Among the spiritual beings of the created order, the angels must surely be ranked as the most powerful and best of those beings, at least as measured in this current age. I add the caveat here, because of that which we find in Psalm 8:4-5. “What is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor.” Yet, per the author of Hebrews, the ‘him’ who is a little lower is not man generally, but Jesus particularly, and in His case, obviously, that status is quite temporary. “You made him for a little while lower than the angels” (Heb 2:7a). “But we see Him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone” (Heb 2:9).
As for man, it is also said that we, or at least a representative sample of we, shall sit in judgment over the angels in that coming age. Actually, given the setting Paul gives this statement, I have to think it is a fairly general claim. “Do you not know that we shall judge angels?” (1Co 6:3a). That, I should note, is a far cry from suggesting that we shall ever have right of command over angels. But, before we get to that thought, and angelology as a broader consideration, let’s turn to those few specifics we are given.
a. Seraphim
I have already considered the Seraphim, who are described for us in Isaiah 6, as the prophet contemplates the scene in the heavenly courtroom at his calling. They are apparently beings with six wings, of which but two would appear to serve for flight, at least in the more or less hovering state they are depicted here. The others are, rather like our robes of righteousness, coverings for the sake of God’s holiness. Each had six wings, Isaiah tells us. “With two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one called out to another and said, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts. The whole earth is full of His glory” (Isa 6:2-3).
The entire emphasis of the passage is on holiness, but it is that perfect holiness which is embodied in God, which is the very essence and chief defining quality of God. The seraphim, it seems, are no more fit to look upon His holiness and live than are we, and as such must cover their eyes, lest they see God and be destroyed. They are no more fit to stand on holy ground than are we, and as such, must cover their feet lest by touching that holy ground, they come under penalty of death.
Four images immediately come to mind in that regard, two from the life of Moses, and two from the life of Christ with His Apostles. The latter pair, I observe immediately, reflect or echo the former pair. Start here. As Moses encounters the burning bush, the voice that comes to him says, “Do not come near here. Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground” (Ex 3:5). Note also that Moses, on that occasion, hid his face, lest he look at God (Ex 3:6). This, at a glance, seems as if it runs counter to the foot-covering example of the angels. Shouldn’t Moses rather be putting something on his feet, lest they touch holy ground? But, in reality, the point is equivalent. It is a prevention of touching the holy with the unclean. For the seraphim, it seems that footwear is not something in their normal experience. Thus, the feet themselves are rendered unclean. For Moses, walking in the desert, sandals of some form were his common equipment, and as a shepherd, one can reasonably understand the need, even if his soles were hardened against the heat of desert sands. But the sandals had served as something interposed between his feet and the unclean grounds. Now, as he would approach holy ground, those sandals must remain behind. Yet, note well that there remains the stricture even against his bare feet coming close. “Do not come near here!” It would be your end.
This, of course, plays out again at the Last Supper, as Jesus washes the feet of His disciples. We readily recall the scene, and also Peter’s reactions. “Never shall You wash my feet!” (Jn 13:8). It was unbecoming for the Master to take up the task given the lowest servants of the household. But, Jesus wasn’t having it. “If I do not wash you, you have no part with Me.” Peter, of course, does an instant and overcompensating about face. “Lord, not my feet only, but my hands and my head!” (Jn 13:9). Clearly, explanation is needed, and Jesus supplies it. “He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you” (Jn 13:10). That last, John observes, referred to Judas, who was going to betray Christ. But, the point is for us. There is a once-for-all cleaning in the work of salvation, already accomplished in the calling of the elect. There is also a continuous need for touch up, the feet, because the feet are ever in contact with the sinful world. Like Moses’ sandals, we don’t really wish to consider where our feet have been, but can be assured that the stuff of the world is upon them, and if we would enter into heaven, to stand upon holy ground, they are going to need sanitizing first; the sanitizing work of sanctification through repentance and forgiveness.
Okay, the second pair of scenes would start with Moses on Mount Sinai. He has been around God long enough that he has, perhaps unwisely, lost some of his initial fear of God. He pleads. “Show me Your face,” or more literally, “Show me Thy glory!” (Ex 33:18), but it was not to be, for as God reminded him in his forgetfulness, “No man can see Me and live!” (Ex 33:20). But, God didn’t leave it at that. He allowed Moses a glimpse, but of His back, as it were. How literally that ought to be taken is an open question, for God is Spirit, remember? But, He set Moses in a cleft in the rock, where his scope of view would be limited, and then covered Moses’ eyes as He passed, only removing that covering when but a glimpse of His back would be possible (Ex 33:21-23). What a merciful God!
This, I would suggest, finds its replay in the scene atop the Mount of Transfiguration. There, for a brief while, was Jesus, the God-Man, transfigured before them; them being Peter, James, and John. “His face shone like the sun, and His garments became as white as light” (Mt 17:2). Still, it seems the three did not quite grasp the situation until the Father spoke, and it would seem they understood His words. “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased. Listen to Him!” (Mt 17:5-6). At this, they fell on their faces and were much afraid, says Matthew. And why would they not be? Even if they remained confused on the true nature of Jesus, the Father they understood, and understanding, they knew, as Moses knew, that to see Him was to cease living. The facts of God had not altered. “No man can see Me and live!”
The nature of man, sadly, had also not altered much. As the focal point of history draws nigh, we find Philip, much like Moses up there on Mount Sinai, losing sight of things just a bit. “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us” (Jn 14:8). Really? Philip, have you still not grasped the scope of what’s going on? First off, which Jesus doesn’t bother reminding His disciples on this occasion, the situation has not changed. You are still imperfect in holiness, and to see the Father would be to die. After all, at this juncture, Jesus has still not made atonement for sins. His disciples’ feet, if you will, remain unclean. Second, and this He does bring to their attention, Philip’s request betrays a continued lack of understanding as to who Jesus is. “Have I been so long with you and you still have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (Jn 14:9).
What, you may ask, has all of this to do with seraphim? Only this: What we are shown in that brief and singular glimpse of them in heaven informs us, through the examples of Moses and of the Apostles, that they are no more perfect in holiness than we are. They may be, and I might even suggest are, holier than we are, but not perfect any more than we are perfect. To the degree that they remain holy, it is on the same basis as we do: The power of God expressed in the grace of God. If it were not so, we should have no concern for Satan, for he would remain a holy, heavenly being, and those demons who serve in his cause would not exist, for they, too, would remain holy, heavenly beings. But, they did not remain holy. These angels, these seraphim, are moral agents as are we. They have a will as do we. They either choose to serve God or they choose to rebel against His authority.
So, as I said, mention of the seraphim comes only in this one passage. And yet, the term has a rather outsized place in Christian thought and liturgy, doesn’t it? I think of that great hymn of the Church, fashioned from this very scene in Isaiah 6. “Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty…” And of course, the later line, “Seraphim and cherubim, falling down before Thee, Who wert and art and evermore shall be.” We sense the awe that these creatures struck in Isaiah, and which, were we to encounter them in so real and tangible a fashion, they would likewise strike in us. And yet, we know very little of them, certainly under this particular label. Perhaps it is that scant knowledge that inspires the awe, but sadly, our awe tends toward romanticized curiosity, rather than a proper view of God’s true holiness.
