Winged Thoughts Section Three

Section Three: The nature of angels. We seek the parameters of the angelic constitution. We will find it. We will study it. We will turn it over and over in our hands until we become quite familiar with it. We will discover, I think, that the nature of angels rubs shoulders with the nature of God. Likewise, we will come to understand that the nature of angels rubs shoulders with the nature of man. Man has concluded that certain manifestations of God should fall under the general header of angelic. Such angels are necessary vehicles for the conveyance of an invisible spirit. We will be more picayune in our naming of angels. Without refuting the angelic properties of the vehicles of God, we will create a separate classification for the humanoid angel. Our first task will be to compare angels with God. In order to accomplish such a thing, we must deal with the fundamentals of the nature of God, and we already hold the first piece of this puzzle. Piece one: God is an invisible spirit. Of his basic nature, God has no similitude. Deuteronomy 4:12 And the Lord spake unto you out of the midst of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye heard a voice. The above is an example of God, the invisible spirit, acting through an elemental vehicle. It is obvious in the example that God controls what people see and hear, and yet, what they see is not God. The non-human angelic form is actually a manipulation of the elements. That, in and of itself, is a major indicator of the nature of God. All matter may be included in the composition of God, but for the purposes of our investigation of an invisible, and I might add, intangible God, matter may be viewed as external to him. Men have considered such apparitions as angelic, and despite our present-day state of advancement, we would marvel at such displays no less than our primitive forefathers. We have to admit – talking fire is cool; we would definitely be impressed. Men gave two names to those apparitions. They called them angels, and they called them 'Lord'. Apparitions of fire and smoke did communicate to man through sight and sound, but touching is not noted in those accounts. The writers of those accounts pretty much agreed that God had no similitude, yet, when humanoid entities represented God, they, too, were called Lord. Jeremiah 1:9 Then the Lord put forth his hand, And touched my mouth. And the Lord said unto me, Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth. We are going on the assumption that God has no similitude. God, himself, may not be seen. God is unique – one of a kind. There is no comparison of the whole, but we may compare attributes and constituent members. Jesus told us that God could be seen, that if our eyes beheld the visible son, our eyes beheld the invisible father. In our investigation, it is necessary to clarify our view of the nature of God. We must look past the whole to see the parts. In doing this, we must explore and define the nature of spirit. We have called God a spirit, and the Lord of all spirits. In other words, God is able to manipulate both the tangible corporeal element and the intangible spirit. We may then initially view God as a spirit around which orbit lesser spirits and these spirits may be viewed as vehicles no less than the elements. Read below. Zechariah 6:4-5 And the angel answered and said unto me, These are the four spirits of the heavens, which go forth from standing before the Lord of all the earth. It may be that angels revolve around the lesser spirits. It may be that angels are the vehicles, or manifestations of lesser spirits. Or, we might view them as caretakers and guardians. We will leave our minds open to the possibility that there are many orbits around God – spirits, spirits of spirits, angels of spirits, etc. Our main investigation here will center around the humanoid angel. We will examine the various descriptions of them to determine their nature. The pieces to our puzzle will fall into place. We name our new classification the 'Brother Angel'. Angels in this category are like men in that they share with us certain familiar traits. They are also notably different in certain respects. We identify with their more human traits, and we aspire to their superior attributes. Angels are routinely described with the traits that most impress those who see the apparitions. For instance, the following verse describes an angel with impressive attributes. We who study such accounts, accept that the descriptions submitted were filtered through comparison. In other words, an angel is seen. He is basically like a man – so, if there is something more to be said, the angel is thus described by comparing him to a man. Revelation 5:2 And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice. The angel was strong. Compared to the average man, the angel might have been larger and more muscular. Did the angel bench press? Was the angel so dressed as to bring attention to the physique? How buff was the angel? It might be common that angels are in good physical condition, but the brother angel is sometimes average. I guess, not every one of them can be super-human. See below. Hosea 12:3-4 Yea, he had power over the angel, and prevailed. The brother angel comes in many shapes and sizes. It would definitely be a mistake to buy into the homogenous view of the statuesque, blond Aryan angel. Since angels can seem like individuals on the outside, it stands to reason that they may also have different temperaments. Some may seem patient and helpful, while others have an attitude. Some can be downright mean and destructive. Read below. Psalms 78:25 & 49 He cast upon them the fierceness of his anger, wrath, and indignation, and trouble, by sending evil angels among them. Here may be clues to evil or fallen angels. Here we may see a reflection of the nature of God in the nature of angels. God is not all sugar like so many people wish him to be. He gets angry. When sending a representative, it seems appropriate that he would send someone to represent his anger. It may be the angel is imbued with the nature of God's current emotion, or it can be that the representative believes in the cause just as intensely as does God. The scenario might be that God calls his princes together, and tells them what's going on. He communicates his disappointment and frustration. His rhetoric whips the crowd into a frenzy. They raise their hands for permission, calling, “I'll go! Choose me!” Read below for one 'worked up' angel. Note his passion for the Lord. Note how important God is to the angel, how high up God is in his estimation. You are not going to dis God and get by this fellow unscathed. Judges 5:23 Curse ye Meroz, said the angel of the Lord, curse ye bitterly the inhabitants thereof; because they came not to the help of the Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty. We have established thus far that angels can be individuals. They can look different, they can have different strengths and weaknesses, they can have emotions, attitudes, and great passion. That is only a small part of their nature. Previously, we noted that they can change shape. This talent must be viewed as an ability to manipulate matter to some degree. Such a thing speaks of the nature of energy. Do you hear the buzz of high voltage? Just for a charge, read the shocking verses below. Job 4:15-16 Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair of my flesh stood up: It stood still, but I could not discern the form thereof: an image was before mine eyes. I said earlier that man identifies with the angels. I have classified the humanoid angels as 'Brother angels'. Here, I wish to include a reference that indicates the opposite – that angels identify with men. It points to very telling facts about the ongoing relationship between men and angels. As you read, you should make comparisons. Ask yourself, just who inhabits the Earth, and in what state they may be compared. Revelation 12:7, 9 & 10 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon fought and his angels And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night. Both men and fallen angels share a fallen state, yet, the non-fallen angels of heaven claim that we are their brothers. Think about it – if the whole world is deceived, would that not include all the inhabitants? Both men and fallen angels are equally in the dark. And, just what does it mean to be cast into the Earth? What is lost in the transference from spiritual to corporeal? The next time you pass a stranger on the street, ask yourself, could he or she be a fallen angel – and not even know it? For that matter, could you be a fallen angel and not know it? One must put the angels in one hand and the inhabitants of the Earth in the other hand. One must compare the attributes of both. Angels can manipulate matter, just like God. They are above the endless cycle of life and death. The inhabitants of the Earth, some of which do not know that they used to be angels, do not have the talents and abilities of the angels. They are caught in the endless cycle; their only way up and out is through salvation. It could well be that the fallen state is not a thing that is settled. It could be an ongoing state. Anyone may be cursed, and anyone may accrue additional curses. Inhabitants of this world, by certain admissions and changes of direction, may be relieved of their curses. Similarly, even the angels of heaven may accrue curses if they are not careful. See below. Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. It is by no means certain that all the falling is over and done with. Neither is trust of angels, on the part of mankind, a settled matter. In the list of all the things that may come between man and his redemption, angels are present and accounted for. I have to ask: why? Why would an angel even think about doing such a thing? Of course, I am discounting those fallen angels who are just as much in the dark as the rest of us. Perhaps the heavenly angels would never do such a thing, but if they tried, they might only be doomed to fail. Surely, some things are stronger than the angels. Romans 8:38-39 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. As individuals, angels may have as much free will as men. Whether their choices are always right – who can say? But, there is a notion that mankind will ultimately be placed over the angels. That might be purely Biblical and based on an obstruction of needful information. After all, the whole world is deceived. However, if angels in heaven are our brothers, and consider us as brothers, does it stand to reason that either of us would judge the other? Would not Jesus be the only judge? It might be, however, that when our eyes are finally opened to the light, we will recognize and judge the fallen angels of the Earth. The scenario might go like this: I note that the fallen angels shared my fallen state. I note that the fallen were just as stuck in the endless cycle of death and rebirth. My eyes being open, I might finally understand that they were in the dark – that is, they thought they were men. They lived like men, making mistakes, making up for mistakes, hoping, and doing good – even repenting, and living in faith. I would look at an individual whose life seemed so much like my own, and knowing that I was forgiven, I would forgive. Judge for yourself. 1 Corinthians 6:3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? Will we become the accusers of the brethren, or will we, like Christ, advocate forgiveness? Mankind has not cornered the market on limited knowledge. Certainly, I do not know everything. I am in the dark, just like you, just like the fallen angels. Even the angels of heaven don't know everything. Jesus told us plainly. Matthew 24:31 & 36 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. Angels do know what God wants them to know. We can rightly assume that the angels of heaven have access to knowledge that is currently beyond the limited abilities of men. In many cases, angels know what God knows. It may be communicated per need, it may be a shared thought or a shared mind. Angels speaking for God – we see it often. Genesis 21:17&19 God heard the voice of the lad and the angel of God called to Hagar out of heaven and said unto her, what aileth thee, Hagar? Fear not; for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is. God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the bottle with water, and gave the lad to drink. Of course, God may speak directly to man. He is able, after all, to manipulate matter. Quite often, however, it is the angel that speaks. The angel, while considered the voice of God, is an individual representative rather than an elemental manifestation. Angels have been noted, in their communications to men, as speaking in two distinct manners. The first is to precede the message with a qualifying statement such as “thus saith the Lord”. The second is simply to say “I”. There have already been examples of the latter in this study. Following is an example of the former. Genesis 22:10-18 the angel of the Lord called unto him (Abraham) out of heaven, and he (answered the voice), “Here am I.” The angel of the Lord called to Abraham out of heaven the second time, and said, “By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord . . .” Since angels of heaven communicate with men on Earth, it takes no stretch of the imagination to understand that sometimes the fallen angels also receive communications. If they are in the dark, if they live the life mortal, what stations might they fill? Are some of them in the service of God? In speaking to an angel on Earth, one associated with the assembly of men, Christ utters a remarkable statement. Read below, read it two or three times. Think about it. Revelation 2:1&5 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write . . . Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. Apparently, the opportunity to repent is also extended to angels. At times I have considered that the angels of the seven churches might be a sort of gestalt of the assembled souls. Now I am of the mind that fallen angels are mostly mortal, mostly in the dark. They live their lives side by side with the humans. They may even look human – mostly. There is a parable that speaks of wheat and tares. Are the fallen angels tares. We know little about such matters, but that only makes me wonder more. What sort of occupations, for instance, would fallen angels be attracted to? If they are in the dark, but still being manipulated by Satan, they might have occupations as taskmasters of the human race. Daniel spoke of such a people, in: Daniel 2:43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another. There are people in this world who are not people. We both walk the same road. It could be that not even the angels of heaven can tell us apart. One parable, in describing a harvest in which the enemy had sown tares, depicts the owner as electing to allow them to grow up together, rather than risk harm to the wheat by the uprooting of the tares. In the 'harvest', the truth will come out. Speaking of elect, there appears to be a level of angel that is known as the elect angel. This brings many questions to mind. How does an angel become elect? From which rank is the elect angel taken? When the angel is promoted, is there an automatic 'file right'? When an angel is promoted from the lowest ranks of angeldom, does a human take his place? The suggestion is that there are levels of angels. What I want to know is: how many? 1 Timothy 5:21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels. Angels of the 'Brother Angel' classification, to recap, are humanoid, consider man to be his brother, come in all shapes and sizes, can manipulate matter, and speak for God. They have free will, which allows for at least the possibility of continued falling. Some of them speak as if they are God, with a notable omission of 'thus saith the Lord' in their communications. Some seem muscle-bound, some seem spooky and sinister. Among heavenly messengers, that is, not including the fallen, there are 'evil' angels. Angels know a lot, but not everything. Perhaps, as they move up in rank, they receive their knowledge on a 'need-to-know' basis. Exploring the exact nature of angels can lead the seeker almost anywhere. Following is the account of the transfiguration from Matthew. For the apostles, it was an apparition, and in Jesus own words, it was a vision. Assuming the apostles were awake, we would like some solid facts of this matter. Jesus, of course, was solid enough. However, he evinced the ability to manipulate matter in such feats as walking on water, turning water to wine, healing the sick, etc. It should come as no surprise to find him emitting light. Did this vision occur as immediately as the text suggests, or had there been some other part to this, something like meditation? Just what was Jesus' definition of a vision? Matthew 17:3-9 there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only. And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead. A seeker, naturally, will ask all sorts of questions. Allow me to ask some for the reader. What exactly is a transfiguration? Was matter manipulated? Had Jesus entered some other dimension? What did the vision have to do with the resurrection? Why did Jesus speak to Moses and Elias rather than Michael and Gabriel? Why did Peter interrupt the discourse? What does the appearance of two dead old testament characters say about those who 'sleep' as compared to those who face the end times? And, just how did the apostles recognize the prophets? There were no photos or paintings to go on. Beyond that, however, please note certain angelic aspects of the account. They are intriguingly similar to accounts of encounters with angels. Note the humans falling on their faces. Note someone coming over to touch them, and to offer comfort through encouraging words. Note a voice emitting cloud. But, let's return to the fallen angel for a moment. Here we wish to make some comparisons. We wish to compare the fallen angels to the heavenly angels. We wish to compare two uses of the word 'cast', along with certain other words. First, take a look at these verses from 2 Peter. 2 Peter 2:4 & 11 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment . . . Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. If the sinner angels were locked away in hell (that is, in some other place) how would they trouble us, or ever be an issue? On the other hand, when the angels fought, the losers in that battle were described as being cast into the Earth. Could there be a sort of sliding scale, in which hell for angels is actually Earth? It is certainly something to think about. Our language includes the common thinking that results in such expressions as 'hell on Earth'. Many people believe that life on Earth is hell. Personally, I do not subscribe to that notion, but the comparison between being cast into hell and being cast into the Earth definitely causes my right eyebrow to twitch upward. The same is true for the word darkness. In an earlier reference, we noted that the fallen angels, being in the same 'whole world' as the humans, were deceived by Satan. They, like us, are in the dark. The chains of darkness, in 2 Peter, is described as something into which God delivered the fallen. We normally think of some state like being buried underground. The way I see it is: if we are deceived, we are in chains of darkness. The angels are said to be 'reserved unto judgment' – well, don't we face a judgment? 2 Corinthians 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ. Finally, pertaining to 2 Peter, I wish to compare the angels of heaven with the fallen angels. In doing so, we are afforded a glimpse of what the angels may have lost in their fall. In contrast, the heavenly angels are 'greater in power and might'. Therefore, power and might are two possible losses for the fallen angels. These abilities may include talents for manipulation of matter. I think it likely, also, that memory and angelic self-awareness are obscured by the endless cycle. We know that there are different kinds of angels. It has already been seen that there are differing angelic allegiances among the humanoid angels. There was a war in heaven – if everyone is on the same side, there is no likelihood of confrontation. The question to ask is this: who is allowed to have angels, and what are the qualifications? Matthew 25:31 & 41 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. God has angels. He is qualified because he is the creator of angels. God is the master of all angels. God's only begotten son has angels. Is his only qualification that he is God's son? Is he qualified beyond being a son because of his resurrection, and victory over death? Is it possible for an angel to move so far up in the ranks of angeldom, that he is rewarded with angels of his own? What I want to know is this: how did the devil get to have angels? What were his qualifications? Was Satan an angel? Is he an angel now? According to certain scriptures, we are led to believe that Satan is just as bound in chains of darkness as all the other fallen angels. He lost the battle and was cast into either the Earth or hell, depending on which verse you read. In other scriptures, it seems rather unlikely that he is currently sharing the same fate as those who followed him into battle. The ability to deceive the whole world suggests several things. One is the freedom to act. Another is a knowledge of how to deceive both humans and angels. Yet another is a more or less contiguous sense of self that is unaltered by the endless cycle. That is not to say he did not lose his power and might, angelically speaking. The following verse suggests change. If one is transformed into an angel, one must necessarily be transformed from a non-angelic state. Of course, if one is transformed in the estimation of others, that will suffice. A transformation by any other name is still a transformation. If it is not a case of estimation, then we are dealing with realities beyond human experience. Therefore, if Satan can transform into an angel, what is he transforming from? Was he ever an angel? Does his qualification for having angels, as with Jesus, approximate more toward son-ship? 2 Corinthians 11:13-15 Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. The following verse is somewhat perplexing. While it was a bit of local opinion that was established neither in custom nor the ordinances of the church, it may be a valuable insight into the reason angels married women. I personally never thought of female head coverings as a form of power – how would such be power against angels? Hair, on the other hand, makes a woman attractive. Are female angels bald? Call me old school, but I hope they are not. 1 Corinthians 11:10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Earlier, I spoke of layers around God. I described revolving spirits, and around them, or as extensions perhaps, angels. Is an angel like a suit of clothing for a spirit? Is an angel only added functionality? Some texts certainly suggest that. Our view of the humanoid angels, despite their man-likeness, is not one of beings who procreate. If I was an angel, and I could get an angel babe – what would be the temptation for going to the Earth in search of a monkey babe? No, we tend to traditionally view angels as created beings. Being a created being suggests the possibility of being uncreated. Does God snatch up an angel, and tell him, hey – I'm going to turn you into an elemental manifestation? Maybe not, but if angels can manipulate matter, they can certainly transform at will. Psalms 104:4 Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire. Just as when some angels change back and forth in their appearance, sometimes we are not sure of the role that we are to attribute to them. In the following verses of Zechariah, there is a wavering in our view of the angel. First of all, we find the angel tagged as a man riding a red horse. Then he is tagged as an angel speaking with the author of the book. The angel speaks to God, god answers the angel, and the angel speaks with Zechariah. The angel instructs Zechariah, using the expression, 'thus saith the Lord', to speak with the people using the expression 'thus saith the Lord'. Zechariah alternately refers to his contact as a man, an angel, and the Lord. We are tempted to think of the verses as having too much information. Beyond the man-angel-Lord / Zechariah conference call, these verses are chock full of symbolic references. There are either three types of horse: red, speckled, and white – plus the red horse the man rode in on, or there is one type of horse: a reddish horse that is white with red speckles. Are these animals a special class of animal, a symbol of other individuals? Are they symbolic of the functional whole, or are they angels who have manipulated their appearance? There are also the symbols of the horn, the altar, and the carpenter, as well the number four. Zechariah 1:7-21 behold a man riding upon a red horse, and he stood among the myrtle trees that were in the bottom; and behind him were there red horses, speckled, and white. And the angel that talked with me said unto me, I will shew thee what these be. And the man that stood among the myrtle trees answered and said, These are they whom the Lord hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth. And they answered the angel of the Lord that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest. Then the angel of the Lord answered and said, . . . And the Lord answered the angel that talked with me with good words and comfortable words. So the angel that communed with me said unto me, affliction. And I said unto the angel that talked with me, What be these? And the Lord shewed me four carpenters. Then said I, What come these to do? And he spake, saying, These are the horns which have scattered Judah, so that no man did lift up his head: but These are come to fray them, to cast out the horns of the Gentiles, which lifted up their horn over the land of Judah to scatter it. It gets confusing sometimes. What if all the characters, except for Zechariah, are merely manifestations of God, that is, spiritual extrusions into corporeal reality? If Zechariah was in some sort of trance or dream state, the source need only be one. However, if the apparition happened while Zechariah was awake, we have angels as angels, angels as horses, God manipulating matter to create a voice, and one or the other of them causing manifestations in the form of horns and carpenters. Our level of certainty in these matters both rises and falls. One thing is sure: men have been trying to describe their angel encounters for a very, very long time. Acts 11:13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house. Basically, an angel encounter may be one of two types: either vision or dream state, or else a waking encounter. Even when angels present themselves as intangible, they produce sound waves in a physical world. People hear them speak. Acts 8:26 And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip. It is sometimes a case of 'you see me, but I don't see you'. The wording of the following verses suggests that Hagar heard a voice, looked around to see someone and failed. If she was by a well in the desert, running from someone, it is likely she was hiding. Perhaps there were shrubs or a rocky overhang. Wording also suggests that just because an angel is invisible, that is no guarantee he will simply appear in the right place as if he had a GPS. The angel 'found' the woman: therefore he looked for her. Look for yourself. Genesis 16:7-13 The angel of the Lord found and spoke to Hagar, Sarai's maid. The angel of the Lord said . . . Hagar called the name of the Lord that spake unto her, Thou God seest me. I have briefly touched upon the angelic nature of Jesus – that he may have been from one of the higher ranks of princes. Jesus said that seeing his person was equal to seeing God his father. It is also said that he was with God in the beginning, and was God. If we keep in mind our notion of angelic advancement and promotion, I see no hindrance to angels 'dressing right' until they are in the uppermost echelons of angeldom. Such levels may be the levels of a son of God like Jesus. To be there, to be equal to God – that is, to be in the form of an invisible and intangible God, is a truly spiritual and desirable state of being. The issue that I am leading to here is the mechanism of traveling between the spiritual state and the physical state. Jesus moved from the spiritual to the physical and lived