BARBELITH underground
 

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


Now Michael, that's not nice.

 
 
the real anti christ
07:32 / 02.04.06
Michael pwning



OK so I assume you see the jpg you get what I am talking about, if not, it's a picture of the arch angel Michael spearing Lucifer down to hell. Now I always was under the impression that Michael and Lucifer we on a pretty close par? Any biblical references you chaps recall supporting this picture would be great, canonical or not.
 
 
Jack Denfeld
08:04 / 02.04.06
Michael's always thought to be the number one angel in Catholocism anyway. Sword raised, calling on people to fight, destroying evil towns. He was the first of the angels to bow to man which makes him a good foil to Lucifer.

The offical view from the Catholic church from the wiki.
The Catholic Church honors Michael with four main titles or offices. He is the Christian angel of death, carrying the souls of all the deceased to heaven, where they are weighed in his perfectly balanced scales (hence Michael is often depicted holding scales). At the hour of death, Michael descends and gives each soul the chance to redeem itself before passing, thus consternating the devil and his minions. Michael is the special patron of the Chosen People in the Old Testament and is guardian of the Church; it was thus not unusual for the angel to be revered by the military orders of knights during the Middle Ages. Last, he is the supreme enemy of Satan and the fallen angels.
 
 
Paolo
17:41 / 02.04.06
I had always had the understanding that Lucifer was the foremost Angel before the fall and outranked Michael. I read a legend somewhere that In the war Lucifer was set to win the fight and was about to drag Michael out of heaven but for Gods direct intervention.
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
17:27 / 03.04.06
hey folks,

what's the source material for the fallen angels?

I've read Paradise Lost and plenty more, but where does this tale come from???

doesn't Umbriel stand guard over the Gates of Hell with a flaming sword? A supporting role to Michael's?

--not jack
 
 
Paolo
07:33 / 04.04.06
I think that (at least one) source is in the Book of Enoch and the book of Jubilees. However the War in heaven idea seems to be a feature of many myth cycles such as Marduk's killing of Tiamat in Sumerian myth
 
 
Paolo
07:40 / 04.04.06
I think the Umbriel legend you are refering to is actually referring to Uriel who is supposed to stand at the gates of Eden with either a flaming sword or a "sword which turns every way".

One thing which always interested me is the legend of the Metatron. The Metatron is supposedly Enoch who was tranlated into Heaven and "walked with God and was not" However if Enoch could become Metatron does this mean that prior to him there was a vacancy in the Angelic Hierarchy. Was this empty seat the position occupied by Lucifer before the fall?
 
 
nyarlathotep's shoe horn
15:48 / 04.04.06
Uriel guards the gates of Eden - thanks Paolo.

I think Clive Barker used Uriel as "the Scourge" character in Weaveworld

--Not Jack
 
 
Paolo
11:40 / 05.04.06
It was definitly Uriel as the Scourge in Weaveworld.

Oddly I have always been able to Link Lucifer with Uriel in hir Archangel of Earth aspect. A gnostic book called "The defence of the Devil" by Eugene Halliday describes one aspect of Lucifer as a stone - a metaphor for physical manifestation. This is available online here:- http://www.eugenehalliday.org/documents.htm

I find the outlook a bit overly Christian in places which is not my thing, however many of the concepts I found excellent for my Qabalah work

However using more traditional qabalah I would place Lucifer on Netzach opposite Michael on Hod. There is always an entanglement between horizontal sephiroth and I suspect that this entangelment is part of what lead to the myth of the fight between the two.
 
 
LVX23
18:58 / 07.04.06
Michael can also be compared in some ways to Atu 8, Adjustment (Thoth deck).
 
 
the real anti christ
03:21 / 08.04.06
Thanks guys. I am sure now that it was the artist mistake or drama.
 
  
Add Your Reply