Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

Liberty University

THEOPHANIES IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

Submitted to Dr. Timothy Chong

in partial completion of course requirements for

THEO 530 – Systematic Theology II

Elke Speliopoulos

Downingtown, PA

February 14, 2010

 ii

THESIS STATEMENT

After an introduction to Old Testament theophanies, this paper will establish that in some places
theophanies may have been misinterpreted to suggest calm, when in reality God may have
showed himself through much more forceful scenarios. In addition, the attempt will be made to
demonstrate that while God showed himself in various types of manifestations throughout the
pages of Scripture, it cannot be finally concluded that one form, the “angel of the Lord” can
without fail be interpreted as a preincarnate Christ.
 iii

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................4

THEOPHANIES IN THE OLD TESTAMENT ...........................................................................5

TYPES OF THEOPHANIES...................................................................................................5

CHARACTERISTICS OF THEOPHANIES ...........................................................................7

COMPONENTS OF A THEOPHANY ...................................................................................8

POWERFUL, NOT GENTLE MANIFESTATIONS ...............................................................9

THE ANGEL OF THE LORD .................................................................................................. 10

THE MESSENGER OF GOD ............................................................................................... 11

GOD IN HUMAN FORM ..................................................................................................... 12

IDENTIFICATION WITH CHRIST ..................................................................................... 12

JEWISH BINITARIAN MONOTHEISM.............................................................................. 14

CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................... 16

BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................................... 17
 4

INTRODUCTION

Throughout the pages of the Scriptures, human agents have encountered the divine. God

revealed himself to people of his choosing. God’s interaction with man in this form has come to

be known by the term “theophany”, which is not found in the pages of Scripture itself, but rather

is derived from the Greek compound qeofavneia (theopháneia “appearance of God”), made up of

the word qeovς (theos “god”) and a verb faivnein (phaínein “to appear”)1. One brief description of

this term proposes that “a theophany is a visible manifestation of God usually restricted to the

Old Testament”2. However, this definition appears almost too narrow as God not only appeared

in visible form but also in auditory manifestations.3 As God displayed himself in the pages of the

Old Testament, the visible manifestation took on a number of forms. A number of times, God

appeared in human form, but many other times, supernatural elements joined with natural

phenomena to let God speak, such as a through his thunderous voice in a storm or from within a

burning bush.

Scholarship of recent years has shown that certain aspects of Old Testament theophanies

may have been misinterpreted and that several elements suggest rather forceful theophanies as

God speaks to his people. In addition, further considerations lead to a tentative conclusion that

the “angel of the Lord” should not by default be identified with the second member of the

godhead.

1. Jeffrey J. Niehaus, God at Sinai: Covenant & Theophany in the Bible and Ancient Near East (Grand
Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 17.

2. bible.org, OT Theophanies, http://bible.org/illustration/ot-theophanies (accessed February 27, 2010).

3. J. C. Moyer, “Theophany,” in Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell, second ed.
(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1984, 2001), 1190.
 5

THEOPHANIES IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

With the ultimate theophany in Jesus’ incarnation, theophanies, while present, are rare in

the New Testament as compared to the Old Testament, on which the focus will be. Theophanies

in the Old Testament showed that God reveals himself to those of his creation who are being

saved, while concealing himself from those that are perishing,4 and they served a number of

purposes.

TYPES OF THEOPHANIES

While many descriptions of theophanies depict God as appearing in dreams (Gen. 20:3-7;

28:12-17), visions (Gen. 15:1-21; Is. 6:1-13), or as an angel (Gen. 16:7-13; 18:1-33)5, this really

is not a complete picture as theophanies in the Old Testament also occurred in other and rather

surprising ways. As already mentioned, theophanies included both visible and auditory

manifestations of God6, and many times did not involve a human form. Two classic examples of

non-human theophanies are the smoking firepot and blazing torch in Genesis 15 and the fire,

smoke and thunder at Mount Sinai in Exodus 19. In those cases where God did appear in

physical form, Erickson writes that in light of Jesus clearly indicating in Luke 24:39 that a spirit

does not have flesh, it appears best “to take the clear statements about God’s spirituality and

invisibility at face value and interpret the anthropomorphisms and theophanies in the light of

them”7. But would the Old Testament characters who encountered God in human form agree?

