Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 11 votes

Was Jesus an Annunaki?


  • Please log in to reply
1026 replies to this topic

#946    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 25 March 2013 - 08:55 AM

View PostEverdred, on 25 March 2013 - 08:48 AM, said:

Snake handlers are a crazy Protestant sect in Appalachia who literally handle dangerous snakes and allow themselves to be bitten under the belief that God will protect them (should he so choose).  They sometimes suffer severe injuries and death as a result.

The point being that Catholics generally follow the teachings of the Church, whereas Protestants emphasize following the words of the Bible above all, which has given rise to lots of different beliefs based on what passages people focus on and how they interpret them.  This includes the modern phenomenon of Young Earth Creationists and the aforementioned snake handlers.

The assumption that Sitchin's motive is to make money is not based on bigotry but rather generosity--his arguments are obviously wrong (and every single expert on the ancient languages in question agrees on that point) so he must either be incredibly stupid or deliberately disseminating misinformation to make money.  Thus we generously call him a charlatan rather than an idiot.
And what does the Church teach?.
I thought that the only difference in principal between Catholics and Protestants was the issue of allegiance to the church. I don't think either are exempt from agreeing that the Bible in it's entirety is the word of God.
Also snake handlers and snake charmers are also slur words for oriental people of the Indian subcontinent, though it has grown rather old fashion.

And once again every single expert on ancient language will not agree on everything. His arguments are not all obviously wrong and neither he is a charlatan hiding behind a degree etc. Considering his motives to be moneymaking is in my eyes Bigotry. He believes what he writes,that is not the signs of a charlatan who intentionally fools people with information that he himself acknowledges to be false for profit. And you can consider the fact that all of us know very little of everything that there is to know about anything so you can consider that we are all incredibly stupid.

Though i would also like to know your opinion of people who considered pilt down man as the missing link for quite some time before it was accepted to be a Hoax. The majority of mainstream was in agreement that pilt down man was definitely the missing link for quite some time and any opinion to the contrary was considered stupid and just wrong.

Edited by Harsh86_Patel, 25 March 2013 - 09:04 AM.


#947    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:02 AM

How do you call people who handle snakes? Snake handlers:

Posted Image


#948    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:14 AM

Posted Image

Posted Image

The original Indian versions of snake handlers/charmers. This and the Indian rope trick were very famous since antiquity,some with intent to insult and  ridicule referred to India as a country of Snake charmers especially during the Imperialist British rule.


#949    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:18 AM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 25 March 2013 - 09:14 AM, said:



The original Indian versions of snake handlers/charmers. This and the Indian rope trick were very famous since antiquity,some with intent to insult and  ridicule referred to India as a country of Snake charmers especially during the Imperialist British rule.

I know about that, but that is not what Everdred was talking about.

This Christian sect believes they are protected by God when handling snakes. They are not 'snake charmers'.


#950    Everdred

Everdred

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 192 posts
  • Joined:10 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 March 2013 - 09:57 AM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 25 March 2013 - 08:55 AM, said:

And what does the Church teach?.
I thought that the only difference in principal between Catholics and Protestants was the issue of allegiance to the church. I don't think either are exempt from agreeing that the Bible in it's entirety is the word of God.
Also snake handlers and snake charmers are also slur words for oriental people of the Indian subcontinent, though it has grown rather old fashion.

And once again every single expert on ancient language will not agree on everything. His arguments are not all obviously wrong and neither he is a charlatan hiding behind a degree etc. Considering his motives to be moneymaking is in my eyes Bigotry. He believes what he writes,that is not the signs of a charlatan who intentionally fools people with information that he himself acknowledges to be false for profit. And you can consider the fact that all of us know very little of everything that there is to know about anything so you can consider that we are all incredibly stupid.

Though i would also like to know your opinion of people who considered pilt down man as the missing link for quite some time before it was accepted to be a Hoax. The majority of mainstream was in agreement that pilt down man was definitely the missing link for quite some time and any opinion to the contrary was considered stupid and just wrong.

The Church teaches all sorts of extra-biblical things.  Worship of Mary, worship of saints (some of which are actually just adaptations of pagan gods), Papal primacy, Papal infallibility, and all sorts of local adaptations designed to encourage the conversion of the natives of a region.  And I believe one of the big issues in the Reformation was the sale of indulgences (pay the Church money and your sins are forgiven!--definitely not in the Bible).  Protestants weren't upset by the notion of allegiance to a church so much as allegiance to that particular Church which had run so far from the Bible (the Reformation was undoubtedly aided by the invention of printing press which put the Bible into the hands of many people outside the Church).  There are all sorts of Protestant churches nowadays, each having some variation based on different interpretations of passages.  The Catholic Church, on the other hand, disseminates to its followers the approved interpretations, so there is much less variance of belief (at least officially).

I agree with you in saying that language experts don't agree on everything.  That's certainly true, and plainly evident if you look at commentaries of the same text.  But one thing they all agree on is that Sitchin is wrong.  Dead wrong.  His translations/interpretations are gross abuses of the actual texts.

As for Pilt Down Man, that's just an example of the unfortunate reality of hoaxing.  A good hoax can and will fool people, even intelligent and educated people.  But Sitchin isn't as skilled as the chap who put Pilt Down together.


#951    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 25 March 2013 - 10:22 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 25 March 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

I know about that, but that is not what Everdred was talking about.

This Christian sect believes they are protected by God when handling snakes. They are not 'snake charmers'.
I understand what Evedred was referring to,thanks for putting that into perspective. But i was also trying to put forward how i interpreted it.


#952    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 25 March 2013 - 11:13 AM

Ancient gold mines in Africa.Please check the dating links as well.

http://www.viewzone....scalendarx.html

Extract:
Something amazing has been discovered in an area of South Africa, about 150 miles inland, west of the port of Maputo. It is the remains of a huge metropolis that measures, in conservative estimates, about 1500 square miles. It's part of an even larger community that is about 10,000 square miles and appears to have been constructed -- are you ready -- from 160,000 to 200,000 BCE!

The area is significant for one striking thing -- gold. "The thousands of ancient gold mines discovered over the past 500 years, points to a vanished civilization that lived and dug for gold in this part of the world for thousands of years," says Tellinger. "And if this is in fact the cradle of humankind, we may be looking at the activities of the oldest civilization on Earth."

http://www.viewzone2...calendar22.html

Extract:
The first rough calculation was at least 25,000 years ago. But new and more precise measurements kept increasing the age. The next calculation was presented by a master archaeoastronomer who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of ridicule by the academic fraternity. His calculation was also based on the rise of Orion and suggested an age of at least 75,000 years. The most recent and most acurate calculation, done in June 2009, suggests an age of at least 160,000 years, based on the rise of Orion -- flat on the horizon -- but also on the erosion of dolerite stones found at the site.


Sitchin anyone??


#953    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 25 March 2013 - 11:39 AM

Yes, Sitchin. Why? Because the one claiming that age based it on Sitchin's books.

Here you can read all about it:

http://www.unexplain...4

.

Edited by Abramelin, 25 March 2013 - 11:45 AM.


#954    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 25 March 2013 - 11:53 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 25 March 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

Yes, Sitchin. Why? Because the one claiming that age based it on Sitchin's books.

Here you can read all about it:

http://www.unexplain...4

.
What would you base the age claim on? a general consensus on when civilization began by the mainstream?
Went through the link but what is your interpretations of the site? which civilization you would attribute it to? Why located so near a good supply of gold?
Would you even consider the ruins to be belonging to a civilization?


#955    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:11 PM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 25 March 2013 - 11:53 AM, said:

What would you base the age claim on? a general consensus on when civilization began by the mainstream?
Went through the link but what is your interpretations of the site? which civilization you would attribute it to? Why located so near a good supply of gold?
Would you even consider the ruins to be belonging to a civilization?

Then I advise you to read that thread I linked to, and you'll know.

As quoted by Peter Cox (a South African):

At present (2011), the site has not undergone any official dating procedures.

http://www.unexplain...15#entry4351863

.

Edited by Abramelin, 25 March 2013 - 12:42 PM.


#956    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,053 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:20 PM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 25 March 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

even if Crick the person who discovered the structure of DNA suggested the theory of Pan-spermia or an outside space alien entity that not only influenced but spawned life on earth,and many other serious scientist acknowledge the possibility you can continue calling it a comic book concept.It seems you are trying to intimidate any potential believers with the threat of ridicule.

Yet Crick fails to tell us where or how these bacteria responsible for panspermia arose.

Do you think the Anunnaki created them?

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#957    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 25 March 2013 - 12:39 PM

View PostHarte, on 25 March 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Yet Crick fails to tell us where or how these bacteria responsible for panspermia arose.

Do you think the Anunnaki created them?

Harte
Maybe.But that again will lead to the question...who created the Annunaki?
Abiogenesis like macro-evolution does not have any empirical proof of success. Though i broached the subject in the evolution debate,that i myself stand in the dark regarding how did life originate question and have not been able to decide as per the information available to me currently.
I do not accept any form of darwinistic evolution theories even the one with the neo in the front,as as per my thought process none of them explain currently how we evolved (if we did actually evolve) by themselves.


#958    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    Lector Historiae

  • Member
  • 8,848 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 25 March 2013 - 06:33 PM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 25 March 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Maybe.But that again will lead to the question...who created the Annunaki?

Oh, that. You should have just asked that a long time ago and saved everyone the effort. They were created by our Past Basset Masters, glorious, droolsome deities who first came to Earth before mankind existed, searching for tasty ham. The Annunaki were created as their servants to do fiddly little things that involve thumbs.

And don't ask where the Past Basset Masters came from. They predate the universe. Some say they blinked into existence so that the universe might be created by something awesome.

--Jaylemurph

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#959    Abramelin

Abramelin

    -

  • Member
  • 18,109 posts
  • Joined:07 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:"Here the tide is ruled, by the wind, the moon and us."

  • God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands

Posted 25 March 2013 - 06:41 PM

View PostHarsh86_Patel, on 25 March 2013 - 12:39 PM, said:

Maybe.But that again will lead to the question...who created the Annunaki?
Abiogenesis like macro-evolution does not have any empirical proof of success. Though i broached the subject in the evolution debate,that i myself stand in the dark regarding how did life originate question and have not been able to decide as per the information available to me currently.
I do not accept any form of darwinistic evolution theories even the one with the neo in the front,as as per my thought process none of them explain currently how we evolved (if we did actually evolve) by themselves.

Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution.


#960    Harsh86_Patel

Harsh86_Patel

    Psychic Spy

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,306 posts
  • Joined:08 Aug 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:India

  • If you stare into the abyss,the abyss stares back into you

Posted 26 March 2013 - 05:39 AM

View PostAbramelin, on 25 March 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Abiogenesis has nothing to do with evolution.
Abiogenesis and evolution are related as mostly people who are die hard supporters of naturalistic mechanism to explain life on Earth and deny any sort of creation have precious little alternatives to explain how life first came into being.
An other way to put it in perspective is that mainstream evolutionary scientists do not acknowledge the possibility of a creator to explain life or how so many species are present on Earth.This problem gave rise to the concept of Theistic evolution where certain segment of scientists acknowledge that life was created by God and then evolution took it's course.The problem with this is that if you acknowledge a creator then you have to acknowledge the possibility of the creators participation in all processes of life. And a hardcore mainstream evolutionist does not entertain and fights against the concept of a Sky Daddy or God to explain anything,so it is but natural for people to ask that if you believe that all observable things have a naturalistic explaination then how do you explain the origin of life.
So the reasoning would go on the basis that if you assert that there is no God or evolution explains the different species we see today and is the process that led to us Humans without any involvement or existence of God then how do you explain how life began? there are no naturalistic explanations backed by proof available.And irrespective of Abiogenesis evolution itself is a theory based on shaky grounds without any empirical proof in it's current form





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users