts 10:38; “How [Yahweh] anointed Yahshua of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for [Yahweh] (El) was with him.” Not that Yahshua was El, but that El was with and in Yahshua. If you choose to use the logic of those in error, then consider the name Jehu. In Hebrew, this name means “He is Yah” or “Yah is He.” Does that mean the man Jehu is, in reality, Yahweh?

Is.9:6 reads, “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” Is this prophecy declaring Yahshua the Messiah to be the Heavenly Father? There are at least 27 names in the Bible with the same Hebrew construction as in this verse. Each one means the “father of (something).” For example, Abishua means “father of plenty.” Instead of translating the phrase in Is.9:6 as “Father of eternity,” the KJV reversed the sequence making the true meaning harder to discern. Several newer versions correct this mistake such as The Emphasized Bible, The Bible in Basic English, The New American Bible, The Holy Bible; A Translation From the Latin Vulgate in the Light of the Hebrew and Greek Originals, and The New English Bible, just to name a few. Yahshua is the Father of Eternity because eternal life comes to us through him. And so it is written in Heb.5:9, “And being made perfect, he became the author (or father) of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;”

One last title that confuses people is “Rock.” 1 Cor.10:4 says, “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Messiah.” Since Yahweh is called a “Rock” in several Old Testament verses, the two beings are made into one. This verse must be understood with Ex.17:6 in mind; “Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it, that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel.” 1 Cor. 10:4 is figuratively making reference to Ex.17:6 which is a shadow of Messiah. To “smite the rock” is to kill the Messiah. The rock could not yield water until it was smitten. Similarly, the Messiah Yahshua could not give forth “rivers of living water” until he was put to death and then resurrected unto eternal life (glorified). Jn.7:39 shows this “living water” to be the Holy Spirit. Yahshua was not physically present with them in the wilderness. Spiritually speaking he was. That is why the verse says “spiritual drink” and “spiritual Rock.” Even if one were to believe Yahshua physically followed Israel, that would not prove he was Yahweh since Yahweh was not personally leading or following Israel in the wilderness. Scriptures reveal that the Angel of Yahweh, Yahweh's representative, followed them (Ex.14:19).

I AM

“Before Abraham was, I am.” These words, spoken by our Savior in Jn.8:58, have led to much controversy and confusion. Some use this verse to prove the Messiah's pre-existence. Others use it to prove the trinity doctrine. And then there are those who use it to prove Yahshua is the great “I AM” of Ex.3:14.

The phrase “I am” is “ego eimi” in Greek. Since the Greek New Testament records Yahshua using “ego eimi” many times, Christian theologians term these sayings, “The I Am's of Jesus.” It is believed that each of these occurrences implies Yahshua's identity as the “I AM” of Ex.3:14. Can this be true? Can our Savior, the Son of Yahweh, actually be the “I AM”?

Ex.3:14-15 reads, “And Elohim said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and He said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And Elohim said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, Yahweh, Elo
him of your fathers, the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and the Elohim of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.” Therefore, the “I AM” is identified as “Yahweh.”

And what does Yahweh say in Ps.2:7? “I will declare the decree: Yahweh hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” Yahweh is the Father of Yahshua. Yahshua is the Son of Yahweh. Yahshua is not Yahweh and the Son is not the Father. Therefore, Yahshua (the Son of Yahweh) cannot be the I AM (Yahweh). That alone should be sufficient to discredit the belief that Yahshua was claiming to be the “I AM.” But let's look into the matter a little farther.

In the Greek Septuagint (LXX), Ex 3:14 reads,

In Septuagint English it reads, “And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you.”

In KJV English it reads, “And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”

In John 8:58, “I am” is “” in Greek. As you can see, “” in Ex 3:14 is just the prelude to what the Almighty really wanted the Israelites to know, that is, that He was the “” or “the Being” or “the Existing One”.

If Yahshua truly wanted to tell the Jews he was the great “I am” of Ex 3:14, he would have said, “Before Abraham was I am the Being” or “I am the Existing One”.

It is believed that Jn.8:59 further supports the position that Yahshua is the “I AM.” Why else would the Jews try to stone him? He obviously blasphemed in the eyes of the Jews, a stoneable offense. Or did he? Is the mere utterance of “ego eimi” a blasphemy? Does the use of “ego eimi” automatically identify the speaker as Yahweh, the I AM?

Several individuals aside from Yahshua used “ego eimi” as well. In Lu.1:19, the angel Gabriel said, “Ego eimi Gabriel.” In Jn.9:9, the blind man whose sight was restored by Yahshua said, “Ego eimi.” In Acts 10:21, Peter said, “Behold, ego eimi (I am) he whom ye seek.” Obviously, the mere use of “ego eimi” does not equate one to the “I Am” of Ex.3:14. But perhaps the Saviors use of it was somehow different. After all, he came down from heaven.

If, in fact, Yahshua spoke Greek to the Jews (which I doubt), he used the phrase “ego eimi” at least twenty times and yet, in only one instance did the Jews seek to stone him (Jn.8:58). Yahshua said, “I am the bread of life” to a large crowd, in Jn.6:35 & 48, yet no one opposed him. In verse 41, the Jews murmured because he said, “I am (ego eimi) the bread which came down from heaven.” But in verse 42, the Jews questioned only the phrase, “I came down from heaven” and ignored “ego eimi.” The same is true of verses 51 & 52.

In Jn.8:12, 18, 24, & 28, Yahshua used “ego eimi” with Pharisees present (vs.13) and yet, no stoning. He, again, used it four times in Jn.10:7, 9, 11, & 14 with no stoning. Yahshua said to his disciples, “…that…ye may believe that I am (ego eimi)” in Jn.13:19 without them batting an eye.

An interesting account occurs in Jn.18 when the Jews came to arrest Yahshua in the Garden of Gethsemane. When the chief priests and Pharisees said they were seeking Yahshua of Nazareth, Yahshua said to them, “Ego eimi.” At that they fell backward to the ground. It is not made clear why they fell to the ground, but what followed will make it clear that Yahshua was not claiming to be the “I AM.”

After Yahshua's arrest, the Jews took him to Annas first (vs.13). Then they took him to Caiaphas (vs.24) and eventually to Pilate (vss.28,29). A parallel account is found in Mt.26:57-68. Notice, in particular, verse 59. The same men that had fallen backward to the ground were in attendance when the council sought false witnesses against Yahshua to put him to death. Verse 60 says they couldn't find any. Eventually two came forward. Interestingly, they didn't bear false witness about what Yahshua said in Jn.8:58, but about his reference to destroying the temple and building it again in three days. Where were all those witnesses from Jn.8:58?

The point about Mt.26 is, why would false witnesses be sought if they had true witnesses in attendance? The arresting officers heard Yahshua say “Ego eimi.” They could have stoned him right there in the garden for blasphemy, but they didn't. They could have reported the supposed blasphemy to the council, but they didn't. Why not? Because it wasn't blasphemy, nor was it a stoneable offense. He was merely identifying himself as Yahshua of Nazareth.

This brings us back to Jn.8:58. Why did the Jews seek to stone him on that occasion? The context of Jn.8 shows that Yahshua;

1) accused the Jews of “judging after the flesh” (vs.15).

2) said they would die in their sins (vss.21,24).

3) implied they were in bondage (vss.32,33).

4) said they were servants of sin (vs.34).

5) said they were out to kill him (vss. 37,40).

6) implied they were spiritually deaf (vs.43,47).

7) said their father was the devil (vs.44).

8) said they were not of Elohim (vs.47).

9) accused them of dishonoring him (vs.49).

10) accused them of not knowing Yahweh (vs.55).

11) accused them of lying (vs.55).

Aside from that, the Jews misunderstood Yahshua's words leading them to believe;

1) that he accused them of being born of fornication (vs.41).

2) Yahshua had a devil (vs.52).

3) that he was exalting himself above Abraham (vs.53).

4) that he saw Abraham (vs.56).

Yahshua's words in verse 58 were the culmination of an encounter that was so offensive to the Jews that they couldn't restrain themselves anymore. They simply couldn't take it anymore so they sought to stone him, not because of two simple words, “ego eimi,” but because he was making himself out to be greater than their beloved father Abraham. They sought to stone him illegally.

So what does Jn.8:58 really mean? Although I do not believe we can be certain what Yahshua meant due to a variety of reasons, I offer the following explanation.

Let's look at the context of Yahshua's statement. It begins in verse 51 with the thought of eternal life; “If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” The Jews thought since Abraham and the prophets were dead, Yahshua must have a devil. The context is eternal life. Then in verse 56 Yahshua says Abraham “rejoiced to see my day.” He did not say he saw Abraham as the Jews misunderstood. How did Abraham see Yahshua's day? Heb.11:13 says, “These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.” He saw Yahshua's day by faith.

Yahshua then resumed the context of his initial conversation by saying, “Before Abraham was, I am.” “Was” is from the Greek “ginomai” meaning, “to come into being, … to arise.” What Yahshua actually meant was, “Before Abraham comes into being (at his resurrection unto eternal life), I will.” Confirmation of this understanding comes to us from Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W. Bullinger, pgs. 521,522. Under the heading “Heterosis (Of Tenses),” subheading “The Present for the Future,” he writes, “This is put when the design is to show that some thing will certainly come to pass, and is spoken of as though it were already present.” He then lists some examples such as Mt.3:10b, “therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is [shall be] hewn down;” and Mk.9:31a, “For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is [shall be] delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.” Included among this list of examples of Heterosis is Jn.8:58. In other words, although properly written, “Before Abraham comes to be, I am,” with “I am” in the simple present tense, the meaning points to the future, “Before Abr
aham comes to be, I will.”

Yahshua was telling them that Abraham will be one of those people who will be granted eternal life, but before that takes place, Yahshua will receive that same eternal life. This statement of fact must be since Yahshua is to have the preeminence in all things. He must be the firstborn from the dead, the first to receive eternal life.

Some people believe this verse should be translated, “Before Abraham existed, I existed.” However, neither Greek verb is in the perfect tense (past tense). “Was” is in the aorist tense and “am” is in the present tense. Let's look a little closer at “was.” Concerning the aorist tense, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by Dana and Mantey says, “It has time relations only in the indicative, where it is past and hence augmented.” The verb ginomai (was) is in the infinitive, not the indicative. Therefore it should not be translated in the past tense. This same reference says of the infinitive, “The aorist infinitive denotes that which is eventual or particular, …” Abraham will eventually resurrect which is why the Greek uses the aorist infinitive. The meaning is, “Before Abraham comes to be” not “Before Abraham was (or existed).”

Yahshua was not declaring that he is the great “I AM” of Ex.3:14. Yahshua was not declaring himself to be Yahweh. And Yahshua was not declaring his pre-existence. He is the Son of Yahweh and the Son of the great “I Am.”

The Word was God?

In Jn.1:1-3 we read, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made” (KJV). As mentioned previously, it is not wrong to address Yahshua as god or elohim as long as we don't address him as the “one true Elohim.” According to the common understanding of verse 1, there are two beings, the Word and God, Yahshua and Yahweh. Therefore, the phrase “the Word was God” would lead one to believe that Yahshua (the Word) was Yahweh (God). However, if we know that Yahweh called Yahshua “God” or “elohim” in Heb.1:9 and Ps.45:7, there is no problem with the phrase “the Word was God.” Yahshua is obviously an elohim in Hebrew or a god in English. This, of course, is based on the common understanding of the “Word” being Yahshua. That, however, is not what John intended when he wrote these verses.

Nor did John intend to teach us that the Son preexisted “with” God from the very beginning of creation. De 32:39 says, “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.” Yahweh the Father is speaking here. He is saying there is no other “elohim” or no other God with Him. John 1:1 says, ” . . .and the Word was WITH God, and the Word was God.” If the “Word” is the Son and the Son was WITH God and was God, how does that harmonize with the above verse? In De 32:39, since Yahweh was speaking, then there was no other God with Him, not even the Son.

Since Yahshua is called “The Word of God” in Rev.19:13, the translators of the KJV assumed the “Word” of Jn.1:1 was also Yahshua and therefore, capitalized the word “word” and used the pronoun “him” in reference to the “word.” The Greek for “Word” is “logos.” It appears in the text written with a small letter l. Logos means “the spoken word” or “something said (including the thought).” In that sense the word is an “it,” not a person but a thing. The great English translator William Tyndale renders it that way in his 1525 version as does the Matthew's Bible of 1537, the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560, and the Bishop's Bible of 1568. (Click here for more info.) Verse 3 should read, “All things were made through it; and without it was not anything made that was made.” In other words, Yahweh spoke creation into existence. This understanding agrees perfectly with passages such as Gen.1:3,6,9,11,14, 20, and 24 all of which begin, “And Elohim said.” Yahweh spoke and it was done. Ps.33:6,9 says, “By the word of Yahweh were the heavens made; and all the host by the breath of his mouth. . . For He spoke and it was; He commanded, and it stood fast.” Not only did Yahweh speak creation into existence, but He also spoke His Son Yahshua into existence; “And the word (Yahweh's spoken word) was made flesh” (Jn.1:14). Yahshua did not become the “Word of [Yahweh]” until his birth as a flesh and blood male child.

How then should we translate verse 1? “In the beginning was the word; and the word was with [Yahweh], and the word was [Yahweh]'s” is one suggestion. The Greek word translated “God” is “theos.” The Greek does not have a different word to show possession. Therefore, theos can be translated “Yahweh” or “Yahweh's.” The possessive form makes this verse so clear and in harmony with the phrase “the word was with Yahweh.”

Who is the Creator?

Getting back to the issue of creation, many believe Yahshua created all things. A thorough study of the Old Testament scriptures shows Yahweh to be the Creator and that He acted alone to accomplish this. Note Is.44:24; “Thus saith Yahweh, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am Yahweh that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;” Where is Yahshua in this verse? It has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Yahshua is not Yahweh, therefore, Yahshua did not have a hand in creation. This is confirmed in Job 9:8; “Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.” Consider also Prov.30:4; “Who hath ascended up into heaven? who hath gathered the wind in His fists? Who hath bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth? What is His name, and what is His son's name, if thou canst tell?” This verse teaches us that the Creator, whoever He is, has a Son. Does Yahshua have a son? No. Father Yahweh is the Creator and He has a Son who is not given credit for creation in this verse.

There are several New Testament scriptures used to prove he did create all things. They are Jn 1:3, which we already looked at; Jn.1:10; 1 Cor.8:6; Eph.3:9; Col.1:16; and Heb.1:2. All these verses use the same basic phrase, “by him” or “by Yahshua Messiah.” The phrase “by Yahshua Messiah” in Eph.3:9 is not found in many Greek MSS. Here is Adam Clarke's commentary on the phrase “by Jesus Christ”: “But the words δια Ιησου Χριστου, by Jesus Christ, are wanting in ABCD*FG, and several others; also in the Syriac, Arabic of Erpen, Coptic, Ethiopic, Vulgate, and Itala; as also in several of the fathers. Griesbach has thrown the words out of the text; and Professor White says, “certissime delenda,” they are indisputably spurious. The text, therefore, should be read: which from the beginning of the world had been hidden in God who created all things.” Without the added words this verse teaches us that Yahweh is the Creator. The remaining four verses imply that Yahshua is the Creator. Thus far, it has been conclusively proven that Yahshua is not Yahweh. Since the scriptures emphatically state over 100 times that Yahweh is the Creator (Ex.20:11) and that He acted alone (Is.44:24), should we discard that wealth of evidence and accept Yahshua as the Creator without question? A careful examination of the Greek of those four verses will yield a different picture.

The Greek word for “by” is “di.” It can be translated “by,” “through,” “on account of,” “for,” etc., based on the context or message of the sentence. These four verses in question will not allow the translation “by” because it does not agree or harmonize with over 100 other verses stating that Yahweh is the Creator. An example of the importance of context is Mk.2:27; “And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.” Both words “for” in this verse are from the Greek word “dia.” It would be incorrect to translat
e “dia” as “by” in this verse: The Sabbath was made by man. If you will notice the Greek of Jn.1:10 you will see it is the exact same construction as Mk.2:27 yet one verse says “for” and the other says “by.” Also, in the case of Heb 1:2, it is revealed that Yahshua is the heir of all things that have been created by Yahweh. He is not the Creator Himself.

1 Pe.1:20 says, “Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you.” Before creation, Yahshua existed in the foreordained plans of Yahweh. He was “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev.13:8). Even before creation Yahweh knew that Yahshua had to be slain. Even before creation Yahweh knew that He would create all things through and for His Son. And so it is written and correctly translated in Col.1:16, “For in him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created through him, and for him:” Without Yahshua in Yahweh's plan, creation would never have occurred. The remaining three scriptures using “by” should be translated similarly.

One other Scripture often used to prove Yahshua's hand in creation is Heb.1:10-12. These verses are indeed very difficult to understand. It appears as though the writer of Hebrews is including verses 10-12 as additional statements that Yahweh has made to His Son. The use of “And” in verse 10 and “but” in verse 13 suggest this. But if we look a little deeper we will find several discrepancies. Verses 10-12 are direct quotes from Ps.102:25-27. They are not a quote from the Hebrew Text, however, but from the Septuagint (LXX). The Hebrew Text does not have “Lord” in it. Therefore, to say that “Lord” in Heb.1:10 proves that Yahshua is Yahweh is unscriptural. The LXX has “Kurie” in Ps.102:25, but that is an addition since it is not found in the Hebrew Text. The LXX also omits “O my el” in verse 24.

In reading the Hebrew of Ps.102, it is clear the subject is Yahweh. They are the words of an afflicted man as he cries out to Yahweh. They are not the words of Yahweh as He speaks to His Son.

Notice each of the other Old Testament quotes in Hebrew 1;

Ps.2:7 – “…Thou art my Son; this day I (Yahweh) have begotten thee.”

2 Sam.7:14 – “I (Yahweh) will be to him a Father…”

Deut.32:43 (LXX) – “And let all the angels of God (Yahweh) worship him.”

Ps.45:6,7 – “Thy throne O elohim…therefore elohim, thy Elohim (Yahweh) hath anointed thee.”

Ps.110:1 – “Sit on my right hand, until I (Yahweh) make thine enemies thy footstool.”

In each of these quotes it can be seen that either Yahweh is talking to His Son or about His Son. Yet, in Ps.102:25-27 it is the Psalmist talking to Yahweh. Therefore, to include Heb.1:10-12 among those things that Yahweh said to or about His Son is incorrect.

The writer of Hebrews had written verses 1-9 to show how Yahweh exalted His Son, even above the angels. It appears as though the writer was then moved to exalt Yahweh as well by including verses 10-12 as a parenthesis. He then resumes by showing Yahshua's exaltation in verse 13 which is a continuation of verse 9. There are an abundance of Scriptures proving that Yahshua is not Yahweh. To make that assumption here is to reject the weightier evidence.

Know the Scriptures

There has been a very sharp attack centered on using Old Testament quotes found in the New Testament that are applied to both Yahweh and Yahshua to prove the two are one and the same. It is important to fully understand these verses correctly.

The first is found in Rom.14:10,11. It reads, “But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God” (KJV). Paul was quoting Is.45:23 in which the speaker is Yahweh. So when verse 23 says, “That unto me,” “me” refers to Yahweh. Every knee will bow and every tongue will swear to Yahweh. Therefore, in Rom.14:11, “Lord” must mean Yahweh, as does “me” and “God”. There is no mention of Messiah in this verse; not even in verse 10. Concerning the phrase “judgment seat of Christ,” the Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Commentary says, “All the most ancient and best MSS. read here, “judgment seat of God.”

Paul does, however, apply portions of Isa.45:23 to Yahshua in Ph.2:10,11. That does not mean he is also applying the Name “Yahweh” to him as well. Jn.5:23 helps us to understand this. If you don't honor the Son, by extension, you don't honor the Father. And Jn.15:23; if you hate the Son, by extension, you hate the Father. If you bow your knees to the Son, by extension, you bow your knees to the Father. Notice that what is sworn in Isa.45:23,24 is not what is sworn in Ph.2:11. (every tongue shall confess or swear that Yahshua is “Master” [kurios]). That same word (kurios) was applied to men in several other verses such as Jn.12:21. It is only a reference to Yahweh when it is a direct quote of an Old Testament verse containing the Tetragrammaton which Is.45:23 does not.

The next reference is 1 Pe.2:8, “And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.” Peter is here applying Is.8:14 to Messiah. It is to be understood in the sense that, since Yahshua is Yahweh's representative or agent, whatever Yahshua does is credited to Yahweh or is as though Yahweh did it. Isaiah says Yahweh will be a stumbling stone. Yahweh then causes Israel to stumble over Yahshua which makes them both stumbling stones. “The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is Yahweh's doing; it is marvelous in our eyes” (Ps.118:22,23).

Consider Ex.7:17 when understanding this verse.

“Thus saith Yahweh, In this thou shalt know that I am Yahweh: behold, I will smite with the rod that is in mine hand upon the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned to blood. And the fish that is in the river shall die, and the river shall stink; and the Egyptians shall lothe to drink of the water of the river. And Yahweh spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand upon the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon their rivers, and upon their ponds, and upon all their pools of water, that they may become blood; and that there may be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood, and in vessels of stone. And Moses and Aaron did so, as Yahweh commanded; and he lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood.”

Yahweh says He Himself will smite the waters with the rod in His own hand. Yet, it was Aaron that held the rod (Ex.7:19,20). Are we to believe that Aaron is also Yahweh? Neither should we believe that Yahshua is Yahweh in this verse.

Consider Zech 14:4 in this light as well.

“And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.”

Most people believe “his feet” refers to Yahweh's feet. Yet, they realize that it is Yahshua who is returning to set up the Kingdom on earth. So they jump to the erroneous conclusion that Yahshua is Yahweh. As Messiah's feet land on the Mount of Olives, Yahweh the Father will cause it to cleave in two. Yet, as Yahweh's representative, Yahshua's feet are spoken of as Yahweh's feet just as Aaron's hand is spoken of as Yahweh's hand.

Yahshua is

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Yahshua is not the only one “coming” on judgment day. Yahweh will come as well, but not in the physical sense that Yahshua will.

Isa 40:10 – “Behold, the Sovereign Yahweh will come with strong hand, and his arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him.”

The phrase “his arm” is a reference to Messiah (Jn 12:38), but “the Sovereign Yahweh” is a reference to the Father.

Isa 66:15 – “For, behold, Yahweh will come with fire, and with his chariots like a whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire.”

This is the language of 2 Peter 3:10-13 when it talks about “the Day of Yahweh.” Yahweh the Father will come bringing judgment upon the world. He will do so through His Son Yahshua and the saints which will be riding on the “chariots” of Yahweh the Father. “All the saints” of Zech 14:5 would include Yahshua.

Ex.7:17 is also the key to understanding Zec.11:13 which reads, “And Yahweh said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of Yahweh.” Since Yahshua was priced at 30 pieces of silver, and since Yahweh here says, “I was prised at of them,” some conclude that Yahshua is also called Yahweh. Using that same logic, who cast the silver down? Mt.27:5 says of Judas, “And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple…” Are we to believe that Judas is also called Yahweh?

The next attack on Scripture comes in 1 Pe.3:14,15, “But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:” (KJV) Several commentaries and Greek manuscripts read “Christ” instead of “God” in these verses. They imply it should read, “But sanctify [Yahweh] who is Christ.” According to the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, there are 6 Mss. that have “Christos” or “Messiah” in the text and 8 MSS. that do not. Since the Hebrew Text clearly says, “Yahweh of hosts” (Is.8:13), the Greek would say either theos or kurios, not Christos. The Greek text was obviously tampered with by those who tried to prove that Yahshua was the YHWH of the Old Testament.

The last attack comes in 1 Pe.2:3,4, “If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is gracious. To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,” (KJV). In verse 3, Peter is quoting Ps.34:8 which is speaking about Yahweh. Some people would have us believe that Peter is applying the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, to the Messiah in verse 4. The words “as unto” in the KJV, however, are added words not found in the Greek that change Peter's meaning. Delete these words and the Greek text reads, “To whom coming toward” or “To whom drawing near, as living stone…” In other words, the living stone (Yahshua) was drawing near or coming toward Yahweh as will all living stones in the future (vs.5). The “whom” in verse 4 refers to the “Lord” YHWH of verse 3; “To [Yahweh] coming, a living stone.”

No Man Has Seen God?

This study would not be complete without addressing the issue concerning the following statements; (Jn.5:37), “And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.”

And again in 1 Jn.4:12, “No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us” (KJV). Since Yahweh (God) was never seen, or heard for that matter, then who was it that men saw in such passages as Deut.4:12, Ex.24:9-11, etc.? It is assumed that the pre-existant Messiah is the one they saw and that he is referred to as Yahweh.

To understand this we need to look at a few other examples. Consider the following;

Gen.22:11-12 – “And the angel of Yahweh called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest Elohim, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.”

Ex.3:2-6 – “And the angel of Yahweh appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush:… And when Yahweh saw that he turned aside to see, Elohim called unto him out of the midst of the bush, … he said, I am the Elohim of thy father, the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and the Elohim of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon Elohim.”

In these two passages, and many others involving the Angel of Yahweh, the angel speaks as though he was Yahweh. That is because Yahweh was speaking through the angel. Ex.23:20-22 reads, “Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.” As Yahweh's chosen representative, the Angel speaks whatever he is told to speak by Yahweh. The same was true of Yahshua (Jn.12:49,50), and the prophets (Heb.1:1).

How does this relate to the giving of the Law at Mt. Sinai? Wasn't it Yahweh's own voice they heard? That is what Deut.4:12 would suggest. Yet, several New Testament Scriptures reveal the speaker to be an angel. Acts 7:38,53 read, “This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:…Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it. ” Also in Gal.3:19, “…and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator (Moses).”

So what can we conclude about this? It is true that Yahweh's voice has never been heard nor His shape seen. It was an angel that appeared to men. Yet, this angel, as Yahweh's chosen representative, could speak with the authority of Yahweh as though he were Yahweh. The prophets do the same thing quite often. Therefore, Malachi can say, “Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me…” (Mal.3:1), yet, no one would dare say Malachi was Yahweh.

