Did Jesus Pray to Himself ?

by J.L. Hall

Jesus' prayers open our understanding to the majesty of the Incarnation, for through them we grasp the divine-human relationship between God and His Son. Trinitarians often refer to statements Jesus made about His father, including those in His prayers, in an effort to prove that two persons were involved - who they identify as God the Son and God the Father. Since they reason that only persons and not natures communicate with each other, they regard the prayers as clear evidence that Jesus is a separate person from "the Father". Moreover, they cite Jesus' remarks about the Father as scriptural support for the Trinitarian theory. However, the prayers and remarks by Jesus destroy any concept of God as being a trinity of co-equal, and co-existent persons.

The Bible clearly distinguishes God the Father from His Son. The Son was born in Bethlehem, but the eternal God does not know a beginning. The Son grew into maturity - physically, mentally, socially, and spiritually. He became tired, hungry, weary, sleepy - just as other men. Although He did not commit sin, He was tempted in all points as other men are tempted. He suffered from the trials in Jerusalem and died on the cross-just as the two thieves also died. God does not grow, nor can He die. These facts alone clearly distinguish the Son from the Father.

The Bible tells us that the man Christ Jesus is the mediator between God and men (I Timothy 2:5). God is one, but a mediator serves more than one - He stood between God and mankind, effecting reconciliation. Only as a man could Jesus be our sacrifice, mediator, advocate, and high priest, acting on our behalf for our justification.

Jesus offered Himself as a spotless lamb to God. Having lived as a human being, He offered the blood from His own body as the basis for the forgiveness of our sins. God did not die on the cross, nor did a divine eternal person offer blood from a divine eternal body. As the Son of God Jesus offered His own human body and His own earthly blood to God. The distinction between God and His Son can also be seen in the events after the crucifixion. God raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 10:9, Ephesians 1:20), gave Him all power in heaven and earth (Matthew 28:18), made Him Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36), and exalted His name to be above every name in heaven, on earth, and beneath the earth (Philippians 2:9). If the Son had been a co-equal person in the Godhead, this exaltation would not have been possible, for He would have had these positions and attributes from eternity. It is evident, therefore, that the Son of God was not a second divine person in the Godhead.

Biblical facts reveal that Jesus lived as an authentic human being, that He did not merely assume the appearance of flesh (1). Therefore we should not be surprised that He prayed to God, seeking strength, guidance, and assurance. Moreover, we should not be surprised that Jesus had a will distinct from God (2), that He was truly human in spirit and soul, that He possessed a self-awareness of His humanity. We are not to suppose, however, that the human Jesus was not different from other people, for only He was begotten by the Holy Ghost. God was His immediate Father. He is rightfully called the "only begotten of the Father". His miraculous birth meant that His humanity was not tainted with the inherited sinful nature of the Fall, and through Him God could reveal Himself to us in redemptive love.

Jesus' prayers to God the Father came from His human life, from the Incarnation. His prayers were not those of one divine person to another divine person of God, but those of an authentic human praying to the one true God. Prayer is based on an inferior being in supplication before a superior being. If the one praying is equal in power and authority to the one to whom he is praying, there is no genuine prayer (3). A conversation can be held between two equals, but an omnipotent person does not need to pray for help from an equal. Even intercessory prayers are meaningless unless the one praying is inferior to the one to whom he prays (4). If he were of equal power, knowledge, and wisdom, he could take care of the needs of those for whom he prays without asking help of another. If Jesus prayed as "God the Son", then God the Son is inferior to God the Father. But such inferiority destroys the Trinitarian theory (5) In submitting His will to the Father, Jesus confessed that His will was inferior: "Nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" (Luke 22:42). He also stated the he did not seek to do His own will, but the will of the Father (John 5:30). If the Son had been an eternal divine person sharing equal power and knowledge, and wisdom with two other persons in the trinity, His will could not have been inferior to theirs.

Jesus also stated that the Father was greater than He was: "My Father is greater than I" (John 14:28). It is absurd to say that this statement was made by a co-equal, eternal person in a trinity. Jesus was not speaking as God, but as the Son of God. Moreover, Jesus said, "the Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise" (John 5:19). He credits the Father as the source of His works, as having the power to give life, and the authority to execute judgment (John 5:19-30). If the Son were an equal person in a trinity, He would have these attributes innately within himself; He could not derive them from a superior Father6.

But we should not suppose that His humanity detracted from His deity. Jesus was not the incarnation of one person of a trinity, but he was the incarnation of the fullness of God - everything that God is was in Him. Thus the Bible says the "God was manifest in the flesh" (I Tim 3:16) and that "in Him [Jesus] dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9). As God incarnate, He identified Himself with the Father: "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30; 31-33);

"If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him ... he that has seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:7-9). As God with us, Jesus revealed His deity, identifying Himself as the God of Abraham and the One who revealed Himself to Moses as the I AM (John 8:24, 58).

Jesus was both God and man. Although this union is sometimes referred to as God-man, this term may be misleading, for it may lead some people to think of Him as a demigod. On the other hand, it is equally incorrect to refer to Him as a anointed man. Although quantitatively God cannot be confined to a body, qualitatively he could reside in a body. Neither was Jesus a part-human, but he was man in the full sense. He was fully God and fully man. He possessed both the nature of God and the nature of man. He was aware that He was He was God and that He was man. He could and did speak and act as a man, and he could and did speak and act as God. As a man, he did not know the day or hour when the Son would come in power and glory (Mark 13:22); as God he forgave sins. Both His humanity and deity, although fused into His one being, remained distinct within His one personality. Admittedly, the Incarnation is a mystery beyond the comprehension of the human mind.

Did Jesus pray to Himself ? No, not when we understand that Jesus was both God and man. In His deity Jesus did not pray, for God does not need to pray to anyone. As a man, Jesus prayed to God, not to his humanity (7). He did not pray to Himself as humanity, but to the one true God, to the same God who dwelled in His humanity and who also inhabits the universe. No further explanation is given, and none is needed. Does Jesus pray now since his exaltation ? The answer is no. He prayed in the days of His flesh (Hebrews 5:7). The work of the mediation was finished through His death on the cross at Calvary (Hebrews 9:14-15). There is no more sacrifice for sins, for once and for all time His blood was shed for the remission of sins (Hebrews 10:12). Unlike the Old Testament priests, he does not continually offer sacrifices for sins. There is no more offering, but there remains remission of sins for those who repent and are baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 10:18, Acts 2:38). His present role as intercessor consists not only of daily prayers but the application of the benefit of the cross to our lives (Romans 8:34; 1 John 1:7-9; 2:1-2).
Jesus said, "At that day ye shall ask in my name: and I say not unto you, that I will pray the Father for you: for the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and believed that I came out from God. I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again I leave the world and go to the Father" (John 16:26-28). Jesus does not pray now, but as God He hears and answers prayers prayed in His name.

(This article appeared in the July issue of the Pentecostal Herald. The footnotes did not appear in the original, and were added by the editor)
_______________________________
1. That is, he was not a phantasm, as some Gnostics held. Jesus was quite real, from birth to death.
2. As a man, while in the flesh
3. In recent years, heretical teachers have often exploited a basic misconception of the nature of God and man in proposing a form and attitude of prayer not demonstrated by scripture. Examples include K. Copeland, F. Price, and others in the "Word of Faith" movement, such as graduates of Hagin's Rhema Bible school. In the imbalance resulting from improper understanding, these people have suggested both the "commanding of God" as "co-equal heirs with Jesus", and that Jesus was indeed, no different that "born-again man". In the editor's opinion, all such distortions clearly conclude in blasphemy.
4. In the quality of inferiority, the author does not include voluntary submission. A prayer to a saint, or angel is therefor without Bible basis, except as a petition to one in authority. We are not led to believe that ascended saints have more authority that those who are flesh bound, on earth, thus there is no support given for prayers to heavenly powers, other than to God the Father, in the name of Jesus Christ.
5. Thus we agree that the scriptures do not teach subordinatism, such as do neo-Arians.
(6) Seeing numerous proofs that sonship is not in equality with fatherhood, the question must be asked, "In what dimensions then is the Son equal to the Father, if distinct, or does such equality only pertain to those aspects in which the Father and Son are indistinct ?"
7. While some contend that this suggests that Jesus is schizophrenic, or split in personality, once again, it is important to understand the difference between nature and person. We are also reminded that Jesus, as man, set the pattern for all "followers of Jesus" who would through the new birth become and abide as sons, or children of God. His prayer illustrates the prayer of all who are of a human nature.
_

Testimony of two men

Paul admonished the church in Corinth with this principle of more than one witness using himself as an analogy.

John 8:17-18
17It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.18I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me
2 Corinthians 13
1This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.2I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that, if I come again, I will not spare
:
If Paul being a Jew who understood the law of witness, and make a statement like these in his letter to Corinth, it makes it easier to understand that God do-sent have to be two or three do accomplish His will but He can do it with the number of His human intervention not number of persons in Godhead.

Paul is one person and yet he claim to have established the rule of witness, read: 2I told you before, and foretell you, as if I were present, the second time; and being absent now I write to them which heretofore have sinned, and to all other, that, if I come again, I will not spare:

See Dr. David K. Bernard book Oneness of God P.189-190)

Definition of Persons and Being according to James White

“Being is what make something what it is Person is what make someone who they are we recognize that distinction everyday as we look into the audience.”

A careful observation of James White definition clearly shows that his claim of One God really not what he actually perceive. He made a connection between the persons in his definition to the audience. I’m curious if He could admit that the persons of the God are as separate as the persons in the audience?  How does he define One when he has compared the father Son and Holy Ghost to as those who were present in the crowd.  To me that is rather un-flattering statement and outright Poly theistic view..

  With these profound  understanding of what he really believe  concerning the persons in the Godhead he has revealed his doctrinal flaws and why he is not a monotheistic but a polytheistic believer.  I’m a person and also a human being and so is everyone in this group. We are persons too and each of us is human beings. If we were being asked by anyone how many human beings are there participating in this group? It will be deceiving to say, “There is one human being but many persons. But rather,  the true statement would be, there are many human beings in this group. Each human being is a person but many humans in here not one.”

Footnote:
1. James White and Robert Sabin Debate on Trinity... http://knowaboutchristianity.org/trinity-vs-oneness-debate-part-1-white-vs-sabin/

Yahweh, Yashua, or Jesus?

In recent years a group known as the Assemblies of Yahweh has placed an unusual emphasis on the spoken pronunciation of the name of God. The AY maintains that God's true name is Yahweh and that salvation comes specifically through this name...
Members of this group also assert that the name of the Son of God must be pronounced as Yashua. Any other form, such as lesous (Greek) or Jesus (English), is unacceptable. They say that the name Jesus was derived from the names of the Greek gods Zeus and Dionysus, because the last two letters of each name are identical. One of their writers has even alleged that the name Jesus means "the pig;' because Je supposedly means "the" and sus supposedly means "pig".
Scholars generally agree that the original Hebrew pronunciation of the Old Testament name of God was Yahweh or something similar; certainly the pronunciation Jehovah is a later English construction. Most scholars also agree that in New Testament times the Hebrew or Aramaic pronunciation of the name Jesus was Yeshua (not Yashua) and that this name is identical to the Old Testament name Joshua. Let us analyze the position of the AY, then, in the light of Scripture.
First, the AY does not attribute full deity to Jesus Christ as the Bible does, but it speaks of God and Jesus as if they were two separate persons. Its view of Jesus is similar to that of Jehovah's Witnesses; both use the designation C.E. (Common Era) instead of A.D. (Anno Domini= in the year of the Lord), apparently because they do not want to acknowledge Jesus as the supreme Lord. The AY exalts Yahweh as the
highest name of God, not realizing that the New Testament provides us with a greater revelation of God and His name.
Yahweh of the Old Testament manifested Himself in flesh to be our Savior in the New Testament. The name Jesus incorporates the revelation of God contained in both testaments, for it literally means "Yahweh-Savior" or "Yahweh is salvation."
Although others have borne the name Joshua, Yeshua, or Jesus, Jesus Christ of Nazareth alone truly personifies the meaning of that name. He was "God with us;' (Matthew 1:23), who came to "save his people from their sins" (Matthew 1:21), and "in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily" (Colossians 2:9). Consequently, the name of Jesus is the only saving name, the highest name ever known to humanity, the name at which every knee shall bow, the name that every tongue shall confess, and the name in which we are to say and do all things (Acts 4:12; Ephesians 1:20-21; Philippians 2:9-11; Colossians 3:17). For this reason, the Early Church baptized in the name of Jesus, not in the nameof Yahweh (Acts 2:3)
Second, the AY wrongly attaches saving efficacy to the pronunciation of God's name in a certain way-to the vibrations of sound waves. In actuality, the significance of the Name rests in its meaning. It is
effective because of the One it represents, and it is effective only when we have faith in the One it represents. When we call the name of Jesus in faith, He responds to our cry and performs a work in our lives.
This is what the Bible means when it says we receive healing and salvation through the Name: "And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong" (Acts 3:16). "Through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts 10:4-3). Answers to prayer did not come to the Early Church because of a certain pronunciation of the Name, but because they invoked the Name in faith.
The seven sons of Sceva attempted to cast out demons by calling on the same name that Paul used with success. They could not cast the demons out because, unlike Paul, they did not have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ (Acts 19:14-17). Their problem was not faulty pronunciation but deficient faith.
A study of human language and speech shows that it is a mistake to attach saving efficacy to a certain pronunciation of the name. No one pronounces words exactly alike; voice prints are as unique as
fingerprints. Even if we could be certain of the original spelling of the Old Testament name of God, no one can know the exact pronunciation that the ancient Hebrews attached to the individual vowels and
consonants. Moreover, ancient Hebrew had different dialects, and in one of them there was no sh sound in certain cases (Judges 12:4-6).
If salvation depends upon exact pronunciation, what happens to people with speech impediments, accents, or dialects? What happens to people whose languages do not contain certain sounds? For example, Greek does not have an sh, and Korean does not have a final s sound.
Third, the position of the AY would require us to reject the new Testament that we now have, including all known manuscripts and versions. The Greek New Testament, including all ancient Greek manuscripts in existence, uses the name lesous. The AY has to maintain that it was not written by the apostles or the Early Church, for if they used lesous in even one passage, then the AY position is disproved.
While a few scholars believe that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, it is impossible to maintain that the entire New Testament was so written. The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were
written by a Gentile, Luke, to another Gentile, Theophilus, and it is unlikely that either of them knew Hebrew or Aramaic. Paul wrote his letters to Gentile churches. Clearly, these writers used Greek.
Moreover, a study of New Testament style, grammar, idioms, and vocabulary demonstrates that Greek was the original language.
For the AY position to be correct, Jesus, the apostles, and the Early Church would have had to use the early Hebrew name Yashua and never any other variation, even when speaking or writing in the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek of their day. We do not have a single manuscript or ancient version of the New Testament that does so, and no one has ever recorded the existence of such a manuscript. no scholar has ever produced evidence that there was such a manuscript.
Fourth, the scholarship of the AY is faulty. Webster's Unabridged Dictionary clearly shows that the English name Jesus came from the Latin lesus, from the Greek lesous, from the Hebrew Yeshua. Yeshua, in turn, is a contraction of the original Hebrew name Yehoshua. This long form occurs in Numbers 13:16, and it comes from Yah (a short form of Yahweh) and hoshia (meaning to help," with the later connotation "to save").
To be consistent the AY should not use the contracted form Yahshua, but the original form Yehoshua or perhaps even Yahwehhoshia. Moreover, the formation of the English name Jesus was not due to any sinister motive or meaning; it occurred according to standard rules and developments in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English.
It is not accurate to say that the name Jesus came from the combination of two separate words Je and sus, supposedly meaning "the pig;' anymore than my name David comes from Da and vid, with the meaning of "daytime video." Moreover, no dictionary says that Je means "the" or that sus means "pig."
The relation of the endings of Dionysus, Zeus, and Jesus is purely coincidental. In the original Greek there is no connection, for the endings are, respectively, -os, -eus, and -ous. (Both eu and ou are diphthongs, which means that the vowels are to be pronounced as one unit and not to be regarded as separate sounds or syllables.)
Fifth, as a practical matter, God Himself honors the use of the English name Jesus. When people pray by using this name in faith, they receive the Holy Ghost, answers to prayer, healing, and deliverance from demons.
In conclusion, the name of Jesus may be pronounced in many different ways in various languages, dialects, and accents. In all of its forms, it means the same thing: the one true God of the Old Testament has become our Savior in the historical person of Jesus of Nazareth. When a person uses the name with that understanding, and with faith in Jesus as Lord and Messiah, then regardless of the language he speaks, his prayer will reach the throne of God and his invocation of God's name will be effective....

Article by. David K. Bernard.

On Mica 5:2

Mic 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.

This scripture is used notoriously by trinitarians to prove  the pre-existence of what they claim to be God the Son or second person of the Triune-God

This is a prophetic scripture about the man Christ Jesus who is to be born in Bethlehem. There is no clear evidence that support the teachings of the so-called , the second person of the Triune-God rather its clearly teaches the monotheistic view hold by oneness Christians.

I'll bring out few points and anyone who wants to jump in is more than welcome.

Point one: The writer says, " yet out of thee shall he come forth." This part of the passage speaks of the incarnation of the man whom the bible says that when the fullness of time comes, God sent forth His son MADE of a woman MADE under the law. There are no hints or anything that can point out to the possibility of pre-existant second person of trinity.

Point 2 , "whose goings forth have been from of old." Now,  any trinitarian would quickly jump to this and say that this is a definite proof that this Jesus is from "of old "so therefore He existed prior to the birth in Bethlehem. Is this what the writer intended for the reader to understand? No! The word here is, "whose goings forth ." Comes from Hebrew wordmôtsâ'âh.

{mo-tsaw-aw'} meaning ( family descent.

FAMILY DESCENT! Its not the second person who is from the everlasting but the one that caused the conception is from the everlasting. The man christ Jesus was born in Bethlehem but the originator is God, the very God who dwelt in Him thats why He could say,"The Father in me, He doeth the work."

Point 3

Jehovah here is speaking as a singular being. Theres no indication that there was another with Him but alone, (Me) He didnt speak in Us , we, our etc.

Point 4

he spoke of the messiah in the futuristice sense; " out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be."

Philips Revelation

John 14:8-9 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

 We got to give Philips some credit for his hunger to know the truth. I think he was trying to reason with all laws given by his forefathers and apply them to the revelation that’s being played in his very own eyes. We don’t hear the rest of disciples asking so I figure they either have it or just being silence for fear of what might confound their own belief structure of who Jesus is. This is exactly what many of us are doing, either were intimidated to ask for fear of what we will find out or too scared to challenged what we’ve always believe on who Jesus is. Philip took courage and asks the lord to show the Father. No doubt in Philip’s mind he was already have preconception on who Jesus is and naturally see more than one just as our friends who hold the doctrine of multiple persons in Godhead.

 His question prompts Jesus to ask a question we should all ask our self and use it as a guide to our conception on who Jesus is. He said, “How sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?” In plain term, how do you create separation of the Father and Himself in your mind? Remember, our words are expressions of what we formulate in our minds that’s communicated by our speech so our listeners could perceive what our minds trying to relay. Jesus knew what he was thinking and He gave him the answer many refuse to hear even now.” “he that hath seen me hath seen the Father;”

Many people today are hungry just like Philip; they want to know who Jesus really is and how He related to the Father and HG. They have to see Jesus through the eyes of creeds that were formulated from the councils of the post apostolic church. With this, they already have structural ways of interpretation in mind before they look at the text such as John 17 and quickly see a pre-existent son of God. A lot of them are sincere and truth full in their approach in discussion just like Philip but as long as creeds continued being the major factor and filter of understand of who Jesus is then there is no turning for them.

