Sunday, October 12, 2008

Jesus is Yahweh Too

The Father is not the only Yahweh, Jesus is too.

Jeremiah 23:

5 "The days are coming," declares the LORD (Yahweh H 3068 Self-Existant, Eternal),
       "when I will raise up to David a righteous Branch,
       a King who will reign wisely
       and do what is just and right in the land. 

 6 In his days Judah will be saved
       and Israel will live in safety.
       This is the name by which he will be called:
       The LORD (Yahweh) Our Righteousness

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on my current understanding. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom.


SmilinJackSprat said...

This is too much of an extrapolation. A name containing a form of God's name does not establish that man as God. Do we think Benjamin Netanyahu is God because his name contains a form of God's name, "Yahu"? Another form of the same name is Nathaniel, containing "El," another name of God. Both names, of Hebrew origin, mean God's gift -- and neither identifies its bearer as God.

Was my uncle God because his name was Emanuel? How about the hundreds of thousands of Latinos who are named Manuel? Every form of that name means "God with us." And not one of the bearers of that name is God.

Is Judah God because his name contains the four letters of God's ineffable name, Y, H, V, H plus a D? Was Joshua God because his name in Greek is Jesus, which you're saying means Jesus is Y-H-V-H too?

"Yehovah tsidkenu" indicates that God [is] our righteousness. This is the natural function of the covenant -- a marriage between God and Israel based upon Torah -- which, ideally speaking, should enable Israel to become righteous as God is righteous.

Arguments from etymology are fraught with pitfalls. Neither Jeremiah nor the Jews who preserved the passage you quoted expected Messiah to be God. Messiah must be a son of King David, reckoned patrilineally, since inheritance, not of the culture but of land or throne, has always been so reckoned. David sat on God's throne, as did Solomon, the one God referred to as His son -- but neither of those anointed kings (messiahs) was God.

SmilinJackSprat said...

I gave you an accurate comment. What kind of Berean are you?

I showed you that God [is] our Righteousness, or "Y-H-V-H tsidkenu" in Hebrew only indicates that God raises Israel to perfection/righteousness by means of the covenant, which is in fact the prenuptial agreement between God and Israel.

Since the Messianic king will rule himself and Israel by means of Torah, which is the mind of God, then it stands to reason that God, through Israel's application of Torah, will become Israel's righteousness.

I also showed you that a name doesn't grant deity to anyone, including Emanuel, which was the name of my late uncle, and also of thousands of Latinos. Emanuel and Manuel both mean "God with us," but the name doesn't remotely suggest that its bearer is God. Jesus, by the way, was never named Emanuel.

I also mentioned that the Jewish scribes who brought us the Hebrew Scriptures under no circumstances would have interpreted the name, "God, [is] our Righteousness" as indicating that the person bearing that name would have actually been God. That idea is preposterous. Jews recite, 3 times daily, the statement that God is One. Jesus also recited that, being Jewish, and is quoted so saying. There is no way that a Jewish scribe would have thought Jeremiah 23 was indicating that Messiah would be God. That would violate the first of the 10 commandments.

I also showed you that Y-H-V-H, with a D added, doesn't indicate that Judah (Yehudah) is God, even though the name, Yehudah, quite obviously includes God's name.

You disappoint me because you're not remotely acting like a Berean. You wrongly say you received no comment, when in fact you received an accurate comment that is more than capable of standing up under scrutiny. Now you've received two comments saying the same things.

Disprove me if I'm wrong! Be the noble Berean you claim to admire! Any conscientious Berean would have discovered, through careful research, that I told you the truth. If you haven't the moxie to either prove or disprove my comment, then you're not even in the Berean ballpark. What are you afraid of?

SmilinJackSprat said...

Thank you, Seeker.

Anonymous said...

smily... what in the bar Jonah are you talking about??? Have you taken leave of your senses, man?

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you here, but where in the heck do you see the author claiming what your arguing against? You're nowhere near on topic.

I hope you don't just go round to blogs posting nonsensical things and arguing with yourself often. That's called 'trolling' and it's always bad netiquette. Seek some professional help.

Seeker Of Truth said...

Thank you for your comment.

Take comfort in knowing that had you read my note above the comment box, you would have seen that it asks the commenter to bear me with because I get pretty busy and don't usually notice comments right away. You left your comment yesterday. I wasn't ignoring you, I simply did not notice it until today. Actually yours was noticed sooner than most. I have yet to refuse a comment.

Now, about your comment;
Can you offer scriptures that prove Jesus is/was not God?

I can see what you are saying, and that could be true if not for the fact that Is. 48:12, 13, 16 tells us that the Christ is the Creator. To be creator would he not have to be God?
As stated in the next post; "JESUS IS THE CREATOR";

Is.48:12 shows us that The speaker identifies himself as the First and the Last.

In verse 13 we see that this speaker says he laid the foundations of the earth and spread out the heavens. Who is this speaker, aside from the creator and the First and the Last? He identifies himself further in the following verse;

Verse 16 The speaker says the Sovereign Yahweh sent him, meaning; the Sovereign Yahweh sent the individual who laid the foundations of the earth,, and spread out the heavens, the One who identified himself as the First and the Last.

Is the Father talking about himself, speaking in the third person, saying that he sent himself?

How about Zec. 2:8 which says;
For this is what the LORD Almighty says: "After he has honored me and has sent me against the nations that have plundered you...

So, here we have Yahweh saying; "after he has honored me and sent me..." if this is the Father speaking, who is honoring him, and who is sending him? Is there any one who can send the Father?

"There is no way that a Jewish scribe would have thought Jeremiah 23 was indicating that Messiah would be God..."

The fact is that the prophet Isaiah tells us that Messiah would be called Mighty God;

Is.9:6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

"...That would violate the first of the 10 commandments."

It seems the 'God is one' thing throws a lot of people off. Here is something to consider;

If a husband and wife are 'one flesh' how can they be two people?

Gen.2:24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.

Since God is not a liar, a husband and wife must be one flesh. Yet they inhabit two different bodies. So, though they inhabit two different bodies, they are still one flesh.

SmilinJackSprat said...

Anon of October 19, 2008 3:35 PM:

I was addressing Seeker's post of October 12, in which he infers that Jesus is Y-H-V-H from the messianic name, "God [is] our Righteousness," in Hebrew "Y-H-V-H tsidkenu."

My point is simply that giving a man a name that includes a name of Deity doesn't make that man God. For example, the thousands of people named Emanuel or Manuel or Emanuele are not "God with us" just because their names have that meaning.

If you re-read his post, the rest should be clear from the above.

Anonymous said...

I think you're not seeing the forest, or are oversimplifying, or some such thing.
Seeker, mind if I take a crack at explaining, then you correct me if I'm wrong?

Seeker is tying the well established idea that Jesus is the root and offspring (branch) of David (REV.22: 16) to Jeremiah 23: 5.

Then, the logical flow into verse 6 clearly shows that Jesus, spoken of in verse 5, is also the one being spoken of in verse 6.

In verse 6, the subject of verse 5, Jesus, is now called YHWH. This goes miles to disprove Ron Weinland's claim that Jesus is not called YHWH.

Another convenient helper to tie the two to Jesus is the word righteous.

So, it's not so simple as "being called YHWH means Jesus is God". If for no other reason than Seeker isn't trying to show Jesus is God - only that Jesus is at times called YHWH.