8

Does Hebrew 1:2 mean that Jesus can’t be the Angel of the LORD? It states that in the old days God spoke to other people "but in these last days he has spoken by His son". So, does that mean Jesus can’t be the Angel through Whom He spoke in the Old Testament?

Heb 1:1, 2 - On many past occasions and in many different ways, God spoke to our fathers through the prophets. But in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, and through whom He made the universe

10
  • In Genesis 3:9, God speaks to Adam. Does this contradict Hebrews 1:1-2? Is God a prophet? Apr 2 at 2:51
  • 1
    Hebrews argues that the Son is greater than angels. But that argument does not negate the fact that the Son (greater than angels) was manifested in angelic form in OT times. There is no contradiction. That he is manifested in human form, now, does not negate the fact that he is God.
    – Nigel J
    Apr 2 at 7:10
  • Hebrews 2:7 says he was made a little lower than the angels. but, if he is God the Son, that makes angels higher than God. Also, if the Angel of the Lord is God, Is God an angel? Apr 2 at 10:07
  • 1
    @user48152 Melchizedek. Jacob's wrestling opponent. Abraham's three visitors. The voice of God walking in the garden of Eden. The angel ascending in the fire which Manoah saw. The Captain of the host which Joshua saw. The fourth in the furnace which Nebuchadnezzar saw. These are all a matter of faith and of interpretation, of course. (And can be argued about all day long, if one has the time and inclination, for these are mysteries.) Seven mysteries, to be precise.
    – Nigel J
    Apr 25 at 9:27
  • 1
    People always forget, Jesus Gods son is the incarnate version. The Angel of the Lord was not human in the Old Testament...that is the difference. Start with what Isaiah says..."he shall be called wonderful, counsellor, everlasting father, prince of peace". Also, remember the verse "and they shall call his name Immanuel, God with us"
    – Adam
    Apr 25 at 10:07
5

Hebrews argues that the Son is greater than angels.

But that argument does not negate the fact that the Son (greater than angels) was manifested in angelic (or other) form in OT times. There is no contradiction.

That he is manifested in human form, now, does not negate the fact that he is God. Nor does it negate that fact, in prior appearances, of different kind(s).


The manifestations to which I (potentially) refer are : Melchizedek, whom Abraham met. Jacob's opponent with whom he wrestled. The three who visited Abraham. The voice of God walking in the garden of Eden, which Adam heard. The angel in the burning bush which Moses saw. The angel ascending in the fire which Manoah saw. The Captain of the host which Joshua saw. The fourth in the furnace which Nebuchadnezzar saw.

These are all a matter of faith and of interpretation, of course ; for they are mysterious occurrences.

1

A very thought provoking question! And, one that will no doubt lead to responses that will prove difficult to exegetically substantiate.

There is opinion, and all be it that some conclusions may be somewhat inescapable, nevertheless they will, at best, be conclusions.

Where there epiphanies of the pre-incarnate Jesus in the Old Testament? We can only go by what we read, not by what we conclude (think).

Example, many say God gave Moses the 10 commandments on Sinai. Yes, every single reference to this Sinai event in the Mew Testaments says it was angels that gave the Law. Similarly, who did Moses meet in the burning bush?

ACTS 7:30 ”Now when forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in a flame of fire in a bush.

But, it is commonly ‘taught’ that is was God. But consider the next verse ..

ACTS 7:31 When Moses saw it, he was amazed at the sight, and as he drew near to look, there came the voice of the Lord:

So, we have an angel, but, Moses nevertheless heard the voice of God.

This, these incident are easily explained when using a Hebraic lens. Hebrew uses a literary term of representation. If a representative of a higher official this speaking, it is as if that higher official themselves was speaking. Exactly what Acts 7:30-31 is saying. Although this concept is not easily accepted by some as it undermines some traditional theology.

So, the answer to your Question “does that mean Jesus can’t be the Angel” is both Yes .. and No. That is, even if? the angel was not Jesus, not a pre-incarnate epiphany, that is, was an angel - nevertheless it was as if Jesus was there. So much so, so ‘real’, that in fact it was Jesus. No issue in Hebraic thinking, but quite conflicting to the western mind.

