Talk:Fallen angel/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Gunk in lead

One sentence in the lead read "One early source for information on angelology and demonology is the Persian [sic] prophet Zoroaster." The hymns attributed to Zoroaster are not "one early source for information on angelology and demonology"; the author of that sentence is confusing Zoroaster with Zoroastrian tradition. Moreover, that sentence is synthesis and has no business being in an article on "Fallen angel" as that concept doesn't exist in (any stage of) Zoroastrianism. -- Fullstop (talk) 19:57, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Need a do-over for the Section Origin of the Term

Fallen Angel is not a translation of the word nephilim (KJV translates as giant.)See wikipedia entry for nephilim. They are the crossbreed children of angels and humans per Enoch. The Jude quote is both out of place in the middle of the Enoch info and doesn't say FALLEN so kind of useless unless there is a reliable source saying in darkness is the same as fallen. The paragraph starting "The distinction of good and bad angels" exactly contradicts the Jude quote unless being on earth is the same as chained in darkness. "The gradual development of Hebrew language consciousness on this point is very clearly marked in the inspired writings. The account of the fall of the First Parents (Genesis 3) is couched in such terms that it is difficult to see in it anything more than the acknowledgment of the existence of a principle of evil who was jealous of the human race." This paragraph makes no real sense. How do we get a gradual development starting with the 3rd chapter of the 1st book? And even if it did how do we get from a principle of evil to a Fallen Angel? (Off the point but: In plain English Adam and Eve is better than First Parents and set is better than couched.)And the Philo paragraph is more of a footnote than a readable entry. I think it says the Greek translation may have used angel instead of son in some passages but we can't tell because those passages are corrupt. I'm willing to do soem clean up but someone who has real knowledge might do a better job. 96.227.80.178 (talk) 01:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I likewise have strong concerns over the accuracy of this section (and the article generally, for that matter). It appears to be mostly rather mangled OR/SYNTH of unclear provenance. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 05:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I am the author of the "Origin of the Term" section. In stating the etymology of the word nephilim, I've shown from where the "fall" comes. While the King James version translates "nephilim" as "giants", a reference to their abnormally tall stature owing to the cross-breeding between human and angel, the actual Hebrew word derives from a reference to their origin, that of having fallen from heaven to mingle with humans on earth (Gen. 6:4). The quote from Jude, who was well familiar with the book of Enoch as evidenced by his quoting from it, lends credibility to this last assertion.Larry Gerndt (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Origins Disputed

The section on "Origins" is indefensible -- there are demonstrably false statements marked as "citation needed" but in truth they need to be deleted. The section needs to be re-written by someone with actual knowledge of the subject, not retrospectively projected assumptions. Most scholars believe the idea of Fallen Angels entered Judaism under the influence of Persian Zoroastrianism during the Babylonian Exile (the suggestion that there are "Bad Angels" throughout the bible is asinine -- there is NOT ONE). *The Apocaplyptic Imagination* by John J. Collins is an excellent place to start looking for more info... Yonderboy (talk) 21:38, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Risen Demon

If their is such thing as angels to sin and fall to hell to be a Fallen Angel, (And possibly differ from the common demon) Is it possible for a demon born in hell, to choose to repent it's sin and become a sort of opposite to Fallen Angel? A "Risen" or "Raised Demon"?--86.146.59.66 (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Angels and thus demons aren't "born", they are created. While some have speculated that it may be possible for a 'fallen angel' to repent, I know of no Abrahamic religion that considers such a possibility within its theology. Regardless, the possibility would require a WP:RS in order to be mentioned in the article. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 18:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

What about Marchosias? He maybe a Duke of Hell but still he is reliable to conjuror, truth to all questions and hope to return to heaven with demons (Not Fallen Angels), Unless he has intentions to storm heaven but that would be foolish, in yet still he holds some sort of hope. This is just a hypothosis.--86.146.59.66 (talk) 00:50, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Only according to Aleister Crowley, and Marchosias leaves Marchosias' status (was he himself a "non fallen angel", is a "non fallen angel" (i) an angel that did not fall or (ii) a demon that is not a fallen angel), and the criteria for "return to heaven" more than a little ambiguous. You would have to return to the original source, and in any case, Crowley himself is a theologically WP:FRINGE figure who should not be given WP:UNDUE weight. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 05:59, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

So you believe their cna be no such thing as Risen Demons? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.128.93.255 (talk) 18:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't care whether there are or not. All I know is that we have no reliable source unambiguously stating that any prominent religion thinks that they do exist. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 19:20, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hm, eitherway I retrieved the answers I seek. Thanks for help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.83.77.2 (talk) 08:28, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, yep Christ has the power to forgive fallen angels, and many believe this will eventually happen, the kid will add some references to the main page. However its important to remember that fallen angels have commited the unforgiveable sin. They witnessed the the miraculous power of God (Mat 12 , Heb6:4 ) yet still choose to rebel. God makes such reprobates not even desire reconciliatoin, he makes them have a depraved mind (Rom 1:28) so its unlikely fallen angels will even want to repent , untill the time comes for the restoration of all things, where they will be forced to accept Christ (Phil 2:10), and afterward will be glad that they have done so when they are restored to blissful union with Love. So anyway, its not likely there is really such a thing as accended demons right now , and in fact they dont appear in the work of great writers who are in tune with the cosmic pulse, but only in genre fiction. PS, its widely beleived that the unforgiveable sin cant be committed by anyone who hasnt had a direct revelation of Gods miraculous nature, so no need for anyone to stress if they said unclean things in their minds. Mrthekid97 (talk) 13:33, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Disobedience to God as per the Koran

Both Islam sections are pretty messed up, especially the second which refers to Iblis as Lucifer and says he is the angel which loves God the most. There is nothing in the Qur'an that refers to Iblis as Lucifer and nothing that indicates he loves God the most or at all. The reason this area lacks citations is because there are none to indicate much of what the article is saying. Someone please clarify that The Qur'an makes no mention of "Lucifer", that "Iblis" is chief of the race called the Jinn, and that the Qur'an never says Iblis loved God the most. It is a very common misconception that Iblis is an angel when the Qur'an clearly states he is a Jinn, right here

"018.050 Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!"

The Qur'an also makes clear that Satan does not really have a battle with God so much is an avowed enemy of Human Kind. It seems Satan has resigned to what he has decided is his fate of everlasting destruction in Hell but has prayed to God to give him a chance to disrupt the affairs of the humans (who disbelieve in God).

"007.014 He said: "Give me respite till the day they are raised up." 007.015 (Allah) said: "Be thou among those who have respite." 007.016 He said: Now, because Thou hast sent me astray, verily I shall lurk in ambush for them on Thy Right Path. 007.017 Then I will certainly come to them from before them and from behind them, and from their right-hand side and from their left-hand side; and Thou shalt not find most of them thankful. 007.018 He said: Go forth from hence, degraded, banished. As for such of them as follow thee, surely I will fill hell with all of you."

and another one

"015.032 (Allah) said: O Iblis! what excuse have you that you are not with those who make obeisance?

015.033 (Iblis) said: I am not such that I should make obeisance to a mortal whom Thou hast created of the essence of black mud fashioned in shape.

015.034 (Allah) said: Then go thou forth from hence, for lo! thou art outcast.

015.035 And surely on you is curse until the day of judgment.

015.036 He said: My Lord! then respite me till the time when they are raised.

015.037 (Allah) said: "Respite is granted thee

015.038 Till the Day of appointed time.

015.039 (Iblis) said: "O my Lord! because Thou hast put me in the wrong, I will make (wrong) fair-seeming to them on the earth, and I will put them all in the wrong,-

015.040 Except Thy servants from among them, the devoted ones.

015.041 (Allah) said: This is a right way with Me:

015.042 "For over My servants no authority shalt thou have, except such as put themselves in the wrong and follow thee."

015.043 And lo! for all such, hell will be the promised place.

So basically I suggest someone fixes this section up. I don't know why I don't feel like doing it myself. I'm hoping someone will clean it up. In the meantime I'm going to check other areas in relation to this as I suspect some errors are likely in relation to what Iblis is and what the Jinn are. It is somewhat essential in understanding the Islamic worldview. __________________ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Junkspy (talk • contribs) 04:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

The whole section seems kind of poorly written (not to mention uncited), but the whole second half is one preposterous, hugely offensive sentence. "It was then that Allah created the universe and sent Adam to earth for by disobeying Allah he had forfeited his right to reside in heaven and since then man has been deceived by Lucifer into creating other gods or changing and misshaping the code of life sent by allah through his prophets ( main are Moosa (moses) whose teachings were misshapen and Jews were born , Eisa (Jesus) whose teaching were in the form of the book called as ingeel (pronounced as In-Jee-l) which was misshapen and changed by the church to give birth to the monopolized religion of Christianity , and finally there was Mohammad (may peace be upon him) who was the last prophet sent by Allah to bring human on the right path of Islam and it was through him that Quran was sent down earth by Allah through the Arc angel Gabriel(gibraeel - pronounced as JIB-RAA-EEl), in parts called as WAHI's, who used to come down to earth and teach the Quran by heart to Mohammad(may peace be upon him) who in turn had it written down by those who could read and write as he himself was uneducated and could not read and write.".

Ya. Wow. --Stephen (talk) 04:38, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

It is just really absurd that most people depict Demons as ugly creatures.... chimerarc —Preceding comment was added at 00:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I am Muslim and I totally agree that that particular section was not very well written. Aside from its non-neutral wording, there are a lot of unnecessary inclusions, such as pronunciation guides... it makes the entry seem like something that was copy and pasted off of a religious education website. I could try to fix it, but right now I am very busy :( We'll see if my schedule doesn't clear up over the next few weeks. --Winterlain (talk) 02:49, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Dark angels

Dark angels er en skater gruppe fra danmark

medlemmer: Andreas Nikolaj lasse —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.72.52.38 (talk) 13:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Translation (via Google Trans): Dark angels are a skater group from denmark

members: Andrew Nicholas placement --Auric (talk) 14:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Quote from Milton

is Book 7, lines 131-134. If you can make it go directly to that quote, please do. 173.21.123.155 (talk) 08:50, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Neutraility

this artcile is not neutral 'coz there is no Islamic POV (Idot (talk) 01:41, 4 September 2009 (UTC))

Because you have provided NO SOURCE for "Islamic POV". Read WP:V. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 05:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

'co it's just absent here! (Idot (talk) 01:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC))

Please read the WP:WEIGHT section of WP:NPOV: "Neutrality requires that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each." No "reliable source" = zero weight. Not mentioning a viewpoint for which a RS has not been given is in perfect compliance with WP:NPOV. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 02:05, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Sumerian "gods" as fallen angels

Enki for example had a son with a human woman, Adapa. Gilgamesh was also 2/3 "god" and 1/3 human. Some of the other Sumerian "gods" also had relationships with human women. And last but not least, the Sumerian "gods" taught the humans many of God's secrets. That's exactly what the fallen angels did, even though God strictly forbid it. Enki's city Eridu is also described as "Place of the Prince", and Enki himself described as "Lord of the Earth" or "Prince" (of hell). That's exactly how Satan and Lucifer are described in the Bible. After reading through all the pages here on Wikipedia regarding Sumer and the Sumerian religion I have no shadow of a doubt that Sumer was the place where the fallen angels came down to earth and corrupted mankind, fornicated with human women. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.201.23.62 (talk) 09:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:RSs dsicussing any of these as "fallen angels" (as opposed to demigods)? Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 09:15, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Since I've almost never seen anon editors bother to actually read the site's guidelines (*sigh*), to be clear Reliable sources typically include: articles from magazines or newspapers (particularly scholarly journals), or books by recognized authors (basically, books by respected publishers). Online versions of these are usually accepted, provided they're held to the same standards. User generated sources (like Wikipedia) are to be avoided. Self-published sources should be avoided except for information by and about the subject that is not self-serving (for example, citing a company's website to establish something like year of establishment). "Truth" is not the criteria for inclusion, verifiability is. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)