# Warhammer is an internalized perception of the war between Michael during his war...



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

The Emperor of mankind and all that encompasses warhammer 40k, is in fact part of a much larger reality. The Emperor is in fact Michael, it is his own self perception of how "he" saw himself while the galaxy at large is the theatre of war that is occuring all around him.

During the beginning Michael was tasked with primarily observing...as "time" went on, his duties changed to securing "earth" for proper evolution of humanity.

Furthermore as time went on Michael received orders to secure more subsequent realities, thus the Emperor began to conquer the universe and attempt to purge "chaos".


Chaos is in fact the layers of reality that existed prior to the current reality, prior to the creation of "light". It was the darkness of "god" so to speak that was the prior dominant mode of existence.

Michael began to become overcome with the guilt of all those he was killing and obliterating from existence....were they humans, no. Were they spirits, perhaps....Michael rationalized his actions under the banner of what he did was all under the command of "God" and thus for the greater good.

The primarchs soon came into being, which were symbolism for Michael's (The Emperor's) fracturing paradigm....he split his perception into 20 different facets....each began to take on their own personality, handling different sources of stress that were a threat to the Emperor.


However with the war growing dimmer, darker, and more cruel with every passing wave of "time" so too were his fractured personalities influenced, some beginning to become consumed by the "Darkness" of which he was so heavily submerged in while waging war upon.

Parts of his mentality....his paradigm begin to perceive his own self as the monster, the murderer, he began to see his self as the enemy as he was carrying out destruction just as rampant as the entity he was fighting against.

Thus certain primarchs turned against the Emperor, while others remained loyal to the Emperor...this was an internal struggle that was occurring on an entirely larger level of complexity. 

Horus represented the original motivation, the Emperor's ambition, his hope, and drive to change reality for the better....but as time went on and Michael's original hope, motivation, all experienced deterioration becoming consumed in self hate, so too did Horus turn against his former master the Emperor.


At the peak of the war, the Emperor engaged Horus in one on one combat, and just as in reality at large Michael dueled Lucifer, the consequences were cataclysmic.

However the battle with Horus represented not Michael combating Lucifer, no it symbolized the few brief moments prior to their engagement, as Michael fought with his own inner self as to which would become the dominant personality....his original ambition and faith in God fractured and impaled his current perception leaving himself a hollow husk.

Reality all around the Emperor halted....and decay set in....just as in the reality at large, Michael was defeated by the bearer of light and cast into the depths of oblivion to where he began to rot in eternal stasis.


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

I'll start early this time, do you have any proof?

Can you prove it?

Can you back this up with anything other than opinion?


----------



## Djinn24 (Jan 12, 2008)




----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

normtheunsavoury said:


> I'll start early this time, do you have any proof?
> 
> Can you prove it?
> 
> Can you back this up with anything other than opinion?


Well, to ask for proof is a bit silly, as games workshop themselves state openly everything is canon and nothing is canon. As it is all from a flawed perspective, each and every book, codex entry etc. Thus giving power to their customers to perceive it how they want using the provided material as a basis.

So yes I do have "proof" and have drawn these perceptions from multiple books of the black library.


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

Surely 'no' would have been far quicker to type?


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

I feel it is important to add, that the Tyranids most likely represent the Emperor's (Michael's) internal desire for true death, thus why the Tyranids came into warhammer 40k reality post of the Emperor's crippling, and Michaels defeat at the hands of Lucifer.

The emperor being fully conscious, but it a stasis prison of which he can not escape, created the psychological construct of the tyranids to act as a concept of hope. For in Michaels state of dread and fractured psyche, all he (the emperor) desires now is freedom...freedom from his imprisonment, and the tyranids manifested as such as the devourers to consume all and free him from his emotional chains.


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Aye. Whatever you say, matey.


----------



## dreadnought1995 (Feb 24, 2012)

Seems a bit far fetched and over complicated


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

I think the religious themes are pretty strong in warhammer personally


----------



## Uber Ork (Aug 23, 2010)

Ahh Lux, the master of outlandish, unfounded, and unsupported assertions. I have yet to figure out if you really believe the things you say, or if you just do it because you have fun watching everyone's reaction. Either way, whenever you start a thread... it's highly entertaining.  



Alright then... _*let the entertainment begin!*_ :biggrin:

I know better than to ask for you to support your assertions by asking for quotes or evidence from a codex, Black Library book, or the 40K rulebook, etc. so I won't bother. Instead I'll just ask for clarification.

Are you saying the Emperor is Michael from the Bible, as in Michael the Archangel? And when you say things like...


Lux said:


> During the beginning Michael was tasked with primarily observing...as "time" went on, his duties changed to securing "earth" for proper evolution of humanity.


Where are you getting that Michael (again, assuming you mean from the Bible) was tasked with first observing, and then "securing" earth for proper evolution? Are you meaning as in Theistic Evolution?


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Uber Ork said:


> Ahh Lux, the master of outlandish, unfounded, and unsupported assertions. I have yet to figure out if you really believe the things you say, or if you just do it because you have fun watching everyone's reaction. Either way, whenever you start a thread... it's highly entertaining.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Several schools of thought actually perceive Michael as bringer of cruelty, wrath, and unwavering law. Such that Michael enforced the "law" with such impunity, and mercilessness that "he" was seen as horribly violent, and malicious. However in the eyes of those whom he benefited, he was seen as a just, true, virtuous paragon of what a true selfless hero is.

Humanity in some schools were perceived as the project of god, of which would supersede all previous creations, their greatest potential lying in their ability to evolve rather than be static.

The Emperor mirroring Michael was a bringer of extreme law, obedience, all in the name of justice, greater good, virtue. After all the Emperor was a reflection of Michael's subconscious.

During the "war" earth was indeed a battleground, it was one of the many theatres of war....of which held importance in the perceptions of many "factions". 

Thus Michael (the emperor) sought to meticulously eradicate all other players from the board, to ensure that the will of "god" that was entrusted to him (the combined shamans that formed the emperor) was carried out.

This led to confrontation with others....such as the bringer of light...

As the war waged on upon many layers of reality, Michael began to "doubt"....and thus led to fracturing of himself (the creation of the primarchs)...these were psychological constructs in a desperate attempt to hold his internal psyche together.....eventually his personalities turned parasite like and began to consume one another for dominance.


----------



## jonileth (Feb 1, 2012)

Not to be a dick or anything, but why must people find connections with single religions in a game that, for all intents and purposes, mirrors none and many at the same time. I will grant you that the deification of the Emperor as a 'god' would put it in line with mainstream Christianity (the monotheistic undertones), but the Emperor would be more liken to Jesus than an Angel. The Emperor meant to save mankind from all the evil in the universe, and waged war against evil to make it so.

Secondly, you have the Gods of Chaos, who mirror many of the more archaic religions (polytheistic undertones) who venerate aspect gods. Each of the Chaos gods personify aspects of human nature, each with their own domains over certain portions of the overall human experience. You also have with that the Eldar and their gods, though most of their gods are now dead, but the same undertones apply.

Then you have the Tau, who are more in line with Taoism than anything, believing in the ineffable nature of the universe, of balance and all that. They venerate no god in particular, and simply respect the universe itself as an entity unto itself.

So when you look at it, the 40K universe has less to do with one specific religion and more to do with themes found world wide that touch on the spiritual sensibilities of a wide range of people. Throwing it into the Christian box and passing that off as what it is, in my opinion, is rather narrow-minded.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Never once did I state warhammer 40k aligned with one religion, I believe all perceptions, religions, creeds, are one and the same.

Every human perception is intertwined in every other human perception, in human judeo-christian views there pagan layers, daoistic layers, hindu, etc. 

Just the same in every other perception and philosophy they are composed of a plethora, if not all other perceptions prior to them, and modified with those that come after them.

Just as with the chaos gods how all existed from the beginning and no one chaos god was created before the other, so too did all paradigms exist as one from the beginning.


----------



## Uber Ork (Aug 23, 2010)

Lux said:


> Several schools of thought actually perceive Michael as bringer of cruelty, wrath, and unwavering law. Such that Michael enforced the "law" with such impunity, and mercilessness that "he" was seen as horribly violent, and malicious. However in the eyes of those whom he benefited, he was seen as a just, true, virtuous paragon of what a true selfless hero is.


I'll ask the question again, because you didn't answer it. 

Do you mean Michael from the Bible? ...as in Michael the Angel? Answering this, will help me greatly understand where you are coming from.






Lux said:


> Humanity in some schools were perceived as the project of god, of which would supersede all previous creations, their greatest potential lying in their ability to evolve rather than be static.
> 
> The Emperor mirroring Michael was a bringer of extreme law, obedience, all in the name of justice, greater good, virtue. After all the Emperor was a reflection of Michael's subconscious.


Again, Michael, the angel from the Bible? I do have a response for you here, but will wait until you answer my question.






Lux said:


> During the "war" earth was indeed a battleground, it was one of the many theatres of war....of which held importance in the perceptions of many "factions".
> 
> Thus Michael (the emperor) sought to meticulously eradicate all other players from the board, to ensure that the will of "god" that was entrusted to him (the combined shamans that formed the emperor) was carried out.
> 
> ...


And yet again, I have an answer for you depending on how you answer my question concerning Michael above...


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Uber Ork said:


> I'll ask the question again, because you didn't answer it.
> 
> Do you mean Michael from the Bible? ...as in Michael the Angel? Answering this, will help me greatly understand where you are coming from.
> 
> ...


To answer you with a finite, linear answer, such as "yes" pertaining to Michael from the bible....would be inaccurate of me to do...

Michael from the bible is but a finite, limited opinion upon the character "Michael", that to some is fiction, to others reality, but ultimately a living concept shaped by humanities perception.

Michael, Mi'kael, Miykael, etc. is mentioned in a plethora of text in many religious, philosophical occult circles and text....

So the answer I desire to give you would be outside the parameters of your original question....


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

I call bullshit on this!  *starts flinging poop* 

in all seriousness tho.. Lux i think you see to much into it. its just a game with background stolen and altered from a dozen and more places.

Haskanael.

PS. who dug lux up this time?


----------



## jonileth (Feb 1, 2012)

Lux said:


> Never once did I state warhammer 40k aligned with one religion, I believe all perceptions, religions, creeds, are one and the same.
> 
> Every human perception is intertwined in every other human perception, in human judeo-christian views there pagan layers, daoistic layers, hindu, etc.
> 
> ...


This is all well and good, but your only real example has been from the Christian bend. Which again brings up the question of why that was the only example given and the only perception put forward as a basis for conversation.

My entire point was that the Emperor doesn't specifically symbolize any one figure in any religion, he could really be any one of a hundred figures in both modern and ancient cultures.

Off the top of my head, he could be personified as Mars/Ares, Ra, as the embodiment of at least half a dozen Norse gods and heroes... And that's without doing any real research on the topic.

Picking one person out of one school of thought makes people assume that you are taking it strictly from one part of the religious spectrum.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

jonileth said:


> This is all well and good, but your only real example has been from the Christian bend. Which again brings up the question of why that was the only example given and the only perception put forward as a basis for conversation.
> 
> My entire point was that the Emperor doesn't specifically symbolize any one figure in any religion, he could really be any one of a hundred figures in both modern and ancient cultures.
> 
> ...


Why did I not mention other ideologies and philosophies....why it was merely the first post.....as I expand and delve more to share with you all....more would have been shared...

So the question is....why assume it was only going to be one ideology explored, and or that is what composes all of warhammer 40k?

But I digress...just wait for the next post...


----------



## Over Two Meters Tall! (Nov 1, 2010)

Lux, you're a hoot!

I think he's having a very rational reaction to reading too many overly burdened discussions about the divinity or lack thereof of fictitious characters drawn up to support a tabletop game premised on a teenagers understanding of the Dark Ages... one which I thoroughly enjoy, mind you. :shok:


----------



## GiftofChaos1234 (Jan 27, 2009)

well, since we are involved in a thread with no proof and he is interpreting warhammer's material how he likes i thinki should add my own unsubstantiated opinion on his post.

The Michael he refers to would have to be Michael Jackson.
the war is symbolic of his inner battle between his African-American heritage and who he had become, the crazy caucasian dude who still made good music but made poor decisions.

The Emperor (michael) was well loved by the people during his early stages (after he brought earth together and started the great crusade), the people of earth thought he was a genius (of course there was the few who hated him, but all artists have haters, haters gonna hate after all) but after the great crusade began in earnest he changed. he started making some real stupid decisions while still having the good of humanity at heart (not telling the primarchs about chaos, council of nikea etc)

this caused many people to have a "da fuuuucckkkk" opinion of him. many however chose to adore him still but the haters who were gonna hate multiplied many many times (including several of his own sons, dangling them off a balcony may not have been a wise move)

This all said i love the king of pop. he made amazing music both early on and later, when he got slightly... crazy. :biggrin:

anyway, the point of all this is to say that if there is no evidence you can say whatever the hell you like and still be wrong as i clearly am. Your op sounds as crazy as what i said just then in my opinion. So I'm gonna go ahead and say no, it isn't michael from the bible.


----------



## Haskanael (Jul 5, 2011)

Lux said:


> Why did I not mention other ideologies and philosophies....why it was merely the first post.....as I expand and delve more to share with you all....more would have been shared...
> 
> So the question is....why assume it was only going to be one ideology explored, and or that is what composes all of warhammer 40k?
> 
> But I digress...just wait for the next post...


You and your crazy farcetched story's never fail to amuse me lux. just like the reaction of most other members.

BTW you would make a great writer of fantasy and sci fy. if you took the time for it. all this creative energy.

Haskanael.


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

I'm trying to think of how to reply to this.

All I can think to type is that you must spend a fortune on tin foil hats.

As to GW statement that everything is canon and everything is not that means that things are subject to change if it moves the story line along further.


----------



## OIIIIIIO (Dec 16, 2009)

I am not sure what is funnier, the original concept of this insane left field original post, or the simple fact that he has some-fucking-how gotten 414 reputation?!?

OT: WTF are you talking about? Micheal the fucking Angel that our God sent to Earth? If so then you are referencing only one religion. Done here. In the words of the Colonel "That chicken is fried son, get it out of the sun!"


----------



## Davidicus 40k (Jun 4, 2010)

Guys.

Wait til Lux expands on his theory before you judge!! He has more posts in store for us!! Can't you wait!?!?

Edit: Just noticed I have 300 Rep. I feel Spartan.


----------



## Uber Ork (Aug 23, 2010)

Lux said:


> To answer you with a finite, linear answer, such as "yes" pertaining to Michael from the bible....would be inaccurate of me to do...
> 
> Michael from the bible is but a finite, limited opinion upon the character "Michael", that to some is fiction, to others reality, but ultimately a living concept shaped by humanities perception.
> 
> ...


:laugh: Lux my friend, you never cease to amaze me in your ability to say so much, yet say nothing at all. Here's the problem... you say the Emperor is Michael, and you define what Michael is like, but you are unwilling to show us from the "plethora" of texts how you arrive at this version of Michael. 

You cling to an outmoded type of philosophical reasoning which is outdated and has been rejected. When you say...


Lux said:


> Michael from the bible is but a finite, limited opinion upon the character "Michael", that to some is fiction, to others reality, but ultimately a living concept shaped by humanities perception


... you have in essence said something like, "Michael is lots of things, and yet nothing at all (i.e. you can't really pin him down to any one thing)." In the end, you've said nothing. You've failed to define Michael in any meaningful way that I or anyone else can discuss and relate to the Emperor. 

I don't mean this as a personal attack, but you remind me a great deal of those philosophers who sit around and discuss whether or not we exist. Modern man has rejected these philosophies because the average person already knows he exists. All we want now is some good advice on how to make it through the life that we already know exists. 

Your vaguely worded description of the Michael "archetype" isn't of any value because in the end, it says nothing of who Michael is. If we know nothing of who this Michael is, then there's no way for us to compare him to the Emperor. If there's no way for us to compare him to the Emperor, then there's no way to intelligently comment on your assertion. 

So in the end I sit here and wonder if you're unable to define this archetype, or if you have an idea of what you think it is, but are unable to support it by directing us to actual support material (i.e. the "plethora of text in many religious, philosophical occult circles" to which you refer but don't cite).


Judaism, Catholicism, and Protestantism, etc. all draw their concept of Michael from the Bible, as will Mormonism, Jehovah's Witness, and so on. I imagine other groups take this concept of Michael as found in the Bible and add to it/change it, but you haven't mentioned who those specific groups are. 

You use the name Michael in your comparison. Why? Because that is the name used in Daniel chapters 10 and 12, the book of Jude, and in Revelation chapter 12 (i.e. the Bible). Using alternate spellings of Michael (Mi'kael, Miykael) doesn't really change this, however... I would be interested to hear the names of the groups as well as see the direct citations of their texts which describe (and use the name) Mi'kael or Miykael. I would very much be interested (but only if actual works are cited) to see how these alternate versions of Michael have helped to shape the Michael Archetype you compare the Emperor to. 



So... in conclusion. 

I would love it if you could mention by name a few of the "plethora of text in many religious, philosophical occult circles" that are outside of the ones I already mentioned (Judaism, Catholicism, etc.) which use the Bible to define Michael. Right now I can quote from each of the passages I mentioned in Daniel, Jude, and Revelation, and am totally willing to do so *if* you can offer a few quotes from the "plethora" of other texts that fit your largely non Biblical description of Michael in your opening post.

*1. Please name the religion or "philosophical occult circle" 
2. Please include what they call the Michael archetype (i.e. Mi'kael, Miykael, or something else)
3. Please name of the book for which the reference can be found
4. Please list the page number/reference (i.e. chapter and verse) in which the quote can be found
5. Please include the written passage itself
*


Failure to do so will lead me (and I imagine anyone else reading this thread) to automatically conclude you have no idea of what you're talking about.



.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

GiftofChaos1234 said:


> well, since we are involved in a thread with no proof and he is interpreting warhammer's material how he likes i thinki should add my own unsubstantiated opinion on his post.
> 
> The Michael he refers to would have to be Michael Jackson.
> the war is symbolic of his inner battle between his African-American heritage and who he had become, the crazy caucasian dude who still made good music but made poor decisions.
> ...


I support this 100% over Lux's post. I feel this is far more representative of the 40k lore then comparing the Emperor to Saint Michael


----------



## Robfu (Feb 14, 2012)

See what heresy breeds. Chaos has truly hooked this one into its evil webs! Exterminates Extremes!


----------



## ChaosRedCorsairLord (Apr 17, 2009)

GiftofChaos1234 said:


> well, since we are involved in a thread with no proof and he is interpreting warhammer's material how he likes i thinki should add my own unsubstantiated opinion on his post.
> 
> The Michael he refers to would have to be Michael Jackson.
> the war is symbolic of his inner battle between his African-American heritage and who he had become, the crazy caucasian dude who still made good music but made poor decisions.
> ...


Ah, Lux was referring to Michael Jackson. Here I thought he was talking about Michael J. Fox; It all makes perfect sense now!

I love these threads.


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

This is brilliant! :rofl:


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I disagree, primarily because the Lightbringer you refer to does not fit the archetype of what we have come to know Horus as. Horus was twisted to the point of killing his own brethren and slaying millions to achieve a simple goal. 

This is not something I have come to associate with Lucifer. And as a Gnostic Luciferian with a Discordian outlook, I would appreciate it if you would put some more thought into your theories. Thank you. 


And everyone else, please keep it civil or I will do nasty things to your posts.


----------



## jonileth (Feb 1, 2012)

I think the heavy philosophical arguments have driven Lux away from this. Either that or we are in for a wall o' text here directly.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Personally, i find the 40k fluff better written than the fluff you think it's based on...


----------



## ThatOtherGuy (Apr 13, 2010)

TheKingElessar said:


> Personally, i find the 40k fluff better written than the fluff you think it's based on...


so you prefer grimderp over herpderp?


----------



## Digg40k (Sep 7, 2008)

Who the fuck is Michael?


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Serpion5 said:


> I disagree, primarily because the Lightbringer you refer to does not fit the archetype of what we have come to know Horus as. Horus was twisted to the point of killing his own brethren and slaying millions to achieve a simple goal.
> 
> This is not something I have come to associate with Lucifer. And as a Gnostic Luciferian with a Discordian outlook, I would appreciate it if you would put some more thought into your theories. Thank you.
> 
> ...


I tried to make it very clear that Horus is not the representation of "Lucifer" the light bringer. I stated that Horus was the representation of Michael's original motivation, and drive to to the Will of "God" that had been twisted by his experiences of "war".

The light bringer is an entity that fought out of its faith in "God", and never once did it waver in its loyalty and faith in its "god".

Others perceived its....actions as destructive, selfish, seeped in hubris....however it is similar to how those who fight against Michael also perceived Michael as being cruel, violent, sociopathic, and ultimately unemphatic.

Furthermore you must remember the warhammer 40k reality is a psychological construct of Michael's mind...thus how "he" (michael) perceives the light bringer does not neccesarily mean that is how the lightbringer truly is.

The motivations behind the lightbringers actions...such as many believing the lightbringer went to "War" in a bid to overthrow god to reshape reality in his image....is entirely inaccurate....

While from the point of the lightbringer, he did what he did to carry out "God's" will, thus remaining loyal to the one entity it always loved above all....it stayed true to its directives...to safeguard humanity and ensure their "Evolution"....

The path humanity was one was devoid of destruction, chaos, dread, drear, suffering....all those components are of "God" just the same as the "positive" aspects are....joy, hope, love, kindness...

Through destruction, fear, hatred, Lucifer ensured humanity would experience and gain all of "God"....so they would one day complete their infinite evolution to be "God"...just as they were always made.....

Lucifer never betrayed God....he was one of the few that truly stayed loyal in terms of faith.


However how Michael perceived the events was entirely different....thus why Michael saw himself as the Emperor.....and perceived Lucifer as Chaos...the Warp itself....

Michael perceived that Lucifer was once stable....orderly....functioning properly just as the Warp once too was a calm ocean....however as time went on and wars occured against the "darkness" of the subconscious of "God"...of both he (michael) and Lucifer fought against, Michael believed Lucifer was changing for the worse because of it.

Thus the birth of the Chaos gods was Michaels perception of Lucifer becoming consumed in terms of personality.


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

You do understand that 40K is a game played with toy plastic space men don't you?


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Lux said:


> I tried to make it very clear that Horus is not the representation of "Lucifer" the light bringer. I stated that Horus was the representation of Michael's original motivation, and drive to to the Will of "God" that had been twisted by his experiences of "war".
> 
> The light bringer is an entity that fought out of its faith in "God", and never once did it waver in its loyalty and faith in its "god".
> 
> ...


Ah. I misunderstood. Sorry. 

But I think you're letting too much ride on one individual's perception. Remember that the 40kverse is seen from the viewpoints of many hundreds of individuals in the collective lore, and very rarely is anything written from the Emperor's (or Michael's) viewpoint. 




Digg40k said:


> Who the fuck is Michael?


The Archangel.


----------



## jonileth (Feb 1, 2012)

Ok, here again, why is this merely the interpretation of 40K with one religious focus? You said previously that it wasn't, but at no time have you actually given any examples of any other point of view but one.

I hate to do the childish thing here, but do you actually read what you write? All jokes aside, you can't one moment claim that you are saying one thing, and then turn right around and focus solely on the one thing you say you're not focusing on. Either you're confused as to what you actually mean when you started this discussion or you are purposely being contrary. Either way, you make a flimsy argument that doesn't seem to have any real practical application to it other than an outlet for some pretty nonsensical thoughts.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

jonileth said:


> Ok, here again, why is this merely the interpretation of 40K with one religious focus? You said previously that it wasn't, but at no time have you actually given any examples of any other point of view but one.
> 
> I hate to do the childish thing here, but do you actually read what you write? All jokes aside, you can't one moment claim that you are saying one thing, and then turn right around and focus solely on the one thing you say you're not focusing on. Either you're confused as to what you actually mean when you started this discussion or you are purposely being contrary. Either way, you make a flimsy argument that doesn't seem to have any real practical application to it other than an outlet for some pretty nonsensical thoughts.


Actually, the texts and stories in the bible can be applied to just about every Abrahamic religion there is, as well as numerous faiths of the Left Hand Path and older mythologies. 

His point has merit, but I'd like to see him go a little deeper in his explanations.


----------



## Dave T Hobbit (Dec 3, 2009)

I can see strong parallels with Persian myths in Lux's thesis. Especially the suggestion that Ahriman and Ahura-Mazda chose to divide as a necessary part of creation.

The idea of reality being shaped more by Michael's belief than by the perceptions on millions of ordinary people is an exposition of the Red King hypothesis on propitiatory religion. The idea of "feeding" an Emperor who is asleep now but will awaken fits equally with Emperor worship being regressive as being enhancing.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

To add a bit more to my theory posed....


In the beginning there was a reality encompassing all realities...of which "God" (I use the term god as it is one individuals in the west most commonly correlate with "The" higher/rulling power/entity, however I do not agree to naming "God" with any term....of any sort...

For when one applies a term, name, title to "God" they are limiting it, limiting their own understanding and or perception of "God". Humans most often indulge in applying names, definitions to concepts...ideas....they do so in order to apply control to that which they have no inherent control over....

Similarly I utilize the title "Michael" as it is one individuals across this reality understand and correlate with the concept I am attempting to display....however "Michael" is but one name among a pool of infinite that all are accurate when attaching to the "Entity" I speak of...Michael is but one name this entity carries, for the perceptions of humans have divided one living concept into a thousand finite, and limited ideas.

Furthermore the lightbringer who I will be speaking of far more in depth very soon....is but one title...one name that concept has had "forcefully" or "Fatefully" attached to it. In the beginning Michael perceived "Lucibel" as a living furnace of wisdom...reality it self...however as Michael became increasingly jaded through the wars against the many levels of "God's" subconscious so to did his perception of his "peers" shift as well...they say Lucifer was the most proud....that lucifer was infinitely jealous...but no that is not the case....lucifer was extremely selfless to the point of denying its own self in order to carry out the Will of "God"....it was the very presence of Lucifer that caused jealousy in all those around him/it....it was this jealousy in Michael and others that caused them to wage war against reality, and using Lucifer as the scapegoat for it...

You see Michael (The Emperor) developed his own interpretation of "God's" will, he then sought to eliminate all other factors upon the chess board in order to perfect "God's" vision...the warp (Lucifer) and all that it represented, all that it brought forth Michael saw as a imperfection....as a threat to the plan of "God"....thus why his perception of the war turning violent...dark...materialized in the warhammer reality.

However the warp itself was always meant to encompass destruction, deceit, chaos, infinite potential, it was the tools and gifts from "God" that were given to Lucifer in order to grow, strengthen, and evolve mankind....for without them Lucifer knew mankind would become stagnant...and suffer the same fate as the previous incarnation of "God's" subconscious that he, michael, and the host so fought against prior to humanities creation.

A war was led against Lucifer (the warp) by Michael, however in the beginning of their war Michael was not yet fractured by Lucifer...not yet in stasis, thus his self perception was entirely different, for Michael so perceived himself as the Necrons, with his inherent power being that of the Star gods...the C'Tan....while in the beginning of this same period Michael perceived Lucifer as the Old Ones....

For in the beginning they worked in unison seperately, however Michael soon sought to bring regulation to Lucifer, to bring about Order, Law, to fulfill his inherent coding...

Lucifer held to his loyalty to God, what some called an act of hubris and infinite pride, Lucifer denied all reality and those who sought to change "him", and fought back against all those who wanted to twist the original will of "God" that was given to all of them....for Lucifer's loyalty was of such magnitude that he was willing to carry out what ever it was, no matter how dark others perceived it...he was willing to carry within himself the darkness of "God's" subconscious...while others far more limited in wisdom saw it as...evil....which evil and good do not exist in the eyes of Lucifer, only the "Will of God".

Michael originally self perceived as the Necrons....wanted to overthrow Lucifer (the old ones) whom he perceived as a entity which had taking the "power" "God" had vested in him and used for his own manipulative purposes....Michael soon sought to tap the power "God" vested in him, and when he found it he found that it consumed him and made him more machine like then ever before in terms of perception....Order, Law, Consequence....

Thus Michael's self perception shifted from that of the Necrons, to that of the Star Gods (his internal power God so vested in him that was prior untapped), he merged with it...and so too did his perception change...to the machine like race the necrons became, ruled by their star god masters...as he Michael became rulled by his power rather than his original directive.

Through sheer calculation, and machine like intellect Michael waged war upon the Old Ones (Lucifer) and their ways of "Magik" which he saw as an abomination to the "Will of God"...

However Lucifer had allies of similar mind structure who joined with his cause, Michael perceived these as the Eldar, the Orks, and a plethora of other races who he saw as less then Lucifer but followers of him, all partaking in his path of thinking and belief, thus all attuned in the ways of "magik" (psyker power).

I will continue later.


----------



## Adramalech (Nov 10, 2009)

Most epic fantasy and science fiction stories have some sort of parallel to the rebellion/fall of lucifer. It's not surprising to see that comparisons can be drawn between the latter and the horus heresy.

That aside, I think it is unwise to discuss such things. Ironically, the topic of religion and religious apocrypha tends to devolve into butthurt and belligerence rather quickly, even if it starts out as rather light-hearted.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

This is mythology more than religion. As long as it stays that way I'm okay with it.  

An interesting start to the story. How do you interpret the necrons overthrowing the c'tan?


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

Riiiiiight. And what, pray tell, is your source for all the things you're drawing upon, with regard to "Michael" and "Lucifer" etc? I've read the Old Testament, and while it WAS a while ago, I don't remember any such detail, calling (for me) into question the validity of the story you're aiming to draw comparisons with.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

I would like to see the emp do the smooth criminal lean dance move, only two people can do it Jackson and Chuck norris





7:14 if you want a quick reminder


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

TheKingElessar said:


> Riiiiiight. And what, pray tell, is your source for all the things you're drawing upon, with regard to "Michael" and "Lucifer" etc? I've read the Old Testament, and while it WAS a while ago, I don't remember any such detail, calling (for me) into question the validity of the story you're aiming to draw comparisons with.


I read a few lines of lux's post, and I was reminded as to why I added him to my ignore list.


----------



## ThatOtherGuy (Apr 13, 2010)

I like Lux's philosophy about GW's position about the 40k Cannon:

"They said you can believe what is cannon and what is not according to your own personal opinion... so I decided to throw everything out the window and replace it with my own crap."


----------



## klaswullt (Feb 25, 2012)

Lux said:


> The Emperor of mankind and all that encompasses warhammer 40k, is in fact part of a much larger reality. The Emperor is in fact Michael, it is his own self quote]
> 
> 
> This feels alot like the rpg game, KULT.
> You could look into Kult to expand on those ideas.


----------

