The 12th Planet/Nibiru/ Zacharia Stitchen/ End Time/ The Gods of Eden & the Mayan Calender/Alternative Belifes
POSTED BY: piratejenny
UPDATED: Monday, June 5, 2006 10:46
VIEWED: 30595
PAGE 11 of 13
Wasn't Stichin the man Jayne killed in Jaynestown?
BTW I'm Catholic and I can see both sides of the argument but sonofman, to say that every religion but christianity is faith and christianity is a state of mind, what the hell is that? You follow God yes, Jesus yes? You believe in them yes? Honey, that's faith, welcome to the ride. I believe in both as well but jeeze, your scaring me a bit hon. Ease up, when you get that heavy with your beliefs you will scare some off, not meaning to be a bitch just saying a fact. I went to Catholic school, learned about creation, the holy trinity, and the lot, but even I can find a belief in the Big Bang. It's interposed with the Creation theory, honey, seriously, when you ask people to BELIVE in God's way and not be closed minded, maybe do the same yourself. There's room for both. Trust me.
Citizen, luv ya and all but wow, you can be a beast, not starting a fight luv just asking to take a breath first before you respond is all. Sonofman has some keen points and I know you responded with great intellegent whit, just please try to be a bit more.... tolerant I guesse...
Ok, rereading it sounds like I insulted you by calling you a beast, didn't mean it the way it sounded (unless you wife/girlfriend can confirm when your in the bedroom)
little levity to break the tension.
I guesse this shows why I don't belong in these threads, I mean I can get as heavily engrossed as the lot of you, but then I hate myself later.
Can't we just kiss and sing "The Man they call Jayne?"
(Oh, I'm not even going to bother responding to the original thread. No offence, not my bag man) If I'm a bitch, then life just got interesting
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SonofMan:
i know this thread has been dorment for awhile..but when i saw it i just had to respond. Has anywhere here even read the Bible? in its entirety?
and im directing this mostly to the thread starter...since he brings up Sitchin and his annunnaki stories. please understand, the reason the sumerians stories pre-date the bibles IS NOT because the bible stole, watered down and misinterpreted the ancient beliefs.
the bible is simply told from a different vantage point, in that it is God, the energy force beyond space and time, the creator of the universe, and his contacts with the early patriarchs. when we
"fell" from our original intent, we became susceptable to false truths and diceptive "knowledge"..which was given to us by the rebellious beings created before man: the annunnaki. ever wonder why, despite the acclaimed "break-throughs" in science, and all this supposed knowledge that humans have now, and yet...the most basic, fundemental issues of our race, greed, bigotry, murder, diception, war...have been with us since the beginning??? what progress are all you scientists really flaunting out there?? and i doubt that the annunnaki, who came to enslave us...have the spiritual answeres we;re looking for. maybe if the world wasnt so anti-christian, maybe we;d be farther along
the annunaki that you are refferring to, can without a doubt be reconciled with the fallen angles of Genesis 6. they were Gods original creations, who rebelled, along with Lucifer, against God and subsequently intervened in Mans progress on earth. which is the purpose of Jesus, and the coming revelations of mankinds redemption from its fall. its quite obvious to be honost...if you read the referces in the bible to the heavenly hosts, who left their domain, to forsake God and ultimately corrupt humanity from reaching its pre=fall potential. there is noo doubt they are one and the same
what is more likely?? that the God of creation caused the flood to wipe out humanity, due to corruption, degeneration, and all the other immoral actions taken place during that time(thanks to the knowledge from the annunaki). or that the flood was cause.. as Sitchin claims...on the part of the annunnaki due to excessive human noisiness?? of course their are similarities between the bible and the sumerian cuniform...the sumerians worshipped idols, and created things(gods..with a small G), wheres Abraham and the isrealis (tried) to worship the creator God...who we would have no contact, or relationship with-without an intervention on his part(the patriarchs..Jesus??)
i especially love when people say that religion is the cause for all the worlds ills. if we are merely evolved species, why do we have a conscience at all?? i consider the 10 commandments to be essentially our basic conscience...not coincidentally, and its hard to image early man making peace without an idealogy that is flawless from the beginning. but to be clear..no holy person, would be envolved in a holy war..its contradictory. so the wars were not started under benevolent circumstances. and secondly...islam, catholicism, judiasm..those are religions, but christianity is not. it is a state of mind that requires almost NO inherent structural traditions; which is why many christians are accused of being hypocrites, because a true christian follows the way of Jesus..but someone can easily cliam to be christian in word, but be an evil person in deed. when you accept the word of Jesus, you change from the inside out...Bush can claim hes a christian, but his actions dont verify his position. if there were no religion, what standards would man have to conform his behavior too?? i know you athiests would rather not have restrictions in your lives..no consequences for immorality or other sins..but your conscience might disagree, and when you die youll be expected to account for your actions, so be aware
but where would we be without Moses 10 commandments, and the fullfillment of the LAW through Jesus? this was the reason God, theNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
*ouch* Jenny, harsh. Listen if you two are so hard core I suggest you go into your respective corners and fight it out. Winner fights Citizen.
BTW hon, no need to insult. It's one thing to have an opinion but to insult the entire Christian faith. Hey, you didn't like it when you thought Citizen insulted you. How's about some tolerance here. Or do the Summarians not know that word.
BTW, this....
`````````````````````````````````````````````````
If you were really interested in the truth about your religion you would stop trying to spin it to make it fit your world view or whatever. The Christian religion is already so full of holes its enough to make a persons head spin, but I'm not going to tell you what to believe or not to believe, but the truth is the truth and no amount of spin is going to change that!!
`````````````````````````````````````````````````
You just contradicted yourself darlin. You won't tell us what to believe in but it's wrong so we shouldn't believe in it..... *whoosh* Honey your spinning your own stuff....
Guesse that means your coming after me next. Well and away, have to and all that. *smoochies* if it means anything to you. If I'm a bitch, then life just got interesting
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
i think people completely mis-interpreted the "tone" of my arguement..i wasnt being condescending. if it was perceived that way, it was because i was being debated on every single statement i made, and i was attempting to defend, or explain my opinion
are not the sumerian text the equivelant to the bible in that they rely on first hand accounts and eye witness testimony?? is that not considered evidence in a court of law? besides that, i attempted to give some reasons why scientifically, the bible can be justified, and i was given the devils advocate treatment. which is fine! i like to debate the bible, but be fair at admit that science has a lot of un=proven, untestable theories that have little factual evidence to support them.
can people offer alternative theories that are just as convincing if not more so?? go ahead, im open! that was my original intention by offering an explanation to this thread about the annunnaki. i reconciled my belief in fallen angels, with the sumerian accounts...hence the similarity. this is my collective state of mind at the moment. as i learn more, my opinion continues to evolve...as i said, this is what i believe right now. i never claimed it was FACT, or that i was right and everyone else is wrong. actually, those seem to be all the responses toward my comments...
i think some of you are being hyprocritical towards me. if i have to justify every belief i have, ask everyone else to do so aswell.
and my opinion regarding catholics and jews being religions, is that the Jewish high priests were continually rebuffed my Jesus by being hyprocrital towards their interpretation of the Law. i dont claim to be a bible scholar, as the rest of you in here, but was not the purpose of Jesus coming to fullfill the Law by introducing the holy spirit? it seems to me that a lot of religions instutionalize certain ceremonies, and in that why, become idolatrous towards God. that is just a theory i am considering..is it FACT NO. but is it worth considering..yes. thats not to say that christianity today is perfect either, i never claimed that..i think we;ve become in-grained wtih pagan and occultic influences that we may not even be aware of. but Jesus did claim that the only way to the father was through him, did he not? if it wasnt neccessary for Jesus to sacrifice himself for our sins, nor even believe in him, than why would God do it?? christians have no religion without Jesus being the son of God, God incarnate, and his ressurection...that should be the point of that. im no bible expert, but i dont think you guys can claim to be either. everyone should look into things themselves, regardless of what other say...which was my intention in commenting on Zacharia Sitchin. so enough already, lets here you experts out there rebuff some other beliefs while your at it!
if we were all perfect, then we wouldnt need Jesus..so rather than attacking me, how about some constructive criticism.
have i asked any of you to justify your beliefs, in order to take any credence in what you say?? i could, but i didnt. its only offensive when its someone makes a religious claim. i guess you cant speculate on the matter, everything i think, because im a christian, i have blind faith and accept, huh? how insulting. and then im the one who gets the lectures... beautiful. i mean lets be fair here
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Misstressahara:
*ouch* Jenny, harsh. Listen if you two are so hard core I suggest you go into your respective corners and fight it out. Winner fights Citizen.
BTW hon, no need to insult. It's one thing to have an opinion but to insult the entire Christian faith. Hey, you didn't like it when you thought Citizen insulted you. How's about some tolerance here. Or do the Summarians not know that word.
BTW, this....
`````````````````````````````````````````````````
If you were really interested in the truth about your religion you would stop trying to spin it to make it fit your world view or whatever. The Christian religion is already so full of holes its enough to make a persons head spin, but I'm not going to tell you what to believe or not to believe, but the truth is the truth and no amount of spin is going to change that!!
`````````````````````````````````````````````````
You just contradicted yourself darlin. You won't tell us what to believe in but it's wrong so we shouldn't believe in it..... *whoosh* Honey your spinning your own stuff....
