o.rnl Ilo.chel as the voice of God (Gen. xxxi. cites Gen. xviii. 1, 2 to prove that, as he 11, 10), aud He co.Ila Himself ao (ver. 13). says," there is another God under (inro) the Jo.cob apeo.ks of the angel e.s havrng "re- tbe Crea.tor of all things, who is called an deemed him from all evil" (Gen. xlviii. IG), angel because he announces (clyyi,\e,v) what- but here the term Goel, though it means e. ever the Creator of all things desires him to ransomer, is not necessarily connected with announce." This being, he arlds, " waR moral evil. After His o.ppee.re.nce to Moses also God before the creation of the world." m the. bush He becomes the specie.I guide of He was another God than the Creator of the children of Israel. His divinity is again the world in number (cip,0µ,p), not in mine! e.aserted in Exod. xiii. 21, for the Being (,vwµ11)- And from the expres.sion "the there spoken of as Jehovah is described in Lord rained down fire and brimstone from eh. xiv. 19 as His angel. The solemn terms the Lord out of heaven" (Gen. xix. 24), he in which the God of Israel refers to him in deduces the belief that this Being was" Lord Exo_d. xxiii. 20, 21 must not be passed over. from beside (1rapa) the Lord who is in He 1a the "Angel of Jehovah." He is sent heaven." He proceeds to cite the passages to "keep" Israel" in the way." They were from the Old Testament which have just to take heed and not rebel against Him (so been mentioned, and to draw from them the LXX.); for, adds Jehovah, "My name is in conclusion which has just been drawn that His inwo.rd parts" (not 1::1 but 1::1':,i?:;I denot- this Being was one who ministered (v'rr1/p•· ing close and intimate union). ·m: ver. 23 rowra) to God who is above; the word the and Exod. xxxii. 34 ; xxxiii. 2. This angel apx11 whom He begatbefore all creation'(sec. is co.lied the Face, or Faces, of the Lord 60, 61). Similarly Theophilus(' Ad Autoly- (Exod. xxxiii. 14; cf. Isa. bill. 9), and is cum,' ii. 22) says that the Word of God held thus specially identified with the revelation a colloquy with Adam in the person (or of Him, like the term ,IKwv in the New representation, 1rpo11w1rq,) of God. Irenreus Testament. The angel that withstood Ba- (' Adv. Haer.,' iv. 7, 4) speaks of the Being who laam assumes o. tone of authority in .har- spake to Abraham at Mam.re and Moses in mony with this view (Num. xxii. 22-35). the bush as superior to a.II created angels Whether the angel e.t Bochim (Judg. ii. 1) and as, in fact, the Word of God; though were a Divine or human messenger does not afterwards (eh. xx. 11) he modifies this appear from the narrative, and the word statement into a manifestation of "cla.ri. 4
is occasionally, as in Hag. i. 13, used of a to.tern et dispositiones patris," "secunclum prophet. But the appearance to Gideon dispositionum ejus ca.use.s sive efficaciam." and Manoah has e. Divine character (Judg. It is to be remembered that we unfortunately vi. 11-22; xiii. 8-22). And the special chiefly possess Irenams in a very unso.tis- reference to Jehovah, the angel of the cove- fo.ctory Latin dress. Similar passages may nant, in Mai. iii. 1 seems to point in e. be fou1;1d !h Clem., 'Alex. Fred.,' i. 7 ; and specie.I manner to the Second Person in the Tertulho.n, 'Adv. Pro.x. ,' 14. The lo.tter says Blessed Trinity. This view, e.s he.a been that God _was " invisible as the Father but stated, is the view of the earlier Fathers, visible as the Son,'' the latter being the nor does there seem any reasonable ground means whereby the former was revealed. for its rejection by those of later date. The The passage from Clement is embodied and idea that the Logos, always the medium of improved upon in e. passage in the 'Apostolic the Father's revelation and impartation of Constitutions,' which presents the primitive Himself, in creo.tion as in redemption, fre- doctrine on this point in clearer language quently took e. 'l'isible form under the old than any other. "To Him (Christ) did dispensation in order to communicate the Moses beo.r witness, and said, • The Lord Divine will to mankind, does not in the received fire from the Lord, and ro.ineu it least militate against the doctrine of His down.' Him did Jo.cob see as a man, an<l consubsta.ntia.lity with the Father. On the said, ' I have seen God face to face, a.nu my contrary, it rather emphasises the fact which soul is preserved.' Him did Abraham en- the New Testament teaches us throughout, tertain, and acknowledge to be the Juuge that the Logos was ever the pio.ni!esta.tion, and his Lord. Him cliu Moses see in the the il!;~y71111t (John i.) of the l,'ather, the bush. Him did Joshua the son of Nun see, eternal medium whereby He communicates as captain of the Lord's host, for assistance Himself beyond Himself. This was in the a.go.inst Jericho" (' Apost. Const ..' v. 20). ma.in the view of the earliest Fathers. They One passage more will le cited on this point. might use nn incautious expression now "Who else,'' says Origen, in his Homily on o.nd then, but they ever intended to be true this passage, "is the prince oI the host of to the doctrine of the Consubstantie.l Son the virt•1es of the Lord, so.ve our Lord Jesus of the Father, who took o. visible shape to Christ?" "Joshua woulu not have adored," oonvey the Father's mind to man. Thus he e.clds, " unless he had recognised God." Justin Mo.rtyr (' Dia.I. own Tryphone,' 66\ The fact that the le.ter Fathers (St. Augus- 92 THE BOOK OF JOSHUA. [cH. v. 18-ltL