himself enjoyed (witness li; - . ,i i I '. : , r, and his treatment of the (h-eik-i; ,:m I v.Ii-k his work done, was always ready to ellace himself (see especially Lightfoot, Sermons on Special Occasion.^, p. 160 ft'.). Again, when we think of the Apostle in his more official aspect, it is sufficient to recall that he was not only the first home-missionary (Jn l-"), but also the first foreign-missionary (12--) —evidence, if evidence be wanted, of the close connexion between the two spheres of work.
_ LiTERATiRE.— In addition to what has been noted above, and • different Lives of Christ, see
IGC ff.
haj ' i]i 77,. • Christian Year, and to the poem on 'St. Andrew tui.l his Cress' ill the Lyra Innocentiimi.
,„ „, George MiLLiGAN.
ANGELS.— The statements as to angels whieli meet us in the Gospels are in most respects tlie same as are found in tlie Jewish literature of the period, both Biblical and extra-Biblical. In the main, Christ and His Apostles appropriated the Angelology of current Judaism — but not without critical selection. It would be difficult
to point to a time when tlie Jews, as a people, did not believe in angels ; yet there were exceptions. PossiUy it was the exuberance of tlie belief that produced in some minds a reaction. At all events it is a fact that tlie portion of the OT known to criticism as the Priests' Code is silent on the sub- ject of angels ; and it is also noteworthy that the Sadducees, who were the descendants of the high- priestly families, protested in the time of our Lord against some, if not all, of the popular notions re- specting angels (Ac 23*).
It is probable that belief in angels is originally a corollary from the conception of God as King. A lone king— a kiiin «itIiiMil. a court— is almost a contradiction in im,,,,. And iiia.sinuch as the recognition of Gi.d .- , IC,,,; ^^ the earliest and nio.st prevalent ot Im;u Is r.,iic,.ptions of God, we naturally expect tlie belief in angels, as God's court, serving Him in His palace and discharging the function of messengers, to be ancient and per- vasive. We have then, doubtless, a very primitive conception of angels in the words of Micaiah to Ahab, in 1 K 22'» ' I saw Jahweh sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him, on his right hand and on his left.' A second and quite distinct feature of the Angelology of the OT is found in the appearances of one who is called 'the_ Angel of Jahweh' — who is described as un- distinguishable from man in appearance, and yet olaiins to speak and act in the name of Jahweh Himself (Gn IS-- !»• " Z-2^-'-«, Jg l33-6-a2)_ j^ jg noteworthy as a feature of OT criticism, that, as P is silent as to angels, so tlie appearances of an angel as a manlike manifestation of God and not a mere messenger, are confined to those portions of the OT which, on quite other grounds, are assigned to JE. Thirdly, when the Jews came to have more exalted views of (lod, and of the incompati- bility between l)i\ iiiity and humanity, spirit and mattei', gootl and evil, and, in consequence, con- ceived of God as aloof from the world and iiK-,i|ialile of immediate contact and intercouis.. viih siulnl mortals, the doctrine of angels lee.iM.I more attention tlian ever before. The same inllnciices which led the Persians to frame such an elaborate system of An-elology, led the Jews, during and iilter the Exile, to frame a similar system, or in some respects to borrow from the Persian system; to believe in gradations among the angelic hosts ; to give names to those who were of high rank, and to assign to each of these some definite kind of work to do among men, or some province on the earth to administer as satrap under ' the King of Heaven ' (see art. ' Zoroastrianism ' in vol. iv. of Hastings' DB).
In the Gospels there are clear indications of the first and third of these phases of belief. Tlie second is of interest to the NT student as a pre- paratory discipline in the direction of Christology ; and as such has no further importance for us at present. Ewald has said (OT and NT Theology, p. 79) that in Christianity there is ' no denial of the existence of angels, but a return to the simpler ic.limii]!:; cif (he early narratives.' So far as sim- pln ii \ I.I iiai l■:iti^e is concerned, there is certainly .1 . Ii. r n, ml, lance between the angel-incidents "I M. I.iiki- and Acts on the one hand, and of tienesis un the other; but in the NT the angel never identifies himself with Jahweh as is done in Genesis ; and tliere are in the NT some jihases of Angelology which belong, not to ' the early narra- tives,' but to post-exilic conceptions.
AN'o -i.isli now, with the help of Jewish literature, more or less contemporary, to make a systematic presentation of those beliefs as to angels which are found in the discourses and narratives of the four Gospels. It might be supposed that we should find it helpful to keep apart tlie utterances of our