Hebrews 1:7

The Angels are Subordinate Servants—1:7

This fourth quotation of Hebrews is from Psalm 104:4—a creation psalm. The phrase “And of the angels He says” makes clear that the preacher is describing the angels. The conjunction “and” is coordinating v. 6 with 7-12. “Who makes His angels winds, and His ministers a flame of fire.” This quotation is directed to the angels, not Christ. The text describes the angels as winds, or spirits (KJV). It is a quote from Psalm 104:4 (LXX 103). The original Hebrew has a different emphasis, there it is God “makes the winds his messengers, flames of fire his servants”[1] The Psalm is that of sovereign praise to the creator. It speaks of God over His creation. The word winds are the word pneuma, which means the wind, the air in motion, breath, spirit, a spiritual being. It denotes their incorporeal spiritual nature. Ross suggests that God arrayed His angels with physical phenomena, similar to the way He often manifested Himself.[2] Hughes notes “the rendering ‘winds’ rather than ‘spirits’ is contextually required, however; for, if the latter were correct, then a consistently parallel interpretation should be sought for the description of God’s servants as fiery flames.”[3] Marshall confirms the context calls for the translation; “he makes winds of his angels and a flame of fire his servants.”[4]

The intent of the quotation is debated. Three views are given: 

• God changes angels into wind and fire for His purpose; a view held by Jewish rabbinic teaching.
• The angels assume the form of wind and fire. 
• It is a comparison between angels and these forces. The best view in my humble opinion is the Wind speaks of invisibility and fire as an instrument of judgment. Kent mentions that “God uses angels as His instruments to carry out His will, just as the winds and flaming fire are agents of swift destruction.”[5] The main point, however, is the “transitory and mutable nature of angels compared to the eternality of the Son.”[6] They are subordinates to carry out the will of God.

---

[1]  NASV gives the more lateral translation

[2]  Allen P Ross, BIBLE KNOWEDGE COMMENTARY: OLD TESTAMENT: “PSALMS”, [Wheaton IL, Victor Books, 1985]. 869,

[3]  Philip Edgeumbe Hughes, HEBREWS, 62. 

[4]  I Howard Marshall, NIGTC: HEBREWS, 120.

[5]  Homer Kent, HEBREWS, 43.

[6]  David Allen, NAC: HEBREWS, 177.

Book Review: Angels

Graham, Jack, ANGELS, [Minneapolis MN, Bethany House, 2016] 220 pages.

Angels is mostly devotional, not theological in presentation. This is clear from the chapter headings. The chapters are divided into 4 sections:

The Wisdom of Angels as You start your Journey—Forgiveness, Perspective, Provision, and Confidence.

The Protections of Angels as You Sustain Life’s Blows—Comfort, Courage, Advocacy, and Shelter.

The Encouragement of Angels as You Soar on Eagles’ Wings: Spurred On When You’re Spiritually Lethargic, Faithfulness When You’ve been broken, and Victory When You Are Tempted.

The Presence of Angels as You Stay the Course with Christ—Companionship When You Are Lonely, Persistence When You Want to Give up, Assurance When You Are Dying, and Inspiration When You’re Short on Hope.

All of these are important aspects of Christian living. In each chapter the reader can find encouragement. However, I have some major problems with the book.

First, it is weak on the theology of angels. It is more on the presentation of his sermons, than of substance or teaching concerning angels.

Second, it has the underlying principle that the work of angels is the same throughout redemptive history. The writer presents the work of angels as always the same, overlooking the dispensational aspects of their work. He makes this clear when he writes: “…the same angelic presence and protection that enveloped Jesus Christ at all points along his earthly journey remains in service to those who love God here and now” (page 14). That is a questionable concept he nowhere proves, but only assumes.

Third, the absence of Pauline teaching for the church the body of Christ.

Fourth, the book emphasizes Christian living rather than teaching on angels.

I read this book with mixed feelings. I was disappointed as the actual teaching on angels is superficial at best. At the same time, I was uplifted at times by the devotional truths of the book. However, there are better books on angels in the marketplace.

