YAHSHUA MESSIAH Is NOT YAHWEH

by John V. Cordaro

Modern day Christians believe that Yahshua the Messiah pre-existed in some form
or another. Some say he was Melchizedek, some say he was "the captain of the
host of Yahweh" (Josh.5:14), some say he was the archangel Michael, others say
he was the "angel of Yahweh". Perhaps the most erroneous view is that Yahshua
was the "Yahweh" (LORD) of the Old Testament. This study is written in the
hopes that all who read it will finally understand that Yahweh is the Almighty
Creator of the heavens and the earth, and that Yahshua the Messiah is His Son,
as it is written.

For some reason people feel they have to magnify the Savior into the position of
the Almighty when, in fact, scripture makes it quite clear that the Father is
greatest of all and the "head of Messiah" (1 Cor.11:3). Consider Yahshua's own
words in Jn. 14:28, "...for my Father is greater than I."; Jn.10:29, "My Father,
which gave them me, is greater than all..."; and Jn. 13:16, "Verily, verily, I say
unto you, The servant [Yahshua] is not greater than his lord [Yahweh]; neither he
that is sent [Yahshua] greater than he that sent him [Yahweh]." These verses
teach us Yahshua's view of his relationship to his Father. Notice he didn't claim to
be the Father but instead, made a clear distinction between the two.

Who is Yahshua's Father?

Who does scripture say is the Father? Is.63:16 says, "Doubtless thou art our
father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not: thou, O
Yahweh, art our father, our redeemer; thy name is from everlasting." Yahweh is
the Father. Yet, some might claim that this scripture says Yahweh is the Father of
Israel, not of Yahshua. In that case we need to note two other verses. The first is
Heb.1:5; "For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this
day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to
me a Son?" Who said these things? All would agree that Yahshua's Father said
them since He is referring to Yahshua as His Son. Heb.1:5 is a direct quote from
Ps.2:7; "I will declare the decree: Yahweh hath said unto me, Thou art my Son;
this day have I begotten thee." The first "I" here refers to Yahshua speaking
through prophecy in which he declares that Yahweh is his Father!

We also previously saw that Yahshua said, "My Father is greater than I." In reality
he was also saying, "Yahweh is greater than I", thereby teaching us that he is not
Yahweh. Anyone who believes Yahshua is Yahweh must also believe Yahshua is
the Heavenly Father. That is even more absurd and more difficult to prove in the
light of scripture.

Who is the Elohim of Israel?

Who does scripture say is the Elohim (God) of Israel? Is. 45:3 says, "And I will
give thee the treasures of darkness, and hidden riches of secret places, that thou
mayest know that I, Yahweh, which call thee by thy name, am the Elohim of
Israel." Yahweh is the Elohim of Israel. Since we already learned that Yahshua is
not Yahweh, Yahshua cannot be the Elohim of Israel. This is confirmed in Acts
3:13, "The Elohim of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the Elohim of our
fathers, hath glorified his Son Yahshua;..." The Elohim of Jacob (Jacob being
Israel) glorified His Son.

Since the scriptures reveal the Elohim of Israel and the Father are both called
Yahweh, some will go so far as to teach that there are two separate beings called
Yahweh in order to support their erroneous belief that Yahshua pre-existed as
Yahweh, Elohim of Israel. They use Gen.19:24 as proof of this; "Then Yahweh
rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from Yahweh out of
heaven;" At first glance there appear to be two Yahwehs, one in heaven and one
somewhere near Sodom and Gomorrah. This is merely a figure of speech peculiar
to the Hebrew language, an idiom. Similar idioms are seen in Eze.11:24 (two
Spirits), Zech.10:12 ( two Yahwehs), Ex.24:1 (Yahweh used as idiom for "me"),
Gen.17:23 (two Abrahams), and 1 Kgs.8:1 (two Solomons).

It is impossible to harmonize the two Yahweh doctrine with verses that teach there
is only one Yahweh. Consider Nehemiah's prayer;

"Thou, even thou, art Yahweh alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of
heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and
all that is therein, and thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven
worshippeth thee." Neh 9:6

Ps 83:18 says;

"That men may know that thou, whose name alone is Yahweh, art the most high
over all the earth."

Is 45:6 says;

"That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is
none beside me. I am Yahweh, and there is none else."

Zech 14:9 reads;

"And Yahweh shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one
Yahweh, and his name one."

A second God cannot be named "Yahweh."

Is.42:1 teaches us that Yahshua is Yahweh's servant. "Behold my servant, whom I
uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he
shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles." And again in Is.49:6, "And he said, It is
a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and
to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles,
that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth."

Ps.2:2 reads, "The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel
together, against Yahweh, and against his anointed." His "anointed" is Yahshua,
making a clear distinction between the two. Peter applied this prophecy to
Yahshua in Acts 4:26; "The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were
gathered together against Yahweh, and against His Messiah." Peter never claimed
that the Messiah pre-existed as Yahweh.

Ps.110:1 also distinguishes the two; "Yahweh said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my
right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool." In Mt.22:41-46, Yahshua
reveals this "lord" to be himself, the Messiah. Is Yahweh talking to His Son the
Messiah or is He talking to Himself?

Ps.110 makes another intersesting statement in verse 5. This is one of the verses
in which the Sopherim removed Yahweh's name and replaced it with "Adonai". The
text would have originally read, "Yahweh at thy right hand shall strike through kings
in the day of His wrath." It is then wrongly deduced that since Yahshua was invited
to sit on Yahweh's right hand (Heb.1:13), he, Yahshua, must also be called
"Yahweh". There is no doubt that Yahweh invited Yahshua to sit at His right hand.
But what does verse 5 mean? It must be understood in the same way Ps.16:8 and
Ps.109:6 are to be understood. When someone is "at thy right hand" it means their
power and strength are derived from that source. David derived his power from
Yahweh and so it is said that Yahweh is "at my right hand." A wicked person
would derive his power from Satan and so it is said, "Let Satan stand at his right
hand." When Yahshua comes to carry out Yahweh's wrath upon the wicked,
Yahweh will be his strength. See, also, Mic.5:4.

Who is the Prophet like unto Moses?

In Acts 3:22,23 Peter quotes from Deut.18:15,19 proving that Yahshua is the
"prophet like unto Moses." Placing the name "Yahshua" in brackets clearly shows
him not to be Yahweh. "Yahweh thy Elohim will raise up unto thee a Prophet
[Yahshua] from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him
[Yahshua] ye shall hearken.. . .I [Yahweh] will raise them up a Prophet from
among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my [Yahweh's] words in his
[Yahshua's] mouth; and he [Yahshua] shall speak unto them all that I [Yahweh]
shall command him [Yahshua]. . . . And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will
not hearken unto my [Yahweh's] words which he [Yahshua] shall speak in my
[Yahweh's] name, I [Yahweh] will require it of him." Jn.12:49 is a direct fulfillment
of Deut.18:18; "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he
gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak."

Let's treat Is.53:6, 10 ,12 similarly; "All we like sheep have gone astray; we have
turned every one to his own way; and Yahweh hath laid on him [Yahshua] the
iniquity of us all. . . Yet it pleased Yahweh to bruise him [Yahshua]; he [Yahweh]
hath put him [Yahshua] to grief: when thou [Yahweh] shalt make his [Yahshua's]
soul an offering for sin, he [Yahshua] shall see his seed, he [Yahshua] shall
prolong his days, and the pleasure of Yahweh shall prosper in his [Yahshua's]
hand."

