Jesus did not demand worship or seek prominence for himself. He in fact did just the opposite in directing attention to his Father to worship and resisting the attempts of others to make him king.
See the link:
http://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/did-jesus-demand-to-be-worshipped/
Friday, August 16, 2013
John 1:1 and The Sahidic Coptic
The Sahidic Coptic translators had a choice at John 1:1c as to which bound construction to use, a definite one or an indefinite one, in accordance with Sahidic syntax and grammar. If they understood the Greek text to say "the Word was God" they would have used the Coptic definite article bound with the count noun: p.noute. They did not have to use the Coptic indefinite article unless they understood the Greek to actually say "the Word was a god," i.e., ou.noute pe pSaje.
The Coptic translators rendered John 1:1c from the Greek text to say "the Word was a god" because that is exactly what they understood it to say, not because they were grammatically ignorant of Greek, or grammatically restrained by Coptic from doing otherwise.
See: www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdMV3PIEUco
Shaliah An Introduction to the Law of Agency - Raymond James Essoe (Book)
Reading with the Hebrew Mindset
A common mistake made today by Christians and others who study and read the Hebrew scriptures is a tendency to read them as if they were written in modern English. We know from the manuscripts discovered that the scriptures were written in the Hebrew language (with the New Testament written in Greek.) The Old Testament scriptures can be referred to as the Hebrew Bible, because they were written by Hebrews. When the scriptures are read by people who are not of Hebrew descent, they should constantly remind themselves that this is a Hebrew collection of writings inspired by YHWH, the one God of Israel.[1] If we read the Hebrew Bible in modern English translations as if they were written in modern English; we will sometimes read them completely wrong and develop erroneous understandings of the information presented. The key to understanding the Hebrew writings is to investigate the Hebrew language in all its forms. The titles, customs, practices, sarcasms, literature, descriptions, poetry, and language are sometimes foreign to the average reader tofay. Difficult scriptures can be understood in their proper context only if we devote some time investigating what the Hebrew writers were trying to convey to their readers.
The Principle - Shaliah
One of the many customs and practices I will be addressing in this paper is a principle which is essential to rightly understanding the Hebrew Scriptures. This principle is common knowledge to those who have thoroughly investigated the Hebrew Bible, and to the Jews. For others, this will be an introduction to the principle. However, if one approaches the Hebrew Scriptures with presuppositions or has been "told" how to interpret them beforehand, this principle will remain undiscovered. This principle is known by the Jews in the Hebrew as Shaliah, the Jewish law of agency. A common feature of the Hebrew Scriptures is the concept (some even call it the “law”) of Jewish agency. All Old Testament scholars and commentators recognize that in Jewish custom whenever a superior commissioned an agent to act on his behalf, the agent was regarded as the person himself.[2] This is well expressed in The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion: Agent (Heb.Shaliah): The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, “a person’s agent is regarded as the person himself” (Ned. 72B; Kidd, 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent.[3]
Jesus and Joseph
In two parallel passages of scripture, we find this principle being applied between Pharaoh and Joseph, and between God and Jesus. In Genesis 41:40-44, Pharaoh tells Joseph, “You shall be in charge of my palace, and all my people are to submit to your orders. Only with respect to the throne will I be greater than you. I hereby put you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his finger and put it on Joseph‟s finger. He dressed him in robes of fine linen and put a gold chain around his neck. He had him ride in a chariot as his second-in-command, and men shouted before him, “Make way!” Thus he put him in charge of the whole land of Egypt. Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I am Pharaoh, but without your word no one will lift hand or foot in Egypt.”[4] We read in 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, a similar pattern: For he [God] “has put everything under his [Jesus'] feet” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. In Ephesians 1:22 we find, And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.[5]
The parallels between the cases are obviously not identical. Pharaoh granted Joseph authority over all his land, which was the land of Egypt. Jesus was granted authority over all God’s creation. Joseph was a representation of Pharaoh and Jesus was the ultimate representation of God. In both passages, Jesus and Joseph are given positions of supreme authority. However, that authority is not above the one who gave it to them. Pharaoh tells Joseph, “Only with respect to the throne will I be greater than you.” Paul writes, “Now when it says that “everything” has been put under [Jesus], it is clear that this does not include God himself.” Pharaoh “put him (Joseph) in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” God “appointed him (Jesus) to be head over everything for the church.”[6] These are examples of agency at work where roles of authority and power are given in another’s name. As we see in these two examples, the principle of agency can be applied by men or by God.
The roles of God’s agents
The principle of agency is found throughout the scriptures. God used men, angels, and his one and only Son, our Lord Messiah Jesus, in order to accomplish his will. He used them as mouthpieces by speaking through them to deliver messages - warnings, and promises.[7] Other than speaking, they were also utilized to carry out work in His name.[8] Agents of God were used to destroy cities,[9] enemies of God,[10] to save his people,[11] and will be used again when God pours out his wrath on mankind.[12] Angels play a role in carrying out commands from God Almighty and acting on his behalf.[13] According to the definition cited above, an agent - whether a man or an angel - can be addressed as God, while not being God himself. An equivalent in our culture to the Jewish custom of agency would be one who is authorized to act with Power of Attorney, or more strongly, one who is given Enduring Power of Attorney.[14] In that case, such an agent has virtually unlimited powers to act on behalf of the one who appointed him.[15] We read this of Jesus in John 3:34, for the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit.[16]
God’s representatives
We read that God utilized angels and men to accomplish certain tasks and also read that the LORD was the one who accomplished the tasks.[17] Is this a contradiction - an error on the writer’s part? Not at all! This is perfectly in line with the principle of agency being put into effect. Any time an angel or man appears to someone and speaks on behalf of God, even if it’s in the first person, then that person is being used as an agent of God. The scriptures are absolutely clear that no one has ever seen God Himself (John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:16, 1 John 4:12).[18] The scriptures also state that God spoke to Moses face to face.[19] At first glance this can cause confusion. How can one passage say Moses spoke with God face to face and another declare that no one has seen God? The principle of agency which declares that some angels, men, and even our Lord Jesus spoke on behalf of God brings clarity to the matter. In Hebrew eyes it is perfectly natural to consider the agent as the person himself.[20] In Hebrew thought, homage given to God’s agent or representative is homage ultimately given to Godf.[21] In other words, the way one treats any servant, messenger, prophet, king, or savior of God is by extension treating God the same way.
The Angel of the Lord
While the agent of one may be considered as the person himself, it still must be understood that the operating agent is not in reality the principle being represented. Much speculation surrounds the identity about the angel of the Lord. Some suggest that the angel of the Lord is actually Jesus, as the second member of the trinity in a preexistent state. This suggestion arises from passages of scripture where this angel makes statements that only God would make. If one believes that Jesus is YHWH, the one God of Israel, then this idea of the angel of the Lord's identity as "Jesus" is a solution to various passages; because if Jesus is YHWH, then he would make statements that only YHWH could make. However, before adopting this solution, we need to step back and look into the Jewish culture for their understanding about the angel’s identity. We know from scripture that Jesus is our monotheistic Jewish Messiah who identifies YHWH as the Only True God.[22] According to the Jewish law of agency, if the one sent is regarded as the person himself;[23] then it is perfectly in line with the angel of the Lord making statements that only YHWH could make. Additionally, it makes more sense that an angel spoke on God’s behalf since man cannot stand in the presence of God in our sinful state. Some would even argue that our Lord Jesus did not even stand in God’s presence until after he accomplished his Father’s will on earth.[24] If asked who spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai and in the burning bush, the majority without any hesitation would probably reply that it was God. Who else but God can make statements such as “I am the God of your Father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob”?[25] A continued reading of Exodus Chapter 3 verses 11-15 all begin with eitherGod said or Moses said to God. So one would ask, how can anyone else be speaking except for God himself? When we read scripture, it is important to pay attention to the narration of the text as to who is speaking at what time. In Exodus 3, before Moses speaks at the burning bush, it states who exactly is speaking from the beginning. Verse 2 states, “There theangel of the Lord appeared to him in the flames of fire from within the bush.”[26] Moses speaking to the angel representing God is ultimately speaking to God himself. Depending on what perspective the Hebrew Scriptures are read from will determine how the reader will interpret the narrative. Reading Exodus 3 with a Hebrew understanding of a Hebrew narrative will eliminate any difficulty in the matter. In Hebrew eyes it is perfectly natural to consider the agent as the person himself.[27] Stephen, the first martyr for Jesus, reaffirms this biblical truth in his speech to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. While speaking, he says, “After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai.[28] Again he says, “….He was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the bush.[29] He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us.[30]
Sodom and Gomorrah
Who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah: two angels or God? Genesis 19 begins with two angels arriving in Sodom,[31] who were recognized as men[32] sent to destroy the cities in the plain.[33] The angels tell Lot, “The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it”.[34] Lot tells his family, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the LORD is about to destroy the city!”[35] Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah-from the LORD out of the heavens. Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain.[36] The narrative ends with Abraham looking at the destruction and with the statement that God destroyed the cities of the plain.[37] Again, who destroyed the cities, God or angels? This narrative of God’s judgment is an illustration of agency at work. God ultimately is the one who destroyed the cities in the plain. The angels are the means by which God did that; for they are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.[38] Another way of illustrating this concept is to consider the matter of one who has committed murder with a firearm. The firearm is the means by which the murderer killed the victim. Or, again, perhaps the electric chair is the means by which the death penalty is executed. In this case, the firearms or electric chair are comparable to the angels of the Sodom and Gomorrah event.
Administering Punishment
In 2 Samuel, King David sins against the LORD by taking his own census. Feeling conscience-stricken, he confessed his foolishness and asked God to take away his guilt. God told David through Gad the Prophet (agency) his three options.[39]Of his three options, David chose to fall into the hands of the LORD.[40] So the Lord sent a plague on Israel from that morning until the end of the time designated, and seventy thousand of the people from Dan to Beersheba died. When the angel of the LORD stretched out his hand to destroy Jerusalem, the LORD was grieved because of the calamity and said to the angel who was afflicting the people, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.” The angel of the LORD was then at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite. When David saw the angel who was striking down the people, he said to the LORD, “I am the one who has sinned…let your hand fall upon me and my family.”[41] A more detailed account of this narrative is found in 1 Chronicles 21. Both narratives state that God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem and then told the angel to withdraw his hand. The angel of the LORD actually orders Gad to tell David to build an altar to the LORD. So David went up in obedience to the word that Gad had spoken in the name of the LORD.[42] David obeys the command coming from the mouth of Gad because he had spoken in the name of the LORD, which is equivalent to God speaking to David directly.
In Exodus 23, God commissioned an angel to prepare the way and to lead the Israelites into the land He had prepared for them. God says, “I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him. If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppose those who oppose you. My angel will go ahead of you and bring you into the land…[43] In verse 22 agency is greatly demonstrated when God says, “If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say.” This statement is no error on the writer’s part, but a clear declaration of God speaking through the angel. The angel will instruct and chastise the people on God’s behalf since God’s Name is in him; that is, God’s presence and authority are manifested in him.[44] Here the angel of the LORD bears YHWH's name: “My name is in him.”[45] This shows that in Hebrew thought, an agent may bear the name or title of his principle.[46] In this case, the angel was playing the role of God. When God says that his Name was in the angel, it meant that God's authority was invested in the angel.[47] Whatever the angel said and did was in reality what God Himself said and did.[48] In obeying the angel, the Israelites were obeying God.[49]
Moses and Aaron acting as God
Is addressing someone else as God other than YHWH idolatry? Maybe, maybe not; it depends on the context and if the one being addressed as God has been given the authority or not. The Hebrew word for “God” elohim has a wide range of possible meanings.[50] Depending on context, it can mean the Supreme Deity, or “a god” or “gods” or even “angels” or human “judges.”[51] Moses is addressed as God (elohim) in Exodus 7 before he is sent to confront Pharaoh. Moses tries to escape the task God wants him to do by complaining of a speech impediment.[52] Verse 1 states, the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh.”[53] Or, “I place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet.”[54] Moses is given the role of God along with his own prophet, his brother. Whatever Pharaoh says or does to Moses, he is saying or doing the same to God Himself.
The LORD tells Moses that Pharaoh’s heart is hard and he refuses to release his people.[55] God commissions Moses as his spokesman to give Pharaoh this warning: “The LORD, the God of the Hebrews has sent me to say to you: Let my people go, so that they may worship me in the desert. But up until now you have not listened. This is what the LORD says: By this you will know that I am the LORD: With the staff that is in my hand I will strike the water of the Nile, and it will be changed into blood.”[56] The reader must be reminded of who the speaker is here. This warning appears as if God Himself is speaking, however these words were spoken by Moses. Moses was commissioned as an agent; his task here was to speak on God’s behalf. Earlier we read that God was going to strike the Nile with the staff that is in his hand. The LORD says to Moses, “Tell Aaron, "Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt…and they will turn into blood.”[57] Moses and Aaron did just as the LORD had commanded. He (Aaron) raised his staff in the presence of Pharaoh and his officials and struck the waters of the Nile, and all the waters were changed into blood.[58] Aaron is told by Moses on multiple accounts to stretch out the staff in his hand.[59] God says He Himself will strike the waters with the staff in his own hand.[60] Yet it was Aaron's hand that actually held the rod; it was Aaron who struck the Nile.[61] Aaron was standing as God’s agent, in the very place of God Himself.[62] As agents of God, Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh.[63]
Angelic Agency
Much of the divine intervention was performed by God through angelic agency. For the Passover, God wanted the tops and sides of the doorframes of the Israelites to be marked with the blood of lambs.[64] In Exodus 12 God says, “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn. The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you.”[65] When Moses summons the elders of Israel, he tells them, “When the LORD goes through the land to strike down the Egyptians, he will see the blood on the top and sides of the doorframe and will pass over that doorway, and he will not permit the destroyer to enter your houses and strike you down.”[66] God told Moses He Himself was going to pass through Egypt at midnight. Moses understood that God Himself would not literally pass through, but rather an angel acting on God’s behalf would. It is understood that the angel known as the destroyer was regarded as God Himself. The tradition that an angelic figure served as God’s agent in the exodus and subsequent events[67] is found throughout the scriptures.
In Joshua 5, Joshua had an encounter with a superior angelic agent.[68] When Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing before him, drawn sword in hand. Joshua asked him, “Are you one of us or of our enemies?” He replied, “No, I am captain of the LORD'S host.[69] Now I have come!” Joshua threw himself face down to the ground and, prostrating himself, said to him, “What does my lord command his servant?” The captain of the LORD'S host answered, “Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy.”[70] And Joshua did so.[71] Joshua treated this highly commissioned angelic agent as God Himself. Why would Joshua prostrate himself before an angel and remove his sandals at the angel’s request? In prostrating himself, Joshua acknowledges that this is a messenger from God.[72]Angels are always nameless until the postexilic period, though this unidentified person is identified as the archangel Michael according to Jewish tradition.[73] The man identifies himself as captain of the LORD'S host, a military figure that partakes of the imagery of the LORD as a divine warrior with commanding officers of the heavenly hosts.[74] Joshua was not committing idolatry because he understood that this angel was appearing to him on God’s behalf. In Hebrew thought, homage given to God's agent or representative is homage ultimately given to God Himself.[75]
In Acts 12 we read of Peter when he was in prison: suddenly an angel of the Lord appeared and a light shone in his cell. He struck Peter on his side and woke him up and the chains fell off his wrists. Peter came to himself and said, “Now I know without a doubt that the Lord sent his angel and rescued me from Herod's clutches and from everything the Jewish people were anticipating.” He went to the house of Mary and they let him in. Peter motioned with his hand for them to be quiet and described how the Lord had brought him out of prison.[76] Who rescued Peter from his jail cell, an angel or God? The passage says both did; but we know that the LORD sent an angel to do the actual work.[77] To the Hebrew mind, it was ultimately the LORD who rescued Peter.[78]
In Daniel 3, Nebuchadnezzar is furious at Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego for not serving his gods. Nebuchadnezzar threatens the three Jewish men with a fiery furnace if they refuse to worship his gods. He asked the three, “What god will be able to rescue you from my hand?” They replied, “O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king.[79] Nebuchadnezzar orders that the furnace be hotter than usual and had Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego thrown into the furnace. Nebuchadnezzar is amazed to see a fourth person in the furnace who looks like a son of the gods (or Divine being[80]). He orders them out and they are unharmed. Then Nebuchadnezzar said, “Praise be to the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel and rescued his servants!”[81] Notice, in verse 17 the three tell Nebuchadnezzar that the God they serve will save them, but in verses 25 and 28 we read that an angel was sent to the rescue. God rescued his faithful servants through the means of an angel, so that glory may be given to God.
According to Genesis 32, Jacob wrestled with a man later identified as God. During the struggle, Jacob refuses to release the man from his grasp unless he is blessed. The man then says to Jacob, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel[82], because you have struggled with God[83] and with men and have overcome.”[84] Jacob’s mysterious adversary is surely supernatural, and most traditional Jewish commentators have taken him to be angelic.[85] This traditional understanding that Jacob wrestled with an angelic or divine being is affirmed in Hosea 12. The LORD has a charge to bring against Judah; he will punish Jacob according to his ways and repay him according to his deeds. In the womb he grasped his brother‟s heel; as a man he struggled with God. He struggled with the angel and overcame him;[86] and wept and begged for his favor.[87] Some may suggest that this event when God appeared to Jacob as a man would qualify as a theophany;[88] this is not the case according to Hosea 12:3-4.[89] So the one who is called both “a man” and “God” in Genesis is identified as an angel in Hosea.[90] The man refuses to give Jacob his name but blesses him. So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face,[91] and yet my life was spared.”[92]
The same language is exchanged in the narrative regarding Moses in Numbers 12. The LORD calls Moses, Aaron and Miriam out from the Tent of Meeting, and the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance and summoned Aaron and Miriam. The LORD said, “Listen to my words: When a prophet of the LORD is among you, I reveal myself to him in visions, I speak to him in dreams. But this is not true of my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. With him I speak face to face,[93] clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the LORD. Why then are you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”[94] There are a few factors to consider in this passage: who is speaking and is it possible to see God’s face? From the narrative, it states that the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud. This is also expressed in Exodus 13:21; By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of the cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.[95] The pillar of cloud described as the LORD is later identified as an angelic agent. Exodus 14:19-20 states, then the angel of God, who had been traveling in front of Israel's army, withdrew and went behind them. The pillar of cloud also moved from in front and stood behind them, coming between the armies of Egypt and Israel.[96] In Exodus 33, before the glory of the LORD passes over Moses, God tells him, “You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.” The LORD then hides Moses in the cleft of a rock and covers him with his hand telling him, “That I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.”[97] God makes it clear that his face must not be seen, so there has to be an explanation as to how God speaks to Moses face to face without contradicting scripture. God distinguishes Moses’ prophetic privileges from those accorded to any other prophet.[98] Moses can speak to God directly, in live dialogue rather than in dreams or visions; God is at his most anthropomorphic[99] in these verses.[100] The book of Acts tells us that an angel was on Mount Sinai speaking on God’s behalf and manifesting His glory. Even though it was an angel, Moses was still not permitted to see the angel’s face. Why the angel was manifested is such a manner meant that God's authority was invested in the angel.[101] This allowed the angel to play the role of God without actually being the one true God. In these passages of Scripture we read that God rescued Peter from prison, wrestled with Jacob, spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, and led the Israelites through the desert as the pillar of cloud.[102] Further examinations of these passages unveil the means by which God acted. IOt was through the agency of angels.[103] These are perfect examples of Jewish agency where the agent is considered as the principle.[104]
In Judges 6, Gideon was visited by the angel of the Lord who said to him, “The LORD is with you, mighty warrior.”[105]Angels or messengers of God tend to appear as adult human beings; therefore Gideon does not know that he is confronted by an angel.[106] This explains why Gideon rather than bowing down or trembling with fear inquires further. Gideon replies, “But sir, if the LORD is with us, why has all this happened to us? Now the LORD has abandoned us and put in the hand of Midian. The LORD turned to him and said, “Go in the strength you have and save Israel out of Midian's hand. Am I not sending you?” “But LORD,” Gideon asked, “How can I save Israel?” The LORD answers, “I will be with you, and you will strike down all the Medianites together. Gideon replied, “If now I have found favor in your eyes, give me a sign that it is really you speaking to me.” Gideon goes onto prepare an offering of meat and unleavened bread and places it on a rock. The angel of the LORD touches the offering with a staff and fire flared from the rock consuming the offering and the angel of the LORD disappeared. When Gideon realized it was the angel of the LORD, he exclaimed, “Ah Sovereign LORD! I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face!”[107] Gideon is not confused as to who spoke with him; He exclaimed, “I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face” (v.22).[108] We know that the angel of the LORD is the agent, and not literally God, because the Scriptures are absolutely clear that no one has ever seen God Himself (John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:16, 1 John 4:12).[109] Many scholars have failed to take this Hebrew way of looking at things into account and have literally identified the angel of the LORD with God Himself.[110]
Human Agency
All confusion is dissipated when we understand the Jewish law of agency: “a person's agent is regarded as the person himself.”[111] The key word in the definition is "regarded" as the person himself. If one were to make the claim that anybody who speaks on God’s behalf in the first person can be none other than God Himself; then scripture would leave us no choice but to conclude that Moses was God. In Deuteronomy 29 when Moses is speaking to the Israelites, he says, “You ate no bread and drank no wine or fermented drink. I did this so that you might know that I am the LORD your God.”[112] It is obvious that God Himself is not personally speaking to the people - Moses is.[113] Moses as an agent of God can speak as though he is the LORD Himself. God is speaking through His man, His appointed representative.[114]Another example of one speaking on God’s behalf in the first person is found in Zachariah 3.
The scriptures declare that Gideon was used as an agent of God. Gideon said to God, “If you will save Israel by my hand as you have promised.”[115] Scripture could not be any clearer that God saved Israel by Gideon's hand. God used Moses in the same way to carry out his vengeance on the Medianites in Numbers 31. The LORD said to Moses, “Take vengeance on the Medianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.” So Moses said to the people, “Arm some of your men to go to war against the Medianites and to carry out the LORD’s vengeance on them.[116] This passage is in unity with what the prophet Isaiah declared in Isaiah 34. The LORD is angry with all nations; his wrath is upon all armies. He will totally destroy[117] them; he will give them over to slaughter.[118] Though Isaiah was speaking of Edom in particular, he addressed the surrounding nations as well. God gave Edom over to slaughter just as He did with the Medianites.
The word agent in Scripture
The principle of agency is applied throughout scripture. The actual Greek word for agent, (ekdikos),[119] is applied only twice. It is defined as an avenger, one who inflicts punishment;[120] (1. without law, unjust; 2. exacting penalty from; a legal representative.)[121] In Romans 13:4 Paul is addressing the matter of submission to authorities and rebellion against what God has established. He writes, "for [the authority] is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent (ekdikos) of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer".[122] In 1 Thessalonians 4:6 Paul is instructing the church to live lives pleasing to God. He writes, that no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish (ekdikos) men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you.[123] In both passages the word ekdikos is used to describe an avenger or one who will inflict punishment. The passage in Romans 13:4 is clear that God will avenge through his appointed agents. The way Paul uses ekdikos in his letter to the Romans was to describe God’s representatives on earth. These representatives would avenge the wrongdoer as his agents of wrath; similar to when Moses carried out the LORD'S vengeance on the Medianites. In modern times, this may apply to military and law enforcement personnel. The judges of Israel had roles as God’s representatives on earth to administer justice. The Hebrew word elohim, depending on context, can mean the Supreme Deity, or “a god” or “gods” or even “angels” or human “judges.”[124] In Exodus 21:6 we read, if a Hebrew servant does not want to be free from his master, his master must take him before the judges (or before God). Our Lord Messiah Jesus reaffirms this truth in John 10:34 when he is accused of blasphemy, “Is it not written in your law that, I have said you are gods?” Thessalonians 4 does not clearly state that God will punish through the means of agents; however, we find in Scripture that God seems to act in that fashion. Paul states this truth in Galatians 3:19, “Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator (Moses), until the seed (Jesus) would come to whom the promise had been made (NASB).” Whether God avenges the wicked exclusively by Himself or through agents, God will restore all things and His justice will be vindicated.
Jesus our Lord Messiah, God’s Ultimate Revelation to Man
“And you are the heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, "Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.' When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways.”[125] “Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.”[126] “For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the spirit without limit. The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands.”[127]“For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”[128]“For as the Father has life in Himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself, and he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.”[129]Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son.[130] Jesus our Lord Messiah, who is the Son of God, was given all authority in heaven and earth.[131] This authority included forgiving sins[132] and speaking the words of the only true God, the Father.[133] Jesus did, of course, claim to function for God as his agent.[134] His words are the words of God, his acts are the acts of God; and the Father has conferred on him the right to forgive sins, judge the world, and even raise the dead.[135] He is not YHWH, but His supremely elevated representative; Jesus’ equality of function with his Father does not mean that Jesus is God.[136] The significance of all this is that the principle of agency has huge ramifications for our understanding of who Jesus is and what his purpose and claims were.[137] Jesus claimed to represent God like no one else before him, to be the unique spokesman for God his Father and to speak the ultimate words of God: he who hears the Son hears the words of God Himself.[138] The opening verses in Hebrews identify the principle of agency as God’s way of revealing Himself to mankind throughout our existence. In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son.[139]
So what has God done exclusively on His own and not through the means of agency? The original creation: in the beginning God created the heavens and earth.[140] If God created the world through the means of an agent, it would be declared in scripture. The scriptures make it clear that God did not create the heavens and the earth through the means of agents. He asked Job, Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation… while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?[141] This passage clearly states that the angels were not laying the earth’s foundations, rather they were celebrating. The prophet Isaiah declared the same message, This is what God the Lord says- he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it.[142] I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.[143] Jesus, who speaks the words of God, also affirms this biblical truth. When speaking on divorce, he tells the Pharisees, that at the beginning the Creator "made them male and female."[144] Jesus refers to his Father as the creator and does not claim credit for creation. Paul writes, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live.[145]
Knowing the One True God
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the Only True God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.[146]According to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord, in him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence.[147] For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.[148]Our heavenly Father is awesome, He chose to repair the relationship that mankind chose to break. He loves us in our rebellion, anger, and fallen state. God desires to have a relationship with those who turn their back on Him, reject Him, and even doubt His very existence. Scriptures tell us that God, from the beginning, puts his plan of redemption into affect with the first messianic prophecy in Genesis 3:15. Why does He want us to know Him, the only true God by revealing Himself through prophets, scripture, His Son, and by His spirit? Who are we that God should care and want us to reign on the earth with His Son our King? There are not enough words to express my gratitude for our Father, who gave up His Son for our sakes. I find it rather interesting when people speak of how horrible their suffering is or what they have gone through. No doubt people do suffer. God told Abraham to sacrifice his son for Him, but before a drop of blood was shed he was interrupted to hear that he would not have to follow through. Our heavenly Father did just the opposite; He followed through. Our heavenly Father suffered more than we could ever know by watching his innocent Son suffer a criminal’s death. There was no other substitute. Our Lord, our King, and our Messiah Jesus, was led like a lamb to his slaughter and our Father allowed it, for us. For you, for me, and for anyone who will call on the name of His Son. Knowing the one true God as a child of His through the blood of His Son is so overwhelming and nothing can measure the depth of His love. I look forward to when our Heavenly Father will no longer dwell in unapproachable light, but will dwell with us on earth and we will reign with His Son. Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.[149]
A common mistake made today by Christians and others who study and read the Hebrew scriptures is a tendency to read them as if they were written in modern English. We know from the manuscripts discovered that the scriptures were written in the Hebrew language (with the New Testament written in Greek.) The Old Testament scriptures can be referred to as the Hebrew Bible, because they were written by Hebrews. When the scriptures are read by people who are not of Hebrew descent, they should constantly remind themselves that this is a Hebrew collection of writings inspired by YHWH, the one God of Israel.[1] If we read the Hebrew Bible in modern English translations as if they were written in modern English; we will sometimes read them completely wrong and develop erroneous understandings of the information presented. The key to understanding the Hebrew writings is to investigate the Hebrew language in all its forms. The titles, customs, practices, sarcasms, literature, descriptions, poetry, and language are sometimes foreign to the average reader tofay. Difficult scriptures can be understood in their proper context only if we devote some time investigating what the Hebrew writers were trying to convey to their readers.
The Principle - Shaliah
One of the many customs and practices I will be addressing in this paper is a principle which is essential to rightly understanding the Hebrew Scriptures. This principle is common knowledge to those who have thoroughly investigated the Hebrew Bible, and to the Jews. For others, this will be an introduction to the principle. However, if one approaches the Hebrew Scriptures with presuppositions or has been "told" how to interpret them beforehand, this principle will remain undiscovered. This principle is known by the Jews in the Hebrew as Shaliah, the Jewish law of agency. A common feature of the Hebrew Scriptures is the concept (some even call it the “law”) of Jewish agency. All Old Testament scholars and commentators recognize that in Jewish custom whenever a superior commissioned an agent to act on his behalf, the agent was regarded as the person himself.[2] This is well expressed in The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion: Agent (Heb.Shaliah): The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, “a person’s agent is regarded as the person himself” (Ned. 72B; Kidd, 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent.[3]
Jesus and Joseph
In two parallel passages of scripture, we find this principle being applied between Pharaoh and Joseph, and between God and Jesus. In Genesis 41:40-44, Pharaoh tells Joseph, “You shall be in charge of my palace, and all my people are to submit to your orders. Only with respect to the throne will I be greater than you. I hereby put you in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” Then Pharaoh took his signet ring from his finger and put it on Joseph‟s finger. He dressed him in robes of fine linen and put a gold chain around his neck. He had him ride in a chariot as his second-in-command, and men shouted before him, “Make way!” Thus he put him in charge of the whole land of Egypt. Then Pharaoh said to Joseph, “I am Pharaoh, but without your word no one will lift hand or foot in Egypt.”[4] We read in 1 Corinthians 15:27-28, a similar pattern: For he [God] “has put everything under his [Jesus'] feet” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. In Ephesians 1:22 we find, And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church,which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.[5]
The parallels between the cases are obviously not identical. Pharaoh granted Joseph authority over all his land, which was the land of Egypt. Jesus was granted authority over all God’s creation. Joseph was a representation of Pharaoh and Jesus was the ultimate representation of God. In both passages, Jesus and Joseph are given positions of supreme authority. However, that authority is not above the one who gave it to them. Pharaoh tells Joseph, “Only with respect to the throne will I be greater than you.” Paul writes, “Now when it says that “everything” has been put under [Jesus], it is clear that this does not include God himself.” Pharaoh “put him (Joseph) in charge of the whole land of Egypt.” God “appointed him (Jesus) to be head over everything for the church.”[6] These are examples of agency at work where roles of authority and power are given in another’s name. As we see in these two examples, the principle of agency can be applied by men or by God.
The roles of God’s agents
The principle of agency is found throughout the scriptures. God used men, angels, and his one and only Son, our Lord Messiah Jesus, in order to accomplish his will. He used them as mouthpieces by speaking through them to deliver messages - warnings, and promises.[7] Other than speaking, they were also utilized to carry out work in His name.[8] Agents of God were used to destroy cities,[9] enemies of God,[10] to save his people,[11] and will be used again when God pours out his wrath on mankind.[12] Angels play a role in carrying out commands from God Almighty and acting on his behalf.[13] According to the definition cited above, an agent - whether a man or an angel - can be addressed as God, while not being God himself. An equivalent in our culture to the Jewish custom of agency would be one who is authorized to act with Power of Attorney, or more strongly, one who is given Enduring Power of Attorney.[14] In that case, such an agent has virtually unlimited powers to act on behalf of the one who appointed him.[15] We read this of Jesus in John 3:34, for the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit.[16]
God’s representatives
We read that God utilized angels and men to accomplish certain tasks and also read that the LORD was the one who accomplished the tasks.[17] Is this a contradiction - an error on the writer’s part? Not at all! This is perfectly in line with the principle of agency being put into effect. Any time an angel or man appears to someone and speaks on behalf of God, even if it’s in the first person, then that person is being used as an agent of God. The scriptures are absolutely clear that no one has ever seen God Himself (John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:16, 1 John 4:12).[18] The scriptures also state that God spoke to Moses face to face.[19] At first glance this can cause confusion. How can one passage say Moses spoke with God face to face and another declare that no one has seen God? The principle of agency which declares that some angels, men, and even our Lord Jesus spoke on behalf of God brings clarity to the matter. In Hebrew eyes it is perfectly natural to consider the agent as the person himself.[20] In Hebrew thought, homage given to God’s agent or representative is homage ultimately given to Godf.[21] In other words, the way one treats any servant, messenger, prophet, king, or savior of God is by extension treating God the same way.
The Angel of the Lord
While the agent of one may be considered as the person himself, it still must be understood that the operating agent is not in reality the principle being represented. Much speculation surrounds the identity about the angel of the Lord. Some suggest that the angel of the Lord is actually Jesus, as the second member of the trinity in a preexistent state. This suggestion arises from passages of scripture where this angel makes statements that only God would make. If one believes that Jesus is YHWH, the one God of Israel, then this idea of the angel of the Lord's identity as "Jesus" is a solution to various passages; because if Jesus is YHWH, then he would make statements that only YHWH could make. However, before adopting this solution, we need to step back and look into the Jewish culture for their understanding about the angel’s identity. We know from scripture that Jesus is our monotheistic Jewish Messiah who identifies YHWH as the Only True God.[22] According to the Jewish law of agency, if the one sent is regarded as the person himself;[23] then it is perfectly in line with the angel of the Lord making statements that only YHWH could make. Additionally, it makes more sense that an angel spoke on God’s behalf since man cannot stand in the presence of God in our sinful state. Some would even argue that our Lord Jesus did not even stand in God’s presence until after he accomplished his Father’s will on earth.[24] If asked who spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai and in the burning bush, the majority without any hesitation would probably reply that it was God. Who else but God can make statements such as “I am the God of your Father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob”?[25] A continued reading of Exodus Chapter 3 verses 11-15 all begin with eitherGod said or Moses said to God. So one would ask, how can anyone else be speaking except for God himself? When we read scripture, it is important to pay attention to the narration of the text as to who is speaking at what time. In Exodus 3, before Moses speaks at the burning bush, it states who exactly is speaking from the beginning. Verse 2 states, “There theangel of the Lord appeared to him in the flames of fire from within the bush.”[26] Moses speaking to the angel representing God is ultimately speaking to God himself. Depending on what perspective the Hebrew Scriptures are read from will determine how the reader will interpret the narrative. Reading Exodus 3 with a Hebrew understanding of a Hebrew narrative will eliminate any difficulty in the matter. In Hebrew eyes it is perfectly natural to consider the agent as the person himself.[27] Stephen, the first martyr for Jesus, reaffirms this biblical truth in his speech to the Sanhedrin in Acts 7. While speaking, he says, “After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to Moses in the flames of a burning bush in the desert near Mount Sinai.[28] Again he says, “….He was sent to be their ruler and deliverer by God himself, through the angel who appeared to him in the bush.[29] He was in the assembly in the desert, with the angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; and he received living words to pass on to us.[30]
Sodom and Gomorrah
Who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah: two angels or God? Genesis 19 begins with two angels arriving in Sodom,[31] who were recognized as men[32] sent to destroy the cities in the plain.[33] The angels tell Lot, “The outcry to the LORD against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it”.[34] Lot tells his family, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the LORD is about to destroy the city!”[35] Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah-from the LORD out of the heavens. Thus he overthrew those cities and the entire plain.[36] The narrative ends with Abraham looking at the destruction and with the statement that God destroyed the cities of the plain.[37] Again, who destroyed the cities, God or angels? This narrative of God’s judgment is an illustration of agency at work. God ultimately is the one who destroyed the cities in the plain. The angels are the means by which God did that; for they are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.[38] Another way of illustrating this concept is to consider the matter of one who has committed murder with a firearm. The firearm is the means by which the murderer killed the victim. Or, again, perhaps the electric chair is the means by which the death penalty is executed. In this case, the firearms or electric chair are comparable to the angels of the Sodom and Gomorrah event.
Administering Punishment
In 2 Samuel, King David sins against the LORD by taking his own census. Feeling conscience-stricken, he confessed his foolishness and asked God to take away his guilt. God told David through Gad the Prophet (agency) his three options.[39]Of his three options, David chose to fall into the hands of the LORD.[40] So the Lord sent a plague on Israel from that morning until the end of the time designated, and seventy thousand of the people from Dan to Beersheba died. When the angel of the LORD stretched out his hand to destroy Jerusalem, the LORD was grieved because of the calamity and said to the angel who was afflicting the people, “Enough! Withdraw your hand.” The angel of the LORD was then at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite. When David saw the angel who was striking down the people, he said to the LORD, “I am the one who has sinned…let your hand fall upon me and my family.”[41] A more detailed account of this narrative is found in 1 Chronicles 21. Both narratives state that God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem and then told the angel to withdraw his hand. The angel of the LORD actually orders Gad to tell David to build an altar to the LORD. So David went up in obedience to the word that Gad had spoken in the name of the LORD.[42] David obeys the command coming from the mouth of Gad because he had spoken in the name of the LORD, which is equivalent to God speaking to David directly.
In Exodus 23, God commissioned an angel to prepare the way and to lead the Israelites into the land He had prepared for them. God says, “I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him. If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppose those who oppose you. My angel will go ahead of you and bring you into the land…[43] In verse 22 agency is greatly demonstrated when God says, “If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say.” This statement is no error on the writer’s part, but a clear declaration of God speaking through the angel. The angel will instruct and chastise the people on God’s behalf since God’s Name is in him; that is, God’s presence and authority are manifested in him.[44] Here the angel of the LORD bears YHWH's name: “My name is in him.”[45] This shows that in Hebrew thought, an agent may bear the name or title of his principle.[46] In this case, the angel was playing the role of God. When God says that his Name was in the angel, it meant that God's authority was invested in the angel.[47] Whatever the angel said and did was in reality what God Himself said and did.[48] In obeying the angel, the Israelites were obeying God.[49]
Moses and Aaron acting as God
Is addressing someone else as God other than YHWH idolatry? Maybe, maybe not; it depends on the context and if the one being addressed as God has been given the authority or not. The Hebrew word for “God” elohim has a wide range of possible meanings.[50] Depending on context, it can mean the Supreme Deity, or “a god” or “gods” or even “angels” or human “judges.”[51] Moses is addressed as God (elohim) in Exodus 7 before he is sent to confront Pharaoh. Moses tries to escape the task God wants him to do by complaining of a speech impediment.[52] Verse 1 states, the LORD said to Moses, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh.”[53] Or, “I place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet.”[54] Moses is given the role of God along with his own prophet, his brother. Whatever Pharaoh says or does to Moses, he is saying or doing the same to God Himself.
The LORD tells Moses that Pharaoh’s heart is hard and he refuses to release his people.[55] God commissions Moses as his spokesman to give Pharaoh this warning: “The LORD, the God of the Hebrews has sent me to say to you: Let my people go, so that they may worship me in the desert. But up until now you have not listened. This is what the LORD says: By this you will know that I am the LORD: With the staff that is in my hand I will strike the water of the Nile, and it will be changed into blood.”[56] The reader must be reminded of who the speaker is here. This warning appears as if God Himself is speaking, however these words were spoken by Moses. Moses was commissioned as an agent; his task here was to speak on God’s behalf. Earlier we read that God was going to strike the Nile with the staff that is in his hand. The LORD says to Moses, “Tell Aaron, "Take your staff and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt…and they will turn into blood.”[57] Moses and Aaron did just as the LORD had commanded. He (Aaron) raised his staff in the presence of Pharaoh and his officials and struck the waters of the Nile, and all the waters were changed into blood.[58] Aaron is told by Moses on multiple accounts to stretch out the staff in his hand.[59] God says He Himself will strike the waters with the staff in his own hand.[60] Yet it was Aaron's hand that actually held the rod; it was Aaron who struck the Nile.[61] Aaron was standing as God’s agent, in the very place of God Himself.[62] As agents of God, Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh.[63]
Angelic Agency
Much of the divine intervention was performed by God through angelic agency. For the Passover, God wanted the tops and sides of the doorframes of the Israelites to be marked with the blood of lambs.[64] In Exodus 12 God says, “On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn. The blood will be a sign for you on the houses where you are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you.”[65] When Moses summons the elders of Israel, he tells them, “When the LORD goes through the land to strike down the Egyptians, he will see the blood on the top and sides of the doorframe and will pass over that doorway, and he will not permit the destroyer to enter your houses and strike you down.”[66] God told Moses He Himself was going to pass through Egypt at midnight. Moses understood that God Himself would not literally pass through, but rather an angel acting on God’s behalf would. It is understood that the angel known as the destroyer was regarded as God Himself. The tradition that an angelic figure served as God’s agent in the exodus and subsequent events[67] is found throughout the scriptures.
