Who Sent Jehovah?
Topics: Angel of the Lord, Cults and Religions, Deity of Christ, Jehovah, Jehovah's Witnesses
(Originally printed in the July/August 1995 Issue of the MCOI Journal beginning on page 2)
Jehovah’s Witnesses often argue online (computer bulletin board systems, my screen name is CULTSRUS) that only the Father is Jehovah and therefore, only the Father is God. We have argued that the Tetragrammaton is applied to both the Father and the Son and shown in a previous issue that the Watchtower’s own translation supports this premise. The following is a condensed version of a multi-part exchange showing at least two persons in the Hebrew Scriptures are referred to as YHWH or Jehovah. It was aptly named:
WHO SENT JEHOVAH?
The Jehovah’s Witness wrote: “Jehovah is jealous for his name, tolerating no rivalry.” (The JW defender is here making the case that if Jesus’ name is also Jehovah along with the Father, that there would thus be a “rivalry” over the name)
We respond: If it is “rivalry” for two persons to bear the name Jehovah, we have a real problem in the following passage taken from Zechariah Chapter 2, since it clearly states that Jehovah of armies HIMSELF sent Jehovah of armies.
“Hey there, Zion! Make your escape, you who are dwelling with the daughter of Babylon. For this is what Jehovah of armies has said [What did Jehovah of armies say?], ‘Following after [the] glory he has sent me to the nations that were despoiling YOU people; for he that is touching YOU is touching my eyeball. [Question-Who ever sent Jehovah anywhere?] For here I am waving my hand against them, and they will have to become spoil to their slaves ‘ And YOU people will certainly know that Jehovah of armies himself has sent me.”
“Cry out loudly and rejoice, O daughter of Zion; for here I am coming, and I will reside in the midst of you,” is the utterance of Jehovah [Who is coming and who will reside?]. “And many nations will certainly become joined to Jehovah in that day, and you will actually become my people: and I will reside in the midst of you.” [On what authority would they know that Jehovah would reside in the midst of them?] And you will have to know that Jehovah of armies himself has sent me to you. And Jehovah will certainly take possession of Judah as his portion upon the holy ground, and he must yet choose Jerusalem. Keep silence, all flesh, before Jehovah, for he has aroused himself from his holy dwelling. (Zech. 2:7-13, NWT)
So, Jehovah of armies was sent by Jehovah of armies. Jehovah went to reside with the people because Jehovah sent Jehovah. Interesting indeed.
The JW responds: Talk about the blind leading the blind while trying to influence those who aren’t!! Who was being sent? Zechariah or Jehovah? To gain a correct understanding of Zechariah 2:7-15, first compare Zechariah 1:1-5 and observe how Zechariah mingles what Jehovah says to him with his OWN comments:
‘”In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius. came the word of Jehovah unto Zechariah… Therefore say unto them. ‘Thus saith Jehovah of Hosts,’ …’Remember unto me, saith Jehovah of Hosts, and I will return unto you, saith Jehovah of hosts.’”
Now- was there an echo in the room where Zechariah was writing, or is the repeated use of “…saith Jehovah…” an example of Jehovah talking to Jehovah as CULTSRUS would obviously contend, or is the repeated use of “…saith Jehovah…” done for emphasis?
In chapter two. we are first told that Zechariah encounters an angel holding a measuring rod. Then, ANOTHER angel begins speaking to the first angel and says. “…For I, saith Jehovah, will be unto her a wall of fire round about, and I will be the glory in the midst of her.” (Zech 2:1-5, ASV)
So to be consistent with the position he takes in “Who Sent Jehovah,” CULTSRUS must now contend with an “angel” who claims to be Jehovah – according to the way CULTSRUS seeks to use scripture.
(The JW defender claims that this passage does NOT refer to two persons named Jehovah, but that one of the persons “speaking” in the passage is the prophet Zechariah)
We volley back with: CULTSRUS would not “obviously contend” that Zech. 1:1-3 is an example of Jehovah talking to Jehovah. Such a statement is simply childish. I agree that the term “…saith Jehovah…” is done for emphasis and was the designation which Zechariah and other Hebrew prophets used to EMPHASIZE when Jehovah was speaking and what He said versus when they (the prophets) were speaking.
