BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Angelic Politics: The Dark Side of the Coin

 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
19:44 / 09.07.03
Grant, by the way, the angel who wrestled with Jacob you mentioned was probably Sammael. In case you wanted to know, I just bumped into it. Anyway, here’s the original medieval list of angels that go with the week.
Sunday-Michael
Monday-Gabriel
Tuesday-Sammael
Wednesday-Raphael
Thursday-Sachiel
Friday-Anael
Saterday-Cassiel

It’s the last three that are the interesting ones. Anael is also referenced as a ruler of the planet Venus, angel of lust, and a chief of Principalities, and that’s as much as I’ve found of real information(most angels have a lot more then that) Sachiel has even less, he’s a cherubim, his name means “covering of God”, and he’s associated with Jupiter. Oh, and he’s a servant of the four subprinces of the eternal fire, whatever that means. There’s actually a fair amount of info on Cassiel, but he’s not overly important, so I wonder why these three made the list unlike, maybe, Metatron, Lucifer, and Uriel? (yes, I know there’s some debate as to whether or not Lucifer and Sammael are the same angel, but you see my point).

Since we’re talking about Gabriel, I’ll throw something in. Assuming angels have genders for a moment, Gabriel is considered one of the few female angels. She also sits at Yahweh’s Left Hand, and is one of only two angels named in the old testament, the other being Michael. I might put more about Gabriel on later, if I’m in the mood. Right now I have things to do.
 
 
waxy dan
08:28 / 10.07.03
On a bit of a tangent, but out of curiousity:
I had always read that the Watchers and the Nephilim were entirely seperate races? That the Watchers were the first race created before the Angels. That their Fall was in essence the first Fall. There being another later as a result of the Angelic rebellion. There only being two Watchers now remaing who are kept chained under the Dark/Black Mountains.

The Nephilim being the result of both Watcher/human pairings, and Angel/human pairings. They were both heroes and monsters and were all but destroyed in the Flood.

Has anyone else come accross that?
 
 
osymandus
12:11 / 10.07.03
Waxy dan:On a bit of a tangent, but out of curiousity:
I had always read that the Watchers and the Nephilim were entirely seperate races? That the Watchers were the first race created before the Angels. That their Fall was in essence the first Fall. There being another later as a result of the Angelic rebellion. There only being two Watchers now remaing who are kept chained under the Dark/Black Mountains.

The Nephilim being the result of both Watcher/human pairings, and Angel/human pairings. They were both heroes and monsters and were all but destroyed in the Flood.

Has anyone else come accross that?


That was early in the topic the nephelim and Watchers etc, i have come across (tanganing to your tangent slighlty) That while Asmodel was the ruler of the Cherbum , it was cast down due to a crime and was buried beneath the Earth in chains by Mikal (Michael ?) Any link there ?

Also are Angels supposed to be capable of assuming both male and female aspects but are inherently androgonus ?
 
 
Quantum
13:10 / 10.07.03
("This Present Darkness, Frank Pereti. Fun, but nearly intolerable for its fundie overtones." Yup, that's the one, ta Cusm!)

Angels are inherently sexless in theory, since they don't reproduce or have boobies etc. Except (as Spyder says) Gabriel and Michael, and maybe Lucifer. Even Gabriel seems to have become male in popular culture (in fact in most pop culture angels are all pretty manly nowadays)
 
 
waxy dan
13:12 / 10.07.03
Sorry, I was convinced I had read something further up stating that the Watchers and the Nephilim were one and the same... something I now can't find. That I've obviously gone mad is the only logical explanation. Also from further up:

stop wasting time arguing about arbitrary bits of scripture written by fully agenda'd-up people two thousand years ago. It's hardly wasting time. They're powerful symbols and, as such, are worthy of examination. Whether or not you suscribe to their associated belief systems.

lucifer, the archbaddie of the christians, was called prometheus by the greeks and way before the Greeks Lucifer was actually the love goddess Isthar.
I can see the thematic connections obviously, but could you source how there's a direct evolution there? Or are you not talking literally, but more in a 'common metaphors appearing in various cultures' way?
...

