“‘The Angel of the LORD’ Isn’t An Angel, He’s Jesus”?
“Some say the Angel of the LORD in the Hebrew Scriptures is no different from other angels. But He is far different. In fact, He is God Himself.”—-Trinitarian Website
It is very awkward for Trinitarians to believe that Jesus is eternally co-equal and co-eternal with God, and yet he’s never mentioned in the Old Testament (OT), but the holy Spirit is. When we read the New Testament, however, we cannot miss the active role that Jesus plays as Savior and Head of the Church. To support their eternal Triune God dogma, Trinitarians have concocted the unscriptural idea that Jesus, as their “second person of the Trinity”, was “the angel of the LORD” who is mentioned a number of times in the OT.
This is the viewpoint that Trinitarians argue from, and we are defending what the scriptures actually say, in the discussion with a Trinitarian that follows. (“BA” stands for us here at this website, and “T” stands for the Trinitarian.)
BA—In the scriptures, “the angel of Yahweh” is always identified as an angel. For example, “the angel of the LORD said, ‘LORD Almighty . . . ” (Zechariah 1:12 NIV). Obviously, “the angel of the LORD” cannot be “the LORD Almighty”.
T- If the correct translation of malak is “the Messenger of the LORD” where does it say he is an angel? mălʼâk, mal-awk’; from an unused root meaning to dispatch as a deputy; a messenger; specifically, of God.BA—“מַלְאַ֧ךְ (mal·’aḵ). Noun – masculine singular construct. Strong’s 4397: A messenger, of God, an angel.”
You’re attempting to inject Trinitarian ideas into a plain reading of the scriptures. The fact is that “the angel of Yahweh then spoke and said, ‘Yahweh . . . ‘ . . . Yahweh then replied with kind and comforting words to the angel who was talking to me” (Zechariah 1:12,13 NJB). Yahweh is someone other than “the angel of Yahweh”.
BA – “Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?” (Mark 12:26 NIV). If Jesus was “the angel of the LORD” in the burning bush, he would have said, “I said to him”, rather than “God said to him”.
T – Jesus is speaking in the third-person vernacular. Do you think he is going to go around saying “I did this as God” back in the good old days. The Jews would have killed him right there on the spot.BA—No, Jesus spoke the truth. Referring to God, he went on to say, “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living” (Mark 12:27 NIV). You’re attempting to twist the scriptures to say something they don’t say, in order to support Trinitarian ideas.
BA—Four times in this account, he is called “the angel of Yahweh” (Genesis 16:7,9,10,11 NJB). The scriptures never mention any “second person of the Trinity”, nor do they say that Jesus was “the angel of Yahweh.”
T – No, four times he is called “the messenger of Yahweh (your interpretation of malak against mine).BA—“Angel” means “messenger.” It’s the same thing. No difference. “Messenger of Yahweh” means he’s not Yahweh.
T—Yes, we know there is no mention of the word ‘Trinity’ in the Bible.
BA—Yes, and we should stick to believing in, and promoting, things that are actually IN the scriptures.
T— If the messenger of the Lord isn’t an angel (and he’s not),
BA—“If”???? – The problem with your interpretation is that the scriptures say he’s an angel. Every time “angel of Yahweh” is mentioned in the scriptures, he’s always identified as an angel. This is a vital point, because GOD IS NEVER CALLED AN ANGEL.
T—-that leaves one other person, the Word (the Word is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ according to John 1:14-17).
BA—According to Trinitarian dogma, “God the Son” is equal to “God the Father.” “The angel of Yahweh” is obviously not equal to Yahweh. “God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem” (1 Chronicles 21:15 NIV). Notice, “God” sent “the angel of Yahweh”. Later, “Yahweh felt sorry about the calamity and said to the angel who was destroying the people: ‘Enough now! Hold your hand!’ The angel of Yahweh was standing the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite” (2 Samuel 24:16 NJB). These verses are not written as though there is any equality between God and the angel, as if angel was “God the Son”. Yahweh God is clearly the commander and controller over what the angel does.
T—You said Jesus was the one Micah referred to, only you used a translation that fits your viewpoint. Here is another translation for Micah 5:2, ” But you, Bethlehem Ephratah, you are little to be among the clans of Judah; [yet] out of you shall One come forth for Me Who is to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth have been from of old, from ancient days. (AMPC). Yes, his goings forth have been from of old as the Messenger of the Lord. Jesus Christ is the Messenger of the Lord of the New Testament.
BA—The translation you quoted of Micah 5:2 says the same thing!!! “Whose goings forth have been from of old, from ancient days. “ Jesus was definitely in existence during OT times and before, but Micah 5:2 says nothing about “his goings forth have been from of old as the Messenger of the Lord. Jesus Christ is the Messenger of the Lord of the New Testament.” You inserted a Trinitarian idea into the text.
BA – “You believe in God, believe also in me”. The language clearly indicates that God is someone other than Jesus.
T – No it doesn’t. Jesus is not going to go around claiming He is God. The Jews would kill him for blashphemy (which they did anyhow). The following is from John 10:29-36.“My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater and mightier than all [else]; and no one is able to snatch [them] out of the Father’s hand.
30 I and the Father are One.
BA—They are “one” [Greek–“hen”, neuter gender], meaning “one” in unity (John 17:11,21-23), but not they are not the same person.
T—31 Again the Jews [d]brought up stones to stone Him.
32 Jesus said to them, My Father has enabled Me to do many good deeds. [I have shown many acts of mercy in your presence.] For which of these do you mean to stone Me?
33 The Jews replied, We are not going to stone You for a good act, but for blasphemy, because You, a mere [e]Man, make Yourself [out to be] God.
34 Jesus answered, Is it not written in your Law, I said, You are gods? (anytime the word gods is not capitalized in any translation it is meant to refer to angels or men but never Elohim.
BA—The human Israelite king is called “God” in Psalm 45:6, and he wasn’t “God the Father” or “God the Son”.
T—35 So men are called gods [by the Law], men to whom God’s message came—and the Scripture cannot be set aside or cancelled or broken or annulled—
36 [If that is true] do you say of the One Whom the Father consecrated and dedicated and set apart for Himself and sent into the world, You are blaspheming, because I said, I am the Son of God?
BA—That is all Jesus claimed to be; “the Son of God”, but never “God the Son”.
T—37 If I am not doing the works [performing the deeds] of My Father, then do not believe Me [do not adhere to Me and trust Me and rely on Me].
38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe Me or have faith in Me, [at least] believe the works and have faith in what I do, in order that you may know and understand [clearly] that the Father is in Me, and I am in the Father [One with Him].
Jesus is content to call himself the Son of God. And to call the Father, God.
BA—True.
T—If Jesus was the Word (and he was)
BA—True.
T—and the Word was God (second Person of the Trinity)
BA—The scriptures never mention, nor imply, any “second Person of the Trinity.”
T—but then was incarnated into a man, then he is not only God but also the Son of God.
BA—Jesus is “the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father”, but is not the “God” “no one has seen” (John 1:18 NASB).
T—Only God can create. A created being cannot create. God Almighty doesn’t need someone to work through. If He did, he wouldn’t be All Mighty.
BA—True, he doesn’t “need to”, but being Almighty, he “does whatever he pleases” (Job 23:13 NIV; Ecclesiastes 8:3 ESV).
The Trinitarian assertion that “the angel of Yahweh” is “God the Son”, Jesus Christ, contradicts the Bible’s first and foremost principle — that “God is One and there is no other but Him” (Mark 12:32 Majority Standard Bible). Combine this with the fact that Trinitarians believe in “God the Holy Ghost”, results in three Gods, although Trinitarians deny they have three Gods.
15 thoughts on ““‘The Angel of the LORD’ Isn’t An Angel, He’s Jesus”?”
Again, if God did exist (he doesn’t), he would not use intermediaries, emissaries, messengers, prophets, offspring, hired hands, or anyone else to do his work, including communication, performance of miracles, rewarding, and punishing. He would do it himself. After all, he would be all-powerful and perfectly moral. Angels don’t exist. Jesus did exist, but he was not supernatural or representing God.
“More Evidence How Universe Formed”
This just published article about the beginning of the universe is just another example of how the increasing scientific discoveries about the universe support the Biblical viewpoint, and further weaken the atheistic denial of the universe’s beginning!
Not at all. I am preparing a rebuttal which will come soon.
Let us know what you think you these recently published (Dec. 22) articles:
MORE EVIDENCE HOW UNIVERSE FORMED
ACCELERATING EXPANSION OF UNIVERSE NOT UNDERSTOOD
I am developing a response to the first listed article, but I see no need to respond to the second listed article because physicists and cosmologists have already given good explanations of the new findings from the new telescopes.
God does exist. Prove your points. You can’t. DUH
You are just making insults which have no place in civil rational discourse. Yes, I will prove my point that God does not exist. Haven’t you read and studied my Argument #4? Here it is:
Argument 4.
Argument Against the Existence of God Based on Absence of Universal Communication: By Gary Whittenberger, 3-18-2024, 6-19-2024, 7-11-2024, 7-20-2024, 8-8-2024, 8-17-2024, 9-15-2024
1. Definition: God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity (primary traits). He/she* is maximally enduring, present, intelligent, rational, knowing, free, creative, powerful, and resilient (primary traits). He/she is also maximally loving, compassionate, cooperative, and moral with respect to other persons (secondary traits). He/she is designer and creator of the cosmos, occasional interventionist in the world, and the afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die (secondary traits). or 2) the Greatest Imaginable Possible Person (the “GIPPer”) or ideal person who, if he/she existed, would possess all desirable traits to the highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship. (*Since God would not have a sex or gender, both male and female pronouns shall be used to refer to God.)
2. If God did exist, then he/she would communicate with all other persons in the BEST POSSIBLE manner.
3. This BEST POSSIBLE manner would be for God to regularly meet and communicate with all presently existing persons at the same time.**
A. Nature of the Meetings
1) God would give advance notice of the locations, days, and times of his upcoming meetings. All persons would have reserved seats at the venues.
2) These meetings would be objective, not merely subjective.
3)** On Earth the meeting would probably start at the same time, e.g. 9 AM, in each time zone during a single 24-hour period.
4) God would “clone” himself/herself to be in all convenient locations at the same time where other persons exist.
5) God would appear in the same general form as the persons to whom he/she would be communicating and in a specific form so as to minimize fear. For example, to human persons he/she would probably look like a kind, gentle, motherly woman 34-41 years old.
6) God would speak, audibly and objectively, to everyone in their own language at the same time.
7) God would identify himself/herself as “God”.
8) By simple pointing and without the use of any devices, God would perform at least three amazing acts which would violate natural laws, as currently known by us, upon random request from any person in the audience. These would be miracles. Some examples are:
a. Create an entire human person from a handful of dirt.
b. Resurrect a human person who had been dead for at least a year from bones or ashes of that person.
c. Voluntarily withstand destruction from firearms, explosives, heat, cold, or radiation.
d. Eliminate the Sun, Moon, or stars for one minute and then restore them.
e. Create something out of nothing.
f. Halt entropy for one minute and then restore it to its current increasing rate.
9) God would present his/her reasons for allowing or causing the Holocaust.
10) God would specify the one and only moral code – the Correct Universal Ethics for Persons (CUE-P).
11) God would specify the consequences of his/her enforcement of CUE-P.
12) God would show how he/she derived CUE-P from the principles of reason, compassion, and cooperation.
13) God would address a few questions, challenges, and requests from the audience.
14) God would provide printed or electronic copies of his/her lecture and demonstrations to all persons who wanted them.
15) God would have these meetings at regular intervals appropriate to the type of persons of his/her audience. For example, he/she would probably meet with human persons every seven years since age seven is considered the “age of reason” for human persons.
B. Reasons or Motives for the Meetings
1) God would be motivated to present the most important sets of facts to all persons, including his/her existence, his nature, CUE-P, and consequences, so that this knowledge would benefit all persons.
2) God would be motivated to present moral rules for proper behavior to all persons so that they would have a clear understanding of how to behave and not behave.
3) God would be motivated to forewarn all persons of the rewards and punishments for compliance and noncompliance with moral rules, respectively.
4) God would be motivated to “levelize opportunity” so that all persons would have the same basic knowledge of the universe and life with which to work. God would not show favoritism to some people over others in providing this basic knowledge.
5) God would be motivated to minimize punishment which could occur for noncompliance with CUE-P.
6) Almost all persons would attend the meetings of their own “free will” (if such a thing even exists). However, for those who did not make the choice, God would probably temporarily suspend their free will and require them to attend. He would judge that having the basic knowledge, as outlined above, would be more important than a free choice to attend or not attend the meetings. God would be providing good information to help all persons make better decisions in the exercise of their free will after the meetings.
7) God would be motivated to use and would use the BEST POSSIBLE mode of communication in order to minimize eight possible adverse effects — misunderstanding, confusion, distortion, inaccuracy, doubt, disbelief, disagreement, and conflict about himself and the moral code. He/she would want there to be just ONE authority and authoritative text – himself/herself and his/her word.
8) God would not use messengers, emissaries, delegates, assistants, offspring, prophets, angels, or any kind of intermediaries to do his/her communication or other work for him/her. He/she would do it all himself/herself.
a) A single consistent authenticated source is more credible to people than multiple inconsistent unauthenticated sources. God would know this and he/she would want high credibility for his/her communications with other persons.
b) Only deities who are weak, lazy, shy, or deceptive would use intermediaries, and God would have none of those traits.
9) God would be the perfect teacher, judge, and enforcer.
10) God would know all facts about communication, including that it is better to communicate with an entire group rather than with subgroups in terms of objectivity, comprehension, and efficiency.
11) Through these meetings with other persons, God would be acting exactly according to his/her nature – maximally intelligent, rational, knowing, powerful, loving, and moral.
4. This kind of meeting of God with all living persons at the same time has never occurred!
5. Therefore, God does not exist.
I am happy to received your feedback.
You said that if God was real, he would:
—Resurrect a human person who had been dead for at least a year from bones or ashes of that person.
He has:
“Elisha died and was buried. Now Moabite raiders used to enter the country every spring. Once while some Israelite were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. when the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet”—2 Kings 13:20,21 NIV
—Create an entire human person from a handful of dirt.
He did:
“Yahweh God shaped man from the soil of the ground and blew the breath of life into his nostrils, and man became a living being”—Genesis 2:7 NJB
—Create something out of nothing.
He did:
“By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that was is seen was not made out of what was visible”—Hebrews 11:3 NIV
BA: You said that if God was real, he would: Resurrect a human person who had been dead for at least a year from bones or ashes of that person.
GW: Yes, I did say that.
BA: He has: “Elisha died and was buried. Now Moabite raiders used to enter the country every spring. Once while some Israelite were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. when the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet”—2 Kings 13:20,21 NIV
GW: First, this is just a story. It is not a first-person, author-identified, low-biased, promptly-written, eye witness report. Secondly, there are not several corroborating reports. Thirdly, there is no statement of how long the man had been dead. Fourthly, there is no statement that God himself raised the man from the dead. Fifthly, Elisha didn’t do anything; she was dead. And lastly, God did not perform the act in front of all living persons at the same time. And so, your example does not meet the criteria.
BA: He would…Create an entire human person from a handful of dirt.
GW: Yes, I did say that.
BA: He did: “Yahweh God shaped man from the soil of the ground and blew the breath of life into his nostrils, and man became a living being”—Genesis 2:7 NJB
GW: First, this is just a story. It is not a first-person, author-identified, low-biased, promptly-written, eye witness report. Secondly, there are not several corroborating reports. Thirdly, “Yahweh God” is not “God.” And lastly, God did not perform the act in front of all living persons at the same time. And so, your example does not meet the criteria.
BA: He would…Create something out of nothing.
GW: Yes, I did say that.
BA: He did: “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that was is seen was not made out of what was visible”—Hebrews 11:3 NIV
GW: First, this is just a story. It is not a first-person, author-identified, low-biased, promptly-written, eye witness report. Secondly, there are not several corroborating reports. Thirdly, the understanding is based on faith, not reason, and thus it cannot be trusted. Fourthly, something that is not visible is not necessarily nothing. And lastly, God did not perform the act in front of all living persons at the same time. And so, your example does not meet the criteria.
GW: Even though ancient peoples believed that God did exist, we now know that he does not. This has been proven by many sound arguments, including my own.
BA: He has: “Elisha died and was buried. Now Moabite raiders used to enter the country every spring. Once while some Israelite were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. when the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet”—2 Kings 13:20,21 NIV
GW: First, this is just a story. It is not a first-person, author-identified, low-biased, promptly-written, eye witness report. Secondly, there are not several corroborating reports. Thirdly, there is no statement of how long the man had been dead.
He was dead long enough for there to be only bones. His flesh had completely decomposed in his burial cave, which would have taken considerable time.
BA: He did: “Yahweh God shaped man from the soil of the ground and blew the breath of life into his nostrils, and man became a living being”—Genesis 2:7 NJB
GW: First, this is just a story. It is not a first-person, author-identified, low-biased, promptly-written, eye witness report. Secondly, there are not several corroborating reports. Thirdly, “Yahweh God” is not “God.”
“Yahweh is the true God. He is the living God, the everlasting king”—Jeremiah 10:10 NJB
BA: He did: “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that was is seen was not made out of what was visible”—Hebrews 11:3 NIV
GW: First, this is just a story. It is not a first-person, author-identified, low-biased, promptly-written, eye witness report. Secondly, there are not several corroborating reports. Thirdly, the understanding is based on faith, not reason, and thus it cannot be trusted. Fourthly, something that is not visible is not necessarily nothing.
God transformed some of energy into matter at the beginning of the universe (Isaiah 40:26). Energy is invisible. It was indeed, out of nothing that was visible!
BA: God transformed some of energy into matter at the beginning of the universe (Isaiah 40:26). Energy is invisible. It was indeed, out of nothing that was visible!
GW: God does not exist This has been proven. Nothing is not something which is invisible. Nothing is the absence of anything and everything.
BA: God transformed some of energy into matter at the beginning of the universe (Isaiah 40:26). Energy is invisible. It was indeed, out of nothing that was visible!
GW: God does not exist This has been proven. Nothing is not something which is invisible. Nothing is the absence of anything and everything.
BA–Prior to this initial transference of energy into matter, there was nothing material in existence, so, in that sense, God did create something out of nothing.
BA: God transformed some of energy into matter at the beginning of the universe (Isaiah 40:26). Energy is invisible. It was indeed, out of nothing that was visible!
GW: God does not exist This has been proven. Nothing is not something which is invisible. Nothing is the absence of anything and everything.
BA–Prior to this initial transference of energy into matter, there was nothing material in existence, so, in that sense, God did create something out of nothing.
GW–There are several problems with this idea:
1) Energy was not transferred or transformed into matter at the Big Bang. That occurred approximately 300K years after the Big Bang.
2) Energy is physical material. It just isn’t matter which is a different physical material.
3) Energy can be neither created nor destroyed. And so, it is eternal. And it is not nothing.
4) You have been confounding nothing with something invisible, and they are not the same thing.
5) If you now claim that something came out of nothing, you are contradicting yourself, since previously you said this could not happen or had never happened. Both propositions cannot be true because they are contradictory. Which one is true? The one which says something cannot come from nothing is the true one, and it is one on which we previously agreed.
6) From other arguments, specifically my Argument #4, we know that God does not exist, and nobody has found an error in this argument, yet.
7) As I see it, even though God does not exist, there is only one model that is comprehensible, which is this one: If God did exist, he would have been composed of spiritual substance (not physical substance). He would have separated and transformed SOME of his own spiritual substance into pure physical energy. This energy was then compacted into the primordial particle which God caused to expand at the moment of the Big Bang. This model avoids the ridiculous idea that something came out of nothing. You are welcome. Although this model is comprehensible and logically possible, it is not true because we know for other reasons that God does not exist.
As previously stated:
BA–Prior to this initial transference of energy into matter, there was nothing material in existence, so, in that sense, God did create something out of nothing.
“By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible”—Hebrews 11:3 NIV
I already refuted this.
God does not exist. We now know this. It has been proven. I even devised several poofs of this, and nobody has found an error in them. Happy New Year!