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.

 

Jordan Maxwell -- Sons of God (vid)

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 07:58 PM
link   
video.google.nl...

Interesting video where Jordan discusses the content of a very old Bible and
how he believes there was more than one God that created the earth and us (humans).

If you read the Bible, Genesis 1:26, it will say "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness".
So its not hard to imagine there were multiple Gods actually. Its very clear i think.

Anyway, very interesting, you might want to skip forward to ~13 minutes thats
where he starts discussing it...




posted on Aug, 30 2006 @ 10:32 PM
link   
There are alot of people who believe the plural divine references in the bible actually refer to alien creators like the annunaki and stuff.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:36 PM
link   
That's a common misconception. "Sons of God" in the biblical text refers to angels. Angels were created before humans. When YHWH says "Let us create man in our image..." He is refering to making man with a spiritual nature. The terms "Lord", "God", etc. have different meanings than the ones traditional religion has led us to believe. "Lord" refers to a leader/ruler. Even human beings are referred to as "lords". "God" refers to "a mighty one" (a spiritual being, ie. an angel). Even Satan is referred to as the "god of this world". The ultimate spiritual being-GOD-is THE ALMIGHTY ONE (definitive article) or known by the tetragramaton which serves as His name-YHWH. The scriptures are quite clear that there is only one Almighty One but there are many "mighty ones" (angels).



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   
the reason there are plurals in the FIRST story of creation is that it was lifted from earlier, pre-abrahamic, henatheistic myths



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Yeah, the Anunnaki/Sumerian thing has made me think alot. more than you could imagine.

I wonder.. could these be the 'Fallen Angels' that had children with human women giving offspring of a half-fallen-angel nature, otherwise referred to as Anakim/Rephaim/Giants.

But teh funny is, in Deuteronomy when its talking about Moses leading the Israelites whom he led from Egypt into Canaan, and all the battles that took place against various peoples. The Ammonites, the descendents of Lot, are now known as Jordanians, and the capital of Jordan is Ammon! But anyways, supposedly after the flood there were still some offspring of the fallen angels left .. referred to as Rephaim or Rephalim or Anakim. Og of Bashan was a leader of theirs.

BUT, I feel God created first, then there were being greater than us humans, then there were us humans ..

Heres a link to some 'Christian Fundamentalist Propaganda' purporting to have some evidence of these 'giants' ..

s8int.com...

[edit on 24-9-2006 by runetang]



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 11:38 PM
link   
Tom Horn has the best spin on the Annunaki/Nephilim and the creation story I have heard yet to date. He basically says that God/Creator "Spoke" humanity into existence (among everything else) but this creation of humanity allowed "Fallen" beings to pervert Gods work through Eugenics/Genetic engineering.
These Nephilim are spoken about all through out the Bible and are often talked about in folklore around the world as giants or mutants with one eye or wings. The reason the Nephilim did this was because they were commanded by Satan to destroy the Human seed (polute it) as the Fallen One knew that a Messiah would be born to this rabble called Humankind....he failed.
I must point out this is not my theory although its entertaining I suggest anyone with an interest in this subject go and listen/read to Tom Horn as he has done alot of research into this field.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 01:26 PM
link   
God's plan in relation to man spans three time periods: from man's creation to eternity. The first time span (epoch) from creation to the flood was under the administration of angels, and is called by Peter "The world that was". 2 Pet. 3:6.

I won't go into the other 2 epochs since they're not the subject of this thread but the first epoch, under the administration of angels was a failure ending in nearly all of humanity's destruction.

Genesis chapter 6 talks about that first epoch: And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them that the sons of God (angels) saw the daughters of men that they were fair and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. (Before then men lived several hundred years and by the time of Moses, man's lifespan was down to 70-80 years). There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that when the sons of God (angels) came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare childen to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. (skip down to verse 9) ...Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations (his geneology-no angels, fallen or otherwise in his ancestral line).

Italicized comments are mine.

Apparently, man was not the only beings chastised in that epoch. By the time you get to the New Testament, angels (sons of God) no longer marry nor are given in marriage. Mark 12:25

"sons of God" simply means spiritual beings, or what we would call "angels".



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   
In the reference "Let US create man in OUR image..." God is refering to His triune nature, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I won't go into detail on which each played in the creation, there are other threads for that.

I would like to address the offspring of the Watchers, the fallen angels who cross bred with humanity. Genesis also refers to the Nephlim being there before the flood and afterwards also. There is a detailed account of this in the Book of Enoch. In the book of Daniel when he is interpreting Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of the giant statue, there is also a curious verse near the end: “and they will mingle their seed with the seed of men, but the two will not adhere together as iron does not adhere to clay…” Who is the imperative they? It has to be the Watchers. Since the prophecy has to do with the end times, we can assume that there will be a resurgence of genetic manipulation, trans-humanism and trans-genetics taking place. Jesus also said, “As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be at the coming of the Son of Man…” Jump to modern culture and what mimics this Old Testament example? That would be the current UFO phenomena and government funding of these experiments.

There is one GOD, we are in a war we can't see and HE told us how it is going to play out from the beginning (Genesis).



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 02:26 PM
link   
No, the Creator was not talking to Himself. The so-called trinity is a theological fallacy. All of scripture clearly states that there is one Almighty One. There are many "mighty ones" (angels/spiritual beings) but only 1 Divine Being. The subject of the so-called trinity is a topic for a different thread but the topic of this thread; sons of God, is repeatedly referenced in the scriptures as angelic beings. Nephilim is a term that Zachariah Sitchim introduced into our vocabulary. He was right about the interbreeding of species just wrong about who the species were. It was not humans and aliens from another planet, it was humans and spirit beings (angels).

YHWH (singular. One Divine Being) created the heavens and the earth. Period. (Genesis 1:1) Starting with Genesis 1:2 something happens to the earth: And the earth BECAME void...

from there a RESTORATION process begins. See G.H. Pember "Earth's Earliest Ages".

A lot of confusion has been caused by papal fallacy of the trinity (among many of their other fallacies, errors and paganistic practices) leading to such thinking as aliens genetically manipulating (essentially creating) human beings, 3 "gods", etc. Hope this clears things up for you.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 02:45 PM
link   
If you read the last of my thread, I stated the fact that there is one God. As we have body soul and spirit created in God's image, why is the triune nature of God such a stretch. Do you acknowledge that the the Son is fully God and Yeshua sent His Holy Spirit, the Counselor when He went to be with the Father?

I am not polytheistic. "Hear O Isreal there is One GOD, GOD is One".



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Mr.M.,
No, I do not acknowledge that the Son is fully God. There are oodles of verses to show that the "son of God" was a created being, therefore not Divine (although a spirit being). He took the form of a man and after completion of all his work here He was rewarded with the Divine nature (as will be the "overcomers"). Since you're probably having apopleptic fits right now, I'll stop. I did not mean to suggest that you are polytheistic. The point I was trying to make is that the term "sons of God" is a biblical reference to angelic beings but has been misunderstood throughout the ages resulting in strange beliefs. There's probably a thread somewhere about the trinity but I'm too lazy to look it up; however, if you would like to discuss the subject further, please direct me to that thread and we can discuss it there. No hard feelings, brother?



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 05:46 PM
link   
No hard feelings, and I agree that the "sons of God" were the Watchers. I am courious what the oddities are that you mentioned, since Jesus told His disciples when they asked to see the Father, that they were looking at Him...soooo, He was either telling the truth or delusional and a liar. I'm not sure what faith you ascribe to, but there is plenty of evidence that Christ was fully man and fully GOD, hence the need for a pure genetic line from Noah (perfect in all his generations) to the promised Messiah to be a spotless sacrifice for sin. Have a good evening.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   
well this so far is all very interesting from a completely erroneous point of view
the Bible was compiled while the Hebrews were slaves of the Babylonians
as such it is full of references that belong to the ancient Sumerian culture passed down through the akkadian culture
the idea that YHWH for instance sent a flood is laughable.
the earliest that this was written in Hebrew was around 700bce
dating from 2300bce is the story of Gilgamesh
when you compare the flood story from Gilgamesh with the flood story of Noah this is what you will notice

Gilgamesh: -
When a seventh day arrived
I sent forth a dove and released it.
The dove went off, but came back to me;
no perch was visible so it circled back to me.

Genesis 7
8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth

Gilgamesh
I sent forth a raven and released it.
The raven went off, and saw the waters slither back.
It eats, it scratches, it bobs, but does not circle back to me.

Genesis 7
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth


So its quite clear that YHWH is based on the Sumerian flood god Enlil

now Enlil was the head of the order of sumerian gods called the IGIGI. this is where all your friendly neighbourhood pseudo heros get their facts wrong
the Annunaki have nothing to do with the Nephilim or anything else that is found in Hebrew religion or any later religion derived from it such as christianity

Enoch quite clearly states that the Nephilim are the children of the watchers
and that the watchers are your angels that you all know and love.
well fact of the matter is that the sumerian word IGI is a determinative.
a determinative is a word that when it appears signifies that any word that contains it corresponds to a certain action
the word IGI on its own means "Eye"
psd.museum.upenn.edu...
when you have two eyes together as in IGIGI the action is "to watch"
now the Sumerian culture is also the source for the Hebrew word Nephilim.
psd.museum.upenn.edu...
psd.museum.upenn.edu...
NE.ILIM - strength of radiance
you see Enlils father was Anu the sun god. so both Enlil and all his children and all their children are direct descendants of the Sun god
which is why they all radiate strongly

so when you consider that YHWH was really Enlil
and that the IGIGI who were the children of YHWH later became the angels where does that leave your modern religions

basically it leaves you here
having to accept the fact that Hebrewism is simply mesopotamian pantheism repackaged for a new generation
and that christianity is simply Herbrewism repackaged for a newer generation
so basically you are all worshipping ancient Pagan deities from a culture that no longer exists
this is the reason why there are errors in the script of the original bible and why it sometimes seems to be indicating other gods
because the original source that it was wholly plaguiarised from actually had many gods

now here of course comes the really shocking news
Enlil it turns out wasn't actually a god in any real sense of the word
Enlil was an epithet given to the high kings of Sumer
so just like in Egypt where each new Pharoah claimed to be a descendant of Horus and therefore divine each new king in Sumeria claimed to be full of the holy spirit of ENLIL

so basically guys
to worship YHWH or Jehovah is the same as saying that you are in fact worshipping a long dead pagan king from a long dead culture
and you know that means when you pray he isn't listening
because he died a long time before Jesus came along
and as you all should know until that point man was still tainted with original sin so therefore no human could enter heaven
and that includes the Human that you seem to think is divine. So if God was a man where does that leave Jesus. shall we ask him

john 8:28
Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he

the truth sucks if youre a fundie doesnt it



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Quote from speaker ;
"If you don't learn to swim, you will drown, because of your own ignorance".

That says alot, and for just about anything.




posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I didn't say "oddities". I said "oodles". Oodles is the technical term for multitudinous amounts. Just kidding.

Okaaaaay. Here we go. The Greek word "Kyrios" that is translated "Lord" in the English Bible should be translated "Master". The Hebrew word "Adon" or "Adonai" should also be translated "Master" whenever it refers to YHWH, for so He is. It's true that common usage titles such as "Kyrios" and "Adonai" can be translated "Lord", but when used in reference to YHWH or Yahshua they should always be translated either "Master" or "Sovereign". "Baal" has been left untranslated in the English Bible because it is a Hebrew word meaning "Lord". The Hebrew word "Elohim", correctly translated, means mighty one or mghty ones, depending on the context, and it is used throughout the Hebrew Scriptures in reference to YHWH, Yahshua, men, angels and even Satan himself and his fallen angels.

Yahshua, YHWH's son, mentioned in the O.T. as The Logos, the Messenger of YHWH, is distinguished from YHWH (as in not equal to and not the same as). He was the Servant of YHWH: Is.42:1, 6, 19; 52:13; 53:11). He was YHWH's Arm, Agent (vicegerent or CEO): Is. 53:1. He is YHWH's Son, not YHWH Himself: Ps. 89:27; 2:7, 12. He was YHWH's Angel, Messenger: Zec. 13:7; Pr. 8:30. He was the FirstBORN of all creation (Col. 1:15, Rev. 3:14, Pr. 8:22-25)

Biblical references to "sons of God" being angels/spirit beings: Gen. 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Jn. 1:12

There are more but in the N.T., references to the sons of God includes the believers who take on the spirit nature in addition to having the human nature.

Again, if you would like to discuss the trinity fallacy, I'd be happy to send you about a hundred pages of scriptures. We have enough of an argument trying to convince unbelievers without giving them a good laugh watching believers argue amonst themselves. The "sons of God" did not participate in the creation process since they are created beings themselves but it's possible they were instrumental in the restoration process whose narrative begins with Gen. 1:2.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 08:37 PM
link   
I recently read a Children's book that draws from some mishna. It suggested that in creation, when God said, "let us create man in our image", God was actually speaking to all that he had created before man. That humanity was a collaborative effort between God and all other created things. Now I don't subscribe to the literal interpretation, this does have some paganist implications in the monotheistic religion. There is abundant evidence that the Hebrews passed through many different stages of spiritual evolution such as paganism, polytheism etc. and it was only when Isaiah 2 was written during the Babylonian exile when the Hebrews found themselves in the cosmopolitan Babylonia that their own religion became crystalized through the contrasts they found with those other religions. This is the time that Genesis was written, possibly a reaction to the Babylonian creation story (Marduk et. al.) and their effort to 'correct' the story.
Christianity has been quite accurately called, "Hellenized Judeao Paganism" - it is not a surprise to any Religious Studies student that the worlds religions have far more in common than they do not.....
Do not confuse the spirituality of the ancient writings with modern day dogma.

[edit on 9/25/2006 by Thinker_1]

[edit on 9/25/2006 by Thinker_1]



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
I would like to continue this discussion here because there are many verses where one person is called “God” or “the Lord” and is distinguished from another person who is also said to be God. In Ps. 45.6-7, the psalmist says, “Your throne O God, will last for ever and ever…You love righteousness and hate wickedness; therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.” Here the psalm passes beyond describing anything that could be true of an earthly king and calls the king “God”, whose throne will last forever and ever. But then, still speaking to the person called “God” the author says that “God”, your God, has set you above your companions”, so two separate persons are called “God” (Heb. ‘Elohim). In the New Testament the author of Hebrews quotes this passage and applies it to Christ. (Hebrews 1:8)

In Psalm 110:1, David says, “The LORD says to my lord: ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet’” Also referred to by Jesus in Matt. 22:41-46. Who is David’s “Lord” if not the God himself? And who can sit at God’s right hand except someone else who is also fully God? David was aware of the plurality of the persons in one God.

Isaiah 63:10 says that God’s people “rebelled and grieved his Holy Spirit” suggesting that both that the Holy Spirit is distinct from God himself and that the Holy Spirit can be grieved, also suggesting the emotional capabilities of a distinct person.

Several Old Testament passages about “the angel of the LORD” suggest plurality of the persons of God. The word translated “angel” (Heb. Mal’ak) means simply “messenger”. If this angel of the LORD is a “messenger” of the LORD, he is then distinct from the LORD himself. Yet at some points the angel of the LORD is called “God” or the “LORD” (Gen. 16:13, Ex. 3:2-6, 23:20-22, Num 22:35 with 38, Judges 2:1-2, 6:11 with 14) At other points in the OT ”the angel of the LORD” simply refers to a created angel, but at least at these texts the special angel (or messenger) of the LORD seems to be a distinct person who is fully devine.

The NT offers more explicit teaching about the triune nature of GOD. First, several verses where all three names are used together: Matt 3:16-17 where all three members of the Godhead are performing three distinct activities. At the end of Jesus’ earthly ministry (Matt. 28:19) “…and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and of the Holy Spirit”. When the Holy Spirit is put in the same expression and on the same level as the other two persons, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the Holy Spirit is also viewed as a person and of equal standing with the Father and Son.

NT authors generally use the name “God” (Gk. theos) to refer to God the Father and he name “Lord” (Gk. kyrios) to refer to God the Son, then it is clear that there is another trinitarian expression in 1st Corinthians 12:4-6: “Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one.” In 2nd Cor. “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” Jude 20-21: “But you, beloved, build yourselves up on your most holy faith; pray in the Holy Spirit; keep yourselves in the love of God; wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.” 2Cor. 4:4-6 as well: “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above and through all and in all.”

For the sake of brevity and that I need to get some sleep, I’ll pause here. Have a good night.



posted on Sep, 25 2006 @ 10:26 PM
link   
since this thread is about the sons of god and not the trinity (and you refuse to either start another thread or meet me on some existing thread about the trinity doctrine )then i can only suggest that you send me some post office box address where i can send you the full lecture complete with scriptures. typing in all those verses with semi colons and colons, etc. is extreeeeemly tedious. it would also not be fair to the people who came to this thread expecting a discussion about the sons of god.

Marduk- i looked up your links and there were none with IGIGI. you said it means "to watch"; however, IGILA seems to be the word for "watch" (according to your source). Apparently the Babylonian reference to nephilim refers to "radiance" or "deathly silence" (aftermath of a big bomb?-kidding) Wikipedia says the Hebrew word 'nephilim' means "those causing others to fall"; however the best translation I've seen so far is from Michael S Heiser (found on geocities). He explains why Zechariah Sitchin is way off base in his translation, shows you the difference in Aramic and Hebrew characters, gives the biblical and intertestamental references (some of which you cited) and explains in great detail why the word simply means "giants".



posted on Sep, 26 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Since I beleive that sound doctrine is essential to having a complete picture to go on concerning the "sons of God" that is why I continued along this subject, but if you wish to focus only on the topic at hand that's fine. Thanks for the offer, but I have plenty of research material including the original translations in Greek and Hebrew.

I would also recommend the Tom Horn interviews to anyone interested in this topic (concerning the Nephilim), there are several hours worth packed with biblical evidences and refrences to these creatures.



posted on Oct, 3 2006 @ 04:48 PM
link   


Marduk- i looked up your links and there were none with IGIGI. you said it means "to watch"; however, IGILA seems to be the word for "watch"

Igi is a determinative, on its own it means "eye"
that means that any word it appears in has to do with watching or looking at
put igi into the search box and look at what all the words that start with it are describing
in sumerian if you want to pluralise something you just say it twice
so IGI.IGI abbreviates to IGIGI and means watches with two eyes which is the derivation that appears in Enoch
Heiser is good at destroying Sitchin's hebrew gaffes but doesn't speak or understand any mesopotamian language
so he might as well be a good french speaker trying to solve a problem that involves sumerian
Nephilim is a loan word in Hebrew the same as Adam and Eden are
they are sourced in sumerian and what ends up in Hebrew is a similar sounding word that has a similar meaning, but you need to allow the change in language that normally happens over jump from one language to another
is a "sabot" the start of an act of defiance or a japanese clog ?

psd.museum.upenn.edu...
psd.museum.upenn.edu...

when these words were first used the hebrews and their language didn't exist



new topics




 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join