Concerning the soul

Here is my answer to a query concerning Matthew 10:28 & the Soul; from a discussion forum in 2004.

Quote:

Matthew 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. Can you kill the soul of God? If God became man and the body died, how then is God dead if His soul remains?

Classic GNOSTIC DUALISM!! Plato and Justin Martyr would be proud. To begin with, your question ... Can you kill the soul of God? If God became man and the body died, how then is God dead if His soul remains? GOD did not become a man so this is a non-starter anyway! Also when one dies, both BODY & SOUL dies. BODY & SOUL is MORTAL! SOULS DO NOT REMAIN! Jesus was no Platonist. None of the GOD-fearing Jews were. The Bible teaches that ‘man’ is ”a psychosomatic unit.” The Bible does NOT teach that man is made up of a mortal body and an immortal soul. This is Platonism. And the platonic church fathers and Hellenistic (Greek-thinking) theologians of the early centuries read these philosophies INTO the scriptures and propagated it in their pseudo-Christian doctrines/leaven. Here are a few quotes to make my point … the emphasis is mine in each case. :-

Bernard W. Anderson, Emeritus Professor of Old Testament at Princeton University Seminary wrote:

“Human nature is not a dichotomy - a body of mortal flesh and a deathless soul, as in some philosophies, but rather a unity of body and spirit, an animated body…This view is expressed classically in Genesis 2, according to which the Lord God infused ‘spirit’ (life force) into a lump of clay and ‘it became a living being.’ The Hebrew word should not be translated ‘soul,’ if that means an immortal essence, but rather ’person’ or ‘self.’ The self is a unity of body and spirit, a psychosomatic unity…In this view, death must be taken seriously…Death is a total event - there is no part of human nature, such as an immortal soul, that is untouched.”

The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, ed. Raymond Brown, Joseph Fitzmeyer and Roland Murphy, p. 1295 wrote:

“In spite of the use of such words as flesh, spirit, and soul, the OT conceived of the human being as a unity and not as a composite of different principles. H. Wheeler Robinson observed in a classic remark that the Greeks thought of an incarnate spirit and the Israelites thought of an animated body…The Hebrew nephesh has usually been mistranslated ‘soul’ - introducing an idea that is foreign to the OT. When Yahweh breathes the spirit, the human being becomes a living nephesh (2:7). ‘Person’ or ‘self’ may be the basic, if not the primitive meaning of the word. The blood is sometimes said to be the seat of the nephesh; in such instances nephesh is not the self or the person, but rather life, which is poured out with the blood…In none of these instances is there anything resembling the ‘soul’ of Greek and modern [pseudo-Christian] thought. This difference has important corollaries in the biblical idea of survival after death.”

Jacques Ellul wrote:

“A familiar example of the mutation to which revelation was subjected is its contamination by the Greek idea of the immortality of the soul. I will briefly recall it. In Jewish thought death is total. There is no immortal soul, no division of body and soul. Paul’s thinking is Jewish in this regard. The soul belongs to the “psychical” realm and is part of the flesh. The body is the whole being. In death, there is no separation of body and soul. The soul is as mortal as the body. But there is a resurrection. Out of the nothingness that human life becomes, God creates anew the being that was dead. This is a creation by grace; there is no immortal soul intrinsic to us. Greek philosophy, however, introduces among theologians the idea of the immortal soul. The belief was widespread in popular religion and it was integrated into Christianity. But it is a total perversion. ... This idea completely contaminates biblical thinking, gradually replaces the affirmation of the resurrection, and transforms the kingdom of the dead into the kingdom of God.”

Paul Althaus wrote:

“The hope of the early church centered on the resurrection of the Last Day. It is this which first calls the dead into eternal life (1 Cor. 15; Phil. 3:21). This resurrection happens to the man and not only to the body. Paul speaks of the resurrection not “of the body” but “of the dead.” This understanding of the resurrection implicitly understands death as also affecting the whole man . . . Thus [in traditional Christian teaching] the original biblical concepts have been replaced by ideas from Hellenistic Gnostic dualism. The New Testament idea of the resurrection which affects the whole man has had to give way to the immortality of the soul. The Last Day also loses its significance, for souls have received all that is decisively important long before this. Eschatological tension is no longer strongly directed to the day of Jesus’ Coming. The difference between this and the Hope of the New Testament is very great.”

M.J. Heinecken wrote:

“Strange as this sounds in some ears, the Bible knows nothing of the immortality of the soul separable from the body. It knows only of a resurrection of the total man from the dead. Man in the Bible is a psychosomatic unity, and as such he passes through death to the resurrection and the judgment to the fulfillment, from faith through death and resurrection to sight. This makes all speculations about a place of the departed spirits absolutely futile.”

