Do Angels Have Sex?

The following brilliant analysis of one of the statements in Baubles of Blasphemy was sent to me to refute my error and to set me straight. In this apologetic work, we learn that I was correct but that god either does or does not have sex and that angels either do or do not have sex and that language doesn't mean anything and names don't mean anything and that the sexless author of the refutation has never encountered a television named Robin.

Reader's views are invited.

Edwin.
-------------------------------------------

From: One Two

Subject: Minor edit for you: angels are sexless, not male

I read today your webpage about Santa Claus at

http://www.edwinkagin.com/columns/christmas.htm

Generally I enjoyed and agreed with what you write.

As a minor complaint, however, you assert that "there

are no female angels--check your bible, you can win

bets on this" -- which is true, in the limited sense

that nearly all translations of the Bible refer to all

spiritual beings as if they were males. However, the

mere fact that the authors and translators, working

within the confines of our limited human languages,

chose this form of expression does not mean that any,

much less all, angels *are* males.

Sex designations are used as differentiators for

reproductive function. It is quite impossible for

angels to have a sex unless both (a) at least two

sexes of angels exist and (b) angels reproduce

themselves sexually (instead of, for example, being

created by G-d or using an asexual reproductive

process). One can no more have a "male angel" without

at least the possibility of the existence of a female

angel than one can have a "male television" or a "male

viral particle."

It would, I think, be more accurate to say only that

all spiritual beings mentioned in the Bible are

*described as* being male.

Thanks for your attention.

Are Atheists Wrong About Prayer?

Is it possible that Atheists are wrong and that sometimes prayers are really answered.

No.

But the results of the recent election does give one pause.

Was it not lawfully prayed in countless churches throughout our land, and unlawfully prayed in a growing number of American public schools, captured by the forces of darkness in the American Religious Civil War (ARCW), for "Our Father Who Art in Heaven" to "deliver us from evil?"

Or was it loyal Americans, tired of tyranny and of theocracy, who managed in some small measure at least to deliver us from evil?

Wonder if those now booted out of office would object to the idea that perhaps it is time for the Legislature to take back control of the Executive Branch of government?

Would those who think our way of life exists to unjustly enrich them be horrified at such an idea? Of course they would be horrified. All Americans should be horrified at such a idea.

That is because such a sentiment is unconscionably unconstitutional.

For the exact same reasons as was the idea, expressed in what some traitors were pleased to call "Justice Sunday," that the Legislature should take back control of the Judiciary.

The ARCW is far from over.

Edwin.