 I received this book free from Bethany House Blogger Review Program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

COMMENTS ON HEBREWS 2:2

"For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty" Heb. 2:2

“For it” is a conditional conjunction, many translations render it “since.” It is assumed to be true. “The speaker draws his audience to just such a connection, basing his argument on what both speaker and audience already embrace as true.”[1]

The steadfastness of the revelation by angels. “The word spoken through angels proved unalterable” (2:2) is a statement of fact. There is some question about what the angels indicate in this text. There are two main views: (1) this view holds that the Greek word translated angel means messenger and refers to men, not spiritual beings.[2] Thus, the word relates to the Lord’s earthly ministry whose words were recorded. There is some credit to this view in the text which refers to a message that they heard (2:1). However, it seems to me not to be consistent with the context of chapters 1-2 of Christ being better than the angels. (2) It is more likely referring to the angels revealing the word of God. This is especially true of the role they played in the giving of the Law (Exodus 19 cf. Deut. 33:2, Acts 7:38). The text of verse 2 has a strong accumulation of judicial jargon.[3] First, we have the word unalterable (bebaios) meaning firm, stable, sure, steadfast, or established. Schlier says it indicates a legal valid confirmation that is actual, effective and forceful[4] The word carries the idea of a legal guarantee. Second, is the phrase “every transgression and disobedience.” The Greek word for transgression (parabasis) means a stepping by the side, a transgression, and a violation of law. It is a legal term for breaking the law. The word disobedience is the Greek word parokoe, found only three times in the New Testament (Heb. 2:2, Rom. 5:19; 2 Cor. 10:6). It means a deviation from obedience; disobedience. It is a deviation from the legal standard. Third, is the result of transgression and disobedience is “a just penalty.” The word penalty (misthapodosia) means the discharge of wages, or getting what is due. The penalty is described as just (endios) indicating fair and just. These terms and phrases confirm or reinforce the word spoken by the angels at Sinai. It is the language of the Law which they delivered to Moses. It was not just a religious document, but a legal one with its provisions of blessings and judgments. It was steadfast legally. Newell gives an excellent summary: “The argument of the verse is: If the Law ordained through angels, who were creatures, brought just recompense, how much rather when the Lord Himself comes and speaks, and men rejected or neglect His word!”[5]           

---

[1]  Daniel Wallace, BEYOND THE BASICS, 694. 

[2]  Robert C. Brock, HEBREWS: A VERSE BY VERSE COMMENTARY,  16.

[3]  William Lane, WBC: HEBREWS 1-8, 37.

[4]  Schlier, “bebaios,” (Kittle) TDNT,  1:602.

[5]  William R. Newell, HEBREWS: VERSE OR VERSE, 37. 

THE ANGELS OF THE CHURCHES

A LOOK AT REVELATION 1:20

“As for the mystery of the seven stars which you saw in My right hand, and the seven golden lampstands; the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven lampstands are the seven churches” (Revelation 1:20).

The commission to write the things he saw—the things which are and will be (1:19). It is clear that the seven lampstands are the seven churches. What is not clear is the meaning of the word angels and that has been much debated. Who are they? It should be observed that the word angel has a very wide application in Scripture. It is used of human messengers (Lk 9:52); spirit beings (Luke 1:11); good angels (Heb. 1:13-14); and evil spirits (Jude 6). Are they literal angels? Are they spirits? Or are they messengers?  They certainly are not evil spirits! Bible students are divided, and views center around four suggestions:

 

• They are guardian angels of the churches (Heb. 4:14).[1] They point to the fact that the term describes heavenly beings throughout the book of Revelation. They also tie it in with angels having an important part in the Tribulation period, which is true. The idea of a guardian angel for the nation is found in Daniel 2:1. Keith Krell gives the evidence for this view as follows: “First, the normal New Testament meaning of the word “angel” is of spirit beings that minister to believers. Second, the Greek word angelos appears 176 times in the New Testament. In the NASB, the word angelos is only translated “messenger(s)” 7 times. So obviously, the vast majority of these occurrences refer to spirit beings. Third, interpreting the book of Revelation depends heavily on an understanding of the book of Daniel. In Daniel, there is precedence for understanding these angels as possible guardian angels for each congregation (Dan 10:13). Fourth, the author of Hebrews asks the rhetorical question: ‘Are they (angels) not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?’ Fifth, it would be unlikely for John to interpret one symbol by using another. Although angelos can definitely refer to human messengers, would Jesus have chosen that particular word in this context when he was making a rather concise interpretation? Finally, the figure of the lampstands is not used elsewhere in the Scriptures. However, the stars, as symbols of angels, are used elsewhere. Wherever the word star is used symbolically, it is always used of an angel. This is true in both the Old and New Testaments.”[2]  Impressive and solid, but however, not without problems.
  
  Note carefully these letters are NOT addressed to the churches, but in each case they are addressed to the angel (2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14). The Greek grammar uses second personal pronouns in chapters 2-3 that look to the individual angels as their subjects and presumably through them to the churches they represent. In the case of the rebukes they are second person singular pronouns that look first to the angel (messenger).[3] For example the words “I hold this against you” (2:4) uses the second personal pronoun, indicating the Lord holds something against the angel. Nowhere in these letters are the angels told to say this to the churches. Thus the sins listed are identified with the angel. Angels cannot partake of the tree of life (2:7), be imprisoned or killed by men (2:10-11), teach false doctrine (2:14, 20), are not written in the Book of Life (3:5). Nor does a guardian angel fall and need to repent (2:5). Garland observes: “If the angel is a heavenly guardian angel, then almost all that is said of him must be strictly representative of the people within the church he guards.”[4] Osborne comments “…strange if the addresses were literal angels.”[5] If these are guardian angels, it appears they are not doing their job. This is a major problem for this view. 

• Human messengers from each church. Constable writes: “These would have been men such as Epaphroditus and Epaphras, representatives of the churches in Philippi and Colossae, who went to Rome to visit Paul. These representatives may have come to Patmos to visit John and carried Revelation back with them to their respective congregations.”[6] This upholds the meaning of angel to be messenger as seen in Matt. 11:10; Luke 7:24, 9:52; and James 2:25. There are three problems with this view: First, Human messengers are never called stars in Scripture. Second, if this is true, God seems to be holding accountable ones that are secondary individuals for the church. Third, there is no indication of representatives being at Patmos in the text.  

• Related to the view above, is the view that the messenger is the pastor, elder, or leader of the churches. Kistemaker says, “The interpretation that the messengers to the congregations are their pastors makes sense if we view pastors as sent forth and commissioned by Christ. They are responsible for the spiritual development of God’s people.”[7] This would make more sense, for they are responsible for the conditions of the church. However, many point out that Pastors are never referred to as angels. Also that the churches of the first century was run by a plurality of elders, an individual would not be responsibility for the condition of the churches.[8] 

• That the lampstand and angels are a personification of the churches. Mounce says these are prevailing spirit of the church.[9] Personification is often utilized in Revelation. The personification of angels typifies the spiritual character of the churches and Christ is addressing that character. The problem is that the term angel can mean a literal angel or mean messenger, but not spirit. I do not see any evidence in the text for this personification.

As one looks at the text, the following elements are observed: First, the word angel must retain some connection with its meaning, since a double personification is unlikely, especially in light there is no double personification of the lampstand. Second, in both the lampstand and the stars are clearly stated as to their meaning (churches/ angels). The word angello literally means “to deliver a message.”[10] Thus, the word could be translated Angel or messenger, both are valid translations. It is interesting that Bullinger brings out that although the angel of the church/ assembly is never used in the New Testament, especially in Paul’s epistles. It is used in the synagogue where there was the Sheliach Tsibbur (angel of the Assembly), who was the mouthpiece of the congregation.[11] He was the messenger of God to the assembly. In these letters, John uses Jewish and Old Testament terms in writing to these churches (i.e. synagogue; tribulation; overcomes; teaching of Balaam, Balak; hidden manna; Jezebel; etc.; all Jewish imagery). Could it be that John is using this Jewish term for the human messengers in the churches of his day? Third, what is said of the angel is also said of the churches. Garland notes:

In most cases, the grammar of the letters to each church implicates each individual angel. This is reflected by the preponderance of verb forms in the second-person singular. Yet the things which are said to the angel include aspects which could only be true of the wider church membership.[12]

In light of this, it appears the best solution is to take the word as messenger, thus being human messengers to the church, namely the Pastor or leader. What Christ says to the messenger as an individual is also true of the entire church.

---

[1]  Robert Brock, THE SEVEN CHURCHES IN THE BOOK OF REVELATION, 9

[2]  Keith Krell, Awesome and Awestruck (Revelation 1:9-20), Electronic Media

[3]  Thomas, REVELATION, 1:117.

[4]  Garland, THE TESTAMONY OF JESUS CHRIST, 1:197.

[5]  Osborne, REVELATION 98.

[6]  Constable, NOTES ON REVELATION, 18; also the view in the Scofield Bible, 1331.

[7]  Kistemaker, REVELATION103. Also the view of Walvoord, REVELATION, 53; Tenney, INTERPRETING REVELATION, 55.

[8]  Garland, 197.

[9]  Mounce, REVELATION, 86.

[10]  W.E. Vine, “angels,” EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY, 1:55.

[11]  E.W. Bullinger, THE APOCALYPSE, 67; also see Craig S. Keener, IVP BIBLE BACKGROUND COMMENTARY: NT, 168.

[12]  Garland, 198.