God's way of speaking about Himself in the OT

[senjui19]

Hi there! There's something I've been wondering about... There are a lot of passages in the Prophets when God first speaks in the first person and then (on the same breath, as I would put it), uses 3d person nouns. For example: I will do this and that and then the LORD will....etc". So first He refers to Himself as "I" and then in the same speech he refers to Himself "God", "the Lord" . Is it just the way the Lord speaks, maybe a figure of speech, or could we infer differentiation between the Persons from such passages? E. g., first the Son speaking about Himself and saying "I", then referring to the Father or the Spirit He uses "God"? There's a whole lot of verses to illustrate this mode of speaking, but just to give you some concrete examples, Zech. 10:12. Will be grateful for any insight you give me.

 

[Contra_Mundum]

You also have not only differences in person (1st 2nd 3rd); at times you also have surprising shifts in tense (past, present, future).

Partly, this is explained by the relative distance that often stands between the subject of the verbs, and the reporter of the words. The writer (Zechariah for instance) repeats what God has said, sometimes in the exact first-person declaration, other times in his own terms of having heard the Lord speak.

Other times, additional options seem reasonable (such as in Zech.10:12), when read and interpreted in light of the clearer NT revelation of God's trinitarian nature. The various pronouns seem to suggest personal distinction, yet numerical identity on the basis of singular nomenclature (the LORD). While some satisfaction can be gained apart from the fulness of NT light--the statement is not beyond comprehension prior to the Savior--reading it as a trinitarian monotheist removes shadow (in my opinion).

Shifts in tense also accompany the prophetic declarations, perhaps never more obvious than in Is.53. v2 begins in the future; by the end of v3 we are in the past. v12 contains all three tenses. All this shifting reflects the difficulty of the prophetic task: how to render into human language the "God's-eye" view of the coming execution of the divine plan. It is both future, from the standpoint of the prophet's hour in history, and present-reality to the first (and subsequent) recipients; and it is most fixed, sure, and done in the decree of God, as if it had been already fully accomplished (past).

The result, of course, is exactly what God intended to convey (verbal, plenary inspiration); but he also uses the effort of his servant, and doesn't bypass the man's gift.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[senjui19]

Thank you so much, Rev. Buchanan! That's very helpful!