dreamer_easy: (Genesis)
[personal profile] dreamer_easy
Continuing my earlier question about why God would send angels rather than putting in a personal appearance: in Exodus 30 God informs Moses that "Thou canst not see my face: for man shall not see me, and live." Putting aside that they are conversing "face to face" (the rest of the chapter makes it clear that Moses cannot literally see God's face), this confirms the face-melting suspicion, but doesn't answer why God sends a messenger rather than just turning up in a hat two sizes too large.

Date: 2005-09-27 08:17 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] megthelegend.livejournal.com
I think even God has to delegate sometimes.

Date: 2005-09-27 08:40 am (UTC)
ext_4110: mystical symbol thing (Default)
From: [identity profile] sheramil.livejournal.com
also known as "please ignore the Mespotamian thunder-god behind the curtain".

Date: 2005-09-27 08:57 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] southerndave.livejournal.com
Because if his face would have melted Moses, it would also have melted any hat he would have worn, however large?

Date: 2005-09-27 12:03 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pbristow.livejournal.com
Well, there's also the question of what the angels would do all day if he didn't send them to chat to us occasionally. We call them "messengers" (angels) because that's the capacity in which we usually encounter them, but that doesn't mean they don't have lives of their own. They're also portrayed as warriors (mostly against each other!) and as "agents" in a more general sense.

Most christian interpretations hold that they were actually created before us (kind of necessarily, if one considers the other Christian doctrine (I dunno if it's also a Jewish doctrine... could someone enlighten me on that?) that (a) the serpent in Genesis 2-3 is Satan; (b) Satan is a fallen angel (usually assumed to be the guy formerly know as Lucifer), and that the serpent has clearly been around long enough to know more about life than Adam and Eve did.

N.B. It's not actually necessary to believe in a literal Adam and Eve to grok the intent of the story, but it makes discussing it a lot simpler. =:o} The upshot is that the earliest humans to "qualify" as human (perhaps the first to have evolved or be specially given a "spiritual capacity"...?) encounter somebody who (a) could communicate with them, (b) knew more than they did, (c) had the capacity for deliberate deception, and used it. The latter two points suggest someone/thing that had been around longer than those first humans, or at least had reached maturity before they did.

So one might just as well ask, "why did bother to create humans when he already had angels who could swarm all over the planet, build unsafe nuclear power stations, devastate vast areas of the planet in their efforts to duff each other up and generally be a pain in the divine bum."

I think he just likes having company. It's worth putting up with a few billion rowdy neighbours just to be able to have the odd repentant and resurrected-as-flame-proof sinner around for pizza and a movie, and a fascinating discussion about how having previously been a sinner gives one a whole different perspective on what it means to be holy.

Date: 2005-09-27 12:28 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] alryssa.livejournal.com
But what about that whole, "Man was made in my image" deal? I just have this mental image of people looking at each other and screaming as their faces melt off simultaneously!

Date: 2005-09-27 02:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] peeeeeeet.livejournal.com
I don't suppose the answer "it's inconsistent because it's not true" would be very helpful, would it? ;-)

Date: 2005-09-27 07:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] capriuni.livejournal.com
I've read in several places (including Joseph Campbell's The Masks of God series) that the angels actually evolved from ancient Babylonian demi-gods, which the Jews encountered while they were in exile, and incorporated into their own faith.

So one reason why (perhaps) angels are so confusing is because they're something of a theological mismatch. Another question you could ask is: Why did the Jews decide to incorporate Babylonian demi-gods into their theology?

Date: 2005-09-28 12:11 pm (UTC)
sidravitale: the_dibbler's Labyrinth 'goblin in hat' LJ icon (Default)
From: [personal profile] sidravitale
(I deleted my prior comment since it was unhelpful at best. I offer this in its stead.)

I don't think there's an answer within theology per se. I think the answer is more in the social structures at the time supported by theology.

Man forms kingdom-type social structures.
Man is formed in God's image.
Therefore, Man's kingdom-type social structures are also in God's image.
Therefore, Heaven is a Kingdom.

If Heaven is a Kingdom,
God is the King.

Kings have flunkies, including heralds.
Therefore, because God is a King, God must also have flunkies, including heralds.

Basically, God would not deliver messages Himself because it's simply "not done", at that time in history, by a king directly.



Profile

dreamer_easy: (Default)
dreamer_easy

May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11 121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2025 02:39 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios