It is currently Fri Apr 27, 2018 2:51 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




 Page 1 of 2 [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 3:44 am 
Many in this forum must wonder how these writings, such as Sitchin's works, conflict with the writings of the Bible. "What is the Truth here?" is a question many have voiced either overtly or silently asking themselves. Not ony in fully understanding the Truth of our ancient past do we learn of our origin, but also very possibly we may learn details that allow us to anticipate our future. Quite apparently "The Past" as represented by many texts, including the Bible's own passages and overtly accredited authors, have been misrepresented and rewritten. and no longer represent the Truth.

The Biblical book Revelation is a good example of a misrepresentation of "current time wish" as distant furture prophecy.

<hr>


Revelation is not written by a Christian, not written by an apostle of Christ, not written by John and is not distant prophecy but rather a near time "vision" of desire couched in what were then present-time frustrations.


Not only does this reprimand to the seven churches in Revelation in chapters 1-4 represent an incongruity of TIME (Present vs. future) when compared to the later chapters of Revelation, but also a incongruity of BELIEF, with verses 1-4 demonstrating a christian belief and the body of Revelation showing what is and
can only be a Jewish belief foundation which quite clearly even now only recognizes Jesus as the long anticipated Christ savior and not the Christ who has already been among man.

Revelation is a compilation of old testament imagery that was later given a preface (chapters 1-4) which is the only portion of Revelations drawing on Christian beliefs while simultaneiously chastising 7 errant churches in western Asia Minor - an exhibit itself which shows frustration and focus on the times at hand and not times yet to come. Distant prophecy from God is hardly the time to focus on current reprimands.

Most of the apocalyptic imagery in Revelations has been borrowed from Old Testament imagery. While there is no direct reference to Old Testament passages, of the four hundred or so verses are about five hundred and fifty references to the Old Testament (B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Greek New Testament, pp. 184 ff. ). Specifically the Old Testament books from which these imagers are drawn are of Isaiah, Ezra, Ezekiel and, in particular, Daniel, which also has fantastic images of the End Time and refers to `one like a son of man.' As is accustomed in the Old Testament the "God of wrath" releases seven `vials of his wrath' - blood, plague, sores, fire, draught, etc. The numerous images of this apocalypse include all sorts of earthly horrors seen in the OT such as 'demonic locusts' torment unbelievers and Kings, captains, false prophets and `the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great' are eaten by fowls that fly and are cast alive into a lake of `fire and brimstone - fire and blood, mountains of fire cast into the sea, a burning star falling to earth, every mountain and island displaced. Unbound carnage.

Chapter after chapter of the "prophecy" details bizarre horrors with numerous, convuluted and often contradicting details.

The early origin of the book is attested by its doctrinal
incompatibility with the rest of the New Testament and Christian founamental beliefs. The doctrine of the Trinity is nowhere in sight. Rather, Revelations embodies Philo's notion of `multiple emanations' the `seven spirits of God' (3:1, 5:6) Later biblical books, in the Chronology of the Bible, will slim this down to a single Holy Spirit. Revelation has no dogma of `original sin' ; it is idolatry which damns the mass of humanity. Baptism is not mentioned; believing Jews are `sealed' not baptised. There is no reference to the Eucharist = nothing so genteel as a meal with friends mars the carnage. To the author's obvious delight, `Babylon' (the Roman Empire) falls unrepentant and the vast mass of humanity perish. There is no religion of love here but only undiluted hatred and lust for revenge against Isreal's enemies.

In fact revelations could only be the writings of a embittered Jew, grounded in the Old Testament (Torah) and not the writings of an apostle of Jesus Christ, John, to whom this passage is attributed. Throughout Revelations we see the embodiment of early Jewish and for the most part pagan imagery and fantasy. One of these 'emanations' of God actually involves Christ being born in the heavens "clothed in the sun, with the moon at her feet, wearing twelve stars as a crown'. Unlike the New Testament, Christ is born in the heavens to reign on earth and not born on earth to reign in the heavens - as is consistant with Judaic beliefs. Even in this writing Christ is only marginally ahead of Moses in the pecking order: Thus in Rev 15:3 the martyrs sing `the song of Moses and the song of the Lamb' and also from even from Revelations 1:5 that Christ is `the prince of the kings of the earth.' (Only a prince?)

