LORD SABAOTH

There are probably only two places where one is likely to run across the strange word “Sabaoth.” If you happen to use the King James, J.B. Phillips, or NASB versions of the Bible, you will see it in Romans 9:29 and James 5:4. But the more likely place is in singing the lyrics to Martin Luther's famous hymn 'A Mighty Fortress is our God.' There it occurs in the following stanza:

Did we in our own strength confide,

Our striving would be losing;

Were not the right Man on our side,

The Man of God’s own choosing.

Dost ask who that may be?

Christ Jesus, it is he;

Lord Sabaoth his name,

From age to age the same,

And He must win the battle.

Actually, Luther is making a rather bold statement here which may or may not be justified by reference to any biblical text. But more of that later.

I would bet that most Christians, when they come across “Saboath,” feel pretty much the same as I did for years and assume that it is just some archaic way of spelling “Sabbath.” And that would seem to make perfect sense out of Luther's words since Jesus actually called himself “the Lord of the Sabbath” in Mark 2:28 (and the parallels in Matthew 12:8 and Luke 6:5). But in actuality, the words Saboath and Sabbath have no relationship to one another.

Instead, “Lord Saboath” is just a transliteration, not a translation, of the Hebrew phrase Yahweh seba'ot, which appears first in I Samuel 1:3 as the title by which God was worshiped at Shiloh. In total, the phrase occurs roughly 280 times in the Old Testament, 250 of which are found in the prophets, 88 of those appearances in the book of Jeremiah alone. And in most New Testament translations its meaning is accurately rendered as “Lord of hosts” (RSV, NRSV, Living Bible, NEB, Jerusalem Bible, ESV, AB) or “Lord Almighty” (NIV, TEV).

This second rendering is in line with the Septuagint translation of the phrase as kyrios pantokrator. But Fretheim states that “such an abstraction lacks convincing evidence.” And Carson takes issue with both translations when he says, “the choice of 'the LORD Almighty' (NIV) captures the general sense, but not the form. The ESV's 'the LORD of hosts' preserves the traditional English but also a religious overtone probably not present if we render the expression more literally as 'the Lord of armies.'” Interestingly, The Message paraphrase renders the phrase as “our powerful God” in Romans 29:9 and as “the Master Avenger” in James 5:4.

I am not surprised that most people do not know what “Sabaoth” means, but I will admit that a few years ago I was a little disappointed when our Sunday school teacher asked the class the meaning of “hosts,” and no one could answer correctly. So I had to step in as my role as teacher's pet and explain that “hosts” meant “armies.” But then, in doing research for this post, I learned to my dismay that even I had a rather incomplete view of the meaning of the word in a biblical setting. The first thing I found out was that even scholars are still wrestling with the issue:

    “Often the meaning of 'hosts' is ambiguous.” (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

    “The hosts in question have been variously interpreted.” (J. Schneider)

    “The meaning of the phrase is much debated.” (Freitheim)

For some commentators, the meaning of “hosts” is rather clear. Thus,

    Bray and Connell both say that it refers “to the angelic armies at his command.”

    Vine begins his discussion on the word by stating, “Sabaoth is is the transliteration of a Hebrew word which denotes hosts or armies.”

    “This is a military figure which pictures Yahweh as the Commander of the angelic armies of heaven as well as the armies of Israel (I Sam. 17:45).” (Ryrie)  I would append one caveat onto this statement. Right before the battle of Jericho, Joshua encountered “the commander of the army of the LORD,” and in that case it certainly was not Yahweh Himself. (Joshua 5:13-15)

But even within the context of conflict and armies, there are a variety of ways in which God shows his power. For example, Ward mentions that there are three ways in which “hosts” have been taken:

    a. the armies of Israel (I Samuel 17:45)

    b. the armies of heaven, that is the stars and the forces of nature (Judges 5:20)

    c. the armies of angels (I Kings 22:19; Isaiah 6:1-5)

Thus, “History, nature and the supernatural are tools in the divine hand to vindicate the oppressed.”

