Relation of Yahweh to the 3 men in Genesis 18

[Nathan Riese]

I am confused as to who the three men are and what the relation Yahweh is to them. Yahweh is used in verses 1 and 13, but it's almost like one of the three men is speaking. Can someone help me out? I've been trying a couple commentaries, but no relief. If someone can either explain it well to me or point me to a resource that explains it well, I would be greatly appreciative!

 

[JTB]

I am confused as to who the three men are and what the relation Yahweh is to them. Yahweh is used in verses 1 and 13, but it's almost like one of the three men is speaking. Can someone help me out? I've been trying a couple commentaries, but no relief. If someone can either explain it well to me or point me to a resource that explains it well, I would be greatly appreciative!

Gordon Clark doesn't answer the question directly, but does discuss the passage in his book on the Trinity. I don't have the book with me at present to reproduce the quotes, but perhaps someone else may oblige, if you don't already possess the volume.

~Joshua

 

[youthevang]

By taking into consideration the whole counsel, I think these are three angels that come to represent the trinity, since no man can see God's face and live. Some scriptures that come to mind are:

Ex. 33:18-23
Gal 3:19
Acts 7:53

 

[au5t1n]

I think the one that speaks, at least, is the angel of the LORD (i.e. the Son pre-incarnate) and therefore is Yahweh. Not sure who the other two are. Angels? Perhaps important angels?

 

[discipulo]

I agree, chapter 18, vs 1 tells us it is a Teophany, and Abraham talks in the singular vs 3 to the Angel of the Covenant, Who bears the Name of God, the Pre Incarnate God the Son.

and we notice that the other 2 characters, are the Angels who go to Sodom on chapter 19

 

[BobVigneault]

I think the safest interpretation (and without too much speculation) is to stick to exactly what the text says. These were three messengers in the form of men. The emphasis should not be so much on the messengers and who they were, but rather on the message and judgment that they were bringing. It might help to think of the three as inter dimensional transmitters.

Just as God spoke from a pillar of fire, from a glowing cloud, from a burning bush, through a donkey, in dreams, in the pre-canon history, He is not challenged in His choices for modes of revelation.

One of these messenger was the transmitter for God himself. He spoke as an omniscient sovereign yet Abraham was not seeing God but only the transmitter. These didn't even need to be angels with a past but rather the Lord could simply form these three for this specific purpose. The other two were sent on as agents of God's wrath.

I believe the reason they appeared in the form of man was the same reason Jesus was incarnated, the Lord was showing that he must condescend in order to deal with mankind. "I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” His language in both condescending and accommodating.

 

[discipulo]

I think the safest interpretation (and without too much speculation) is to stick to exactly what the text says. These were three messengers in the form of men. The emphasis should not be so much on the messengers and who they were, but rather on the message and judgment that they were bringing. It might help to think of the three as inter dimensional transmitters.

Just as God spoke from a pillar of fire, from a glowing cloud, from a burning bush, through a donkey, in dreams, in the pre-canon history, He is not challenged in His choices for modes of revelation.

One of these messenger was the transmitter for God himself. He spoke as an omniscient sovereign yet Abraham was not seeing God but only the transmitter. These didn't even need to be angels with a past but rather the Lord could simply form these three for this specific purpose. The other two were sent on as agents of God's wrath.

I believe the reason they appeared in the form of man was the same reason Jesus was incarnated, the Lord was showing that he must condescend in order to deal with mankind. "I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” His language in both condescending and accommodating.

Bob, I am just reading my bible with no commentary aid, so I hope I am not

drawing wrong conclusions here, but wouldn't you say that verse 3, my Lord

with Abraham prostrated on the ground and all the following offerings confers

the context of a clear Divine visitation ?

 

[Romans922]

I would definitely be careful of saying that it was all three persons of the Trinity. I don't think I could be convinced of that fact. There are no other places in Scripture where anyone SEES all three persons of the Trinity.

I however do find it appropriate to say that one of the messengers was the Son of God (Preincarnate).

 

[discipulo]

I would definitely be careful of saying that it was all three persons of the Trinity. I don't think I could be convinced of that fact. There are no other places in Scripture where anyone SEES all three persons of the Trinity.

I however do find it appropriate to say that one of the messengers was the Son of God (Preincarnate).

That's the way I see it Rev Barnes,

but I do remember that often in evangelical circles because of being 3 persons, this is quoted as a trinitarian passage, clearly out of scriptural warrant as you say.

 

[BobVigneault]

Of course it was a divine visit, and just as Moses removed his sandals and fell down before the burning bush so Abraham realizes that this is of the Lord. As it's been pointed out, no one sees God and lives so whatever this messenger was in essence, it was acting as a transmitter of God's message and a filter for God's glory.
Remember, Abraham's grandson is going to wrestle with one of these beings all night. It is most definitely an encounter with the Lord but it's a condescending and creature friendly encounter.

I think the safest interpretation (and without too much speculation) is to stick to exactly what the text says. These were three messengers in the form of men. The emphasis should not be so much on the messengers and who they were, but rather on the message and judgment that they were bringing. It might help to think of the three as inter dimensional transmitters.

Just as God spoke from a pillar of fire, from a glowing cloud, from a burning bush, through a donkey, in dreams, in the pre-canon history, He is not challenged in His choices for modes of revelation.

One of these messenger was the transmitter for God himself. He spoke as an omniscient sovereign yet Abraham was not seeing God but only the transmitter. These didn't even need to be angels with a past but rather the Lord could simply form these three for this specific purpose. The other two were sent on as agents of God's wrath.

I believe the reason they appeared in the form of man was the same reason Jesus was incarnated, the Lord was showing that he must condescend in order to deal with mankind. "I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know.” His language in both condescending and accommodating.

Bob, I am just reading my bible with no commentary aid, so I hope I am not

drawing wrong conclusions here, but wouldn't you say that verse 3, my Lord

with Abraham prostrated on the ground and all the following offerings confers

the context of a clear Divine visitation ?