The nail in the coffin for divine agency theories

The most common reply to arguments for a high Christology is an appeal to divine delegation, or agency.

A Christian might say something like, "Jesus calmed the storm in Mark, who but God can do that?"

The dissenter replies, "That's because Jesus was given divinely authorized power, just as Moses was when he split the Red Sea. You wouldn't call Moses God, would you?"

At first glance, the symmetry seems accurate. But look beneath the surface, and a serious problem emerges.

What the dissenter is really doing is anchoring their interpretive framework to adjacent Jewish agency texts, passages featuring mediatorial figures such as prophets, angels, and messengers, or even inanimate objects like the ark of the covenant.

The goal is to draw a parallel between Jesus and figures who mediated the presence of YHWH without ever being YHWH.

The trouble is that no such parallel actually works in totality.

Now you might be thinking, "But doesn't Jesus carry out divine prerogatives, just as those other figures did?"

Yes, He does, but that's a distraction from the real point of contention.

The real issue is what I'll call the overextension problem.

The overextension problem: Agency-only models use Jewish agency parallels to explain more than those parallels can bear. They can account for how an authorized agent represents YHWH, but they cannot, on their own, explain why Christ personally occupies the YHWH-only subject-position.

That subject-position turns on something I'll call identity-emphasis.

Identity-emphasis: the way a text signals which figure is being made the focal bearer of divine significance in a given passage.

How do we know this is the crux? Simple: in every proposed parallel, whatever mediates YHWH's presence and authority never retains an identity of its own, it functions purely as a channel for YHWH's speech and action.

So here's the logic of the agency-only model:

YHWH commands → the human agent obeys and signifies the act → YHWH completes it.

Take Moses at the sea. He stretches out his hand, but it is YHWH who drives the waters back:

Exodus 14:21 "Moses stretched out his hand toward the sea, and the Lord drove the sea apart by a strong east wind all that night..."

Notice where the weight falls: on YHWH, not on Moses.

Now compare Jesus calming the sea:

Mark 4:39 "So he got up and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, 'Be quiet! Calm down!' Then the wind stopped, and it was dead calm."

And the disciples respond:

"Who then is this? Even the wind and sea obey him!"

Here, the weight does not fall on some other agent. It falls on Jesus Himself.

That gives us a different logic:

Jesus commands → creation obeys → Jesus occupies the divine subject-position.

Think about what that means. In every non-Christological scenario, the identity of the mediator is displaced by YHWH, who is the one truly acting. But with Christ, no such displacement occurs. He stands at the center of the action and acts on His own authority.

In short:

Agency-only: YHWH is the identity emphasized, whereas the agent is merely the authorized mediator.

YHWH-only: Christ's identity is emphasized, whereas He acts, speaks, receives honor, and exercises prerogatives in ways reserved for YHWH alone.

The identity-emphasis falls on Christ precisely because the text places Him in the role, speech, honor, and prerogative-space that belong to YHWH alone.

So the next time someone tells you, "That's just divine agency,"

you can answer:

"That only works if the text keeps the identity-emphasis on YHWH. In the Christological passages, it falls on Christ. Agency is included, but agency alone under-explains the data, which gives us good reason to reject it."

Did you find this helpful? Comment your thoughts 👇🏽

15 comments

The nail in the coffin for divine agency theories