Talk:Symbols and symbolism in Christian demonology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Quality

This article reads like a hack demonologists soliloquey, any chance of someone with some knowledge in the subject matter making a few tweaks? There's quite a few errors on behalf of the original authors indicating a vastly inferior knowledge of the Christian faith, ergo it in reference to 'Christian demonology' is pretty much appearing like some tripe worth putting up for VfD in my eyes. Jachin 17:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree. What does the digression on days of the week have to do with anything?--Hyperizer 19:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The "tripe" dates from at least the middle ages and is certainly encyclopedically noteable - see Lesser Key of Solomon for example. I'm not sure why the article is restricted to "Christian" forms of demonology though. Clinkophonist 17:37, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removed Some Text

I took out the following:

"The Pentagram was originally a pagan symbol, the symbol of the godddess Venus. The symbol comes from the weight year cycle of the planet Venus, where the planet traces a perfect pentacle across the sky. The goat comes from the pagan god of fertility, Bahamut, who is depicted as a ram-human.

The devils pitchfork was once the trident of Poseidon, god of the sea. None of these symbols are actually devil worship, they are merely the result of vatican smear campaigns."

Seems like an angry cut and paste job from the Da Vinci Code or its own dubious sources.

Some discussion could be presented here regarding the conversion from pagan to demonic symbols, but care and research would be nice.

192.91.173.36 11:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Purpose of article

When I first arrived at this article it seemed largely to be an attempt to link neopagan religions to satanism through innuendo. Having removed some of that highly misleading innuendo there is now some information of interest, although there's also a lot of information that sounds highly questionable, and nothing is sourced.

The real question is, though, what is the article about? It has no "lead" section containing a brief summary, but rather launches straight into demonic signatures. It has a smattering of discussion of what certain symbols are, without explaining their origins or who believes them to be demonic. For instance, are the various symbols used by "satanists", or by people identified by certain christians as "satanic", or are they only used in christian contexts to symbolise satanism?

This article could be really interesting if it explained the context and development of some of these symbols. For instance, many details of demonic symbolism deriving from the witch-trials originated as pagan beliefs or folk customs that were not understood as such by the Church; the Church was very suspicious of these customs and forced them into a demonic mould; gradually the people practicing these things began to accept that what they were doing was in fact consorting with demons, and their stories started to fall in line with the prescribed demonology.

Basically I think this article would be more interesting if it were about Christian views of demonology rather than from the point of view of this very accusatory style of Christianity. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture. Fuzzypeg☻ 05:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)