He doesn't have to because he's stated "our" elsewhere in the our Father in heaven prayer. Same relationship.
If anything, he's clearly saying he isn't God.
2 So He said to them, “When
you pray, say: Our Father in heaven, (Lk 11:2).
5 “And when
you pray... But
you, when
you pray... 7 And when
you pray... 9
In this manner, therefore, pray: Our Father in heaven (Mt 6:5–9).
Jesus never includes Himself in the 'OUR'
What matters is YHWH doesn't have flesh as proven elsewhere.
Don't change the subject. Shall we place your et argument on the self?
And Tanakh emphatically states he ain't. Several men like Moses, Ex 7:1, judges, Ex 21:6;22:8-9, etc., are called God and we don't confuse it with divinity.
You have a poor understanding of what you claim to know. Elohim carries several meanings including + rulers, judges, either as divine representatives at sacred places or as reflecting divine majesty and power: And we translate based on the passage.
As to Greek when the noun carries the definite article it's definite. When it does not it is either definite or indefinite based on the passage. When theos carries the definite article it is equivalent to YHWH. Titus 2:13, 2 Pe 1:1, John 20:28, all have theos carrying the definite article, therefore YHWH.
Rotfl... and yet Jesus tells the Samaritan woman Jews know God and make-believe Jews don't.
Why are you rolling on the floor. Are you incapable of reading. The text is clear, explicit. Luke states that the HS spoke to Isaiah.
Actually the only spirit is the Father, Neh 9:6, that makes one.
Elohym
Plural intensive—singular meaning = Elohym governs a singular verb or adjective when referring to the God of Israel, but grammatically plural elohim, takes a plural verb or adjective when used of pagan divinities. Pagan divinities when singular carry a singular verb.
However, there are places where the Elohim is used of the true God and yet is followed by a plural verb:
Genesis 20:13: “And when God [Elohim] caused me to wander [literally: “They” caused me to wander] from my father’s house.
Genesis 35:7: “There God [Elohim] had revealed himself to him.” [Literally: “They” appeared unto him.]
2 Samuel 7:23: “God [Elohim] went.”” [Literally: “They” went.]
Psalm 58:11: “Surely there is a God [Elohim] who judges.” [Literally: “They” judge.]
Ecclesiastes 12:1: “Remember now your Creator.” [Literally: creators.]
God not only speaks of Himself in the plural, but many authors of Scripture also refer to God’s plurality. Out of the Hebrew, we find that nouns and adjectives describing God are in the plural form:
Psalm 149:2: “Let Israel rejoice in their Maker.” [Literally: makers.]
Joshua 24:19: “holy God” [Literally: holy Gods.]
Isaiah 54:5: “For your Maker is your husband.” [Literally: makers, husbands.]
In the OT we do have verses that speak of YHWH as a plurality.
Actually the form spoken of is the same related to the house of David being Gods, Zech 12:8. Being that he was Messiah and should have reigned, he temporarily set it aside to suffer. That's the idea ?.
So you interpret 'form' by taking a trip to the OT and grab onto anything you think might stick. That is not how hermeneutics is done. If that was the case any fool can interpret.
Interpret first from the immediate text.
Vs7, but emptied Himself, taking the "morphe/form/nature of a "man/bond-bondservant, and being made in the likeness of men.
“Form” is translated from “morphe” used Phil 2:6,7, and Mk 16:12. In Phil 2:6 Jesus is in “form of God”, 2:7 “form of man”, and Mk 16:12 “ a form taken after the resurrection”. If “morphe “cannot be applied ontologically in Phil 2:6 then it should not be literal in Phi2:7, and if so what was crucified, died, and resurrected in MK?
Sure it is. True God doesn't lose His essence. Jesus did.
I think you're application of John 5:19 is a poor application of anthropomorphisms. Not even close. The NT describes God as never seen.
You can do your own homework.
Before you run your mouth and look bad, suggest you do your homework first.
Jesus never said that no one has seen God, but no one has seen the Father.
Jn 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.
Jn 5:37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
Which shows the son is less than the Father, not God.
It shows a hierarchy of authority not a hierarchy of being.
And the Father had no interest in being flesh, so...
Now you speak for him.
Which the Father never did, nor can.
Based on what? I quoted from John, what John wrote as a eyewitness to what Jesus said. Who should we believe?
Actually, God doesn't have a need to keep the physical commandments, Jesus does.
Jesus stated that He does not.
For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.” (Mt 12:8).
Hardly continuous as the son takes many nappy times. Besides,
If Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever; therefore immutable, unchanging {Heb 13:8}, and if Jesus upholds the universe by the word of His power {Heb 1:3}, such that in Jesus all things hold together, consist {Col. 1:17}. One has to ask, “How was Jesus able to do this when he was an embryo in Mary’s womb, a new born, a toddler learning how to walk, an adolescent growing in wisdom and stature {Luke 2:52} and finally dead for three days?
If Jesus was limited to a human body as He existed on earth, how was He able to be present everywhere in His creation, {all the universe in its totality}, directing it, being the source of its life, and giving life as He chooses if He was not God?
Jewitzu
Jesus was abandoned at the cross. That isn't continuous love.
This is how clueless you are.
I believe you read this before.
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (Jn 3:16).
That is the depth of my God's love.
Prayer to another for strength is an indication of a mortal. There are plenty of examples of Jesus doing just that. And don't forget that all knees and tongues will confess the true God. Jesus is no exception. It was sworn.
Prayer for strength is not an indication that the one praying is inferior to the one being prayed to. When Jesus prayed to the Father He was communicating with the Father.