"Now the resurrection promises us nothing else than the restoration of the fallen to their ancient state; for the grace we look for is a certain return to the first life, bringing back again to Paradise him who was cast out from it. If then the life of those restored is closely related to that of the angels, it is clear that the life before the transgression was a kind of angelic life, and hence also our return to the ancient condition of our life is compared to the angels. Yet while, as has been said, there is no marriage among them, the armies of the angels are in countless myriads; for so Daniel declared in his visions: so, in the same way, if there had not come upon us as the result of sin a change for the worse, and removal from equality with the angels, neither should we have needed marriage that we might multiply; but whatever the mode of increase in the angelic nature is (unspeakable and inconceivable by human conjectures, except that it assuredly exists), it would have operated also in the case of men, who were "made a little lower than the angels ," to increase mankind to the measure determined by its Maker."
- St. Gregory of Nyssa, On the Making of Man
This is the type of statement that I have difficulty with, comparing humans to angels. Angels are incorporeal, they do not have bodies nor sex organs, and I don't think that they eat or drink of necessity. It's another statement that sex/marriage is a result of the fall. Why then did God create male and female? (of course in an earlier posting one of the Fathers is quoted as saying it was because God foresaw the fall).
The argument that there are myriad numbers of angels, and that they do not reproduce through marriage is not relevant to the reproduction of mankind (or animals for that matter). Angels are an entirely different class of beings. Man is unique, created in the image and likeness of God, something that the angels were not. It is a weak argument to base the behavior of humans on the behavior of the angels.
As for the verse: "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven," cannot be construed to mean that man was just like the angels before the fall, it just refers to the issue of marriage after the last judgment.
I don't think it is the Orthodox teaching that the purpose of mans creation, or of theosis, is to become just like the angels that God created. The angels had free will, evidenced by the fall of Satan, but they don't have a redeemer, or a plan for salvation that we know of. The Savior did not incarnate, die, and rise, to provide salvation for the fallen angels.
Some of the Fathers seem to imply though that we are striving to be like the angels. To emulate their obedience to God is praiseworthy, but man was not created simply as a corporeal version of the angels.
At least that is how I see it.