Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Commander of Angelic Army

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Commander of Angelic Army

    Once when Joshua was by Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing before him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went to him and said to him, "Are you one of us, or one of our adversaries?" He replied, "Neither; but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come." And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and he said to him, "What do you command your servant, my lord?" The commander of the army of the Lord said to Joshua, Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy. And Joshua did so. (Josh. 5:13-15).

    Who is this commander of the Lord's army? Please note that Joshua fell on his face to the earth and "worshiped" (NRSV) -- this seems to extend beyond mere obeisance and reverence exemplified by Joseph's brothers in Gen. 42:6 -- further indicated by the commander's command that Joshua: "Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy"; which of course harks back to Ex. 3:5.

    So, is the commander of the Lord's angelic army none other than the pre-incarnate Messiah? Is this a Christophany in the Old Testament? What do you say?

    Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? (Matt. 26:53).
    Last edited by Scrawly; 06-30-2018, 03:55 AM.

  • #2
    I think all of the appearances of "the Angel of the Lord" are Christophanies.

    Comment


    • #3
      Why not the Holy Spirit appearing in human form? Or why not the Father appearing in human form? Or why not just say it was God Himself appearing in human form? Why does it have to be the Son?
      When I Survey....

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Faber View Post
        Why not the Holy Spirit appearing in human form? Or why not the Father appearing in human form? Or why not just say it was God Himself appearing in human form? Why does it have to be the Son?
        Because most scholars agree that these references in the OT refer to Christ.


        Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

        Comment


        • #5
          But on what grounds? I'm not saying they're wrong; I just don't see adding more into the Bible than what's there. It's called eisegesis.
          When I Survey....

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Faber View Post
            But on what grounds? I'm not saying they're wrong; I just don't see adding more into the Bible than what's there. It's called eisegesis.

            Perhaps the Hebrew language says it's so.


            Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Faber View Post
              But on what grounds? I'm not saying they're wrong; I just don't see adding more into the Bible than what's there. It's called eisegesis.
              What normally happens when a man tries to worship an angel as God? What happened in this case?
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • #8
                This passage is very interesting because of its connections to passages like 2 Kings 6, Rev 12, and other places about angelic guardians & warriors, and heavenly armies. I see no reason to think there is a Christophany here: a heavenly being is indicated in the text, but finding a Divine Person there is a step too far.

                I think the story has more in common with stories, known from Classical authors, of gods fighting for armies: such as the help given by Castor and Pollux to the Roman army at the battle of Lake Regillus in about 499 BC. This narrative is, ISTM, an Israelite/Jewish version of that motif, but theologised in accord with Israel’s faith. It does not follow from this that a genuine religious experience does not underlie the story.

                Another interesting question is, how does the figure of the “angelic” Heavenly Warrior relate to the concept of God Himself as a “man of war” ? Did one idea succeed the other, or were they concurrent ?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Faber View Post
                  But on what grounds? I'm not saying they're wrong; I just don't see adding more into the Bible than what's there. It's called eisegesis.
                  Well, Jesus is the one we know incarnated in human form, and two it fits well with His role as God's Word.

                  Rushing Jaws there are a couple of points about the Angel of the LORD. In one verse He refers to Himself in the covenant name of YWHW, Joshua recognized Him as YWHW, and a later verse explicitly calls Him YWHW. There are a lot more passages about the connection with the divine here. He also doesn't refuse worship as other angels do in numerous occasions in the OT, and NT. You're apparently not reading the text carefully if you are missing some of the big clues there.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    When John fell at the feet of the angel in Rev 22:8-9, he was told not to do that, because the angel was a "fellow servant"....

                    In Joshua 5, when Joshua falls before the "commander of the army of the Lord", he actually asks, in essence, "what now?" and is told to continue in worship by removing his shoes.

                    "The Lord" then continues, in Joshua 6, to give 'battle plans" to Joshua.

                    I believe this was, indeed, the pre-incarnate Christ.

                    (I always like to add that, having flatly negated Joshua's request to "Identify Friend or Foe", the Captain of the Host of the Army of the Lord was saying, "I'm not here to take sides, I'm here to take over". )
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Faber View Post
                      Why not the Holy Spirit appearing in human form?
                      Where else do we see the Holy Spirit doing that?

                      Or why not the Father appearing in human form?
                      He did - in Christ Jesus.

                      Or why not just say it was God Himself appearing in human form? Why does it have to be the Son?
                      [half kidding] because that's his yob, man! [/half kidding]
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Faber View Post
                        But on what grounds? I'm not saying they're wrong; I just don't see adding more into the Bible than what's there. It's called eisegesis.
                        So who do you say the commander of the army of the Lord is?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
                          This passage is very interesting because of its connections to passages like 2 Kings 6, Rev 12, and other places about angelic guardians & warriors, and heavenly armies.
                          Do you take the position that Israelite religion was henotheistic at some point in it's supposed evolution; and that other deities existed alongside Yahweh?

                          I see no reason to think there is a Christophany here: a heavenly being is indicated in the text, but finding a Divine Person there is a step too far.
                          But the commander is echoing Exodus 3:5 when he tells Joshua to remove the sandals from his feet.

                          I think the story has more in common with stories, known from Classical authors, of gods fighting for armies: such as the help given by Castor and Pollux to the Roman army at the battle of Lake Regillus in about 499 BC. This narrative is, ISTM, an Israelite/Jewish version of that motif, but theologised in accord with IsraelÂ’s faith. It does not follow from this that a genuine religious experience does not underlie the story.
                          So in the context of Israelite religion, this commander was a lesser astral god among many in a henotheistic sense? Why not just see them angels in a hierarchical sense?

                          Another interesting question is, how does the figure of the “angelic” Heavenly Warrior relate to the concept of God Himself as a “man of war” ? Did one idea succeed the other, or were they concurrent ?
                          You will find throughout the OT that the Angel of the Lord and Yahweh operate as one and the same, yet remain distinct, kind of like the tri-unity of God, or binitarianism at least. Please see Gen. 48:15-16; Isa. 44:6.
                          Last edited by Scrawly; 06-30-2018, 11:42 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
                            Do you take the position that Israelite religion was henotheistic at some point in it's supposed evolution; and that other deities existed alongside Yahweh?
                            I’m not a specialist in the OT. I’m open to any and all possibilities. If the evidence, textual or otherwise, favours:
                            • henotheism
                            • polydaemonism
                            • polytheism
                            • the recognition of a female consort for JHWH
                            • a mixture of the preceding at the same time in different parts of Israel/Judah
                            • strict monotheism throughout the history of the Chosen People (basically, the traditional Christian pre-critical approach)
                            • other solutions

                            - then I don’t exclude any of them on *a priori* grounds.

                            I think the *bene elohim* of Gen.6.1-4 were, for the author of the passage, lower-ranking deities, equivalent to, or the same beings as, the “sons of El” at Ugarit;
                            and that the “god” of the Jabbok could have been a river-deity or *numen*, perhaps like Achelous or Skamander in Classical mythology.
                            If the “queen of heaven” in Jer. 7 & 44 was a goddess worshipped (officially or not) as the queen-consort of JHWH, a sort of Jewish Asherah or Ishtar, then I have no problem with that possibility.

                            And the texts themselves have complicated histories, so those facts too must be respected. I don’t expect the texts to give a harmonious and uniform picture of OT theism - if they give contradictory pictures of how God was thought of, I take that contradiction as part of the overall message of the OT as a whole.

                            STM that the human reality of the texts is the way to beginning to see what they meant as inspired Scripture. If the kings of Judah gave a place to Baal and Asherah alongside JHWH, and if this was in later times regarded with disfavour by the authors of Kings & Chronicles and re-interpreted by them, as having been sinful, then fair enough.

                            I don’t think the traditional Christian strict monotheistic approach to the OT does justice to the OT as the pre-Christian, culturally alien, humanly varied thing it is. The *bene elohim* in Job 38 may seem to Christians to be angels - but is that how the author(s) of Job saw them ? The same applies to the seraphim of Isaiah 6, or to the cherubim. Or to the “commander of the host of JHWH” in Josh.5.