Nothing in Revelation suggests that this Christ is ever incarnated on earth. Though said to have been `dead , and is alive' (Rev 2:8), within the out of place 4 chapter preface, the circumstances of this dying and rising are never given. Christ has many appearances throghout Revelations: He appears as a high priest; later in the book, he is `alpha and omega' (first and last), the beginning and end of God's creation that has existed from all eternity. He is also the `bright morning star' and the `Lamb of sacrifice'. Yet Christ's primary role in Revelations is as a Jewish warlord, who `doth judge and make war'. This celestial war god bears little in common with a Galilean carpenter or the teaching of Love demonstrated by Jesus Christ in the New Testament:

"And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God." (19.13,15)

Yet at one point War breaks out in heaven after the seals are opened and it is not Christ who is the conquering hero but rather the archangel Michael who is Isreal's patron angel champion.

Of particular note here is the description of SALVATION in
Revelations. Nowhere is there evident the Christian belief that faith in Christ achieves salvation. On the contrary, on the day of judgement it is `works' (public action) that will count, not the Christian `grace through faith'. In fact these "works" are more in reference to the Jewish Priests within the bounds of that CHurch, with these being notably ONLY Male, as is Judaic custom, with women being defiled and currupt. This is not the teaching of Christ.

"But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection... they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years." (Rev 20:5,6)

Notable above in Rev 20:5,6 is that these "Priests of Christ" are not priests of the Christian Christ, Jesus, born of earth and resurrected upon death, but rather the Jewish Christ Whom the Jews believe has yet to come but is arrived in this dream/desire of Revelation.

Some the righteous brethren of course are saved, but the idea of `resurrection in a single day' for all of humanity as seen in Matthew 25 has not yet evolved and is not a part of the beliefs of the time. Instead the end of times as depicted by Revelations demonstrates a two track redemtion. In the first, Christ rules an earthly kingdom for a thousand years while Satan, confined but not defeated, is locked up in a pit. During this period, 144,000 Jewish males (12,000 from each of the twelve tribes of Israel) are the only ones to share the kingdom . In this heaven, there is not a single woman. The male elect are `not defiled by women; they are virgins'! (14:4).Everyone else is still dead!

At the end of the thousand year reign of seeming "golden age of Jewish virginity", Satan is loosed from the pit and now a final apocalypse wrecks havoc on humanity. Presumably the rest of humanity is only resurrected in order to be killed off and yet remarkably, Satan's army is still numerous! "And he shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea." (20:8)

Finally Satan and his minions are all defeated and a new Heaven create in but a few lines of Revelations. However, curiously, even now outside the golden city there are still the unrighteous!:

"FOR WITHOUT ARE DOGS, AND SORCERERS, AND WHOREMONGERS, AND MURDERERS, AND IDOLATERS, AND WHOSOEVER LOVETH AND MAKETH A LIE."
(Rev 22:15)

One must ask, "what has changed in this 'revelation'?" Nothing.

"Clearly" the one thing we are NOT dealing with in Revelation is a clear vision of the future. In fact revelations is very likley not a vision of the distant future at al and more a vision (wish) for the immediate future at or near the time of its writing. Revelation is a "wish" which is not at all written by an apostle of Christ and with chapters 1 through 4 only being after-the-fact attempts to make this enigmatic and fascinating tale of glory and repeated carnages fit into Christian beliefs. Revelation is not a Christian writing and does not belong in the New Testament. It is very likely that Revelation is refering to the times of the reign of Galba (68-69 AD) and the "beast" referenced is disguised using the Jewish systerm of numerology, Gematria, due to the confusion and possible threats at this time of the crisis of the year 67/68, the so called "year of four emperors". The reason for the encryption was the then rumors that Mero Ceaser, "the beast", was not dead and would return. Nero Ceaser does, in fact, resolve to "666" using gematria.

Many early Christians rejected Revelations outright, attributing authorship and the described doctrine of an `earthly kingdom' to a late first century Jewish Egyptian heretic called Cerinthus. Revelations is essentialy Jewish scripture with Chapters 1-4 added on after-the-fact to legitimize the document which did (and still does) fascinate so many with its opulent descriptions of the glory of God and the wide array of bizarre carnage.


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:30 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:08 pm
Posts: 47
Location: Portland
While I see you have given some thought to Revelations, I know an authoritarian acquaintance, Sean, who doesn't agree with your analysis. :)

I haven't seen the NT used very much in Sitchin theories, except for speculations about Christ and who he really was. Do you have any other comments about the NT in relation to Sitchin?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:14 am 

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:34 am
Posts: 39
Hey Arni,
Welcome aboard! Good to see you. (and good to be seen)

I am not sure how Christ fits in to Sitchin but as far as I am concerned I think that Revelation demonstrates how passages have been melded to fit into the Christian faith, and largely the motivation was the fact that it was such a gory, macabre, fascinating writing.

Here's a bit more:
<hr>
In actuality, it is very likely that Revelation is refering to the times of the reign of Galba (68-69 AD) and the "beast" referenced is disguised using the Jewish system of numerology, Gematria, due to the confusion and possible threats at this time of the crisis of the year 67/68, the so called <b>"year of four emperors"</a></b>. The reason for the encryption was the then rumors that Nero Ceaser, "the beast", was not dead and would return. Nero Ceaser does, in fact, resolve to "666" using gematria.

<font color=gold>Roman History Of the Times</font>

A Brief Roman History:
<blockquote>
<table><tr><td><img src="http://www.classicalcoins.com/media/roman/Galba.jpg"></td><td><img src="http://www.classicalcoins.com/media/roman/Otho.jpg"></td><td><img src="http://www.classicalcoins.com/media/roman/Vitellius.jpg"></td></tr><tr><td><center>GALBA</center></td><td><center>OTHO</center></td><td><center>VITELLIUS</center></td></tr></table><hr style="color:gold">
<center><b><font size=+1><a href="http://www.classicalcoins.com/page92.html" target="_blank">"The Year Of Four Emperors"</a></font>
68 - 69 AD </b></center>
In 68 AD, <b>Nero</b> was succeeded by <b>Galba</b>, whose dedication to reform quickly made him unpopular. Although Clodius Macer's revolt in Africa was suppressed, the German legions then proclaimed <b>Vitellius</b> emperor. Galba was assassinated in a coup led by <b>Otho</b>, who did not last long as Emperor, taking his own life after his forces were defeated by Vitellius, who in turn fell to <b>Vespasian</b> after losing the battle of Bedriacum.

<hr style="color:gold"></blockquote>

Revelation is nothing more than a representation anti-Roman frenzy born of fear at the culmination of years of Roman imperialistic oppression and meant to stiffen the brethren through lurid images of their foes in torment.
<blockquote><b>And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.</b>
(Rev 17:10,11)</blockquote>
The seven kings referred to are the emperors of Rome. At the time of writing, five are past or "fallen" and are Augustus, Tiberias, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. The one who rules still, Galba, ruled from June 6, 68 to January 15, 69. The prophesy is made that only one other will rule. Could Nero be the he who "was and is not" (alive then thought dead then come again)? How is this possible? The answer is that the crisis of the year 67/68 (the so-called year of four emperors) lasted long enough for rumours to spread throughout the then known "world" that Nero had not died at his own hand, but had fled to Persia, had raised an army and would reclaim the throne from the interloper Vittelius. the appearance of an impostor on the island of Kithnos (Thermia) claiming to be Nero was only served to fuel the rumors of Nero's anticipated return.



These events in The history of Rome pretty thoroughly nail down the time of authoring of Revelation to the year 69AD.

The historically recognized persecution under Nero gives real motivation for the encryption of the name "Nero Ceaser" in Gematria due to the reasonable fears by both Jews and proto-Christians enhanced from the uncertainies of events then transpiring. The enigmatic use of Gematria, which does, in fact, resolve the name "Nero Ceaser" to "666" when written as it then appeared in Hebrew, without any vowels, is a reasonably expected outcome in a writing expounding on the demise of Nero, who was then thought to be still alive. Not surprisingly, the vagueries of the gematria encryption method, once required to protect the author and religious adherents from immediate threats, do still contribute to and fascilitate the continuing projection of this identity upon current times and personages.

The fact is that what is in evidence in Revelation shows itself to not be distant phrophecy at all but rather a succumbing to existent rumors and fears about the very time in which the document was written.</blockquote>

In Conclusion, all indications are that the Biblical book "Revelation" was not written as a distant prophecy and was likely written as a near-time "wish". Ironically the conclusion that the only christian trappings in Revelation were added on after the fact is supported by Revelation itsef:

<blockquote>Revelation 22:18-19

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: <b>If anyone adds anything to them</b>, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. <b>And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy</b>, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.</blockquote>

This passage warns of dread consequences for adding or taking away anything from the prophecy of Revelation. What is curious is that the preface to Revelation, chapters 1 through 4, the only portions of Revelation that offer any sort of evidence of a Christian perspective, in no way add to the "prophecy" of revelation, nor do they change it in any way. These 4 chapters do not even pretend to be prophetic in nature. What is even more curious about Revelation 22:18-19, above, is that these words show a definate selfconsciousness within the "prophecy" itself, indicating an after-the-fact alteration and further evidence of the hashing and rehashing done to this mesmerizing text.

Perhaps these early Christians who were so desirous to give Revelation a Christian perspective also feared the consequences of altering the same writing and exacting upon themselves the wrath of God. As indicated previously, many Christians felt this writing was not of Christian origin. Evidently the group that worked to add Revelation to the cannonical text sincerely believed it was a writing coming from God. The stark difference of these 4 chapters in light of this passage warning alteration of the "prophecy" makes overall alteration of Revelation by their inclusion even more obvious.

The inescapable conclusion is that Revelation is not valid Christian, cannonical text and that such a prophesized, distant "second coming" was not in line with other Christian teachings is supported by nearly identical words in each book of Mathew, Mark and Luke being "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." These words were allegedly spoken on Mt Olives to the apostles and they clearly indicate that the 'second coming" of the Christ is expected within the lifetimes of atleast some of those apostles and not in some then distant, now current, apocalyptic change.

Once you take Revelation out of current day expectatons of a "Second Coming" (which some believe is not supported by the specific, direct representations in Biblical text), then the gory depictions in Revelation can be more readily recognized to be motivated by and describing the times near at hand.... but near at hand to the times the piece was written in.


</blockquote><blockquote><

(Edited by Tripp at 1:07 pm on Aug. 4, 2005)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:15 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Hello,

indeed, the christ figure presents an interesting problem. the symbolism around christ implies that he could just be a fictional character, even if the person did exist, but if one takes a closer look, symbolism is present in many portraits of ancient important historical figures. King Gudea or Gilgamesh for example.

it would be interesting to examine the idea of the "messiah", since its obviously possible to trace its nature into the past. the messiah is closely tied with the return of the heavenly host, in ancient times the importance was focused in the return of the gods but christianity has usurped the focus of the messianic event and inverted its logic: the messiah himself became the central figure of the revelatory event.

it sounds like disinformation to me.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:32 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
here's something i replied to a certain person, mentioned above, regarding his claims about Christ. unfortunetly i never got an answer back regarding this issue, it sure would be interesting to see the reaction of the apologists of the prophetic revelations when these do not comply with historical fact.

he said, and i quote: "You fail to understand who and what Jesus Christ is and that His earthly lineage is directly from the DNA of King David. He is the one King Ezekiel speaks of. This Kingdom is known as the Millennial Reign of Christ on the Earth."

i know Jesus was a pretense descendent of David. if true he was therefore, of course, of royal blood (at least as per Christian interpretation, there are others that think otherwise and with good reasons). but you seem to gorget that any of the pretenders to the throne of king David were called the Christs.

anyway, despite that little problem of indentifying who exactly will be the Christ presiding over an unified Israel, we have Chronicles 17:11 and 22:9-10 where apparently "god" plainly states who he has in mind for the job:

Behold, a son shall be born to you,
who shall be a man of peace,
for I will give him peace from all his enemies,
for his name shall be Solomon...
He shall build the HOUSE for my name,
and he shall be my son, and I will be his father,
and I WILL establish the throne of
HIS kingdom over Israel FOREVER.

1 Chron 22:9-10

well, "forever" seems really like the final statement. unless "god" has failed to fullfill his own will i do not see anyother reason why this matter wasnt settled in the time of Solomon. after all Solomon was a rightfull son of David, and "god" did promise that he would rule over Israel no matter what.

somehow this didnt happen, and i wonder why?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:34 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
oops, Tripp i believe the HTML in your post just messed up the thread.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:01 pm 

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:34 am
Posts: 39
Hey outcast! welcome aboard!

Quote:
Quote: from outcast on 1:15 am on Aug. 4, 2005
Hello,

indeed, the christ figure presents an interesting problem. the symbolism around christ implies that he could just be a fictional character, even if the person did exist, but if one takes a closer look, symbolism is present in many portraits of ancient important historical figures. King Gudea or Gilgamesh for example.


Interesting you should bring up Gudea.

Did you recall one of my posts elsewhere dealing with Boyd Rice's discussion the Gudea and the Chaldean King’s List?

Rice describes Gudia thusly:
<blockquote> <b>GUDIA:</b> Though one of the most illustrious of the Sumerian/Chaldean monarchs, Gudia remains a relatively obscure personage in terms of mainstream history. Gudia was both priest-king and architect, a builder of great cities and temples, not unlike Cain/Nimrod. And it just so happens that Nimrod was Gudia’s patron saint, as well as having been his ancestor. Gudia was like many of the Old Testament prophets, in that he was <b>prone to dreams and vision</b>. In one such dream, Nimrod himself appeared to the king, <b>revealing to him the blueprints of a temple</b> he wished to be erected in his honor. Upon waking, Gudia lost no time setting in motion plans to construct the Temple of Nimrod, a structure that would eventually be seen as one of the most magnificant edifices of its day

The reign of Gudia witnessed a flourishing of culture and civilization in his region. He wandered the full length and breadth of Mesopotamia (and often beyond) to amass lumber, blocks, and precious metals for his many projects. He not only built new cities and temple, but rebuilt old ones as well. Ruling from his capitols of Lagash and Ur, he <b>preferred not to be seen as a king, but rather as a priest and prophet</b>. He was known simply as the<b> “Good Shepherd”</b>, and may in fact have refused the title of king (although his name does appear in the King’s List</blockquote>

Rice then examines Gudia's name, and recognizes that in these times there was no "G" or "I". Therefore, substituting the closest letter equivalent, Rice transliterates <b>Gudia</b> into <b>Judea</b> or <b>Judah</b>

Rice goes on to observe:
<blockquote>So it was that the ancient Chaldean King’s List was consulted again, the reasoning being that if Gudia and Judah were the same figure, perhaps other names in close proximity on the list might have a familiar ring. Four lines above Gudia on the list was a king named “Irarum.” Though not precisely identical to “Abraham”, it was the only name on the list with so familiar a ring to it. Remember that these names were not only spelled and pronounced differently from culture to culture, but also often in the same culture. Irarum had a son named “Dar”, who also went by the title “Asahk” (literally, “Son of God”). Asahk’s son was “Khab” (or “Khabulum”), and his son in turn took the royal title “Akhab” (“Son of Khab”). He in turn fathered Gudia. So if we take into account the sound of these names in their respective order, we arrive at something quite extraordinary:

<list>
<li><b>“Irarum”</b> is the same as <b>“Abraham”</b>

<li><b>“Asahk”</b> is the same as<b> “Issac”</b>

<li><b>“Akhab”</b> is the same as <b>“Jacob”</b>

<li> <b>“Gudia”</b> is the same as <b>“Judah”</b>
</list>



<b>So with one notable exception (the extra figure of “Khab” or “Khabulum”), we find in the Chaldean King’s List an almost perfect reflection of the Old Testament line of patriarchs.</b></blockquote>

Evidently quite a lot more has become "disinformation" over time than we might first imagine. Quite likely over centures and cultures, Religion has gradually melded and molded the past to make it more conform to religious precepts.

