By T.G. Blankenship at The Gethsemane Blog
Many people have a notion that when they die they shall be given wings and transformed into an angel, maybe even a loved-one's guardian angel. It is a popular belief that angels are an elevated form of human; an improved or superior type of being when compared with man. This is part of the reason why people will call a loved one their "angel" (though I like to think people use it to mean that the person is a messenger/servant of God in disguise as seen in the story of Lot when he lived in Sodom).
Some Christians even believe these things about angels and humans to be true. In fact, I recently came across a teaching of a man named Brian Barthrop, a false prophet/teacher, who stated, "The more you grow in the glory the more you feel and actually are an angel with a little body suit on." Because these views are so popular I want to try and set the record straight on the issue of angels, humans, their differences, and resurrection in a few short words.
The word for angel in the greek is 'angelos' (αγγελος) which primarily means messenger. An angel's primary function is to relay messages of God through both words and deed. Scripture shows angels relaying God's messages to humans (Acts 7:53), helping to protect humans (Genesis 19:15, Psalm 91:11), destroying (Psalm 78:49, 2 Samuel 24:16), killing (Revelation 9:15), aiding in judgment (Matthew 13:49), and even ministering to Jesus (Matthew 4:11). From the way angels are spoken of in scripture (especially the ones which depict the return of Christ) we can conclude that while they function here on earth they also derive from another place or plain in which God is present (John 1:51,Mark 13:27 and 32).
The creation account tells us that humans are made in the image of God (imago dei). This is never said of angelic beings. At the same time, both angels and humans have the free will to rebel against God as we see with Satan and the demons. It is debated whether or not these rebellious angels will be able to be redeemed as humans were. Billy Graham argued that they will not get to experience redemption since they rebelled without influence whereas humans were influenced by already rebellious beings. This argument looks to Matthew 25:41 for support. In 1 Corinthians 6:3, Paul makes it clear that humans will one day judge the angels (most likely in reference to rebellious angels which we call demons). A distinction is made between the two created beings in this verse.
In Hebrews 2, the author reminds the reader of Psalm 8:4-6 which states, "...what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet," This speaks of both Jesus (who was to come) and humanity in general. Jesus made himself lower than the angels in bodily form, taking on the form of a human who already was lower in form than the angels.
It is here, through a misunderstanding, that people get the idea that humans shall one day become angels. The passage says that humans and Christ shall, for a while, be lower than the angels. Doesn't this mean there shall come a time when men shall be angels? Not quite. It does mean that humans shall become like angels. This leads us into the discussion on resurrection. Christ was resurrected, the first of all who would be resurrected. When he was resurrected he had a different form of body, a heavenly body. This same transformation is promised to humans upon their resurrection.
In 1 Corinthians 15:35-49, Paul gives some explanation for the differences in the natural/earthly body and the spiritual/heavenly body and why we must first experience the natural/earthly body before experiencing the spiritual/heavenly body. For our purposes we can simply say that the two are different and that we are like Adam in our earthly state but shall be raised and made like Christ in our resurrection state. In Luke 20:36, Jesus also teaches on the post-resurrection nature of humans saying,, "...they cannot die anymore, because they are equal to angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection" (Luke 20:36). But what is that post-resurrection body like? How is it no longer lower than the angels? How is it similar or equal?
R
ight away we can determine from this teaching that angels don't die and their bodies are thus imperishable. This shall be true of those humans who are resurrected. Paul continues his teaching that we examined a moment ago in verses 50-58 by stating that this transformation is a mystery. He also states, "...we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality" (vv. 52-53).
Jesus examples this spiritual body when he visits his followers after his resurrection. Mark 16:12 communicates that Jesus appeared in different forms to different people in this body.* We're told that angels can be disguised as humans (Hebrews 13:2) and we see this happen in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19). It seems that the spiritual body is able to transform in these ways. Luke 24:31 shows the post-resurrected Christ being able to vanish before the eyes of two men. Perhaps this is also a characteristic of such a body. Later in the same chapter Jesus shows the wounds of his hands and feet to the followers to convince them that he is who he is. Perhaps this is part of his ability to transform and perhaps the marks are truly still there (many would argue that the marks remained and that it is not a trick).
Ultimately, being imperishable is the defining characteristic of this spiritual body which the angels already possess and which we shall inherit through the resurrection we receive and share in Christ Jesus. When the scriptures say than humans are lower than the angels it means that they are in bodies which are perishable. One day, those who are resurrected will have imperishable bodies, like the angels, but they will not be angels, they will be resurrected humans.
Matthew 22:30 says that we will be similar to angels after resurrection but it does not say that we will be angels. It is at that point that we shall share more similarities than we currently do, such as not being concerned with earthly bonds as found among spouses, but we will continue to be different from the angels. This passage gives a pretty clear picture as to why the notion of being a guardian angel for a loved one doesn't make sense biblically. When we enter into the resurrection we shall no longer have such concerns for God shall be everyone's all in all. A similar teaching can be found in Luke 20:27-39.
At the end of the day, scripture never gives the impression that a human shall become any angel or that an human has ever been an angel. Rather, scripture tells us directly that certain humans shall be resurrected just like Christ was resurrected and in that time they shall be transformed from a perishable body into an imperishable body. From that time forward humans will also be similar to angels in the way that they will no longer be concerned with things such as marriage or other unique bonds found only upon perishable earth. At no point are we instructed that humans shall return to their previous angel state or that they shall become angels, we are merely told that the two will have similarities as eternal beings who experience God as their all in all in his realized kingdom of heaven.
So the next time someone says you'll become an angel when you die or tries to convince you that you're already an angel in a human disguise, tell them that scripture paints a different picture.
*Some manuscripts don't include this passage.
True
Comments (15)
I appreciate your points, but you didn't show that scripture decisively states that humans willnot become angels. It's possible that angels were once humans and/or other spiritual beings that now act in a specific function, i.e. messengers for God. Certainly Scripture doesn't say we WILL be angels either, but I don't see how it's an impossibility.
Thank you for this educational post! So many people say or believe this misconception. It makes me clench my teeth when I hear it because it's not supported anywhere.
@kk_grayfox@xanga - but angels and humans are separately created beings. As the OP states, humans are made in the image of God, where as angels are spiritual beings that take human form as necessary. Each category of created being by God has his or her, or it's, own role and purpose. An angel cannot do what I do on a daily basis, nor I the same as an angel. God put us on different strata as created beings for a reason.
@Lean_to_the_Write@xanga - So what is God's image? Is it flesh or is it spirit? The former makes no logical sense so our spirits are what are made in God's image. Why can't angels be human spirits, created in His image, that now serve Him as messengers? God is Spirit (John 4:24), angels are spirits (Hebrews 1:14) and we have spirits (1 Thess 5:23). To me it seems quite possible that after we leave our bodies, depending on our relationship with God, we may choose to minister on behalf of God in spirit as angels.
@kk_grayfox@xanga - The reasoning in the post is clear and logical. It adheres to Scripture and aligns with the teaching traditions of Judaic, Christian, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Islamic faith and sects. Humans are humans, angels are angels. Just as I cannot die and become a dog, I cannot die and become an angel. God glorifies the human body after death and judgement, angelic spirits do not change in nature/appearance. We are separate. Angels are spirits; when Scripture refers to humans as having a spirit, it is in reference to our Soul. We do not have a choice to minister God as angels; God chooses. He is Creator; He is Supreme. We serve as He created us to, we cannot take over His Will.
@kk_grayfox@xanga - We are made in the image of God in both flesh and spirit. The shape of our body is the name of God written in Hebrew. You can see that in this image http://www.joshuagraves.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Yahweh.jpg.
The word image as used in Genesis refers to a specific type of image. It is the image a king would have made (i.e. a portrait or statue) and spread across the kingdom so the people would know who he is and what he looks like. Our physical bodies are living tatoos of His name on this earth. We are a physical reminder of who is King. And we are His image in spirit. Our physical bodies point to who is King and our spiritual lives depict what He looks like (albiet, we do a very poor job of that).
@Lean_to_the_Write@xanga - I am not saying that this post is not clear and logical, I am saying that it never ultimately refutes the worldview that it's opposed to (i.e. that humans can become angels).
Everything you say afterwards in your comment is your opinion (i.e. they aren't based on facts) and I totally respect that. I just differ in my conclusions.
@Watanuki10@xanga - Google "YHWH in ancient Hebrew" and you will get a very different image (e.g. http://www.alanhorvath.com/bibletools_yhwh.php). Remember that it was written in a more antiquated version of Hebrew before it was ever written as depicted in the image you shared (since the Hebrew language has changed over the millennia).
So do you think we literally look like God does? Or how God would look if He was flesh?
Because everything you said could be satisfied simply by the fact that we "look" like God in our spirits: we're powerful, creative, loving, selfless, etc. (as long as we're aware of our real identity in Him).
@kk_grayfox@xanga - Maybe this will help:
There is never a connection of any kind between the terms used for angels and those used for humans in scripture that would communicate the notion that human beings will become angels. Any language that discusses the future state of humans (that is post-resurrection humans) that is connected with angelic beings is language which is associated with similarities but never sameness. In other words, within the teachings that connect human beings to angelic beings in the post-resurrection circumstance there is a distinct separation between the two when humans and angels are set side by side in order to show how the two are similar. To show the ways in which they are similar also shows that they are not the same because when something is the same as something else one merely needs to say they have become the same. However, when someone illustrates the similarities between two different things they show both that the two things are different while merely sharing select attributes.
The scriptures don't need to explain that humans won't become angels because there was no need for such clarifications in the times and places of the writings. Not only that, but the distinctions between the two types of beings is plainly seen in scripture, even in the post-resurrection descriptions. To continue the use of distinctive terms in the post-resurrection scenario proves that one does not become the other. That is, because the New Testament authors don't speak of humans as angels at any point but rather speak of humans and of angels separately when they speak of the time after the resurrection we can very safely conclude that the two remain different even if they share similarities. The consistent language and structure of language in scripture show that humans do not become angels but acquire attributes that angels also possess because of the realm in which they exist.
Nothing in the scriptures makes any allusions to the notion that any angel was a human being at an earlier point in creation's history. If angels had previously been humans then a teaching upon this fact would be present in the scriptures or, at the very least, popular in traditional rabbinic teachings, but this is not the case. With the information provided by scripture on the nature of angels and of humans we have to conclude that the burden of scriptural evidence lies in the camp of those who would argue that humans become angels. An argument from silence is no argument at all and the scriptures don't at all seem silent about what angels are or what they do. Nor are the scriptures silent about the nature of humans. To rest upon the argument that scripture doesn't say humans don't become angels is insufficient since the scriptures provide enough information about the nature of humans, angels, and the resurrection to conclude that humans do not become angels.
http://leonew36.wordpress.com/
http://leonew360.wordpress.com/
http://www.facebook.com/new.age.revolution
@kk_grayfox@xanga - No, I don't think we literally look the way God does. As I said, we are tattoos of His name. Physically and spiritually we are His image on this earth. If that were not so, why give us physical bodies?
Remember, God did take on flesh, and He did look like us.
@kk_grayfox@xanga - Also, thanks for the link. I gave it a cursory read (off to class now), but it looks like it deserves a more careful read through.
@TheGreatBout@xanga - "
Any language that discusses the future stateof humans (that is post-resurrection humans) that is connected with
angelic beings is language which is associated with similarities but
never sameness."
Post-resurrection humans are not the same as post-death humans. Perhaps disembodied humans can become angels.
"To show the ways in which they are similaralso shows that they are not the same because when something is the same
as something else one merely needs to say they have become the same."
There are different descriptions for God "the Father", God "the Son" and God "the Holy Spirit", as well as descriptions that show they are similar. Does that mean that they aren't the same?
"The scriptures don't need to explain thathumans won't become angels because there was no need for such
clarifications in the times and places of the writings."
Okay, fair enough. But you can just as easily say that there was no need to describe that they would become angels. Why would it matter to humans in the here and now what they will eventually become? I know Paul described post-resurrection bodies to some extent, but it certainly wasn't extensive and probably wasn't necessary.
"Nothing in the scriptures makes any allusionsto the notion that any angel was a human being at an earlier point in
creation's history. If angels had previously been humans then a teaching
upon this fact would be present in the scriptures or, at the very
least, popular in traditional rabbinic teachings, but this is not the
case."
You're assuming that all of the information that exists about angels and humans can be found in the Bible. The Bible could most certainly be omitting plenty of facts about these beings. It's certainly omitting plenty about humans. There's terribly little on the background of angels, so why should you assume that if it's true it HAS to be in the Bible?
"With the information provided by scriptureon the nature of angels and of humans we have to conclude that the
burden of scriptural evidence lies in the camp of those who would argue
that humans become angels."
That's fair. That's why you could look to other sources besides scripture.
"An argument from silence is no argument at all and the scriptures don't at all seem silent about what angels are or what they do"But I think your argument is an argument from silence: the Bible doesn't mention anyone becoming an angel, therefore we do not become angels.
"To rest upon the argument that scripture doesn't say humans don't become angels is insufficient "I don't disagree.
@Watanuki10@xanga -
"Remember, God did take on flesh, and He did look like us."Well, it would have been difficult for Him to relate to us if He was a squirrel...lol.
"Also, thanks for the link. I gave it acursory read (off to class now), but it looks like it deserves a more
careful read through."
I actually didn't read the link. I just found YHWH in ancient Hebrew and that was one of the places that had it (though you can find it elsewhere).
@kk_grayfox@xanga - Haha! Indeed it would be hard for Him to relate to us as a squirrel. I like your sense of humor.