Angels Eating with people before Christ's resurrection

[jbehnke]

I have been reading about another faith and I saw that they believe that Christ when resurrected did not actually take up his body. My first thought was, how could he then have eaten fish with His disciples after his resurrection? They also said that spirits can take on physical form... and I thought well I know I don't believe that but all I I can't, for my own personal benefit, find a good scripture to the contrary.

But shortly thereafter they talk about how angels ate with Lot in Genesis 19:1-3. Well this was before the resurrection so how could any angel have a physical body? Then I found this quote "The angels who visit this earth are persons who have been assigned as messengers to this earth: "There are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it" (D&C 130:5)." from the eom.byu.edu on angels. I'm reading this as they have to be from earth or related to earth....

Obviously for me, modern day revelation trumps all but it would be nice to see this from the bible.

Thanks everyone

 

[Fether]

1 hour ago, jbehnke said:

I have been reading about another faith and I saw that they believe that Christ when resurrected did not actually take up his body. My first thought was, how could he then have eaten fish with His disciples after his resurrection? They also said that spirits can take on physical form... and I thought well I know I don't believe that but all I I can't, for my own personal benefit, find a good scripture to the contrary.

But shortly thereafter they talk about how angels ate with Lot in Genesis 19:1-3. Well this was before the resurrection so how could any angel have a physical body? Then I found this quote "The angels who visit this earth are persons who have been assigned as messengers to this earth: "There are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it" (D&C 130:5)." from the eom.byu.edu on angels. I'm reading this as they have to be from earth or related to earth....

Obviously for me, modern day revelation trumps all but it would be nice to see this from the bible.

Thanks everyone

 

If your comment is based around exalted beings eating, then it is true. Exalted brings still eat.

ad for the angels mentioned in genesis, I may be wrong but I understand that use of the word angel as meaning “God’s messengers” in that they were not exalted beings or even spirits, but rather missionary type men living on the earth at the time.

Christ obviously ate following his resurrection.

Orson Pratt was recorded in saying “A Saint who is one in deed and in truth, does not look for an immaterial heaven, but he expects a heaven with lands, houses, cities, vegetation, rivers, and animals; with thrones, temples, palaces, kings, princes, priests, and angels; with food, raiment, musical instruments, etc., all of which are material. Indeed, ...On it they expect to live, with body, parts, and holy passions; on it they expect to move and have their being; to eat, drink, converse, worship, sing, play on musical instruments, engage in joyful, innocent, social amusements, visit neighboring towns and neighboring worlds; indeed, matter and its qualities and properties are the only beings or things with which they expect to associate”

though we have received a lot of light since he said this (and I’m not sure by what authority he made this comment) so perhaps this isn’t true.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Fether

[Guest Scott]

Quote

But shortly thereafter they talk about how angels ate with Lot in Genesis 19:1-3. Well this was before the resurrection so how could any angel have a physical body?

What Fether said.   The LDS believe that they were holy men not angels (in the sense that you are thinking of).   As far as I know this belief is unique to us.  All other Christian sects believe that they were angels.  Other Christian sects (maybe not all, but many) believe that angels can eat and even have sex.  Several sects (I'm not sure if all of them do, but it is a majority) believe that the Nephilum in Genesis 6:1-4; Ezikiel 23:27; and Numbers 13:33 are the result of offspring from angels having sex with humans.

How the LDS look at angels is very different from how other Christian sects look at them.  

Edited August 1, 2018 by Scott

[estradling75]

52 minutes ago, jbehnke said:

I have been reading about another faith and I saw that they believe that Christ when resurrected did not actually take up his body. My first thought was, how could he then have eaten fish with His disciples after his resurrection? They also said that spirits can take on physical form... and I thought well I know I don't believe that but all I I can't, for my own personal benefit, find a good scripture to the contrary.

But shortly thereafter they talk about how angels ate with Lot in Genesis 19:1-3. Well this was before the resurrection so how could any angel have a physical body? Then I found this quote "The angels who visit this earth are persons who have been assigned as messengers to this earth: "There are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it" (D&C 130:5)." from the eom.byu.edu on angels. I'm reading this as they have to be from earth or related to earth....

Obviously for me, modern day revelation trumps all but it would be nice to see this from the bible.

Thanks everyone

 

There are Angels and then there are Angels...   The first type you see as described in the D&C... the second is simply a "Messenger."  Anyone that God calls can be an Angel in the later way

The scriptures are full of mortal people getting a divine mandate to deliver a message.  While doing so some are on record of doing (or having done to them) miraculous things not humanly possible while on mission.  Thus this second type of Angel is much more common and also very mortal.  Thus for the Old Testament when Angels visit people it does not have to be a resurrected or translated or exalted person.  It simply has to be someone whose divine commission is known and accepted.

Can this be proven using the bible?  Nope.  The examples are all there of course but nothing directly connects them except one of the variations in the definition of Angel.

[Guest Scott]

13 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

There are Angels and then there are Angels...   The first type you see as described in the D&C... the second is simply a "Messenger."  Anyone that God calls can be an Angel in the later way

The scriptures are full of mortal people getting a divine mandate to deliver a message.  While doing so some are on record of doing (or having done to them) miraculous things not humanly possible while on mission.  Thus this second type of Angel is much more common and also very mortal.  Thus for the Old Testament when Angels visit people it does not have to be a resurrected or translated or exalted person.  It simply has to be someone whose divine commission is known and accepted.

Can this be proven using the bible?  Nope.  The examples are all there of course but nothing directly connects them except one of the variations in the definition of Angel.

Yes.  To add to this, here's what the Bible Dictionary says: 

There are many references to the work of angels in the Old Testament. In some passages the “angel of the Lord” speaks as the voice of God Himself (Gen. 22:11–12). The word angel is also sometimes used to designate a human messenger, as in JST Gen. 19:15 (Appendix), and may have some application also in Matt. 13:39–42. There is evidence of nonmortal beings who serve God in heaven (1 Kgs. 22:19; Alma 36:22) and also of some who do God’s will and minister to men on the earth (Gen. 28:12; 32:1; 2 Sam. 24:16; 1 Kgs. 19:5–7; 2 Kgs. 1:15; 19:35; Ps. 91:11).

It also specifically mentions that Genesis 19 refers to human messengers.

JST also adds the following:

15 And they were angry with Lot and came near to break the door, but the angels of God, which were holy men, put forth their hand and pulled Lot into the house unto them, and shut the door.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Scott

[zil]

Welcome, @jbehnke!

The holy men in chapter 19 are probably the same holy men who were in chapter 18.  The JST for chapter 18 refers to these as "angels which were holy men, and were sent forth after the order of God" - which we should recognize as descriptive of the Mechizedek Priesthood.

Then, in chapter 19, verse 1, the JST says "two" should be "three", and the footnote for "angels" notes (hee hee) that the word translated as "angels" is Hebrew for "messengers".  (See also footnote a for verse 12.)  The way Lot treats them (such as suggesting they come in and wash their feet) suggests that they at least appeared to have physical bodies subject to things like getting their feet dirty (I'm not sure we would believe such a thing about a spirit-only angel in his glory¹ - and if we won't, Lot probably wouldn't have either).

¹Am I remembering correctly that a spirit being is not capable of suppressing their glory whereas a translated or resurrecting being would be able to?

Continuing in chapter 19, verse 10, the men (messengers, angels) "put forth their hand, and pulled lot into the house to them" - as Mormons, we believe that a spirit-only angel could not do this - or at least, we could not feel their hand on us (see D&C 129).

Finally, we know that in addition to the option of these being mortal priesthood-holders sent by God, the Lord sometimes uses translated beings, and there was this whole city of Enoch full of folks who might have been eligible for the assignment - as well as anyone else who lived on earth prior to this time who may have been translated rather than dying.

Not that any of that will help a non-Mormon believe these things.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

Hello and welcome to the forum.  Going along with the suggestion that the angels in this case were mortal men doing God's work, Elder Holland gave a talk called The Ministry of Angels, and he spoke about both heavenly messengers and angels who are still mortal.  It's a great talk if you haven't read it recently.     Here are a couple pertinent quotes.

"I have spoken here of heavenly help, of angels dispatched to bless us in time of need. But when we speak of those who are instruments in the hand of God, we are reminded that not all angels are from the other side of the veil. Some of them we walk with and talk with—here, now, every day. Some of them reside in our own neighborhoods. Some of them gave birth to us, and in my case, one of them consented to marry me. Indeed heaven never seems closer than when we see the love of God manifested in the kindness and devotion of people so good and so pure that angelic is the only word that comes to mind."

"My beloved brothers and sisters, I testify of angels, both the heavenly and the mortal kind. In doing so I am testifying that God never leaves us alone, never leaves us unaided in the challenges that we face."

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2008/10/the-ministry-of-angels?lang=eng

And just because I love these quotes...

"I believe we need to speak of and believe in and bear testimony of the ministry of angels more than we sometimes do."   
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/01/for-a-wise-purpose?lang=eng

One of the things that will become more important in our lives the longer we live is the reality of angels, their work and their ministry. I refer here not alone to the angel Moroni but also to those more personal ministering angels who are with us and around us, empowered to help us and who do exactly that (see 3 Ne. 7:18; Moro. 7:29–32, 37; D&C 107:20)."
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1996/01/for-a-wise-purpose?lang=eng
 

Edited August 1, 2018 by LiterateParakeet

[Traveler]

On ‎8‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 7:29 AM, jbehnke said:

I have been reading about another faith and I saw that they believe that Christ when resurrected did not actually take up his body. My first thought was, how could he then have eaten fish with His disciples after his resurrection? They also said that spirits can take on physical form... and I thought well I know I don't believe that but all I I can't, for my own personal benefit, find a good scripture to the contrary.

But shortly thereafter they talk about how angels ate with Lot in Genesis 19:1-3. Well this was before the resurrection so how could any angel have a physical body? Then I found this quote "The angels who visit this earth are persons who have been assigned as messengers to this earth: "There are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it" (D&C 130:5)." from the eom.byu.edu on angels. I'm reading this as they have to be from earth or related to earth....

Obviously for me, modern day revelation trumps all but it would be nice to see this from the bible.

Thanks everyone

 

They were the Home Teachers - they were later called ministers and in the final analysis it was decided to just refer to them as ministering angles.  Which BTW is what we are trying to get to now  -  I think.

 

The Traveler