Was Jesus an Annunaki?

[The Puzzler]

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

Hi legionromanes,

Personally I don't think the Bible is a remake but I couldn't help but sort of go off on that tangent because so many say it is but then reject this concept of Jesus being part of it.

I think the Bible, the Old Testament anyway was a reaction to trying to escape the clutches of the old human sacrifice religions.

Sorry to confuse. It was almost a sarcastic post I made. I want the ones who say that the Bible is a remake of the Sumerian myths to think about it some more....

[Dan Dare]

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

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

Thats not nice Harte, Puzzler studies and reaches her own concussion and that she is entitled to do.

The only insipid thing is your attack, totally unjust and uncalled for, you should be apologizing for making such a post.

Dan Dare

[kmt_sesh]

I think the Bible, the Old Testament anyway was a reaction to trying to escape the clutches of the old human sacrifice religions.

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

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

[The Puzzler]

Thats not nice Harte, Puzzler studies and reaches her own concussion and that she is entitled to do.

The only insipid thing is your attack, totally unjust and uncalled for, you should be apologizing for making such a post.

Dan Dare

Thanks Dan, Harte has taken his bat and ball and run off home, putting me on Ignore...

One of those that can dish it out but can't take it.

Thanks also for the info before, I got side tracked and forgot to say thanks.

[Harte]

Thats not nice Harte, Puzzler studies and reaches her own concussion and that she is entitled to do.

The only insipid thing is your attack, totally unjust and uncalled for, you should be apologizing for making such a post.

Dan Dare

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

Pretty insipid and empty, IMO.

Opinions are allowed here, right?

Harte

[shemTov]

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

Pretty insipid and empty, IMO.

Opinions are allowed here, right?

Harte

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

Edited October 16, 2008 by shemTov

[Dan Dare]

Opinions are allowed here, right?

Harte, if you think you are allowed an opinion here, you must live in cuckoo land.

Check out post 5511, Conspiracies & Secret Societies, Did we land on the moon.

Dan Dare

[louie]

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

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

[The Puzzler]

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

Yes, I agree I may be chasing my tail but I am learning heaps in the process by reading tonnes of information I never knew and learning more than I could ever learn about everything and anything, I have become more knowledgable in the last 2 years than ever, how that can make me 'insipid and empty' I'll never know. Harte reminds me of the Sophists Plato speaks of.

You shemTov are one of the most informed people I have come across on here and I'm pretty sure by following the Atlantis you speak of you became more informed than ever, I had never heard of the Cucuteni-Trypillians and half the stuff I find now essentially important knowledge if I hadn't come across you.

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

That is my last word on him.

[shemTov]

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

[nohands]

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

[The Puzzler]

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

lol fair enough.

Hey Louie,

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

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

Edited October 16, 2008 by The Puzzler

[Magnanimus]

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

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

[nohands]

lol fair enough.

Hey Louie,

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

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

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

[jaylemurph]

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

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

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

From Wikipedia:

The etymology of Apollo is uncertain. Several instances of popular etymology are attested from ancient authors. Thus, Plato in Cratylus connects the name with ἀπόλυσις "redeem", with ἀπόλουσις "purification", and with ἁπλοῦν "simple", in particular in reference to the Thessalian form of the name, Ἄπλουν, and finally with Ἀει-βάλλων "ever-shooting". Hesychius connects the name Apollo with the Doric απελλα, which means "assembly", so that Apollo would be the god of political life, and he also gives the explanation σηκος ("fold"), in which case Apollo would be the god of flocks and herds. It is also possible that apellai derives from an old form of Apollo which can be equated with Appaliunas, an Anatolian god whose name possibly means "father lion" or "father light". The Greeks later associated Apollo's name with the Greek verb απολλυμι (apollymi) meaning "to destroy".

It has also been suggested that Apollo comes from the Hurrian and Hittite divinity, Aplu, who was widely evoked during the "plague years". Aplu, it is suggested, comes from the Akkadian Aplu Enlil, meaning "the son of Enlil", a title that was given to the god Nergal, who was linked to Shamash, Babylonian god of the sun.

