Before going through our four reasons why angels are incorporeal, we must first establish the fact that we can know nothing for certain about the nature of angels unless God himself infallibly tells us in his Word. This is not a subject we can learn about by scientific observation, philosophical reasoning, or on the mere authority of men. Human beings can experience angels and demons, but without a “sure word of prophecy” (2 Peter 1:19) we cannot confidently or accurately interpret our experiences. Speculative philosophy, or interpreting the Bible in light of the speculative philosophy of ancient heathens, will not help us either. The disciplines of logic and metaphysics can help us, as handmaidens, to properly order and systematize the Bible’s teaching on subjects, but by themselves they cannot reveal information about the subject of angels.

Four Reasons Angels Do Not Have Bodies

Doctrine: Angels do not have bodies. That is, they are immaterial and incorporeal. Although many church fathers, following the heathen and Jewish Platonic & Stoic philosophers of their day, attributed proper bodies to angels, [1] the truth is that the Bible teaches they are incorporeal. Angels are not composed of physical and material parts, like animals, humans, and inanimate objects are. Yet angels are not omnipresent nor absolutely simple like God (i.e. they are devoid of parts, yet subject to the compositions of substance and accident, and potency and act, unlike God [2]). Angels are only able to be present in one place at a time, and they do not take up space, but are present definitively and virtually. Physical objects have mass and take up space, two objects cannot be in the same place at the same time. But spirits are locally present without being circumscribed by, or extended in, space. These things are true for the following four reasons:  

1. Angels are spirits.

First, Scripture expressly calls angels, spirits. God “maketh his angels spirits” (Psalm 104:4; Heb. 1:7); angels are “ministering spirits” (Heb. 1:14; cf. Job 4:15, Acts 19:12-16). If they were material and corporeal beings, then why would Scripture call them spirits? Spirit is diametrically opposed to body, as Christ says: “a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have” (Luke 24:39). “Now the Egyptians are men, and not God; and their horses flesh, and not spirit.” (Isa. 31:3). “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against…spiritual wickedness” (Eph. 6:12).

John of Damascus (675-749) understood the teaching of Scripture this way when he wrote that angels are “an incorporeal race, a sort of spirit or immaterial fire: in the words of the divine David, ‘He maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire’ (Ps. 104:4)” and that “they are incorporeal, and are free of all bodily passion, yet are not passionless: for the Deity alone is passionless. They take different forms at the bidding of their Master, God, and thus reveal themselves to men and unveil the divine mysteries to them.” [3]

Moreover, spirits are not visible and sensible, as Francis Turretin draws from Colossians 1:16—because they are spirits, “they are classed among things ‘invisible’ and are thus distinguished from all the works of God which strike the senses.” [4] “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him” (Colossians 1:16). Angels are invisible and insensible to us, therefore they are spiritual and immaterial.

That Scripture refers to angels as “flames of fire” (Ps. 104:4), Turretin explains: “Although they are compared to winds and flames of fire, they are not therefore to be termed corporeal. Otherwise a body must be ascribed to God (who willed to shadow himself forth often under these similitudes). Rather they are so called analogically, to teach that they are like the winds and the lightning—most swift messengers of God.” [5]

2. Multiple Angels may occupy the same space.

Angels are delimited by space, they cannot be in more than one place at a time. “For that which exists nowhere does not exist [or at least not as personal intelligent beings], and whatever exists everywhere and without dimensions is God.” [6] This is further evident from Scripture’s testimony to the fact that angels move successively from one location to another (Gen. 28:12; Job 1:7; Heb. 1:14; Luke 1:26; 1 Peter 5:8; Luke 11:24; Ps. 91:11-12, etc.), although they do so very quickly as if on wings (Ezek. 1:6), or like fire, wind (Ps. 104:4), or lightning (Luke 10:18).

At the same time, angels are not circumscribed by, or extended in, space, and hence many angels can be in one place simultaneously. For instance, thousands of unclean spirits were inside one man at the same time: “And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him.” (Luke 8:30). This would not be possible if angels had their own physical bodies, because it is impossible for two physical objects to be in the same place at the same time, or else they would be one body. As Francis Turretin wrote:

“if they were corporeal they would have quantity and so would be impenetrable, and more than one could not be at the same time in the same place (which nevertheless did happen, for a “legion” of demons is said to have been in one possessed, Lk. 8:30).” [7]

3. Scripture nowhere attributes matter to Angels.

Not only does Scripture distinguish between flesh and spirit, as we saw in point 1, but also the Bible nowhere ascribes material bodies to angels. In fact, the nature of angels is expressly contrasted with the nature of man. The soul and spirit of man is not essentially the same as the spiritual nature of angels. “For verily [Christ] took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.” (Hebrews 2:16). And in Heaven, the “innumerable company of angels” is distinct from “the spirits of just men made perfect” (Hebrews 12:22-23). On the other hand, man is composed of both body and soul, which are hypostatically united together in one man: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28). “And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:23).

Further, there is a resurrection of the body for human beings, whether good or evil (Job 19:26-27; John 5:28-29; 1 Cor 15:42-44; cf. WCF 32.2), but no such thing for angels or devils. This fact necessarily implies the inherent identity of a man’s body as a necessary component of his person. Even when the body and soul are separated and under the power of death, and the body decomposes and is eaten by worms, the Christian’s body “sleeps in Jesus” (1 Thess. 4:14; cf. Isa. 57:2), which could not be said if the body ceases to exist or if a new one will be created and given to him. These distinctions remain important when we consider our next point.

If Scripture does not ascribe proper bodies to angels, then we have no basis for believing that they do have proper bodies. Much less do we have any basis when Scripture consistently draws the distinction between spiritual beings and physically embodied human beings.

4. Angels assume physical forms.

Although angels exist as spirits independently of bodies, yet Scripture also teaches that they may appear in bodily form. Far from being an argument for the corporeality of angels, their occasional assumption of physical forms proves that they do not already have their own bodies. As Turretin argued: “If they already had bodies, they could not and ought not to assume other bodies. However, they evidently often did when they presented themselves to be seen in assumed bodies.” [8]

In the Bible, angels have appeared to holy men in dreams and visions (e.g. Ezekiel 1; Isaiah 6; Zechariah 6). But in these cases there was no need for them to assume a physical form since these were merely images presented to the minds of those visited, they were not perceived by the sight of the eyes. In these dreams and visions, the various figures—eyes, wings, wheels, animals, etc.—are to metaphorically represent some spiritual characteristic of the angel’s mission and God’s powerful providence in his use of them. These things are not descriptions of what angels physically look like. Hence, the internet trend of creating images of “biblically accurate” angels with Artificial Intelligence based on these texts is fallacious—ignoring the obvious context and meaning of these passages.

Secondly, angels have also appeared to holy men “in sensible vision and in a form striking the senses.” These types of visitations would require the angels assuming a physical form that could be seen with the eyes and interacted with by the physical environment (e.g. Genesis 18-19; Judges 13; Mark 16:5; Luke 2:9-15). These physical forms were not mere phantasms of the mind, nor “proper bodies hypostatically united to them, but economical and borrowed (according to the prescription of God). By free will, they were assumed for a time in order to perform the ministry demanded of them.” [9] The precise nature and mode of these physical forms are not described by Scripture and cannot be learned about by any other means of study, as Turretin wrote about these “apparitions” (i.e. appearances) of angels:

“What they were and whence assumed (whether created from nothing or from some preexisting but incapable matter, or adopted and combined from condensed air, or indeed from some other compressed material), it is curious to inquire and rash to define (Scripture being silent). It is better to be ignorant without crime than to search with peril.” [10]

That being said, we do know some things that they can not have been.

Biblical Denials About Physical Appearances of Angels.

First, the temporary assumption of a body “was not personal and internal (such as that of the soul and body), but external and accidental (after the manner of assisting forms) that they might manifest themselves (as the movers are united with the thing movable) by putting on and laying aside those bodies as garments (as Augustine says).” [11] Wilhelmus a Brakel explains:

“Although the bodies by which they interacted with men were true bodies [i.e. were physical, not that they were human bodies], the angels were not essentially united to those bodies as the soul is united to the body. They set those bodies in motion, not formaliter, that is, in essence, but efficienter; that is, as operative agents of those motions, such as when a man moves the gears in his watch. This occurred for the purpose of enabling the angels to meet with man in a manner consistent with his own form of existence, and thus to interact with man in a manner familiar to him.” [12]

Secondly, Turretin continues, “the operations performed by the angels in those bodies (such as talking, walking, eating) cannot properly and strictly be called vital. For these must be done in a living subject, animated by a soul hypostatically united with a body and intimately moving it (as belonging to men alone) because a second act supposes a first necessarily.” [13] When Genesis 18:8 states that the angels ate food, it simply means that they chewed it and swallowed it; it does not mean that they digested it to the health of their bodies like men and animals must do. “As to eating, if it is taken simply for the mastication of food, they can be said to have eaten; but if used for the taking of food convertible into substance and its digestion in the stomach, it cannot belong to them.” [14] And this certainly would also exclude the idea of angels being capable of procreation, either among themselves or with other beings, as well as any possible existence of angel-human hybrid beings (Matthew 22:30). [15]

Finally, “What became of the bodies assumed, after the work for which they were sent had been performed, is a superfluous question. Scripture tells us only that they disappeared from the time that the angels departed [e.g. Judges 6:21; 13:20]—whether those bodies were resolved into their own principles (whence they were composed), or reduced to nothing, or, if they had been the bodies of living men, restored to their pristine state.” [16]

In sum, the angels’ occasional assumption of physical forms necessarily implies that they do not already have their own material bodies. If it is objected that these physical appearances of angels proves that they have corporeal, material bodies, we answer with Mastricht: “God also not infrequently appeared to the patriarchs, yet from this he is not material in substance (Gen. 18:1-2). Therefore they rendered themselves conspicuous to us not in their own bodies, but in assumed bodies, as they are in themselves spirits, for which reason, when their business was completed, they set aside the assumed bodies (Judges 13:3, 6, 8-10, 20).” [17]

Objections Answered.

Objection: “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.” (1 Cor. 15:44). Therefore, angels do have bodies, just of a different kind than humans have, made of some kind of spiritual substance or material.

Answer: Matthew Poole comments: “it shall be ‘raised a spiritual body;’ spiritual, not as to the substance of it, for in that sense a spiritual body is a contradiction, but in respect of the qualities and conditions of it (Matt. 22:30, Luke 20:35-36). Bodies which, in respect of many new qualities they shall have, shall be more like angels and other spirits, than human bodies; beautiful, incorruptible, free from infirmities, not subject to hunger, or thirst, or injuries from cold or heat, etc. not using meat, drink, clothes, physic, or marriage; free, active, and nimble as spirits (1 Thess. 4:17).” [18]

Calvin emphasizes, “Let us, however, always bear in mind, what we have seen previously – that the substance of the [resurrected] body is the same, and that it is the quality only that is here treated of… no one may, by philosophizing farther, indulge in airy speculations, as those do who suppose that the substance of the body will be spiritual, while there is no mention made here of substance, and no change will be made upon it.” [19]

Charles Hodge wrote of the resurrected body: “It is still a body and therefore material, retaining all the essential properties of matter. It is extended. It occupies space. It has a definite form, and that a human form…The risen body of Christ, therefore, as it now exists in heaven, although retaining its identity with his body while here on earth, is glorious, incorruptible, immortal, and spiritual. It still occupies a definite portion of space, and retains all the essential properties of a body.” [20]

Also notice here how this objection is inconsistent with the claim of this position that angels eat food from Genesis 18. The spiritual body described here, as Poole notes, will not need to eat food, and in this sense has a similarity to the angels.

Objection: Jesus’ resurrected body could teleport and/or pass through walls (John 20:19; Luke 24:36). Therefore, angels may likewise have physical bodies, but with supernatural abilities that normal bodies do not have.

Answer: First, as we have seen, this theory violates the clear testimony of Scripture to the contrary. Jesus flatly denied this idea at the very occasion cited, when he spoke of his resurrected body: “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have” (Luke 24:39). It is contrary to the nature of a material body to share the same space with another physical material. Although more could be said, this alone is a sufficient rebuttal for our present purposes.

In point 2 above, we proved from Scripture that angels move successively from one location to another. If they move successively from one location to another, then they do not teleport, or move instantaneously from one location to another. Although their movement is so swift from our perspective that it practically may seem to be instantaneous, just like lightning shooting across the sky appears to be (cf. Luke 10:18), which is why they are figuratively described as having wings (Ezek. 1:6) and to be like fire and wind (Ps. 104:4). As Heinrich Heppe wrote:

“Therefore angels whom no medium resists must move very swiftly; much more, assuredly, than a corporeal thunderbolt, which is borne from east to west in a most destructive movement. Nor does it follow from this that angels move in a moment or by deserting their localisation acquire a new one in a moment. Although the medium is not resistant, succession is and so is a fresh act succeeding a former one, as well as the distance between the termini, which involves some measure of delay. For it is impossible that in the same νύνι [instant] and present it should have a locus and when it leaves it should acquire a new one.” [21]

Objection: “Man did eat angels’ food” (Psalm 78:25). If manna is angels’ food, then this seems to imply that angels eat and therefore would be corporeal beings.

Answer: Verse 24 calls manna “the corn of heaven,” so if it were properly speaking the food of angels then it would also be food that is grown in heaven. But this is absurd. David Dickson explains, “not that there is corn in heaven, or that angels eat any corporeal food; but manna is so called for the excellency of the food, for it might have served as food to angels, if they had any need of food.” [22]

Conclusion.

In sum, Herman Bavinck writes: “The clear pronouncement of Holy Scripture [is] that the angels are spirits (pneumata; Matt. 8:16; 12:45; Luke 7:21; 8:2; 11:26; Acts 19:12; [23:8;] Eph. 6:12; Heb. 1:14), who do not marry (Matt. 22:30), are immortal (Luke 20:35–36) and invisible (Col. 1:16), may be “legion” in a restricted space (Luke 8:30), and like spirits, have no flesh and bones (Luke 24:39).” [23]

---

[1] cf. Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology VII.ii.1, vol. 1, p. 541. A proper body is the material substance hypostatically united—and permanently belonging—to a being, such as a human body, an animal body, or the material of an inanimate object. This is in contrast to an assumed body, which is not hypostatically and permanently united to the being, but is temporary and borrowed exclusively for a specific functional purpose. Angels do not have the former, but have occasionally taken up the latter, as explained in this article.

[2] cf. Petrus Van Mastricht, Theoretical-Practical Theology 1.3.7.7, vol. 3, p. 181.

[3] Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 2.3, NPNF 2-9.18-20.

[4] Turretin, IET VII.ii.2, vol. 1, p. 542.

[5] Turretin, ibid., p. 542.

[6] Wilhelmus a Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, vol. 1, p. 288.

[7] Turretin, IET VII.ii.3, vol. 1, p. 542.

[8] Turretin, ibid., p. 542.

[9] Turretin, IET VII.vi.2, vol. 1,  p. 549.

[10] Turretin, ibid., pp. 549-550.

[11] Turretin, ibid., p. 550.

[12] Brakel, ibid., p. 288.

[13] Turretin, ibid., p. 550.

[14] Turretin, ibid., p. 550.

[15] cf. Turretin, IET VII.v.5, vol. 1, p. 548; Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica 1.51.3.

[16] Turretin, ibid., p. 550.

[17] Mastricht, TPT 1.3.7.25, vol. 3, p. 192.

[18] Matthew Poole, comment on 1 Corinthians 15:44.

[19] John Calvin, comment on 1 Corinthians 15:44.

[20] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, vol. 2, p. 628-9.

[21] Heinrich Heppe, Reformed Dogmatics 10.14, p. 209.

[22] David Dickson, comment on Psalm 78:24-25.

[23] Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, vol. 2, pp. 456.