Angels Do Not Have Sex

[JLB]

JLB are Jesus and God one in the same?

Jesus Christ is the Man in whom one must believe in order to obtain salvation.

Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Jesus Christ is YHWH who became flesh, and suffered and died for our sins.

The Old Testament saints were preserved alive in Abraham's Bosom until The crucified Jesus Christ was revealed to them.


Reba, had YHWH become flesh and died on the cross when he made Covenant with Abraham?

The sons of God that are destined to be revealed at the resurrection, won't actually be declared sons of God until that time.

Look at what Paul taught us -

19 For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; 21 because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. 23 Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. 24 For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance. Romans 8:19-25

The reality of you being a son of God will be revealed at the resurrection.

Until then, you have faith that you are a son of God and the Holy Spirit bears witness with your spirit that you are a child of God, as long as you continue in this hope.

Never the less it is still hope.

... but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees.

We along with creation will see the reality of you as a son of God at the resurrection.

Until then you have hope.

Then end of your faith is the salvation of your soul.



JLB

 

[Sparkey]

Greetings, JLB

You replied to my belief that angels were only part of the group of creatures that could be called sons. We know that Jesus is THE son, the only begotten of God. We are joined into Him and may call God Father because of the love of the man who died for us. He said that if we are not ashamed of Him, he would not be ashamed of us (and I can't figure that part out because I'm still ashamed of me) but Jesus will confess us to His Father. Every claim to any promise or heritage ultimately goes to and through Jesus, the Christ.

That is WHY he is the way and the truth and the door. I don't find the difference between Old and New to exclude possible sonship. The Old looked forward to the time of fulfillment by Jesus, but all prophecies shall be fulfilled. They (the old covenant saints) had a covenant with God. God's mercy and goodness applies to them as well as it does to me.

None are saved except through Him. So what then? Can we think that John the Baptist was not one of those who may be counted in the company called "the sons" ? Maybe that's what's meant when Jesus spoke of him (John the Baptist) and those born of women in Matthew 11:11.

Jesus spoke of "those born of women" and that indeed defines a certain select group. Adam was not born of woman. Jesus was not. Angels were not either. But we are not here speaking about "those born of women," are we? We are speaking of the company of creatures that may be rightly called sons.

I still do not see your Scriptural proof showing that humans (born of women) can never be called sons.

That's the problem it does matter because it is through faith in Christ that enables us to be BORN OF GOD.

This dis not occur in the OT.

If you say there is then you are saying that there was some "other" way to God.

Just isn't so.

Sons of God are offspring of God.

In the OT this meant angels.

I am not saying that there is "some other way to God," and you know this. What I am saying is that believers may also be included in the term 'sons'.

"The Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God" (Romans 8:16). That the Old Testament saints were justified by faith is clearly stated in Hebrews 11. Their faith was a real, living faith and one, no doubt, given to them by God.

"Sons of God" is a New Testament expression. "Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God" (1 John 3:1). It is very seldom used in the Old Testament but the whole process of getting to know Him includes discovery and revelation. When the time was right, God revealed Himself to us in the form of the man, Jesus who is the Christ. Even today we see as through a glass, darkly. Our glass has been made more clear by the life of Jesus.

You saying that the Prophets and others (like King David) are not sons. In the same breath you ask me to call angels that fornicate sons. I don't see why I should. If I wanted to try to support the statement "In the OT this (the term sons of God) meant angels and only angels," I would not be able to cite chapter and verse. I've looked for something that could resolve the difference between the two beliefs but could not find any definitive proof text. Nothing works unless we introduce our thoughts (and 'preconceived' ideas).

I could not say, for instance, "According to the book of _______________, chapter _______________ and verse __________, (and I quote) "Angels and only angels may be called sons - Well, except for Adam, that is." No, sadly we have only your word for that.

 

[Edward]

Sparrowhawke:...Jesus spoke of "those born of women" and that indeed defines a certain select group. Adam was not born of woman. Jesus was not.

Uhhh, Am I missing something brother? Wasn't Jesus born of Mary?

Oh, waitaminute, you must mean before all that and before the earth was even created. Ok

 

[Sparkey]

Yeah, I would like to speak face to face with Him someday and get it all figured out.
But until then, thank you for grace --> especially when my fingers are not connected while typing.

 

[Edward]

Yeah, I would like to speak face to face with Him someday and get it all figured out.
But until then, thank you for grace --> especially when my fingers are not connected while typing.

I hear you brother. Yesterday was such a challenging yet blessed day for me. It was wrought with difficulties and trials and yet, I continued to pray all day, and bang bang bang one thing after another clicked into place so that everything worked out for me. It was the Lord! It was the Lord! The things that happened and how they clicked for me (last minute but never late!) were of such a strange coincidence (Ha!) that it was able to be made to work out that it was absolutely awe inspiring. I should probably write a thread about it, it's a good testimony.

long story short...Praise the Lord!!!

 

[elijah23]

Angels Do Not Have Sex
Back around in the mid 90's I had a little debate with a preacher about Genesis 6:1-4. First of all angels don't have reproductive organs and they don't have blood' sperm has blood. and another thing' if they were good angels they could never do this sin. And bad angels would never be called the sons of God. So why is this lie still around' your guess is as good as mine. This just goes to show you about the wrong doctrine that man will teach you.

I suspect no one will want to have sex in the resurrection. I think we will find life is better without it.

 

[Sparkey]

You're suspicion is correct. I have it on the highest authority that in that manner at least, we will be like the angels in heaven.

And no, that does not mean that we will have to slip into the angel's closet to take on a corporal form or body in order to exit heaven and fornicate. That is NOT what Jesus said. But going by what has been said here, it is what some of His followers believe. They just have not said it quite that way.

Still...

 

[Edward]

You're suspicion is correct. I have it on the highest authority that in that manner at least, we will be like the angels in heaven.

And no, that does not mean that we will have to slip into the angel's closet to take on a corporal form or body in order to exit heaven and fornicate. That is NOT what Jesus said. But going by what has been said here, it is what some of His followers believe. They just have not said it quite that way.

Still...

I agree with both of you brothers on this. From testimonies that I have read, the feeling of being in the presence of God is one that surpasses all. To be saturated with pure love. I would think that this feeling would make even the thought of sex laughable to us then. The pleasure of sex is nothing. Being in the presence of God is our reward. I look forward to it.

I think that if/when the fallen angels had thoughts of mating with our women...they didn't even have pleasure on their mind then. It was more to procreation and contamination of the bloodlines to stop Jesus from being born.

 

[JLB]

You're suspicion is correct. I have it on the highest authority that in that manner at least, we will be like the angels in heaven.

And no, that does not mean that we will have to slip into the angel's closet to take on a corporal form or body in order to exit heaven and fornicate. That is NOT what Jesus said. But going by what has been said here, it is what some of His followers believe. They just have not said it quite that way.

Still...

I don't think it will be called sex. However we know that Spirit gives birth to spirit.

We also know that there will be a marriage supper of the Lamb to His Bride.

We also know that Jesus will eventually be called Everlasting father.

We also know that Paul taught -

30 For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Ephesians 5:30-32


"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Can anyone on this thread name who the 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?


JLB

 

[Edward]

JLB:..."For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Can anyone on this thread name who the 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?

You ask good questions, lol. I'm going to chew on this.

Sparrowhawk:...That is NOT what Jesus said.

You are correct, and therein is our difficulty. Rightly dividing the Word of God...this is our training from the Lord. Makes us think, study, pray and meditate. This is one of the best college courses ever and not so easy to get an "A". Our studies include reasoning, and something else...a...spiritual receiving and perception.

That's why 1000 different people can read the same passage and there could be 1000 different facets of the truth perceived (given) to them all. That's from the spiritual perception (Spirit!)

Hebrews 5:14
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil./

 

[JLB]

You ask good questions, lol. I'm going to chew on this.



You are correct, and therein is our difficulty. Rightly dividing the Word of God...this is our training from the Lord. Makes us think, study, pray and meditate. This is one of the best college courses ever and not so easy to get an "A". Our studies include reasoning, and something else...a...spiritual receiving and perception.

That's why 1000 different people can read the same passage and there could be 1000 different facets of the truth perceived (given) to them all. That's from the spiritual perception (Spirit!)

Hebrews 5:14
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil./

Do you have any thoughts on this Mystery?

It would seem that both the Direct Interpretation and the Prophetic Implication have the same father and mother.

30 For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31 "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Ephesians 5:30-32


"For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

Can anyone on this thread name who the 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?


JLB

 

[Edward]

Can anyone on this thread name who the 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?

Ok well, I haven't had much time to chew on this, I got distracted yesterday with other things but I'll take a stab at it right now, off the top of my head. Christ, Israel, The Church, and The Remnant.

 

[JLB]

Ok well, I haven't had much time to chew on this, I got distracted yesterday with other things but I'll take a stab at it right now, off the top of my head. Christ, Israel, The Church, and The Remnant.

Please fill in the blanks of this Mystery. The man and his wife are revealed in the scriptures.

What isn't revealed is: a Mystery.


The scripture that Paul is referring to in Ephesians 5 comes from Genesis 2:24

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24

Man = Adam

Wife = Eve

Father = ________

Mother = ________



For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Ephesians 5:31-32

Man = Christ

Wife = Church

Father = ____________

Mother = ____________


As I said before, the direct interpretation which is Genesis 2:24 and the prophetic implication Ephesians 5:31-32 have the same answer.



JLB

 

[Edward]

Please fill in the blanks of this Mystery. The man and his wife are revealed in the scriptures.

What isn't revealed is: a Mystery.


The scripture that Paul is referring to in Ephesians 5 comes from Genesis 2:24

Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. Genesis 2:24

Man = Adam

Wife = Eve

Father = ________

Mother = ________



For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Ephesians 5:31-32

Man = Christ

Wife = Church

Father = ____________

Mother = ____________


As I said before, the direct interpretation which is Genesis 2:24 and the prophetic implication Ephesians 5:31-32 have the same answer.



JLB

Father must be God the father. Our Father, which art in Heaven, call no one on earth your father, and so forth...but Mother throws me for a loop brother...I...don't know. Mary? The Holy Spirit?

 

[chessman]

Some people will think the "great mystery" includes four (versus the two that is actually stated). Odd really, when you think about it. Why would Paul say the mystery is about two individuals, if rather he really meant four individuals?

They'll say it is about; 1) Jesus/Christ (The Son of God) and 2) The Church (the Bride) which of course is correct because that's what Paul says his point/mystery is about. but then certain denominations go on to speculate and build doctrines off their speculation that it's really about 3) Mary (Jesus's earthly mother) and 4) The Father (RCC)

That's called adding to the Word, in my opinion.

Or 3) Israel and 4) The Remnant. (DispensationalTheology)

Or 3) the Father and 4) His Spirit bride(s) (LDS)

Or 3) Eve and 4) _Satan (serpent seed theology)

Or etc. etc.

Also, the RCC used a mistranslation of this verse (Eph 5:32) from within their Vulgate to build their doctrine of marraige being a Sacrament of the church. But the point is, the Bible doesn't say marraige is a church sacrament.

Vulgate says: This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church.

Other translations correct this by translating what Paul actually said better into English:

32 (This mystery (sacrament) is great, but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.) ​

But as for the actual question/answer; it's a leading question (i.e. the question as formed includes part of it's conclusion within the question. That is, there are four individuals within the "mystery" versus two. Which is why these types of questions are not allowed in a court of law (or scholarly debate).

"Can anyone on this thread name who the 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?"

it doesn't even get off the ground running (and would be objected to by a court who's aim was the truth on the grounds of being a "leading question") and thus improper. But even if allowed, it's obviously a false assumption since the text itself says "the two" are the mystery (not the four). And Paul tells us plainly who he means (Christ and The Church) are within the mystery. so it's a settled "mystery". He means by "mystery" that it took God's revelation to point out to him (and now us via Scripture) that God (way back when) actually created marriage to be a type/anti-type of Christ and the chruch. Mystery solved (not still hidden).

Which is why so called "same sex marriage" is such an obvious affront to the creator. And also, BTW, why a "marraige" between a women and an angel is not really a "marriage" to begin with and thusly God wouldn't call such a sexual union (if it happened) a "marraige". An abomination, maybe, but not a marraige.

31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”
​

"Can anyone on this thread name who the 2 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?" Yes. Christ and The Church.

 

[BigSodaExposer]

Angels in 3D space? I would start a thread on this, but I don't think I should. This is a really good thread, I think someone here can help answer this. Ok basically, many believe that Angels are just spiritual creatures or heavenly host. When one looks further into Angels, they find there are several types of Angels. Many people don't believe an Angel can be here in this physical 3D world. Even though, there are countless stories/testimonials of mysterious strangers, that end up warning a person, or helping a person in some way.

Many believe that Angels can only offer visions, but this doesn't explain the scripture evidence of a multitude seeing the same "Angels", at the same time. Genesis 19:4-5 "4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them." Also Hebrews 13:2 "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares". This supports the old urban myth that some (not all) homeless people, might actually be Angels. Yet in other verses we see Angels offering dreams, or visions. Mathew 2:19 "But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,20 Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life."

So you can see where I am going with this. This post actually ties into this thread and Genesis 6. An Angel, in 3D space (flesh), mating with a mortal female, creating giants, men of renown, nephilim. But even though there are no female angels in the bible, can a holy Angel be a female? If the purpose is centered around such? If a heavenly Angel can enter this space, are they still a spirit? Or some other form of matter existing in 3d space? Like a plasma? If an Angel can be a male, then why not a female? Why not a lamp post? Or a simple stray dog? Or a bird in the sky?

I have read many books that suggest fallen angels, choose female over male. Because this is the opposite of God's masculine command structure. This makes me wonder about all these ancient "goddesses", actually being fallen angels. That makes me think of this scripture, Colossians 2:18" "Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,"

I see a difference here...A fallen angel chooses fleshly and worldly desires, and to be worshipped itself. That makes me think the Angels of God are the random strangers. They perform a task from the lord, yielding positive fruits, then they are out. No name, no rank, gone. I'm thinking the fallen angels stick around, and seek that individual worship. And offer names to know them by.

Well, I just wanted to hear everyone's opinions about Angels being here in a physical world VS spirit.

 

[JLB]

Some people will think the "great mystery" includes four (versus the two that is actually stated). Odd really, when you think about it. Why would Paul say the mystery is about two individuals, if rather he really meant four individuals?

They'll say it is about; 1) Jesus/Christ (The Son of God) and 2) The Church (the Bride) which of course is correct because that's what Paul says his point/mystery is about. but then certain denominations go on to speculate and build doctrines off their speculation that it's really about 3) Mary (Jesus's earthly mother) and 4) The Father (RCC)

That's called adding to the Word, in my opinion.

Or 3) Israel and 4) The Remnant. (DispensationalTheology)

Or 3) the Father and 4) His Spirit bride(s) (LDS)

Or 3) Eve and 4) _Satan (serpent seed theology)

Or etc. etc.

Also, the RCC used a mistranslation of this verse (Eph 5:32) from within their Vulgate to build their doctrine of marraige being a Sacrament of the church. But the point is, the Bible doesn't say marraige is a church sacrament.

Vulgate says: This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church.

Other translations correct this by translating what Paul actually said better into English:

32 (This mystery (sacrament) is great, but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.) ​

But as for the actual question/answer; it's a leading question (i.e. the question as formed includes part of it's conclusion within the question. That is, there are four individuals within the "mystery" versus two. Which is why these types of questions are not allowed in a court of law (or scholarly debate).


it doesn't even get off the ground running (and would be objected to by a court who's aim was the truth on the grounds of being a "leading question") and thus improper. But even if allowed, it's obviously a false assumption since the text itself says "the two" are the mystery (not the four). And Paul tells us plainly who he means (Christ and The Church) are within the mystery. so it's a settled "mystery". He means by "mystery" that it took God's revelation to point out to him (and now us via Scripture) that God (way back when) actually created marriage to be a type/anti-type of Christ and the chruch. Mystery solved (not still hidden).

Which is why so called "same sex marriage" is such an obvious affront to the creator. And also, BTW, why a "marraige" between a women and an angel is not really a "marriage" to begin with and thusly God wouldn't call such a sexual union (if it happened) a "marraige". An abomination, maybe, but not a marraige.

31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”
​

"Can anyone on this thread name who the 2 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?" Yes. Christ and The Church.

There are 4 individuals mentioned.

Christ and the Church are specifically named as two.

Adam and Eve are also two that Genesis is referring to.

Who is the Father and Mother of Adam and Eve.

Who is the Father and Mother of Jesus, before He became flesh?


JLB

 

[Edward]

Some people will think the "great mystery" includes four (versus the two that is actually stated). Odd really, when you think about it. Why would Paul say the mystery is about two individuals, if rather he really meant four individuals?

They'll say it is about; 1) Jesus/Christ (The Son of God) and 2) The Church (the Bride) which of course is correct because that's what Paul says his point/mystery is about. but then certain denominations go on to speculate and build doctrines off their speculation that it's really about 3) Mary (Jesus's earthly mother) and 4) The Father (RCC)

That's called adding to the Word, in my opinion.

Or 3) Israel and 4) The Remnant. (DispensationalTheology)

Or 3) the Father and 4) His Spirit bride(s) (LDS)

Or 3) Eve and 4) _Satan (serpent seed theology)

Or etc. etc.

Also, the RCC used a mistranslation of this verse (Eph 5:32) from within their Vulgate to build their doctrine of marraige being a Sacrament of the church. But the point is, the Bible doesn't say marraige is a church sacrament.

Vulgate says: This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church.

Other translations correct this by translating what Paul actually said better into English:

32 (This mystery (sacrament) is great, but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.) ​

But as for the actual question/answer; it's a leading question (i.e. the question as formed includes part of it's conclusion within the question. That is, there are four individuals within the "mystery" versus two. Which is why these types of questions are not allowed in a court of law (or scholarly debate).


it doesn't even get off the ground running (and would be objected to by a court who's aim was the truth on the grounds of being a "leading question") and thus improper. But even if allowed, it's obviously a false assumption since the text itself says "the two" are the mystery (not the four). And Paul tells us plainly who he means (Christ and The Church) are within the mystery. so it's a settled "mystery". He means by "mystery" that it took God's revelation to point out to him (and now us via Scripture) that God (way back when) actually created marriage to be a type/anti-type of Christ and the chruch. Mystery solved (not still hidden).

Which is why so called "same sex marriage" is such an obvious affront to the creator. And also, BTW, why a "marraige" between a women and an angel is not really a "marriage" to begin with and thusly God wouldn't call such a sexual union (if it happened) a "marraige". An abomination, maybe, but not a marraige.

31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”
​

"Can anyone on this thread name who the 2 4 different and distinct individuals are in this Mystery?" Yes. Christ and The Church.

I'm sorry brother, I don't seem to get your point here. What is your point? One of contention to your brother? This is not a court of law and brother JLB posted a very thought provoking question. I can see no edification or point to your post at all. I find that a bit curious from a professed Christian brother. May I suggest a walking in brotherly love and respect to your fellow Christian brothers and sisters here in the thread and forum?

Angels in 3D space? I would start a thread on this, but I don't think I should. This is a really good thread, I think someone here can help answer this. Ok basically, many believe that Angels are just spiritual creatures or heavenly host. When one looks further into Angels, they find there are several types of Angels. Many people don't believe an Angel can be here in this physical 3D world. Even though, there are countless stories/testimonials of mysterious strangers, that end up warning a person, or helping a person in some way.

Many believe that Angels can only offer visions, but this doesn't explain the scripture evidence of a multitude seeing the same "Angels", at the same time. Genesis 19:4-5 "4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter:5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them." Also Hebrews 13:2 "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares". This supports the old urban myth that some (not all) homeless people, might actually be Angels. Yet in other verses we see Angels offering dreams, or visions. Mathew 2:19 "But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt,20 Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life."

So you can see where I am going with this. This post actually ties into this thread and Genesis 6. An Angel, in 3D space (flesh), mating with a mortal female, creating giants, men of renown, nephilim. But even though there are no female angels in the bible, can a holy Angel be a female? If the purpose is centered around such? If a heavenly Angel can enter this space, are they still a spirit? Or some other form of matter existing in 3d space? Like a plasma? If an Angel can be a male, then why not a female? Why not a lamp post? Or a simple stray dog? Or a bird in the sky?

I have read many books that suggest fallen angels, choose female over male. Because this is the opposite of God's masculine command structure. This makes me wonder about all these ancient "goddesses", actually being fallen angels. That makes me think of this scripture, Colossians 2:18" "Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,"

I see a difference here...A fallen angel chooses fleshly and worldly desires, and to be worshipped itself. That makes me think the Angels of God are the random strangers. They perform a task from the lord, yielding positive fruits, then they are out. No name, no rank, gone. I'm thinking the fallen angels stick around, and seek that individual worship. And offer names to know them by.

Well, I just wanted to hear everyone's opinions about Angels being here in a physical world VS spirit.