In Joshua 5, Joshua had an encounter with a superior angelic agent.[68] When Joshua was near Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing before him, drawn sword in hand. Joshua asked him, “Are you one of us or of our enemies?” He replied, “No, I am captain of the LORD'S host.[69] Now I have come!” Joshua threw himself face down to the ground and, prostrating himself, said to him, “What does my lord command his servant?” The captain of the LORD'S host answered, “Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy.”[70] And Joshua did so.[71] Joshua treated this highly commissioned angelic agent as God Himself. Why would Joshua prostrate himself before an angel and remove his sandals at the angel’s request? In prostrating himself, Joshua acknowledges that this is a messenger from God.[72]Angels are always nameless until the postexilic period, though this unidentified person is identified as the archangel Michael according to Jewish tradition.[73] The man identifies himself as captain of the LORD'S host, a military figure that partakes of the imagery of the LORD as a divine warrior with commanding officers of the heavenly hosts.[74] Joshua was not committing idolatry because he understood that this angel was appearing to him on God’s behalf. In Hebrew thought, homage given to God's agent or representative is homage ultimately given to God Himself.[75]
In Acts 12 we read of Peter when he was in prison: suddenly an angel of the Lord appeared and a light shone in his cell. He struck Peter on his side and woke him up and the chains fell off his wrists. Peter came to himself and said, “Now I know without a doubt that the Lord sent his angel and rescued me from Herod's clutches and from everything the Jewish people were anticipating.” He went to the house of Mary and they let him in. Peter motioned with his hand for them to be quiet and described how the Lord had brought him out of prison.[76] Who rescued Peter from his jail cell, an angel or God? The passage says both did; but we know that the LORD sent an angel to do the actual work.[77] To the Hebrew mind, it was ultimately the LORD who rescued Peter.[78]
In Daniel 3, Nebuchadnezzar is furious at Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego for not serving his gods. Nebuchadnezzar threatens the three Jewish men with a fiery furnace if they refuse to worship his gods. He asked the three, “What god will be able to rescue you from my hand?” They replied, “O Nebuchadnezzar, we do not need to defend ourselves before you in this matter. If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to save us from it, and he will rescue us from your hand, O king.[79] Nebuchadnezzar orders that the furnace be hotter than usual and had Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego thrown into the furnace. Nebuchadnezzar is amazed to see a fourth person in the furnace who looks like a son of the gods (or Divine being[80]). He orders them out and they are unharmed. Then Nebuchadnezzar said, “Praise be to the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel and rescued his servants!”[81] Notice, in verse 17 the three tell Nebuchadnezzar that the God they serve will save them, but in verses 25 and 28 we read that an angel was sent to the rescue. God rescued his faithful servants through the means of an angel, so that glory may be given to God.
According to Genesis 32, Jacob wrestled with a man later identified as God. During the struggle, Jacob refuses to release the man from his grasp unless he is blessed. The man then says to Jacob, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel[82], because you have struggled with God[83] and with men and have overcome.”[84] Jacob’s mysterious adversary is surely supernatural, and most traditional Jewish commentators have taken him to be angelic.[85] This traditional understanding that Jacob wrestled with an angelic or divine being is affirmed in Hosea 12. The LORD has a charge to bring against Judah; he will punish Jacob according to his ways and repay him according to his deeds. In the womb he grasped his brother‟s heel; as a man he struggled with God. He struggled with the angel and overcame him;[86] and wept and begged for his favor.[87] Some may suggest that this event when God appeared to Jacob as a man would qualify as a theophany;[88] this is not the case according to Hosea 12:3-4.[89] So the one who is called both “a man” and “God” in Genesis is identified as an angel in Hosea.[90] The man refuses to give Jacob his name but blesses him. So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face,[91] and yet my life was spared.”[92]
The same language is exchanged in the narrative regarding Moses in Numbers 12. The LORD calls Moses, Aaron and Miriam out from the Tent of Meeting, and the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud; he stood at the entrance and summoned Aaron and Miriam. The LORD said, “Listen to my words: When a prophet of the LORD is among you, I reveal myself to him in visions, I speak to him in dreams. But this is not true of my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. With him I speak face to face,[93] clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the LORD. Why then are you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?”[94] There are a few factors to consider in this passage: who is speaking and is it possible to see God’s face? From the narrative, it states that the LORD came down in a pillar of cloud. This is also expressed in Exodus 13:21; By day the LORD went ahead of them in a pillar of the cloud to guide them on their way and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, so that they could travel by day or night.[95] The pillar of cloud described as the LORD is later identified as an angelic agent. Exodus 14:19-20 states, then the angel of God, who had been traveling in front of Israel's army, withdrew and went behind them. The pillar of cloud also moved from in front and stood behind them, coming between the armies of Egypt and Israel.[96] In Exodus 33, before the glory of the LORD passes over Moses, God tells him, “You cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.” The LORD then hides Moses in the cleft of a rock and covers him with his hand telling him, “That I will remove my hand and you will see my back; but my face must not be seen.”[97] God makes it clear that his face must not be seen, so there has to be an explanation as to how God speaks to Moses face to face without contradicting scripture. God distinguishes Moses’ prophetic privileges from those accorded to any other prophet.[98] Moses can speak to God directly, in live dialogue rather than in dreams or visions; God is at his most anthropomorphic[99] in these verses.[100] The book of Acts tells us that an angel was on Mount Sinai speaking on God’s behalf and manifesting His glory. Even though it was an angel, Moses was still not permitted to see the angel’s face. Why the angel was manifested is such a manner meant that God's authority was invested in the angel.[101] This allowed the angel to play the role of God without actually being the one true God. In these passages of Scripture we read that God rescued Peter from prison, wrestled with Jacob, spoke to Moses on Mount Sinai, and led the Israelites through the desert as the pillar of cloud.[102] Further examinations of these passages unveil the means by which God acted. IOt was through the agency of angels.[103] These are perfect examples of Jewish agency where the agent is considered as the principle.[104]
In Judges 6, Gideon was visited by the angel of the Lord who said to him, “The LORD is with you, mighty warrior.”[105]Angels or messengers of God tend to appear as adult human beings; therefore Gideon does not know that he is confronted by an angel.[106] This explains why Gideon rather than bowing down or trembling with fear inquires further. Gideon replies, “But sir, if the LORD is with us, why has all this happened to us? Now the LORD has abandoned us and put in the hand of Midian. The LORD turned to him and said, “Go in the strength you have and save Israel out of Midian's hand. Am I not sending you?” “But LORD,” Gideon asked, “How can I save Israel?” The LORD answers, “I will be with you, and you will strike down all the Medianites together. Gideon replied, “If now I have found favor in your eyes, give me a sign that it is really you speaking to me.” Gideon goes onto prepare an offering of meat and unleavened bread and places it on a rock. The angel of the LORD touches the offering with a staff and fire flared from the rock consuming the offering and the angel of the LORD disappeared. When Gideon realized it was the angel of the LORD, he exclaimed, “Ah Sovereign LORD! I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face!”[107] Gideon is not confused as to who spoke with him; He exclaimed, “I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face” (v.22).[108] We know that the angel of the LORD is the agent, and not literally God, because the Scriptures are absolutely clear that no one has ever seen God Himself (John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:16, 1 John 4:12).[109] Many scholars have failed to take this Hebrew way of looking at things into account and have literally identified the angel of the LORD with God Himself.[110]
Human Agency
All confusion is dissipated when we understand the Jewish law of agency: “a person's agent is regarded as the person himself.”[111] The key word in the definition is "regarded" as the person himself. If one were to make the claim that anybody who speaks on God’s behalf in the first person can be none other than God Himself; then scripture would leave us no choice but to conclude that Moses was God. In Deuteronomy 29 when Moses is speaking to the Israelites, he says, “You ate no bread and drank no wine or fermented drink. I did this so that you might know that I am the LORD your God.”[112] It is obvious that God Himself is not personally speaking to the people - Moses is.[113] Moses as an agent of God can speak as though he is the LORD Himself. God is speaking through His man, His appointed representative.[114]Another example of one speaking on God’s behalf in the first person is found in Zachariah 3.
The scriptures declare that Gideon was used as an agent of God. Gideon said to God, “If you will save Israel by my hand as you have promised.”[115] Scripture could not be any clearer that God saved Israel by Gideon's hand. God used Moses in the same way to carry out his vengeance on the Medianites in Numbers 31. The LORD said to Moses, “Take vengeance on the Medianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.” So Moses said to the people, “Arm some of your men to go to war against the Medianites and to carry out the LORD’s vengeance on them.[116] This passage is in unity with what the prophet Isaiah declared in Isaiah 34. The LORD is angry with all nations; his wrath is upon all armies. He will totally destroy[117] them; he will give them over to slaughter.[118] Though Isaiah was speaking of Edom in particular, he addressed the surrounding nations as well. God gave Edom over to slaughter just as He did with the Medianites.
The word agent in Scripture
The principle of agency is applied throughout scripture. The actual Greek word for agent, (ekdikos),[119] is applied only twice. It is defined as an avenger, one who inflicts punishment;[120] (1. without law, unjust; 2. exacting penalty from; a legal representative.)[121] In Romans 13:4 Paul is addressing the matter of submission to authorities and rebellion against what God has established. He writes, "for [the authority] is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent (ekdikos) of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer".[122] In 1 Thessalonians 4:6 Paul is instructing the church to live lives pleasing to God. He writes, that no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish (ekdikos) men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you.[123] In both passages the word ekdikos is used to describe an avenger or one who will inflict punishment. The passage in Romans 13:4 is clear that God will avenge through his appointed agents. The way Paul uses ekdikos in his letter to the Romans was to describe God’s representatives on earth. These representatives would avenge the wrongdoer as his agents of wrath; similar to when Moses carried out the LORD'S vengeance on the Medianites. In modern times, this may apply to military and law enforcement personnel. The judges of Israel had roles as God’s representatives on earth to administer justice. The Hebrew word elohim, depending on context, can mean the Supreme Deity, or “a god” or “gods” or even “angels” or human “judges.”[124] In Exodus 21:6 we read, if a Hebrew servant does not want to be free from his master, his master must take him before the judges (or before God). Our Lord Messiah Jesus reaffirms this truth in John 10:34 when he is accused of blasphemy, “Is it not written in your law that, I have said you are gods?” Thessalonians 4 does not clearly state that God will punish through the means of agents; however, we find in Scripture that God seems to act in that fashion. Paul states this truth in Galatians 3:19, “Why the Law then? It was added because of transgressions, having been ordained through angels by the agency of a mediator (Moses), until the seed (Jesus) would come to whom the promise had been made (NASB).” Whether God avenges the wicked exclusively by Himself or through agents, God will restore all things and His justice will be vindicated.
