The following is an objection to Trinitarian models that affirm that Jesus is the Angel of the LORD [Malak Yahweh] that I encountered on Facebook. Followed by my answers and solutions. Not all Trinitarians believe the Old Testament "Angel/Messenger of the LORD" is the pre-incarnate person who is Jesus in the New Testament. I DO believe and affirm it.
Know (or Remember) that the word for "angel(s)" in the Hebrew of the Old Testament and the Greek of the New Testament just means "messenger." By itself, it doesn't tell us the metaphysical nature of the personal entity. Context can sometimes help us determine whether the messenger is human or a supernatural personal entity which we usually mean by an "angel." Like the angel Gabriel or the angel Michael [or even Satan]. So, it would be incorrect for a Non-Trinitarian to say that THE Angel of Yahweh must be a created being, or cannot be a second person in God (or within the Godhead, or of the Trinity). Trinitarians like myself and Anthony Rogers show that the best explanation for all the data on the Malak Yahweh is that He [whom we believe to be the Son] is fully divine as the one who sends/sent Him [the Father]. See Anthony Rogers' videos on YouTube. HERE is a link to his CHANNEL. He also has some excellent ARTICLES HERE.
The Non-Trinitarian wrote:
You and others like you believe that "the Angel of the LORD" is Jesus. You do this because he's called "God" or "the LORD" in places, and then transpose divine attributes upon him, despite an obvious lack:
For one, HE CANNOT FORGIVE SINS: "he will not forgive your transgression, because My name is in him", i.e., he is only sent in God's name.
For two, HE DOESN'T KNOW ALL THINGS: "now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld your son, your only-begotten, from me", i.e., he didn't know Abraham's heart.
For three, HE DOESN'T ACCEPT THE WORSHIP OF CHRISTIANS: "see that you do not do it! I am a fellow-servant or yours with your brothers, the prophets", i.e., as in Hebrews 1, where "angels" and "prophets" are used interchangeably.
Rather than using these concepts to show that the Son is greater than angels, Trinitarians, Oneness, and all deity-of-christ believers have mistakenly corrupted the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ --- because they didn't believe that these things God has given into the hand of Man. (Genesis 1:26; 9:6)
Here's my response:
.
//You and others like you believe that "the Angel of the LORD" is Jesus. You do this because he's called "God" or "the LORD" in places, and then transpose divine attributes upon him, despite an obvious lack://
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
I'll answer each objection in a new post. I don't have time for a debate.
//For one, HE CANNOT FORGIVE SINS: "he will not forgive your transgression, because My name is in him", i.e., he is only sent in God's name.//
Only God can forgive sins. So there would be no point in saying He won't forgive your sins, if He can't anyway. Rather, the fact that it says He won't forgive your sins implies that He can, but won't. I don't know about the Hebrew, but in English it doesn't say He cannot/can't, but He will not/won't. It says He will not BECAUSE the Father's name is in Him. If your interpretation were correct, it ought to say He can't forgive sins because Yahweh's name IS NOT in Him. The passage is saying something similar to Exo. 34:7 which says of Yahweh, "...forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, BUT WHO WILL BY NO MEANS CLEAR THE GUILTY..." God could forgive, but all things being equal, God won't clear the guilty. The good news of the Gospel is that things are no longer equal in that God [through the cross] did something that makes universal forgiveness possible to all who will repent and believe the Gospel. Also having God's name in Him means He has God's nature and presence, which implies full deity. Because "name" can mean nature, character and attributes. That's why the Jews were careful with what name they chose for their children, because it would/may affect and reflect his destiny. It's also why Ps. 9:10 says:
[10] And those who know your name put their trust in you, for you, O LORD, have not forsaken those who seek you.
Meaning, those who know God's character, attributes and nature put their trust in Him because by knowing those things they also know His a reliable source of help and blessing. It's not about knowing the mere spelling and pronunciation of a word.
Similarly notice Prov. 30:4
[4] Who has ascended to heaven and come down? Who has gathered the wind in his fists? Who has wrapped up the waters in a garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is his son’s name? Surely you know!
The verse is not asking whether you know the spelling and pronunciation of the word YHWH. They are Jews. They already know it. It's rhetorically asking who among you knows and fully grasps the incomprehensible nature of Yahweh? The implied answer is no one. While Yahweh can be truly *Apprehended* in the creaturely mind, His nature cannot be exhaustively *Comprehended*. Then when it asks whether you know the name of the Son, it's implying the Son's nature cannot be exhaustively comprehended either. Implying His sharing the same nature as His Father.
[27] All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
This verse [paralleled in Luke 10:22] implies the incomprehensibility of both the Father and the Son, and therefore the equal Divinity of both. Since only what is divine is absolutely incomprehensible to creatures; and only what is divine can comprehend that which is incomprehensible in that uniquely divine way. That only the Father can comprehend the Son, implies the Son's inomprehensibility [to all creatures], and therefore implying the Son's full deity. That the Son can comprehend the infinite incomprehensibility [to creatures] of God the Father implies the Son is not a creature, but is as fully divine as the Father. That's also why 1 Cor. 2:10-11 & Rom. 8:27 teaches the full Divinity and personhood of the Holy Spirit.
[10] these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. [11] For who knows a person’s thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
[27] And he who searches hearts knows what is the MIND OF THE SPIRIT, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.
Some might give the following objection. That there are a number of places in the Old Testament where Yahweh talks about His name [in the sense of "presence"] being "there" in a location like a city or a temple/building [e.g. 1 Ki. 8:16, 29; 9:3; 11:36; 2 Ki. 23:27; 2 Chron. 6:5-6; Neh. 1:9]. That that doesn't prove that the city or building is God. How can a city be God?!?!? So why should the name Yahweh within the Angel of the LORD prove that that Messenger is equally God? But that presupposes that the presence of God in the temple or city isn't the person of the Holy Spirit. If it is, then that fits with the full Deity of both the Son and Spirit. The Name of Yahweh is shared by all three persons of the Trinity.
[19] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them inthe name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Notice it doesn't say in the nameS [plural], but in the name [singular]. Notice too that in the Greek it has the definite article "the" for each one mentioned. That the word "name" is singular affirms equality and a shared nature, as well as the genuine personhood of each. That the definite article is used of each precludes Modalism or Oneness theology. It does NOT say "Father, Son and Holy Spirit" which would better fit with Modalism or Oneness. But rather it says "of THE Father, and of THE Son, and of THE Holy Spirit" which better fits with Trinitarianism.
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
//For two, HE DOESN'T KNOW ALL THINGS: "now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld your son, your only-begotten, from me", i.e., he didn't know Abraham's heart.//
This objection doesn't work for the following reasons. Does Gen. 11:5 imply that Yahweh is not omniscient because He had to come down to the Tower of Babel to see what's happening? Or what about when Yahweh had to visit Sodom and Gomorrah to see what was happening? Does it disprove Yahweh's omniscience? Obviously not.
[5] And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built.
[20] Then the LORD said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave, [21] I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.”
The phrase "according to the outcry that has come to me" makes it clear that Yahweh is speaking [from a Trinitarian perspective this is talking about either the Father, or possibly the Son who is the Angel of the LORD]. Since it is to absolute Deity that sins are an ultimate offense toward/against.
Also, when it says "now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld your son," it doesn't refer to a lack of knowledge. Since God's tests and trials are often likened to the refining of metals through fire. Not only does the fire reveal what's there, it purifies and improves what's there. So, it didn't exist in that form prior. Before Abraham was tested by being commanded to sacrifice his son, his faith hadn't yet risen to the point it eventually did after passing the test. That's why NOW [at THAT time] the Angel can know it, because that kind of faith and commitment didn't exist beforehand/prior. See Prov. 17:3; Ps. 66:10; Isa. 48:10; Zech. 13:9; Jam. 1:12.
[3] The crucible is for silver, and the furnace is for gold, and the LORD tests hearts.
[10] For you, O God, have tested us; you have tried us as silver is tried.
[12] Blessed is the man who remains steadfast under trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.
[9] And I will put this third into the fire, and refine them as one refines silver, and test them as gold is tested. They will call upon my name, and I will answer them. I will say, ‘They are my people’; and they will say, ‘The LORD is my God.’”
[10] Behold, I have refined you, but not as silver; I have tried you in the furnace of affliction.
I've also written two blogposts on Jesus' omniscience here:
Jesus' Omniscience
Does Mark 13:32 Disprove Jesus' Omniscience?
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
//For three, HE DOESN'T ACCEPT THE WORSHIP OF CHRISTIANS: "see that you do not do it! I am a fellow-servant or yours with your brothers, the prophets", i.e., as in Hebrews 1, where "angels" and "prophets" are used interchangeably.//
That's not Jesus speaking in Rev. 19:10. That's clear if you read the entire verse. Nor is it Jesus speaking in Rev. 22:8-9.
[10] Then I fell down at his feet to worship him, but he said to me, “You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers WHO HOLD TO THE TESTIMONY OF JESUS. Worship God.” For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Jesus does receive worship from Christians and angels.
Hebrews 1:6, which is about angels worshipping Jesus, is a quotation and allusion to the Septuagint's Greek translation of Deut. 32:43 and Ps. 97:7. These passages are about how all spiritual and supernatural entities ought to worship Yahweh, yet it is surprisingly applied to Jesus. Something which would be blasphemous if Jesus isn't fully absolute Deity. Unitarians should have a major problem with this verse.
Similarly, in Phil. 2:10-11 Paul takes what is arguably the most monotheistic Verse in the most monotheistic Chapter in the entire Old Testament and applies it, and its teaching about worshipping Yahweh, TO JESUS! This would again be blasphemous if Jesus isn't absolutely divine as the Father is. The type of bowing was the kind reserved for the one true God. The kind forbidden in Rev. 19:10 and 22:8-9. The kind that God condemned when it was directed toward Baal.
[4] But what is God’s reply to him? “I have kept for myself seven thousand men WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO BAAL.”
See also my blogpost:
Praying to and Worshipping the Holy Spirit
[10] so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE SHOULD BOW, in heaven AND ON EARTH and under the earth, [11] and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
[23] By myself I have sworn; from my mouth has gone out in righteousness a word that shall not return: ‘TO ME EVERY KNEE SHALL BOW, every tongue shall swear allegiance.’
The worship of the post-resurrection and post-ascension Jesus in Luke 24:52 and John 20:28 goes beyond mere obeisance.
[52] And THEY WORSHIPED HIM and returned to Jerusalem with great joy,
[28] Thomas answered him, “My Lord and my God!”
Notice Thomas answered "Him" [i.e. Jesus]. Thomas wasn't addressing God the Father. Also, the use "my Lord and my God" is like Ps. 35:23, but in reverse [the words are switched]. The use of the possessive "my" and "our" in relation to a elohim/theos/God was reserved by Jews for Yahweh alone. Yet Thomas called Jesus "MY God."
//Rather than using these concepts to show that the Son is greater than angels, Trinitarians, Oneness, and all deity-of-christ believers have mistakenly corrupted the knowledge of God in Jesus Christ --- because they didn't believe that these things God has given into the hand of Man. (Genesis 1:26; 9:6) //
This doesn't really need a reply.
