It is currently Fri Apr 20, 2018 6:25 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

 Page 1 of 3 [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 23, 2002 4:01 am 
Who so loved man that he gave unto us his only begotten son? Who cared enough about us to stick his neck out to save us from the flood? Enki. Could Jesus be the son of Enki? Did many of Jesus teachings not mirror much of what the original visitors tried to teach mankind? I'm new to the 12th planet scene, has anyone given any thought to how Jesus might tie into any of this?

(Edited by twilli75 at 4:08 am on Feb. 23, 2002)

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2002 9:31 am 

Greetings! Well, I'm going to post my short answer to your question now; but in the near future, when I have time, I will post the detailed answer.

My short answer to your question is: "no".

You're assuming that Jesus was "really" the Son of God and somehow a Saviour. But Enki had several sons. And using Jesus as a "sacrifice" would not compare to using, say, Prince Mardok (his firstborn son and fully Annunaki) as a "sacrifice".

Besides, based upon the acknowledgement of the Annunaki presence and activity, there is utterly no need for and no logical or sensible reality to any Mankind-saving "atonement sacrifice".

Hate to cut this short, but I'm at the office. More later! Thanks for joining our postings!

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 26, 2002 10:48 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 9:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Pheonix,AZ
I'm, also, new to this discussion. I have noted that in Sitichin's books, there is no reference to Jesus. I was told that he is a Christian, but have not seen evidence to that effect.
I was only introduced to the 12th Planet last week and have since located six of his works. Have only read two.
In looking his his index's, I see little reference to the New Testament, and no reference to Jesus. I'll continue to read his works and post if I find such.
As regards Stichin's research and theories, I do not see fault, as yet. My Jesus is large enough to accomidate a Nibiru origin. :-) The New Testament is ripe with examples of what might be support of Sitchin's angelic or creation explanations. Paul was knocked from his horse on the road to Damascus. He was blinded by a bright light. What about John's Revelations?
I will be interested in the responses that persons post and e-mail to me. ;-)

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2002 1:35 am 
Ok, did Enki have any actual brothers? Could Enki himself come to Earth as Jesus? And even if he wasn't an only son (thereby setting aside the entire notion completely as an embellishment or misinterperatation in the Bible), could not the reason for the crusades of Jesus have been to provide justification to the main councils of the Annunaki, and also to help facilitate a situation whereby some of us would be more desireable to take with them (save) upon the return of the 12th planet and the subsequent destruction of the Earth?

I've only read the first book (recently), and have never been privy to knowledge of the clay tablets, but out of pure coincedence, I've been formulating relatable theories to Sitchin's for many years now.

I have the feeling that even in Sitchins' later books, he would not have strayed too far from the actual writings on the clay tablets, which of course were written long before Jesus showed up. But, if it seems that a vast amount of the information in the Old Testiment can be linked directly to the clay tablets, might not much of the references to God and Godly things in the New Testimant have stayed the course to some degree and still had many links to the Annunaki?

One possible scenario: I imagine that the 12th planet was quite a distance upon it's course away from us during the New Testiment times, and that any trip back to Earth to impregnate Mary with (a cloned embryo?) would have been quite an undertaking, and would most likely have been a one way trip, thereby leaving them stranded here. That's quite a sacrifice in itself.

On another subject: A thought occurred to me recently in relation to the passages in Revelations that mention the raising up of the dead so that they may be judged. Hmmm... I thought about another theory that our genetic code might contain a lot more memory than just basic instincts. Hmmm... The book of life? Our genetically stored memories? Collection of this genetic material from every remaining human, dead or alive to help in the evaluation of who should be taken with them???
An interesting idea in the least. Any comments to eather of the above theories would be greatly appreciated.

(Edited by twilli75 at 1:50 am on Feb. 27, 2002)

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2002 9:41 am 
Twilli75 and the "other new guy",

Yes, very good thoughts!!!!

There is a Christian Theologian and Minister, Barry Something-or-Other, who began to seriously believe that the "miracles" in the New Testament were really super-advanced technologies and that Jesus was an E.T. all the way back in the 1960s, before there was any Sitchin material. Fear not, I have him bookmarked somewhere, and when I'm free I'll post the link to him. There wasn't a lot of him on the Web, but there's enough for an intro.

Sitchin considers himself to be a Jew, although he has no "problem" with Christianity.

Twilli75, there certainly are links between Jesus and the Annunaki. They simply are not as "direct" as it seems you are presently speculating. You will see that there is no need for Jesus to literally be an E.T. nor "really Enki" for these links to exist.

One hint: the New Testament and the Old Testament are stylistically quite, quite different. A New Testament "Visitation" is not the same as one from the Old Testament...

For research, check out Sir Laurence Gardner. He'll show you many, many links.

Also check out any writings of or about the Essenes.

Well, I'm at the office again, so I'll have to post my fully-fledged thoughts later.

Thanks for joining us!!!!

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 27, 2002 10:25 pm 
The theologian's name is Dr. Barry Downing.

I don't agree with him in his overall philosophy/theology; but his independent research and thought lends corroborating evidence to our purpose...

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 28, 2002 7:07 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 9:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Pheonix,AZ
Brent, Twilli, & cyberworld truth travlers,

I think your thoughts,theories, and suggestions are excellent. It will be interesting to see if some others jump in, too.

The first book in the New Testament, Matthew, opens with the Geanealogy of Jesus, back to include Abraham. Wasn't Abraham the recipient of God's promise and Isaac the first manifestation proving that He can deliver? The God, according to Sitichin in The Cosmic Code, was the God Yahweh who, in the bibical realm, "controlled both Destinies and Fates." Unlike other Annunaki gods, Enlil, Enki,etc., Sitchin notes "the total absence of a genealogy for Yahweh." His ability to control "Destinies", enables Him "to foretell the course of future events, years, centuries, even millennia later." Was it destined for Jesus to make His appearance, too? Was it Yahweh that came to Mary, not with a cloned embryo, but to make her the Earth mother of the New Adam? Was it with His Holy Spirit that he fertilized Mary's own egg?

Your thought regarding the time cycle of Nibiru's passing and the clay tablets having been made long before Jesus showed up, makes perfect sence to me, Twilli. If it takes the planet over 3600 years to make a return to our vacinity, and our advancement in flight technology has exploded in under 100 years, wouldn't you think that the Annunaki might have mastered improved transportation vehicles and methods during their cycle? Is there any reason to beleive that the only time they can visit Earth is when they are in the vacinity? Nibriu's civilization doesn't have to start over every time it swings by the Earth. We can conceive accelerated space travel, even time travel. I wonder if they've mastered these and other conceptions, already? Is it possible that, in these New Testament times (Last Days) improved methods of communication has also been in usage? Spiritual, maybe?

What do any of you think?

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 28, 2002 12:03 pm 

Greetings and welcome! Thank you for your compliment.

Again, all, at this moment I can only post a short answer.

PX, Matthew is only the "first book in the NT" because of canononical arrangement. In reality, Mark is the first of the 4 biblical gospels written. And Mark is also not the first gospel. There is another, the Gospel of Peter, which is very, very likely the first. And that book only talks about the Crucifixion Event; there is nothing else mentioned. And this makes perfect sense, because original source material within the context of that time and place would have been written by people who really didn't care about anthything else save that their friend, who dedicated his life to setting his people free, was now seemingly stomped out by the crushing might of the "Kittim"--the Sons of Darkness, the Roman Empire.
In the Bible, the first NT works ever written were not the Gospels; they were the letters of Paul. Paul is the inventor of Christianity.
Think about this: if the Virgin Birth literally happened...where are the other attestations? Even all 4 of the canononical gospels do NOT agree about this supposedly all-important event. Paul does not talk of it, either. The Gospel of Peter does not. The well-know extracanonical Gospel of Thomas does not.
Think about this: Augustus Caeser, the Roman Emperor at the time when Jesus would have been born, was also pronounced to have been "born of a virgin"! Nobody literally believed it (and no, it wasn't a "lie", either); that was a way of saying something, metaphorically, about the greatness of a man back in those days. It was symbolic of the idea that anyone who became great "must" have had some, shall we say, "celestial links" in his bloodline somewhere, like Ka-in (Cain) did.
Jesus might well have been an Essene, in which case he again could have had a symbolic Virgin Birth status bestowed upon him. The Essenes were fanatically symbolic and ritualistic.
Got to run; more later when I have the chance.

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2002 6:02 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 9:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Pheonix,AZ
Brent & others interested,

Thanks for your response to one of my questions and your commrnts, too.

As you know, Brent, the Gospel of Peter is but a small fragment of a 9 page codex found in 1886 by French archaeologists in Egypt. The same "Book" included another small portion of the Book of Enoch. As you said that the Gospel of Peter "talks about the Crucifixion Event; that there is nothing else mentioned", it should be pointed out, that the Ressurrection of Jesus, the angelic beings who were discribed (to look very much like gods in Sitichin's books), Mary of Magala ( the first to see the empty tomb), and the Roman gaurd's fears were not only mentioned, but detailed, too. As for the reason it was written at all, the return of Jesus from the dead, was the most important of the events. This small, incomplete copy (from an earilier larger, original) lends authenticity to John's Gospel account of the Resurrection. Was Jesus the New Adam who gave mankind more of what the Annunaki had withheld? They had withheld the ability to reproduce prior to expulsion from the Garden of Eden event?

Stichin's 1998 book, The Cosmic Code, explains that in the bibical realm, it was the God, Yahweh, who controlled both Destinies and Fates. Because of the former, His prophets could fortell future events. Is Jesus the One that this same God, Yahweh, fortold the comming of? The One, fortold through His prophet,Isaiah, Who would would set the captives free?

Other Gospels and writings to which you refered attest to the validity of a New Creation. The question was asked, earilier, " What about Jesus?" A possible answer might be: Jesus fulfilled the Laws of the Annunaki and of the Old Testament. He is the begining of a New Adam as recorded in the New Testament and elsewhere.

Your ideas and comments are welcome. Join in!!!

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2002 9:11 am 

Forgive me; you are correct about The Gospel of Peter; I meant, and I should have stated much more clearly than I did, that there is not a complete "lifetime story" of Jesus in that Gospel. I was attempting to refer to the Crucifixion Event as inclusive of more than just "okay, we murdered him on a couple of pieces of wood". Thank you for making that matter clear to whomever else might read our postings.
As far as what else is referred to by you, I cannot agree to it. The Gospels do not agree to a Virgin Birth; and you, as you are clearly a Bible scholar and a very bright person, will readily know that the 4 canononical gospels are not in complete accord with regards to their stories, as they very well should be. It has long been the arduous--and, to me, vain--task of Christian scholars and theologians to attempt to "apologize" for these glaring inconsistencies. Literary analysis proves layer upon layer of revision and editorial redaction within the gospels. These qualities are not mere opinion, but more-than-proven facts.
It has been shown that, indeed, God himself disappears from the Old Testament entirely, over time. In the last book ever composed for the Old Testament, which I believe is Ruth, God is not even mentioned! "Fate" is the driving force.
Logic would say that this is because the Annunaki were leaving. Temporarily or forever, who knows? But by approximately 400 BCE, Mankind was left on its own.
Pyschologically traumatized by the "gods" being gone, Mankind kept them "present" in imagination. Rituals and symbols were maintained and even invented. But in the absence of the "gods", the ideas and presences that these things were meant to preserve only degenerated into dim memories and partial truths and misinformation.
What "Annunaki Order" was Jesus supposed to fulfill? The NT attestations to a "new birth" are the outpouring of expression about an entirely new Age--an Age in which there are no "gods" to be found. The worship of Mithrais, an Assyrian dying-and-rising god, was heavily prominent in that Roman-dominated world. Augustus Caesar was declared the "Prince of Peace" and the "Saviour" in Year 1 (1 CE).
Got to run. Much, much more later! I promise!

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2002 9:39 pm 
"The gospels...[bring] OT figures 'back to life' in the 'here and now'. On a mountain in the north of the country, where Jesus and Peter were present in the flesh, Jesus was seen conversing with Elijah and Moses. Peter saw it all, and did not comment on the marvel, but made a blundering remark about constructing three 'tabernacles' for the three of them, thus treating Jesus as only one of a triarchy. Heaven, or a cloud, intervened by taking the other two away, leaving only Jesus. (Mk 9:2-8)

At the crucifixion, some bystanders thought that Jesus was calling on Elijah for help, even though he said Eloi, meaning God. Why would they think that he should select Elijah –- had Elijah been so central to Jesus’ awareness? Why did they think there was any point in their making the sarcastic remark: 'Let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down?' (Mk 15:34-36).