4. Niehaus, God at Sinai, 17.

5. Bible.org, OT Theophanies.

6. Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, second ed.. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic,
1984, 2001), 1190.

7. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, second ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1983, 1984,
1985, 1998), 294. He adds on p. 468 that the three proposed interpretations are “(1) he is merely an angel with a
special commission; (2) he is God himself temporarily visible in a humanlike form; (3) he is the Logos, a temporary
preincarnate visit by the second person of the Trinty.”
 6

An example here might be Abraham’s encounter with the three men, one of whom Abraham

quickly identifies as the Lord, under the oaks of Mamre in Genesis 18. Most certainly, these men

ate and drank with Abraham – a very real and physical encounter.

For the most part, theophanies in the Old Testament involve a single individual, but there

are several incidents of group theophanies, e.g. Exodus 19:1–20:18 and 24:1–18. In Exodus 19:9,

God tells Moses the purpose for his appearing to the Israelites: “Behold, I am coming to you in a

thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with you, and may also believe you forever.”8

In Exodus 24:1-18, the purpose of the group theophany is for Aaron, Nadab and Abihu as well as

the 70 elders to experience God as Moses prepares to ascent the mountain. Moses recalls these

experiences in Deuteronomy 4:1–5:30.9

Theophanies could also serve the purpose of a calling in a type of “commissioning

ceremony”10. Examples can be found when Isaiah is commissioned by God in Isaiah 6:8-13.

Likewise, Ezekiel experiences such a divine encounter in Ezekiel 2:1-10. However, it was not

always just a prophet God commissioned. Other examples of such a commissioning can be seen

in 1 Kings 22:20-22 where God gives the order to a spirit to deceive King Ahab, as well as in

Daniel 7:13-14 when the “Ancient of Days” gives authority to “one like a son of man” to rule the

peoples of the earth.11

Encounters with God could range anywhere from the supernatural, such as a bush that

was not being consumed by fire or the above mentioned imagery of the smoking firepot, to rather

forceful encounters, such as the dark clouds and thunder of Mount Sinai, all the way to the rather

8. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, vol. 10 of 19 (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001), 9.

9. George W. Savran, Encountering the Divine: Theophany in Biblical Narrative (New York: T & T Clark
International, 2005), 27.

10. R. B. Chisholm Jr., “Theophany,” in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. T. Desmond Alexander
and Brian S. Rosner, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001).

11. Ibid.
 7

gentle human form appearances. However, as Savran correctly points out, this leads to a

dilemma of sorts:

Using dream reports, mythic depictions of theophany and the upheaval of nature,
promises of divine guidance, and prophetic oracles, the literary genius of the biblical
narrative developed a new way of discussing the interaction between the human and the
divine, in a way which reflected the biblical concern with the special relationship
between YHWH and Israel. In order to accomplish this, the writers had to negotiate the
tension between divine transcendance and anthropomorphism.12

It is exactly this tension, which is best exemplified in the form of the “angel of the Lord”.

