I've definitely seen the Piri Reis map. But I guess I never fully considered that it was connected to Antarctica. You make a solid point. Me, I assumed there was some margin for error there, based on the fact that they were working 2 dimensionally when they were making those maps (essentially), and we only have a few examples that corroborate anything similar. This isn't me discounting what you're saying, though. Just throwing my thoughts out there.
I'm aware of the Sumerian king list, too. Definitely a trip. I've always assumed there was more to that particular story.
I'm also vaguely aware of this idea that there is some different more Ancient-Sumerian-friendly, for lack of a better term, translation of the Bible. Do you know where this Mauro Biglino fellow dug up this new translation?
And I'm also not one who is going to tell you there's no chance anything in the Bible was mistranslated. I've heard a fair bit of evidence to suggest otherwise. But if you're down with Jesus, do you think he was pointing humanity towards a God or the Annunaki? And... do you think he's coming back?
I agree that this is all super fascinating. But there is still this issue of trusting authorities to me. I suppose I should probably start looking more into the actual supporting evidence. Got any suggestions on where to start?
Actually, in one of his presentations Biglino tells the "origin story" of this part of his work (couldn't tell you exactly where, though). He's a professional translator and was working for the official publishing house for the Vatican. Starting with the Leningrad Codex, the oldest complete Hebrew copy of the OT, he said, "I'd like to do a translation in the most straightforward way possible. No interpretations, just the plain meanings of the words."
As he moved along in the work, it dawned on him that the story being told was much different that everyone seemed to think. It was actually the story of the interaction of humans with a group of powerful extraterrestrial beings. Sometime later he realized that this group of beings were the same ones the Sumerians wrote about and that Sitchin studied. In short, all his work is original.
As far as Jesus, his whole message boils down to, "act morally". Interestingly, the same simple message comes out of the OT as well, but it's like no one bothers actually reading it. Take a look at Isaiah 1, for example. Yahweh flatly rejects what we would call "organized religion" and tells the people basically just to "act morally". In more modern and developed terminology, we would simply say that everyone should act in accordance with "natural law" (the moral law of the Universe, see Mark Passio). Well, none of this has anything specifically to do with God or the Anunnaki, unless you want to say that the Creator established natural law in the Universe along with it's physical laws.
Jesus (and the other Anunnaki) are definitely coming back. (Note that Satan and his faction of 200 Anunnaki never left.) Jesus says that he'll return "at the end of the age". The Anunnaki alternated rulership of the Earth by zodiacal ages, each being 2160 years.
There are giant problems figuring out when that is, though. Our chronology has been so screwed up with fake history and lies we can't tell what year it really is. Strong evidence tells us that Jesus, for example, was born in what we would call the year 1152 AD. Then we have to establish what year the last turnover was.
You can see the problem. With reasonable guesses, the end of the age is still several centuries out, but on the other hand the Elites sure seem to act like they're running out of time. So who knows? Could be tomorrow or could be a thousand years. In my book, nothing about any of that should affect our adherence to natural law.
Finally, as to where to start, I suggest it should all be guided by the questions you pose to yourself. What do you really want to know about? You'll end up branching off anyway. Like with me, I set out years ago to learn about the "Baltic Dry Index" so I could improve my investing activities. I still do not know what it is.
I'll check Biglino out. You don't have any worries about him working for the Vatican though?
I have mixed feelings on organized religion. There's Isaiah 1, but the Old Testament also has a lot of specifics based on how religion is supposed to work, and there's structure to it. And, in the New Testament, the apostles setup proper churches. Acts covers this quite a bit. 1 Corinthians 14 is just a random example that talks specifically about order in the church.
I think the Bible teaches that we're supposed to gather together in an organized fashion (beyond that I'm not making assertions). However, I get what you're saying. When Paul talks to the churches in Revelation, like what, 1 in 7 doesn't get reprimanded? I think a lot more people are doing it for the wrong reasons than realize it. And I agree that organized religion fails more often than not. But even so, I think the Bible is big on not forsaking the assembly of the saints.
As far as Jesus' teachings go, I'm more curious about the nuance beyond "act morally." There's the concept of grace through faith. There's some real specific prophecy. The concept of the Holy Spirit. The signs that will follow the believer:
17 And these signs will follow those who [d]believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[e] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
The idea of eternal life:
27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”
This isn't really Jesus' teaching, but how about the armor of God? (Ephesians 6:10-18) What do you do with that?
I'm aware of a lot of these outside of the norm ideas. I am on conspiracies.win... lol. I like having my ideas challenged. Your viewpoint is particularly interesting, because you have a lot of the pieces put together. I'm not sure what the whole picture looks like, but that's what made me curious. I appreciate you sharing.
I've heard of some ideas about deleted history. "There was no dark ages..." etc. But where do you get Jesus being born in 1152 AD? Or are you just saying that's how far our calendar is off?
(Also, for whatever reason my upvotes don't seem to save. Maybe it's because this account is pretty new?)
Technically speaking, Biglino didn't work for the Vatican but for the publishing house Edizione San Paulo, which handles almost all the Pope and cardinals' work. He steers wide of the Church and it's doctrine, since he's aware of how people get so easily wrapped around the axle with all that. Watch any of his videos and you'll see he's is just all about linguistics and deep etymology. It'd be boring a hell if it wasn't for the actual subject matter. Oh, and when he started talking about this stuff, they flushed him right quick.
You know, you touch on the whole concept of morality, Jesus' teachings, other Biblical teachings, Church doctrine, etc, etc. As you know, the debate is endless. But in the course of this area of research, I stumbled onto a conclusion about the nature of morality and human consciousness that would necessitate a fundamental reconsideration of that entire debate.
Bold claim, to be sure, and I wouldn't make it unless I was sure. There is, as you might guess, an extremely long story that can and should be told to back it up. Guess I'll have to write a book one of these days.
Just as the tip of the iceberg, I'll mention that the penny finally dropped when I closely read the Garden of Eden narrative. Not to explain everything I found, but what I realized was that everyone else had been misreading it. And I mean everyone.
Another tall claim, but do the experiment if you don't believe me. Write down ten (or however many you like) facts about the story that you "know". Then go back and find them in the text (and technically, remember the real text is in Hebrew, not English). Waving your hands around about "what it means" is not allowed.
You'll be shocked how far off you are. If you think you got it all right, send me a copy and I'll put metaphorical red ink all over it just like in school, but no one likes that. Remember, it's not a test for a grade, it's an exercise for learning.
Strangely enough, I saw a confirmation of what I thought were my most esoteric ideas on this in the first season of "WestWorld". That was both startling and reassuring. And if you're wondering how I could possibly wrap this all back to WW, well, I told you it was a long story.
As for the 1152 dating of the Nativity, you'll find it here in Chapter 1 of TSAR OF THE SLAVS by А.Т.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy. These guys are academics, so you may find it rough going when reading it. But that's just the point: it is, as we used to say in mathematics, "closely reasoned". You also find out the Shroud of Turin is real, unless you can convince yourself it's all one big coincidence!
So, I listened to a couple hours worth of content from Biglino. And I am down with a lot of what he's teaching. I can buy the Annunaki and people, hybrids, living thousands even tens of thousands of years in the distant past thing. But I don't know that I agree with the theory's core nature.
Let me give some examples. Biglingo really emphasizes this multiple gods idea. But that teaching isn't really new. I thought there'd be a bit more to it. But I've heard this multiple gods theory repeated by Christians, specifically those who have developed a genuine/independent interest in their faith. Hell, I've actually heard through the Bible teachers talk about this (granted, it's not a subject they tend to linger on). The biblical idea, as I'm sure you're aware, is that the world is given over to Satan until Jesus comes back. There are powers and principalities over areas and peoples, demonic influence of sorts. And there's one Elohim above all others. A Christian who's just reading their bible should know this. Biblically, there's real power in the demonic, but it's only a fraction of what God wields. I tend to think this is what the Annunaki were, essentially Pagan gods/fallen angels. I tend to think even Enki and Inlil (spelling?) were in this boat, whether they represented themselves that way or not.
There was also this notion of a "savage" God, which I find pops up when you get into this sort of conversation with folks who study the Bible but don't believe it (referring to a video I saw of Belingo here. It was in this series I linked below). And that's a little bit of a red flag for me, just because it's evidence of a fair bit of emotion surrounding the argument, a sort of hatred or anger towards God. Like you can grasp the concept of an almighty being, beyond time, one who spoke the universe into existence, eternal... And what's going to hold you up is a judgement you placed on this being based on your super tiny moral perspective? Seems like a small, kind've pointless argument in the scheme of things. And stuff like that gives me pause.