Try this explanation. Some 50 years before Jesus’ time, a New Israel had been formed. A revised form of Judaism, more suitable for contemporary conditions. So it was called a New Covenant, superseding the Old Covenant. The term New Covenant is found in the DSS (CD 6:19; 8:21; 19:34, 20:12; 1QpHab 2:3). It was also called a Kingdom of Heaven, as it aimed to impose a world power that was a theocracy. :O

A New Israel must naturally have a new Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. These titles were adopted by three men who were the founders. The spiritual leader used the title ‘Abraham’ as the Father of the New Covenant. This one would have seen Jesus if Jesus had been born about 20 BCE. Two others were its patriarchs, ‘Isaac’ and ‘Jacob’.

As the organisation progressed, other officials within it used the same device, adopting the titles ‘Elijah’ and ‘Moses’. They were real men who conversed with Jesus in Mk 9. It was a real man, using the title ‘Elijah’ to whom Jesus called for help on the cross. But there was some doubt about whether this man would help him, as the bystanders knew.

There is clear external evidence that at the meetings of the Therapeutae a man adopted the role of Moses in order to play the role of Moses in their Exodus drama, their liturgy (Contemp. Life 87).

The offices continued, and successive occupants of the office each used the title. The Church adopts the same practice –- each Pope is a ‘Peter’. But before that, I suggest that each Pope was an ‘Abraham’ –- the Father, giving the word ‘Pope’. The system of Pope and patriarchs was retained by the Church, but the OT titles were dropped when it turned away from its Jewish origins."

All of the above is quoted from theologian Barbara Thiering. She has studied what is known as Christology almost as long as Zechariah Sitchin has studied the origin of the Nephilim in the Bible--which led to his discovery and study of the Annunaki. Note: above, DSS refers to the Dead Sea Scrolls, of which Thiering is a great scholar.

"Trying to find the actual Jesus is like trying, in atomic physics, to locate a submicroscopic particle and determine its charge. The particle cannot be seen directly, but on a photographic plate we see the lines left by the trajectories of larger particles it put into motion. By tracing these trajectories back to their common origin....we can locate and describe the invisible cause."
--Morton Smith in "Jesus the Magician"

"...later Christian accounts slowly but steadily increased the reverential dignity of their burial accounts." --Dr. John Dominic Crossan

Explanation of "How blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked (Psalm 1:1)". Interpreted, this saying concerns those who turn aside from the way of the people; as it is written in the book of Isaiah the Prophet concerning the last days, "It came to pass that 'the Lord' turned me aside, as with a mighty hand, of walking in the way of this people (Isaiah 8:11)." They are those of whom it is written in the book of Ezekial the Prophet, "The Levites strayed far from me, following their idols (Ezekial 44:10)." They are the sons of Zadok who seek their own counsel and follow their own inclination apart from the Council of the Community.
--Dr. John Dominic Crossan, quoting from a "Midrash (or Commentary) on the Last Days" and its supplemental commentary, a scroll found in Cave 4 at Qumran.
Above notes: "The sons of Zadok" are Sadducees and the Council of the Community are the Essenes [all according to Crossan];...and "the Lord" is the Lord opposed to his brother Enlil, who is "Yahweh".

I promised you more...

More to come...

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2002 11:10 pm 
Wow! It has become apparent to me that you guys have done a great deal more studying than I ever have. I have learned quite a bit from your responses.

It seems that the general consensus here would be that there is a definite possibility that Jesus was either related to, or linked in some significant way, to the Gods of the 12th planet.

Somewhere along the way, it stuck in my head that Jesus went to be baptized by John The Baptist and seemed to feel the need for confirmation from John that he was indeed the saviour that had been previously prophecied.

I think that John confirmed this to Jesus at that time, but from a lot of other passages about Jesus, it seems that Jesus not only would already have known who and what he was, but even seemed to be aware that he was part of a predetermined plan and had been receiving some sort of communication from God about this.

Does anyone have any opinion, or more accurate information about this??

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2002 11:47 pm 

There was no Saviour "prophecied"...among Men. The Lord Enlil, who was/is Yahweh, would never have stomached such a thing. Only his brother, the Lord Enki, would have even considered the possibility.
Christians wish, of course, to be so sure of their take on things...but let us not forget the "Messiah" Simon Bar Kochba of C.E. 132-135, a supposedly great Warlord who arose to free the Jewish people from all oppression (don't forget that the original concept of the "Messiah" was that of a great Warlord who would set his people free through force of arms). Bar Kochba was defeated. Keep in mind that there still are Jews who are not Christian (obviously) because according to them the true Messiah--the all-conquering Warlord--has not (yet) arisen. Where do they get this concept from?
Simple: the god of the Jews was/is the Lord Enlil, the Annunaki "Lord Commander", half-brother to Lord Enki and, by bloodline descent but not through seniority, the Crown Prince of the Nibiruan throne. If you claim that the NT supports your Jesus, then you claim allegiance to the Lord Commander, Enlil. But Enlil is not a lover of Mankind! Indeed, he was angry at his brother Enki for giving them knowledge, giving them the ability of sexual procreation, and saving them during the Flood.
As Enlil is Yahweh, so Enki is the "serpent". Enki is Ba'al ("the Lord").
John the Baptist was a ritualist who acted out olden-day paradigms. The Jews had a circular concept of history: they really, really were into "what goes around, comes around"! So if John had arisen to begin purification rituals in the Jordan, then there "had to be" some Anointed One, some Messiah, on the way.

Problem (among many) is, the concept of Messiah comes straight out of Egypt...

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2002 3:55 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 9:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Pheonix,AZ

Thanks for two complements! You are very well read, and you write well, too. I appreciate that you are still, as I am, seeking the "Truth," where ever it can be found. That's why we found this Zecharia Sitchin website.

While it would be fun to discuss the various reasons for apparent inconsistencies in the numerous accounts about Jesus's life and His impact on this planet, why the canonical Gospels do not not all focus on the same things, how many of the revisions and redactons have taken away significant teachings and the effects used to control mankind, it would take us, and others who might read what we have to say, away from the question asked: What about Jesus?"

I agree with you in that persons should be aware that the Bible, as we have it today, is but a fraction of the recorded writings, much of which would be more convenient (In my openion )if they were all contained in one book. Unfortunately, since they are not, persons will have to seek out the knowledge and come to understanding through their own research and analysis. Fortunately, the Internet is a vehicle that can easily give us all access to The Gospel of Peter, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary (Magdalene), the Essenes ( the Jewish sect of which I think Jesus may have been a member) writings, the Book of the Prophet Enoch, and many other works which were formerly "Lost", or withheld. I hope you will agree that we should encourage others to get busy searching out their own Truths. Sitichen's contributions to our understanding of how the Nibiru connection has been misunderstood, denied, and ignored by scientists and theologians are very significant. Let's attempt to address our discussion around his works. O.K., Brent?

You said in an earileir post: "there are certainly links between Jesus and the Annunaki. They simply are not as "direct". I am most interested in your thinking about that. I agree with you that there is no reason for Jesus to be an E.T. nor "really Enki" for those links to exist. I think Enki has been given a "bad rap" and falsely called Satin when, in fact, he gave mankind a genetic upgrade in he Garden of Eden. I wouldn't be suprised if Jesus was another upgrade to the species whereby he added the longevity (eternal life) to mankind's ability to have. He said: "I come that you might have life, and that more abundantally."

What do you see?

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2002 5:12 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 9:28 pm
Posts: 9
Location: Pheonix,AZ
Welcome back Twilli, :)
Great job, Brant! :biggrin:I want to apologize to you, Brant, for misspelling you name, previously. :( Sorry!

Somehow, my last post was hung up on my computer and didn't get out until after you two had posted your last threads. I really liked how you shared your understanding of Jesus in the last post, Brant. How did you determine that Enlil is Yahweh? Enki is indeed the serpent. ;)

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 Page 1 of 3 [ 36 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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: