Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
draconic chronicler

Is the Biblical Yahweh actually a dragon?

458 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

drakonwick
Sorry Moro, but you just don't know enough about this. Ningishzida is sometimes portrayed as a full fledged Mushushu dragon with nothing human about him, and sometimes as a man with two snake heads. Even Grem will probably admit to this. Certainly some of his sources say this.

And Grem also provided the hymn of Ea where he is described as a scaly, snake headed, clawed monster.

The facts I stated really cannot be refuted.

Did people believe Enki could also look like a human. Yes. But did they also say he was the Great Dragon who stands in Eridu? Yes.

This is no different than the Greeks believing Zeus could take the form of a Gander or Drakon to rape human females.

Do I believe these creatures could change like that? No.

I must agree! Being that I do not know enough about sumerian mythology, I will bow out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Seems like moro's doing fine. There is an interpretation of this pic that says that Ningishzida is depicted twice, once in Mushushu form and then as humanoid escorting the king to Enki. But this is just one interpretation, another says that it is one of Ningishzida's attendant mushushu, and he/she is only depicted once....in human form.

your speculations DC are just that. as i stated previously about Sassu Wunnu and Enki ....why would enki have a personified mushushu form/aspect if he himself was a mushushu????

Enki's true form in Sumerian literature and depictions, is humanoid....without question....his symbols have been also noted previously....he is called Ushumgal once or twice metaphorically, while there are lots of instances of him being called Great Bull. In fact you have only alluded to one example from Sumerian sources to support your case.

One could not argue that Zeus's true form was as a bull....even though he assumes the form to rape Europa.....nor can we say his true form was a swan, a shape he assumes to rape Lyda. So it is with Enki.

Do 'these creatures' (meaning mushushu) exist? No.

They are composite constructs...just like many of the Sumerian composite creatures....there are many. Bovine ingredients are far more frequent in these sorts of creatures, so that if one was to ask which creature was most sacred to the Sumerian....it would have to be a Bull.

There is nothing about the mushushu that states it must be a composite. Archosaurs have all of the same physiological features. Your observations are as ridulous as the story about the "Elephant and the Blind Men". "It must be a snake becasue one felt its writhing trunk, etc).

Many reptiles have sharp claws. But since felines do too, you think it must be a composite, imaginary beast? Don't be ridiculous. You have read enough of the literature to know that several scientists believed the Mushushu to be a real, extinct animal, becasue unlike ALL OTHER MYTHIC CREATURES in the Levant, only the MUSHUSHU remained in a consistent form in art for literally thousands of years, and thousands of years after that, we see dragons like the one on the Welsh flag that anyone in the acient middle east would immediately identify as a Mushushu.

It is you who speculates. If the hymns state Enki is a great dragon, then that is what they believe him to be. And this is to be expected if he is a son of Tiamat. But if he can change into human form, then it is human nature to believe this his his favorite form because it is natural for humans to believe they are superior. Even Ishtar/Inanna is called a great dragon in her hymns.

You can see this same human nature at work in a dearth of fantasy novels today. Many have shapeshifting dragons, but the dragons prefer their human forms because of all the human ammenities, and only become dragons when danger threatens. Humans think the same ways now as they did back then. It is highly likely that this is the explanation for the Sumerian "great dragons" who look like men (and women). It may be as simple as the fact that since they came from 'Heaven', they must assume their dragon forms while in heaven. And this is no different than the Christian belief that 'angels' are spirit creatures in heaven, that assume the form of flesh and blood humans while on missions on earth.

You are the one with the greater speculations Grem, not I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Gremlin
There is nothing about the mushushu that states it must be a composite. Archosaurs have all of the same physiological features. Your observations are as ridulous as the story about the "Elephant and the Blind Men". "It must be a snake becasue one felt its writhing trunk, etc).

Im obviously going to disagree, if the depictions of the mushushu arent enough to convince you that the creature was made up of the bits of other animals then the incantation provided above should confirm this....your assertion flies in the face of the evidence presented before it.....the very evidence it attempts to use.

Many reptiles have sharp claws. But since felines do too, you think it must be a composite, imaginary beast? Don't be ridiculous. You have read enough of the literature to know that several scientists believed the Mushushu to be a real, extinct animal, becasue unlike ALL OTHER MYTHIC CREATURES in the Levant, only the MUSHUSHU remained in a consistent form in art for literally thousands of years, and thousands of years after that, we see dragons like the one on the Welsh flag that anyone in the acient middle east would immediately identify as a Mushushu.

sorry i dont need to respond to this. just hot air.

It is you who speculates. If the hymns state Enki is a great dragon, then that is what they believe him to be. And this is to be expected if he is a son of Tiamat. But if he can change into human form, then it is human nature to believe this his his favorite form because it is natural for humans to believe they are superior. Even Ishtar/Inanna is called a great dragon in her hymns.

i have shown otherwise, and dont need to repeat myself ad nauseum, if by now you are unconvinced i think the reason lies with you rather than the evidence and argument.

You can see this same human nature at work in a dearth of fantasy novels today. Many have shapeshifting dragons, but the dragons prefer their human forms because of all the human ammenities, and only become dragons when danger threatens. Humans think the same ways now as they did back then. It is highly likely that this is the explanation for the Sumerian "great dragons" who look like men (and women). It may be as simple as the fact that since they came from 'Heaven', they must assume their dragon forms while in heaven. And this is no different than the Christian belief that 'angels' are spirit creatures in heaven, that assume the form of flesh and blood humans while on missions on earth.

:sleepy:

You are the one with the greater speculations Grem, not I.

Rather....i am the one presenting evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Im obviously going to disagree, if the depictions of the mushushu arent enough to convince you that the creature was made up of the bits of other animals then the incantation provided above should confirm this....your assertion flies in the face of the evidence presented before it.....the very evidence it attempts to use.

sorry i dont need to respond to this. just hot air.

i have shown otherwise, and dont need to repeat myself ad nauseum, if by now you are unconvinced i think the reason lies with you rather than the evidence and argument.

:sleepy:

Rather....i am the one presenting evidence.

You have presented nothing. Several scientists believe the Mushushu was based on a real creature, because it never changed like the composite fantasy monsters. We see what is essentially the mushushu on the Welsh flag 5000 years later.

I am amazed by your inability to comprehend that if the ancient hebrews did not remember from their Meseopotamian origins that there was "a great dragon of eridu" who made a garden in eden, then there would never have benn the talking, walking "serpent" in the Genesis story. Do you really think that can be a coincidence?

Like it or not, the evidence all supports the fact that the Sumerian high gods were "great serpent-dragons of Heaven", exactly as thier ancint hymns proclaimed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

I have not really payed much attention to the these draconic threads but what are they about DC? Just so have historical knowledge? Or are we supposed to go back and worship dragons again? Are they returning so we have to prepare for them? Are they physical beings or spiritual beings able to manifest in the flesh? Just four little questions I thought would ask to be a bit more informed of your views.

Edited by Clovis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Gremlin
You have presented nothing. Several scientists believe the Mushushu was based on a real creature, because it never changed like the composite fantasy monsters. We see what is essentially the mushushu on the Welsh flag 5000 years later.

I am amazed by your inability to comprehend that if the ancient hebrews did not remember from their Meseopotamian origins that there was "a great dragon of eridu" who made a garden in eden, then there would never have benn the talking, walking "serpent" in the Genesis story. Do you really think that can be a coincidence?

Like it or not, the evidence all supports the fact that the Sumerian high gods were "great serpent-dragons of Heaven", exactly as thier ancint hymns proclaimed.

As ive said DC you cannot prove that Enki was a dragon, and that people believed him to be an actual physical living dragon.

All you have alluded to is one metaphoric epithet in Sumerian literature. While there are many epithets that Enki had, and many of them in literature are used more frequently.....Like 'Great Bull'.

He is never depicted as a 'dragon' in Sumerian art. Though he is depicted in a number of 'guises'....if he were really a dragon in his 'true' form, why would we not have one???

The symbols we recognise as his are not dragons.......why?

I have not seen any conclusive evidence that the mushushu seated by Marduk is Enki, just theories......there are other theories as ive mentioned.

~Again, Why would Enki have a mushushu like aspect (called Sassu Wunnu) if he himself was really a mushushu???

I can only conclude that Enki to the sumerians was as he is depicted, and written about......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
As ive said DC you cannot prove that Enki was a dragon, and that people believed him to be an actual physical living dragon.

All you have alluded to is one metaphoric epithet in Sumerian literature. While there are many epithets that Enki had, and many of them in literature are used more frequently.....Like 'Great Bull'.

He is never depicted as a 'dragon' in Sumerian art. Though he is depicted in a number of 'guises'....if he were really a dragon in his 'true' form, why would we not have one???

The symbols we recognise as his are not dragons.......why?

I have not seen any conclusive evidence that the mushushu seated by Marduk is Enki, just theories......there are other theories as ive mentioned.

~Again, Why would Enki have a mushushu like aspect (called Sassu Wunnu) if he himself was really a mushushu???

I can only conclude that Enki to the sumerians was as he is depicted, and written about......

It is probable that by the time Enki was called EA, the original hymns that established his orignal form was a dragon had been all but forgotten, but it was still remembered he could become a dragon. Therefore, the Babylonian hymn simply stated that by this time it was only one of his aspects, much like Zeus being though of primarily as humanoid, but who could become a Gander or Drakon when he had his 'fun'.

But we go back to the most ancient times, Enki is called a dragon, as are all the high gods, his relatives like Ningishzida are sometimes depicted as literal mushushu dragons, and for reasons that should be obvious to everyone, the ancient Hebrews belived that there was a walking, talking serpent in Eden, the exact same place Enki created, just as he created the first humans to live in that Garden.

Sorry Grem, if it were not for the Genesis story of the talkin serpent of Eden you might have a case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
I have not really payed much attention to the these draconic threads but what are they about DC? Just so have historical knowledge? Or are we supposed to go back and worship dragons again? Are they returning so we have to prepare for them? Are they physical beings or spiritual beings able to manifest in the flesh? Just four little questions I thought would ask to be a bit more informed of your views.

Mostly for the historical knowledge. It is pointless to worhsip the dragons now for they were never more than 'assistants' to the real creator, and the real creator does not require worship. Worship, and the offering of animals (and sometimes people) were simply ways the dragons were 'paid' for their sevices as tribal guardians and teachers, and Yahweh was little different from the rest. There is nothing they can teach us now, except perhaps humility.

Obviously, they were/are physical creatures or they would not require and demand lambs, calves, first born chldren and liqour. They are perhaps still among us, but when seen today are regarded as sea serpents and lake monsters. Perhaps they have some 'powers' which enable them to constantly elude researchers, though it may simply be the fact they are as intelligent as us, as well as possessing the acute senses of a predatory archosaur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rosewin

Thank you DC. I do notice too many cultures, unconnected and unrelated, at least through modern perceptions, have the image of the dragon or large serpents. So there is something to it all of it definitely.

Have you ever seen a Dragon Dance during a Chinese New Years celebration? I have seen two or three. They are very interesting. The Hand consider 'Descendants of the Dragon' as a term that describes their ethnicity. Did dragons in your view mate with humans? Do humans have dragon genes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Gremlin
It is probable that by the time Enki was called EA, the original hymns that established his orignal form was a dragon had been all but forgotten, but it was still remembered he could become a dragon. Therefore, the Babylonian hymn simply stated that by this time it was only one of his aspects, much like Zeus being though of primarily as humanoid, but who could become a Gander or Drakon when he had his 'fun'.

But we go back to the most ancient times, Enki is called a dragon, as are all the high gods, his relatives like Ningishzida are sometimes depicted as literal mushushu dragons, and for reasons that should be obvious to everyone, the ancient Hebrews belived that there was a walking, talking serpent in Eden, the exact same place Enki created, just as he created the first humans to live in that Garden.

Sorry Grem, if it were not for the Genesis story of the talkin serpent of Eden you might have a case.

this is speculation for which you have no evidence.

please provide these 'hymns'.....i provided one that gives his metaphoric epithet as Ushumgal (great serpent), but showed that he is called other things more frequently, where are the others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Archosaur
Thank you DC. I do notice too many cultures, unconnected and unrelated, at least through modern perceptions, have the image of the dragon or large serpents. So there is something to it all of it definitely.

