1. Is the term "Jesus" something
applicable to this person prior to his being born of Mary?
At the point that sin entered the world, the Son was destined to be
called Jesus. He identifies himself as the ego eimi, the 'I AM,'
which is roughly (and in its context) a Greek equivalent to the Hebrew
covenant-keeping name of God -- YHWH (Yahweh or Jehovah). The name Yeshua
means Yah Saves (or something similar). In my opinion,
this name is applicable to the Son from the moment, at least (I will
get to this below), that sin entered the world. Before there was sin,
there may not have been a need for "salvation" (see
immediately below).
There is indication, however, that in eternity past God anticipated
(here's the question of foreknowledge: Did he "anticipate" it or was it a
fact by way of decree?) that sin would be an issue which would have to be
addressed. Paul states in Ephesians that before the creation of the
world the Father purposed to adopt sons and daughters "through Jesus
Christ." David, this will probably involve one of those non
sequiturs :>) but if he purpose to adopt us in "Jesus," then
the very name of him through whom we would be adopted seems to imply at
least a potential need for our salvation.
Hence, it seems to me that the name Jesus can be considered
applicable to this Son, not only before his birth, and not only from the
introduction of sin into creation, but even back into eternity to that point
when the Father purposed to adopt sons and daughters through this One
whose name means Yah Saves.
jt: Question .. Then why didn't God just simplify
things and do it your way - Why all of his 'redemptive' names such as
Jehovah Jireh, Jehovah Nissi, Jehovah Tsidkenu,
Jehovah Shalom etc. and why use the term Prophet in Deut 18:15. Jesus
is the name of the man; as Mary's child he was
both son of God and son of man. However, he came as Prophet, was
raised to be Priest, and is our soon coming King. What kind of
presumption locks him into being an "eternal son" just because of 4th
century carnal and circular reasoning?
I have demonstrated to you from Scripture why I
believe the Son is eternal.
2. Is the term "Messiah" or "Christ" applicable to this
person prior to his being born of Mary?
The same answer applies here in many of the same ways as it does to the
name Jesus. The Father purposed to adopt us through the Christ, and this he
did before the foundation of the world. I believe therefore that the Christ
was destined (in fact predestined) to come to us in incarnate form; this
from that point in eternity. Yes, I believe it is applicable. I also
believe, however, as per acts 2.36 and Phil. 2.11, that because of sin and
the need to purge it, the "Christ" had to die and rise anew before he could
be fully equipped and qualified to function as such in that role.
jt: So His redemptive titles didn't avail for the
Old Covenant folk? How so, the promises were made to them
also.
His redemptive names avail for the Old covenant
folk in that they were fulfilled in the New by Jesus Christ.
3. Is the term "son of David" applicable to this person prior
to his being born of Mary?
From the moment that the "Seed" passed through the loins of Jesse into
David, the term is applicable, although this person did not become the "son
of David" until his physical birth.
jt: So that title isn't eternal - just being the
son is? Why?
No, Jesus is not eternally the son of David. I say
this because David is not eternal. Now perhaps the Son was eternally going
to become son of David and this title may apply in that sense, but that is
somewhat speculative. David is human; he is finite; he had a beginning. It
is through his flesh at the incarnation, that the Son of God becomes
also the son of David. In other words, this is a term which applies to
Jesus' humanity. Judy, if you want to speculate and get into foreknowledge
and say that God forever knew the Son would be the son of David, hence this
makes him eternally the son of David, you may do that (I guess in that sense
you may call us all eternal). But I chose not to, on this ocassion, because
David himself is not eternal.
4. Is the term "Savior" applicable to this person prior
to his being born of Mary?
This goes back to the question of Jesus. It is applicable in the same
way that the name Yah Saves is applicable.
jt: Isn't Yah another way of saying Yahwek or
Jehovah ie: His redemptive titles under the Old Covenant? Why can't
they be eternal?
See my opening statements.
5. Is the term "firstborn" in Col. 1:18 applicable to this
person prior to his being born of Mary?
Yes, but again because of sin and the necessity that it be defeated and
his humanity "perfected," it is only fully realized after the
resurrection.
Is it applicable prior to his being resurrected from the
dead?
The term "firstborn" is a title of position and stature as much as it
is a title of birth order. He was the firstborn from birth (and even prior
to that, by way of promise), but he was qualified to
function in that capacity through the resurrection.
jt: And what about the man who walked around
telling everyone that he was from heaven, that he came down from the father;
the one the demons recognized and trembled over; the one who only did what
he saw the father doing and spoke what he heard the father
saying?
Well, what about him? The Son came to destroy the
tyrants, and that is what he did. The last enemy to be destroyed is death;
he destroys death in resurrection. What's your problem with that? As both
God AND MAN he now has preimenance over everything; this again because
of resurrection; hence the title "firstborn over all creation" and "from the
dead."
By the way, the word for "firstborn" is prototokos, from which
we get our word "prototype" -- just a little aside.
6. Is the term "first begotten" in Rev. 1:5 applicable
to this person prior to his being born of Mary? Is it applicable
prior to his being resurrected from the dead?
I believe so, in that he was destined to be Yeshua and the Christ
from eternity past and, as is noted above, because of sin, the Christ
finds fulfillment and qualification in resurrection.
By the way, this again is the word prototokos
Yes - so? What do you believe this Greek
word implies?
I pointed this out because the KJV translates this
word differently in the two passages that David mentions. I am sure that he
was aware of that but I was not at all sure that you or some of the other
readers (you not being familiar with the Greek) would be aware of it. I
have already explained what I think the word implies.
7. Is the term "everlasting Father" applicable to this person
prior to his being born of Mary?
No, I don't think so (a lot of certainty
there, huh?). Allow me to explain. It is in the incarnate person of Jesus
Christ, that the Son of God can be called the everlasting Father, and
this by way of union, because in Christ the entire Godhead is
represented via the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, which is the unity which
makes God "one." Hence, the "eternal Father" is known and represented
in and through the person of Jesus Christ.
You had better check further on this one
BT