Before turning to this type of theophany, it is important to understand typical patterns of

theophany depictions in the text, as well as other aspects of theophanies that is critical in

understanding what the people experienced when they encountered God.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THEOPHANIES

Niehaus identifies the following eight characteristics of theophanies:

1) Temporariness, i.e., God’s appearance is for a purpose, which he accomplishes and

then disappears again;

2) Salvation and judgment, i.e., when God appears it is to save, oftentimes in mighty acts,

but it can also bring judgment as Job 40:1-6 demonstrates;

3) Impartation of holiness, i.e., God’s holiness sanctifies temporarily the location of the

theophany, thereby making it holy (examples are Moses’ encounter with God in the burning bush

in Exodus 3:5 and Joshua’s meeting with the commander of the Lord’s army in Joshua 5:15);

4) Revealer and concealer, i.e., a human would literally not be able to endure God’s

glory, so God partially reveals and partially conceals himself;

5) Human fear, i.e., the human response to meeting with God is always fear once the

realization sets in that he or she is in divine presence;

12. George W. Savran, Encountering the Divine: Theophany in Biblical Narrative (New York: T & T Clark
International, 2005), 2.
 8

6) Natural upheaval, i.e., natural phenomenon occur that suggest a disturbance in the

normal environment, such as when Elijah encounters God (1 Kings 19:11-13);

7) Adumbrated eschatology, i.e., the theophany gives a glimpse into God’s end time role;

8) Theophanic words, i.e.; God only appears because he has a message and intends to

speak.13

COMPONENTS OF A THEOPHANY

Scholars such as Hermann Gunkel, Julian Morgenstern and Eduard Norden investigated

theophanies by arriving from different angles of approach. However, it was the work done more

recently by Jörg Jeremias and J. Kenneth Kuntz that added significantly to this discussion in the

area of form criticism.14 Kuntz, in particular provided a list of ten components that establish

theophanies as a literary Gattung:

1 Introductory description in the third person

2 Deity’s utterance of the name of the (mortal) addressee
3 Response of the addressee
4 Deity’s self-asseveration
5 His quelling of human fear
6 Assertion of his gracious presence
7 The hieros15 logos addressed to the particular situation
8 Inquiry or protest by the addressee
9 Continuation of the hieros logo with perhaps some repetition of
elements 4, 5, 6, 7 and/or 8
10 Concluding description the the third person16

Niehaus clarifies that while this provides an excellent framework, it is important to

remember that not all elements will necessarily appear in every example of a theophany.

13. Niehaus, God at Sinai: Covenant & Theophany in the Bible and Ancient Near East, 20-30.

14. Ibid., 31.

15. Greek for “holy word”- a word from God to a human recipient

16. Niehaus, 31-32.

 9

However, since these elements occur regularly, these fundamental components should be

considered a guide to working with Old Testament theophanies. 17

POWERFUL, NOT GENTLE MANIFESTATIONS

The passage depicting Isaiah’s calling in Isaiah 6 provides a glimpse into the

overpowering impact of an encounter with the God of the universe. As Niehaus writes, Isaiah

initial response is “not a response to Yahweh’s words, but to his dreadfully holy appearance”.18

Realizing that one suddenly finds oneself in the presence of God causes powerful reactions to

individuals in the Old Testament. Yet this seems to raise a question about why an omnipotent

God who appears to convey messages of blessing and curse, pronounce decrees, but also to

speak judgment would seem to wander so seemingly leisurely into the garden after Adam and

Eve’s sin.

This has caused Niehaus to take a more in-depth look into the forcefulness of divine

encounters. These appear to be more readily tangible in the Hebrew text, but may have lost their

urgency and power in some English translations. The distinct storm imagery depicts the approach

of the divine in multiple theophanic passages. Forceful imagery is abundant, such as when

Yahweh appears as covenant judge in a frightening image of a storm theophany as in Ezekiel’s

vision by the Kebar River19, which Ezekiel describes with terms such as “a windstorm coming

out of the north—an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light”.20

Similar imagery can be found in other passages of the Old Testament, in particular in the

theophanic imagery at Mount Sinai.

17. Ibid., 32.

18. Ibid., 250.

19. Ibid., 255.

20. The Holy Bible: English Standard Version, vol. 10 of 19 (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2001), Eze
1:4.
 10

Returning to the passage in Genesis in the garden, Niehaus has reached the conclusion

that the scene with God returning to look for Adam and Eve may not be a peaceful one at all, but

rather indicate impending judgment, based on comparative study of an Akkadian term, umu, a

term corresponding to the Hebrew yom (day). However, this term means “storm” in Akkadian

texts, found frequently in divine ephitets and used with overtones found in theophanic

depictions.21 If the Hebrew ‫( יּוֹם‬yôm, day) is understood with this background, the picture of God

seeking Adam and Eve in the garden shifts dramatically. As Niehaus writes, “in the context of

such a theophany, the ‫( קוֹל‬note: qôl, voice) of Yahweh that the man and the woman hear is no

longer merely Yahweh’s ‘voice’. It is the ‘thunder’ of his stormy presence.”22

A similar possible misinterpretation (or mistranslation) may occur in the theophany

experienced by Elijah (1 Kings 19:9-19). What has been traditionally translated as a “still small

voice” (KJV) or “a gentle whisper” (NIV), seems to warrant reconsideration in light of the

appearance of ‫ קוֹל‬in this passage. This word is often used with an overtone of a loud and

thunderous speaking by God.23 As is seen, much in a scholar’s attempt to understand the

Scriptures rises and falls with a correct interpretation of the terms not just in their original

Hebrew context, but even more so in the meaning of cognates in the languages of Israel’s

neighbors.

THE ANGEL OF THE LORD

It is the theophany in human form that has probably produced the greatest abundance of

scholarly writing. Who is the “angel of the Lord”? The divine manifestation known as the “angel

of the Lord” is found as the ‫( ַמלְאַ ֧ ְך י ְהוָ ֛ה‬mǎl·ʾāḵ yhwh, “angel of the Lord”) or the ‫ֹלהים‬
֤ ִ ֱ‫מַ ְל ַ֨אְך א‬

21. Niehaus, God at Sinai: Covenant & Theophany in the Bible and Ancient Near East, 156-57.

22. Ibid., 158.

23. Ibid., 248.

 11

(mǎl·ʾāḵ ʾělō·hîm, “angel of God”) and occurs more than 50 times in these forms in the Old

Testament24. This angel appears to have the characteristics of God, e.g. bearing the name of God,

allowing himself both to be worshiped and to be recognized as God. Erickson describes three

broadly suggested interpretations of the “angel of the Lord”: first, he may be an angel who has

been given a particular commission by God, secondly, God may be temporarily displaying

himself in human form, and thirdly, this is the Logos, Jesus Christ, in a preincarnate visit to

mankind.25

THE MESSENGER OF GOD

Upon closer inspection of the term ‫מַ לְאַ ֧ ְך‬, there are a couple of elements, which are critical

in observation. BDB offers a translation primarily of “messenger”, and here this can be a

messenger in the role of a delegate, a messenger of peace, but also a messenger of evil or death.26

Strong’s describes the meaning as originating from “an unused root meaning to despatch (sic) as

a deputy”.27 Clearly, the term comes with a strong sense of someone conveying an important

message. It is clear from many passages that the “angel of the Lord” was both identifying

himself as God and yet was distinct from God. Chisholm writes that there are some scholars who

believe that the “angel of the Lord” signifies God taking an angelic form. He does, however,

differentiate here that “where the angel is identified with the Lord, this is probably in a

representational sense only, not in essence.”28 Routledge believes that the “angel of the Lord” is

24. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 1191.

25. Erickson, Christian Theology, 468.

26. Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver and Charles Augustus Briggs, enhanced brown-driver-briggs
hebrew and english lexicon, electronic ed. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 2000), 521.

27. James Strong, The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible: Showing Every Word of the Text of the
Common English Version of the Canonical Books, and every occurrence of each word in regular order., electronic
ed. (Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship., 1996).

