Welcome to Gaia! ::

Young King under Heaven's avatar

Golden Citizen

9,400 Points
  • Millionaire 200
  • Tycoon 200
  • Popular Thread 100
There is mention of a War in Heaven in Revelations, and Angels and Demons would be eternally combating for human souls
stealthmongoose's avatar

Dangerous Conversationalist

7,550 Points
  • Beta Forum Regular 0
  • Beta Citizen 0
  • Beta Contributor 0
Read the Bible from cover to cover. If you're not an atheist by the time you're done, there is something wrong with your brain! Not that that's inherently a bad thing, but your perceptive skills would be quite lacking.
blackcyclamens's avatar

Partying Genius

8,050 Points
  • Partygoer 500
  • Wall Street 200
  • Junior Trader 100
sicK pandaH
Is there any mythology or lore based around Christianity? I'm talking about such things as angel/demon wars or something to that effect? Or is everything in the religion what "could" happen?
I'm writing a book based around an Angel and I was curious as to if there was any lore I could research and make references at?

Please, and thank you for the input, everyone! ^-^


Angels have different forms, and one of those is 2 rings crossed together with eyes all over it. See thrones.


http://www.google.com.ph/imgres?imgurl=http://www.angel-ology.com/images/Lg_Thrones_Angels.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.angel-ology.com/The_Thrones_Choir.html&h=800&w=693&sz=225&tbnid=DsCcwAuXjCoUvM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=78&zoom=1&usg=__1MdfZY6lNQPJeg3VIG7r9Kf2W2I=&docid=NsQzq2MN5seBpM&sa=X&ei=Wv8gUbDKA8iPrgeP-IGwBA&ved=0CEEQ9QEwAg&dur=7
I would pick up a bible and start at revelation. Some interesting ideas have sprouted up from that book.
Raven Cpu's avatar

Blessed Giver

8,100 Points
  • Inquisitor 200
  • Money Never Sleeps 200
  • Millionaire 200
If you're writing a book that talks about Christianity, rather than asking random internet people about it (or are most likely going to give you incorrect information), why not pick up the Bible and get the answers yourself?
sicK pandaH
Is there any mythology or lore based around Christianity? I'm talking about such things as angel/demon wars or something to that effect? Or is everything in the religion what "could" happen?
I'm writing a book based around an Angel and I was curious as to if there was any lore I could research and make references at?

Please, and thank you for the input, everyone! ^-^


I don't know that it has ever been officially recognized by any sect, but you could perhaps look into Paradise Lost by Milton, or Dante's Divine Comedy?
haruki_jitsunin's avatar

Friendly Seeker

7,100 Points
  • Millionaire 200
  • Hygienic 200
  • Tycoon 200
There is plenty! The whole bible IS the lore. However, it is only the 'lore' that's considered cannon. If you want to really get into it, there is a lot of lore that uses the same judeo/christian figures that aren't considered cannon.

Here is a list of possible books. The site itself is not credible and again, these books ARE NOT considered cannon, but deal with the same lore and were written in similar times.

http://www.thelostbooks.com/list.htm

As far as angels/demons, I would check out the old testament, which deals a lot with angels visiting humans. I would check out Enoch (in the lost books), Revelations and also Paradise Lost is a great read in neither the bible nor the lost books that deals a lot with the fall of lucifer.
Xx-Deal With The Devil-xX's avatar

Dangerous Flatterer

9,250 Points
  • Brandisher 100
  • Invisibility 100
  • Flatterer 200
sicK pandaH
Is there any mythology or lore based around Christianity? I'm talking about such things as angel/demon wars or something to that effect? Or is everything in the religion what "could" happen?
I'm writing a book based around an Angel and I was curious as to if there was any lore I could research and make references at?

Please, and thank you for the input, everyone! ^-^


Christianity is a mythology.
Avgvsto's avatar

Dapper Reveler

Before I begin with my response I'd like to thank you for not getting so angry at me so quickly this time. And I'd like to say that this is one of the first times I actually took the time to read all of your responses after the point where you get really wordy in order to seem very passionate.


stealthmongoose
What you are asking is, in a nutshell, "But stealthy, if fiction can be influential to the point of making laws and societal decisions that work unless examined skeptically by most people (murder being a crime in all instances for example, makes self defense impossible) then why don't we just consider it religion or dogma and follow it as an absolute truth?
I don't think i was being stealthy. My question more simply put could be like, if opinions (and eventually dogmatic understandings of things) must be influenced by emotions because humans are emotional creatures then wouldn't an appeal to emotions alter truth just as much as reality. Reality (according to my argument) is not inherently determined by an objective sort of reason but also by a emotional rendering of perspective. Therefore the effects going into developing perspective would be seemingly as essential to determining truth from reality as the reality in question in the first place. If we can only see and understand the reality at hand through a filter of perspective would developing that emotional filter pertain as much to reality as the inherent objective form of reality? I'm not sure if i can make that question much clearer. Most of your arguments seemed a little off key towards this exact description so i'll let you try again. Also as far as the murder thing goes, you would still require some objective or dogmatic stance to determine the difference between murder and self defense and why one is better than the other in order to make the rule worth while.