                            Baal-worship was seen as a threat during the regnal period. Conversely, the god of Israel is called “(El) Elyon”, “(God) Most High”, which, while by no means proof that other deities were taken to be serious competitors for Israel’s allegiance to him, is certainly consistent with the idea. The epithet could be an expression of something like transcendence, or, it may mean only that he was “a great king above all gods” - as is said in Ps.95.3. The assembly-scenes in 1 Kings 22 and Job 1 seem to express something different from strict monotheism.

                            Of course, there is the detail that what counts as monotheism has varied through the ages: Trinitarian monotheism might well look like something less than monotheism from a Jewish POV. It does not help matters that polytheism and monotheism can be seen as versions of each other.
                            But the commander is echoing Exodus 3:5 when he tells Joshua to remove the sandals from his feet.
                            That makes sense, as the “commander” is a numinous, “unhuman” being. It does not show that the “commander” is God.

                            Joshua’s action, like that of Moses, distinguishes the “sacred” area of the apparition from the “profane” area surrounding it. This distinction was part and parcel of ANE and Classical religion. It is why Muslims wash before handling the Koran, and why Catholics dip their fingers in water before entering church. It is why the sanctuary of a church is “set apart” from the rest of the interior. And why the Temple was divided into different areas, of increasing un-profaneness/sacredness, from the Court of the Gentiles, to the Most Holy Place. What Jesus does, is to be, among “profane”, actually sinful, mankind, not the Most Holy Place, but the even more sacred “Place” of God, of which the MHP is the earthly counterpart.
                            So in the context of Israelite religion, this commander was a lesser astral god among many in a henotheistic sense? Why not just see them angels in a hierarchical sense?
                            For the same reason I don’t see Castor and Pollux at Lake Regillus as angels. The *stories* are, as stories, of the same kind: narratives, from whatever sources, of heavenly warriors fighting for the winning side. The motif by itself tells one nothing about either
                            (1) the “historicity” of the story
                            or
                            (2) the theological significance of the narrative.

                            The comparison raises the possibility that, if God sent His angel to fight for the Chosen People, maybe He did likewise for the Romans. Maybe the story of Rome, from the Fall of Troy to the principate of Augustus, is as much a “sacred history” (albeit a non-Biblical one) as that of the Jews/Israelites. None of the empires of the past - or the present - could have grown as they did but for Divine Providence. This does not imply or require that they were virtuous; only that God had a purpose to work out through them. Including the Israelites/Jews.
                            You will find throughout the OT that the Angel of the Lord and Yahweh operate as one and the same, yet remain distinct, kind of like the tri-unity of God, or binitarianism at least. Please see Gen. 48:15-16; Isa. 44:6.
                            IMHO that Christianises the OT too much. IMHO, the Trinity is not to be found anywhere in the OT; I think the Tri-Unity of God has to wait for the Person of Christ to be revealed, since He alone is a fully adequate Revelation of the Father. The Jews had enough trouble getting it into their heads that God was One & Unique & Incomparable - there were thousands of gods in the ANE, and no lack of Divine triads, dyads, quartets, and other groups of gods; not to mention hypostatised Divine attributes. Working out a Christian doctrine of the Trinity took centuries, even in a culture that was gradually putting the old gods aside. So there is a good *a priori* case against the idea that the Trinity was revealed or intimated in the OT, even before one gets down to the OT texts adduced in support of the idea.
                            The angel St Gabriel faithfully expresses the Divine purpose when he greets the BVM, but no-one thinks the angel is a Divine Person.
                            Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 07-01-2018, 10:52 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Faber View Post
                              Why not the Holy Spirit appearing in human form? Or why not the Father appearing in human form? Or why not just say it was God Himself appearing in human form? Why does it have to be the Son?
                              Doesn't the bible say that no one has seen the Father?

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
                              35 responses
                              166 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
                              4 responses
                              49 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                              Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
                              10 responses
                              119 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post mikewhitney  
                              Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
                              14 responses
                              71 views
                              3 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
                              13 responses
                              59 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Cow Poke  
                              Working...
                              X