Zech.12:10 is often misunderstood due to an apparent error in the text. It reads,
"And I [Yahweh] will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of
Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me
whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his
only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his
firstborn." The word "me" obviously does not harmonize with the pronouns "him"
and "his" that follow. The same verse is quoted in Jn.19:37; "And again another
scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced." John gives us the
correct understanding of this verse.

Another possible error occurs in Acts 20:28; "Take heed therefore unto
yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Spirit hath made you
overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood
(KJV)." The great majority of Greek MSS have kurios (Lord) here instead of theos
(God). In that case, Lord would refer to Yahshua whose blood was shed. Even if
we were to accept the KJV rendering, it would have to be understood in the sense
that parents often refer to their children as their "own flesh and blood." In that
sense the blood of Yahshua was the "blood of Yahweh's own."

YAHWEH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS

Jer.23:6 is often used to prove Yahshua is Yahweh. "In his [Yahshua's] days
Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his [ Yahshua's]
name whereby he [Yahshua] shall be called, YAHWEH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS."
If this verse teaches that Yahshua is Yahweh because he is called "Yahweh Our
Righteousness, then Jer.33:16 teaches that Jerusalem is also Yahweh. It reads,
"In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is
the name wherewith she shall be called, Yahweh our righteousness." The
translators did not use the same capitalization because they undoubtedly feared
that it would suggest Jerusalem is Yahweh.

A difficult passage to understand is found in Jn.12:37-41. A superficial reading
leads one to believe that the "his" and "him" of verse 41 refers to Yahshua and ties
in with verse 37. For the sake of clarity these verses will be printed out with
[brackets] designating the speaker. Jn.12:37,38, "But though he [Yahshua] had
done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him [Yahshua]: That
the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he [Isaiah] spake, Lord,
'who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Yahweh been
revealed?' (The underlined is a quote from Is.53:1. The "arm of Yahweh" is
Isaiah's reference to the Messiah). The passage continues with verses 39-41;
"Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, 'He [Yahweh]
hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with
their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I [Yahweh]
should heal them.' These things said Esaias, when he [Isaiah] saw his [Yahweh's]
glory, and spake of him [Yahweh]." Verse 40 (underlined) is a quote from Is.6:10.
John is quoting a second passage from Isaiah to show why they could not believe
on Yahshua; because Yahweh blinded them. Verse 41 therefore, is referring to
Is.6:10, not Is.53:1. In Is.6:1-3 Yahweh is seen in all His glory. That is the glory
referred to in verse 41. It was not Yahshua's glory.

Since John the Baptist preceeded Yahshua, Is.40:3 and Mt.3:3 are often used to
prove Yahweh is Yahshua. Is.40:3 reads, "The voice of him that crieth in the
wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Yahweh, make straight in the desert a highway
for our Elohim." Of all the N.T. verses that quote Isaiah, Lu.3:4-6 aids our
understanding because it includes Is.40:4 & 5. It says, "As it is written in the book
of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the
wilderness, Prepare ye the way of Yahweh, make his paths straight. Every valley
shall be filled, and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked
shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth; And all flesh
shall see the salvation of Yahweh." "Prepare ye the way of Yahweh" does not
mean, "Move out of the way because Yahweh is coming." And so when Yahshua
comes they believe he is Yahweh.

How was "the way" to be prepared? By filling valleys, leveling mountains,
straightening paths, etc. This work is not to be understood literally, but spiritually
through the humbling of those in exalted positions and the restoration of truth. Who
was to do that work? Jn.4:34 says, "Yahshua saith unto them, My meat is to do
the will of Him that sent me, and to finish his work." Almighty Yahweh appointed
His Son Yahshua to finish His work. Yahshua was Yahweh's instrument in the
accomplishment of His great plan. Yahshua is the "Messenger of the Covenant,"
"the servant of Yahweh," and "the salvation of Yahweh." Jn.14:6 calls Yahshua
"the way." He is "the way of Yahweh;" the means through which Yahweh will finish
His work.

Two Creators?

Gen.1:26 is often used to show Yahshua's hand in Creation. It reads, "And Elohim
said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle,
and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
They say the Father is talking to the Son in this verse based on the pronouns
used. Notice, however, that verse 27 says, "So Elohim created man in his own
image, . . ." Why isn't the phrase "in their own image" used? Again, in Gen.11:7,8,
"us" is used and yet Yahweh alone scattered them abroad. According to Job
38:4-7, "the sons of Elohim shouted for joy" when Yahweh created the earth. This
doubtless refers to the angels who were also present at the creation of man.
Yahweh could be speaking to them, in Gen.1:26, using the plural of majesty. An
example of this is found in Ezr. 4:18; "The letter which ye sent unto us hath been
plainly read before me." In this case, a letter was written strictly to King
Artaxerxes and no one else (vs. 11). Yet the King speaks as though it was written
to others as well. Another example would be the Queen of England saying, "We,
the Queen of England, . . ." It can also be understood in the sense of someone
saying, "Let us drive to the lake for a picnic," and yet, only the speaker does the
driving. To believe Yahweh is talking to Yahshua is an assumption. It is reading
into the text something that it does not say.

If we do not try to force the scriptures to conform to our own doctrines, they are
so simple to understand. Instead men try to support "Holy Trinities",
"Incarnations", "Transubstantiations", and the like. The Bible does not use terms
like "Father" and "Son" to try and trick us. They are used to express a relationship
that we can relate to. If Yahshua is Father Yahweh, the scriptures would state it in
plain language. Instead, it says that Yahshua is the Son of Father Yahweh.

An article in "Israel Today" tried to explain this relationship by saying Yahweh
manifested himself in the fleshly form of Yahshua. The author calls this the
incarnation. This same author rightfully puts down the trinity because the word is
not found in the Bible and yet, he exalts another unscriptural term, "incarnation."
Perhaps he was misled by the erroneous translation of 1 Tim.3:16 in the KJV. It
says, "God was manifest in the flesh." A footnote in the Emphatic Diaglott reads,
"Nearly all ancient MSS., and all the versions have "He who," instead of "God," in
this passage." Even if the incarnation theory was true, would Yahweh continue to
manifest himself as Yahshua even after the Millennium? 1 Cor.15:24-28 and
Rev.22:1 show both as separate beings after the Millennium. The truth is, they are
not parts of one being but two separate and distinct beings. That is why Yahshua
could say what he did in Jn.8:17,18, "It is also written in your law, that the
testimony of two men is true. I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father
that sent me beareth witness of me." Yahweh and Yahshua are two separate
beings, not two manifestations of one being.

When the scriptures are accepted at face value, without reading into the text more
than it says, the relationship between the two becomes quite clear. In spite of this,
many people are not satisfied with Yahshua's rank in the hierarchy of heaven.
They feel a need to exalt him into the number one position, that of Yahweh
Almighty, and they will twist scripture in a variety of ways to accomplish this.

Yahweh is One

Concerning the "Shema" (Deut.6:4) it reads, "Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our Elohim
is one Yahweh:" or "Yahweh is one." It is believed by many that the word "echad,"
translated "one," means "a united one" or a "compound unity," not singularity. The
scriptures prove this belief to be false. Note Nu.7:13-82 where "echad" is
translated "one" 84 times and each time it means one as in the number one,
singularity. Consider also Gen.2:1 - one rib and Dan.9:27 - one week.

Historic Judaism does not give echad the meaning of unity or plurality as is seen in
the Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 14, p.1373: "Perhaps from earliest times, but
certainly from later, the word echad (one) was understood also to mean unique.
God is not only one and not many, but He is totally other than what paganism
means by gods." Note also The Jewish Commentary, Soncino Edition, p.770: "He
is one because there is no other Elohim than He; but He is also one, because He
is wholly unlike anything else in existence. He is therefore not only one, but the
Sole and Unique, Elohim."

Perhaps the most conclusive evidence that the word echad has the meaning of
alone or unique comes to us from the Messiah himself in Mk.12:28-34. When
asked which commandment was the most important, Yahshua responded by
quoting the Shema. In response to his answer the teacher replied, "You are right
in saying that Yahweh is one and there is no other but Him." Although Yahshua did
not specifically say "there is no other but Him" the teacher understood that
meaning to be implied in the word echad or one. Yahshua acknowledged that the
teacher answered wisely thereby confirming the teacher's correct understanding
of the meaning of the Shema.

It is true that echad was used in verses such as Ge.2:24 and Ge.41:25. There we
see two people becoming one flesh and two dreams having one meaning. The key
here is that two become one. In the Shema, we only see one individual, Yahweh,
proclaimed to be one! It doesn't say, "And the two Yahweh's became one." In the
two verses in Genesis, we don't see one becoming two. But that is what people
are trying to do with the Shema. They say one means two and therefore, there
must be two Yahweh's. What utter nonsense!

Yahshua said, "I and my Father are one." (Jn.10:30). Does that mean they are the
same being? Yahshua said something similar in Jn.17:22, "And the glory which
thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:"
Here again, Yahshua says he and the Father are one. But he also prays that his
followers will be one in the same sense that he and Yahweh are one. That is a
oneness of mind, purpose, and will, not a oneness of being. And it certainly does
not mean there are two Yahweh's.

Elohim - Plural or singular?

The word "Elohim," translated "God," is often attacked as well. It is believed that it
denotes a plurality or a god consisting of more than one being or more than one
manifestation of a being. This, too, is a false concept based on the philosophy of
men. Elohim is used in the Bible with a plural sense when it refers to several
deities and in a singular sense when it refers to a singular deity. Its plural sense
can be seen in Ex.12:12, "For I will pass through the land of Egypt this night, and
will smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all
the gods (elohim) of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am Yahweh." Its singular
sense can be seen in 1 Sam.5:7, ". . . and upon Dagon our god (elohim)" and 2
Kgs.1:2, ". . . Go, enquire of Baal-zebub the god (elohim) of Ekron whether I shall
recover of this disease." Are we to believe that Dagon and Baal-zebub are also
plural beings who can "incarnate" themselves as Yahweh "supposedly" did?

The word "God" (elohim) is properly applied to Yahshua in Heb.1:9 and Jn.20:28.
Both words are from the Greek word "theos" which was also used in reference to
Satan (2 Cor.4:4) and Herod (Acts 12:22). It has the same meaning as the
Hebrew word "elohim" and can be applied to men, angels, and the Almighty.
Ps.82:6 applies it to any child of the Most High; "I have said, Ye are gods [elohim];
and all of you are children of the most High." It simply means "a mighty one among
his people." It is not wrong to call Yahshua an elohim or a god. The problem lies in
believing he is the one true "God," Yahweh Almighty. Yahshua made it clear that
he was not, in Jn.17:3; "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee
[Yahweh] the only true Elohim, and Yahshua Messiah, whom thou hast sent." The
Apostle Paul declared the same thing in 1 Cor.8:6; "But to us there is but one
Elohim, the Father [Yahweh], of whom are all things, and we in him; and one
Master Yahshua Messiah, by whom are all things, and we by him."

Oneness proponents wrongly interpret 1 Jn.5:20 to mean that Yahshua is the one
true "God." It reads, "And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given
us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is
true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life" (KJV).
When it says, "his Son Jesus Christ," it means Yahweh's Son. That being the
case, the previous use of the pronoun "him" in the two phrases "him that is true"
must also refer to Yahweh. The "his" and "him" refer to the same person. To say
that "This is the true God" refers to the Son is grammatically incorrect.

Not only is Yahweh the one true Elohim, but He is also Yahshua's Elohim. If
Yahshua is an elohim or god and he himself has a god, then surely his god must
be a greater god. This is what scripture teaches in Mt.27:46; Jn.17:3; 20:17;
Eph.1:17; Heb. 1:9; and Rev.3:12. Rev.3:12 says, "Him that overcometh will I
make a pillar in the temple of my Elohim, and he shall go no more out: and I will
write upon him the name of my Elohim [Yahweh], and the name of the city of my
Elohim, New Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my Elohim: and I
will write upon him my new name." Yahshua is saying this after he ascended to
heaven and sat down at the right hand of Yahweh (Heb 8:1). If he was the
Yahweh Almighty of the Old Testament, who is his Elohim and who is he sitting
next to? Two scriptures answer that question. The first is Ps.110:1; "Yahweh said
unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool."
The second is Mic.5:4; "And he [Yahshua] shall stand and feed in the strength of
Yahweh, in the majesty of the name of Yahweh his Elohim; and they shall abide:
for now shall he be great unto the ends of the earth."

The Image of Yahweh

What about Jn.14:9? "Yahshua 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?" Is Yahshua declaring that
he is Father Yahweh? Heb.1:3 and Col.1:15 both state that Yahshua is the
"image" of Yahweh. An image is something that resembles something else.
Yahshua resembles Yahweh in that their characters are almost identical. "Not that
any man has seen the Father" (Jn. 6:46) bodily, but we have seen His character
through His Son.

What about Mic.5:2; "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among
the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be
ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." This is
undoubtedly a Messianic prophecy. The question is, what does "goings forth"
mean? Does it mean Yahshua has existed as long as Yahweh? Some say yes
thereby giving more weight to their argument that Yahshua is Yahweh. According
to Strong's Concordance, "Goings forth" comes from one Hebrew word,
"mowtsaah". It means, "a family descent." Since Yahweh is Yahshua's Father,
Yahshua's family descent would go back as far as Yahweh's existence. Since
Yahweh has always existed, Yahshua's family descent or goings forth must be
from everlasting. The New English Bible, the Phillips translation, and Todays
English Bible render it similarly. Yahshua himself is not from everlasting. His family
descent, or his family tree, is.

There are those who believe that Yahshua was not only Yahweh, but Melchizedek
as well. They site Heb.7:4 to prove this. In Gen.14:18 we read that Melchizedek,
king of Salem, "was the priest of the most high God." The "most high God" is
shown to be Yahweh three verses later; "...I have lift up mine hand unto Yahweh,
the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth." Therefore, Melchizedek is
the priest of Yahweh, not Yahweh Himself. If Yahshua is Melchizedek, he cannot
be Yahweh. If Yahshua is Yahweh, he cannot be Melchizedek. The fact is,
Yahshua is neither one of these beings. He is Yahweh's Son and Yahweh made
him a priest "after the order of Melchizedek" (Ps.110:4, Heb. 7:21).

Receiving Worship and Forgiving Sins

Many people believe that only Almighty Yahweh can forgive sins and receive
worship. Since Yahshua did both they believe he must be the Almighty. Yahshua
indeed is worthy of our worship and honor, but only as Yahweh's representative,
not as Yahweh Himself. Yahweh commanded even the angels of heaven to
worship Yahshua (Heb.1:6). Rev.5:12 ,13 show both Yahweh and the Lamb
[Yahshua] receiving worship. Eventually, those believers comprising the
Philadelphia assembly will receive worship as well (Rev. 3:9). The worship they
receive however, is not directed at them as though they were Yahweh.

