For which Jehovah should we witness?

[dakoski]

Jesus claimed to be the sent one from Jehovah (i.e. the angel of Jehovah as angel means ‘sent one’) e.g. Matt 10:40, 15:24, 21:37; Mark 9:37, 12:6; Luke 4:18, 4:43, 9:48, 10:16.; John 3:34, 4:34, 5:23, 5:24, 5:30, 5:36, 5:37, 5;38, 6:38, 6:44, 6:57, 7:16 etc. He also claimed to be the unique revelation of Jehovah: ‘No one knows the Father but the Son and those to whom he chooses to reveal him.’ (Matt 11:27)

The angel of Jehovah is a central figure throughout the Hebrew Scriptures (e.g. Genesis chapters 16, 18-19, 21, 24, 28, 31, 48; Exodus 3, 23, 24, 28, 31, 32, 33-34; Numbers 22; Judges 2, 5, 6, 13 etc.). He is the unique revelation of Jehovah, both referred to as Jehovah but also distinguished from Jehovah in the heavens who no one may see and live. There are a vast number of references where the angel of Jehovah is addressed as Jehovah so there’s only space for a few key examples but we can work through as many as you wish:

1) Gen 18-19.
18:1 makes clear Jehovah appears to Abraham. 19:1 clarifies that of the three people who visit Abraham two of these were angels who are then sent to Sodom. The person left with Abraham continues to be addressed as Jehovah (e.g. 18:20, 22, 26) by Abraham and the narrator. Then the angel of Jehovah leaves Abraham (18:33) and goes to Sodom to destroy the city: "By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land. Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens." (Gen 19:23-24)

Of course the word translated Lord here is Jehovah. Even more interesting is that the person who speaks with Abraham and who goes down to Sodom is addressed as Jehovah and is distinguished from another person in the heavens also addressed as Jehovah. This is found in the JW’s NWT as well as all other translations

2) Exodus 33. This passage similarly distinguishes between a person addressed as Jehovah who spoke regularly with Moses face to face (v11) and another person also addressed as Jehovah who no one may see face to face and live (v20). Again this is found in the JW’s NWT as well as all other translations.

Questions for debate:
1) Do you think Jesus was claiming to be the angel of Jehovah mentioned in the Old Testament?

2) Do you agree that the angel of Jehovah was referred to as Jehovah, yet distinguished from Jehovah in the heavens? If not, what do you think these passages are teaching?

3) What is the significance of the angel of Jehovah being addressed as Jehovah:

a) Does it just reflect that the angel of Jehovah as ambassador was speaking on behalf of Jehovah but was not actually Jehovah? If this was common practice, wouldn’t we expect to see many examples of other ambassadors of Jehovah being referred to as Jehovah? Was any other angel, prophet, or messenger referred to as Jehovah?

b) Does it reflect that Jehovah is not a single person God? But rather that Jehovah in the heavens has always sent another person, who equally bears the divine name Jehovah, as a mediator with humanity?

[dakoski]

[Replying to post 148 by dakoski]

No you did not. Please refer to the specific points in post # 147 you have yet to address, namely authority and rank.


Thank you in advance.

JW

I have addressed this by referring to 1 Corinthians 11:3 which specifically answers your question.

I still haven't heard your defence for your assertion that this passage teaches that Jesus is a lesser god than the Father. In order to make that argument you are going to have to show that women are less human than men - good luck with that.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 150 by dakoski]

No you did not. You made no reference to authority nor to rank or position which is the question at hand.

Indeed I have gone through the entire thread and you have never once made a direct reference to which of the two person's in question is of superior rank, position or authority. I can only presume that your avoiding even mentioning these words because doing so would matter rubbish of any theory they are both Almighty.

Feel free to refer to post 147 for clarification.


Regards,


JW

[dakoski]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness]

No you did not. You made no reference to authority nor to rank or position which is the question at hand.

Indeed I have gone through the entire thread and you have never once made a direct reference to which of the two person's in question is of superior rank, position or authority. I can only presume that your avoiding even mentioning these words because doing so would matter rubbish of any theory they are both Almighty.

Feel free to refer to post 147 for clarification.


Regards,


JW

The point of this thread is to discuss the angel of Jehovah and whether Scripture refers to him as Jehovah. I have shown some flexibility and have more than addressed your question despite you repeatedly asking it. I have answered more than 10 times that the Father and Son have distinct roles but are equally Jehovah. I have each of these times provided scriptures to back up these claims. You have not been able to rebut any of these arguments.

