Are angels humans from the future?

[Mark_13]

...specifically, resurrected Christians. I could make a positive case for it, but am interested if anyone has verse(s) that they feel definitely disproves it. (Just to change the subject from cal/noncal for a bit).

 

[DiamondLady]

...specifically, resurrected Christians. I could make a positive case for it, but am interested if anyone has verse(s) that they feel definitely disproves it. (Just to change the subject from cal/noncal for a bit).

No, absolutely not. There are many but here's one that is enough unto itself.

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

 

[convicted1]

...specifically, resurrected Christians. I could make a positive case for it, but am interested if anyone has verse(s) that they feel definitely disproves it. (Just to change the subject from cal/noncal for a bit).

I don't think so. I'd be interested in what you'd have to say.

 

[Mark_13]

No, absolutely not. There are many but here's one that is enough unto itself.

Heb 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.

The KJV there adds in the words "him the nature of" (in italics indicating this), which are not in the original greek. So, the NASB for example translates it as

(Heb 2:16) For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the descendant of Abraham.

and cast that way, one could claim that humans are not angels now, so Christ wouldn't be redeeming angels, but it wouldn't rule out humans subsequently becoming angels.

I don't know if the KJV or NASB (along with several other versions) is correct. But the KJV is adding in a lot of extra words.

Certainly the entire first two chapter of Hebrews needs to be considered on this subject, but it says some very puzzling things like,

(Heb 1:4) [Christ] having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent name than they.

So presumably Christ, who was a little lower than the angels when manifested as a man, subsequently became more excellent than the angels. Could humans then become angels?

 

[Mark_13]

I don't think so. I'd be interested in what you'd have to say.

(Rev 19:10) Then I [John] fell at his feet to worship him [an angel]. But he *said to me, "Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

(Dan 9:21) while I was still speaking in prayer, then the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision previously, came to me in extreme weariness about the time of the evening offering.

(Mat 22:30) "For in the resurrection they [people] neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

But actually though, I should have considered Hebrew 1-2 more carefully before claiming that. It says Jesus becomes greater than the angels and its clear now I think Christians as well become greather than the angels:

(Heb 2:11) For both He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren,

(Heb 2:5) For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are speaking.

So, nevermind I guess.

 

[convicted1]

(Rev 19:10) Then I [John] fell at his feet to worship him [an angel]. But he *said to me, "Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

(Dan 9:21) while I was still speaking in prayer, then the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision previously, came to me in extreme weariness about the time of the evening offering.

(Mat 22:30) "For in the resurrection they [people] neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.

But actually though, I should have considered Hebrew 1-2 more carefully before claiming that. It says Jesus becomes greater than the angels and its clear now I think Christians as well become greather than the angels:

(Heb 2:11) For both He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren,

(Heb 2:5) For He did not subject to angels the world to come, concerning which we are speaking.

So, nevermind I guess.

Correct. We are heirs to God, and joint-heirs with Christ. That verse blows my mind. Someone so unworthy as I, and I am a joint-heir with Christ? My mind can't wrap around such an amazing and profound statement. Glory!!:godisgood::jesus::godisgood::jesus:

 

[Mark_13]

Here's where I'm still undecided on the issue: Every time angels appear in scripture, its always very specific about them appearing as men - specifically young men. So you have this huge host of anthopomorphic entities as a fixture in the presence of God. Well, evidently resurrected Christians are also going to be another huge host of anthropomorphic entities in the presence of God, and Christ himself will be also thus (with arms, legs, hands feet etc.) Well in that context, what distinguishes angels and resurrected Christians. Although it says that Christians are the "bretheren" of Christ (thus making us in a real sense also sons of God) Hebrews also has the following to say regarding Christ and angels:

(Heb 1:9) "YOU HAVE LOVED RIGHTEOUSNESS AND HATED LAWLESSNESS; THEREFORE GOD, YOUR GOD, HAS ANOINTED YOU WITH THE OIL OF GLADNESS ABOVE YOUR COMPANIONS."

So the "companions" there seem clearly in the larger context to be talking about angels. So whereas Christ is not an angel, Hebrews 1-2 is talking about Him in the context of angels

Humans originally acquired a human form "naturally" as it were (Christ himself as well). And in eternity evidently (if I am not mistaken) we will be retaining such a form at least as a default manifestation. And Christ as well will have a human form (right?) Well, if angels also will have a human form, where did they get their human form from? Is it just sort of a facade they will maintain for the benefit of us "real" resurrected humans?

Also its clear from Daniel I think that an angel like Michael is bouncing around from one epoch to another, essentially time travelling, because it talks about in the last chapter him appearing at the end of the age (after being a player in the Ancient near East in Daniels day). And at the Transfiguration, you have the O.T. patriarachs appearing in glorified bodily form as as will with Christ, which to me is a vision of the future.

So, in a way it really simplifies the picture of things if resurrected Christians are in fact the angels we hear about all the time.

But everything does seem to hinge on Hebrew 1-2: it probably needs to be parsed very carefully before making a determination one way or the other.

 

[freeatlast]

...specifically, resurrected Christians. I could make a positive case for it, but am interested if anyone has verse(s) that they feel definitely disproves it. (Just to change the subject from cal/noncal for a bit).

No angels are not resurrected humans. They are beings that God has created to serve a purpose. The scripture says they were created. Psalm 148:2-5
Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts.
Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light.
Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that [be] above the heavens.
Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.

Also in the garden after Adam sinned God booted Adam out of the garden and angels were placed at the entrance to keep them out and no human had died at that point so no, Angels are not resurrected humans.
Gen 3:24
So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Angels are angels. Humans are humans. Both created for distinct purposes. Both created differently.

Angels are spirits whose many-fold purpose includes serving the portion of humanity that will be saved. So says Hebrews 1:14.

1 Peter 1:12 talks about the angels and how they long to look into the concept of the the gospel and salvation, but that they don't experience it. If angels at one time had been human beings, then they would understand salvation and it wouldn't be a curiousity to them.

Angels do appear to humans as humans sometimes, but that serves a purpose, too.

Angels and human beings are not the same creation.

 

[preacher4truth]

Hey mark_13, do you know of any theologians who hold to your views or thoughts? Have you gotten any of this from an orthodox study of angelology?

 

[Amy.G]

Hebrews 1:14 Are they not all ministering spirits,sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

Angels are not human. They are a separate creation of God and have different ministries.

But according to this verse, angels are sent to minister to humans and we may not ever know it.

Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Matthew 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.

The angels are watching God and waiting for Him to send them to the aid of His children.

 

[Mark_13]

No angels are not resurrected humans. They are beings that God has created to serve a purpose. The scripture says they were created.

So, humans were not created??? (And don't serve a purpose?)

Here's Scarlett's O's comment:

"Angels are angels. Humans are humans. Both created for distinct purposes. Both created differently."

So the fact that angels are created doesn't seem to establish anything on the question one way or the other.

(Incidentally, I'm just considering the evidence anyone puts forward on its face. I have not made a final assessment of Hebrews 1-2 which seems to be the definitive statement on the subject.)

Psalm 148:2-5
Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts.
Praise ye him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars of light.
Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that [be] above the heavens.
Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he commanded, and they were created.

Its not saying in that passage that only angels are created. Humans are created too (by some means or another but by God ultimately). In fact the passage seems to be dictating that everything in all creation praise the Lord - certainly that would include humans, right? (Not seeing how you ever saw this passage as being conclusive on the subject).

Actually though, who are the "hosts" the passage mentions. You seem to be assuming they are just a repeat reference to angels, and if that is the case it lends further credence to the idea that angels are humans, in that the passage would be mentioning everyting in creation but humans should praise the Lord. Humans are not instructed to praise the Lord when even the sun and the moon are?

But if the hosts are not the angels but another group (a possibility I guess) it could mean humans, but then why are angels mentioned ahead of humans (as if human are down the pecking scale in creation). Nevertheless, "hosts" may mean humans here - not sure. A commentary I picked up says hosts there may mean stars (in addition to angels) - plausible in that it mentions the sun and the moon right afterwards. But in Daniel it says that those who lead many to righteousness will shine like stars for ever and ever.

Also in the garden after Adam sinned God booted Adam out of the garden and angels were placed at the entrance to keep them out and no human had died at that point so no, Angels are not resurrected humans.
Gen 3:24
So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

Remember the supposition being put forward (what is the term for that - escapes me) is that angels are resurrected Christians who are able to travel through time. Thus angels being present anywhere in the O.T. does not contradict my thesis.

 

[Amy.G]

Mark, here's an article that might help you.

http://carm.org/questions/about-doctrine/what-are-angels

 

[beameup]

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation oikētērion,
he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. - Jude 6

For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God,
an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house oikētērion which is from heaven: - 2 Cor 5:1-2

That which the rebellious angels "gave up" is what the believers in Christ will "receive", that is, the oikētērion.


the sons of God [bene ha Elohim] saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. - Gen 6:2
the sons of God [bene ha Elohim] came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them - Gen 6:4

For if God spared not the angels that sinned [bene ha Elohim], but cast them down to Tartarus, and delivered them into
chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; - 2 Pet 2:4

 

[Scarlett O.]

So, humans were not created??? (And don't serve a purpose?)

I didn't say that. I said that humans WERE created and DO serve a unique purpose that is different from angels. You even quoted me as saying such. :thumbs:

Here's Scarlett's O's comment:

"Angels are angels. Humans are humans. Both created for distinct purposes. Both created differently."

So the fact that angels are created doesn't seem to establish anything on the question one way or the other.

But the fact that the Bible says that angels were created to be "ministering spirits to those who were to receive salvation" DOES answer the question.

Ministering spirits who serve those who are saved are not themselves saved. Angels do not get saved. Ergo, angels are not and were not human.

And another poster has shown you where the angels first habitation and estate was not earth, but heaven.

 

[Don]

I'll get serious about this in a little while, and provide a serious response . . . In the meantime, I have to ask: are we seriously discussing time-traveling evolved humans?

 

[Mark_13]

Angels are spirits whose many-fold purpose includes serving the portion of humanity that will be saved. So says Hebrews 1:14.

There are other passage in Hebrew 1-2 that may be problematic for my thesis - not sure that's one of them.

The fact that angels are sent forth as ministering spirits to serve those who will be saved doesn't seem to rule out angels in actuality being resurrected Christians from the future (who will also have spritiual bodies according to Paul in I Corinthians).

1 Peter 1:12 talks about the angels and how they long to look into the concept of the the gospel and salvation, but that they don't experience it. If angels at one time had been human beings, then they would understand salvation and it wouldn't be a curiousity to them.

OK, that's pretty good - will have to give that some thought.

Angels do appear to humans as humans sometimes, but that serves a purpose, too.

It seems that they virtually always appear as humans. Sometimes as literal humans, other times as as quite plainly anthropomorphic, but in some exalted form - shining or in flames, etc.

 

[Mark_13]

I'll get serious about this in a little while, and provide a serious response . . . In the meantime, I have to ask: are we seriously discussing time-traveling evolved humans?

No - I didn't bring up evolution at all. (That's a whole other discussion.) The idea is that angels are actually resurrected Christians from some future age, travelling to our time to minister to us (their fellow Christians). (Just as, now that I think of it, Christians are always commanded to minister to each other). Are you saying that resurrected Christians will definitely not be able to time-travel? I personally wouldn't assume that.

 

[preacher4truth]

I think what freeatlast meant was that angels were created.

As angels.

 

[Mark_13]

Hey mark_13, do you know of any theologians who hold to your views or thoughts?

So what are you saying - you don't think I count as a theologian?

Have you gotten any of this from an orthodox study of angelology?

Yes in my life I have perused orthodox comment regarding the nature of angels. Haven't seen anyone put forth the idea I'm presenting here. I have mentioned previously in the thread a few of several passages from the Bible that were the impetus for this idea of mine. Doesn't mean I'm right. I have mentioned repeatedly from the opening post onward that in this particular case, this idea I'm putting forward is tentative. Don't anyone immediately disregard all future commentary of mine on other subjects. Really I am just giving others in the forum a chance to stretch their own Biblical knowledge to refute the idea if they are capable of doing so. ScarletO original reply regarding I Peter was pretty good. Also Hebrews 1-2 which I'm still considering.