HECTOR HEINZ AND JOB 9:8
Sam
Shamoun
The
aim of my paper is to deal with some of Heinz’s response to my use of
OT passages which say that Yahweh alone created the cosmos. Heinz’s
comments will be in blue. Heinz begins:
Sam
does bring up Scriptures where Jehovah says he created alone. We
know that Jehovah, was not really alone at the time of creation because
Job 38:6, 7 tells us: "When I laid the foundation of the earth ...
all the sons of God shouted for joy". The angels shouted for joy
when Jehovah, through His Son, "laid the foundations of the
earth".
RESPONSE:
Heinz
misrepresents my argument. Here is what I originally wrote in my
response to Heinz:
JW
apologists claim that this passage does not prove that Jehovah created
all things by himself, but that the context is refuting the false notion
that the pagan gods of the nations were responsible for creation. It is
in this light that Jehovah claims to be alone in creating the cosmos.
Yet this reasoning cannot be sustained in light of the following
passage:
“He
speaks to the sun and it does not shine; he seals off the light of the
stars. He ALONE stretches out the
heavens and treads on the waves of the sea.” Job 9:7-8 NIV
Job
reiterates the point of Isaiah 44:24 and yet no mention of pagan gods
can be found throughout the context. Therefore, the reasoning employed
by JWs cannot be sustained since with or without the context of false
gods, the OT is in agreement that Jehovah alone created all things.
It
is quite clear to anyone reading my comments that I was saying that
Yahweh created the cosmos without the assistance of anyone. I wasn’t
claiming that Yahweh was necessarily alone when he created the cosmos BY
HIMSELF. As I said in response to Stafford, which Heinz supposedly has
read:
Furthermore,
Trinitarians do not deny the possibility of angels existing during the
formation of the universe. The Trinitarian point is that Scripture
ascribes creation to Jehovah alone, not that Jehovah was by himself when
he alone created the universe.
Heinz
also misapplies and misunderstands Job 38:6-7, since he thinks this
proves that there were angels present at the time of creation. By
creation, I take Heinz to be referring to the heavens and the earth. The
problem with Heinz’s reading of the passages is that Job 38 says
nothing about angels being present when God created
the heavens. It only says that angels were present when God laid
the foundations of the earth:
“Where
were you when I laid the
foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who
determined its measurements--surely
you know! Or who stretched the
line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone,
when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted
for joy? Or who shut in the sea with doors, when it burst forth from the
womb; when I made clouds its garment, and thick darkness its swaddling
band, and prescribed bounds for it, and set bars and doors, and said,
‘Thus far shall you come, and no farther, and here shall your proud
waves be stayed’?” Job 38:4-11 RSV
One
is safe to assume that angels were around when God was fashioning the
earth since they would have come into being during the creation of the
heavens. This view is supported both by the overall context of the
scriptures and extra-biblical references which can be read here: http://www.forananswer.org/John/Jn1_1_ov1.htm
In
any case, Heinz’s appeal to Job 38 does nothing to refute the point
that Yahweh ALONE created the cosmos.
HEINZ:
We see also
that the created Wisdom (Jesus) was helping god during creation
creation,
"when he marked out the foundations of the earth, then I was beside
him, like a master workman (ftn. little child)." Prov 8:22-30 RSV
RESPONSE:
Heinz
erroneously assumes several things:
1.
He erroneously
assumes that Prov. 8:22 refers to the preincarnate Christ
2.
He erroneously
assumes that the Hebrew verb qanah means create, as opposed to possesses, to get etc.
Since
it is beyond the scope of this article to deal with these issues, we
will have to defer this discussion for a future article. For now, we
recommend Ray Goldsmith’s refutation of the JW use of Prov. 8 in his
dialogue with JW Wrench, titled:
A
Dialog on the Son of God Created between Wrench in the Works (an
anonymous, self-described Jehovah's Witness) and Ray Goldsmith (a
Christian layman).
The debate can be found here: http://jude3.net/whatnew.htm
Here,
we would like to show how Heinz’s method of exegesis can be used to
prove the very opposite of his assertion.
In trying to connect the Lord Jesus with the Wisdom of Prov. 8,
Heinz failed to see how this undermines his own position:
Reply:
It is the Bible that calls Jesus "the firstborn of all
creation," "the beginning of God's creation," the
"only-begotten Son" and links Jesus to the "created"
Wisdom of Proverbs (Col 1:15; Rev 3:14; Jn 3:16; Prov 8:22-30 cf. Lu
11:47/1Cor 1:24 RSV).
(http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/wilson.htm)
Heinz
connects Prov. 8 with 1 Cor. 1:24 to prove that Jesus is God’s created
Wisdom. We would like to quote the passage in order to show our readers
what Heinz missed:
“however,
to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the
POWER of God (christen theou dunamin) and the WISDOM of God.” NWT
Jesus
is called God’s Wisdom AND Power, which is quite significant. The
Scriptures state that God’s power is both eternal and divine:
"For
his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world's creation
onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even
his ETERNAL POWER (he te aidios
autou dunamis) and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."
Romans 1:20 NWT
“forasmuch
as his DIVINE POWER (tes
theias dunameos autou) has given us freely all the things that
concern life and godly devotion, through the accurate knowledge of the
one who called us through glory and virtue.” 2 Peter 1:3 NWT
Applying
Heinz’ exegetical method we are forced to conclude that Jesus is
uncreated! Note:
1.
God's power is
divine and eternal.
2.
Jesus is God's
power.
3.
Therefore, Jesus
is divine and eternal.
If
Heinz is to remain consistent then he must accept this conclusion, since
both premises in the syllogism are biblically valid. Otherwise, for
Heinz to reject this only shows that he is rather inconsistent in how he
handles the biblical data and is simply reading into the Holy Bible his
post-biblical 19th century JW theology.
Furthermore,
to quote a passage that says that Wisdom was there when God created all
things doesn’t help Heinz in the least. God’s Wisdom is an essential
part of his eternal Being, originating from within Himself. In fact, the
Scriptures also teach that God used Wisdom to create ALL THINGS. See for
instance the following citations:
“For
the Lord gives wisdom, and from his mouth comes knowledge and understanding.” Proverbs
2:6 NET Bible
The NET
translators’ note 26 says:
…
This expression is an anthropomorphism; it indicates that the Lord is the immediate source or author of the
wisdom. It is worth noting that in the incarnation many of these
"anthropomorphisms" become
literal in the person of the Logos, the Word, Jesus, who reveals
the Father. (http://netbible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_26)
Continuing
further:
“The
Lord by wisdom laid the foundation of the earth; he established the
heavens by understanding. By his knowledge the primordial sea was broken
open, and the clouds drip down dew.” Proverbs 3:19-20 NET
Bible
“O
LORD, how manifold are thy works! In wisdom hast
thou made them ALL; the earth is full of thy creatures.” Psalm
104:24 RSV
“The
Lord is the one who by his POWER made the earth. He is the one who by his WISDOM fixed the world in place.” Jeremiah 10:12 NET Bible
These
facts demonstrate that Wisdom is uncreated, which provides additional
evidence that Jesus is eternal, and hence God! Again:
1.
God’s Wisdom is
eternal and the agent of creation.
2.
Jesus is God’s
Wisdom.
3.
Therefore, Jesus
is eternal and the agent of creation.
Interestingly,
it was passages such as these that led the early Church to conclude that
Christ was eternally begotten or generated; i.e., that Christ existed
eternally with the Father, while at the same time deriving his Deity and
divine existence from the One who generated him.
HEINZ:
The
use of the term, "alone", "by myself" etc do not
necessarily mean the same thing to those in power, even in the Bible.
What do I mean?
Let
us look at Daniel 4:30 and Isaiah 63:3. Daniel 4:30, "The king
reflected and said, 'Is this not Babylon the great, which I myself have
built.' " NASB.
"The
king was saying, 'Great Babylon! Imperial palace! Did I not build it
alone.' " Jerusalem Bible.
"The
king spake and said, Is this not Babylon the great, - which I myself
have built," J.B. Rotherham
Nebuchadnezzar was not the only person to have built Babylon, was he?
But it was built by his authority, his word and no other's.
RESPONSE:
Heinz
has committed the fallacy of false analogy since these passages are not
at all parallel to God creating the cosmos. It is evident that alone
here doesn’t mean that Nebu built Babylon by himself, but refers to
his having the authority to carry out his desires. But even here Nebu
was wrong as the CONTEXT shows, since it was Yahweh who granted
authority to the king to carry out his plans:
“This
is the interpretation, O king. It is the decision of the Most High that
this has happened to my lord the king. You will be driven from human
society, and you will live with the wild animals. You will be fed grass
like oxen, and you will become damp with the dew of the sky. Seven times
will pass by for you, before you
understand that the Most High is ruler over human kingdoms and gives
them to whomever he wishes. Now in that they said to leave a taproot
of the tree, your kingdom will be restored to you when
you come to understand that heaven rules. Therefore, O king, may my
advice be pleasing to you. Break away from your sins by doing acts of
righteousness, and from your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor.
Perhaps your prosperity will be prolonged.’” Daniel 4:24-27 NET
Bible
“But
at the end of the appointed time I, Nebuchadnezzar, looked up toward
heaven, and my sanity returned to me. I blessed the Most High, and I
praised and glorified the one who lives forever. For his rule is an
everlasting rule, and his kingdom extends from one generation to the
next. All the inhabitants of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he wishes with the army of heaven and with those who inhabit
the earth. No one slaps his hand and says to him, ‘What have you
done?’ At that time my sanity returned to me. I was restored to
the honor of my kingdom, and
my splendor returned to me. My ministers and my magistrates were seeking
me out, and I was reinstated over my kingdom. Tremendous greatness was
restored to me, greater than before. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise
and exalt and glorify the King of heaven, for all his deeds are right
and his ways are just. He is able to bring low those who live in pride.”
Daniel 4:34-37 NET Bible
Heinz’s
next example actually proves that Jesus and the Angel of Yahweh (whom we
feel is the preincarnate Christ) is Yahweh God!
Isaiah
63:3 says: "I [Jehovah] have trodden the wine press alone, and of
the peoples there was no man with me." Again, it was not Jehovah
who personally punish these people. It was His angel acting on the
Jehovah's authority. (2 Kings 19:35, 36)
RESPONSE:
Later
on we will show that the Angel is Yahweh God. Here, we would like to
quote Isaiah 63 in order to see how this provides additional proof that
Jesus is Yahweh God Almighty:
"Who
is this one coming from E'dom, the one with garments of glowing colors from Boz'rah, this one who
is honorable in his clothing, marching in the abundance of his power?
'I, the One speaking in righteousness, the One abounding [in power] to
save.' Why is it that your
clothing is red, and your garments are like those of one treading in the
winepress? 'The wine I have
trodden BY MYSELF, while THERE WAS NO MAN WITH ME from the peoples. And I kept treading them in my anger, and I kept tramping them down in
my rage. And their spurting blood kept spattering upon my garments and
all my clothing I have polluted. For the day of vengeance is in my
heart, and the very year of my repurchased ones has come. And I kept
looking, BUT THERE WAS NO HELPER; and I began to show myself astonished,
BUT THERE WAS NO ONE OFFERING SUPPORT. So
my arm furnished me salvation, and my rage was what supported me.
And I kept stamping down peoples in my anger, and I proceeded to make
them drunk with my rage and to bring down to the earth spurting
blood.'" Isaiah 63:1-6 NWT
Isaiah
repeats this here:
"… 'And
Jehovah got to see, and it was bad in his eyes that there was no
justice. And when he saw THAT THERE WAS NO MAN, he began to show himself
astonished that there was no one interposing. And
his arm proceeded to save for him, and his OWN righteousness was the
thing that supported. Then he put on righteousness as a coat of
mail, and the helmet of salvation upon his head. Furthermore,
he put on the garments of vengeance as raiment and
enwrapped himself with zeal as if a sleeveless coat. In accordance
with the dealings he will reward correspondingly, rage to his
adversaries, due treatment to his enemies. To the islands he will
recompense due treatment. And from the sunset they will begin to fear
the name of Jehovah, and from the rising of the sun the glory of him,
for he will come in like a distressing river, which the very spirit of
Jehovah has driven along. And to
Zion the Repurchaser will certainly come, and to those turning from
transgression in Jacob, is the utterance of Jehovah. 'And as for me,
this is my covenant with them,' Jehovah has said. 'My spirit that is
upon you and my words that I have put in your mouth- they will not be
removed from your mouth or from the mouth of your offspring or from the
mouth of the offspring of your offspring,' Jehovah has said, 'from now
on even to time indefinite.'" Isaiah 59:15b-21 NWT
According
to these last two passages God had to work out salvation by himself
since there was no one, no man, qualified to help him. Now compare this
with the following depiction of the risen Lord:
"And
I saw the heaven opened, and, look! a white horse. And the one seated
upon it is called Faithful and True, and he judges and carries on war in righteousness. His eyes are a
fiery flame, and upon his head are many diadems. He has a name written
that no one knows but he himself, and
he is arrayed with an outer garment sprinkled with blood, and the
name he is called is The Word of God. Also, the armies that were in
heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in
white, clean, fine linen. And out of his mouth there protrudes a sharp
long sword, that he may strike the nations with it, and he will shepherd
them with a rod of iron. He treads too the winepress of the anger of the wrath of God the
Almighty. And upon his outer garment, even upon his thigh, he has a
name written, King of kings and Lord of Lords." Revelation 19:11-16
NWT
Here,
Jesus is described in the same exact way that Isaiah describes Yahweh
and does exactly what the prophet says God alone was going to do! In
other words, Isaiah saw and wrote about Jesus!
HEINZ:
Did
Jehovah personally chastise the Babylonians or did He use the Medes and
Perians to accomplish His will? (Daniel 5:26-28, 30-31) All these acts
were done by Jehovah's authority; and by His alone.—Ezekiel. 36:33,
36.
But
this again, is where agency comes in, such as was mentioned in the
first reply to Sam. Nave's Topical Bible rightly says under
*Worship,* "to be rendered to God only."
RESPONSE:
Heinz again commits
the fallacy of false analogy since God using creatures to accomplish his
purpose is not at all analogous to God creating the cosmos.
Furthermore,
Heinz’s appeal to the concept of agency doesn’t help him at all.
Agency doesn’t account for a person calling himself Yahweh God,
receiving the worship of God, and doing the works that God alone can do.
For instance, the Lord Jesus
refers to this concept when sending out the disciples:
“The
one who listens to you listens to me, and the one who rejects you
rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects the one who sent me.”
Luke 10:16 Net Bible
Just because the
Apostles functioned as Christ’s agents didn’t mean that they could
call themselves Jesus Christ when speaking to others, receive worship,
or claim to be the preexistent Logos. Agency simply means that since
they were Christ’s emissaries, having his authority, when they said or
did something it was if Christ had personally said or done it. More on
this later.
Heinz continues with
his false analogies by bringing up the issue of worship:
Yet, the worship to God (Shachah, OT), is again, contrasted between
Jehovah and the false idol gods.
Ex
20:3-4, " Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not
make unto thee a graven image..."
Ex
34:14, 17 "for thou shalt worship no other god: for Jehovah, whose
name is Jealous, is a jealous God...Thou shalt make thee no molten
gods."
...and
interestingly, Deut 29:26, "and went and served other gods, and
worshipped them, gods that they knew not, and that he had not given unto them."
It
is of no small note that the Bible also uses the same word (Shachah)
used in exclusive WORSHIP to Jehovah, to others as well.
"Then
the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel"
Dan 2:46 KJV, RV, ASV
"And all the congregation blessed the LORD God of their fathers,
and bowed down their heads, and worshipped the LORD, and the king."
1Chron 29:20 KJV, ASV
Here, king David is given the same worship as Jehovah.
RESPONSE:
It is rather tiresome to see Heinz
consistently bring up irrelevant points that have nothing to do with the
issue at hand. We are not talking about whether the word shachah is used
in a BROADER sense to refer to the honor and reverence that is shown to
superiors. We are talking about creation and who exactly brought it into
being.
Furthermore,
we are not aware of any passage which says that shachah is to be given to God alone, which leads me to my next
point. It is interesting that Heinz does not tell his readers that there
is another word that is used for worship, namely the Aramaic word pelach.
This is often rendered in English as “serve” as the following
example in Daniel shows:
“Nebuchadnez'zar
said, ‘Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed'nego, who has
sent his angel and delivered his servants, who trusted in him, and set
at nought the king's command, and
yielded up their bodies rather than serve
and worship any god except their own God.’” Daniel 3:28 RSV
“And
the kingdom and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdoms under
the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most
High: his kingdom is an
everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.” Daniel 7:27 ASV- Cf. 3:12,14,17-18;
6:16,20[17,21 LXX]; Ezra 7:24
In
all the examples above, the LXX uses latreuo
for pelach. According to
the Lord Jesus, latreuo is to
be given to God alone:
“Then
Jesus said to him, ‘Begone, Satan! for it is written, “You shall
worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve (kai
auto mono latreuseis).”’” Matthew 4:10 RSV
Amazingly,
Daniel states that all the nations will render unto the Son of Man, whom
the NT identifies as the Lord Jesus, the very pelach/latreuo/service
that only God is to receive:
“I
saw in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven there
came one like a son of man, and he came to the Ancient of Days and was
presented before him. And to him
was given dominion and glory and kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and
languages should serve him;
his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and
his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.” Daniel 7:13-14 RSV
The
Bible Works (5.0) version of the LXX and the Rahlfs edition of the LXX
both have latreuousa in Daniel
7:14. The Aramaic word here is yiplechûn.
It should be noted that the Rahlfs edition of the LXX contains two
different readings of this verse. Rahlf's version of Daniel has a
translation from one codex on the top of the page (syro-Hexaplaris) and
another on the bottom (a Theodotion translation). The Theodotion
translation (bottom of the page on Rahlf's translation), which
Brenton’s LXX follows here, contains a form of the verb douloo,
which means to serve or slave. The Bible Works 5.0 version of the LXX
also contains this variant reading. Yet, the same Aramaic word and both
Greek words latreuo and douloo are
used in the Aramaic and Greek versions of Daniel 3:28. There we saw that
Daniel's three friends ‘yielded up their bodies so as not to serve
or worship any god except their own God.’ So, regardless of any
textual variant in the LXX, the Aramaic word used in Daniel 7:14 refers
to the service that is not to be given to any god except the true God
Yahweh. And yet it is given to the Son of Man!
