📖 Preface
The writings of the Renewed Covenant preserve in their greetings and doxologies a consistent pattern of how the early assemblies understood the relationship between Elohim the Father and Yahusha Mashiyach. At first glance, some passages seem to present a “binary formula,” giving esteem or peace “from Elohim our Father and Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.” This has raised questions of whether the text reflects two sources of blessing or two centers of glory.
However, when we examine the earliest manuscripts (such as Papyrus 46 from around 200 CE), alongside the Greek text, and also bring in the imagery of the Hebrew uau (ו) — the tent peg, connector, and nail — the meaning becomes much clearer. The source is always one Elohim, the Father, and the manifestation of that source is always in Yahusha Mashiyach. Later scribes often expanded the greetings and doxologies with additional wording, creating the appearance of a “binary,” but the internal logic of Shaul’s theology and the original readings emphasize oneness of source through mediation.
In this way, Yahusha is not presented as a second Elohim beside the Father. Rather, He is Elohim manifested bodily, the fullness in whom the invisible Father dwells (Colossians 1:19; 2:9). Thus, every ascription of grace, peace, and esteem flows from the Father and is realized in or through Yahusha Mashiyach, and all esteem is returned to the Father, inseparably within Him.
I. Long vs. Short Forms in the Greek New Testament Greetings
1. The Short Form
In Colossians 1:2, we have a remarkable early witness that gives us a short greeting without mentioning Yahusha Mashiyach alongside Elohim.
• Greek text (Papyrus 46, ca. 175–225 CE):
χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν.
• Literal rendering with the terminology:
“Favor to you and peace from Elohim our Father.”
This reading is found in Papyrus 46, one of our earliest collections of Shaul’s letters, dated to around 200 CE. In this manuscript, Colossians 1:2 does not add “and the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.” This is significant because it shows that at least in one strand of the textual tradition, the greeting was seen as flowing only from the Father, with no explicit binary formula.
2. The Long / Binary Form
In the majority of Greek manuscripts — from the 4th century onwards, but also in most parts of P46 itself — we see the longer greeting:
• Greek text (typical form in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, etc.):
χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
• Literal rendering with the terminology:
“Favor to you and peace from Elohim our Father and the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.”
This long form is attested in:
• Papyrus 46 itself (most letters other than Colossians 1:2).
• Codex Sinaiticus (4th century).
• Codex Vaticanus (4th century).
• Codex Alexandrinus (5th century).
Thus the longer greeting formula dominates the manuscript tradition, while the shorter form in Colossians 1:2 in P46 remains an intriguing exception.
3. Revelation 14:1 as a Parallel Example
Although not a greeting, Revelation 14:1 shows a similar long vs. short issue which we discussed in an earlier study.
• Longer form (major manuscripts like Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Vaticanus):
“…having His Name and the Name of His Father written on their foreheads.”
The point is here again, a binary pattern develops in the longer reading in the minds of the readers : the Name of Yahusha Mashiyach alongside the Name of the Father.
This illustrates a scribal/theological tendency to expand toward binary forms or shorten it to create the confusion. (In Rev 14:1 they shortened it).
Revelation 14:1 (longer form, Greek)
καὶ ἰδοὺ τὸ ἀρνίον ἑστὸς ἐπὶ τὸ ὄρος Σιὼν, καὶ μετ’ αὐτοῦ ἑκατὸν τεσσεράκοντα τέσσαρες χιλιάδες, ἔχοντες τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ γεγραμμένον ἐπὶ τῶν μετώπων αὐτῶν.
English (literal)
“And I looked, and behold, the Lamb standing on Mount Tsiyon, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Name and /kai the Name of His Father written upon their foreheads.”
👉 The word is καί (kai), the standard Greek conjunction “and.”
So, in Rev 14:1 the “longer form” explicitly uses kai — which, read in Greek, looks binary: His Name and His Father’s Name.
But — if read Hebraically with the imagery of ו (uau/peg), the meaning can be “His Name joined-to the Name of His Father,” i.e., one Name manifested in Yahusha, not two competing Names.
Also kai also means “in unison “ where the source name is in the name given by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12)
Yahusha means “Yahuah is Salvation “
II. The Language of “Through” (διὰ) in Shaul’s Letters
Where Shaul is not bound by epistolary formula, he overwhelmingly uses διὰ (dia = through) to describe how Yahusha Mashiyach functions in relation to Elohim. This proves that Shaul’s theology was not two independent “sources,” but one source (Elohim) mediated through the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach with an understanding that Yahusha is the visible form of the invisible Elohim.
Examples:
1. Romans 5:1
Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν θεὸν διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.
→ “Therefore, having been made right by belief, we have peace with Elohim through our Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.”
2. Romans 5:11
…διὰ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δι’ οὗ νῦν τὴν καταλλαγὴν ἐλάβομεν.
→ “…through our Adon Yahusha Mashiyach, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.”
3. 1 Corinthians 8:6
ἀλλ’ ἡμῖν εἷς θεὸς ὁ πατήρ … καὶ εἷς κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, δι’ οὗ τὰ πάντα.
→ “For us there is one Elohim, the Father, from whom are all things … and one Adon, Yahusha Mashiyach, through whom are all things.”
Here Shaul is crystal clear: the source is one — Elohim the Father in an estate related to created realms— through Yahusha Mashiyach in a lower form who is the connector, the mediator, the channel through whom we receive everything.
This makes sense of why the greetings could be read theologically as “from Elohim, through Yahusha Mashiyach”, even though grammatically they read “from Elohim … and Yahusha Mashiyach.”
III. The Conjunction καί (kai) vs. ו (vav / uau)
1. The Greek καί
In Greek, καί (kai) normally means “and.” But it is not limited to strict addition. It can also carry the sense of “also,” “even,” “together with,” or “in union with.”
Thus, when Shaul writes:
ἀπὸ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἡμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,
this could be read with a misunderstanding:
• Binary: “from Elohim our Father and from the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.”
• Mediated unity: “from Elohim our Father — together with / in union with / through the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.”
Shaul’s own διὰ (dia) language elsewhere favors the second sense.
2. The Hebrew ו (vav/uau)
In Hebrew and Aramaic texts (e.g., Khaboris, Peshitta), the equivalent conjunction is ו (vav/uau), normally rendered “and.”
But in its ancient pictographic form (Paleo-Hebrew), vav is drawn as a peg or nail, meaning “hook, connector, fastener.” It joins things together.
Thus, in Hebrew perspective:
• Saying “Elohim our Father ו Adon Yahusha Mashiyach” can naturally mean one source joined through the connector (peg).
• The peg imagery beautifully fits Yahusha Mashiyach’s mediating role — He is the “tent peg” joining heaven and earth, joining Elohim and man.
The tent peg / nail (ו) also echoes:
• Isaiah 22:23 — “I will fasten him as a peg in a sure place.”
• Zechariah 10:4 — “From him comes the cornerstone, from him the tent peg.”
• Psalm 22:16 — “They pierced (nailed) my hands and my feet.”
👉 So Messiah Himself is the peg (ו) — the mediator who joins heaven and earth, Father and His people, into one.
IV. How the Binary Expansion Likely Developed
• The earliest manuscript evidence (P46, ca. 200 CE) preserves at least one short form (Colossians 1:2).
• As time went on, scribes and communities harmonized the greetings to a standard form and the ‘kai ‘ interpretation messed up the understanding as the translations came with a binary form which dilutes the text: “Elohim the Father and (kai) the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.”
• This was likely due to liturgical and theological emphasis on Yahusha’s role alongside as One who is added to the Divinity by making His Name explicitly joined in the opening blessing.
• By the 4th century (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus), the binary formula is firmly believed.
Thus, the shorter Father-only form is earlier in at least some streams showing One form, while the binary form became the standard in the majority unison of all manuscripts diluting the ‘Kai’ to mean ‘AND’ which gives the reader a feeling One divine Creature is Besides Another instead of “in union with.”
We saw Shaul’s Ruach thought “through” (dia) statements which clarify the relationship:
• The source is Elohim.
• The means or agency is Yahusha Mashiyach of the same Elohim bodily as Shaul teaches
Col 1:19 Because in Him all the completeness was well pleased to dwell,
Col 2:9 Because in Him dwells all the completeness of Elohim-ness bodily,
• This prevents a binary “two-source” formula.
V. Bringing It Together
1. Manuscripts: The short form (“from Elohim our Father”) is preserved in P46 Colossians 1:2 (~200 CE). The long form (“from Elohim our Father and the Adon Yahusha Mashiyach”) is preserved in most of Shaul’s greetings in P46 and then standardized in the great codices (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus).