Regarding the use of “hosts” as a reference to the stars, there are several aspects to take into account:

        “The association of heavenly hosts, in the astrological sense, with idolatry (Deut 4:19) may have been a limiting factor on this understanding in certain periods.” (Fretheim)

        “But possibly the term also had polemical overtones, directed against the cult of the stars and spirits, deeming by its use that Yahweh also controlled them.” (Schneider)

    d. DBI additionally cites the locust hordes in Joel 1:4-7; 2:1-11,25 as examples of God's “army” sent to invade Israel but also stresses that the expanded phrase “the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel” appears in Jeremiah thirty times to underscore the sovereignty over Israel herself. Also, “Zechariah uses the term frequently in association with an angelic visit concerning God's plan for Jerusalem, so the image might represent God's authority over the heavenly hosts as well as over Israel's history.”

    e. And Freitheim notes that when God uses foreign armies to punish Israel, they are also part of His “hosts.”

But aside from such military nuances, “Lord of hosts” carries a much broader meaning, as the following scholars explain:

    “It expresses God's omnipotence and supremacy.” (Carson)

    Schneider notes that it is not simply a case of the prophets transferring the hosts from the terrestrial to the celestial plane. The term refers to the totality of forces over which Yahweh rules.”

    Vine gives the following historical perspective on the word: “While the word 'hosts' probably had special reference to angels, the title 'the LORD of hosts' became used to designate Him as the One who is supreme over all the innumerable hosts of spiritual agencies, or of what are described as 'the armies of heaven.' Eventually it was used as equivalent to 'the LORD all-sovereign.'”

    “Hosts has reference to any group, human or divine, called upon by God to mediate a divine objective, which may or may not be military in nature.” (Freitheim)

    “The title reveals the sovereignty and omnipotence of God and was used often by the prophets (Isaiah and Jeremiah) to remind the people during times of national crises that God was their Leader and Protector.” (Ryrie) But we must also keep in mind that it was also use to chastise Israel when it was needed.

All of the above brings us to the two New Testament appearances of the title, which is sometimes not translated but left as 'Sabaoth.' Bray feels these should be taken as “a reminder that this is a personal name as much as a description of who God is.” And both NT appearances of this title appear in the context of God's judgment and allude to the writings of Isaiah.

In Romans 9:29 Paul quotes directly from Isaiah 1:9; 10:22-23 concerning the righteous remnant spared by God from such a judgment as Sodom and Gomorrah suffered. As Seifrid says, “Despite Israel's unbelief, a remnant has believed in the Messiah – a harbinger of Israel's salvation.” L.C. Allen echoes this thought: “Isaiah's teaching on the remnant in Isa. 10:22f; 1:9 pointed forward to the present situation, when a Jewish minority formed the nucleus of the Church. It was not that anything had gone amiss in the execution of God's plan: of that the OT gives assurance.”

Thus, “Lord Sabaoth” in Romans clearly refers to God. But what about its appearance in James 9:29?

Kreitzer notes, “There is some debate about whether kyrios in James 5:7-8 means God or Christ...There is something to be said for it being God, especially since the verses immediately preceding (Jas 5:4-5) speak of a 'day of slaughter' and seem to use traditional Day of the Lord battle imagery drawn from Jewish prophetic apocalyptic literature.”

Ben Witherington is even more definite in his judgment, “The usage of kyrios [Lord] in James is easier to analyze than in some New Testament books. In thirteen instances kyrios is used, and in all but four it seems certain that the reference is to God not Jesus....Thus it is God the Lord to whom one prays (Jas 1:5-7, 5:4 – the 'Lord Sabaoth' or 'almighty') and whom one worships (Jas 3:9). The term Lord in James then normally refers to the One who is and has always been sovereign over all the universe and has always been the object of prayer.”

And Wall says, “The misery of mistreated workers ironically foreshadows the misery of the rich in the last days, when they will lose their wealth (Jas 5:1-2) and lives (Jas 5:4) to an angry God.”

All of the above goes to demonstrate that whether “Lord Saboath” appears in the OT or the NT, it always refers to God, not Christ. Thus, we we would seem to be relatively safe in saying that Luther really had no scriptural justification for applying that title to Christ instead. But, of course, Luther was too good a theologian to make such a blunder. For while it is true that the army of angels is clearly said to be under God's control in passages such as Matthew 4:6 and 26:53 referring to conditions while Jesus was still on earth, passages such as Matthew 13:41; 16:27; 24:31; and 25:31 dealing with future events assign the Son of Man as the leader of the heavenly host.

To this, one can add passages such as Revelation 9:16 and 19:11-20 in which it is the risen Christ who summons his army. Peter explains in no uncertain terms that Jesus Christ “has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him.” Thus, it is another example of some prerogatives of the Father being granted to the Son at the present and future time.