Technically speaking, ophanim/cherubim/seraphim aren’t angels (malakhim). Malakhim (“messengers”) are always depicted in anthropomorphic terms afaik, those other guys are divine beasts and mystical chariot wheels that often attend or uphold the throne.
books.google.com/books?id=kE2k3…
books.google.com/books?id=kE2k3…
Cherubim seem to be related to Mesopotamian chimeric beasts like lamassu, seraphim are winged serpents that may relate to Bronze Age serpent cults, and malakhim correspond to the fourth and lowest tier of deity at Ugarit, the messenger deities.
The bronze serpent mentioned in Numbers and Kings represents an older cult (possibly associated with medicine and healing). It sort of got grandfathered in to standard practice, since it had been there forever.
jstor.org/stable/3263536
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehushtan
jstor.org/stable/3263536
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehushtan
There’s also this short mention in this wiki article, which pertains to Nehushtan, the bronze serpent removed from the Jerusalem temple by monotheistic reformers.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_wor…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_wor…
During the Renaissance, cherubim were conflated with putti (singular putto), chubby babies associated with love and classical depictions of Eros/Cupid. Exactly why they were conflated, I’m not sure, and the answers I’ve found seem fairly speculative.
In many of the narrative sections of the Bible in which angelic beings are described as directly engaging with humans, they are described as being like men. Many vivid descriptions of angels appear in apocalyptic literature.
They are describing mystic visions of the future and other realms.
If you read Sodom and Gomorrah, the angels appear as regular people. Lot specifically offers to wash their feet and the towns' citizens think that they are regular travelers.
Btw, not only angels, but also God himself. Mark S. Smith, Where the Gods Are:
Btw, not only angels, but also God himself. Mark S. Smith, Where the Gods Are:
