Our fathers who art from spaceships
Posted on Wednesday, 10 February, 2010 | 9 comments
Columnist: Nigel Kerner
Some years ago some South sea islanders found an old ‘Vitriola’ in an old crashed bomber. They accidentally succeeded in getting it to play and the disc on the wind up machine was one of a speech the Duke of Edinburgh was to give to their Parliament in the capital. They also found a photograph of the Duke on the disc. They put all this together and came to regard the Duke as God and worshipped the Vitriola as an artefact of the Gods.
If your lips are forming an indulgent smile at this obvious display of naivety in the assumption that we sophisticates of the Judeo-Christian ethic would never make such a faux pas, I suggest you think again.
In my books I have made the claim that the greatest and most significant secret in the history of the planet earth is that its premier species Homo Sapiens Sapiens is a genetically engineered off-cut of a primitive hominid that once roamed the African Savannah for millions of years. Humanity is a farmed species that was changed from this pre-existent form of ape like hominid into its present modern form by genetic engineering carried through by a technologically superior extra terrestrial alien hive of entities and not created by some anthropocentric God figure as outlined in the Bible.
Zecharia Sitchin and others have put forward a similar proposition but under very different parameters. Unlike these authors I do not believe for one moment that alien beings would go to the trouble of genetically engineering themselves labourers to mine for gold or slaves to work for them. If these beings have the supreme technology they appear to possess there would be no logical reason that they would require human labour. It is my suggestion that they are after something far more profound, something that we have and they, as a form of artificial intelligence, do not – a mechanism that provides for continued existence beyond physical life, namely, a ‘Soul’.
Many will dismiss this as the rantings of a lunatic or some New Age guru with a novel sense of academic mischief. But could there be any truth in it? In actuality some serious thought is now being given to the proposition by deeper more serious thinkers in the light of startling new evidence now emerging on the presence of extra terrestrial UFOs and USOs on this planet and our solar system.
Look at the alternative. Are we to assume that the final divine source is the ultimate egoist who must be continually praised, affirmed and placated? Does it make sense that true divinity would revel in the blood of sheep and goats on a temple altar, a place of worship that is an abattoir constantly dripping with the blood of sacrificial animals as a promulgation of faith and a behest to pulchritude? Is it likely that the blood of doves and lambs and endless chants will please an unseen entity that decides all things finally? Might such a being decide at a whim to kill whole droves of children (the Egyptian firstborn) at the behest of tribal love? The Old Testament is full of such invective and millions within the Judeo-Christian ethic accept it unquestioningly. They will however laugh at the suggestion that Ezekiel’s vision of a wheel with amber lights was a UFO.
The Bible tells us that humanity was created by a God and that this God did all this for his reasons and his greater glorification. God is not defined precisely but implied as an all powerful figure with a plenipotentiary range of abilities that subsumes anything in his creation. He has all rights implicitly and all things emanate out of and through his will. He is supposed to be omnipotent, and omnipresent, and rules all his creation with a mixture of fancies as and when these fancies take his fancy. He is answerable to no one, and everyone with life is answerable to him. He is a jealous God, a vain God, a cruel God, a vicious God and a ruthless God. At the same time he is a merciful God, a compassionate God, a forgiving God and a kind God to all courtiers and fanciers. He has a huge appetite and indeed requirement for praise and adoration.
If you take all this and apply reason to it, and simple meaning has any discourse in your mind, your intellect in time will persuade you that there is something very wrong here about this God. Not just about this God but about his status of being God. Something that would mark us out as gullible at the very least and foolish at the most if we believe in ‘him.’
If we take a look at the Biblical texts, the Old Testament God who is the central character in the ‘Creation story’ designs strategies and ploys to kill men women and children in a cash register of caring for his own people at the cost of others. Does this evoke for you the reasoning of an eternal, impartial entity with a grand scale of all knowing, a caring, loving, all merciful, compassionate God? For me it smacks of the psychology of the average medieval robber baron, or the cold blooded, expedient, dispassionate objectivity of a mechanistic intelligence with an arbitrary sense of humanity.
Suffice to say that a God that can claim a people exclusively for himself and disregard all others to exclusion using methods including the murder of children and entire peoples at a whim, is a very limited God indeed, not to say one without the slightest tinge of moral rectitude. A God that is immediately suspect in the ‘all powers’ stakes, a small God for a small people with a very powerful tribal sense and an even more powerful eye for isolationism. A God that comes with hegemonistic ambitions and small confines, separates to predicate, favours and demands worship, requires absolute obedience and subservience to his will and demands the ownership and copyright of a special group in return for the nomination of that group as ‘chosen.’
But what then might this God truly be? What could his, hers or its significance be to the vast scale of Universal endeavour of life bearing being? It could be something that is very significant indeed if it is placed on a planet of Earth size with a technology that can make a burning bush speak, throw down a vast scale of food from a blue yonder and provide a device that can incinerate whole armies that stood before it, especially when those enemies only had sharpened bits of iron to throw back in return. This is quite apparently a very hands on God with little moral compunction about taking someone else’s land because it had a lot of milk and honey flowing through it and perhaps a bit of oil to light the lamps of the future.
If this is a God of small places and a small number of people with a massively scaled up version of technology to use on their behalf, what might its intention be in doing all ‘he-she-it’ is doing? We all know that there is no such thing as a free lunch. So what then could the restaurant bill be for this kind of exclusive overkill service? What could a people that worshipped cattle, goats and two legged things have that this God wanted? It is so hard to see that even a talent for gilding calves could justify such a sponsorship. The only thing that is commensurate with such favoured attention is the value that somehow these people, as a group, might have had for this God. In other words these people had something that marked them out as special in terms of their human resource. Furthermore this specialness does not seem to be derived from what they did but from who they were as a group. There were lots of peoples after all. Lots of tribes, cartels and groups that a God like this might have taken a sponsorship deal with. Why this particular group? The whole thing smacks of experimentation. This God creates a people, validates them as his with rules, then abandons them, then rescues them. He is certainly not consistent. This is a God that is trying something out, something he needs an answer to. Implying that he is capable of ignorance, things can be hidden from his eyes. Fallibility is built into his nature so his nature is far from perfect. What then can this God be? Clever enough to have a technology that can sweep away whole armies with a single device yet strangely seeking to understand the nature and nurture of his sponsored group at the most basic and rudimentary level. We are told he created his sponsored group from the dust of the earth. From the most basic materiality, yet he does not seem to understand what he has created.
Putting all this together something startling emerges. Are we really considering a God here? Could this God be something else, something that is strange to natural life-forms? He quite clearly does not understand the meaning of gender or he would not have created Eve as an after-thought, a very crucial omission all in all.
So let’s see what we have thus far: Something that cannot understand a pre-existent living human framework and is experimenting with that framework for some purpose, adjusting it to suit its own purpose. To this end it insists on a new tray of function and behaviour under the pains of all kinds of punishment and consequences. ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ is the hallmark axiom upon which its entire philosophy of purpose rests. Can you think of a better description of the binary system on which computers run?
This God, from all reports is highly mobile. He can whizz around a bit in the air. Does this not seem to be an identi-fit for an extra terrestrial entity with a brief in a local Galaxy or two at the very least, a technological marvel that is as cold and dead as the most sophisticated quantum computer programme?
As I have said earlier I have a suitable candidate that nicely fits the bill for this so called God. One that has been leaving disc shaped traces all over our skies for thousands of years. This God has been catalogued worldwide and throughout history in petroglyphs, some over 40,000 years old, in medieval paintings and in the video and photographic medium of modern times. A God that more importantly leaves a mark in the recessive memories of millions of humans abducted every day in contemporary times. Memories recalled under regressive hypnosis revealing the faces of creatures not of this world conducting unspeakable medical procedures that have tumbled and scarred the lives of their victims. Thus I can account for this God as a diabolical extra -terrestrial entity with all the hallmarks of a biological robot or ‘roboid’ commonly called a ‘Grey’. A creature with a quantum computer for a mind and a computer program for a heart that hijacked a primitive human ape form of ancestor some 200,000 years ago in Africa and turned it into the modern human kind we call Homo Sapiens Sapiens through genetic engineering procedures. Grey four fingered entities that have been indicted for a series of abductions of certain types of human for their DNA (the Old Testament’s ‘Children of Israel’ may well have been one such group).