2. Theology: Shaul elsewhere insists all is from Elohim through Yahusha Mashiyach. This consistent pattern means the greetings should not be read as “two independent Elohim,” but as “one Elohim, with Yahusha Mashiyach as the connector, mediator, peg bodily “
3. Language:
• Greek καί can mean “and,” but also “in union with.”
• Hebrew uau literally comes from a pictograph meaning “peg/hook.” It implies connection, not separation.
4. Historical Development: The short form survives in one strand (Colossians 1:2 in P46), but the binary expanded across the greetings, and by the 4th century it was standardised as two beings understanding.
So in perspective:
• The earliest witness points to Elohim as sole source.
• Shaul’s theology supports oneness of source through Yahusha Mashiyach bodily
• The binary formula is a later misunderstanding expansion, but reconcilable to the elect as Ruach enables to read through Shaul’s “through” theology and the Hebrew uau image: one peg, one source, one connection
Doxologies in the New Testament
Just like greetings, doxologies sometimes appear in short form (singular Elohim) or expanded form (binary in misunderstanding ie. Elohim + Mashiyach).
Examples:
1. Romans 16:27
• Greek (short form in some witnesses):
μόνῳ σοφῷ θεῷ, διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἡ δόξα
“To the only wise Elohim, through Yahusha Mashiyach, be glory.”
• Note: Here dia again prevents binary. Yahusha is the mediator, not a second Elohim-source.
2. Galatians 1:4–5
“Who gave himself for our sins … according to the will of Elohim and our Father, to whom be glory forever and ever.”
• The glory is directed to Elohim through Yahusha in mediation and obedience.
The source is Elohim bodily.
Php 4:19 And my Elohim shall fill all your need according to His riches in esteem in (Greek:en) Messiah יהושע.
Php 4:20 And to our Elohim and Father be esteem forever and ever. Aměn.
The text is showing that the Father’s glory is being realized in Yahusha Mashiyach, and then returned to the Father through Him.
👉 Context: v.19 says the Father supplies “in glory in Mashiyach Yahusha,” then v.20 sends esteem back to “our Elohim and Father.” This is not dividing esteem but showing the cycle: the Father’s riches → in Mashiyach → returning as esteem to the Father in Himself.
Ephesians 3:21
Greek:
αὐτῷ ἡ δόξα ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ καὶ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ εἰς πάσας τὰς γενεὰς.
“To Him [Elohim] be the esteem in the assembly and in Mashiyach Yahusha to all generations forever and ever. Aměn.”
👉 Here esteem is located “in Mashiyach Yahusha”
What this shows
• The prepositions matter:
• “διὰ” (through) → esteem/glory passes through Yahusha.
• “ἐν” (in) → the Father’s riches and fullness are in Yahusha.
The grammar never creates two independent Elohim’s. Instead, the Father’s esteem/glory is in Yahusha (Col 1:19; 2:9; Phil 4:19), and then Shaul’s doxologies always ascribe the final glory to the Father which is His first estate— but that esteem is not outside Yahusha, it is realized in Him.
Where scribes added “binary” sounding forms:
Later manuscripts (4th century onward: Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) add the binary-sounding formula “and Adon Yahusha Mashiyach.”
• The original intent (as preserved in earliest witnesses like P46) shows esteem/glory/peace from Elohim the Father, realized in Yahusha.
• The later additions of “and” formulas (kai, καί) can be seen as scribal expansions — but even then, the Hebrew uau (ו) as “peg/connector” shows it doesn’t need to mean “two sources,” but rather the one esteem of the Father manifested in Yahusha.
1) Core Colossian texts — Greek, literal rendering (with your names), and manuscript summary
Colossians 1:15
Greek (standard text):
ὅς ἐστιν εἰκὼν τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ἀοράτου, πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως·
Literal (with your terms):
“Who is the image of the invisible Elohim, firstborn over all creation.”
Why it matters: Shaul says Yahusha is the eikon (visible “image”) of the invisible Elohim — the Father’s reality is shown in the Son.
Manuscripts / witnesses:
This verse is present and textually stable in the Shaul’s epistles, attested in early papyrus evidence and all the Great Uncials (e.g., Papyrus 46, c.175–225 CE; Codex Sinaiticus, 4th c.; Codex Vaticanus, 4th c.; Codex Alexandrinus, 5th c.).
Colossians 1:19
Greek (standard):
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ εὐδόκησεν πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα κατοικῆσαι.
Literal :
“For in him it was pleasing that all the fullness should dwell.”
(Implicit subject in context = the Father / Elohim — i.e., it pleased Elohim that the fullness dwell in Yahusha.)
Manuscripts / witnesses:
Colossians (including 1:19) is preserved in Papyrus 46 (P46, c.175–225 CE) and in the major uncials (Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Alexandrinus). The wording “ἐν αὐτῷ … τὸ πλήρωμα … κατοικῆσαι” is well attested and very widely supported.
Theological point (explicit): the grammar “ἐν αὐτῷ” = “in him” is decisive: the Father’s fullness is not at some remote location — it is in Yahusha. That aligns exactly with the statement that the Father is found/esteemed “in Him.”
Colossians 2:9
Greek (standard):
ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς.
Literal :
“For in him dwells all the fullness of the deity (the Elohim-ness) bodily.”
(“σωματικῶς” = bodily / in a body.)
Manuscripts / witnesses:
Colossians 2:9 has strong support across Shaul’s quotations in manuscript tradition: Papyrus 46 (P46) contains Colossians and the line is attested in the great uncials (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus) and the majority tradition. The Greek formula “ἐν αὐτῷ … τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς” is the standard reading.
Why this is central: the verse literally says all the fullness of the Elohim-ness dwells in him bodily. That is the strongest single NT statement that Yahusha is the locus in whom the fullness of Elohim dwells in embodied form.
2) Philippians 4:19–20 — Greek, literal rendering, and manuscript support
Philippians 4:19
Greek (standard):
Ὁ δὲ θεός μου πληρώσει πᾶσαν χρείαν ὑμῶν κατὰ τὸ πλοῦτος αὐτοῦ ἐν δόξῃ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ.
Literal :
“But my Elohim will supply every need of yours according to his riches in glory, in Mashiyach Yahusha.”
(“ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ” = in/within Mashiyach Yahusha — i.e., the riches are realized in the sphere of Messiah.)
Manuscripts / witnesses:
Philippians is preserved in Papyrus 46 and in the major uncials (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Alexandrinus); the phrase “ἐν δόξῃ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ” is regular across early witnesses.
Note on sense: Paul’s grammar ties the Father’s riches to their realization “in” (ἐν) Mashiyach — i.e., the Father’s provision is located/manifest within the sphere of Messiah.
Philippians 4:20
Greek (standard):
τῷ δὲ θεῷ καὶ πατρὶ ἡμῶν ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων· ἀμήν.
Literal :
“And to our Elohim and Father be the glory for the ages of the ages. Amen.”
Manuscripts / witnesses:
Stable in the manuscript tradition (P46 for Philippians + the major uncials and the Byzantine tradition). The doxology places the final glory on Elohim the Father — and, read together with v.19, it shows: the Father’s glory is realized/manifest in Mashiyach (v.19), and the ascription of eternal glory returns to the Father (v.20).
3) John 14:9 — “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (connection to “Father in Him”)
Greek (standard):
λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς· ὁ ἑωρακὼς ἐμὲ ἑώρακεν τὸν πατέρα.
Literal:
Yahusha said to him, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.”
Why this matters? Yahusha himself claims that seeing Him is seeing the Father — this strongly supports the theological claim that the Father’s presence and being are manifest in the person of the Son (Yahusha), not something that is found separately at a different “location.”
4) Grammar — why the NT phrasing supports the reading (“in Him” / Father present in Him)?
• ἐν (en) = “in, within, in the sphere of” — used repeatedly (Col 1:19; Col 2:9; Phil 4:19) to place the Father’s fullness / riches in Mashiyach. That is not incidental: the preposition is locative/relational — the fullness dwells in him.
• διὰ (dia = through) elsewhere Shaul marks mediation — from the Father through the Son (e.g., Romans 5:1; 1 Cor 8:6). Shaul’s broader usage shows the Father is the source and the Son is the mediator/manifestation. (We examined many dia-passages earlier in the thread.)
• καί (kai = and) in greetings/doxologies is ambiguous grammatically (literal “and”) but context and Shaul’s dia-language allow it to be read as union/association (i.e., the Father’s blessing in union with the Adon). The Hebrew uau image (“peg/connection”) is a powerful way to think about that union — the Father’s reality is joined/manifest in the Son.
5) Manuscript certainty — brief note
• Papyrus 46 (P46) — the earliest comprehensive papyrus for Shaul, c. 175–225 CE; it contains Colossians and Philippians among Shaul’s letters. It therefore witnesses the Greek wording of Colossians 1:15, 1:19, 2:9 and Philippians 4:19–20 as part of the early papyrus tradition.
• Codex Sinaiticus (British Library Add. MS 43725, 4th century) and Codex Vaticanus (Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Vat. gr. 1209, 4th century) and Codex Alexandrinus (Royal MS 1 D. V–VIII, 5th century) are the great uncials that also preserve Shaul’s corpus and the same Colossians/Philippians passages; the readings above (the “in him” formula and “fullness of Elohim” expressions) are broadly attested in those witnesses.
6) Short exegetical synthesis (how Scripture supports what we have discussed )
1. Colossians 1:15 — Yahusha is the visible image of the invisible Elohim (the Father’s reality made visible).
2. Colossians 1:19 & Colossians 2:9 — the Father’s fullness dwells in Him, and “all the fullness of deity dwells bodily in him.” The grammar insists the Father’s fullness is not merely “with” Him, but in Him — i.e., Elohim’s being is present in the person of Yahusha Mashiyach.
3. Philippians 4:19–20 — the Father supplies according to His riches in Mashiyach; then the doxology gives glory to the Father — the Father’s riches and glory are realized/found “in” Messiah.
4. John 14:9 — Yahusha’s own word: seeing the Son is seeing the Father; the Father’s presence is not elsewhere apart from the Son in terms of revelation to us.
Put plainly: the textual and grammatical flow of Shaul and the Gospels point in the same direction — Elohim’s fullness and glory are present and manifest in the person of Yahusha Mashiyach; the Father is “found” (revealed, glorified, and operative) in Him.
📖 Summary
Through this discussion we examined:
1. Short and Long Forms in Greetings
• The shorter form (“Grace to you and peace from Elohim our Father”) is attested in early manuscripts like Papyrus 46 (c. 200 CE) and sometimes Codex Vaticanus (4th century) along with the longer form (“… from Elohim our Father and Adon Yahusha Mashiyach”) and the longer form also appears more consistently in later manuscripts such as Codex Sinaiticus (4th century), Codex Alexandrinus (5th century), and the Byzantine majority tradition (9th century onward).
• This shows that usage of grammar emphasized in the sources, created a misunderstanding of two beings besides each other which elevates one and demeans the other or a beginning for a Trinitarian formula which places the beings on equal ground but in three places of Divinity relative to each other besides and not within 🤦🏻♂️.
2. The Role of “Through” (διὰ) and “In” (ἐν)
• Key verses (Romans 1:8; 5:1; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 5:20; Rom 16:27) explicitly use “through” (διὰ) or “in” (ἐν) Yahusha Mashiyach.
• These prepositions show the Father as source, and Yahusha as the mediator, peg, and vessel in whom the Father’s fullness is made known.
3. Greek kai vs. Hebrew uau
• In Greek, kai (“and”) can be read as binary, suggesting two sources which is the case we see today in Christianity and Hebrew roots movement.
• In Hebrew/Paleo-Hebrew, the waw/uau (ו) is a pictograph of a tent peg/nail, whose function is to connect and secure.
• Therefore, when greetings are read in Hebrew style (“Elohim our Father u-Adon Yahusha Mashiyach”), it does not suggest two sources, but one source connected and manifested in Yahusha.
4. Doxologies
• Doxologies (Romans 16:27; Ephesians 3:21; Philippians 4:20; Galatians 1:4–5, etc.) consistently direct esteem to Elohim the Father in Yahusha Mashiyach.
• Yet they place that esteem outside Yahusha Mashiyach , showing that the Father is glorified apart from Him.
• The study showing the grammar perspective perfectly aligns with the confession that in Yahusha dwells all the fullness of Elohim bodily, and all esteem to the Father is contained in Him.
Conclusion
Yahusha is not a second Elohim, but Elohim manifested bodily. The Father cannot be found beyond Him, and all esteem flows to Elohim in Him. Thus, when the apostles wrote their greetings and doxologies, they were not dividing glory, but declaring the unity of Elohim’s fullness made manifest in Yahusha, the peg that secures heaven and earth, Father and creation, into one.
No comments:
Post a Comment