Thanks Timeforabrew. I posted here because your OP seemed general, open and enquiring. I wouldn't have posted for example if it was about someone who had recently lost a loved one and believed that that person was visiting them as an angel.
Secondly, although I've not been on MN long it seems like a feisty bunch of (mainly) women who don't mind a bit robust debate and humour. Maybe i read it wrong and this section has more of character of a multi-faith conference where its all serious and respectful and people from different religions are at pains not to admit that their doctrines are mutually incompatible, and whats more they believe that theirs is the only true route to enlightenment and eternal life in heaven.
I am interested in the angels topic because of its growing popularity, alongside other mysterious thinking (both religious and non-religious) which has a perplexing (to me) hold on people, despite advances in science and education. I don't see why religious ideas should be beyond challenge.
I think atheists are generally seen as coming accross as rude because people are used to automatic deference being given to religious ideas. Though not many people respect this convention and wouldn't challenge someone's belief in angels, you can be sure that many will think its a bit soft-headed. I would be seriously worried if my Prime Minister, airline pilot or doctor professed a relationship with angels.
When I talk to theists about the conflict between science and religion they usually say something along the lines of 'you athesists seem to be stuck on a child's idea of god with a big white beard, living in the clouds, answering prayers, it is all much more profound, metaphorical and mysterious than that. God is outside of time and place, he/she/it isn't a 'being' as we understand it, he doesn't intervene, he/she/it is not detectable in the real world...you need a faith and/or some serious study of theology to get it. There is no conflict between science and religion.'
The angels thing seems quite different - more like ghosts, fairies, poltergeist and other supposed supernatural phenomena. They humanoid, temporal, here and interventionist. They are apparently engaged in sub-Derren Brown trickery like moving feathers around (or are the feathers believed to have fallen from their wings?). These kinds of claims are testable and can be subject to rational examination. So why not? Every other topic on MN is fair game.
Sorry though that I derailed your thread. If you start another one and label it clearly as not for rational discussion, I will hide the topic and promise not to post on it. 