any former mormons out there?

[Allweather]

The same thing here. I am not interested in who they are and what they believe in. The quote I had given from them was well reasoned, and appeared to be well researched, and that is all I care about. If you think that the information they had provided was not correct, it is up to you to prove otherwise. I had no reason to question the acuracy of it.

zerinus

Again, that’s kinda what I thought. You appear to be a man who seaches the internet for things that “appear” (your word) to support whatever harebrained idea you are promoting. I’m guessing that you are either in college, or are a college educated man. You should therefore know better. As for who is going to prove what, let me put it this way: Polygamy is immoral and illegal, and it has always been so under Christian auspices. In places where it existed, it was a pagan practice, and, as you correctly noted earlier, not widely practiced. It was associated with sin. Even in pagan Rome, it was admittedly illegal, according to the information you gathered from your Googling. This BTW is why the people in Ohio and Missouri had such a big problem with Joseph Smith and his sinful behaviors among Mormon women. The reason it took a half-century for Utah to obtain U.S. statehood was one main thing: polygamy. These are historical facts, easy to confirm, even from scholarly LDS sources, rather than nutcase religious websites. We can know them to be true, because when we look outside at our society, we see them to be so. Even the LDS church, which loves polygamy so, has had to bring itself into accord with law, and get itself a revelation from a so-called prophet. We don’t need five word quotes from ancient sources to know this. We see it all around us.

 

[Allweather]

I have some ideas about it. I read Scofield’s Bible a long time ago where it was first popularized (it is actually a very good Bible, and has very meaningful cross-references). But I am not terribly interested in it to be honest. Allweather’s aim in bringing all these things up is to cast aspersions and innuendos that we have borrowed our ideas from here and there, which is not worth a cent as far as I am concerned. Nobody believes that except him.

zerinus

LOL, well, without getting into a long-winded defense of my so-called “aspersions and innuendos” let me just assure our polygamy-minded Mormon friend that I am hardly alone in knowing what Mormonism has “borrowed” and from which sources it has borrowed it. Of course, the Protestants take no ownership of Mormonism, neither do Mormons take ownership of Protestanisms. Yet, the cross pollination is easy to see. Only people with religious bones to pick, or minds clouded by religious zeal, have any problem seeing this.

Still, this is another debate. Right now, we are onto the trail of polygamy, and we should stick right to it until we catch up to it and put it to death.

 

[Allweather]

This is nothing more than a cheap slur and worthless innuendo against the LDS Church. You seem to be out of your depth; you have lost the argument against LDS, and you are left with nothing more than to cast aspersions and launch cheap innuendos against the LDS Church. That is not the kind of discussion I am interested in.

zerinus

I won’t try to hold ya, Z, but I sure hope you’ll stay and help us to understand yours and Mormonism’s love for polygamy. I admit that I know very little about the nuts and bolts of Mormon polygamist theology, and I’d really like to know more. I won’t deny that I hold polygamists in contempt. I think that the Mormon Warren Jeffs is pretty much where he belongs: behind bars. I’m not one of these touchy-feely guys who thinks we should just leave polygamists and pedophiles alone to do what feels good to them. Still, I’ll try to understand. Please stick around and continue to defend your polygamist faith. I’m sure that there are many lurkers watching, who also are getting a good education about Mormons and Mormonism.

 

[Allweather]

I don’t know what the Protestants believe about dispensations (or Catholics for that matter), and I don’t care.

zerinus

You might look into it a little. There appear to be quite a few things you don’t know.

Of course, there are quite a few things I don’t know as well. But one thing I do know is that the group of heresies embodied in Protestantism are the moving force behind all the cults, and not just Mormonism.

You have this idealized model of the little boy Joseph Smith being one so holy, so pure. The truth about Joseph Smith is far more ominous, and involves greed, arrogance, amibition, and sexual predation, yea, even perversion. So, yes, you might look into this a little.

 

[zerinus]

I won’t try to hold ya, Z, but I sure hope you’ll stay and help us to understand yours and Mormonism’s love for polygamy. I admit that I know very little about the nuts and bolts of Mormon polygamist theology, and I’d really like to know more. I won’t deny that I hold polygamists in contempt. I think that the Mormon Warren Jeffs is pretty much where he belongs: behind bars. I’m not one of these touchy-feely guys who thinks we should just leave polygamists and pedophiles alone to do what feels good to them. Still, I’ll try to understand. Please stick around and continue to defend your polygamist faith. I’m sure that there are many lurkers watching, who also are getting a good education about Mormons and Mormonism.

AS you know, LDS believe that the early Christian church apostatized, and modern Christendom, which includes Catholicism, is nothing more than a remnant of a dead and apostate religion, which has absolutely no divine authority and legitimacy before God, and is doomed to eventual dissolution and disbandment as the true Church that God has established in the last days (as prophesied in scripture) will continue to progress and increase until the purposes of God are fulfilled. You as a representative of a dead and apostate religion play your part well to hate and wage war against the true Church of God, but you will fail.

Much has been said about the prophecies of Joseph Smith not coming to pass. Allow me to quote you a prophecy from him that has come to pass, and will continue to come to pass until it is completely fulfilled:

No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing. Persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame; but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done. (History of the Church, 4:540.)

I am not interested in your slurs and innuendos against the LDS Church.

zerinus

 

[rmcmullan]

I’m curious. And this really is a serious question. Seems to me I remember reading earlier that only those Mormons in polygamous marriages could ascend to the highest level of the Celestial heaven.
Nan

No, he just has to be married:

D&C 131:1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees;
2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.
4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase.

Some of the creepy polygamous cults you might have seen on tv might have said that but no, it’s not correct.

Nan, also on your other posts you say that Catholics do not believe that you can become an angel? Can you give me some references? How aboout the Mount of the Transfiguration where Elijah & Moses appeared?

 

[Allweather]

AS you know, LDS believe that the early Christian church apostatized, and modern Christendom, which includes Catholicism, is nothing more than a remnant of a dead and apostate religion, which has absolutely no divine authority and legitimacy before God, and is doomed to eventual dissolution and disbandment as the true Church that God has established in the last days (as prophesied in scripture) will continue to progress and increase until the purposes of God are fulfilled. You as a representative of a dead and apostate religion play your part well to hate and wage war against the true Church of God, but you will fail.
zerinus

Are you done with polygamy now? I hope to explore this more with you, especially as the Joseph Smith revelation(s) regarding the institution, or restoration, of polygamy relate to the Catholic teaching that public revelation is closed with the coming of Jesus Christ.

Yes, I am somewhat aware of the Mormon ideas about the so-called universal apostasy. This is another thing that is easily disproven from the witness of history and common sense. Earlier I mentioned that polygamy was the main thing that convinced my Mormon fiance as to the falsity of Joseph Smith and the religion, Mormonism. Another thing, almost equally important, was my abilty, by constant pointing out the illogical nature of the apostasy claims, to show her that the universal apostasy is a lie, and that those who make the allegation, knowing the truth, are liars. You see, it really isn’t very hard to shoot down these Mormon innovations. Mormonism isn’t the only cult religion to claim a universal apostasy. Mormons swim in the same slimy pond with Adventists, JWs, many Protestants, and a host of other false, failed religions and so-called prophets.

And, if you are under the impression that Mormonism is actually growing, perhaps you’d better change brands or flavors of Koolaide. It is shrinking, not growing. Even compared to the other cults, Mormonism is dying. You’re on a sinking ship, brother. Don’t be the last one to abandon, and for SURE don’t go down with it.

 

[Allweather]

Much has been said about the prophecies of Joseph Smith not coming to pass. Allow me to quote you a prophecy from him that has come to pass, and will continue to come to pass until it is completely fulfilled:

No unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing. Persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame; but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished, and the Great Jehovah shall say the work is done. (History of the Church, 4:540.)

I am not interested in your slurs and innuendos against the LDS Church.

zerinus

Well, now. This is a “prophesy” that even I could issue, and I’m not even a prophet. If this is your idea of a prophesy, then I truly do feel sorry for you, brother.

No, rather, the ones I’m talking about are the ones with dates, times, places, events specific. These are the ones to be proven, or in the cases I’m talking about, shown by proof to be false. I understand your reluctance to engage conversation on this point, but as soon as you’re strong enough to face facts, let me know, and I’ll help you to understand. Meantime, I’d rather stay on the topic of Mormon polygamy.

I hope there are investigatores online and checking this thread out. Many souls are, I hope and pray, being saved.

 

[christianley]

And, if you are under the impression that Mormonism is actually growing, perhaps you’d better change brands or flavors of Koolaide. It is shrinking, not growing. Even compared to the other cults, Mormonism is dying. You’re on a sinking ship, brother. Don’t be the last one to abandon, and for SURE don’t go down with it.

This is true. The Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses are growing much faster all over the world as are the Pentecostals. During the pontificate of Pope John Paul II I understand the Catholic Church added over 400 million more members. During the same time the LDS Church claimed to have added about nine million. The unfortunate reality for the LDS Church is that many of these nine million no longer consider themselves Mormon even if the LDS Church still counts them. Self-identification surveys in various Latin American countries consistently show the LDS self-identification rate at about 25 percent of what the LDS Church claims, while the self-identification for other groups is about the same as the claims made by the various religions. In fact the self-identification for JWs in some of these countries was way above what the JWs were claiming.

This is an example from Chile:

rickross.com/reference/mormon/mormon319.html

Note at the bottom of the article the LDS Church claims 535,000 members. In the 2002 Chilean census only 120,000 people identified themselves as LDS and only 57,000 people attend sacrament meeting nationwide. The real numbers don’t show the increase the LDS Church claims.

 

[geraldffff]

I have some ideas about it. I read Scofield’s Bible a long time ago where it was first popularized (it is actually a very good Bible, and has very meaningful cross-references). But I am not terribly interested in it to be honest. Allweather’s aim in bringing all these things up is to cast aspersions and innuendos that we have borrowed our ideas from here and there, which is not worth a cent as far as I am concerned. Nobody believes that except him.

zerinus

Z you are mistaken, again, I believe the same as allweather. Im sure if you were interested you could find volumes of honest historical information that would prove Mormons “borrowed” all their odd ideas from other religions. I did read one of the sites you posted. It appears the Mormons teach that females are nothing more than pawn or objects which are used to slake the lust of men. Are you a female hatter? This is a quote from your site.
God sent the prophet Nathan to David to confront him about his sins of adultery and murder. In
2 Samuel 12:8 the Lord told David “I gave to you the house of your master, and the wives of
your master into your bosom. And I gave to you the house of Israel and Judah. And if it is a
little thing to you I would have added to you unto these things". God stated that He was the
one who had given David the wives of his master to be his own. God further added that if these wives
were not enough, He (God) would have added more. These words clearly indicate that God was the
supplier of all the wives in David’s polygamous household, and further, God was willing to give him
even more wives if those were insufficient. **God had no problem in satisfying all David’s sexual needs **
with as many wives as he wished and promised him as many wives as he required, leaving David with
no excuse for committing adultery. So by Z’s logic it is ok to have our mothers, grandmothers, aunts, sisters and daughters used as objects, just, sex objects for a mans sexual gratification. This fits in with the modern day secularists world view. By extension men are to be treated as being nothing more than an erect xxxxx. Matthew 19:8
He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.houseofdavidministries.com/Biblical_marriage.html

 

[Allweather]

Oh my goodness! We have now become Protestant have we? The chameleon has changed his colours! Since when did you start appealing to the Protestantism to support your false theology? Well, Protestantism is a remnant of an apostate religion, just like Catholicism is; so I guess you are birds of a feather. It is only natural that you should in the end make common cause to fight against the Restored gospel of Jesus Christ.zerinus

In a way, you’re correct in what you say here. I am hardly a Protestant, but when it comes to Mormonism and the other various sinful, apostate, unholy cults, we Catholics do have common cause with our separated brethren. There are many various areas of common cause between Protestants and Catholics because, you see, we are all Christians, while you Mormons and JWs and Christain Scientists, etc, are not. That is why I frequently mention those areas in which you Mormons, though derived and enabled by the heresies that characterize Protestantism, are opposed not only to Catholics, but also to Christianity at large. I don’t want to leave the impression that this is a Catholic vs Mormon thing. No. It is a Mormon vs all of Christianity thing.

