Amaleq13

capnkirk,


There was apparently some confusion about this subject in Paul's day to the point where he felt compelled to admonish against worshipping angels:

"Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God." (Col 2:18-19, NASB)

judge

Man, on the other hand, whose nature was to be a mean between the angelic and bestial, He created in such sort, that if he remained in subjection to His Creator as his rightful Lord, and piously kept His commandments, he should pass into the company of the angels, and obtain, without the intervention of death,(1) a blessed and endless immortality; but if he offended the Lord his God by a proud and disobedient use of his free will, he should become subject to death, and live as the beasts do,--the slave of appetite,


http://ccel.org/fathers/NPNF1-02/Aug....htm#t66.htm.4


Man was not Gods highest creation, but rather halfway 'tween angels and beasts, but with the opportunity for greater things

capnkirk

So far I have read nothing in the responses that isn't entirely arbitrary, subjective, or anecdotal...not very helpful. Zoroastrianism is pantheistic because they had the audacity to refer to Ahura-Mazda's underlings as gods, but Xtianity isn't because they call Yahweh's underlings angels? Sorta' makes mincemeat of the distinction, doesn't it.

Earlier, someone said that angels lack free will. It sure seems to me that those angels who 'chose' to become demons were exercising free will...as were those who 'chose' not to!

waddayasay 'bout dat?

Magus55

Don't you mean polytheistic, not pantheism? And why would Christianity be polytheistic? Polytheism means more than 1 God/diety. Angels are not dieties. What point are you trying to make?

capnkirk

Polytheistic IS the more technically correct term for Zoroastrianism.

THAT was the point I am making.

In the absence of any reasonable anthropological standard for defining "a god" (as opposed to the way the practitioners of any religion choose to define their own god(s)), all distinctions between monotheism, polytheism, and pantheism become entirely arbitrary and subjective. "Can you hear me now?"

Postcard73

I think this thread would be better off in GRD.

Scott (Postcard73)
BC&H Moderator

Magus55

I get what you are saying, but I don't get why you are saying it. We do not worship angels. We do not exalt them to god status. Angels are created beings that serve a purpose. They do not have the powers of God, nor do they have His sovereignty. They are not deities.

Ojuice5001

Actually, the accepted usage is moving towards calling Zorastrianism and similar religions "duotheistic." A religion like Zorastrianism, with only a pure-good power and a pure-evil power, is very different from true polytheisms along the lines of Greco-Roman mythology, or Norse mythology, etc. The term "duotheism" is also used, perhaps more frequently, to apply to Wiccan theology, in which the God and the Goddess are generally considered to subsume all the deities of the world, but not each other. But it's important to notice a difference between Wicca and Zorastrianism. In Zorastrian-type religions, the good and evil powers are mortal enemies. In most forms of Wicca, there is only moderate rivalry (at most) between the Goddess and the God.

I definitely don't think Christianity is polytheistic. But it's quite easy to look at the religion and come to the conclusion that it's a duotheistic religion of Zoraster's type.

capnkirk

What I am specifically pointing out is the apparent disconnect between accepted usage and any reasonably objective standard for what constitutes a god in any given religion. That is why (earlier in this thread) I said:If someone can point out a definition accepted by scholars and anthropologists, I will gladly retract the quoted conclusion and apply that definition uniformly to all religious systems.

P.S. The characterization of Zoroastrianism as "duotheistic" when it also lists Yahweh as one of the gods on the side of light aptly illustrates this "disconnect".

hinduwoman

Well in polytheistic religion angels would be gods/godlings. But when only one God is allowed, angels become servants of God without any of his Powers.
In the Bible angels are always servants and messengers of God --- not God.