Who really created the Son of God?

[JustMe]

Yes, the future Son of God was created, that then begs the question, what and who is he, really. A god-man, God as his father, or simply the second Adam as the Bible describes him. His existence can only be explained in one way. The conception of Jesus Christ is understood as a divine act initiated by the logos of God and executed through the power of his Holy Spirit. Please continue reading.​

(Luke 1:35) And the angel answered and said to her: The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you. Therefore also the holy thing which is begotten within you shall be called the Son of God. (NEV)

There are two clauses in the second sentence of the verse above, but there are no further grammatical devices or structures. This was purposefully said and recorded in this manner. It creates a writing style known as Hebraic parallelism. These two clauses in this statement are two repeats of the same notion, utilizing different language and uncombined. Additionally, when united, the topic unambiguously and unequivocally defines their meaning. In this situation, it tells the reader clearly by the union of the two phrases that the Holy Spirit of the Most High = The might or power of the Most High.

The (Holy) Spirit embodies the divine power of the Most High, known as El Elyon, or God-Most High, who is ultimately referred to as YHWH. This Father God will overshadow Mary, enabling her to conceive and give birth to a child.

Some people hold the view that the Holy Spirit is the third person of God, known as God the Holy Spirit, while the Most High is considered the first person, referred to as God the Father. They propose that both the first and third persons were present at the conception of Mary. However, this interpretation overlooks the clear Hebraic parallelism in the sentence structure in Luke 1:35, which provides a straightforward understanding of its meaning. It’s notable that there is no mention of a second person in God during the conception and birth of Jesus, yet they claim that the son born of Mary is their second person of God. This reflects the Trinitarian belief in Jesus as both divine and human, a notion that contradicts other parts of scripture.

The power of the Holy Spirit, stemming from God-Most High (later called YHWH), brought forth the miraculous conception of Mary, resulting in the birth of a new baby who was alive and breathing for the very first time. The Holy Spirit or Spirit of God is one of the two fundamental and intrinsic attributes of the one true God, known as El Elyon-Elohim, showcasing the divine essence that underpins His being.

Having established that there is only one God and not multiple persons in the divine, it is important to introduce another key aspect: the logos, or the Word of God. This element initiated the entire process that led to the birth of Mary’s son.

The logos, representing the divine mind and intention, always exists with the Father God and is revealed or conveyed through His Spirit in this world. Regarding the topic of Jesus' birth, the logos of the one God crafted the divine plan for this event long ago. This plan was destined to be realized through His Spirit at the appointed time in the future.

To summarize, El-Elyon (Most High) devised and initiated the glorious plan that encompassed the birth of his son destined to come in the future. This sacred task was accomplished by this singular deity through his own (Holy) Spirit. He brought forth a human son untouched by the corruption of mankind.

Considering the involvement of Father God in the conception and birth of His own son, does this imply that His son is the same God as His Father? Is God engaged in the creation of little human hybrid god-sons or Els-Elyon, as His own divine offspring in a form resembling humans? Or did He simply create a typical human being (Son of Man), a human person without any inherent divine nature? He did not impart His own divine spirit or God DNA ‘essence’ into Mary's ovum. Instead, He generated pure HUMAN genes for Mary's ovum for the purpose of conception. This resulted in a human nature, untainted and sinless, forming a male human with no inclination to sin or of a sinless essence.​

There can only be one intrinsic internal form and one nature for the Son of God: either divine OR human, as ONLY a human-based perfect likeness of God that the first Adam once embodied. Yeshua was not fashioned as a hybrid being as depicted in Greek mythology, nor as some so-called ‘church fathers’ have suggested in their writings. He is not a God-man, even now! He was reborn/resurrected/existed anew as an immortal man of God and was created human, just as the angels were made after their own kind or lineage; for they are not God either.​

 

[David Lamb]

Yes, the future Son of God was created, that then begs the question, what and who is he, really. A god-man, God as his father, or simply the second Adam as the Bible describes him. His existence can only be explained in one way. The conception of Jesus Christ is understood as a divine act initiated by the logos of God and executed through the power of his Holy Spirit. Please continue reading.​

(Luke 1:35) And the angel answered and said to her: The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you. Therefore also the holy thing which is begotten within you shall be called the Son of God. (NEV)

There are two clauses in the second sentence of the verse above, but there are no further grammatical devices or structures. This was purposefully said and recorded in this manner. It creates a writing style known as Hebraic parallelism. These two clauses in this statement are two repeats of the same notion, utilizing different language and uncombined. Additionally, when united, the topic unambiguously and unequivocally defines their meaning. In this situation, it tells the reader clearly by the union of the two phrases that the Holy Spirit of the Most High = The might or power of the Most High.