It's the same thing with arguments like the one linked below. It's weird to me when people substitute in stories of creation that make no sense. At least with the theory of divine creation you end up at a mystery, "the mystery of God." I can at least accept that I can't grasp the full nature of creation. Meanwhile, one explanation in this little clip is just "maybe string theory is responsible for creation." What? Which part?
Below, he is unironically talking about ancient aliens (And don't get me wrong, still down). But notice, he can’t wrap his mind around the idea that this biblical passage could be literal. If you can consider alien demi-gods as potential creator beings, but can’t fathom that maybe there’s also a different realm/dimension we can interact with in a limited fashion, even though it's an idea presented in some of the same texts… I think this calls into question some of the logic you’re operating under.
Like I said previously, I don't discount all of what Belingo is saying. Most of it seems to be pointed in the right direction. I don't know the whole body of his work, and I'm not trying to setup strawmen here. But I get the impression he's missing the mark on the spiritual nature of this story. I think there probably were/are Annunaki or something close to them. But, in Mathew 10:8, Jesus told the disciples to heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, and cast out demons. I think this is real (I'm not saying I understand everything about it), and without the spiritual side, you (the royal you, not you you) only have part of the story. I tend to believe there's a blindness in part people contract when they ignore that.
In one of your previous posts, you asked what I really want to know. I think the most important question we should attempt to answer is what comes next. All said and done, our lives are short and purposeless independent of anything else. And I think that speaks to what existence is. I tend to think that we weren't created randomly at all, and it would make the most sense in the world if life was a test of sorts.
Lol. It's funny you mention westworld. By whatever the last season of that was (5?) I was cracking up about the messaging. "Oh, this is what they want for us," referring to the total control through sound waves and the disposable nature of the people who were left. What did you see in season 1? (I'm not even sure how well I remember that)
You should write a book. Get all of this in one coherent place, and present whatever evidence there is. I'll buy a copy.
I've definitely seen the Piri Reis map. But I guess I never fully considered that it was connected to Antarctica. You make a solid point. Me, I assumed there was some margin for error there, based on the fact that they were working 2 dimensionally when they were making those maps (essentially), and we only have a few examples that corroborate anything similar. This isn't me discounting what you're saying, though. Just throwing my thoughts out there.
I'm aware of the Sumerian king list, too. Definitely a trip. I've always assumed there was more to that particular story.
I'm also vaguely aware of this idea that there is some different more Ancient-Sumerian-friendly, for lack of a better term, translation of the Bible. Do you know where this Mauro Biglino fellow dug up this new translation?
And I'm also not one who is going to tell you there's no chance anything in the Bible was mistranslated. I've heard a fair bit of evidence to suggest otherwise. But if you're down with Jesus, do you think he was pointing humanity towards a God or the Annunaki? And... do you think he's coming back?
I agree that this is all super fascinating. But there is still this issue of trusting authorities to me. I suppose I should probably start looking more into the actual supporting evidence. Got any suggestions on where to start?
Actually, in one of his presentations Biglino tells the "origin story" of this part of his work (couldn't tell you exactly where, though). He's a professional translator and was working for the official publishing house for the Vatican. Starting with the Leningrad Codex, the oldest complete Hebrew copy of the OT, he said, "I'd like to do a translation in the most straightforward way possible. No interpretations, just the plain meanings of the words."
As he moved along in the work, it dawned on him that the story being told was much different that everyone seemed to think. It was actually the story of the interaction of humans with a group of powerful extraterrestrial beings. Sometime later he realized that this group of beings were the same ones the Sumerians wrote about and that Sitchin studied. In short, all his work is original.
As far as Jesus, his whole message boils down to, "act morally". Interestingly, the same simple message comes out of the OT as well, but it's like no one bothers actually reading it. Take a look at Isaiah 1, for example. Yahweh flatly rejects what we would call "organized religion" and tells the people basically just to "act morally". In more modern and developed terminology, we would simply say that everyone should act in accordance with "natural law" (the moral law of the Universe, see Mark Passio). Well, none of this has anything specifically to do with God or the Anunnaki, unless you want to say that the Creator established natural law in the Universe along with it's physical laws.
Jesus (and the other Anunnaki) are definitely coming back. (Note that Satan and his faction of 200 Anunnaki never left.) Jesus says that he'll return "at the end of the age". The Anunnaki alternated rulership of the Earth by zodiacal ages, each being 2160 years.
There are giant problems figuring out when that is, though. Our chronology has been so screwed up with fake history and lies we can't tell what year it really is. Strong evidence tells us that Jesus, for example, was born in what we would call the year 1152 AD. Then we have to establish what year the last turnover was.
You can see the problem. With reasonable guesses, the end of the age is still several centuries out, but on the other hand the Elites sure seem to act like they're running out of time. So who knows? Could be tomorrow or could be a thousand years. In my book, nothing about any of that should affect our adherence to natural law.
Finally, as to where to start, I suggest it should all be guided by the questions you pose to yourself. What do you really want to know about? You'll end up branching off anyway. Like with me, I set out years ago to learn about the "Baltic Dry Index" so I could improve my investing activities. I still do not know what it is.
I'll check Biglino out. You don't have any worries about him working for the Vatican though?
I have mixed feelings on organized religion. There's Isaiah 1, but the Old Testament also has a lot of specifics based on how religion is supposed to work, and there's structure to it. And, in the New Testament, the apostles setup proper churches. Acts covers this quite a bit. 1 Corinthians 14 is just a random example that talks specifically about order in the church.
I think the Bible teaches that we're supposed to gather together in an organized fashion (beyond that I'm not making assertions). However, I get what you're saying. When Paul talks to the churches in Revelation, like what, 1 in 7 doesn't get reprimanded? I think a lot more people are doing it for the wrong reasons than realize it. And I agree that organized religion fails more often than not. But even so, I think the Bible is big on not forsaking the assembly of the saints.
As far as Jesus' teachings go, I'm more curious about the nuance beyond "act morally." There's the concept of grace through faith. There's some real specific prophecy. The concept of the Holy Spirit. The signs that will follow the believer:
17 And these signs will follow those who [d]believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; 18 they[e] will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”
The idea of eternal life:
27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”
This isn't really Jesus' teaching, but how about the armor of God? (Ephesians 6:10-18) What do you do with that?
I'm aware of a lot of these outside of the norm ideas. I am on conspiracies.win... lol. I like having my ideas challenged. Your viewpoint is particularly interesting, because you have a lot of the pieces put together. I'm not sure what the whole picture looks like, but that's what made me curious. I appreciate you sharing.
I've heard of some ideas about deleted history. "There was no dark ages..." etc. But where do you get Jesus being born in 1152 AD? Or are you just saying that's how far our calendar is off?
(Also, for whatever reason my upvotes don't seem to save. Maybe it's because this account is pretty new?)
Technically speaking, Biglino didn't work for the Vatican but for the publishing house Edizione San Paulo, which handles almost all the Pope and cardinals' work. He steers wide of the Church and it's doctrine, since he's aware of how people get so easily wrapped around the axle with all that. Watch any of his videos and you'll see he's is just all about linguistics and deep etymology. It'd be boring a hell if it wasn't for the actual subject matter. Oh, and when he started talking about this stuff, they flushed him right quick.
You know, you touch on the whole concept of morality, Jesus' teachings, other Biblical teachings, Church doctrine, etc, etc. As you know, the debate is endless. But in the course of this area of research, I stumbled onto a conclusion about the nature of morality and human consciousness that would necessitate a fundamental reconsideration of that entire debate.
Bold claim, to be sure, and I wouldn't make it unless I was sure. There is, as you might guess, an extremely long story that can and should be told to back it up. Guess I'll have to write a book one of these days.
Just as the tip of the iceberg, I'll mention that the penny finally dropped when I closely read the Garden of Eden narrative. Not to explain everything I found, but what I realized was that everyone else had been misreading it. And I mean everyone.
Another tall claim, but do the experiment if you don't believe me. Write down ten (or however many you like) facts about the story that you "know". Then go back and find them in the text (and technically, remember the real text is in Hebrew, not English). Waving your hands around about "what it means" is not allowed.
You'll be shocked how far off you are. If you think you got it all right, send me a copy and I'll put metaphorical red ink all over it just like in school, but no one likes that. Remember, it's not a test for a grade, it's an exercise for learning.
Strangely enough, I saw a confirmation of what I thought were my most esoteric ideas on this in the first season of "WestWorld". That was both startling and reassuring. And if you're wondering how I could possibly wrap this all back to WW, well, I told you it was a long story.
As for the 1152 dating of the Nativity, you'll find it here in Chapter 1 of TSAR OF THE SLAVS by А.Т.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy. These guys are academics, so you may find it rough going when reading it. But that's just the point: it is, as we used to say in mathematics, "closely reasoned". You also find out the Shroud of Turin is real, unless you can convince yourself it's all one big coincidence!
So, I listened to a couple hours worth of content from Biglino. And I am down with a lot of what he's teaching. I can buy the Annunaki and people, hybrids, living thousands even tens of thousands of years in the distant past thing. But I don't know that I agree with the theory's core nature.
Let me give some examples. Biglingo really emphasizes this multiple gods idea. But that teaching isn't really new. I thought there'd be a bit more to it. But I've heard this multiple gods theory repeated by Christians, specifically those who have developed a genuine/independent interest in their faith. Hell, I've actually heard through the Bible teachers talk about this (granted, it's not a subject they tend to linger on). The biblical idea, as I'm sure you're aware, is that the world is given over to Satan until Jesus comes back. There are powers and principalities over areas and peoples, demonic influence of sorts. And there's one Elohim above all others. A Christian who's just reading their bible should know this. Biblically, there's real power in the demonic, but it's only a fraction of what God wields. I tend to think this is what the Annunaki were, essentially Pagan gods/fallen angels. I tend to think even Enki and Inlil (spelling?) were in this boat, whether they represented themselves that way or not.
There was also this notion of a "savage" God, which I find pops up when you get into this sort of conversation with folks who study the Bible but don't believe it (referring to a video I saw of Belingo here. It was in this series I linked below). And that's a little bit of a red flag for me, just because it's evidence of a fair bit of emotion surrounding the argument, a sort of hatred or anger towards God. Like you can grasp the concept of an almighty being, beyond time, one who spoke the universe into existence, eternal... And what's going to hold you up is a judgement you placed on this being based on your super tiny moral perspective? Seems like a small, kind've pointless argument in the scheme of things. And stuff like that gives me pause.
It's the same thing with arguments like the one linked below. It's weird to me when people substitute in stories of creation that make no sense. At least with the theory of divine creation you end up at a mystery, "the mystery of God." I can at least accept that I can't grasp the full nature of creation. Meanwhile, one explanation in this little clip is just "maybe string theory is responsible for creation." What? Which part?
https://youtu.be/mxOfEFPuU5I?t=764
Below, he is unironically talking about ancient aliens (And don't get me wrong, still down). But notice, he can’t wrap his mind around the idea that this biblical passage could be literal. If you can consider alien demi-gods as potential creator beings, but can’t fathom that maybe there’s also a different realm/dimension we can interact with in a limited fashion, even though it's an idea presented in some of the same texts… I think this calls into question some of the logic you’re operating under.
https://youtu.be/ALmXC9oGFSw?t=644
Like I said previously, I don't discount all of what Belingo is saying. Most of it seems to be pointed in the right direction. I don't know the whole body of his work, and I'm not trying to setup strawmen here. But I get the impression he's missing the mark on the spiritual nature of this story. I think there probably were/are Annunaki or something close to them. But, in Mathew 10:8, Jesus told the disciples to heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, and cast out demons. I think this is real (I'm not saying I understand everything about it), and without the spiritual side, you (the royal you, not you you) only have part of the story. I tend to believe there's a blindness in part people contract when they ignore that.
In one of your previous posts, you asked what I really want to know. I think the most important question we should attempt to answer is what comes next. All said and done, our lives are short and purposeless independent of anything else. And I think that speaks to what existence is. I tend to think that we weren't created randomly at all, and it would make the most sense in the world if life was a test of sorts.
Lol. It's funny you mention westworld. By whatever the last season of that was (5?) I was cracking up about the messaging. "Oh, this is what they want for us," referring to the total control through sound waves and the disposable nature of the people who were left. What did you see in season 1? (I'm not even sure how well I remember that)
You should write a book. Get all of this in one coherent place, and present whatever evidence there is. I'll buy a copy.