Are angels just constructs?

This topic came up in the chat a day or two ago, so I thought I'd see what you guys think.

Construct: An energetic thinger of an individual's creation programmed to be and/or do one or more somethings. Can be programmed for whatever purposes its creator desires.

Angel: An energetic being created by a higher power for whatever purpose or to serve a certain role.

So are angels just constructs of the divine?

Here are my thoughts...angels have free will, while constructs can do only what they are told and be only what they are created to be. Though angels are created for a purpose, they may choose to deny that purpose and/or carry it out how they see fit. A construct can do a task how it is told to do it.

Some people have said that a construct can be programmed to evolve. If that's possible than couldn't it also be programmed to have free will? If it was programmed as such would it still be a construct?

Are constructs limited to the energy they are created with? Angels are connected to the universal energy, but constructs can only make do with the energy they are given in their creation...unless they are programmed to function parasitically.

Are angels made of a different "type" of energy? I personally believe that angels are (and energy beings in general) are of a different sort of energy than the ambient energy of earth. That they are made of universal energy of the source...divine energy so to speak. So to me a construct is made of a different variety of energy than an angel.

All in all, I do feel that constructs have many things in common with angels...but I do not feel that they are the same. So what are your thoughts?

I believe that an angel is simply a sentient, semi-autonomous tool created by a being known as a "god".

Energetic or physical, all good. Natural background energy or something specialised, all good.

It's a very wide category.

If "sentient, semi-autonomous tool created for a purpose" counts as a "construct", then sure.

Yes, I believe angels are constructs, and I don't see any real difference except that with a god you expect a higher level of craftsmanship than you'd get form a mom's basement magician.

However, I don't believe that my Shaper was the same as my Creator. The Shaper just took the already existent semi-sentient energy and gave it a form and a purpose. The energy itself didn't have a need for either of those previously.

In a way, aren't even our physical bodies contructs of carbon-based matter? As for if angels are energy consrtucts, how can they truly have free will?

The way contruct sounds to me is like a robot. A word which translates as slave. Perhaps there are two ways to look at the definition. One, a construct, a machine made out of energy or matter. Two, a constructed sentience, think aritfical intelligence. You may ask what really is the big difference.

We define life according to specific scientific rules. If something man-made were follow these rules we would define it as alive. In the movie I-Robot Sonny was deferent than than the other robots because he had the abilty to choose. He was still fashioned by the same maker, but was meant to do more than his counterparts.

Quote:Construct: An energetic thinger of an individual's creation programmed to be and/or do one or more somethings. Can be programmed for whatever purposes its creator desires.
Angel: An energetic being created by a higher power for whatever purpose or to serve a certain role.
So are angels just constructs of the divine?

No. A construct is a mindless automaton, without any possibility left of self-reflection or so. Angels have a purpose, something that gives them a kind of meaning, a higher one, maybe. We (I am one) have more possibilities of free and own actions then an automaton or a construct.

Quote:Here are my thoughts...angels have free will, while constructs can do only what they are told and be only what they are created to be. Though angels are created for a purpose, they may choose to deny that purpose and/or carry it out how they see fit. A construct can do a task how it is told to do it.

Exactly. There is the difference.

Quote:Some people have said that a construct can be programmed to evolve. If that's possible than couldn't it also be programmed to have free will? If it was programmed as such would it still be a construct?

Well, there is - to my knowledge - none construct (computer directed robot) that have this kind of programm in itself. Humans are similar: They have hardwired in their brain that it learns. To program a robot to have free will, there have to be a consciousness first. Otherwise the program simply runs algorhythms. Without consciousness there are no free decisions. Using a true random generator does not solve this problem.

Quote:Are constructs limited to the energy they are created with? Angels are connected to the universal energy, but constructs can only make do with the energy they are given in their creation...unless they are programmed to function parasitically.

Depends. Constructs, robots, can be constructed in a way that they can sustain themselves by certain methods of energy-gaining.

Quote:Are angels made of a different "type" of energy? I personally believe that angels are (and energy beings in general) are of a different sort of energy than the ambient energy of earth. That they are made of universal energy of the source...divine energy so to speak. So to me a construct is made of a different variety of energy than an angel.

In my own perception the energy of an angel is nothing that can be compared with the concepts of energy usually known in physics.

Quote:All in all, I do feel that constructs have many things in common with angels...but I do not feel that they are the same. So what are your thoughts?

Constructs are too limited in their freedom. They do not have consciousness. Something that angels have. Constructs have no soul.

Quote:

Quote:All in all, I do feel that constructs have many things in common with angels...but I do not feel that they are the same. So what are your thoughts?

Constructs are too limited in their freedom. They do not have consciousness. Something that angels have. Constructs have no soul.

Funny. I think that I may have started off as a construct. Then again, I've always said I didn't have a soul. (This would be literally eons ago, if time even equates in this case. Trans-universal differences in time are confusing...) Also, I've always considered "souls" to be things humans, or at least physical sentient beings, have. Angels are spirits, so they don't have a "soul" by my definition. But they are sentient and have a spirit.

What about constructs that had been made to change with conditions? They could develope a consciousness with enough time. It's my personal view that consciousness would develope in something spiritual with enough time and complexity. If that consciousness would be similar to a humans is another thing to examine.

As per the definition of construct you could call me one. The question isn't about consciousness or soul but about purpose.
In my Opinion:
If a god creates a construct for a set purpose, it might allow the construct to exist beyond said purpose, but it will gear the inner workings of the construct to do the job as well as possible. This means that the construct has "limited" free will. If the god however doesn't create the right tool for the job, I wouldn't call the tool an "angel" as the word comes with the connotations of a job in my mind. If it's not built for the job, it's just a "sentient being that happened to be created by another sentient being of greater power".

Every post here makes quite a few presumptions(including the thread-starter). Do Angels have free will(as previously discussed, this question highly depends on the deity-figure/religion,etc.)? Do they necessarily have to be *created* by a deity(as opposed to being recruited)? What is a "construct"(by definition)?

This one thinks the actual context of the question should be clarified before proceeding, as opposed to assuming that the other posters follow this paradigm/are aware of this paradigm in which the question is set.

Don't always agree with you Vark, but on this.. I concur.
Definitions are in order.

Sera did post her definitions and her assumptions about free will.