If Jesus is God, how is he called God's only begotten son?

The most used name in the Old Testament is Yhwh (JHVH), and translates roughly as Yahweh or Jehovah. It can be found around 6500 times. Bizarrely when this was originally written done, the ancient writers didn't use the vowels, and so wrote it as JHVH, assuming that all the readers, who then would have spoken Ancient Hebrew would naturally fill in the blanks, unfortunately a superstition then fell upon the Ancient Jews, where it was deemed improper to say the name out loud. So with no one saying the name, and it not being correctly written, led to today's predicament where we actually don't know what it is or how to pronounce it.

"El Shaddai" is another name used to refer to God, but only appears seven times in the Old Testament. We translate this name as "God Almighty".

"El Elyon" appears twenty seven times and translates as "High God"

"Adonai" translated as "Lord". The following "Adonai-Jehovah" would be translated as "Lord God". This is used 434 times.

Elohim is another word used in the Old Testament to refer to God (Or Deity). Why this word was used is unclear, and reading of any translations, just translates Elohim as God. Possibly though, it could refer to another God rather than Jehovah, but is used some 2000 times in the writings.

The word Qanna is also used, this translates as "Jealous" which is another name used for God in the Old Testament. It appears six times.

For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous (Qanna), is a jealous God: Exodus 34.14

According to some ancient Christian texts the being referred to in the Old Testament (Torah) is not God but the one who calls himself God (Known also as Yaltabaoth, Saklas, Samael, or the First Archon), they believe he created earth, life on it, and the universe as the Old Testament says, he also created man in the image of the true God, but is also jealous of us, that is why we are trapped on the material plane in an eternal incarnation until the day we seek the true God.

Some names for God taken from the New Testament are Theos (Greek for God), Kurios (Greek for Lord) and Despotes (Greek for Master), according to the Islamic religion God (Allah) has 99 names, although this is not written into the Holy Koran (Qur'an), and seems to be a developed tradition rather than Qu'ranic or Islamic fact.

So from what we read God has many names, and is referred to in many different ways, but what we have to understand and believe is the simple question "Is there just one God?"

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

From http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?section=2&t=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=tr&query=God&st=201&pn=11

In the beginning was (5713) the Word, and the Word was (5713) with God, and the Word was (5713) God.
en arxh hn o logov kai o logov hn prov ton yeon kai yeov hn o logov

en arxh hn o logov,
In the beginning was the word,

kai o logov hn prov ton yeon, (Theon: accusative case: the God)
and the word was with God,

kai yeov hn o logov. (Theos: nominative case: a god)
and the word was God.
{and God was the word: Berry, 1972}

Check it out for yourself.

Also you can look at the numerous times that 'theos' (the same form used in John 1:1 that says 'the Word was God' ) is used in 1 John .

1 John 4:8 God is love

1 John 5:20 we are in him that is true, [even] in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

1 John 1:5 God is Light

1 John 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.

1 John 5:10 because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

All of these confirm that the usage of 'God' in John 1:1 to refer to the Word as God, do not refer to 'a god' but to the only true God.

These passages are never rendered 'a god' , and to be consistent neither should John 1:1.

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Also you can look at the numerous times that 'theos' (the same form used in John 1:1 that says 'the Word was God' ) is used in 1 John .

1 John 4:8 God is love

1 John 5:20 we are in him that is true, [even] in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

1 John 1:5 God is Light

1 John 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.

1 John 5:10 because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

All of these confirm that the usage of 'God' in John 1:1 to refer to the Word as God, do not refer to 'a god' but to the only true God.

These passages are never rendered 'a god' , and to be consistent neither should John 1:1.

Amen.
Preach on.
Something that a Jehovah's Witnessess knows nothing about.
All they do is hold Q&A's in their Kingdom Hall.
Read the pamplet at home, then read it at the KH, and then ask the questions on the bottom then answer them which the answers are in the pamplet. WHere is the room for the spirit of God to spontaneously move and have a man/woman of God speak what is the mind of God to the Unsaved.

There is no room for the HOLY GHOST. WHich is why they see the HOLY GHOST as nothing more than like electrcity that flows from the Father and Son.

0 Replies

You guys are making me do research in Greek. Thanks a bunch!!!
Suffice it to say the distinction between generic and specific is not easy when it comes to the word theos.

Cut, edited,and pasted:

"ho the·os' = the God vs. kai the·os' en ho lo';gos = a god was the word

The Greek word the·os' is a singular predicate noun occurring before the verb and is not preceded by the definite article. This is an anarthrous the·os'. The God with whom the Word, or Logos, was originally is designated here by the Greek expression ho the·os', that is, the·os'; preceded by the definite article ho. This is an articular the·os'. Careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, (specific) whereas a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb points to a quality about someone. (generic) Therefore, John's statement that the Word or Logos was "a god" or "divine" or "godlike" does not mean that he was the God with whom he was. It merely expresses a certain quality about the Word, or Logos, but it does not identify him as one and the same as God himself." (Underlined words added)

Not to mention the ridiculous idea that one could be with someone and be that person at the same time. (Me, myself and I excluded.)

Given time, I will do better.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

You guys are making me do research in Greek. Thanks a bunch!!!
Suffice it to say the distinction between generic and specific is not easy when it comes to the word theos.

Cut, edited,and pasted:

"ho the·os' = the God vs. kai the·os' en ho lo';gos = a god was the word

The Greek word the·os' is a singular predicate noun occurring before the verb and is not preceded by the definite article. This is an anarthrous the·os'. The God with whom the Word, or Logos, was originally is designated here by the Greek expression ho the·os', that is, the·os'; preceded by the definite article ho. This is an articular the·os'. Careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, (specific) whereas a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb points to a quality about someone. (generic) Therefore, John's statement that the Word or Logos was "a god" or "divine" or "godlike" does not mean that he was the God with whom he was. It merely expresses a certain quality about the Word, or Logos, but it does not identify him as one and the same as God himself." (Underlined words added)

Not to mention the ridiculous idea that one could be with someone and be that person at the same time. (Me, myself and I excluded.)

Given time, I will do better.

Are you suggesting that ANY Greek noun without ho must be properly translated with the indefinite article 'a' ?

To be consistent, you must ; however it takes very little time to show what a wreck that would make of any translation from Greek.

Forced Greek translations to fit theological bias can get messy in a hurry.

---------------------

Now regarding Jehovah appearing in a man's body, do you deny that passages such as Gen 18 do refer to such?

During the time that Jehovah was incarnate in the episode of Gen 18, was Jehovah present anywhere else in the universe at that time?

How 'bout anywhere else in the world?

Anywhere else in Canaan?

Was Jehovah present with Abraham's herdsmen over the next hill as well as being physically incarnate and talking with Abraham at the same moment?

Do we really think that this is too hard for God to accomplish?

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

But none can get to the father except through me, Jesus said.

We are part of the body of Christ and Christ is again, the "image" of God, not God.

MA, I might add that if you are incorrect about the trinity then the scriptures that you use to prove the trinity mean something else... Please give this some careful consideration.

Like, "In the beginning was the word".

You simply say Jesus is the "word" so he is God...

By squeezing the trinity into that verse you are missing the real meaning.

Which is, that there is more than one WORD.

There is the "word in God's mind" (which IS or agrees with God) which was of course there in the beginning. There is "spoken word" and there is the "written word". So instead of just inserting the name of Jesus in place of the word you might consider that in each verse it is using a different form of "the word".

As when the Bible says, "God created the world and the world knew him not." Here is an example of the Bible using the same word in a verse with different meanings. The first "world" is the created world and the second "world" is the inhabited world.

This is the same case where, "in the beginning was the word." Each usage of the word "word" has a different meaning. It was not intended to just supply Jesus' name instead of the word "word". Jesus was certainly not the written word and he was also not the word in God's mind.
The word became flesh which only shows that before it was flesh it was in a different state.

I submit that whenever you try to force the trinity into the scriptures you are obliterating the actual intended meaning of the verses.

Look at the verses they are actually saying a different thing.

The trinity has messed things up so much that it has corrupted the simplicity of Jesus having a body, soul and spirit (just as we do) and turned him into a "godman" that preexisted his birth. (Which the word could not have even become flesh if Jesus had not been TOTALLY within the realm of the flesh. )

1 John
1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
4 Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world

Comment:
Jesus came as body, soul and spirit and God was in Christ as an "image" of (created) spirit. God was not created. It is the risen body of Christ and this SAME image of God that we are partakers of. Not our own image of God but the image of Christ in us. We do not make this image Christ Jesus made it. This same spirit in us that was in Christ does not make us Jesus Christ, it just simply allows us to talk in his place.

Jesus had God's spirit "created" in him (dove). That did not make Jesus God or exclusively "the word" but it just allowed Jesus to talk in God's stead.

I would consider you taking every scripture that you use to base your faith in the trinity and reconsidering them as to their real intended meaning.

The scriptures that you are using are vague at best...

After all, John does not say "AND JESUS WAS GOD".

Sixty three times he calls him "the son of God", never once does he ever call him "God the son" or God.

The son is derived from the father but he is not the father not in any mystery or dogma.

The great mystery is God in Christ in us.

"God in Christ" makes Jesus no more God than "Christ in us" makes us Jesus.

Let US make man in OUR own image...

The angels had already been created and they were spirit beings (God is spirit) in God's image (spirit) too. So God was talking plural because the angels were there when God CREATED "spirit" in humans.

The angels "worship" Jesus because Jesus usurped lucifers power. Lucifer WAS the greatest of the arc angels before the fall.

Jesus empowers us so we do not need a "priest" but we can talk directly with God. So we worship God through Christ but we do not worship Christ for that would be idolatry. Jesus was Israel's high priest forever, not ours. Each believer in the church is a priest unto God endowed by holy spirit. This holy spirit is not a ghost or a person but it is potential energy.

The cup of Christ is within us, the word is within us, the arc of the covenant (holy of holies) is within is us. This is the gift of God, this is the divinity of Christ and us this is the holy spirit. The mystery is revealed.

Peace with God

0 Replies

real life wrote:

Forced Greek translations to fit theological bias can get messy in a hurry.

I'll say!

real life wrote:

Now regarding Jehovah appearing in a man's body, do you deny that passages such as Gen 18 do refer to such?

Yup.

real life wrote:

Do we really think that this is too hard for God to accomplish?

I don't think anything is impossible. It just didn't happen.

0 Replies

kai is not "a", but "and"
or it can be
"""also, likewise,even, still,but also, and also"""
So John 1:1 could read these ways

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, also the Word was with God, also the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, likewise the Word was with God, likewise the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, even the Word was with God, even the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, still the Word was with God, still the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, but also the Word was with God, but also the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and also the Word was with God, and also the Word was God.

But there is no "A". Sorry.

0 Replies

Scott777ab wrote:

kai is not "a", but "and"
or it can be
"""also, likewise,even, still,but also, and also"""
So John 1:1 could read these ways

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, also the Word was with God, also the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, likewise the Word was with God, likewise the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, even the Word was with God, even the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, still the Word was with God, still the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, but also the Word was with God, but also the Word was God.

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and also the Word was with God, and also the Word was God.

But there is no "A". Sorry.

Not kai = a; but ho = the. (The word kai is, I believe, a conjunction.)

Pay attention to real life. Then at least you can be wrong with dignity.

BTW, real. The coffee's always warm in Edmonds, Washington. You too, Scott.

0 Replies

I don't believe Jesus was Jehovah.

Jehovah is the personal side of God and Jesus was especially close to Jehovah (in nature). But Jehovah is the part of God that is a "father and mother" where Elohim is the the less personal and distant creator part of God.

Trinitarians confuse Jehovah with the son of Jehovah.

Jehovah is not the son but the father.

God is our saviour because God devised a "plan of redemption" before the foundations of the world and Christ fulfilled that plan and thus Jesus is our saviour also.

Adam committed the first sin and what died "on that very day"? It was not his body and soul... Adam lost his spiritual connection with Jehovah. Adam and Eve's spiritual connection was conditional ours is unconditional seed. It was this connection that Jesus repaired.

This first sin was committed by Adam and Adam and Eve were the models for what "flesh" is defined as...

Flesh is a person who falls within the realms of body, soul and spirit.

So it was mankind who put themselves into sin and so it would take another person of the "flesh" to pay for this sin. Jesus would be the scape goat for the human race.

God could not pay for the sin because God is not "flesh".

God was not responsible for what humans did by their own free will choice.

God could not play any tricks with our redemption or it would not be "legal". We would then still be legally owned by the adversary.

If God had possessed Jesus then the saving of the world would have been induced and would not have been made by a free will "flesh" choice.

As Adam and Eve used their free will and were consequently lost into spiritual deficiency Christ by his free will and obedience to God brought back the "image" of God.

To suggest that Jesus was somehow God then detracts from the obedience and the free will choice that made Christ Jesus' suffering/commitment/obedience to God notable.

The trinity reduces the suffering of Christ as merely an act or show portrayed by a masquerading God.

The father cannot pay for the sins of the son, the son has to pay for his own sin.

If a man's son had wronged you would you accept that his innocent father be imprisoned and the son be set free?

Humans had to pay for their own sin and Jesus had to be 100% human or "in the flesh" or the devil would have had grounds to contest.

In the flesh is not referring to Jesus being "real" or alive it is referring to Jesus being truly a body, soul ans spirit man.

It is silly to think the apostles would discuss whether if Jesus was "real" when they had all known him personally.

In the flesh means "totally within the realm of the flesh." That means that Jesus could not have had an advantage that Adam did not, or the devil could cry foul.

So Jesus was no more a godman than Adam or any other human.

We are saved because Jesus was a man.

Romans 5:19
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one [another man] shall many be made righteous.

1Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive

1Corinthians 15:45
And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

1Corinthians 15:47
The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

Comment:
Jesus Christ was the second Adam (man) and is the "image" of the one true God the father in spirit and Christ Jesus is seated at God's right hand.

I don't think God is sitting on his own hand. Smile

Free will and believing is still the rock of the church.

0 Replies

There's hope for you yet, Rex. C'mon over for coffee. I'm at the Starbucks on Hwy 99 at 220th SW.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

There's hope for you yet, Rex. C'mon over for coffee. I'm at the Starbucks on Hwy 99 at 220th SW.

Sounds like fun... I am a decaf man though. Hehe

Starbucks makes the best decaf.

0 Replies

Yer on.

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

real life wrote:

Forced Greek translations to fit theological bias can get messy in a hurry.
I'll say!
real life wrote:
Now regarding Jehovah appearing in a man's body, do you deny that passages such as Gen 18 do refer to such?
Yup.
real life wrote:
Do we really think that this is too hard for God to accomplish?
I don't think anything is impossible. It just didn't happen.

Who appeared to Abraham in Gen 18?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

neologist wrote:
real life wrote:

Forced Greek translations to fit theological bias can get messy in a hurry.
I'll say!
real life wrote:
Now regarding Jehovah appearing in a man's body, do you deny that passages such as Gen 18 do refer to such?
Yup.
real life wrote:
Do we really think that this is too hard for God to accomplish?
I don't think anything is impossible. It just didn't happen.

Who appeared to Abraham in Gen 18?

The angels.

0 Replies

Thanks, Rex.

It's customary for those representing a higher authority to use the name of that authority, is it not?

0 Replies

neologist wrote:

Thanks, Rex.

It's customary for those representing a higher authority to use the name of that authority, is it not?

Usually you have to be given permission to use a higher authorities name but once you are given a "ministry" you are free within reason to invoke the name.

We invoke the name of Jesus Christ but that does not make us Jesus.

Jesus may have invoked the name of his father but that does not make him God. That only indicates that he has been granted this ministry from God. Jesus did not come to spread his own ministry but the ministry of God.

2Co 5:18
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

0 Replies

Help a rank layman out here, you bible scholars...

Why would it say, in Genesis 18 - the Lord did this and the Lord did that, if it was not the Lord, but some angels?

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Help a rank layman out here, you bible scholars...

Why would it say, in Genesis 18 - the Lord did this and the Lord did that, if it was not the Lord, but some angels?

It is angels (created beings) that in the realm of phenomenon appear in the form of "men", not God... There seems to be a limited heavenly manifestation of a human earthly "body" for angelic beings.

In the cannon angels are never mentioned as ever having "wings". I am not sure when angelic wings came into Christianity. They may have their roots in Enoch (just a guess). I don't believe angels are ever mentioned as "singing" either in the the Bible.

We only see the image (created spirit) of God in human form (Christ), not God (Spirit).

Christianity is much simpler than theology makes it.

Jesus is the lord because his life (soul) was not from Adam. God is the Lord because God is the master builder of all that is.

0 Replies

The original Hebrew text did indeed use the term Jehovah many times in Ch. 18. The word Adonai inserted in verse 3 (and other places) was added by Jewish scribes in their superstitious avoidance of the divine name. However, the context makes it clear that the person speaking is an angel of Jehovah and not Jehovah himself.

0 Replies

If Jesus is God, how is he called God's only begotten son?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know