Re: Angels of other religions
I'm right here.
I'll avoid discussing the monotheistic monopoly, and the "angels" from a lot of it (in the text).
The reason is in part, how we define Angel / Celestial. For the most part, English is a Christian dominated language, so Angel, by it's very connotation has an implication of YaHooWaHoo and His lot. Also, even if we take YaHooWaHoo (actually, curious יהוה just testing if my Hebrew works on phpbb or not) we tend to have a very narrow view of what an Angel is. Not to rehash the argument, but this whole Winged humanoid happy light thing only really started forming eight hundred years ago, what Angels were (and are) traditionally have a huge variety of appearances and purposes. Yet, when we think of Angels in the public sphere, it tends to be humanoid, wings, often long blond hair, all those cliches.
That notion is pretty recent, and doesn't appear in other religions. The Celestials in other religions may have similar original purposes, but a variety of forms, which make it almost nonsensical to try to co-opt a culturalized term, like Angel. I mean personally, I draw a line between Celestial and Angel (Angel being the YHWHic Celestials, Celestials being general), and wouldn't identify as an Angel, cause what I am has very little in common with an Angel, other than I'm a "servant" of my Goddess (who is from a polytheistic pantheon). So I stick with identifying myself by name, I am Rakshasa. Using a term like Angel or Celestial is too general, and often of little importance or interest to me, so I use Rakshasa, that's what I am. I know other people, who would be considered a Celestial of various Gods, but they don't use Angel or Celestial, because their kind already has their own names and titles, and most see no need to identify with or as an overarching umbrella, and unless other people have done the research, they wouldn't necessarily know they are Celestials.
Another factor may be cultural exposure. The majority of people in the Kin community, are from a YHWHic culture. So when you begin to have memories of something Celestial, or impressions of what you are, the most readily available cultural context for your concept, is the common public notion of Angels, and it wouldn't be too hard for someone clinging for an identity to pick up on that resonance, and run with it. Like how in the Therian community, some people theorize there are so many wolves, because someone realizes "I'm an animal" and the most popular human/animal hybrid in our cultural context, is the werewolf, so they identify as wolf, when they could be something else, as initially they grasp on the most common/visible thread for identity.
Also, I tend not to pipe up on a lot of Celestial topics here, cause they tend to be Angel heavy with the YHWH crowd. Even those who claim "My God isn't YHWH" but they recount poorly understood Islamic myth, or Milton adaption or such. So really, there is no point for me to pipe in. It's like trying to discuss what it is like being raised in one country, with a group of people from a foreign country. Sure, we're all people, but our place of origin makes us sufficiently different, that discussion on many topics, becomes difficult, especially when you have a large group from one place, who thinks what they experienced is the only way it can/did happen.
When we first begin all things simply are.
As we grow all things are external.
As we learn all things are internal.
As we understand all things are not.