Sunday, April 7, 2019

The Dispute Over the Body of Moses (Jude 1:9)



9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.


The context of this event is clearly seen in the preceding and succeeding verses. Verse 8. “Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.” … Verse 10, “But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.” So, then, the context is the sin of speaking evil of those in authority. 

Jude illustrates his point with a reference to Michael the archangel disputing with the Devil over the body of Moses. Here, he points out that even Michael did not bring (what would have been) a just accusation of evil doings against the Devil. What the King James Version has as “railing accusation” the Greek text actually reads “βλασφημίας”: i.e. “blasphemous.” An argument of comparison: Michael one of the chiefest angels, was content to deliver Satan, although a most accursed enemy, to the judgment of God to be punished: and these perverse men are not ashamed to speak evil of the powers who are ordained of God.


Moving from the context and the purpose of Jude’s reference, we will attempt to gain some understanding of the actual reference itself. Jude’s reference to Michael disputing with the Devil over the body of Moses has been a question in the Christian community, if not in the Jewish, for most of two millennia. I say, “if not in the Jewish” because, indeed, in the Jewish tradition there is no lack of illumination on this event. For example, in the Targum, or Paraphrase, of Jonathan on Deuteronomy it is stated that the grave of Moses was given over to the special custody of the Archangel Michael. In the Debarim Rabba i.e. the Midrash on Deuteronomy (fol. 263), it is related that Sammael, the prince of the Evil Angels, was impatient for the death of Moses. “And he said, ‘When will the longed-for moment come when Michael shall weep and I shall laugh?’ And at last the time came when Michael said to Sammael, ‘Ah! cursed one! Shall I weep while thou laughest?’ and made answer in the words of Micah, ‘Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy: when I fall, I shall arise; when I sit in darkness, the Lord shall be a light unto me’ ” (Micah 7:8). A longer legend is given in the same book (fol. 246), which must be somewhat abridged. “Moses prayed that if he might not enter into the Promised Land, he might at least be allowed to live; but God told him that unless he died in this world he could have no life in the world to come, and commanded Gabriel to fetch his soul. Gabriel shrank from the task. Michael was next bidden to go, and he too shrank; and then the command was given to Sammael, who found him with his face shining as the light, and he was afraid and trembled. He told him why he was come, and Moses asked him who had sent him, and he made answer that he was sent by the Creator of the Universe. But Moses still held out, and Sammael returned with his task unfulfilled. And Moses prayed, ‘Lord of the World, give not my soul over to the Angel of Death.” And there came a voice from Heaven, ‘Fear not, Moses, I will provide for thy burial,’ and Moses stood up and sanctified himself as do the Seraphim, and the Most High came down from Heaven and the three chief angels with Him. Michael prepared the bier and Gabriel spread out the winding sheet.… And the Most High kissed him, and through that kiss took his soul to Himself” (Nork, Rabbinische Quellen). The Christian writer Oecumenius, writing in the tenth century, demonstrates a reliance on the Targum Jonathan account, for he reports a tradition that Michael was appointed to minister at the burial of Moses, and that the devil urged that his murder of the Egyptian (Exodus 2:12) had deprived him of the right of sepulture, and Origen (de Princ. iii. 2) states that the record of the dispute was found in a lost apocryphal book known as the Assumption of Moses.

I am certain that we must make allowances for the imagination of the ancient Jewish divines. However, it is obvious, from the manner in which Jude writes, that he assumes that the event to which he refers was familiar to his readers. According to Clement of Alexandria (Adumbr. in Ep. Judae), and Origen (De Princ. iii. 2, 1. ) the story here narrated by Jude is taken from the apocryphal writing known as the Assumptio Mosis. This writing was extant in the time of Jude. Charles  L. Feinberg, in his edition of the Assumption thus summarizes the fragments dealing with the funeral of Moses: (1) Michael is commissioned to bury Moses, (2) Satan opposes his burial on two grounds: (a) he claims to be the lord of matter (hence the body should be handed over to him). To this claim Michael rejoins, “The Lord rebuke thee, for it was God’s Spirit which created the world and all mankind”. (b) He brings the charge of murder against Moses (the answer to this is wanting). The story is based upon Deuteronomy 34:6 (R.V.), “he buried him (mg. he was buried) in the valley … but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.” Moreover, Josephus (a priest, general in the Jewish Revolt against Rome [Jewish commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee] and Jewish historian), a contemporary to Jude,  gives further details of the passing of Moses (Antiquities of the Jews 4:8,48): 

“… for although he was always persuaded that he ought not to be cast down at the approach of death, since the undergoing it was agreeable to the will of God and the law of nature, … Now as he went thence to the place where he was to vanish out of their sight, they all followed after him weeping; … All those who accompanied him were the senate, and Eleazar the high priest, and Joshua their commander. Now as soon as they were come to the mountain called Abarim, (which is a very high mountain, situate over against Jericho, and one that affords, to such as are upon it, a prospect of the greatest part of the excellent land of Canaan,) he dismissed the senate; and as he was going to embrace Eleazar and Joshua, and was still discoursing with them, a cloud stood over him on the sudden, and he disappeared in a certain valley, although he wrote in the holy books that he died, which was done out of fear, lest they should venture to say that, because of his extraordinary virtue, he went to God.” 
The dispute seems to be: Whether Moses’s body should be so buried as to be concealed from the Israelites? In Deuteronomy 34:6, it is said God buried him, (which very well could mean by the ministry of Michael the archangel), and that no man knoweth of his sepulchre. The Devil opposed the Angel, desiring to have the place of his burial known, that in later times it might be a snare to God’s people, and a means to bring them to idolatry. And this seems very probable with what the Israelits did with the brass serpent that was, in the beginning, an instrument of God, but the people made an idol (Numbers 21:4-9 cf 2 Kings 18:4, Nehushtan);  further,  if we consider what work the Devil has made in the world with the bodies of saints and martyrs, and how much idolatry he has brought in by the actions of the Romanish church. Both God and the Devil know the need of humankind to have a physical object as a conductor for faith. For this reason the Lord gave us the holy Eucharist, and for this reason the Devil perverted God’s gift and devised the doctrine of transubstantiation to make an idol of the holy elements.  


 Hello friends, I am a full time biblical researcher. I  rely on freewill love offerings (from those of you who benefit from my work) and book sales  for my support. Would you please consider leaving a small donation at the link provided here? Thank you for your support. -JLH

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC

Dear friends, thousands of you read and benefit from our essays each month. If each of you invested only $1.00 each month, all of our financial needs would be met. Thank you for your support.



That Jude would incorporate apocrypha stories and accounts into his epistle is not unprecedented in the New Testament. The Apostle Paul names Jannes and Jambres, the two Egyptian magicians who confronted Moses in the staffs to snakes event (2 Timothy 3:8-9 cf Exodus 7:8 - 8:19). Although they are not named in the canon of holy Scripture, the names were a part of Jewish tradition from which they passed into the Talmudic and other Jewish writings; see Targum Jonathan, Exodus 7:11Exodus 22:22. Because of our view of biblical inspiration it must be maintained that if the Holy Spirit inspired both Jude and Paul to include an apocrypha account into their canonical Scripture (at least) the part they cited must be actually factual. Jude, as inspired, could distinguish how much of the tradition was true, how much false. We have no such means of distinguishing, and therefore can be sure of no tradition, save that which is in the written word. So, then, though holy canon does not give the account of Michael’s contention with the Devil over the body of Moses, because the Holy Spirit inspired the account to Jude, we must accept it as truth. We may be frustrated that Jude did not give us more information,  however,  the information he did give is all that we may be certain of. It should be pointed out that we must not, without reservation, accept the complete story on the strength of the germ of the tradition that New Testament inspiration sanctified. Ergo, we accept as truth that Michael and the Devil disputed over the body of Moses: but, when or where that happened we do not know because Jude did not say; what the nature of the dispute was we do not know because Jude did not say. 


We may observe the close connection between
Moses, Elijah and Jesus from the event on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke 9:28-31). The mystery surrounding the passing from this life in the cases of both Moses and Elijah and the fact of their presence with Christ on the Mount, more importantly the subject of their conversation, makes us think that in some manner the nature of their passing is connected with the transfiguring of Christ event. At any rate the conversation between the three concerned the death Jesus was about to experience. Luke uses an interesting word (in verse 31) for his description of Christ’s death, “elegon tên exodon autou”: they “spoke of his exodus.” The Greek word for “exodus” (literally the “departing”) is used only two other times in the New Testament: in Hebrews 11:22 for Israel’s departure from Egypt and in 2 Peter 1:15 where that Apostle uses it for his death, then immediately he goes into a reference of the Mount of Transfiguration in the very next verse. (Other words for death (thanato) in the N.T. are ekbasi, going out as departure ( Hebrews 13:7 ), apxi, departing ( Acts 20:29 ), analusi, loosening anchor ( 2 Timothy 4:6 ) and analusai (Philippians 1:23 ).) But Jesus’ exodus (departure) involved much more than the dying: it involved the resurrection and the ascension. While an imperfect type, as all types and shadows are, the disappearance of Moses did, indeed, prefigure the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ — the prophet like unto Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15 cf Acts 3:22-23). Satan, as having the power of death, would have opposed the raising of Moses’ body, on the ground of Moses' sin at Meribah (Numbers 20:2-13), and his murder of the Egyptian (Exodus 2:12ff). That Moses' body was raised, appears from his presence with Elijah and Jesus (who were in the body) at the Transfiguration  (note and apply Jesus’ explanation of the resurrection: Luke 20:27-40). This Mount of Transfiguration appearance was the sample and earnest of the coming resurrection kingdom, to be ushered in by Michael's standing up for God's people (Daniel 12:1). Thus in each dispensation a sample and pledge of the future resurrection was given: Enoch in the patriarchal dispensation, Moses in the Levitical, Elijah in the prophetical. 

Other Considerations
Having acknowledged the above Jewish tradition concerning the passing of Moses, the story does not end here. There are other possible understandings of the Jude text that have great merit, as far as this writer is concerned. As has already been pointed out: Jude did not indicate when this contest took place. It is true that most commentators accept that it happened at the death of Moses; but there is nothing that chisels that scenario in stone. There are two other possible explanations for Michael contending with the Devil over the body of Moses that I am interested in reviewing. These are 1. The infancy of Moses and 2. Israel’s national renewal. I am interested in these two possible explanations because of what seems to be strong biblical grounds for their plausibility.


Infancy of Moses
One possible origin for this Michael/Devil narrative is the Infancy of Moses (Exodus 2:1-10). Moses was born to be the deliverer of his people, Israel. Satan raised up against this in moving the heart of Pharaoh to have all the male babies of the Hebrews killed. The agent of Hell (the Devil) and the agent of Heaven (Michael) did, in very fact, compete for the literal body of Moses. We can speak of Michael’s intervention in this murder attempt because the Bible is clear that he is the special guardian of the Hebrew people (Daniel 12:1), and would have been personally involved in any action to protect them.

Israel’s National Renewal
Finally, there is the allegorical application of Jude’s narrative. In this understanding Jude’s narrative references the national renewal of the Jewish people after the return from the Babylonian Captivity under Nehemiah and Ezra. The evidence that makes an allegorical interpretation of Jude’s narrative so appealing are two in number. The first part of such evidence is the apocalyptic nature of sections of Jude’s epistle (vv7, 9. 14-16). Apocalyptic literature has its own hermeneutic. It is not interpreted as is normal writing such as the Gospels which are for the most part straight forward narratives of the life and ministry of Christ, or the Acts of the Apostles which is an accounting of the life of the early days of the Church, or the Epistles which are letters of instructions to churches and individuals. Apocalyptic scripture often requires an allegorical interpretation. Apocalyptic books of the Bible with which we are familiar are Daniel, Ezekiel, Zechariah and Revelation; there is a very real sense in which the book of Jude may be added.  Second, is the quote furnished by Jude, The Lord rebuke thee.” This is seen by some to be taken from the apocalyptic book of Zechariah 3:1-2, “And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the LORD said unto Satan, The LORD rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?”

If we pursued such a course of interpretation the “body of Moses” would be an allegory for either the Law of Moses (Hebraically the body of a thing is the thing. From Romans 7:14 we learn that the body of sin is sin. Thus, the “body of Moses” signifies Moses himself, who in the New Testament is put for his law: E.g,  2 Corinthians 3:15 “When Moses is read…”; Acts 15:21, “Moses has in every city them that preach him.”) or the Jewish people themselves: i.e., the Jewish Church. 

In this light the high priest Joshua represents the people of God (the Jews) who have returned from their captivity dirty from sins and transgressions: see v3, “Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel.” Joshua is before the Angel of LORD pleading for the people’s reinstatement to their covenant relationship with their covenant God. Satan is on the priest’s right hand resisting his efforts; no doubt pointing out every reason why the people should not be readmitted to covenant relationship, why Jerusalem and its temple should not be rebuilt. Thus, as "the body of Christ" is the Christian Church, so "the body of Moses" is the Jewish Church. Those who came up out of Egypt and their descendants had been baptized unto Moses in the sea and cloud (1 Corinthians 10:2) and were the “body of Moses” just as are those who have been baptized into Christ are said to be “the body of Christ” (Romans 6:3 cf 1 Corinthians 12:12, 27). So, then, ”the body of Moses" means the Jewish Church accused by Satan, before God, for its filthiness, on which ground he demands that divine justice should take its course against Israel, but is rebuked by the Angel of the LORD, who in this place we may understand to be Michael the archangel, who has "chosen Jerusalem.” Michael  is "one of the chief princes" (Daniel 10:13), "your prince" (Daniel 10:21), "the great prince who stands for Israel" (Daniel 12:1), who gives help against Persia, and stands for the chosen people. He is also introduced in the Book of Enoch, and the view given of him there is like that in Jude. He is "the merciful, the patient, the holy Michael" (40:8). So it is appropriate that he is the one contending against the Devil for the people of Israel, I,e, the body of Moses. 


Allegorically, Jude 1:9 is a match for Zechariah 3:1-4.


Eschatological and Essclesiological consequences for this allegorical interpretation are wonderfully profound. In this paradigm the sacred Scripture depicts three bodies: the Body of Moses (Jewish church, 1 Corinthians 10:2, etc.), the Body of Christ (the Christian church,  1 Corinthians 12:12, 27) and the body of the Beast (human [secular] government, Daniel ch 7). The “body of Moses” (the Jewish church) is born again at Pentecost A. D. 30 (John 3:3-5; Romans ch 11) and becomes (Ephesians 2:12 - 3:8) the “body of Christ” (the Christian church);  the body of Christ (the Christian church) overcomes and replaces (Daniel 2:34; 7:10-27) the body of the Beast (human [secular] government). So, the end game is:  “And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever” (Revelation 11:15). 



Summary
Faced with the challenge of exegeting Jude 1:9 (Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. KJV) the passage was made difficult by seemingly being a stand alone text with no companion texts from which to garner understanding. But this was only true if the text was not viewed allegorically. As it turned out Jude’s narrative has possible origins in three Old Testament texts: two provide literal interpretations and one must be understood allegorically.

Candidate number one is the death of Moses (Deuteronomy 34:6). Jewish tradition and apocrypha writings provided the ample background for Jude’s narrative.

Candidate number two is the infancy narrative of Moses. Here, we saw how Satan moved Pharaoh to kill all male Hebrew boys in an attempt to kill baby Moses who was the deliverer of the Hebrews. We suggested that because the archangel Michael was the patron Angel of the Hebrews that the divine care of baby Moses was his personal mission.

Candidate three offers an allegorical interpretation to the Jude narrative. In this view we show how the “body of Moses” over which the Devil and the Archangel contended was the Jewish Church being contested in Zechariah 3:1ff. This third offering has a strong claim, in this writers opinion, because of the Michael quote “The Lord rebuke thee.” These words of Michael were also the words of the Angel of the LORD from Zechariah 3:2.

If I might offer a covert observation of my own by way of pointing out that holy Scripture, many times, has more than one meaning or application. It is called the high and low, the near and far, of prophecy. Since three is the biblical number of confirmation — couldn’t it be that all three are true?

Apostolically Speaking
☩☩ Jerry L Hayes




Dear Friends,
If you have enjoyed the above article, and if it spoke some spiritual worth to you, then I know you would like to have the book we are offering here. Letters To My Children on Apostolic Kingdom Theology is the collection of twenty-four actual letters I wrote to my children mapping my journey from dispensationalism to a biblical kingdom theology. All who have an interest in where the Church is going will thrill at the information in this book. Order your personal copy today from the link provided here:
https://www.amazon.com/Letters-Children-Apostolic-Kingdom-Theology/dp/1482716712/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=letter+to+my+children%2C+hayes&qid=1554876286&s=books&sr=1-3-catcorr





THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT BY
PURCHASING MY BOOKS FOR YOUR LIBRARY

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




 Hello friends, I am a full time biblical researcher. I  rely on freewill love offerings (from those of you who benefit from my work) and book sales  for my support. Would you please consider leaving a small donation at the link provided here? Thank you for your support. -JLH

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC

Dear friends, thousands of you read and benefit from our essays each month. If each of you invested only $1.00 each month, all of our financial needs would be met. Thank you for your support.








Wednesday, April 3, 2019

The Apostolic Creed



Written by Bishop Jerry Hayes Sr, Abbot General of the Disciples of the Way (Apostolic)

The Apostolic Creed

I believe in one God(1), solitary in being (2); Maker of Heaven and Earth, and all things therein(3): by His eternal Word(4). That is to say: By the breath of his mouth(5). Thereby, and because of creation, reasonably termed the Father(6).

Who, because of us sinners, and for our salvation(7), became manifested in flesh(8). Conceived by the Holy Spirit(9), born of the virgin Mary(10). This incarnation(11) not lessening His deity(12), nor altering his humanity(13); fully God(14) and fully man(15), consubstantiated(16). Therefore, the angel named him Jesus(17) - Yahweh Savior(18). As to his deity, He is the same essence, nature, and being as the Father(19). As to his humanity, he is a like essence, nature, and being with us men(20). Thereby, and because of generation and redemption, reasonably termed the Son of God(21).

Who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, was buried(22), and descended into Hades(23). Who, in His deity raised Himself from the dead on the third day(24), ascending to the right hand of the Majesty on High(25); from which he shed forth His Spirit on the Day of Pentecost(26). Thereby, and because of emanation and sanctification(27), reasonably termed the Holy Spirit(28).

I believe in the one true saving gospel(29): the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ(30). Which saving graces are individually appropriated respectively(31), through repentance(32), water baptism by immersion(33), with the invocation of Jesus’ name(34): thereby, washed in his blood(35); and the infilling of His Spirit as in the beginning(36).

I believe in the holy(37), universal(38), and apostolic Church(39), the communion of the saints(40), and the forgiveness of sins(41); the sacramental mysteries(42) of: Jesus name water baptism(43), the Lord’s Supper(44), and the laying on of hands(45). I believe in the resurrection of the body(46), the catching away of the Church(47); the physical return of Jesus Christ(48), eternal judgment(49) and life everlasting(50).


Hello friends, I am a full time biblical researcher. I  rely on freewill love offerings (from those of you who benefit from my work) and book sales  for my support. Would you please consider leaving a small donation at the link provided here? Thank you for your support. -JLH

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC

Dear friends, thousands of you read and benefit from our essays each month. If each of you invested only $1.00 each month, all of our financial needs would be met. Thank you for your support.


Footnotes:
1. De 6:4; Mk 12:29; 1 Ti 2:5; Ga 3:20. 
2. De 32:39; Is 43:3, 11; 44:6, 8; 45:5, 18, 21, 22; 46:5,9.
3. Is 44:24; 45:12; Mal 2:10.
4. Jn 1:1-3; He 11:3.
5. Ps 33:6; He 1:3.
6. 1 Co 8:6; Mal 2:10; He 12:9 cf Zech 12:1.
7. Ro 2:23; 1 Jn 3:5.
8. Is 9:6; 1 Ti 3:16; Col 2:2-10.
9. Mt 1:18; Lk 1: 35.
10. Is 7:14; Mt 1:23,25.
11. 2 Co 5:19; Col 2:9.
12. Jn 2:19-21; 11:25; 14:7-11; 15:24; 20:28.
13. Ga 4:4; Lk 22:41, 42.
14. Col 2:9; Ro 9:5; Titus 2:13; 1 Jn 5:20; Jude 25; Re 1:8.
15. Ga 4:4; Mt 26:28; Is 53:12; Ac 2:31; He 4:15; 1Ti 2:5.
16. To be united in one common substance: Is 9:6; Re 22:1-4.
17. Mt 1:21.
18. Is 43:11; Lk 2:11.
19. Jn 10:30; 14:8-9; Is 9:6.
20. Ga 4:4; 1 Ti 2:5; He 2:17.
21. Jn 3:16; Lk 1:35.
22. Lk 23:3-33, 46, 50, 52.
23. Eh 4:8-9; Re 1:18.
24. Jn 2:19; 11:25.
25. He 1:3; 8:1.
26. Joel 2:28; Mt 3:1; Ac 2:1, 3-4; Ac 2:16, 33;  Col 1:27.
27. Ro 15:16; 1 Pt 1:2.
28. Jn 5:26; Col 1:27.
29. Ga 1:8; Eh 4:5; 2 Ti 1:15; Jude 3.
30. 1 Co 15;1-4; Ro 6;1-4.
31. Ac 2:38; Ro 6;1-4.
32. Lk 13:3; Ac 17;30; He 12:14-17.
33. Col 2:12; Ro 6:4; Ac 8:38-39.
34. Ac 2:28; 8;16; 10;48; 19:5; 1 Co 1:13; Ja 2:7.
35. Mt 26:28; Ac 22:16; Eh 5:25-26 (washed by the Rhema = living voice); Re 1:5.
36. Ro 8:11; Ac 11:15-16; see Ac 1:5; 2:1-4; 10:46; 19:6.
37. To be set apart: Mt 16:18; Eh 2:19-21; 1 Ti 3:15.
38. Including, or covering all: Mt 16:18-19;Ga 4;26; 1 Ti 3:15.
39. Apostolic: of, or pertaining to, the Apostles; Church: a called out body: Eh 4:5; Ga 1:9; Jude 3; Eh 2:20-22.
40. Communion: koinonia, fellowship; saints: godly believers, living and dead; Eh 3:15; Ac 2:42, He 10:25; 12:18, 22-23.
41. Mt 6:14; Ac 2:38; Eh 1:7; 1 Jn 1:9.
42. A rite that produces a grace from God when observed in faith: Ja 2:24-26 (also see vv 17, 20, 22).
43. Ac 2:38; 8:12, 16; 10:48; 19:5; 1 Co 1:13; Mt 28:19.
44. Mt 26:26-28;1 Co 10:16; 11:23-33.
45. He 6:1-2; 1 Ti 4:14; De 34:9.
46. 1 Co 15:52; 1 Th 4:16.
47. 1 Th 4:17-18.
48. Ac 1:10-11; Re 1:7.
49. He 6:2; 4:27; Mk 9:48.
50. Jn 3:16, 36; 4;14; 5:24; 6;40.


Here are other works of the Bishop concerning Creeds: About Christian Creeds
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-christian-creed.html

Origin of the Apostles' Creed
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-origin-of-apostles-creed.html

The Creed of Nicæa vs The Nicene Creed
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/01/the-creed-of-nicaea-vs-nicene-creed.html


Christological teaching is a large part of the Bishop's ministry. Here is a book you are sure to want for your library:


Godhead Theology is a study of Christian Godhead theology. In Godhead Theology Bishop Jerry Hayes follows that debate concerning Jesus through the first 300 years of the Church's history. Our book is in five sections: Section One is the history of the early Church from A. D. 100 to 400 and 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 objections from the Pluralists: Trinitarians, Binitarians, Arians and Semi-Arians. Included are two comprehensive indexes: Subject Index and Scripture Index. (613 pages)

Own this classic work on the Godhead by placing your order today at the link provided here:https://www.amazon.com/Godhead-Theology-Modalism-Original-Orthodoxy/dp/1516983521/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=bishop+Jerry+hayes&qid=1554349453&s=gateway&sr=8-4





THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT BY
PURCHASING MY BOOKS FOR YOUR LIBRARY -JLH


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




Apostolically Speaking
☩☩ Jerry L Hayes
(Mar David Ignatius)

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"

"Philippians 2:6-8, Answering Trinitarian Objections"

"How Is God One?"

"Hebrew Monotheism"


"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"

The Conception of the Incarnation



The ninth line of The Apostolic Creed☩ states that Mary “conceived by the Holy Spirit.” 

Therefore, it is needful to take up the word “conceived.” 

What the Creed means by “conceived” is the normal physical conception of a human child. The first definition that is in the Merrian-Webster Dictionary that is before me is: to become pregnant; or pregnant with (a child). It is this plain meaning of the word that is intended by the Creed. 

The Creed declares this because it is the clear teaching of the Scripture. The Angel of the Lord told Joseph, concerning Mary: “Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost” (Matt 1:20). The Angel said Mary had conceived. Was it true? Yes, if we are to assume the Angel had his facts straight. 

The fact of the conception is fundamental to every other point of doctrine touching the Father’s plan of salvation. If Mary conceived, not only was God in her womb; but, mingled with that deity was also humanity—Mary’s humanity. Humanity reaching all the way back to Adam. This point did not escape the evangelist Luke (a doctor by profession), for when he recorded the genealogy of Christ (Luke 3:23ff) he did so through the lineage of Mary’s family (reaching King David through Nathan, not Solomon as does Matthew’s record – Matthew 1:1ff) back to Adam. The conception was necessary for the humanity of Jesus to have real existence. The alternative to conception would have been an implantation. If Jesus was simply God implanted into the womb of a woman, then, he had no humanity, in any real sense. If this were true, what we know of Him as human only appeared so to be, but had no real substance. This would make His body a phantom, and His suffering and death would not have been real, but only pretended. If Jesus was not truly born in human flesh, then Calvary has no salvific merit, for the passion was not real. No! Jesus was conceived as a flesh and blood human being in Mary’s womb♱—the Angel said so (Matt 1:20)! That there were those, even in the apostles’ time, that denied the flesh of Christ is seen in John’s Epistles. John does not stutter when he writes that those who do not confess that Christ has come in the flesh are antichrists (2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.).


Hello friends,  I am a full time biblical researcher. I  rely on freewill love offerings (from those of you who benefit from my work) and book sales  for my support. Would you please consider leaving a small donation at the link provided here? Thank you for your support. -JLH

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=4EXSWA2A47ARC




Dear friends, thousands of you read and benefit from our essays each month. If each of you invested only $1.00 each month, all of our financial needs would be met. Thank you for your support.


Mary conceived by the “Word” that was spoken into her womb♱. There, the Word of God that was, in very fact, God Himself (John 1:1), was “made flesh” (John 1:14). Although Christ had no earthly father, and we should not think of Mary’s conception being the fruit of sexual intercourse between Father God and Mary (she conceived by the Word of God – see Luke 1:38, 45, “And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. ...” 45 “And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord.”),  yet the developmental process within the womb should not be considered as different from the normal process of nature. Namely this: upon conception there is a union of the male sperm with the female egg. In that a human cell is made up of 46 chromosomes, both the egg and sperm provide 23 chromosomes each, producing, at the time of conception, one complete cell. This one cell contains the genetic code of both parents. We have no reason not to believe that something like this took place within the womb of Mary, upon her believing and receiving the Word of God spoken to her by the Angel. The Word, then, fertilized Mary’s egg. Thus, the genetic code of man and God bonded (intermingled) in her womb, making the unique Son of God: the God-man. 

This conception provided God with humanity, complete with a human body that could really suffer, so that the cross has real meaning—a human soul (see Matt 26:38//Mark 14:34) that could really feel compassion, so that, the writer of Hebrews effectively wrote with conviction, We do, in fact, have a high priest, in Jesus of Nazareth, who can be touched by the feelings of our infirmities, for he was tempted in all points as we humans (Heb 4:15)—a human spirit (breath of life/spark of the divine) that could be returned to the Father from whence it had come (see Luke 23:46 cf Ecc 12:7). 
An implantation would have given the world nothing more than the Voice that Walked with Adam in the cool of the day (Gen 3:8), the One for whom Abraham prepared a feast and Whose feet he washed (Gen 18:1-8), or Melchizedek (Gen 14:17-18), or Jacob’s Wrestler (Gen 32:24ff). As awesome as these manifestations of Yahweh were, the human condition needed something— Someone—more. The sin of humankind called for—even demanded—a unique Being that would stand in the midst of the great gulf between God and His fallen creation; grasping one in one hand and the other in the other hand, and pulling them towards one another until total communion was achieved. The human condition called for Jesus of Nazareth, Mary’s baby boy, the one who was both God and man, Who alone could bridge the vast expanse between the holiness of God and the sinfulness of humanity – because of His conception. 
☩ The Apostolic Creed: http://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2019/04/the-apostolic-creed.html
Also:https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2015/07/the-christian-creed.html
♱ For the sake of this article the term "womb" is employed for the female reproductive matrix.

Apostolically Speaking
☩☩ Jerry L. Hayes
(Mar David Ignatius)






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: 





THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT BY
PURCHASING MY BOOKS FOR YOUR LIBRARY -JLH


View my book shelf at:
www.amazon.com/books/bishopjerryhayes

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



Apostolically Speaking
☩☩ Jerry L Hayes
(Mar David Ignatius)

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

"Glory With The Father"
https://bishopjerrylhayes.blogspot.com/2012/12/glory-with-father.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

"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