A study of the Hebrew and Greek words that were translated "worship" will show
that the Almighty is not always the recipient. Of the 170 occurrences only about
half refer to the worship of Yahweh. This is hidden from the reader of scripture
because half of those occurrences were translated 'to bow, bow down, do
reverence, do obeisance,' as can be seen in the following verses: Gen.18:2; 19:1:
23:7,12; 27:29; 1 Sam.24:8; 25:23,41; 2 Sam.9:6; 14:4,22.

Yahshua said to a man with palsy, "thy sins be forgiven thee" (Mt.9:2). The
account continues, "But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on
earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy
bed, and go unto thine house. And he arose, and departed to his house. But when
the multitudes saw it, they marveled, and glorified Yahweh, which had given such
power unto men." Were they correct? Had Yahweh given Yahshua the power to
forgive sins? Yahshua said, "I can of my own self do nothing," "I do nothing of
myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things," "the words that I
speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth
the works" (Jn.5:30a; 8:28b; 14:10b). Yahweh gave Yahshua the authority to
forgive sins, judge men, heal the sick, raise the dead, etc. He is Yahweh's
Representative with the power to act in His name. The word "power" in Mt.9:2 is
from the same Greek word that was translated "authority" in Jn.5:27 and
throughout the New Testament. This same power was given to the Angel of
Yahweh in Ex.23:20-21, "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the
way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and
obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my
name is in him."

While we are on the subject of sin, many believe Yahshua was the one true "God"
because "only the death of God could atone for man's sins. The death of a man
wouldn't suffice." This is another example of the philosophy of men contrary to
scripture. Heb.9:22 says, "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood;
and without shedding of blood is no remission (of sins)." One requirement was
shed blood. The other requirement was that the sacrifice had to be "without
blemish" which, regarding Messiah, meant sinless. Yahweh Almighty did not have
to die. Only the blood of a sinless man was required. Yahshua was that only
sinless man (1 Jn.3:5).

The Attributes of Yahweh

The terms "omniscient" (all knowing), and "omnipotent" (all powerful) are often
applied to Yahshua to prove he is the Almighty. In Jn.5:30 Yahshua said, "I can of
mine own self do nothing" therefore, he cannot be omnipotent as Yahweh is. Mt.
24:36 proves Yahshua is not omniscient; "But of that day and hour knoweth no
man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but my Father." In
order to explain such verses "Oneness" proponents must turn Yahshua into the
"God-Man." This unscriptural idea claims that Yahshua's divine half is omniscient
and omnipotent but that he suppressed his powers during his life in the flesh.
Nowhere in scripture is the Messiah called a God-Man or shown to have two such
natures at the same time. He is repeatedly referred to as a man in such verses as
1 Tim.2:5. When he is called "God" it is in the sense of a mighty one among his
people as was shown earlier. This is not to say that Yahshua was a mere man.
Scripture is clear that Yahshua's birth was a miracle in that he was not made from
the seed or sperm of man. He is Yahweh's only begotten Son; the only being ever
to be "Fathered" by Yahweh.

Titles in Common

Should we refer to Yahshua as the Almighty, a title only applied to Yahweh?
Nowhere in scripture is this ever the case. One scripture that seemingly supports
such an application is Rev. 1:8; "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the
ending, saith [the Lord]*, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the
Almighty." (KJV). *The Greek has "kurios o theos" ("the Lord the God" or "Yahweh
Elohim"). The phrase "Lord God" is never used of Yahshua in the New Testament.
Aside from that, John is giving a greeting starting in verse four and ending in verse
seven. Verse four is a greeting from the Father "which is, and which was, and
which is to come." Verse five is a greeting from Yahshua the Messiah. Verse eight
is spoken by the Father which is, and which was, and which is to come, the
Almighty." Scripture makes a clear distinction between the Almighty and Yahshua
in Rev.21:22; "And I saw no temple therein: for Yahweh Elohim Almighty and the
Lamb are the temple of it." Yahshua is not Yahweh Almighty.

This misapplication of titles is often the cause of making these two beings into
one. For example, Acts 3:14 reads, "But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and
desired a murderer to be granted unto you;" Here the title "Holy One" is applied to
Yahshua the Messiah. In Is.43:3 it says, "For I am Yahweh thy Elohim, the Holy
One of Israel, thy Saviour:. . . " Here the title "Holy One" is applied to Yahweh.
Without further study one would conclude these two references are to the same
person. However, we are not to study scripture superficially. In what way is
Yahshua the Holy One? The answer is found in Mk.1:24; "Saying, Let us alone;
what have we to do with thee, thou Yahshua of Nazareth? art thou come to
destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of Yahweh." Yahweh is the
Holy One of Israel and Yahshua is the Holy One of Yahweh, not of Israel.
Ps.16:10 confirms this understanding; "For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell;
neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." This is a Messianic
prophecy. "My soul" refers to Yahshua's soul and "thine Holy One" refers to
Yahweh's Holy One. Scripture reveals two Holy ones that are separate beings.

Another shared title is "Savior." Is.43:11 says, "I, even I, am Yahweh; and beside
me there is no saviour." That seems quite clear. Since Yahweh is the only Savior
and Yahshua is called our Savior, the two must be one and the same being. This
is true only in the minds of men who do not study deeply. Is.19:20b reads, "for
they shall cry unto Yahweh because of the oppressors, and he shall send them a
saviour, and a great one, and he shall deliver them." It was prophesied that
Yahweh would send someone other than Himself to be a savior to Egypt. Yahweh
is the one true Savior who works through Yahshua the Messiah, His appointed
Savior.

A few other shared titles, all basically equal in meaning, are "Alpha and Omega,"
"the first and the last," and "the beginning and the end." Each of these titles are
applied to both Yahweh and Yahshua (Is.41:4;44:6;48:12; Rev.1:8,17;2:8;22:13)
and have the meaning of uniqueness. Each is the first and last of his peculiar,
unique kind. Yahweh is unique in that He is the only being that was not created
and Yahshua is unique in that he is the only being ever to be directly begotten by
Yahweh the Father (Jn.1:14). (Adam was created, all others were begotten by
men).Titles that Yahweh and Yahshua have in common do not supply a firm
foundation for a "Oneness" doctrine. If that were true, Cyrus, the king of Persia,
would have been the pre-existent Yahshua since both are called "Messiah." In
Is.45:1a it reads, "Thus saith Yahweh to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I
have holden, to subdue nations before him;" The Hebrew for "anointed" is the
same word that was translated "Messiah" in Dan. 9:25,26 and "anointed" in Ps.2:2.

The scriptures tell us Yahshua would also be called Emmanuel, meaning "God with
us," or more correctly, "El with us." As a result, people teach that Yahshua is
"God." This name is to be understood in the light of Acts 10:38; "How Yahweh
anointed Yahshua of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power: who went
about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for Yahweh
(El) was with him." Not that Yahshua was El, but that El was with and in Yahshua.
If you choose to use the logic of those in error, then consider the name Jehu. In
Hebrew, this name means "He is Yah" or "Yah is He." Does that mean the man
Jehu is, in reality, Yahweh?

Is.9:6 reads, "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." Is this
prophecy declaring Yahshua the Messiah to be the Heavenly Father? There are at
least 27 names in the Bible with the same Hebrew construction as in this verse.
Each one means the "father of (something)." For example, Abishua means "father
of plenty." Instead of translating the phrase in Is.9:6 as "Father of eternity," the
KJV reversed the sequence making the true meaning harder to discern. Several
newer versions correct this mistake such as The Emphasized Bible, The Bible in
Basic English, The New American Bible, The Holy Bible; A Translation From the
Latin Vulgate in the Light of the Hebrew and Greek Originals, and The New
English Bible, just to name a few. Yahshua is the Father of Eternity because
eternal life comes to us through him. And so it is written in Heb.5:9, "And being
made perfect, he became the author (or father) of eternal salvation unto all them
that obey him;"

One last title that confuses people is "Rock." 1 Cor.10:4 says, "And did all drink
the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them:
and that Rock was Messiah." Since Yahweh is called a "Rock" in several Old
Testament verses, the two beings are made into one. This verse must be
understood with Ex.17:6 in mind; "Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the
rock in Horeb; and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it,
that the people may drink. And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel." 1
Cor. 10:4 is figuratively making reference to Ex.17:6 which is a shadow of
Messiah. To "smite the rock" is to kill the Messiah. The rock could not yield water
until it was smitten. Similarly, the Messiah Yahshua could not give forth "rivers of
living water" until he was put to death and then resurrected unto eternal life
(glorified). Jn.7:39 shows this "living water" to be the Holy Spirit. Yahshua was not
physically present with them in the wilderness. Spiritually speaking he was. That is
why the verse says "spiritual drink" and "spiritual Rock." The word "them" in the
phrase "that followed them" is not in the Greek. Reading the verse without that
misleading word gives the meaning that Yahshua followed in time as in 1 Pe.1:11,
"Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Messiah which was in them
did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Messiah, and the glory
that should follow." Even if one were to believe Yahshua physically followed Israel,
that would not prove he was Yahweh since Yahweh was not personally leading or
following Israel in the wilderness. Scriptures reveal that the Angel of Yahweh,
Yahweh's representative, followed them (Ex.14:19).

I AM

"Before Abraham was, I am." These words, spoken by our Savior in Jn.8:58, have
led to much controversy and confusion. Some use this verse to prove the
Messiah's pre-existence. Others use it to prove the trinity doctrine. And then there
are those who use it to prove Yahshua is the great "I AM" of Ex.3:14.

The phrase "I am" is "ego eimi" in Greek. Since the Greek New Testament
records Yahshua using "ego eimi" many times, Christian theologians term these
sayings, "The I Am's of Jesus." It is believed that each of these occurrences
implies Yahshua's identity as the "I AM" of Ex.3:14. Can this be true? Can our
Savior, the Son of Yahweh, actually be the "I AM"?

Ex.3:14-15 reads, "And Elohim said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and He said,
Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. And
Elohim said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel,
Yahweh, Elohim of your fathers, the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and
the Elohim of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is
my memorial unto all generations." Therefore, the "I AM" is identified as "Yahweh."

And what does Yahweh say in Ps.2:7? "I will declare the decree: Yahweh hath
said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." Yahweh is the
Father of Yahshua. Yahshua is the Son of Yahweh. Yahshua is not Yahweh and
the Son is not the Father. Therefore, Yahshua (the Son of Yahweh) cannot be the
I AM (Yahweh). That alone should be sufficient to discredit the belief that Yahshua
was claiming to be the "I AM." But let's look into the matter a little farther.

It is believed that Jn.8:59 further supports the position that Yahshua is the "I AM."
Why else would the Jews try to stone him? He obviously blasphemed in the eyes
of the Jews, a stoneable offense. Or did he? Is the mere utterance of "ego eimi" a
blasphemy? Does the use of "ego eimi" automatically identify the speaker as
Yahweh, the I AM?

Several individuals aside from Yahshua used "ego eimi" as well. In Lu.1:19, the
angel Gabriel said, "Ego eimi Gabriel." In Jn.9:9, the blind man whose sight was
restored by Yahshua said, "Ego eimi." In Acts 10:21, Peter said, "Behold, ego
eimi (I am) he whom ye seek." Obviously, the mere use of "ego eimi" does not
equate one to the "I Am" of Ex.3:14. But perhaps the Saviors use of it was
somehow different. After all, he came down from heaven.

If, in fact, Yahshua spoke Greek to the Jews (which I doubt), he used the phrase
"ego eimi" at least twenty times and yet, in only one instance did the Jews seek to
stone him (Jn.8:58). Yahshua said, "I am the bread of life" to a large crowd, in
Jn.6:35 & 48, yet no one opposed him. In verse 41, the Jews murmured because
he said, "I am (ego eimi) the bread which came down from heaven." But in verse
42, the Jews questioned only the phrase, "I came down from heaven" and ignored
"ego eimi." The same is true of verses 51 & 52.

In Jn.8:12, 18, 24, & 28, Yahshua used "ego eimi" with Pharisees present (vs.13)
and yet, no stoning. He, again, used it four times in Jn.10:7, 9, 11, & 14 with no
stoning. Yahshua said to his disciples, "...that...ye may believe that I am (ego
eimi)" in Jn.13:19 without them batting an eye.

An interesting account occurs in Jn.18 when the Jews came to arrest Yahshua in
the Garden of Gethsemane. When the chief priests and Pharisees said they were
seeking Yahshua of Nazareth, Yahshua said to them, "Ego eimi." At that they fell
backward to the ground. It is not made clear why they fell to the ground, but what
followed will make it clear that Yahshua was not claiming to be the "I AM."

After Yahshua's arrest, the Jews took him to Annas first (vs.13). Then they took
him to Caiaphas (vs.24) and eventually to Pilate (vss.28,29). A parallel account is
found in Mt.26:57-68. Notice, in particular, verse 59. The same men that had fallen
backward to the ground were in attendance when the council sought false
witnesses against Yahshua to put him to death. Verse 60 says they couldn't find
any. Eventually two came forward. Interestingly, they didn't bear false witness
about what Yahshua said in Jn.8:58, but about his reference to destroying the
temple and building it again in three days. Where were all those witnesses from
Jn.8:58?

The point about Mt.26 is, why would false witnesses be sought if they had true
witnesses in attendance? The arresting officers heard Yahshua say "Ego eimi."
They could have stoned him right there in the garden for blasphemy, but they
didn't. They could have reported the supposed blasphemy to the council, but they
didn't. Why not? Because it wasn't blasphemy, nor was it a stoneable offense. He
was merely identifying himself as Yahshua of Nazareth.

This brings us back to Jn.8:58. Why did the Jews seek to stone him on that
occasion? The context of Jn.8 shows that Yahshua;

1) accused the Jews of "judging after the flesh" (vs.15).
2) said they would die in their sins (vss.21,24).
3) implied they were in bondage (vss.32,33).
4) said they were servants of sin (vs.34).
5) said they were out to kill him (vss. 37,40).
6) implied they were spiritually deaf (vs.43,47).
7) said their father was the devil (vs.44).
8) said they were not of Elohim (vs.47).
9) accused them of dishonoring him (vs.49).
10) accused them of not knowing Yahweh (vs.55).
11) accused them of lying (vs.55).

Aside from that, the Jews misunderstood Yahshua's words leading them to believe;

1) that he accused them of being born of fornication (vs.41).
2) Yahshua had a devil (vs.52).
3) that he was exalting himself above Abraham (vs.53).
4) that he saw Abraham (vs.56).

Yahshua's words in verse 58 were the culmination of an encounter that was so
offensive to the Jews that they couldn't restrain themselves anymore. They simply
couldn't take it anymore so they sought to stone him, not because of two simple
words, "ego eimi," but because he was making himself out to be greater than their
beloved father Abraham. They sought to stone him illegally.

So what does Jn.8:58 really mean? Although I do not believe we can be certain
what Yahshua meant due to a variety of reasons, I offer the following explanation.

