Ufos in Art of Antiquity?

I came across this page recently:

Ufos Antiquity

Many of the objects in these paintings are very strange indeed but need not be ufos -could be comets, etc.

But others really seem like ufos, for example: "Madonna with Saint Giovannino" , "Baptism of Christ" . Strange.

Notice that every painting is of an event of importance like the crucifiction battles sieges and great events. Notice that UFO's are there to observe.

Seems quite possible that those are ufos in the paintings, but strange clouds/meteors etc. could be some reasons for them. The sputnik one is just plain strange.

Many of these objects are nothing more than artistic representations of the sun, moon, stars, clouds, comets, The Holy Spirit, souls, the glory of God, angels and in the case of the famous DaVinci painting in which people state they see a UFO, I believe it's nothing more than DaVinci's representation of one of his own inventions, though I could be wrong...I'm probably far closer to the truth than the conclusion that it's a UFO. There's truly no evidence of any UFO's in antiquities...just the conclusion that there is by UFO believers desperate to prove this has been an ongoing invasion of some type.

[edit on 6/13/2004 by Sinobyte]

Sinobyte . . . Those are strange representations of suns and stars and such. And I think they ARE evidence of chariots of fire/ufo's and celestial beings/gods and angels.

I believe it's far closer to the truth that they are indeed ufo's. I am by no means a ufo buff but it's much easier to believe in that than the other as far as I'm concerned.

I think that overall, Sinobyte is correct. The descriptions for these things is easily explained when we think about the subject of the paintings. Plus remember artistic license. They can add anything they like into those.

However, with that being said, I find it interesting that the Haratonohama, Hitachi, Japan ~ 1803 UFO sighting was in VERY deep detail. The artist even went so far as to provide cryptographic evidence of the craft's other-worldly origins. Again, I can't tell whether or not this is nothing more than a dream had by the artist, and there's no way to know, but it sure makes for a great conversation piece.

Originally posted by I See You
I believe it's far closer to the truth that they are indeed ufo's. I am by no means a ufo buff but it's much easier to believe in that than the other as far as I'm concerned.

It's far closer to the truth to believe that religious paintings DID NOT depict the Glory of God or comets, moons, clouds, stars, angels or the holy spirit?

Would you like to read that statement again? It's easier to believe RELIGIOUS painters painting RELIGIOUS paintings of RELIGIOUS experiences weren't painting RELIGIOUS symbols and symbolism but alien craft?

Simply because our modern, multimedia engorged outlooks of UFO's automatically means they're aliens does not mean they are. Are they UFO's in those paintings? Sure...they're flying in the paintings and they cannot be readily identified but this does not automatically mean they are the same UFO's we relate to.

Once again, as is the norm on ATS, I see the replies in this post getting ready to point to "uneducated, inarticulate medieval painters that weren't able to adequately identify the objects they were panting". It's always funny to me that people can insinuate this simply based on their ability to "recognize" an object in the sky. Many of these painters were brilliant men, geinuses who made almost all of the I.Q.'s on this board like look a childs shoe size.

Only if you believe in such, in which I don't. That is why I believe the other. You may believe in whatever you wish to as do I. I stated my opinion on the matter just as you have, I'm sorry if you don't like it but that's the way it is. I believe they were ufo's or alien spacecraft. OK?

In any case, I believe it is pretty difficult for us to put ourselves in the mindset of our ancestors. They had a different set of symbols and beliefs and manners of speech. We even have trouble understanding each other when we communicate on this forum, imagine understanding symbolism of the past.

I personally am not capable of coming to any definite conclusion, just think it is interesting to speculate. I don't want to "believe" either one or the other. All I can say is "I do not know".


For those interested in an even bigger site, with B.C. art and pre-1940 photos, look at this. Professional site with a cool slide show.

Historical Artwork and Ufos

Originally posted by I See You
Only if you believe in such, in which I don't. That is why I believe the other. You may believe in whatever you wish to as do I. I stated my opinion on the matter just as you have, I'm sorry if you don't like it but that's the way it is. I believe they were ufo's or alien spacecraft. OK?

Simply because you do not believe in God or his "glory" or The Holy Spirit does not mean the painters were not painting them it simply means you choose to select what you want to believe from their paintings and ignore the rest which means your opinion is uninformed or halfassed. Do I care if your opinion is uninformed? Not really, uninformed opinions based on religious prejudice is all the rage these days. You're definitely free to it but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be at liberty to form my own opinion of your uninformed opinion and post that opinion...so if you don't like my opinion of your uninformed opinion, that's the way it is. OK?

Harlan Ellison once said, "The two most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity."


[edit on 6/13/2004 by Sinobyte]

Originally posted by gzhpcu
But others really seem like ufos, for example: "Madonna with Saint Giovannino" , "Baptism of Christ" . Strange.

Many modern day people read the account of Ezekiel 1:4 as proof of extra terrestrial life to further their belief that God is truly an alien.

Ezekiel 1:4

I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north-an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal.

The fact of the matter is that we don�t know what these flying things are. People applying modern day popular media and folklore to ancient events. The only similarity in Ezekiel says �the center of the fire looked like glowing metal� then the modern human being influenced by modern thoughts sees a UFO and assumes God is an alien. The only thing we really know about UFO�s is that they are unidentified objects. Again modern media has us thinking that they are intergalactic transports, this has not been proved. We don�t have any proof that they are piloted, hollow, metal or from another galaxy. It�s hard to deny that objects have been seen throughout 1000�s of years of human history according to paintings and cave pictographs, but who�s to say its alien technology and not from god.

Lets look at the painting "Madonna with Saint Giovannino" :



What you need to remember is that the book of Ezekiel was written approximately 571 B.C.. Any painting with Jesus on that web site was painted 2000 years after Ezekiel�s account. The painter was probably influenced by what they read in the Old Testament. This is not a photograph it�s a painting. It was painted 1500 years after the birth of Christ. The painter wanted to show that God was present during this event, and he decided to depict him as Ezekiel�s saw him; he could have used the image of the burning bush to convey this thought but obviously decided against it.

It's interesting how often people arguing faith as the way of knowing there is a god, uses the lack of evidence to prove the non-existence of extra terrestrial intelligence/technology.

Originally posted by Sinobyte
There's truly no evidence of any UFO's in antiquities...just the conclusion that there is by UFO believers desperate to prove this has been an ongoing invasion of some type.

I think you are the one too desperate to prove that there is no evidence. There are many ancient accounts of ufos. For example, in the Vedic scriptures they are called vimanas. Every ancient culture has accounts of Gods/Godesses in discus, or flying chariots. Ezekiel's wheel within a wheel, where a strange being comes out of it, is also a good example of what "could very possibly" have been a ufo encounter.

BTW, you are reaching into conclusion that this is some sort of invasion, if that was what whatever entities are behind ufos wanted to do, they could have done it a long time ago. Who knows, perhaps they did it and left behind a way to keep people in control so people would believe they are "all powerful divine entities or entity."


[edit on 13-6-2004 by Muaddib]

Originally posted by kinglizard
It�s hard to deny that objects have been seen throughout 1000�s of years of human history according to paintings and cave pictographs, but who�s to say its alien technology and not from god.

I really don't like using a quote from a science fiction movie.... I am not even that much of a Star Trek fan, but as Captain Kirk would say.

Why does God need a ship if it is all powerful?

Why would angels also need ships? Are they dependant in technology to move around? That wouldn't sound as being all powerful, only technologically more advanced.

Originally posted by Muaddib
I really don't like using a quote from a science fiction movie.... I am not even that much of a Star Trek fan, but as Captain Kirk would say.

Why does God need a ship if it is all powerful?

Why would angels also need ships? Are they dependant in technology to move around? That wouldn't sound as being all powerful, only technologically more advanced.

Who says these objects are ships? The fact is that nobody knows what these objects are. Your sci-fi quote is appropriate, you are applying modern day popular media and folklore to this object. Maybe god wanted to make an impression, he wanted to be seen, this is the form he chose.

let me guess....its a ilusion!...no,,,its a weather baloon!...no...its a ball lightning!...no..its a venus glare....hehe, ho well!

[edit on 13-6-2004 by kangaxx]

Originally posted by kinglizard
Who says these objects are ships? The fact is that nobody knows what these objects are. Your sci-fi quote is appropriate, you are applying modern day popular media and folklore to this object. Maybe god wanted to make an impression, he wanted to be seen, this is the form he chose.

Many of the ancient described them as what we would call today ships. I haven't seen any aliens, or inside any of these "ships," but I have seen one through binoculars, and that's what it pretty much was, a ship.

If what you call Elohim wanted to show itself it could have chosen some other way, but it has seemingly chosen to use the same form for thousands of years for some strange reason.

Originally posted by Sinobyte

Originally posted by I See You
Only if you believe in such, in which I don't. That is why I believe the other. You may believe in whatever you wish to as do I. I stated my opinion on the matter just as you have, I'm sorry if you don't like it but that's the way it is. I believe they were ufo's or alien spacecraft. OK?

Simply because you do not believe in God or his "glory" or The Holy Spirit does not mean the painters were not painting them it simply means you choose to select what you want to believe from their paintings and ignore the rest which means your opinion is uninformed or halfassed. Do I care if your opinion is uninformed? Not really, uninformed opinions based on religious prejudice is all the rage these days. You're definitely free to it but that doesn't mean I shouldn't be at liberty to form my own opinion of your uninformed opinion and post that opinion...so if you don't like my opinion of your uninformed opinion, that's the way it is. OK?

Harlan Ellison once said, "The two most abundant things in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity."


[edit on 6/13/2004 by Sinobyte]

You obviously have the latter in Harlan Ellison's quote as I never said you couldn't have your own opinion. I was stateing mine. If anyone is uninformed or halfassed it is you. Simply because you don't believe in anything other than god and his glory does not mean that they are not alien spacecraft. You have no idea what they are...or do you? I doubt it. My opinion is what I said it was. Yours is what you said it was. Leave it be and relax yourself.

Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by gzhpcu
But others really seem like ufos, for example: "Madonna with Saint Giovannino" , "Baptism of Christ" . Strange.

Many modern day people read the account of Ezekiel 1:4 as proof of extra terrestrial life to further their belief that God is truly an alien.

Ezekiel 1:4

I looked, and I saw a windstorm coming out of the north-an immense cloud with flashing lightning and surrounded by brilliant light. The center of the fire looked like glowing metal.

The fact of the matter is that we don�t know what these flying things are. People applying modern day popular media and folklore to ancient events. The only similarity in Ezekiel says �the center of the fire looked like glowing metal� then the modern human being influenced by modern thoughts sees a UFO and assumes God is an alien. The only thing we really know about UFO�s is that they are unidentified objects. Again modern media has us thinking that they are intergalactic transports, this has not been proved. We don�t have any proof that they are piloted, hollow, metal or from another galaxy. It�s hard to deny that objects have been seen throughout 1000�s of years of human history according to paintings and cave pictographs, but who�s to say its alien technology and not from god.

Lets look at the painting "Madonna with Saint Giovannino" :

What you need to remember is that the book of Ezekiel was written approximately 571 B.C.. Any painting with Jesus on that web site was painted 2000 years after Ezekiel�s account. The painter was probably influenced by what they read in the Old Testament. This is not a photograph it�s a painting. It was painted 1500 years after the birth of Christ. The painter wanted to show that God was present during this event, and he decided to depict him as Ezekiel�s saw him; he could have used the image of the burning bush to convey this thought but obviously decided against it.

Start reading in Chapter 10, verse 9 where Ezekial begins to describe EXACTLY what he saw. He interprets what he saw, and it becomes completely apparent to anyone reading that what he saw in his vision was NOT a UFO.

Remember now, it was a VISION, not reality. Something one sees in a vision cannot, and should not be attributed to actual things. To say that he saw something wierd in a vision/dream is fine, but remember that a lot of people dream about things that aren't real too. True, this vision was inspired by God, but what puzzles me is that just because he saw something that we cannot explain that people immediately jump to the conclusion that it's a UFO with aliens inside.

Please do not take my post to be an insulting one, as that was not my intent. I simply have gotten tired of people mis-quoting the Bible, and taking someone else's word for something that they saw in it, just as kinglizard has also pointed out. Please read the WHOLE book of Ezekial before making a judgement like that, so that you can at least get the whole story.

Again, if I have offended anyone, I am sorry, but we need to keep to the facts.

[edit on 13-6-2004 by TheBorg]