That while Asmodel was the ruler of the Cherbum , it was cast down due to a crime and was buried beneath the Earth in chains by Mikal (Michael ?) Any link there ?
Probably. I read about it in a ritual involving the magician's journey to seek knowledge from the Watcher. I can't remember most of it, it involved going out to the desert and following a black cat that would lead one under the Dark/Black Mountains to where he lay chained. I can't remember who it stated actually chained Azael (being the name given to this Watcher in this text) there.

... Thinking about it years after first reading it, it looks startingly like the last few episodes of Buffy.. but.. anyway...


...Okay... so Metatron then?
 
 
grant
13:58 / 10.07.03
Metatron is God's Ari Fleischer.

If Ari Fleischer gave the State of the Union address too.

And was governor of the planet.

----

The Watchers are angels, just an order that got seduced by carnal life, and in turn took human women as wives and bred the Nephilim, or Giants.

That whole story is told in The Book of Enoch.

Enoch, Noah's grandpappy, gets assumed to heaven at the end of the second book (2 Enoch, or Secrets of Enoch) and is, according to tradition, transformed into Metatron.

There's more detail about the race of Giants in the (even more fragmentary) Book of Giants. I believe there are fragments of Giants among the Dead Sea Scrolls (I know Enoch's in there) -- oh yeah, if you scroll down that link, there's mention of the Qumran version of this book.

Oddly, there was a prison prepared underground for the Watchers before they ever rebelled. It's hard work being outside time like God is, I guess.

And during the fight that put the Watchers behind bars, Raphael tangles with Leviathan in the ocean, and both vanish. Which is a little weird, since Raphael's not usually much of a fighter, from what I've read.
 
 
_Boboss
14:18 / 10.07.03
'these are powerful symbols'

one thing all this chatter's suggesting to me is that they're not. there's no complete and workable layout of human psychology in there, these names having been so corrupted by the aforementioned agendas and difficulties in translation. play with these symbols if you want but don't expect them to turn you into much other than a pedagogue and idolator. george and tony have had their heads so spun round by this shit they think bombing families is moral.

there's a reason the western magical tradition largely dumped this shit and started using the the latin and greek archetypes - they're more comprehensive and balanced, if only because the people developing with them were more rational and capable of writing about them more coherently. christianity has not historically been a system designed to facilitate the personal development of the practitioner. i know the gd and whoever were all calling themselves christians, but that was just to keep the cops off their back, pagans not being too well thought of and only really able to talk openly about their beliefs in the past forty years.

or am i talking rubbish again? arguments from enochian adepts and guilty catholics please
 
 
waxy dan
14:18 / 10.07.03
Metatron is God's Ari Fleischer.
That's brilliant!

I'm really not sure about the Watchers. I'm trying to find the damned book that I was reading yonks ago on Amazon or something. But I remember them being a seperate race, before the Angels came on the scene. Also, that they were 'outside of time' as well.

...arse... thanks for those links by the way.
 
 
waxy dan
14:23 / 10.07.03
george and tony have had their heads so spun round by this shit they think bombing families is moral
I would say anything that can do that is a powerful symbol. I would also say that anything that is recognisable by just about every human mind in this world, and that you come accross on such a regular basis (less so outside of the West, I know) is a powerful symbol.

Whether or not you personally suscribe to it doesn't lessen it's power.
 
 
_Boboss
14:30 / 10.07.03
power, no, agreed
efficacy, i really think so. studying these symbols has made g'n't into functional psychopaths because they're just too messy to get a sensible handle on

i'm enjoying this discussion as much as anyone, it has the dark stink of mystic history in full effect, i just think it's kind of important to remember that there's a difference between the study of comparative religion and magical practice. i really really reckon that studying these dusty angels as living presences will not turn one into an enlightened master
 
 
waxy dan
14:45 / 10.07.03
efficacy: the power to produce an effect.
I really think you're splitting some awful thin semantic hairs there.

No, I don't think studying the history of the Angel symbol is going to make anyone an enlightened master. But then, I don't believe that any standarised religion or faith is. I do think that a symbol as ubiquitous as this does deserve study. Something that can mean so much to so many shouldn't be ignored.

In much the same way that I think Mickey D's Golden Arches and caduceus and similar are deserving of study. If that makes sense? Though the Angel has more history and is thus more a part of our makeup, and so perhaps is deserving of more.


...And somebody slap me down if this is threadrot.
 
 
_Boboss
15:18 / 10.07.03
one man's rot's another's timely change

[and the sunshine seems to bring out the fighter in me. 'pologies]

angels as universal symbols, instantly recognised all over? well okay i'll let you have that, although not many people i think know or care that there are different ones, or that they represent certain ascribable principles of 'meaning'. and that meaning is so flexible as

so maybe we have different ideas of the word 'study': what is it about the macdonalds arches that makes you want to find out what's lurking behind them? as an example of memetic processes they're an interesting case, but do the really symbolise anything deeper than junk food?

and the caduceus, who'd win the holy war for that one, the doctors or the postmen?

i think you may be wrong to not believe that religious systems can provide enlightenment, what about the holiness of the buddha? come on, he's lovely there's no two ways about it....if you don't believe that, why are we talking about angels as if they might matter?

hmm yeh that's probably it i've stumbled into this chat from the wrong side. hometime now so you win
 
 
grant
15:27 / 10.07.03
If you find the idea of angels confusing, you might want to read this discussion of the Angel of the Lord, as well as this Catholic Encyclopedia entry and this Jewish Encyclopedia article on the nature of angels.

From the first link:
When the Angel of The Lord spoke to Hagar (Genesis 16: 11) he speaks to her as an ambassador of the Lord and assures her that "The Lord has heard your afflictions" and yet he also says "I will multiply your descendants exceedingly." (v 10).

In other words, they're sort of holograms of God - pseudopods or emanations of the Omnipresent Self. They're both separate from and not-separate from the Lord.

-----

Also, if you didn't catch it before, there's a certain crossover between Enoch/Metatron and the risen Christ. They echo each other. Which is used to make some hay in discussions of the Trinity, and the Divine Person of Christ.
 
 
waxy dan
15:53 / 10.07.03
[and the sunshine seems to bring out the fighter in me. 'pologies]
Not at all. I didn't mean to come accross as being peeved, sorry! I'm finding this very interesting and enjoyable.

...
True, the Buddha is a lovely chap. Just look at that big grin, he's like Alfred, Parker, and your favourite uncle all rolled into one.

Perhaps following a standard text has worked for many people, I really don't know to be honest. I think there is a lot of wisdom to be gained from studying someone else's route to enlightenment. Especially a large and well-grounded religion. Buddhism, I would agree with you, probably has more merit that angelic history on that front. However I don't believe that anyone else's roadmap is ever going to work step-by-step for somebody else. The best they can give is an approximation, and guide as to how they got there, and maybe you can find a similar route.

I think that, for myself at least, being raised in a western background, the angel does mean a lot to me. Studying that symbol and how it came about does work well as a focus for better understanding the society I grew up in, and thus myself. Seeing as an understanding of the construction of my 'self' is what I'm ultimately after, then it seems like a good idea.

Big Macs and doctors were really just examples. Whether you using 'semiotics' or 'sigils' I think symbols like these do hold a definite power and influence. That power being possibly a negative one doesn't negate the influence it has. Just telling it to piss off won't make it go away, at least not unless everyone else says the same thing.

I'd agree with your view on what this system of beliefs has come to and how full of lies, semi-truths, and just plain inadvertant confusion it is. But between its part in constructing 'me', its influence over the world at large, and its age (Hero of a Thousand Faces - stylee, I think there's a lot to be gained from looking for an 'ur-myth'), I believe it worthy of study.

But I'm really just talking for myself here. To someone else it's probably just bullshit. Anyway, I didn't mean to be trying to 'win' an arguement here, sorry if I gave that impression. Just about hometime here too!

...
grant

Yeah, Enoch/Metatron always seemed like a dry-run for Christ to me.

