Hope of Israel Ministries (Ecclesia of YEHOVAH):

Was the Messiah the "Angel of the LORD"?

by HOIM Staff

The most important thing to remember when studying the identity of the angel of the LORD (also referred to as the angel of God in some instances) in the Bible is that the meaning may vary depending on the context of the passage. The best way to study the meaning is to look at the context of the passage, as well as the context of similar passages. We should use Scripture to interpret Scripture, and, as always, pray for discerning wisdom from the holy spirit.

Though there is some controversy surrounding the identity of the angel of the LORD, there are generally four schools of thought -- that the angel of the LORD is either:

• A special angel messenger, a heavenly being, who acted as YEHOVAH God’s representative (not YEHOVAH Himself).

• YEHOVAH God the Father, showing Himself as a divine manifestation to humanity. This is known as a theophany -- “appearance of God.”

• The Messiah, manifested in a pre-incarnate body form. This is known as a Christophany -- “appearance of Christ.”

• It varies. The figure is sometimes a manifestation of YEHOVAH God and sometimes an angelic heavenly being representing YEHOVAH God, depending on the context of the text.

The term angel means “one sent” or “messenger,” and LORD in Hebrew is YHVH or YEHOVAH when the vowels are supplied. The angel of the LORD is one sent by YHVH or a messenger of YHVH. If the Bible passage is thought to be referring to a pre-incarnate Messiah, then the meaning of "angel" is referring to the office of one sent. If one believes the Messiah pre-existed, then this would be in line with the Messiah’s assumed mission as the One the Father sent into the world. (John 8:18, John 3:17).

However, when the passage refers to an angelic heavenly being sent to a deliver a message then the term “angel” is referring to the nature of the being -- one of the heavenly hosts, a spirit-being created by YEHOVAH God. So the word "angel" does not always refer to the nature of a being named in Scripture, it can also refer to the office of a being. With this in mind let’s take a look at a number of instances where the Bible mentions "the angel of the LORD."

• Genesis 16:7-11: The angel of the LORD found Hagar and spoke to her.

• Exodus 3:2: The angel of the LORD appeared to Moses in a flame of fire from the midst of a bush.

• Judges 6:11-12: The angel of the LORD appeared to Gideon and called him a mighty man of valor.

• 1 Chronicles 21:16: The angel of the LORD stood between heaven and earth with a drawn sword.

• Matthew 1:20: An angel of the LORD appeared to Joseph in a dream, reassuring him about Mary.

These verses illustrate various instances where the Angel of the LORD plays a significant role in biblical narratives.

It is believed by some Trinitarians that in the Old Testament “the angel of the LORD” is the Messiah before he supposedly “incarnated” as a human. This point is disputed by many, and with good reason. There is not a single verse that actually says that the Messiah is the angel of the LORD. The entire doctrine is built from assumption. Why then, if the doctrine is not stated, do so many people believe it?

The reason is that it is very awkward for Trinitarians to believe that the Messiah is co-equal and co-eternal with YEHOVAH God from the beginning of time, and yet he never appears in the Old Testament. Since one cannot miss the active role that the Messiah plays today as Head of the Church or Ecclesia, is it possible that he could have been around throughout the entire Old Testament and yet never have gotten involved with YEHOVAH's people Israel? A Trinitarian answer to this question is to place the Messiah in the Old Testament by assumption: he must be “the angel of the LORD”!

However, we answer the question by asserting that this is very strong evidence for our position that the Messiah did not yet exist during the Old Testament, but was in the plan of YEHOVAH God for the salvation of Israel. Exactly what are the reasons Trinitarians say that the angel of the LORD is the Messiah? Trinitarians differ on the points of evidence (which is to be expected when working from assumptions), but the standard reasons are:

• He seems superior to other angels,

• He is separate from YEHOVAH God,

• He is able to forgive sins (Exodus 23:21),

• He speaks with authority as though he were YEHOVAH God,

• His countenance struck awe in people,

• He was never seen after the Messiah’s birth, and, most importantly,

• He is addressed as YEHOVAH God Himself.

All these points will be considered, and we will start with the last, which is the most essential point of the argument.

7. He is addressed as YEHOVAH God Himself. A study of the appearances of the angel of the LORD reveals that sometimes he is addressed as the angel and sometimes he is addressed as “the Lord” or “God” (see Genesis 16:13 and Judges 6:16). The Israelite law of agency explains why this is so. According to the Israelite understanding of agency, the agent was regarded as the person himself. This is well expressed in The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion:

"Agent (Heb. Shaliah): The main point of the Jewish law of agency is expressed in the dictum, “a person’s agent is regarded as the person himself” (Ned. 72b; Kidd. 41b). Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principal, who therefore bears full responsibility for it with consequent complete absence of liability on the part of the agent."

