|
📜 Introductory Note to the Reader I must clarify that I am not a scholar
in religious history but rather an enthusiast in mythology. Having been
raised in the Catholic tradition, I have always found the Jewish and Catholic
angelic narratives fascinating in how they blend linguistics, theology, and
mythic imagination. This essay, therefore, approaches the topic as a reflective
exploration, not as a doctrinal or theological treatise. My intention is to recognize the
significance of Moncure Daniel Conway’s Demonology and Devil Lore
(1879) as a foundational work that sheds light on how the Elohim, once
part of a divine council, evolved through reinterpretation into the more
dichotomous figures of angels and demons known today. Understanding Conway’s
argument helps us grasp how mythology and theology continually interact,
redefining the boundaries between the sacred and the profane. |
Angels, Elohim, and the Shadowed Names: A Comparative Study
|
|
📜 Abstract This essay examines
the linguistic, theological, and mythological significance of the “-el”
suffix in angelic names within Hebrew and Christian traditions, as well as
Moncure Daniel Conway’s interpretation of how ancient deities (Elohim) were
redefined through the lens of monotheism. By analyzing examples such as Michael,
Gabriel, Raphael, Uriel, Jophiel, Fanuel, Samael, and Azazel, the
paper reveals how divine attributes—strength, light, beauty, and even
exile—are embedded in angelic nomenclature. Drawing upon Conway’s Demonology
and Devil Lore, the essay explores the demonization of figures like Dagon,
Astaroth, Chemosh, and Milcom as part of a historical process of
theological reclassification. Ultimately, this comparative approach
underscores how naming conventions, mythology, and religious reinterpretation
together illuminate humanity’s evolving conception of divinity. |
📜 Keywords: Angelology, Elohim, Moncure
Daniel Conway, Demonology, Theophoric Names, Hebrew Mythology |
|
|
|
📜 Resumen El presente ensayo examina el significado
lingüístico, teológico y mitológico del sufijo “-el” en los nombres angélicos
dentro de las tradiciones hebrea y cristiana, junto con la interpretación de
Moncure Daniel Conway sobre la transformación de los antiguos dioses (Elohim)
a través del monoteísmo. A partir de nombres como Michael, Gabriel,
Raphael, Uriel, Jophiel, Fanuel, Samael y Azazel, se muestra cómo
los atributos divinos —fuerza, luz, belleza e incluso exilio— se integran en
la onomástica celestial. Basándose en Demonology and Devil Lore, el
texto explora la demonización de figuras como Dagon, Astaroth, Chemosh
y Milcom como resultado de un proceso histórico de reinterpretación
teológica. En conjunto, este análisis comparativo resalta cómo los nombres,
los mitos y la evolución religiosa revelan la manera en que la humanidad
redefine lo divino. |
|
|
|
|
📜 Resumo Este ensaio analisa o
significado linguístico, teológico e mitológico do sufixo “-el” nos nomes
angélicos das tradições hebraica e cristã, juntamente com a interpretação de
Moncure Daniel Conway sobre a transformação dos antigos deuses (Elohim) no
contexto do monoteísmo. A partir de exemplos como Michael, Gabriel,
Raphael, Uriel, Jophiel, Fanuel, Samael e Azazel, observa-se como
atributos divinos —força, luz, beleza e exílio— são incorporados à linguagem
dos nomes celestes. Com base em Demonology and Devil Lore, o texto
discute a demonização de figuras como Dagon, Astaroth, Chemosh e Milcom
como parte de um processo histórico de reinterpretação teológica. No fim,
esta leitura comparativa mostra como a mitologia e a linguagem refletem a
evolução da ideia humana do divino. |
|
|
Introduction
In religious and mythological traditions, names
often encode belief about power,
identity, and relationship with the
divine. In Hebrew and Christian angelology, many celestial beings’ names
end in “-el”, linking them to El (God). But some names such as Samael,
Azazel, etc., bear darker connotations. Simultaneously, in Demonology and Devil Lore, Moncure Daniel Conway argues that many
gods once counted among the Elohim were later reinterpreted as demons in
monotheistic tradition we see today in religion nowadays. The sole intention of
this essay, my blog post #486, intends to shallowly explore how angelic names
function theologically, to examine particular names (e.g. Uriel, Jophiel,
Fanuel), and to situate Conway’s perspective on the transformation of other
Elohim (such as Dagon, Astaroth, Chemosh, Milcom) into demonological beings.
Theophoric Names and the “-el” Suffix
In Hebrew, El
(אֵל) is a common term for “God” or “mighty
one.” In the context of angelic names, “-el”
functions as a theophoric suffix,
that is, a marker that ties a name to God. Thus, names like Michael, Gabriel, Raphael, Uriel, Jophiel, Fanuel etc., can
be read as short expressions or “sentences” about God:
●
Michael
(מִיכָאֵל) = “Who is like God?” (a rhetorical
question implying none)
●
Gabriel
(גַּבְרִיאֵל) = “God is my strength”
●
Raphael
(רְפָאֵל) = “God heals”
●
Uriel
(אוּרִיאֵל) = “Light of God” or “God is my light”
●
Jophiel
/ Iophiel (יוֹפִיאֵל) = “Beauty of God”
●
Fanuel
/ Phanuel (פְּנוּאֵל) = “Face of God” or “God has turned /
turned toward”
These names not only designate beings but also express a function or attribute (“healer,”
“light,” “beauty,” etc.). The suffix “-el” anchors their identity to the
divine; they are not autonomous gods but beings whose authority or being is
derived from God.
Special Cases: Samael, Azazel
●
Samael (סַמָּאֵל) is commonly interpreted as “poison / venom of
God,” or “blindness of God.” This negative-sounding element reflects his more
ambiguous or adversarial role in some Jewish and mystical sources (angel of
death, accuser).
●
Azazel (עֲזָאזֵל) has a more complex etymology: sometimes
rendered “strong one of God” or connected to the Hebrew azael, azazel, meaning
“scapegoat.” In Leviticus 16, one goat is sent by the community “for Azazel” into the wilderness
(symbolically carrying away sins). In later Jewish lore (e.g. Book of Enoch), Azazel becomes a fallen
angel who teaches forbidden knowledge, and in Christian/demonological tradition
he becomes a demon leader.
Because their names still include “-el,” we see
that in early mythic/angelic cosmologies, even adversarial beings were
originally part of the same Elohim
structure before later being recast as demonic forces.
The Elohim, Demonization, and Moncure D. Conway
Moncure Daniel Conway (1832–1907) was a
19th-century American writer, thinker, and scholar who, in his two-volume Demonology and Devil Lore (1879), traces
how beliefs in gods, demons, and spirits evolved across cultures over the
centuries.
A central claim of Conway’s is that many gods or divine beings (Elohim) of
earlier polytheistic or henotheistic systems were eventually reinterpreted as
devils or demons once monotheism became dominant. In his publications,
Conway uses historical, comparative, and folkloric evidence to show that the
gods worshiped by nations neighboring Israel, such as Dagon, Astaroth, Chemosh,
Milcom, were originally divine Elohim in their own traditions. Over time, in
the theology of Israel and later Christianity, these figures were recast or
re-interpreted as false gods, evil spirits, or demonic powers.
This transformation is not merely a shift in
classification, but a reorientation of
theological meaning:
●
What
was once a god of fertility (Baal), war (Milcom), or foreign worship (Chemosh)
becomes a demon or devil in polemical narratives.
●
The
names survive, but their status is inverted: once an Elohim, now a demon.
●
This
supports Conway’s broader thesis: demonology
is the history of defeated gods, as monotheism asserts supremacy, the
pantheon is reinterpreted.
Thus, when we see angelic names ending in “-el,” it evokes a prior
cosmological structure in which many beings, good, neutral, or evil, were part
of the heavenly council of Elohim.
Only later do we see the strict bifurcation (angel = good; demon = evil) more
fully enforced.
Comparative Dynamics: Biblical, Mystical, and
Demonological Traditions
To make the shift clear, let us consider three layers:
1. Biblical
/ Canonical tradition
o The Hebrew Bible introduces “Elohim” plural in
grammar, occasionally used to denote gods of other nations or divine council
members (e.g. Psalm 82:1).
o Names like Michael and Gabriel appear (e.g. in
Daniel) as positive, divine agents.
o Figures like Azazel (in Leviticus) appear in
ritual contexts.
2. Mystical
/ Apocryphal expansions
o In the Book
of Enoch, Uriel, Fanuel, and others become archangels, while Azazel and
Samael are fallen.
o Kabbalistic and medieval angelology elaborate
dozens more names, functions, and hierarchies (e.g. Metatron, Raziel, etc.).
o The “-el” suffix remains standard in new angelic
names, underscoring the continuity of the divine-name tradition.
3. Demonological
reinterpretation (as per Conway)
o Former gods become devils (Dagon, Astaroth,
Chemosh, Milcom).
o Angels are purified; adversarial beings are
vilified.
o The narrative of divine testing (e.g. Satan in
Job) is recast as theological mythology rather than literal cosmic warfare.
Implications & Reflections for Comparative
Theology
●
Name as theology: Angel names are not random; they encode a
claim about how those beings relate to God.
●
Continuity beneath change: The persistence of “-el” in names like Samael
and Azazel reveals a deeper surfeit; these beings, even in their corruption,
remain tied to God’s sphere, not independent deities.
●
Demonization is interpretive: Conway’s approach reminds us that labeling
something as “evil” is often a religio-cultural
reclassification rather than an ultimate ontological judgment.
●
Comparative reading: By comparing the ideology of the Hebrew Bible,
later Jewish mystical texts, Christian tradition, and Conway’s historical
anthropology, we can see how the tradition shifts
categories, from polytheistic or henotheistic cosmos to strict monotheism
with a dichotomy of angels and demons.
Conclusion
The prevalence of “-el” in angelic names provides a linguistic window into early theologies: these beings were understood as participants in a divine order, not independent gods. The names Uriel, Jophiel, Fanuel (and even Samael, Azazel) show how attributes (light, beauty, presence, poison, exile) were integrated into that divine vocabulary. Moncure Daniel Conway’s work highlights how, as monotheism ascended, many other Elohim (Dagon, Chemosh, Milcom, Astaroth) were reinterpreted as demons, thus rearranging the cosmic taxonomy. Studying names, mythic shifts, and theological reclassification together helps us trace how human religious imagination transforms divine plurality into monotheistic unity.
📚 References
Conway, M. D.
(1879). Demonology and Devil Lore
(Vols. 1 & 2). Henry Holt & Company. Retrieved from Project Gutenberg.
Conway, M. D.
(2012). Demonology and Devil Lore: Volume
1 (Reprint ed.). Cambridge University Press.
“Demonology and
Devil Lore.” (n.d.). In Archive.org.
Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/demonologydevill00conw
Angels, Elohim, And the Shadowed Names by Jonathan Acuña
No comments:
Post a Comment