The Ultimate Vampire Resource and Directory

I hope this is OK now the allowed forum subjects have opened up a bit

Through the bible the angels are spirits (Hebrews 1:14) in the service of God. they are mentioned time and again as making sure that God's will happens (Matthew 13:41; Acts 12:23) - it seems that whenever some enforcement was needed God sent down the angels to make it happen. Sometimes what they did could be considered evil.

Myth tells us that Satan was once an angel (I think who sat at the left hand of God), yet when he fell he was capable of performing acts of great evil

There have been other mentions on here that other creatures of myth (Elves I think) were also believed to have been fallen angels.

Keeping in mind VR's policy to repect everyone's views on religion - and restricting the discussion to just angels please

What are people's views on angels - are they the good guys or literally the beginning of all things evil ?

Sheesh that's hard.
Its hard to believe that you could be all good and just turn evil.
Maybe they're somewhere sort of inbetween and their lives sort of spin out the way that they are..I'm not making sense...All I can think about is:
"When Angels Attack"

demons are angels created by "satan","loki",what ever you belive in so I would say that they can be both evil and good of course the concept of good or evil is in the eye of the beholder.

Also another note on Lucifer I was hoping someone to clear up for me. Wasn't he also referred to as "The Morning Star"?

I believe that biblical angles do not have free will... it is either that or that they have gone beyond self love and only adhere to God's will.

In the Former, it is not any more logical for an angel to fall than for a hindu cow to disreguard it's purpose... granted to it by God.

In the second, It is far more heinous an act for someone who has disreguarded self, to fall... and once again become selfish, and discontent with God.

lucifer was referd to as the light bringer
god was the morning star but it does go on to compare lucifer to the morning star.

Lucifer and the morning star question:

Lucifer seems to be a latin word meaning 'morning star' if you believe some google seraches.

In the Old Testament he's was called 'son of the morning' but also called Lucifer by name

How a latin word ended up in a Hebrew text before the roman language is a problem

It seems to explain how Lucifer was known as the morning star, but leaves us with a 'which came first' situation

Lucifer was an angel yes. The way I see things is..... There are different types of angels. I mean angels are to be Gods army. Well in the army are there not different ranks? I say there are the angels that are to only do as told, the weaker of the angels, and there are the angels with the power of Lucifer. Those angels have free will, and the ability to do many things, for if they didnt how would Lucifer have chosen evil. Do mortals not have the ability to choose good or evil? I believe somewhere in the bible (cant recall this second where) that everyone is given free will. I believe that angels are mostly good, but there are a few that decide to go astray, and that is their decision. I dont know if all that made sense to anyone but me but I hope it did. Mind you it doesnt mean I am correct, but just giving my input. :)

My understanding is that anglels are older than christianity or judiasm. My thinking is that angels are generally a force for good.
The fae are rumored to be angels who were neutral when the battle between god and satan happened. Therefore ther were not banished to hell - but put in limbo on earth.
I don't think that there could be evil angels. I think that if an angel turned evil it would change into something else.

Angels can be both good or evil.......there are many stories in the bible that tell of angels being guides and in revelations it shows how destructive angels can be

Has anyone seen The Prophecy trilogy? of angels split into two groups in Heaven. Gabriel leading the revolt against mankind - they were jealous of God making man and caring about man, and the other angels who agree with what God did and tried to protect mankind. Lots of interesting ways of portraying angels and learning about the many ranks of angels.

Angels are what, supposedly God's messengers and warriors? I believe Lucifer was a Seraphim.

Per Dante, here is an angel hiearchy from the most holy down to the most basic of angels:

1. Seraphim
2. Cherubim
3. Throne
4. Dominations
5. Virtues
6. Powers
7. Archangels
8. Principalities
9. Angels

Great topic... and more appropriate to this website than might otherwise be thought.

The first mention of "angels," predating the Biblical accounts by at least a thousand years, is found in Sumerian mythology as the minor deities, the "Anunnake," who came to Earth and taught Humankind the basics needed to begin civilization on this planet. The Biblical Abraham, who came to Canaan (Judea) from Sumer, brought with him many of Sumer's myths and beliefs including the Great Flood myth and the myth of heavenly messengers, or "Watchers," who became what was later called... Angels:

The Watchers were "a specific race of divine beings known in Hebrew as nun resh 'ayin, 'irin' (resh 'ayin, 'ir' in singular), meaning 'those who watch' or 'those who are awake', which is translated into Greek as Egrhgoroi egregoris or grigori, meaning 'watchers'. These Watchers feature in the main within the pages of pseudepigraphal and apocryphal works of Jewish origin, such as the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees."

- Andrew Collins, From the Ashes of Angels - The Forbidden Legacy of a Fallen Race (1996) p. 3


To the Canaanites, these "Watchers" were called "angels":

"And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters.

And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.'... "

- Book of Enoch, Ch. 6, vss. 1-3


The story of Satan as a "fallen angel" and a member of these "Watchers" (Grigori) has its literal Genesis in the Biblical account of these "fallen angels" of Genesis, Chapter 6. This is where the concept of what later became "Satan" began:

"The 2nd Book of Enoch also called the Slavonic Book of Enoch contains references to a Watcher Grigori called Satanail."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan



And this earliest of legends in these "Watchers" is also where we find the beginnings of the Vampire legends, as well:

"Romantic writers, for instance, became transfixed by the stories of the Sons of God coming unto the Daughters of Men, and began to feature these devilish characters in their poetic works. A little later, Victorian painters started portraying this same subject matter on canvas. One might even be tempted to suggest that the Book of Enoch was a major inspiration behind the darker excesses of the so-called Gothic revival, which culminated in such literary works as Bram Stoker's Dracula, in which the eponymously named character is himself a fallen angel."

- "From the Ashes of Angels", Collins, p. 21 (emphasis added)


Thus, the concepts of angels, Satan, and the Vampire all began with the Sumerian myths of the first "angels," the Anunnake, later renamed in the Bible and the Book of Enoch and vilified as "Fallen Angels."

Fascinating... is it not?

I think they are neutral, capable of being Good or Evil, whichever they choose. Or whichever God tells them to be.

The Anunnaki (actual spelling) were not angels, but could be seen as such if you have a faith in monotheism. They were Gods, much like the Pagan Gods. The Sumerians had a polytheistic structure to their religion. The instructions to life, given to the Sumerians, came from Enki (God of the Earth)--who was among one of the "visitors." The Sumerians made the "visitors" into Gods.

Lucifer is not Satan...

And wasn't Satan push? It wasn't like had a bad spill, lost his balanced, and fell off a cloud. Also, according to biblical text, Satan was capible of evil before he... uh triped over that stone that wasn't there before. I mean, that was why he fell, he was blinded by his own sin. (Har Har)

Since we, people, are the ones judging good an evil here, I would say angels are evil. If we compare them to us, they are breaking many of the laws of humanity that make us good. Thou shalt not kill, unless you have feathers or a glowing head.

angels are both and that only means if they actually exist, which would be a definate answer if there is an afterlife or not

Very interest thread and the replies. I do not believe in satan or god, however I do believe there are spirits, entities that can and do work to help guide us. And in reality, there can not be good w/o bad..Everything needs a balance.

I think the Angels are good guys. How they fall is an accident. Im not really clear on the whole thing. I have the idea that they have strict rules and codes to follow and sometimes they will mess up a very little bit but it will call for their immediate dismissal from Heaven.

Its hard to say. I think they can be both good & evil. We can be both, so i think its a conscious decision to be either or.

Angels are a mystery to me. I believe there are spiritual beings that can help and there are others that can hinder us.

Angels are good by defenition and creation (dont flam me here) as for the ones who are evil, well they are called deamons.

Angels are created through the word of perfection. When the battle happened lucifer was expelled from heaven he took 1/3 of the angles with him.

It has only been through certain teaching that we are told the ones in heaven are perfect and the ones in hell are not.

Knowing that Lucifer was created in such a way that he was the most beautiful angel in heaven.

Angels do exist..they show up in my life a lot now a days..the only ones i even think of are good..here to help..guide and protect when called on..i know theyre taking care of my boys..and they help me get thru everyday.....and they have also led me to the love of my life..angels are something great to believe in

They are the mislead fathers of the poorly judged.

id say both good and evil. for instance the angel of death.

I think there are good points on all sides of what angels are or were. I agree that it all depends on how you believe and were taught.

I was brought up to believe that god cast Lucifer & the angels that followed him out of heaven. Thus, we have demons and satan.

I honestly think it is whatever you believe it to be. I agree, this is truely a very good forum topic.

i like this topic because although you are not touching the religious aspect of this you are touching peoples belief and every 1 is different

Good? evil??

perhaps...fable.