The revelation of who Jesus is begins when we differentiate the Jesus of the Bible from Jesus of historical Christianity. I’m not saying that there are two Jesus but what I’m saying is that, the Jesus whom the orthodox Christianity has portrayed has been Smothered with blood of the martyrs, as a power seeking, rude and ill treatments caused by those who self proclaimed themselves to be the center of the Christendom and abused its power by solicit the name of God for their own benefits and iron clawed the creeds with the tip of the sword…

    
 Jesus of the bible rebuked peter for using a sword Matt 26:52, He came to seek and save the lost, Luke 19:10, He didn’t come to judge, John 12:47. This is how we should see Jesus not the way the history has painted Him as a warrior, conqueror and an Iron clawed fist ruler who wanted to take over this world.

Much was done by the early church to make sure everyone will agree and follow the doctrine that is agreed on and set forth by the councils. Throughout the century many laws were assembled to forbid anyone to teach anything which is contrary to what Catholic Church (Universal Church) said to be the truth.

 Philip was looking into Jesus through the eyes of his traditions and was confronted with the idea of more than one personality in God. Jesus asked the question and brought Philip back to the reality of one God. We should ask our friends the same, how do you that? A good and honest question for the seeker of Jesus would be something align to what Jesus said, Why do I see distinct personality in the Godhead? Why do I see more than one persons in one being of God? Am I believing this way because I was taught to or is this a structural set interpretation I attained in my quest to know who Jesus is? Can I know who Jesus really is?

The answer would be yes, anyone can know who Jesus is and it can only be revealed to us by Himself if we sincerely and honestly willing to lay down our stronghold and prejuduce and seek Him with honesty. Another thing, One can be sincere in his approach just like Philip but still be misguided in his understanding. We must be willing to accept the truth just like Saul (Paul) .

Matthew 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

 Luk 10:21-22 In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.

I grew up in an Evangelical Trinitarian denomination, I believed in Trinity until I was 26. It was a general understanding where I grew up. Passed down by traditions, Songs and knowledge everyone agrees on. We just naturally think of God as triune being though we didn’t understand all about it but was hoping someday God will tells us everything. And now I’m glad that I got the revelation just like Philip. God confronted my thoughts and revealed Himself to me, I saw Jesus only. Someday He says I will be His son and He will be my God and Father..

Revelation 21:7 He that over cometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. “ If I will be Jesus son, then that will make Jesus my FATHER.. There is only one Father

There is only one God, whom the OT calls Him Father, for He is the Father of Creation. This one God became our brother by being born into His creation, The Humanity. He was Emmanuel,”God with Us” to reconcile the world to HIMSELF and we named Him Jesus, The Mighty God in Christ…

• Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?

Proverbs 8:22 Daughter of God

• Proverbs 8:22-31 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men.

Wisdom here is being personified and being referred to as I as if she is a person and was there in the creation with God.The wisdom said she was By Him and With Him. Can we conclude that wisdom in this passage is another member of Godhead or daughter of God?

We would think so by the way the text read and by exegetical rules used by others. We cannot just come to the scripture and read them plainly to prove our preconceptions of what does says the word. But instead we need to reconcile all passages to get the best and acceptable, reasonable interpretation of the scriptures. see  2 Tim 3:16.

List of pronouns in Prov 8, 
• [LORD possessed me], [I was set up], [, I was brought forth], [he prepared the heavens, I was there], [Then I was by him], [and I was daily his delight], [and my delights were with the sons of men.]

A lot of people argued and insist that we have to look into the scriptures and read them plainly but in this case it would be foolish to do so. If we incorporate this type of exegesis then we will have to add another member into the Godhead.
In john 16 and 17 Jesus spoke many things in a veil language. We can see the disciples asking Him to speak in an openly manner without any restrictions for they too could not understand what Jesus was saying. Prov 8 along with many other passages are good example to show us the validity of the word of God and the Shemma. There was none beside God in the Beginning, He create all things by Himself without anyone to consult. 

Just as there is no God the Daughter, there is no clear evidence and scriptures to support the teachings of God the Son. All passages read to support such ideas cannot hold in relation to other text therefore fail to meet the qualification as a proper interpretation. 

There is only one God, whom the OT calls Him Father, for He is the Father of Creation. This one God became our brother by being born into His creation, The Humanity. He was Emmanuel,”God with Us” to reconcile the world to HIMSELF and we named Him Jesus, The Mighty God in Christ…
• Malachi 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us?