The Jewish understanding of this is important to note here. It is called the law of agency. “The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion,” Adama Books, New York, 1986, pg.15 reads, “The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum “A person's agent is regarded as the person himself.” Almighty Yahweh appointed both Yahshua the Messiah, His Son, and the Angel of Yahweh, as His agents. As such, anything they did was regarded as though the Almighty Himself did it.

A wealth of scriptural truth has been presented in this study. An honest seeker of truth should now know that Yahshua is not Yahweh, the Mighty One of Israel. He is Yahweh's only begotten Son. That is what we must believe. “Whosoever shall confess that Yahshua is the Son of [Yahweh], [Yahweh] dwelleth in him, and he in [Yahweh]” (1 Jn.4:15). If you believe that Yahshua is Yahweh instead of the Son of Yahweh, the truth is not in you. Peter knew this truth and responded correctly; “Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living Elohim” (Mt.16:16). How will you now respond?

Appendix A

There are several passages in which Yahweh is spoken of as “God” and yet, they are mistakenly applied to Yahshua. The first is Jude 1:24,25. It reads, “Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.” Who is it that is able to keep us from falling? Jn.10:29 and Rom.16:25-27 teach us that
it is the Father (Yahweh) who keeps us. He is “God only wise” or “the only wise God.”

The second passage is 1 Tim.1:17. It reads, “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.” We just saw who the “only wise God” is in Rom.16:25-27.

The third passage is Titus 2:13; “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;” Does this mean Paul is saying Yahshua is the great God? In his opening (Titus 1:4) he greets Titus from “God [Yahweh] the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ [Yahshua]. In Paul's mind there are two individuals, not two manifestations of one being. Some commentators believe the word “and” in Titus 2:13 should be translated “even” since the Greek word “kai” can carry that meaning. Most lexicons will show that kai means “and” in the overwhelming majority of uses and, in comparison, rarely means “even.” If we change “and” to “even” anytime we want, then we can say things like Prisca and Aquila are the same person (2 Tim.4:19), etc.

SOURCE

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2011,11:41)

For Frank – the writings of mikeboll64, who has put this in HIS OWN words, knows the scriptures that back up his own words, and is willing and able to DEFEND what he writes: 1.  John was not the light, but came to testify about the light who was coming into the world.  The Word was the light of men who came into the world.  And we know from later scriptures that JESUS was that light. 2.  In Rev 19:13, Jesus is called “the Word of God” because he is the main spokesman for God.  He is called the Word of God by the same author in John's gospel. 3.  The Word became flesh, dwelled among us, and had the glory of God's only begotten.  Only Jesus had the glory of God's only begotten, because only Jesus IS God's only begotten. 4.  It is this Word that John testified about, saying very specific words.  Later, in verses 29-30, we find out that it was JESUS that John said these words about. 5.  To all who believed in the Word of God, the Word gave the right to become children of God.  JESUS is the one who gave us the right to become begotten of God, and joint heirs of God along with him. 6.  The Word cannot be the Spirit of God, as many non-preexisters claim, because the Spirit of God is what came down and rested on the Word of God who became flesh. Frank, unlike you, I am able to defend each and every thing I just posted.  Unlike you, I am here to discuss the scriptural validity of what I post.  Because, unlike you, I am not afraid of being proved wrong, if it means I can learn the actual truth of the matter.

LIAR!

[mikeboll64]

You remind me of Kangaroo Jack yelling “ANATHEMA” at me because I wouldn't agree that Jesus is the God Almighty that he is the Son of.

Naturally, I don't suppose you'd care to show me where I lied, would you? You've called me a liar after two different posts I made. Show me which part of each post was a lie, Frank.

If you cannot, then as a moderator, I might be forced to give you a tile. Because we don't allow that word to be said without proof around here. (In fact, the owner of the site doesn't like that word to be said at all. He's okay with “you lied in that statement”, etc, but he frowns upon calling another member a liar.)

Will you show me where I lied, Frank? Or will you just keep calling me a liar while ignoring the completely scriptural things I posted?

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 01 2011,12:02)

You remind me of Kangaroo Jack yelling “ANATHEMA” at me because I wouldn't agree that Jesus is the God Almighty that he is the Son of.       Naturally, I don't suppose you'd care to show me where I lied, would you?  You've called me a liar after two different posts I made.  Show me which part of each post was a lie, Frank. If you cannot, then as a moderator, I might be forced to give you a tile.  Because we don't allow that word to be said without proof around here.  (In fact, the owner of the site doesn't like that word to be said at all.  He's okay with “you lied in that statement”, etc, but he frowns upon calling another member a liar.) Will you show me where I lied, Frank?  Or will you just keep calling me a liar while ignoring the completely scriptural things I posted?

LIAR!

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Yeshua the Messiah Did Not Pre-Exist!

Did Yeshua the Messiah divest himelf of his previous identity, lose all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God — only to establish this all again after his resurrection? What for? What did it accomplish? Is such a belief logical? A careful consideration of scripture will reveal that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!

John D. Keyser

Just who is Yeshua the Messiah?

We state this question in the present tense, because although Yeshua the Messiah was crucified almost 2,000 years ago at the instigation of a Judean mob and the maladministration of Roman power, he lives today.

And the fact that he lives is of the greatest significance to mankind.

Paul, the one time inveterate opponent of Christianity, who was converted into its greatest advocate by the incontestable evidence of the Messiah's resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:10), explained it thus:

“For he has set a Day when he will judge the inhabited world, and do it justly, by means of a MAN whom he has designated. And he has given public proof of it by resurrecting THIS MAN from the dead” (Acts 17:31 — Jewish New Testament).

To judge the world is to rule it. Paul thus taught that the living Messiah is the assurance of YEHOVAH God that He will send the Messiah to set up His Kingdom on earth (Acts 1:11; 3:19-20). The Messiah is coming to change present conditions, and to reign as a king and High Priest under his Father YEHOVAH.

Confusion Concerning the Messiah

But who is Yeshua the Messiah? Eternal life is bound up in the answer to this question, as the quotation at the head of this article shows. Put the question to Jews, and they reply that he was the son of Joseph and Mary, and that he lived and died in Judea 2,000 years ago. Ask it of most clergymen, and they will state that he is the second person of a biune or triune God. Others, whilst rejecting the Trinitarian concept as unscriptural and illogical, teach that he pre-existed. Thus endless controversy has continued; even those who admit that he lives, violently disagree as to who he is.

While the Jewish answer is technically correct, they completely rejected Yeshua as being the Messiah chosen by YEHOVAH God. The disciples were not liars, fools, mystics or charlatans. They comprised practical fishermen like Peter, hard-headed businessmen like Matthew, even skeptics like Thomas. Such men were not prepared to be misled by a rumor, but demanded concrete proof of the resurrection of the Messiah (John 20:24-29). We believe them, and reject the unbelieving attitude of the Jews and atheists.

We not only set aside the skeptical attitude of the Jews and atheists; but we also repudiate the doctrine of the Trinity and the doctrine of a biune God. The concept of three Gods who are but one God is illogical and unscriptural. Similarly, the idea that two gods existed together from eternity is totally unscriptural. The word “Trinity” is not found in the Bible, but is a title manufactured to serve the cause of theology. On the other hand, the Bible teaches that the Messiah is subordinate to YEHOVAH God, thus:

“There is ONE God, and one mediator between God and man, the MAN Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5).

“ONE God, the Father . . . and one Lord, Jesus Christ” (1 Corinthians 8:6).

“Now when everything has been subjected to the Son [the Messiah], then he will subject himself to God [YEHOVAH], who subjected everything to him; so that God [YEHOVAH] may be everything in everyone” (1 Corinthians 15:28 — Jewish New Testament).

Did the Messiah Pre-exist?

Although such a question, if asked of any other person, would be treated with the ridicule it deserves, it is seriously alleged of the Messiah.

Yet the Bible clearly shows that the Messiah had no existence prior to his birth in Bethlehem, 2,000 years ago. He was born of Mary, his father being the carpenter Joseph from Nazareth, and thus was truly the son of man.

From his parents, he derived the nature common to all mankind, but from YEHOVAH God he received spiritual proclivities that strengthened him to conquer the flesh:

Great beyond all question is the formerly hidden truth underlying our faith: He was manifested physically and proved righteous spiritually, seen by angels and proclaimed among the nations, trusted throughout the world and raised up in glory to heaven (I Timothy 3:16, Jewish New Testament).

He was executed as a criminal, but, in fact, never sinned, and therefore YEHOVAH God's justice demanded his resurrection (Acts 2:24). He was raised to immortality, and ascended into heaven, where he awaits the time to return and set up the reign of YEHOVAH God on this earth (Acts 3:19-23; Daniel 2:44).

Nowhere is it suggested that he existed before his birth!

Take, as an example, the opening verse of the New Testament:

“The genealogy of Jesus Christ the SON of David, the SON of Abraham” (Matthew 1:1).

If the Messiah lived in some form before Abraham and David, he was not their son, and the statement is false.

We believe that the statement is true, and all Scripture agrees therewith. Consider the record of his early childhood:

“And Yeshua grew both in wisdom and in stature, gaining favor both with other people and with God” (Luke 2:52 — Jewish New Testament).

How can these words possibly apply to a pre-existent angel, or the second person of a Triune or Biune God? Could such a one increase in wisdom and in favor with YEHOVAH God? Assuming the impossible were true, and the Messiah pre-existed as an angel or a member of the god-head, on what grounds could it be said that he increased in favor with YEHOVAH merely because in his new state he grew from a baby to a youth!

If the Messiah pre-existed, he must have divested himself of all previous identity, lost all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God, and had to establish this all again! What for? What did it accomplish? Is such belief logical? We shall show it is unscriptural!

It is normal procedure for a child to “develop in wisdom and stature,” but where the Messiah differed from all before or since, was in his selection by YEHOVAH God Who “appointed [him] in advance for you,” and his exceptional predilection for spiritual things. This he received from YEHOVAH God Who became revealed in the Son (2 Corinthians 5:19; Isaiah 11:2-3; John 12:49), so that the Messiah could say with perfect truth, “before Abraham was I am.”

The only sense in which it can be taught with truth that there was anything pre-existent about the Messiah is in relation to YEHOVAH God Who was manifested in him. In all that he did and said, there was the influence of YEHOVAH's spirit that was given him “without measure” (John 3:34). He is “the only begotten son” of YEHOVAH God after his resurrection (John 3:16), whom “the Lord made strong for Himself” (Psalm 80:17), in order that His ways might be revealed unto men.

The Thread of Evidence Throughout The Bible

Throughout the Old Testament the promise of the Messiah is proclaimed; throughout the New Testament the person of the Messiah is described.

He was the “seed of the woman” promised from the beginning, to destroy the law of sin and death which was the product of the misguiding influence of the serpent (Gen. 3:15). The New Testament comments:

“When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth His son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law” (Galatians. 4:4).

If the Messiah pre-existed, how could he be described as the “seed of the woman?”

Abraham was taught: “In thy seed shall all nations be blessed” (Genesis 22:18).

Paul commented: “And that SEED is Christ” (Galatians 3:16).

Would Abraham imagine that his seed (son) existed before he did? Of course not! Where is there any evidence in Genesis that the Messiah was then
living in any form? There is none!

Moses, Israel's law-giver and leader, who typified the coming Law-giver and Leader (Yeshua the Messiah) told the Israelite nation:

“The Lord thy God will raise up unto Thee a Prophet FROM THE MIDST OF THEE, OF THY BRETHREN, LIKE UNTO ME; unto him ye shall hearken” (Deuteronomy 18:5).

In the New Testament, Peter quoted those very words and applied them to the Messiah (Acts 3:22; 7:37), and Paul taught:

“Therefore, IN ALL THINGS he had to be made like his brethren . . . .” (Hebrews 2:17 — NKJV).

Can the words of Moses above apply to a pre-existent angel or a member of the god-head? Could such a one be truthfully described as “raised up from the midst of thee,” “of thy brethren, like unto Moses?” Did the Messiah's brethren “pre-exist” in heaven alongside YEHOVAH God?

Only a false theory could possibly make those words apply to a pre-existent angel or a god.

The Messiah was the son of David, and David was told:

“When thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, WHICH SHALL PROCEED OUT OF THY BOWELS, and I will establish his kingdom for ever. I WILL BE HIS FATHER, and he SHALL BE My son (2 Samuel 7:12-14).

The prophecy relates to the Messiah, as the New Testament comment upon it makes abundantly clear (see Luke 1:32-33; Hebrews 1:5), and with that clearly established, note well the future tense used in relation to him. YEHOVAH God says: “I WILL BE his Father,” he “SHALL BE My son.” If the Messiah were already in existence, should not YEHOVAH have said: “I AM his Father,” “he IS My son”? Mary was told:

“He shall be [not is!] great, and shall be [not is!] called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David; and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end” (Luke 1:32-33).

These words of the angel Gabriel state that the Messiah “SHALL BE called the Son of the Highest,” and he shall reign on the throne of “his father David.” Can these expressions apply to one already in existence?

Consider also the preaching of the apostles. Did they proclaim belief in a pre-existent angel or god who had assumed human form? They did not. Listen to Peter's preaching:

“David . . . being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the FRUIT OF HIS LOINS, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne” (Acts 2:30).

Whom did David believe would sit upon his throne? An angel or god who was already in existence? No; he believed the one who would reign there would be “the fruit of his loins,” that is, a descendant. The boy born of Mary and Joseph was a descendant of David, not a pre-existent angel or god assuming human form!

In short, YEHOVAH God revealed Himself in a man of His choosing who became the pattern for all those who would approach Him in hope of eternal life. YEHOVAH does not expect that such will attain unto the perfection they behold in the Son, but He does require of them that they build into their lives some of the divine characteristics that they see there revealed. By so doing, they develop a character worthy of perpetuation in a body of incorruptible glory in the Age to come (1 Corinthians 15:53-57).

The theory that sets forth the Messiah as a pre-existent angel or a member of the god-head, however, destroys this pattern, and mystifies and distorts the beautiful doctrine of God-manifestation in the man Yeshua through the holy spirit.

And remember that a correct understanding of the relationship of the Father and the Son is essential to salvation — “And eternal life is this: TO KNOW YOU, the ONE true God, and HIM WHOM YOU SENT, Yeshua the Messiah” (John 17:3).

Is Not the Messiah the Firstborn?

At this juncture the reader might try to point out Bible references that seem to give some support to the pre-existence theory. However, we are not ignorant of those passages, but proclaim that none of them give support to the theory if they are properly interpreted. It is unfortunately true, however, as the Bible itself states, that some take passages of Scripture that are “hard to be understood” and proceed to “wrest them unto their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:16).

Such a reference is Colossians 1:15. It describes Yeshua the Messiah as “the firstborn of every creature,” and some have advanced this in support of the pre-existence theory. If the Messiah is firstborn, he must have existed before all others, they claim.

But does not that set Scripture against Scripture? If he is literally “firstborn” in the sense implied by the theory, how can the Bible claim that he is the “son of Abraham and David” (Matthew 1:1)?

And consider the statement itself: “first BORN of every creature.” Does not that demand a mother? Who was the mother who gave birth to him before all others?

These difficulties are solved, and the passage simply and beautifully explained, when the Bible doctrine of the “firstborn” is understood. In the Bible, “firstborn” is a legal term, describing pre-eminence of position or status, though not necessarily of birth. There were special privileges granted the legal firstborn in a family. He represented his father, he acted as a priest, he received a double portion of the family inheritance (see Deuteronomy 21:17).

But the law of YEHOVAH God provided that the eldest son of a family could forfeit his position as legal firstborn, if guilty of misconduct or inability to perform the necessary duties, and be supplanted by a younger son. In other words, it was not necessary for the Messiah to be the first of YEHOVAH's creation to be eligible for the position of legal firstborn.

For example, consider 1 Chronicles 5:1:

“Reuben the firstborn of Israel . . . but forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his birth right was given unto the sons of Joseph, and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright!”.

Reuben's lewd conduct earned the rebuke of his father, who deposed him from his legal status of firstborn, and gave the position to a much younger son: Joseph.

Other examples can be briefly mentioned: Ephraim was blessed as firstborn by Jacob, even though he was younger than Manasseh his brother (Genesis 48:14-19), and YEHOVAH endorsed the appointment by describing Ephraim as “His firstborn” (Jeremiah 31:9). Jacob was given the birthright over his older brother Esau (Genesis 25:32-34). Simri was appointed to the position even though he was younger in years than his brethren (1 Chronicles 26:10).

These examples (and they could be multiplied many times over) clearly show that it was often the practice for a younger son to be elevated to the position of legal firstborn in a family. In fact, this was so common that the Mosaic Law prohibited the elevation of a younger son to this position on the mere whim of his father, because of favoritism. It commanded:

“It shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated . . . ” (Deuteronomy 21:17).

This prohibition shows that a legal firstborn could be a younger son, and therefore has a great bearing on the interpretation of Colossians 1:15.

The Bible refers to two notable “sons of God”: Adam and the Messiah (see Luke 3:38). The “first Adam” forfeited the right of inheritance, the position of firstborn of the human race, because of sin; but YEHOVAH God raised up a younger Son (called in 1 Corinthians 15:45 “the last Adam”) whose complete obedience to the will of his Father proved him worthy of the preeminence. He was thus elevated to the position of firstborn of the human race, which means that he receives “a double portion of the inheritance,” and that he acts as priest in the family of YEHOVAH God. The Messiah is firstborn, not by fact of longevity (which confers no merit) but by virtue of his moral excellence.

His ele
vation was predicted in the Old Testament. YEHOVAH declared concerning him: “I WILL [future tense] MAKE HIM My firstborn, higher than the kings of the earth” (Psalm 89:27).

