|
received by Email on April 24, 2022
It hardly gets more concrete than that and I have to do my own research to see what can be done with a large variety of relevant information.
The Bible begins with a creation story and I assume that I also have to that myself. Mankind has had many cultures and religions with both similarities and differences since ancient times.
How are you supposed to find your way there? The historical tracing of the Bible texts leads to the land called Sumer. This study does not seem to take us any further back.
So let's start there.
In the Mesopotamian region we find a creation story called the Enuma Elish, which seems to be the earliest that can have anything to do with our Bible.
The name is formed from the first two words in the cuneiform text, meaning "As above".
Some other Bibles, e.g. the German translation by Luther, have (here in English):
The Hebrew Bible has miqedem = from the east.
But I won't speculate about that here.
The path back in time leads to Abraham and his father Terah, who lived in the Sumerian city of Ur, so it might be expected that they initially held rather Babylonian beliefs.
Terah made statuettes of gods, which he probably sold for prayer and ritual purposes, which Abraham considered idolatry. One day he had the opportunity to destroy these figurines. Abraham was then to be thrown into a fire as punishment, but was miraculously saved. Under unclear circumstances, Terah then migrated with his family to go to Canaan, but they first stayed in Haran (now in south-eastern Turkey).
Much later - according to one source when Terah had died, according to another when he still was alive - Abraham moved on with his family to Canaan, prompted by God, who promised him an important task there.
Most likely he and the family brought some of the Babylonian faith with them and then probably also the knowledge of Enuma Elish.
But there they had to live as second-class inhabitants and rather be servants of the local population. Half a millennium later, under circumstances familiar to us from school education, they were able to return to Canaan, hailed as the "Promised Land."
When they finally arrived after a very long wandering, they were initially disappointed. The country wasn't free! There were already people living in cities in the land!
Then an order came to the immigrants from their highest authority:
However, it was permissible to take virgins as booty...
For what? As housemaids or even wives? Or for "sexual services"? And who then enacted this? Yah-weh!
And who is he? I will come back to that... The genocide in Canaan also meant that they killed descendants of their own ancestors, actually their relatives!
Was all this staged in order to eliminate old knowledge in this way through "mass brainwashing"? A kind of ethnic cleansing?
The original texts are cuneiform tablets, written in Babylonian and Assyrian, found during excavations at various sites: Ashur, Sultantepe, Nimrud and Nineveh (Ashurbanipal's library) and others.
The text may have been written before the fall of Sumer in 1750 BC, even if later tablets date up to about 1200 BC.
Most other translations here have "Mummu-Tiamat" or also "progenitor Tiamat", sometimes one tries with "mother, chaos, creator, womb, son and even bosom of Tiamat"...
She also wants to explain the name with the physical principle of entropy.
Most translations later in the text refer to "Mummu" as Apsu's Vizier. Almost nothing else is found in the cuneiform tablets about this Mummu, except that he is a god of knowledge, wisdom and ability.
I find that to be "far-fetched."
Our school science always has trouble with the fact that in some cultures beings and immaterial life are taken more seriously than we are used to in our culture. For me they are beings and especially cosmic energies of higher dimensions, as well as other beings primarily created by them.
It is understandable that, in our usual but limited three-dimensional way of thinking, we then officially switch to a rather naïve image in order not to reveal "ridiculousness" to colleagues and others, for example. It's then better to hit the same mark.
We know at most half of that fourth dimension... Some seem to think today that the universe has twelve dimensions. I agree with that because an old writing by Dionysius Areopagita called Celestial Hierarchy (ca. 600 AD) reports three times three hierarchies arranged one above the other - i.e. nine - and if we then add "our" three to them, we get 12.
It goes without saying that the nine dimensions superordinate to us can by no means be "empty", but rather have energies and are populated by entities that are invisible to us because our organs of perception consist of three-dimensional substances and therefore can only perceive three-dimensionally.
The "gods" who create themselves, and to some extent also those created by them, will undoubtedly be "at home" in such higher regions.
It will have to do with a rather formless primordial energy that does not yet have a shape but in which something can materialize (also being of higher dimensions).
In the Bible this is described as tohu wa bohu, "void and waste."
Tiamat found her often unbridled behavior uncomfortable, but said nothing about it at first.
