Was Jesus the one that made the Covenant with Israel or His Father

Theology
1

7 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?

2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.

6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

2

It is God the Father who establishes the covenant with Israel, not Jesus acting independently. The Old Covenant, as given at Sinai, is always portrayed as originating from God Himself, with the law as His instrument to guide Israel. Jesus, in His earthly ministry, does not make that covenant; rather, He fulfills it and inaugurates the New Covenant through His life, death, and resurrection. The distinction is important: the Old Covenant is God’s covenant with Israel, mediated through Moses, and it demanded obedience under the law. Jesus does not replace God as the covenant-maker; He is the mediator and fulfillment of God’s promise.

Romans 7, which you quoted, illustrates this beautifully. Paul compares the law to a marriage: as long as the husband lives, the wife is bound to him. Likewise, the law held dominion over Israel “as long as they lived” under it (Romans 7:1–2)[1].

Paul then explains that through the death of Christ, believers are “loosed” from the Old Covenant in the sense that the law no longer has dominion to condemn them (Romans 7:4–6)[2]. The covenant remains God’s; Christ’s death is the means by which we are transferred from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. Jesus does not make a new legal contract with Israel on His own, He fulfills the Father’s covenant and becomes the mediator of the promise of life and righteousness.

God the Father is the covenant-maker; Jesus is the covenant-fulfiller and mediator, and through His death and resurrection, believers are joined to Him in a New Covenant that brings life instead of condemnation.

J.

  1. “Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?” - KJV ↩︎

  2. “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.” - KJV ↩︎

1 Like
3

Was Jesus the one who made the Covenant with Israel or His Father?

I was going to simply say “Yes.” Then point out verses such as these.

“For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1

“All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” John 1:3

“I and the Father are one.” John 10:30

“You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.” John 14:28

“Yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” 1 Corinthians 8:6

However, I am a bit concerned that this thread would be hijacked by another debate on the Trinity. So, I would just go with what @Johann said.

Peter

1 Like
4

Not really sure of where you are going with your scriptures. I have not read any post on the trinity in here- as far as I know.

I would think Peter- and this is for anyone reading

That before Jesus came into the world He is the word.

Another words: the word which was clothed with Flesh

Somewhere I read that there were 3 that testified in heaven

1 John 5
For there are three that bear record in Heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.

So in my opinion, sense I don’t know ..it might be a societal agreement of the trinity. Hence, then it wouldn’t Matter who made it because in someway they exist as one.

However Peter, the reason Im asking is because the one who made it had to die physically- if Israel was going to be brought off under the law..so I guess one could still say God in the flesh, or God’s word which is still God.

Or it had to be already decided upon-

Depending on how the term “word” is used- as God’s word, speech, breath

Then that would be like the words I speak is who I am. But is that true? Are we what we speak?

If God’ Spirit is His breath- His breath never dies.
Hence if the Spirit that is in Christ be in us it would quicken the mortal body.

So what does it mean for the word to have become flesh?

The ideals of God, word as a story

What is the word? Is the word a story, a plot,

The Logos- The “Word” signifies God’s eternal reason, plan, and creative power, which was present at creation and is revealed in Jesus.

So here is a thought about what I heard from someone years ago: and I might add to their thought.

But the book of life is the Story line. Its about getting caught up in His story (History, ha ha). Hence ur name written in the book of life, which could also imply God’s life or experiences.

Beautiful

So what might that look like when Jesus goes back to the father and says restore the Glory that I had while I was with you before the world begun?

Shared experiences ?

Anyway those were my outloud thoughts, God is so deep He cant be put in a box…

So my answer is God made it…but also when does God become a Father. To answer that-Humanly speaking when does man become a father?
When a child comes into the world?

So which beggs the question: was God always the Father of Jesus sense Jesus was His only begotton son.Answer: In theory that the ideals of God existed.
And sense that is so the son made it too…

5

Right-on Brother! Jesus is the old covenant fulfiller and the New covenant mediator.

6

All divine action is Trinitarian action. So the answer to the question of whether it was the Father or the Son Who established the Covenant with Israel, the answer is yes. It is the One God, YHWH, who established the Covenant.

The Father is YHWH.

The Son is YHWH.

The Holy Spirit is YHWH.

So, yes, it is the Father who established the Covenant.
And yes, it is the Son who established the Covenant.
And yes, it is the Holy Spirit who established the Covenant.

1 Like
7

Sorry @TheologyNerd

When the covenant with Israel is established in the Old Testament, who is speaking and acting according to the text itself?

At Sinai, the covenant is explicitly established by YHWH. Exodus 24:8 states:

[1]

Exo 24:8 And Moshe took the remaining dahm, and sprinkled it on HaAm, and said, Hinei dahm habrit, which Hashem hath cut with you concerning all these words.

The covenant is said to be made by “the LORD” which in the Hebrew text is YHWH. The text does not distinguish Father, Son, and Spirit at that point. It simply identifies the covenant maker as YHWH, the God of Israel.

Deuteronomy 5:2 says the same:

[2]

Deu 5:2 Hashem Eloheinu made a Brit with us in Chorev.

Again, it is YHWH.

Now move to the New Testament. The Father is clearly identified as God. For example, 1 Corinthians 8:6 says:

[3]

1Co 8:6 Yet in fact for us we have da’as that there is ADONOI ECHAD ("L-rd is One " DEVARIM 6:4), Hashem AV ECHAD L’CHULLANU ("One Father of us all” MALACHI 2:10), from whom are all things, and we exist for Hashem, and there is Adon Echad [MALACHI 3:1], Moshiach Yehoshua [ZECHARYAH 3:8; 6:11-12], through whom are all things and we through him.

The Son is also identified as fully divine. John 1:1 says:

[4]

Bereshis (in the Beginning) was the Dvar Hashem [YESHAYAH 55:11; BERESHIS 1:1], and the Dvar Hashem was agav (along with) Hashem [MISHLE 8:30; 30:4], and the Dvar Hashem was nothing less, by nature, than Elohim! [Psa 56:11(10); Yn 17:5; Rev. 19:13]

And Hebrews 1:8 applies divine kingship language to the Son:

[5]

Heb 1:8 And Hashem says to HaBen, KIS’AHCHA ELOHIM OLAM VAED SHEVET MISHOR SHEVET MALKHUTECHA (“Your throne, O G-d, will endure for ever and ever, and the scepter of justice is the scepter of your kingdom” --TEHILLIM 45:7).
Heb 1:9 AHAVTA TZEDEK VATISNA RE’SHA, AL KEN MESHAKHACHA ELOHIM, ELOHECHA SHEMEN SASSON MECHAVERECHA (“You loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; on account of this G-d, your G-d, anointed you with the oil of gladness more than your companions”–TEHILLIM 45:8).

So biblically, YHWH is the covenant maker. The New Testament reveals that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, yet there is one God.

What does the Bible explicitly say about covenant mediation? Hebrews 8:6 says of Christ:

[6]

And Hebrews 9:15:

[7]

So the Old Covenant is said to be made by YHWH. The New Covenant is said to be mediated by Christ through His death and resurrection.

The Bible does not contain a verse that says, “The Son established the Sinai covenant,” nor does it say, “Only the Father established it.” It says YHWH made it. Then the New Testament reveals that Jesus shares in the divine identity of YHWH.

So strictly from the text:

• The covenant at Sinai was established by YHWH.
• The Father is called God.
• The Son is called God.
• Christ mediates the New Covenant through His blood.

Deuteronomy 5:2 reads:

יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ כָּרַת עִמָּנוּ בְּרִית בְּחֹרֵב

The verb כָּרַת (kārat) is Qal perfect 3rd masculine singular. The subject is יְהוָה (YHWH), a singular proper noun. The perfect form presents the action as completed. Grammatically, the one performing the action of covenant cutting is singular. There is no plural verb and no compound subject. The morphology identifies one grammatical actor: YHWH.

Exodus 24:8 contains:

אֲשֶׁר כָּרַת יְהוָה עִמָּכֶם

Again, כָּרַת is Qal perfect 3ms. The subject is explicitly יְהוָה. The agreement is singular masculine. Hebrew grammar here is unambiguous. A singular subject performs a singular completed action.

Exodus 19:5 includes:

וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת־בְּרִיתִי

בְּרִיתִי is בְּרִית (covenant) with 1st person singular pronominal suffix, “my covenant.” The suffix ִי marks possession by a singular speaker. That speaker in context is יְהוָה. The covenant is grammatically owned by a singular “I.”

The divine name יְהוָה itself is morphologically singular. Though אֱלֹהִים can be morphologically plural, when referring to the God of Israel it takes singular verbs and adjectives. In Deuteronomy 5:2, the verb is singular, confirming singular grammatical agency.

So strictly at the morphological level:

• The covenant verb כָּרַת is singular.
• The subject יְהוָה is singular.
• The possessive suffix “my covenant” is singular.
• There is no grammatical plurality in the covenant-making action.

The text presents one grammatical actor: YHWH.

Now, the New Testament later identifies the Son as sharing the divine identity, but that is theological synthesis drawn from later revelation. Morphologically, in the Sinai covenant texts themselves, the covenant is established by a singular subject, יְהוָה, acting in the Qal perfect 3ms.

Grammar does not speculate. It simply shows one covenant maker in the text: YHWH.

J.

  1. “And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.” - KJV ↩︎

  2. “The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb.” - KJV ↩︎

  3. “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” - KJV ↩︎

  4. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” - KJV ↩︎

  5. “But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.” - KJV ↩︎

  6. “But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.” - KJV ↩︎

  7. “And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death… they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.” - KJV ↩︎

8

There are other threads that are debating the Trinity in depth. Let me say this. Make no mistake, the Holy Spirit is a very real person. He is not a concept or idea, a wind, or a force. He is as real as Jesus and as you are. He has been around since the beginning. In,

Genesis 1:1-2

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.”

When there was yet nothing, the Holy Spirit was there. Then a little bit later in Genesis…

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” Genesis 1:26-27

Just like God and Jesus themselves, the Holy Spirit is a very real person. Jesus told us about the Holy and told us exactly what we should expect of Him.

Here is something that is not taught often. “If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and WE will come unto him, and make our abode with him.” John 14:23 What is He saying? Jesus said WE will make OUR abode with him. The very real person Jesus, the very real person the Holy Spirit, and even God Himself, will live IN us.

As the verse you pointed out. Let’s look at 1 John 5:6-8

“This is he who came by water and blood–Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.”

Some translations say “are one,” which is what this is saying. Hope this clarified my position for you.

Peter

9

It’s my understanding of the Bible’s teachings that all three Persons of the Trinity are involved in all of his actions, @Johann: creation, the covenant, salvation, and sanctification. The Father is the Originator; the Son, the Agent; and the Holy Spirit, the direct Doer.

10

Then you have to deal with the morphology here @Bruce_Leiter since many don’t study this way.

Exodus 24:1-18
Contents: Order of worship prescribed, pending the building of the tabernacle.

Characters: God, Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, elders, Joshua, Hur.

Conclusion: The unapproachable glory of God tells a sinner to keep off, but the altar shows him how he can feast and worship in God’s presence.

Key Word: Worship, Exo_24:1.

Strong Verses: Exo_24:8, Exo_24:17.

Striking Facts: We never hear “draw near” (Heb_10:22) from the shadows of the law. For Christ’s work was not then done which entitled the sinner to draw near. Law always says “worship afar off.”

Exodus 24:6-8
The blood was divided into two parts. One half was swung by Moses upon the altar (זָרַק to swing, shake, or pour out of the vessel, in distinction from הִזָּה to sprinkle) the other half he put into basins, and after he had read the book of the covenant to the people, and they had promised to do and follow all the words of Jehovah, he sprinkled it upon the people with these words: “Behold the blood of the covenant, which Jehovah has made with you over all these words.” As several animals were slaughtered, and all of them young oxen, there must have been a considerable quantity of blood obtained, so that the one half would fill several basins, and many persons might be sprinkled with it as it was being swung about. The division of the blood had reference to the two parties to the covenant, who were to be brought by the covenant into a living unity; but it had no connection whatever with the heathen customs adduced by Bähr and Knobel, in which the parties to a treaty mixed their own blood together. For this was not a mixture of different kinds of blood, but it was a division of one blood, and that sacrificial blood, in which animal life was offered instead of human life, making expiation as a pure life for sinful man, and by virtue of this expiation restoring the fellowship between God and man which had been destroyed by sin. But the sacrificial blood itself only acquired this signification through the sprinkling or swinging upon the altar, by virtue of which the human soul was received, in the soul of the animal sacrificed for man, into the fellowship of the divine grace manifested upon the altar, in order that, through the power of this sin-forgiving and sin-destroying grace, it might be sanctified to a new and holy life. In this way the sacrificial blood acquired the signification of a vital principle endued with the power of divine grace; and this was communicated to the people by means of the sprinkling of the blood. As the only reason for dividing the sacrificial blood into two parts was, that the blood sprinkled upon the altar could not be taken off again and sprinkled upon the people; the two halves of the blood are to be regarded as one blood, which was first of all sprinkled upon the altar, and then upon the people. In the blood sprinkled upon the altar, the natural life of the people was given up to God, as a life that had passed through death, to be pervaded by His grace; and then through the sprinkling upon the people it was restored to them again, as a life renewed by the grace of God. In this way the blood not only became a bond of union between Jehovah and His people, but as the blood of the covenant, it became a vital power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God; and the sprinkling of the people with this blood was an actual renewal of life, a transposition of Israel into the kingdom of God, in which it was filled with the powers of God’s spirit of grace, and sanctified into a kingdom of priests, a holy nation of Jehovah (Exo_19:6). And this covenant was made “upon all the words” which Jehovah had spoken, and the people had promised to observe. Consequently it had for its foundation the divine law and right, as the rule of life for Israel.
K&D

If we stay strictly inside Exodus 24, without importing later theological systems, the text is very clear: it is YHWH who makes the covenant.

Exodus 24:3 says Moses told the people “all the words of the LORD.”
Exodus 24:7 speaks of “the book of the covenant.”
Exodus 24:8 says, “Behold the blood of the covenant, which the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words.”

The Hebrew consistently uses יהוה, YHWH. The covenant formula, the blood ratification, the spoken words, all are attributed to YHWH. There is no second divine agent named in the narrative. No distinction is introduced. The covenant partner is YHWH alone.

From a strictly Old Testament narrative perspective, yes, YHWH alone makes the covenant at Sinai.

Now, the later Christian theological question is different. The New Testament affirms that Jesus shares the divine identity of YHWH and was active in Israel’s history, for example in ~1 Corinthians 10:4 and in textual traditions of ~Jude 5. That leads some to say the pre incarnate Son was present in covenant revelation.

But that is a theological synthesis built from the whole canon. It is not something Exodus 24 itself explicitly states.

So if the question is textual, historical, and grammatical within Exodus, the answer is simple: YHWH alone is presented as the covenant maker.

If the question is Trinitarian theology, then Christians affirm that whatever YHWH does is not independent of the Son, because the Son shares the divine identity. But the passage itself names only YHWH.

Keeping those categories distinct prevents confusion.

Just to show I’m not a “lone wolf”

And pray this will be a blessing to others here.

You agree @bdavidc ?

J.

11

I do agree. What difference would it make which Person of the Godhead actually did it?

2 Likes
12

Thank you @peaceful23 and may the shalom reign, rule and castle upon you and family.

J.

1 Like
13

Hi, well I posted the passage. And I believe it was what was said…if a husband dies the wife was now free to marry another.

By the same token- from being under the law to faith
The one that made the covenant with Israel then would have to die to it, whereby they are not married to the law anymore.

So my question Did Jesus make the covenant sense He died to free those under it?

So it was a question that matters to me, because someone also said Jesus was the one who spoke to Moses. Which I also thought to be interesting.

14

Again, I would simply say yes. They, as in they.

“Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” Gensis 1:26

That they. They combided made the Covenant. If you think about it. God spoke it, Someone walked it through the animals, and Jesus came to fulfill it.

As for Jesus speaking to Moses, apparently, He did often. Here is another example.

“And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light. And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him.” Matthew 17-1-3

Either way, it WAS Jesus who fulfilled the law.

Peter

15

See here @PeterC

…many Christians believe that the Son, who is later revealed as Jesus Christ, appeared and spoke in the Old Testament, including in events involving Moses. But the text itself does not explicitly say, “Jesus spoke to Moses.”
What it presents is the LORD speaking. The theological question is whether that LORD-appearance can be understood as the pre-incarnate Son.

Let us work carefully here brother, maybe you can help me.

In the Pentateuch, Moses encounters “the LORD” repeatedly. The most famous moment is the burning bush in ~Exodus 3. The text says that “the angel of the LORD” appeared in the flame, yet the voice identifies Himself as “I AM THAT I AM” (~Exodus 3:14).

Later, in ~Exodus 33:11, it says, “the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend.” The Hebrew verb דִּבֶּר (dibber) is Piel, intensive, indicating direct, active speech. Grammatically, it is YHWH who is the speaker.

Now move to the New Testament. In ~John 1:1–3, the Word is said to be with God and to be God, and all things were made by Him. Then ~John 1:18 states that “no man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son… he hath declared him.”

The Greek ἐξηγήσατο (exēgēsato) means “to explain, to reveal.” This becomes crucial. If no one has seen the Father, yet Moses clearly sees and hears the LORD in some manifest way, then many theologians conclude that the visible, speaking manifestation of YHWH is the Son.

Jesus Himself says in ~John 5:46 that Moses wrote of Him. He also identifies Himself with the divine name in ~John 8:58, “Before Abraham was, I am,” directly echoing the Exodus revelation.

In classical Trinitarian theology, especially in writers like Justin Martyr and later Augustine of Hippo, the argument is that the Son is the mediator of divine revelation throughout Scripture.

Therefore, when YHWH appears or speaks in a personal, visible, dialogical way in the Old Testament, this is often interpreted as a Christophany, that is, a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ.

However, the Old Testament text itself simply identifies the speaker as YHWH.

The explicit name “Jesus” belongs to the incarnation.

Theologically, Christians affirm one God in three persons. So if YHWH spoke to Moses, and Jesus is fully YHWH according to the doctrine of the Trinity, then yes, the Son was involved in that revelation. But that is a theological synthesis drawn from the whole canon, not a direct Old Testament statement.

So the precise answer is/must be this: the Old Testament says the LORD spoke to Moses;

Christian Trinitarian theology understands that the Son, later incarnate as Jesus Christ, is the eternal Word through whom God reveals Himself, and therefore very likely the one speaking in those encounters.

Do I lean to “Christian theology” or to what stands written, in plain text, that it is YHWH speaking, or is it YHWH AND the Son?

Not denying re the article in GotQuestion.

Thanks.

J.

16

Actually,

“And the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed.” Exodus 3:2

The theory rests on a specific pattern: the “Angel of the Lord” (in Hebrew, Malakh Yahweh) often appears as a messenger but then speaks and acts as if he is God. He accepts worship: In Joshua 5, a figure identifies himself as the “commander of the army of the Lord.” Unlike regular angels in the Bible who usually say “Don’t do that!” when people bow down, this figure tells Joshua to take off his sandals because the ground is holy, just like God did with Moses.

He speaks in the first person as God: In the story of Hagar (Genesis 16), the Angel of the Lord promises to multiply her descendants—a power only God has. Hagar later says, “I have seen the One who sees me,” explicitly identifying the Angel as God.

Then you have this.

“No one has ever seen God; God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.” John 1:18

Therefore, theologians argue that if someone in the Old Testament is seeing and talking to God in a physical form, they must be seeing the Son, who is the “image of the invisible God.”

The “Angel” vs. “An Angel”. It’s important to note the grammar. In many translations, there is a distinction between “an” angel, one of many created beings, and “the” Angel of the Lord, a singular, unique figure.

This is why it’s seen as Jesus with Hagar, Genesis 16. The Angel speaks as God, and Hagar calls him “God.” Abraham ? Genesis 22: The Angel stops the sacrifice of Isaac and says, "Now I know you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son from me.”

What do you think, brother?

Peter

17

The following is taken from the Holman Old Testament Commentary: Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Max Anders & Stephen Miller (general editors), Broadman & Holman Publishers, Nashville, TN 2004. This comes specifically from the section on Zechariah. It provides evidence which confirms that the Angel of Yahweh is not a creature, but a fully divine Person who just so happens to be the Lord Jesus in his prehuman existence.

B. The Angel of the LORD (3:1, 5-6)

In the Book of Zechariah, the prophet frequently interacted with angels. Sometimes these were ordinary angels (1:19; 4:1, 4, 11; 5:5, 10; 6:4-5), but in six cases “the angel of the LORD” designated God himself (1:11-12; 3:1, 5-6; 12:8). “Angel” means “messenger,” and in these instances the one who brought the message was deity. The rider of the red horse in 1:8 is identified as “the angel of the LORD” in 1:11. His preeminence is demonstrated by the fact that the other riders (angels) reported to him (1:11). In chapter 3 the angel of the Lord presided over the heavenly court. When he spoke in verse 2, he was identified as “the LORD.” In verse 4 the angel of the Lord forgave sins, a divine prerogative. In 12:8 the angel of the Lord was identified with both names – “the LORD” and “God.”

Elsewhere in the Old Testament the angel of the Lord is equated with deity. After Hagar, Sarah’s maid, encountered the angel of the Lord (Gen. 16:7-12), she called him “the God who sees me” (Gen. 16:13). In speaking to Abraham, the angel of the Lord said, “I swear by myself, declares the LORD” (Gen. 22:16). The angel of the Lord appeared to Moses in a burning bush (Exod. 3:2). When Moses investigated, God spoke to him from the bush (Exod. 3:4-6). In the angel of the Lord’s conversation with Gideon, the text repeatedly identifies the speaker as “the LORD” (Judg. 6:11-24). Samson’s parents recognized that in their visit with the angel of the LORD, they had “seen God” (Judg. 13:20-22).

Evangelical scholars usually identify the angel of the Lord as a preincarnate appearance of Christ – the second person of the Trinity. Paul Enns offers the following support for this interpretation:

The theophanies prove His [Christ’s] eternal existence. A theophany may be defined thus: “It is the Second Person of the Trinity who appears thus in human form.” … The identification of Christ with the appearances of the angel of the Lord (the theophany) can be demonstrated in the following manner. The angel of the Lord is recognized as deity. He is referred to as God (Judg. 6:11, 14; note in verse 11 He is called “the angel of the LORD,” while in v. 14 He is called “LORD”). The angel of the Lord in other instances is distinct from Yahweh because He talks to Yahweh (Zech. 1:12; 3:1-2; cp. Gen. 24:7). The angel of the Lord could not have been the Spirit or the Father, because neither the Spirit nor the Father [is] ever revealed in physical form (cp. John 1:18). The angel of the Lord no longer appears after the incarnation of Christ. There is no mention of the angel of the Lord in the New Testament; He ceases to appear after the birth of Christ (Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, Chicago: Moody Press, 1989, p. 216).

In the appearance of the angel of the Lord, we are granted a glimpse of Christ’s glory before his incarnation. He is fully God with all the prerogatives of God at his disposal. For example, he forgives sin (3:4), makes descendants numerous (Gen. 22:17; see Gen. 16:10), brings Israel out of Egypt (Judg. 2:1; cp. Exod. 23:20-21), knows the future (Judg. 13:3), and performs miracles (Exod. 3:2; Judg. 13:20). These passages also preview the doctrine of the Trinity (three persons–Father, Son, and Holy Spirit–one God). Even in the Old Testament era, it was revealed that our one God exists as more than one person. (Pp. 170-171)

1:8. Although it was night, the vision came not in a dream but while the prophet was awake. Zechariah saw a man riding a red horse. The word standing may refer to the horse upon which the rider sat or to the rider who had now stepped down from the horse. The man among the myrtle trees is identified in verse 11 as “the angel of the LORD,” yet he is no ordinary angel. Frequently in the Old Testament, the angel of the Lord is identified as God (Gen. 16:7-13; 22:11-12; Exod. 3:2-6; Judg. 6:14, 22; 13:9-18, 22). According to Lindsey, “That this ‘Angel’ (literally, ‘Messenger’) is a manifestation of the preincarnate Christ is established in chapter 3 where He is specifically called ‘the LORD’ who yet refers to ‘the LORD’ as another Person (3:2). Also He is seen exercising the divine prerogative of forgiving sins (3:4)” (Lindsey, 1550). Moreover, this person is plainly in command for the riders (angels) of the other horses report to him (v. 11). According to Feinberg, the Babylonian Talmud states: “This man is no other than the Holy One, blessed be He; for it is said, ‘The Lord is a man of war’” (Feinberg, Minor Prophets, 275). (P. 142)

In this verse one divine person (“the angel of the LORD” = preincarnate Christ) interceded to another, the LORD Almighty. Here we are afforded an Old Testament glimpse of the Trinity. This passage reminds us of Christ’s great intercessory prayer in John 17. (P. 144)

I’ll talk to you later brother @PeterC

J.

18

THE ANGEL OF THE LORD (BDB 521 construct BDB 217)

It is obvious that Deity manifests Himself physically in human form in the OT. The question for Trinitarians becomes which person of the Trinity fulfills this role. Since God the Father (YHWH) and His Spirit are consistently non-corporeal, it seems possible to suggest that these human manifestations are the pre-incarnate Messiah.

To demonstrate the difficulties one faces in trying to identify a theophany from an angelic encounter the following list is illustrative.

  1. the angel of the Lord as an angel (often “His Angel,” “an Angel,” “the Angel,” “the Angel of God,” even “pillar”)

a. Gen. 24:7,40

b. Exod. 23:20-23; 32:34

c. Num. 22:22

d. Jdgs. 5:23

e. 2 Sam. 24:16

f. 1 Chr. 21:15-30

g. Zech. 1:12-13

  1. the angel of the Lord as theophany

a. Gen. 16:7-13; 18:1-33; 22:11,15; 31:11,13; 48:15-16

b. Exod. 3:2,4; 14:19 (13:21)

c. Jdgs. 2:15; 6:22-24; 13:3-23

d. Hosea 12:3-4

e. Zech. 3:1-5

f. Acts 7:30,35,38

 **Only context can distinguish between the two options.**

This is what I’m referring to brother.

J.

19

The Covenant that was made with Israel, is after the Covenant made with Abraham.

Are you saying they are the same covenant?

And correct me if I’m wrong but it was the covenant God made with Abraham where Abraham was sleep and animal sacrifices were walked through alone.

Please share the passage where that same thing happens in Israel’s covenant with God.

So JESUS FULLFILLs God’ covenant with Abraham by fullfilling the the Covenant under the law as man. In the sense that Jesus death brought Israel off under the law for righteousness. Hence the old covenant taught not to look to oneself for righteousness. Not married to legalism the law might have brought by the letter. But the true Spirit, attitude or meaning of the letter of the law which was to lead us to God in Christ.(love),(the communion they share)

So sense God is in Christ they both made the Covenant with Israel. God knowing what He would do through the son.

20

Here is my answer @PeterC I see the preincarnate Christ/Memra/Davar in Genesis 1.1 to Revelation.

And fully concur with @TheologyNerd and you brother.

The covenant meal was eaten by Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and the seventy elders in the presence of the God of Israel. The text does not explicitly say God ate.

It says they saw God and they ate and drank. The emphasis is that they survived the encounter: “upon the nobles of the children of Israel he laid not his hand.”

In ancient Near Eastern covenant context, a shared meal ratified the covenant. Here, the human representatives of Israel ascend, behold a theophanic manifestation of YHWH, and participate in a covenant meal before Him. It is a confirmation of the covenant established earlier in the chapter with blood sprinkled on the altar and the people.

The text does not say “the Father sat down and ate.” It says they ate in His presence after seeing Him. The stress falls on two shocking facts:

They saw the God of Israel.

They were not struck dead.

Visible radiance → kāḇôḏ
Visionary form → mar’eh
Revelatory speech → dāvar
Mediated presence → mal’akh YHWH
Relational encounter → pānîm

No one “saw” YHWH’ “essence” and lived to tell the proverbial “tale”

Do we agree on this?

J.