1

For to which of the angels did God ever say, “You are My Son; today I have become Your Father”? [ Heb 1:5 ]

Does this not imply that Jesus is also an angel, or if not, certainly angelic, even as those resurrected will be "like the angels". [ Lk 20:36 ]

In any case in Heb 1:1, Jesus was not contrasted to angels, but to the prophets.

Of course in Heb 2:2, angels do speak messages too, which are binding, etc.

Fundamentally the confusion is founded on the notion of angels, ie what are angels, and what is the mechanics of angelic interactions with men.

In Heb 1:14 we have angels defined as "ministering spirits".

Our knowledge of spirits comes from our direct experience of the Holy Spirit within us, or for the unelected/unsaved, even evil spirits, including Satan himself, as Peter, before the Pentecost, was afflicted with.

Secondly spirits are unseen and ethereal without material form, like a ghost, without "flesh and bones" [ Lk 24:39 ]

(Now there is a difference between the soul and the spirit, and soul of the dead is also a ghost, and it is unclear whether the ghost of the dead can interact with the living, the tale of the witch of Endor notwithstanding; but the Holy Spirit is also called the Holy Ghost.)

Now for a spirit to interact with the physical world, such as to have its message heard, or for it to be seen, it must inhabit a created being. And a human being is such an inhabitable created being, having a spirit element within us, which can be substituted, or added to, by other spirits - eg God can give the Spirit without measure [ Jn 3:34 ].

So before Peter was rebuked, Satan took possession of him at that moment.

What about other angelic beings? They too can take possession of man, and thus we have inspired prophets, eg 2 Chr 18:22.

The other mechanism for angelic interactions is in dreams or visions, where prophets like Daniel and Ezekiel see archangels and cherubims, etc, ie the angels are not in material form but only seen in the inner eye, in the spiritual invisible world, the world our soul travels to when we sleep(?).

What about Christ then? Now unlike the angels, Christ has a created form, or a form compatible with the created world, from the beginning, the pre-existing Christ, the image into whom Adam was made.

So when Christ is to be seen on Earth, before his incarnation, he comes in that form, and that is the Angel of the Lord. Now there may be more to this, for he appeared to Abraham, before the destruction of Sodom, as three beings, and not one.

Now Christ is within us, as the Holy Spirit, and so there is no need for direct manifestation of Christ in bodily form outside in the physical world, but he certainly could, as he did with his disciples after the resurrection. And he also manifested in a vision to Saul on the road to Damascus, and to Stephen before he was martyred.

So in conclusion Jesus certainly can be the Angel of the Lord, even the Son of God, and to whom the other angelic beings worship.

1

Does Hebrew 1:2 mean that Jesus can’t be the Angel of the LORD? It states that in the old days God spoke to other people "but in these last days he has spoken by His son". So, does that mean Jesus can’t be the Angel through Whom He spoke in the Old Testament?

No. It does not mean that Jesus cannot be the angel of the LORD (YHWH) whom he spoke in the old testament because he (Jesus Christ) was the angel of YHWH that led the Israelites on their way to the promised land. 1 Corinthians 10:4; Exodus 23:20-23.

2
  • @user48152. It is 1 Corinthians 10:4. I made the correction. Thank you. Apr 25 at 11:40
  • the spiritual Rock that followed them - nothing about 'led' It points to the future that was always planned in Christ. We are told when he was born, and is not mentioned until then.
    – steveowen
    Apr 25 at 11:58
0

The OP's question is interesting because there are TWO sides to it:

  1. Heb 1:2 possibly implies that God did NOT speak via the Son in the OT but only by the prophets
  2. The God spoke through the various prophets in the OT and so does not speak via prophets in the NT because God now speaks through the Son.

A moment's reflect suggests that second cannot be true because how else would we have the NT writings except by the prophets?

Similarly, the first is untrue because while Jesus was the "Angel of the LORD" quite often (see appendix below) the people at the time did not know this and so the Father could not be revealed personally through the Son as was the case in the NT, see John 14:9.

