Women verses men

Apostle Paul wrote, “²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” Galatians 3:28

This statement could be one of the main reasons that some believe women can serve in any role that a man does.

Yet Paul also wrote, “But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” 1 Corinthians 11:3

If “head” is used figurative for authority, and the headship of Christ over man is not merely cultural, then the headship of man over woman is as literal as is the headship of Christ over man.

But what does this headship mean? Is it a contradiction to the statement that there is “in Christ” "neither male nor female?”

There can be a distinction in roles between male and female that relate to this life that do not relate to the resurrected life in the age to come. Paul also said, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.” 1 Timothy 2:12 Is this just a cultural issue, or is it a fundamental principle?   In the requirements of an elder/ bishop (overseer)--I'll use “elder” from here on--of the Christian assembly, we see that the elder is a man: “If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. ² A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife...” 1 Timothy 3:1-2

Obviously, some believe women can fill the role of elder, probably seeing Paul's restrictions as cultural, while others may not allow such a role for women yet allow women to speak (some say “preach”) to the Christian assembly, probably justifying it on the grounds that she is still under authority of a male elder.

The role of deacon is extended to women probably because the word translated “wives” can be translated “women”: “¹¹ Likewise, their wives [or women] must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things.” 1 Timothy 3:11 Yet as you read on, Paul says, “¹² Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.” 1 Timothy 3:12 The word for “deacon” is really just a transliteration of the Greek word into English, and it means “minister.” Yet it is presented as an official role/ office in the church and not just a general reference to ministering. We have the account in Acts 6:1-6 where 7 men were chosen to fulfill a service-type-role. Yet again, we have the reference to Phoebe as a servant in the Church, using the Greek word for “deacon”: ​¹ I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a servant of the church in Cenchrea, ² that you may receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and assist her in whatever business she has need of you; for indeed she has been a helper of many and of myself also." Romans 16:1-2   Was she of the office of deacon, or just a servant/ minister in general, that any believer can fulfill?

I believe this all boils down to the issues of roles and authority in the Church function. I don't believe it is just about culture and customs but divinely establish roles. There may be some room for compromise, and I'm sure compromise is going to happen due to the times and culture we live in, especially with girls being raised to believe they can be anything they want, and they can do anything as good or better than a man. 

I don't believe this discussion about roles has to be about who could do a better job.  It's about Divinely appointed roles in this age. And in this age, there are differences between the sexes that make them better suited for their particular roles, whether in marriage and raising children, or in the Church. 

Men are to live with their wives with the understanding that they are the “weaker vessel”: “ ⁷ Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered.” 1 Peter 3:7 Is she physically weaker, or psychologically weaker, or culturally less significant or more vulnerable? One will pick what best fits their view about women. I do know that generally, men are physically stronger--though there are exceptions, and we see that the transgender issue affects women more than men in athletic competition--and that men can usually handle criticism better than women—saying something negative about a woman's appearance, and she will never forgive you, but a man will more likely blow it off.

Women and men are generally different, and each have their strengths and weaknesses. This is probably due to their natural differences and what they were designed to do. Women and men can do each other's roles in about anything, except men cannot have babies and women cannot impregnate. There will be times when men can do better what a woman generally does, and vise-versa. Both women and men suffer from the same problem of having a sinful disposition, and both can have evil thoughts and do evil. Men generally want to be significant, and women want to be secure, though both sexes want a degree of significance and security.  But these basic needs are fulfilled by husbands loving their wives and wives respecting their husbands.  If the wife is seeking to be significant outside the marriage relationship, such as in seeking a career at the expense of the marriage or family, then there may be problems in the marriage relationship. It is typical for men to seek a career that provides for his family and gives him that significance naturally needed.  

It will seem women are happier if they feel secure in their marriage relationship and have their significance in having children and managing the home, in which she can have an impact on their children's' character. Of course, the husband and wife need to work out what is expected of each in their marriage roles. The instruction by Apostle Paul concerning younger widows seems right for young women: “Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully.” 1 Timothy 5:14 How many women put a career first—after years of college, and then regret getting too old to have children? They have been raised to be independent and be prepared for a failed marriage, and then when they are old, they lack fulfillment, because they went against the natural design.

Of course, women can do probably most things that a man can do. They may be able to do it better. They can carry a gun and go into combat. But what about the roles God intends for them? Are either male or female better suited to do the opposite sexes traditional roles? Yes, there are exceptions. But both men and women are subject to a fallen nature: "The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it?” Jeremiah 17:9. Both can fail at their roles or doing the other's role. We should not pit one sex against the other. Though both male and female are one in Christ, they were physically designed for different roles in life. Both should find their significance and security in those unique roles without the need of denigrating one to raise up the other. After all, God created the woman from man to be “a helper comparable to him.” Genesis 2:20  

The Thief's Appeal

 The one thief on the cross must have concluded that Jesus was the Christ, and that he could appeal to his mercy. This account is similar to the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector.

I've done some rethinking of the thief's request and faith when he asked Jesus to “remember” him:

³⁹ Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us." ⁴⁰ But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? ⁴¹ And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong." ⁴² Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom." ⁴³ And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." Luke 23:39-43

The one thief makes reference to Jesus being “the Christ,” which would suggest they (the 2 thieves) knew this claim being made of Jesus. The one thief was saying it with ridicule, but the other thief, probably having a change of mind (cp. Matthew 27.44), rebuked the one who made ridicule, having come to a fear of God in their hopeless state.

