Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 17
MichaelB

Was Jesus an Annunaki?

1,027 posts in this topic

This is fascinating, I have never heard the terms Nephillim or Annunaki before...

Sorry, this is a pretty pointless thread, I just wanted to say thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edited.

Edited by Ryo Ohki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Edited.

ahhh..well there aint any female angels because..the Annunaki were the angels the bible talked about and only the men annunaki came to earth for a long time..then enki and enlils sister came down to help with the genetic engineering daa daaaaaa...(ok that left me open for a right booting didnt it) :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is fascinating, I have never heard the terms Nephillim or Annunaki before...

Sorry, this is a pretty pointless thread, I just wanted to say thanks!

LOL, facinating and pointless..... lol... :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Someone's been confusing Sitchin's fantasies with the real world again ..... :rolleyes:

er....the real world, plleeeeas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Someone's been confusing Sitchin's fantasies with the real world again ..... :rolleyes:

When will that man ever stop writing trash?....... :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When will that man ever stop writing trash?....... :rolleyes:

Just after people stop /buying/ it...

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be very honest with you .... I have pondered the very same thing ....

But I choose not to talk to much of this specific topic ....

History can be nasty!

~*~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my first exposure to the Annunaki tradition. I googled it and got thousands of hits.

If Nibiru, or Planet X, were going to approach our solar system in 2012, wouldn't we be able to see it by now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think, wouldn't you?

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend and I have been discussing and studying into this very subject for years. Our own understanding and conclusion (though definitely open to further information) is that Jehovah was an incarnation of Enlil. When Jesus stepped into his ministry, it was to warn the Israelites that the God they were serving was really the devil they were to fear. For this he was called a blasphemer and was crucified. Jesus therefore was not Enlil's son. The God of the OT and the God of the NT are very clearly different; otherwise, that "One God" is very schizophrenic.

It was pointed out to us by another person about 6 years ago that in John 8, it tells that the Pharisees were again arguing with and confronting Jesus that the God of Abraham was their father. He did not argue with them on that, but said "You are of your father the devil, and his lusts do you do".

Then he said his own father was in "Heaven". Whatever and wherever that is, I believe it is beyond the material and incarnate or manifest realms. The point for me is that they condemned him for calling their God "Satan". Today's Pharisees in all monotheistic religions are making the same mistake. :(

It was very "gnostic" of him to point out "Have I not said, ye are all gods?". :yes::tu:

As for Zecharia Sitchin, he did seem to begin by endeavoring to tell us the truth about it all. Then, on another group where I chatted about this a few years ago, it was determined that the Vatican must have gotten to him and threatened him if he didn't recant, so his stories began to change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Joust tui Hu'ah suimah loeght uiy' ohl uif Li'oes Kuiy'fousoeuiy', NASA ohy'd uiLi'ahr den uirgohy'oesohtoeuiy' hohvah ohl trohkahd Nibiru tui bah oht Li'ah lahngLi' uif den hoet uirboet, ruioughly 1800 den yahohr ohVohy, sui Juiy'oe dui y'uit ahxpahkt hoet fuir ien Vhoelah.

Li'ahy hovah y'uit fuiouy'd den hoet ohxohkt luikohtoeuiy' (tui yuidoe'y ky'uiVlahdgah) , bout Li'oht oes Li'ah ohrahoh oey' den hoet uirboet Li'oht Li'ahy hovah y'ohruiVahd hoet duiVy' tui.

Entroegahr

Edited by Kohrtohrdodos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading some of Sitchens work and also seeing a similar connection between Abraham and the prophet Muhammed sorry for spelling typing from memory. Abraham was called by out by a single god among a culture of many gods. Muhammed was also called out by a single god Allah out of a culture of many gods. I'm maybe a Christian but to me theres a seems to be a connection. This is a subject that most so called fundamentalist christians don't want to touch or are afraid of their faith being shakin. Whether Jesus has a connection with the Annunaki I've started wondering myself after reading Sitchens work. Also consider this the scripture also states that the Apostle Paul went by himself into Arabia for a period of time. I've also been wondering if he might have encountered Sumerian writings during that time. Who knows what the truth really is. It's something that the mainstream christian church doesn't want to touch. And I don't think that's its some grand conspiracy to conceal the truth because of writings such as the Nag Hammadhi books and gnosticism being rediscovered is just I think that christians are afraid of their faith being shaken. To me if the Annunaki if Sitchins work is to be belived created us well then somehow they must have evolved elsewhere. It still doesn't shake my faith in Intelligent design. I don't exactly agree with pure creationism or pure evolutionism. And if you ever read Genesis it only talks about the creation of earth and life on it. It doesn't exactly get into detail anywhere else. But then you can get into this big argument theologically if there's life elsewhere then Jesus would have also been crucified for other lifeforms and go in circles and circles till your head explodes. But I think that it boils down to the fact that most christians are afraid of the real truth and having their faith being shaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have long puzzled over something – and that is the pre-identity of Jesus. It seems that for most everyone else this is a non-question, as they are in two different, non-overlapping camps, e.g., "He is Jesus Christ the Only Son of God," or "He was a great teacher," but a crucial point is being missed, as he himself alluded several times to his pre-existence.

What to me is a simple connecting-of-the-dots gives the conclusion that Ninurta, son of Enlil, incarnated into the son of Joseph and Mary (or "possessed" him, choose your terminology).

-- The research is very convincing that the Anunnaki leader Enlil was Jehovah/Yahweh.

-- His son Ninurta was designated as his successor.

-- Enki's son Marduk siezed power instead, thus he was termed "The Usurper." This led to "The Pyramid Wars," culminating in nuclear-type weaponry being used.

-- As a way of creating a new covenant with mankind (and breaking the hold of Marduk's, and other, "pagan" cults) the plan was created for Ninurta to form a once-and-for-all religion in which "The Father" would be worshiped, and the rancorous human population would become peaceful and loving.

-- On at least two occasions, a voice spoke from the clouds, or mists, "This is my son, in whom I am well pleased."

So the question becomes, who else could this father-son team be? It seems unlikely that it is Enki referring to his son Marduk because of, among other reasons, all the references to the devil being a serpent, which is the Enki line’s trademark. And Jesus gave full "props" to Jehovah/Yahweh and the prophets who spoke for and about him, even saying he was here to fulfill the words of the prophets. Also, "the Father and I are united" and "He who has seen me has seen the Father."

None of the books I have on this subject even vaguely hint at this possibility. As well, I’ve done several Internet searches, Google and others, and nowhere is this connection made. It seems so obvious to me now that I am amazed that it has not previously been seized upon. (I’m even surprised at myself, but pre-conceived mindsets can be a stubborn obstacle.)

If I had to speculate, I would say that the Vatican has this information in it’s off-limits library, and this is the reason why they, to this day, retain many symbols from the ancient times in their vestments and architecture.

I would appreciate any comments from the good folks at this forum.

Interesting ideas. But if you are going to accept the existence of the Sumerian Gods, then you shouldn't just pick and choose those parts that fit your theory. I agree that Yahweh seems to be Enlil, and Satan seems to be Enki. Many authorities state this. But these myths state they are brothers and in their "Godly" forms are known as Umshagals - great dragons! And these dragons were subservient to a greater, non-dragon God called Anu. Enlil raped his dragoness sister and was exiled by Anu. And it was Enki-Satan who actually saved "Noah" , for Enlil was intent on wiping out the entire human race. So is Jesus the Son of a Sumerian rapist, draco-form wind God? And this God was not the creator of mankind, Enki-Satan was. And the creator of both the universe as well as his dragon servants enlil, enki and the annuaki was Anu the high God over them all. But I suppose Enlil-Yahweh does seem like a dragon at times, ordering the slaughter of his own worshippers, consuming his own priest, and described with fiery breath and smoking nostrils in the Old Testament. In fact, the Zoroastrian Persians did state that the God of the Jews was an enormous and wicked dragon, and brother of the dragon Ahriman, said to be the same creature as Satan. So here we see the same confirmation of Enki-satan and Enlil-Yahweh as both brother and dragons over a 1000 years after the Sumerian religion was all but forgotten. This is all discussed in detail in my upcoming book. But no ancient astronauts, or atomic "pyramid wars". If this were true we would have found some extraterrestrial evidence by now. But virtually every human culture does acknowledge huge, intelligent dragons, and both Christians and Jews have apparently made one of them their God, only are too ignorant of their own theology to realize this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