28. Chisholm, New Dictionary of Biblical Theology.

 12

to be understood as a “personal representative of God, who speaks for Yahweh and is, in many

cases, identified with him.”29

GOD IN HUMAN FORM

God is recognized as God in many passages and does not speak as a messenger of God,

but as God himself. Examples are God’s meeting with Hagar in Genesis 16:7-14 and 21:17-18,

or when Abraham is about to sacrifice Isaac in Genesis 22:1-18.30

A strong support for this view also comes in the reaction of those that have encountered

the “angel of the Lord”. Both Manoah’s and Gideon’s (Judges 6) encounter with the “angel of

the Lord” results in them fearing for their life as they realize they have just encountered God

Most High in the form of the “angel of the Lord”.

IDENTIFICATION WITH CHRIST

Many scholars postulate that the “angel of the Lord” is indicative of the second member

of the godhead, Jesus, manifesting himself in the Old Testament.31 While nowhere in the Old or

New Testament Jesus is identified with the “angel of the Lord”, this is justified through

backward reasoning by scholars who point to the teaching in John 1:16 that “no one has seen the

Father.”32 Likewise, Keathley, studying Joshua 5, is convinced that “Joshua’s response in verse

14b and the statement of the captain in verse 15 show this was a theophany, or better, based on

29. Robin Routledge, Old Testament Theology: A Thematic Approach (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity
Press, 2008), 119.

30. D. R. W. Wood and I. Howard Marshall, New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity Press, 1996), 37.

31. Bible.org, OT Theophanies.

32. Sinclair B. Ferguson and J.I. Packer, New Dictionary of Theology, electronic ed. (Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2000), 681.
 13

the truth of John 1:1-18, it was a Christophany.”33 He defines Christophany as “a manifestation

of the preincarnate Christ, who, as the Logos, is the one who reveals God.”34

Lightner, also arguing for the “angel of the Lord” being the second member of the

godhead, Jesus, raises the following four points. Primarily, Jesus in his incarnate form is

recognized as the visible member of the Trinity. As a second point of argument, Lightner

recognizes that the “angel of the Lord” does not appear after Jesus’ incarnation. Thirdly, the

roles of the “angel of the Lord” and of Jesus match, i.e., both were sent to minister for God the

Father. Lastly, the fact that people could visually observe the “angel of the Lord” eliminates the

possibility that they were observing God the Father, as the Scriptures clearly state that no man

can look on God and live.35

Goldberg argues that one confirmation of the identity of the “angel of the Lord” lies in

two passages which use the same word, pele* (beyond understanding, wonderful), yet in one case

this word is assigned to the “angel of the Lord” in Judges 13:15-18, and the second time it is

used in a strongly Messianic passage in Isaiah 9:6.36 Goldberg also reiterates Lightner’s point by

highlighting that only three times is the expression “angel of the Lord” found in the New

Testament (Matthew 2:19, Acts 12:7, 23), yet each time it is preceded by an indefinite article and

refers to an angelic being in God’s service. 37

33. J. Hampton Keathley III, “The Captain of the Lord’s Army (Joshua 5:13-15),” bible.org,
http://bible.org/article/captain-lord%E2%80%99s-army-joshua-513-15 (accessed March 3, 2010).

34. Ibid.

35. Robert Lightner, Angels, Satan, and Demons: Invisible Beings That Inhabit the Spiritual World, ed.
Charles R. Swindoll (Nashville, TN: Word Publishing, 1998), 63.

36. Louis Goldberg, God Torah Messiah: The Messianic Jewish Theology of Dr. Louis Goldberg, ed.
Richard A. Robinson (San Francisco: Purple Pomegranate Productions, 2009), 323.

37. Ibid., 324.

 14

JEWISH BINITARIAN MONOTHEISM

From what has been described, the difficulty in the interpretation of the “angel of the

Lord” arises in his sometimes acting as a messenger of God and sometimes speaking as God

himself. Heiser in his work on the divine council38 has proposed a look at elements of a Jewish

Binitarian monotheism, which was accepted in the Jewish rabbinical thought until the second

century after Christ, and which Rainbow writes was a necessary element in order for first century

Jews coming to faith to “make sense of the cultic veneration of Jesus beside God”.39 It is here

that we find an alternate proposal as to the identity of the “angel of the Lord”.

The research done by Heiser to formulate a doctrine of the godhead in the Old Testament

took him “on a quest to find traces of this fundamental point of Christian theology.”40 Heiser

approached this search via an approach that, as he writes “politely ignores the New Testament.”41

Studying both rabbinical writings and the text of the Old Testament, he realized quickly that a

Binitarian godhead can be derived from this reading. The background of the rabbinical thought

lies in the concept of an understanding of a divine council surrounding Yahweh, complete with

inherent authority structures, as well as a perception of two Yahwehs – one who is visible, and

one who is invisible. Bringing together these two components of who God is and how he rules

allowed for the understanding of a Binitarian godhead.42 Heiser cites Alan Segal who 30 years

ago wrote a major work on the concept of two powers in heaven in Jewish thought.43 Segal found

38. Michael S. Heiser, The Divine Council, http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/HeiserIVPDC.pdf (accessed

March 3, 2010).

39. Paul A. Rainbow, “Jewish Monotheism as the Matrix for New Testament Christology: A Review
Article,” Novum Testamentum 33, no. 1 (1991): 86.

40. Michael S. Heiser, The Concept of a Godhead in Israelite Religion (2008),

http://www.michaelsheiser.com/TwoPowersInHeaven/ETS2008.pdf (accessed March 3, 2010), 1.

41. Ibid.

42. Ibid.

43. Ibid. The book referenced by Heiser: Alan Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports
About Christianity and Gnosticism (Brill, 1977).
 15

that a teaching reaching back to the Second Temple period (about 200 B.C.) allowed for a

“second God” or a “lesser Yahweh”. 44

The rabbis had found evidence for such a Binitarian godhead construct in passages such

as Daniel 7:9-13, Exodus 23:20-22, and Exodus 15:3. What Segal was able to rule out was the

influence of Persian dualism, or Zoroastrianism, as this would have been unacceptable in light of

the fact that both powers in heaven were good.45

Heiser believes that the background here lies in the Israelite divine council and its

common features with the Ugarit council of gods described in the Baal cycle. El, the highest

sovereign of this divine assembly, was deemed both king and a benevolent holy deity. Baal, the

storm god or “cloud rider”, became king of the gods within El’s divine council. The major

departure here comes in the fact that it would have been impossible for monotheistic Israelites to

accept such a co-regency concept. The only solution to them was that Yahweh was actually two

Yahwehs, one invisible and one visible.

In order to circumnavigate the problem of Yahweh’ non-corporeal and holy being that

would bring death to a human should he encounter him, Heiser believes “Yahweh adopted a

strategy of contacting humans in means detectable by the human senses.”46 In other words,

humans would be able to communicate with God and live. As such, Yahweh could remain the

invisible high sovereign, while the visible Yahweh was able to fight battles or communicate

decrees.

44. Ibid.

45. Ibid.

46. Ibid.
 16

CONCLUSION

Much of what is needed to begin to understand Old Testament theophanies requires a

thorough understanding of the culture and language of Israel’s neighbors. Many similarities have

been found in ANE text passages that help in the interpretation of the biblical text. However, one

has to be careful to recognize that while these similarities do exist, they do speak of the false

gods and idols of the ANE religions and do not change that the God of Israel is the one true and

transcendent God. As such, scholars have to be careful not to rule out the miracle operating God

of the universe who is capable of truly saving his people. Heiser’s research is very intriguing, but

also here it is necessary to approach these findings ultimately from a post-cross perspective,

which brings a completed revelation. Regarding the “angel of the Lord”, to quote Niehaus one

more time, “the angel of Yahweh is perhaps best understood as a theophanic presence of God.”47

