PDA

View Full Version : Jesus the Everlasting Father?



Pilgrimtozion
Dec 6th 2008, 08:58 PM
Yesterday, I heard a live rendition of Handel's Messiah, which was absolutely gorgeous. One of my favorite parts is when they sing Isaiah 9:6. As I was listening to this, an old question came to mind. Here is the verse:

6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

This is IMHO a wonderful verse that shows the Deity of Christ - the child being talked about here is obviously Christ, who will be called "Mighty God", a fascinating and beautiful statement. This leads, however, to my question: why will Christ be called 'Everlasting Father'? Isn't this a bit strange in light of the traditional perception of the Trinity.

Now please note that my intention with this thread is not to question the Trinity in any way. I know this is not allowed and I am a believer in that Trinity, so please do not steer this thread in such a direction.

Why do you think Jesus is called 'Everlasting Father' in this passage? How does this work in the context of this passage and the context of the Trinity (starting from the presumption that the Trinity is Biblical)?

Walstib
Dec 7th 2008, 12:53 AM
Reading that to me it speaks of The Trinity Himself.

Man will be born and is---

God-Trinity/Godhead
Counselor-- Holy Spirit
Eternal Father--Father
Prince of peace- Jesus

First thoughts,
Joe

Pilgrimtozion
Dec 7th 2008, 02:04 AM
Reading that to me it speaks of The Trinity Himself.

Man will be born and is---

God-Trinity/Godhead
Counselor-- Holy Spirit
Eternal Father--Father
Prince of peace- Jesus

First thoughts,
Joe
Yeah, I hear what you are saying. At the same time, the Trinity as we see it also tells us that though Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and the Father are all God, Jesus is not the Father or the Holy Spirit. This distinction yet unity is vital to seeing the Godhead in the right perspective.

Yet this verse declares that Jesus shall be called Everlasting Father. This is what I do not understand. Perhaps I am missing something...?

RogerW
Dec 7th 2008, 02:12 AM
Yesterday, I heard a live rendition of Handel's Messiah, which was absolutely gorgeous. One of my favorite parts is when they sing Isaiah 9:6. As I was listening to this, an old question came to mind. Here is the verse:

6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

This is IMHO a wonderful verse that shows the Deity of Christ - the child being talked about here is obviously Christ, who will be called "Mighty God", a fascinating and beautiful statement. This leads, however, to my question: why will Christ be called 'Everlasting Father'? Isn't this a bit strange in light of the traditional perception of the Trinity.

Now please note that my intention with this thread is not to question the Trinity in any way. I know this is not allowed and I am a believer in that Trinity, so please do not steer this thread in such a direction.

Why do you think Jesus is called 'Everlasting Father' in this passage? How does this work in the context of this passage and the context of the Trinity (starting from the presumption that the Trinity is Biblical)?

Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Joh 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Hope this helps to answer your questions.

Many Blessings,
RW

Pilgrimtozion
Dec 7th 2008, 02:14 AM
Joh 10:30 I and my Father are one.

Joh 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
Joh 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Hope this helps to answer your questions.

Many Blessings,
RW
But just because they are one, doesn't mean they're interchangeable! Could you answer the reasoning I displayed in my OP and first response?

RogerW
Dec 7th 2008, 02:38 AM
But just because they are one, doesn't mean they're interchangeable! Could you answer the reasoning I displayed in my OP and first response?

I don't have an answer for you, but perhaps these commentaries from Henry and Calvin might help. :idea:

Matthew Henry Commentary:

He is the everlasting Father, or the Father of eternity; he is God, one with the Father, who is from everlasting to everlasting. He is the author of everlasting life and happiness to them, and so is the Father of a blessed eternity to them. He is the Father of the world to come (so the LXX. reads it), the father of the gospel-state, which is put in subjection to him, not to the angels, Heb. ii. 5 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Heb.2.html#Heb.2.5). He was, from eternity, Father of the great work of redemption: his heart was upon it; it was the product of his wisdom as the counsellor, of his love as the everlasting Father.