And the list goes on … as more and more investigate the scriptural teaching of ‘body and soul’.
Sadly, it was through this platonic doctrine of ‘the immortal soul’ that the very doctrine of ‘the pre-existent person known as the Logos’ actually found it roots! And of course, Platonists such as Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria and Origen used the book of John (esp. Chapter 1) to propagate this Hellenistic philosophy, which has you see, is still with us in modern times.
Back to the Hebrew Scriptures and away with Greek philosophy.
Has for the killing of souls ... well souls DO DIE ... you can indeed kill a soul!

Context! Context! It’s all about Context!
The word ‘soul’ in the Scriptures (nephesh in the Hebrew Bible {Strong’s 5315}, psuche in the NT {Strong’s 5590}) is used predominantly to denote three things …

1) An actual creature (man or animal), esp. a living creature. Synonym for person.

2) The very life(-force) of a creature ... One’s life

3) As a synonym for YOU, YOURSELF … One’s Self
Hence, instead of saying I am in despair ... one would say ‘my soul is in despair’; instead of saying ‘I am very happy ... one would say ‘my soul is very happy’.
(Compare Psa 42:11 Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted within me? i.e. David was [cast] down, he was disquieted.
OR Mat 26:38 My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: i.e. Jesus of Nazareth was in turmoil, he was exceeding sorrowful)

Context determines how nephesh/psuche is used.

For examples of No. 1 we have ...

• Souls = human beings and animals, especially in the sense of them being alive
• (Gen 1:21,24) And God created great whales, and every living creature/nephesh that moveth 24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature/nephesh after his kind …
• (Gen 2:7) And YAHWEH God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul/nephesh.
• (Gen 2:19) … and whatsoever Adam called every living creature/nephesh, that was the name thereof.
• (Gen 9:9-10, 12, 16) And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; 10 And with every living creature/nephesh that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth. 12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature/nephesh that is with you, for perpetual generations: 16 And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature/nephesh of all flesh that is upon the earth.
• ‘SOUL=PERSON’ (7 persons/souls Gen 46:25; 70 souls/persons Exo 1:5; 3000 persons/souls Acts 2:41; etc) It wasn’t 3000 non-corporeals that were baptized. NO! It was 3000 persons i.e. 3000 souls! See also Acts 27:37, Gen 12:5, etc
• Souls live! Souls die! [Ezek 18:4,20 ] Souls are slain/killed. [Ezek 13:19, Num 31:19, 35:30, etc] Souls are ‘cut off’ [Exo 31:14, Lev 22:3, Num 19:20, etc] The scriptures speak of DEAD SOULS/nephesh! The KJV translators obscured this fact! However, the fact remains that the Scriptures speak of SOULS dying and speaks of SOULS BEING DEAD and speaks of SOULS being corporeal! Right now, THE DEAD PERSONS/SOULS ARE DEAD & SLEEP IN THE DUST OF THE EARTH!
• (Ezek 18:4,20) … the soul/nephesh that sinneth, it shall die.
• (Lev 19:28 ) Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead/nephesh...
• (Lev 21:1) ... There shall none be defiled for the dead/nephesh among his people:
• (Lev 21:11) Neither shall he go in to any dead body/nephesh ...
• (Lev 22:4) ... And whoso toucheth any thing that is unclean by the dead/nephesh ...
• (Num 5:2) ... and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead/nephesh
• (Num 6:6) All the days that he separateth himself unto YAHWEH he shall come at no dead body/nephesh
• (Num 19:11) He that toucheth the dead body/nephesh of any man ...
• (Num 19:13) Whosoever toucheth the dead body/nephesh of any man that is dead ...
• (Num 19:16) And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body/nephesh ...
• (Num 31:19) ... whosoever hath killed any person/nephesh, and whosoever hath touched any slain ...
• (Num 35:30) Whoso killeth any person/nephesh ...
• (Josh 20:9) ... whosoever killeth any person/nephesh at unawares ...

Et Cetera

For examples of No. 2 we have ...

• Matthew 16:26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Greek ”psuche” - life) or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? (Greek ”psuche” - life).
• (John 13:37) Peter said unto him, Lord, why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life/psuche for thy sake.
• (Acts 20:24) But none of these things move me, neither count I my life/psuche dear unto myself …

Et Cetera

For examples of No. 3 we have ...

• Numbers 23:10 … Let me die ( original, “let my soul” ) the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his!
• Esther 4:13 Then Mordecai commanded to answer Esther, Think not with thyself ( original, “soul” ) …
• Luke 12:19 And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou has much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, [and] be merry. (He is talking to himself).

Et Cetera

So, it is not so much that you have ‘a soul’ it is rather ... ‘you are a soul’ ... to save a soul is to save someone ... a dead soul is a dead person ... The Hebrew Scriptures indeed speak of SOULS/NEPHESH being touched and being dead! The same word ‘nephesh’ is synonymous with ‘self’ and ‘your life’. Therefore again, yet another proof that the Scriptures teach that ‘THE SOUL’ is MORTAL!

When ONE DIES! = They die = SOUL DIES! When ONE DIES! = HIMSELF/HERSELF DIES = SELF DIES = SOUL DIES. When ONE DIES! = Their life ends = Their SOUL ends. When ONE DIES! = Their life ceases = Their SOUL ceases.

The scriptures do NOT teach that we are dichotomous or trichotomous. The scriptures teach that we are a ‘psychosomatic whole’. The whole man/soul dies ... the whole man/soul shall rise again at the last day! The Scriptures clearly teach that the Nephesh/Soul is MORTAL!

However, as you see commonly in the Hebrew Bible; for emphasis, terms such as body, soul, spirit, bone, marrow, etc are used poetically and metaphorically to denote ‘the whole being, the whole PERSON’.

Hence, to love GOD with your all the scriptures would exhort us to love GOD with

• with all thine heart,
• and with all thy soul,
• and with all thy mind,
• and with all thy strength

.... Deut 6:5, Matt 22:37, Mark 12:30, Luke 10:27. These verses are not giving us a biology lesson! They are not splitting up man into composite parts! NO! It is telling us to love GOD with everything. Hebrews 4:11 isn’t a biology lesson. NO! It is poetically and metaphorically saying that the word of GOD can get to the very intent of man’s heart … that there is nothing in man that cannot be touched or affected by GOD’s word. 1 Thess 5:23 interprets itself. Paul is praying that GOD would sanctify the saints TOTALLY & WHOLLY...their entire being. He emphasizes this by using the terms, whole spirit, soul & body;

Neither David nor Jesus was saying that some ethereal, immortal part of them was cast down, disquieted or exceedingly sorrowful in Psalms 42:11 and Matthew 26:38. No! David was saying that he was cast down and disquieted. Jesus was saying that he was exceedingly sorrowful.

Context! Context! It’s all about Context!

Hence Matthew 10:28. Jesus was no Platonist. He was no Gnostic. He most definitely did not adhere to the platonic doctrine of a part of man that lives on after the body dies. That doctrine is pagan and not scriptural. So Matthew 10:28 is poetically and metaphorically saying ... “Don’t fear them that are able to kill you but are not able to kill you totally so that you could never be resurrected; rather fear HIM who is able to DESTROY and ANNIHILATE YOU TOTALLY (hence the expression ‘body and soul’) in Gehenna ... the lake of fire”

Souls are dying daily ... Souls are being killed daily. That is, men, women and children are dying daily. However, there will be a future resurrection of the just and the unjust. ALL shall be raised. Some to life in the age to come and immortality. Some to contempt, judgment and shame in that age. [Dan 12:2] Some will forever be with the Lord, while others will be destroyed in the lake of fire.

Jesus was saying nothing different than what the prophets of old had already said. They weren’t Platonists and neither was Jesus. Jesus was warning us to fear GOD and not man. To fear GOD His Father who is able to destroy & annihilate us totally with no hope of ever coming back.

In conclusion, I will quote from the

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged Version, p. 1349 wrote:

Matt. 10:28 presents God as the one who can cast both body and psyche (soul, life) into Gehenna. The saying posits the unity of the two and negates the idea of the soul’s immortality…God alone controls the psyche, and for those who have true life with him he prepares a new body, just as he destroys both the body and psyche of those who do not have true life with him.

Concerning Isaiah 9:6

Here is my answer to a query concerning Isaiah 9:6; from a discussion forum in 2004.

 

Quote:

The term mighty God has been given to both Jesus and the Father: 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. Isaiah 9:6 And compared to: The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God. Isaiah 10:21 Both are called mighty God …

My Response:

There is always the possibility that Isaiah 9:6 is simply a name being given to a child
(similar to Mahershalalhashbaz, Isaiah 8:3,
or Immanuel, Isaiah 7:14, 8:8 ).
This is suggested by the Jewish Publication Society’s Masoretic Text rendering of Isaiah 9:6:
“And his name is called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom.”
Incidentally, many ancient rabbis had understood Isaiah 9:6-7 to be speaking of King Hezekiah as well as the Messiah e.g.

Quote:

“Hezekiah, who was very unlike his father Ahaz. This passage is acknowledged, not only by Christians, but by the Chaldee interpreter, to relate in the same manner, but in a more excellent sense, to the Messiah.” —Annotationes ad vetus et Novum Testamentum, by Hugo Grotius, 1583-1645.

The Jewish Publication Society’s Masoretic Text, as cited above, says this …

Quote:

There are good reasons to apply the name to Hezekiah, since this is one of those outstanding texts of Isaiah that speak in exalted and royal terms both of Israel’s kings and the coming human Messiah. The hope of Israel was resting on the permanence of David’s dynasty. The symbolic name given to the royal child signified more than a continuation of the dynasty. It meant a decisive intervention by God whose own greatness would become manifest in his dealings with and blessings upon Hezekiah. This is suggested by the Jewish Publication Society’s Masoretic Text rendering of Isaiah 9:5: “And his name is called Pele-joez-el-gibbor-Abi-ad-sar-shalom”.

Either way, whether Jews saw this verse, as Messianic or not, they all interpreted this verse as speaking of an Israelite king – they never interpreted Isaiah 9:6 as speaking of deity!!
They had NO CONCEPT of ALMIGHTY GOD being born! IT NEVER EVER ENTERED THEIR MINDS!


Nevertheless, let us individually look at the terms mighty god & everlasting father.


The term ‘mighty God’ in Hebrew is ‘el gibbor’, which in fact, is never used of the Father! The Brown, Driver and Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, p.42 (hereafter cited as BDB), the best lexicon around, informs us that ‘el gibbor’ in Isaiah 9:6 means “divine hero (as reflecting the divine majesty)”.
In fact, the Hebrew bible speaks of more than one ‘el gibbor’.

The plural ‘elei gibborim’ can be found in Ezek 32:21, the BDB informing us that thereby it means
“mighty heroes”. It is translated in the KJV as “The strong among the mighty”. It is therefore talking about
the strongest mighty men and definitely not deities!
(NJB translates it as “the mightiest heroes”. The RSV/NRS translates it as “the mighty chiefs”.)

How much more the Messiah, who is the most mightiest man/hero in the universe, the most ultimate representative of GOD Himself, who so perfectly reflects the divine majesty of GOD. How rightly he is the ultimate ‘el gibbor’, the strongest, mightiest one of them all, next to GOD the Father.

In the Hebrew bible, men that are human beings, are not only sometimes called elohim [e.g. Exo 7:1, 21:6, 22:8-9,28; Psa 82:6] but they are also sometimes called el(ei) or el(im) as shown above.
(For example, Ezek 32:11, Nebuchadnezzar, the el {mighty one} of the heathen).
In each of these cases, these men have not been deified neither have they somehow become ‘god-men’!!

When men are called elohim (Strong’s 430) it is as representatives of GOD ... they represent Almighty GOD.
The same goes for the Messiah. [Psa 45:6 cp. Heb 1:8].

When men are called el (Strong’s 410, 352 and 193) it is used to denote that they are MIGHTY, STRONG men.
[e.g. Exo 15:15, Job 41:25, Ezek 17:13, 31:17, etc]

How much more the ‘warrior-king’ whose return we are awaiting, the King Messiah.
He won’t be ‘No Gentle Jesus, Meek & Mild’ at his return. Oh no! He will be the ‘mighty one of GOD’ who will execute the wrath and judgment of GOD; [Isa 61:2, 2 Thess 1:7-8, Rev 6:16-17, 19:15] whose enemies will be made his footstool! [Psalms 110:1, Heb 10:13]


Now concerning Isaiah 10:21 ... the fact is the definite article ‘the’ is NOT in the Hebrew text of this verse.

The text actually reads “… the remnant of Jacob, unto [a] mighty god” i.e. ‘el gibbor’, the ‘el gibbor’ of
Isaiah 9:6, the Messiah. The text is talking about Israel acknowledging the Messiah after the Messiah destroys The Assyrian. Look at the context of Isaiah 10, noting the fact that Isaiah called the Messiah, el gibbor in Chapter 9; in the very next chapter he uses the title again; there is no need to believe he is not referring again to the Messiah. See the context :- Isaiah 10:5-11:4:

• {10:5} “Woe to the Assyrian…[the instrument for the punishment of Israel, to bring her back to God and the Messiah]. {v. 12} When the Lord has completed all his work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, He will say: ‘I will punish the fruit of the arrogant heart of the King of Assyria…’ {v. 16} The Lord will send a wasting disease among his stout warriors. And under Assyria’s glory a fire will be kindled like a burning flame. And the light of Israel will become a fire and His Holy One a flame and it will burn and devour Assyria’s thorns and his briars in a single day…
  
• {v. 20} Now it will come about in that day that the remnant of Israel and those of the house of Jacob who have escaped will never again rely on the one who struck them, but will truly rely on YAHWEH, the Holy One of Israel.
  
• {v. 21} A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob to a Mighty God
  [Divine Warrior, the Messiah – note: there is no ‘definite article’].
  
