Comments on: Where Did the NT Writers Get the Idea of Jesus as Co-Creator? http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/ Biblical theology, stripped bare of denominational confessions and theological systems Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:00:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: MSH http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-5738 MSH Wed, 31 Aug 2011 19:07:09 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-5738 if it's physical (and it is) that isn't inconsistent with binitarianism. I'm not denying he's physical. The issue is that I don't see anything in Gen 14 that leads me to believe Melchizedek was the embodied Yahweh. if it’s physical (and it is) that isn’t inconsistent with binitarianism. I’m not denying he’s physical. The issue is that I don’t see anything in Gen 14 that leads me to believe Melchizedek was the embodied Yahweh.

]]> By: MSH http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-5737 MSH Wed, 31 Aug 2011 19:05:28 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-5737 thanks; good reminder for me, since I often feel like a man without a theological country (which isn't bad on a personal level, but it does make me question my usefulness). thanks; good reminder for me, since I often feel like a man without a theological country (which isn’t bad on a personal level, but it does make me question my usefulness).

]]> By: Christian Gains http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-5734 Christian Gains Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:08:52 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-5734 Mike, I just read your exchanges with Ilia. In the last one, (I believe it was), you mention that you don't think Paul's reference to Melchizedek was referencing a Theophany, but rather binitarianism. In the Genesis "blessing" incident to which Paul refers, [Gen.14: 17 - 20], Melchizedek is CLEARLY in physical form, as he is stated to be "the KING of Yeru Salem - the City of Peace. And, Paul's description is CLEARLY, [7:1] referring to a visible and physical being. ("sovereign" of a physical city; "high priest" of "the MOST HIGH Elohim"); {no challenge intended, BTW, I'm just surprised). Maybe I need to re-read your "Two Powers" material? But, from my earliest reading of these passages, (both OT & NT), I always got a referral to Abraham's encounter with The LORD in Gen.18, [ver.17 & 19]...I've always understood these two encounters with "THE LORD", to be physical manifestations of Jesus, the WORD...AGENT...not...Yahwey...the FATHER. Can you help me here?. Mike, I just read your exchanges with Ilia. In the last one, (I believe it was), you mention that you don’t think Paul’s reference to Melchizedek was referencing a Theophany, but rather binitarianism.

In the Genesis “blessing” incident to which Paul refers, [Gen.14: 17 - 20], Melchizedek is CLEARLY in physical form, as he is stated to be “the KING of Yeru Salem – the City of Peace.

And, Paul’s description is CLEARLY, [7:1] referring to a visible and physical being. (“sovereign” of a physical city; “high priest” of “the MOST HIGH Elohim”); {no challenge intended, BTW, I’m just surprised).

Maybe I need to re-read your “Two Powers” material?

But, from my earliest reading of these passages, (both OT & NT), I always got a referral to Abraham’s encounter with The LORD in Gen.18, [ver.17 & 19]…I’ve always understood these two encounters with “THE LORD”, to be physical manifestations of Jesus, the WORD…AGENT…not…Yahwey…the FATHER. Can you help me here?.

]]> By: Christian Gains http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-5733 Christian Gains Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:35:38 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-5733 THANK YOU MIKE! And, glad to see you've realized how NEEDED you're simplest info, (which, to us clods of clay, is MONUMENTAL info), is, and what a TREMENDOUS blessing it is, and makes us much more capable in our witnessing. Look forward to MORE of these vids! Please be assured that there are MANY MORE hungry sheep out here, that thrive on what the Lord gives you to share! God BLESS you bro, we're keeping you in prayer! Just keep feeding the flock! (Heb.5:14 -- Matt.24:45 - 47) THANK YOU MIKE!

And, glad to see you’ve realized how NEEDED you’re simplest info, (which, to us clods of clay, is MONUMENTAL info), is, and what a TREMENDOUS blessing it is, and makes us much more capable in our witnessing. Look forward to MORE of these vids!

Please be assured that there are MANY MORE hungry sheep out here, that thrive on what the Lord gives you to share! God BLESS you bro, we’re keeping you in prayer! Just keep feeding the flock! (Heb.5:14 — Matt.24:45 – 47)

]]> By: MSH http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-3953 MSH Sun, 30 Jan 2011 00:48:02 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-3953 yes - they are all part of the binitarian mindset in Jewish theology prior to the New Testament. yes – they are all part of the binitarian mindset in Jewish theology prior to the New Testament.

]]> By: Ilia Panayotov http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-3938 Ilia Panayotov Tue, 25 Jan 2011 14:29:31 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-3938 I meant to ask you if you think these verses can be said to relate or identify Jesus, the Rider on the Clouds, with the Angel of the Lord (as other verses do, like Jude 1:5, 1 Cor 10:4 and perhaps 1 Cor 10:9) Also, I have a question regading Daniel 7. In Dan 7:13-14 the Son of man appears and is given eternal authority. Then, when the vision is interpreted, it is said that the saints of the Highest One possess the kingdom. You've shown that at the end of the chapter it is stated that "all dominions will serve and obey Him" which again leads to the Son of man. So, is the Son of man the Highest One? Not that I know Aramaic (just looked at an interlinear) but it seems there are two different words in Daniel 7 usually translated as "Most High"; the NASB translates one as "Most High" (Illay) and the other one as "Highest One" (Elyon) for distinction. See Daniel 7:25 (also another possible distinction is Daniel 7:22). So do you think there is a real distinction in the chapter regarding these titles? In other words, can we say the Most High is the Ancient of Days, while the Highest One (from "the saints of the Highest One") is the Son of man? I meant to ask you if you think these verses can be said to relate or identify Jesus, the Rider on the Clouds, with the Angel of the Lord (as other verses do, like Jude 1:5, 1 Cor 10:4 and perhaps 1 Cor 10:9)
Also, I have a question regading Daniel 7. In Dan 7:13-14 the Son of man appears and is given eternal authority. Then, when the vision is interpreted, it is said that the saints of the Highest One possess the kingdom. You’ve shown that at the end of the chapter it is stated that “all dominions will serve and obey Him” which again leads to the Son of man. So, is the Son of man the Highest One?
Not that I know Aramaic (just looked at an interlinear) but it seems there are two different words in Daniel 7 usually translated as “Most High”; the NASB translates one as “Most High” (Illay) and the other one as “Highest One” (Elyon) for distinction. See Daniel 7:25 (also another possible distinction is Daniel 7:22). So do you think there is a real distinction in the chapter regarding these titles? In other words, can we say the Most High is the Ancient of Days, while the Highest One (from “the saints of the Highest One”) is the Son of man?

]]> By: MSH http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-3929 MSH Tue, 25 Jan 2011 08:48:39 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-3929 Since the name of Jesus was, well, Jesus (!), and its clear who's on the horse, most scholars believe that the name "written on his thigh" is YHWH, the tetragrammaton. THAT is the name that is lord of lords and king of kings in OT theology. I would agree. Since the name of Jesus was, well, Jesus (!), and its clear who’s on the horse, most scholars believe that the name “written on his thigh” is YHWH, the tetragrammaton. THAT is the name that is lord of lords and king of kings in OT theology. I would agree.

]]> By: Ilia Panayotov http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-3912 Ilia Panayotov Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:58:35 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-3912 I noticed something very interesting in the Bible that has to do with the Angel of YHWH and Jesus. It's not as powerful as the verses you've shown but I think it still kind of supports this idea. It has to do with the Angel not revealing His name. 1. Genesis 32 When Jacob wrestles with the "man" who is later revealed to be the Angel and God, Jacob asks the Angel of HIs name. "Then Jacob asked him, "Please tell me your name." But he said, "Why is it that you ask my name?" 2. Judges 13 The Angel appears to Manoah and his wife. "And Manoah said to the angel of the LORD, "What is your name, so that, when your words come true, we may honor you?" And the angel of the LORD said to him, "Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?" 3. Revelation 19 The Vision of Christ in heaven, riding a white horse. "Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. " What do you think? I noticed something very interesting in the Bible that has to do with the Angel of YHWH and Jesus. It’s not as powerful as the verses you’ve shown but I think it still kind of supports this idea. It has to do with the Angel not revealing His name.

1. Genesis 32 When Jacob wrestles with the “man” who is later revealed to be the Angel and God, Jacob asks the Angel of HIs name. “Then Jacob asked him, “Please tell me your name.” But he said, “Why is it that you ask my name?”
2. Judges 13 The Angel appears to Manoah and his wife. “And Manoah said to the angel of the LORD, “What is your name, so that, when your words come true, we may honor you?” And the angel of the LORD said to him, “Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?”
3. Revelation 19 The Vision of Christ in heaven, riding a white horse. “Then I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse! The one sitting on it is called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he judges and makes war. His eyes are like a flame of fire, and on his head are many diadems, and he has a name written that no one knows but himself. ”

What do you think?

]]> By: MSH http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-3904 MSH Fri, 21 Jan 2011 00:22:01 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-3904 There are nearly two dozen options (opinions) in Jewish literature from the second temple period about the second power. It was a period when such speculation flourished. Philo's thoughts were of course one stream. I would not say Philo had no influence, but I think his influence is exaggerated. The matter of the "Word" is one example. You don't need Philo to explain or understand John 1:1-3 for example. The word in anthropomorphic form (and even embodied) is seen in the Old Testament (cf. Jer. 1:1-10; 1 Samuel 3, etc.). At any rate, Philo is one of many trying to articulate how there can be a second Yahweh and yet come out with monotheism. I do not think Melchizedek was a theophany; I think the point of those references in the NT is related to binitarianism, though. There are nearly two dozen options (opinions) in Jewish literature from the second temple period about the second power. It was a period when such speculation flourished. Philo’s thoughts were of course one stream. I would not say Philo had no influence, but I think his influence is exaggerated. The matter of the “Word” is one example. You don’t need Philo to explain or understand John 1:1-3 for example. The word in anthropomorphic form (and even embodied) is seen in the Old Testament (cf. Jer. 1:1-10; 1 Samuel 3, etc.). At any rate, Philo is one of many trying to articulate how there can be a second Yahweh and yet come out with monotheism. I do not think Melchizedek was a theophany; I think the point of those references in the NT is related to binitarianism, though.

]]> By: Ilia Panayotov http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/2009/12/where-did-the-nt-writers-get-the-idea-of-jesus-as-co-creator/#comment-3900 Ilia Panayotov Thu, 20 Jan 2011 10:28:02 +0000 http://michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/?p=496#comment-3900 Thanks. Did the Israelites consider the Second Power to be YHWH in the Second Temple Period and before? Because you and Larry Hurtado have shown some texts where it seems some Ancient Jews considered the Second Power to be Enoch, Moses, Malchizedek, etc Also I wanted to ask you what kind of influence do you think Philo might have had on Christianity - it seems a lot of people (usually non-Christians) hold that Philo had a great influence on Christianity (in my opinion, Philo and Christians drew on the same OT and Intertestimental material instead) And one more thing - do you think Malchizedek was a theophany in Genesis or an ante-type? Because the author of Hebrews kind of states that he's an ante-type of Jesus but then there are some things he says that might be interpreted as a theophany of Jesus (Hebrews 7:8 and Hebrews 7:3). Thanks. Did the Israelites consider the Second Power to be YHWH in the Second Temple Period and before? Because you and Larry Hurtado have shown some texts where it seems some Ancient Jews considered the Second Power to be Enoch, Moses, Malchizedek, etc
Also I wanted to ask you what kind of influence do you think Philo might have had on Christianity – it seems a lot of people (usually non-Christians) hold that Philo had a great influence on Christianity (in my opinion, Philo and Christians drew on the same OT and Intertestimental material instead)
And one more thing – do you think Malchizedek was a theophany in Genesis or an ante-type? Because the author of Hebrews kind of states that he’s an ante-type of Jesus but then there are some things he says that might be interpreted as a theophany of Jesus (Hebrews 7:8 and Hebrews 7:3).

]]>