Total Posts:3|Showing Posts:1-3
Jump to topic:

Problem of Angels?

The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/27/2012 10:38:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool:

Excerpt from Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan. (1651)

If we condition the places of the Old Testament where angels are mentioned, we find that in most of them nothing else can be understood by the word Angel but some images raised (supernaturally) in the imagination/dreams, so to signify the presence of God in the execution of some supernatural work. And therefore in the rest where their nature is not expressed it may be inferred in this manner.
Considering there for the signification of the word angel in the Old Testament, and the nature of dreams and visions that happen to men by the ordinary way of nature, I was inclined to this opinion that angels were nothing but supernatural apparitions of the fancy (imagination) raised by the special and extraordinary operation of God, by that means to make his preens and commandments known to mankind, and chiefly to his own people.

But the many places of the New testament and our Saviours own words, and in such texts where there is no suspicion of corruption of the Scripture have extorted from my feeble reason an acknowledgement and belief that there are physical angels. But yet this is in contradiction with their incorporeal nature.

Thus as Hobbes argues they are to be taken as incorporeal in the OT. But yet are spoken of in Corporeal nature in the New Testament.

The Fool: How do we reconcile this problem, and with what justification is done?
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/28/2012 4:00:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
*bump*
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2012 2:57:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/28/2012 4:00:31 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
*bump*
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL