It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Starseed theory

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Modern Druidism is a recreation of the 20th century. Almost no records exist of the real Druids.


That is the issue for me...from the onset I had no idea of the Druids/Celts...well perhaps a little...my fav book is Way of Wyrd by Brian Bates; when I read about the Celts 'writing in Greek for all other purposes' it really made me think. The Celts were very secretive and I would really like to have been a fly on the wall when Caesar met the Celts, Caesar's account provides a legitimate basis; And insight into the Celts sacred traditions?

The Indigenous Australians' are also an oral culture...it is only recently that the western culture is realising the wealth of knowledge they possess. Previously this knowledge was discarded because they didnt have written records.

Now Sacred Knowledge is just that..absolutely sacred with respect to Indigenous AU's...women in the tribe didnt even know about the men's sacred rituals and vice versa, other groups did not know of another groups sacred rituals. Ethnography provides some insight into the cultures BUT I wouldn't read anything pre 1970 on the account that the majority of ethno is written from a superior and racist viewpoint. The best insight I feel into the cultures can be found in archaeo-ethnographic accounts...it is very matter of fact without the euro/western ideology. Anyway, the point I am making is that even with the knowlegde we have about the Indigenous AU's there exist huge amounts of sacred knowledge that we will never be told. The Hindmarsh Island affair is testimony to this...in sum...Native Title heritage claim relied on sacred info..women's business...even under oath, the women would not disclose the details and so, tragically the claim was rejected.

I am more intrigued because there is no records of the real Druids...


Probably the best lay scholars on this are the Celtic Reconstructionists:
en.wikipedia.org...

I know a number of them and have read their sources and they meet with my very picky standards of scholarship. While I wouldn't say they had the final word, their sources and resources are usually excellent.


thanks so much for the additional info and links..



My personal theory is that it keeps you just drunk enough that you don't CARE if you have the flu or not! I kinda like the idea, personally.


lol I think your right...takes the edge of it very nicely! I would also agree with leaving the garlic out...the taste is really unique thats about how best I can describe it with the few tastebuds I had working!



[edit on 24-4-2006 by NJE777]




posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

There's no references to Atlantis beyond that one tale in Plato.

There are no heroes in black figured vases with labels saying "Trocanter of Atlantis and the Great Boar" though there are plenty like that about the Trojan War and other events. There are no hero names or even villain names, no stories of the great houses (like Atreius) and certainly no plays that reference it.

This would have been PRIME material for plays -- a great nation that attempts to conquer Athens and fails (so why no inscriptions in Athens of "We rule! We stomped Atlanta into rubble!") and then is destroyed, presumably because of their hubris (pride.) Hubris was THE great topic of national plays for many centuries, and the playwrights would have had a lot of fuel for award winning plays (similar to Cassandra, Medea, and the Odyssey.)

There's a complete absence of this material. There's a complete absence of this material in other cultures.


excellent point...it would have been prime material so why isnt it there? very strange...but stranger that Plato would make it up as a teaching story without stating it was fictional.

It is perhaps a big if, but the complete absence of this material in other cultures, could it be possible that the Celts knew about atlantis and were forbidden to disclose the info? Macalister suggested ogham was an early form of sign language; it isnt generally an accepted theory, but if the Celts were secretive, sign language would serve that purpose, almost like in the spy movies...getting the note and then eating it...lol there would be no proof of any communication.

I am also reluctant now to make reference to 'ancient Druids' because nothing exists to prove or give weight to their existence. I had the impression that Druids and Celts were the same? Different terminology for different epochs.

hmm and now I am not sure!

& how can we prove if Plato, the only? source of atlantis is fiction or non fiction?




[edit on 24-4-2006 by NJE777]



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Inspiringstar
Go to my website, read Star People, Silent Warrior, Earth Changes and Magnetic Energy..there are hidden meanings in these which only Star People will heed.


What is your website called?


thanks



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
...nygdan pointed out the script named "atlantis" by Hellanicus of lesbos. It predates plato by 100 years.

Also, in sanskrit, there is an 7-isle island named atala. they even give lattitude and longitude for it, which corresponds with the canary islands.
[edit on 23-4-2006 by XphilesPhan]


This earlier usage of the word "Atlantis" was first brought to my attention here at ATs. Here is the thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com....
There is an actual passage from this text quoted in this thread. It comes from a post at a Google group by Doug Weller, whom I consider to be extremely credible. He operates Doug's Archaeology Site, where I would live if I could, but there's no place to sleep.
Here's the link to the aformentioned Google group post by the esteemed Mr. Weller:
groups.google.com...# f81f2fb016ff5c0a

In the above ATS thread, Atala is also mentioned. I've looked into Atala before, and again quite recently. I have found it wanting so far, at least as regards it's being part of some ancient Atlantis myth. Here's a recent post of mine where I give what I think are fairly good reasons for this:
www.abovetopsecret.com... .
Now, I realize that Atala is also mentioned in the Mahabarata, not just the Vishnu Purana. But I haven't found an indexed version of the Mahabarata. I don't intend to go through tens of thousands of pages (or however many) searching for Atala, just to find out that the Mahabarata agrees with the Vishnu Purana.

Atala, apparently, is one of the seven regions of the Hindu underworld, populated by demons, spirits, elementals, etc. At least in the Vishnu Purana, it is certainly not by any stretch of the imagination described as an island.

Pehaps the next time you cite the Vedas as source for some Atlantean myth, you can provide us with some link to the actual book, chapter and page, preferably. I realize the amount of work this requires, but as you can see, I've done some of this myself, can't you? Just saying "The Mahabarata" without backing it up is pretty much meaningless because of the huge size of that work. Find it and post it, please.

Harte



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 05:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by mojo4sale. Here is another link that you may find wothwhile.
www.archaeolink.com...


Wow! Great stuff! Thanks SO much for that recommendation! I can see I have some good reading ahead of me!



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
There is an actual passage from this text quoted in this thread. It comes from a post at a Google group by Doug Weller, whom I consider to be extremely credible.


I found that post, actually, on Usenet and scanned it for more. I'm glad to hear that Castledan is a credible source!

But... what I wanted to find out is whether this piece actually refers to a place called "Atlantis." It could, of course refer to a person or a temple or a lot of other things. Any idea, or is that one sentence the only surviving bit of the play? If so, then that's truly not much evidence of anything.



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

Originally posted by Shane
I have found, that in it's basic root, the "Religions" of the world have a core element which is similiar to each other.


What core elements do you find that are similar?

I see culture correlations based on an overarching culture, but I don' think I see your Great Connection. Could you explain further?


It is simple Byrd.

All cultures reflect a similiar basis of a Main God, generally being good, and have him set upon some highpoint or mountian. There is similiar ceremonies in the very basic sense, and days that are marked days which again have commonality.

This is because, at some point in the ancient past, they all worshiped according to the Good God. Christians call him God, Muslims call him Allah, and despite who you look at, he is always there, buried under the changes that occured regionally and culturally to the peoples in later days.

Of course, you would first have to wash away what the petty "dieties" and lesser "gods" brought into the picture to confuse the matter, but even then, the foundation of what was carried out by all peoples on this earth, is still evident.

But, this has nothing to do with Christianity, and making some stretch to imply this. You will find this may get detailed more, in the Great Flood post. Infact I am certain it will.

Have a good day Byrd

Ciao

Shane



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 11:24 AM
link   
I'm so happy again...so happy la la

well to cut a long story short..emailed Dr Bradley
and asked to have his research..got very excited when he sent me article..but crushed cos my OE wouldnt let me open the attachment..so email again and say..hi I am a moron and can u send it to me in any other format, please no PDF...he he he he he

and well the answer was No..but gave me a link where I could get it!!!!!

wooo hooo
this is so good... I believe, I believe (singing) this indicates the true age of the Celts...




Celtic languages are now spoken only on the Atlantic facade of Europe, mainly in Britain and Ireland, but were spoken more widely in western and central Europe until the collapse of the Roman Empire in the first millennium A.D. It has been common to couple archaeological evidence for the expansion of Iron Age elites in central Europe with the dispersal of these languages and of Celtic ethnicity and to posit a central European "homeland" for the Celtic peoples. More recently, however, archaeologists have questioned this "migrationist" view of Celtic ethnogenesis. The proposition of a central European ancestry should be testable by examining the distribution of genetic markers; however, although Y-chromosome patterns in Atlantic Europe show little evidence of central European influence, there has hitherto been insufficient data to confirm this by use of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA). Here, we present both new mtDNA data from Ireland and a novel analysis of a greatly enlarged European mtDNA database. We show that mtDNA lineages, when analyzed in sufficiently large numbers, display patterns significantly similar to a large fraction of both Y-chromosome and autosomal variation. These multiple genetic marker systems indicate a shared ancestry throughout the Atlantic zone, from northern Iberia to western Scandinavia, that dates back to the end of the last Ice Age. The Longue Durée of Genetic Ancestry: Multiple Genetic Marker Systems and Celtic Origins on the Atlantic Facade of Europe

