Friday, February 8, 2013

Philippians 2:6-8 Answering Trinitarian Objections


Jesus taught servanthood by being a servant.
Philippians 2:6-8
Answering Trinitarian Objections
by
Bishop Jerry Hayes


I.  The Challenge of Philippians 2:6-8 To Oneness (Modalistic) Theology
The Trinitarian understanding of Philippians 2:2-8 presents Modalism with three basic challenges. First, the monotheism of the apostles is challenged by the introduction of the plurality of Beings concept; secondly, the Trinitarian willingness to accept the idea of a person of God ‘divesting’ Himself of His deity brings into question the doctrine of incarnation; thirdly, the integrity of the teaching of the ‘immutability” of God is brought into dispute.
  1. Denies the Radical Monotheism of ScriptureFirst, there is verse 6 which seems to place Jesus as another person of God Who was equal with God; i.e. “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”  This presents a theological problem in view of the many Scriptures which show clearly that this equality of another person with God is an impossibility. Notice the following scriptures carefully. 
  • Exodus 8:10, “That thou mayest know that there is none like unto the Lord our God.”  
  • In Exodus 15:11 Moses sings out this question, “Who is like unto thee, O Lord, among the gods?”  To this own question Moses gives the answer, “There is none like unto the God of Jeshurum” (a symbolic name for Israel, means upright). (Deuteronomy 33:26.)  
  • Furthermore, David declared in 2 Samuel 7:22, “Wherefore thou art great O Lord God for there is none like thee,” 
  • Then there is 1 Kings 8:23, “... Lord God of Israel, there is no God like thee, in heaven above, or on earth beneath.”  
  • The Psalmist asked, “For who in the heaven can be compared unto the Lord?” Psalms 89:6. 
  • Isaiah asked a like question, “To whom will ye liken unto God?” Isaiah 40:18.  
  • The LORD God asked the same question Himself, “To whom will ye liken me, and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be like?” Isaiah 46:5.  
  • Finally the scribe concurs with Christ when he says, “Well, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:” (Mark 12:32).

B.  A Person of God divesting (Emptying) Himself of Deity Denies the Incarnation.
The second challenge presented by the pluralist view is to the integrity of Yahweh Himself and is found in verses 7-8, “But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a  servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.”  It is alleged pluralist that the second person of God, i.e. Jesus Christ, “emptied” Himself of His deity in order to live and die as a man. Thereby, becoming inferior to the Father. The theological problem with this interpretation is that Colossians 2:9-10 teaches that just the opposite is true: “For in him (Jesus Christ) dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power.”

Paul’s statement as it appears in English is: “But make himself of no reputation...” This statement in the Greek is: all eauton ekenosen. While the pluralist want to interpret this as “poured out (or empitied) himself” (and by that implying that the second person of the Godhead emptied Himself of deity in order to suffer as a man) the testimony of holy Scripture just will not allow it. The word ekenisen is kenoō (Strong’s #G2758) from #G2756; to make empty, i.e. (figuratively) to abase, neutralize, falsify:-make (of none effect, of no reputation, void), be in vain.  Although the root of this Greek word  (kenos) has as one of its meaning “to make empty,” our word “kenoō” is never so translated in the New Testament. 

Kenoō is used four other times in the New Testament and that by the same writer, Paul: 
  • Romans 4:14 “...faith is made void.” 
  • 1 Corinthians 1:17 “...lest the cross of Christ should be made void.” 
  • 1 Corinthians 9:15 “...should make my glorying void.” 
  • 2 Corinthians 9:3 “...lest our boasting of you should be in vain.”
In our text (Philippians 2:7) kenoō is used in the same context as its other uses and is so translated by the KJV translators as “no reputation.”

Not only does the “divesting” interpretation go counter wise to Colossians 2:9-10 but it also is a denial of the incarnation of the Mighty God in Christ. In this understanding of Philippians 2:2-8, which takes the imagined second person of Deity and empties him of his God-ness, we do not have Yahweh God manifest in flesh, as 1 Timothy 3:16 would teach. But instead, we have a God that has divested (emptied) himself of His deity in order to BECOME human. The problem exists in the fact that the Scripture states: “To wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself” (2 Corinthians 5:19).  Now the question, simply put, is: Was Jesus Christ God IN man, or was Jesus Christ God BECOME man? For the integrity of the incarnation to remain intact, it must be admitted that Jesus was God IN man.

C.  Does Violence to the Immutability of God
Another part of this problem is that if Jesus, as God, divested Himself of Deity in order to become a man it would require a change in the nature of God. I.e. God gave up what He was in order to become what He was not. Which is to say that God, who is not and was not human, became human. something; that He was not before! This presents a problem of some magnitude, because the Word of God states emphatically, “Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither a shadow of turning.” (James 1:17).  Furthermore, God says of himself.”For I am the LORD, I change not” (Malachi 3:6).  so, not only is the emptying or divesting interpretation of Philippians 2:6-8 a denial of the incarnation of the Mighty God in Christ, but it is in the same instance a rejection of the ‘immutability” (the impossibility of change) of God; which doctrine is taught clearly in Scripture. 


II  Philippians 2: 6-8 Interpreted Biblically
Having stated the challenges of the text as understood by the pluralist, such as the Trinitarians, I will attempt to show that, although the text presents problems that need solving, there is no problem with the text. The perceived difficulty for  Oneness theology exists only when a wrong interpretation is forced upon the passage in order to arrive at a pretext (a purpose or motive alleged or an appearance assumed in order to cloak the real intention or state of affairs). When rightly divided, the meaning is harmonious with other scripture, and its message is edifying.

A.  The Context Is Humility.
First and foremost, we must not make the mistake of attempting to force a meaning onto the passage which the writer did not intend. What then did the writer intend to teach by Philippians 2:6-8? The answer may be found in the verses 3 and 4. When we approach the text in this manner we are studying and interpreting by context.  (A text without context is a pretext.) The question, then, is: “What is the context of the passage?”  The subject is introduced clearly in verse 3, “...in the lowness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.”  The topic is humility. Not to insist on one’s own importance; but, to always prefer others before one’s self. Paul writes in verse 4, “Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.”  

In order to bring this truth home to his readers Paul directs them to Christ their Great Example as a model for the correct way to think of one’s self.  Notice verse 5, “Let this mind be in you that was also in Christ Jesus.”  Then verse 8 says, “he (Jesus) humbled himself.”  That is the whole point! Paul is teaching the Philippians about humility by employing the master example: the Creator of the universe “appearing” as a mere man.  

It does not follow that one loses his importance by assuming an inferior image; nor does one lose his superiority by projecting an inferior attitude.  Counter-wise, however. One is proven even more important and more superior by his or her unassuming character.

B.  Jesus Did Not Cease To Be God Because He Appeared As A Man.
So, now we face the text in its proper context. (This will avoid the pretext of the pluralist.) That is, although Jesus was All Important, All Superior, All God, because He was the Almighty (Revelation 1:8), He did not display His importance, His superiority, His deity, before men. Instead, He appeared as a servant. This, however, did not lessen His importance, His superiority, His deity; but rather, exalted it.  Notice the spiritual principle of holy Scripture, “So the last shall be first and the first last,” (Matthew 20:16). The Christian gets by giving (Luke 6:38); Lives by dying (Colossians 2:20); Is exalted by being abased (Matthew 23:12).

C.  The Scholars Explain.
In commenting on Philippians 2:6 (“Who being in the form of God thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”) Joseph Henry Thayer explains: “Who, although (formerly when he was Logos) he bore the form (in which he appeared to the inhabitants of heaven) of God (the Sovereign). Yet did not think that this equality with God was to be eagerly clung to or retained...”  Adam Clark shares the following insight: “Who being in the form of God did not think it a matter to be earnestly desired to appear equal to God. But made himself of no reputation. Though he was from eternity in the form of God ... yet he thought it right to veil this glory and not to appear with it among ...men. He ... took upon ... the form or appearance of a servant.”

To all of this I can add very little except to say that Jesus was God (in being and form) from eternity. When it became necessary for God to come into our world He, in His wisdom, thought it not good to appear unto men as God. So He humbled himself and appeared as a man - in the form of a man; all the while remaining God in being. Thus, 1 Timothy 3:16, “...God was manifest in flesh.”

D.  Why did He Not Just Say So?
Many times the question is asked, ‘If Jesus was Father God why did he not just say so?”  The answer to this question is so completely summed up in Philippians 2:5-8.   He was humble.  He did not think it a good thing to flaunt His deity before men. He did not choose to appear better than other men, although He was better that all other men for He was the creator of all men.  He choose, instead, to have all men appear better that himself.

When Jesus spoke of the Father it was always in a way that distanced His own identify from that of the Father God. This action was in keeping with His character of not appearing as God - although He was.  Concerning this very subject Jesus made the following promise, “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs: but the time cometh, when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall shew you plainly of the Father.” (John 16:25).  Paul referred to this same event of revelation when he wrote to Timothy, “Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and the Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.” (1 Timothy 6:15-16).

At the time of this great revelation may we all bow low at His feet and whisper in hushed tones of adoration the confession of Thomas, “The Lord of me and the God of me!”



Amen
Read other essays from the Bishop on the subject of the Godhead:

"The Dual Nature Of Jesus Of Nazareth"

"The Worlds, Made By The Son"

"Hebrews 13:8 vs 1 Corinthians 15:28"

"Glory With The Father"

"How Is God One?"

"Hebrew Monotheism"

"An Exegesis of 1 Corinthians 8:6-7"


"The Apostolic Creed"

"Jesus Is Father God"

"Homoousia And The Creed Of Nicaea"

"The Triquetra And Modalism"

"Modalism, Simultaneous Or Sequential?"

"Micah 5:2-4, An Exegesis"


"Elohim, the Plural form For God"

"Can the Deity of Jesus Be called The Son Of God?"

"Mathematical Equation For The Godhead"

"Hebrew Monotheism, Second Edition"

"Jesus, On God's Right Hand"

"The Name of the Deity" (The Tetragrammaton)

"Christology of the Apostolic Church Fathers"

"Christian Modalism challenged by the Greeks"

"The Apologists and the Logos Christology"

"Logos Christology"

"The Seven Spirits of God"

"Historical Numerical Superiority of the Monarchians"

"How Is God One?" Second Edition

"Creed of Nicæa (Creed of the 318) Affirmed"

"Another Comforter (Answering Objections to Modalism)"

"Echad vs Yachid (Answering Objections to Modalism)"

"The Godhead Teaching of Ignatius of Antioch"

"Hebrews 1:8, (Answering Objections to Modalism)"

"Godhead Theology of the Tabernacle of Moses"

"Proper Biblical Understanding of the Word 'Person'"

"Defense of Isaiah 9:6, Answering Objections to Modalism"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2017/04/defense-of-isaiah-96.html

Defense of 1 Timothy 3:16 (Answering Objections to Modalism)



Godhead Theology is a study of Christian Godhead theology. ... Was He God or not? In Godhead Theology Bishop Jerry Hayes follows that debate through the first 300 years of the Church's history. Our book is in five sections: Section One ... demonstrates Modalistic Monarchianism as the original orthodoxy of the Chruch; Section Two introduces the Apostolic Creed ... ; Section Three is an affirmation of Modalistic Monarchianism; Section Four is Modalism's responses to objection from the pluralists Trinitarians, Binitarians, Arians and Semi-Arians. Included are two comprehensive indexes: Subject Index and Scripture Index. 613 pages.

Own this classic book today by ordering from the link provided here:https://www.amazon.com/Godhead-Theology-Modalism-Original-Orthodoxy/dp/1516983521/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Bishop+Jerry+hayes&qid=1554244653&s=books&sr=1-4




Be sure to listen and subscribe to the Bishop's Podcast: Apostolic Bishop, at:



Posted by at 1 comment:

Thursday, January 3, 2013

Eucharistic Prayers of Forgiveness and Blessing


Eucharistic Prayers of Forgiveness and Blessing


Eucharistic Prayer of Forgiveness:
The Apostle Paul instructs Christians to examine themselves as they approach the Lord’s Table.This self examination should be accompanied by a prayer of forgiveness. This prayer must be personal to each communicant. After a time of self examination each person will ask forgiveness of sins of commission and omission; willful sins and sins of ignorance. It is permissible for one person to intercede for the group with each communicant saying “Amen” to the prayer.

The Personal Eucharistic Prayer of Forgiveness should look something like this:
“Holy Father I come to you in Jesus name confessing that I am a sinner saved only by your grace and the shed blood of Your Son. I ask forgiveness of all sins of which I am knowledgeable and those unknown to me; forgive me for missing Your will in my life. I am not worthy of your mercy, but say the word and I shall be clean.”

A Communal Prayer of Forgiveness should look something like this:
“Holy Father we come to you in Jesus name confessing that we are sinners saved by grace and the shed blood of Your Son. We ask forgiveness of our sins of which we are knowledgeable and those unknown to us; forgive us for missing Your will in our lives. We are not worthy of Your mercy, but say the word and we shall be clean.”


Eucharistic Blessing:
The manner in which one blesses the elements of the Lord’s Supper is important but the words are not to be taken as an incantation that works some kind of white magic that changes the elements into the flesh and blood of Christ. Instead, the words of the blessing should beseech the Lord for His body and blood to be present in a real way. The one making the invocation should pray with such earnestness as to expect the desired answer to the request. Thus, the words, not being an incantation of specific words, are to be an earnest prayer as any other prayer that is expected to be answered in the affirmative.

Having stated the above, it should be remarked that the invocation should contain certain specifics: 
  • Thanks given for the broken flesh  and shed blood of our Savior; 
  • Thanks given for His blessings on the earth that produced the bread and the wine; 
  • Request made for the blood of Christ to be present: in the cup, around the cup, over the cup, and under the cup. 
  • Request made for the flesh of Christ to be present: in the bread, around the bread, over the bread, and under the bread;

The Eucharistic Blessing over the Bread should look something like this:
“Lord Jesus we come before You in Your most holy name, thanking You for Your broken flesh. We acknowledge Your blessings upon our land that has produced the bread before us today.  Now, we humbly ask that Your body be present in this bread, around this bread, over this bread, and under this bread. This we pray in Jesus name. Amen.”

The Eucharistic Blessing over the Wine should look something like this:
“Lord Jesus we come before You in Your most holy name, thanking You for Your shed blood. We acknowledge Your blessings upon other land that has produced the fruit of the vine that is before us today. Now, we humbly ask that Your blood be present in this cup, around this cup, over this cup, and under this cup. This we pray in Jesus name. Amen.”


The above remarks are intended to assist the Disciples as they begin to observe the Lord’s Supper through out the earth. 

I am encouraging you, as Christians, to begin a weekly observance of the Lord’s Supper where ever you may be located. I understand that you will most likely not have the help of local churches; so, this is something you may have to do on your own. Do not be afraid. If you are the head of your household, you are the high priest of your family. If you are the only Christian in your family try to celebrate this with a fellow believer, if no one is available do it by your self. 

For extra study material see the following links:


The God of all Mercy bless and keep you, is my prayer for you.


