Written by Jerry Hayes
We know that God is Spirit (
Jn 4:24) and is omnipresent (1 Kings
8:27//
2 Chronicles 6:18). We often say: “God is a Being whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere”. And yet: God has a throne before which His creation appears; and God, as a visible individual, sits upon that throne. (
Job 1:6, Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, … . )
Of this visible and discernible Deity, we have the Bible presenting us with the following accounts: the Voice that walked in the garden in the cool of the day (
Genesis 3:8); the Angel that appeared to Hagar with the promise of Ishmael and the great people that would come from her womb (
Genesis 16:7-13); the One who appeared to Abraham with the two angels, Abraham washed His feet and ate with Him (
Genesis 18:1-8); the Voice that spoke to Moses from the burning bush (
Exodus 3:2-14); the Angel that went before the Israelites during the wilderness wanderings (
Exodus 20:20-23); the Captain of the LORD’s hosts that appeared to Joshua (
Joshua 5:13-15); the Angel of the LORD that appeared to Manoah, the father of Samson, (
Judges 13:15-22). I personally would add to this lineup, Melchizedek (
Genesis 14:18-20), although I know most would not.
Given the above, we must view God as having a general presence throughout the universe (in His omnipresent Spirit form), but also having a PARTICULAR presence that is Himself and not another sentient being. To this end the prophet Isaiah references this “Angel” as the Angel of Yahweh’s Presence (
Isaiah 63:9).
Micah 5:2 references the pre-existence of Jesus. Jesus did not have pre- existence as the Christ (anointed man) but he did have pre-existence as God. Throughout the Old Testament the visible manifestation of the invisible God (
Colossians 1:15 i.e. Jesus) was called the “Angel of the LORD”. The Angel of the LORD was not another person/being from the LORD (YHWH); but, was His tabernacled presence. We think the tendency of Pluralist theologians to reference the Angel of the Lord as a christophany is incorrect. There is nothing in the Old Testament accounts of the Angel of the LORD to indicate that He is any other than a visible and knowable manifestation of Father God. Thus, the traditional and orthodox designation of “theophany” should stand. (There is a movement afoot in the Pluralists’ camp to replace the word “theophany” with the recently coined appellation of “christophany”. By this means they attempt to remove any reference to a physical manifestation of Father God from Holy Scripture.)
When the Angel of the LORD appears in the Scriptures He is identified as YHWH Himself. He is called the Angel of His Presence (
Isaiah 63:9). In fact it was the Angel of the LORD that spoke to Moses from the bush (
Exodus 3:2 – 4:17).
Angel of the LORD Activity or Attribute Jesus
Genesis 16:7,13 Called “LORD” (YHWH)
John 20:28
Genesis 48:15-16 Called-God Jude v25
Exodus 48:15-16 “I am”
John 8:58
Exodus 13:20-23 Sent from God
John 5:30
Joshua 5:13-18 Capt. of the LORD’s Host
Isaiah 9:6
Isaiah 63:9 Redeemed His own
Ephesians 5:25
A review of Old Testament texts such as
Micah 5:2 shows the coming Messiah to have two sources of origin: 1. a temporal, earthly origin, i.e. Bethlehem, and 2. from of old, from everlasting, i.e. a Heavenly origin; here, the Hebrew reads “from days of eternity,” the RSV has, “from ancient days.” That this is referencing eternity past, and not just from a long time ago, is obvious since Daniel calls Yahweh, the Ancient of Days (
Daniel 7:9). “From of old” is a Hebrew idiom meaning from eternity, as the very next clause states: “From everlasting,” i.e. eternity past. This, Micah passage, shows Jesus to have an eternal pre-existence; moving Him effectively beyond the realm of created beings. In this way, Micah demonstrates the human and divine origins of the Messiah. So then, both Peter and Paul would be able to speak of the duality of Jesus’ birth with such terms as “according to the flesh,” and “according to the Spirit” (see
Acts 2:30;
Romans 1:3-4). Therefore both apostles, just mentioned, demonstrated there was much more to the genesis of Jesus than just His flesh (humanity).
Although Jesus had pre-existence as God, he did not have pre-existence as the Christ, for the term ‘Christ’ references the Incarnation: anointed man. Neither is it proper to reference Jesus as “Jesus” in His pre-existence; Jesus is the New Covenant name of YHWH, and as such is a proper moniker only within the New Covenant.
According to the prophet Micah, the Messiah (Who would be born in Bethlehem) would be God. For Who else would have existence from eternity past? There can be but One Eternal! Jesus is true God from true God. He is Light from Light. Not as one would light one torch from another, but as the sunlight proceeds from the sun. Throughout the Old Testament, the visible manifestation of the invisible God (
Colossians 1:15 the one we know as Jesus) was called the Angel of the LORD. The Angel of the LORD was not another person/being/self from the LORD (YHWH), but was His tabernacled presence (
Gen 16:7, 13; 48:15-16;
Ex 3:2-14; 23:20-23;
Josh 5:13-15;
Jud 13:15-22;
Isa 63:9).
Answering An Objection
Some will object to the Modalist’s view of the Angel of the LORD by pointing to the Subject/Object address of YHWH to the Angel of YHWH found in
1 Chronicles 21:15. The Pluralists suggest that two distinct individual selves are in view here — two rational persons. This conclusion is arrived at because (in the Pluralists’ mind) one god-person spoke to another god-person.
“And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and as he was destroying, the Lord beheld, and he repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed, It is enough, stay now thine hand. And the angel of the Lord stood by the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite.”
My thoughts on
1 Chronicles 21:15 are as follows:
I am not at all certain that this is the same Angel referenced at other times as the angel of the Lord. There is a very real sense that all angels are angels of the Lord. But there is only one "the" Angel of the LORD. Same as there are many sons of God but only one "the" Son of God.
In this text, verse 15 states that God sent "an" angel to Jerusalem. This particular angel is called "the destroying angel". It is true that this "destroying angel" is referenced as "the angel of the LORD," but there is a question (in my mind, at least) as to whether or not this particular Angel is "the" angel of the LORD.
That being said, I see no problem with Yahweh communicating within himself. Paul wrote that God takes counsel with his own will (
Ephesians 1:11). This is exemplified in
Genesis 1:26 where he said "let us make man…"
We, as humans, have been made in the likeness of God. Perhaps we may get a handle on this but considering the way our minds work: we may have a decision to make, and as we consider different scenarios we debate within our own minds. There is a sense in which one speaks within his or her own mind and carries on a conversation with oneself as though he or she were two persons. Thus, we arrive at the decision needed.
Yahweh had existence outside the angel of the Lord, just as Yahweh had existence outside the physical body of Christ in the incarnation. So I see no biblical problem of Yahweh outside of the Angel communicating to himself, as he was actualized within and by the Angel, to halt the destruction.
The bottom line is: there are options of explanations available. One does not have to cave to plural god-persons and violate the Shema.
Apostolically Speaking;
☩ Jerry L Hayes
Linear Mode
