Romans 9 Isn't What You Think It Is

[CJP69]

I'm no Calvinist and this IS the context. Individual vessels predestinated and elected from both the Jews and the Gentiles.

15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that hath mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, For this very purpose did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power, and that my name might be published abroad in all the earth.
18 So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will?
20 Nay but,O m an, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus?
21 Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?
22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction:
23 and that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory,
24 even us, whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles? Ro 9

You argue in favor of Calvinist doctrine. That makes you a Calvinist as far as I'm concerned. A fart by any other name still stinks just as badly.

And no, that is not the context! That is the text! There is a difference! The context is provided by the rest of the chapter and by the Old Testament passages that Paul is referencing as I have clearly established (by merely quoting them, by the way) without substantive response from you or anyone else on this thread.

 

[JD731]

I'm no Calvinist and this IS the context. Individual vessels predestinated and elected from both the Jews and the Gentiles.

15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that hath mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, For this very purpose did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power, and that my name might be published abroad in all the earth.
18 So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will?
20 Nay but,O m an, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus?
21 Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?
22 What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction:
23 and that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory,
24 even us, whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles? Ro 9

You are Reformed, no? Same difference!

Predestination is clearly a NT doctrine but not with the definition you use. Believers are elected by God the Father after they have been baptized in the body of Christ by the Spirit. God the Father elects them because they are in the Son and he has elected the Son before the world (time) began.

Mt 25:19 After a long time <5550> the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.
2Ti 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began <5550>,

Eph 1:Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

The blessings of God the Father are "in Christ," not before.

 

[CJP69]

[


I dropped commentaries a long time ago

Stupidity!

And unbiblical high handed selfishness to boot!

Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?

because I believe the scriptures are written to explain themselves and the Holy Spirit indwells all believers and is our teacher.

So you believe that you've figure out all of biblical doctrine by means of the Holy Spirit Himself and have nothing to learn from other believers who have the same Spirit as you and who maybe given a gift that you have not?

I can't even remember the last time I found somone so foolishly high on themselves!

If the Holy Spirit taught Bob Enyart valuable truth I think he can and will teach me the same truth if I have the same Bible.

Has it ever occurred to you that the existence of Bob's book is the means by which the Holy Spirit is trying to teach you these things? Oh! No! That can't be it! Surely God will allow every thought that He ever allowed any human being to learn about His word to occur to you personally by merely opening up your bible and reading it.

Boy! It sure must be nice to be you! I mean, I had to study for decades under several teachers and had to spend a great deal of time prayerfully discerning which teachings were worth hanging onto and which were not. I'm jealous of the miraculous relationship you get to enjoy with the Holy Spirit Himself teaching you in person everything there is to know about his word independently of every great thinker that has ever lived in the last two thousand years of Christian history!

I mean, WOW!

One wonders why you waste your time going to an Independent Baptist Church! What could they possibly have to offer you that you don't get from God Himself teaching you His word? What on Earth is preventing you from starting your own church and disseminating this God given wisdom to the rest of the world?!

Jesus said, "sanctify them through thy truth, thy (God the Father's) word is truth." Jesus said again

Joh 12:44 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.
45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.
47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.
48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.
50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

As if this itself doesn't count as the very thing you "gave up long ago"; a now published commentary!

I do not know when we decided the words of God were not from heaven but most have.

One of the main themes of scriptures is God's kingdom over the earth and the preaching of it by Jesus Christ caused his own nation to crucify him.

Mt 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Ps 115:16 The heaven, even the heavens, are the LORD’S: but the earth hath he given to the children of men.

More commentary! Your very existence here makes you a hypocrite!

My harshness here has been in keeping with the severity of your error! You absolutely have to repent of this nonsense

I Corinthians 12: 20 But now indeed there are many members, yet one body. 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary. 23 And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our unpresentable parts have greater modesty, 24 but our presentable parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, 25 that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. 26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.
​

Incidentally and rather ironically, the fact that the bible is EASY to understand and that it interprets itself is a major underlying premise of Bob's book! It doesn't merely make the claim that this is the case, it demonstrates WHY it is the case and hands the reader the ability to not only understand why they believe what they believe but understand why those who disagree believe what they believe as well. All without any need of miraculous divine revelation, fancy degrees or knowledge of ancient languages or anything other than the naked word of God as read in any language you desire to read it in. What's more is that it wouldn't require you to move away from your current doctrine hardly at all. All it would do is modify some details and solidify most of what you currently already believe. The few differences it would make are quite important but not so drastic that anyone at your church would even hardly notice without you making a point to highlight the distinctions. An effort that I can tell you from experience would very likely be a fruitless and quickly squashed endeavor in such a church.

 

[DaveXR650]

Thank you!

My enemies should despise me if I am having the desired effect.

This might illustrate the problem. I don't consider you an enemy and you don't know me well enough to consider me one. I've gone round and round with several of the guys on here and we joke about it later. Go back and look at your posts to everyone just in this thread. You have some serious issues you need to work out.

 

[kyredneck]

You argue in favor of Calvinist doctrine.

No, I argue for correct exposition of scripture. Calvinism has zero influence on my interpretation of scripture.

 

[JD731]

​

Incidentally and rather ironically, the fact that the bible is EASY to understand and that it interprets itself is a major underlying premise of Bob's book! It doesn't merely make the claim that this is the case, it demonstrates WHY it is the case and hands the reader the ability to not only understand why they believe what they believe but understand why those who disagree believe what they believe as well. All without any need of miraculous divine revelation, fancy degrees or knowledge of ancient languages or anything other than the naked word of God as read in any language you desire to read it in. What's more is that it wouldn't require you to move away from your current doctrine hardly at all. All it would do is modify some details and solidify most of what you currently already believe. The few differences it would make are quite important but not so drastic that anyone at your church would even hardly notice without you making a point to highlight the distinctions. An effort that I can tell you from experience would very likely be a fruitless and quickly squashed endeavor in such a church.

Thank you for your kind and gracious words but does this last paragraph negate all your previous criticism. Surely you are not suggesting that one must read Bob's commentary or else be all those things you accused me of? Would you agree that my first underlined point above was my argument that you say was stupid? If all I need is the naked word of God, why do I need Bob?

Your arguments and conclusions are schizophrenic..

And by the way, one cannot improve on the doctrines of God. God's idea was to establish LOCAL churches and assign called men to fill the offices. He would equip them and this idea of having national pastors and para church groups and such like that we have today has led to perfect chaos and confusion. It is very rare here when someone brags on their own pastor.

 

[Silverhair]

@CJP69 please remember that we are all Christian brothers here. I do not hold the same views as KY or Dave but I would not refer to them the way you have.

 

[Silverhair]

Thank you for your kind and gracious words but does this last paragraph negate all your previous criticism. Surely you are not suggesting that one must read Bob's commentary or else be all those things you accused me of? Would you agree that my first underlined point above was my argument that you say was stupid? If all I need is the naked word of God, why do I need Bob?

Your arguments and conclusions are schizophrenic..

And by the way, one cannot improve on the doctrines of God. God's idea was to establish LOCAL churches and assign called men to fill the offices. He would equip them and this idea of having national pastors and para church groups and such like that we have today has led to perfect chaos and confusion. It is very rare here when someone brags on their own pastor.

I do not think anyone on here would say the bible is not the standard that we are to judge other works by. I was taught that the bible is it's own best commentary but even then we can use works by gifted men to help us to better understand the bible.

I do not read or speak any of the biblical languages but I have access to those that do through the various commentaries and dictionaries I have. Why should I not use them as the tools they were meant to be?

 

[JD731]

I do not think anyone on here would say the bible is not the standard that we are to judge other works by. I was taught that the bible is it's own best commentary but even then we can use works by gifted men to help us to better understand the bible.

I do not read or speak any of the biblical languages but I have access to those that do through the various commentaries and dictionaries I have. Why should I not use them as the tools they were meant to be?

I was speaking of commentaries only, not other Bible study aids. Most commentaries are written by people who I disagree with on elementary theology and who uses various Bible translations. Why would I want to trust these guys?

I think I generally like the attitude and spirit of DaveXR650 but do you think I would be interested in reading his Bible commentary if he wrote one that is devoted to teach Christian doctrine or explain the Bible? I trow not! Commentaries can be a form of brain washing and most are not worth the time. It seems like Bob and I already agree on things so I will probably not invest in his book.

 

[Silverhair]

I was speaking of commentaries only, not other Bible study aids. Most commentaries are written by people who I disagree with on elementary theology and who uses various Bible translations. Why would I want to trust these guys?

I think I generally like the attitude and spirit of DaveXR650 but do you think I would be interested in reading his Bible commentary if he wrote one that is devoted to teach Christian doctrine or explain the Bible? I trow not! Commentaries can be a form of brain washing and most are not worth the time. It seems like Bob and I already agree on things so I will probably not invest in his book.

Even reading someone you disagree with can at times be helpful. I have commentaries from both pro calvinism and pro bible views. When I read through a work that presents a different view I find it makes me dig deeper into what the bible says so actually strengthens by biblical view.

I have found that when compared to scripture the arguments put forward in support of calvinism are not that compelling. Now of course I would expect those that hold to a calvinist view would disagree with me and that is their right. But it does not make them right.

 

[kyredneck]

You're a liar, ky.

You're now on ignore, and I've reported your vitriolic chutzpah.

 

[JD731]

Even reading someone you disagree with can at times be helpful. I have commentaries from both pro calvinism and pro bible views. When I read through a work that presents a different view I find it makes me dig deeper into what the bible says so actually strengthens by biblical view.

I have found that when compared to scripture the arguments put forward in support of calvinism are not that compelling. Now of course I would expect those that hold to a calvinist view would disagree with me and that is their right. But it does not make them right.

That is a personal choice I honor, but there was a time for me when they were no longer helpful. They do not provoke unity. We all pick and choose whose commentaries we buy and the divide becomes more intense. I say there is more advantage for learning the words and ways of God from the scriptures rather than from high profile scholars.

 

[Silverhair]

That is a personal choice I honor, but there was a time for me when they were no longer helpful. They do not provoke unity. We all pick and choose whose commentaries we buy and the divide becomes more intense. I say there is more advantage for learning the words and ways of God from the scriptures rather than from high profile scholars.

The bible is the standard as I indicated. But since I do not know the languages of the bible it is necessary to use the resources that one has available to further the study of scripture.

 

[CJP69]

Thank you for your kind and gracious words but does this last paragraph negate all your previous criticism. Surely you are not suggesting that one must read Bob's commentary or else be all those things you accused me of?

No! Of course not! Bob's book isn't scripture and it isn't "required" reading. However, anyone who has read it understands the bible - the entire bible - better than 99% of those who are making a living preaching God's word.

That sounds like an exaggeration. I assure you that it is not. It is very simply the most valuable extra-biblical publication that has been written in a hundred years, perhaps longer. There are other books written on the same topic but they aren't nearly as powerful, in my view, because they don't spend the time fully establishing each precept that Bob's book spends the time to fully establish with usually all of the pertinent biblical material.

Would you agree that my first underlined point above was my argument that you say was stupid? If all I need is the naked word of God, why do I need Bob?

That's like a chef asking, "If my knives are sharp, what do I need that honing steal for?"

Why wouldn't your question apply to every preacher or teacher that has every come along? Why would the Twelve have needed Jesus if they had the scripture? Where was the need for Martin Luther and his 95 theses? Why is it that anyone ever benefited at all from Billy Graham's ministry? Why sit under a pastor or even bother to go to church at all if we have a copy of the bible on the shelf?

If you don't think that there are people out there that have important things to teach you about God's word, then you're worse than stupid. Notice that I said, "IF" there. The fact is that I don't believe that you're stupid at all. You're just making a whopping big error that my strong language is intended to hopefully divert you away from.

Your arguments and conclusions are schizophrenic..

No they aren't. Every good commentary or bible teaching has as its focus the word of God, not the teacher. The bible itself tells us that there are those who have been given the gift of teaching, while others have been given a different gift. Why would the Holy Spirit give it some to be preachers and teachers if you're attitude toward bible teaching is correct?

And by the way, one cannot improve on the doctrines of God. God's idea was to establish LOCAL churches and assign called men to fill the offices. He would equip them and this idea of having national pastors and para church groups and such like that we have today has led to perfect chaos and confusion. It is very rare here when someone brags on their own pastor.

This is typical Independent Baptist Church rhetoric that I've never once been shown a good argument for. The assistant Pastor of the IBC church attended for a few years gave me two different books on the topic that were both patently idiotic. They both started off by declaring the idea of a universal body of Christ a doctrine of Satan. You can know instantly that there isn't going to be any real arguments made for a doctrine when an author starts with that tidbit of unfalsifiable emotionalism. Indeed, "unfalsifiable" is a term that fits that entire doctrine. The arguments beg the question from beginning to end, typically being based upon one or more premises that are only true if the doctrine happens to be correct.

The bible, however, seems to destroy the notion that there are thousands upon thousands of independent bodies of Christ in a single sentence....

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.​

Not that this is the ONLY sentence that says something similar. In fact, given the topic that we are discussing here, how can I fail to quote Romans....

Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith. 4 For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function, 5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another. 6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, let us prophesy in proportion to our faith; 7 or ministry, let us use it in our ministering; he who teaches, in teaching; 8 he who exhorts, in exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness.
​

 

[CJP69]

@CJP69 please remember that we are all Christian brothers here. I do not hold the same views as KY or Dave but I would not refer to them the way you have.

I'll try to tone it down.

Have you ever said such a thing to them when they insult me or is it that I don't hide my insults under condescension, sarcasm and snark that makes you feel uncomfortable with the way I dish it back to them? Just askin'.

 

[Silverhair]

I'll try to tone it down.

Have you ever said such a thing to them when they insult me or is it that I don't hide my insults under condescension, sarcasm and snark that makes you feel uncomfortable with the way I dish it back to them? Just askin'.

Just the very unChristian attitude that comes through in those words is disheartening. We are to turn the other cheek not strike the other cheek.

Why do you feel it is necessary to respond that way?

Just look at your response to KY in post # 118.

You have stepped over the line when you question another's salvation just because they do not think as you do.

KY is NOT a heretic. I would call him misguided or misinformed but he still trusts in God for his salvation.

Have I mentioned that we need to be more civil on this board? Yes. The tone can get rather heated by times and we all need to step back and remember that we are all members of one body.

 

[JD731]

The bible is the standard as I indicated. But since I do not know the languages of the bible it is necessary to use the resources that one has available to further the study of scripture.

So, let me follow your logic and reasoning. You reason that God has not preserved his words and so you defer to those who know the original languages in spite of the fact that scholars have no more confidence in the source manuscripts than you do in their translations from them. All the foot notes they include proves it.

So We read commentaries by men who do not believe their translations they hold in their hands and go to prove their doctrines from men who are unsure about the manuscripts they have translated resulting in no one really having a standard.

Satan has been successful in these last days to reduce the scriptures to the wisdom of men and the result is what God condemned in first Corinthians and addressed in chapters. 1-3.

 

[JD731]

No! Of course not! Bob's book isn't scripture and it isn't "required" reading. However, anyone who has read it understands the bible - the entire bible - better than 99% of those who are making a living preaching God's word.

That sounds like an exaggeration. I assure you that it is not. It is very simply the most valuable extra-biblical publication that has been written in a hundred years, perhaps longer. There are other books written on the same topic but they aren't nearly as powerful, in my view, because they don't spend the time fully establishing each precept that Bob's book spends the time to fully establish with usually all of the pertinent biblical material.


That's like a chef asking, "If my knives are sharp, what do I need that honing steal for?"

Why wouldn't your question apply to every preacher or teacher that has every come along? Why would the Twelve have needed Jesus if they had the scripture? Where was the need for Martin Luther and his 95 theses? Why is it that anyone ever benefited at all from Billy Graham's ministry? Why sit under a pastor or even bother to go to church at all if we have a copy of the bible on the shelf?

If you don't think that there are people out there that have important things to teach you about God's word, then you're worse than stupid. Notice that I said, "IF" there. The fact is that I don't believe that you're stupid at all. You're just making a whopping big error that my strong language is intended to hopefully divert you away from.


No they aren't. Every good commentary or bible teaching has as its focus the word of God, not the teacher. The bible itself tells us that there are those who have been given the gift of teaching, while others have been given a different gift. Why would the Holy Spirit give it some to be preachers and teachers if you're attitude toward bible teaching is correct?


This is typical Independent Baptist Church rhetoric that I've never once been shown a good argument for. The assistant Pastor of the IBC church attended for a few years gave me two different books on the topic that were both patently idiotic. They both started off by declaring the idea of a universal body of Christ a doctrine of Satan. You can know instantly that there isn't going to be any real arguments made for a doctrine when an author starts with that tidbit of unfalsifiable emotionalism. Indeed, "unfalsifiable" is a term that fits that entire doctrine. The arguments beg the question from beginning to end, typically being based upon one or more premises that are only true if the doctrine happens to be correct.

The bible, however, seems to destroy the notion that there are thousands upon thousands of independent bodies of Christ in a single sentence....

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.​

Not that this is the ONLY sentence that says something similar. In fact, given the topic that we are discussing here, how can I fail to quote Romans....

Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith. 4 For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function, 5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another. 6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, let us prophesy in proportion to our faith; 7 or ministry, let us use it in our ministering; he who teaches, in teaching; 8 he who exhorts, in exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness.
​

If I were allowed to guess I would guess that what you have written is what Bod said even though some of what you said is illogical. Does this mean Bob has trouble with logic at times?

 

[Silverhair]

So, let me follow your logic and reasoning. You reason that God has not preserved his words and so you defer to those who know the original languages in spite of the fact that scholars have no more confidence in the source manuscripts than you do in their translations from them. All the foot notes they include proves it.

So We read commentaries by men who do not believe their translations they hold in their hands and go to prove their doctrines from men who are unsure about the manuscripts they have translated resulting in no one really having a standard.

Satan has been successful in these last days to reduce the scriptures to the wisdom of men and the result is what God condemned in first Corinthians and addressed in chapters. 1-3.

You are learning well from the calvinists that you claim to dislike. You twist whatever someone says so that you can continue to justify your view. Really sad there JD.

I am sure we can look forward to your enlightened commentary that will correct all the errors of all those scholars that just do not know anything about the ancient languages.

Your arrogance is showing there JD. You need to remember that God loves the humble and judges the proud.

 

[JD731]

You are learning well from the calvinists that you claim to dislike. You twist whatever someone says so that you can continue to justify your view. Really sad there JD.

I am sure we can look forward to your enlightened commentary that will correct all the errors of all those scholars that just do not know anything about the ancient languages.

Your arrogance is showing there JD. You need to remember that God loves the humble and judges the proud.

Well, Silverhair, I apologize for offending you. I must always remember that the scriptures are for Christians and men must choose what they think is the word of God after they are saved. The scriptures will not help unsaved men to be saved, it takes the gospel of Jesus Christ to do that. Saved men can preach the gospel in their own words, yea, they must preach it in their own words because preaching the gospel is basically a saved man telling someone who is not saved what happened to them and they can be saved the same way. Here are a couple statements from heaven that proves that;

1Co 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

1Co 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

Notice in V18 it is the preaching of the cross, not the word that gets sinners saved. This is an important distinction. Everyone must come to the cross of Jesus Christ to be saved.

I read many of your comments on here and generally agree with what you say. What Bible you carry is of no consequence to me and I can fellowship with you as a brother if it is your testimony you have been saved by believing the gospel of Jesus Christ. However, Our fellowship will not be as members of a local church that has a statement of faith and constitution that includes the definition of the authority of God for faith and practice being in one Bible in one place because as much as I like you, you cannot and will not say it is. I think you will not confess that there is a Bible in the world, whether hand copied or printed, that is as Jesus Christ is, perfect. Yet in the OT and the NT he comes to his prophets so they can give his words he gives them a voice. His name that was revealed in Gen 15 is Lord GOD (Adonay Jehovah) and his title is "the word of the LORD," (Jehovah). When the scriptures say the word of the LORD came unto such and such saying, he means a person came and that person was Jesus Christ.

1Sa 3:7 Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD, neither was the word of the LORD yet revealed unto him.
1Sa 3:21 And the LORD appeared again in Shiloh: for the LORD revealed himself to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the LORD.

For instance - Eze has the title the word of the LORD coming to Ezekiel in 60 verses. He has The Lord GOD in 205 times.

Here is who he is according to my scripture authority.

Ps 110:1 «A Psalm of David.» The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.

Here is NT confirmation of this truth;

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.
34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

I have scriptural precedent that God's preacher used scripture with authority to confirm what God said and of whom he said it and I have confidence that God has not changed his person or his ways.

So we will just have to disagree about what the word of God is.