http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kings_of_Babylon
Looks like a lot of people enjoyed ruling Babylon. I personally do not see it as offensive, especially since it is a title, as opposed to a proper name. However, if you have submitted your ticket, I will see what I can do.
lol. The very tenuous concept is this. In Isaiah 14:12-17 (Old Testament), the passage makes reference to the King of Babylon Helal, son of Shahar (who was reportedly a bit of a bastardo and not particularly liked much by the Jews) as 'shining like the morning star' (day star, son of dawn).
In the 4th Century, this gets translated into Latin by Saint Jerome, who does it bit of a hatchet job in places when translating from the original Hebrew and later Greek version. In fourth century Latin the common used name for Venus, (the morning star) was Lucifer. lux/lucis = light, ferre = to bring.
This is where it sort of gets silly.
Fast forward to the New Testament to 2 Corinthians 11:14, where Paul writes that 'Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.' and where Luke 10:18-19 says 'Satan fell like light/lightning from heaven'
Thus when you play the Biblical version of the 'Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon'
If King Helal of Babylon shined like the morning star and Satan is an angel of light and fell from the sky, then the King of Babylon WAS Satan! OMG!
Very similar logic to...
"If she weighed the same as a duck... she's made of wood.
And therefore?...
A witch!"
Edited by lainee, 07 April 2011 - 06:43 PM.