a short lifetime in this realm before returning to his former state. Philippians 2:6-8 Who, being in the form of God . . . took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. Spiritual beings, at certain levels, may exist almost exclusively on their higher plane. They might only take on a physical body when it is called for. An angel, on some levels, while still an individual, may be considered as a transitional device for God to travel between realities. That is not the same as an elemental manipulation., although it might seem as such. There may be strings attached to the transition between realities. One thought is that certain levels of the angelic order, being spiritually advanced, may only take on a concomitant level of physical manifestation. While the angel may be able to take on enough physical presence to speak, he may himself require an elemental manifestation in which to house himself – say, a cloud. Exodus 19:9 The Lord said unto Moses, Lo, I come unto thee in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with thee. The mystery of those higher levels of angeldom may be of great interest to angels of lower levels. It may be said that they are equal to man in that they have not seen God. They serve him, but to their eyes, as to the eyes of man, God is an invisible spirit with no similitude. In speaking of God as Christ, the following verse notes that angels 'saw' God. Had they not seen God until Christ? Perhaps the angels so noted are of the lower, more tangible levels. They had to use Christ to see the part of themselves that remained hidden from them – rather like using a mirror to see the back of one's head. 1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. Could it be that angels have angels – that is, higher more ethereal levels to which they owe allegiance? If the highest levels owe allegiance to God, there may be a sort of 'trickle down' effect whereby lower orders offer allegiance up through the higher orders. Authorities owe allegiance to angels, and powers owe allegiance to authorities. It makes for a tight network of ownership where none fall through the cracks. 1 Peter 3:22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him. Here, I wish to look closely at the word 'into'. I get the sense that this word is used in a common manner – as: 'into the service', or 'into a deep trance', or 'into the house'. Revelation 3:12 indicates such an advanced state that transition between the realities is no longer an issue. 'Into' indicates a total immersion by which the individual is then defined by the state into which he is immersed. Since transition was open to Jesus, I assume he was not totally immersed. That state may lie in his future. Most of the rest of us will dress right, but, some of us will be included in the immersion with Jesus. Nothing says allegiance, or trickle down, like this next reference. Note expressions that speak of rank and advancement. Note the better 'name' or title. Note the possibility that 'son-ship' is defined by way of immersion, or inclusion. After all, a father defines his son as being a part of him. The matter of an angel's allegiance to Christ may place that angel in the image of Christ through certain implied machinery. I speak of machinery as functionality, as cause and effect – as when Jesus said: “your faith has made you whole'. In that regard, the machinery of Christ's allegiance to God fulfilled itself in Christ being begotten in the image of God. Hebrews 1:4-6, 13 & 14 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? Let's take a closer look at that machinery. Basically, for humans, to be born again requires nothing more than to believe. That's all it takes, but what does that faith entail? What is the machinery of such a transition? I think it lies within the thinking. One is transformed by the renewing of his mind. This same machinery holds true for angels as well. Faith is a spiritual allegiance. By that, I mean that it is a heightened mental reality. To think and thus act like Christ makes one Christ-like. To study the communications of God: to internalize them and act upon them makes one Godly. In a sense, it makes one an extension of the original. It places one as an image of the original. It stands to reason that the employment of such functional allegiance will always show evidence of transition and transformation. For instance, when an angel subscribes to the stronger aspects of God, that allegiance bears the image of strength in that angel as evidence. Psalms 103:20-21 Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word. Bless ye the Lord, all ye his hosts; ye ministers of his, that do his pleasure. Jesus claimed to always do those things that pleased the Lord. What he was saying was that he internalized certain aspects of God, and exercised those aspects within himself. An angel that excels in strength is one who internalizes strength aspects such as commandments and judgments and makes them a regular practice. The machinery is the same for all ranks of angels, authorities, and powers. This is the short of it: if you wish to be born of God, be filled with God. If you were an empty glass that wished to be a glass of water, you would need only to be filled with water. It seems no more than natural cause and effect; it explains transition as a simple matter of content. This machinery suggests that forward advancement is a bit iffy. Men and angels alike may advance, backslide, and redirect. This two-way traffic is easy to spot in Jacob's dream. Genesis 28:12 He dreamed, and saw the angels of God ascending and descending on a ladder that reached heaven. Higher ranks of angels, say – archangels, may be more stable. Greater knowledge does lend itself toward one's self-mastery. The following reference speaks of an angel generally thought to be high up in the ranks. What does it mean, exactly, for an angel to stand in the presence of God? God, as we have seen, is initially surrounded by spirits. When I say spirit, I mean mind or mindset. If entities surround these minds, they may well be guardians or care-takers. They may even be extensions of these mindsets, according to the machinery of immersion, or internalization. Allegedly, it is Gabriel, himself, speaking in the following verse. Note how Gabriel speaks of himself. Luke 1:19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee. He seems to suggest that he is able to be in two places at the same time. To stand in the presence of God, and also appear to man presents us with two possibilities. One is of the power of the angel; the other is of the nature of the location of God. Either Gabriel can be in two places at once, or God is everywhere. The intriguing aspect of this verse is the wording of Gabriel's assertion. This is what he does not say: 'I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God', rather, who is 'that' and stands is 'stand'. When we look closely at the wording, we see the suggestion that Gabriel may not be an individual. What then? Gabriel may be the name of an order, and or rank of angel / care-taker. Now, it may only be that the text I am using is King James – they did speak funny back then, but the fact of the matter is that King James is an interpretation. They did not make anything up – out of the blue. They simply wrote an old text in English. I personally believe that we are given the Bible in such form as God wishes us to receive it. What and how we understand, Biblically, must come from the current wording. In that regard, a 'he' stands in the presence of God, while a 'they' stand in the presence of God. Now, I'm not a literalist – exactly. I recognize that much of what we study must necessarily retain a symbolic content. I recognize that the communication of the Bible is filtered through the medium of mortal mentality. That, in and of itself, is not an impediment, for we have already seen that man shares in common with angels certain aspects of the mind of God – it is simply a matter of degrees. Revelation is notable as a book of vision, and dream state mentality. Most people, I think, are careful not to view the book in too literal a manner. It may indeed come from an altered mental state, that is – not completely from the waking state. That does not mean all of it was dreamed. We must remain open to the possibilities. I look at a verse like the next one and see the greater likelihood of it recounting a vision or dream. However, when I look at it, I also ask myself – under what circumstance might it have been a reality? We have seen that God and angels can manipulate matter. Scores of people, all at the same time, have heard the voice of God. Sound waves can be manipulated without corroborating evidence for the eye. Angels, usually in the form of men, have been seen floating above the Earth. Even Christ, who lived an entire life among other men, was seen rising up from the Earth by many who knew him. If the account in the following verse is real, how did it occur? Most people are smart enough not to look into the sun. The sun, however, is not always blinding. I have viewed it many times through a thin veil of clouds. I think that if a bright floating angel was between the viewer and such an obscured sun, the apparition would be possible. Revelation 19:17 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God. Apparitions of God to men are traditionally humanoid angels. When something out of the ordinary appears, it is written about. The following account makes no mention of fire, cloud, winged four-faced creatures, or stopping to sleep. That leaves our inquiry with the suggestion of an encounter with a humanoid angel. In reading accounts where it is said that God or the Lord appeared to this or that person, we should consider the encounter to be with an angelic representative of God. I include this account of Isaac's encounter because it is an instance of communication in which we do not find the expression: 'thus saith the Lord'. The angel speaks directly to Isaac in an authoritative manner – he says 'I' this and 'I' that. Genesis 26:2,3&24 The Lord appeared unto him . . . “I will be with thee” . . . and the Lord appeared unto him the same night . . . Now, the last verse in the above reference might suggest to some that Isaac dreamed, but it seems that after the apparition, and before he erected a place to sleep, he labored to build an altar, and then called on the name of the Lord. More importantly, it occurred to me in the reading of this that the way in which an angel addresses a man may indicate the rank of the angel... Some angels say 'thus saith the Lord' while other angels say 'I' this and 'I' that. It may be that the 'I' angels are ranked higher than those who begin their dialogs with 'thus'. So, what makes an angel stand out? What was the common pedestal upon which men placed angels in the old days? We find in accolades to a king, possible attributes of the angelic nature. Read below. 2 Samuel 14:17 & 20 . . . as an angel of God . . . to discern good and bad; according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to know all things that are in the earth. Men thought of angels as wise beyond the common man. Sometimes, rare individuals displayed such wisdom. When they did, they were compared to angels. Two traits of wisdom are pointed out in 2 Samuel. They are the ability to tell the good from the bad, and a broad knowledge of worldly matters. Telling good from bad is a matter of understanding. Understanding is a mental attribute that is built upon the exercise of knowledge – in other words, knowledge put to use. To know all that is in the world indicates that one has information at one's disposal. Angels are out there doing all that angel stuff. Their constant practices make them better at being angels. They become more knowledgeable and use more understanding in their ongoing exercises. The difference between angelic ranks may be due in large part to the difference between levels of knowledge and understanding. These levels of knowledge and understanding are due to immersion and internalization. We ask, what do the highest ranks internalize? Do they internalize the very nature of God? Is the angel God? The following verse might suggest just that, but keep in mind that it may only be due to the ambiguity of the wording. Acts 27:23 For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve. Paul may only be saying that his allegiance is to God, but according to the word structure, it is just as likely that Paul is speaking about the angel. He may refer to the angel as the presence or apparition of God. Paul may consider there to be no difference between God and God's angel. Was this angel a 'thus' angel, or an 'I' angel? The internalization of God can certainly change things. In the next verse, we initially see the work of God, in that he defends the people of Jerusalem - but how does that play out exactly? What is notable in the verse may be immersion. We note that people are 'one-upped'. The internalization of God can turn a feeble man into a mighty warrior – just like David. Further, this verse provides an inkling of how God may have been commonly accepted. The thing to look at here is the amendment or the qualification that is made in regard to the house of David. It boils down to this: “as God, as the angel of the Lord”. Zechariah 12:8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them. Did they commonly consider an angel to be God? Did they consider the angel to be the body of God? It is clear that the associations in their minds were close. As an aside, I am curious about the augmented 'house of David'. In referring to the House of David, what exactly was conveyed? Did they mean for us to understand the house of David as one: the tribe of Judah, two: the city of Jerusalem, or three: the bloodline of David? There are many accounts of God defending his favorite people. Sometimes there was a physical manifestation, sometimes there was not. Whether there was a non-human angel, a humanoid angel, and regardless of confirmed visibility, we easily note the possessive case in the texts. Exodus 32:34 Behold, mine Angel shall go before thee . . . We may call such instances accounts of 'guardian angels'. Just like many modern accounts of such events, those written in the Bible often omit physical descriptions. In other words, the angel is invisible. Real things happen, but there is no mention of actually seeing the angel. Take note of the account in Daniel Daniel 6:22 My God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have not hurt me: forasmuch as before him innocency was found in me; and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt. We are left with uncertainties as to whether the account was of an angel or an elemental manipulation. Daniel was trapped in a pit; the entrance was covered with a stone. It is, therefore, likely that the interior was dark. The wording of the story suggests that the den was a hole and that the stone was laid on top. No account is given of a den apparition. Even though we are assured that an angel could have lighted the den up like a sunny day, there is no indication or hint of such. I wonder what the percentages would be – invisible guardian angels, as opposed to visible guardian angels. Some people will naturally ascribe the invisibility of a guardian angel to chance or serendipity. In other words, they believe that things just worked out that way. Some modern accounts of guardian angels are unconvincing. I have a personal account of a guardian angel, and I might as well include it here. In San Francisco, 1974, as I walked along a street, an event perplexed me. I was lifted above the sidewalk and turned completely around. I found myself looking in the direction from which I came, toward a billboard. I turned almost immediately back around to resume my walk; no more than five seconds were involved. As I walked, I thought through the event, wondering if I had merely stopped and turned around. That explanation did not explain the lifting up. I knew the sensation of levitation from my extreme youth. Baling out of swings was a thing I much enjoyed as a small child. The heady sensation of weightlessness that one attains at the apex of such an arc cannot be forgotten. I concluded that I had been physically lifted and turned – but, Why was I lifted and turned. As I stepped down into a small alley, a sports car entered the street traffic at a truly reckless speed. Had I been just a few seconds earlier, I would have been hit. If we choose the option that an angel is only a manifestation of God, not much more than a suit which God throws on before going out, does that not bring God into a more familiar relationship with man? In that regard, a guardian angel becomes a guardian God. We must ask, is there something to the accounts that swing between the identity of God and the identity of an angel? We complain about cameras at intersections, but check out the secret eye in the following verses. Ecclesiastes 5:5-6 Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay. Suffer not thy mouth to cause thy flesh to sin; neither say thou before the angel, that it was an error: wherefore should God be angry at thy voice, and destroy the work of thine hands? Above, we see some strange things. You say something to an angel, and God gets angry. Why? Is the angel a direct circuit to the ear of God? Of course, we are talking about an invisible angel, here, for what man faced with the presence of an angel will not guard his words? What! Now, they're spying on us? I can't get around the similarity to cameras at intersections. A letter just shows up one day, and it says that you have been recorded in the act of wrongdoing. They have the evidence, they have your license number. They have your address and phone number. Out of the blue, you owe them a couple hundred dollars. You can't really argue against video; you really don't remember the incident – but, Jeez! You didn't even get the consideration of a heated chase. It is twice mentioned above that the words a man speaks can have a physical outcome the man will not want. Words cause the flesh to sin, and words can bring all your plans and efforts to naught. My Dad used to have a saying – which I heard quite often – it was: Don't let your mouth overload your ass. Apt words. In the following verses, we turn our thoughts down two new avenues. The first avenue will be summed up in the difference between 'the' angel and 'an' angel. Down the second avenue, we will see that the angelic nature can also be the nature of God. Only three Biblical entities get the appellation of 'Holy'. We already knew that two of them were God, and, the Holy Ghost. I do not mention Jesus here because the reason he was called holy rested entirely in that God lived within. As to the third appellation, read below. Acts 10:3, 7, 22 He saw in a vision . . . an angel of God coming in to him . . . And when the angel which spake unto Cornelius was departed, he called two of his household servants, and a devout soldier of them that waited on him continually; And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee. The communication is still from God, known as Holy and Reverend, the medium is still an angel. How, then is the angel imbued with something that should not belong to a mere manifestation? If an angel is Holy, does that speak of rank? Is that angel the 'glass that became a glass of water'? I open this avenue to the thoughts of fellow seekers. As to the former avenue, why was this angel only 'an' angel? 'An' seems to convey mediocrity, as in 'any old run of the mill' angel. If this angel was Holy, why not call him 'the' angel? The following verse does describe its angel as 'the' angel. Isaiah 63:9 In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old. This take is more or less the physical manifestation of God's presence. The interpretation is that God was actually there. The verse refers to the old days when God led Moses by the right hand when God saved his people. The angel in those days, as we recall, was either fire or cloud; the angel was an elemental manipulation and was recognized as such generations later. Curiously, the wording of this verse in Isaiah suggests certain aspects of God, and his relationship to man, that need further attention. It is said that God was afflicted with the affliction of the people. In other words, he felt what they felt. When man suffered, God suffered. But, how? God is not only invisible, but he is also intangible. He has no flesh and bone; he has no nervous system. Two immediate solutions to that problem are evident to me. Not to say there are only two solutions, but, I present these for consideration. One is that God requires some sort of physical manifestation through which not only to communicate but to receive input. God feels what man feels through the angel of his presence. We, as Christians, are more familiar and at home with the concept of God's suffering son, but who are we to say that God did not suffer? Who are we to say that the first suffering was not a pattern for the second suffering? Innately, we do accept that history repeats. For those of us who accept that Christ is God, we see that God has suffered twice; Christ has suffered twice. We note, in the relationship between God and man, the second solution to the suffering of an intangible God. It is the spirit – that is to say, the mind. God is spirit and has placed within man that same quality. We ask, then, is it man that suffers, or spirit? All the angels that surround, support, present, and minister to God may be seen as surrounding, supporting, and ministering to the spirit in man. Angels may also be seen as presenting God to man – or, as I would like you to see it here, presenting spirit to spirit. The next verse may seem to suggest that angels are only manifestations, and I could have included this reference under 'non-human angelic forms'. I chose to place it here because it suggests human rather than non-human angels. To interpret the verse, one should refrain from viewing the angels as mere chariots. We have already touched on angels as vehicles of God. Here, however, one should rather view the angels as the chariot drivers. Such a view suggests an army. Indeed, God is said to be the Lord of hosts. This verse is actually support for the humanoid view of angels. If you can compare the charioteers to whatever you may know of worldly armies, you should have a clear picture of the hosts of heaven. In our armies, soldiers are not always geared up. They are not always marching, or shooting, or driving tanks. Sometimes they are just hanging out at camp. As an aside, I would like to briefly draw attention to the word 'host'. Traditionally, we view this to mean the angelic soldiers of God – his Minutemen. However, we also are aware that the same word refers to someone possessed. A host houses another identity within itself. In spiritual terms, man is no less a host than the hosts of heaven. I say this because we are possessed by God. There is within man a spiritual identity that is not the same as his physical identity. Psalms 68:17 The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place. Again, the next verse is of the fire and cloud angel manifestation. I include it here only to point out the dual nature of an angel of God. To the enemies of God, the angel was darkness, but to the children of Israel, it was light. Functionally, it stopped the advance of the Egyptians. Symbolically, it represents the glory of the Lord being deprived to the enemies of Israel. Even in our modern day, attitudes can be divided from one person to the next. Picture two men on the street in conversation. One is filled with the glory of the Lord, while the other is filled with darkness. This illustration is made in regard to a person's attitude. A person's attitude affects what he does, what he thinks, what he says to the other person, and what he hears the other person say – or, what he thinks he hears the other person say. As with the Egyptians, a person filled with darkness is unable to advance. See the darkened Egyptians stopped cold in their tracks. Exodus 14:19-20 And the angel of God, which went before the camp of Israel, removed and went behind them; and the pillar of the cloud went from before their face, and stood behind them: And it came between the camp of the Egyptians and the camp of Israel; and it was a cloud and darkness to them, but it gave light by night to these: so that the one came not near the other all the night. Two things: first is that we may view the darkness of certain people as a deliberate act of God. Here, I include modern people with darkened attitudes. There can be no real argument against this. Some will contend that it is God's fault for them being the way they are – as if they had been just standing there minding their own business. Not true. An enemy is pummeled for a reason. Second is by way of identification. Briefly, the type to which I refer is the type that wears his heart on his sleeve. According to his nature, he must immediately thrust his argument toward his fellow man. Being thus darkened, he assumes that the things said by those filled with light are as much a thrust toward him. In this regard, those who wear their hearts upon their sleeves are like checker players – they feel compelled to take their jump. As an example of this, I recently shared with my brother that I had begun studying and writing about angels. He immediately felt compelled to tell me he did not believe in angels. I did not argue the point with him, as I consider myself more of a chess player. I think both God and his angels are able and prepared to alter both thoughts and events. To some is dispensed light, to others darkness. Some minds are opened while others are closed, and by such, events are manipulated to the will of God. Note the following account. The angel went before the servant and caused certain events to unfold. Some may argue it was only an opinion associated with good fortune. My answer is that the angel of God's presence need not show himself to be effective. Genesis 24:7&40 The Lord God of heaven . . . which spake unto me . . . He shall send His angel before thee, and thou shalt take a wife unto my son from thence. The Lord, before whom I walk, will send his angel with thee . . . The use of 'his' before the word angel implies the genitive or possessive case. This always seems to imply ownership, and as such can ascribe a vehicular nature to the angel, but there is another way to view this, and that is in terms of allegiance. There can be an acute difference between a slave and a servant. 'His angel' may, equally, indicate either ownership or devotion to a cause. The Hebrew culture, through which so much was written of angels, had a growing experience with the heavenly hosts. From their earliest history, they received communications from God through angels. When someone wrote something new about angels, they not only recorded an encounter but drew from a deep well of collective experience. When someone had an opinion or wrote a commentary, it was filtered through many layers of a tightly woven tapestry. The following verses begin by indicating the long association with angels that fill the well of common experience. It was an experience that ran from the 'first' right up to their present time. The experience indicates that angels were messengers, that pronouncements of punishment were issued through their agency. These verses from the book of Hebrews speak of the nature of humanoid angels. We get that strong message through comparison. By their vast stores of shared experience, a comparison is made possible; it is made between humanoid angels and a humanoid son of God. Where the comparison connects the two is in the issue of physical death. Now, of course, we immediately realize that physical death and a physical body go hand in hand. One may not experience psychical death without flesh. Two things should pop out at you when you read the verses below: first is that Christ took on a physical body for the express purpose of suffering mortal death, and second is that in the accomplishment of being able to die, Jesus was only a 'little' lower than the angels. Brother angels have bodies that can react with physical human beings, but they do not suffer mortal death. Both angels and men possess humanoid bodies, but the nature of the angelic flesh is different. Different – yes – I've said it before. They can manipulate matter, why not their own bodies? Well, read – and judge for yourself. Hebrews 2:2, 3, 5, 9, 16 For if the word spoken by angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompence of reward; How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.