For
more on Jesus receiving latreuo,
please read the following: http://www.forananswer.org/Top_JW/Jesus_Latreuo.htm
Heinz next
erroneously assumes that angels received worship:
An
angel even receives worship(NKJV, ASV) at Joshua 5:13-15 c.f.Ex. 23:23.
Angels
were even allowed to use God's name. In Exodus 3:2 [Acts 7:30-32],
"the angel of Jehovah appeared unto him [Moses] in a flame of fire
out of the midst of a bush" Ex. 3:2. Yet later on we read that this
same angel used the name Jehovah for himself [v. 16], even the "I
AM"[v.14] you find so important to your theology. As Ex 23:20, 21
says,
"Behold,
I send an angel before thee,
to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have
prepared. Take ye heed before him, and hearken unto his voice; provoke
him not; for he will not pardon your transgression: for
my name is in him."
So
as representatives of God, angels were allowed to use his name, and to
act as God. You will find other examples of angels in similar situations
at Gen 16:13, 21:17; 22:15,16; 31:11, 13, Jg 6:12, 13, 14, 20, 21, 22,
23; 13:6, 21, and Deut 5:24.
RESPONSE:
None
of these citations ascribe worship to angels, nor do they teach that
angels were allowed to use God’s name and act as God. The references
all refer to a PARTICULAR messenger of God who just so happens to be
Yahweh God also (as Heinz himself notes in anticipation of my response)!
This accounts for why this angel could receive the worship due to God,
have God’s name, and act as God SINCE HE IS GOD!
Furthermore,
Heinz’s explanation leads to contradictions with the following NT
passages:
“And
the angel said to me, ‘Write this: Blessed are those who are invited
to the marriage supper of the Lamb.’ And he said to me, ‘These are
true words of God.’ Then I fell
down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, ‘You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your
brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus. Worship God.’ For the
testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.'" Revelation 19:9-10
RSV
“I
John am he who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw
them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to
me; but he said to me, ‘You
must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brethren
the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship
God.’” Revelation 22:8-9 RSV
These
passages pose considerable problems for Heinz. If it were true that
angels can receive the worship due to God since they act as his
representatives, implying that the worship is really being directed to
God, then there would have been no reason for this angel to forbid John
from worshiping him. This is especially the case when we take into
consideration that this angel is identified as the angel of God and
Christ, and therefore stands in their place as their representative:
“Then
the angel said to me, ‘These words are reliable and true. The Lord,
the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent HIS angel to show his servants what must happen soon.’”
Revelation 22:6 NET Bible
“I,
Jesus, have sent MY angel to testify to you about these things for
the churches. I am the root and the descendent of David, the bright
morning star!” Revelation 22:16 NET
The
very fact that the angel REFUSES to be worshiped, despite being God’s
representative, demonstrates just how untenable Heinz’s explanation
truly is.
Heinz
seeks to undermine my position regarding the Angel of Yahweh, since he
apparently realizes that if I am correct then Heinz’s JW Unitarian
view of Yahweh is exposed as being com[lately and thoroughly unbiblical:
It
should be noted that Sam will say that the "Angel of the LORD"
is also a member of the Trinity, or even Jesus. This may be true some of
the time, but not always. Consider a few examples:
RESPONSE:
Heinz
is correct regarding what I will say since the OT shows beyond any
reasonable doubt that this particular Angel is not a creature, but
Yahweh God Almighty who appears visibly (often as a man) to his
servants. At the same time, the Angel is shown to be distinct from
another who is also Yahweh God. These OT appearances of the Angel of
Yahweh provide evidence that there is a plurality of Persons existing as
the one true God, Yahweh. We invite our readers to carefully go over all
of Heinz’s citations to see this for themselves.
Heinz
provides an alleged “counter-argument” to my claim:
In
Zechariah 1:11-13 we have a conversation between this angel and Jehovah.
"And they answered the angel
of Jehovah that stood among the myrtle-trees, and said, We have walked
to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still,
and is at rest. Then
the angel of Jehovah answered and said, "O Jehovah of hosts, how
long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah,
against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten
years?"
And Jehovah answered the angel
that talked with me with good words, even comfortable words."
If
the angel of the LORD is the LORD himself (or a member of the LORD...I
can't believe I just said that) then how did he not know the answer to
the question he posed to the LORD? The
text indicates that the Angel really is perplexed over the present state
of Judah. He does not know what the LORD knows and so poses the
aforesaid question to Him.
RESPONSE:
If
Heinz’s logic is correct that the Angel asking a question proves that
he is not God, then he must be consistent and conclude that Jehovah is
not God either since he too asks questions from others:
“Finally
Jehovah said to Moses: ‘How long
will this people treat me without respect, and how long will they not
put faith in me for all the signs that I performed in among them?’”
Numbers 14:11 NWT
“And
Jehovah went on to speak to Moses and Aaron, saying: ‘How
long will this evil assembly have this murmuring that they are carrying
on against me? I have heard the murmuring of the sons of Israel that
they are murmuring against me.’” Numbers 14:26-27 NWT
“And
he went on to say: ‘Therefore HEAR the word of Jehovah: I certainly
see Jehovah sitting upon his throne and all the army of the heavens
standing at his right and his left. And Jehovah proceeded to say, “Who
will fool A’hab the king of Israel that he may go up and fall at
Ra’moth-gil’ead?” And there was talk, this one saying
something like this, and that one saying something like that. Finally, a
spirit came out and stood before Jehovah and said, “I myself shall
fool him.” At that Jehovah said to him, “By
what means?” To this he said, “I shall go forth and certainly
become a deceptive spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.” So he
said, “You will fool him, and, what is more, you will come off the
winner. Go out and do that.”’” 2 Chronicles 18:18-21 NWT
Hence,
Zechariah 1:11-13 no more disproves my position that the Angel is Yahweh
God than the preceding passages disprove the deity of Yahweh God!
