More of your nonsense. There is NOTHING to suggest that the Babylonian concept of these God's was much different than the Sumerian. In fact, they are the SAME god's, only with different names. Virtually every reliable source will tell you the same.

If the epithet of "great dragon" were given to a normal human, then it would be an epithet. If it is given to a God, it is a description of his form, or one of his forms.. I can't believe how dense you are in this matter. The greeks believed Zeus could turn into a swan or a drakon at leisure, apparently enjoying haveing sex with mortal women in these forms.m. It is probable that Zeus had his origins in the Sumerian storm God Enlil who is also called a great dragon of the Earth. The feathered serpent-dragon Quetzalcoatl is the same thing. His God form is a mighty, feasome "great serpent-dragon" as well, but legends plainly state he can assume a human form as well. In China the same thing, great dragons, who can also appear to man as humans.

The Sumerian gods are no different, and we have some good evidence that this is the very ORIGIN of the shape shifting dragons that appear in the myths around the world having emanated from Mesopotamia. You have even said as much in the past.

So are you really this clueless? I'd like the think better of a post-graduate studen with some apparent familiarity with ancient mythology. Hopefully you are simply playing your self admitted role as the "gremlin-troll", simply trying to get a rise out of me, when you know I am actually right about all of this. And in fact, ALL of the evidemce is on my side. The Mesopotamian hymns called their Gods DRAGONS, and described their physical appearance as unquestionably reptilian DRAGONS, though admitted they could assume the less fearsome appearance of humans EXACTLY like the CONTEMPORARY DRAGONS of virtually EVERY humand Culture that surrounded Mesopotamia. It is no wonder most of the depictions of these gods interrelating with humans will depict them in their human forms. The Gods were too terrifying to speak to in their Dragon forms, but when honoring the Gods in their hymns, they describe them in their oriinal heavenly forms. This is what ALL of the evidence tells us.

Next you will be telling us that the Chinese "really didn't think their dragons were dragons but were just human gods", or "the aztecs really didn't think their feathered serpent entity Quetzalcoatl was a feathered serpent but only a man. After all, no acnient people would beieve their Gods could change from human form to dragon form. Grem you not only are a trollish, Gremlin with nothing to contribute here, but you are also a JOKE, with arguments that are nothing but nonsense.

I don't quite see the point of justifying the reality of "Noah's Ark" when there is indisputable evidence it is based on an earlier Sumerian story, like EVERYTHING else in the book of Genesis. And the much older, recorded Sumerian version, unlike the Biblical one, it compatible with science and the achaeological record. Now I am not saying this is all fake, quite the contrary, in fact, as my book explians. Maybe Yahweh really is a storm-casuing "dragon" who wanted to drown mankind because it was "too noisy". It would certainly explain a lot of other things.

you don't see any point in discussing the Noah story because you know full well that it was subject to chineses whispers over millenia yet the details in other similar stories you believe have remained unchanged because they discuss an absolute truth
that truth being that huge lizards with wings that breathe fire and leave no physical trace which could morph into human bodies were a reality
and youre trying to tell other people whats real ?
keep taking the pills !!

Lets keep this civil please, enough bickering and personal attacks.

You know that I said from the beginning that all of the dragon stuff is based on the premise there is "truth" behind the scriptures that form the basis of three of the world's great religions. If the "majority rules" then the God of the Bible is real, along with his attendant dragons. There are scientists far smarter than you who happen to believe its true. The God part that is,, they just don't know aobut the dragons until my work is finished.

And the are not "huge lizards", they are obviously archosaurs. And no, they cannot morph into human bodies. This was simply a belief that evolved to people feel more comfortable around them.

right now heres the problem
you are claiming that three of the world's great religions claim this
are you not aware that Judaism and Christianity evolved from Judaism and share the same mythology
so basically what you just said was
all of the dragon stuff is based on the premise there is "truth" behind the scriptures that formed the basis of a middle eastern cult religion 2500 years ago
thats hardly evidence
youre claiming that people who believed that all the races of man could be bred from one smitic sailor who we know didn't exist were writing the truth
face it
your evidence is derived from an outdated cosmological mythological view of the creation of the earth and in a lot of cases from your imagination
thats why you are constantly being labelled as a nutter by other posters


as for them being Archosaurs
you know youre saying that as a cop out
Archosaurs are real and leave real evidence of their existence
you can read about them in more than an out of date relgious book
theres plenty of archaosaur remains in ancient tombs and they are well attested in ancient cultures and not related to dragons at all
everyone knew what they were and theres no confusion in that area

I am still waiting for you to post links to the scholarly articles you claim to have written
also for the name of the well known graphic comic artist who is adapting your book
also the name of the publisher whos producing it (you know the one you claimed would be a bestseller)
also why your claims havent changed about any of this in two years
also why you apparently havent learned a damn thing in the last two years from the many talented and articulate people who have pointed out time and time again that your details and therefore your conclusions are totally wrong

the thing that I find really Ironic is that by your own confession you know nothing at all about ancient mesopotamia, you've never studied it at school, you've never been there, you've never studied the languages or the people
and you then claim to be an expert on an aspect of it
go get a dictionary
look up expert

God was wroth with man there were giants fornicating with women of Earth they also taught man how to make weapons to cause wars
So God decided to open the flood gates and make it rain to destroy all wickedness

did it work ?

how do giants fornicate with women exactly ?
isn't what you are claiming physically impossible ?

The women on earth were taller than the fellers from heaven, but the women on earth were able to be seduced by all of the scientific things that these fellers could do that came from heaven. But, if you take the bible as a reference, all mankind, men and women, were made in the same image. The fellers from heaven were the 'us' in genesis.

You really should read what I say before coming up with all the fundamentalist nonsense you claim I believe in. I have said many times that the Elohim creation is largely compatible with evolution and the fossil record, even placing dinosaurs and birds together before the age of mammals. I have said many times that Adam was simply a priest of Enki in the stone age city of Eridu. It is useless to discuss anything with you ***SNIP***.

As others here have commented, I win. You have demonstrated you don't know what You're talking about. The only think you can do, is attempt to put words in other people's mouths.

You win what
this isn't a competition its a discussion forum
everyone knows you cherry pick what evidence to include in your ridiculous hypothesis
tell us again how 25 cm Draco Voltans proves that Archosaurs that could breathe fire and fly
tell us again about the 6 limbed archosaurs
tell us again who is publishing your book
who is converting it into a graphic novel
its your inability to satisfactorily answer a direct question that means that in any debate scenario you are the all time loser

btw your post was a personal attack after Saruman had told you to lay it off

If people wish this thread to remain open then please start debating in an adult manner. Continuation of bickering and personal attacks will lead to the closing of this thread just as surely as night follows day.

Thank you.

i posted this...

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...t&p=1723304

in the wrong thread, should have been put here. its about the land of the origin of the flood myth and the lifestyle of the people there, which hadnt changed for over 5000 years, until saddam drained the area.....
since he's now gone the water has returned, but it may never recover...

also here's a nice presentation of one of the flood myths, its sumerian in origin, but our source is babylonian...no dragons unfortunately apparent in the text...
http://faculty.gvsu.edu/websterm/Atrahasi.htm

Thanks for this info! I know where I'm vacationing next year!!

anywhere but Turkey as it will be full of christian fundementalists
not good when you consider that its a Moslem country

here's a mystery for you. The Marsh arabs built their homes on pilings (stilts) driven into the mud of the marsh or on tiny islets or on hand made beds of floating reeds anchored to the bottom. Now, in a marsh like this bugs would have been an enormous problem during most months of the year but especially during summer. The greatest danger coming from malaria carrying Mosquitos.
What secret did the Marsh arabs have as a defence against the clouds of bugs that would have driven them insane?

they sat around all day burning s**t
still works today
you burn enough of that stuff and you don't care about insects

And the concept of dragons was to help them "feel more comfortable" with what they could not understand.

But isn't it strange that people all over the world "invented" the same dragons? And why would they be considered "comforting"? Some anthropologists claim dragon's are a composite of the animals we fear the most, yet in religions around the world these terrifying monsters were believed to have taught humans technology and agriculture. It is really just the stupidest barbarian cultures that considered dragons to be evil monsters. Advanced civilisations thought they were Gods. An interesting contrast.

Not quite true.....
European dragons tend to be portrayed as evil and dragons of asia tend to be of a benevolent nature.

Information sources on legendary creatures (like dragons) tends to be limited so I must use Wiki....

In Western folklore, dragons are usually portrayed as evil, with exceptions mainly in modern fiction.
European dragon


Depicted as a long, snake-like creature with four claws, in contrast to the Western dragon which stands on two legs and which is usually portrayed as evil, it has long been a potent symbol of auspicious power in Chinese folklore and art.
Chinese dragon

How are these the same dragons?


I believe you were the one to mention "comforting".

It comes down to what you have been taught to believe.

Key words are "religions" and "believed".....used in combination at that.

BTW: Not ALL Beliefs/Religions have a dragon in their MYTHOLOGY.



In European Mythology.....dragons are considered to be evil.....are you saying Europeans are barbarians?


Asians are.......


Is it really now?

European=evil/bad
Asian=benevolent/good

Yes I believe it is.

the Akkadians and the Babylonians thought serpents were evil
thats the whole point in having the head of their pantheon defeat them as a rite of passage
are you saying the akkadians and babylonians were stupid barbarian cultures
you don't have a clue do you Dragon Chronic
you got this personal belief and you are ignoring any evidence to the contrary

they never thought Tiamat was a god
she doesn't have dingir in her name
oh i forgot
you don't know anything about mesopotamian linguistics do you

Wrong, Zandore.
Drakons/Dragons are "good" in civilized, classical Europe, just as they are in most other civilized lands such as Asia and Mesoamerica where people could read and write. In the classical world Winged Drakons pull chariots of the Gods, and they guard sacred groves. They were Sacred to Mars and the Romans used them for battle standars. Zeus turns himself into a Drakon to rape human women. Zeus is probably the Sumerian Storm Dragon Enlil, just as Yahweh originally was. Celts similarly had some good dragons.

It was the near-caveman germanic barbarians and other nordic peoples that generally considered dragons "evil". If we assign any reality to these legends, perhaps the dragons were allowed to wreak havoc on the barbarians to amuse themselves, as their legends suggest, since these peoples contributed virtually nothing to mankind anyway, unlike the ancient civiilzation that equated dragons with their gods. If dragons regularly ravaged barbarian europe we would never know the difference because their miserable hovels of twigs and cowdung rotted away to nothing in a few years anyway.

Asia = Good
MesoAmerica = Good
Classcial Europe = Good
Celtic Europe = Good
Illiterate Germanic Euriope = Bad

I see a pattern developing. Civilized people thought dragons were good and connected to the Gods, Nordic Barbarians feared them becasue they burnt down their mead halls, and ate them when they were hopelessly drunk in said mead halls, or so their few surviving legends tell us.

the only reason you see a pattern is because you are tinkering with the resutls

Asia = Good
MesoAmerica = Good
Classcial Europe = Good
Celtic Europe = Good
Illiterate Germanic Euriope = Bad
Mesopotamia = bad
Judaism = bad (satan)
christianity = bad

but then thats exactly what we've all come to expect from someone like you with a heavy agenda for historical redaction without evidence

As I explained to you before, Timat and other chaos serpents have nothing to do with the good Mushrushu Dragons which were the pricniple form of the greatest Sumerian Gods. The Babylonians also acknowledged these Gods. Sirrush dragons are sacred to Marduk and the very symbol of Babylon, I guess you didn't know that. Marduk's father was the dragon Enki, who is carfully described in BABYLONIAN HYMNS as a serpent headed scaly dragon with clawed hands and feet, NOT A SERPENT. Same thing with the Akkadians, their myths mirrored the Sumerian with Gods that were Mushrushu dragons, but evil Chaos SERPENTS that the Dragons defeat. There are some evil dragon like creatures in the Babylonian pantheon, but the reptile headed dragons are all good and are Gods. The lion headed monster in the stele with marduk is not a dragon, like his father, EA/ENKI. I am right again as usual, and as everyone else says who monitor our discussions. I will remind the moderators that you are hurling insults again, as you always do when I prove you wrong. Give it up, guy, you don't know anything about this. You prove that to everyone, every time you try to discredit me.

Tiamat was a mušhuš D C
Mushrushu isn't even spelled correctly
mušhuššu is the Akkadian word for serpent or dragon
whereas mušhuš is the sumerian word for monster
but what kind of monster could it be

third symbol along designates it as a large sea creature
but of course you not knowing anything about mesopotamian linguistics (i.e. you cant even spell simple akkadian words) i dont expect youd know that
so speaking from a position of complete ignorance again arent you

youre nothing but a fantasist hiding behind your basic fundementalism of the bible arent you
thats why you keep slagging off the germanic peoples and even on one occaison claimed thet Beowulf was a german text
which was why iyo it was rubbish
fyi Beowulf is an Anglo Saxon poem
that means its english
and as you know
Us English are about a million times more civilised than anyone who ever worked for the DofD could ever possibly be
lol

no you got me there
I always thought that Bel Marduk was the son of Ea
see like all poor scholars you don't appreciate the difference between one culture and another
Ea is Babylonian
Enki is Sumerian and Akkadian
so where does time travel fit into your theories

(latest adjudication indicates that you are on score of - 400 on the Z.Sitchin credibility scale)

Every authority I am aware of state that Enki and Ea are the same God.

Winged reptiles are not evil in Christiainity or Judaism. They are heavenly servant creatures featured in the texts of both religions. Satan is identified as one of these creatures but this does not make the creatures evil as a whole. The seraphim are Winged reptiles according to the Jewish Encyclpedia as I have demonstrated in the earlier post.

Mushrushu dragons guard both Akkadian and Babylonian Gods. It is thought this is also where Judaism got the Seraph-dragon guards. This is why all Judao Christian sources don't like the winged serpent throne guardains of Yahweh, becasue it sounds to much like the throne guading dragons of Marduk.

You still haven't prove me wrong on anything.

I know of no depiction of Tiamat as a Mushrushu dragon. She is usally a serpent, sometimes seven heaeded.

The Anles and Saxons are both German tribes. You may have hear of "Saxony" a state in Germany. The Grendel episode take place on the Jutland penninsual of Denmark, the Fire Drake episode in Southern Sweden. The Angles and Saxons of Continental Europe brought their legends to Britain which woould become Angle-land England.

boy really flowing with ignorance now arent we
the jewish encylopedia says nothing about the seraphim being reptiles
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp...search=seraphim

show me where it says reptiles
we have already established that sea serpents are aquatic creatures
doh

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beowulf
English
not german

your lack of understanding cultural origins verges on racism
what is it you have against the germans exactly
girl dumped you ?

Actually, Seraphim comes either from the Hebrew verb saraph ('to burn') or the Hebrew noun saraph (a fiery, flying serpent).
A serpent is a reptile.

I still think it's just a metaphor for a different meaning all together.


Anyway, DC! I have read many articles and did lots of searching concerning you're dragon theories and,
I haven't found any real evidence of your supposed claims. Are you just making these things up as you
go along with these theories?

prove it

what about that serpant that is coiled 3 and a half times in oneself at the base of your spine in what is called the base chakara.

Okay!
From a dictionary!

Back-formation from pl. seraphim, from Middle English seraphin, from Old English, from Late Latin seraphīn, seraphīm, from Greek serapheim, from Hebrew śərāpîm, pl. of śārāp, fiery serpent, seraph, from śārap, to burn; see śrp1 in Semitic roots.]

se·raph'ic (sə-rāf'ĭk), se·raph'i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) adj., se·raph'i·cal·ly adv.

(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Easton's 1897 Bible Dictionary - Cite This Source
Seraphim

mentioned in Isa. 6:2, 3, 6, 7. This word means fiery ones, in allusion, as is supposed, to their burning love. They are represented as "standing" above the King as he sat upon his throne, ready at once to minister unto him. Their form appears to have been human, with the addition of wings. (See ANGELS.) This word, in the original, is used elsewhere only of the "fiery serpents" (Num. 21:6, 8; Deut. 8:15; comp. Isa. 14:29; 30:6) sent by God as his instruments to inflict on the people the righteous penalty of sin.

ok so where does it say anything about reptiles ?

Apollyon, a serpent is commonly known as a snake! A snake is in fact a reptile.

But, I still do not see how DC gets a dragon out of a snake!

today a serpent is commonly known as a snake
in ancient times that was not the case
in ancient times heaven was not a magical place out in space where God lived forever amidst choirs of angels and dragons either

You are correct! I don't even think the word reptile even came into context back then.

Pesonaly, I feel the whole bible is one big metaphor.

In your own words you have confirmed what I said about the highest heavenly creatures being fiery flying serpent, so I am obviously not making it up. Now if you want to believe that ancient peoples calling their gods and the servants of their gods reptilian creatures is only "a metaphor" that is your opinion. But the FACT is, all of these ancient cultures believed in and feared, or worshipped dragon-like creatures.. To them they certainly were not metaphors. I have stated sources for everything I have said on these forums, and you have confirmed one of them in your last post, yet in the same breath you state you think it is a metaphor.

If the ancient Jews did not think the word Seraphim literally meant Dragons, they would not have translated the word as Drakons in the Dead Sea Scrolls. So your "metaphor" idea goes out the window. I have provided evidence for eveything I have said here, I'm sorry you can't figure it out. But then if you are to believe everything the ancient peoples believed about dragons is a metaphor, then there really isn't a point in explaining it to you.

first point, You are right, serpents in the ancient world could have limbs and wings and be what we call dragons today.

second point, You are wrong, in ancient times, many cultures believed heaven was somewhere in the sky and Gods flew on the backs of dragons and had dragon throne guards. Just look at Babylonian depiections of Marduk flanked by dragons, EXACTLY as Isaiah says in his vision of heaven. Or riding a dragon as described in II Samual and Psalms (Cherubim-dragons).

I would like to see your sources on this......


I can answer that for him.....fiction all the way.

BTW Welcome Dragonwick to UM Forum.

I have proven you wrong time and time again Zandore, the evidence is in the past posts for all to see. As an atheist you can say it is all "fiction". But the point is not that God or the "dragons" actually exist, (which I cannot prove), but that I can, and have proven, that the Judao Christian religions acknowledged fiery winged serpent dieties as the highest ranked heavenly creatures in past history even though they have since modified this, probably because history shows that these serpent dragon dieties were part of all the other near eastern religions just as in ancient Judaism.

What puzzles me most is that the small handful of people who seem to object to this most, are the ones that reveal how anti-Chrisitan they are in their other posts. So I have to wonder at your motives, for most Christians generally don't like seeing the uncomortable Bible facts revealed.

But I have discovered another thing in common . Maybe it is becasue one thing you and the others have in common is your little dragon avators or names alluding to dragon like creatures such a Appolyon, and you with your little dragon, a dragonlike Gremlin, moondoggy's dragon, Chimeradraigg and now Dragonwyk. Could this all be some bizarre coincidence? Not likely.

It seems pretty evident that you all fantasize dragons in some goofy new age way based on modern fantasy novels and the Dungeons and Dragons games you play, so you despise the fact that I have proven the ancient Jews themselves have doucmented in ancient scriptures that dragons are actually the highest heavenly creatures in the religion you continue to discredit here.
So now we see a motive for your neverending-ending childish attacks, which only reveal to everyone else how little you know about any of this. You probably all think you were "dragons" in a past life too, (otherkin), and the biblical connection to dragons proves that this is impossible. Sorry about breaking your goofy dragon fantasy bubbles, children.

I have provided satisfactory evidence for everything I have said on these forums, it is just you and a couple others here that do not like being proven wrong, so you have invented the fantasy that "I'm making it all up". The proof is in all the past posts here --- they show that I am right, and you are wrong. Now it's "history" and history you cannot change.

oh dear!
no need to feel so persecuted DC, most people only object to your theory (which is seriously flawed) and occasionally your attitude.



are you saying that non-christians should support you and take similar enjoyment in making christians feel 'uncomfortable'? This seems a bit trollish on your behalf, are these your motives? I know you live in the bible belt, perhaps you have a similar animosity towards the Christians you display towards German folk.

I dont fantasise about dragons...usually its just women, but this is a family show so i wont go there.

Again its your theory that is criticised, your interpretation and misuse of evidence has been pointed out many times (re: 'dragons' thread amongst others).
the rest of your post (carpet bomb) doesnt deserve comment.

whi is this guy still allowed to post here after wasting so much of everybodies time ?
isnt being a lying racist religious fundementalist troll totally against the code of conduct ?

When......if so that is news to me!



Wrong again

I do not call my self an Atheist......I am an Ex-Christian.



Please keep that in mind in future posts.....you can not prove they were real.




1. This is not the religion section
2. Please refer to my comment above 'Please keep that in mind in future posts.....you can not prove they were real'



I remember a poll of mine that said MOST PEOPLE did not think dragons were real.....IE: a myth

Need a link to it: My Poll

You were so upset with the way the poll was going you got it closed.


So what.....is there a problem with that?

Here is something I have told you before......I have used a dragon as my avatar since almost from day 1......and you have been the only one to complain about it.


Hey Gremlin.......

Thanks for the link to your poll Zandore twas very funny and i hadnt read that thread before....one of the things i found amusing is that waaaay back in 2005 DC was just putting his finishing touches on his book, and just looking for final good points- and found some in all of that LOL LOL....

Its interesting that the same points get argued over still, and that he seems to have learned a little more about Sumerian myth than he knew when he was postulating then. Unfortunately for his argument its still...

for me his argument is

Apparently, I was right about this.

right about what
can you be more specific because you being right about something would be a first ?

The only thing I see that DC said that could possibly be right is "Seraphim" being a fiery flying serpant.

thats not how theyre described in Isiaiah
and that book is the original source

DC knows this but chooses to ignore it
like all the other evidence


heres his most recent claim


apparently this animal

is an ancestor of this animal

cos DC thinks they look similar
they look similar to you
and of course Dragons now apparently have psychic powers as well
thats something not mentioned in any ancient text as well
that and his other claim of them being able to travel inter dimensionally
lets face it
he hasn't got a clue how ridiculous his claims sound no matter how many people tell him the truth
hes not interested in the actual facts
just his personal belief

You are correct here is the original text!
Isaiah (6:1–3) records the prophet's vision of the Seraphim:

"... I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and His train filled the Hekhal (sanctuary). Above Him stood the Seraphim; each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew."
In the vision the seraphim cry continually to each other, '"Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of His glory"' (vi.3). The "foundations of the thresholds" of the Temple were moved by the sound of their voices.

As far as these seraphim having psychic powers and being able to travel inter-dimentionally just seems a bit rediculous.
There is nothing in the bible that can even begin to prove this claim.