okay...more of Stichin's made-up fantasy nonsense. His theory of ping-pong planets is simply ridiculous and absurd. Don't be so gullible and believe everything you read.....unless of course I decide to write a book exposing a new ridiculous theory then by all means buy several copies of my book and give them to your friends (hmmm....how about if a race if superaliens known to ancient Minoans decided to split Jupiter so it wouldn't become a binary star and that is why we have Saturn (leaving massive rings for some reason I have yet to determine) and Uranus which is on its side and rotates in a different direction from other planets)

As someone posted earlier, there are linkages between ancient Sumarian mythology and Jewish mythology which has come down to Christianity through the bible. This does not mean that you need to take these Sumarian legends as historical events....just as you cannot take the Bible stories as historical events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

okay...more of Stichin's made-up fantasy nonsense. His theory of ping-pong planets is simply ridiculous and absurd. Don't be so gullible and believe everything you read.....unless of course I decide to write a book exposing a new ridiculous theory then by all means buy several copies of my book and give them to your friends (hmmm....how about if a race if superaliens known to ancient Minoans decided to split Jupiter so it wouldn't become a binary star and that is why we have Saturn (leaving massive rings for some reason I have yet to determine) and Uranus which is on its side and rotates in a different direction from other planets)

As someone posted earlier, there are linkages between ancient Sumarian mythology and Jewish mythology which has come down to Christianity through the bible. This does not mean that you need to take these Sumarian legends as historical events....just as you cannot take the Bible stories as historical events.

If you are referring to me, I do not believe I stated that I took ANY of Stichin's nonsense seriously. I am merely suggesting one can take the Sumerian myths at face value, the same way people take the Bible at face value, since these stories are the origin of the Bible. But as to the Sumerian inspired stories of Genesis, logic would give more credence to the Sumerian versions than the Hebrew, becasue we have over 3500 year old preserved copies of these on cunieform tablets, whereas the illiterate Hebrew Shepherds forgot and changed many elements of the same stories when they repeated these stories as an oral tradition around their campfires. The original stories make Satan both the creator of man, and savior of Noah, not Yahweh, although if Christians actually read the Bible, they would see that just as in the Sumerian stories, the Biblical Satan, like the Sumerian one, serve their brother Enlil-Yahweh, though being slightly diobedient at times to do little things like saving the human race. The Biblical Yahweh then, is neither Enki or Enlil. The poor illiterate Hebrew Shepherds seem to have mixed the stories up and their God is both Enki and Enlil, simply retaining in their memories the "good" things about both Gods, and combining them to make one God, blisfully ignorant that half of their God is in fact, Enki the wise, Serpent dragon of Eden, or the other half is Enlil, the sister-raping, flood bringing, dragon god of wind and storms. But this is not to say Jesus is fake, but even he apparently did not realize that the creator of mankind, savior of Noah, etc. was Enki-Satan, the much maligned brother of the God Jesus believed was his father.

Edited by draconic chronicler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear a lot of talk regarding mythology, but where are the facts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are referring to me, I do not believe I stated that I took ANY of Stichin's nonsense seriously. I am merely suggesting one can take the Sumerian myths at face value, the same way people take the Bible at face value, since these stories are the origin of the Bible. But as to the Sumerian inspired stories of Genesis, logic would give more credence to the Sumerian versions than the Hebrew, becasue we have over 3500 year old preserved copies of these on cunieform tablets, whereas the illiterate Hebrew Shepherds forgot and changed many elements of the same stories when they repeated these stories as an oral tradition around their campfires. The original stories make Satan both the creator of man, and savior of Noah, not Yahweh, although if Christians actually read the Bible, they would see that just as in the Sumerian stories, the Biblical Satan, like the Sumerian one, serve their brother Enlil-Yahweh, though being slightly diobedient at times to do little things like saving the human race. The Biblical Yahweh then, is neither Enki or Enlil. The poor illiterate Hebrew Shepherds seem to have mixed the stories up and their God is both Enki and Enlil, simply retaining in their memories the "good" things about both Gods, and combining them to make one God, blisfully ignorant that half of their God is in fact, Enki the wise, Serpent dragon of Eden, or the other half is Enlil, the sister-raping, flood bringing, dragon god of wind and storms. But this is not to say Jesus is fake, but even he apparently did not realize that the creator of mankind, savior of Noah, etc. was Enki-Satan, the much maligned brother of the God Jesus believed was his father.

Acutually I was not referring to you specifically, just the general tone of the thread which was presuming that the Sumerian gods were real.

Incidently, I agree with everything you said above, with the proviso that it is all mythological history. And I would also say that Jesus wasn't intentionally "faked".....his story was a meant as a learning myth by the writers, it just got mistakenly believed as historical fact later on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have long puzzled over something – and that is the pre-identity of Jesus. It seems that for most everyone else this is a non-question, as they are in two different, non-overlapping camps, e.g., "He is Jesus Christ the Only Son of God," or "He was a great teacher," but a crucial point is being missed, as he himself alluded several times to his pre-existence.

What to me is a simple connecting-of-the-dots gives the conclusion that Ninurta, son of Enlil, incarnated into the son of Joseph and Mary (or "possessed" him, choose your terminology).

-- The research is very convincing that the Anunnaki leader Enlil was Jehovah/Yahweh.

-- His son Ninurta was designated as his successor.

-- Enki's son Marduk siezed power instead, thus he was termed "The Usurper." This led to "The Pyramid Wars," culminating in nuclear-type weaponry being used.

-- As a way of creating a new covenant with mankind (and breaking the hold of Marduk's, and other, "pagan" cults) the plan was created for Ninurta to form a once-and-for-all religion in which "The Father" would be worshiped, and the rancorous human population would become peaceful and loving.

-- On at least two occasions, a voice spoke from the clouds, or mists, "This is my son, in whom I am well pleased."

So the question becomes, who else could this father-son team be? It seems unlikely that it is Enki referring to his son Marduk because of, among other reasons, all the references to the devil being a serpent, which is the Enki line’s trademark. And Jesus gave full "props" to Jehovah/Yahweh and the prophets who spoke for and about him, even saying he was here to fulfill the words of the prophets. Also, "the Father and I are united" and "He who has seen me has seen the Father."

None of the books I have on this subject even vaguely hint at this possibility. As well, I’ve done several Internet searches, Google and others, and nowhere is this connection made. It seems so obvious to me now that I am amazed that it has not previously been seized upon. (I’m even surprised at myself, but pre-conceived mindsets can be a stubborn obstacle.)

If I had to speculate, I would say that the Vatican has this information in it’s off-limits library, and this is the reason why they, to this day, retain many symbols from the ancient times in their vestments and architecture.

I would appreciate any comments from the good folks at this forum.

Your thought is provocative. But, really I consider that all of these Marduks and Enkis and Eas planets. This is from wiki:

According to later Babylonian myth, the Anunnaki were the children of Anu and Ki, brother and sister gods, themselves the children of Anshar and Kishar (Skypivot and Earthpivot, the Celestial poles). Anshar and Kishar were the children of Lahm and Lahmu ("the muddy ones"), names given to the gatekeepers of the Abzu temple at Eridu, the site at which the Creation was thought to have occurred. The head of the Anunnaki council was the Great Anu, (rather than being just a sky god, Anu in Sumerian actually means "sky"), of Uruk and the other members were his offspring. His place was taken by Enlil, (En=lord, lil=wind,air), who at some time was thought to have separated heaven and earth. This resulted in an ongoing dispute between Enlil of Nippur and his half brother Enki of Eridu regarding the legitimacy of Enlil's assumption of leadership. Enki, (En=lord, Ki=Earth), in addition to being the God of fresh water, was also God of wisdom and magic, regarded by some as an alchemist. When the Igigi went on strike and refused to continue to work maintaining the universe, on the Shappatu (Hebrew. shabbat, Eng. sabbath) Enki created humankind to assume responsibility for the tasks the Gods no longer performed. *****

This is from me:

If you really think about it, Enki is 'lord Earth.' This earth is said to be alive and have a spirit named Gaia, from Celtic lore. Sorry if I repeat some of your studies, but there is some differences in the meanings in certain areas. It is very hard to bring these together. The first thing to bring out is something about Jesus Christ. A very interesting thing. Thomas, also named Didymus, was the twin of Jesus. Thomas means twin and Didymus means double or twin. In Hebrew, Thomas means duplicate. After Jesus was resurrected, he appeared to some of the disciples at Lake Tiberius, Thomas was among them. They did not recognize him. Mary thought he was the gardner at the tomb. Jesus appeared to many people after his resurrection in a different form. That is shapeshifting and that is a Celtic belief. I am bringing out that in the Celtic belief Anu is the great mother ancestor of the Danaan gods.

In Celtic legends, there is a riocht or coimimeadh, this is a little off subject, but I'll try to tie it in. These words mean 'co-walker,' exterior hidden-soul, or double. It appears as a sign of death or great danger.

About the Anunnaki: http://www.metahistory.org/ReptilianAgenda.php

However, there is a world of difference in the way the story is treated in two sources. The Sumerian cuneiform record tells the intervention scenario as if it were (pre)historical fact, a set of events that really happened. In the NHC (Nag Hammadi Codex), the story of the Annunaki (there called Archons) is presented in the cosmological perspective of the Sophia Mythos, the Fallen Goddess scenario, and then it is analyzed, deconstructed. In other words, the Gnostics had a view of the cosmic origins of the Annunaki, and they also took a critical approach to intervention. They deconstructed the Sumerian narrative. The cuneiform record is just a story, without critical commentary. The description of the "alien interbreeding program" occurs in several places in the NHC, but the Gnostic materials tell us that the attempt failed:

The Archons came to Adam. When they saw Eve talking to him they said to each other, ‘What sort of creature is this luminous woman?’ … Now come, let us lay hold of her and cast our seed into her, that she may become soiled and unable to access her inner light. Then those who she bears will be under our charge… But Eve, being a free power, laughed at their decision. She put mist in their eyes [and escaped them].”

The Origin of the World, NHC II, 5, 116.10ff

This is one of several riveting passages in the NHC that show Eve, the primal woman, outwitting the Archons. The Mystery teaching presents a mythological event, and comments on the outcome of that event. In the Gnostic view, the Archon/Annunaki do attempt to interbreed with humanity, but fail. Other texts describe how Eve leaves her “phantom image” which the Archons defile, but they are unable to actually access her body, i.e., human genetic structure.

From me:

If you call Jehovah/Yahweh Enlil from the Anunnaki, Elijah from the bible is the God of Jehovah (El Jah) and that would point to Jehovah being Anunnaki and Elijah being Enlil.

This stuff is so deep.

Zecharia Sitchin is basing his beliefs on Planet X or whatever on a 'twin star' to our sun, which is not out of the question. In other words, it could be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This stuff is so deep.

Zecharia Sitchin is basing his beliefs on Planet X or whatever on a 'twin star' to our sun, which is not out of the question. In other words, it could be.

It's deep something, alright.

--Jaylemurph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's deep something, alright.

--Jaylemurph

Yeah, I have to scrub my boots to get that stuff off!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whether Jesus has a connection with the Annunaki I've started wondering myself after reading Sitchens work. Also consider this the scripture also states that the Apostle Paul went by himself into Arabia for a period of time. I've also been wondering if he might have encountered Sumerian writings during that time.

No need for it. The Jewish beliefs were based on Babylonian beliefs (from when the Jews were captives in Babylonia), which were based on Akkadian beliefs, which were in turn based on Sumerian beliefs. After a thousand years of following this borrowed belief system, is it any wonder that parallels between the Sumerian and the Christian belief systems exist?

In fact, the Zoroastrian Persians did state that the God of the Jews was an enormous and wicked dragon, and brother of the dragon Ahriman, said to be the same creature as Satan. So here we see the same confirmation of Enki-satan and Enlil-Yahweh as both brother and dragons over a 1000 years after the Sumerian religion was all but forgotten. This is all discussed in detail in my upcoming book.

Sorry about the book, but the Sumerian religion was very certainly not forgotten at the time the Avesta was finally recorded (I assume this is what you're talking about here) in the 6th century BC. Also, as I'm sure you know, the Avesta has an extremely long oral tradition associated with it, though exactly how long is problematic, as is true with any oral tradition.

The "Sumerian religion," which was practiced in Babylonia and spun off into various forms in the conquered territories of Babylonia, had undergone some change but it was essentially the same. IOW, the names had changed, as had the language. Pretty much as would be expected for any civilization over a period of three thousand years or so.

However, there is a world of difference in the way the story is treated in two sources. The Sumerian cuneiform record tells the intervention scenario as if it were (pre)historical fact, a set of events that really happenedIn the NHC (Nag Hammadi Codex), the story of the Annunaki (there called Archons) is presented in the cosmological perspective of the Sophia Mythos, the Fallen Goddess scenario, and then it is analyzed, deconstructed.

Associating the "Archons" (a Greek word meaning the Authorities, or those in charge, from the same root as monarch) with the Annunaki is too great of a stretch to make. First of all, there is no "the Nag Hammadi Codex." The Nag Hammadi library contained 13 Codices, made up of 52 books. Just saying "the Nag Hammadi Codex" is not only useless and meaningless, it betrays an unwillingness to examine the facts of the matter on your part. For if you had, you might have noticed that your quote from "On the Origin of the World" came from a single book in one of these thirteen codices. Secondly, this word is typically translated as "the Authorities" and is generally accepted to mean the Authorities of Chaos, which existed before creation (still does, in fact). These "Authorities" were the created offspring of Yaltabaoth:

Next, the ruler had a thought - consistent with his nature - and by means of verbal expression he created an androgyne. He opened his mouth and cooed to him. When his eyes had been opened, he looked at his father, and he said to him, "Eee!" Then his father called him Eee-a-o ('Yao'). Next he created the second son. He cooed to him. And he opened his eyes and said to his father, "Eh!" His father called him 'Eloai'. Next, he created the third son. He cooed to him. And he opened his eyes and said to his father, "Asss!" His father called him 'Astaphaios'. These are the three sons of their father.

Seven appeared in chaos, androgynous. They have their masculine names and their feminine names. The feminine name is Pronoia (Forethought) Sambathas, which is 'week'.

And his son is called Yao: his feminine name is Lordship.

Sabaoth: his feminine name is Deity.

Adonaios: his feminine name is Kingship.

Elaios: his feminine name is Jealousy.

Oraios: his feminine name is Wealth.

And Astaphaios: his feminine name is Sophia (Wisdom).

These are the seven forces of the seven heavens of chaos. And they were born androgynous, consistent with the immortal pattern that existed before them, according to the wish of Pistis: so that the likeness of what had existed since the beginning might reign to the end. You will find the effect of these names and the force of the male entities in the Archangelic (Book) of the Prophet Moses, and the names of the female entities in the first Book of Noraia.

who himself started out as an aborted amalgamation of the envy and jealousy that the shadow had for the much mightier, and prettier light (from whence Pistis Sophia came, or it came from Pistis Sophia) that was spoken into existence by Pistis Sophia:

Then shadow perceived there was something mightier than it, and felt envy; and when it had become pregnant of its own accord, suddenly it engendered jealousy. Since that day, the principle of jealousy amongst all the eternal realms and their worlds has been apparent. Now as for that jealousy, it was found to be an abortion without any spirit in it. Like a shadow, it came into existence in a vast watery substance. Then the bile that had come into being out of the shadow was thrown into a part of chaos. Since that day, a watery substance has been apparent. And what sank within it flowed away, being visible in chaos: as with a woman giving birth to a child - all her superfluities flow out; just so, matter came into being out of shadow, and was projected apart. And it did not depart from chaos; rather, matter was in chaos, being in a part of it.

And when these things had come to pass, then Pistis came and appeared over the matter of chaos, which had been expelled like an aborted fetus - since there was no spirit in it. For all of it (chaos) was limitless darkness and bottomless water. Now when Pistis saw what had resulted from her defect, she became disturbed. And the disturbance appeared, as a fearful product; it rushed to her in the chaos. She turned to it and blew into its face in the abyss, which is below all the heavens.

And when Pistis Sophia desired to cause the thing that had no spirit to be formed into a likeness and to rule over matter and over all her forces, there appeared for the first time a ruler, out of the waters, lion-like in appearance, androgynous, having great authority within him, and ignorant of whence he had come into being. Now when Pistis Sophia saw him moving about in the depth of the waters, she said to him, "Child, pass through to here," whose equivalent is 'yalda baoth'.

Pistis Sophia who was the original immortal:

After the natural structure of the immortal beings had completely developed out of the infinite, a likeness then emanated from Pistis (Faith); it is called Sophia (Wisdom). It exercised volition and became a product resembling the primeval light. And immediately her will manifested itself as a likeness of heaven, having an unimaginable magnitude; it was between the immortal beings and those things that came into being after them, like [...]: she (Sophia) functioned as a veil dividing mankind from the things above.

None of which appears in the Sumerian religion. So, too much of a stretch, like I said.

All quotes are from greggk's source, except I'm actually going to provide a link:

On the Origin of the World from the Nag Hammadi Library

Feel free to poke around and see these Gnostic texts that were found at Nag Hammadi in Egypt and written several centuries after the death of Christ.

The Archons came to Adam. When they saw Eve talking to him they said to each other, ‘What sort of creature is this luminous woman?’ … Now come, let us lay hold of her and cast our seed into her, that she may become soiled and unable to access her inner light. Then those who she bears will be under our charge… But Eve, being a free power, laughed at their decision. She put mist in their eyes [and escaped them].”

The Origin of the World, NHC II, 5, 116.10ff

This is one of several riveting passages in the NHC that show Eve, the primal woman, outwitting the Archons. The Mystery teaching presents a mythological event, and comments on the outcome of that event. In the Gnostic view, the Archon/Annunaki do attempt to interbreed with humanity, but fail. Other texts describe how Eve leaves her “phantom image” which the Archons defile, but they are unable to actually access her body, i.e., human genetic structure.

IMO, there's no parallel between a race that created humanity, and one that did not even express a desire to do so. You can cease linking the Gnostic mythology to that of the Sumerians. It simply doesn't work.

Zecharia Sitchin is basing his beliefs on Planet X or whatever on a 'twin star' to our sun, which is not out of the question. In other words, it could be.

No, he bases it on cuneiform texts which he purposefully mischaracterizes when he claims to translate them. The actual fact is, he cannot translate cuneiform. Simple as that. He's never shown any ability to do so, and when asked to show such an ability, he refuses.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have long puzzled over something – and that is the pre-identity of Jesus.

...

I would appreciate any comments from the good folks at this forum.

He left mid cycle in the 3,600 time period so he should not have been able to go to the 10th planet as their technology wasn't developed sufficiently for long range travel. Also he operated within the day/thousand year formula so has to be someone else.

All they did was modify something they found already here. There is an original creator who is often left out of these postulations and I think that must be who he references. The annanaki present as a quarrelsome interfering meddling race more like the Farengi pattern and the christ always addressed them as desendents of the serpent figure. I see nothing but trouble when these people return so my hope is in the promises of the original to do what he says. The serpent don't need mankind. They already decided to reduce us to a manageable 500,000 global population and it is said there will be no flesh left alive except by original intervention. That has been promised so I wait patiently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are these Annunaki the same folk as the Chitauli that are common throughout Sub-Saharan African Legend?

Hope this threads not dead...I only discovered it today! Very interesting...Makes me feel better I'm not the only nutter out there interested in this sort of stuff :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hope this threads not dead...I only discovered it today! Very interesting...Makes me feel better I'm not the only nutter out there interested in this sort of stuff :D

Don't worry, you're not alone. Every couple of weeks another Annunaki thread pops up around here!

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 17

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.