Recently, in the Genesis 15 thread we engaged in some discussion about angels and whether they are only spiritual or material in some cases. I did not want to de rail my other thread so I decided to move that discussion here. In short, because the term angel can apply to people, not all angels in the bible are spiritual.
I think the biggest misconception that leads to confusion is the fact that Hebrew and Greek terms usually translated into English as "angel" are used for both human and heavenly messengers. The context determines whether the messenger is sent from God or from an earthly authority.
The hebrew word "malakh" and greek word "angelos" are probably best translated as "messenger" in English.
This then must necessitate that some angels are material, because some angels are merely humans sent to send a message.
In the Old Testament, the hebrew word malakh appears over 213 times. In the OT its usages are:
"Human messenger";
"Messenger of God";
"Heavenly messenger" or "angel"; and
"The messenger of the Lord or God"
The messenger can be the Angel of the Lord, which ancient Jews interpreted as God incarnate.
Between the Testaments.
Jewish views on angels developed during pre-New Testament and New Testament times, as reflected in the writings of sectarian communities around the Dead Sea Scrolls and rabbinic literature.
In Grco-Roman society and Classical Greek literature, the (angelos) was a message bearer who was protected by the gods. It became a technical term for emissary.
Divine (e.g., Hermes) and human messengers existed, as well as those from the Underworld. Philo (20 bcad 50) linked Hermes and (logos, "word") theology by allegorizing (mal'akh). He equated an angel and the logos (the "word" or "message") and merged Jewish angelology with Greek demonology.
Jewish views regarding Old Testament heavenly messengers developed into an angelology with hierarchies of principalities. The Jewish view of the Sadducees, influenced by Greek rationalism, dismissed angels as a reality (TDNT, 80). The tension the Sadducees and Pharisees is seen in the New Testament:
In Acts, there is the parenthetical statement: "The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all" (Acts 23:8 NIV).
In the deuterocanonical literature, a distinction is found between good and bad angels (e.g., 2 Macc 15:22; Tobit 5:22; NRSV).
In 4 Maccabees, Aaron conquers a fiery angel (4 Macc 7:11).
In the New Testament
The English translation "Angel" in the New Testament is always a rendering of (angelos); this is not a true translationit merely anglicizes the Greek letters into English. This same Greek word is used to translate "messenger" (, mal'akh) in the Old Testament. A human or heavenly messenger in the Greek Bible is (angelos), whereas we (in English) distinguish "angel" and "messenger." New Testament uses of (angelos) are:
"[Human] messenger, envoy, one who is sent."
"Heavenly spirits" of whom some are "guardian [messengers]"
New Testament "messengers" (good or obedient angels) are called:
The angel
His angels
The Angel of the Lord
Angel of God
Angel of the church
Holy angels
An archangel
My angel
Elect angels
Sometimes "messenger" is neither "angel" or human but an illness. Satan has "messengers" (Rev 12:9; 2 Cor 12:7) but is never named directly as an Old Testament or New Testament "angel."
The real debate comes down to the identity of the Angel of the Lord. There are four interpretations:
(1) Heidt and Malone suggest that the Angel of the Lord is actually God Himself (Heidt, Angelology, 7096; Malone, "Distinguishing the Angel of the Lord," 297314).
(2) Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Irenaeus, and Tertullian suggested that the Angel is the pre-incarnate Christ (see Heidt, Angelology, 98; Juncker, "Christ As Angel," 224250).
(3) Lopez has suggested that the Angel is a representative messenger of God who speaks as though he is God because he is given the authority to do so (Lpez, "Identifying the 'Angel of the Lord' " 118).
(4) Meier and Ausloos suggest that the text is inconsistent, and this inconsistency can be used to decipher the source and redaction history of the text (Meier, "Angel of Yahweh," 5759; Ausloos, "The 'Angel of Yahweh,' " 112; compare Smith, "Remembering God," 63638, 64445).
I personally think that the first two interpretations are really a distinction without a difference.
In the Old Testament, the identity of the Angel can be difficult to distinguish from Yahweh Himself (Gen 21:1719; Exod 3; Judg 2:15; 6:1124; Hos 12:4). Gen. 32:24.