When we contemplate the seraphim, it seems to me the best lesson we can take from that contemplation is our own desperate need for holiness. We need that with which to guard our eyes, lest the impurity of our gaze encounter the undiluted holiness, the perfect purity of God Himself. We need that righteousness of Christ by which to robe ourselves and prevent our feet from sullying the perfectly holy ground of that glassy sea around the throne of God. We are, wonder of wonders, invited to enter into that place, to come before our holy God in prayer and communion, having the bold confidence of faith in Christ. But, we are not invited to come parade our sinful flesh before Him. We are invited to come, robed in the righteousness of Christ our Savior, to speak with God our Father.
b. Cherubim
[10/15/19]
The cherubim are actually the first name by which we are introduced to the order of angels, and it is not a happy introduction. It comes at Adam’s expulsion from Eden, whereupon God stationed the cherubim east of the garden to stand with flaming sword, ‘to guard the way to the tree of life’ (Ge 3:24). I should note that it was not a single cherubim, but multiple who were thus stationed.
Cherubim also feature largely in the features of God’s temple. Two gold statues of cherubim face one another across and over the ark of the covenant (Ex 25:18-22), and figures of cherubim are worked into the curtains and other aspects of the tabernacle. As to those first statues, their wings cover the mercy seat, toward which they face (Ex 37:9). This is certainly suggestive of the angels in relation to Christ Jesus, Who is the Mercy Seat. It suggests their guarding of His Person, particularly in those days of earthly ministry, but I suspect, also insomuch as they attend upon Him in heaven, and face Him as their commander, our Lord of Hosts.
It is intriguing that Samuel writes of David bringing the ark of God into the city of David, observing that the ark is ‘called by the Name, the very name of the LORD of hosts who is enthroned above the cherubim’ (2Sa 6:2), whereas Moses entered the tent of meeting to speak with God, and heard Him speak ‘from above the mercy seat that was on the ark of the testimony, from between the two cherubim’ (Nu 7:89). I’m not sure what, if anything to make of this other than to recognize clearly that this was no idol, no tool for capturing God’s presence in some safe and determinate place. God, being God of all, is everywhere and anywhere He pleases. Yet, there is something special about that place that He has caused to be sanctified to His Name, such as the temple and the tabernacle, such as the church in all its local instances. Where the people of God are gathered together to come before the Lord and worship Him, there indeed is holy ground, and the people of God do well to recognize this.
Again, with the construction of Solomon’s temple, the figure of the cherubim feature significantly; their figures carved into door and wall. Within the holy of holies, there were two such sculptures, each with wings five cubits long, a cubit being in the range of 22 inches or somewhat less. It is to be observed, though, that while these figures of cherubim seem to be a constant image in the house of God, they are not objects to be worshiped or adored. They are more nearly decorations, adornments not so far removed from the pomegranates that adorned the tops of the pillars in the temple (2Chr 4:16). It is not their figures that are worthy of our consideration, but those which the images depict.
Ezekiel gives us the clearest picture, as I considered earlier in this consideration of the creation. These are, per Ezekiel one and the same as the living creatures that came to him in vision on the river Chebar. These, he observed, had each four faces and four wings, two for flight and two for covering their bodies (Eze 1:11). Now, while their appearance is indeed a most curious thing as Ezekiel describes them, fantastical even, it is their activity which I think deserves more of our attention. He sees them, in Ezekiel 10, arrayed below the sapphire-like sea upon which God’s throne is set, and they are around, it would seem, a fire from which coals are taken by a ‘man clothed in linen’, to be scattered over the city of Jerusalem (Eze 10:2), after which, “the glory of the LORD went up from the cherub to the threshold of the temple, and the temple was filled with the cloud, and the court was filled with the brightness of the glory of the LORD” (Eze 10:4).
These cherubs appear to serve more or less as a junction between heaven and earth, doing the Lord’s bidding as concerns the men of His kingdom here. Ezekiel describes them as accompanied by some odd wheel-like contraption with eyes all around. It’s unclear what exactly that contraption is or what it looked like, but the implication is that nothing is going to escape their notice as the patrol the Lord’s earth. It is also clear that they have particular connection to the Lord’s house, the temple.
This, it seems to me, is the common thread that runs through all the various descriptions of the cherubim. They are particularly connected to the Lord’s throne and to His house. Now, again I must stress that the physical structures that we associate with worship, be they temple or church, be they made of cloth or stone or metal or wood or whatever else we may think to use, are not in and of themselves significant. It is not the structure that calls for the guarding work of these angelic beings. Neither is it the case that God stands in need of their protection. But, they are concerned with guarding His holiness, and as such we find them primarily interposing themselves between the perfection of God and the sinfulness of man.
This interposition is there at the gates of Eden. God is not in need of their protection, but man is in need of protection from his own sinful impulses. Recall that these cherubim are set out on this first guard duty so that man might not come and partake of the tree of life. This is for man’s protection. What could be more terrible a fate than to have fallen into sin, to have that sin unaddressed in the only possible way it could be addressed, in the victory of the promised Seed, and to be granted eternal life, but eternal life now incapable of redemption? That, I should have to note, is in fact the final fate of all who reject the Christ, but God has gone out of His way to see His children safely to redemption.
This same guarding of sinful man from too near a contact with the holiness of God may be seen in the two cherubim whose wings overstretch the mercy seat. It is once again a barrier to prevent man drawing too close and finding himself destroyed for his impetuousness. Then, too, in that image of the cherubim below the glassy platform of God’s heavenly throne, there is imposition of something, or someone, between holy God and sinful man, lest man come too close and suffer for it.
With that, perhaps, we can briefly consider that man in linen who comes between the cherubim to take from the purifying fire and go out into the city. At first glance, that seems a sign of judgment, perhaps because we see the similarities to John’s imagery in the Revelation. But, in fact, that heavenly fire is for purification, as the fires of the atoning sacrifice purify the offering. We see it in the way that scene plays out. It is not for the destruction of Israel that this man is sent, but for her redemption. The exiles must endure their exile, yes, but God has not abandoned them. He has chastised them in order that they may indeed repent and return to worship once more.
This, I think, also addresses the common, recurring mention of images of cherubim in the artistry of God’s temple, in all its iterations. They are not merely for decoration, and they are assuredly not for purposes of being worshiped themselves. But, they are reminders; reminders that even here in the temple, man stands in need of protection from his holy God. Understand that it is not because God is wrathful, although God is wrath. It is not that God is vengeful, although vengeance is His. It is for one reason only: God is holy, and that holiness is so utterly pure, so thoroughly incompatible with sin, that it must, by its merest presence, eradicate sin.
Even the cherubim and the seraphim find it needful to shield themselves somewhat from the presence of His holiness, but they are created for that very purpose, and well equipped to do so, remaining in His presence without it destroying them. And this service they do, in obedience to Him who sits on the throne, but also, by His decree and design, in service to us, lest we be destroyed by the experience of Him in His fullness. The time will come when we, like they, are given a form suited to His presence, wedding clothes they are called, robes of pure white linen as we are clothed in the very righteousness of Christ. But, until that time, there remains the need of some distance between God and man, even though we abide in Him, and He abides in us.
Yes, it is assuredly the case, for Jesus stated it plainly, that we are ourselves temples of the living God, who has in point of fact taken up residence in us. Yet, in some way beyond my capacity to describe, it seems the cherubim still stand their guard, lest our contact be so close as to leave us burned to ash by His purifying fire.
c. Named Angels/ Archangels
[10/16/19]
If little is said of the seraphim, and not all that much of the cherubim, there is next to nothing said in regard to archangels, and as to angels spoken of by name, I find but two, and those given the briefest notice. As to the matter of archangels, there are but two verses that speak of them at all. The first comes from Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians. “The Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first” (1Th 4:16). This is clearly an end-times, last day matter. It is concerned primarily with the truth about the resurrection that is to come for those who belong to Christ. The archangel, in this instance, seems to serve as little more than herald, although even that might be misinterpreting the scene.
I’ll take the opportunity to consult at least a lexical reference here, because the term is a rarity. The term itself expresses the meaning pretty clearly. This is a chief angel, if not the chief angel. It is a leader of angels, an angel with authority over other angels. Only two are named, as I said, but there are suggestions of more, although the references given in the Complete Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament are not places that speak immediately of archangels. Given that these other references do not specifically address archangels, but rather angels of particular rank and assignment, I think it best to save consideration of their mention for the next section of my effort.
So, then, an archangel is one with authority over other angels. Yet, an archangel remains under the rule of God, and we might even go so far as to say, based on the verse we just looked at, that they are particularly under the rule of Christ, who Himself will descend with the voice of the archangel, and the trumpet of God. Note that both those images are associated with heralding events. The trumpets blow to declare the arrival of royalty. At least, this is an image engraved on our minds by film and by other depictions of life with kings and queens.
As to the matter of archangels, it is not entirely clear to me that there are more than one, but I see the basis on which multiple such archangels are proposed. This comes back to the passage that speaks of Michael, whom Jude identifies as the archangel (Jude 9). On that occasion, Michael is seen to be disputing with the devil as concerns the disposition of Moses’ body. This is not something for which we are going to find an OT reference, mind you, but that’s a consideration for another day, perhaps. The focus of that verse is primarily on prideful men, purportedly believers, who throw off authority, and even go so far as to ‘revile angelic majesties’ (Jude 8). His point is that even Michael the archangel did not look to his own strength in opposing the devil, but called back to the authority of God. “The Lord rebuke you.” I should think from our perspective, the rebuke of an angel would be a terrible thing indeed to experience, but then, it’s not us that he’s dealing with. It’s the devil, an angel such as himself, though fallen; one, then, of equivalent power.
But, Michael is one we do see again, in the context of Daniel 10. There, he is spoken of as ‘one of the chief princes’ (Dan 10:13). It is probably worthwhile to look at that vision more largely. Daniel sees ‘a certain main dressed in linen, whose waist was girded with a belt of pure gold’ (Dan 10:5). His face is like lightning, his eyes burn like torches, and his limbs have the appearance of polished bronze (Dan 10:6). Daniel is overawed, and those who had been with him on the bank of the Tigris at the outset had long since fled away, leaving him alone to witness this vision. What do we learn? This is not some dream of the night, but something seen in the day, albeit only by Daniel. Not too surprisingly, he collapses to the ground, face down, but this one calms him, tells him to stand up, ‘for I have now been sent to you’ (Dan 10:11).
At first, one might be forgiven for thinking this is in fact the Son of God come to speak with Daniel, but I rather think not, for we find, “the prince of the kingdom of Persia was withstanding me for twenty-one days; then behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left there with the king of Persia” (Dan 10:13). To that battle this one is to return, and the prince of Greece is about to come as well, though it’s unclear which side of the battle he can be expected to join (Dan 10:20), but then comes this: “However, I will tell you what is inscribed in the writing of truth. Yet there is no one who stands firmly with me against these forces except Michael your prince” (Dan 10:21).
What are we seeing? These princes, and even the king of Persia, as depicted here, are not earthly men whose names might be found engraved in the annals of this country or that. They are spiritual beings, angels. That is not to say that they are universally good. Clearly, the prince of Persia is not presented as a force for good, but as one who seeks to oppose the messenger sent by God. The prince of Greece, one suspects, is likewise not for good but for evil, for the only one standing with this unnamed messenger is Michael, ‘your prince’.
This scene has something of a reprise in the Revelation. “There was war in heaven, Michel and his angels waging war with the dragon. And the dragon and his angels waged war, and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven” (Rev 12:7-8). The dragon, we are told explicitly, is Satan, and we see from this that those angels fighting with him on his s side are those elsewhere called demons.
I observe, though, that Michael alone is seen having charge here. It is not Michael and the other archangels with their angels, it is Michael alone with his. If I lay that alongside the vision given Daniel, I could perhaps see that man dressed in linen as the Son after all. The one thing that gives me pause in stating that certainly is the idea of the Son being successfully opposed for even so brief a time. Yet, I suppose we can accept that if it were to His purpose to tarry, He might allow the appearance of successful opposition for a season. Has He not done so on the earth, where it seems, as it has seemed for ages, that darkness is winning? Did it not seem like Satan had succeeded in opposing Him as He lay in the darkness of the tomb? Yet, it was but the appearance of victory, and in fact, Satan, death, and Hades were defeated on that day. And still, the battle rages on in heaven, as John shows us here. It is a weird thing, that we witness this both as history and as current events and as future, but that is what is given us. The victory is won, yet the battle is ongoing.
Okay, so if Michael is one prince amongst some unspecified number of princes, perhaps one per nation or one per empire, as Daniel’s vision seems to suggest, does that in fact mean there are many angels of equal power and authority, which is to say, a multiplicity of archangels? I do not find that a necessary conclusion, although I can see a basis for it. It makes more sense to me, that in any sort of organization, there is one in final command. Yes, we can lay that final headship on the Son, or on God more generally, as we can with the whole of creation. But, take the example of an earthly military force. Somewhere there is a commander in chief. There may be ever so many generals, and those generals may have final say in the immediate disposition of their assigned troops. Their troops will likely, with the exception of upper echelons, never hear their commands directly, and even those upper echelons are unlikely to hear or appeal to that one who is commander in chief. Indeed, even the general may find himself more directly answerable to a higher ranking general.
Is Michael alone the only archangel? I don’t think that can be said with the certainty of truth. It is suggested, and yet, it is entirely possible that there are other archangels whose duties simply don’t impinge so directly on the unfolding drama of redemption, and as such, do not find themselves mentioned by name, or even by association. All that being said, it does seem rather striking that we only see the term archangel in the singular, and where it is associated with any specific individual at all, it is Michael, who alone stands with the man in linen, and who, seemingly alone, carries the heavenly battle to the dragon.
[10/17/19]
Gabriel is another to whom we are introduced in connection with Daniel. He is sent to explain the visions Daniel has seen (Dan 8:16). Note that while Gabriel is spoken of as a man, he is one whom Daniel saw in the vision (Dan 9:21). It is worth observing the two matters that Gabriel comes to explain. In the first vision, the topic is the end of days, ‘the final period of the indignation’ (Dan 8:19). That explanation of the vision concludes with a degree of promise. As to the insolent king who will arise, “he will magnify himself in his heart, and he will destroy many while they are at ease. He will even oppose the Prince of princes. But he will be broken without human agency” (Dan 8:25). At this point, the picture remains somewhat unclear, although it is clear that the situation will be dire. This king who is to come is not one coming for good, but for ill. “He will destroy mighty men and holy people” (Dan 8:24b). It will end, and not by human agency, but just how his end will come is not explained. Is it to be natural causes? Does the earth itself rise up against this king?
The strongest clue we are given is that this king thinks to oppose the Prince of princes, which is to say God Himself. In the second visit of Gabriel, we find this a more explicitly stated answer. Here we learn of a period of seventy weeks, although quite clearly not seven literal weeks. Messiah the Prince will come (Dan 9:25), but He will then be cut off, ‘and the people of the prince who is to com will destroy the city and the sanctuary’ (Dan 9:26). These are pretty clearly the same two rulers seen in Daniel 8, the insolent king and the Prince of princes. It is shocking, certainly it should be, to read here that the Messiah will be cut off. Daniel, I should think, must have been beside himself to hear such a thing. God comes to rescue, but He is cut off? How can this be? What sort of message is this, Gabriel, and who exactly has sent you?
But, Daniel does not appear to have had any question as to Daniel’s boss, nor to have been overly dismayed at the message given. Note the introduction Gabriel gave. “At the beginning of your supplications the command was issued, and I have come to tell you” (Dan 9:23a). There really is no question of who sent him. It is God whom Daniel has petitioned, and God who has sent answer through this Gabriel. And the answer pertains to Messiah. What exactly was understood of Messiah at this juncture is not certain, but what is learned here certainly had the impact of building up expectations amongst the people of God. It strikes me that the messages delivered by Gabriel still have that effect today, as many seek to find clues about God’s timetable in his words. To that I can only observe that Jesus, the Messiah, the Prince of princes, and the commander of Gabriel, states quite clearly that the timetable is not going to be revealed.
As to Gabriel, we find him involved in events once again at the advent of Christ. Not surprisingly, his two visits are connected with that advent. He comes first to speak to Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist (Lk 1:19), indeed to announce the conception of that one, who would fulfill the coming of one in the spirit of Elijah (Lk 1:17). This is marvelously good news, and news marvelous not only for the good it portends, but because of the utter improbability of Zacharias and his wife Elizabeth having a child. Yet it comes about.
Gabriel is then sent, some time later but before the birth of John, to young Mary, a mere child by our reckoning, being probably some fourteen years of age or so. But the message Gabriel brings to her is even more unbelievable than that brought to Zacharias. It is well, I should think, that Elizabeth is far enough along in her pregnancy to make the accuracy of that earlier message plain. Mary, to her credit, does not appear to need the confirmation of seeing Elizabeth, although she will have that as well, and the as yet unborn baby John delivering the confirmation from within the womb. But, what news for this young girl! Messiah is about to be conceived in your womb, born into the world He comes to save. This, as was told to Daniel, comes about apart from human agency. He shall be the Son of Man, but He shall be the son of no man; rather the Son of God.
If Daniel had cause for mixed feelings at hearing that this Messiah would come, but would be cut off and the city destroyed, imagine how these events must have hit Mary, who both heard the warnings and experienced the reality. How deep must her agony have been to see her child, one she knew as no other could know was truly the Son of God bloodied and beaten, rejected by the very ones He came to save, and finally nailed upon the cross to die the most horrible death the art of man had yet devised. But joy comes in the morning! As severely as these events must have tried her, they were not the end of the story, but really the beginning. The Prince of princes died, and those who had rejected Him would perish for their crimes, but the Prince of princes did not remain dead. He rose from that grave, having defeated death and defeated death’s king, that insolent king of Daniel’s vision, who caused so much destruction amongst mighty and holy alike, was finally brought to his end. He had indeed opposed the Prince of princes, and to the uttermost. Somewhere, somehow, he must have become convinced that the deeds he had instigated (or so he thought) that led to the cross represented final victory for his treasonous reign. But, in fact, he had been played, and that seeming victory was in reality his final defeat.
Now, what does all of this tell us about angels generally, or Gabriel specifically? Not a great deal, and that in itself is highly significant information, as concerns our understanding. Gabriel, one of only two angels whose names are revealed to us, has nothing to say about himself. We do not read of legions of angels at his disposal. We do not find him riding to war at the head of his columns, as Michael is seen. We see him sent to explain events to a few key individuals, and on one subject only: The subject of Messiah. He goes not of his own accord, but as commanded. He is a messenger, sent to speak only that which he has been commanded to speak, and only to those specific individuals to whom he is commanded to speak.
I would observe that Michael is likewise not off on his own, pursuing plans and purposes he has devised. If he goes to war, it is as one commanded, even as he has command of others. The forces of heaven are not rogue forces, but forces arrayed under the command of God Himself. Whether, as is posited, they are under the command of the Son, or whether they are under the command of the Father is of little to no consequence. Indeed, as God is One, the command of the Son is the command of the Father, and the command of the Father is the command of the Son.
I will insist on this point, however, and will hopefully reinforce it somewhat in the next subsection of my efforts. The angels, even the least of angels, are not set under the command of man. God is not so foolish as to allow such a thing, and to suppose otherwise smacks of idolatrous thinking. It has more in it of the genies of Arabian fantasy than of biblical truth. Indeed, if there is that which appears to be angelic and yet appears to submit itself to the command of man, one must wonder who exactly this purported angel actually serves. It is unlikely to be either God or man.
Let me offer one example from Scripture to support my point. With the passing of Moses, it fell to Joshua to take up the leadership of the people of Israel. Joshua would be their chief as they entered the Promised Land, but that entrance into the land wasn’t going to happen unopposed. There were fortified cities to be dealt with, and once of the first of these would be Jericho. As he led the armies of Israel, indeed pretty much the whole of Israel, forward to Jericho, he encountered ‘a man standing opposite him with his sword drawn in his hand’ (Josh 5:13). This, when you are at the head of a few hundred thousand people, must seem rather odd behavior, to say the least. But, it also suggests cause to be wary, for the man does not appear mad, but rather confident. So Joshua asks the obvious question. “Are you for us or for our adversaries?” Whose side are you on?
But, observe the answer. Indeed, observe but the first word of that answer, for it really conveys the point quite nicely. “No” (Josh 5:14). But, our man is not so terse as all that. He explains. “I indeed come now as captain of the host of the LORD.” Understand, Joshua, I am not yours to command any more than I am at the beck and call of the ruler of Jericho. Indeed, I am at no man’s beck and call, but as captain of the host of the LORD, I serve only the LORD of hosts. And so, he has a command to give to this commander in chief over all Israel: “Remover your sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy.” Joshua wisely complied (Josh 5:15).
Now, that last bit gives me pause. Is this Michael or one such as he, who has come on the Lord’s business, which happens to include the battle ahead? Or, given the appeal to holy ground, is this indeed the LORD of hosts Himself, the self-same Messiah who was, and who is, and who is to come? If it is the latter, then it is surely no surprise that he answers to no man, but if it is the former, it really shouldn’t surprise us any the less. I guess what I am saying here is that I cannot be as certain as I would like to be that this passage actually supports my position.
[10/18/19]
I want to return to the Word Study Dictionary of the New Testament, and its article on archangels. They point to there being seven such angels before the throne of God. This refers us to Gabriel, already mentioned in Luke 1:19, and then to Revelation 8:2, with its mention of seven angels who stand before God, to who seven trumpets were given. Then we are referred to Revelation 12:7, speaking of Michael leading the angels to war against the dragon, as evidence that these seven have charge of other angels. There seems to me to be a fair amount of assumption and conjecture in the conclusions drawn here. The first is that what we read in regard to Michael applies to any other of the angels. The second is that reference to the seven angels standing before the throne indicates that this is something of a permanent position, or a marker of rank. I find it just as believable that they stand before the throne because they were summoned hence to receive orders, along with the trumpets. After all, they go forth with said trumpets, do they not?
As to Gabriel’s comment in regard to himself, I am inclined to hear his statement as something more generally true of all the angels. “I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God” (Lk 1:19). This standing is given in the perfect tense, present result of past action; and yet it retains a present tense significance. He is there with Zacharias because he stands in the presence of God. He has been sent on this commission to inform Zacharias of the son he is about to have, but he remains fully connected to the immediate presence of God in some sense. I suppose we shall have to say that the same holds for those seven angels with their trumpets. They, too, are sent forth, yet they also in some sense remain standing in the presence of God.
All this to say that while I cannot rule out that Gabriel, and perhaps others, are archangels, or that indeed there are more than one, yet I cannot find proof certain in the explanation given by this dictionary. I find three disparate scenes with no distinct connection. Between Gabriel’s comment and the trumpet bearing angels, there is but this idea of standing in God’s presence, and little said as to how or why in either case. It seems too much a gauze of possible interpretations to accept as definitive. I suppose the same can be said of my own take on those three verses.
d. Angelology
So, what might be said of angels more generally? As I have observed (I think) much earlier in this study, those references that speak of an angel of the LORD need careful consideration, as to whether it is indeed an angel or the LORD Himself in the Person of the Son being presented for our consideration. I think, for example, of that earliest encounter, at least as our books are ordered, when the angel of the LORD comes to Hagar after she has been sent out of Abram’s camp (Ge 16:7-13). At first, the encounter is such that we could readily accept that this is an angel come to deliver a message and instruction to Hagar. But, then it gets a bit too direct to attribute to a messenger’s voice. “The angel of the LORD said to her, ‘I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they shall be too many to count’” (Ge 16:10). This is no, “Thus says the LORD,” such as we might get from a prophet or a messenger. This is first-person stuff. I am going to do this. And Hagar doesn’t seem to have any misconceptions on this front. “She called the name of the LORD who spoke to her, ‘Thou art a God who sees’; for she said, ‘Have I even remained alive here after seeing Him?’” (Ge 16:13).
On other occasions, we see appeals to angels that are clearly not the Lord. I think here of Abraham sending his servant to find a bride for his son. “The LORD, the God of heaven, who took me from my father’s house and from the land of my birth, and who spoke to me, and who swore to me saying, ‘To your descendants I will give this land,’ He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there” (Ge 24:7). Now, those who are desirous of commanding angels will look at this and see Abraham commanding angels, but that is not the case. He is commanding nobody other than his own servant. He is, however, conveying word to said servant of how things shall be, not because he has commanded it, but because God has ordained it. No, we have nothing in the record to suggest that Abraham had been given God’s word on this matter, assured that his commissioning of this servant to go find a bride was indeed the plan and purpose of God. I think rather it expresses a basic understanding of Abraham’s, that this is how God operates. His servant had expressed concerns. “What if…?” How is he to be assured of successfully complying with his master’s wishes, and no doubt the thought is in his mind, and what happens if I fail? So, Abraham expresses his confident expectation. God is with him, and God will be with his servant in the same fashion; by the accompaniment of angels to see to the success of this venture.
Now, we may ask why he should have such confidence, and to what degree that confidence ought to apply more generally to believers? I am inclined to say that confidence comes from at least a limited understanding of the Seed. Abraham had this promise. He reminded himself and his servant of that. God said – direct promise – “To your descendants I will give this land.” First off, it was descendants plural, not just this one son he had. Second, one might recall how God had numbered those descendants – beyond counting. That was going to require more than this one generation, even if he were to produce more sons and daughters at this late age. So, there’s already that cause to expect success. He also has some understanding, I think, of that separation that God was calling for. “Don’t even think of taking my boy back there” (Ge 24:6). God took my from the land of my birth. No turning back! There’s something for every Christian to lay hold of.
But, the confidence is more than just this promise of progeny. It’s the promise contained within that progeny, the promise that required an Isaac when he already had an Ishmael. There was a promised Seed to come, and that promised Seed, it had been made sufficiently clear, came from the line of Isaac, not Ishmael. The son of the servant would not do. It must be the son of the daughter. God had a purpose in this, and it was in His purpose that Abraham found confidence; it was in service of His purpose that he could expect God’s angel to go with his own servant, because his pursuit was in fact to God’s purpose.
So, is there something here for us? Do we have equal cause to expect angelic support services for our endeavors? I would have to say that based on this verse alone, the answer must be no. That is not to say that support for such expectations is absent entirely from Scripture, but it isn’t coming from this scene, unless our endeavors are equally concerned with godly pursuit of God’s agenda. Then, maybe, we have cause for confidence akin to Abraham’s. But, I think we need to consider the matter more widely before we attempt to draw more general conclusions.
[10/19/19]
Another occasion in which we find angels distinctly involved is in the exodus of Israel, which is to say, their eventual entrance into the Promised Land. As they were on the verge of that entrance, God had a message for them. “Behold, I am going to send an angel before you to guard you along the way, and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Be on your guard before him and obey his voice; do not be rebellious toward him, for he will not pardon your transgression, since My name is in him” (Ex 23:20-21). Immediately, I observe two things, and the most fundamental is that this angel is not under the command of Moses or the Israelites, but rather they are clearly set under his command. As for the angel, he is under the command of God alone, Whose name ‘is in him’. Here, I suppose I must once more remind that the name of God is not a mere word, but a way of stating that He has delegated authority to this one, at least as concerns the specific mission for which this messenger has been sent.
God’s command of the situation is clear. “I sent him. My name is in him.” The chain of command is fully established, and not to be disregarded. Sadly, this was not how things worked out, and so a few short chapters later, we hear God repeat this promise, but now as reminder and warning. “But go now, lead the people where I told you. Behold, My angel shall go before you; nevertheless in the day when I punish, I will punish them for their sin” (Ex 32:34). “Depart, go up from here, you and the people whom you have brought up from the land of Egypt, to the land of which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, saying, ‘To your descendants I will give it.’ And I will send an angel before you and I will drive out the Canaanite, and the Amorite, the Hittite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite. Go up into a land flowing with milk and honey; for I will not go up in your midst, because you are an obstinate people, lest I destroy you on the way” (Ex 33:1-3).
Was ever a sadder pronouncement made? Here was a people chosen by God, protected by God, accompanied by God, and yet they had at every turn rejected God. And still, God says, “I will send My angel before you.” I learn more from this. I learn of the Lord’s compassion, yes, but I learn as well that the work progresses because it is the Lord’s work, not because of its benefit to this wayward lot. God’s purpose is going to be accomplished because God is going to see to it. We may benefit from that reality, and we may still benefit from it even if we are not His children, even if we are stiff-necked and proud like Israel before us. The blessing, then, is not proof of blessedness, but rather of God’s unchanging nature. The angelic assistance is likewise no proof of holiness, except it be proof of God’s holiness. Note why the angel is sent: “If I went with you, I would destroy you.” The angel is almost a consolation prize, but more, it’s an insurance policy to see to it that God’s will is accomplished. Here is one He can trust to abide by His command and fulfill His command. Clearly, Israel wasn’t going to do it.
