RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Andrews Angel
revelation. The transition was then easy to the sense of a generic name for the beings of the heavenly world, from whom the God of Israel is called " Yahweh, God of Hosts," or " Yahweh of Hosts." To distinguish angels from men, they are called "sons of God" (Gen. vi. 2, 4; Job i. 6, ii. 1, xxxviii. 7) or " sons of the mighty " (Ps. xxix. 1, margin, lxxxix. 6). A special connection with God is always implied, as well as a certain superiority over men (I Sam. xxix. 9; II Sam. xiv. 17, 20). This connection is emphasized by the epithet " holy " (A. V., " saints "; Job v. 1, xv. 15; Ps. lxxxix. 5, 7; Dan. viii. 13; Zech. xiv. 5). In I Kings xxii. 19-24 and Acts xxiii. 9 a distinction is made between angels and spirits, and in the Talmud the latter name is used for demons only. With reference to their duties angels are called " watchers " in Dan. iv. 13, 17, 23.
i. Biblical Conceptions: As concerns their function, it is not the Biblical conception that angels are the indispensable means of i. Angels communication between the higher are God's and lower worlds, nor are they a per- Servants. sonification of nature powers. Yet they are consistently represented as serving God's purposes in revelation and salvation, and are his " ministering spirits " (Heb. i. 14) from the appointment of the cherubim to guard Eden (Gen. iii. 24) to their activity at the second coming and the end of the world (Matt. xiii. 41, xxiv. 29- 31; cf. Gen. xxiv. 7, 40, xlviii. 16; Ex. xiv. 19, xxiii. 20, 23; Luke xvi. 22). Sometimes they appear in companies (Gen. xxviii. 12, xxxii. 1-2; II Kings vi. 16-17; Matt. xxv. 31; Luke ii. 13; Rev. xix. 14), but usually it is one angel who executes God's command; he is called the " angel of God " or " angel of Yahweh " (Gen. xvi. 7, 9-11, xxi. 17; Ex. iii. 2, xiv. 19; Judges vi. 20; and often). The relation of the " angel of Yahweh " to Yahweh himself is a difficult question. One of the three who appear in Gen. xviii. 2, 22 (cf. xix. 1) is evidently Yahweh, and Yahweh and his angel are both called the guide of Israel (Ex. xiii. 21, xiv. 19). Similar identification apparently occurs elsewhere, while in Zech. i. 9, 12-14, and other passages there is a sharp distinction.
In the New Testament the angel of the Lord occurs only when an angel has been previously mentioned (Matt. i. 24; Luke i. 11, 2. The New 13, ii. 9, 10, 13; Acts xii. 7, 11, vii. Testament 30, 38, Gk. text). There is no thought Conception of an identification of the angel with not Differ- the Lord. That the conception is ent from different from that of the Old Testathe Old. ment can not be proved, and such an „ assumption is not in accord with
Stephen's references (Acts vii. 30-35) to the appearance in the burning bush (Ex. iii.). But the distinction between the angel and Yahweh does not mnder from making the angel speak as Yahweh or trom speaking of the angel as of Yahweh. It tollows that the distinction can not be a product « later times. The angel is not the Logos, the second person of the Trinity, as assumed by the aHTT thers> the older Lutheran dogmaticians, ana Hengstenberg; nor is he merely a theophany
(Vatke, De Wette, Wellhausen, Kosters, and others). The former view is not consistent with the New Testament revelation, which makes it impossible to find in the Old Testament a knowledge of the threefold character of God; and the latter falls because a " mission," not an " appearance," of God is always spoken of. The true Biblical conception of the "angel of Yahweh" is that of a created being (Neh. ix. 6), belonging to the heavenly hosts (Augustine, Jerome, Hofmann, Riehm), who represents God, but is in no way identified with God. The fact, that in the New Testament the angel of Yahweh recedes, does not justify the assumption that he is a type of Christ. A realization of God's presence through angels and the communication of his revelation by them was as necessary in the old covenant as the revelation and presence of God in Christ or in the Holy Spirit are in the new (cf. Acts vii. 38; Gal. iii. 19; Heb. ii. 2). The angel has no more place in the new covenant because the first has been made old and is " ready to vanish away " (Heb. viii 13).
From the beginning the appearance of an angel is looked upon as a sign of God's favor (Gen. xxiv. 7, 40, xlviii. 16; Ex. xxiii. 20; II Kings 3. Later xix. 35; Isa. Ixiii. 9), and the belief Develop- that God's angels guard his servants ments. finds expression in the Psalms (Ps. xxxiv. 7, xci. 11). From the unity of God arises the conception of a multiplicity of angels (Gen. xxviii. 12, xxxii. 2); and then it is only a step to that of Yahweh's hosts (Josh, v. 14-15), with which he comes to the help of Israel (Isa. xxxi. 4-5), which surround his throne, offering him praise and adoration (I Kings xxii. 19; Ps. cxlviii. 2), and constitute, in the language of the synagogue, " the family above." Apocalyptic literature develops the thought, depicting in symbolic narratives the part of the angels in the history of Israel (cf. the visions of Zechariah, Ezekiel, and Daniel). In the Book of Daniel (viii. 16, ix. 21, x. 13, xii. 1) two angels are named — Gabriel and Michael. The fact that names are given (cf. Judges xiii. 18) and the names themselves indicate Babylonian influence, which later tradition recognizes by ascribing the many angels' names which it knows to Babylon (Genesis, Rabbah xlviii.). What is said of these two angels does not contradict existing views, but is merely a development of them, influenced by contact with Babylonian and Persian ideas. The fantastic and bizarre conceptions of later Judaism, however, can not deny their origin from this heathenism (cf. Tobit iii. 17, v. 6, 21, vi. 4-17, viii. 2-3). That which is really new in the Book of Daniel concerns the participation of the angels in the sin of the world. In the New Testament the apocalyptic symbolism appears in the Book of Revelation only (cf. xii. 7sqq.; Jude9). All allusions to angels in New Testament history and in the Epistles can be explained as in full accord with Old Testament conceptions, and if new ideas are found by any it is only because of the desire to find them. It requires great art of eisegesis to ascribe to Paul (as does Everling) the angel doctrine of Jewish legend and rabbinic theology.
Angel