The JW would like to believe that I have been forcing Scripture in order to support this position. There was NO forcing Scripture in my presentation. The Scriptures clearly said that Jehovah sent Jehovah and that Jehovah went because Jehovah sent Him.
Regarding “‘The Angel of the Lord” claiming to be YHWH, it has nothing to do with the way I seek “to use Scripture” but rather, dealing with what Scripture says.
The JW chides: Hey – the “angel” DID SAY, “I Jehovah” didn’t he? So, Mr. CULTSRUS, Don, now Jehovah sends Jehovah as an “angel” to be a fire round about. So, explain Jehovah being an angel and therefore, a created being.
We oblige: Where does it say that the word “angel” means created being? The text doesn’t say nor imply that the word angel means created being nor that “The Angel of the Lord,” who claimed to be Jehovah, was a created being. The word translated ”angel” is the Hebrew word “malak” and means “messenger or agent.” In fact, the Watchtower publication “Insight on the Scriptures.” 1988 edition on page 106 confirms this, “ANGEL. Both the Hebrew mal-’akh’ and the Greek ag’ge-los literally mean ‘messenger.’” The responsibility would be the JW’s to prove that the designation “angel” means “created being” and especially that “The Angel of the Lord” was a created being, especially since “The Angel of the Lord” claimed to be YHWH which, if He is correct, would mean that He is God.
We will review the text in question so that we don’t lose track of what we are discussing. In Zechariah 2:8 the prophet writes. “…this is what Jehovah of armies has said.” So, who is saying this? Jehovah of Armies. What does Jehovah of armies say? “Following after [the] glory he has sent me to the nations…” Jehovah said He was sent. Who sent Him? In verse 9 Jehovah said, “Jehovah of armies has sent me.”
In verse 10 we read that someone is coming and will reside with the people. Who is it? “I am coming and I will reside in the midst of you,’ is the utterance of Jehovah.” Jehovah is coming and will reside in the midst of the people.
In verse 11 we read that many nations will become joined to Jehovah, He will reside in the midst of His people and then they will know that “Jehovah of armies” sent Him (Jehovah).
The JW argues: The Angel of the Lord could not have been Jehovah, for angels are created and Jehovah is not created. Jehovah is the Father’s name and the son’s name is Jesus or Michael. We know this because “The Angel of the Lord” is a powerful angel and Michael is the most powerful angel. Therefore, “The Angel of the Lord” must be Michael. Are you saying that Michael was not created?
We clarify: You haven’t shown that 1) the Father’s Name is YHWH. 2) That YHWH is absolutely and ONLY applicable to the Father. 3) That the term “angel” means created being. I will write this out in a logic statement, called a syllogism, to make my position more understandable.
A) Everything except God is created.
B) YHWH is God
C) The “Angel of the Lord” claimed to
be YHWH
D) Therefore, “The Angel of the Lord”
is God and uncreated.
Regarding Michael I would say:
A) Everything except God is created.
B) YHWH is God
C) Michael the archangel is not YHWH
D) Therefore, Michael the archangel is
a created being.
To refute my position, it is not enough to say, “Na, na, na, na, na, na.” You must show that YHWH is absolutely and only applicable to the Father and never the Son. That the term angel means “created being” and that ‘The Angel of the Lord” was either lying or mistaken when He claimed to be YHWH.
The JW, with hands over his ears and gnashing his teeth says: You are incapable of proving that the Tetragrammaton is NOT applicable only and absolutely to the Father. Do you think to sneak a little advantage for yourself in support of your Trinitarian doctrine because of only one reference in the OT (Is. 63:16) to God the Father as YHWH.’ One such reference is quite enough tor the honest hearted and doctrinally unbiased. What an utterly absurd and impotent attempt from which to build support for your doctrine.
Your attempt to manipulate near “silence” into a doctrinal proof won’t work -because not ONE incident in the Hebrew texts containing the Tetragrammaton is applied to anyone OTHER than God the Father — NEVER— !!! I do challenge you to produce a single text from the Hebrew Scriptures, wherein the Tetragrammaton is specifically attached (o anyone other than the Father!!!
(The JWs ASSUME that the name Jehovah or YHWH ALWAYS refers to the Father, though there is only one scripture reference that specifically calls the Father by that name. The JW defender contends that we are making our case from “silence”…ie,that we are saying that Jesus must be Jehovah also, just because the OT specifically says that the Father is Jehovah only once. He argues that the JWs at least have ONE SCRIPTURE, whereas there are NO scriptures backing up our claim that anyone OTHER than the Father is Jehovah. His claim is invalid, as we shall show.)
We answer: Ok. First, as I have demonstrated from Zechariah 2:8, YHWH was quoted as speaking and He said He was sent. In v:9 He said that YHWH sent Him. In Genesis 19:24 we see that YHWH made it rain sulphur and fire from YHWH in the heavens. So, again, we have at least two who are referred to as YHWH. In Jeremiah 50:40 the prophet quotes YHWH as saying. ‘”Just as with God’s overthrow of Sodom and of Gomorrah and of her neighbor [towns],’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘no man will dwell there, nor will the son of mankind reside in her as an alien.’” (NWT) Similarly, in Amos 4:9-12. the prophet Amos records the words of YHWH as He recites the various ways which He used to try to bring His people back to Himself. In v:11 YHWH said, “I caused as overthrow among you people, LIKE God’s overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah.” (NWT) In Genesis Jacob wrestled with “The Angel of the Lord” and afterward stated, “I have seen GOD face to face, yet my life has been preserved.” (Gen. 33:16). In Exodus 3:1-15, “The Angel of the Lord” appeared in the midst of the burning bush and when questioned about who He was, identified Himself as YHWH.
We see a number of things from this. YHWH sent YHWH. YHWH went because YHWH sent Him. YHWH had fire and brimstone sent from YHWH in heaven. YHWH said that it was God who overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. YHWH said that HE caused the people to be overthrown just like God did at Sodom and Gomorrah. Jacob wrestled with YHWH and “The Angel of the Lord” who sent Moses to deliver His people was YHWH.
In Malachi 3:1, the NWT reads, “‘Look! I am sending my messenger, and he must clear up a way before me. And suddenly there will come to His temple the [true] Lord, whom YOU people are seeking, and the messenger of the covenant in whom YOU are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,’ Jehovah of armies has said.”
The messenger who was going to clear the way is John the Baptist. The one who is coming to HIS temple is the “[true] Lord.” The Society’s note is the 1984 NWT with references shows that the “[true] Lord” here is “ha Adohn” (p. 1174). In the same work, on page 1568 note 1H tells us that “ha-Adohn” is exclusively the title of Jehovah God. So, the “[true] Lord” who is coming to His temple is YHWH HIMSELF! The verse continues, ‘”…whom YOU people are seeking, and the messenger (the note at the bottom of the page points out that this is “angel”) of the covenant in whom YOU are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,’ Jehovah of armies has said.”
YHWH HIMSELF is coming to His temple. YHWH is the “messenger (angel) of the covenant” and His coming was announced by Jehovah of armies in Malachi.
I have shown, not one single verse, but seven distinct examples of someone other than the Father being referred to as YHWH.
Jesus is YHWH! Amen, come quickly Lord! Jesus.
L.L. (Don) Veinot Jr. is president Midwest Christian Outreach, Inc.
Author: Don Veinot (189 Articles)
Midwest Christian Outreach, Inc. | P.O. Box 446 | Wonder Lake, IL 60097-0446
I really liked how this was dealt with in a slower paced, meticulous, thoughtful manner. The dissecting of the passage genuinely makes everything fall in place and removes any ambiguity in light of orthodoxy.
Thanks!
“the Tetragrammaton is applied to both the Father and the Son”
And the holy spirit?..
the trinity is composed of 3 not 2..there is one missing, where is he?
It is true I have not demonstrated that the Tetragrammaton is applied to the Holy Spirit. Oddly, the Scriptures do not require belief that the Father is God to be saved or that the Holy Spirit is God to be saved. Believing that the Father is God is not difficult for most. The biggest obstacle is believing that the Son is God in the same sense that the Father is God. We accept the doctrine of the Trinity because the Holy Spirit is called God in other passages without ascribing the divine name.
As a side note, most believe that the devil or Lucifer is a personal malevolent being. The reason is because he is ascribed with personal characteristics in Scripture. He is prideful, he tempts others, etc. In the same way, we believe the Holy Spirit is a personal being because He is described with personal characteristics and is called God in many instances. For example, In Acts 5, Ananias were called to task for deception and we read in Acts 5:3-4:
You cannot really lie to an electrical current or as the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim, “an active force,” but you can lie to a person. In this case the person was the Holy Spirit and Peter claims that by lying to the Holy Spirit they were lying to God. In Acts 15:28 we find the Holy Spirit makes decisions:
In 1 Corinthians 12:11 He has a will and decides how He will distribute His gifts:
In Eph. 4:30 we find the Holy Spirit can be grieved:
The Holy Spirit prays on our behalf
There is more but this is a sampling that demonstrates the Holy Spirit is a person and is God. The doctrine of the Trinity affirms the biblical claims that there is one true God and the biblical claims that the Father is that true God, the Son is that one true God and the Holy Spirit is that one true God. There are many things about God that we do not fully comprehend but are none-the-less true. We must decide if we will accept Him as He has revealed Himself or will we craft a god that we can fully comprehend and explain in human terms?
In the Hebrew Scriptures, or the “Old Testament,” there are references to the “holy spirit” and to “my [God’s] spirit.” (Psalm 51:11; Joel 2:28, 29) We read that the holy spirit can fill a person, come upon him, and envelop him. (Exodus 31:3; Judges 3:10; 6:34) Some of God’s holy spirit can be taken from one person and given to another. (Numbers 11:17, 25) The holy spirit can become operative upon someone, enabling him to perform superhuman feats.—Judges 14:6; 1 Samuel 10:6.
What can reasonably be concluded from such statements? Surely not that the holy spirit is a person. How can a portion of a person be taken from one individual and be given to another? Moreover, there is no evidence that when Jesus was on earth, faithful Jews viewed the holy spirit as a person equal to the Father. They certainly did not worship the holy spirit. Rather, their worship was directed solely to Jehovah, the One whom Jesus himself called “my Father” and “my God.”—John 20:17.
Like the so-called Old Testament, the part of the Bible called the Christian Greek Scriptures, or “New Testament,” says that the holy spirit can ‘fill’ a person or be “upon” him. (Acts 2:4; Luke 2:25-27) Holy spirit was ‘given,’ ‘poured out upon,’ and ‘distributed.’ (Luke 11:13; Acts 10:45; Hebrews 2:4) At Pentecost 33 C.E., the disciples received “some of” God’s spirit. (Acts 2:17) The Scriptures also speak of baptism with holy spirit and of anointing with it.—Matthew 3:11; Acts 1:5; 10:38.
Such Biblical statements prove that the holy spirit is not a person. This conclusion is confirmed when we see that the holy spirit is listed with other impersonal things. For instance, the Bible states that Stephen was “full of faith and holy spirit.” (Acts 6:5) And the apostle Paul recommended himself as God’s minister “by purity, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by holy spirit, by love free from hypocrisy.”—2 Corinthians 6:4-6.
True, at times the Bible personalizes the holy spirit. For instance, Isaiah said that certain rebels ‘made God’s holy spirit feel hurt.’ (Isaiah 63:10) Paul said it could be ‘grieved.’ (Ephesians 4:30) And a number of scriptures say that the holy spirit teaches, guides, speaks, and bears witness. (John 14:26; 16:13, 14; 1 John 5:7, 8) But the Bible also personalizes other nonliving things, such as wisdom, death, and sin. (Proverbs 1:20; Romans 5:17, 21) This is actually a vivid way in which the Scriptures sometimes express matters.
Today, we speak of the Bible in a similar manner when we say that it says something or teaches a doctrine. In using such expressions, we do not mean that the Bible is a person, do we? Neither does the Bible mean that the holy spirit is a person when it uses comparable expressions.
I have a few points to make with regard to Peter’s latest post.
1 Honest questions and comments deserve honest responses. Dishonest questions and comments do not deserve any response.
2 Although I am responding this time it is to demonstrate that Peter’s comment is dishonest and in the future dishonest comments will not be approved. It is dishonest because he committed plagiarism:
The material Peter posted came entirely from the January 15, 1991 WT p. 4. Cut and pasted from the CD-ROM the Watchtower produces. He did so without citing his source which represents that this was his original work and thoughts. This is dishonest.
3) We have demonstrated in a number of articles, such as The Wheat and the Weeds: Exposing the False History of the WTBTS and Should You Believe in the Watchtower or Is Jesus Christ Truly Almighty God?
Lastly, simply because an unreliable source (Peter and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society) make assertions , that does not prove their assertions to be true. For example, because the Holy Spirit can fill someone,come upon them or envelop them, is not evidence that the Holy Spirit is not a person or God. The mere assertion is not evidence or persuasive. We read in Exodus that YHWH was “in” the pillar of fire and the pillar of smoke which led Israel. He was “in” the burning bush. Jesus said the He and the Father would dwell in believers. If filling or indwelling means the one doing those things cannot be a person or be God than the Father couldn’t be God either. That is patently absurd thinking.
If personal qualities do not demonstrate that the Holy Spirit is a personal being, than to be consistent Peter would also have to conclude that Satan is also not a personal being but simply an evil force. I suspect he would not do that. It would also be absurd. If Peter wants to demonstrate where I am wrong on the merits of my argument then he would need to demonstrate that the Holy Spirit and Satan are both simply active forces like electricity and we can lie to an active force, an active force can make decisions, etc. Honest questions and comments deserve honest responses. Dishonest questions and comments do not deserve any answers.
Peter asked, “‘the Tetragrammaton is applied to both the Father and the Son’
And the holy spirit?..
the trinity is composed of 3 not 2..there is one missing, where is he?”
Good question. The NWT on page 1564 states, “To know where the divine name was replaced by the Greek words Κύριος and Θεός, we have determined where the inspired Christian writers have quoted verses, passages and expressions from the Hebrew Scriptures and then we have referred back to the Hebrew text to ascertain whether the divine name appears there. In this way we determined the identity to give Ky′ri·os and The·os′ and the personality with which to clothe them.”
This is why the NWT inserts the name “Jehovah” into the New Testament 237 times. One of those instances is Hebrews 10:15-18 which says, “Moreover, the holy spirit also bears witness to us, for after it has said: “‘This is the covenant that I shall covenant toward them after those days,’ says Jehovah. ‘I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds I shall write them,’” [it says afterwards:] “And I shall by no means call their sins and their lawless deeds to mind anymore.” Now where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.”
If it is correct to follow the rule quoted earlier, then the Tetragrammaton DOES apply to the Holy Spirit too. The HOLY SPIRIT quotes the new covenant portion of Jeremiah 31 and applies it to Himself. That makes Him Deity.
Mt. 28:19 “…in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit.”
The fact that “name” is singular at Matt. 28:19 is only further proof that “authority” or “power” was meant and not a personal name. If more than one person is involved, then the plural “names” would be used (compare Rev. 21:12). Even trinitarians admit that their God is composed of 3 separate persons. And each one of those “persons” has his own personal name (except, as we have seen, the holy spirit really does not)! Therefore, if personal names were intended here for these three different “persons,” the plural “names” would have been used in this scripture.
Since it clearly means “in recognition of the power, or authority of,” it is perfectly correct to use “name” in the singular. In fact, it must be used that way. We even recognize this in our own language today. We say, for example, “I did it in the name [singular] of love, humanity, and justice.”
There is a famous statement in United States history that perfectly illustrates this use of the singular “name” when it is being used to mean “in recognition of power or authority.” Ethan Allen, writing about his capture of Fort Ticonderoga in 1775, quoted the words he spoke when the British commander of that fort asked him by what authority Allen had captured it.
Ethan Allen replied:
“In the name [singular] of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress.” – p. 100, A Book About American History, Stimpson, Fawcett Publ., 1962 printing. (Also see Rebels and Redcoats, p. 54, Scheer and Rankin, Mentor Books, 1959 printing; and p. 167, Vol. 1, Universal Standard Encyclopedia, the 1955 abridgment of the New Funk and Wagnalls Encyclopedia.)
How ludicrous it would be to conclude that Allen really meant that Jehovah and the Continental Congress had the same personal name and were both equally God!
To paraphrase the quote credited to trinitarian writer Reymond at the beginning of this section above:
“What Ethan Allen does say is this … ‘in the name [singular] of the Great Jehovah and the Continental Congress,’ first asserting the unity of the two by combining them within the bounds of the single Name, and then throwing into emphasis the distinctness of each by introducing them in turn with the repeated article ['the'].”
According to this desperate attempt by trinitarians to make trinitarian evidence from Matt. 28:19, then, the same kind of statement by Ethan Allen is evidence (because of the singular “Name” and the repeated article) that The Continental Congress is equally God! (We might also consider a British expression: “in the name of God, king and country.”)
Also notice how Luke 9:26 (which actually says, “when [Jesus] comes in the glory [singular] of him [Jesus] and of the Father and of the holy angels”) is “first asserting the unity of the three by combining them all within the bounds of the single [glory], and then throwing into emphasis the distinctness of each by introducing them in turn with the repeated article.” But, here, of course, the angels, too, make up the “trinity.” We have, then, God the Father, God the Son, and God the holy angels!
If Jesus were really saying that Jehovah, Jesus, and the holy spirit had personal names and these names must be used during baptism, he would have used the plural word “names” at Matt. 28:19. And we would see the Father’s personal name (“Jehovah” – Is. 63:16; 64:8 – Ps. 83:18 and Luke 1:32 – Exodus 3:15 and Acts 3:13) and the Son’s personal name (“Jesus” – Luke 1:31, 32) and the holy spirit’s personal name (“?”) all being used in Christian baptism ceremonies for the past 1900 years.
Honestly now, how many religions actually use the personal names “Jehovah,” “Jesus,” and “(??)” when baptizing? – (“We baptize you in the names of ‘Jehovah,’ ‘Jesus,’ and ‘???’.”) Or, since a few anti-Watchtower trinitarians even claim that the singular “name” at Matt. 28:19 is really “Jehovah,” how many religions really use the personal name “Jehovah” (or “Yahweh”) when baptizing? (“We baptize you in Jehovah’s name.”) Any church that does not do so, must be admitting, in effect, that “name” in this scripture does not mean personal name!
In spite of the extreme weakness of the trinitarian “evidence” for Matt. 28:19, it is nearly always cited by trinitarians because, incredibly poor as it is, it is one of their very best trinitarian “proofs”! And it is generally hailed by trinitarians as the best evidence for the deity of the holy spirit! This certainly shows how extremely weak the scriptural evidence is for a trinity!
Greetings,
A few things, First, as a friend of mine at Jew for Jesus often says, “Honest questions deserve honest answers. Dishonest questions do not deserve any answers.” Second, I will be out of town until early next week and so cannot do a lengthy response but, Third, I noted that you did not deal with the content of this post. In order to eb credible you will have to demonstrate from the text how what I have written is wrong. Simply bcuase “name” can and in Scripture sometimes does mean “power” or “authroity” does not mean that it always means that not does it mean that the Father and Son (and HOly Spirit) do not have the same Name, which we can clearly see is true in Who Sent Jehovah?. Last, many of the standard objections are dealt with in Should You Believe in the Watchtower or Is Jesus Christ Almighty God? and the follow up, Part 2 Answering Objections to the Deity of Christ which begins on page 1 of the Winter 2004 Journal beginning on page 1. This one is a pdf file.) You would need to refute each point in these as well. Barring that there is not much need for you to respond with dishonest questions.
When i read zechariah 2 i cannot see Jehovah has sending Jehovah… So, did the hebrew language contains punctuations. The answer is no..
When you leave the punctuation it’s obvious Jehovah sent Zechariah.. Then you read it like this…: 7 “Hey there, Zion! Make your escape, you who are dwelling with the daughter of Babylon. 8 For this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘Following after [the] glory he has sent me to the nations that were despoiling YOU people; for he that is touching YOU is touching my eyeball. 9 For here I am waving my hand against them, and they will have to become spoil to their slaves.’ And YOU people will certainly know that Jehovah of armies himself has sent me.