The thief who had a change of mind recognizes the innocence of Jesus and the just consequences of their situation. And instead of ridiculing the claim that Jesus was the Christ, he must have accepted that claim. And in acceptance of that claim, knowing that the Christ was both Son of God and king of Israel, the thief appealed to his mercy.

The Old Testament says that God desires mercy over sacrifice. Jesus said: ³ But go and learn what this means: I desire 'mercy and not sacrifice.' For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance." Matthew 9:13 (⁶ For I desire mercy and not sacrifice, And the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings. Hosea 6:6)

This appeal by the thief came from an acceptance in who Jesus was, being the Christ, and he made the appeal for mercy as he acknowledged his sins and trusting that Jesus could grant it.

This is similar to the parable by Jesus about the Pharisee and the tax-collector:

⁹ Also He spoke this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: ¹⁰ "Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. ¹¹ The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, 'God, I thank You that I am not like other men—extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this tax collector. ¹² I fast twice a week; I give tithes of all that I possess.' ¹³ And the tax collector, standing afar off, would not so much as raise his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, 'God, be merciful to me a sinner!' ¹⁴ I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." Luke 18:9-14

The tax collector, in the parable, acknowledged his sinfulness and appealed to the mercy of God. The pharisee trusted in himself, that he was righteous, comparing himself to the tax collector. Jesus said the tax collector went to his house justified rather than the pharisee.

There's definitely a similarity between the thief on the cross and the tax collector, because both make an appeal to Divine mercy.

We know from Divine revelation that the death of Christ was for sins. It is because of this Divine sacrifice for sins (the “propitiation”) that God is just in justifying us through faith:

²¹ But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, ²² even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; ²³ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, ²⁴ being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, ²⁵ whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, ²⁶ to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Romans 3:21-26

Some may argue the mercy of God was accomplish at the cross, while others would say it is in saving us from our sins (forgiveness of sins or justification) or from our sinful nature (regeneration or eternal life).

In the account of the thief and the parable of the tax collector, you have individuals who made an appeal to divine mercy. Whether they could understand the divine basis of that mercy or not, they trusted the one who could grant it.

Unlike the thief who still had a mind of ridicule towards Jesus and the self-righteous pharisee, these acknowledged their sinfulness and need, and they believed/ trusted in and appealed to the mercy that only God can give. Therefore, the thief was given assurance of being in Paradise, and the tax collector was said to be justified.

Is unbelief sin?

“And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: ⁹ of sin, because they do not believe in Me; ¹⁰ of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; ¹¹ of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.” John 16:8-11

Some believe this “sin” is specifically unbelief in Christ. The Holy Spirit convicts of this “sin.” That view might be a problem for those who believe the death of Christ released everyone from their sins, because what about the “sin” of unbelief? (They say that people go to hell because of being unregenerate, not to “pay” for their sins—which Christ already paid for.) I've seen some say unbelief is a condition and not a sin, because unbelief keeps them from being saved. Unbelief does keep one in an unsaved state: see John 3:18 below.

Others may see it as sin in general: the Holy Spirit convicts people of sin in general, so that they will see their need for Christ. Jesus said, “²⁴ Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins." John 8:24 One needs to believe in Jesus so that they don't die in their sins, but one must believe they are a sinner or else why do they need to believe?

I could see both views as possible.

Interestingly, about the time of my salvation, when I believe it happened, I was particularly convicted of my lack of trusting in Christ for may salvation—I was trying to reform myself.

But whether unbelief is a sin is a difficult question with respect to many things that can be believed or not believed. And what about persuasion?

Belief requires knowledge and persuasion. If one does not know, how can they be charged with sin? And even if one knows, can they believe, if they are not persuaded?

But there is a role that the will can play, if the evidence is undeniable.

But there are a lot of things people differ on, and to believe one thing and not another is not necessarily sin. To believe in a young earth or old earth is not a sin issue. To believe in pretrib or posttrib is not a sin issue. Some may say these are sin issues, but I don't believe so.

However, when it comes to salvation, unbelief does leave one in a condemned state.

¹⁸ "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 3:18

And there is the issue about the works of Jesus being denied, which because of the circumstances, to not believe he was the Christ would seem to be a sin—because the works were undeniable. And in connection with this is the “unpardonable sin,” which appears to be denying the undeniable working of the Holy Spirit: “²⁸ "Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; ²⁹ but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation" Mark 3:28-29

That blaspheme must include unbelief because it involved attributing the working of God through Jesus to Satan. That the works of Jesus were clearly from God, and to attribute it to Satan is a sin that can't be forgiven. That attribution was due to unbelief, and since that unbelief can't be forgiven reveals that it is a sin. So there is unbelief that is sin. But not all unbelief falls into a sin category, due to what is at issue, as in things involving eschatology (prophecy) or ecclesiology (Church operation).

faith can fail

 What if one's faith fails?

Satan wants you to fail: ³¹ And the Lord said, "Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat. ³² But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren." Luke 22:31-32

The failure here was probably not Peter's denial of knowing Christ, which was more a denial from fear of persecution, but the failure that could come from the denial. If satan can get you to commit certain sin or to question your faith or depart from sound doctrine, it can lead to failure in your faith. And such failure will make you useless as a vessel fit for service to God.

¹⁸ This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, ¹⁹ having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected, concerning the faith have suffered shipwreck, ²⁰ of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme. 1 Timothy 1:18-20

¹⁶ But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. ¹⁷ And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, ¹⁸ who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some. 2 Timothy 2:16-18

⁵ Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified. ⁶ But I trust that you will know that we are not disqualified. 2 Corinthians 13:5-6

symbolism

 Symbols in Scripture may be used because of the complexity of what they represent. 

How could you give a vision of a future nation defeating another nation except by using symbolism and then explaining what that symbol means?

In a vision of past, present, and future kingdoms, symbolism can portray all the kingdoms at once for simplicity and consistency of revelation, such as with the revelations of kingdoms in Daniel and Revelation.

I was considering, suddenly a male goat came from the west, across the surface of the whole earth, without touching the ground; and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes. ⁶ Then he came to the ram that had two horns, which I had seen standing beside the river, and ran at him with furious power. Daniel 8:5-6

The male goat grew very great; but when he became strong, the large horn was broken, and in place of it four notable ones came up toward the four winds of heaven. ⁹ And out of one of them came a little horn which grew exceedingly great toward the south, toward the east, and toward the Glorious Land. Daniel 8:8-9

Look, I am making known to you what shall happen in the latter time of the indignation; for at the appointed time the end shall be. ²⁰ The ram which you saw, having the two horns—they are the kings of Media and Persia. ²¹ And the male goat is the kingdom of Greece. The large horn that is between its eyes is the first king. ²² As for the broken horn and the four that stood up in its place, four kingdoms shall arise out of that nation, but not with its power. Daniel 8:19-22

²³ "And in the latter time of their kingdom, When the transgressors have reached their fullness, A king shall arise, Having fierce features, Who understands sinister schemes. ²⁴ His power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; He shall destroy fearfully, And shall prosper and thrive; He shall destroy the mighty, and also the holy people. Daniel 8:23-24

Symbols can be used to emphasize certain characteristics of an object or to represent a spiritual condition. A spiritual reality can be represented by clothing and the condition of the clothing.

​¹ Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him. …

³ Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and was standing before the Angel.

⁴ Then He answered and spoke to those who stood before Him, saying, "Take away the filthy garments from him."

And to him He said, "See, I have removed your iniquity from you, and I will clothe you with rich robes."

⁵ And I said, "Let them put a clean turban on his head." So they put a clean turban on his head, and they put the clothes on him. And the Angel of the LORD stood by. Zechariah 3:1-5

Who are these arrayed in white robes, and where did they come from?" ¹⁴ And I said to him, "Sir, you know." So he said to me, "These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. ¹⁵ Therefore they are before the throne of God, and serve Him day and night in His temple. And He who sits on the throne will dwell among them. Revelation 7:13-15

The marriage of the Lamb has come, and His wife has made herself ready." ⁸ And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints. Revelation 19:7-8

The physical features of the "beast," in Revelation 13, as that of a leopard, bear, and lion draw our attention to other nations in the book of Daniel chapter 7. that were represented as a leopard, bear, and lion. 

I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rising up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name. ² Now the beast which I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion. The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. ³ And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed. And all the world marveled and followed the beast. ⁴ So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, "Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?" Revelation 13:1-4

"I saw in my vision by night, and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea. ³ And four great beasts came up from the sea, each different from the other. ⁴ The first was like a lion, and had eagle's wings. I watched till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man's heart was given to it. ⁵ "And suddenly another beast, a second, like a bear. It was raised up on one side, and had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And they said thus to it: 'Arise, devour much flesh!' ⁶ "After this I looked, and there was another, like a leopard, which had on its back four wings of a bird. The beast also had four heads, and dominion was given to it. ⁷ "After this I saw in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, exceedingly strong. It had huge iron teeth; it was devouring, breaking in pieces, and trampling the residue with its feet. It was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns. ⁸ I was considering the horns, and there was another horn, a little one, coming up among them, before whom three of the first horns were plucked out by the roots. And there, in this horn, were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking pompous words.  Daniel 7:2-8

He was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. ⁶ Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. ⁷ It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. Revelation 13:5-7

It's possible that 5 of the 7 heads of the beast in Revelation 13 correspond with the 4 nation-divisions of Nebuchadnezzar's dream image in Daniel 2. The dream image of Daniel 2 and the beasts of Daniel 7—especially the fourth beast--and the 7 headed beast of Revelation 13 with its 10 horns all have a relationship to one-another.   Daniel's fourth beast vision includes a "little horn" that corresponds with the particular beast-man of Revelation 13 that corresponds to the 7th head that speaks pompous words and persecutes the saints of God.

³⁶ "This is the dream. Now we will tell the interpretation of it before the king. … you are this head of gold. ³⁹ But after you shall arise another kingdom inferior to yours; then another, a third kingdom of bronze, which shall rule over all the earth. ⁴⁰ And the fourth kingdom shall be as strong as iron, inasmuch as iron breaks in pieces and shatters everything; and like iron that crushes, that kingdom will break in pieces and crush all the others. ⁴¹ Whereas you saw the feet and toes, partly of potter's clay and partly of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; ... ⁴⁴ And in the days of these kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever. Daniel 2:36-44

The "beast" in Revelation 13 is a composite representation.  The beast has 7 heads, and yet there is a future 7th head, and we are told in Revelation 17 that the 7th head is also an 8th head, and so the 7th head are two stages of the kingdom represented, and the 7th head stage has 2 phases. It is the 7th head that dies and comes to life again, can corresponds to the particular beast and little horn that speaks pompous words and persecutes the saints. 

⁹ "Here is the mind which has wisdom: The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits. ¹⁰ There are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, and the other has not yet come. And when he comes, he must continue a short time. ¹¹ The beast that was, and is not, is himself also the eighth, and is of the seven, and is going to perdition. ¹² "The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have received no kingdom as yet, but they receive authority for one hour as kings with the beast. ¹³ These are of one mind, and they will give their power and authority to the beast. ¹⁴ These will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, for He is Lord of lords and King of kings. Revelation 17:9-14

The end of the Daniel's 4 beast and the final phase of Nebuchadnezzar's image and the final phase Revelation 13's beast--all these are revelations of the same ruler and kingdom--will be at the Second Coming of Christ who will defeat the beast's kingdom and the armies of the nations who have gathered for battle ("Armageddon").

It seems that the complexity of the things represented, and for simplicity and consistency of the revelation, symbolism works best.

Updated 4/7/25

Muster the Mustard

 Jesus *informed his disciples that they could not cast out a demon because they were faithless and unbelieving. He goes on to say that if they have faith of a mustard seed, they can move a mountain.

Since he said they were faithless and unbelieving, then the contrast must be between having no faith or faith. But what is “mustard seed” faith? Is it just a super tiny amount?

And how does one get such mustard seed faith? Can one just muster it up by strength of the will?

**Elsewhere, Jesus accused Peter of having “little faith” and doubt. Is little faith less than mustard seed faith? After saying Peter had little faith, he asked him why he doubted? Is little faith equal to doubt and less than mustard seed faith?

^*19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, "Why could we not cast it out?" ²⁰ So Jesus said to them, "Because of your unbelief; for assuredly, I say to you, if you have faith as a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.” Matthew 17:19-20

**³¹ And immediately Jesus stretched out His hand and caught him, and said to him, "O you of little faith, why did you doubt?" Matthew 14:31

It could be that mustard seed faith speaks of the fact of faith, as opposed to doubt or unbelief. It's not how much faith one can muster up, but it is faith, nevertheless, in contrast to doubt or unbelief. As far as the ability to muster up faith at all, it does help if one wants to believe or is willing to be honest and humble enough to be objective, that is, to be persuaded by the facts or evidence.

Peter believed he could walk on water when Jesus gave him the command to come to him. Peter saw Jesus walking on water, and so it was probably that fact and that he knew the miracles that Jesus did, and so, if Jesus gave the command to come to him, he was able to take those steps into the water. But the ***fierceness the weather distracted him and caused him to doubt that he could continue what was humanly impossible .

***²⁸ And Peter answered Him and said, "Lord, if it is You, command me to come to You on the water." ²⁹ So He said, "Come." And when Peter had come down out of the boat, he walked on the water to go to Jesus. ³⁰ But when he saw that the wind was boisterous, he was afraid; and beginning to sink he cried out, saying, "Lord, save me!" Matthew 14:28-30

So Peter started out in faith, but then began to sink when he became afraid, and Jesus attributed this with doubt.

But what did Jesus mean by “little faith?” Is it less than mustard seed faith? Is little faith with more doubt than mustard seed faith? I think speaking of degrees of faith and degrees of doubt can get confusing.

The Greek word translated “little faith” is oligopistos. The Greek word “oligos” can mean “little” as in size, but it can also mean “short” as in duration. The Greek word “pistis” means “faith.” Could it be that Jesus was saying that Peter began well, because he did walk on the water, but it was short-lived? Peter had short-lived faith, for shortly after he began, he was frightened and doubted and began to sink.

Peter didn't have to muster up faith, though he was willing to believe he could walk on water: He only needed the command of Christ to be persuaded it could be done, but the threatening circumstance of the weather distracted him and caused fear and doubt, and so his faith was short lived, and he doubted and began to sink.

It is about how much faith one has, but whether they are persuaded. It helps to want to believe. And for a time, Peter did believe.

The book of James says that God will give wisdom to those who believe and have no doubt: “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. ⁶ But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind.” James 1:5-6 This supports the view that faith does not include doubt. This faith must take God at His word, that God will keep His word. Of course, one must understand what this particular wisdom is about—that God will provide. It doesn't mean you will be on the level of of Solomon in earthly wisdom, but it must be understood in light of the context of trials and temptation.

Mustard seed faith must be about what is the object of your faith and not percentages. It's like the man who believed Jesus could heal without coming to his house. Jesus said that he had “great faith”: ¹⁰ “When Jesus heard it, He marveled, and said to those who followed, "Assuredly, I say to you, I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel!” Matthew 8:10 The man understood who Jesus was and what he could do. Unlike others who would need Jesus to come to where they needed a miracle, this man understood and was convinced that Jesus work the miracle from anywhere. This man understood the authority of Christ and was without doubt. He did not have to muster up faith he already had. The object of his faith made his faith “great,” though a mustard seed faith would have worked.    4/4/25

Overarching theme

 

Overarching theme (of Scripture)       “a people for His name”

I recently read an article (by Corey Marsh) in “Bibliotheca Sacra” (The Dallas Theological Seminary Journal) that sought to demonstrate a “doxological-historical” model for biblical theology as opposed to the more popular “redemptive-historical” model. The doxological model focuses on the theme of God's glory as progressing though canonical (inspired Scripture) history. The redemptive model views the history of redemption as the overarching framework of Scripture.

The article says, “God is glorious, so he created. He created so he could redeem. He redeemed so he could re-create. He recreated so he is glorified in all creation. Viewing Scripture as primarily doxological rather than redemptive safeguards God's place as sovereign who receives glory, providing a vital link connection creation to redemption to recreation.”