The Tanakh confirms this from a Jewish understanding; God can appear in human form.48

What can add tremendously to the understanding of the Old Testament is to view God in

the complete picture of his ultimate holiness. As seen, this holiness expressed itself often in the

form of rather frightening encounters, but God also showed great compassion in allowing his

people to also encounter him in very personal face-to-face meetings. It was this personal

encountering of God that culminated in Jesus Christ, as God Incarnate. Theophanies ceased after

Jesus’ time walking on the earth, but God gave his people something much better: God in us in

the form of the third person of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit.

47. Niehaus, God at Sinai, 191.

48. The Jewish Study Bible: Featuring the Jewish Publication Society Tanakh Translation, ed. Adele
Berlin, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Michael Fishbane (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 67.
 17

BIBLIOGRAPHY

bible.org. OT Theophanies. http://bible.org/illustration/ot-theophanies (accessed February 27,

2010).

Brown, Francis. Samuel Rolles Driver and Charles Augustus Briggs. Enhanced brown-driver-
briggs hebrew and english lexicon, electronic ed. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research
Systems, 2000.

Chisholm, R. B. Jr. “Theophany.” In New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, edited by T.

Desmond Alexander and Brian S. Rosner. Electronic ed. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2001.

Elwell, Walter A. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Second ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Academic, 1984, 2001.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Second ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1983,
1984, 1985, 1998.

Ferguson, Sinclair B., and J.I. Packer. New Dictionary of Theology. Electronic ed. Downers
Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000.

Goldberg, Louis. God Torah Messiah: The Messianic Jewish Theology of Dr. Louis Goldberg.
Edited by Richard A. Robinson. San Francisco: Purple Pomegranate Productions, 2009.

Heiser, Michael S. The Concept of a Godhead in Israelite Religion. 2008.

http://www.michaelsheiser.com/TwoPowersInHeaven/ETS2008.pdf (accessed March 3,
2010).

______. The Divine Council. http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/HeiserIVPDC.pdf (accessed

March 3, 2010).

The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. Vol. 10 of 19. Wheaton: Standard Bible Society,
2001.

The Jewish Study Bible: Featuring the Jewish Publication Society Tanakh Translation. Edited by
Adele Berlin, Marc Zvi Brettler, and Michael Fishbane. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2004.

Keathley, J. Hampton III. “The Captain of the Lord’s Army (Joshua 5:13-15).” bible.org.
http://bible.org/article/captain-lord%E2%80%99s-army-joshua-513-15 (accessed March
3, 2010).

Lightner, Robert. Angels, Satan, and Demons: Invisible Beings That Inhabit the Spiritual World.
Edited by Charles R. Swindoll. Nashville, TN: Word Publishing, 1998.
 18

Moyer, J. C. “Theophany.” In Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell.

Second ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1984, 2001.

Niehaus, Jeffrey J. God at Sinai: Covenant & Theophany in the Bible and Ancient Near East.
Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995.

Rainbow, Paul A. “Jewish Monotheism as the Matrix for New Testament Christology: A Review
Article.” Novum Testamentum 33, no. 1 (1991).

Routledge, Robin. Old Testament Theology: A Thematic Approach. Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press, 2008.

Savran, George W. Encountering the Divine: Theophany in Biblical Narrative. New York: T &
T Clark International, 2005.

Strong, James. The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible: Showing Every Word of the Text of the
Common English Version of the Canonical Books. And every occurrence of each word in
regular order., electronic ed. Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship., 1996.

Goldberg, Louis. God Torah Messiah: The Messianic Jewish Theology of Dr. Louis Goldberg.
Edited by Richard A. Robinson. San Francisco: Purple Pomegranate Productions, 2009.

Wood, D. R. W., and I. Howard Marshall. New Bible Dictionary. 3rd ed. Downers Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity Press, 1996.