.png)
The Angel Who Claimed to Be God: Was Jesus Walking Through the Old Testament?
There is a strange figure who keeps showing up in the Old Testament.
He is called the Angel of the LORD, but He doesn't behave like an ordinary angel. He speaks as God, exercises the authority of God, and people who encounter Him believe they have encountered God. Unlike other angels in Scripture, He doesn't always correct them.
Then there are other mysterious figures: a priest-king named Melchizedek suddenly appears to Abraham with no genealogy, no recorded beginning, and no recorded death. Centuries later, three Hebrew men are thrown into a furnace, only for Nebuchadnezzar to see a mysterious fourth figure walking through the flames with them.
Christians have looked at passages like these for centuries and asked an intriguing question: Was Jesus appearing in the Old Testament before He was born in Bethlehem? The answer requires some humility. Scripture doesn't put a caption beneath every mysterious Old Testament appearance saying, "This is the pre-incarnate Jesus Christ." But neither should we dismiss the possibility too quickly. Once we start putting these passages together, something remarkable begins to emerge.
Jesus Didn't Begin in Bethlehem
Before examining any of these appearances, we need to establish something fundamental to Christianity: Jesus Christ did not begin to exist when Mary gave birth to Him. John opens his Gospel by declaring, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (John 1:1). Then John 1:14 tells us, "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us."
This is what Christians mean by the Incarnation. The word literally carries the idea of becoming flesh. The eternal Son of God did not come into existence in Bethlehem; He took upon Himself a genuine human nature. That's an important distinction because it changes how we read the Old Testament. If the Son existed before Bethlehem—and Christianity clearly teaches that He did—then there is nothing inherently strange about asking whether He revealed Himself to humanity before His birth.
Bethlehem wasn't His beginning. It was His entrance into humanity.
And Scripture gives us several fascinating candidates for what theologians call a Christophany, an appearance of Christ before His incarnation.
Melchizedek: A Type of Christ—or Christ Himself?
One of the strangest figures in the Old Testament appears almost without introduction. Genesis 14:18 tells us,
"And Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; now he was a priest of God Most High."
Melchizedek is simultaneously king and priest. He blesses Abraham, and Abraham gives him a tenth of everything. Then Melchizedek disappears from the Genesis narrative almost as quickly as he appeared.
What makes the encounter especially intriguing is what Genesis doesn't tell us. We are given no information about:
His parents or ancestry
His genealogy
His birth
His death
The origin of his priesthood
Then, roughly a thousand years later, Psalm 110 suddenly brings Melchizedek back into the conversation:
"You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek."
The New Testament book of Hebrews identifies that eternal priest as Jesus and spends much of Hebrews 7 explaining the relationship between Christ and this mysterious priest-king.
Hebrews describes Melchizedek as being
"without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, he remains a priest perpetually" (Hebrews 7:3).
That is extraordinary language.
Traditionally, many interpreters have understood Hebrews to be describing Melchizedek typologically. Genesis simply doesn't record his ancestry, birth, or death, and Hebrews uses that literary silence as a picture of Christ's genuinely eternal priesthood. Under this interpretation, Melchizedek was a real historical king and priest whom God providentially used to foreshadow Jesus.
That's a very reasonable interpretation, but it isn't the only one Christians have proposed. Some have asked whether Melchizedek might actually have been an appearance of the pre-incarnate Christ. The text never explicitly tells us that he was, so we shouldn't pretend the question is settled. But neither should we dismiss the possibility solely because Hebrews says Melchizedek was "made like the Son of God."
Does "Like the Son" Settle the Question?
At first, the wording seems straightforward. If Melchizedek was like the Son of God, then presumably he wasn't actually the Son of God. That certainly supports the typological interpretation, but another Old Testament passage gives us reason to be cautious about making the word "like" carry too much theological weight.
In Daniel 3, Nebuchadnezzar throws Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego into the fiery furnace. When he looks inside, he is astonished. "Look! I see four men loosed and walking about in the midst of the fire without harm." Then he describes the mysterious fourth figure.
The King James Version famously renders his words, "the form of the fourth is like the Son of God." The Aramaic is more accurately translated "like a son of the gods," as most modern translations render it. That makes sense because Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan Babylonian king describing a supernatural figure through his own worldview, not giving us a lesson on the Trinity. Later, in Daniel 3:28, he describes this figure as God's angel, or messenger.
Was the fourth man the pre-incarnate Christ? Christians have often interpreted the passage that way, although other interpreters understand him as a created angel sent by God. Daniel never explicitly settles the question. But the passage demonstrates something important: describing someone as being "like" a divine figure doesn't necessarily establish his actual identity. It tells us how he appears or what he resembles.
So Hebrews saying Melchizedek was "made like the Son of God" certainly fits the interpretation that he was a type of Christ, but that phrase by itself probably isn't enough to prove that he could not have been Christ. That leaves Melchizedek where Scripture seems content to leave him: mysterious, and perhaps intentionally so.
Then We Meet the Angel of the LORD
The evidence becomes considerably stronger when we encounter another mysterious Old Testament figure: the Angel of the LORD. The first thing we need to understand is the word angel. The Hebrew word mal'akh and the Greek word angelos both essentially mean messenger. The word describes someone's role as one who is sent; it does not automatically tell us the nature of the messenger.
That's important because when English-speaking Christians hear "angel," we immediately picture a particular class of created heavenly beings. But Scripture can use the language of "messenger" more broadly. Depending upon the context, a messenger can be human or heavenly. Therefore, saying Jesus could be the Angel of the LORD does not mean Jesus is a created angel.
The important question isn't simply, "Is He called an angel?" The important questions are: Who is this Messenger? What does He say? What authority does He exercise? How do people respond to Him? And perhaps most importantly, how does Scripture itself identify Him?
Ordinary Angels Know They Aren't God
Scripture establishes a remarkably clear boundary between God and His created servants. In Revelation 19:10, John falls at an angel's feet, and the angel immediately responds, "Do not do that... Worship God." It happens again in Revelation 22:8–9. The angel refuses John's worship because he is a fellow servant. We see the same principle when Cornelius falls before Peter in Acts 10. Peter immediately lifts him up and says,
"Stand up; I too am just a man."
The pattern is remarkably consistent:
God receives worship.
Created servants refuse worship.
Faithful messengers redirect worship toward God.
That distinction becomes extremely important when we encounter the Angel of the LORD, because this Messenger doesn't behave like the created messengers we encounter elsewhere.
The Burning Bush: A Messenger Who Says, "I Am God"
Exodus 3 begins with Moses tending sheep near Mount Horeb. Then Exodus 3:2 tells us, "The Angel of the LORD appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of a bush." The text clearly identifies the one appearing as the Angel of the LORD.
But just two verses later, something interesting happens:
"When the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush..."
The figure introduced as the Angel of the LORD is now being described as the LORD and God. Then the speaker identifies Himself:
"I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob."
Moses responds by hiding his face because he is afraid to look at God.
Notice what never happens. The Angel doesn't interrupt Moses and say, "Don't misunderstand. I'm simply delivering God's words." Nor does He say, "God told me to tell you that He is the God of Abraham." The Messenger speaks in the first person: "I am the God of Abraham." The Angel of the LORD appears, Yahweh speaks, and Moses believes he is standing in the presence of God. That is difficult to explain if we're dealing with an ordinary created angel.
Gideon Encounters the Same Mystery
Judges 6 gives us another remarkable encounter. The Angel of the LORD appears to Gideon and begins speaking with him, but throughout their conversation the narrator moves remarkably freely between calling the speaker "the Angel of the LORD" and simply "the LORD." There isn't a clear handoff where one character leaves and another arrives. The narrative treats it as one continuous encounter.
When Gideon finally realizes what has happened, he cries,
"Alas, O Lord GOD! For now I have seen the Angel of the LORD face to face" (Judges 6:22).
Gideon believes he is going to die because he believes he has encountered God. Then the LORD responds,
"Peace to you, do not fear; you shall not die."
Again, there is no correction saying, "Gideon, you didn't actually see God." Instead, the text seems perfectly comfortable maintaining two ideas simultaneously: the Angel is distinguishable from Yahweh, yet the Angel is also identified as Yahweh. That tension becomes even stronger in the next encounter.
Manoah Says, "We Have Seen God"
Judges 13 tells the story of Samson's parents, Manoah and his wife. The Angel of the LORD appears and announces Samson's birth. Eventually Manoah asks the Angel His name, and the Angel responds,
"Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?"
The Hebrew carries the idea of something extraordinary, incomprehensible, or beyond understanding. That becomes especially interesting when Isaiah later describes the coming Messiah as "Wonderful Counselor."
Manoah then offers a sacrifice to the LORD. As the flame rises from the altar, the Angel of the LORD ascends in the flame. Manoah falls to the ground and tells his wife,
"We will surely die, for we have seen God" (Judges 13:22).
Now compare that with Revelation. John falls before an ordinary angel, and the angel immediately says, "Don't do that. Worship God." Manoah encounters the Angel of the LORD and concludes, "We have seen God." No rebuke follows. No correction is recorded. Whatever exactly is happening in Judges 13, this Messenger is being presented very differently from ordinary created angels.
Now the Pattern Becomes Difficult to Ignore
When these encounters are placed side by side, the cumulative evidence becomes more significant than any single passage. The Angel of the LORD isn't merely delivering divine messages. Scripture repeatedly presents Him in ways that blur the distinction we normally expect between a messenger of God and God Himself.
The Angel of the LORD:
Is described as a Messenger of Yahweh.
Is sometimes personally distinguished from Yahweh.
Speaks in the first person as Yahweh.
Identifies Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Exercises divine authority.
Is encountered by people who believe they have seen God.
Does not consistently respond like created angels who refuse divine honor.
This is more than an angel saying, "Thus says the LORD." The Messenger is somehow distinguishable from God while simultaneously being identified as God. That sounds contradictory if we assume from the beginning that God must be only one Person. But once we reach the New Testament, the pattern suddenly becomes much more familiar.
"With God" and Yet "Was God"
John begins his Gospel with an extraordinary statement: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Those two descriptions have to remain together. The Word was with God, indicating personal distinction. Yet the Word was God, indicating divine identity.
That same pattern continues throughout the New Testament. Jesus is sent by the Father. He speaks to the Father. He obeys the Father. He returns to the Father. Yet the New Testament simultaneously identifies the Son as divine. The Father and Son are personally distinct without being separate gods.
That doesn't mean Exodus or Judges gives us the fully developed doctrine of the Trinity. It doesn't. But it does mean the Trinity doesn't suddenly appear out of nowhere in the New Testament. The Old Testament has already given us categories that prepare us for what will later be revealed more clearly. Among them we find:
God speaking of Himself with plural language in Genesis 1:26.
The Spirit of God acting throughout the Old Testament.
Yahweh distinguished from Yahweh in passages such as Genesis 19:24.
A mysterious divine Messenger who is distinguished from Yahweh yet identified as Yahweh.
Mysterious figures such as Melchizedek whose characteristics anticipate what will ultimately be revealed in Christ.
The New Testament doesn't erase these Old Testament mysteries. It gives us a framework for understanding them.
And Then Something Changes
There is one final observation worth considering. After Christ comes in the flesh, the distinctive Old Testament appearances of the Angel of the LORD no longer occur in quite the same way. Angels certainly remain active in the New Testament. They announce Christ's birth, minister to Jesus, appear at the resurrection, and carry messages throughout Acts and Revelation. But these angels behave exactly as we would expect created servants of God to behave. They serve God, deliver His messages, and refuse worship.
The mysterious Old Testament Messenger who speaks as Yahweh and is identified as Yahweh is no longer appearing in quite the same manner. Scripture doesn't explicitly tell us why, so we shouldn't build the entire argument upon His apparent disappearance. But if the Angel of the LORD was the pre-incarnate Son, there is an obvious theological explanation: the Messenger has become flesh.
John 1:14 says,
"And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us."
The eternal Son is no longer simply appearing temporarily within human history. Something unprecedented has happened. He has actually entered humanity. He hasn't stopped being God, nor has He merely disguised Himself as a man. The eternal Son has taken on a genuine human nature.
That is the Incarnation.
So Was Jesus Walking Through the Old Testament?
This is where I think we should resist being more dogmatic than Scripture allows. Was Melchizedek Jesus? Possibly. He may have been a historical priest-king whom God intentionally used as a type of Christ, and that remains a very strong interpretation of Hebrews 7. But the possibility that he was a Christophany shouldn't simply be dismissed because Hebrews says he was "made like the Son of God." His unusual description, his priesthood, his relationship with Abraham, and the way Hebrews develops his story make the question legitimately fascinating.
Was the fourth man in Daniel's furnace Jesus? Possibly. Daniel identifies him as a supernatural messenger sent by God but never explicitly calls him the pre-incarnate Christ. The traditional Christian interpretation is certainly possible, but we shouldn't claim more than Daniel actually tells us.
What about the Angel of the LORD? Here the evidence becomes considerably stronger. This Messenger doesn't merely resemble Christ. He speaks as Yahweh, exercises Yahweh's authority, identifies Himself as the God of Abraham, and is encountered by people who believe they have encountered God. Yet He is somehow personally distinguishable from Yahweh.
That is why Christians throughout history have seen these passages as possible glimpses of the eternal Son before His incarnation. Not because every mysterious person in the Old Testament secretly has to be Jesus, but because the Jesus revealed in the New Testament fits remarkably well with the divine Messenger we have already encountered in the Old Testament.
Bethlehem Wasn't the Beginning
Before Mary, before Nazareth, before David, before Abraham, before creation itself, the Word already was. That is one of the foundational claims of Christianity. Jesus didn't come into existence when Mary gave birth to Him. The eternal Son entered into the human condition He had created.
Maybe Melchizedek was pointing toward Him. Maybe Melchizedek actually was Him. Maybe the fourth man walking through Nebuchadnezzar's furnace was Him. Scripture leaves enough mystery around those encounters that we should be comfortable saying, "We don't know for certain."
But when the Angel of the LORD appears in the burning bush and declares, "I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," the evidence becomes much harder to dismiss. We may very well be hearing the voice of the Son centuries before a baby cried out from a manger in Bethlehem.
And if that's true, then the Old Testament isn't merely predicting Jesus.
In some places, we may actually be meeting Him.
Bethlehem wasn't the beginning of Jesus.
It was the moment the eternal Son stopped merely appearing in human history and actually became human.
Comments