"Let Us Make Man In Our Image"

[jamie]

"Behold, behold that I am he, and there is no god beside me"​

(Deut.32:39).​

There is only one God but that does not mean just one person who is God.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Hi JudgeRightly,

One of the meanings of the Hebrew word translated "angel" is "messenger." Here we read that the "messenger" of Jehovah's "presence" saved Israel:

"The kind acts of Jehovah I make mention of, The praises of Jehovah, According to all that Jehovah hath done for us, And the abundance of the goodness to the house of Israel, That He hath done for them, According to His mercies, And according to the abundance of His kind acts. And He saith, Only My people they `are', Sons -- they lie not, and He is to them for a saviour. In all their distress `He is' no adversary, And the messenger of His presence saved them, In His love and in His pity He redeemed them, And He doth lift them up, And beareth them all the days of old" (Isa.63:7-9; YLT).​

In that passage we read that Jehovah is the Savior of Israel. We also read that the "messenger of His presence" saved Israel. Jehovah also says that besides Him "there is no savior."

"Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. 11. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour" (Isa.43:10-11).​

Therefore, we can know that Jehovah and the "messenger of His presence" are One. We can also know that this "messenger of His presence" is the Lord Jesus because He is God and that Savior:

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our saviour Jesus Christ" (Acts 13:23).​

Jerry, I can't seem to figure out which side of the issue you're on. Are you a trinitarian?

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, I can't seem to figure out which side of the issue you're on. Are you a trinitarian?

Yes I am. I just don't believe that the Lord Jesus is an angel or has ever been an angel. I believe that the correct translation which is referring to the Lord Jesus is not "angel of His presence" but instead "messenger of His presence."

Do you believe that the Lord Jesus was ever an angel?

Thanks!

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes I am. I just don't believe that the Lord Jesus is an angel or has ever been an angel. I believe that the correct translation which is referring to the Lord Jesus is not "angel of His presence" but instead "messenger of His presence."

Do you believe that the Lord Jesus was ever an angel?

Thanks!

No, I don't believe He was an angel either. Hence why I put "The Angel of the Lord" in quotes. It's a title, like the "Son of Man."

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again JudgeRightly and Jerry,

Exodus 3:6 "The Angel of the Lord" is a phrase used to refer to God Himself, and is most likely Jesus pre-incarnate. Jesus himself said "Before Abraham was, I am," pointing to when Moses asked God what His name was, and God said "I AM WHO I AM."

I have already given my understanding of John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14 in the thread “The Meaning of the Term Son of God” posts 66,70,71.

Yes, I will admit it. However, are you willing to argue that the Elohim mentioned in the following verse is the same elohim which refers to angels?:

"Behold, behold that I am he, and there is no god beside me"​

(Deut.32:39).​

Unless you are willing to argue that the Elohim in this verse is the same elohim at Psalm 8:5 then you have no case.
Are you willing to argue that?

In Psalm 8:5 the Angels (Elohim) are mentioned as distinct from Yahweh. In Deuteronomy 32:39 the word Elohim seems to be saying that all pagan gods that people regard as Gods are nothing. If it is talking of the angels, then it is saying that the angels only exist because of God, even as we only draw our breath because of God’s power and providential care.

Therefore, we can know that Jehovah and the "messenger of His presence" are One. We can also know that this "messenger of His presence" is the Lord Jesus because He is God and that Savior:

I suggest that you are missing the clear testimony of the Scriptures by denying the existence of the Angels, who represent God, speaking and acting on His behalf. We are given the names of at least two of the angels, Gabriel and Michael, who stand in God's presence.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[JudgeRightly]

Greetings again Jerry,
I have already explained my understanding of John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14 in the thread “The Meaning of the Term Son of God” posts 66,70,71.

Perhaps you could recap it here, briefly, or even better, provide a link to the thread post.

In Psalm 8:5 the Angels (Elohim) are mentioned as distinct from Yahweh. In Deuteronomy 32:39 the word Elohim seems to be saying that all pagan gods that people regard as Gods are nothing. If it is talking of the angels, then it is saying that the angels only exist because of God, even as we only draw our breath because of God’s power and providential care.
I suggest that you are missing the clear testimony of the Scriptures by denying the existence of the Angels, who represent God, speaking and acting on His behalf. We are given the names of at least two of the angels, Gabriel and Michael, who stand in God's presence.

Kind regards
Trevor

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[Jerry Shugart]

In Psalm 8:5 the Angels (Elohim) are mentioned as distinct from Yahweh.

So your argument that it was both god and the angels who created man falls flat on its face.

I suggest that you are missing the clear testimony of the Scriptures by denying the existence of the Angels, who represent God, speaking and acting on His behalf. We are given the names of at least two of the angels, Gabriel and Michael, who stand in God's presence.

I never denied the existence of angels.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again JudgeRightly and Jerry,

Perhaps you could recap it here, briefly, or even better, provide a link to the thread post.