Jesus our Lord Messiah, God’s Ultimate Revelation to Man
“And you are the heirs of the prophets and of the covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, "Through your offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.' When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of you from your wicked ways.”[125] “Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know.”[126] “For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the spirit without limit. The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands.”[127]“For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”[128]“For as the Father has life in Himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself, and he has given him authority to judge because he is the Son of Man.”[129]Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son.[130] Jesus our Lord Messiah, who is the Son of God, was given all authority in heaven and earth.[131] This authority included forgiving sins[132] and speaking the words of the only true God, the Father.[133] Jesus did, of course, claim to function for God as his agent.[134] His words are the words of God, his acts are the acts of God; and the Father has conferred on him the right to forgive sins, judge the world, and even raise the dead.[135] He is not YHWH, but His supremely elevated representative; Jesus’ equality of function with his Father does not mean that Jesus is God.[136] The significance of all this is that the principle of agency has huge ramifications for our understanding of who Jesus is and what his purpose and claims were.[137] Jesus claimed to represent God like no one else before him, to be the unique spokesman for God his Father and to speak the ultimate words of God: he who hears the Son hears the words of God Himself.[138] The opening verses in Hebrews identify the principle of agency as God’s way of revealing Himself to mankind throughout our existence. In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son.[139]
So what has God done exclusively on His own and not through the means of agency? The original creation: in the beginning God created the heavens and earth.[140] If God created the world through the means of an agent, it would be declared in scripture. The scriptures make it clear that God did not create the heavens and the earth through the means of agents. He asked Job, Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation… while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?[141] This passage clearly states that the angels were not laying the earth’s foundations, rather they were celebrating. The prophet Isaiah declared the same message, This is what God the Lord says- he who created the heavens and stretched them out, who spread out the earth and all that comes out of it.[142] I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.[143] Jesus, who speaks the words of God, also affirms this biblical truth. When speaking on divorce, he tells the Pharisees, that at the beginning the Creator "made them male and female."[144] Jesus refers to his Father as the creator and does not claim credit for creation. Paul writes, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live.[145]
Knowing the One True God
Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the Only True God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.[146]According to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord, in him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence.[147] For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.[148]Our heavenly Father is awesome, He chose to repair the relationship that mankind chose to break. He loves us in our rebellion, anger, and fallen state. God desires to have a relationship with those who turn their back on Him, reject Him, and even doubt His very existence. Scriptures tell us that God, from the beginning, puts his plan of redemption into affect with the first messianic prophecy in Genesis 3:15. Why does He want us to know Him, the only true God by revealing Himself through prophets, scripture, His Son, and by His spirit? Who are we that God should care and want us to reign on the earth with His Son our King? There are not enough words to express my gratitude for our Father, who gave up His Son for our sakes. I find it rather interesting when people speak of how horrible their suffering is or what they have gone through. No doubt people do suffer. God told Abraham to sacrifice his son for Him, but before a drop of blood was shed he was interrupted to hear that he would not have to follow through. Our heavenly Father did just the opposite; He followed through. Our heavenly Father suffered more than we could ever know by watching his innocent Son suffer a criminal’s death. There was no other substitute. Our Lord, our King, and our Messiah Jesus, was led like a lamb to his slaughter and our Father allowed it, for us. For you, for me, and for anyone who will call on the name of His Son. Knowing the one true God as a child of His through the blood of His Son is so overwhelming and nothing can measure the depth of His love. I look forward to when our Heavenly Father will no longer dwell in unapproachable light, but will dwell with us on earth and we will reign with His Son. Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen.[149]
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
"The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Angels"
In the Bible the term "god" may represent one of three entities. It could describe (1) the Almighty God, (2) a false god, or (3) a person/being that has had power and authority given or allowed to them by the Almighty God. There are only two categories that are worshipped: The Almighty God and the false idol gods of the nations. Since only one can be the True God and be worshipped as such, all other gods that are worshipped are false gods. Notice that they are worshipped as gods, but because they are not the True God, they are false gods.
As promised earlier we now will return to the Jewish thought about angels/gods. This can best be illustrated by the use of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Dead Sea Scrolls are one of the most important manuscript finds of the century. They have completely changed the scholarly view of ancient Jewish belief and Bible interpretation. They will also help us better understand how Biblical monotheism is better and more accurate than the strict monotheism of today.
The reason for consulting the Dead Sea Scrolls is simple. The community that prepared and preserved them is the Qumran community. These formed a religious group known as the Essenes. The Essenes were one of the most influential theological groups of their time. They were just as, if not more, influential as the sects of the Pharisees and the Saducees that you read about in the Gospel accounts, and because they were so influential to Jewish beliefs and traditions and due to the age of the community, it is only wise to see how they viewed angels.[4]
In one fragment labeled 4Q403 I i, 30-46 we read of the Song of the holocaust of the Seventh Sabbath on the sixteenth of the month."[5] In this fragment we read of how the angels are called the "high among all the gods of knowledge" and "the holy ones of the 'gods' sanctify the King of glory," and the "Princes of the praises of all the 'gods', praise the God of majestic praises" (Vermes 225). The writer of this exhalation exhorts them to "celebrate all the celebrating gods the King of majesty, for all the gods of knowledge celebrate his glory and all the spirits of righteousness celebrate his truth" (ibid.). They are also called "divine spirits" but the strongest proof we have for believing this author is talking about angels is by what he writes next.
Praise him, divine spirits, praising for ever and ever the firmament of the highest heavens, all...and its wall, all its structure, its shape. The spirits of the holy of holies, the living 'gods', the spirits of eternal holiness above all the holy ones...The divine spirits surround the dwelling of the King of truth and righteousness; all its walls (Vermes 226).[6]
We can see that the author viewed angels as "gods." To him, there was nothing in his very strict Jewish belief that angels could not be called "gods" and yet compromise his monotheism. There is more in these fragments that can help us understand monotheistic Jewish thought concerning angels. One fragment called 4Q405 19ABCD offers a great deal of help in this matter.
The figures of the 'gods' shall praise him, the most holy spirits...of glory; the floor of the marvelous innermost chambers, the spirits of the eternal gods, all...figures of the innermost chambers of the King, the spiritual works of the marvelous firmament are purified with salt, spirits of knowledge, truth and righteousness in holy of holies, forms of the living 'gods,' forms of the illuminating spirits. All their works of art are marvelously linked, many-coloured spirits, artistic figures of the 'gods,' engraved all around their glorious bricks of splendour and majesty. All their works of art are living 'gods,' and their artistic figures are holy angels. From beneath the marvelous inner most chambers comes a sound of quiet silence: the 'gods' bless...(Vermes 228).
The author here describes the Most Holy chamber of the Temple. It was in this chamber that the Ark of the Covenant was kept. This is where Jehovah dwelled (symbolically). Everything in the Most Holy was made of the finest gold. The Bible tells us that the Temple was ornamented with pictures of angels (1 Kings 6:27-32). Therefore, this description of the "gods" ministering to the Almighty fits perfectly with the Bible. The curtain that separated the Holy from the Most Holy even has pictures of angels ("gods") woven into it (2 Chron. 3:14).
In one fragment the author seems to be writing about the angels stationed before God in heaven. This seems to be the best interpretation when you compare the first line (and the rest of the fragment) to what was written in Job 1:6 and 2:1. In the fragment we read:
The 'gods' praise him when they take up their station, and all the spirits of the clear firmament rejoice in his glory...when the gods of knowledge enter by the doors of glory, and when the holy angels depart the realm, the entrance doors and the gates of exit proclaim the glory of the King...the fear of the King of 'gods' is awe-inspiring to all the 'gods,' and they undertake all his commissions by virtue of his true order (Vermes 229).
This is not just the thought of one author, because in what is called The War Rule[7] we read that "the host of warring 'gods' gird themselves for the Day of Revenge" (1QMXV, Vermes 121). We also find in the fragment titled by Vermes as The Song of Michael and the Just (4Q491 fr. II, Ma) an incomplete sentence that says that there is "a throne of strength in the congregation of 'gods' so that not a single king of old shall sit on it, neither shall their noble men...(Vermes 126). The one called Michael is also held as saying "I am reckoned with the 'gods' and my dwelling place is in the congregation of holiness" and "for I am reckoned with the 'gods,' and my glory is with the sons of the King" (Vermes 126).
As we can see from the numerous Dead Sea Scrolls quotes, the ancient Jews really had no problem with calling angels "gods." They recognized that angels were not to be worshipped, that they received their power and authority from Almighty God himself, and it is he that bestowed this title upon them. It cannot be claimed that the Jews were not monotheistic, for, they were the epitome of a monotheistic religion. They loathed any person or nation that worshipped more than one god. They did, however, understand the difference between worshipping something and giving something the respect it deserves. They worshipped God Almighty, the Only True God. They rejected idols (most of the time) and others who claimed to be gods and wanted worship as false gods. Yet at the same time they recognized that angels represented God. They had the authority from God to act as God in his place. They, therefore, rightly recognized them as "gods." A title that gave them the honor and respect they commanded and deserved, but they were also careful not to give worship to them. They knew that worship belonged only to Jehovah. Trinitarians are therefore wrong by claiming that angels could not be "gods."
See: www.deadseascrolls.org
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Stafford's "ANI HU and the LXX of Isaiah" (Book)
This page refutes those who believe that John's use of 'EGW EIMI' by Jesus is to identify him as Jehovah who uses similiar words to identify himself in Isaiah. It used to be 'fashionable' by Trinitarians to link Jesus's words at John 8:58 to Exodus 3:14LXX. Few scholars now do that hence the attempted link with some texts in Isaiah.Where elipses are encountered at the beginning of the text discussed, Stafford quotes them in Hebrew, Greek and then English. Numbers in brackets refer to the footnotes.
'ANI HU and the LXX of Isaiah
Both Brown and Harner argue that the Old Testament, particularly the book of Isaiah, is the most likely source of influence for the use of ego eimi in the Fourth Gospel. Brown asserts that "Jesus is presented as speaking in the same manner in which Yahweh speaks in Deutero-Isaiah."(117) Harner agrees, saying: "Second Isaiah supplied John with a solenm expression that was eminently suited for expressing the unity of the Son and the Father and that had at the same time a strong connotation of monotheism which also served to express the Christian belief that God continued to be one "' (118)
We will now consider the passages from Isaiah that are considered to have had the greatest influence on the Johannine use of ego eimi. ......
