• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can Angels marry

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
No.

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels[a] in heaven. (Matthew 22:30)
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
That would be correct.

But without definition of angelic.....personal commitment could change form.
Maybe someone should ask to move this to the debate section?
 

dance-above

Member
No.

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels[a] in heaven. (Matthew 22:30)

I believe the same scripture and believe it shows they do not.the main reason I was thinking about it because some teach that Christ is Michael the archANGEL and if that is so then it contradicts the teaching that the church is the bride of Christ.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
I believe the same scripture and believe it shows they do not.the main reason I was thinking about it because some teach that Christ is Michael the archANGEL and if that is so then it contradicts the teaching that the church is the bride of Christ.

Hi, Greetings in Christ.


I think this adds another aspect to the discussion, I take bride of Christ as both metaphor here, and real, however, the "Church" means all Christians, collectively, imo.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
I believe the same scripture and believe it shows they do not.the main reason I was thinking about it because some teach that Christ is Michael the archANGEL and if that is so then it contradicts the teaching that the church is the bride of Christ.

That's a teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses and, no, it doesn't make much sense. It's very strange. I do not believe that Jesus was/is the Archangel Michael. Humans do not become Angels and vice versa. They're a completely different species.

The Church being the Bride of Christ is a mystical relationship.
 

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
That's a teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses and, no, it doesn't make much sense. It's very strange. I do not believe that Jesus was/is the Archangel Michael. Humans do not become Angels and vice versa. They're a completely different species.

The Church being the Bride of Christ is a mystical relationship.

Ha, that almost got by me. Yes I'm not familiar with that.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
Genesis suggests that in the time of Noah, the sons of God did produce offspring - the giants. But, this wasn't pleasing to God as He destroyed them all.

That's a misreading of the story.

Genesis records a strange hybrid which resulted from sexual unions between the "daughters of men" and the “sons of God.
6:1 When men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, 6:2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took to wife such of them as they chose. 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh, but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years." 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.
While many scholars prefer to dismiss this entirely as myth which is borrowed from pagans cultures of the ancient near east, it is more appropriate to look for some truth and reality behind this mythical sounding text. Some of the Church Fathers, such as St. Augustine, Chrysostom, and Cyril of Alexandria suggested that the “sons of God” may refer to righteous descendants (men) of Seth who took descendants (women) of Cain as wives. In such a case, “sons of God” associates the men with the goodness of God whereas “daughters of men” would be intended as a contrast to this. This is typical of ancient Semitic expressions which must not be interpreted literally as we understand such constructions but in accord with the customary use of language at the time. Knowing the background of Cain as a killer and the bad blood of his descendants, it is no wonder that such unions would be regarded in a negative light, which unions led to a situation in which humanity was corrupted and unacceptable to God. On the other hand, it is said of Seth and his line that these were the first to reverence the Name of Yahweh. The word “Nephalim” literally means “fallen ones” which sense would be consistent with an interpretation that views this group as a corrupt mixture of good and bad blood. Other commentators have suggested that the “sons of God” were (fallen) angels who somehow mated with human women, but this does present metaphysical complications in light of the natures of each. For now, I find the Patristic solution the most satisfying.
EWTN.com - who were the Nephilim
 

dawny0826

Mother Heathen
That's a misreading of the story.

Genesis records a strange hybrid which resulted from sexual unions between the "daughters of men" and the “sons of God.
6:1 When men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, 6:2 the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took to wife such of them as they chose. 6:3 Then the LORD said, "My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh, but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years." 6:4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.
While many scholars prefer to dismiss this entirely as myth which is borrowed from pagans cultures of the ancient near east, it is more appropriate to look for some truth and reality behind this mythical sounding text. Some of the Church Fathers, such as St. Augustine, Chrysostom, and Cyril of Alexandria suggested that the “sons of God” may refer to righteous descendants (men) of Seth who took descendants (women) of Cain as wives. In such a case, “sons of God” associates the men with the goodness of God whereas “daughters of men” would be intended as a contrast to this. This is typical of ancient Semitic expressions which must not be interpreted literally as we understand such constructions but in accord with the customary use of language at the time. Knowing the background of Cain as a killer and the bad blood of his descendants, it is no wonder that such unions would be regarded in a negative light, which unions led to a situation in which humanity was corrupted and unacceptable to God. On the other hand, it is said of Seth and his line that these were the first to reverence the Name of Yahweh. The word “Nephalim” literally means “fallen ones” which sense would be consistent with an interpretation that views this group as a corrupt mixture of good and bad blood. Other commentators have suggested that the “sons of God” were (fallen) angels who somehow mated with human women, but this does present metaphysical complications in light of the natures of each. For now, I find the Patristic solution the most satisfying.
EWTN.com - who were the Nephilim

The author that you've quoted doesn't speak in definitive terms, preferring the Patristic approach. I'm not Catholic. And I'm comfortable with my different interpretation.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
The author that you've quoted doesn't speak in definitive terms, preferring the Patristic approach. I'm not Catholic. And I'm comfortable with my different interpretation.

Can you find some evidence that early Christians since as the Church Fathers agreed with your view of it?
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Can Angels marry?


No. Disobedient angels left their proper dwelling place to marry women before the Flood of Noah's day. They were judged adversely and apparently since the Flood, are unable to repeat their sin. (Genesis 6:1,2 and Jude 6) These angels allowed the unnatural sexual desires they cultivated to cause them to take on human bodies and marry human women.
 
Top