Jack777
January 27th 2005, 01:55 PM
Then, there are angels identified as breath-filled beings –living souls--in the passages from Ezekiel below. If you say, people were evolved and are not careful about all of Scripture, then the question arises, “did angels evolve?” They are living creatures, breath-filled beings.
I have opinions about all of this and would welcome others.
20Whithersoever the spirit was to go, they went, thither was their spirit to go; and the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels. 21When those went, these went; and when those stood, these stood; and when those were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. 22And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above. *
Ezekiel 1:20-22
Just a brief interjection here.
Ezekiel is describing what he saw. This is not the place to start calling anyone in the Bible a liar and it is never good to deny the inspiration of Scripture and call God a liar in an underhanded manner. It may be sly and sound slick in some of the ways the Higher Critics do it, but still, this is not good. The 20-22 verses of Ezekiel One give a snapshot of restoration imagery that is repeated in the Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ to John (The Apostle). The next verses emphasize cherubim. Ezekiel says they are breath-filled living beings. Does it not appear God is emphasizing this for a reason? He inspires Ezekiel to refer to the cherubim mentioned six times as “living creatures” (breath-filled living beings in Hebrew) three times. Even a duffer like me can see something going on here.
15And the cherubims were lifted up. This is the living creature that I saw by the river of Chebar. 16And when the cherubims went, the wheels went by them: and when the cherubims lifted up their wings to mount up from the earth, the same wheels also turned not from beside them. 17When they stood, these stood; and when they were lifted up, these lifted up themselves also: for the spirit of the living creature was in them. 18Then the glory of the LORD departed from off the threshold of the house, and stood over the cherubims. 19And the cherubims lifted up their wings, and mounted up from the earth in my sight: when they went out, the wheels also were beside them, and every one stood at the door of the east gate of the LORD’S house; and the glory of the God of Israel was over them above. 20This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they were the cherubims.*
Ezekiel 10:15-20
As far as the assertion of some about angels, here is a bit more: In a senior moment, I referred to the Book of Noah where I should have said, Enoch.
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. [1] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn1)
Jude 6
Commentary by others
The reference to angels “who did not keep their proper domain” corresponds to Peter’s reference to the same event (see II Peter. 2:4). The pre-cosmic fall of Satan (noted typologically in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28) included a sizable contingent of angels who followed him (possibly one third, cf. Revelation 12:4). Some of these have been reserved in chains awaiting the concluding judgment of all angels (cf. I Corinthians 6:3), while others remain active agents of Satan.[2] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn2)
II Peter 2:4—Peter uses the Greek verb tartaroµgsas (to hold captive in Tartarus) to indicate where the sinning angels were sent. The word translated “hell” (from tartaroµgsas) is used only here in the N.T. The reference is to the place in which some fallen angels “who did not keep their proper domain” (Jude 6) are kept awaiting judgment. The sin which the fallen angels committed probably occurred prior to the Fall of Adam and Eve (cf. Gen. 3). If this is correct, we have no information as to the nature of the sin or why only certain evil angels are confined while others remain free. An alternate view is that the sin described is a reference to Gen. 6:1–4, where the sons of God (i.e., fallen angels) are said to have intermarried with the daughters of men (human women). This latter view, however, is unlikely, since it does not appear that angels (spirit beings) can have sexual relations with women (cf. Luke 20:34–36).[3] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn3)
Criswell would not have agreed with me about the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4, but
many do. See Unger’s Commentary on Genesis as well as Gregory Boyd’s God at War, Donald Barnhouse, The Invisible War, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and Hesiod’s work on cosmogony. Also, the Dead Sea Scrolls have been interpreted several time, the translation by Florentino Garcia Martinez is a good one. I also have a list of references on my web site. That should give you a start so you can decide for yourself.
Jude 6—See Genesis 6:1–4. Jude here as below seems to make use of II Peter 2:4. The non-canonical Book of Enoch, chapters 6–10, may also be quoted here, or an oral tradition that is also in that book. His apparent use of non-canonical writings does not mean he considered them to be on the same level as Scripture itself. See Paul’s references to secular writers, in order to make a point, in Acts 17:28; I Corinthians 15:33; Titus 1:12.[4] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn4)
I do not agree with all that McGee says about this, but here is an observation that he made:
For many years the liberal wing of the church has denied the supernatural and denied that there were any such creatures as angels. We are living in a materialistic age, and the viewpoint was that God and the idea of angels were superstitions that we no longer needed. I believe it was Huxley who said that the belief in God was like the fading smile of a Cheshire cat, that it was disappearing in this scientific age.
Back in 1963 Ben Hecht wrote an article under the title,“New God for the Space Age.” Let me quote the first few paragraphs:
The most amazing event to enter modern history has been generally snubbed by our chroniclers. It is the petering out of Christianity. Not only are the Bible stories going by the board, but a deeper side of religion seems also to be exiting. This is the mystic concept of the human soul and its survival after death.
Parsons are still preaching away on this topic and congregations are still listening. But congregation and parson both seem to have moved from church to museum.
Fifty years ago religion was an exuberant part of our world. Its sermons, bazaars, tag days, taboos and exhortations filled the press. Its rituals brought a glow to our citizenry. At their supper tables a large part of the voting population bowed its head and said grace.
Religion today is a touchy subject, not because people believe deeply and are ready to defend such belief with emotion, but because they do not want to hear it discussed. They do not know quite what they feel and they do not know what to say about God, His angels and the record of His miracles. Not wanting to sound anti-Christian (or antisocial or anti-anything not under general condemnation) they settle for silence. In this silence, more than in all the previous agnostichullabaloos, religion seems swiftly disappearing.
Remember that Ben Hecht wrote that in 1963. Since that time there has been a tremendous revival.
For many years liberalism has been predicting the death knell of the church and of all that is supernatural. Around 1963 Gibson Winter, a professor of ethics at the University of Chicago Divinity School, wrote a book entitled The Suburban Captivity of the Churches in which he made this statement:
U.S. Protestantism—once famous for its diversity—is homogenizing into what is almost a new faith, and if it continues in its present direction, it will be stone-cold dead in a couple of dozen years.[5] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn5)
On Angels and Jude see:
“Book of Enoch,” in The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, Translator R.H. Charles, Oxford: The Clarendon Press
Florentino Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, Translator, Wilfred G. E. Watson, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, Copyright 1992 Editorial Trotta sa, Madrid, Spain; Copyright 1994, 1996; E. J. Brill, Leiden, the Netherlands, 1996.
On angels and Jude from a pagan perspective see:
My favorite is:
Nathan Covington Brooks, The Metamorphoses of Publius Ovidius Naso, New York: A. S. Barnes and Burr, 1860.
This provides an excellent resource for the original Latin and commentary so that other cosmogonies and the derivation of them by Ovid is brought out plainly, whether Syrian or Babylonian for instance. Excellent format too.
Publius Ovidius Naso, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Translator, Rolfe Humphries, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, Copyright 1955 Indiana University Press, 1955.
A bit different perspective translation is listed below and has some modern evolution philosophy interspersed a tiny bit, which is really interpretation disguised as translation—in my opinion. Decide for yourself though. Odd that the good Mr. Brooks referred to the appropriate contemporaries of Ovid and his sources as well as the naturalistic understanding of the ancients rather than put a spin on it.
Ovid - The Metamorphoses, Translator A. S. Kline, “A new, complete, English translation, and in-depth mythological index. The text is fully hyperlinked to the mythological index, and vice versa,” Internet publication, WWW: (c)Copyright 2000 A. S.Kline, All Rights Reserved: http://www.tkline.freeserve.co.uk/ (http://www.tkline.freeserve.co.uk/).
This link should work for Hesiod which might be nce as a comparison contrast:
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Hesiod.html (http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Hesiod.html)
Additionally, Fordham and MIT have translations of texts with information on cosmogonies as well as sacred-texts.com. Oxford and the University of Chicago have some resources as well.
Other cosmogonies are listed as references on my site’s reference pages.
[1] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref1)The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
[2] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref2)W.A. Criswell, Believer’s study Bible [computer file], electronic ed. , Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1991 by the Criswell Center for Biblical Studies.
[3] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref3)W.A. Criswell, Believer’s study Bible [computer file], electronic ed. , Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1991 by the Criswell Center for Biblical Studies.
[4] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref4)Thomas Nelson, Inc., King James Version Study Bible [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1988 by Liberty University.
[5] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref5)J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible commentary [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1981 by J. Vernon McGee.
I have opinions about all of this and would welcome others.
20Whithersoever the spirit was to go, they went, thither was their spirit to go; and the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creature was in the wheels. 21When those went, these went; and when those stood, these stood; and when those were lifted up from the earth, the wheels were lifted up over against them: for the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. 22And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above. *
Ezekiel 1:20-22
Just a brief interjection here.
Ezekiel is describing what he saw. This is not the place to start calling anyone in the Bible a liar and it is never good to deny the inspiration of Scripture and call God a liar in an underhanded manner. It may be sly and sound slick in some of the ways the Higher Critics do it, but still, this is not good. The 20-22 verses of Ezekiel One give a snapshot of restoration imagery that is repeated in the Book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ to John (The Apostle). The next verses emphasize cherubim. Ezekiel says they are breath-filled living beings. Does it not appear God is emphasizing this for a reason? He inspires Ezekiel to refer to the cherubim mentioned six times as “living creatures” (breath-filled living beings in Hebrew) three times. Even a duffer like me can see something going on here.
15And the cherubims were lifted up. This is the living creature that I saw by the river of Chebar. 16And when the cherubims went, the wheels went by them: and when the cherubims lifted up their wings to mount up from the earth, the same wheels also turned not from beside them. 17When they stood, these stood; and when they were lifted up, these lifted up themselves also: for the spirit of the living creature was in them. 18Then the glory of the LORD departed from off the threshold of the house, and stood over the cherubims. 19And the cherubims lifted up their wings, and mounted up from the earth in my sight: when they went out, the wheels also were beside them, and every one stood at the door of the east gate of the LORD’S house; and the glory of the God of Israel was over them above. 20This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they were the cherubims.*
Ezekiel 10:15-20
As far as the assertion of some about angels, here is a bit more: In a senior moment, I referred to the Book of Noah where I should have said, Enoch.
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. [1] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn1)
Jude 6
Commentary by others
The reference to angels “who did not keep their proper domain” corresponds to Peter’s reference to the same event (see II Peter. 2:4). The pre-cosmic fall of Satan (noted typologically in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28) included a sizable contingent of angels who followed him (possibly one third, cf. Revelation 12:4). Some of these have been reserved in chains awaiting the concluding judgment of all angels (cf. I Corinthians 6:3), while others remain active agents of Satan.[2] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn2)
II Peter 2:4—Peter uses the Greek verb tartaroµgsas (to hold captive in Tartarus) to indicate where the sinning angels were sent. The word translated “hell” (from tartaroµgsas) is used only here in the N.T. The reference is to the place in which some fallen angels “who did not keep their proper domain” (Jude 6) are kept awaiting judgment. The sin which the fallen angels committed probably occurred prior to the Fall of Adam and Eve (cf. Gen. 3). If this is correct, we have no information as to the nature of the sin or why only certain evil angels are confined while others remain free. An alternate view is that the sin described is a reference to Gen. 6:1–4, where the sons of God (i.e., fallen angels) are said to have intermarried with the daughters of men (human women). This latter view, however, is unlikely, since it does not appear that angels (spirit beings) can have sexual relations with women (cf. Luke 20:34–36).[3] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn3)
Criswell would not have agreed with me about the interpretation of Genesis 6:1-4, but
many do. See Unger’s Commentary on Genesis as well as Gregory Boyd’s God at War, Donald Barnhouse, The Invisible War, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, and Hesiod’s work on cosmogony. Also, the Dead Sea Scrolls have been interpreted several time, the translation by Florentino Garcia Martinez is a good one. I also have a list of references on my web site. That should give you a start so you can decide for yourself.
Jude 6—See Genesis 6:1–4. Jude here as below seems to make use of II Peter 2:4. The non-canonical Book of Enoch, chapters 6–10, may also be quoted here, or an oral tradition that is also in that book. His apparent use of non-canonical writings does not mean he considered them to be on the same level as Scripture itself. See Paul’s references to secular writers, in order to make a point, in Acts 17:28; I Corinthians 15:33; Titus 1:12.[4] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn4)
I do not agree with all that McGee says about this, but here is an observation that he made:
For many years the liberal wing of the church has denied the supernatural and denied that there were any such creatures as angels. We are living in a materialistic age, and the viewpoint was that God and the idea of angels were superstitions that we no longer needed. I believe it was Huxley who said that the belief in God was like the fading smile of a Cheshire cat, that it was disappearing in this scientific age.
Back in 1963 Ben Hecht wrote an article under the title,“New God for the Space Age.” Let me quote the first few paragraphs:
The most amazing event to enter modern history has been generally snubbed by our chroniclers. It is the petering out of Christianity. Not only are the Bible stories going by the board, but a deeper side of religion seems also to be exiting. This is the mystic concept of the human soul and its survival after death.
Parsons are still preaching away on this topic and congregations are still listening. But congregation and parson both seem to have moved from church to museum.
Fifty years ago religion was an exuberant part of our world. Its sermons, bazaars, tag days, taboos and exhortations filled the press. Its rituals brought a glow to our citizenry. At their supper tables a large part of the voting population bowed its head and said grace.
Religion today is a touchy subject, not because people believe deeply and are ready to defend such belief with emotion, but because they do not want to hear it discussed. They do not know quite what they feel and they do not know what to say about God, His angels and the record of His miracles. Not wanting to sound anti-Christian (or antisocial or anti-anything not under general condemnation) they settle for silence. In this silence, more than in all the previous agnostichullabaloos, religion seems swiftly disappearing.
Remember that Ben Hecht wrote that in 1963. Since that time there has been a tremendous revival.
For many years liberalism has been predicting the death knell of the church and of all that is supernatural. Around 1963 Gibson Winter, a professor of ethics at the University of Chicago Divinity School, wrote a book entitled The Suburban Captivity of the Churches in which he made this statement:
U.S. Protestantism—once famous for its diversity—is homogenizing into what is almost a new faith, and if it continues in its present direction, it will be stone-cold dead in a couple of dozen years.[5] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftn5)
On Angels and Jude see:
“Book of Enoch,” in The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, Translator R.H. Charles, Oxford: The Clarendon Press
Florentino Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, Translator, Wilfred G. E. Watson, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, Copyright 1992 Editorial Trotta sa, Madrid, Spain; Copyright 1994, 1996; E. J. Brill, Leiden, the Netherlands, 1996.
On angels and Jude from a pagan perspective see:
My favorite is:
Nathan Covington Brooks, The Metamorphoses of Publius Ovidius Naso, New York: A. S. Barnes and Burr, 1860.
This provides an excellent resource for the original Latin and commentary so that other cosmogonies and the derivation of them by Ovid is brought out plainly, whether Syrian or Babylonian for instance. Excellent format too.
Publius Ovidius Naso, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Translator, Rolfe Humphries, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, Copyright 1955 Indiana University Press, 1955.
A bit different perspective translation is listed below and has some modern evolution philosophy interspersed a tiny bit, which is really interpretation disguised as translation—in my opinion. Decide for yourself though. Odd that the good Mr. Brooks referred to the appropriate contemporaries of Ovid and his sources as well as the naturalistic understanding of the ancients rather than put a spin on it.
Ovid - The Metamorphoses, Translator A. S. Kline, “A new, complete, English translation, and in-depth mythological index. The text is fully hyperlinked to the mythological index, and vice versa,” Internet publication, WWW: (c)Copyright 2000 A. S.Kline, All Rights Reserved: http://www.tkline.freeserve.co.uk/ (http://www.tkline.freeserve.co.uk/).
This link should work for Hesiod which might be nce as a comparison contrast:
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Hesiod.html (http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/OMACL/Hesiod.html)
Additionally, Fordham and MIT have translations of texts with information on cosmogonies as well as sacred-texts.com. Oxford and the University of Chicago have some resources as well.
Other cosmogonies are listed as references on my site’s reference pages.
[1] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref1)The King James Version, (Cambridge: Cambridge) 1769.
[2] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref2)W.A. Criswell, Believer’s study Bible [computer file], electronic ed. , Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1991 by the Criswell Center for Biblical Studies.
[3] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref3)W.A. Criswell, Believer’s study Bible [computer file], electronic ed. , Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1991 by the Criswell Center for Biblical Studies.
[4] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref4)Thomas Nelson, Inc., King James Version Study Bible [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1988 by Liberty University.
[5] (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=64#_ftnref5)J. Vernon McGee, Thru the Bible commentary [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1981 by J. Vernon McGee.