The evil origins of the Anunnaki and their bastardized Nephilim monsters

page: 3
12
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 





Sitchin is the guy that Daniel Jackon from the Stargate tv show series was based on.


You sure about that; the movie character was a trained academic, well educated, and could read ancient languages while Sitchin was an economist, made stuff up and couldn't tell the difference between Assyrian and Sumerian


Sitchin was one of the first people who started spouting junk about the great pyramids being created by aliens from outter space and yeah James Spader even said Jackson's character was based off of Sitchin and so was the movie.




posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


You sure about that; the movie character was a trained academic, well educated, and could read ancient languages while Sitchin was an economist, made stuff up and couldn't tell the difference between Assyrian and Sumerian


Can YOU translate Sumerian?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Eaglecall

Can YOU translate Sumerian?


Not at all but then I never claimed I could. Can you wear your trousers on your head and scream like a badger?

Oh you have questions to answer, back up and read the questions you skipped over and try to answer them.....if you'd like I'll try to help you find the words, lol
edit on 4/1/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Sitchin was one of the first people who started spouting junk about the great pyramids being created by aliens from outter space and yeah James Spader even said Jackson's character was based off of Sitchin and so was the movie.


I guess Spader knew nothing about Sitchin!



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 04:05 AM
link   
You are still ignoring Byrds first post. Please provide the evidence requested:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I'm somewhat torn about the notion that God wills illness.

I think at some point, however we slice it . . . one can end up saying essentially that.

However, I believe He pulls back His protection and

ALLOWS the consequences of

1. collective sins' sowing and reaping . . . pollution etc. poisons in food and water; bad habits etc.

2. personal sins' sowing and reaping

to result in illness and even death.

And, I believe that some folks are allowed to die before their otherwise time . . . else they'd reap far worse punishments if allowed to continue on their hell-bent lives.

I think

www.beinhealth.com...

Henry Wright's work has been unparalleled in matching specific diseases with specific spiritual problems. He's seen thousands of people healed as a result and dozens of MD's consult with him regularly.

Many incurable diseases that medicine had no answer for have been cured under his ministry.

An interesting side-light . . . he's observed USUALLY--not 100% of the time but USUALLY--the vast magjority of the time . . . and I forget which side goes with which person but as an illustration--I'll just guess--He's observed that:

IF a woman has breast cancer only on the left side--guessing--then she has unresolved forgiveness, resentment, bitterness, conflict, anger issues with her mother-in-law.

IF a woman has breast cancere only on the right side--guessing--then she has unresolved forgiveness, resentment, bitterness, conflict issues with her own mother.

And, he's correlated specific types and locations of various kinds of cancers with rather specific unresolved spiritual/relationship problems as well.

I believe that God wants us well and that Christ's stripes were for our healing. However, we don't tend to walk in His will as we ought and suffer the consequences accordingly.

Nevertheless, He is merciful and OFTEN, not always, heals people whether they 'deserve' it or not or even due to someone else's faith or just God's sovereign desire to heal them.

In terms of the OP, it is the fallen angels' job and interest to keep humans afflicted, sickened, dying, suffering, and to foster their sinfulness as a good route to such suffering. They know, like their boss knows, that when we violate God's laws and priorities, suffering is a natural consequence. And the fallen angels et al are CERTAINLY handy on the spot to deliver as much suffering as they can 'legally' get away with.

IT's the only way satan can get back at God for being kicked out of Heaven.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I think Stichin was a useful idiot of great use to the fallen angels and the global oligarchy in setting things up for the GREAT DECEPTION of the end times.

His stuff fits the script perfectly.

If he hadn't existed, they'd have created someone like him to fill the role.

Interestingly, if one lays all the "evidence" of such stuff out on the table, end to end, so to speak,

A relatively small percentage of it agrees with the rest of it . . . except in VERY BROAD BRUSH STROKE terms.

The contradictions are greater than the congruencies, imho.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


Poetic license.

Besides, to have the movie character seem so greatly more erudite, scholarly and knowledgeable than Stichin was, in fact,

helps with the propaganda/brainwashing of the masses toward their swallowing Stichin's swill smoothly & unreservedly.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I think Stichin was a useful idiot of great use to the fallen angels and the global oligarchy in setting things up for the GREAT DECEPTION of the end times.

His stuff fits the script perfectly.

If he hadn't existed, they'd have created someone like him to fill the role.

Interestingly, if one lays all the "evidence" of such stuff out on the table, end to end, so to speak,

A relatively small percentage of it agrees with the rest of it . . . except in VERY BROAD BRUSH STROKE terms.

The contradictions are greater than the congruencies, imho.


I think youre right. I have read his stuff and he seems to put rose tinted glasses on a subject where mankind had nearly been destroyed and subverted by the Fallen and he leads people to think they were good? Look around the Sinai desert and near those regions of the middle east at all the blackened craters that give off small amounts of radiation to this day. Someone or something was throwing down with them and they got the short end of the stick.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Yeah i have delved into the UFO alien stuff, nearly went crazy too complete with tinfoil hat a few years ago. Ultimately the moral of the story is they tried to destroy us before and subvert our natural order by their nephilim and their chimera monsters that might possibly be depicted in ancient egyptian hierogpyphs of people with dog heads (Anubis), people with owlheads (Horus) and the reptilian peoples with the crocodile heads (Sobek) or the giant bull thing the ancient egyptians cremated and dumped bitumen all over for fear it would resurrect and had buried in the tomb of the bull in a giant granite sarcophagus..

Clearly the ancients must have seen things that scared the crap out of them to cremate something rather than embalm and preserve it.



You really take things QUITE literally. I mean there seems to be no capability in your presentation for symbolism. You take the images on the walls of tombs as literal representations of actual beings instead of symbolic representations of what they stood for.
The members of GreekRomanEgyptianChristianHindu pantheons of different spiritual 'beings' are there to outline and illustrate specific spiritual and intellectual concepts that man can 'imbibe' from.. (BIBle).. to drink from and use his intellect to see the true deep meaning of the plethora of psychological aspects within himself....

As opposed to the action-figure-esque Saturday morning cartoon type good-guy vs bad-guy scenarios I'm seeing envisioned here.

Guess it's all up to the perceptual acumen of the observer to decipher such things.. which in the case of the OP, imo, is null and void, which is sad, because it's not just here that it's represented as such.. but all across the world.. in the same perception a toddler or chimpanzee would envision the ancient writings as.

but.. more power to them.. makes good comic books i guess... if that's all they want to see it as.

edit on 1/4/2012 by prevenge because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Eaglecall

Can YOU translate Sumerian?


Not at all



Then who are you to criticize Sitchin for his translations? Is it only because you believe a clown who says so and is more convenient for you?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I think Stichin was a useful idiot of great use to the fallen angels and the global oligarchy in setting things up for the GREAT DECEPTION of the end times.

His stuff fits the script perfectly.

If he hadn't existed, they'd have created someone like him to fill the role.

Interestingly, if one lays all the "evidence" of such stuff out on the table, end to end, so to speak,

A relatively small percentage of it agrees with the rest of it . . . except in VERY BROAD BRUSH STROKE terms.

The contradictions are greater than the congruencies, imho.


The great contradiction is that this whole myth you are throwing up as reality is based on rebellion and conspiracy against an all powerful supreme omni-present being of unlimited power and the ability to alter time and space - which by your own parameters cannot succeed. It would seem if your scenario is correct that god is running the whole thing for his or hers amusement.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eaglecall

Then who are you to criticize Sitchin for his translations? Is it only because you believe a clown who says so and is more convenient for you?


lol, gee Eaglecall you sure aren't very logical

Can you read Sumerian? Please explain how you know Sitchie was correct?

I cannot speak or read Russian but I can be critical of Stalin based on translations of his works and actions and commentary of his actions by those I take to be experts.

I can read the Sumerian translations that were once in books and are now online, more importantly I can read the archaeological data that contradicts him; Sitchin made up stuff



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eaglecall
Who are you?
It is not possible to reply to your post since is based in nothing. You reply asking for answers that nobody has.

Woah woah woah...
Did you or did you not state the following:

Originally posted by Eaglecall
It is difficult to elaborate "theories" since we are missing so much information. But we posses some undeniable facts.

Then, you are in fact not "in possession of undeniable facts?" Then why did you say you are? And why on Earth did you expect to be able to make such a claim and not be asked to provide these wondrous facts?


Originally posted by Eaglecall
You reply with assumptions and distortions of words. You replay with "maybe's". My post was based un pure undeniable logic, which was brilliant by the way.

Meh.
Must've missed it. Looked more like "pure idiocy" to me.
Word of advice - when you claim to know something that nobody else knows, be ready for other people to ask you to tell them about it. And don't expect to get away with "I can't answer such stupidity" or whatever. We all know what such a response actually says about the responder (that's you, FYI.)

Harte



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte
Meh.
Must've missed it. Looked more like "pure idiocy" to me.
Word of advice - when you claim to know something that nobody else knows, be ready for other people to ask you to tell them about it. And don't expect to get away with "I can't answer such stupidity" or whatever. We all know what such a response actually says about the responder (that's you, FYI.)

Harte


LOL, he forgot to put into his first post the magical phrase: 'I'm infallible, all knowing and cannot be questioned or be bothered to provide information and explanations".

Then we would have realized he was a complete loon (or lived under a bridge) and left him be....



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by Eaglecall

Then who are you to criticize Sitchin for his translations? Is it only because you believe a clown who says so and is more convenient for you?


lol, gee Eaglecall you sure aren't very logical

Can you read Sumerian? Please explain how you know Sitchie was correct?

I cannot speak or read Russian but I can be critical of Stalin based on translations of his works and actions and commentary of his actions by those I take to be experts.

I can read the Sumerian translations that were once in books and are now online, more importantly I can read the archaeological data that contradicts him; Sitchin made up stuff



Show me where I stated that I assume Sitchin correct? I know you are trying to change the topic but no. Show me that first, then explain who the hell you are to criticize Sitchin's translations.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harte

Originally posted by Eaglecall
Who are you?
It is not possible to reply to your post since is based in nothing. You reply asking for answers that nobody has.

Woah woah woah...
Did you or did you not state the following:

Originally posted by Eaglecall
It is difficult to elaborate "theories" since we are missing so much information. But we posses some undeniable facts.

Then, you are in fact not "in possession of undeniable facts?" Then why did you say you are? And why on Earth did you expect to be able to make such a claim and not be asked to provide these wondrous facts?


Originally posted by Eaglecall
You reply with assumptions and distortions of words. You replay with "maybe's". My post was based un pure undeniable logic, which was brilliant by the way.

Meh.
Must've missed it. Looked more like "pure idiocy" to me.
Word of advice - when you claim to know something that nobody else knows, be ready for other people to ask you to tell them about it. And don't expect to get away with "I can't answer such stupidity" or whatever. We all know what such a response actually says about the responder (that's you, FYI.)

Harte



Incorrect. I never sztated that i have "information that nobody has"....(x-files music) uuu...that makes it sounds so mysterious... but bullcrap. I never stated mystery here. That's what happens with average emotional people.

Those facts I refered to, are simple evident things like How the Baalbeck stones were cut and transported. How the stones at Puma Punku were cut and transported. Those kind of things. It is evident, but the "scientistszzz" play stupid with a blind eye to that because they have no clue what they're doing. "oh dont worry thats mythology...that's mythology trust me..." Bullcrap again. If you tell me that it was done by 1000 slaves with a shizle and a hammer, then pulled by 5000 slaves over a bed of wood, then the conversation is over. We are not kids anymore. That "official scientific" explanation is good for mentally challenged people.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 




I think youre right. I have read his stuff and he seems to put rose tinted glasses on a subject where mankind had nearly been destroyed and subverted by the Fallen and he leads people to think they were good?

Look around the Sinai desert and near those regions of the middle east at all the blackened craters that give off small amounts of radiation to this day. Someone or something was throwing down with them and they got the short end of the stick.


Good points.

However, there's a lot of power and a lot of bias DEDICATED to avoiding such truths and in seducing mankind with well crafted fantasies and lies. And a lot of folks' biases are eager to suck-up any such explanations because it comforts their rebellions and raging lusts. Very understandable and human. Not very life giving.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Hanslune
 


I don't see that God's "amusement" is the only or even the most plausible option.

IT seems to me that God's using earth as a bootcamp

to rear those to rule and reign with Christ over countless worlds and multi-verses.

And . . . to insure that they learn the supreme priorities of Love and Humility in the process . . . through repeated brokenness experiences.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eaglecall


Show me where I stated that I assume Sitchin correct?


Then why are you deeply upset that I don't like Sitchin? Would it be better if we dismissed Sitchin together?



I know you are trying to change the topic but no.


No just asking a question - can you translate Sumerian?


Show me that first, then explain who the hell you are to criticize Sitchin's translations.


Sorry no, your refusal to answer my questions negates my neccesity to answer yours. You will note that I did answer your question - to show you how it is done. So answer those questions you are avoiding and I'll answer yours....now isn't that fair?
edit on 4/1/12 by Hanslune because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join