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

From Greek Απολλων (Apollon), which is of unknown meaning, though perhaps related to Indo-European *apelo "strength". Another theory states that Apollo can be equated with Appaliunas, an Anatolian god whose name possibly means "father lion" or "father light". The Greeks later associated Apollo's name with the Greek verb απολλυμι (apollymi) meaning "to destroy". In Greek mythology Apollo was the son of Zeus and Leto and the twin of Artemis. He was the god of prophecy, medicine, music, art, law, beauty, and wisdom. Later he also became the god of the sun and light.

--Jaylemurph

[The Puzzler]

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

From Wikipedia:

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

--Jaylemurph

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

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

Edited October 19, 2008 by The Puzzler

[The Puzzler]

OK I'm back, sorry about that previous post but as you know if I had put something down that I couldn't back up properly I would have been in strife, I like to be able to back up my answers.

As most know Apollo is Horus. I don't believe the Greeks went on linguistics, rather, similarities and parentage. You cannot make Apollo out of Horus linguistically as far as I know. This is also why Plato's rendition of Atlantis makes no sense to anyone. The Greek gods are later constructs of Egyptian ones. The Pelasgians took the Egyptian Gods and attributed them to their own Gods identities who became the Greek Gods. Homer and Hesiod do a good job of covering this up and making all the Gods Greek.

I doubt you can get Demeter out of Isis no matter how much of a linguistic scholar you are.

Isis and Osiris are brother/sister - Osiris represents Demeter as well, bringer of the corn/grain. That is the male/female twin deity order at work.

Osiris and Isis therefore represent Demeter. Demeter ends up with Dionysus because he is Osiris too.

Isis and Osiris had Horus. Persephone is not Artemis though.

Horus being Apollo, how can this be, when Leto is Apollo's mother. Artemis is Bast (Bubastis) twin sister of Horus.

Well, the Egyptians believe Isis let Leto bring them up, Horus and Bast, they are not Leto's own children, still children of 2 powerful Gods though, just like Apollo and Artemis are. That is why in the Greek myth even though Apollo and Artemis are Leto's children she has them at different times. They are not true twins in the sense but represented as twins. The Greeks couldn't quite make that one fit properly. The male/female thing again. Hera is always the enemy of Leto and refuses to let her give birth on any soil because she knows that Horus (Apollo) is too powerful and will be a threat to Zeus, Horus was indeed a powerful God.

As for Heracles, he is Khonsu, son of Amun. Son of Zeus.

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

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

Franck Goddio, president of the European Institute for Underwater Archaeology, said the discoveries were important for two reasons. "First, it confirms the original name of the city of Heracleion which is 'the mouth of the Canopic Branch of the Nile,' and second, until now the city has been known only from legendary sources and from Herodotus's accounts, not from actual evidence. This is a sensational discovery, and the success of the expedition has exceeded all expectations," he said.

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

Edited October 19, 2008 by The Puzzler

[kmt_sesh]

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

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

[questionmark]

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

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

[kmt_sesh]

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

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

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

[questionmark]

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

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

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

[The Puzzler]

You fellas got me all wrong.....lol I meant in regards to Greek myth being essentially Egyptian named Gods. Maybe I don't understand.

So tell me, how do we get Demeter from the word Isis?

I'd love to know.

[+DieChecker]

....

As most know Apollo is Horus. .... The Greek gods are later constructs of Egyptian ones. ...

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

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

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

[jaylemurph]

As most know Apollo is Horus.

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

--Jaylemurph

Edited October 20, 2008 by jaylemurph

[The Puzzler]

It's also quite possibly that the Greeks grafted on names and traits of local gods onto the more familiar figures borrowed from Egypt.

--Jaylemurph

I guess that is what I should have said instead of 'linguistics, schminguistics'....in retrospect.

I understand how important linguistics is and I admit I don't know much about it. Basically I think you can only follow who they were by their attributes and not names.

Isis and Demeter are 'bringers of corn/grain', but does Isis equate to Demeter in Greek or Pelasgian, it might mean 'corn' but it doesn't mean Isis is Demeter in Greek, it means corn is.

One I can see interpreting into both is Re/Ra into Helios, both meaning sun, and if that's what linguistics does then I accept that, but I really was thinking of the word equating to the word, not the meaning but like I said I really don't know much about linguistics, my point was however, that it alone cannot be used to identify one myth identity to another.