Colossians 1:15 – Did Jesus Have a Beginning?

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. — Colossians 1:15

One claims that Colossians 1:15-20 makes no sense except in the context that there is a trinity. And, yet, in order to get the trinity doctrine into the the verses, one has use the human spirit of imagination, assumptions based on what is imagined, add those assumptions to, and read those assumptions into, the passage being discussed.

We should note first that “God” is used unipersonally in the phrase “image of the invisible God.” The word “God” is referring, not to three persons, but to one person. Jesus is not being included as a person of “God”. The context shows that the word “God” is being used to denote the one person, “God, the Father of our Lord Jesus.” (Colossians 1:13) Again, Colossians 3:1, we read that Jesus sits at the right hand of “God”, and it should be apparent that “God” is there unipersonal, not tripersonal. “God” refers to one person, the God and Father of Jesus. (Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3) All through the New Testament, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always presented as the one person: the God and Father of Jesus. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is never, not even once, ever presented as more than one person.

So what the trinitarian has to do is use his spirit of human imagination so as to imagine that “God” refers to the assumed first person of the trinitarian assumptions. Then they have further use his spirit of human imagination to image that “He,” which refers to Jesus, means the imagined second person of the trinitarian assumptions. And thus, in this manner the trinitarian assumptions are added to, and read into, what Paul wrote. In reality, the phrase “image of God” shows that Jesus is not the

The scriptures are quite plain on the fact that Jesus came into existence through a creative act of God. This can be clearly seen from Colossians 1:15, in speaking of Jesus: “who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation”.

Two things in this verse show that Jesus had a beginning and that he was created.

First, its structure shows that he came into living existence by a creative act. The rule of Greek grammar on the partitive genitive proves this, because the construction, “firstborn of every creature [or all creation]”, is in Greek grammar called the partitive genitive, that is, the genitive which contains as a part of its contents the thing or things mentioned in the noun that governs the genitive. The expression, “the firstborn of every creature,” being in the Greek a partitive genitive, it includes as a part of itself the thing implied in the noun that governs it, that being “firstborn.” Therefore, it implies that the firstborn one is a part of creation and, accordingly, was created and thus had a beginning.

Additionally, Jesus’ being called “firstborn” of every creature, or of all creation, proves that he came into existence by a creative act, even as those who are the afterborn of creation came into existence by a creative act. Being born of God as the first of the creation spoken of, he is not Jehovah the Almighty who gave this birth to him.

Some claim that his scripture teaches that Christ is over all creation; the ruler of all creation, and thus that Jesus is apart from the class of created beings.

The word “firstborn” is always used in either of two settings: as being the firstborn offspring of a father (as in Genesis 25:13), or as being part of the group being spoken of. Nevertheless even when used as the firstborn offspring of a father, it is still the group of children that the offspring of the father that the firstborn is a member of. For instance, In Exodus 11:5 we find: “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of the group that would make up Pharaoh’s offspring. Still, since Colossians 1:15 is definitely not saying that Jesus is the offspring of creation, making the creation the father, the other alternative is that Jesus is definitely included as part of the creation of which he is firstborn. In no case does “firstborn” mean that the firstborn did not have a beginning, or that the firstborn is not included in the group of which he is firstborn.

See our studies:

Psalm 89:27 – Jehovah’s Firstborn King for study on Psalm 89:27.

Genesis 34:7 – The firstborn nation, Israel

Jeremiah 31:9 – Ephraim as Jehovah’s firstborn

Someone objects that when prototokos (the Greek word translated firstborn in Colossians 1:15) is one of the class referred to, the class is plural , as in Colossians 1:18 and Romans 8:29.

The Greek singular of creation is often used by Paul and others to denote the collective whole of creation. See: Mark 10:6; 13:19; Romans 1:20; 8:19,20,21,22; Revelation 3:14.

Another objection that many put forth is: If Paul meant to convey that Christ was the first created being, why did he not use the Greek word protoktistos, which means “first created”?

One could ask a similar question concerning Paul usage of firstborn in Colossians 1:18, such as why didn’t he say “first raised” from the dead, rather than “firstborn” from the dead?

There is no record that the word protokistos was in common use in Paul’s day. If the word protokistos (which nowhere appears in the Bible) had been used, then the thought would have been shifted from the rights of the one who is firstborn to his being the first created. Paul was not emphasizing that Jesus was the first created, but rather that Jesus held the rights of heirship as the firstborn of all creation. This in no way negates the fact that the firstborn one is included in the group spoken of; it certainly does not provide any reason to change its meaning in this case from the meaning shown in its usage throughout the scriptures.

Nevertheless, Clement uses the terms prototokos and protokistos almost interchangeably. He refers to Christ the “first created” and later the “firstborn”. In his work Stromata Clement calls Christ “first-created” [TON PROTOKTISTON]. He also composes the line [referring to Proverbs 8:22]: TES SOPHIAS TES PROTOKTISTOU TO THEO. [“Wisdom that was the first created of God.”] “Clement repeatedly identifies the Word [John 1:1] with the Wisdom of God [Proverbs 8:22], and yet he refers to Wisdom as the first-created; while in one passage he attached the epithet ‘first-created,’ and in another ‘first-begotten,’ to the Word. At a later date a sharp distinction was drawn between ‘first-created’ and ‘first-born’ or ‘first-begotten,’ but no such distinction was drawn in the time of Clement, who with the Septuagint rendering of a passage in Proverbs [8:22] before him could have had no misgiving as to the use of these terms. Clement makes a sharp distinction between the Son and the Word who was begotten or created before the rest of creation and the alone Unbegotten God and Father.” [Clement of Alexandria, John Patrick (1914)] Thus, we recognize that while this does not mean that these two terms mean exactly the same thing, it does indicate that the idea of “first created” (protokistos) is included in the word “firstborn” (prototokos).

Additionally, we find this in Justin Martyr’s Dialogue With Trypho: “But this Offspring which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with him; even as the Scripture [Proverbs 8:22-31] by Solomon has made clear that he whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten AS A Beginning BEFORE all His creatures and as Offspring of God … We [Christians] know [Christ] to be the first-begotten of God, and to be before all creatures. … He is the Son of God and since we call him the Son, we have understood that he proceeded before all creatures from the Father by His power and will.” Thus Willis B. Shotwell remarks: “The language here is such that it cannot be argued that Justin considered the Logos to be eternal[*]. The most that can be said about the Logos is that he was created before anything else.” (The Biblical Exegesis of Justin Martyr, London 1965)

*Evidently Shotwell is using the term “eternal” here to mean an eternal past.

