One of the places I lurk quietly in the background is The Mad Zionist – with a name like that how could I not read? Anyway, a discussion started there which spilled out onto another blog – the Merry Widow. Following the discussion in the comment thread I came across an idea I had never actually encountered before. Actually I found the idea disturbing. Now I am wondering if this idea is part of mainstream Christian thought.
It concerns the angels. Long-time readers of my blog know that I am in the midst of writing a book but what most probably won’t know is that the story revolves around one of the Mal’akh Ha’maret or Angels of Death. And I have drawn heavily from the story of the Watchers from the book of Enoch as background. But here’s my question to Christian readers. Do you really believe that the Angels which are mentioned in the Old Testament are pre-incarnations of Christ or simply messengers from G-d?
11 comments:
Kate:
the Jewish tradition holds that angels are, in fact, messengers from God. "Angel" and "messenger," as terms, are frequently used interchangeably in the Jewish Bible.
Michael, that's what I always presumed to believe as well - I guess what I am trying to gauge is if its a true tenet of belief in orthodox Christianity that Angels are the pre-incarnations of Christ. I find whole notion very strange and foreign.
Christianity confuses, me, too. A "pre-incarnation?" That just sounds too wierd.
I think, in religion as in much else, Occam's Razor does apply...
Kate, thanks for the link and all that lurking you've secretly been up to over at my blog. To anwer your question about the angels, it does appear from what the Christians wrote on the TMW thread that they believe that angels are not simply messengers of GOD but GOD himself, and indeed related to the Jesus is GOD idea they believe in. This is utterly foreign and complete avera from a Jewish perspective, but it is apparently how they interpret the text of Torah. Incredible, isn't it?
At one point I asked them if they actually believe man is created in God's physical image, and, if so, whether God Himself must then actually have a tushee. Believe it or not, they said yes He really does have a tushee, because how else could He sit on His thrown?!
Anyway, just thought I'd toss in my two cents to the discussion. I'll be sure to link you up at my site.
Michael, MZ, I have to admit I am lost with this whole pre-incarnations of Jesus bit. But then again, I never got the three in one either - so there you go.
I suppose it makes a certain kind of sense from their view. I had just never heard of such a concept. Who would have presumed the Moshiach needed a trial run?
MZ, I have a confession to make, I have listened to most of your Kahane audio files as well. It's quite a resource.
For a long time, I just blindly accepted view Kahane was guilty of many transgessions but listening to those files belies a great deal of that kind of judgment. I will admit there are times when I don't want Kahane to be right, but in retrospect, he seems more right than not. It also finally made me comprehend why the established poltical echelon of Israel had to bann the Kach party.
Funny, isn't it, that rather than being the voice of ranting lunacy and bigotry that the media portreys, Kahane actually was always the rational and composed speaker of reason who defeated everyone he faced in debate with superior arguments and intellect.
People who take angels as 'pre-incarnations' are mistaken or are basing their beliefs on fictional literature.
I know of no Christian denomination that believes anything besides the definition that Michael has given above.
In the book of Daniel there has been some confusion as to who is speaking at different points of the book. Michael the angel (protector of Isreal) hands out prophecy to Daniel in chapter 11 and 12. At one point there is a second figure in the story, of whom Daniel is very afraid. You would need to read some very in depth commentaries, but at that point in the Hebrew, there is clear separation between Michael and the other speaker and that Micahel is inferior in bearing to that speaker. Michael himself is able to contend with the mightiest of the hosts on the opposing side of G-d.
There are several other relevant passages in the book of Daniel that show the separation between God and the angels he created. The book can be a confusing read and there are Biblical scholars who really disagree about different points, but it is fascinating.
I'm the one who first brought up at TMW's the "angel of the LORD / Word of the LORD" as being physical manifestations of God himself interacting with men in the Old Testament. This is not to say that all angels in the OT are pre-incarnations of Jesus, just that those appearances of an angel entitled THE angel of the LORD or THE Word of the LORD is.
This was part of a larger argument for the ability of God to take physical human form and interact with humans, such as the time God dislocated Jacob's hip joint with a mere touch, a wrestling feat which would have required the strength of over 2 men.
I'm the one who first brought up at TMW's the "angel of the LORD / Word of the LORD" as being physical manifestations of God himself interacting with men in the Old Testament. This is not to say that all angels in the OT are pre-incarnations of Jesus, just that those appearances of an angel entitled THE angel of the LORD or THE Word of the LORD is.
Okay Mr.Beamish, I’ll give you get full credit for posting the pre-incarnations Jesus/God/Angel concept thingy.
And this is where all my Christian friends/readers despair and wash their hands of me. I am not even close to being a bibical scholar but a do think it’s a little presumptous to claim solid understanding of Torah without Talmud – and a good working knowledge of Hebrew couldn’t hurt either.
As far as the pre-incarnation of Jesus thingy goes - I am sticking with the Rambam’s 13 principles as my working definition and end by suggesting we agree to disagree.
Fair enough. Just wanted to clarify that I didn't mean ALL angels, just the angel given the title "The Angel of the LORD" and "The Word of the LORD." To me this is more revealing as a Christian than my Jewish friends want to grasp. And yet, no one disputes that the words spoken by the angel / word of the LORD are in fact what God said to the men (and women) it spoke to. It's kind of like arguing whether or not a book is its words or the paper it is printed on. Esoteric, yes. A stumbling block, definitely. But not all that amazing, at least to Christians.
Post a Comment