Yeshua, Lord of Hosts

[gadar perets]

Let me add to that thought.

In Colossians 1:12 - 17 we read: "Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear SON: In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by Him (the Son) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him: And He (the Son) is before all things, and by Him all things consist."

A false translation. The ASV, NIV, ERV, and YLT, among others, have it correct :

for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;​

 

[gadar perets]

Again in Hebrews 1:1-2 we read: "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by His SON, whom He hath appointed heir of all things, by Whom (the Son) also He made the worlds..."

The correct translation is "through whom also He made the worlds." Father YHWH created everything through the Son. Also, this passage clearly shows that the Father (God) did NOT speak through His Son in OT times, but only in these last days.

 

[gadar perets]

It was by the Son of God that all things were created; thus He was the Son of God before His incarnation.

Think of it this way...
God's mind [Father]
God's body [Son]
God's Spirit [Holy Spirit]

Still one God

Wishful thinking that is not found in Scripture.

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

The narrow path is not a broad path, and therefore the narrow path is necessarily a "heresy" as judged by those who walk on the broad path.

Paul refers to the Way as such, and so it must be still today.
Were it a broad path then it would not be so, but it is a narrow path.

The narrow path is not heresy...it is truth. Proverbs 14:12

 

[visionary]

The correct translation is "through whom also He made the worlds." Father YHWH created everything through the Son. Also, this passage clearly shows that the Father (God) did NOT speak through His Son in OT times, but only in these last days.

Let's say that your translation perference is correct... it still says "through whom also He made the worlds" which means Yeshua was before birth the Creator.

 

[visionary]

A false translation. The ASV, NIV, ERV, and YLT, among others, have it correct :

for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;​

Same thing, it is still saying Yeshua was before the beginning creating it all.

 

[gadar perets]

Let's say that your translation perference is correct... it still says "through whom also He made the worlds" which means Yeshua was before birth the Creator.

There are over 100 verses that say YHWH created everything. Some say He did it by Himself, alone. There are only a handful of verses suggesting the Son created everything. Most of them contain the Greek word "dia" erroneously translated "by" rather than "through".

Before anything was created, Yahweh had a plan in mind. We are told that Yeshua is the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world. That is not literal. Yeshua was the Lamb slain in Yahweh's plan of salvation. Yahweh knew man would fall and be in need of saving. He created a plan to carry that out. When Yahweh created all things, He did it because the lamb slain before the foundation of the world needed a venue or a stage, so to speak, for that to be fulfilled. Therefore, the impetus for creation was the Son. Without the Son in Yahweh's mind there would be no creation. It was done "through" the Son. The earth was created along with everything needed for man to survive. Man was created for Yeshua to die for. Trees were created so Yeshua could hang on one. Metal was created to nail him to a tree, etc. At the same time, Yahweh created everything "for" His Son. It was part of His plan to give all power and authority to His Son so that he would rule the entire Kingdom forever.

 

[visionary]

There are over 100 verses that say YHWH created everything. Some say He did it by Himself, alone. There are only a handful of verses suggesting the Son created everything. Most of them contain the Greek word "dia" erroneously translated "by" rather than "through".

Before anything was created, Yahweh had a plan in mind. We are told that Yeshua is the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world. That is not literal. Yeshua was the Lamb slain in Yahweh's plan of salvation. Yahweh knew man would fall and be in need of saving. He created a plan to carry that out. When Yahweh created all things, He did it because the lamb slain before the foundation of the world needed a venue or a stage, so to speak, for that to be fulfilled. Therefore, the impetus for creation was the Son. Without the Son in Yahweh's mind there would be no creation. It was done "through" the Son. The earth was created along with everything needed for man to survive. Man was created for Yeshua to die for. Trees were created so Yeshua could hang on one. Metal was created to nail him to a tree, etc. At the same time, Yahweh created everything "for" His Son. It was part of His plan to give all power and authority to His Son so that he would rule the entire Kingdom forever.

He did it by Himself, alone. Yeshua is Yahweh... that is how.

 

[AbbaLove]

I have no conflict with this verse. You do because in a previous post you said something like, "No one posting here believes Yeshua is the Father." Why, then, are you posting this verse? To teach me Yeshua is the Father?

You misinterpreted my post. This was my reply to Visionary that you referenced ...
​

By the way no one posting here "claims the Son (Suffering Servant) is our Heavenly Father" as he (gadar) supposes. What we do claim is that the Father and Son are One (God in the flesh, "Immanuel interpreted as God with us").​

Being as you say that you have no conflict with John 14:9 than we agree that "Whoever has seen me (Yeshua) has seen the Father" that they are One (Echad = common unity).
​

John 14:9

Yeshua replied to him, “Have I been with you so long without your knowing me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?​

​

What we apparently disagree on is applying the “Echad” in the Shema when used as a "compound unity" ... http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/hebrew/echad.html ... we are going round and round on our interpretation of "echad" as applied to John 14:9

We both believe in the monotheism of "echad" with respect to Yeshua's words in John 14:9 but apparently disagree on the "common unity" of the “Echad” in the Shema when it comes to John 14:9. We both believe in the "common unity" (monotheism) of the Father and the Son (John 10:30, 14:9).

​

 

[AbbaLove]

He did it by Himself, alone. Yeshua is Yahweh... that is how.

All this is to say: monotheism isn’t so simple a topic to discuss, as though everyone knows and agrees on what the word means (e.g. Echad in the Shema as it relates to John 14:9).

It’s evident that if we want to grasp the Bible’s own teachings about God (YHWH), we should study the Bible itself, trying not to read it through the contradictory lenses of Diaspora Jewish and Western Christian traditions.​

http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/monotheism/monotheism.html​

 

[gadar perets]

He did it by Himself, alone. Yeshua is Yahweh... that is how.

The book of The Revelation comes to us from Yeshua. It declares that Yahweh is the Creator. Revelation 4:10,11 reads;

"The four and twenty elders fall down before Him that sat on the throne [Yahweh], and worship Him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying, Thou art worthy, O [Yahweh], to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created."
​

Then, Revelation 5:6-7 says;

"And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of [Yahweh] sent forth into all the earth. And he came and took the book out of the right hand of Him that sat upon the throne."
​

Notice that the Lamb, Yeshua, takes the book from Yahweh who sits on the throne. We just saw, in Revelation 4:10-11, that the one who sits on the throne is the Creator. Therefore, the one who takes the book from the Creator cannot also be the Creator.

In Acts 17:22-31, the Apostle Paul was declaring the "Unknown God" to the men of Athens. Verse 24 reads;

"God [Yahweh] that made the world and all things therein,. . ."
​

He then continues to declare Yahweh unto them and in verse 31 says;

"Because He [Yahweh] has appointed a day, in which He will judge in righteousness by that man [Yeshua] whom He has ordained."
​

The Apostle declared that the Creator and the ordained judge are two different people. The ordained judge is not "The Unknown God" who created all things. Nor is Yeshua the "YHWH" that created all things by Himself. There is only one Creator and one YHWH.

You have no case.

 

[gadar perets]

You misinterpreted my post. This was my reply to Visionary that you referenced ...
​

By the way no one posting here "claims the Son (Suffering Servant) is our Heavenly Father" as he (gadar) supposes. What we do claim is that the Father and Son are One (God in the flesh, "Immanuel interpreted as God with us").​

​

I did not misinterpret your post. It clearly says that no one is saying the Son is our Heavenly Father. Yet, you continue to post John 14:9 to show the Son is the Father. Or are you saying I misinterpreted what you are saying about John 14:9?

Being as you say that you have no conflict with John 14:9 than we agree that "Whoever has seen me (Yeshua) has seen the Father" that they are One (Echad = common unity).

John 14:9

Yeshua replied to him, “Have I been with you so long without your knowing me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
​

What we apparently disagree on is applying the “Echad” in the Shema when used as a "compound unity" ... http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/hebrew/echad.html ... we are going round and round on our interpretation of "echad" as applied to John 14:9

We both believe in the monotheism of "echad" with respect to Yeshua's words in John 14:9 but apparently disagree on the "common unity" of the “Echad” in the Shema when it comes to John 14:9. We both believe in the "common unity" (monotheism) of the Father and the Son (John 10:30, 14:9).

John 14:9 says nothing about "compound unity" or "common unity" or "echad". Where do you get that from? The verse speaks of Yeshua being the express character image of the Father as in Hebrews 1:3.

Are you confusing John 14:9 with John 10:30 concerning "echad"?

 

[AbbaLove]

John 14:9 says nothing about "compound unity" or "common unity" or "echad". Where do you get that from? The verse speaks of Yeshua being the express character image of the Father as in Hebrews 1:3.

Are you confusing John 14:9 with John 10:30 concerning "echad"?

We both believe in the "common unity" (monotheism) of the Father and the Son of John 10:30 and John 14:9

(#229).

As you know the Shema of Echad is also expressed as a "comm-Unity" by these Jewish translations ...

Isaac Leeser: Hear, O Israel! The Lord, our God, is the One Eternal Being.
Jewish Publication Society (1917): Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
Joseph Hertz: Hear, O Israel, The LORD is our God, the LORD is one.
Jewish Publication Society (1985): Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.​

You have expressed your belief (if i understand your following statement) that any references in the Tanakh to YHWH as "LORD" have been transferred to Yeshua/Immanuel as Lord. You say: "Yeshua, Lord of heavenly hosts and YHWH of Hosts." Are you saying that YHWH was never LORD and that the title of LORD/Lord has been reserved for Yeshua as a "lesser Elohim." Your statement comes across as if you believe only Yeshua/Immanuel (and not YHWH) now merits the title of LORD (or Lord as a "lesser Elohim").

Do you believe the Temple High Priests thought of YHWH as Yisrael's LORD (all caps) to distinguish YHWH from Yisrael's Mashiach. If so then why do you say, "YHWH of Hosts" instead of YHWH, LORD of Hosts.

Isaiah 7:14

This image shows a fragment of the Isaiah Dead Sea Scroll. In the top line the word יהוה (YHWH) is underlined (name of God). In the Masoretic text the word אדוני (adonai) is used. Adonai is generally understood as a plural (comm-Unity) which can be applied to both John 10:30 and John 14:9 although you disagree. So we disagree because you don't see the Oneness (Shema of Echad) in John 14:9 … so what else is new under the sun within: Judaism, Christianity and Messianic Judaism

It stands to reason that those MJs that view Yeshua/Immanuel as a "lesser Elohim" may find John 14:9 somewhat perplexing ... thus your wry comment, "thus declares AbbaLove" the first time i quoted John 14:9 in a reply to your post.

 

[gadar perets]

As you know the Shema of Echad is also expressed as a "comm-Unity" by these Jewish translations ...

Isaac Leeser: Hear, O Israel! The Lord, our God, is the One Eternal Being.
Jewish Publication Society (1917): Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
Joseph Hertz: Hear, O Israel, The LORD is our God, the LORD is one.
Jewish Publication Society (1985): Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone.​

You are reading "comm-Unity" into those translations, especially the last one where echad" means "alone".​

You have expressed your belief (if i understand your following statement) that any references in the Tanakh to YHWH as "LORD" have been transferred to Yeshua/Immanuel as Lord.

I never said such a thing and never will.

You say: "Yeshua, Lord of heavenly hosts and YHWH of Hosts." Are you saying that YHWH was never LORD and that the title of LORD/Lord has been reserved for Yeshua as a "lesser Elohim." Your statement comes across as if you believe only Yeshua/Immanuel (and not YHWH) now merits the title of LORD (or Lord as a "lesser Elohim").

I'm not sure why you are not understanding my clear words, but I'll try again. "LORD" is a man-made title used to replace "YHWH". In that regard, He is Scripturally not "LORD". However, He is "Lord" as a translation of "Adonai". "LORD" is also not a title for Yeshua since that would imply Yeshua is YHWH. "Lord" is a title for Yeshua based on the Hebrew "adoni" and the Greek "kurios". Neither YHWH nor Yeshua merit the title "LORD". The man-made substitute "LORD", which the Holy Spirit NEVER inspired, needs to be totally removed from our Bibles and replaced with the correct transliteration of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton "YHWH".

Do you believe the Temple High Priests thought of YHWH as Yisrael's LORD (all caps) to distinguish YHWH from Yisrael's Mashiach. If so then why do you say, "YHWH of Hosts" instead of YHWH, LORD of Hosts.

The priests thought of YHWH as YHWH. "LORD" did not exist until the English language was invented.
"LORD of Hosts" is a translation of "YHWH tsebâ'âh". To say "YHWH, LORD of Hosts" is to say, "YHWH, YHWH of Hosts".

Isaiah 7:14

This image shows a fragment of the Isaiah Dead Sea Scroll. In the top line the word יהוה (YHWH) is underlined (name of God). In the Masoretic text the word אדוני (adonai) is used. Adonai is generally understood as a plural (comm-Unity) which can be applied to both John 10:30 and John 14:9 although you disagree. So we disagree because you don't see the Oneness (Shema of Echad) in John 14:9 … so what else is new under the sun within: Judaism, Christianity and Messianic Judaism

It stands to reason that those MJs that view Yeshua/Immanuel as a "lesser Elohim" may find John 14:9 somewhat perplexing ... thus your wry comment, "thus declares AbbaLove" the first time i quoted John 14:9 in a reply to your post.

Adonai is not a "comm-Unity". It is the plural of majesty just as "elohim" is. In the Shema, echad means one, singular, alone. The word one in John 10:30 means united in purpose, goal, etc. The Father and Son are definitely united in purpose, goal, etc., as should all believers. They are NOT united in deity.

Also, what word in John 14:9 is the Greek equivalent to echad? Where is the unity in John 14:9? It speaks of common character, not unity.

 

[AbbaLove]

​

I worship, prostrate myself, bow down to, and honor Yeshua as my "Lord" and my "elohim". I do not treat him as my "LORD" and my "GOD".

I believe in the deity of Father YHWH and I do not worship the Son as my only true God.

I'm not sure why you are not understanding my clear words, ... .

 

[gadar perets]

Well, your last post certainly was not helpful since I have no idea why you posted those quotes. I will say that I stand by everything I wrote.

 

[visionary]

Well, your last post certainly was not helpful since I have no idea why you posted those quotes. I will say that I stand by everything I wrote.

I worship, prostrate myself, bow down to, and honor Yeshua as my "Lord" and my "elohim".

 

[gadar perets]

I worship, prostrate myself, bow down to, and honor Yeshua as my "Lord" and my "elohim".

Good. So we agree.

 

[visionary]

Good. So we agree.

I quoted ... so that you can see how you are agreeing with us.

 

[gadar perets]

I quoted ... so that you can see how you are agreeing with us.

I don't agree with you. My quote is not what you believe. You believe, "I worship, prostrate myself, bow down to, and honor Yeshua as my "LORD" and my "God".