Another FUN Question, This Time Regarding Angels in general

[Allan]

Ok, here is another fun Theological Twist-and-Turn seldom ever addressed but seemingly pretty fun to speculate on.

So here goes:

We agree that God is the one who must reveal spiritual truths to men (even believers)
We agree that God is able to speak audibly to man (lost and believer alike)
We agree that God the Holy Spirit is able to speak and does so, to the hearts of men (both in the OT and NT)

There are a few others I can put but that should suffice for the question I am bringing. Now for the question:

If God is able to do the above, why the need to use angels at all?

We find God speaking directly to men many times in scripture. Yet we also find many times God sending angels to deliver His messages, even though it can/will 'seemingly' delay the message (like with Daniel).

Anyway, been up for 17 hours and falling asleep while writing this one.. So I will 'hope' it conveys the premise for the thread well enough.

Ok... Have fun.

p.s. if you don't get the point, let me know and I will come back later to try to expound better the OP.

 

[Van]

Why did God choose to work at times through intermediaries? Their actions provide illustrations for us, both before we repent and put our trust in God and His Christ, and also after we are saved, working to help reach others for Christ. And again, the core truth is God allows some of His creatures to make autonomous choices, and so the angels help present the picture of choosing to serve, or not, and serving even when difficulty arises.

God Bless

 

[webdog]

If God is able to do the above, why the need to use angels at all?

Because He's sovereign and has decided to?

That is the simple answer. God is not limited to drawing people in numerous manners as you touched on.

 

[Allan]

Why did God choose to work at times through intermediaries? Their actions provide illustrations for us, both before we repent and put our trust in God and His Christ, and also after we are saved, working to help reach others for Christ. And again, the core truth is God allows some of His creatures to make autonomous choices, and so the angels help present the picture of choosing to serve, or not, and serving even when difficulty arises.

God Bless

While most of what you wrote misses the point, the question is still - WHY, since he is able to do all that Himself.

Are you saying that God is incapable of doing those same things Himself?

 

[Allan]

Because He's sovereign and has decided to?

That is the simple answer. God is not limited to drawing people in numerous manners as you touched on.

Yes, He is Sovereign and agreed, He is not limited.
Yet by the same token, does it not limit God to use other beings, in that He can do all things perfectly and in the moment He declares it.

Yet your post still does not answer the question of why does He do so when He is completely capable of doing so himself.

 

[webdog]

Yes, He is Sovereign and agreed, He is not limited.
Yet by the same token, does it not limit God to use other beings, in that He can do all things perfectly and in the moment He declares it.

Yet your post still does not answer the question of why does He do so when He is completely capable of doing so himself.

Not sure how else to answer that apart from knowing God's mind. Because He desires it is as close to an answer anyone can get, IMO. Similar to the answer I gave on your similar thread.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

Allan—I really have thought about this question a lot---is it b/c God just didn’t feel like doing everything so He created these spiritual servants to carry out task He was just not in the mood to do?---I highly doubt it (lol)---but to me it has to revolve around similar reasons as to why He created humans (what ever this may be)---if you have a personal idea as to why He did this—it might give insight into why angels exist (although they cannot be saved, there really are other similarities).
Not to mention---if I had the ability to create these amazing spiritual warriors who simply existed to serve my beckon call—I’d probably create them too---but I’m sure God has deeper reasons than my personal motive!

 

[Allan]

Not sure how else to answer that apart from knowing God's mind. Because He desires it is as close to an answer anyone can get, IMO. Similar to the answer I gave on your similar thread.

LOL.. that is kinda the point brother. Scripture doesn't speak to the issue so it is more postulation and theory. Just trying to get people to consider/ponder 'why' and place it along side their views. It is just for fun, and while there is some leeway for fun, we must also be careful not to diminish God.

So it makes one have to REALLY think

 

[Tom Butler]

I'm wondering if any of you believe in guardian angels. I have my doubts, but I could be convinced.

 

[Skandelon]

While most of what you wrote misses the point, the question is still - WHY, since he is able to do all that Himself.

Are you saying that God is incapable of doing those same things Himself?

Allan, this line of questions reminds me of that illustration about the guy in the flood who is praying for Gods help and the car comes to pick him up and he turns it away saying that he is waiting on God to rescue him, then a boat, then a helicopter and he sends each away saying God will rescue him. He drowns and gets to heaven and complains, God why didn't you rescue me? And God says I sent a car, a boat and a helicopter.

My other post in the other "fun angel" thread addresses this more fully, but clearly God has chosen to accomplish somethings through His creatures and when you ask "why, when he could have done it Himself," that presumes that He is not doing it Himself when he does it through his creatures. So, the real question is as Van asked, "Why did God choose to work at times through intermediaries?"

In other words, why send a helicopter to rescue me instead of coming yourself in some supernatural God-like way? The answer is, as explained in the other thread, that God has almost always chosen to work through natural means and involve others...and as Van indicated, in doing so it provides us illustration, understanding and revelation while getting us involved in his work.

Allan, this also relates to the discussion you never replied to regarding the Holy Spirit and the gospel because you have the tendency to not view the gospel itself as a work of the Holy Spirit... HERE>

 

[Allan]

My other post in the other "fun angel" thread addresses this more fully, but clearly God has chosen to accomplish somethings through His creatures and when you ask "why, when he could have done it Himself," that presumes that He is not doing it Himself when he does it through his creatures. So, the real question is as Van asked, "Why did God choose to work at times through intermediaries?"

No, that is simply a restating of my initial question.
Why did choose to use.. instead of Why does God not do so Himself.

In other words, why send a helicopter to rescue me instead of coming yourself in some supernatural God-like way? The answer is, as explained in the other thread, that God has almost always chosen to work through natural means and involve others...and as Van indicated, in doing so it provides us illustration, understanding and revelation while getting us involved in his work.

Ok. So are you supposing that God can not do the same if wast the one personally doing it as well

In relation to humans speaking with humans, yes, an illustration can seen and/or understood - yet is God incapable of doing this, and at the same time getting us involved. Another question this poses is why use angels?

I fully understand that God has 'chosen' to do it this way.. but why not do it Himself since He could do it all Himself as well?

Again, I don't disagree.

You seem to presume that I have an answer or that there actually is one. The fact is, God never addresses it. Does God use others? Yes, and that without question. So why use others when is He is all powerful, able to speak both to our spirit AND to us audibly. revealing, bringing understanding, and even bringing us to interaction.

Thus the point is simple - speculate as to WHY HE does not.

To suppose that God is doing the work through us, ignores the fact that we can choose not to and therefore bring the discussion back to Him doing it since He is able. The point is to ask why not do so Himself, personally?

For me.. God doesn't do it Himself because there is more to our (and the angels) purpose than even we understand or can comprehend. Not just regarding what is done, but WHY it is done in such a way. The very depth and gravity of such purposes, interwoven in the fabric of God's eternal plan (from the beginning till fulfillment) are understood by Him alone not because God desires to keep it from us, but because He alone can and does understand 'why'.

Clear as mud

 

[Skandelon]

No, that is simply a restating of my initial question.
Why did choose to use.. instead of Why does God not do so Himself.

Actually, I think it was a bit of a clarification of your original question, which was, "If God is able to do the above, why the need to use angels at all?"

As you stated, we all agree that God has the ability to do things without the use of intermediaries, so the question is not whether or not intermediaries are needed, but "why has He chosen to use them?" (which I realize you meant based on what you have said here)

I fully understand that God has 'chosen' to do it this way.. but why not do it Himself since He could do it all Himself as well?

And Van did offer the possibility that God chose to use angels in this respect as examples to teach us, which is not an unreasonable suggestion, I think. Though I agree, there is certainly no clearly revealed answer.

Again, I don't disagree.

I know, I'm following you. This is a speculative venture...

Thus the point is simple - speculate as to WHY HE does not.

Well, let's take just the example of Jonah, who clearly did not want to go to Nineveh. God could have just made his will change by the use of some inward supernatural power. He chose the natural or outward means of a storm and a big fish instead. Why?

It makes for a more interesting story for one. Two, it teaches us that God doesn't, for whatever reason, just supernaturally change or control man's desires, but might choose to intervene to bring change through natural means if He really wants something accomplished. Third, the reason for God not just supernaturally changing Jonah's will could be that he created us to be autonomous creatures and determined NOT to affect man's will in that manner so as to give us a true measure of freedom and accountability. In other words, by using 'normative' means, God maintains man's autonomy and responsibility for the choices they make, whereas, if God just made Jonah want to preach to Ninevah He would have been violating that since of autonomy. Make sense?

To suppose that God is doing the work through us

Are we just supposing that? Isn't that an established point of agreement?

ignores the fact that we can choose not to

As in the case of Jonah, God can use normative means to convince any man to change his mind by his own volition if such convincing is necessary for God to accomplish a decreed purpose. So, if we choose not to do the Lord's work there is nothing to say that God might choose to use someone else, or use circumstances to change our minds before he would "do it himself" through some supernatural intervention. 'Rocks crying out' comes to mind.

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

I'm wondering if any of you believe in guardian angels. I have my doubts, but I could be convinced.

Tom---they run zone--- not man----if u need them---_they will be assigned---but not by person—but by situation! They do what ever God assigns them to—including guarding humans—when the situation requires it.

 

[webdog]

I'm wondering if any of you believe in guardian angels. I have my doubts, but I could be convinced.

Matthew 18 10"See that you do not despise(A) one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven(B) their angels always(C) see the face of my Father who is in heaven.[a]

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

Matthew 18 10"See that you do not despise(A) one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven(B) their angels always(C) see the face of my Father who is in heaven.[a]

That certainly is a popular verse for those who support the notion of individual guardian angels. This is usually coupled with the idea of national guardian angels as possibly talked about by Daniel 10; 12---& the fact that guardian angels were a poplar concept among Jewish writers (see: t Shab 17:2-3; Sifre Num 40.1.5; Gen. Rab. 44:3; 60:15; Song Rab. 3:6, ect) & in various non-canonical Jewish works (Tob 12:13-22; 1 En 100:5; Jub 35:1, ect). Most scholars hesitate to say this verse proves that each individual has a guardian angel b/c of the lack of evidence elsewhere in the NT. But at the very least the verse hints at the fact that God does use angels to protect believers (cf Heb 1:14) & could possibly imply that believers are assigned angels, once they are in the faith. I personally wish there was a clearer statement than “their angels” b/c this could refer to a short term assigned task or a lifelong protection plan---the obscurity makes it difficult to be certain.

 

[webdog]

That certainly is a popular verse for those who support the notion of individual guardian angels. This is usually coupled with the idea of national guardian angels as possibly talked about by Daniel 10; 12---& the fact that guardian angels were a poplar concept among Jewish writers (see: t Shab 17:2-3; Sifre Num 40.1.5; Gen. Rab. 44:3; 60:15; Song Rab. 3:6, ect) & in various non-canonical Jewish works (Tob 12:13-22; 1 En 100:5; Jub 35:1, ect). Most scholars hesitate to say this verse proves that each individual has a guardian angel b/c of the lack of evidence elsewhere in the NT. But at the very least the verse hints at the fact that God does use angels to protect believers (cf Heb 1:14) & could possibly imply that believers are assigned angels, once they are in the faith. I personally wish there was a clearer statement than “their angels” b/c this could refer to a short term assigned task or a lifelong protection plan---the obscurity makes it difficult to be certain.

There is also Hebrews 1:14 that I also believe goes hand-in-hand with the other passage...

14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?

I think it is safe to say that if there are guardian angels, they are for believers and not unbelievers. This passage along with Matthew 18 also reaffirms my belief all infants and children are saved. We know that they ministered to Christ, and believers are "in Christ".

 

[Gabriel Elijah]

There is also Hebrews 1:14 that I also believe goes hand-in-hand with the other passage...

14 Are not all angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?

I think it is safe to say that if there are guardian angels, they are for believers and not unbelievers. This passage along with Matthew 18 also reaffirms my belief all infants and children are saved. We know that they ministered to Christ, and believers are "in Christ".

While I don’t personally believe Matt 18:10 & Heb 1:14 unconditionally supports individual life long guardian angels—they do support the idea than angels at least sometimes guard us. But to be honest, as long as the idea of individual guardian angels is limited to Christians—I can admit the idea is biblically plausible. Although I personally lean towards the zone over man idea, I’m sure there are times when angels protect certain believers for a long period of time & possibly even in some cases a lifetime. I just wish there was more explicit evidence, but when it comes to angels—we are on a need to know basis--& all we really need to know is that they do indeed help us in certain situations.

 

[Alcott]

Why has He sent out apostles, evangelists, and missionaries to convert people to the way of the gospel, when He could just do it all himself?
[And no, Geico can't save very many people 15% or more on their insurance (JFTR)].

 

[Skandelon]

Why has He sent out apostles, evangelists, and missionaries to convert people to the way of the gospel, when He could just do it all himself?
.

Great corollary question, which is why I used it as a parallel in order to gain some possible insight as to why God might choose this method.

Why would God use a big fish to change Jonah's mind when he could have just "done it himself."

Why would God use a blinding light to change Saul's mind when he could have just "done it himself."

God most typically uses normative (outward) means to accomplish His purposes, which is one of the many reasons I reject the concept of the "effectual calling."