# Angels and Covenant



## Dan.... (Jul 27, 2006)

Are angels in covenant with God?

Consider Westminster Confession, Chapter 7, Section 1:



> The distance between God and the creature is so great, that although reasonable creatures do owe obedience unto him as their Creator, yet they could never have any fruition of him as their blessedness and reward, but by some voluntary condescension on God's part, which he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant.


...including angels?



Charles Hodge says this:



> _Systematic Theology_
> 
> The question whether perpetual, as well as perfect obedience was the condition of the covenant made with Adam, is probably to be answered in the negative. It seems to be reasonable in itself and plainly implied in the Scriptures that all rational creatures have a definite period of probation. If faithful during that period they are confirmed in their integrity, and no longer exposed to the danger of apostasy. Thus we read of the angels who kept not their first estate, and of those who did. Those who remained faithful have continued in holiness and in the favour of God. It is therefore to be inferred that had Adam continued obedient during the period allotted to his probation, neither he nor any of his posterity would have been ever exposed to the danger of sinning.



Were/Are the angels in a covenant of works with God? without Federal headship?

Concerning the angels that are predestined to everlasting blessedness: can we speak of them as having merited eternal life in any way?


----------



## brymaes (Jul 27, 2006)

The idea of probationary period for angels is shaky. The idea of their leaving their first estate implies no such thing. It merely states that they did not continue in the state wherin they were created.

Being reasonable creatures, angels owe God their obedience and whatsoever He is pleased to require of them. However, there doesn't seem to be any covenantal condecension toward angels, nor any reward of future blessedness for their obedience.

So there is no CoW with the angels, no federal head, and no merit to speak of.


----------



## Dan.... (Jul 27, 2006)

> _Originally posted by theologae_
> The idea of probationary period for angels is shaky. The idea of their leaving their first estate implies no such thing. It merely states that they did not continue in the state wherin they were created.
> 
> Being reasonable creatures, angels owe God their obedience and whatsoever He is pleased to require of them. However, there doesn't seem to be any covenantal condecension toward angels, nor any reward of future blessedness for their obedience.
> ...



Certainly you must say that the angels which "kept not their first estate" chose to sin, correct? (else God would be the author of sin).

It seems to me that there are a couple of possiblities:
1. God created some angels with an inability to sin and other angels with the ability to sin.
2. God created all angels with the ability to sin, yet sealed the obedient angels at the end of their probationary period, thus making them unable to sin.


----------



## MW (Jul 27, 2006)

Certainly fallen angels sinned, implying a law sinned against.

I would understand that the elect angels receive blessedness as an act of condescension, but not necessarily that the condescension is by means of covenant.

The covenant made with Adam was as a figure of Christ to come. Hence it always had soterion as the means of fulfilling its eschaton.

Just some thoughts, but ultimately it concerns me about as much as the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.


----------

