since you are not one to withhold information DC,
Please cite 'where' the word seraphim is translated to drakon, for the benefit of this discussion.
Exactly where...not a vague ref but so that we can find it without too much trouble.

If you mean the DSS please give cave number, scroll number etc.....and preferably a link to a site which displays it.

Im sure you have such critical info handy.

are there any other examples you can cite of this apparently common and mainstream translation?

what does "him" mean in hebrew.

i just remembered "serap" means "to burn". and the serphim burn away corruption as one approaches our lord.

assuming him is derived from hymn [in this case anyway]

seraphim would more likely mean "burning song" [makes sense they do sing praises as DC attests].

now since a "voice" is also refered to in some cases as a "breath" this would lead to an assumption of breathing fire [burning breath]

now these seraphim DC's obsessed with their role is to cleanse. this means they represent truth or from the Raelien Pov dissenfectant machines. [dissenfectants burn try rubbing alchohol]

Oh, I bleed.

You and I have already discussed this. I checked out your story on this point months ago. It didn't pan out.

Feel free to have the last word in the exchange. Our conversation is concluded.

Hey, one of the most scholarly and respected sources for the Bible and Judaic theology agrees with what I am saying (seraphim are winged and footed serpentine deities). If the esteemed Jewish Encyclopedia didn't "pan out" for you, I believe you may have a severe reading or comprehension problem.

Not quite sure what you mean here dc, can you rephrase?

as i mentioned in my post there is real evidence that suggests that my proposal is valid. Archaeological, literary, epigraphic.
There are a number of articles written about specific parts of the theory (which are not my own but suggested by a number of academics), and the theory goes far further than i have suggested.

Since im still investigating the validity of the information i suggest it only as an idea, feel free to wax lyrical how magical winged serpent representations of a real live draconic god is 'far more likely'.

By the way I do believe that the Jewish Encyclopedia supports my opinions on both the Brazen serpent and Seraphim, and are soooo far removed from supporting the idea that Jehovah was a quadrupedal immortal dragon it beggars belief how you constantly mention them....as i have shown numerous times.

P.S. Please be so kind as to respond to the request i made in my previous post here for information....you havent provided refs for this since ive been a member here, so its probably time you pulled this particular rabbit out of the hat.

for the benefit of those interested here are links to the articles in the jewish encyclopedia about the Brazen serpent, and Seraphim.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp...88&letter=S
the article mentions Isaiah first and his vision, but discounts them as late......then moves on to other possible origins.....

QUOTE

According to a third and more probable theory, the seraphim originally were serpents, as the name implies. Among many peoples of antiquity serpents played an important part in myth and folk-lore. For instance, there were Tiamat in the Babylonian legend of the Creation, and the Uræus serpent in Egypt.

So snakes...big mythical snakes.....and since you claim Tiamat is not really a dragon, they cannot by your 'model' of dragon. Personally i would include them (tiamat and uraeus) as dragons, since they match the original criteria of the Greeks....ie...big mythical snakes....and the JE agrees...
but you dont....

End of.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp...razen%20serpent



Bear in mind what they say about Isaiah and the most probable theory about seraphim....
clearly poisonous snakes....


I hope im not boring anyone....



As the symbolic meaning was lost in the course of time, and a cult arose, the serpent became winged....often a designation of 'spirituality' and in-corporeality. (how does one depict the formless?)

This was seen to be going against the commandments so H. destroyed the image.

....and the coup de grace.....



Game Over.

So just where do they support you, and where do they disagree with what ive been saying for months?
I am surprised, since i have posted this info a number of times, that you persist in insisting that the Eminent scholars of the Jewish Encyclopedia (who are academic and have no political/religious agenda beyond inquiry and clarification) support your notion that Seraphim and Jehovah are quadrupedal winged dragons that really exist physically and still do, although relagated to skulking in ponds and avoiding their former cattle, now we've got guns.



Edit: It would be rude of me not to actually address the topic of this thread, so here goes.....early polytheism. Council of gods. Before the concept of Jehovah and monotheism evolved. Its not as simple as saying Jehovah was this god, or that god, he absorbed the roles, duties, powers, exploits of a number of deities. The concept continued to evolve, and still is.

Now im not saying God doesnt exist, but our concept has evolved....'for now we see as through a glass, darkly....' as a wise man once put it.

Wrong extra-terrestrial means not of the Earth. The last time I checked God is not of the Earth. No I do not think of Christ as God, but the son of God.

Moses took his walking stick and laid it before Pharaoh and it turned into a snake. Pharaoh's high priests took two sticks and laid them on the ground and they turned into snake. Moses's stick then proceeded to eat the other two not growing in size as it did so. Then Moses reached out taking hold of the snake and it turned back into a stick.


No where in that does it say that the stick looked like a snake but that it became a snake.

The other two snakes were an illusion.




The above is parapharasied. It has been over 20 years since I read it.

Jewish Rabbis often use that passage to show their students how ignorant Chrisitians are of the actual scripture. No word associated with snakes is used in the Moses story in the original Hebrew. The word used is tanniyen that is usually translated to dragon. But this doesn't make much sense so Christians say it means "snake" but then in Genesis they say the exact same word means "whale" in the creation story.

I believe in the original story Moses stuck the staff to summon the Yahweh dragon, and not perform some silly magic trick to turn a stick into a snake, when no word for snake is even used in the scripture.

Yes, what an excellent point that you make. I agree completely.....

In saying this, I also believe that the religious texts have been greatly tampered with by the political/religious powers throughout the ages in order to suit themselves, however what you've said seems to make sense.

I always think back to Leviticus, which is a bunch of Jewish social/hygiene rules and it is in Leviticus that most religious people will justify that homosexuality is wrong.

I don't believe that this law was given by Yahweh....we must remember that the Bible was written by men, who were open to misunderstandings and mistranslations etc. I read in a book called 'The Sins of Scripture' that this hatred of the homosexual lifestyle was attributed to when the Jewish people were in exile and were wandering around amongst other tribes. For those tribes, it was the norm to have homosexual and hetrosexual relationships (we even know that in Rome bisexuality was seen as a prestigious thing to be eg. Alexander and other emperors).

The Jewish people, wanting to preserve their culture and their lifestyle (much like today) most likely forbade anyone to mix with these other tribes, or eat with them (kosher food) or to partake in anything else (like homosexuality).

What do you think?

-Josh

if you google the two words "seraphim" and "drakones" Grem, you will get like a hundred references stating the "word used for seraphim is drakones in the book of Enoch." This source can only be the Cairo Papyrus. I have seen some sources claim it is in the DSS also, but the greek fragments of Enoch are from the wrong books.

There seems to be some contradiction in accounts as you may have discovered yourself. Some sources claim a lot more of Enoch was found in the DSS than the two fragments.

We have gone over the snake vs. dragon thing before. Serpent often means a classical winged and footed dragon in literature NOW, and undoubtedly earlier as well. The point is, there can be no doubt that the ANCIENT conception of the Seraphim were reptilian cratures, and this was clearly understood by mainstream Chirstianity by the continued use of the serpent dragons depicted surrounding the throne of god, like the seraphim are described. This PROVES the reptile definition of the seraphim was acknowledged by both Judaism and the catholic church.

We know the catholic church acknowledged Cherubim as classic, winged and footed dragons as well, as this is how they are depicted in illuminated bibles depicting the specific verses of "god riding the Cherubim". Of course, in these times, bibles were reserved for the clergy.

i dont know how we got to this worthless debate about dragons.but it seems weve strayed somewhat.

i beleive from the God=ET perspective that angels are automatons of sort [explains perfection].

in "our image" God could be talking to himself this of course is what i do all the time.

I think, and I'm not sure, that 'him' doesn't mean anything. It's the 'im' part that we need to look at.

Seraph is a singular. Seraphim is a plural word.
Eloha is a singular. Elohim is a plural word.

Perhaps 'im' means more than one, as in, the plural attached to things?

I like how you translated the 'seraphs' into dissinfectant machines, because I suppose that's what they could have been. But in the Bible anywhere were it talks about angels, they are talking about the creators.

Angelos means messenger in greek. And we know that in the Jewish Bible no angels ever had wings (just personal jet backs on their backs, feet and arms to steer) They were always people who came down from heaven to give messages to humanity.

We get our concept of angels and their heirachy and archangels and stuff like that from later on in history, through paintings and whatnot.

snake or dragon it is the story in this case that is all that is important. Moses's trick wasn't a trick. where as the priest's trick was a trick. that is the meaning of that story.

here is what I got.




Main Entry: ser·a·phim
Pronunciation: \ˈser-ə-ˌfim, -ˌfēm\
Function: noun plural
Etymology: Late Latin seraphim, plural, seraphs, from Hebrew śĕrāphīm
Date: 12th century
1: an order of angels — see celestial hierarchy
2singular, plural seraphim : one of the 6-winged angels standing in the presence of God
— se·raph·ic \sə-ˈra-fik\ adjective
— se·raph·i·cal·ly \-fi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb


Couldn't find anything on drakones. maybe you mean dark ones.

Hello,

No I don't follow the ideas of Sitchin, I follow the message given to Rael by the ET's that created us (if you believe what we believe). But the idea of aliens creating us isn't new, and the message given to Rael was given in 1973 at a time when humanity could understand this idea without completely dismissing it. The word of Von Danikan and Sitchin had already prepared humanity for the idea that we were created by ET's, and they did a great job with their theories for having figured it out on their own. Rael was just a normal guy with a normal job when he was given the message from the Elohim.

How do you know that there are no ET creators called Elohim? This is what the Jewish people called them, but in every race there are testimonies to their creators from beyond the stars. The Sumarians called them the Annukai (spelling okay?) and others call them the Watchers.

I can see that you believe in the existance of God, so I won't go on about my point of view. However you've said that these ET's who created us cannot be eternal, immortant, unchanging and all powerful. Well, you're right to a point. They are normal humans like us, but they're way more advanced that us and they have used science (for many thousands of years) to achieve these attributes that many people say 'God' has.

The Elohim have extended their lifespan to 700-1000 years, by having a surgical proceedure that extends their cell life to this point.
If they are worthy and have given much to their humanity, they are eligible to become 'eternal' and 'immortal' by having their body cloned and their memory/personality transferred into the body of the clone, ready to live out another 700-1000 years. When this time is up, they are transferred into another fresh body. This is how some of them are eternal.
They do change though, like many people. They are human, so obviously their looks/tastes/personalities/hobbies etc change over time.
They aren't all powerful, but their level of science is one of the highest in this part of the universe. They can do things that would amaze our most advanced scientists.....they can move planets by manipulating certain waves that we've not even discovered yet.

All of these attributes, which they had in the beginning when they created us, were soon attributed to the idea of one 'God'.

This is just my belief though, and the beliefs of all of the Raelians on the planet.

Please tell me how you came to believe in God?

-Josh

Heres the crux of your problem. In the Septuagint, which is the ancient Greek translation of the bible written around 250 B.C. if I'm not mistaken, there no place where the word Saraph is translated to Dragon.

Before I go any further I must state that this is the version you are always saying translayed Saraph to Drakon. Sorry, it just isn't there.

The following verses are the only places where "Saraph" is written in Hebrew, please note that in none of them is it translated as "Dragon".

Num 21:6
And the LORD 03068 sent 07971 fiery 08314 serpents 05175 among the people 05971, and they bit 05391 the people 05971; and much 07227 people 05971 of Israel 03478 died 04191 .

Num 21:8
And the LORD 03068 said 0559 unto Moses 04872, Make 06213 thee a fiery serpent 08314, and set 07760 it upon a pole 05251: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten 05391 , when he looketh 07200 upon it, shall live 02425 .

Deu 8:15
Who led 03212 thee through that great 01419 and terrible 03372 wilderness 04057, [wherein were] fiery 08314 serpents 05175, and scorpions 06137, and drought 06774, where [there was] no water 04325; who brought thee forth 03318 water 04325 out of the rock 06697 of flint 02496;

Isa 6:2
Above 04605 it stood 05975 the seraphims 08314: each one 0259 had six 08337 wings 03671; with twain 08147 he covered 03680 his face 06440, and with twain 08147 he covered 03680 his feet 07272, and with twain 08147 he did fly 05774 .

Isa 6:6
Then flew 05774 one 0259 of the seraphims 08314 unto me, having a live coal 07531 in his hand 03027, [which] he had taken 03947 with the tongs 04457 from off the altar 04196:

Isa 14:29
Rejoice 08055 not thou, whole Palestina 06429, because the rod 07626 of him that smote 05221 thee is broken 07665 : for out of the serpent's 05175 root 08328 shall come forth 03318 a cockatrice 06848, and his fruit 06529 [shall be] a fiery 08314 00 flying 05774 serpent 08314.

Isa 30:6
The burden 04853 of the beasts 0929 of the south 05045: into the land 0776 of trouble 06869 and anguish 06695, from whence [come] the young 03833 and old lion 03918, the viper 0660 and fiery 08314 00 flying 05774 serpent 08314, they will carry 05375 their riches 02428 upon the shoulders 03802 of young asses 05895, and their treasures 0214 upon the bunches 01707 of camels 01581, to a people 05971 [that] shall not profit 03276 [them].

That's it, nowhere else do you find the word.

We find that the word for Dragon is actually Leviathan, which is a transliteration of the hebrew but is also occasionaly translated as Dragon.

Again, in the Septuagint we find the word Dragon, let us see where:

1. Daniel 14
... no dishonesty found in her. 64 From that day forth was Daniel had in great reputation in the sight of the people. Chapter 14 Bel and the Dragon 14:1 And king Astyages was gathered to his fathers, and Cyrus of Persia received his kingdom. 2 And Daniel conversed with the king, and was honoured above ...

2. Esaias 27
... disclose her blood, and shall not cover her slain. Chapter 27 27:1 In that day God shall bring his holy and great and strong sword upon the dragon, even the serpent that flees, upon the dragon, the crooked serpent: he shall destroy the dragon. 2 In that day there shall be a fair ...

3. Psalms 74
... , in thy might, thou didst break to pieces the heads of the dragons in the water. 14 Thou didst break to pieces the heads of the dragon; thou didst give him for meat to the Ethiopian nations. 15 Thou didst cleave fountains and torrents; thou driedst up mighty rivers. 16 The day is ...

4. Sirach 25
... above the head of a serpent; and there is no wrath above the wrath of an enemy. 16 I had rather dwell with a lion and a dragon, than to keep house with a wicked woman. 17 The wickedness of a woman changeth her face, and darkeneth her countenance like sackcloth. 18 Her husband ...

5. Jezekiel 29
... prophesy against him, and against the whole of Egypt: 3 and say, Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I am against Pharao, the great dragon that lies in the midst of his rivers, that says, The rivers are mine, and I made them. 4 And I will put hooks in thy ...

6. Jeremias 28
... He has devoured me, he has torn me asunder, airy darkness has come upon me; Nabuchodonosor king of Babylon has swallowed me up, as a dragon has he filled his belly with my delicacies. 35 My troubles and my distresses have driven me out into Babylon, shall she that dwells in Sion say; ...

7. Job 26
... , and by his wisdom the whale has been overthrown. 13 And the barriers of heaven fear him, and by a command he has slain the apostate dragon. 14 Behold, these are parts of his way; and we will hearken to him at the least intimation of his word: but the strength of his ...


As you can see, your affirmation is apparently incorrect. Saraphs were never translated as Drakon because that word already had equivalents: Leviathan, Tannah or Tanniyn.

That is why it is supposition, a leap of intuition without scriptural support.

words are sometimes misassociated with false definitions.

ex: kazikami=divine wind=hurricane
kazi=wind
kami=spirit

remember now kamikazi means suicide strike in reference to japanese suicide bombers in WWII. yet as you can see there is distance when properly broken down.

Here is what Yahweh, the President of the Council of the Eternals and the leader of the Elohim (our extra terrestrial creators) told Rael regarding this part of the Bible:

"The creators taught human beings how to inject themselves to treat snakebites:

'Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole and it shall come to pass, that everyone that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.'
NUMBERS 21:8

As soon as someone was bitten, he 'looked' at the 'serpent of brass', that is to say, a syringe was brought to him, and he was injected with the serum."

What do you think? Do you think that primitive language/metaphors had to be used in the ancient texts in order for primitive people to understand when they read the story? No one knew was a syringe was, so they called it a serpent of brass.....

-Josh

And that is why I stated that it was a play of words because the use of this particular expression has come to mean something specific. aliens.

Doesn't change the fact that according to my very specific post God is not an ET.

As for your slant on the expression, I agree God is not of earth, he is the author, owner and creator of it.

and by definition not an earthling thus he is an alien.

In the context of the brazen serpent, seraphim were clearly poisonous snakes as my post on page 7 shows.

If the term was also used for the totem then it may refer to its representation of one of these such poisonous snakes, or the fact that the bronze image was 'fired'.

As the JE guys state folk elevated this image and a cult formed, the image was worshiped and 'spiritualized'....later in the time of Isaiah (and the JE guys hold him partly responsible) it was changed to be depicted with wings....i have alluded to the significance of wings in these contexts but you have not picked up on it...they were spirits, the wings symbolise that they were not physical beings.
It came to resemble the Uraeus (with wings) .... and had a very comparable role.

please be more specific than just say 'cairo papyrus', you must have an actual reference....papyrus number etc. (does your 'research' go that far?)
I did request that you not be so vague/elusive.

also why was the book of Enoch rejected from the canon?
Finally, as mentioned on the previous page, the JE guys equate seraphim with other serpent/dragons...the uraeus and Tiamat...who you regard simply as a symbolic chaos-serpent, and not a dragon.... (not fitting your model)
So they believe them to be more snakey than quadrupedal etc. how does this support your theory?

I know that later they evolved into the classical dragon shape we all know and love, just as the greek drakones evolved from great mythical snakes to the same. but this suggests that they were merely concepts and not actual creatures being depicted.

This thread has gotten really wacky.

But instead of challenging the many odd things now being posted on it. I thought I'd add something interesting, which you guys may use to back up your stance.

I don't know if it's been listed yet, but "Seraphim" does mean "burning ones".

Just thought I'd add.

Yes, Will, and in modern American English, we have a regional folk name for a certain kind of insect, fire ants.

Now, does this mean that there are tiny armored fire-breathing dragons plaguing the American Southwest? I don't know, but I think these particular beasties are called that because when they bite you, you experience a burning sensation.

I've been told there are snakes whose venom evokes similar sensations. Some of those snakes apparently live in the deserts of the Middle East. I wonder what some people might call a snake like that.

Fire snake maybe?

Introducing The horned viper.

The israeli armed forces have an apache gunship, which has Adder as its designate, its other is Seraph.
Co-inkidink?

A viper administers venom not poison, which burns like crazy as it destroys cells.

Below is an inventory of all the accient Enoch. I thought Cairo Papyrus was enough becasue you included this in one of your posts before. It would be interesting to see how the Seraphim are identified in the Aramaic versions. There are more references to reptilian Seraphim in other DSS scroll however as Dr. Heiser has pointed out and posted here before.

The Seraphim sent to punish the Israelites are the same seraphim in Isaiah. This is the word that is used. There are a number of other words the hebrews would have used if these were mere poisonous snakes. And the Seraphim are clearly described with wing and hands and feet, just like the mushushu, you on the Gudea vase hold the gates of heaven open and become the biblical cherubim.

The reason some authorities think Tiamat resembled a limbed and winged dragon in older texts is due to the misidentification of a Babylonian frieze of a bearded god hero fighiting a winged monster. Now it is believed the monster is Zu or Kur. In any case, it cannot be Tiamat becasue it has a clearly depicted PENIS!

The shape of the classical dragon is the Mushushu of the third millenia BC and this is obviously the creature Isaiah visualized. What is the translation of the Mushushu? Furious SERPENT, yet it clearly has wings, and clawed arms and legs. This PROVES that the term serpent or snake in ancient times could mean a winged/limbed dragon as well. And the greeks knew winged 'dragons' from the earliest times, just by different names, Ketos and Gryphons.



from Wiki:

Aramaic
Eleven Aramaic-language fragments of the Book of Enoch were found in cave 4 of Qumran in 1948,[8] and are in the care of the Israel Antiquities Authority. They were translated and discussed by Józef Milik and Matthew Black in The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976). Another translation has been released by Vermes and Garcia-Martinez (Vermes 513-515; Garcia- Martinez 246-259). Milik described the documents as being white or cream in color, blackened in areas, made of leather which was smooth, thick and stiff. It was also partly damaged with the ink blurred and faint.

4Q201 = 4QEnoch a ar, Enoch 2,1-5,6; 6,4-8,1; 8,3-9,3.6-8
4Q202 = 4QEnoch b ar, Enoch 5,9-6,4; 6,7-8,1; 8,2-9,4; 10,8-12; 14,4-6;
4Q204 = 4QEnoch c ar, Enoch 1,9-5,1; 6,7; 10,13-19; 12,3; 13,6-14,16; 30,1-32,1; 35,; 36,1-4; 106,13-107,2;
4Q205 = 4QEnoch d ar; Enoch 89,29-31; 89,43-44
4Q206 = 4QEnoch e ar; Enoch 22,3-7; 28,3-29,2; 31,2-32,3; 88,3; 89,1-6; 89,26-30; 89,31-37
4Q207 = 4QEnoch f ar
4Q208 = 4QEnastr a ar
4Q209 = 4QEnastr b ar; Enoch 79,3-5; 78,17; 79,2 and large fragments that do not correspond to any part of the Ethiopian text
4Q210 = 4QEnastr c ar; Enoch 76,3-10; 76,13-77,4; 78,6-8
4Q211 = 4QEnastr d ar; large fragments that do not correspond to any part of the Ethiopian text
4Q212 = 4QEn g ar; 91,10; 91,18-19; 92,1-2; 93,2-4; 93,9-10; 91,11-17; 93,11-93,1.
Also at Qumran (cave 1) have been discovered 3 tiny fragments in Hebrew (8,4-9,4; 106).


[edit] Greek
The 8th century work Chronographia Universalis by the Byzantine historian Giorgio Sincello preserved some passages of the Book of Enoch in Greek (6,1-9,4; 15,8-16,1).

Cairo Papyrus 10759 consists of fragments of papyri containing portions of chapters 1-32, recovered by a French archeological team at Akhmim in Egypt, and published five years later in 1892.
V. 1809: 89,42-49
P. Oxy. 2069: 77,7-78,1; 78,1-3; 78,8; 85,10-86,2
CB185: 97,6-107,3
The hypothesis that in addition, several small fragments in Greek have been found at Qumran (7QEnoch), dating from the first century BCE or CE is highly contested. Comprising 103:3-4 and 103:7-8, they are written on papyrus with gridlines across them.[9]

No. "Burning things" is what these fire spewing reptiles do. The Leviathan spews fire from his mouth, Yahweh spews fire from his mouth, and so do the reptilian seraphim. The noun is the Hebrew reptile deity. The verb is what they do. We know this is the true definition because the egyptians also knew the Seraph as a fiery reptile, and just as Isaiah said, they have wings and feet in their hieroglyph.

Modern christians uncomfortable with the true defintion of seraphim turned them into swan winged human 'cartoon' angels associated with fire in Isaiah, but in numbers creatures of the same name turn into mere biting snakes of the desert. But this is impossible because the Seraph described in Isaiah have wings, and can pick up coals in their hands.

The trained Hebrew scholars as well as the Christian expert, Dr. Heiser, all agree that the Seraphim of the Bible are reptilian entities, but nothing in their description suggest they are merely snakes. And the brazen serpent clearly had wings, and its later name associates it with the Hebrew word for Dragon, "tannyn".

Probably because we are talking about Yahweh and the highest angels, and their "image", and in the REAL Hebrew Bible the highest heavenly creatures are winged 'dragons', just as Yahweh has been described by Christians and Persians, and the very name Yahweh, is connected to a remarkably similar Canannite dragon diety with even the same cosort, (Asherah) and same arch enemy (Ba'al Haddad). Coincidence?

Accoridng to the Bible, Yahweh has great wings, spews fire from his mouth, smoke from his nostrils, demand silver and gold in place of taking children, does 'consume' calves, lambs, and on one occasion, was presented with 32 Midianite virgins. Don't blame me, I didn't write the Bible.

Fire snakes crawling around heaven? You still don't get it. All the scholars say the Seraphim in Isaiah are reptilian creatures that "guard" the throne, something we see all over the ancient mideast. Mushushu dragons flank marduk, and winged cobras flank pharoah. If the Biblical God is real, then all of these other motiffs are based on the Biblical God's Reptilian assistants. This is why the Bible says God SENDS them to punish the Israelites. YOu dont SEND a herd of pea brained snakes. Christianity uderstood this for centureis, but not today. The Seraphim in Isaiah are the Seraphim in Numbers. Same name, same creature. I guess if you want to believe they magically transform from cartoon humanoid angels into common desert vipers, that is you perogative.

i dont see how dragons creating somthing in their image casts man as is.

you could say it refers to our reptilian ancesters [evolution] but that knowledge couldnt have survived so long.

or it refers to the structural commonalities all vertebrates share but this backs an Et based arguement.

the word 'Elohim' as i understand it, is a uni-plural term.. in the same way that a church is a singular instance made up from individual congregation members, or a house is made from its individual members..

perhaps this is the 'us' being refered to?

I'm fluent in Hebrew and have copies of every source of the Hebrew Scripture at home, which I study daily. This statement is just ridiculous. Especially as "dragon" is not a Hebrew concept, but a Greek one.

"He who causes to be" is all "YHWH" is....


I think you are reading a different Bible...

by answering this post ill answer the preceeding reply to me.

Thanks by the way for those refs, ill take a good look at them when ive got time...(in 3 or 4 weeks)


The Jewish Encyclopedia, as well as lots of stuff ive read about Isaiah regard him fondly, but as an inspired visionary. Drakones without wings flying around the heavens may have not been as unimaginable as all that, Archaic and Early Classical Greek depictions of Medea flying around in her chariot drawn by drakones depict them as all drakones in Greek art at the time....big snakes.







http://www.theoi.com/Ther/DrakonesMedea.html
These creatures exist in myth not in reality.

These creatures are the 'origin' of the word dragon.

Therefore you cannot conclude that the drakones mentioned in numbers have to be mushushu looking. As the JE fellas indicate some evolution in conception or representation is evident.

As mythical creatures they dont have to be stupid....they are not real.

by the time of the translation the term came to be used for different mythical entities and configurations of depiction.

Dragon is not a Hebrew name, but large winged reptiles associated with gods is a universal human trait. If the beast is not specifically a Seraph or Chrerum the Hebrew word is tannyn . But once Greek became the Lingua Franca of the near east, the Jews freely used this language for their scripture as you must know from Qumran. There are many religious texts that regard "drakons" as heavenly creatures, with this word used to replace Seraphim in some cases. Besides Enoch, the apocolypse of Baruch and the Testament of Solomon both describe heavenly dragons, and one in Solomon is clearly described with wings, arms and legs, and saws stone blocks to build solomon's temple.

Images of the Yaw Dragon even decorate the Holy Menorah of the temple! There are ancient Jewish religious ordinances that DICTATE how a Drakon must be depicted in order to be placed on religous items.

For someone who claims to be fluent in Hebrew I am amazed how little you know about Hebrew theology.

Everything I said about Yahweh, wings, fiery breath, smoky nostrils, virgin offerings, accepting money instead of children , etc, is in the Old Testament.

And his name must be derived from Yaw, becasuse there are too many similarieis between Yahweh and Yam/Yaw, as I have already illustrated.

EVERYTHING I have said is based on ancient Jewish scripture and archaeological finds. If you find it 'ridiculous' it really only indicates how little you know about ancient Judaism.

The dragons do not. Yahweh is just a tribal "watcher" deity of the Hebrew. El is the high god and not a dragon. Many scholars have noted that Yahweh and El are not the same God in original Judaism, just as they are two distinctly different Gods in Cannanite theology.

"In his image", I believe it means El is a Sentient creature that is able to "create" as we do. Even the fearsome dragon servants that became mankinds earliest gods do not create.

Hi Josh,

I've heard of the Raelian beliefs but I've never studied them in any deep way, yet I do have adequatre knowledge on Von Danikan and Sitchin though. When I was younger (in my teens) I read every book I could get my hands on regarding ET creators. It sounded extremely logical to me and I found myself nodding in complete agreement with what they had to say on the subject of our origins. The Raelian belief system is somewhat based on these ideas from what I gather but I won't lay that in stone.



Because, the paradigm simply doesn't fit the facts. The origins of the wording and its meaning through the ages has changed a little but in all respects, it can never be applied to simple ET's.

Yes we can correlate that the elohim (Hebrew), Anannuki (Sumerian) and the watchers have elements in common but they are also different in very important ways. That is another subject completely and I really don't want to get sidetracked here but I will say this.

God created the elohim, they are the highest tier of the heavenly spirtual world. We can call them Seraphim or Cherubim. He created them much like he created man but with a different type of essence. They are created in his image but their bodies are made of the same stuff God himself is made of. They are spiritual entites like God himself. That is why they are also classified as elohim. Some call them angels but that is not strictly correct because they are not mere messengers. God gave them authority and power to be rulers with him but not co-rulers. They are subject to his authority.

It is some of these elohim who are refered to in Genesis 6 as "Sons of God" who rebelled against Gods plan for mankind and tried to destroy mankind by polluting humanities bloodline. They are also refered to as "Watchers" in this context. When God imprisoned some of them below the earth, they became after some time to be connected to what is called the underworld, which by the way is what the anannuki are, lords of the underworld according to Sumerian mythology.

So the anannuki are watchers but it cannot be said that all watchers are anannuki. Likewise we can say that God is an elohim but the elohim are not God.



A nice argument overall, but then I have to ask, who created these "elohim" ET's, who in turn created us?

Even if I give credit to your argument, that still doesn't answer the question of 1st causality. Who created the 1st life in the universe?

My answer to that question is simple: God the Most High, creator of the universe, creator of the galaxies, creator of the suns and the planets that revolve around them and ultimately, creator of life.



While I will respect your freedom to believe as you want, it is also neccesary to refute that belief, purely in a philosophical sense mind you, we are after all just talking...



Let's say that I didn't believe in God at all. I was an atheist. Tehn I tried to put a bullet in my brain but God spoke to me (actually spoke to me!!!) and I became a totally differnt person after that. Mind you, there was not church and no salvation, he didn't mention any of that, but he did say that if I trusted him, my life would be better than it was at that moment. I decided to trust that voice, it hasn't let me down yet, when it speaks, which is rare by the way.

I later joined a church and became a christian.

I won't presume to question your experience, but I think it is unlikely the God you spoke to was the prideful, fire breathing, child eating dragon, Yahweh. This is a created creature of El, as the ancient Hebrews and Canannites originally acknowledged.

Even Jesus warned the pharisees they were worhsipping "the murderer from the beginning", (Yahweh). Jesus doesn't call to this dragon from the cross, he calls to El, the creator of the dragon, and the rest of his surrogate, ancient dragon gods scattered around the world as ancient religions confirm.

Thats the Royal " We" or "Our" or "I". It still refering to one entity, but in english it is seen as the Royal " We" or "Our". like the Queen would say "We do not agree with this", meaning she does not, but the We here is a royal "we".

Funny how that "murderer" has helped me out alot in my life, but then I don't make a distinction between Yaweh and El / Elyon, you do. So it doesn't bother me in the least, and I sincerely doubt it bothers God either. For me he is the God of love as well as the God of judgement. One and the same, but a stumbling block to those who don't believe.

who's seen Braveheart

Wallace: I am William Wallace

Soldier: you cant be him hes 10ft tall and commands lightning.

Wallace: Aye and shoots fireballs out of his a***.

case in point theres always some exageration and imagination. so where does that leave our 4000 year old texts vs what we expect.

please keep an open mind.

In no scripture does it say that they are to worship the serpent....

wouldnt the order to make an idol from god be a test.

Heres an example of how I see eve

There is no royal "We" in the bible, much less in this particular part of it. The reference is directed at Gods divine council who were present when God anounced his intention of creating mankind. The original hebrew gramatically demonstrates this idea as well as the fact that upon actual creation of mankind, the verb is singular indicating that a single being created mankind. The council, were present but did not participate.

heck that seems closer to Raelian theory.

I would say that it is biblical study at its best...

Why make the idol and come before it to be healed? That sounds like praising it, EXACTLY as ancient people would do before any idol of a god they believed in. The Bible has also been changed in places, and worshipping the serpent dragon idol is something later Jews and Christians would be uncomfortable with.

OF COURSE modern Jews and Christians don't want this to be a idol, but hey, a rose by any other name is still a rose...... and the same applied to brazen serpent dragon idols.

No, but it is implied that if they 'come before it' they will be healed, as one would expect a real idol would do.

And the Bible says that they did indeed worship the serpent idol, and for hundreds of years when the Israelites were at their greatest power. This suggest Yahweh was pleased with their worship. It wasn't until Hezakiah destroyed the idol that terrible things began to happen.

That what the Bible really says.

Yes, it was a test........ make the idol of a fiery flying serpent and go before it.......... or be killed by real fiery flying serpents.

They passed the test and continued to worship the idol for centuries, in the glory days of David and Solomon, and Yahweh was well pleased.

i dont know the concept of it being more a symbol to identify anti-venom makes sense. like midevil businesses used symbols to id shops.

and the 10 rules. god liked to test devotion [like abraham's sacrifice] telling them to do something like that may have been a test.

The LDS Church's theology is such that it allows for multiple gods even though there is one God. We also believe that God does in fact have a wife.