 

[majick275]

No, he just has to be married:

Some of the creepy polygamous cults you might have seen on tv might have said that but no, it’s not correct.

Nan, also on your other posts you say that Catholics do not believe that you can become an angel? Can you give me some references? How aboout the Mount of the Transfiguration where Elijah & Moses appeared?

I wanted to jump in here. on the polygamy being a requirement for exaltation, that comes primarily from the teachings of Brigham Young. some mormons claim that it was true THEN because God was commanding it then and not being a polygamist AT THAT TIME would be disobeying God.

A thorough study of Mormon prophets teachings on polygamy would seem to disagree with that. They (LDS Prophets who taught polygamy) all seem to agree that in the Celestial Kingdom there are three degrees of Celestial glory resulting in three classes of “exalted” beings. They are unclear on the exact distinctions of all three but they do explicitly agree that those who are not “sealed” to a spouse are only “ministering angels” who serve the higher folks in that kingdom. The highest degree is going to be ALL polygamous families. Those who were not allowed to practice it on earth will be “given” wives from amongst the worthy women who were unable to be sealed to a worthy spouse on earth. Thus it IS true that in Mormon teaching ONLY polygamists will become Gods. It is also true though that they need not practice polygamy on earth unless approved by the “proper” priesthood authority. Mormon scripture is also explicit that only the prophet holds the keys to do that. (technically he delegates this to all of the temple sealers but with the restriction that they not solemnize polygamous unions at this time)

on angels, People who have died on earth still live on in spirit and some are in purgatory while others are with God. They can be “assigned” duties as God wills. (think saints) thus we can have Elijah and Moses appearing in that situation and we can have saints appearing and performing miracles as God wills. ANGELS though are a different order of being than men. God created angels but they are not the same as men. This is not new to Christianity but was commonly taught in judaism from the beginning. (ginzbergs “legends of the bible” is a good treatment of some of those traditions)

This is very different from the LDS view that all angels are people who are either waiting to be born (peter, james and john) or have been resurrected (moroni, gabriel/noah, adam/michael) OR satanic attempting to appear as angels (Lucifer)

 

[JonathanKinsman]

AS you know, LDS believe that the early Christian church apostatized, and modern Christendom, which includes Catholicism, is nothing more than a remnant of a dead and apostate religion, which has absolutely no divine authority and legitimacy before God, and is doomed to eventual dissolution and disbandment as the true Church that God has established in the last days (as prophesied in scripture) will continue to progress and increase until the purposes of God are fulfilled

. You as a representative of a dead and apostate religion play your part well to hate and wage war against the true Church of God, but you will fail.

The highlighted section gives the real reason Zerinus haunts these threads: to preach the Gospel of Moroni, the Acts of the Avenging Angels, Letters to the Nehis and Laminates [sic], the Churl of Great Pride (Brigham and his Harem).

We might be hoping against hope, but there is never a dialogue with Zerinus: he cherry picks those queries which (to his way of thinking) seem the easiest to answer. And the answer is (drumroll) “innuendos against LDS.”

Prayer is the only way we can reach this poor, deluded soul.

I am not interested in your slurs and innuendos against the LDS Church.

Zerinus: as an act of Christian charity I took the liberty to include your standard non-response. Oh, you’re welcome!

 

[rmcmullan]

A thorough study of Mormon prophets teachings on polygamy would seem to disagree with that.

Interesting but I’m just going by the scripture. Majick275, I know you like all the old journals and whatnot but I can’t accept them as doctrine. It does seem to be what the creepy cults believe though.

I am interested on the angels/saints teaching though, that’s pretty interesting. Again, you quote some non-Biblical source but I guess in this case it’s okay since the Bible doesn’t really say much about the matter. SO the angels don’t belong to this world? I presume God created them. Oh, the mind reels! And Catholics would say it’s Saint Moroni atop the temple, not the Angel?

 

[truthsilence]

This post is nothing more than a subtle form of Mormon bashing, and it is not worthy of my reply.

zerinus

…well at least it’s “subtle”. Gee, Z, have ya read through your posts? You really should. Some of them sound like the anti-christ himself wrote them!

 

[truthsilence]

A thorough study of Mormon prophets teachings on polygamy would seem to disagree with that. They (LDS Prophets who taught polygamy) all seem to agree that in the Celestial Kingdom there are three degrees of Celestial glory resulting in three classes of “exalted” beings. They are unclear on the exact distinctions of all three but they do explicitly agree that those who are not “sealed” to a spouse are only “ministering angels” who serve the higher folks in that kingdom. The highest degree is going to be ALL polygamous families. Those who were not allowed to practice it on earth will be “given” wives from amongst the worthy women who were unable to be sealed to a worthy spouse on earth. Thus it IS true that in Mormon teaching ONLY polygamists will become Gods. It is also true though that they need not practice polygamy on earth unless approved by the “proper” priesthood authority. Mormon scripture is also explicit that only the prophet holds the keys to do that. (technically he delegates this to all of the temple sealers but with the restriction that they not solemnize polygamous unions at this time)

Majick, I personally was told by a Stake President that I would be given a worthy husband in the celestial kingdom, if my husband never accepted the LDS church. The thought made my skin crawl.

 

[tundramom]

SO the angels don’t belong to this world? I presume God created them. Oh, the mind reels! And Catholics would say it’s Saint Moroni atop the temple, not the Angel?

Hi rmcmullan,
No Catholics would not say that it’s “Saint Moroni” atop your temples. Nor would we call him an “Angel”, since people and angels are two different species, if you will. Angels were created by God to be His messengers. People were created by God to love and worship Him. You know, come to think of it, I guess that since to us Moroni didn’t even exist, except in the imagination of JS, we’d probably say it’s some gold statue.

in Christ
Steph

 

[Allweather]

I’m more and more tending to think that Zerinus is a missionary who has been assigned to inhabit the internet and perform his work in and amongst Christians. It seems to me that this would be an ideal place for missionary activity, given the large number of people, many of whom are searching for a religion, who spend time on various boards. Today at work I was imagining him in a room full of missionaries in front of computers, each in a cubicle, with one or two or three overseers walking around, supervising, offering help with arguments and sources. I picture him being in his twenties, maybe in college or just out of college. Considering his spelling and writing skills, he might want to get a refund from that college. I think that this sort of missionary setup probably helps to explain why he is so persistent, and has appeared here under at least two usernames. It doesn’t seem likely that he is a potential Catholic, though I continue to hope that he is. No, I think that this is a mission for him, and I suspect that rmcmullen is his good-cop partner. The two of them probably sit side-by-side in the cubicles.

The other possible explaination for his persistence is that he is actually investigating the Catholic faith for himself, and is simply working through all the arguments, thrashing them out, perhaps hoping to be persuaded to remain Mormon. Either possibility has merit.

Another thing that I’ve noticed is that he has a fairly obvious British Commonwealth “sound” to him. He sometimes spells color “colour” and employs various phrases that are not American. I also notice that the times of his postings are in the overnight hours, which suggests that he is in a distant land, perhaps in Europe, but not likely in Canada or South America.

In any case, I’m glad he’s here. If not for Zerinus, we’d have no worthy Mormon upon whom to practice our witnessing skills. I have learned a LOT from him, and you can bet yer bottom dollar that everything I’ve learned will be used to good effect in the months and years ahead as I engage Mormons in evangelizing debate. We’ve got quite a few Mormons out here in the western U.S. I hope to see many of them come home to the Truth. Thanks, Z!

 

[majick275]

Interesting but I’m just going by the scripture. Majick275, I know you like all the old journals and whatnot but I can’t accept them as doctrine. It does seem to be what the creepy cults believe though.

I am interested on the angels/saints teaching though, that’s pretty interesting. Again, you quote some non-Biblical source but I guess in this case it’s okay since the Bible doesn’t really say much about the matter. SO the angels don’t belong to this world? I presume God created them. Oh, the mind reels! And Catholics would say it’s Saint Moroni atop the temple, not the Angel?

I’m not so willing to discard the “journals and whatnot” since they are still referenced in current teaching manuals. The teachings of the prophet Joseph smith, Modern day prophets speak, Answers to gospel questions, doctrines of salvation and Documentary history of the church are all books that could easily be considered “mainstream” LDS. I look to them as providing support for these teachings staying consistent in development over time.

I think that discarding the talks that LDS prophets give in general conference is to discredit those men as prophets. (I’m okay with that if you are ) D&C 132 sure looks like scriptural support as does the OD (manifesto) The Temple teaching reinforces this (albeit subtly) The “creepy cults” tend to highlight the worst case scenarios of this principle. They disregard the manifesto claim (possibly supported by BoM) that God commands when to do it. (tends to contradict OT support provided by LDS prophets) and they certainly violate the manifesto provision of the prophet being the only one who can authorize. (somewhat “diluted” by actual practice during early LDS church years) Joseph Smith was actually every bit as creepy as the worst of them in his practice of polygamy. Read In sacred loneliness by todd compton for a “pro-LDS” (although still seemingly accurate) view on this. The teaching on future polygamy, while not shouted around a whole lot these days has certainly NEVER been refuted nor even downplayed by any LDS prophet. They just don’t discuss it much these days… YOU can find plenty of current LDS articles in the Ensign and other sources that promote the idea that worthy single women who just can’t seem to find a man to take them to the Temple need not worry, they will be given a mate in the Celestial kingdom. now where are those men gonna come from? I also want to look a the role of women in the temple ceremony but I’ll refrain for now lest I digress too much form the subject at hand.

For Biblical support of angels as a separate species you need only look to the translation and words used. What are cherubim? what does the word angel mean? that’s why I mention a book on jewish ancient traditions. It’s important to know what the folks who wrote those words meant by them. when the bible says angel I think it means an angel. NOT a human in a pre-born or resurrected state. of course in the Catholic church we have the magisterium which gives a well defined catechism so we know these things.

 

[zerinus]

I am interested on the angels/saints teaching though, that’s pretty interesting. Again, you quote some non-Biblical source but I guess in this case it’s okay since the Bible doesn’t really say much about the matter. SO the angels don’t belong to this world? I presume God created them. Oh, the mind reels! And Catholics would say it’s Saint Moroni atop the temple, not the Angel?

Actually, the Bible says quite a lot about it. Etymologically, the English word “angel” is derived from Greek, where it means literally “messenger”. The Hebrew equivalent of it also means exactly the same thing—a “messenger”. Hence Satan also has his own “angels” (Matt 25:41), who are nothing more than the evil spirits that followed him in the pre-existence when he rebelled against God, and now act as his agents or messengers. Thus anyone who can act as God’s agent or messenger can be called God’s “angel,” including mortal men living here on earth. That is why in the Revelation of John the Lord refers to the overseers of the churches established on earth as angels (Rev 3:1, 7, 14). Needless to say, if those people could act as God’s agents or His “angels” while they lived as mortals here on earth, it stands to reason that after they had died and become resurrected, where their spiritual powers are enhanced, they can act even more fully in the capacity of God’s ministering agents, or His “angels”. Indeed, the angel that appeared to John, and showed him the great vision that is known as the Revelation, identified himself as “thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book” (Rev 22:9). In fact, whenever angels have appeared to and ministered to mankind, they have appeared as “men” (see Genesis 18:1-2, 8; Luke 24:4-5; Acts 1:10-11). They have never been anything other than men. Matthew tells us that after the resurrection of Christ, “the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many” (Matt 27:52-53). How did they “appear unto many,” unless as “resurrected” (hence supernatural) beings who were acting as God’s agents—i.e. His “angels”? Paul goes even further, and tells us that in judgement day members of the church will “judge angels” (1 Cor 3:3). How could they “judge angels,” unless those “angels” had been men accountable for their actions in this life for which they could be judged? The Lord told His Twelve Apostles that in the resurrection they should sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Daniel informs us that in the resurrection “judgment was given to the saints of the most High” (Daniel 7:22); John the revelator tells us the same thing is Rev 20:4: “And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them”. These are of course the saints of God who are “co-judges” with Jesus and His Apostles of the rest of mankind; and those “angels” whom they shall judge are none other than men. All have to be judged, the wicked as well as the righteous. The righteous are those who are the “angels,” while the wicked are those to whom the Lord shall say, “Depart from me . . . into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt 25:41). These of course will become the devils angels, just like those who had joined him in the pre-existence. Thus angels are indeed men, either in this life or in the next, who are capable of acting as God’s messengers or agents.

zerinus