Last time, I was arguing that “hosts” in this title probably
does not refer to angels, but rather to the hosts of Israel .
It is pertinent to this contention that the word “hosts” when used apart from
this phrase and in the plural always refers to human armies, most commonly to
the armies of Israel .
So, for example, Ex 12:41 says, “all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land
of Egypt .” Deut 20:9, when speaking
of the armies of Israel
preparing for battle says, “then commanders shall be appointed at the head of
the people” (literally: they shall appoint princes of the hosts at the head of
the people). 1 Kgs 2:5 speaks of the “two commanders [princes] of the hosts of Israel .”
Psa 68:12 says, “kings of armies [hosts] did flee apace.”
The title “Lord of hosts” occurs one hundred forty-five
times in the books of Isaiah and Jeremiah. It occurs over fifty times in the
much shorter Book of Zechariah. It occurs fourteen times in the two chapters of
Haggai and twenty-four times in the four chapters of Malachi. The usage in the
prophets accounts for the vast majority of the uses of the term in the Old
Testament, and it is used consistently with the nation of Israel
in view. This would seem to lend weight to the idea that the focus is not on
angelic armies, but rather on human armies, in particular the armies of Israel .
Interestingly, when the word “host” is used in such a way as
to indicate the possibility of the “host” being angels, it occurs in the
singular. Thus with the cryptic text in Josh 5:14ff, it is the prince of the
host (singular) of the Lord who appears to Joshua. Likewise, in 1 Kgs 22:19 “all the host of Heaven,” host is
singular. It is the same case in Psa 103:21 and Psa 148:2.
What can we conclude from this? I think first, that the
reason hosts is singular in regard to angels is due to the fact that they are
considered a single army. Israel ,
on the other hand, was made up of twelve tribes, each providing its own army
[host]. Hence the God of Israel is the Lord of the hosts of Israel ,
a perfect image of the Old Testament church militant.
Very interesting, thanks for the follow up.
ReplyDelete