Constructions of the Nephilim.

reply to post by sparky8580


The best we will have is an outline of our past. Cultures that build large constructions usually leave habitation levels and evidence of being there. Not to many cultures have the ability to build large structures without some social order and organization.

Well after reading the responses to my initial question it seems a few people admit that the (diluted) nephilim still walk amongst us today.

However, no one has answered my question 'Who is willing the obey orders from these once fallen demi-gods or angel/human hybrids ?'

It seems that ATS human non-Christian 'grasshoppers' are unwilling to accept the fact that if they want to live then they are going to have to take orders from a stronger race.

Numbers 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

So are ATSers 'grasshoppers', 'ostriches' or fighters ?

reply to post by Rapha



Speaking for myself it isn't how i frame the greater scenario, it's just how the Semites interpreted events that had occured thousands of years earlier, before their arrival in the relevent regions, and how they approached the architectural remains and biological remnants...but really we are only just begining to appreciate the greater undertaking and should reserve judgements.


...around 10,000 B.C., this began to change. A genetic mutation appeared, somewhere near modern-day Turkey, that jammed the lactase-production gene permanently in the “on” position


Gen etic Mutations

reply to post by Harte


Thank you, I don't know much about Baalbek.

Was there another temple on the site before the roman one? I am wondering very much where the name came from.

reply to post by Kantzveldt


The Temple Mount of Baalbek and the Temple Mount of Jerusalem were landing zones of the "gods" from heaven. At least the original lower parts are. They are space platforms. But you already knew that. Instead of worrying why the deniers try to link them to Herod to fit in their "normal" fantasy, why not ask yourself:

Why did these gods need to build platforms?
Why not just land on cleared solid ground?

Originally posted by Mkoll
reply to post by Harte

 

I am wondering very much where the name came from.

"Baal, god worshiped in many ancient Middle Eastern communities, especially among the Canaanites, who apparently considered him a fertility deity and one of the most important gods in the pantheon. As a Semitic common noun baal (Hebrew baʿal) meant “owner” or “lord,” although it could be used more generally; for example, a baal of wings was a winged creature, and, in the plural, baalim of arrows indicated archers. Yet such fluidity in the use of the term baal did not prevent it from being attached to a god of distinct character. As such, Baal designated the universal god of fertility, and in that capacity his title was Prince, Lord of the Earth. He was also called the Lord of Rain and Dew, the two forms of moisture that were indispensable for fertile soil in Canaan. In Ugaritic and Old Testament Hebrew, Baal’s epithet as the storm god was He Who Rides on the Clouds. In Phoenician he was called Baal Shamen, Lord of the Heavens.

But Baal was not exclusively a fertility god. He was also king of the gods, and, to achieve that position, he was portrayed as seizing the divine kingship from Yamm, the sea god.

The myths also tell of Baal’s struggle to obtain a palace comparable in grandeur to those of other gods. Baal persuaded Asherah to intercede with her husband El, the head of the pantheon, to authorize the construction of a palace. The god of arts and crafts, Kothar, then proceeded to build for Baal the most beautiful of palaces which spread over an area of 10,000 acres. The myth may refer in part to the construction of Baal’s own temple in the city of Ugarit. Near Baal’s temple was that of Dagon, given in the tablets as Baal’s father.

The worship of Baal was popular in Egypt from the later New Kingdom in about 1400 bc to its end (1075 bc). Through the influence of the Aramaeans, who borrowed the Babylonian pronunciation Bel, the god ultimately became known as the Greek Belos, identified with Zeus."


~ Britannica Encyclopedias

reply to post by Hanslune


Habitation levels and evidence of being there does not always relate to original construction.

Let's say someone just sold you a house on Laural Canyon that they had renovated in 1975. The house they just sold you would have had all the trash removed, all the yards cleaned up, etc, etc. 20 years from now there might not be any evidence of the house being lived in until you moved into it in 2012. Though the innards of the would reveal that it came from 1975, the house was still built originally in 1925.

Though here we are only talking decades, when it comes to stone we could be talking thousands of years. If "gods" removed all evidence of their presence when they moved out, all you would have is the trash that later renters left.

reply to post by Kantzveldt


Your original post is excellent. Nice pictures and good info with links. But of course you knew that too.

Academic deniers are not allowed to think out of the box. They must fit the status quo to retain their jobs. So the party line must be upheld that everything found fits into a nice, tidy order. You can hear them talking now,

"Let's assign this one to Herod and avoid any hard questions."

Asinine. And no help to anyone seeking the truth.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

Some of those blocks weigh 2 million pounds, no way a normal sized team of men could move something like that much less lift it into place, especially with the type of technology they had back then.

And that settles it.
Herod did not do that. Neither did the Arabs or the Romans or the Jews.
But someone before them did, and it must have been easy for them.
If they were a space faring civilization then the “how” is an easy answer.
The “who” is the real question here.

And your ancestors told us the "who" came down out of the sky.

Originally posted by Hanslune

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

Some of those blocks weigh 2 million pounds, no way a normal sized team of men could move something like that much less lift it into place, especially with the type of technology they had back then.

Personal incredulity is not really that impressive as an argument. Again the 1000 ton stones were not moved, they were left in the quarry. The three 650-800 ton stones were moved, obviously. Ancient man only moved 8 stones heavier during the ancient period, why? It was damn hard. Did the Roman's have the technology to do it? Yep

Let's look at a stone that is part of a row of stones in the Western Wall known as the Master Course.

Some quick stats on the huge stone:

Length: 41 feet
Depth: 11.5 ft.- 15 ft
Height: 11.5 ft.
Weight: Over 500 metric tons.

Focus on the massiveness of this huge stone. Over 500 metric tons! Up until the 1980’s the best cranes could only lift 250 tons.

But the Baalbek trilithon are even larger.

Take a look at the image in this link.

Note the size of the human figure under the red lettering compared to the stone blocks to his right


www.bibliotecapleyades.net...


According to the ancient tablets, this was one of the places where the Gods rose to space. Known as the Launch Pad at Baalbek. The stones that sit above the flat base were put there thousands of years later by the Romans to honor the God Jupiter. The second layer stones comprise blocks that weigh 500 tons. The huge flat stones ABOVE THEM that make up the edge of base are said to be 1,000 TONS. Or 5 times as heavy as any in the Pyramids. Who put them there, why, and most importantly HOW?

The fact is that up until the 1980’s there existed no crane, vehicle or mechanism that could lift such a weight of 1000-1200 tons - to say nothing of carrying such an immense object over valley and mountainside, and placing each slab in its precise position, many feet above the ground. There are no traces of any roadway, causeway, ramp or other earthworks that could even remotely suggest the hauling or dragging of these megaliths from the quarry to their uphill site.


Gray Whales did not put those cut blocks there. Wooly Mammoths did not put them there. Brontosaurus did not put them there. Nature did not put them there and Romans could not have put them there. Did I leave out anyone who was strong enough to put 500 ton blocks up above ground like that, let alone 1,000 ton ones on top of them?


Humans certainly were not strong enough to do that. Unless they created some kind of lifting device that was better than anything humans had made by 1980. Only someone who was as technologically advanced as we are today, 1,500 years after the Romans, could have done that. Was humankind that advanced in the past? Or was there someone else here that was.

Originally posted by LightAssassin
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

The 'Lord of Hosts' IMO is not the Ultimate God, and certainly has more possibility of being the leader of said nephilim who built these megalithic structures.

edit on 24-10-2012 by LightAssassin because: (no reason given)

It must be understood that the term Baal is titular in its usage more so than a name for a specific god. As "Baal" means "Lord". It is also clear that the Sumerian god Enki (EN.KI) was variously known as Enki the Wise, Lord of the Earth and simply Lord. As His name is composed of two parts, EN meaning "Lord" and KI meaning "Earth". It is because of this that we find one of the largest mistakes of the Book of Genesis, presenting the "Lord God" and the Lord as the same entity.

Note that this is a problem amongst a people who believe that any use of the words "lord" or "god" refer specifically to one god (i.e., their god) - it is a monotheistic problem. Just as Satanists are derailed in their search for the many incarnations of the Prince of Darkness in history when they find a god like Yahweh who slaughters humans and children and calls down war and pestilence upon man, they mistakenly believe the god to be yet another incarnation of Satan. In such cases Satanists are going off the misperception that Satan can be found by the attributes bestowed upon Him by the Christians - i.e., the endorsement of horrible actions by a deity must mean that the deity is a devil, in the sense of being akin to the Devil - just as the Christians believe that the term "Lord" as it is used in the Bible must always refer to their god.