Even
more amazing is that, as a JW, Heinz believes that God exercises
selective foreknowledge, i.e. that God can choose to not know certain
things:
The
view that God's exercise of his foreknowledge is infinite and that he
does foreordain the course and destiny of all individuals is known as
predestinarianism. Its advocates reason that God's divinity and
perfection require that he be omniscient (all-knowing), not only
respecting the past and present, but also regarding the future. For him
not to foreknow all matters in their every detail would evidence
imperfection, according to this concept.
But consider the implications of such a predestinarian view. This
concept would mean that, prior to creating angels or earthling man, God
exercised his powers of foreknowledge and foresaw and foreknew all that
would result from such creation, including the rebellion of one of his
spirit sons, the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden
(Gen. 3:1-6; John 8:44), and all the bad consequences of such rebellion
down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that
all the wickedness that history has recorded (the crime and immorality,
oppression and resultant suffering, lying and, hypocrisy, false worship
and idolatry) once existed, before creation's beginning, only in the
mind of God, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future.
If the Creator of mankind had indeed exercised his power to foreknow all
that history has seen since man's creation, then
the full force of all the wickedness thereafter resulting was
deliberately set in motion by God when he spoke the words: "Let
us make man." (Gen. 1:26) These facts bring into question the
reasonableness and consistency of the predestinarian concept;
particularly so since the disciple James shows that disorder and other
vile things do not originate from God's heavenly presence but are
"earthly, animal, demonic" in source.-Jas. 3:14-18.
The argument that God's not foreknowing all future events and
circumstances in full detail would evidence imperfection on his part is,
in reality, an arbitrary view of perfection. Ultimately, God's own will
and good pleasure are the deciding factors as to whether anything is
perfect, not human opinions or concepts.-2 Sam. 22:31; Isa. 46:10.
To illustrate this, God's almightiness is undeniably perfect and is
infinite in capacity. (1 Chron. 29:11, 12; Job 36:22; 37:23) Yet his
perfection in strength does not require him to use his power to the full
extent of his omnipotence in any or in all cases. Clearly he has not
done so, or, not merely would certain ancient cities and some nations
have been destroyed, but the earth and all in it would have been
obliterated long ago by God's executions of judgment, as at the Flood
and on other occasions. (Gen. 6:5-8; 19:23-25, 29) God's exercise of his
might is therefore not simply an unleashing of limitless power but is
constantly governed by his purpose and tempered by his mercy, where
merited.-Neh. 9:31; Ps. 78:38, 39.
Similarly, if, in certain
respects, God chooses to
exercise his infinite ability of foreknowledge in a selective way and to
the degree that pleases him, then assuredly no human or angel can
rightly say: "What are you doing?" (Job 9:12; Isa. 45:9; Dan.
4:35) It is therefore not a question of ability, what God can foresee,
foreknow and foreordain, for "with God all things are
possible." (Matt. 19:26) The
question is what God sees fit to foresee, foreknow and foreordain, for
"everything that he delighted to do he has done."-Ps.
115:3. (Watchtower 8/1/1970 pp. 469-70; see also Insight on the
Scriptures, Volume 1, pp. 851-860 [specifically 853-854])
Again,
if Yahweh can choose to be ignorant of certain things without this
nullifying his Deity, then why should the Angel beseeching Yahweh on
behalf of Judah prove that he is not fully God? One can argue that the
Angel, much like Yahweh, was exercising “his infinite ability of
foreknowledge in a selective way and to the degree that pleases him”!
With
that said, I do not believe that the Angel was asking a question due to
being perplexed or ignorant of God’s purpose or plan. Rather, I take
the Angel’s question as more of a request for God to show mercy to his
covenant people. In other words, the Angel was functioning as Israel’s
intercessor, beseeching God to show grace and kindness to Judah. This is
why the text goes on to say that Yahweh comforted the Angel ‘with
good words, even comfortable words”, and why vv. 14-15 say:
“Turning
to me, the messenger then said, ‘Cry out that the sovereign Lord says,
“I am very much moved for
Jerusalem and for Zion. But I am greatly displeased with the nations
that take my grace for granted. I was a little displeased with them, but
they have only made things worse for themselves.”’” NET Bible
Furthermore,
reading further into Zechariah one will find explicit evidence that the
Angel is in fact Yahweh God:
“And
he showed me Joshua the high priest standing
before the angel of Jehovah, and Satan standing at his right hand to
be his adversary. And Jehovah said unto Satan, Jehovah rebuke thee, O Satan; yea,
Jehovah that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand
plucked out of the fire? Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and was standing before the angel. And HE answered and spake unto those that stood before him, saying,
Take the filthy garments from off him. And
unto him HE said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from
thee, and I will clothe thee with rich apparel. And I said, Let them
set a clean mitre upon his head. So they set a clean mitre upon his
head, and clothed him with garments; and
the angel of Jehovah was standing by. And the angel of Jehovah protested
unto Joshua, SAYING, Thus saith Jehovah of hosts: If
thou wilt walk in MY ways, and if thou wilt keep MY charge, then thou
also shalt judge MY house, and shalt also keep MY courts, and I will
give thee a place of access among these that stand by. Hear now, O
Joshua the high priest, thou and thy fellows that sit before thee; for
they are men that are a sign: for,
behold, I will bring forth my servant the Branch. For, behold, the
stone that I have set before Joshua; upon one stone are seven eyes:
behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith Jehovah of hosts, and
I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day. In that day, saith
Jehovah of hosts, shall ye invite every man his neighbor under the vine
and under the fig-tree.”
Zechariah 3:1-10 ASV
The
Angel here is identified as Yahweh who rebukes Satan and has the ability
to forgive Joshua of his sins, a divine function. This is not the only
place where the Angel is said to be able to forgive sins:
“I
am going to send an angel before you, to protect you in the way, and to
bring you into the place which I have prepared. Take heed because of
him, and obey his voice; do not
rebel against him, for he will not pardon your transgressions, for my
name is in him. But if you diligently obey him, and do all that I
speak, then I will be an enemy to your enemies, and I will be an
adversary to your adversaries. For my angel will go before you, and
bring you in to the Amorites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the
Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, and I will cut them off.”
Exodus 23:20-23 NET Bible
The
NET translators say in footnote 47:
…
The word is Ea*l=m^ (mal'ak),
"messenger, angel." This angel is to be treated with the same
fear and respect as Yahweh, for Yahweh will be speaking in him. Cassuto
says that the words of the first clause do
not imply a being distinct from God, for in the ancient world the
line of demarcation between the sender and the sent is liable easily to
be blurred. Cassuto then shows
how the "Angel of Yahweh" in Genesis is Yahweh. He
concludes that the words here mean "I will guide you" (pp.
305-6). Christian commentators
tend to identify the Angel of Yahweh as the second person of the Trinity
(Kaiser, p. 446; and Kaiser, Old
Testament Theology, p. 120). However,
in addition to being a
preincarnate appearance, the word could refer to Yahweh-some
manifestation of Yahweh himself. (http://netbible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_47;
bold emphasis ours)
And
in regards to the Angel embodying God’s name, in footnote 50 they
write:
…
This means "the
manifestation of my being" is in him (Driver, p. 247). Driver
then quotes McNeile as saying, "The
'angel' is Jehovah Himself 'in a temporary descent to visibility for a
special purpose'." The Talmud identified the Angel as "Metatron,"
who stood nearest the throne of God. (http://netbible.org/cgi-bin/netbible.pl#note_50;
bold emphasis ours)
The
OT also implicitly testifies that the Angel knows all things that occur
in the earth:
“For
the sake of altering the face of the matter your servant Jo’ab has
done this thing, but my lord is wise as
with the wisdom of the angel of the [true] God so as to know all that is
in the earth.” 2 Samuel 14:20 NWT
It
is therefore evident that a careful and accurate examination of the data
leads to the inevitable conclusion that this Angel is Yahweh God
Almighty.
Heinz
next tries to pull a fast one on his readers:
Next,
we have the angel of the Lord appearing to Joseph, while Mary was
pregnant (Matt 1:20), and while Jesus was a child (Matt 2:13). If Jesus
is the Angel of the Lord, then how many members of the trinity are
there?
RESPONSE:
Heinz
equivocates here since he assumes that this NT Angel of the Lord is the
same entity mentioned throughout the OT. Heinz is apparently assuming
that since both are called the Angel of the Lord then they are somehow
one and the same?! The error in Heinz’s reasoning should be apparent
to all since it is not simply the title which implies that they are the
same entity, or that the Being is God, but rather the ascription of
divine characteristics which would demonstrate these facts. For
instance, the OT states that:
1.
The Angel is
called Yahweh and God.
2.
The Angel calls
himself Yahweh and God.
3.
The Angel is
worshiped.
4.
The Angel
performs divine functions.
Yet,
there is nothing in Matt 2 that implies that THIS Angel is God or is the
same Angel of the Lord mentioned in the OT. Just because the same title
is used doesn’t mean that Matt had the same Being in view.
Just
to show you the level of dishonesty that goes into these theories, read
the follwing from Charles Ryrie: "That He [the angel of the Lord]
is a member of the Trinity is indicated by the fact that the appearances
of the Angel of Yahweh cease after the Incarnation." (To Ryrie the
"Angel of Yahweh" is the same as the"Angel of the
Lord"...see index). p. 236, Basic Theology, by Charles Ryrie.
Not
only do the above 2 Scriptures contradict him, but so do the mention of
the "angel of the Lord" at Acts 5:19; 8:26; 12:7, 23. Can we
believe ANYTHING these people say regarding the Trinity, if they are
even willing to lie about it?
RESPONSE:
Apart
from Heinz’s ad hominem slurs, it is quite evident that Heinz really
has nothing to offer by way of response. Amazingly, Heinz attacks Ryrie
based ON HIS OWN MISREADING AND MISQUOTING Ryrie’s book. Heinz has
conveniently quoted Ryrie out of context. Here is the FULL quotation
taken from p. 239 (not 236!) so as to see what Ryrie actually wrote:
B.
His Activity as Angel
1.
His identity as Angel of Yahweh.
Clearly the Angel of Yahweh is a self-manifestation of Yahweh, for
He speaks as God, identifies Himself with God, and claims to exercise
the prerogatives of God (Gen. 16:7-12; 21:17-18; 22:11-18; Ex. 3:2;
Jud. 2:1-4; 5:23; 6:11-24; 13:3-22; 2 Sam. 24:16; Zech. 1:12; 3:1;
12:8). Yet He is distinguished from Yahweh (Gen. 24:7; Zech. 1:12-13).
That He is a member of the Trinity is indicated by the fact that the
appearances of the Angel of Yahweh cease after the Incarnation. This
is confirmed by the Old Testament statement that the Angel of God
accompanied Israel when they left Egypt (Ex. 14:19; cf. 23:20) and the
New Testament statement that the Rock who followed Israel was Christ (1
Cor. 10:4). (Ryrie, Basic Theology [Victor Books, 1982], p. 239; bold and italic
emphasis ours)
Ryrie
says elsewhere:
E.
Angel of Yahweh
As
discussed in chapter 40, the Angel of Yahweh is a Christophany, a
preincarnate appearance of Christ. The
Angel speaks as God, identifies Himself with God, and exercises the
prerogatives of God (Gen. 16:7-12; 21:17-18; 22:11-18; Ex. 3:2; Jud.
2:1-4; 5:23; 6:11-24; 13:3-22; 2 Sam. 24:16; Zech. 1:12; 3:1; 12:8).
Appearances of the Angel cease after the incarnation of Christ which
supports conclusions that He was the preincarnate Christ. (Ibid., p.
130; bold emphasis ours)
In
his section on the Triunity of God, Ryrie writes:
C.
The Angel of Yahweh
Though
THIS MAY REFER TO ANY OF GOD’S
ANGELS (1 Kings 19:7; cf. v. 5), sometimes that Angel is referred to
as God, yet distinguished from Him (Gen. 16:7-13; 18:1-21; 19:1-28; Mal.
