A Jehovah's Witness and a LDS member discussion.
LDS = italics
Well first off It seems your understanding of the Trinity is a little off.
So I quote the following from Wikipedia:
In Christianity, the doctrine of the Trinity states that God is one being who exists, simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons: the Father, the Son (incarnate as Jesus of Nazareth), and the Holy Spirit. Since the 4th century, in both Eastern and Western Christianity, this doctrine has been stated as "three persons in one God," all three of whom, as distinct and co-eternal persons, are of one indivisible Divine essence, a simple being. Supporting the doctrine of the Trinity is known as Trinitarianism. The majority of Christians are Trinitarian, and regard belief in the Trinity as a test of orthodoxy. Opposing, nontrinitarian positions that are held by some groups include Binitarianism (two deities/persons/aspects), Unitarianism (one deity/person/aspect), the Godhead (Latter Day Saints) (three separate beings) and Modalism (Oneness).
Quoted from this message
Reply,
As regards the Trinity, if something is true then it has always been true, it doesn’t take (hundreds of years) until the 4th century for it to become true! And no amount of councils can make it true; if it wasn’t true to begin with!
The Wikipedia is just quoting a man made creed and is not supported by biblical Christianity.
As for being “simultaneously and eternally, as a mutual indwelling of three persons” this is pure Hellenistic Greek Philosophical Metaphysics (try reading, some of the works of Plato, Plotinus’s Enneads, Parmenides and others…)
You say, “Opposing, nontrinitarian positions that are held by some groups include Binitarianism (two deities/persons/aspects), Unitarianism (one deity/person/aspect), the Godhead (Latter Day Saints) (three separate beings) and Modalism (Oneness).”
“…the Godhead (Latter Day Saints) (three separate beings)…”
If this is truly the case with LDS theology, then Mormons are “polytheists”. As you believe in three separate beings (gods). Not a bible teaching, but extra biblical, and therefore pagan. (end of quote)
"Know our own statement regarding the Godhead is much simpler than the Nicene creed.
We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. (First Article of Faith, Pearl of Great Price)"
When you say, “We believe in… (above)” this wording smacks of Trinitarianism. But then you say that you believe in three separate personages! This to many would be very confusing, as you say you don’t believe in the Trinity as some (on this board) understand it (and I respect their right to believe what they believe), but the wording of your belief leads me to the only conclusion of polytheism-3 separate gods! Again not a bible teaching, but can be found outside of the bible.
You quote,
“(First Article of Faith, Pearl of Great Price). This document has no authority whatsoever. The bible itself is the only authority. (end of quote)
"As to the nature of God and the Godhead I provide the following:
The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit. Were it not so, the Holy Ghost could not dwell in us. (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22) "
Quoted from this message
Reply,
The above is not supported by the bible. The words you use, “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also; but the Holy Ghost has not a body of flesh and bones, but is a personage of Spirit”, have more in common with Greek Mythology than the bible... The Greeks made the gods in their image and not the other way round.
And saying, “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s; the Son also…” Is diametrically opposed to what the bible teaches.
1 Corinthians 15:50 (King James Version)
“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”
Yes, as the bible plainly and clearly teaches, “flesh” and “blood” cannot inherit God’s kingdom. And it is of no use to try and add “bones” to make it palatable!
Just as, “…neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”, likewise with the “flesh” and heaven, otherwise, we could turn around and say, “…corruption [does] inherit incorruption”. Brackets mine for emphasis!
As regard “God” what does the bible say, as opposed to, “Doctrine and Covenants 130:22”?
John 4:24 (King James Version)
“God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth”.
See also, 2 Cor. 3:17, 18; Eph 2:22.
Think about it! (end of quote)
"So there are two Physical Bodies and a Personage of Spirit, so three separate beings. For how they are one:
Though each God in the God-head is a personage, separate and distinct from each of the others yet they are "one God", meaning that that are united as one in the attributes of perfection. For instance each has the fullness of truth, knowledge, charity, power, justice, judgment, mercy, and faith.
Accordingly they all think, act, speak, and are alike in all things, and yet they are three separate and distinct personalities ... The oneness of the Gods is the same unity that should exist among the saints. (Godhead; Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie)"
Again, you say, “So there are two Physical Bodies…”
Again, this is not what the bible teaches:
1 Corinthians 15:50 (King James Version)
“Now this I say, brethren, that “flesh” … cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.”
Notice the parallel contrast; “flesh” with “corruption”.
“For instance each has the fullness of truth, knowledge…”
If each has the fullness of knowledge, then whatever one knows the other knows, none would be ignorant of certain facts or would have to be given any etc.
Revelation 1:1 (King James Version)
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John.
As regards knowing, knowledge, it would seem to contradict:
“Godhead; Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie”.
The emphasis being on (knowledge)-“For instance each has the fullness of … knowledge…”
In the Revelation given to John, it would seem that John had to be given the revelation by an angel sent by Christ! In turn, Christ had to given the revelation by God! At this time Christ is in heaven, not on the earth.
But if the Father and the Son are coequal, how could the Son be ignorant of things the Father knows? Like John and the (sent) angel, Jesus had to be given the revelation in order to hand it down from its source! Just as John and the angel were not the source of the revelation, neither was Jesus the source of the revelation-he was given it!
‘Jesus had two natures,’ some will answer. ‘When on earth he spoke as a man.’ (See Mark 13:32 KJV below)
And, yet, even if that were so, what about the “Holy Ghost”? If it is the third person of the Trinity, why does it not know? A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. And the “Holy Ghost” is part of the “Trinitarian” chain.
Mark 13:32 (King James Version)
“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”
If the spirit was a person, don’t you think Mark would have included the Holy Spirit in knowing or not knowing? The fact is, he didn’t! (end of quote)
"So when you say Trinity, I and the rest of the English speaking world think of One God who is somehow three manifestations. We believe in Three Gods who are one in purpose and I suppose we could have used the word Trinity had not someone else used the word for a different doctrine."
You say, “We believe in Three Gods…” It is totally irrelevant when you say, “…are one in purpose…” That is beside the point! The true point is, your belief, you believe in three gods, therefore, you believe in 3 gods, and therefore you are polytheistic. Not a bible teaching, that finds its authority outside the bible.
"As regards the Comma I actually did know about it. But let's declare my biblical prejudice:
With the discovery of more ancient mss. not available to the King James translators, many translations of the Bible have been produced since 1900 by Bible scholars.
However, based on the doctrinal clarity of latter-day revelation given to Joseph Smith, the Church has held to the King James Version as being doctrinally more accurate than these recent versions.