The angel of the lord wrestles with Jacob. How much more material can that get?
All material comes from the Lexham Bible Dictionary search for Angel.
I think the biggest misconception that leads to confusion is the fact that Hebrew and Greek terms usually translated into English as "angel" are used for both human and heavenly messengers. The context determines whether the messenger is sent from God or from an earthly authority.
The hebrew word "malakh" and greek word "angelos" are probably best translated as "messenger" in English.
This then must necessitate that some angels are material, because some angels are merely humans sent to send a message.
In the Old Testament, the hebrew word malakh appears over 213 times. In the OT its usages are:
"Human messenger";
"Messenger of God";
"Heavenly messenger" or "angel"; and
"The messenger of the Lord or God"
The messenger can be the Angel of the Lord, which ancient Jews interpreted as God incarnate.
Between the Testaments.
Jewish views on angels developed during pre-New Testament and New Testament times, as reflected in the writings of sectarian communities around the Dead Sea Scrolls and rabbinic literature.
In Grco-Roman society and Classical Greek literature, the (angelos) was a message bearer who was protected by the gods. It became a technical term for emissary.
Divine (e.g., Hermes) and human messengers existed, as well as those from the Underworld. Philo (20 bcad 50) linked Hermes and (logos, "word") theology by allegorizing (mal'akh). He equated an angel and the logos (the "word" or "message") and merged Jewish angelology with Greek demonology.
Jewish views regarding Old Testament heavenly messengers developed into an angelology with hierarchies of principalities. The Jewish view of the Sadducees, influenced by Greek rationalism, dismissed angels as a reality (TDNT, 80). The tension the Sadducees and Pharisees is seen in the New Testament:
In Acts, there is the parenthetical statement: "The Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, and that there are neither angels nor spirits, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all" (Acts 23:8 NIV).
In the deuterocanonical literature, a distinction is found between good and bad angels (e.g., 2 Macc 15:22; Tobit 5:22; NRSV).
In 4 Maccabees, Aaron conquers a fiery angel (4 Macc 7:11).
In the New Testament
The English translation "Angel" in the New Testament is always a rendering of (angelos); this is not a true translationit merely anglicizes the Greek letters into English. This same Greek word is used to translate "messenger" (, mal'akh) in the Old Testament. A human or heavenly messenger in the Greek Bible is (angelos), whereas we (in English) distinguish "angel" and "messenger." New Testament uses of (angelos) are:
"[Human] messenger, envoy, one who is sent."
"Heavenly spirits" of whom some are "guardian [messengers]"
New Testament "messengers" (good or obedient angels) are called:
The angel
His angels
The Angel of the Lord
Angel of God
Angel of the church
Holy angels
An archangel
My angel
Elect angels
Sometimes "messenger" is neither "angel" or human but an illness. Satan has "messengers" (Rev 12:9; 2 Cor 12:7) but is never named directly as an Old Testament or New Testament "angel."
The real debate comes down to the identity of the Angel of the Lord. There are four interpretations:
(1) Heidt and Malone suggest that the Angel of the Lord is actually God Himself (Heidt, Angelology, 7096; Malone, "Distinguishing the Angel of the Lord," 297314).
(2) Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Irenaeus, and Tertullian suggested that the Angel is the pre-incarnate Christ (see Heidt, Angelology, 98; Juncker, "Christ As Angel," 224250).
(3) Lopez has suggested that the Angel is a representative messenger of God who speaks as though he is God because he is given the authority to do so (Lpez, "Identifying the 'Angel of the Lord' " 118).
(4) Meier and Ausloos suggest that the text is inconsistent, and this inconsistency can be used to decipher the source and redaction history of the text (Meier, "Angel of Yahweh," 5759; Ausloos, "The 'Angel of Yahweh,' " 112; compare Smith, "Remembering God," 63638, 64445).
I personally think that the first two interpretations are really a distinction without a difference.
In the Old Testament, the identity of the Angel can be difficult to distinguish from Yahweh Himself (Gen 21:1719; Exod 3; Judg 2:15; 6:1124; Hos 12:4). Gen. 32:24.
The angel of the lord wrestles with Jacob. How much more material can that get?
All material comes from the Lexham Bible Dictionary search for Angel.