Taken too simply, “straightforward,” and literally leads to contradictions. Your quotation at the end is a good example. The point was that Moses’ connection to God was more clear and direct than any prophets they had known, and not that God had some sort of physical shape or form. Taking this in such a manner as to combine it with John 14:9 to say that Moses must have seen Jesus is an absurdity like treating Jesus parable in Mathew 13 as lesson in gardening.
1 Like
Num 12:6"When a prophet of the Lord is among you, I reveal myself to him in visions, I speak to him in dreams. 7 But this is not true of my servant Moses; he is faithful in all my house. 8 With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak gainst my servant Moses?" 9 The anger of the Lord burned against them, and he left them."
You are mistaken. The point is exactly what God said above.
Exodus 20:1-17 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
The Ten Commandments
20 Then God spoke all these words, saying,
2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 5 You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
7 “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.
8 “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.
12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the Lord your God gives you.
13 “You shall not murder.
14 “You shall not commit adultery.
15 “You shall not steal.
16 “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
17 “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”
—————————————————————
Exodus 31:18 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
18 When He had finished speaking with him upon Mount Sinai, He gave Moses the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written by the finger of God.
Exodus 32:15-16 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
15 Then Moses turned and went down from the mountain with the two tablets of the testimony in his hand, tablets which were written on both sides; they were written on one side and the other. 16 The tablets were God’s work, and the writing was God’s writing engraved on the tablets.
Exodus 32:19 New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Moses’ Anger
19 It came about, as soon as Moses came near the camp, that he saw the calf and the dancing; and Moses’ anger burned, and he threw the tablets from his hands and shattered them at the foot of the mountain.
————————————————————
That’s the entire chapter of 34. It’s also concerning the second set of tablets.
——————————————————-
So it seems that God wrote several things on the tablets on the front and back. Scripturally I see no reason to believe it was ten things and in each section it sounds like completely different things. One story mentions these things and the other story mentions those things and it seems like we really don’t know what was on the tablets.
It also seems like sometime way after all of these events happened they were wrote down. In the gospels we see slightly different accounts of various things. In one account we see the Lord’s Prayer this way and in another a different way. We see a account of 1 angel and then another of 2 angels. We see one genealogy following one path and the other another. Yet all of these are inspired by God. So the same with the commandments. Even the “10” which seemed to be way more than 10 had portions of them put out at different times in different ways.
Hebrews 2:2–3 (NIV 2011): 2 For since the message [the law] spoken through angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, 3 how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?
Acts 7:53 (NIV 2011): you who have received the law that was given through angels but have not obeyed it.”
Galatians 3:19 (NIV2011): The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator.
In taking a plan reading of Exodus and Deuteronomy (that God wrote/spoke the Law for/to Moses) one inevitably runs foul of the NT. For example, The Writer to the Hebrews, Stephen, and Paul all believed that the Lord gave the law to angelic messengers who spoke it for Moses for Moses to transcribe.
I believe you and I would both share the common ground belief that the bible cannot contradict itself. So, with the exception of the Ten Commandments which the Lord spoke from the fire in the hearing of the people, God cannot have physically written the law on stone tablets in Moses presence. That language in Ex/Dt must mean something else, because the New Testament teaches that the contents of the law came to Moses via angels. To take that OT language too literally leaves one in a position where either Moses got the facts wrong or the NT folks quoted above did.
You’re interested in whether members of the forum are open to changing their minds, are you willing to change yours in light of new evidence?
1 Like
It is one thing when the Bible states a question and then addresses it like in 1 Cor 15 when Paul actually states the question which he is addressing “How are the dead raised. With what kind of body do they come?” When the Bible does that, then the answer it gives is irrefutable. But Numbers 12:6 does no such thing. There is a question stated in Numbers 12 and it is “Has the Lord indeed spoken only through Moses?” That is the question it is addressing and not whether God has a form. Thus you are using a turn of phrase out of context to insert into the Bible quite contrary to the statement of the rest of the Bible on that topic. “God is spirit.” John 4:24 “No one has seen God at any time.” John 1:18, 1 Timothy 6:16 So we Christians, who accept the Biblical canon as authoritative for Christian belief, do not read one part of the text in a way that contradicts another part of the text. So, for example, when Jesus says “When you see me you see the Father.” This does not mean that Jesus is the Father and God has a body and Jesus’ body is it. Instead we have the doctrine of the Trinity that Jesus and the Father are one God but not the same person. Only in this way is the Christian religion distinguished from other religions like Islam, Mormonism, and Jehovah Witnesses, who add other texts to alter the meaning they get from the Bible to something else.
1 Like
Man. Man wrote ‘The Law’. Who else? How?
Why does there have to be only one reason for keeping the sabboth? It seems to me that it is wrong to assume that there is onlly one right answer, when their might be many many more. Besides the ones above, what about our health? Mankind can’t work effectively 24/7 or even 8/7
One should not only look for the assumptions that go into Cody’s question but what went into your answer.
Since we know that as Jesus said in John 10:35 ”the Scripture cannot be broken.” And “Matt 5:18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” I must conclude that the words of Jesus and the apostles must agree with the Word of God from Genesis to the Law and then through the prophets. So I will study the scriptures to see how they mesh.
I have wondered about the Angle (messenger) of the Lord before. Like others may think, it may have something to do with the Word before He became flesh. Scripture states that others beside Moses saw Jehovah and the Angle of The Lord. Ex 6:2-2 And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord: 3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them.
When Moses saw the burning bush, it mentions both the Angle of Jehovah and also states that Elohiym called out to him. The same word for angle used there is the same used in Mal 3:1 “Behold, I will send my messenger (I believe John the Baptist), and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant (Jesus), whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.”
