Peterkin

Lots of people, over a long period of time, have made lists. What's the point of reproducing some of those lists here?

To make them user-friendly, - and very expensive. If you look at most of those giant textbooks, you'll see wide right margins, as much as one third of the page, where they can put cartoons, fun facts, quotes, summaries or whatever. There are far more illustrations and diagrams than in the old books, lots of full-page, four-colour pictures, large font size with extra-large headers and titles,on fat, glossy, acid-free paper. These monsters could last 500 years without half trying - and will, in the landfills - because they go out of print in about five years, when a new edition is released and all the professors require that one. It was completely insane by about 2010. Fortunately (for students with early-onset spinal compression; unfortunately for booksellers) a lot of those college and highschool textbooks are now available in electronic editions, so they can carry the whole load in a pocket.

Not necessarily. Both Jesus and Mary got up there without any wings. Sometimes angels are depicted with wings, sometimes without: they're optional.

Thanks! I enjoyed that (and bookmarked the venue so that I can return for more videos.) Here is a book on the same topic: https://readersfavorite.com/book-review/bias-is-all-around-you

No, it doesn't. That's renaissance and Rococo art. Angels in Catholic churches and graveyards are mostly adult androgyns; some later ones, particularly of the guardian class look more distinctly female, while the juveniles merely cluster about the edges of clouds for decoration. Of course they're human-looking: that's what it says, over and over again, in both testaments of the bible. Are you sure? Leviticus says which is roughly he same as your Exodus quote: it says no idols for worship. Pictures are fine; idols are forbidden. If you couldn't make pictures of anything from heaven or earth or the ocean, you couldn't have any art. Several places. But most places angels are mentioned, wings are not. That doesn't mean they don't have any: feet and hands are not specifically mentioned, either, yet nobody who met one says an angel is a disembodied face with no limbs. They're simply not described in detail. It's the message they bring that's considered important, not the messengers' appearance. But sometimes, as in Sodom, they're deliberately passing for ordinary men. That wasn't the Catholic church, that was some artists, practicing artistic license. It came to be a comforting notion for people of the Middle Ages, when infant and child mortality was very high, that their children become angels in Heaven. Why would you begrudge those grieving parents? What's your problem with wings, anyway? Why should a heavenly messenger not have wings? And the critical difference would be.... ?

It's interesting literature, but not everyone's taste. Have you seen the series Good Omens? (BBC/amazon prime) It's nowhere close to as good as the book, and quite unnecessarily over the top in the graphic depiction of devils. Oh dear! I very much fear that's a trash heap out-take.

There are some more, but they're apocryphal; Enoch didn't make it into the bible. He also tells about the war in Heaven - so much material for European theologians, novelists, poets and painters. Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Uriel, Saraqael, Raguel, and Remiel are the good ones; Moloch, Chemosh, Dagon, Belial, Beelzebub and Satan himself are the fallen angels, who rebelled against God's law.

Not exactly. An angel introduces himself to Zacharias after telling him that his prayers are answered; he and Elisabeth are going to have a baby: John the Baptist. He doesn't say he's an archangel, but he's high ranking: and then tells Mary she's about to get pregnant by The Highest And the Mary goes to visit Elisabeth - a sort of prepartum play-date for their babies - and Elisabeth says The 'arch' may have been added by Paul 100 years later, then the early Catholic scholars elaborated out all the other ranks, possibly after their own hierarchical organization under the pope.

wrong wrong Understanding is not the problem here. In any case, you're way off topic.

I'm with mistermack : There can be all kinds of intrusive thoughts, like "She's lying. She doesn't really love me." and "Could I kill my father? Could I kill anybody?" It may be on any subject. All these thoughts have in common is that they tend to come out of the blue and be distressing and repetitive. The specific category "call of the void" is a very common one, particularly in the late teens, early 20's, that comes in a small array of notions regarding of self-cancellation. Images of jumping off a balcony or bridge, walking into the ocean or fire; perhaps just staring up at the night sky and feeling as if you might be sucked up into it. I think that what Nietzsche was referring to The lure of high places is probably the form that lasts longest; it stays with some people throughout their life. And, of course, suicides often choose the method that resembles their long-standing intrusive thought.

https://catholicexchange.com/what-are-the-nine-choirs-of-angels This is the only reference I know of to any member of the highest sphere performing an earth-related service for God: They don't normally get anywhere near the ground. Archangels are not mentioned in the biblical stories; the first references are in Paul's letters. Later they're reported to make some announcements and issue warnings, but the courier chores - frequent throughout both OT and NT - fall to mere low-ranking angels, just as you say. It was during the 4th century that the main body of Christian (now Catholic) canon was developed. Also: Christianity had moved to Rome, where its art and literature, going forward, would be heavily influenced by Roman aesthetics and expectations. That's very likely where the wings came from: depictions of Cupid, Mercury and the putti, the ubiquitous winged baby boys on valentine cards and overdecorated ceilings, who were later incorrectly dubbed "cherubs".

That's how it's usually stated. The correct term is "revive": Grass, like other perennial plants, goes dormant in unfavourable conditions; the top foliage dies off, but the roots are still alive, though inactive. When conditions improve, the roots revive and new foliage grows. In the case of grass, since the foliage is so simple and grows directly out of the roots, this new growth is - the transition from dead brown to vivid green - is startlingly rapid. Thus it is said to "green up"

Okay, wise guy! How does he steer?

Apparently not: What they can't have is 'graven images' - that is to say, objects of worship, or icons that are prayed-to. Illustrations are okay. Not for want of trying! But it it wouldn't be easy. https://www.pinterest.ca/pin/760052874590157281/?d=t&mt=login Only the pictures inside the churches - of which there are plenty. But long before, after and since, there have been pictures in art galleries, murals on outside walls, miniatures in pendants, mosaics in public baths, illustrations in books and on trading cards, sculptures in parks and graveyards and opera houses. Angels all over the place! It doesn't have to be an illusion: it's an idea that people have just always liked.

I think ol' Zeke was impressed!

Not necessary. The word already has a quite respectable definitions in dictionaries. https://www.lexico.com/definition/respect Why? How did that come into respect for ideas? I disagree on both counts. A great many examples of each are very prominent in public discourse, political decision-making and interpersonal relations. If you don't know that, bringing examples would be a waste of my time. Here's just one that meets at least three of the criteria for disrespect: The national institute of health is not staffed by Okay.

Might there not also be an element of envy? Who has not dreamed of flying? Why should earth-bound humans not desire wings in their own afterlife?

Of course, the vast majority of angels, cherubim, seraphim, and the dear little putti so beloved of the Renaissance, don't come from the Bible at all, but from Bible-based or simply fanciful literature and art. There are also a number of angelic forms in other mythologies; that is, winged and/or flaming supernatural entities that have been co-opted into the christian folklore. They're more a cultural - Eurocentric - icon than a strictly religious one. Eastern and American traditions have plenty of demon-like creatures, but the divine avatars appear to be unlike the angel of winged human aspect.

Yes, most of the references are like that, vague. In many, they are specifically man-like. AFAIR only Ezekiel gives a vivid description.

You may think we need to, but we don't, and can't. Respect is also an emotion. You cannot remove emotion from human responses: if you could, you'd be left with a robot response; nor can you remove thought from human feelings. Comprehend, consider, reflect, assess; decide. Some ideas have more intellectual merit than others and deserve to be treated as more worthy. Some ideas are implausible, impractical, hare-brained, unethical, or just plain silly: having considered and assessed such ideas, we are intellectually, as well as emotionally correct to give them no credence. In some cases, we are even justified in withdrawing respect from the person putting forth a very bad idea.

Yes, most of the time: they do a lot of walking and teleporting. I suspect the wings are mostly for lift during combat. They never have to make long, directed flights - but if they did, I imagine they'd steer with their fists, like Superman. Satan did, and he talked a whole army into rebelling with him. Does "history" have a meaning in heaven?

They were described in several places, but not completely. Of course, many of the ancient writings have been lost or destroyed. (The early Christians did not well tolerate the documents, icons or monuments of other cultures.) Four wings, two faces, the second being that of a lion; man-like but radiant, carrying flaming swords. Since there nine classes of angel divided into three choirs, there can also be as many different physical types to do different jobs. The most frequently seen were the ones delivering messages from God, or sent out to test people's faith, and they always appear in the guise of men. Presumably the ones that mated with native girls were also man-like. That would be no surprise: God seems to like creating minions in his own image.

They seem rather a fractious lot. First the rebellion and civil war, then half of them get cast into the Pit and the other half hang out on the freshly created earth, delivering messages or making trouble and marrying all the prettiest girls* and having giant babies. I don't know about the wings, but I wouldn't trust of these guys as far as I could throw him - which might be quite a distance, what with the wings 'an all. *

Excellent! You go and do that. How about we respect the person, even if we despise the idea?

Yes. I'm talking about history and you're talking about popular belief among one insular group. All religions - all philosophies, all human ideas - are inventions. They do not occur in nature, and they did not come fully formed into anybody's mind: they evolved with and were developed by people. That's why crows and dolphins don't have any.