I watched the first Prophecy not too long ago, coincidentally - Walken delivered a perfect performance that definitely portrayed how angels can indeed be very strange
Yeah. Interesting, Kristin. Thanks for putting angels into perspective beyond blind human ignorance and child-like fawning over these serious Devine entities. I appreciate your frank approach to many topics, literary or otherwise.
One, the prophecy is amazing. After seeing Viggo Mortensen as Lucifer it was hard to see him be Aragorn.
As for the complexity of Angels, between the physical biblical descriptions of Angels, and the old testament recaps, I think it is safe to say that they very complex entities. How can you read about a four faced winged thing, and also that Angels fell in love with the daughters of men? The idea is almost Lovecraftian, but certainly unnerving. If there was ever a lost book to be found, perhaps a version of Enoch that can be proven original without the Manichean additions would prove useful.
I think the reason the Angels (let's put a cap 'A' in there out of reverence and respect; I don't want to call one down for being disrespectful) had no eyes in the first movie was a demonstration they had no souls, not as we have. If there is a core Angelic spirit, it must be utterly different. Eyes are the windows to the soul; no need for windows if no soul is home. All that's just a speculation or opinion but I think it consistent with the movie.
What I like to see are movies that put things back where they belong... The Witch (2015) was a brilliant film that put the Witch back her place as an agent of The Enemy. Nosferatu (2024) put vampires back in the category of implacable eaters of humans, destroyers to be feared and fought. This is the turning of the tide, the ending of the Great Inversion that has upended Western Civilization.
These inversions happen from time to time; if you care to follow any of the stuff put out by Johnathon Pageau, he elaborates on such symbolic upheavels in human civilization, where the monsters from the margins try to rule from throne and temple only to fail utterly and be restored to the margins. We are amdist such an inversion now, obviously. The great utility to Pageau's take on these things is his interpretations of them are in symbolic ways. His insights are steeped in deep, deep faith and equally as deep understanding from serious studies of Christian writings ancilliary to his Greek Orthodox faith. (Honestly, I have trouble keeping up; he cites authors I've never heard of, assuming you understand their works he's referencing. I get a bit lost easily. But it's still worth sifting for the nuggets I can understand. Find his Symbolic World channel on YouTube. And since we are on the topic of Pageau, he's been retelling the old folk tales in book format. These books are beautifully illustrated and well-made, intended to last. But he puts the teeth back in the ancient tales, with death and hardship and terrible suffering, as is proper.)
The Prophecy had the guts to examine religious matters with a fresh perspective and proper respect. That's very rare coming out of Hollywood; aside from Christmas movies, or the Biblical epics from the 50s and 60s, they tend to abuse Christianity more than tend it properly. I was also glad to see animated Biblical films finding their way into theaters in the last few years.
The Prophecy is a fabulous and interesting movie and well worth getting a copy.
Regarding The Witch -- or "The VVitch" -- if we must :) I also saw it as another argument in favor of going to the source materials when making genre stories (especially fantasy and horror). A lot of what we see these days is "a copy of a copy of a copy," soulless (sorry) and forgettable.
Whereas, the director of The Witch wanted to be historically accurate, so he read diaries and other texts from the era in which the movie takes place. The witch as an agent of Satan is congruent within that context. I've not seen that movie or "Nosferatu," but I'm familiar with ideas of the original vampires, who were repulsive. And Nosferatu, if I recall correctly, is actually a remake -- but a remake of a movie from a time when monsters weren't seen as love interests.
I almost never watch supernatural horror, because it's usually made by people who don't take angels or demons very seriously. They never seem to grapple with the second order effects of their story's premise, which is frustrating if one *wanted* to see how those effects would play out.
Exactly correct: go to the origin. Explain why witches were so feared.
Black Phillip was a holy terror on the set, BTW. I think he took is Satanic character a little to seriously or literally.
But that’s the point: we are finally putting the monsters back in their original boxes. They are not misunderstood, they’re destroyers. They are EVIL, existing solely to plague the living. Rather like some classes of people…
Angels have souls, in fact, angels /are/ souls. They are creatures of pure spirit. And angels have free will, but it operates differently from ours. As creatures without bodies, their intellects process everything it can and makes a decision in an instant. Once that decision is made, it cannot change. They are also individuals, with different levels of intelligence and other traits, just like people. They "care" for humanity insofar as they have agreed with God's Will and to the limits of their capacities, yet even they do not fully understand why God made His plan. They aren't omniscient. Nor does it mean they're particularly thrilled about all the aspects of it. Imagine someone you love asking you to do something you find amazingly stupid, but you do it anyhow because you love that person. Times it by perfection. You do it wholeheartedly, and without reservation, but don't get the point. Angels can experience that.
Considering that multiple points in the bible and supplemental works go out of their way to state the following...
Ophanim: Described as "wheels within wheels" with rims "full of eyes all around"
Cherubim: Described as four-faced, winged beings had eyes covering their entire bodies, hands, and wings.
Seraphim: Described as six-winged beings and "full of eyes" around and within them, ceaselessly chanting praises.
I think that not only is your article spot on but also there is good reason why Angels when they appear in the Bible, tend to start their side of the discussion with some form of the words "Be not afraid."
There is one LOL moment in the bible where Samson's parents sees an angel, and the husband immediately frets that he and his wife will be killed as punishment for seeing it. In the Amplified translation the narrator dryly refers to the wife as "sensible" before quoting her impeccable logic when she explains to her husband where's going wrong in his fear. In this passage, though, the angel is taken for a regular man. The husband initially thinks he's talking to a man until enough clues build up for him to get the point.
I saw the first Prophecy (didn't know about the others) when it first came out on video, and it stuck with me. I can't believe Viggo Mortenson played Lucifer! I just realized from the comments. He was actually striking, when I never thought of him that way in anything since. Anywho, the war in heaven bit reminds me that I don't think anyone has ever made a movie about the book of Revelation that included the fantastical bits, e.g., the multi-headed dragon.
Re: angels, I don't know why they wouldn't have souls. Several times the Bible implies the soul and the spirit are two different things, with the mysterious author of Hebrews even stating God's word can divide them. But even in the Greek, the two words used in that verse have similar meanings. I've seen the soul defined as one's "mind, will, and emotions." And the spirit being the indestructible, immortal aspect that allows a connection to God.
Under this rubric, angels are spirit beings that have souls, because they definitely have a mind, will, and emotions. They can just also manifest in bodily form. Which is disquieting; I've always dismissed stories of people *seeing* demons, because I never thought of them as having independent bodies. If they had them, why would they need to possess humans (and other creatures)? But it occurs to me that I don't really *know* what their limitations are.
To the point that angels aren't necessarily on "our" side, I considered this when I read the passage where the Prince of the Lord's host appears. Joshua asks whether he's on the side of the Israelites or the Canaanites, and the Prince replies that he's on neither side: he's on the Lord's side. Which is interesting, if the theory is correct that the Prince = Jesus. That said, I would rather the movie have made up an angel instead of taking one of the few who is actually named, and assigning a POV that may be at odds with what he actually thinks.
Only the fallen angels that became demons hated humanity. The rest love us as much as God requires of them. They marvel in particular at women. In the Orthodox Church it is taught that women veil for the sake of the angels since they marvel at the fact that God became incarnate through a woman. They are messengers, protectors, warriors. They are the forces of nature, the pattern of the heavens. I reccomend reading the works of Pseudo-Dionysius as well as St. Maximus the Confessor on the Logoi to understand what angels are. I also reccomend the symbolic world youtube channel. The Modern depictions of angels in media are refracted through the lens of late stage protestantism and occultism.
Kristen, if you have not seen the miracke of the movie below plese checkit out. One film made me a film buff. It is heartbreakingly beatifull.
Key Takeaways:
“Wings of Desire” is a mesmerizing movie released in 1987, blending angels and humans in Berlin. It won awards, inspired other films, and explores deep themes of love and connection.
The film’s poetic storytelling, stunning cinematography, and powerful performances make “Wings of Desire” a timeless masterpiece that continues to captivate audiences and inspire filmmakers worldwide.
I watched the first Prophecy not too long ago, coincidentally - Walken delivered a perfect performance that definitely portrayed how angels can indeed be very strange
I found the way those movies handled suicide particularly disturbing.
Yes. Seemed to confirm the Catholic stance that you’re headed downstairs
Yeah. Interesting, Kristin. Thanks for putting angels into perspective beyond blind human ignorance and child-like fawning over these serious Devine entities. I appreciate your frank approach to many topics, literary or otherwise.
One, the prophecy is amazing. After seeing Viggo Mortensen as Lucifer it was hard to see him be Aragorn.
As for the complexity of Angels, between the physical biblical descriptions of Angels, and the old testament recaps, I think it is safe to say that they very complex entities. How can you read about a four faced winged thing, and also that Angels fell in love with the daughters of men? The idea is almost Lovecraftian, but certainly unnerving. If there was ever a lost book to be found, perhaps a version of Enoch that can be proven original without the Manichean additions would prove useful.
I think the reason the Angels (let's put a cap 'A' in there out of reverence and respect; I don't want to call one down for being disrespectful) had no eyes in the first movie was a demonstration they had no souls, not as we have. If there is a core Angelic spirit, it must be utterly different. Eyes are the windows to the soul; no need for windows if no soul is home. All that's just a speculation or opinion but I think it consistent with the movie.
What I like to see are movies that put things back where they belong... The Witch (2015) was a brilliant film that put the Witch back her place as an agent of The Enemy. Nosferatu (2024) put vampires back in the category of implacable eaters of humans, destroyers to be feared and fought. This is the turning of the tide, the ending of the Great Inversion that has upended Western Civilization.
These inversions happen from time to time; if you care to follow any of the stuff put out by Johnathon Pageau, he elaborates on such symbolic upheavels in human civilization, where the monsters from the margins try to rule from throne and temple only to fail utterly and be restored to the margins. We are amdist such an inversion now, obviously. The great utility to Pageau's take on these things is his interpretations of them are in symbolic ways. His insights are steeped in deep, deep faith and equally as deep understanding from serious studies of Christian writings ancilliary to his Greek Orthodox faith. (Honestly, I have trouble keeping up; he cites authors I've never heard of, assuming you understand their works he's referencing. I get a bit lost easily. But it's still worth sifting for the nuggets I can understand. Find his Symbolic World channel on YouTube. And since we are on the topic of Pageau, he's been retelling the old folk tales in book format. These books are beautifully illustrated and well-made, intended to last. But he puts the teeth back in the ancient tales, with death and hardship and terrible suffering, as is proper.)
The Prophecy had the guts to examine religious matters with a fresh perspective and proper respect. That's very rare coming out of Hollywood; aside from Christmas movies, or the Biblical epics from the 50s and 60s, they tend to abuse Christianity more than tend it properly. I was also glad to see animated Biblical films finding their way into theaters in the last few years.
The Prophecy is a fabulous and interesting movie and well worth getting a copy.
Regarding The Witch -- or "The VVitch" -- if we must :) I also saw it as another argument in favor of going to the source materials when making genre stories (especially fantasy and horror). A lot of what we see these days is "a copy of a copy of a copy," soulless (sorry) and forgettable.
Whereas, the director of The Witch wanted to be historically accurate, so he read diaries and other texts from the era in which the movie takes place. The witch as an agent of Satan is congruent within that context. I've not seen that movie or "Nosferatu," but I'm familiar with ideas of the original vampires, who were repulsive. And Nosferatu, if I recall correctly, is actually a remake -- but a remake of a movie from a time when monsters weren't seen as love interests.
I almost never watch supernatural horror, because it's usually made by people who don't take angels or demons very seriously. They never seem to grapple with the second order effects of their story's premise, which is frustrating if one *wanted* to see how those effects would play out.
Exactly correct: go to the origin. Explain why witches were so feared.
Black Phillip was a holy terror on the set, BTW. I think he took is Satanic character a little to seriously or literally.
But that’s the point: we are finally putting the monsters back in their original boxes. They are not misunderstood, they’re destroyers. They are EVIL, existing solely to plague the living. Rather like some classes of people…
Angels have souls, in fact, angels /are/ souls. They are creatures of pure spirit. And angels have free will, but it operates differently from ours. As creatures without bodies, their intellects process everything it can and makes a decision in an instant. Once that decision is made, it cannot change. They are also individuals, with different levels of intelligence and other traits, just like people. They "care" for humanity insofar as they have agreed with God's Will and to the limits of their capacities, yet even they do not fully understand why God made His plan. They aren't omniscient. Nor does it mean they're particularly thrilled about all the aspects of it. Imagine someone you love asking you to do something you find amazingly stupid, but you do it anyhow because you love that person. Times it by perfection. You do it wholeheartedly, and without reservation, but don't get the point. Angels can experience that.
This essay is very ironic (to me,) considering the themes of the serial fiction I am working on and hoping to submit to BMF
Christopher Ruicchio's Sun Eater series has a cool take on angels. The way I read it anyway.
Considering that multiple points in the bible and supplemental works go out of their way to state the following...
Ophanim: Described as "wheels within wheels" with rims "full of eyes all around"
Cherubim: Described as four-faced, winged beings had eyes covering their entire bodies, hands, and wings.
Seraphim: Described as six-winged beings and "full of eyes" around and within them, ceaselessly chanting praises.
I think that not only is your article spot on but also there is good reason why Angels when they appear in the Bible, tend to start their side of the discussion with some form of the words "Be not afraid."
There is one LOL moment in the bible where Samson's parents sees an angel, and the husband immediately frets that he and his wife will be killed as punishment for seeing it. In the Amplified translation the narrator dryly refers to the wife as "sensible" before quoting her impeccable logic when she explains to her husband where's going wrong in his fear. In this passage, though, the angel is taken for a regular man. The husband initially thinks he's talking to a man until enough clues build up for him to get the point.
I saw the first Prophecy (didn't know about the others) when it first came out on video, and it stuck with me. I can't believe Viggo Mortenson played Lucifer! I just realized from the comments. He was actually striking, when I never thought of him that way in anything since. Anywho, the war in heaven bit reminds me that I don't think anyone has ever made a movie about the book of Revelation that included the fantastical bits, e.g., the multi-headed dragon.
Re: angels, I don't know why they wouldn't have souls. Several times the Bible implies the soul and the spirit are two different things, with the mysterious author of Hebrews even stating God's word can divide them. But even in the Greek, the two words used in that verse have similar meanings. I've seen the soul defined as one's "mind, will, and emotions." And the spirit being the indestructible, immortal aspect that allows a connection to God.
Under this rubric, angels are spirit beings that have souls, because they definitely have a mind, will, and emotions. They can just also manifest in bodily form. Which is disquieting; I've always dismissed stories of people *seeing* demons, because I never thought of them as having independent bodies. If they had them, why would they need to possess humans (and other creatures)? But it occurs to me that I don't really *know* what their limitations are.
To the point that angels aren't necessarily on "our" side, I considered this when I read the passage where the Prince of the Lord's host appears. Joshua asks whether he's on the side of the Israelites or the Canaanites, and the Prince replies that he's on neither side: he's on the Lord's side. Which is interesting, if the theory is correct that the Prince = Jesus. That said, I would rather the movie have made up an angel instead of taking one of the few who is actually named, and assigning a POV that may be at odds with what he actually thinks.
Only the fallen angels that became demons hated humanity. The rest love us as much as God requires of them. They marvel in particular at women. In the Orthodox Church it is taught that women veil for the sake of the angels since they marvel at the fact that God became incarnate through a woman. They are messengers, protectors, warriors. They are the forces of nature, the pattern of the heavens. I reccomend reading the works of Pseudo-Dionysius as well as St. Maximus the Confessor on the Logoi to understand what angels are. I also reccomend the symbolic world youtube channel. The Modern depictions of angels in media are refracted through the lens of late stage protestantism and occultism.
This is how I’m characterizing angels in my current series right now. I love biblically accurate angels
Kristen, if you have not seen the miracke of the movie below plese checkit out. One film made me a film buff. It is heartbreakingly beatifull.
Key Takeaways:
“Wings of Desire” is a mesmerizing movie released in 1987, blending angels and humans in Berlin. It won awards, inspired other films, and explores deep themes of love and connection.
The film’s poetic storytelling, stunning cinematography, and powerful performances make “Wings of Desire” a timeless masterpiece that continues to captivate audiences and inspire filmmakers worldwide.
Pardon the spelling mistakes, I am recovering from a concussion.
What?
That was my exact response to your post.
It's not even worth arguing about the characterization of angels. But the claim that biblical angels are basically God's hitmen is nonsense.
Perhaps not exactly rage bait but a controversial post about angels is probably good for a few clicks, let's be honest.
It’s a commentary on a movie series calm down ffs. Nothing is controversial