What some view as good, another views as evil. Take a war for example, each side thinks they are doing good and that the other is evil, who is right?

Good things come from bad things, and bad things come from good things. So I think Angels (if they exist) do what needs to be done to balance an equation of good and evil.

i believe it is true that angels can be either good or evil. they are servants of God or servants of Lucifer. I believe its more of abduction thing, not so much that they have free will. though im not sure however they come to be, however it is, its on the side of darkness or the side of light, and the commander of that side teaches them their beliefs' and they learn to become either good or evil doing tasks for the one who taught them.

"Angel" and "Demon" are generic and often interchangeable words, describing ethereal beings, capable of either helping or harming others at will.

In Christianity, if I'm not mistaken, angels are perfect, and are incapable of error. Once they make a decision, it is final. That's why Lucifer was cast out the second he decided not to be subservient to god. Demons, as I'm told, are fallen angels, the most notable of which are the 72(?) Goetic demons, which were cast out at the same time as Lucifer.

Many biblical scholars regard Satan and Lucifer as two different beings. Some believe Satan is the god/angel of mankind, charged with convincing god that his creation is inferior, and that Lucifer is the Seraph cast out of Heaven, and on the day of judgement, he will be cast down with the sinners, I guess. I forgot where I found the information, but they cited a lot of good biblical passages to support it...

both

angels are just like people. in fact if you ran into one you'd never know unless they told you who they were.

Woah thanks guys for all that input:

I knew that Lucifer and Satan are different beings, I think Lucifer was first on the scene.

campeador6de6eternus6patientia - the abduction idea is one I hadn't ever thought about. Angels being forced/duped by a leader into doing what we see as evil

I thought angels were all created in an instant [Psalm 148:5 ] and no more have been made since. If demons are fallen angels it must be that heaven is losing them. There are supposed to be a lot of them though Psalm 68:17 says the heaven bound angels number twice ten thousand, and thousands upon thousands which isn't really helpful

I knew that Satan fell, but didn't know he tripped over a rock ...

There is some mention of a battle in the thread where Satan took a lot of followers with him. I'm not sure about that because it goes against the rock fable, but I do know that he had a gatekeeper in Hell - so he must have arrived with some company.

Thanks for keeping on track guys ....

i think all angels r like the yin yang. a little bit of bad in every good and a little bit of good in every bad. i do not believe that there are more good ones then bad and vice versa. it is an equal part on both!

I think there can be both good and evil angels,but i often see angels as good.

Stabb I see where you're coming from: You can't yourself be evil if you are only following orders - the act may be evil, the person ordering the act may be evil - but the person forced to do the act may not be

In the case of fallen angels / demons, didn't they stop following orders ? That's what got them thrown out of heaven. They made up their own minds to go against God's will and chose a path of evil

Does it really surprise people that there are things in life that could turn you evil totally evil.
I think angels just like humans make there choices and thus become eveil or good.
The light has its up side but the darkness i would have to say i prefer.

There are the good angels, guardians and such, and there are the fallens. Fallens aren't necessarily bad angels. Just angels that fell from grace because of one thing or another. Some may be evil, but there must be balance. Good and evil angels. Without the good angels the bad would be useless, and without the bad, the good would be as well.

Angels.....angels are known to have reached perfection...yet how would they be perfect if some believe that they're evil? Satan was thrown from heaven for plotting against God (or so they say) therefor his wings were burned, and he could no longer keep flight so he plunged....i have known people who say the angels who followed Satan were cast out as well...becoming what is known as "demons"...with this said i believe that angels and demons are one, both good and evil...

STABB: Nice to see others refer to non-Biblical sources, as well.

The Book of Enoch is important as it is one of the few sources to give the Hebrew version of this legend of celestial beings from the sky ("Watchers") descending to teach Mankind and also to marry women and with them raise families. However, it must be remembered that the Book of Enoch was written thousands of years after the events therein described, being written only a couple hundred years BCE.

Lest we have forgotten, this same legend began with the first Sumerian accounts of the Anunnake descending to Earth, teaching Mankind, and marrying Human females. In these far more contemporaneous Sumerian accounts, their offspring were not giants at all, but instead Sumer's first kings. Likewise, the Egyptians recounted almost identical beginnings of their own Empire, telling the tale of the the "Shemsu Hor" (Followers or Family of Horus) likewise entering their lands and mating with Human females whose offspring were Egypt's first demi-god rulers (called the "Demigods of Manes"). For this reason, all subsequent pharaohs had to have a "Horus name" linking them to these original demi-god rulers.

Further documenting these legends and also including near identical accounts from the Americas, is the book "Fingerprints of the Gods" by Graham Hancock.

Only in the Hebrew accounts were these offspring vilified as cannabalistic giants that supposedly so enraged God as to have incited the destruction of the Earth by the "Great Flood," supposedly destroying them all.

And yet... following the Flood are found numerous Biblical references to this same "angelic" progeny, the Rephaim (also called: Anakim, Emim, etc.), still existing and thriving in Canaan until defeated and expelled from the area (as per the Old Testament). Thus, the books of Genesis and Enoch were incorrect as the offspring, according to the Bible's later books, did survive the Flood quite nicely, thank you very much! ;)

In addition to this glaring contradiction is the further obvious ones found within the Book of Enoch itself re: its vilifications of the Fallen Angels in that it first states repeatedly (as also does Genesis ch. 6) that they married their wives and with them raised loving families. Then Enoch later, in justifying the bloody slaughters of their wives and children, calls these demi-god offspring "the children of fornication" and "bastards." (?!) And then, Enoch recounts how the children are killed not by the Flood (thus contradicting Genesis 6) but by the sword. (?!!)

Thus, while the Sumerian and Egyptian accounts predating the Biblical version by thousands of years agree with and complement each other so wonderfully, it is the far better known though highly flawed and contradictory Biblical and Enochian accounts that are more generally accepted and believed.

I red in one teoligical work that angel is name for good spirit
same as demon is name for evil spirit.
And I thint that is good explain.

Oh... and one little post-script to my previous entry...

... it is also only in the Biblical and Enochian accounts, wherein we find such glaring contradictions, that these angelic visitors who married Human females and with them raised loving families, are vilified as "evil", as "Fallen", and later... as demonic.

Thus, the only accounts that vilify these "Watchers" (Anunnake, Shemsu Hor, etc.) are also those that continually contradict themselves in their headlong rush to so vilify them.

The point being... in ancient Canaan alone there was a deliberate and concerted effort to vilify these celestial visitors for daring to enliven females with the true "Dark" Gift that was embraced by the Sumerians and the Egyptians, to their great multi-millennial benefit as civilizations, while shunned as evil by Canaanite cultures.

I would think the Angels are but tools of god's will.
Considering the utterly nasty business they have performed over the course of the old testament, doing them with good or evil intent would render them insane. I don't think they have minds of their own at all, only what god put there to begin with.

For example, god does not speak; when he does, he speaks through the angel Metatron; the lesser deity. As angels speak the word of god, their actions are god's actions performed through the hands of the angels. This would leave the Angels empty, soulless vessels.

To those who would argue otherwise, because the Angels rebelled, remember that without evil, there is no good, and any fallen angels or even satan is doing god's will according to god's plan, creating evil for humans to turn to god for. Why else would there be a need for free will?

------
(on a side note, indeed Lucifer is not Satan or Jesus. Lucifer is the roman god of the morning star, and the name was probably included to gain roman followers or to add 'credibility')

Thank you so much you guys, its still on track and not RIA'd !

UpirLikhyj and Stabb thats some really epic information there. I think one of the differences that you mention would have to be that angels are supposed to be spirits and without bodies in the bible (Hebrews 1:14) but they do take on solid form from time to time in the scriptures- but in this Book of Enoch, that I have to admit I hadn't even heard of before today, they're managing to marry human women. So I take it they took on a male human form and stayed that way.

Its all real interesting and thought-making stuff

i belive there are both ..... good and evil angels....... just like in people...... just like heaven has there angels i would asume hell has there angels too........

Artemka: Thank you for your kind remarks.

Your question re: whether angels are corporeal or not is excellent. The answer ought not to be too controversial, I hope.

The Sumerians and Egyptians both stated these celestial visitors were corporeal (with bodies); they would have had to have been to have married women and sired Sumer's and Egypt's first rulers, after all.

Likewise, the Bible and the Book of Enoch both state that they sired children (this was, after all, only a far later revised version of the original Sumerian account).

It has only been in even far later additional revisions that angels have been depicted by Early Christian writers as being spirits, only.

Thus, the original (again... gotta find the primary source material as all others proceeding therefrom are not going to be as accurate) accounts from both Sumer and Egypt have these celestial visitors (again... that predated the Biblical accounts of "angels" by thousands of years!) as having bodies and able to procreate with Human females.

Upir, concerning Genesis ch 6, the bible translation has in impact on that, as many translations, old ones as well as new, do not state 'married' but 'lived with'.

I know taking into account every difference in translation would be painstaking, but it is as it is written, you know. But I guess one would have to learn hebrew for simplicity' sake ;)

VUpirLikhyj - were these angels who took human wives - the fallen angels ? I'm guessing so (because they don't live in heaven and so have fallen), wouldn't it follow that these angels couldn't all be evil / demons otherwise the earth would be littered with their evil offspring - or is it ?

Its really hard to get my mind round an earlier book on this stuff before the bible - its great that someone out there knows.

CTyler thanks for the input - please don't rush off and learn hebrew just for this thread :)

I would like to first thank everyone for all there posts. I learned some new stuff today. My oppinion has always been that angels are both good and evil. Heaven and hell both have there angels as well as Heaven has banished angels to hell etc.

Another thing, Upir. These Sumerian 'earlier accounts' you are talking about... would those be the Enuma Elish?

In that case, would this not carry the symptoms of the other thread, the vampire fact thread, where the earlier form of the creature would be drastically different or un-related to the modern (written judeo christian) form?

Origanolly posted by Cursedtodarkness: "Lucifer was an angel yes. The way I see things is..... There are different types of angels. I mean angels are to be Gods army. Well in the army are there not different ranks? I say there are the angels that are to only do as told, the weaker of the angels, and there are the angels with the power of Lucifer. Those angels have free will, and the ability to do many things, for if they didnt how would Lucifer have chosen evil. Do mortals not have the ability to choose good or evil? I believe somewhere in the bible (cant recall this second where) that everyone is given free will. I believe that angels are mostly good, but there are a few that decide to go astray, and that is their decision. I dont know if all that made sense to anyone but me but I hope it did. Mind you it doesnt mean I am correct, but just giving my input. :)"


This is extremly accorate in my opinion as well, angels much like humans especially of the higher statue have the ability to choose thier destiny. let us keep in mind that many of the things lucifer did are only THOUGHT to be evil... essentially it is OPINION. yes he did trick eve at the tree of knollage but did he really MAKE her take it?? no. he was told to test her and he did. angels are very complicated and have many types.... the ranks are long and elaborate if you take the time to look them up, they start small as just messangers, and go up to protecting god himself. in addition all angels have thier alliance choice... you see if a angel goes bad they often turn into a Dark angel, one that uses the force of evil rather then the force of good.... often joining saiten.... but they can also become Grey, from either A falling from heaven due to a bad act or evil act... or simply loosing thier zeal or faith in god. You cant ask if ANGELS are good or evil............thats like saying are humans good or evil? i mean one human can work in a hospitol while another is hurting people to the point of going to a hospitol. its the same principle.... so dont be pregidust and make stereo types either way....

thank you,
vX Vampre

i just saw mention of fallen angels taking human wives... well people say this is the reason for the great flood... to kill off these hybreds but it is rumored that noah had part in him that god somehow didnt know and some genes were passed down forming vampires and werewolves and elves ect...... and trying not to get too religios but i have a theory that jesus was half angel due to fact that god usually uses a angel to do his bidding and his powers would make scence... soo.... he could have a angel as a birth father

vXVampre yup I hear where you're coming from.

The problem is that some people do prejudge angels as being only good - others rename fallen (bad) angels as demons so that their evil deeds don't dirty the reputation/name of angels. That was the kciking off point of the thread

Most people, maybe all I can't recall, agree that angels can be both evil and good .. so far

CTyler -

Thanx for your remarks.

So far I have been unable to find any translation that translates Genesis 6 as "living with" rather than marrying the women. I would appreciate any citation where that interpretation is made.

Additionally, not only Genesis, but also the Books of Enoch and Jubillees as well as the acount of 1st Century historian Josephus all refer to these "angels" as having married their wives with whom they then had children.

As re: the "Enuma Elish," this was not a Sumerian account. This was instead a Babylonian account written in about 1200 BCE (contemporary with our current Old Testament), which is about 1000 years after the Sumerians.