It is claimed that “God begets God” and thus if Jesus is Son of God, that this makes him God Almighty himself. This would limit God’s ability to produce a Son who is not the Supreme Being, based on the limited procreative powers that God placed upon the material creation. (Genesis 1:11,12,21,25) Of course, God is not so limited, and he can bring forth a Son who is not the Supreme Spirit Being that he himself is. Believing that if God has begotten a son, that the son must be equal in every way to the Father who begot him, the trinitarian and many others reason that the Son must also be Supreme Being. And since the scriptures declare only one Supreme Being, they come up with the idea of more than one person in the one Omniscient Supreme Being. Nevertheless, God did not use any kind of reproductive powers to bring forth his Son, as though he were limited like humans and other animals in this respect, so that his Son would, in effect, have to be himself. Jehovah set the limits of reproduction on the animate material creation, not upon himself.

The evidence suggests that the translation is correct in thought where it has Jesus in his prehuman existence stating: “The Lord (Jehovah) created (qanah) me at the beginning of his work (derek), the first of his acts of long ago. Ages (olam) ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth.” (Proverbs 8:22, New Revised Standard Version) Thus Jesus had a beginning, and does not have to be God who begot him in order to be the Son of the God who begot, or brought him forth in creation.
See:
Proverbs 8:22,23 Proof that Jesus Existed in an Eternal Past?

God is not so limited as man is, nor did God bring forth a son in the same way that man does. Of course, Jesus, in his prehuman and posthuman existence, is of the same substance as God, that is “spirit”. While in the days of his flesh, Jesus was not a spirit being — he was human, a little lower than the angels, nothing more, nothing less. (Hebrews 2:9; 5:7) Jesus gave up as an offering his being — his soul [Hebrew, nephesh, Greek, psyche], represented in his blood (Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 17:11; Deuteronomy 12:23) — as a human, which offering includes the human body that God had prepared for just such an offering for sin. — Isaiah 53:10,12; Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-25,34; Luke 22:19,20; John 6:51-56; 1 Corinthians 10:16; 11:25-27; 15:21,22; Romans 5:15-19; Colossians 1:14,22; Hebrews 9:7,12,14,26,28; 10:5-12.

Revelation 3:14

Regarding Revelation 3:14 where Jesus is called “the beginning of the creation of God: He is not called the “beginner” of the creation of God. This would not only be a mistranslation, but would contradict the second part of the expression: “of the creation of God”. If the creative act is God, then God must have at least begun it alone; therefore the Son of God did not begin it. Revelation 3:14 thus proves that God started the creative work by bringing the Logos, God’s firstborn, into existence. This would mean, then, that the Logos, as a created being, is a part of creation and, therefore, was both created and hence had a beginning.

Hebrews 1:6

An additional proof is found in Hebrews 1:6, where Jesus is called Jehovah’s firstborn. Thus these scriptures do prove that God created Jesus. Therefore Jesus is the firstborn of God, the later born ones of God including angels (Job 38:7), Adam and Eve (Luke 3:38) and God’s Gospel-Age children (John 1:12; 3:3,5).

John 3:16

In John 3:16 we find further proof of this. There Jesus is called “the only begotten Son.” The fact that he was begotten proves that Jesus was a creation of Jehovah. The further fact that he is called the only begotten “Son” proves the same thing, for the word “son” implies either a direct or an indirect act of creation. As applied to Jesus it would be a direct creative act of Jehovah — one which Jehovah alone exercised, without the assistance of any other agency. Seeing that Jehovah created everything else indirectly, that is, through the Word (John 1:3), it would therefore be proper to call Jesus the “only begotten.”

John 1:18

This is further corroborated by John 1:18: “No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.” Some of the best manuscripts call Jesus here “the only begotten God (Mighty One)” instead of “the only begotten Son.” Whichever version we accept makes little difference in the sense, because the only begotten Son is an only begotten God, a mighty one, mightier than all other gods, the Father excepted, and because an only begotten God (mighty one) would be the only begotten Son of the only true Supreme, the Father. (John 17:3) In either case the passage shows Jesus’ pre-human creation by Jehovah and proves that Jesus had a beginning. The same can be said of John 1:14 and 1 John 4:9, for to be begotten implies a beginning and a coming into existence.

Ezekiel 21:30 equates birth as a form of creation.

Cause it to return into its sheath. In the place where you were created, in the land of your birth, will I judge you.

Isaiah 43 equates “being formed” with creation:

Isaiah 43:1 But now thus says Yahweh who created you, Jacob, and he who formed you, Israel: Don’t be afraid, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by your name, you are mine.
Isaiah 43:7 everyone [in reference to the peoples of Israel to be regathered] who is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yes, whom I have made.
Isaiah 43:22 – the people which I formed for myself, that they might set forth my praise.

Also notice:

Isaiah 46:3 – Listen to me, house of Jacob, and all the remnant of the house of Israel, that have been borne [by me] from their birth, that have been carried from the womb;

Isaiah 49:1 – Listen, isles, to me; and listen, you peoples, from far: Yahweh has called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother has he made mention of my name:

Additionally, we find that Jehovah speaks of Israel as his firstborn:

Exodus 4:22 – You shall tell Pharaoh, ‘Thus says Yahweh, Israel is my son, my firstborn. See also Deuteronomy 14:1; Jeremiah 31:9; Hosea 11: 1;

Jehovah “made” and formed Jacob (Israel) from the womb.

Isaiah 44:2 – Thus says Yahweh who made you, and formed you from the womb, who will help you: Don’t be afraid, Jacob my servant; and you, Jeshurun, whom I have chosen.

Isaiah 44:21 – Remember these things, Jacob, and Israel; for you are my servant: I have formed you; you are my servant: Israel, you shall not be forgotten by me.

Isaiah 43:1,6,7 – But now thus says Yahweh who created you, Jacob, and he who formed you, Israel: Don’t be afraid, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by your name, you are mine…. I will tell the north, Give up; and to the south, Don’t keep back; bring my sons from far, and my daughters from the end of the earth; 7 everyone who is called by my name, and whom I have created for my glory, whom I have formed, yes, whom I have made.

Deuteronomy 32:6 – Do you thus requite Yahweh, Foolish people and unwise? Isn’t he your father who has bought you? He has made you, and established you.

Commonly, however, in NT scriptures, the words creation and created are limited in application either to the intelligent creation (which includes the angels as well as humans, powers, principalties in heaven or earth — Colossians 1:15); things created in heaven and earth (Revelation 5:13; 10:16), or more often, it is limited in application by context to the world of mankind, “the creation” having been subjected to vanity/futility. — Mark 10:6; 13:19; 16:15; Romans 8:19-22; Colossians 1:23; Hebrews 9:11; 2 Peter 3:4.

When Jesus said to “preach the gospel to the whole creation”, was he not referring to the mankind as a creation, but yet also as the offspring of Adam? Paul uses the word “creation” in a similar way in Romans 8:19-22. In Colossians 1:15, however, the word “creation” appears to be applying to all the intelligent creation, both in heaven and earth. The rule of Greek grammar on the partitive genitive proves that Jesus is being here referred to as the firstborn creature, because the construction, “firstborn of every creature [or all creation]”, is in Greek grammar called the partitive genitive, that is, the genitive which contains as a part of its contents the thing or things mentioned in the noun that governs the genitive. The expression, “the firstborn of every creature,” being in the Greek partitive genitive, includes as a part of itself the thing given in the noun that governs it, that being “firstborn.” Therefore, it shows that the firstborn one is a part of the creation spoken of and, accordingly, was created.

The expression “firstborn of all creation” is further shown to include Jesus as a creature as can be seen from similar usage in Revelation 1: 5: “firstborn of the dead”. Jesus was indeed dead, a member of the group of which he was the firstborn, and was the first to be fully made alive from the dead, never to die again. That Jesus was actually a member of those dead can be seen a few verses further, for Jesus says: “I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore.” (Revelation 1: 18) Later on, Jesus is referred to as the one “who was dead, and has come to life”. (Revelation 2:8) Further, Paul tell us that “Christ died, rose, and lived again.” (Romans 14:9) Jesus is not being spoken of as simply a ruler over the dead. Certainly, however, as being the first to actually be made alive from the dead, he possesses the right of firstborn in that sense also, thus we read: “Christ died, rose, and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living.” (Romans 14:9) Thus Colossians 1:18 tells us: “He is the head of the body, the assembly, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.” The usuage of “firstborn”, however, both in Revelation 1:5 as well as Colossians 1: 15, does not mean that the one spoken of as firstborn is not a member of the group of which he the firstborn.

See also the following studies:
Colossians 1:16 — Is Jesus Designated the Creator?

Jesus is Not Jehovah (Yahweh)

Colossians 1:15 – Firstborn of the New Creation?

Psalm 89:27 – Jehovah’s Firstborn King

Jeremiah 31:9 – Ephraim as Jehovah’s Firstborn

The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is Unipersonal

One has commented:

I think this were your confusion about Trinity lies, every time you say that God is unipersonal in the person of the Father. Of course, Trinitarians do know that. We do know that God can refer to the person of the Father alone, because He is 100% fully God, but it does not mean that the Son and the Holy Spirit is not God anymore.

Actually, we do not just say that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is unipersonal in the person of the Father; the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation ALWAYS present the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and one person — period. In the New Testament, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is ALWAYS presented as one person, that is, the God and Father of Jesus. The fact is that, in the Bible, Jehovah (Ehjeh/Ehyeh), the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, is ALWAYS presented is one person and never once ever at all anywhere as more than one person. And in the New Testament, Jesus is presented, not as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but as being sent by the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. — John 17:3; Acts 3:13-26; Hebrews 1:1,2.

No Scripture Says that God Created Jesus

We have been challenged to produce a scripture that directly states that God created Jesus. The challenger states:

Firstborn of every creature and the beginning of the creation of God were debatable, while the Son was created by the Father is direct and clear. Jesus never ever said that he was created by the Father, why? Because he was not!

Of course, no such scripture exists that states directly the Father created His Son; why should there be? The default reasoning is not that the Son was uncreated, but that he WAS created; all through the Bible the word “firstborn” never designate the one being called firstborn as being one who was never brought forth; it is ALWAYS used in such a manner that it designates the firstborn as being of the class of which he is being spoken of as “firstborn”. That class in Colossians 1:15 is “creation”; thus the firstborn is a creation. Likewise, in the Bible the words “father” and “son” always designates the Father as the life-giver, and the son as the one who has been given life. We have no reason to think otherwise respecting God and his Son.

The more proper question should be: Where does Jesus or anyone else ever say that Jesus was NOT created by his God and Father? The default reasoning is that the son of is brought forth into existence from his father, not that the son was not brought forth into existence from his father.

The claim is made that when we are begotten by our parents, that this does not mean that our parents created us. Not directly, this is true. On the other hand, begotten is never used except that one begotten was brought forth into existence, was given life. Many refer to the reproductive process as “pro-creation”, which is indeed a form of creation. To claim that “begot” when applied to Jesus does NOT mean being brought forth would make such an application an exception, and that only to serve the teaching that Jesus had no beginning, which, in effect, makes such a argument circular reasoning.

Jesus was brought forth (begotten) in his original creation before the world of mankind was made through him. He was begotten (brought forth into existence) as a human when became flesh. He was begotten (brought forth into existence) from death as a spirit being when his God raised him from death. This was brought out in the study: Colossians 1:15 – Firstborn of the New Creation?

Likewise, if one claims that because there is no scripture that says that God created Jesus, that this means that Jesus is uncreated, such an idea evidently is based on the preconceived notion that would have the default reasoning being that Jesus was uncreated, whereas such a notion is not the default, but rather an assumption. The default reasoning should be that Jesus was a creature, as this is the given reasoning regarding all who are sent by only true God, etc. Additionally, this default reasoning is well supported by what God has revealed in the Scriptures.

=============

         
Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2014 Jesus and His God

36 comments to Colossians 1:15 – Did Jesus Have a Beginning?

  • Born Again Christian:
    Romans 11:32-36New King James Version (NKJV)
    32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.
    33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!34 “ For who has known the mind of the LORD? Or who has become His counselor?”35 “ Or who has first given to Him And it shall be repaid to him?”

    36 For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.

    THE BIBLE IS CLEAR THAT ALL THINGS ARE FROM THE FATHER, NOT THROUGH THE FATHER. If you keep insisting that Yahweh who is God in this passage is only the Father, then you are wrong.