Let's look at the context of Yahshua's statement. It begins in verse 51 with the
thought of eternal life; "If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death." The
Jews thought since Abraham and the prophets were dead, Yahshua must have a
devil. The context is eternal life. Then in verse 56 Yahshua says Abraham
"rejoiced to see my day." He did not say he saw Abraham as the Jews
misunderstood. How did Abraham see Yahshua's day? Heb.11:13 says, "These all
died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and
were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were
strangers and pilgrims on the earth." He saw Yahshua's day by faith.

Yahshua then resumed the context of his initial conversation by saying, "Before
Abraham was, I am." "Was" is from the Greek "ginomai" meaning, "to come into
being, ... to arise." What Yahshua actually meant was, "Before Abraham comes
into being (at his resurrection unto eternal life), I will." Confirmation of this
understanding comes to us from Figures of Speech Used in the Bible by E.W.
Bullinger, pgs. 521,522. Under the heading "Heterosis (Of Tenses)," subheading
"The Present for the Future," he writes, "This is put when the design is to show
that some thing will certainly come to pass, and is spoken of as though it were
already present." He then lists some examples such as Mt.3:10b, "therefore every
tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is [shall be] hewn down;" and Mk.9:31a,
"For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is [shall be]
delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed,
he shall rise the third day." Included among this list of examples of Heterosis is
Jn.8:58. In other words, although properly written, "Before Abraham comes to be,
I am," with "I am" in the simple present tense, the meaning points to the future,
"Before Abraham comes to be, I will."

Yahshua was telling them that Abraham will be one of those people who will be
granted eternal life, but before that takes place, Yahshua will receive that same
eternal life. This statement of fact must be since Yahshua is to have the
preeminence in all things. He must be the firstborn from the dead, the first to
receive eternal life.

Some people believe this verse should be translated, "Before Abraham existed, I
existed." However, neither Greek verb is in the perfect tense (past tense). "Was"
is in the aorist tense and "am" is in the present tense. Let's look a little closer at
"was." Concerning the aorist tense, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New
Testament by Dana and Mantey says, "It has time relations only in the indicative,
where it is past and hence augmented." The verb ginomai (was) is in the infinitive,
not the indicative. Therefore it should not be translated in the past tense. This
same reference says of the infinitive, "The aorist infinitive denotes that which is
eventual or particular, ..." Abraham will eventually resurrect which is why the
Greek uses the aorist infinitive. The meaning is, "Before Abraham comes to be"
not "Before Abraham was (or existed)."

Yahshua was not declaring that he is the great "I AM" of Ex.3:14. Yahshua was
not declaring himself to be Yahweh. And Yahshua was not declaring his
pre-existence. He is the Son of Yahweh and the Son of the great "I Am."

The Word was God?

In Jn.1:1-3 we read, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were
made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made" (KJV). As
mentioned previously, it is not wrong to address Yahshua as god or elohim as long
as we don't address him as the "one true Elohim." According to the common
understanding of verse 1, there are two beings, the Word and God, Yahshua and
Yahweh. Therefore, the phrase "the Word was God" would lead one to believe
that Yahshua (the Word) was Yahweh (God). However, if we know that Yahweh
called Yahshua "God" or "elohim" in Heb.1:9 and Ps.45:7, there is no problem with
the phrase "the Word was God." Yahshua is obviously an elohim in Hebrew or a
god in English. This, of course, is based on the common understanding of the
"Word" being Yahshua. That, however, is not what John intended when he wrote
these verses.

Nor did John intend to teach us that the Son preexisted "with" God from the very
beginning of creation. De 32:39 says, "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is
no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any
that can deliver out of my hand." Yahweh the Father is speaking here. He is saying
there is no other "elohim" or no other God with Him. John 1:1 says, " . . .and the
Word was WITH God, and the Word was God." If the "Word" is the Son and the
Son was WITH God and was God, how does that harmonize with the above
verse? In De 32:39, since Yahweh was speaking, then there was no other God
with Him, not even the Son.

Since Yahshua is called "The Word of God" in Rev.19:13, the translators of the
KJV assumed the "Word" of Jn.1:1 was also Yahshua and therefore, capitalized
the word "word" and used the pronoun "him" in reference to the "word." The Greek
for "Word" is "logos." It appears in the text written with a small letter l. Logos
means "the spoken word" or "something said (including the thought)." In that sense
the word is an "it," not a person but a thing. The great English translator William
Tyndale renders it that way in his 1525 version as does the Matthew's Bible of
1537, the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560, and the Bishop's Bible
of 1568. (Click here for more info.) Verse 3 should read, "All things were made
through it; and without it was not anything made that was made." In other words,
Yahweh spoke creation into existence. This understanding agrees perfectly with
passages such as Gen.1:3,6,9,11,14, 20, and 24 all of which begin, "And Elohim
said." Yahweh spoke and it was done. Ps.33:6,9 says, "By the word of Yahweh
were the heavens made; and all the host by the breath of his mouth. . . For He
spoke and it was; He commanded, and it stood fast." Not only did Yahweh speak
creation into existence, but He also spoke His Son Yahshua into existence; "And
the word (Yahweh's spoken word) was made flesh" (Jn.1:14). Yahshua did not
become the "Word of Yahweh" until his birth as a flesh and blood male child.

How then should we translate verse 1? "In the beginning was the word; and the
word was with Yahweh, and the word was Yahweh's" is one suggestion. The
Greek word translated "God" is "theos." The Greek does not have a different
word to show possession. Therefore, theos can be translated "Yahweh" or
"Yahweh's." The possessive form makes this verse so clear and in harmony with
the phrase "the word was with Yahweh."

A second possible translation would be, "and the word was mighty." Theos is
equivalent to the Hebrew word elohim. Elohim has the meaning of great or mighty
in such verses as Gen.30:8, "And Rachel said, With great [elohim] wrestlings have
I wrestled with my sister, and I have prevailed: and she called his name Naphtali"
and 1 Sam 14:15, "And there was trembling in the host, in the field, and among all
the people: the garrison, and the spoilers, they also trembled, and the earth
quaked: so it was a very great [elohim] trembling." Since the word theos in the
phrase "the Word was God [theos]" is not preceded by the article "ho" (the God),
as are the other two uses of theos in verses 1 & 2, it can be understood as an
adjective rather than a noun.

Who is the Creator?

Getting back to the issue of creation, many believe Yahshua created all things. A
thorough study of the Old Testament scriptures shows Yahweh to be the Creator
and that He acted alone to accomplish this. Note Is.44:24; "Thus saith Yahweh,
thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am Yahweh that maketh
all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth
by myself;" Where is Yahshua in this verse? It has been proven beyond a shadow
of a doubt that Yahshua is not Yahweh, therefore, Yahshua did not have a hand in
creation. This is confirmed in Job 9:8; "Which alone spreadeth out the heavens,
and treadeth upon the waves of the sea." Consider also Prov.30:4; "Who hath
ascended up into heaven? who hath gathered the wind in His fists? Who hath
bound the waters in a garment? Who hath established all the ends of the earth?
What is His name, and what is His son's name, if thou canst tell?" This verse
teaches us that the Creator, whoever He is, has a Son. Does Yahshua have a
son? No. Father Yahweh is the Creator and He has a Son who is not given credit
for creation in this verse.