3:1). This points to personal distinctions within the Godhead. Since the
Angel is called God, He could hardly be only a prophet, functioning in
pre-prophetic times as the prophets did in later times as the prophets
did in later times (as Edmund Jacob suggests in Theology
of the Old Testament, pp. 75-76). (Ibid., pp. 51-52; bold and
capital emphasis ours)
That
Ryrie is also aware of the NT appearances of AN angel of the Lord can be
seen from his comments regarding the activity of angels during the
earthly life of Christ:
A.
At His Birth
1.
Prediction. Gabriel
predicted His birth (Matt. 1:20; Luke 1:26-28)
2.
Announcement. An
angel announced His birth to the shepherds and was then accompanied in
praise by a multitude of angels (Luke 2:8-15).
B.
During His Life
1.
Warning. An angel
warned Joseph and Mary to flee to Egypt to escape Herod’s wrath (Matt.
2:13-15).
2.
Direction. An angel
directed the family to return to Israel after Herod died (vv. 19-21).
(Ibid., pp. 131-132)
These
citations show that Ryrie is clearly aware that there are other angels
who are called the/an angel of the Lord. After reading Ryrie’s
statements IN CONTEXT, it is quite clear what Ryrie meant regarding this
Angel ceasing to appear after the Incarnation. After the birth of the
Lord Jesus, you will not find any angel speaking as God, identifying
himself as God, and/or exercising the prerogatives of God. We therefore
challenge Heinz TO PRODUCE NT CITATIONS WHERE AN ANGEL SPEAKS AND ACTS
AS GOD, AS WELL AS CLAIMING TO HAVE THE VERY PREROGATIVES OF GOD IN THE
SAME WAY THAT THE ANGEL OF YAHWEH DOES IN THE OT.
In
light of the foregoing, it is quite obvious that Heinz has either
deliberately twisted Ryrie’s words and/or misunderstood what he
actually meant. Therefore, can we believe ANYTHING Heinz says regarding
the Trinity, when he is willing to lie and twist primary sources to suit
his purposes?
Heinz
next quotes Elwell:
"He
is distinguished from God in that God refers to the angel (Ex 23:23;
32:34) and speaks to him (2 Sam 24:16; 1 Chron 21:27) and the angel
speaks to Yahweh (Zech 1:12). The evidence for the view that the angel
of the Lord is a preincarnate appearance of Christ is basically
analogical and false short of it being conclusive. The NT does not
clearly show make that identification." Evangelical Dictionary of Theology
by Elwell, p. 62
RESPONSE:
As
we had noted in our initial response, Heinz is fond of committing the
fallacy of appealing to authority (argumentum
ad verecundiam). We had stated that one way a person commits this
fallacy is by appealing to certain experts, while failing to note that
other experts disagree with those cited.
In other words, since experts in the field disagree on an issue
to appeal to one group of experts proves absolutely nothing.
The
fact of the matter is that biblical scholars do not all agree over the
precise identity of the Angel of Yahweh, something which can be seen
from Elwell’s book. For example, contributing author T.E. McComiskey
states:
“Many
understand the angel of the Lord as a true theophany. From the time of
Justin on, the figure has been regarded as the preincarnate Logos. It
is BEYOND QUESTION that the angel of the Lord MUST
BE IDENTIFIED in some way with God (Gen. 16:13; Judg. 6:14;
13:21-22), yet he is distinguished from God in that God refers to the
angel (Exod. 23:23; 32:34) and speaks to him (2 Sam. 24:16; 1 Chron.
21:27) and the angel speaks to Yahweh (Zech. 1:12).
The
evidence for that the angel of the Lord is a preincarnate appearance of
Christ is basically analogically and falls short of being conclusive.
The NT does not clearly make that identification. It is best to see the angel AS A SELF-MANIFESTATION OF YAHWEH in a form that would
communicate his immanence and direct concern to those whom he
ministered.” (Elwell, Evangelical
Dictionary of Theology [Baker Book House; 2nd edition, May 2001], p.
62; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Contributor
J.C. Moyer disagrees. Under the heading Theophany,
Moyer writes:
“… Some label
the expression ‘angel of the Lord’ or ‘angel of God’ as a
theophanic angel. These expression occur more than fifty times in the
OT; some of the most important passages include Exodus 23:20-23;
32:34; and Isaiah 63:9. Various interpretations have been suggested
including an appearance of God himself, an appearance of a messenger
or one of God’s many angels, and an appearance of the preincarnate
Christ. Each interpretation has difficulties, and there is no
consensus.” (Ibid., p. 1191)
The
problem is far from solved. Elwell also edited Baker’s Theological Dictionary of the Bible. On p. 770, under the
heading Theophany,
contributing writer William C. Williams claims:
“Manifestation
of God that is tangible to the human senses. In its most restrictive
sense, it is a visible appearance of God in the Old Testament period
often, but not always, in human form. Some would also include in this
term Christophanies (preincarnate appearances of Christ) and
angelophanies (appearances of angels). In the latter category are
found the appearances of the angel of the Lord, which some have taken
as Christophanies, reasoning that since the angel speaks for God in
the first person (Gen. 16:10) and the human addressed often attributes
this experience to God directly (Gen. 16:13), the angel must therefore
be the Lord or the preincarnate Christ. Yet, though the angel is
clearly identified with the Lord, he is distinguished from him (he is
called ‘angel,’ meaning ‘messenger’; similar patterns of
identification and distinction can be seen in Genesis 19:1, 21; 31:11,
13; Exod. 3:2, 4; Judg. 2:1-5; 6:11-12, 14; 13:3, 6, 8-11, 13, 15-17,
20-23; Zech. 3:1-6; 12:8). In the ancient oriental world, a king’s
messenger spoke in the name of the king. Any insult to the king
himself (cf. Hanun’s treatment of David’s embassy, 2 Sam. 10:1-4;
1 Chron. 19:2-6). There seems, therefore, no necessity to posit a
theophany for the angel of the Lord. In Joshua 5:13-6:5, the conquest
narrative is interrupted by the abrupt appearance of a being who calls
himself the ‘commander of the army of the Lord’ (5:14). To
interpret this event as an encounter with God oR with the preincarnate
Christ forces the text. Angels were sent on missions of this kind (Judg.
6:11, 13:3), and some were identified as captains over heavenly armies
(Dan. 10:5, 20; 12:1). While there are no indisputable Christophanies
in the Old Testament, every theophany wherein God takes on human form
foreshadows the incarnation, both in matters of grace and judgment.”
