A reader writes:
I read your blog post "Tin-Eared Translators" but I was hoping you would address the entire phrase "angel of the Lord" as it’s used in Gn 22 (and elsewhere in the OT). The phrase often seems to refer to God himself – for example, "you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me" (v. 12, RSV-CE). Could you comment on the use of this phrase? Thanks!
It’s true that "the angel of the Lord" often seems to speak with the voice of the Lord, and this has led some (particularly in Protestant circles) to speculate that the angel of the Lord is some kind of divine manifestation, such as a pre-Incarnate appearance of the Second Person of the Trinity.
Catholics generally have not gone for this piece of speculation, though it would be permitted by the Church.
A significant problem is the fact that the term "angel" is used to describe this being, and the pre-Incarnate Christ is not an angel.
It seems more likely (to me, anyway) that we are to understand the angel of the Lord speaking in the Lord’s voice the same way we would understand the messenger of a king speaking in the king’s voice. Messengers of that kind regularly would read proclamations written in the voice of the one who sent them or orally deliver messages prefixed with some tag such as "Thus says my master. . . ."
It also is not clear to me that the use of the definite article ("the" or ha- in Hebrew) is meant to indicate that there is one angel in particular who is known as the angel of the Lord (implying that he’s the Lord’s angel in a way that other angels are not). The rules in different languages about when the definite article gets used and how much weight should be put on it are not always clear. When the Old Testament says that the angel of the Lord did something, it may only mean that the angel of the Lord who happened to be there at the moment, did the thing–not that there is a unique "angel of the Lord."
That being said, there are passages in which there seems to be ambiguity about whether we’re looking at an angel or a manifestation of God himself.
St. Paul’s solution to such passages seems to be to interpret them as involving encounters with angels rather than divine manifestations. Thus he says that the Law was put in effect by angels through a mediator [Moses] (Gal. 3:19), when if you look back in the Torah it makes it sound like God himself was there with Moses (Ex. 24:9-12).
I don’t know if I can explain this very well, but in much of what I’m reading lately in my endeavors to defend the concept of the Trinity, I’m noticing a lot of passages where persons are being “in” one another. Christ is in the Father and the Father is in Him; the fullness of the Father is in Him, even, because Christ is also God. We are in the body of Christ; when we eat His flesh and drink His blood, Christ is in us and we are in Him, and thereby are united in the body of Christ–not that this suddenly makes us God, because we’re not divine persons. It would seem to make sense, then, that since God is not limited by time, that even in the Old Testament, we’re seeing Christ being “in” His angel, as though the angels too can be “in” Christ and have Christ “in” them. We see in the New Testament how being “in” Christ and having Christ “in” us is also made possible for members of His Church.
The pope is also said to speak with the voice of Christ, right?
We can see from looking at ourselves that this doesn’t mean we give up our own distinct personhood; we remain distinct and separate persons/beings. Even the Trinity maintains three distinct persons, yet they are “in” each other. So likewise, the angel(s) in these passages isn’t Christ and Christ isn’t an angel, yet Christ can be “in” an angel and speak through the angel, or enable the angel to speak with His voice.
Either that or we’re to understand the angel as a messenger relaying a message after-the-fact, just happening to speak in the first person for the Lord, which makes sense too. Any thoughts? If something is untenable here, please let me know. All I’m doing is expounding on ways to defend the Trinity and any help is appreciated.
(P.S. If anyone’s wondering what it has to do with the Trinity, what I’m doing is refuting the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that Jesus is Michael the Archangel. Half of their argument is wrapped up in passages where an angel speaks with the voice of the Lord or where the Lord comes again, with the voice of an angel.)
I believe there is Patristic support for the idea that all divine manifestations in the OT are anticipations of the Incarnation, so it’s not that far out an idea.
Karen – Good luck to you with the jw’s! I’ll keep you in my prayers.
Could it be the Holy Spirit?
Pontius Pilate said, of “Jesus, Nazarene, King of the Jews,” — “What I have written, I have written.”
He certainly didn’t write it with his own hand.
I just changed my little ‘scripture quote per day’ thingie on my desk and here’s what I have;
“The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear him, and he delivers them”
Psalm 34:7
God Bless