I. Scripture Statements and Imitations.1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
I. Scripture Statements and Imitations.1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
I. Scripture Statements and Imitations.1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
I. Scripture Statements and Imitations.1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
I. Scripture Statements and Imitations.1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
I. Scripture Statements and Imitations.1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
1. As to the nature and attributes of angels.(a) They are created beings.Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”[pg 445](b) They are incorporeal beings.InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.
(a) They are created beings.
Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”
Ps. 148:2-5—“Praise ye him, all his angels.... For he commanded, and they were created”;Col. 1:16—“for in him were all things created ... whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;cf.1 Pet. 3:32—“angels and authorities and powers.”God alone is uncreated and eternal. This is implied in1 Tim. 6:16—“who only hath immortality.”
(b) They are incorporeal beings.
InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”
InHeb. 1:14, where a single word is used to designate angels, they are described as“spirits”—“are they not all ministering spirits?”Men, with their twofold nature, material as well as immaterial, could not well be designated as“spirits.”That their being characteristically“spirits”forbids us to regard angels as having a bodily organism, seems implied inEph. 6:12—“for our wrestling is not against flesh and blood, but against ... the spiritual hosts[or“things”]of wickedness in the heavenly places”; cf.Eph. 1:3;2:6. InGen. 6:2,“sons of God”=, not angels, but descendants of Seth and worshipers of the true God (see Murphy, Com.,in loco). InPs. 78:25(A. V.),“angels' food”= manna coming from heaven where angels dwell; better, however, read with Rev. Vers.:“bread of the mighty”—probably meaning angels, though the word“mighty”is nowhere else applied to them; possibly =“bread of princes or nobles,”i. e., the finest, most delicate bread.Mat 22:30—“neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”—andLuke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels”—imply only that angels are without distinctions of sex. Saints are to be like angels, not as being incorporeal, but as not having the same sexual relations which they have here.
There are no“souls of angels,”as there are“souls of men”(Rev. 18:13), and we may infer that angels have no bodies for souls to inhabit; see under Essential Elements of Human Nature. Nevius, Demon-Possession, 258, attributes to evil spirits an instinct or longing for a body to possess, even though it be the body of an inferior animal:“So in Scripture we have spirits represented as wandering about to seek rest in bodies, and asking permission to enter into swine”(Mat. 12:43; 8:31). Angels therefore, since they have no bodies, know nothing of growth, age, or death. Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, 133—“It is precisely because the angels are only spirits, but not souls, that they cannot possess the same rich existence as man, whose soul is the point of union in which spirit and nature meet.”
(c) They are personal—that is, intelligent and voluntary—agents.
2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.
2 Sam. 14:20—“wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God”;Luke 4:34—“I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God”;2 Tim. 2:26—“snare of the devil ... taken captive by him unto his will”;Rev. 22:9—“See thou do it not”= exercise of will;Rev. 12:12—“The devil is gone down unto you, having great wrath”= set purpose of evil.
(d) They are possessed of superhuman intelligence and power, yet an intelligence and power that has its fixed limits.
Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”
Mat. 24:36—“of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven”= their knowledge, though superhuman, is yet finite.1 Pet. 1:12—“which things angels desire to look into”;Ps. 103:20—“angels ... mighty in strength”;2 Thess. 1:7—“the angels of his power”;2 Pet. 2:11—“angels, though greater[than men]in might and power”;Rev. 20:2, 10—“laid hold on the dragon ... and bound him ... cast into the lake of fire.”ComparePs. 72:18—“God ... Who only doeth wondrous things”= only God can perform miracles. Angels are imperfect compared with God (Job 4:18; 15:15; 25:5).
Power, rather than beauty or intelligence, is their striking characteristic. They are“principalities and powers”(Col. 1:16). They terrify those who behold them (Mat. 28:4). The rolling away of the stone from the sepulchre took strength. A wheel of granite, eight feet in diameter and one foot thick, rolling in a groove, would weigh more than four tons. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 86—“The spiritual might and burning indignation in the face of Stephen reminded the guilty Sanhedrin of an angelic vision.”Even in their tenderest ministrations they strengthen (Luke 22:43;cf.Dan. 10:19). In1 Tim. 6:15—“King of kings and Lord of lords”—the words“kings”and“lords”(βασιλευόντων and κυριευόντων) may refer to angels. In the case of evil spirits especially, power seems the chief thing in mind,e. g.,“the prince of this world,”“the strong man armed,”“the power of darkness,”“rulers of the darkness of this world,”“the great dragon,”“all the power of the enemy,”“all these things will I give thee,”“deliver us from the evil one.”
(e) They are an order of intelligences distinct from man and older than man.
Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”
Angels are distinct from man.1 Cor. 6:3—“we shall judge angels”;Heb. 1:14—“Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of them that shall inherit salvation?”They are not glorified human spirits; seeHeb. 2:16—“for verily not to angels doth he give help, but he giveth help to[pg 446]the seed of Abraham”; also12:22, 23, where“the innumerable hosts of angels”are distinguished from“the church of the firstborn”and“the spirits of just men made perfect.”InRev. 22:9—“I am a fellow-servant with thee”—“fellow-servant”intimates likeness to men, not in nature, but in service and subordination to God, the proper object of worship. Sunday School Times, Mch. 15, 1902:146—“Angels are spoken of as greater in power and might than man, but that could be said of many a lower animal, or even of whirlwind and fire. Angels are never spoken of as a superior order of spiritual beings. We are to‘judge angels’(1 Cor. 6:3), and inferiors are not to judge superiors.”
Angels are an order of intelligences older than man. The Fathers made the creation of angels simultaneous with the original calling into being of the elements, perhaps basing their opinion on the apocryphal Ecclesiasticus, 18:1—“he that liveth eternally created all things together.”InJob 38:7, the Hebrews parallelism makes“morning stars”—“sons of God,”so that angels are spoken of as present at certain stages of God's creative work. The mention of“the serpent”inGen. 3:1implies the fall of Satan before the fall of man. We may infer that the creation of angels took place before the creation of man—the lower before the higher. InGen. 2:1,“all the host of them,”which God had created, may be intended to include angels. Man was the crowning work of creation, created after angels were created. Mason, Faith of the Gospel, 81—“Angels were perhaps created before the material heavens and earth—a spiritual substratum in which the material things were planted, a preparatory creation to receive what was to follow. In the vision of Jacob they ascend first and descend after; their natural place is in the world below.”
The constant representation of angels as personal beings in Scripture cannot be explained as a personification of abstract good and evil, in accommodation to Jewish superstitions, without wresting many narrative passages from their obvious sense; implying on the part of Christ either dissimulation or ignorance as to an important point of doctrine; and surrendering belief in the inspiration of the Old Testament from which these Jewish views of angelic beings were derived.
Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”
Jesus accommodated himself to the popular belief in respect at least to“Abraham's bosom”(Luke 16:22), and he confessed ignorance with regard to the time of the end (Mark 13:32); see Rush Rhees, Life of Jesus of Nazareth, 245-248. But in the former case his hearers probably understood him to speak figuratively and rhetorically, while in the latter case there was no teaching of the false but only limitation of knowledge with regard to the true. Our Lord did not hesitate to contradict Pharisaic belief in the efficacy of ceremonies, and Sadducean denial of resurrection and future life. The doctrine of angels had even stronger hold upon the popular mind than had these errors of the Pharisees and Sadducees. That Jesus did not correct or deny the general belief, but rather himself expressed and confirmed it, implies that the belief was rational and Scriptural. For one of the best statements of the argument for the existence of evil spirits, see Broadus, Com. onMat. 8:28.
Eph. 3:10—“to the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known through the church the manifold wisdom of God”—excludes the hypothesis that angels are simply abstract conceptions of good or evil. We speak of“moon-struck”people (lunatics), only when we know that nobody supposes us to believe in the power of the moon to cause madness. But Christ's contemporariesdidsuppose him to believe in angelic spirits, good and evil. If this belief was an error, it was by no means a harmless one, and the benevolence as well as the veracity of Christ would have led him to correct it. So too, if Paul had known that there were no such beings as angels, he could not honestly have contented himself with forbidding the Colossians to worship them (Col 2:18) but would have denied their existence, as he denied the existence of heathen gods (1 Cor. 8:4).
Theodore Parker said it was very evident that Jesus Christ believed in a personal devil. Harnack, Wesen des Christenthums, 35—“There can be no doubt that Jesus shared with his contemporaries the representation of two kingdoms, the kingdom of God and the kingdom of the devil.”Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:164—Jesus“makes it appear as if Satan was the immediate tempter. I am far from thinking that he does so in a merely figurative way. Beyond all doubt Jesus accepted the contemporary ideas as to the real existence of Satan, and accordingly, in the particular cases of disease referred to, he supposes a real Satanic temptation.”Maurice, Theological Essays,[pg 447]32, 34—“The acknowledgment of an evil spirit is characteristic of Christianity.”H. B. Smith, System, 261—“It would appear that the power of Satan in the world reached its culminating point at the time of Christ, and has been less ever since.”
