Scriptures quoted, and from many others, that, per-dered by angels to mankind, we may safely adopt sonally taken, the sense of a messenger, or one de- the idea of their being servants of this Great King, puted by another to act for him, is the genuine idea sent from before his throne to this lower world, to of the word angel, both in the Old and in the New execute his commissions: so far, at least, Scripture Testament. Hence, therefore, Christ Jesus may warrants us. In such services, some of them, probwell be called, "The angel of God:" he being emi-ably, are always engaged, though invisible to us. nently the deputy from God to man; the great Angel We may receive from them much good, or evil, of the covenant; (Mal. iii. 1.) the agent for God. without being aware of any angelic interference. (2.) Taken impersonally, the word ANGEL implies, Thus the activity of Satan (an agent of evil) in Job, that agent which executes the will of another: and, is represented as producing great effects, (by storms as the great natural agents of the world around us and other means,) but Job knew not that it was are wholly beyond the direction of man, and, there- Satan: he referred all the calamities he felt, or fore, are esteemed as exclusively obedient to God, feared, to the good pleasure of God acting by natuthe word angel imports something empowered or ral causes; and thus the angel might long have commissioned to execute his will. Now, though all watched Abraham invisibly, before he called out to the powers of nature, in all their operations, are, in forbid the slaying of Isaac, Gen. xxii. In this sense, this sense, angels of God, as acting for him, yet their angels are "ministering spirits, sent forth to do more extraordinary effects are principally noticed, as a variety of services to the heirs of salvation," being most evidently his agents: these appearing Heb. i. 14. most remarkable to feeble humanity, and most exciting its attention. In a sense greatly analogous to this, we say, in common speech, "Providence interposed so and so;" such a thing is "the dispensation of Providence." But we rarely express ourselves thus, in respect to the ordinary occurrences of life. Extraordinary operations of providence, then, though accomplished by natural means, are in Scripture considered as angels (agents) of God: and so the Psalmist observes, (civ. 4.) that God can, if he please, "make winds his angels," to conduct his dispensations; "and flames of fire his ministers," or servants, to perform his pleasure.

II. But, beside agencies of natural powers, or providential angels, we have reason to infer, that there exists in the scale of beings, a series of CREATED INTELLIGENT POWERS, who are angels, inasmuch as they are occasionally agents of God towards mankind. These, in capacity and dignity, are vastly superior to ourselves; indeed, they are so much our superiors, that in order to render them in any degree comprehensible by us, their nature, offices, &c. are illustrated by being compared to what occurs among mankind. Thus, if a human prince have his attendants, his servants, his guards, this circumstance is taken advantage of, and is employed to illustrate the nature of celestial angels; and to this effect, by way of similitude, and condescending to the conception of humanity, angels are represented as attendants, servants of God. We know that God needs no attendants to perform his commands, being omnipresent; but being himself likened to a great king, his angels are compared to courtiers and ministers, subordinate to him, and employed in his service. It cannot be said, God does not need angels, therefore angels do not exist; for God does not need man, yet man exists. This principle is evidently the foundation of the apologue which prefaces the poetical part of the book of Job: (chap. i. 6.) "There was a day, when the sons of God came to present themselves (as it were, at court) before the Lord;" also, of 1 Kings xxii. 19. "I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him, on his right hand, and on his left." Isaiah's vision (chap. vi.) is to the same purpose; and our Lord continues the same idea, especially, when speaking of his glorious return,-"The Son of Man shall send his angels, to expel from his kingdom all that offends. He shall sit on the throne of his glory, and all his holy angels around him," Matt. xxv. 31, seq. Throughout the Revelation, many coincident representations may be observed. In reference to the services ren

If angels are thus engaged invisibly in the care or service of mankind, then we can find no difficulty in admitting that they have had orders, on particular occasions, to make themselves known, as celestial intelligences. They may often have assumed the human appearance, for ought we can tell; but if they assumed it completely, (as must be supposed, and which nothing forbids,) how can we generally know it? How can we recognize them? This is evidently beyond human abilities, unless it be part of their commission to leave indications of their superior nature. This produces the inquiry-By what tokens have angels made themselves known?

(1.) Such discovery has usually been after they had delivered their message, and always for the purpose of a sign, in confirmation of the faith of the party whom they had addressed. It is evident, that the angel which appeared to Manoah, was taken by both Manoah and his wife only for a prophet, till after he had delivered his message, he took leave "wonderfully," to convince them of his extraordinary nature. Thus the angel that wrestled with Jacob, at last put the hollow of his thigh out of joint-a token that he was no mere man. The angel that spake to Zacharias, (Luke i. 20.) rendered him dumb-a token beyond the power of mere man (e. g. an impostor speaking falsely in the name of God) to produce; und so of others.

(2.) But sometimes angels did not reveal themselves fully; they gave, as it were, obscure, and very indistinct, though powerful, intonations of their presence. When angels were commissioned to appear to certain persons only, others who were in company with those persons, had sensations which indicated an extraordinary occurrence. Although the appearance was not to them, yet they seem to have felt the effects of it; as Dan. x. 7. "I, Daniel, alone saw the vision-the men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves." So Acts ix. 7. "The men which journeyed with Saul stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.” xxii. 9. "They that were with me saw a peculiar kind of light and were afraid; but they heard not the voice (the distinct words) addressed to me." xxvi. 14. "We were ALL fallen to the earth." The guards of the sepulchre (Matt. xxviii. 4.) seem to have been in much the same situation; they probably did not distinctly (i. e. accurately, steadily,) see the angel; but only saw a general splendid appearance, enough most thoroughly to terrify them, and to cause them to become as dead men, but not enough to resist the

crafty explanations of the priests, and the influence | Also, if the thorn in the flesh, and the angel of Satan, of their money. be the same, in the case of Paul, 2 Cor. xii. 7.

66

it to shrink. Neither did they eat animals which had been ta' ken, or touched, by a ravenous or impure beast, such as a dog, a wolf, or a boar;-nor the flesh of any animal, that died of itself. Whoever touched the carcass of it was impure until the evening; and till that time, and after he had washed his clothes, he could not associate with others, Lev. xi. 39, 40.

Fish that had neither fins nor scales were unclean, Lev. xi. 10. Birds which walk on the ground with four feet, such as bats, and flies that have many feet, were impure; but the law (Lev. xi. 21, 22.) excepts locust s, which have their hind feet higher than those befor e, and rather leap than walk.-These are clean, and may be eaten ; as, in fact, they were, and still are in Palestine, and other eastern countries.

geance, or punishment. "Is God unjust, who makes people sensible of the effects of his anger?" or who taketh vengeance, (speaking after the manner of men,) Rom. iii. 5. Anger is gone out from the Lord, and begins to be felt," (Numb. xvi. 46.) by its effects, in a plague. Anger is often joined with fury, even when God is spoken of; but this is by way of expressing more forcibly the effects of his anger, or what may be expected from the just occasions of his indignation, Deut. xxix. 24. "Turn from us the fury of thine anger," 2 Chron. xxix. 10; Dan. ix. 16. "The day of wrath," is the day of God's judgment, the day of vengeance, or punishment, (Rom. ii. 5.)" the wrath to come;" (Matt. iii. 7; 1 Thess. i. 10.) "We were all children of wrath," "vessels of wrath, fitted to destruction," Eph. ii. 3; Rom. ix. 22. Interpreters are much divided with relation to the Paul enjoins the Romans to "give way, or place, legal purity or impurity of animals. It is believed by to wrath;" (Rom. xii. 19.) that is, provoke not the sor ne, that this distinction obtained before the flood wicked, who are already sufficiently exasperated sir ce God commanded Noah (Gen. vii. 2.) to carry against you, but let their anger of itself sink and se ven couple of clean animals into the ark, and only decline; also, do not expose yourselves unseasona- two of unclean; (see ARK;) but others, as Augustin bly to their passion; as, when we meet a furious and | Origen, Irenæus, are of opinion, that it is altogethe unruly beast, we go out of the way, and avoid him; syrubolical, and that it denotes the moral purity which so behave toward your persecutors. The weapons the Hebrews were to endeavor after, or that impu of God's anger (Jer. 1. 25.) are the instruments herity which they were to avoid, according to the natur uses in punishment, war, famine, barrenness, dis- of these animals. Thus, if a hog, for example, sig eases, &c. but particularly war, which is the con- nified gluttony; a hare, lasciviousness; a sheep, gen junction of all misfortunes, and the fulness of "the tlene ss; a dove, simplicity;-then the principal desig cup of God's wrath." To consummate, finish, fill, of Moses in prohibiting the use of swine's flesh, wa his anger, is to cause the effects of it to be felt with to condemn gluttony, and excess in eating or drink the utmost rigor. ing; or in recommending sheep, or doves, it was reco mmend gentleness, &c. Others, as Theodore believe, that God intended to preserve the Hebrew fror a the temptation of adoring animals, by permittin the n to eat the generality of those which were r gar ded as gods in Egypt; and leading them to loo with horror on others, to which, likewise, divin ho 1ors were paid. They never had any idea wc rshipping the animals they ate; still less of adorin those which they could not persuade themselves us e, even for nourishment. Tertullian thought, th God proposed, by this means, to accustom the H brews to temperance, by enjoining them to depri themselves of several sorts of food. Many commen ators, however, discern in the animals which are fo bidden as unclean, merely some natural qualiti which are really hurtful, or which, at least, are u de rstood to be so by certain people. Moses forba the use of those beasts, birds, and fishes, the flesh which was thought pernicious to health; the which were wild, dangerous, or venomous, or th were so esteemed. God, likewise, who designed separate the Hebrews from other people, as a nati consecrated to his service, seems to have interdict the use of certain animals, which were consider as unclean, that by this figurative purity they mi be inclined to another purity, real and perfect, as intimated, Lev. xx. 24.

The Hebrews express anger by the same word which signifies nose and nostrils, borrowed from the idea of hard breathing or snuffing, and the consequent dilatation of the nostrils, which accompanies violent anger. So Theoc. i. 8. Martial vi. 64. See NOSE.

ANIM, a city of Judah, (Josh. xv. 50.) probably the Anam, or Anea, mentioned by Eusebius and Jerome, about eight or ten miles east of Hebron.

ANIMALS. The Hebrews distinguish clean animals, i. e. those which may be eaten and offered in sacrifice to Jehovah, from those which are unclean, the use of which is prohibited. The distinction consists in the form of the foot or hoof, which must be thoroughly cloven into two parts, and no more, and in chewing the cud. Those animals which possess both these qualities are clean; those which have neither, or only one, of them, are unclean.

The sacrifices the Hebrews generally offered were, (1.) of the beeve kind; a cow, bull, or calf. When it is said oxen were sacrificed, we are to understand bulls, for the mutilation of animals was not permitted or used among the Israelites, Lev. xxii. 18, 19. (2.) of the goat kind; a she-goat, he-goat, or kid, xxii. 24. (3.) of the sheep kind; an ewe, ram, or lamb. In burnt-offerings, and sacrifices for sin, rams were offered; for peace-offerings, or sacrifices of pure devotion, a female might be offered, if pure and without blemish, iii. 1. Besides these three sorts of animals used in sacrifice, many others might be eaten, wild or tame; such as the stag, the roe-buck, and in general, all that have cloven feet, and that chew the cud. All that have not cloven hoofs, and do not chew the cud, were esteemed impure, and could neither be offered nor eaten, Lev. xi. 3, 4. The fat of all sorts of animals sacrificed, was forbidden as food; as was the blood in all cases, on pain of death. Neither did the Israelites eat the sinew which lies on the hollow of the thigh, because the angel that wrestled with Jacob at Mahanaïm, touched it, and occasioned

Most nations have fixed on certain animals as 1 fit for human food than others; in other words, unclean; and this, independent of their properties more or less saluta ry or injurious to health. Yet find considerable variations of opinion and practi even among natio ns inhabiting the same countr The horse, held unlawful by the Hebrews, is ea by the Tartars; the camel, forbidden to the Jews eaten by the Aral ; as is also the hare, and other

In general, it n ay be observed, that whatever forbidden as ord inary food was still more stron prohibited from 1 he altar; and, among other reas because as sacrifices were eaten either in whole o

part, by the priest or offerer, or both, it is evident, | ple the most solemn place for it. Anna was fourscore that the admission of animals legally impure would and four years of age, when the Virgin came to prehave spread impurity under the sanction of the altar sent Jesus in the temple; and entering there, while itself. And further, that as the altar partook of the Simeon was pronouncing his thanksgiving, Anna, sacrifice, the fat, &c. which were consumed by its likewise, began to praise God, and to speak of the fire, that fire, with the sacred implement itself, would Messiah to all who waited for the redemption of have been absolutely desecrated by such unwarrant- Israel. able departure from the instituted rites. See the histories of this in the Maccabees, &c. The flesh of the swine was usually the pollution forced by persecutors on the Jews; but it is evident, that any kind of prohibited food, from whatever class derived, would have produced the same effect. See further under GOAT, and SHEEP.

ANISE, an herb well known, which produces small seeds of a pleasant smell. Our Lord reproaches the Pharisees with their scrupulous exactitude in paying tithe of anise, mint, and cummin, while they neglected justice, mercy, and faith, which were the most essential principles and practices of religion, Matt. xxiii. 23.

I. ANNA, wife of Tobit, of the tribe of Naphtali, carried captive to Nineveh, by Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, Tobit i. 1, 2, &c.

II. ANNA, daughter of Phanuel, a prophetess and widow of the tribe of Asher, Luke ii. 36, 37. She was married early, and lived but seven years with her husband, after which she continued, without ceasing, in the temple, serving God, day and night, with fasting and prayers. Dr. Prideaux remarks that this expression is to be understood no otherwise than that Anna constantly attended the morning and evening sacrifice at the temple, and then with great devotion offered up her prayers to God; the time of the morning and evening sacrifice being the most solemn time of prayer among the Jews, and the tem

ANNAS, a high-priest of the Jews, Luke iii. 2; John xviii. 13, 24; Acts iv. 6. He is mentioned in Luke as being high-priest along with Caiaphas his son-in-law. He is called by Josephus, Ananus the son of Seth; and was first appointed to that office by Quirinus, proconsul of Syria, about A. D. 7 or 8, (Jos. Ant. xviii. 2. 1.) but was afterwards deprived of it by Valerius Gatus, procurator of Judea, who gave the office first to Ismael the son of Phabæus, and a short time after to Eleazar the son of Annas. He held the office one year, and was then succeeded by Simon, who, after another year, was followed by Joseph, also called Caiaphas, the son-in-law of Annas, about A. D. 27 or 28, who continued in office until A. D. 35. In the passages of the New Testament above cited, therefore, it is apparent that Caiaphas was the only actual and proper high-priest; but Annas, being his father-in-law, and having been formerly himself high-priest, and being also perhaps his substitute, (,) had great influence and authority, and could with great propriety be still termed high-priest along with Caiaphas. Jos. Ant. xviii. 2. 2. Kuinoel on Luke iii. 2. *R.

ANNUNCIATION, a festival on which Christian churches celebrate the conception, or incarnation of the Son of God in the womb of the Virgin Mary. It falls on the 25th of March. The angel Gabriel first announced the approach of this event to Zacharias, telling him that his son should be the fore-runner and prophet of the Messiah. Six months afterwards Gabriel was sent to Nazareth, to the Virgin Mary, of the tribe of Judah, and family of David, whom he saluted by saying, "Hail, thou highly-favored of the Lord; the Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women!" Mary, being greatly perplexed by the salutation, the angel added, "Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found favor with God. Thou shalt conceive, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest," &c. Then said Mary to the angel, "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" The angel answered, “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee; therefore, also, that Holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God. And behold thy cousin, Elisabeth, she also hath conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month with her; for with God nothing shall be impossible." And Mary said, "Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me according to thy word," Luke i. 5, 26. The angel then departed; and by the operation of the Holy Ghost, Mary conceived the only Son of the Father, who had been four thousand years expected; and who was to be the happiness, the light, and the salvation of men.

In the Koran, (third Sura,) there is this remarkable passage: "Remember what is written of Mary-We sent to her our Spirit, in the human form; she was affrighted, and said, 'God will preserve me from you, unless you have his fear before your eyes.' But the angel answered, O Mary! I am the messenger of thy God, and of thy Lord, who will give thee a wise and active son!' She replied, 'How shall I have a

son, without the knowledge of man?' 'HE HAS SAID IT-answered the angel: 'the event shall be as I have announced to thee.' Then she became pregnant." The history of the annunciation, as a part of the miraculous conception, having been impugned, this extract may serve to show, that it was extant in other authorities, beside our present gospels. Mahomet certainly found it in some ancient writing, since he says, "Remember what is written," an appeal which he could hardly have adopted, had not the occurrence been the general belief, prior to his time; as its primary aspect is so favorable to Christianity. Mahoinet doubtless borrowed this passage from the New Testament itself, like many other parts of the Koran. R.

Lord-and how should she know that Mary had believed?-See Luke i. 42.

2. There is another annunciation, which ought not to be overlooked here-that made in a dream to Joseph, (Matt. i. 20.) probably by the same celestial messenger that appeared to Mary and Elisabeth, and certainly to the same import as the former annunciation to Mary. Now, as Joseph appears to have been a thoughtful, well-informed, and considerate man, not a young man, and, above all, a just man, (i. e. very strict,) we may be assured that a man of his understanding, his experience in life, his reputation, (perhaps his family pride as descended from David,) and his moderate situation in the world, would not degrade and burden himself with a supposititious issue, unless he had been fully convinced that the case was miraculous.-Thus the mediocrity of Joseph's situation, in respect to property, becomes a reason of considerable weight-since he could so easily have relieved himself from the attendant expenses of a rising family, at his time of life, by fulfilling his first design of putting Mary away privily; which, in fact, unless under complete conviction, was his duty.

1 This subject has been so often placed before our eyes, by representations (rather misrepresentations) of the pencil, that it becomes necessary to guard against false ideas received through this medium; to dismiss the cloud attending the angelthe flowers-the brilliancy-and all such artful and artificial, but unwarrantable, accessories; and to reduce the story to the simple narrative of Luke. From this it appears, that Mary was in a houseprobably in private; (but this is not said, nor in what It should be remarked, that the angel, in speaking part of her house;) for the angel entered and ad- to Mary, uses language which may be taken in refervanced towards her. Nor did he appear in splen- ence to a temporal Messiah—(He shall reign, &c.) dor, or in any extremely disturbing manner, so but to Joseph, he seems to be more explicit, and to as to astonish Mary, but gave her time to con- speak of a spiritual Messiah,-"He shall save his sider, to reason with herself, respecting his say-people from their sins." He also refers Joseph to the ing: Gr. "what kind of salutation (not what kind of prophecy respecting Emmanuel; and informs him, person) this could be"--and to recover from her first that this event was the completion of that prophecy: surprise, at such a compliment paid her. He then "THIS ALSO ALL IS COME TO PASS, that it might be proceeded to deliver his message; and she inquires fulfilled." Of course both Joseph and Mary well of him-if, indeed, her exclamation, "How can that knew the prophetic writings: Mary, as appears from be!" be not rather the language of surprise. It does the allusions to them in her song; and Joseph, to not appear that she knew him to be an angel; for whom, otherwise, the appeal to Isaiah's prophecy then she would have acquiesced in his words with- had been useless. See JOSEPH, MARY, &c. out hesitation; but after he had, as a sign, given her information that her cousin Elisabeth was pregnant, he departed. He did not vanish; but went away from her. Mary went "in haste"-directly-to visit Elisabeth, (a considerable journey,) from whom she could acquire information to guide her conduct in this matter.-Had Elisabeth NOT been pregnant, then Mary might have thought the appearance delusive; but finding Elisabeth really pregnant, she could learn from her what kind of vision had appeared to Zacharias in the temple, whereby to identify the person seen by herself. She would thus receive abundant evidence in confirmation of her own experience, and of her confidence in the divine interposition.

Thus simply considered, this narrative has much resemblance to that of the annunciation of the birth of Samson, wherein the angel was repeatedly addressed as a mere man-a prophet; and was not discovered, till after his message had taken its effect. In like manner, an angel announced to Sarah the birth of Isaac; but was not known, at the time, to be an angel; Sarah hesitated, because of her great age; and the Virgin Mary hesitated, because of her (early) youth. Mary, being a person of a reflective turn of mind, could not but ponder, and consider very attentively the language and expression used in both instances, the similarity of appearances, and other circumstances.

It is worthy of remark, that as Mary was referred to Elisabeth, so Elisabeth was in some sense referred to Mary. How, if this were not the case, should Elisabeth know that Mary was the mother of her Lord-and what things were told Mary from the

3. As the annunciation of the birth of John the Baptist appears very much to illustrate and to confirm that respecting Jesus, it demands the consideration of some of its circumstances:

(1.) The age of Zacharias (probably above fifty) rendered it unlikely that he should be imposed upon; and equally unlikely that he should, through warmth of imagination, impose on himself. (2.) Elisabeth apparently was near the same age as her husband, which, for a woman in the East, is a much more advanced period of life than among us. Considering the early age at which the Jews married, this couple had probably lived together, barren, thirty or more years. (3.) The lot determined whose duty it was to burn incense. Zacharias, then, could little have expected this visit-at this time:-nothing could be more contingent, in respect to him. (4.) Being in the sanctuary, he there saw a person standing on the right side of the altar of incense-that being the most convenient situation to permit Zacharias to fulfil his office; and (as we understand it) so that the altar and the smoke of the incense was between them. (5.) The very great sanctity of this placeno person was ever admitted here, but the priests who had duty in it; no ordinary Jew ever approached it; not even a priest had duty in it at this moment of solemn worship, except he who was engaged in that worship; and Zacharias not only must have personally known any intrusive priest, but it was his duty to punish his intrusion. The appearance of the angel, though we suppose it to be completely human, yet was certainly different from that of a priest, in dress, manners, &c. (6.) The angel's discourse to Zacha