Could you expand on the hologram idea a bit?
 
 
diz
17:13 / 10.07.03
What you can say is that there appears to be a change in the way that the Jews conceived of their God at about the time that Cyrus allowed the temple to be rebuilt. This may be connected to Zoroastrianism, or may simply be a result of cultural change as a result of a lenghty period of enforced separation form the previous ideas of Yahweh - no temple, no sacrifices, no battle against other tribes.

with all due respect, i don't think this is an either/or, but a both/and. i don't think that Judaism is an offshoot of Zoroastrianism (though i might be inclined to argue that it might descend in some part from Egyptian monotheism under Akhenaten), but i think the influence of Zoroastrianism on post-exile Judaism is pretty clear, and that the way was cleared for that influence by the period of separation from the normal tribal context of Israel.

Certainly the religion was reorganised and the theology of Judaism changed, but that does not necessitate that those changes were taken from Zoroastrianism, or indeed that Judaism was "recreated".

i think that's a bit hard to swallow. People X live in Land Y for a time, and during that time Religion X comes to look a lot more like Religion Y than it did previously, but that's just coincidence? i'm not buying it.

please keep in mind that i'm not arguing that it "restarted" during the Exile, but to say that Persian religion wasn't a really major influence on Judaism is a bit of a stretch.

re: Metatron and God

IMHO, Metatron is to God like the Borg Queen is to the Borg Collective or Nyarlathotep is to Azathoth - the receptacle of the whole's sense of itself as a single entity. it functions as a face and a sense of identity for an entity too vast and expansive to have either.

no identity can contain Infinity/Eternity, because identity is necessarily defined by boundaries. God is everything, everywhere, and everywhen, and thus, when taken as a whole, no one thing and no one time and no one place in particular. and yet, at the same time, God is said to have and speaks and acts as if God has an identity, a sense of self, and acts in such a way as to make God-self "appear" in a particular time and place. thus, Metatron.

Metatron is the part of God that thinks of God-self as a person. as such, it's limited in time and space and must have defined boundaries. in concept, it's like the biggest finite number that there could ever be. as such, it's not the same as God, but in a sense it's the closest any finite thing could be to being God.

if that makes any sense.

re: the general topic

i strongly recommend Gustav Davidson's A Dictionary of Angels: Including the Fallen Angels as a general reference work on the topic.
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
20:34 / 10.07.03
Yay, my thread hit the two page mark! (sorry, that's never happened before)

Well, to clear up a bunch of stuff, in miyopinion, heres a big lod list.


starring dizfactor, as Friendly Officer Po-Po, thank you, I was just about to suggest that book to everybody.
Someone asked about the connection between Lucifer and previous gods. According to "Angels a to Z" (I don't have a copy of Davidson's book currently, I'm looking for one. This book is overly Christian, but pretty good) Lucifer has dominion over Venus, and that said morningstar was personified as Belit and Ishtar by the Assyrians and Babylonians, respectibly. I'll have more on the Watchers and one of my favorite subjects, Metatron, later.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:35 / 11.07.03

Certainly the religion was reorganised and the theology of Judaism changed, but that does not necessitate that those changes were taken from Zoroastrianism, or indeed that Judaism was "recreated".


So, your criticism is that no belief ever changes over the course of centuries unless it has the shit invaded out of it by a group of people who actually don't share the same structural beliefs as the people you believe changed the way people a believed?

OK.

Cool.

Next question: Greek thought in the 6th century, with particular reference to pottery - how was it changed by invading aliens from Yuggoth?

Not everything is directly attributable to invading armies, physical or conceptual. Try dizfactor - he is proposing a reasonable compromise.
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
14:43 / 12.07.03
....
....
Ok, I'm way out of my league once we move to aliens...
Metatron, right. Metatron is a mega-angels, basically. An angel of death (like most of them, apparently)but more importantly the voice of God. His name means "little Yahweh". He is the second tallest angel, has 36 wings, and "countless eyes". He was once Enoch, and is one of, if not the youngest angels. He also teaches the prematurely dead in paradise.
 
 
Quantum
08:43 / 14.07.03
..and was played excellently in Dogma by Alan Rickman :-)
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
12:25 / 14.07.03
Well, yes, that too.
 
 
grant
15:10 / 14.07.03
grant

Yeah, Enoch/Metatron always seemed like a dry-run for Christ to me.