The (Holy) Spirit embodies the divine power of the Most High, known as El Elyon, or God-Most High, who is ultimately referred to as YHWH. This Father God will overshadow Mary, enabling her to conceive and give birth to a child.

Some people hold the view that the Holy Spirit is the third person of God, known as God the Holy Spirit, while the Most High is considered the first person, referred to as God the Father. They propose that both the first and third persons were present at the conception of Mary. However, this interpretation overlooks the clear Hebraic parallelism in the sentence structure in Luke 1:35, which provides a straightforward understanding of its meaning. It’s notable that there is no mention of a second person in God during the conception and birth of Jesus, yet they claim that the son born of Mary is their second person of God. This reflects the Trinitarian belief in Jesus as both divine and human, a notion that contradicts other parts of scripture.

The power of the Holy Spirit, stemming from God-Most High (later called YHWH), brought forth the miraculous conception of Mary, resulting in the birth of a new baby who was alive and breathing for the very first time. The Holy Spirit or Spirit of God is one of the two fundamental and intrinsic attributes of the one true God, known as El Elyon-Elohim, showcasing the divine essence that underpins His being.

Having established that there is only one God and not multiple persons in the divine, it is important to introduce another key aspect: the logos, or the Word of God. This element initiated the entire process that led to the birth of Mary’s son.

The logos, representing the divine mind and intention, always exists with the Father God and is revealed or conveyed through His Spirit in this world. Regarding the topic of Jesus' birth, the logos of the one God crafted the divine plan for this event long ago. This plan was destined to be realized through His Spirit at the appointed time in the future.

To summarize, El-Elyon (Most High) devised and initiated the glorious plan that encompassed the birth of his son destined to come in the future. This sacred task was accomplished by this singular deity through his own (Holy) Spirit. He brought forth a human son untouched by the corruption of mankind.

I don't understand how you can state what you do about the Son of God being created, in view of the Fact that John's gospel opens in that passage about the Word Who became flesh:

“1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (Joh 1:1-3 NKJV)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:14 NKJV)

Those verses and others tell us that He was the Creator of all things, not a created Being Himself. For exmple:

“15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.” (Col 1:15-17 NKJV)

 

[JustMe]

I don't understand how you can state what you do about the Son of God being created, in view of the Fact that John's gospel opens in that passage about the Word Who became flesh:

“1 ¶ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (Joh 1:1-3 NKJV)

“And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (Joh 1:14 NKJV)

Those verses and others tell us that He was the Creator of all things, not a created Being Himself. For exmple:

“15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.” (Col 1:15-17 NKJV)

Well David, it seems you are among those who selectively choose a verse or two, like many others here, who either cannot or refuse to consider credible evidence in scripture that may challenge some of your deeply held beliefs regarding the nature of God and His Son.

It would be reasonable for you to address my post and its content first, rather than swiftly diverting to other scripture passages that do not directly relate to what I have presented. This undermines the effort I put into sharing it for public discussion and consideration.

If you wish to engage in a conversation about your post, which covers two entirely different topics, I am open to that.

However, it appears you may struggle to refute what I stated in my original post. You seem to lack a solid answer or a substantial counter-argument. This might indicate that I am making some progress here.

Could you offer some insightful commentary on the initial section of John 1 and Colossians 1:15-17, illustrating that the Son of God was not a creation, but rather a Greek mythological hybrid being or deity, as you seem to suggest? I would be interested in reading your perspective.

 

[David Lamb]

Well David, it seems you are among those who selectively choose a verse or two, like many others here, who either cannot or refuse to consider credible evidence in scripture that may challenge some of your deeply held beliefs regarding the nature of God and His Son.

It would be reasonable for you to address my post and its content first, rather than swiftly diverting to other scripture passages that do not directly relate to what I have presented. This undermines the effort I put into sharing it for public discussion and consideration.

If you wish to engage in a conversation about your post, which covers two entirely different topics, I am open to that.

However, it appears you may struggle to refute what I stated in my original post. You seem to lack a solid answer or a substantial counter-argument. This might indicate that I am making some progress here.

Could you offer some insightful commentary on the initial section of John 1 and Colossians 1:15-17, illustrating that the Son of God was not a creation, but rather a Greek mythological hybrid being or deity, as you seem to suggest? I would be interested in reading your perspective.

