The Sitchin - Catholic Problem

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by SplitInfinity

 

When I say Sensitives...I am not talking about your average bunch of people who get together and chant amongst a bunch of Quartz Crystals...I am talking about people who are employed by various Agencies of the United States. Thus...I have been present while incredible acts of Precision by these people have been performed. Curiously...they also think very much like me in that they know that Conciousness can access many interconnectivities in the Multiverse...but they are not religious and are rather introverted.

You also have to understand that God strictly forbid this type of work as it plays right into Satan's hands and lets him fool them. One time he may let them see rock solid info so he can show them something really wrong later or use them for something evil to do what he wants done in the long run.

edit on 22/1/2012 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)

I do not believe in SATAN but I DO believe in the cruelty of MAN. By the way....if there was a GOD and a DEVIL then wouldn't the DEVIL be performing an act dictated by GOD to punish the evil?

As far as people who have certain abilities...we all have these to an extent but just have not either developed them or have EVOLVED to the point of being able to use them. Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
reply to post by SplitInfinity

 

When I say Sensitives...I am not talking about your average bunch of people who get together and chant amongst a bunch of Quartz Crystals...I am talking about people who are employed by various Agencies of the United States. Thus...I have been present while incredible acts of Precision by these people have been performed. Curiously...they also think very much like me in that they know that Conciousness can access many interconnectivities in the Multiverse...but they are not religious and are rather introverted.

You also have to understand that God strictly forbid this type of work as it plays right into Satan's hands and lets him fool them. One time he may let them see rock solid info so he can show them something really wrong later or use them for something evil to do what he wants done in the long run.

edit on 22/1/2012 by ArMaP because: (no reason given)

I do not believe in SATAN but I DO believe in the cruelty of MAN. By the way....if there was a GOD and a DEVIL then wouldn't the DEVIL be performing an act dictated by GOD to punish the evil?

As far as people who have certain abilities...we all have these to an extent but just have not either developed them or have EVOLVED to the point of being able to use them. Split Infinity

You just brought up something I was thinking about for the last hour or so (not that i haven't occasionally pondered it before), but this time, a little light bulb went on and it came to me. The text of revelation says, we will be surprised when we see "the devil" finally. The people will say something long the lines of "you're kidding me! THAT is the devil?"

that use to bug me. i couldn't figure out why it would be such a surprise to people. But after studying the opening passages regarding the creation of humans, i realized it was all about DNA, and not just DNA but mammal DNA. I think the big bad guy, is a little section of dna, and that little section is responsible for the cascade event that leads to death, the necessity to procreate in order to reproduce and all the pain and death associated with it such as death of the mother, of the child, death of both, sexual transmitted diseases, rapes, birth defects, permanent injuries, and last but not least, the hormones required for mammalian reproduction also dictate mental health, mood, lust, survival of the fittest, the drive to perform, violence, murder, war, territorial behavior, the whole gamut of what we like least (and most) about ourselves and each other, right there in one tiny part of a strand of dna.

it's the devil.

reply to post by undo

Alright, that is more like it. I had no idea what you were trying to do in your earlier posts.

I actually like your answer but there are a couple things that I don't get. If Jesus is the son of Cleopatra and Julius Cesar then he is not the messiah who, according to the Jews, was supposed to be from the House of David?

If the goal was to regain the throne of the roman empire then why pose as a member of an occupied people?

Also, if the vids are right and what he wanted to do was to put the power of the roman empire back into the hands of his family then that pretty much shatters the whole image of an enlightened being who is trying to show humanity the path back to the source as some new age leaning christians believe.

reply to post by undo

Well...EVERYONE has the capacity to KILL another Human Being for various reasons. Even the meekest of us...say a 99 lbs woman with a baby....will without hesitation KILL another Human who attemps harm to her child.

Humans are Animals just like any animal on the face of Earth. But...there is a diference between Killing for Protection or Self Survival as compared to those who Kill for the purpose of obtaining power or control.

Then we get into my sometimes job where terrible things must sometimes be done in order to protect the collective body. If I do my job right...this does not happen and everyone goes home safe to their families...unfortunately...some people are just EVIL #@&$# and there are no other alternatives available.

This is very much the same thing as far as Politicians doing their job in difusing a volitile situation so that Soldiers do not have to be sent in.

Asfar as there being a part of DNA that you could label the DEVIL...then there would be alot of different areas of the Human Genome that would be responsible for KILLING. Split Infinity

Originally posted by daskakik
reply to post by undo

 

Alright, that is more like it. I had no idea what you were trying to do in your earlier posts.