stealthmongoose
The answer to that is simple. We want our societal practices and truths to be based around reality, if nothing more than for practical purposes.
What makes the basis of "reality" not subjective and as such how do we determine what qualifies as real? If it is subjective then why bother basing some societal rules off of an opinion perhaps not universally shared?



Overall Avgusto, i think you're suffering from a problem that you see as binary. You consider it impossible for anything to have value unless it is dogmatically true, which is why it is easy for those like me and others to draw inspiration from fictitious work without appealing to them as true, while others (presumably the stance you're presenting) require the idea to be true in all instances inescapably or else surrender itself to being completely false.
I prefer my name with two V's makes me feel more like an ancient Roman. I can feel the empathy for me in your caring about my opinion which I enjoy and i believe you are an honorable opponent in thought, but i am quite proud of what i perceive to be logical.
stealthmongoose's avatar

Dangerous Conversationalist

7,550 Points
  • Beta Forum Regular 0
  • Beta Citizen 0
  • Beta Contributor 0
Avgvsto
stealthmongoose

I don't hold this work to have absolute truths or applicability in all instances, ergo i accept it as a fable and the inspirational quality of it's story. Your question is malformed, as nobody who i know follows a fiction dogmatically unless they hold it to be true in some sense beyond a simple fable or fictional inspiration.
If you don't accept the fable as a universal truth why would it pertain to a universal question? Also, do you really think that society is in no way influenced by the fictitious cultures that go into it? And if you don't why is that influence which offers emotional background any less a part of dogma than the allegations (such as actual law and philosophy) that are made as an after effect of emotion and thought- in fact how is it not more essential?


Because questions (even universal ones) don't have universal solutions. "What is the meaning of life?" for example is a question that supposes the opinion of either the asker or those being asked, as meaning is created by those involved in the function. A hammer is not meant to do anything until it's put to a nail, before then it can be used to bash someone's skull in or otherwise, at which point it was meant to bash someone's skull in.

I've spoken with someone else on the subject of influence and fiction, and i think that fiction can be influential like any song, ballad, myth, or otherwise. Before we proceed to that notion, however, let me clarify your question to see if i understand what you're asking...

What you are asking is, in a nutshell, "But stealthy, if fiction can be influential to the point of making laws and societal decisions that work unless examined skeptically by most people (murder being a crime in all instances for example, makes self defense impossible) then why don't we just consider it religion or dogma and follow it as an absolute truth?

The answer to that is simple. We want our societal practices and truths to be based around reality, if nothing more than for practical purposes. I really hate to simplify your argument further, but here is an example of two ideas, one of which is more fictional than the other.

Idea 1: Sandwiches are made from a number of ingredients: Bread, cheese, ham, lettuce, tomatoes, mustard, pickles, etc. are all stacked on top of one another in between the two slices of bread to create what is commonly known as a sandwich.

Idea 2: Sandwiches are made by the will of God. The ingredients come from his divine grace, and by putting these ingredients in a certain order God's will is done, thus making a divine sandwich.


While in both instances, this may appear tempting, and in some cases may even yield sandwiches in both cases; The issue comes when we try to research these ideas and put them to practice. In practice, idea 1 is more efficient, accurate, and demonstrable than idea 2. Idea 2 will never have the same truth value as idea 1, and idea 2 isn't even the right way to make a sandwich.

That's why we label idea 2 fictional. Idea 2 can be followed, but other than for inspirational purposes there is no real truth to it, though the principles can lead one towards making a real sandwich.

Much like the emperor's new clothes can lead me to making real observations about arguments from authority and ideas without appealing to the fiction as though it were true in all instances.

Overall Avgusto, i think you're suffering from a problem that you see as binary. You consider it impossible for anything to have value unless it is dogmatically true, which is why it is easy for those like me and others to draw inspiration from fictitious work without appealing to them as true, while others (presumably the stance you're presenting) require the idea to be true in all instances inescapably or else surrender itself to being completely false.

While at times i could find myself agreeing with this sort of attitude, fiction is made specifically for this purpose, of having an uncanny life-lesson without proposing that the story is literally true. As such, it has a special place in my heart that is neither immune from scrutiny nor proposes to be absolutely true, making it neither necessary or essential in delegating societal or other policies. Law, in this instance, is a moot point.
Avgvsto's avatar

Dapper Reveler

stealthmongoose

I don't hold this work to have absolute truths or applicability in all instances, ergo i accept it as a fable and the inspirational quality of it's story. Your question is malformed, as nobody who i know follows a fiction dogmatically unless they hold it to be true in some sense beyond a simple fable or fictional inspiration.
If you don't accept the fable as a universal truth why would it pertain to a universal question? Also, do you really think that society is in no way influenced by the fictitious cultures that go into it? And if you don't why is that influence which offers emotional background any less a part of dogma than the allegations (such as actual law and philosophy) that are made as an after effect of emotion and thought- in fact how is it not more essential?
stealthmongoose's avatar

Dangerous Conversationalist

7,550 Points
  • Beta Forum Regular 0
  • Beta Citizen 0
  • Beta Contributor 0
Avgvsto
stealthmongoose
Avgvsto
stealthmongoose


I never thought of you as the poetic type, in fact, I always thought that mythos was the most disagreeable thing you found in religion.


nonsense, the most disagreeable thing i found in religion is it's lack of honesty towards it's own mythos.

J.K. Rowling and Charles Dickens, for example, have the courtesy to put "This product is a work of fiction" on their myths, usually in big, bold, cartoon mouse-shaped letters.

The day a religion has the courtesy to do the same or to admit it's relevance to reality without proposing it dogmatically, is the day i get shot for forgetting to say "God Bless You."
Well your opinion still seems somewhat relevant here, why then suggest following some other work of fiction dogmatically?


One is not following a work of fiction dogmatically if one remembers the fiction's relevance to reality.

In the Emperor's new clothes, the argument from authority fallacy is taught quite effectively without having a literal, physically true, or realistic interpretation of the story. In it, we have a fable of events that outline the issue with trusting authority without evidence. I don't follow this work dogmatically or religiously, and to some degree the emperor's new clothes being labeled as a fiction makes it more conveyable and less hindered by truth claims.




I don't hold this work to have absolute truths or applicability in all instances, ergo i accept it as a fable and the inspirational quality of it's story. Your question is malformed, as nobody who i know follows a fiction dogmatically unless they hold it to be true in some sense beyond a simple fable or fictional inspiration.
Avgvsto's avatar

Dapper Reveler

stealthmongoose
Avgvsto
stealthmongoose


I never thought of you as the poetic type, in fact, I always thought that mythos was the most disagreeable thing you found in religion.


nonsense, the most disagreeable thing i found in religion is it's lack of honesty towards it's own mythos.

J.K. Rowling and Charles Dickens, for example, have the courtesy to put "This product is a work of fiction" on their myths, usually in big, bold, cartoon mouse-shaped letters.

The day a religion has the courtesy to do the same or to admit it's relevance to reality without proposing it dogmatically, is the day i get shot for forgetting to say "God Bless You."
Well your opinion still seems somewhat relevant here, why then suggest following some other work of fiction dogmatically?
Tsur's avatar

Beloved Soldier

8,450 Points
  • Profitable 100
  • Hygienic 200
  • Somebody Likes You 100
Scurvy Fighter
Lucifer was God's favorite angel, and then he fell and created Hell. Or some s**t like that.

Genies are from Islam if you want to throw those in too.


A bit of correction. Lucifer was God's Anointed Cherubim in Heaven. Meaning he was to be in position of reflection of God's Glory. His beauty got the best of him and brought his heart high (in other words he desired more power) He attacked God's authority thus causing a war in Heaven, God was forced to caste Lucifer (Satan) down to Earth with 1/3 of the Angels in Heaven.

Hell wasn't made by Satan but by God. And he isn't there at the moment. He walks the Earth until the end of God's Millennial Reign (1000 years after Armageddon). Revelation 20:1-10 describes Satan's final destination. By the way, Jinni (Genies) are Fallen Angels (Demons). It's just the same name in Arabic.

More info in this link, if you're curious. smile
stealthmongoose's avatar

Dangerous Conversationalist

7,550 Points
  • Beta Forum Regular 0
  • Beta Citizen 0
  • Beta Contributor 0
Avgvsto
stealthmongoose


I never thought of you as the poetic type, in fact, I always thought that mythos was the most disagreeable thing you found in religion.


nonsense, the most disagreeable thing i found in religion is it's lack of honesty towards it's own mythos.

J.K. Rowling and Charles Dickens, for example, have the courtesy to put "This product is a work of fiction" on their myths, usually in big, bold, cartoon mouse-shaped letters.

The day a religion has the courtesy to do the same or to admit it's relevance to reality without proposing it dogmatically, is the day i get shot for forgetting to say "God Bless You."

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games