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.
originally posted by: TheBadCabbie
What about the Tower of Babel myth?
"On that day when there is no snake, when there is no scorpion, when there is no hyena, when there is no lion, when there is neither dog nor wolf, when there is thus neither fear nor trembling, man has no rival! At such a time, may the lands of Šubur and Ḫamazi, the many-tongued, and Sumer, the great mountain of the me of magnificence, and Akkad, the land possessing all that is befitting, and the Martu land, resting in security -- the whole universe, the well-guarded people -- may they all address Enlil together in a single language! For at that time, for the ambitious lords, for the ambitious princes, for the ambitious kings, Enki, for the ambitious lords, for the ambitious princes, for the ambitious kings, for the ambitious lords, for the ambitious princes, for the ambitious kings -- Enki, the lord of abundance and of steadfast decisions, the wise and knowing lord of the Land, the expert of the gods, chosen for wisdom, the lord of Eridug, shall change the speech in their mouths, as many as he had placed there, and so the speech of mankind is truly one.""
originally posted by: TheBadCabbie
doesn't elohim translate as 'heavenly host'?
Elohim (Hebrew: אֱלֹהִים) is a grammatically plural noun for "gods" or "deity" in Biblical Hebrew
originally posted by: TheBadCabbie
originally posted by: Marduk
Elohim (Hebrew: אֱלֹהִים) is a grammatically plural noun for "gods" or "deity" in Biblical Hebrew
It is a plural noun, though, at least according to your mysterious source...
originally posted by: peter vlar
The only thing more mysterious than the aforementioned source is the absolute lack of due diligence on the part of people who are so eager and willing to absorb even the most ridiculous of hoaxes here on ATS. I shouldn't be surprised by it at this point but some silly part of me is an eternal optimist hoping that people will grasp these basic principles of research and dialogue.
originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: TheBadCabbie
So in your op what you should be doing is posting evidence his position is right. If your unable to do that than its nothing more than his belief.
Of course, Sitchin's translations are only a small part of his work. What I found to be much more interesting and compelling about it was the comparative archaeology, history, and mythology that he presents in his Earth Chronicles series. I've read this series of books, and I can't dismiss the body of evidence presented by Sitchin. Most of it is pretty mainstream really, just presented comparatively.
originally posted by: TheBadCabbie
a reply to: Xcalibur254
Personally I could care less about VA 243, I thought it was a weak connection in the first place. What I liked about Sitchin's work was the comparative history and mythology. As I replied to dragonridr: 'If you dismiss all of his translations, some of his alleged bad archaeology even, you're still left with an extensive body of comparative history and mythology. These are aspects of his work that are what they are. He's basically just quoting sources when he includes this work in his books. That right there establishes Sitchin's merit in my opinion. '
originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: Marduk
Thanks for the link loved the comment section gave you a star for the Flintstones comment ...I have no shame :>)