Angels
I. THE EXISTENCE OF ANGELS Angels are mentioned many times in
We come, finally, in the doctrine of providence to a consideration of angels.
Angels are by definition messengers’
and serve as superhuman beings in various ways to fulfill God’s providen- tial concerns in relation to the world and man.
I. THE EXISTENCE OF ANGELS Angels are mentioned many times in both the Old and New Testaments.2 The first instance is found in Genesis
16:7-“ The angel of the Lord found her [Hagar] by a spring of water in the wilderness”; the last occurs in Revela- tion 22: 16-“ I Jesus have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches.” There are also a number of expressions in the Old Testament some- times used for angels-namely, “sons of God,“3 “holy ones,“4 “watchers,“5 and “hosts,” as in the familiar expres- sion “the Lord of hosts.“6 It is by no means invariably clear when angels are
‘The word “angel” in Greek is angelos. It may refer to a human messenger, as in Mark 1:2- “Behold, I send my messenger [John the Baptist] before thy face, who shall prepare thy way” (cf. Matt. 11:lO; Luke 7:27); Luke 7:24- “When the messengers of John had gone”; Luke 9:52- “And he sent messengers ahead of him”; James 2:25-“Rahab . . . received the messengers and sent them out another way. ” In all of these a form of angelos is found, representing a human messenger. However, in all other cases in the New Testament angelos refers to a heavenly messenger. It is, of course, these heavenly messengers that we will be considering.
*In the Old Testament the Hebrew word for “angel,” ma1 ‘dk, occurs some 114 times;
ungelos in the New Testament some 169 times.
3Job 1:6; 2:l; 38:7; Psalm 29:l; 89:6; cf. Daniel 3:25. For the Psalms passages RSV reads
“heavenly beings” with the marginal reading “sons of gods.” The “sons of God” referred to in Genesis 6:2 who marry “the daughters of men” are viewed by many as angels;
however, it is more likely that they are the godly line of Seth (see Gen. 4:25-26) who intermarry with the ungodly line of Cain (see 4: l-24). In light of Jesus’ words that angels do not marry (Mark 12:25), it hardly seems possible that Genesis 6:2 can refer to angels.
4Or “holy one.” See Deuteronomy 33:2; Job 5: 1; 15:15; Psalm 89:5,7; Daniel 4: 13, 17, 23;
8:13; Zechariah 14:5.
5”Holy one(s),*’ also called “watcher(s),” found in Daniel 4:13, 17, 23.
6An expression used nearly three hundred times in the Old Testament.
169
l<l..:\i lb\ .‘\I 1 t lt:~o1>CL~
being referred to. For example, the word “host” may additionally refer to armies on earth7 or even to celestial bodies .X However, in the numerous places where the word “angel” ap- pears, there can be no questioln about its referring to a heavenly messenger.
The existence of angels is reciognized throughout the Scriptures. Jesus un- questionably affirmed their existence in many of His teachings.9 The only per- sons, it is interesting to obserwe, who were said to deny the existence of angels were the Sadducees iin N e w Testament ‘times: “The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit” (Acts 23:8). The Sadlducees, however, represented only a velry small group of people compared with the overall biblical witness. Ange:ls were generally accepted as a part of the total picture of reality.
It has sometimes been argueld philo- sophically that the existence of angels is probable in light of the hierarchy of being. Man stands at the apex off earthly existence as a rational being; but since below him is a wide gradation of lesser forms of life, it seems likely that there are other creatures in a scale above
him. Or to put it another way: since there are purely corporeal entities (e.g., stones) and beings that are both corpo- real and spiritual (man), there could well be wholly spiritual beingsro-an- gels. Moreover, another argument:
since man after death and before the resurrection of his body is a purely noncorporeal spiritual being,’ 1 it seems at least possible that God might already have created spiritual beings without bodies, namely, angels. Such argu- ments, however, do not really prove anything. It is only through the revela- tion of God in Scripture that the truth about angels is to be found. Nonethe- less, the arguments mentioned do at least suggest that the existence of an- gels is not antecedently impossible.
Also it could be a check on man’s pride at least to think that he might not be the highest creation in the universe!12
When we turn to our contemporary situation, it is apparent that many peo- ple today are by no means ready to affirm the existence of angels. Angels are often viewed at best as symbolic expressions of God’s action or as myth- opoetic pictures of various dimensions of human existence.13 In a scientific
‘In some instances “the Lord o:f hosts” may refer to God’s lordship over the hosts of Israel; however, in many cases, reference is clearly made to “the host of heaven,” that is,
“the host of angels” (as, e.g., in I Kings 22:19 and Luke 2:13).
8For hosts as celestial bodies, sele, e.g., Deuteronomy 4: l9-“the sun and the moon and the stars, all the host of heaven.”
yThe references are too many to list. There are over twenty in the four Gospels. We will be noting a number of these later in this chapter.
‘OFor a discussion of angels as spiritual beings or “spirits,” see below.
“See, e.g., Hebrews 12:23-“the spirits of just men made perfect” (cf. Rev. 6:9).
I 2A concluding footnote from A. H. Strong: “The doctrine of angels affords a barrier against the false conception of this world as including the whole spiritual universe. Earth is
only part of a larger organism. As Christianity has united Jew and Gentile, so hereafter will it blend our own and other orders of creation: Col. 2: IO- who is the head of all principality and power’ = Christ is the head of angels as well as of men; Eph. I:lO-‘to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth’ ” (Systematic Theology. 444). This I like, for it carries one beyond philosophical reasoning (though it is similar to it) into the province of biblical revelation.
“In similar fashion Paul Tillicb refers to angels as “Concrete-poetic symbols of the structures or powers of being. They are not beings but participate in everything that is.” He
speaks also of “their rediscovery frlom the psychological side as archetypes of the collective
170 .‘, .,
Ii
age, it is sometimes said, there is little, if any, place for angelic beings.14 For many in the Christian church, while angels may be sung about and even recited in certain of the creeds, there has come to be a growing skepticism concerning their actual existence. In some cases the questioning about an- gels does not stem so much from an antisupernatural attitude as it does from the matter of relevance. Does Christian faith need angels? Is it not enough to believe in God without adding to the superstructure by bringing in angels?
With a proper understanding of God and His own presence, there seems to many persons little space or even desire for heavenly messengers.
Let us pursue this a bit further. Even among some who accept the existence of angels by virtue of the biblical wit- ness, there is not much zeal about them. Rather than belonging to the joy of faith, they are felt to be a burden.
Furthermore, as far as theology goes, could we not bypass the whole area of angels and move forthwith to some other doctrine and be as well off, or
ANGELS
even better off?15 Sometimes too there is the recollection of earlier periods in church history when angelology was rampant, and both popular piety and theology were laden with interest in angels that went far beyond the biblical record.16 Are we ill advised in Christian doctrine to venture again into this area?
But now there is another matter to be considered. Throughout the history of the church there have been frequent claims of visitations of angels. A few years ago a book appeared entitled Angels on Assignment’7 in which a local pastor claimed that he had had many visits of angels. He gave the names of some, descriptions of their appearance, their varied activities, spe- cial messages from God, and much else.
In view of a book like this (and many other similar accounts in the past), one of the tasks of theology must surely be that of seeking to evaluate such claims through a careful study of biblical reve- lation. If angelic visits are still possi- ble,r 8 there is all the more need for such study to be done.
unconsciousness” (Systematic Theology, 1:260). Thus angels are only symbolic representa- tions of an aspect of the world or of human consciousness.
14“In a universe of electrons and positrons, atomic energy and rocket power, Einsteinian astronomy and nuclear physics, angels seem out of place.” So writes Bernard Ramm in an article, “Angels,” in Basic Christian Doctrines, 65. Ramm, while himself affirming the reality of angels, does surely capture some of the modern mood. Bultmann expresses this modern mood in writing: “It is impossible to use electric light and the wireless and to avail ourselves of modem medical and scientific discoveries, and at the same time to believe in the New Testament world of daemons and spirits” (Kerygmu and Myth, 5).
r5Applying “Ockham’s razor” (also called the Law of Parsimony or Economy), i.e., that entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity, could we not “shave off’ angelology in toto with no real loss to theological endeavor? If angels are not necessary (so this reasoning goes), let us dispense with further consideration of them.
r6A. H. Strong writes, for example, about scholastic theology (theology of the Middle Ages): “The scholastics debated the questions, how many angels could stand at once on the point of a needle . . . whether an angel could be in two places at the same time; how great was the interval between the creation of angels and their fall . . . whether our atmosphere is the place of punishment for fallen angels,” and so on (Systematic Theology, 443). In popular piety angels often also became more important than Christ or the Holy Spirit in mediating the things of God.
“The book is by Pastor Roland H. Buck as told to Charles and Frances Hunter.
reThis is a matter we have yet to consider. I believe that there is both biblical and
Kf-Nf I\‘/\1 I I ff:Ol cx;1
Now as we enter upon this consider- ation of angels, it is with keen aware- ness of many of the countercurrents, but also with growing conviction that there is much of importance and rele- vance that can accrue from such a study. It could be that angels play a significant role in our understanding of the whole of reality. Whatever the case, I will seek to stay closely within bounds of Scripture,19 and trust that deepened vistas of understanding will open up by the illumination of God’s Holy Spirit.
II. THE NATURE OF ANGELS At the outset it is significant to note that in the Scriptures angels belong to the realm of mystery.20 They come and go; they speak and disappear; they act and are nowhere to be found. Often they appeared at highly important mo- ments in biblical history, for example, in the New Testament at the birth of Jesus,” at His resurrection,22 and at His ascension,‘3 and they will appear at His future return.24 Angels never call attention to themselves but invariably point to something else-often mysteri- ous, even incomprehensible. They al- ways seem to be a part of God’s action
and have their existence alongside or in relation to Him. The being of angels is a matter of little biblical interest; their activity is much more a matter of inter- est.
Now with this much by way of back- ground, what can we say about the nature of angels? Here we must exer- cise some diffidence, since they prob- ably would not care for such attention(!) and because the Scriptures do not give
a great deal of information. Let us move therefore with circumspection.
A. Angels Are Moral Beings As we consider the nature of angels, we need to recognize that angels belong in either of two categories: the holy or the unholy. The “holy angels”25 are the primary concern of the Scriptures; they are God’s angels26 or Christ’s angels;2’
often they are simply called “angels,”
with the understanding that they are holy and good. Indeed, holy angels are referred to in the Scriptures wherever the word “angels” (or “angel”) ap- pears except in four instances: Matthew 25:41; 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6; and Revela- tion 12:7-9.28
experiential testimony to such a possibility. (See the interview with me by the editor of Christirrn Llfr magazine entitled, “Angels in Your Life,” [Nov. 19801, 30-77).
IYIn a section on angels Calvin well says, “The duty of a Theologian . . . is not to tickle the ear, but confirm the conscience, by teaching what is true, certain, and useful . . . .
Bidding adieu, therefore, to that nugatory wisdom [regarding angelic speculation], let us endeavor to ascertain from the simple doctrine of Scripture what it is the Lord’s pleasure that we should know concerning angels” (Institutes, I. 14. 4, Beveridge trans.).
?“nlot mythology!
?I Luke 2: I3-“And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, ‘Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men.’ ” zzE.g., Matthew 28:2-6-“An angel of the Lord descended from heaven and . . . rolled back the stone . . the angel said to the women . . . ‘he has risen.’ ”
?‘Acts I: IO-“while they [the apostles] were gazing into heaven . . . two men stood by them in white robes.”
?4E.g., Matthew 16:27-“the Son of man is to come with his angels in the glory of his Fat her.”
?( For this expression see Mark X:38; I,uke 9:26; Revelation 14:lO.
?“Sce Genesis 2X: 12; 32: I; I.uke 12:8--O; IS: IO; John 151; Hebrews 1%; Revelation 35.
The expression is usually “the angels of God.”
?‘Sec Matthew l3:41; 16:27; 24:3l; 2 ‘I’hessalonians l:7. They are “his angels.”
2x It is possible that Paul’s reference in Remans X:3X to “angels” also relates to unholy or evil angels. hut that is by no means certain. First Corinthians 6:3 is another possibility.
Before proceeding with the study of the good or holy angels, let us briefly comment on this negative category.
According to 2 Peter and Jude, there are angels who sinned, lost their former high station, and are being kept in pits of “nether gloom” until the day of judgment.z9 In Matthew Jesus spoke of
“the devil and his angels,” for whom
“eternal fire” has been prepared.30 The Book of Revelation speaks of “the dragon [Satan] and his angels” and how both he and they were cast down to earth.31 From the Scriptures in 2 Peter and Jude it is apparent that unholy angels are actually fallen angels, and in Matthew and Revelation that they are associated with the devil (Satan). Be- yond that there is no clear biblical picture of their activity. It is possible that demons -unclean or evil spirits- frequently mentioned, especially in the New Testament, are fallen angels; how- ever, that connection is not specifically made.32 In any event this discussion about angels will focus on the unfallen or holy angels, for, as I said before, it is about them that the Scripture is almost totally concerned.
gels are moral beings. It is apparent from the record in 2 Peter and Jude that the angels who fell were guilty of a prideful moral decision; they “did not keep their own position” (Jude 6).33 This implies that other angels did not make the same decision and have stayed in God’s will from their begin- ning. Thus the holy angels are not simply holy by necessity but have re- tained their holiness and goodness by a free moral choice.
Angels- and henceforward we will use that designation for holy angels- are moral beings. They are confirmed in holiness by moral decision and serve as God’s messengers in a freedom of total commitment. As moral beings, they are also always on the side of righteousness and justice among people. Of such character are the angels revealed to us in Holy Scripture.
B. Angels Are Spirits
Now to our basic point: the very fact of the existence of both fallen and unfallen angels demonstrates that an-
Angels are pure spiritual beings. In the Book of Hebrews angels are de- scribed as “ministering spirits” (1: 14).
The word for “spirits” is pneumata,34 the plural form of pneuma (“spirit”), which is also used in relation to God, for example, in John 4:24-“God is spirit.” Angels, therefore, are real be- .*HOWeVer, as a general rule unholy or wicked angels are not called “angels” without some defining adjunct.
z92 Peter 2:4; Jude 6.
SOMatthew 25:41.
31 Revelation 12:7-9.
3*In one New Testament incident (Matt. 12:24-28; Mark 3:22-26) “Beelzebul” is called
“the prince [or “ruler”] of demons.” Since Satan and Beelzebul are closely associated in the account, Satan is actually “the ruler of the demons.” Since Satan has his angels (as we have observed), it is possible that these angels are also demons. D. E. Aune, contrariwise, writes in an article entitled “Demons” (ZSBE, 1:923) that “the fallen angels . . . are nowhere
in the N.T. regarded as demonic beings.” I would not, however, rule out this possibility.
Moreover, if the demons are not fallen angels, where do they come from? (Incidentally, the tracing of demons back to the offspring of Nephilim [or giants] in Genesis 6:4, an attempt made in Intertestamental Judaism, has very little to commend it.)
33 Satan’s prideful action, similar to and possibly the background for the angel’s seeking to go beyond their own “position,” will be discussed in chapter IO, “Sin.”
j4Angels are also called pneumata in Hebrews I :7-“[God] makes his angels pneumuta.” The R S V. N I V, N A S B, and NEB translate as “winds”; KJV as “spirits.” Either translation is possible, as pneuma means both “wind” and “spirit” (cf. John 3:8).
173
ANGElS
ings whose nature, like that of God, is wholly spiritual. 35 This is not an attri- bute or quality of their being; rather in essence angels are spirits.
Angels, accordingly, are incorporeal:
they have no bodies. A spirit, a pneu- ma, does not have flesh and bones.
Jesus in a resurrection appearance to His disciples said, “See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have” (Luke 24:39).36 Angels are spirits, therefore, without flesh and bones: they are incor- porea1.37
Now, on the one hand, this does not mean that angels are without form.
They are not something nebulous, shapeless, amorphous. Angels have particular being as do both God and people. On the other hand, having form does not mean that angels have a kind of refined, subtle, ethereal corporeality.
It has sometimes been thought that angels may occasionally be seen per- haps as a glimmering, vaporous, ap- pearing and disappearing light. Such, however, is impossible, for as spirits they are totally invisible to human eyes.
Angels are spirits, having form but totally without corporeality.
But, we must immediately add, ac- cording to the biblical record, they may appear in human form. The earliest example of this is to be found in the story of Abraham and the visit of “the three men” (Gen. l&2), two of whom
turned out to be angels as they went on to Sodom (see 19:1-“the two an- gels”). The “men” ate Abraham’s pre- pared meal and later that of Lot in Sodom. Also they “put forth their hands” (19: 10) and rescued Lot from the Sodomites. So in every way they appeared to be men, not just phantasies but corporeal entities. Another Old Tes- tament illustration of an angel as a man is that relating to Joshua near the city of Jericho, which had not yet fallen to Israel. Joshua “lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, a man stood before him with his sword drawn in his hand”
and announced that “as commander of the army of the LORD I have now come”
(Josh. 5:13-14). In turning again to the New Testament we observe that at the resurrection of Jesus, according to Mark’s Gospel, the women “saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe; and they were amazed” (165) ;3* according to Luke,
“two men suddenly stood near them in dazzling apparel” (24:4 NASB). Likewise at the ascension of Jesus the record in Acts reads that “two men stood by them [the apostles] in white robes”
(1: 10). The persons described in all these instances were undoubtedly an- gels, but they appeared as men. An- other interesting statement in the same direction is that found in Hebrews: “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have enter- tained angels unawares” (13:2). This
35Here the word “spiritual” does not refer to a quality as, e.g., when one speaks of a
“spiritual man” over against an “unspiritual man” (as in 1 Corinthians 2:14-15).
“Spiritual” in regard to God and angels signifies their essence. Calvin writes regarding angels that “they are real beings possessed of spiritual essence” (Instifutes, 1.14.9).
‘6It is significant that even though Jesus had been raised with a spiritual or glorified body, He is still not “a spirit.” This, incidentally, points also to the fact that in the resurrection to come when we too shall have a spiritual body we will not be “spirits.” We will never (it hardly needs saying) be angels.
“The basic difference between angels and people is that while angels are spirits, people have spirits. However, since the spirit is the deepest dimension of human nature (see chapter 9, “Man”) and will continue after death until the future resurrection of the body, there is a certain kinship with angels.
lnln the parallel Matthew 28:2 (as earlier quoted) the word “angel” is specifically used.
174
probably refers to the story of Abraham and Lot and their hospitality, but of course it further suggests that other strangers to whom people have shown hospitality may also actually prove to have been angels!
Another point: angels as spirits are not bound to any particular place.
They, like the wind,39 move freely and invisibly, but even beyond the wind, which can be limited by objects. There is no limitation, no barrier, to the movement of angels. They suddenly appea@O and disappear. For angels be- long to another dimension beyond that of our spatio-temporal existence. Their abode is in heaven, and from there they may move to any earthly place at any moment and just as quickly return. We may here recall Jacob’s dream at Bethel of a ladder reaching from earth to heaven: “Behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it!”
(Gen. 28:12). And yet the ascent and descent are not from one physical sphere to another, but from the tran- scendent realm into our world of space and time. Angels as wholly spiritual beings, therefore, are bound by no earthly limitations.
C. Angels Are Finite Creatures Angels were made by God; they are therefore His creatures. In the beautiful opening words of Psalm 148 there is first a call for angels, the heavenly host, to praise the Lord: “Praise the LORD from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him all his angels, praise him, all his host!” Then follows a calI to the cosmic host: “Praise him, sun and
ANGELS
moon, praise him, all you shining stars!” After this the psalmist, address- ing both heavenly and cosmic hosts, sings forth, “Let them praise the name of the LORD! For he commanded and they were created.” Angels, as well as sun and moon; the heavenly host, as well as the shining stars, are God’s creatures: at His command they all came into existence.
In correspondence with the words just quoted are those of Colossians 1:16--” In him [Christ] all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or do- minions or rulers,41 or authorities.“42 The “invisible orders”43 consisting of thrones, dominions, rulers, and authori- ties44 refer to angels. Hence, God cre- ated not only all visible things-every- thing in the physical universe (the visi- ble heavens and earth, all living things including mankind)-but also the vast invisible realm of angelic beings. They also are God’s creation in Christ; they are likewise His creatures.
There is no clear biblical testimony as to the time of the creation of angels.
Since angels are mentioned along with other creaturely reality in Psalm 148 and Colossians 1, one might assume that they were created at the same time.
Indeed, a further Scripture that could point in this direction is Genesis 2:1-
“Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.”
However, “the host of them” would seem to be the heavens and the earth whose description, without mention of angels, has been given in Genesis 1.d5 39Recall the statement that God “makes his angels winds” (Heb. 1:7 RSV and others).
‘OEven when angels appear as men there is no gradual arrival as with ordinary men. As quoted above, “two men suddenly stood near . . . in dazzling apparel.”
‘i NASB. NIV. The RSV (so KJV) has “principalities.” “Rulers,” I believe, is preferable.
42The KJV and NEB translate this word as “powers.” The Greek is exousiai.
43 NEB.
44This will be discussed in more detail later.
“Also cf. Psalm 33:6- “By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and all their 175