Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 35
Like Tree13Likes

Thread: Grant Morrison Explains What Angels Are In The New 52

  1. #1
    Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    20,877

    Default Grant Morrison Explains What Angels Are In The New 52

    At the end of last year, 77% of Americans believed in angels. Only 15% believe in evolution. Over a third believe in aliens.

    Well, Superman believes in all three. And in Action Comics #14 out today, he tells you exactly what they are.



    After fighting them for a bit, of course. Now these aren't Weeping Angels, creatures of a singularity of time, but they have something in common. They are... something else.



    Which, one could say, fits into Christian theology quite nicely. The four dimensional expression of something far larger, and greater? I'm sure that's in the Book Of Mxyzptlk...

  2. #2
    Consultant of Cool
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    244

    Default

    Grant keeps it interesting that's for sure!

    Now we sit back and wait for the inevitable onslaught of Grant Morrison hate to fill this thread...

  3. #3
    Consultant of Cool
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    196

    Default Evil comes in many guises some of these are even Beautiful ( Superman #236 )

    Not read this yet, but I'm really looking forward to it.

    Since Rich has gone theological I'll just note in the Judeo-Christian tradition Angels ( from Angelos and Malak, Greek and Hebrew respectively ) means in both cases "messenger" and is translated as Angel only when it's obvious that the being in question is something else.

    Angels vs Aliens is another topic.

    This does lead to a couple of interesting translation questions - for example Peter is mistaken for a Ghost, in Acts but the word used is Angel, ie Messenger.

    Bottom line is angels are not as Supeman #236 told us necessarily good.

    These are some snippets from the research I did when plotting my fantasy novel. Which is about Dragons. Again another story.
    @countryboylife - A collection of contradictions, upsetting expectations. UK. Occasional Writer.

  4. #4
    Consultant of Cool
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    259

    Default

    The Angels are a fork.
    Brilliant.

  5. #5
    Exceedingly Cool
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    israel
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rudecherub View Post
    Not read this yet, but I'm really looking forward to it.

    Since Rich has gone theological I'll just note in the Judeo-Christian tradition Angels ( from Angelos and Malak, Greek and Hebrew respectively ) means in both cases "messenger" and is translated as Angel only when it's obvious that the being in question is something else.

    .
    actually it's malhach[and ch like in chrome not like cherry or character] and not malak.
    and only 15%!? really???? good thing that evolution doesn't need you to believe it for it is fact.....
    toodoor and Joe B. Pangrazio like this.

  6. #6
    Very Cool
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    26

    Default

    I wonder if they serve Gah Lak Tus?

  7. #7
    Captain Cool
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,569

    Default

    Weeping angels!

  8. #8
    Zen Master of Cool Rich Flair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    868

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nusan View Post
    and only 15%!? really????
    No, not really.

  9. #9
    Consultant of Cool
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    196

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nusan View Post
    actually it's malhach[and ch like in chrome not like cherry or character] and not malak.
    and only 15%!? really???? good thing that evolution doesn't need you to believe it for it is fact.....
    I'm sure you're correct on the transliteration into English, I was simply remembering the word from the English Sources I'd referenced, and that was spelling I recalled.
    @countryboylife - A collection of contradictions, upsetting expectations. UK. Occasional Writer.

  10. #10
    Bleeding Cool
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    12,386

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rudecherub View Post
    I'm sure you're correct on the transliteration into English, I was simply remembering the word from the English Sources I'd referenced, and that was spelling I recalled.
    Hebrew to English transliteration does seem to be one of those that results in multiple correct spellings. Just look at how many different "correct" spellings there are for Hanukkah. In this case, I think ch might be "more correct", but I don't think either option is exactly incorrect.
    SAMURAI36 likes this.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •