Who Was Moses Talking To??

[JAL]

A theophany--a manifestation of God--isn't the same thing as seeing God in His ineffable, eternal, unknowable, incomprehensible Essence.

The text speaks of Moses seeing the "backside" of God. Whatever else that might mean, it very obviously means that Moses did not see God in the full unmediated terrifying radiance of His glory and essence. Recall what God says in Exodus, "No man may see Me and live".

So did Moses see God? Moses certainly had a profound encounter with God at Sinai, described as God revealing His backside to Moses, and which in turn made Moses' face shine so unbelievably bright that a veil had to cover his face.

-CryptoLutheran

I sort of agree.
"His face was shining brighter than the sun" (Rev 1). A full exposure to the divine Light would be a full revelation of the divine Holiness (His majesty, purity, power, and love). This would be too terrifying AND too sin-convicting for our biological heart to survive the emotional shock; we'd die of a heart attack. God therefore has to initiate us at low radiance and then gradually increase the radiance - this is called sanctification. So we can EVENTUALLY be exposed to the full radiance without dying - well at least in theory, but the problem is that the human lifespan is too short for this gradual process to complete. Hence "No one (in this life) can see my face (in the fullness of its radiance) and live."

Many biblical saints saw God face to face but it wasn't the full radiance, it was a shaded view.

But Moses was asking for the full radiance in that passage. He wasn't asking for a shaded view. And he got it - well, sort of. Here's the thing. The brightest part of the divine form is HIS FACE. His BACK isn't quite as bright. God knew that Moses couldn't withstand His face but he was mature enough to withstand the fullness of God's back.

And that, my friends, is astonishing. Moses was so incredibly advanced that he could withstand the fullness of Gods back - a revelation that would have instantly killed any ordinary man. Who knows? Had Moses lived just a little longer, and kept maturing spiritually, perhaps he soon would have been able to withstand God's face.

 

[JohnRabbit]

I sort of agree.
"His face was shining brighter than the sun" (Rev 1). A full exposure to the divine Light would be a full revelation of the divine Holiness (His majesty, purity, power, and love). This would be too terrifying AND too sin-convicting for our biological heart to survive the emotional shock; we'd die of a heart attack. God therefore has to initiate us at low radiance and then gradually increase the radiance - this is called sanctification. So we can EVENTUALLY be exposed to the full radiance without dying - well at least in theory, but the problem is that the human lifespan is too short for this gradual process to complete. Hence "No one (in this life) can see my face (in the fullness of its radiance) and live."

Many biblical saints saw God face to face but it wasn't the full radiance, it was a shaded view.

But Moses was asking for the full radiance in that passage. He wasn't asking for a shaded view. And he got it - well, sort of. Here's the thing. The brightest part of the divine form is HIS FACE. His BACK isn't quite as bright. God knew that Moses couldn't withstand His face but he was mature enough to withstand the fullness of God's back.

And that, my friends, is astonishing. Moses was so incredibly advanced that he could withstand the fullness of Gods back - a revelation that would have instantly killed any ordinary man. Who knows? Had Moses lived just a little longer, and kept maturing spiritually, perhaps he soon would have been able to withstand God's face.

i have seen no scripture that supports what you say, so what you have written is pure conjecture!

 

[JAL]

i have seen no scripture that supports what you say, so what you have written is pure conjecture!

Ok I cited the Scripture that says His face shone like the sun.

And as for the shading part, it's pretty clear in the passage, God said, "I will cover you with my hand as I pass by" - that's a clear reference to shading.

I'm not sure which parts of my post were conjecture. You might want to be more specific.

Not that it really matters much, I build my theology on a lot of passages so I'm not too terribly worried about one problem passage.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Ok I cited the Scripture that says His face shone like the sun.

It also says that His hair was made of wool as white as snow and His eyes like blazing fire, and that a sword protruded from His mouth. This is a vision of Jesus, not a literal description of what Jesus physically looks like. I don't seem to recall the Gospel accounts talking about the resurrected Jesus having fire eyes and a sword in His mouth, because He didn't. The man Jesus Christ who died and rose is the same Jesus who ascended and is seated at the right hand of glory. A flesh-and-bone human being.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[JAL]

It also says that His hair was made of wool as white as snow and His eyes like blazing fire, and that a sword protruded from His mouth. This is a vision of Jesus, not a literal description of what Jesus physically looks like. I don't seem to recall the Gospel accounts talking about the resurrected Jesus having fire eyes and a sword in His mouth, because He didn't. The man Jesus Christ who died and rose is the same Jesus who ascended and is seated at the right hand of glory. A flesh-and-bone human being.

-CryptoLutheran

In view of the human tendency toward idolatry, you honestly think that God is foolish enough to show us false images of Himself? Please. I see the Lutheran emblem on your profile. Do you not believe in the Real Presence?That God can assume any physical form?
You should recall that Augustine stated that every visible manifestation of God (every theophany) in both testament was a PHYSICAL PRESENCE. Admittedly he did not go so far as to admit (with me) that God is a physical being – a great mistake, in my view.

Man is made in the image of God – that’s reason enough to surmise a human-like figure, and the Bible abundantly attests to it by documenting such in biblical visions and theophanies. You’re free to draw a different conclusion based on Platonic philosophy but the Bible itself is clear enough.

When the 70 elders went up the mount to see God, it says His feet rested on pavement. Is the Bible trying to deceive us? Is it TRYING to foster within our minds false, idolatrous images for us to worship?Is God really foolish enough to behave that way - and then record it in a book as to mislead all future generations as well?

 

[ViaCrucis]

In view of the human tendency toward idolatry, you honestly think that God is foolish enough to show us false images of Himself? Please. I see the Lutheran emblem on your profile. Do you not believe in the Real Presence?That God can assume any physical form?
You should recall that Augustine stated that every visible manifestation of God (every theophany) in both testament was a PHYSICAL PRESENCE. Admittedly he did not go so far as to admit (with me) that God is a physical being – a great mistake, in my view.

Man is made in the image of God – that’s reason enough to surmise a human-like figure, and the Bible abundantly attests to it by documenting such in biblical visions and theophanies. You’re free to draw a different conclusion based on Platonic philosophy but the Bible itself is clear enough.

When the 70 elders went up the mount to see God, it says His feet rested on pavement. Is the Bible trying to deceive us? Is it TRYING to foster within our minds false, idolatrous images for us to worship?Is God really foolish enough to behave that way - and then record it in a book as to mislead all future generations as well?

So then God is literally, physically a bush on fire? Or is He a human-shaped thing? Or is He physically, literally a pillar of smoke/flame? Or is He a great cloud?

Does when God sit down, His feet literally are kicked up and resting upon planet earth?

Indeed theophanies are visible, physical manifestations of God's presence in a localized way. That does not make theophanies the actual, exact, physical definition of the Divine Essence. God clearly has chosen to act and show forth Himself in various ways in the past--that's what a theophany is. It does not mean that God is, actually and literally, in His eternal Essence a flaming bush, a pillar of smoke, or a human-shaped being. It means He appeared this way for very specific purposes. Because He's God and can do that.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[JAL]

So then God is literally, physically a bush on fire? Or is He a human-shaped thing? Or is He physically, literally a pillar of smoke/flame? Or is He a great cloud?

Does when God sit down, His feet literally are kicked up and resting upon planet earth?

-CryptoLutheran

Any vision of God is an accurate revelation of Him. It's not a deception.

As for the burning bush, I personally don't think He was the bush itself, more likely the Fire in the bush. But He could have assumed bush-form as well, no reason why not. You're saying He can become bread and wine but not a bush?

John promised a baptism of the Twelve in Fire. The disciples saw (wait for the surprise) Fire descend on their heads on Pentecost. Hm....this Bible is really difficult to follow...

 

[JohnRabbit]

Ok I cited the Scripture that says His face shone like the sun.

a fact that i think everyone knows on this fourm.

And as for the shading part, it's pretty clear in the passage, God said, "I will cover you with my hand as I pass by" - that's a clear reference to shading.

this is not what you presented in your original soliloquy. what you presented earlier was akin to God dimming His glory like one would dim a lampshade.

I'm not sure which parts of my post were conjecture. You might want to be more specific.

after you state that God's face shines as the sun, you immediately go into conjecture!

Not that it really matters much, I build my theology on a lot of passages so I'm not too terribly worried about one problem passage.

that may be the case, but it does not negate the fact that you spewed conjecture which is edifying to no one.