Isaiah 41:4
..... The use of 'ani hu ("I [am] he") in this verse appears simply to refer back to the One who had just previously been mentioned, [tetragram](YHWH, "Jehovah"), while in the LXXego eimi refers back to the [ego theos](theos, "God") of the same verse. Thus, 'ani hu is used to identify the speaker as the One who in this context is spoken of as being active against the nations, the One who chose Israel as His servant, the covenant God of Israel, Jehovah. The use of ego eimi in the LXX of Isaiah 41:4, therefore, is similar to John's use of the phrase in reference to Jesus. It is used without a predicate, but a predicate is implied or directly expressed in the context.
This usage is also observable in Isaiah 45:18, where the Hebrew ....(ani YHWH, "I [am] Jehovah") is translated by ego eimi. Of course, in the LXX the predicate .....(kyrios, "Lord"), or possibly ho theos (both titles at times stand in place of the tetragrammaton), is understood per the context.'(119) In verse 18 the predicates kyrios and ho theos ("God") are in fact supplied by some manuscripts,(120) and in 45:19 .......(ego eimi ego eimi kyrios) translates ....('ani YHWH, "I [am] Jehovah").(121)
Isaiah 43:10-13
......In verse 10 'ani hu/ego eimi stands without an expressed predicate, though it is expressed in the context.(122) The archaic ....('anoki, "I") is followed by the divine name in verse 11. In verse 12 ...(el, "God") follows ...(ani). Israel is reminded that Jehovah alone is God, not the idol gods of the nations, as none of them has ever had or will ever have actual existence. Yet He has proved to be a living God, who has effected deliverance for His people (Isa 43:1-9).
The end of verse 12 reads, "'You are My witnesses,' says the Lord [Heb:[tetragram] "Jehovah"; LXX: "God" or "Lord," or possibly the divine name], 'and I am God' [....'ani 'el; LXX: kurios ho theos, "the Lord God" (some manuscripts add ...ego, "I," before "Lord")]." (NIV) Verse 13 begins by saying, "Also, all the time I am the same One [ani hu]." (NWT)(123) Again the predicate (or 'el, "God") is supplied by the context.
Isaiah 43:25
Brown, though he acknowledges that the Hebrew and LXX translation can bear the meaning reflected in the RSV translation, nonetheless believes this verse may also be understood as, "I am 'I AM' who blots out transgressions," a translation which sees the second ego eimi as a name.(124) He also notes that the same may be true of Isaiah 51:12. This would lend support to the view that the Johannine use of ego eimi, in reference to Jesus, is an implication of his divinity. But in Isaiah 45:19 this interpretation is very questionable, "as it requires that what is duplicated is not the verb but the tetragrammaton, which is rendered first by then by [ego eimi] and then by [kurios](125). Davies provides sufficient refutation of Brown's claims:
"Brown insists that the doubling of the 'I am' in the Septuagint translation of Isa. 43:25, 'I, I am he who blots out your transgressions':[ego eimi ego eimi ho exaleiphwn]... means that the second 'I am' is a declaration of the divine name. In other words, God declares, 'I am "I am" (= divine name), who blots out your transgressions.' Were there evidence that elsewhere ,I am' is the divine name, this would be a possible, but not a necessary reading of the Septuagint of Isa. 43:25 (and cf. Isa, 51:12). Without such evidence, however, Brown's suggestion is merely fanciful, an attempt to find later Catholic christological doctrine in the Fourth Gospel. The only evidence from Scripture which he cites in support of his case is the Septuagint of Isa. 52:6, 'Therefore my people should know my name, because I am he, who speaks [ego eimi autos ho lalwn]; I am here ([pareimi]).' Brown interprets 'my name' and 'I am' as parallel expressions which should be identified, but if 'I am' is a name in the second clause, it is impossible to translate, since a verb not a name is required. Lindars rightly rejects Brown's argument as unconvincing (1972: 336). He points out that if Jesus' [ego eimi] in 8:58 is to be understood as a name, the statement should read 'Before Abraham was, I am "I am."' It is better, as in the case of Isa. 52:6, to allow [ego eimi] it's verbal force."(126)
Davies goes on to argue that in John 8:58 (which she translates, "Before Abraham was, I am he") Jesus words go back to the start of the discourse, were he stated, "I am the light of the world." (8:12) Thus, as the light of the world, "Jesus fulfills God's promise to Abraham, that 'in him all the nations of the earth would be blessed' (Ge 12:3). He is therefore superior to Abraham. (127)
Isaiah 43:25 identifies God as the One who wipes out transgressions, 51:12 tells us that Jehovah is the One comforting the people, and 52:6 emphasizes that the people will know God's name because he is the One speaking and who will thus cause it to happen (compare Eze 20:4).
Isaiah 46:4
......Here Jehovah highlights the fact that unlike the idols of Bel and Nebo, who have not been able to deliver their worshipers, Jehovah is the same One who has been with them "from the belly," (verse 3) and who will continue to be with them until the days of their "grey-headedness." Jehovah emphasizes His identity as the same One who provided escape for the Israelites long ago. (Isa 46:9) Thus, 'ani hu/ego eimi is again used as a means of self-identification. Harner is probably right in suggesting that the second ego eimi in 46:4 (LXX) represents a variant Hebrew reading.(128)
Conclusion
We have seen that the LXX translation of 'ani hu is used in a manner consistent with the use of the same phrase in the Fourth Gospel and the Synoptics: self-identification. This in no way suggests that the identity of the speaker is the same in each case. The identity of the speaker must be determined from the context in which the phrase is used. In the case of the Fourth Gospel, John uses the phrase, in reference to Jesus, in the same manner as the Old Testament does in reference to Jehovah. He also uses it in John 9:9 to identify a blind man whom Jesus healed. Thus, Davies rightly observes:
"[T]he expression functions in these Scriptural examples [that is, Isa 43: 1 0 and Joel 2:27] in exactly the way it functions in Jn 18.5, 8, 6.20 and 9.9, namely, to allow the speaker to identify himself .Of course, the 'self' identified in each instance is different. In the prophetic oracles God identifies himself as God, and in the Fourth Gospel the man bom blind identifies himself as the man bom blind." (129)
Those instances in John's Gospel where simple self-identification is not intended (Joh 4:26; 8:24, 28, 58, and 13:19), are completed by a predicate which is either implied or directly stated in the context. Although this is likely also the case with John 8:58, eimi is part of an idiom designed to highlight the fact that Jesus' existence extends from a time before the birth of Abraham, to the present.
While the use of ego eimi in John at times signifies something special, various examples where God reveals Himself using 'ani hu "do not provide a basis for interpreting the Johannine use because in all of these instances it is clear that God is the speaker, 'I am the Lord [Jehovah], and there is no other.' " (130) The context in which the statements are made in the Fourth Gospel and in the Synoptics will not allow for an identification between Jesus and the Speaker in Isaiah, Jehovah. He is the God of the Messiah, and the One who "sent forth His Son as Savior of the world." (Mic 5:4; I Jo 4:14) By means of the phrase ego eimi, Jesus' identity as the promised Messiah is made manifest, and by accepting him as the Christ we may gain life everlasting in paradise (Isa 11:1-11).
117.Brown, The Gospel According to John(i-xii),537. For a discussion of the Witnesses view concerning the authorship of Isaiah, see "Where is Modern Catholic Scholarship Heading?"Awake 22 March 1973, 18-19; Insight on the Scriptures, vol.1(Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society,1988),1221-1223; "All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial," 2nd.ed. (Brooklyn: Wtachtower Bible and Tract Society,1990),118-119.
118.Harner, The "I AM" of the Fourth Gospel,57.
119.Unless, of course, the LXX retained the divine name. We believe this to be true, based on the fact that all known fragments of the LXX and other Greek translations down to the second century CE contain the tetragrammaton or IAW.
120.See footnote apparatus in Joseph Ziegier's Isaias (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983).
121.See below discussion of Isa.43:25 for the meaning and translation of the double ego eimi.
122.See notes 123 and 124 below.
123 The LXX reads [epi ap arches} ("even from the beginning"), showing that God has always been what He now claims to be. NWT correctly translates the Hebrew, "I am the same One." H. W. F. Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, ed . E. Kautzsch, trans. A. E- Cowley, 2d Eng. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980), 437 , note 1, tells us: "The separate pronouns,-apart from their employment as the subject in noun-clauses ... [are used in] the sense of the same (.... [ho autos; when used in the attributive position, the Greek third person personal pronoun is translated "same" and is, thus, an adjective.])or (one and) the same, is used in Is. 41:4, 43:10, 13; 46:4, 48:12 (always Harner (The 'I AM" of the Fourth Gospel, 7, note 5, par. 2) notes that the LXX reflects this understanding at one point, in Isa 52:6, where the LXX translates , ani hu as ego eimi autos ("I am he"). Compare Lu 24:39, where ego eimi autos is used for the same purpose (identity), though the identity is made manifest not simply because of the words ego eimi autos, but because Jesus' words are completed by a predicate ("Jesus') which is implied through the reference to the wound marks from his execution, as these would naturally have been associated with Jesus of Nazareth.
124. Brown, The Gospel According to John (i-xii), 536. But note Isa 43:11(Hebrew: ....."I, I am Jehovah"; LXX: ego ho thoes, "I am God"), where the divine name is found,nothu("He"). This suggests that the hu of verse 25 stands in the place of the divine name in verse 11. Some LXX manuscripts read [ego eimi ego eimi theos or Kurios]("I, I am God" or "Lord") similar to Isa 43:25. See the footnotes to Isa 43:11 in Ziegler's Isaias.
125. Elizabeth Harris, Prologue and Gospel: The theology of the Fourth Evangelist(JSNTSup 107; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,1994),131.
126.Davies, Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel, 85.
127.Ibid., 85-86.
128.Harner, The "I AM" of the Fourth Gospel,7,note 5,par.1.
129.Davies,Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel,85.
130. Painter, The Quest for the Messiah,227.
Extract from: Jehovah's Witnesses Defended-An Answer to Scholars and Critics. G.Stafford, 2nd edition, 2000. Elihu books, Hunington Beach, Ca. pp.297-303.
See his first public debate: Is Jesus God or a god ? (Mr. Stafford vs. Dr. White)
'ANI HU and the LXX of Isaiah
Both Brown and Harner argue that the Old Testament, particularly the book of Isaiah, is the most likely source of influence for the use of ego eimi in the Fourth Gospel. Brown asserts that "Jesus is presented as speaking in the same manner in which Yahweh speaks in Deutero-Isaiah."(117) Harner agrees, saying: "Second Isaiah supplied John with a solenm expression that was eminently suited for expressing the unity of the Son and the Father and that had at the same time a strong connotation of monotheism which also served to express the Christian belief that God continued to be one "' (118)
We will now consider the passages from Isaiah that are considered to have had the greatest influence on the Johannine use of ego eimi. ......
