In this reblog post I only have a slight quibble of what Carson has written. Here is the section where I have a different understanding: It is vital to state that Jesus was not incarnate until the NT. He did not possess any kind of human (or angelic) body in the OT. He appeared in a human form in the former times of the OT, but He did not assume a human form until “the fullness of time had come” (Galatians 4:4) in the NT. There is a major difference in the Son of God revealing Himself through His creation in the OT and the Son of God uniting Himself to His creation in the NT.
Since all creation was by and for Christ, He could temporarily assume a physical body that appeared normal and tangible to other humans. Of course He could also manifest His glory at other times such as on Sinai, the glorified visions to O.T. Prophets, and, post-incarnation, such as the Transfiguration of Jesus to His core disciples.
In the O.T. He ate with Abraham and appeared as Melchizedek, the prototypical High Priest of God Most High. To Joshua, he appeared as a warrior with drawn sword. Joshua assumed Him a normal, tangible human. Of course I agree the difference post-incarnation being His ever-afterward permanent state of flesh: …and the Word became flesh (Jn. 1.14). Additionally, after His resurrection, Jesus now possesses a spiritual body as a “first fruit” from the dead. Christians constitute the remaining grain harvest represented by the figure of “first fruits,” since they will one day also receive a body like His (Phil. 3.21, 1Cor. 15.35-54).
This grain harvest is probably when Christ swings His sickle and harvests the earth (Rev. 14.14-16). The subsequent harvest by an angel in vss. 17-20 clearly refer the the “grapes of wrath” harvest and is differentiated from Christ’s harvest of Christians to glory.Why is the Angel of the LORD Important? | Ben Carlson — Covenant Baptist Theological Seminary