Jehovah sent Zechariah not himself. Zechariah is portrayed as one sent to “shepherd the flock meant for the killing”—sheeplike people exploited by their leaders. In his role as a shepherd, Zechariah foreshadowed Jesus Christ, who was sent to God’s covenant people but was rejected by them. The cutting up of “Pleasantness” symbolized that God would end the Law covenant with the Jews and stop dealing pleasantly with them. The cutting up of “Union” meant breaking up the theocratic bond of brotherhood between Judah and Israel
I have a very short window of time at home this week. Only had a few hours available to get caught up on ministry stuff. I will respond to your posts next week as I am able.
First, a point of clarification, I didn’t say in the above that Jehovah sent Himself but that there are at least 2 in the O.T. that are called by the name YHWH or as the Watchtower translates this, Jehovah. I even cite other passages which demonstrate this.
Second, it is true that the Hebrew does not have punctuation in the way we have it in English. It also does not have vowels as we have in English. However, reading it in Hebrew does allow one to know who is speaking and if they are communicating a message given by another. We can go back to the beginning of the chapter and clearly see where Zechariah was speaking for himself and where he, or an angel, was communicating the words of Jehovah to the people.
Here, Zechariah said he raised his eyes, there was “a man” (later identified as an angel) who was on his way to Jerusalem to measure it.
A second angel arrives who was instructed to go and speak to Zechariah. The message concerned Jerusalem. Part of it was that someone (“I”) would become “a wall of fire all around, and a glory is what I shall become in the midst of her.” Who is the “I” here? It is either the angel who was going to be a wall of fire and a glory or it was Jehovah. The phrase, “is the utterance of Jehovah” tells us, with or without punctuation. Jehovah would not allow an angel to be Jerusalem’s glory but rather, Jehovah will be Jerusalem’s protector (wall of fire) and glory. The message that was delivered by the angel was a verbal quote from Jehovah and continues from the angel.
The angel, speaking to Zechariah, communicates from Jehovah that the people should flee and that it was Jehovah who spread the people abroad. If your argument is applied consistently that you would have the angel who is delivering Jehovah’s message to the prophet as the one who spread the people abroad but contextually, Jehovah is the One who did that and the angel is delivering His message.
The angel is continuing to speak and deliver the message from Jehovah who said, he was sent and that the nations that were hurting Israel were poking him in the eye. The nations were not touching the angel’s eyeball but Jehovah’s eyeball. The phrase “this is what Jehovah of armies has said” informs us that the words the angel is speaking are the words of Jehovah Himself and Jehovah says He was sent and that Jerusalem’s enemies were touching His eyeball.
The angel continues communicating Jehovah’s words Who says He is waving His hand against the enemy and that that people would know that Jehovah of Armies sent Him. The angel continues quoting Jehovah with:
Jehovah, who said He was sent by Jehovah, is coming (I am coming) and will live with the people (I will reside in the midst of you). The angel is simply delivering Jehovah’s message punctuated from time to time with a reminder that this “is the utterance of Jehovah.”
We see again that the angel is NOT saying that the people would become his people but that he was communicating a message from Jehovah who said that Jerusalem would become His people, that He would dwell in the midst of them, that Jehovah had sent him and Jehovah had aroused Himself from His hoy dwelling.
So, by simply following the flow of the context we see that a message was being communicated to Zechariah, by the second angel, from Jehovah in which Jehovah said he was sent, he is coming, he will dwell in the midst of the people, he is being poked in the eye, he will be their protection, he will be their glory and that Jehovah sent Him. There are 2 in the passage that are designated as Jehovah. One sending and one being sent. The passage supports and informs the Trinitarian position and demonstrates the view of nature of God of the Watchtower to be unbiblical.
Truly one of the best passages in all of scripture! It’s as clear as a bell to those who have the spirit of God. To those who don’t, it is as clear as mud, because as Paul tells us at 1 Cor 2:14 “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
Blessings!