Where did the modern version of angels come from?

[Mithie]

I don't understand why all the angels today are glowing virginal chicks with dainty little wings when in the bible, the angels are described as triple-faced flying heralds of death, doom, and destruction.

I, for one, am sick and tired of badass bringers of doom (the ranks from which SATAN came from) being degraded to playthings and cutsie little window ornaments. A biblical angel is more likely to run you through and cast you into the chasm of fire and damnation than cuddle around your wall.

Biblical angels do three things: fly, kick ass... okay, maybe they only do two things.

Anyway, where did the modern vision of angels come from? And aren't the REAL angels kind of peeved at being degraded from being badass motherers to somebody's lawn ornament?

[The Cobra]

From fiction.

[Thanatos]

Because people don't want to hear about death and destruction, yeah? How often do you hear fire and brimstone sermons? Not very often anymore.

My old avatar of St. Michael.... now this is what an angel looks like, dammit:

[Calamari]

Although I think the swords and shields are used because those were the weapons of the day. Plus theres something more peotic about saint Micheal wirlding a firery sword and smiting the devil. St. Micheal with pimpin' piece poppin' caps in the unbelievers isnt quite as easy on the eyes, or for that matter a three headed harbinger of death.

[motiv-8]

Michael owns. So does Gabriel.

[Thanatos]

I mean, c'mon, the Archangel St. Michael crushing Lucifer with the fiery sword of God?

Nothing else even comes close.

[Calamari]

I mean, c'mon, the Archangel St. Michael crushing Lucifer with the fiery sword of God?

Nothing else even comes close.

My point exactly

[Thanatos]

I mean, there's just something.... something RIGHT in the whole "chopping off the head of evil," smiting Satan, and all that stuff.

Makes you feel manly.

[Calamari]

You can't strike fear into peoples hearts with a gun, you need a giant flaming sword and a sack full of snake heads!

[Legio]

Fiction and art have changed angels from hardcore to cupid.
Medieval engravings still show some terrifying angels.
Then Renaissance comes and we have naked girl angels!
Also, many works of literature have made angels either very good and pure or completely evil.
imo it started with Victorian depictions of golden beings of light- and it continued from there.

[Maverick]

I don't understand why all the angels today are glowing virginal chicks with dainty little wings when in the bible, the angels are described as triple-faced flying heralds of death, doom, and destruction.

I, for one, am sick and tired of badass bringers of doom (the ranks from which SATAN came from) being degraded to playthings and cutsie little window ornaments. A biblical angel is more likely to run you through and cast you into the chasm of fire and damnation than cuddle around your wall.

Biblical angels do three things: fly, kick ass... okay, maybe they only do two things.

Anyway, where did the modern vision of angels come from? And aren't the REAL angels kind of peeved at being degraded from being badass motherers to somebody's lawn ornament?

I think he looks pretty cool (is that a Rolex?), I believe Michael the Archangel is just a revised version of this ancient deity.

And Christian iconography has no rules, Jesus evolved into a white hippy over time.

[Djûn]

"In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft."
-Isiah 6:1-2

Strange how the highest Choir of Angels seems to be put rarely into iconography, yet have one of the strangest appearances to contemplate.

[ThiudareiksGunthigg]

"In the year King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord seated on a high and lofty throne, with the train of his garment filling the temple. Seraphim were stationed above; each of them had six wings: with two they veiled their faces, with two they veiled their feet, and with two they hovered aloft."
-Isiah 6:1-2

Strange how the highest Choir of Angels seems to be put rarely into iconography, yet have one of the strangest appearances to contemplate.

It's also strange how another order of angels - the Cherubim - gave rise to the cutesy concept of cherubs. Beings whose name possibly means "Creatues of Fire" and who the Assyrians depicted as human-headed winged bulls are now depicted as chubby, curly-haired infants with cute little wings.

This is a cherub:

[Thanatos]

At least we can all agree on one thing, Christians, Atheists, whatever the heck you are:

We had cooler icons and statues back then.

[Cúchulainn]

And aren't the REAL angels

Hmm......

kind of peeved at being degraded from being badass motherers to somebody's lawn ornament?

They are portrayed as being good and moral, to contrast the devil.

god being so moral and just, for a psychotic, tantrum throwing child that is, must have all it's minions a liken to it.

Which of course is a contradiction, the devil being a creation of the perfect god also.

In reality, and I use that word quite loosely, all angels are as amoral as their creator.

But christians don't won't to think that way, so they are distorted to suit their view.

[motiv-8]

Which of course is a contradiction, the devil being a creation of the perfect god also.

Ignoring the rest of your babble, please go ahead and explain how that is a contradiction. I'm arleady prepared to thoroughly discredit you, but I'd like to hear it just for kicks anyway.

[Cúchulainn]

Ignoring the rest of your babble,

<cough>

I'll let that one go, this time.

please go ahead and explain how that is a contradiction. I'm arleady prepared to thoroughly discredit you, but I'd like to hear it just for kicks anyway.

Fine.

Premise 1.
God is a perfect being.

Premise 2
He created the universe and everything in it.

Premise 3
He created angels, then man.

Premise 4
God cares about you and is sadden by your suffering .

Conclusions

Based in these premises, God is not a perfect being, having created angels, many of whom revolted against him.
Which lead to countless deaths and eternal abandonment from Him.

Nor does he care about your suffering, seeing as he does nothing to alleviate this suffering in his creation, the Universe, caused by his creation, The Devil.

So the idea that angels are moral and just is a contradiction, as their creator isn't either moral or just, by any stretch of one's imagination.

Nor were a good third of his creations.

[Big War Bird]

The existance of angels is a relic of polytheism, with different angels filling various heveanly duties not unlike the Greek or Roman pantheon of gods.

However since Christianity is supposed to be monotheistic, the inherient contradiction of having powerful lesser beings has slowly and gradually written out by theologists over the centuries.

[ThiudareiksGunthigg]

The existance of angels is a relic of polytheism, with different angels filling various heveanly duties not unlike the Greek or Roman pantheon of gods.

However since Christianity is supposed to be monotheistic, the inherient contradiction of having powerful lesser beings has slowly and gradually written out by theologists over the centuries.

It has? All forms of Christianity accept the existence of angels. It's a bit hard for them not to, since angels appear regularly in various New Testament stories.

Christianity's angels, of course, come directly from Judaism. And Jewish angels have Zoroastrian, Persian, Assyrian and other early Semitic polytheistic antecedents.

[Big War Bird]

It has? All forms of Christianity accept the existence of angels. It's a bit hard for them not to, since angels appear regularly in various New Testament stories.

Christianity's angels, of course, come directly from Judaism. And Jewish angels have Zoroastrian, Persian, Assyrian and other early Semitic polytheistic antecedents.

Yes that exactly what I mean, thank you. Yes they accept the existence of angels, but the concept of angels in the first place is an evolutionary step from the polytheistic traditions you mention. The Angels of the Old Testament are gods in all but name, subservient to the king god but still possessors of their own divinity. (Pointedly God never explicitly creates angels anywhere in the Bible.) For some reason God cannot even bring himself to smite dastardly Satan.

And yes it is a bit hard for them to deny angels, but that doesn't mean they cannot be marginalized and ignored. Theologists are good at that, picking and choosing what to tout and what to kick under the bed. That God ever needed angels is embarrassing to the concept of an all powerful, all knowing being. Mind you I am only speaking in generalities and am well aware the different denominations place varying emphasis on angels, but overall the thrust of the evolution of thought has been to diminish angels as important beings.