It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

There are NO female angels

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   
just thought ide share with you guys and gals a little info. i get a little tired of seeing displays and statues of female angels. first off if your going to believe in angels you obviously must believe in the bible and god. well the bible has a lot of evidence proving my theory. First off god created man....male...it wasnt until later that he noticed he needed a mate....so theres hint #1 that eve was the first female ever. Hint # 2 is the actions of some of the angels. In genesis it describes how some angels started to "notice the daughters of men and they were beautiful" and so it goes on to say that those angels made the ultimate sin of creating fleshly bodies for themselves and taking wives for themselves thus creating the half breed angel/human vicious offspring the nephilim. Hint #3 is the fact that every description in the bible is a male angel. another thing is the purpose of angels, they are gods messengers. in fact angel in latin means messenger, and he created all of his messengers to be male. im not saying this to be sexist or anything. no way i love women. but theres too many fools out there and shows, and music videos depecting female angels. Before you say "blaa blaaa no way! there are female angels!" read the bible cover to cover. you will come to know the truth.
thank you for your time




posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by rowdyroddy
just thought ide share with you guys and gals a little info. i get a little tired of seeing displays and statues of female angels. first off if your going to believe in angels you obviously must believe in the bible and god.

Not necessarily. There are many belief systems have angels or something similar.

well the bible has a lot of evidence proving my theory. First off god created man....male...it wasnt until later that he noticed he needed a mate....so theres hint #1 that eve was the first female ever.

The bible was based on the torah. The original creation story included Lilith who ran away then Eve was created.

Hint # 2 is the actions of some of the angels. In genesis it describes how some angels started to "notice the daughters of men and they were beautiful" and so it goes on to say that those angels made the ultimate sin of creating fleshly bodies for themselves and taking wives for themselves thus creating the half breed angel/human vicious offspring the nephilim.

Sounds similar to the incubus superstition [demonic evil spirits].

Hint #3 is the fact that every description in the bible is a male angel.

The bible was written by men in an age where women were considered nothing more than property. A little bias is to be expected.

another thing is the purpose of angels, they are gods messengers. in fact angel in latin means messenger, and he created all of his messengers to be male.

Joan of ark wasn't male.

im not saying this to be sexist or anything. no way i love women
but theres too many fools out there and shows, and music videos depecting female angels.

I haven't really seen this.. though.. as with many other make mythical creatures I don't think there are any steadfast 'rules'. Girls look better in dresses [most anyway].

Before you say "blaa blaaa no way! there are female angels!" read the bible cover to cover. you will come to know the truth.
thank you for your time

I have and as it didn't convince me in the existence of angels.. [amongst other things] I never really bothered to ponder over what gender they would be if they actually existed. That and they wouldn't have genitalia as they are meant to be beings of light.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 08:53 AM
link   
angels are considered be androgonynous aren't they? That is having qualities of both male and female. It's probably wrong to think of them in human terms of male and female as they are mean't to be divine beings.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 09:14 AM
link   
I'm sure Christians (I am a Pagan) will disagree with your perspective of there being no female angels. I admit I have not read even one page of the bible nor had any inclination to burden my headspace with, what I consider to be, a publication rich in myth, distortions of fact and contradiction.
Just because female angels have not been included in bible does not exclude their existence in a biblical context.
Concerning the 'God created man' statement I suggest you weigh the evidence against evolution theories.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
angels are considered be androgonynous aren't they? That is having qualities of both male and female. It's probably wrong to think of them in human terms of male and female as they are mean't to be divine beings.


I think this would be closest to the truth. Angels had no need to procreate, therefore they would not need to have distinct sexual indentification. The Angels were said to have been tempted by the long hair of the daughters of man. It is also alluded to that they had homosexual tendencies at times. Even that Samson's hair was a source of his power, which may tie in to the source of his power in his ability to gain power through the help of the Angelic realms. Just a thought about Sampson.

The Nephilim have been connected with Vampiristic notions which are frequently projected to love males over females.

Parts of the Legend of the Fall of MAN, suggests splitting into two identities which leads me to believe the original form was androgenous.

Gabriel is one of the Angels who was projected as male with female tendencies.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I agree, I always thought them to be Asexual creatures. I don't think gender was an issue in the heavens.

