Editing Talk:Titanomachy (section)

===Proto-apocalyptic texts vs. Paradise Lost===
I suppose we can't cite Satan's speech in the first book of ''Paradise Lost''? You can always try Jan Bremmer, "Remember the Titans!" in ''The Fall of the Angels'' (Brill 2004). A draft is [http://theol.eldoc.ub.rug.nl/FILES/root/2004/Remember/Bremmer-5Titanskm.pdf here], I'm not sure if it's the final text. The first couple of sentences establish Wetman's point quite well. [[User:Akhilleus|--Akhilleus]] ([[User talk:Akhilleus|talk]]) 18:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

:*There isn't any one "Judeo-Christian rebellion-in-heaven tradition," as you imply with the term. If you read the chapter in Neil Forsyth's "The Old Enemy," that you cite, you will see his total failure to agree with this text. My issue-- as before-- is not if the fallen angel(s) were successful or not, but what (if anything) considers it a rebellion of "another generation."
:*It is generally in the Pentateuch that scholars see any evidence of Israely theology being of a council of gods, with Yahweh at the head. Apocalyptic literature is typically thought to begun much later, like a 100 or 200 years BC. The Israely/Jewish texts that Forsyth discusses are between these to times and calls the texts (such as Isaiah 12) "proto-apocalyptic texts" (p.146). 
:*Forsyth agrees that Israely theology is maximally [[monotheistic]] by the time of Isaiah. This is ''contrasted'' with the idea of the "many gods," (of a different generations) that is the subject of this [[Titanomachy]] and even ''contrasted'' with Zoroastrianism-like [[dualism#Moral dualism|dualism]] that sees [[Satan|the enemy]] as the ''equal'' and opposite of [[Yahweh|the (good) God]].
:*Forsyth, in this chapter, follows the motif of an enemy that is a rebel of an overlord. There is an idea of a Satan during the same time frame  (see his chapter 5), but Forsyth points out that they ''later'' became "fused." Forsyth does not developed any union of the two and seems to be indicating that it is ''only later'' that this happens. At the chapter's end Forsyth says "we should not make the mistake of reading into these texts the full cosmology that was to be invented by Christianity, though that was precisly what the church fathers were to do." In fact, this contrast with Christian cosmology is the only mention of Christianity in the whole chapter.
:*Futhermore, any full commentatry (from the last 100 years) on Isaiah or Ezekial will tell you that the passages by Isaiah/Ezekial/whoever-you-think-authored-'em had ''human'' kings (or emperors) in mind for these passages and thus they are about ''human'' rebelliors. (And only later seen as Satan by church fathers. <small>This theology was made even more one or two thousand years later in "Paradise Lost," but not even all Christians holds to Milton's cosmology, much less Judism today.</small>)
:*Forsyth seems to be aware of this but does not make it clear (as it is not really his interest.) But even if ''you'' think this is a chapter by scholar supporting the idea that these passages really are about Satan, it is moot because even by this time all ideas of there being non-Yahweh "god" are dropped. Satan is a just another created being (like human kings.) <sup>[[User talk:Carlaude|{{#if:|<span style="background-color:Carl;color:red;"></span>|<span style="color:red;">Carl</span>}}{{#if:|<span style="background-color:aude:;color:green;"></span>|<span style="color:green;">aude:</span>}}]][[User talk:Carlaude|{{#if:|<span style="background-color:Talk;color:purple;"></span>|<span style="color:purple;">Talk</span>}}]]</sup> 06:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)