The use of the future tense in this prophecy shows that the Messiah is not the firstborn by birth but by appointment; otherwise YEHOVAH should have said, “He IS My firstborn.”

The resurrection of the Messiah was the seal of the Father's approval on the Son (Romans 1: 1-4). This constituted him the Firstborn. Paul wrote: “He is . . . the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence” (Colossians 1:18), the “firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29). The followers of the Messiah are also described as a “kind of firstfruits” to YEHOVAH God (James 1:18; Revelation 14:4), and as “the congregation of firstborns” (Hebrews 12:23 — Greek. See Diaglott). Therefore, if the title “firstborn” teaches the pre-existence of the Messiah, it must do so also in relation to his followers. All the privileges of the firstborn that rest on the Messiah, apply to a lesser extent to his followers. They will receive a double portion of inheritance in the Age to come, even immortality (1 Corinthians 15:52-54), and they will act as a royal-priesthood (Revelation 5:9-10) in relation to the mortal population that will remain (see Zechariah 14:16) during the period of the Messiah's millennial reign and that of the Father on this earth (Revelation 20:6).

These expressions show conclusively that the apostle DID NOT mean, by his use of the term, that the Messiah pre-existed.

Did the Messiah Create the Heavens?

Some will remind us, however, that we have not disposed of all the difficulties contained in Colossians 1. For example, does it not reveal that the Messiah created all things? Paul taught:

“For by him (i.e. Yeshua) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him and for him” (Colossians 1:16).

This seems conclusive evidence, for it appears to teach that the Messiah created even heaven. But a close examination of the passage will reveal that it teaches too much if this interpretation is pressed, for it claims that he created all things “in heaven.” That would include YEHOVAH God Himself, to say nothing of the angels!

That is obviously neither logical nor Scriptural. What, then, does the verse mean? The Scriptures speak of heavens other than those that are above. For example, the prophet Isaiah speaks of “new heavens and a new earth” to be manifested in the future, which he describes as “Jerusalem a rejoicing and her people a joy” (Isaiah 65:17-18).

The coming of the Messiah will result in the formation of these political “heavens.” The rulers who will reign therein will be followers of the Messiah, then made immortal, reigning “on the earth” (Revelation 5:9-10).

Even now, a follower of the Messiah is elevated into a position of privilege in relation to YEHOVAH God and His Son, described as “the heavens in Christ” (Ephesians 1: 3 — see margin). Paul thus taught:

“He hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places [the heavens] in Christ” (Ephesians 2:6 — Margin).

These “heavens” have been brought into existence through the Messiah, and they are the precursors of the political “heavens” to be manifested in the age to come when he rules on earth. In them are found gradations of authority, described as thrones, dominions and so forth; some of which were visible then, and some of which are yet to be manifested, and, therefore, are as yet invisible.

All will be revealed in the Age to come.

The term “heaven,” therefore, often relates to a position of privilege or elevation. It is used to describe the present relationship of the Messiah's followers to the Father and the Son, as well as the authority that they will wield in the Kingdom that the Messiah will set up on earth — in which they will exercise gradations of power (see Luke 19:17-19).

In Isaiah 65:17-18, the “heavens” constitute the rulers or government of the age to come, and the “earth” the ruled, or common people, as the prophet is careful to show (see v.18). The same interpretation is demanded for Colossians 1:16. The word in the Greek translated “by” is the preposition en. This is translated “because” in Matthew 26:33; Mark 14:27, but is more commonly rendered “in.” It signifies “in the sphere of” a person's influence or being. The R.S.V. and Revised Version translations of the Bible render Colossians 1:16 as “for in him were all things created.” It cannot be said that the material creation was created “in Christ,” and therefore the reference must be to the spiritual creation, as is further implied in v.18.

Elsewhere, a person “in Christ” is described as a “new creature,” or “new creation” as the expression should be rendered (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15), and as the “things” that the Messiah is said to have created are “in him” it is obviously this “new creation” is what the apostle has in mind. The Messiah is the beginning of this new creation of YEHOVAH God (Revelation 3:14), leading the way to which his followers can attain (Philippians 3:21; 1 John 3:1-2), for what he is today they can become.

To summarize, Colossians 1:16 DOES NOT teach the literal creation of the heavens and the earth by the Messiah, because:

1. It conflicts with the testimony of the Old Testament which teaches that YEHOVAH God alone created the heavens and the earth.

2. The heavens in question are “in Christ” which is only possible if they relate to spiritual things.

3. Other expressions by the apostle align the “heavens” to positions of privilege in the Messiah.

So Paul concludes: “He is before (Greek — superior to) all things, and by (Greek – en, in) him all things consist” (Colossians 1:17).

The Greek word translated “consist” is sunistemi and signifies to “stand, or adhere, together.” The Messiah is the cohesive force of the NEW creation, and as such these words can be understood. But if the creation in question is interpreted to mean the literal creation, we must acknowledge that the Messiah holds all that together. Why, then, did it not disintegrate when he died? Obviously this interpretation is wrong, and as the context clearly shows, was never intended by Paul, who was writing of a spiritual creation in the Messiah.

“I Am From Above” (John 8:23)

This statement is often used to teach that the Messiah was in heaven before he came down to earth. The context of the verse, however, shows that this interpretation is incorrect. The Messiah declared to the Judeans: “Ye are from beneath: I am from above,” then, in explanation, he continued: “Ye are of this world; I am not of this world.” The Messiah was “from above” and “not of this world” because he manifested wisdom and characteristics that were of and from YEHOVAH God through the holy spirit.

A man who “loves the world” is “from beneath,” or “earthy,” but one who has “the love of the Father” dwelling in him is “from above” (John 8:23). The Messiah told Nicodemus that a person must be “born from above” (John 3:3 — margin) if he would inherit the kingdom of YEHOVAH God. Such a one is begotten by the word of YEHOVAH (I Peter 1:23; 1 John 3:9-10), by a “wisdom that descendeth from above” (James 3:15-18). The character that he will develop is one molded by the Word that dwells in him (John 17:17), so that he can claim to be “from above” though he was never literally in heaven.

That is the sense in which the Messiah's words are to be understood. He was “not of this world” in the same sense as John exhorted believers to be “not of this world” (1 John 2:15). The Messiah-follower is expected to look beyond the earthly things of this world to the glory yet to be revealed, and to become mentally and morally changed by the influence (holy spirit) which is “from above.”

The Messiah provided an exam
ple of this.

“I Came Down From Heaven” (John 6:38)

“This is a hard saying, who can understand it?” asked the disciples (v. 60). It was followed by one even more difficult: “What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before?” So ridiculous did this sound to some of the Messiah's disciples that they left him (v. 66). And that conclusively proves that they knew nothing of the theory of a pre-existent Messiah.

Moreover, consider the title the Messiah used. He described himself as “Son of Man.”

Was the pre-existent one a Son of Man? Evidently he was if this reference is relied upon as proof of his supposed pre-existence.

What did the Messiah mean by these difficult sayings?

They appear at the end of a long conversation with the Judeans, based upon the giving of manna in the wilderness, and the circumstances provide the KEY to their meaning.

The manna is described as “bread from heaven” (John 6:32), and the Messiah likened himself to anti-typical manna or “bread from heaven” (vv. 32-33). Does this description mean that the manna was manufactured in heaven, at the dwelling place of YEHOVAH God, and wafted down in a thick cloud every night through the limitless spaces above to the wilderness below? Or did YEHOVAH God send His spirit to earth, and there manufacture it?

Undoubtedly the latter, as any reasonable person will concede.

That is the sense, therefore, in which we must understand the Messiah's allusions to himself. Consider the circumstances of his birth. The angel told his mother:

“The holy spirit shall come upon thee, the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee, therefore that holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).

The Messiah was “the only begotten Son of God” and therefore from above. Paul taught that “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19). That which was in the Messiah (the spirit) had come down from heaven, and tabernacling in the flesh of the Messiah, ascended into heaven after his resurrection.

That this is the true meaning is shown by the explanatory words of the Messiah himself. To the confused disciples he declared:

“What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before? It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing” (John 6:62-63).

YEHOVAH God, by His spirit, descended to earth to provide one of the human race capable of conquering sin (see Ps. 80:17), and having done so, He withdrew this one to heaven, having changed his nature from a body of flesh to one of spirit, for it should be clearly understood that a spirit being is corporeal (1 Corinthians 15:44-45). Thus the spirit ascended where it was before, though in a different form. It descended as the power of YEHOVAH God; it ascended as a Son of Man made immortal.

In the Beginning Was the Word (John 1)

John's Gospel commences with this statement, and goes on to state that this word was with God (YEHOVAH) and was God (YEHOVAH), and made all things (vv. 1-4). And because the title, Word of God, is applied by many to the Messiah in Revelation 19:13 (in actual fact this is applied to YEHOVAH God's Shekinah Glory — not the Messiah), it is claimed that these verses in John relate to a pre-existent Messiah.

If this were so, however, it would make the Bible appear hopelessly contradictory, for such reference as: “I will be his Father, and He shall be my son,” “I will make him My firstborn,” “Jesus Christ the son of Abraham the son of David” are at variance with the teaching that represents the Messiah as already living.

The Greek term translated “word” is Logos. It signifies the outward form of inward thought or reason, or the spoken word as illustrative of thought, wisdom and doctrine. Not only that, but it can also refer to YEHOVAH's Shekinah Glory.

John is teaching that in the very beginning, YEHOVAH's purpose, wisdom or revelation (Shekinah Glory) had been in evidence. It was “with God” in that it emanated from him; it “was God” in that it represented Him to mankind. A similar expression is used by the Messiah in Matthew 26:28: “This is my blood” — that is, this represents my blood. Again in Matthew 13:20: “the same is he” signifies the same, “represents he.” “That rock was Christ” (1 Corinthians 10:4, it represented the Messiah); and it became the motive power of all that YEHOVAH God did, for all was made with it in mind, and it presented the hope of life to mankind (see John 1: 3-4).

What John is stating, therefore, is that in the very beginning there existed the wisdom or purpose of YEHOVAH God (His Shekinah Glory), and that it was revealed unto men to provide a way of life.

What did it proclaim?

The coming of one of the human family who would overcome sin and give reality to the hope of life. The promise of this was stated from the beginning in the Word or Shekinah Glory of YEHOVAH God(e.g. Genesis 3:15).

This Word, Wisdom or Shekinah Glory found its reality, its substance, its confirmation (Romans 15:8) in the person of the Messiah; therefore John taught:

“According to [or by] the word [wisdom or Shekinah Glory] flesh was created; and dwelling among us — who are flesh — and we beholding his glory, was the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of honor and truth” (John 1:14).

While the Word (wisdom, Shekinah Glory) created all flesh — including that of the Messiah — the Declaration of Divine wisdom found its substance and reality in the person of the Messiah. Before his advent, it was a mere Word or Promise, but when he became manifested, it became a person in the Judahite way of thinking.

The person did not exist before the birth of the child Yeshua; but the promise and wisdom (Shekinah Glory) of YEHOVAH God always existed.

That is the teaching of John. It does away with the embarrassment of teaching that an angel or a god became an embryo in the womb of a woman, as demanded by the theory of a pre-existent Messiah.

We acknowledge that “Word” is personalized as “him”, in John 1:4, but that is a common Hebraism found throughout the Bible. Riches, Wisdom, Sin, and other subjects are similarly treated. Sometimes these are used to press the doctrine of pre-existence. For example, on several occasions, Jehovah's Witnesses have drawn attention to such passages as Proverbs 8:22, and applied them to their notion of a pre-existent Messiah. The passage reads:

“The Lord possessed me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old.”

The subject matter of the chapter is wisdom which is personified; but, unfortunately for the doctrine of the preexistent son, it is personified as a woman: “She standeth, she crieth” etc. (Proverbs 8:1-3).

“The Glory I Had with Thee Before the World was” — John 17:5

Do these words mean that the Messiah was personally with the Father from the very beginning? or are they expressive of the fact that YEHOVAH God, as a wise Architect (Hebrews 11:10), foresaw the glory of His completed plan?

The latter without doubt! This is shown beyond question because of the use of similar language in the same manner.

Thus Peter taught that the Messiah was “foreordained before the foundation of the world but was manifested in these last times for you” (1 Peter 1:20). John describes him as “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8).

Was the Messiah “slain from the foundation of the world?” Typically, yes, in the sacrifices provided; but literally, NO!

In like manner, YEHOVAH God, who knows the end from the beginning, foresaw the glory of the Son and proclaimed it through the prophets. The ultimate glory of the Messiah was in the mind and purpose of the Father from the very beginning.

He also provided for the ultimate glory of the Messiah's followers, so that the Messiah prayed:

“The glory which Thou gavest me, I have given them” (John 17:22).

Do the Messiah's fo
llowers possess his glory now? They do not, they are merely “in hope” of it (see Romans 5:2).

How can the Messiah then claim to have given it to them? Only in the sense that he has provisionally bestowed it, foreknowing that they to whom it is given in promise will fulfill the conditions to ultimately receive it in reality.

Thus, an accepted follower at the Messiah's coming could well speak to the Messiah as Yeshua prayed to the Father:

“Glorify thou me with the glory that I had [in promise] with thee before [this millennial] world began!”

YEHOVAH foreknows the completed purpose, and knowing that He will bring it to consummation, is able to “call those things which be not as though they are” (Romans 4:17). Paul taught:

“God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy, without blame before Him” (Ephesians 1:4).

If John 17:5 proves the pre-existence of the Messiah, Ephesians 1:4 must prove the pre-existence of all who are followers of him!

The same language is used of other men whom YEHOVAH God has used in a special way. Of Jeremiah it is written:

“Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations” (Jeremiah 1:5).

Does that prove the pre-existence of Jeremiah? If not, why should John 17:5 be used to teach the pre-existence of the Messiah, and so be made to conflict with many other references which clearly speak of him as the son of David born 2,000 years ago? Similar language is used of Paul (Galatians 1: 15) and others. When the Messiah returns, his accepted followers will be granted a glory similar to that bestowed upon the Son. They will be “conformed to the image of YEHOVAH's Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29).

Your Responsibility

As the hope of eternal life is bound up in a correct understanding of the Father and Son (John 17:3), it is the responsibility of all to seek out the truth concerning these matters. It is very difficult to rid our minds of bias, but it is necessary if we would find the truth. Is it logical that an angel or a god should become a baby, and be compelled to learn all over again those things that once he knew? What purpose is served by this?

No, the truth is simple, clear and logical. Yeshua the Messiah came into this world through a NORMAL birth, his father being Joseph and his mother, Mary. From his birth YEHOVAH's spirit strengthened him in his daily pilgrimage towards victory over sin. By so doing there was revealed the means of victory for each and every one of us: divine help and strength (Philippians 4:13). A careful consideration of Scripture will show that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!

[Frank4YAHWEH]

THE SOURCE OF MY PREVIOUS POST

[terraricca]

frank

Quote

John D. Keyser

this is a men just like you and I,

Quote

Yeshua the Messiah Did Not Pre-Exist! Did Yeshua the Messiah divest himelf of his previous identity, lose all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God — only to establish this all again after his resurrection? What for? What did it accomplish? Is such a belief logical? A careful consideration of scripture will reveal that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!

Lk 2:48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.”
Lk 2:49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?”

Christ was about 10 years old here witch Father did he talked about ??

Lk 2:50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.are you just as they were ??

Lk 3:23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was ;so it was thought; the son, , of Joseph,

Lk 4:18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
because he has anointed me
to preach good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to release the oppressed,
Lk 4:19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
Lk 4:20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him,
Lk 4:21 and he began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

Jn 1:3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
Jn 1:4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men.

Jn 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Jn 1:15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ ”

is this not plain English ?

Quote

No, the truth is simple, clear and logical. Yeshua the Messiah came into this world through a NORMAL birth, his father being Joseph and his mother, Mary. From his birth YEHOVAH's spirit strengthened him in his daily pilgrimage towards victory over sin. By so doing there was revealed the means of victory for each and every one of us: divine help and strength (Philippians 4:13). A careful consideration of Scripture will show that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!

she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit.
Mt 1:19 Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.
Mt 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.
Mt 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”
Mt 1:22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:
Mt 1:23 “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”—which means, “God with us.”
Mt 1:24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.
Mt 1:25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

it seems clear to all of us that you do not believe what is written in scriptures ,and so many things that you believe are of men fabrication but not of God,

Quote

the truth is simple, clear and logical.

this is true ,but you have to have acquired the knowledge God gives not the one men supplies

Pierre

[Frank4YAHWEH]

Quote (terraricca @ Dec. 01 2011,13:03)

frank Quote John D. Keyser this is a men just like you and I, Quote Yeshua the Messiah Did Not Pre-Exist! Did Yeshua the Messiah divest himelf of his previous identity, lose all his former knowledge, power and standing with YEHOVAH God — only to establish this all again after his resurrection? What for? What did it accomplish? Is such a belief logical? A careful consideration of scripture will reveal that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false! Lk 2:48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.” Lk 2:49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” Christ was about 10 years old here witch Father did he talked about ?? Lk 2:50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.are you just as they were ?? Lk 3:23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was ;so it was thought; the son, , of Joseph, Lk 4:18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, Lk 4:19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” Lk 4:20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him, Lk 4:21 and he began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” Jn 1:3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. Jn 1:4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. Jn 1:14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth. Jn 1:15 John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’ ” is this not plain English ? Quote No, the truth is simple, clear and logical. Yeshua the Messiah came into this world through a NORMAL birth, his father being Joseph and his mother, Mary. From his birth YEHOVAH's spirit strengthened him in his daily pilgrimage towards victory over sin. By so doing there was revealed the means of victory for each and every one of us: divine help and strength (Philippians 4:13). A careful consideration of Scripture will show that the doctrine of pre-existence is both illogical and false!   she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit. Mt 1:19 Because Joseph her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly. Mt 1:20 But after he had considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. Mt 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” Mt 1:22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: Mt 1:23 “The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”—which means, “God with us.” Mt 1:24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. Mt 1:25 But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus. it seems clear to all of us that you do not believe what is written in scriptures ,and so many things that you believe are of men fabrication but not of God, Quote the truth is simple, clear and logical. this is true ,but you have to have acquired the knowledge God gives not the one men supplies Pierre

Pierre,

It is quite clear that you have very little comprehension of what it is that you read!

[terraricca]

frank

Quote

Pierre, It is quite clear that you have very little comprehension of what it is that you read!

you practice religion leadership,just has the Pharesees ,and the Saducees and the doctors of the law ;this is a example of their process;;

The Pharisees Investigate the Healing

Jn 9:13 They brought to the Pharisees the man who had been blind.
Jn 9:14 Now the day on which Jesus had made the mud and opened the man’s eyes was a Sabbath.
Jn 9:15 Therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. “He put mud on my eyes,” the man replied, “and I washed, and now I see.”
Jn 9:16 Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.”
But others asked, “How can a sinner do such miraculous signs?” So they were divided.
Jn 9:17 Finally they turned again to the blind man, “What have you to say about him? It was your eyes he opened.”
The man replied, “He is a prophet.”
Jn 9:18 The Jews still did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight until they sent for the man’s parents.
Jn 9:19 “Is this your son?” they asked. “Is this the one you say was born blind? How is it that now he can see?”
Jn 9:20 “We know he is our son,” the parents answered, “and we know he was born blind.
Jn 9:21 But how he can see now, or who opened his eyes, we don’t know. Ask him. He is of age; he will speak for himself.”
Jn 9:22 His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews, for already the Jews had decided that anyone who acknowledged that Jesus was the Christ would be put out of the synagogue.
Jn 9:23 That was why his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”
Jn 9:24 A second time they summoned the man who had been blind. “Give glory to God,’” they said. “We know this man is a sinner.”
Jn 9:25 He replied, “Whether he is a sinner or not, I don’t know. One thing I do know. I was blind but now I see!”
Jn 9:26 Then they asked him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?”
Jn 9:27 He answered, “I have told you already and you did not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you want to become his disciples, too?”
Jn 9:28 Then they hurled insults at him and said, “You are this fellow’s disciple! We are disciples of Moses!
Jn 9:29 We know that God spoke to Moses, but as for this fellow, we don’t even know where he comes from.”
Jn 9:30 The man answered, “Now that is remarkable! You don’t know where he comes from, yet he opened my eyes.
Jn 9:31 We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly man who does his will.
Jn 9:32 Nobody has ever heard of opening the eyes of a man born blind.
Jn 9:33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.”
Jn 9:34 To this they replied, “You were steeped in sin at birth; how dare you lecture us!” And they threw him out.

when they done and could not prove nothing against the man ;Jn9:34Tothistheyreplied,“Youweresteepedinsinatbirth;howdareyoulectureus!”Andtheythrewhimout[/COLOR class="bbcode-color">

Pierre

[Proclaimer]

The problem you have Frank and Gene is that John 1:1:51 is talking about the same IT.
And it is Jesus.

Please point to me the exact point where IT become a person or him in your view.

Obviously the chapter ends with talking about Christ because that is spelled out to the point that you can't deny it. But if you go toward the beginning it also is seems quite cleat that it is talking about the same IT/person and I can't see exactly where you yourself draw the line in saying this is Jesus and this is an IT.

Q: Where does the change take place exactly according to you guys?

I have also noticed Frank that most of your responses usually involve some diversion away from scripture to some external writing which is a strategy that could at worse be there to tickle the ears. I will add that this is a strategy of cults in order to not get them to rely on scripture without first being externally indoctrinated so as to read scripture through the lenses of these doctrines. I way prefer to stick to scripture most of the time because scripture should be good enough IMO.

[GeneBalthrop]

T8………No, IT is not a HE or a SHE, it is simply used in a object(-ive) sense.  If i say the elephant , “IT” moves slow I am referring to (IT) in a objective sense. “It” cognitive thought better known as (INTELLECT) is what Spirit (IS), Spirit is not a she or her  or he or him. “IT” is what is (IN) a person, who is a she or he . As i have said before a big problem here and many other places, people do not understand the meaning of the word SPIRIT .  They think like Mike (IT) the object Spirit, has many meanings which is simply not true and as a result all kinds of false conclusions come about. IMO

T8, Frank and I have posted you the truth over and over when are you going to at least start to accept some of (IT) again an object of thought not a Person.

peace and love to you and yours T8…………………………………………………..gene

[Proclaimer]

Gene and/or Frank, could you do us a favour?

Where does the change between IT and Jesus take place exactly in John 1?

John 1:1 In the beginning was IT….
John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

What verse makes the switch in your view?
It must be between verse 1 and 29 somewhere right?

[mikeboll64]

I would also like to know the answer to t8's question guys.

[GeneBalthrop]

T8………There is NO Change at all. Would you call you word a He or She, No you call it and It because it is a OBJECT of your reference. God in John 1:1 are one in unity Just as your word and your are. God's word is an aspect of HIM Just as Your words are and aspect of YOU. You can not separate them no more then you and your word could be separated. Now if i am in agreement with you or your words then we are ONE, Remember Jesus said that “Me and the Father are ONE, IN agreement another words and acting as one>  Jesus only Spoke God's WORD to US not HIS WORDS .

If you understood that GOD was not a Person, but a Spirit as Jesus said and then understood what spirit was then you could easily see God as and IT and It God can be in you, because IT is SPIRIT and SPIRIT can and does  INDWELL you I know Jesus personified the Word GOD as Father but he also said that He presented the Father in proverbial language , which is a (fictitious illustration) another words not a true picture of HIM. God is Spirit and is portrayed as a FATHER because (IT)or (THEM)   the  SEVEN Spirits are what made us and everything that exists. GOD is not a Man but a spirit and can indwell all and be through all things. That is not a Being as such but a Power that is LIFE and is expressed in WORDS (Intelligent utterances) So in the Beginning was intelligent utterance and intelligent utterance was with God (SPIRITS) and the (intelligent utterance ) was GOD (Spirits).

I have ask you this many times before T8, don't you think if John wanted us to believe he was talking about Jesus he would have just simply have written Jesus there, instead of Word? Why even force the Test at all T8 just accept it as it is God and His word were in the beginning, Just as if i said you and your word were in the beginning of Heaven Net. No difference i am still talking about the same person you and your words.  IMO

peace and love……………………………………………………………………..gene

[mikeboll64]

Hi Gene,

t8 is asking when John stopped talking about God's Word and started talking about Jesus. For example:

Is verse 1 about Jesus? How about verse 2? 3? 4?

In which verse does John switch from talking about the Word to talking about Jesus?

(I believe that's what he's asking.)

[Ed J]

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 02 2011,10:13)

Hi Gene, t8 is asking when John stopped talking about God's Word and started talking about Jesus.  For example: Is verse 1 about Jesus?  How about verse 2?  3?  4? In which verse does John switch from talking about the Word to talking about Jesus? (I believe that's what he's asking.)

Hi Mike,

Verse 4 is when Jesus is brought in as the object,
yet the subject (“The Word”) continues until verse 14.
In verse 15 the subject switches to Jesus. I hope this helps.

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

[Proclaimer]

Come on Gene. Where does IT finish and Jesus start in John 1:1?
Do you agree with Edj?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 02 2011,14:34)

Quote (mikeboll64 @ Dec. 02 2011,10:13) Hi Gene, t8 is asking when John stopped talking about God's Word and started talking about Jesus.  For example: Is verse 1 about Jesus?  How about verse 2?  3?  4? In which verse does John switch from talking about the Word to talking about Jesus? (I believe that's what he's asking.) Hi Mike, Verse 4 is when Jesus is brought in as the object, yet the subject (“The Word”) continues until verse 14. In verse 15 the subject switches to Jesus. I hope this helps. God bless Ed J (Joshua 22:34) http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

Funny thing Edj. You say Jesus is the HIM in verse 4 right?
But how can it be Jesus if the preceding verses do not identify Jesus at all? What makes you think it is Jesus if the subjects before are not Jesus?

HIM has to be either God or the Word as they are the only ones/ITs identified so far.

Additionally, the word HIM in verse 4 is “autos” which is exactly the same word that refers to the Word and Gene and I guess yourself believe and teach that the Word is an IT.

Neither of your views add up.

[Author]

Posts