That is, while Jesus was the "Angel of the LORD" quite often in the OT, He never lived among us (John 1:14), did not speak and teach, did not heal people and had not become human to show us how to live, pray, and walk with God. It was thus that Jesus revealed the Father in the NT by living among us.

APPENDIX - Angel of the LORD

We observe the clear statement several times in the NT that no human has ever seen God the father:

  • John 1:18 - No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.
  • John 6:46 - No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. (See also Matt 18:10.)
  • 1 John 4:12 - No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God remains in us, and His love is perfected in us.
  • Isa 64:4 - From ancient times no one has heard, no ear has perceived, no eye has seen any God besides You, who acts on behalf of those who wait for Him.

This last reference is significant because it says that people have seen God, that is The LORD, YHWH (V8), despite what the NT texts assert. Here are more examples:

  • Gen 18:1, 10 - Then the LORD appeared to Abraham by the Oaks of Mamre in the heat of the day, while he was sitting at the entrance of his tent. ... Then the LORD said, “I will surely return to you at this time next year, and your wife Sarah will have a son!”
  • Gen 32:30 - So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, "It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared."
  • Ex 3:5, 6 - “Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.” Then He said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.”
  • Josh 5:13 - 6:2 - And the LORD said to Joshua, “Behold, I have delivered Jericho into your hand, along with its king and its mighty men of valor. (V2)
  • Judges 6:14 - The LORD turned to him and said, “Go in the strength you have and save Israel from the hand of Midian. Am I not sending you?” [See also V16]
  • Eze 1 - the prophet's vision of God; many elements of which are repeated in Rev 4 & 5.
  • See also instances of the “Angel of the LORD” clearly being the LORD - Gen 16:7-13, 22:11-17, 32:24-30, 48:16, Ex 3:2-6, 32:34, Num 22:22-35, Josh 5:13-15, Judg 2:1-4, 6:11-23, 13:3-23, Isa 63:9, Dan 3:25, 28, Hos 12:4, 5, Zech 3:1-7, Mal 3:1, Rev 8:3-5, 10:1-10, 18:1, 20:1-4.
  • A closely related phrase, “Angel of God” who is clearly God as in Gen 6:13, 8:15, 9:8, 17, 15:13, 17:3, 4, 21:12, 16-21, 35:1, 10, Ex 4:3-8, 6:2, 23:20, 21, Deut 1:6, 1 Kings 12:22, etc. See also Acts 10:3, 4, Gal 4:14.

The very fact that the NT so confidently asserts that no human has seen God the Father, but many people have seen God/YHWH in the OT means the inescapable conclusion is such epiphanies were of the pre-incarnate Jesus as per John 8:58 – “Truly, truly, I tell you,” Jesus declared, “before Abraham was born, I am!” See also John 17:5.

0

I've heard this question many, many times before and mainly by Unitarians and not necessarily regarding Jesus the Angel of the Lord.

They use Hebrews 1:2 to prove that Jesus Christ did not pre-exist His incarnation, cannot be God, cannot be the angel of the Lord because He only existed in these last days as the Son.

Look at the very first word at Hebrews 1L1. "God" after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways." Vs2, "in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, THROUGH WHOM ALSO HE MADE THE WORLD."

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus Christ is identified or presented as the Agent of Creation at John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16-17, Hebrews 1:10 by His own Father and at Revelation 3:14. John 1:3 explicitly states in no uncertain terms, ""ALL things came into being by Him, and WITHOUT Him nothing came into being that has come into being."

Secondly, the writer of Hebrews says at Hebrews 1:3, "And He is the radiance of His/God the Father's glory and the EXACT representation of His nature, and upholds ALL THINGS by the word of His power When He made purifications of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high."

In reading the rest of chapter 1 of Hebrews His Father says the angels are to worship Him, (vs6) and at (vs8) the Father identifies the Son as God and (again) credits Jesus with creation at Hebrews 1:10.

