I found in the BSac—V104 #416—Oct 47—483ff. Probably needed to include this as a footnote…

Jim

I am hesitant to interact with you anywhere since in the past, you and Greg have shown a complete lack of self-control in what you write and how you write. It is not that I am afraid of your questions. I gladly accept all questions, if they are asked in a spirit of love seeking understanding. For example, Jonathan, who agrees with your position, is more than welcome to interact with me here since he knows how to interact with grace. But I have not seen this come from you yet. You misquote, misrepresent, use pejorative language, name calling, personal ad-hominem attacks, and other behavior unfit for Godly online dialogue.

Even IF you are right in your position, and I am wrong, I don’t think the Lord Jesus Christ is pleased with how you say it. The way you interact with those who disagree with you is neither glorifying to God, nor conducive for helping people see the truth. For someone who claims to be “free grace” you do not exude much grace.

If you think I am wrong on this too, how you react to this comment on your own blog will reveal the truth.

Sorry I spelled Sheelagh wrong in my comment…

We will keep her in prayer. Let me know what you find out.

Sheelagh had exploratory surgery a couple of days ago. And everything went real well. They didn’t find any cancer this time. Waiting for the biopsies to come back, but all looks well.
Hope your family is doing well, congratulations on the new little one.
blessings alvin

One question, will you interact with Greg Schliesmann or myself in the comment threads at your blog or at mine on these important doctrinal discussions?

LM

PS: (5pm) I just replied to your reaction (see JM 1pm) to the question above. My reply did not appear in this thread. Are my comments being blocked or moderated? Please advise. Thanks.

11pm- It appears your site is having some technical difficulty because my second post from 6 hours ago has not appeared. Following is my reply to your statement below that you posted at 1:01pm.

BEGIN…
Jeremy:

I will react here, we will report on and explain your “study”, at my blog.

You wrote, “You misquote, misrepresent, use pejorative language, name calling, personal ad-hominem attacks, and other behavior unfit for Godly online dialogue.”

I have to assume you actually believe what you wrote above. These statements are, IMO, untrue, and are impressions that are being created to evade defining and defending your views.

IMO, Greg Schliesmann’s series devastated your (Hodges/Wilkin/GES) position and underpinnings on the Gospel and the titles of the Lord Jesus Christ. Once you had no answer to his penetrating questions you essentially cried, “foul,” and checked out of the discussion with him.

You also wrote, “It is not that I am afraid of your questions. I gladly accept all questions, if they are asked in a spirit of love seeking understanding.”

Again, I do not agree with your interpretation of the “spirit” of the questions being asked. They are and have been direct, to the point, and get at what we believe is the root of the errors we find in the GES position on the Gospel and the titles of the Lord Jesus Christ.

If you are unafraid of questions, how do you explain the deletion of the articles and comments threads at your GES blog?

Finally, allow me to ask once more: Are you willing to interact with Greg Schliesmann or myself in the comment threads at your blog or at mine on these important doctrinal discussions?

LM

Thanks for the preliminary study and listing of passages. I will try to look at every single one of those in my study.

The final quote by Story is interesting. Where is that from? Is is a book or an article? Also, do you know where the Edersheim quotes are from?

My Hebrew professor from DTS is probably a leading expert on the OT understanding of the Messiah. He is writing an entire book on it, and has been presenting papers at ETS for years. On Friday, I talked to him for about an hour about this “Messiah” issue, and he ended up giving me his entire manuscript! I was so excited. Of course, I don’t always agree with everything he says, so will be reading it with a critical eye, but that’s the way we should read everything, right?

Thanks for reading! I hope all is going well for you. How is SheeLa?

If this is true, John is not trying to teach that believing that Jesus is God is how a person receives eternal life, but that believing that Jesus is God brings a person to believe in Jesus for everlasting life. There is a vast difference.

Good Idea! I have been kicking around on this with a couple of folks who think of me as a heretic as well, I will post the longer version on my blog. Here’s the short version:

What kind of Messiah did the Jews look for? Many say a King. The Kingship of the Messiah contains the strange God-Man Concept concerning the Messiah.

Some passages which deal with the Kingship of the Messiah add a whole new dimension to the Person of the Messiah, making Him a man—and yet more than a man.

Isaiah 9:6-7

Verse 6 declares that a son will be born into the Jewish world who will eventually control the reigns
of government. Verse 7 identifies Him as the Messianic descendant of David; it gives a dramatic description of His reign, which will be characterized by peace and justice. However, in verse 6 He is given names that can only be true of God Himself: Mighty God and Everlasting Father. Wonderful Counselor and Prince of Peace can be true of a man. This new dimension, presented by Isaiah regarding the Person of the Messiah, is that the Messiah had to be a man, a descendant of David, but He was to be God as well. This further explains what the prophet said two chapters earlier in Isaiah 7:14, when he stated: Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

In this passage Isaiah declares that there is going to be a Son born of a virgin. Then He is given a name which is said to be Immanuel. In the Bible, when a parent names his child, it shows the thinking of the parents. However, when God gives a person a name, it actually represents the person’s very character as only God can foresee. When this Child is named Immanuel by God, the name portrays the actual character of the Child. What does Immanuel mean? It means: “With us, God.” Here we have a Child that is born of a virgin and who is “With us, God” or “God is among us!” The Isaiah 9 passage further clarifies that this Son is a descendant of David, and He is labeled as God Himself. Isaiah clearly portrays the Messiah as the God-Man.