I am not sure how to link the thread, but the following was my part of post 66 of “The Meaning of the Term Son of God” thread. Post 70 was explaining the view that the Divine Name is better translated as “I will be” showing also that there is not a strong link to John 8:58, and post 71 was a brief development of the Name showing that it is fulfilled in Christ. At the moment the latest post on the thread was December 30th.

The immediate context of John 8:58 gives the meaning of “I am”:
John 8:23-28 (KJV): 23 And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. 24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. 25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning. 26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. 27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. 28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Now note that the KJV translators have added the "he"” in both occurrences, and this gives the impression that they did not believe that Jesus was claiming here a connection with Exodus 3:14. It speaks in the first of his claim to a Divine origin as the Son of God v23, and in the second that he was the Son of Man v28. Rather than having some claim to independent Deity, he rather states his absolute dependence upon God His Father, “I do nothing of myself”.

So your argument that it was both god and the angels who created man falls flat on its face.

Not at all, but it appears that what I have attempted to explain, possibly a bit obscure, is unacceptable to you or outside your comprehension. Possibly one day you will at least understand what I am trying to say, even if you do not agree.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[daqq]

Psalm 8:5 is not so hard to understand as it is for most to simply accept. The passage clearly contains the word Elohim in Hebrew but in the Septuagint and in the epistle to the Hebrews which quotes it from the Septuagint, (Hebrews 2:6-8, and applies it to Yeshua in Hebrews 2:9), both render Elohim into Greek as αγγελους which clearly means Angelous-Angels or Messengers:

Which one is it? Is it "God" or "Angels" in the passage in question?

Psalm 8:4-5 KJV
4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?
5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, [Elohim] and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

Psalm 8:4-5 ASV
4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? And the son of man, that thou visitest him?
5 For thou hast made him but little lower than God, [Elohim] And crownest him with glory and honor.

Either way "the Son of man" is made a little lower, that is to say, either a little lower than the Elohim-Angels or a little lower than Elohim. So again, ask yourselves, which one is it? Which rendering above is correct? The KJV or the ASV? But remember that either way you answer, the answer will clearly define the Son of man as being a little lower or lesser than the Father who is YHWH Elohim the Almighty.

Who is this Son of man!?!? :chuckle:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Possibly one day you will at least understand what I am trying to say, even if you do not agree.

I understand what you are trying to say. Why didn't you respond to what I said to you earlier?:

Are you willing to argue that the Elohim mentioned in the following verse is the same elohim which refers to angels?:

"Behold, behold that I am he, and there is no god beside me"​

(Deut.32:39).​

Unless you are willing to argue that the Elohim in this verse is the same elohim at Psalm 8:5 then you have no case.

Are you willing to argue that?

Thanks!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Psalm 8:5 is not so hard to understand as it is for most to simply accept. The passage clearly contains the word Elohim in Hebrew but in the Septuagint and in the epistle to the Hebrews which quotes it from the Septuagint, (Hebrews 2:6-8, and applies it to Yeshua in Hebrews 2:9), both render Elohim into Greek as αγγελους which clearly means Angelous-Angels or Messengers:

Are you willing to argue that the Elohim who is speaking in the following verse is the same elohim which refers to angels?:

"Behold, behold that I am he, and there is no god beside me"​

(Deut.32:39).​

Are you willing to argue that?

But remember that either way you answer, the answer will clearly define the Son of man as being a little lower or lesser than the Father who is YHWH Elohim the Almighty.

Yes, but before He was made a little lower than the angels He was in the form of God:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

 

[daqq]

Yes, but before He was made a little lower than the angels He was in the form of God:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

Thank you for admitting that your claim "Jesus is Jehovah" is false, (or "JHWH" as you also have said). We have already been over "the form", (of God), which you already know says "a form".

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings daqq and Greetings again Jerry,

Psalm 8:5 is not so hard to understand as it is for most to simply accept. The passage clearly contains the word Elohim in Hebrew but in the Septuagint and in the epistle to the Hebrews which quotes it from the Septuagint, (Hebrews 2:6-8, and applies it to Yeshua in Hebrews 2:9), both render Elohim into Greek as αγγελους which clearly means Angelous-Angels or Messengers:
Which one is it? Is it "God" or "Angels" in the passage in question?
Either way "the Son of man" is made a little lower, that is to say, either a little lower than the Elohim-Angels or a little lower than Elohim. So again, ask yourselves, which one is it? Which rendering above is correct? The KJV or the ASV? But remember that either way you answer, the answer will clearly define the Son of man as being a little lower or lesser than the Father who is YHWH Elohim the Almighty.

I appreciate your spelling this out, but I suggest that if Paul was simply quoting the LXX, when it is then possible that the LXX is wrong, then his whole argument that Jesus must of necessity be made lower than the angels is on shaky ground. Rather he is either stating that Elohim in Psalm 8:5 should be translated angels, or he is as well fully agreeing with the LXX.

I understand what you are trying to say. Why didn't you respond to what I said to you earlier?:
Are you willing to argue that the Elohim mentioned in the following verse is the same elohim which refers to angels?:

"Behold, behold that I am he, and there is no god beside me"​

(Deut.32:39).​

Unless you are willing to argue that the Elohim in this verse is the same elohim at Psalm 8:5 then you have no case.
Are you willing to argue that?

But I did answer you and it seems to me that your locking Deuteronomy 32:39 (rather how you seem to view the second part of Deuteronomy 32:39) with the Elohim of Psalm 8:5 indicates that you will not allow Elohim in Psalm 8:5 to be translated as Angels. This would disallow or undermine the exposition in Hebrews 2. So to answer your question, the Elohim of Psalm 8:5, although absolutely dependant on Yahweh, God the Father, are separate beings to Yahweh, and are the Angels as taught by Spirit inspiration in Hebrews 2.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So to answer your question, the Elohim of Psalm 8:5, although absolutely dependant on Yahweh, God the Father, are separate beings to Yahweh, and are the Angels as taught by Spirit inspiration in Hebrews 2.

Then I can only conclude that the "us" in these verses have nothing to do with angels:

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him" (Gen.1:26,27).​

If the "us" in verse 26 is including angels then we must believe that the way the word "God" is used in verse 27 means that angels make up the Godhead.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Thank you for admitting that your claim "Jesus is Jehovah" is false, (or "JHWH" as you also have said). We have already been over "the form", (of God), which you already know says "a form".

Thanks for putting words in my mouth which I never said. Here we see a verse that speaks of the Lord Jesus:

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (Isa.9:6).​

The Mighty God is none other than JHWH:

"Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD (JHWH) of hosts, is his name" (Jer.32:18).​

Therfore, common sense dictates that the Lord Jesus is JHWH.

 

[Ben Masada]

Let Us Make Man in Our Image.

Since HaShem has no image, if you read Deuteronomy 4:15-20, it means that man was created according to His attributes.

 

[daqq]

Greetings daqq and Greetings again Jerry,
I appreciate your spelling this out, but I suggest that if Paul was simply quoting the LXX, when it is then possible that the LXX is wrong, then his whole argument that Jesus must of necessity be made lower than the angels is on shaky ground. Rather he is either stating that Elohim in Psalm 8:5 should be translated angels, or he is as well fully agreeing with the LXX.

But I did answer you and it seems to me that your locking Deuteronomy 32:39 (rather how you seem to view the second part of Deuteronomy 32:39) with the Elohim of Psalm 8:5 indicates that you will not allow Elohim in Psalm 8:5 to be translated as Angels. This would disallow or undermine the exposition in Hebrews 2. So to answer your question, the Elohim of Psalm 8:5, although absolutely dependant on Yahweh, God the Father, are separate beings to Yahweh, and are the Angels as taught by Spirit inspiration in Hebrews 2.

Kind regards
Trevor

In the portion you addressed to me: you are assuming that Paul wrote Hebrews? While that may be your assumption what I stated is not assumption because I know from Hebrews 1:6 that the author is quoting from the LXX-Septuagint. I know this because the quote found in Hebrews 1:6 cannot be found anywhere in the Masoretic Hebrew text but was taken straight from the LXX-Septuagint, (Deuteronomy 32:43 LXX). By the way this also changes the entire meaning of the statement in Hebrews 1:6 because it speaks of bringing the firstborn, (Yisrael), again-back into the Land; which is exactly what happened at that very same time with the passing of Moshe. The phrase "Let all the messengers do obeisance unto him" may only be found in the Septuagint and that is precisely what all the Prophets do, that is, they write and prophesy of Meshiah. Even king David did obeisance unto him when he calls him Adoni, ("my Master").

 

[daqq]

Thanks for putting words in my mouth which I never said. Here we see a verse that speaks of the Lord Jesus:

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace" (Isa.9:6).​

The Mighty God is none other than JHWH:

"Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD (JHWH) of hosts, is his name" (Jer.32:18).​

Therfore, common sense dictates that the Lord Jesus is JHWH.

That is what the passage teaches and you answered, "Yes, (but)..."
You appear not to even really care what the scripture says when it refutes your paradigm.

 

[JudgeRightly]

That is what the passage teaches and you answered, "Yes, (but)..."
You appear not to even really care what the scripture says when it refutes your paradigm.

I dont see a "Yes, (but)..." anywhere in his post.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

 

[daqq]

I dont see a "Yes, (but)..." anywhere in his post.

Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app

Are you willing to argue that the Elohim who is speaking in the following verse is the same elohim which refers to angels?:

"Behold, behold that I am he, and there is no god beside me"​

(Deut.32:39).​

Are you willing to argue that?



Yes, but before He was made a little lower than the angels He was in the form of God:

"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" (Phil.2:5-7).​

Okay so technically he said "Yes, but..." in answer to my post which he quoted; and I included the "but" in parenthesis, "(but)", because the YES portion of his confession was most important to my point. If you care so much about such minor technicalities then why do you not read the scripture in the same way? Would that you only would! :chuckle: