Angelomorphic Christology

Matthias Reinhard Hoffmann identifies an angelomorphic portrait of Christ in certain passages of Revelation and provides possible reasons for the inclusion of an angelomorphic Christology: Angelomorphic Christology is not regarded as an isolated christological concept. In turn, the author compares angelomorphic Christology with the prominent Lamb Christology of Revelation. A comparison of these concepts reveals that both Lamb and angelomorphic Christology serve the purpose of contrasting different functions of Christ. The functions correspond with the implied perception of Christ by his followers on the one hand and his opponents on the other. Accordingly, Christ appears to be an eschatological juridical figure (described in angelomorphic patterns) to his opposition, while he is perceived as salvific redeemer (in form of the Lamb) by those who believe in him. Such a christological perspective draws on traditions from the Exodus narrative, namely the features of the Passover Lamb and the Destroying Angel. Further, equality between God and Christ is established despite an angelomorphic portrait of Christ: especially those passages describing Christ as the Lamb put him on par with God. But also within visions with an angelomorphic description of Christ, his status as superior to angels and as an equal to God is displayed.

In his stigmatization against believers in Christ, Celsus reminds that I Enoch was re-read like a very ‘living’ Christological tradition in contemporary proto-Christian groups. With his response, Origen stresses that there is a disagreement between such a Christological interpretation and the ‘true’ faith. This article underlines that the ‘extremities’ involved in such polemical statements seem to implicate, on the one hand, the so-called ‘Judeo-Christian’ angelomorphic Christology and, on the other hand, its re-readings carried out by the so-called ‘Gnostic’ groups of Third Century CE. Origen seems to connect the complex universe of the so-called ‘angelomorphic Christology’ to the polemical construct of ἰουδαϊσμός/ ἰουδαΐζειν. A further conclusion can be drawn from the article: the references to Enochic literature carried out by Origen could be better explained as ‘functional’ re-readings. In some cases, Origen seems to reject the authority of Enochic writings (for example, see Cels. 5, 53, Comm. Jo. VI 25, 217, Hom. II in Ps. 15); but in other cases, the Alexandrinian is impelled to confirm his exegetical statements on the basis of Enochic literature (for example, cfr. Princ. IV 4, 8).

Hebrews has more to say about Melchizedek than what is said about him in LXX Ps 109,4 (perhaps also MT Ps 110,4) and Genesis 14. Heb 7,3 says that Melchizedek is ““without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life”” and that ““he remains a priest forever””. I discuss where the author gets this information from. Methodologically, priority should be given to an explanation made on the basis of the hermeneutical techniques that the author uses elsewhere. I argue that the surplus information found in Heb 7,3.8 stems from arguments made from silence. The author explicitly makes arguments from silence in Heb 7,14.20.

The Ancient Prophecies (often built upon Hebrew wordplays on messianic vocabulary) of the Angel of the Lord become Angel in utero as acknowledged by both early heretical sects and proto-orthodox culminated in the liturgical expression of the Angel of Great Counsel or "Wonderful" born in utero. Early Eucharistic prayers and euchological blessings used as their paradigms these prophecies in some of the earliest extent (putative) liturgies known, i.e., in the Apostolic Tradition.

First, an introduction to Roman law and the Angel-Christ in the Roman Canon is discussed. Next, Bonaventure's youthful liturgical conservatism is covered, showing his understanding of Roman institutions in his exegesis of Roman Canon. Next, his reception of angelomorphic theology and its continuation in the Franciscan order is explored as key to his openness to consecration of the gifts by means of the epiclesis (and words of consecration). Finally, Bonaventure's doctrine of consecration in the context of his forebears and peers is discussed by compare and contrast.

Chapter 1 Approaches to concepts of heaven This dissertation examines concepts of heaven in the early history of Western religions and the extent to which themes found in other traditions are found in Christianity. Russell, in A History of Heaven, investigates the origins of the concept of heaven, which he dates at about 200 B.C.E. and observes that heaven, a concept that has shaped much of Christian thought and attitudes, has been strangely neglected by modern historians. 1 Christianity has played a central role in Western civilization and instructs its believers to direct their life in this world with a view to achieving eternal life in the next, as observed by Liebeschuetz. 2 It is of the greatest historical importance that a very large number of people could for many centuries be persuaded to see life in an imperfect visible world as merely a stage in their progress to a world that was perfect but invisible; yet, it has been neglected as a subject for study. Russell notes that H...

1 Jn deals in no way with the problem of Docetism. The same is valid for all Sarx Christi places of the well-known early Christian writings. Only Ignatius reacts to Docetism. But, his Christology of Incarnation precedes his Opposition to Docetism.  Docetism develops parallel to the beginnings of Angel Christology probably mainly from what I call “Angel Docetism”.

Conceptions of Incarnation probably develop from experiences of inspiration and ascension of Jesus himself. In this context Jesus or his disciples experience that he becomes talented with the Name of God (= Word of God).
The conception of Sarx Christi is designed similar to the metaphorical material of the changes of dresses which is very well known from Ascension experiences and Temple Cult practices.

The High Priest, talented with the Name of God (inscription on his turban), passes through the temple curtains on the day of reconciliation. In this moment he is dressed in the same materials like the veil, which represent the sky/cosmos - in the same way as in the natural world the ›flesh‹ is the material of the cosmos.

In this sense Jesus is a mystic person who in his return from an ascension or initial inspiration experience appears as an heavenly figure, as an ambassador, as an authorized person, a representative of the Father in highest power (Son of God, Son of Man, Messiah etc), dressed with flesh as his body dress.

This is a prolegomenon to a series of articles in Byzantine Catholic World on Angelomorphic Exegesis of Scripture by imitating and applying Pre-Nicene patristic methods of interpretation. I begin with a fascinating development of the "Angel of Great Counsel" (Isaiah 9) and Melchizedek (Genesis 14) as received into the early patristic and liturgical tradition devoid of philosophical and Arian preoccupation typical of post-Constantinian struggles in the empire.

This paper examines the concept of angelomorphism and magical transformation with reference to canonical and non-canonical Christian and Jewish beliefs. Magic, as loosely defined, is the attempt to engage with the world through the imagination or psyche in order to obtain some form of knowledge, benefit, or advantage, while celestial magic engages with the cosmos through stellar, planetary, or celestial symbolism, influences, or intelligences.1 Angelification of an individual is linked to the concept of resurrection, where, in the eschaton, the physical body of the righteous is transformed into a glorious new body fit for eternal life in heaven, regaining its divine likeness and becoming androgynous like an angel. The Hebrew Bible and Merkabah traditions support the possibility of the exceptional transformation of a human being into an angelic entity. Qumran liturgical texts also suggest the formation of an angelomorphic identity among the priesthood. The Christian gospels state tha...