Angels, Theophanies, The trouble with language.

[Patrick McDermott]

I have come to believe that one of the basic reasons we do not fully understand the Bible as interpreted is not because we are neither Greek nor Hebrew scholars, but because; first, we do not understand our own language, and second the translations often choose to avoid modern terms which would more correctly explain phenomena they feel is best left clouded in archaic terms such as angels, chariots, etc.

There are some, such as those whom I read on this site, who dare to move beyond conventional understanding of the heretofore unexplainable. Not that I agree wholeheartedly with all that I've seen, but I believe it is necessary to understanding that what we know now should be applied to what was a mystery to the Saints of Old.

I think it is time to discuss Angels in modern terms.   

Angels are described in the bible as ministering spirits, and yet they are visible.  Abram spoke and haggled with "the Angel of The Lord" over Sodom.

To get right to it, I suggest we should consider trying to think of angles, not wholly as "spirit". While the word spirit conjures all sorts of images and is the preferred Biblical translation, I've never heard a clear explanation of what "spirit" is. We are stuck with defining a term with the term - Spirit is spirit.

I think our high-tech culture has come up with a concept that we can use, and which I believe will be instantly revelational  in the discussion of angels.  Now before I drop the bomb, I want to point that the word comes from the Hindu religion.  But, it has been co-opted by Geekdom for the ether world – although in its context, it is conceptually similar.

 

The word and concept is "Avatar".

 

Those of you, who saw the movie of the same name, might have recognized something familiar about the whole story line. The idea of the avatar as portrayed in the movie is quite similar in concept to the angels of the Bible.  Beings not of the environment, entering into the environment in a way that makes them fully visible and functional with respect to speaking, eating, interacting with man, but not in their actual form.  These are not Cherub or seraphim, which are creatures in their own right, but a sort of solid holographic being, able to translate back to heaven #3 and original form. 

Because words convey ideas, it is important to use words which more clearly convey the idea.  I believe that the use of avatar might be just the word to help this generation understand the concept of angels better.

The familiar delivery is, “the angel of the Lord”.   Most will agree that in this case, it is not some creature sent by the Lord, but the Lord in a form He chose for the purpose.  While we still cannot grasp the “technology” that makes such a thing possible, the substitution of the word avatar for angel should open up our understanding – The Avatar of The Lord.

Perhaps someone has already posited this idea. If so, let us remember, There is nothing new under the sun.  That which is has been and that which has been will be. 

[Bean]

hi Patrick, interesting post!

True, modern people don't know their English.. not long ago, the KJ Bible was listed as 8th grade reading level material.. which means 14 year-old kids could grasp it.

i think it's possible most of the translators did the best they could, all things considered, under the circumstances.. my favorite is 'crisping pin'.. but, in all fairness, people today could consult a dictionary any day of the week to find answers to their language questions.

i like the idea of defining spirit by more than just 'breath on the wind' or something like that.

Interesting, plenty of people will quickly acknowledge the existence of the holy angels, but in the same breath deny the existence of the fallen angels.

"angel" is used to define a few different types of beings.. in Enoch, the fallen Watchers (sometimes referred to as 'angels') could interact with humans.. but Satan, a seraph, (also referred to as an 'angel') had to enter in and possess the serpent in order to interact with Eve (the same way he also had to enter in and possess Judas in order to interact with Yahushua).. and it seems any of them who are instructed, or able, to physically manifest on the flesh plane, could.

i agree, it's easier to learn from a picture than from unfamiliar, often misunderstood words.. image associations drawn from Scripture would probably help a lot of people better understand the true nature of spirit and angels, and how that all fits into the warfare, afterlife and eternity we're taught so much about in the Word.

Peace in Yahushua

[Prodigal Son]

Hi Patrick, welcome to Time No Longer. Thank you for you post, you bring up very good points. We have discussed something very similar before and it would be nice if i could locate that to add here but locating it is another matter, so I am glad that it came up again.

I agree that the definition of spirit is not the intangible thing that it can seem to those who exist and have only known existence on this "physical" plane. It seems this way, perhaps only because there is that dimensional divide which limits visualizing and touching anything beyond it, except for extraordinary circumstances.

It might be closer to truth to understand spiritual entities as, just that, extra-dimensional creatures, rather than an ethereal essence. There have been limited instances of their own tangible substance being brought into the dimension where mortal human beings exist and so that is possible in some cases, while others it requires a "substitute housing" inside a native physical body of this dimension.

Avatar, the movie, might really be a cleverly made film designed to introduce the thought of possession to the public in a way that seems benevolent.