ANGEL
227
ANGEL
(Psa. viii, 5 ; xcvii, 7), applied to them, are also given to men (see Luke iii, 38 ; Psa. lxxxii, G, and comp. our Lord's application of this last passage in John x, 34—37), points in the same way to a difference only of degree and an identity of kind between the human and the angelic nature. The angels are therefore re- vealed to us as beings, such as man might lie and will be when the power of sin and death is removed, par- taking in their measure of the attributes of God, Truth, Purity, and Love, because always beholding His face (Matt, xviii, 10), and therefore being "made like Him" (1 John iii, 2). This, of course, implies finiteness, and therefore (in the strict sense) "imper- fection" of nature, and constant progress, both moral and intellectual, through all eternity. Such imper- fection, contrasted with the infinity of God, is express- lv ascribed to them in Job iv, 18 ; Matt, xxiv, 36 ; 1 Pet. i, 12; and it is this which emphatically points them out to us as creatures, fellow-servants of man, and therefore incapable of usurping the place of gods. This finiteness of nature implies capacity of temptation (see Butler's Anal. pt. i, c. 5), and accord- ingly we hear of "fallen angels." Of the nature of their temptation and the circumstances of their fall we know absolutely nothing. All that is certain is, that they " left their first estate" (ti)i> tavrwv cipxuv), and that they are now "angels of the devil" (Matt. xxv, 41 ; Rev. xii, 7, 9), partaking therefore of the falsehood, uncleanness, and hatred, which are his pe- culiar characteristics (John viii, 44). All that can be conjectured must be based on the analogy of man's own temptation and fall. On the other hand, the title especially assigned to the angels of God, that of the " holy ones" (see Dan. iv, 13, 23 ; viii, 13 ; Matt. xxv. 31), is precisely the one which is given to those men who are renewed in Christ's image, but which be- longs to them in actuality and in perfection only here- after. (Comp. Heb. ii, 10; v, 9 ; xii, 23.) Its use evidently implies that the angelic probation is over, and their crown of glory won.
In the Scriptures angels appear with bodies, and in the human form ; and no intimation is anywhere given that these bodies are not real, or that they are only assumed for the time and then laid aside. It was manifest, indeed, to the ancients that the matter of these bodies was not like that of their own, inasmuch as angels could make themselves visible and vanish again from their sight. But this experience would suggest no doubt of the reality of their bodies; it would only intimate that they were not composed of gross matter. After his resurrection, Jesus often ap- peared to his disciples, and vanished again before them; yet they never doubted that they saw the same body which had been crucified, although they must have perceived that it had undergone an important change. The fact that angels always appeared in the human form does not, indeed, prove that they really have this form, but that the ancient Jews believed so. That which is not pure spirit must have some form or other ; and angels may have the human form, but other forms are possible. See Cherub.
The question as to the food of angels has been very much discussed. If they do eat, we can know noth- ing of their actual food ; for the manna is manifestly called " angels' food" (Psa. lxxviii, 25 ; Wisd. xvi, 20) merely by way of expressing its excellence. The only real question, therefore, is whether they feed at all or not. We sometimes find angels, in their terrene manifestations, eating and drinking (Gen. xviii, 8 ; xix, 3) ; but in Judg. xiii, 15, 16, the angel who ap- peared to Manoah declined, in a very pointed manner, to accept his hospitality. The manner in which the Jews obviated the apparent discrepancy, and the sense in which they understood such passages, appear from the apocrj-phal book of Tobit (xii, 19), where the angel is made to sajr, " It seems to you, indeed, as though I did eat and drink with you ; but I use in-
visible food which no man can see." This intimates that they were supposed to simulate when they ap- peared to partake of man's food, but that yet they had food of their own, proper to their natures. Mil- ton, who was deeply read in .the " angelic" literature, derides these questions (Par. Lost, v, 433—439). But if angels do not need food ; if their spiritual bodies arc inherently incapable of waste or death, it seems not likely that they gratuitously perform an act design- ed, in all its known relations, to promote growth, to repair waste, and to sustain existence.
The passage already referred to in Matt, xxii, 30, teaches by implication that there is no distinction of sex among the angels. The Scripture never makes mention of female angels. The Gentiles had their male and female divinities, who were the parents of other gods, and Gesenius {Thes. Heb. s. v. "2, 12) in- sists that the "sons of God" spoken of in Gen. vi, 2, as the progenitors of the giants, were angels. But in the Scriptures the angels are all males ; and they ap- pear to be so represented, not to mark any distinction of sex, but because the masculine is the more honor- able gender. Angels are never described with marks of age, but sometimes with those of youth (Mark xvi, 5). The constant absence of the features of age indi- cates the continual vigor and freshness of immortali- ty. The angels never die (Luke xx, 36). But no being besides God himself has essential immortality (1 Tim. vi, 16) ; every other being, therefore, is mor- tal in itself, and can be immortal only by the will of God. Angels, consequently, are not eternal, but had a beginning. As Moses gives no account of the cre- ation of angels in his description of the origin of the world, although the circumstance would have been too important for omission had it then taken place, there is no doubt that they were called into being before, probably very long before the acts of creation which it was the object of Moses to relate. See Sons of Gon.