Answering questions from Johnathan regarding the angel of the Lord.

Angels Or Man

Angels or man can speak for GOD , as GOD , with the authority of GOD .
Many examples of this .

Genesis 16:10 (KJV)
And the angel of the LORD said unto her, I will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude.

Genesis 22:11 And the angel of the LORD called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here [am] I.
12 And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only [son] from me.

Exodus 3:2 (KJV)
And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush [was] not consumed.

Numbers 22:35 (KJV)
And the angel of the LORD said unto Balaam, Go with the men: but only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that thou shalt speak. So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.

Judges 2:1 (KJV)
And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you.


All these are Angels speaking for GOD , as GOD .

The Angel of the LORD said “ I “ in all these verses .
 
Since you said, "All these are Angels speaking for GOD , as GOD ." I have a question for you? Do you think an angel or even a man can swear an oath on behalf of God? I say no! Genesis 22:15-17 the angel of the Lord is speaking.

"Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, vs16, and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son, vs17, indeed, I will greatly bless you and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies."

The writer of the book of Hebrews at Hebrews 6:13-16, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore By Himself, vs14, saying, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply you." Vs15, And thus, having patiently waited, he obtained the promise. Vs16, For men swear by one greater than themselves, and with them an oath given as confirmation is an end of every dispute."

So you see the writer of Hebrews backs up what God Himself said at Genesis 22. You might want to read Genesis 24:7 and Genesis 26:3 and there are others. Personally, I believe the angel of the Lord is the preincarnate Jesus Christ.

IN GOD THE SON,
james
 
For sure you know there are ranks of
jamesh said:
Since you said, "All these are Angels speaking for GOD , as GOD ." I have a question for you? Do you think an angel or even a man can swear an oath on behalf of God? I say no! Genesis 22:15-17 the angel of the Lord is speaking.

"Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, vs16, and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son, vs17, indeed, I will greatly bless you and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies."

The writer of the book of Hebrews at Hebrews 6:13-16, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore By Himself, vs14, saying, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply you." Vs15, And thus, having patiently waited, he obtained the promise. Vs16, For men swear by one greater than themselves, and with them an oath given as confirmation is an end of every dispute."

So you see the writer of Hebrews backs up what God Himself said at Genesis 22. You might want to read Genesis 24:7 and Genesis 26:3 and there are others. Personally, I believe the angel of the Lord is the preincarnate Jesus Christ.

IN GOD
Click to expand...
jamesh said:
Since you said, "All these are Angels speaking for GOD , as GOD ." I have a question for you? Do you think an angel or even a man can swear an oath on behalf of God? I say no! Genesis 22:15-17 the angel of the Lord is speaking.

"Then the angel of the Lord called to Abraham a second time from heaven, vs16, and said, "By Myself I have sworn, declares the Lord, because you have done this thing, and have not withheld your son, your only son, vs17, indeed, I will greatly bless you and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies."

The writer of the book of Hebrews at Hebrews 6:13-16, "For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore By Himself, vs14, saying, I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply you." Vs15, And thus, having patiently waited, he obtained the promise. Vs16, For men swear by one greater than themselves, and with them an oath given as confirmation is an end of every dispute."

So you see the writer of Hebrews backs up what God Himself said at Genesis 22. You might want to read Genesis 24:7 and Genesis 26:3 and there are others. Personally, I believe the angel of the Lord is the preincarnate Jesus Christ.

IN GOD THE SON,
james
Click to expand...
Reincarnation is adopted from the Far East religions.
Angels have rank .
you see it in Daniel and Joshua 5:14 .
all Angels cannot speak as GOD the FATHER.
that is not their job or function.
only the highest ranking can speak as GOD , for GOD .
If Jesus is one of the hosts of heaven and you worship him you violate
Deuteronomy 17:3 (KJV)
And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
Only GOD the FATHER is to be worshipped.
 
Caroljeen said:
Daniel 7:13-14.
13 As I watched in the night visions,
I saw one like a human being
coming with the clouds of heaven.
And he came to the Ancient One
and was presented before him.
14 To him was given dominion
and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations, and languages
should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
that shall not pass away,
and his kingship is one
that shall never be destroyed.

By all three synoptic accounts Jesus is the one who revealed this prophecy to them while he was still alive. Mark 13:26, Luke 21:27, Mt 24:30
How do you reconcile this as a near account of prophecy?
Click to expand...
The implied author who claims to have experienced this vision (ostensibly Daniel, but really someone living in the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes) does not understand it and thus asks one of the attendants to explain it to him (7:15-16) and he proceeds to do so, equating the four beasts to four kingdoms (7:17) and referring to "the holy ones of the Most High" as those who "shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever" (7:18), similar to what the "one like a human being" was said to receive --- indeed, this figure within the vision is a cipher or heavenly representative for these holy ones. Compare specifically the following:

To him {the one like a human being} was given dominion and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations and languages should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away,
and his kingdom is one that shall never be destroyed.
Dan 7:14 (Vision)

The kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven
shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High;
their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom,
and all dominions shall serve and obey them.
Dan 7:27 (Explanation)

Antiochus (the little horn; 7:8, 20-21, 24-26) did soon after die, but an independent kingdom would not materialize for another couple decades of struggle and that lasted less than a hundred years before the region became a client kingdom of Rome and eventually one of its provinces... the prophecy clearly failed to materialize. Early Christian exegetes picked up on the enigmatic cipher character and understood this to be Jesus, which is reflected in the passages you cite from the "Little Apocalypse" discourse dated to Jesus' final week in Jerusalem... such an interpretation derives from the method of pesher that I mentioned a week or so ago --- taking a text and finding some sort of contemporary application. I don't consider such a method valid since prophetic fulfillment becomes an act of creative exegesis with little to no controls... at such a point the original context and authorial intent is ignored.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 
Caroljeen said:
Just for clarification...are you saying in your third point that all the Levites can serve as priests, but the high-priestly line is reserved for sons of Aaron?
Click to expand...
Negative... the text acknowledges the passing of (high-)priestly prerogative from Aaron to Eleazar, but attempts to head things off before Phinehas by extending priestly duties to all Levites before a pattern of son-to-son becomes well established... these duties opened up to all Levites could conceivably include appointment to the office of high priest. Hope this helps clarify...

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 
En Hakkore said:
The implied author who claims to have experienced this vision (ostensibly Daniel, but really someone living in the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes) does not understand it and thus asks one of the attendants to explain it to him (7:15-16) and he proceeds to do so, equating the four beasts to four kingdoms (7:17) and referring to "the holy ones of the Most High" as those who "shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever" (7:18), similar to what the "one like a human being" was said to receive --- indeed, this figure within the vision is a cipher or heavenly representative for these holy ones. Compare specifically the following:

To him {the one like a human being} was given dominion and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations and languages should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away,
and his kingdom is one that shall never be destroyed.
Dan 7:14 (Vision)

The kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven
shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High;
their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom,
and all dominions shall serve and obey them.
Dan 7:27 (Explanation)

Antiochus (the little horn; 7:8, 20-21, 24-26) did soon after die, but an independent kingdom would not materialize for another couple decades of struggle and that lasted less than a hundred years before the region became a client kingdom of Rome and eventually one of its provinces... the prophecy clearly failed to materialize. Early Christian exegetes picked up on the enigmatic cipher character and understood this to be Jesus, which is reflected in the passages you cite from the "Little Apocalypse" discourse dated to Jesus' final week in Jerusalem... such an interpretation derives from the method of pesher that I mentioned a week or so ago --- taking a text and finding some sort of contemporary application. I don't consider such a method valid since prophetic fulfillment becomes an act of creative exegesis with little to no controls... at such a point the original context and authorial intent is ignored.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
Click to expand...
In Daniel 7:13-14
It is speaking of the prince , like unto David .
Ezekiel 37:24-
He will give sacrifices, have children .
The Lord GOD will come to the Temple and break bread with him .
The prince you are speaking of matches the one in
Ezekiel 28:2 and the people of Isaiah 14 : 13 -
 
En Hakkore said:
Negative... the text acknowledges the passing of (high-)priestly prerogative from Aaron to Eleazar, but attempts to head things off before Phinehas by extending priestly duties to all Levites before a pattern of son-to-son becomes well established... these duties opened up to all Levites could conceivably include appointment to the office of high priest. Hope this helps clarify...
Click to expand...
thank you
 
Jim harmon said:
For sure you know there are ranks of


Reincarnation is adopted from the Far East religions.
Angels have rank .
you see it in Daniel and Joshua 5:14 .
all Angels cannot speak as GOD the FATHER.
that is not their job or function.
only the highest ranking can speak as GOD , for GOD .
If Jesus is one of the hosts of heaven and you worship him you violate
Deuteronomy 17:3 (KJV)
And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
Only GOD the FATHER is to be worshipped.
Click to expand...

Jim harmon said:
For sure you know there are ranks of


Reincarnation is adopted from the Far East religions.
Angels have rank .
you see it in Daniel and Joshua 5:14 .
all Angels cannot speak as GOD the FATHER.
that is not their job or function.
only the highest ranking can speak as GOD , for GOD .
If Jesus is one of the hosts of heaven and you worship him you violate
Deuteronomy 17:3 (KJV)
And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
Only GOD the FATHER is to be worshipped.
Click to expand...
I ask you a very specific question? Can angels swear an oath on behalf of God Almighty? Yes, angels do have rank but I don't care what their rank is, can they swear an oath on behalf of God? And yes, angels at times do speak on behalf of God, but again can they swear an oath on behalf of God?

Jesus is not one of the hosts of heaven. Your "assuming" that Jesus Christ is an angel. The Hebrew word for angel is "malak." and it simply means "messenger." Angels are messengers and the word "malak/messenger" is also applied to humans. Malachi is a human prophet and his name is rooted in the word "malak" and he ain't no actual angel.

Btw, I don't know why you brought up Reincarnation but Hebrews 9:27 shoots that belief down. So Jim harmon, please answer my question?

IN GOD THE SON,
james
 
Dizerner said:
I don't think there is any implication "the angel of the Lord" always has to be the exact same singular angel.

And since angel just means messenger of some kind, this messenger could perhaps at times be Christ.

In cases like the following, we have a very direct correlation between the messenger and the Lord himself:

Malachi 3:1 "Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, Will suddenly come to His temple, Even the Messenger of the covenant, In whom you delight. (Mal. 3:1 NKJ)
Click to expand...
THE Angel of Yahweh in the OT was indeed all appearances of the preincarnate Christ, as he was the unique messenger of Yahweh, who spoke for God and yet also was Himself God!
 
En Hakkore said:
The implied author who claims to have experienced this vision (ostensibly Daniel, but really someone living in the time of Antiochus IV Epiphanes) does not understand it and thus asks one of the attendants to explain it to him (7:15-16) and he proceeds to do so, equating the four beasts to four kingdoms (7:17) and referring to "the holy ones of the Most High" as those who "shall receive the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever" (7:18), similar to what the "one like a human being" was said to receive --- indeed, this figure within the vision is a cipher or heavenly representative for these holy ones. Compare specifically the following:

To him {the one like a human being} was given dominion and glory and kingship,
that all peoples, nations and languages should serve him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion that shall not pass away,
and his kingdom is one that shall never be destroyed.
Dan 7:14 (Vision)

The kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven
shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High;
their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom,
and all dominions shall serve and obey them.
Dan 7:27 (Explanation)

Antiochus (the little horn; 7:8, 20-21, 24-26) did soon after die, but an independent kingdom would not materialize for another couple decades of struggle and that lasted less than a hundred years before the region became a client kingdom of Rome and eventually one of its provinces... the prophecy clearly failed to materialize. Early Christian exegetes picked up on the enigmatic cipher character and understood this to be Jesus, which is reflected in the passages you cite from the "Little Apocalypse" discourse dated to Jesus' final week in Jerusalem... such an interpretation derives from the method of pesher that I mentioned a week or so ago --- taking a text and finding some sort of contemporary application. I don't consider such a method valid since prophetic fulfillment becomes an act of creative exegesis with little to no controls... at such a point the original context and authorial intent is ignored.
Click to expand...
Was Jesus lying to his disciples? Did his disciples make it up? Why would either do such a thing?

Thank you for your explanation of that passage.
 
En Hakkore said:
Negative... the text acknowledges the passing of (high-)priestly prerogative from Aaron to Eleazar, but attempts to head things off before Phinehas by extending priestly duties to all Levites before a pattern of son-to-son becomes well established... these duties opened up to all Levites could conceivably include appointment to the office of high priest. Hope this helps clarify...
Click to expand...
Phinehas was the high priest after his father, Eleazar, died.. Judges 20:17-28
Does that undo all of efforts of the writer(s) of Deuteronomy?
 
Caroljeen said:
Was Jesus lying to his disciples?
Click to expand...
I don't think we have access to anything Jesus specifically said, the best we have is the gist of his teachings... and even if I were to concede, for the sake of argument, he said something along the lines of what is found in Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luk 21:27, echoing the words of Dan 7:13, he may have genuinely believed it and thus was not lying, simply mistaken.

Caroljeen said:
Did his disciples make it up?
Click to expand...
I also don't think any of his disciples were responsible --- at least not directly --- for anything now contained in these gospels... they are the work of second and third generation Christians. Similar to above... if they passed along the tradition of Jesus being the one coming on/in/with the cloud/s, they presumably did so firmly believing it and thus should not be indicted as being liars either, just mistaken. And in Luke's defense, he wisely did not give this event a firm timetable so could conceivably be vindicated one day, though I doubt it...

Caroljeen said:
Thank you for your explanation of that passage.
Click to expand...
You're welcome.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 
Caroljeen said:
Phinehas was the high priest after his father, Eleazar, died.. Judges 20:17-28
Does that undo all of efforts of the writer(s) of Deuteronomy?
Click to expand...
No, the Deuteronomists were writing long after the purported time of the judges (late first millennium BCE) and were aware of priestly succession from Aaron... they were attempting to undermine this restriction in the seventh century BCE with their version of the Mosaic period.

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 
En Hakkore said:
I don't think we have access to anything Jesus specifically said, the best we have is the gist of his teachings... and even if I were to concede, for the sake of argument, he said something along the lines of what is found in Matt 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luk 21:27, echoing the words of Dan 7:13, he may have genuinely believed it and thus was not lying, simply mistaken.


I also don't think any of his disciples were responsible --- at least not directly --- for anything now contained in these gospels... they are the work of second and third generation Christians. Similar to above... if they passed along the tradition of Jesus being the one coming on/in/with the cloud/s, they presumably did so firmly believing it and thus should not be indicted as being liars either, just mistaken. And in Luke's defense, he wisely did not give this event a firm timetable so could conceivably be vindicated one day, though I doubt it...
Click to expand...
If Jesus were just a man, then your explanation would be possible.
You're being very generous. I want to bring up C.S. Lewis's assessment, but I'll pass.
 
En Hakkore said:
No, the Deuteronomists were writing long after the purported time of the judges (late first millennium BCE) and were aware of priestly succession from Aaron... they were attempting to undermine this restriction in the seventh century BCE with their version of the Mosaic period.
Click to expand...
I guess it would be possible for the people to be hoodwinked but wouldn't there be the sons of Aaron at the time of the Deuteronomists who would know better and speak up? It seems a little far-fetched.
 
Caroljeen said:
I guess it would be possible for the people to be hoodwinked but wouldn't there be the sons of Aaron at the time of the Deuteronomists who would know better and speak up?
Click to expand...
Absolutely! I'm not suggesting the Deuteronomists were successful in their attempt to broaden priestly service to all the Levites, but they certainly attempted it... in the post-exilic period the writers behind Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, for example, were fighting back just as strong to keep the Levites in their ostensibly proper place as helpers to the priests.

Caroljeen said:
It seems a little far-fetched.
Click to expand...
Does it still seem far-fetched given what I wrote above?

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 
En Hakkore said:
Absolutely! I'm not suggesting the Deuteronomists were successful in their attempt to broaden priestly service to all the Levites, but they certainly attempted it... in the post-exilic period the writers behind Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah, for example, were fighting back just as strong to keep the Levites in their ostensibly proper place as helpers to the priests.
Click to expand...
I get annoyed when families can't get along.
En Hakkore said:
Does it still seem far-fetched given what I wrote above?
Click to expand...
Isn't anyone just recording history as it happened?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top