According to the Church, Angels, by definition, are good... According to the truth, they are not all good, and an example might be The Angel of Death, which expresses the wraith of God on the humans...
Now, Lucifer is still an Angel...a Fallen One, yes, but still an Angel...
Do not make the mistake of reffering him as Satan, which is another Fallen One...
Lucifer, The Morning Star, was the brightest...he was the one who reflected the light of God upon the other Angels...he was the one who had free choice in the first place...
When he was cast away, his light began to fade and turned into darkness...
The other Fallen Angels became dark, as him, and turned ugly into the Hell's fire... and they became bad...
So, there you have it: there are good angels and bad ones...the only problem now is in who shall we trust?

Ahriman are you saying that Lucifer and Satan are not the same angel? Could you please specify so that I may understand a bit more what you are saying. That is the only thing that threw me off. :)

i have an issue with you saying that the angel of death is evil first of all dying is not a evil thing... and the vengance of god? god is ifinatly good no matter what he demands or says is good not evil. to be good is to strive to be like god.

Excuse me if that sounded argumenitive it wasnt my intention. i did understand basically the rest of what you siad but when it comes to angels with tasks such as those of killing, they are doing as they are ordered from thier commander.

when a war is waging you dont blame the soldiers you blame thier leader... so who would be in question is god not the angel... and this is what makes some people think god is evil.... but as most faithful would say he works in mysterous ways... we just have to believe in what he is saying is right... or join his enemy.

Ok im really fascinated with angels so it doesnt matter to me whether they are evil or good its just something about them I dont know they are just fascinating creatures.

Good or Evil? Seems to depend on your religious point of view.

To the Sumerians and Egyptians, they were considered very good and their unlimited sexual capacity was considered a gift of the Gods. To the ancient Hebrews, however, their insatiable sexuality made them evil.

As for the "angels" themselves, they are who they and how they are... whoever they are.

I like your point. Individuality I believe plays a key role here. It is all in ones perception of what is truley good or evil.

Wow! What a topic! I've enjoyed reading both the research and opinions expressed in this thread; it is something I've pondered often. So here's my thought...

I think Angels are an advanced version of us and therefore capable of good or evil, I just think that since the bible has become such a pervasive text in our society that most people don't think beyond what is written in it about angels. The bible says that angels are God's army, but it doesn't say all of the angels are in it and as stated earlier in the thread it is said that Lucifer took 1/3 of the angels with him when he left heaven. If Lucifer is considered capable of evil wouldn't it make sense that his followers would be as well?

Just my humble thoughts on this topic...

wise words plain and simple, factual and logical.

I agree with Niskuny. I think that angels are capable to be good or evil, and powerful.

Niskuny has it right on... short, sweet, and to the point.

Few understand that just because its the Bible doesn't mean it's accurate or objective; the Hebrews had their foundational biases, too... especially where sexuality was concerned. And the Old Testament was written over 2,000 years after the Sumerian Empire and at least 3,500 years after the time of the Anunnake they later called the Nephilim, the "Fallen Ones" (i.e., "Fallen Angels").

Forgive me any redundancy, I di feel compelled to "weigh in" o my Angel perspective. I believe they were "the Creators" (If such an entity exists) beta run. I see us as the final science project. Angles are incomplete bologically, but I believe them to be hyper-sensitive emotionally. This can be simply so by the "higher-knowledge" they possess that we do not. Asfterall, us mere humans barely use our brains to a quarter of their capacity.

Theologians can only do what htey do best -- theorize this subject. We are none smarter but our opening up more and more to the "divine" and recording it does give an opportuniity to credit or discredit.

CryingDuchess, I am amazed at the extent of your amazing insight: you're right there. There's a reason why these proto-"angels" were first called "The Watchers."

A far more accurate word for them would have been "The Observers." They are indeed "Creators" on a level of existence higher than ours and to which we may ultimately achieve, as well. And YES, as they are more advanced, they are also much more highly potentiated emotionally... which also explains their hyper-sensuality and sexual capacity, as well.

(Notice that they bonded emotionally with their mates first, including marriage, prior to bonding sexually with them, as well. A lesson we need to learn and understand in THIS Age if ever we hope to progress to their level.)

Now... I ask you... is that evil, or very very good?

whaaaaatttt???? what does all that have to do with them being evil or not? this is just like side notes on thier nature and properties... not to be a nag but lets try to focus.

"Good" and "evil" are shamefully outdated, inaccurate terms. There exist so many shades of grey, it would be feeble minded to say or believe that things can be put into such simple, nondescript categories. Evil and good are relative, man made descriptions made to make life easier and more distinguishable. Sadly it will never be that easy.

I agree with focusing.

I believe the basics of this is what you truely believe in.

As far as the Satan/Lucifer, is he one in the same, that he was the appointed & anointed Cherub, ect. There's a book titled 'The Devil' by John Wesley White, foreword by Billy Graham (author of "Angels"). There is a lot of information along with scriptures verses from where the info comes from.

vXVampre: You didn't understand how understanding the nature of these "angels" is critical in objectively evaluating whether they were good or evil? I would think this is the only way to attempt determining this.

And frankly, I find such far more on point than discussing what Billy Graham or other modern writers might think of Satan/Lucifer. In fact, the topic of Satan/Lucifer has almost nothing to do with determining the good/evil of angels, which is the topic of this thread.

I have to disagree a bit with you... the whole thing of Lucifer being involved is that Lucifer himself is an angel. Biblically speaking he was the first to fall, and frankly the only one I have read about to have fallen. Lucifer being cast out and now whom is refered to as Satan is where he comes into play in this thread as being part of the good/ evil balance. I see how this ties in quite well. I am not trying to argue just simply felt the need to point that out.

hmm...i hate to but i disagree with you house member, i dont see how the sexuality of the angels deals with the way they behave... evil demons mate as well how does this part of thier behavior depict wether or not they are evil and dark or light and good?

to the mention of good and evil being too basic this is true but as we are all humans here...or similar to humans at the least... we all understand that they are being generally placed as mostly this or mostly that... and ive already mentioned that thier are grey angels.

Well... to counter such re: the origins of Satan/Lucifer would truly take this discussion too far afield of its focus. So, I'll continue to address the issue of angels, generally.


As for vXVampire's latest remark: while you disagree, the fact is that ... as previously discussed at length here, the concept of angels began with the "Fallen Angels" of Genesis 6 where the angels were condemned for having had sex with Human females. Thus, their sexuality is at the heart of whether or not they were good or evil.

The reason I disagree with leaving Lucifer out of this discussion, and that he is not relavent is.... in the very first post that the person who brought us this disccusion made, he is named from the get go.... Therefore I dont see how it is off topic to mention him when he was mentioned in the very first post and topic starter.... I feel that he plays into the topic because as humans we were not there and can not very well know what truley happend. All we have to go on is what we can read and learn, from the men that have written about it. I feel that leaving his fall from grace, due to his choices, is leaving a part of the story out. He is a prime example of the capability of choice that an angel has... Therefore in my eyes makes him very relavent.

those angels were condemed yes but by doing that they choose evil by disobeying god... so they were (grey or dark or fallen )

so by you choosing that you are generalizing all angels on a few... and with lucifer he is a a prime example of one that did somthing similar to the group you choose to use as an example...

so if you can use a few as an example saiten should also be used as one.... you are directly controdicting your self...

in essance these examples show us that angels have a choice. they can choose good or evil based on thier direct actions... but we must understand that god chooses whitch actions are good or evil.

vXVampire: You've missed the point entirely, as pointed out by others and myself when history is examined from all standpoints re: who and what these first "angels" truly were.

As stated by Niskuny and others, "good" and "evil" cannot be determined simply because the Bible called them one or the other. It requires far more scholarship on the subject, which is the point of this thread. Were it so cut and dried that Biblical "authority" alone decided the issue, what would be the point of discussing it here?

Sexuality either way I think is a very human term as to if that is evil or not is also due to human beliefs not gods, demons or angels...
Angels being bad or god are our limited concept of the terms good and evil and I doubt were the last part of the experiment at all our brains are far to limited we dont use as much as we have so we cant be..We are part of a greater working something we cant see and would understand in the first place even if we saw the whole picture..
If Angels are the first in this and we are next what will come after us???
I dont mean to seem argumentitive here at all ok just I think saying we are the end and best result of an experiment is rather egotistical...

And as re: Lucifer... it is important to study what was originally intended here, as well.

"Lucifer" is a word based in Latin ("Light bearer") which language did not even exist when this term was first recorded in Isaiah 14:12. This word was a mistranslation made by early Christian Fathers (particularly St. Jerome in the 4th Century) and that mistranslation has continued to our day.

Actually, the term that was mistranslated as "Lucifer" was a Hebraic play on words that specifically referenced the King of Babylon then ruling, as made evident by reading Isaiah 14:2 (ten verses earlier).

For those interested in this: Lucifer Explained

I will gladly take myself from this now, because it has become an argument. It was to be mearly opinion, and opinion is not scholar nor is it right or wrong. This was a fun topic to read and post on until it became apparent that opinions were to be bashed, and things that could play a part dismissed. I simply implied that taking a piece from the story as a whole doesnt help find a resolution. I feel that all opinions are correct because they are indeed opinions. I personally do not wish to be informed that my opinion is not acceptable. I found myself going against my own beliefs of not being argumentive, and I do not like that. I feel that arguing over opinions is off topic in itself, and I personally enjoyed reading everyones.

my goodness the intelligance is vanishing and me too... im not going to stay either... i didnt come to argu over the meaning of the word lucifer when we are talking about somone named it... my name is christopher meaning bearing christ.. does that mean he is in me? does everyone named christopher have that same quality?? this is mad ....so i am leaving before my natural insticts as a aries start a fight.... good bye.

Ironic that both of you (cursedtodarkness and vxvampire) should attempt to portray this thread as deviating from the topic when it was your posts re: lucifer that got us here (as I tried to point out several posts ago). If it finally took me pointing out this tangent as a dead-end issue so as to get us back on topic, then while sad that you both have taken offense thereto, yet hopefully this thread is now back on point.

No you have not proven anything sir. I have not become angry, I just feel that I do not wish to become argumentive. However I shall not stand back to let you seemingly belittle and obscure what I said. I did not start this thread nor did I begin with bringing Lucifer/Satan into it. I simply pointed out that he was brought into the picture from the beginning.. You misread and misunderstood what I was saying.

Fine... let's just keep beating it to a pulp:

As Lucifer was not being referred to as having "fallen" in Isaiah 14:12, but instead the King of Babylon... Lucifer was not a "Fallen Angel"... hence not relevant to a discussion of those so portrayed.

Now... can we return to a discussion of those actual angels and all others?

Lucifer is highly irrelevant in terms of putting so much focus on it, lets not put the focus on a charictor from a fable. Shall we not egg on further argument and or debate on that matter?

yeah I thought this thread was on whether angels are good or evil???
Good and evil are human concepts we place value on them.
I don't think they even apply to angels or any celestial beings, we cant limit them to our values what we think is right or wrong..
We don't and can't see the bigger picture that may or may not be an issue or is important to beings that have different concepts then we do.
I like the history again but then I am a history buff and it always interests me to read about things that are from the past.
I think it is a bit presumptious of us to place what we see as right or wrong on creatures we have no understanding of it tend to be to me a bit like making a moral value for a culture we arent apart of.
I personally havent ever done a study of the bible nor and other myths involving angels.
My grand did tell me as a kid that Lucifer was the most beautful of angels but head strong and wilfull he wanted to have the same powers as god and wouldn't do as he was told. That is when god cast him out of heaven...

Good bad or indifferent (yes there are some who are)....

we all play a role, Though that statement may deviate from "angels" as was said above me, there is a bigger picture that must be taken into consideration. You miss the point when you place your terms on things, black and white does not exist here.

I agree that we can not label an angel. The only opinion I can honestly give is that I would think that they have the choice of their paths. It is hard to go with the bible in this situation, due to the fact of its huge change over the years of being translated and its constant contradictions of itself. Unfortunatly when trying to perceive an answer to this question bible is all we truley have to go on. I know that I dont like to be labled and I would think it unfair to lable a being of such greatness.

Biblically speaking (since that is all we have to go by, despite its inaccuracy) angels were created in gods form just as man, which is why most pictures portray them as human with wings... some studies will tell you that angels are gleaming rays of light....

There are also faiths that believe the fallen angel or the angel that chooses evil (whichever you prefer) to be the vampire...

It truley is all a matter of ones perception and opinon, I we leave our lack of understanding out of this and just say that angels are unlabelable. LOL.... with that being said I am finished... I have put all the input I have into this unless something else is said that I think is a good point or something interesting to learn.

it is also said that the offspring of Angels and Humans (the Nephlim) are the gods of the ancient civilizations. i.e. [romans, Greeks, Norse, Egyptians, babylonians......ect.]. Jesus is also thought to be Nephlim and he did not die on the cross.

Yes, lots of interesting speculation on the matter. Saw something on the History channel about it.

This thread has been automatically closed for length.