In the texts in which the angel is called “God” or “the LORD,” it is imperative to notice that he is always identified as an angel. This point is important because YEHOVAH God is never called an angel. YEHOVAH God is God. So if a being is called “God,” but is clearly identified as an angel, there must be a reason. In the record in Genesis noted above, the angel is clearly identified as an angel four separate times. Why then would the text say that “the LORD” spoke to her? It does so because as YEHOVAH’s agent or messenger, the angel was speaking for YEHOVAH God and the message he brought was YEHOVAH’s message.

The same basic idea is expressed when “God” is said to “visit” His people Israel, when actually He sends some form of blessing (Luke 7:16). YEHOVAH Himself does not show up, but someone unfamiliar with the culture might conclude from the wording that He did. Also, some of the people to whom the angel appeared, clearly expressed their belief he was an angel of YEHOVAH God. Gideon exclaimed, “I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face!” (Judges 6:22).

There is conclusive biblical evidence that YEHOVAH God’s messengers and representatives are called “God” (Hebrews 1:8). This is important because, if representatives of YEHOVAH God are called “God,” then the way to distinguish YEHOVAH God from His representative is by the context. We have already shown that when the angel of the LORD is called “God,” the context is careful to let the reader know that the agent is, in fact, an angel.

2. He is separate from YEHOVAH God. Another piece of evidence that reveals that the angel of the LORD is an angel and not a “co-equal” member of the Trinity is that he is under the command of YEHOVAH God. In one record, David disobeyed YEHOVAH God and a plague came on the land. “God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem” (1 Chronicles 21:15).

We learn from the record that it was the angel of the LORD afflicting the people, and eventually “the LORD was grieved because of the calamity and said to the angel who was afflicting the people, ‘Enough! Withdraw your hand.’ The angel of the LORD was then at the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite” (2 Samuel 24:16). These verses are not written as if this angel was somehow YEHOVAH God Himself. There is no “co-equality” here. This is simply YEHOVAH God giving commands to one of His angels.

Another clear example showing that the angel of the LORD cannot be YEHOVAH God in any way is in Zechariah. Zechariah was speaking with an angel about a vision he had. The Bible records, “Then the angel of the LORD said, ‘LORD Almighty, how long will you withhold mercy from Jerusalem and from the towns of Judah, which you have been angry with these seventy years?’ So the LORD spoke kind and comforting words to the angel who talked with me” (Zechariah 1:12-13).

The fact that the angel of the LORD asked YEHOVAH God for information and then received comforting words indicates that he is not co-equal with YEHOVAH God in power or knowledge. It is unthinkable that YEHOVAH God would need information or need comforting words. Thus, any claim that the angel of the LORD is the pre-incarnate Messiah who is in every way YEHOVAH God just cannot be made to fit what the Bible actually says.

Also, the angel of the LORD speaks about YEHOVAH God in the third person. For example, in Genesis 16:11 above, the angel says, “The LORD has heard of your misery.” The angel does not say, “I have heard of your misery,” as if he were YEHOVAH God. In Genesis 22:12, the angel said, “Now I know that you fear God,” not “Now I know you fear me.” In Judges 13:5, the angel says Samson will be “set apart to God,” not “set apart to me.” So although the text can call the angel God, which is proper for a representative of YEHOVAH God, the angel never said he was YEHOVAH God and even referred to YEHOVAH in the third person.

Also, if the Messiah was the angel of the LORD who spoke to Moses at the burning bush, then he did not say so in his teaching. Mark 12:26 records the Messiah speaking with the Sadducees and saying, “Have you not read in the book of Moses, in the account of the bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’”

If the Messiah had been the angel in the bush, and was openly proclaiming himself to be “the pre-existent God,” he would have used this opportunity to say, “I said to Moses.” The fact that the Messiah said it was YEHOVAH God who spoke to Moses shows clearly that he was differentiating himself from YEHOVAH God.

3. He is able to forgive sins. That the angel of the LORD seems superior to other angels is no reason to assume he is somehow part of the Trinity. Many scholars agree that angels differ in power and authority. The Bible mentions archangels in 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and Jude 9, for example. It would not be unusual that this angel would be one with greater authority. Neither is the fact that the angel of the LORD can forgive sins any reason to believe that he is YEHOVAH God. YEHOVAH’s agents can forgive sins. YEHOVAH God gave the Messiah the authority to forgive sins, and then he in turn gave the apostles the authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:7).

4. He speaks with authority as though he were YEHOVAH God. It is interesting that two pieces of evidence that Trinitarians use to prove that the angel of the LORD must be the pre-incarnate Messiah are that the Bible clearly states that he is separate from YEHOVAH God and that he speaks with YEHOVAH’s authority. We would argue that the reason he is separate from YEHOVAH God is because he is exactly what the text calls him, i.e., an angel, and that he speaks with authority because he is bringing a message from YEHOVAH God. The prophets and others who spoke for YEHOVAH also spoke with authority, as many verses affirm.

5. His countenance struck awe in people. Although it is true that the countenance of the angel of the LORD occasionally struck awe in people, that is no reason to assume he is YEHOVAH God. A careful reading of the passages where he appears shows that sometimes the people did not even realize that they were talking to an angel. For example, when the angel of the LORD appeared to Samson’s mother, she returned to her husband Manoah with this report: “A man of God came to me. He looked like an angel of God, very awesome. I didn’t ask him where he came from, and he didn’t tell me his name” (Judges 13:6).

Note that angels had a reputation for having an awe-inspiring countenance, and the woman thought this “man of God” did too, but she still did not believe he was an angel. When Manoah met the angel of the LORD and the two of them talked about how to raise Samson, Manoah did not discover he was an angel until he ascended to heaven in the smoke of Manoah’s sacrifice. Therefore, just because someone’s countenance may be awesome, he is not necessarily YEHOVAH God.

6. He was never seen after the Messiah’s birth. It is also argued that the Messiah is probably “the angel of the LORD” because those words never appear after his birth, and it seems reasonable that this angel would appear right on through the Bible. The fact is, however, that the angel of the LORD does appear after the Messiah’s conception, which seems inconsistent with the premise that the angel of the LORD is the “pre-incarnate Christ.”

The record of the Messiah’s birth, as we have it today, is well known. Mary was discovered to be pregnant with the Messiah before she and Joseph were married, and Joseph, who could have had her stoned to death, decided to divorce her. However, “an angel of the LORD” appeared to him in a dream and told him the child was YEHOVAH’s. Matthew 1:24 states, “When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the LORD had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife.”

If we take this part of Matthew as being factual (when the first two chapters of the Book of Matthew were not a part of the original) two conclusions can be drawn from this record. First, the Messiah was already in Mary’s womb when the angel of the LORD appeared to Joseph. From this we conclude that “the angel of the LORD” cannot be the Messiah because the Messiah was at that time “in the flesh” inside Mary. Second, it should be noted that in the same record this angel is known both as “an” angel of the LORD and as “the” angel of the LORD. This same fact can be seen in the Old Testament records (Cp. 1 Kings 19:5-7).

There are many appearances of “an” angel of the LORD in the New Testament (Cp. Acts 5:19; 8:26; 12:7; 12:23). From this we conclude that it is likely that the same angel who is called both “the” angel of the LORD and “an angel” in the Old Testament still appears as “an angel of the LORD” after the Messiah’s birth. When all the evidence is carefully weighed, there is good reason to believe that the words describing the “angel” of the LORD are literal, and that the being referred to is an angel, just as the text says.

Some Strong Evidence

The passage that completely denies the Messiah was an angel of any kind is found in Hebrews chapter 1. This analysis is unique:

“Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, ‘You are my Son, this day have I begotten thee’? And again, ‘I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son’? And again, when he brings in the first begotten into the world, he says, ‘And let all the angels of God worship him.’ And of the angels he says, ‘Who makes his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.’ But unto the Son he says, Your throne, O God, is for ever and ever [literally, the age of the age or the greatest age]: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom” (Hebrews 1:3-8).

Three times Paul cites Old Testament references that distinguish the Messiah from angels: [1] Psalm 2:7; [2] 2 Samuel 7:14, 1 Chronicles 17:13, 22:10, 28:6; and [3] Psalm 97:7. The passage that says, “But unto the Son...” is directly from Psalm 45:6-7. The Messiah is described as the Son of God in Revelation 2:18, “And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God...” In other words three direct proofs, and more, are given that the Messiah was not and could not be an angel, but that he was a son. Note also that all the angels are to worship Him.

In the King James Version of the Bible we find Hebrews 2:16 as follows:

“For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren…”

Notice, now, the Bible in Basic English (BBE) version:

"For, truly, he does not take on the life of angels, but that of the seed of Abraham."

The Authorized Version (AV) agrees with this but other translations do not. For example, the New International Version (NIV) says:

“For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants” (though the footnote adds, “Christ assumed not angelic nature, but human nature.”)

The Young's Literal Translation (YLT) reads “For, doubtless, of messengers it doth not lay hold, but of seed of Abraham it layeth hold.”

The New World Translation (NWT) reads “For he is really not assisting angels at all, but he is assisting Abraham’s seed.”

These translations make little sense when viewed in the context of chapter two. The idea of "help" is very strange. What would be the purpose of saying that the Messiah "helped" the seed of Abraham and did not "help" angels? The whole of the introduction of the epistle to the Hebrews is a contrast of the person of Messiah and the nature of angels. The argument develops through comparisons not with what aid was given to whom, but with the testimony of the Hebrew scripture to the person who was promised and his superiority to all that had been before, whether angels, Legal administration or Levitical priesthood, all associated with the covenant now become "old."

The Greek phrase in question is epilambanetai. Young’s Concordance only gives epilambanomai, for which it lists, take on/take hold on x2; take hold of x 2; lay hold upon x 1; lay hold on x 2; catch x 2; take x 7; take by x 5.

Now, the problem is that the KJV and the NIV (for example) say two different things about the Messiah appearing as a man. To say that the Messiah did not take on himself the nature of angels (but took on the nature of men), is not the same as saying it is not angels he helps (but men)!

This has doctrinal impact because the KJV, the AV, and a few other versions, show that, if he pre-existed, the Messiah could not have been an angel because he could not take on himself something he already had. If the Messiah had the nature of angels prior to becoming man, then the text would have had to say that he added to his angelic nature, human nature. Or, it would have had to say that he abandoned his angelic nature in order to become man (reducing him to no more than a man). But to say that the Messiah did not take on himself the nature of angels proves that he could not have been an angel prior to taking on himself the nature of man.

Now the direct word-for-word translation from the Greek is as follows:

"Not for actually somewhere of angels he is taking hold upon, but of seed of Abraham he is taking hold upon."

So this, coupled with the context of the chapter, would indicate that the overall context of Hebrews 1-2 should prefer the KJV translation, "he took not on him the nature of angels" or the Geneva Bible, "For he in no sort took on him the Angels’ nature." Even more precise translation could be incarnation or embodiment, which may not be absolutely literal but really conveys the meaning accurately in modern English. I don't know why the Bible versions turned from "nature" (KJV), to "lay hold" (YLT) then to the confusing "help" in most modern versions.

Conclusion

We have addressed some prevalent misconceptions about the “Angel of the LORD.” Some, like William Smith in his Bible Dictionary, contend that “the angel of the LORD” is a pre-incarnate manifestation of YEHOVAH God or even the Messiah’s visible form before his earthly incarnation. This perspective, however, isn’t congruent with a careful reading of Scripture.

Another point of contention arises when some associate the “Angel of the LORD” with Gabriel or even suggest an alignment with the holy spirit, as inferred from Acts 8:26, 29. This position isn’t tenable either. Gabriel, while undeniably a high-ranking angel with a close association with YEHOVAH God, is distinct from the “Angel of the LORD.” Moreover, equating this angel with a pre-incarnate Messiah doesn’t hold water. The “Angel of the LORD,” though powerful and authoritative, remains a creation and, therefore, subservient to the Messiah.

In conclusion, while the “Angel of the LORD” has immense authority and is influential in the biblical narrative, it is essential to discern and differentiate this entity from YEHOVAH God, the Messiah, and other significant angelic figures. Proper understanding aids in preventing theological inaccuracies and fosters a richer appreciation of the intricate tapestry of celestial beings depicted in Scripture. It is the angel of the LORD that was leading the Israelites through the wilderness.

The term malakh YHVH, translated as “the Angel of Jehovah” in the Updated American Standard Version, appears sixty-seven times in the Old Testament. Exodus 3:2 is its only occurrence in Exodus, though it was already well-known in Genesis 16, the story of Hagar, and Genesis 22, the story of Abraham’s close sacrifice of Isaac.

Exodus 3:2 Updated American Standard Version (UASV): "The angel of Jehovah appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed."

Exodus 14:19 Updated American Standard Version (UASV): "Then the angel of God who was going before the army of Israel moved and went behind them, and the pillar of cloud moved from before them and stood behind them,.."

Exodus 23:20-23 Updated American Standard Version (UASV): “Look, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you on the way and to bring you into the place that I have prepared. Take heed before him, and listen to his voice, do not rebel against him; for he will not pardon your transgression, for my name is in him. “But if you shall indeed listen to his voice, and do all that I say; then, I will be an enemy to your enemies, and an adversary to your adversaries."

In this passage from the book of Exodus, YEHOVAH God speaks to the Israelites about sending an angel ahead of them to protect and guide them on their journey to the place He has prepared for them. The angel carries YEHOVAH’s authority and should be respected and obeyed. If the Israelites rebel against this angel, their transgressions will not be pardoned. However, if they listen to and obey the angel’s voice, YEHOVAH promises to be an enemy to their enemies and an adversary to their adversaries. This passage suggests that the mentioned angel would lead the Israelites into the promised land, had the power to forgive or not forgive sins, delivered teachings and commands that must be followed, bore the representation of YEHOVAH’s Name, and acted as the judge and destroyer of Israel’s enemies.