(April 10, 2021 at 10:26 pm)Belacqua Wrote: The Bible is ambiguous about the appearance of angels. The Greek word "angelos" just means "messenger," and could refer to anyone delivering a message from God. A human being carrying a message could serve as an angel, even unwittingly, if he had such a message.
Later on the various creatures who exist in the hierarchy between people and God were categorized, most famously by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, into different types. Some looked more like people than others.
Since the Bible doesn't give clear descriptions of most angels, and Jews are notoriously opposed to visual representations, it posed a problem for people in Hellenistic and Roman culture who converted to Christianity and wanted pictures of angels. For the most part the artists simply used types of figures they already had. Pre-Christian and pagan psychopomps and genius figures served similar roles to angels in Hellenistic and Roman religions, so it was simplest to give Christian angels the same appearance.
https://wellcomecollection.org/articles/...AAABJiKOvK
Later, in the Renaissance, Cherubs (who are frightening high-level angels in scripture) were confused with Greek and Roman pictures of baby Eros or Erotes, giving rise to the strange picture of cute baby angels which we see in Raphael and on Valentine's Day cards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotes#/me...morini.JPG
I always thought that "angel" is a rank; in Islam Satan was with the angels even though he was a Jinn -then became a demon when he rebelled against God-; I think that gender simply doesn't fit that rank; i.e if a creature climbed to such rank, male/female doesn't fit their new existence anymore.
