Angels in Abrahamic Religions: Manifestations of Pagan inclinations

>>1752538
Angels exist as a go between from the world out of time, to the world within time.

Fuck, don't remind me of that video. It's getting dark outside where I live.

>>1752556
And god needs to relie on thoe because he cant do it himself?

>>1752556
And why would an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent deity need someone to act as a "go-between"? That's right: such a deity would not "need" at all.

The angels - and the same goes for humans - only make sense if you acknowledge that God might not actually be all-knowing, all-powerful, or omnibenevolent.

>>1752573
Humans can be explained as "children", "pets" or simply a way to pass time. Now, in many religions, starting with beliefs that Sumer held, angels or similar figures are explained away as a beta-test, which were replaced by humans because they either lacked in something or rebelled (Lucifer was an angel after all).

I haven't studied religion too much but I imagine angels would be used as some kind of physical tool or something.

>>1752581
>Humans can be explained as "children", "pets" or simply a way to pass time.

But you're just stating what I already said in the OP. Angels were born from polytheistic tendencies: former gods being demoted to celestial attendants during the adoption of Yawheh-exclusive worship among the Hebrews, and manifestations of polytheism among the Romans of Late Antiquity.

In modern Christianity/Islam, where the absolute perfection of God is stressed inordinately, there is no reason why the angels should exist, nor is any attempt made to explain them other than the convoluted apologetics.

>>1752538
angels aren't exclusive to monotheism. angels existed in pagan religions as messengers for the gods. i don't that this was from gods being integrated but also demoted in early judaism. if you look at the names of the angels they're mostly names like Raphael, Michael, names that contain the name of the god El. it's likely that El's messengers just weren't removed from the religion as it turned towards monotheism

God is all powerful. God's need for angels is the same need for humans. Why attempt to justify the existence when the existence is already justified?

It is not absurd to say God has angelic forces that act for God. We can't just sit in front of a computer and limit God to our own understanding or even that understanding of another person.

>>1752581
>god
>needing a beta

pls.

>>1752581

Why would you compare humans to "pets" What?

File: Idols..jpg (127KB, 421x563px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 421x563px

>>1752601
God is allpowerful. God's ability to be also many Gods is the same ability as enabling free will while knowing all outcomes. Why attempt to justifie monotheism when its already justified in polytheism and vice versa?
It is not absurd to say God is also many God.We can't just sit in front of a computer and limit God to our own understanding or even that understanding of another person.

So let me have my Idols, k?
How to respond to that?

>>1752538
You're assuming angels aren't real. If they're real, they aren't a remnant of anything and they don't need any particular logical justification - they simply are.

But if you really want a reason, try this: God, by His very nature, creates. It's the ultimate expression of divinity. Angels are simply one of His creations; they don't really need a purpose, but they're given a purpose anyway, because God loves bringing order to chaos. He doesn't "need" messengers, He simply makes them because they fit into His creation.

>>1752629
There is a difference between a god and an idol.

>>1752634
yeah, you worship gods through idols

>>1752634
There is also a difference between Jesus christ and a cruzifix necklace.
Your point is?

>>1752641
The power is not in the idol. The power is in God alone.

>>1752633
>You're assuming angels aren't real. If they're real, they aren't a remnant of anything and they don't need any particular logical justification - they simply are.
so how about we use this same logic for the universe. it doesn't need a creator or a reason to exist, it just simply is

>>1752646
If you want to idol worship Jesus, at least buy the state of the risen Christ rather than the dying Christ.

However, Christ needs not be idol worshipped. What you can physically see in Christ, words or depictions, is not what is not physically seen, that is Christ.

>>1752648
The power is not in the Ark of the Covenant, the power is in God alone.

>>1752657
There is a difference between the Ark of the Covenant and an idol statue.

It's a milder carrot-on-a-stick akin to the 62 virgins

>>1752656
Well. Thats the way polytheists think about their idols too, otherwise you as a mere human would create a higher being the moment you carve an image of it in stone or wood.
Back to my initial argument about god being able to be infinitivly many gods because it is god.

>>1752652
I'm not arguing in favor of theism or atheism. I'm simply saying that existence doesn't require an explanation. You don't need to explain your place in the universe to know that you exist. You either do or you don't. Same with angels. They either exist or they don't. They don't have to make sense in order to exist. After all, none of us really "make sense" in the scheme of things, but here we are.

>>1752661
just like the idols, Yahweh's physical presence was supposed to be in the Ark. when Solomon builds the temple and places the Ark inside Yahweh enters the temple in a huge cloud. both objects were used to get near the physical precense of the deity, neither was supposed to be the actual deity himself

>>1752671
To break down the idol is to understand that it is just a representation of an aspect of God, should bring you to worship God alone. Otherwise, you can recognize the idol as inferior to God, but still worship the idol. However, every ok to believe whatever it is they want.

You know the idol and the angel by the fruit of the tree:
>"likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit."

So when the angel says "worship me", it is an idol, a fallen god. When the angel says "worship God", the angels cause is for the Lord.

>>1752675
you are simplifying the issue. they aren't supposed to be eternal beings but created by God. they, in this framework, are supposed to fullfill a specific purpose, one which God, as he is defined, shouldn't require

>>1752682
The Ark is a Tabernacle.

>>1752699
that doesn't matter. the same aspects you attack in idol worship are also in the Ark of the Covenant

>>1752696
I'm with this guy:

>>1752633
>>1752675

The ways of God are inscrutable. Humans don't have full knowledge of what God is or "requires"/wants.

>>1752705
There is no attack on idol worship here. The Ark is a moving Temple, not an idol.

Monotheism recognizes angels, devotion to them, and the angels are devoted to God. The religion recognizes the existence of humanity and divine beings however is devoted to God alone, while having respects for the angels that minister to them.

Polytheism, recognizes the angels, and devotion to them, and the angels are worshipped instead of God.

>>1752538
Angeloi are literally "Messengers". Just as we are, they are a creation of God. Your issue, OP, is that you're trying to rationalize the irrational. We cannot comprehend God with our extremely limited capabilities.

>>1752641
>>1752629
An idol is an empty vessel - lifeless. It is not to be worshiped.

>>1752599
Angel-like beings make sense in polytheistic religions, since deities and spirits are not considered to be all-powerful or all-knowing or perfect. But when they exist in Abrahamic religions, it's nonsensical.

>>1752726
>"le mysterious ways :^)" meme

Fuck off

>>1752750
>meme

>The "I am the end all be all human who can rationalize everything and understand all" meme

>>1752538
Angels are appendages of god.

>>1752745
Abrahamic religions recognize Gabriel sending Mary and Muhammed revelations.

"I have been given permission to speak about one of the angels of God who carry the Throne. The distance between his ear-lobes and his shoulders is equivalent to a seven-hundred-year journey." (Abu Daud)

"They celebrate His praises night and day, nor do they ever slacken." (Quran 21:20)

>>1752753
"My god is truer then your god and I dont need tto rationalise it"

>>1752663
This

>>1752759
>perfect self-contained being creates beings who exist solely to eternally shout praises at him

Sure, "perfect"

>>1752774
Sounds like azathoth.
If they stop praising his work he might think beyond it and scrap it.

>>1752556
You sound like someone who genuinely knows what he's talking about. That's exactly how I would describe the Holy Guardian Angel.

Have you attempted the Abramelin operation by any chance?

>>1752768
Nice strawman.

>>1752759
>We send not the angels down except for just cause: if they came (to the ungodly), behold! no respite would they have! (Surah Al-Hijr, 8)

>>1752786
Nah, not really.
You say god is incomprehenible, but its comprehensible that he made angels with specific task and names.

>>1752675

I agree. Life (sentient, intelligent life) is a paradox when presented in the same aspect as an almighty God, and so are angels and spirits that roam the land. By land, define the universe. The universe is the balance of things; God is perfect, the universe is not. God is order, the universe is chaos. We live and thrive in a chaotic environment which is paradoxical to the order that God represents. In chaos there is no order, only coincidences; the fact that our planet is just in the right distance to the sun and has the right amounts of elements to provide and sustain life is a huge coincidence, set into motion by a single event, pushed forward by God at the moment of creation. Angels are, thus, a link between a world of order and chaos; they are nothing but a beacon that gives mankind to a certain purpose. Angels are the "big bang" to create an event that is necessary to set something in motion in our chaotic world.

>>1752793
you see a microwave, a leather pouch, or a car for the first time, having never met a human or anything associated with humanity prior. Are you able to comprehend a human, then? No.

>>1752798
The irony of that is that the Quranic verses came a demon, multiple demons, or Satan himself disguised as an Archangel.

>>1752798
dropping a description of what angels do does not explain why god needed them to do as described as its in his range of infinite abilitys to do himself.

>>1752810
>The irony of that is that the Quranic verses came a demon, multiple demons, or Satan himself disguised as an Archangel.

That is a meme.

>>1752813
>dropping a description of what angels do does not explain why god needed them to do as described as its in his range of infinite abilitys to do himself.

There are more description of angels and their functions.

File: Lord Surya.jpg (209KB, 800x1089px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 800x1089px

>>1752810
But you cant see angels in the same way you cant see hindugods.
Still, some people claim to experience them, if those experiences deride from a common but incomprehensible source, how can you make claims about which of those experiences are true (gabriel) and which not (lets say yamantaka)

>>1752538
>Why exactly do those of the Abrahamic religions believe God created the angels?

Catholics believe that these beings of incredible power and subtly were created to bow down to man, to exalt him.

Lucifer refused to bow to man, his pride wouldn't allow it.

>>1752538

From that line of thinking, it would SEEM to be absurd for an omnipotent and omniscient being to do anything at all.

And yet here we are. Consider the short blip of consciousness that is your life compared to the vastness of the temporal universe, and eternity beyond that.

Do you really think you're equipped to question God's decisions with any hope of actual understanding?

Pillars of creation man.

>>1752841
>how can you make claims about which of those experiences are true (gabriel) and which not (lets say yamantaka)

from self-evidence to the self

If God one day decided to let you know Yamantaka is just a false idol, such that you would know that it was so with an absolute certainty beyond the pale of normal human knowledge, you would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was so.

But unless it be God's will, you could not prove this to anyone else any more than you could prove to someone that you have an internal experience, or that you put on pants before your shirt this morning.

File: 1263103476240.gif (1MB, 410x305px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 410x305px

>>1752873
>If Yamantaka one day decided to let you know God is just a false idol, such that you would know that it was so with an absolute certainty beyond the pale of normal human knowledge, you would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was so.
>But unless it be Yamantaka's will, you could not prove this to anyone else any more than you could prove to someone that you have an internal experience, or that you put on pants before your shirt this morning.

Rilly m8ks ya thnq

>>1752538

Become a Christian and ask him.

>>1752573
>omnibenevolent

This is the bullshit one.

>>1752882

>refer to an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient being granting you certain knowledge
>LOL ALL DIVINE FIGURES ARE COMPLETELY INTERCHANGEABLE CHRISTKEKS BTFO

you completely missed the point, idiot.

>>1752841

Everyone here has seen an angel. Everyone.

They can look like us.

They can breed with our women.

>>1752900
CHERUBED.com

>>1752900
>Everyone here has seen an angel. Everyone.

prove it.

Also you're probably fooled by aliens, they like to dress up like angels and demons and fuck with people. Rookie mistake, no need to be embarrassed.

>>1752873
The sad thing is that even if god would decide so to let me know a part of the truth of things, noone would believe me as long as I would not manage to put up a show to convince them with my limited human abilitys.

This is why Moses had to kill the worshippers of the golden lamb who had their own vision concerning which beings are worthy of praise and its the reason why you have people like me who question moses to this day.

>>1752563
God directly involving himself in the world would cause the world to be destroyed, since changeless things cannot interact with things that change.

See Moses and Abraham when they tried to see God.
>>1752573
God created the world because he himself cannot change. It's an cosmic entropy dump.

>>1752899
>>refer to an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient being granting you certain knowledge
So did I.
#Rekt

>>1752910

What mental defect do you have that causes you to wander through life thinking that anything but mathematics has proofs? It is just autism, or is it worse?

>>1752538
Give me a good reason why when its possible things could not exist why they do exist.
lol, get out.

>babby discovers philosopy on plebbit
also
>Clemens
>anything intelligent

>>1752910
Angels are demons are aliens; they're the same things. All of them. Angels maintained their loyalty to God; demons gave it to satan; both are alien to the human race.

>>1752922
Woah, that makes a lot of sense.
If this universe however was willed by god to be a place of change and change being imperfect as it is not like god who is perfect, does that mean that our imperfect ways are not sinful by default as long as we dont choose to label them so ourselves, as we are expected to be imperfect?

>>1752923

>Yamantaka the wrathful death guardian, Buddha manifestation
>somehow omnipotent, omniscient

fag

>>1752922
>he himself cannot change

Untrue. An omnipotent entity has no restrictions, even being beyond the restriction that it has no restriction.

File: image.png (209KB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 500x333px

>>1752910

>>1752968
fug, then I can be a polytheist because god can and is many gods without the old limitation of polytheism that relies on beings perceived as being too restrictive?

>>1752968
>An omnipotent entity has no restrictions
depends on your frame of reference
if one were to behold God, then yes, perhaps you could behold him in different ways, but from God's frame of reference he is unchanged, because God is as God was and always will be.

>>1752956
You sin at any point where you are not like God.

Sin means "missing the mark", as in an archer who misses the target.

Everyone has sinned; no one is like God.

>>1752629
If there are many gods, why don't they ever bestow loos so that their subjects may poo in them?

>>1753022
But its not wrong to miss, as we were created to miss in this entropic place, so its not sin in the "feel guilty" sense.
That would be feeling ashamed of the need to poop after eating.

>>1753046
We were created as intended, sinless. We lived with God in the Garden of Eden; walked and talked with him, ate and drank with him, named the animals for him. This world, and the first two human being's lives, were sinless and wonderful.

Then everything changed, and some of us have found our way back.

>>1753014

>god can be X

yes

>and is X

Are you certain? Remember, God isn't forced to be anything at all.

>>1753016

>God's frame of reference he is unchanged

Not necessarily. He's God, remember he can make square circles.

>>1753033
fug, checkmate'd :DDD

>>1753033
We are in the Kali-Yuga, wherein there are no loos, only poos.

>>1752597
Is there any actual evidence of that though? I've seen several tendencies/parallelisms that seem to indicate some syncretism of Yahweh/El from Ba'al and other Levantine/Mesopotamian deities. I haven't seen much on angels. It's possible they've always been part of a wider semitic mythos. Christianity places a lot more emphasis on saints rather than angels.

Sloth is abhorred in abrahamic tradition. It only makes sense those closest to God would fill certain roles.

>>1753101
The "sons of God" are angels in Genesis, and sang when the universe was created, and 1/3 of them rebelled against God and were cast down to the earth. They mated with females and produced giants.

This is all in Genesis.

>>1753058
You believe that literally?

>>1753060
>Are you certain?
Mh, I cant be-true.
On the other hand I cannot grasp him at all, which is why worshipping deities at his place seems to be alluring as you can grasp a small part of him that way by taking a slice out of the whole and giving it a face.

Even the strict monotheists all relie on angels/deities (with the exception of christ whose words were toyed around with quiete a bit on paper later on) to get a message from the incomprehensible one.
So why trust them and not do as people did before the israelites made an impact and do so today in the far east?

