As one of my favorite researchers, Michael Tsarion likes to say, “You’ve been sold a lie and worse yet, you bought it!”
I have cut ‘n pasted the main body of this article here so that I could insert my own comments here, seen in red. I wrote my bits as I was reading and you’ll see that I sometimes say something that the author later said. Yep, very good article I provide the link for.
I bold AND italicize the portions from the article to which I am referring. If it’s only in bold, that is the article’s author’s highlighting.
I’ve known this information for many years. This is an excellent article:
Who is Yahweh?
His name is actually written with only the consonants YHWH. In the Hebrew writing the vowels are, if at all written, marked with diacritics (additional signs), which is never or only rarely done with YHWH. The reason may be that according to old tradition his name should not be pronounced. One therefore talks about him in indirect ways, such as Adonay = “the Lord”. For this reason the vowel signs for ADNY are used also for YHWH. This would actually lead to Yahowah, but it became Yehowah. Why is that? One reason for the “e” could be that Yehu is an alternative name for him (and apparently one that may be pronounced). The more proper pronunciation will, however, be Yahweh.
Yehu, meaning “Yahu is He”. Ha! I always call idiotic and unruly ETs “yahoos”. Uh huh. There’s the Divine giving Mini Me a clue, ‘cuz that’s how these things work. I had a hunch that yahoo and Yahweh were related. Yep.
Recent discoveries of ancient texts and inscriptions  show that the archaic Hebrew religion knew a highest god ’El ‘Elyon (the sign ’ is in transliterations used for the Hebrew letter ’aleph and ‘ for the letter ‘ayin), who had 70 sons. One of his sons was Yahweh, who had a consort ’Asherah, i.e., a goddess. Her name is mentioned some 40 times in the Old Testament but it is almost always translated as “grove” or “tree”. This is because her symbol is a tree or and upright wooden pole. So when the Old Testament states that it is forbidden to plant a tree at the altar of Yahweh it really means that it is forbidden to place a symbol of ’Asherah there (Deut 16:21 – and what sense would it otherwise have to forbid planting a tree there?). Has Yahweh even rejected her?
Have you noticed how every time there is some mass killing and you have reason to think that the global cabal are behind it, they always want to make a memorial and one of the things at the memorial is often a tree? Hiding the Feminine in plain view. They get to use the power of the Divine Feminine, but YOU don’t!
Has Yahweh rejected his consort ‘Asherah? Is this about hiding the Divine Feminine… in order to create an imbalanced – and easily controllable – patriarchy?!
The true creator god, the prime creator, was therefore not Yahweh, but ’El ‘Elyon. He has obviously created a number of secondary gods as his “sons” – better: deities – of which Yahweh is one (and, of course, also the “daughter” ’Asherah). Hence, Yahweh is not the prime creator he wants us to believe that he would be, even though he has also produced certain creations. We recognize a noticeable parallel to the Babylonian creation story Enûma Elish. This tells us about a prime creator pair Apsû and Ti’âmat (who we, in a way, could also regard as the male and female side of the prime creator, resp.), who created a number of deities, from which further deity races arose. One such deity race is the one of the Anunnaki (so called because their ruler and leader is named Anu). They separated themselves off from the prime creators and wanted to live and act without them. Enûma Elish tells about a murder of the highest gods. The Anunnaki are told to have killed first Apsû and then Ti’âmat! Is it possible to kill the prime creators? Of course not! This merely symbolizes that they turned away from them and didn’t want to have anything to do with them, as if they were dead – that was the fall, the plunge out of the divine light into a relative darkness. Therefore, the Anunnaki are fallen deities. The one who is said to have murdered Ti’âmat is Marduk who also became the lord of the Earth. The Anunnaki have under his rule created new human beings on our Earth by means of genetic manipulation, and from them to-day’s humanity arose. The first attempts for this were not very successful, but then they had the new race they wanted to produce.
The “sons” and “daughters” of ’El ‘Elyon (God / All That Is / Prime Creator), including all of you and me, absolutely ARE gods / creators, but we’re NOT Prime Creator. We are though PART of Prime Creator. I have always LOVED the term Prime Creator for the All That Is because of its implications – we are ALL gods / creators. Creatures and Creators all in one. So, it’s asinine for someone to worship a past Christ because that is one soul worshiping another soul – the right hand bows to the left hand sorta thing. It’s actually almost as silly to worship Prime Creator because we are part of Prime Creator – the hand bows to the head or heart sorta thing. God / All That Is / Prime Creator though is the perspectives of all perspectives, literally. So, yeah, the wise person bothers to utilize their DIRECT Divine Connection and go straight to God and draw on that higher perspective.
Correspondences with the Bible
The first sentence in the Bible reads, in the common translation: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen 1:1). The Hebrew word that is here translated as God is ’Elohim. It is a linguistic fact that cannot be denied that this word is a plural and hence means “gods”. It has been tried to explain this away through declaring it as pluralis majestatis, which actually doesn’t seem to be common in Hebrew. It rather looks as if one is trying to sweep an embarrassing question under the carpet.
In Hebrew, the sentence is: Bere’shit bara’ ’Elohim ’et ha shamayim ve-’et ha ’aretz. Therefore, some want to translate it as: “In the beginning the gods created the heaven and the earth”, but this doesn’t fit, since the word bara’ = “create” is in singular. Furthermore, the word for “heaven”, shamay, is also in plural: shamayim. However, the problem has a solution.
According to cabbalistic sources, the word bere’shit means not only “beginning”, but also “the first one”, the “original one”, the first entity that was, the highest God. The little word ’et could be seen as an accusative particle but can also be translated as “with” (in ve-‘et the word ve means “and”, hence: “and with”). We now arrive at the following translation, which fits grammatically: “The first one created the gods [together] with the heavens [cosmic worlds] and with the Earth”. This translation, therefore, refers to a prime creator, who first created “gods” and cosmic worlds, of which one is the Earth. According to Gen 2, Yahweh is one of these gods, one of the ’Elohim (since the Bible here calls him “Yahweh ’Elohim” in the Hebrew text, and not simply “Yahweh”). Some regard the ’Elohim as creator gods, who (themselves created) in their turn created other entities – human beings, animals and plants, like Yahweh did.
How I’ve heard this story is thus: Anu was the leader of the Anunnaki. They came to Earth to mine for gold. Anu left his two sons, Enlil and Enki, here in charge. Enki was a genetics engineer. Yep, Enki created what we have come to know as homo sapiens. His genetic engineering explains what some call “the missing link”, which means the archeologists see some kind of hominid (perhaps more than one) living here on Earth and then suddenly out of seemingly no where there is evidence of a new hominid (homo sapiens). Yep, their / our human form was not a product of a slow evolutionary process but a product of genetic engineering.
The conventional and “dogmatically approved” translation of bere’shit is based on be = “in, at” and re’shit = “beginning”. However dictionaries (such as ) state that re’shit can also mean “the first (of its kind)” and be can be a reference to the “origin”. Therefore, the word bere’shit can also be understood as a somewhat tautological expression for “the original first”, “the very first” or “the first of all”. A cabbalistic interpretation is that the word is a combination of beyt = “house, residence” and re’sh = “the supreme, the lord” placed inside beyt (between be and yt). This is then interpreted as “the lord in his residence”.
In a more exact transliteration is bere’shiyt and re’shiyt, resp., and thus one can say “between be and yt”. In -iyt, however, the letter y (actually being a consonant) phonetically marks the prolongation of i and therefore the more common (but less exact) transliteration is bere’shit. More exactly then with a stroke over the i that marks the length: ī.
There are some more peculiarities in the sentence. If one still wants to translate as “in … beginning”, it should more literally be “in a beginning” rather than “in the beginning” (because the latter would be bare’shiyt – a contraction of be-ha-re’shiyt – and not bere’shiyt). This seems to make little difference, but the word is actually written in an undetermined form as if there could have been more than one beginning (like “in one of the beginnings”). Or it could be a genitive, like “beginning’s” or “of the beginning”. This again makes little difference, but in this case, the word “create” would have another grammatical form . Such little peculiarities also disappear if we accept the cabbalistic explanation that bere’shiyt actually can be understood as “the first one”.
Plurals in the Bible
First, we note that the Bible has two stories of creations of human beings. In Gen 1 it is stated that the gods – the ’Elohim – created humans in their image. Here the plural is obvious: “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness … So the gods [properly translated] created man in their own image … male and female they created them” (Gen 1:26-27). This, furthermore, means that the woman was created equivalent to man. They should reproduce diligently.
In Gen 2, we come to the second creation of humans. Here we meet Yahweh ’Elohim – hence one of the gods named Yahweh – who first created Adam and then Eve. He obviously makes his own creation and he forbids Adam to eat from the “tree of knowledge”. The two must later leave Eden and Yahweh ’Elohim said: “Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil” (Gen 3:22).
Second creation of humans? There is more to this than just creating a man and a woman.
Hopefully my memory will serve me here, but you can do your own research anyway…. Michael Tsarion tells that Enki actually created not one but two Adamic races.
Enlil had wanted Enki to create a slave race since those from their own ranks (other Anunnaki) went on strike and didn’t want to mine for gold anymore. Enki’s first creation was highly intelligent and didn’t go for that slave crap. There’s reason to believe that this first race was androgynous or hermaphroditic. And the “in our image, after our likeness” thing may indicate that the first Adamic race may have looked VERY reptilian… like their creators… keep reading.
As you will read about in this article also, but the author may have a slightly different take from what I’m saying here, but it’s all interconnected… there is reason to think that the Anunnaki (or some entities who were fed up with them) may have destroyed the planet Tiamat, the remnants of which are the asteroid belt. Mars used to be the / a moon of Tiamat. In that calamity many souls were released in a very traumatic way. Some think that Enki actually wanted to create a race for those “lost” (trapped in this solar system) souls to incarnate into. Some think it was out of compassion, but it may just be that Enki was aware that there were trapped souls around and knew they would then inhabit his new creatures.
So, Enki was back to the drawing board and his second Adamic race had the genders split and also the brain now had two hemispheres instead of being contiguous. The split into two brain hemispheres, amongst other things, essentially “dumbed down” the new race.
And… “They should reproduce diligently.” Go forth and multiply. Yep, get t’ busy making us more slaves, thank you very much.
If we assume two creations of humans (which the conventional theology apparently doesn’t want to do), this also explains something in Gen 4 that would otherwise be a riddle. There obviously already were people of the first creation outside of Eden, to where Adam and Eve had to go. Cain killed Abel and Yahweh said: “…whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold” (Gen 4:15). Who would else be there to possibly kill him? Then Cain took a wife and had a son with her, etc. From where did otherwise these women come?
There were two Adamic races! The first race, or at least someone from the first race went to “Eden” to tell the second Adamic race, the Adams and the Eves (there were more than just one of each) that Enki had created they themselves (the first race) as a slave race but they were too sharp and didn’t go for that and further went on to warn the second race, the Adams and the Eves, that they were Enki’s next try at creating a slave race.
The first Adamic race was literally the “serpent in the garden” and since then serpents and snakes have been given a bad rap and that first Adamic race, who were just attempting to warn the second of their fate, were villified… by “Yahweh” / Anu.
The Serpent was not there to mislead the Adams and Eves but to warn them of who WAS misleading them. The Eves were intuitive so they knew that the Serpent spoke the truth and they had to work on getting that through the Adams’ thick skulls. The Eves caught a clue. The Adams may not have even been quick enough to catch a cold, beasts that they were. 😉 To this day, the Bible thumpers who are STILL duped by Yahweh have the audacity to say that it was “Eve” who was misled. *shaking head* As I’ve said, ignorance and arrogance often go together.
And… down through history, the men have thought that THEY are best suited to be spiritual leaders while, yep, they can’t catch a clue and dis their very connection to God / their intuition and dis the women who could teach them about it. *shaking head* An old friend of mine used to say that women are the conscious Unconscious, while men are the unconscious Conscious. Uh huh.
In Gen 18:1-5 Abraham is visited by three men – Yahweh together with two others. In Gen 19 Lot asks Adam about the three, who later destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. They will all three have been ’Elohim.
In many Bible passages, gods are mentioned in a context which gives us the following impression: there are other gods but you should stick to only one of them. The well-known command in Ex 20:3 (below) could be understood as a “non-competition clause”. There are in Exodus more relevant passages, such as:
“Who is like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods?” (15:11)
“Now I know that the LORD is greater than all gods…” (18:11)
“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” (20:3)
“Thou shalt not revile the gods…” (22:28)
“…make no mention of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy mouth.” (23:13)
There is a large number of other examples in Ex 12:12; 20:5; 22:20; 22:28; 23.24; 23:32-33 and 34:14-16, in Num 25:2 and 33:4, in Deut 4:28; 5:7; 6:14; 7:4; 7:16; 7.25; 8:19; 10:17; 11:16; 11:28; 12:2-3; 12:30-31; 13:2; 13:6-7; 13:13; 17:3; 18:20; 20:18; 20:26; 28:24; 28:64; 29:18; 29:26; 30:17; 31:16; 31:18; 31:20; 32:16-17 and 32:37 as well as in many more passages in Joshua, Judges, 1Samuel, 2Samuel, 1Kings, 2Kings, 1Chronik, 2Chronik, Ezra, Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Hosea, Nahum und Zephaniah.
Another remarkable part in the Bible is the mentioning of the “sons of God” in Gen 6:2 and 6:4: “That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose … There were giants (tyrants) in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” Here again the Hebrew text has ’Elohim and “the sons of God” are, correctly translated, “the sons of the gods”. The text makes a difference between them and the humans. Hence, they were not humans. Were they half-gods? And the “giants” who were born from them, where they maybe quarter-gods?
This last paragraph I interpret as… the Anunnaki bred with their human creations (the Eves).
The Gnostic Christian view of Yahweh
In the early Christianity there were two mainstreams: the Paulinian and the Gnostic Christians. Saul had pursued Christians until he converted and became Paul. The year of his conversion is estimated to be between 33 and 35. The Paulinian Christianity began to develop only after that. Who were the Christians that Paul pursued? They will especially have been the so-called Christian Jews. This concept refers to groups among the earliest Christianity, to which belonged Jews who still adhered to Jewish customs – like Jesus and his disciples themselves. Out of these Christian Jews arose the movement of the Gnostic Christians. Because of his views, Paul cam into a conflict with this original Christianity . Hence, the Paulinian Christianity didn’t arise out of the original Christianity, and with Paul, who hadn’t known Jesus himself, an obviously modified Christianity began, that distanced itself from the Christianity close to Jesus that was in the beginning.
Saul became Paul – Ah yes, the cabal directive, “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” – infiltrate and corrupt!
The beginning of the TRUE original Christianity being hijacked!
My insert here – read at this link: “Jesus” is also not a real person, but a composite character. And this link.
One author of an article about this said, “The Jews kept waiting for a messiah so the Gnostics gave them one.”
A composite character based on what / who? First, based on many Pagan archetypes and allegories from many cultures throughout history, but also on the wisdom of the Gnostic Christians, the “New Agers” of their day, here to usher in the Age of Pisces, which is why “Jesus” is associated with the symbol of the fish – Pisces.
For the Gnostics, the creator of this world wasn’t the true prime creator, but a demiurge, a “craftsman”, a fallen angel, who also has an evil side. While the real God, the true prime creator (who Jesus calls “father”) is unrestrictedly good, an imperfect demiurge created an imperfect world. It has been shown that the Gnostics identified this imperfect demiurge-“god” with the god of the Old Testament, who they also called Yaldabaoth, who wants to keep humans in a state of ignorance in a material world and who punishes their attempts to achieve knowledge and insight (to “eat from the tree of knowledge”). The demiurge is a lesser god who wants to be the only one . The text The Apokryphon of John (or The Secret Book of John) states: “He is impious in his madness that dwells in him. For he said, ‘I am God and no other god exists except me’, since he is ignorant of the place from which his strength had come” . (Cf. Ex 20:23 and Deut 5:7). Could this be the explanation of all the abominable cruelties, which after all are literally described in the Old Testament (see below)?
“creator of this world” Eh, this is a bit of a blending of things. There are many creators that create at many levels. I’d have to say – define “world”. If the planet is what is being talked about, well, that would be a higher-level creator god who makes planets, solar systems, galaxies, universes… perhaps. Then as far as life in general on this planet goes, there were many ETs involved over much time at seeding and gardening the life on this planet. Then there were the Anunnaki who created homo sapiens through genetic engineering.
If “world” is not about the planet but is more defined like this: “all of the people, societies, and institutions on the earth”, then yeah, Yahweh had a lot to do with how things have gone here… since the creation and enslavement of homo sapiens.
“He is impious… ” This to me is what the word “hubris” is about. Some like to define “hubris” as someone who thinks they are a god… and that is “bad” in some way. Well, we ALL are gods. What’s wrong with a god thinking they are a god? Nothing! But when they don’t acknowledge that everyone else is also a god and there is a Prime Creator, yep, THAT would be “hubris.”
From Merriam-Webster – “English picked up both the concept of hubris and the term for that particular brand of cockiness from the ancient Greeks, who considered hubris a dangerous character flaw capable of provoking the wrath of the gods.”
Accurate. Other gods.
A similar view was expressed by Marcion (approx. 85-160) , the first theologian who made a difference between the God of Love in the New Testament and an evil god of the Old Testament.
The abominable cruelties of Yahweh
Who reads the Bible in an objective and unprejudiced way without blinders that fade out certain passages, will (or should…) become deeply indignant about the abominable cruelties  described therein.
The “lord” guides his people to the “promised land”, but that land isn’t free. People already live there in various towns. Therefore, the “lord” commands his people to mercilessly slaughter all of them. In nearly all cases not even a child, a woman or an old man is spared, but they should completely all be killed, so that his people can live in: “great and goodly cities, which thou buildedst not, and houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full” (Deut 6:10-11). With this, a veritable holocaust begins!
In one city after the other, they murder and slaughter until no one is left. The only exception is in a few cases that they kidnap virgins. For what? It would certainly be naïve to claim that it would not be for sexual “services”.
When Moses by order of Yahweh could say as follows, he strongly disqualifies himself and his commissioner: “And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host… which came from the battle. And Moses said unto them, ‘Have ye saved all the women alive? … Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves’” (Num 31:14-18).
This rather looks like a mass human sacrifice for the “lord”…
For those who understand German I may suggest to read what the learned Karlheinz Deschner writes about this extremely blood-curdling common history of two world religions .
Persons who regard themselves as Christians like to suggest that the victims would be “evil” people who lived in “sin”, and don’t want to understand how they this way betray Jesus’ teachings. There can be no worse sin than to kill in the name of God (or of his messenger Christ)! And if one kills in the name of Yahweh, or by his order, this shows clearly enough that he cannot be the true god. Jesus taught us that who takes to the sword will be undone by the sword, and even to love our enemies.
When Yahweh rages as follows, he demonstrates his fake divinity: “And if ye walk contrary unto me, and will not hearken unto me; I will bring seven times more plagues upon you according to your sins. I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you of your children, and destroy your cattle, and make you few in number; and your highways shall be desolate. …And when I have broken the staff of your bread, ten women shall bake your bread in one oven, and they shall deliver you your bread again by weight: and ye shall eat, and not be satisfied. And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me; Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” (Lev 26:21-29)
The macho behavior began already before the exodus from Egypt. Yahweh sent Moses several times to the Pharaoh to request letting the Hebrews free. The Pharaoh repeatedly declared that he would do that, but Yahweh the each time hardened his heart so that he, after all, refused: “…for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him” (Ex 10:1). Yahweh insisted in showing his muscles and have all the ten plagues come over Egypt before he would let the Pharaoh allow the Hebrews to go. At last, he went through Egypt and killed all innocent first-born! (Ex 11:5, 12:12, 12:29, 13:15) For what did he want to demonstrate all this cruelty? In a similar way he hardened the hearts of the Hivites (living in the “promised Land”) so that they should not try to make piece (sic – peace?) with the Hebrews but meet them in battle so that they would be mercilessly destroyed (Josh 11:19.20). Everyone should die!
We might estimate that on the average a woman (married or not – even some unmarried had children) had five children in those days. The guess may be reasonable. Of the five only one, of course, was first-born. This would mean that he killed something like 20 % of the population!!!
Another of the many cruel incidents is where Yahweh requests that Abraham kill his own son as a sacrifice for him. When Abraham is prepared to do it, Yahweh stops him and makes it look like a test of Abraham’s slavish obedience. And that is, of course, a test that displays Yahweh’s cruelty. If he had tested Abraham’s love, he would have to declare him as failed … because then Abraham should have strictly refused to do such a thing!
Yahweh was a VERY jealous god.
So who, then, are these Anunnaki?
The Sumerian texts tell about a planet Nîbiru that like a comet moves in a long-stretched elliptic orbit with a revolution period of 3600 years, and that that planet is the home of the Anunnaki. Hence, the planet during more than 3000 years is so far away from the sun that everything must be frozen there. How can they live in such a world?
The answer will be that they are multidimensional beings, maybe 5-dimensional. They are said to be of a reptilian nature. We are only three-dimensional, i.e., we can only perceive three space dimensions and think only three-dimensionally. It seems that the Anunnaki have made us this way so that we should not perceive them, unless they appear in there three-dimensional form. This form (their three-dimensional body) is in the long period when the planet is far from the sun – apparently during more than 3000 years – in some state of hibernation, and then they act in other dimensions, invisible to us. In times when it is closer to the sun, they have visited us in their three-dimensional shape and that is told about in the Sumerian and related clay-plate texts. During other times they, however, influence us invisibly from the other dimensions and want to control how things are going on our planet and manipulate us their way, in politics, in a controlled science (leaving out things they don’t want us to know) and in business.
They, of course, need life energy. They could have had it from still higher dimensions, but they instead take it from us and want to keep us as a kind “milking cattle” for such energies, but without us being conscious of it. We shouldn’t know what is going on. Why do they do it that way? The answer will be that they separated themselves off from their divine origin – they “killed” the prime creators. Hence, they cannot expect to get energy from there. They love brutality – fight, war, violence, bloodshed and violent death. Why that? When a human being dies violently, his body is normally still full of life energy (his “batteries are charged”). This energy is released at the time of death and the Anunnaki can gather it. But when someone dies wasting away or in old-age weakness, there is hardly any energy left to “harvest” (his “batteries are empty”). It furthermore seems that they enjoy animating us to violence and war, like when a child plays war games with a computer. They have for this reason put aggressiveness in our genes, but also character traits like obedience to superiors and easily feeling fear. To have fear, especially fear of death, is an effective means for manipulation. When we feel rage and hatred in aggressions, we unconsciously also set life energies free, and we do the same when we have a strong fear. Obedience makes us more easily manipulated to do things we really don’t want to do.
In my Power of Words… post I talk about how humans are encouraged to be “humble” or exhibit “humility”, both of which literally mean “lowly”. That’s how the Anunnaki view humanity.
It should also be mentioned that they (being multidimensional beings) will know quite well what too few of us want to know: that there actually is no death. Only the body dies, but the soul is immortal. This doesn’t make things they do less cruel … but rather becomes a bad excuse. I wonder if it might not be the karma for many of them to become real “milk and slaughter cattle” after the end of their long lives …
We, however, get our life energy from above, through the light of the sun, since we have not intentionally and consciously cut off ourselves from that energy flow (yet we are not conscious of what is going on). The light energy is absorbed by plants that we eat, and we also eat animals (unless we are vegetarians) who have eaten plants and absorbed energy from them. So we indirectly do feed on energy from above.
Much of the archetypal information in the Bible has to do with satisfying Pagan religions to convert their followers. Paganism, to me, has to do with what I like to call “Being Earthlings… for Dummies.” Paganism acknowledges the sun and the planet and its seasons, etc., essentially the environment we live in on Earth, and astrology informs us of the energies we, as Earthlings, as influenced by. As I’ve said elsewhere, the word origin of pagan has to do with “villagers / country folk”, ya know, those who live on and work closely with the land and have to give a sh*t about the seasons for farming, hunting, and gathering purposes, etc. They are “in tune” with the planet they live on. These days the cabal still have the dumbed-down urban-dwelling “libtards” dissing the country / small town folk, making it sound like the rural folks are the idiots, when it is the urban dwellers who are completely out of touch with their planet, etc. and tend to have an SSDD (same sh*t different day) sort of existence – regardless of season or amount of daylight, etc., they do the 8 to 5, day in and day out. *yawn*
This explains why the Anunnaki allegedly have very long life spans, of the order of thousands and even tens of thousands of years. In the state of hibernation, their three-dimensional bodies don’t age.
I would venture to say that the Anunnaki don’t really have 3D bodies. They have higher-dimensional crystalline bodies, implying they have ascended at some point… then got “full of themselves” in all the wrong ways and love to lord that over 3D beings. I sense that they can slow down the frequency of their 5D crystalline bodies to be “in the physical” here when they choose to be.
I also get that they “mine for gold” to use for 3D-level purposes. I won’t venture a guess on what that would be.
I also am getting that Nibiru really doesn’t have much to do with them. I also get that Nibiru is now no where’s near this solar system. Was it merely a coincidence that Nibiru was around about the same time that the Anunnaki were? Maybe. I’m intuiting that Nibiru was a planetoid-type object that kinda got caught in our solar system at one point.
This interpretation of the Sumerian and related clay-plate texts is, of course, another one than that of official science. Who, however, studies the original texts (of which translations are found in University libraries) will find that there are no real contradictions to such an interpretation. It is really possible, but official science denies it. Only few have dealt with the subject from this aspect, the best known being Zecharia Sitchin . My book Es begann in Babylon (“It began in Babylonia”)  also does so, but describes several things differently than Sitchin does – which means that I don’t agree to everything he writes, especially not the remarkable embellishment of the Anunnaki (a.o., Sitchin doesn’t discuss the “primary murder” of the creator gods Anû und Ti’âmat).
In this case, (God informs me) THIS Anû is referring to the Divine Masculine (as opposed to the biological father of Enlil and Enki) and Ti’âmat here represents the Divine Feminine.
And, astrologically, the planet Tiamat had Feminine energy and was destroyed, so that REALLY was a blow to Feminine energy in the Sol-ar system.
In the fall of 2007, a rumor was around that Sitchin would have been arrested. This later turned out to have (highly probably) been a hoax (or maybe an intent was cancelled and later denied). No one should be astonished that some by all means strive to refute him as a crank or a liar. As an example, there is a website that claims that the words “Anunnaki” and “Nîbiru” would be found nowhere in the clay-plate texts. But I have an academic treatise by an ethnological scientist in which these words are certainly found in the translations .
As concerns channeling, I am very skeptical, since it is hard to separate the chaff from the wheat, and there obviously is much more chaff than wheat. There is, however, a book that deals with these things of which I (rather exceptionally) have a good feeling: Bringers of the Dawn by Barbara Marciniak . The Anunnaki are there called “lizzies” (as diminutive of “lizards”), since they are reptilian.
I’m with this person – most channeled info is total garbage. Barbara Marciniak’s Pleiadian changelings are an exception. The “Ps” as Barbara calls them, very much resonate with me and they, through Barbara, have been awakening humanity to the Anunnaki and the global cabal for decades.
There is much information that indicates that the Anunnaki still to day have a secret influence, especially through secret societies like Zionism and related associations, like the Illuminati and certain Masonic orders. In them, only very few chosen ones at the very top of the pyramid know about the Anunnaki connection, but the mass of people – also of members – is kept in ignorance. (I suspect that something similar since almost 2000 years holds for the Church.)
The “harvest” of life energies from humans and animals gives a sense to the cruel practice of sacrifice. Of course, the meat is of no use to the “gods”, but the for us invisible life energies are. This underlines the remark above that all the murdering in the Old Testament may be seen as a mass human sacrifice for the “lord”. Since this life energy is especially contained in the blood, this also explains the command for the cruel practice of letting an animal bleed to death that is maintained in certain cultures. The blood – rather: the life energy in it – is for the “gods”, only the meat is for humans.
And who, then, is Yahweh?
Sitchin in one of his books  takes the question up, who Yahweh may be. Is he also an Anunnaku? He is visibly trying hard to show that Yahweh isn’t an Anunnaku, but the god of the Anunnaki. His argumentation is, however, not very convincing. In my book  I demonstrate that his reasoning can also be seen to demonstrate that Yahweh is Marduk, and that is something he certainly wants to deny. It is a question of the point of view. Thus, one can actually set up the hypothesis that Yahweh is an Anunnaku! And that he during their physical absence from the Earth is a kind of “governor” of the Anunnaki. This fits to what is stated above about his abominable cruelty, on one side, and on the other side the violent nutrition of the Anunnaki with our life energies. Does he supply the Anunnaki with such energies from the Earth during their hibernation?
Yahweh, then (together with two other, see above) had Sodom and Gomorrah (more correctly ‘Amorah) destroyed. There are indications that this could have been done by means of a nuclear explosions. Certain geological peculiarities in the area may be such an indication. This allegedly was done because the inhabitants of the cities were prone to sin. However, Sitchins understanding of the clay-plate texts claims that the Anunnaki in the area were operating a basis for space traffic with Nîbiru. One gets the impression that they wanted to destroy this and eliminate all traces before they at that time gave up their three-dimensional physical presence on Earth. Sinai would at the time have been a forbidden area for humans. And that is from where Yahweh came – he is in the history of religions described to be a war-god from Sinai ! The thing about “sin” may then rather have been an excuse … or the “sin” was being in, or too close to, the forbidden area (so that they knew about it, which others should not).
It is written in the Bible that the lord let “brimstone” and fire fall on the two towns. The Hebrew word that is here translated as “brimstone” is gaphrit, which rather means “pitch” (bitumen or tar) and generally refers to “inflammable material” , which may well be connected with explosions. Lot’s wife became a “pillar of salt” when this occurred (Gen 19:26). She had hesitated, stopped and looked back, and thus probably was too late to find protection and security, so that her body instantly died and became white from the radiation. As concerns “sin”, rabbinic sources like Talmud and Tanach but also gospels mention hostility towards strangers and denying hospitality , but later interpretations want to see voluptuousness and especially homosexuality here. If the latter would be true: why should so many heterosexuals and even children be punished along with the others? Actually: whatever the “sin” may have been: why punish also all the innocent? Here we again come to the unjust cruelty …
And who is Jesus’ God?
In the New Testament Jesus presents a divine father to us, who much more corresponds to our expectations of universal love and universal good. He also talks about the Holy Spirit, who by many original Christians and by the Gnostics was understood to be a female manifestation of God. God as the prime creator thus appears as male and female at the same time. The prime creators Apsû und Ti’âmat were described as a pair – prime God and prime Goddess. Could there be a connection between the Holy Spirit and Ti’âmat?
See my discussion of the Holy Trinity in Interpretation … of Stairway to Heaven where I talk of the “Holy Spirit / Holy Ghost” is really the Divine Feminine. But we can’t actually acknowledge the Divine Feminine if we’re trying to maintain the imbalance and dumbed-down-edness of a patriarchy.
Ti âmat and Holy Spirit – as I’d already said, both represent the Divine Feminine, which is our connection to Prime Creator / All That Is through our Intuition.
It isn’t easy to reduce the God, about whom Jesus spoke and Yahweh to a common denominator. The following quotation from the Gospel of John may be mentioned hereto:
“Then said Jesus to those Jews …” (8:31)
“’…If God were your Father, ye would love me:
for I proceeded forth and came from God…” (8:42)
“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.
He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth,
because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own:
for he is a liar, and the father of it.’” (8:44)
The “devil” is not an actual entity but was an icon that the Vatican created to fear-monger. But if that (now meme) “devil” (deceitful) archetype could be applied to anyone, it would be Yahweh who dared to portray himself as Prime Creator / All That Is. Learn more about “the devil” / Satan / Lucifer here: Lucifer
About whom did Jesus speak here? It can hardly have been Abraham, to which those he spoke to refer (8:39). The story of Abraham in the Old Testament gives no reason for that. It has been suggested that Jesus here spoke about Yahweh. One might object that the persons he spoke to probably were devoted to worldly things, materialists and in their true attitude servants of Mamon (the lord of richness). In that case, they were rather paying lip service in their belief. Is it imaginable that Jesus would speak about Yahweh as “the devil” or even “Satan”? The Greek text here has diabolos, which actually means “calumniator” or “defamer” and that would probably be a more suitable translation. That Yahweh isn’t the prime creator, but an anunnakian tribal god among others may in view of his undeniable cruelty even appear probable… Looked at it that way, the translation “calumniator” would fit.
Indeed. Making false statements. That’s Yahweh, the yahoo, all over.
But quite generally: Did Jesus want to teach original truths and was he for this reason killed by means of anunnakian influence? Did one want to prevent an attempt to give truth back to people? Has one for this purpose infiltrated the Church when it became clear that the new teachings could not be abolished ? People expected a Messiah, who would liberate them from Roman rule – but maybe someone came, who would show us the way to liberation from the Anunnaki, and no one really understood him…
The cabal love the archetype of Prometheus and his torture / punishment… for what? For giving the Truth to humanity. Geez, can’t have that!
A hypothesis about Jesus’ mission and the Christianity
Against the background of these considerations I have come to the following hypothesis.
Jesus came from above, sent with a revolutionary message to humanity and born in the very area, where the Anunnaki had had their center. These still had an invisible influence over humanity from “behind the veil”. Jesus gradually brought people a truth, which these invisible rulers didn’t want them to know. His teachings about love, peace and spiritual as well as human independence were seen as a threat. Then he also in a cautious way taught that his “Father” isn’t the god they believed in. As it came that far, he had to die for it. The invisible ruler hoped that, with his death, his teachings would with time become forgotten. But it came to be differently.
As I’d said earlier there was no “Jesus” but this author seems to lean in the direction that there was. Nevertheless, what is being pointed to with the archetypal character of Jesus does indeed bring an empowering message that the cabal did not want out. What’s really being pointed to is Gnostic Christianity. But if the global cabal could wrap that all up in one character and then have that character crucified, they were “killing” the allegorical “Jesus” in the same way that they killed the creator gods Anû and Ti’âmat. It wasn’t a literal “killing” but a metaphoric one, yes, in hopes that the True Christian teachings that came from the Gnostics would fall by the roadside.
The “killing” both literal and figurative just never stopped with Yahweh and the followers of Yahweh in the form of “the Church” / the Vatican.
Check out the pretty much wiping out of the Cathars in the 13th thru 15th Centuries for daring to say that the Old Testament “God” was not the real God / All That Is / Prime Creator.
“Catharism (; from the Greek: καθαροί, katharoi, “the pure [ones]”) was a Christiandualist or Gnostic revival movement that thrived in some areas of Southern Europe, particularly what is now northern Italy and southern France, between the 12th and 14th centuries. “
“The idea of two gods or principles, one good and the other evil, was central to Cathar beliefs. This was antithetical to the monotheistic Catholic Church, whose fundamental principle was that there was only one God, who created all things visible and invisible. Cathars believed that the good God was the God of the New Testament and the creator of the spiritual realm. They believed the evil God was the God of the Old Testament, creator of the physical world whom many Cathars, and particularly their persecutors, identified as Satan. Cathars thought human spirits were the genderless spirits of angels trapped in the material realm of the evil god, destined to be reincarnated until they achieved salvation through the consolamentum, when they could return to the benign God.
From the beginning of his reign, Pope Innocent III attempted to end Catharism by sending missionaries and by persuading the local authorities to act against them. In 1208, Innocent’s papal legate Pierre de Castelnau was murdered while returning to Rome after excommunicating Count Raymond VI of Toulouse, who, in his view, was too lenient with the Cathars. Pope Innocent III then abandoned the option of sending Catholic missionaries and jurists, declared Pierre de Castelnau a martyr and launched the Albigensian Crusade which all but ended Catharism.”
Very interesting that the Cathars would be considered “dualistic” for merely pointing out that the so-called “God” of the Old Testament was NOT the All That Is / Prime Creator and hence not the God of the New Testament that the Gnostics spoke of. I see this as more the Vatican twisting of Truth. It was the Vatican that created the icon of “the devil”. Also Zoroastrianism may have influenced other religions, where Duality of “good” and “evil” and also the concept that God / All That Is / Prime Creator had some “evil” counterpart. Nope, no evil counterpart to God, just an ET called Yahweh.
Christianity spread, and through the murder of Jesus it was rather reinforced than weakened. Seeing this, the invisible rulers conceived a new strategy. They intended to infiltrate this Christianity and modify it in there own sense, so that it would no more be a threat to them but serve their purposes. This was done and led to the formation of a Church, while the original Gnostic Christianity was lost. Jesus’ teachings became twisted and falsified. In their place came the dogma of the Church and the real Christ was replaced by a fake “Christ”.
Again, the cabal directive, “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” – infiltrate and corrupt! The Vatican then hijacked the gnostics’ True Christianity.
In every Church, the dead Jesus hangs on a cross with nails in hands and feet, with thorns in his head and with a wound in his side. This is a real voodoo-technique for blocking his power. The subconscious message to us is: “Jesus is dead! Now we are in power!” Then the triumph over his death was symbolized with the torture and murder tool he was killed with: the cross … If they had hanged him, I suppose the symbol of the Dogma would have been a rope with a slipknot…
Just like Prometheus… how dare “Jesus” (the gnostics, the True, original Christians) give humanity the Truth. The crucifix is just another statue of Prometheus, demonstrating what happens to those who give the Truth to humanity.
Paul played an important role, maybe as an unconscious agent for the invisible rulers. He “converted” from being Saul, an enemy of Christians, to become the “apostle” Paul, who in a clever and sneaky way modified the teachings. That is how the alienation began, which later Constantine and others continued. They thereby also strove for a return to earlier patriarchal conditions, away from positive attitude to women that Jesus had. A new misogyny came into Christianity through the back door, the way the invisible patriarchal rulers wanted to have it. The possibility for a return of the Goddess could not be allowed. The female quality of the Holy Spirit should again be forgotten, and all tendencies for devotion to a divine femininity were tactically diverted to Mary. She is, of course, revered in her own right, but this reverence at the same time serves a secret deviation from the Goddess, who anew became forgotten.
Again… infiltrate and corrupt.
And who was Constantine? Constantine the Great, a roman emperor, who, along with the Council of Nicaea, a bunch of Vatican bishops, put the Bible together in the 4th Century.
And who, then, is Allah?
Islam arose around 600 years after Christianity and reveres Allah as the one and only god. The word actually means “The God” and thus isn’t really a name but a designation (like “Yahweh” isn’t really a name either, but also a designation that means “he is”). One of the central basic principles of Islamic confession is: “There is no god except ‘The God’” (La ilaha illa Allah). This reminds strongly of Yahweh’s “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Under the hypothesis that Yahweh saw himself threatened by Christianity and, therefore, infiltrated it, one can envision that the same Yahweh wanted to create an analogous religion under a new denomination in a related people. On one side in order to have a have a “second track” for his influence and on the other side in order to be able to play the two off against each other in a Machiavellian sense of “divide and rule”.
It’s my understanding that the religion of Islam was yet another Vatican creation. Vatican, Vatican, Vatican. Notice the common denominator.
Years ago, I had a rather large list of email addresses of lightworkers with whom I would share info, that sharing went both directions. We were enlightening each other to details. I sent out something about the Free Masons being corrupt. A friend wrote back, “I know many masons and they’re all good people. If you want to know about corruption, check out the Vatican.” I wrote back, “I know full well about the corruption of the Vatican, but I was raised Catholic and I have to tell you that most Catholics are good folks, just like you know masons to be. But Joe Average Catholic and Mason don’t know what is going on in the upper ranks of their organizations.” My friend wrote back, “You’re absolutely right.”
Also other extraterrestrial visits?
It is highly probable that humans of this Earth have had contacts with extraterrestrials already before. It seems quite possible that the Egyptians, Incas, Mayas and Aztecs had such contacts and that these extraterrestrials will not always have been Anunnaki. Regressions with persons, who once lived in Atlantis, indicate that the culture there had contacts with extraterrestrials, who gave them higher knowledge as a kind of development aid. They withdrew disappointedly when they saw that the knowledge was abused. One client experienced himself as a hybrid between extraterrestrials and humans, and suffered from being discriminated by both sides, since he didn’t really look like an Earth human, but also not like an extraterrestrial.
ETs have been here all along. This planet was seeded and gardened and tended to. Everything on this planet comes from ET DNA, ourselves included. Not all were malevolent like the Anunnaki. And not all Reptilians are bad either. Those that came here were kinda outcasts of their own race. Their Reptilian cousins are not thrilled with them either. Also, some benevolent ETs “made mistakes” by showing themselves to humans, hoping to awaken and guide humanity, but alas, the dumbed-down humans then wanted to worship these ETs. Oops. That kinda was counterproductive to these benevolent ET’s intentions.
Very evil chapters of human history on our planet are the cruel conquests and destructions of above all the Latin-American cultures through European Yahwistic cultures. Why did the latter want that? A logical answer will be that Yahweh manipulated humans to that end, since he didn’t want competition in his influence on humankind. Thus, this will concern influence of other extraterrestrials than the Anunnaki or, maybe, rivaling Anunnaki groups.
It may be assumed that there were also other cultures on Earth before the anunnakian manipulation of human life here, and that they may in many cases have had benevolent contacts with other extraterrestrials.
In India, an ancient knowledge has to a large extent survived that probably also has to do with very early extraterrestrial contacts. The yahwistic attempts to eradicate this by means of the British rule (and earlier through the Muslim Moguls) luckily didn’t really work. Instead, the knowledge became accessible to the entire world, since ancient Sanskrit texts were translated to English! As if the plan backfired… (but to day business globalization is, instead, doing much damage to the Indian culture).
Are then all “Gods” only extraterrestrials?
There are authors who seem to claim that. But the true creator God certainly isn’t in that sense an extraterrestrial, since he – beyond that concept – is everywhere. That then some of his creations were regarded as “gods”, when they came from somewhere else to visit the Earth, is quite another matter.
The Anunnaki want to claim that they are our creators!
The Anunnaki are not our creators! They have by means of genetic manipulation in very ancient times only created the bodies of our prime ancestors but not created them out of pure energy, as the prime creator did when he created our souls. They are in no way our creators!
For clarity, the Anunnaki, yes, created our bodies, by combining the DNA from a local hominid with their own DNA. Our SOULS are God’s / Prime Creator’s / All That Is’ creation. Our bodies are not really “us”, they are on loan to us from the planet when we incarnate here.
Are the Anunnaki mentioned in the Bible?
The Bible mentions a tall people called Anakim, the sons of Anak. They have to do with the Nephilim, who are the above-mentioned “sons of the gods” who came down to Earth to have children with the “daughters of man”. The following Bible passages mention “Anakim” and “Anak”: Num 13:22; 13:28; 13:33, Deut 1:28; 2:10-11; 2:21, 9:2, Josh 11:21-22; 14:12; 14:15; 15:13-14; 21:11, Judg 1:20.
The conclusion near at hand would be that these are Anunnaki (in their three-dimensional appearance) or probably rather there off-spring resulting from their sexual involvement with humans of the Earth.
There is reason to think that some Reptilians can shape-shift – being higher dimensional beings – into human form. Some say that is one reason that they want a blood sacrifice and literally drink human blood… enabling them to take on human form. *shrug*
Also the old “right of kings” thing plays into all this. The shapeshifting may though then be due to them being a mix of homo sapiens (which is already part Reptilian) and then being bred with Reptilians.
The western (European) monarchies were / are more Reptilian than most of us and they do their best to keep it that way, which is why they marry their cousins, to “keep their bloodline pure”. So, they think this gives them the right to rule over humanity.
Barbara Marciniak’s Pleiadian contacts (the “Ps”) like to talk about how the “kings” (political rulers who are sell outs to the Anunnaki / Reptilians) think that if they control and kill off humanity by destroying / terraforming the surface of the planet, that they can hide away underground until they can resurface and rule the world without most of humanity. But the Ps say these “kings” like to think the Anunnaki / Reptilians will reward them, but no, these “kings” will be the Anunnaki’s dinner.
YOU DON’T HAVE TO TAKE MY WORD OR THE WORD OF THE AUTHOR OF THIS LINKED ARTICLE ON ANY OF THIS, YOU CAN ACTUALLY UTILIZE YOUR DIRECT DIVINE CONNECTION AND TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS DIRECTLY TO GOD / ALL THAT IS / PRIME CREATOR (NOT TO A FRICKIN’ ET CALLED YAHWEH)… IF YOU’VE GOT THE GUTS. IF YOU CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH.