Terra Papers - I was there

Originally posted by undo
that's relying on the old concept that knowledge in the biblical sense was sexual congress. i don't think it was sex. i think it was genetic modification.. back to the meat bag materializer.

Well, that was the the author's interpretation--not necessarily mine. It might well have to do with becoming entranced with the material world of the senses. It also lends credence to your idea that this is connected with the forces of civilization.

i should mention, i've seen examples of this in modern people as well. my husband doesn't have a photographic memory, but one day while contemplating the meaning of the virgin birth, he received a vision of sorts. he said, the words on the page regarding the birth of christ, lifted off the page, floated in the air and went...smack..into his head. at this point, he began to understand thousands of years of data regarding this one event, as if he were downloading an akashic type of library on that single topic and everything related to it. after that experience, he could remember all kinds of details about both old and new testaments. i can ask him about all kinds of info from the bible and he just knows it... in detail......it's oddly cool!

I shouldn't post this, but I have experienced something like that. Except mine involved the identification of Christ with the Ram of Mendes (Osiris) while blood poured down the pages.

So ... diff'rent strokes, I guess.

Originally posted by undo
reconpilot and i have had many discussions but he was very angry with me for defending "enlil." he said enlil and enki are the same guy, though, so i was in essence (as far as he was concerned) defending a god capable of being as evil, cunning and deceitful as satan and as destructive, short-tempered and judgmental as jehovah, who, according to him, are the same guy. and when i say he was mad, i mean HE WAS MAD. and this all happened in one of my threads, so i started avoiding him in effect to keep from having another lengthy session of him condemning me for not agreeing with him on the topic

Yeah, that sounds like him. I'm just going to quote what I said in that thread: "I would have liked to say something to Reconpilot, but this forum has a strict profanity filter."

[edit on 13-4-2009 by Eleleth]

reply to post by kshaund


well if you follow the biblical creation account and the sumerian creation account AND also consider the egyptian creation account are all trying to tell the same exact story, you might be able to tease out the bits and pieces that are either missing or simply not described due to the texts starting off as oral histories.

for example, in one of the egyptian creation accounts, atum makes man (this sounds like adam makes man (that's what his name means, anyway..."man"). now let's say that in this sense, adam is enki and eve is ninmah. what we would be reading are two stories nearly inextricably interwoven, but still relative to our situation (flesh is flesh). time passage is nearly irrelevant, as it doesn't have any bearing on the events that follow, other than the surprise and sudden arrival of characters such as cain's wife, which are not explained in the available text UNLESS you make some assumptions.

now add to the story, the pseudopigraphical text of the life of adam and eve, and here we see eve apologizing for what SHE's done to adam, which in essence, could be a generation later! a woman would be making the offspring by that time -- babies (more adams and eves) came out of the woman not out of the man. man is a very generalized word and doesn't indicate how many.
it could be looked at as no different than saying and so god made canine. no plural indicator needed, it's assumed.

essentially what this means is, time passage and assumption is coloring and has colored our view of the words and their meanings. for example, if Atum created man, what happens to the other creator gods of egypt, such as Ra or Ptah? are they all the same god? especially if you consider the possibility that our creation was a three step affair: first we were created as spirit beings, then we were created a flesh container (meat bag) for our spirit being. then the eve (the woman) takes over and starts pumping out the flesh containers (with a little help from the adam) in which new spirit beings are residing as well? i don't get that part.

in short, which story has the most antiquity? seems to me that regardless of when they were written down, the enki and ninmah account may be a retelling and remixing, of an even older story in which the adams and the eves are created as spirits and then as humans, and it doesn't differentiate, it just plops it out there as the creation of humans. .. no indication that you are a living soul, capable of things like out of body, prophecy and visions. could it be possible that by the time the enki and ninmah text, biblical text, and egyptian texts are written down, that the story is already quite ancient? it would almost have to be.

I shouldn't post this, but I have experienced something like that. Except mine involved the identification of Christ with the Ram of Mendes (Osiris) while blood poured down the pages.

could you add more detail to this? for example, you mentioned pages? you were reading about christ and then blood started to pour down the page you were reading and then what happened? you turn the page and blood there too?

I just came across the youtube video titled the Lost Book of Abraham - and checked it out and was blown away - I have no idea what any Book of Abraham should be about and it doesn't explain it, but it does a GREAT job of explaining just like Terra Papers -

www.youtube.com...

Please watch this - I think its really well done and says it all (unfortunately!)

reply to post by kshaund


oh no, he's following sitchin's theory that the abzu (apsu, absu) was in south africa. see, there's the problem. in order to believe that, you have to ignore the other information. just like, in order to believe the abzu/apsu was the sun, you have to ignore the previous references to it.

reply to post by undo


I also came across truthism.com... which I think explains it too - the reptilian, religion, etc. They're all basically saying the same thing - We've been so screwed!

rarely discussed among sitchinites is the mesopotamia reversal of the letters "p" and "b"

nibru became nibbur became nippur
abzu became absu became apsu
abzu and apsu are the same thing. the abzu is the abyss, not south africa. there may be an abzu in south africa but it is not the abzu by itself. : /

Originally posted by undo
for example, in one of the egyptian creation accounts, atum makes man (this sounds like adam makes man (that's what his name means, anyway..."man").

Atum is actually the Adam Kadmon of the Kabbalists—the hermaphroditic "complete one":

His name is thought to be derived from the word 'tem' which means to complete or finish. Thus he has been interpreted as being the 'complete one' and also the finisher of the world, which he returns to watery chaos at the end of the creative cycle. As creator he was seen as the underlying substance of the world, the deities and all things being made of his flesh or alternatively being his ka.

The great paradox is that we frequently find the First Man identified with the instructor of humanity. Thus, Adam is also Oannes (Adapa), Thoth, Osiris, Prometheus, Dionysus, and, yes, Jesus (the "second Adam"). There must be some significance to this.

essentially what this means is, time passage and assumption is coloring and has colored our view of the words and their meanings. for example, if Atum created man, what happens to the other creator gods of egypt, such as Ra or Ptah? are they all the same god? especially if you consider the possibility that our creation was a three step affair: first we were created as spirit beings, then we were created a flesh container (meat bag) for our spirit being. then the eve (the woman) takes over and starts pumping out the flesh containers (with a little help from the adam) in which new spirit beings are residing as well? i don't get that part.

They are different puzzle pieces. But again, I must emphasize that the Egyptians were renowned for their magic, and thus you will find these things to be highly esoteric in character. Ra is the Ray-of-Light, and his primacy only indicates that the Egyptians knew that all things are composed of light. Ptah, as the demiurge, is the principle of vibration, and creates the world by speaking it into existence (can we hazard to connect him with "talk"?). Thoth, the orderer and measurer of all things, is simply thought.

In all of these, you have the masculine deities impressing themselves upon chaotic, feminine elements. They are thus said to "stabilize" them, or bring them into order--and the sexual overtones are readily apparent, as the hieroglyph for this act was an ejaculating penis. Thus, we may want to take into consideration James Bartley's affirmation that these gods operate by manipulating female energy (kundalini shakti). And your own OBE might substantiate this.

in short, which story has the most antiquity? seems to me that regardless of when they were written down, the enki and ninmah account may be a retelling and remixing, of an even older story in which the adams and the eves are created as spirits and then as humans, and it doesn't differentiate, it just plops it out there as the creation of humans. .. no indication that you are a living soul, capable of things like out of body, prophecy and visions. could it be possible that by the time the enki and ninmah text, biblical text, and egyptian texts are written down, that the story is already quite ancient? it would almost have to be.

Jewish tradition holds that the first chapter of Genesis describes the creation of the world in its spiritual, or Platonic aspect, while the second chapter of Genesis tells of the creation of the physical world. Thus the two apparent contradictions in the accounts.

Originally posted by undo
could you add more detail to this? for example, you mentioned pages? you were reading about christ and then blood started to pour down the page you were reading and then what happened? you turn the page and blood there too?

Well, it's extremely difficult to describe in words. It appeared as a sudden flash of images after I had closed my eyes. I saw all those instances of the words "lamb" and "blood"—i.e., "But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot," 1 Peter 1:19—sort of assemble itself into an image of Baphomet. Which is perfectly appropriate, as the Templars were Christians, after all.

These lines in the Bible seem to be indebted to the doctrine of the Mithraic Mysteries, where the initiated were cleansed of their sins by quite literally being baptized in the blood of a slain bull (emblematic of the Age of Taurus).

But I would strongly emphasize that I do not put much stock in these things as having any great veracity, due to the incredible variety of visionary experiences that people have claimed. Nevertheless, Blavatsky's line about Satan being merely God in the world may perhaps be taken as expressing some arcane truth.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by Eleleth]

the idea that female energy is chaotic is from the mistaken (i think?) concept that tiamat was a literal living being, a female. of course, you know my theory is that tiamat was a deified object, a wormhole, not a female, and that it was from this deification that the concept of sex magic arose and the mistaken (i think?) idea that the gate was actually representative of sex (thusly aleister crowley's depiction of coitus, the head of a penis and the vaginal opening, which he calls an entity named LAM that came threw the "gate" created during the alamantrah working.)

www.excludedmiddle.com...

[edit on 13-4-2009 by undo]

addendum: in case you weren't aware of this, my theory was that the gate was mistaken for a gigantic womb and vaginal opening from which the gods were born and that this is also the nun, the primeval waters of chaos (et.al, the abyss, the abzu, the bottomless pit and as a result, tiamat).



[edit on 13-4-2009 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
the idea that female energy is chaotic is from the mistaken (i think?) concept that tiamat was a literal living being, a female. of course, you know my theory is that tiamat was a deified object, a wormhole, not a female, and that it was from this deification that the concept of sex magic arose and the mistaken (i think?) idea that the gate was actually representative of sex (thusly aleister crowley's depiction of coitus, the head of a penis and the vaginal opening, which he calls an entity named LAM that came threw the "gate" created during the alamantrah working.)

Haha, for a good Christian girl, you seem to know more about Crowley than I do. My ideas mostly comes from Tom Hare's "post-structuralist" approach to the mythology in Re-Membering Osiris. He actually seems to have been very bewildered by what all of this stuff means, but he takes a look at it from a different perspective than most Egyptologists.

Tiamat also seems to be equivalent to the Egyptian Tefnut ("Deep Night"?), by the way. Some have also connected it to Nut ("Night"?), but this is obviously just a different "generation" of the same thing!

[edit on 13-4-2009 by Eleleth]

reply to post by Eleleth


i made a little video about a year ago, showing what i believe to be the evolution if you will, of the gate symbols. (turn up the volume! there's music)
included are early depictions of hathor as it relates the bull of heaven with the 7 reins (7 tiamats, 7 gate systems), etc. you'll see.

here it is:




[edit on 13-4-2009 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
i made a little video about a year ago, showing what i believe to be the evolution if you will, of the gate symbols. (turn up the volume! there's music)
included are early depictions of hathor as it relates the bull of heaven with the 7 reins (7 tiamats, 7 gate systems), etc. you'll see.

Hey, you may very well be right--who knows? I hope I have at least gotten you to look at things from different angles.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by Eleleth]

reply to post by Eleleth


well i did a little stint where i studied the back history of the ram-headed god of egypt, but it wasn't osiris, it was khnum or something like that. i had no idea that osiris was ever associated with that particular symbol.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by undo]

Originally posted by undo
well i did a little stint where i studied the back history of the ram-headed god of egypt, but it wasn't osiris, it was khnum or something like that. i had no idea that osiris was ever associated with that particular symbol.

Well, it says so right there on Wikipedia, so it's not that obscure. They nailed the lamb to an X and it turned into a fish and swam away.

However the deity that was venerated at Egyptian Mendes was actually a ram deity Banebdjed (literally Ba of the lord of djed, and titled "the Lord of Mendes"), who was the soul of Osiris.

Inanna descended into the underworld and was killed and strung up on a hook, where she lay for three days and three nights before coming back to life. If Inanna was to escape and return to her celestial abode, the gods of the underworld demanded a replacement. Far in the distance, hiding among the reeds, she saw the poor, innocent shepherd Tammuz. She made them throw him into a net and bind his hands. From then on, he would die every year in her place.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by Eleleth]

reply to post by Eleleth


erm, the account of inanna's descent to the underworld that i've read from oxford university translators, doesn't depict tammuz as a christ like figure. he's found perched on inanna's throne, dressed in finery, not the least bit concerned with her fate and enjoying the perks of being the new ruler. i think the tendency to assume any shepherd figure in history is jesus, is stretching the limits of credibility.



[edit on 14-4-2009 by undo]

undo, clarification please

Are you suggesting Tiamat never was never the name for a previous planet in this solar system?

I can't recall who asked about Enlil and if he was Sirian or Orion - I was just re-reading the Terra Papers and believe Ea was Sirian and Enlil was Sirian and Orion, his father King Anu having abided by the Queens of Orions conditions of ruling that they have one of their own by their side. If I recall, I believe this is why there was some confusion about marrying half sisters, is that the Kings were required to have a daughter of the Orions at his side. And bloodline of Orion dominates bloodline of Sirians and why Enlil had more power than Ea

reply to post by kshaund


correct. sitchin was the one that propogated that theory in his original earth chronicles. this is what i think he did:

1. he saw that the accounts of the abzu and tiamat in the enuma elish were markedly different than those in the previous stories.
2. he also noticed that marduk was trying to take credit for everything that was done by all the previous gods.
3. he developed the idea that marduk's enuma elish was the cause of the rise of monotheism and the concept of worshipping only "jupiter" (the planet) was a symptom of that, seeing as how enlil was associated with jupiter, this gave rise (he theorized) to the idea that the LORD in the enuma elish, was a planet, but not jupiter because marduk was a liar (or something like that)
4. since jupiter was said to be nibiru when it crossed the meridian of the sky in the babylonian astrological texts, and enlil's city was called nibru (not nibiru but close enough), he theorized that nibiru was not in fact a city of a god but a planet of gods. he made it into a noun when it fact it was more like an adjective.
5. he started looking for evidence to support his theory that nibiru was a planet that crossed the meridian of the sky (all planets do this, btw)
6. he saw the cylinder seal with the star chart in the corner, and assumed it was the sun and several planets, but the symbol of star and sun were depicted differently by the sumerians and what he claimed was the sun, was in fact a star symbol. i dunno why he insists on this interpretation. i'd be more inclined to accept his theory based on its similarity to velikovsky's theories of periodic destruction caused by some astronomical event. but his original hypothesis is based on an incorrect interpretation of the symbols.
7. previous mentions of abzu and tiamat depict them as being related to the abyss, the nun, the primordial chaos, so he assumed when it said primordial chaos,it was okay to just ignore the rest of the data, i guess?
i'm only guessing based on my reading of his material and discussions with others.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by undo]

reply to post by undo


Ah, I see

I was just checking Roberts website and he's answering questions from people via here:



NOTICE:

eveningstarmorningsky.com...

It's a GREAT opportunity to get clarification about the Terra Papers and anything else!