I am sorry you felt that way. You statement that the Son of God was created was what stood out to me from your post, and I concentrated on answering that with bible quotes that indicate He was not created. So I don't understand what you say about my post being about two entirely different topics. I certainly did not suggest or even imply that the Son of God is a Greek mythological hybrid being or deity. I assure you that I do not believe Him to be mythologic, or hybrid. I think that rather than risk causing further misunderstanding, I will leave it there. Sorry if I have misunderstood you.

 

[JLB]

Well David, it seems you are among those who selectively choose a verse or two, like many others here, who either cannot or refuse to consider credible evidence in scripture that may challenge some of your deeply held beliefs regarding the nature of God and His Son.

It would be reasonable for you to address my post and its content first, rather than swiftly diverting to other scripture passages that do not directly relate to what I have presented. This undermines the effort I put into sharing it for public discussion and consideration.

If you wish to engage in a conversation about your post, which covers two entirely different topics, I am open to that.

However, it appears you may struggle to refute what I stated in my original post. You seem to lack a solid answer or a substantial counter-argument. This might indicate that I am making some progress here.

Could you offer some insightful commentary on the initial section of John 1 and Colossians 1:15-17, illustrating that the Son of God was not a creation, but rather a Greek mythological hybrid being or deity, as you seem to suggest? I would be interested in reading your perspective.

Since you haven't provided any scripture, we can only conclude that you are just another person who has chosen to venture into an area that you obviously know nothing about.


Please provide a scripture and make your point from that scripture and allow others to respond accordingly.


I realize you are from "another faith" so maybe you could tells us a little about what "your faith" believes.

 

[HealthyShape]

Yes, the future Son of God was created, that then begs the question, what and who is he, really. ​

The future Son of God?

Having established that there is only one God and not multiple persons in the divine

You have not establish that.

it is important to introduce another key aspect: the logos, or the Word of God. This element initiated the entire process that led to the birth of Mary’s son.

The logos, representing the divine mind and intention, always exists with the Father God and is revealed or conveyed through His Spirit in this world. Regarding the topic of Jesus' birth, the logos of the one God crafted the divine plan for this event long ago. This plan was destined to be realized through His Spirit at the appointed time in the future.

This is a very different story from Gospels. Your personal fantasy or do you have a source?​

 

[JustMe]

Since you haven't provided any scripture, we can only conclude that you are just another person who has chosen to venture into an area that you obviously know nothing about.


Please provide a scripture and make your point from that scripture and allow others to respond accordingly.


I realize you are from "another faith" so maybe you could tells us a little about what "your faith" believes.

Clearly, you haven't taken the time to read the original post to make such absurd claims that seem more fitting for an angry crowd. You simply dropped a bombshell here and then disappeared back into the shadows.

However, this does not change the undeniable truth I present.

You are welcome to reveal yourself and emerge from hiding if you choose. I would genuinely be interested in hearing your thoughts on my original post. The real question is, are you able to, and will you?

 

[JustMe]

​

The future Son of God?​

​

You have not establish that.​

​

​

This is a very different story from Gospels. Your personal fantasy or do you have a source?​

I acknowledge your insight regarding the first two comments you made.

Future Son of God, as in prior to his creation. Or perhaps from your perspective, before he was simply born and not created, of course. It was the tense and phrasing that were fitting for the development of my argument.

Indeed, I have asserted that there is only one deity, God the Father, supported by the style of writing in the specific verse I referred to and the reasoning backing this claim, provided you followed closely, countering the untenable concept of a triune god made up of three persons, which does not align with how the verse was articulated.

What would suffice to demonstrate that there is solely one person of God, based on the context and wording of the singular verse that I highlighted in the original post?

Additionally, I require further clarification regarding your third point about the Gospel writers supposedly indicating that Yeshua was not created, either directly or by implication.

What is your opinion on the two-clause verse in Luke from my original post that indicates there is NO God the Holy Spirit? It refers to the power of the one God, and the singular person, the Father?

 

[JLB]

Clearly, you haven't taken the time to read the original post to make such absurd claims that seem more fitting for an angry crowd. You simply dropped a bombshell here and then disappeared back into the shadows.

However, this does not change the undeniable truth I present.

You are welcome to reveal yourself and emerge from hiding if you choose. I would genuinely be interested in hearing your thoughts on my original post. The real question is, are you able to, and will you?

What is your point from this scripture below?

(Luke 1:35) And the angel answered and said to her: The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow you. Therefore also the holy thing which is begotten within you shall be called the Son of God. (NEV)

 

[HealthyShape]

Indeed, I have asserted that there is only one deity, God the Father

This is not Biblical, though. Or, you would need to cherrypick just some verses and ignore another ones.

What would suffice to demonstrate that there is solely one person of God, based on the context and wording of the singular verse that I highlighted in the original post?

Nothing. The verse does not say anything like that.

Additionally, I require further clarification regarding your third point about the Gospel writers supposedly indicating that Yeshua was not created, either directly or by implication.

J 1:1, for example.

What is your opinion on the two-clause verse in Luke from my original post that indicates there is NO God the Holy Spirit? It refers to the power of the one God, and the singular person, the Father?

I think you are reading things into it which are not said there.

 

[JustMe]

This is not Biblical, though. Or, you would need to cherrypick just some verses and ignore another ones.


Nothing. The verse does not say anything like that.


J 1:1, for example.


I think you are reading things into it which are not said there.

Will you tackle my original post and its main idea? Do you see why the Bible uses Hebraic parallelism, like in Luke 1:35? Writers picked this style and device with care, to be clear who created Yeshua, from its planning, to conception, creation to birth as the future Son of God. That title took hold at his baptism—we can cover that later if you wish. The use of this style of writing proves one God holds not three persons, only one. It's amazing what you can find in scripture if we have the time and the motivation to search and analyze its many gems of truth.

Your other comments do not address the subject at hand I'm afraid. And John 1:1, possibly your touchstone verse, misses the mark of this discussion entirely.

 

[JustMe]

What is your point from this scripture below?

Apparently, this subject is over your head if you cannot 'see' the point.

 

[Matthias]

This is not Biblical, though.

How can it not be Biblical when the God of the Jews, including Jesus himself, is only one person, the Father?

 

[HealthyShape]

How can it not be Biblical when the God of the Jews, including Jesus himself, is only one person, the Father?

Because it is not so. The God of Jews was described in multiple persons (before Judaism) and also the God of Christians is in multiple persons.

 

[HealthyShape]

Will you tackle my original post and its main idea? Do you see why the Bible uses Hebraic parallelism, like in Luke 1:35? Writers picked this style and device with care, to be clear who created Yeshua, from its planning, to conception, creation to birth as the future Son of God. That title took hold at his baptism—we can cover that later if you wish. The use of this style of writing proves one God holds not three persons, only one. It's amazing what you can find in scripture if we have the time and the motivation to search and analyze its many gems of truth.

Your other comments do not address the subject at hand I'm afraid. And John 1:1, possibly your touchstone verse, misses the mark of this discussion entirely.

You took one verse and created a lot based on just that one verse. Jesus is not created, but begotten. God is three persons and Jesus existed with the Father before the world even began.

 

[JustMe]

How can it not be Biblical when the God of the Jews, including Jesus himself, is only one person, the Father?

Ah, the Bible-pounding rescuers rolled in right on cue. Thanks again for backing the plain truth: God stands alone as number one, cardinal one person.

I may stray from the main post and hit John 1:1-3 once more. Folks dash back there for calm when threads like this flair up. Still, I'll slice off verse 14 they cling to and connect to these verses. Let those words hold their own weight I say...


Enjoy your week, Mat.

 

[Matthias]

Because it is not so. The God of Jews was described in multiple persons (before Judaism) and also the God of Christians is in multiple persons.

Thanks. It’s rare that I come across someone who isn’t aware that the Jews (including Jesus) weren’t ever trinitarians. Their God has always been only one person, the Father.

I’m confident you can confirm that Jesus ascended to his God.

***

I did speak with a trinitarian some years ago who believed that the Jews were always trinitarians. In his unhistorical view, the NT story is that the Jewish religious authorities believed their God is the Trinity and the dispute with Jesus concerned whether or not he is the second person of the Trinity. According to that person, they rejected Jesus as the second person of the Trinity and thought someone else, someone who would come later, would be the second person of the Trinity.

No reputable biblical scholar - trinitarian or non-trinitarian - would ever support that view.

 

[HealthyShape]

Thanks. It’s rare that I come across someone who isn’t aware that the Jews (including Jesus) weren’t ever trinitarians. Their God has always been only one person, the Father.

I did not say "trinitarians". Trinitarianism is Christian completeness, Jews had only shadows:

YHWH was either in multiple persons or there were more than one.

 

[Matthias]

I did not say "trinitarians".

Then we should easily be able to agree that Jesus himself, as well as the Jews, weren’t trinitarians. He and they are unitarians.

Trinitarianism is a Christian completeness, Jews had only shadows:

 

[HealthyShape]

Then we should easily be able to agree that Jesus himself, as well as the Jews, weren’t trinitarians. He and they are unitarians.

Are there two YHWHs?

Gen 19:24
And Yahweh rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out of heaven

And who is the angel of YHWH?