[HiTech RedNeck]

This is based on a tendentious theology.

People want to say it was Jesus Christ preincarnate (to the point of capitalizing S in Son) in the blaze. The Hebrew does not explicitly support this and the NIV (blasphemy!) is pretty good about bringing a literal rendition of the Hebrew. (Why aren’t you looking at the NASB or other contemporary conservative renditions, however? Is it because you want strawmen to pan?)

Indeed you SHOULD be a Berean — that would eliminate the problem. If you want to hang a footnote on that verse and opine that this was Jesus Christ preincarnate, by all means feel welcome to. But that’s your commentary. That isn’t the text. This verse explains how it looked to the pagan king. To see a pagan shade on it is utterly, perfectly logical.

[WhatNot]

Really? Was the pagan king expressing his pagan shade when in verse 28 he says God (singular) not god's (plural), not once, but three times,

OR is that just more KJV tomfoolary?