    Romans 11:36 is discussed in the study:
    Who Is Over All
    http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=365

    “God” in Romans 10:9; 11:1,2,5,8,21,22,23,28,29,30,32,33 and on through to Romans 15:6 refers to only one person, not to three persons. The evident “all” being directly referred to is that which is being spoken of in the context. The “all” that is being spoken of is from God, and it is also through God to the church. The “all” being spoken of here should not be confused with the creation of Genesis 1. Deliverance is what is being spoken of in Romans 11, not creation.

    Born Again Christian:
    Yahweh who is God in this passage pertains to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Here’s why:
    1) Yahweh who is the name of God, is not only the name of the Father, but also of the Son and Holy Spirit. I already proved that to you.

    Actually, there is no real reason to think that Paul is using the word “God”, which is also “Yahweh”, in Romans 10:32-36 any differently than he uses the word in Romans 1:1-8; 2:16; 3:24,25; 5:1,10,11,15; 6:9-11,23; 7:25; 8:3,34; 10:9; 15:6; 16:27, in which verses Paul presents “God” as one person and distinguishes the unipersonal God from Jesus.

    So far no Scriptural proof has been offered that Yahweh is three persons except what has been imagined, assumed, added to, and read into, the Scriptures.

    Regarding Matthew 28:19, see:
    http://godandson.reslight.net/?p=265
    http://sonofyah.wordpress.com/2008/09/19/mat-2819/

    • Born Again Christian

      Whenever the word God is used pertaining to the Father of course it would be one person. We do not deny that God is one person in the person of the Father. What we don’t accept is you saying that God is only one person in the person of the Father. If you still insists that God is only one person, then

      SHOW ME THIS VERSE WHERE IT SAYS THAT
      “GOD IS ONLY ONE PERSON”

      • ResLight

        Born Again Christian
        Submitted on 2013/03/14 at 7:04 am | In reply to ResLight.

        Whenever the word God is used pertaining to the Father of course it would be one person. We do not deny that God is one person in the person of the Father. What we don’t accept is you saying that God is only one person in the person of the Father. If you still insists that God is only one person, then

        SHOW ME THIS VERSE WHERE IT SAYS THAT
        “GOD IS ONLY ONE PERSON”.

        The default presentation of the Bible from beginning to end is that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is indeed only one person or individual. Jesus is never once at all ever at any place presented as being the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and throughout the New Testament, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always distinguished from Jesus, and Jesus is always presented as being the son of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Again, since the idea that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is more than one person is against the entire default of the Bible, there would no reason for the Bible say: The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is only one person (or individual)”. Nevertheless, Deuteronomy 6:4 does indeed, in effect, say this, but trinitarians, via usage of human imagination, reject the plain statement and create a lot of assumptions and reasonings whereby they claim that it does not say what is does say. Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 6:4 (Marks 12:26-30) and obviously applied it to only one person, his God and Father. — John 17:3; Ephesians 1:3.

      • Javoris

        You asked where does it say God is only one person. Gal 3:20 “Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God IS ONE.” KJV So this passage tells us that although a mediator (Jesus) mediates for many, God is not many, he is one.

  • Born Again Christian:

    2) Here in Romans 11:32-36 it is referring to Yahweh, while in Isaiah 40:13 it is referring to the Holy Spirit. Who is it really? The Father or the Holy Spirit? Well, the answer is both, because the Father and the Holy Spirit are only one God.
    Isaiah 40:13
    New King James Version (NKJV)
    13 Who has directed the Spirit of the LORD, Or as His counselor has taught Him?

    Isaiah 40:10 Behold, the Lord Yahweh will come as a mighty one, and his arm will rule for him: Behold, his reward is with him, and his recompense before him.
    Isaiah 40:11 He [Yahweh] will feed his [Yahweh’s] flock like a shepherd, he will gather the lambs in his [Yahweh’s] arm, and carry them in his [Yahweh’s] bosom, [and] will gently lead those who have their young.
    Isaiah 40:12 Who has measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out the sky with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? [None but Yahweh]
    Isaiah 40:13 Who has directed the Spirit [“mind” in Romans 11:34] of Yahweh [except Yahweh], or being his [Yahweh’s] counselor has taught him [Yahweh]?
    Isaiah 40:14 With whom took he [Yahweh] counsel, and who instructed him [Yahweh], and taught him [Yahweh] in the path of justice, and taught him [Yahweh] knowledge, and shown to him [Yahweh] the way of understanding?

    Ruwach

    The NAS Old Testament Hebrew Lexicon

    Strong’s Number: 7307
    Original Word Word Origin
    xwr from (07306)
    Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
    Ruwach TWOT – 2131a
    Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
    roo’-akh Noun Feminine
    Definition

    wind, breath, mind, spirit

    http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/nas/ruwach-2.html
    Notice the Hebrew word for “spirit” has many different shades of meaning; it does not always mean God’s Holy Spirit.

    Yahweh’s spirit or mind is identified as belonging to Yahweh, and the question as given in the scripture evokes the answer that no one but Yahweh has directed Yahweh’s mind, his spirit, his will. Yahweh needs no one to direct His mind, His spirit. As Paul shows in Romans 11:34, the word “spirit” in Isaiah 40:13 is not being used in the sense of God’s Holy Spirit, but rather of Yahweh’s “mind”. It certainly is not being used to mean that the Holy Spirit that belongs to Yahweh is a separate and distinct person of Yahweh.

    • Born Again Christian

      The Holy Spirit were sometimes referred to as breath and mind of Yahweh to show that he is indistinguishable from Yahweh. Just like the Son is the word of Yahweh who is also indistinguishable from Yahweh. This is to show that Yahweh’s word, breath and mind are also Yahweh to proved that they are only one God or Yahweh. But while the bible is showing that the word, breath and mind is indistinguishable from Yahweh this is not to say that they are not persons of Yahweh.

      Person by definition means someone who has own will, mind and emotions and all three possessed these.

  • Born Again Christian:

    3)Psalm 33:6 New King James Version (NKJV)6 By the word of the LORD the heavens were made,And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. a. Who is the only God who created everything? Answer: The Father through his word (which is the Son) and through the breath of his mouth (which is the Holy Spirit) created everything.

    Psalm 33:6 is evidently speaking of the creative works of Genesis 1; it is not speaking of the deliverance that is being spoken of in Romans 11.

