I recently had the privilege of listening to two excellent discussions. The first was on the concept of pre-existence in the writings of second temple period Hebrews, and the second was on the nature of pre-existence in the gospel of John (particularly in regards to the person of Christ). Rather than explain it all here, I'll let Dr. Dustin Smith (dustinmartyr.wordpress.com) tell you all about it.
Here is part 1: Pre-Existence in Ancient Jewish Thought Here is part 2: The Pre-Existence of Jesus in the Gospel of John
0 Comments
I had the pleasure of listening to a 4 hour debate/discussion yesterday on trinitarian vs. unitarian issues. Many perspectives given, and much discussion and disagreement was involved in examining the different viewpoints.
I did notice though that it seemed those in the trinitarian camp always wished to pinpoint the non-trinitarians to a particular denomination. Of course, some of the non-trinitarians were members of the Jehovah Witnesses or inactive Jehovah's Witnesses at least. Generally, when those two words are mentioned together (Jehovah and Witnesses) people stop in their tracks and put up their sword and spear. I on the other hand always enjoy talking with Jehovah's Witnesses. They are very Biblically astute and quite cordial for the most part (I have found). At any rate, why did the trinitarians almost demand that a non-trinitarian place himself under the umbrella of a particular denomination? I have found that people often ask me what denomination I belong to. When I explain to them that I do not belong to a denomination they almost always immediately reply, "Oh, you are non-denominational." It's as though the tital "non-denomination" has in effect turned into a denomination these days! I try my best to explain to them that I am just a follower of the Messiah, and I believe in the Sacred Scriptures. Sometimes people cannot get over the fact that you do not identify yourself with the Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, Pentecostal, etc. denominations of today. Where there any such things in Scripture? I don't think so. I only see those who profess to believe in the Scripture. I see those who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of the Son of God (Rev. 14). I see people called Saints, Christians, believers, etc. What I do not see is the label of a denomination, so I do not think it necessary to be involved in such in this day. Matthew Janzen Mark 13:32 states the following (NASB):
"But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only." This seems pretty straight forward to me. Not even the Son of the Father knows the day and hour of the coming that is predicted in Mark 13. One of the attributes of Deity is that Elohim is omniscient - all knowing. There is absolutely zero that Yahweh Elohim does not know. There are too many passages in the Bible that make this clear. Isaiah 46:9-10 (KJV) will suffice for now: "Remember the former things of old: for I am Elohim, and there is none else; I am Elohim, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure." I have shown Mark 13:32 to many Trinitarians as well as Oneness believers and generally they usually explain to me that the Son really does know the day and the hour, exactly the opposite of what the passage blatantly says. The response goes something like this: "Well, Matthew, he was talking about his human nature not knowing, but his divine nature really did know." What this amounts to is someone saying, "I realize he said he did not know, but I believe that he really did know." Is this what Yeshua was trying to get across to his listeners when uttering these words? Was he trying to tell them that although he said he did not know he could at any point switch over to his divine nature and know all of a sudden? Do you honestly believe that is really what he meant? Is is much easier to allow the passage to speak to us from its context. The Son of the Father doesn't know, right in line with the angels and me and you. This is what the Bible says, and there is nothing in the context of the passage that would lead us to believe otherwise. I'd much rather stay with what is actually said, rather than the exact opposite of what is said. Matthew Janzen Tonight is the first session of a two night debate I'll be having. Whenever I engage in a debate it is very difficult to study about anything else except the subject matter of debate. In this case I've been entrenched in Christology for the past couple of months. I must say that I have again come to know my Almighty and His Son in a more intimate way.
One Scripture I've really been meditating on lately is John 17:3. In this chapter Yeshua prays what many theologians call the high priestly prayer; the prayer just before His betrayal and death. In this verse He speaks of eternal life, and states that eternal life is in knowing Him and His Father. What is astounding though is that He identifies His Father as the only true God and distinguishes Himself from that position in the very same verse. "And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true [Elohim], and Yeshua [the] Christ whom you have sent." [ESV] Notice here again that Yeshua is praying to His Father (vs. 1) and has already identified Himself as theSon of the Father (vs. 1), proving He is not the Father. He has also stated that it was the Father that gave him authority over all flesh so that He could give eternal life to those the Father gave Him (vs. 2). This proves that Yeshua is not the Almighty for He had to be given this authority. It is at this point that He expresses the knowledge people must have in order to have eternal life. To know His Father as the only true Mighty One, and to know Him (Yeshua) as being the one who was sent. The common Trinitarian (or Deity of Christ) position is that the verse speaks of having a joint knowledge of the Father and the Son in order to have eternal life. Therefore, in their minds, if Yeshua is not God why would we have to believe in Him to have eternal life? This must mean that He somehow must be God, yet at the same time distinct from the Father He is in prayer to. This point misses the argument I am making as well as dismisses the authority of Yahweh. First, there is no disagreement from me that it takes a joint knowledge of the Father and Son to have eternal life, but that's not the point of identification I'm making. Our joint knowledge is in knowing (1) the only true Mighty One, and (2) the one sent by the only true Mighty One. In this verse it is obviously the Father that is the only true Mighty One, and Yeshua is the one commissioned by Him. Yeshua does not even identify Himself as the only true Mighty One. Second, Yahweh has the authority to save His elect people by means that He chooses. If Yeshua is not the Almighty (which I am proposing) and Yahweh still chooses to save His people by His only begotten Son, commanding people to believe in the Son for eternal life that is not a problem. We must do what the Father tells us to do. If the Father begets a special Son, and commands us to believe in Him for eternal life, the He is the Father's means of salvation and we must not argue about such. Belief in the Son does not prove the Son is Yahweh Almighty, it only proves that Son is an important vehicle in the Father's ultimate salvation of His people. When the dust settles, the passage is still emphatic that Yeshua called His Father the only true Mighty One, and distinguished Himself from that position in the very same verse. Why not believe what Yeshua believed? Matthew Janzen |
AuthorBlog by Matthew Janzen. Lover of Yahweh, Yeshua, my wife and 5 children. All else is commentary. Archives
December 2023
Categories
All
|