You might also gain insight from Calvin's Commentary:

The father of the age. The Greek translator has added μέλλοντος future; 143 (javascript:toggle('fnf_xvi.i-p104.2');)143 Πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰω̑νος, Father of the future age. In the Messiah, Pope has beautifully introduced this passage —
“Mankind shall thus his guardian care engage,
The promised Father of the future age.”

and, in my opinion, the translation is correct, for it denotes eternity, unless it be thought better to view it as denoting “perpetual duration,” or “an endless succession of ages,” lest any one should improperly limit it to the heavenly life, which is still hidden from us. (Colossians 3:3 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Col.3.html#Col.3.3).) True, the Prophet includes it, and even declares that Christ will come, in order to bestow immortality on his people; but as believers, even in this world, pass from death to life, (John 5:24 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.John.5.html#John.5.24); 1 John 3:14 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.iJohn.3.html#iJohn.3.14),) this world is embraced by the eternal condition of the Church.

The name Father is put for Author, because Christ preserves the existence of his Church through all ages, and bestows immortality on the body and on the individual members. Hence we conclude how transitory our condition is, apart from him; for, granting that we were to live for a very long period after the ordinary manner of men, what after all will be the value of our long life? We ought, therefore, to elevate our minds to that blessed and everlasting life, which as yet we see not, but which we possess by hope and faith. (Romans 8:25 (http://www.ccel.org/ccel/bible/asv.Rom.8.html#Rom.8.25).)

moonglow
Dec 7th 2008, 02:41 AM
Yesterday, I heard a live rendition of Handel's Messiah, which was absolutely gorgeous. One of my favorite parts is when they sing Isaiah 9:6. As I was listening to this, an old question came to mind. Here is the verse:

6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

This is IMHO a wonderful verse that shows the Deity of Christ - the child being talked about here is obviously Christ, who will be called "Mighty God", a fascinating and beautiful statement. This leads, however, to my question: why will Christ be called 'Everlasting Father'? Isn't this a bit strange in light of the traditional perception of the Trinity.

Now please note that my intention with this thread is not to question the Trinity in any way. I know this is not allowed and I am a believer in that Trinity, so please do not steer this thread in such a direction.

Why do you think Jesus is called 'Everlasting Father' in this passage? How does this work in the context of this passage and the context of the Trinity (starting from the presumption that the Trinity is Biblical)?

I found this on one bible commentary:
David Guzik's Commentaries (http://www.studylight.org/com/guz/view.cgi?book=isa&chapter=009)
i. The Messiah is the Everlasting Father: The idea in these Hebrew words is that Jesus is the source or author of all eternity, that He is the Creator Himself. It does not mean that Jesus Himself is the Person of the Father in the Trinity.

This is a good read too if you read the whole passage and its meaning on there...very interesting.

Anyway I think that passage isn't calling Jesus God the Father...but Father in a different sense of the word...was said in the commentary...the Creator.

When we read Genesis we read a couple of clues there...while they three in one, they can and do work as One as times:

26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;....

I think we tend to assume when we read the word, God, in the OT, we assume its God the Father...yet as far as I know there is no scriptures saying any word saying "God" must mean God the Father...it could very well be God the Son...God the Holy Spirit...or all three represented in One.

I am tired so maybe not making alot of sense.

God bless

mdo757
Dec 7th 2008, 03:22 AM
It's to bad that you guys don't have an NIV Exhaustive Concordance. I have both the Strong's and the NIV. I also have a collection of bibles, but most of all I use the KJ/NIV Study Bible. Some times what one group of scholars won't say, the others will.

David Taylor
Dec 7th 2008, 02:30 PM
6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

This leads, however, to my question: why will Christ be called 'Everlasting Father'? Isn't this a bit strange in light of the traditional perception of the Trinity.


The intent here isnt to call the Trinity into question or a state of confusion.

It is focusing on characteristics of Jesus, God the Son, solely.

"Father" in this usage, doesn't denote a reference to the 1st person of the Trinity, but rather an "owner" or "possessor" and "giver" of something...in this example, of everlasting.

Jesus alone, is coming -- and is/will be the owner, possessor, and giver of "Everlasting".

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life

Teke
Dec 7th 2008, 03:49 PM
Yesterday, I heard a live rendition of Handel's Messiah, which was absolutely gorgeous. One of my favorite parts is when they sing Isaiah 9:6. As I was listening to this, an old question came to mind. Here is the verse:

6 For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us;
And the government will rest on His shoulders;
And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.

This is IMHO a wonderful verse that shows the Deity of Christ - the child being talked about here is obviously Christ, who will be called "Mighty God", a fascinating and beautiful statement. This leads, however, to my question: why will Christ be called 'Everlasting Father'? Isn't this a bit strange in light of the traditional perception of the Trinity.

Now please note that my intention with this thread is not to question the Trinity in any way. I know this is not allowed and I am a believer in that Trinity, so please do not steer this thread in such a direction.

Why do you think Jesus is called 'Everlasting Father' in this passage? How does this work in the context of this passage and the context of the Trinity (starting from the presumption that the Trinity is Biblical)?

Hi Pilgrim, :)

The Septuagint English translation doesn't word the verse the way the Massoretic English translations (the one you've given) do.

Isaiah 9:5,6 in the Sept. reads, "Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. His name will be called the Angel of the Great Counsel, for I shall bring peace upon the rulers, peace and health by Him. 6 Great shall be His government, and of His peace there is no end. His peace shall be upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order and establish with righteousness and judgment, from that time forward and unto ages of ages. The zeal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this."

"A Child is born" speaks of Christ's human nature, and "a Son is given" unites His two natures in one Person.

mdo757
Dec 7th 2008, 04:47 PM
Hi Pilgrim, :)

The Septuagint English translation doesn't word the verse the way the Massoretic English translations (the one you've given) do.

Isaiah 9:5,6 in the Sept. reads, "Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. His name will be called the Angel of the Great Counsel, for I shall bring peace upon the rulers, peace and health by Him. 6 Great shall be His government, and of His peace there is no end. His peace shall be upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order and establish with righteousness and judgment, from that time forward and unto ages of ages. The zeal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this."

"A Child is born" speaks of Christ's human nature, and "a Son is given" unites His two natures in one Person.His name will be called the Angel of the Great Counsel? Hello Teke, long time, no see. MichaelTheeArchAngel.:wave:

Yukerboy
Dec 7th 2008, 04:58 PM
Reading that to me it speaks of The Trinity Himself.

Man will be born and is---

God-Trinity/Godhead
Counselor-- Holy Spirit
Eternal Father--Father
Prince of peace- Jesus

First thoughts,
Joe

I myself never looked at it that way.

But I do now. Very nice.

Just_Another_Guy
Dec 7th 2008, 05:50 PM
Why do you think Jesus is called 'Everlasting Father' in this passage? How does this work in the context of this passage and the context of the Trinity (starting from the presumption that the Trinity is Biblical)?

It works in that he came in the glory of the Father...this is the same glory that the Father shares with us as believers in his son.

John 17:21-22 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

Pilgrimtozion
Dec 7th 2008, 07:02 PM
The intent here isnt to call the Trinity into question or a state of confusion.

It is focusing on characteristics of Jesus, God the Son, solely.

"Father" in this usage, doesn't denote a reference to the 1st person of the Trinity, but rather an "owner" or "possessor" and "giver" of something...in this example, of everlasting.

Jesus alone, is coming -- and is/will be the owner, possessor, and giver of "Everlasting".

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life
Interesting perspective; I hadn't considered not applying 'Father' in the trinitarian sense. Thank you.

kenrank
Dec 7th 2008, 08:51 PM
Hi Pilgrim, :)

The Septuagint English translation doesn't word the verse the way the Massoretic English translations (the one you've given) do.

Isaiah 9:5,6 in the Sept. reads, "Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. His name will be called the Angel of the Great Counsel, for I shall bring peace upon the rulers, peace and health by Him. 6 Great shall be His government, and of His peace there is no end. His peace shall be upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order and establish with righteousness and judgment, from that time forward and unto ages of ages. The zeal of the Lord of hosts shall perform this."

"A Child is born" speaks of Christ's human nature, and "a Son is given" unites His two natures in one Person.

Just keep in mind Teke, the Septuigent was translated from the Massoretic texts. The Septuigent is a GREAT resource, I use it for many things, but it shouldn't trump the understanding we gain from the Hebrew. The Massoretic texts were written in Hebrew ny Jews. The Septuigent was tanslated by Jews in Greek. Anytime we take one language into another, some words just don't have the exact equivelants. Going from Hebrew to Greek is more of an issue than either into English.

Ken

Teke
Dec 7th 2008, 09:40 PM
His name will be called the Angel of the Great Counsel? Hello Teke, long time, no see. MichaelTheeArchAngel.:wave:

:wave:

The word 'angel' means 'messenger'. In this case it is literally The Word.

Teke
Dec 7th 2008, 10:20 PM
Just keep in mind Teke, the Septuigent was translated from the Massoretic texts. The Septuigent is a GREAT resource, I use it for many things, but it shouldn't trump the understanding we gain from the Hebrew. The Massoretic texts were written in Hebrew ny Jews. The Septuigent was tanslated by Jews in Greek. Anytime we take one language into another, some words just don't have the exact equivelants.

The Septuagint was used by Jesus and His Apostles, and was written before the Massoretic text the KJV uses. The latter excludes many passages which the Jews decided to take out because of Christianity, as well as changing the wording. Of course the Latins also made changes before it became canon as well.

The Greek defines the Hebrew better IMO. After studying the Hebrew I find it can be very diversified in it's meaning. This is very apparent in rabbinic interpretations and or commentaries.
For me, the Sept. is as good for me as it was for Jesus and the Apostles.


Going from Hebrew to Greek is more of an issue than either into English.

Ken

Hebrew nor English gives the understanding that Greek does. The Greek has words that neither Hebrew nor English have an equivalent to.
This is my opinion. I have no dispute with either language. It's understanding not language that is of importance.

SIG
Dec 7th 2008, 10:58 PM
Is it possible that Jesus is much bigger than we imagined?

David Taylor
Dec 8th 2008, 09:54 PM
The Father, the Spirt, and the Son are all depicted in the OT as YHWH at different times.

"The LORD(YHWH) our God, The LORD(YHWH) is one." Deuteronomy 6:4


The Father is YHWH in the O.T.:
Psalms 86:5 "saith the LORD(YHWH): for I will forgive their iniquity"
Matthew 6:14 "your heavenly Father will also forgive you"


The Son is YHWH in the O.T.:
Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith the LORD(YHWH) the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD(YHWH) of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."
John 1:49 "Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son, the King of Israel."
Galatians 3:13 "Christ hath redeemed us"
Revelation 1:17 "And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore" of God; thou art


The Spirit is YHWH in the O.T.:
2 Samuel 23:2 "The Spirit of the LORD (YHWH) spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me"
Luke 12:11 "for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say."

kenrank
Dec 8th 2008, 10:18 PM
The Septuagint was used by Jesus and His Apostles, and was written before the Massoretic text the KJV uses. The latter excludes many passages which the Jews decided to take out because of Christianity, as well as changing the wording. Of course the Latins also made changes before it became canon as well.

The Greek defines the Hebrew better IMO. After studying the Hebrew I find it can be very diversified in it's meaning. This is very apparent in rabbinic interpretations and or commentaries.
For me, the Sept. is as good for me as it was for Jesus and the Apostles.


Hebrew nor English gives the understanding that Greek does. The Greek has words that neither Hebrew nor English have an equivalent to.
This is my opinion. I have no dispute with either language. It's understanding not language that is of importance.

Teke...here is nothing for me to say. The Septuigent works for you, you are blessed by it....I back away and allow said blessing to continue!!

You're right on the dates, I had them backwards in my head.
Ken

kenrank
Dec 8th 2008, 10:25 PM
Is it possible that Jesus is much bigger than we imagined?

I believe you nailed it right on the head!! Listen...this is a good visual....

We live on one of 9 planets circling a star. There is 100 million forms of life on this planet.

Our local star, the sun, is one of 500 billion (500,000,000,000) stars in this galaxy. It is assumed that most galaxies have a similar amount of stars, and there are hundreds of BILLIONS of other galaxies.

The closest one single star is 4 light years away, or about 22,000,000,000,000 MILES away.(22 Trillion) That's the closet ONE...and there are 500 billion others in the galaxy, and hundreds of billions of other galaxies.

Jesus created it all!

So, is Jesus bigger than we think he is? I would say there is a chance at that!!

Peace.
Ken

neverleaveunorfors
Dec 9th 2008, 01:14 AM
do u really know what this means ? It is part of prophcey so u know whoi the real Christ is john played the best part for all to know but if u read 1st john 2snd john it explaians his gospel . and then revalation is exactly who the Christ was and is 1st chapter gives the revalation

mccain22
Dec 10th 2008, 09:32 PM
Jesus is not the Father. Father is a term used as a term of respect. I'm not sure how to explain it exactly. He takes us in and comforts us like a father would i guess is what im saying. Hebrews(who wrote this passage) had no concept of God being Father, Son, Holy Spirit.