To be clear, I am not suggesting that Vos would have endorsed the modern interpretation of the Divine Council as presented by scholars such as Gerald McDermott (God’s Rivals), Meredith Kline (meredithkline.com), Craig Carter (Contemplating God with the Great Tradition), Doug Van Dorn (Giants, sons of god), or Michael Heiser (Unseen Realm). The purpose of this article is to highlight his conclusions regarding the concept of the host of heaven, particularly in relation to Deuteronomy 32:8:
"When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God."
To get straight to the point, Vos asserts: “So far as the prophets are concerned, then, we are led back to the older view, which interprets the 'hosts' of the multitude of angels.”In other words, Vos concludes that the division of nations was assigned to angels rather than the sons of Israel, supporting his view with biblical evidence and textual variants. While I have not included all of his arguments here—due to space constraints and copyright considerations—you can find his complete discussion in his Biblical Theology section, “JEHOVAH OF HOSTS.”
Here are a few key passages that offer insight into Vos's perspective on the concept of a heavenly host.
The interpretation which understands the hosts of the astral bodies has some things in its favour. 'The host of heaven' occurs most frequently in passages where astral idolatry is spoken of [Deut. 4:19; 17:3; Jer. 8:2; 19:13; 32:29; Zeph. 1:5]. In pagan religion this is usually based on the belief that the stars are living beings or somehow identified with superhuman spirits. It has been suggested that this reference of the phrase 'host of heaven' is originally identical with the reference of it to angels. It would then date back to a time when a similar belief still prevailed among the ancestors of the Hebrews. Its use in the name of God would involve a protest against this species of idolatry, it being intimated that Jehovah is superior to these beings, Lord over every creature. There was also a belief, not seldom associated with the preceding, that the star-angels had been set over the pagan nations to rule them under the permission of God, and the belief in this form seems to have existed and survived late among the Jews. There are some contexts in Deuteronomy, where this belief is referred to. In chap. 29:26, we read: 'they went and served other gods … whom He had not divided unto them.' In 32:8, the Septuagint has a text diverging from the Hebrew, which reads: 'When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when He separated the children of men, He set the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the angels of God.' The Hebrew reads, 'according to the number of the children of Israel'. But the difference in reading between the original and the Greek Version rather suggests that here the Septuagint translators or readers stood under the influence of this peculiar idea, and changed the text accordingly. And there are several serious objections to the idea that the name was in ancient Israel understood in this sense. In the early prophets it does not occur in contexts where the stars are mentioned. Amos in 5:8, where he speaks of Pleiades and Orion, does not employ it [cp. also Isa. 40:26]. The stars are uniformly called the 'host' of heaven in the singular. And they are never called 'the host of Jehovah'. Geerhardus Vos. BiblicalTheologyOldandNewGeerhardusVos (p. 294-295). Kindle Edition
This introduces the following pages, where Vos examines the arguments for and against the variant translations. Should the text refer to Israel, or to angels as the "sons of god"?
The next few paragraphs present his conclusion that, while this interpretation aligns with a pagan view of the stars, that alone does not necessitate its rejection as a valid biblical perspective.
The prophets probably felt that the times had changed. Whilst in the time of David the whole trend of the religion of Israel was towards the forcible shaking off of a foreign yoke, in the period of the prophets, when altogether too much reliance was placed on military resources, and the divine purpose was to break this unreligious, untheocratic frame of mind, the stress could no longer be laid upon what should be done with human help, but rather upon what Jehovah would miraculously accomplish. And therefore the 'hosts' become of a different complexion; they are now exponents of the heavenly, supernatural interposition of God in the affairs of His people. This is quite in line with the condemnation of political alliances, which is a constant ingredient of the prophetic preaching of our period.
So far as the prophets are concerned, then, we are led back to the older view, which interprets the 'hosts' of the multitude of angels. This best satisfies all the facts in the case. We have already found that the occurrence of the name in 1 Sam. 4:4 and 2 Sam. 6:2, is due to the mention of the cherubim. A number of other instances show the same conjunction. It is Jehovah worshipped by the seraphim whom Isaiah calls Jehovah of Hosts. In Isa. 37:16, Hezekiah's prayer, Jehovah is called Jehovah of Hosts as sitting upon the cherubim. The only place where the name occurs in Hosea stands in a context which mentions the angel of Jehovah [12:4, 5]. In Psa. 89 the name occurs only once, vs. 8, and in the preceding context the angels stand in the foreground.
Further, this interpretation most easily explains the several features associated with the name. The war-like flavour arises from the fact that the God of the angels is the omnipotent King of the heavenly multitudes, who can conquer His enemies, when earthly resources fail, nay, can even turn His hosts against Israel, if need be [Isa. 31:4]. Jehovah of Hosts is His royal name. It designates Him as the almighty King both in nature and history [Psa. 103:19–22; Isa. 6:5; 24:23; Jer. 46:18; 48:15; 51:57]. In the Orient the might of a king is measured by the splendour of his retinue. (p. 298)
Vos does not provide further insights into why God divided the nations among the sons of God or the angels. It is important to avoid drawing conclusions where Vos himself did not. The purpose of presenting this information is simply to demonstrate that, according to Vos, the text necessitates translating Deuteronomy 32:8 as referring to angels—an interpretation that also aligns with the Divine Council narrative in Psalm 82.
As modern theologians continue to grapple with this text, it is always valuable to look back at how past godly scholars have interpreted these passages and consider their conclusions.
Comentários