So it’s not that God didn’t speak the Law to Moses and it is obvious that Moses saw the form of God. It is; how does that blend with the writings of the apostles? I will continue to honor the scripture from Genesis on just as Jesus did. I may not fully understand it all but I will not dishonor the scriptures when Jesus gave His stamp of approval on them. Matt 5:17 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
I’ll keep seeking the Fathers knowledge and wisdom on this matter.
1 Like
I agree with you @gbob, in fact, I never said there wasn’t more that one reason to rest. For example, the Writer to the Hebrews links our rest now with New Creation. Sabbath rest is a foretaste of the eternal rest we’ll enjoy there. And in Matthew 11:25 Jesus links rest to his own messianic mission. Rest in the bible is a deep and rich vein. On that I’m sure we can both agree.
The point I was making above was that both Dt 5 and Ex 20 state that the Ten Commandments they record in were spoken by God out of the fire on the mountain audibly to the people of Israel. And yet, Dt5 and Ex20 record different versions of the sabbath command. I then suggested what I believe to the most convincing way to reconcile this interruptive conundrum.
Please do. Proverbs 18:17 (NIV2011) says “In a lawsuit the first to speak seems right, until someone comes forward and cross-examines.” The same is true for forum posts. 
1 Like
For the record, just because someone believes that parts of the Bible is symbolic or metaphorical does not mean they dishonor the word or hold it in any less light.
Disagreeing with a persons opinion on what the word says and means is not the same as disagreeing with the word.
3 Likes
There is one explanation I can think of for 2 statments of God in regard to the 10 suggestioins.(which they have become practically. lol. God mad Moses a set of tablets, which he smashed and Moses had to go back up the mountain with tail between his legs, asking for another copy, at which point God could have said something different. Thus the two different proclamations. Just an idea to solve this conundrum
Ex 32:9–original tablet smashed
Ex 35:1 Moses chiseled out a new set.
This habit of even the most religious of people to alter what God has said according to their own understanding can explain other things. For example, there is considerable puzzlement over the incident of Numbers 20 where God says Moses did not believe in Him and said that he should therefore not enter the promised land. But what did Moses do wrong? Such is the puzzlement among Jewish scholars that they have looked for excuses in unrelated texts. But the plain text is only that Moses did not follow the instructions God gave precisely as they were given.
The angle was right.
It’s called a theophany.
Well, I have read the scripture to see if I could gain an understanding of why angels were brought up; I did not come to a conclusion. However angels may have been involved, it does not distract from the fact that God spoke some of the Law directly to the people and spoke the whole Law to Moses. It was not any of man’s ideas, or an influence working in Moses, it was God dictating His Word to Moses.
While reading Hebrews again, it was confirmed about God speaking to the people. Sorry for the long scripture reference but it not only went along with the thread, it also is such a strong warning and encouragement to us, to stay steadfast in our following God; there is no room for sin in our lives.
Heb 12:18 You have not come to a mountain that can be touched and that is burning with fire; to darkness, gloom and storm; 19 to a trumpet blast or to such a voice speaking words that those who heard it begged that no further word be spoken to them , 20 because they could not bear what was commanded: “If even an animal touches the mountain, it must be stoned.” 21 The sight was so terrifying that Moses said, “I am trembling with fear.” 22 But you have come to Mount Zion, to the heavenly Jerusalem, the city of the living God. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, 23 to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the judge of all men, to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, 24 to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel. 25 See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks . If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? 26 At that time his voice shook the earth, but now he has promised, “Once more I will shake not only the earth but also the heavens.” 27 The words “once more” indicate the removing of what can be shaken — that is, created things — so that what cannot be shaken may remain. 28 Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, 29 for our “God is a consuming fire.”
Blessed be the Lord God Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ our Redeemer, our Salvation.
The good angles; opps! The good angels always are:)
1 Like
I thought the angle was a bit obtuse myself.
3 Likes
That’s a cute observation.
3 Likes
You’ve got that right.
2 Likes
I must point out a certain irony… the article you agree with is entirely consistent with plenary verbal inspiration… And in fact, that article supporting the dynamic view of inspiration closes with an extended quote to support his position from Loraine Boettner, a classic defender of inerrancy and the traditional plenary verbal inspiration viewpoint.
Thus for what it is worth, the second article is a terrible misunderstanding and straw-man treatment of the verbal inspiration view. The author’s confusion on this point is rather embarrassingly well demonstrated by the fact that he didn’t seem to realize he was quoting and endorsing the perspective of a plenary verbal inspiration supporter in defense of his own position.
Every critique of the verbal inspiration view that he gives in the second article relies on a confused conflation of what we traditionalists believe with a crass straw-man style “dictation” theory. But I am just am so very amused at the great irony involved…
The same author he quoted so approvingly who said “Hence we see that the Christian doctrine of inspiration is not the mechanical lifeless process which unfriendly critics have often represented it to be. Rather it calls the whole personality of the prophet into action, giving full play to his own literary style and mannerisms, taking into consideration the preparation given the prophet in order that he might deliver a particular kind of message, and allowing for the use of other documents or sources of information as these were needed.“…
is the same author who said, in the very same book, “By “verbal inspiration” we mean that the Divine influence which surrounded the sacred writers extended not only to the general thoughts, but also to the very words they employed, so that the thoughts which God intended to reveal to us have been conveyed with infallible accuracy.”
One would think, if he had really read Boettner’s book carefully, he might have realized the level of a straw man he was constructing in his critique of those who embrace “plenary verbal inspiration”!
I feel like you missed something. People can refer to what they agree with in quoting someone whose view they don’t entirely embrace. That’s kind of common in scholarship, because you are supposed to interact with other thinkers. He likes Boettner’s metaphor. I’m pretty sure Michael Bird knows exactly who he is quoting and what he’s talking about. He’s a first-rate scholar.
1 Like