Isaiah 41:4
..... The use of 'ani hu ("I [am] he") in this verse appears simply to refer back to the One who had just previously been mentioned, [tetragram](YHWH, "Jehovah"), while in the LXXego eimi refers back to the [ego theos](theos, "God") of the same verse. Thus, 'ani hu is used to identify the speaker as the One who in this context is spoken of as being active against the nations, the One who chose Israel as His servant, the covenant God of Israel, Jehovah. The use of ego eimi in the LXX of Isaiah 41:4, therefore, is similar to John's use of the phrase in reference to Jesus. It is used without a predicate, but a predicate is implied or directly expressed in the context.
This usage is also observable in Isaiah 45:18, where the Hebrew ....(ani YHWH, "I [am] Jehovah") is translated by ego eimi. Of course, in the LXX the predicate .....(kyrios, "Lord"), or possibly ho theos (both titles at times stand in place of the tetragrammaton), is understood per the context.'(119) In verse 18 the predicates kyrios and ho theos ("God") are in fact supplied by some manuscripts,(120) and in 45:19 .......(ego eimi ego eimi kyrios) translates ....('ani YHWH, "I [am] Jehovah").(121)
Isaiah 43:10-13
......In verse 10 'ani hu/ego eimi stands without an expressed predicate, though it is expressed in the context.(122) The archaic ....('anoki, "I") is followed by the divine name in verse 11. In verse 12 ...(el, "God") follows ...(ani). Israel is reminded that Jehovah alone is God, not the idol gods of the nations, as none of them has ever had or will ever have actual existence. Yet He has proved to be a living God, who has effected deliverance for His people (Isa 43:1-9).
The end of verse 12 reads, "'You are My witnesses,' says the Lord [Heb:[tetragram] "Jehovah"; LXX: "God" or "Lord," or possibly the divine name], 'and I am God' [....'ani 'el; LXX: kurios ho theos, "the Lord God" (some manuscripts add ...ego, "I," before "Lord")]." (NIV) Verse 13 begins by saying, "Also, all the time I am the same One [ani hu]." (NWT)(123) Again the predicate (or 'el, "God") is supplied by the context.
Isaiah 43:25
Brown, though he acknowledges that the Hebrew and LXX translation can bear the meaning reflected in the RSV translation, nonetheless believes this verse may also be understood as, "I am 'I AM' who blots out transgressions," a translation which sees the second ego eimi as a name.(124) He also notes that the same may be true of Isaiah 51:12. This would lend support to the view that the Johannine use of ego eimi, in reference to Jesus, is an implication of his divinity. But in Isaiah 45:19 this interpretation is very questionable, "as it requires that what is duplicated is not the verb but the tetragrammaton, which is rendered first by then by [ego eimi] and then by [kurios](125). Davies provides sufficient refutation of Brown's claims:
"Brown insists that the doubling of the 'I am' in the Septuagint translation of Isa. 43:25, 'I, I am he who blots out your transgressions':[ego eimi ego eimi ho exaleiphwn]... means that the second 'I am' is a declaration of the divine name. In other words, God declares, 'I am "I am" (= divine name), who blots out your transgressions.' Were there evidence that elsewhere ,I am' is the divine name, this would be a possible, but not a necessary reading of the Septuagint of Isa. 43:25 (and cf. Isa, 51:12). Without such evidence, however, Brown's suggestion is merely fanciful, an attempt to find later Catholic christological doctrine in the Fourth Gospel. The only evidence from Scripture which he cites in support of his case is the Septuagint of Isa. 52:6, 'Therefore my people should know my name, because I am he, who speaks [ego eimi autos ho lalwn]; I am here ([pareimi]).' Brown interprets 'my name' and 'I am' as parallel expressions which should be identified, but if 'I am' is a name in the second clause, it is impossible to translate, since a verb not a name is required. Lindars rightly rejects Brown's argument as unconvincing (1972: 336). He points out that if Jesus' [ego eimi] in 8:58 is to be understood as a name, the statement should read 'Before Abraham was, I am "I am."' It is better, as in the case of Isa. 52:6, to allow [ego eimi] it's verbal force."(126)
Davies goes on to argue that in John 8:58 (which she translates, "Before Abraham was, I am he") Jesus words go back to the start of the discourse, were he stated, "I am the light of the world." (8:12) Thus, as the light of the world, "Jesus fulfills God's promise to Abraham, that 'in him all the nations of the earth would be blessed' (Ge 12:3). He is therefore superior to Abraham. (127)
Isaiah 43:25 identifies God as the One who wipes out transgressions, 51:12 tells us that Jehovah is the One comforting the people, and 52:6 emphasizes that the people will know God's name because he is the One speaking and who will thus cause it to happen (compare Eze 20:4).
Isaiah 46:4
......Here Jehovah highlights the fact that unlike the idols of Bel and Nebo, who have not been able to deliver their worshipers, Jehovah is the same One who has been with them "from the belly," (verse 3) and who will continue to be with them until the days of their "grey-headedness." Jehovah emphasizes His identity as the same One who provided escape for the Israelites long ago. (Isa 46:9) Thus, 'ani hu/ego eimi is again used as a means of self-identification. Harner is probably right in suggesting that the second ego eimi in 46:4 (LXX) represents a variant Hebrew reading.(128)
Conclusion
We have seen that the LXX translation of 'ani hu is used in a manner consistent with the use of the same phrase in the Fourth Gospel and the Synoptics: self-identification. This in no way suggests that the identity of the speaker is the same in each case. The identity of the speaker must be determined from the context in which the phrase is used. In the case of the Fourth Gospel, John uses the phrase, in reference to Jesus, in the same manner as the Old Testament does in reference to Jehovah. He also uses it in John 9:9 to identify a blind man whom Jesus healed. Thus, Davies rightly observes:
"[T]he expression functions in these Scriptural examples [that is, Isa 43: 1 0 and Joel 2:27] in exactly the way it functions in Jn 18.5, 8, 6.20 and 9.9, namely, to allow the speaker to identify himself .Of course, the 'self' identified in each instance is different. In the prophetic oracles God identifies himself as God, and in the Fourth Gospel the man bom blind identifies himself as the man bom blind." (129)
Those instances in John's Gospel where simple self-identification is not intended (Joh 4:26; 8:24, 28, 58, and 13:19), are completed by a predicate which is either implied or directly stated in the context. Although this is likely also the case with John 8:58, eimi is part of an idiom designed to highlight the fact that Jesus' existence extends from a time before the birth of Abraham, to the present.
While the use of ego eimi in John at times signifies something special, various examples where God reveals Himself using 'ani hu "do not provide a basis for interpreting the Johannine use because in all of these instances it is clear that God is the speaker, 'I am the Lord [Jehovah], and there is no other.' " (130) The context in which the statements are made in the Fourth Gospel and in the Synoptics will not allow for an identification between Jesus and the Speaker in Isaiah, Jehovah. He is the God of the Messiah, and the One who "sent forth His Son as Savior of the world." (Mic 5:4; I Jo 4:14) By means of the phrase ego eimi, Jesus' identity as the promised Messiah is made manifest, and by accepting him as the Christ we may gain life everlasting in paradise (Isa 11:1-11).
117.Brown, The Gospel According to John(i-xii),537. For a discussion of the Witnesses view concerning the authorship of Isaiah, see "Where is Modern Catholic Scholarship Heading?"Awake 22 March 1973, 18-19; Insight on the Scriptures, vol.1(Brooklyn: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society,1988),1221-1223; "All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial," 2nd.ed. (Brooklyn: Wtachtower Bible and Tract Society,1990),118-119.
118.Harner, The "I AM" of the Fourth Gospel,57.
119.Unless, of course, the LXX retained the divine name. We believe this to be true, based on the fact that all known fragments of the LXX and other Greek translations down to the second century CE contain the tetragrammaton or IAW.
120.See footnote apparatus in Joseph Ziegier's Isaias (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983).
121.See below discussion of Isa.43:25 for the meaning and translation of the double ego eimi.
122.See notes 123 and 124 below.
123 The LXX reads [epi ap arches} ("even from the beginning"), showing that God has always been what He now claims to be. NWT correctly translates the Hebrew, "I am the same One." H. W. F. Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, ed . E. Kautzsch, trans. A. E- Cowley, 2d Eng. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980), 437 , note 1, tells us: "The separate pronouns,-apart from their employment as the subject in noun-clauses ... [are used in] the sense of the same (.... [ho autos; when used in the attributive position, the Greek third person personal pronoun is translated "same" and is, thus, an adjective.])or (one and) the same, is used in Is. 41:4, 43:10, 13; 46:4, 48:12 (always Harner (The 'I AM" of the Fourth Gospel, 7, note 5, par. 2) notes that the LXX reflects this understanding at one point, in Isa 52:6, where the LXX translates , ani hu as ego eimi autos ("I am he"). Compare Lu 24:39, where ego eimi autos is used for the same purpose (identity), though the identity is made manifest not simply because of the words ego eimi autos, but because Jesus' words are completed by a predicate ("Jesus') which is implied through the reference to the wound marks from his execution, as these would naturally have been associated with Jesus of Nazareth.
124. Brown, The Gospel According to John (i-xii), 536. But note Isa 43:11(Hebrew: ....."I, I am Jehovah"; LXX: ego ho thoes, "I am God"), where the divine name is found,nothu("He"). This suggests that the hu of verse 25 stands in the place of the divine name in verse 11. Some LXX manuscripts read [ego eimi ego eimi theos or Kurios]("I, I am God" or "Lord") similar to Isa 43:25. See the footnotes to Isa 43:11 in Ziegler's Isaias.
125. Elizabeth Harris, Prologue and Gospel: The theology of the Fourth Evangelist(JSNTSup 107; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,1994),131.
126.Davies, Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel, 85.
127.Ibid., 85-86.
128.Harner, The "I AM" of the Fourth Gospel,7,note 5,par.1.
129.Davies,Rhetoric and Reference in the Fourth Gospel,85.
130. Painter, The Quest for the Messiah,227.
Extract from: Jehovah's Witnesses Defended-An Answer to Scholars and Critics. G.Stafford, 2nd edition, 2000. Elihu books, Hunington Beach, Ca. pp.297-303.
See his first public debate: Is Jesus God or a god ? (Mr. Stafford vs. Dr. White)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)