    It seems that one would have to imagine and assume many things regarding this verse in order to force the triune God assumption into the verse:

    (1) One would have to imagine and assume that the “word” of Yahweh in this instance refers to Jesus.

    (2) One would have to imagine and assume that the “word” that belongs to Yahweh is in fact a person of Yahweh, and thus IS Yahweh.

    (3) One would have to imagine that “breath” (spirit – Hebrew transliterated as “Ruwach”) here means “the Holy Spirit of God”.

    (4) One would have to imagine and assume that the Holy Spirit that belongs to Yahweh is a person of Yahweh, and thus Yahweh’s Holy Spirit is Yahweh.

    Directly, the Psalmist is simply saying that by means of Yahweh’s command the skies were made, and by means of the spirit [breath] of his mouth the host of the skies were made. This is evidently referring to the “beginning” that is spoke of in Genesis 1:1 and John 1:1.

    If the form of the word transliterated as “dabar” (word) refers to Jesus, we know that Yahweh did use his Son in the creation of the skies over the planet earth, and that in doing so, he also used His Spirit, which is likened to His mouth. Whatever God does through agencies is as truly His work as though he were the direct Actor, since all those agencies are of his creation; just as a contractor for a building is said to build a house, though he may never have lifted a tool towards it. He does it with his materials and through his agents. Often in the scriptures we read of various servants of God who performed great acts on behalf of God. Nevertheless, at the same time the scriptures may refer to these acts as being performed by Yahweh (Jehovah) himself. (A few examples: Exodus 3:8,10,12; 12:17,51; 18:10; Numbers 16:28; Deuteronomy 32:12; Judges 2:6,18; 3:9,10; 6:34; 11:29; 13:24,25; 14:6,19; 15:14,18; 16:20,28-30, 2 Kings 4:27; Isaiah 43:11, 45:1-6) Thus, when we read that Yahweh (Jehovah) — God — created the heavens and the earth, (Genesis 2:4.) we are not to suppose that he personally handled it. Creation did not spring instantly into order; for we read that time was used–six days or epochs. (Genesis 1:3-31; Exodus 20:11; 31:17) We are told plainly that all things are of or from the Father (1 Corinthians 8:6) — by means of his energy or spirit; yet that energy was exercised through his Son. The Son of God, afterward called Jesus, was used in the creation of the world of mankind. (John 1:3,10; Hebrews 1:8-12.) Additionally, when we turn to Genesis, we find it stated that the power which created was God’s Spirit –“The Spirit of God brooded over the face of the waters.” (Genesis 1:2.) Hence the only reasonable inference is, that it was the spirit, energy, will, of Jehovah, working through His Son, executed by means of the Son. Assuming that Yahweh’s son and His Holy Spirit are being referred to Psalm 33:6, this still does not give any reason to further assume that God’s Son is God Himself, and that God’s Spirit is a person of Himself, etc.

    However, if the word “ruwach” refers to “breath”, this would mean that the Psalmist is speaking figuratively; indeed, the use of the word “mouth” would lend to this understanding. In other words, by saying “breath of his mouth”, we should not think that Yahweh actually breathes, or that he actually has a mouth, but rather the Psalmist provides a figurative illustration of God’s making all things in the skies by means of his command. While God’s spirit could be figuratively referring to His Holy Spirit as His “mouth” (Deuteronomy 8:3; 1 Kings 8:24; 2 Chronicles 6:4; 36:12,21; Ezra 1:1; Isaiah 1:20; 40:5; 45:23; 48:3; 58:14; 62:2; Jeremiah 9:12,20; Ezekiel 33:7; Micah 4:4; Matthew 4:4; Mark 12:36; Acts 1:17; 28:25; Hebrews 3:7; 9:8; 10:15,16; 2 Peter 1:21), the usage in Psalm 33:6 does not seem to be referring to such. “For He spoke, and it was done ; He commanded, and it stood fast.” — Psalm 33:9.

    The emphasis in the verse is certainly not about any trinity of persons, but rather that all this creation are works of Yahweh, not of man, “For he spoke, and it was done. He commanded, and it stood firm.” (Psalm 33:9) Indeed, “Yahweh brings the counsel of the nations to nothing. He makes the thoughts of the peoples to be of no effect,” whereas “The counsel of Yahweh stands fast forever, The thoughts of his heart to all generations.” — Psalm 33:10,11.

    • Born Again Christian

      These are not all imaginations, because it is already clear in the bible that all things are from God and through God.
      ALL THINGS ARE FROM THE FATHER AND ALL
      THINGS ARE THROUGH THE SON AND THE HOLY SPIRIT

  • Born Again Christian:
    Genesis 1:1-3
    New King James Version (NKJV)
    1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
    3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light.a. Who is the only God who created everything? Answer: The Father through his word (which is the Son) and through his Spirit (which is the Holy Spirit) created everything.

    I have no objection to this; “God” is identified, however, not as three persons, but as one person. Who is God [ELOHIM] in the phrase “Spirit of God”? Yes, the God and Father of Jesus is the only true God, and yes, the only true God did indeed create the heavens and earth by means of His Son, and also by means of His Spirit. Nothing in this means that “God” is more than one person.

    • Born Again Christian

      God here is a singular God who through his Word and Spirit created the heavens and the earth. Nothing here is saying that he is one person. Don’t mixed up singular God in number with singular God in person.

      IF YOU STILL INSISTS THAT GOD IS ONLY PERSON, THEN SHOW ME THIS VERSE WHERE IT SAYS THAT
      “GOD IS ONLY ONE PERSON”

  • Born Again Christian

    ResLight,

    *There is a difference between the “so-called gods” and God. There is only one God in nature. Angels, Moses, pagan idols and even Satan were only called gods, but they are not that ONE GOD BY NATURE.

    1 Corinthians 8:4-6
    New King James Version (NKJV)
    4 Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.
    Galatians 4:8

    New King James Version (NKJV)
    8 But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods.

    • ResLight

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2012/01/02 at 7:33 pm

      ResLight,

      *There is a difference between the “so-called gods” and God. There is only one God in nature.

      Yes, there is a difference between the “so-called gods” and the one God who is the source of all. There is only one such God is who, by nature of his being the source of all might, that Mighty One. However, there are in addition to the “so-called gods” who, by nature, have no might, the “many gods” to whom Yahweh has granted special mightiness or authority, such as the angels, and many others that are spoken of in the Bible. These are not so-called gods, but are indeed ‘gods’ by nature of what God has permitted them to have.

