The Trinity and the Incarnation

[charismaticlady]

The BURNING BUSH did not speak . . . it was the Angel of the LORD who spoke out of the bush AS IF HE was God.

That is the Jewish Law of Agency: (Heb. Shaliah): The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, “a person’s agent is regarded as the person himself” (Ned. 72B; Kidd, 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principal, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent.”

God sent his angel to represent him --- to speak on his behalf to Moses. The Angel acted as the agent of God and therefore could speak as God. There are a lot of these instances in the OT.

The voice in the bush claimed to be God. The Angel of the Lord is also a title God uses when appearing in some way to man. The Angel of the Lord is not a created angel. It is just a title. The key in knowing this Angel from, say, Gabriel, is Gabriel would never allow someone to worship him. Not so with the Angel of the Lord. He allows worship and the ground He stands on is holy ground and He says that He is God.

 

[amazing grace]

The voice in the bush claimed to be God. The Angel of the Lord is also a title God uses when appearing in some way to man. The Angel of the Lord is not a created angel. It is just a title. The key in knowing this Angel from, say, Gabriel, is Gabriel would never allow someone to worship him. Not so with the Angel of the Lord. He allows worship and the ground He stands on is holy ground and He says that He is God.

Scripture specifically states that it is the Angel of the LORD. It is the Angel of the LORD who is representing God and therefore is regarded as the one who sent him, i.e. God. By ignoring the Jewish Law of Agency - how an agent, the one sent, is regarded as the person who sent him - your understanding will remain in error.

 

[FreeInChrist]

The angel of the Lord was worshipped by several of Gods chosen in the OT.

Gideon refers to the Messenger of YHWH as adoni.
Since the Messenger of YHWH is YHWH demonstrates Gideon was referring to YHWH as adoni.

Judges 6:11-23
11 The Messenger of the Lord came and sat under the oak tree in Ophrah that belonged to Joash from Abiezer’s family. Joash’s son Gideon was beating out wheat in a winepress to hide it from the Midianites.
12 The Messenger of the Lord appeared to Gideon and said, “The Lord is with you, brave man.”
13 Gideon responded, “Excuse me, sir! But if the Lord is with us, why has all this happened to us? Where are all the miracles our ancestors have told us about? Didn’t they say, ‘The Lord brought us out of Egypt?’ But now the Lord has abandoned us and has handed us over to Midian.”
14 The Lord turned to him and said, “You will rescue Israel from Midian with the strength you have. I am sending you.”
15 Gideon said to him, “Excuse me, sir! How can I rescue Israel? Look at my whole family. It’s the weakest one in Manasseh. And me? I’m the least important member of my family.”
16 The Lord replied, “I will be with you. You will defeat Midian as if it were only one man.”
17 Gideon said to him, “If you find me acceptable, give me a sign that it is really you speaking to me.
18 Don’t leave until I come back. I want to bring my gift and set it in front of you.”
“I will stay until you come back,” he said.
19 Then Gideon went into his house and prepared a young goat and unleavened bread made with 18 quarts of flour. He put the meat in a basket and the broth in a pot. Then he went out and presented them to the Messenger of the Lord under the oak tree.
20 The Messenger of the Lord told him, “Take the meat and the unleavened bread, put them on this rock, and pour the broth over them.” Gideon did so.
21 Then the Messenger of the Lord touched the meat and the bread with the tip of the staff that was in his hand. Fire flared up from the rock and burned the meat and the bread. Then the Messenger of the Lord disappeared.
22 That’s when Gideon realized that this had been the Messenger of the Lord. So he said, “Lord God! I have seen the Messenger of the Lord face to face.”
23 The Lord said to him, “Calm down! Don’t be afraid. You will not die.” (GW)



Verse 12 - The Messenger of YHWH appears unto Gideon.
Verse 14 - The Messenger is described as the Lord (YHWH) which spoke unto Gideon.
Verse 17, 18 - Gideon asks "Him" (the Messenger of YHWH) not to depart.
Verse 18 - The Messenger of YHWH says He will wait until Gideon returns.
Verse 19 - Gideon brings out the food unto the Messenger of YHWH under the oak tree. This is where the Messenger of YHWH was originally (verse 11).
Verses 20-22 - Describes what the Messenger of YHWH did to Gideons' offer.

Notice also in verse 22 that Gideon realized that the Messenger to whom he referred to as "sir" (adoni) in Judges 6:13 was in fact YHWH! By seeing the Messenger (YHWH) face to face Gideon was in fear that he would die (cf. Exodus 33:20). This is why in the very next verse (23) YHWH assures Gideon that he will not die even though Gideon saw YHWH face to face.

The Angel of the Lord in the OT was the pre incarnate Son which is why He is identified as YHWH and worshiped as God unlike the created angels who are not worshiped.

Gen 22:11-14
But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!"

"Here I am," he replied.

12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."

13 Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. 14 So Abraham called that place The Lord Will Provide. And to this day it is said, "On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided."


Exodus 3:2, 5

And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed…And he said, Draw not nigh thither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.”


Well the main function or a general definition of a "shaliach" is as follows:

A shaliaḥ (שָלִיחַ; pl. שְלִיחִים, sheliḥim) in Halakha is a Jewish legal or agent. Accordingly, a shaliaḥ performs an act of legal significance for the benefit of the sender, as opposed to him or herself.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaliach


A Chabad shliach (שליח, pl. שליחים/שלוחים, shlichim/shluchim) is a Chabad member sent out to promulgate Judaism and Chasidut around the world. Chabad shluchim today number about 4,000 worldwide, and can be found in many of even the most remote worldly locales.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaliach_(Chabad)

Now, I am bringing this up for a very good reason and I want to cut to the chase of my point in this little exercise. The basic job of a "shaliach or the definition is an agent sent on a specfic mission to represent the interst of someon else. In short there are restrictions to the function of a shaliach and I will give you the best example.

Now, you have at Genesis 16:7 the very first appearance of the angel of the Lord. If you read the context from verse 7 to Genesis 17:1-2 you will discover that the Lord God Almighty is the speaker even though the the angel of the Lord is actually speaking. At verse 10 the angel of the Lord says that He will greatly multiply the descendents of Hagar. Then at Genesis 17:1 and 2 it's the Lord God Almighty who will multiply his descendents. You cannot get away from the fact that the same being is taking in the passages. Even at Genesis 16:13 Hagar says I have see the Lord God and am still alive.

Now, lets jump to Genesis 22 where God is going to test Abraham. You have the Lord God Almighty speaking from Genesis 22:1-10. There is no question about this fact. At verse 11 it states, "But the angel of the Lord called to him (Abraham) from heaven and said, "Abraham, Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." Then at verse 15 the angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time." (Note: why does the angel of the Lord have to call out for God Himself a second time from heaven?) Is not the Lord God Himself capable of calling out from heaven Himself. I mean He did call out from heaven at Mark 1:11. He did not need the so-called shaliah then.

After the angel of the Lord calls out from heaven the second time which is Genesis 22:15 here is what this so-called shaliach/emissary says, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld you son, you only son. Indeed, I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is on the seashore etc."

So you see from following the sequence of events a shaliach is limited or he can only do so much on behalf of the sender. He cannot swear an oath for the sender as you see the scriptures say. He cannot multiply the seed of anyone as you see the scriptures say.

Not only that but the real kicker of all of this is found in the NT at Hebrews 6:13. The writer of the Hebrews states, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, SINCE HE COULD SWEAR BY NO ONE GREATER, HE SWORE BY HIMSELF, VS14, SAYING, "I WILL SURELY BLESS YOU , AND I WILL MULTIPLY YOU." This text is referring back to Genesis 22 and Abraham. A shaliach cannot swear an oath on behalf of the sender and it even says God swore by Himself. In short, the shaliach argument will not work and I maintain that the messenger of the Lord is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ

hope this helps !!!

Yes Sir,

"The Angel of the Lord in the OT was the pre incarnate Son which is why He is identified as YHWH and worshiped as God unlike the created angels who are not worshiped."

If I can understand this anyone should be able to.

 

[FreeInChrist]

Who did the speaking? God did the speaking . . . God spoke his word.

Correct. God the Word spoke.

And before you diss this...

It IS correct to say "God the Word," especially in Christian theology where "the Word" refers to Jesus Christ, as indicated in the Bible (John 1:1).

 

[amazing grace]

Correct. God the Word spoke.

And before you diss this...

It IS correct to say "God the Word," especially in Christian theology where "the Word" refers to Jesus Christ, as indicated in the Bible (John 1:1).

Nope . . . GOD HIMSELF SPOKE WORDS! No such expression as 'God the word' . . . God the Word is not WRITTEN.

AGAIN. . . . grammatically 'God' is the predicate nominative in John 1:1c - a noun used as an adjective. The word is the full expression of God; the word fully expresses God ---- that full expression of God became flesh, a human being, in the man Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

We call our Bibles the Word of God . . . . because it contains the 'words of God' . . . a book, not a person.

 

[amazing grace]

Let's try it this way.

What was the Word doing while waiting for Mary to be made pregnant?

I have no idea. If you know, please tell me. There is no God the Son . . . Yep, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe Jesus preexisted.

There is no God the Son . . . Yep, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe Jesus preexisted. What was he in his preexistent state? What was he doing?

Which is why I asked ^.

I really would like an answer to the above questions. It seems I can never get my questions answered from any of you guys.

And still no answer . . . .

 

[civic]

I have no idea. If you know, please tell me. There is no God the Son . . . Yep, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe Jesus preexisted.

Which is why I asked ^.

And still no answer . . . .

exact word fallacy........................

next fallacy

 

[amazing grace]

Let's try it this way.

What was the Word doing while waiting for Mary to be made pregnant?

Why can I be asked ^ and it is expected that I answer such a question?
Yet, when I ask . . .

There is no God the Son . . . Yep, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe Jesus preexisted.
What was he in his preexistent state? What was he doing?

I am accused of . . .

exact word fallacy........................

next fallacy

Since you guys believe Jesus preexisted then I have the right to ask the above questions which excludes those questions from being any kind of 'word fallacy'.

 

[civic]

Why can I be asked ^ and it is expected that I answer such a question?
Yet, when I ask . . .

I am accused of . . .

Since you guys believe Jesus preexisted then I have the right to ask the above questions which excludes those questions from being any kind of 'word fallacy'.

its clear in numerous passages He preexisted since He existed before all created things and is the One who created all things. He even said He was together with the Father sharing His glory with Him before the world came into existence. John 17:5.

next fallacy

 

[FreeInChrist]

Nope . . . GOD HIMSELF SPOKE WORDS! No such expression as 'God the word' . . . God the Word is not WRITTEN.

AGAIN. . . . grammatically 'God' is the predicate nominative in John 1:1c - a noun used as an adjective. The word is the full expression of God; the word fully expresses God ---- that full expression of God became flesh, a human being, in the man Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

We call our Bibles the Word of God . . . . because it contains the 'words of God' . . . a book, not a person.

YOU CALL YOU BIBLES????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/

There is not such word in the bible.

You pick and choose what you think makes sense.

The word bible is not in the bible so how can you say you call your bible the word of God.

 

[FreeInChrist]

I have no idea. If you know, please tell me. There is no God the Son . . . Yep, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe Jesus preexisted.

Which is why I asked ^.

And still no answer . . . .

Let's you and me try to figure out some time before conception of when the Word could have been.

Now... The first thing you have to acknowledge is that John 1:14 is a true statement.

Even the JW NWT bible says...

John 1:14.... So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of divine favor and truth

Please note that while the NWT calls the Word a god... little g it also says the Word was an only begotten son from a father.

Does not acknowledge that the father being talked about was God.

Does not acknowledge he was the only begotten... it says an only begotten meaning there are the possibilities of more if they were to ever happen.

I have fairly discerned about myself I am truly not smart enough to understand the NWT. I admittedly only have an IQ of 135
so when I read this verse of John 1:14 that father could well be Joseph... could it not.... if not why not. As far as the Catholics declare Jesus was Marys only son so he could have been Jesus' father. The NWT say "A" father so how are we to know who that is?

I digress.....

Now... back to our problem.

We have this Word/word. We are told everywhere that the Word/word became flesh and either walked among us or resided among us depending on translation

Do you disagree that for the Word/word to become flesh that had to have happened prior to Mary being impregnated?
or her conception?

So I submit that the Word/word had to be at least 15 minutes old at minimum. (Don't ask how I figured that)

NOW.... now.... can we do better.

Let us look at John 1:1 NWT

In the beginning was the Word... ( kindly note that Word in the NWT has a capital W)

It goes on ...

And the Word was with God

And John 1:2-3 says : This one was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence

Now the NWT has pointed out that The Word was in the beginning.

WHAT BEGINNING. The beginning of creation and the world? The beginning of New Testament times? The begiinning of mankind... all of us learning about salvation? WHEN WAAS THE BEGINNING.

We can narrow this down

The NWT says...John 1: 3-4 All things came into existence through him, ( that would be the Word identified in John 1:1) and apart from him (Also the Word identified in John 1:1) not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4  by means of him ( Also the Word identified in John 1:1 ) was life, and the life was the light of men.

So now I will stop at this point because iut is safe to say that no matter what anyone ever says... The Word was Separate from God the Father... and most important the Word had to be at the very minimum 4000 years plus from the date Jesus was born to Creation that we were told in the NWT the Word did...

We just do not know before creation where the Word was or what the Word was doing.

But 4000 years.... Of that we are certain.

 

[amazing grace]

its clear in numerous passages He preexisted since He existed before all created things and is the One who created all things. He even said He was together with the Father sharing His glory with Him before the world came into existence. John 17:5.

next fallacy

That's not what I asked so my questions remain unanswered.

There is no God the Son . . . Yep, I'm one of those people who doesn't believe Jesus preexisted.
What was he in his preexistent state? What was he doing?

 

[amazing grace]

YOU CALL YOU BIBLES????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/

There is not such word in the bible.

You pick and choose what you think makes sense.

The word bible is not in the bible so how can you say you call your bible the word of God.

YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT MEAN ----- Most Christians say their Bible is the word of God.

The word 'book' is in the bible - biblos - which is where we derive our English word Bible......so pretty close!

 

[amazing grace]

Let's you and me try to figure out some time before conception of when the Word could have been.

Now... The first thing you have to acknowledge is that John 1:14 is a true statement.

Even the JW NWT bible says...

John 1:14.... So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of divine favor and truth

Please note that while the NWT calls the Word a god... little g it also says the Word was an only begotten son from a father.

Does not acknowledge that the father being talked about was God.

Does not acknowledge he was the only begotten... it says an only begotten meaning there are the possibilities of more if they were to ever happen.

I have fairly discerned about myself I am truly not smart enough to understand the NWT. I admittedly only have an IQ of 135
so when I read this verse of John 1:14 that father could well be Joseph... could it not.... if not why not. As far as the Catholics declare Jesus was Marys only son so he could have been Jesus' father. The NWT say "A" father so how are we to know who that is?

I digress.....

Now... back to our problem.

We have this Word/word. We are told everywhere that the Word/word became flesh and either walked among us or resided among us depending on translation

Do you disagree that for the Word/word to become flesh that had to have happened prior to Mary being impregnated?
or her conception?

So I submit that the Word/word had to be at least 15 minutes old at minimum. (Don't ask how I figured that)

NOW.... now.... can we do better.

Let us look at John 1:1 NWT

In the beginning was the Word... ( kindly note that Word in the NWT has a capital W)

It goes on ...

And the Word was with God

And John 1:2-3 says : This one was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence

Now the NWT has pointed out that The Word was in the beginning.

WHAT BEGINNING. The beginning of creation and the world? The beginning of New Testament times? The begiinning of mankind... all of us learning about salvation? WHEN WAAS THE BEGINNING.

We can narrow this down

The NWT says...John 1: 3-4 All things came into existence through him, ( that would be the Word identified in John 1:1) and apart from him (Also the Word identified in John 1:1) not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4  by means of him ( Also the Word identified in John 1:1 ) was life, and the life was the light of men.

So now I will stop at this point because iut is safe to say that no matter what anyone ever says... The Word was Separate from God the Father... and most important the Word had to be at the very minimum 4000 years plus from the date Jesus was born to Creation that we were told in the NWT the Word did...

We just do not know before creation where the Word was or what the Word was doing.

But 4000 years.... Of that we are certain.

I only want two questions answered: What was he in his preexistent state? What was he doing?
It's your premise so you should be able to answer them plainly and simply.
BTW, I am not a Jehovah witness.

 

[FreeInChrist]

I only want two questions answered: What was he in his preexistent state? What was he doing?
It's your premise so you should be able to answer them plainly and simply.
BTW, I am not a Jehovah witness.

But The New World Translation can in no way be identified with a Trinitarian Bible and we have folks of all stripes reading these forums....

And a whole peck who clamor its a Trin bible.... So what option do I have?

I never say the Holy Book is the word of God, I declare it is the "inerrant word if God because the writings in the Holt Book are considered inspired, meaning they are believed to be "God-breathed" and convey God's message through human authors.

Now, with that being said I believe the following in answer to your 2 questions because the answers come from the Holy Scriptures as definitely being God-breathed.

I will refer you to the prologue of the Gospel of John (John 1:1–18), specifically the identity and activity of "the Word" (Greek: ὁ Λόγος / ho Logos) in his preexistent state~ i.e., before the Incarnation, before he "became flesh" (John 1:14).

I suggest you pull out your favorite translation and follow along. SO NOT make the error of believing you remember what is written. That is how mistakes happen and the wrong info imbeds in your brain.

What was the Word in his preexistent state?​

According to John 1:1–3:

He was God “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (ὁ Λόγος ἦν ὁ Θεός / ho Logos ēn ho Theos). The Greek construction emphatically identifies the Word as fully divine, sharing the same essence as God, while simultaneously being distinct in person (“was with God”). THERE you can see are TWO

He was eternal “In the beginning was the Word” ~ the verb “was” (ἦν) is imperfect tense, indicating continuous existence in the past with no beginning. The phrase deliberately echoes Genesis 1:1, placing the Word already in existence when time and creation began. I will repeat... "the verb, WAS, indicates continuous existence. The Word already was in existence when time and creation began.

He was distinct from, yet in perfect communion with, the Father“ The Word was with God” (πρὸς τὸν Θεόν / pros ton Theon) ~the preposition pros with the accusative implies intimate, face-to-face fellowship and relational distinction within the Godhead.

What was he doing in his preexistent state?​

The same passage tells us his eternal activity:

He was the agent of all creation “All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made” (John 1:3; cf. v. 10).... Everything that exists was created through the personal agency of the Word. This aligns with other New Testament texts:

Colossians 1:16–17: “By him all things were created… and in him all things hold together.”

Hebrews 1:2–3: God made the universe through the Son and he “upholds the universe by the word of his power.”

He was the source of life and light “In him was life, and the life was the light of men” (John 1:4). ~Eternally, the Word possesses life in himself (John 5:26) and is the origin of both physical and spiritual life/light for humanity. Even before the Incarnation, he was radiating the light of God’s glory into the darkness of the created order (though “the darkness has not overcome it”).

He was the eternal object of the Father’s love and delight Though not explicitly stated in John 1, the rest of the New Testament fills this in:

John 17:24: The Father loved the Son “before the foundation of the world.” THIS VERY VERSE SGOULD BE ALL YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE WORD/JESUS CAME BEFORE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE WORLD

Proverbs 8:22–31 (interpreted christologically in early Christianity): Wisdom (identified with the Logos) was daily the Father’s delight, rejoicing before him.

​

In a nutshell.....

In his preexistent state, the Word (the eternal Son, the second Person of the Trinity):

Was fully and eternally God,

Existed in perfect, face-to-face communion with the Father,

Was the personal agent through whom the Father created and sustains everything,

Was the possessor and source of life and light,

And was eternally loved and delighted in by the Father.

All of this is the backdrop to the staggering declaration in John 1:14:“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.”

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

 

[charismaticlady]

Scripture specifically states that it is the Angel of the LORD. It is the Angel of the LORD who is representing God and therefore is regarded as the one who sent him, i.e. God. By ignoring the Jewish Law of Agency - how an agent, the one sent, is regarded as the person who sent him - your understanding will remain in error.

Why would a mere angel say he was God? He'd have to be a fallen angel to lie.

 

[synergy]

Why would a mere angel say he was God? He'd have to be a fallen angel to lie.

Now you've done it. You introduced logic into the conversation that unitarians run away from.

 

[civic]

Why would a mere angel say he was God? He'd have to be a fallen angel to lie.

Amen

 

[amazing grace]

Why would a mere angel say he was God? He'd have to be a fallen angel to lie.

OMGosh . . . I can't explain it any clearer.

Refer to the Jewish Principal of Agency to understand what I am saying -----

That is the Jewish Law of Agency: (Heb. Shaliah): The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, “a person’s agent is regarded as the person himself” (Ned. 72B; Kidd, 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principal, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent.”

God sent his angel to represent him --- to speak on his behalf to Moses. The Angel acted as the agent of God and therefore could speak as God. There are a lot of these instances in the OT.

The LORD, aka YHWH aka the LORD is the principal.

the Angel of the LORD is SENT by the LORD, aka YHWH aka God as HIS agent.

The Agent, the angel of the LORD, acts on behalf of the principal.

A person's (the LORD's) agent, in this case, the Angel of the LORD, is regarded as the person (the LORD) himself.

The Angel acting as the agent sent by God could therefore speak AS God.

 

[synergy]

OMGosh . . . I can't explain it any clearer.

Refer to the Jewish Principal of Agency to understand what I am saying -----

The LORD, aka YHWH aka the LORD is the principal.

the Angel of the LORD is SENT by the LORD, aka YHWH aka God as HIS agent.

The Agent, the angel of the LORD, acts on behalf of the principal.

A person's (the LORD's) agent, in this case, the Angel of the LORD, is regarded as the person (the LORD) himself.

The Angel acting as the agent sent by God could therefore speak AS God.

Most of us are not Jews here. So your attempt to sell us on your "Jewish Law of Agency" will not go very far, sorry.