Was the OT totally in reference to God the Father?

Pavel Mosko · Mar 4, 2021

The Liturgist said:
He was such a good preacher, at times I wish ministers who aren’t good at preaching would just use portions of his homilies. I say portions because he tended to preach at the ninth hour, using Noone as a preaching service separate from and after the liturgical synaxis, and some of his sermons are long. But some, like the Paschal homily, are extremely compact.

I only ever use his Paschal homily and the similar Paschal homily of St. Athanasius, because I have never heard a modern day priest do a better job of explaining Easter than either of them.

You know come to think of it my best friend said something similar. He inherited all the Church Father commentaries from his bishop who died a few years back. and I think he did read that sermon on one Easter/Pascha.

By the way this is his sermon video on Repentance that I posted a few places, take a look.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10157223763006054

ViaCrucis · Mar 4, 2021

The Liturgist said:
@MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis - there was a Lutheran minister who did an amusing video with Irish twins arguing Christology with St. Patrick. Would either of you have a link to that to paste in here?

It's St. Patrick's Bad Analogies by Lutheran Satire:

-CryptoLutheran

The Liturgist · Mar 4, 2021

ViaCrucis said:
It's St. Patrick's Bad Analogies by Lutheran Satire:

-CryptoLutheran

I love it. So anyone who wants to know which interpretations of the relationship between God the Father and God the Son are, there is that video.

ViaCrucis · Mar 4, 2021

Nathan@work said:
In other words, I did not 'create' my kids. I 'begot' them.

The Son is the eternally begotten Son of the Father, and so His generation from the Father is outside of time. We specifically confess in the Nicene Creed that He is "begotten, not made" because His eternal generation from the Father means He is the uncreated Son and Logos, He is of the Father's own Being as true and very God--"God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God".

In the Incarnation He became part of creation by becoming man. God becoming man is the Uncreated becoming part of the created, for the purpose of redeeming it. The Eternal Son of the Father, the very Logos Himself, united Himself with human nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin; and for this reason we can say that Mary gave birth to God (which is why she is called Theotokos meaning "Birth-giver of God" and also called the mother of God, as she gave birth to God the Son in His humanity).

As the God-Man, He is fully and truly God; God from and with the Father and the Holy Spirit in perfect Unity and Trinity; and also fully and truly human, like us in all ways but without sin.

Thus in Christ is the union of the Uncreated (God) and the created (man), by which God has come to save the world by the means of Himself, by His own righteous human life, His death, resurrection, ascension, and coming again in glory on the Last Day.

The Divine Person is never a creature of course, for He is from everlasting, God the Son and Word, begotten of the Father, not created. But that Divine Person of the Son was united with humanity, so that the Person who is eternally God is now also truly and really human. God and man without separation, without confusion, united in one Person, Jesus Christ our Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Nathan@work · Mar 4, 2021

ViaCrucis said:
The Son is the eternally begotten Son of the Father, and so His generation from the Father is outside of time. We specifically confess in the Nicene Creed that He is "begotten, not made" because His eternal generation from the Father means He is the uncreated Son and Logos, He is of the Father's own Being as true and very God--"God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God".

In the Incarnation He became part of creation by becoming man. God becoming man is the Uncreated becoming part of the created, for the purpose of redeeming it. The Eternal Son of the Father, the very Logos Himself, united Himself with human nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin; and for this reason we can say that Mary gave birth to God (which is why she is called Theotokos meaning "Birth-giver of God" and also called the mother of God, as she gave birth to God the Son in His humanity).

As the God-Man, He is fully and truly God; God from and with the Father and the Holy Spirit in perfect Unity and Trinity; and also fully and truly human, like us in all ways but without sin.

Thus in Christ is the union of the Uncreated (God) and the created (man), by which God has come to save the world by the means of Himself, by His own righteous human life, His death, resurrection, ascension, and coming again in glory on the Last Day.

The Divine Person is never a creature of course, for He is from everlasting, God the Son and Word, begotten of the Father, not created. But that Divine Person of the Son was united with humanity, so that the Person who is eternally God is now also truly and really human. God and man without separation, without confusion, united in one Person, Jesus Christ our Lord.

-CryptoLutheran

Like I said, begotten not made.

Jesus, as flesh, was born.

God, The Father of Jesus, was never born.

The entire Bible makes a clear distinction between Jesus and His Father - God. When you read, without imposing any denominational doctrine, it’s clear.

I’ve only ever been confused when different denominational teaching try to explain the relationship between Them. When just simply looking at what is written in the New Testament, it is very clear.

When making claims, that we never find written down, about Jesus - it’s imperative to understand He died. Without His death, the Gospel message is skewed.

God, The Father of Jesus, cannot die.

There is a clear - crystal clear - distinction between Them.

Bruce Leiter · Mar 4, 2021

Jaxxi said:
the Lord said to him, “I am the Lord. Tell Pharaoh, Egypt’s king, everything that I’ve said to you.” Exodus 6:29

Statements like this are from God the Father, correct? The New Testament is God the Father speaking through Jesus, is that correct? Jesus says that the Father is in Him. So was the Old Testament mainly God the Father speaking?

No, the three Persons of God work together in creation (Old Testament). The Father is its Source or Originator ("God"), the Second Person (later to become Jesus) was the Agent (John 1), and the Holy Spirit was the Atmosphere as the direct Cause (Genesis 1-hovering over the waters). The Lord's appearances as the angel of the Lord and other manifestations like the "man" who wrestled with Jacob may have been the Second Person taking human form. The Lord of the burning bush is probably also the Second Person.

ViaCrucis · Mar 4, 2021

Nathan@work said:
Like I said, begotten not made.

Jesus, as flesh, was born.

God, The Father of Jesus, was never born.

The entire Bible makes a clear distinction between Jesus and His Father - God. When you read, without imposing any denominational doctrine, it’s clear.

I’ve only ever been confused when different denominational teaching try to explain the relationship between Them. When just simply looking at what is written in the New Testament, it is very clear.

When making claims, that we never find written down, about Jesus - it’s imperative to understand He died. Without His death, the Gospel message is skewed.

God, The Father of Jesus, cannot die.

There is a clear - crystal clear - distinction between Them.

A distinction in their Hypostases, yes. But the reason why the Church has, historically, tried to use language to talk about these things--in agreement with the language of Scripture--is because theological controversies and certain heretical teachers and movements forced the question and as Christians we must stand firm in the faith. So when someone like Arius came along and tried to argue that the Son was a kind of junior god, the Church's response to this controversy ultimately resulted in the Council of Nicea, and the symbol of faith produced there. Which was reaffirmed and expanded upon at the Council of Constantinople in order to affirm the true Deity of the Holy Spirit.

We can't simply try and say that this is "denominational teaching", because Scripture is clear about the importance of our confession, and not being swayed by the teachings of heretics.

That's why it is so important that we confess what has been confessed, which i is what we do when we confess the Nicene Creed.

We should not mistakenly think the Creeds are optional in the Christian faith, they are part of the Church's historic foundation, built upon Christ Himself, and His Apostles.

-CryptoLutheran

MarkRohfrietsch · Mar 4, 2021

The Liturgist said:
@MarkRohfrietsch and @ViaCrucis - there was a Lutheran minister who did an amusing video with Irish twins arguing Christology with St. Patrick. Would either of you have a link to that to paste in here?

This one: donnell and connell trinity - Google Search

Jaxxi · Mar 4, 2021

Dkh587 said:
Well, to get technical, the verses where they heard a voice from heaven, it does not say it was the Father.

I may have missed where the NT writers linked the voice to the Father, though.

John 5:37
And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

The only possible exception to this would be the witnesses at the baptism of Messiah, and those on the Mount of Transfiguration.

" This is my beloved Son with whom I am well pleased " Unless Angels are liars, this would have to be God the Father speaking.

Jaxxi · Mar 4, 2021

Jake Arsenal said:
Jesus is not separate from the Father like I am separate from you. Father, Son, Holy Spirit are distinct yet all of one substance. Most heresies have arisen from finite people trying to understand the substance of an infinite GOD.

Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

But Jesus and the Holy Spirit do not know the Day of the Lord. Only the Father. If They were all one, They all would know. Right?

But nobody knows when that day or hour will come, not the heavenly angels and not the Son. Only the Father knows.
Matthew 24:36

Is this not a clue that they are separate?

Or do you think that I’m not able to ask my Father and he will send to me more than twelve battle groups of angels right away? Matthew 26:53

The Lord Jesus must ask the Father for things- it is not just known. They are One but they are different. I feel like they hold the same rank, like partners in a business where they both act with the same authority. Jesus refers to His Father's kingdom. He does not say it is His per say. I mean He says the Father is giving it to Him, but Jesus is not the king of this world right now. He should be, but He is not.

ViaCrucis · Mar 4, 2021

Jaxxi said:
But Jesus and the Holy Spirit do not know the Day of the Lord. Only the Father. If They were all one, They all would know. Right?

But nobody knows when that day or hour will come, not the heavenly angels and not the Son. Only the Father knows.
Matthew 24:36

Is this not a clue that they are separate?

Or do you think that I’m not able to ask my Father and he will send to me more than twelve battle groups of angels right away? Matthew 26:53

The Lord Jesus must ask the Father for things- it is not just known. They are One but they are different. I feel like they hold the same rank, like partners in a business where they both act with the same authority. Jesus refers to His Father's kingdom. He does not say it is His per say. I mean He says the Father is giving it to Him, but Jesus is not the king of this world right now. He should be, but He is not.

The Father and Son are distinct, but never separate.

The reason why Jesus says the Son doesn't know is part of the Mystery of the Incarnation. Because at the same time we read that Jesus knew the hearts and minds of men, that's omniscience. Jesus Christ, God the Son, is omniscient, He knows all things. And yet, here He tells us that He does not know.

This is a paradox, but it one of many paradoxes in the Christian faith.

We confess that God cannot die, and yet Christ died, and Christ is God. Therefore we confess that God has died. God who cannot die, died. God, who cannot suffer, suffered.

This is all part of the Mystery of the Incarnation. God became man. That means He was fully God and fully human, at the same time--and He remains for all eternity the undivided God-Man.

-CryptoLutheran

The Liturgist · Mar 5, 2021

ViaCrucis said:
The Father and Son are distinct, but never separate.

The reason why Jesus says the Son doesn't know is part of the Mystery of the Incarnation. Because at the same time we read that Jesus knew the hearts and minds of men, that's omniscience. Jesus Christ, God the Son, is omniscient, He knows all things. And yet, here He tells us that He does not know.

This is a paradox, but it one of many paradoxes in the Christian faith.

We confess that God cannot die, and yet Christ died, and Christ is God. Therefore we confess that God has died. God who cannot die, died. God, who cannot suffer, suffered.

This is all part of the Mystery of the Incarnation. God became man. That means He was fully God and fully human, at the same time--and He remains for all eternity the undivided God-Man.

-CryptoLutheran

Your Theopaschite theology is not only correct, but expressed with exquisite beauty. When I read your posts @ViaCrucis the harmony of exegetical excellence is like listening to the sacred compositions of Buxtehude and Johann Sebastian Bach, the two greatest Lutheran composers, but it is also like listening to Byzantine Chant or Coptic Chant or other Eastern Orthodox liturgical music in English, because you dare to use the direct Theopaschite Christocentric terminology which directly confronts the divine mystery in a manner reminiscent of some of my favorite hymns from the Christian Orient.

Now, on the specific mystery we are discussing here, St. John Chrysostom argued that in this case, the paradox of the Son not knowing was to convey that it is forbidden for humans to know the time of the Eschaton. Since our Lord is fully human, He voluntarily excludes His Person from knowledge of the time, even though He is fully divine. I also like the Judaic matrimonial theory, where Jesus Christ, as the bridegroom of the Church, has the duty to marry the Church, whereas setting the arrangements for the marriage including the time of the wedding feast which will be preceded by the dreadful Day of Judgement, is an arrangement to be made by the Father. I think both answers are doctrinally acceptable and not mutually exclusive.

By the way, your skill at expressing Nicene Christology is so excellent, have you considered teaching theology in an academic setting?

The Liturgist · Mar 5, 2021

Jaxxi said:
" This is my beloved Son with whom I am well pleased " Unless Angels are liars, this would have to be God the Father speaking.

Indeed, this was certainly a case where the Father did speak aloud. He says this twice in the Gospel According to Mark, first at the Baptism and secondly at the Transfiguration.

When Scripture does not directly ascribe words to the Father, I believe that we should regard them as pronounced by the Son, and we should regard all appearances of God as anything other than a man, as being the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit has been revealed in the form of a dove and cloves of fire.

chad kincham · Mar 5, 2021

Dustoff said:
No you are incorrect. Our Jesus is the Yahveh of the OT. Anytime you see God appearing thats Jesus. The pre-incarnate Christ. It was Jesus speaking out of the burning bush for eg. Gen.1/1 Jesus was the creator God. Obviously, there is only one God and when God speaks they are all speaking. But almost everywhere in the OT you see or hear God its the pre-incarnate Christ.

If you want to see Jesus in the OT read Isaiah 6 and Ezek 1.

I believe both the Father and Son appear in the OT - whenever God in full glory appears, such as the burning bush, where Moses needed shielded from it, that’s the Father - but wherever God in the form of a man shows up, it’s Jesus transcending time, and showing up with the body He incarnated into in the first century - which happened frequently in the OT.

chad kincham · Mar 5, 2021

Dave L said:
“Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.” Jude 5 (ESV)

“and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they were all drinking from the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ.” (1 Corinthians 10:4)

Interesting - but the word translated as JESUS by the ESV, is KURIOS in the original Greek, which means, God, Lord, Mater, or Sir, and does not say the name Iesous, which is Greek for Jesus - so that verse does not prove whether it’s Father or Son in the text.

GreekOrthodox · Mar 5, 2021

chad kincham said:
Interesting - but the word translated as JESUS by the ESV, is KURIOS in the original Greek, which means, God, Lord, Mater, or Sir, and does not say the name Iesous, which is Greek for Jesus - so that verse does not prove whether it’s Father or Son in the text.

I just looked at the Greek myself and "kyrios" is there. Seems to be an odd translations of the ESV. Although I just saw this as a footnote: Some manuscripts although you fully knew it, that the Lord who once saved

Bible Gateway passage: Jude - English Standard Version

The Liturgist · Mar 5, 2021

chad kincham said:
I believe both the Father and Son appear in the OT - whenever God in full glory appears, such as the burning bush, where Moses needed shielded from it, that’s the Father - but wherever God in the form of a man shows up, it’s Jesus transcending time, and showing up with the body He incarnated into in the first century - which happened frequently in the OT.

The problem with that exegesis is not with your conclusion that anthropic appearances of a man are Jesus, indeed, our Lord would entirely transcend time because time is a creature and Jesus Christ is the uncreated Word and only begotten Son of God, and is God incarnate.

Rather, the idea that other appearances of God “in full glory” are problematic because it implies that Jesus Christ, when He is incarnate as a man, is not God in full glory, and seems to deny that we were created in the image of God. When I see an icon of Christ, I see God in full Glory, and man in full Glory, neither the Godhood overpowering the humanity God had partaken of, nor the humanity diminishing the divine glory, but rather, both resplendent in theandric union. The icons depicting the Infancy, Crucifixion, Burial, Resurrection and Ascension of God are especially moving.

Also, in the case of the burning bush, why wouldn’t that be the Holy Spirit? We have some reason to believe God the Father has never been perceived, based on various statements to the extent that no one can behold Him and live, and our Lord, God the Son, saying that no one has seen Him at any time. On the other hand, God the Holy Spirit has appeared to us, and more specifically, on Pentecost appeared as tongues of fire. So why wouldn’t the burning bush be the Spirit?

MarkRohfrietsch · Mar 5, 2021

The Liturgist · Mar 5, 2021

Pavel Mosko said:
I can imagine!

I mean in my nondenominational Charismatic days, I've heard some doozies. This one in particular was more Anselm than Anselm, and the way the person described all the sin and shame being put on Christ, which caused the Father to recoil, it was kind of Nestorian, in Christ experiencing separation from the Father while on the cross... Nestorian not quite the right term but you get my drift, it was like the Trinity was momentarily divided.

Yeah, that is the ugliness of Nestorian theology. Mar Narsai wrote a Nestorian hymn intended to contrast the divine and human characteristics of Christ our God, and the result is silly, annoying, and the worst Patristic era hymn I’ve heard.

GreekOrthodox · Mar 5, 2021

The Liturgist said:
Also, in the case of the burning bush, why wouldn’t that be the Holy Spirit? We have some reason to believe God the Father has never been perceived, based on various statements to the extent that no one can behold Him and live, and our Lord, God the Son, saying that no one has seen Him at any time. On the other hand, God the Holy Spirit has appeared to us, and more specifically, on Pentecost appeared as tongues of fire. So why wouldn’t the burning bush be the Spirit?

The Orthodox view is that Moses saw God's uncreated eternal energy.

Was the OT totally in reference to God the Father?

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Confessional Lutheran

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Confessional Lutheran

Always ready :)

A sinner saved by God's astounding grace and love

Confessional Lutheran

Unapologetic Apologist

Half-ready for Anything.....

Half-ready for Anything.....

Confessional Lutheran

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Psalti Chrysostom

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Unapologetic Apologist

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Psalti Chrysostom

Similar threads