It wasn't until temptation was introduced that gender became an issue.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 03:45 PM
link   
GENESIS


1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


the bible says god created man and woman at the same time

then it says god created man, then animals, then woman...

hmm

i smell a contradiction



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   


quote: another thing is the purpose of angels, they are gods messengers. in fact angel in latin means messenger, and he created all of his messengers to be male.


Good point.


[edit on 26-12-2006 by marcopolo]



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Apart from the fact that ancient writings tend to be a little male biased....

I've never considered Angels' Wiggly Bits before.
I doubt the Angelic Ecosystem would need male and/or female members as God zaps them into existence as needed.

A community of all male, sexually active, Angels would not meet the approval of much of the religious community down here on Earth, that's for sure.

Heaven administered by Gays.....



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
That is having qualities of both male and female.


Angels are pure spirit beings and do not procreate. Therefore they do NOT have any male or female reproductive organs. They are all spiritual beings created by God, not created by reproductive means.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
angels are considered be androgonynous aren't they? That is having qualities of both male and female. It's probably wrong to think of them in human terms of male and female as they are mean't to be divine beings.


thats my understanding of it...hence the confusion down here about 2 becoming one...

yin/yang = each person has male/female sides of their body. When the 'other self' meets/joins, they then become one in spirit. And even sex..here we are putting the pieces of the puzzle together and in some cases 'not together' lol; what we are trying to do is 'join' like in the spirit world.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by rowdyroddy
There are NO female angels


Who cares?

Furthermore, who here can do anything about your concerns, one way or the other?

[edit on 2006/12/26 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by rowdyroddy
There are NO female angels


Who cares?

Furthermore, who here can do anything about your concerns, one way or the other?

[edit on 2006/12/26 by GradyPhilpott]



The author, and everyone who posted. And you, at least enough to post. And how did you further the conversation?

Love ya Grady, but sometimes you just sound old and grumpy.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by rowdyroddy
First off god created man....male...it wasnt until later that he noticed he needed a mate....so theres hint #1 that eve was the first female ever.


Pardon me, but . . . the bible also say that God created male and female in his image he created both.

So I imagine that Angels are both male and female just like the Bible said God is also.

Both male and female.

funny how the bible kind of make you wonder sometimes.



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by kickoutthejams
That is having qualities of both male and female.


Angels are pure spirit beings and do not procreate. Therefore they do NOT have any male or female reproductive organs. They are all spiritual beings created by God, not created by reproductive means.



Right on! The terms male and female are only a valid description if relative to each other, so if there are no female angels, then there are no male ones. If they had bodies with penis's they would still not be male without females to procreate with, right?



posted on Dec, 27 2006 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Perspectives.

I'm sure Christians (I am a Pagan) will disagree with your perspective of there being no female angels. I admit I have not read even one page of the bible nor had any inclination to burden my headspace with, what I consider to be, a publication rich in myth, distortions of fact and contradiction.
Just because female angels have not been included in bible does not exclude their existence in a biblical context.
Concerning the 'God created man' statement I suggest you weigh the evidence against evolution theories.


I don't quite see how you could make a good judgment on something that you haven't even been formally aquainted with. If you haven't even read the Bible, then I would have to say you have no authority to even have an opinion.

And I would have to say that there is much more scientific evidence promoting creation over evolution(unless of course you only read the evolution side, because they pick out the evidence that could possibly support their theorys). The Bible explains everything about the orgins of the universe, evolution explains very little.

Is it possible that there were only men angels, then God appointed women?

I would still imagine that they would be neither male or female aside from appearance possibly?



posted on Dec, 27 2006 @ 12:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by thexsword
And I would have to say that there is much more scientific evidence promoting creation over evolution(unless of course you only read the evolution side, because they pick out the evidence that could possibly support their theorys).


The bible is hardly the book to look upon when learning historical facts my friend, is good as a reference but nothing else.



The Bible explains everything about the orgins of the universe, evolution explains very little.


The bible is a book written by men with the narrow view of the man at that time, they wrote about their surroundings and nature the only way that they were able to understand, in a primitive way.



Is it possible that there were only men angels, then God appointed women?


Even the bible makes no distinction of God's sex been either male or female and more of both, in Genesis, to contradict itself when later writers attached the male gender to the biblical God later on.

Something that early humans in their hasty to humanized their god forgot.



I would still imagine that they would be neither male or female aside from appearance possibly?


On this one I kind of agree with you. But I imagine that been on the image of a creator only means in the naked way of a soul without its human body and that could also apply to angels.

Perhaps beings of light.



posted on Dec, 27 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   
Well I've seen an angel and it looked like a boy looking like a girl looking like a boy looking like a girl.

So there.


Really, I've seen one, they're not one or the other.

[edit on 27-12-2006 by clearwater]



posted on Dec, 27 2006 @ 03:32 AM
link   
I don't think it is accurate to say God and or angles have a gender.

When the Bible speaks about spiritual beings have one or the other gender type it is refering to the nature of that gender type. Both God and angels have a feminine and masculine nature. Its more about behavior then genatailia.

The book of laws (Torah first five books of the Old Testament) are the masculine side of God where you will find His judgement, the feminine (Talmud and Kabbalah) is where you will find his compasion and love.

As for the Bible contradicting itself, it doesn't. The Sunday school version may teach that Adam was the first man. He wasn't, and the Bible doesn't say he was the first man.

Let's look at what it does say: Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. This is where God spoke man a woman into existance at the same time.

Now lets look at: Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Note: no Adam yet.

May be redundant but...In the six days of creation everything was spoke into existance; at this point Adam had not been form of the dust of the earth. See a differance?

Adam was created after the seventh day of God's rest: Genesis: 002:007 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. The first man Adam is when man became a living soul.

Go on to read where Cain was put out because he killed his brother Abel. Genesis:004:016 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. 004:017 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Okay so who did Cain marry. No it wasn't his sister. Some laws, even laws of nature just shouldn't be broken. There were people already on earth, living and going about there business. People had been on the earth sense the sixth day.

Sorry for the side track, back to angels not being female.....

I agree angel are not female neather are the male. They may have the nature of both, but are not physically capable of being either.

Using latin to determine what the word angel means in the Bible is not the way to go. The Bible was first written in Hebrew and Greek. These two lanuages sometimes have translation problems in latin.

In fact the Bible does talk about four different types of angels: those who made music, those who were in fact messengers, those who were angels of war, and those angels who stay around the throne of God and do nothing other than worship Him.

Lucifer was a music making angel, and the angels that fell with him were angels that made music. A full third of Heaven. Not counting the angels around the throne, leaves the warring angles, and the messenger angles.

When using the term angel consider that it also repesents what that angel is doing; why it is doing it. If that angel is warring then it would have a masculine nature. If that angel is on a mission of mercy, then it's nature is feminine.

I have found many instances where the latin translation did not cover the full intent of a word when originally pened. Example, the word salvation. That word does not just mean going to Heaven, but also health, weath, safety on so on.

If we are going to negotiate the meaning of the Bible, it's words and what they mean, then we really should start with the original text. A good Greek and Hebrew concordance helps a lot.

[edit on 12/27/2006 by hammerhead1791]



posted on Dec, 27 2006 @ 05:05 AM
link   
Your not reading your bible. In Proverbs chapter 1 Wisdom is refered to as female so is Folly. Wisdom actually speaks in Proverbs saying she was there when God laid the foundation of the Earth. Also Zechariah 5: 7-9 " 7 Then the cover of lead was raised, and there in the basket sat a woman! 8 He said, "This is wickedness," and he pushed her back into the basket and pushed the lead cover down over its mouth.

9 Then I looked up—and there before me were two women, with the wind in their wings! They had wings like those of a stork, and they lifted up the basket between heaven and earth."

I believe there are male and female angels as refered to in the bible. To say an angel is asexual shows an ignorance of the bible. When a male angel appears he is reffered to as male, there is no confusion on the authors description. To those who say all angels are male I say read your BIBLE. To those of you who say the bible isnt good for historical facts shows a major ignorance of the word. The bible has been historically and archaeologically correct and that isnt even its main focus. How much more correct do you think it would be on its spiritual matters? Yes God created male and female but he said to Adam and Eve to be fruitful and multiply. He did not say that to the angels.

madnessinmysoul
There is no contradiction in Gen. Chapter 1 is an over view of what happened, then it focus's on the sixth day of creation when God created man and woman. Read it and you will see your error.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join