You keep telling me you're not satisfied with this answer - if you can show that I have somehow missed something that is relevant to the questions for debate on this thread then I'm happy to address that. If you'd like to discuss a topic different from that posed in this thread then feel free to start another thread.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 152 by dakoski]

And still you avoid any mention of rank, authority or position indeed it seems you are diligently avoiding any mention of these notions. Of course you could make the statement that the two different persons in questions are BOTH Almightybut I think we both know that would expose a fundamental flaw in reasoning.

If you want to answer the question feel free to. If you don't, given that it strikes at the very heart of your theory, I will understand you declining and wanting to change the subject. One does not rock a boat that is about to sink.

What we do know is that that angel (however he is called in heaven) submits to the Father and is of a lower rank and has less authority than his Father and only does what he is told to do or instructed to do.

Agreed?

Good day to you.



JW

[dakoski]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness]

And still you avoid any mention of rank, authority or position indeed it seems you are diligently avoiding any mention of these notions. Of course you could make the statement that the two different persons in questions are BOTH Almightybut I think we both know that would expose a fundamental flaw in reasoning.

If you want to answer the question feel free to. If you don't, given that it strikes at the very heart of your theory, I will understand you declining and wanting to change the subject. One does not rock a boat that is about to sink.

Its a bit early for the pantomine season - so I'm getting tired of the 'oh yes I did' 'oh no you didn't'. If you think there's a flaw in my reasoning then please point it out. I've shown clearly from Scripture:

The Father and Son are distinct but both are Jehovah

The Bible says that the angel of Jehovah (Jesus) is Jehovah (e.g. Exodus 33:11, Genesis 18:1) and is distinct from another person (the Father) who is also Jehovah (Exodus 33:20)

The Bible shows the Father and Son have different roles

This is summed up in 1 Corinthians 11:3 which says that just as men and women have different roles but are equally human - so the Father and Son have different roles but are equally Jehovah.

If you think there is some flaw in Biblical interpretation or reasoning please point it out.

I get that you want to try to put words in my mouth to make a particularly point - hence asking the same question 10-15 times and keep claiming I'm not answering in the way you want. Unfortunately, if you want to make that point you're going to have to make it yourself using your own words. If you're willing to do then I'll happily evaluate your argument.

But the reality is the Scripture I've cited above speak for themselves - if you want to try to find flaws in what they are saying you'll find you're arguing with God and not with men but that's up to you.

[Elijah John]

The Father and Son are distinct but both are Jehovah

Then what is the Father's name? What name was Jesus referencing when he said, "hallowed be thy name? One can infer from that statement that the Father has a name all his own. Otherwise, wouldn't it be "Hallowed be our name?

"Thy", "your", refences someone other than one's self.

And remember, Jesus did not include himself as the object of prayer when teaching the LORD's prayer. In that very same prayer, he did not even teach to "pray in Jesus name".

Everything about that prayer is thoroughly Jewish and utterly Monotheistic, not Trinitarian by any stretch of the imagination.

[dakoski]

[Replying to Elijah John]

Then what is the Father's name? What name was Jesus referencing when he said, "hallowed be thy name? One can infer from that statement that the Father has a name all his own. Otherwise, wouldn't it be "Hallowed be our name?

"Thy", "your", refences someone other than one's self.

If you check the line you quoted from me: 'The Father and the Son are distinct but both are Jehovah' then of course I agree that the Father is distinct from the Son - I'm not a modalist (i.e. I do not think that the Father and the Son are the same person - they are distinct). But they are also united in the divine name YHWH - as I've shown from passages in Genesis, Exodus, Dueteronomy, Judges, Isaiah and many others in the thread.

So I affirm both their distinction - although the angel of YHWH is given a distinct title he is also addressed as YHWH. In a similar way the YHWH in the heavens (Genesis 19) is sometimes given as a title for the Father who no one may see and live. But I also affirm their unity in that they are both addressed as YHWH.

You're also being a little literalistic with the use of 'name' here. In Hebrew thought name is often about character and - so to hallow someone's name is to hallow their character.

And remember, Jesus did not include himself as the object of prayer when teaching the LORD's prayer. In that very same prayer, he did not even teach to "pray in Jesus name".

Everything about that prayer is thoroughly Jewish and utterly Monotheistic, not Trinitarian by any stretch of the imagination.

Yes that's correct that prayer is primarily to be directed to the Father. As I say, I affirm both distinctions in role but also their unity in bearing the divine name - the Lord's prayer does not say that 'the Father alone is God and Jesus is not' so you're over reaching with your conclusion.

