Angels on earth

[Art]

Group,

I'll make this short just to get something rolling.

As I've spoke on other groups, there are only two types of angels that deal with everyday lives of humans. Messengers and guardians.

1. Messengers

They deliver my messages, prayers, etc. to our Father and visea-versa.

2. Guardian

Protect me from myself.

IMHO

Art

[Art]

I also have thoughts at times about the animals around the world. They may be angels type spirits, but then they may also have souls like us humans?????


Art

[Art]

Hello Art,

Do you think God created all these different angels for no reason?

Art2

[Art]

Hello Art2,

Yes God did create many angel races, but they were created for other reasons, not just to take care of the human race.

Art

[ghost]

There are two other functions of angels as well. To rule, and to guide.
From my experience, the four permissions are:

1. To light - enlighten and teach
2. To guard - to protect
3. To rule - providing a path
4. To guide - to guide along that path

[_-SOLO-_]

Well guys, as I see it, there realy is only one "function" an angel has:
Love.
All their other actions are a direct result thereof.

_-SOLO-_.

[ghost]

Love as a motivational force behind their acts, certainly, solo.
But permissions are given to angels for their actions.

[_-SOLO-_]

Permissions indeed, Ghost. But not only from higher hand. The subject in question (the one who is to be helped) must also be willing to accept this help. i.e. give his/her permission.

[ghost]

In my experience, yes and no. There are several combinations here
to consider. About these four permissions, first, they should be considered
seperately. But also, although it is correct for you to say "subject", the
term is a little bit vague and i will explain why. If you understand my meaning
you will see that there are several more possibilities than at first one
might have considered.

Considering an average person, one whom by no means has any knowledge
or consideration of angels. A person perhaps whom has never even been
introduced to the topic, even a person whom hasn't any sort of philosophical
ideas whatsoever. This person could be simply very young, or perhaps lives
in a modern area but has been sheltered, or perhaps this person is mentally
retarded, in any case, this person is devoid of the concept of angels. For
such a person could we use the label "unaware"?

Considering another person, perhaps one whom has been introduced to the
topic only by means of commercialism. Perhaps this person has never been
offered the opportunity of any sort of religion, or perhaps they simply were
turned off by the topic. In any case, the person is aware of what an angel
is considered by the definition of the word or by the generic collective information
they have seen in their life, perhaps on TV, or in a movie, or maybe even only
figurines in a pawn shop. In any case, lets say that such a person has already
determined that angels are mythic only at best, or idiocy in the other extreme.
Could we call such a person "ignorant"?

Consider another person, one whom is religious, one who has been taught in
some way that angels are real. Consider that this person believes that angels
exist, has a different view than the generic commercialized angel, or perhaps
similar at best. In any case, the person has never encountered an angel but
the concept of angels fits into their religious beliefs or their philosophy well.
For such a person it would be easier to believe in angels simply by how they
feel about angels but only practically based on how the idea fits into their world.
Could we say such a person is "faithful"?

Consider now another person, one whom exceeds faithful. A person whom has
had the opportunity to witness the physical entity of an angel. Consider this
person rare but also well documented. Persons like this have seen lights,
ladies, the blessed virgin, and there are other types of reports as you well
know. Could we call such people "witnessed"?

Another category of person would be one whom also exceeds faithful, but whom
has not witnessed an apparition. However, as the case may be they have seen
angels clearly in visions. Of this entire generic group of people there are four
classifications. Those who saw visions of angels which were angels. Those who
saw visions of angels which were not angels, and those who saw visions of
something different and didn't know these visions were of angels. And finally,
those who saw visions of something different, and called them angels, even
though they were not angels. Generically as a group, could we call such
people "mystic"?

Of the four types of mystic there are some things to be said as well. Angels in
my experience have consistently identified as angels in one way or another.
There isn't any doubt in the mind about such a vision. Therefore the third type
of mystic, one whom saw a vision of something, yet didn't understand the vision
was an angel, does not exist. If it is a real vision, the vision is understood. But
I listed this case to cover the possibilities and to be complete.

Also mystic experiences come in all shapes and sizes. They are affected by a
person's education as well as their skepticism. In the fourth case of mystic,
a person might see a vision of something different than an angel, and call it
an angel, even though it was not an angel. Could we call this type of mystic
"Hopeful"?

In the second case of mystic, one whom has seen something angelic, but has
not been introduced mystically to an angel, such a person might be hopeful
as described above, or such a person might be under the influence of anything
from a narcotic or hallucinogen, or even extremely hopeful because of surrounding
circumstances such as hospitalization, or any number of other pressures. This
sub category of mystic has two types of person in my experience. Could we
call these sorts of mystics "self-fulfilled" or "decieved" depending on the situation?

About mystics whom have seen angels that were actually angels. There are
three types that i am aware of. Of these three types i have only spoken with
the first type, read about the second, and experienced the third. The first
type are people that have mystically seen angels but only in passing. The
angels were a part of their mystical experience but were doing something
other than interacting with the mystic. Could we call these mystics "mystical
witnessed"?

The second type of mystic is one whom has called for an angel by invocation
using ritualistic means. These would be people whom would be considered
artful in the occult. Even today such groups are esoteric and secret because
of the backlash which results from various other religions which have been
more acceptable to society for one reason or another. Could we refer to these
mystics as "adepts"?

The third type of mystic is one whom has been called by angels through their
invocation upon the mystic. The reason for this may be because of interaction
with angels in a previous part of the life, or may simply be because of the
quality of the mystics life and they are called by the angels for a reason.
Could we refer to these mystics as "ordained"?

Of the ordained, i am only familiar with three types of mystic. At this point i think
it would be wise to hear your reply before continuing.

[ghost]

I listed those various types of people to give you an idea of the various
types of circumstances which a person could find themselves when it
comes to permissions. You had mentioned that a person needed to ask
for help, but there is more to it than that. In the ways of protection,
there doesn't even need to be a request. Angels are independent to do
as they please just as much as we are, albeit we are not as advanced
a life form as angels.

I have met people in the past that considered Angels about the same
as they would a robot, or as if an angel hadn't any personality of their
own and/or believed that angels could only act if given an order by God
as if God were some sort of military general or something. And some
of the people that spoke about angels in this regard claimed to have
actually conversed with angels but not seen them. These types of
experiences might be explained somehow, but they are contrary to any
experience i have had of my own. Of the many times in the past and
in the many ways in which meetings have occurred, angels have always
been visible in one form or another and identified themselves as angels.

Basically anything that a human can do, an angel can certainly do.
So when it comes to helping and permissions, you might be taught
something by a human teacher who did something behind the scenes.
Would you have needed to ask that person? No.

Also, there are things which i have been asked to do by angels. These
situations were not initiated by me, but them. It doesn't exactly fit the
same sort of scenario as you presented, but in the same light, yes, i
have never been forced or coerced to make a decision or perform an
act by an angel. But just the same, they didn't require my permission
to ask me in the first place.

Besides the several types of persons i mentioned earlier, and the four
permissions, there is yet another attribute to consider about your statement.
When witnessing an angel, one is fully awake and in a normal lower faculty
mode of mind. While in a mystical state one might see angels in a passive
dream, or an active dream while the body is asleep. Also in the mystic
state one might see angels while in an ascended mode of mind in a vision.
During a passive dream there isn't any control over one's disposition. These
are the normal types of dreams which most people have. In such a dream
seeing an angel would not be by your asking or giving permission, i.e willing
to accept the situation. But an angel might advise, console, or counsel a
person in such a dream. In an active dream or in an ascended vision,
when a person is in control of their environment, interaction with angels
is pretty much a two way street. They are independent in their means and
they have what they apparently need to share regardless of your asking
or being willing to accept. Sure, you can decide not to listen i suppose if
you wanted to, but that would be rather contrary to one's inclination at the
time.

I hope this is giving you a clearer picture about what you asked, solo.
I know your busy this week, so, i'll just leave this topic be until you've
had a chance to catch up.

[edward_follin1969]

According to what member "Karaprachniel" said on this forum:
Dear forum members, I found something that might interest you:
If not then move this post to different category


Comfort Memory Sleeping - Sleeping in Caves
Ship Jobs Luxury: Luxury lofts
Cruises Lines: Cruises from Philly
Paypal, eBay sued for moat of contract - Market - Reload Paypal Complaints
Syptoms Vaginitis Bumps: Cymphonix watches users, traffic, but hits a
Lithium Racer Gallery - One Minute Recharge For Toshiba's
Custom - Roy's Custom Grips
Cool Xmods Racing: Cool Hotels
Upper Daisy Gratis - Upper air
Make 'em laugh : sort helps acquisition of - Jacket Hoodie Sweatshirts
Solution Drug Rabeprazole - The Solution Path
Sodium Wirkstoff Diclac - Sodium bicarbonate in mortal-threatening
Online DVD Rentals - Blackbuster Rentals Bolckbuster
Diclofenac Retard Ratiopharm: Elite Announces Amendment to Agreement with
Around town: events seminars meetings talks - Classes Seminars China Leather
Book Company - The power of the press: borstal institution
Jeep Cherokee Weight: Cherokee Women in Crisis: Trail of Tears, Civil
Clothing: Clothing as material listing
Social networks and the emergence of the new - Jewishcafe Networks Spark
Sulfur sinks disappearing for clean-diesel - Kitchen Sinks Double
Here Promotion Austin - Officer promotion board changes take effect
Zappos Comm - Zappos.com Ranked Number 8 Clothing Web Site by
Animal Wekly Wildlife: Mad randomly domestic animals; looking at