The newer versions are in many instances easier to read, but are in some passages doctrinally weaker in their presentation of the gospel. Therefore, the King James Version remains the principal Bible of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (Bible; Bible dictionary of the LDS Scriptures)"
“With the discovery of more ancient mss. not available to the King James translators, many translations of the Bible have been produced since 1900 by Bible scholars.”
We are now in possession of thousands of manuscripts and parts of manuscripts going back to approximately (between) the 2nd cent upwards etc. So why have the LDS not revised and modernised the attitude towards the KJV and its some 20,00 errors.
Again, you quote “Bible dictionary of the LDS Scriptures” as if a recognised authority! As far as the bible is concerned it has no authority whatsoever!
“With the discovery of more ancient mss. not available to the King James translators, many translations of the Bible have been produced since 1900 by Bible scholars.
However, based on the doctrinal clarity of latter-day revelation given to Joseph Smith, the Church has held to the King James Version as being doctrinally more accurate than these recent versions.”
“However, based on the doctrinal clarity of latter-day revelation given to Joseph Smith, the Church has held to the King James Version as being doctrinally more accurate than these recent versions.”
In the light of many manuscripts being found how the LDS can say,”… the Church has held to the King James Version as being doctrinally more accurate than these recent versions”.
This is really beyond belief and ridiculous to say the least!
Like Christendom the LDS holds to doctrines that are not supported by the bible, these doctrines are extra-biblical and that some of the LDS belief system have elements taken from Greek philosophy and Oriental Buddhism, i.e. Life before birth, life after death… and others. These and other beliefs are to be found in the above. Not a bible teaching.
It is obvious you do not know that the KJV of the bible has over 20,000 errors in it!
The Book of Mormon quotes extensively from the KJV of the Bible, with its Shakespearean English, and it’s over 20,000 errors which were already considered archaic in Joseph Smith’s day.
It has troubled some people that The Book of Mormon, this “most correct” of books, lifts at least 27,000 words directly from the Bible version that is purportedly full of errors and that Smith later undertook to revise, the KJV! In other words, the book of Mormon has incorporated in it the same errors carried over from the KJV. The Book of Mormon itself has had several revisions and changes since the original.
A very interesting point to note as regards the book of Mormon:
A comparison of the first edition of The Book of Mormon with current editions reveals to many Mormons a surprising fact. The book said to be “translated. . . by the gift and power of God” has itself undergone numerous changes in grammar, spelling, and substance.
Who is “the Eternal Father”?
For instance, there is apparent confusion over the identity of “the Eternal Father.”
According to the first edition at 1 Nephi 13:40, “the Lamb of God is the Eternal Father.”
But later editions say that “the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father.” The two original 1830 manuscripts of The Book of Mormon still exist. One of the two originals, held by the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, has the words “the Son” added between the lines. Can you explain this?
Also,
As for the Mormon scripture Doctrine and Covenants, the book The Revelations of the Prophet Joseph Smith, by LDS scholar Lyndon W. Cook, explains in the preface:
Significant textual additions and deletions.
“Inasmuch as some revelations have been revised by those committees appointed to arrange them for publication, significant textual additions and deletions have been noted.” One such alteration is found at Book of Commandments 4:2, which said of Smith: “He has a gift to translate the book. . . I will grant him no other gift.”
Now please note this:
But when the revelation was reprinted in 1835 in Doctrine and Covenants, it read:
“For I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished.”—5:4.can you explain this as regards this “most perfect of books?”
I would like you to explain some of these “ENIGMAS”?
I find it difficult to reconcile that about 20 Jews were said to have left Jerusalem for America in 600 B.C.E. but that in less than 30 years, they had multiplied and split into two nations!
How many children can a woman produce in a year, even if she had twins or triplets etc-why not work it out? If there were some 20 Jews and let’s say that three quarters were women - say fifteen women, who had at least twins if not triplets on average, once per year…how do you get two sprawling civilizations out of 15 women (2 Nephi 5:28) within 19 years of their arrival?
This small band supposedly built a temple “after the manner of the temple of Solomon. . ., and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine”—a formidable task, indeed! The seven-year construction of Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem occupied nearly 200,000 labourers, craftsmen, and overseers.—and yet there is nothing to show for it, no artefacts…2 Nephi 5:16; compare 1 Kings 5, 6.
Where is the archaeological evidence to be found to substantiate such a claim? If I go to the middle east and elsewhere, I see the evidence of ancient civilizations everywhere, where is your evidence?
Also,
Can you explain?
Careful readers of the Book of Mormon have puzzled over certain events that seem out of proper chronological sequence.
When were the first Christians?
For example, Acts 11:26 says: “The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.” (KJ) But Alma 46:15, purportedly describing events in 73 B.C.E., has Christians in America before Christ ever came to earth.
How do you get Christians before Christianity (ever existed 73 BC) was brought about by divine providence?
Also,
Perhaps you could explain?
The Book of Mormon presents itself more as a historical narrative than as a doctrinal treatise. The phrase “and it came to pass” occurs about 1,200 times in the current edition—about 2,000 times in the 1830 edition. Many places mentioned in the Bible still exist, yet the locations of virtually all sites named in The Book of Mormon, such as Gimgimno and Zeezrom, are unknown. Where are they?
Also,
The Mormon story tells of vast settlements across the North American continent.
Helaman 3:8 reads:
“And it came to pass that they did multiply and spread. . . to cover the face of the whole earth.” According to Mormon 1:7, the land “had become covered with buildings.” Many people wonder where the remains of these sprawling civilizations are. Where are the Nephite artefacts, such as gold coins, swords, shields, or breastplates?—Alma 11:4; 43:18-20. The civilizations of the bible are there to be seen, but not so much as one in the book of Mormon.
Also,
You need to think about this:
Considering such questions, members of the Mormon faith do well to reflect seriously on the words of Mormon Rex E. Lee:
“The authenticity of Mormonism stands or falls with the book from which the Church derives its nickname.” A faith based upon solid Scriptural knowledge, rather than just on an emotional prayer experience, presents a challenge to sincere Mormons—as well as to all claiming to be Christians.”
Is it possible for you as an LDS member to correct what I have written? Perhaps, I have misunderstood you! I will stop the discussion here, as it will be updated later.
letusreason
Friday, 7 September 2007
Tuesday, 4 September 2007
Wonderful Counsellor Isaiah 9:6
Wonderful Counsellor Isaiah 9:6
Taken from: ‘thechristianexpositor.org’ web site.
‘The Christian Expositor is a non-denominational, orthodox evangelical Christian group…’
The site says this:
“Jehovah's Witnesses WHO IS Jesus Christ? Is He God?”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not ask who is Jesus Christ. And, is He God?
Jehovah’s Witnesses know who Jesus Christ is [he is the son of Jehovah] and do not subscribe to the Trinitarian view that he is God [Jehovah]. The Lord Jehovah is the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The site shows its bias and a lack of insight in understanding what texts like, Judg 13:18-22; Isa 9:6; 11:1-3; Gen 18; and Gen 32 and others texts really convey.
I have used the text from Judges 13:18-22 ASV that the site authors preferred to use.
It must be remembered that the site’s authors are ‘Evangelicals’ and avowed Trinitarians and therefore their site information is biased and leans toward their theology, i.e. Trinitarian theology.
You may be surprised at the findings when using various bible translations instead of just one or two that would seem to lean to a particular interpretational belief/theology.
Other than the NWT, all other translations are the works of Trinitarian translator(s).
It is my intention to show how the authors of this site have twisted and corrupted the scriptures and their meaning and misinforms unsuspecting readers. The site’s authors wish you to believe that Jesus is Jehovah (God) of the Hebrew Scriptures [O/T].
I have taken various [free online] bibles including the NWT to show how
the site leaves out is the fact that The God of Israel [Jehovah] is never called an ‘angel’ or referred to as an angel! Also, the site leaves out other translations and how they translate Isaiah 9:6
--------------------------------------------------------
I will start with the:
Isaiah 9: 6 NWT (Please, see (*))
For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called *Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
*Wonderful Counsellor can also read: Lit.
“Wonder (Miracle) of a Counsellor,” or “Wonder, Counsellor,”
M.; LXX, “The Angel of Grand Counsel”;
Sy, “Wonder and Counsellor.”
According to the Hebrew the titles are:
*Pele-yo’ez-el-gibbor-avi-‘ad-sar-shalom. (See above: M, LXX and Sy)
Five translation examples were chosen for this example. Please note the difference with these five Trinitarian bibles
Isaiah 9:6 five translations.
Isaiah 9:6 (English Standard Version)
6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called*Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Footnotes:
Isaiah 9:6 Or is upon
Isaiah 9:6 Or is called
New International Version (NIV)
6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called*Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Footnotes: Isaiah 9:6 or Wonderful, Counsellor
Isaiah 9:6 (Amplified Bible)
6For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder, and His name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father [of Eternity], Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6 (New King James Version)
6 For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6 (Darby Translation)
6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.
Now notice two of these Trinitarian translations and where they put the comma when it comes to ‘Wonderful’ and ‘Counsellor’.
Isaiah 9:6 (Darby Translation): “…Wonderful, Counsellor,”
Isaiah 9:6 (New King James Version)): “…Wonderful, Counsellor,”
Now look at these other Trinitarian translations and notice where the translators put the comma (,).
Isaiah 9:6 (English Standard Version): “…Wonderful Counsellor,”
New International Version (NIV): “…Wonderful Counsellor,”
Isaiah 9:6 (Amplified Bible): “…Wonderful Counsellor,”
Why the sudden abrupt change (in punctuation) from “Wonderful Counsellor” to “Wonderful, Counsellor”?
Certain Trinitarian translations differ one from another and are not consistent with each other. The reason is Trinitarian bias. Altering the flow of “Wonderful Counsellor” only and not the others (titles) is forcing the text to mean what the authors want it to mean!
Why is it that “Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Are not changed also to “Mighty, God; Everlasting, Father…”? (bias)
Altering the text in this way alters the meaning of Isaiah 9:6 and yet it will be noticed that the Trinitarian translators of the English Standard Version, New International Version, and the Amplified Bible show that they understand what is implicit in the text, that these are titles to be bestowed on the Messiah and therefore render the text, “Wonderful Counsellor” denoting a title like the rest of Isaiah 9:6. Please see (*) above.
Notice in the following texts what would happen to this ‘twig/stump’ of Jesse when he turned up, and eventually, what the fulfilment of the prophesy would mean, and its outcome upon the foretold Messiah, and the effect he would have on the people.
Isaiah 11:1-3 (New Living Translation)
A Branch from David’s Line
1 Out of the stump of David’s family will grow a shoot— yes, a new Branch bearing fruit from the old root. 2 And the Spirit of the Lord will rest on him— the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. 3 He will delight in obeying the Lord…
Isaiah 11:1-3 (NWT)
And there must go forth a twig out of the stump of Jes´se; and out of his roots a sprout will be fruitful. 2 And upon him the spirit of Jehovah must settle down, the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and of mightiness, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah; 3 and there will be enjoyment by him in the fear of Jehovah.
Zech.6:13 NWT
And he himself will build the temple of Jehovah, and he, for his part, will carry [the] dignity; and he must sit down and rule on his throne, and he must become a priest upon his throne, and the very counsel of peace will prove to be between both of them.
Zechariah 6:13 (New Living Translation)
Yes, he will build the Temple of the Lord. Then he will receive royal honour and will rule as king from his throne. He will also serve as priest from his throne, and there will be perfect harmony between his two roles.’
Footnotes:
Zechariah 6:13 Or There will be a priest by his throne.
What are the above translations telling us about this ‘twig/stump’ of Jesse?
The Lord here means Jehovah.
the Spirit of the Lord will rest on him,
the Spirit of wisdom and understanding,
the Spirit of counsel and might,
the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord
He will delight in obeying the Lord
When the spirit of Jehovah rested on the Messiah what would this mean?
The Christ of Jehovah would have, “wisdom, understanding, counsel and might, knowledge and he would delight in obeying the (Lord) Jehovah…
The effect of all of this on the people that the Messiah would have, as a result of a fulfilling of the prophesy of Isaiah 9:6
Matthew 7:28 (Amplified Bible)
When Jesus had finished these sayings [the Sermon on the Mount], the crowds were astonished and overwhelmed with bewildered wonder at His teaching,
Mathew 7.28 NWT
Now when Jesus finished these sayings, the effect was that the crowds were astounded at his way of teaching.
Matthew 12:42 (Darby Translation)
A queen of [the] south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, more than Solomon [is] here.
Mathew 12:42 NWT
The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it; because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, but, look! something more than Solomon is here.
Notice the result this had on the people:
“The crowds were astonished and overwhelmed with bewilderment, wonder at His teaching”
“the effect was that the crowds were astounded at his way of teaching.”
Also, Jesus performed many wonderful miracles when he was on earth as Jehovah’s “twig/stump”. Please see (*) above.
What the site authors try to do!
What the Trinitarian authors of the site try and do, is to take the title “Wonderful Counsellor” (*) and proceed to disjoint it in such a way that that part of the title “Wonderful” is being used to refer to Jehovah. These are the lengths Trinitarians will go to, to prove their interpretation, belief, theology.
The Trinitarian translations above do not even agree with each other in regard to Isaiah 9:6. Is it “Wonderful Counsellor” or “Wonderful, Counsellor”?
A basic definition of the word “wonder” is to be amazed, be in awe, astonishment etc. (*)
The context shows that the prophesy of Isaiah 9:6 wasn’t using “Wonderful Counsellor” or “Wonderful, Counsellor”, or even “Wonderful” on its own (no matter which way the words are put) to identify Jesus with Jehovah.
No, the context shows that, because Jehovah’s spirit would be with Jesus the true Messiah (rest on him), people would stand in amazement, in awe, incredulous, speechless, bewildered, in wonder at this “Wonderful” miracle worker having more wisdom than even Solomon.
The people would have seen nothing or heard nothing of the like…The people would be astounded, amazed, dumbfounded, astonished… at his way of teaching…
*Wonderful Counsellor can also read: Lit.
“Wonder (Miracle) of a Counsellor,” or “Wonder, Counsellor,”
M.; LXX, “The Angel of Grand Counsel”;
Sy, “Wonder and Counsellor.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, this Evangelical site tries (yet again) to use scripture to prove that Jesus is Jehovah.
So, if I understand this correctly (see below), the Trinitarian Evangelical site authors are saying that, Jesus is Jehovah and therefore God, but not God the Father! So, we have God and God the Father and the authors use the texts below to prove this.
These are the words taken directly of the above Evangelical web site.
Judges 13:18-22. ASV
“Nine times in this passage He is referred to as the Angel of 'Jehovah': in verses 3, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21. But then, in verse 22, He is said to be God Himself. Note also in verse 18 that this Angel's name is "Wonderful."
The web site authors are correct in the above verses in that these verses refer to Jehovah’s angel 9 times. But when it comes to v22 the same authors show a blatant case of twisting the Hebrew text to make it fit Trinitarian theology. The authors cite the case of Manoah and his wife in Judges 13:18-22 emphasising v22.
First they say that it is Jehovah’s angel “the angel of Jehovah”, then turn and say that this same angel, who is Jehovah’s angel, is God, Jehovah Himself, because of what is said on the basis of the above verses up to v21.
Let’s look at vss 21 and 22 of Judges 13.
Judges 13:21, 22 RSV (Catholic Edition)
“…then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the Lord”
“And Manoah said to his wife, “we shall surely die, for we have seen God”.
Was the angel actually God? Was he Jehovah? Did Manoah and his wife actually see God with their own eyes? The text just says “angel of Jehovah” and adds nothing else to it.
Turn your bible to Genesis 16 a familiar account about the troubles in Abraham’s household, between Sarai (Sarah) and Hagar. V7 lets us know that Jehovah’s angel finds Hagar in the wilderness.
Note that it just says “Jehovah’s angel” it doesn’t specify any particular angel and supplies no name, yet we have Hagar saying,
Genesis 16:13 (American Standard Version)
“And she called the name of Jehovah that spake unto her, Thou art a God that seeth: for she said, Have I even here looked after him that seeth me?” (ASV)
Gen 32: 24-30 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Jacob Wrestles
24Then Jacob was left alone and a man wrestled with him until daybreak.
25When he saw that he had not prevailed against him, he touched the socket of his thigh; so the socket of Jacob's thigh was dislocated while he wrestled with him.
26Then he said, "Let me go, for the dawn is breaking." But he said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me."
27So he said to him, "What is your name?" And he said, "Jacob."
28 He said, "Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel; for you have striven with God and with men and have prevailed."
29Then Jacob asked him and said, "Please tell me your name." But he said, "Why is it that you ask my name?" And he blessed him there.
30So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, “I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved."
Footnotes:
Genesis 32:28 I.e. he who strives with God; or God strives
Genesis 32:30 I.e. the face of God
The angel asks Jacob the “man”, “What is your name?” Jacob replies!
Jacob asks the angel for his name, the angel does not reply!
In v28 the angel said that Jacob had contended with God. In v30 Jacob said that he had seen God face to face and lived.
In Genesis 18 the same can be said for angels (three men) meeting Abraham and one of them was Jehovah. In v22 of Gen18 it says the “men” went off but Jehovah stayed with Abraham. Now, in Gen 19 it says “the two angels arrived at Sodom…” Where was the other, the third one? Well, he stayed with Abraham as in Gen 18:22; this one was called Jehovah.
So, Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Jacob and Manoah and his wife actually saw angels and then said as a result of their experience, that they had seen God (Jehovah) face to face, as it were! So, did they actually see Jehovah God Face to face?
Do angels at times speak in the place of God (the Father), as if they were God themselves?
Ex 3:2 Exodus 3:2 (New American Standard Bible)
The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed.
Ex 23:20 NWT
“Here I am sending an angel ahead of you to keep you on the road and to bring you into the place that I have prepared.”
Other examples of angels speaking, as if they were the true God.
The angel who delivered God’s message to Moses at the burning thornbush was also a spokesman. He is identified as Jehovah’s angel at Exodus 3:2, where we are told:
“Jehovah’s angel appeared to him in a flame of fire in the midst of a thornbush.” Verse 4 says: “When Jehovah saw that he turned aside to inspect, God at once called to him out of the midst of the thornbush.” In verse 6, this angelic spokesman for God said: “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” So when speaking with this personal representative of God, Moses spoke as if he were speaking to Jehovah himself.—Exodus 4:10.
In the 6th chapter of Judges, we find another example of a man speaking to God through an angelic representative. Verse 11 identifies the message bearer as “Jehovah’s angel.” There we read:
“Later Jehovah’s angel came and sat under the big tree that was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while Gideon his son was beating out wheat in the winepress so as to get it quickly out of the sight of Midian.” This messenger, “Jehovah’s angel,” is thereafter represented as if he were Jehovah [God the Father] himself. In verses 14 and 15, we read: “Upon that Jehovah faced [Gideon] and said:
‘Go in this power of yours, and you will certainly save Israel out of Midian’s palm. Do I not send you?’ In turn he said to him: ‘Excuse me, Jehovah. With what shall I save Israel?’”
So the materialized angel seen by Gideon and with whom he spoke is represented in the Biblical account as if he were God himself.
In verse 22, Gideon says:
“I have seen Jehovah’s angel face to face!” The angel spoke precisely what God told him to speak. Therefore, Gideon spoke with God through this angelic spokesman.
Now it is possible to understand why Abraham addressed the materialized angelic spokesman of God as if he were talking to Jehovah God himself.
Since this angel spoke precisely what God wanted to have said to Abraham and was there personally representing Him, the Biblical record could say that “Jehovah appeared to him.”—Genesis 18:1.
Remember that an angelic spokesman for God could transmit His messages just as precisely as a mobile phone or a radio can transmit our words to another person today in the 21st Century. Hence, it can be understood how Abraham, Moses, Manoah, and others could speak with a materialized angel as if they were talking to God.
While such individuals were able to see these angels and the glory of Jehovah reflected by them, they were not able to see God. Therefore, this in no way contradicts the apostle John’s statement: “No man has seen God at any time.” (John 1:18) In contradiction to the Evangelical web site. What these men saw were angelic representatives and not God himself.
So, all the individuals above saw God face to face. What they saw in reality was an angelic representative of Jehovah God, acting as if they were Jehovah and not actually the person of God, Jehovah.
If the Queen of England, who might weigh 9 stones and is 80 years old and is 5 foot 5 inches and wears a size 6 shoe, sends out one of her ambassadors to another country, and he is 6 foot 4 inches, weighs 170 pounds, is 40 years of age and wears a size 10 shoe, he is her legal representative (Shaliach). He carries all the power and authority invested in him to carry out the Royal will. It is as if he were Elizabeth. He would be a reflection of the will of the Royal Sovereign, an ambassador, stepping in, substituting for the Queen of England.
Eleazar is the first mentioned Shaliach (intermediary). Put it another way, a man's shaliach was as the man himself. This means that the shaliach had the power of attorney and was authorized to act in the place (stead) of the person he or she represented.
Eleazar acted as if he was Abraham, in the execution of that ones will i.e. a wife for his son Isaac. He was Abraham’s ambassador, substituting for him.
The apostles were substitutes for Christ Eph 6:18-20; 2Cor 5:20
2 Cor 5:20 NWT
”We are therefore ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making entreaty through us. As substitutes for Christ we beg: “Become reconciled to God.”
2 Corinthians 5:20 (Amplified Bible)
”So we are Christ's ambassadors, God making His appeal as it were through us. We [as Christ's personal representatives] beg you for His sake to lay hold of the divine favour [now offered you] and be reconciled to God.”
The apostles stood in the place of Christ (in his stead), and being “ambassadors substituting for Christ” places serious restrictions upon God’s representatives who are new creatures in union with Christ.
What are these restrictions?
Those similar to the restrictions that rest upon ambassadors of the political nations.
Not only today, but also in Bible times, ambassadors had no right to meddle in the politics of foreign nations to which they were sent. (Luke 19:12-15, 27) They might make an appeal to those foreign governments, or even a protest, but they must strictly keep out of the politics of such alien nations.
They must be loyal to their own home government and jealously take care of its interests when they are dealing with foreign governments. If they do not do this, they can be refused recognition or their credentials be turned down and their presence in the land can be denied.
So, the angels who visited Abraham, Manoah etc were Jehovah’s ambassadors, legal representatives, (Shaliach) not meddling in any affair except doing the will of their Sovereign Jehovah.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the above web site.
In the earlier study of Isaiah 9:6, it was pointed out that pele, the Hebrew word for "Wonderful," is only used of God, never of man, or an angel. The very fact that He claims this name for Himself shows that He is not a common angel, but God Himself. And, of course, the title belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ:
Judges 13:17, 18 NWT
Then Ma•no´ah said to Jehovah’s angel: “What is your name, that when your word comes true we shall certainly do you honour?” 18 However, Jehovah’s angel said to him: “Just why should you ask about my name, when it is a wonderful one?”
Judges 13:18 (New American Standard Bible)
But the angel of the LORD said to him, "Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?"
Footnotes:
Judges 13:18 I.e. incomprehensible
Judges 13:18 (New Living Translation)
“Why do you ask my name?” the angel of the LORD replied. “It is too wonderful for you to understand.”
Judges 13:18 (King James Version)
And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?
Judges 13:18 (New International Version - UK)
1 He replied, why do you ask my name? It is beyond understanding.
Judges 13:18 Jerusalem Bible
And the Angel of Yahweh replied, ‘why ask my name? It is a mystery.’
Judges 13:18 The Bible an American Translation. By E. J. Goodspeed
“Why do you ask for my name,” the angel of the Lord said to him, “seeing that it is ineffable.”
Judges 13:18 The bible in living English. By S T Byington
But the angel of Jehovah said to him “what do you ask my name for, when it is mysterious.”
If you look at the above texts on Judges 13:18 you will notice (and in a footnote) a very big difference in wording, giving the said text a different contextual understanding and not as the authors are implying.
The translators of the above various translations are making explicit what is implicit and their findings are simply saying:
‘A wonderful one, wonderful (footnote- incomprehensible), It is too wonderful for you to understand, it is secret, It is beyond understanding, It is a mystery, seeing that it is ineffable, it is mysterious.’
The above does not have the same connotation that the site authors will like you to believe, but the above shows the very opposite. You decide for yourself.
Where does he ‘claim this name for himself?’
The above uses the word “Wonderful”.
The context of the various translations below belie the claim made by the site authors, that “Wonderful” in this context has a special meaning, that it applies to Jesus and that because of this, Jesus is Jehovah and therefore Jesus and Jehovah are one and the same, but not God the Father. So, in this context we have God and God the Father. This belief is not a Bible teaching, but extra biblical. It has its roots outside the bible. Its origins lie in the metaphysics of Greek and Oriental philosophy.
This Evangelical site turns everything upside down. It makes an angel Jehovah, Jesus is “Wonderful” therefore must be Jehovah, Jesus is Jehovah because Jehovah appeared as an angel, therefore, Jesus must be an angel!
Sorry, but that’s how it reads to me!
Yes, this is what the authors site says (below):
“Isa 9:6: For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
So who had all of these Old Testament figures been speaking with? Manoah said unto his wife, 'We shall surely die, because 'we have seen God.'
They recognised that they had seen and spoken to God - to 'Jehovah'.
But it could not have been God the Father because we read the words of Jesus:
John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
So none of these appearances of the 'angel' shown to be 'Jehovah' could be God the Father, for He has never been seen by man at any time (John 1:18).”
But, do not forget the principle of the SHALIACH!
letusreason
Taken from: ‘thechristianexpositor.org’ web site.
‘The Christian Expositor is a non-denominational, orthodox evangelical Christian group…’
The site says this:
“Jehovah's Witnesses WHO IS Jesus Christ? Is He God?”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, Jehovah’s Witnesses do not ask who is Jesus Christ. And, is He God?
Jehovah’s Witnesses know who Jesus Christ is [he is the son of Jehovah] and do not subscribe to the Trinitarian view that he is God [Jehovah]. The Lord Jehovah is the Father of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The site shows its bias and a lack of insight in understanding what texts like, Judg 13:18-22; Isa 9:6; 11:1-3; Gen 18; and Gen 32 and others texts really convey.
I have used the text from Judges 13:18-22 ASV that the site authors preferred to use.
It must be remembered that the site’s authors are ‘Evangelicals’ and avowed Trinitarians and therefore their site information is biased and leans toward their theology, i.e. Trinitarian theology.
You may be surprised at the findings when using various bible translations instead of just one or two that would seem to lean to a particular interpretational belief/theology.
Other than the NWT, all other translations are the works of Trinitarian translator(s).
It is my intention to show how the authors of this site have twisted and corrupted the scriptures and their meaning and misinforms unsuspecting readers. The site’s authors wish you to believe that Jesus is Jehovah (God) of the Hebrew Scriptures [O/T].
I have taken various [free online] bibles including the NWT to show how
the site leaves out is the fact that The God of Israel [Jehovah] is never called an ‘angel’ or referred to as an angel! Also, the site leaves out other translations and how they translate Isaiah 9:6
--------------------------------------------------------
I will start with the:
Isaiah 9: 6 NWT (Please, see (*))
For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called *Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.
*Wonderful Counsellor can also read: Lit.
“Wonder (Miracle) of a Counsellor,” or “Wonder, Counsellor,”
M.; LXX, “The Angel of Grand Counsel”;
Sy, “Wonder and Counsellor.”
According to the Hebrew the titles are:
*Pele-yo’ez-el-gibbor-avi-‘ad-sar-shalom. (See above: M, LXX and Sy)
Five translation examples were chosen for this example. Please note the difference with these five Trinitarian bibles
Isaiah 9:6 five translations.
Isaiah 9:6 (English Standard Version)
6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called*Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Footnotes:
Isaiah 9:6 Or is upon
Isaiah 9:6 Or is called
New International Version (NIV)
6 For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called*Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Footnotes: Isaiah 9:6 or Wonderful, Counsellor
Isaiah 9:6 (Amplified Bible)
6For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder, and His name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father [of Eternity], Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6 (New King James Version)
6 For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6 (Darby Translation)
6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name is called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.
Now notice two of these Trinitarian translations and where they put the comma when it comes to ‘Wonderful’ and ‘Counsellor’.
Isaiah 9:6 (Darby Translation): “…Wonderful, Counsellor,”
Isaiah 9:6 (New King James Version)): “…Wonderful, Counsellor,”
Now look at these other Trinitarian translations and notice where the translators put the comma (,).
Isaiah 9:6 (English Standard Version): “…Wonderful Counsellor,”
New International Version (NIV): “…Wonderful Counsellor,”
Isaiah 9:6 (Amplified Bible): “…Wonderful Counsellor,”
Why the sudden abrupt change (in punctuation) from “Wonderful Counsellor” to “Wonderful, Counsellor”?
Certain Trinitarian translations differ one from another and are not consistent with each other. The reason is Trinitarian bias. Altering the flow of “Wonderful Counsellor” only and not the others (titles) is forcing the text to mean what the authors want it to mean!
Why is it that “Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Are not changed also to “Mighty, God; Everlasting, Father…”? (bias)
Altering the text in this way alters the meaning of Isaiah 9:6 and yet it will be noticed that the Trinitarian translators of the English Standard Version, New International Version, and the Amplified Bible show that they understand what is implicit in the text, that these are titles to be bestowed on the Messiah and therefore render the text, “Wonderful Counsellor” denoting a title like the rest of Isaiah 9:6. Please see (*) above.
Notice in the following texts what would happen to this ‘twig/stump’ of Jesse when he turned up, and eventually, what the fulfilment of the prophesy would mean, and its outcome upon the foretold Messiah, and the effect he would have on the people.
Isaiah 11:1-3 (New Living Translation)
A Branch from David’s Line
1 Out of the stump of David’s family will grow a shoot— yes, a new Branch bearing fruit from the old root. 2 And the Spirit of the Lord will rest on him— the Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. 3 He will delight in obeying the Lord…
Isaiah 11:1-3 (NWT)
And there must go forth a twig out of the stump of Jes´se; and out of his roots a sprout will be fruitful. 2 And upon him the spirit of Jehovah must settle down, the spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the spirit of counsel and of mightiness, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of Jehovah; 3 and there will be enjoyment by him in the fear of Jehovah.
Zech.6:13 NWT
And he himself will build the temple of Jehovah, and he, for his part, will carry [the] dignity; and he must sit down and rule on his throne, and he must become a priest upon his throne, and the very counsel of peace will prove to be between both of them.
Zechariah 6:13 (New Living Translation)
Yes, he will build the Temple of the Lord. Then he will receive royal honour and will rule as king from his throne. He will also serve as priest from his throne, and there will be perfect harmony between his two roles.’
Footnotes:
Zechariah 6:13 Or There will be a priest by his throne.
What are the above translations telling us about this ‘twig/stump’ of Jesse?
The Lord here means Jehovah.
the Spirit of the Lord will rest on him,
the Spirit of wisdom and understanding,
the Spirit of counsel and might,
the Spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord
He will delight in obeying the Lord
When the spirit of Jehovah rested on the Messiah what would this mean?
The Christ of Jehovah would have, “wisdom, understanding, counsel and might, knowledge and he would delight in obeying the (Lord) Jehovah…
The effect of all of this on the people that the Messiah would have, as a result of a fulfilling of the prophesy of Isaiah 9:6
Matthew 7:28 (Amplified Bible)
When Jesus had finished these sayings [the Sermon on the Mount], the crowds were astonished and overwhelmed with bewildered wonder at His teaching,
Mathew 7.28 NWT
Now when Jesus finished these sayings, the effect was that the crowds were astounded at his way of teaching.
Matthew 12:42 (Darby Translation)
A queen of [the] south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it; for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and behold, more than Solomon [is] here.
Mathew 12:42 NWT
The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it; because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, but, look! something more than Solomon is here.
Notice the result this had on the people:
“The crowds were astonished and overwhelmed with bewilderment, wonder at His teaching”
“the effect was that the crowds were astounded at his way of teaching.”
Also, Jesus performed many wonderful miracles when he was on earth as Jehovah’s “twig/stump”. Please see (*) above.
What the site authors try to do!
What the Trinitarian authors of the site try and do, is to take the title “Wonderful Counsellor” (*) and proceed to disjoint it in such a way that that part of the title “Wonderful” is being used to refer to Jehovah. These are the lengths Trinitarians will go to, to prove their interpretation, belief, theology.
The Trinitarian translations above do not even agree with each other in regard to Isaiah 9:6. Is it “Wonderful Counsellor” or “Wonderful, Counsellor”?
A basic definition of the word “wonder” is to be amazed, be in awe, astonishment etc. (*)
The context shows that the prophesy of Isaiah 9:6 wasn’t using “Wonderful Counsellor” or “Wonderful, Counsellor”, or even “Wonderful” on its own (no matter which way the words are put) to identify Jesus with Jehovah.
No, the context shows that, because Jehovah’s spirit would be with Jesus the true Messiah (rest on him), people would stand in amazement, in awe, incredulous, speechless, bewildered, in wonder at this “Wonderful” miracle worker having more wisdom than even Solomon.
The people would have seen nothing or heard nothing of the like…The people would be astounded, amazed, dumbfounded, astonished… at his way of teaching…
*Wonderful Counsellor can also read: Lit.
“Wonder (Miracle) of a Counsellor,” or “Wonder, Counsellor,”
M.; LXX, “The Angel of Grand Counsel”;
Sy, “Wonder and Counsellor.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next, this Evangelical site tries (yet again) to use scripture to prove that Jesus is Jehovah.
So, if I understand this correctly (see below), the Trinitarian Evangelical site authors are saying that, Jesus is Jehovah and therefore God, but not God the Father! So, we have God and God the Father and the authors use the texts below to prove this.
These are the words taken directly of the above Evangelical web site.
Judges 13:18-22. ASV
“Nine times in this passage He is referred to as the Angel of 'Jehovah': in verses 3, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21. But then, in verse 22, He is said to be God Himself. Note also in verse 18 that this Angel's name is "Wonderful."
The web site authors are correct in the above verses in that these verses refer to Jehovah’s angel 9 times. But when it comes to v22 the same authors show a blatant case of twisting the Hebrew text to make it fit Trinitarian theology. The authors cite the case of Manoah and his wife in Judges 13:18-22 emphasising v22.
First they say that it is Jehovah’s angel “the angel of Jehovah”, then turn and say that this same angel, who is Jehovah’s angel, is God, Jehovah Himself, because of what is said on the basis of the above verses up to v21.
Let’s look at vss 21 and 22 of Judges 13.
Judges 13:21, 22 RSV (Catholic Edition)
“…then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the Lord”
“And Manoah said to his wife, “we shall surely die, for we have seen God”.
Was the angel actually God? Was he Jehovah? Did Manoah and his wife actually see God with their own eyes? The text just says “angel of Jehovah” and adds nothing else to it.
Turn your bible to Genesis 16 a familiar account about the troubles in Abraham’s household, between Sarai (Sarah) and Hagar. V7 lets us know that Jehovah’s angel finds Hagar in the wilderness.
Note that it just says “Jehovah’s angel” it doesn’t specify any particular angel and supplies no name, yet we have Hagar saying,
Genesis 16:13 (American Standard Version)
“And she called the name of Jehovah that spake unto her, Thou art a God that seeth: for she said, Have I even here looked after him that seeth me?” (ASV)
Gen 32: 24-30 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Jacob Wrestles
24Then Jacob was left alone and a man wrestled with him until daybreak.
25When he saw that he had not prevailed against him, he touched the socket of his thigh; so the socket of Jacob's thigh was dislocated while he wrestled with him.
26Then he said, "Let me go, for the dawn is breaking." But he said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me."
27So he said to him, "What is your name?" And he said, "Jacob."
28 He said, "Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel; for you have striven with God and with men and have prevailed."
29Then Jacob asked him and said, "Please tell me your name." But he said, "Why is it that you ask my name?" And he blessed him there.
30So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, “I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved."
Footnotes:
Genesis 32:28 I.e. he who strives with God; or God strives
Genesis 32:30 I.e. the face of God
The angel asks Jacob the “man”, “What is your name?” Jacob replies!
Jacob asks the angel for his name, the angel does not reply!
In v28 the angel said that Jacob had contended with God. In v30 Jacob said that he had seen God face to face and lived.
In Genesis 18 the same can be said for angels (three men) meeting Abraham and one of them was Jehovah. In v22 of Gen18 it says the “men” went off but Jehovah stayed with Abraham. Now, in Gen 19 it says “the two angels arrived at Sodom…” Where was the other, the third one? Well, he stayed with Abraham as in Gen 18:22; this one was called Jehovah.
So, Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Jacob and Manoah and his wife actually saw angels and then said as a result of their experience, that they had seen God (Jehovah) face to face, as it were! So, did they actually see Jehovah God Face to face?
Do angels at times speak in the place of God (the Father), as if they were God themselves?
Ex 3:2 Exodus 3:2 (New American Standard Bible)
The angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed.
Ex 23:20 NWT
“Here I am sending an angel ahead of you to keep you on the road and to bring you into the place that I have prepared.”
Other examples of angels speaking, as if they were the true God.
The angel who delivered God’s message to Moses at the burning thornbush was also a spokesman. He is identified as Jehovah’s angel at Exodus 3:2, where we are told:
“Jehovah’s angel appeared to him in a flame of fire in the midst of a thornbush.” Verse 4 says: “When Jehovah saw that he turned aside to inspect, God at once called to him out of the midst of the thornbush.” In verse 6, this angelic spokesman for God said: “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.” So when speaking with this personal representative of God, Moses spoke as if he were speaking to Jehovah himself.—Exodus 4:10.
In the 6th chapter of Judges, we find another example of a man speaking to God through an angelic representative. Verse 11 identifies the message bearer as “Jehovah’s angel.” There we read:
“Later Jehovah’s angel came and sat under the big tree that was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiezrite, while Gideon his son was beating out wheat in the winepress so as to get it quickly out of the sight of Midian.” This messenger, “Jehovah’s angel,” is thereafter represented as if he were Jehovah [God the Father] himself. In verses 14 and 15, we read: “Upon that Jehovah faced [Gideon] and said:
‘Go in this power of yours, and you will certainly save Israel out of Midian’s palm. Do I not send you?’ In turn he said to him: ‘Excuse me, Jehovah. With what shall I save Israel?’”
So the materialized angel seen by Gideon and with whom he spoke is represented in the Biblical account as if he were God himself.
In verse 22, Gideon says:
“I have seen Jehovah’s angel face to face!” The angel spoke precisely what God told him to speak. Therefore, Gideon spoke with God through this angelic spokesman.
Now it is possible to understand why Abraham addressed the materialized angelic spokesman of God as if he were talking to Jehovah God himself.
Since this angel spoke precisely what God wanted to have said to Abraham and was there personally representing Him, the Biblical record could say that “Jehovah appeared to him.”—Genesis 18:1.
Remember that an angelic spokesman for God could transmit His messages just as precisely as a mobile phone or a radio can transmit our words to another person today in the 21st Century. Hence, it can be understood how Abraham, Moses, Manoah, and others could speak with a materialized angel as if they were talking to God.
While such individuals were able to see these angels and the glory of Jehovah reflected by them, they were not able to see God. Therefore, this in no way contradicts the apostle John’s statement: “No man has seen God at any time.” (John 1:18) In contradiction to the Evangelical web site. What these men saw were angelic representatives and not God himself.
So, all the individuals above saw God face to face. What they saw in reality was an angelic representative of Jehovah God, acting as if they were Jehovah and not actually the person of God, Jehovah.
If the Queen of England, who might weigh 9 stones and is 80 years old and is 5 foot 5 inches and wears a size 6 shoe, sends out one of her ambassadors to another country, and he is 6 foot 4 inches, weighs 170 pounds, is 40 years of age and wears a size 10 shoe, he is her legal representative (Shaliach). He carries all the power and authority invested in him to carry out the Royal will. It is as if he were Elizabeth. He would be a reflection of the will of the Royal Sovereign, an ambassador, stepping in, substituting for the Queen of England.
Eleazar is the first mentioned Shaliach (intermediary). Put it another way, a man's shaliach was as the man himself. This means that the shaliach had the power of attorney and was authorized to act in the place (stead) of the person he or she represented.
Eleazar acted as if he was Abraham, in the execution of that ones will i.e. a wife for his son Isaac. He was Abraham’s ambassador, substituting for him.
The apostles were substitutes for Christ Eph 6:18-20; 2Cor 5:20
2 Cor 5:20 NWT
”We are therefore ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making entreaty through us. As substitutes for Christ we beg: “Become reconciled to God.”
2 Corinthians 5:20 (Amplified Bible)
”So we are Christ's ambassadors, God making His appeal as it were through us. We [as Christ's personal representatives] beg you for His sake to lay hold of the divine favour [now offered you] and be reconciled to God.”
The apostles stood in the place of Christ (in his stead), and being “ambassadors substituting for Christ” places serious restrictions upon God’s representatives who are new creatures in union with Christ.
What are these restrictions?
Those similar to the restrictions that rest upon ambassadors of the political nations.
Not only today, but also in Bible times, ambassadors had no right to meddle in the politics of foreign nations to which they were sent. (Luke 19:12-15, 27) They might make an appeal to those foreign governments, or even a protest, but they must strictly keep out of the politics of such alien nations.
They must be loyal to their own home government and jealously take care of its interests when they are dealing with foreign governments. If they do not do this, they can be refused recognition or their credentials be turned down and their presence in the land can be denied.
So, the angels who visited Abraham, Manoah etc were Jehovah’s ambassadors, legal representatives, (Shaliach) not meddling in any affair except doing the will of their Sovereign Jehovah.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the above web site.
In the earlier study of Isaiah 9:6, it was pointed out that pele, the Hebrew word for "Wonderful," is only used of God, never of man, or an angel. The very fact that He claims this name for Himself shows that He is not a common angel, but God Himself. And, of course, the title belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ:
Judges 13:17, 18 NWT
Then Ma•no´ah said to Jehovah’s angel: “What is your name, that when your word comes true we shall certainly do you honour?” 18 However, Jehovah’s angel said to him: “Just why should you ask about my name, when it is a wonderful one?”
Judges 13:18 (New American Standard Bible)
But the angel of the LORD said to him, "Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?"
Footnotes:
Judges 13:18 I.e. incomprehensible
Judges 13:18 (New Living Translation)
“Why do you ask my name?” the angel of the LORD replied. “It is too wonderful for you to understand.”
Judges 13:18 (King James Version)
And the angel of the LORD said unto him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is secret?
Judges 13:18 (New International Version - UK)
1 He replied, why do you ask my name? It is beyond understanding.
Judges 13:18 Jerusalem Bible
And the Angel of Yahweh replied, ‘why ask my name? It is a mystery.’
Judges 13:18 The Bible an American Translation. By E. J. Goodspeed
“Why do you ask for my name,” the angel of the Lord said to him, “seeing that it is ineffable.”
Judges 13:18 The bible in living English. By S T Byington
But the angel of Jehovah said to him “what do you ask my name for, when it is mysterious.”
If you look at the above texts on Judges 13:18 you will notice (and in a footnote) a very big difference in wording, giving the said text a different contextual understanding and not as the authors are implying.
The translators of the above various translations are making explicit what is implicit and their findings are simply saying:
‘A wonderful one, wonderful (footnote- incomprehensible), It is too wonderful for you to understand, it is secret, It is beyond understanding, It is a mystery, seeing that it is ineffable, it is mysterious.’
The above does not have the same connotation that the site authors will like you to believe, but the above shows the very opposite. You decide for yourself.
Where does he ‘claim this name for himself?’
The above uses the word “Wonderful”.
The context of the various translations below belie the claim made by the site authors, that “Wonderful” in this context has a special meaning, that it applies to Jesus and that because of this, Jesus is Jehovah and therefore Jesus and Jehovah are one and the same, but not God the Father. So, in this context we have God and God the Father. This belief is not a Bible teaching, but extra biblical. It has its roots outside the bible. Its origins lie in the metaphysics of Greek and Oriental philosophy.
This Evangelical site turns everything upside down. It makes an angel Jehovah, Jesus is “Wonderful” therefore must be Jehovah, Jesus is Jehovah because Jehovah appeared as an angel, therefore, Jesus must be an angel!
Sorry, but that’s how it reads to me!
Yes, this is what the authors site says (below):
“Isa 9:6: For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
So who had all of these Old Testament figures been speaking with? Manoah said unto his wife, 'We shall surely die, because 'we have seen God.'
They recognised that they had seen and spoken to God - to 'Jehovah'.
But it could not have been God the Father because we read the words of Jesus:
John 5:37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
So none of these appearances of the 'angel' shown to be 'Jehovah' could be God the Father, for He has never been seen by man at any time (John 1:18).”
But, do not forget the principle of the SHALIACH!
letusreason
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)