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2012/01/02 at 7:33 pm

      Angels, Moses, pagan idols and even Satan were only called gods, but they are not that ONE GOD BY NATURE.

      If this is so then the angels have no power or authority at all from Yahweh; Moses had no power or authority at all given to him from Yahweh; and Satan has not power or authority in this present age to decieve and seek to devour as a Lion, etc. Since Satan’s power is, however, indeed real, he is not actually amongst “so-called gods”, but he is amongst the “many gods” that Paul refers.

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2012/01/02 at 7:33 pm

      1 Corinthians 8:4-6
      New King James Version (NKJV)
      4 Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.

      Yes, an idol-god is nothing; it has no power to see, feel, touch, hear, etc. However, as Paul goes on to demonstrate, service given to these idols, who by nature have no might, is actually rendered to the demons. (1 Corinthians 10:20) While the idols have no power or might, and are thus nothing, the demons are real and they do indeed have power and might. Since only the God and Father of Jesus is the source of all (1 Corinthians 8:6), these demons would have no power at all except that they were granted such from God. It is similar to what Jesus told Pilate: “You would have no power at all against me, unless it were given to you from above.” — John 19:11.

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2012/01/02 at 7:33 pm

      Galatians 4:8

      New King James Version (NKJV)
      8 But then, indeed, when you did not know God, you served those which by nature are not gods.

      Yes, these Galatian believers did, before they came to know the God of Jesus, serve idols which are by nature not mighty, and have no power.

  • Born Again Christian,

    Born Again Christian: The exaltation of the Son is in relation to his humanity’s obedience and humility after completing his mission. You gotta remember that the Son was already given the name Jesus at the time of his birth, not after the exaltation of his humanity.

    Yes, the exaltation of the Son is indeed after he had sacrificed his humanity, and was therefore no longer a human being, a man, described in Psalm 8:4,5 and Hebrews 2:6,7 as a little lower than the ELOHIM, the angels.

    Yes, the “name” that is applied to Jesus after his exaltation is not the name “Yahweh” nor the appellation “Jesus”, but the office to which the God of Jesus had so exalted Jesus. Thus, “name” in Ephesians 1:17-23, Philippians 2:9 as well as Acts 4:12 does not mean that Jesus was given the name of Yahweh, or that Jesus is Yahweh. If it does, then it would mean that Jesus did not become Yahweh until either when he born and received the appellation Jesus, or it would mean that he did not become Yahweh until his God exalted him.

    See:
    Far Above All Rule, Authority, Power
    Humility of Mind/Jesus exalted
    The Only Name Given By Which We Are Saved

  • Born Again Christian: name

    There is no doubt in my mind that name, Jesus, is very significant. It is significant as applied to Son of Nun, who delivered the children of Israel into the Promised Land, and even more significant as applied to the Son of God. There is nothing in the name often rendered into English as Jesus/Joshua/Yeshua, however that means that this is the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Were those of the Old Testament who bore this name bearing the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as their own name?

    Yes, the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is included in the name JESUS/JOSHUA/YESHUA, (meaning, “Yahweh saves/delivers”, or “Yahweh is savior/deliverer”), but that does not either mean that the name itself is the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

    Its meaning, as applied to the Son of Yahweh, carries us forward from the mere word to the exalted official position, on account of which he can “save them to the uttermost that come to God through him” as the means of salvation provided by his God and Father, Yahweh. — Hebrews 7:25; John 3:16,17; Acts 5:31; 1 John 4:14.

    See:
    The Name of Messiah:
    http://jesus-rlbible.com/?p=54

  • Silas

    Do you mean to say that Jesus is not God?

  • Born Again Christian

    Where can we read in the bible that “God is one person”?
    Where can we read in the bible that “the Father is the only God”?

    • ResLight

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2013/03/12 at 5:43 am

      [[Where can we read in the bible that “God is one person”?]]

      There very fact that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is ALWAYS presented as being one person or individual throughout the entire Bible makes the default reasoning to be that God is only one person. The fact that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is NEVER ONCE presented as being more than one person also makes the default reasoning to be that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is only one person. Of course, there would NO REASON for the scriptures to bluntly state the default.

      [[Where can we read in the bible that “the Father is the only God”?]]

      If by only God one means the only true MIGHT of the univere, the source of all might, Jesus stated this in John 17:1,3. Paul confirms this in 1 Corinthians 8:6.

  • Born Again Christian

    Of course, the name Jesus is significant because it is the other name of God besides Yahweh. If Yahweh is the only name of God, then everything would be in the name of Yahweh but it is not. In fact, the name Jesus is above every name and whatever we say or do, do all in the name of Jesus Christ.

    • ResLight

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2013/03/14 at 6:56 am

      Of course, the name Jesus is significant because it is the other name of God besides Yahweh.

      No where in the Bible is the name “Jesus” ever once presented as being “the other name of God besides Yahweh.

      Born Again Christian
      Submitted on 2013/03/14 at 6:56 am

      if Yahweh is the only name of God, then everything would be in the name of Yahweh but it is not. In fact, the name Jesus is above every name and whatever we say or do, do all in the name of Jesus Christ.

      It is Yahweh, the God and Father of Jesus, who has made the name (office) of Jesus to be above every name (with the obvious exception of the name of the God and Father of Jesus — 1 Corinthians 15:27).

  • ResLight

    demac
    Submitted on 2011/12/09 at 5:47 pm

    I think born again christian made some very good points which you have not addressed, yes I do agree that Jesus was not uncreate, but rather was a pro-creation of God, hence he must be because of the words begotten. However Jesus is the name of God, I don’t understand why as a christian you would dispute that. Jesus states that he came in his Father’s name, further we baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. the name signifying one name being Jesus Christ, so where do you get the fact that Jesus is not the name of the Father.

    If I am understanding the above correctly, it is stating that since Jesus came in the name of his Father, that Jesus is the name of God? No, if one comes in the name of another, it does not mean that the name of the one sent is the name of the sender. Actually, since there is no scripture that says that the name Jesus is the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and since scripture delineates the name Jesus from the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, one should wonder why any Christian would think that Jesus is the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

    See:
    Jesus is Not Yahweh (Jehovah)
    The Baptismal Name
    Is Jesus the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?

  • I agree with you that “firstborn” in Colossians 1:15 is a partitive genitive, and yet I also still believe in the Trinity. My thoughts are spelled out at http://nealmatt.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/colossians-115-firstborn-of-all-creation/. On that same blog I also address Revelation 3:14.

    • ResLight

      Matt Submitted:

      I agree with you that “firstborn” in Colossians 1:15 is a partitive genitive, and yet I also still believe in the Trinity. My thoughts are spelled out at http://nealmatt.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/colossians-115-firstborn-of-all-creation/. On that same blog I also address Revelation 3:14.

      The above appears to be contradicting what is presented in the article linked to. If it is partitive genitive in Colossians 1:15, then it is referring to Jesus as a member of “every creature”; otherwise, it is not partitive genitive. One would have to isolate this genitive usage in this one verse and claim that it means something other than partitive, which is what is presented in the article linked to. The only reason for setting Colossians 1:15 apart from the rest of the Bible so as to think that Jesus is not a member of the group of which he is the firstborn would be due to the preconception that Jesus is not a creature, which results in circular reasoning: because we believe that Jesus is not a creature, then we do not believe that Jesus is being included in “every creature” in Colossians 1:15, etc.

      • Matt

        Sorry that I am just now replying to you. I did not get notified that you had replied to me, and I am just now stumbling back on this 13 months later. It is not true at all that the article linked to claims that “firstborn” in Colossians 1:15 is not a partitive genitive. In fact, just the opposite is true — the article goes to great lengths to prove that it is. Here is the first line of the summary, for example: ‘I believe Paul in Colossians 1:15 includes Christ in all creation when He calls Him the “firstborn of all creation.”’ I do not feel that you read the article very closely if you came away with the impression that it was arguing against a partitive genitive.

  • skip

    Here’s the simple truth, God in the past was a spirit creature by himself. No beginning and nameless but being complete within himself. In time he chose to have company so he created a son. How did God do this? He created this spirit creature (who later came to be known as the man Jesus) from nothing. That’s why he’s referred to as the “Only Begotten Son”. If you look at the definition of begotten it says that it is something sired or produced as from a father. Also something unique or one of a kind. Certainly Jesus fits this description in that he was the only thing directly created by God and he was created from nothing making him both unique and one of a kind. Now it was time for names, so God chose a name for himself (Yahweh/Jehovah which means he causes to become) and for his son (whatever that name was and not a title such as The Word). Also in creating this son God made him in His image, Col. 1:15, 2 Cor. 4:4. It is not recorded how long this Father and Son were alone together before other creations were begun but it must have been a very long time because as Heb. 1:3 says the Son became the exact representation of his father. Again, in time God sought to begin a creation process but instead of directly doing the creating He chose to do it through his son. His son had no direct creating ability on his own but God did the creating through him, Col. 1:16, John 1:3. At Revelation 3:14 the Son is here talking and refers to himself as the beginning of the creation by God. Now this is an interesting verse that some have a problem with. Let’s examine it for a minute. At the beginning of the verse Jesus identifies or refers to himself as the faithful and true witness. No one has a problem with that but again what he says next some people outright disagree with. The beginning of the creation by God. Why is it that certain people believe what he says in the beginning but then disagree with Jesus himself with what he says next. If I were to say that to people they act like they’re disagreeing with me, but I didn’t say it, I just repeated it. So their problem isn’t with me, it’s really with Jesus himself. Now think about this, let’s say for the sake of argument that the trinity doctrine is true and we look at this verse. The beginning of the creation “by God”. If Jesus was God the second person of the trinity how would this verse work? Would Jesus as God the creator have to create himself so that everything else could be created through him. Huh? Certainly a reasonable person would see where trinitarians have a problem with this. They probably wish that verse didn’t exist. But it does exist. It also clarifies the verse at Genesis 1:26 where it says “let US make man in OUR image. If Jesus himself was created in God’s image and although they’re two separate individuals but exactly alike it would be proper to say that verse in the manner it was said. But look at verse 27 where it says that God created man in His Own image, the same image that Jesus was created in. Hmmm!
    This is getting rather lengthy so I’ll end it with a challenge to trinitarians. I believe the Bible wholeheartedly so when it says that Jesus was the beginning or the very first thing created (Pro. 8:22,) I accept that. After all a house has to begin somewhere, and that’s with the foundation. So again, lets say the trinity is true. If so, from the Bible show me what the very first creation of the trinity was. And please don’t say something so vague as the heavens, be specific such as what Rev. 3:14 is.

  • George

    i read almost entire article. and i m glad about the fact that simple logic is considered here. let’s be honest with it. you can not create anything without time(that’s logically impossible). if one has created something, i would ask him: “when did you created it?” and he would give me the brightest answer. after all how can someone be called a “son” if he has lived together with another person for eternity. that would make them brothers, right?

  • […] Isaac and Jacob, by means of His holy spirit, reveals through the scriptures that Jesus is the firstborn creature, existing with his God and Father — whom he identifies as “the only true God”, […]

  • Rich

    This is the best article so far that I’ve read on the subject so far and I totally agree with it, and Skip’s post is RIGHT ON. The fact the Jesus died and could die is proof inherent that he Himself was a creation of the ALWAYS EXISTING and EVERLASTING God the Father whom was always eternal. Something which was in a state on non existence can go back to said state and something which never was in a state of non existence (i.e.eternal) even though it can change form can never die. Jesus is indeed God….but not God the Father. He is God insomuch as the Father bestows that title (or chooses to share) onto Him and allows all of the privileges that come with it e.g. allowed to be worshiped, prayed to etc.

    I’ve always thought of the Trinity as analogous to a lawyer who own a practice but before his first case allows another – his only son who he loves to partner with him as a junior partner, and another ‘helper’ junior partner whom both he and the son grooms, and whom all the cases were tried by the son. But make no mistake it’s in the lawyer power to fire both junior partners and remove them from the partnership at will if he so desired, because He IS the law practice and is SOVEREIGN – it’s just that he has no inclination to do so. Any title anyone in His firm has is a GIFT and something he chooses to share/bestow, but within his power to take back/rescind. Turns out that he’s NOT a liar and doesn’t lie and for their good works has allowed them to share as a group the same title as Him, but make no mistake – He is the ONLY SOVEREIGN and the other two depend on Him for their existence in the firm. Now as time passes the firm hires more and more people that the son grooms but the 3 partners operate in unison and share one title whereas all of the other employees are below those 3 and share various titles and groupings (eg. angels, mortal men, lower animals, trees etc).

    Christ is NOW everlasting but wasn’t always for there were 3 days in which he ceased to exist (after he died on the cross) – something that could never happen to an everlasting being which can never die i.e. God the Father. Christ is everlasting insomuch as the Father who never lies says he shall never again die, and shall be higher (the firstborn of/over) than all other creatures.

    I really don’t know what is so difficult for people to understand. Here is another article on the subject which also comports to all scripture.

  • […] Did Jesus Have a Beginning? Genitive and the Usage of Hoti Is Jesus Designated the Creator? Is Jesus the Creator? […]

  • Berean

    The Holy Spirit gave us the inspired interpretation for what the Hebrew word ECHAD means from the very beginning. It says in Gen 1:5 that the evening (eber) and the morning (boker) were ECHAD day. Then, if we didn’t get the first clue, the Holy Spirit repeated this in Gen 2:24 with the first adam and wife being ECHAD flesh.

    Furthermore, the grammar in Gen 2:24 demands that one YHWH on the scene rains brimstone and fire from another YHWH in heaven.

    No amount of rabbinical twistings or Hebrew gymnastics and revisionism will be able to ever change that.

    The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father Himself so can’t be a third distinct person (John 14:23). But there are definitely two described in Daniel’s vision: an Ancient of Days and a Bar Enosh coming in the clouds. Likewise, dialogue in Isaiah 48:16 suggests there are two that are ECHAD. It is His arm (Zeroa hashem) who rules for Him in Isaiah 40:10. John 1:1 and John 10:30 & 17:11 Explicitly tells us that there are two that are ECHAD.

    • ResLight

      The Holy Spirit gave us the inspired interpretation for what the Hebrew word ECHAD means from the very beginning. It says in Gen 1:5 that the evening (eber) and the morning (boker) were ECHAD day.

      This falls in line with our study of echad at:
      http://jesus-rlbible.com/?p=958

      Then, if we didn’t get the first clue, the Holy Spirit repeated this in Gen 2:24 with the first adam and wife being ECHAD flesh.< ./blockquote>

      Again, the “one flesh” designates two persons who make up the marriage bond; neither one alone is the marriage bond. Genesis 2:24 is discussed in the study at:
      http://jesus-rlbible.com/?p=958

      Furthermore, the grammar in Gen 2:24 demands that one YHWH on the scene rains brimstone and fire from another YHWH in heaven.

      No amount of rabbinical twistings or Hebrew gymnastics and revisionism will be able to ever change that.< ./blockquote>

      Don’t need to twist what is stated; nevertheless, it is definitely not speaking of two Jehovahs. There are not two Jehovahs, there is only one Jehovah. (Deuteronomy 6:4) Jesus identified that “one Jehovah” (Isaiah 61:1) as being his Father and the only true God. (John 17:1,3) Paul shows that it is the Father who is the “one God”, the one Supreme Being. No one but the God and Father of Jesus is the source of all, and therefore only the God and Father of Jesus is the Supreme Being.

      See:
      http://jesus-rlbible.com/?p=317
      and
      http://reslight.i8.com/blog/701952/Genesis_194_What_does_it_mean_that_Yahweh_rained_fire_from_Yahweh_out_of_the_sky

      The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of the Father Himself so can’t be a third distinct person (John 14:23).< ./blockquote>

      I do agree that the Holy Spirit of the God and Father (Ephesians 1:3; 4:30) of Jesus is not a person. God’s holy spirit is likened to God’s finger (as the power of God). (Matthew 12:28; Luke 11:20) As the instrument of the revealing of truth, the holy spirit is likened to God’s “mouth”. (Deuteronomy 8:3; 1 Kings 8:24; 2 Chronicles 6:4; 36:12,21; Ezra 1:1; Isaiah 1:20; 40:5; 45:23; 48:3; 58:14; 62:2; Jeremiah 9:12,20; Ezekiel 33:7; Micah 4:4; Matthew 4:4; Mark 12:36; Acts 1:17; 28:25; Hebrews 3:7; 9:8; 10:15,16; 2 Peter 1:21) I certainly would not think of my finger or my mouth as being a separate and distinct person of myself (using trinitarian terminology)!

      Regarding John 4:23: Jehovah is spirit, he is not of the flesh — His bodily glory is spiritual, celestial, invisible, not physical, fleshly, terrestrial; likewise, those who worship him must worship in the spirit as invisible, not in the flesh which is seen. True worshipers walk by spiritual faith, not by fleshly sight. — Romans 8:24,25; 1 Corinthians 13:12; 2 Corinthians 5:7; Galatians 2:20; Hebrews 10:38; Hebrews 11:1 – 26,27; 1 Peter 1:8; 5:9.

      But there are definitely two described in Daniel’s vision: an Ancient of Days and a Bar Enosh coming in the clouds.< ./blockquote>

      Daniel 7:13 – I saw in the night-visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of the sky one like a son of man, and he came even to the ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.

      Yes, it speaks of the one who likened to a son of man who comes in the clouds, and this one comes to, and is brought before the Ancient of Days. Jesus, when he comes in the clouds, is no longer a human being, but he likened to a son of man. He comes before the Ancient of Days, who is his God, Jehovah.

      Likewise, dialogue in Isaiah 48:16 suggests there are two that are ECHAD.< ./blockquote>

      Regarding Isaiah 48:16, see:
      http://jesus-rlbible.com/?p=587

      It is His arm (Zeroa hashem) who rules for Him in Isaiah 40:10.< ./blockquote>

      John 1:1 and John 10:30 & 17:11 Explicitly tells us that there are two that are ECHAD.< ./blockquote>

      There is nothing about two being one in John 1:1.

      For studies related to John 1:1:
      http://jesus-rlbible.com/?page_id=4871

      John 10:30 does present Jesus as saying that he is one with the only true God. (John 17:1,3) John 17:11,21,22 shows that there many more that share this same oneness with the only true God and the one whom the only true God sent.

      For related studies, see:
      http://jesus-rlbible.com/?page_id=5322

  • Berean

    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.

  • […] 1:18 (variant readings in manuscripts) Did Jesus Have a Beginning? Only Begotten […]

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  

  

  

Categories