Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Ken W · 08-03-2004, 11:27 AM

The way an angel is depicted in art seems fantastically stupid to me, it's a chimera that evokes as much disbelief in me just like the images of pegasus, hippogrif, minotaur, harpies, etc. What makes this image of an angel believable? I'm talking about the white robe, curly hair, huge white feathered wings and cherub faces type of angel.

How in the world do angels use their wings? What muscles do they attach to? I'd love to see an angel's skeletal structure because it would be mind boggling I am sure.

If angels have wings because they live in heaven, why doesn't God have wings when depicted in art?

Is there any scriptural basis for the way angels are depicted in art? This is something I am not familiar with.

Mageth · 08-03-2004, 11:41 AM

1 Kings 6 describes cherubs that were placed on the Ark of the Covenant. 2 Chronicles 3 repeats these descriptions.

Isaiah 6 describes seraphim with six wings. They don't look like the typical angels of religious art, though.

Ezekiel describes some more winged heavenly creatures, this time with four wings each (and four faces). Again, they don't look like those typically depicted.

Daniel describes some more winged creatures, but they're not angels exactly.

Zechariah 5 describes some winged women that are apparently angels. These perhaps come closest to the artistic renderings.

And some more winged creatures are described in Revelation; some of them are quite similar to the ones described by Isaiah and Ezekiel.

Peter Fletcher · 08-03-2004, 12:40 PM

Ken

The following does not answer your many questions but you may like to know that the Christian world did not invent human forms with wings on their backs.

I have seen Etruscan tomb wall paintings (up to c. 400 BC) with the Executioner (The Etruscan Devil) having similar wings.

Once again the Christian world has borrowed from others parties.

Toto · 08-03-2004, 12:44 PM

About 5 years ago, when angels were a hot item due to that TV program, the Vatican put together an art exhibit from its collection that I saw in LA (The City of Our Lady the Queen of the Angels.

) (The Invisible Made Visible: Angels from the Vatican also here and in book form.) It was a bit tongue in cheek, since every religious scholar knows that the popular view of angels is unBiblical, but it was interesting.

Angels are messengers of god. They would not have wings. All of the Biblical angels are male, unlike the curly haired female angels of the Christmas trees.

I think I recall the exhibit noting that angels through the ages were depicted as whatever the sexual object of desire was in that era. Young, buff men, putti - naked young children with very round buttocks, or beautiful women, depending on which century the art was from.

There is an educator's resource here in pdf format. It says:

Quote:

Visualizations of Angels were rare in the Judeo-Christian tradition before the fourth century A.D., partly due to the avoidance of images in the Jewish tradition. After the fourth century, however, artists began to use the Winged Victory of pagan religious as the inspiration for Angels. By the fifth century, a whole iconography had developed for Angels, including wings, clothing, youthful appearance, asexuality, and other attributes.

Toto · 08-03-2004, 01:21 PM

Angels take wing

Quote:

Since the third century when an unknown artist sketched the first representation of a Christian angel, a wingless, beardless man-like figure with outstretched arms, on the walls of a Roman catacomb, artists have bestowed on them flawless, ageless physical beauty and celestial serenity as they carefreely dance, play instruments, sing and in other ways demonstrate the glory of God.

“They possess wings because they can fly and come from beyond,�? Duston said. “They have halos, which suggest their divine origins. Many times, however, they are shown without wings. For example, in Michelangelo’s ‘The Last Judgment’ in the Sistine Chapel, none of his angels have wings.�?

So there you have it. No wings needed.

Ken W · 08-03-2004, 01:57 PM

Very nice info, thank you. I'm not very informed concerning art. It appears that the current depiction of angels developed in the Renaissance period, a fleshing out of concepts surrounding angels and what they "should" look like.

If angels are built like birds are, they would use pectoral muscles for flight. This leads to the conclusion that angels would have huge keelbones and breasts resembling a steroid injected turkey-like abomination!

I wonder what response I will get when telling my friend that her angel collection is as silly as her unicorn collection

Toto · 08-03-2004, 02:20 PM

Don't diss unicorns on this board!

Mathetes · 08-03-2004, 02:25 PM

The word ἄγγελος in Greek is a pretty commonplace word, and it means nothing other than "messenger", without implying any kind of supernatural entity.

I believe this is also the case in the OT, although someone with knowledge of Hebrew should confirm this.

Amlodhi · 08-03-2004, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Genesis 19:1

And the two angels came into Sodom at evening. And Lot was sitting at the gate of Sodom. And Lot saw, and he rose up to meet them and bowed his face to the earth.

I'm not suggesting that they had wings; but what was it, do you suppose, about these angels that caused Lot to recognize them. Or was Lot simply in the habit of bowing down to and taking home everyone who entered the city.

Curious,

Amlodhi

Amlodhi · 08-03-2004, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mathetes

I believe this is also the case in the OT, although someone with knowledge of Hebrew should confirm this.

Yes, מל�?ך basically means, "messenger".

Amlodhi

08-03-2004, 11:27 AM	#1
Ken W Regular Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 118	Angel wings The way an angel is depicted in art seems fantastically stupid to me, it's a chimera that evokes as much disbelief in me just like the images of pegasus, hippogrif, minotaur, harpies, etc. What makes this image of an angel believable? I'm talking about the white robe, curly hair, huge white feathered wings and cherub faces type of angel. How in the world do angels use their wings? What muscles do they attach to? I'd love to see an angel's skeletal structure because it would be mind boggling I am sure. If angels have wings because they live in heaven, why doesn't God have wings when depicted in art? Is there any scriptural basis for the way angels are depicted in art? This is something I am not familiar with.

08-03-2004, 12:40 PM	#3
Peter Fletcher Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Surrey, England Posts: 9	Angel Wings Ken The following does not answer your many questions but you may like to know that the Christian world did not invent human forms with wings on their backs. I have seen Etruscan tomb wall paintings (up to c. 400 BC) with the Executioner (The Etruscan Devil) having similar wings. Once again the Christian world has borrowed from others parties.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-03-2004, 11:41 AM	#2
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	1 Kings 6 describes cherubs that were placed on the Ark of the Covenant. 2 Chronicles 3 repeats these descriptions. Isaiah 6 describes seraphim with six wings. They don't look like the typical angels of religious art, though. Ezekiel describes some more winged heavenly creatures, this time with four wings each (and four faces). Again, they don't look like those typically depicted. Daniel describes some more winged creatures, but they're not angels exactly. Zechariah 5 describes some winged women that are apparently angels. These perhaps come closest to the artistic renderings. And some more winged creatures are described in Revelation; some of them are quite similar to the ones described by Isaiah and Ezekiel.

08-03-2004, 01:57 PM	#6
Ken W Regular Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 118	Very nice info, thank you. I'm not very informed concerning art. It appears that the current depiction of angels developed in the Renaissance period, a fleshing out of concepts surrounding angels and what they "should" look like. If angels are built like birds are, they would use pectoral muscles for flight. This leads to the conclusion that angels would have huge keelbones and breasts resembling a steroid injected turkey-like abomination! I wonder what response I will get when telling my friend that her angel collection is as silly as her unicorn collection

08-03-2004, 02:20 PM	#7
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Don't diss unicorns on this board!

08-03-2004, 02:25 PM	#8
Mathetes Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Spaniard living in Silicon Valley Posts: 539	The word ἄγγελος in Greek is a pretty commonplace word, and it means nothing other than "messenger", without implying any kind of supernatural entity. I believe this is also the case in the OT, although someone with knowledge of Hebrew should confirm this.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.