The Trinity Doctrine

[bodhitharta]

Quote

Jesus came forth in creation…creation was established with time…so YHWH did nto become a Father nor did Jesus Become a son…until creation began.

According to what you wrote above it proves my point. You said YHWH did not become a Father until creation began in saying that you Acknowedge that God is above being a literal Father as He has always been God from Everlasting.

Also you assume that Jesus was created or born at the time of creation yet this is absent in genesis? Was God trying to hide Jesus for thousands of years?

As I have told you the term Son of God is not as unique as you think.

Hasidism and the Galilee

Also preaching and teaching during the time of the Messiah, and also coming from the region of Galilee, were the religious pietists and worshipers known as the “Hasidim.” In fact, says Shmuel Safrai, all the references to the Hasidim in the Second Temple Period relate to the Galilee.

Although Jerusalem Pharisees tended to look down their long noses at Galileans, and others away from Jerusalem, in the period before (compare John 7:52) and immediately after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 A.D., the Galilee was noted as a place where Torah was taught in public, and in many respects the moral and religious behavior of the Galileans was on a higher level than that of the Judeans. Rabbinic literature refers to Galilean sages teaching in their academies and in the open air of the Galilee, much as Yeshua the Messiah did. Says Safrai:

“Jesus, who was quite closer to the Hasidim and perhaps even involved with some of them, does not therefore reflect Galilean boorishness or ignorance, but rather the dynamism and ongoing creativity of Jewish life in Galilee.”

The Hasidim, like Yeshua the Messiah and the apostles, referred to YEHOVAH God in a very intimate way as “father,” or “abba.” The intimate term “my father in heaven” is found only once in a rabbinical text, and that is actually a text belonging to Hasidic literature. In Hasidic works however the phrase is found often — no fewer than seventeen times in “Seder Eliyahu.” This literature is unique in that it reflects what remains of Hasidic thought and practice embedded in the greater corpus of rabbinic literature. Says Shmuel Safrai:

“It appears . . . that the Hasidim and those associated with them, including Jesus, considered their relationship with God to be one of extreme familiarity . . . However, in Hasidic circles the relationship of a Hasid to God was not just one of 'child of God,' but of a son who can brazenly make requests of his father that someone else cannot make. The Hasid addressed God as 'abba,' 'my father,' or 'my father in heaven,' and the LORD responded the way he responded to 'Hanina, my son.'”

Generally, it was the Hasidic element within the Pharisaical movement to which the people looked when they desired prayer for healing, or exorcism of evil spirits. They had more faith in the prayers of a Galilean Hasid, than in a Jerusalem priest, who were not considered to be that “close” to YEHOVAH God. When the Hasid prayed, they “begged” YEHOVAH, like a little child begs his father. It was “obvious” to them that their prayers would be answered — they had true “faith.”

The Hasidim, also like Yeshua, stressed the qualities and advantages spiritually of poverty. In Hasidic thought, poverty is the ideal state that leads to all other positive and praiseworthy qualities of character. Rabbinic sources, or the Pharisees, on the other hand, seemed to value wealth and at least moderate income, and as a consequence many during the time of the Messiah had become corrupted by the accouterments of power and authority, and the “pleasures” of life that wealth could bring. The tomb of Caiaphas, for example, which was recently found in Jerusalem, showed that he was a wealthy high priest who made use of the perks of his office for self advantage.

What was the view of the Messiah concerning poverty? In the sermon on the mount, He declared: “Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled. Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall laugh” (Luke 6:21). “But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn and weep” (verses 24-25). When the young rich man came asking him what to do to inherit eternal life, Yeshua told him he should keep the commandments (Matt.19:17-19). When the man said he kept them, and asked what he still lacked, Yeshua replied: “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me” (v.21). On hearing that saying, the young man departed sorrowful — for he had great wealth, and was not willing to part with it (v.22).

Considering the deceitfulness of riches, Yeshua then told his disciples: “Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God” (Matt.19:23-24).

The Pharisees of the school of Hillel the Elder already differed from the Hasidim in this respect, during the time of the Messiah. According to Hasidic thought, YEHOVAH God tested Israel in the furnace and found no quality more conducive to holiness than poverty. This view was not, however, common among the Rabbinic sages or Pharisees. Although the typical Pharisee did not esteem to great wealth, he did not look upon poverty as a spiritual blessing to be desired, either.

In another example, Hillel taught that “The ignorant man cannot be a fearer of sin, and the am ha-eretz [poor man or “farmer”, literally, “man of the earth”] cannot be a Hasid.” He was reacting to the teaching of the Hasid who emphasized that DEEDS are more important than “study.” Hillel disagreed, obviously, and emphasized the importance of study of Torah. The story is told about Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah who had to admonish a priestly Hasid who was seemingly ignorant of a number of laws of ritual purity. Says Shmuel Safrai,

“Unlike the sages, however, the Hasidim did not seek a balance between 'study' and 'deed,' but maintained that the deed is to be preferred even at the expense of Torah study. When they mentioned the saying in the Mishnah that refers to the fruits of certain deeds that are enjoyed in the world to come, they delete the saying's conclusion which states that 'the study of Torah is equal to them all.'”

There are a number of anti-Hasidic stories found in rabbinic literature. Even as the Pharisees looked down on the Messiah, and rejected him, they also tended to denigrate and hold in contempt the lowly Hasidim. However, the Hasidim in their views were much closer to the Messiah than the Jerusalem Pharisees, or either the schools of Hillel or Shammai.

Another contrast between the Pharisees and the Hasidim was their view of “faith” and “trust” in YEHOVAH God. The Pharisees took a more worldly, “practical” view of this matter. If a city were surrounded by an enemy king, who demanded the life of a righteous man in the city, or else he would destroy the city,