Jeremiah 23:5-6

Jeremiah echoes Isaiah in Jeremiah 23:5-6. A descendant of David reigns upon the throne of David and the character of His reign is described as one of peace and security for Israel. Yet He is given the very name of God, which can only belong to God Himself—Adonai Tzidkenu—Jehovah our righteousness. This is the YHWH, the very name that God revealed to Moses as being His own personal name: I AM. Once again, the future King Messiah of Israel is seen as a man on one hand but as God on the other.

There is also the Sonship concept, as the God-Man concept is related to the Messiah’s Kingship.

Micah 5:2

According to Micah 5:2, the Messiah’s birth would be in Bethlehem. According to Micah 5:2 the Messiah’s human origin will be Bethlehem, but Micah states even further that this Individual, who is to be born in Bethlehem, has His origins from eternity. Only one Person is eternal from eternity past, and that is God Himself. As to His human origin, He was born in Bethlehem; as to His divine origin, He is from eternity, which means He is both God and man at the same time.

Zechariah 13:7

The Hebrew word translated as “fellow” (KJV) associate (NET) means “my equal”. The verse literally reads: “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my equal [deity], says Jehovah of hosts” Again, the Messiah was to be both God and man.

Psalm 110:1-2 (NET)

The Lord says to my Lord: “Here is the Lord’s proclamation to my lord: “Sit down at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool!” The Lord extends your dominion from Zion. Rule in the midst of your enemies!”

We should note first of all that the psalmist here is David. David had no human lord; there was no authority over him except Jehovah Himself. Yet, in verse 1 of this psalm, David speaks of two lords: “The LORD said to my Lord …” David is speaking of two personalities here—LORD and “my Lord.” But who could “my Lord” be, since David had no human over-lord? The only way to understand this verse is to see Jehovah as God the Father and “David’s Lord” as Messiah. It is Messiah, therefore, who is invited to sit at God’s right hand.

Implicit within this prophecy is the concept of the God-Man. We know from 1 Kings 2:19 that anyone who sits at a king’s right hand must be equal with the king. Since Messiah is invited to sit at God’s right hand, it follows that Messiah must be equal with God. As to His humanity, Messiah is to be a descendant of David, and as to His deity, He can sit at the right hand of God.

I also found some old bibsac articles where Cullen I. K. Story wrote about “What Kind of Messiah Did the Jews Expect?” Here are some excerpts:

BEGIN CITATION

It is apparent as we read the four Gospels that, with very few exceptions, the understanding of the person of Messiah by the vast majority was at the most only partially complete. For example, when our Lord sets forth a certain claim, and that claim is questioned or rejected by the Jews, He appeals to the Old Testament for substantiation. From their Scriptures they should have known Messiah in His full character; yet Christ infers that their Messianic perception was only partial, either as a result of a lack of diligence in searching the Scriptures or a lack of an understanding of the Scriptures.

Included in that partial conception there seems to have been by many a belief in the pre-existence and even in the eternal existence of Messiah. Alfred Edersheim notes that the Midrash on the eighth chapter of Proverbs expressly states the Messiah is among the seven things created before the world. This would not only prove Messiah to be above the ordinary conditions of humanity but it would mean, since His pre-mundane state is asserted in other places, that Messiah existed long before He appeared. Indeed Dr. Edersheim says: “Even in strictly Rabbinic documents, the pre-mundane if not the eternal existence of the Messiah appears as a matter of common belief.”

The discussion of the eternal existence of Messiah naturally leads up into the question of His divine character. A Messiah who is a pre-existent being could not be an ordinary man. As a starting point for our consideration of the Jewish conception of the divinity of Messiah we observe three definite, basic facts. In the first place the Messiah as prophesied in the Old Testament was to be of divine nature. The passages are numerous in this regard. For instance, the clear-cut language of the 110th Psalm , the vision in Daniel 7, and the “mighty God” of Isaiah 9:6 all point to Messiah as being God, not in a representative sense or a metaphysical sense but in actual nature. Godet declares that “the idea of the divinity of the Messiah is the soul of the entire Old Testament.” And Warfield, whose treatment of the subject of the divine Messiah in the Old Testament is indeed excellent, speaks of “the hope of the coming of God to His kingdom” as “the heart of Israelitish religion from its origin.”

Secondly, the writers of the New Testament assert the deity of Messiah and without hesitation appeal to the Old Testament for confirmation. And thirdly, Christ Himself recognized that the Old Testament Scriptures were replete with references to His divine nature. In a reference already cited, Mark 12:35–37, our Lord asked the Pharisees whose son Christ is. When they made answer, “the son of David,” He replied with a question, “How then doth David in spirit call him Lord?” and in doing it appealed to the 110th Psalm as supporting the divine side of Messiah’s nature.

END CITATION

Hope this helps…