Board index ‹ Angels

[Serenity]

I know that most pop-culture like to portray angels as having wings and a humanoid appearance, but one look at the Bible (the book of Ezekiel comes to mind) and it's pretty obvious that angels often appear as winged creatures with many eyes, or spinning wheels with eyes on them... That being said, I like the Archangel Michael the most. Often the angels greet others by saying "Don't be afraid..."

[jimwalton]

There are different types of spiritual beings in the Bible (cherubim, seraphim, archangels, various winged creatures), but angels are never described as having wings. They do, however, have a human-like appearance (Gn. 19.1; 32.1).

[Yackovitch]

I agree with all of the above, and while they are never depicted as having wings (they even take a ladder to get to heaven in Jacob’s vision), Gabriel (described as a “man”) is shown to be capable of flight in Daniel 9:21. This doesn’t mean he had wings of course, but I think it’s notable. Images of winged men do have a long tradition in ancient Near Eastern art, including winged images of storm gods like Baal and Marduk.

[jimwalton]

Walton, Matthews, & Chavalas, in The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, regarding Daniel 9.21 write,

"In Isaiah 6 the creatures called seraphim fly, and in Zechariah 5 there is a vision of women with wings who fly, but in this verse is the only occasion where a being identified as an angel flies. Though other supernatural creatures (the ones listed earlier, as well as cherubim) are portrayed with wings, angels (= messengers) are not, despite the artistic renditions of the past 1500 years. In Mesopotamian art, protective genii are portrayed with wings, as are a variety of demons. In Intertestamental literature the earliest reference to flying angels is in I Enoch 61:1 (though cherubim and seraphim are by then included in the category). The Hebrew construction used is a complex one and many commentators have concluded (with good cause) that the text expresses weariness (yup) rather than flight (uwp)."

[Pastor]

Why are you classifying "angels" separate from the cherubim and seraphim? They are all angels of different kinds, and yes they have wings. They can shape-shift into human appearance, and when they do so, we're never told that they appear as men with wings. But that doesn't mean that their natural appearance doesn't have wings.

[jimwalton]

Angels: Angels are God's messengers. They are most often mouthpieces bringing His messages to humans, but at times are involved in doing actions of judgment as agents for God. They are never described as having wings.

Archangels: Seemingly a higher power of angel, almost always involved in military (both physical and spiritual) or political matters. The Bible only ever mentions 1 archangel. Its name is Michael (I use "its" because its gender is unknown or nonexistent). It appears in the Bible only a few times: Dan. 10.13, 21; 12.1; 1 Thes. 4.16; Jude 1.9; Rev. 12.7. That's it. We are told almost nothing about archangels.

What does it do? It seems to be a guardian over Israel, battling for Israel in the spiritual realm (Dan. 10.13). In 1 Thes. it is the agent God uses to signal Christ's return and the final spiritual battle, and therefore possibly a guardian over Christians in the spiritual realm. In Jude, Michael is doing battle for the body of Moses. In Revelation, Michael is fighting against "the dragon."

So I think we can conclude an archangel is a warrior who fights on behalf of God's people in the spiritual realm. That's about all we know from the Bible. Of course there are many traditions (the book of Enoch, Jewish literature) making up stuff about archangels, even adding archangels and naming them, but that's all unauthorized speculation, as far as actual Bible study is concerned.

Seraphim: Seraphim seem to always be in the presence of God (Isa. 6, the only place they are mentioned)—we know close to nothing about them. The only descriptions we have of them make them seem to have the appearance of winged serpents who are on fire or glow as if they were. They are also described as having face, hands, feet, and wings. So they are most likely upright fiery flying serpents who surround God's throne.

Cherubim: Cherubim seem to flank the throne of God, but they did appear on Earth once to guard the way to the garden (Gn. 3). So they are guardians who mark out God's invisible presence. They are composite creatures with faces, wings, and bodies like several animals put together.

> They can shape-shift into human appearance,

Textual evidence?

> But that doesn't mean that their natural appearance doesn't have wings

Textual evidence?

[Pastor]

First of all, we have to define our terms. "Angel" is a broad term that can denote heavenly creatures, humans, or God himself (i.e. the angel of Yahweh) depending on context. It simply means "messenger."

In this discussion, we're talking about heavenly angels, not human or divine. We know we're dealing with heavenly angels when they appear in dazzling white clothing, cause blindness, fly, etc. -- those are not mere humans. Yet they often appear to be human since they function as messengers to humans.

Here's where some logical speculation comes in: I do not believe that God would make heavenly creatures look identical to human beings when they aren't human beings and not made in the image of God. They can appear to be human but this would be a shape-shifting phenomenon, similar to how God can appear as fire and cloud and a dove.

So then, what do the heavenly angels look like according to their own nature? The only descriptions we have are of the cherubim and seraphim, and they certainly have wings. Therefore, I believe that the cherubim and seraphim are heavenly angels. When angels appear as men, we don't know if they are cherubs or seraphs, but I think they must be one or both.

There is only one archangel, Michael, and there is strong biblical evidence that this was the preincarnate Jesus (aka the angel of Yahweh). This is not just a Jehovah's Witness belief, but believed by early Protestants and in the commentary of the Geneva Bible.

Fyi, Zechariah's vision has two winged women, which would also be heavenly angels, so there is evidence of female angels with wings.

[jimwalton]

> we have to define our terms.

Yes, let's.

> "Angel" is a broad term that can denote heavenly creatures, humans, or God himself (i.e. the angel of Yahweh) depending on context. It simply means "messenger."

"Angel" in the Bible is never used as a broad term to denote all classes of heavenly creatures. "Angel" means messenger. They are particularly and specifically defined for us as messengers, nothing more. Sometimes in Revelation they act as messengers from God who are agents of judgments. "Angel" is not used in the Bible to describe any other heavenly creature. It is not that broad a term.

> can denote ... humans

Textual evidence?

> God himself (i.e. the angel of Yahweh)

You know as well as I that it is unknown there these references are to an angel or to God. Some are of the opinion, as I'm sure you know, that the "angel of the Lord" may refer to Jesus. I'm not so sure, and no one can be.

> In this discussion, we're talking about heavenly angels, not human or divine.

Correct. Agreed.

> We know we're dealing with heavenly angels when they appear in dazzling white clothing, cause blindness, fly, etc. -- those are not mere humans.

Agreed. Only once is an angel said to fly (Dan. 9.21), and that reference is questionable. Walton, Matthews, & Chavalas, in The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, regarding Daniel 9.21 write, "In Isaiah 6 the creatures called seraphim fly, and in Zechariah 5 there is a vision of women with wings who fly, but in this verse is the only occasion where a being identified as an angel flies. Though other supernatural creatures (the ones listed earlier, as well as cherubim) are portrayed with wings, angels (= messengers) are not, despite the artistic renditions of the past 1500 years. In Mesopotamian art, protective genii are portrayed with wings, as are a variety of demons. In Intertestamental literature the earliest reference to flying angels is in I Enoch 61:1 (though cherubim and seraphim are by then included in the category). The Hebrew construction used is a complex one and many commentators have concluded (with good cause) that the text expresses weariness (yup) rather than flight (uwp)."

> Here's where some logical speculation comes in: I do not believe that God would make heavenly creatures look identical to human beings when they aren't human beings and not made in the image of God.

I would consider it illogical speculation. Let's stick to what the Bible says. Our image of God is not our appearance. God doesn't have human form, and so being in the image of God is not our human form.

> They can appear to be human but this would be a shape-shifting phenomenon, similar to how God can appear as fire and cloud and a dove.

The Bible knows nothing of shape-shifting and never teaches shape-shifting. Theophanic references are not shape-shifting.

> The only descriptions we have are of the cherubim and seraphim, and they certainly have wings.

Cherubim and seraphim have wings, but they are not angels. Cherubim are composite creatures whose role and function is to guard the presence of God. They are not angels. Seraphim are multi-winged creatures who surround the throne. They are not angels. Angels are God's messengers who most often appear in human form whose role and function is to bring a message, to protect (Ps. 91.11-12), and to do God's work in the world (Heb. 1.14).

> Therefore, I believe that the cherubim and seraphim are heavenly angels.

There's no warrant to regard cherubim and seraphim as angels. They are spirit beings, obviously, but different from angels in appearance, role, and function. They aren't angels, they are cherubim and seraphim. The Bible never confuses the categories, and neither should we.

> When angels appear as men, we don't know if they are cherubs or seraphs, but I think they must be one or both.

No. Angels are angels; cherubim are cherubim; seraphim are seraphim.

> There is only one archangel, Michael, and there is strong biblical evidence that this was the preincarnate Jesus (aka the angel of Yahweh).

The Bible speaks of only one archangel, as you have said, but there is no biblical evidence, let alone strong evidence, that he is the preincarnate Jesus. The angel of YHWH is never confused with Michael.

> Fyi, Zechariah's vision has two winged women, which would also be heavenly angels, so there is evidence of female angels with wings.

It is unwarranted to read "angels" into the two women. The angel speaking is clearly identified. There's a woman in the basket, two woman who lift the basket, and it's all very symbolic. I stand on Scripture that the angel is identified in the text, and the two winged women are not identified as angels. Since angels in the Bible are never described as having wings, that's not the go-to explanation here. In the OT, angels are not female and are not portrayed with wings.

[Yackovitch]

I hadn’t heard about the potential translation issues and the idea that “weariness” rather than “flight” might be intended. Very interesting, thanks for sharing.

[Nice show]

They do have wings:

“The wings of these cherubim extended twenty cubits. The cherubim stood on their feet, facing the nave.” 2 Chronicles‬ ‭3:13‬

“Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.” ‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭6:2‬