|
|
Post by Alejandro on Aug 23, 2005 19:48:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rgrove on Aug 25, 2005 16:38:07 GMT -5
It's the work of an unbeliever obviously. There's a mixture of truth and falsehood as a result. If you click on the link for "Lucifer" it goes to a page that poorly tries to state what "Christian mythology" states. What an awful work. This is what happens when people are defining things they just don't understand...
|
|
|
|
Post by Soulfyre on Aug 28, 2005 4:01:46 GMT -5
I would have to agree with Ron on this one. The article is accurate in its exegesis of Isaiah 14:12 ("Lucifer" was indeed Jerome's Latin translation of the Hebrew text), and this text has been traditionally applied to Satan (as well as the Babylonian prince, either Nebuchadnezzar or Belshazzar, for whom it was originally written). Whether one can appropriately call this "Christian mythology" is certainly open to question (since Satan is assuredly not a mythical creature--just ask Job!). Unfortunately, one cannot reliably look to Wikipedia to give an entirely objective and unbiased rendition of facts regarding Christianity. Matthew (soulfyre) Brown  |
|