Ah! Back to topic, and this is very relevant brother. I have not seen any scriptures that i recall which identify any Angels as female. there are indeed many scriptures where Angels manifested to brothers and sisters of old though, and I think it was not so out of the ordinary for them. They were used to it. When Mary saw the Angel in the tomb, she didn't freak out and say oh my gosh, an Angel! She got right to the point, Where's Jesus?!

Sometimes they were recognized as Angels, other times they were not, they were seen as men. I believe that they can manifest pretty much however they want to be seen. I have taken the scripture to be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for some have entertained Angels unawares very seriously over time. I think I met one one time for sure. he came to help me within two hours of my asking for help. A couple other times, I have had my suspicions about certain individuals having really been Angels. They seem to be, well spoken, non-confrontational and very very polite. I have thought that if I come across such an individual again sometime, I plan to ask him, (heart to heart) if Jesus came in the flesh and if he is an Angel of the Lord? I do not think they would lie about it.

Personally, I think that all of the old Greek gods like Zues and all the mythological beings, were misidentified nephilim. very real, but no Gods at all. The book of Enoch speaks of the fallen angels also creating hybrid animals, like the centaurs and so forth...to provoke God to anger.

 

[BigSodaExposer]

I'm sorry brother, I don't seem to get your point here. What is your point? One of contention to your brother? This is not a court of law and brother JLB posted a very thought provoking question. I can see no edification or point to your post at all. I find that a bit curious from a professed Christian brother. May I suggest a walking in brotherly love and respect to your fellow Christian brothers and sisters here in the thread and forum?



Ah! Back to topic, and this is very relevant brother. I have not seen any scriptures that i recall which identify any Angels as female. there are indeed many scriptures where Angels manifested to brothers and sisters of old though, and I think it was not so out of the ordinary for them. They were used to it. When Mary saw the Angel in the tomb, she didn't freak out and say oh my gosh, an Angel! She got right to the point, Where's Jesus?!

Sometimes they were recognized as Angels, other times they were not, they were seen as men. I believe that they can manifest pretty much however they want to be seen. I have taken the scripture to be not forgetful to entertain strangers, for some have entertained Angels unawares very seriously over time. I think I met one one time for sure. he came to help me within two hours of my asking for help. A couple other times, I have had my suspicions about certain individuals having really been Angels. They seem to be, well spoken, non-confrontational and very very polite. I have thought that if I come across such an individual again sometime, I plan to ask him, (heart to heart) if Jesus came in the flesh and if he is an Angel of the Lord? I do not think they would lie about it.

Personally, I think that all of the old Greek gods like Zues and all the mythological beings, were misidentified nephilim. very real, but no Gods at all. The book of Enoch speaks of the fallen angels also creating hybrid animals, like the centaurs and so forth...to provoke God to anger.

Thanks for replying brother! According to the book of Enoch, wasn't the nephilim a big cause of the flood? Like they totally took over and corrupted the Earth provoking God's anger? I think I have met some (angels) in my life before too. I never thought about asking them such a question to test them. Something to think about!

 

[chessman]

I'm sorry brother, I don't seem to get your point here. What is your point?

Answer=

Some people will think the "great mystery" includes four (versus the two that is actually stated). Odd really, when you think about it. Why would Paul say the mystery is about two individuals, if rather he really meant four individuals?

One of contention to your brother?

No, I have no contention with brother JLB. Just with what he had to say about Paul's mystery involving four individuals. I feel It actually only involves two and I don't mind stating my position on that and I included the Biblical reasons why it only involves two individuals. Plus some other reasons. Obviously y'all are free to consider them valid or not and/or provide counter evidence for why Paul really meant there was a mystery that involved not just Christ and the church's union but other individuals.

Apologetics & Theology
Discuss topics related to defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines and theology.
​

I find that a bit curious from a professed Christian brother. May I suggest a walking in brotherly love and respect to your fellow Christian brothers and sisters here in the thread and forum?

Might I suggested you also call me a Christian brother as you did JLB and not just a "professed Christian brother". I do respect him and you.

This is not a court of law and brother JLB posted a very thought provoking question.

I know it's not a court of law. I didn't say this Forum was one. His question was thought provoking sure, but it assumes the mystery is about four individuals and Paul says it is about two (Christ and the church). I disagree with him. But I still love him. I think he's cool too. He's also quit smart in my opinion.