I actually like your answer but there are a couple things that I don't get. If Jesus is the son of Cleopatra and Julius Cesar then he is not the messiah who, according to the Jews, was supposed to be from the House of David?

If the goal was to regain the throne of the roman empire then why pose as a member of an occupied people?

Also, if the vids are right and what he wanted to do was to put the power of the roman empire back into the hands of his family then that pretty much shatters the whole image of an enlightened being who is trying to show humanity the path back to the source as some new age leaning christians believe.

she was speculating about any additional info, and as i mentioned, there are some things she speculated, that i dont agree with at all.

as far as being the messiah, he had lineage from king david thru his ptolemy family line. he would've been the rightful heir of the roman empire, egypt and israel, all at the same time. "the messiah was to rule the nations with a rod of iron" (big hint there) . "thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me." (the rod and staff are the items of power, pharaohs hold in their hands that people know today as the crook and flail
upload.wikimedia.org...

if you watch the entire video series, that the jesus was caesarian thing is in the middle of, it's actually a very long movie called THE RING OF POWER. you can watch it all here (warning it's long and she's slightly prejudice, but as with her jesus research, she's done a basically good job with some aggregious errors tossed in), like her info on moses is only partially right. she chose tuthmose out of the hyksos shepherd kings (habiru) to represent the pharaoh who was in power when moses and company were there, but in fact, it was ahmose during the time of the hyksos. as a result, she misses the exodus story and assumes it never happened. she is wrong. ahmose "chased" the hyksos out of egypt, they didn't just walk out all nice and fancy.

WARNING: THIS FILM IS FIVE HOURS LONG



www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by undo

 

Well...EVERYONE has the capacity to KILL another Human Being for various reasons. Even the meekest of us...say a 99 lbs woman with a baby....will without hesitation KILL another Human who attemps harm to her child.

Humans are Animals just like any animal on the face of Earth. But...there is a diference between Killing for Protection or Self Survival as compared to those who Kill for the purpose of obtaining power or control.

Then we get into my sometimes job where terrible things must sometimes be done in order to protect the collective body. If I do my job right...this does not happen and everyone goes home safe to their families...unfortunately...some people are just EVIL #@&$# and there are no other alternatives available.

This is very much the same thing as far as Politicians doing their job in difusing a volitile situation so that Soldiers do not have to be sent in.

Asfar as there being a part of DNA that you could label the DEVIL...then there would be alot of different areas of the Human Genome that would be responsible for KILLING. Split Infinity

well you get the idea. it's exceedingly small. that such a small thing could cause so much suffering, like a virus or bacteria does, is the point of that section of text in revelation. also, there's a great deal of confusion on the subject, since the devil as an entity is confused with the work and appearance of the devil as revealed in revelation.

the text of genesis describes how human dna was nerfed and a self-destruct code was built in, because the "gods" didn't want procreating, self-repairing, sentient mammals on the loose. so they nerfed us genetically. it's all there, in big flashing lights, once you recognize what the text is saying. and the section that was added before the nerf, the procreation modification, the tree of the "knowledge" (to know or have knowledge of, was to have sex. adam "knew" his wife and she gave birth) of good and evil, was the inspiration for the kill switch, the death cascade and the source of pain in mammalian childbirth that wasn't there before that.

in effect, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the procreative modification. we didn't procreate as a species before that. we were copied in the image of, which sounds like some kind of cloning to me.

now you know why artificial insemination (virgin birth) was such a big deal, because the lfeform being inseminated was not subject to the same nerfs provided it was not the result of human copulation.

Originally posted by undo
as far as being the messiah, he had lineage from king david thru his ptolemy family line.

I looked up ptolemy but all I get is references to greece so I'm not sure how the David lineage comes through on that.

5 hours of biased video. I'm tempted but not enough. Maybe some other time.

I will say that it all seems like royal high jinx. Makes me doubt all the talk about a messiah even more. I mean many civilizations seems to have something similar and it's always a product from within the ruling blood line. How convenient.

Now I know I started kinda off topic because I think you exaggerated on the "there is more evidence of Jesus than other people of note" claim but the whole atheists take papal writs over the bible is also off. As for me, taking the Noah example, I don't know anything about any papal writ but if you flood the earth and everything not on the boat dies then that would imply, within human experience, that you would have to have more than a couple dozen animals on the ark. Doesn't make sense, with or without a pope's input, that you could get the biodiversity that exists from only a pair of each species in 6000 years.

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by undo
as far as being the messiah, he had lineage from king david thru his ptolemy family line.

I looked up ptolemy but all I get is references to greece so I'm not sure how the David lineage comes through on that.

5 hours of biased video. I'm tempted but not enough. Maybe some other time.

I will say that it all seems like royal high jinx. Makes me doubt all the talk about a messiah even more. I mean many civilizations seems to have something similar and it's always a product from within the ruling blood line. How convenient.

Now I know I started kinda off topic because I think you exaggerated on the "there is more evidence of Jesus than other people of note" claim but the whole atheists take papal writs over the bible is also off. As for me, taking the Noah example, I don't know anything about any papal writ but if you flood the earth and everything not on the boat dies then that would imply, within human experience, that you would have to have more than a couple dozen animals on the ark. Doesn't make sense, with or without a pope's input, that you could get the biodiversity that exists from only a pair of each species in 6000 years.

edit on 23-1-2012 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

because it wasn't global. lol
that's exactly what i'm saying. its like they count on people not reading it for themselves, so they later discredit it and no one's the wiser. even if you do prove to people who've been effected by that, they are so comfie in their outlook, they don't want to hear it. so you end up with believers who haven't read it quoting sunday school manuals and non believers who haven't read it quoting critical manuals. and you stand there going AHHHHHHHHHHHH!

so i only say it here in this thread now, out of frustration. i'll get over it. makes me wanna do the same to other people as an object lesson, but i'm just too interested in learning to do that.

Originally posted by undo
because it wasn't global. lol
that's exactly what i'm saying. its like they count on people not reading it for themselves, so they later discredit it and no one's the wiser.

Well I have read it and this is what it says(KJV):

[17] And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Destroy all flesh? Every thing that is in the earth shall die? Sounds pretty global. Maybe it isn't people not reading but the source that is the problem.

Logic dictates that it wasn't global but if you make use of a little more logic you would realize that if it wasn't global then Noah didn't need to build anything. All he had to do was head for high ground. But it says he couldn't because: Genesis 6:19 says "[19] And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered."

How do you cover high hills with water without flooding the entire world? Actually you can't so it ends up sounding like a fairy tale not because of some papal writ but because of the story itself.

Now is it based on an actual event? Probably, but after being told over and over it becomes a tall tale. Humans are good at that.

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by undo
because it wasn't global. lol
that's exactly what i'm saying. its like they count on people not reading it for themselves, so they later discredit it and no one's the wiser.

Well I have read it and this is what it says(KJV):

[17] And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

Destroy all flesh? Sounds pretty global. Maybe it isn't people not reading but the source that is the problem.

Logic dictates that it wasn't global but if you make use of a little more logic you would realize that if it wasn't global then Noah didn't need to build anything. All he had to do was head for high ground. But it says he couldn't because: Genesis 6:19 says "[19] And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered."

How do you cover high hills with water without flooding the entire world? Actually you can't so it ends up sounding like a fairy tale not because of some papal writ but because of the story itself.

Now is it based on an actual event? Probably, but after being told over and over it becomes a tall tale. Humans are good at that.

the words everything and all are not available to compare in the strongs translation, so my theory is, since the rest of the text makes it sound like it was the royal barnyard and not all animals everywhere, that somebody added all and everything to the text. there's also the issue of the ice age references in the text, such as the opening passages of genesis that make it sound as if the world was already here, and just recovering from a cataclysm in which the surface was covered in water-ice. it melted and drew back to reveal the land that was already there. i think there's 2 floods in the text. a global one and the black sea flood.

as i mentioned earlier, i think there's 2 versions of the same history, one with more details in some areas and less in others, and one with more details in different areas. this i believe, is the result of moses being both egyptian raised and habiru born. he's recounting the information as it was maintained by the egyptian royals and how it was maintained by the habiru. same story. different cultural views different data.

this is pretty much supported by geologists, who said that the mediterranean has been a valley more than once in the ancient past, and then completely filled with water over a short span of time, the last being the one that lead to the cataclysm we call the ice age, in which the planet appears to be covered in deep frozen water and sheets of ice.

since the nile flows south to north, into the mediterranean, this means at one time, the mediterranean valley would've had a spectacular waterfall, created by the nile flowing down into it

p.s. there's at least 2 "dispensations" of history mixed into the biblical text. one dispensation is the dispensation of the angels. the other is the dispensation of humans. the biblical texts are almost entirely about the human dispensation but every so often , you can see little hints of what happened on the earth before the arrival of homo sapians during the angelic dispensation. angels are lifeforms that preceeded homo sapians. .

one more thing, the phrase:

"in the beginning, elohim created the heavens and the earth."

is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay before
the rest of the verses. one reason that is is the text there says
the earth was tohu, but it's mentioned later the earth was not created tohu.
so that's not a reference to the creation of the earth, but the re-terraforming
of the earth (either by science or sunshine or both)
after the ice age, which signals the beginning of the human dispensation.

the texts are wound into each other like a maze and highly condensed.
that's why it's important to study it if you're going to attempt a serious critical
stance on it or claim it's perfectly accurate as it is currently presented in
classes and critical works that barely skim the surface.

also, i keep getting this feeling when reading it, that some of it is missing. i could be wrong on that
but it wouldn't surprise me that there are parts that the big wigs decided the general population
didn't need to know, which would account for mountains being covered in flood waters of the black sea flood, which were incapable of doing so but more than capable of being covered in the cataclysm that we call the ice age.

in effect, it's accurate in as much as we are allowed to see and in as much as the translators allowed, particularly if they added words so the sentences made "sense" to them and their view of it. i mean why else use the word man, where the word adam was, in one verse and then a few verses later, use adam instead of man. that part is really transparent once you realize how it changes the entire meaning of the verse. and the real irony of it is, adam = plural males/females. not man. but because man can be used in a plural global sense, like the race of man, they get away with it. and that messes up the info, perhaps innocently, but still messes it up, just the same.

Originally posted by undo
the words everything and all are not available to compare in the strongs translation, so my theory is, since the rest of the text makes it sound like it was the royal barnyard and not all animals everywhere, that somebody added all and everything to the text.

But this means that a person must go beyond just reading their bible to find this information which is much different than saying that they have never read the bible.

If those words were added to make it seem like a global event then it just makes the whole thing suspect and makes disregarding the whole thing easier than sifting through it to get at little nuggets of truth that probably don't mean anything to humanity as a whole.

as i mentioned earlier, i think there's 2 versions of the same history, one with more details in some areas and less in others, and one with more details in different areas.

2 versions of the same history is possible but it's still these versions that lead people to believe things like 2 of every animal on the ark not papal writs.

this is pretty much supported by geologists, who said that the mediterranean has been a valley more than once in the ancient past, and then completely filled with water over a short span of time, the last being the one that lead to the cataclysm we call the ice age, in which the planet appears to be covered in deep frozen water and sheets of ice.

I don't think the whole planet has ever been covered in ice. From a quick google search it seems that in north america the glaciers only went south to around the great lake area. That would be be around 40º N while Egypt is at 30ºN and Israel a couple degrees above that.

reply to post by daskakik


why would you not want to know what happened back then, just because it doesn't tell all the info or because the info is not always easy to extract? that's like saying, we don't really want to dig those bones out of the ground because we will have to learn what they mean, who they belonged to, and when, and what they were doing at the time and there will be missing pieces of data, so screw it.

also, the ice age sheets extended that far but when they began to melt, what happened? that's alot of water.

2 geologists from oxford discuss how they discovered that the flood of the bible and the epic of gilgamesh,
is a real historical event

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by daskakik

 

why would you not want to know what happened back then, just because it doesn't tell all the info or because the info is not always easy to extract?

Because it really doesn't make a difference. Sure it is nice if your into that kinda thing. Want to dig up old bones? Great, have at it but don't expect others to get excited over your findings unless it's relevent to them in some way.

the ice age sheets extended that far but when they began to melt, what happened? that's alot of water.

Floods of course but I still can't seem to build up much enthusiasm about that factoid.

reply to post by daskakik


oh well i'm a complete nerd about this kinda thing. so to me it's fascinating and
useful for my studies of not just the bible, but the entire ancient world.

reply to post by undo


Star and flag, undo, another great post and thoughts. I too have seen all of the confusion that comes when one really begins to research religion, and have come to think the waters are muddied for a good reason. A full understanding was not there at the time the bible was canonized, and instead of "correcting mistakes," which would be akin to changing the bible, the Scribes and Popes just kept it like it was, and went along.

The thing that bothers me most about the Christian religion as a whole, it no mention of the Divine Feminine. The Council made the Godhead all male, so males could be Priests and Popes, and Women could not, at least that's my take. Another thing is they made a dead man, a wise Rabbi, into a God. I have a lot of other things against organized religion, but that's it on the major bitches I have about it. I have found evidence that a Female God, a Goddess, was worshipped on Earth for many thousands of years before She was changed into a male.

Goddess Worship during Biblical times:

Further south, as Judaism, Christianity & eventually Islam evolved, the Pagan religions were suppressed and the female principle was gradually driven out of religion. Women were considered inferior to men. The God, King, Priest & Father replaced the Goddess, Queen, Priestess & Mother. The role of women became restricted. A woman's testimony was not considered significant in Jewish courts; women were not allowed to speak in Christian churches; positions of authority in the church were limited to men. Young women are often portrayed in the Bible as possessions of their fathers. After marriage, their ownership was transferred to their husbands. Yeshua of Nazareth (a.k.a. Jesus Christ) rejected millennia of religious tradition by treating women as equals. Women played a major role in the early Christian church. Later, epistle (letter) writers who wrote in the name of Paul, started the process of suppressing women once more.

A feminine presence was added to Christianity by the Council of Ephesus in 431 CE when the Virgin Mary was named Theotokos (Mother of God). But her role was heavily restricted and included none of the fertility component present in Pagan religions. A low point in the fortunes of women was reached during the very late Middle Ages, when many tens of thousands of suspected female witches (and a smaller proportion of males) were exterminated by burning and hanging over a three century interval. Today, respect for the Virgin Mary as a sexually "pure," submissive mother is widespread, particularly in Roman Catholicism.

Source

THE GREAT GODDESS

In prehistoric and early historic periods of human development, religions existed in which people revered their supreme creator as female. The Great Goddess, the Divine Ancestress, was worshiped as far back as the Upper Paleolithic about 25,000 BC -- not 7000 BC as had been previously believed by archaeologists and scholars based on archaeological evidence. The last Goddess temples were closed about 500 AD.

Source

I believe, as human intelligence grows, and more evidence begins to be commonly known, we will see a fall of organized religion as a whole. Religion has been a bane on mankind for many years, and has a great deal of blood on its stained pages of history.

reply to post by autowrench


hi auto

i've done some preliminary study on goddess worship and this is what i found:

the goddess was not homo sapian. in fact, the goddess doesn't even appear to be mammalian, although there's a possible demi-goddess nephilim version in the person of inanna. all the old statues were reptilians of various sizes, although a couple may have had some kind of amphibian dna involved.

the first example of the goddess in biblical text, i think, is hidden in the creation of the adam verses. when it says the elohim (plural) created the adam, male female.

some researchers think that means hermaphrodite. i do not. the words for male and female there are also capable of being translated as plurals. the reason they were not was because they assumed the elohim was one male person thus they turned the word adam there into the word man. that was a very bad mistake. i mean VERY BAD.

allow me to demonstrate:
Gen 1:27 So God 430 created 1254 man 120 in his [own] image 6754, in the image 6754 of God 430 created 1254 he him; male 2145 and female 5347 created 1254 he them.

words that have numbers after them, have an equivalent translation in the strongs for this passage, from the original hebrew. words without numbers, do not. the word God there is actually Elohim, and the word Man is actually Adam.

So that verse would more accurately say,

Elohim (a plural word meaning gods) created adam (plural) image. male female created.

add the plurals so the verse is grammatically correct:

The Elohim created Adam images, males females created.

So the first adam was a race of males and females who were created in the images (clones) of the male and female gods/goddesses, called the Elohim.

www.blueletterbible.org...

as far as jesus, i will cover that in my next post

as far as jesus' deity:

the text of genesis describes how human dna was nerfed and a self-destruct code was built in, because the "gods" didn't want procreating, self-repairing, sentient mammals on the loose. so they nerfed us genetically. it's all there, in big flashing lights, once you recognize what the text is saying.

and the section that was added before the nerf, the procreation modification, the tree of the "knowledge" (to know or have knowledge of, was to have sex. adam "knew" his wife and she gave birth) of good and evil, was the inspiration for the kill switch, the death cascade and the source of pain in mammalian childbirth that wasn't there before that.

in effect, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the procreative modification. we didn't procreate as a species before that. we were copied in the image of, which sounds like some kind of cloning to me.

now you know why artificial insemination (virgin birth) was such a big deal, because the lifeform being artificially inseminated into the woman's womb was not subject to the same nerfs provided it was not the result of human copulation.