Apostolically Speaking
Bishop Jerry Hayes
Abbot General, Disciples of the Way (Apostolic)
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, December 28, 2012

Manifesto of the Disciples of the Way (Apostolic)


When a new enterprise is embarked upon, and others are expected to be influenced or to join in its proceedings it is only proper to set forth a manifesto detailing the purpose, views, and intention of the endeavor under consideration. Therefore, the following manifesto is set forth for Disciples of the Way (Apostolic)

As we view Christianity alongside other world religions, especially Islam and Judaism, it becomes very clear that the character of Christianity differs in very many ways from the character of all other faiths, but especially Islam and Judaism. The basic difference lies in the fact that both Islam and Judaism are masculine religions expressing aggressive characteristics; Christianity on the other hand is feminine and expresses herself through the softer characteristics of love, mercy, and forgiveness. 
In a world that hosts three monotheistic religions, two masculine -- one feminine, the aggression that is innate in the masculine constantly threatens the feminine.  This threat is apparent when the theology of all three groups are juxtapose. All three, Christianity, Islam and Judaism have theologies that decree world dominance. Christianity and Islam, in particular, are mandated by their holy Scriptures to convert all peoples of the earth to their individual faiths. Christianity is to “make disciples of all nations” through the preaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and manifesting Christ to the world through acts of love, mercy, forgiveness; the characteristics of a mother (the Bride of Christ). While, Islam, on the other hand, is instructed by the Koran to convert all to itself by the means of the sword. Dozens of times the Koran states“slaughter is better than turmoil.” Christianity offers the world peace through the teachings of Jesus Christ; while, Islam offers the same world a different peace through the teachings of Mohammed: whose teachings declare that there are only two options apart from sharia law: death or subjection to servitude.
In the spirit of “speaking the truth in love” it must be stated with certainty that the Jewish world view is no friend to the Faith of Christ. Religious Jews hate Christians and teach that Jesus was the bastard son of a Jewish peasant girl. Zionist Jews (secular Israel) have driven Palestinian Christians from their homes throughout the area they control. The energy the West expends on Zionist Israel would better serve the Kingdom of Christ by being applied to the aid of Christians the Zionist have disenfranchised. Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) is opposed to the support of a political/religious system which rejected their Messiah and wars, even today, against His Kingdom. Christians who believe and teach Christian Zionism are misguided and must be instructed from their error.

Although Christianity claims one-third of the  earth’s population the enemy that she is facing in the 21st century is unprecedented in its ferocity. Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) will offer Christians a way to man-up in the face of the aggressive challenge coming from both Islam and Judaism.
To facilitate the the strengthening of feminine Christianity, to help position her as the militant force in the earth she must become, Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) proposes the blending of two ancient warrior/priest paradigms: the Warriors of Light of the Essenes - an ancient Jewish sect of the time of Christ and His apostles, and the Celtic Culdees (warrior society of the Celtic Church). Indeed, many historians see them to be one and the same. It is argued that the Essenes were transported to the British Isles in A.D. 37 by the Jewish Christians who accompanied Joseph of Arimathea. In this view the Jewish Essenes became the Celtic Culdees.
Continuing in the tradition of the Essene/Culdee, Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) will vouchsafe the deposit of faith that has been committed to the church by whatever means the Holy Spirit allows through the teachings of the holy Scripture; and, will propagate the Gospel of Christ throughout the earth.
Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) will be comprised of communities called Abbeys (physical and virtual). Each Abbey will be organized with the following structure: Novices, Culdees, Warriors of Light, Bishop, and an Abbot who serves under an Abbot General.
The Novice:
Upon entering association with Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) one enters his/her novitiate. The novitiate is a probation period where the novice may determine his/her suitability to the ministry of Culdee. The most important lesson for the novice to learn is obedience to the Mysteries of the Faith. The novice has no vote in the community.
The Culdee:
A Culdee is any person who has entered the office of Warrior Monk; and, who freely binds himself/herself to service either for a limited time or for life, and who accepts the sitting Abbot General as his/her earthly commander in chief. The Culdee advances through seven degrees of discipleship to attain to the position of a Warrior of Light. Each Culdee shall have an equal vote to elect his/her Abbot.
The Warrior Of Light:
A Warrior of Light shall be any Culdee who has mastered all seven degrees of discipleship, who has freely taken an oath of service for life, and who accepts the sitting Abbot General as his/her earthly commander in chief. Only the Warriors of Light may vote for a new Abbot General.
Bishop:
The Bishop shall be a Warrior of Light who has received the calling and unction of the Holy Spirit to be the Spiritual overseer and confessor for the community. Upon the manifestation of this calling and unction the Bishop shall be appointed by the Abbot who occupies the seat of Moses in the community with the Bishop occupying the seat of Aaron.
Abbot:
The Abbot shall be of the Warriors of Light and shall be elected for life. In the case of a new Abbey the Abbot may be appointed by the Abbot General. The Abbot sits in the seat of Moses and exercises full temporal authority over the community. The Abbot will acquiesce in spiritual matters to the judgement of the Bishop. The Abbot may be male or female.
Abbot General:
The Abbot General shall be of the Warriors of Light and shall be elected by that class of the Culdees for life. The Abbot General is recognized as the earthly commandeer in chief of all Abbeys. It will be assumed that the Abbot General alone hears from God in matters which concerns Disciples of the Way (Apostolic), through God's Word, spirit filled counselors, and direct inspiration. The Abbot General may be male or female.
The Community:
Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) will consist of communities called Abbeys. A mature Abbey will consist of thirteen persons: the Abbot and his/her Culdees. In the true spirit of the Celtic tradition the Abbey will be made up of both male and female Culdees which may include family units. When and where possible the members of an Abbey should live in close physical community. However, when separated by great distances Culdees will function as members of a Virtual Abbey.
The Mission Of The Abbey:
The mission of Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) is the defense and the propagation of the Kingdom Gospel of Jesus the Messiah. This is a polemic mission of Apologetics. The Lord of all the earth has chosen preaching as the means of salvation for the world; therefore the Culdee will be master swordsman in the craft of spiritual warfare. Education of the Culdee is the foremost objective of each Abbey. The Abbey must strife to provide the intelligentsia for its secular community. False religion, and especially false teaching within Christianity, will be confronted at every opportunity. The marching orders of the Abbey is “Educate and Engage.”
Veneration Of The Family:
 The cohesiveness of every society is the family unit. Disciples of the Way (Apostolic) emphasizes the veneration of the family.  The love shared between a man and a woman which in turn produces offspring as holy seed is considered the ultimate will of Father God for His children. (Consequently, the practice of homosexuality is an affront to the human race and is not to be looked upon with any degree of toleration; the practice of such a lifestyle betrays the fundamental purpose of mankind.)
Children of believing parents are holy seed; who qualify for all kingdom prerogatives. Such offspring are born into covenant privileges and are not to be considered as aliens from the Commonwealth of Israel, but are citizens by right of birth. Consequently, children born to Christians are Christians by birthright and eligible for all Kingdom blessings.
Children are to be initiated into the community through a series of rites of passage. Christian baptism is to be administered by eight days old; following the Old Testament example of circumcision; first Holy Communion will be administered at eight years of age; confirmation into the faith at 12 years of age; and ordained a warrior monk at 18 years old.




Posted by at 1 comment:

Friday, December 14, 2012

Glory With the Father


Glory With the Father
Written by Bishop Jerry Hayes Sr. Abbot General of the Disciples of the Way (Apostolic)
John 17:5
And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.


Of course, the Trinitarian feels that this scripture proves the pre-existence of the Son of God.  We will show that too much has been attempted, in that the problem created by such a view of this passage is insurmountable, even by those who hold it.  To the Trinitarian Jesus is asking the Father to glorify Him with the Father’s glory; notice: “And now, Father, glorify thou me with thine own self…”  If there are two God-persons in view here, and if Jesus is a separate God-person from the Father, there is a very big problem.  The problem lies in the simple fact that Father God will give His glory to NO other. Two passages of scripture declare this clearly:


1.     Isaiah 42:8 “I am the LORD (Yahweh), that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another.”
2.      Isaiah 48:8 “… and I will not give my glory unto another.”


Is Jesus praying an impossible prayer?  Obviously not.  Jesus is praying a correct prayer.  He is praying a proper prayer that could and would be answered.  If He was asking Father God, a separate being from Himself, to share His (the Father’s) glory with Him (the Son) then that would have been an exercise in futility.  It would have been so, because Isaiah 42:8 and 48:11 are Bible absolutes that can never be altered. (Psalms 119:89, “forever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.”)  If, on the other hand, the MAN Christ Jesus was praying to the Father to be glorified into fore ordained Son-ship, and not into Deity, then the prayer has great merit.


Second, Timothy 2:15 instructs us to “rightly divide the word of truth.”  In all truthfulness it is the Son which is praying, and the Son prays to be glorified with the glory that He (the Son) had with the Father before the world was created.  In order to understand what this  glory, which the Son enjoyed with the Father before the world was, we must “rightly divide the word of truth.”


The text before us (John 17:5) gives us two very important bits of information:


1.     Where this glory was experienced,
2.      When this glory was experienced. 


The ‘where’ was in the Father’s presence; the ‘when’ was before the world was.  We must then ask the question,”  What was with Father God, before the creation of the universe? (I say “creation of the universe”, because that is what the word kosmos means – here, translated world.)


The answer to the question, “What was with Father God before the creation of the universe?” is not another person of deity; although, this is what the Trinitarian concept of John 17:5 would demand.  We may be confident in this, because of the declarations of Father God Himself: He says in Deuteronomy 32:39 “See now that  I, even I, am he, and there is no God with me:…”  Isaiah 44:24 “…I am the LORD that maketh all things, that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself.”  God the Father asks, “To whom will ye liken me and make me equal and compare me, that we may be like?” (Isaiah46:5).  The Trinitarian says “We will compare thee to the Son of God, and we will make thee equal to Him.” To such people the prayer of Jesus (John 17:5) was a request to be restored to equality with the Father.  No! And as thousand times No!  The assumed answer to Yahweh’s question put to Isaiah is: None, LORD, is Your equal, and we cannot compare You to any.


Now that we have seen what the answer to the question, “What was with the Father before the world (kosmos) was” is not, perhaps we can ascertain what the answer IS.


This we know, The Counsel of God was with God in the beginning.  John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God…”  The logos  was with the Father before the world was. Logos is the expression of thought, as embodying a concept or idea (Vine).  Hebrews 11:3 states, “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God …”


The Word (logos) was not a separate being from God the Father in the beginning, but was simply the expression of His thought, which embodied the conception or idea of Creation, and Redemption. (Therein, rests His Counsel.)


Three elements existed in the “Counsel of God,” before the world was:


1.     The Atonement;
2.     God’s Elect; and
3.     The Kingdom. 


Paul makes us aware in Ephesians 1:11 that God counsels with Himself before He performs any work.  What a work creation was!  But the work of creation pales in the energetic aurora from the labor of Calvary’s summit.  Creation and Redemption, one is predicated upon the other. Both were in the Counsel of God before the world was.


In the Counsel of God was The Atonement – before the world was: 1 Peter 1:19:20, “But with the precious blood of Christ, as a lamb without blemish and without spot: who verily was fore ordained before the foundation of the world …” Again: Revelation 13:8 “…Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”  And again, Hebrews 4:3 “… although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.”


In the Counsel of God was God’s Elect – before the world was: Ephesians 1:4 “…he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world.” Again, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 “… because God hath from the beginning chose you to salvation …” And again, Revelation 17:8 “… names … written in the book of life from the foundation of the world …” 




In the Counsel of God was The Kingdom – before the world was: Matthew 25:34 “…then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.”


In the full Counsel of Cod, the Son (the humanity) was the paramount part.  When Jesus prayed to be glorified with the FORMER glory that He (the Son) had with the Father before the world was, He was referencing the Atonement; God’s Elect; and the Kingdom.  He was saying (this prayer He prayed the night he was betrayed): “Father, I am now ready to realize this FROMER GLORY through the suffering of the cross.  I was in your Counsel before the world was; I (as a man suffering for mankind) had glory with you, there and then, now, I am ready to receive that glory.” He said, “No man takes my life from me, I lay it down.”
Amen

 Read other essays from the Bishop on the subject of the Godhead:

"The Dual Nature Of Jesus Of Nazareth"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-dual-nature-of-jesus-of-nazareth.html

"The Worlds, Made By The Son"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-worlds-made-by-son.html

"Hebrews 13:8 vs 1 Corinthians 15:28"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2012/12/hebrews-138-vs-1-corinthians-1528.html

"Philippians 2:6-8, Answering Trinitarian Objections"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/02/philippains-26-8-answering-trinitarian.html

"How Is God One?"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-is-god-one.html

"Hebrew Monotheism"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/02/hebrew-monothesim.html

"An Exegesis of 1 Corinthians 8:6-7"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/02/an-exegesis-of-first-corinthians-86-7.html

"Answering Trinitarian Objections To The Oneness Faith"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/03/answering-trinitarian-objections-to.html

"The Apostolic Creed"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/05/i-believe-in-one-god-1-solitary-in.html

"Jesus Is Father God"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/07/jesus-is-father-god.html

"Homoousia And The Creed Of Nicaea"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/10/homoousia-and-creed-of-nicaea.html

"The Triquetra And Modalism"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2013/12/triquetra-and-modalism.html

"Modalism, Simultaneous Or Sequential?"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2014/01/modalism-biblical-and-historical.html

"Micah 5:2-4, An Exegesis"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2014/02/micah-52-4-exegesis-but-thou-bethlehem.html


"Elohim, the Plural form For God"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2014/10/answering-trinitarian-objections-to.html

"Can the Deity of Jesus Be called The Son Of God?"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/04/can-deity-of-jesus-be-called-son-of-god.html

"Mathematical Equation For The Godhead"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/04/mathematical-equation-of-godhead-1x1x11.html

"Hebrew Monotheism, Second Edition"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/05/hebrew-monotheism.html

"Jesus, On God's Right Hand"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/05/jesus-on-gods-right-hand.html

"The Name of the Deity" (The Tetragrammaton)
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-name-of-deity-tetragrammaton.html

"Christology of the Apostolic Church Fathers"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/06/christology-of-apostolic-church-fathers.html

"Christian Modalism challenged by the Greeks"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/06/christian-modalism-challenged-by-greeks.html

"The Apologists and the Logos Christology"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/06/the-apologist-and-logos-christology.html

"Logos Christology"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/06/logos-christology.html

"The Seven Spirits of God"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/07/revelation-14-apostolically-speaking.html

"Historical Numerical Superiority of the Monarchians"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-historical-numerical-superiority-of.html

"How Is God One?" Second Edition
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/07/how-is-god-one.html

"Creed of Nicæa (Creed of the 318) Affirmed"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/09/creed-of-nica-creed-of-318-affirmed.html

"Another Comforter (Answering Objections to Modalism)"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/09/another-comforter-answering-objections.html

"Echad vs Yachid (Answering Objections to Modalism)"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/09/echad-vs-yachid-answering-objections-to.html

"The Godhead Teaching of Ignatius of Antioch"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/10/godhead-theology-of-bishop-ignatius-of.html

"Hebrews 1:8, (Answering Objections to Modalism)"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/10/godhead-theology-of-bishop-ignatius-of.html

"Godhead Theology of the Tabernacle of Moses"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2016/08/godhead-theology-of-tabernacle-of-moses_5.html

"Proper Biblical Understanding of the Word 'Person'"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2017/04/proper-biblical-understanding-of-word.html

"Defense of Isaiah 9:6, Answering Objections to Modalism"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2017/04/defense-of-isaiah-96.html

"Defense of Isaiah 9:6, Answering Objections to Modalism"



The above article is excerpted from the author's best selling book entitled "Godhead Theology." You may own your personal copy of this classic work on the Godhead by ordering from the link provided here: 
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)