There are several New Testament scriptures used to prove he did create all
things. They are Jn 1:3, which we already looked at; Jn.1:10; 1 Cor.8:6; Eph.3:9;
Col.1:16; and Heb.1:2. All these verses use the same basic phrase, "by him" or
"by Yahshua Messiah." The phrase "by Yahshua Messiah" in Eph.3:9 is not found
in any Greek MSS. Without the added words this verse teaches us that Yahweh is
the Creator. The remaining four verses imply that Yahshua is the Creator. Thus
far, it has been conclusively proven that Yahshua is not Yahweh. Since the
scriptures emphatically state over 100 times that Yahweh is the Creator
(Ex.20:11) and that He acted alone (Is.44:24), should we discard that wealth of
evidence and accept Yahshua as the Creator without question? A careful
examination of the Greek of those four verses will yield a different picture.

The Greek word for "by" is "di." It can be translated "by," "through," "on account
of," "for," etc., based on the context or message of the sentence. These four
verses in question will not allow the translation "by" because it does not agree or
harmonize with over 100 other verses stating that Yahweh is the Creator. An
example of the importance of context is Mk.2:27; "And he said unto them, The
sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath." Both words "for" in this
verse are from the Greek word "dia." It would be incorrect to translate "dia" as
"by" in this verse: The Sabbath was made by man. If you will notice the Greek of
Jn.1:10 you will see it is the exact same construction as Mk.2:27 yet one verse
says "for" and the other says "by." Also, in the case of Heb 1:2, it is revealed that
Yahshua is the heir of all things that have been created by Yahweh. He is not the
Creator Himself.

1 Pe.1:20 says, "Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world,
but was manifest in these last times for you." Before creation, Yahshua existed in
the foreordained plans of Yahweh. He was "the Lamb slain from the foundation of
the world" (Rev.13:8). Even before creation Yahweh knew that Yahshua had to be
slain. Even before creation Yahweh knew that He would create all things on
account of and for His Son. And so it is written and correctly translated in
Col.1:16, "For in him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in
earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities,
or powers: all things were created on account of him, and for him:" Without
Yahshua in Yahweh's plan, creation would never have occurred. The remaining
three scriptures using "by" should be translated similarly.

One other Scripture often used to prove Yahshua's hand in creation is
Heb.1:10-12. These verses are indeed very difficult to understand. It appears as
though the writer of Hebrews is including verses 10-12 as additional statements
that Yahweh has made to His Son. The use of "And" in verse 10 and "but" in verse
13 suggest this. But if we look a little deeper we will find several discrepancies.
Verses 10-12 are direct quotes from Ps.102:25-27. They are not a quote from the
Hebrew Text, however, but from the Septuagint (LXX). The Hebrew Text does not
have "Lord" in it. Therefore, to say that "Lord" in Heb.1:10 proves that Yahshua is
Yahweh is unscriptural. The LXX has "Kurie" in Ps.102:25, but that is an addition
since it is not found in the Hebrew Text. The LXX also omits "O my el" in verse 24.

In reading the Hebrew of Ps.102, it is clear the subject is Yahweh. They are the
words of an afflicted man as he cries out to Yahweh. They are not the words of
Yahweh as He speaks to His Son.

Notice each of the other Old Testament quotes in Hebrew 1;

Ps.2:7 - "...Thou art my Son; this day I (Yahweh) have begotten thee."

2 Sam.7:14 - "I (Yahweh) will be to him a Father..."

Deut.32:43 (LXX) - "And let all the angels of God (Yahweh) worship him."

Ps.45:6,7 - "Thy throne O elohim...therefore elohim, thy Elohim (Yahweh) hath
anointed thee."

Ps.110:1 - "Sit on my right hand, until I (Yahweh) make thine enemies thy
footstool."

In each of these quotes it can be seen that either Yahweh is talking to His Son or
about His Son. Yet, in Ps.102:25-27 it is the Psalmist talking to Yahweh.
Therefore, to include Heb.1:10-12 among those things that Yahweh said to or
about His Son is incorrect.

The writer of Hebrews had written verses 1-9 to show how Yahweh exalted His
Son, even above the angels. It appears as though the writer was then moved to
exalt Yahweh as well by including verses 10-12 as a parenthesis. He then
resumes by showing Yahshua's exaltation in verse 13 which is a continuation of
verse 9. There are an abundance of Scriptures proving that Yahshua is not
Yahweh. To make that assumption here is to reject the weightier evidence.

Know the Scriptures

There has been a very sharp attack centered on using Old Testament quotes
found in the New Testament that are applied to both Yahweh and Yahshua to
prove the two are one and the same. It is important to fully understand these
verses correctly.

The first is found in Rom.14:10,11. It reads, "But why dost thou judge thy brother?
or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the
judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall
bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God" (KJV). Paul was quoting
Is.45:23 in which the speaker is Yahweh. So when verse 23 says, "That unto me,"
"me" refers to Yahweh. Every knee will bow and every tongue will swear to
Yahweh. Therefore, in Rom.14:11, "Lord" must mean Yahweh, as does "me" and
"God". There is no mention of Messiah in this verse; not even in verse 10.
Concerning the phrase "judgment seat of Christ," the Jamieson, Faussett, Brown
Commentary says, "All the most ancient and best MSS. read here, "judgment seat
of God."

Paul does, however, apply portions of Is.45:23 to Yahshua in Ph.2:10,11. That
does not mean he is also applying the Name "Yahweh" to him as well. Jn.5:23
helps us to understand this. If you don't honor the Son, by extension, you don't
honor the Father. And Jn.15:23; if you hate the Son, by extension, you hate the
Father. If you bow your knees to the Son, by extension, you bow your knees to
the Father. Notice Is.45:23 does not say what will be sworn; Ph.2:11 does - every
tongue shall confess or swear that Yahshua is "Lord," "kurios". That same word
was applied to men in several other verses such as Jn.12:21. It is only a reference
to Yahweh when it is a direct quote of an Old Testament verse containing the
Tetragrammaton which Is.45:23 does not.

The next reference is 1 Pe.2:8, "And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense,
even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they
were appointed." Peter is here applying Is.8:14 to Messiah. It is to be understood
in the sense that, since Yahshua is Yahweh's representative or agent, whatever
Yahshua does is credited to Yahweh or is as though Yahweh did it. Isayah says
Yahweh will be a stumbling stone. Yahweh then causes Israel to stumble over
Yahshua which makes them both stumbling stones. "The stone which the builders
refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is Yahweh's doing; it is
marvelous in our eyes" (Ps.118:22,23).

Consider Ex.7:17 when understanding this verse.

"Thus saith Yahweh, In this thou shalt know that I am Yahweh: behold, I will smite
with the rod that is in mine hand upon the waters which are in the river, and they
shall be turned to blood. And the fish that is in the river shall die, and the river shall
stink; and the Egyptians shall lothe to drink of the water of the river. And Yahweh
spake unto Moses, Say unto Aaron, Take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand upon
the waters of Egypt, upon their streams, upon their rivers, and upon their ponds,
and upon all their pools of water, that they may become blood; and that there may
be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood, and in vessels
of stone. And Moses and Aaron did so, as Yahweh commanded; and he lifted up
the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river, in the sight of Pharaoh, and
in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to
blood."

Yahweh says He Himself will smite the waters with the rod in His own hand. Yet, it
was Aaron that held the rod (Ex.7:19,20). Are we to believe that Aaron is also
Yahweh? Neither should we believe that Yahshua is Yahweh in this verse.

Consider Zech 14:4 in this light as well.

"And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before
Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof
toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and
half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south."

Most people believe "his feet" refers to Yahweh's feet. Yet, they realize that it is
Yahshua who is returning to set up the Kingdom on earth. So they jump to the
erroneous conclusion that Yahshua is Yahweh. As Messiah's feet land on the
Mount of Olives, Yahweh the Father will cause it to cleave in two. Yet, as
Yahweh's representative, Yahshua's feet are spoken of as Yahweh's feet just as
Aaron's hand is spoken of as Yahweh's hand.

Yahshua is not the only one "coming" on judgment day. Yahweh will come as well,
but not in the physical sense that Yahshua will.

Isa 40:10 - "Behold, the Sovereign Yahweh will come with strong hand, and his
arm shall rule for him: behold, his reward is with him, and his work before him."

The phrase "his arm" is a reference to Messiah (Jn 12:38), but "the Sovereign
Yahweh" is a reference to the Father.

Isa 66:15 - "For, behold, Yahweh will come with fire, and with his chariots like a
whirlwind, to render his anger with fury, and his rebuke with flames of fire."

This is the language of 2 Peter 3:10-13 when it talks about "the Day of Yahweh."
Yahweh the Father will come bringing judgment upon the world. He will do so
through His Son Yahshua and the saints which will be riding on the "chariots" of
Yahweh the Father. "All the saints" of Zech 14:5 would include Yahshua.

Ex.7:17 is also the key to understanding Zec.11:13 which reads, "And Yahweh
said unto me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prised at of them.
And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them to the potter in the house of
Yahweh." Since Yahshua was priced at 30 pieces of silver, and since Yahweh
here says, "I was prised at of them," some conclude that Yahshua is also called
Yahweh. Using that same logic, who cast the silver down? Mt.27:5 says of Judas,
"And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple..." Are we to believe that
Judas is also called Yahweh?

The next attack on Scripture comes in 1 Pe.3:14,15, "But and if ye suffer for
righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be
troubled; But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an
answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with
meekness and fear:" (KJV) Several commentaries and Greek manuscripts read
"Christ" instead of "God" in these verses. They imply it should read, "But sanctify
Yahweh who is Christ." According to the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the
Greek Scriptures, there are 6 Mss. that have "Christos" or "Messiah" in the text
and 8 MSS. that do not. Since the Hebrew Text clearly says, "Yahweh of hosts"
(Is.8:13), the Greek would say either theos or kurios, not Christos. The Greek text
was obviously tampered with by those who tried to prove that Yahshua was the
YHWH of the Old Testament.

The last attack comes in 1 Pe.2:3,4, "If so be ye have tasted that the Lord is
gracious. To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but
chosen of God, and precious," (KJV). In verse 3, Peter is quoting Ps.34:8 which is
speaking about Yahweh. Some people would have us believe that Peter is
applying the Tetragrammaton, YHWH, to the Messiah in verse 4. The words "as
unto" in the KJV, however, are added words not found in the Greek that change
Peter's meaning. Delete these words and the Greek text reads, "To whom coming
toward" or "To whom drawing near, as living stone..." In other words, the living
stone (Yahshua) was drawing near or coming toward Yahweh as will all living
stones in the future (vs.5). The "whom" in verse 4 refers to the "Lord" YHWH of
verse 3; "To [Yahweh] coming, a living stone."

No Man Has Seen God?

This study would not be complete without addressing the issue concerning the
following statements; (Jn.5:37), "And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath
borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his
shape."
And again in 1 Jn.4:12, "No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one
another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us" (KJV). Since Yahweh
(God) was never seen, or heard for that matter, then who was it that men saw in
such passages as Deut.4:12, Ex.24:9-11, etc.? It is assumed that the pre-existant
Messiah is the one they saw and that he is referred to as Yahweh.

To understand this we need to look at a few other examples. Consider the
following;

Gen.22:11-12 - "And the angel of Yahweh called unto him out of heaven, and said,
Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon
the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest
Elohim, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me."

Ex.3:2-6 - "And the angel of Yahweh appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of
the midst of a bush:... And when Yahweh saw that he turned aside to see, Elohim
called unto him out of the midst of the bush, ... he said, I am the Elohim of thy
father, the Elohim of Abraham, the Elohim of Isaac, and the Elohim of Jacob. And
Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon Elohim."

In these two passages, and many others involving the Angel of Yahweh, the angel
speaks as though he was Yahweh. That is because Yahweh was speaking
through the angel. Ex.23:20-22 reads, "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to
keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your
transgressions: for my name is in him. But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and
do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary
unto thine adversaries." As Yahweh's chosen representative, the Angel speaks
whatever he is told to speak by Yahweh. The same was true of Yahshua
(Jn.12:49,50), and the prophets (Heb.1:1).

How does this relate to the giving of the Law at Mt. Sinai? Wasn't it Yahweh's own
voice they heard? That is what Deut.4:12 would suggest. Yet, several New
Testament Scriptures reveal the speaker to be an angel. Acts 7:38,53 read, "This
is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in
the mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto
us:...Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it.
" Also in Gal.3:19, "...and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator
(Moses)."

So what can we conclude about this? It is true that Yahweh's voice has never
been heard nor His shape seen. It was an angel that appeared to men. Yet, this
angel, as Yahweh's chosen representative, could speak with the authority of
Yahweh as though he were Yahweh. The prophets do the same thing quite often.
Therefore, Malachi can say, "Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall
prepare the way before me..." (Mal.3:1), yet, no one would dare say Malachi was
Yahweh.

The Jewish understanding of this is important to note here. It is called the law of
agency. "The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion," Adama Books, New York,
1986, pg.15 reads, "The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in
the dictum "A person's agent is regarded as the person himself." Almighty Yahweh
appointed both Yahshua the Messiah, His Son, and the Angel of Yahweh, as His
agents. As such, anything they did was regarded as though the Almighty Himself
did it.

A wealth of scriptural truth has been presented in this study. An honest seeker of
truth should now know that Yahshua is not Yahweh, the Mighty One of Israel. He
is Yahweh's only begotten Son. That is what we must believe. "Whosoever shall
confess that Yahshua is the Son of Yahweh, Yahweh dwelleth in him, and he in
Yahweh" (1 Jn.4:15). If you believe that Yahshua is Yahweh instead of the Son of
Yahweh, the truth is not in you. Peter knew this truth and responded correctly;
"Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living Elohim" (Mt.16:16). How will you now
respond?

Appendix A

There are several passages in which Yahweh is spoken of as "God" and yet, they
are mistakenly applied to Yahshua. The first is Jude 1:24,25. It reads, "Now unto
him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the
presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Saviour, be
glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen." Who is it that
is able to keep us from falling? Jn.10:29 and Rom.16:25-27 teach us that it is the
Father (Yahweh) who keeps us. He is "God only wise" or "the only wise God."

The second passage is 1 Tim.1:17. It reads, "Now unto the King eternal, immortal,
invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen." We
just saw who the "only wise God" is in Rom.16:25-27.

The third passage is Titus 2:13; "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious
appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;" Does this mean Paul is
saying Yahshua is the great God? In his opening (Titus 1:4) he greets Titus from
"God [Yahweh] the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ [Yahshua]. In Paul's mind
there are two individuals, not two manifestations of one being. Some
commentators believe the word "and" in Titus 2:13 should be translated "even"
since the Greek word "kai" can carry that meaning. Most lexicons will show that
kai means "and" in the overwhelming majority of uses and, in comparison, rarely
means "even." If we change "and" to "even" anytime we want, then we can say
things like Prisca and Aquila are the same person (2 Tim.4:19), etc.

YAHSHUA MESSIAH Is NOT YAHWEH