im.
_ t That ’eohim in this passage cannot be understood, accord- ing to the usual interpretation, as meaning ‘judges’ (as repre- sentatives of God), is proved by Dt 1517, where, in the otherwise
RELIGION OF ISRAEL
might also be understood of a téraphim; but there, as well as in v.°@), the reference is more likely to a Divine image in a public sanctuary.
From the above we conclude, then, that the *éphéd and (at least from the monarchical period) the téraphim as well were images of Jahweh, which as such were regarded as quite unobjection- able in the pre-Prophetic period, nay, even as late as Hosea (34), until at last they were involved in the same condemnation as images of idols proper (cf. below, p. 679° ff.).
(d) Finally, the golden bulls set wp by Jeroboam at Bethel and Dan were intended as images of Jahweh, and not as heathen images. It might ap- pear otherwise from the language of the Chronicler (2 Ch 138 eé al.), but the truth was still quite evident to the Deuteronomic redactor of the Books of Kings (cf. 1 K 12%%), In like manner the narrative of Ex 32, which belongs to the older sources of the Pentateuch, is quite aware that Aaron meant to represent Jahweh by the golden calf which had brought Israel out of Egypt, for he makes him in v.® proclaim a feast to Jahweh. But even here the giving of this form to Jahweh is looked upon as a grievous offence on the part of Aaron; and the Deuteronomist is never weary in the Books of Kings of denouncing this cult as ‘the sin of Jeroboam,’ and of discovering in it one of the principal causes of the downfall of the Northern kingdom (cf. especially 2 K 17").
The question whether in the pre- Prophetic period all those different kinds of images were actually identified with Jahweh, and were thus venerated as fetishes, cannot be answered right off by a YesoraNo. The plurality of images (so in particular also the ¢wo official bull-figures at Bethel and Dan) would naturally lead of itself to a dis- tinguishing between Jahweh enthroned in heaven or upon Sinai and His numerous pictorial repre- gentations. But only too frequently, at least amongst the lower orders, there would be a ten- dency to fall into the error of confounding the Deity with His image, just as in the Roman Catholic Church distinctions are made by the people between different images of the Mother of God in regard to their miraculous virtues, although all these images are meant to represent one and the same person. The reproach so frequently addressed by the pre-exilic Prophets to their con- temporaries, that they ‘bowed down to the work of their hands,’ must have been no less applicable in the pre-Prophetic period. Half unconsciously men changed, like the heathen (Ro 1), the glory of the immortal God into the image of perishable men and beasts. :
5. Before closing our discussion of the con- ception of God, it may be fitting here to touch briefly upon the few passages that speak of angels as intermediate beings betwixt God and man, and of certain half-mythological figures which had already taken their place in Jahwism in the pre- Prophetic period.*
(a) The belief in supramundane and at the same time almost independent powers shows itself in the most surprising fashion in Gn 6", a passage with a strong mythological colouring, Which be- longs to the older stratum of J. The béné ’élohim [lit. ‘sons of the gods,’ but really a designation of those who belong to the category of Elohim or numina (just as béné néb?im does not mean ‘sons almost identical text, the reference to *Slohim is omitted. The Deuteronomist, in fact, quite correctly understood the reference
to be to an nase of Jahweh, and suppressed it on that account. Again, in Ex 228. 27 (9.28) and 18 225 *élohim has no other sense n that of ‘ Deity.’ i : Me Cf. Kosters, hk ‘Het onstaan en de entwikkeling der angelologie onder Israel’ in Theol. Tijdschr. 1876, pp. 34ff., 113ff.; A. Aeberhard, art. ‘Gottes Umgebung nach den vorexi- lischen Schriften’ in Schweizer Theol. Zeitschrift, 1902, p. 193 ff.
RELIGION OF ISRAEL 643
of the prophets,’ but members of the guild of nébvim)] appear here, if not as full-blooded popular gods in the sense of polytheism, yet as standing outside the realm of Jahwism as a kind of demi- gods. In all probability the original text meant simply to record that from their union with the daughters of men there sprang up on earth a hybrid race similar to the Titans and giants of Greek mythology. But it must be added that Gn 61*- is the only passage of this kind. The béné *élohim are mentioned elsewhere only in Job 1° 2? 387, where they are simply angelic beings in the service and train of God.
A more frequent designation of these inter- mediate beings is mal’akh, ‘messenger,’ ‘ angel.’ Of course we here leave out of account the above (p. 688 f.) described theologumenon of the ‘ angel of Jahweh or of God.’ To the category of creature angels serving or surrounding Jahweh may have belonged, according to the pre-Prophetic popular belief, the ‘men’ who accompany Jahweh on His visit to Abraham [in Gn 19!:, after parting from Jahweh, they are first called ‘angels’] and are entertained by the latter.* So also the guardian- angel sent by Jahweh in Gn 247-4, Nu 2016 (although in these passages the idea of the mavakh Jahweh is not remote), and 1K 19°; further, the angels of Gn 28! (E) whom Jacob in a dream sees ascending and descending a ladder (namely, in order to facilitate communication be- tween heaven and earth at Bethel, a, principal centre of revelation [the mention of the ladder in this passage shows that angels are still thought of as unwinged]); and the troop of angels of God (Gn 323 @) [E]) whose appearance led Jacob to give the city of Mahanaim (‘camp’) its name. In the very doubtful text, Dt 337, the ‘holy myriads’ may probably refer originally to the attendants of God at theophanies. In addition to these few passages from the Pentateuch there are in the older strata of the Historical books: Jos 5% (J ?), where the leader of the [heavenly] army of Jahweh meets Joshua ; and 2 K 6'7, where the fiery horses and chariots are to be thought of as driven by angels. The ‘destroying angel’ of 2S 24’, who at the command of Jahweh smites the people with pestilence, is evidently thought of, not as a pro- fessional ‘ executioner angel,’ but as one appointed by God to carry out His judgment in this par- ticular instance. In 1 K 22, again, in the vision of the prophet Micaiah the whole host of heaven on the right and the left of Jahweh represents a celestial deliberative assembly. Quite a peculiar position is occupied here by ‘the spirit,’ who, in the light of the whole context, can be only the personified spirit of prophecy. Nothing is said in any of these passages about the moral quality of the angels, for even in Dt 33° [if the text be correct] ‘holiness’ refers not to their moral per- fection, but only to their exaltation above this world and their belonging to God. So also the comparison of David to an angel of God (1 S 29°) has in view only the trust and reverence due to angels.—Our whole survey shows, however, that in early Israel statements about angels play only a subordinate part, and_ belong rather to the popular beliefs than to Jahwism proper. It is to be noted, moreover, that the most characteristic expressions are connected either with a dream (Gn 982) or a vision (1 K 22%, 2K 6” may also be included in this category).