 

[JAL]

a fact that i think everyone knows on this fourm.

this is not what you presented in your original soliloquy. what you presented earlier was akin to God dimming His glory like one would dim a lampshade.

Well we do want to explain the passage, right? I suppose there will have to be some conjecture at some points in Scripture due to a lack of clarity.

Anyway my view makes good sense. Imagine God's walking toward you FACING you, and assume His face is too bright (but not His back). Therefore He must shade His face until HE HAS PASSED YOU (until He is no longer facing you) thus allowing you to see His back. "I will cover you with my hand UNTIL I HAVE PASSED BY, And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen." Once He has passed by, there is no longer any need for the facial covering/shading.

I don't see how you call this conjecture. This passage could hardly make it more clear.

I mean, my view isn't some random conjecture. It's a reasonable, professional interpretation.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Well we do want to explain the passage, right?

right!

I suppose there will have to be some conjecture at some points in Scripture due to a lack of clarity.

the lack of clarity is cleared up by other verses, you know, here a little there a little... (isa 28:10).

also peter said:

2 Peter 1:20(NKJV)
20knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,

Anyway my view makes good sense.

may make sense to you, but is not consistent with the written record!

Imagine God's walking toward you FACING you, and assume His face is too bright (but not His back). Therefore He must shade His face until HE HAS PASSED YOU (until He is no longer facing you) thus allowing you to see His back. "I will cover you with my hand UNTIL I HAVE PASSED BY, And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen." Once He has passed by, there is no longer any need for the facial covering/shading.

I don't see how you call this conjecture. This passage could hardly make it more clear.

it's not!

it's simply not what you presented in your soliloquy!

I mean, my view isn't some random conjecture. It's a reasonable, professional interpretation.

it is random, nowhere reasonable, and sorely amateurish!

again i refer you to 2pet 1:20!

 

[JAL]

right!



the lack of clarity is cleared up by other verses, you know, here a little there a little... (isa 28:10).

also peter said:

2 Peter 1:20(NKJV)
20knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,




may make sense to you, but is not consistent with the written record!




it's not!

it's simply not what you presented in your soliloquy!




it is random, nowhere reasonable, and sorely amateurish!

again i refer you to 2pet 1:20!

(sigh). "Nowhere reasonable"? Ok that sounds like intellectual dishonesty so I likel won't debate this much longer. My conclusion may be incorrect but it's not totally random and unreasonable.

Why do YOU think God covered Moses when passing by? That is, why did He provide the covering only when facing Moses and then withdrew the covering when His back was to Moses? (Personally I'll bet you'll reply with some random conjecture).

Or maybe you're debating whether it was God the Father or God the Son. (That disctinction isn't generally important to me when it comes to visions since either of the two Persons is likely glorious enough to satisfy my need for beauty).

 

[JohnRabbit]

(sigh). "Nowhere reasonable"? Ok that sounds like intellectual dishonesty so I likel won't debate this much longer. My conclusion may be incorrect but it's not totally random and unreasonable.

Why do YOU think God covered Moses when passing by? That is, why did He provide the covering only when facing Moses and then withdrew the covering when His back was to Moses? (Personally I'll bet you'll reply with some random conjecture).

Or maybe you're debating whether it was God the Father or God the Son. (That disctinction isn't generally important to me when it comes to visions since either of the two Persons is likely glorious enough to satisfy my need for beauty).

here's conjecture:

"And that, my friends, is astonishing. Moses was so incredibly advanced that he could withstand the fullness of Gods back - a revelation that would have instantly killed any ordinary man."


and this is embellishment on your part, the bible says no such thing!

i'm not trying to give you a hard time, i'm just calling it as i see it!


i'm not debating, i have proved through scripture that it was Jesus who spoke to moses.

 

[JAL]

here's conjecture:

"And that, my friends, is astonishing. Moses was so incredibly advanced that he could withstand the fullness of Gods back - a revelation that would have instantly killed any ordinary man."


and this is embellishment on your part, the bible says no such thing!

i'm not trying to give you a hard time, i'm just calling it as i see it!


i'm not debating, i have proved through scripture that it was Jesus who spoke to moses.

So what if it was Jesus or the Father? Does the Son of God have more visible glory, or less, than the Father? Not worth debating in my opinion.

And the part about Moses' maturity isn't total conjecture. You might want to take a look at Numbers 12:6-8 which says that Moses' spiritual maturity is what licensed him to have such face-to-face encounters with God.

If you think you're on a par with Moses - capable of withstanding the same degree of divine revelation as he did - then you either (1) overestimate yourself or (2) underestimate the emotional trauma of a full revelation of the Son's glory.

More likely #2, based on my experience with the church. Most Christians haven't got the faintest clue as to the degree of exhilaration signified in Christ's statement, "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly."

 

[JohnRabbit]

So what if it was Jesus or the Father? Does the Son of God have more visible glory, or less, than the Father? Not worth debating in my opinion.

And the part about Moses' maturity isn't total conjecture. You might want to take a look at Numbers 12:6-8 which says that Moses' spiritual maturity is what licensed him to have such face-to-face encounters with God.

If you think you're on a par with Moses - capable of withstanding the same degree of divine revelation as he did - then you either (1) overestimate yourself or (2) underestimate the emotional trauma of a full revelation of the Son's glory.

More likely #2, based on my experience with the church. Most Christians haven't got the faintest clue as to the degree of exhilaration signified in Christ's statement, "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly."

this thread was started because there are some in this forum that don't believe that it was Jesus Who talked to moses and has nothing to do with more or less glory. however, this fact does have implications on other points of doctrine.



as far as moses' maturity, what you have written about it is conjecture, even though you cite the verses from numbers.


here's proof of your conjecture!

you said:

"Had Moses lived just a little longer, and kept maturing spiritually, perhaps he soon would have been able to withstand God's face."

so taking what you said, one can take scripture and prove you wrong!

Exodus 33:20(NKJV)
20But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.”

see?

God says that no man can see His face and live!

so your conjecture on moses' maturity would simply contradict the verse!


i'm not trying to down or belittle you. i'm actually trying to be a help!

we simply cannot add, take away from or embellish the scripture as we are admonished not to do so - per 2pet 1:20.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

............
you said:

"Had Moses lived just a little longer, and kept maturing spiritually, perhaps he soon would have been able to withstand God's face."

so taking what you said, one can take scripture and prove you wrong!

Exodus 33:20(NKJV)
20 But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.”

God says that no man can see His face and live!

so your conjecture on moses' maturity would simply contradict the verse!

Perhaps that is why these folks in Revelation 6 are asking the mountains and rocks to hide them from the Face of Yahweh/Jesus?

Reve 6:16
And they are saying to the mountains and to the rocks "be falling on us! and hide us! from Face of the One-sitting upon the Throne
and from the wrath of the Lamb.
[Hosea 10:8/Luke 23:30]

Reve 20:11
Then I saw a great white throne and Him Who sat on it, from Whose Face the land and the heaven fled away.
And place not was found to them.
[Reve 12:8/6:16]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7435912-5/#post54001293
Face of One sitting upon the throne Reve 6/20



.

 

[JohnRabbit]

Perhaps that is why these folks in Revelation 6 are asking the mountains and rocks to hide them from the Face of Yahweh/Jesus?

Reve 6:16
And they are saying to the mountains and to the rocks "be falling on us! and hide us! from Face of the One-sitting upon the Throne
and from the wrath of the Lamb.
[Hosea 10:8/Luke 23:30]

Reve 20:11
Then I saw a great white throne and Him Who sat on it, from Whose Face the land and the heaven fled away.
And place not was found to them.
[Reve 12:8/6:16]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7435912-5/#post54001293
Face of One sitting upon the throne Reve 6/20



.

good point!

 

[YosemiteSam]

Your point is????

Point is Cribstyl your post was just defeated. Here we see he has a waist, feet, face...etc... Evidently God does have definition which man can see when allowed...

Gen 2 "Let US make man after OUR image and after OUR likeness"

Get the point?

 

[YosemiteSam]

this thread was started because there are some in this forum that don't believe that it was Jesus Who talked to moses and has nothing to do with more or less glory. however, this fact does have implications on other points of doctrine.



as far as moses' maturity, what you have written about it is conjecture, even though you cite the verses from numbers.


here's proof of your conjecture!

you said:

"Had Moses lived just a little longer, and kept maturing spiritually, perhaps he soon would have been able to withstand God's face."

so taking what you said, one can take scripture and prove you wrong!

Exodus 33:20(NKJV)
20But He said, “You cannot see My face; for no man shall see Me, and live.”

see?

God says that no man can see His face and live!

so your conjecture on moses' maturity would simply contradict the verse!


i'm not trying to down or belittle you. i'm actually trying to be a help!

we simply cannot add, take away from or embellish the scripture as we are admonished not to do so - per 2pet 1:20.

You hear that? NOthing! Excellent scripture driven post!

 

[YosemiteSam]

maybe this will help (a repost of mine):

when the bible refers to the "Angel of the Lord", often, it is referring to the One we know as the Christ.

moses talked to the One we know as Jesus and here's proof from the bible!

John 1:1(NKJV)
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

word, strongs G3056
G3056

λόγος

logos

log'-os

From G3004; something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse), also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation; specifically (with the article in John) the Divine Expression (that is, Christ):—account, cause, communication, X concerning, doctrine, fame, X have to do, intent, matter, mouth, preaching, question, reason, + reckon, remove, say (-ing), shew, X speaker, speech, talk, thing, + none of these things move me, tidings, treatise, utterance, word, work.

He that speaks came to this world in the flesh jn 1:14!

now, look at this:

Hebrews 2:7-9(NKJV)
7 You have made him a little lower than the angels; You have crowned him with glory and honor, And set him over the works of Your hands.
8 You have put all things in subjection under his feet.” For in that He put all in subjection under him, He left nothing that is not put under him. But now we do not yet see all things put under him.
9But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

moses didn't see the face of God in glory! (ex 33:20-23), you have to remember that when He appeared in His Glory, He often hid Himself in a thick black cloud!

notice this:

Exodus 24:9-11(NKJV)
9Then Moses went up, also Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel,
10and they saw the God of Israel. And there was under His feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone, and it was like the very heavens in its clarity.
11But on the nobles of the children of Israel He did not lay His hand. So they saw God, and they ate and drank.

now, compare to:

John 1:18(NKJV)
18No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him. (Who declared Whom?)

John 6:46(NKJV)
46Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

1 John 4:12(NKJV)
12No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us.



so, who did moses and the others see? i think it's safe to say it wasn't the Father!


moses talked to the One we know as Jesus and here's proof from the bible!


exodus says they saw God and 1jn says no one has seen God. there can be no contradiction.

so, the One we know as Jesus is the answer!

i definitely haven't found any scripture that suggests it was God's Holy Spirit.

now here's more scripture for proof!

Exodus 14:19-20,24(NKJV)
19And the Angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, moved and went behind them; and the pillar of cloud went from before them and stood behind them. 20So it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel. Thus it was a cloud and darkness to the one, and it gave light by night to the other, so that the one did not come near the other all that night... 24Now it came to pass, in the morning watch, that the Lord looked down upon the army of the Egyptians through the pillar of fire and cloud, and He troubled the army of the Egyptians.

the phrase "Angel of God" is referring to God and not some angel. the Angel of God in this instance is the one we know as the Christ.


now check this out!

Exodus 24:15-16(NKJV)
15Then Moses went up into the mountain, and a cloud covered the mountain.
16Now the glory of the Lord rested on Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days. And on the seventh day He called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud.

God talked to moses from the cloud. so, we know who's in the cloud. from the verses that john wrote, i.e. jn 1:1,18, we know this could not be God the Father.

Exodus 33:9-10(NKJV)
9And it came to pass, when Moses entered the tabernacle, that the pillar of cloud descended and stood at the door of the tabernacle, and the Lord talked with Moses.
10All the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the tabernacle door, and all the people rose and worshiped, each man in his tent door.

Numbers 14:14(NKJV)
14and they will tell it to the inhabitants of this land. They have heard that You, Lord, are among these people; that You, Lord, are seen face to face and Your cloud stands above them, and You go before them in a pillar of cloud by day and in a pillar of fire by night.

can't get much clearer on Who's going before the COI in a pillar of cloud!


and now the "coup de gras"!

1 Corinthians 10:1-4(NKJV)
1Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea,
2all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,
3all ate the same spiritual food,
4and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.


the bible says it was Christ Who spoke to moses!

"and that Rock was Christ"

Sir, I am going to challenge you on that.... Ughhhh, okay you're right it was Christ, the Lord of the Sabbath.

 

[YosemiteSam]

chirp, chirp, chirp.... huh? I think I hear crickets.