Guesse that means your coming after me next. Well and away, have to and all that. *smoochies* if it means anything to you.
Why do you consider facts to be an insult? it is a fact that the Old testment Hebrew bible stories is taken from much older sources namely the summarians thats a fact
and no I didnot contridict myself it is not my place to tell someone what they should or should not believe in and I didn't. The christian religion is full of holes and saying so isn't an insult to a whole faith its the truth, believe me if I wanted to insult the whole christian faith I would.
people like you are scared to face facts thats the problem, you guys aren't interested in facts.
Quote:
are not the sumerian text the equivelant to the bible in that they rely on first hand accounts and eye witness testimony
yes...yes ..and yes..actually the sumerian text are by far more accurate and more detailed then the bible , the bible is full of allegory and symbolism, the summarian text isn't and yes some of the text is even written in the 1rst person. the sumerian text is far superior to the bible accounts, you should check it out.
Quote:
and my opinion regarding catholics and jews being religions, is that the Jewish high priests were continually rebuffed my Jesus by being hyprocrital towards their interpretation of the Law. i dont claim to be a bible scholar, as the rest of you in here, but was not the purpose of Jesus coming to fullfill the Law by introducing the holy spirit? it seems to me that a lot of religions instutionalize certain ceremonies, and in that why, become idolatrous towards God. that is just a theory i am considering..is it FACT NO. but is it worth considering..yes. thats not to say that christianity today is perfect either, i never claimed that..i think we;ve become in-grained wtih pagan and occultic influences that we may not even be aware of.
yes like christmas and easter among many other influences, christians say amen,after a prayer, which orginates from Amen Ra, the eygptian God, who was Marduke in the summarian pantheon. The cross which is the main symbol of christianty orginates in ancient sumaria and has long been used there, there are so many things in the christian religion that orginates in what you call pagan religions and thats simply because christianty in an off-shoot of the judeo religon which itself is an off shoot of older relgions with the orginal source being in summaria, the hebrew bible is just a condensed version of older stories to make it fit monotheism. Thats why alot of the stories such as Adam and Eve for example don't make much sense, but when you go back and read the orginal sumarian source it makes a great deal of sense
being a christian I don't know if your aware of this or not but, it makes total sense that the judeo hebrew bible (old testment) would come from summarian sources for the s
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just Curious,
Where can I find Semmerian texts to check out?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by oldenglanddry:
Just Curious,
Where can I find Semmerian texts to check out?
you can go to the library and check out books on summarians, its that easy
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
...Other considerations that weigh in against Stichin's claims:
1) Life requires external energy to operate. In our case its the Sun. It provides fuel for plants which provide fuel for other critters (including us). While 470 A.U.s may be cosmological chicken feed in terms of distance, it does render the Sun a negligible energy source for fueling life on Planet X at aphelion. In fact, ALL external energy sources in our galactic neighborhood are chicken feed at that distance. You can postulate that this Intelligence on Planet X developed their own energy sources... but that just begs the argument "where did the energy to sustain them come from before they got smart enough to scavenge it on their own?" You can't just say "Well there must have been something else at the start because they exist now!" That's something of a circular argument... impossible to refute, contributing no information, hence useless..
according to Zecharia Stitchen the planet Nibiru, has an internal heat source, that comes from the planets inner core.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
i understand the origins of the sumerian texts, i have not read all them per se, so i cannot comment outside of what i do know, but i am fully aware they pre-date the bible, and im vaguely aware of the general similarities. i wasnt always christian, and i didnt always believe the Bibles take
i was aware that Abraham came from that region, which is why i posed that obviously he would be knowledgeable of the culture or beliefs of that time, which he left at the behest of God; that would be our religions beginning. i will have to become more familiar with the sumerian texts once again, but i dont see how they supersede, or discredit or invalidate the Bible, when it clearly chooses a divergent path from previous history. i realize it claims to be the factual origins of the Bible, but its yet to be proven that the Bible is meritless or a complete plagurization(?) when it can be compared to the equivelant of an opposing testimony
i wouldnt claim that christianity is full of holes though... there are false practices and dis- and mis-information, certainly, which could have happened over time, if you believe that this world has been under control of the rebellious forces from the beginning. but at the same time its hard to imagine a fairy tale being acknowledge 2000+ years later, if there were no evidence of any accuracies.. i mean does not history have a way of weeding out the truth from the fancifull? there are a lot of scriptures that werent involved in the canon, which serve as additional sources, such as the book of Enoch and Jubilees, which describe essentially the same thing as Sitchin, but again from a more divine Biblical perspective..like Enoch for example, besides that some claim him being involved in the developement of the sphinx(i dont know the hole story though specifically), but it talks about the names and the knowledge of these fallen beings, and the influence they had on "Adams" ancestors.(whether created by the annunnaki or God).
i will say though that certainly every person is responsible for their own actions, or sins, the bible never contradicts that. it simply gives explanations as to how sin entered the world, what its purpose is, and so on...but i wont bother with that aspect..i just want to say that the bible doesnt allow believers a free pass on sin, ints not as if we plead "the devil made me do it!" therefore become guiltless..but we acknowledge the mystery of lawlessness in the world
only i dont see how the first hand accounts of matthew, mark, and luke(or john, i forget) become discounted, or the thousands of eye witnesses to Jesus miracles, or even the witnesses to his alleged ressurrection. if we wanted to assume that the claims by the sumerians are correct, i dont know for sure whether the belief in the annunnaki automatically refutes Jesus' legacy. the Bible would claim that the annunnaki were created things, they were present at the creation of man.. whether they want to claim for themselves the work or not, thats debatable..but i think there are enough similarites to suggest that there is a power struggle occuring, and not between enki and enlil, but between both of them and the creator.
if their were a God of creation, which was to manifest itself in the form of a man, would that oppose aliens coming from a distant planet to earth? IMO not neccessarily..unless the annunnaki claimed to have evolved...do you know what they claim on that issue? understand im being genuine, im not asking condescendingly...
its definately an interesting subject.. especially since the Bible claims that they will return, as im sure Sitchin claims of the annunnaki. which if thats the case, it is worthwhile to consider the similarities between the two and how they should be associated
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SonofMan:
i understand the origins of the sumerian texts, i have not read all them per se, so i cannot comment outside of what i do know, but i am fully aware they pre-date the bible, and im vaguely aware of the general similarities. i wasnt always christian, and i didnt always believe the Bibles take
i wouldnt claim that christianity is full of holes though... there are false practices and dis- and mis-information, certainly, which could have happened over time, if you believe that this world has been under control of the rebellious forces from the beginning. but at the same time its hard to imagine a fairy tale being acknowledge 2000+ years later, if there were no evidence of any accuracies.. i mean does not history have a way of weeding out the truth from the fancifull? there are a lot of scriptures that werent involved in the canon, which serve as additional sources, such as the book of Enoch and Jubilees, which describe essentially the same thing as Sitchin, but again from a more divine Biblical perspective..like Enoch for example, besides that some claim him being involved in the developement of the sphinx(i dont know the hole story though specifically), but it talks about the names and the knowledge of these fallen beings, and the influence they had on "Adams" ancestors.(whether created by the annunnaki or God).
i will say though that certainly every person is responsible for their own actions, or sins, the bible never contradicts that. it simply gives explanations as to how sin entered the world, what its purpose is, and so on...but i wont bother with that aspect..i just want to say that the bible doesnt allow believers a free pass on sin, ints not as if we plead "the devil made me do it!" therefore become guiltless..but we acknowledge the mystery of lawlessness in the world
only i dont see how the first hand accounts of matthew, mark, and luke(or john, i forget) become discounted, or the thousands of eye witnesses to Jesus miracles, or even the witnesses to his alleged ressurrection. if we wanted to assume that the claims by the sumerians are correct, i dont know for sure whether the belief in the annunnaki automatically refutes Jesus' legacy. the Bible would claim that the annunnaki were created things, they were present at the creation of man.. whether they want to claim for themselves the work or not, thats debatable..but i think there are enough similarites to suggest that there is a power struggle occuring, and not between enki and enlil, but between both of them and the creator.
if their were a God of creation, which was to manifest itself in the form of a man, would that oppose aliens coming from a distant planet to earth? IMO not neccessarily..unless the annunnaki claimed to have evolved...do you know what they claim on that issue? understand im being genuine, im not asking condescendingly...
its definately an interesting subject.. especially since the Bible claims that they will return, as im sure Sitchin claims of the annunnaki. which if thats the case, it is worthwhile to consider the similarities between the two and how they should be associated
you must remember that I'm talking about the Old testment, not the new testement, and you seem to be alot more open minded then I orginally thought I must admit!!
nor am I saying that the bible should be discounted, actually I'm saying the opposite, I believe the stories, but they have to be put in proper context and in order to do that you have to go to the orginal source.
Quote:
i was aware that Abraham came from that region, which is why i posed that obviously he would be knowledgeable of the culture or beliefs of that time, which he left at the behest of God; that would be our religions beginning. i will have to become more familiar with the sumerian texts once again, but i dont see how they supersede, or discredit or invalidate the Bible, when it clearly chooses a divergent path from previous history. i realize it claims to be the factual origins of the Bible,NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME