What is it that Everlasting Father cannot mean in Isaiah 9:6?

[glen smith]

Found in the Directory of the Forum Jesus Christ Crucified under
“Foundational Truth,”
And under the Topic
“What is the Problem for Salvation if only a human Jesus died?”

Quoting part of the reply by Lou in post #2:

But as to His Godhood, Jesus is the One an Only God who created everything that exists.

Isaiah 9 Geneva Bible

⁶ For unto us a child is born, and unto us a Son is given: and the government is upon his shoulder, and he shall call his name, Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The prince of peace.

Everlasting Father means He was always The Father and always will be The Father. This Everlasting Father of Jesus could never die, because He is EVERLASTING, or eternal.

===========================================
Reply:

Lou makes this point regularly on this forum and has made it from before there was any communication between us some 15 years ago. I did not convince him way back then of a different view of Isaiah 9:6 and do not expect to now.

I have been reticent to post on this topic, in part because there are such an extreme number of explanations on line for anyone desiring to certify or examine their own ideas in the search for the truth. A Google search for “Everlasting Father” will do it.

However, I wish to bring attention to the other view than the one presented by Lou. This other view has been held by most scholars over the centuries concerning Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6. Check your commentaries. I post this because those on this forum deserve a balanced perspective to aid in understanding what God has revealed. A debate will be avoided, letting these posts and what the reader might find in a Goggle search and in commentaries speak for this position which is:

Everlasting Father cannot mean the Lord Jesus is God the Father or that God the Father is the Lord Jesus.

In my opinion the following two posts (#2 & #3) explain why Everlasting Father cannot mean the Lord Jesus is God the Father or that God the Father is the Lord Jesus.
.
The explanations use biblical hermeneutics and the truthfulness of God (post #2) and an article by a scholar of the ancient Hebrew language (post #3).

My prayer is for this study to find your heart at peace and filled with love while avoiding all animosity and dissension. Remember, we are all trying to understand and make our own sense of what we think about the spiritual world.

[glen smith]

This post,
III. GOD AS FATHER: OLD TESTAMENT MESSIANIC PROPHECY -
is one of the 16 chapters about the relationship between God the Father and Jesus the Son from my Bible study.

These 16 chapters form the section titled -
DIVINE FATHERHOOD: A BIBLICAL EXAMINATION OF GOD AS FATHER which is one of seven sections of my Bible study addressing -
THE NATURE OF GOD.

III. GOD AS FATHER: OLD TESTAMENT MESSIANIC PROPHECY

A.
In the Old Testament ‘Father’ is used to refer to God as the Father of His Son in three (3) verses.

If ‘Father’ is figurative language in the first two of these it is as a metaphor. However, these passages may be prophetic and therefore, in some sense literal. The Prophet Nathan spoke these words as recorded in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles to King David which are general understood as messianic prophecies which predicts the relationship of God the Father and Jesus the Son. Some may interpret other verses predicting the relationship of Father and Son at the Incarnation (conception).

2 Samuel 7:14
¹⁴ I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with a rod wielded by men, with floggings inflicted by human hands.

1 Chronicles 17:13
¹³ I will be his father, and he will be my son. I will never take my love away from him, as I took it away from your predecessor.

The Apostle Paul from the synagogue at Pisidian Antioch declared the promise made to the Jewish ancestors was fulfilled by God through Jesus:
Acts 13:33 NIV
he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm: “‘You are my son; today I have become your father.’

This is a quote by Paul of Psalm 2:7-9
⁷ I will proclaim the Lord’s decree:
He said to me, “You are my son;
today I have become your father.
⁸ Ask me,
and I will make the nations your inheritance,
the ends of the earth your possession.
⁹ You will break them with a rod of iron;
you will dash them to pieces like pottery.”

B.
One of the Old Testament titles for the Messiah is Everlasting Father.

Isaiah 9:6 NIV
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.

1. Context of the Bible

It is almost universally accepted by Old Testament scholars that portions of Isaiah 9 are a Messianic prophecy. If it is from the English version of the Old Testament alone, then Isaiah 9:6 makes a very strong case that the coming Messiah as the Everlasting Father would be God the Father or even YHWH God depending upon ones understanding of the nature of God.

However, this verse does not stand alone but must be reconciled with over four hundred (400) New Testament passages. When Isaiah 9:6 is used as the filter or to be the control through which all New Testament passages must be understood, such interpretation argues against both the observable revelation of the Bible and hermeneutical principles of biblical interpretation.

a. Observable Revelation
All of Christianity recognizes the Old Testament as an incomplete revelation of the plan of redemption because the Messiah is yet to come. The symbols of the temple, of sacrifices, and feast days were shadows (types) of what is recorded in the New Testament as the reality from which the shadow is cast (antitype). The messianic prophecies were not fully understood even by the prophets who recorded them. The messianic expectations drawn from the Old Testament left even the remnant confused. They were confused about whether there were one or two messiahs and even confusion about the nature of the Kingdom of God and the nature of the messiah as either human or elohim. Because of this incomplete aspect of the observable revelation, theology has adopted an understanding that revelation is progressive through history in both content and specificity where the final revelation about the plan of redemption is in the Christ event.

b. Biblical Interpretation
It is from this understanding that revelation is progressing through history that the hermeneutical principle is derived that the Old Testament is interpreted using the revelation from the New Testament (New Testament interprets the Old Testament). If just the opposite is practiced where the Old Testament is used as the filter or as the control for the interpretation of the New Testament the interpretation then suffers from using incomplete revelation to determine the meaning of the completed revelation (Old Testament interprets the New Testament). Such an inaccurate style of biblical interpretation stems from an inadequate understanding by the novice Bible student or from those indoctrinated with Pentecostalism or dispensationalism – both of which are notorious for making up new “principles of interpretation” resulting in hazardous biblical interpretations.