The article says it is the assumption of modern evangelical scholarship that views “humanity's redemption as the ultimate paradigm through which to understand all other biblical themes.”

The article says, “While both glory and redemption are related, even complimentary, concepts, they are distinct categories in Scripture. In simple terms, one is bigger than the other. The glory of God, as progressing throughout the canon and manifested throughout history, subsumes humanity's history of redemption. The bible, therefore, conveys a history of God revealing himself rather than a history of humanity.”

Could there be an alternative view as to the overarching theme of Scripture that incorporates both views, being the intent of God to have a people for His name? This view would include both the redemptive and the doxological ideas, because throughout time and in eternity, God will have a people to manifest his holiness and salvation, for His glory.

I have come to a modified form of dispensationalism that is based on the people of God for His purposes (his elect and servants) in (temporal) time, to show forth His holiness and salvation. And in the final state (the new creation), it will be a people for His name (His glory) among whom God will dwell. Following is a dispensational chart showing the dispensations according to this view. I will include Scripture that speaks of God having a people for His name.

And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him. Genesis 5:24

Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered My servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, one who fears God and shuns evil? Job 1:8

If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, make Myself known to him in a vision; I speak to him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses; He is faithful in all My house. I speak with him face to face, Numbers 12:6-8

For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth. Deuteronomy 7:6

Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. Acts 15:14

Thus says the LORD of hosts: 'In those days ten men from every language of the nations shall grasp the sleeve of a Jewish man, saying, "Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you. Zechariah 8:23

In that day Israel will be one of three with Egypt and Assyria—a blessing in the midst of the land, whom the LORD of hosts shall bless, saying, Blessed is Egypt My people, and Assyria the work of My hands, and Israel My inheritance. Isaiah 19:24-25

Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with them and be their God. Revelation 21:3

Perfect Man

 I believe that Ephesians 4:11-16 (see below) reveals the purpose as to why Christians should assemble together. This purpose is something a christian cannot accomplish apart from assembling with other believers. Unless one has health issues or an obligation that keeps them from assembling for this purpose, he/ she may be out of the will of God.

The text speaks of the roles in the Church in accomplishing the “perfect man,” which is not about being perfect but whole/ complete and mature in the faith.

There are some roles that God has put in place to help others to accomplish this “perfect man.” But all believers have roles to fulfill, and those roles are the “work of the ministry.”

It's not about sinless perfection but being whole or complete as an assembly of believers. It is about maturity in the faith and doctrine. It's true that not everything done in the assembly accomplishes this, but it is the Divine aim.

Are you working against the Divine aim or for this Divine aim? Are you fulfilling any role in the assembly to accomplish this Divine aim?

¹¹ And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, ¹² for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, ¹³ till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; ¹⁴ that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, ¹⁵ but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— ¹⁶ from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love. Ephesians 4:11-16

Don't be a destroyer of the “temple of God” which is the body of Christ.

^“17 If anyone destroys God's temple, God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy, and you are that temple.” 1 Corinthians 3:17

3/17/2025

Christ is king! (?)

 You may be hearing the statement lately that "Christ is king!"

It would be better to say, "Jesus is the Christ!" 

"Christ" is just the English transliteration of the Greek word for the Hebrew word (transliterated as "messiah") for "anointed one" which was usually a king.  "Christ" is not a name for "Jesus."   So, it's like saying "king is the king."  It's a little redundant.

But are some saying it as a political statement or to create division or to be unnecessarily offensive? 

Are they purposely using that statement at this present time to cause division among those who hold similar conservative social views who are not Christians, such as certain Jews?

What's their intent here? 

Every Christian should know that Jesus is the Christ. It should not be a political statement with an ulterior motive to alienate certain social conservative Jews.

3/17/2025

Sabbath commandment

“We keep all of the 10 commandments but the Sabbath, why is that?”

This was a question I was asked by Bob. Bob had given in to a particular Jewish Christian group that believed we should observe the Sabbath day, besides other views like only the writings of Moses were inspired Scripture.

I gave 2 reasons why we do not recognize the Sabbath day like we do the other 9 commandments.

One reason is because the 10 commandments are part of the whole Mosaic Law, and the Mosaic Law was for Israel as a nation, not the Church, which is not a nation, but exists as assemblies of believers within nations. And only those laws of the Mosaic law that are moral and not social or ceremonial are universal—the moral laws are contained in the Mosaic Law along with the uniquely ceremonial and social laws for Israel. The Sabbath is more of a ceremonial law, unlike the other laws within the 10 commandments.

The other reason is because the Sabbath is never made an issue in the moral requirements of the New Testament. Surely, if the Gentile believers had to be exhorted to not lie and steal and covet, etc., they would need to be exhorted to keep the Sabbath holy. Nowhere does any of the New Testament authors exhort anyone to keep the Sabbath. Would not Gentiles have failed in this practice as they did with everything else? Especially since they were not Jews and did not practice it before conversion. There were several kinds of Sabbath rests for the Jews, but the Church did not replace Israel, and they are not a nation among nations like Israel was. The Church is not under the laws of Moses like Israel was. The Church is only to fulfill the moral requirements that are universal and timeless, moral laws that are included in the law of Moses. But the Law of Moses included social and ceremonial laws that do not apply to the Church.

Some will suggest that the Sabbath was fulfilled in Christ, but I'm not sure if that is a sufficient argument, since it appears that the Sabbath will be observed in the Millennial Kingdom.  Though the Apostle Paul did say to the Colossians,  So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths,  which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. Colossians 2:16-17   Paul also said, One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind.  He who observes the day, observes it to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it.  Romans 14:5-6   

The Sabbath will be again observed by Israel in the Millennium: For as the new heavens and the new earth Which I will make shall remain before Me, says the LORD, So shall your descendants and your name remain. And it shall come to pass That from one New Moon to another, And from one Sabbath to another, All flesh shall come to worship before Me, says the LORD. Isaiah 66:22-23 The difference will be that Israel will be a nation again, and they will be under laws that govern them as a People and Nation. And they will be a People who have believed in Christ who saved them, both individually and nationally. But they will be a theocracy again in the land promised to Abraham. 

 Revised 4/2/2025

Angels cast down

 The angels that Satan threw down

³ And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. ⁴ His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. Revelation 12:3-4

It's often believed that Satan took a third of the angels with him based on this text. The stars being angels became Satan's angels. We read later that Satan and his angels fought with Michael and his angels, and Satan is defeated and cast to earth with his angels. The casting to earth is the same word used in 12:4 for “threw.” “⁷ And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, ⁸ but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them in heaven any longer. ⁹ So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” Revelation 12:7-9

In Daniel 8, we read of the little horn: “And it grew up to the host of heaven; and it cast down some of the host and some of the stars to the ground, and trampled them. ¹¹ He even exalted himself as high as the Prince of the host; and by him the daily sacrifices were taken away, and the place of His sanctuary was cast down. ¹² Because of transgression, an army was given over to the horn to oppose the daily sacrifices; and he cast truth down to the ground. He did all this and prospered. ¹³ Then I heard a holy one speaking; and another holy one said to that certain one who was speaking, "How long will the vision be, concerning the daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation, the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot?" Daniel 8:10-13

Could the 1/3 angels cast to the earth be a future event? Could the 1/3 angels be non-rebellious angels that Satan cast down in conflict? How did the little horn cast down some of the “stars?”

2/17/2025

Ishmael

 

Muslim asking me about Ishmael:

Sir, you still haven't answered my question! Did God promise to bless Ishmael yes or no? Did God say He has blessed Ishmael yes or no? Where is Ishmael's great nation? Or do you not care if God kept that promise or not? I didn't ask about Issac, and Jacob's seed. Where is that great nation of Ishmael's seed?

My response to Muslim:

There is obviously no nation of people today called “Ishmael” or “Ishmaelites.” 

The promise to Ishmael was that God would multiply him (Gen 17:20), and he would have 12 princes/ chiefs and a great nation. We see this fulfilled later in Genesis 25:17-18 where it says Ishmael's descendants “settled from Havilah to Shur which runs next to Egypt all the way to Asshur.” This is in the Arabian Peninsula, probably north western part. So God kept his word. There is no promise that Ishmael would continue as some identifiable people/ nation forever. 

Many nations of people rise and fall, and the people of which they consist are assimilated by another nation of people. 

So the descendants of Ishmael today probably exist genetically in some of the Arab people. But there is no Ishmaelite nation of people remaining today, and such was not promised to endure forever—it was already fulfilled centuries ago. 

And always remember that it is in the "seed" of Isaac that all nations will be "blessed." That "seed" being one, being "Christ." 

In Christ all nations will be blessed. Anyone else is a thief and a robber and antiChrist. Those who believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God and Savior of the world are justified as was Abraham, and they become sons of Abraham and heirs of God.  

--------

⁷ Therefore know that only those who are of faith are sons of Abraham. ⁸ And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel to Abraham beforehand, saying, "In you all the nations shall be blessed." ⁹ So then those who are of faith are blessed with believing Abraham. Galatians 3:7-9

¹⁶ Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, "And to seeds," as of many, but as of one, "And to your Seed," who is Christ. ¹⁷ And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. ¹⁸ For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise. Galatians 3:16-18

it is written that Abraham had two sons: the one by a bondwoman, the other by a freewoman. ²³ But he who was of the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and he of the freewoman through promise, ²⁴ which things are symbolic. For these are the two covenants: the one from Mount Sinai which gives birth to bondage, which is Hagar— ²⁵ for this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and corresponds to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children— ²⁶ but the Jerusalem above is free, which is the mother of us all. ...
²⁸ Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. ²⁹ But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now. ³⁰ Nevertheless what does the Scripture say? "Cast out the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman." ³¹ So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman but of the free. Galatians 4:22-31

² Then the LORD appeared to [Isaac] ... ³ Dwell in this land, and I will be with you and bless you; for to you and your descendants I give all these lands, and I will perform the oath which I swore to Abraham your father. ⁴ And I will make your descendants multiply as the stars of heaven; I will give to your descendants all these lands; and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; Genesis 26:2-4

Repentance

 Young's concordance defines "repent"  and "repentance" as “to have another mind” and “to have a change of mind” respectively. Those are probably the broadest and catch-all meanings that can work in any context. What that change of mind involves depends on context. Many may define the word as “turning from sins,” but that may be more of a fruit of repentance (see , depending on context. It can't be “turning from sins” as we saw in God's response to the Ninevites, in which God “relented” (Jonah 3.10) of the disaster he was going to bring. Even my “resolve to think or do differently” could be more of a fruit of repentance. Concerning the Ninevites, we see in Jonah that they believed God, while Jesus said they repented (Matthew 12.41 and Jonah 3.5 ). Some believe repentance can mean the same as to believe, because faith is a change of mind from unbelief. But I think that is too simplistic. Belief in a message would precede repentance—as would be the case with the Ninevites. Belief could follow repentance, depending on what the repentance is in reference to. However one understands repentance, it should not contradict that eternal salvation is by faith alone. The gospel of John never uses the word “repent,” and many Scriptures about salvation never use the word. But where the word is used with reference to salvation, it needs to be understood in context as to who it is speaking to and what is expected. To the gentiles, repentance could be a call to a change of mind about the nature of God (see Acts 17:29-30 and Acts 20:20-21), or it could be a call to get right with God, which obviously is not complete until one believes in Christ for salvation (see Acts 11:18). If a person is asking how to be saved, repentance isn't necessary to seek, since by their question, they are already seeking to be right with God. And so the answer is the one Paul gives in Acts 16.31, or the answer Peter gives in Acts 10.43.

*****

I think it’s significant that "repent" translates the Hebrew nacham (relent) and not shub (turn) in the LXX for God in Jonah 3:9-10. "⁹ Who can tell if God will turn [shub] and relent [nacham], and turn away [shub] from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish?

¹⁰ Then God saw their works, that they turned [shub] from their evil way; and God relented [nacham] from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it."  Jonah 3:9-10

The turning is a result of the relenting.

I don’t know if “resolve” to think or do differently would be the same as repentance or be a result of repentance. (I have said in the past that repentance is a resolve to think or do differently but maybe a resolve is a result of repentance.) Turning would be a result.

Could repentance in some texts be a resolve to get right with God, which wouldn’t be complete until one believes in Jesus for salvation? I think it is. Therefore, to repent and believe involves a resolve to get right with God which is complete by believing in Jesus for salvation. "I kept back nothing that was helpful, but proclaimed it to you, and taught you publicly and from house to house, ²¹ testifying to Jews, and also to Greeks, repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ."  Acts 20:20-21

*****

Other Scriptures referenced above:

"Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? ⁸ Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance, ⁹ and do not think to say to yourselves, We have Abraham as our father.' For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones."   Matthew 3:7-9

^"41 The men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, because they repented at the preaching of Jonah; and indeed a greater than Jonah is here." Matthew 12:41

^"5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest to the least of them."   Jonah 3:5

"Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising. ³⁰ Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,"  Acts 17:29-30

^"18 When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life."  Acts 11:18

^"29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. ³⁰ And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
³¹ So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household." Acts 16:29-31

^"43 To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins." Acts 10:43

updated 3/19/2025

Dialogue with a Muslim

My dialogue with a Muslim the past few days on Messenger... (3/3/25)

Muslim:

I'm Muslim myself and I always wondered why some Christian's go learn about Islam from people who aren't Muslims. I'm not saying you did the same, but maybe you still had some concerns I may be able to answer for you? 

Me:

I have gone and heard from a former Muslim.  His name is Daniel Shayesteh. 

Obviously, Islam and Christianity cannot both be true. Islam says that Jesus is the Christ, but they do not believe he is the Son of God. But the Christ is the Son of God. It is an essential truth of Christianity.

Jesus also died for our sins as the satisfaction of Divine justice, so God can be just in justifying us. This also Islam rejects, but it is an essential truth of Christianity. Jesus both died for our sins and rose again from the Grave. His resurrection is essential truth of Christianity. 

Muslim:

That's correct, Islam and Christianity cannot both be true. 

From a quick search about Daniel, it looks like he followed a sect of Islam that is Shiism, considering his background his involvement with the Iranian revolution. That sect is less than 8% of all Muslims. 

In pursuant of truth, going directly to the source, by reading the Quran, asking learned Muslims, clerics, scholars, etc. is a critical part of due diligence. 

Our belief is Jesus was perceived to be killed but he was not. God saved him, ascended him to heaven, and will return to slay the Dajjal (anti-Christ) near the end of times. 

We believe he was born of a virgin birth. We love and revere Mary, there's even a whole chapter dedicated to her in the Quran. 

At the root, Islam isn't just rejecting the claims you've mentioned. It affirms that the gospel was sent down to Jesus but it was the rabbis, priests, leaders who changed the words of God for their own worldly gain. 

Jesus never claimed divinity. Even in the Bible Jesus was praying to the father. Crucifying an innocent man isn't divine justice because we wouldn't accept an innocent man being put to death today for the sins of his family. 

Me:

The reason Jesus was born of a virgin was because he preexisted and is Divine. He was without sin, so He was qualified to bear the sin of man. 

Doesn't the Quran say someone who is burdened cannot bear the burden of another? Only Jesus was without sin. 

But doesn't the Hadiths say Jews and Christians will bear the sins of Muslims who have sinned? 

It is the historical view of the Church for 2000 years that Jesus is the Son of God, and that he died for our sins on the cross and rose again, that God justifies those who believe in Jesus. Islam rejects this, and therefore, is in opposition to Christianity. Like Islam, Christianity has sects, and not everything that has developed is true in those sects. 

Muslim:

The Quranic verse that states "no one will carry the sins of another" is found in Surah Al-An'am (The Cattle), verse 164, which reads: "Say, 'Should I seek a lord other than Allah while He is the Lord of everything?' No one will reap except what they sow. No soul burdened with sin will bear the burden of another. Then to your Lord is your return, and He will inform you of your differences."

Since being born of a virgin is a precursor to divinity in your point of view, then that makes Adam more worthy of divinity because he had no father or mother.

The Hadith you’re speaking of is classified as inauthentic by many scholars. If there is any Hadith that contradicts the Quran, it’s rejected and classified as inauthentic.

