Why didn't God become an Angel?

  • Thread starter Thread starter N0X3x
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

N0X3x

Guest
God incarnated himself as a man, not only to redeem us, but also to elevate and bless humanity.

Or so I’ve heard.

If this is the case, why didn’t God become an Angel, to elevate and bless the angelic nature as well?

One possible response: It may be possible, and indeed the case, that the Son is both man and God, but for the Son to be man, God, and angelic is an impossibility. Mankind and angelic natures are not compatible in the way that divinity is with its rational creations.

To which I answer: the person of the trinity that posesses a hypostatic union with angels need not be the same person that posesses a hypostatic union with humanity. While the Son is both man and God, why isn’t the holy spirit both God and Angel?

Perhaps it is possible that he is?
 
The Angels are already the highest beings.

Also, while one becomes human by taking on a human body, God is Spirit, and angels are pure spirit. There is nothing to “take on.”

ICXC NIKA
 
Maybe God is a very high-ranking angel. Or maybe God needed rogue angels for certain purposes. Or maybe angels aren’t in reality intrinsically evil or good. Maybe they shift their way of behaving based on circumstances. Or or or…

I guess we have no idea. Some might argue saying that angels have a superior intellect (or are? interesting creatures) and such can’t be saved because once they’ve made a choice they can’t change their minds. Therefore they forever and ever hate and despise God for no reason (or maybe not…conspiracy theories incoming). I honestly don’t buy that. The topic of angels is not developed and the Church refuses to analyze them. And that’s extremely bad as they’re very interesting and worthy of understanding.

More and more questions arise and more of them are left unanswered. And God is yet to be discovered.
 
The topic of angels is not developed and the Church refuses to analyze them. And that’s extremely bad as they’re very interesting and worthy of understanding.
The Church doesn’t refuse to analyze them. Angelology is a serious discipline in Catholic theology and that theology has undergone development. If you are interested in the field, start making scholarly contributions and study the contributions of people before you. The Church Fathers and the scholastic doctors built on Scripture and pagan thinking about angels. Those are four decent places to start.
 
It is hard to “analyze” beings of higher intellect who do not present themselves for our study and, because unbodied, are unreachable to our senses, anyhow.

ICXC NIKA
 
God incarnated himself as a man, not only to redeem us, but also to elevate and bless humanity.

Or so I’ve heard.

If this is the case, why didn’t God become an Angel, to elevate and bless the angelic nature as well?

One possible response: It may be possible, and indeed the case, that the Son is both man and God, but for the Son to be man, God, and angelic is an impossibility. Mankind and angelic natures are not compatible in the way that divinity is with its rational creations.

To which I answer: the person of the trinity that posesses a hypostatic union with angels need not be the same person that posesses a hypostatic union with humanity. While the Son is both man and God, why isn’t the holy spirit both God and Angel?

Perhaps it is possible that he is?
St. Anselm was dealing with this question. As far as I remember, there was no point in redeeming the angels. There is no original sin in the angels. Some of them betrayed the God, some remained faithful, but their nature was not tainted.
 
St. Anselm was dealing with this question. As far as I remember, there was no point in redeeming the angels. There is no original sin in the angels. Some of them betrayed the God, some remained faithful, but their nature was not tainted.
I agree with you. When Lucifer revolted, one-third of the angels joined him. The other two-thirds remained faithful to God. There was nothing to be done for either side.
 
God incarnated himself as a man, not only to redeem us, but also to elevate and bless humanity.

Or so I’ve heard.

If this is the case, why didn’t God become an Angel, to elevate and bless the angelic nature as well?

One possible response: It may be possible, and indeed the case, that the Son is both man and God, but for the Son to be man, God, and angelic is an impossibility. Mankind and angelic natures are not compatible in the way that divinity is with its rational creations.

To which I answer: the person of the trinity that posesses a hypostatic union with angels need not be the same person that posesses a hypostatic union with humanity. While the Son is both man and God, why isn’t the holy spirit both God and Angel?

Perhaps it is possible that he is?
The angels have full and complete knowledge of the consequences of their free will decisions. Once they come to a decision it is irrevocable, they will never repent. This is my understanding although I’m sure it could be stated better than I have done.

191
 
The Church doesn’t refuse to analyze them. Angelology is a serious discipline in Catholic theology and that theology has undergone development. If you are interested in the field, start making scholarly contributions and study the contributions of people before you. The Church Fathers and the scholastic doctors built on Scripture and pagan thinking about angels. Those are four decent places to start.
So…then what exactly do we know about angels? Something relevant, something important, not general ideas. Because that’s everything that is apparently known about them (or that’s only the amount of knowledge shared).

…like a psychological analysis.
 
some of these responses miss the point.

Jesus didn’t become a man merely to redeem us. He also came to teach us and elevate humanity.

so why didn’t he become an angel, for those reasons?
 
So…then what exactly do we know about angels? Something relevant, something important, not general ideas. Because that’s everything that is apparently known about them (or that’s only the amount of knowledge shared).
Aquinas wrote about angels, and Dr. Peter Kreeft, noted Catholic theologian, has a very informative talk developed from Aquinas’ ideas. One of the first things Dr. Kreeft notes is that there are no experts on angels and we probably know as much about them as our pets do about us.
youtube.com/watch?v=zAYl2QVjwVA
 
some of these responses miss the point.

Jesus didn’t become a man merely to redeem us. He also came to teach us and elevate humanity.

so why didn’t he become an angel, for those reasons?
Because of the way angelic intellects and wills work, redemption is impossible.

As for elevation, it would seem to be dependent on a redemption. Consider original innocence with respect to the incarnation. What is the point of it without a need to pay the debt?

Sheen suggests that perhaps Lucifer had such a thought… Foreseeing the incarnation, he thought God should have become an angel instead, like him, and so he decided he could not serve such a God.
 
Aquinas wrote about angels, and Dr. Peter Kreeft, noted Catholic theologian, has a very informative talk developed from Aquinas’ ideas. One of the first things Dr. Kreeft notes is that there are no experts on angels and we probably know as much about them as our pets do about us.
youtube.com/watch?v=zAYl2QVjwVA
And that was my point. Nobody knows anything relevant about them…so it’s safe to say that the Church refuses to analyze them, because if the Church did so we would have known more about them now…right? And I mean serious analysis, not just speculation.

I have a question: When so many saints have met angels…why didn’t they think of writing about them in detail? And before you tell me that they have, I mean writing about their real appearance (not just what they make us see - and saying that they’re pure intellect/spirit and that they don’t have wings isn’t relevant because it’s too obvious) , intellect , personalities (if they even have that) , when they’ve been created (before us doesn’t count) , the way they relate to one another…etc. Again , vague information does not count when talking about “knowing”.

Well, I guess we’ll never know.
 
And that was my point. Nobody knows anything relevant about them…so it’s safe to say that the Church refuses to analyze them, because if the Church did so we would have known more about them now…right? And I mean serious analysis, not just speculation.

I have a question: When so many saints have met angels…why didn’t they think of writing about them in detail? And before you tell me that they have, I mean writing about their real appearance (not just what they make us see - and saying that they’re pure intellect/spirit and that they don’t have wings isn’t relevant because it’s too obvious) , intellect , personalities (if they even have that) , when they’ve been created (before us doesn’t count) , the way they relate to one another…etc. Again , vague information does not count when talking about “knowing”.

Well, I guess we’ll never know.
Like Joan of Arc?

There’s way more out there in the world of mystical theology than you might think.
 
And that was my point. Nobody knows anything relevant about them…so it’s safe to say that the Church refuses to analyze them, because if the Church did so we would have known more about them now…right? And I mean serious analysis, not just speculation.

I have a question: When so many saints have met angels…why didn’t they think of writing about them in detail? And before you tell me that they have, I mean writing about their real appearance (not just what they make us see - and saying that they’re pure intellect/spirit and that they don’t have wings isn’t relevant because it’s too obvious) , intellect , personalities (if they even have that) , when they’ve been created (before us doesn’t count) , the way they relate to one another…etc. Again , vague information does not count when talking about “knowing”.

Well, I guess we’ll never know.
Why do you say the Church “refuses” to analyze angels? You make it sound like the church either doesn’t care or is trying to hide something. Angels are spiritual beings, you can’t sit them down for an interview or conduct experiments on them. Everything we know for sure about them has been revealed in sacred scripture, anything else is speculation, albeit inspired speculation.
 
The angels have full and complete knowledge of the consequences of their free will decisions. Once they come to a decision it is irrevocable, they will never repent. This is my understanding although I’m sure it could be stated better than I have done.

191
👍
Angels are far superior in intelligence than humans. When they exercised their free will to serve or not to serve God - they remained set for all eternity in their decision. Humans are much weaker and vacillate in choices. We are called to become perfect - fixed in our decision to serve the Father. But it’s a work in progress during our earthly journey. Our state of soul at the moment of death will determine our eternity.

God did not need to redeem Angels -their wills are eternally fixed. God in His loving mercy desired to exalt the lowly (mankind). The Father sent His only-begotten Son to earth clothing the divine nature of the Second Person of the Trinity in mortal flesh. Jesus Christ was born, suffered, died, rose from the tomb, and ascended with His glorified body into heaven to prepare a place for us mortals. All bodies will rise on the last day to be reunited to their souls. The just will ascend to the eternal happiness of heaven with God and the good angels. The unjust will descend to eternal damnation with the fallen angels.

The Holy Spirit is NOT an angel. He is the Third Person of the Blessed Trinity, co-equal and co-eternal to the Father (First Person) and the Son (Second Person) of the Godhead or Trinity. The Trinity is a supernatural mystery beyond our understanding yet believed because it has been revealed to us.
 
Like Joan of Arc?

There’s way more out there in the world of mystical theology than you might think.
I’ve read a lot about Joan of Arc. She doesn’t go in detail about angels.

And , if angels exists, there’s much more knowledge about them that it’s not shared with us - that you can’t deny.
 
Why do you say the Church “refuses” to analyze angels? You make it sound like the church either doesn’t care or is trying to hide something. Angels are spiritual beings, you can’t sit them down for an interview or conduct experiments on them. Everything we know for sure about them has been revealed in sacred scripture, anything else is speculation, albeit inspired speculation.
That’s exactly what I was trying to say.

Sure, you can’t do that, but why is there so much accent put on angels when we virtually know nothing about them? That’s just silly and foolish. And…how can you fight your enemy when you don’t know anything about them? Demons are angels too. Everything about them doesn’t make sense and that’s what unsettles me. You’re put in a very vulnerable position this way.
 
God incarnated himself as a man, not only to redeem us, but also to elevate and bless humanity.

Or so I’ve heard.

If this is the case, why didn’t God become an Angel, to elevate and bless the angelic nature as well?

One possible response: It may be possible, and indeed the case, that the Son is both man and God, but for the Son to be man, God, and angelic is an impossibility. Mankind and angelic natures are not compatible in the way that divinity is with its rational creations.

To which I answer: the person of the trinity that posesses a hypostatic union with angels need not be the same person that posesses a hypostatic union with humanity. While the Son is both man and God, why isn’t the holy spirit both God and Angel?

Perhaps it is possible that he is?
If God became an angel how would we know about it one way or the other?
 
That’s exactly what I was trying to say.

Sure, you can’t do that, but why is there so much accent put on angels when we virtually know nothing about them? That’s just silly and foolish. And…how can you fight your enemy when you don’t know anything about them? Demons are angels too. Everything about them doesn’t make sense and that’s what unsettles me. You’re put in a very vulnerable position this way.
What exactly are you looking for here? No one in this thread is going to be able to tell you what St. Michael’s personality is like, or whether St. Gabriel likes to swim. There are several things that we know, as revealed in Scripture and interpreted by the Church and various Saints.

Angels are purely spiritual beings. They exist in eternity, though they are not eternal, as they all had a beginning.

Being pure spirit, with no body, not being subject to time, their will is also not subject to change. They have free will, but as they are pure spirit existing outside of time, there is no vacillation in their choices. Angels are presented with full knowledge and full understanding of the consequences of the choice they made, which is the choice we all face. Do I serve the will of God, or do I serve myself? 2/3 of the angels chose correctly, and having done so with full understanding and consent, reside eternally in Heaven with God. 1/3 chose incorrectly, with full knowledge and full consent of will, to oppose God’s will in favor of their own. These angels are known as demons, and like the souls in Hell, separated themselves eternally from God.

This is why an angel in Heaven will never change its mind. They can, as they still have free will, but their will is oriented towards God eternally, as are those of the saints in Heaven. After having perceived the Beatific Vision, they have no desire to leave God’s presence. Conversely, demons also will not change their minds. Just as a person who dies in a state of mortal sin has eternally oriented their soul and will against God, a demon has, with full knowledge and full consent, committed mortal sin and eternally rejects God.

We know that angels are organized in a hierarchy, which was explored in detail by St. Thomas, based on Scripture and logical analysis.

And to answer the OP’s question. The angels do not need to be elevated. The angels are like human souls who are already in Heaven, and we have 3 whose names have been revealed to us, namely Michael, Raphael, and Gabriel. They are considered Saints because, like the saints, they reside in Heaven in the presence of God. Thus they can intercede for us.

But, unlike even the saints, the angels do not have and have never had original sin, as they are not subject to time and don’t have bodies. Original sin is a consequence of human disobedience to God’s will. Unlike angels, humans are both body and soul. We are not pure spirit, and intrinsic to our nature is our body, which means we are a union of body and soul, not a soul with a body or a body with a soul. Who and what we are is the two of those things in union, which is why we are subject to time, and also why we will be resurrected on the last day. Our will is free, but as we are mortal, it is not fixed. When we commit mortal sin, it is done with full knowledge and full consent, but until our deaths our will itself is not fixed. As our bodies are subject to time, our will is subject to change while we still live. We can go to Confession to be forgiven for our sins, which is an act of will on our part that orients our souls back to God, and an act of Grace from God bestowed on us to return us to communion with Him.

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong about any of this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top