Sorry about that Shiva, I meant Kali!

Harte

Huh, the Bible real, they say it's from what the Roman Textalus or some such, which in fact they may as will of called, it the Roman Pythicus, or the Book that tells all, knows all, now give me your credit card numbers.

Anasazi aliens, heh cool, I consider Sitchin an alien, since he's sooo, alien to proper writing, and just pulling off the same crap over and over, like Stephen King, with his, ah so called writing, material.

As for the Annunaki, since I wrote this, maybe some crazy person will think me, an Anunaki Spy, and Jaymorpher(ie the White Power Ranger) a Anunaki Deceiver.

Come on Jay, what's the purpose of not discussing this, if it's on a site, that has nothing to do with actual evidence, what's the purpose of coming here if your just going to tear down, and destory, like I do to every thing in the house, when bored. There's no point in coming to a site called "unexplained mysteries", hence the word mysteries, to just disclaim every visionistic idealogy, that's put out their to be shot at, with every single point of thought. You might as will be wearing a shirt that says, On Pause No Answer.

What do I think of Jesus being an Annunaki, possibly was, no idea, was he even real, when at one point the Bible as it's so called, disclaims Witchcraft, and Wizardry, and yet the original name/title given to Jesus is TriMagus, which translates into Wizard of the Trinity. Same goes for the book of acts, when the apostles throw stones at a guy name Simon Magus, or Simon the Wizard, claiming him to be of the Devil. While Jesus claims him of the right path, weird, yea I know, go look it up.


Go your own way in peace,

Enigmatic Annasawzi

Maybe you should be the one checking facts and timelines.

Anunnaki were indeed SUMERIAN & AKKADIAN deities.

It was later in Babylonian myth when it developed into them being the children of Anu and Ki.

Anna...

There is every point in coming to this site to provide a sane point of view for the fringers to counterpoint off of.

Were it not for opposing views, the site would turn into a bobblehead forum with every poster congratulating every other poster for being so "open minded" and no real information would be exchanged.

Jay (and I) come here for information exchange. It's just that it seems like these days there's very little coming in our direction and nobody wants to hear the information we are providing.

That's too bad for them, I say. Those that don't want to hear it can always put us on ignore, as I have done to many of the more ridiculous posters here.

Harte

I wasn't trying to dissapprove of everything he said, I was just trying to get the debate, ahem, thread more interesting, but since this makes the point even more so, debateable, then here goes my point of view to this whole doonbockle.

I think if Jesus was an Annunaki, then a good point to this whole thing was when he said to the Heavens Do not hurt them, they know not what they do," can't remember where this line comes from, haven't read that Bible in an age.

Then again, will certainly have to agree, with jay, and say this still pointless, since the facts seem to have holes in itself, then again, so does all of mythology. But to just come into a thread and try to shut it down with evasive, yet abusive comments, isn't the best way to get a debative conversation to continue, I wasn't saying everyone should congradulate each other, that would just be boring. Disagreement, shouldn't have anything to do with disapproval, but since you still believe that to be the case, then sorry.

Will if the Annunaki are real, and this all originates with the Sumerian tale of the Enki, Enlil, and all other deities under Azura Mazda, then I'd say Jesus must have been a Shiva Avesta, or Avatar of Light. Come to save us from the oppression of singular scientific thought, to a more plural oppressive on your knees bias thought. I never saw religion as an medium where all should pray for salvation, then again, I never saw Jesus as the ultimate ONE, there always has to be a ONE Effect, or ONE objective that comes with the job of mysticism.

So my point still sttands for the Magus part from Acts, and the fractured ideals of the rest of the Bible, I like the fact that the whole ideal is fractured, ever since the Council of Nicea, and the burning of many of the original books.

Go your own way in peace,

Enigmatic Annasawzi

Where is the 'choose to ignore when it suits me button'?

Here is a link everyone should read so as to be clear on exactly who the Anunnaki were, starting back into Sumerian and then onto Babylonian myth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_mythology

Odd, just as I clicked on this thread, a song came on Winamp called "Inanna's love song and lament"...



Did they?

I've seen at least one reference that implied some (those in the archives at Ebla specifically) only got baked and survived because they were caught in a fire after the fact. I don't know what the prevailing wisdom is on the purposeful firing of tablets, but it's possible they may never have been intended to be preserved long-term in that manner.

Possibly, but we do have the Sumerian seals which were made to be used so many would have seen them, whether as you say it was intentional that they were meant to be preserved I suppose is another thing.

Since many here are always saying how the Bible is just an overhauling of the Sumerian myths maybe Jesus is part of it all..........

Life is one big oddity isn't it just?
Just as I read this I had finished reading Homer's Hymn to Demeter, to whit Inanna is equated with Persephone, Demeter's daughter....

Part of me wants to hug you for saying these things. Part of me wants to shake you like I was a British nanny for saying exactly the same thing in the same way. The overall effect is remarkably Chekhovian.



Good heavens, do you mean me? Where I come from (a fussy, over-heated Victorian parlour, as most people would readily agree), getting a person's name right is the most basic of courtesy. Even I can manage to get Orion von Koch's name correct!



Harte answered this far more pleasantly than I'm inclined to. As he points out, some people find value in hearing the clear-headed voice actual history, and from time to time, sanity. And on occasion I (amongst others) can provide that, like pointing out mythical African writing systems, misunderstood historical vagarities and the infrequent out and out lie. The refusal to believe utter tosh is not the refusal to discuss everything: every thinking brain, by definition, rejects some ideas.



Uh, no. I'm not sure where you've picked that up -- I'd hazard one of the less informed gnostic sites out there, that just got sloppy in identifying Hermes Trismigestus -- but I leave its potential more certain identification and its relevance to actual Biblical eponymy to those with a more comprehensive Biblical education than I posess. OTR perhaps? Certainly if it were some faux-gnosticism, darkbreed would know it call it out from the real thing.





Ahh, once again, Puzz. has proven she's the smartest of the lot of us!

--Jaylemurph

Negative. Christ came from the same bloodline as King David and you can trace that line all the way back to Adam. Annunaki are fallen angels and are not from the same bloodline as Christ.

Nice word.



This was Christ on the cross asking the Lord to forgive the ones crucifying him (us, figuratively speaking.)
"Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do."



Both I and Wiki question the accuracy of that page:



From the same source:


The Igigi above were the Sumerian version of the Babylonian Annunaki, IIRC. The Anuna were the sky dieties and the Igigi were of the underworld, regardless of what Sitchen may tell you.

I'll check this sometime, though, because I may have misremembered. Possibly, I have that backwards.


There is no evidence that David actually existed, so I seriously doubt one can "trace his bloodline" all the way back to a fictional character like Adam.

Harte

Aragorn son of Arathorn's bloodline could be traced all the way back to Isildur. So I guess no difference in tracing Christ's bloodline back to Adam?

Ahh, never mind Harte, we can share the crown...
By the way, I don't think J meant my Wiki link when he was referring to my smarts...

Also, does anyone really even comprehend these myths at all, they are too complex for you or I or anyone to understand, with Sitchen thrown in, we all just really grope in the dark methinks.

Does anyone even comprehend the question: Was Jesus an Annunaki?

Hah!

Why understate it?

I mean, the other poster is tracing all the way back to the first man, right?

Aragorn, son of Arathorn, should then trace his bloodline all the way back to Elros Tar-Minyatur, first High King of Numenor.

Harte

No, I didn't, nor was I even trying to be ironic. My respect for Puzz is genuine. Just to make that clear.

--Jaylemurph

I wouldn't know, since I can only read Puzzler's posts when someone quotes them.

My point about the Wiki page is that it is one of the pages at Wiki that shouldn't be considered accurate, necessarily, because unlike a vast number of wiki pages, it doesn't cite references or sources.

IOW, it could have been written off the top of someone's head, like my post about the Igigi and the Anuna.

Except, in my case, I included qualifiers like "IIRC" and "I'll check this sometime" and "I may have misremembered."

Also, U-M is not a site claiming to be an encyclopedia.

I wouldn't trust that wiki page for accurate info since I found that it appears to indicate that the Babylonian Annunaki were the Sumerian sky gods.

But, as I said, I might be remembering it wrong.

It is certain, however, that "Annunaki" is a Babylonian word and not a Sumerian word. Or, possibly it might be Assyrian.

Harte

Well thank you very much for that J, I really appreciate that and I do likewise for you. Much respect goes a long way in life my friend.

Ah dear....where is your nouse Harte, get up and fight me like a man, ignoring one is very rude....

But I guess you won't see this anyway, what do I care really, go and hide then, imagine that, Harte taken down by by lil' ol me.

J respects me and Harte ignores me....obviously I have an effect on people. Watch out fellow UMer's, Puzzler is here!

Just for you Harte.

Rebel,

Thanks for the reminder of the insipid emptiness of Puzzler's posts.

I'm glad I stopped reading them - what a waste of time!

Harte

Was a fictional person (or possibly real person around whom much fiction was subsequently written) really a fictional figure from a different culture thousands of year earlier?

It's a bit like asking was King Arthur the Egyptian god Set?

Just like this one I am reading of yours hey Harte....

You should lighten up a bit....in case you forgot, you did your Victory Dance on ME first, way back when, and decided to include it in your signature, which was deemed so offensive by the Moderators they took it off...did I go off crying, ignoring you? No, I took it in good faith and may I add in good humour.

Another giver that can't take it....

Please someone quote THIS so Harte can read it. How quickly they forget.

Yes. I see. I thought I'd go back to the original first post by Michael B who doesn't seem to be with us anymore since it is from 2006 but I find it intriguing, even if I 'm not sure what it all means, so this is what he posted:

I am suprised no one is thinking some more on this because so many are so quick to tell us how the Bible is just a rehash of the Sumerian myths.
So he is seeing Enlil as Yahweh - God.
His son Ninurta therefore could be identified with Jesus according to him, so Jesus would be an Anunnaki....
If the Bible and Flood is indeed a remake of the Sumerian myths it would be logical that Jesus could have been Ninurta...I guess.

but the Bible isn't a remake at all, it does contain some stories which were prevalent in Mesopotamia for thousands of years before it was put together but they were edited by Hebrew scribes to suit their new beliefs. New characters are introduced and new plot devices so its a bit like saying that new coke is the same as the old recipe. It may indeed look the same, taste the same and come in a can made to the same design but apparently its completely different, this is if course if you can relate the coca cola company to the christian church and of course if you believe a single word out of the mouths of either of them

Hi legionromanes,
Personally I don't think the Bible is a remake but I couldn't help but sort of go off on that tangent because so many say it is but then reject this concept of Jesus being part of it.
I think the Bible, the Old Testament anyway was a reaction to trying to escape the clutches of the old human sacrifice religions.
Sorry to confuse. It was almost a sarcastic post I made. I want the ones who say that the Bible is a remake of the Sumerian myths to think about it some more....

Thats not nice Harte, Puzzler studies and reaches her own concussion and that she is entitled to do.
The only insipid thing is your attack, totally unjust and uncalled for, you should be apologizing for making such a post.

Dan Dare

I think that's an accurate way to look at it, Puzzler. The earliest Hebrews were trying to differentiate themselves from the Canaanite culture from which they originally sprung, and much of the Old Testament served as a means to legitimize the nascent Hebraic kingdom--establishing its own traditions, religion, and laws. Much later in time, after captivity in Babylon had ended and Cyrus the Great sent the Jews back to Jerusalem, they also retroactively edited their history to help further establish the events that brought them into existence.

The Old Testament is much more than a mere rehashing of Sumerian traditions. We do indeed see snippets from the traditions and religions of the Sumerians, Akkadians, Canaanites, Egyptians, Zoroastrians, and others, but that shouldn't be taken to mean Judaism was just a facsimile of someone else's form of worship. All major world religions, past and present, have borrowed from the traditions of others. Judaism borrowed and made these beliefs uniquely theirs, but what was borrowed is only part of the Old Testament.

Thanks Dan, Harte has taken his bat and ball and run off home, putting me on Ignore...
One of those that can dish it out but can't take it.
Thanks also for the info before, I got side tracked and forgot to say thanks.

I suppose Puzzler may have changed her methods, but prior to putting her on ignore I witnessed her doing nothing but chasing her tail in search of Atlantis.
Pretty insipid and empty, IMO.

Opinions are allowed here, right?

Harte

there now. i agree. harte you are no doubt an expert on insipid emptiness. except for the fact that she spends her day reading and becoming unempty right? you just stay empty.

Harte, if you think you are allowed an opinion here, you must live in cuckoo land.
Check out post 5511, Conspiracies & Secret Societies, Did we land on the moon.

Dan Dare

You know this whole theory was written in a book, called. Jesus heir to the astronauts.

http://www.antiqbook.co.uk/boox/ma9/20346.shtml

Yes, I agree I may be chasing my tail but I am learning heaps in the process by reading tonnes of information I never knew and learning more than I could ever learn about everything and anything, I have become more knowledgable in the last 2 years than ever, how that can make me 'insipid and empty' I'll never know. Harte reminds me of the Sophists Plato speaks of.
You shemTov are one of the most informed people I have come across on here and I'm pretty sure by following the Atlantis you speak of you became more informed than ever, I had never heard of the Cucuteni-Trypillians and half the stuff I find now essentially important knowledge if I hadn't come across you.

Harte can stay in his own little protected world where he doesn't have to interact with people who challenge him just that little bit too much, that way he can stay thinking he is superior to us all, I shook him up or should that be showed him up and he didn't like it so he ignores me. Weak.
That is my last word on him.

you know puzz a while ago i had the opportunity to watch a group of "expert" egyptologists puzzling over a little statue that any 12 year old child in the carpathian basin could identify in 2 seconds. the informed world is a funny place where you have to love children.

it seems that this connections serves as one of the many confusers that mankind has ever created, it doesnt matter if there are evidence we don't have to fully obey what it projects hence we did not live in those past years.....i think leaning on to what your faith means is the most important thing.

lol fair enough.

Hey Louie,
Thanks for that link too, I will check it out.

nohands, I think this also is one of the most confused things around and stated that a few posts back, that is why I haven't really made many productive posts in this topic, it is all a bit mushed up to even decipher, what with Sitchin and Sumerian myths or Babylonian myths...does anyone really know who the Anunnaki are?

There are many pagan analogs to Christ. Some may just sound similar, others may be unwiting prophecies of a coming Messiah. But the unique thing about the one we know as Jesus Christ is that, though He shares many traits, He is the only "character" to have all of the traits.

Now as to Ninurta, he is commonly identified with the Roman god contemporary to Christ as Apollo. Apollo has several Messianic traits about him. God of life and death, god of the light and sun, omniscient and omnivident, a dragon/demon slayer, the greatest of all healers, a divine shepherd, son of the King of Heaven. But there's a rub. Apollo is identified and acknowledged in Christianity as a legitmate being. John the Divine mentions in the Book of Revelation the last fallen angel by name. Though somewhat ambiguous, this angel is called Abaddon in Hebrew and Apollyon in Greek. "Apollyon" literally means "destroyer", and is considered to be linguistically tied, if not the root of, the name Apollo. How can a god of healing be called "Destroyer"? Apollo is a giver of life and it's destroyer.

hehe...i really don't know this methologies that maybe im confused as to what they post.....

That's not quite correct. The later Greeks did associate the two words, but this is an instance of folk etymology, which is always a little dubious.

From Wikipedia:



This entry from Behindthename.com discusses the etymology more common to linguists:



--Jaylemurph

As I've said before "linguistics, schmingistics", you will not find these answers from linguists.


I've edited my answer because I had to do some more research before I made a conclusive answer, sorry.

OK I'm back, sorry about that previous post but as you know if I had put something down that I couldn't back up properly I would have been in strife, I like to be able to back up my answers.
As most know Apollo is Horus. I don't believe the Greeks went on linguistics, rather, similarities and parentage. You cannot make Apollo out of Horus linguistically as far as I know. This is also why Plato's rendition of Atlantis makes no sense to anyone. The Greek gods are later constructs of Egyptian ones. The Pelasgians took the Egyptian Gods and attributed them to their own Gods identities who became the Greek Gods. Homer and Hesiod do a good job of covering this up and making all the Gods Greek.
I doubt you can get Demeter out of Isis no matter how much of a linguistic scholar you are.
Isis and Osiris are brother/sister - Osiris represents Demeter as well, bringer of the corn/grain. That is the male/female twin deity order at work.
Osiris and Isis therefore represent Demeter. Demeter ends up with Dionysus because he is Osiris too.
Isis and Osiris had Horus. Persephone is not Artemis though.
Horus being Apollo, how can this be, when Leto is Apollo's mother. Artemis is Bast (Bubastis) twin sister of Horus.
Well, the Egyptians believe Isis let Leto bring them up, Horus and Bast, they are not Leto's own children, still children of 2 powerful Gods though, just like Apollo and Artemis are. That is why in the Greek myth even though Apollo and Artemis are Leto's children she has them at different times. They are not true twins in the sense but represented as twins. The Greeks couldn't quite make that one fit properly. The male/female thing again. Hera is always the enemy of Leto and refuses to let her give birth on any soil because she knows that Horus (Apollo) is too powerful and will be a threat to Zeus, Horus was indeed a powerful God.

As for Heracles, he is Khonsu, son of Amun. Son of Zeus.
Herodotus even tells us they are 2 different Gods, one an immortal Egyptian God and one a Greek hero God. In my opinion Melqart/Heracles is the version of Khonsu, not Heracles the Greek hero. So you can't expect to find Heracles the Greek hero in Egypt.

Here's an interesting article by the way, showing Herodotus is right again:


http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/2001/538/travel.htm

So...science, schmience? Are we to abandon it all and make it up as we go along?

only the parts where we don't like the answers....

Well, good grief, such a statement is rather shocking, don't you think? I'm quite stunned when I read something like that. Really, it's the same as saying, "I don't like what the trained and vetted professionals have to say, so I'm just going to make it up."

I mean, without the field of linguistics, one of the most important disciplines in all of historical study, we would not be able to ready Egyptian hieroglyphs or their hieratic or demotic script, the cuneiform of Mesopotamia and Anatolia, Luwian hieroglyphs, the Phoenician script, the Mayan glyphs, and numerous other forms of writing. In other words, we of today would not really have any meaningful understanding of any of these cultures. To know what they wrote is to know what they thought.

Yeh... but if we want to talk seriously about history we always have the other forum

You fellas got me all wrong.....lol I meant in regards to Greek myth being essentially Egyptian named Gods. Maybe I don't understand.
So tell me, how do we get Demeter from the word Isis?

I'd love to know.

I don't necessarily believe that is true. There are gods with the same portfolios in almost all ancient pantheons, wither Greek, Norse, Chinese, Japanese, Hindu, Celtic, Aztec or Mayan. You are not suggesting that all gods with the same divine aspects are the same being, are you?

It is clear that the Romans took many of their gods directly from the Greeks, but it is not very clear that the Greeks took their gods "directly" from the Egyptians. There is undoubtedly some bleed over of gods and aspects, but I don't think you can put a = between specific Greek gods and Egyptian gods.

This is really just my un-theologically trained, but historically knowledgeable opinion.

This is another case, I think, of simplifying things out of reality. There's without a doubt a relationship between the two (as there is with the Norse Balder and Apollo), but merely equating one with the other is to miss out on important identifying subtleties. Local colour (including naming), as it were, adds at least as much here as parentage. It's also quite possibly that the Greeks grafted on names and traits of local gods onto the more familiar figures borrowed from Egypt.

--Jaylemurph

I guess that is what I should have said instead of 'linguistics, schminguistics'....in retrospect.
I understand how important linguistics is and I admit I don't know much about it. Basically I think you can only follow who they were by their attributes and not names.
Isis and Demeter are 'bringers of corn/grain', but does Isis equate to Demeter in Greek or Pelasgian, it might mean 'corn' but it doesn't mean Isis is Demeter in Greek, it means corn is.
One I can see interpreting into both is Re/Ra into Helios, both meaning sun, and if that's what linguistics does then I accept that, but I really was thinking of the word equating to the word, not the meaning but like I said I really don't know much about linguistics, my point was however, that it alone cannot be used to identify one myth identity to another.