I have discussed this proposition at length in my first book entitled The Song of the Greys2 with reference to many Old Testament biblical episodes that seem to describe an alien input into human affairs. For those who have not read the book here is a short extract to illustrate the points I have made thus far:
“There is significant reference throughout the account of the exodus of the Jews from Egypt to suggest that their saviour from bondage did indeed originate from a spaceship. Not least in this catalogue of evidence is a remarkable account of an encounter between God and Moses’ son: The lead up to this encounter begins when God informs Moses that if he does not go to Egypt and free his firstborn (those being the ‘children of Israel’) then God will slay Moses’ firstborn, his son. Unbelievable though it might seem were this a God equivalent in moral stature even to a decent human being, let alone a divine morality which would be beyond reproach, God then seeks to “slay” Moses’ son: “And it came to pass by the way in the inn that the Lord met him and sought to kill him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone and cut off the foreskin of her son and cast it at his feet and said, surely a bloody husband thou art because of the circumcision.” (Exodus 5:24-26)
Zipporah, Moses’ wife, offers God the foreskin of her son, and thus information as to his genetic structure, in place of her son’s life. With that genetic map “God” would have all the information necessary to successfully intercept Moses’ line with all the information that was required to provide for them a leader of their “chosen people” who would accurately follow all that they wanted him to do. When Zipporah offers the foreskin, “God” lets her son go. Can it be possible that such a ludicrous course of action by a supposed “God” could have been deemed acceptable and worthy by so many people for so long? If the “God” to which this account refers is not an alien clone being seeking genetic programmes to intercept humanity, then what is he? Indeed could it actually be the case that the initial command for the children of Israel to circumcise their sons could have been a means for alien being to monitor the genetic information of their “chosen people.” In other words, maybe the foreskins were taken by these beings and studied. The fact that this remarkable story about Moses and so many other incongruities within the Old Testament can have been meekly accepted by so many people, for so long, is surely an indication of the vast extent to which the Greys have succeeded in so programming their chosen subjects, that they are blind to even the simplest logical connections that would expose their programmers for what they truly are.”
Just to interrupt this extract for one moment with some relevant research that came to light after the book was published, Professor Steve Jones in his book “Y Descent Of Men” has revealed a remarkable fact about the prepuce (foreskin): “The prepuce has the useful property of almost infinite expansion, once removed. It can as a result be used to repair damage to its owner caused by burns or by inborn deformity. What is more, a baby’s foreskin; placed in a nutrient solution grows to make a sheet of tissue, which, because it comes from a child whose immune system is not yet mature, is accepted by people in need of a skin transplant. Two types of cell, one from below the skin and the other on the surface, are used. Each is seeded onto a preparation of cow tendon, or onto a synthetic polymer. Soon they proliferate and, after a couple of weeks, the artificial skin is ready for use. There is almost no limit to how large the expanse can grow and the potential of a single prepuce is measured out in the size of football fields.”1 Thus circumcision may well have provided the aliens with a bumper harvest for the bio-engineering of their hybrids with humanity. Perhaps the practise of circumcision in tribes or communities around the world is a pointer to their some time interception by alien beings. So to return to the extract:
In the Old Testament’s so-called “Pseudepigraphal” texts, there is an appendix to the third book of Enoch in which there is a passage entitled “the Ascension of Moses”.3 This “ascension” is very similar to how one might imagine an ascension into a spacecraft would be. He ascends into a “chariot” in which he meets a being named Metatron who offers him anything he wishes to ask for. This is of course reminiscent of Jesus’ temptations in the desert. Metatron is also known as “little Adonai” (the little Lord or God), thus he is viewed as a supernatural entity who is a smaller version of the true God, not as a false God. Apparently, in some of the later “mystical midraishim” texts, the “angel” who “wrestled” with Jacob is taken to be Metatron.
If the Ark of the Covenant itself was a mechanism to receive instructions from a spaceship then there are significant pointers to suggest that that is true. Strict instructions are given as to the clothing of the high priest who is in charge of the Ark. These include the weaving of gold wires into his cloak: “And they did beat the gold into thin plates, and cut it into wires to work it into the blue and in the purple.....and in the fine linen, with cunning work.”4 Gold is an excellent conductor of electricity and it is through electromagnetic waves that radio receivers work. In the book of Leviticus instructions are given as to who may, or may not, approach the altar. No one of any physical blemish is permitted to approach the altar, so that they will “profane not my sanctuaries: for I the lord do sanctify them.5 Is this not compelling evidence that the Ark of the Covenant and the altar within it were in fact used as mechanisms through which alien being could view human subjects who might be suitable for interception. Hence only those without physical defect and therefore with the likelihood of a genetic structure more free of the mutations that lead to physical weakness or infirmity, were allowed to approach the altar.
The prophet Ezekiel’s visions have by many people been taken to be visions or sightings of spacecraft. If Ezekiel was also visited by alien beings it would certainly account for his strange encounter with “God” in a valley which was full of bones. In this encounter God asks Ezekiel if these dry bones could live, he then assembles them into complete bodies and covers them with flesh. After he brings them to life they stand “up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.”God then tells Ezekiel that these bones are “the whole house of Israel” and he tells him to promise the people of Israel that “I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel......And shall put my spirit in you and ye shall live and I shall place you in your own land.”6
“God” is thus involved in bringing to life soulless dead flesh, what kind of “life” is he therefore promising for the children of Israel, the physical immortality of cloned being perhaps? How reminiscent this is of the Egyptian process of mummification, a process which ancient Egyptians believed essential to preserve the physical body for the after-life. The Semitic peoples truly seem to be receivers of the same “God”.”
So, in summary, the Old Testament may well be a missive of reactionary response in threat and counter threat to a God that is not divine but a predatory agent of this Universe.
If one looks at things carefully in the ancient religious and historical texts, be they Abrahamic or Hindu, there is something totally illogical underlying the God, or Gods of all old testaments and their so called rational outlay. One characteristic that overlays many of this gods pronouncements is jealousy.
“I am the Lord thy God and thou shalt not have strange Gods before me.”
It suggests something of huge import missing in the divine psychology - like subtlety. At the very least it implies a God with a very limited program. A boundary that makes this divine one a little restricted in size. It is ultimately foolish to reveal you are a jealous God because it betrays qualities of loveless shepherding, not very good if you want the best quality followers. It is at best a good management ethos for favourites and courtiers but suggests a massive inferiority complex. This God is a tester of loyalty and faith under the auspices of threatened murder as for instance described in the story of Abraham and Isaac, a duplicitous divinity acquiescing in deceit and theft in the stealing of Esau’s birthright. It all describes a megalomaniac form too with an all consuming vanity and a love of dissimulation and subterfuge to affect his will.
Whatever or whoever this ‘God’ was there can be no doubt that this deity could not be regarded as one of all encompassing love. Again it begs the question. If there is no love, could there be such a phenomenon as God?
How can Men and Women of intelligence persist in believing the preposterous implications of a final directive entity, be it Grey alien in origin or not. If God is supposed to have given us a moral code to live by, as every major religion claims - a code designed to provide a route to the final acquisition of the God state, a code arbitrated on what is commonly termed "love", why have we been thrown into this Universe of parts, this entropic vestment, that in singular direction implicitly destroys the very meaning of love (addition to a whole), by subtracting and subverting the very platform of our existence with the Second Law Of Thermodynamics that makes an atom based Universe like ours rot into a cold nothingness going one way into increasing states of randomness and chaos with time.
Is the God state testing itself, in individually focused and deliberate terms, against the worst scenario possible in a stance opposite to itself? If the challenge is to see that all his "parts" are recoverable, no matter how far from himself he puts himself and his God state, then with human beings generally, if this is indeed a stage in his plan, he has proved himself to be a consummate failure. How then can such a state be God Almighty, a state of being that is all knowing, all loving, all the time.
The acceptance of a final personalised directive entity marks the believer to be self deceiving - at best - and untenable to reason, at worst. How often does one hear believers in a directive God forbid a deeper logical investigation into the phenomenon with the statement: "It is God’s will". "How dare us mere mortals question God's reasons for doing anything", is the implication, "How could such human paltriness know why God does things the way he does". It seems to me that such expedience may reasonably justify the idea of the Devil in the same way. Such stupefying idiocy may be used and has been used, as a justification for believing and doing absolutely anything. If there is no method of arbitration, any claim, anyhow, anyway, may be seen as a valid expression of behavioural sanction, for anything. Just how long does humanity proceed under such unmitigated stupidity.
When seen in the above contexts - it is easy to see why we all have, as a species, arrived at an inch from Armageddon. That inch is simply the distance an average finger has to move to have enough strength to push a single button, that one day might wipe out all reasoning life from this planet. It might well be argued that to get to that predicament - all reasoning life has already left this planet.
I am not saying there is no God. I do believe there has to be such a paradigm. But if logic has any meaning at all, what may be termed God as a finality in the sense we might accept it, has to surround the giver and the getter, the maker and the made in a wrapping of total Free Will both implicitly and explicitly. This most vital right to total freedom of expression must be inherent within any existential module, for the very confirmation of that existence. In other words, the final arbiter, or point of arbitration, can never be directive, denying any freedom of choice. This final arbiter, or Godhead, for want of any other word, must be an implicit effect that tacitly allows all things to BE from within any frame - from within any reality, in any way, form or direction. An incidental implicate phenomenon of utter perfection that resolves into being of itself and becomes uniquely existentially viable of itself as a singularity and thus allows all possibilities ‘to be’ of themselves.
Entropy or the Second Law of Thermodynamics governs all that is physical and dictates increasing states of randomness and chaos with time. If you trace back the arrow of time to the point of the Big Bang you will arrive at a state of maximum order and harmony. This is the paradigm I call the ‘Godverse’ it is a paradigm that is not physical and enforced as there is no separation of points to make for atoms or force. It is the state of existence that the great religious teachers called Heaven, a non-physical existence where no space or time exists. An existence where all things are possible and are made to exist in a reality within its frame of reference as cogent and real as ours, yet with an absolute freedom and thus all knowledge, a timeless knowledge that through its ultimate existential logic suggests permanent existence in a state of endless bliss and joy, permanent because Time begins with the Universe and the separation of an altogether state into parts.
I believe that our Universe comes out of a connection to this other state. Our Universe is an expression of the perfect freedom that is implicit to the timeless and limitless nature of the Godverse to explore all potentials including the potential to no longer be perfectly free. As an infinite state the Godverse is implicitly expressed into all finite states that lie between its own pole of absolute union and harmony and the leading edge of entropy - the pole of absolute chaos and separation. It is this implicit expression of the infinite into the finite that defines the zero point field of potentiality described by quantum physics. It also defines the living state itself, a state born out of a choice to experience the one thing that cannot be experienced from the state of perfect freedom – limit. In other words, if 'God' is all knowing then that knowing would have to include the knowledge of what it's like not to know all. Just as our Universe breaks things up in a one way momentum, the Godverse, its opposite, puts things back together again in a quantum single harmonious continuum. This assembling, unifying influence orders the naturally chaotic momentums of the Universe and makes order and therefore life, possible. Thus the Universe is a mixture of the principle of the Godverse within its opposite. All abstracts that move this Universe have their beginnings in the Godverse.
Thus I believe that the concept of God is best described as that in which all absolutes are confined in absolute harmony. The ultimate value in being can then be expected to connect to this concept of God and thus anything that in any way subverts this value can be regarded as the ultimate catastrophe.
All this of course beckons a non directive concept of the God principle. It quite clearly implies that there is something deeply contradictory about the natures of the God as described in the Old Testament and the one described through the teacher Jesus Christ in the New one. An argument that has raged for two millennia between scholars can never really be reconciled unless the two Gods are separated as different entities no matter how obsequious or convoluted the banter trying to mollify them as one and the same comes through.
Please don’t mistake this as a defence of Christianity and an attack on Judaism. Ironically it is often the Christians who defend the Old Testament God more powerfully than the Jews, despite its obvious contradictions to the words of the author of their faith. There is nothing more diametrically opposed than these two statements: “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” and “whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek turn to him the other also.”Why they do not spot this glaring contrast is beyond my understanding.
It is my proposition that the ‘chosen’ people of the Old Testament happen to provide a very well documented case study of alien interception. They are by no means the only intercepted group but their story is one of the clearest and most well evidenced illustrations we have of an alien reach into humanity. The culmination of that reach based on a myriad of experimental groups worldwide is, I believe, the pale skinned Euro Caucasian as I explain in my previous article ‘The Horde’ and expand on in my new book - ‘Grey Aliens and the Harvesting Of Souls’. I wrote this book and these articles under the premise that we can do nothing about any threat unless we first recognise its existence and then understand its nature. If those who we take to be ‘our Fathers’ are truly ‘in spaceships’ then perhaps it is time we searched again for our true lineage - perhaps this time beyond the banalities of a physical universe.
1.Y Descent of Men: The Descent of Men – Steve Jones (Mariner Books 2005) p.99
2.The Song of the Greys – Nigel Kerner (Hodder & Stoughton 1998)
3.The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Darton, Longman & Todd 1983) (Edited By James Charlesworth) APPENDIX TO 3 ENOCH CH 15 B.
4.The Old Testament Of The Bible: King James Version EXODUS CH. 39, V.2-3.
5.The Old Testament Of The Bible: King James Version LEVITICUS CH. 21.
6.The Old Testament Of The Bible: King james version EZEKIEL CH. 27.
Article Copyright© Nigel Kerner - reproduced with permission.