Because the job of Making Stuff Up is too important to be trusted to anyone but ancient Jews.
Religions in general are a mixture of “official stuff from a holy book,” commentary from religious scholars and saints (or equivalent), oral traditions, and things borrowed from other religions. All of these contribute to the final product. Claiming that if it isn’t in the Bible it can’t be considered in this discussion makes no sense.
Jinn are made of fire, angels of light, and humans of clay. I think Jinn are supposed to be generally larger and darker skinned than humans and angels too, but don’t quote me on that last one.
I was brought up Catholic.
VERY Catholic.
I was taught angels have free will. Actually, not taught as this question seldom comes up but I remember asking about it.
My priest was insistent that angels have free will. However, he was big on Thomas Aquinas and not sure if that was just his opinion or is also the opinion of the Church.
I never heard that Jinn are larger and darker, but the Koran states that the Jinn have free will and that they can mislead humans, or do the opposite and be of great help.
From the Creator of the Angels Who Are Free Beings from the Vatican.
My take on it is we are children of angels and angels are children of arch angels etc. We will ‘evolve’ into angels and have our own human children to raise, and ever upward. We are always eternal children on some levels but also will be one day eternal parents. We will be given ‘toys’ of great power by our spiritual parents (the technology we have today has been gifted to us even if we think we have invented it). As I understand it this will go on forever, we will increase in ability and universes will open to us to explore and learn new things, yet we will also have the time to assist our children on their path.
Since you and others have opined in on this, my take on it is that many faiths have angelic encounters, Islam has a arch-angelic encounter as it’s basis of their entire holy book, and the Bible has many angelic encounters. By discrediting anyone’s claim of a angelic encounter as their imagination you discredit every one, every faith taht has angelic encounters is now subject to this and this to me is unacceptable, and insulting to many people.
To me Czarcasm’s comment is equally applicable to Mohamed imagined it all, something that many people would take offense to. If he wanted to just question the scripture he should have stuck with that instead of saying I imagined my angelic encounter.
It seems to me that at one time angels had free will, or they would not have been able to defy the will of God. But that’s changed now, and angels do not have free will, but only the desire to serve God. They are a separate order of creation, spiritual beings, not human or formerly human.
This seems to be a popular theme among some folks, but it is inaccurate.
It may be related to the misunderstanding, repeated several times in this thread, that only things in “the Bible” can be examined when looking for the sources of Christian belief. Martin Luther probably initiated that idea when he decided that he was going to expurgate any book of the bible that did not agree with his theology. Of course, he merely separated the books that contained ideas with which he agreed and ideas with which he disgreed. He was sufficiently educated to realize that there were other ideas within Christianity; he simply rejected those ideas with which he disagreed as not inspired by God. It was the later movement of the nineteenth century that took the additional step of pretending that ideas that were not within the (already limited by Luther) bible were, in some way, inventions of the devil, leading a number of people with less than complete education to come to the misunderstanding that if it was not in the bible, it was not in Christian belief. (Luther’s sola scriptura certainly promoted that notion, of course).
On the other hand, Judaism did not go on hiatus from the 5th century B.C.E. until the beginnings of the Talmud. There are a lot of theological ideas that were explored in what we now refer to as the Intertestamental works. Juadaism did, indeed, shrug off most of those ideas under the dual pressures of conflict with Christianity and of Roman persecution. Christianity also dropped many of the ideas as being irrelevant to the theme of Salvation that was its core message. However, the ideas explored in those works did not simply disappear, and several of those works explored the concepts of angels. The book of Daniel (which could have been an intertestamental work except that it got accepted as Scripture) has several references to angels that are not completely in accord with earlier references in Genesis. The book of Tobit, (that was accepted by Christians as Scripture until Luther threw it out–Catholics and Orthodox still regard it as Scripture), also presents an expanded view of angels. Most importantly the First book of Enoch spent a great deal of effort exploring concepts of angels and it is from that book, written about 1900 years prior to Milton that the the idea of fallen angels is taken in Christian mythology. The Letter of Jude, which is canonical in all Christian denominations, either quotes or alludes to the 1st Book of Enoch when it describes angels who sinned and whom God holds in chains.
It is true that most of the works discussing angels, (notably 1st Enoch), are not canonical. On the other hand, there are several references to some of the ideas that appear in 1st Enoch that do appear in Christain Scripture. It is certainly true that Milton elaborated upon a much smaller tradition, (as did Dante), but it is not true that Milton created the ideas out of whole cloth.
Its a nice theory but where is the support for it in official doctrine?
Also, it seems to completely fly in the face of the creation story. God shaped man in his image, didn’t he, not let his children the angels give birth to humans.
Just because a prophet is visited by an angel, does not mean that you are a prophet, or that you were visited by an angel; so a believer would not necessarily be insulted by someone discrediting your tale of angelic visitation, because it may be only be your encounter that was in question and not necessarily all encounters.
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
The entire concept of eternal damnation for a temporal act seems to me to be ludicrous and
a case of supreme overkill where the ‘punishment’ does not come close to fitting the ‘crime’.
I consider it a fear tactic, something men would come up with in attempt to control the behavior of other men.
There is one place that can be directly interperted as a angel with human children, Rev 12 - which at first is a female being in the heavens with non-human-like description, so this appears to be an angel giving birth to a child. In verse 17 we see that this female angelic figure has many earthly children (called her offspring). So Angels do have earthly children.
Some other comments on your other points. In Gen 6 God is stated to have ‘sons’ (plural), some translate this as angels, but either way these are (male) children of God who are not human. In Luke 20:36 we see human children of the resurrection and the angels being referred to as God’s children. And in many places in the NT we see that the people being referred to as God’s children. So both angels and humans are God’s children.
So to your point, I see no reason why angels would not also be created in the image of God, actually I would expect it as they are also children of God.
Going around telling people they are wrong and you are right based only on your belief system usually is not a good persuasion tactic, and will usually get them to think negatively of you.
Gee I can’t imagine why. 
Anyway, back to the topic…
IMO the answer is easily yes. Angels have free will. Any intelligent being does, and angels certainly qualify.
To proffer an answer to the original question “Do angels have free will” doesn’t necessarily presume a belief in angels anymore than a discussion as to whether or not Hobbits or Greek demigods had free will. It is obviously possible to speculate on angels having free will based on biblical myth, a personal belief in angels, some concept of free will itself or a multitude of other reasons without angels having to have actual existence.
God is an iron and I see you worshipping him in the appropriate form. 
Total and wholehearted agreement. It’s “subjunctive” reasoning: “If there were angels, what could we conclude about them?” It’s like the many threads on alternate histories. If Pearl Harbor wasn’t attacked…what then? Obviously, we can never know…but we can make some fairly educated guesses.
Alas for this case, there just isn’t enough documentation. The Bible mentions angels a few times – but there is some dispute over what is meant. Dear old Harold Camping is back preaching again, after his recent humiliations (give him credit for staying power!) He teaches that several of the “angels” in the Bible are actually God himself, and not servants or messengers.
Leaving that out, there is only the briefest hint of the rebellion in heaven. Jewish sources give a little more information. How much is just “legend” is impossible to assess. (How much weight should we give to the “Lilith” story?)
The angels who remained loyal seem to be VERY loyal. I doubt you’re going to get any secondary rebellions. I suspect that even those angels who had private mental reservations were swept up in the house-cleaning and exiled to hell. The ones who remain are of CERTAIN loyalty. (And, with hell staring me in the face, I probably would be too!)
So, yes, angels have free will. They also are not permitted to exercise it.