From an Email Sent to Me: Consider the appearances of YHWH in the OT to his saints. And consider them in context with Ex 33:20, "Thou canst see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.," and with the parallel declaration in the NT, "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him," indicate the he, who thus manifested himself, was the Lord Jesus.
Now Jacob says, "I have seen YHWH face to face, and my life is preserved" (Gen 32:30), and after his wrestling all night long in tangible conflict with the One now called a man, now the angel, now God, now the Lord of Hosts (Hosea 7:3,4). The elders saw the God of Israel. To Moses, for example, the Lord spoke face to face, as a man speaks with his friend (Ex. 33:11). Joshua conversed with the adorable captain of Jehovah's hosts (Josh 5:15). Manoah feared, saying, "We shall surely die, because we have seen God" (Jud. 13:22). Isaiah cried, "Woe is me! for I am ruined;...for my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts" (Isa. 6:5). Of the message then recorded, we are expressly told - "These things said Isaiah, when he saw his (Christ's) glory, and spoke of Him (Jn 12:41). These are only a few on many passages in which the who appears under the form of an angel or a man, is, in the immediate context, declared to be God (YHWH). The big question is, who was this being? Who is this Angel, or Sent One - the one whom the Lord calls "MY PRESENCE"? (Ex. 33:14; Num. 12:8). It is also said of this being - "Beware of Him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my Name is in him" (Ex. 23:20-21). This one could not be distinctively the Father, for no man hath seen him at any time, or can see him and live. But he who appeared is declared to be YHWH . Are we not compelled to acknowledge that he was the Divine Word, the Son, the brightness of His Father's glory, the express image of His person? (Heb 1:3ff). And let's talk briefly about Heb 1: I think that this passage gives Christ the Divine Name - the Tetragrammaton, the name which names the unique identity of the One God, the name which is exclusive to the One God in a way that the sometimes ambiguous word 'god' is not. Heb. 1:4 states that Jesus, exalted to the right hand of God, became "became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is more excellent then theirs." This can only refer to the divine name, as must "the name that is above every name," from Phip. 2. Connected with this naming of the exalted Christ by the divine name is the early Christian use of the phrase "to call on the name of the Lord", as a reference to Christian confession in baptism. The OT phrase [Ps 82:18; Isa. 12:4; Joel 2:32; Zeph. 3:9; Zech. 13:9] means to invoke God by His Name YHWH [CF. Gen. 4:26; 1 Kings 18:24-39], but the early Christian use of it applies to Jesus. It means invoking Jesus as the divine Lord who exercises the divine sovereignty and bears the divine name. Another reason that Heb. 1:8 should be rendered "Thy Throne , o God [HO THEOS IS AGAIN APPLIED TO JESUS] is forever...
Reply: The Dictionary of Deities and Demons [Van Der Toorn] says of the ANGEL OF YAHWEH, "The word ANGEL in this phrase is literally 'messenger'. The juxtaposition of the common noun 'messenger' with a following divine name in a genitive construction signifying a relationship of subordination is attested elsewhere in the ancient Near East." That is probably not what you want to hear, is it?
Others have also mentioned that the angel of Jehovah might be Jesus. Let's take a look at this. In Genesis 18 we have more than one, "And Jehovah appeared unto him by the oaks of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him." Later we have these 3 angels splitting up, 19:1 "And the two angels came to Sodom". It is not realistic to imagine Jesus as 2 or 3 people. After referencing Genesis 18 and 19, Justin explains to Trypho: "There is . . . another God and Lord SUBJECT TO THE MAKER OF ALL THINGS; who is also called an Angel, because He announces to men whatsoever the Maker of all things---above whom there is no other God---wishes to announce to them."?Chap. LVI.?God Who Appeared to Moses Is Distinguished from God the Father.
The angel that appeared to Moses was still referred to as an angel in the NT, even though HERE would have been a great opportunity to explain otherwise, "And when forty years were fulfilled, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush. And when Moses saw it, he wondered at the sight: and as he drew near to behold, there came a voice of the Lord, I am the God of thy fathers, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. Acts 7:30-32
There were other appearances of the angel of the Lord in the book of Acts (see Acts 5:19; 8:26; 10:3; 12:7, 11, 23). see also Gal. 3:19; Heb. 2:2) Compare this to visions of Jesus in the same book. As a spirit creature Christ is "the image of the invisible God" and "the exact representation of his very being", yet a partial revealment of his glory was so intensely brilliant that it blinded Saul of Tarsus, and sight returned only after a miracle of God. (Acts 9:1-18)
Interestingly, the Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible says this of Moses, "In the OT as well as the NT Moses is above all the mediator or revelation. Several times his most intimate relation with the LORD is emphasized (e.g., Exod 19:9.19; 20:18-21; 24:18; 33:11.18-23; Num 12:7,8; Deut 5:20-28; Ps 103:7; Sir 45:5; cf. John 9:29; Acts 7:38; Heb 8:5), evidently to emphasize that Moses' words and prescriptions really are the words and rules of the LORD himself. In connection with his role as a mediator of revelation, Moses is portrayed with superhuman traits (cf. also Deut 34:5; Sir 45:20. According to Exod 34:29-35 the skin of Moses' face radiated after his meeting with the Lord on Mount Sinai (Exod 34:29.30.35), i.e. his face was enveloped in a divine aura. By this nimbus Moses was legitimated as the true representative of the LORD (cf. Matt 17:2, Acts 6:15)."So there were similarities in the representational aspects of both Moses and Jesus, without either having to share nature or essence or Godhood in a consubstantial manner. And I also submit that the angel of Jehovah could have been Jesus at times, but this does not help your view since and angel is a lesser being than Jehovah himself.
But did the name Jehovah become supplanted by Jesus?
The NT writers had use of the LXX (Septuagint). Did the early LXX use the divine name?
"We know that the the Greek Bible text [the Septuagint] as far as it was written by Jews for Jews did not translate the Divine Name by Kyrios, but the Tetragrammaton written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such MSS. It was the Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by Kyrios, when the divine name written in Hebrew letters was not understood anymore". (Dr. P. Kahle, The Cairo Geniza, Oxford, 1959, p.222)When did they remove the name? In a commentary on the manuscript P Fouad 266, Professor G. D. Kilpatrick, on talking about the period between 70-135 C.E. said that 3 important changes were made in this period. The change from scroll to Codex, the Tetragrammaton was replaced by KYRIOS and abbreviations were introduced for divine names. See Etudes de Papyrologie Tome Neuvieme 1971 pp. 221,222
Why did they remove the Name? "The removal of the Tetragrammaton from the New Testament and its replacement with the surrogates KYRIOS and THEOS blurred the original distinction between the Lord God and the Lord Christ, and in many passages made it impossible which one was meant. ..Once the Tetragrammaton was removed and replaced by the surrogate 'Lord', scribes were unsure whether "lord" meant God or Christ. As time went on, these two figures were brought into even closer unity until it was often impossible to distinguish between them. Thus it may be that the removal of the Tetragrammaton contributed significantly to the later Christological and Trinitarian debates which plagued the church of the early Christian centuries." George Howard, The Name of God in the New Testament, BAR 4.1 (March 1978), 15The Trinity, the removal of the Divine Name, the conciliar decisions and the controversies surrounding it blurred the lines between Father and Son
"The strongest anti-Arians experienced their present as a sharp break with the past. It was they who demanded, in effect, that Christianity be "updated" by blurring or even obliterating the long-accepted distinction between the Father and the Son." When Jesus Became God by Richard E. Rubenstein, p.74Is this Christian or Biblical though?
A. Marmorstein in the book The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God deals extensively with the Hellenistic in the early Jews, and that is the major reason they stopped pronouncing it.
The Bible never tells us to stop using it though. In fact, just the opposite.
Ex. 3:15: "And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt
thou say unto the children of Israel, Jehovah, the God of your fathers,
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent
me unto you: this is my name forever, and this is my memorial unto all
generations."
Ps 135:13 "Thy name, O Jehovah, [endureth] for ever;
Thy memorial [name], O Jehovah, throughout all generations."
Mal 3:6 "For I, Jehovah, change not"
In fact, Jehovah jealously guarded his name."And ye shall
not profane my holy name; but I will be hallowed among the children of
Israel" Lev 22:32
We know that Jesus made mention of this name at John 5:43, 10:25, 17:6, 11, 12 and Matt 6:9
So what Name was it that Jesus had? "Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow.
So let us take a look at Hebrews 1....again. Here I will be quoting from the Anchor Bible/Hebrews 1, which also has an interesting parallel of Jesus to Moses like I mentioned above:
"Hebrews also considered Jesus a 'reflection of the glory' which means the same as being a 'stamp of his nature.' The Greek word for 'stamp' comes from the verb charassein, "to mark, engrave, or stamp." The stamp, accordingly, refers to the characteristics and distinctive form (see II Macc 4:10). Isaac was claimed to have features like those of Abraham (Gen R. 21:2; 53: 6). Thyis does not mean either that Isaac was actually identical to Abraham or that Jesus was identical to God. Both were reflections and had characteristics of their Fathers. Jesus was the son, heir, and apostle of God (3:1). As apostle or agent he was sent with the full authority of the one who sent him. A man's agent is like the man himself, not physically, but legally. He has the power of attorney for the one who sent him. That which the apostle/agent does in behalf of and has the approval and support of the one who sent him. He has the authority of an ambassador who speaks in behalf of a king in negotiating for his country (Ber. 5:5)...Just as Christians thought of Jesus as an apostle of God, so Jews thought of Moses as the 'apostle between Israel and their heavenly Father' (Sifra behuqqotai, perek 8:12; Lev 26:46). As the great apostle (magnus nuntius), Moses prayed "every hour, both day and night...to him who rules the world." (Assumption of Moses 11:17). Samaritans also thought of Moses as their apostle of God; they called him a good apostle, a righteous apostle, an apostle of God, and the apostle of the true One whom God especially chose for apostleship. As apostle he was also called "Son of the house of God," God's "man", "saviour," "prophet," "Faithful one," "crown of the righteous of the world," and "light of prophethood". As an apostle, Moses was entrusted with the mysteries and honored in the things revealed. To Moses was revealed that which preceded creation and also that which follows the day of vengeance....There are many biblical illustrations of apostolic authority: Jehu was ritually made king when Elisha sent one of the sons of the prophets to anoint him. It was not necessary for Elisha to anoint him himself for the anointing to be authoritative (II Kings 9:1-10). Paul sent a message to the Corinthians, giving them authority to deliver to Satan the man who had been living with his father's wife, becasue Paul was "with them in spirit", meaning that his legal authorization was there (1 Cor 5:1-5)."But does v.8 mean that he is the Almighty God himself?
"This is not a necessary conclusion. As the pros in v.7 means "in reference to," and it seems most likely that pros in vs. 8 should be rendered in the same way, so it is in reference to the Son that the author quoted the scripture dealing with the eternity of God's throne, upon which the Son would sit. When Solomon, who was God's Son (II Samuel 7:14), ruled over the Lord's kingdom (1Chron 29:11), he sat on the Lord's throne (al kisse Yhwh) (1 Chron 29:23; see also Enoch 51:3; 55:4; 61:8; 62:2-3, 5; 69:26-27, 29). That did not mean that Solomon was God. It means that Solomon ruled over God's kingdom when he ruled over Palestine, and he sat on God's throne when he ruled from Jerusalem. Therefore it is just as proper to speak of the eternity of God's throne with reference to the Son Jesus who was to sit on it as it was to speak of God's throne when Solomon the Son, sat on it. ....For the author(of Hebrews), the Son was the first-born, the apostle of God, the reflection of God's glory, and the stamp of his nature (1:3, 6), but he was not God himself." The Anchor Bible with Commentary by G. W. Buchanan.
By quoting Ps. 97:7, Hebrews 1:6 relates to Jesus' position under God. (Phil.2:9-11) Paul shows that the resurrected Jesus has a God over him (1:9). He is not God but "the reflection of [God's] glory and the exact representation of his very being (1:3)." God is his father (1:5) God speaks to us through his son, a Son which was appointed to his position (1:2). Jesus sits at the "right hand of Majesty (1:3). He obtained a better name/authority (1:4). God had to subject the risen Christ's enemies below his feet (1:14). In Hebrews, as is common elsewhere in the Bible, Jesus is never placed on an equal footing with the Almighty, his God Jesus is not the Almighty. Jesus had a God over him before, during and after he came to earth (Mic.5:4, Rom.15:6, Rev.1:6; 3:2,12). Rather than being equal in power, Jesus is said to be in subjection to God even at his highest. (1Cor.15:27,28, Eph. 1:17; 19-22). Mat.28:18,19 says that when Jesus returned to heaven he had to be "given" all authority (power-KJV). If Jesus were equal to God in power, why would he need to be "given" any authority? (Mt.28:18; 11:27; Jn. 5:22; 17:2; 3:35; 2 Pet.1:17) cf. (Mat.11:26-27, Dan.7:13-14, Phil.2:9). Why isn't he powerful enough to subject things to himself? (1 Cor.15:27, Eph.1:17,22) Why doesn't he have the authority to personally grant his followers special positions? (Mat.20:23.) Matt. 24:36 shows that Jesus was not equal to God in knowledge (Cf. Lk.8: 45). Even after his ascension to heaven, why did he then not know what God knows--having to receive a revelation from God? (Rev.1:1). Why did Jesus have to LEARN anything? (Heb.5:8, Jn.5:19; 8:28) Jesus did not exist from eternity but is everywhere described in temporal terms denoting a beginning of life: son, begotten, born, produced, birth, child, image and copy etc. Why did he have to be GIVEN life in himself? (Jn.5:25,26) If Jesus existed from eternity, how could he be a "BEGOTTEN God"? (Jn. 1:18) The idea of "eternal generation" is foreign to scripture and it is a contradiction of terms, an oxymoron. Before Athanasius the word "begotten" meant just that: a birth of something not in existence before. The term "Eternal generation" was invented by Athanasius who could not accept the normal meaning of biblical words when they contradicted his theology. (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers I:349)
Jesus is at the right hand of God, and thereby does not share the same substance. How could he be at the "right hand of God," if he were in fact the very substance of God? (Luke.22:69, Acts 7:55, Romans.8:34) These are facts that contradict a Trinity. The only way is to resort to a Trinity is to claim that it is “mystery” beyond human understanding. And, evidently beyond God’s ability to explain in his word.
metatron3@gmail.com
"And, evidently beyond God’s ability to explain in his word." Excellent and brilliant sentence, brother.
ReplyDeleteAhhh...someone is actually reading my blog :) Thank you
Delete