|
12 September 2008 received by Email
In a very interesting text: The Anunnaki history and role of Reptilian ETs, Part 1 and Part 2, Sokolov states that Jesus would have been a Yahweh agent, an agent provocateur of the colonial Yahweh power. He is right about “agent provocateur”, but not in the way he thinks.
My studies in the history of
Christianity and comparisons between the Old and New Testaments lead
to a different picture, which I wish to sketch here. He is also
right about the fact that Yahweh and the yahwists are
controlling this planet in a very negative way and that the Church
is one of their tools, as is to-day’s Christianity - but not the
original Christianity!
I will make it short, but this is all according to what is actually written in the Old Testament (see Bible references at the end of this text [1]). The Hebrews wanted out of Egypt and Yahweh - who I do believe is an Anunnaku (singular of Anunnaki) who wanted to have his own people to work for him as a split-off group (his own faction) and for a power he could gradually extend - saw an opportunity to have his own people here.
He, through Moses, offered to the Hebrews to lead them out to a Promised Land.
But they could have had it easier, since the Pharaoh was willing to let them go, yet Yahweh wanted to demonstrate his power and first have all his 10 plagues come over Egypt. He was eager to show his muscles and hardened the heart of Pharaoh to provoke a fight about the issue. One of the plagues was to go through the land of Egypt and kill all firstborn of men and animals, except among the Hebrews.
As the history in the Bible shows, this
wasn’t necessary, but he wanted to have his cruel game as a
demonstration of his power.
When the inhabitants of a town wanted to negotiate, he again hardened their hearts to force the conflict he wanted to have as an excuse to make the Hebrews kill them all. Occasionally only virgins were spared and caught as booty, and it would be naïve to believe that it wouldn’t be for sexual “services”.
These murderous robbing raids were a
veritable holocaust!
His message was revolutionary and he revealed secrets. Slowly, bit by bit. He talked about a love that Yahweh despised. He talked about his “Father” in terms which gave a picture very different from the one of Yahweh.
The “Father” is loving, caring, benevolent, forgiving, contrary to the qualities of Yahweh. So the one Jesus talked about clearly wasn’t Yahweh.
John 8,31-44 reflects this in Jesus’ speech to the Jews:
So Jesus actually was an agent
provocateur, but against Yahweh!
The latter declared that Yahweh (who
they also called
Yaldabaoth) wasn’t a real god, but a
demiurge, a
secondary god, himself created by the highest God and prime creator
- a fact that Yahweh didn’t want to be known. He wanted to be
regarded as the prime creator himself.
But which Christianity? Not the one he
had before fought against, but his own modified and falsified
version the way Yahweh wanted to have it.
The emperor gave their petitions
unopened to the fire. They were at the end declared to be heretics.
This was the beginning of the end of Gnostic Christianity. Instead a
yahwistic Church was formed, which claimed to adhere to Jesus
Christ, but not the true one. So we since have two Christs: the
false one of the Church and the true one who had once incarnated as Jesus.
And who, then, is Yahweh? In the latter decades remarkably interesting discoveries were made in the research into the history of religions, based on archeological findings in Israel. In the original Hebrew religion (or Pre-Hebrew religion) the highest god was ’El Elyon' [2]. He had 70 sons and one of them was Yahweh.
Yahweh had a consort ’Asherah,' a goddess.
Her name is found around 40 times in the Hebrew text of the Bible, but it is always translated as “tree” or “grove” in order to obscure the real meaning, since her symbol is a vertical pole or a tree. At about the time of the exodus from Egypt, and still more during the time of the Babylonian captivity, the religion was made monotheistic and one shouldn’t know of the others, not even of ’Asherah.
When the Bible states that it is
forbidden to plant a tree at the altar of Yahweh (Deut. 16,21), the
real meaning is that it is forbidden to put a symbol (or maybe even
image) of ’Asherahp' at the altar (and what sense would it have to
forbid planting a tree there?).
The first sentence in the Bible (Gen. 1,1) reads:
Now it has always been a problem swept under the carpet that ’Elohim' is plural and literally means “gods”.
Therefore, some want to understand it as:
However, the first word bereshit can not only be translated as “beginning”, but also as “the first one” - the one who was in the beginning.
Now we can correctly (no grammatical problem anymore) translate as,
Yahweh is in the Hebrew Bible text usually mentioned as “Yahweh Elohim”, which seems to indicate that he is one of the created ’Elohim. The plural repeats in other passages:
Sitchin’s sympathy for Yahweh is logical. He
is a Jew - I respect him sincerely as such - and must have this
sympathy, or he would face heavy criticism from his own people,
regarded as a black sheep, would he describe it differently. His
conclusion that Yahweh would be the god of the Anunnaki [3]
cannot be taken very seriously.
But there is one book I feel is quite pure wheat: Bringers of the Dawn, by Barbara Marciniak (channelings from the Pleiadians) [4].
The Pleiadians talk about a “prime creator” who has created all in the beginning, out of which secondary creations were later made. The Prime Creator created the Pleiadians, the Anunnaki, and so on. In the message Anunnaki are called “lizzies” since they are said to originally be reptilian by nature. They are not very positive beings, but “uninformed”, wherefore they create “uninformed systems”.
In a struggle about the Earth they took control over it a very long time ago.
The time for our liberation is
slowly approaching, and
the Pleiadians say that they are helping us,
but that in the meantime the control by the Anunnaki will become
much more subtle and sophisticated and therefore more mean. Even
though many of them are quite negative, not all of them are.
They also created the Anunnaki, who became some kind of “celestial rowdies” and disturbed the order in the creation. Therefore, Apsû wanted to reverse their creation so that they should no more exist. Tiâmat, however, opposed this, since they were her children. Ea (Enki) then killed Apsû and later Marduk killed Tiâmat, the original mother of all gods. This is a very sinister act but in the texts Marduk is made a hero and Tiâmat a monster… Obviously this is a biased view that reverses the question of good and evil!
But can you kill the prime creators? Of course not!
The meaning of this can only be that the
Anunnaki split off from them and wanted to be independent, as if
they were dead. And to the Anunnaki they became effectively dead…
This, again, gives a negative impression of the Anunnaki. They, like
Yahweh, wanted to be regarded as the real creators and we should not
know about those who created them.
This planet is called
Phaeton (or Mallona). A part of it
according to Enûma Elish became the Earth and the rest became the
asteroid belt. It can be assumed that a part of the population of
Phaeton (Tiâmat’s people) survived. Some could save themselves to
Mars, where with time that civilization died, and another part to
the Earth (or they survived on the part that became the Earth).
There could very well have been earlier civilizations on Earth before that, which either disappeared or were also genetically manipulated. For the control of the Earth, people should be kept in the dark, be unknowing and not “eat from the tree of knowledge”. Earlier and higher developed civilizations wouldn’t be tolerated, anymore.
When the “Watchers” (the sons of the
Elohim) acted against the laws of the Anunnaki and brought new
genes in the Earth population (Gen. 6) - a kind of compassionate
development aid! - they were punished and the “giants” which were
born out of it, with qualities and capacities Earth people were not
allowed to have, were killed in the flood.
The Prime Creator will be one!
In India,
Brahma is known as the highest god. I think it is “materializing”
things a bit too much to state that there would be no non-physical
entities that really are and were what we would call gods, and that
there is no highest one who created all. After all, the question
unavoidably arises: who created the extraterrestrials regarded as
gods? Following this question back will at the end have to lead to
an immaterial prime creator…
Regression experiences with persons, who once lived in Atlantis, indicated that extraterrestrials were in contact with the Atlanteans and gave them knowledge, but withdrew disappointed when they saw it abused.
Therefore they can make themselves invisible to us and shape-shift in ways non-understandable in a three-dimensional world concept.
That is probably also a reason why
we were genetically engineered to be able to perceive and think only
in three dimensions and have but a three-dimensional consciousness,
lest we would know too much... To want more would be to “eat” from
the forbidden “tree of knowledge”.
Thus he could play the two out against each other in the
Machiavellian sense of “divide and rule”. (“Allah” is, by the way,
not derived from ’El = “god”, since “al” is the article in Arabic;
“lah” means “god” and “al lah” simply means “the god”).
Sokolov writes “mulmul, our solar system” as it is “called in the ancient texts”. That could make more sense.
In which ancient texts is that written?
As multidimensional beings they can easily take energies from us without our knowing.
They seem to love bloodsheds, like Yahweh in the Old Testament. When a person is killed, he dies full of life energy that can be “extracted” from the dying or just dead body.
But if someone dies old or sick, his “batteries” are weak or empty and there isn’t much energy to take.
These things and others will be described in much more detail in my forthcoming book in German: Es begann in Babylon (“It began in Babylon”).
References
|
