Cliquer sur une vignette pour aller sur Google Books.
Chargement... Dictionary of All Scriptures and Myths (1923)par George Arthur Gaskell
Aucun Chargement...
Inscrivez-vous à LibraryThing pour découvrir si vous aimerez ce livre Actuellement, il n'y a pas de discussions au sujet de ce livre. What can you truly say about this book? It's an Encyclopedic Dictionary. Plot, storyline, and the desire to hold your attention IS NOT it's theme. As an Encyclopedia, it has a wide variety of entries, most of them are fairly long. Would have to study both the book and the God/dess they are speaking of to be able to judge the accuracy of their information. Maybe someday, but not today. The rating I gave it is based on the ability of the book to hold your interest, NOT the quality of the information which appears to deserve **** aucune critique | ajouter une critique
G. A. Gaskell's Dictionary of the Sacred Language of All Scriptures and Myths, first published in 1923, examines several different aspects of religion, including examples from Ancient Egyptian religion and mythology to modern-day Christianity, providing explanations of gods, events, and symbols in alphabetical order. This is a perfect reference book for students of theology or the history of religion. Aucune description trouvée dans une bibliothèque |
Discussion en coursAucunCouvertures populaires
Google Books — Chargement... GenresClassification décimale de Melvil (CDD)291.1Religions Other Religions Comparative Religion; Mythology (No Longer Used) MythologiesClassification de la Bibliothèque du CongrèsÉvaluationMoyenne:
Est-ce vous ?Devenez un(e) auteur LibraryThing. |
That is, essentially, a lie.
All of those practices and deities are mentioned -- and assigned some absurd spiritual meaning. According to the book, Zeus is "A symbol of the Higher Self" -- but in fact Zeus is the boss in Greek mythology. Midgard is not "A symbol of the mind or mental plane"; it's the mortal world in Eddic mythology.
The book contains occasional useful quotations from ancient and recent authorities. But the interpretations are about as sensible as a fever dream. If you are an empiricist in any degree at all, flatly, don't go near this piece of absurdity. ( )