Cherubim

[Matthias123]

Do those that support theistic evolution have a problem with Angles of the choir of Cherubim being depicted as having " four faces: one of a man, ox, lion, and eagle. "? This is something that seems to be in conflict.

This belief apparently came from Summa Theologica. Which by the way, for those who do not know, is not infallible.

Obviously truth can never contradict truth. Therefore if evolution is proven to be correct it would become apparent that this is a symbolic representation rather then a literal one.

References for this belief include the Revelation to John. I have been told that reading that book in the most literal sense will actually look demonic.

Any thoughts?

 

[Matariel]

Do those that support theistic evolution have a problem with Angles of the choir of Cherubim being depicted as having " four faces: one of a man, ox, lion, and eagle. "? This is something that seems to be in conflict.

This belief apparently came from Summa Theologica. Which by the way, for those who do not know, is not infallible.

No, Cherubim are described this way in Ezekiel 1 and 10, and the Scriptures are infallible.

Obviously truth can never contradict truth. Therefore if evolution is proven to be correct it would become apparent that this is a symbolic representation rather then a literal one.

??? This does not follow. God may have based these creatures faces off of the cherubim.

References for this belief include the Revelation to John. I have been told that reading that book in the most literal sense will actually look demonic.

Um… demonic? The holy Cherubim are not demonic.

 

[Matthias123]

No, Cherubim are described this way in Ezekiel 1 and 10, and the Scriptures are infallible.

??? This does not follow. God may have based these creatures faces off of the cherubim.

Um… demonic? The holy Cherubim are not demonic.

No, Cherubim are described this way in Ezekiel 1 and 10, and the Scriptures are infallible.

I know that. However are these passages using symbolism, or is it meant to be taken literally?

This does not follow. God may have based these creatures faces off of the cherubim.

My logic was flawed. Thank you for the correction.

Um… demonic? The holy Cherubim are not demonic.

I never said they were. I was referring to reading the book the Revelation to John in the most literal sense. Jesus is compared to a lamb with multiple eyes. Taken in its most literal sense it seems almost a demonic image. (I probably should have worded my post better.) However the eyes represent the churches of Asia Minor. What I am trying to ask is, could some type of symbolism be taking place or is there no room for interpretation?

 

[Matariel]

I know that. However are these passages using symbolism, or is it meant to be taken literally?

They are spirits, but I guess when they “materialize” (don’t quite know how to put it) they manifest in this form. Some of the great Saints, such as St. Francis of Assisi, have seen the Cherubim (although he saw one bearing the holy Stigmata) and they seem to be able to manifest in slightly different forms (i.e., in Ezekiel 1 there are eyes only on the Ophanim, but in 10 there are eyes covering the Cherubim as well. In Reveleation we see a cherub manifested in a separated form, with the faces having each there own body. God always designs things for a reason, though; most of the saints and Fathers interpreted the Cherubim’s quadrupal faces as being representative of the Gospels and their writers.

My logic was flawed. Thank you for the correction.

You’re welcome.

I never said they were. I was referring to reading the book the Revelation to John in the most literal sense. Jesus is compared to a lamb with multiple eyes. Taken in its most literal sense it seems almost a demonic image.

Hm. Not necessarily “demonic” though, I would just say terrifying. Certainly this is what John saw, and I’m sure it does have symbolic meaning. The eyes are probably also a reference to Christ’s omniscience.

(I probably should have worded my post better.) However the eyes represent the churches of Asia Minor. What I am trying to ask is, could some type of symbolism be taking place or is there no room for interpretation?

Yes, I think there is room for much symbolism; but these angels and heavenly beings are, however, real. And when they “materialize” (perhaps “become visual” is better) they do appear in these forms, no doubt.

Symbolic interpretation and literality can sometimes be equally applied to some places in the Bible.

 

[Malperdy]

I’m not sure what ‘theistic evolution’ is, but maybe you mean that Cherubim ought to have existed before any man, ox, lion, or eagle. So, why do they have human and animal faces?

The Cherubim, being one of the orders of Angels, that is, pure spirits, would not have ‘faces’ at all. Faces being part of the physical bodies of animals and humans.

When St John and others experience their visions, and try to tell others about them, they would be really struggling to convey what may be truly indescribable. What is experienced in God-given vision may still not be fully apprehended by the human brain.

Alternatively, these visionaries may have been granted a manifestation of these pure spirits in material form, and if so God could have commanded any appearance, no matter how bizarre or shocking, including quadrupal faces.

Elsewhere, St John says that some other things he was shown were beyond his power of words to describe.

 

[Matthias123]

Perfect answers. Thank you so much, I appreciate it.

Pax Christi

 

[narrowpath]

I believe in thiestic evolution (though I prefer Francis Collin’s phrase ‘biologos’), and I see no problem. Angles are spirit, they don’t have material bodies. I think they can ‘materialize’, or incarnate as they did at the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah any way God allows them.

 

[Dan86]

The Cherubim may not have a set appearance. It’s possible that they look different to different observers. It depends on who, or what, is looking at them.