I thought apostolics believed Jesus is the Father?

[thephnxman]

"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."

Most everyone has erred on the NAME: they are still considering the "veil" of the
natural man, Jesus, instead of the NAME. Isa. 9:6, is telling us what we will find
in the NAME: it is His wonder, Counsel, the Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and the
Prince of Peace. As in "...whosoever shall call upon the NAME of the Lord shall be saved."

YAH-weh (Je-hovah) is the O.T. NAME of promise for deliverance, salvation, etc.
YAH-shua (Je-sus) is the N.T. NAME that fulfills(ed) the promises.
God's (the Father's) NAME is YAH, which is Savior; therefore, God is the savior.

This in no way detracts from "...the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world."

[Esaias]

If Jesus isn't the mighty God and everlasting Father, then he isn't the Prince of Peace either.

[n david]

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.


Colossians 2:8-9 KJV

[votivesoul]

The titles of Isaiah 9:6 are not titles, as in several.

It is one long title in Hebrew:

פֶּלֶא יֹועֵץ אֵל גִּבֹּור אֲבִיעַד שַׂר־שָׁלֹֽום

Pele-joez-el-gibbor-abi-ad-sar-shalom

The child/son of this passage is called one long title, not five separate titles, the same way, earlier in Isaiah (8:3) Gold told Isaiah to name one of his son's Mahershalalhashbaz, or one long prophetic title, as opposed to a standard name.

As such, the title of Isaiah 9:6 needs to be translated and interpreted differently than most current models do.

One example is: Wonderful in counsel is God the mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace.

The title then is a not a description of the one who bears it, so much as it is a prophetic proclamation about the One described in the title proper.

[n david]

One of my father's favorite Scriptures is Isaiah 12:2:

"Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation."

The word for "salvation" is "Yeshua" or, as we know it, "Jesus." So the verse reads:

"Behold, God is my Yeshua/Jesus; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my Yeshua/Jesus."

[votivesoul]

Further, a literal word to word translation of the entire title does not necessarily bring out the same meaning we all know.

For example el gibbor can just as easily mean "a great tyrant/conqueror or mighty hero" since el, which can be translated as God, can also be translated many other ways.

Even Nebuchadnezzar is called el (See Ezekiel 31:11).

Additionally, the standard Hebrew word father, that is to say, av is not an automatic reference to God the Father, anymore than Avram or Exalted Father means that Abram was God the Father.

In ancient Jewish thought, a man could be a father of or to many different things, without being an actual father, much less God the Father. One merely needs to possess a thing in ancient Jewish thought to be called its father, or even to be an instructor and/or master of a subject. Consider Elishah's cry to Elijah "My father...". Or Job saying he was a father to those not actually of his progency.

So, just because this child/son is to be the "Father" of ad, or eternity, doesn't equate him with God the Father. Rather, in his future age of which this prophecy predicts, the child/son will be a master over eternity, as someone who, in his future immortality, possesses it.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by n david

One of my father's favorite Scriptures is Isaiah 12:2:

"Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation."

The word for "salvation" is "Yeshua" or, as we know it, "Jesus." So the verse reads:

"Behold, God is my Yeshua/Jesus; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my Yeshua/Jesus."

That's an old time myth.

Here is the Hebrew text, transliterated:

Behold, God is my yeshua'ti; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the Lord Jehovah is my strength and my song; he also is become my li'shuah.

Both transliterated words, while related to the name Yeshua, are actually from a slightly different word, namely: yeshuah. This word is not a proper noun, that is, a name, but rather, is a standard noun, meaning salvation or deliverance.

Note, too, that it's a Hebrew word. Yeshua, as a proper name, is Aramaic, but in Hebrew, Christ's name was and is Yehoshua or "Yah (makes) safe". Yehoshua is a compound of the Tetragrammaton YHWH and yasha.

The Hebrew word from Isaiah 12:2, while closely related, isn't the same as the Aramaic name Yeshua, or even the Hebrew name for Jesus, i.e. Yehoshua.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Sean

The very thing that "qualifies" Jesus as the Father, is the indwelling fullness of the Father in His human son(Jesus).

so the Son is the Father?

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by n david

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Colossians 2:8-9 KJV

That is correct: the fullness of the Godhead, or everything that is God, dwells
in the body of Jesus.

"To wit, that God was IN Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not
imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of
reconciliation."

How was God, and His fullness, in the body? By the SPOKEN WORD sent from God
through the angel, when he (the angel) said, "Hail, Mary...that which is conceived in
thee...you shall call his NAME Jesus, for He shall save...". And then: "He sent
His WORD and healed them from their destruction." Once more, this is not
detracting anything from "...the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world."

[ApostolicKitty]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Seems I was mistaken? I keep running into people who identify as "apostolic" and "oneness" who nevertheless believe and teach "Jesus is not God", or that Jesus is NOT the Father, that he is only " indwelt" by Deity and is not Himself the Supreme Deity, and other similar types of things.

Did I get on the wrong bus? Should I get off ASAP?

I was blown away when I discovered there were "apostolics" who didn't believe in the new birth of water and Spirit, or who didn't believe that baptism in the Name is FOR (not "because of") the remission of sins. But the last several years seems there is a rapidly growing number of apostolic oneness pentecostal believers who aren't even oneness - at least not as I understand the term...

The guy we were friends with that we started doing Skype studies with became one of these. Years ago he would greatly argue for oneness. Honestly, I learned a lot from reading his writings back then. It's also when we became friends... He started doing research for his book and was reading all kinds of things, apparently the doctrines of devils, and became convinced that Jesus was just an obedient man. I didn't realize it till we were on Skype. Then I noticed that, not only had his doctrine changed, but he had a different spirit about him. The way he acted actually reminded me of a rabid dog, rather than the Holy Ghost filled man I had know him as. He claimed that what we believed (and what he once believed) about Jesus being the father was gnosticism. I think he was the one who actually adopted gnosticism. I believe the Bible is clear about Jesus being one and the same as the Father.

It still makes me sad to think of how we had to cut ties with him.