On his “Dividing Line” webcast, James R. White provided an attempted interpretation of Isa 44:24 against “Mormon” theology. One can watch this episode of his show. His comments on this verse begin at the 36:57 mark here.
There are a number of problems with White’s interpretation (read: eisegesis) of this verse. One such problem is his misinformed comment that:
"Anybody who can read the original language can know that Elohim and Jehovah are not separate Gods"
White has been corrected on many occasions by LDS scholars on this issue, including Daniel C. Peterson, William Hamblin, and Daniel McClellan. The near-consensus of Old Testament scholarship is that Yahweh (Jehovah) and Elohim were separate deities who were only at a later stage identified with one another. For a good discussion, see Mark S. Smith, The Origins of Biblical Monotheism: Israel's Polytheistic Background and the Ugaritic Texts (Oxford, 2001). One key text is Deut 32:7-9 which differentiates Yahweh from El Elyon:
Remember the days of old, consider the years long past; ask your father, and he will inform you; your elders, and they will tell you. When the Most High (Elyon) apportioned the nations, when he divided humankind, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the gods; and the Lord's (Yahweh) portion was his people, Jacob his allotted share. (NRSV)
The Masoretic Hebrew text reads "sons of man," but the earliest Hebrew text of this pericope from Qumran reads "sons of God" (alt. "gods"), with Yahweh being one of these deities distinct from El Elyon.
One cannot help but see the double standards in White’s interpretation of Isa 44:24 when he asks which divine person creates in the LDS temple endowment in light of this text. However, keep in mind what White believes that Paul “split” the Shema in 1 Cor 8:4-6; such an interpretation (based on Bauckham’s ludicrous idea of divine identity) results in one rendering the Greek of Deut 6:4 as follows:
"Akoue Israel, Iesou o Pater hemon, Iesou eis estin" (Listen Israel, Jesus is our Father, Jesus is one)
Needless to say, such is inane (and results, not in the Trinity, but Modalism), but such is the exegetical gymnastics (read: eisegesis) one must engage in to hold to the Trinity.
One other problem for White is that he does not address which divine person is speaking in this passage. In both the Hebrew and the LXX, singular verbs and singular personal pronouns are used, indicating one divine person is speaking, not three. Which member of the Trinity is speaking? And if White wishes to absolutise this passage and be consistent, where is the exegetical justification for allowing an additional two divine persons in his belief?
Unlike White, I provided a careful exegesis of this text previously on this blog; for the sake of convenience. let me reproduce it here:
Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things, that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself. (Isa 44:24)
This verse has been used by a number of critics of Latter-day Saint theology, arguing that God, and God alone, was involved in creation, contrary to the Book of Abraham that has “the gods,” under the jurisdiction of the Father, involved in creation (see chapters 4 and 5 of the Book of Abraham). However, there are problems for our Trinitarian opponents who sometimes use this verse against Latter-day Saint theology and Scripture.
Firstly, one should compare Isa 44:24 with Heb 1:1-2:
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom he also made the world.
In this pericope, it is the singular person of the Father who is the creator, with Jesus as an intermediary (cf. 1 Cor 8:4-6). Absolutising both these passages, the Isaiah text forces us to conclude that the person of the Father alone was the creator, which, of course, is antithetical to Trinitarian sensibilities.
[God] alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.
In this passage, it is Yahweh alone who “trampled upon the waves of the sea” (NRSV). Interestingly, however, there is a difference between the Masoretic Text and the LXX. The LXX renders this portion of the verse as καὶ περιπατῶν ὡς ἐπ᾽ ἐδάφους ἐπὶ θαλάσσης, which Brenton renders in his translation as "and walks on the sea as on firm ground." Therefore, the LXX states that Yahweh alone has the authority to walk upon the seas. One should compare the LXX rendition of Job 9:8 with Matt 14:29:
[Jesus] said, "Come." So Peter got out of the boat, started walking on the water, and came toward Jesus.
Absolutising LXX Job 9:8 in the way that critics of LDS theology absolutise Isa 44:24, one must conclude that Yahweh alone can walk on the water, and taking it to its “logical” conclusion, Peter is Yahweh(!) Of course, that is eisegesis, just as it is eisegesis to claim that Isa 44:24 is a strictly “Trinitarian.”
Ultimately, Isa 44:24 is better understood that the authority and source of creation derives from God (the Father) and all those who played a role in creation were under His jurisdiction, including the person of Jesus (see 1 Cor 8:4-6, as an example). This was the interpretation of the earliest Christian commentators, including Origen (185-254):
Thus, if all things were made, as in this passage also [John 1:3], through the Logos, then they were not made by the Logos, but by a stronger and greater than He [the Father]. (Origen, Commentary on the Gospel of John [Ante-Nicene Fathers 9:328]; comments in square brackets added for clarification)
We can further substantiate this by examining another text from the book of Isaiah:
I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no saviour. (Isa 43:11)
In this verse, God is said to be there only מושׁיע (“Saviour”). Notwithstanding, there are other figures who are referred to as being a מושׁיע:
And when the children of Israel cried unto the Lord, the Lord raised up a deliverer (מושׁיע) to the children of Israel, who delivered them, Othniel son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother. (Judg 3:9)
And the Lord gave Israel a saviour (מושׁיע), so that they went out from under the hand of the Syrians: and the children of Israel dwelt in their tents, as before time. (2 Kgs 13:5)
In these verses, Isa 43:11 notwithstanding, Yahweh Himself commissions other “saviours” (מושׁיע). Absolutising Isa 43:11 in the way that our Trinitarian critics absolutise Isa 44:24, one would have to conclude that it is explicitly contradicted by the two aforementioned texts. However, if one understands that Yahweh is the ultimate source of being a saviour but can commission others to be “saviours” such as Othniel, there is no issue.
Ultimately, Isa 44:24 is properly understood, not speaking as the “number” of persons involved in the creation, but that the Father alone is the source of its causality and does not preclude other divinities having had a role as an intermediary in the creation, as one finds in the Book of Abraham and Latter-day Saint theology.