Have you ever seen a Dragon Dance during a Chinese New Years celebration? I have seen two or three. They are very interesting. The Hand consider 'Descendants of the Dragon' as a term that describes their ethnicity. Did dragons in your view mate with humans? Do humans have dragon genes?

Well, Clovis, I can throw my two cents in. The Han, especially the Imperial family, did consider themselves to have some relation with the dragon. Likewise, Cecrops (the legendary half-dragon founder of Athens) and Alexander the Great (supposedly conceived by Zeus in the form of a Drakon) are a coupe of examples in the west. It is possible that these were rulers and noblemen who wanted to be associated with the power and lineage of the dragon (even today the dragon is associated with the heraldry of many noble families), or this could be an expansion of the dragon's foondness (both east and west) for young women. Or, something else entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Thank you DC. I do notice too many cultures, unconnected and unrelated, at least through modern perceptions, have the image of the dragon or large serpents. So there is something to it all of it definitely.

Have you ever seen a Dragon Dance during a Chinese New Years celebration? I have seen two or three. They are very interesting. The Hand consider 'Descendants of the Dragon' as a term that describes their ethnicity. Did dragons in your view mate with humans? Do humans have dragon genes?

My theories about the dragons that mankind universally revered actually do not violate science. No, humans could not mate with reptiles and produced offspring. But as with dragons in general being real, sentient creatures that became mankind's earliest gods, there is probably a kernel of truth in the idea of dragons being the descendents of human leaders not only a symbolic sense, but in a biological sense as well.

We know that in many ancient cultures, the dragons were believed to have the ability to change their form into a human. What brought about this idea? Perhaps the dragons did not wish to be bothered with the day to day ritual of playing god in a temple, so they recruited surrogates and tricked their worshipper into believing the human surrogates were them. Perhaps if the dragon had a red hide, it would dye the human surrogates skin red to render a partially supernatural appearance.

So if a human female were impregnated by the dragon impersonator, the resulting child would be believed to be the offspring of the dragon. The dragon surrogates were probably 'eliminated' and replaced before they grew old, so not to give away the deception. Perhaps their faces were obscured by elaborate beards as was the mesopotamian style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ozi
Dude, I NEVER said God was a dragon. I said the Seraph dragon Yahweh is a dragon, who works for the Creator El. I am not dreaming this up, this is Original Judaism which is identical to the Cananit beliefs. El is the Chief God, and each tribe, including the Hebrews have a Bene Elohim (son of God/dragon god). Every culture had them, though the best rmembered are those of Mesoamerica and China.

I have posted scholarly articles here that show that the Hebrews were originally montheistic, and recognized El as the supreme God and Yahweh as their personal/tribal God. Google Hebrew Henotheism and Polytheism and you will see that I speak the truth.

Be very glad the the cruel, prideful, paronoid, virgin eating Yahweh IS a dragon, and not the Creator God.

Dude, to say Yaweh is actually a dragon is to call the jewish God a dragon. As i said before, yaweh simply means eternal and you have to understand hebrew, like arabic to fully understand the meaning and context of verses. For example, El, is simple translated as god in english, in arabic, Ilah, means god, even Il can, Elohim according to you means sons of gods, and these sons are dragons, elohim is a plural term if im correct, it something i need to recheck, for gods, because the jews did divert to paganism even during moses reign, and for this action they wondered the wildreness for 4o years. I am simply trying to say, that serpants were used in metaphoric and real terms, the latter refering to adam and eve in the garden of eden.

Now just to give an islamic perspective, which is very similar, it also refer to a serpant, and it is further elaborated on by the prophet in hadith, saying that the serpant then did have legs etc, and even snakes today have sharp teeth, but it does refer to serpants once having legs, the fact that this serpant carries the devil in his mouth and get him in side the garden of eden, as a result its punishment was to crawl on its belly till the end of times. This could be translated as dragons and as i said i dont refute their very existence at sometime, but the bible does not refer to them in the context you are refering to, its merely speculation and one could also speculate the serpants and monsters the bible refers to maybe dinosaurs indicating that man has been here longer than we think and walked with the dinosaurs etc, it also believe the mankind then was much larger themselves compared to today.

You see when you say El, you simply saying god, but when you Yaweh, this was a name given to one true god, bu the jews, meaning the the eternal. The jews also called many of their prophets as sons of god, but in a literal meaning, but metaphoric and in the sense that these men are of god and do his work, like Ezra, in Arabic he is called Uzair.

Aswell as the mistranslations and misunderstanding of the hebrew, your are incorporating pagan deities, with judaic ones. Ofcourse mesopotamia and mesoamerican civilisation had pagan gods, dragons you name it, just because the stories have commanalities does not mean that the pagan gods were a reality and existed, it simple means, that the message about Yaweh, god, or the one true god, has been present throughout all time and come to all nations, hence similarities in stories of eden, adam and eve etc. These commanilities are the true aspects of those pagan religions and todays monotheistic religions, if the same stories are repeated throughout time, with out any contradiction or conflict, then they are reconciliatory in their substance. For example, Hinduism is one of the oldest religions of the world, and its probable the most polytheistic of them all, yet when you analyse the scripture, it refers, to only one true god, but gives many names for this god, which happen to be attributes of the same god, yet people have decided to make those attributes and those names as seperate gods, human error again. But what one cand deduce from the scripture is that, its teachings are common with that of islam, judaism, christianity etc, yet today they seem poles apart. Simple put, what the hindu scriptures say from 1000's of yrs ago, is then repeated again, in the bible, torah, quran as common teaching and beliefs, one could say they copied the other, but thats the easy way out, afer analyses, its clear they dont or have not copied each other, simple meaning that the message sent by god has always been the same, but tampered and changed by man, and to find the truth, you come to common ground amongst all the world religions and you find they have alot in common than we think.

Its a bit long winded and off on a tangent, but what im trying to say is, because something maybe in common with something else, it simple mean its the truth being repeated and confirmed at later stages, but to take those commonalities and then try and mix them with differences, i.e the pagan gods and think they were real is mere speculation at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ozi
Dude, I NEVER said God was a dragon. I said the Seraph dragon Yahweh is a dragon, who works for the Creator El. I am not dreaming this up, this is Original Judaism which is identical to the Cananit beliefs. El is the Chief God, and each tribe, including the Hebrews have a Bene Elohim (son of God/dragon god). Every culture had them, though the best rmembered are those of Mesoamerica and China.

I have posted scholarly articles here that show that the Hebrews were originally montheistic, and recognized El as the supreme God and Yahweh as their personal/tribal God. Google Hebrew Henotheism and Polytheism and you will see that I speak the truth.

Be very glad the the cruel, prideful, paronoid, virgin eating Yahweh IS a dragon, and not the Creator God.

Dude, to say Yaweh is actually a dragon is to call the jewish God a dragon. As i said before, yaweh simply means eternal and you have to understand hebrew, like arabic to fully understand the meaning and context of verses. For example, El, is simple translated as god in english, in arabic, Ilah, means god, even Il can, Elohim according to you means sons of gods, and these sons are dragons, elohim is a plural term if im correct, it something i need to recheck, for gods, because the jews did divert to paganism even during moses reign, and for this action they wondered the wildreness for 4o years. I am simply trying to say, that serpants were used in metaphoric and real terms, the latter refering to adam and eve in the garden of eden.

Now just to give an islamic perspective, which is very similar, it also refer to a serpant, and it is further elaborated on by the prophet in hadith, saying that the serpant then did have legs etc, and even snakes today have sharp teeth, but it does refer to serpants once having legs, the fact that this serpant carries the devil in his mouth and get him in side the garden of eden, as a result its punishment was to crawl on its belly till the end of times. This could be translated as dragons and as i said i dont refute their very existence at sometime, but the bible does not refer to them in the context you are refering to, its merely speculation and one could also speculate the serpants and monsters the bible refers to maybe dinosaurs indicating that man has been here longer than we think and walked with the dinosaurs etc, it also believe the mankind then was much larger themselves compared to today.

You see when you say El, you simply saying god, but when you Yaweh, this was a name given to one true god, bu the jews, meaning the the eternal. The jews also called many of their prophets as sons of god, but in a literal meaning, but metaphoric and in the sense that these men are of god and do his work, like Ezra, in Arabic he is called Uzair.

Aswell as the mistranslations and misunderstanding of the hebrew, your are incorporating pagan deities, with judaic ones. Ofcourse mesopotamia and mesoamerican civilisation had pagan gods, dragons you name it, just because the stories have commanalities does not mean that the pagan gods were a reality and existed, it simple means, that the message about Yaweh, god, or the one true god, has been present throughout all time and come to all nations, hence similarities in stories of eden, adam and eve etc. These commanilities are the true aspects of those pagan religions and todays monotheistic religions, if the same stories are repeated throughout time, with out any contradiction or conflict, then they are reconciliatory in their substance. For example, Hinduism is one of the oldest religions of the world, and its probable the most polytheistic of them all, yet when you analyse the scripture, it refers, to only one true god, but gives many names for this god, which happen to be attributes of the same god, yet people have decided to make those attributes and those names as seperate gods, human error again. But what one cand deduce from the scripture is that, its teachings are common with that of islam, judaism, christianity etc, yet today they seem poles apart. Simple put, what the hindu scriptures say from 1000's of yrs ago, is then repeated again, in the bible, torah, quran as common teaching and beliefs, one could say they copied the other, but thats the easy way out, afer analyses, its clear they dont or have not copied each other, simple meaning that the message sent by god has always been the same, but tampered and changed by man, and to find the truth, you come to common ground amongst all the world religions and you find they have alot in common than we think.

Its a bit long winded and off on a tangent, but what im trying to say is, because something maybe in common with something else, it simple mean its the truth being repeated and confirmed at later stages, but to take those commonalities and then try and mix them with differences, i.e the pagan gods and think they were real is mere speculation at best. Also, regarding these ancient dragons and monsters from ancient cultures and civilisations are either exaggerated descriptions of incidents or they are descriptions of Djin playing havoc, as they shape shift, and present themselves as many things to re-enforce false beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dredimus

Seraph

A seraph (Heb. שׂרף, pl. שׂרפים Seraphim, lat. seraph[us], pl. seraphi[m]) is one of a class of celestial beings mentioned once in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh or Old Testament), in Isaiah. Later Jewish imagery perceived them as having human form, and in that way they passed into the ranks of Christian angels. In the Christian angelic hierarchy, seraphim represent the highest known rank of angels. There are only two angels in the canonized Greek and Hebrew Bible mentioned by name: Michael (who is described as the archangel) and Gabriel.

Funny how the Hebrew scholars that study the language and have made it a major factor in their life fail to mention the seraph as a dragon in any of their linquistic translations that are officially published to the public....

Anyway, Ive been through this battle before but I just keep gettin sucked back into it.

No where in any of the bible does it say that they worshipped the "Fiery Idol" on the staff. They looked upon the staff that was empowered by God to heal them if they had been bitten.

Furthermore, by your reasoning DC, in the end of days we will see 2 dragons fighting one another in the sky... yet strangely enough one of the dragons will be wielding a sword... In my opinion, what all of this boils down to (and we see it all the time) is some one had read to deeply into mythology and mingled it with "modern" religion and has formed an idea based on many different sects or denominations.

Now, it is believed the first mention of Dragons on record are from 3000 B.C. The sumerians wrote of Tiamat/Lubbu. And yes, it is a creation story and even those that follow this Sumerian/Babalonian story of creation to this day claim that it is metaphor.

The Full Story of the Sumerian Creation of man can be found here...

http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/...cle_5235.shtml

And to be honest, the fact that Tiamat was a dragon is speculation... I mean... just have a look at the translation of the 7 Tablets of Creation (Sumerian)

First: (Tablet 1)

unto Tiamut, the glistening one

Next: (Tablet 2)

Tiamat, who is a woman, is armed and attacketh thee.

.. rejoice and be glad;

The neck of Tiamat shalt thou swiftly trample under foot.

.. rejoice and be glad;

Next: (Tablet 4)

But Tiamat... , she turned not her neck,

With lips that failed not she uttered rebellious words:

Next: (Tablet 4)

Tiamat opened her mouth to its full extent,

Next: (Tablet 4)

He seized the spear and burst her belly,

Next: (Tablet 4)

And the lord stood upon Tiamat's hinder parts

Now, we turn to the subject of KUR a dragon story nearly a millenia older than tiamat... from Cuneiform text... (same story as tiamat only depicted in 39 tablets) My point is, mythology has a way of traveling... just as the greek mythology is prevalent in story today, the dragons have been as well. But, they are what they are... Myth...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Seraph

A seraph (Heb. שׂרף, pl. שׂרפים Seraphim, lat. seraph[us], pl. seraphi[m]) is one of a class of celestial beings mentioned once in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh or Old Testament), in Isaiah. Later Jewish imagery perceived them as having human form, and in that way they passed into the ranks of Christian angels. In the Christian angelic hierarchy, seraphim represent the highest known rank of angels. There are only two angels in the canonized Greek and Hebrew Bible mentioned by name: Michael (who is described as the archangel) and Gabriel.

Funny how the Hebrew scholars that study the language and have made it a major factor in their life fail to mention the seraph as a dragon in any of their linquistic translations that are officially published to the public....

Anyway, Ive been through this battle before but I just keep gettin sucked back into it.

No where in any of the bible does it say that they worshipped the "Fiery Idol" on the staff. They looked upon the staff that was empowered by God to heal them if they had been bitten.

Furthermore, by your reasoning DC, in the end of days we will see 2 dragons fighting one another in the sky... yet strangely enough one of the dragons will be wielding a sword... In my opinion, what all of this boils down to (and we see it all the time) is some one had read to deeply into mythology and mingled it with "modern" religion and has formed an idea based on many different sects or denominations.

Now, it is believed the first mention of Dragons on record are from 3000 B.C. The sumerians wrote of Tiamat/Lubbu. And yes, it is a creation story and even those that follow this Sumerian/Babalonian story of creation to this day claim that it is metaphor.

The Full Story of the Sumerian Creation of man can be found here...

http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/...cle_5235.shtml

And to be honest, the fact that Tiamat was a dragon is speculation... I mean... just have a look at the translation of the 7 Tablets of Creation (Sumerian)

First: (Tablet 1)

unto Tiamut, the glistening one

Next: (Tablet 2)

Tiamat, who is a woman, is armed and attacketh thee.

.. rejoice and be glad;

The neck of Tiamat shalt thou swiftly trample under foot.

.. rejoice and be glad;

Next: (Tablet 4)

But Tiamat... , she turned not her neck,

With lips that failed not she uttered rebellious words:

Next: (Tablet 4)

Tiamat opened her mouth to its full extent,

Next: (Tablet 4)

He seized the spear and burst her belly,

Next: (Tablet 4)

And the lord stood upon Tiamat's hinder parts

Now, we turn to the subject of KUR a dragon story nearly a millenia older than tiamat... from Cuneiform text... (same story as tiamat only depicted in 39 tablets) My point is, mythology has a way of traveling... just as the greek mythology is prevalent in story today, the dragons have been as well. But, they are what they are... Myth...

I have shown many times here that the Jewish Encylcopedia states the MOST PROBABLE meaning of the Biblical Seraphim are winged, serpentine creatures, and this is hard to dispute when we know the Egyptians acknowledged the exact same fiery flying serpent by the exact same name, and its hieroglyph looks a good deal like the Mushushu dragons of Sumeria, where Abraaham was said to come from.

Christians for centuries acknowledged the Seraphim as dragons as confirmed in art and writings. Books such as Enoch and the Apocolypse of Baruch, used by Chrisitans and Jews for centuries both acknowledged dragons/serpents as heavenly creatures.

No, I don't see two dragons fighting at the end of days, becasue the Revelation story was borrowed from Zoroastrian mythology, only the dragon's name was changed from Ahriman to Satan.

There are a number of scholars that recognize El and Yahweh are two different dieties in Hebrew, because El and his "favorite son" Yam/Yaw are two seperate dieties. It is most likely that Yaw and Yahweh are the same dieities becasue of clear dragon connections with them both, they both quarreled with Ba'al Hadad, and they both had the same cosort Asheroth, though both Judaism and Christianity today try to ignore the evidence of Yahweh having a consort.

And yes, the Bible does say the Hebrews 'burnt incense' to the winged serpent idol. This is why Hezakiah broke it and by all evidence, Yahweh allowed both the Assyrians and Babylonian to humble Israel in His displeasure. The Hebrews prospered under Solomon and his successors when both the Consort Asheroth and the serpent idol were venerated. And the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, along with the temple were Destroyed only AFTER Yahwh's idol, ordered by Him to Moses was desecrated. These are the indisputable facts of the matter, though becasue modern Jews and Christians have made Yahweh in their image, these truths are ignored.

I agree Tiamat never existed, the story was invented to give importance to Marduk over the earlier Enki, who almost certainly seems to be the earliest version of Yahweh. the 'Great Dragon who stands in Eridu', who does nearly everything in the Sumerian stories that Yahweh would do in Genesis. His fight with Kur is probably a myth as well, for it is very clear the land of the earth is not the body of a gigantic chaos serpent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Dude, to say Yaweh is actually a dragon is to call the jewish God a dragon. As i said before, yaweh simply means eternal and you have to understand hebrew, like arabic to fully understand the meaning and context of verses. For example, El, is simple translated as god in english, in arabic, Ilah, means god, even Il can, Elohim according to you means sons of gods, and these sons are dragons, elohim is a plural term if im correct, it something i need to recheck, for gods, because the jews did divert to paganism even during moses reign, and for this action they wondered the wildreness for 4o years. I am simply trying to say, that serpants were used in metaphoric and real terms, the latter refering to adam and eve in the garden of eden.

Now just to give an islamic perspective, which is very similar, it also refer to a serpant, and it is further elaborated on by the prophet in hadith, saying that the serpant then did have legs etc, and even snakes today have sharp teeth, but it does refer to serpants once having legs, the fact that this serpant carries the devil in his mouth and get him in side the garden of eden, as a result its punishment was to crawl on its belly till the end of times. This could be translated as dragons and as i said i dont refute their very existence at sometime, but the bible does not refer to them in the context you are refering to, its merely speculation and one could also speculate the serpants and monsters the bible refers to maybe dinosaurs indicating that man has been here longer than we think and walked with the dinosaurs etc, it also believe the mankind then was much larger themselves compared to today.

You see when you say El, you simply saying god, but when you Yaweh, this was a name given to one true god, bu the jews, meaning the the eternal. The jews also called many of their prophets as sons of god, but in a literal meaning, but metaphoric and in the sense that these men are of god and do his work, like Ezra, in Arabic he is called Uzair.

Aswell as the mistranslations and misunderstanding of the hebrew, your are incorporating pagan deities, with judaic ones. Ofcourse mesopotamia and mesoamerican civilisation had pagan gods, dragons you name it, just because the stories have commanalities does not mean that the pagan gods were a reality and existed, it simple means, that the message about Yaweh, god, or the one true god, has been present throughout all time and come to all nations, hence similarities in stories of eden, adam and eve etc. These commanilities are the true aspects of those pagan religions and todays monotheistic religions, if the same stories are repeated throughout time, with out any contradiction or conflict, then they are reconciliatory in their substance. For example, Hinduism is one of the oldest religions of the world, and its probable the most polytheistic of them all, yet when you analyse the scripture, it refers, to only one true god, but gives many names for this god, which happen to be attributes of the same god, yet people have decided to make those attributes and those names as seperate gods, human error again. But what one cand deduce from the scripture is that, its teachings are common with that of islam, judaism, christianity etc, yet today they seem poles apart. Simple put, what the hindu scriptures say from 1000's of yrs ago, is then repeated again, in the bible, torah, quran as common teaching and beliefs, one could say they copied the other, but thats the easy way out, afer analyses, its clear they dont or have not copied each other, simple meaning that the message sent by god has always been the same, but tampered and changed by man, and to find the truth, you come to common ground amongst all the world religions and you find they have alot in common than we think.

Its a bit long winded and off on a tangent, but what im trying to say is, because something maybe in common with something else, it simple mean its the truth being repeated and confirmed at later stages, but to take those commonalities and then try and mix them with differences, i.e the pagan gods and think they were real is mere speculation at best. Also, regarding these ancient dragons and monsters from ancient cultures and civilisations are either exaggerated descriptions of incidents or they are descriptions of Djin playing havoc, as they shape shift, and present themselves as many things to re-enforce false beliefs.

Like it or not Ozi, most scholars today recognize that early Judaism was polytheistic, and El and Yahweh (Yaw) were seperate dieties, and the latter was associated with dragons/winged serpents, both in the correct interpretations of the Seraphim and the veneration of the fiery serpent idol. Okay, I will agreee that all of the religions you state have common roots, but they all go back to the Great Dragon of Eridu, Enki, who

Created the Garden of Eden

Made the first man "out of clay".

Tricks Adam out of Eternal Life

Warns the original 'Noah' about the great flood

Caused mankind to adopt numerous languages at the Tower of Babel.

Abraham came from Ur according to the Bible. This is just a few miles from Eridu. This is why Judaism has these stories. I am not saying they are only myths. Every human culture seemed to have these same 'dragons' that were our earliest Gods. The only difference is that modern Judaism, Islam and Christianity simply overlook the fact that the biblical Yahweh is the same dragon god as Enki, who was subservient to the actual Creator who was called Anu in Sumeria and El to the canannites and hebrews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dredimus
I have shown many times here that the Jewish Encylcopedia states the MOST PROBABLE meaning of the Biblical Seraphim are winged, serpentine creatures, and this is hard to dispute when we know the Egyptians acknowledged the exact same fiery flying serpent by the exact same name, and its hieroglyph looks a good deal like the Mushushu dragons of Sumeria, where Abraaham was said to come from.

Christians for centuries acknowledged the Seraphim as dragons as confirmed in art and writings. Books such as Enoch and the Apocolypse of Baruch, used by Chrisitans and Jews for centuries both acknowledged dragons/serpents as heavenly creatures.

No, I don't see two dragons fighting at the end of days, becasue the Revelation story was borrowed from Zoroastrian mythology, only the dragon's name was changed from Ahriman to Satan.

There are a number of scholars that recognize El and Yahweh are two different dieties in Hebrew, because El and his "favorite son" Yam/Yaw are two seperate dieties. It is most likely that Yaw and Yahweh are the same dieities becasue of clear dragon connections with them both, they both quarreled with Ba'al Hadad, and they both had the same cosort Asheroth, though both Judaism and Christianity today try to ignore the evidence of Yahweh having a consort.

And yes, the Bible does say the Hebrews 'burnt incense' to the winged serpent idol. This is why Hezakiah broke it and by all evidence, Yahweh allowed both the Assyrians and Babylonian to humble Israel in His displeasure. The Hebrews prospered under Solomon and his successors when both the Consort Asheroth and the serpent idol were venerated. And the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, along with the temple were Destroyed only AFTER Yahwh's idol, ordered by Him to Moses was desecrated. These are the indisputable facts of the matter, though becasue modern Jews and Christians have made Yahweh in their image, these truths are ignored.

I agree Tiamat never existed, the story was invented to give importance to Marduk over the earlier Enki, who almost certainly seems to be the earliest version of Yahweh. the 'Great Dragon who stands in Eridu', who does nearly everything in the Sumerian stories that Yahweh would do in Genesis. His fight with Kur is probably a myth as well, for it is very clear the land of the earth is not the body of a gigantic chaos serpent.

Acknowledgement and literal translation are two completely different things. Let's talk about this "idol" you keep bringing up. You need to put into context and include all of the information instead of picking and choosing what you put in there. Here are the verses.

Num 21:8

And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

Num 21:9

And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

2Ki 18:3

And he (Hezekiah) did [that which was] right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did.

