My Angelic Challenge

Shemjaza said:

I think it was evil people and evil civilisation... the part human giants were just icing.

Given that later books imply that Anakim are connected to the Nephilim, maybe some or all of the survivors on the Ark are supposed to have giant blood. (Genesis isn't big on the ancestry of women, just Noah's male lineage to Seth rather than Cain.)

Click to expand...

Fair point. We don't know the lineage of Noah's sons' wives.

The IbanezerScrooge said:

That is talking about before the flood. Geneisis 7:23 clearly states that every living thing except Noah and those with him on the ark died.

Click to expand...

That's a matter of opinion, they may even contradict each other annoyingly.
What about if some nephilim had some extra abilities or just in case prepared a place, perhaps underwater where they could hide out for a year or so.
The door is kept ever so slightly open there for some to have survived unfortunately.

Or maybe, some recessive genes made it through in one or more of Noah's son's wives though i feel i'm drawing a long bow here.

AV1611VET said:

I think Shemjaza is an atheist who knows the Bible.

It's rare (to me, anyway) to see an atheist mention the Anakim.

Click to expand...

I think they are listed as a part of Goliath's ancestry, right?

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

Is Aquinas generally taken as an authoritative source on these kinds of things in Christian circles?

Just curious.

Click to expand...

He is for Catholics. He is sometimes called the Angelic Doctor for his substantial work on angels (I believe that's why). Of course, he didn't say anything about evolution (predates the theory). I can't think of any Protestants that have written much on angels. At any rate, he's the first one that comes to my mind when the subject of angels comes up.

Shemjaza said:

If it's more rational, you should be able to present the coherent steps of your rationale that led you to the conclusion that spiritual answers are more rational then material ones.

I suspect that you have a steady internal conviction... but little you can express as objective facts.

Click to expand...

Material acts are driven by thoughts, opinions, emotions, conscience, beliefs, etc. It all starts in the mind and heart, or, what is called "the spirit in man". The Holy Spirit adds the spirit of discernment, or judgment to the human spirit. The way of the world reveals that few have both spirits.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

It's Satanic to judge one's own behaviour? What about Matthew 7:3 ?

Click to expand...

Perhaps Jesus was saying that we should not judge others because we would also need to judge ourselves. Therefore we should NOT judge others OR judge ourselves.

cloudyday2 said:

Perhaps Jesus was saying that we should not judge others because we would also need to judge ourselves. Therefore we should NOT judge others OR judge ourselves.

Click to expand...

That doesn't really answer the question - Matthew 7:3 implies a responsibility or obligation of self-judgement - it looks like a contradiction.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

That doesn't really answer the question - Matthew 7:3 implies a responsibility or obligation of self-judgement - it looks like a contradiction.

Click to expand...

We've got to look at the entire paragraph Matthew 7:1-5
The first verse says "Do not judge, or you will be judged" ( Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 7 - New International Version )

Notice that it does NOT say "judge yourself as strictly as you judge others". No, it says "do not judge..."

Later it does say "first remove the plank out of your own eye...", but this might be only to highlight the futility of judging either yourself or others. It might be like saying "it is impossible to remove that plank from your own eye, so don't even try to judge yourself or others."

cloudyday2 said:

We've got to look at the entire paragraph Matthew 7:1-5
The first verse says "Do not judge, or you will be judged" ( Bible Gateway passage: Matthew 7 - New International Version )

Notice that it does NOT say "judge yourself as strictly as you judge others". No, it says "do not judge..."

Click to expand...

My view is that "Do not judge, or you will be judged" is an expression of reciprocity of the same kind as Matthew 7:12, i.e. a version of the Golden Rule. The "Do not judge" implicitly refers to others - it doesn't make sense for it to say, "Do not judge yourself or you will be judged"

Later it does say "first remove the plank out of your own eye...", but this might be only to highlight the futility of judging either yourself or others. It might be like saying "it is impossible to remove that plank from your own eye, so don't even try to judge yourself or others."

Click to expand...

That makes no sense to me - I was always taught that it was an admonition to get your own house in order before criticising others, i.e. don't be a hypocrite. It's the same admonition as John 8:7.

If you can't judge yourself, how can you know to repent or apologise or regret?

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

My view is that "Do not judge, or you will be judged" is an expression of reciprocity of the same kind as Matthew 7:12, i.e. a version of the Golden Rule. The "Do not judge" implicitly refers to others - it doesn't make sense for it to say, "Do not judge yourself or you will be judged"

Click to expand...

To judge anything is to falsely imagine that freewill exists and that the universe is not ultimately one thing. If I judge somebody else then I divide myself from that person. If I judge myself then I also divide myself from others.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

That makes no sense to me - I was always taught that it was an admonition to get your own house in order before criticising others, i.e. don't be a hypocrite. It's the same admonition as John 8:7.

Click to expand...

Notice how the story ends though. They don't go to the Temple to cleanse their sins through a sacrifice and continue with the stoning. They all go home.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:

If you can't judge yourself, how can you know to repent or apologise or regret?

Click to expand...

Regretting and repenting are two separate things. Regretting and shame come from being in a Satanic state of consciousness. Repenting is a result of learning that new behavior is preferable. We can change our behavior simply by learning without any need for judgment or regret or shame. Ideally we learn what God wants and do that. There is no good and evil but simply one thing that God wants and another thing that God doesn't want. If we can't change our behavior immediately then we simply keep trying without any regret or shame.

I'm just making this up as I go in an effort to satisfy the challenge in the OP. Essentially I am trying to eliminate the problem of the evolution of angels by making angels a state of human consciousness.

My understanding of the OP was that angels present a problem for Christians who believe in evolution, because angels are mostly if not entirely spiritual beings. Evolution only explains physical beings. If angels were created directly by God then why wouldn't that be true for humans and animals too? ... That is how I understood the challenge anyway. So my solution is to hypothesize that angels are merely a state of consciousness.

cloudyday2 said:

I'm just making this up as I go in an effort to satisfy the challenge in the OP.

Click to expand...

OK, never mind.

AV1611VET said:

If you don't believe in angels, explain why you're in the minority.

Click to expand...

...because I'm not afraid of being in a minority.

AV1611VET said:

If you believe in angels and evolution, explain how they came about.

Click to expand...

Not to argue for evolution, but we know from Scripture that God moved, in some cases, to create by a direct act and, on other occasions, by a gradual development.

AV1611VET said:

I believe the angels were created ex nihilo.

Click to expand...

By a direct act on the part of God.