Then Apsu called Mummu to come:
Here Mummu behaves like a son, the first son of both.
Some variants of the text interpretations also call him son. So far, all three obviously belong together and that's how it was at the beginning, when the other and rather subordinate gods were not yet created.
This is an original trinity! A topic we will to explore further.
We have it in biblical belief as:
Like Barbelo in Gnostic Christianity, the Holy Spirit is regarded as female (cf. Jesus quote in the apocryphal Gospel of the Hebrews: "My mother, the Holy Spirit." ).
Ea took his crown and robe and "settled on Apsu," presumably meaning that he took his role. Mummu was unable to help Apsu, instead being tied up and held on a leash ("nose-rope").
Even more:
"Killing" created beings on this level should mean bringing them back into the primal energy of creation rather than "destroying."
Such as: Back to the beginning and then start again. "Killing" of the Creator rather means excluding him from ones fellowship. People wanted to be independent of him and no longer have anything to do with him.
Tiamat became very restless and was accused:
She was now called to battle and goaded to avenge the "death" of Apsu, for which she armed herself with a variety of weapons.
However, the gods first created by Apsu and Tiamat were afraid of a fight with Tiamat and retreated, until Marduk declared himself ready to fight. This is followed, in Enuma Elish, by a lengthy narrative of a battle almost reminiscent of a Star Wars story.
In the end, Marduk managed to "kill" Tiamat and he used her "body parts" to create a new world - assuming that it means that he used parts of her primal energy for this.
To describe this fight, the term "chaos fight" has become common.
After the created gods hijacked Apsu's power, a world separated from higher dimensional realms emerged from Tiamat's energies.
Thus was established the rule of the Anunnaki - the autocratic parent-murdering offspring of Apsu and Tiamat, comprising the first-begotten Lahmu and Lahamu, and then from them Anshar and Kishar, and as a sort of side leap Kingu.
The latter is said to be a leader and co-fighter in the battles of the Tiamat. On the next level came the sky god Anu, hence the name Anunnaki for these gods.
An alternative interpretation of this designation as "those who came to earth from heaven" might today be considered inaccurate.
The myth of Adapa shows that Anu himself remained in heaven and did not settle on earth.
Already in the first sentence we encounter an old riddle that is always swept under the carpet, namely the word elohim in the He-brew text! The word is undeniably the plural form of eloha = god and thus means "gods"!
Now how can you turn this around?
The Hebrew text in Genesis 1:1 reads as follows:
...mostly translated as:
Whichever way you look at it, elohim is and remains the plural form of eloah = "God".
Therefore, one has tried to interpret the sentence as,
However, this does not fit grammatically, since the verb bara has the singular form.
Relieved, theologians then sweep the riddle under the carpet and declare elohim to be Pluralis Majestatis. While this grammatical form does occur in Hebrew, I present here another solution to the problem that theology probably purposely avoids addressing.
Thus, the word bereshit can be taken as a somewhat tautological formulation meaning "the original first" or "the very first," i.e., the prime creator.
Then it also fits grammatically, as follows:
The translations by various linguists of Enuma Elish and other cuneiform texts differ markedly, in some cases greatly.
Where Apsu is spoken of in the beginning, he is also occasionally referred to as the "Primal One" or the "First One," which fits directly with this interpretation of bereshit and suggests a connection.
Who then are the "created gods"?
In our context, obviously inhabitants of the cosmic worlds - planets or dimensional realms - and not only inhabitants of the earth, but also extraterrestrial life in general:
As already indicated above, in our hypothetical consideration of the Mesopotamian texts - which assumes that the texts are potentially based on actual facts (represented only allegorically) - the Anunnaki annexed a part of creation.
If we are dealing here with a part of creation, it can be assumed that there will also be other areas.
The people that were then created according to this prototype were intended to be slaves to the gods. Another text, Atrahasis, gives a detailed account of this, as if by some sort of a genetic process.
The Bible mentions only briefly in Genesis 1:26-28:
Accordingly, man and woman are equal!
Humans are supposed to multiply and that is almost an imperative for sexuality, but sexuality in love! This is about human creation in general.
But there is also a second human creation in Genesis 2, where God (here for the first time called JHWH elo-him!) makes himself a gardener in his private garden and gives him a wife.
But now the subject of sexuality emerges in Genesis 3 in a certain way, because an intruder provokes:
Then what is the forbidden tree of knowledge? Its name in Hebrew is ez ha-daat, which means tree of wisdom.
Many associate this with sexuality and believe that the forbidden fruit is extramarital or other sexual debauchery. This comes from a misunderstanding of Genesis 4:1:
...in which the Hebrew word yada, "to know" in this context is erroneously understood as "having inter-course".
In Gnostic Christianity, however, it is said that Eve was twice raped by Yahweh and that she had her firstborn child by him.
The correct translation of Genesis 4:1 would then be:
Only the third child Seth is from Adam.
This may be hard for some readers to digest, but yada certainly does not mean "having intercourse" and there is no ez ha-"yada" or equivalent word in the Bible (perhaps ez ha-zihui from "knowledge" or hagilui from "discovery").
This "deliberate misunderstanding" is already proven by the fact that the fruit makes you wise and opens your eyes (and that it was only then that they realized they were naked).
Also, it doesn't fit with the fact that first Eve and then Adam ate the fruit one after the other. You have sex together and not one after the other... Adam was also forbidden to eat that fruit before Eve was created and sex was not an issue anyway.
It furthermore contradicts Genesis 1:28:
So what was forbidden was not to manifest love physically, but to know too much! You should do your job without asking questions. Those who know too much are more likely to start thinking and may understand hidden intentions that it is better not to know.
A slave bid for the "garden gnomes"...
The solution is simple:
Adam was the first created only in Eden. However, there were also sister marriages.
Since Anu essentially remained in the heavenly heights, Enlil became the god on earth and over its humanity, a god of wind and storm, and in a sense also a god of the mountain, because his house and temple Ekur was high up on a mountain in the Sumerian city of Nippur.
Quite a few stories about Enlil in the Sumerian clay tablets show parallels to Gene-sis, which is why it does not seem unreasonable to compare him with Yahweh.
This could have something to do with the fact that Baal and Yahweh were regarded as one and the same at times and regions in ancient cultures, but since there were different ideas of Baal (especially as one to whom children were sacrificed...), it is probable that in some areas the word was simply used unspecifically in the sense of "god" and that therefore a Baal as a storm god was, in a way, transferred to the wrong one.
There was also a mountain god Baal.
So he wanted to wipe them out with a deluge.
Since this was not enough, he planned a deluge to wipe them out. He forbade his brother Enki to tell this to the people and to warn them. Enki violated the prohibition with a trick.
He described what the ship should be like.
Then Atrahasis spoke to the council of elders:
The ship was built.
Various animals (though apparently "slaughtered") and his family was brought on board. His heart was broken and he was vomiting bile. The weather changed, the storm god Adad began to roar in the clouds, and it rained profusely.
Atrahasis sealed the door with pitch. A huge flood came.
People could not recognize each other in the catastrophe. It got very dark and you couldn't see the sun anymore. After seven (?) days, it was finally possible to go ashore again, and Atrahasis made a sacrifice to the "gods" .
Death was required - and in order to limit population growth, children were to die. Taboos were enacted that celebrated celibacy. A female demon named Pashittu was said to steal children from the womb of the bearer.
A third of the women should not give birth successfully because their birth canal was narrowed. From then on, many women were to lead a monastic life. Pashittu seems related to Lamashtu, who bears a resemblance to Lilith in Hebrew mythology, who kills newborn children.
Then one could have regulated human fertility differently...
Atrahasis is named Ziusudra in a similar but shorter Sumerian Deluge myth. In the famous Epic of Gilgamesh something similar is told, but there he is called Utnapishtim. Herein is also a tale of another malice of Enlil. He had "created" a giant named Humbaba who ruled over a great cedar forest and had to do with wickedness in the land, and Gilgamesh wanted to fight him.
He and his good friend Enkidu also managed to kill the giant and free the people from his evil influence.
Afterwards, Enlil decided that one of the two should die as punishment, although Enlil had intriguingly instigated the fight himself - probably hoping that Gilgamesh would die. Enkidu fell ill and died, and Gilgamesh grieved greatly.
Enki then spoke to him:
The deluge in the Bible
Yahweh has kept this promise so far - at least until this was written (April 2022), because then we were already in a new phase of "smiting" everything that lives... with coercive measures that endanger our health, with the threat of a "Great Reset" and with world events which, according to estimates at the time of writing, could lead to World War 3... (whoever reads it today will probably know more from what has happened in the meantime)...
As described below, there were two highest angels in the beginning:
The latter started to administrate the creation in his sense and that's where the development went wrong. Interventions became necessary. First Satanael was dismissed, who later as Satan wanted to deny God entry in his region.
Then a messenger of Christ, called Yeshua (Jesus), was also sent to mankind to enlighten people and show them the right way, without coercion but with free choice. A growing spiritual movement then arose around him.
However, Satan was still around, and tension developed between the two.
Christianity arose from those who were willing to follow the path outlined out by Yeshua. Satan was hostile to this development and wanted to thwart it if possible, because he wanted to reserve power over people for himself. The new movement continued to grow even though he unknowingly influenced Saul and others to fight it.
He then sought another way and had the idea of misleading Christianity and manipulating Saul - now calling himself Paul - into preaching a modified teaching similar to that of Jesus but in Satan's sense different.
This has misled Christianity.
The Roman Emperor Constantine actually,
Thus arose the Roman sect of the Vatican.
Paul was most likely an epileptic, and in the past epilepsy was thought to be a form of possession. There are not few contradictions between the teachings of Paul and Jesus.
The message given to us by Yeshua (Jesus) was seen as a severe threat by Satan and his strategy became one of splitting, dividing, infiltration and falsifying to create fake belief systems, which actually serve his interests behind a facade of Christianity.
Yeshua once said,
From these early Christians "at the Master's feet" grew, over time and after the nefarious crucifixion, a movement that became called "Gnostic Christianity."
The Greek word gnosis means "knowledge" and the term means that the "Gnostics" knew more than those who had never heard Yeshua and only heard about what he taught through hearsay. Unfortunately, the term "gnostic" is also used by other groups unrelated to Christi-anity, such as those concerned with magic and other "occult knowledge," claiming to know more than others.
As a result, in circles such as the political elite, priesthood and the like, the term "gnostic" has been misused to discredit Gnostic Christians, because a deeper Christian knowledge could threaten positions of power.
Power is better maintained when the people don't know too much...
It seems to me that the true God wished to rescue it through dark times until the time came for its evaluation. That time will be now, but many will resist changing hardened opinions, prefer-ring to dismiss testimonies about Yeshua and events of that time simply because they are not in the Bible.
Furthermore, evaluating these in a complementary way and thus enriching Christian knowledge with new perspectives could probably weaken the power of existing doctrines. One does not want this, because the "business" is running well without changes...
But it's true that sometimes you have to separate the "chaff from the wheat."
From the cited Gnostic text about Barbelo:
In this process the light emerged and condensed in many ways from thought-forms, like waves and patterns and condensations.
They divided and individualized as beings, which were then called angels. Especially a number of archangels and "ordinary" angels associated with them in groups.
In Gnostic texts, Christ is often called Autogenes ("the one who arose from himself").
Here again we have a trinity:
And that, according to academic theology, is not to be considered the same as the biblical one?
And if at least hypothetically the same:
His advice to Apsu was probably rather good-natured, because on that level (as mentioned) it would not be about killing in our human sense, but about a "restart" of the creation.
Can Mummu be understood as Apsu's conscience?
Her somewhat individualized desire manifested in a lower eon as Achamoth (Sophia Achamoth, Hebrew chokhmah). This desire then materialized in such a way that it probably unintentionally materialized out of her (through her thought-form) as an entity, but without her partner's consent.
This entity had a face like a lion and a body like a serpent, and she called him Yaldabaoth (or Yaltabaoth, presumably from Aramaic yalda bahut "son of chaos" - cf. Tiamat above as "chaos"...).
She was startled when she saw the creature's appearance and realized with shame that she had made a mistake.
She enveloped it in a cloud from where it escaped into darker regions, exiled from the primeval light of creation.
In the usual translation of Exodus 20:2-3 and Deuteronomy 5:6-7:
However, the literal translation of these two passages is:
The term elohim has already been discussed above.
What did Yahweh mean by that - that he was "one of the Elohim (i.e. one of created gods) who is now your god, and expect no other"? In any case, he does not contradict that there could be others, and rather speaks in terms of non-competition...
The Bible itself indicates that there could have been other "gods" in the beginning.
Where are the darker regions?
Some texts mention the "outer darkness" (Greek tartaros) as a region far away from the divine light.
But wasn't the original light of El Eljon everywhere?
In the Hebrew Kabbalah there is a remarkable declaration by the great Rabbi Isaac Luria (Yitzhak Luria) that,
In medieval angelology, common angels belong to the lowest of nine heavenly orders (seraphim, cherubim, thrones, authorities, virtues, powers, principalities, archangels, and [ordinary] angels).
One of the archangels was Satanael (Satanel, Satanail), whom many mention as the first archangel. He became self-admiringly narcissistic and had the impossible notion that he could set his throne higher in the clouds above the earth, thus becoming equal to the Creator God and his power.
Because of this arrogance, he was thrown out of the light, along with a third (common interpretation of Rev 12:4) of the angels (presumably those who were still guided by him as archangel).
Ezek 28:15-17 says:
Archangels have specific duties.
What might Satanael's job have been before he was thrown out? Satan means "adversary" in Hebrew and that's what he became after he had to go away, but did he - in a more positive sense - have a special function when he was still in the light? He may have been a sort of administrator who developed his own notion of how things should be administered.
In fact, the Sumerian word shatam means "administrator."
Basic principles for the supreme creator El Eljon are empathy, love and harmony. However, Satanael seemed to see other principles as somehow "effective" for successful administration, namely selfish competition, where "necessary" with strength, violence, and totalitarianism regardless of the individual desires and needs of others.
A rule of the most powerful, overwhelming the weaker (a bit analogous to Darwin's "survival of the fittest").
The hierarchical principle of Christ, on the other hand, is horizontal. Everyone is equal and works in cooperation. It's like in an orchestra: Everyone belongs equally and plays together with a wonderful sound.
If some-one steps out of line, disharmony will ensue and he will have to rearrange.
He first became a sort of "miscarriage" of Sophia Achamoth, transfigured into Yaldabaoth, and he then escaped into darker regions where he settled as Yahweh.
The expulsion may have given him a sense of devaluation, so he wanted to set up his own enclave in the darker realm as revengeful compensation, there to present himself as the only god and with his own "creatures" separate himself from the true Creator God. Thus Satanael became just Satan (without "el" = divine).
He was highly respected and sat at the right of God as his steward, but he became dissatisfied with his situation and rebelled. He persuaded other angels to join him and promised deliverance from tedious liturgical services.
God threw them all out and Satanael went into an empty realm and decided to establish for himself a second heaven, over which he could become a secondary but independent god. The universe became his second heaven . However, I tend to believe in the creation account of the Gnostic Christians (Bogomilism was a later branch) according to which Autogenes was the first created.
Also 31.1 4:
We may compare this to the Sumerian creation story Enuma Elish, according to which a first group of created beings in the light world of the original creation turned their backs on the Creator God and declared him dead.
But one can hardly kill the Creator without ceasing to exist oneself. What actually happened is that they settled in a separate region where they wanted nothing to do with the true Creator, but declared him "dead" - deicide - to live as if he didn't exist.
Given the extremely ferocious thirst for blood depicted in the pages of the Old Testament that fanatical Bible-lovers might prefer not to read, the hypothesis would be warranted to regard evil as a bring-over from Satan/Enlil/Yaldabaoth to the murky region in which we have to live and where he settled as Yahweh...
An alternative name is Jehovah. Both names are transliterations from the "Tetragrammaton" יהוה. Because originally the Hebrew texts omitted the vowels - probably because one should not pronounce the name - different vowels have been tried.
Yahweh is Gesenius' suggestion. Jehowah is another attempt, with vowels of "Adonai" = "Lord" used to avoid pronouncing the "four letters."
In his arrogance he boasted,
Therefore he was called Samael, the blind god, because he did not want to see the truth. He was also called Saklas, the fool.
Solid matter was formed in his region. On this plateau in the stairway of creation we now encounter the abominable character of Yahweh. He has Moses lead the Hebrews to the "Promised Land."
Then, after wandering through Sinai for many years, they came to that land which, to their disappointment, was not free (as mentioned above). There people lived in cities.
Therefore Yahweh commanded that they should all be put to death without sparing a child, woman or old man, so that they could live in,
A veritable holocaust then began, in which one city after another was attacked and the murderous gang left "no one alive", as vividly described in the bloody pages of Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges and other books of the Bible.
After this complete genocide, they had stolen the land from its original inhabitants to have it for themselves. Is this what a loving and peaceful God wants, like the one Jesus calls "Father"?
Of course not!
An example:
In Numbers 31:14-18 we read:
Why should all these girls be allowed to live? Undoubtedly for sexual "services"...
Hosea 13:16:
In the Psalms we read:
These are just examples of monstrosities in the Bible.
There are such a large number of passages of this nature that one could write a long book on them alone. The extraordinarily learned German scholar Karlheinz Deschner wrote about it in his book Kriminalgeschichte des Christentums (Christianity's Criminal History), Volume 1.
A book that is particularly worth reading is Jehovah Unmasked! by Nathaniel Merritt.
Isn't it obvious that Yahweh, who ruled over the people in one country and now wants to rule the whole earth - also through churches that have accepted him as their "god" - disqualifies himself in this way?
When he says,
...does that mean there are no others, or is it a non-competition clause: there are other gods, but I shall be your only god and you shouldn't have anything to do with the others?
This has been clarified by research into the history of religions and by excavation findings, which revealed many inscriptions.
Even though Enlil/Yahweh was connected to these sources, he wanted this truth to re-main hidden so that he himself could stand as an original god. This may be a reason why the He-brews in his service should eradicate the people in the land to which they were led.
In the Gospel of Truth (a Gnostic text ), which calls Yahweh an error (because his "birth" as Yaldabaoth was held in error), it says:
See websites like "Cruelty and Violence in the Bible" and "Proof that Yahweh is Satan." How can it be that he's so addicted to blood? Let's look at the flow of life energy in creation!
It is evident that,
The quickening light is the light of the 'true' creator and even Yahweh depends on as it well for his existence.
However, he wants to separate himself completely from that light and has tried in vain with some kind of lower-dimensional Luciferian light. Therefore, he feeds on us and other biological life forms in creation through the blood.
The light of life flows invisible to us in our blood and it is for this reason that the Bible prescribes slaughter in the kosher way (shehchitah) (compare Deuteronomy 12:21 "as I have commanded thee" with no direct description of "how").
When an animal is slaughtered, its throat shall be cut so that the blood runs out. Beings like Yahweh and his archons feed on the (for us) invisible life energy in the blood. The blood is for the "gods" and the flesh for the people.
There is a scene in the Epic of Gilgamesh that as an image says more than the mere words:
The source of this life-giving light is the sun (cf. ).
Plants feed on sunlight and combine it with carbon dioxide and substances from the soil on which they grow. People and animals feed on plants and their fruits and thus get life energy. Many people also feed on animals that have eaten plants in order to indirectly obtain life energy.
Certain entities that do not belong to the three dimensions feed on humans analogously... However, Yahweh wants to break this last chain in feeding and make himself completely independent of his Creator.
Then what will happen?
Then he will no longer need a biological sys-tem and can eliminate it in all forms (thus abdicating humanity for its "service"...). The earth will then be a dead planet on which "life" is simulated technologically, functionally powered by nuclear plants and the like (for repair, conversion and further development of the own system with subsystems).
And yet, after thousands or even a million years, he will see that such sources of energy will inevitably be exhausted... No such system can function forever! Stone, metals and solid matter are also, in a way, nothing else but light - but solidified light.
His "Great Reset" would reduce humans to robotized slaves except for a small "elite" of those in power.
How so, then?
There is planned to be a connection with the AI using chips in the brain, 5G and injected graphene oxide in the body.
With that, the command "Be happy" reaches the brain, however baseless, simulating a feeling that occa-sionally only the elite will know in its real form...
Here one comes to think of Isaiah 14:13-14:
That led to a justifiable ejection then and will also do so today. Harari's book Sapiens has been commented on as "a scientifically weak and ethically uninspiring" vision.
There has already been a first "reset", namely the deluge!
This time it will be in an end time where Satan will face his Waterloo along with his "elite". Then, finally, 'Christ' can come 'again'...
"Reset" and "New World Order" then collapse like a house of cards.
The 20th century Holocaust is just one example and the Canaanite holocaust mentioned above is another. This is reflected in today's Satanism, which is currently spreading as a social psychopathology, no doubt inspired by Archontic and similar entities.
There are people belonging to a satanic order who perform horrible rituals that often involve killing for sacrifice.
In the most disgusting rituals, a child is abused, killed and even eaten! What is the intent of such a cannibalistic ritual? A fairly recent discovery is a substance called adrenochrome, a hormone thought to be a secret immortality serum (which I don't believe is true, but it may increase strength and consciousness, and certainly increases selfishness to extreme intoxication).
It is produced from adrenaline in the body under extreme conditions of fear, horror and pain, and that is the goal of treating the victim accordingly. Then that hormone can be consumed...
I've seen even more disgusting atrocities on the internet... BUT IT IS APPARENTLY A REALITY OF THE ULTIMATE EVIL!!!
Can this be related to anything other than to SATAN? Closing our eyes and trying to convince ourselves it's not true doesn't help. It's still there...
We can take a stand against Satanism, and if Yahweh is (or is associated with) Satan, also against him.
Then what is the alternative? CHRIST! Is there another? However, not the false Christ of the Church (with its fake Jesus), but the true Christ who sent us the true Jesus as a messenger, who was then killed by Yahweh so that he could replace true Christianity with a counterfeit one.
And where do we find the true Christ? In ourselves, but also in so-called Gnostic Christianity, which has its roots in the inner circle around the living Jesus.
The knowledge of this was miraculously hidden to be found in modern times (in Nag Hammadi). It is accessible again today. It appears that by divine will this knowledge was secretly "tunneled" through difficult times when it would otherwise have been lost, so that humanity now has it again in looming end times.
There is as much room in it for evil as for good. Christ was created good (as the love of the Prime Creator). Therefore, atheism does not appear as a suitable alternative. Or a polytheistic religion like Hinduism or the Norse Ásatrú? These appear to be comparatively more peaceful. Or Islam?
Isn't there just as much violence and bloodshed there as in Yahwism?
Apsu and Tiamat were "killed" and with that a connection to higher dimensions was broken. As mentioned, these two are certainly not dead but still there, but only in higher dimensions and the "gods" in our three (or three and a half) dimensions didn't want to deal with them because they didn't want to be ruled over and patronized.
They thought they could do better themselves. The price was losing sight of other dimensions. In the biblical story, Satan (Enlil) was thrown out, but it seems more likely that he wanted it that way, in order to be the highest himself in a closed realm.
As a compromise, however, he had to allow his world to continue to be nourished by divine light, which is then done through the sun. Without that, his world couldn't exist this far. Now he also wants to break away from that and replace biological life with a machine world. He thinks he is then finally "free" from the true divine.
Machines do not need the light of life because they actually are already dead.
This is could be achieved by a secret and forced personality change through reprogramming via genetic manipulation. This is the secret goal of vaccine madness. Protection against supposed viruses is only a pretense and a lie, because it is incomplete and not permanent.
In this sense, very actual but destructive efforts such as the New World Order and "Great Reset" - and also the demonization of an open Christianity, in connection with sectarianism ("blinkered Christians") and ecclesiastical claims to power in various forms - are unfortunately having an effect today.
Even the Pope advocates,
The intention is obvious:
They are now considered by many to be extraterrestrials, possibly reptilian in nature and said to be from a planet called Nibiru.
Nibiru is thought to be the 12th Planet in our solar system, but its existence is still hypothetical. It is said to have a strong gravity that affects our earth. However, it has not yet been seen with certainty.
"Black holes" may also be able to exert strong gravitations.
It came clearly to me:
What was that? How could that be possible?
It occurred to me that while time travel is a subject for science fiction, quite a few websites, texts, and books today discuss the possibility that we could go both backwards and forwards in time. There are scientific models that explain how this might be possible. There are reports of alleged time travelers claiming to have come to us from the future (or were gone there and back).
For example John Titor and Paul Dienach.
A fantastic idea:
Although the energy flows forward, it could also flow back in a reversal loop at the end, back to the beginning of the timeline in order to "recharge" it there again. In this way, the timeline could be preserved instead of going into emptiness somewhere. Evil could feed and sustain itself.
Not a pretty world view... but would that be possible?
A "wet dream" of selfishly mischievous ones.
If that is possible, the big question is how to get out of it! According to Indian philosophy, the rotation pauses at certain periods, pralaya, in which higher world structures remain but lower ones "sleep", after which it continues again - with tendencies that the world tends to get worse each time.
At some point, however, the mahapralaya will come, the Great Pralaya, in which also the upper structures will disintegrate. After that, creation begins all over again .
Let's hope this is all just a partly pathological fantasy. However, it is also repeatedly claimed that even intergalactic wars would take place in the universe, whereby an entire planet and its population might be destroyed without inhibitions.
Then evil can take uncanny proportions. If this is even partially true, one gets the impression that the whole universe is firmly anchored in Satanism, and one wonders where there are any good and peaceful civilizations left.
Of course there will be, otherwise in the end only the mahapralaya could become urgently necessary.
Whoever reads about it will make his or her personal opinion. I'd rather refrain from making a judgment.
Just one remark:
It is very likely that there will also be civilizations that for a long time have been able to do something, which we terrestrials do not yet even suspect:
However, that might also be possible, for example when the journey takes place simultaneously in both space and time, combining both. A journey that would otherwise take a thousand years runs very quickly if you at the same time go back a thousand years.
Still more:
Already in the Book of Revelation in the Bible there are statements about the future that turn out to be true today. In the German-speaking countries, Irlmaier and Mühlhiasl are particularly well known and today their predictions in politics and world affairs are being fulfilled, but there are many others.
The longer back in time the prediction was given, the more astonishing it is that many of them actually come true, because humanity should have developed in the meantime!
These include predictions about the world wars. After the madness of WWI and WWII, humanity should have matured enough to not repeat such idiocy again.
And yet there is still talk of a 3rd World War...
One could expect something similar with some other world events. But no, it still goes on incorrigibly and apparently even planned in advance by the untouchables.
The American high mason Albert Pike seems to have been involved in planning all world wars as early as in the 19th century.
A friend told me something plausible about this:
However, your personal karma affects whether you will be there or not.
What was before that? Or was there no Before?
The well-known big bang theory assumes that everything started when something suddenly expanded explosively. It is, of course, extremely difficult to imagine that there was nothing before that. But if there was an explosion, there must there have been something that exploded (or at least expanded)?
So there must have been something there after all.
Then it was "a Nothing"! The question then becomes different: what was this "Nothing." Something that does not exist in the known universe. Another universe unknown to us three-dimensional ones.
So not "a Nothing" after all, but something unknown to us. If we assume the 12-dimensional world view (leaning on Dionysios Areopagita - see above), this "to-us-unknown" simply did not exist in our three-dimensional realm - but only in higher dimensions.
When we broke away from it through the "deicides," these dimensions no longer existed for us.
It then became a relative "Nothing", which could, in a way, expand from the point of fracture, as if something were streaming in there. This (to us) "Nothing" will not be empty, but an entirely different world. A living world with "higher" beings that we can hardly imagine.
A world with the most divine of all gods, higher than Jahweh&Co.
He also published an equally dissenting Bible criticism, Die Große Täuschung (The Great Deception), which questioned the accuracy of the Bible's language and translation far more than its content itself. His command of the Hebrew language was so good that he even wrote a comprehensive correction of the Bible texts.
As a justified reason for this, in my opinion, he stated that when copying older text versions of the Hebrew Bible, one could in some cases mix up similar letters or otherwise misread them, after which no correction was done in the copy. Tradition forbade changing this because it was believed that even a mistake in writing was willed by God...
This could result in some errors being maintained in future versions!
A second enlarged edition
Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament (The Cuneiform
Inscriptions and the Old Testament) was probably judged to be "too"
critical of the Bible and perhaps therefore was published in a
"toned down" and altered third edition, revised by two other
(co-)authors.
|
