Talk:Seraphs

There is no proof to my knowledge of Zachariah being a 'seraph'.

The christian angelology, of the nine choirs of angel, the seraph are the highest ranked above the Ophanim and Cherubim, and are the Angels that are always around god's presence, surrounding his throne.

In the Choir rankings, Archangels are the second-to lowest, above standard Angels.

The way Zachariah is descrubed in his true angelic form is that of a Cherub, who have 4 faces of a man, a lion, an ox and an eagle and have 6 conjoined wings.

Although some accounts describe Seraph to be simmilar to cherubim, classically they are beings of pure light with 6 burning wings, 2 of which they fly with, 2 to cover thier feet and 2 to cover thier yes as not even they can look upon god directly.

All this can be sourced online, theres are lengthy wikipedia article on the subject.

Zachariah therefore cannot be credited as a seraph and to my knowledge have not even been mentioned.

Castiel named the Cherub '3rd class' but this assumes all other angels ecxept Archangels to be class 2, with the 4 archangels as class 1, and the Article on seraph has no real credability.

94.0.33.248 15:30, August 17, 2012 (UTC)

Thats not strictly true, Seraphs are at the top of the choir, but Archangels (note the captial thats important) are higher, there name basically means chief angels, and Michael the Archangel is refered to as the "Prince of the Seraphrium," not in the show in the lore.

As for the cherubs, he didn't mean it as in third class of angel, he ment as in third class of cherubs, in supernatural angels are organised like the millitary, its the same as saying second class of infantry, of fifth class naval batalion. As for the descriptions, admitally there similiar, but Cherubs actuall descriptions differ, for instance they have hooved feet like goats.

Finall its already been established that Cherubs are the lowest class of angel (in the show,) so as Zachariah is the highest angel, under the Archangels, he can't be a Cherub. Plus I think someone in the cast, said he was a seraph in a interview. General MGD 109 (talk) 17:12, August 17, 2012 (UTC)

But Zachariah is the only angel of his supposed class as you said, 'highest' under the Archangels as if to say he is singular in his authority, when ideally there should be other 'seraphs' but none were shown, none that we know of took charge after his death, and in season six, Raphael leads against Castiel, and only other members of cass garrison are shown, aswell as unnamed angels, but they seemed to insignifigant and not powerful enough to be of Zacharia's class.

Really, it seems that the Archangels appointed a single angel to organise the garrisons as directed by the archangels.

The way he described his true form may just be a nod towards aspects of classical angelogy as, Castiels true form, is not mentioned as any discription for an angel outside the show.

and if he had six wings in heaven, how come when he died, like all angels he displayed ashes of 2 wings, he may of just been trying to make himself look big.

But anyway, are you sure there was an interview naming Zach as a seraph? can you provide a source?

otherwise the category for seraph seems not very stable in the established continuity of the show and may fool fans, as an interview is an obscure source as it is, and it seems zach is the only seraph known of to date.

94.0.33.248 01:27, August 18, 2012 (UTC)

Page Naming
Why has this page been reverted back to "Seraphs"? It needs to be "Seraphim" because that is grammatically correct. SilverRain (talk) 00:47, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

I agree gramatically, but the fact that the word Seraphim has never been mentioned in the show, while Seraph has, might pose a problem. General MGD 109 (talk) 01:23, November 11, 2012 (UTC)

That seems like a weak excuse. I'm sorry, but the word "Seraphs" hasn't been used either. In fact Zachariah hasn't been mentioned as one. We've only taken that on conjecture based on his description of his appearance. So, we should use Seraphim as the page name because it is grammtically correct and it would not pose any problem.SilverRain (talk) 02:59, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

Actually, yes it has. The first time Castiel appeared in season 8, he specifically mentioned that he is a Seraph.L4D2 Ellis (talk) 03:22, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

I'm talking about Zachariah. I know Castiel did. But I do not remember anyone mentioning Zachariah as being a Seraph. And we've used that term for a while now. So why not be grammtically correct about it? SilverRain (talk) 03:33, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

I only said that because you said, "I'm sorry, but the word "Seraphs" hasn't been used either.". Your mention of Zachriah seemed to be another point.L4D2 Ellis (talk) 03:55, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

"Seraphs" has not been mentioned. "Seraph" has. So we might as well use the grammatically correctly terminology, don't you think?SilverRain (talk) 04:20, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

And here I thought it was a complaint between "Seraph" and "Seraphim". L4D2 Ellis (talk) 04:26, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

Oh haha. Misunderstanding. "Seraphim" is the plural of Seraph in Hebrew. "Seraphs" is darn near slang. Is the page still going to remain as "Seraphs"? There are numerous places throughout the wiki in which the correct termonolgy is used, so why not the name page for these angels too?SilverRain (talk) 04:46, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

I would agree with that. Go with the correct terminology. L4D2 Ellis (talk) 21:30, November 15, 2012 (UTC)

Grammatical inaccuracy, what? Seraph and Seraphim / Cherub and Cherubim =/ mean the same thing. In the English language, both "Seraphs" and "Seraphim" are words, so both would be grammatically correct. As far as what's been mentioned in the show, specifically, Castiel calls his type "Seraph" not Seraphim, while they mean the same thing. Zachariah is a Seraph though, his description of his true form proves it. -- ImperiexSeed, 7:22 PM, November 15th 2012

I mean no disrespect, ImperiexSeed, but you are incorrect in this situation. "The word seraphim, literally "burning ones", transliterates a Hebrew plural noun" - Wikipedia, in case you don't believe me. Referring to Castiel as a seraphim is like me calling you a humans. It's incorrect. Same with Cherub(im). Seraph = singular, seraphim = plural. Yes Seraphs is a word, but so is the "F" word; doesn't mean that's proper. This page, as it refers to class of angels as a whole, must be renamed "Seraphim" SilverRain (talk) 23:27, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

As far we should be concerned, series accuracy superscedes real-world accuracy in order to correctly document Supernatural's canon, so I say "Seraphs" remain as the page title at least until the term "Seraphim" is actually used in the series. 108.247.151.188 23:46, November 17, 2012 (UTC)

That's silly. Using the argument of series accuracy over real world accuracy is contradictary. Zachariah was NEVER called a Seraph in the show; the wiki just assumed he was. Castiel WAS called one. So just because the show never said "Seraphim" in the plural sense, doesn't mean that it's wrong to that here. If anything, calling Zachariah a Seraph is wrong because he was never stated as such. If I am shown an instance where Zachariah is called a Seraph in the show or by the creators, I will gladly give due apologies. However, until then, it is a contradiction to call him a Seraph and not let the page be renamed "Seraphim" on the grounds of series accuracy over real world accuracy. SilverRain (talk) 00:25, November 18, 2012 (UTC)