- This topic has 963 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Gene,
If the Father of Jesus were your God, then you would agree on how He identifies the Son as YHVH who laid the foundation of the world and the heavens are the works of the Son’s hands.
But you don’t.
You have an imaginary father who doesn’t identify his son as YHVH.
Hi Sis Kathi,
The words translated as “God/gods” have various meanings. I believe that the eternal creator God is YHVH which consists of the Father, Son, and their Spirit. Any other beings or things translated as god or gods are either man made idols, or beings that dwell in the spirit world that did not always exist and do not have power over YHVH.
I know the word God or god has many meanings but that doesn’t deviate from the concept of One God Yahweh as claimed by the Hebrew religion. Your interpretation of Yahweh consists of Father, Son and their Spirit is some thing which I am not able to uphold when I compare it with the concept of God Yahweh available in the Hebrew Bible. Forget about the other so called gods or idols.
2 Cor 13:13
The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the communion of[e] the Holy Spirit be with all of you.
Here Jesus is included in the doxology along with God. There are many such scriptures which support the exalted role of Jesus along with God in the NT…Exactly! Two powers of YHVH along with the power of the Holy Spirit is also supported in the OT.
But my arguments are against this new concept of doxology imputed to Jesus and the Holy Spirit in the NT which is not supported in the Hebrew Bible other than God Yahweh.
As is apparent in your last post, you have no idea about Greek plural nouns or singular nouns. Here is a picture of how the root word “theos” is changed in spelling to represent different uses of the word in the sentence. Please note that the singular form is not written the same as the plural form.
I can’t help it if you keep misunderstanding things. Not my fault. Read my post again. It simply is saying that ‘theos’ can be applied to one or many. Further, I have taught in the past it can be applied to judges, Satan, idols, and the one true God.
Of course context and definite articles or lack of them are going to help define what theos is being spoken of. I have taught these things for not only years, even decades.
I think you need to pay attention before opening your mouth next time as this is not wise. And it doesn’t bode well for your teachings when you keep missing the mark on what others are saying. You appear to be confused. Both your teaching and interpretation of what others say seems to lack truth and understanding. This is not meant to be an insult but is truly what I am observing from you.
Hi Sis Kathi,
Adam,
Are you aware that the Son is identified as YHVH in the NT? Heb 1.
Yes I am aware of Heb 1 which is purely the interpretation of it’s unknown writer. He had misquoted the Hebrew scriptures by taking them in bits and parts out of their original context to suit his Christology. The scriptures he quoted from the Hebrew Bible were originally meant for God Yahweh and not to Jesus. This is the reason why I am questioning these writings.
Yes I am aware of Heb 1 which is purely the interpretation of it’s unknown writer. He had misquoted the Hebrew scriptures by taking them in bits and parts out of their original context to suit his Christology. The scriptures he quoted from the Hebrew Bible were originally meant for God Yahweh and not to Jesus. This is the reason why I am questioning these writings.
Great. I can kill two delusions with one stone. The truth about this verse is it can be translated multiple ways and of course which option do you think Trinitarian scholars will choose. The one that appears to make Jesus as God, despite the rest of the New Testament clearly teaching that the one true God is the Father only.
An honest interpretation of any verse that can be translated multiple ways is to choose the translation that the rest of the NT is teaching.
Even Trinitarian scholars admit that “God is your throne” is a viable translation and that it makes theological sense.
So there is no reason to teach that God calls the Son as God because of this one verse. Some common sense would go a long way here instead of jumping to irrational conclusions.
But even if the Father did refer to the son as elohim / theos, even then it wouldnt be teaching the Trinity or saying Jesus is the one true God. We see these very words applied to others who are not the one true God like angels for example.
Gadam. Did you abandon the faith because of that verse?
Hi Proclaimer,
Great. I can kill two delusions with one stone. The truth about this verse is it can be translated multiple ways and of course which option do you think Trinitarian scholars will choose. The one that appears to make Jesus as God, despite the rest of the New Testament clearly teaching that the one true God is the Father only.
Which verse you are talking about in fact LU was referring the whole chapter 1 of Hebrews here. You just quoted only verse 8. Please check the whole chapter on Jesus the Son and his role in God’s creation as assigned by the Hebrews writer. And receives worship like God. I am quoting the NT scriptures only.
We see this most clearly in Hebrews 1:6, which reads, “And when he [God] brings the firstborn into the world, he says ‘Let all God’s angels worship him.’”
When Satan tried to bribe Jesus into worshiping him, Jesus responded, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve’” (Matt. 4:10). Worship is an honor reserved for God.
Angels tell men to “worship God” (Rev. 19:10; 22:9), but God tells angels to worship the Son.
God’s attributes are those perfections that Scripture ascribes to him that make him who he is. Some attributes he shares with us, but others belong to him alone. For example, God alone is eternal and unchanging and all-powerful and all-knowing.
And yet according to Hebrews 1:10–12, the Son is also unchanging and eternal. “[The heavens] will perish, but you remain . . . like a garment they will be changed, but you are the same, and your years will have no end.”
Of the angels he says
“He makes his angels winds,
and his ministers a flame of fire.”But of the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, is forever and ever . . . ” (Heb. 1:7–8)
Here the Son is addressed as “God,” Of course you have already referred this verse in your reply.
Immediately after citing Psalm 45 and calling the Son “God,” the author cites Psalm 102:25–27, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning” (Heb. 1:10). The word here is kurios, the Greek word typically used in the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew YHWH, “the LORD,” God’s covenant name. “LORD” (YHWH/kurios) is the most commonly used name for God in the Hebrew Bible.
[Please note as for the angels, they were present when God “laid the foundations of the earth” (Job 38:4), but only as spectators and singers (Job 38:7), not as creators and no Son is visible here]
Yet Hebrews 1 is clear that the Son is the one “though whom God . . . created the world” (Heb. 1:3). It was the Son who “laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of [his] hands” (Heb. 1:10).
Please remember these are not my logics but the logics of the writer of Hebrews. This is one such examples in the NT where Jesus is highly exalted to the role of divine (if not God). If you see the original verses the writer of Hebrews quoted from the Hebrew Bible no where it talks about the Son Jesus. This is the reason why I am questioning the honesty of these writers.
Psalm 45, how it was misused by the NT writers:
1. Overview
Following is a summary description of this psalm to help put its context into perspective.A ‘ROYAL MARRIAGE’ SONG: At first glance this composition seems to be no more than a wedding song, celebrating the marriage of a king to his princess, containing praise for the groom, and exhortation to the bride, and a prayer for the happiness of the union. Several profound interpretations have been ascribed to
the Psalm. Ibn Ezra understands the ‘king’ as referring to David or, as Targum and Kimchi, to the Messiah, and the ‘marriage’ as an allusion to his redemption of Israel.Rashi explains the song as dedicated to Torah scholars who are acclaimed as kings (Prov. 8:15; Gittin 62a). The scholar’s partner is the nation of Israel who, to survive, must heed the words of its elders who are its true spiritual leaders. According to Malbim, the ‘king’ is the mind and the soul that rule the rest of the body. The ‘queen’ represents the senses which must be trained to accept instructions from the brain that is their ‘master’ (verse 12) and knows how best to utilize the various parts of the body for good. The superscription attributes this psalm to the “Sons of Korah”, who were either the immediate sons of this rebellious person (Numbers 16), and who were spared from death (Numbers 26:11), or they were later descendants.
As Levites, they composed several other psalms. This is the first of the psalms being investigated in this series of essays, which some Jewish Sages have interpreted as messianic text, though historical interpretations have also been put forth by others.
a) The Messiah’s throne would be everlasting Psalms 45:7-8a[6-7a] and Luke 1:31-33 :
The relevant texts from the KJV “Old Testament” and New Testament, and the corresponding Jewish translation for reference purposes, are given below with the respective relevant portions of the passages shown in highlighted form.
KJV “Old Testament” Translation of Psalms 45:6-7a
6. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
7. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: [therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows:]KJV New Testament Translation from the Greek of Luke 1:31-33
31. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
32. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
33. And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.Jewish Translation from the Hebrew of Psalms 45:7-8a
7. Your throne [of] God [is] forever and ever; the scepter of equity is the scepter of your kingdom.
8. You loved righteousness and you hated wickedness; [therefore God, your God, anointed you with oil of joy from among your peers.]The opening phrase in the Hebrew text of verse 7, יםִ ה ֱא ֲאְ סִ כּ (kis’aCHA eloHIM), is treated differently by Jewish and Christian translators. Jewish translators generally render this phrase as “Your throne
[of] God” (as above), or “Your divine throne”, or “Your throne is (the throne of) God”, or “Your throne, O judge”,13 where the reference is to persons who are, or will be, occupying a certain throne. The common rendition of this phrase by Christian translators is “Thy throne, O God”, referring to the throne occupied by God. Clearly, these diverse views cannot both be correct.As noted in the “Overview” of Psalms 45, it is a royal wedding hymn, for which Jewish Sages have proposed several interpretations. Some consider the bridegroom literally a mortal king in his role as a ruler, one who can be either a historical figure or the promised ַיחִ שָׁ מ ;others view the bridegroom as a metaphor for something else. Yet, all these different interpretations are consistent with the context of the psalm.
The Hebrew Bible contains references to a “seat” or “throne” that is exclusively and unambiguously that of God, e.g., Isaiah 6:1, Psalms 11:4, 47:9, 89:15, 97:2, 2Chronicles 18:18, among others. There are also two
instances in the Hebrew Bible of the phrase יהוה אֵ סִּ כּ) kiSE Y-H-V-H), the throne of the Lord. One is at Jeremiah 3:17, where it is a name by which Jerusalem will be known in the messianic era. The other is in the following passage:1Chronicles 29:23 – And Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord [יהוה אֵ סִּ כּ [as king instead of David his father, and he prospered, and all Israel obeyed him.
This shows that Solomon occupied his father’s throne, one that was established by God, but was not God’s own “seat” or “throne”. In His promise to King David, God said that He will establish the eternal (Davidic)
throne with him and continue it through his son Solomon:2Samuel 7:12-13,16 – (12) When your days are fulfilled, and you shall lie with your forefathers, then I will raise up your seed that shall issue from your body after you, and I will establish his kingdom. 13) He shall build a house for My Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.
(16) And your house and your kingdom shall be established forever before you; your throne shall be established forever.
The annotated outline of Psalms 45 shown below helps to demonstrate that the Christian rendition is in error:
Verse 1 – Superscription [dedication, instructions, nature of psalm]
Verse 2 [1] – Prelude [author speaking of himself]
Verse 3-10[2-9] – Praise of the bridegroom [written in terms of 2nd-person, singular, masculine gender conjugated verbs and inflected nouns]
Verse 11-13[10-12] – Address to the bride [written in terms of 2nd-person, singular, feminine gender conjugated verbs and inflected nouns]
Verse 14-16[13-15] – Description of the bride [written in terms of 3rd -person, singular, feminine gender conjugated verbs and inflected nouns]
Verse 17-18[16-17] – Concluding address to the bridegroom [written in terms of 2nd-person, singular, masculine gender conjugated verbs and inflected nouns]Verse 7[6] is in the midst of a passage that refers either to an earthly person or, metaphorically, to earthly things. Consider the very next verse:
Psalms 45:8 – You loved righteousness and you hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, anointed you with oil of joy from among your peers.
Psalms 45:7(KJV) – Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows:
Consequently, the Christian translation of this verse, according to which it is about God, is ruled out.
The author of the “fulfillment” text attempts to connect Jesus, allegedly divine by virtue of being conceived of the Holy Spirit, with the throne of his “father” David. How could Jesus be of the line of King David if he was fathered by the Holy Spirit? According to the Hebrew Bible, which was the Scripture in force during the lifetime of Jesus and for years after his death, tribal pedigree is passed exclusively from a father to his male progeny. There also is no evidence in the New Testament, or in recorded history, that Jesus ever sat on any throne as a ruler of an earthly kingdom.Conclusion: Psalms 45:7-8a[6-7a] may be a valid “messianic prophecy”, though it remains unfulfilled.
b) The Messiah would be God – Psalms 45:7-8b[6-7b] and Hebrews 1:8-9:
The relevant texts from the KJV “Old Testament” and New Testament, and the corresponding Jewish translation for reference purposes, are given below with the respective relevant portions of the passages shown in highlighted form.
KJV “Old Testament” Translation of Psalms 45:6-7a
6. Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre.
7. Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: [therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows:]KJV New Testament Translation from the Greek of Hebrews 1:8-9
8. But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.
9. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.Jewish Translation from the Hebrew of Psalms 45:7-8a
7. Your throne [of] God [is] forever and ever; the scepter of equity is the scepter of your kingdom.
8. You loved righteousness and you hated wickedness; [therefore God, your God, anointed you with oil of joy from among your peers.]What is the context of verse 8[7]? In verse 2[1] the psalmist declares that his composition conveys his thoughts about an unnamed king. In the passage that follows, verses 3[2]-10[9], the psalmist directs his remarks at this king, and uses 2nd-person, singular, masculine gender conjugations of verbs and inflexions of nouns throughout. The psalmist is the speaker in verse 8[7], where he tells the king that, because of his (the king’s) righteousness, his (the king’s) God selected him for this leadership role.
The “fulfillment” text is in the midst of a collection of misquoted passages from the Christian “Old Testament”, which the author of the Letter to the Hebrews attempts to represent as God [“the Father”] speaking of His “Son” and declaring his divinity with his opening phrase of verse 8, “But unto the Son he saith”. In addition to this being a non-Biblical concept, and regardless of the context of the “fulfillment” text, a correct reading of the passage in Psalms 45 does not convey the idea that ַיחִ שָׁ מ is divine, an idea that would contradict what the Hebrew Bible teaches.
Conclusion: Psalms 45:7-8b[6-7b] is not a valid “messianic prophecy
Hi Danny,
You constantly reject the NT, but you said you were neutral?
You are a liar, a deceiver!
You can call me any thing. I have given two versions of Heb 1 both Christian and Jewish and they are not mine. Please read my both posts.
Hi Adam,
You said to Proclaimer:
Which verse you are talking about in fact LU was referring the whole chapter 1 of Hebrews here. You just quoted only verse 8. Please check the whole chapter on Jesus the Son and his role in God’s creation as assigned by the Hebrews writer. And receives worship like God. I am quoting the NT scriptures only.
I was wondering the same thing, in fact this is not the first time he has missed the message of Heb 1.
You also said:
Immediately after citing Psalm 45 and calling the Son “God,” the author cites Psalm 102:25–27, “You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning” (Heb. 1:10). The word here is kurios, the Greek word typically used in the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew YHWH, “the LORD,” God’s covenant name. “LORD” (YHWH/kurios) is the most commonly used name for God in the Hebrew Bible.
[Please note as for the angels, they were present when God “laid the foundations of the earth” (Job 38:4), but only as spectators and singers (Job 38:7), not as creators and no Son is visible here]
Yet Hebrews 1 is clear that the Son is the one “though whom God . . . created the world” (Heb. 1:3). It was the Son who “laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of [his] hands” (Heb. 1:10).
It does my heart good to know that you can see this also even though the message of Heb 1 causes you to doubt the validity of the book of Hebrews since it is such a clear message to support what I have been saying here specifically that the Father identifies the Son as YHVH who laid the foundation of the earth, etc.
Nice job,
LU
I think we are having a communication issue. Your post about plurals and singulars compare the word like “sheep” which is spelled the same way whether it is singular or plural, with the word “theos” and then go on to say how theos is plural in John 10:34. It is true that the root word of “theos” is translated as plural in John 10 but your post does not reflect that the word in John 10:34 is spelled “theoi.” Therefore, the root word “theos” is not like sheep that is spelled the same way whether it is singular or plural. The spelling of the word changes to indicate if it is plural or singular and should not be in your list here:
Words with both singular and plural usage
sheep;
cattle;
deer;
fish;
trout;
salmon;
aircraft;
spacecraft;
tsunami;
elohim;
theos.Can you see that “theos” does not fit this list?
Hi Sis Kathi,
It does my heart good to know that you can see this also even though the message of Heb 1 causes you to doubt the validity of the book of Hebrews since it is such a clear message to support what I have been saying here specifically that the Father identifies the Son as YHVH who laid the foundation of the earth, etc.
Nice job,
I always like your positive attitude. Yes the NT certainly talks the divinity of Jesus. There are number of verses to support this argument. For example I am quoting few scriptures from Revelation;
1. The First and the Last:
Please compare
Rev 1:
8 “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.
with
Rev 1:
17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he placed his right hand on me, saying, “Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one. I was dead, and see, I am alive forever and ever; and I have the keys of Death and of Hades”
When Jesus says that he is “the first and the last”, (Revelation 1:17) he is applying to himself a title of the Almighty God. “Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and Israel’s Redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God” (Isaiah 44:6) and as mentioned in Rev 1:8
2. The Appearance of the Son of Man:
Rev 1:
13 and in the midst of the lampstands I saw one like the Son of Man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash across his chest. 14 His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, 15 his feet were like burnished bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. 16 In his right hand he held seven stars, and from his mouth came a sharp, two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining with full force.
Compare the appearance of Jesus Christ in John’s vision (Revelation 1:12-18), with Daniel’s visions of the Ancient of Days and One like the Son of Man (Daniel 7:9-10,13-14). In both John and Daniel’s visions, there is “One like a Son of Man”. Yet when he appeared to John, he looked like the Ancient of Days who appeared to Daniel. This signifies that this Son of Man has the glory like that of the Ancient of Days.
3. The Lamb’s Glory:
Rev 5:
13 Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, singing,
“To the one seated on the throne and to the Lamb
be blessing and honor and glory and might
forever and ever!”
14 And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the elders fell down and worshiped.when we come to the visions of Heaven (Revelation 4:1 to 5:14) we can see again that Jesus has equal glory to God. Jesus appears as the Lamb, nevertheless in the songs John heard and the acts that he saw, the Lamb, who is Jesus Christ, is accorded the same glory and worship as the One who sits on the throne (Revelation 5:11-14).
The above verses prove that John the writer of Revelation certainly quoted Jesus the son of man or Lamb of God as divine and worthy to be worship along with God.
This is reason why I am repeatedly bringing out these deviations on God and the Messiah in the NT when compared to the Hebrew Bible.
Thanks and peace to you…..Adam
Both of you have bought the Trinity Doctrine hook line and sinker. Yes you have responded differently, but the Trinity has deceived both of you as well as much of Christianity.
The New Testament teaches us that the Most High God is invisible and no man has seen him. It also teaches clearly that Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God.
Thus, when men see God in the old or new testaments, they are seeing an agent or representitive of him. This is confirmed in scripture itself like when Moses saw God, it says in both testaments that it was an angel.
What the testaments are teaching you is God and the law. Then his Son and grace. It is a process. But not all men are onboard with God’s plan of redemption, so they look for excuses to change the truth to suit where their heart is.
Hi Proclaimer, Thanks for your comments on my post.
The New Testament teaches us that the Most High God is invisible and no man has seen him. It also teaches clearly that Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God.
Thus, when men see God in the old or new testaments, they are seeing an agent or representitive of him. This is confirmed in scripture itself like when Moses saw God, it says in both testaments that it was an angel.
First of all I am not a Trinitarian. I am only bringing the arguments on how the NT writers incorporated Jesus the supposed Messiah into Doxology which belongs to God (Yahweh) alone as per Hebrew Bible.
Regarding invisibility of God by the Johannine writer:
For the Old Testament’s (Hebrew Bible) part, there is nothing intrinsically invisible about God. Bultmann makes the point emphatically: ‘The thought of the invisibility of God in the strict sense is in no way an Old Testament one. … In the OT the notion is pervasive, that one can see God with human eyes’.
I will post details in my next post.
Seen and Unseen God in The Hebrew Bible
An obviously anthropomorphic expression is found in Genesis: ẓelem Elohim (“the image of God”), and there are references to actually “seeing” God (Ex. 24:9–11; Num. 12:8).
Ex 24: 9 Then Moses and Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel went up, 10 and they saw the God of Israel. Under his feet there was something like a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness. 11 God[a] did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel; also they beheld God, and they ate and drank.
Num 12:8 With him I speak face to face— clearly, not in riddles; and he beholds the form of the Lord.
The Limbs of the human body frequently serve as allegorical descriptions of the acts of God as perceived by man. Thus divine providence is referred to as “the eyes of the Lord” and “the ears of the Lord” (very common in Prophets and Psalms); “the mouth of the Lord” speaks to the prophets (both in Torah and Prophets); the heavens are the work of His fingers (Ps. 8:4), and the tablets of the covenant are written by the finger of God (Ex. 31:18). Striking figurative expressions are af (“nose”; i.e., “the wrath of the Lord”), “His countenance” (which He causes to shine or, alternatively, hides), yad, (“hand,” “His right hand,” “His arm,” “His sword”). At times the personification is startlingly extreme: God (or His voice) “walks about in the garden” (Gen. 3:8); He “goes down” in order to see what is being done on the earth (Gen. 11:5; 18:21) or in order to reveal Himself there (Ex. 19:18; 34:5), and He “goes up again” (Gen. 17:22; 35:13); He goes through the land of Egypt and passes over the houses of the Israelites (Ex. 12:12–13); He sits on a throne (Isa. 6:1), causes His voice to be heard among the cherubim who are over the ark of the tabernacle (Num. 7:89), dwells in Zion and in Jerusalem (Ps. 132:13; 135:21); the hair of His head is as wool (Dan. 7:9); Moses sees “His back” (Ex. 33:23). Anthropomorphic expressions abound in the song at the Red Sea (Ex. 15) and in the song of David (II Sam. 22; Ps. 18).
More important from a theological perspective are the anthropopathisms, or psychical personifications of the Deity. Scripture attributes to God love and hate, joy and delight, regret and sadness, pity and compassion, disgust, anger, revenge, and other feelings. Even if one explains these terms as being nothing but picturesque expressions, intended to awaken within man a sense of the real presence of God and His works, nonetheless they remain personifications. The basis for such terms is the conception of God as a Being who wills in a personal (though not exactly in a human) way. This personalized conception of the Deity, in conjunction with the axiomatic belief in His absolute transcendence, leads to unusual boldness in the use of anthropomorphic imagery.
Ultimately, every religious expression is caught in the dilemma between, on the one hand, the theological desire to emphasize the absolute and transcendental nature of the Divine, thereby relinquishing its vitality and immediate reality and relevance, and on the other hand, the religious need to conceive of the Deity and man’s contact with Him in some vital and meaningful way. Jewish tradition has usually shown preference for the second tendency, and there is a marked readiness to speak of God in a very concrete and vital manner and not to recoil from the dangers involved in the use of apparent anthropomorphisms.
However, this anthropomorphic style is frequently accompanied by mitigating expressions indicating reservations. The basic opposition to all such personifications is decisively formulated in the Decalogue. In addition, it finds expression in many verses which maintain that nothing can be compared to God, who has no form or shape, cannot be seen, is eternal and without end (very frequent in the Pentateuch, Former and Latter Prophets, Psalms, Job, and Chronicles). Yet, many of these verses appear to contradict others which describe God in corporeal terms (for example, Ex. 20:4; Deut. 4:15, as against Gen. 1:26; Num. 23:19 and I Sam. 15:29 as against Gen. 6:6; I Kings 8:27 as against Ex. 25:8, and other such examples). These verses emphasize the transcendent nature of the Divine, not in philosophical abstractions but in vivid descriptive expressions. In other places one finds attempts to avoid such personifications and to substitute less daring imagery; if it is said, on the one hand, that the Lord dwells in His sanctuary (Ex. 35:8), and also appears in the cloud over the cover of the ark (Lev. 16:2), on the other hand there are verses which speak instead of God’s kavod (“glory”) or Shemo (“His name”; Ex. 24:16–17; Lev. 9:23; Num. 14:10; Deut. 12:5, 11; 16:2, 6; I Kings 8:11). Some scholars (S.D. Luzzatto and Geiger) argued that the present vocalization of Exodus 34:24 “to appear before the Lord” was emended by the masoretes from original לִרְאוֹת (lirot; “to see”) to לֵרָאוֹת (lera’ot; “to be seen”), to avoid an objectionable anthropomorphism.
There is no evidence of any physical representation of God in Jewish history (in contradistinction to the worship of Canaanite and other foreign gods by Israelites). Even the golden calves of Jeroboam represented, according to the view of most scholars, only a footstool for the invisible God. In archaeological excavations no images of the God of Israel have been unearthed. Biblical Hebrew is the only fully developed language which has no specific term for the notion “goddess.”
Exodus 33:11
So the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend. And he would return to the camp, but his servant Joshua the son of Nun, a young man, did not depart from the tabernacle.
Exodus 33:20
But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.”Here there is no contradiction as God can speak face to face with men, but not while in all His glory; otherwise, mortal man would die.
In the Christian NT like the Johannine writer claimed that only Jesus revealed this unseen God to us. But this is not supported by the Hebrew scriptures. Rest is speculation on part of Christianity stating that Jesus was preexisting as an Angel of God or Michael, the Word of the Yahweh etc.
Please share your views.
Adam…..Very good post brother, I just wonder, could it be that In order to see God , we would have to come out side of him ( and because life is what God is) so that would mean we would have to come outside of him, and we would have to die, in order to achieve that?
I am more and more convinced, God is what life “itself” is. Remember what Paul said, “know you not your “body” is the temple of the living God. God being “in All and through ALL, is the “tree of life” which is God. He is referred to as the, “TREE” ( that which brings forth from “SELF” ) . So life “itself” is what, God is. So with that view, everything that has life has God “in” it.Another words we “all live, and have our being “in” God. Just food for though brother.
There is life because , life is what God actually is.
peace and love to you and yours Adam………..Gene
Gadam AND Gene
1John 5:12
He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
[23] Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 1John 2:22,23
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
