Talk:Archangel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Archangel is part of WikiProject Judaism, a project to improve all articles related to Judaism. If you would like to help improve this and other articles related to the subject, consider joining the project. All interested editors are welcome. This template adds articles to Category:WikiProject Judaism articles. |
|
Project Judaism To-do:
|
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
168.122.214.55 04:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Benjamin Hemeon is an archangel.168.122.214.55 04:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Are the archangels in Islam 3+1, 4+1, or 7+1? The text is not clear...Jorge Stolfi 01:51, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
- Four archangels in Islam - Michael, Gabriel, Israfel & Azrael. - Lee (talk) 02:19, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hello everyone;
In islamic traditions; CAMI (which means Mosque) represents the four archangels. CAMI = Cebrail (Gabriel) , Azrail (Azrael) , Mikael (Michael) and Israfil (Israfel, some translates it as Uriel.)
I would like to ask a question; I have prepared the archangel document of Remiel and Ariel and I was also thinking adding Jeremiel but it is represented as Remiel here. In many traditions, the name of such archangel is always Jeremiel but I really don't know how to change the name of the document. Anybody could help ? Or any ideas ?
Thanks. --Nerval 13:56, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] "year 0"?
"Satan falling from his position at about the year 0 following a dispute with Michael"
What calendar is being used here? Last I knew, the common western calendar doesn't include a 0 year.
ben hemeon= archangel
[edit] Other traditions
Is there a citation to support the claim of an early Christian tradition of invoking the 4 archangels as guardians of the 4 directions? I'd believe gnostic, but that was never considered part of the Christian church and is clearly based on a non-Christian source anyway.
Isn't "Tarish" in this context fictional? I suggest we not include fictional depictions of archangels as representing "other traditions" since an exhaustive list would dominate the article, and there's really no reason to favor one fictional world over another. TCC (talk) (contribs) 01:40, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've removed the reference to the Tarish; I have not been able to find any resources to validate the statement that was in the article. If anyone knows more about this, feel free to add it back with the appropriate link. Zahakiel 17:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Amr Ashraf
The archangels in Islam are known to be 7 written on the page, some of them are not written in the quran because not all of the religion is taken from the quran some are taken from al Hadith. In some Hadith's (words spoken by the prophet Muhammed pbuh) there are stories told of these archangels. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.204.159.162 (talk • contribs).
[edit] Other beliefs concerning the Archangels
In the Latter-Day Saint aspect of the Chirstian faith, it is believed that the Archangels were given a chance at humanity. It is believed that the Biblical father of humanity, Adam, was actually Micheal. Also, Noah is believed to have been Gabriel. Raphael is still undiscovered as of right now, as still are the other four. But who knows what revelations the future may bring? 64.183.50.49 08:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)Aaron Melancon —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.183.50.49 (talk) 07:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC).
Hi guys, i was just wondering where archangel Raziel was included in the lists.
I have here a link to a wikipedia page about him. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raziel Please look at this, as i was worried as to why he had not been included. Seen as he was Keeper of Secrets" and the "Angel of Mysteries." Also His famous Sefer Raziel HaMalach ("Book of Raziel the Angel") contains all secret knowledge and is considered to be a book of "magic." He stands close by God's throne, and therefore hears and writes down everything that is said and discussed.
I thought this information was important and should be included on this page. Feel free to disagree
2. CORRECTION: Satan's original name was NOT Lucifer Morningstar --- it was Lucibelle Shadow-of-Venus (translated: "reflection of the morning star").
[edit] Archangel gender
This sentence seems confused; "To be exact Nakir and Munkar are never mentioned as archangels in the Quran or any other Islamic Text; it is emphasised in Islamic texts that angels are genderless". 'Archangel' is no more or less gendered than is 'angel', so I can't figure out what point the writer was trying to get across. 85.8.12.78 15:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- I couldn't either... I have cleaned up the paragraph a bit, and removed the "by-the-way" statement about gender. That should probably be covered in Islamic view of angels, although it isn't, and may be incorrect. Angels like Harut and Marut are described as falling in love with mortal women, so the statement was open for debate anyway. ◄Zahakiel► 15:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Only one Archangel?
Hi everyone
I am puzzled by the idea that there can be more than one Archangel.... According to what I read and understand the word Archangel is defined as follows:
L.L. archangelus, from Gk. arkhangelos "chief angel," from arkh- "chief, first"
Does that allow for several archangels? I don't believe so.
The prefix “arch,” meaning “chief” or “principal,” implies that there is only one archangel, the chief angel; in the Scriptures, “archangel” is never found in the plural. First Thessalonians 4:16, in speaking of the preeminence of the archangel and the authority of his office, does so in reference to the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ: “The Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.” It is, therefore, not without significance that the only name directly associated with the word “archangel” is Michael.—Jude 9; see MICHAEL No. 1.
So the way I understand it Jesus in his heavenly role is Michael and he alone is THE Archangel...
Maybe you have other points of view... I'd be intersted to hear them.
David Harvey80.43.61.236 10:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Mr. Harvey,
- A good question. It is true that arch is translated as "chief" or "principal" from the Greek word, but this does not linguistically imply uniqueness. For example, there were several "chief priests," archiereus, among the Sanhedrin, (Acts 26:12) and "chief captains," chiliarchos, among the various dignitaries of the earth in Revelation's prophecies. (Rev 6:15) You are perfectly correct that Michael is the only named Archangel in the canonical Bible, but the Book of Daniel clearly states that He is one of a particular set. Gabriel describes Him as "one of the chief princes, [who] came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia." (Dan 10:13) This is obviously, from internal evidence, speaking about divine beings, for there was only one human "king" of Persia at the time, but Michael here is one of the "chief princes," a phrase in Hebrew (h'sarim h'rishonim) that corresponds precisely with the New Testament term "arch-angel," remembering that "princes" and "kings" are being used in this context of spiritual figures.
- Now, you'll probably notice that I capitalized the word "He" just now :) This is because I actually agree with your view of Michael as a pre-incarnation manifestation of the non-created Son of God... but this is based on other factors than the label that Michael is given, for example the intercessory role He takes, the fact that the "Captain of the Lord's Host/Yahweh Angel" received worship in Joshua 5, and that the name Micha-El means "One who is like God" (I do not believe any lesser being could truly be "like God" in the sense that a uniquely identifying name would indicate, and names represent characteristics in Biblical language). Christ was a "man," one of many, but not limited by that designation. He was a "prophet" in that He prophesied, and one of many, but not limited by that designation either. Therefore, to say that there are many archangels (as the language of Scripture would suggest) and that Michael was considered to be one of this class does not in any way restrict an interpretation of His Person to also be the One who would later become the Christ. If you have any further questions, because I don't want to stray too far from the issue of the article itself, feel free to post me at my talk page. ◄Zahakiel► 18:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
WHAT???? What kind of Oneness Pentecostalism are you peddling? Jesus was a man, possibly a nephilim, but not as you think. I used to go to Cavalry Chapel until they started pushing that stuff.--71.185.193.245 (talk) 00:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Hiya!
I checked out your other page... WOW! That's quite an impressive profile you have there! I'm afraid in the words of the scripts I am just an unlettered man... Never passed a worthwhile exam in my life.... just a baker by trade... and a simple would-be lover of God like yourself... So if I screw up linguistically or otherwise you'll have to bear with me! Thanks.
I know that this is slightly off topic but... I was puzzled that you say that Jesus, in his pre-human existence was the non created Son of God. Have I misunderstood Colossians 1:14 which states in my Bible.. (American Standard) that Christ is "the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation"? And Revelation 3:14 where Jesus is spoken of as "the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God" And Proverbs 8: where my Bible says that Jesus as Wisdom personified was "brought forth" ?
I am off on holiday for a while tomorrow morning but I will check your reply when I return... Keep it as simple as you can... thanks.
David.
- Since it is a bit off topic, I am posting the reply on my talk page. ◄Zahakiel► 14:52, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] No explicit references to archangels in the Old Testament?
Isn't the Hebrew word Elohim currently translated as "The Archangels"? This is one of the two most common words for God in the Old Testament.207.118.47.197 09:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
- No. "Elohim" is translated "God". TCC (talk) (contribs) 09:38, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
Where is Elohim translated as "God"? Christians translate it as "The Trinity". The only two Hebrew translations I have come across are "The Others" and "The archangels". "The Others" suggests an origin separate from Yahweh, so it can hardly be canon. Rabbis I have spoken to on the matter say that the reason every archangel's name ends in "el" is a reference to their position as one of the Elohim. Can I ask for a source for translating Elohim into God, aside from the scribes of King James?69.29.217.85 21:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- You can check any lexicon of Biblical Hebrew. You can read the Strong's Concordance or Thayer's Lexicon. Elohim in Hebrew is almost unversally translated as "God." Specifically, the word Elohim occurs in the Masoretic text 2606 times. This was the set of documents from which all the older versions of the English Bible, not just the King James, were translated. Of those times, it is translated into "God" on 2346 occasions. It is translated into the word "god" 244 more times, when it refers not to the God of the Hebrews, but to heathen deities. In a very few instances it is used as an adjective, e.g., "mighty" or "great." It is never translated as "the others" or "the archangels" in the Old Testament in any version of which I am aware, and the word "Trinity" does not occur in the Bible in either Testament. ◄Zahakiel► 21:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- "Scribes of King James"? That's a new one on me. The KJV was made by translation committees, not by a professional class of scribes. To the extent they still existed at the time -- literacy was more widespread than it had been -- they were called "scriveners".
- I suspect either you misunderstood the rabbis or they were deliberately misleading you. That can happen when someone asks what they feel is an inappropriate question, or where they judge that the true answer would do more harm to the inquirer than good. Most archangels' names end in "-el" because they translate to a description of some way the archangel relates to God, not because they are God.
- Christians translate "Elohim" as "God", as you ought to know since you have apparently read the KJV. (If you haven't, then you should if you're going to be entering discussions on the subject.) I defy you to show even one place in any Christian translation where "Elohim" is translated "Trinity", "archangels" or "the others".
- As for Jewish translations, the 1917 JPS translation is PD and easy to find on the web. You'll fine "Elohim" translated "God" there as well, right from the very first sentence of the Law. [1] TCC (talk) (contribs) 22:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Since personal communications are not evidence and retranslation of Biblical texts nigh impossible in today's political climate, I will simply ask one last question.
Why then is it Elohim (a plural) rather then Eloha?69.29.217.85 23:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- There are various theories on the etymology and morphology of the word, which Elohim summarizes. It also gives various fringe theories, such as those of the Raelians and anthroposophists, which need not be taken seriously.
- Biblical texts are retranslated all the time, some with particular social agendas in mind and others without. You can only say this is impossible if you're not familiar with the subject. If it were possible to translate "Elohim" as "The Others" or "The Archangels" there would surely be a translation that does so. TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:35, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I am satisfied with the contradictory nature of your explanation. Thank you.69.29.217.85 23:52, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- To give you a concise answer regarding why it is Elohim rather than Eloah, in Biblical Hebrew (and you can check with the Rabbis you mentioned about this) it is sometimes the case that pluralizing something increases its importance. For example, behamah is "beast," and Behemoth (fem. plural) is not literally translated as "the (female) beasts," but as "the great beast." It is the same with El/Eloah; plurality in form indicates importance of concept. You can verify this by both context and subject-pronoun agreement in the documents themselves. ◄Zahakiel► 05:06, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] it's all Greek to me
Isn't the Greek for archangel spelled with a "nu" insted of two gammas? αρχανγελος ? P.M. Kernkamp 07:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- No... see the corresponding section re: the Greek spelling on the Angel talk page. ◄Zahakiel► 14:26, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
- oops! yes, you're right of course. Thanks for putting me right! P.M. Kernkamp 15:40, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
can archangels be seraphs? If not so does this mean that arch angel michael isnt a serpah, and therefor as the general of gods army either stronger than a seraph or didnt the seraphs take part in the war in heaven? As the highest order of angels youd think the serpahs would lead or fight in a battle that determined the fate of the universe.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.160.170.135 (talk) 02:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Scientific section needed
Evidence needed? Why did the idea of an archangel evolve? Mike0001 (talk) 20:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Lucifer
I cut the following, as neither reference was actually supported the statement: "Sometimes Satan (named Satanel in the Book of Enoch) is considered a fallen archangel whose original name was Lucifer, or "Son of the Morning".Isaiah 14:12[1]". Note "Lucifer" in the KJV translation of Is 14:12 is a transliteration of the latin lucifer ('lucis-ferre' or light bringer), which is a translation of the original, and completely different, hebrew word. TrickyApron (talk) 20:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Where does it say anywhere that Lucifer was an angel and got cast out of heaven? Nomad13 (talk) 18:32, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Gabriel as Archangel
Where is Gabriel mentioned as being an archangel? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Monkeysocks2 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
