Matthew 1:23: Immanuel - Does This Mean that Jesus is God?
 |
Nevertheless, we know of no one who is consistent in the kind of application that many like to the name Immauel in Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:23. Many other names given to many people are with similar construction, speaking of God, but no one thinks that the usage of God or Jah in those names is being applied to the bearer of those names.
The scriptures show that "God" (one person, not three persons) was "with" Jesus. This is the same one person who spoke through the prophets of old and who now speaks through His son, Jesus. (Hebrews 1:1,2) Peter spoke of "Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed him with the Holy Spirit (Isaiah 11:2; 61:1) and with power, who went about [in the days of his flesh—Hebrews 5:7] doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him." (Acts 10:38, World English) Peter used the word "God" twice while speaking of Jesus. He first stated how "God" anointed Jesus. Earlier Peter stated, "God has made him both Lord and Christ [meaning, anointed one], this Jesus whom you crucified." (Acts 2:36) Was it three persons that anointed Jesus, or was it one person? Isaiah quotes the Messiah prophetically as stating, "Jehovah hath anointed me" (Isaiah 61:1, American Standard Version). This is the same Jehovah who proclaimed Himself to be "the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." (Exodus 3:14,15) The one person who is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob speaks and performs His works through His son. — Deuteronomy 18:15-19; John 3:34; 5:19; 6:38; 7:16,28,29; 8:28,38,40; 12:29; 14:10; 17:8; Acts 3:13-26; Hebrews 1:1,2.
But when Peter said, "God was with him" (Acts 10:38), who was Peter speaking of as being "God"? Again, it is only one person spoken of as God that Peter speaks of who was with Jesus. However, the fact that "God was with him" and the fact that Jesus was with Israel demonstrate that God, being with the one whom He anointed, was also with His people Israel through Jesus' presence. However, only a few recognized Jesus for who he really was. -- John 1:10-12.
There is no scriptural reason to add to the scriptures the dogma that would make Jesus a person of the Most High, or any teaching that Jesus is the Most High.
The above scriptures are sometimes presented by trinitarians in an effort to prove that Jesus is Jehovah. It is claimed that since David called Jesus "Lord," this means that Jesus was David's Lord at the time that David said this, and from this it is further claimed that Jesus was thus in existence from all eternity past.
Some, relying solely on the way the extant Greek manuscripts have forms of the Greek word κύριος, meaning "lord", twice, imagine and assume that this means that there are two equal "lords", both of whom are equally God Almighty.
Many trinitarians present Matthew 22:41-45 as a proof of the trinity since they claim Jesus highlights the divine, multi-personal nature of God by distinguishing between Yahweh/Jehovah (the Father) and the Messiah (the Son) as co-equal and divine figures.
Jesus' question was pertaining to Jesus being the son of David and yet how David called Jesus "my lord." Usually, a father does not call his son "my lord."
Trinitarian, however, may claim that Jesus quotes Psalm 110:1 ("The LORD [Yahweh] said to my Lord [Adonai]...") to show a conversation between two distinct divine persons. They would, in effect, change the Masoretic text to read Adonai (my Supreme Lord) instead of Adoni (my lord), evidently to reinforce their belief that Jesus is God Almighty. We plan to discuss this more in our study on Psalm 110:1. Some trinitarians claim that Jesus, by asking how David can call his descendant "Lord," was actually claiming that the Messiah is not merely a human son of David, but the pre-existent, divine Son of God. The trinitarian may see the fact that David spoke "in the Spirit" (or inspired by the Holy Spirit), as being a reference to the third person of their triune God.
The trinitarian, however, views the trinity as being default, and thus based accepting this assumption as being a fact, evidently will reason that they have a right to imagine and assume whatever is needed to make a scripture conform to the assumed fact. The reality is that there is nothing at all in Matthew 22:41-45 that presents Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as being more than one person, or that Jesus is a person of Jehovah.
Of course, David is speaking prophetically of when Jehovah makes the promised son of the man David (Matthew 1:1; Matthew 9:6; Matthew 9:27) both Christ and Lord. (Acts 2:36) Jesus was made "lord," and having become "lord" of the dead and the living, he also became the "lord" of David; Jesus was not the lord of David from all eternity past. The prophecy of Psalm 110:1 has its actual fulfillment after the ascension of Jesus, when Jesus was exalted and where he now sits at the right hand of his God, Jehovah, in heaven. -- Micah 5:4; Acts 2:32-34; Ephesians 1:20; Hebrews 1:3; Hebrews 10:12,13; Hebrews 12:2; 1 Peter 3:22.
"To this end Christ died, rose, and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living." (Romans 14:9) Of course, at the time that Jesus was exalted, David was still in the oblivious condition of the Bible hell (Ecclesiastes 9:10), where he will be until the last day, when all will be raised from the Bible hell, which is the result of the condemnation of death in Adam. (Acts 2:29; John 5:28,29; John 6:39,40,44,54; John 11:24; John 12:47,48; Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22; 2 Timothy 4:1; Revelation 20:4,6,12,13) Jesus has now become the life-giving spirit from heaven. (1 Corinthians 15:45) As such, he will, as the agent of his God and Father, raise the dead, including David, in the "last day." Jesus' regenerating (Matthew 19:28) the human race in the last day, in effect, makes Jesus the "last Adam," taking Adam's place as the father and lord of the human race. Thus, Jesus becomes not only the branch out of David and Jesse, but he is also the root of David, since David will only receive life through Jesus. -- Isaiah 11:1; Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15; Revelation 5:5; 22:16.
Matthew 28:18 - Was This God the Son Speaking?
Matthew 28:18 is often presented as proof that Jesus is God Almighty. Many make the claim that Jesus is wholly and fully God, and at the same time he is wholly and fully a man. This concept is usually referred to as the "dual natures" of Christ, or "hypostatic union."
Based on the concept (which is nowhere found in the Bible), the claim is being made that when Jesus spoke, at times it was GOD speaking and at times the flesh speaking, evidently applying the alleged “dual natures” philosophy. Jesus' words spoken in Matthew 28:18 are given as evidence of this, since Jesus stated that all power in heaven and earth had been given to him. The person making this claim asks how this could be, and the answer is supplied that this was God (incarnated in Jesus) who was speaking.
Other trinitarians claim that in Matthew 28:18, it is not "God" Jesus who is speaking, but rather that it is the man, Christ Jesus, who is speaking. The claim apparently is that God Almighty gave to the man, Christ Jesus, all authority. This application would claim that Jesus receives this authority in his "human nature," even though he already possesses all authority eternally in his "divine nature.
It should be evident that “all authority” that is given to Jesus has been given to him from someone else. Other scriptures show that Jesus receives this authority from the “one God” that Paul wrote about, He who is the source of all. (1 Corinthians 8:6; Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Psalm 2:6-8; 45:7; 110:1,2; Isaiah 9:6,7; 11:2; 42:1; 61:1-3; Jeremiah 23:5; Ezekiel 34:23,24; 37:24; Daniel 7:13,14; Micah 5:4; Matthew 12:28; 28:18; Luke 1:32; 4:14,18; 5:17; John 3:34; 5:19,27,30; 10:18,36-38; Acts 2:22,36; 3:13-26; 10:38; Romans 1:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:27; 2 Corinthians 13:4; Colossians 1:15,16; 2:10; Ephesians 1:3,17-23; Philippians 2:9-11; Hebrews 1:2,4,6,9; 1 Peter 3:22.) The idea that Jesus is two separate beings (natures) at the same time is nowhere found in the Bible. Such an idea has to be added to and read into the scriptures in order to accommodate the added-on concept that Jesus is God Almighty. We do not find any evidence that it was the alleged “God Jesus” who spoke these words or that Jesus spoke these words only as being the man Christ Jesus. Actually, the truth is that what Jesus stated shows that he was NOT speaking as the Most High, since the Most High, being the source of all power and authority (1 Corinthians 8:6), has no need to be given any authority from someone else.
What Jesus stated as recorded in Matthew 28:18 is in harmony with 1 Corinthians 8:6, as well as Ephesians 1:3, 17-23, where we find that the God and Father of Jesus subjected the all to Jesus, but as Paul stated in 1 Corinthians 15:27, it is evident that He who subjected the all to Jesus is excepted.
Since the Bible is fully in harmony with itself without imagining, adding, and reading the assumption of “dual natures” of Jesus into the scriptures, I have no scriptural reason to add the assumption to any scripture.
See my study related to the “all power” that the only true God has given to Jesus.
Luke 1:35
Luke 1:35 - The angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore also the holy one which is born from you will be called the Son of God. -- World EnglishThis scripture is sometimes presented by trinitarians as a proof-text that is alleged to speak of the trinity. The angel is identified as the "angel of Jehovah"* in Luke 1:11 and as Gabriel in Luke 1:19. Gabriel in verse 35 is speaking to Mary.
--------
*In the Old Testament, we never find the expression "angel of the Lord," but it is actually "angel of Jehovah" (or, as some prefer, "angel of Yahweh"). It should be obvious that in the extant NT manuscripts, in this expression, the Holy Name has been changed to a form of the Greek word for "Lord". See also our studies related to "Angel of Jehovah"
Most often, trinitarians simply cite the verse without comment, and evidently, based on their presumption that the trinity is the default reasoning, imagine that the scripture is speaking of their trinity. According to Walter Martin, the trinity appears in Luke 1:35. (Kingdom of the Cults, 2003 edition, page 83) One claims that one of the things Gabriel accomplished was "to assure Mary that God is triune"; however, since no idea at all is presented in Luke 1:35 that "God is triune," that idea has to be thought beyond what is stated and then affixed to and read into what is actually stated.
Evidently, what the trinitarian is imagining and assuming in this verse is that "the Most High" ("the Highest" in some translations) is not the triune God but rather is referring to only one person of the triune God, and similarly respecting the "Holy Spirit" and "the Son of God". The "Most High" is definitely speaking of only one person, and that one person is identified in Luke 1:32 as being Jehovah God of Isaiah 9:7. Luke 1:32 thus differentiates Jehovah God from the Son to whom Jehovah gives the throne of David. Jesus is never referred to anywhere in the Bible as being the "Most High".
Additionally, in Luke 1:35 itself, we find that the word "God"—in the expression, "Son of God"—is referring to only one person, not three persons. Jehovah God is not in Luke 1:35 or anywhere else in the Bible revealed to be more than one person. Despite what trinitarians may conceive and read into the scriptures, we have no scriptural reason to think that the word "God" in Luke 1:6, Luke 1:8, Luke 1:16, Luke 1:19, Luke 1:26, Luke 1:30, Luke 1:32, Luke 1:37, Luke 1:47, Luke 1:64, Luke 1:68, Luke 1:78 is speaking of more than one person as "God'; all these verses are speaking of the same one person as being "God," and nowhere in Luke 1 or anywhere else in the Bible is the only Most High ever presented as being more than one person. While Luke 1:35 refers to the Son of God, Luke 1:32 refers to Jesus as the "Son of the Most High." It should be obvious that "God" and "Most High" both refer to the same one person who is "God." Jesus himself identified the "the only true God" as being Jehovah, the one whom he referred to as his father. -- Isaiah 61:1; John 17:1,3.
Trinitarians will often separate "power of God" from the Holy Spirit and claim that the Holy Spirit is not the power of God, since it is supposedly presented as being separate from the Holy Spirit. The Greek word for "and" (kai), however, is often used in the Bible with many different applications. It does not always mean something in addition to what was presented before but can also be used as a further designation of what came before. In such cases, in English, the Greek word KAI is often presented as an adverb, such as "namely" or "even." As applied to the usage in Luke 1:35, it would be something like, "The Holy Spirit will come on you; namely, the power of the Most High will overshadow you." The Greek conjunction could be used in the sense of connecting a clarifying phrase to the primary phrase. Thus, I believe that in English a possible rendering would be: The Holy Spirit will come on you, that is, the power of the Most High will overshadow you."
While God surely made use of his holy spirit in the conception of Mary, and thus Mary gave birth to His Son, this does not mean that we need to read the triune God dogma into what is stated.
Luke 2:8-14 - Christmas, the “Birth of God,” and the Incarnation Doctrine
The Star and the Shepherds: What the Bible Actually Says
 |
| Adoration of the Shepherds by Dutch painter Matthias Stom, c. 1650 |
In many Christian traditions—especially those shaped by Trinitarian or Oneness theology—Christmas is frequently described as the “birth of God” or even “God’s birthday.” A simple online search for the phrase “birth of God” confirms how widespread this language has become. Yet this terminology rests on theological assumptions that are not found in the Bible itself. Instead, it is rooted in the post‑biblical doctrine known as the Incarnation.
How the Incarnation Doctrine Shapes Christmas Language
The idea that Christmas is the celebration of the “birth of God” is closely tied to the doctrine of the Incarnation. Although the term does not appear in Scripture, it plays a central role in traditional Christian theology.
The Trinitarian View of the Incarnation
From a Trinitarian perspective, the Incarnation teaches that the eternal Son of God, the second person of a triune Godhead, took on human flesh and became Jesus of Nazareth. In this view, Jesus is fully divine and fully human at the same time.
The Oneness (Apostolic) View of the Incarnation
Oneness theology interprets the Incarnation differently. It teaches that the one God of the Old Testament manifested Himself in flesh and that the fullness of the Godhead—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—dwells bodily in Jesus. Rather than distinguishing between divine persons, Oneness doctrine identifies Jesus as the single divine being who appears in different modes.
The Logical Tension Within Incarnation Theology
Both systems ultimately describe Jesus as possessing two radically different forms of sentience simultaneously:
an omniscient divine consciousness that knows all things
a limited human consciousness that does not
This effectively results in a dual‑sentience model—two centers of awareness existing within one individual. In practical terms, this would mean Jesus functions as two persons, one omniscient and one not, even though the doctrine insists on calling Him a single person.
The Biblical Contrast: Jehovah Has Never Been Born
According to Scripture, Jehovah has never been begotten, conceived, or brought into existence, for He has always existed. The idea that God was ever “born” must therefore be added to the text; it is not stated in the Bible. Likewise, the notion that Jehovah became a human being—while remaining the Most High—is never presented in Scripture, even though many claim certain verses imply such a doctrine.
Christmas, Noel, and the Traditional Link to the Incarnation
Historically, the celebration of Christmas (or Noel) has become deeply intertwined with the doctrine of the Incarnation. In many traditional expressions of Christianity, “the Incarnation of God” is treated almost as a synonym for Christmas itself. This connection is so strong that the holiday is often interpreted as a celebration of God becoming man, which naturally leads to the idea of the “birth of God.”
From this perspective, Christmas becomes a celebration of the belief that Jesus is God, whether understood through Trinitarian or Oneness frameworks. Yet these interpretations require theological assumptions that must be read into Scripture rather than drawn from it.
This raises a significant concern: if Jesus is proclaimed to be the “one God” from whom all things originate (1 Corinthians 8:6), then attributing divine glory to a created human life risks turning Jesus into an object of idolatry, assigning to the creature what belongs only to the Creator.
The Word “Noel” and Its Evolving Meaning
Traditionally, the word “Noel” has become synonymous with “Christmas.” Most dictionaries define it this way and trace its origin to the Latin natalis, meaning “birth” or “nativity.” However, these explanations often overlook the “El” in Noel—a term that, in Hebrew and other ancient languages, means “God” or “mighty one.”
Because of this, some have interpreted "Noel" to mean “birth of God.” This interpretation is usually tied to the Incarnation doctrine and the belief that Jesus is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. In this framework, the Incarnation implies that God Almighty took on human nature, becoming both Supreme Being and human being simultaneously.
Whether or not this etymology is linguistically precise, the cultural association is clear: for many people, Noel has come to signify the “birthday of God.”
Incarnation Themes Reflected in Christmas Carols
The influence of the Incarnation doctrine is also evident in numerous Christmas carols. Even when English translations do not explicitly state the idea, many hymns assume or imply that God Himself was born as a human child. These songs reinforce the traditional interpretation of Christmas as the celebration of God’s birth, even though such a concept is not found in Scripture.
Examining “The First Noel”
Among the many songs sung during the Christmas season, “The First Noel” remains one of the most familiar and beloved. Its origins are uncertain, and the identity of its original author is unknown, yet the version commonly sung today has become deeply embedded in Christian tradition. Because the song is often interpreted through the lens of the Incarnation doctrine and the idea of the “birth of God,” it is worth examining its lyrics in light of Scripture and historical context.
The Opening Verse and the Meaning of “Noel”
The first verse reads (in part):
The First Noel, the Angels did say
Was to certain poor shepherds in fields as they lay…
Noel, Noel, Noel, Noel,
Born is the King of Israel.
While the original intent behind the word “Noel” in this hymn is uncertain, many modern listeners associate it with the idea of the “birthday of God.” Yet the Bible never speaks of a “birth of God Almighty.” What Scripture does record is the announcement of the birth of the one whom Jehovah anointed to be the King of Israel.
Luke’s Gospel describes this angelic announcement:
Shepherds were in the fields at night (Luke 2:8)
An angel of Jehovah appeared to them (Luke 2:9)
The angel proclaimed “good news of great joy” (Luke 2:10)
A Savior was born in the city of David—Christ the Lord (Luke 2:11)
A multitude of angels praised God (Luke 2:13–14)
The term “Christ” means “anointed one,” and Scripture consistently identifies Jehovah as the one who anointed Jesus (Isaiah 61:1). Jesus is therefore the anointed King, not Jehovah Himself.
The Angel’s Message to Mary
Earlier, the angel Gabriel told Mary:
She would bear a son named Jesus (Luke 1:31)
He would be called the Son of the Most High (Luke 1:32)
Jehovah God would give Him the throne of David (Luke 1:32)
His kingdom would have no end (Luke 1:33)
This aligns with Isaiah 9:7, which attributes the establishment of this kingdom to Jehovah of Hosts.
Could “Noel” Mean “Birth of a Mighty One”?
If El in Noel is understood in its broader ancient sense of “mighty one,” the term could be interpreted as “birth of a mighty one.” In that sense, it could scripturally apply to Jesus as the promised King anointed by Jehovah. However, this would not imply that Jesus is Jehovah or that He possesses the glory that belongs only to the one God “from whom are all things” (1 Corinthians 8:6). It is unlikely that the hymn’s authors intended such a nuanced meaning.
Some have also suggested that “Noel” could relate to the concept of begetting or conception, similar to the Greek gennaō (Matthew 1:20). If Jesus was born in early October, his conception may have occurred around late December, which led some Bible Students to refer to December 25 as “Annunciation Day.” Again, this interpretation is speculative and almost certainly not in the mind of the hymn’s original writers.
The Star and the Shepherds: What the Bible Actually Says
The next lines of the hymn describe a star shining brightly in the East, seen by the shepherds. However, Scripture does not say that the shepherds saw any star. As recorded in the Scriptures, the only individuals who saw a celestial sign were the Magi from the East.
The Bible records:
A “star” (or light) appeared to the Magi (Matthew 2:2)
It led them first to Jerusalem, not Bethlehem
The light apparently disappeared and later reappeared (Matthew 2:9–10)
The Magi rejoiced when they saw it again
They eventually found Jesus in a house, not a manger (Matthew 2:11)
The Greek word translated “star” has a broader meaning than the modern scientific term. It is unlikely that the Magi saw a star in the modern astronomical sense.
The “Three Wise Men” Tradition
The hymn speaks of “three wise men,” but the Bible never specifies the number of Magi. The tradition of “three” likely arose from the three types of gifts—gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Scripture simply states that Magi came from a distant land, and their journey may have taken many months or even years. By the time they arrived, Jesus was no longer an infant in a manger but a young child living in a house.
The Final Verse and the Question of Jesus’ Identity
The last verse proclaims:
…That hath made Heaven and earth of nought
And with his blood mankind has bought.
This wording appears to identify Jesus as the Creator of Genesis 1:1 and the one who made heaven and earth “from nothing.” Yet Scripture does not explicitly say that God created the physical universe out of nothing, nor does it teach that Jehovah Himself became flesh and shed blood.
The Bible consistently distinguishes between:
Jehovah, the God and Father of Jesus (2 Corinthians 11:31; Ephesians 1:3; 1 Peter 1:3)
Jesus, whose human life was given to Him by the Father (John 6:57)
The glory of God and the lesser glory of human flesh (Psalm 8:5; Hebrews 2:7,9)
Jehovah, being spirit, has never had flesh or blood to offer. Jesus’ human body was prepared by God (Hebrews 10:5), and only in that representative sense could His blood be described as connected to His Father’s purpose. The hymn’s authors, however, likely intended to present Jesus as Jehovah Himself.
Conclusion: A Beloved Song with Significant Theological Assumptions
“The First Noel” is a cherished Christmas carol, but, in many versions, its lyrics contain numerous elements that do not align with the biblical record. Many of these details appear shaped by non-Biblical traditions and by doctrines—especially Trinitarian interpretations—that must be read into Scripture rather than drawn from it.Even so, many lines can be understood in ways consistent with the biblical narrative when interpreted carefully. The hymn remains a meaningful part of Christian culture, but its theological claims deserve thoughtful examination.
Incarnation Language in Other Christmas Carols
Many well‑known Christmas carols contain language that reflects the traditional doctrine of the Incarnation—the belief that God Himself became a human being in the person of Jesus Christ. While these expressions are familiar and deeply rooted in Christian tradition, they also reflect theological assumptions that are not found in Scripture. Several popular hymns illustrate how the idea of “God incarnate” has shaped Christmas music.
“Hark! The Herald Angels Sing” and the Incarnate Deity
One of the most widely sung carols, “Hark! The Herald Angels Sing,” includes the lines:
Veiled in flesh the Godhead see;
Hail th’ Incarnate Deity,
Pleased as man with men to dwell,
Jesus, our Emmanuel.
These lyrics explicitly present Jesus as God in human flesh, a direct expression of the incarnation doctrine. The hymn encourages the worshiper to “see” the Godhead veiled in flesh and to hail Jesus as “the Incarnate Deity,” reinforcing the belief that the child in Bethlehem was God Himself appearing in human flesh.
“In the Bleak Midwinter” and the Lord God Incarnate
Another carol, “In the Bleak Midwinter,” contains the line:
The Lord God incarnate, Jesus Christ.
Here again, Jesus is identified as “the Lord God incarnate,” a phrase that assumes the full deity of Christ in the sense of God becoming human. This language reflects traditional theology rather than biblical terminology.
“How Should a King Come” and the Hidden God
The carol “How Should a King Come” includes the lines:
And a King lay hid in a virgin’s womb…
At last in a barn in a manger of hay He came,
and God incarnate lay!
This hymn likewise presents Jesus as “God incarnate,” emphasizing the idea that God Himself lay in the manger as a newborn child.
The Theological Issue: Incarnation Language and Biblical Teaching
These carols, though poetic and beloved, express a theological viewpoint that identifies Jesus as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. According to Scripture, however, Jesus consistently distinguishes Himself from His God and Father. If Jesus is worshiped as the Almighty Himself, the worshiper risks giving to the Son the glory that belongs only to Jehovah, the one God from whom are all (1 Corinthians 8:6).
From a biblical standpoint, attributing divine worship to the man, Jesus, as though He were Jehovah is a form of idolatry, since it assigns to a created human life the honor that belongs exclusively to God. The apostle Paul’s warning remains relevant: “Flee from idolatry” (1 Corinthians 10:14).
A Call for Thoughtful Reflection—and Perhaps New Lyrics
Because many Christmas hymns reflect doctrinal assumptions rather than biblical statements, some may wish to reconsider or reword certain lines to better align with Scripture. Those with musical or poetic skill could potentially revise these carols to express biblical truths without perpetuating theological errors.
Links regarding Christmas and Incarnation:
"Christmas - The Incarnation of God."
"Christmas Incarnation" "the real meaning of Christmas -- the incarnation of God"
"Christmas - The Miracle of the Incarnation"
"The Christmas Miracle of the Incarnation of the Omnipresent Word"
"Christmas, the Incarnation, and the Communion
"Advent and Christmas draw our focus to the mystery of the Incarnation, of God becoming man."
http://thecatholicspirit.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=872&Itemid=108
"Christmas is the celebration of the incarnation of God."
http://www.cresourcei.org/cyxmas.html
"the account of incarnate deity.... " (The context shows that the author is using the word "deity" to mean the God of the Bible, the Most High.
"The Feast of the Incarnation... The incarnation of God."
http://www.virtualmuseum.ca/Exhibitions/Noel/angl/incarnat.htm
"a holiday celebrating the birth of God Incarnate."
http://brothersjuddblog.com/archives/2002/12/why_are_there_no_good_chanukah_1.html
"celebrates the birth of Christ and the wonderful mystery of the incarnation" "the good news of Christmas and the incarnation"
http://www.christchurch-cardiff.org.uk/show.pl?Magazine
"Birth of Christ, Incarnation, Nativity and Christmas"
http://www.abcog.org/xmas.htm
"Christmas is the church's celebration of the Incarnation, the supreme mystery that the holy and almighty God took on human flesh and was born in this world of the Virgin Mary."
http://www.stpaulskingsville.org/christmas.htm
"The incarnation of God becoming human and actually living among us is the Wonder of the Christmas story."
http://www.petrafel.org/images/message_transcript/The%20Wonder%20of%20Christmas.pdf
"Christmas focuses on the incarnation of Jesus" "The Incarnation, then, refers to God taking upon Himself a human form. So when Jesus was born into the world, Godfor one time in all human historybecame man!"
http://asiteforthelord.com/articles/theincarnationofjesus.doc
"The Christmas season celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ, the incarnation of God."
http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Worship/Planning/Christmas.aspx
"The Christmas festival is about the incarnation of God"
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/george_pitcher/blog/2008/12/02/christmas_is_for_israel_too___
"the pinnacle of Advent comes with Christmas, when we celebrate the Incarnation of God. "
http://dotnettemplar.net/An+American+Catholics+Thoughts+On+Christmas.aspx
"the very heart and meaning of Christmas ... the wonder of the Incarnation (the birth of God-made-man Jesus)"
http://lichfieldcathedralschool.co.uk/newsmiscthe_chaplains_christmas_message.html
"The Christmas Marvel" "The birth of God! It took place in Bethlehem."
http://www.postchronicle.com/religion/article_212194723.shtml
John 5:46 - Was Jesus Saying that He Was Jehovah of the Old Testament?
We learn from Hebrews 1:1,2 that this same God who spoke through Moses, now speaks through Jesus, His Son. Thus, if Jesus was EHYEH who spoke to Moses at the buring bush, then it was Jesus who now speaks through the son of Jesus, who is Jesus who has Jesus as his God.
We learn from Micah 5:4 that Jehovah whom Moses foretold was to raise up the prophet like himself is the God of the Messiah.
We learn from Isaiah 61:1,2 that Jehovah whom Moses foretold was to raise up the like himself anointed and sent the Messiah, and the Messiah refers to him as "our God [Elohim]."
Acts 20:28
New King James Version (NKJV)
28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
THE SON IS THE GOD (HIS DIVINE NATURE),
WHO PURCHASE HIS CHURCH WITH HIS OWN BLOOD (HIS HUMAN NATURE)
This appears to be splitting up the scripture as it appears in the NKJV and applying "God" to the alleged "divine (Almighty God) nature" of Jesus, and "He purchased" and "His own blood" to the human nature of Jesus. In effect, it would read into the verse that "He" in the phrase "He purchases", and "His" in the phrase of "His own blood" does not refer to the alleged God Jesus allegedly spoken of in the phrase "church of God", but rather to the human Jesus. Of course, in reality, there is no reason to imagine, assume, and add such idea into the scripture except to make the scripture appear to support man's added-on trinitarian dogma.
It is retained, however, by Beza, Mill, and Whitby as the genuine reading. The most ancient mss., and the best, read “the church of the Lord,” and this probably was the genuine text. It has been adopted by Griesbach and Wetstein; and many important reasons may be given why it should be retained. See those reasons stated at length in Kuinoel “in loco”; see also Griesbach and Wetstein. It may be remarked, that a change from Lord to God might easily be made in the transcribing, for in ancient mss. the words are not written at length, but are abbreviated. Thus, the name Christ Χριστός Christosis written ChoS; the name God θεός theosis written ThoS; the name Lord κύριος kuriosis written KOS; and a mistake, therefore, of a single letter would lead to the variations observable in the manuscripts. Compare in this place the note of Mill in his Greek Testament. The authority for the name “God” is so doubtful that it should not be used as a proof text on the divinity of Christ, and is not necessary, as there are so many undisputed passages on that subject. -- Barnes' Notes
Barnes, by his saying "divinity of Christ", I am sure meant that Christ is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; while the divinity of Christ can be proven in line with the Hebraic usage of the words for "God", there is no passage of scripture that presents Jesus as being the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
More than likely, however, the reading "church of God" in this verse is not what Paul originally stated. If he used "Church of the Lord" instead of "Church of God", "the Lord" would refer to Jesus. Nevertheless, it is also possible that Paul actually used a form of the Holy Name, and that copyist changed it to words that mean either Lord or God.
If he did say "church of God", it still would not be a reference to Jesus as being God, since the Greek text is not that definite so as to say that "blood" refers back to "God". Nevertheless, Jesus' body of flesh and blood was especially prepared by God, that thus the blood in Jesus' body is God's blood with God had given to Jesus. Such would not mean that we need to imagine and assume that Jesus is two beings at the same: Supreme Being and human being.
prosechete heautois kai panti tw poimniw en
BE YOU PAYING ATTENTION TO SELVES AND TO ALL THE FLOCK, IN
4337 1438 2532 3956 3588 4168 1722
hw humas to pneuma to hagion etheto episkopous
WHICH YOU THE SPIRIT THE HOLY PUT OVERSEERS,
3739 4771_7 3588 4151 3588 0039 5087 1985
poimainein teen ekkleesian tou theou heen
TO BE SHEPHERDING THE ECCLESIA OF THE GOD, WHICH
4165 3588 1577 3588 2316 3739
periepoieesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou
HE RESERVED FOR SELF THROUGH THE BLOOD OF THE OWN (ONE).
4046 1223 3588 0129 3588 2398
Regardless, several translations do make a distinction between "Son" and "God, such as:
In reality, if it was actually the blood of the invisible God rather than the blood of the man Jesus Christ, then there has been no ransom, for it is the blood of one lower than the angels — a human — that was needed to make satisfaction for the sin of Adam. This, of course, brings us back to the alleged "dual natures" (hypostatic union) of Jesus. I realize that trinitarians claim that Jesus was both a spirit being in nature and a human being in nature at the same time, and they style this the “dual nature” of Christ, but no scripture says such a thing. The idea has to be read into any scripture presented that is alleged to be speaking of such "dual natures" of Jesus. Yte, Jesus, being our high priest appointed by the only true Supreme Being, offered his own body with its blood to the only true Supreme Being; Jesus is not the the only true Supreme Being who receives the sacrifice. — Psalm 8:5; John 17:1,3; Hebrews 2:9; 3:1,2; 9:14.
Acts 3:15 and the “Prince of Life”: What the Passage Really Says About Jesus and God
“And the Prince of the life ye did kill, whom God did raise out of the dead, of which we are witnesses.” — Acts 3:15, Young’s Literal Translation
Acts 3:15 is often quoted to support the idea that Jesus is God—either within a Trinitarian framework (three persons in one God) or within Oneness theology (one person manifesting as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit). However, a close reading of the passage and its context shows that only one person is identified as God, and that person is not Jesus.
God in Acts 3:15: One Person, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
In Acts 3:13–15, Peter consistently identifies “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” as the one who raised Jesus from the dead. Jesus is not presented as that God but as the one whom God raised up and appointed as the promised prophet like Moses (Deuteronomy 18:15–19).
To claim that Peter was teaching that Jesus is God requires reading assumptions into the text. Nothing in the passage suggests a multi‑person Godhead or a single divine person manifesting in different modes. Instead, the narrative distinguishes clearly between God and the one whom God raised.
Does “Prince of Life” Mean Jesus Is God?
Much of the argument for Jesus being God in this verse centers on the Greek word archēgós (Strong’s #747), translated “Prince” in Young’s Literal Translation and many others.
According to HELPS Word Studies, "archēgós" is a compound of:
archē — “first”
agō — “to lead”
It describes:
“the first in a long procession; a pioneer leader or founding leader.”
Strong’s Concordance gives the sense of “chief leader, author, captain, prince.”
However, none of these meanings imply that Jesus is God Himself. The same word appears in:
Acts 5:31 — Jesus became prince and savior
Hebrews 2:10 — Jesus as the chief leader of salvation
Hebrews 12:2 — Jesus as the pioneer and perfecter of faith
In none of these passages is archēgós used to identify Jesus as Jehovah or as a person within God.”
Peter’s Message: Jesus Is God’s Appointed Leader, Not God Himself
If Peter intended to teach that Jesus is God Almighty—the ultimate source of all created life—his discourse in Acts 3:13–26 would reflect that. Instead, Peter repeatedly emphasizes:
God is one person: the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
Jesus is God’s servant, prophet, and appointed leader
God raised Jesus from the dead
The distinction is consistent and unmistakable.
Why Jesus Is Called the “Prince of Life”
One reason Jesus is the “Prince of Life” because God gave Him authority to grant life (Matthew 28:18; John 5:21,25–29; 17:2). Jesus is God’s chosen instrument for salvation, not the ultimate source of life Himself. Scripture repeatedly affirms that:
God is the one who gives life (1 Timothy 6:13; 1 John 5:11)
God raised Jesus from the dead (Acts 2:24,32; 4:10; 10:40; Romans 8:11; 1 Peter 1:21)
Jesus’ authority is given to Him by God (John 3:35; 13:3; Ephesians 1:17–23)
Jesus’ role as life‑giver is therefore delegated, not inherent.
Jesus’ Role in Redemption
Because Adam’s disobedience brought sin and death upon all humanity, a perfect human life was needed to satisfy divine justice. God prepared a body for Jesus so that, through His obedience and sacrificial death, He could become the ransom for all (Romans 5:12–19; 1 Timothy 2:5–6; Hebrews 10:5–10; 1 Peter 3:18).
Jesus is the means by which God justifies sinners while remaining just. Yet even in this central role, Jesus is consistently portrayed as God’s servant, not as God Himself.
The Consistent Biblical Pattern
Across Acts 3 and the rest of Scripture, we find:
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is always one person
Jesus is the one whom God anointed, sent, empowered, and raised
No passage teaches that Jesus is Jehovah
No passage presents God as more than one person
No passage supports the idea that Jesus is the same person as the God who anointed Him
Any Trinitarian or Oneness interpretation must be added to and read into the text, not drawn from it.
Comments
Post a Comment