Who are the seven angels of the seven churches?

[Vindicator]

Additionally, when we consider Revelation 2:20. Most translations translate it: "you tolerate that woman Jezebel"; or "the woman Jezebel." But the Greek γυναῖκα (gynaika) especially means "wife." For example: "Strong's Greek 113: A woman, wife, my lady. Probably from the base of ginomai; a woman; specially, a wife."

Now let's look at how the Majority Text translates this verse: "But I have this against you, that you tolerate your wife Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols." Now we see how it makes perfect sense that the "angels" would be prophets. And we can also see how this verse has particular importance today, with all the husband and wife "prophetic" teams about.

Ok, wait, wait, wait, wait, Lol.

You started off well here, RA. The "angels" are indeed likely human messengers, and more likely than not the readers of the churches, who received epistles from the apostles and read them to the church. And yes, the Greek word γυναῖκα can be translated "woman" or "wife" depending on the context. But there is nothing in the context that suggests the messengers were prophets, and nothing suggesting Jezebel was even married. This is constructing a theory without substantiation. You'd need to have something from one of the early Fathers to even remotely establish this kind of a theory, I'm afraid.

I think you are going too far here.

 

[Vindicator]

Why was it necessary to send angels at this time? That's the real issue. The isle of Patmos in the Aegean Sea (where John was) is about 35 miles from the Western coast of Turkey (formerly Asia Minor). For an angel this travel would be a piece of cake. For others it could have been a hazardous trip. So Jesus sent angels to the seven churches, and apostolic churches were aware that angels were watching them (probably watching over them).

Greetings, Nehemiah.

The problem with this position for me is that Jesus says to John, "To the messenger of the church of Ephesus write...", and if they were indeed angels, why would they need to be written to? When it's an angel, for one thing God would just inform them Himself. For another thing, the Lord could've just ordered them to be present during the vision. It makes no sense.

 

[Nehemiah6]

The problem with this position for me is that Jesus says to John, "To the messenger of the church of Ephesus write...", and if they were indeed angels, why would they need to be written to? When it's an angel, for one thing God would just inform them Himself. For another thing, the Lord could've just ordered them to be present during the vision. It makes no sense.

Actually there is no problem at all. Each of the seven angels was given a written message to be delivered to each church. Just like an ambassador would be given a written message for another foreign head of state to be delivered to him in person. The job of the ambassador would be simply to deliver the exact message.

 

[Vindicator]

Actually there is no problem at all. Each of the seven angels was given a written message to be delivered to each church. Just like an ambassador would be given a written message for another foreign head of state to be delivered to him in person. The job of the ambassador would be simply to deliver the exact message.

I'd simply say I think you are holding to the more illogical position, though that doesn't make it impossible. But that men would need to be written to makes perfect sense. That angels need to be written to by a man is... not, IMO, unless they were present in each of the seven churches and then called by God to Patmos, where they appeared unto John, read what the Lord had commanded him to write, and then delivered it to each of the seven churches on their return. It has in its favor that the delivery would be made easier than if it had travelled by human agency, since John was in prison on a remote island. But it currently leaves too much out for me where evidence for this interpretation is concerned. I would think someone in early church would have made reference to it if that's how it actually occurred.

 

[Nehemiah6]

That angels need to be written to by a man is... not, IMO,

Who said angels need to be written to? I already explained very clearly that angels were to convey the written messages of Christ to specific churches. Just like an ambassador to a foreign head of state. He simply hands over the message. But in the case of the angel, he would read the message to the whole church. The authority of Christ Himself would be in that written message (which the angel could not alter or re-interpret).

 

[Vindicator]

Who said angels need to be written to? I already explained very clearly that angels were to convey the written messages of Christ to specific churches.

The text clearly states, "To the angel/ messenger at the church of Ephesus, write..."This means the angels (if they were indeed angels) were being written to. The text does not say, "They were to convey the written messages." The text says they were very specifically written to.