Angel of The Lord = Jesus [YHWH Manifested].

[Yahweh will increase]

Spot on James another excellent biblical response. There is no getting around the fact it was the Son who was the "angel of the Lord" in the OT since the Son said no man has seen the Father nor heard His voice. So that leaves us with Moses on the mount hearing the Son, not the Father.
@cjab is up a creek without a paddle on the identity of the angel of the Lord. He assumes wrongly that angel must mean a created being when many instances it refers to a messenger not an angel. Keep up the good work brother defending our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ who was the Angel of the Lord in the OT known as YHWH.

Wow, it just doesn't dawn on you or James that you are actually sowing a world of trouble for yourselves by your private interpretation on this.

So here again is what the writer of Hebrews said about this and it would have made no sense at all for him to write this if God ever spoke by his Son in the OT or if the Son was one of the OT angels, so it is obvious that the writer of Hebrews did not hold your private interpretation about it.


Hebrews 1:1-2

1 God, who at various times and in different manners spoke in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,​

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;


Hebrews 1:4-6

4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

The first question you need to answer Civic and James, is when did Jesus become "ginomai" superior to the angels, being you believe he was God and never ceased to be God even while being a man? ​

5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”?
Or again,

“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”?
6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,

“Let all God’s angels worship him.”

Notice also, that God says "I will be a Father unto him and he will be my Son", so when did this happen, for in God saying "he will be", it is clear that there was a beginning to this and the passage tells you when it began also.

For it began on a specific day in creation time and that day was when he was brought into this world as the human heir of God (God's Son) and the writer also makes that clear in verse 6 and verse 4.

 

[Chalcedon]

Off topic for this thread. Sorry. That I believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as divine is my limit on that one.

Oh but the word trinity is not in the bible. So much for your argument.

 

[jamesh]

First of all cjab, I didn't realize your relatively new to Carm so I want to welcome you. Secondly, don't worry about the thread is off topic, I'm really sure that Towerwatchman will not mind. Also, your the one who brought up three or four times the following: " Why are you referring to the "pre-incarnate Christ." Where do I find the term "pre-incarnate Christ" in the bible? Where do I find the theology in the bible about the pre-incarnate Christ? And if not, what is your authority for inventing it?" The issue of the "pre-incarnate Christ.."

In my opinion the best proof of the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ is Him being the angel of the Lord before He incarnated as a man. So, when you say you believe, "I believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as divine is my limit on that one." Can you please explain what you mean by divine?

IN GOD THE SON,
james

 

[jamesh]

Wow, it just doesn't dawn on you or James that you are actually sowing a world of trouble for yourselves by your private interpretation on this.

So here again is what the writer of Hebrews said about this and it would have made no sense at all for him to write this if God ever spoke by his Son in the OT or if the Son was one of the OT angels, so it is obvious that the writer of Hebrews did not hold your private interpretation about it.


Hebrews 1:1-2

1 God, who at various times and in different manners spoke in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,​

2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;


Hebrews 1:4-6

4 So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

The first question you need to answer Civic and James, is when did Jesus become "ginomai" superior to the angels, being you believe he was God and never ceased to be God even while being a man? ​

5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,

“You are my Son;
today I have become your Father”?
Or again,

“I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son”?
6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,

“Let all God’s angels worship him.”

Notice also, that God says "I will be a Father unto him and he will be my Son", so when did this happen, for in God saying "he will be", it is clear that there was a beginning to this and the passage tells you when it began also.

For it began on a specific day in creation time and that day was when he was brought into this world as the human heir of God (God's Son) and the writer also makes that clear in verse 6 and verse 4.

Here's my simple question to you regarding you quoting Hebrews 1:1-2. Please tell me from Hebrew 1:1, what is the very first word you see? I know civic will get my point and what it means. Bible study is so much fun when you actually take the time to read the words.

IN GOD THE SON,
james

 

[Yahweh will increase]

Here's my simple question to you regarding you quoting Hebrews 1:1-2. Please tell me from Hebrew 1:1, what is the very first word you see? I know civic will get my point and what it means. Bible study is so much fun when you actually take the time to read the words.

IN GOD THE SON,
james

It is "God" and just how do you think that this helps your false doctrine about it, for I can't wait to hear what you are going to invent from this???

By the way, this is the first word in the translation but it isn't the first words from the way it is written in the original Greek.

 

[cjab]

First of all cjab, I didn't realize your relatively new to Carm so I want to welcome you. Secondly, don't worry about the thread is off topic, I'm really sure that Towerwatchman will not mind. Also, your the one who brought up three or four times the following: " Why are you referring to the "pre-incarnate Christ." Where do I find the term "pre-incarnate Christ" in the bible? Where do I find the theology in the bible about the pre-incarnate Christ? And if not, what is your authority for inventing it?" The issue of the "pre-incarnate Christ.."

In my opinion the best proof of the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ is Him being the angel of the Lord before He incarnated as a man. So, when you say you believe, "I believe in the Father, Son and Holy Ghost as divine is my limit on that one." Can you please explain what you mean by divine?

IN GOD THE SON,
james

Divine means (a) in a divine relation with the Father, whom is, and which is, the only measure of divinity, (b) subsisting before the world was made, i.e. from eternity and uncreated from our human perspective.

You said "In my opinion the best proof of the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ is Him being the angel of the Lord before He incarnated as a man."

That is just a circular argument or not even an argument at all. You have to find biblical authority for the "angel of the Lord" being linked directly to the Word of God. That the angel of the Lord speaks the words of God and acts on the authority of the "Word of God" is I think the only evidence you are able to provide for the angel of the Lord being the "pre-incarnate Christ" (whatever you mean by that term as distinct from the "Word of God"). Yet it is only circumstanial evidence, and clearly vitiated by the use of the word "angel" which in the NT is relegated to being in an entirely different category of being to the begotten son of God or the Word of God.

As I see it, a central issue is that the term "pre-incarnate Christ" is a contradiction in terms, because the "Christ" or biblical Messiah was human, whereas the pre-incarnate Word of God is not human. So why juxtapose words connoting humanity, with words connoting divinity?

Are you trying to say the "pre-incarnate Christ" i.e. the Word of God, is akin to some mythological pagan deity such as Zeus or Hermes (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Philemon-and-Baucis) who flits between humanity and deity at will, without ever forfeiting the latter. Are you really saying that there is no hard distinction between humanity and deity, in that deity may assume humanity whenever it wills?

In which case, why did God say to Moses "No one may see my face and live?"

Are you positing the "pre-incarnate Christ" as analogous to the Trinitarian incarnate Christ, in that in the former, a permanent deity never forfeits any of the attributes of deity and transiently assumes humanity, whereas in the Trinitarian Christ, a permanent deity never forfeits any of the attributes of deity and temporarily assumes humanity for the duration of a whole human life?

It seems to me such theses only take one out of the bible into the realms of pagan mythology, because they are clearly based on a concept of deity found in the pagan myths. They are both unnecessary and unprovable in scriptural terms, and in case, no such doctrines are directly articulated in the bible.

 

[jamesh]

You know cjab it would be nice if you actually did your homework on this subject as to the identity of the angel of the Lord. Some of the early Church fathers identified the angel of the Lord as the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ here: https://taylormarshall.com/2015/01/is-the-angel-of-the-lord-the-pre-incarnate-christ.html

Also, pre-incarnate is, "Existing as God before his permanent incarnation as a human being. Why are you so "hung-up" on this, which btw has "NOTHING" to do with paganism. Here are a bunch of sites that explains "the angel of the Lord" and who he is. https://www.google.com/search?q=is+...90l3j69i65.10656j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Finally, can you please tell me who is Jesus Christ, is He God? And what is your definition of "divine?" PS: Jesus Himself said God the Father cannot be seen. John 5:37, John 6:46 as well as other verses like 1 John 4:12 or 1 Timothy 6:6.

IN GOD THE SON,
james

 

[Roger Thornhill]

What I don't understand is why you refer to concepts that the bible knows nothing of.

(1) Why are you referring to the "pre-incarnate Christ." Where do I find the term "pre-incarnate Christ" in the bible? Where do I find the theology in the bible about the pre-incarnate Christ? And if not, what is your authority for inventing it?

(2) Can angels swear oaths on behalf of God?

Of course they can. As I have already explained, an agent has full authority act on behalf of, and bind his principal, because he "is" the principal for all purposes. So if an angel can represent God, then he can do all these things. Your objection is to the principle of angels as agents of YHWH. Yet why?

Galatians 3:19: “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.”

Stephen said to Israel’s national leadership, Acts chapter 7: “[51] Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. [52] Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: [53] Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it."

In the Book of Hebrews, chapter 2, we read: “[1] Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard, lest at any time we should let them slip. [2] For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward..."

Where do I find the "pre-incarnate" Christ in the above passages? Why is the bible silent on the "pre-incarnate" Christ?

Is it not the fact that your "pre-incarnate" Christ is just your non-scriptural invention?

And in any case, why would God enthroned on high demean himself to appear on earth as an angel? What were angels created for?

Heb 1:14 "Are not the angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?"

Of course they are. In the OT they are fulfilling that very role assigned to them. Why are you putting the "pre-incarnate Christ" in the role of a ministering spirit?


This is not the issue and I don't want to discuss the biblical usages of angels versus angel of the Lord as it proves nothing or only what you want it to. A material issue is what the Jews understood by "angel of the Lord," as they wrote the scriptures. Check out:

The Council of My Nation - Idolatry - The Angel of the Lord

The Angel of the Lord Let us move on now to those passages in which God seems to be interchangeable with an angel. In chapter 18 of Genesis three men appear to Abraham.

jewsforjudaism.org

So Christian Jews refuse to recognize the "angel of the Lord" as the "pre-incarnate" Christ. Nor do any other Jews (obviously). So if the authors of the bible didn't, why do you?

This is what Paul said about angel worshippers:

Col 2:18 "Do not let anyone who delights in false humility and the worship of angels disqualify you with speculation about what he has seen. Such a person is puffed up without basis by his unspiritual mind. He has lost connection to the head, from whom the whole body, supported and knit together by its joints and ligaments, grows as God causes it to grow. "


I really don't care which angel is speaking. Any angel is speaking, just as it says in verse 6. There is an unbroken continuum between verses 6 & 7.

But how do you know it's not the "angel of the Lord?"


Given the principle of agency, it could be and likely is the angel speaking throughout. But as I wasn't there I won't be pedantic on this.

@cjab

Am I to understand that you disagree with the belief that the Son of God had a prehuman existence?

 

[jamesh]

@cjab

Am I to understand that you disagree with the belief that the Son of God had a prehuman existence?

Speaking of that Roger, how did the Son of God exist in His pre-human state?

IN GOD THE SON,
james

 

[Roger Thornhill]

Speaking of that Roger, how did the Son of God exist in His pre-human state?

IN GOD THE SON,
james

In the form of God (Phil 2:6) and God is a spirit (Jn 4:24).

 

[cjab]

@cjab

Am I to understand that you disagree with the belief that the Son of God had a prehuman existence?

No. I was objecting to the phrase "pre-incarnate Christ." The biblical term is "Word of God." If people only stuck to what the bible says, they might realize how incongrouous the term "angel of the Lord" is to describe the "Word of God."

 

[cjab]

You know cjab it would be nice if you actually did your homework on this subject as to the identity of the angel of the Lord. Some of the early Church fathers identified the angel of the Lord as the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ here: https://taylormarshall.com/2015/01/is-the-angel-of-the-lord-the-pre-incarnate-christ.html

Oh right, the same culprits who formulated the Trinity "doctrine". What do you make of this:

"The first defense of the doctrine of the Trinity was in the early 3rd century by the early church father Tertullian. He explicitly defined the Trinity as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and defended his theology against "Praxeas", though he noted that the majority of the believers in his day found issue with his doctrine."

Trinity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Questions: Why did it take circa 200 years to formulate (invent) the trinity "doctrine" (i.e. so as to include the novel import from paganism, "God the Son")? What was so defective about scripture and its teaching of Jesus and the Word of God that it omitted it? Do you suppose that during these first 200 years when the trinity doctrine was unformulated that anyone suffered eternal damnation for disbelief in the trinty "doctrine"? And if not, then why were refusniks excommunicated as damnable heretics after it had been invented?

If the Trinity "doctrine" is so wonderful, why is Jesus throughout Revelation called "the lamb" and "the Word of God." Why is he never once denoted as "God the Son?" Why does the bible not use the Trinity formulation?

I am sure they had time to invent other fanciful doctrines along the way, such as the "Word of God" being a messenger, or angel, which no-one ever heard of before.

Also, pre-incarnate is, "Existing as God before his permanent incarnation as a human being. Why are you so "hung-up" on this, which btw has "NOTHING" to do with paganism. Here are a bunch of sites that explains "the angel of the Lord" and who he is. https://www.google.com/search?q=is+...90l3j69i65.10656j0j9&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I am not hung up on the concept. I just object to yet more non-biblical nomenclature. The biblical nomenclature. is "Word of God." Every time you invent more jargon, you introduce novel and subtle meanings. This is a recipe for creating false doctrines.

Finally, can you please tell me who is Jesus Christ, is He God? And what is your definition of "divine?" PS: Jesus Himself said God the Father cannot be seen. John 5:37, John 6:46 as well as other verses like 1 John 4:12 or 1 Timothy 6:6.

I offer you the bible. Consider what he said of himself. I cannot better him. I will not be drawn into opinions on non-biblical terminology. Hint: what he said was, "for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me." John 8:42.

Now it's time for you to answer me: do you suppose Christ himself was speaking heretically when he spoke these words?

 

[eternomade]

No. I was objecting to the phrase "pre-incarnate Christ." The biblical term is "Word of God." If people only stuck to what the bible says, they might realize how incongrouous the term "angel of the Lord" is to describe the "Word of God."

Any thoughts on the targums that predate Christs birth concerning the Memra?

 

[Fred]

Genesis 48:16 the Angel who has redeemed me from all harm—
Are Angles redeemers?

1. Jacob credited the Angel for redeeming him from all evil.
2. Jacob asked the Angel to bless Joseph's children.
3. Jacob asked the Angel to cause his descendants to grow into a multitude.

The above is worship.

 

[Fred]

I believe YHWH on earth and YHWH in Heaven are the SAME PERSON just as the Son of man on earth and the Son of man in Heaven are the SAME PERSON.

They are not the same person. One speaks to another (2 Samuel 24:16; cf. 1 Chronicles 21:27).

 

[Yahchristian]

I believe YHWH on earth and YHWH in Heaven are the SAME PERSON just as the Son of man on earth and the Son of man in Heaven are the SAME PERSON.

They are not the same person. One speaks to another (2 Samuel 24:16; cf. 1 Chronicles 21:27).

You were not clear which statement(s) you disagreed with. So to clarify...


1) The Son of man on earth and the Son of man in Heaven are the SAME PERSON. TRUE or FALSE?

2) YHWH on earth and YHWH in Heaven are the SAME PERSON. TRUE or FALSE?

 

[jamesh]

Another "dumb" question? The Son of man on earth and the Son of man in Heaven are the same person. Yes! To put it another way. "Jesus who was on earth is the same Jesus who is in Heaven.

YHWH/God on earth and YHWH/God in Heaven are the same "BEING". Fred is correct. Did you read 2 Samuel 24:16? And how about reading Zechariah 1:12. Since I answered your question can you explain from 2 Samuel 24:16 and from Zechariah 1:12 whether there are two distinct persons in the verses? Yes or No? PS: After all these years and all these questions you still do not understand the difference in definition between the words "Being" and "Person."

IN GOD THE SON,
james

 

[Yahchristian]

After all these years and all these questions you still do not understand the difference in definition between the words "Being" and "Person."

But I DO understand the difference in the definition between “a being” and “a person”.

a being: a living thing

a person: a self-conscious or rational being

But do YOU? How do you define “a being” and “a person”?

Since I answered your question can you explain from 2 Samuel 24:16 and from Zechariah 1:12 whether there are two distinct persons in the verses? Yes or No?

2 Samuel 24:16... And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite.

Zechariah 1:12... Then the angel of the LORD answered and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?

The LORD (YHWH) is ONE eternal “self-conscious or rational being” who also incarnated as the man Christ Jesus.


Now.....

Since I answered your question can you explain from Deuteronomy 6:4 how “one LORD” can refer to more than ONE “self-conscious or rational being”?

 

[johnny guitar]

I believe YHWH on earth and YHWH in Heaven are the SAME PERSON just as the Son of man on earth and the Son of man in Heaven are the SAME PERSON.

John 3:13... And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

Do you believe John 3:13 proves the Son of man is more than one Person?

If not, then the other verse doesn’t prove YHWH is more than one person either.

Numerous verses in the N.T. prove YHWH to be more than one Person.

 

[johnny guitar]

I think you better examine the original text for John 3:13, for the words "even the son of man who is in heaven" are not in the most reliable manuscripts.

You also need to read Zechariah 1:12 below as well, for the Angel of the Lord was not Yahweh or Jesus and this proves it also.

12 Then the angel of the Lord said, “Lord Almighty, how long will you withhold mercy from Jerusalem and from the towns of Judah, which you have been angry with these seventy years?”

In Zechariah 1 the angel is introduced as a man and as the angel who talked with me.
NOT THE Angel of The Lord as in Exodus 3 and other places.