(Baker Theological Dictionary of
the Bible, edited by Walter A. Elwell [Baker Books: Grand Rapids,
MI, 1996], p. 770; http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi?number=T690)
In
the same volume we find contributor Louis Goldberg disagreeing with
Williams! The former writes:
Angel
of the Lord.
(Heb., mal’ak yehwah).
Supernatural being who bears a message on behalf of God. In many
passages in the Old Testament, the angel of the Lord is identified with
God, while in other instances a distinction is made between the Lord and
the angel. In general, however, the terms ‘the angel of the Lord,’
‘the Lord,’ and ‘God’ are interchangeable.
The angel of the
Lord is the messenger of both good and evil. He comes to Hagar after she
has fled from the abusive Sarai (Gen. 16:7-14) to assure her that God
has heard about her misery and that her descendants will be too numerous
to count. She names him ‘You are the God who sees me’ (v. 13). The
angel of the Lord pronounces a curse on the people of Meroz, because
they refused to come to the help of the Lord (Judg. 5:23).
The
angel of the Lord executes judgment on behalf of the Lord. He puts to
death 185,000 Assyrian soldiers in their camp, thereby saving Jerusalem
from decimation (2 Kings 19:35).
The
angel of the Lord both commissions and commends God’s servants. The
commander of the Lord’s army commissions Joshua to undertake the
Lord’s battles for Canaan, just as Moses had been commissioned to
confront Pharaoh (Josh. 5:13-15; cf. Exod. 3:5). The angel of the Lord
appears to Abraham. He stops Abraham from sacrificing Isaac and commends
him because he has not withheld his only son from God (Gen. 22:11-18).
Abraham identifies the angel as God, calling the place ‘The
LORD Will Provide.’
The
angel of the Lord carries out a ministry of reconciliation. He asks how
long God will withhold mercy from Jerusalem and Judah (Zech. 1:12).
The
connection between the angel of the Lord and the preincarnate
appearances of the Messiah CANNOT BE DENIED. Manoah meets the angel of
the Lord, and declares that he has seen God. The angel accepts worship
from Manoah and his wife as no mere angel, and refers to himself as
‘Wonderful,’ the same term applied to the coming deliverer in Isaiah
9:6 (Judg. 13:9-22). The functions of the angel of the Lord in the Old
Testament prefigure the reconciling ministry of Jesus. In the New
Testament, there is no mention of the angel of the Lord; THE MESSIAH
HIMSELF IS THIS PERSON.” (Ibid., p. 23- http://bible1.crosswalk.com/Dictionaries/BakersEvangelicalDictionary/bed.cgi?number=T33;
capital emphasis ours)
This
means that instead of quoting authorities, one must prove their case
from the Holy Bible. Once this is done, it becomes rather evident that
the Angel is indeed Yahweh God.
Heinz
concludes with some comments from the NIV Study Bible:
"Traditional
Christian interpretation has held that this 'angel' was a preincarnate
manifestation of Christ as God's messenger-Servant. It may be, however,
that, as the Lord's personal messenger who represented
him and bore his credentials, the angel could speak on behalf of the
(an so be identified with)
the One who sent him (see especially 19:21; cf. 18:2, 22; 19:2). Whether
this 'angel' was the second person of the Trinity remains therefore
uncertain." NIV Study Bible, Genesis 16:7]
Again,
this is simply another example of appealing to authority and simply
demonstrates that scholars are not unanimous in their views. Yet, do
note the NIV’s statement carefully:
"Traditional
Christian interpretation has held that this 'angel' was a
preincarnate manifestation of Christ as God's messenger-Servant…
Amazingly,
Heinz failed to quote the one source that is far more authoritative for
him as a JW then all the others he has cited; a source which concedes
the plausibility of the Traditional Christian interpretation. Insight on
the Scriptures writes:
“Doubtless on
many occasions during his prehuman existence as the Word, Jesus acted
as Jehovah’s Spokesman to persons on earth. While certain texts
refer to Jehovah as though directly speaking to humans, other texts
make clear that he did so through an angelic representative. (Compare
Ex 3:2-4 with Acts 7:30, 35; also Ge 16:7-11, 13, 22:1, 11, 12,
15-18.) Reasonably, in the
majority of such cases God spoke through the Word. He likely did
so in Eden, for on two of the three occasions where mention is made of
God’s speaking there, the record specifically shows someone with
Him, undoubtedly his Son. (Ge 1:26-30; 2:16, 17; 3:8-19, 22) The angel
who guided Israel through the wilderness and whose voice the
Israelites were strictly to obey because ‘Jehovah’s name was
within him,’ may therefore
have been God’s Son, the Word.- Ex 23:20-23; compare Jos
5:13-15.’” (Insight, vol. 2, p. 53; bold emphasis ours)
And:
“In a similar
way God’s firstborn Son doubtless served as the Mouth, or Spokesman,
for his Father, the great king of Eternity. He was God’s Word of
communication for conveying information and instructions to the
Creator’s other spirit and human sons. It is reasonable to think
that prior to Jesus’ coming to earth, on many of the occasions when
God communicated with humans he
used the Word as his angelic mouthpiece. (Ge 16:7-11; 22:11;
31:11; Ex 3:2-5; Jg 2:1-4; 6:11, 12; 13:3) Since the angel that guided
the Israelites through the wilderness had ‘Jehovah’s name within
him,’ he may have been
God’s Son, the Word.- Ex 23:20-23; see JESUS CHRIST (Prehuman
Existence).” (Ibid., p. 1203; bold emphasis ours).
Hence,
even the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society concedes the possibility
that the Angel is none other than the preincarnate Christ!
For
more information regarding the biblical evidence which supports the view
that this Angel is Yahweh God, and that he is indeed the preincarnate
Christ, we recommend the following articles:
http://www.answering-islam.org.uk/Responses/Menj/tam1.htm
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/trin02.html
http://christian-thinktank.com/nothe.html
http://www.answering-islam.org/Who/angel_of_the_lord.html
http://www.tektonics.org/aotl.html
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/14-06/similarities.htm
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/02-09/angel.htm
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/14-06/messenger.htm
|