Could you expand on the hologram idea a bit?



Well, it kind of got covered up there by someone else, but basically, there's this Huge Grand Light of the Creator, and to behold it fully would incapacitate any human. So the Creator sends out these little sparks that humans can perceive without going mad or blind. Because the nature of God is the sum total of Personality-ness (arguable, I suppose, but it's a subjective view), each spark or ray of personality has elements of that Personality... enough to be perceived as an individual, but still a projection of the Huge Grand Personality.

That's a bit muddled, I know.

More like your hand is your hand. It has a different character than your foot, but the same blood and the same DNA. Sometimes, it might do things you're not entirely consciously aware of, like tapping fingers on a desk, or absent-mindedly scratching an itch on your leg. But it's your hand, it's a part of you. To, say, a goldfish in a small tank, that's the only part of you it'll ever interact with -- because if you tried to get your whole body in the fishtank, there'd be no room and the fish would be crushed. So to the goldfish the Hand = the Whole Person in the same way that to a human the Angel = God.

Does that make sense?
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
17:40 / 14.07.03
Actually, yeah. Of course, it sort of goes with the Hindu concept of Atman god rather then the Judeo-Christian Yahweh god. But that's not a bad thing at all. And it would explain the relations between some angels and older gods, similar to the greys/barbelith/archons/supercontex thing.
 
 
waxy dan
07:20 / 15.07.03
Thanks Grant. That makes sense, yeah. The hologram theory I understand (more from all those holographic universe articles in New Scientist last year than anything else).

What I didn't get was the application of Angel - God from it. Which, in retrospect, I really should've done.

I'm probably missing something really obvious here. But where's the connection to: When the Angel of The Lord spoke to Hagar (Genesis 16: 11) he speaks to her as an ambassador of the Lord and assures her that "The Lord has heard your afflictions" and yet he also says "I will multiply your descendants exceedingly." (v 10).
Hagar was human right? Or is there a Metatron-like thing going on somewhere that I can't google?
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
15:44 / 15.07.03
Both, probably. Although, I'd have to look up the passage to find whether Enoch was dead yet, so it might not actually be Metatron.
 
 
grant
17:02 / 15.07.03
Oh, the Hagar passage has to do with the way the Angel of the Lord is speaking about God, as both "He" and "I" in the same passage. ("The Lord has heard..." vs "I will multiply..."). So there's a same/different thing going on with the relationship between God and the angel.
 
 
I The Golden Dawn-nie Darko U
20:30 / 22.07.03
Not to mention, Enoch was "translated" to heaven on June 6th (Tsivan) making him...the beast? (666 as a date is usually recognized as June 6th). Just an odd coincidence?
 
 
I The Golden Dawn-nie Darko U
21:01 / 22.07.03
"Both, probably. Although, I'd have to look up the passage to find whether Enoch was dead yet, so it might not actually be Metatron"

Actually, Enoch did become the Metatron - thus the Logos. You are indeed correct when you say "a dry run for Christ" - though it is a bit more.

Moses was instructed by "Metatron" when assigned his task to liberate the slaves in Egypt. We find in the book "The Ascencion of Moses" (sometimes called Enoch 3?) Moses questions the source:

"...because I was Enoch, your ancestor!" the Metatron replies.

"In the beginning was the word..." and that was Enoch - during his face to face with YHVH, God creates the universe in Enoch's sight, and then gives him the blueprints.

And Enoch did not die - he in fact counsels his great grand child Noah regarding the deluge and then Moses...amongst others.
 
 
Spyder Todd 2008
01:40 / 23.07.03
"And Enoch did not die"
Huh. I always figured that he died, and thus, by dieing transended his own mortality and became the voice of God. But, I suppose he could do all that with out dieing, just by becoming enlightned and then... I don't know, taking it a step beyond that maybe.
 
 
Who's your Tzaddi?
22:04 / 01.08.03
36 wings? Wacky. The sum of [1-36] is 666. or 3 6's.Odd.
 
  

Page: 1(2)

 
  
Add Your Reply