>>1753153
The first rule of biblical interpretation is that if the literal makes sense, seek no other sense.

Yes, literally.

>>1753282
But creationism has been challenged by science.

>>1753305
Has it been?
List the contradiction.

>>1753282
Biblical interpretation is very different in the various Christian groups. Biblical literalism is something various Protestants denominations prefer, but it is not the case for the whole Christianity.

>>1753305
Indeed it has. So you have two competing narratives.

One that has always been right.

One that has always been wrong.

>>1753343
People who don't take the bible as intended can hardly be referred to as Christians.

Cultists, Catholics, Orthodox, Mormons, Jews, Muslims, but not Christians.

Look. There's a lot of people fooling themselves that they are Christians. They have no idea what they are talking about. It becomes very obvious very quickly.

>>1753359

daily reminder that salvation does not depend on your ability to read the bible

>>1753341
Well, the thing about populations not descending from pairs of two without dying out from genetic deeneration, besides the question where neanderthals and the likes come from.

>>1753359
Are you saying your "Real Christian" denomination is an offshoot of 2000 years of Nonchristian cult practices?
Where did the sudden legitimacy and doctrinal correctness "Christianness" originate from then?
Was it evolved from constant translations and revisions?
Did it emerge from cultural, national, or ethnic absorption?
Is it a realization from scientific and philosophical movements?

How lucky that we temporal, modern English-speaking Americans have the honor of joining the One True Faith at the expense of billions of sorrowful delusional cultists..

>>1753399
>How lucky that we temporal, modern English-speaking Americans have the honor of joining the One True Faith at the expense of billions of sorrowful delusional cultists..
Is it really that strange compared to Latin church establishing the "One True Church" hundreds of years after Christ?

>>1753359
How do you even take a literalist position when the various testimonies on Jesus in the New Testament a contradictory in various ways?

>>1753559
That's what I'm saying, if they are Nonchristians then why are suddenly a Real Christian since you are an offshoot of them?

If they are nonchristians for being 100 years late, why are you a real christian for being maybe 1800 years late?

File: 61448bd3bca82d1880a03bb47d3b97b0.jpg (14KB, 236x326px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 236x326px

>>1752538
>why this deity would create angelic beings
So angsty teenagers have something to fight when they ride giant their robots, baka!

>>1752833
>That is a meme.
>What are the Satanic Verses?
Also, the Holy Spirit, nor Angels, will make one want and attempt to commit suicide. Mohammed tried just that.

>>1752918
The Prophets, including Moses, came with miracles to which the multitudes observed.. through the Grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit. That is one way you'll know if it's truly the work of God, or simply a demon/Satan.
This is one way to tell that Mohammed was a false prophet.

>>1753359
>Orthodox
>not Christian
They have 2000 years of the teachings of Christ, His Apostles, and Church Tradition backing them, as was how Christ taught. How do you say they are "not Christian"?

>>1752890
Not him but I tried, didn't work.
Seems the people god talks to are just the crazy ones.

File: c184fabfcaada6903fba28aeb9376ac0.jpg (132KB, 602x800px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 602x800px

I love the psychadeilc and all but Lovecraftian descriptions of Angels and the manifestations of God in certain cases in the Abrahamic scriptures and supplemental material.
Hell, I sometimes have intense dreams/nightmares where I see what could amount to comparable figures, hard to describe them.

>be lord
>defeat other lords and vassal them
>call them "angels"

not that hard man

>>1754388
B-but muh only god....

>>1752937
even mathematics requires axioms

>>1754411
You cannot worship other gods BEFORE him. After him, it's fair game.

God doesn't need them. Angels are the incorporeal living things God created, and he created them for similar reasons to creating corporeal living things. Angels who side with God, serve him, and get to accomplish those tasks as an expression of their love for him. Many angels literally do nothing for their whole existence except praise God.