Quite hardly the same thing, mystra. =)
Yes, Daniel, I agree that Satan must originally have been of high rank (after all, the scripture in Ezekiel does call him "the anointed cherub"), but we have still yet to see any reason to call him mightiest or favorite.
Thank you, Bethberry, I hadn't thought to look to the Catholic Encyclopedia. It still doesn't show directly where the notion comes from, but I get some idea.
Quote:
|
and reading them in the light of patristic and theological tradition.
|
Tradition seems to me to be a hindrance to Bible understanding.
Or perhaps it is from one or more of the apocryphal books, several of which are quoted in the article. There is a reason these books aren't included in the accepted Bible canon.
Quote:
|
Now, what this has to do with Tolkien ....
|
Yes, I realize we're pretty far off-topic. Thank you for indulging me. I do agree with Daniel that, if we were going to parallel Tolkien with the Bible, Melkor would be Satan. It seems obvious enough. However, if this particular belief (that Satan was in origin mightiest or the favorite of God)is a Catholic teaching, Tolkien would likely have believed it, and therefore would probably have thought along much the same lines as Daniel did in his earlier correlation of Melkor's and Satan's pre-rebellion station among the angels.