Author	Thread: you not guilty?
mcubed View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 8 Oct, 2013 09:34 PM According to the Law (Deuteronomy 13) how can Y-shua be G-d? There is only one G-d! How can G-d have a son and if you claim that Y-shua is G-d are you not guilty of making G-d into a man? Fun questions for discussion, but deserve real answers�. Post Reply
mcubed View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 8 Oct, 2013 10:56 PM These are not really trick questions. I do not in any way believe in three G-ds. My G-d is one, and his name is the LORD (or, Yahweh, known to Orthodox Jews as HaShem) G-d revealed himself to us through his Son, the Messiah, who is the very image and reflection of G-d. Y-shua is the eternally preexistent Son of G-d, through whom the universe was made, came forth from G-d his Father and was clothed with human flesh, making himself known to us as Y-shua the Messiah. Since the Son came forth from the Father and shares his divine nature it is quite correct to say that Y-shua is G-d (or, divine, or deity), always bearing in mind that the overwhelming testimony of the New Testament writings is that Y-shua is the Son of G-d, and according to the Hebrew Scriptures that there is absolutely nothing idolatrous about what I believe. Isaiah 9:6 �For a child is born unto us, a son is given unto us; and the government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom;� This child which is born is called El-Gibbor, which as I�m sure you know is 'Mighty G-d' and is never used of a man. Avi-Ad is literally �Father of Eternity� and could never describe a mere man. In the Targum of Isaiah we read: "His name has been called from old, Wonderful Counselor, Mighty G-d, He who lives forever, the Anointed One (Messiah), in whose days peace shall increase upon us." Midrash Mishle, S. Buber edition: The Messiah is called by eight names: Yinnon, Tzemah, Pele ["Miracle"], Yo'etz ["Counselor"], Mashiah ["Messiah"], El ["G-d"], Gibbor ["Hero"], and Avi 'Ad Shalom ["Eternal Father of Peace"] The great rabbi Ibn Ezra said: There are some interpreters who say that �wonderful, counselor, mighty G-d, everlasting Father� are the names of G-d, and that only �prince of peace� is the name of the child. But according to my view, the right interpretation is that they are all the names of the child. (Walter Riggans, Yeshua Ben David [Wowborough, East Sussex; MARC, 1995], p. 370) Jeremiah 23:5-6 'The days are coming,� declares the LORD, �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. 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 Our Righteousness. Micah 5:2 But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto Me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from ancient days. The Targum Jonathan (second century A. D.) : �And You Bethlehem Ephrath, you who were too small to be numbered among the thousands of the house of Judah, From you shall come forth before Me The Messiah.� In regards to the Messiah�s human origin He is said to have been born in Bethlehem, but regarding His divine origin He is said to be �from old, from ancient days.� Arnold Fruchenbaum writes �The Hebrew for �from long ago, from the days of eternity� are the strongest Hebrew words ever used for eternity past. They are used of G-d the Father in Psalm 90:2� Again we have a passage which shows that Messiah is to be human � being born at some specific point in time at some specific place � yet having existed since eternity past, and therefore divine.� . Psalm 2:7-12 Messiah would be the Son of G-d. Therefore He would be divine. Isaiah 7:14 While many don�t believe, the prophecy shows that a virgin would give birth to a child who is literally, �G-d with us�. The Hebrew word 'Almah' is used in this passage and speaks of a virgin. Arnold Fruchtenbaum writes �Since everyone agrees that 'almah' means an unmarried woman, if the woman in Isaiah 7:14 were a non-virgin, then G-d would be promising a sign involving fornication and illegitimacy. It is unthinkable that G-d would sanction sin, and in any case, what would be so unusual about an illegitimate baby that could possibly constitute a sign? As far as ancient Jewish writers were concerned, there are no arguments about Isaiah 7:14 predicting a virgin birth� The Jews who made this translation (Septuagint), living much closer to the times of Isaiah than we do today, translated Isaiah 7:14 using the Greek word parthenos which very clearly and exclusively means a virgin. Psalm 110 We know from 1 Kings 2:19 that anyone who sits at the king�s right hand must be equal with the King. This Psalm of David�s speaks of someone other than Jehovah who is David�s lord. This Lord is both a priest and a king and sits at Jehovah�s right hand. It is a joke to say that this is David himself as David was from not a priest, but was from the tribe of Judah. Nor does he sit at the right hand of G-d. It is the Messiah who is spoken about in this passage and He is equal to G-d. Here is a riddle � It consists of 6 questions. The first 4 questions are obviously about G-d Himself as only G-d could accomplish these things. The fifth question asks what the name of G-d is. I�m sure you can answer this one. The sixth question reveals that G-d has a Son! And it asks what His name is! (The Messiah is the son of G-d and His name is Y-shua!) Prov 30:4 Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Whose hands have gathered up the wind? Who has wrapped up the waters in a cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is the name of his son? Surely you know! Psalm 45:6-7 Elohim is applied to two divine personalities in the same verse! The second Elohim is called the G-d of the first Elohim! Only makes sense in terms of the Messiah being G-d, the son of G-d as other verses have shown! Hosea 1:7 We see the same thing where the speaker (G-d � Elohim) will save them by the Jehovah, their Elohim. Elohim is again spoken of as two distinct personalities. Another example is Gen 19:24. Zech 2:10-11 Shout and be glad, O Daughter of Zion. For I am coming, and I will live among you,� declares the LORD. �Many nations will be joined with the LORD in that day and will become my people. I will live among you and you will know that the LORD Almighty has sent me to you.� The LORD is going to dwell amongst us and it is the LORD Almighty that sent Him! Can it get any clearer? This shows the YHWH sent YHWH and only makes sense when you know that the Messiah Y-shua is G-d! He is the one who lived amongst us. He is �G-d with us!� That is why in the Shema, �Hear, O Israel! The Lord is our G-d, the Lord is one!�, the �our G-d� part is plural in the Hebrew (literally �our G-ds� and the word for �one� is echad � a compound unity, not absolute unity as in the word �yachid�.) Arnold writes �If Moses had intended to teach G-d�s absolute oneness as opposed to His compound oneness, this would have been a far more appropriate word (yachid) to use.� But he didn�t! He used echad which is used in such passages as Gen 1:5 where evening and morning are called one (echad�) day. Gen 2:24 where when man and woman come together in marriage and are called �one flesh�. Ezra 2:64 where the whole assembly was one, though of course it comprised of many people. Or Ezek 37:17 where the two sticks are combined to become one. These are all uses of echad and show that it is a compound unity. Post Reply
View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 8 Oct, 2013 11:44 PM It's very interesting. Thank you for sharing. Specifically, how does this differ from the Christian Trinity? Post Reply
DontHitThatMark View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 9 Oct, 2013 10:55 AM Mcubed, are you asked this question a lot by Jewish people? I think your answer is very good, and I agree with IWA, I can't see a difference from the way the trinity is explained. God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit are all one. We really shouldn't even call it a "trinity" because it does imply "three", but it does actually mean that all three are the same God/power/authority like your answer explained. :peace::peace: Post Reply
mcubed View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 10 Oct, 2013 04:53 PM These are very great questions. IWA and DontHitThatMark I do not think this differs from Christian Trinity, because anything answered about the New Testament can be, I would say must be able to be answered in the Old. (now the question wasn�t about the Holy Spirit which would make a good question)�.� but I think if Christians are asked why they believe Y-shua is G-d like Paul said we should be able to give an answer. I personally think few can really backup why they believe Y-shua can be G-d; it appears I may be right in my opinion according to the responses�/ lack thereof the question�.. Answers I got to the question�. Post Reply
3lectric View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 10 Oct, 2013 05:49 PM All I can say is Amen! and you used the Old Testament to back your view which is precisely what was available at the time when Paul told us to be prepared to make our case. :) What you have posted is worth getting a study group together in order that more people can make an argument like yours. Be Blessed! Post Reply
One_Sojourner View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 10 Oct, 2013 05:51 PM This post is good incentive for those who don't make it priority and study both the old and new as we should (me)... to study/search out questions and read/pray/ more Miss Mcubed... lack of response may be due to lack of disagreeing or argument on the points you make. Newer believers need the guidance and elders sometimes need to re-kindle the coals to fire and flames again... Thank you!:glow: Post Reply
View Profile History	you not guilty? Posted : 11 Oct, 2013 01:32 PM Does the lord ever change? Post Reply