| a redactor, and occasioned perhaps by the redac-
tory addition in y.¥, which also speaks of the angel of Jahweh]. In Gn 31" (E) the angel of God calls to Jacob ‘in a dream,’ so that here too any allusion to direct personal intercourse is avoided. But the angel of Jahweh expressly iden- tifies himself with the God of Bethel. In this instance, then, there is no possibility of denying a self-revelation of Jahweh in the form of the angel. In the story of Jacob’s wrestling (32%) only a ‘man’ is spoken of ; but the latter appears to be thought of also as mal’akh Jahweh, for he blesses Jacob, who declares (v.*1), ‘God have I seen face to face, and yet have escaped with my life.’— We encounter the mal’akh Jahweh again in Ex 37. Here he appears to Moses as a flame of fire, and thus comes into the realm of the visible. Hence it must be due to a redactor that in v.*, the Elohistie addition to the Jahwistic v.4*(‘ Jahweh saw ’—analogous to Gn 21” ‘Jahweh heard’), it is God Himself and not the angel of God that calls to Moses from the bush. By the way, in the whole of the further transaction (v.*) there is not the slightest whisper of doubt that it is God Himself and not some messenger of God that speaks.
In precisely the same way as in Gn 16 and 21 may be explained the remarkable interchange of ‘ Jahweh’ or ‘God’ and ‘angel of Jahweh’ in Nu 22-8, The latter opposes the progress of Balaam (vv. #426); he is seen by the ass (vv.% 2-27), and at last by Balaam himself (v.%!); it is he that speaks to Balaam (vv.***), and the latter replies to him (v.*4), On the other hand, ‘ Jahweh’ gives the ass the faculty of speech (v.%8) ; He opens the eyes of Balaam (v.*, ef. the precisely similar case in Gn 21*)—both examples of far-working effects of the power of Jahweh.
In Jg 6"*-, again, we have, according to v.44, a personal manifestation of Jahweh. This is called mavakh Jahweh everywhere except in vy. 16 23. but even in vv. 16 the LXX read mal’akh J. ahweh, and no doubt this was the original reading, and not an intentional change introduced for the sake of harmony with the text elsewhere. Finally, in Jg 13°" the angel of Jahweh, whom the parents of Samson took at first for a man of Go , is in- tended to be an appearance of Jahweh Himself, as is shown not only by v.38, but quite expressly by v.4t. The last passage to which we may claim to appeal in this connexion is Hos 124+ ‘Jacob con- tended with God, he contended against a Divine manifestation (mal’akh),’ ete. The prophet evi- dently avoids naming Jahweh Himself, but his meaning is clearly the same as is intended in the passage which underlies his reference (see above). Other witnesses to this sense of the expression malakh Jahweh are to be found in the statements, summary as they are, of Gn 48'6 (E), Jg Ql 4 2 K 13-1, and in the mention of the angel of God (in E parallel with the pillar of cloud in J ) in Ex 14, On Mal 3! see below.
It is intelligible how, as the conception of God grew more profound, the above described pale manifestation, although only temporary and not exhausting the complete being of Jahweh, must have given offence to the religious sense. But this offence was not summarily removed by transform- ing the mal’akh Jahweh into a created angel; on
PE ee eee
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
the contrary, men still held fast to a representation of Jahweh, although with a stronger emphasis laid upon the distinction between this and Jahweh Himself. Under this head fall certain passages in which it is sometimes hard to say whether we are still to think of a mal’akh Jahweh in the form described above, or simply of a created angel. So in Ex 23% ‘Truly I will send my * angel before thee, to keep thee by the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Take ye heed of him, and hearken unto his voice ; be not rebellious against him, for he will not forgive your transgression ; for my name is in him. This last expression means nothing else than ‘for he is a representation of m being’ (see below, p. 640°f.), and is not to be weakened, with Ewald and others, as if it meant only that the angel represents God as the ambassador does the king, and has power to speak in His name; on the contrary, he is him- self essentially Divine. We shall presently see, however, that the ‘name’ of God is not so directly identical with God as could be said of the mal’akh Jahweh. In the same sense as we have just estab- lished for 23° we are to understand also 32% and 332 [read again, with Luc., ‘my angel’]. For in 393-5 it is said of God Himself that He cannot go up in the midst of the Israelites, for He should have to destroy such a stiff-necked people. Per- haps we ought, finally, to include in this category the passages where David is compared to the angel of God (2S 141% *° 19°; on the other hand, 1 8 29° has ‘like an angel of God’). The expression is too general to permit of a certain interpretation. But, seeing that the woman of Tekoa would hardly have ventured to treat David’s wisdom as equal to the wisdom of God Himself, it is not unlikely that we are here also to think of a representation of Jahweh which is not absolutely identical with Him. On the other hand, ‘the angel of J ahweh’ in 2S 2416 is a creature angel, for Jahweh com- mands him to leave off his work of destruction. The case is similar in 1 K 19” (cf. v.°) and 2 K 19* (Is 37%), Finally, in Ps 348() 35°! we have perhaps neh, the idea of a guardian angel (appointed by od).