Me:

Adam was created from the dust of the earth, and Eve from his rib/ side. Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit in a woman. He preexisted his conception. Jesus was not a created being prior to his incarnation (coming in the flesh).

Because God is just, and justice must be satisfied. It’s how God governs his universe.  

Isaiah 53:6 "All we like sheep have gone astray; We have turned, every one, to his own way; And the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all." 

Second Corinthians 5:21 "For He [God] made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him."

Muslim:

How is killing an innocent man and giving a sinless man everyone’s sins justice?

Me:

The penalty of sin is death. Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sins. Jesus bore the wages of sin. It is taught from the beginning of time. It is seen in the animal sacrifices from the beginning.

Leviticus 17:11: “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’” 

Penal substitution is clearly taught from the beginning. You can deny it if you want, but there is no question that it is taught. 

Even Islam recognizes that Jesus was born of a virgin without sin. 

He came for this purpose: to bear our sins to bring us to God.  It is the message of the Old and New Testament, that is, the Hebrew and the Gospels and Christian Scriptures. 

It is essential doctrine of Christianity, that the Christ, the son of God, became human, to bear our sins in death, rise again, and he’s coming again to judge the world and reign over the earth. To him every knee shall bow, and tongue confess that he is Lord.

Muslim:

“Islam recognizes that every baby is born sinless, whether that be baby Jesus or a little baby born today. There’s no concept of original sin in Islam. Question. Do you believe Jesus is God or the son of god?”

Me:

There is that view among Christians that every baby is born sinless. Those who take that view reject the concept of original sin.

There is a view that I take that does not hold to original sin, but that the inclination towards evil was inherited from Adam. When Adam sinned, the inclination towards evil developed in him, and it has been passed on to his progeny/ descendants.

Original sin says that everyone is guilty for Adam's sin, but the view I take is that we inherited the inclination towards evil, not the guilt.

The virgin birth of Jesus kept him from inheriting that inclination towards evil, because he was conceived by the Holy Spirit, and not by the common union of human father and mother.

The inclination to do evil is evident in that the failure rate is 100%--”for all have sinned.” Scripture says because of Adam, “all have sinned.”

Yet Jesus did not sin. Even Islam attests to this.

We are told in Genesis, after the flood, “I will never again curse the ground because of humankind, even though *the inclination of their minds is evil from childhood on*.” Genesis 8:21

We also read in the writings of Apostle Paul concerning believers in Christ: “...all of us also formerly lived out our lives in the cravings of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and the mind, and *were by nature children of wrath* even as the rest.” Ephesians 2:3

And in Paul's letter to the Church in Rome: “¹² Therefore, just as through one man [Adam] [the]sin entered the world, and death through [the] sin, and thus [spiritual] death spread to all men, because [of which] all sinned.” Romans 5:12

Again, to the Romans: “²¹ I find then a law [principle], that *evil is present with me,* the one who wills to do good. ²² For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. ²³ But *I see another law [principle] in my members, warring against the law of my mind,* and bringing me into captivity to *the law of sin which is in my members.* ²⁴ O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? ²⁵ I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! Romans 7:21-25

This inclination to evil (the “law” or principle of sin) exists in us all from conception—except Jesus, who lived without committing sin.

The “Christ” is the Son of God. I believe this.

“Christ” is just the Greek word for the Hebrew word that means “anointed.” The Hebrew word in English is “Messiah.”

The Messiah/ Christ is the Son of God. This is in the Old Testament, and it was understood by the Hebrews and Jews.

Psalm 2 says: “​¹ Why do the nations rage, And the people plot a vain thing? ² The kings of the earth set themselves, And the rulers take counsel together, Against the LORD and against His Anointed, saying, ³ "Let us break Their bonds in pieces And cast away Their cords from us." ⁴ He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision. ⁵ Then He shall speak to them in His wrath, And distress them in His deep displeasure: ⁶ "Yet I have set My King On My holy hill of Zion." ⁷ "I will declare the decree: The LORD has said to Me, You are My Son, Today I have begotten You. ⁸ Ask of Me, and I will give You The nations for Your inheritance, And the ends of the earth for Your possession. ⁹ You shall break them with a rod of iron; You shall dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel.'" Psalms 2:1-9

When Jesus asked the disciple/ Apostle Peter who he was, we read: “¹⁶ Simon Peter answered and said, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Matthew 16:16

When Jesus was on trial before the chief priests, the elders, he scribes, and the High Priest, we read that: “...the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?" ⁶² Jesus said, "I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven." ⁶³ Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, "What further need do we have of witnesses? ⁶⁴ You have heard the blasphemy! What do you think?" And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death.” Mark 14:61-64

The Son of God is God. He has the same divine attributes as the Father and Holy Spirit.

He has all authority over creation, and he is heir of all things. Every knee shall bow to Him.

The book to the Hebrews says: “when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: "Let all the angels of God worship Him." ⁷ And of the angels He says: "Who makes His angels spirits And His ministers a flame of fire." ⁸ But to the Son He says: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom. ⁹ You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions." Hebrews 1:6-9

The Gospel of John says: “​¹ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² He was in the beginning with God. … ¹⁴ And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” John 1:1-2, 14

The “only begotten” speaks of him as the heir of all things.

Keep in mind that person-hood and God are not the same categories. Person-hood speaks of individuality/ identity, while “God” speaks of Divine attributes. There is One God, but 3 persons: three Persons that have the same divine attributes that are shared with no other being.