Furthermore, because ancient Hebrew is a very different way of expression than any of the western languages, those not proficient in Hebrew must depend on the Hebrew scholars and not merely the Hebrew trained university student who can read Hebrew and use Hebrew reference sources. Such education is far from being an ancient Hebrew scholar. Isaiah 9 is ancient Hebrew poetry and must be comprehended using the appropriate literary genre rather than any translation or English version.

2. The Issue of Divine Deceit

For Isaiah 9:6 to be understood as a messianic prophecy where a literal reign of the Lord Jesus is depicted and then to understand Everlasting Father as both -
the meaning of the literal Father of Jesus who is the Son of God
and Jesus who is the Son of God
would make the God who revealed this a deceiver.

Maintaining that Everlasting Father refers literally to the Lord Jesus as the divine being God the Father of the New Testament makes the God who revealed this a deceiver. How so?

The literal meaning of father is of a male who has children or in the case of Isaiah 9, a son.
The literal meaning of son makes having a father a necessity.
It is not possible for the father to be both his son and his father nor is it possible for the son to be both his son and his father.

If Everlasting Father and Isaiah 6 are understood as figurative language rather than in a literally sense, then what is revealed is not deceit if Everlasting Father is understood other than God the Father of the New Testament. There is not an issue of divine deception if the Bible Student comprehends what is known by the ancient Hebrew scholar.

3. Conclusion about Isaiah 9:6

Isaiah 9:6 should not be interpreted independently of all the other four hundred (400) plus verses in the New Testament with information concerning the relationship between God the Father and Jesus or without using the Old Testament passages quoted under this heading (2 Samuel 7:14; 1 Chronicles 17:13; Psalm 2:7). Just as important, Isaiah 9:6 should not be the single verse used to interpret all other passages concerning Jesus and God the Father. To do so would be either to ignore or subjugate over four hundred (400) New Testament passages to this single verse.

Interpreting Isaiah 9:6 must be interpreted the other way around where the four hundred (400) plus verses of the New Testament are used to qualify the meaning of the Old Testament verse Isaiah 9:6. If the proper hermeneutic principle is applied, Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6 may not be understood to mean the coming Messiah would be God the Father or YHWH God.

The mystery of the meaning of this prophecy by Isaiah might be found in the doctrine of the Trinity formula of the Godhead in that God the Father and Jesus the son are one in essence. Thereby, the character, purpose, glory, and eternal nature of each being of the Godhead is the same or of a single essence. Similarly, in the reading of the Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6 would not be much different than the readings of God as Spirit, or His Spirit, or the Spirit of God, the Spirit of the Lord, or even the one place where the scripture uses the Spirit of Jesus. These are not different than speaking of the Holy Ghost but the emphasis of these terms perhaps stem from whose work the Holy Spirit accomplishes. It might be that the reference to the Messiah as the Everlasting Father is to be understood in His accomplishment of the work of the Father.

The title of Might God from the same verse in Isaiah might also be interpreted to apply to the Messiah in His relationship to the triune Godhead.
The child born of Mary certainly did not appear as the Mighty God but as a human baby boy.
Jesus under the Roman whip did not appear as the Might God but as the flesh and blood of a human man.
Jesus on the cross did not appear as the Might God but as the flesh and blood of a human man.
Even in the transfiguration, at His baptism, the calming of the wind and the seas, walking on water, or in the resurrection, these appear as the acts of the Might God but not as the appearances of the Mighty God.
It is only in the vision of the Divine Throne Room by Stephen and the visions recorded in the Book of Revelation by the Apostle John where Jesus appears as the Might God. It should be noted, even in these visions what is recorded as having been seen are of a glorified human kind of being while Jesus said no one has seen God (John 1:18) for He is invisible (Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17).

4. Perspective

Honest believers must be reconciled to live with uncertainty and mystery.
These are the aspects of revelation which define the subject of revelation as things unknown, things that could not be observed, and things hidden. As such, everything hidden is not revealed.
_________________________________
This following note is not what post #3 is about but introduces the next chapter of my Bible study and is left here to make you curious.

IV. VIRGIN BIRTH AND FATHER SON RELATIONSHIP
This next section explores the relationship of God the Father and the virgin birth –
and might be the most controversial position concerning Christianity that I have ever made.

[glen smith]

Everlasting Father

Everlasting as an adjective is defined forever, immortal, or eternal. Everlasting as a noun is defined as eternity. In English the meaning of both immortal and eternal (eternity) may have the idea of no beginning or end, but the text is in Hebrew.

Isaiah 9:6 as a literal Hebrew translation.

that boy he-is-born to-us son he-is-given to-us and-she-shall-become the-chieftainship on shoulder-blade-of-him and-he-shall name-of-him marvelous one-counseling to master father-of-future chief-of welfare.

Everlasting from the Hebrew differs a little from the English everlasting. To make a theological application of the English everlasting one would need to understand the Hebrew word to contain these ideas in English: duration, continuity, terminus, advance, and perpetuity. The translator that used the English “future” to translate the Hebrew in the above version picked an excellent word to capture the meaning. However, to keep from implying the idea that the adjectival form of “future” would seem to give to “father” – as in “future father” – he chose to place it as a genitive “father of the future” which is correct in meaning but not literal. This explains the choice to represent “Everlasting Father” as a genitive, “Father of Everlasting” to capture the idea in the Hebrew.

The ancient Hebrew had only one form and could not be called upper case or lower case letters, i.e. no capitals. All the capitals are supplied by the translators as appropriate. Titles, as in Isaiah 9 should be capitalized in English, but the capitalization of the “F” in Father does not provided or imply any theological information as represented in the Hebrew.

Understanding Hebrew poetry. Isaiah by the account of a number of literary scholars may be the finest poetry ever written. His poetry has fascinated men of poetry for millenniums. Unlike English poetry, Hebrew poetry does not use rhyme or meter. Hebrew poetry uses parallelism, that is, it says the same thing twice in different ways. Hebrew poetry takes several forms, but the most common forms may be represented by these number patterns. 1a to 1b; 2a to 2b; 3a to 3b or an alternative 1a, 1b to 2a, 2b or 1a, 1b, 1c, to 2a, 2b, 2c. The point is the same idea is represented by the same alphabet letter while the number represents the first, second, or third use of the idea. In the following six verses of Isaiah I try to align the parallels. There are scholars who have done this, but I don’t have that work. I have chosen to start over with each verse to keep it simple enough for me to perform this task. I am uncertain I kept the numbers and letters straight, but the verses are correct. Done correctly, the scheme itself is very amazing. You miss that in my rendition.

Taking the NIV translation, I have tried to demonstrate this parallelism in Isaiah 9:2-7.

(Verse 2) 1a, 1b, 1c, to 2a, 2b, 2c.

The people walking	in darkness	have seen a great light;
on those living in the land	of the shadow of death	a light has dawned.

(verse 3)

You have enlarged the nation
and increased their joy;
they rejoice before you
as people rejoice at the harvest,
as men rejoice when dividing the plunder.

The Hebrew word order is as below rather than as the NIV has it. The word translated “nation” has no known definition. The meaning has been lost. The words “You have enlarged the nation” is the translators’ guess at the implied meaning. The words are not even in the text but is supplied by most translations by context. The poetic parallelism is best represented by the following.

1a to 2a; 1b to 2b

and increased their joy;	they rejoice before you
as people rejoice at the harvest,	as men rejoice when dividing the plunder.

(verse 4) 1a; 1b to 2b; 2b

For as in the day of Midian's defeat,	you have shattered the yoke that burdens them,
the bar across their shoulders,	the rod of their oppressor.

(verse 5) 1a to 1b; 2a to 2b.

Every warrior's boot used in battle	will be destined for burning,
and every garment rolled in blood	will be fuel for the fire.

(verse 6) 1a to 2a; 1b to 2b; 1c to 2c; 1d to 2d.

For to us a child is born, (1a)	to us a son is given, (2a)
and the government (1b) (to get the complete idea this phrase might be “and he shall be ruler of government”.)	will be on his shoulders. (2b)
And he will be called Wonderful Counselor,(1c)	Mighty God,(2c)
Everlasting Father, (1d)	Prince of Peace.(2d)

------------------- or literally from the Hebrew -----------------

that boy he-is-born to-us	son he-is-given to-us
and-she-shall-become the-chieftainship (The grammar requires a feminine participle since the word for government is feminine.)	on shoulder-blade-of-him (idiom meaning the same as our idiom “on his shoulders”)
and-he-shall name-of-him marvelous one-counseling to	master
father-of-future (or maker of the future who)	chief-of welfare. (establishes a peaceful future)

Note: In the Hebrew poetry scheme the “Wonderful Counselor” parallels the meaning in “Mighty God”;
or “the one who does marvelous counseling” is also the “master”. The ideas of each are contained in the other, in other words, the Mighty God as the Wonderful Counselor would be a part of His attributes without saying it. The same is true of the next parallel, Everlasting Father insures an everlasting peace, therefore He is the Prince of Peace or literally, from the Hebrew, the father-of-the-future is also the chief-of welfare.

(verse 7) 1a to 2a; 1b to 1b; 1c to 2c; 1d end.

Of the increase of his government	He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it
and peace	with justice and righteousness
there will be no end.	from that time on and forever.

The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this.

Maybe this will aid in grasping how “Everlasting Father” is used in Isaiah 9.

Copied from the internet on 30 December 2007

[Lou Newton]

Found in the Directory of the Forum Jesus Christ Crucified under
“Foundational Truth,”
And under the Topic
“What is the Problem for Salvation if only a human Jesus died?”

Quoting part of the reply by Lou in post #2:

But as to His Godhood, Jesus is the One an Only God who created everything that exists.

Isaiah 9 Geneva Bible

⁶ For unto us a child is born, and unto us a Son is given: and the government is upon his shoulder, and he shall call his name, Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The prince of peace.

Everlasting Father means He was always The Father and always will be The Father. This Everlasting Father of Jesus could never die, because He is EVERLASTING, or eternal.

===========================================
Reply:

Lou makes this point regularly on this forum and has made it from before there was any communication between us some 15 years ago. I did not convince him way back then of a different view of Isaiah 9:6 and do not expect to now.

I have been reticent to post on this topic, in part because there are such an extreme number of explanations on line for anyone desiring to certify or examine their own ideas in the search for the truth. A Google search for “Everlasting Father” will do it.

However, I wish to bring attention to the other view than the one presented by Lou. This other view has been held by most scholars over the centuries concerning Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6. Check your commentaries. I post this because those on this forum deserve a balanced perspective to aid in understanding what God has revealed. A debate will be avoided, letting these posts and what the reader might find in a Goggle search and in commentaries speak for this position which is:

Everlasting Father cannot mean the Lord Jesus is God the Father or that God the Father is the Lord Jesus.

In my opinion the following two posts (#2 & #3) explain why Everlasting Father cannot mean the Lord Jesus is God the Father or that God the Father is the Lord Jesus.
.
The explanations use biblical hermeneutics and the truthfulness of God (post #2) and an article by a scholar of the ancient Hebrew language (post #3).

My prayer is for this study to find your heart at peace and filled with love while avoiding all animosity and dissension. Remember, we are all trying to understand and make our own sense of what we think about the spiritual world.

I care not what mere men say or believe, for God tells us that all men are lairs. To preserve their doctrines and what they have taught they will claim that what they say is true and what God says is not true. The words that God says are totally true. He is The Truth and can not lie.

Let us look at the passage is question:

Isaiah 9 GNV

⁶ For unto us a child is born, and unto us a Son is given: and the government is upon his shoulder, and he shall call his name, Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The prince of peace.

⁷ The increase of his government and peace shall have none end:

First who is this child - of course the child is Jesus. So as a child he was born into this world and is begotten.

Second who is the HE that calls this child The Everlasting Father - that is of course God

God calls the child more than Everlasting Father. He calls the child the wonderful counselor, or The Holy Spirit. God calls the child The Mighty God - how many Gods are there. Jesus tells us that there is but one and only one God.

Deut 6: ⁴ Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.

Mark 12 The Greatest Commandment


²⁸ One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, “Of all the commandments, which is the most important?”

²⁹ “The most important one,” answered Jesus, “is this: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one

Is Jesus trying to confuse us or are mere men confusing us ?

Certainly words have meaning and One means One not three.

What does everlasting mean : it means lasting forever. Forever means without beginning or end. Everlasting Father means the child Jesus always was the Father and always will be The Father.

Jesus told us that he had no beginning and no end. Jesus tells us He is the first and last. But The Manhood of Jesus was born into this world and died on the cross. But The Godhood of Jesus has no beginning and no end.

This is why Jesus could tell Philip: ⁸ Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”

⁹ Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? ¹⁰ Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?

Jesus can not lie, this is the total truth.

Now if Jesus is The Everlasting Father, the Everlasting Father has no beginning and no end. So The Everlasting Father was not born and did not die. For He has no beginning or end. He is LIFE and there is no death in Him. Whoever He enters also has eternal Life. If The Everlasting Father could die, we would not be insured eternal life. How would we know that we would not die. Those who are born again by His Holy Spirit will never die a real death for they have eternal life from the Eternal Father. If The Everlasting Father could die, then we could also die. But The Everlasting Father is everlasting and can not die.

So who died on the cross ? Let us look at what The Holy Scriptures tell us and not what mere men claim:

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Acts 13:33
God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.

It was the Only begotten Son of God that died. The Kinsman Redeemer had to be our closest relative or had to be a man. God became a man to prove that all men are guilty of Sin. For if one man could live without sin, then all had the opportunity to live without sin. If men were created without the opportunity to live without sin, then they would not be guilty of sin. But The Manhood of Jesus proved that a man could live without sin. So we are all guilty of sin.

Who raised Jesus from the dead:

Now a dead being can not raise anyone from the dead, for they are dead. Only life can bring forth life. Death can not bring forth life. If that were possible we could raise ourselves from the dead.

John 2

¹⁸ The Jews then responded to him, “What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”

¹⁹ Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

²⁰ They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” ²¹ But the temple he had spoken of was his body. ²² After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.

Now The Manhood of Jesus died and could not raise Himself from the dead.

But The One and Only God, The Everlasting Father could raise Jesus from the dead. Jesus was both God and Man. His manhood died on the cross and was buried. The Godhood of Jesus, The Everlasting Father, raised The manhood of Jesus from the dead.

[Lou Newton]

Glen writes:

The literal meaning of father is of a male who has children or in the case of Isaiah 9, a son.
The literal meaning of son makes having a father a necessity.
It is not possible for the father to be both his son and his father nor is it possible for the son to be both his son and his father.

I will tell you something just as impossible for mere men to understand:

How can anyone be both God and Man. Was not Jesus fully man and fully God ?

[glen smith]

Lou, do you wish to reconcile this verse with your position:
Jesus is the Father and
Jesus and the Father are one single entity?

Hebrew 9:24 NASB
²⁴ For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

[Lou Newton]

Lou, do you wish to reconcile this verse with your position:
Jesus is the Father and
Jesus and the Father are one single entity?

Hebrew 9:24 NASB
²⁴ For Christ did not enter a holy place made with hands, a mere copy of the true one, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

You have not reconciled the verses I have posted, why should I answer yours.

But since it is not problem to do so:

God did not leave the throne to be born of a woman and become a man to become our Savior. We are told that Christ holds the whole universe together, how could anyone do that. We are told that there is no where we can go that God is not already there. God is omnipresent and can not only be two places at the same time, God is everywhere at the same time.

Please reconcile this passage: Revelation 5 (NIV)

The Scroll and the Lamb


5 Then I saw in the right hand of him who sat on the throne a scroll with writing on both sides and sealed with seven seals. ² And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming in a loud voice, “Who is worthy to break the seals and open the scroll?” ³But no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth could open the scroll or even look inside it. ⁴ I wept and wept because no one was found who was worthy to open the scroll or look inside. ⁵ Then one of the elders said to me, “Do not weep! See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals.”

No one in all of heaven was able to open the scroll except for The Lamb, who is Christ.

Now God is able to do anything and He is all powerful. So why could not The Father open the scroll ?

God never goes against His Nature, or Name. God is just and it would not be just for God to judge men because He is not our peer. Many would say, God, you are not a man, so you do not understand our plight.

So because of His nature of being just, God could not open the scroll. So God became a man and walked on this earth as a man, so he understands our plight, He became our brother.

So since God became a man, The Lion of Judah, The Lamb, He is able to open the scroll.

Glen you are claiming The Holy Scriptures do not mean what they say, I am claiming that they mean what they say.

How about this passage:
Philippians 2 New International Version (NIV)

Imitating Christ’s Humility


2 Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit,if any tenderness and compassion, ² then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. ³ Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, ⁴ not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.

⁵ In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:

⁶ Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
⁷ rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
⁸ And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!

⁹ Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
¹⁰ that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
¹¹ and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

First God tells us that Christ is in His very nature, God. Nothing short of God, but God Almighty, who is the Father.

Christ was found in appearance as a man. Christ was not only a man, but only in appearance a man. Why, because Christ was much more that a man, He was also God.

⁹ Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,

Now we can believe what God clearly states here or we can believe popular opinion, or some tradition of men.

This verse means exactly what it says. Jesus is the highest name and is above every other name. So for that to be true, Jesus is the highest Name of God.

God revealed His highest nature when He humbled Himself to be born of a woman and walk this earth as a man. Further God humbled Himself to die a criminals death on the cross as a man. The highest nature of God is not His power, but His humility.

The Holy Scriptures mean what they say and say what they mean.

For Jesus to die, He had to become a Man. For men can die, but God can not die, for death is not found in Life. God is LIFE. Life is not death.

[glen smith]

Lou posted:
Certainly words have meaning and One means One not three.

What does everlasting mean : it means lasting forever. Forever means without beginning or end. Everlasting Father means the child Jesus always was the Father and always will be The Father.

Reply:
Forever does not mean without beginning but without end.

adverb
1.
without ever ending; eternally:
to last forever.
2.
continually; incessantly; always:
He's forever complaining.
3.
lasting for an endless period of time:
the process of finding a forever home for the dog. noun 4.
an endless or seemingly endless period of time:
It took them forever to make up their minds.

[glen smith]

Lou posted:
Now a dead being can not raise anyone from the dead, for they are dead. Only life can bring forth life. Death can not bring forth life. If that were possible we could raise ourselves from the dead.

Reply:
The biological secular meaning of death fits your definition of death but not the biblical definition. You reason from a human understanding where after death there is only a material body left to under go the process of decay.

Biblically those who have died a biological death occurring before the resurrection of the Lord Jesus (Jesus being the first of the resurrected) are in sheol (the abode of the dead or of departed) which seems to have separate abodes for the redeemed (figuratively being in Abraham’s bosom) and the condemned who wait for the day of judgment.

Those who have died a biological death after the resurrection of the Lord Jesus go immediately to be with Him and are waiting to come with Jesus when He returns to harvest the living and provide resurrected (new) bodies.

How does the death of the Lord Jesus fit into the biblical view of death? As much as I know, even considering interpretations of obscure passages of scripture, all opinions are just that – speculation. However, let me speculate.

The two or duel nature of Christ Jesus allows the material body to die while divine essence continues just as does His human nature continues.
Would this be in two separate existences – divine and human?
This idea seems neither to fit with the orthodox position of the indivisible two natures of Christ Jesus nor with what is theologically necessary for salvation.

How the death of the Lord Jesus fits into the biblical view of death remains a mystery not revealed.

[glen smith]

Lou Posted Who raised Jesus from the dead:

John 2

¹⁸ The Jews then responded to him, “What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”

¹⁹ Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

²⁰ They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” ²¹ But the temple he had spoken of was his body. ²² After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.

Now The Manhood of Jesus died and could not raise Himself from the dead.
------------------------------------------
Reply:

Whatever the Lord Jesus means by using this analogy it must be reconciled with the two verses of the New Testament stating the God the Father:
(1) grants life to Jesus
(1) and raised Jesus from the dead

Jesus has life granted by the Father NIV

These two (2) verses from the Gospel of John record the Son is granted life in himself by the Father. In attempting to understand the relationship between the Father and the Son it is necessary to be aware that it is the Father who grants life to the Son. Obviously, there are some difficult theological issues here, but for the purpose of this Bible study it is the dynamics of the relationship between Father and Son that is being considered. In Colossians again it is revealed that it is God who makes the faithful alive in Christ.

John 5:21
For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.

John 5:26
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.

Colossians 2:13-15
¹³ When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, ¹⁴ having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. ¹⁵ And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
----------------
God the Father raised Jesus from the dead NIV

Of the many passages concerning the resurrection of the Lord Jesus there are only two which may be understood that Jesus raised himself from the dead (John 2:19 and John 10:17). There are fifteen (15) passages specifically stating God raised Jesus from the dead, and of those fifteen (15) there are two (2) passages specifically stating the Father raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 6:4 and Ephesians 1:17, 19-23).

Concerning John 2:19 is figurative language, therefore subject to various understandings.
¹⁹ Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

This is a reply to the Jews who asked for a sign in the preceding verse (John 2:19).
John 2:18 The figurative language of John 2:19 was given as a sign.
¹⁸ The Jews then said to Him, “What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?”

Of course, Jesus is using the temple (it in verse 19) as metaphor of himself as the temple of God. There are a number of passages where witnesses recall that Jesus said he would rebuild the temple built by Herod in three days. These witnesses took the figurative language used by Jesus as having a literal meaning.

At least one witness understood what Jesus said as a metaphor or either heard Jesus actually say the following.
Matthew 27:63 This technically was hearsay.
“Sir,” they said, “we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’

Conclusion about John 2:19
From John 2:19 it would appear Jesus raised himself from being dead, but this verse is not the norm or preponderance of the scripture texts.
-------------------------------
John 10:17-18.

The next occurrence of Jesus teaching about His Resurrection is recorded in John 10:17-18.
¹⁷ For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
¹⁸ No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command (charge) I received from my Father.”

Conclusion:
While this passage indicates that Jesus may take up his life (meaning the resurrection) the passage also provides that his authority to take up his life is from the Father.

------------------------------
If the above scriptures were all that were relevant to the question of who raised Jesus from the dead, then the answer might be that Jesus raised himself from the dead. However, in Matthew 16:21 the act of Jesus being raised to life has Jesus in the passive mood in that he “on the third day be raised to life.”

Matthew 16:21
²¹ From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.

---------------------------
Reconciling the two verses where Jesus is the active agent in His Resurrection with the fifteen (15) passages where God is the active agent must lie in some kind of understanding of the triune nature of God.
From John 10:18 it is clear that the power for the Lord Jesus to raise from the dead is from the Father and as such complies with the other fifteen (15) passages where it is clearly stated that God raised Jesus. Also, scripture is clear that the ministry of the Lord Jesus occurs in obedience to and is empowered by God the Father in that he only does what his Father does.
----------------------------------------------------

The Preponderance of the Literal Language Scripture Texts

Here are fifteen (15) passages recording that God raised Jesus of which two (2) specifically record the Father raised Jesus. These passages are unlike the figurative language used in John 2:19 which is subject to various understandings.

These fifteen (15) passages are declarative statements using the literal meaning of the language.
---------------------------------------------------
Acts 2:24
²⁴ But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

Acts 13:30
³⁰ But God raised him from the dead,

Acts 13:33-34
³³ he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:
“‘You are my son;
today I have become your father.’
³⁴ God raised him from the dead so that he will never be subject to decay. As God has said,
“‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David.’
Acts 13:37
³⁷ But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.

Acts 17:30-31
³⁰ In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. ³¹ For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Romans 6:4
⁴ We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

Romans 8:11
¹¹ And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

Romans 10:9
⁹ If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

1 Corinthians 6:14
14 By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also.

1 Corinthians 15:15
¹⁵ More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.

Ephesians 1:17, 19-23
¹⁷ I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. . . .
¹⁹ and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength ²⁰ he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, ²¹ far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. ²² And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, ²³ which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

Colossians 2:12
¹² having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Hebrews 13:20
²⁰ Now may the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep,

1 Peter 1:21
²¹ Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

Conclusion:

To determine doctrine from the figurative language of John 2:19 in place of the literal language of fifteen (15) other New Testament passages is not an acceptable practice of what should be the obvious means to a correct understanding of the Bible. How anyone who has read the New Testament can make this mistake exceeds my comprehension. However, if one is just using the New Testament for the proof texting their own opinions, then it is comprehendible - if not a forgivable practice.

Biblical interpretations will use all relevant Bible passages to make the best interpretation rather than using a few selected Bible verses or just one verse to claim support for a doctrine (teaching). One may teach something by using just selected verses interpreted to support their idea while ignoring the entirety of the biblical teaching.

[Lou Newton]

Lou Posted Who raised Jesus from the dead:

John 2

¹⁸ The Jews then responded to him, “What sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”

¹⁹ Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

²⁰ They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” ²¹ But the temple he had spoken of was his body. ²² After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.

Now The Manhood of Jesus died and could not raise Himself from the dead.
------------------------------------------
Reply:

Whatever the Lord Jesus means by using this analogy it must be reconciled with the two verses of the New Testament stating the God the Father:
(1) grants life to Jesus
(1) and raised Jesus from the dead

Jesus has life granted by the Father NIV

These two (2) verses from the Gospel of John record the Son is granted life in himself by the Father. In attempting to understand the relationship between the Father and the Son it is necessary to be aware that it is the Father who grants life to the Son. Obviously, there are some difficult theological issues here, but for the purpose of this Bible study it is the dynamics of the relationship between Father and Son that is being considered. In Colossians again it is revealed that it is God who makes the faithful alive in Christ.

John 5:21
For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.

John 5:26
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself.

Colossians 2:13-15
¹³ When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, ¹⁴ having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. ¹⁵ And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
----------------
God the Father raised Jesus from the dead NIV

Of the many passages concerning the resurrection of the Lord Jesus there are only two which may be understood that Jesus raised himself from the dead (John 2:19 and John 10:17). There are fifteen (15) passages specifically stating God raised Jesus from the dead, and of those fifteen (15) there are two (2) passages specifically stating the Father raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 6:4 and Ephesians 1:17, 19-23).

Concerning John 2:19 is figurative language, therefore subject to various understandings.
¹⁹ Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”

This is a reply to the Jews who asked for a sign in the preceding verse (John 2:19).
John 2:18 The figurative language of John 2:19 was given as a sign.
¹⁸ The Jews then said to Him, “What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?”

Of course, Jesus is using the temple (it in verse 19) as metaphor of himself as the temple of God. There are a number of passages where witnesses recall that Jesus said he would rebuild the temple built by Herod in three days. These witnesses took the figurative language used by Jesus as having a literal meaning.

At least one witness understood what Jesus said as a metaphor or either heard Jesus actually say the following.
Matthew 27:63 This technically was hearsay.
“Sir,” they said, “we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’

Conclusion about John 2:19
From John 2:19 it would appear Jesus raised himself from being dead, but this verse is not the norm or preponderance of the scripture texts.
-------------------------------
John 10:17-18.

The next occurrence of Jesus teaching about His Resurrection is recorded in John 10:17-18.
¹⁷ For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
¹⁸ No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command (charge) I received from my Father.”

Conclusion:
While this passage indicates that Jesus may take up his life (meaning the resurrection) the passage also provides that his authority to take up his life is from the Father.

------------------------------
If the above scriptures were all that were relevant to the question of who raised Jesus from the dead, then the answer might be that Jesus raised himself from the dead. However, in Matthew 16:21 the act of Jesus being raised to life has Jesus in the passive mood in that he “on the third day be raised to life.”

Matthew 16:21
²¹ From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.

---------------------------
Reconciling the two verses where Jesus is the active agent in His Resurrection with the fifteen (15) passages where God is the active agent must lie in some kind of understanding of the triune nature of God.
From John 10:18 it is clear that the power for the Lord Jesus to raise from the dead is from the Father and as such complies with the other fifteen (15) passages where it is clearly stated that God raised Jesus. Also, scripture is clear that the ministry of the Lord Jesus occurs in obedience to and is empowered by God the Father in that he only does what his Father does.
----------------------------------------------------

The Preponderance of the Literal Language Scripture Texts

Here are fifteen (15) passages recording that God raised Jesus of which two (2) specifically record the Father raised Jesus. These passages are unlike the figurative language used in John 2:19 which is subject to various understandings.

These fifteen (15) passages are declarative statements using the literal meaning of the language.
---------------------------------------------------
Acts 2:24
²⁴ But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.

Acts 13:30
³⁰ But God raised him from the dead,

Acts 13:33-34
³³ he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second Psalm:
“‘You are my son;
today I have become your father.’
³⁴ God raised him from the dead so that he will never be subject to decay. As God has said,
“‘I will give you the holy and sure blessings promised to David.’
Acts 13:37
³⁷ But the one whom God raised from the dead did not see decay.

Acts 17:30-31
³⁰ In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. ³¹ For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Romans 6:4
⁴ We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

Romans 8:11
¹¹ And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of his Spirit who lives in you.

Romans 10:9
⁹ If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

1 Corinthians 6:14
14 By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also.

1 Corinthians 15:15
¹⁵ More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.

Ephesians 1:17, 19-23
¹⁷ I keep asking that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the glorious Father, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, so that you may know him better. . . .
¹⁹ and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength ²⁰ he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, ²¹ far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. ²² And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, ²³ which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

Colossians 2:12
¹² having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.

Hebrews 13:20
²⁰ Now may the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep,

1 Peter 1:21
²¹ Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.

Conclusion:

To determine doctrine from the figurative language of John 2:19 in place of the literal language of fifteen (15) other New Testament passages is not an acceptable practice of what should be the obvious means to a correct understanding of the Bible. How anyone who has read the New Testament can make this mistake exceeds my comprehension. However, if one is just using the New Testament for the proof texting their own opinions, then it is comprehendible - if not a forgivable practice.

Biblical interpretations will use all relevant Bible passages to make the best interpretation rather than using a few selected Bible verses or just one verse to claim support for a doctrine (teaching). One may teach something by using just selected verses interpreted to support their idea while ignoring the entirety of the biblical teaching.

Well it is beyond me how anyone can read all these passages and that clearly say that The Father raised Jesus from the dead, and Jesus ( who is The Truth) says I will raise myself from the dead; that Jesus and The Father are one in the same.

Especially with the other passages that I quoted that you ignored. God clearly tells us that He is the only Savior.

Please show me a scripture that claims God has a triune nature.

[Lou Newton]

Lou posted:
Certainly words have meaning and One means One not three.

What does everlasting mean : it means lasting forever. Forever means without beginning or end. Everlasting Father means the child Jesus always was the Father and always will be The Father.

Reply:
Forever does not mean without beginning but without end.

adverb
1.
without ever ending; eternally:
to last forever.
2.
continually; incessantly; always:
He's forever complaining.
3.
lasting for an endless period of time:
the process of finding a forever home for the dog. noun 4.
an endless or seemingly endless period of time:
It took them forever to make up their minds.

Let us look in Strongs:

H5703

עַד
‛ad
ad
From H5710; properly a (peremptory) terminus, that is, (by implication) duration, in the sense of perpetuity (substantially as a noun, either with or without a preposition): - eternity, ever (-lasting, -more), old, perpetually, + world without end.
Total KJV occurrences: 48

Now let us look in the Holy Scriptures:

Ps 41
¹³ Praise be to the Lord, the God of Israel,
from everlasting to everlasting.

Rev 14
⁶ And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

The gospel is eternal and was God's plan before time began and so it had no beginning and will have no end.

But this is all moot. For God no only called the child, Jesus, everlasting, but He called Him The Father. Is God trying to confuse us. Why would God call Jesus The Father if he was not the Father?

But Jesus clearly stated He had no beginning and no end. Certainly you do not think He was not being truthful.

Jesus said if you see Him you see the Father.

[Lou Newton]

Let me ask everyone this:

When you die, is that a change for you ? Do you change when you die ?

When an animal dies, does it change ?

If God died that would certainly be a change for the Living God.

But God tells us that he has never changed and never will change.

[glen smith]

Let me ask everyone this:

When you die, is that a change for you ? Do you change when you die ?

When an animal dies, does it change ?

If God died that would certainly be a change for the Living God.

But God tells us that he has never changed and never will change.

From my post #3 let me copy.
Reply:
The biological secular meaning of death fits your definition of death but not the biblical definition. You reason from a human understanding where after death there is only a material body left to under go the process of decay.

[glen smith]

Lou, brother in Christ, may you take this kindly.

This is my thoughts concerning your beliefs observed from our email and forum communications over the years.

First, let me remind you I have previously responded to your position and proofs on the doctrine on the nature of God known as Oneness. Because of previous exchanges, I posted at the beginning of this Topic “What is it that Everlasting Father cannot mean in Isaiah 9:6?” this statement.

“Lou makes this point regularly on this forum and has made it from before there was any communication between us some 15 years ago. I did not convince him way back then of a different view of Isaiah 9:6 and do not expect to now.”

Let me begin with another recent Topic:
We do not know what we do not know.
In your case, it seems to me, you do not want to know what you do not know.
I suspect not wanting to know what we do not know has more to do with the limitations from the perspective of our western philosophical tradition. Simple put, this is the worldview of westerns as contrasted to other world views outside of Europe, Canada, and the USA. Without an educated examination of how worldviews freezes thinking within their own frameworks there is little hope of escaping. We just can not think about what we do not know.

What do we need to know to melt the freeze?

Language is based upon the philosophy held by a people who speak the language and their worldview is philosophically based. Within any philosophy there are a number of assumptions that are so basic to the language and to the worldview that these assumptions go unrecognized outside the disciplines which intentionally look for them. This is one of the main reasons a classical education requires both philosophy and two foreign languages.

Lou, your recent use of the omni attributes of God is an excellent place to start. The idea of the omni attributes of God is from the western philosophical tradition.

Taking it in order, the ideas of omni originate with the idealism of the ancient Greek philosophy of Plato. Idealism is about perfect forms as patterns for reality. A perfect form is about the ultimate idea that can possibly be conceived. Concerning God this would be the omni attributes. Western theology adopted this idealism into the nature of God. This idea of God is contrasted with the ancient Hebrew worldview which is antithesis of idealism.

This ancient Hebrew philosophy is a concrete reality based on observation and experience. Philosophically, concrete means specific to the reality as it is experienced or observed rather than derived at through speculation or logical extension as with idealism. This means for the ancient Hebrew the presence of God was specific to the place where He is experienced rather than being everywhere. A specific place for the ancient Hebrew would be in Jacob’s dream where he recognized “God is in this place,” or in the burning bush, in the column of fire, and in the Holy of Holies. This is why they removed their shoes when on holy ground but could wear shoes when not on holy ground. If the ancient Hebrew thought like or modern westerns or idealism philosophy all ground would be holy.

Can the omni attribute be demonstrated from the Bible? I suppose all books on western Christian theology have a chapter which demonstrates the omni attributes of God. There is no need for you or others to defend this practice since it is amply demonstrated.

Also, an aspect of this western philosophical tradition which constructs the worldview of Europe, Canada, and the USA is the thinking processes of the Enlightenment. Through the Enlightenment we inherited logic and reason as primary ways of thinking and this is what enabled the west (Europe, Canada, and the USA) to be the first to exceed in science and mathematics. But it is not just science and mathematics which the reason and logic affected but language and culture which controls the way we think. We use language literally, factually, analytically, rationally, and logically. Furthermore, our view freezes the thinking so that understanding other basis for language and thinking is hidden. This is not unique to the western philosophical tradition but to all traditions.

The way we think in the west is the way you think about the shema. (The Lord our God, the Lord is one.), and this is why I tease you with “you do not want to know what you do not know.” My opinion is that you see the English version and comprehend it from a western philosophical worldview perspective, literally, factually, analytically, rationally, and logically.

In my ancient previous emails I have proposed your misunderstanding of the ancient Hebrew use of “"one”" from the shema. You could not accept what I presented years ago, and I have seen no development in your more recent presentations. Therefore, there is not any reason to attempt a correction to your thought. However, just recently, the video posted of Heiser, “The Divine Worldview Council,” briefly mentioned the same correction to your view of the use of “one” from the shema. Heiser indicated “"one" did not mean a numerical number describing the nature of God, but that He is the only God of Israel is a better understanding of what the ancient Hebrew means.

Of course, what Heiser is presenting in this video is detailing the differences between the ancient Hebrew worldview and the modern western worldview so that we might correctly understand the Bible from the same worldview as those who recorded the texts. His presentation was insightful and informative on the meaning of elohim and what their relationships are in the spiritual world and on earth. For both the Old Testament and the New Testament, the presentation by Heiser tied up several loose ends for me on this subject –- meaning a comprehensive and consistent understanding of passages that just kind of dangled because of an incomplete ancient Hebrew world view.

The better comprehension of even New Testament passages depends upon the correct ancient Hebrew worldview because this is how the recorders of the New Testament understood reality. The beginning error made by modern English speakers is to do Bible study or theological thinking from a western philosophical tradition and then to try to think like the ancient Greeks when interpreting the Greek texts of the New Testament when the thinking ought to be like the ancient Hebrew worldview.