2Ki 18:4

He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.

2Ki 18:5

He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor [any] that were before him.

Now, its more than evident that the serpent was destroyed because the people of israel were having a hard time following the commandments of the lord, thus Hezekiah had many things destroyed (the israelites had a habbit of doing such things if you remember... how about that blast of a party they had at the bottom of Mt. Sinai?) So, anyway, they were not burning incense to the serpent as if God had commanded them to. It was quite the other way around and Hezekiah, decendant of David, decided it was time to clean house, and the Israelites were not "punished" for this, actually Hezekiah prayed to the lord and asked for his help with this matter....

2Ki 19:32

Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning the king of Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it.

2Ki 19:33

By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the LORD.

2Ki 19:34

For I will defend this city, to save it, for mine own sake, and for my servant David's sake.

2Ki 19:35

And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the LORD went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they [were] all dead corpses.

Anyway, I think that's enough for now, I've made my point... and provided scripture.... what a novel idea!

*edited for a spelling error*

Edited by Dredimus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cleomenes
My theories about the dragons that mankind universally revered actually do not violate science. No, humans could not mate with reptiles and produced offspring. But as with dragons in general being real, sentient creatures that became mankind's earliest gods, there is probably a kernel of truth in the idea of dragons being the descendents of human leaders not only a symbolic sense, but in a biological sense as well.

We know that in many ancient cultures, the dragons were believed to have the ability to change their form into a human. What brought about this idea? Perhaps the dragons did not wish to be bothered with the day to day ritual of playing god in a temple, so they recruited surrogates and tricked their worshipper into believing the human surrogates were them. Perhaps if the dragon had a red hide, it would dye the human surrogates skin red to render a partially supernatural appearance.

So if a human female were impregnated by the dragon impersonator, the resulting child would be believed to be the offspring of the dragon. The dragon surrogates were probably 'eliminated' and replaced before they grew old, so not to give away the deception. Perhaps their faces were obscured by elaborate beards as was the mesopotamian style.

There is only one sentence above that is not wild speculation. I have put it in bold for all to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Acknowledgement and literal translation are two completely different things. Let's talk about this "idol" you keep bringing up. You need to put into context and include all of the information instead of picking and choosing what you put in there. Here are the verses.

Num 21:8

And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

Num 21:9

And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

2Ki 18:3

And he (Hezekiah) did [that which was] right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did.

2Ki 18:4

He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.

2Ki 18:5

He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor [any] that were before him.

Now, its more than evident that the serpent was destroyed because the people of israel were having a hard time following the commandments of the lord, thus Hezekiah had many things destroyed (the israelites had a habbit of doing such things if you remember... how about that blast of a party they had at the bottom of Mt. Sinai?) So, anyway, they were not burning incense to the serpent as if God had commanded them to. It was quite the other way around and Hezekiah, decendant of David, decided it was time to clean house, and the Israelites were not "punished" for this, actually Hezekiah prayed to the lord and asked for his help with this matter....

2Ki 19:32

Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning the king of Assyria, He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow there, nor come before it with shield, nor cast a bank against it.

2Ki 19:33

By the way that he came, by the same shall he return, and shall not come into this city, saith the LORD.

2Ki 19:34

For I will defend this city, to save it, for mine own sake, and for my servant David's sake.

2Ki 19:35

And it came to pass that night, that the angel of the LORD went out, and smote in the camp of the Assyrians an hundred fourscore and five thousand: and when they arose early in the morning, behold, they [were] all dead corpses.

Anyway, I think that's enough for now, I've made my point... and provided scripture.... what a novel idea!

*edited for a spelling error*

Understand that the 2Ki verses were undoubtedly written in Babylon or even later, after the captivity. Because of thier exposure and influence of Persian Zoroastrianism, it was natural that the Jews would want to present Hezakiah's actions in a good light, but just look at the facts.

1. Yahweh Himself ordered what was essentially an idol or graven image to be made by Moses. This is the ONLY idol Yahweh ever approved of, and it just may be bacause it is His likeness, a fire spewing, cattle eating, winged creature (according to Bilbical scripture), with assistants/relatives who are the same type of creatures (Seraphim).

2. Nor was this a mere piece of metal, for Yahweh somehow imbued it with the power to cure those bitten by serpents, therefore while scripture wrote how the idols of false gods were powerless and only things of stone or metal, Yahweh's idol had real power.

3. Yahweh made Solomon the most powerful and prosperous of all the Israelite monarchs, yet it seems probable that it was Solomon who put the idol in the temple, and also honored a canannite fertilitiy diety (also associated with serpents) as the CONSORT of Yahweh. If Yahweh truly was not pleased with the honoring of a female Canannite fertility Goddess (I suspect really just a female 'dragon' that mooched off of the Canannites), why did He honor Solomon so much? In fact, the animosity between Ba'al Hadad and Yahweh, according to canannite scripture seems to be about these two fighting over Asheroth.

Now look what happens after the idol is broken by Hezakiah.

1. The Assyrians invade and capture/destroy nearly EVERY Israelite city.

2. Hezakiah can only 'buy them off' by giving them all of the temple treasury as recorded in the Assyrian annals.

3. Everythin continues to go down hill, the Babylonians conquer the Assyrians but there is no gold left to 'buy off' the Babylonians so they destroy Jerusalem and the temple and deport the leading citizens.

Are you beginning to see a 'pattern'? Everything is GOOD while Yahweh's idol and consort are worshipped, just as in the glory days of Solomon. On the contrary, the moment after the idol of Yahweh was desecrated, the Jews have been a conquered and subjugated people until 1948! And it may be no coincidence that the Holy Menorah from the Arch of Titus, decorated with GRAVEN IMAGES of the Yahweh Dragon, is today an official symbol of the state of Israel. Perhaps Yahweh is pleased again that after 2500 years he is finally being honored again in the manner he requested.

It doesn't matter if the later Biblical writers state that the desecrator of Yahweh's idol, and who brought ruin to the country 'was a good guy'. The historical facts speak for themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dredimus
Understand that the 2Ki verses were undoubtedly written in Babylon or even later, after the captivity. Because of thier exposure and influence of Persian Zoroastrianism, it was natural that the Jews would want to present Hezakiah's actions in a good light, but just look at the facts.

1. Yahweh Himself ordered what was essentially an idol or graven image to be made by Moses. This is the ONLY idol Yahweh ever approved of, and it just may be bacause it is His likeness, a fire spewing, cattle eating, winged creature (according to Bilbical scripture), with assistants/relatives who are the same type of creatures (Seraphim).

2. Nor was this a mere piece of metal, for Yahweh somehow imbued it with the power to cure those bitten by serpents, therefore while scripture wrote how the idols of false gods were powerless and only things of stone or metal, Yahweh's idol had real power.

3. Yahweh made Solomon the most powerful and prosperous of all the Israelite monarchs, yet it seems probable that it was Solomon who put the idol in the temple, and also honored a canannite fertilitiy diety (also associated with serpents) as the CONSORT of Yahweh. If Yahweh truly was not pleased with the honoring of a female Canannite fertility Goddess (I suspect really just a female 'dragon' that mooched off of the Canannites), why did He honor Solomon so much? In fact, the animosity between Ba'al Hadad and Yahweh, according to canannite scripture seems to be about these two fighting over Asheroth.

Now look what happens after the idol is broken by Hezakiah.

1. The Assyrians invade and capture/destroy nearly EVERY Israelite city.

2. Hezakiah can only 'buy them off' by giving them all of the temple treasury as recorded in the Assyrian annals.

3. Everythin continues to go down hill, the Babylonians conquer the Assyrians but there is no gold left to 'buy off' the Babylonians so they destroy Jerusalem and the temple and deport the leading citizens.

Are you beginning to see a 'pattern'? Everything is GOOD while Yahweh's idol and consort are worshipped, just as in the glory days of Solomon. On the contrary, the moment after the idol of Yahweh was desecrated, the Jews have been a conquered and subjugated people until 1948! And it may be no coincidence that the Holy Menorah from the Arch of Titus, decorated with GRAVEN IMAGES of the Yahweh Dragon, is today an official symbol of the state of Israel. Perhaps Yahweh is pleased again that after 2500 years he is finally being honored again in the manner he requested.

It doesn't matter if the later Biblical writers state that the desecrator of Yahweh's idol, and who brought ruin to the country 'was a good guy'. The historical facts speak for themselves.

I'm pretty sure you should go back and actually READ my post... Everything in the scripture I just provided goes against everything you just replied. Do you honestly think you can change the bible to support your opinions? Because thats what you are doing, trying to bend the scripture to conform to what you want it to be, and it doesnt work that way. You know, you could probably clear your name a good bit if you would respond intelligently, and actually quote some real sources, but I dont see that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cleomenes
I'm pretty sure you should go back and actually READ my post... Everything in the scripture I just provided goes against everything you just replied. Do you honestly think you can change the bible to support your opinions? Because thats what you are doing, trying to bend the scripture to conform to what you want it to be, and it doesnt work that way. You know, you could probably clear your name a good bit if you would respond intelligently, and actually quote some real sources, but I dont see that happening.

That is what he always does in every thread concerning dragons. These actions have destroyed his credibility. Outside of the early teenage crowd on here, nobody takes him seriously at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
That is what he always does in every thread concerning dragons. These actions have destroyed his credibility. Outside of the early teenage crowd on here, nobody takes him seriously at all.

I'm sorry that you know too little about the bible, and how it relates to the actual historical events supported by archaeology to be able to understand what I am talking about. You are unable to refute anything I have said so the best you can do is your childish insults.

I have very good credibility to anyone who has tha ability to think for themselves and who understands that sometimes real history contradicts the Bible. I know what I am talking about, and you obviously do not. In fact, people like your are annoyed, upset and lash out with your juvenile behaviou becasue I make too much sense, and it troubles them.

Show me where I am incorrect, and therfore have no credibility. You cannot, because you know nothing about these subjects.

Edited by draconic chronicler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
I'm pretty sure you should go back and actually READ my post... Everything in the scripture I just provided goes against everything you just replied. Do you honestly think you can change the bible to support your opinions? Because thats what you are doing, trying to bend the scripture to conform to what you want it to be, and it doesnt work that way. You know, you could probably clear your name a good bit if you would respond intelligently, and actually quote some real sources, but I dont see that happening.

I'm not try to change the Bible. Everything I have said is a fact. I am just looking at the same facts you are but not brainwashed to believe the Bible's version when it contradicts historical facts. And actually it is not so much facts but opinions we disagree on.

The Bible writers say Hezakiah was a good king becasue he destroyed Yahweh's idol. And there are still Germans who will say Hitler did great things for Germany.

I am just not buying the Jewish mythology that Hezakiah did the right thing becasue both the Bible and real history tell us terrible things happened from the moment the idol was broken, whereas Solomon, the king who honored the idol as well as Yahweh's sepent-dragon female consort was the richest and most powerful king the Israelites ever had. Like it or not, these are the facts. You are just freaked out because you never heard of anyone approaching these stories from the fact Yahweh in not the creator, but a selfish, prideful, bloodthirsty, virgin and child-eating dragon, just as many ancient Christians understood, as well as the Persians. Even Jesus said as much when he told the Pharisees they were worshipping the 'murderer from the beginning' , who was NOT His father. And who were the Pharisees worshipping? Yahweh, of course.

Please show me just one thing I said that was not true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
annmariet
I'm sorry if you that you know too little about the bible, and how it relates to the actual historical events supported by archaeology to be able to understand what I am talking about. You are unable to refute anything I have said so the best you can do is your childish insults.

I have very good credibility to anyone who has tha ability to think for themselves and who understands that sometimes real history contradicts the Bible. I know what I am talking about, and you obviously do not. In fact, people like your are annoyed, upset and lash out with your juvenile behaviou becasue I make too much sense, and it troubles them.

Show me where I am incorrect, and therfore have now credibility. You cannot, because you know nothing about these subjects.

I think for myself on a daily basis (I am even doing it currently) and yet, I am completely untroubled by you "making sense" of any type, let alone too much sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.