How are angels differentiated, since they don't occupy space?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe differerentiation in the spiritual realm is in likeness. Souls and angels and God

Edit to add: Sorry, BlackFriar posted a more comprehensive explanation.
 
Last edited:
“Light bearer” of “light bringer” actually.

Hence the “Morning Star” (the planet Venus which always heralds/brings dawn (the sun)) is an equivalent title/translation.

Understandably it was denied.
A friend of mine wanted Cain.
 
tweedlealice said:
They can take up space when they take on forms
Click to expand...
I dont think so TA.
Space, or better extension, is an accident of matter not spiritual substances (pure form).
We do not know how angels manifest to people. It is likely purely by affecting the imagination.
 
Ok soooo…

Do angels exist anywhere? When they are not assuming a physical form — when they are pure spirit — what does it mean for them to exist? I guess the same could be asked of human souls.

My hunch is to say that angels don’t exist “anywhere,” but that would sound like saying they don’t exist at all. Maybe it’s just because the world of my experience is attached to space and time…

But how is it that there can be individual, differentiated spirits without being somewhere? Is this just my imagination that’s getting everything wrong?
 
Last edited:
Your guardian angel is right there beside you right now.
Click to expand...
Beside me suggests my angel is physically located next to me. Is he 2 inches away? 2 feet away? He has no spatial dimensions of his own, so how would I know when I actual “reach” him, if I were to extend my arm out, for example?
 
How do you know when God hears you?
You pray, you speak to them.
I never think of my guardian angel as being so close that he would sit on my lap. LOL
(and before anyone jumps on me, yes, I know they have no gender but this is a conversation I am having, I will use a pronoun.)
It’s just a good relationship as I regard him as my protector and friend. A spiritual friend.
Angels do exist somewhere. Where that is, we cant p(name removed by moderator)oint. IT’s something I don’t need to know. I just know God has assigned one to me. That’s enough.

All the best.
 
Angels do exist somewhere. Where that is, we cant p(name removed by moderator)oint. IT’s something I don’t need to know. I just know God has assigned one to me. That’s enough.
Click to expand...
Right, and thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut, but my question from the very beginning was concerning where they exist. Maybe no one knows, but I would hope there is some answer that helps make believing in angels reasonable.
 
Angels are amongst the first born, spiritual yes but still defined within their own existence and able to manifest in physical form.

You are guilty perhaps of trying to transpose glimmers in scripture onto perceived reality.

For example; Gabriel conveying messages, surely cannot be so in some people’s minds without manifestation of his personal presence into a defined quantifiable ‘space’ of some kind.

Simply apply your God given common sense 🙂

To ‘exist’, is to be an entity unto yourself, spiritual or otherwise. It would be fallicy to limit their ability and scope, when they walk with God - whilst we no longer do. Fallen from that place long ago.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that your question is invalid. Asking, where are they, imposes on the the angels a physicality that they don’t have. “Where” cannot apply to a spiritual being in the sense being asked.
catholic1seeks said:
Right, and thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut, but my question from the very beginning was concerning where they exist. Maybe no one knows, but I would hope there is some answer that helps make believing in angels reasonable.
Click to expand...
 
It seems to me that your question is invalid. Asking, where are they, imposes on the the angels a physicality that they don’t have. “Where” cannot apply to a spiritual being in the sense being asked.
Click to expand...
I think I partly acknowledged that somewhere above. Maybe I didn’t. But I guess the issue is, what does it mean for something to exist – with an intellect and will – but not existing anywhere? It’s just really hard to imagine something existing without being somewhere. For some reason, it never seemed to be as much of a challenge thinking of God existing in this way: I know He is without dimension and does not exist in space and time. I guess there is just something about the finite and differentiated nature of individual angels that causes me more difficulty conceiving of their existence without actually ever being somewhere.
 
Last edited:
catholic1seeks said:
Maybe it’s just because the world of my experience is attached to space and time…
Click to expand...
Exactly so, strictly speaking a non material being does not occupy space and is not in any physical location.

We only speak in this manner by analogy. Its a causal presence not some sort of intangible physical presence. That would be a bit of a contradiction in terms.
The more ongoing or effective this causal connection the “closer” these beings are to us.

Is a message on the phone from mum a physical presence? Not really, but it is a causal presence.
 
Last edited:
Exactly so, strictly speaking a non material being does not occupy space and is not in any physical location.

We only speak in this manner by analogy. Its a causal presence not some sort of intangible physical presence. That would be a bit of a contradiction in terms.

Is a message on the phone from mum a physical presence? Not really, but it is a causal presence.
Click to expand...
True enough. So it must be a problem with the imagination. Thank you.

It’s probably a distortion of what I think it means to be a person. Angels are individual, personal creatures, in that they have their own minds. So it’s hard for me to think that they don’t exist somewhere.
 
catholic1seeks said:
But I guess the issue is, what does it mean for something to exist – with an intellect and will – but not existing anywhere?
Click to expand...
All existence is about presence. Whether physical or immaterial its about causality, having an effect. You dont need to be physically present to change the world, or a person…or to create it.

God is the First Cause for a reason, Maker of all that is seen and unseen.
 
Last edited:
We are differentiated on this forum by our manner of thought, we each have an evident personality. Yet we do not occupy space on the internet, far as I know.
 
Last edited:
All presence, whether physical or immaterial is about causality, having an effect. You dont need to be physically present to change the world, or a person…or to create it.

God is the First Cause for a reason, Maker of all that is seen or unseen.
Click to expand...
This makes a lot of sense to me, insofar how we speak of angel being “present” here or there. So then how can we perceive of an angel existing in its own nature? Perhaps if I can use my imagination to get across my question: I understand how an angel is present in the sense of a flashlight beaming its light, focusing on something. So an angel is present comparable to how a mind concentrates on something, without having to actually be there physically. But we still have to account for the presence of the flashlight itself. So from where does the angel’s concentration “beam” from?

Sorry if that makes little sense or if it gets the whole thing wrong. What I’m trying to say is that, I appreciate what it means for an angel to be here, and then there, by concentration or causality. But, in its own nature, how does an angel exist? Is it always someWHERE by always focusing on something different? Or is it everywhere in the same sense God is “everywhere?” Or should I just be content with an angel being “nowhere” in its true nature, and just accept my imagination will never fully understand what that means?
 
Last edited:
Where is gravity? Its causal effect is everywhere.
A poor analogy because gravity is still a property of matter even if it does cause effects invisibly at a distance.
But I think it makes the point.

You may as well ask where is the soul?
It is said to be “in” my body because that is the only place in the universe that responds to my will and causes an effect…like hitting my keyboard and talking to you with my mind.

But really my soul is everywhere and nowhere. It has no place because it is spirit. Only the matter it controls has a location.
That is the only reason we say it is in my body. In fact it isnt.
It could be in a hallcrux in a parallel universe for all that it matters. It is still causally connected with my body regardless.
 
Last edited:
Where is gravity?
Click to expand...
My knowledge of physics is also at a minimum, so I can’t flirt with this much. But I do understand your point, and it helps with the question.
 
This is a slightly different subject. But I think part of the questioning behind this whole thing is that I have a suspicion that our (Thomistic, more theological) understanding of angels is a rationalization of a more mythological religious element that carried over into the development of Christianity.

Let me be clear: As a Catholic, I believe in the existence of angels. I believe in Revelation and in scripture.

But how the modern Catholic describes an angel seems to be very different from the way the Old Testament (and their religious culture) depicted angels. It almost seems like a rationalization: like how we can reasonably believe in other spiritual beings. I’m having a hard time explaining myself here. I guess one way to say would be that I could expect a skeptic or atheist to object to the Catholic doctrine of angels by saying it is a residue of the unscientific past: That winged spiritual creatures of ancient Israel and early Christianity have little to do with the Thomistic, more intellectual understanding of the nature of an “angel”
 
Last edited:
You touch on a very deep hermeneutic issue and I basically agree with you.
It applies to modern Catholicism itself with its theories of sacraments and Pope and bishops etc etc which is far removed from a pious reading of SS.

As time goes by and the contradictions in the alleged simplicity of the old days and their reported events and teachings come to the fore…and other cultures with their different beliefs get assimilated into the same ongoing narrative…well the narrative gets more and more complicated doesnt it?

For everything to be held together in a harmonious way we have to abstract and rationalise down to common principles that do get somewhat philosophic and dry.

This is exactly what has happened in this discussion.

We start with our childish physical understandings of angels as being material even though spiritual, with wings to fly.

With adult minds we reason and see the contradictions in such impressions.

But then, provided we have a grasp of the philosophy needed to reconcile these contradictions, we can still go back to our physical images…because we know what is truly meant…it is analogy, metaphor, poetry, “myth” (in the best sense of that word), symbol.

Actually children know implicitly that wings does not mean angels must have physical feathers. They know it can be a symbol of the very opposite…freedom from location and physicality.

And if an angel were to reveal its existence to us in our imagination how else could it communicate its essential nature but by the means of symbolic use of the physical! As you so rightly note, even in our most astract ideas we always have an associated physical image in mind. It is impossible not to do so.
 
I have to go somewhere but would like to continue this conversation.

For now I would ask you: So do you think the ancients (the Israelites and first Christians) knew that angels were actually pure spirit, and so forth? Did they realize that depictions of angels were either for the imagination and did they think angels were assuming bodily form for our sake? Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top