In summary, Jesus Christ is the angel of the Lord who spoke to the fathers and the prophets all over the place in the Old Testament. He finally appears in the New Testament at the appointed time of this, the last dispensation/the last days in a permanent manner. Jude vs 3 confirms this.

6
  • THROUGH WHOM ALSO HE MADE THE WORLD - it should not say world or universe. aiōnas is ages, and refers not to a Genesis creation. :) Christ is identified or presented as the Agent of Creation at John 1:1-3 only in your mind - not in the bible. If these are your foundation, it is a house of cards.
    – steveowen
    Apr 25 at 7:38
  • 1
    @user48152 Your not only disagreeing with me but with the Lexicons, various commentaries and the Bible. Explain why the following is the wrong rendering? blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/… And while you at it, please explain how it is possible that the Logos/Word/Jesus Christ is clearly identified/presented as the agent of creation at John 1:1-3 ? I know, John 1:1-3 is God's spoken word huh? If that's the case then who is the "He" at Hebrews 1:3 that is the exact representation of His Father's nature and He upholds all things by the word of His power?
    – Mr. Bond
    Apr 25 at 14:37
  • Lex. Comm. simply extrapolate much of the church father waffle, so they do not always represent the bible as intended. Clearly you seem unable to read John1:1-3 and v14 in their correct time frame. You jumble the verses and each identity all together, missing the whole point. The clinging to the dogma has rendered truth invisible.
    – steveowen
    Apr 25 at 21:18
  • @user48152 The time frame Mr.Bond set out is perfectly stated. In Heb 1:1-2 the emphasis is purely with the time-frame emphasis as follows: Apr 26 at 0:35
  • @user48152 The time frame Mr.Bond set out is perfectly stated. In Heb 1:1-2 the emphasis is purely with the time-frame emphasis, being that, while a Spirit, the WORD of God spoke as a Spirit, but in these last days, as a Son. Jesus became a Son at birth. Apr 26 at 0:36
-1

"Through Him God created universe" (Hebrew 1:2), which phrase does not mean that God had an option to create either through Him (Logos) or directly, without the Logos, which supposition will be as stupid as counterintuitive, but that Logos was indispensable for the Father in the act of creation, and therefore the Logos is co-God and co-Creator with Him, the Father; and given the monotheistic context of the Scriptures, we can firmly assert the one and identical being, the one and identical uncreated reality of the Father and the Son (which reality was later called οὐσία) together with the unmixable, uninterminglable distinctivneness of the Father and the Son (which distinctiveness was later called ὑπόστασις).

Having established this, we can move safely to answer of your question: when God-Father creates, He necessarily creates through God-Logos. But when He re-creates a human being giving him a new birth, how does He do it? Of course necessarily through the Logos (and also the Holy Spirit for that matter) again, for faithful and committed acceptance of the divine word and commandments makes us a "new creation" (Galatians 6:15), investing us with a new life, and this word we get through Logos always. Now, sometimes this Logos, in pre-incarnate condition in Old Testament is referred to also as "Angel" (cf. Exodus 23:21), and this Angel, or God Himself in His Hypostasis of Logos, speaks to the Jewish nation through prophets, as is said by Paul in Hebrews 1:1-2. However, the same Angel, or God-Logos, got incarnate and now speaks not through prophets or through created angels, but directly, which makes a salutary difference Paul speaks about.

Thus, to conclude, NO, Jesus cannot be anyone other than that Angel of the Old Testament who is also referred to as Lord there and is worshipped by Moses before the burning bush (cf. Exodus 3:1-6, where the Angel of the Lord is also the Lord and "God of Abraham and Isaak"), but He is that uncreated Angel, the Person of the God-Logos, for this Person of the God-Logos adopted human nature and spoke to humans not through tongues of prophets, but now through His own physical tongue and physical voice.

1
  • 1
    @Down voter, a friendly limerick to you: “When counter arguments are naughty,//Best way is down-voting,//And, better, stay anonymous!//For discussion looms ominous://It will reveal the down-voter’s conviction//Not a theology, but a fiction!” Apr 25 at 8:48

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.