Remember that the enemy of humans - the one who calls for our blind unquestioning obedience; the one who commands the death of little children among other crimes, is the Christian god! (Hosea 9:11-16, Ezekiel 9:5-7, Exodus 12:29-30, Jeremiah 51:20-26, Leviticus 26:21-22, Isaiah 13:15-18, Numbers 31:17, Deuteronomy 2:34, Deuteronomy 28:53, I Samuel 15:3, 2 Kings 8:12, 2 Kings 15:16, Lamentations 2:20, Hosea 13:16)

In Exodus 33:2 it states :

"And I will send an angel before thee; and I will drive out the Canaanite, the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite

Exodus 33:3 :

Unto a land flowing with milk and honey: for I will not go up in the midst of thee; for thou [art] a stiff-necked people: LEST I CONSUME THEE on the way."

This Yahweh is prone to violence and seems to despise his chosen people.

He is a perfect match for ISH.KUR (Hadad), whose land is occupied by the Amorites and Hittites, and is a known demonstrator of violence and contempt for his worshipers.

ISH.KUR's image, traits, and symbols match those of Baal.
He is also anti-Babylon and anti-Egypt, as is Yahweh.
And like Yahweh's, the real name of the Canaanite Baal (Hadad) must not be spoken.

Evidence within the Bible itself and the Sumerian, Phoenician and Canaanite traditions, the following is a logical conclusion and solution to THE IDENTITY of the Jewish God of the Old Testament:

ISH.KUR = Hadad = El Shaddai = Baal = YAHWEH

The Jewish people evolved from polytheism to monotheism with the promotion of a god who had been known by a variety of names, into one supreme God, Yahweh [whose real name must not be spoken].

And it gets even more interesting... or stranger

Isis / Ra / El

By adopting Yahweh they did NOT adopt the SUPREME God of the Pantheons ~ El, but his SON ~ ISH.KUR.

ISH.KUR [Baal, Hadad, El-Shaddai] ~ an entity who was in open revolt against his father El, and ultimately aided in this revolt by his mother and consort, Asherah.

Yes that's right... Yahweh may have had a honey... and it looks like it was his mother.

This female entity was later merged by Greek and Roman traditions into Aphrodite and Venus ~ but she was known earlier to the Egyptians as Isis.

Once we understand this, the etymology of the name Israel :

Is [ Isis ]
Ra [ Head of the Egyptian Pantheon ]
El [ Lord / Baal ]

- makes far more obvious sense than the convoluted "Yisrael" yarn from the Hebrew faith.

Isis Ra El

The obvious conclusion is that Yahweh was just one god from a pantheon and not the alleged
ONLY GOD OF THE UNIVERSE.

reply to post by LightAssassin


Abode of the Sun God

"Besides the one in Egypt, there is another famous Heliopolis nearby, in Lebanon at a place now called Baalbek. Since antiquity, it has been a city sacred to the Sun God. The Old Testament calls it Beth-Shemesh or the "Abode of the Sun God," Shemesh or Shamash being the Semitic name for the Sumerian Sun God Utu. The land of Lebanon, known to the Sumerians as "the cedar land" was under the aegis of the Mesopotamian sun god.

At Baalbek, the Greeks erected a splendid temple to their Sun God Apollo or Helios. It is also here that the Romans built a magnificent temple to their Sun God Jupiter. This temple was the largest they erected anywhere in the world, including Rome, indicating the importance they attached to this location. Even today, six of its mighty columns still stand, each 62 feet high and eight feet in diameter.

But what is remarkable about this temple is that it is built on a massive three-tier stone base that must have been here long before the Greeks and Romans. It is raised 30 feet above the ground, and is paved with perfectly hewn and fitted stones ranging from 10 to 30 feet long and 6 to 9 feet wide.

The base for this platform was constructed of cyclopean blocks of stone 32 feet long, 13 feet wide, and 12 feet thick. Each slab of stone is estimated to weigh 500 tons (for comparison, the largest stone in the Great Pyramid is 200 tons).

A fourth stone lies in the quarry nearby, readily shaped and cut except for a portion of its base. It is 72 feet long with a cross-section of 16 by 16 feet, estimated to weigh over 1200 tons. The stone was apparently intended to extend the size of the platform but operations seem to have suddenly ceased and the work was never completed.

Such a massive stone platform was obviously designed either to hold an immense weight, or for some operation that must have applied tremendous pressure on the ground, such as that exerted by a large rocket motor.

The Lebanese Sun God Shamash who made his home base at Baalbek was in many ways similar to the Egyptian sun god. Like the Egyptian Ra who appears with the sun disc over his head, Shamash is always shown with a sun disc, containing a four-pointed star and four radiating spokes. And just like Ra, he is often depicted with the head of an eagle. Some scenes also show him holding the symbols of immortality.

When Utu or Shamash left Baalbek, one of his destinations was ostensibly the City of Annu in Egypt where his bright arrival and departure in flames became the core of the legend of the golden and red Phoenix bird.

For thousands of years throughout the whole Middle East, the betyl or Sun Stone became a sacred fetish revered as the physical dwelling of the sun god. Its conical or pyramidion shape was their attempt to represent the dwelling of the sun god, that is, the command or personal capsule of the first stage of a composite rocket.

In Egypt, the origin of the Sun Stone is partially remembered in the ancient hieroglyphic sign used to represent the City of Annu or Heliopolis. It is shown as a bolt aimed at the sky."
~ Boulay

Wow. That's impressive.

reply to post by spiritualarchitect




The way i see it is it;s sort of like a notorious trial were everyone knows 'he did it' ,but the Defence Barrister puts forward a wonderfully prepared case for the defence, showing himself aware of the minutest details of the case and seemingly having an answer for everything, whereas the case for the prosecution is presented in such an incompetant manner it brings discredit upon the allegations...the jury naturally goes with the best made case.


The case for Herod having constructed the large and well cut masonry at Hebron, Baalbek and Jerusalem can be countered, and like i have demonstrated this involves bringing in other examples he couldn't possibly have been involved with and presenting evidence from the sites he certainly constructed such as Masada and Herodium


www.bible-architecture.info...


The current paradigm of Herod begining construction of a Temple of Jupiter at Baalbek, outside of his Kingdom, and the Romans coming along and taking over is farcial in my opinion, but the site hasn't been greatly investigated and documented due to it's location, and i don't think there are enough facts available to understand the oldest date and purpose of construction.

Originally posted by spiritualarchitect
Is [ Isis ]
Ra [ Head of the Egyptian Pantheon ]
El [ Lord / Baal ]

- makes far more obvious sense than the convoluted "Yisrael" yarn from the Hebrew faith.

This doesn't fit well with the first mention of the name, Genesis 32:28, where Jacob wrestles with a stranger who is actually a physical manifestation of God for an entire night. God wins by popping Jacob's hip out of its socket. When Jacob asks the stranger (God) for a blessing, God gives him the titular name "Israel" ("struggled with God".) www.etymonline.com...

The King James Version says: "And He said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel for you have struggled with God and with men, and have prevailed.”

Also, "Isis" is not the name of the goddess -- that's the Greek pronunciation of her name. The original (as it is spelled in hieroglyphics) is "Aset" (which means "throne").

reply to post by Byrd


My dear Friend. You surprise me with your very well considered response.

One concern though is Jacob, although wrestling with GOD as the intent is expressed, it was an Angel, ( A Messenger of GOD, that was Jacob's opponent, or as you have expressed a Stranger.)

The closest anyone alive came to being even in the presence of GOD was Moses, and then it was the Spirit of GOD contained within a burning bush. One could argue Enoch may well be another, due to the references made in Genesis.

The Messenger of GOD was presenting the intended message GOD wish Jacob to learn. That was their function, as watchers. The Book of Enoch carries this premise forward in much more detail than the Biblical Account.

I just thought this should be made clear, incase others mistook your references.

As for Israel, I think that association made by Spiritualarchitect, is a result of the “Pyramidologists” of the past, attempting to provide yet further evidence of a alternative history for Egypt.

The neat association of the varied names happens to align with Israel.

If newer members are not aware of this concept, your could review The Following

It is a brief breakdown of the many other happenstances that the Pyramidologists find when looking at another structure made by Entities other than man. Or so the thought is.

All of which, bears a "WITTNESS" to the premise that like Baalbek, The Great Pyramid has a history we are yet to understand. But unlike Baalbek, The Great Pyramid is known to all as Kufu's, who never was buried within the vacant structure, and It has been researched for centuries.

We just chose to dismiss the obvious as nutty, and embrace nonsense as fact.

Ciao

Shane

Originally posted by spiritualarchitect

This Yahweh is prone to violence and seems to despise his chosen people.

He is a perfect match for ISH.KUR (Hadad), whose land is occupied by the Amorites and Hittites, and is a known demonstrator of violence and contempt for his worshipers.

ISH.KUR's image, traits, and symbols match those of Baal.
He is also anti-Babylon and anti-Egypt, as is Yahweh.
And like Yahweh's, the real name of the Canaanite Baal (Hadad) must not be spoken.

Evidence within the Bible itself and the Sumerian, Phoenician and Canaanite traditions, the following is a logical conclusion and solution to THE IDENTITY of the Jewish God of the Old Testament:

ISH.KUR = Hadad = El Shaddai = Baal = YAHWEH

The Jewish people evolved from polytheism to monotheism with the promotion of a god who had been known by a variety of names, into one supreme God, Yahweh [whose real name must not be spoken].

And it gets even more interesting... or stranger

Isis / Ra / El

By adopting Yahweh they did NOT adopt the SUPREME God of the Pantheons ~ El, but his SON ~ ISH.KUR.

ISH.KUR [Baal, Hadad, El-Shaddai] ~ an entity who was in open revolt against his father El, and ultimately aided in this revolt by his mother and consort, Asherah.

Yes that's right... Yahweh may have had a honey... and it looks like it was his mother.

This female entity was later merged by Greek and Roman traditions into Aphrodite and Venus ~ but she was known earlier to the Egyptians as Isis.

Once we understand this, the etymology of the name Israel :

Is [ Isis ]
Ra [ Head of the Egyptian Pantheon ]
El [ Lord / Baal ]

- makes far more obvious sense than the convoluted "Yisrael" yarn from the Hebrew faith.

Isis Ra El

The obvious conclusion is that Yahweh was just one god from a pantheon and not the alleged
ONLY GOD OF THE UNIVERSE.

the first part is totally wrong.
no scholar or expert believes that yahweh is hadad, he is thought however to be a son of EL, yaw, or yam, a storm or war god.
also you have no idea how the israelites adopted yahweh, he replaced all the gods over time and took up their powers, hence why he sometimes has motherly or female traits, because he replaced all the gods including the female ones. this includes EL, because yahweh became EL, the supreme god, so your nonsense is absurd, you need to read up on the beliefs of the hebrews and later the israelites.
the dead sea scrolls are just like the later manuscripts, only they call yahweh EL, being that he was the high god of the israelites, so again your claims are nonsense based on misinformation.

as for his consort, she was added later when the israelites started to lose their faith in yahweh and took up canaanite beliefs again, she was not his mother, but his consort like the canaanites around them.

heck they named yahweh ba'al till it was stamped out by the priests.

israel is a hebrew word, the idea that it is segmented like that is absurd, it means struggles with god, or did you suddenly forgot what EL means?! oh yeah GOD, not lord, or baal GOD.
the only thing convoluted is the nonsense you are peddling, as it has been pointed out, isis is a greek name for the goddess not the egyptian name.
also why in the heck would the hebrews use egyptian names? or in this case greek ones?

you are trying too hard to produce an objection, while showing you know nothing about the hebrews, egyptians or greeks.

I think that they are pretty much the Anunaki. creators.

Originally posted by spiritualarchitect

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Kantzveldt

 

Some of those blocks weigh 2 million pounds, no way a normal sized team of men could move something like that much less lift it into place, especially with the type of technology they had back then.

And that settles it.
Herod did not do that. Neither did the Arabs or the Romans or the Jews.
But someone before them did, and it must have been easy for them.
If they were a space faring civilization then the “how” is an easy answer.
The “who” is the real question here.

And your ancestors told us the "who" came down out of the sky.

Complete hooey.

Please explain how men moved the Thunderstone:

The Thunder Stone is sometimes claimed to be the "largest stone ever moved by man". This stone was large and heavy; it was effectively moved 6 km (3.7 mi) overland to the Gulf of Finland by manpower alone; no animals or machines were used. Transported by barge up the Neva River, it reached St. Petersburg. The entire effort is considered an historic engineering feat.

Due to the large size of the rock, the easiest way to measure its mass is to calculate it. According to the fall 1882 edition of La Nature, its dimensions before being cut were 7 × 14 × 9 m. Based on the density of granite, its mass was determined to be around 1500 tonnes.[8] Falconet had some of this cut away to make a wave-like shape, so the finished pedestal weighed slightly less. It is still the largest when compared to other large, sculpted stones...

Source: Wiki

Harte

Originally posted by Mkoll
reply to post by Harte

 

Thank you, I don't know much about Baalbek.

Was there another temple on the site before the roman one? I am wondering very much where the name came from.

You aren't the only one.

People have been arguing and speculating over this for a hundred years.

Baal means Lord, as well as the god of the same name.

Also, the term might well mean only "The Valley of Bekka," as it is today called.

Harte