Brian McEvoy,1 Martin Richards,2 Peter Forster,3 and Daniel G. Bradley1

1Department of Genetics, Trinity College, Dublin; 2Schools of Biology and Computing, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom; and 3The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom


isnt that the best? Still waiting on some other info/permission but this is FANTASTIC!!!

oh edit againx2 to say thankyou to Shane for posting the Scotsman article where Dr Bradley's etal work was.....

oh and now I have decided based on 'authority' to refer to the Celts as 'Ancient Celts!'



oh so excited, edit to correct so many spelling errors in the little of my writing there was


[edit on 25-4-2006 by NJE777]

[edit on 25-4-2006 by NJE777]

[edit on 25-4-2006 by NJE777]

[edit on 25-4-2006 by NJE777]



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shane
All cultures reflect a similiar basis of a Main God, generally being good, and have him set upon some highpoint or mountian.

Actually, no. Many cultures (Aboriginies, many Native American cultures before the Europeans came, Eskimos, rainforest Indians, some Polynesian cultures (Hawai'ians come to mind), K!ung and other African tibes) have no "Main God." Some have no gods; only spirits that control certain places and are powerless elsewhere (this is called "animism."

Gods reflect the social organization of the believers. In tribal cultures where there is often no chief but many "chiefs" (who can be thought of as specialists -- a hunting chief, a boat building chief, a clan that specializes in locating game, a clan that specializes in finding water) there will not be a "main god" or even a chief of gods. For example, in the original Chumash mythology, Sky Coyote was a beneficent creator god but he was not the chief of the gods (their gods had no chief.)

Creators (Grandmother Spider) of humans did not necessarily make the earth and they may need help or heroes (The Twin Heroes) to conquer fairly ordinary threats like giants. They could also die (Coyote, in many myths) and be resurrected innumerable times.

A few of the AmerInd cultures did have a chief god, but not many of them.

Gods also follow the moral beliefs of their followers... so you don't have a Christian god with 500 wives, for example. And you don't have Zeus killing himself by throwing himself on a pyre to make sure that the sun rises the next day (Aztec).



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by NJE777
oh and now I have decided based on 'authority' to refer to the Celts as 'Ancient Celts!'


??? I thought this was a given. The Celtic culture's demonstratably over 3,000 years old. www.joellessacredgrove.com...

Uhm... whoever told you it wasn't an ancient culture was wrong. HOWEVER... it's an ancient culture that was not literate and got overrun with other cultures (Roman and then the European traditions.) What we know of their practices in the 1200 BC to 400 AD era comes from writings of other people and from objects and villages and altars and temples.

Wikipedia gives a good overview:
ms.wikipedia.org...

The Boring Archaeological Stuff:
www.celticcorner.com...



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Hey Byrd

I know you are noting what you have, as accurately as possible when delving into this subject, but I just posted a"Similiar" theme in another area, which would disagree with you in respects to Native Americans. Here's a link

www.sacred-texts.com...

Also, You are noting the result, and not delving into the Origin. I do care what some diety or lesser god have twisted things to become, and the eventual way their beliefs became. It was the Start of those beliefs, and this is what is common to quite a few distinct peoples.

Myself, I have nothing to offer on the Polynesians, and Africans are a bit different, to some extent, but that may deal with Their Origins, and from where they came from.

Not that these peoples surrounding the Med and "Cradle of Civilization" are anything special, but they all have the same basic story.

This is what is meant.

And try and remember Byrd. This has little to do with Christianity. Its solely observation. Christainity is about Christ.


Ciao

Shane



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by NJE777

excellent point...it would have been prime material so why isnt it there? very strange...but stranger that Plato would make it up as a teaching story without stating it was fictional.

how can we prove if Plato, the only? source of atlantis is fiction or non fiction?

[edit on 24-4-2006 by NJE777]


Nice to see you up and at it again Nat.

I trust the medicine worked.

Since you seem to one, who welcomes thoughts, and exhibits interest, without dismissing everything because thats the nature, I have been reviewing Ignatius Donnelly's work on Atlantis, and I will suggest, Byrd maybe incorrect in swaying you to presume, evidence beyond Plato is not to be found.

The Deluge Legends from around the Globe, suggest otherwise, but my dear, it will take one with the dedication and desire you have shown to decide this for yourself.

Review the Part II Chapter 1 thru 6
www.sacred-texts.com...


And I am pleased Dr. Bradley was helpful in some manner.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Apr, 25 2006 @ 11:53 PM
link   
Hello again Nat

I was reviewing some Sacred Texts at that site and seen a Celtic link.

www.sacred-texts.com...

The Religion of the Ancient Celts by J.A. MacCulloch 1911

I thought you may enjoy this.

Ciao

Shane



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd

??? I thought this was a given. The Celtic culture's demonstratably over 3,000 years old. www.joellessacredgrove.com...

Uhm... whoever told you it wasn't an ancient culture was wrong. HOWEVER... it's an ancient culture that was not literate and got overrun with other cultures (Roman and then the European traditions.) What we know of their practices in the 1200 BC to 400 AD era comes from writings of other people and from objects and villages and altars and temples.


ty...I had called the ancient Celts -> Druids and that isn't correct, based on the fact that there exist no records to show that the Druids existed. All this time, I have been persistently trying to show that the Celts were in fact 'ancient', and finally I had some more info: Dr Bradley's etal research.

As I said before, I thought the ancient Celts were called Druids...now that is (I think) incorrect??? That's why I said I was hesitant in even making reference to the 'ancient' Druids within the timeline of 3000 BCE.

lol am I making sense? I hope that explains where I am at?!


edit: Now I am quite sure, that when I said the Celts were in the Hellenic period I was met with some opposition and that 3000BCE timeframe was rejected.
The error may have been with the terminology I used. As I said, I called the ancient Celts, Druids. Perhaps thats where the contention lies?
Ogham cannot, at this time be found anywhere in that timeframe.

Who came first, the Celts or the Druids? I, after reading info, had believed the ancient Celts to be the Druids and yet this is wrong?


[edit on 26-4-2006 by NJE777]



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shane

Review the Part II Chapter 1 thru 6
www.sacred-texts.com...




Plato identifies "the great deluge of all" with the destruction of Atlantis. The priest of Sais told Solon that before "the great deluge of all" Athens possessed a noble race, who performed many noble deeds, the last and greatest of which was resisting the attempts of Atlantis to subjugate them; and after this came the destruction of Atlantis, and the same great convulsion which overwhelmed that island destroyed a number of the Greeks. So that the Egyptians, who possessed the memory of many partial deluges, regarded this as "the great deluge of all."
Ref directly above.

Wow! Atlantis ties in with Biblical story of Noah?


It is now conceded by scholars that the genealogical table given in tho Bible (Gen., chap. x.) is not intended to include the true negro races, or the Chinese, the Japanese, the Finns or Lapps, the Australians, or the American red men. It refers altogether to the Mediterranean races, the Aryans, the Cu#es, the Phœnicians, the Hebrews, and the Egyptians. "The sons of Ham" were not true negroes, but the dark-brown races. (See Winchell's "Preadamites," chap. vii.)
If these races (the Chinese, Australians, Americans, etc.) are not descended from Noah they could not have been included in the Deluge. If neither China, Japan, America, Northern Europe, nor Australia were depopulated by the Deluge, the Deluge could not have been universal. But as it is alleged that it did destroy a country, and drowned all the people thereof except Noah and his family, the country so destroyed could not have been Europe, Asia, Africa, America, or Australia, for there has been no universal destruction of the people of those regions; or, if there had been, how can we account for the existence to-day of people on all of those continents whose descent Genesis does not trace back to Noah, and, in fact, about whom the writer of Genesis seems to have known nothing?
We are thus driven to one of two alternative conclusions: either the Deluge record of the Bible is altogether fabulous, or it relates to some land other than Europe, Asia, Africa, or Australia, some land that was destroyed by water. It is not fabulous; and the land it refers to is not Europe, Asia, Africa, We are thus driven to one of two alternative conclusions: either the Deluge record of the Bible is altogether fabulous, or it relates to some land other than Europe, Asia, Africa, or Australia, some land that was destroyed by water. It is not fabulous; and the land it refers to is not Europe, Asia, Africa,or Australia--but Atlantis. No other land is known to history or tradition that was overthrown in a great catastrophe by the agency of water; that was civilized, populous, powerful, and given over to wickedness.


I am absolutely sure, The Dreaming incorporates the Great Deluge story…I will have to follow up with that.

I haven’t heard Noah & Atlantis connection before at all. This relies solely upon Biblical interpretation? I am not dissing the source, as I have previously said, scriptures run often more than not parallel with science...just absolutely gobsmacked as I havent ever considered the connection nor had I considered the Flood to wipe out a select group of people.

thanks for this info Shane! I cant imagine that this would be a popular/accepted line of thought, re Mediterranean races...very interesting though



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shane

Taken from the Lost Gospel of Paul, Acts Chapter 29

www.biblefacts.org...

"And it shall come to pass that certain of the Druids came to Paul privately, and showed by their rites and ceremonies they were descended from the Jews which escaped from bondage in the land of Egypt, and the apostle believed these things, and gave them the kiss of peace."


I cant believe I missed this! Think I was head down bottom up with Gombach/Fell debate when you posted this?


So I offer this solely to note, Paul knew from where the Druid's Originated.
To bad the Church today, does not know.


Yes it is, perhaps the info from Vera Stanley Alder I posted explains it.


The Druids would have escaped Egypt around 2400 BC or later and Ogham would be a Language which would have had a 700 to 600 BC Origin at the earliest.


So how does this sit with the Rhine origins? Would they have escaped to the Rhine region?

And how can it be possible that if ogham was the language of the Druids, est (2400BC) and the language is at a later point? (700 BC).

So what, they just didnt have a language until 700 BC? What did they have pre 700BC?





posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by NJE777

I am absolutely sure, The Dreaming incorporates the Great Deluge story…I will have to follow up with that.



Hi Nat there are a number of dreamtime stories that relate to floods, most of these are only localized events, though there are some that could be interpreted as having greater meaning.

From a book of dreamtime stories 'Tjarany-Roughtail' by Gracie greene, Joe Tramacchi and Lucille Gill,


In 'Kalpartu the Dreamtime Snake', the Willy Wagtail man came to visit a ceremonial ground where some people were having a corroboree. These people "...teased him and made him feel unwelcome". The Willy wagtail Man solicited help from his "cousin brothers, who were Dreamtime snakes". The snakes made a big flood and all but one of the people were killed. When the Dreamtime snake is angry, " he leaves his waterhole. Thunderstorms and rain follow him. When he has quietened down we see his ranbow in the sky. All this is still here today."


Then theres this from Wikipedia


This is type 1. During glacial times, a stretch of level plain joined Australia with New Guinea and enabled humans to walk into Australia. That plain flooded to form the Gulf of Carpentaria around 12,000 to 10,000 years ago. It is significant that aboriginal Australian myth of the "dream time" includes a Great Flood which is not ordinarily a recognizable feature of the Australian climate and geography, except for infrequent filling of ordinarily dry lake basins (e.g. Lake Eyre).


here

And lastly this tale,


‘According to the natives on Cape Grafton, northern Queensland, the Barrier
Reef was the original coastline of the country. Goonyah was the first man in
that country. One day with his two wives, he went to the coast to catch fish.
In some way he offended the Great Spirit Balore. It is said, that he caught
and ate a certain kind of fish that was forbidden. Balore in anger caused the
sea to rise in order to drown Goonyah and his women, but they fled to the
mountains. The waters rose rapidly as the fugitives climbed to the heights of
the Murray Prior range. This range is called by the aborigines “Wambilari”
[Moses said that this must be a reference to Wumbilgay, a baldy-headed
mountain]. The two women became very tired, and stopped running.
Goonyah, well ahead of them, stopped on a huge boulder of granite, and
called upon them to hurry. The natives took the author to this spot, and
showed him the footprint of Goonyah. It is a patch of very dark stone in the
granite about fifteen inches long and very wide. It is said that the mark was
left by Goonyah’s muddy foot. He must have been something of a giant.
They succeeded in reaching the top of the highest peak in the range, and
there they made a fire, and heating large stones rolled them down the
mountain side, and succeeded in checking the flood. The sea, however,
never returned to its original limits. (Goonganjie tribe).’”
Although Moses had never previously heard a story about Gunya the theme
was familiar to him – many Yidinyji stories are concerned with rising seas and
what olden times people did to try to stop them.
Told by Dick Moses in the coastal dialect; recorded at Yarrabah on 22 August
1973 (duration 10 minutes).


I found it amusing that the aboriginal fella telling the story is called Moses!!

www.didgeridoos.net.au...

Hope there is something of interest there for you.

Cheers
M4S



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shane

Taken from the Lost Gospel of Paul, Acts Chapter 29

www.biblefacts.org...

"And it shall come to pass that certain of the Druids came to Paul privately, and showed by their rites and ceremonies they were descended from the Jews which escaped from bondage in the land of Egypt, and the apostle believed these things, and gave them the kiss of peace."


Erm, did you check your Bible and doublecheck that source? Acts only has 28 chapters.
www.gnpcb.org...

I do find one modern Bible with an "Acts 29." In this site which offers verses in a large number of Bibles, the verse says nothing about druids:
www.biblegateway.com...

That particular chapter "Acts 29" comes from something called "The Sonnini Manuscript and was discovered in the archives in Constantinople in the 1780's. No one knows where it came from.

In the 1700's, they certainly knew about druids.


So I offer this solely to note, Paul knew from where the Druid's Originated.
To bad the Church today, does not know.


Did he? Based on a manuscript that "mysteriously" turns up in the 1780's at the time when there was a need to "justify" the English as the "lost tribe of Israel?" During the time of a rise of Irish nationalism and British imperialism -- a document that shows the English are "God's Chosen"?

There is no proof that "Acts 29" existed before that.


And how can it be possible that if ogham was the language of the Druids, est (2400BC) and the language is at a later point? (700 BC).

Ogham isn't a language. It's an alphabet.

They spoke various Celtic dialects (and various other dialects.)

[edit on 26-4-2006 by Byrd]



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   
Hi Nat

Nice to see you are catching up on things.

I will say, I did give you a lot of things for consideration. You remarked, as follows:

"I haven’t heard Noah & Atlantis connection before at all. This relies solely upon Biblical interpretation? I am not dissing the source, as I have previously said, scriptures run often more than not parallel with science...just absolutely gobsmacked as I havent ever considered the connection nor had I considered the Flood to wipe out a select group of people."

We must believe, if the Biblical account of the Great Flood is an accurate account of the Deluge, then we must also believe in what the intent of the flood was.

Enoch tells us exactly what was occuring, and Genesis 6 gives a few remarks in passing.

From the Original Sin, in the Garden until the Great Flood, the Sons of God, namely Satan and the Fallen, according to the Bible, or detailed by name and speciality in Enoch, came to earth and did serveral things.

The took the Daughter of Man, and sired offspring.
They taught man the Mystries such as Astrology, according to the Fallen.
And Satan, and to a lesser extent, the Fallen, set themselves up as gods.

The Biblical Flood was intended to wipe the Spawn of the Fallen off the Earth. It was also to cleanse the polluted bloodlines off the earth as well. And in some readings we can find, it was also to bind the Fallen in the abyss, so their physical form could no longer interfere with man.

Where did all the Gods and Deities of Ancient history go Nat? What became of them?

Reviewing Donnelly's theory on the Deluge and the reports of the Deluge legends, we see the same story, but from another perspective.

I do not believe in coincidence, and there is far too many here, to simply dismiss it all away.

But keep an open mind Nat, and I am sure everything will fit inplace. One day you will find something that is not directly related to all of this, that will suddenly draw it all together.

Have a Good Evening

Ciao

Shane



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd


So I offer this solely to note, Paul knew from where the Druid's Originated.
To bad the Church today, does not know.


Did he? Based on a manuscript that "mysteriously" turns up in the 1780's at the time when there was a need to "justify" the English as the "lost tribe of Israel?" During the time of a rise of Irish nationalism and British imperialism -- a document that shows the English are "God's Chosen"?

There is no proof that "Acts 29" existed before that.

[edit on 26-4-2006 by Byrd]


Are you certain you are not from "The Show Me State" Byrd. No worries!

I am fully aware, my KJV does not include an Acts 29, and I can assure you, my KJV has no Amen at the end of Acts 28, as is customary with Pauls writings.

I am fully aware it was found in the 1700's and ponder, what does it gain a Frenchman to offer this up? Proving his Enemy is one of God's People.

Here's some reference material for review.

www.angelfire.com...
www.asis.com...
www.zazzle.com...


Seems I find Druid's mentioned in the Text, but was not surprised by the New Age Speak version you offered. Had a good laugh looking at that thing. And you call it a bible.

Ciao

Shane



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join