The God-Man in Isaiah 9:6-7

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
The God-Man in Isaiah 9:6-7

“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. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this.” (Isaiah 9:6-7)

“For to us a child is born. To us a son is given; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, on David’s throne, and on his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from that time on, even forever. The zeal of Yahweh of Armies will perform this.” (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 125 BC; Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls)

Those who reject/oppose that Jesus Christ is Almighty God, and consider His Deity as an invention of the Christian Church, it is generally believed, that this passage in Isaiah, refers to the Old Testament King, Hezekiah, who lived during the time of the Prophet Isaiah. Hezekiah was an adult man at the time of this Prophecy, so why would Isaiah speak of his birth, and not just the man Hezekiah?

There is no doubt, that Hezekiah was one of the great Kings in the Old Testament, and please the Lord in much that he did. However, it is also clear from the Old Testament accounts, that he also failed the Lord. In 2 Kings 18:13-16, we read of Hezekiah giving into the demands of the wicked king of Assyria, and giving him the gold from the Temple of the Lord, to appease him. In 2 Kings chapter 2, we read of Isaiah becoming very sick, near death, and the Lord sent Isaiah to tell him to “get your house in order or you will die and not live” (verse 1). Towards the end of his life, Hezekiah became “proud, Hezekiah didn’t respond according to the benefit that had come to him. So there was wrath on him, Judah, and Jerusalem” (2 Chronicles 32:24-26). He also rather foolishly showed off to the envoys from Merodach-baladan son of Baladan, king of Babylon, “his whole treasure house—the silver, the gold, the spices, and the precious oil—and his armoury, and everything that was found in his treasuries. There was nothing in his palace and in all his realm that Hezekiah did not show them”. God sent Isaiah to rebuke Hezekiah for what he had done, and tell him that everything that he had shown these envoys, would be carried away to Babylon (2 Kings 20:12-13, 16-18). Neither was Hezekiah a King of “peace”, as he fought many battles during his lifetime. Neither was Hezekiah’s kingdom an eternal one. The evidence is very clear, that this passage cannot refer to any human king.

In fact, the older Jewish Rabbis, understood this passage to refer to The Messiah. In the 1st/2nd century AD, Rabbi Yose HaGelili, said of this passage:

“Thus rabbi Jose, of Galilee, says, ‘The name of the Messiah is שׁלום shâlôm, as is said in Isa 9:6, “Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.” ‘Ben Sira (fol. 40, of the Amsterdam Edition, 1679) numbers among the eight names of the Messiah those also taken from this passage, Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Prince of Peace. The later Jews, however, have rejected this interpretation, because the Messiah is here described as God” (Albert Barnes Commentary)

About the same time we have the Jewish Targum of Jonathan Ben Uziel the disciple of Hillel (110 BC-10AD; Bab. Meg. 32):

“The prophet saith to the house of David, A child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old (from eternity, Pauli ed), Wonderful counsellor, Mighty God, He who lives for ever, the Anointed one (or, Messiah), in whose days peace shall increase upon us. Great shall be the splendour of them that observe the law, and of them that preserve peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to build it in judgement and in righteousness from henceforth and for ever: by the Memra of the Lord of hosts shall this be wrought” (Targum Jonathan Ben Uziel. J F Stenning; The Targum of Isaiah, p 32. Oxford 1953 ed, also, Rev. C. W. H. Pauli; Targum Jonathan Ben Uziel: The Chaldee Paraphrase on The Prophet Isaiah; pp.30, 31)

Some have tried to weaken this Prophecy as referring to The Messiah, by arguing that the verbs used in the Hebrew, are in the “past tense”. It is clear that both these Jewish works, that date to the first century AD, and older, understood the passage to refer to The Messiah. Ther is also more ancient Jewish evidence that this passage is Messianic, Rabbi Mordecai's Drash: Isaiah 9:6 A Prophecy of Messiah

As for The “past tense”, in Hebrew grammar, it is often used for what is yet to take place, which is agreed by Jewish and Christian Hebrew grammarians. Page Not Found - 404 Hebrew Tenses It really does not matter to the passage, whether it is “is called”, “was called”, or “will be called”, because this does not change the fact, that it cannot refer to any human being. The DSS 1QIsa(a), which is about 100 BC, reads “is called” (so the LXX, present, kaleitai); whereas the,4QIsa(c), is, “will be called”. The second century AD Hebrew manuscripts, which were the basis for the Greek translations, we have Aquila, “ekalesen”, which is the aorist, “called”; and Symmachus, “kelthesetai”, the future, “will be called”. Either corrections or corruptions.

There is no doubt, that the passage refers to The Messiah, Who is The Lord Jesus Christ.

The Prophecy of the Birth of this Child, Who is a Son, speaks of One Who is not only to be Born “human”, but Who is also fully God. This is clear from the Names/Titles that this Son has.

He is called, “Wonderful” (pe·le), which is the Name that “The Messenger of Yahweh”, gives Manoah in Judges chapter 13, “And the Messenger of Yahweh said to him, “Why do you ask my Name, seeing it is Wonderful (p̄e·li)?” (ver. 18). It is clear that this was not a created being, as Manoah clearly reconsigned Him to be God, “And Manoah said to his wife, We shall surely die, for we have seen God.” (ver. 22). Malachi 3:1 is clear, that the Coming of Yahweh/Jesus Christ, is “ū·mal·’aḵ hab·bə·rîṯ (and even The Messenger of the Covenant)”, Who is Himself, “hā·’ā·ḏō·wn (the Lord)”.

This Son is also called “Counsellor” (yō·w·‘êṣ). In 1 John 2:1, Jesus Christ is called, “Paraklēton”, which is often translated by “Advocate”. The Theological Dictionary Of The New Testament, informs us, “of the Rabbis, in their religious vocabulary... became a common loan word in the sense of “advocate,” related in meaning to “counsel,” “defender””

Next this Son is the “Mighty God (’êl Gibbôr)”. Some have tried to reduce the meaning of the Hebrew here, to “mighty-hero”, so as to remove the Deity of the Son. However, it is clear from other places in the Old Testament, where we find “’êl Gibbôr”, like Isaiah 10:21, and Jeremiah 32:18, these same translations that have “mighty God”. Why the difference, when used for The Messiah, Jesus Christ? The Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) of Isaiah, reads, “’êlGibbôr”, without any space in the words, so that it is a name, “MightyGod”. This was changed by the Masoretes (MT) Jewish scholars, to read, “’êl Gibbôr”. We find the same in Isaiah 7:14, which is another Prophecy of the Son, Who is to be Born from The Virgin, fulfilled in the Birth of Jesus Christ. In this verse in Isaiah, the MT reads “‘im·mā·nū ’êl”, but the DSS, “‘im·mā·nū’êl”, as a Name, “Godwithus”. In the New Testament, Paul says of Jesus Christ, that He is “tou megalou theou (The Great God)” (Titus 2:13). The Greek, “mégas”, can also mean, “mighty”, which is what Isaiah 9:6 says.
 

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Next we have the Title, “Eternal Father”, as in our English Versions. In the Hebrew, it is the noun, “’ă·ḇî·‘aḏ”. This Title cannot be used for any human person.

The Hebrew, “'âb”, is a very broad word, which does not always have the meaning of “father”.

“the Sumerian language…a later a-a, ‘father’ = ‘begetter’…a-a-kalam-ma, ‘father of the land’, i.e., begetter and creator of the world…Like the other Semitic languages…abu... ‘father’…is used as a synonym for banu, ‘begetter’…In Hebrew ‘abh sometimes means the founder…protector” (Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, Vol. I, under ‘abh).

“Of the author, or maker of anything, specially of the Creator” (Gesenius Hebrew lexicon)

“originator, producer, generator, protector, ruler” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew lexicon)

“It designates primarily “begetter,” though by extension, ancestor, and metaphorically, an originator, chief, or associate in some degree” (R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke; Theological Wordbook of The Old Testament)

Likewise, in the Greek, πατὴρ, also has the meanings, “author” (Liddell & Scott, Greek lexicon). “founder…as the originator and ruler” (W. Arndt & F. Gingrich Greek lexicon). “the originator, protector, creator” (Thayer Greek lexicon)

It literally reads, “Originator of Eternity”. In the Book of Revelation, Jesus Christ says of Himself, that He is, “egō eimi ho prōtos kai ho eschatos kai ho zōn”, literally, “I Am The First and The Last and The Ever-Living One”. (1:17, 18; 2:8; 22:13). In Isaiah 44:6, it reads, “Thus said YHWH, King of Israel, And his Redeemer, YHWH of Hosts: “I [am] the first, and I [am] the last, And besides Me there is no god”. On the words, “ho prōtos kai ho eschatos”, the Unitarian scholar, Dr Joseph Thayer, says in his Greek lexicon, “the eternal One, Rev 1:17; Rev 2:8; Rev 22:13”. The Greek Old Testament, known as the Septuagint, reads, “ego eimi ho on”, “I AM The Eternal One”.

Prince of Peace: “śar-šā·lō·wm”

The Dead Sea Scrolls, Isaiah lQIsa, it reads, “The Prince of Peace”

Verse 7

“His government will expand, and peace will be endless for the throne of David and his kingdom, to establish it and to sustain it with justice and righteousness from now on and forevermore.” (Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible; Fred P Miller; The Great Isaiah Scroll, 2006 ed)

The Government and Peace, of the Son, will expand and be eternal, built on the Throne of King David. This cannot refer to king Hezekiah, whose rule was not one of peace, and did come to an end.

We do read of the Son of Man, The Messiah, Jesus Christ, in the Book of Daniel:

“His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed” (7:14)

In the Gospel of Luke we read:

“You will conceive and give birth to a Son, and you will call His name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (1:31-33)

2 Peter 1:11 says;

“For in this way, entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be richly supplied to you”

In Hebrews 1:8, God the Father addresses Jesus Christ, and says:

“ho thronos sou, ho theos, eis ton aiona tos aionos”, which is, “The Throne of You The God is to the ages of the ages”

In Revelation 11:15, it says;

“The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He shall Reign for ever and ever”

The Greek here is very important: “tou kuriou hēmōn (of our Lord, God the Father) kai tou Christou autou (and of His Christ, The Messiah)”. It is clear that we here have a distinction of Persons, “our Lord”, from “His Christ”. Yet, the words “He shall Reign”, in the Greek, is “basileusei”, which is the masculine, singular. It can either mean, the Reign of “His Christ”, or the Joint-Reign of “our Lord” and “His Christ”. Chapter 22 makes the latter clear. In verse 1 we read, “the throne of God and of the Lamb”, where the Greek is, “tou thronou tou Theou kai tou Arniou”, “thronou”, is in the singular, THRONE. It continues in verse 3, “the throne of God and of the Lamb (tou thronou tou Theou kai tou Arniou)”; “and His servants will Worship Him”. Both HIS (hautoû) and HIM (autós), are also in the singular number. These passages are some of the strongest for the absolute Deity and CoEquality of Jesus Chris with God the Father. There is no subordination in the Godhead of any of the Three Persons.

We have in Isaiah 7:14, and 9:6-7, two passages of the clearest Old Testament Teaching, on the Deity of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and His Incarnation, where He becomes The God-Man.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,717
2,415
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The God-Man in Isaiah 9:6-7

“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. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this.” (Isaiah 9:6-7)

“For to us a child is born. To us a son is given; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, on David’s throne, and on his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from that time on, even forever. The zeal of Yahweh of Armies will perform this.” (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 125 BC; Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls)

Those who reject/oppose that Jesus Christ is Almighty God, and consider His Deity as an invention of the Christian Church, it is generally believed, that this passage in Isaiah, refers to the Old Testament King, Hezekiah, who lived during the time of the Prophet Isaiah. Hezekiah was an adult man at the time of this Prophecy, so why would Isaiah speak of his birth, and not just the man Hezekiah?

There is no doubt, that Hezekiah was one of the great Kings in the Old Testament, and please the Lord in much that he did. However, it is also clear from the Old Testament accounts, that he also failed the Lord. In 2 Kings 18:13-16, we read of Hezekiah giving into the demands of the wicked king of Assyria, and giving him the gold from the Temple of the Lord, to appease him. In 2 Kings chapter 2, we read of Isaiah becoming very sick, near death, and the Lord sent Isaiah to tell him to “get your house in order or you will die and not live” (verse 1). Towards the end of his life, Hezekiah became “proud, Hezekiah didn’t respond according to the benefit that had come to him. So there was wrath on him, Judah, and Jerusalem” (2 Chronicles 32:24-26). He also rather foolishly showed off to the envoys from Merodach-baladan son of Baladan, king of Babylon, “his whole treasure house—the silver, the gold, the spices, and the precious oil—and his armoury, and everything that was found in his treasuries. There was nothing in his palace and in all his realm that Hezekiah did not show them”. God sent Isaiah to rebuke Hezekiah for what he had done, and tell him that everything that he had shown these envoys, would be carried away to Babylon (2 Kings 20:12-13, 16-18). Neither was Hezekiah a King of “peace”, as he fought many battles during his lifetime. Neither was Hezekiah’s kingdom an eternal one. The evidence is very clear, that this passage cannot refer to any human king.

In fact, the older Jewish Rabbis, understood this passage to refer to The Messiah. In the 1st/2nd century AD, Rabbi Yose HaGelili, said of this passage:

“Thus rabbi Jose, of Galilee, says, ‘The name of the Messiah is שׁלום shâlôm, as is said in Isa 9:6, “Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.” ‘Ben Sira (fol. 40, of the Amsterdam Edition, 1679) numbers among the eight names of the Messiah those also taken from this passage, Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Prince of Peace. The later Jews, however, have rejected this interpretation, because the Messiah is here described as God” (Albert Barnes Commentary)

About the same time we have the Jewish Targum of Jonathan Ben Uziel the disciple of Hillel (110 BC-10AD; Bab. Meg. 32):

“The prophet saith to the house of David, A child has been born to us, a son has been given to us; and he has taken the law upon himself to keep it, and his name has been called from of old (from eternity, Pauli ed), Wonderful counsellor, Mighty God, He who lives for ever, the Anointed one (or, Messiah), in whose days peace shall increase upon us. Great shall be the splendour of them that observe the law, and of them that preserve peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to build it in judgement and in righteousness from henceforth and for ever: by the Memra of the Lord of hosts shall this be wrought” (Targum Jonathan Ben Uziel. J F Stenning; The Targum of Isaiah, p 32. Oxford 1953 ed, also, Rev. C. W. H. Pauli; Targum Jonathan Ben Uziel: The Chaldee Paraphrase on The Prophet Isaiah; pp.30, 31)

Some have tried to weaken this Prophecy as referring to The Messiah, by arguing that the verbs used in the Hebrew, are in the “past tense”. It is clear that both these Jewish works, that date to the first century AD, and older, understood the passage to refer to The Messiah. Ther is also more ancient Jewish evidence that this passage is Messianic, Rabbi Mordecai's Drash: Isaiah 9:6 A Prophecy of Messiah

As for The “past tense”, in Hebrew grammar, it is often used for what is yet to take place, which is agreed by Jewish and Christian Hebrew grammarians. Page Not Found - 404 Hebrew Tenses It really does not matter to the passage, whether it is “is called”, “was called”, or “will be called”, because this does not change the fact, that it cannot refer to any human being. The DSS 1QIsa(a), which is about 100 BC, reads “is called” (so the LXX, present, kaleitai); whereas the,4QIsa(c), is, “will be called”. The second century AD Hebrew manuscripts, which were the basis for the Greek translations, we have Aquila, “ekalesen”, which is the aorist, “called”; and Symmachus, “kelthesetai”, the future, “will be called”. Either corrections or corruptions.

There is no doubt, that the passage refers to The Messiah, Who is The Lord Jesus Christ.

The Prophecy of the Birth of this Child, Who is a Son, speaks of One Who is not only to be Born “human”, but Who is also fully God. This is clear from the Names/Titles that this Son has.

He is called, “Wonderful” (pe·le), which is the Name that “The Messenger of Yahweh”, gives Manoah in Judges chapter 13, “And the Messenger of Yahweh said to him, “Why do you ask my Name, seeing it is Wonderful (p̄e·li)?” (ver. 18). It is clear that this was not a created being, as Manoah clearly reconsigned Him to be God, “And Manoah said to his wife, We shall surely die, for we have seen God.” (ver. 22). Malachi 3:1 is clear, that the Coming of Yahweh/Jesus Christ, is “ū·mal·’aḵ hab·bə·rîṯ (and even The Messenger of the Covenant)”, Who is Himself, “hā·’ā·ḏō·wn (the Lord)”.

This Son is also called “Counsellor” (yō·w·‘êṣ). In 1 John 2:1, Jesus Christ is called, “Paraklēton”, which is often translated by “Advocate”. The Theological Dictionary Of The New Testament, informs us, “of the Rabbis, in their religious vocabulary... became a common loan word in the sense of “advocate,” related in meaning to “counsel,” “defender””

Next this Son is the “Mighty God (’êl Gibbôr)”. Some have tried to reduce the meaning of the Hebrew here, to “mighty-hero”, so as to remove the Deity of the Son. However, it is clear from other places in the Old Testament, where we find “’êl Gibbôr”, like Isaiah 10:21, and Jeremiah 32:18, these same translations that have “mighty God”. Why the difference, when used for The Messiah, Jesus Christ? The Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) of Isaiah, reads, “’êlGibbôr”, without any space in the words, so that it is a name, “MightyGod”. This was changed by the Masoretes (MT) Jewish scholars, to read, “’êl Gibbôr”. We find the same in Isaiah 7:14, which is another Prophecy of the Son, Who is to be Born from The Virgin, fulfilled in the Birth of Jesus Christ. In this verse in Isaiah, the MT reads “‘im·mā·nū ’êl”, but the DSS, “‘im·mā·nū’êl”, as a Name, “Godwithus”. In the New Testament, Paul says of Jesus Christ, that He is “tou megalou theou (The Great God)” (Titus 2:13). The Greek, “mégas”, can also mean, “mighty”, which is what Isaiah 9:6 says.

Yes, there are some really good arguments here. Just like progressives here in the US like to treat the Constitution as a "living document," altering it and applying it as they see fit, so the Jewish rabbis early tried to distance Jewish interpretation from any possible link to Jesus.

Some people wish to change truth to benefit what they wish to promote according to their personal agenda, which they claim is for a good cause. But dishonesty benefits nobody.

It's clear to me that OT prophecy and Isaiah's prophecy here in particular spoke of a divine Messiah, and certainly not about King Hezekiah. Has there ever been a Jewish King to bring in God's Kingdom? The only candidate for a proclaimed divine Messiah who brought "near" the Kingdom of God was Jesus.

It is no longer even possible for anybody but Jesus to do this, since Israel lost its royal line thousands of years ago! A resurrected Messiah who brought the Kingdom "near" is the only one who could possible fit this definition, in my opinion. But of course, it requires recognition of who God is first. Knowing God, and then seeing that God in Jesus is the only way to have genuine understanding that Jesus was and is the Messiah.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Next we have the Title, “Eternal Father”, as in our English Versions. In the Hebrew, it is the noun, “’ă·ḇî·‘aḏ”. This Title cannot be used for any human person.

The Hebrew, “'âb”, is a very broad word, which does not always have the meaning of “father”.

“the Sumerian language…a later a-a, ‘father’ = ‘begetter’…a-a-kalam-ma, ‘father of the land’, i.e., begetter and creator of the world…Like the other Semitic languages…abu... ‘father’…is used as a synonym for banu, ‘begetter’…In Hebrew ‘abh sometimes means the founder…protector” (Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, Vol. I, under ‘abh).

“Of the author, or maker of anything, specially of the Creator” (Gesenius Hebrew lexicon)

“originator, producer, generator, protector, ruler” (Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew lexicon)

“It designates primarily “begetter,” though by extension, ancestor, and metaphorically, an originator, chief, or associate in some degree” (R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer, Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke; Theological Wordbook of The Old Testament)

Likewise, in the Greek, πατὴρ, also has the meanings, “author” (Liddell & Scott, Greek lexicon). “founder…as the originator and ruler” (W. Arndt & F. Gingrich Greek lexicon). “the originator, protector, creator” (Thayer Greek lexicon)

It literally reads, “Originator of Eternity”. In the Book of Revelation, Jesus Christ says of Himself, that He is, “egō eimi ho prōtos kai ho eschatos kai ho zōn”, literally, “I Am The First and The Last and The Ever-Living One”. (1:17, 18; 2:8; 22:13). In Isaiah 44:6, it reads, “Thus said YHWH, King of Israel, And his Redeemer, YHWH of Hosts: “I [am] the first, and I [am] the last, And besides Me there is no god”. On the words, “ho prōtos kai ho eschatos”, the Unitarian scholar, Dr Joseph Thayer, says in his Greek lexicon, “the eternal One, Rev 1:17; Rev 2:8; Rev 22:13”. The Greek Old Testament, known as the Septuagint, reads, “ego eimi ho on”, “I AM The Eternal One”.

Prince of Peace: “śar-šā·lō·wm”

The Dead Sea Scrolls, Isaiah lQIsa, it reads, “The Prince of Peace”

Verse 7

“His government will expand, and peace will be endless for the throne of David and his kingdom, to establish it and to sustain it with justice and righteousness from now on and forevermore.” (Martin Abegg Jr., Peter Flint and Eugene Ulrich. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible; Fred P Miller; The Great Isaiah Scroll, 2006 ed)

The Government and Peace, of the Son, will expand and be eternal, built on the Throne of King David. This cannot refer to king Hezekiah, whose rule was not one of peace, and did come to an end.

We do read of the Son of Man, The Messiah, Jesus Christ, in the Book of Daniel:

“His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed” (7:14)

In the Gospel of Luke we read:

“You will conceive and give birth to a Son, and you will call His name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end” (1:31-33)

2 Peter 1:11 says;

“For in this way, entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will be richly supplied to you”

In Hebrews 1:8, God the Father addresses Jesus Christ, and says:

“ho thronos sou, ho theos, eis ton aiona tos aionos”, which is, “The Throne of You The God is to the ages of the ages”

In Revelation 11:15, it says;

“The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He shall Reign for ever and ever”

The Greek here is very important: “tou kuriou hēmōn (of our Lord, God the Father) kai tou Christou autou (and of His Christ, The Messiah)”. It is clear that we here have a distinction of Persons, “our Lord”, from “His Christ”. Yet, the words “He shall Reign”, in the Greek, is “basileusei”, which is the masculine, singular. It can either mean, the Reign of “His Christ”, or the Joint-Reign of “our Lord” and “His Christ”. Chapter 22 makes the latter clear. In verse 1 we read, “the throne of God and of the Lamb”, where the Greek is, “tou thronou tou Theou kai tou Arniou”, “thronou”, is in the singular, THRONE. It continues in verse 3, “the throne of God and of the Lamb (tou thronou tou Theou kai tou Arniou)”; “and His servants will Worship Him”. Both HIS (hautoû) and HIM (autós), are also in the singular number. These passages are some of the strongest for the absolute Deity and CoEquality of Jesus Chris with God the Father. There is no subordination in the Godhead of any of the Three Persons.

We have in Isaiah 7:14, and 9:6-7, two passages of the clearest Old Testament Teaching, on the Deity of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and His Incarnation, where He becomes The God-Man.

In Hebrew there are no vowels. The word translated as "everlasting Father" avi-ad could just as easily be rendered as avi-ed. And to me that rendering makes more sense. Avi-ed means "witness of my father". The difference is in whether we add in the "a" or the "e" as vowels.

It doesn't make sense that Jesus be called Father. There is is one Father and one Lord Jesus Christ. It makes far more sense to see Jesus bearing witness of the Father. No one has seen the Father but the Son.
 
Last edited:

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
In Hebrew there are no vowels. The word translated as "everlasting Father" avi-ad could just as easily be rendered as avi-ed. And to me that rendering makes more sense. Avi-ed means "witness of my father". The difference is in whether we add in the "a" or the "e" as vowels.

It doesn't make sense that Jesus be called Father. There is is one Father and one Lord Jesus Christ. It makes far more sense to see Jesus bearing witness of the Father. No one has seen the Father but the Son.

you should know that the Hebrew noun אב does not always mean "father", as I have shown in the OP.
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,717
2,415
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In Hebrew there are no vowels. The word translated as "everlasting Father" avi-ad could just as easily be rendered as avi-ed. And to me that rendering makes more sense. Avi-ed means "witness of my father". The difference is in whether we add in the "a" or the "e" as vowels.

It doesn't make sense that Jesus be called Father. There is is one Father and one Lord Jesus Christ. It makes far more sense to see Jesus bearing witness of the Father. No one has seen the Father but the Son.

It's true that there's no vowels. Context should be relied on a lot, I should think? To arbitrarily choose one word over another should be avoided, since that would be ignoring context.

A lot of people get worked up over prophecy of Messiah being declared to be "Everlasting Father." Often this is because identifying a name of Deity and identifying the Trinitarian Person of God the Father are two very distinct things. One is calling upon God in relationship with His Son Jesus. The other is expressing a name for God prior to the revelation of Jesus, the Son.

So "Everlasting Father" is simply a name for Deity, identifying God as the Father from Eternity. Jesus is that God. That's what I believe the text to be declaring, that the Messiah will bring to pass the Kingdom of God.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
It's true that there's no vowels. Context should be relied on a lot, I should think? To arbitrarily choose one word over another should be avoided, since that would be ignoring context.

A lot of people get worked up over prophecy of Messiah being declared to be "Everlasting Father." Often this is because identifying a name of Deity and identifying the Trinitarian Person of God the Father are two very distinct things. One is calling upon God in relationship with His Son Jesus. The other is expressing a name for God prior to the revelation of Jesus, the Son.

So "Everlasting Father" is simply a name for Deity, identifying God as the Father from Eternity. Jesus is that God. That's what I believe the text to be declaring, that the Messiah will bring to pass the Kingdom of God.

You are muddying the water here for no reason. The Hebrew word ad (ayin dalet) does not mean forever...it means "until". So then saying avi-ad means everlasting father is a real stretch...and unreasonable in my view. A much more common use of ayin-dalet as a stand alone word is ed which is the Hebrew for witness. The is NO authorative way of making avi-ad as the proper rendering of the text. The only way that is achieved is by looking for other instances in the scriptures...which are not present in this case.

Ad is used for eternity in such phrases as ad-olam or va-ad

There is no way that Jesus claims to be the Father. He is the Son and the Father is greater than He. Very confused translations bring confusion where a much more authentic way of seeing things is required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: faithfulness

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada

I have studied Hebrew for many years. I can read the OT in Hebrew. I use the scriptures to define the scriptures. Avi in Hebrew means MY FATHER...not just Father. Ayin dalet (a two letter word in Hebrew) means either "until" or "witness." Now Jesus is indeed "a witness of My Father" an avi-ed.....אביעד.....but He is NOT an "everlasting Father" Himself. This to me is very straightforward. (And I don't care how translators mixed things up) ;)
 

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,717
2,415
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are muddying the water here for no reason. The Hebrew word ad (ayin dalet) does not mean forever...it means "until". So then saying avi-ad means everlasting father is a real stretch...and unreasonable in my view. A much more common use of ayin-dalet as a stand alone word is ed which is the Hebrew for witness. The is NO authorative way of making avi-ad as the proper rendering of the text. The only way that is achieved is by looking for other instances in the scriptures...which are not present in this case.

Ad is used for eternity in such phrases as ad-olam or va-ad

There is no way that Jesus claims to be the Father. He is the Son and the Father is greater than He. Very confused translations bring confusion where a much more authentic way of seeing things is required.

I guess you missed the argument I was making? I said that the Trinitarian Father has a different meaning than "the Father" as a name for God. The Father is God. And the Holy Spirit is God. And yet, one cannot say that the Father is the Holy Spirit.

So it's really in how you're applying "Father," whether as an identifier of the eternal God or as one of the 3 Persons of the Trinity. Even if you don't believe in the Trinity, you have the same dilemma--the Father in the NT is identifying God in relationship with His Son Jesus, where the Father in the OT identifies God as an eternal Being.

As to whether the expression can be translated "Everlasting Father," I have more faith in the scholars than in you or in those you are relying on. If the scholars legitimately forward this kind of translation, I have faith that they know what they're talking about.

We can't just read a Concordance or Lexicon, or take a beginner's course in Hebrew, to know how to do this. There are nuances that only scholars know.

Even if you've studied Hebrew for years, as my brother has, you still wouldn't know some of these things unless you were an actual scholar. My brother, as I said, has been translating the Hebrew into English by himself, and he claims he knows very little next to scholars.
 

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
You are muddying the water here for no reason. The Hebrew word ad (ayin dalet) does not mean forever...it means "until". So then saying avi-ad means everlasting father is a real stretch...and unreasonable in my view. A much more common use of ayin-dalet as a stand alone word is ed which is the Hebrew for witness. The is NO authorative way of making avi-ad as the proper rendering of the text. The only way that is achieved is by looking for other instances in the scriptures...which are not present in this case.

Ad is used for eternity in such phrases as ad-olam or va-ad

There is no way that Jesus claims to be the Father. He is the Son and the Father is greater than He. Very confused translations bring confusion where a much more authentic way of seeing things is required.

I don't know where you are getting from my OP, that I said Jesus Christ is
I have studied Hebrew for many years. I can read the OT in Hebrew. I use the scriptures to define the scriptures. Avi in Hebrew means MY FATHER...not just Father. Ayin dalet (a two letter word in Hebrew) means either "until" or "witness." Now Jesus is indeed "a witness of My Father" an avi-ed.....אביעד.....but He is NOT an "everlasting Father" Himself. This to me is very straightforward. (And I don't care how translators mixed things up) ;)

what christian are you? do you believe in the Trinity?
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I guess you missed the argument I was making? I said that the Trinitarian Father has a different meaning than "the Father" as a name for God. The Father is God. And the Holy Spirit is God. And yet, one cannot say that the Father is the Holy Spirit.

So it's really in how you're applying "Father," whether as an identifier of the eternal God or as one of the 3 Persons of the Trinity. Even if you don't believe in the Trinity, you have the same dilemma--the Father in the NT is identifying God in relationship with His Son Jesus, where the Father in the OT identifies God as an eternal Being.

As to whether the expression can be translated "Everlasting Father," I have more faith in the scholars than in you or in those you are relying on. If the scholars legitimately forward this kind of translation, I have faith that they know what they're talking about.

We can't just read a Concordance or Lexicon, or take a beginner's course in Hebrew, to know how to do this. There are nuances that only scholars know.

Even if you've studied Hebrew for years, as my brother has, you still wouldn't know some of these things unless you were an actual scholar. My brother, as I said, has been translating the Hebrew into English by himself, and he claims he knows very little next to scholars.


Scholarship has some merit...but spiritual understanding goes much further. Otherwise the Jews would be the very best expositors of scriptures...which they are not. Why not? A lack of spiritual understanding. The same goes for religious scholars. Religion does not equate to prophetic understanding.

I think you are overawed by "scholarship" whereas it's not as big a deal as you think. :)

The deviations in the translations are easy to find in most cases.

Here's an example...(that even non-Hebrew speakers can grasp)

When Jesus says...ELI ELI LAMAH SABACHTHANI, He is saying...My God My God.... Now, El means God (singular)Why doesn't Jesus use ELOHIM? (plural) Because He is part of the Godhead...and there's only the Father beside Himself in the Godhead. (they share One Holy Spirit between them). Jesus does NOT say God, God....no, that would be EL EL LAMAH.... Jesus says MY God MY God or ELI ELI...(notice the "i" added onto the El)

Now back to Is. 9....What is improperly translated as "everlasting Father" begins with AVI. Compare that with ELI in the above explanation (as in My God). Avi means MY FATHER...not just Father. So at the very least avi-ad would mean "MY Father is everlasting." ( and not everlasting Father) I don't support that since it is obvious that God is everlasting. What is not so obvious is that Jesus has come into the world to bear witness of His Father. So I maintain that the Hebrew text is saying avi-ed (witness of My father)

I find that scholars confuse the text as soon as there is a prophetic element to the text. Why is that? No spiritual understanding.

Look for ANY university course where one of the prerequisites is spiritual understanding. You will not find any.
 
  • Like
Reactions: faithfulness

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I don't know where you are getting from my OP, that I said Jesus Christ is


what christian are you? do you believe in the Trinity?


Spiritual Christian...called personally by the Lord. There is no trinity apart from Roman doctrines that try explaining spiritual things to non-spiritual people.

There is the Father and the Son united in One Holy Spirit. We join in fellowship with them by that One Spirit. The Spirit of God is not a separate person. God has only one Spirit. And it is holy. You cannot show any evidence of there being more than One Holy Spirit.

The trinity doctrine was invented to control people. Reducing the presence of God (Spirit) to a name removes the need to be filled with the Spirit in reality. The church can control the name of the Spirit without waiting on God for His power and presence.

I was raised Catholic. I thought the Holy Spirit was just a name to say when you crossed yourself. That is until I actually was filled with the Spirit.

The masses have no idea of the spiritual walk in Christ. The vast majority of modern believers are no better informed. Religion is about quantity NOT quality. :) Look at all the dogmatic beliefs that are meant to be memorized...without any real fellowship with the living God. Look deeper.
 

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
So I maintain that the Hebrew text is saying avi-ed (witness of My father)

then what you maintain is wrong! Your Hebrew is what you yourself want it to say, and not what it actually means.

Can you quote some Bible translations that read "witness of My father"?

The Holy Spirit is a DISTINCT Person from the Father and Jesus Christ, both in the Hebrew Old Testament, and Greek New Testament
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mailmandan

ByGraceThroughFaith

Well-Known Member
Mar 14, 2021
2,870
852
113
Dudley
trinitystudies.org
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
Spiritual Christian...called personally by the Lord. There is no trinity apart from Roman doctrines that try explaining spiritual things to non-spiritual people.

There is the Father and the Son united in One Holy Spirit. We join in fellowship with them by that One Spirit. The Spirit of God is not a separate person. God has only one Spirit. And it is holy. You cannot show any evidence of there being more than One Holy Spirit.

The trinity doctrine was invented to control people. Reducing the presence of God (Spirit) to a name removes the need to be filled with the Spirit in reality. The church can control the name of the Spirit without waiting on God for His power and presence.

I was raised Catholic. I thought the Holy Spirit was just a name to say when you crossed yourself. That is until I actually was filled with the Spirit.

The masses have no idea of the spiritual walk in Christ. The vast majority of modern believers are no better informed. Religion is about quantity NOT quality. :) Look at all the dogmatic beliefs that are meant to be memorized...without any real fellowship with the living God. Look deeper.


Isaiah 48:16, the Speaker is Yahweh, He says that Adonay Yahweh is SENDING Him and His Spirit. If the Father SENDS the Holy Spirit, how can He be that same Person as the Father?

In John 15:26, Jesus speaks of the Spirit a Coming FROM the Father, where the Greek preposition, παρὰ, shows that the Spirit is DISTINCT from the Father.

Your theology is flawed!
 
  • Like
Reactions: mailmandan

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
then what you maintain is wrong! Your Hebrew is not what you yourself want it to say, and not what it actually means.

Can you quote some Bible translations that read "witness of My father"?

The Holy Spirit is a DISTINCT Person from the Father and Jesus Christ, both in the Hebrew Old Testament, and Greek New Testament

Not at all. The Jews are expert in reading Hebrew...if you didn't realize that. Now they had the OT for a thousand years BEFORE there was a church of Christ. AND...the early believers used the OT as their bible. No Jew EVER considered God's Spirit as a separate person. It's absolutely ridiculous to think so. The early believers were Jewish....and they NEVER considered the Spirit of God as a separate entity apart from Him.

Look at what Paul says...

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

Paul is showing that God has a Spirit the way men have a spirit. Are our spirits separate people from us? Do you read Paul's letters? Do you realize he was Jewish and therefore read Hebrew (fluently)? Do you realize that no Jew EVER thought that God's Spirit was a separate person? Ever! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: faithfulness

Randy Kluth

Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2020
7,717
2,415
113
Pacific NW
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Spiritual Christian...called personally by the Lord. There is no trinity apart from Roman doctrines that try explaining spiritual things to non-spiritual people.

There is the Father and the Son united in One Holy Spirit. We join in fellowship with them by that One Spirit. The Spirit of God is not a separate person. God has only one Spirit. And it is holy. You cannot show any evidence of there being more than One Holy Spirit.

The trinity doctrine was invented to control people. Reducing the presence of God (Spirit) to a name removes the need to be filled with the Spirit in reality. The church can control the name of the Spirit without waiting on God for His power and presence.

I was raised Catholic. I thought the Holy Spirit was just a name to say when you crossed yourself. That is until I actually was filled with the Spirit.

The masses have no idea of the spiritual walk in Christ. The vast majority of modern believers are no better informed. Religion is about quantity NOT quality. :) Look at all the dogmatic beliefs that are meant to be memorized...without any real fellowship with the living God. Look deeper.

I sympathize with your conversion from liturgical Catholicism, which is often lifeless, to a more spiritual Christianity. But it does not follow that breaking from Catholic formulations of the Trinity can be justified, simply because they've become lifeless for many Catholics! You can be renewed spiritually, whether as a Catholic or other, without giving up fundamental Christian beliefs.

To say the Trinitarian formulations were the product of self-seeking, power-hungry individuals is a judgment call. I don't find any of that to be true--the early theologians of the Church, and the defenders of the faith, seemed motivated by a desire to avoid heretical diversions, confusion, and excuses for unbelief.

Orthodox doctrine is what keeps us, as Christians, attached firmly to God's word so that our spiritual life continues unabated. That's what they were interested in doing, notwithstanding those who wished to use Scriptures purely for argumentation, or for sectarian desires.

Doctrine should not be strictly reduced to a ceremony of worship, which is often the case in churches that have lost their spiritual life. Liturgies are no better than incantations, attempting to draw upon God's Spirit without proper attachment to God's revealed word.

And apart from God's, word, which is God's connection to us, we are wayward, and wander far from our experience with God. And we end up not just out of our fellowship with God, but our beliefs begin to change for the worse, as well.
 

Episkopos

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2011
12,825
19,303
113
65
Montreal
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Isaiah 48:16, the Speaker is Yahweh, He says that Adonay Yahweh is SENDING Him and His Spirit. If the Father SENDS the Holy Spirit, how can He be that same Person as the Father?
Do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God?
Jesus shares the Holy Spirit with His Father. When He sends the Son the Spirit goes with Him.

Do you believe that the Spirit also accompanies spiritual Christians? Not as a separate entity from God...but in fellowship with God.

Have you ever heard of...God be with you!?! How is that possible? By His Spirit accompanying those who abide in Him.