It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Do angels have a moral sense?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 11:25 AM

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by UnknownPhilosopher

Do angels have to work for their place in heaven?

Why didn't he create angels with free will and thus "original sin"? Is this a sick experiment or something? "created sick, and ordered to be well".
edit on 29-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)

This one of the reason I have a problem with the concept of god as portrayed by the bible. My heart would want more the Native American or Hindu version of god but my brain likes to see god as Johnny Appleseed. I love studying world religions and I have an open mind but I spend allot of time on the fence about the whole thing.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 12:22 PM
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz

I can relate to your "problem", or perhaps doubt?

To claim there is a God is one extraordinary claim; to claim to understand the mind of God; and the hereafter is a separate claim altogether, and no less extraordinary.

All i ask is that ordinary evidence is provided to justify such claims. and i would hope that if it IS true; that a benevolent God would forgive me for rejecting Pascal's Wager - For being truly honest with myself and others and for trying to be a kind person.

I've heard many people claim that Angels were infact man's attempt at describing flying people from the skies; from the "heavens" - I don't feel guilty for being skeptical of that claim either; although extra-terrestrial life is probable; and we have information from telescopes showing the vastness of the universe. Again, it seems the claim that they visisted earth is somewhat unsubstantiated; but i can imagine many begging to differ.
edit on 29-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 02:18 PM
What is God?

1. What is God?

"God is the Supreme Intelligence--First Cause of all things."

2. What is to be understood by infinity?

"That which has neither beginning nor end; the unknown: all that is unknown is infinite."

3. Can it be said that God is infinity?

"An incomplete definition. Poverty of human speech incompetent to define what transcends human intelligence."

God is infinite in His perfections, but "infinity" is an abstraction. To say that God is infinity is to substitute the attribute of a thing for the thing itself, and to define something unknown by reference to some other thing equally unknown.

Proofs of the Existence of God
4. What proof have we of the existence of God?

"The axiom which you apply in all your scientific researches, 'There is no effect without a cause.' Search out the cause of whatever is not the work of man, and reason will furnish the answer to your question."

To assure ourselves of the existence of God, we have only to look abroad on the works of creation. The universe exists, therefore it has a cause. To doubt the existence of God is to doubt that every effect has a cause, and to assume that something can have been made by nothing.
5. What is to be inferred from the intuition of the existence of God which may be said to be the common property of the human mind?

"That God exists; for whence could the human mind derive this intuition if it had no real basis? The inference to be drawn from the fact of this intuition is a corollary of the axiom 'There is no effect without a cause.'"

6. May not our seemingly intuitive sense of the existence of God be the result of education and of acquired ideas?

"If such were the case, how should this intuitive sense be possessed by your savages?"

If the intuition of the existence of a Supreme Being were only the result of education, it would not be universal, and would only exist, like all other acquired knowledge, in the minds of those who had received the special education to which it would be due.
7. Is the first cause of the formation of things to be found in the essential properties of matter?

"If such were the case, what would be the cause of those properties? There must always be a first cause."

To attribute the first formation of things to the essential properties of matter, would be to take the effect for the cause, for those properties are themselves an effect, which must have a cause.
8. What is to be thought of the opinion that attributes the first formation of things to a fortuitous combination of matter, in other words, to chance?

"Another absurdity! Who that is possessed of common sense can regard chance as an intelligent agent? And, besides, what is chance? Nothing."

The harmony which regulates the mechanism of the universe can only result from combinations adopted in view of predetermined ends, and thus, by its very nature, reveals the existence of an Intelligent Power. To attribute the first formation of things to chance is nonsense for chance cannot produce the results of intelligence. If chance could be intelligent, it would cease to be chance.
9. What proof have we that the first cause of all things is a Supreme Intelligence, superior to all other intelligences?

"You have a proverb which says, 'The workman is known by his work.' Look around you, and, from the quality of the work, infer that of the workman."

We judge of the power of an intelligence by its works as no human being could create that which is produced by nature, it is evident that the first cause must be an Intelligence superior to man. Whatever may be the prodigies accomplished by human intelligence, that intelligence itself must have a cause and the greater the results achieved by it, the greater must be the cause of which it is the effect. It is this Supreme Intelligence that is the first cause of all things, whatever the name by which mankind may designate

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 03:35 PM
reply to post by mb2591

please if you want to no who you are. come let us reason togather series blessings from the most high.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:02 PM
I dare god to judge me. If you made me defective and didn't even childproof the place and just let me stumble around in the dark getting hurt and then want to hold my actions against me? No, not happening. I imagine if angels had free will they might feel the same. This is all the "what if" game because there is no proof of angles one way or the other.

posted on Jun, 29 2011 @ 06:23 PM
reply to post by Ladysophiaofsandoz
This non-childproof world is itself a judge and it pronounces us all unable to survive it and figure out how to live forever. A higher judge will make a pronouncement condemning the world and this thing that we have known for this brief span living in it, will be done away with. How the world got to be how it is was not our doing and we can not be held responsible for that. Making the area which falls within our sphere of influence a slightly less hellish place, I believe, shows us to be suitable for a new world, made to replace the old and we will be children again but in a safe place.

edit on 29-6-2011 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in