h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Demonology - A2288711
Author: KevinM - U561361

Yes it deals with a questionable subject(in terms of its objective reality) but it attempts to take a serious look at what should be properly considered a branch of theology. Whether demons exist or not people do beleive in them and create theories about them.

A couple of hints from someone who has experiance of PR slaging your hard work off.

Spell and Gramma check (and ask one of the dudes who can do spelling and gramma to give you a correction list.)

From what I've heard of Imps are lesser demons who have been outcast because they use their powers to help people (see http//www.freewebs.com/aipcp for how I have used this little peice of info in the name of charity production company.)

Is it Daemons or Demons? What's the difference? Appart from the spelling!

The souls of the dammed can gain promotion to daemon through evil deeds.

When a demon posseses a body it has no idea how to use it so hosts can die but remain operated by the daemon like a sinister puppet.

You can't kill a demon only banish it.

I hope you find these useful!

Hi KevinM

Lengthy and informative entry . As Shadowbane pointed out it will be essential to correct the grammar and spelling throughout (though this isn't 'slagging off' it is 'constructuve criticism' ). If you can, try and put your text through a spellchecker (please) - there are online ones eg http://www.spellcheck.net/ (hope it gives you British spelling )

Also worth reading the Writing-Guidelines - there is a link to a spell check there too. Another aspect that will need adjusting is use of first person (I and so on) to third person. Some headings to split up the entry would be helpful too.

I hope you are willing to put in the effort to get this into the Edited Guide, as there isn't a detailed entry like this already. You could probably profitably link to some of the edited entries on paganism.

Anyway, lots to do

Pimms

Ok I went and ran the full entry through a spell check(admittedly the wording is American as are the spellings but well I live in the US so thats the way I write and speak). In regards to the difference between daemons and demons. Daemon is the Greek root word for the English demon. There nature depends some what on which philosopher you ask(I refference them primarilly through Xenocrates definition becuase his was the closest to the modern usage). In regards to imps they are low level demons this is true. They are believed generally to be forces in line with the powers of Hell not against it. Its true that some reports from the middle ages put them in less malevolent roles but generally demonologists(at least modern ones and most historical) would account for this in the fact as the weakest rung on the ladder they're the ones most often in service to human sorcerers. Some of it may also be confusion between the different forms of fae(some of whom are called imps to confuse the matter further) many of which different church scholars dismissed as demons at different times in the middle ages. I chose not to go into greater detail regarding that because to cover completely even every major variation on Christian demonology would fill several books.

Silly question I realise, but how is any of this 'known' (rather than just fancifully created by the writers of the demon textbooks)?

Why should anyone believe in the divisions provided? Are we talking mad monks being 'inspired' to provide more detail on what Heaven (legions of seraphim and cherubim) and Hell are like? Can the demons of Greek mythology be the same as the Christian ones?

Pimms

Hi, this is an really intresting topic for an entry, and will be an intresting addition to the guide if picked, I do have a couple of ideas, just to try and make it better, not slagging off...

I do think that some of the paragraphs are very large, and do tend to take up your whole screen which makes it a bit difficult to read. Perhaps you could divide them up into smaller paragraphs, or perhaps put some sub headers in the entry..

Good work, , and sorry to nitpick..

The demons of previous mythologies have a fair ammount in common with Christian ones but substantial differences do exist. The point of being clear with them is a point of emphasizing accurate scholarship in favor of simplistic pigeonholing. Beleive in demons or not you can't change the historical reality that the different conceptions cultures have had about them has had a profound effect on history. Think I'm wrong ask Paracelsus or Robert Bacon both were prominent figures in early science and both were magicians with a belief in the pretenatural world. For that matter ask Torquemada and his Inquisition. As to "mad" monks why must they be mad? Augustine and Aquinas wrote inteligently and extensively on the spirit world in fact the better part of the modern distinctions of angelic ranks are the direct result of the work of Thomas Aquinas.

As to breaking up the paragraphs I think thats probably not the way to go with things. On the other hand your suggestion of dividing it into sections with specific headings makes a lot of sense. When I have a chance I'll look over the material and work on doing so.

Hi, Kevin,
Really interesting! I'll have to read it again.
(but please could you put in the spelling corrections - There are four in the FIRST two paragraphs Furst > First being the first!)

and Shadowbane - we're not slagging off! We're trying to be helpful (Even if we tell you to put in double quotes that we then learn ourselves should only be single quotes! - I just found one of my own that nobody had noticed )

and Pimms Lettuce - constructuve > constructive


Have demons anything to do with the working of Ouiji boards? We had a really scarey session once - served us right, as we were only doing it 'for fun'.


Watermusic

Ok I ran the spell check and altered the article accordingly whats still there the checker didn't catch. In terms of those infernal boards go back over the invitation section I do mention them and may wind up writing a detailed article on the subject(its a complex issue in its own right). The short answer to your question is that ouija boards usually contact demonic spirits. Most of the most violent reported cases in history in fact began with Ouija boards(The Exorcist itself in fact did both the original case and the movie).

Ok a couple responses to the first post.
First demons are well aware how to run bodies they control. They've studied man since thd ay we were born and know us better then any of us.
Second humans CAN'T become demons nor can demons become humans. They are two different orders of being set as such when they are created.
As to killing them yep your quite right

pretty please!

to there status as a religious tool(a court trial that ultamitely failed). > to their status as a religious tool (a court trial that ultimately failed).

there > their - will not have been picked up by a spellchecker, but
ultamitely > ultimately - should have.


Watermusic

I have to disagree with your first premise;

>The most accurate defenition of demonology is the study of spiritual evil. The word litterally means the study of demons, but in practice the discipline studies most a considerably broader field including black magick, Satanism, devil worship, demons, devils, poltergeists, etc.<

In an entry on Demonology I would expect it to be a bit more balanced, rather than just spouting modern definitions.

Demons are more properly 'Lesser Gods' some are indeed evil, while others can be quite benign. It is the modern monotheistic religions that have decided that any entity that is not their supreme God must be against him (or her) and therefore evil. The Pagan view is quite different, and should be considered here.

Also please change your opening word from 'Furst' to 'First' just to start off on the right note.

F S

Ok first of all this is predominantly an examination of Judeo-Christian demonology not the largely dead Ancient Greek version. Also as to the lesser gods defenition of daemon(NOT demon) thats innacurate. The Greeks offered no less then three defenitions of the word daemon. It can alternately be: A a guardian spirit in service to the gods, an intermediate rank of god, or alternatively an evil spirit in opposition to the gods. This last defenition was first offered by the Greek philosopher Xenocrates and as such contrary to popular oppinion was NOT a Christian invention.

It's me again! Now I have read it through properly

In the section Satan:
Three known acceptations do exist. > Three known exceptions do exist.
is what you mean, i.e. Satan has rarely entered the physical world except for when he entered Judas Iscariot etc.

Watermusic

Ok I went through added several new sections, put in headings, and corrected the errors pointed out. Any more things I can improve on?

Hi! I'm one of the people who checks the grammar and spelling. It's good stuff but there are some slip-ups. I've only check about half of it so far. Here's what I've found:

The first paragraph sounds very defensive. You could make it sound better by putting it the other way around:

"This entry is an examination of the history and modern practice of demonology as it applies to the real world. It is in no way a discussion of the TV series Buffy The Vampire Slayer or Angel."

For the rest of it, I'm going to put what you said followed by what you would have said:

studies most a considerably broader --> studies a considerably broader
magick --> magic (unless you've a particular reason for this spelling)
mythology then any thing, else it will --> mythology than anything else, it will
the demonic is, a question --> the demonic is a question
by theologians and philosophers the study --> by theologians and philosophers, the study
Samaria --> Sumeria
some where below --> somewhere below

Start a new paragraph at "Judaism itself".

Judaism itself has a large body --> Judaism has a large body

is nearly universal every major religion --> is practiced in every major religion
Goliath was a nephillim --> Goliath was a nephil
hierarchy's of Hell --> hierarchies of Hell
are often are --> are often
in there threats --> in their threats
Mestopholes --> Mephistopheles
lutenants --> lieutenants

The paragraph which starts "The assorted ranks" seems to be just a repeat of stuff you've said earlier and can probably be removed.

into there own --> into their own

While its core, prayers --> While its core prayers
the office itself in the 16th --> the office itself, in the 16th
for such phenomenon --> for such a phenomenon
preformed --> performed
with out --> without
In the 90's --> In the 1990s
Of these several --> Of these, several
mention none of whom more so then --> mention, none more so than
some where between 7-10 --> somewhere between 7 and 10

That's as far as I've checked.

The use of magick is intentional. Its a modern convention I happen to agree with to differentiate the practice of stage trickery(reffered to as magic) from actual supernatural feats(magick). Its a convention of the late Aleister Crowley and while he was an odd ball to say the least I think it was one of his better ideas.

Hi, just read through this, very good, well-constructed entry, and I agree with the 'magick' issue. As has been said, you are not allowed to use the word 'I' in edited entries, so I suggest:

I honestly do not know the name of any other modern person recognized--> This researcher honesttly does not know...

for simplicities sake I will be using demon as a catch all term --> For simplicity's sake, the catch-all term 'demon' will be used

I will cover the difference in a moment --> The difference will be covered in a moment.


And as for the demon/daemon thing: Both derive from the Greek root word 'daimon', meaning spirit. A demon is always an evil being or fallen angel, whereas a daemon is another from of being, distinct from fays, which may be good, evil, or neutral.

Good luck getting this into EG, and I look forward to more entires from you as time goes on!

In regards to daimon I'd suggest reading what I wrote on the matter. There is no single accurate definition for that word becuase different Greek philosophers defined it in different ways. Yours is one, the god defenition is another, and the evil spirit definition is a third. All of which were offered by Greek philosophers(Plato, Aristotle and Xenocrates I think although I'm not positive on the first two). I've been trying to remove the I sentences so I'll run back through and change what you mentioned.

I've read through the rest of the entry now and there are lots more spelling mistakes which I will point out to you later. But there is a more important thing to attend to.

You say most deliverance ministers cast out spirits with names like homsexuality and anger. This is very offensive and there's no way you could leave such a statement in an edited entry without lots of qualifications. Not only is homosexuality legal, but it is illegal to incite people to dislike homosexuals (as far as I know). Your entry certainly gives the impression that there is something wrong with homosexuals and we should try and cure them. To say that homosexuality is a form of possession could easily be construed as inciting hatred against homosexuals.

It is on the other hand ok to point out that deliverance ministers feel that homosexuality is a case of possession by demons, and that this entry does not endorse this view in any way.