If there remains any doubt as to the disconnect between angelic visitation and personal piety, we might look at the case of Balaam, who was hardly a righteous man. We might find his equivalent in the many today who would insist that they are spiritual, they just aren’t connected with any particular religion or church. Well, that’s cute, isn’t it? But, it’s also lie. The claim is an outright rejection of and rebellion against God, a seeking for any sort of spiritual connection that doesn’t require obedience to He who made us. It wants the thrills without the responsibilities, but in the end, it can only lead to idolatry, which is the worship of demons. And this is where we find Balaam (Nu 22). Balaam was very spiritual. His efforts took from the practices of most every cult extent at the time, so when he went to get a word from the Lord, his approach consisted largely of the practices of Baal. Yet, God gave him a word, even if it wasn’t one he particularly wanted. Eventually, God even sends an angel to prevent Balaam from further evils. Against instruction, Balaam takes off to meet once more with the leaders of Moab, and God was not happy. So, ‘the angel of the LORD took his stand in the way as an adversary against him’ (Nu 22:22). I note that it was the donkey upon which Balaam was riding that recognized the angel ahead, and not Balaam. Indeed, it was not until, ‘the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam’ that he recognized the angel standing ahead of him, sword drawn (Nu 22:31).
This may seem an unusual case; that we find an angel sent out to both inform and oppose, and in this case, to do so with one who doesn’t even particularly care for the Lord. This is not one of God’s people, clearly, and yet, here is the angel of the LORD both preventing him from going too far off course, and also giving him words from heaven to speak. What can we say to this? I can say this much: Don’t be so much impressed by those who claim angelic visions and speech. It may be that they have indeed been visited by such an emissary, and it’s possible, certainly, that the message they relay is true. But, then, I think of occasions from the era of the kings. Angels are once more sent out to deal with men, in this case, the king of Israel, if memory serves. But, their words are deceptions, bad counsel to lead the king astray, because God’s purpose is not for that particular king’s good, but for certain punishment for his sins.
This is not to say that the angels only deal with God’s people, although it seems that they most often have some connection to God’s people. I think of the days of Hezekiah, and Assyria come once again to maraud the land of Israel. Sennacherib was determined to see this thorn of a nation subdued once for all, but “the LORD sent an angel who destroyed every mighty warrior, command and officer in the camp of the king of Assyria. So he returned in shame to his own land. And when he had entered the temple of his god, some of his own children killed him there with the sword” (2Chr 32:21). Observe once again, however, that it is the LORD who is firmly in command of the situation. Hezekiah, and no doubt others in Jerusalem, had prayed. They had made their petitions known to God. But, observe, “Hezekiah gave no return for the benefit he received, because his heart was proud; therefore wrath came on him and on Judah and Jerusalem” (2Chr 32:25). No, the angel served God’s purpose. The destruction and punishment meted out upon the armies of Assyria, while they benefited Judah, were not primarily for Judah’s benefit, but for God’s glory.
David has his observations in regard to angels. Most notably, he observes that ‘the angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear Him, and rescues them’ (Ps 34:7), and what might be taken as the counterpoint, “Let them be like chaff before the wind, with the angel of the LORD driving them on” (Ps 35:5). Be it granted, that the purposes of the Lord are ever and always for the good of those who revere Him. David speaks of it as fear, but Paul would describe it as love. In neither case should the term be taken in the purely emotional sense common to our usage. The fear is reverence, as is the love. Both look upon the same marvelous truth: the glorious holiness of God, and the wonder of His loving care for us.
As to the prophets, whom we might incline to associate with those who heard from angels, it’s interesting that only in Zechariah do we find any great basis for this idea. He indeed seems to reveal a rather lengthy conversation with an angel, and that conversation, none too surprisingly, concerns matters of the Messiah and of the end times. I am not going to get too involved with those visions at this juncture, but only note that once again, the messenger sent to man is concerned primarily with that same topic that occupied Gabriel earlier: News of Messiah and the coming of His kingdom. Interestingly, this is the last we see of angels in the Old Testament, and the next occasion upon which we encounter them is in announcing the arrival of said Messiah.
Angels are heavily involved in that period of Christ’s advent. They are there, in the person of Gabriel, to inform the parents of John the Baptist, and the mother of Christ as to the significance of those two births. They are there to keep Joseph from misinterpreting events and divorcing Mary, and later, as guides to get the family out of harm’s way while Herod sought to prevent the newborn king from reaching maturity, and then again, to call the family back to Israel when the coast was clear (Mt 2). We see them announcing the birth, albeit to shepherds, a scene worth considering more fully, I think.
“And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened” (Lk 2:9). Stop there for just a moment. First, we have mention of ‘an angel of the Lord’. This has clear echoes of those appearances to the patriarchs back in Genesis, and almost certainly the allusion is intentional. We have also the ‘glory of the Lord’ shining around those to whom the angel appeared. This suggests to me something more than an angel, and yet, perhaps that is not the case. Perhaps it is but a breakthrough of heaven, if you will. But, the larger point that really needs to register with us is this: They were terribly frightened. This is pretty much the standard reaction to angels, as we see it in Scripture. This is not some joyful wonder that we can witness, and poke each other and laugh in wonder at the experience. No. This is the holiness of heaven breaking through into our sinful experience, and the wise sinner recognizes the danger inherent in such a contact. Fear is proper, because holiness is highly destructive to sinfulness. Think how often we see the angels sent out as destroyers of unrighteousness versus the rarity of them being sent to instruct. The fundamental point is this: Until you know on what business said angel has come, a high degree of circumspection is called for. Go back to God’s instruction to the Israelites out there in the desert. “I’m sending my angel. Be on your guard in his presence, for My name is in him.” Don’t mess up.
But, this scene continues, again on a very typical trajectory for angelic encounters. The angel says, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news” (Lk 2:10). Rightly did the shepherds respond to the initial experience. The glory of heaven shone, and the only possible reaction for sinful man is, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man.” What could this holy agent want with me, other than to pronounce judgment upon my sins, for they are many? But, no! More stunning even then the appearance of this angel in their midst are the words he speaks, “I bring you good news.” And that news, as should come as no surprise by this point, concerns Messiah. He’s not coming. He’s here! Behold, He is born, the one who can and will address your sins, not in punishment, but in redemption! “Today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord” (Lk 2:11). For you! You, the least thought of members of Jewish society; you, who are not even thought worthy to bear witness at trial; you who spend your days and nights on the hillside amongst unwashed sheep. For you this One has been born to be your Savior. He is Messiah. He is Lord. You know, right there, we already had the announcement, didn’t we? He is God. For there is, nor can be any other Lord.
But, the picture keeps developing. “Suddenly there appeared 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 with whom He is pleased’” (Lk 10:14). One angel wasn’t enough for the occasion. It seems possible that the whole population of heaven turned out to sing the praises of this moment, and why wouldn’t they? Here was the whole point come into view. Here was the focal point of their existence, because it was the centerpiece of God’s whole work in Creation. This is what it was all about. This is what it was always all about.
You know, the angels, too, had known sin; and thus we have the demons to consider in the next section. They, too, have suffered the sorrow of sin’s poison, the contempt of sinners for their own righteousness, the reviling and false accusations, the sneers. They, too, have cause to ask, “How long, O, Lord?” And they, too, have their answer in this glorious moment. Events are underway; events which no power of heaven or hell, let alone the puny efforts of man, can deter. The end is certain in the beginning, and the beginning is now good and truly come.
[10/20/19]
As at His birth, so at His death we find angels present, and for similar purpose. They would appear to have been sent with the primary purpose of strengthening the God-man as he faced the trial of death on the cross. Luke informs us of this fact. “Now an angel from heaven appeared to Him, strengthening Him. And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground” (Lk 22:43-44). But, also, they appeared to comfort and inform those who came and found the tomb empty after His death and resurrection. “But Mary was standing outside the tomb weeping; and so as she wept, she stooped and looked into the tomb; and she beheld two angels in white sitting, one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been lying. And they said to her, ‘Woman, why are you weeping?’ She said to them, ‘Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him’” (Jn 20:11-13). Now, I note that on this occasion no sooner had she turned around from speaking with these two than Jesus is there speaking to her, so we might yet question whether they came as continued strength to the Lord in His battle with death and Hades, or whether they were stationed there to help Mary cope.
If we observe Matthew’s account of events, we find that Mary was not alone, but others were with her, and indeed the words of the angels come both as comfort and instruction. “Do not be afraid” (Mt 28:5). There it is again, the necessary introduction for angels when addressing those they encounter, for fear is our natural and actually proper response to something so otherworldly. “For I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place He was lying” (Mt 28:6). Note the focus remains on Jesus, and reminding His people of what He said. They are here to keep the attention of believers firmly on this crucial moment of victory. “And go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead; and behold, He is going before you into Galilee, there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you” (Mt 28:7). Now comes a message from this same Lord, to be delivered by the angel, His messenger. It is a message of instruction to His people. It both reminds of His now accomplished word, and informs of His command for them.
Yes, this command reflects some limited knowledge of the near future; knowledge that would prove entirely accurate and true. But, to the degree that this is foretelling events, observe that it is strictly such events as pertain to the Lord and His work. It is not weather forecasts for the faithful, nor is it assistance with mundane trials of the day to day. It is highly specific, because the angels come as messengers of the Lord. It is the Lord alone they serve.
It’s a funny thing. I had in mind with such certainty that Peter and John likewise encountered these angels at the tomb, but in point of fact, there is no record of any such encounter. They saw the tomb empty, and they saw the grave clothes there, but not the angels (Jn 20:3-8). John is quite clear on things here. They still didn’t get it. They saw, the believed, but as yet they did not understand, so they just went back to their homes (Jn 20:9-10). The angels, and Jesus, in this case, came to see Mary, not these two. What to make of that?
As events developed in Jerusalem, Peter at least would have occasion to encounter angels in his own right. An angel comes to bust the apostles out of jail, for the Sadducees had arrested them for preaching Jesus (Ac 5:17-19). And observe, the angel doesn’t just come to give them escape. He comes once more with instruction, and that instruction once more comes from and concerns the Lord. “Go and stand in the temple and speak to the people all the words of this Life” (Ac 5:20). This will come as a testimony to those very Sadducees, albeit to no avail as concerns their faith. But, as to those who had arrested them on orders from those Sadducees, perhaps there might actually be an impact.
We find angels directing the activities of the apostles, for example telling Philip to go south toward Gaza (Ac 8:26). There, we know, he would meet the Ethiopian eunuch and lead him to faith. But, observe yet again: Even the apostles are not given charge over these angels, but rather the angels have a certain right of command over the apostles. This happens again, to some degree, with Peter and his call to go to the Gentiles. Granted, in this case, the angel actually appears not to Peter but to Cornelius, the Gentile. This man, a centurion of the Italian Cohort, while a devout God-fearer, is also a man trained for war and no doubt hardened by its experience. He is not one to be easily cowed or impressed, although we might suppose he has somewhat of that Roman propensity for superstition. But, when he saw an angel, and that only in a vision, note his response. “He stared at him in terror and said, ‘What is it, Lord?’” (Ac 10:4). Now, the ESV and the NASB both capitalize this use of the title Lord, but we don’t really have cause to think it is Jesus Himself who appeared in this vision. Nor, as yet, does Cornelius have cause to speak of Jesus thus, so far as we know. Rather, it seems he speaks in respectful terms to this one who has so awed him; and him a soldier and commander!
Again, whose mission is the angel on? He informs Cornelius that his prayers have been heard, so there is something there for Cornelius, but he comes also to instruct Cornelius with instruction from the Lord. Send men to Simon Peter. You will find him at the house of Simon the tanner. And so he did, and so they did (Ac 10:5-8). Peter, meanwhile, was having visions of his own to prepare him for this visit. He gets his instruction more directly, from the Holy Spirit, but here, too, the message is instruction concerning matters pertaining to Christ and His mission.
Indeed, the first clear encounter with angels that we find for Peter concerns his own imprisonment and delivery from same. An angel comes to him as he slept bound in chains between two soldiers in a jail cell. He more or less kicks Peter to wake him up, and get him moving, and the chains simply fall off (Ac 12:6-7). Peter, none too surprisingly, is a bit disoriented and requires further simple instruction. Get dressed. Put your shoes on. We need to go. He does so, but as a man who isn’t convinced he’s experiencing anything more than a dream of freedom, maybe a vision. He’d heard of people having visions. Maybe that’s what this was. But, once outside the prison gates, the angel just up and leaves, and Peter is still there, outside and free. No vision this, then, but a real and true encounter (Ac 12:8-11). “Now I know for sure that the Lord has sent forth His angel and rescued me from the hand of Herod and from all that the Jewish people were expecting.” I have to say, it still seems odd to hear the Apostles, Jews to a man, speaking of ‘the Jewish people’, as if they were some foreign entity, but so they had become, for the Apostles, as with all disciples, were a new creation, a new body politic, being now citizens of the kingdom of heaven.
But, why did the angel come to rescue Peter? Was it for Peter’s benefit? It certainly did benefit Peter, for rather than death and injustice at the hands of Herod, he was free to preach the gospel, and to travel to distant lands in service of our Lord. But, that is the real reason for angelic involvement. Peter had much to do yet in service of our Lord, and the angel came in service of our Lord. I note that in the course of time Peter would once (at least once) more be imprisoned, and this time there would be no angel delivering him from his chains, but rather a death not unlike that of his Savior, stretched upon a cross.
Beyond this point, while we find angels mentioned with sufficient frequency, we do not find them particularly involved in events. We do, granted, find Paul speaking with an angel as he rides through the storm imprisoned on a Roman ship. “For this very night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve stood before me, saying, ‘Do not be afraid, Paul. You must stand before Caesar; and behold, God has granted you all those who are sailing with you’” (Ac 27:23-24). Again, the recipient of the message does indeed have some benefit from the news, but it is primarily for the purpose of God that the message comes, and the benefit is received. Paul, this isn’t the end. You still have work to do, and these with you shall be kept safe as well. Why? They aren’t specified as being of God’s elect? Well, they might become so. I suppose that’s one way to read the message, “God has granted you all those who are sailing with you.” But, I think this goes little beyond the fact that they would be kept alive, because in so doing, Paul will more readily be kept alive, and thus, their preservation serves the purpose of the Lord. They might also be seen as a witness, intentional or not, to the power of God in having preserved them through the storm and through the wreck of their ship.
[10/21/19]
But, Paul expresses no great interest in angels, and in fact rather warns against such excess of interest. “For even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light” (2Co 11:14). To those in Colossi he writes, “Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind” (Col 2:18). As for the church in Galatia, he sends similar advice. “But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed” (Gal 1:8).
If I look at this overall picture, a few things come very clear to me. First, there is not a single instance to be found wherein angels are ever set under the command and control of man. Ever and always they come not to be commanded by men, but to bring God’s command to men. I don’t know how any believer has managed to become convinced that they are sufficient to such command, even if it were of God, but it needs to be settled with us that the angel who would offer us the pretense of control is no angel, but rather, as Paul reminded Corinth, one acting in disguise, pretending to be an angel from God when in fact they are from the pit.
I find a similar conclusion has to be drawn when it comes to those who come ostensibly as angels, yet make themselves friend and companion to this one or that. This is something we would more commonly speak of as a familiar, and not in the context of holy visitation, but rather in connection with dark arts. God does not send angels to be buddies with us, or to make sure our days are pleasant. They don’t come to ensure sunshine should we happen to go to the beach, or to clear traffic out of our way because we happen to be running late. They don’t come to cover the eyes of the local constabulary simply because we choose to ignore a law at some inconvenient moment. If their activities are to our benefit, it is because our benefit is to the purpose, and the purpose is ever and always the Lord’s purpose.
He and He alone gives command to this host, for He alone is Lord of hosts. Insomuch as He sends ministering angels, it is not for the purpose of our amusement and ease. It is for the purpose of equipping us for the work at hand, perhaps of preserving us to stand witness for His glory. The same can be said of all our circumstances, for ‘in this life you will have tribulations’ (Jn 16:33), yet it remains true that all things ‘work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose’ (Ro 8:28). Let me just suggest that maybe there’s a bit of punctuation missing there, although I can’t swear to it. All things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called, according to His purpose. That is to say, the object of this good outcome are those who love God which are the same as are called. The reason things work for good is the purpose of God. It was His purpose that called them. It was His purpose that engendered in them the capacity to love Him. It is His purpose that arrays the events of life, and which directs them to our good, and that includes our own half measures.
That also includes the doings of angels. They do not have full understanding of all that God is doing any more than do we. Indeed, it may be that they are slightly less informed on certain aspects. Peter writes of the apostles and prophets that they made careful search and inquiry, ‘seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow’ (1Pe 1:10-11). Observe what follows! “It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven – things into which angels long to look” (1Pe 1:12). That suggests, at least, that in the revelation of the gospel, the Church was given to know things that even angels did not understand. I suppose they do now, having watched events unfold.
We have learned, then, that the apostles had at least the occasional interaction with angels. John, for example, attributes the whole of the Revelation to something shown him by God’s angel (Rev 1:1), and well that it was so, for that whole vision is at once terrifying and incomprehensible. And yet, at the same time, we find John instructed to write ‘to the angel of the church’ in this location and that (Rev 2:1). Some would take this as indication that indeed, angels stand watch over each church body, and it may even be the case that this is so. Yet, if there is any such angel standing watch over our local body, he is in no need of a letter, for it would seem that even while on duty such as this, he stands as well in the presence of the Lord. The comm lines back to headquarters in heaven are never severed, never down, never busy. The chain of command is unbroken. There is another theory, that these refer to the pastors of the churches mentioned, who also serve as messengers of God, if they serve in obedience to God. Given the letters, that seems the more likely understanding.
Yet, angels do play a large role in this revelation of the end, the last of the Last Days. And observe: What we see them doing is the same thing we’ve seen them doing since the first. They are gathered around the throne in worship (Rev 7:11), or they are out and about on the Lord’s business, under the Lord’s command. It is at His command that the seven angels go forth with their trumpets to do His bidding. It is at His command that the angels with the bowls go out to do what He has commanded. It is at His command that Michael goes forth with the angels in his charge to wage war against the dragon and his angels (Rev 12:7). But, the whole pertains to the Lord, to His worship and to His coming in final victory, to rule and to reign forever, having executed in full the battle against sin and the devil, and having achieved in full the subjection of all things unto the Father. And so the book closes, and with it Scripture, with this message from our Lord and Savior. “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star” (Rev 22:16). The angel comes, if he comes, for one purpose, and one purpose only: To testify the word of God concerning His Christ to His church, to His elect, that they may respond in faith, saying, “Even so, come, Lord Jesus.” And His response? “Yes, I am coming quickly” (Rev 22:20).
So, then, let us recognize that the angelic appearance that gives us warm fuzzy feelings is quite likely a fraud, at least if said feelings ensue from the outset. The real visitation seems ever and always to inculcate awe with undertones of fear. This is, after all, a being superior to us both in power and in holiness, and holiness ever and always has a certain terror to the sinful, for the sinful root recognizes its destruction in the purifying light of holiness. The angel come to befriend us or to draw our attention to him is certainly not behaving as Scripture would lead us to expect. I continue to maintain that the angel that stood before Joshua outside Jericho sets the tone for all encounters. “Are you for us or against us?” “No.” The angel of the Lord, as the very title should make plain, is for the Lord, commanded by the Lord, sent by the Lord, and answerable solely to the Lord, at least as concerns any human agency. It would seem there are chains of command amongst angels, a hierarchy of some sort, but one of which we have only the most limited of glimpses. Yet, at their head stands the Lord of hosts, commander in chief of all the host of heaven. He doesn’t rent them out.
As to conceptions of guardian angels and so on, I am not finding much by way of evidence for such beliefs. They appear to have more to do with wishful thinking and tales told by parents hoping to comfort young children (or perhaps themselves). Again, it may well be that in the course of pursuing the purposes of God, protection of this individual or that, or even of whole nations, may transpire. Yes, we see some sense of spiritual forces arrayed on behalf of the nations, although the exact nature of those forces beyond their being spiritual in nature is not given into our body of knowledge. What we can perceive from this, and from other matters of the role of nations, is that God’s purposes ordain and direct them. He determines the rulers, and the span of their rule. Whatever role the angels may play in that regard, it remains under His direct command. They are not playthings for the elect. They are messengers and servants of God Almighty, awesome in their own right, and single-minded in their purposeful pursuit of His command. They will not suffer to be made objects of worship or idolization, and that may indeed be our first hint at something wrong with those who come to us in the guise of angels, but are no angels of the Lord.
This has got to give us pause in this day and age where so many desire spirituality without having to deal with God. In an age of counterfeit holiness, expect counterfeit angels. It has, in fact, ever been thus, hasn’t it? What was that serpent in Eden if not a counterfeit messenger spreading messages of doubt about God. The devil has been a liar and the father of lies forever, so far as our experience of him is concerned. It may be, as some suppose, that he was once counted amongst the heavenly host, but was the first of those ‘who did not keep their own domain’ (Jude 6). But, he has always been a liar, always operating amongst man in the guise of light-messenger, but ever to the detriment and destruction of man and of holiness.
