View Single Post
Old 01-24-2005, 05:42 PM
Max Max is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 127
Default Re: The Norwegians are right!!!!!

alumbrado wrote:
You've never been to University of Texas before?
Yes- I've been to UT many times but that doesn't exclude the hand sign from having a double meaning (if you want to ignore the minor differences between the two). You claim "there's nothing remotely satanic about it" and I'd just like to know how you can be so certain. The way I see it that's not possible- you can't disprove it. To top things off you dish out an insult of "Be realistic" based on an argument you can't fully support.

Of course, there has been a strong case built to show the hand sign is satanic.

According to the Jewish/biblical folklore-myth, Lucifer (a Romanized name for the Hebraic name of Sammael), the greatest of all the Lord's angels, was the brightest Angel in the heavens, righteous and brilliant in light but very prideful in his own sense of self-realization. He learned that God have planned to create a new being on Earth, a being greater than Lucifer/Sammael and he became jealous of the new being which would become Man. In anger and pride, he rejected God's new creation and rebelled against the Lord, leading a host of his followers in the War in Heaven. The Archangel Michael defeated Lucifer/Sammael and God stripped Lucifer/Sammael of his divinity and casted the first Rebel out of the Heaven and fell to the earth, to the darkness that would become his domain. He became the Prince of the Earth, for God believed that he should remain on Earth forever, trapped with God's newest creation that would become Man. Or the story goes.
I am familiar with this (as well as the occult "real" meaning) but I've never meant anyone who refers to Lucifer as an "Angel of Light"- why do you think it is appropriate to say this? Isn't "Prince of Darkness" more fitting?
Truth, Peace, Freedom, Trust, Abundance, Unselfishness, Joy, Humility and Pure Love
Reply With Quote