The same remark applies to the view which regards Satan as but a collective term for all evil beings, human or superhuman. The Scripture representations of the progressive rage of the great adversary, from his first assault on human virtue in Genesis to his final overthrow in Revelation, join with the testimony of Christ just mentioned, to forbid any other conclusion than this, that there is a personal being of great power, who carries on organized opposition to the divine government.
Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.
Crane, The Religion of To-morrow, 299 sq.—“We well say‘personal devil,’for there is no devil but personality.”We cannot deny the personality of Satan except upon principles which would compel us to deny the existence of good angels, the personality of the Holy Spirit, and the personality of God the Father,—we may add, even the personality of the human soul. Says Nigel Penruddock in Lord Beaconsfield's“Endymion”:“Give me a single argument against his [Satan's] personality, which is not applicable to the personality of the Deity.”One of the most ingenious devices of Satan is that of persuading men that he has no existence. Next to this is the device of substituting for belief in a personal devil the belief in a merely impersonal spirit of evil. Such a substitution we find in Pfleiderer, Philosophy of Religion, 1:311—“The idea of the devil was a welcome expedient for the need of advanced religious reflection, to put God out of relation to the evil and badness of the world.”Pfleiderer tells us that the early optimism of the Hebrews, like that of the Greeks, gave place in later times to pessimism and despair. But the Hebrews still had hope of deliverance by the Messiah and an apocalyptic reign of good.
For the view that Satan is merely a collective term for all evil beings, see Bushnell, Nature and the Supernatural, 131-137. Bushnell, holding moral evil to be a necessary“condition privative”of all finite beings as such, believes that“good angels have all been passed through and helped up out of a fall, as the redeemed of mankind will be.”“Elect angels”(1 Tim. 5:21) then would mean those savedafterfalling, not those savedfromfalling; and“Satan”would be, not the name of a particular person, but the all or total of all bad minds and powers.Per contra, see Smith's Bible Dictionary, arts.: Angels, Demons, Demoniacs, Satan; Trench, Studies in the Gospels, 16-26. For a comparison of Satan in the Book of Job, with Milton's Satan in“Paradise Lost,”and Goethe's Mephistopheles in“Faust,”see Masson, The Three Devils. We may add to this list Dante's Satan (or Dis) in the“Divine Comedy,”Byron's Lucifer in“Cain,”and Mrs. Browning's Lucifer in her“Drama of Exile”; see Gregory, Christian Ethics, 219.
2. As to their number and organization.(a) They are of great multitude.Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”(d) They have an organization.1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
(a) They are of great multitude.
Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.
Deut. 33:2—“Jehovah ... came from the ten thousands of holy ones”;Ps. 68:17—“The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands upon thousands”;Dan. 7:10—“thousands of thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him”;Rev. 5:11—“I heard a voice of many angels ... and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands.”Anselm thought that the number of lost angels was filled up by the number of elect men. Savage, Life after Death, 61—The Pharisees held very exaggerated notions of the number of angelic spirits. They“said that a man, if he threw a stone over his shoulder or cast away a broken piece of pottery, asked pardon of any spirit that he might possibly have hit in so doing.”So in W. H. H. Murray's time it was said to be dangerous in the Adirondack to fire a gun,—you might hit a man.
(b) They constitute a company, as distinguished from a race.
Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”
Mat. 22:30—“they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven”;Luke 20:36—“neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are sons of God.”We are called“sons of men,”but angels are never called“sons of angels,”but only“sons of God.”They are not developed from one original stock, and no such common nature binds them together as binds together the race of man. They have no common character and history. Each was created separately, and each apostate angel fell by himself. Humanity fell all at[pg 448]once in its first father. Cut down a tree, and you cut down its branches. But angels were so many separate trees. Some lapsed into sin, but some remained holy. See Godet, Bib. Studies O. T., 1-29. This may be one reason why salvation was provided for fallen man, but not for fallen angels. Christ could join himself to humanity by taking the common nature of all. There was no common nature of angels which he could take. SeeHeb. 2:16—“not to angels doth he give help.”The angels are“sons of God,”as having no earthly parentage and no parentage at all except the divine.Eph. 3:14, 15—“the Father, of whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named,”—not“every family,”as in R. V., for there are no families among the angels. The marginal rendering“fatherhood”is better than“family,”—all the πατριαί are named from the πατήρ. Dodge, Christian Theology, 172—“The bond between angels is simply a mental and moral one. They can gain nothing by inheritance, nothing through domestic and family life, nothing through a society held together by a bond of blood.... Belonging to two worlds and not simply to one, the human soul has in it the springs of a deeper and wider experience than angels can have.... God comes nearer to man than to his angels.”Newman Smyth, Through Science to Faith, 191—“In the resurrection life of man, the species has died; man the individual lives on. Sex shall be no more needed for the sake of life; they shall no more marry, but men and women, the children of marriage, shall be as the angels. Through the death of the human species shall be gained, as the consummation of all, the immortality of the individuals.”
(c) They are of various ranks and endowments.
Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”
Col. 1:16—“thrones or dominions or principalities or powers”;1 Thess. 4:16—“the voice of the archangel”;Jude 9—“Michael the archangel.”Michael (= who is like God?) is the only one expressly called an archangel in Scripture, although Gabriel (= God's hero) has been called an archangel by Milton. In Scripture, Michael seems the messenger of law and judgment; Gabriel, the messenger of mercy and promise. The fact that Scripture has but one archangel is proof that its doctrine of angels was not, as has sometimes been charged, derived from Babylonian and Persian sources; for there we find seven archangels instead of one. There, moreover, we find the evil spirit enthroned as a god, while in Scripture he is represented as a trembling slave.
Wendt, Teaching of Jesus, 1:51—“The devout and trustful consciousness of the immediate nearness of God, which is expressed in so many beautiful utterances of the Psalmist, appears to be supplanted in later Judaism by a belief in angels, which is closely analogous to the superstitious belief in the saints on the part of the Romish church. It is very significant that the Jews in the time of Jesus could no longer conceive of the promulgation of the law on Sinai, which was to them the foundation of their whole religion, as an immediate revelation of Jehovah to Moses, except as instituted through the mediation of angels (Acts 7:38, 53;Gal. 3:19;Heb. 2:2; Josephus, Ant. 15:5, 3).”
(d) They have an organization.
1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”
1 Sam. 1:11—“Jehovah of hosts”;1 K. 22:19—“Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left”;Mat. 26:53—“twelve legions of angels”—suggests the organization of the Roman army;25:41—“the devil and his angels”;Eph. 2:2—“the prince of the powers in the air”;Rev. 2:13—“Satan's throne”(not“seat”);16:10—“throne of the beast”—“a hellish parody of the heavenly kingdom”(Trench). The phrase“host of heaven,”inDeut. 4:19;17:3;Acts 7:42, probably = the stars; but inGen. 32:2,“God's host”= angels, for when Jacob saw the angels he said“this is God's host.”In general the phrases“God of hosts”,“Lord of hosts”seem to mean“God of angels”,“Lord of angels”: compare2 Chron. 18:18;Luke 2:13;Rev. 19:14—“the armies which are in heaven.”Yet inNeh. 9:6andPs. 33:6the word“host”seems to include both angels and stars.
Satan is“the ape of God.”He has a throne. He is“the prince of the world”(John 14:30; 16:11),“the prince of the powers of the air”(Eph. 2:2). There is a cosmos and order of evil, as well as a cosmos and order of good, though Christ is stronger than the strong man armed (Luke 11:21) and rules even over Satan. On Satan in the Old Testament, see art. by T. W. Chambers, in Presb. and Ref. Rev., Jan. 1892:22-34. The first mention of Satan is in the account of the Fall inGen. 3:1-15; the second inLev. 16:8, where one of the two goats on the day of atonement is said to be“for Azazel,”or Satan; the third where Satan moved David to number Israel (1 Chron. 21:1); the fourth in the book ofJob 1:6-12; the fifth inZech. 3:1-3, where Satan stands as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, but Jehovah addresses Satan and rebukes him. Cheyne, Com. on Isaiah, vol. 1, p. 11, thinks[pg 449]that the stars were first called the hosts of God, with the notion that they were animated creatures. In later times the belief in angels threw into the background the belief in the stars as animated beings; the angels however were connected very closely with the stars. Marlowe, in his Tamburlaine, says:“The moon, the planets, and the meteors light, These angels in their crystal armor fight A doubtful battle.”
With regard to the“cherubim”of Genesis, Exodus, and Ezekiel,—with which the“seraphim”of Isaiah and the“living creatures”of the book of Revelation are to be identified,—the most probable interpretation is that which regards them, not as actual beings of higher rank than man, but as symbolic appearances, intended to represent redeemed humanity, endowed with all the creature perfections lost by the Fall, and made to be the dwelling-place of God.
Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.
Some have held that the cherubim are symbols of the divine attributes, or of God's government over nature; see Smith's Bib. Dict., art.: Cherub; Alford, Com. onRev. 4:6-8, and Hulsean Lectures, 1841: vol. 1, Lect. 2; Ebrard, Dogmatik, 1:278. But whatever of truth belongs to this view may be included in the doctrine stated above. The cherubim are indeed symbols of nature pervaded by the divine energy and subordinated to the divine purposes, but they are symbols of nature only because they are symbols of man in his twofold capacity ofimage of Godandpriest of nature. Man, as having a body, is a part of nature; as having a soul, he emerges from nature and gives to nature a voice. Through man, nature, otherwise blind and dead, is able to appreciate and to express the Creator's glory.
The doctrine of the cherubim embraces the following points: 1. The cherubim are not personal beings, but are artificial, temporary, symbolic figures. 2. While they are not themselves personal existences, they are symbols of personal existence—symbols not of divine or angelic perfections but of human nature (Ex. 1:5—“they had the likeness of a man”;Rev. 5:9—A. V.—“thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood”—so read א, B, and Tregelles; the Eng. and Am. Rev. Vers., however, follow A and Tischendorf, and omit the word“us”). 3. They are emblems of human nature, not in its present stage of development, but possessed of all its original perfections; for this reason the most perfect animal forms—the kinglike courage of the lion, the patient service of the ox, the soaring insight of the eagle—are combined with that of man (Ez. 1and10;Rev. 4:6-8). 4. These cherubic forms represent, not merely material or earthly perfections, but human nature spiritualized and sanctified. They are“living creatures”and their life is a holy life of obedience to the divine will (Ez. 1:12—“whither the spirit was to go, they went”). 5. They symbolize a human nature exalted to be the dwelling-place of God. Hence the inner curtains of the tabernacle were inwoven with cherubic figures, and God's glory was manifested on the mercy-seat between the cherubim (Ex. 37:6-9). While the flaming sword at the gates of Eden was the symbol of justice, the cherubim were symbols of mercy—keeping the“way of the tree of life”for man, until by sacrifice and renewal Paradise should be regained (Gen. 3:24).
In corroboration of this general view, note that angels and cherubim never go together; and that in the closing visions of the book of Revelation these symbolic forms are seen no longer. When redeemed humanity has entered heaven, the figures which typified that humanity, having served their purpose, finally disappear. For fuller elaboration, see A. H. Strong, The Nature and Purpose of the Cherubim, in Philosophy and Religion, 391-399; Fairbairn, Typology, 1:185-208; Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ, 1:87; Bib. Sac., 1876:32-51; Bib. Com., 1:49-52—“The winged lions, eagles, and bulls, that guard the entrances of the palace of Nineveh, are worshipers rather than divinities.”It has lately been shown that the winged bull of Assyria was called“Kerub”almost as far back as the time of Moses. The word appears in its Hebrew form 500 years before the Jews had any contact with the Persian dominion. The Jews did not derive it from any Aryan race. It belonged to their own language.
The variable form of the cherubim seems to prove that they are symbolic appearances rather than real beings. A parallel may be found in classical literature. In Horace, Carmina, 3:11, 15, Cerberus has three heads; in 2:13, 34, he has a hundred. Bréal, Semantics suggests that the three heads may be dog-heads, while the hundred heads may be snake-heads. But Cerberus is also represented in Greece as having only one head. Cerberus must therefore be a symbol rather than an actually existing creature. H. W. Congdon of Wyoming, N. Y., held, however, that the cherubim are symbols of[pg 450]God's life in the universe as a whole.Ez. 28:14-19—“the anointed cherub that covereth”—the power of the King of Tyre was so all-pervading throughout his dominion, his sovereignty so absolute, and his decrees so instantly obeyed, that his rule resembled the divine government over the world. Mr. Congdon regarded the cherubim as a proof of monism. See Margoliouth, The Lord's Prayer, 159-180. On animal characteristics in man, see Hopkins, Scriptural Idea of Man, 105.