Talk:Baal (demon)

2009

In the article it says it is ironic that Diablo II features a boss named Baal. How is this ironic? Baal is used in this sense as one of the three rulers of hell, which is consistent with his depiction in demonology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.219.239.233 (talk) 11:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the image of Baal in the video game is interest. It allows for a comparison between the tradition Baal and comtemporary use. [anon user]

They have a link to the article to the video game. If readers care they can follow that link for all the info they ever wanted, but it doesn't belong here. We could fill up every article on this magazine with trivial references to that topic in TV shows, movies and video games, they just aren't that significant. DreamGuy 18:18, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Demons in Christianty?

I was shocked by reading "Christian demon"... I'm quite sure (Roman Catholic) Christianty doesn't believe in demons, or alike. What do "Christian" means here? It's not stated nor linked... Maybe Medieval Christianty or something? --euyyn 11:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

You mean the same Roman Catholic Church that recognizes and performs exorcisms? It's in the Catechism: http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/index/d.htm -- 13 April 2008

RESPONSE

Demons are a very central theme in Christianity, I don't understand how you do not know that. http://www.religioustolerance.org/dem_bibl.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.51.155.100 (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

To believe in god u must believe in demons or bad. look up ur facts before u speak them out —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.1.219 (talk) 05:37, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Facts require evidence, which you're not providing. You don't have to believe in demons to believe in God, unless you believe God was created by demons. Ian.thomson (talk) 12:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

That just makes no sense, If you believe in the Christian God you must believe in Jesus and angels, in which you must believe in Satan aswell as demons, sources can be found in a bible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.129.75.181 (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Except that the Bible can read from the perspective that angels and demons are just metaphors for good ideas and bad ideas, respectively, and that Satan represents the idea of evil, which in turn is just the absense of good and not something that independantly exists. That was a position held by a number of theologians for centuries (c.f. Neoplatonism and Christianity). The literalist interpretation came about a millenium and a half after Christianity started, and it was not accepted universally. While one must believe in Jesus to believe in the Christian God, that is only becaues Jesus is the Christian God. The rest of the spiritual realm can, and has, been read as artistic representations of ideas that are more easily experienced through meditation than explained in concrete terms. The ideal interpretation also avoids issues of henotheism, and pulls the rug out from under magic.

The literal interpretation is one among many, actually many among many as the "literal" view varies according to the group's other beliefs (see the Amish, Snake handling, Prosperity gospel, and Lutheranism to see the different results of going with only "what the Bible says.") For the sake of neutrality, we don't stick with just the literal meaning but discuss any notable view that is reliably documented. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge topic

Should this page be merged with the god Baal, as the demon described on this page is basically a christian interpretation of the aforementioned god? Many gods of polytheistic belief systems were regarded as "demons" by early Christianity, as they were seen as a form of idol worship. In the Dictionaire Infernal, the Hindu goddess Kali is listed as a demon, and many other deities who are listed on Wikipedia have also been regarded as demons by various sources. Further, several of the articles on these deities include descriptions of various misinterpretations of the beliefs of those who worshiped them, including the artile on the god Baal. Are the differences between the Semetic god and the demon based off of it different enough that the Christian demon is effectively a completely different being, or should these articles be merged?--66.24.229.7 20:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

This page should be named Bael wich is the correct name in christianity, and not Baal.--151.47.91.209 (talk) 10:07, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Baal's Depiction

I never knew that Baal meant "Lord" in anyway, i thought that he was one single god, not several. The bible talks about Baal as a fake idol god, in several differnt books. I'm suprised they just took all of the other religions and put them into one word, Baal. They also talk about human sacraficing with the context of Baal.

Levant?

Why does this article use the word Levant to refer to part of the middle east? Not very relevant considering it's a outdated, imprecise medieval term. However I'm not aware of which area the author is referring to and therefore cannot amend. 61.95.65.186 08:17, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality

I think its offensive that this article is saying that Christianity turns any foreign god into demons or false idols. (Supposing you are a theist) I think we have legitimate reason to believe Baal (That is how it is spelled in the NKJ version of the bible) is a demon, as he requires people to sacrifice their children in fire, something specifically forbidden by the Lord God. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2020:2-5 http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?passage=Deuteronomy+18%3A10

It should be rephrased in a manner which does not portray Christianity arbitrarily giving gods the 'demon' title, as this is a very serious charge in the bible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.51.155.100 (talk) 14:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

New stuff goes at the bottom. Do you have any proof that Baal even exists? The first depictions of him are as a deity, and depictions as a demon came later. The "turning gods into demons" bit is not saying that Baal was a real god and then became a real demon, it just means that perceptions of this figure that may or may not exist changed. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Though I'm not a Christian and am not particularly fond of serious Christians, I still do have a very large respect for all religions and find them all interesting and worth studying. Just thought I would include that, but with that said, though it is a terrible thought that a group of people would do such a thing, I wouldn't say that it couldn't happen. I would have to say we don't have any evidence of if he is or is not evil, at least yet. I wouldn't trust a book on that, I'd go more ancient and in the past, personal experiences, ect. 03:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.5.227.71 (talk • contribs)

Please see the guidelines on identifying reliable sources. "Personal experiences" are not listed. Books have the potential to be much more ancient than personal experiences. By the time Baal was referred to as a demon, worship of Baal had fallen out of favor, due to the Levant being taken over by the (pre-Christian) Romans (who said "hey, our god Sol Invictus is what you've been calling Baal, just quit worshipping Baal"), and then finally thanks to Islam rising in Arabia. The idea of Baal as a demon, if it existed during the time his worshippers were still around, would have originated with Judaism (the religion Christianity comes from), since Baal (as Baal Zebub) is refered to negatively in the New Testament (which doesn't make a point of actively demonizing Baal, so it appears that either the idea had not developed, or the idea was way past developed when the books of the New Testament were written).

Also, you have to consider the context. Medieval theologians, never having encountered Baal worship, would just know from the Bible that Baal was a figure that drew ancient people away from worship of God. The medieval folks believed there is only one God, which left them with two possibilities: that Baal was a made up figure and a mistake, OR that Baal is some lesser being acting against God. Then they find stuff from pre-Christian Roman historians going on about horrible some cultures were (who coincidently, worshipped Baal) for practiced human sacrifice (even killing children). These Roman historians have been relied upon in other instances, so the assertion that Baal worshippers sacrificed men, women, and children to Baal is accepted (having no reason to doubt it). For these medieval theologians, as terrible as their world was, they didn't want to believe that someone would worship a being by slaughtering people for it. Two possibilities arise: that human beings are horrible, or that these figures were actively misguided by a malign figure.

Now, that doesn't mean they were right (it's just easier to assume that Baal doesn't exist as a god or demon, and that people are horrible and mistaken), but their mistakes were understandable. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

God should be a demon too, he used to ask for a sacrifice too... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.38.84.204 (talk) 01:21, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can find, other than mass extermination by His hand, God has only asked for one human sacrifice, and even that was just a test to see if Abraham would actually do as he was told; a test of obedience so to speak.

By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, (KJV)-Hebrews 11:17

The God of the Old Testament only asked for animal or material good sacrifice (as bartering was still very prevalent) for atonement.

And the king went to Gibeon to sacrifice there; for that was the great high place: a thousand burnt offerings did Solomon offer upon that altar. 1 Kings 3:4 (KJV)

In return, God offered his son as a sacrifice to end all animal sacrifices. Now we just tithe.

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. (KJV)-Romans 12:1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.14.112.41 (talk) 15:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Duplication with Baal

I have pruned, linked to the main article, and spun out other to Baal in popular culture. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:54, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Baal and Halloween

This is an embarrassingly poor inclusion. Aside from the Christian fundamentalist web page in source link 3, no Celtic Studies scholar would agree with the etymological root of the modern Beltaine (itself an borrowing of the Old Irish Beltaine, arguably derived from proto-Celtic belo-te(p)niâ) being derived from a common origin with the English Baal. There is also no etymological or established cultural link between Samhain and Baal, nor Baal and the term "Halloween" for that matter. This segment should be removed from the article, unless self-published fundamentalist Christian web pages are acceptable sources?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.11.79.185 (talk • contribs)

I've removed that material (and re-written and moved the article), since Bael the demon is only inspired by the Biblical depictions of the Canaanite deity (who is not connected to the Celtic Belenus at any rate). Ian.thomson (talk) 02:35, 24 November 2019 (UTC)