Your post is bad and the biblical angel meme is mostly accurate, with some caveats.

Let’s look at the actual verses in question here.

Ezekiel 10:9-13:

9 I looked, and I saw beside the cherubim four wheels, one beside each of the cherubim; the wheels sparkled like topaz. 10 As for their appearance, the four of them looked alike; each was like a wheel intersecting a wheel. 11 As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the cherubim faced; the wheels did not turn about[b] as the cherubim went. The cherubim went in whatever direction the head faced, without turning as they went. 12 Their entire bodies, including their backs, their hands and their wings, were completely full of eyes, as were their four wheels. 13 I heard the wheels being called “the whirling wheels.” 14 Each of the cherubim had four faces: One face was that of a cherub, the second the face of a human being, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.

Sure, you could plausibly argue that the ophanim (the wheel-within-wheel-covered-in-eyes angels) were “vehicles” of some sort. But they are generally regarded as their own class of angels, as is made clear in other Jewish texts of the time such as the Book of Enoch. And besides that, the hayyoth / cherubim are specifically stated to each have FOUR ANIMAL FACES. They don’t have to look around because their faces point in all directions. Cherubs are not cute little Cupid babies with wings.

in Isaiah 6 we have seraphim who have wings, hands and feet

That makes it sound like they were regular two-wing angels. Again, let’s take a look. Isaiah 6:2:

2 Above him were seraphim, each with six wings: With two wings they covered their faces, with two they covered their feet, and with two they were flying.

Yes, they had wings. Weird-ass bent-in-nonsense-directions-to-conceal-their-full-glory wings.

I’d trust medieval religious artists to know their Bible and angelology better than modern twitter memers.

Why would you trust European artists, from a time when printers didn’t exist yet and the Bible hadn’t yet been translated into their native languages, to accurately depict beings originating from Jewish mythology? Those guys could barely figure out what cats looked like, let alone angels. Whereas modern artists all have immediate access to dozens of competing translations of the Bible and the Jewish apocrypha.

Oh, and you totally skirted over Revelation. From Revelation 4:5-8:

5 From the throne came flashes of lightning, rumblings and peals of thunder. In front of the throne, seven lamps were blazing. These are the seven spirits[a] of God. 6 Also in front of the throne there was what looked like a sea of glass, clear as crystal. In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures, and they were covered with eyes, in front and in back. 7 The first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle. 8 Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under its wings. Day and night they never stop saying: “‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty,’ who was, and is, and is to come.”

Would you look at that, more animal monsters covered in eyes and wings. So, pretty much exactly the “biblical angel meme.”

Now, were there angels in the Bible that looked like regular humans? Yes! But just regular humans. Not guys with wings. Think Castiel from Supernatural. Regular-ass human-without-wings angels appear, for instance, in the story of Lot. (Oh, or they could be giants, like the nephalim. I’m not going to get into them because they aren’t well-described in the Bible, but it seems like they’re supposed to be some sort of half-angels that just look like giant humans. Still no wings though.)

As far as I’m aware, though, there isn’t a single angel in the Bible who fits the “regular guy but with wings” image. Those really do seem to be a later artistic interpretation with little to no scriptural basis. Biblical angels that look like regular guys don’t have wings and Biblical angels that do have wings either have six of them, 2/3s of which are just there to keep you from beholding their true form, or else they have multiple faces or animal heads or they’re covered in eyes.

The meme isn’t inaccurate; and if we were to get as pedantic as OP did, then the classic angel does become inaccurate. Cherubs aren’t cute little babies, and angels who appear as humans don’t have wings. But really, it doesn’t even matter. The imagery of the winged humanoid has become so intrinsically tied to angels, we won’t stop seeing artists representing them as so. Give me scary angels and winged bird people alike, idc, both can be interesting.

 

 
back to reddit