Terra Papers - I was there

if you've seen that video called zeitgeist, you might be aware of the attempt to prove jesus was a fiction based on the sun gods of egypt.
how they make this connection in one of their examples is "son of god" equals "sun god".

the silly thing is, sun and son in egyptian were spelled totally different and the hieroglyphs for them were different as well. also totally different in latin and greek. etc. furthermore, there were lots of "sons of gods," so it's not like the idea was a historical anomalie. suddenly it's as if we are expected to believe gilgamesh (2/3rds god, makes him a son of god) was real but jesus wasn't, because he's called a son of god and all sons of God were just sun gods from egypt (lol). honestly, time to look straight in the mirror and ask yourself.... do i really want the truth or am i more interested in trashing ancient history? i realize it can be a scary place, the ancient texts, but those were the lives of our ancestors! that's the crap they had to go through. those were the things they saw.

one guy sent me a text about how there was an elite unit of space gods that had been around since the beginning and the name he gave for them was an acronym for a modern word "god", that had nothing to do with the word for god in the timeframe he's referring to. i was like uhhh, "god" is a modern word that hadn't even been created during the time you're referring to. i never heard from him again. i dunno what gets into people to come up with these ideas that have no foundation in anything at all. no artifacts or texts, nothing behind it, simply because they say so.

sitchin's book, the Lost Books of Enki, is a fiction. he even says, this is a fiction, a dramatization of what he thinks might have happened. it's not written in the same serious voice as the Earth Chronicles. people are actually quoting from it now as if it were documented fact. it's amazing to me really, that folks are so resistant to the idea that the real ancient texts might have any validity, they tossed out the baby with the bath water and carted in a doll and an empty tub to replace it. nearly 5000 years of history have been just wiped out as having any validity, as anything other than a bedtime story or a metaphor for the night sky.

and new stories, made up from just whatever, are replacing it with alarming frequency.

don't get me wrong, i can recognize sitchin's onto something. it's possible to see where he's going with it, and why he would arrive at the places he does in some cases (although not all, there's some real doozies in there). but to assume it's all true simply because he says so, is some kind of weird phenomena. if i didn't know better, i'd swear it was an attempt to completely re-write the ancient past so we will be totally unprepared for or unable to differentiate or even understand what is happening to us when the crap hits the fan.





[edit on 27-6-2008 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
if you've seen that video called zeitgeist, you might be aware of the attempt to prove jesus was a fiction based on the sun gods of egypt.
how they make this connection in one of their examples is "son of god" equals "sun god".

I agree that Jesus was most likely a real human. In fact, as the Papers say, he was. [shrug]

Because I have read Robert's writing, and transcripts of his talks, I am convinced that HE believes what he says. And when I read the Papers, the explanations of things rang so true to me that I could not dismiss them.

Prior to reading them, I might add, I was an "Alien Agnostic." I though there might be aliens (but had no clue in what capacity), but still had a paradigm of us looking and finding nothing as the set in which I viewed things.

The Papers changed that for me fully.

And if the Papers are correct, EA was who many pointed to as the culprit of "bad" things to discredit the teachings he offered. And this started about the time of the Sumerian civilization...

In reading what you wrote, I am unclear whether you are suggesting that I am casting away the historical documents, or whether it is people in general.

Let me say that it is possible your interpretations of many things (like the abyss stuff and star gates) may be highly accurate. The only issue *I* have is the portrayal of EA as a "body snatcher" and cloner who is evil and in charge now.

From what I can see, a great deal (if not all) of the evidence you present for this specific evaluation is biblical. And I would say that the Bible, if the Papers are correct, is the LAST place to look for valid descriptions of EA.

For I am sure the lizards saw how good at keeping their Beasts in line the monotheistic, "all in service for reward after death," thing was. And given that they had factions (Judaic, Christian, Islamic), like Machiavelli suggests, pitting one against the other is an awesome tool for control.

And lo, we are fighting the "rag-heads..."

[sigh]

It all makes sense.

Where are the Canyon lands ?Utah?
What did you see there?

I ask this on page 10. No hurry though.

Roper

I have Native American relatives and my great grandmother was a full blooded Native.

I've heard little of these papers but I am very interested in them and your story. I've often heard there are Native tales of "star people". Some of the older Native's in my family, all deceased now, supposedly talk of these people and told stories as well. Only they were called "star holders" far as I've gathered. I have no idea why, but it has made me increasingly curious towards the subject. I do not think they ever came into contact with "star holders" only told tales of them passed down from generation to generation, as is the custom with most tribal cultures.

it would all make sense if it weren't for the fact that people have fought each over for any number of reasons, even reasons unrelated to religion or monotheism. pol pot wiped out 1.7 million people, he was a communist. native american tribes, fought with each other over land and so forth, they weren't judaic or islamic or christian or necessarily monotheistic. the vikings felt to die in battle was the only way to go. you couldn't even get to heaven in their religion unless you died valiantly in battle. fact is, there's not a group of living entities on this planet, of any description (be it animal, vegetable, bacterial, viral, hybrid or human), in the history of the planet, that hasn't killed /murdered /slaughtered for whatever reasons -- mostly related to survival, but sometimes related to the perception of survival.

i know where you are going with this and believe me, i've pondered all of it at great length. let's look at the history of the ancient texts, starting with the bible since it's the most controversial and well known at the moment.

my personal belief is that the english translation of the bible is a mess. this is due primarily to the fact that english does not lend itself as eloquently to the way the hebrews thought, as well their own language did.

other examples are simply the case of decisions that were more about their understanding at the time of translation, than what the original words meant. so i'm always careful to verify the original languages for the words and back track it against the understanding of the scholars at the time (something atheists should really do when considering the ancient texts).

for example, there's a verse that says God is going to destroy the images of the egyptians. this was way back in the first 5 books of the bible, known as the pentateuch. i checked each word for its original , and lo and behold, "images" was actually "mastabas." why they translated it to mean "images" is beyond me, but they did.

another example is the word "man":

in the original languages of the time, the words "adam" and "enosh." were both translated into english as simply "man." this was a sticky point and another odd decision they made when translating the text into english.
so alot of what we perceive as less than revealing is often just our inability to really research what the original words were in the first place.

the old testament is especially scary. christian women in particular, do not like it, for the more obvious reason that jehovah is a whole lot scarier and sounds a heckuvalot meaner than jesus. in fact, there's almost no comparison unless you understand what it is you are reading and seeing -- something most people, not even christians, are going to do because it takes ALOT of time and requires reading those scarier confusing jehovah moments. thus most have no idea what the old testament says beyond the more popular prophetical texts (ezekiel and daniel), the sunday school stories and the opening chapters of genesis.

next, i would like to piont you to the fact that even though the holy roman church compiled what books would be in the bible, they clearly did not follow most of the texts and in fact, hid them. this was mostly because they were painstakingly copied down by hand over many years.

the pope was the living prophet and the words of the bible were sorta tucked away and only the purview of the priests. even then, the priests did not follow the text if the popes didn't okay them to follow them. as a result, i see no reason to suggest the popes tinkered with the text -- they didn't have to. they outlawed them from being read or translated by anyone but priests. that's how they handled it. no one even knew what the texts said. cause most couldn't read to begin with. also, they were only written in latin and greek for a very long time, therefore, even ones that could read, couldn't read the languages they were written in. in short, the popes didn't have to change the texts .. they just tucked them away and ignored them for the most part.

now i suppose an argument could be made that they changed the texts so the priests would follow their version but they didn't have to. they were the final say on any subject relating to god or gods anyway. they had absolute authority and it was their priests and scholars that eventually decided to trash most of ancient history in a bid to prove the bible was the most accurate document. problem was, when they did that, the bible no longer had any verification in other ancient texts and so it got pitched in the trash can too.

then those scholars, who were accustomed to people believing whatever they said, told everybody that all the ancient texts were myths including the bible. thus began the enlightenment. bet you didn't know that one of the reasons it's believed the ancient world is a big myth factory is because of a bunch of catholic scholars and priests who suddenly turned atheist when they had boxed themselves into a corner.



[edit on 27-6-2008 by undo]

and here is where the ancient greek texts come in. a scholar of the time, who was a favorite of german higher criticism, wrote a book on the subject of the ancient greeks in which he argued the case that the ancient greeks couldn't write during the time their histories and epics were said to have been written. so the catholic professors charged into their class rooms in the universities in germany with this new data and had their students write similar works on the subject of faulty greek texts. troy never existed, they proclaimed.

with that outta the way, they took aim at the next batch of ancient texts, which naturally sprang leaks because of their connections to the greek texts, and so fell the ancient world, one civ at a time. down went the hindu texts, the pseudopigraphical texts of the hebrews, the chinese, babylonian, japanese, assyrian texts, the talmud, the norse texts, the egyptian texts (what few there were at the time) and finally the bible. oh did i mention, archaeology hadn't even been created yet, so they were making all these decisions on hardly nothing at all?

40 years, and many thousands of theses and papers, books and scholarly documents later, it was discovered the ancient greeks could write, but it was 40 years too late to save ancient history.



[edit on 27-6-2008 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
and here is where the ancient greek texts come in. a scholar of the time, who was a favorite of german higher criticism, wrote a book on the subject of the ancient greeks in which he argued the case that the ancient greeks couldn't write during the time their histories and epics were said to have been written. so the catholic professors charged into their class rooms in the universities in germany with this new data and had their students write similar works on the subject of faulty greek texts. troy never existed, they proclaimed.

What if... What if this scholar was teamed up with a faction that wanted to discredit historical documents? Or even was one of the faction, lizard-hearted?

I don't know this is true, but I don't know it is false, either.

Your take... What if?

EDIT to ask... And what have you got on EA outside of biblical texts?

[edit on 6/27/2008 by Amaterasu]

Originally posted by Amaterasu


What if... What if this scholar was teamed up with a faction that wanted to discredit historical documents? Or even was one of the faction, lizard-hearted?

I don't know this is true, but I don't know it is false, either.

Your take... What if?

EDIT to ask... And what have you got on EA outside of biblical texts?

My point exactly. Everything you were told is false about the ancient world has turned to be true instead, proven by archaeology, but they don't tell you that. It's there, you can read it for yourself and even see it for yourself, but you're still being taught it never really happened.

The only thing we can't prove is the existence of the "supernatural" or "hypernatural" beings in the texts, which some are saying now, may be the extra-terrestrials. If that turns out to be true, we will have proven either from personal experience, ET disclosure, or archaeological evidence that ancient history is not a lie.

Yes, there are metaphors. Yes, there are mistakes in translation. Yes, there examples where the information was massaged or dramatized, but overall, the ancient texts are historical documents.

Yes, there are Ea texts that are not biblical and I have read them. There's one entitled ENKI AND THE WORLD ORDER. there's another called ENKI'S JOURNEY TO NIBRU. there's another called ENKI AND NINMAH. And quite a few more, where he either features prominently or is a secondary character.

Overall, those texts were written by HIS priests. Have you ever read Inana's Descent to the Underworld? Enki is the good guy in it. Enlil is not. Ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh? Enki good guy, Enlil bad guy. This goes on and on, because Enki's priests were the mainstream historians. Enlil's black headed people and the rest of the slaves, never got a chance to describe their experiences until nearly Babylon. They maintained the data as an oral history instead.

Enki's not the abused figure some claim he is. Not till the slaves have their say, does Enki start getting a bad rap. He told Adapa not to take the food and water of life. He warned the nephilim king of the impending flood, by being sneaky. At the time the attribute of craftiness wasn't frowned upon so they were not insulting him when they called him the tricky god or the crafty god. It was a mark of wisdom and intelligence that he seemed to find a way around his problems or the problems of the nephilim and their slaves.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
Yes, there are Ea texts that are not biblical and I have read them. There's one entitled ENKI AND THE WORLD ORDER. there's another called ENKI'S JOURNEY TO NIBRU. there's another called ENKI AND NINMAH. And quite a few more, where he either features prominently or is a secondary character.

Overall, those texts were written by HIS priests. Have you ever read Inana's Descent to the Underworld? Enki is the good guy in it. Enlil is not. Ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh? Enki good guy, Enlil bad guy. This goes on and on, because Enki's priests were the mainstream historians. Enlil's black headed people and the rest of the slaves, never got a chance to describe their experiences until nearly Babylon. They maintained the data as an oral history instead.

Enki's not the abused figure some claim he is. Not till the slaves have their say, does Enki start getting a bad rap. He told Adapa not to take the food and water of life. He warned the nephilim king of the impending flood, by being sneaky. At the time the attribute of craftiness wasn't frowned upon so they were not insulting him when they called him the tricky god or the crafty god. It was a mark of wisdom and intelligence that he seemed to find a way around his problems or the problems of the nephilim and their slaves.

Are these available on the web...? I have read some of Gilgamesh, but not the others. According to the Papers, ADAPA is not one man but the name of the group of Beasts that were originally designed and given to AN-EN (Enlil).

You say "Enlil's black headed people and the rest of the slaves, never got a chance to describe their experiences until nearly Babylon." What texts are there from that time...?

enki texts (check the 1.1.1 range, several enki texts there)
www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk...

enlil texts of that time are the torah (pentateuch), first five books of the bible.




[edit on 27-6-2008 by undo]

btw, if you want to hear something amazing, check out this
sound file of the sounds of jupiter. it's a big mp3 file, over 8 megabytes in size but worth it. what they did was record the various electromagnetic sounds of jupiter and then sped it up. not quite like anything you've heard before i imagine. i play it in my winamp player
thestargates.com...

Originally posted by undo
enki texts (check the 1.1.1 range, several enki texts there)
www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk...

enlil texts of that time are the torah (pentateuch), first five books of the bible.

So... You're saying that EA was the good guy until the Bible.

And the Bible is suspect.

So... Why again do you conclude that EA is the bad guy...?

(Thanks greatly for the link! I have some readin' to do!)

reply to post by Amaterasu


Because everything is "suspect", but nothing should be thrown away.
Enki's name means LORD EARTH. This planet belongs to him. What do you see going on around you? The hebrew texts claim this all happened before the flood. And it crescendoed with the near annihilation of all humans by nephilim, war, pollution, starvation and the mangling of the DNA of code of everything on the planet. Who do you suppose is in control, if not LORD EARTH?

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Amaterasu

 

Because everything is "suspect", but nothing should be thrown away.
Enki's name means LORD EARTH. This planet belongs to him. What do you see going on around you? The hebrew texts claim this all happened before the flood. And it crescendoed with the near annihilation of all humans by nephilim, war, pollution, starvation and the mangling of the DNA of code of everything on the planet. Who do you suppose is in control, if not LORD EARTH?

I started reading the links you gave, and am surprised at how they mesh with the Papers... Granted, these must have been written by people who did not understand the technological and extraterrestrial nature of Enki and Enlil. but they support the Papers.

And the Papers to me, at least, are the least suspect, in that I believe the info WAS given to Robert's grandfather by an ET, and that it is only two "generations" removed from the source. And if the Papers are correct, "EN-KI" means “Lord of the world in the likeness of ASA-RRR,” and is a differentiation from "Enlil, which means “Lord of Command” or “Lord of the Word,” and also meant Lord of the "sky," or "heavens."

According to the Papers, EA was given command originally of the genesis work and administration ground-side, and AN-EN (Enlil) was given command of the space environment. Administration was removed from Enki and also given to Enlil. Enki's choice to use his own DNA to create us was the eventual result as a revenge for that decision.

But then Marduk took over in a coup, using the lizard hybrids and renegade SSS-T reptilians. He established himself as RRA (Ra) and tampered with records and minds. At this time, Enlil returned to the kingdom of his father (ASA-RRR) and Enki fled to the Pleiades. Neither were in control again. But discovering the power over the Beasts of monotheism, Marduk (Ra) began making the teachings of Ea, which were still available through his teachers, the EA-SU, into the teachings of "Satan," and the Old Testament was born, reviling those teachings and admonishing the Beasts to obey and serve the one god.

But the lizard hybrids (HEN-T) and the renegade SSS-T lizards took over and Marduk/Ra fled.

So who do *I* think is responsible for the mess the humans on this planet are?

The lizard-hearted. THEY are the ones now in control. THEY are the ones planning to cut our numbers to less than five hundred million.

They kept the monotheism established by Ra, helping to write the Old Testament. Because it was so good a paradigm for the Beasts to keep them in fear, obedience and service.

So I do not believe that just because Enki had a title, it means he is still in any kind of control today.

i'm still reading the terra papers, so i'll get back to you on your comments and add a few more of my own.

reply to post by undo


Ah. Well then. We will address things when you have finished. [smile]

Originally posted by Roper
reply to post by kshaund

 

Where are the Canyon lands ?Utah?
What did you see there?


Roper

Hi Roper - I hope this reply finds its way to you especially after all your patience ;-)

The canyonlands are in Utah but they are huge - I recall some of the places we went to - Elephant Wash, Needles, but I cannot be more specific because I don't recall. What I remember seeing is another story - many falcons carved into the tops of stones, one stone had a dog face (I have a photograph of it) carved into, another place there was an ape. And interestingly, in certain places where there should have been remnants of fallen rock (like a chunk in terms of tonnage) were simply not there, as in removed or vaporized. There was on long wall with what's called the alleuvial fan (not sure on spelling) and in the middle there was a piece (like city blocks long) that was 'not there' nor were it's 'alleuvial' base as was everywhere else. Petroglyphs showing being with six fingers, etc. There was a LOT to see if you shifted your perspective. Major parts of the canyonlands were being restricted and since my last visit there I understand some areas (major carvings) have been restricted altogether now. Hope this helps - Regards, KShaund

Originally posted by undo
Overall, those texts were written by HIS priests. Have you ever read Inana's Descent to the Underworld? Enki is the good guy in it. Enlil is not. Ever read the Epic of Gilgamesh? Enki good guy, Enlil bad guy. This goes on and on, because Enki's priests were the mainstream historians. Enlil's black headed people and the rest of the slaves, never got a chance to describe their experiences until nearly Babylon. They maintained the data as an oral history instead.

Enki's not the abused figure some claim he is. Not till the slaves have their say, does Enki start getting a bad rap. He told Adapa not to take the food and water of life. He warned the nephilim king of the impending flood, by being sneaky. At the time the attribute of craftiness wasn't frowned upon so they were not insulting him when they called him the tricky god or the crafty god. It was a mark of wisdom and intelligence that he seemed to find a way around his problems or the problems of the nephilim and their slaves.

[edit on 27-6-2008 by undo]

Hi Undo - I wish to 'suggest' there might be some alternatives here in interpretations... What is not in the Terra Papers but is in much more detail in his workshop, Robert Morning Sky explains that the lizards (Shet-I) are the ones in charge at this time after yet another historical coup, not Ea, not Ra, that they have usurped everything which is another confounding explanation for this entire global mess we're in. Ea's 'beasts' were not told by Ea to not do anything - they were 'taught' by Ea to become independent (not remain slaves) therefore Ea became the fallen one for going against a billions of years of order. It was Ea's beasts, once freed, who were left here to keep the records so it would make sense Ea was favored in the writings. Enlil was the Lord of Command, Lord of the Word, the administrator on Earth - Enki was the Lord of Creation, the genetic scientist. These two became one 'god' in the bible. That we (humans) have passion, sex for pleasure, spontaneity makes us 'not' good slaves - therefore.... here we are.... waiting for the return of the 'gods' to see what their judgment deems.

Quote from RMS Workshop: "Ea, creator, also known as Ba-El or Lord, he fled to Ba-L Ea-Tesh, the sacred place of Enki, the sacred place of Ea. Baaleatesh, Pleiades, the term Pleiades comes from Ba-L Ea Tesh, the sacred gathering place of Prince Ea where he went and he said, “You know what? I’ve developed this star system and I got one rule. No rules. You show up here if you want but you contribute. I am not going to take care of you. I am not going to tell you what to do. I am not going to provide you with food. There’s no social security. You make your own job, your own career, you make your own food. You contribute or you’re out. I don’t want to have to take care of you.” It is a place for renegades who are fed up with the system and don’t want to be controlled or taken care of but who want their own destiny and will take care of their own butts."

I so appreciate the incredible depths of your research - I personally cannot 'get' through ancient texts as they are presented (which they count on) and would rather study the originals rather than trust translations as you've also remarked about. Mostly I go with what has made the most sense, and unfortunately Robert's work did all too well, especially when you read his other material, which I hope will be available soon! Regards - KShaund

reply to post by Amaterasu


EN was the sumerian word for Lord.
KI was the sumerian word for Earth.
LIL was the sumerian word for AIR
ANU was the sumerian word for HEAVEN.
ANUNNA was the sumerian word for the gods from HEAVEN.
ANUNNAKI was the sumerian word for the matings (of the gods) of HEAVEN with (the daughters of men on) EARTH

Anu+Ki, the word NEPHILIM derives from this.

One of the problems I see with your position is the disconnects that have to be made for the entire picture to be an integrated whole. For example, you connect with the idea that the texts have been tampered with to the detriment of EA, then disconnect where it refers kindly to EA (by disconnect I mean you put your suspicions on a temporary hold when the text is kind to him), then connect again, where it doesn't refer kindly to him or rather where the perception is that it doesn't refer kindly to him. The overall result is you're willing to allow the text some leeway provided it's in the favor of EA, but no leeway when it is not.

In addition, you feel as if other texts not related to the sumerian texts or the Terra Papers, have been so highly tampered with they are no longer reliable and are full of lies, but you accept with some margin of error, the mainstream versions of the ancient past, not only written by Enki's priests but translated by the same system you claim is corrupt beyond measure (our modern institutions) as regards translations.

The dichotomy of it is confusing and so selective, that it doesn't even notice it has went against its own paradigm to prove any points that might discredit even a bit.

(continued in a bit)

There's a certain train of thought that transpires in our minds when trying to determine what is and isn't true. I believe the first step we look for is consistency in action. For example:

God Whatcha-ma-callit is depicted as being cruel and heartless in an ancient tome. The text has clearly been translated from an ancient language that loses some umph in the translation. Part of the loss is due to lack of comprehensive data regarding the setting of the events. Add to this, the complexities of local interpretation by the historians of the time in which the events are happening. Clearly something happened, but are the references accurate? We have no way of knowing because we weren't there.

So the next logical step is comparative analysis. This is where most have the hardest time deciphering the past. If you aren't willing to give all the ancient texts an equal chance to tell the story, you're missing, in my estimation, alot more than you know. Also, without the benefit of this analysis, you may end up being lead to believe something is or isn't true, on nothing more than pretense and surface noise.

Next is the problem of interpreting the "gods" or their "teachings" based on the behavior of their followers. There's a HUGE disconnect here. This is like saying the guy who built CHOMP-ALOT HIGH SCHOOL and the guys who teach classes about behaving yourself in CHOMP-ALOT HIGH SCHOOL, are responsible for the actions of the students who decided to stick bubble gum under their desks or dip piggy tails in the ink well or mow down their fellow students with machine guns. That's a big disconnect.

(continued in a bit)