• {v. 22} For though your people Israel may be like the sand of the sea, only a remnant within them will return. A destruction is determined overflowing with righteousness. For a complete destruction, one that is decreed, ADONAI YAHWEH of Hosts will execute in the midst of the whole land. Therefore, thus says ADONAI YAHWEH of Hosts, ‘O my people who dwell in Zion, do not fear the Assyrian, who strikes you with a rod and lifts up his staff…{v. 25} For in a very little while My indignation against you will be spent and My anger will be directed to the destruction of Assyria… {v. 33} Behold, Adon YAHWEH of hosts will lop off the boughs with a terrible crash…
  
• {Isaiah 11:1} Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit. And the spirit of YAHWEH will rest upon him: the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and strength, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of YAHWEH…
  
• {11:4} With righteousness he will judge the poor and decide with fairness for the afflicted of the earth. And he will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth and with the breath of his lips he will destroy the wicked one.”
  
• How does Paul deal with this information?
  He gives inspired commentary on it. In Romans 9:27, 28 he quotes Isaiah 10:22, 23, repeating the prophet’s vision of the future when the Messiah returns. In 2 Thessalonians 2:8 he warns of the coming of the Wicked one and describes the destruction of the Wicked one by Jesus, using the words found in Isaiah 11:4 (above).
  
• Paul, in other words, expects the Wicked one to be the Assyrian of the end-time and he sees the fulfillment of Isaiah 11:4 at the coming of Jesus. Jesus will eliminate the Assyrian “with the breath of his lips.” All this is part and parcel of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God, the Kingdom to which the Gospel invites us and the Kingdom, which will assert divine government across the globe.
  

Hence the ‘el gibbor – mighty god’ spoken of in Isaiah 10:21 is indeed the Messiah.
In conclusion then, since ELOHIM  is used in regards to men and judges; and since EL is used in regards to ‘power’ (e.g. Gen 31:29, Micah 2:1, etc), idols (Isaiah 44:10,15,17, etc) and mighty men including heathen kings such as Nebuchadnezzar (e.g. Ezek 31:11);
EL (and ELOHIM) being used in a title for the Messiah is no proof of the so-called deity of the Messiah.

Quote:

… but furthermore Jesus is also called the Everlasting Father as in God the Father, do you see the connection here my friend?

My Response:

You are kidding, right? Am I misunderstanding you? Are you saying that Jesus IS the Father!!!
I assumed you were a trinitarian not a modalist neither ‘Oneness’ in your theology!!! Guess I got that wrong as well. Beside the very obvious fact that Jesus is clearly called the ‘Son of the Father’
[2 John 3] in the Scriptures; maybe I am misunderstanding you.

Let us look at the Hebrew phrase translated as ‘everlasting father’
i.e. abi-ad (Strong’s 1 & 5703)

Practically every name that begins with ‘ab(i)-’ (Strong’s 1) is translated ‘father of’. e.g.

1. Abraham – father of a multitude
   
2. Abimelech – father of the king
   
3. Abidah – father of knowledge
   
4. Abiasaph – father of gathering
   
5. Abidan – father of judgment
   
6. Abihail – father of might
   
7. Abinoam – father of pleasantness
   
8. Abner – father of light
   
9. Abiathar – father of abundance
   
10. Absalom – father of peace
    
11. Abinadab – father of generosity
    
12. Abishai – father of a gift
    
13. Abishua – father of plenty
    

ET CETERA

‘Abi-ad’ can therefore be translated ‘father of the age’ hence
the Messiah will be ‘the father of the age to come’; as translated in :-

• “Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty One, Potentate,
  Prince of Peace, Father of the age to come.”—The Septuagint as found in the Codex Alexandrinus, translated by Sir Lancelot C.L. Brenton, c. 1850. (Also translated in this manner by Archimandrite Ephrem Lash)
  

See also

• “Wonder-Counsellor, Divine Champion, Father Ever, Captain of Peace.”—Byington
  
• “A wonder of a counsellor, a divine hero, a father for all time, a peaceful prince.”—Moffatt
  
• Interestingly, the Catholic Douay-Rheims Version of the Bible calls Messiah
  “the Father of the world to come.”
  

Of course being called ‘father’ doesn’t make Christ ‘deity’ anymore than Abraham or Eliakim or Joseph being ‘deity’ even though they are called ‘our father’ or ‘a father to the inhabitants of Israel’ or ‘a father to Pharaoh’ respectively [John 8:53, Rom 4:12, Isa 22:20-21, Gen 45:8].

In the age to come, the Messiah will be the ‘father’ of that age in fulfillment of Isa 9:6 (also compare Isa 22:20-22 with Rev 3:7). Jesus will demonstrate that he is the “Father of the Coming Age” because he will “raise the dead and gives them life” in the age to come. Clearly, Jesus will be an ‘eternal’ “Father of the world to come,” the “Father of the age to come,” since both he and the children given to him by God will live forever.

 

PS See also the blog articles:

• Isaiah 9:6: What is Meant by the Messiah being “God” and “Father”?

• Isaiah 9:6: A New and Accurate Translation of Messiah's "Names" or Attributes

• and http://www.focusonthekingdom.org/65.htm#1 concerning the Assyrian & Isaiah chs. 10-11

 

Concerning Micah 5:2

Here is my answer to a query concerning Micah 5:2; from a discussion forum in 2004.

 

Quote:

Also in the book of Micah it says: But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. This is further proof that He {Jesus} has no beginning, therefore making Him the Eternal God and Saviour my friend.

Jesus most definitely does have a beginning. Matthew speaks of the ‘genesis’ of Jesus Christ. [Matt 1:1]. Neither Matthew nor Luke in their narration about how Christ came into existence, has any concept of literal pre-existence.
Now let us look at the phrase ‘from everlasting’.
The Hebrew is OWLAM (Strong’s 5769). Now note how it is translated in the following verses:
(In each case the word(s) translated from OWLAM are CAPITALIZED)

• mighty men which were OF OLD: Gen. 6:4;
  
• for those nations were OF OLD: 1 Sam. 27:8;
  
• the ANCIENT people: Isa 44:7;
  
• in the generations OF OLD: Isa 51:9;
  
• Lo, I will bring a nation upon you from far ... it is an ANCIENT nation: Jer 5:15;
  
• the prophets ... OF OLD: Jer 28:8;
  
• the people OF OLD TIME: Ezek 26:20;
  
• tabernacle of David ... as in the days OF OLD: Amos 9:11;
  
• days OF OLD: Micah 7:14, Mal. 3:4
  

Although OWLAM in the right context can be used to denote ‘eternity’, it is clear to see that OWLAM in the above cases cannot mean eternal/eternity i.e. eternal mighty men, eternal nations, eternal prophets, eternal people, etc.
And this goes also for Micah 5:2 which is a verse simply speaking about the coming (that is, his first coming) and birthplace of the Messiah (as used in Matt 2:5-6, John 7:42). It is simply saying that the Coming of the Messiah had been depicted and spoken of from days of old, from of old time, even from the time of Abraham, who rejoiced to see his day. [John 8:56]
The KJV English translators being biased by their trinitarian theology used the words ‘from everlasting’.
Therefore, using the same Hebrew word, Micah 5:2 could so easily be
translated: ”… yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from old time.”

Compare :-

• Revised Standard Version (hereafter cited as RSV) Micah 5:2
  But you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are little to be among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.
  (Likewise the New Revised Standard Version has the same rendition; hereafter cited as NRS)
  
• Young’s Literal Translation Micah 5:2
  And thou, Beth-Lehem Ephratah, Little to be among the chiefs of Judah! From thee to Me he cometh forth—to be ruler in Israel,
  And his comings forth {are} of old, From the days of antiquity.
  
• New American Bible Micah 5:1
  But you, Bethlehem-Ephrathah too small to be among the clans of Judah, From you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel;
  Whose origin is from of old, from ancient times.
  
• New Jerusalem Bible (hereafter cited as NJB) Micah 5:1
  But you (Bethlehem) Ephrathah, the least of the clans of Judah, from you will come for me a future ruler of Israel whose origins go back to the distant past, to the days of old.
  

That is all this verse is saying. It is Messianic. It is the verse that the Jews in Herod’s time turned to, knowing full well that this verse was speaking about the ‘Coming and Birth of the Messiah’. The coming and origin of the Messiah was prophesied from old or ancient times, even as ancient as Adam & Eve [Gen 3:15], Abraham [Gen 22:18, Gal 3:16], Judah [Gen 49:8-10], David [2 Sam 7:12-14, 1 Chr 17:11-13, Psalms 132:11, Isaiah 11:1,10, Jere 23:5, 33:15], Daniel [9:25-26], etc. The Jews were expecting a Davidide Israelite king whose origin had been spoken of from ancient times, to be born in Bethlehem.
This is what Micah 5:2 is all about.

Does the Bible ever refer to Jesus Christ as "God"?

Taken from: http://www.biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=130

(Please note: my citing of this article does not mean I agree with everything on www.biblicalunitarian.com esp. in regards to their non-christological teachings)

Considering the fact that the majority of Christians have been taught that Jesus is God, that is a very good question. "And the answer is…"—Yes, and No. Huh?

The answer is Yes only because most versions of the Bible wrongly capitalize the word "God" in Hebrews 1:8 and elsewhere. In a sense, the answer is also Yes because Jesus is called "god" in the Bible. The answer is No because Jesus is never called "God" in the same way as is the Father, who Jesus himself referred to as "the only true God" (John 17:3). There is only one "capital-G" God, and that is the Father (1 Cor. 8:6). And, as we will see, Jesus is far and away the best of all the "small-g" gods.

Jesus is called "god" in the Bible? Yes, and so are Satan, Moses, the spiritual leaders of Israel, and pagan deities. A study of the word "god" in Scripture will show that there are quite a number of different ways that word is used, and that whether or not it is capitalized makes a big difference in its meaning.

...

In John 10, the Jews were bugging Jesus to tell them once and for all if he was the Messiah, and he replied by saying (v. 25ff) that it should have been obvious to them by the miracles he did. He then drew a parallel between him and his Father (vv. 28,29), saying that no one could snatch a chosen one from either of their hands. His next statement has been too often wrenched from its context and grossly misinterpreted: "I and my Father are one." How so? Clearly, in the sense that he just stated.

The Jews, very dissatisfied with Jesus’ answer, picked up stones to kill him, whereupon Jesus asked them which miracle they didn’t like. "It’s not the miracles—we loved the free fish sandwiches at the picnic," they said, "it’s that you, a man, claim to be a god." That is the proper translation of the verse, but nearly all Bible versions mistranslate it as "…claim to be God," and, without a shred of textual justification, the very Trinitarian NIV goes so far as to toss in the adjective "mere" before the word "man." Both of those translational foibles serve only to confuse people about this classic and critical section of Scripture. No Jew in his right mind would have said that Jesus was claiming to be God (Yahweh). Had they thought that, they would have dismissed him as demented. They all knew that the Messiah was to be a man, but they had it in for Jesus and refused to believe that he was that man.

Had Jesus been "God" in the sense that most Christians today think he is, this was his golden opportunity to make that clear: "You’re right—I am God." Instead, quoting from Psalm 82, he said, "Hold it, doesn’t the Old Testament call the judges of Israel ‘gods’? Well then, what’s so bad about me saying I’m the Son of God?" By the way, if words have definitive meanings, one cannot be both the Son of God and God. ...

Look at Psalm 82—it’s only eight verses, and is talking about God’s evaluation of those He had called to lead Israel. In verse one we see the cultural Hebrew usage of the word "god" as referring to one whom God chose as His representative. In verses 2-7 God laments how badly those "gods" were doing in caring for His people, and the psalm closes in verse 8 with a plea for the Messiah to come and rule the earth righteously. Unfortunately, the word "god" is wrongly capitalized in verse 8.

Let’s look at a couple of other places in the Old Testament where the Messiah is referred to as "god." The first is Isaiah 9:6 ... Too bad the word "god" is once again wrongly capitalized. The Messiah would not be the mighty "God," he would be the mighty "god." The Moffatt Bible and Martin Luther’s translation read "mighty hero" rather than "mighty God." That is a very accurate rendering, because, as the ultimate representative of God, the Messiah would be the hero of all heroes. And Jesus was exactly that! He perfectly represented God’s heart to mankind. He is the "god" called for in Psalm 82:8.

How about Psalm 45, another prophecy about the Messiah—this one about him riding forth victoriously to conquer and then rule the earth as God’s perfect representative. Verses 6 and 7 are quoted in Hebrews 1:8 and 9, which is where we will go next. Sad to say that in verse 6 the word "god" is once again mis-capitalized as "God." No, like Psalm 82 and Isaiah 9:6, this psalm is also speaking of the Man among men, the one whom God would empower to restore His lost Paradise.

OK, let’s look at Hebrews 1, and the context of the quote from Psalm 45. For the record, Hebrews 1 and 2 are a trenchant account of Jesus Christ’s journey from suffering to glory, emphasizing why he had to be a man (the Last Adam) in order to be the Redeemer of mankind.

Hebrews 1:1-3 shows how God did His best in Old Testament times to communicate to mankind via the spoken and written words of the prophets, but what He really had in mind was Jesus, His ultimate image. Verse 4 then begins a most significant analogy between Jesus and the angels that goes all the way through Chapter 2.

Verses 5, 6, and 7, each quoting an Old Testament reference, are speaking about the resurrection of Jesus Christ (v. 5—it’s not about his birth—look at Ps. 2:7 & Acts 13:33) and his return to the earth to rule (v. 6). Verse 8 clarifies that Psalm 45:6 and 7 are a Messianic prophecy, but the translators once again mis-capitalize "god" as "God." But look at verse 9! It says, "… therefore God, even your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy." Say, if one is God, how can anyone else be his "God"? That should be a more frequently asked question! In agreement with many other verses of Scripture, Hebrews 1:9 is clearly saying that because Jesus Christ suffered and died, God raised him from the dead and highly exalted (anointed) him as Lord.

Another pertinent verse is John 20:28, where Thomas cried out upon first seeing the resurrected Christ: "My Lord and my God." Many people use that verse to prove that Jesus is God, but it does not, for two reasons. The first is that the Bible is not stating that Jesus is God, the Bible is stating that Thomas called Jesus "God." And the second reason is that "God" should be "god." As a Jew, Thomas was familiar with that usage of the word "god."

So, the Bible does refer to Jesus as "god," but only in the sense of his being the perfect representative of the only true God, his Father and his God. Neither God nor Jesus ever said that he is God. Both call him the Son of God. Amen.

Is Jesus Really God?

Without a doubt, you have often heard the claim that Jesus is God, the second person in the "Holy Trinity". However, the very Bible which is used as a basis for knowledge about Jesus and as the basis for doctrine within "orthodox" Christianity clearly belies this claim. We urge you to consult your own Bible and verify that the following conclusions are not drawn out of context:

1. God is All Knowing ... but Jesus was not.

When speaking of the Day of Judgment, Jesus clearly gave evidence of a limitation on his knowledge when he said, "but of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in Heaven, neither the son, but the Father." (Mark 13:32 and Matt 24:36) But God knows all. His knowledge is without any limitations. That Jesus, of his own admission, did not know when the Day of Judgment would be, is clear proof that Jesus is not all-knowing, and that Jesus is therefore not God.

2. God is All-Powerful ... but Jesus was not.

While Jesus performed many miracles, he himself admitted that the power he had was not his own, but derived from God. He said, "Verily I say unto you, the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do..." (John 5:19) Again he said, "I can of mine own self do nothing: As I hear I judge, and my judgment is just because I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which has sent me." (John 5:30) But God is not only all-powerful, He is also the source of all power and authority. That Jesus, of his own admission, could do nothing on his own is clear proof that Jesus is not all-powerful, and that therefore Jesus is not God.

3. God does not have a God ... but Jesus did have a God.

God is the ultimate judge and refuge for all, and He does not call upon nor pray to any others. But Jesus acknowledged that there was one whom he worshipped and to whom he prayed when he said, "I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God." (John 20:17) He is also reported to have cried out while on the cross, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt 27:46) If Jesus were the one God, then couldn't this be read "Myself, myself, why hast thou forsaken me?" Would that not be pure nonsense? When Jesus prayed the Lord's prayer (Luke 11:2-4) was he praying to himself? When in the garden of Gethsemane he prayed, "O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: Nevertheless, not as I will but as thou wilt." (Matt 26:36-39) Was Jesus praying to himself? That Jesus, of his own admission, and by his own actions, acknowledged, worshipped and prayed to another being as God, is clear proof that Jesus himself is not God.

4. According to the Bible, God is invisible to humans ... but Jesus was flesh and blood.

While thousands saw Jesus and heard his voice, Jesus himself said that this could not be done with God. "No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18) Jesus said "Ye have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His shape." (John 5:37) He also said in John 4:24, "God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." That John & Jesus would say that no one had seen or heard God at any time, while his followers both saw and heard Jesus, is clear proof that Jesus was not God.

5. No one is greater than God and no one can direct Him... but Jesus acknowledged someone greater than himself whose will was distinct from his own.

Perhaps the clearest indication we have that Jesus and God are not equal, and therefore not one and the same Being, comes again from the mouth of Jesus himself who said in John 14:28, "My Father is greater than I." When someone referred to him as a "good master" in Luke 18:19, Jesus responded, "Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God..." Further more, Jesus drew clear distinctions between himself and God when he said, "I proceeded forth and came from God, neither came I of myself but He sent me." (John 8:42) Jesus gave clear evidence of his subordination to God, rather than his equality with God, when he said in Luke 22:42, "not my will but thine be done," and in John 5:30, "I seek not mine own will but the will of the Father which has sent me." That Jesus would admit that he did not come into the world on his own initiative ... that he would acknowledge another being as greater than himself, and that he would negate his own will in deference to affirming the will of another, gives clear proof that Jesus is not the Supreme One and therefore Jesus is not God.

Conclusion

The Church recognizes the Bible as the primary source of knowledge about God and Jesus. But since the Bible makes it clear that Jesus is not the Supreme Being and the Supreme Being is not Jesus, upon what basis have so-called orthodox Christianity & trinitarians come to believe otherwise?

My brother or sister, the belief that the Supreme Being is a Trinity is false and completely inconsistent with the words of Jesus as presented in the Bible. God is One, not three. He is a perfect unity.

If you are interested in the truth about God and your relationship to Him, I invite you to investigate these claims; and using the Bible with all prayer and supplication; allow the ONE GOD, that is, the GOD of Abraham, of Isaac, of Jacob; and now the GOD and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; to reveal the wondrous truths about Himself, His Son and their Coming Kingdom.

May GOD bless you all in your Search.

(John 17:3) And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

(1 Cor 8:6) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

(2 Pet 1:2) Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord

---

NB: The above was based upon a post taken from an Islamic source on the internet. Although I do not agree with the Islamic religion (hence the above post has been modified accordingly); the general theme of this post aligns with Scripture; and one cannot argue against the truth of Scripture!