But remember that the Lord's prayer is a model prayer - it doesn't mean we just recite that prayer literally and use no other form of prayer. Otherwise we would have to declare the very Hebrew prayers of the Psalms, the prayers of Jesus and others null and void - which of course is not the point of Jesus teaching on prayer.

There are many examples in the Bible where people pray to Jesus: e.g. 1 Cor 1:1-2, 2 Cor 12:8-9, 2 Thess 2:16-17, Acts 7:59, Rev 22:20. You most probably don't accept the authority of these verses - but that's OK for us to agree to disagree due to our different presuppositions on the authority of Scripture.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 156 by dakoski]

Sorry for the interjection. But, I just read all those verses and none of them imply prayer to Yeshua. Acts was the closest, but if ok, the and wouldn't be there. There is instruction in the Tanakh about directing all prayer to God(YHWH) and Jesus followed that throughout what we know of his short career.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 156 by dakoski]

You seem to be quibbling about the meaning of the term "name". I guess we'll have to disagree on that. Are you also quibbling on the meaning of the term "thy", or "your"?

Does the Father or doesn't He have a name all His own? The one constantly referred to the the Psalms, as well as the one alluded to in the LORD's prayer. Isn't it reasonable to conclude that Jesus was referring to the same name as was referenced in the Psalms? And by the prophets?

I do not recall the name of the Messiah being mentioned at all in the Pslams, I DO remember the name of the Father being mentioned, (rendered as LORD in most English translations), repeatedly.

Is is obvious that Yahshua and Yahweh are not the same name, even if one wants to make the case that they are the same person. No one ever called Jesus "Yahweh" in his lifetime nor did he ever call himself "Yahweh" as far as we know. Yes, Jesus' (Yahshua's) name incorporates the name of Father Yahweh, but so do many other theophonic names, such as Elijah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Jo-el (YHVH God, or YHVH is God), Joshua (Yahshua) etc. None of that makes those people "God".

[dakoski]

[Replying to Elijah John]

You seem to be quibbling about the meaning of the term "name". I guess we'll have to disagree on that. Are you also quibbling on the meaning of the term "thy", or "your"?

Does the Father or doesn't He have a name all His own? The one constantly referred to the the Psalms, as well as the one alluded to in the LORD's prayer. Isn't it reasonable to conclude that Jesus was referring to the same name as was referenced in the Psalms? And by the prophets?

The Lord's prayer, and the rest of the New Testament, distinguishes the Father from the Son. That does not imply that the Father is YHWH and the Son is not. It just means they are distinct persons - which is consistent with the Hebrew Scriptures where the angel of YHWH (who speaks face to face with humans) is referred to as YHWH along with another person who no one may see and live. We have to let the Hebrew Scriptures inform our understanding of YHWH rather than impose our own presuppositions.

I do not recall the name of the Messiah being mentioned at all in the Pslams, I DO remember the name of the Father being mentioned, (rendered as LORD in most English translations), repeatedly.

As we've seen in the thread YHWH (or LORD in most English translations) is used not only for the Father (e.g. Exodus 33:20) who no one may see and live but the one sent by YHWH (Exodus 33:11). Jesus over 50 times in the New Testament refers to himself as the one sent by the Father.

Is is obvious that Yahshua and Yahweh are not the same name, even if one wants to make the case that they are the same person. No one ever called Jesus "Yahweh" in his lifetime nor did he ever call himself "Yahweh" as far as we know. Yes, Jesus' (Yahshua's) name incorporates the name of Father Yahweh, but so do many other theophonic names, such as Elijah, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Jo-el (YHVH God, or YHVH is God), Joshua (Yahshua) etc. None of that makes those people "God".

Either you've misunderstood or this is a strawman argument - I'll choose to give you the benefit of the doubt.

YHWH is referred to by a range of names and titles in the Hebrew Bible e.g. Elohim, Adonai, El Shaddai, El Elyon, El Olam, the Angel of YHWH, YHWH in the heavens. So being addressed as Yeshua (or Yahshua) doesn't mean that he is not YHWH.

Yes that's true that Jesus is not called Yahweh in the New Testament - nor is the Father. That's because the New Testament is written in Greek not Hebrew. The Jewish translation into Greek (the Septuagint) translates YHWH as Kurios in Greek - Jesus is addressed as Kurios multiple times in the New Testament.

If we want to know about whether only one person was addressed as YHWH we'd need to go back to the Hebrew Scriptures. When we do that we find that there is a person who no one may see face to face (Exodus 33:20) and another person who people may seen face to face (Genesis 18-19, Exodus 33:11 etc).I.e. the theory that only the Father is referred to as YHWH is falsified.