I would seriously like to find verifiable references for the Chaldean King's List (and compare that with the Sumerian King's List). I've debated writing Rice and asking for his sources.

reference: <a href="http://www.thevesselofgod.com/theluciferianlegacy.html" target="_blank"> Boyd Rice</a>

(thread html fixed. Believe it or not, that narrowness was all caused by my failure to put a "/" in a closing table tag)



(Edited by Tripp at 1:39 pm on Aug. 4, 2005)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:30 pm 

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:34 am
Posts: 39
Quote:
Quote: from outcast on 1:32 am on Aug. 4, 2005

he said, and i quote: "You fail to understand who and what Jesus Christ is and that His earthly lineage is directly from the DNA of King David. He is the one King Ezekiel speaks of. This Kingdom is known as the Millennial Reign of Christ on the Earth."
[/br]


This brings up the post I never got around to doing "elsewhere". That post I will do here on ZS furums and will title it as <b>"Enoch & The Noah Enigma"</b> (likely in another area) and, to my own view, gives credible reasons to question that this line of Christ is "earthly lineage" and that the line has more to do with a direct procreation with these ancient "gods", with that lineage later being manipulated to disguise the reason for the patriarchal line being so "unique".

(Now that I look at it, this thread on "Revelation" (which is now wandering far afield and looking at the Bible in a broader scope), probably would have fit better in some other area than "12th Planet".)

(Edited by Tripp at 1:34 pm on Aug. 4, 2005)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:15 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
Rice says: "Gudia was like many of the Old Testament prophets, in that he was prone to dreams and vision. In one such dream, Nimrod himself appeared to the king, revealing to him the blueprints of a temple he wished to be erected in his honor. "

Nimrod? i believe Rice is mistaken here, according to L. W. King the god who appeared to Gudea was Ningirsu. Nimrod is the mythical self proclaimed god king of ancient Sumer, suposedly the one who erected the Babel tower. unless Ningirsu and Nimrod are the same person. i'll look at what Nin-gir-su means in sumerian and compare it with the epithets attributed to Nimrod ("Mighty Hunter" for example).

i wrote this in another post when analysing Gudea's "visions":

Gudea, the king of Lagash who was instructed by the god Ningirsu, the city god, at sugestion from Enlil, to construct a new temple. a "vision" appeared at night to Gudea of a man of great stature, which he could not even recognize as his god, but he knew the man to be a god because of a diadem he used on his head. the sign of divinity was on his head as shown in every Sumerian depiction of the gods. in the same way as in Ezekiel's vision the god rested in a whirlwind. when the god spoke to Gudea he could not understand the meaning of the words. then Gudea witnessed a great light as if the Sun rose form the Earth and he beheld a woman carrying a tablet with a "star of the heavens".

Gudea decided to seek the help of a godess called Nina, a daughter of Enki, to interpret the "dream". and allthough in the texts this person is in fact a real, physical person with which Gudea addressed and talked to, again this is interpreted as a symbolic discourse. is there any evidence for this mythological interpretation? actualy no, but its the one adopted in academic books from the early 1900's.

(Edited by outcast at 12:17 am on Aug. 5, 2005)


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:22 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
this woman (goddess) who appeared to Gudea also brought with her the plans for a temple. these were presented to Gudea in symbolic form and Gudea was portrayed as a dunkey, a beast of burden, at the command of the gods to do their bidding.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 3:53 am 
Regarding "Nimrod", Archaeologist David Rohl has this to say:

<blockquote><hr>A second discovery has finally also solved the mystery surrounding the historical identity of the biblical King Nimrod. Genesis 10:8-10 has this to say about him:


<blockquote>Cush (son of Ham and grandson of Noah) fathered Nimrod who was the first potentate on earth. He was a mighty hunter in the eyes of Yahweh, hence the saying, 'Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter in the eyes of Yahweh'. The mainstays of his empire were Babel, Erech and Akkad, all of them in the land of Shinar.</blockquote>


Shinar is ancient Sumer, Akkad became the capital of the later Akkadian empire (the city is still to be located), biblical Erech is Uruk, and Babel, as we have seen, originally referred to Eridu. But Nimrod himself has always eluded identification - until now.


The trick was to realise that the element 'kar' in Enmerkar was the Sumerian word for 'hunter'. Thus the king of Uruk's name consists of a nomen plus epithet - Enmer 'the hunter'. This was precisely the epithet Genesis uses to describe Nimrod. The next step was straightforward. Ancient Hebrew was originally written without vowels (as in the Dead Sea Scrolls). Vowel indications were only added into the Masoretic manuscripts from the 5th century AD onwards. So, in early copies of Genesis the name Nimrod would simply have been written 'nmrd'. The name Enmer would also have been transcribed into Hebrew as 'nmr' - identical to Nimrod but for the last 'd'. The Bible is well known for its plays on words. The Israelite writers often translated foreign names into familiar Hebrew words which they felt had appropriate meaning. In this case they changed Sumerian 'nmr' to Hebrew 'nmrd' because the latter had the meaning 'rebel' - a perfect description for the king who defied God by building a tower up to heaven.


The 1st-century-AD Jewish historian, Josephus, informs us that it was Nimrod who built the Tower of Babel. We have not only identified Babel with Eridu but also Enmerkar with Nimrod. These findings are confirmed by the epic literature which informs us that Enmerkar lavished great building works upon both his capital of Uruk and the sacred temple of Enki at Eridu (Nun.ki) whereas Nimrod is closely associated with both Erech (Uruk) and Babel (Nun.ki = Eridu). Enmerkar was seen as the first great ruler in Sumer whilst Nimrod is called the 'first potentate on earth'.<hr></blockquote>

Source <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040207151005re_/www.nunki.net/PerDud/TheWorks/Express/TowerBabel.html" target="_blank">resurrected from Internat "Wayback" Archive, "Tower of Babel"</a>


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 7:53 pm 
Hi, guys!

Looks like this is a reunion of "old" cast members! Ha!

It would be nice if this topic gets some "fresh blood." Not that your posts are not informative.

Like on the other board, let me just drop this gem for posterity for anyone else perusing by: what if Revelation is a vision of the future war whereby Inanna or whoever comes back from her extraterrestrial base to challenge the authority of Marduk as the Earth moves into Aquarius?

When you take all of the works available to us from all of the sources (which is growing), there definitely is a pattern of history playing out that has not been completely revealed. It's like a deep mystery that hooks many of us, and instead of the author revealing the solution, we are the sleuths slogging through all of the "evidence" trying to find "a smoking gun" and enough proof to finally "convict" someone or something.


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:08 pm
Posts: 47
Location: Portland
Or... perhaps Revelations was planted by the Anunnaki to prepare their cultivated flock for their return. They told us they were gods once, why not have the congregation set up for their next return? Christ returns with his army of angels, right? Hmmm...

I do have a little trouble reconciling Christ with the Anunnaki though, he seems to have a different message than the one portrayed by the "gods" in Sumeria, unless it he was one way for them to lead the immoral humans to a higher moral ground. I speak of Christ, not of the church and the many evils done by churches. Perhaps he was from the Elohim of the elohim.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 10:51 pm 
Christ and the Anunnaki: I quite agree. If anything, Christ would be an anathma to the Anunnaki and their designs (past, present, and future).


  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 17, 2005 3:07 am 

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:52 am
Posts: 65
Location: Portugal
indeed, Christ can be quite the problem to ascertain. but can we even be sure of his existence knowing that the Roman church compiled a great deal of the Biblical texts? was he then at the same level as Buddah, for example, just another enlightned human being?

Christ, allthough apparently bringing a message of hope did convey the idea that his god's kingdom was to come about eventualy. in my opinion, the same idea based on Earthly Kingship was patent in his words. the question is, who exactly was his god?


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 2 [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

cron