Talk:Demonology

The article is written unapologetically from the point of view of an occultist. A more balanced approach would be to not minimize so strongly the Christian view on this patently Christian topic.

What's with the 'peasentry' and 'uncivilised' cultures comments? Egypt is hardly on the same level as old indiginous cultures. Plus, in this Post-Modern world, who's to say what's civilised and what isn't?

What follows below is the archived discussion from a previous peer review:

Regarding the various articles about individual demons, can you please give cites about where the information on these demons comes from? Most of us don't believe in demons, but are willing to accept statements about demons as mythological / fictional figures, or statements that someone else believed demons to be real. It would be useful to say "According to the Grimoire of X by Y, the demon Z is..." -- The Anome 07:26 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I'm a bit uncertain as to exactly what you are asking for here. The article says such things as "In Christian tradition, demons are fallen angels. . ," or "Judaism received the concept from Zoroastrianism, wherein. . ." These things seem to indicate fairly clearly, at least to me, that those sentences are talking about Christian or Zoroastrian belief, and that non-believers in those faiths can treat them as mythical (at the peril of their souls, of course. ;-) Or are you talking here about a whole 'nother class of articles which I han't seen yet? -- IHCOYC 16:36 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)~

I believe he or she is asking that, for example, in an article on Astaroth, that one properly cite a source, such as Wierus' Pseudomonarchia Daemonorum, or the Ars Goetia appearing as the first part of Lemegeton, attributed to Solomon. Even obscure occult notions do have sources to cite. People who don't know these sources and cannot cite them probably ought not to be creating articles on the subject.

For one Satanists and Lucifarians are two different groups, whith opposing dogmas. And for two; this is in no way a patently Christian topic.

I only felt the subject was painted with broad strokes and only touched on a few references of how "demons" are viewed in different religions. I believe this topic is far more extensive and cannot be covered in such a short general overview. I did not however, feel this topic was written by a christian, muslim, satanist etc, as I saw no indication of any bias or outside influence in the facts or references presented in the summary. If anything was wrong with this entry it was only it's lack of information. It would be nice if an author with a theology doctorate would add to this article.

3:56 15 July 2005 (ZEBURN)

I am removing Tartaric Demonology as it is mainly about Demonolatry, and is well dealt with on that page. Parts of it clearly violate NPOV. In the next few days I will attempt to rework this article as it clearly lacks information and needs a full rewrite. --Chaoscrowley 08:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

haha "lower cultures" who wrote this crap? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.162.48.37 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Reorganization, NPOV, general editing

I've been reorganizing some of the sections and doing general editing - removing some non-NPOV material, wikifying, etc. More needs to be done, such as filling out some stub sections. Aleta 02:06, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I'll start working on that today. It looks like the first thing it needs is some major sourcing, which will alleviate the NPOV problem in most cases, at the very least showing what wording needs to be changed to accurately reflect the verifiable material. ◄Zahakiel► 19:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Deleting Tartaric Demonology

I am unable to find any reliable information for this section either online or in what I would consider the reasonable literary sources. I am removing the section without prejudice toward recreation if someone who knows where to find verifiable data comes along. ◄Zahakiel► 16:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

demonolatry merged

Demonolatry has been merged in, to form a small mention of occult and ceremonial magic's use of demonology. We can't really deny it exists at all.:)Merkinsmum 00:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The merge doesn't seem appropriate to me... demonology is a largely Christian subject, while demonolatry is an occult subject -- also, one is a study, while another is effectively a religion. While there is some cross over (and I'm sure demonolatry is of interest to Christians), they don't seem to "fit" in the same article.--Shadowlink1014 06:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree - it is apples and oranges. Demonology is a scholarly discipline. Demonolatry is a religious practice, albeit an obscure and controversial one. The two are not equivalent terms. I oppose this merger.

Demonology and Charismatic Christianity

I find the placement of this article into Category:Charismatic and Pentecostal Christianity unnatural. If WikiProject Charismatic Christianity wants it (which I also find quaint) that must be up to their members to decide, but I certainly do not think demonology is a central part of their curriculum. __meco 07:25, 28 September 2007 (UTC)